| This study examined gender differences in a 360-degree leadership development assessment. First, consistent with Role Congruity Theory (Eagly & Karau, 2002), the context of the work environment was expected to impact the relationship between leader gender and leader ratings such that female leaders would be rated as being less effective and needing more development than their male counterparts in male-dominated work contexts. The types of context variables explored were the level of male domination of the industry and functional areas within which the leaders worked, and the proportion of male raters for each leader. Second, gender differences in ratings were expected for different types of skills being assessed. In this study, both communal and agentic leadership skills were included in the 360 instrument. It was expected that women would generally receive ratings indicating higher effectiveness and less need for development with regard to communal, as opposed to agentic, leadership skills. Finally, the impacts of rater gender, rater level relative to the leader (i e. boss, peer, subordinate), and leader level on leadership ratings (including self-ratings) were explored.;No gender differences were found for any type of rating: overall leadership effectiveness, agentic development needs, or communal development needs. Further, gender differences in ratings were not impacted by the organizational context variables included in this study, thereby failing to support Role Congruity Theory. Finally, no gender differences were found as a function of rater gender, rater level, or leader level. |
