Queen Bee Syndrome

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Queen Bee Syndrome (in German "Queen Bee Syndrome") describes a reaction of predominantly women in a male-dominated work environment.

Women who strive for individual success in a male-dominated work environment, distance themselves from a subgroup of women and prevent female junior staff from advancing up the social ladder, are pejoratively referred to as “queen bees”. According to Belle Derks, Colette Van Laar and Naomi Ellemers, one does not speak of Queen Bee Syndrome if only individual aspects are affected, for example the emphasis on male characteristics in women such as competitiveness and assertiveness. Rather, one refers to a combination of several aspects that make up the syndrome, for example the emphasis on male characteristics, the distancing from other women and the denial of the existence of a gender gap .

Some studies have failed to support the concept of Queen Bee Syndrome.

history

The term "Queen Bee Syndrome" was first mentioned in 1973 by G. Staines, C. Tavris and T. E. Jayaratne. Their study included women's opinions on traditional gender roles and what they thought of changes in roles, with the researchers regarding respondents' adherence to traditional gender roles as queen bee syndrome.

Virginia W. Cooper of Old Dominion University hypothesized in 1997 that traditional women would be more likely to prefer the traditional leadership style over the nontraditional leadership style, but this could not be confirmed and with theoretical foundations of Queen Bee Syndrome could explain. Back then the syndrome was seen as female competitiveness. Accordingly, a distinction must be made between women who reject traditional gender roles and those who accept them.

The 2016 study by Belle Derks, Colette Van Laar, and Naomi Ellemers took the syndrome as a gradual response. Where some women are more prone to the syndrome than others, the same woman may also have different tendencies towards the syndrome depending on the situation. The syndrome is characterized by a combination of several aspects, e.g. B. by distancing themselves from other women, emphasizing male characteristics, recognizing gender inequality and striving for success at the expense of other women.

causes

In the study by B. Derks et al. It was pointed out that Queen Bee Syndrome is not due to the personality traits of women or their ability to compete with other women, but is a response to devaluation and stereotypical discrimination. This argument is based on the theory of social identity , which postulates, among other things, that individuals base their identity in part on their gender.

If the woman belongs to a group that is disadvantaged or belongs to a minority group, there is a likelihood that the woman will not consider the characteristics of the group to be important or valuable. By devaluing or stereotypically discriminating against women, they can perceive this as a threat to their social identity. In the course of this, there are two coping strategies, one on a collective and the other on an individual level. The collective strategies for reducing the threat to identity include reassessing the characteristics of the group (for example, a focus on gender-stereotyped qualities such as empathy and interpersonal skills [social creativity]) or improving group-specific outcomes (social change). Individual strategies include distancing oneself from the disadvantaged group in order to seek acceptance within the higher-ranking group (individual mobility). In a male-dominated work environment, this happens through the adoption of male characteristics. Individual strategies are usually only considered if the individual could only weakly identify with their own group.

It should be noted that the Queen Bee Syndrome does not only apply to women, but to all groups that are disadvantaged or viewed as a minority and in which the individuals feel threatened in their social identity and feel weakly connected to their own group . This has been observed, for example, in losing teams, gay men, lesbians, bisexuals, senile people and African Americans .

criticism

From the study by Paulo Roberto Arvate et al. In 2018, it emerged that Queen Bee Syndrome could only be a myth and that female executives who were promised discretion behave benevolently towards their offspring. The term "Regal Leader" should be a more appropriate term for women in leadership positions instead of "Queen Bee". Others claim that the term "Queen Bee" is sexist in itself.

Anna Sobczak explained that the queen bee phenomenon is only one of many aspects of the “work landscape” of women in management positions and thus may not play a decisive role.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c Belle Derks, Colette Van Laar, Naomi Ellemers: The queen bee phenomenon: Why women leaders distance themselves from junior women . In: The Leadership Quarterly (Ed.): ScienceDirect . tape 27 , no. 3 . Elsevier, June 2006, pp. 456-469 (English).
  2. ↑ Christine Kurmeyer: The "Queen Bee Syndrome" . In: Agenda HR - Digitization, Work 4.0, New Leadership . Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden 2018, ISBN 978-3-658-21179-0 , p. 269–275 , doi : 10.1007 / 978-3-658-21180-6_17 ( springer.com [accessed March 9, 2019]).
  3. ^ A b c Anna Sobczak: The Queen Bee Syndrome. The paradox of women discrimination on the labor market . Ed .: Journal of Gender and Power. tape 9 , no. 1 . Poland 2018.
  4. ^ Press Association: 'Queen bee syndrome' among women at work is a myth, study finds . In: The Guardian . June 7, 2015, ISSN  0261-3077 ( theguardian.com [accessed March 9, 2019]).
  5. ^ Virginia W. Cooper: Homophily or the Queen Bee Syndrome. In: Small Group Research. 28, 2016, p. 483, doi : 10.1177 / 1046496497284001 .
  6. ^ Henri Tajfel et al .: An integrative theory of intergroup conflict . In: Organizational identity: A reader . 1979, p. 56-65 .
  7. ↑ CR Snyder, Mary Anne Lassegard, Carol E. Ford: Distancing after group success and failure: basking in reflected glory and cutting off reflected failure .. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 51, 1986, p. 382, doi : 10.1037 / 0022-3514.51.2.382 .
  8. ↑ CJ Bishop, Mark Kiss, Todd G. Morrison, Damien M. Rushe, Jacqueline Specht: The Association Between Gay Men's Stereotypic Beliefs About Drag Queens and Their Endorsement of Hypermasculinity. In: Journal of Homosexuality. 61, 2014, p. 554, doi : 10.1080 / 00918369.2014.865464 .
  9. ^ Thomas A. Morton, Tom Postmes: When Differences Become Essential: Minority Essentialism in Response to Majority Treatment. In: Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 35, 2009, p. 656, doi : 10.1177 / 0146167208331254 .
  10. ^ David Weiss, Frieder R. Lang: The Two Faces of Age Identity 1Action editor of this article was Dieter Ferring .. In: GeroPsych. 25, 2012, p. 5, doi : 10.1024 / 1662-9647 / a000050 .
  11. ↑ Signithia Fordham, John U. Ogbu: Black students' school success: Coping with the "burden of acting white." In: The Urban Review. 18, 1986, p. 176, doi : 10.1007 / BF01112192 .
  12. ↑ Paulo Roberto Arvate, Gisele Walczak Galilea, Isabela Todescat: The queen bee: A myth? The effect of top-level female leadership on subordinate females. In: The Leadership Quarterly. 29, 2018, p. 533, doi : 10.1016 / j.leaqua.2018.03.002 .
  13. ↑ Sharon Mavin: Queen Bees, Wannabees and Afraid to Bees: No More 'Best Enemies' for Women in Management ?. In: British Journal of Management. 19, 2008, S. S75, doi : 10.1111 / j.1467-8551.2008.00573.x .
  14. ^ Leah D. Sheppard, Karl Aquino: Sisters at Arms. In: Journal of Management. 43, 2016, p. 691, doi : 10.1177 / 0149206314539348 .