Papers/Projects

“Maybe Baby?” Bias

A wealth of research has highlighted mothers’ many employment disadvantages compared to childfree women and men, such as reduced pay and lower perceptions of competence and commitment. But what if actual motherhood is not necessary for young women to experience motherhood penalties? Although maternal leave is ostensibly intended to benefit working women, this might come at the cost of their subtle social mistreatment (i.e., workplace incivility; see here for the published paper in Journal of Vocational Behavior). “Maybe baby” expectations may also increase perceptions of hiring risk for early-career women, but not men or mothers, which hiring managers compensate for by awarding this group of women with more precarious employment conditions (see here for the published paper in Journal of Applied Social Psychology and a more practical take on this work here in Psychology Today).

Predictors of Parental Leave Support: Bad News for (Big) Dads and a Policy for Equality

Parenthood increases gender inequality in paid (employment) and unpaid labor (e.g., caretaking), highlighting pregnancy as a key period for intervention. In response, organizations offer new parental leave plans that aim to increase gender equality by reducing managerial discretion and offering gender-neutral benefits. However, coworkers may undermine these inclusive aims, particularly if they show variable support according to key employee characteristics. We examined why and how employee gender and obesity interactively predicted coworkers’ support for parental leave and tested an intervention to increase equality by design. Findings show that obesity decreases coworkers’ parental leave support for men, but increases coworkers’ parental leave support for women. These effects are driven by coworkers’ caregiving ability expectations, however, these inequalities are eliminated when parental leave is made the default. See here for the published paper in Group Processes & Intergroup Relations.

Help When Leaders Need Somebody? Follower Reactions to Leader Work-Family Conflict

Perceptions of others’ work-family conflict (WFC) have typically been studied as a top-down phenomenon, revealing negative career consequences for followers with higher WFC–particularly women. However, we know less about how those lower in organizational hierarchies (e.g., followers) notice and behave in response to leaders’ WFC–particularly male leaders. We propose that followers perceive leaders’ WFC and respond to it prosocially with extra effort to help leaders at work. Results from a field study and two experiments generally supported our predictions. This research highlights a new behavioral bonus wherein leaders’ ostensibly negative state–WFC–elicits positive behavioral effects in the form of extra effort from followers and lower-level evaluators. See here for the published paper in the Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings.

Critical events at critical times? A gendered identity approach on the path to (sustainable) leadership

What are critical events or shocks? How might they influence early career professionals' leadership pursuits? Do these processes differ for those who identify as men and women? What are their implications for sustainability? In this theoretical piece, Dr. Stephanie Rehbock, Ronit Kark, and I highlight how #criticalevents affect early career professionals and their #identitysalience at a critical time for gender equity and (social) sustainability more broadly, while also challenging research and practice to more carefully consider the accuracy of our science and the untapped potential of the nexus between #diversity, #leadership, and #sustainability. For more, see the article in Frontiers.