Studies show link between gender stereotyping and harsher punishments for workers

Abstract

Purpose The researchers set up two studies to test their theory that gender-stereotypical counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) were more likely to be harshly punished than non-gender stereotypical ones. Design/methodology/approach Two rival theories were used. Expectancy–confirmation theory suggests people process behavior more easily when it fits in with their expectations. But expectancy–violation theory argues the polar opposite. It states that perceivers react more negatively when bad behavior is inconsistent with their expectations. They carried out two studies. The first one analyzed the appeals of 197 federal employees against their CWBs. The second one was a simulation using MBA students to test the findings of study one. Findings Study one confirmed the concept of expectancy–confirmation theory for both men and women. Gender-stereotypical CWBs led to more dismissals. The second study supported the first study’s result, but only for women. The opposite result prevailed for men. Originality/value The studies are important because they show that gender stereotypes can influence the perceptions of individuals in charge of punishment. This is something that organizations need to be aware of as it is important for them to be consistent. Punishment decisions, the authors suggest, “have important consequences for not only the target of punishment, but also can have a powerful social effect upon the broader organization.”