Hillman, Shropshire and Cannella (2007) seeks to answer the question of why do some organizations have women on their board of directors while others do not? This review will seek to identify the objective of the study; basic assumptions and theories deployed; identify the hypothesis and research methodologies used in testing the assumptions, and discuss the results before reaching a conclusion.
The research question is appropriate because it focused on the characteristics organisations have that are likely pointers to the level of female representation on its board. Previous research looked at female representations based on work group level (e.g Cox & Nkomo, 1991; Milliken & Martins, 1996) or on an individual level. In addition, despite the several agitations and literatures that show the accrued benefits of having more women on board( e.g Blackman, 2004; Browder, 1995; Gasparino &Boyce, 1998), recent statistics shows that men still hold a greater number of seats on boards of US firms. Schnake et al (2006:31). What could be the reason for this? What are the common attributes/characteristics of these organisations where there are women on their boards? These were referred to as organisational predictors.
According to Hillman et al, focusing on organizational characteristics that are predictive of women on corporate boards allows us to systematically explore under what conditions a firm’s board is more likely to include female directors (2007:941). This represents the underlying objective of this study. In achieving this, references were made to existing theory and hypotheses were developed and tested.
The resource dependence theory was used as the theoretical framework in the search to answers for these questions. It examines the interdependence between organizations and entities in their external environment. Pfeffer, Pfeffer & Salancik, cited in Hillman et al (2007:942). The Resource dependence theory is also, hinged on the fact that no organisation can succeed without the derived benefits they get from external entities. This remains a crucial factor in board recruitment and female board members can provide such benefits to their organisations.
The article is based on deductive research, which entails testing of hypotheses derived from existing theories and concept (Gummesson as cited in University of Leicester 2008:187). The hypotheses tested were as follows
1. Organisational size is positively associated with female representation on a board of directors
2. Firms in industries with greater female employment bases are positively associated with female representation on boards of directors
3. A firm’s level of diversification is positively associated with female representation on its board of directors
In the American society, we constantly hear people make sure they say that a chief executive officer, a racecar driver, or an astronaut is female when they are so because that is not deemed as stereotypically standard. Sheryl Sandberg is the, dare I say it, female chief operating officer of Facebook while Mark Zuckerberg is the chief executive officer. Notice that the word “female” sounds much more natural in front of an executive position, but you would typically not add male in front of an executive position because it is just implied. The fact that most of America and the world makes this distinction shows that there are too few women leaders. In Sheryl Sandberg’s book “Lean In,” she explains why that is and what can be done to change that by discussing women, work, and the will to lead.
Nemko, Marty. "The Real Reason So Few Women Are in the Boardroom." Martynemko.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Mar. 2014.
First, our company should understand the importance of gender diversity. In the first article “Why Workplace Gender Diversity Matters”, Anne Marsan pointed out directly that most tech companies lack of gender diversity. Then she explained several reasons why gender diversity matters to companies. Using logos, she mentioned that women in U.S. purchased 50 percent of computers, 50 percent of cars and 80 percent of consumer goods. In other words, organizations with gender diversity are better to connect with
Women face discrimination in the workplace. Discrimination is defined as a behavioral activity is exhibited in how people treat members of other groups and in the decisions they make about others. In chapter 3 Race and Ethnicity in the United States discusses how discrimination not only effects positions in companies it also affects pay rates. Income is drastically different when it comes to men and women and only gets worse for women who are minorities. These women have broken through the glass ceiling in their corporations. “In 1991 the Glass Ceiling Commission was formed to help women and minorities, fight their derrepresentation in the workplace”. With this article and with research that is being done women are starting to break the glass ceiling that is holding them down. Women account for only 2.2% of Fortune 500 companies CEO roles. The number is shockingly low, less than 15 companies have women CEO’s in the 500 companies we look at that best fit our country’s
Positions of Power: How Female Ambition is Shaped by J.D. Nordell of Slate Magazine details the female disposition in the workplace. Nordell writes, “...women account for 35 percent of MBAs but only 2 percent of Fortune 500 CEOs. Women now make up 16 percent of congressional seats - and 0 percent of U.S. presidents…” (Nordell). The statistics provided above show an obvious discrepancy in the amount of influence women have in the workplace. A popular theory is that this discrepancy is caused by the influence of gender roles on the workplace - men are not taking women as seriously in the workplace. Females’ introduction into the major economy is still a relatively new concept, and the underlying archaic gender role that women should tend to the house and children is preventing women from being taken seriously by the men of the business world, and thus constraining their performance in the economy. This is further supported by the case of Ben Barres: “Recently, the transsexual neuroscientist Ben Barres, who has worked as both a woman and a man in science, noted that he is treated with more respect and interrupted less frequently now that he is a man” (Nordell). This further elaborates on the phenomenon that women are taken less seriously in the workplace. Considering the excerpts from Positions of Power: How Female Ambition is Shaped, it is easy
Gender Diversity has been considered a key issue in the Corporate Governance and the details about how the organizations have worked on improving the women’s representation in the Boardroom composition has also been discussed. Several examples have been given about the board room composition of various companies and the number of female professionals in it.
Here is a overview of seven predominant factors that motivate companies, large and small, to diversify their workforces, As a Social Responsibility, As an Economic Payback, As a Resource Imperative, As a Legal Requirement, As a Marketing Strategy, As a Business Communications Strategy, As a Capacity-building Strategy.
(Despeignes, and Dunne 06) In other words, men dominated majority of the companies CEO 's which influence the decision and implementation of having an equal pay to women. I bet the situation of the 10 companies that run by women are different than the rest. A Cornell University Study, by Francine Blau and Lawrence Kahn, showed that the pay gap had tightened as women gained more full time work experience and employers became influenced that women were dedicated to remain at their jobs. (Blau) In my experience, working in the financial institution for seven years, larger part of my work are senior female that works more than 20 years compare to
Today, however, women have integrated themselves into every field of activity and every kind of industry smoothly and skillfully. Whether travelling twenty days of the month or accepting transfers, they are as performance-oriented, sincere, competent and persevering as their male counterparts, if not more. Their presence in the corporate world is now more a rule than an exception such that a feminist agenda and, in fact, any speci...
Half of all employees in the US alone are women and yet “only around five percent hold senior positions (Source 11)”. According to this, one can assume that out of all the employees in the US, only around three percent are women in senior positions, which is a small number of women. However, the representation of women in large corporations is bigger with twenty five percent as higher level managers (“Sexism in the workplace”). Small numbers of women in different kinds of jobs is still common in today’s jobs, even though some may consider the sexes to be equal. They are also underrepresented in blue collar jobs such as construction workers, precision production, and mine working. The cause of these small numbers could be because the employers of these jobs are sexist and the gender of the applicant matters when finding people to fill the jobs, but this is not always the case. Women could also not be applying for the blue collar jobs as well. They may not do this because they do not feel that they could stand doing the heavy duty work. Men could be convincing them that they could not last in the job, when in reality they most certainly
The argument for gender-diversity enhancing boardroom effectiveness and performance in listed companies has been made. The evidence herein is also very compelling. However, If gender-diversity is to enhance corporate governance in listed companies; then women appointees to directorship positions will be required to have suitable training, development, as well as experience. Furthermore, tokenism’ alone will not allow listed companies realize the tangible and intangible benefits of diversity, including gender diversity, in corporate governance.
Many writers have addressed the popular question of women and the relationship between gender and leadership. These vary from women not possessing the quality and traits necessary for managerial work to the negative stereotypes attached with women striving to succeed in a male dominant quarter. 3% of CEO’s in the Fortune 500 companies are women [10], therefore this gap in leadership means that there are many obstacles barricading women in senior positions to make that leap through the glass ceiling that is holding them back. In this essay, I will be explaining a few obstacles women in leadership face and what can be done to address them.
Harvard Business Review. Women in the Workplace: A Research Roundup. n.d. 15 November 2013 .
Managing diverse groups to achieve a cohesive philosophy and consistency of performance is what is required of today’s corporate leader. Evidence shows that women and men are as adept, or as bad, as each other at responding to this challenge.
Gender inequality is present in all aspects of human society, from culture, politics, and economic stand point to personal relationships. Gender inequality can be viewed as a major problem especially within the business world (Corporation, 2016). In the past, men are seen as leaders in all aspects. For example, men could work without any criticisms, they could participate in political issues and were given higher education. Women on the other hand, were given no political participation, criticized for working outside the household as they were responsible for chores such as takes care of their children, cooking or cleaning and given limited education compared to men. Although there are claims rights equality of women in 21st century and much has been written about it in the field of business (Player, 2013), but there is still a gap between male and female. This essay aims to explore the impact of gender inequality in business and will analyze the details in terms of the men are given high pay and specific jobs over women.