glass ceiling project
TRANSCRIPT
INTRODUCTION:
The research team has selected the topic of “Glass ceiling” for the research project. It has been
observed that during the last few years a lot of women are going in management field but not a
lot of them are getting an opportunity to get into the top management positions. This has got
nothing to do with their abilities and dedication to their work, it is clear that glass ceiling is
affecting and stopping the women from reaching the top management positions. The problem of
glass ceiling persists in the other countries of the world as is clear from the previous researches
but this problem is more evident in Pakistan. This is because despite the boom in education
sector, the society still remains conservative and negative feelings and stereotypes do exist
against women employees. As a result of the glass ceiling, the performance of women employees
is also being affected. This is a cause of concern and it is happening because women managers
feel that they are not being treated equally. They develop the feelings that their efforts are not
being properly rewarded. Due to the presence of pre-defined rules and regulation for promotions
women working in public sector are not being affected a great deal by glass ceiling. Thus it is the
private sector where the women are facing glass ceiling the most. The significance of this study
is that the research team looked into the main problems which are prohibiting the women from
going into the top management positions. By identifying the factors causing the problems, the
team will be able to judge the reasons and help eradicate them. It is important to look in the
organizational factors that would help the women to reach to top management positions as early
as they deserve. This study is an effort to not only identify the factors responsible for affecting
the performance of women managers through glass ceiling but also to give solutions to over
come from this problems.
1
LITERATURE REVIEW
The term ‘glass ceiling’ refers to the transparent but real and strong barrier which prevents
women from moving up in the management hierarchy in an organization (Morrison & Glinow,
1990). The minority of women in senior management has led many researchers to investigate
whether glass ceiling barriers such as sexual discrimination, gender wage gap, gender stereotype,
harassment and lack of family-friendly workplace policies in the organizations are at play and
how these barriers affect the performance of female employees in the organizations (Jeavons &
Sevastos, 2002).
The existence of glass ceiling in different organizations, cultures and time span has been
confirmed by many researchers. In 1997, Tokunaga & Graham looked at employees in the
technical division at one large Fortune 500 corporation and found that female engineers could
not advance as far up the corporate hierarchy as did the male engineers, thereby providing
evidence for the existence of a “glass ceiling” against women. A research conducted by Veale &
Gold (1998) in Metropolitan District Council situated in Yorkshire, UK also confirmed that a
glass ceiling did exist within the council and this inhibited women’s progression into senior
management.
This existence of a strong glass ceiling effect prevents women to progress in the organizations. A
study controlled for previous job experience, education, age, tenure, initial job level and gender
showed that even levels of promotions existed for men and women. However, qualitative data
showed that women were employed by the organization at a level that was lower than their
qualifications, or lower than men doing the same job. Therefore, even with equal rates of
promotion, women will not progress as far as men (Jeavons & Sevastos, 2002).
There a number of factors that keeps the glass ceiling in effect. One of them is the gender
stereotype. Over the last three decades, Schein (2007) found that gender stereotyping of the
2
managerial position has continued to be the major barrier to women’s progress in management,
worldwide. He also shown that on international level, the view of women as less likely than men
to possess requisite management characteristics is a commonly held belief among male
management students in the USA, the UK, Germany, China and Japan.
Apart from gender stereotyping, gender wage gap also plays its role in the organizations. Across
a sample of eleven European Union countries in 1995–2001 Booth & Bryan (2007) found that
women were paid less than men and this wage gap typically widened toward the top of the wage
distribution (the “glass ceiling” effect), and in a few cases it also widened at the bottom (the
“sticky floor” effect). In recent studies of promotion to partner process, Kumra & Vinnicombe
(2008) concluded that the disadvantages women face in organizations in relation to the
promotion to partner process arise from a combination of firm-based and societal based factors.
Discussing the relationship between discrimination, harassment and glass ceiling (Bell,
McLaughlin & Sequeira, 2002), glass ceiling was referred as one of the form of sex
discrimination. In the study it was concluded that because all three have some common
antecedents, steps to reduce one of them will likely affect the others. Apart from that they
suggested that measures designed to increase numbers of women in higher level positions will
reduce sexual harassment.
As a result of this glass ceiling there is an inclination of women to entrepreneurship as a result of
barriers to women’s advancements in corporation (Mattis, 2004). Mattis showed that lack of
flexibility continued to be a feature of the corporate culture that lead to the attrition of high
potential women and contributed to the dramatic increase in entrepreneurship among women in
the US
3
Glass ceiling affects the performance of women at managerial posts. Some of the “masculine”
organizational barriers that severely hinder women’s ability to be effective in their role as
strategic decision makers include reluctance of male subordinates towards female managers;
isolation by male colleagues; exclusion from male-dominated informal networks and the lack of
mentorship (Okanlawon, 1994). Exploration of a model of decision making (Large & Saunders,
1995) explains how a combination of both individual choices (employees’ own perceptions,
requirements and priorities like family, social life) and organizational blockages (organizational
structure, policies and culture) maintains the glass ceiling.
Gender related attributes also play their role. An appropriate theoretical foundation for
explaining differences between male and female service providers originates in the sociology
literature and is referred to as feminist theory. This theory proffers two perspectives regarding
gender-related differences in performance. One argues that there are a wide variety of issues that
are impacted by society’s attitudes towards women (Hooks, 2000). These attitudes are based in
the history and institutional structure of society. As a result, women are treated differently than
men, so that the performance of businesses owned by women suffers. Another stream of
literature argues that there are innate differences between male and female approaches to issues.
These differences lead women to take different actions than males in similar situations (Buttner,
2001; Fletcher, 1998).
There is an alternative theoretical perspective that would not accept the arguments advanced by
feminist theory. The foundation for most of this research is the rational economic model (Ferber
& Nelson, 1993). This theory argues that individuals make rational economic choices and seek to
maximize economic benefit to themselves or the firm. Most of these models assume that
customers are economically rational and will make their choices based on the benefits gained
from the transaction, and not the gender of the service provider. Prior research on whether
gender as an impact on the financial performance of professional service providers has not
provided clear insights on whether feminist theory or the rational economic model is more valid.
Some researchers find that women achieve lower financial performance than men (Hisrich &
4
Brush, 1984; Loscocco, Robinson, Hall, & Allen, 1991; Lustgarten, 1995; Chaganti &
Prasuraman, 1997; Fasci & Valdez, 1998), while others argue that there is no performance
difference between male & female owned enterprises (Fischer, Reuber & Dyke, 1993; Kalleberg
& Leicht, 1991).
Davidson & Cooper (1983) found that managerial women experience greater strain and feel
more isolated at work than males which in turn affect their performance. There is gender
difference in leadership because of negative perception and evaluation of women in leadership
(Stelter 2002).
Sex role orientation and the stereotype of manager role as masculine construct, along with lack
of career planning among women are predominant theme that explains why so few women
progress to leadership position (Chugh & Sehgal 2007). Women are not advancing in work place
because they did not receive training to perform job moreover manager do not appreciate
achievements of their women employee as compare to men (Asplund 1988).
RESEARCH QUESTION
How glass ceiling affect the job performance of managerial women?
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
There are three variables which are under study. Job performance is dependent variable and it is
the variable of primary interest and changes or variations in job performance will be explained
by two independent variables (1) gender stereotyping (2) cooperation among colleagues. Gender
stereotyping has negative relation with job performance i.e. if there is less gender stereotyping
among the members of organization then greater will be the job performance. Cooperation has
positive relation with job performance i.e. if there is more cooperation among the employees the
greater will be the job performance.
5
Review of past researches shows if there is gender stereotyping female manager can not get the
equal opportunities, males are only favoring the males so ultimately it affect the job performance
of female employees that’s why there is a negative relation between job performance and gender
stereotype.
Past researches also shows that the cooperation plays a very important role in increasing the job
performance because if there is a cooperation among employees then they can motivate each
other and it leads towards increase in job performance.
Independent Variable Dependent variable
Independent Variable
HYPOTHESES
If cooperation among the colleagues at work place is increased then the job performance
of managerial women will be increased.
If gender stereotyping is reduced at work place then the job performance of managerial
women will be increased.
Gender Stereotyping
Cooperation among colleagues
Job Performance
6
METHODOLOGY
Study design
In this cross-sectional co-relational field study data on two independent variables (gender
stereotype, cooperation among colleagues) and dependent variable(job performance) were
collected from both males and females at management level working in private
organizations( PIFRA(Project to Improve Financial Reporting and Auditing) World bank, Ittehad
airlines,IBM Pakistan) in Islamabad through personally administered questionnaires.
Population and Sample
Population for the study comprised all men and women at managerial level working in private
organizations in Islamabad. Quota sampling method was used to draw sample out of population
because it was deemed fit by the researchers on the basis of cost and time considerations.
Subjects were chosen in predetermined numbers. The total sample size was n=34 which
comprised 14 (41.2%) males and 20(58.8%) females. 40 questionnaires were given to both
gender and they all were received back within a time period of 2 weeks, resulting in 100%
response rate because questionnaires were personally administered and researchers clarify
research topic, doubts and assist some of the respondents in understanding some questions. The
units of analysis were individuals who responded to the survey. Out of females 8 (40 %) were at
low and 12 (60 %) were at middle level management. Out of males 8 (57.1 %) were at low and 6
(42.9 %) were at middle level management. During data filtration patterns were observed in 6
out of 40 questionnaires of which 3 were filled by males and rest by females, such questionnaires
were set a side and remaining 34 were used for analysis.7 questionnaires include missing items
ranging from 1 to 2 so middle value on the interval scale i.e. 3(unsure) was assigned to them.
7
Variables and Measures
Questionnaires include two demographic variables (gender & managerial level), they were
tapped by direct single questions.
Job performance :
This dependent variable indicates the extent to which employees of the organization are
expected to acquire job knowledge, achieve assigned goals and maintain better work related
relations with members of organization at workplace. Researchers develop 5 point interval scale
containing 6 items to measure the relationship of this variable with cooperation among
colleagues (independent variable). An example item is “A friendly atmosphere among colleagues
at work place leads to better job performance” Reliability of these items checked via SPSS
SOFTWARE gave alpha= .56 Means reliable. Researchers used 8 items scale to measure the
relationship of job performance with gender stereotype (independent variable). An example item
is “I feel additional pressure to perform because I am women”. Reliability of these items checked
via SPSS SOFTWARE gave alpha= .6334
Gender stereotype :
Stereotypes of men and women commonly reflect the distinction made in implicit personality
theory between agency and communion (e.g., Rosenberg, Nelson, & Vivekananthan, 1968). This
independent variable was measured using 5 point interval scale containing 14 items. An example
item is “a woman’s place is in home” Reliability of these items checked via SPSS SOFTWARE
gave alpha= .636
8
Cooperation among colleagues:
”cooperation is a process by which individuals, groups and organizations come together, interact
and form psychological relationships for mutual gain or benefit (Smith et al., 1995)”. This
independent variable was measured using 5 point interval scale containing 10 items. An example
item is “open communication of relevant information occurs between male and female
colleagues” Reliability of these items checked via SPSS SOFTWARE gave alpha= .634
Data collection method
Data was collected through personally administered questionnaires because the survey was
confined to local area i.e. Islamabad. Moreover, this method was deemed fit in Pakistan as
compared to mailed and electronic questionnaires. Method of personally administered
questionnaires was adopted to introduce research topic, clarify doubts of respondents and collect
all the completed responses within a short span of time. All questionnaires were received back
within 2 weeks. 5 point interval scale was used for data collection containing range from
“strongly disagree to strongly agree”
9
RESULTS
In order to test the formulated hypotheses, statistical analysis of the responses of the
questionnaires was done.
The reliability of the four scales is given below:
Reliability of Cooperation among colleagues (CAC) scale
Table 1
Alpha Reliability Coefficient of CAC for the Main Study (N=34)
Scale No. of items Alpha coefficient
CAC 10 0.634
Table 1 shows the alpha reliability (r=0.634) for the CAC scale. The results in table 1
show that scale has satisfactory reliability.
10
Reliability of Gender stereotyping (GS) scale
Table 2
Alpha Reliability Coefficient of SRS for the Main Study (N=34)
Scale No. of items Alpha coefficient
GS 14 0.636
Table 2 shows the alpha reliability (r=0.636) for the SRS scale. The results in table 2
show that scale has satisfactory reliability.
Reliability of Cooperation effect on Performance (CEP) scale
Table 3
Alpha Reliability Coefficient of CEP for the Main Study (N=34)
Scale No. of items Alpha coefficient
CEP 6 0.56
11
Table 3 shows the alpha reliability (r=0.56) for the PER scale. The results in table 3 show
that scale has satisfactory reliability.
Reliability of Stereotyping effect on Performance (SEP) scale
Table 4
Alpha Reliability Coefficient of SEP for the Main Study (N=34)
Scale No. of items Alpha coefficient
SEP 6 0.633
Table 4 shows the alpha reliability (r=0.633) for the PER scale. The results in table 4
show that scale has satisfactory reliability.
The results are organized under five main headings:
(1) Cooperation among colleagues
(2) Sex-role stereotype
(3) Perception about female managers
(4) Effect of cooperation on performance of female managers
(5) Effect of stereotyping on performance of female managers
12
Cooperation among colleagues
Table 5
Gender Mean N SD
Male 3.45 14 0.63
Female 3.39 20 0.43
Note: Scale: strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5)
The male respondents think that cooperation does exist in private organizations among male
and female colleagues (3.45). Female respondents also think that cooperation exist between
male and female colleagues (3.39).
Sex-role stereotype
Table 6
Gender Mean N SD
Male 3.10 14 0.92
Female 2.76 20 0.813
Note: Scale: strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5)
13
Sex role stereotyping does exist in male respondents but its very less (3.1). However it does
not exist in female respondents (2.76).
Perception about female managers
Table 7
Gender Mean N SD
Male 2.67 14 0.83
Female 3.51 20 0.51
Note: Scale: strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5)
The male respondents do not think that female managers have to be more competent than
males and behave in a typically ‘masculine way’ in order to be noticed and promoted (2.67).
However female respondents think that they are required to be more competent in order to be
taken seriously (3.39).
14
Effect of cooperation on performance of female managers
Table 8
Correlation between Cooperation among colleagues and performance of female managers
(N=34)
Correlation r
Correlation between .286
cooperation among colleagues
and performance of female
managers
________________________________________________________________________
p=0.101
Table 8 shows that the hypothesis assuming that there is a relationship between
cooperation among colleagues and performance of female managers is accepted as there is non-
significant relationship between these two. Results indicate a weak relationship between
cooperation among colleagues and performance of female managers. Results also show that only
8% of job performance of female managers is affected by cooperation among colleagues.
15
Effect of stereotyping on performance of female managers
Table 9
Correlation between stereotyping and performance of female managers
(N=34)
Correlation r
Correlation between .117
stereotyping and
performance of female
managers
________________________________________________________________________
p=0.510
Table 9 shows that the hypothesis assuming that there is a relationship between
stereotyping and performance of female managers is rejected as there is non-significant
relationship between these two. Results indicate a weak relationship between stereotyping and
performance of female managers. Results also show that only 1% of job performance of female
managers is affected by stereotyping.
16
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to see the level of cooperation among colleagues and the gender
stereotyping in private organizations and then to determine the impact of these two on the
performance of female managers in the private organizations. The statistical analysis of the data
acquired from the filled questionnaires revealed that both male and female managers at the low
and middle level of organization think that there exists a friendly atmosphere among male and
female colleagues at work place. They help each other in time of need and in performing work
related tasks. Though both male and female agree that cooperation does exist but the interesting
finding is that male employees perceive that there is cooperation among colleagues more then
female employees do.
Another interesting finding is that male employees think that a woman’s place is in home and
they are not suited for work outside of the home. According to their point of view traditional
husband/wife roles are the best and that it is the job of women to manage the home and men to
go out to work. Also, they think that women lack the skills and abilities needed at work. This
finding is supported by a study conducted by Schein (2007) who found that on international
level, the view of women as less likely than men to possess requisite management characteristics
is a commonly held belief among male management students in the USA, the UK, Germany,
China and Japan. However, female employees do not think that women lack the managerial skills
and that they are not suited for work outside the home.
Female employees think that compared to male managers, female managers must continually
prove themselves in order to be taken seriously and get promoted. Whereas male managers think
that male and female managers are treated equally and in the same fashion as those of male
managers. These results are supported by (Jeavons & Sevastos, 2002) who found out that the
existence of a strong glass ceiling effect prevents women to progress in the organizations. The
researchers also showed that women were employed by the organization at a level that was lower
than their qualifications, or lower than men doing the same job
17
It was hypothesized that if the cooperation among colleagues is increased then the performance
of female managers will be enhanced. The study results show that there exist a relationship
between cooperation among colleagues and the performance of female managers. So the study
results show that if the cooperation among colleagues is increased there will be an improvement
in the performance of female managers. This finding is also proved by a previous study
conducted by (Okanlawon, 1994) that glass ceiling affects the performance of women at
managerial posts and a friendly atmosphere among male and female colleagues contributes in the
better and improved performance of female managers.
Another hypothesis that was formulated was that the reduction in gender stereotyping will result
in an improved performance of female managers. This hypothesis has been proved wrong. The
study shows that there is a very weak relationship between stereotyping and the performance of
female managers. Also these two are weakly correlated in a positive way. The conclusion drawn
is that in the private organizations of Pakistan, female employees do not bother about what male
think of females as managers. Female managers do not feel discouraged due to stereotyping.
Their work activities, abilities and morale is not affected by the stereotyping of male colleagues.
CONCLUSION
The study aimed at finding either male and female colleagues in organizations cooperate with
each other and either gender stereotyping exists among male and female managers. The findings
show that both male and female employees at managerial posts of private organizations agree
that cooperation does exist but the degree of agreement is higher in male then in female
managers. The study was also aimed to see if there exist a relationship between cooperation
among colleagues and job performance of female managers. A moderate relationship does exist
between cooperation and female managers’ job performance. Hence if the level of comfort and
cooperation among male and female colleagues at work is enhanced, female managers’
performance will improve. It is evident from the findings of the study that female managers’
performance is not affected by the gender stereotyping of their male peers.
18
RECOMMENDATIONS
Since it has been found that a friendly atmosphere among male and female employees at
workplace plays a vital role in the better performance of female managers, the private
organizations in Pakistan should figure out ways and make policies to make sure that female
employees feel at ease with their male peers and both male and female employees work together
and coordinate with each other in order to enhance employees’ performance.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
The generalizability of the results of this study is low since a non-probability sampling technique
was used due to lack of time and resources. The sample size is also very small (n=34) which is
not suitable for such kind of research.
For future research, work which look more directly at these issues taking a larger sample size
will be encouraged. Also it is required to see that though gender stereotyping is not affecting the
performance of female managers but it is probable that gender stereotyping that is being found in
Pakistani organization might be affecting the hiring or/and promotion criterion of female
managers.
19
REFERENCES
Virginia E. Schein (2007). Women in management: reflections and projections. Women
in Management Review, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 6-18.
Camilla Veale, & Jeff Gold (1998). Smashing into the glass ceiling for women managers.
Journal of Management Development, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp.17-26.
Author, Howard Tokunaga & Tracy Graham (1997). The “glass ceiling” [On-line]
Avaialble http://www.
Simone Jeavons, & Peter Sevastos (2002). Glass Ceiling Effect or Sticky Floors? [On-
line] Avaialble http://www.
Wiji Arulampalam, Alison L. Booth, & Mark L. Bryan (2007). Is There A Glass Ceiling
Over Europe? Exploring The Gender Pay Gap Across The Wage Distribution. Industrial
and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 60, No. 2.
Myrtle P. Bell, Mary E. McLaughlin, & Jennifer M. Sequeira (2002). Discrimination,
20
Harassment, and the Glass Ceiling: Women Executives as Change Agents. Journal of
Business Ethics, 37, 65–76.
Savita Kumra & Susan Vinnicombe (2008). A Study of the Promotion to Partner Process
in a Professional Services Firm: How Women are Disadvantaged. British Journal of
Management, Vol. 19, S65–S74.
Mary C. Mattis (2004). Women entrepreneurs: out from under the glass ceiling. Women
in Management Review, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp.154-163.
Martin Large & Mark N.K. Saunders (1995). A decision-making model for analyzing
how the glass ceiling is maintained: unblocking equal promotion opportunities. The
International Journal of Career Management, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 21–28
Gus Okanlawon (1994).Women as Strategic Decision Makers: A Reflection on
Organizational Barriers. Women in Management Review, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 25-32
Fletcher, J. 1998. Relational practice: A feminist Reconstruction of work. Journal of
Management Inquiry, 7(2): 163-186.
Buttner, E. H. 2001. Examining female entrepreneurs’ management style: An application of a
relational frame, Journal of Business Ethics, 29: 253-269.
21
Hisrich, R. D., & Brush, C. G. 1984. The women entrepreneur: Implications of family,
educational and occupational experience. Journal of Small Business Management, 22(1), 30-37.
Loscocco, K. A., Robinson, J., Hall, R. H., & Allen, J. K. 1991. Gender and small business: An
inquiry into women’s relative disadvantage. Social Forces 70, 65-85.
Fasci, M. and Valdez, J. 1998. A performance contrast of male- and female-owned small
accounting practices. Journal of Small Business Management, Fischer, E. M., Reuber, A. R., &
Dyke, L. S. 1993. A theoretical overview and extension of research on sex, gender and
entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 151-168.
Davidson, M. & Cooper, C. (1983). Stress and the Women Manager.
Nicole, Z.S.2002. GENDER DIFFERENCES IN LEADERSHIP. Journal of leadership and
organizational studies.
Chugh, s. & sahgal, P. (2007) . why do few womens advance to leadership position. Global
business review 2007.
Asplund, G. (1988). Women managers:Changing organizational cultures, Morrison, A. M. and
M.A. Von Glinow (1990). ‘women and minorities in management’, American Psychologist, 45 ,
pp. 200-208.
22
23