Search results

Although Corporate America has expended great efforts to shrink the gender equity gap at all levels, there is persistent evidence in the financial press that the gap still exists. This study focuses on the gender equity gap in the most highly compensated positions within corporations. Using Standard & Poor’s Compustat ExecuComp database for 1992‐1997, we find that only 3 percent of the most highly compensated executives are female, that these positions are held disproportionately by men, and that female executives are more likely to be clustered in particular industry groups. In a sample matched by job title, company size and industry, male executives earn significantly higher salaries and bonuses, though total compensation is not significantly different. However, these compensation differences may be explained by differences in human capital characteristics such as age and tenure within a particular job title. Thus, the gender equity gap at top executive positions may be due more to a lack of opportunity than to wage discrimination.

The purpose of this study was to compare South Korean female executives’ definitions of career success with those of male executives, identify their career development strategies for success and provide implications for research and practice. Two research questions guiding our inquiry included: How do female executives’ definitions of career success differ from those of male executives? What career development strategies do male and female executives use for career success?

A basic qualitative research design was used and semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 male executives and 15 female executives in diverse corporations by using an interview protocol of 13 questions regarding participants’ background, definitions of career success and final thoughts. To analyze the interview data, we used both NVivo 11 and a manual coding method.

Gender differences were detected in the participants’ definitions of career success and success factors. As previous studies indicated, male and female executives had different perspectives on career success: men tended to define career success more objectively than women. Many male executives, through experiencing transforming changes in their careers, began to appreciate work–life balance and personal happiness from success. Gender differences were also detected in their career development challenges, meanings of mentors and networking activities. While work stress surfaced as a challenge that men faced, experiencing the token status in the gendered workplace was a major challenge for female participants.

In this study, three research agendas are presented, needing further investigation on career success, women’s token status and comparative analyses.

Three implications for practice have been provided, including organizational support, government’s role and HRD’s role.

Gender differences in this study were not as distinctive as previous literature has indicated. Some male executives valued more subjective career success than others, while a few female executives spoke of more objective definitions than others. These subtle differences could be captured through in-depth interviews. By hearing the participants’ stories, both objective and subjective definitions of success, for both genders, could be observed, which might not have been possible in quantitative research. In addition, the study findings reflect the nature of a uniquely Korean context. The participants worked in a Confucian and military culture, which operates in hierarchical structures and the command and control system, coupled with a heightened camaraderie spirit in the workplace.

We document three new facts about gender differences in executive compensation. First, female executives receive lower share of incentive pay in total compensation relative to males. This difference accounts for 93% of the gender gap in total pay. Second, the compensation of female executives displays lower pay-performance sensitivity. A $1 million dollar increase in firm value generates a $17,150 increase in firm-specific wealth for male executives and a $1,670 increase for females. Third, female executives are more exposed to bad firm performance and less exposed to good firm performance relative to male executives. We find no link between firm performance and the gender of top executives. We discuss evidence on differences in preferences and the cost of managerial effort by gender and examine the resulting predictions for the structure of compensation. We consider two paradigms for the pay-setting process, the efficient contracting model and the “managerial power” or skimming view. The efficient contracting model can explain the first two facts. Only the skimming view is consistent with the third fact. This suggests that the gender differentials in executive compensation may be inefficient.

The study sets out to examine how male and female managers in general and male and female municipal executives in particular are evaluated by the members of the organisation.

The study presented used the methodology of focus group discussion.

The results show that employees clearly had different expectations regarding the characteristics of male and female executives. The most negative image of female executives emerged in the group of men. However, even female office managers tended to mention numerous negative features of women executives, and seemed to prefer men in executive positions.

The research involved four focus group sessions at the municipality in the autumn of 2004, consequently the research results cannot be generalised.

This paper contributes to the limited number of academic literature on female executives in Hungary, and explores the deep prejudices against women in leading positions.

The purpose of this paper is to explore three research questions. Are there gender differences in the demonstration of emotional and social intelligence competencies? What is the relationship between emotional and social intelligence competencies and success, and does gender moderate that relationship? Are there differences between the most successful male and female leaders in their demonstration of these competencies?

This study used a 360‐degree instrument to measure the demonstration of emotional and social intelligence competencies by top‐level executives in one financial services organization. Annual performance and potential assessments measured the participants' success. Regression analyses and tests of mean differences were used to analyze the research questions.

The results indicated that there were no significant differences between male and female leaders in their demonstration of emotional and social intelligence competencies. The most successful men and women were also more similar than different in their competency demonstration. However, gender did moderate the relationship between the demonstration of these competencies and success. Male leaders were assessed as more successful even when the male and female leaders demonstrated an equivalent level of competencies. Finally, distinctions were found between the most successful males and females and their typical counterparts.

A field sample from one organization limits the generalizability of the results.

Implications for organizations and their leadership are discussed including the importance of a broad range of competencies used in assessments, the awareness of gender stereotypes and gender‐stereotypical behavior, and the acknowledgement of multiple measures of success.

This study highlights the moderating influence of gender between the demonstration of emotional and social intelligence competencies and success. Distinctions in competency demonstration between the most successful top‐level executives and the typical executives contribute to the literature and to leadership development practice.

This paper aims to analyze the impact of gender in leadership on strategic orientation and the relative impact of these strategic orientations on organizational performance with the leadership of each gender.

Cross-sectional survey-based data were collected from 1,260 logistics companies, and 503 responses were found suitable for further data evaluation. Structural equation modeling (SEM) and regression analysis were used to analyze the data and test the hypotheses.

Results show that managers' gender affects only the aggressiveness subdimension (p = 0.018 and ß = 0.114) in strategic orientation decisions and that male managers tend to be more aggressive-oriented than female managers. Strategic orientation is more effective on organizational performance. More clearly, when female executives use the same strategic orientation as their male counterparts, organizational performance is higher than that of male executives.

Managers' power is related to social norms about their valuable contribution to the organization and roles are associated with experiences. Thus, at different levels of management, different results will be obtained.

Organizations should only define leadership roles in masculine terms with information or research that explains how women leaders can contribute to the organization's outcomes.

The lack of fit model should not be expected when determining executive-level female leaders' performance.

There is a significant potential in studying strategic decision-making and whether the ability to provide effective organizational outcomes is related to a person's gender. Even if previous literature suggests that gender stereotypes affect perceptions of men's and women's fit for executive positions, the strategic conception of organizational decisions is immune to gender, but strategy execution is not.

The under‐representation of entrepreneurial women, or women leaders, in the higher levels of organisations is an increasingly debated issue. Comments in the media regarding the lack of women in senior management positions in the creative industries have attracted much attention, both for and against. Despite opposing viewpoints there is little doubt that this is an issue that requires investigation. However, understanding the under‐representation of women in senior management, leadership and ownership roles has been problematic due to a lack of “hard data”. The purpose of this paper is to provide a quantitative understanding of the under‐representation of female leaders in the UK's creative and cultural industries. Based on a study completed by TBR for the Cultural Leadership Programme (CLP) it presents baseline data and groundbreaking analysis to understand gendered leadership in organisations.

The study for CLP established a quantitative evidence base to benchmark the number of women in leadership in the creative and cultural industries. This was possible by utilising a unique data resource, TCR, which enabled detailed analysis of gendered management structures in creative and cultural organisations. We use this evidence base to further understand gender diversity in organisational leadership positions and the characteristics of different leadership styles.

The study generated unique understanding regarding gendered leadership within the creative and cultural industries. It identified that there are 32,800 female and 82,450 male leaders in the creative and cultural industries and despite there being a comparatively high proportion of all‐female managed organisations, there are half the number of female executives per organisation compared to the UK average.

A trend of polarisation of all female and all male led organisations was identified over the last 25 years, which was reflected in recognition of distinct female and male leadership styles. The study proves some assumptions about the leadership approach of men and women and identifies characteristics similar to the transactional and transformational styles described in Women at the Top by Holden and McCarthy. Unless this trend is reversed, it is likely to become increasingly important for women and men to develop skills in both transactional and transformational leadership styles.

The paper provides a new examination of the balance of male and female leadership in organisations and significantly furthers debate about the under‐representation of women in leadership. It provides “hard‐data” to inform future dialogue regarding entrepreneurial women and further investigates the lack of women in leadership.

Executive leadership is constituted as a predominantly male domain, placing women in an antithetical position to executive power. In theorising this situation, a social constructionist model of gender suggests that in the corporate world, as elsewhere, perceptions of the behaviour of men and women are “automatically filtered through a gendered lens” and reconstituted within a more general discourse on gender difference, tapping into subconscious images of leadership to reinforce a masculinist construction of executive power. Yet today women are increasingly in executive roles. This study explores the relationship between a social constructionist model of gender and executive discourse by drawing on interviews with ten male and ten female New Zealand executives. Given that these executives hold comparable organisational status and power, the study examines whether or not a gendered lens still operates in their representations of one another, and if there are indications of gender and social change in the discourse.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate differences in compensation related to gender concentrations among industries at different organisation levels of management to identify gender‐based patterns of compensation at the macro level not investigated in previous studies that simply suggest industry or occupational differences. Findings provide guidance for selection processes, career path management for maximising compensation and policy‐making.

Data from the Current Population Surveys and the Standard and Poor's ExecuComp database were used to examine differences in compensation of managers and top executives.

Findings suggest that men and women must seek different paths and endpoints to optimize compensation. Maximising compensation for women requires working as a minority and changing industries. Men, on the other hand, may work in male‐dominated industries at every level or may move to female‐dominated industries at the managerial and executive levels and still receive equitable pay.

The paper was conducted on a USA sample so further research should examine data from other countries.

In practice, this paper suggests that men and women must seek different paths and endpoints to optimize compensation. Human resource managers should be aware of these potential biases and try to rectify them within their organisations through the use of appropriate selection and compensation practices. At the macro‐level, policy‐makers can identify patterns of inequity to address.

Gender‐related difference studies of compensation offer little understanding about how to maximise compensation during one's management career as it progresses through management levels and across industries.

The gender diversity of top management teams (TMTs) is slowly increasing. Research shows that top executives influence firms through their role in strategic decision-making but that executives are not equally engaged in it. The purpose of this paper is to understand whether gender affects the likelihood of inclusion in strategic decision-making.

Drawing on surveys completed by chief executive officers (CEOs) and using expectation states and gender roles theories, the author examines the relationship between gender and inclusion in strategic decision-making for 266 top executives of global public firms.

After controlling for a myriad of factors, results indicate that female executives are less likely than male executives to be included in strategic decision-making. Firm tenure moderates this effect such that it leads to a greater likelihood of inclusion for female executives but not male executives.

This study provides a unique consideration of strategic decision-making in TMTs. The findings suggest that diversity and inclusion do not always go hand in hand and that female executives may need to prove themselves more than male executives to be given an equal voice in the strategic direction of the firm.