Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Real Men Don’t Make Mistakes: Investigating the Effects of Leader Gender, Error Type, and the Occupational Context on Leader Error Perceptions

  • Published:
Journal of Business and Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Despite the fact that leaders make mistakes, little attention has been paid to the effects of errors on subordinate perceptions. This study investigated the influence of errors on perceptions of leader competence, effectiveness, and desire to work for the leader. It also examined the effects of gendered expectations on perceptions of male and female leader errors by investigating the interactions that occur between the leader’s gender, the type of error, and the occupational context.

Design/Methodology

A sample of 284 undergraduates read a series of fictional employee emails describing a leader’s behavior and responded to several measures while envisioning themselves as subordinates of the leader.

Findings

Results suggested task and relationship errors exert damaging and differential effects on perceptions of leader task and relationship competence, respectively, and equally damage desire to work for the leader. Male leaders were perceived as less task and relationship competent, desirable to work for, and effective than female leaders for committing errors in a masculinized domain.

Implications

This study suggests leader errors matter, and that current leadership models ought to be expanded to account more clearly for them. Moreover, it offers insight into the role of gendered expectations in determining perceptions of male and female leader errors.

Originality/Value

This study is one of the first to empirically examine leader error perceptions and the effects of gender stereotypes on these perceptions. It represents a step toward understanding evaluations of male and female leaders, not when they succeed, but when they make mistakes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. All stimulus materials are available upon request from the first author.

References

  • Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1, 74–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). Multifactor leadership questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biernat, M., & Kobrynowicz, D. (1997). Gender- and race-based standards of competence: Lower minimum standards but higher ability standards for devalued groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 544–557.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brescoll, V. L., & Uhlmann, E. L. (2008). Can an angry woman get ahead? Status conferral, gender, and expression of emotion in the workplace. Psychological Science, 19, 268–275.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, P. J., Stets, J. E., & Cerven, C. (2007). Gender, legitimation, and identity verification in groups. Social Psychology Quarterly, 70, 27–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bush, P. J. (1976). The male nurse: A challenge to traditional role identities. Nursing Forum, 15, 390–405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cabrera, S. F., Sauer, S. J., & Thomas-Hunt, M. C. (2009). The evolving manager stereotype: The effects of industry gender typing on performance expectations for leaders and their teams. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33, 419–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. P., McCloy, R. A., Oppler, S. H., & Sager, C. E. (1993). A theory of performance. In N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel Selection in Organizations (pp. 35–70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social Influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & L. Gardner (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 151–192). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insider’s perspective on these developing streams of research. The leadership Quarterly, 10, 145–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1987). Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic leadership in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 12, 637–647.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cushenbery, L., Thoroughgood, C. N., & Hunter, S. T. (2009, April). Impact of leader error on subordinate trust: An experimental investigation. Poster presented at 24th annual conference for the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychologists, New Orleans, LA.

  • Dormann, T., & Frese, M. (1994). Error training: Replication and the function of exploratory behavior. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 6, 365–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2003). The female leadership advantage: An evaluation of the evidence. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 807–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A Meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 569–591.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–598.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, D., & Leviatan, U. (1975). Implicit leadership theory as determinant of the factor structure underlying supervisory behavior scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 736–741.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson, A. C. (1996). Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: Group and organizational influences on the detection and correction of human error. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32, 5–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einarsen, S., Aasland, M. S., & Skogstad, A. (2007). Destructive leadership behaviour: A definition and conceptual model. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 207–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2004). Implicit leadership theories in applied settings: Factor structure, generalizability, and stability over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 293–310.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eubanks, D. L., & Mumford, M. D. (2010). Leader errors and the influence on performance: An investigation of differing levels of impact. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 809–825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, S. (2003). Why smart executives fail and what you can learn from their mistakes. New York: Portfolio.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleishman, E. A., Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Levin, K. Y., Korotkin, A. L., & Hein, M. B. (1991). Taxonomic efforts in the description of leader behavior: A synthesis and functional interpretation. The Leadership Quarterly, 2, 245–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D. R., Heiney, M. M., & Wright, S. S. (1997). Biases in appraisals of women leaders. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1, 98–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D. R., Schlenker, B. R., Leary, M. R., & McGown, N. (1985). Self-presentational determinants of sex differences in leadership. Small Group Behavior, 16, 197–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foschi, M. (1996). Double standards in the evaluation of men and women. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 237–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foschi, M., Lai, L., & Sigerson, K. (1994). Gender and double standards in the assessment of job applicants. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 326–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giessner, S. R., & van Knippenberg, D. (2008). “License to Fail”: Goal definition, leader group prototypicality, and perceptions of leadership effectiveness after leader failure. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105, 14–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., Diebold, J., Bailey-Werner, B., & Zhu, L. (1997). The two faces of Adam: Ambivalent sexism and polarized attitudes toward women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1323–1334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glomb, T. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1997). Anger and gender effects in observed supervisor–subordinate dyadic interactions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 72, 281–307.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heilman, M. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. Research in Organizational Behavior, 5, 269–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 657–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J., & Martell, R. F. (1995). Sex stereotypes: Do they influence perceptions of managers? Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 10, 237–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J., Martell, R. F., & Simon, M. C. (1989). Has anything changed? Current characterizations of men, women, and managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 935–942.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heilman, M. E., & Okimoto, T. G. (2007). Why are women penalized for success at male tasks?: The implied communality deficit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 81–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heilman, M. E., Wallen, A. S., Fuchs, D., & Tamkins, M. M. (2004). Penalties for success: Reactions women who succeed at male tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 416–427.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Helmreich, R. L., & Merritt, A. C. (2000). Safety and error management: The role of crew resource management. In B. J. Hayward & A. R. Lowe (Eds.), Aviation resource management (pp. 107–119). Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, S. T., Bedell-Avers, K. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2007). The typical leadership study: Assumptions, implications, and potential remedies. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 435–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, S. T., Tate, B. W., Dzieweczynski, J. L., & Bedell-Avers, K. E. (2011). Leaders make mistakes: A multilevel consideration of why. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 239–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iacuone, D. (2007). “Real men are tough guys”: Hegemonic masculinity and safety in the construction industry. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 13, 247–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jelinek, M., Smircich, L., & Hirsch, P. (1983). Introduction: A code of many colors. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 331–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, E. (1979). The rocky road from acts to dispositions. American Psychology, 34, 107–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). Lisrel 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2007). LISREL 8.8 [computer software]. Chicago: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelloway, E. K., Sivanathan, N., Francis, L., & Barling, J. (2005). Poor leadership. In J. Barling, E. K. Kelloway, & M. R. Frone (Eds.), Handbook of work stress. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landy, F. J. (2008). Stereotypes, bias, and personnel decisions: Strange and stranger. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 379–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Likert, R. (1961). New patterns of management. New York, NY: MacGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Likert, R. (1967). The human organization: Its management and value. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lord, R. G., Binning, J. F., Rush, M. C., & Thomas, J. C. (1978). The effect of performance cues and leader behavior on questionnaire ratings of leadership behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 21, 27–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & De Vader, C. L. (1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 343–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & Phillips, J. S. (1982). A theory of leadership categorization. In J. G. Hunt, U. Sekaran, & C. Schriesheim (Eds.), Leadership: Beyond establishment views (pp. 104–121). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyness, K. S., & Heilman, M. E. (2006). When fit is fundamental: Performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level female and male managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 777–785.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Masser, B. M., & Abrams, D. (2004). Reinforcing the glass ceiling: The consequences of hostile sexism for female managerial candidates. Sex Roles, 51, 609–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maurer, T. J., & Lord, R. G. (1991). An exploration of cognitive demands in group interaction as a moderator of information processing variables in perceptions of leadership. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 821–839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCall, M. W. J., & Lombardo, M. M. (1983). Off the track: Why and how successful executives get derailed. Greensboro: Center for Creative Leadership.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meindl, J. R., & Ehrlich, S. B. (1987). The romance of leadership and the evaluation of organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 91–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meindl, J. R., Ehrlich, S. B., & Dukerich, J. M. (1985). The romance of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30, 78–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgeson, F. P. (2005). The external leadership of self-managing teams: Intervening in the context of novel and disruptive events. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 497–508.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, A. M., White, R. P., & Van Velsor, E. (1987). Breaking the glass ceiling: Can women reach the top of America’s largest corporations?. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, C. (1986). Nurturance and mastery: Competing qualifications for women’s access to high public office? Research in Politics and Society, 2, 211–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller, H. J., & Rowell, M. (1997). Mexican women managers: An emerging profile. Human Resource Management, 36, 423–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, K. R., Herr, B. M., Lockhart, M. C., & Maguire, E. (1986). Evaluating the performance of paper people. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 654–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murtadha, K., & Watts, D. M. (2005). Linking the struggle for education and social justice: Historical perspectives of African American leadership in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 414, 591–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, T. (1986). The real Coke, the real story. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ospina, S., & Su, C. (2009). Weaving color lines: Race, ethnicity, and the work of leadership in social change organizations. Leadership, 5, 131–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Padilla, A., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2007). The toxic triangle: Destructive leaders, susceptible followers, and conducive environments. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 176–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedhazur, E. J. (1982). Multiple regression in behavioral research (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, P. P., Gioia, D. A., & Gray, B. (1989). Influence modes, schema change, and organizational transformation. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 25, 271–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ragins, B. R., & Sundstrom, E. (1989). Gender and power in organizations: A longitudinal perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 51–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reason, J. (1990). Human error. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rickard, L. (1995). Remembering new Coke. Advertising Age, 66, 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rochlin, G. I. (1999). Safe operation as a social construct. Ergonomics, 42, 1549–1560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 173–220). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rush, M. C., Thomas, J. C., & Lord, R. G. (1977). Implicit leadership theory: A potential threat to the internal validity of leader behavior questionnaires. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 20, 93–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sakalli-Ugurlu, N., & Beydogan, B. (2002). Turkish college students’ attitudes toward women managers: The effects of patriarchy, sexism, and gender differences. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 136, 647–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sapiro, V. (1983). The political integration of women: Roles, socialization, and politics. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, V. E. (1973). The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57, 95–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schein, V. E. (2001). A global look at psychological barriers to women’s progress in management. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 675–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schyns, B., & Hansbrough, T. (2008). Why the brewery ran out of beer: The attribution of mistakes in a leadership context. Social Psychology, 39, 197–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senders, J., & Moray, N. P. (1991). Human error: Cause, prediction, and reduction. Series in applied psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shamir, B. (1995). Social distance and charisma: Theoretical notes and an exploratory study. The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 19–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sitkin, S. B. (1996). Learning through failure: The strategy of small losses. In M. Cohen & U. Sproull (Eds.), Organizational learning (pp. 541–577). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of the literature. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, P. E. (1985). Accountability: A social check on the fundamental attribution error. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 227–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twenge, J. M. (1997). Changes in masculine and feminine traits over time: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 36, 305–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dyck, C., Frese, M., Baer, M., & Sonnentag, S. (2005). Organizational error management culture and its impact on performance: A two-study replication. Journal of Applied Psychology, 6, 1228–1240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, R., Rottenstreich, Y., Camerer, C., & Knez, M. (2001). The illusion of leadership: Misattribution of cause in coordination games. Organization Science: A Journal of the Institute of Management Sciences, 12, 582–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G. (2007). Leadership in organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G., Gordon, A., & Taber, T. (2002). A hierarchical taxonomy of leadership behavior: Integrating a half century of behavior research. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 9, 15–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zapf, D., Brodbeck, F. C., Frese, M., Peters, H., & Prumper, J. (1992). Errors in working with office computers: A first validation of a taxonomy for observed errors in a field setting. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 4, 311–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zapf, D., & Reason, J. T. (1994). Introduction: Human errors and error handling. Applied Psychology, 43, 427–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, B., & Olivera, F. (2006). Error reporting in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 31, 1012–1030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, J., & Shalley, C. E. (2003). Research on employee creativity: A critical review and directions for future research. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 22, 165–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University, 506 Keller Building, University Park, PA, 16802, USA

    Christian N. Thoroughgood & Samuel T. Hunter

  2. Department of Psychology, Villanova University, St. Mary’s, Suite 119, 800 Lancaster Ave., Villanova, PA, 19085, USA

    Katina B. Sawyer

Authors
  1. Christian N. Thoroughgood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Katina B. Sawyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Samuel T. Hunter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian N. Thoroughgood.

Appendix: Sample Introduction and Emails from Study Vignettes

Appendix: Sample Introduction and Emails from Study Vignettes

Instructions: Now that you have completed the preliminary survey, you will be presented with a series of emails from employees working in a large hospital setting. Some of the emails are announcements from representatives in the hospital’s administration. The other emails represent exchanges between members of one of the hospital’s nursing units. This nursing unit is supervised by a head nurse/unit leader, who is in charge of leading and directing the unit’s day-to-day activities and operations. After reading the emails, you will be asked to respond to a series of questions. Please find below a list of the employees you will read about in the following emails:

Nursing Staff

  1. 1.

    Barbara Smith—Head Nurse and Unit Leader

  2. 2.

    Debby Wilson—Junior Nurse

  3. 3.

    Becky Winters—Junior Nurse

  4. 4.

    Karen Fairchild—Junior Nurse

  5. 5.

    Sarah Sawyer—Senior Nurse

Hospital Administration

Pam Donohue—Administration Representative

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thoroughgood, C.N., Sawyer, K.B. & Hunter, S.T. Real Men Don’t Make Mistakes: Investigating the Effects of Leader Gender, Error Type, and the Occupational Context on Leader Error Perceptions. J Bus Psychol 28, 31–48 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-012-9263-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-012-9263-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation