Examining Differences in Psychological Capital, Burnout, and Work Engagement Among Women in Leadership Positions
Abstract (300 words maximum)
Leadership behaviors are typically defined in masculine terms confirming women’s disadvantages in attaining leadership roles. Female stereotypes are generally inconsistent with leader roles because of the expectation that women are communal (e.g., concern for others, sociability, and emotional sensibility) and that leaders are agentic (e.g., independent, instrumental, assertive). Research has indicated changes in gender stereotypes, in particular of women increasing in agentic traits over time. Identifying as androgynous (both masculine and feminine traits) has become desirable among women in leadership roles since the perception of success within the role stems from obtaining agentic traits. This fluid and flexible expression of their gender is related to positive leadership and well-being outcomes. However, limited research exists on how personal resources and work-related well-being outcomes fluctuate, considering women’s identification with their gendered traits. This study examines the differences in psychological capital (PsyCap), burnout, and work engagement between women in leadership roles based on their femineity and masculinity traits. We collected data from 158 managerial women using a panel with Qualtrics across different job sectors in the United States. We used the Bem Sex-Role Inventory to measure identification with gendered traits (i.e., masculinity, femininity, androgyny, undifferentiated). One-Way ANOVA results indicated significant differences in PsyCap [F (3,154) = 8.772, p < 0.001, η²= .145], work engagement [F(3,154)= 19.696, p < 0.001, η² = .277], but not in burnout [F(3,154)= 2.658, p=.050, η²= 0.049] among the four groups of gendered traits. In general, participants who scored high in androgyny showed higher levels of PsyCap and work engagement. Our findings indicate that women in leadership positions that identify with a full portfolio of traits, not in the binary of men-masculine and women-feminine, show higher work-related well-being. This is relevant to continue reinforcing changes in organizational norms that reinforce and perpetuate gender differences and traditional gender role expectations.
Key Terms: Women in leadership, Psychological Capital, Social roles, Burnout, Work engagement, Social role theory, Bem Sex-Role Inventory
Academic department under which the project should be listed
RCHSS - Psychological Science
Primary Investigator (PI) Name
Israel Sanchez-Cardona
Examining Differences in Psychological Capital, Burnout, and Work Engagement Among Women in Leadership Positions
Leadership behaviors are typically defined in masculine terms confirming women’s disadvantages in attaining leadership roles. Female stereotypes are generally inconsistent with leader roles because of the expectation that women are communal (e.g., concern for others, sociability, and emotional sensibility) and that leaders are agentic (e.g., independent, instrumental, assertive). Research has indicated changes in gender stereotypes, in particular of women increasing in agentic traits over time. Identifying as androgynous (both masculine and feminine traits) has become desirable among women in leadership roles since the perception of success within the role stems from obtaining agentic traits. This fluid and flexible expression of their gender is related to positive leadership and well-being outcomes. However, limited research exists on how personal resources and work-related well-being outcomes fluctuate, considering women’s identification with their gendered traits. This study examines the differences in psychological capital (PsyCap), burnout, and work engagement between women in leadership roles based on their femineity and masculinity traits. We collected data from 158 managerial women using a panel with Qualtrics across different job sectors in the United States. We used the Bem Sex-Role Inventory to measure identification with gendered traits (i.e., masculinity, femininity, androgyny, undifferentiated). One-Way ANOVA results indicated significant differences in PsyCap [F (3,154) = 8.772, p < 0.001, η²= .145], work engagement [F(3,154)= 19.696, p < 0.001, η² = .277], but not in burnout [F(3,154)= 2.658, p=.050, η²= 0.049] among the four groups of gendered traits. In general, participants who scored high in androgyny showed higher levels of PsyCap and work engagement. Our findings indicate that women in leadership positions that identify with a full portfolio of traits, not in the binary of men-masculine and women-feminine, show higher work-related well-being. This is relevant to continue reinforcing changes in organizational norms that reinforce and perpetuate gender differences and traditional gender role expectations.
Key Terms: Women in leadership, Psychological Capital, Social roles, Burnout, Work engagement, Social role theory, Bem Sex-Role Inventory