I’ve written previously about how people from upper-class backgrounds tend to have an inflated sense of self-confidence, which plays a significant role in their landing top jobs.
Research from UCL suggests that there is also a gender aspect to overconfidence, with men 19% more likely than women to assess their capabilities higher than they actually are. This then feeds into the unequal distribution of top jobs between men and women, with 24% of men holding such roles by the time they’re 42 versus just 16% of women.
Starting early
The researchers find that this is a trend that begins very early on in life, with evidence of its existence during adolescence. The findings emerged after an analysis of around 3,600 people who participated in the 1970 British Cohort Study.
Using test scores from cognitive assessments taken at ages five, ten, and 16, the researchers devised a measure of overconfidence. By comparing this measure to self-assessments of ability in various domains, they found that individuals who overrate their talents are more likely to hold top positions in their careers by the age of 42, on average, than their peers who do not exhibit such overconfidence, as per our overconfidence scale.
The researchers found that their measure of overconfidence was enough to explain around 11% of the gender gap in terms of those holding top jobs by the time they reach 42. They argue that their findings illustrate the important role overconfidence plays in achieving such roles.
Contributing to confidence
The researchers suggest that a number of factors help to contribute to overconfidence. For instance, they found that attending university contributed around 6% of the overconfidence gap between men and women.
Indeed, they argue that both the school we attend and the subject we study are significant, with the gender gap 15% among graduates versus just over 6% among non-graduates. Similarly, the role overconfidence played was also larger among graduates. The subject studied was also found to be important.
Male graduates enjoy a significant advantage over their female counterparts when it comes to securing top positions in science, technology, engineering, and maths (STEM) and senior roles in law, economics, and management (LEM), according to a recent study.
In fact, male graduates are 58% more likely than female graduates to be in a top job in STEM and 34% more likely to hold a senior position in LEM. Interestingly, the study found that overconfidence accounted for 12% of the gender gap in top LEM roles, but it did not appear to play a role in STEM positions. This may be due to the technical nature of STEM jobs compared to those in LEM.
Other factors
Beyond industry, other factors also contribute to career gender disparities. Unsurprisingly, having children impacts one’s career trajectory, with working mothers being 27% less likely than working fathers to reach the upper echelons of their profession by mid-career.
Notably, however, the study found that overconfidence did not explain any of the gender gap in this context. Rather, it suggests that women are more likely than men to adjust their working patterns once they become parents.
Of course, the issue is compounded by the fact that overconfidence is also liable to make one less likely to want to change or challenge the status quo. Research from Princeton shows that there is a link between overconfidence and acceptance of inequality.
Less likely to change
The researchers wanted to test how our preferences change regarding income inequality when we better understand the gap between our economic status and the (inflated) self-evaluation we have of our ability.
“There is a large variation in the level of inequality in countries with similar levels of income redistribution, in terms of the degree to which people support or oppose income redistribution,” the researchers explain. “We are interested in understanding why those who benefit economically from the implementation of income redistribution policies oppose such policies, and have focused on the nature of the ‘self-confidence overload’.”
The results show that people who said that their income was less than they would expect for their ability would often have lower confidence in meritocracy and that society was fair, with this inherent unfairness preventing them from reaching their potential. Indeed, it was this unfairness that was holding them back rather than any personal characteristics or behaviors.
Change needed
As such, it’s clear that organizations need to be both aware of how overconfidence can distort the way we assess each other, and adapt recruitment and appraisal practices accordingly.
For instance, overconfidence is strongly linked with one’s likelihood of putting oneself forward for important gigs, promotions, and pay rises, which can then exacerbate any unfair gaps within the organization.
Instead, employers should aim to provide more consistent performance-based feedback and actively encourage women to pursue promotions earlier than they may consider doing independently. This approach is particularly significant in LEM positions, where the primary driver of the gender gap is found to be overconfidence.
However, the influence of overconfidence diminishes among women who have children. This highlights that the lack of workplace flexibility and access to childcare continues to be a significant obstacle to women’s career advancement.
Simply expecting women to “lean in” or participate in confidence-boosting programs is not the answer. Placing the burden of change on women by addressing issues like imposter syndrome or a lack of confidence fails to address the underlying systemic problems. It is incumbent upon us all to identify ways to reform the system.
