As a rule, a promotion does not just happen out of the blue. Before leaders decide to let someone move up the corporate ladder, they make predictions about that person: how will they develop? How much potential does she have to take on a challenging role? Such assessments are inherently subjective. But a study now shows that women are systematically disadvantaged.
Better performances, but worse ratings
Alan Benson from the University of Minnesota and his colleagues Danielle Li (MIT, National Bureau of Economic Research) and Kelly Shue (Yale, National Bureau of Economic Research) evaluated the data of around 30,000 executives of a US retail chain between 2011 and 2015.
Her study “‘Potential’ and the Gender Promotion Gap” was published in the summer. It correlated performance reviews and promotions with executive demographics. The company, whose data the research team analyzed, used a matrix to measure a person’s performance on one axis and their potential on the other. An analysis showed that women received, on average, higher performance ratings than male employees, but still received 8.3 percent lower potential ratings than men.
In the “performance” criterion, women were even seven percent more likely than men to receive the top grade “high”. Nevertheless, they rarely achieved a high rating for the “potential” criterion. As a result, they are 14 percent less likely to be promoted, the study authors said. Half of the promotion gap between men and women in the company could be attributed to this alone.
Close the gap
However, according to Alan Benson and his research colleagues, removing the “potential” item from the assessments is not a solution. The results of a thought experiment suggest that a fix could alleviate the problem. If the company raised the “potential” score for women by one notch, it could eliminate the gender promotion gap. It would also increase the quality and performance of those being transported. “But this special measure is difficult to implement,” writes the research team. “It could result in executives underrating women in the first place to forestall this gender ‘bonus.’ However, the data suggest that companies benefit from de-biasing their otherwise informative assessments of potential.”
Source: Nachrichten
