A multilevel, complexity theory approach to understanding gender bias in leadership.

By Mary Hogue, R. Lord. 2007

176 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract We use principles from multilevel theory, complexity theory, and connectionist theory to integrate existing gender bias explanations into a comprehensive model of gender bias in leadership, one that can be used to examine and understand how throughout the leadership process gender bias occurs and can affect women negatively. The synthesis of connectionism and complexity theories provides an opportunity to suggest novel solutions to this important leadership problem, but it also shows why multiple solutions applied at individual, group, and organizational levels all may be required to change the way agents and systems of agents respond to potential female leaders.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/95104e9d42a134853907985ab80361dfd723edb5

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. R. Lord
2. R. Kark
3. C. Mainemelis
4. H. Ibarra
5. D. Kolb
6. R. Ely
7. S. Hannah
8. L. Levy

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

1. R. Kark
2. O. Epitropaki
3. R. Lord
4. C. Mainemelis
5. S. Hannah
6. L. Levy
7. P. L. Jennings
8. H. Ibarra

In Safety Research

1. R. Kark
2. R. Lord
3. S. Hannah
4. O. Epitropaki
5. Christopher G. Myers

Citations in the corpus

• Taking Gender into Account: Theory and Design for Women's Leadership Development Programs (2011, background): “…development has gained popularity (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; DeRue & Ashford, 2010b; Lord & Hall, 2005; van Knippenberg et al., 2004), it has not been linked to theory and research on the gender dynamics associated with leader identity development (for an exception, see Hogue & Lord, 2007).”
• Authentic Leadership and Follower Development (2011, background): “One of the most consistently important characteristics has been the effect of leaders’ and followers’ gender (Eagly, 2005; Eagly & Johnson, 1990; Gardiner & Tiggemann, 1999; Hogue & Lord, 2007; Watson & Hoffman, 1996).”
• Leadership and followership identity processes: A multilevel review ☆ (2017, background): “…can emerge not only at the interpersonal perceptual level but also as intrapersonal processes that affect how women leaders see themselves, what they believe they must do to be effective, and whether they should assume to maintain leadership roles (Karelaia & Guillén, 2014; Hogue & Lord, 2007).”
• A framework for understanding leadership and individual requisite complexity (2011, background): “…and flexibility was that complex adaptive systems similar to those operating at collective levels also operate within individuals (Cillers, 1998; Hogue & Lord, 2007) and are responsible for the production of dynamic forms of general, social, self, and affective leader complexity, and thus the…”