The key studies on the glass cliff, from the 2005 paper that named it to the newest work in 2025, including the studies that found no effect.
Each entry is summarised in our own words. Labels show whether a study supports the glass cliff, finds a nuanced result, or finds no effect.
Ryan & Haslam (2005). British Journal of Management, 16(2), 81–90.
SupportsThe study that named the phenomenon. FTSE 100 companies that appointed women to their boards had often experienced consistently poor share-price performance in the months before.
Ryan & Haslam (2007). Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 549–572.
SupportsA theoretical review setting out the possible explanations, from stereotypes to scarce opportunity, and a research agenda.
Ashby, Ryan & Haslam (2007). William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law, 13(3).
SupportsLaw students were more likely to assign a high-risk case to a female lead counsel.
Haslam & Ryan (2008). The Leadership Quarterly, 19(5), 530–546.
SupportsExperiments with management graduates, business leaders and students: women were seen as more suitable to lead organisations whose performance was declining.
Adams, Gupta & Leeth (2009). British Journal of Management, 20(1), 1–12.
No effect foundUS data: no evidence that women CEOs were appointed to firms in worse condition than men.
Ryan, Haslam & Kulich (2010). Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34(1), 56–64.
SupportsIn the 2005 UK general election, women Conservative candidates were more likely to contest hard-to-win seats.
Bruckmüller & Branscombe (2010). British Journal of Social Psychology, 49(3), 433–451.
SupportsParticipants favoured a female candidate for a struggling company with a history of male leadership, suggesting she signalled change.
Ryan, Haslam, Hersby & Bongiorno (2011). Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(3), 539–546.
SupportsStereotypically female traits matched what participants wanted in a leader of a failing company.
Cook & Glass (2013). Social Problems, 60(2), 168–187.
SupportsMinority head coaches in US college basketball were more likely to be hired by losing teams and replaced by white coaches.
Cook & Glass (2014). Strategic Management Journal, 35(7), 1080–1089.
SupportsFortune 500: women and minority executives more likely promoted to CEO of weakly performing firms, and more likely replaced by white men if performance declined.
Sabharwal (2015). Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(2), 399–426.
Mixed or nuancedWomen in the US Senior Executive Service reported less organisational support and agency than men.
Glass & Cook (2016). The Leadership Quarterly, 27(1), 51–63.
SupportsInterviews and data on women leaders: appointments in risky conditions, with less support and shorter tenures.
Ryan, Haslam, Morgenroth, Rink, Stoker & Peters (2016). The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 446–455.
Mixed or nuancedA decade review: evidence, explanations, and why the effect is not universal.
Morgenroth, Kirby, Ryan & Sudkämper (2020). Psychological Bulletin, 146(9), 797–829.
Mixed or nuancedThree meta-analyses: a small archival effect that depends on domain; women more likely selected in crisis in experiments, more so in less gender-equal countries; extends to racial and ethnic minorities.
Goyal (2025). Coventry University report (British Academy / Leverhulme).
SupportsFTSE 350: higher likelihood of appointing female chairs in companies with sustained financial decline, especially during COVID-19.
Li et al. (2025). Summary by CourageUS.
No effect foundUS corporate data with several distress measures: no clear evidence of a glass cliff in CEO selection.
Social Science Quarterly (2025). Abstract via NYU Institute for Public Knowledge.
SupportsWomen CEOs had shorter tenures and higher dismissal risk, a gap that widened when appointed during weak performance.
Dempsey (2025). PhD thesis, Dublin City University.
Mixed or nuancedHow context and categorisation shape precarious appointments for ethnic minority leaders.
A newspaper article in The Times argues that women on boards are linked to weaker share prices.
Ryan and Haslam publish the FTSE 100 study and name the glass cliff.
Theoretical review in the Academy of Management Review; first evidence from legal work.
The New York Times lists the glass cliff among the ideas of the year.
Adams, Gupta and Leeth find no effect in US firms, opening the debate.
Evidence from UK politics and the 'signal of change' experiments.
'Think crisis, think female' published in the Journal of Applied Psychology.
Cook and Glass extend the pattern to minority leaders and describe the saviour effect.
'Glass cliff' is shortlisted for Oxford Dictionaries' Word of the Year; decade review published.
Meta-analysis in Psychological Bulletin finds a real but context-dependent effect.
Sophie Williams' TEDx talk brings the idea to a mass audience.
New studies on UK chairs, US CEO selection, CEO dismissal risk and ethnic minority leaders.
Students can win a prize and publication for a 1,500-word research brief.
See the Student Research Brief