For instance, women may not be considered a good fit for a managerial position if being aggressive is seen as a characteristic of a successful manager.
Eagly (1987)[4] suggest women due to their socially accepted roles are more often perceived in lower status positions than those of their male counterparts.
These accepted gender stereotypes allow for a greater prediction of sex differences between males and females in social behaviors.
Findings consistent with this theory can be seen in evidence presented by Eagly and Karau (1991),[5] who found that men emerged more often than women as leaders.
Ritter and Yoder (2004)[6] provide further evidence of gender role differences in leadership positions between men and women.
The stereotype fit hypothesis was developed by Heilman[7] in order to evaluate the current role of women in high-power positions in the workplace.
[2] Since Heilman's initial research, many studies have been conducted to determine how women are affected by job positions which are considered to be more masculine.
For example, Lyness & Heilman (2006)[8] utilized archival organizational data from a multinational finances company to study the effects of stereotype fit on performance evaluations and promotions.
Consistent with role congruity theory, Winocour, Schoen and Sirowatka (1989)[11] found ratings of male professors were not dependent on their lecture style.
Descriptive bias occurs when women leaders are stereotyped for having less leadership potential simply because of their gender, whereas prescriptive bias occurs because leadership is typically seen as a masculine desire, leaving women leaders typically evaluated less favorably because they are seen as violating a traditionally masculine desire.
[16] Both biases place female leaders into this double bind, as they are unable to express agentic behavior and emotions without negative consequences.
A 2007 reported by Catalyst found that when women act in ways that are consistent with gender stereotypes, such being relationship-focused, they are viewed as less competent leaders.
Elsesser and Lever found that study participants who preferred female managers (13%) cited positive characteristics such as their compassion, warmth or interpersonal skills.
These characterizations which are formed on stereotypical gender traits and not merit, are an example of how a descriptive bias leads employees' to incorrectly underestimate women leaders' leadership ability.
The Catalyst report found that when women behaved in ways traditionally valued for male leaders, such as acting assertively, they were viewed as having less effective social skills and being less personable.
Female leaders who do this violate the gender assigned stereotypes, which is why women in the study were found to have less effective social skills.
[20] The double bind between competence and being well liked ultimately leads to backlash for female leaders, as they are negatively perceived if they stray too far into masculine leadership styles or feminine practices.