Shifting Perspectives: How Scrutiny Shapes the Relationship Between CEO Gender and Acquisition Activity

Research Summary: Several upper echelons studies have found that firms led by female executives are less likely to engage in risky endeavors than those led by male top executives. We argue that conceptualizing female CEOs as universally conservative decision-makers may paint too simplistic a picture and that the impact of CEO gender on strategic decision-making may vary significantly depending on the given situation CEOs are experiencing. We integrate executive job demands and gender research to propose that scrutiny will exhibit differential effects on female and male CEOs\u27 acquisition activity. We show that in high-scrutiny contexts, the difference between male and female CEO acquisition activity disappears. In contrast, in low-scrutiny contexts, the difference between male and female CEOs\u27 acquisition activity is exaggerated. Managerial Summary: Substantial research has shown that female executives acquire at a lower rate than male executives. We argue that viewing female CEOs as universally conservative decision-makers may paint too simplistic a picture and that the impact of CEO gender on strategic decision-making may vary significantly depending on the given situation CEOs are experiencing. In particular, we argue and find that in high-scrutiny contexts, the difference between male and female CEO acquisition activity disappears. This research suggests that managers should consider the impact of environmental context—especially the role of scrutiny—when considering the risk propensity of female leaders

A Call to Action: Taking the Untenable out of Women Professors’ Pregnancy, Postpartum, and Caregiving Demands

Despite becoming increasingly represented in academic departments, women scholars face a critical lack of support as they navigate demands pertaining to pregnancy, motherhood, and child caregiving. In addition, cultural norms surrounding how faculty and academic leaders discuss and talk about tenure, promotion, and career success have created pressure for women who wish to grow their family and care for their children, leading to questions about whether it is possible for these women to have a family and an academic career. The current paper is a call to action for academia to build structures that support women professors as they navigate the complexities of pregnancy, the postpartum period, and the caregiving demands of their children. We specifically call on those of us in I-O psychology, management, and related departments to lead the way. In making this call, we first present the realistic, moral, and financial cases for why this issue needs to be at the forefront of discussions surrounding success in the academy. We then discuss how in the U.S. and elsewhere, an absence of policies supporting women places two groups of academics—department heads (as the leaders of departments who have discretion outside of formal policies to make work better for women) and other faculty members (as potential allies both in the department and within our professional organizations)—in a critical position to enact support and change. We conclude with our boldest call—to make a cultural shift that shatters the assumption that having a family is not compatible with academic success. Combined, we seek to launch a discussion that leads directly to necessary and overdue changes in how women scholars are supported in academia

CEO Gender-Based Termination Concerns: Evidence from Initial Severance Agreements

We theorize that female candidates considering CEO roles will perceive greater termination vulnerability in such roles than their male counterparts. We further theorize that indicators of recent organizational distress will exacerbate female CEO candidates’ perceptions of termination vulnerability, while the presence of female leaders will mitigate these concerns. To test our arguments, we examine the initial values of newly appointed female and male CEOs’ severance agreements from 2007 to 2014. Results support our arguments and begin to shed light on the factors that influence female executives’ concerns about CEO roles and ultimately firms’ ability to appoint female CEOs