Joyce C. He, University of California, Los Angeles; Jon M. Jachimowicz, Harvard Business School; Celia Moore, ³Ô¹ÏºÚÁÏ Business School
'Why passionate men succeed, even when they're mediocre', Organization Science
Problem
Many large companies run programmes to identify their most promising employees and fast-track them into leadership. These programmes are meant to find the best people. But the criteria they use are often subjective. One of the most common is passion: how enthusiastic and driven an employee appears to be. When the same display of passion comes from a man or a woman, it is read in entirely different ways and the consequences for women's careers are serious.
Science
We studied whether men are more likely than women to be selected for high-potential programmes, and why. We examined how evaluators respond to visible signs of passion such as eyes lighting up, energetic gestures and varied vocal pitch when those signs come from men versus women. We found two distinct patterns. When men show passion, evaluators read it as a sign they'll work hard. When women show the same passion, evaluators are less impressed and, in many cases, judge the display as inappropriate. We tested these patterns across multiple studies, tracking how passion was perceived and how those perceptions shaped selection decisions.
Outcome
A man who shows passion is seen as more likely to be diligent, even if his performance record is only average. That perception pushes him into the high-potential category, unlocking career opportunities he would not otherwise receive. A woman showing identical passion does not get the same boost. Because evaluators already expect women to work hard, her passion reads as nothing more than meeting expectations. Worse, it can be judged as overly emotional, actively reducing her chances of selection. The same behaviour produces opposite results depending on who displays it.
Change
High-potential programmes were designed to find the best talent and build more diverse leadership. Our research shows they are doing the opposite when passion is used as a selection criterion. We call on organisations to replace subjective signals like passion with concrete evidence: achievements, problem-solving results and project outcomes. Where passion is assessed, managers should have direct conversations with employees rather than reading emotional displays. Organisations should also audit who gets selected and why and raise the performance bar for average-performing men, who currently receive an unearned advantage that equally capable women do not.