Annotated bib gender roles

Gender Rolesin the Workplace: Annotated Bibliography Karissa Roveda Oakland University Rochester, MI Adler, M. A. (1994). Male-Female power differences at work: A comparison of supervisor and policymakers. Sociological Inquiry, 64(1), 37-55. This article spoke of the positions of power between men and women, and how policymakers and supervisors distribute that power to men and women. In the work place, when considering for advancement, employers have undefined criteria such aspersonalitycharacteristics and potential managerial qualities.

These standards become the cause of inequality in authority and power at work place. Jobs that are available for women have low wages and also less authority. Similar research studies have shown similar points, in that inequality is found at the workplace because of such gender based characteristics. Even though women were shown to be more educated, they do not follow the same status. The researcher in this study used methodology to find these inequalities at the work place. The study consisted of four data points to test and used 531 women and 619 men for this data.

The author collected data for power in wage labor, employment, sample characteristics and occupation byeducation. The results showed that men achieve higher positions and also showed they have a higher chance at a supervisory level and more authority than women. In the workplace, gender is a major part of determining positions of power. Also, it shows that education is more important to get supervisor positions, which is less effective for women. This study demonstrates the inequality between men and women that makes men more prone to positions of power than women.

The data and research clearly showed that women have greatly less access to positions of power and authority at work place than men, and that gender is the key factor in determining those positions. Policymakers and supervisors may indeed make regulations promotingequalitybut gender bias is still obviously exhibited. Carbonell, J. L. , & Castro, Y. (2008). The impact of a leader model on high dominant women’s self-selection forleadership. Sex Roles , 58, 776-783. This study had women observe a leader model of either gender model a task they would have to complete. The study looked at effects of ender role model in the decision of high dominant women to be leaders, given a masculine task to complete with a male co-worker. The hypothesis states that women would become leaders at a higher rate when a woman model is given rather than a male. The research took a total of 190 students: 95 women and 95 men. Each individual was given the California Psychological Inventory, measuring: impression, communication, and dominance. This study looked at dominance in particular. Only 15 pairs were exposed to women models. The study observed 2 groups to support or reject their hypothesis.

Focused groups were made of high dominant woman paired with a low dominant man with a female model, and high dominant woman paired with a low dominant man with a male model. A chi square analysis showed a correlation between leader model and leader development, “ The results are that 60% of women took the leader role when given a woman model compared to 20% in male model” (Castro, 2008). The study concluded in the presence of a female model, high dominant individual would be the leader. The gender of the leader model did not affect leadership for males. I believethis study shows importance of woman leader models in professional fields.

The lack of exposure of woman leaders for women reduces the chances that they will take on leadership roles. Katz, D. (1987). Sexdiscriminationin hiring: The influence of organizational climate and need for approval on decision making behavior. Psychologyof Women Quarterly, 11(1), 11-20. Previous studies have caused the idea that equally skilled men and women are assessed unequally when applying for jobs. The present study observes the influence from different organizational workplaces or “ the quality of an organization’s internalenvironment” (Katz, 1987), and society’s need for approval on the notion of biased employees decisions.

The study sought out three main hypotheses, if an unfair organizational environment would influence people to hire a male applicant over an identical female applicant. Second, that in a workplace a male applicant would be ranked as a better fit and more likely to stay with the company longer than a female applicant. And third, that those subjects with a high need of approval would match more to the demands of job on the hire and salary assessments than lower approvalmotivationapplicants. The study included 161 male undergrads enrolled in a business class.

They were given a booklet which contained experimental materials necessary in controlling organizational workplace. They were also given either a female or male completed application and asked for their judgments on an applicant’s suitability for the position. Results from the experiment showed that as initially expected, males were favored over females in the unfair environment. The results also showed that males were chosen as fitting significantly better than females, and that men were also offered higher salaries in the same conditions.

In my opinion, the implications of this study can establish that the workplace can deeply influence the decisions of hiring workers and lead to gender bias. McTavish, D. , & Miller, K. (2009). Gender balance in leadership? Reform and modernization in the UK further education sector. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(3), 350-365. The research question that this article attempted to answer was “ Why are few women advancing into leadership positions despite a large number of women being employed into the further education sector? ” (McTavish & Miller, 2009).

The further education sector employs a high proportion of women yet relatively few women progress into leadership positions. The article seeks to provide explanations for this gender imbalance and argues that despite change and modernization initiatives, the further education sector remains gendered in many aspects of leadership, governance and executive practices. The only major difference between male and female academics was that female academics were twice as given to apply for promotion if supported by their line manager, and male academics were twice as likely to apply if there was an opportunity to influence college power.

Also female academics were twice as likely to apply if they were obtained feedback through their staff review. There are many conclusions that were drawn from this study. Reform and structural change have definitely led to a larger number of possibilities for women. Changes in organizational policy have led to a friendlier environment for females. Women have to adjust to masculine managerial styles, such as competitiveness. In addition, even though it appears that the reforms are creating gender balance, in reality; women are still going to their stereotypical roles such as teaching and lecturing.

Meyerson, Debra E. , and Joyce K. Fletcher. ” A Modest Manifesto for Shattering the Glass Ceiling. ” HarvardBusiness Review (2000): 127-36. ” Gender discrimination is now so deeply embedded in organizational life as to be virtually indiscernible. Even the women who feel its impact are often hard-pressed to know what hit them” (Meyerson & Fletcher, 127). The authors believe that the glass ceiling will be shattered ” only through a strategy that uses small wins-incremental changes aimed at biases so entrenched in the system that they’re not even noticed until they’re gone” (Meyerson & Fletcher, 128).

The small wins approach to change was developed by Karl Weick. The authors emphasize that real and lasting change can be made by small changes, and that these small changes are not threatening to any stakeholders. For example, one firm discovered it could recruit women more effectively simply by increasing the length of theinterviewtime from 30 minutes to 45 minutes, which gave female candidates just a little bit more time to ” bond” with their middle-aged male interviewers. Another firm reversed its high turnover rate for female middle managers by bringing more discipline to meetings, ensuring that meetings started and ended on time.

This would be a change that freed all employees from the need to be available 15 hours per day. I personally think both strategies are very effective because at least these firms are putting in the effort to make a difference through the gender roles fairness in the workplace. Roos, P. A. (1981). Sex stratification in the workplace: Male-Female differences in economic returns to occupation. SocialScienceResearch, 10(3), 195-224. The study causes the idea that there is a large earning gap between men and women.

Gender differences in earning are important because it focuses on the gender-based inequalities of power at the workplace. The author of the study used a literature review to explain the gender gap in earning, and it showed that sex segregated characteristics still remain at the occupational level. It shows that women work at low paying jobs and they are less likely to use authority in those jobs. The main reason why there are gender differences in earnings is the belief of human capital theory, and it has a huge concern with the supply side of the market.

The researcher used a non-institutionalized English speaking population to explain the data for gender influenced gap in earning. The sample included 959 men and 670 women. The results showed that women are paid low wages, and are in positions of lowresponsibility. Even when a women reaches a higher level job, their earning is much lower than that of men. The results also show that women’s low income is mainly because of their job characteristics, in that men and women are distributed differently across jobs.

Men earn more than women, mainly because women are not considered employers. The study demonstrated that the characteristics of the workers create inequality at the workplace; this is also a reason for why there is a large gap in earning between genders. Human capital theory discourages women from working and it presents women as low rent employees. They have less understanding of the mean of production. The characteristics of this research show improvement in the earnings of men and women. Yuping Zhang and Emily Hannum and Meiyan Wang. Gender-Based Employment and Income Differences in Urban China: Considering the Contributions of Marriage and Parenthood. ” Social Forces 86. 4 (2008): 156-159. Web. 2 April 2010. This article is based on the income differences and job opportunities of workers in urban China between men and women and why these differences exist. These authors argue that married women and parents receive the biggest disadvantage amongst female workers in China due to their lack of capital regarding education, energy and financially.

These particular women are not able to make as many social connections as men do due to their role in the household and so they are at a great disadvantage. In China’s market it is essential to have these kinds of social connections. It is a capitalistic society where everyone is out for his or herself and so people must use other people to get what they want. If these connections are not present then these urban female workers will not be able to make nearly as much progress and therefore will be much less successful.

It is these expectations that cheapen the women and set them at a great disadvantage if they ever plan on having afamilyand household to upkeep. This lack of opportunity in the article is summarized as a disadvantage of ‘ time use’ due to being a wife and having children in comparison to those who do not. However, if a woman were to decide that she didn’t want a family and wanted to primarily focus on her work this would be frowned upon in society, due to how valued the dynamic of family is in China.