Inequitable work environments can heavily influence women’s professional choices, contributing to a widened gender gap in male-dominated fields. Past work has established that leaders' desire to use power for good produce better business outcomes, but we examine how leaders' use of power may influence gender equity in male-dominated work environments. I hypothesize that encountering a male-leader who is motivated to use power for good reduces women’s gender bias concerns. Women participants recruited through the online platform Prolific (N = 98) completed a survey in which they read leadership and team culture evaluations of two male leaders of male-dominated work teams (order counterbalanced). After reading the evaluations, participants rated how much they would worry about gender bias if they worked for each leader. The evaluations were identical except that in the experimental condition, participants read that 95% of the leader’s employees reported he used power for good compared to 43% in the control condition. I analyzed the data with a dependent samples t-test revealing women had reduced gender bias concerns after reading about the leader who used his power for good compared to the control condition. The results suggest that perceiving that a leader desires to use power for good reduces women’s gender bias concerns in male-dominated work environments. Signaling that the use of power for the good of others is a desirable institutional value may help establish gender equity and reduce climate threats. Future work should examine potential interventions that train leaders to better demonstrate their desire to use power for good of others in order to promote gender equity in male-dominated fields.

Workplace diversity and inclusion (D&I) efforts are well-intentioned but often too focused on meeting metrics instead of making structural changes that are directly aligned with the commitment to D&I. To examine people’s perception of company training towards D&I efforts, the current study investigates whether knowing a company is dedicated to implementing D&I initiatives influences their perception on the necessity of other systemic interventions. We expose each participant to a company that implements D&I training (diversity training company) and a company that does not (no diversity training company). Then, we measure their perception of each company's need for structural changes. We hypothesize that participants presented with the diverse training company will rate the company’s future diversity efforts as less necessary. The finding of this research provides evidence that the presence of D&I training may have unintended consequences of preventing organizations from making other important systemic changes.