Description:
Committee quotas have been introduced during the last years for combatting the underrepresentation of women in male-stereotyped environments. However, the unclear effect of evaluators’ gender and the gender differences in group dynamics question the effectiveness of the policy. I provide experimental evidence in both directions: a) how the gender composition of the committees affects the probability of female candidates of being recruited in a hiring process, and b) how men and women behave in group dynamics as a mechanism explaining the outcome of the policy. I designed a laboratory experiment in which groups of three subjects had to jointly select two candidates from a pool of six to perform a task. The probability of success of female candidates did not improve as the number of women in the committee increased. I found that male-majority committees were the most beneficial for female candidates. In these groups, men and women exhibited a similar level of voice and influence during deliberations, proposing both male and female candidates for recruitment. Female-majority groups were, in contrast, the most detrimental for female candidates. Women in female-majority groups exhibited a higher level of voice but men, who proposed only male candidates as a modal proposal, were more influential, what limited the contribution of women. The paper suggests that more women in the committee do not necessarily benefit female candidates and calls for caution at the time to design policies for equality in the labour market