Exploring Gender at Work

This chapter examines several critical movements in American culture that attempted to elevate society toward gender equality. Each change is observed from a practical and theoretical lens. Three specific areas are discussed. First, there are many milestones in the movement toward gender equality in America. Many of these have political, economic, social/cultural, and technological (PEST) roots. These milestones are compiled into categories and their ramifications discussed. Second, in addition to the external environmental culture, the demographic landscape of the workplace has had dramatic shifts. These shifts are explored as well as gender positions of power, from the boardroom to managerial levels. Finally, gender equality roles are discussed as they are displayed in books, music, television, and other forms of media. How these roles have shifted in the mind of the American consumer over the decades is reviewed, and the elevated impact on gender equality that media channels have on culture is evaluated. Intertwined with these topics is the timeline and progress of Critical Theory. With its 1930s birth at the Frankfurt School in Germany, this school of thought, depending on one’s preference of conservatism versus liberalism, is viewed somewhere between an unrelenting epidemic or an emerged sense of possibilities for the future. This chapter evaluates the connection “if any” between social movements in America and efforts to transform a new nation into a modern society using education, intellect, reasoning, and understanding to encourage progressive thinking and the questioning of the way things have always been.

Societies across the globe have long-established binary gender identities based on biological sex, assigning gender roles based on external sexual attributes. These gender identities correspond to religious, moral, and political norms in these societies, which usually establish preferential leadership roles to biological males. Such roles are then limited to men that exhibit strong masculine traits and characteristics, principle among them the fathering of children and successfully raising them within and according to the norms of the society. The result is a generalized “rule of fathers” wherein religious, moral, and political power is exercised exclusively by those men to whom the attributes of successful fatherhood are attributed or assumed. Despite the predominance of this practice, patriarchy has not been without contestation by rival forms of leadership emanating from different qualifications (for example in matriarchy), from women who demonstrate the requisite masculine traits and strive for power on those bases, or from biological men who are not fathers or do not exhibit the typical traits of paternal leadership. The historical ways in which religious, moral, and political values have thus influenced the predominance of patriarchy and its several challenges illuminate and inform a consideration of the continuing power of, and the ongoing legacy of, patriarchy in the contemporary world.

Gender relationships significantly changed over the course of the twentieth century and inequalities between women and men are continually challenged in all spheres of life in the twenty-first century. Yet, gender gaps and inequalities persist: full-time working women make only 85 cents for every dollar that their male counterparts earn, women continue to shoulder most of the domestic load (e.g., childcare, housework) in their partnerships, and women are less likely to hold executive positions in corporate America or represent large constituencies as elected officials. How do these gaps persist in an advanced industrialized country that has enjoyed social and economic transformation in the modern era? Enduring gender stereotypes are largely responsible for these stubborn inequities that frame how women and men interact with one another and inform our beliefs about the roles each is permitted to inhabit. This chapter will explore theoretical perspectives from sociology, psychology, political science, and social cognition that elucidate how gender differences and hierarchies function and persist over time. The intersectionality of racial categories, socio-economic status, and gender further contributes to overt and systemic privilege and discrimination in the American context. Cumulative disadvantage is utilized as a case study to illustrate the ways in which gender stereotypes produce inequities across a woman’s career. This example reinforces the fact that gender-based inequality continues to be the norm rather than the exception.

Much has been written about gender differences—particularly between men and women—in regard to communication. Primarily relating to gender communication differences in professional settings, Pearson (Advertising: Principles & practice. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River,, 1981) presented the terms masculine rhetoric versus feminine rhetoric, with the first one being decisive, direct, rational, authoritative, logical, aggressive, and impersonal, and the second being cautious, receptive, indirect, emotional, conciliatory, subjective, and polite (Baker in Management Communication Quarterly 5:36, 1991). Some of the most frequently mentioned differences in gender communication are that, (1) women are more vocal than men; (2) women are more verbally skilled than men; (3) men are more action oriented in their use of language, while women are more relationship oriented; (4) men are more competitive in their language use, while women are more cooperative; and (5) the above differences lead to regular communication frictions between men and women (Cameron, 2007). Some other communication differences often highlighted are, that men mainly communicate to support their prominence, while women do so to build relationships; men smile less than women, women use more paralanguage (nonverbal indicators of listening and understanding) than men do; men will use communicative touching more to confirm their dominance (pat on the back or shoulder), while women will touch for connection (arm-touching or offering a hug), and women use more eye contact than men (Admin/Public Relations …, 2017). This chapter will outline, then analyze, the most common stereotypical classifications of gender-related communication, provide a contemporary view on whether these classifications are myths or reality, and how they should be addressed in this third decade of the twenty-first century.

Gender stereotypes are ideas about how people will and should act according to their gender. Gender stereotypes associate men with achievement, competence, ambition, and independence. Women, on the other hand, are associated with caring, nurturing, and concern for others. Gender schemas are unconscious assumptions we have about women and men. Women are assumed incompetent until proven otherwise and it’s the opposite for men. These assumptions impede women’s professional development because women are not seen as leaders. They impede men’s emotional development because in order to be regarded as manly, strong, independent, men need to reject and deny any vulnerabilities. A common gender stereotype pattern, a conundrum, emerges where men need to dominate and assert their power in order to confirm gender stereotypes, while women resist and struggle to break through stereotypes. This struggle makes visible different styles of leadership, domination and collaboration. The conundrum that emerges is that we look for autocratic traits in our leaders but value a democratic work environment.

Aspects of masculinity have implications for organizational dynamics and human relations in the context of gender at work. Those aspects include: relational styles, ways of caring, self-reliance, a worker/provider tradition, risk-taking, group orientation, use of humor, and (in some instances) heroism. First, a description of possible enactments of these aspects of masculinity in the workplace will be presented. Then, in addition to simply describing these aspects of masculinity, a more sophisticated approach will extend the scope and advance the conversation to explore the relationships these aspects of masculinities have to the daily lives of employees in the workplace, including the mismatches, the tensions, and the resistances such as retribution or imposter syndrome. Finally, the chapter concludes with a consideration for how these aspects of masculinity shape organizational workplace climate and behavioral norms in the workplace (i.e., masculinity contest culture), where implications might include behavioral, affective, or somatic responses such as anxiety and stress, aggression, adaptive or maladaptive risk-taking, avoidance of femininity, and so on.

Stereotyping in advertising is considered as both “mirror” and “mold”, reflecting and shaping the values of its target audience. However, the connection between stereotyping of women in advertising and marketers’ profiling of women has not yet been explored. To address the issue, this study provides meta-analysis of research on gender stereotypes in advertising and content analysis of “how to market to women” in practical marketing guidelines and academic research. Women are more likely portrayed as young while men are in the middle age and older age segments. Women are often portrayed as sexually attractive. They are significantly portrayed in decorative roles and traditional roles. Meanwhile, some marketers present more realistic female images. The female market is heterogeneous. Women play multiple roles in daily life, and traditional roles are just a few among many. Female consumers are strong, assertive, and active. They join the labor force and gain higher social, financial, and educational status. They support social causes that matter to their communities and the societies in which they live.

Being out at work is a significant decision in the life of anyone who is transgender. Most transgender people are aware of the transphobia they could experience at work when they come out—exclusion from jobs, unfair work schedules, ridicule, homophobic jokes, bullying, shunning, sexual and physical harassment, job loss, and more. Transgender employees challenge norms of gender that are reinforced in interactions with others in a social process of gender authentication that may result in transphobia. Yet, many transgender people choose to be out at work. Their choice was made when they perceived a psychologically safe environment in which they could be their authentic selves. Transgender employees assess structural and interpersonal stigma barriers as part of their assessment of their decision to come out. Change agents in organizations can support transgender workers in making their decisions by understanding the role of gender in their organizations and use that understanding to create interventions, including educating co-workers, with the goal of reducing transphobia and increasing perceptions of an inclusive environment. Such steps will lead to transgender employees perceiving a psychologically safe environment in which they can safely come out. Coming out will allow them to be their authentic selves and will validate the inclusiveness of their employer’s diverse and inclusive workplace.

This chapter explains why gender diversity is beneficial for organizations and institutions. The discussion begins with defining gender diversity in a way that goes beyond the discourse around men and women to include non-binary gender identities, cultural symbols, and archetypes. It provides a focus on the need to include those marginalized at the leadership level and at all levels of privilege and power in society. It illustrates the unconscious bias of decision makers which hampers diversity and inclusion. The chapter argues that the different genders come from different social contexts and experience distinctly different challenges, and thus lead in different ways. As a result, different leadership styles, lenses and approaches to policy and to how people work and engage with one another emerge from homophily compared to diversity in leadership teams and networks. Diversity enhances innovation and the ability of human and biological systems to thrive and evolve. Furthermore, diversity is important for organizations to grasp and embrace the diverse needs and interests of those served. Gender diversity therefore is essential not only for equality but for leadership effectiveness and organizational impact, thereby enhancing psychological, societal, and planetary health. Finally, the chapter provides recommendations for organizations and institutions to uncover unconscious bias and take the appropriate steps to enhance gender diversity, equality, and inclusion.

The Chapter elucidates the importance of gender equity in organizations. The chapter also focuses on the important difference between gender equity and equality, oftentimes used interchangeably however are different from each other significantly. The chapter has provided a variety of strategies for bridging the gender gap such as gender diversity indices, corporate governance codes, Blau and Shannon index, and gender-based legislation which have been adopted by various countries in recent years. It also brings out the importance of gender diverse boards through enforcement of non-mandatory and mandatory mechanisms like corporate governance codes, and legislations, respectively. The case of India is also shared to show the execution and effect of mandatory legislations on increasing gender diversity on board.

This chapter first reviews the remarkable fact that women, in spite of long-term higher percentages in college graduations, and having been confirmed to lead more effectively than male leaders, only hold 21% of C-suite positions. Foundational reasons for this to occur are considered, from self-deprecation to lack of mentorship, and from excessive competition among one another to relational aggression. The chapter dives into a phenomenon that has been addressed in a different light, but potentially not made entirely clear before: the fact that women oftentimes advocate men in leadership positions. Several reasons for this to be the case are discussed. The chapter next introduces the acronym “WOMEN UNITE” to serve as a support system for women who are eager to restore the leadership balance, and doing so in a consciously and morally responsible way. The elements of this acronym are: Walk your talk; Open your heart; Motivate others; Express your appreciation; Nurture constructive habits; Understand differences; Navigate the path from here onward; Instill values into actions; Tread gently; Excel where it matters.

Research on female innovation-driven entrepreneurialism demonstrates that the number of start-ups by women worldwide still lags that of their male counterparts. This is in part due to women’s lower level of entrepreneurial self-efficacy which impacts negatively their entrepreneurial intention. This study uses the concept of multiple identities seen from a psychodynamic perspective, to explore theoretically how female entrepreneurs’ identity affects their entrepreneurial self-efficacy. First, I look into female entrepreneurs’ identity as part of their multiple identities situated within their self-concept. Second, I use Bourdieu’s androgenic cosmology to look into gender identity’s impact on women’s entrepreneurial identity and its potential impact on women entrepreneurs’ self-efficacy and their intention to start a business. Finally, I offer the adoption of “metaxu” as an ontological concept on how women entrepreneurs can reconcile their multiple identities and bring their best at work.

The purpose of this chapter is to inspire women to smash through the glass ceiling to achieve gender equality globally. It debunks myths about women leaders. It differentiates between men’s and women’s leadership and their communication styles. It draws a blueprint for women to fast-track their careers by equipping them with soft skills, networking skills, and negotiation skills. It encourages to overcome queen bee syndrome and implores successful senior women leaders to handhold young and ambitious women leaders. It emphasizes work-life integration. It explains closing the gender pay gap with examples of countries including Iceland, Norway, Finland, Sweden, and Denmark. It advises humanizing brands with examples of global companies including Google, Apple, Facebook, Nike, Coca-Cola, South West Airlines, McDonald’s, and Starbucks. It reminds that cooperation between men and women is essential to build gender equality globally. It implores men to support women wholeheartedly to build a prosperous world. It calls upon women to smash through the glass ceiling. Women must not shy away from shouldering responsibilities. They must stay in the game by learning and leading. They must break structural obstacles; build knowledge, skills, and abilities; and network to fast-track their careers.

This chapter exegetically dives deep into the Bible to evaluate the role of women and the relationship between the historical context and modern-day presumptions that exist. A review of named females in the Bible will include the likes of Bathsheba, Deborah, Mary Magdalene, and many others. Additionally, an examination of the unnamed women in the Bible will take place. Scrutiny of the omission of women in the Bible will add credence to the historical context of women’s roles in history. The exegetical analysis will assist with examining the modern-day role of women regarding their rights, roles, and responsibilities in society. A comparison between historical context and modern-day virtues will also be observed.

Gender inequality remains a global phenomenon and according to the World Economic Forum Global Gender Gap Report 2020 it will take more than 100 years to reach full gender equality in the world. Iceland has made the greatest progress toward closing the Gender Gap, 87.7%. Yet no woman is CEO of a listed company on the Icelandic stock exchange in 2020. Women CEOs are more likely to lead small enterprises, and women count for 13% of CEOs in larger companies. Women’s board membership and leadership positions in Icelandic companies are currently receiving a lot of attention and companies are encouraged to improve the gender ratio on boards and in the C-suite. The chapter reports on the results of a survey of Icelandic women business leaders regarding their beliefs on why no woman is CEO of a listed company in Iceland and what actions they deem feasible to increase the number of women in senior positions. Responses from 189 women revealed that they feel that action must be taken, even legislative, such as enforcing gender quotas for executive positions, business cultures, and attitudes must change, women need more opportunities.

The study explores senior female executives’ views on supporting female subordinates in managerial careers (i.e., female solidarity). The chapter provides a distinctive approach to female managerial career development by contextualizing the study in Turkey, where several socioeconomic trends with competing influences on women’s place in society are observed. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 Turkish senior executive women. Evidence of support for improving women’s representation in the boardroom was limited. Positive views were anchored where gender was most salient: on patriarchal norms that are imposed on most Turkish women and the senior executive women’s perceived need to fulfill a moral obligation. The great majority of participants referred to the meritocratic context of managerial careers, which renders gender irrelevant. The findings highlight the role of perceived gender salience of the context on which senior executive women anchor their views. The study also contributes to the current debates on the gendered nature of merit and has implications for policy and practice concerning women’s career development through HRM, most notably on standards of merits.

This chapter studies the current scenario of gender diversity in corporate boards across the globe, with particular focus on India. It delves into the impact of gender diversity on corporate performance and tries to establish that gender quota is needed to push the idea of more diverse boardrooms. The research findings suggest that women representation in the corporate boardrooms has been dismal. That it has something to do solely with merit is a fallacy. The present chapter does not establish the fact that economic performance and gender diversified boardrooms are positively correlated. Since economic motives alone cannot drive female inclusion, the chapter concludes that gender quotas are indeed necessary, but are not enough to solve the problem of workplace exclusion of women. Finally, it also proposes certain solutions to make corporate workplaces more gender inclusive.

While being homosexual in Africa has serious consequences, in post-democratic South Africa, with its progressive constitution, homosexual people are considered equal to heterosexual people. However, constitutional equality does not always translate into practical equality for various reasons, in particular, religion. In this chapter, we evaluate the experiences of gay and lesbian South African employees from three empirical studies from the past five years. We were specifically interested in the perceived experiences of stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination of homosexual people. Results indicated that for gays and lesbians, these negative experiences at work are still a reality, which was confirmed by contemporary literature. Furthermore, religion continues to fuel these stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination. Although forced by company policy, there are also signs that fellow employees are becoming more tolerant. Organizations have at their disposal various ways to dismantle the harmful stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination and to help foster a climate of inclusion. The findings add to the lacking body of knowledge regarding the treatment of gays and lesbians in the workplace in South Africa and give insight into the influence of religion in this dynamic. Directions for future research are given.

The whole world endorses women’s equal rights in workplace, family, and society (Pew Global 2020). Researchers find gender inclusion benefits workers and companies through enhanced worker and customer satisfaction, increased profits, and worker well-being. Why does gender workplace equity remain a “stalled revolution”? We suggest work/family dynamics supporting challenges of care for the most vulnerable—children, elders, the disabled, adults experiencing ill health—need to be “re-visioned” as “wicked problems” within applied complexity/developmental systems sciences. Complexity sciences argue gendered inequalities maintain stability through entangled forces at multiple levels yet can be transformed through problem-and-setting specific ecological analysis, identifying leverage points for maximum impact toward achieving valued outcomes. We apply transdisciplinary cultural/developmental systems perspectives on the gendered, interdependent life course, highlighting shared individual, family/kin, business, and public responsibilities toward supporting work and caretaking (Brandth, Halrynjo, & Kvande, 2017). These approaches help map multi-systemic factors offering impactful leverage points catalyzing measurable change. Global comparative literatures identify three transformative leverage points: (1) Gender-neutral paid family/kinship care leave when meeting life course challenges of childbearing/adoption and infant care; (2) Public/private partnerships providing flexible, predictable employment and institutional supports for early childhood care, schooling, and dependent caretaking needs for workers at all income levels (Thébaud & Halcomb, 2018); (3) Systems-minded organizational interventions addressing gender stereotyping of work/family decisions in Human Resources administration and in leadership training for both managers and workers.

In recent years there has been more discussion around the topics of work, work–life balance, and work–life integration. Many people today spend a large part of their life at work. In some cases, many are working 40 hours a week plus. Today, both men and women are in the workforce. Single People, Single people with children, and Married couples with or without children are working and trying to balance home and work–life while paying the bills. Due to changes in the economy and increases in the cost of living, many people have to work to support their families. There is also a segment of the population that must care for elderly parents. Research shows that some women indicate that the care of family has affected their ability to advance in their careers. How are workers managing it all? What role do employers play? How are families affected? What are some of the options to help with work–life balance? What about work–life integration? How do men and women see the work–life balance? These are some of the areas explored in this chapter.