Leadership and gender advantage

By Robert P. Vecchio. 2002

327 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/01f700d0084e516734f8c57f72a742112b8a99ab

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Gender Studies

1. John Antonakis
2. N. Ellemers
3. M. V. van Engen
4. Floor Rink
5. Michelle K. Ryan
6. B. Derks
7. Margaret M. Hopkins
8. Samantha C. Paustian‐Underdahl

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

1. John Antonakis
2. M. V. van Engen
3. Bruce J. Avolio
4. Leire Gartzia
5. Floor Rink
6. M. Neubert
7. Samantha C. Paustian‐Underdahl
8. B. Derks

In Sociology and Political Science

1. N. Ellemers
2. John Antonakis
3. B. Derks
4. Michelle K. Ryan
5. Floor Rink
6. M. V. van Engen
7. Samantha C. Paustian‐Underdahl
8. Leire Gartzia

Citations in the corpus

• Social and emotional competencies predicting success for male and female executives (2008, background): “There are various points of view concerning men and women in leadership positions: “ … the search for sex differences in the behavior of leaders has yielded results that are highly equivocal” ( Vecchio, 2002”
• Women and Leadership (2017, background): “…ambiguity (Gastil, 1994), the more limited narrow conceptualization of style offered by this approach (Eagly & Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001; Field, 1979), or the complex relationship between democratic versus autocratic style and effectiveness (Foels, Driskell, Mullen, & Salas, 2000; Vecchio, 2002).”
• Gender and perceptions of leadership effectiveness: a meta-analysis of contextual moderators. (2014, background): “Vecchio (2002) criticized Eagly and Johnson (1990) for including self-ratings of leadership effectiveness in their meta-analysis, as he believed “this type of assessment is presently regarded as highly suspect in the field of leadership research” (p. 650).”
• Are (male) leaders feminine enough? Gendered traits of identity as mediators of sex differences in leadership styles (2012, background): “Although some authors have questioned the extent to which sex differences in leadership styles can be found (Vecchio, 2002), a comprehensive meta-analyses of sex differences in leadership styles by Eagly et al.”
• Context and leadership: An examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. (2003, background): “Although differences have not been very large (see Eagly & Johnson, 1990)—and according to Vecchio (2002) largely overstated—it does appear that women tend to use transformational leadership behaviors and in particular individualized consideration more often than do men, and that men tend to use…”
• Women in high places: When and why promoting women into top positions can harm them individually or as a group (and how to prevent this) (2012, background): “However, research in this area has tended to ignore variation in the content of these stereotypes across organizational contexts (Vecchio, 2002).”
• Pathways to informal leadership: The moderating role of gender on the relationship of individual differences and team member network centrality to informal leadership emergence (2004, background): “In a recent review of gender-based leadership research, Vecchio (2002) argues that gender research needs to move away from simple main effect laboratory studies to the study of gender in intact groups.”
• Shared leadership : A post-heroic perspective on leadership as a collective construction (2007, unknown): “…unitary command as the only viable solution), to which we can add the contemporary idea that problems of gender inequality are finally being solved (implying that any basic redefinition of leadership would be unnecessary since we have already found the most suitable forms) (cf. Vecchio, 2002).”