Task cues, dominance cues, and influence in task groups.

Abstract

Both basic and applied research indicates that women are generally seen as less competent and are less influential in task groups than men. Two studies were conducted, with both female and male speakers, to examine the effectiveness of influence attempts when displaying task cues (behaviors that imply ability or task competence) or dominance cues (attempts to influence or control through threat). Results indicated a significant positive effect of task cues on perceived competence and actual influence, whereas the display of dominance cues was ineffective in gaining status and influence and resulted in negative reactions from others. Furthermore, this pattern held for female and male speakers. These results suggest that the display of task cues is an effective means to enhance one's status in groups and that the attempt to gain influence in task groups through dominance is an ineffective and poorly received strategy for both men and women. Despite the growing presence of women in professional and technical roles, the stigma still exists that they are somehow less competent than their male counterparts. Studies of mixedsex laboratory groups indicate that women are less active and less influential, are interrupted more often, and are chosen as leaders less often than men (see Ridgeway, 1988; Webster & Driskell, 1983; Wood & Karten, 1986). Similarly, studies in the field have demonstrated that women are perceived as less effective managers and as having less leadership ability, self-confidence, and business skills than men (Schein, 1973; Wiley & Eskilson, 1982). Despite gains in the representation of women in management, recent research has shown that this negative stereotype shows no sign of abating (Heilman, Block, Martell, & Simon, 1989). In summary, a large body of basic and applied research has documented the fact that women are both perceived as less competent and actually exercise less authority and influence in task groups than men. This state of affairs is further complicated because certain forceful or directive behaviors that may be used to gain increased influence may in fact be ineffective. For example, Watson (1988) found that female supervisors who used a dominant approach were less influential and were more likely to be resisted by subordinates than when they used a less dominant management style. Haccoun, Haccoun, and Sallay (1978) found that a female supervisor who used a directive management style was perceived as less effective than when that supervisor used a more analytic approach. Rosen and Jerdee (1973) reported that the attempt by a female supervisor to influence others via threat resulted in extremely low evaluations from subordinates. Accordingly, women have been cautioned against enacting be