erful people. Named in June to head the International Monetary Fund, she previously held several cabinet posts in the French government, including finance minister, making her the first woman to hold that job in a major economy.
As it happens, Ms. Lagarde is also very attractive and stylish. Vanity Fair just named her to its best-dressed list, along with the likes of Kate Middleton and Lady Gaga. A synchronized swimmer in her youth, she works hard to stay fit and has paid tribute to her mother for teaching her to present herself with classic French eclat.
Ms. Lagarde possesses an abundance of what I call 'erotic capital,' and she has used it knowingly and to great advantage.
Women in the U.S., Britain and other outposts of the Anglo-Saxon world tend, by contrast, to resist the idea that their physical appearance should matter to their professional advancement. In our age of feminism and meritocracy, women who emphasize their looks are thought to be superficial; it somehow seems like cheating.
But do we have this all wrong?
Beauty is not limited to supermodels and A-list celebrities. It can be achieved by wearing flattering styles, getting in shape, improving posture and putting some effort into choosing clothing and hairstyles.
And erotic capital is not just about physical attractiveness. It also encompasses personality, charm, liveliness, social energy and the ability to make people feel at ease and want to know you. It is not about flaunting your sexuality at the office by showing more cleavage and wearing tight pants.
Researchers have consistently found that attractive people of both sexes are perceived to be more competent and intelligent. Attractive adults are noticed more and treated more favorably, and they are more often welcomed into social networks, where they receive more cooperation and help from others. They are more persuasive and sell ideas and products more successfully.
Erotic capital also translates into income. A number of studies show that, in the U.S. and Britain, there is a 10% to 20% 'beauty premium' in earnings across the workforce. In jobs that involve contact with customers or clients, the returns can be even greater, adding up to hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional income over the course of a career. Fifteen years after graduating from a prestigious law school, an attractive lawyer in private practice, for instance, earns over $20,000 per year more than an unattractive lawyer, holding other relevant factors constant.
But there is a gender imbalance lurking in these numbers. Though women, as a group, are generally judged to be more attractive than men─their portrait photos receive higher ratings on the scales typically used by researchers─men reap substantially more benefits from their attractiveness, particularly in managerial and professional occupations.
A study conducted in the mid-1990s on data from the U.S. and Canada found that attractive men earn 17% more than unattractive men, on average, but the 'beauty premium' for women was just 12%. These findings, it should be noted, could not be attributed to differences in height or weight, which have their own independent impact on earnings.
Why do women fail to reap all the benefits of their attractiveness?
One likely cause is how employers see the wider prospects of such women. In one controlled experiment, interviewers tended to find attractive, highly qualified female applicants less suitable for management jobs than attractive men and unattractive women of comparable backgrounds.
What accounts for this discrimination? Part of the explanation may lie in the fact that employers are banned by law from asking about the family plans of female applicants. Without definite information about a candidate's commitment to her career, they may simply assume that attractive women are more likely than attractive men or unattractive women to be sidetracked by marriage and children.
Some credentials can override these stereotypes. A 1991 study of the career success of full-time MBA graduates from a large U.S. university used photographs taken on entry to the program to obtain independent ratings of each graduate's attractiveness. It found that attractiveness raised men's starting salaries and sped up salary increases in management jobs. Attractiveness had no effect on women's starting salaries, but more-attractive women earned more later in their careers.
Even experienced personnel managers who claim to disregard appearances rate attractive men and women as more likeable and employable, but they then err on the side of caution in hiring male candidates and avoiding attractive women.
What does this mean for attractive women with high career aspirations?
In order to avoid the idea that they are accustomed to doors opening for them, they need to use their style of dress and personal presentation to emphasize their hard work, motivation and unemotional disposition. They must perform the difficult balancing act of displaying their attractive looks and personality while also stressing that they mean serious business.
But managing erotic capital is not just for the manifestly beautiful, those who lead the charmed lives of local celebrities. It is an asset in which anyone, male or female, can invest, once made aware of its significance in modern knowledge economies. Wherever collaboration and social finesse are essential components of success, even marginal advantages in erotic capital are worth cultivating.
Over the course of our working lives, we enter numerous competitions─for jobs, promotions, contracts, good transfers. Being attractive and likeable can be the small, notionally 'irrelevant' factor that helps to tip the balance in our favor.
The cumulative benefits can be huge─and can even land a charming French technocrat like Christine Lagarde on the red carpet of celebrity fashion.
CATHERINE HAKIM
(Dr. Hakim is a research professor of sociology at the London School of Economics. Her new book is 'Erotic Capital: The Power of Attraction in the Boardroom and the Bedroom,' from which this is adapted.)
