Sisters at Arms

Abstract

The narrative surrounding the nature of relationships and interactions between and among women at work is decidedly negative, which is evident in the coverage that female competition and the queen bee syndrome receive in the media, nonfiction books, and the management and psychology literatures. In the current article, we propose a two-stage theory that is grounded in gender stereotyping to account for this narrative. In the first stage, we draw from theories of social comparison and in-group distancing to offer plausible reasons for why women’s same-sex relationships at work might be more fraught with interpersonal conflict than men’s. In the second stage, we set aside consideration of possible gender differences in same-sex conflict frequency and draw from attribution theory to propose that female same-sex conflict is more problematized by third parties than male same-sex conflict, which could produce the exaggerated perception that women have more dysfunctional same-sex workplace relationships than men. Implications for future research and gender equality in organizations are discussed.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 78 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.