Stereotyping and Roles in Leadership Positions

Question: Discuss about the Stereotyping and Roles in Leadership Positions. Answer: Stereotyping is the behaviour demonstrated by individuals wherein assumptions and conjectures are made about a certain group of people and applied to individuals since they belong to that particular group irrespective of their personal features and attributes. Stereotypes may be neutral, negative or positive (Wagner and Hollenbeck 2014). Though negative and positive stereotypes have been found to have a declining impact on organisational culture and behaviour, they can also provide with a learning experience at times for the individuals. There is a body of debate regarding the benefits and the problems stereotyping can bring about (Champoux 2016). The common notion is that stereotyping can be considered as a form of categorical thinking helping people to have a sense of the world. The present research essay discusses how stereotyping benefits employees in an organisation and the potential problems of stereotyping. The essay aims to highlight the impact stereotyping on organisational behaviour in a workplace. It compares and critiques the findings of relevant current developments in the research topic. A logical conclusion is drawn to summarise the key points of the essay and provide implications for future practices. According to DuBrin (2013) stereotype is the belief, thought and notion adopted about a certain group of individuals that may not be accurately reflecting the reality. It is, therefore, the inflexible and bias belief cropping up about a certain group of individual or person. Stereotypes are a representation of social classification, becoming a factor for prejudice attitudes. Judge and Robbins (2015) suggests that stereotype can be rightfully an exaggerated image of an individual or group of individuals, permitting very little individual differences and social variation, passed along by other individuals. Stereotyping comes from personal experiences, peers, family members and media. Individuals have a tendency to tag a label on others since it gives a feeling of safety or security. Being judgmental is how stereotyping works and forming conclusions based on unfair assessment is the undermining view. These conclusions are often mutually detrimental and erroneous. Nahavandi et al. (2013) stated that stereotypes are prevalent as people want to have some comical effects out of it and make a sense of the world. The world is a vast place, and therefore people tend to find ways to make the surrounding straightforward for better understanding. Stereotypes can help people to categorise individuals into boxes that are manageable, allowing one to develop an expectation about situations and individuals. Duguid and Thomas-Hunt (2015) opine that all workplaces are breeding grounds of stereotype threats. In the workplace, such practices are harmful as well as limiting. In the corporate world the high price that organisations have to pay for entertaining stereotyping include loss of customers and sales, poor morale, litigation, diminished profit and difficulty in retaining valuable employees. According to Appelbaum et al. (2016) stereotyping can lead people working in an organisation to mistreat other individual in a particular manner on the basis of preconceived notions about the group that the individual belongs to. Diversity factors, mainly race, culture, ethnicity, age, gender and religion, contribute to the predisposition of stereotyping exhibited in any organisation. Incorporating non-discriminatory practices in a workplace promotes acceptance of individuals who have different cultural backgrounds and creates an environment of openness, thereby eliminating negative effects. Leslie, Mayer and Kravitz (2014) highlighted that stereotyping can lead to low morale for the group or individual who undergoes stereotyping and the whole workplace can be made toxic. Employees facing criticism, comments that are negative have the tendency to lose motivation to perform well. Their interest in their job is gradually diminished, and they are marked as bottom performers. Low morale is often found among the worker facing stereotyping and in indirect manner impacts organisations to a great extent. Over time, the organisation faces productivity loss, hampering the whole culture of the organisation. The other two issues with stereotyping are poor working relations and legal tension. Since collaboration and teamwork are necessary for the success of all organisations, stereotyping acts as a barrier for effective team work. Group progress is impeded as employees tend to act on the basis of stereotyping they face instead of having faith and self-confidence and putting in the be st efforts. An employee is prevented from getting help and support from other employees due to personal differences arising from stereotyping. Team work, therefore, suffers in here. Accepting or allowing the stereotypes to occur and the resulting consequences can lead to legal tension in an organisation. An individual affected by such negative practises may sue an individual who undertake such activities. The failure to enforce and implement fair practices and policies can be a burden for the organisation. Successful lawsuits have an impact on the organisation as it is financially draining. An environment where there is the constant ripple of negative stereotypes may give rise to a threat to targeted group individuals aspirations to become future leaders. Individuals who undergo stereotypic discrimination have fewer chances of selecting a leadership role in an organisation in subsequent tasks. Related to the individuals weak leadership aspirations, the individual may show weaker intentions to undertake the task. Such issues arise mainly when gender stereotyping is prevalent. It is often perceived that intensions and aspirations of women in a workplace are weaker when compared to male counterparts. The detrimental impact of stereotyping on aspirations has more to it than sheer willingness to combat difficult challenges, a feature of leadership in competitive organisations (Miller 2014). Dipboye and Colella (2013) found that men and women who initially gave good performance on a certain task diverged in the succeeding preferences for taking up a difficult task that had op portunities for rewards. Womens repugnance for uncertainty and difficulty make them forgo challenges, limiting their aspirations. Stereotyping holds the potential to diminish aspirations through self-handicapping (Baker 2014). Rather than giving best effort and defeating risks, individuals who are victims of stereotypes may come up with alternate explanations for having a low-grade performance. Psychological issues are cited as the reason for the lack of desired success. Stereotyping threat may lead to lowered desire among employees to get feedback and be open to constructive criticism. For example, among managers, stereotyping predicts indirect feedback requesting on uncertain indications to determine performance. Feedback discounting can also be a result of discounting, whereby the motives of providers of feedback are under questions. Since direct feedback is essential in order to have improvement in work performances, avoiding it limits the achievements of the organisation over time. Stereotype threat has an impact on the amount of trust that employees have towards actual as well as potential employers. Brink and Nel (2014) studied organisational case studies and found that implementing any policy opposed to explicit policies based on stereotyping heightens discomfort and distrust among the employees. Eliminating discrepancies can enhance leadership and build a sense of trust that encourages employees to excel. In organisations where employees talent is revered, individuals facing challenges and complexities may fail to realise their career aspirations and leadership potentials, thereby increasing the chances of failure. Bar-Tal et al. (2013) examines the possible downstream aftermath of stereotype on organisational performance. As per the author, stereotypically masculine features like rationality and assertiveness are related to high performers. Stereotypes preaching that men have a higher level of comfort in taking risks give them an added advantage over women in matters of entrepreneurial efforts for creating new and novel business ideas. Moreover, stereotypical anticipations that womens orientation is relational, may have an impact on how the approach towards them is. Another noteworthy domain of organisational performance where stereotypes make a mark is a negotiation. Negotiation is known to all as a decision-making process between interdependent parties over any matter of allocation of resources. Negotiations have a competitive component producing stereotyping threat. A significant non-performance result of stereotype is the tendency of individuals to have reduced engagement with work. Employees can distant themselves from people causing such stereotyping in order to maintain self-esteem. A person is often found to perform poorly and detach himself from work out of fear of proving the stereotype true. The individual, therefore, suffers a feeling of powerlessness. Individuals who are stigmatised gradually reduce the concern they have towards work and the care and devotion they give. Disengagement has an impact on motivation. If employees facing stereotyping are engaged with work and receive negative feedback, it is highly injurious to self-esteem (Kosakowska-Berezecka et al. 2016). Fiske (2016) contradicts the destructive impacts of stereotyping by stating that there are some benefits of stereotyping too that we often tend to overlook. Such practices may be useful in cases when an employee is in a new situation, and the situation demands fast decisions to be taken and quick judgements to be done. For example, if an employee does not have any prior experience of communicating with a senior member who holds an esteemed position, the employee can stereotype his senior to be reserved and formal. The approach to the employee would, therefore, be respectful, and the response would be appropriate, gaining him a positive impression. Mujtaba, Cavico and Seanatip (2016) support the positive impact of stereotyping by stating that it is a process of simplifying the environment in an organisation so that the understanding of the overall environment is less complex. It enables one to put people into categories, allowing the formation of expectations about individuals. Workin g in the organisation is, therefore, easier and predictable. Czopp, Kay and Cheryan (2015) brings into focus the aspect of positive stereotyping and states that positive stereotyping is the representation of contradictory confluences. Positive stereotypes are favourable belief and notions about groups. Stereotype is the picture we make in our mind representing a strange connection between reality and facts and the subjective analysis of the individual. A multifaceted duality of depersonalisation and favouritism is represented through positive stereotyping, and the implications of positive stereotyping in an organisation are mostly positive. A rich pool of evidence suggests that positive stereotyping has some psychological benefits for the group members faced with such practices; however, a growing body of research tries to indicate that there may be pervasive and profound negative impacts as well. The authors argue that positive stereotype improvers negative impression about one group. For example, self-promoting women employee in an organisat ion may act in a manner that puts focus on positive female stereotypes linked to dependence and communality for maintaining others positive impressions of them. Women who have the ability to demonstrate these stereotypes of gender may be getting advantages in an organisation under suitable conditions. Shih, Young and Bucher (2013) argue that group members who are a target of stereotyping mat at times exhibit well-being and increased performance with implicit reliance on the outcomes of stereotyping. For instance, upon subtly activating positive stereotyping, a boost in the work-oriented performance is experienced within the arena of stereotyping. Though stereotypes have always been known to have a negative impact on organisations, recent analyses put forward dissimilar approach and highlight the benefits of communication stereotypes in workplaces. There have been many examples where stereotyping has been made as the weapon for coming out of a difficulty and turning the situation in favour of the organisation. The underlying implication is that on one side is personal gain and on the other side is honesty. A reason why stereotypes exist is to scapegoat another individual so that the blame can be transferred easily and justification can be provided easily. Undesirable situations can, therefore, be avoided by employees at workplaces that may have otherwise led to miscommunication and conflict (Kalokerinos, von Hippel and Zacher 2014). Spencer, Logel and Davies (2016) conducted a study to investigate the relationship of managers stereotypes and employment decision-making. The study was conducted to establish the nature and kind of decision-making manager display at work and how stereotyping affects colleagues. The stereotypes exhibited by managers had both negative and positive impact on prejudicial perceptions. Positive stereotypes, describing employees to be hardworking, diligent and helpful led to positive decisions. Motivation is the underlying principle as these employees get motivated to work with more efforts for being under the good impression. Being in the good books has always been the goal of all employees, and this is further made easy through positive stereotyping of managers. Poor performers are also motivated to get into the category of valuable employees as they strive to make a difference through their work and efforts. Finkelstein, King and Voyles (2015) comment that though stereotypes have always been known to have a negative impact, there are some points of positivity about stereotyping too. Stereotypes at times guide and shape out attitude towards others, coming from different cultures and races. Stereotypes give us awareness of differences and the urgency to have a proper understanding of different values and norms existing in the world regardless of the assumptions we make. In this method, one learns to take part in communication and social interaction and verify the beliefs held. Stereotypes can be helpful when an employee of an organisation approaches individuals with different culture as he is provided with a restrained and refrained state of mind saving him from potential cultural and social blunders. Social experiences in an organisation can also become more organised through classification of people and situations in a method in which they can be easily remembered. Therefore stereotypes are useful as one enters a diversified workforce with people from different race, place and language. The gap in learning and experiences is therefore filled up. The above discussion reviews the positive implications of stereotyping in organisations and examines the stereotyping threat in organisations. Stereotyping is the method of mentally organising viewpoints about an individual or group of an individual based on scattered information. It works by ignoring unexpected information about the individual or group. Dispensing characteristics based on typical experiences is the key feature of stereotyping. It can be concluded from the above discussion, upon undertaking reflection, that there are positive as well as negative impact of stereotyping in an organisation. Stereotyping can protect an individual from sources of anxiety. One is given a sense of worth through designating own grouping as standard and designating others to be inferior. Stereotyping can enable a person to determine whether he possesses the abilities and characteristics of the members of the group he belongs to. It may serve purposes for supporting motivations and providing l ogic for the behaviour exhibited by others. Myriad opportunities are also present for such practices to have the pernicious effect on targeted individuals in any organisation. Given the absolute ubiquity of assessments in an organisation putting a focus on bottom-line performance, attempts to reduce stereotyping practices need to have their foundation on active efforts to diversify workforce, manage stereotypes, have provision for adequate staff training and shape the culture of organisations in methods that nurture adaptive credence. References Appelbaum, S.H., Wenger, R., Buitrago, C.P. and Kaur, R., 2016. The effects of old-age stereotypes on organizational productivity (part three).Industrial and Commercial Training,48(6), pp.303-310. Baker, C., 2014. Stereotyping and women's roles in leadership positions.Industrial and Commercial Training,46(6), pp.332-337. Bar-Tal, D., Graumann, C.F., Kruglanski, A.W. and Stroebe, W. eds., 2013.Stereotyping and prejudice: Changing conceptions. Springer Science Business Media. Brink, L. and Nel, J.A., 2014. Experiences of stereotyping among individuals employed in selected South African organisations.Journal of Psychology in Africa,24(6), pp.513-519. Champoux, J.E., 2016.Organizational behavior: Integrating individuals, groups, and organizations. Routledge. Czopp, A.M., Kay, A.C. and Cheryan, S., 2015. Positive stereotypes are pervasive and powerful.Perspectives on Psychological Science,10(4), pp.451-463. Dipboye, R.L. and Colella, A. eds., 2013.Discrimination at work: The psychological and organizational bases. Psychology Press. DuBrin, A.J., 2013.Fundamentals of organizational behavior: An applied perspective. Elsevier. Duguid, M.M. and Thomas-Hunt, M.C., 2015. Condoning stereotyping? How awareness of stereotyping prevalence impacts expression of stereotypes.Journal of Applied Psychology,100(2), p.343. Finkelstein, L.M., King, E.B. and Voyles, E.C., 2015. Age metastereotyping and cross-age workplace interactions: A meta view of age stereotypes at work.Work, Aging and Retirement,1(1), pp.26-40. Fiske, S.T., 2016. Prejudice, Discrimination, and Stereotyping. Judge, T.A. and Robbins, S.P., 2015.Essentials of organizational behavior. Pearson. Kalokerinos, E.K., von Hippel, C. and Zacher, H., 2014. Is stereotype threat a useful construct for organizational psychology research and practice?.Industrial and Organizational Psychology,7(3), pp.381-402. Kosakowska-Berezecka, N., Besta, T., Adamska, K., Ja?kiewicz, M., Jurek, P. and Vandello, J.A., 2016. If my masculinity is threatened I wont support gender equality? The role of agentic self-stereotyping in restoration of manhood and perception of gender relations.Psychology of Men Masculinity,17(3), p.274. Leslie, L.M., Mayer, D.M. and Kravitz, D.A., 2014. The stigma of affirmative action: a stereotyping-based theory and meta-analytic test of the consequences for performance.Academy of Management Journal,57(4), pp.964-989. Miller, K., 2014.Organizational communication: Approaches and processes. Nelson Education. Mujtaba, B.G., Cavico, F.J. and Seanatip, T., 2016. Managing Stereotypes toward American Muslims in the Modern Workplace through Legal Training, Diversity Assessments and Audits.Journal of Human Resources,4(1), pp.1-45. Nahavandi, A., Denhardt, R.B., Denhardt, J.V. and Aristigueta, M.P., 2013.Organizational behavior. SAGE Publications. Shih, M., Young, M.J. and Bucher, A., 2013. Working to reduce the effects of discrimination: Identity management strategies in organizations.American Psychologist,68(3), p.145. Spencer, S.J., Logel, C. and Davies, P.G., 2016. Stereotype threat.Annual review of psychology,67, pp.415-437. Wagner III, J.A. and Hollenbeck, J.R., 2014.Organizational behavior: Securing competitive advantage. Routledge.