The purpose of this paper is to investigate the role that gender differences play in evaluating perceptions of global competence, individual readiness for expatriate assignments and overall job performance.
A total of 11 global leadership competencies and perceptions of expatriate readiness for international assignments, along with job performance are rated by self raters and supervisors.
The results suggest mixed support for sex‐role stereotyping and role‐congruity theory (e.g., women will be rated lower than men for expatriate positions which have typically been held by men) and the similar‐to‐me hypothesis (supervisors will rate same‐sex subordinates higher than opposite‐sex subordinates).
The most interesting finding is that supervisors overall (and male supervisors in particular) rated women lower than men on perceptions of expatriate readiness for international assignments, while there were no differences in ratings of overall performance.
This study uses a sample of male and female self raters and supervisors to examine the relationship between perceptions of expatriate readiness, global competencies, and overall performance. Results suggest that although women may be perceived by their supervisors as having the same level of performance as men, they are not seen as being ready for international assignments at the same rate.
