Personnel managers examined vignettes in which an employee had made a serious judgmental error. The employee was seen in a traditional male position (construction supervisor, production manager), or in a relatively more female-identified position (public relations officer, executive secretary), and was identified as male or female. Individuals employed in male-identified positions were viewed as more competent than those in traditional female positions. Overall, evaluations were correlated with recommended personnel actions. Punishing personnel action was least likely to be recommended, however, for males employed in traditional male positions. The results are interpreted as consistent with role theory and with certain attributional concepts. Implications are discussed for career strategy and for personnel policy.