Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/282090 
Year of Publication: 
2023
Series/Report no.: 
Discussion Paper No. 398
Publisher: 
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München und Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Collaborative Research Center Transregio 190 - Rationality and Competition, München und Berlin
Abstract: 
This paper provides empirical evidence on the aggregation of information in committees. We analyze unique data from the decision-making process of hiring committees within a large private company. In the hiring process, committee members first conduct independent one-to-one interviews and give individual recommendations before deliberating on a collective hiring decision. We find that committees' final hiring decisions are systematically less aligned with the initial recommendations of women than with those of men, even though women and men are equally qualified and experienced. This disparity in influence is strongest when recommendations exhibit high disagreement and when a single woman deliberates with two men. The estimated distribution of influence reveals that almost all men are more influential than the median woman. We offer suggestive evidence that these findings have implications for the effectiveness of gender quotas.
Subjects: 
committee decision-making
gender differences
hiring
JEL: 
D71
J16
M51
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
797.49 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.