The Management Hierarchy Of Female Employees

"In 1950 about one in three women participated in the labor force. By 1998, nearly three of every five women of working age were in the labor force" (Heatherfield, n.d., para. 4). In 2008, the U.S. Department of labor estimates that women will make up 48% of the workforce (Heatherfield, n.d., para. 6). As the number of women in the workforce rises so do the numbers of women who hold higher titles such as Chairman, CEO, Vice Chairman, President, Chief Operating Officer, Senior Vice President, and Executive Vice President. This number has increased from 7.3% in 2000 to 9.9% in 2002 (Diversity statistics, 2006).

Findings and Conclusion: This research shows that women are still unrepresented in top management globally. The difference in performance of the companies in the same country and same industry implies that diversity serves a competitive differentiator. Certain companies focus on gender diversity and others focus on ethnic and racial diversity but no company in the top quartile focus on both. Companies which have greater diversity are able to attract top talent, improve internal and external customer satisfaction, improve decision making and hence improve

In the United States, study after study continues to show that women have fewer opportunities to advance in the workplace than men. These disadvantages are a result of society’s views of women in leadership positions and how women may view themselves in these roles. Women have been making progress in terms of equality in pay and job positions, but significant gaps remain. Women who strive to be promoted into higher levels of responsibility in their companies often meet resistance that prevents them from achieving the goal of a senior or executive level of management. This barrier is referred to as the “glass ceiling” and it is a controversial issue in our country today. The glass ceiling called this because women are able to see the higher level positions, but can reach them because of an intangible barrier. One can look at the Fortune 500 companies, which are the most successful companies in the U.S. in terms of revenue to see how few women are in leadership positions. Clearly, women are significantly underrepresented in these companies, as less than 5 percent of these companies have female chief executive officers (CEO) today (Dockterman 105). Providing the opportunity for women to move into management positions, like CEOs, would bring a unique talent and a new perspective on how the company can operate to perform better (Buckalew 147). The “glass ceiling” is a real obstacle that creates an intangible barrier that puts women at a disadvantage in advancing in a company.

CEO: Serve as the team leader and final decision maker for the company. The CEO is the face of the organization and will be the primary voice for any public statements made.

However, more attractive and more qualified women may not be hired for the sole fact that the employer doesn’t want to deal with sexual harassment cases due to the amount of men in the workplace. A female in a position of power in the workplace may be seen as a tyrannical, bossy leader. Although, a man in the same position is seen as an assertive, and driven to help the

This myth has been perpetuated throughout history and in result; we have barriers such as the glass ceiling in existence. If we were to pull up a list of the Board of Directors for any given company, the probability of it being a predominately male group is high. This notion alone shows how companies have continued to dwell in olds days where men are considered more capable than women. The Glass ceiling effect has continued to place barriers against women endeavor in achieving success in their careers and participation in their work place. Women have not been able to realize their potential in their work places since they are not offered equal chances as compared to their men counterparts who enjoy great opportunities in organizations. The fact that an organization is ran by men, may cause an adverse effect on the performance of men. Obviously, a man thinks differently than a woman. It is likely that a decision made by men only is likely to ignore the interests of women in the organization. This creates a domino effect because it affects the woman’s performance in business since they only get limited chances to learn, and limited job assignments that will enhance their skills. Hence, low or limited skills and experience will lower their overall

Women treat men with equal respect, whereas men do not. “Women tend to be receptive to both men and women in superior roles, found a 2014 study titled A Man’s (Precarious) Place. Men, on the other hand, were more likely to be threatened by women in superior positions and were more assertive with female leaders, according to the study.”(Kirkham 2015). Elyssa Kirkham states that women are more willing to receive input from men. This capability creates diversity within the workplace. Diversity leads to more talent within the workplace, an advantage for companies determined to strive. Pallab Dutta, of Demand Media, states, “Access to a larger talent pool is one of the biggest advantages of having an employment recruitment policy that values diversity.”(Dutta 1). This diverse environment leads to more talent, which results in “creative solutions for problems and better organizational productivity”(Dutta 1). Having employees that can endorse equality, accept both men and women’s input, is key to success within a business. Without it, a companies who do not support equality will not thrive. This acceptance towards both men and women creates a positive atmosphere within the workplace. This positive energy, that women acquire, inspires motivation within employees which results in an increase of business

Next, sexism can be seen today in America’s work forces through discrimination in positions. CNNMoney analysis announced a number of female CEO in America. In the Standard & Poor’s 500 (S&P 500) that represents top 500 American companies, women account for 14.2 percent in top management positions, such as Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Operating Officer (COO), Marketing Manager, and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) at companies. Out of 500 companies, the number of female CEOs is only 24 (Egan). Women make up a half of financial field. However, only executive officers at 12.4 percent, and board directors at 18.3 percent are women. There are no female CEOs in the financial field. Because stereotypes persist, Deborah Gillis, a CEO of Catalyst,

For my research question I will be asking: “How is America making progress on gender equity?” Fundamentally, I believe that women are still misrepresented, and are still facing many challenges in the workplace, especially in the business world. The gender stereotypes play a considerable role in the way the society sees women as leaders. However, it will be judicious to consider the small but noticeable changes that have been made over the past years concerning gender equality in the American workplace.

Gender and race are often synonymous with one’s place in organizational power structure. Those individuals who occupy the top positions have a tradition in maintaining traditional rules and procedures related to hiring, seniority, and other personnel practices that work to their advantage and exclude others. A good example is that corporate policies and practices can subtly maintain the status quo by keeping men in positions of corporate power. Boards of directors, which are mostly comprised of men, sometimes perpetuate the status quo by selecting CEO’s who look like them. Other gender based barriers include behavioral and communication styles that differ vastly from the company’s norms and women’s lack of opportunity to gain general management and or line

While the corporate environment has significantly progressed in terms of incorporating women and minorities into the work face, the glass ceiling still poses a threat in the environment for women. Fortune magazine periodically ranks and publishes a list of America’s largest companies. Crampton (1999) reports that among the Fortune 50 companies, only 1.3% of corporate officers were women, while 1.7% were among the Fortune 500 (Daily 1999). Among two-hundred of America’s largest companies, women hold less than a quarter of executive jobs and less than five percent of the vice-presidents are women (Daily 1999). In the past ten years no more than two women have served as CEO’s for a Fortune 500 company (Daily 1999). The number of women who serve on the boards for these major corporations comprise a relatively modest percentage of all board members (Daily 1999). Discrimination against women still plays a large part in enforcing the artificial barrier. Crampton (1999) reported that a recent study found that 79% of the CEO’s believed that prejudice and stereotypes are among the most identifiable barriers to women’s advancements. Crampton (1999) reported that discrimination can occur in forms of organizational structure policies, informal networks, and cultures that are so male-dominated that they become barriers for women to rise in the organization.

In this case study, Liz Ames has come up against an all too common problem in business today: gender bias. Effectively managing racial, ethnic and gender diversity is not just a human resources issue; it is a serious business issue.

Even though numbers are slowly rising in the United States, there are still more men in executive positions than women. According to one survey, female workers only made up 43% of legislators, senior managers, and senior officials whereas male workers made up 57%. In congress, congresswomen make up only 17% of representation compared to congressmen making up 83% (Ferrante, 2011, p. 312). Gender stratification is one explanation for the tremendous gap. Ferrante (2011) describes gender stratification as the unequal distribution of opportunities and resources amongst male and female employees. (p. 311) For example, male workers have an increased opportunity to receive a promotion than a female worker. According to Tinsley (2013), women are more likely to receive executive positions when a company is doing well, rather than when a company is suffering. Some companies stereotype that women workers will leave the workforce soon to bear children, limiting their chances of achieving executive status (Ferrante, 2011, p. 316).

Gender diversity is also remaining to be a challenge due to the issues in relation with cultural factors. In fact, women in executive roles are ready to make sacrifices in their personal lives in order to contain a top management position. The issue rises in whether or not corporate culture will support the rise of women in executive and senior executive positions. Barriers limiting women as top managers revolve around the limited availability they would have to offer the organization. In a survey conducted, only sixty-nine percent of senior executive women believe that reaching the C-suite is possible. Those who were less confident about moving into top-management explained that environmental and cultural factors were more influential than individual factors. More confident women show the leadership styles that these companies are seeking these types of leadership and communication styles. This absent of diversity within leadership styles is still a challenge because of top management already having a model role; these women’s

A lack of women present in top leadership and technological positions has been a topic of discussion for many years. With more women than men graduating from college in the U.S., why is it that only 15.7% of board seats of Fortune 500 companies occupied by women (“Why is There…” 2014)? The gender issue that is of critical importance to American society is the lack of women in corporate and technological positions. The reasons why this is important is for diversity in the workplace, representation in the industry, and to break the glass ceiling.