Glass_Ceiling

Why aren’t there more women in senior management positions' Discuss with reference to research on the ‘glass ceiling’ The phrase ‘glass ceiling’ is a figurative term coined in the 1970s and is widely used to highlight and describe the psychological, social and economic barriers that prevent women from securing top positions in their respective field. It is, therefore, important that a pluralistic approach is taken to truly identify the factors that cause fewer women to be in senior management positions. In describing the invisible barrier as a glass ceiling, it is suggested that gender equality in the work place is an illusion as systematic discriminations still exist. Despite there being a number of changes in women’s equality over the year’s traditional gender roles remain relatively intact, often, to the detriment of women’s career. It is almost expected that a woman’s career or job must take a secondary role to family and domestic commitments whilst men on the other hand are able to make greater commitment to work related progress. The result of this is more women try to maintain flexibility by taking on part-time positions, which means, lower pay and little chance of promotion. It is evident that there is a significant difference between the historical working patterns of women and men, with 90% of part-time positions being occupied by women throughout the European community during the 1990s (Women of Europe Supplements, 1989) whilst a further two fifths of female part-time workers being employed in low-skilled, low-status occupations at the time (New Earnings Survey, 1990). In the cases where women are able to secure full time positions, their career progress is often stultified by attitudes and prejudice of male employers whose discriminations are based on the assumptions that women are less committed to their career. A married woman hoping to gain a managerial position, for example, is likely to suffer discrimination due to employers’ view that she would be less flexible if a job required relocation or long periods away from home (Spencer Stuart & Associates Ltd. 1993). Interestingly, this view is not held as strongly when looking at married male candidates for managerial positions, suggesting that there is an underlining belief that males have more autonomy within their family and are, therefore, in a better position to make such pivotal decisions. Widely held gender stereotypes based on the views that women are not aggressive enough for authoritative positions and are naturally good care givers means that occupational gender segregation occurs both horizontally and vertically. The effect of both forms of segregation is evident in the disproportionately high percentage of women in the care sector despite the top positions being predominately occupied by males. Statistics showed that in the mid 1990s only 3 per cent of senior managers were females whilst approximately 97 per cent of secretaries and a further 87 per cent clerical worker were females (Employment department, 1992). It could be argued on one hand, that this is due to many women needing more flexible positions and thus being unable to fulfil the demands of a managerial position. However, those women who do meet the organisations requirements still have to contend with preconceptions of women lacking leadership qualities such an assertiveness and competiveness. Interestingly, former oppositionist on Trade and Union, Baroness Jean Denton pointed out that the issue with women gaining top positions is not in men not wanting women but rather in men not knowing them. Often you may hear people say ‘It is not what you know, it is who you know’ to illustrate how job mobility can be achieved but it could be argued that this is heavily affected by ones gender as the ‘old boy network’ mean job networking can have a high level of gender exclusivity. This directly affects women’s chances of filling senior management positions because despite possibly having the right skills and attributes for a high status job they are unable to form the necessary connections. Research conducted by Liff and Ward in 2001, interviewing over 50 male and female junior and senior managers found that women were limited by procedural discrimination and their primary orientation towards home and family. Despite both men and women identifying the same issues the significance of them were largely based on their perception of incompatibility between active parenting and senior management roles. Furthermore, the study highlighted how commitment to home and family is treated almost as just being a ‘woman’s problem’ despite many of the managers being part of dual career families. This raises serious concerns on whether gender inequality in the work place needs to be looked at in a more holistic manner. After all, what purpose does it serve to implement gender equality legislations if social inequalities continuously prevent them from being effective in offering women the same opportunities as men in their chosen occupation' Others, however, have dismissed such ideas for the more meritocratic view that any woman who is sufficiently qualified and determined enough to achieve can do so (Morrison 1992; White 1992). Hakim (1996) even went as far as to argue that the reason most women do not attain top positions is because more than half of adult women accept the sexual division of labour and treat market work as secondary to their domestic roles. These views, so polarized, from the idea that women are victims to systematic discrimination gave way to a third school of thought which is the idea that women are actually not excluded by organisations simply through the promotion process but the organisational cultures, structures and practices which many women, despite their determination and ambition, feel is not suited for them. Moreover, in a study conducted by Marshall (2005) it was found that women, who left their managerial positions to move on to different jobs, did not do so because of lack of ambition or even due to not being able to balance work and family life. Contrary to the views expressed by Hakim et al. what was most notable in these women’s accounts of why they left their previous position was because of the masculine work cultures that dictated how they were able to work and influence the outcome of work related events. This is somewhat similar to aspects of the study conducted Liff and Ward (2001) where 8 women in senior/junior position jobs commented on how they felt isolated and suggested that they experienced work placed bullying. This is particularly worrying as none of the men in the study recalled any similar experiences despite them also being in managerial positions. Interestingly senior managers seemed happier in their roles despite doing an average of an extra hour a day compared to junior managers but this may be linked to the financial benefits and the advantages of being better able to manage the time spent at work. In addition to this, the study conducted by Liff and Ward (2001) exposed how participants views on gender identity influenced how much they viewed themselves and others as a suitable candidate for a senior management position. Women, for example, believed that they needed to become more ‘though’ and went on to explain how they were sometimes subjected to what they deemed as ‘aggressive behaviour’ to see if they were suited for the job. Men correspondingly, claimed that the women they knew in senior positions had ‘lost their femininity ’In taking into considerations the views expressed in the Liff and Ward (2001) it could be suggested that the working environment for women, particularly in managerial roles is very hostile and isolating, leaving them to often seek alternative roles despite having the necessary drive and determination to succeed. Further attitudinal prejudice is evidenced in the study as many of the male participants expressed surprised at particular females securing managerial positions on the basis of them being ‘too nice.’ It is evident in the study that both males and females maintain the belief that the ideal manager must have traditionally masculine personality traits. This of course puts the women in a state of conflict between their gender identity and their goal to be a successful senior manager. Where raising a family was concerned the women in the study feared that having a child would lead to decline in their career progress and/or them losing their managerial position, these views were held despite the organisation’s strong gender equality profile and examples of other female senior mangers that show that there is a possibility of combining family and work. The women in fact, reported that information was not readily available on job flexibility despite claims of the organisations formal commitment. It could therefore be argued that gender equality in the work place exist in the theoretical sense but the practical application is sometimes not done effectively, preventing many women from achieving their goal of becoming a senior manager. To conclude, a number of factors contribute to fewer women being employed in senior management positions, including male perceptions, gender stereotypes, the division of labour at home and the disruption to women’s career due to family commitments and child rearing. In order for true gender equality to be achieved in the work place wider social and systematic gender discriminations need to be considered. The way in which various agents of socialisations are used must be investigated more closely, as Bryak and Soroka (1997) noted ’Preparation for a future adult role often entails learning about activities deemed appropriate for members of one’s sex’ It is therefore important that the early stages of development are looked at closely so less women do not feel they are predestined for specific job role due to their gender or that they can only go so far in their chosen carers due to misconceptions such as females are not assertive enough to be good managers. Furthermore, from a Marxist feminist perspective it could be argued that the unequal division of home labour is evidence of both patriarchy and capitalism working together as it means more men are able to put their career first whilst benefiting economically from the free labour. If married women are to have the same career opportunities as men there needs to be a rise in conjugal roles. Institutional changes have been made to encourage this with the introduction of a paternity leave in many work places, which allows men to take time off to look after their newborns. Whilst this is certainly a positive as it means that there can be less disruption to women’s career, studies conducted showed that even with organizational changes being made to help further increase gender equality, traditions often stifle these movements towards progress. Rapoport et al, 1976, research on Dual-Career family shows that despite efforts of married couples to maintain gender symmetry in the division of labour five key issues impacted this. Three of the problems encountered were due to practicalities (household maintenance, demands of work, balancing both) whilst the other two issues raised were due to roles contravening with their normative gender identity and external perceptions of friends and family on gender roles. Nevertheless, one can still appreciate that there are positive changes being made towards gender equality, such as paternal leave which allows fathers to take time off to care for their newborns, helping to reduce the disruption to women’s careers but it is equally important that social changes are made along with the changes being made to laws and legislations. Lastly, if the idea of a psychological contract is better employed rather than viewing individuals career as a fixed plan there could be greater satisfaction amongst female mangers Reference List Bryjal, George J. and Michael P. Soraka.  Sociology: Cultural Diversity in a Changing World.  Ed. Karen Hanson.  CITY: Allyn & Bacon, 1997.  209-245. Breaking the glass ceiling : can women reach the top of America's largest corporations' / Ann M. Morrison, Randall P. White, Ellen Van Velsor, and the Center for Creative Leadership. Employment Department (1992) Skills and Enterprise Update, May, referring to Supervision (Advisory Booklet number 17), ACAS Hakim, C. (1995). Five feminist myths about women’s employment. British Journal of Sociology, 46,429[']455. Liff, S. and Ward, K. (2001), Distorted Views Through the Glass Ceiling: The Construction of Women's Understandings of Promotion and Senior Management Positions. Gender, Work & Organization, 8: 19–36. doi: 10.1111/1468-0432.00120 Marilyn L Davidson and Cary L Cooper (1992). The 1990s: Women in Management and Business –An Overview. Shattering the glass ceiling: The woman Manager (pp.3). London, UK Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd. Rhona Rapport, Robert N. Rapport (1976). Dual-Career Family Re-examined (2nd ed.). London, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. (Original work published 1976).  Spencer S & Associates Ltd. (1993). Point of View No. 17, Women in Management, available from 16 Connaught Place, London W2 2ED, free booklet. van Vianen, A. M., & Fischer, A. H. (2002). Illuminating the glass ceiling: The role of organizational culture preferences. Journal Of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 75(3), 315-337.