The Think Manager-Think Male Stereotype - Malleable or Stable?

Purpose Stereotypes about leadership still represent a potent barrier to women’s advancement to leadership roles. Successful leaders are perceived to possess predominately agentic traits (e.g., assertive, dominant) that are more similar to those ascribed to men than women. This perceived incongruity of people’s beliefs about leaders and women underlies prejudice against women leaders (Eagly & Karau, 2002). Thus, an important question is whether such stereotypical beliefs about the traits of leaders, men, and women incorporate change or stability over time. Design/Methodology To examine this question, 235 Irish business students (113 men, 122 women) rated a target group’s characteristics (men, women, middle managers) as of a specific time (50 years ago, present, 50 years into the future) on gender‐stereotypical traits. Results Following Schein’s (1973) approach, intraclass correlation coefficients estimated the extent to which the stereotype of managers was similar to that of men or women. The results showed a large, significant correlation between the stereotypes about men and managers within each time condition and overall. In contrast, the women‐manager correlation was negative and nonsignificant overall. However, this negative correlation weakened from the past to the present and became positive and marginally significant for the future. Research/Practical Implications Altogether the results suggest that people perceive stereotypes about leaders to be more similar to men than to women. These perceptions may continue to function as impediments to women leaders’ advancement despite the trend over time toward femalemanager similarity. Originality/Value To our knowledge this is the first study to systematically test perceptions of change in the think manager‐think male stereotype overtime.

I shouldn't have to do this: Illegitimate tasks as a stressor in relation to organizational control and resource deficits

The performance of tasks that are perceived as unnecessary or unreasonable, illegitimate tasks, represents a new stressor concept that refers to assignments that violate the norms associated with the role requirements of professional work. Research has shown that illegitimate tasks are associated with stress and counterproductive work behaviour. The purpose of this study was to provide insight into the contribution of characteristics of the organization on the prevalence of illegitimate tasks in the work of frontline and middle managers. Using the Bern Illegitimate Task Scale (BITS) in a sample of 440 local government operations managers in 28 different organizations in Sweden, this study supports the theoretical assumptions that illegitimate tasks are positively related to stress and negatively related to satisfaction with work performance. Results further show that 10% of the variance in illegitimate tasks can be attributed to the organization where the managers work. Multilevel referential analysis showed that the more the organization was characterized by competition for resources between units, unfair and arbitrary resource allocation and obscure decisional structure, the more illegitimate tasks managers reported. These results should be valuable for strategic-level management since they indicate that illegitimate tasks can be counteracted by means of the organization of work.

Long-term Success of Family Firms: Investigating Specific Aspects of Firm-level Entrepreneurship and Individual-level Antecedents

Long-term success of family firms is of utmost social and economic importance. Three of its determinants are in the center of this Dissertation: firmlevel entrepreneurial orientation (EO), managers' entrepreneurial behavior, and value-creating attitudes of non-family employees. Each determinant and respective research gaps are addressed by one paper of this cumulative dissertation. Referring to firm-level EO, scholars claim that EO is a main antecedent to firms' both short- and long-term success. However, family firms seem to be successful across generations despite rather low levels of EO. The first paper addresses this paradox by investigating EO patterns of long-lived family firms in three Swiss case studies. The main finding is that the key to success is not to be as entrepreneurially as possible all the time, but to continuously adapt the EO profile depending on internal and external factors. Moreover, the paper suggest new subcategories to different EO dimensions. With regard to entrepreneurial behavior of managers, there is a lack of knowledge how individual-level and organizational level factors affect its evolvement. The second paper addresses this gap by investigating a sample of 403 middle-level managers from both family and non-family firms. It introduces psychological ownership of managers as individual-level antecedent and investigates the interaction with organizational factors. As a central insight, management support is found to strengthen the psychological ownership-entrepreneurial behavior relationship. The third paper is based on the fact that employees' justice perceptions are established antecedents of value-creating employee attitudes such as affective commitment and job satisfaction. Even though family firms are susceptible to nonfamily employees´ perceptions of injustice, corresponding research is scarce. Moreover, the mechanism connecting justice perceptions and positive outcomes is still unclear. Addressing these gaps, the analysis of a sample of 310 non-family employees reveals that psychological ownership is a mediator in the relationships between distributive justice perceptions and both affective commitment and job satisfaction. Altogether, the three papers offer valuable contributions to family business literature with respect to EO, entrepreneurial behavior, and value-creating employee attitudes. Thus, they increase current understanding about important determinants of family firms' long-term success, while opening up numerous ways of future research.