Leaders may be subjected to discrimination since certain leadership traits are characterised by age and gender. For example, warmth is more significant in women leaders than men. What role can HRM and HRD play in helping organisations to minimise discrimination as far as possible, if not eradicate it?
Implicit Leadership Theories (ILTs) encompass people's preconceived ideas about effective leadership, often influenced by factors such as age and gender, which can lead to discrimination.
Human Resource Management (HRM) and Human Resource Development (HRD) are pivotal in addressing such discrimination. HRM can cultivate an organisational culture that values diversity and inclusion. Policies promoting equality and discouraging stereotyping can be devised, such as fair recruitment and selection processes focusing on competencies rather than age or gender (Benschop & Doorewaard, 2012). However, it is essential to note that more than these policies are required if the broader organisational culture still unconsciously fosters bias.
HRD can organise training initiatives to doubt ILTs, educate employees about the adverse effects of stereotyping, and encourage them to appreciate diverse leadership styles. These may include workshops on unconscious bias to challenge implicit assumptions about leadership. However, the effectiveness of these initiatives largely depends on their design and implementation—generic training may not address specific biases (Bezrukova et al., 2016). These programmes must be tailored to the organisation’s unique context.
While ILTs are deeply ingrained, HRM and HRD can significantly mitigate their impact. However, comprehensive organisational change, involving leadership commitment, policy changes, and continuous monitoring and improvement, is crucial to minimise discrimination and foster a more inclusive leadership landscape (Bohnet, 2018). This approach would help to ensure that leadership is not confined by stereotypes, promoting a more equitable environment.
References
- Benschop, Y., & Doorewaard, H. (2012). Gender subtext revisited. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 31(3), 225—235. https://doi.org/10.1108/02610151211209081
- Bezrukova, K., Spell, C.S., Perry, J.L., & Jehn, K.A. (2016). A meta-analytical integration of over 40 years of research on diversity training evaluation. Psychological Bulletin, 142(11), 1227—1274. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000067
- Bohnet, I. (2018). What works: Gender equality by design (Reprint ed.). Belknap Press.
If we take Implicit Theory as an unconscious cognitive theory that individuals develop from their education and leadership experience, what are the pros and cons of this in the workplace?
Implicit Leadership Theories (ILTs) refer to an individual’s built-in assumptions, stereotypes, or beliefs about the traits and behaviours characterising an effective leader. These theories, often unconsciously developed through education and leadership experiences, have pros and cons in the workplace.
One of the advantages of ILTs is that they can facilitate quick decision-making processes (Müller & Turner, 2005). Since these theories are often built on previous experiences, they enable employees to make instinctive judgments about a leader’s effectiveness. This can be particularly useful in fast-paced work environments where swift decisions are crucial. Additionally, ILTs can promote a shared understanding of leadership within an organisation, fostering organisational culture and unity (Epitropaki & Martin, 2005).
However, ILTs can have serious shortcomings. They can perpetuate stereotypes and biases, leading to discriminatory leadership evaluations (Sczesny et al., 2004). For instance, an inherent belief that men are better leaders than women can unconsciously affect how individuals evaluate leadership effectiveness. These biases can also limit diversity in leadership, as individuals who do not fit the stereotypical paradigm may be overlooked for leadership roles.
Additionally, ILTs can hinder the development of unconventional or innovative leadership styles (Foti & Lord, 1987). If a particular behaviour or trait is not aligned with the established implicit theory, it may be dismissed as ineffective, even if it could offer new perspectives or solutions.
While ILTs can expedite decision-making and cultivate a shared understanding of leadership, they can also foster biases and impede innovation. To mitigate these drawbacks, organisations should promote awareness, critical evaluations, and strategies for addressing their potential shortcomings (Hogue & Lord, 2007). Reflecting on one’s ILTs can also be a valuable practice for individual growth and development.
References
- Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2005). From ideal to real. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 659—676. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.659
- Foti, R.J., & Lord, R.G. (1987). Prototypes and scripts. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 39(3), 318-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(87)90027-6
- Hogue, M., & Lord, R.G. (2007). A multilevel, complexity theory approach to understanding gender bias in leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 370—390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.04.006
- Müller, R., & Turner, J.R. (2005). The impact of principal–agent relationship and contract type on communication between project owner and manager. International Journal of Project Management, 23(5), 398—403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.03.001
- Sczesny, S., Bosak, J., Neff, D., & Schyns, B. (2004). Gender stereotypes and the attribution of leadership traits. Sex Roles, 51(11), 631—645. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-004-0715-0
