A Survey Experiment on “Bad Bosses”: The Effect of Social Networks on Gender Solidarity

Isabella Alcañiz,Ernesto Calvo,Marcelo Escolar

doi:10.25222/larr.453

Abstract

Are women and men in positions of authority judged differently? If a gender evaluation gap exists, is it due to persistent stereotypes or notions of gender solidarity? We explore gender differences in judgement through a survey experiment in Argentina with a national sample of 4,068 employees. Respondents were asked to recommend a salary increase for a “bad boss” whose behavior was characterized as aggressive and at the limit of what is fair and appropriate. The survey experiment measures the extent to which respondents punish and reward female and male managers differently. The main finding is that women are more likely to punish male bad bosses, and men are more likely to punish female bad bosses. We explain variation as a function of respondents’ social and personal networks. Study findings carry significant implications for the study of the gender pay gap.

Highlights

Are women and men in position of authority evaluated differently? Two leaders of the political and the corporate world, cognizant that women in positions of authority are judged more harshly than their male counterparts, offer different prescriptions to the problem
We really understand that we have to help each other. ...The bottom line is, the more we have a cadre of women moving up the scale, and it doesn’t seem threatening, and people realize that women work much harder than men, and realize that they need more women in these jobs, I think that [discrimination] goes away.”1 On the other hand, Sheryl Sandberg, chief executive officer (CEO) of Facebook and one of the few women at the top of the tech industry, recommends that women “lean in” and become more assertive and bold—in a way, mimic the stereotypical male overconfidence in the workplace
The prescriptions advanced by Secretary Albright and Ms Sandberg beg the question, are women and men as bosses judged differently, and if so, is it a function of differences in personal ties or gender stereotypes? We theorize that personal networks, as essential sources of interpersonal norms and information, shape evaluations of authority

Summary

Introduction

Are women and men in position of authority evaluated differently? Two leaders of the political and the corporate world, cognizant that women in positions of authority are judged more harshly than their male counterparts, offer different prescriptions to the problem. ...The bottom line is, the more we have a cadre of women moving up the scale, and it doesn’t seem threatening, and people realize that women work much harder than men, and realize that they need more women in these jobs, I think that [discrimination] goes away.” On the other hand, Sheryl Sandberg, chief executive officer (CEO) of Facebook and one of the few women at the top of the tech industry, recommends that women “lean in” and become more assertive and bold—in a way, mimic the stereotypical male overconfidence in the workplace Sandberg acknowledges that this strategy is not without negatives, as more aggressive women are less liked. The prescriptions advanced by Secretary Albright and Ms Sandberg beg the question, are women and men as bosses judged differently, and if so, is it a function of differences in personal ties or gender stereotypes? We theorize that personal networks, as essential sources of interpersonal norms and information, shape (gendered) evaluations of authority.

Objectives

Results

Conclusion