Gender mismatch and bias in people-centric operations: Evidence from a randomized field experiment

Abstract

Research at the interface of operations management (OM) and gender bias has mostly focused on operational outcomes such as hiring decisions on behalf of the employer (or firm). Largely overlooked is how the design of operational processes exacerbates (or diminishes) the amount of gender bias exhibited on behalf of the customer in a people-centric operations environment. In this study, we conduct a randomized field experiment with a partner firm to assess gender mismatch and bias in client-consultant exchanges. The experimental design enables us to examine gender bias within dyadic exchanges when there are gender matches (female client-female consultant or male client-male consultant) or gender mismatches (female client-male consultant or male client-female consultant). We find that reporting the consultant's gender significantly increases the client's likelihood of leaving more and higher reviews, increases the clickthrough rate on recommended products, and that the effect is stronger for females than for male consultants. We also provide support for the heterogenous effects of client experience depending on the gender (mis)match in client-consultant exchanges, including whether the prior effects hold when there is gender masking or manipulation (e.g., reported female consultant when actually male). Our findings offer important theoretical contributions and practical implications for OM scholars and managers.