There is a national interest in United States women’s underrepresentation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); however, gender inequality in the social sciences has not received similar attention. Although women increasingly earn postgraduate degrees in the social sciences, women faculty still experience gender inequities. Consistent gender inequities include slower career advancement, blunted salaries, unequal workloads, work-life conflict, systemic gender biases, underrepresentation in positions of power, and hostile work environments. Cultural biases suggest that once women have achieved parity, gender bias no longer exists. This review challenges that notion by providing evidence from social science domains in which women are well-represented but continue to face systemic gender biases. We examine cultural influences on gender representation and career advancement in psychology, economics, political science, sociology, and anthropology. We make interdisciplinary comparisons of career trajectories and salaries using national data, documenting patterns across the social sciences. For example, women economists face gendered standards in publishing, and women political scientists are less likely to have their work cited than men. Furthermore, data show that salaries become stagnant as the representation of women in these fields increases. These disparities reflect cultural biases in perceptions of women’s competence stemming from social role theory. We discuss best practices to address these problems, focusing on the ADVANCE organizational change programs funded by the National Science Foundation that target (a) improving academic climate, (b) providing professional development, and (c) fostering social networking. Federally supported interventions can reveal systemic gender biases in academia and reduce gender disparities for women academics in the social sciences.
more »
« less
The Organization of Networking and Gender Inequality in the New Economy: Evidence from the Tech Industry
In the new economy, with shrinking organizational supports and increased precarity for professional workers, networking has intensified as an entrepreneurial career management strategy. Networking is embedded in the logic of new work organizations, but less attention has been paid to its impact on gender inequality. Through fifty interviews with workers from one tech company and nine months of observations, I ask: (1) In the new economy, with intense networking demands, how does gender structure the networking strategies of workers? And (2) How does the organization of networking contribute to gender inequality? I find that individuals draw on masculinity and femininity as they network in ways that reproduce gender status hierarchies. The structure and culture of networking disproportionately limit the careers of women compared to men by shaping their (1) networking approaches; (2) attitudes about networking; and (3) resources gained from networking. Men network by strategically socializing, confidently building informal relationships with other men through masculine activities and leveraging these relationships for key resources. Women cannot similarly access informal relationships, and so they engage in strategic networking, attending formal networking events that are less effective in providing career resources. Women embodying an elite, white femininity locate personal support in the company-sponsored women's network. However, this group reinforces organizational boundaries by gender and race. This article advances sociological literature on inequality in the new economy, drawing on gender theory to demonstrate how in elite, male-dominated industries like technology, networking contributes to the maintenance of gender inequalities.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10380788
- Publisher / Repository:
- SAGE Publications
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Work and Occupations
- Volume:
- 49
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 0730-8884
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 383-420
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)Substantial research has documented challenges women experience building and benefiting from networks to achieve career success. Yet fundamental questions remain regarding which aspects of men’s and women’s networks differ and how differences impact their careers. To spur future research to address these questions, we present an integrative framework to clarify how and why gender and networks—in concert—may explain career inequality. We delineate two distinct, complementary explanations: (1) unequal network characteristics (UNC) asserts that men and women have different network characteristics, which account for differences in career success; (2) unequal network returns (UNR) asserts that even when men and women have the same network characteristics, they yield different degrees of career success. Further, we explain why UNC and UNR emerge by identifying mechanisms related to professional contexts, actors, and contacts. Using this framework, we review evidence of UNC and UNR for specific network characteristics. We found that men’s and women’s networks are similar in structure (i.e., size, openness, closeness, contacts’ average and structural status) but differ in composition (i.e., proportion of men, same-gender, and kin contacts). Many differences mattered for career success. We identified evidence of UNC only (same-gender contacts), UNR only (actors’ and contacts’ network openness, contacts’ relative status), neither UNC nor UNR (size), and both UNC and UNR (proportion of men contacts). Based on these initial findings, we offer guidance to organizations aiming to address inequality resulting from gender differences in network creation and utilization, and we present a research agenda for scholars to advance these efforts.more » « less
-
CONTEXT The need to better prepare students for the engineering workplace is a long-standing and on-going concern among engineering educators. With the aim of addressing gaps in preparation, the number of new work- and practice-based programs is growing. Identifying the first and most significant challenges recent graduates face in the workplace can contribute new insights into how students could be better prepared for the school-to-work transition. PURPOSE In order to better understand the transition from school to work, this paper presents findings from the first year of a five-year longitudinal study exploring the experiences and career trajectories of early career engineers. The specific question addressed in this paper is: What was the biggest challenge civil engineers experienced during their first year in the workplace? METHODS Eighteen early career civil engineers participated in semi-structured interviews in May of 2019. Participants were recruited from national and local listservs in the United States. None worked in the same office, although two worked for the same company in different offices. They were asked a range of questions related to their experiences transitioning into their careers. For this paper, responses pertaining to the biggest challenge question were analysed through open coding to determine if any themes could be identified in participants’ responses. OUTCOMES Participants were asked about the biggest challenge they had encountered since starting their job. Their responses covered a very wide range of issues. There were three themes of note that appeared in at least four different participants’ responses. They were: 1) interdependence, 2) new practices and material, and 3) negative interactions. 1 and 2 were cited by both men and women; 3 was only cited by women. CONCLUSIONS In addition to providing insights into job readiness that engineering educators can address, the findings speak to several aspects of organizational socialization. Most participants’ biggest challenges (in the form of interdependence and new practices and materials) were related to “learning & adaptation.” Challenges related to “relationship building” and “work group socialization tactics” (in the form of negative interactions) were only the biggest challenges for women, not men. However, negative interactions also extended beyond factors accounted for in current models of organizational socialization, and should be accounted for in revised models. KEYWORDS Early career, job readiness, organizational socializationmore » « less
-
Status-based theories of labor market inequality contend that, even when workers have identical qualifications and performance, employers evaluate them differently based on stereotypes about their status group. Gender and parenthood are status characteristics that affect decisions about hiring, pay, and promotion through stereotypes that mothers should not work, fathers should not take leave, and caregivers of either gender are less reliable, committed workers. We contend that family-leave laws mitigate these status effects by conveying a consensus that both men and women can legitimately combine work and family. An experiment testing this theory shows that, when the law is not salient, participants pay mothers (whether or not they take leave) and fathers who take leave less and rate them as less promotable than other identical workers. Participants also rate these employees as less competent, committed, and congenial than other identical workers. By contrast, when participants review family-leave laws before they evaluate employees, they treat mothers and caregivers no worse than other workers. Reviewing an organizational family-leave policy did not reduce the effects of stereotypes as much as reviewing formal law. These findings suggest that making law salient during workplace evaluations can reduce inequality through law’s expressive effects.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Traditional gender roles and gender stereotypes assume different life and career priorities among men and women. Meanwhile, the science profession is commonly considered to abide by a universalist ethos and a meritocracy that is independent of gender. We examined whether men and women scientists held different ideals about the good life and about good science. Furthermore, we investigated if those ideals of good life and of good science were linked in the minds of scientists; and if the linkages differed by gender. This study used a structural topic modeling approach to analyze the interview transcripts of 108 women and 92 men elite scientists who had received highly prestigious postdoctoral fellowships during the 1960s and1970s. In the open-ended interviews, the scientists were asked to describe their ideals of good life and of good science. Regarding the good life, we found that women scientists focused more on enjoying life and relationships and less on intellectual stimulation, relative to men scientists. For good science, women scientists focused more on empirical procedural accuracy and less on basic and fundamental breakthroughs, relative to men scientists. Moreover, we found that women scientists exhibited correlations between life and science ideals, whereas the two domains were completely separate for men scientists. In conclusion, a gendered system of life and science ideals existed even among this group of highly promising scientists.
