3 ms·

I think the evidence is sort of mixed. Here's an article responding to the study that quote came from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984

I think the evidence is sort of mixed. Here's an article responding to the study that quote came from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S104898431500123X http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984315... As for explanations that could explain this particular case: Men are more likely to get another chance at a CEO job, so they can afford to turn down a crisis position. When an organization is in crisis, they are likely to look for a candidate as different as possible from the CEO that caused that crisis, and hiring a woman tends to send a very visible signal that the organization is going in a different direction, even if that's sort of a sexist assumption. I think there are more likely explanations than the directly sexist idea of "male board members don't respect women and use them as scapegoats".

Bartweiss 10y ago
Thanks, this is a good summary. I suspect there's probably something to the phenomenon (even in terms of turnaround CEOs), although I'm immensely skeptical of the people who explain this with "women are seen as caring and sensitive so they get positions where morale is bad". That narrative seems like a terrible way to explain many of the other outcomes, like preferring women for hotly-contested political races. I'm also hesitant about the "afford to turn down a crisis" narrative - certainly it could apply in many cases, but turnaround CEO for Yahoo isn't a job people were running from. Taking or rejecting it was hardly the kiss of death: saying no looks sensible, saying yes either makes your name forever or gets an "at least you tried". (Does anyone think this exit is going to actually harm Mayer's employability?) And indeed a bunch of men also took the role and failed, arguably much worse than Mayer. I do think the signaling thing is quite true. If things have been going to hell, appointing a radically different CEO shows new direction, and an appointment like Mayer is a great way to produce news stories about your new direction (with big pictures of her in them - it might be a sexist assumption but it's also a very media-friendly one). There's also a claim that it's a way for something like Yahoo to signal "See, we aren't outdated and stuffy! We did an appointment you'd never see at a boring old bank!" Rambling aside, none of the studies really sold me in either direction (replication crisis and all that) but I can see a lot of reasons this could happen in places where business as usual hasn't been working.
- burkaman 10y ago
  Totally reasonable comment. But "Does anyone think this exit is going to actually harm Mayer's employability?" Yes, absolutely. The overwhelming narrative from the media and the public is that she failed, she made terrible decisions, and someone else could have done a lot better. I'm sure the people in charge of choosing CEOs are capable of seeing through that narrative and assessing her actual performance, but if they care about their stock price, they have to care about what the public thinks. Choosing Mayer will no longer get you articles about your fresh new direction, it will produce stories about her past failures. This certainly would apply to male CEOs as well, but I don't agree that taking the Yahoo job was basically a win/win.

Bartweiss 10y ago

Thanks, this is a good summary. I suspect there's probably something to the phenomenon (even in terms of turnaround CEOs), although I'm immensely skeptical of the people who explain this with "women are seen as caring and sensitive so they get positions where morale is bad". That narrative seems like a terrible way to explain many of the other outcomes, like preferring women for hotly-contested political races. I'm also hesitant about the "afford to turn down a crisis" narrative - certainly it could apply in many cases, but turnaround CEO for Yahoo isn't a job people were running from. Taking or rejecting it was hardly the kiss of death: saying no looks sensible, saying yes either makes your name forever or gets an "at least you tried". (Does anyone think this exit is going to actually harm Mayer's employability?) And indeed a bunch of men also took the role and failed, arguably much worse than Mayer. I do think the signaling thing is quite true. If things have been going to hell, appointing a radically different CEO shows new direction, and an appointment like Mayer is a great way to produce news stories about your new direction (with big pictures of her in them - it might be a sexist assumption but it's also a very media-friendly one). There's also a claim that it's a way for something like Yahoo to signal "See, we aren't outdated and stuffy! We did an appointment you'd never see at a boring old bank!" Rambling aside, none of the studies really sold me in either direction (replication crisis and all that) but I can see a lot of reasons this could happen in places where business as usual hasn't been working.

burkaman 10y ago
Totally reasonable comment. But "Does anyone think this exit is going to actually harm Mayer's employability?" Yes, absolutely. The overwhelming narrative from the media and the public is that she failed, she made terrible decisions, and someone else could have done a lot better. I'm sure the people in charge of choosing CEOs are capable of seeing through that narrative and assessing her actual performance, but if they care about their stock price, they have to care about what the public thinks. Choosing Mayer will no longer get you articles about your fresh new direction, it will produce stories about her past failures. This certainly would apply to male CEOs as well, but I don't agree that taking the Yahoo job was basically a win/win.