Asher Lawson
Assistant Professor of Decision Sciences
Asher Lawson is an assistant professor of Decision Sciences at INSEAD. He holds a PhD from the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University and a BA from the University of Oxford.
His research investigates the biases in how people make decisions, and how we can improve those decisions with targeted interventions.
Broadly, he is interested in the factors that lead to people holding accurate perceptions of information, decisions, and groups, how these perceptions can be translated into effective decision making, and the use of machine learning to develop and improve psychological theories.
Can you share an example of research or teaching that has helped challenge traditional gender norms?
Much of the existing research on gender norms focuses on situations where women are permitted—or at least not penalised—for exhibiting traditionally masculine behaviours. These behaviours align with stereotypes about leadership that prioritise traits like decisiveness, assertiveness, and aggressiveness, which are traditionally seen as male. Progress, in this sense, is often framed as women successfully adopting these characteristics.
To me, however, this approach feels backward-looking. It essentially says, “Traditionally, leaders have behaved in these male-typed ways, and now women can too.”
The bigger question we should be asking as a society is: why must leaders embody these traits at all?
Why is leadership still so narrowly defined?
At INSEAD, much of our work emphasises "soft skills"—fostering more inclusive and effective communication styles in leadership. Yet, in research on gender stereotypes, the focus often remains on whether women face backlash for breaking traditional gender norms. This leads me to a deeper question: why do these norms exist in the first place? Why must we cling to outdated ideas about how leadership roles should be performed, rather than reimagining them altogether?
This theme emerged in some of my own research, which was published in PNAS in 2022 where we examined how the language used to describe male and female leaders shifts when women are appointed to high-power roles, such as CEOs or board directors. We found that women leaders were more often associated with agentic traits while retaining strong associations with communal traits like kindness and care.
In the short term, women being recognised for traits traditionally reserved for men while maintaining their perceived communal strengths might seem like progress, however, in the long run, I believe true gender equity will come when we dissolve these stereotypes altogether—both for roles and for genders. It’s not just about women being agentic or men being communal; it’s about breaking down the notion that these traits are tied must be tied to leadership success in specific ways.
What impact do you believe business education can have on moving the needle toward gender equity?
Education provides a unique pause—a chance to step back and reflect on experiences in a way that's difficult in a workplace setting.
At a place like INSEAD, where the surroundings are intentionally removed from daily pressures, students can reflect deeply on their values and assumptions, and explore these questions in a meaningful way. This reflection is, in many ways, the greatest gift of education—not just learning technical skills but unlearning fixed beliefs that may hinder progress. To truly move the needle, however, business education must avoid preaching or top-down directives.
Our role as educators is not to push specific agendas but to provide tools, evidence, and space for reflection.
This means two things: as researchers, we must produce high-quality, data-driven insights that quantify the value of diversity and its impact; as educators, we must foster balanced, evidence-based discussions that empower students to form their own views. Ultimately, real change happens when individuals choose to challenge their assumptions and act on these insights—not because they were told to but because they genuinely believe in the value of equity and inclusion.
What message do you hope to convey to students about the importance of gender equity in leadership?
Although gender equity in leadership isn't a focus of my course, Management Decision Making, I do address it through a case on hiring consultants. In the resulting discussion, , the frustration of the students the other side of diversity-oriented policies—men in this case—comes through. Students often start off by arguing that if gender equality truly existed, gender wouldn’t need to factor into hiring decisions and express their frustration with affirmative action-based policies which are making things harder for them.
It’s important to recognise that these students aren’t necessarily sexist or unsupportive of gender equity. The key issue is understanding that we need to look at the broader picture.
Gender inequality doesn’t just manifest in hiring decisions—it’s shaped by systemic issues that affect people across their entire life cycle.
For example, women have historically been discouraged from pursuing STEM careers, which leads to disparities that aren’t immediately visible. Similarly, in leadership, evaluating candidates based on masculine traits further disadvantages women, as this reinforces traditional gender norms.
While I understand the frustration of feeling disadvantaged, it’s crucial to broaden one’s perspective. We must consider the long-term impact of historical inequalities and reflect on how they continue to shape current opportunities. Affirmative action may seem unfair in the short term, but it’s a necessary measure to address the structural disadvantages women face.
We must also acknowledge that gender equity is a long-term goal. Just a century ago, women were still denied the vote, and such changes take time. While we’re far from achieving true gender equity—only 9% of S&P 500 CEOs are women—we must remain focused on the broader vision of an equitable future.
Stay Inspired
