Management and Gender - Essay Example

?Content 3 Introduction 4 Theoretical Explanation on Gender Imbalance in Management 4 Indicators of un/Equal Gender Representation in Management 5 Measures That Have Been Implemented to Ensure Gender Balance in Management 7 Notable Benefits That Come With Adequate Gender Representation in Management 9 Drawbacks of Integrating Equal Gender Representation to Management and Organisational Culture 12 Recommendation 13 Conclusion 14 Abstract The most prevalent thought when management and gender issues are mentioned is that developed countries and geopolitical blocks such as the US, the United Kingdom and Europe are totally beyond this problem. Nevertheless, a critical look at the problem reveals that gender equality and representation in management have not been satisfactorily achieved. This is because, while both sexes are both represented in the public, corporate and entrepreneurial lives of a country such as Britain, yet the managerial sector remains under men’s control. Further keenness reveals that this inequality is spurred on by a patriarchal society and forces of socialisation and acculturation. However, the gains that proceed from gender equality remain pervasive and unparalleled by a single-sexed form of management, the drawbacks of the same notwithstanding. Introduction That the world is critical and reflective in thinking is a matter that is underscored by the many theories which try to explain gender relations. Many theoretical standpoints and postulations abound to divulge on gender relations, by analysing the dynamics of male-female relationships within the auspices of the society. As opposed to the 19th century developments which mainly delved on gender parity at the domestic level, the 1950s opened a new era which was characterised by the quest to have gender equality entrenched even in the corporate sector. This is the case with the UK, the US, the West and the rest of the developed world (Maleta, 2011, 75). The importance of theoretical standpoints that explain gender relations is that they help inculcate understanding on the history, nature and dynamics of gender relations, with the main goal being, providing directly or indirectly, the panacea to the problem of gender imbalance at the workplace, or any other sphere of the human society. Likewise, according to Moore (2012, 620), the need to relook the issue of gender and corporate life is underscored by the fact that in spite of women having been incorporated in the corporate life of developed countries, yet female presence is yet inadequately represented at the managerial level of corporate life. Theoretical Explanation on Gender Imbalance in Management One of the most moving theories on gender is that of Julia Kristeva. Kristeva’s theory has been applicable in the field of semiotics. Kristeva’s theory in explaining gender disparity and relations at the managerial level of the corporate life has a topical theme of abjection. Particularly, Kristeva structures subjectivity on abjection of the mother, arguing that a society is constructed just as an individual abjects or excludes his mother as a way of curving out an identity. Kristeva continues that just as individuals, patriarchal cultures exclude the feminine to either come into being, or consolidate its position (Cousineau and Roth, 2012, 430). Beyer (2011, 307) contends that the implication of Kristeva’s postulation is that the inability to perpetuate gender parity in organisational management is not so much occasioned by characteristics inherent in women, as is by unequal sexist relations, structures and policies which have been entrenched by a male-dominated society. This discourse will thus look into the issue of gender and management, in light of Kristeva’s theoretical postulations. Indicators of un/Equal Gender Representation in Management A critical examination of the corporate, entrepreneurial and public sectors shows the inordinate concentration of men in management. One of the indicators of the gender gap in the British business sector is the stunted rise in the number of women in executive positions. According to a report that was released in 2010 by The Independent, out of 329 business executive directors, only 20 of them were women. To further underscore this gender imbalance in the UK boardrooms, the former trade minister Lord M. Davies disclosed that only 12% of FTSE 100companies were female. The situation seemed to have been rendered grimmer by the revelation that several women held multiple positions, meaning that the number of women executive directors could only be less than the mentioned 12%. This information is important because it shows that out of 1,100 directors, only 132 were female. Again, out of 329 executive directors, there were only 20 females serving in the same capacity (Arnott, 2010, 1). The statistics further indicated that not more than five of the FTSE 100 companies have female representation at the board level. These companies are Publishers Pearson, Imperial Tobacco, Miners Anglo American, Fashion House Burberry and the Alliance Trust. To corroborate Kristeva’s argument that gender disparity at the corporate level is only underpinned by a male-dominated society and not an inherent deficiency on the side of the woman, the chairlady of the Financial Reporting Council, Baroness Hogg observed that the presence of female executive talent is very ubiquitous in the British entrepreneurial sector, though female representation is unevenly distributed. Baroness Hogg observed that female representation in management is only visible in areas and sectors where women really mattered, such as the retail and the fashion industry (Cousineau and Roth, J. 2012, 432). In the same wavelength, The Equality and Human Rights Commission postulated that it could take 7 decades for the directorship of the United Kingdom to be evenly balanced between the genders. According to Goodley (2012, 1), another factor that displays readily, the discrimination in directorship that women have had to endure is the income distribution gap. The applicability of the income distribution gap herein is that the higher one ascends in organisational leadership and hierarchy, the better his remunerations are bound to be. This means that low emoluments are to junior staffs, as better remunerations are to the directors, managers, chief executive officers (CEOs). A survey that was carried out and tabled by the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) showed that over the course of their working lives, female executives earned 400,000 pounds less than their male counterparts. This is despite both genders having the same academic qualifications and sharing in the same career. Annually, the average female executive earns 10,060 pounds less than her male counterpart, besides receiving less perks also (Gesinde and Akujobi, 2011, 4049 and Gherardi, 1995, 45). Although junior female executives earned marginally more than their male counterparts, upper adjustments of salaries as one ascends the organisational hierarchy remains harder to come by for women. The same gender inequality in management is underscored by the vulnerability to loss of managerial jobs between the sexes. The labour turnover data produced by the CMI showed that 4.3% of women executives were declared redundant within a year (August 2011 to August 2012). In contrast, only 3.2% of the male executives lost their jobs within the same period (Goodley, 2012, 1). Evidence of the bleak situation above is underscored by the information that was provided by the World Economic Forum (WEF) in 2012. WEF observed that in the United Kingdom, only 3% of the top British companies are managed by women. The crux of the matter is that all the measures that have been ratified to bring about gender balance in the corporate sector have not been able to rein in gender imbalance. For instance, this inequality still persists, 42 years after the ratification of the Equal Pay Act (Fonjong, 2008, 462 and McGuinness, 2009, 72). Measures That Have Been Implemented to Ensure Gender Balance in Management Alvesson and Billing (1997, 75) observes that there are tenable measures that can be implemented to inject equal gender participation into the veins of management. One of the most salient of these measures includes the ratification of all the provisions made by the Ministry of Labour to enforce mandatory equal pay audits. Likewise, the government should strive to make amendments on the mandatory equal pay audits by incorporating thereto, annual gender pay audits. The same amendments should move a step further to criminalise gender-based payment disparities. This move will help the government eliminate pay differentials that are based on gender. The measure will go a long way in entrenching equal gender representation in management, so long as there will be no voluntary progress being made by leaders in the corporate sector. The exaction of mandatory equal pay audits will help entrench equality in the distribution of equal distribution of salaries across the board. At the same time, the enforcement and upholding of equal pay will motivate women to aggressively seek to participate in organisational management (Wan, Wan and Al-Taee, 2012, 25). It will also be important that the government through the Ministry of Labour sets actual targets to achieve the 40% gender requirement rule for either of the sexes. This requirement should be concentrated on the managerial and executive positions of leadership, since the general representation of women in the corporate, civil and private sectors is already satisfying. Oshagbemi (2008, 1897), Gupta and Turban (2012, 141) maintain that it may also be helpful if the government increased funding for facilitating gender education programmes in businesses, entertainment sector and schools. The same educational programmes will further the promotion of values that Women’s Empowerment Principles seek to perpetuate. This effort may further be supplemented by making it mandatory for organisations to sign the Women’s Empowerment Principles CEO Support Statement. As part of adherence to this provision, all CEOs should table a report on annual progress made, to key stakeholders, annually, on matters touching the incorporation of female input as part of organisational management. Grisoni and Beeby (2007, 200) posit that it is also incumbent upon organisations to complement the efforts of the government by integrating gender equality and fairer human resources management (HRM) practices into organisational culture. This for instance will have an organisation launching workshop drives and training programmes to help its staff overcome bias and other hindrances that impede the tenure of female managers at the workplace. Conversely, an organisation may consider the establishment of scorecards at levels of leadership, to help promote flexibility in practices pertaining to management. Responsible organisations may also team up with the government to carry out campaigns that are to help promote public engagement and awareness with gender equity and the benefits that gender equity bring in dispensing social well-being and economic prosperity and stability (Bogda and Sendil, 2012, 217). Notable Benefits That Come With Adequate Gender Representation in Management According to Broadbridge and Simpson (2011, 275), the benefits of equal gender representation cannot be overstated, given that they are far-reaching. One of the benefits that come with gender balance in management is plurality of views. As women work alongside men, decisions arrived at become more comprehensive and accommodative. This means that organisational decisions will both benefit from pragmatism and humanness. This is because, women are more humane and easily observe values such as compassion, effective and successful flow of communication (or information) and philanthropy. On the contrary, men are more likely to consider the practicability and merits that may be accrued from the implementation of certain organisational policies. The import of this is that when organisational management is inclusive of both sexes, that organisation is likely to uphold tenable policy frameworks and performance targets (because of men’s input), while benefiting from positive communication culture, corporate social responsibility and fairer and more democratic HRM culture and practices (because of women’s input ) (Rose and Mackey-Kallis, 2012, 600). It is against the backdrop of the foregoing that a study of Fortune 500 Firms which was conducted by Pepperdine University revealed strong links between wider profit margins and adequate female executives. Pepperdine University carried out a study on 215 Fortune 500 firms in 2011 and produced results that show that gender balance in management has greater affinity to high profitability. The study showed that 25 Fortune firms which had been randomly picked out from the 215 Fortune 500 firms did not only have the most consistent history of promoting female employees to senior-most positions, but the same also were always 18%-69% more profitable than other normal Fortune 500 firms competing in the same market (Arnott, 2010, 1). At the same time, it is clear that an organisation which practices gender fairness in management is likely to have a good corporate or public image. This is especially the case since the UK, the US, Europe and a greater part of the globe have become democratic, and some of the facets of democracy are meritocracy and all-inclusion (collective participation). Meritocracy demands that people are employed or extended values, based on their qualifications (merits) and not sex or acquaintance. For an organisation to have only male managers, executive directors and CEOs and defend its lopsidedness against female representation by citing merit is to inadvertently or deliberately insinuate that women do not attain to men’s qualification. Similarly, an organisation that fails to incorporate female input in management cannot lay claim to being democratic, given that a truly democratic organisation is one that is inclusive of both sexes. On the converse, a society in which organisations do not incorporate female input in management is a society that is less liberated and less appreciative of the role played by women. Such a society only underscores the standpoint that Kristeva advances, to the effect that highly patriarchal societies suppress the role and dominance that women should exert in the society. Likewise, such a society is less likely to be held as a corporate model to other states, for Kristeva’s postulation intimates that such a society is less appreciative of its motherhood (the womenfolk), given that it deems the womenfolk as unworthy to lead, when it confines women’s representation to the periphery. It is also true that having both genders represented in management helps promote equality in the society. This is because, the elevation of women into the society gives a strong incentive to economic empowerment. Gender balanced societies in turn have a lot to enjoy from internal cohesion and social security (Miller, 2012, 19 and Mihaela and Nick, 2008, 66). The factoring of gender in management efforts is also lauded by marketing leading strategists such as Ross-Smith and Huppatz (2010, 550) as a form of marketing strategy. This culture stems from the consideration of the fact that organisations which respect gender balance are considered as more accommodative, committed towards egalitarianism and meritocracy. His therefore earns a good public image and ultimately, increased marketability. According to Visagie and Linde (2010, 400) and Kulich, Ryan and Haslam (2007, 589), the relationship between gender and management in marketing is also seen in the fact that gender balance in management is being considered as a form of nontraditional arrangement and labour to help meet employees’ shifting aspirations and needs. This value is indispensible, given that Europe and the rest of the developed world are rapidly changing industrial bases that have very competitive markets. Again, the gravity of the matter at hand is that equal gender representation in management is a serious matter, bordering on fundamental human rights and freedom. At the same time, employers who maintain gender equality in apportioning management portfolios are bound to enjoy access to a more diverse and larger workforce. Employees who experience equality also benefit from greater and superior access to higher wages, training and a generally improved quality of the workforce. O'Connor (2010, 17) points out that the profit stemming from a globalised economy is more fairly distributed in societies with equality, broader public support for the furtherance of socioeconomic development and is likely to support greater social stability. Drawbacks of Integrating Equal Gender Representation to Management and Organisational Culture Honesty in thought demands the consideration of both pros and cons when discussing any concept or practice such as equal and fair representation of women in management. For one, there are concerns that with the advent of women participating in disciplined forces such as the army, women are likely to jeopadise their security and personhood. This is because, generally, men are said to have 1/3 additional strength to that of women. This may not auger well for the woman since at times; even office personnel such as the first-level clerk in a personnel office may be required to attend to the needs in the battlefield. Again, it is emerging that sex (rape or sodomy) is increasingly being used in military combat as a weapon against the enemy combatants. This may also undercut the wellbeing of the woman (Storvik, 2012, 160). Kusterer (2008, 550), LeAnn and Davis (2012, 620) divulge that there are organisations which see the introduction of the woman in management as an effort which may open up the organisation to performance gaps. This concern is always advanced in light of life’s natural courses such as pregnancy, family and marital commitments. Because of this, some organisations cite maternity leave as one of the factors that strengthen the relationship between female management and performance gap. There are also other organisations which cite the flexibility of men and the emotional pragmatism of men as the source of their preference for male management to female management. Nevertheless, it is important to note that these supposed drawbacks are not inherently attributable to the occupation of women in management. Instead, these pitfalls stem from the way the society has been socialised. The only exception may be the disciplined forces (Burton and Parker, 2010, 13). Recommendation In respect to the gains that characterise the observation of gender in organisational management, it is important that different measures are put in place to safeguard gender balance in management. First, there is the need to universalise this effort by creating global or transnational agencies which are committed to promoting gender balance. In areas that these agencies already exist, it is important that the performance of local organisations is synchronised with the standards that these organisations seek to uphold. Likewise, the functions of local caucuses which clamour for gender parity in management should be integrated with the operations of global agencies for greater input and output. For instance, integrating the efforts of CMI to those of The Promoting of Gender Equality in the World of Work will go a long way in informing the world or Britain about the gains that are being made locally and globally, as far as promoting gender balance is concerned. As self determinate entities, organisations should also make their own initiatives in the struggle to ensure fair representation across both sexes. The case of ABNAMRO aptly exemplifies some of corporate entities’ commitment to gender balance in management. Particularly, in 1996, ABNAMRO came up with the M/F policy as a way of revamping its organisational structure and increasing the presence of women in managerial posts. ABNAMRO would go the extra length of helping women reconcile work burden and family life, as a way of including women in its equality plan. The M/F programme was meant at speeding the traffic of women into higher-level portfolios through the stimulation and observation of fair and balanced staff competition. ABNAMRO proceeded to become a subsidiary of Opportunity in Business to help in accessing information that is useful in improving women’s inflow into managerial positions (Mirza, Moazzam and Jabeen, 2011, 260). ABNAMRO also introduced New Life Balance between 1995 and 1998 as part of the collective agreements. It is at this juncture that the 36-hour/week was introduced, to help women balance family and work. This arrangement meant that employees can attend work for 4 days of 9 hours, in lieu of the 5 days of 8 hours per week. Starting from 2000, the ABNAMRO-based collective agreement began to allow employees to set their own working schedules and to make applications for financial support towards expenditure ranging from out-of-school care, nannies to day-care. Conclusion From the entire discussion, it is clear that there is no excuse that can be advanced to explain away the failure to adopt gender balance and equality in organisational management. The need to adopt gender balance is both ethically and constitutionally binding. For the latter, it is a criminal offense to bar an individual from ascending into an office simply because of gender bias. Likewise, it is imperative that corporate leaders and women readily acknowledge the possibility of women serving as leaders and managers while not foregoing any of their domestic responsibilities. Indeed, the proposed gender education and campaigns which are to be held in favour of female empowerment must remind all and sundry of Brenda C. Barnes as one of the most renowned corporate leaders who have managed to maintain a close-knit relationship with their matrimonial home and family. References Alvesson, M. and Billing, Y.D. 1997. Understanding Gender and Organisations. London: Sage Arnott, S. 14th August, 2010. “Revealed: The gender gap in British business.” The Independent. Retrieved From: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/revealed-the-gender-gap-in-british-business-2052374.html Beyer, Sylvia. 2011. “Gender Differences and Intra-Gender Differences amongst Management Information Systems Students.” Journal of Information Systems Education, 19 (3), 301-310 Bogda, D. K. & Sendil, G. 2012. “Investigating Infidelity Tendency and Conflict Management Based On Attachment Styles and Gender.” Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 11 (40), 205-219. Broadbridge, A. and Simpson, R. 2011. “25 Years on: Reflecting On the Past and Looking To the Future in Gender and Management Research.” British journal of management, 22(3):470-483 Burton, L. & Parker, H. 2010. “Gender Typing in Management: Evaluation of Managerial Sub-roles for Sport.” Advancing Women in Leadership, 30 (18), 1-14. Cousineau, L. & Roth, J. 2012. “Pervasive Patriarchal Leadership Ideology in Seasonal Residential Summer Camp Staff.” Leadership, 8 (4), 421-440 Fonjong, L. N. 2008. “Gender Roles and Practices in Natural Resource Management.” Local Environment, 13 (5), 461-475 Gesinde, A. M. & Akujobi, R. 2011. “Gender-related differences in attitudinal disposition of university workers to resolving conflict through mediation.” Gender & Behaviour, 9 (2), 4039-4051 Gherardi, S. 1995. Genders, Symbolism and Organisational Cultures. London: Sage. Goodley, S. 7th, November, 2012. “Boardroom Pay Survey Shows Persistent and Large Gender Gap.” The Guardian. Retrieved From: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/nov/07/boardroom-pay-survey-gender-gap Grisoni, L. & Beeby, M. 2007. “Leadership, Gender and Sense-Making.” Gender, Work & Organization, 14 (3), 191-209 Gupta, V. K. & Turban, D. B. 2012. “Evaluation of New Business Ideas: Do Gender Stereotypes Play a Role?” Journal of Managerial Issues, 24 (2), 140-156. Kulich, C., Ryan, M. K. & Haslam, S. A. 2007. “Where is the Romance for Women Leaders? The Effects of Gender on Leadership Attributions and Performance-Based Pay.” Applied Psychology: An International Review, 56 (4), 582-601 Kusterer, H. L. 2008. “Exploring the Gender Typing of Management Characteristics in an Egalitarian Context.” Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49 (6), 549-557 LeAnn, B. & Davis, T. J. 2012. “Gender Disparity in Professional City Management: Making the Case for Enhancing Leadership Curriculum.” Journal of Public Affairs Education, 18 (4), 617-632 Maleta, Yulia. 2011. “Social Dimensions of Gender and Hegemony within Environmental Organisations and Communities.” International Journal of Diversity in Organisations, Communities & Nations, 10 (6), 79-91 McGuinness, R. 2009. “The Practice of Distributed Leadership: A Bridge from Social Deprivation to Academic Achievement?” International Journal of Learning, 16 (5), 66-77 Mihaela, K. and Nick, R. 2008. An Introduction to Critical Management Research. London: Sage Miller, G. R. 2012. “Gender Trouble: Investigating Gender and Economic Democracy in Worker Cooperatives in the United States.” Review of Radical Political Economics, 44 (1), 8-22 Mirza, A., Moazzam B. & Jabeen, N. 2011. “Gender Stereotypes and Women in Management the Case of Banking Sector.” South Asian Studies, 26 (2), 259-284 Moore, Fiona. 2012. “The Diorama.” Management International Review (MIR), 52 (5), 619-642 O'Connor, P. 2010. “Is Senior Management In Irish Universities Male-Dominated? What are the implications?” Irish Journal of Sociology, 18 (1), 1-21 Oshagbemi, T. 2008. “The Impact of Personal and Organisational Variables on the Leadership Styles of Managers.” International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19 (10), 1896-1910 Rose, J. & Mackey-Kallis, S. 2012. “Face it: The Impact of Gender on Social Media Images.” Communication Quarterly, 60 (5), 588-607 Ross-Smith, A. & Huppatz, K. 2010. “Management, Women and Gender Capital.” Gender, Work & Organization, 17 (5), 547-566 Storvik, A. E. 2012. “Introducing the Feminist Management Discourse in Organizations.” Review of European Studies, 4 (1), 155-166 Visagie, J. C. & Linde, H. 2010. “Evolving Role and Nature of Workplace Leaders and Diversity: A Theoretical and Empirical Approach.” Managing Global Transitions: International Research Journal, 8 (4), 381-403 Wan, I. &Wan, K. & Al-Taee, F. 2012. “Integrating Gender, Traits And Transformational Leadership Style As Viewed From Human Resource Management Strategy.” International Journal of Academic Research, 4 (3), 16-20 Read More