39
Perceptions of Female Managers in
Male-Dominated Industries:
Effects of Gender Rarity, Performance,
and Diversity Justification
Shefali Patil1
New York University
Abstract
Two experimental studies were conducted to measure the effects of contextual
and situational factors on employees’ perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors to-
ward female managers in traditionally male-oriented jobs. Study 1 manipulat-
ed the contexts (gender rarity and diversity justification) of female perceivers
through the mediating effect of social identity, while Study 2 manipulated the
contexts (gender rarity and performance) of female and male targets. Results
for Study 1 indicate that: (a) rare female perceivers are more likely to per-
ceive female managers as being dominant (a stereotypically male trait) and
adopt these traits, (b) rare female perceivers are also more likely to believe
that they have to try harder to prove themselves in the organization, and (c)
female perceivers in companies with legal compliance diversity justification
are less likely to encourage prospective females to join the company. Results
for Study 2 indicate that companies with female targets in positions of gender
equality were assumed to have affirmative action hiring policies more often
than companies with female targets in positions of gender rarity – this provides
evidence for future research about the types of organizations in which rarity
evokes assumptions of preferential hiring. Overall, these studies contribute to
the debate over the use of affirmative action policies by providing insight into
1 Shefali Patil is a recent alumna of the undergraduate Stern School of Business, New York University,
with a double major in Management & Organizations and Marketing. This research paper was completed
while she was a participant of the Senior Honors Program 2008. She would like to sincerely thank her
advisor, Dr. Steven Blader, Associate Professor of Management, for his guidance, keen insights, strong
enthusiasm, and honest advice throughout this research process. He was the first one to welcome her to the
world of academic research, and she is very grateful to him for his continued efforts and encouragement.
She would also like to thank her mother and father for their never-ending care and dedication, her brother,
Akhil, for his love and companionship, and her roommate and close friend, Belig Borjiged, for her
help with these studies and unflagging friendship. She greatly appreciates the constant support from the
aforementioned people. Comments are welcome at shefpatil@gmail.com.

---

40
THE MICHIGAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS
the unintended consequences of their implementation. Results indicate that
increasing female representation in male-typical professions is not enough to
counter negative perceptions and behaviors toward traditionally underrepre-
sented minorities – equal gender representation must be coupled with a culture
that believes that diversity is intrinsically advantageous, in order to mitigate
some of the effects of implicit sex-based discrimination in the workplace.

---

Perceptions of Female Managers in Male-Dominated Industries
41
Introduction
The 1960s in American history marked the beginning of substantial
changes to the organizational workplace with respect to gender equality. Dur-
ing those years, government and society worked to decrease discrimination
against women in the workplace to create fair hiring policies and to provide
equal employment opportunities. Some of these measures include Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act, which barred discrimination in employment on the basis
of sex and race, the Equal Pay Act, which made it illegal for employers to pay
women less than men in the same jobs, and Title IX of the Education Amend-
ment, which banned sex discrimination in schools. These efforts have had a
major social and economic impact, as women’s participation in the workplace
has increased significantly. The most influential change, however, has come
from the increase in women’s participation in traditionally male-dominated in-
dustries, such as finance, science, and law, and from the increase in the number
of degrees held by these women in preparation for these jobs. According to the
U.S. Department of Labor, “almost three-quarters of women were employed
in management, professional, sales, and office occupations in 2006, compared
with about half of men.”2 These professional fields are perhaps among the
most powerful, lucrative, and highly regarded in the job market, and changes
in these fields have created an advantageous opportunity for many women.
While there has been a dramatic decrease in explicit sex-based discrimina-
tion, discrimination still continues in a less apparent yet almost equally harm-
ful form. This implicit sex-based discrimination prevents women from fully
benefiting from high-earning positions. Women, especially at the managerial
level, continue to face numerous obstacles pertaining to matters, such as com-
pensation, promotion, and representation, even years after the initial impact
of the movement. For example, a woman still continues to earn seventy-three
cents for every dollar that a man makes in the same job and position.
One of the factors that underlie this particular form of sex-based discrimi-
nation involves the concept of perception. In organizational behavior theory,
perception is defined as the way in which people observe, view, and interpret
others and events around them to create a sense of order for their environ-
ment.3 Perception greatly affects the attitudes employees have of others and
themselves, as well as the decisions they make within an organization. Biases,
or systematic tendencies, often distort these perceptions, leading to inaccurate
assessments and evaluations. With regard to women in the workplace, this
gender-based biasing and stereotyping is one of the factors that prevents full
2 United States Department of Labor. www.dol.gov, Accessed November 5, 2007.
3 Jennifer M. George & Jones, G.R. Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. 6th ed.,
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005.

---

42
THE MICHIGAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS
attainment of gender equality in male-dominated organizations.
This paper, through the execution of two experimental studies, aims to
examine the surrounding contexts that cause differences in perceptions. Study
1 focuses on the context of female perceivers in the workplace and their per-
ceptions of female targets (the ones who are perceived). Study 2 focuses on
the context of female targets and the consequent perceptions of both male and
female perceivers.
Study 1
Context of a Female Perceiver and Its Impact on Her Perceptions of
Female Managers, and Attitudes and Behaviors in the Organization
Background
One of the prevalent forms of implicit sex-based discrimination that oc-
curs in today’s workplace involves the negative perceptions of female em-
ployees by other females in male-dominated organizations. For example, in an
experimental study on interviews, it was found that female recruiters evaluated
male applicants more favorably than female applicants, while no significant
differentiation was found with male recruiters.4 Graves & Powell suggested
that this occurred because female recruiters, who were employees of a tra-
ditionally male profession, may have seen male applicants as more similar
to themselves than female applicants; this perceived similarity affected their
assessment of the applicants’ subjective qualifications. Additional phenomena
can be found in prominent polls. A Work and Power survey of 60,000 partici-
pants conducted by MSNBC revealed that three out of four women expressed
a preference to work for a man than a woman.5 Gallup Poll’s annual Work and
Education survey revealed that half of all adult women in the United States
prefer working for a man (compared to 45% of all men).6 These results are
perhaps unexpected, as one might assume that women would prefer female
bosses who could potentially be a source of help and advice for lower level fe-
male employees. The most surprising implication of this survey is that women
themselves, who are fully aware of the disadvantages in the workplace, may
be contributing to sex-based discrimination.
Some of this behavior can be explained by the mediating effect of social
4 Laura M. Graves & Powell, G.N. “The Effect of Sex Similarity on Recruiters’ Evaluations of Actual
Applicants: a Test of the Similarity-attraction Paradigm.” Personnel Psychology, 48 no. 1 (1995), 85-98.
5 Eve Tahmincioglu. “Men rule — at least in workplace attitudes.” MSNBC. March 8, 2007. http://
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17345308/, Accessed December 2, 2007.
6 W.W. Simmons. “When it Comes to Choosing a Boss, Americans Still Prefer Men.” Gallup
Website, http://www.gallup.com/poll/2128/ When-Comes-Choosing-Boss-Americans-Still-Prefer-Men.
aspx, Accessed January 14, 2008.

---

Perceptions of Female Managers in Male-Dominated Industries
43
identity.7 Through this, people categorize and group themselves based on gen-
der, race, ethnicity, profession, etc.8 The consequences of taking on a particular
identity involve both positive and negative behaviors.9 A female recruiter’s
preference for male applicants can indicate a distancing from the female iden-
tity and a stronger identification with the male group, a higher-status group in
the male-dominated organization. The extent of a woman’s identification with
a female social identity may therefore be related to perceptions and behaviors
toward other females.
Hypotheses
It is hypothesized that the context or environment that a female perceiver
is in may influence the extent to which she identifies with a female social iden-
tity, and thus her perceptions of other women. Two specific contextual factors
that may influence how females react to other females are gender composition
and justification of diversity measures. Parallel to the methods used in previ-
ous studies,10 both these contextual factors “prime” females by making their
female identity salient, which may, in turn, influence the following perceptions
she has about a female manager: the perceived competency, the perceived in-
terpersonal hostility, the perceived communality (stereotypically female char-
acteristics), the perceived agenticism (stereotypically male characteristics),
the likeability of the female manager, and the satisfaction working under the
female manager. Perceptions of the female manager can influence the per-
ceiver’s behaviors and attitudes as well. Some of these include the likelihood
she will seek the female manager out as a mentor and adopt her behaviors, the
likelihood she will join a women’s mentoring/networking program, her adop-
tion of stereotypical masculine and feminine traits, and her general beliefs
about female managers. These are all behaviors that can potentially affect the
future success of the female in the organization.
Pertaining to the first proposed contextual factor, gender composition, it
is predicted that women in a situation of gender rarity (she is the only female
within the organization) would identify less with the female identity because
of her male-dominated surroundings. This distancing would make her the most
likely to perceive female managers negatively. On the other hand, women in a
situation of gender equality (equal number of women relative to men) would
7 Henri Tajfel. Human Groups and Social Categories. London: Cambridge University Press, 1981.
8 Priscilla M. Elsass & Graves, L.M. “Demographic Diversity in Decision-making Groups: The
Experience of Women and People of Color.” The Academy of Management Review, 22 no. 4 (1997), 946-
973. 9 Laura M. Graves & Powell, G.N. “The Effect of Sex Similarity on Recruiters’ Evaluations of Actual
Applicants: a Test of the Similarity-attraction Paradigm.” Personnel Psychology, 48 no. 1 (1995), 85-98.
10 Margaret Shih, Pittinsky, T.L., & Trahan, A. “Domain-specific Effects of Stereotypes on
Performance.” Self and Identity, 5 (2006), 1-14.

---

44
THE MICHIGAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS
self-identify more with the female identity, decreasing negative perceptions
towards other women:
Hypothesis 1a: Women in situations of gender rarity will have more
negative perceptions of a female manager, adopt less advantageous
behaviors, and hold more negative attitudes than women in a situa-
tion of gender equality.
The second proposed contextual factor aims to define the culture of the
organization that the perceiver is in. Although culture is very broad, intricate,
and hard to define, a sense of it can be revealed through an organization’s jus-
tification/framing of diversity recruitment. There are two mainstream justifica-
tions that are currently used: the first is for business reasons, thereby imply-
ing that diversity gives the company a competitive advantage, and the second
is commonly referred to as affirmative action programs, which are perceived
to be implemented in order to comply with government regulations.11 Prior
research has shown that members of an organization have more positive at-
titudes toward a program that is justified through competitive advantage rather
than affirmative action.12
It is expected that, under the competitive advantage justification, women
would be more likely to identify with the female identity because the female
group would bring them higher status; it is, in essence, self-enhancement iden-
tification13 within an organization that values diversity. However, in an orga-
nization with affirmative action policies, or a culture of hiring females for the
sake of avoiding legal penalties, a woman is perhaps more likely to move away
from the disadvantaged female identity and embrace other identities.14
Hypothesis 1b: Women in an organization with affirmative action
diversity measures will have more negative perceptions of a female
manager, adopt less advantageous behaviors, and hold more nega-
tive attitudes than women in an organization with competitive ad-
vantage diversity measures.
The interaction of the gender rarity and diversity justification measures
provides an interesting complication in the matter. It is expected that becau-
11 O.C. Richard & Kirby, S.L. “Women Recruits’ Perceptions of Workforce Diversity Program
Selection Decisions: A Procedural Justice Examination.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28 (1998),
183-188.
12 David L. Kidder, Lankau, M.J., Chrobat-Mason, D., Mollica, K.A., & Friedman, R.A. “Backlash
Toward Diversity Initiatives: Examining the Impact of Diversity Program Justification, Personal, and
Group Outcomes.” International Journal of Conflict Management, 15 no. 1 (2004), 77-102.
13 Charles Stagnor & Thompson E. “Needs for Cognitive Economy and Self-enhancement as Unique
Predictors of Intergroup Attitudes.” European Journal of Social Psychology, 32 (2002), 563-575.
14 Steven Fein & Spencer, S. J. ”Prejudice as Self-image Maintenance: Affirming the Self Through
Derogating Others.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73 (1997), 31-44.

---

Perceptions of Female Managers in Male-Dominated Industries
45
sea woman would identify with the female group in both gender equality and
competitive advantage justification, this combination would be the “best case
scenario,” with women having more positive perceptions of female manag-
ers. However, rarity and affirmative action justification are predicted to be the
“worst case scenario,” with strong distancing from the female identity.
Hypothesis 1c: Women in an organization with gender rarity and af-
firmative action diversity measures will have more negative percep-
tions of a female manager, adopt less advantageous behaviors, and
hold more negative attitudes than women in an organization with
gender equality and competitive advantage diversity measures.
Finally, it is hypothesized that the effects of these two contextual factors
are also dependent on the personal beliefs of the perceiver, particularly with
respect to her beliefs about the separation of gender roles. In prior research,
egalitarian attitudes have been proven to affect other similar behaviors, such
as a woman’s likelihood of engaging in nontraditional occupations.15 Follow-
ing this pattern, it is likely that women with highly egalitarian values who
believe less in the separation of gender roles would not distance themselves as
much from a female social identity as those with low egalitarian values. This
measure can also have an effect on women’s reactions to other women in the
workplace.
Hypothesis 1d: Women with less egalitarian views about gender
roles will have more negative perceptions of a female manager, adopt
less advantageous behaviors, and hold more negative attitudes than
women with more egalitarian views about gender roles.
Method
Participants and Design
The participants of Study 1 were 80 women, between the ages of 18 to
34. The vast majority were undergraduate students from various universities
across the United States, with some from universities in Australia, New Zea-
land, Singapore, South Korea, India, and Israel. They were recruited through
online networking sites. All participants were entered into a raffle for cash
prizes.
The design of Study 1 was a 2 x 2 factorial design with rarity (only males
in the organization, or three females and three males) and company justifica-
tion of diversity measures (affirmative action or competitive advantage) as the
15 J. Chatterjee & McCarrey M. “Sex Role Attitudes of Self and Those Inferred of Peers,
Performance, and Career Opportunities as Reported by Women in Nontraditional vs. Traditional Training
Programs”. Sex Roles, 21 (1989), 653–69.

---

46
THE MICHIGAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS
manipulations. Participants were randomly assigned one of these four condi-
tions.
Procedure and Stimulus Materials
All participants were emailed a link to one of four online surveys.
Each survey began with an introduction containing a general, irrelevant
purpose, which stated that the study explores the experiences of new hires
and management’s responsibilities of facilitating these experiences. This was
followed by instructions that made the participant aware that she was going
to read a new-hire information letter and instructed her to imagine that she
had just accepted a highly desirable job offer from the company. The latter
part of these instructions was added to mitigate any pre-conceptions that the
participant might have had about financial companies or finance-related jobs,
considering some were not from business-oriented schools.
Participants were then directed to the following page that contained the
new-hire information/orientation letter for a fictitious mid-sized financial ser-
vices company named SIL Financial Services, Inc. [A fictitious company was
used to (1) prevent any irrelevant biases/perceptions that a participant may
have had about a real company from influencing results and (2) avoid unnec-
essary affiliations of diversity justification and hiring procedures with a real
company. Although the company was fictitious, all efforts were made to make
this letter as realistic and believable as possible].
The letter began by personally welcoming the participant to the com-
pany by providing background information on SIL Financial and describing
its culture as supporting a collegial environment that provided opportunities
for professional growth.
The two experimental manipulations, justification of diversity measures
(presented as “Employee Diversity at SIL Financial”) and gender rarity (pre-
sented as an introduction to the participant’s team), appeared after the back-
ground and culture information. These two parts were the only sections of the
information letter that were unique to each condition. These manipulations
will be discussed in detail in the following section.
Finally, the new-hire information letter introduced the participant to the
managing director of her team, a fictitious female. She was given strong quali-
fications in order to “create” the image of an objectively competent, well-qual-
ified manager. After the new-hire information letter, participants were directed
to the questionnaire.

---

Perceptions of Female Managers in Male-Dominated Industries
47
Experimental Manipulations
(1) Company Justification of Diversity Measures: Participants were given
a paragraph in the new-hire information letter under the heading, “Employee
Diversity at SIL Financial,” which justified the hiring of female employees
and other minorities as either a sole compliance of affirmative action policies
set forth by the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) guidelines (affirmative
action justification condition) or a voluntary adoption of minority recruitment
to increase the competency of the organization (competitive advantage justifi-
cation condition). Wording of these justification measures were modeled after
the framing of diversity recruitment measures created by Richard & Kirby,
1998. Both of these paragraphs specifically addressed the hiring of women, as
well as the hiring of other minorities.
The affirmative action justification stated:
SIL Financial operates in compliance with the affirmative action re-
quirements set forth by the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO)
guidelines for minority representation in the workplace. We follow
the mandate to hire minorities, especially women, who have been
consistently underrepresented in the finance industry. SIL has thus
implemented an affirmative action program to seek, hire, and pro-
mote minority group members.
The competitive advantage justification stated:
SIL Financial recognizes that today’s client base has become in-
creasingly diverse. In order to have a competitive advantage in this
type of market, we believe it is important to have employees, espe-
cially women, who reflect this diversity and understand this client
base. Although SIL does not have an affirmative action program, it
has voluntarily implemented a diversity initiative to seek, hire, and
promote minority group members.
(2) Gender Rarity: Rarity was manipulated by changing the gender com-
position of the participant’s team that she would be “joining.” Participants
were given a paragraph in the new-hire information letter, under the head-
ing, “Your Team at SIL Financial,” that introduced them to the team and its
fictitious members. The paragraph either contained all males (the participant
would be the only female employee in this team) for the rarity condition, or
three males and three females (to give the impression of gender equality) for
the no rarity condition. Included with each name were the member’s position

---

48
THE MICHIGAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS
(Vice President, Associate, or Analyst), highest educational degree and the
degree-granting institution, and hometown.
Sex Role Egalitarian Scale
The egalitarian scale used in this study was adapted from the Tradition-
al-Egalitarian Sex Role Scale (TESR)16 and was intended to measure partici-
pants’ beliefs in the equality of gender roles. Ten out of the twenty items were
selected from the scale, particularly those that were most relevant in today’s
times. It appeared near the end of the study. A list of these scale items can be
found in Appendix A.
Dependent Measures
The first half of the questionnaire measured participants’ evaluations of
the female managing director. It contained seven parts. The first five measures,
which consisted of competency, interpersonal hostility, communality, agenti-
cism, and liking, were compiled from Heilman & Okimoto, 2007. Each was
posed with the question, “I think the Managing Director will be:” The com-
petency measure consisted of three 7-point Likert Scales: competent (not very
competent-very competent), effective (not very effective-very effective), and
productive (not very productive-very productive). The interpersonal conflict
scale consisted of five 7-point Likert Scales with the following adjectives:
abrasive (not very abrasive-very abrasive), pushy (not very pushy-very pushy),
untrustworthy (not very untrustworthy-very untrustworthy), manipulative (not
very manipulative-very manipulative), and selfish (not very selfish-very self-
ish). The communality scale consisted of four 7-point Likert Scales with the
following adjectives: supportive (not very supportive-very supportive), under-
standing (not very understanding-very understanding), sensitive (not very sen-
sitive-very sensitive), and caring (not very caring-very caring). The measure
of agenticism consisted of six 7-point Likert Scales with the following adjec-
tives: strong (not very strong-very strong), assertive (not very assertive-very
assertive), tough (not very tough-very tough), bold (not very bold-very bold),
active (not very active-very active), and dominant (not very dominant-very
dominant). The final scale measured liking with one 7-point Likert Scale with
the adjective likeable (not very likeable-very likeable).
The next part measured how the participant thinks she would feel work-
ing under the female managing director. This was asked in two questions: the
first was a 7-point Likert Scale (not very satisfied-very satisfied) correspond-
ing to the question, “How satisfied do you think you will be working under
16 Knud S. Larsen & Long, E. “Attitudes Toward Sex Roles: Traditional or Egalitarian?” Sex Roles,
19 (1988), 1-12.

---