Running head: INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
Equality of women in male dominated workforce, biases a thing of the past: Fact or Fiction
Christian Magallon, Fhaiza Raza, Carla N. Saldana, and Rahul Ragu
WRITING 101, University of California, Merced
Author Note
Christian Magallon, Department of Psychology, University of California, Merced;
Carla Saldana, Department of Psychology, University of California, Merced;
Rahul Ragu, Department of Psychology, University of California, Merced;
Faiza Raza, Department of Psychology, University of California, Merced.
Correspondence to this article should be addressed to Christian Magallon, Department
of Psychology, University of California, Merced, CA 95348. Email: cmagallon2@ucmerced.edu
1
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
2
Abstract
In the contemporary world, inequality between males and females in the workplace is becoming
a critical issue. This has been often considered a part of our past and yet now in modern times men and
women are entering into the workplace in equal numbers but women still face gender discrimination in
their occupations, especially in managerial positions. There are certain limitations and restrictions that
women encounter while in workplace. There is a common idea that people firmly believe, that women
are not suitable for upper division positions because they do not have the characteristics suitable for
those positions. It is very important to understand the basic biases and factors which are deterring
women from reaching their goals and creating inequality in a male dominated workplace. The main
factors affecting gender inequality in the workplace which have been studied here are leadership, power
and perceptions.
Keywords: gender bias, sexual discrimination, workplace segregation
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
Equality of women in male dominated workforce, biases a thing of the past: Fact or Fiction
This research seeks to support the fictive notion that gender equality exist today and gender
biases are a thing of the past regardless of current efforts to create equality among genders in the
workplace. To increase understanding of factors affecting women this study focuses on: leadership,
power, and perceptions.
Throughout history there has been a struggle for equality. The suffrage movement and later
affirmative action were efforts to increase equality among genders. As the economy of the nation
changed to a more industrialized one it demanded more workers. While Men were at war, the demand
of workers needed for war production increased. Women decided to do their part to help with the war
efforts: taking over the jobs left by men. This was a huge step for women, and the realizing of women’s
potential in the workforce.
Women were now becoming more and more present in the workforce, diversifying the
population of employees. The introduction of women brought with it new theories through research,
assessing and further supporting the existence of inequality for women in the workforce. To further
assess and support the existent inequality between men and women; research was obtained through a
search on the University of California, Merced’s library data base. Over 278 studies preceded using key
descriptive words: women, power, perceptions, and leadership.
Studies found support the differences within gender and the workplace. Looking in detail at
studies like Roos and Brook (1981) that assessed data from the 1974-1977 that showed that women
have a large earning gap compared to men due to sex segregated characteristics at an occupational
level. The research showed, women mostly work at low paying jobs and they are less likely to exercise
authority in those jobs. In a related study on economics, Mano-Negrin (2004), showed a significant
increase in participation of women in the labor market without a parallel decrease of gender wage gaps.
3
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
Adler (1994) research results showed that men hold higher position, higher supervisory, and
authority compared to women. Women have less access to power and authority at work. Policymakers
and supervisor make equal rules for them but women exercise less power than men. Aviolio (2009)
results showed a significant difference in the effect sizes for leadership interventions conducted with allmale and majority-male participants versus all-female and majority-female participant studies. Bosak
(2008) showed in their study that women perceive themselves less suitable for high positions because
the perceived notion that they do not associated with masculine characteristics of men. Research has
served as evidence for change.
Major developments include formation of new associations and legislations. The Association for
Women’s Rights in Development purpose is to strengthen movements that advance women’s rights and
promote gender equality worldwide (AWID). The Equal Pay Act was signed into law by President John F.
Kennedy in 1963 (EEOC). The Equal Pay Act was a law against reduction of wages that discriminates due
to sex.
President Kennedy emphasized : "Adds to our laws another structure basic to democracy" and
"affirms our determination that when women enter the labor force they will find equality in their
pay envelope."(EEOC)
However, regardless of efforts it is clear that subtle biases of gender still contribute to
discriminate against women in the workplace especially in male dominated workforce. Existential biases
affect the prevalence of women in leadership, job performance, and male dominated careers. It is
important to understand underlying biases and factors in the work place that may hinder woman from
reaching a state of equality among men in the workforce. Factors studied across genders in the
workplace: leadership, power, and perceptions.
4
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
Leadership and Power
Let us first observe the two omnipresent notions that are leadership and power. It has long
been understood and accepted albeit bias, that leadership and power are traits commonly associated
with the male sex. Also, positions of power and of authority are linked to such generalizations. For
example, this can be seen in the workplace where women are often segregated into professions that
ultimately reduce the possibility of exercising autonomy and supervisory authority (Jaffee, 1989). We
see time and time again that women, when being considered for a position are subject to a bias
comparison that subjugates their attempts at equality and fair judgment. The majority of the time the
employers that are doing the considering prefer masculine gender characteristics to feminine
characteristics (Goktepe & Craig, 1989). In their study, Goktepe and Craig found that interpersonal
attractiveness and sex role orientation are both associated with the emergent candidate for the
position. In this, we can see that it is of the utmost importance to understand what influences the
emergence of a leader and note any difference between genders.
So persistent is this notion of a gender bias that even women themselves cannot escape
acknowledging it and even falling susceptible to its ideas. We see this recurring problem in several
common patterns, one being that of women feeling vulnerable and out of place because they have no
female role model in a position of power to revere. This lack of stimuli results in a reduction in chances
of women to take on a leadership role (Carbonell & Castro, 2008). In Carbonell and Castro’s study we
see when confronted with a female leader model, for more than half the time women take the
leadership position, but when faced with a male leadership model the results are underwhelming. And,
the men in that study felt indifference when faced with either model, signifying a common acceptance
of male superiority or dominance.
5
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
Other studies have also supported this disparity of ideas concerning the similarity between
women and managers. In a study conducted by Brenner , Tomkiewicz and Schein (1989), we observe
that men perceive successful middle managers as having those characteristics, attitudes, and
temperaments more commonly ascribed to men in general than to women in general. Although the
women in this study judged both male and female characteristics equally viable, it was only a function of
change in the perception of women in general rather than a change in the perceived requirements for
managerial success or even any perceptions of men in general. In other words, what has been perceived
as approved managerial characteristics in the past has not changed. What has changed is how women
perceive themselves in a managerial position. What may seem as a leap forward in positive and equally
thinking is in truth very misleading. Yes behaviors have changed but sadly male managers still hold onto
their original attitudes which involve a skewed sense of what the proper qualifications may be.
It seems that blind ignorance may also affect aspects of occupational labor in the workplace. In
the study by Cann and Siegfried (1990), there is a strong indication that the behaviors people recognized
as indicators of a successful leader included those that are viewed as feminine. Leaders must be
“behaviorally androgynous,” they must have the flexibility to exhibit both male and female
characteristics. Thus, effective leaders are those that can appease an assortment of demands, and yet
we witness the constant reminder of a societal gender bias implicating female characteristics as weaker
and even less desirable. One can only wonder why some choose to ignore a possible fine addition to a
firm because of a commonly held notion of gender superiority.
Presumed notions of gender superiority in leadership qualities can easily be ascertained from
many studies that have been conducted in the past, involving commonly held societal beliefs. But, these
same bias notions of leadership qualities can be enhanced by certain workplace organizational climates.
The atmosphere in which business involving the hiring of future employees or any upper level position is
6
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
7
conducted, can be greatly affected by the pressures that are applied during that time. In a study done
by Katz (1987), when put into a discriminatory setting the test subjects preferred to hire males. In the
same study test subjects were put into a nondiscriminatory setting and the results proved to be quite
interesting, the preference levels were almost equal between male and female candidates. From this
information we can gather that a significant catalyst for discriminatory thinking is in part caused by the
organizational climate that someone is in.
Currently, sexual discrimination and gender bias in the workplace is alive and well. It is a
widespread problem that is inhibiting many women’s rights and allowing for an unfair advantage for the
opposite sex. Most of today’s research concerning this notion is focused on investigating the
debilitating effects that negative stereotypes have on the targets of said stereotypes (Hoyt &
Blalscovich, 2007). In order to move forward and overcome this bias and discrimination we must
discover new avenues in which to employ a politically correct attitude towards those individuals of the
fairer sex.
Perceptions
Understanding perceptions of society, focusing on perceptions of women in the workplace,
helps increase understanding of the existent gap between genders at work. There are many factors that
may contribute to the differentiation in treatment and appointment to leadership between genders in
the workplace. Trentham, and Larwood (1998), examined the effects of power and willingness to
discriminate in the workplace. Results show that people have a predisposition to discriminate against
women. This study found that people in top positions of organizations had higher tendencies to
discriminate against women than people with lower positions of authority. Individuals in power affect
the disposition of a person of lower status to act in a discriminating manner often times going against
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
own personal beliefs. The importance of this study is that biases exist against women due to perceived
influences of power commands in the workplace.
A study done by Tougas and Beaton (1993) analyzes perceptions and attitudes of past events,
and future measures implemented to reduce gap between genders in the workplace. Results show that
men feel that past measures affected their careers more negatively, however both genders showed
equal dissatisfaction with past measures. Men agreed with eliminating systemic barriers that limit
advancement for women but where against preferential treatment. This clearly states that both gendrs
have self interest in mind. Women want help to go up the ladder, men see that as a threat, therefore
disapprove. Self interest conflicts held by men may hinder women from reaching equality in the
workplace.
Another study that looked at perceptions of leadership qualities in groups of similar gender was done by
Prime, Jonsen, Carter, and Maznevski (2008). This study looked at managers perceived qualities
associated with leadership and gender. The study hypothesized that the qualities associated with
leaders was more prominent in men than in women. Results show that in women respondents
perceived women as more effective than men in: planning and role modeling, providing intellectual
stimulation, and problem solving. Men on the other hand attributed that men were better at delegating
than female leaders. Both men and women perceived and stereotyped women leaders as being more
competent in supporting. The study indicated that both genders were attributing more positive ratings
to their gender than the opposing gender. This study indicates that self perceptions also affect beliefs of
self and others in ability in the work place.
Perceptions of the meaning of equality are different among individuals according to their self
interest. Other studies examine perceptions of gender and leadership concerns in the workplace over
time. The study done by Koch, Loft, and Kruse (2005) takes a look at changes in perceptions of women in
8
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
leadership. With an increase of women in leadership the study compares the amount of change in
beliefs now to the beliefs held 20 years ago. Results showed a tendency for gender association that
went along with social perceptions; men were associated with terms: hard, strong, and aggressive.
Women were judged as soft, sentimental, and delicate. Although data shows a shift towards associating
women with leadership; it is not significant as the correlation between men and leadership. Despite
efforts to close the gap of inequality it still exists in positions of leadership, small shift seen of women in
leadership, is not dismissed.
Perceptions of femininity in leadership Johanson (2008) seeks to find if prior conceptions of
leadership exist between genders in perceived: conception, structure, masculinity, femininity,
androgyny, and overall leadership ability. Results support the hypothesis that leadership ratings were
associated with masculinity and structure; the positive correlation between consideration and
femininity was clearly supported. Leadership positively correlated with structure and not conception.
The study indicates the importance of beliefs and associations of leadership without environment
influence on perceived individual leadership style. This study proves that individuals still show a
predominant belief that leadership is more closely associated with masculinity and structure than
femininity and conception. Individuals overall continue to think of leadership as male oriented. For
women characteristics associated with femininity are still not seen as positively affiliated with leadership
characteristics.
A study that demonstrates the effects of gender in leadership is the study done by Haslam, and
Ryan (2008).The study focused on the perceived suitability of women and men in leadership of failing or
succeeding organizations. This study looks at the inequalities that women encounter when trying to
advance in the workforce. The study hypothesized that women are appointed to leadership positions
when risk of failure and criticism are high. Results show that in general women are preferred over male
9
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
candidates. The results state that the male was selected over a female when the company performance
was improving. Women where often selected as the suited individual to take a leadership position in a
company that was declining. This study shows that there is a clear preference of men to successful
companies. This may be due to perceptions and beliefs of the individuals who appoint leaders to a
position.
This study looked at the suitability of both men and women in a management position Ted H.
Shore (1992).The study focused on the potential of performance in managerial positions by assessing
cognitive ability, job advancement, interpersonal and performance skills. Despite women rating higher
than men on performance style dimensions, they received lower ratings in management potential.
Management ratings of both genders were comparable. The study results serve as evidence of subtle
gender bias within the workplace. Stating that despite higher performance rates in women the actual
advancement in the job is the same as men of lower performance rates. The study analyzes perceptions
of woman’s interpersonal skills compared to men. Assessors deemphasized the fact that women
outperformed men; giving more credit in interpersonal skills. A mismatch is perceived of women and
attributes associated with management due to stereotypical and perceived views of women.
Finally a study done by Wolf, and Fligsteing (2009)looks at factors that contribute to the unequal
distribution of women compared to men in positions of authority focusing on education, experience,
tenure, marriage, children, that help map how and why some individuals are in positions of authority.
The study looks at composition of the workplace and situational beliefs of employers and women in
notions of authority. The study assesses factors that influence job characteristics and allocation of
male/female in authority. The study concluded that men are given more authority than women in the
workplace. The importance of this study highlights factors like traditional gender roles, personal choices,
and self perceptions that affect the prevalence of women in authority.
10
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
11
Conclusion
According to McTavish and Miller (2009) there are both pros and cons to the modernization
agenda. Reform and structural change have led to greater opportunities for women. Reform and
modernization in organizational procedures have led to somewhat gender friendlier environments.
However, there are paradoxes in the modernization agenda. It seems like women have to conform to
masculinist styles of management. Many of the reforms are actually leading to re-gendering of job roles
and procedures. (McTavish and Miller, 2009, p. 361-362).
In the article Women’s Leadership Development Strategic Practices for Women and
Organizations Hopkins, O’Neil, Passarelli, and Bilimoria (2008) propose seven areas of leadership
development practice along with recommendations in each of these categories for consultants and
human resources professionals working with individual women and organizations. They state that
leadership development increases women’s allocation of human, social, and political capital, resulting in
positive outcomes at both the individual and organizational levels. They assert that responsibility for
developing the human, social, and political capital of women resides at the individual and the
organizational levels. They also state that leadership development of women employees is a major
business advantage to organizations. Also stressed is that principal importance must be placed on
women feeling connected to the goals and objectives of the greater organization and conceptualizing a
comprehensive picture of themselves as vital organizational partners. They also emphasize that
consulting psychologists and human resources professionals have an essential role in helping women
and organizations. They conclude that the assembly of leadership development that appreciates and
addresses women’s unique contributions will result in women fulfilling their individual potential and in
organizational transformation, the two principal goals of effective, sustainable leadership development.
(Hopkins et al., 2008, p. 360-361).
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
Reskin and Ross (1992) conclude that even though women have made momentous gains in
obtainment of managerial titles their findings imply that the desegregation of managerial occupations
has not resulted in the reduction of sex discrimination in the assignment of workplace authority.
According to Baxter and Wright (2000) in the United States, Sweden, and Australia a gender gap
in authority exists even when a variety of personal qualities is included in the equation. In the United
States there is little evidence for large and systematic glass ceiling effects. There do appear to be
possible glass ceiling effects in Sweden and Australia but located more around the middle of managerial
hierarchies than at the top: In these countries, women appear to be particularly disadvantaged relative
to men in moving from lower-to middle management levels. Low representation of women at the top of
authority hierarchies may give an appearance of a glass ceiling when in fact discrimination either is more
or less the same throughout the organization or even concentrated at the bottom. Since the
assumption of a glass ceiling may take political attention away from struggles over opportunities at the
lower levels of hierarchies, the commonly used metaphor should be used with prudence.
References
Adler, M. A. (1994). Male-Female power differences at work: A comparison of supervisor and
policymakers. Sociological Inquiry, 64(1), 37-55.
Avolio, B. J., Mhatre, K., Norman, S. M., & Lester, P. (2009). The moderating effect of gender on
leadership intervention impact: An exploratory review. Journal of Leadership & Organizational
Studies, 15(4), 325-341.
Baxter, J., & Wright, E. O. (2000). The glass ceiling hypothesis: A comparative study of the united states,
sweden, and australia. Gender & Society, 14(2), 275-294.
Bosak, J., & Sczesny, S. (2008). Am I the Right Candidate? Self-Ascribed Fit of Women and Men
to a Leadership Position. Sex Roles, 58, 682-688.
12
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
Brenner, O. C., Tomkiewicz, J., & Schein, V. E. (1989). The relationship between sex role stereotypes and
requisite management characteristics revisited. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3), 662-669.
Carbonell, J.L., Castro, Y. (2008). The impact of a leader model on high dominant women’s self-selection
for leadership. Sex Roles ,58,776-783.
Cann, A., & Siegfried, W. D. (1990). Gender stereotypes and dimensions of effective leader behavior. Sex
Roles, 23(7/8), 413-419.
Goktepe, J.R., Craig, E.S. (1989). Role of sex, gender roles, and attraction in predicting emergent leaders.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(1), 165-167.
Haslam, A.S., & Ryan, M.K. (2008). The road to the glass cliff: differences in the perceived suitability of
men and women for leadership positions in succeeding and failing organizations. The Leadership
Quarterly, 19, 530-546.
Hopkins, M. M., O'Neil, D. A., Passarelli, A., & Bilimoria, D. (2008). Women's leadership development
strategic practices for women and organizations. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and
Research, 60(4), 348-365.
Hoyt, C.L., and Blalscovich, J. (2007). Leadership efficacy and women leaders' responses to stereotype
activation. Group processes intergroup relations,10, 595.
Jaffee, D. (1989). Gender inequality in workplace autonomy and authority. Social Science Quarterly,
70(2), 375-390.
Johanson, J.C. (2008). Perceptions of femininity in leadership: modern trend or classic component?. Sex
Roles, 58, 784-789.
Katz, D. (1987). Sex discrimination in hiring: The influence of organizational climate and need for
approval on decision making behavior. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 11(1), 11-20.
Koch, S. C., Luft, R., & Kruse, L. (2005). Women and leadership - 20 years later: A semantic connotation
study. Social Science Information, 44(1), 9-39.
Mano-Negrin, R. (2004). Gender inequality and employment policy in the public sector. Administration
and Society, 36(4), 454-477.
13
INEQUALITY: WOMEN IN A MALE WORKFORCE
McTavish, D., & Miller, K. (2009). Gender balance in leadership? Reform and modernization in the UK
further education sector. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(3), 350-365.
Prime,J., Jonsen, K., Carter, N., and Maznevski, M.L. (2008). Managers' perceptions of women and men
leaders: A cross cultural comparison. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 8, 171.
Reskin, B. F., & Ross, C. E. (1992). Jobs, authority, and earnings among managers: The continuing
significance of sex. Work and occupations, 19(4), 342-365.
Roos, P. A. (1981). Sex stratification in the workplace: Male-Female differences in economic returns to
occupation. Social Science Research, 10(3), 195-224.
Shore, T. H. (1992). Subtle gender bias in the assessment of managerial potential. Sex Roles, 27(9-10),
499-515.
Tougas, F., & Beaton, A.M. (1993). Affirmative action in the work place: for better or for worse.
International Association of Applied psychology, 42(3), 253-264.
Trentham, S., & Larwood, L. (1998). Gender discrimination and the workplace: An examination of
rational bias theory. Sex Roles, 38(1-2), 1-28.
Wolf, W. C., & Fligstein, N. D. (1979). Sex and authority in the workplace: The causes of sexual inequality.
American Sociological Review, 44, 235-252.
14