Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Gender Differences in Leadership Role Occupancy: The Mediating Role of Power Motivation

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

Abstract

Although the proportion of women in leadership positions has grown over the past decades, women are still underrepresented in leadership roles, which poses an ethical challenge to society at large but business in particular. Accordingly, a growing body of research has attempted to unravel the reasons for this inequality. Besides theoretical progress, a central goal of these studies is to inform measures targeted at increasing the share of women in leadership positions. Striving to contribute to these efforts and drawing on several theoretical approaches, the present study provides a contemporary examination of (a) whether women and men differ in their levels of power motivation and (b) whether potential gender differences in this motivation contribute to the unequal distribution of women and men in leadership positions. Results from four studies provide converging support for these assumptions. Specifically, we found that women consistently reported lower power motivation than men. This in turn mediated the link between gender and leadership role occupancy. These results were robust to several methodological variations including samples from different populations (i.e., student samples and large heterogeneous samples of employee), diverse operationalizations of power motivation and leadership role occupancy (self- and other ratings), and study design (cross-sectional and time-lagged designs). Implications for theory and practice, including ways to contribute to a more equal gender distribution in leadership positions, are discussed.

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. As noted earlier, we used three different scales of power motivation across our studies to ensure that our findings were not artifacts of the scales we applied. To provide further justification for this approach, we conducted a pilot study to examine the correlations among the scales (N = 57 students). Results revealed that the scales were highly related with correlations consistently ≥.75.

  2. Some groups did not include any male participants (yet no group included only men). To examine whether this had an effect on power motivation and leadership role occupancy, we compared the scores of female students with versus without male group members. ANOVAs showed no significant differences between the two groups on power motivation, F(1, 48) = .00, p = .95, or leadership role occupancy, F(1, 48) = .85, p = .36. Hence, the presence of male group members did not significantly affect the scores of female students.

  3. Please note that 90 % confidence intervals around indirect effects correspond to one-tailed testing at α = .05. As methodologists have repeatedly noted, it is fully adequate to examine directional mediation hypotheses using one-tailed testing (i.e., 90 % confidence intervals; Preacher et al. 2010).

  4. For Studies 3 and 4, we also conducted all hypothesis tests using industry as an additional control. To this end, we applied the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system by the US Department of Labor, which distinguishes 10 broad industrial categories. The SIC has been widely applied in previous studies (e.g., Probst et al. 2008). Importantly, including industry as a control (i.e., nine dummy variables coding the 10 industry types) did not change the pattern of results. Given space restrictions in the tables (i.e., in Tables 5, 6), the results are not reported here; however, they are available from the first author.

References

  • Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. (1975). The decomposition of effects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40, 37–47. doi:10.2307/2094445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aries, C. (1976). Interaction patterns and themes of male, female and mixed groups. Small Group Behaviour, 7, 7–18. doi:10.1177/104649647600700102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arvey, R. D., Zhang, Z., Avolio, B. J., & Krueger, R. F. (2007). Developmental and genetic determinants of leadership role occupancy among women. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 693–706. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandalos, D. (2002). The effects of item parceling on goodness-of-fit and parameter estimate bias in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 78–102. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0901_5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B. M. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, T. E. (2005). Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational research: A qualitative analysis with recommendations. Organizational Research Methods, 8, 274–289. doi:10.1177/1094428105278021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergner, S., Neubauer, A. C., & Kreuzthaler, A. (2010). Broad and narrow personality traits for predicting managerial success. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19, 177–199. doi:10.1080/13594320902819728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biddle, B. J. (1979). Role theory: Expectations, identities, and behaviors. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgogni, L., Petitta, L., & Barbaranelli, C. (2004). Test di orientamento motivazionale [Test of motivational orientation]. Florence: Organizzazioni Speciali.

  • Bosak, J., & Sczesny, S. (2011). Exploring the dynamics of incongruent beliefs about women and leaders. British Journal of Management, 22, 254–269. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2010.00731.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brief, A. P., Aldag, R. J., & Chacko, T. I. (1976). The Miner sentence completion scale: A psychometric appraisal. In Proceedings of the American Institute for Decision Sciences, San Francisco (pp. 171–172).

  • Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 349–444). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M. (1999). Evolutionary psychology. London: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cascio, W. (1991). Applied psychology in personnel management (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, K. Y., & Drasgow, F. (2001). Toward a theory of individual differences and leadership: Understanding the motivation to lead. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 481–498. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (2000). Towards an integrative theory of training motivation: A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 678–807. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.85.5.678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, D. V., Sin, H.-P., & Chen, T. T. (2004). Assessing the burdens of leadership: Effects of formal leadership roles on individual performance over time. Personnel Psychology, 57(3), 573–605. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.00001.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D., Brockner, J., Fishman, A., Van Dijke, M., Van Olffen, W., & Mayer, D. M. (2010). When do procedural fairness and outcome fairness interact to influence employees’ work attitude and behaviors? The moderating effect of uncertainly. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 291–304. doi:10.1037/a0017866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2008). Of women, men, and motivation: A role congruity account. In J. Y. Shah & W. L. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of motivational science (pp. 434–447). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become leaders. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–598. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., Karau, S. J., Miner, J. B., & Johnson, B. T. (1994). Gender and motivation to manage in hierarchic organizations: A meta-analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 5, 135–159. doi:10.1016/1048-9843(94)90025-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harlan, A., & Weiss, C. L. (1982). Sex differences in factors affecting managerial career advancement. In P. A. Wallace (Ed.), Women in the workplace (pp. 59–100). Boston: Auburn House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haslam, S. A., & Ryan, M. K. (2008). The road to the glass cliff: Differences in the perceived suitability of men and women for leadership positions in succeeding and failing organizations. Leadership Quarterly, 19, 530–546. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.07.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausmann, R., Tyson, L. D., & Zahidi, S. (2010). The global gender gap report. Cologny, Switzerland: World Economic Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2011, October 20). Indirect. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/.

  • 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. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00234.

    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 and Personality, 10, 237–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, B. J., Woehr, D. J., Maldagen-Youngjohn, R., & Lyons, B. D. (2011). Great man or great myth? A quantitative review of the relationship between individual differences and leader effectiveness. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84(2), 347–381. doi:10.1348/096317909X485207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoobler, J. M., Lemmon, G., & Wayne, S. J. (in press). Women’s managerial aspirations: An organizational development perspective. Journal of Management. doi:10.1177/0149206311426911.

  • Hossiep, R., & Paschen, M. (2008). The business-focused inventory of personality. Oxford: Hogrefe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hossiep, R., Paschen, M., & Muehlhaus, O. (2003). Bochumer Inventar zur berufsbezogenen Persönlichkeitsbeschreibung [The business-focused inventory of personality]. Goettingen: Hogrefe.

  • Howard, A. (2005). Subconscious and conscious motives in long-term managerial success. In G. P. Latham (Chair), The effects of subconscious trait and state motivation on performance. Symposium at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Los Angeles.

  • Ibeh, K., Carter, S., Poff, D., & Hamill, J. (2008). How focused are the world’s top-rated business schools on educating women for global management? Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 65–83. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9653-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joy, L. (2008). Advancing women leaders: The connection between women board directors and women corporate officers. New York: Catalyst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 765–780. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellett, J. B., Humphrey, R. H., & Sleeth, R. G. (2002). Empathy and complex task performance: Two routes to leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 523–544. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00142-X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koenig, A. M., Eagly, A. H., Mitchell, A. A., & Ristikari, T. (2011). Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three research paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 616–642. doi:10.1037/a0023557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kovjanic, S., Schuh, S. C., Jonas, K., Van Quaquebeke, N., & Van Dick, R. (2012). How do transformational leaders foster positive employee outcomes? A self-determination analysis of employees’ needs as mediating links. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(8), 1031–1052. doi:10.1002/job.1771.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kristof-Brown, A., Zimmerman, R., & Johnson, E. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person–job, person–organization, person–group, and person–supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latham, G. P., Stajkovic, A. D., & Locke, A. E. (2010). The relevance and viability of subconscious goals in the workplace. Journal of Management, 36, 234–255. doi:10.1177/0149206309350777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lester, P. B., Hannah, S. T., Harms, P. D., Vogelgesang, G. R., & Avolio, B. J. (2011). Mentoring impact on leader efficacy development: A field experiment. The Academy of Management Learning and Education, 10, 409–429. doi:10.5465/amle.2010.0047.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindner, I. (2003). Studienfuehrer psychologie [Study guide psychology]. Eibelstadt: Lexika Verlag.

  • Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_1.

    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. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(84)90043-6.

    Article  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. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, D. C. (1985). Human motivation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, D. C., & Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). Leadership motive pattern and long-term success in management. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 737–743. doi:10.1037/0021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, D. C., & Burnham, D. H. (1976). Power is the great motivator. Harvard Business Review, 54, 100–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mezulis, A. H., Abramson, L. Y., Hyde, J. S., & Hankin, B. L. (2004). Is there a universal positive bias in attributions? A meta-analytic review of individual, developmental, and cultural differences in the self-serving bias. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 711–747.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miner, J. B. (1975). The challenge of managing. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miner, J. B. (1978). Twenty years of research on role-motivation theory of managerial effectiveness. Personnel Psychology, 31. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1978.tb02122.x.

  • Noe, R. A. (1988). An investigation of the determinants of successful assigned mentoring relationships. Personnel Psychology, 41, 457–479. doi:10.1111/j.1744.1988.tb00638.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakley, J. G. (2000). Gender-based barriers to senior management positions: Understanding the scarcity of female CEO’s. Journal of Business Ethics, 27, 321–334. doi:10.1023/A:1006226129868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neil, D. A., Hopkins, M. M., & Bilimoria, D. (2007). Women’s careers at the start of the 21st century: Patterns and paradoxes. Journal of Business Ethics, 80, 727–743. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9465-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17–59). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., Zyphur, M. J., & Zhang, Z. (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15, 209–233. doi:10.1037/a0020141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Probst, T. M., Brubaker, T. L., & Barsotti, A. (2008). Organizational injury rate underreporting: The moderating effect of organizational safety climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1147–1154. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.1147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins, S. P., Judge, T. A., & Campbell, T. C. (2010). Organizational behavior. Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437–453. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1987.tb00609.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silk, J. B. (2007). The adaptive value of sociality in mammalian groups. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 362(1480), 539–559. doi:10.1098/rstb.2006.1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sy, T., Shore, L. M., Strauss, J., Shore, T. H., Tram, S., Whiteley, P., et al. (2010). Leadership perceptions as a function of race-occupation fit: the case of Asian Americans. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 902–919. doi:10.1037/a0019501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 19–136). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ullrich, J., Christ, O., & Van Dick, R. (2009). Substitutes for procedural fairness: Prototypical leaders are endorsed whether they are fair or not. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 235–244. doi:10.1037/a0012936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Iddekinge, C. H., Ferris, G. R., & Heffner, T. S. (2009). Test of a multistage model of distal and proximal antecedents of leader performance. Personnel Psychology, 62, 463–495. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2009.01145.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Quaquebeke, N., Van Knippenberg, D., & Brodbeck, F. C. (2011). More than meets the eye: The role of subordinates’ self-perceptions in leader categorization processes. Leadership Quarterly, 22(2), 367–382. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.02.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Vugt, M. (2006). Evolutionary origin of leadership and followership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 354–371. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waldman, D. A., Galvin, B. M., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2012). The development of motivation to lead and leader role identity. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies. doi:10.1177/1548051812457416.

  • Winter, D. G. (1973). The power motive. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter, D. G. (1988). The power motive in women and men. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 510–519. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.3.510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W., Christensen, P. N., Hebl, M. R., & Rothgerber, H. (1997). Conformity to sex-typed norms, affect, and the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 523–535. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Alice H. Eagly for her helpful comments and suggestions during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Psychology, Goethe University, Grüneburgplatz 1, 60323, Frankfurt, Germany

    Sebastian C. Schuh, Alina S. Hernandez Bark & Rolf Van Dick

  2. Department of Management and Economics, Kühne Logistics University, Hamburg, Germany

    Niels Van Quaquebeke

  3. Institute of Psychology, Ruhr-University, Bochum, Germany

    Rüdiger Hossiep & Philip Frieg

Authors
  1. Sebastian C. Schuh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alina S. Hernandez Bark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Niels Van Quaquebeke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rüdiger Hossiep
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Philip Frieg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Rolf Van Dick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastian C. Schuh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schuh, S.C., Hernandez Bark, A.S., Van Quaquebeke, N. et al. Gender Differences in Leadership Role Occupancy: The Mediating Role of Power Motivation. J Bus Ethics 120, 363–379 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1663-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1663-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation