Why We Should Stop Trying to Fix Women: How Context Shapes and Constrains Women's Career Trajectories.

In this review we examine two classes of interventions designed to achieve workplace gender equality: (a) those designed to boost motivations and ambition, such as those that aim to attract more women into roles where they are underrepresented; and (b) those that try to provide women with needed abilities to achieve these positions. While such initiatives are generally well meaning, they tend to be based upon (and reinforce) stereotypes of what women lack. Such a deficit model leads to interventions that attempt to "fix" women rather than address the structural factors that are the root of gender inequalities. We provide a critical appraisal of the literature to establish an evidence base for why fixing women is unlikely to be successful. As an alternative, we focus on understanding how organizational context and culture maintain these inequalities by looking at how they shape and constrain (a) women's motivations and ambitions, and (b) the expression and interpretation of their skills and attributes. In doing so, we seek to shift the interventional focus from women themselves to the systems and structures in which they are embedded.

The who, when, and why of the glass cliff phenomenon: A meta-analysis of appointments to precarious leadership positions.

Women and members of other underrepresented groups who break through the glass ceiling often find themselves in precarious leadership positions, a phenomenon that has been termed the glass cliff. The glass cliff has been investigated in a range of domains using various methodologies, but evidence is mixed. In 3 meta-analyses, we examined (a) archival field studies testing whether members of underrepresented groups, compared with members of majority groups, are more likely to be appointed to leadership positions in times of crisis; (b) experimental studies testing whether members of underrepresented groups, compared with members of majority groups, are evaluated as more suitable for, as well as (c) more likely to be selected for, leadership positions in times of crisis. All 3 analyses provided some evidence in line with the glass cliff for women. Specifically, the meta-analysis of archival studies revealed a small glass cliff effect that was dependent on organizational domain. The leadership suitability meta-analysis also showed a small glass cliff effect in between-participants studies, but not in within-participants studies. The analysis of leadership selection revealed that women are more likely to be selected over men in times of crisis, and that this effect is larger in countries with higher gender inequality. The glass cliff also extended to members of underrepresented racial and ethnic groups. We explore several moderating factors and report analyses shedding light on the underlying causes of the glass cliff. We discuss implications of our findings as well as open questions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).