arbiter
JournalsAccount

“Potential” and the Gender Promotion Gap

Alan Benson et al.

The American Economic Review2026https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20220831article
FT50AJG 4*ABDC A*
Weight
0.41

Abstract

We show that subjective assessments of employee “potential” contribute to gender gaps in promotion and pay. Using data on 29,809 management-track employees from a large retail chain, we find that women receive substantially lower potential ratings despite receiving higher performance ratings. Differences in potential ratings account for approximately half of the gender promotion gap. Women’s lower potential ratings do not reflect accurate forecasts of future performance: Women subsequently outperform male colleagues, both on average and on the margin of promotion. We highlight two mechanisms driving the gender potential gap: strategic retention and stereotyping. (JEL J16, J31, J71, L81, M12, M51)

2 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20220831

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{alan2026,
  title        = {{“Potential” and the Gender Promotion Gap}},
  author       = {Alan Benson et al.},
  journal      = {The American Economic Review},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20220831},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

“Potential” and the Gender Promotion Gap

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.41

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.25 × 0.4 = 0.10
M · momentum0.55 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.