Abstract
Scholars and practitioners have offered anecdotal evidence that firms led by female chief executive officers (CEOs) fare better during global recession, perhaps because they take fewer risks. In contrast to commonly held stereotypes that women are more risk averse than men, neither systemic theorizing nor empirical findings support that this popular assumption holds among top organizational leadership. Rather than seeking absolute gender differences in risk aversion, we take a more nuanced approach, considering executive job demands and decision orientation theories to examine underlying psychological mechanisms and economic boundary conditions to gender differences in strategic risk-taking. We test our hypotheses using multiple methods and samples, including an archival study of Fortune 1,000 firms and a survey of CEOs. Our results challenge absolute assumptions of gender risk preferences; rather, we find that female CEOs are less likely to choose risky strategies in a high job demands environment (e.g., economic downturn) due to underlying gender differences in other-orientation.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
