Leadership and Diversity

1. Leadership and Diversity Crystal L. Hoyt, Ph.D. Tufts University November, 2006

2. Overview • Introduction • Research Context • Women and Leadership • Latino/a Leaders • Related/Future Research

3. Situational Demands Leader Personal Resources Leader Adjustment Stereotypes Leadership Efficacy Performance Leadership Identification Well-being Attributions Discrimination Construal Processes Leadership and Diversity: A Model of Adjustment

4. In vivo: Leadership efficacy (Hoyt, Murphy, Halverson, & Watson, 2003) Examined the role of leadership efficacy in leaders’ responses to demanding situations In vivo and in VR: Leadership in the virtual workplace (Hoyt & Blascovich, 2003) Examined leadership in face to face and computer mediated contexts Past Research:A Multi-Method Approach

5. A New Research Tool • Immersive Virtual Environment Technology • Immersion in circumambient environment created by a graphics computer • Explore the environment by moving head and can interact with environment • Classic social influence effects are found in VEs (Hoyt, Blascovich, Swinth, 2003)

6. Collaborative Virtual Environments Physical Room A Physical Networked VR Room B CVE Physical Room C

7. Collaborative Virtual Environments • Research benefits (Blascovich, Loomis, Beall, Swinth, Hoyt, & Bailenson, 2002) • Superb control • Conduct research more efficiently • Impossible manipulations become possible

8. Leadership and Diversity: A Model of Adjustment Situational Demands Leader Personal Resources Leader Adjustment Stereotypes Leadership Efficacy Performance Leadership Identification Well-being Discrimination Construal Processes

10. The Glass Ceiling "In government, in business, and in the professions there may be a day when women will be looked upon as persons. We are, however, far from that day as yet." -Eleanor Roosevelt

11. The Glass Ceiling 50.3% Women in Managerial/Professional Positions 46.4% Women in the U.S. Labor Force 57.5% Women Obtaining Bachelor Degrees

12. The Glass Ceiling 15% Women in US Congress Glass Ceiling 50.3% Women in Managerial/Professional Positions 46.4% Women in the U.S. Labor Force 57.5% Women Obtaining Bachelor Degrees

13. The Glass Ceiling <2% Women CEOs 7.9% Women Highest Titles 15% Women in US Congress Glass Ceiling 50.3% Women in Managerial/Professional Positions 46.4% Women in the U.S. Labor Force 57.5% Women Obtaining Bachelor Degrees

14. MEN • AGENTIC • Confident • Assertive • Independent • Decisive • WOMEN • COMMUNAL • Kind • Helpful • Sympathetic • Concerned for others Good Leadership is a Manly Business….or so many think…. • Gender leader stereotype • Good leaders are described with masculine attributes • Stereotypically male qualities are thought necessary to being a successful leader

15. “…people could perceive me only as one thing or the other - either a hardworking professional woman or a conscientious and caring hostess ... It was becoming clear to me that people who wanted me to fit into a certain box, traditionalist or feminist, would never be entirely satisfied with…my many different, and sometimes paradoxical, roles ... “We were living in an era in which some people still felt deeply ambivalent about women in positions of public leadership and power.” Role Incongruity

16. Biased Perceptions and Evaluations • Women are presumed to be less competent leaders than men and less worthy of the leadership position across a variety of contexts • Women are evaluated less favorably when they demonstrate behaviors that fulfill prescriptions of the leader role

17. Responses to Stereotypes • Stereotype Threat(Steele & Aronson, 1995) • Stereotype Threat & Women Leaders (Davies, Spencer, Steele, 2005) • Exposure to gender-stereotypic TV commercials undermined female participants’ leadership aspirations on an upcoming task.

18. Stereotypes Are Not Always Threatening • Stereotype Reactance • Behave in manner inconsistent with stereotype • Women blatantly presented w/stereotype, outperform men at bargaining table (Kray, Thompson, & Galinsky, 2001)

19. Leadership Efficacy & Stereotype Reactance • Leadership Self-efficacy • One’s perception regarding his or her general capabilities to lead • Leadership efficacy effective in predicting leadership, group, & organizational outcomes(Hoyt, Murphy, Halverson & Watson, 2003) • Leadership efficacy----outcomes relationship is enhanced under demanding situations(Murphy, 2001)

20. Stereotype Control Predicted Pattern of Results • When blatantly presented with the gender leader stereotype, women with high levels of leadership efficacy will react against it. Performance Leadership Identification Psychological Well-Being

21. Participants 51 women (Study 1) 72 women (Study 2) Independent variables: Stereotype activation (Primed or not) Leadership efficacy (High or Low) Dependent variables: Perceived performance Rated performance Domain identification Well-being Self-esteem Depressed affect Research DesignHoyt & Blascovich, Group Processes and Intergroup Relations

22. Binder containing images of male leaders Instructions: Men outnumber women in top leadership roles One possible reason is that men are more effective leaders This research is looking at these differences Procedure Stereotype Activation

23. Procedure Stereotype Activation Prepare for Leader Role • Employee-hiring task • President of James Frick Inc. • Chair selection committee hiring new associate • Influence & motivate followers to make best decision • Provided relevant materials • Memo from CEO; Applicant information packets • Protocol • 7-minute preparation period • 3-minute meeting with ‘vice-chairs’

24. Procedure Stereotype Activation Prepare for Leader Role Lead in VR

25. Physical Room A Physical Networked VR Room B CVE Physical Room C Procedure Stereotype Activation Prepare for Leader Role Lead in VR

26. Procedure Stereotype Activation Prepare for Leader Role Lead in VR • Participant leads followers in 3 minute meeting • Using virtual reality technology • One-way communication with followers • Communication was recorded

27. Procedure Stereotype Activation Prepare for Leader Role Lead in VR

28. Procedure Stereotype Activation Prepare for Leader Role Lead in VR Final Questionnaires • Final questionnaires: • Domain identification • Well-being • Perceived performance • Debriefing

29. Perceived Performance • F(1,117)= 9.08, p<.01, η2 = .07 Scale: 0 to 6

30. Rated Performance Scale: 1 to 9 • F(1,101)= 2.90, p=.09, η2 = .03

31. Domain Identification Scale: 0 to 6 • F(1,117)= 5.91, p<.05, η2 = .05

32. F(1,66)= 4.48, p<.05, η2 = .06 • F(1,67)= 5.10, p<.05, η2 = .07 Scale: 0 to 6 Well-Being Self-Esteem Depressed Affect

33. In Sum • Leadership self-efficacy moderates the following responses to stereotype activation: • Perceived and actual performance • Domain identification • Well-being (self-esteem and depressed affect) • High efficacy leaders demonstrated reactance responses

34. Discussion • The gender leader stereotype has important implications for not only perceptions and evaluations of women leaders, but also for the responses of the leaders themselves. • Continued research in this area and a better understanding of high efficacy women’s reactance responses may provide us with tools to help buffer those more adversely affected by stereotypes.

35. Leadership and Diversity: A Model of Adjustment Situational Demands Leader Personal Resources Leader Adjustment Stereotypes Leadership Efficacy Well-being Attributions Discrimination Construal Processes

36. Latino Leaders: Performance Feedback and Well-BeingHoyt, Aguilar, Kaiser, Blascovich, & Lee (in press), Journal of Experimental Social Psychology • Latinos and other minorities in leadership positions may experience difficulty making attributions to others’ evaluations of their leadership performance. • Attributional ambiguity • Uncertainty as to whether the feedback is a veridical reflection of their leadership abilities or a reflection based on stereotypes and prejudices (Crocker & Major, 1989)

37. Attributions and Well-Being • Psychologically healthy people • Attribute POSITIVE events…. • Internal, global, stable aspects of self • Attribute NEGATIVE events…. • Sources external to self

38. Hypotheses • Visibly Latino leaders will attribute feedback more to discrimination compared to visibly White leaders. • Negative feedback: self-protective effects • Higher well-being (Study 1 and Study 2) • Positive feedback: undermining effects • Lower well-being (Study 2)

39. Participants 40 participants (20 Latino, 20 White) Independent variables Portrayal in the Virtual Environment Latino or White Participant Ethnicity Latino or White Dependent Variables Well-Being Attributions to discrimination Study 1: Methodology

40. Position & Orientation Tracking (A) Head Mounted Display (HMD) (C) Rendering Computer (B) Procedure • Participants performed the leadership task using Immersive Virtual Environment Technology Leader’s view of the two followers during the meeting in the immersive virtual environment.

41. Portrayals in the Virtual Environment: Latino or White Portrayal matched gender of participant Received negative feedback from followers Leaders completed final questionnaires Attributions Well-being Portrayal: Latina female Portrayal: White male Procedure

42. Scale: 0 to 6 • F (1, 35) = 4.94, p < .05, 2 = .12 • F (1, 35) = 3. 19, p = .08, 2 = .08. Study 1: Results • Attributions • Well-Being

43. Attributions to Discrimination B = .36 B = .55 Portrayal Well-Being Total Effect=.72 Indirect Effect=.19 Direct Effect=.53 Study 1: Mediational Analyses • Attributions to discrimination as a mediator of the effects of portrayal on well-being.

44. Participants 59 Latino participants Independent variables Portrayal in the Virtual Environment Latino or White Leadership Feedback Positive of Negative Procedures Same as Study 1 except feedback Study 2: Methodology

45. F (1, 55) = 5.91, p = .02, 2 = .10 • F (1, 55) = 7.22, p = .01, 2 = .12 • F (1, 55) = 7.22, p = .01, 2 = .12 Study 2: Results • Attributions • Well-Being

46. Attributions to Discrimination B = .20 B = .44 Portrayal Well-Being Total Effect=.53 .23 + Indirect Effect=.09Direct Effect=.44 . Attributions to Discrimination B = -.27 B = .63 Portrayal Well-Being Total Effect= -.51 Indirect Effect=.17Direct Effect=.34 Attributions to Discrimination B = .32 B = .52 Portrayal Well-Being Total Effect=.71 .23 + Indirect Effect=.16Direct Effect=.55 . Study 2: Mediational Analyses Negative Feedback: Positive Feedback: Study 1 & 2 combined:

47. In Sum • Attributing feedback to one’s group membership can buffer against negative feedback but can undermine their ability to take credit for positive feedback in the leadership context.

48. Related/Future Research Leader Personal Resources Situational Demands Leader Adjustment Leadership Efficacy Stereotypes Construal Processes Performance Leadership Identification Well-being Attributions Discrimination Situational Moderators Group Composition Cognitive Load Counter-stereotypic Exemplars Media Images

49. Jim Blascovich Cheryl Kaiser Lauren Aguilar Kevin Lee Undergraduate Research Assistants Lauren Aguilar Donovan Bean Lauren Davidovitz Michelle Denni Sarah Estrada Sarah Haskell Diana Hill Annie Lamson Kevin Lee Elizabeth LeMoine Robin Lensing Cari Nicholson Molly Thompson Acknowledgements