Women and Hrm

Women, HRM and Equal Opportunities

DISADVANTAGES FACED BY WOMEN
Women face disadvantages in countries all around the world. These include vertical and horizontal segregation, glass ceiling, pay gaps etc.

Horizontal Segregation
Horizontal segregation concerns the clustering of women into certain occupation categories, in particular the healthcare sector, nursing, teaching, hotels and catering and retailing.

Vertical Segregation
Vertical segregation on the other hand concerns the clustering of women at lower levels of the occupational hierarchy (hence, the glass ceiling issue). This phenomenon is demonstrated by official statistics. For instance, less than 5% Directors of UK companies are female. (Gracie 1998)
Even in female dominated areas, the evidence suggests that women are failing to secure the top jobs. The most striking example relates nursing. 90% of qualified nurses are women. However, it typically takes 18 years without career breaks for a female nurse to reach the managerial post of nursing officer compared with 8.5 years for a male nurse (Rosenthal 1994)

Pay Gaps
There is also a considerable pay gap between men and women. For instance in the UK, research released in February 2000 by the government’s women unit revealed that an average woman educated to GCSE level will earn £241,000 less than men in the course of their lifetime, regardless of whether or not they have children. Women tend to have less access to company benefits such as private health care, company cars and pension schemes. Looking at management grades, women managers are paid even less fairly. They receive only 70% of the pay received by male managers.
The pay gap is partly explained by the fact that women do different types of jobs from men. Thus, horizontal segregation explains a considerable proportion of the pay gap between men and women
The pay gap is also explained by the fact that a high proportion of women work part time. For instance, figures from the Spring 2001 Labour Force Survey show that of the 12 million women within the labour market in the UK, nearly 5.2 million (43%) were working part time. Where men are concerned, only 1.2 million (8%) are part timers (Labour market trends 2001)

Glass ceiling
Glass ceiling: Hearn(1992) argues that it is men and managements who need to change. Women are confronted by a ‘glass ceiling’ blocking upward career advancement when it comes to entering positions of power in organisational senior executive levels as well as government. ‘This glass ceiling is invisible but women experience it as a real barrier when they vie for promotion to top jobs’.

REASONS FOR THE DISADVANTAGE FACED
There are various person centred as well as situation centred explanations for this disadvantage.

PERSON CENTRED EXPLANATIONS
Person centred explanations argue that women are somehow different from men in several respects and as such they may be less suited to managerial and leadership positions. As men and women are differently socialized, this results in fundamental differences in behaviour. These can be explained by the ‘preference’ and ‘attribution’ theories.

Preference Theory

Catherine Hakim (1996) argues that women’s disadvantage in organizations stems from the fact that they consciously make different life choices from men. i.e. they have different preferences. For example, they ‘choose’ to work part time in order to be able to balance their work and family life and this is something they do willingly rather than being forced into it.
In addition she argues that women may be under represented in managerial grades as they choose not to have to deal with the stress and anxiety that a high post managerial role brings.

Attribution Theory

This theory states that men and women attribute success and failure to themselves in different ways. For example in the event of a successful work outcome, men would attribute that to themselves, i.e. the result of their own personal efforts. Women by contrast will attribute the success to the team they are working within or they will attribute it to luck. If this is transmitted within performance appraisal situation, the result would be that women would be viewed as less confident of their own ability than men.

SITUATION CENTRED EXPLANATIONS
This set of theories suggests that women experience disadvantage as a result of certain organizational practices, structures or systems. These include a number of practices which could have potentially discriminatory effects. For instance, lack of access to informal networks i.e. ‘old boy networks’ within which a great deal of business is conducted and decisions made. These networks often require the out of hours socializing that many women may not be able to participate in as a result of child care responsibilities.

Devolution of the HR function, i.e. HR activities such as grievance handling have been devolved to line managers. Questions have been raised as to whether the line managers possess the expertise and have undergone the training necessary to handle such issues sensitively.

The concept of presenteeism has taken hold in recent times which relates to the fact that employees, typically managers and professionals are at the work place, even when they do not really need to be there in order to try to appear committed to the organization. Women who have domestic responsibilities will be unable to engage in such presenteeism and they may appear to be less committed as a result. (Simpson 1998)

Lack of friendly policies is another very important issue which puts women in a position of having to choose between having a family and having a career. To highlight this issue, only 16% of women in top jobs are mothers, which suggest they have had to sacrifice motherhood in order to get on in their careers.

WILL THIS DISADVANTAGE BE OVERCOME IN THE FUTURE?
Whether this disadvantage is likely to be overcome in the future depends on firstly, the likely impact of formal written equal opportunities (EO) policies: there are two main EO policies: liberal and radical approaches. Both these approaches have been extensively criticized. So even if companies decide to implement formal EO policies in the future in greater numbers, it might not help to overcome disadvantages that women experience.

Liberal Approach

The liberal approach argues that everyone within the organization should be able to compete freely for rewards or for promotion on the basis of ability and procedural impartiality and not decided through the old boy’s network or other informal networks.
For instance, recruitment and promotion opportunities should be publicized widely to make sure that everyone has the opportunity to apply.
In addition the organization should provide a range of family friendly practices such as extensive maternity leave and assistance with child care costs.

Limitations

However commentators argue that liberal approaches to EO policy leave several of key problem areas facing women untouched, e.g. they do nothing to address stereo types concerning the supremacy or superiority of typical make management styles over female management styles. Secondly, not all aspects of work can be governed by formal procedures. For instance, gaining access to old boy networks. Also, it is possible to have equal opportunities procedures and practices on paper but in reality the have little impact on the actual decisions made in terms of who gets promoted or who gets recruited.

Radical approach

The radical approach starts from the assumption that men and women are essentially the same in the sense that they are equally talented and affected in terms of leadership where discrimination arises, for instance, men are being paid more than a woman. Organizations should take direct action or positive discrimination such as deliberately recruiting more women into management grades. A further aspect concerns educating and training managers within the organization of issues and situations that can give rise to gender discrimination.

Limitations

However there are problems with the radical approach. These include the legality of positive discrimination. E.g is it legal to introduce positive action that focuses on female development training? But it is difficult to judge the point at which such action becomes positively discriminatory, which is illegal in the sense that it excludes men from developmental opportunities.

Secondly, efficiency concerns may arise. If women who do not possess the necessary skills, experience or qualifications to do the job are recruited or promoted, organizational effectiveness would be adversely affected. As far as the re-educative approach is concerned, it may be effective in changing the attitude and behaviour of some managers but others may be less willing to accept that their past behaviour may have the discriminatory effect, thus failing to bring about a genuine attitude change towards women. Finally, where women are given special treatment, discrimination is simply shifted onto males and not removed, resulting in increasingly negative male attitudes towards women. This it is clear that neither approach, whether liberal or radical is able to address some of the key difficulties faced by women.

Managing diversity (the business case or the business argument for EO)

In the above discussion it was highlighted that equal opportunities, where both the liberal and the radical approaches are concerned is based on the principle of social justice, and therefore equality is viewed as an end in itself.

By contrast, managing diversity is closely related to the business case for equality which sees equal treatment not as an end in itself but as a means to an end. In other words, it is possible for organisatons to secure organizational benefits from managing diversity if they adopt sound approaches to EO.

Means (managing diversity)( End (org benefits)

The business case for equality of treatment argues that it is important to take EO issues seriously to aid recruitment, retention, product development and other labour market issues. And if more companies buy into the business case, this could have a positive impact. Taking labour market issues for instance, women form a large proportion of the current workforce and this proportion is said to be growing. By discriminating against women, companies are in effect reducing the talent pool of candidates in their search of suitable recruits. This is a very important issue when labour markets are tight or in sectors of the economy where there is a labour shortage.

Liff (1999) found that British Telecom introduced several initiatives aimed at increasing the proportion of women employed within many of its core job roles, which in the past have proved to be heavily male dominated. These include deliberately targeting women, which are recruited to male dominated areas and initiatives such as “take our daughters to work” focusing in particular on technical male dominated jobs.

With regard to retention issues, EO policies can play an important part in maximizing return on the investment made in relation to recruitment, training and development costs. E.g. given the costs involved in training and developing managing staff makes sense to retain contact with female managers to leave the organization to have children and provide them with occasional training to keep their skills up to date. If women perceive that they are being discriminated against in terms of issues such as management development and networking opportunities, they are more likely to leave the organization to seek employment elsewhere.
For instance, in the early 1990s, it was found that many female employees were leaving ‘Deloitte and Touche” as a result of not being provided with adequate developmental opportunities. As a result the company went to great lengths to ensure the career development of staff on flexible working arrangements to assist in balancing their work and domestic responsibilities. Women were also given the opportunity to work on more attractive accounts with the gender mix of staff allocated to different accounts becoming closely monitored.
Some companies try to be good equal opportunity employers as it is important in terms of a company’s image within the labour market. For instance, Deutsche bank and another city investment bank have introduced diversity programmes, quotas for female graduate in take, crèches (day care center, an organization of adults who take care of children in place of their parents) and flexible working schemes. With regards to product development, it is easier to tailor a service or a product to meet the needs of women if women play a part in its development. E.g. British Airways has deliberately brought women into the field of product development in order to assist in the creation of services that are more female friendly to cater to the growing sector of female business travelers.

Finally, management style typically associated with women are becoming increasingly sought after within more progressive organizations. Many companies are moving away from hierarchical bureaucratic structures and systems of direct management control and trying to develop teamwork and a delegative, participative style rather than a directive management style, all considered to be female approaches.

Limitations

However, there are several limitations to the business argument. First, business argument is contingent. For example, it might make sense to bring women into areas such as product development in order to help develop female oriented products and services. But there might not be a case for equality across the organization as a whole. Also, it does nothing to help women lower down in the hierarchy and it only applies under certain labour market conditions or in certain job roles. Additionally it requires considerable culture change, which may be difficult to bring about.
Also there is a risk that the argument that male and female management styles differ could be used to justify the inferior treatment of women. For instance, arguing that in certain male dominated environments, women’s management styles will not fit in with the prevailing norms.

Government’s role

The government also plays a role in promoting equality of opportunity through legislation as well as other non legislative government initiatives. For instance in the UK, the Labour government introduced: • the national minimum wage, which benefited two million people, three quarters of which were females. • It signed up to the Social Chapter of the Maastricht Treaty implementing directives such as: The Parental Leave Directive, The EU directive on Part Time workers, the European Directive on the Burden of Proof in Discrimination Cases. • The government has also amended the UK law on maternity leave.

Non legislative initiatives include: • establishment of the Women’s Unit, • the helpline known as Equality Direct and • Leading by example, hoping to encourage other organizations in both the public and private sector to follow suit.

Limitations:To what extent is it successful:

If equality legislation is toughened in the future, it could well have a positive impact. The law encourages companies to take Equality Opportunities more seriously if:
1) The penalties of non-compliance are higher;
2) It is important symbolically(by introducing new initiatives and new legislation, the government is sending an important message to employers that it is not acceptable to discriminate against women and that discrimination is viewed as socially unacceptable behaviour;
3) It impacts on all organisations.

From the point of view of the UK:
-the government has tended to implement new legislation emanating from the EU in a minimalist fashion.
-Also, the UK’s system based on individual rights will always be inherently weaker than systems, as in the US for example, that allow for class actions.
-Similarly, a change of government would probably lead to an even less sympathetic view with regard to employment regulation. For instance, the Conservative government’s attitude towards equal opportunities legislation was that if it was not in a company’s interest, it should not be compelled to do so by government intervention.
-One might argue that the UK’s law needs to be strengthened significantly and fundamentally if it is ever to have a significant impact.
-However in addition, a stronger law could lead to problems of its own. It can ‘problematise’ women; it doesn’t necessarily bring about culture change; it can do little to overcome some of the problems women face such as access to informal networks, etc.

As such, there is no guarantee that the law will help to improve the position of women in organisations in the future.

The role of trade unions

Arguments relating to joint regulation are also important. If it is the case that the union movement is seeing an increase in influence (notions of partnership, etc.) this influence can be used to bargain over equality issues – ensuring that EO is applied to all and not just to those in management/ professional positions, ensuring workplaces adhere to new legislation, companies do not withdraw their support for equal opportunities when it no longer makes business sense etc. Union representatives can provide a channel by which the views of women with regard to equality initiatives can be taken into account.

Limitations

This argument relies on increasing union influence in the workplace however, which in itself is doubtful. It also relies on attitude change within the union movement. Typically unions have not taken EO issues particularly seriously.

Self employment

Finally, the self employment route could have a positive effect – over a third of new businesses are now started by women. However there are some potential problems for women wishing to go down this route. For example there is evidence that women face difficulties in terms of securing access to venture capital from banks. As such there may be limitations as to the extent to which self employment is a viable option for women.

Different Conclusions

1. In the above discussion we considered the different routes by which the disadvantage faced by women can be overcome and improvements might be brought about. These routes include EO policies (liberal and radical), the development of a business case, trade unions, legal regulation and self employment. However, given that each approach has its problems, the future may not be particularly positive. As per Hakim’s ‘preference theory’ – the position of women in organisations will not improve in the future irrespective of legal or other changes, given women’s preferences with regard to their career and lifestyle choices.

2. In some organisations, the business case will be sufficient to bring about improvements in the position of women, and for those that genuinely buy into the business case for equal opportunities, a change in the law will not be necessary.
In others, where unions play a role in upholding equal opportunities, legal change may also not be necessary (though it could be supportive of the unions’ role).
In other organizations (where the business case is not sufficient), however, it is perhaps fair to argue that positive improvements will not occur without legal intervention (this is very much in line with Dicken’s ‘three-pronged’ approach that ‘improvements in the position of women in organizations are dependant on a three pronged approach involving trade unions, legal regulation and the development of a business case for equal opportunities’).

It must also be noted that the position of women in organisations will not improve in the future, irrespective of legal or other changes, if women consciously make different choices than men with regard to their career and lifestyle (in line with Hakim’s ‘preference theory’).