Skip to main content

Abstract

Gender greatly impacts access to opportunities, potential, and success in corporate leadership roles. We begin with a general presentation of why such discussion is necessary for basic considerations of justice and fairness in gender equality and how the issues we raise must impact any ethical perspective on gender in the corporate workplace. We continue with a breakdown of the central categories affecting the success of women in corporate leadership roles. The first of these includes gender-influenced behavioral factors, such as the requirements and expectations of gendered verbal and nonverbal communication styles as well as appearance. We move on to address the impact of family on corporate leadership opportunities and success, discussing the asymmetrical evaluation of an individual’s potential, authority, and competence based on gender stereotypes of familial obligations and expectations. Finally, we address how gender impacts access to networking and sponsorship opportunities and the long-term effects of systematic limitations on women’s inclusion in the upper echelons of corporate leadership. We conclude with a summary of the questions and issues raised by our discussion and direct individuals to consider how different ethical systems and moral requirements might influence their interpretations of gender and leadership in the corporate workplace.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    It is not the only inequality; other inequalities, such as race and class, are present as well. These can often intersect with gender, but can stand alone, as well. In this chapter, our focus is on gender, specifically.

  2. 2.

    Though the present levels of women in corporate leadership around the globe are problematic, the experience of women today trying to enter the ranks of corporate leadership differs from the experience of women who were attempting the same feat over a generation ago. Similarly, older women today have a different experience when they work to attain high-level positions of corporate leadership. Though the differences between the two groups are important and worthy of research, they are not the main focus of our work here.

  3. 3.

    “Low skilled” is determined here by performance on the Armed Forces Qualification Test resulting in placement within the bottom third of NLSY respondents. High skilled respondents are identified as those falling within the top third of test takers. Wilde, 2010, p.16.

References

  1. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2011) Current population survey, Table 2: employment status of the civilian noninstitutional population 16 years and over by sex, 1973 to date. Annual Averages 2010. http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat2.pdf

  2. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey, Employed persons by detailed occupation and sex, 2000–2009 (unpublished data)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2011) Current population survey, Table 11: employed persons by detailed occupation, sex, race, and hispanic or latino ethnicity, Annual Averages 2010. http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.pdf

  4. Soares R, Combopiano J, Regis A, Shur A, Wong R (2010) 2010 catalyst census: fortune 500 women executive officers and top earners. Catalyst. http://www.catalyst.org/publication/459/11/2010-catalyst-census-fortune-500-women-executive-officers-and-top-earners

  5. Soares R, Carter NM, Combopiano J (2009) 2009 catalyst census: fortune 500 women board directors. Catalyst. http://www.catalyst.org/publication/357/2009-catalyst-census-fortune-500-women-board-directors

  6. Catalyst (2008) 2008 catalyst census of women corporate officers and top earners of the fortune 500. http://www.catalyst.org/publication/283/2008-catalyst-census-of-women-corporate-officers-and-top-earners-of-the-fortune-500

  7. Catalyst (2007) 2007 catalyst census of women board directors of the fortune 500. http://www.catalyst.org/publication/363/2007-catalyst-census-of-women-board-directors-of-the-fortune-500

  8. Catalyst (2006) 2005 catalyst census of women board directors of the fortune 500. http://www.catalyst.org/publication/19/2005-catalyst-census-of-women-board-directors-of-the-fortune-500

  9. Binkley C (2008) Bare-legged ladies: hosiery reveals office divide, 5 June 2008, WSJ. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121262443191346927.html

  10. Bowles HR, Babcock LC (2008) When doesn’t it hurt her to ask? Framing and justification reduce the social risks of initiating compensation. In: IACM 21st annual conference paper, 14 Dec 2008. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1316162

  11. U.S. Census Bureau (2012) USA quickfacts from the US census bureau. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html

  12. Binkley C (2008) Women in power: finding balance in the wardrobe. 24 January 2008, Wall Street Journal. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120112420869611063.html

  13. Oakley JG (2000) Gender-based barriers to senior management positions: understanding the scarcity of female CEOs. J Bus Ethics 27(4):312–333

    Google Scholar 

  14. Conden D (2006) Am BITCH ous. Morgan Road, New York

    Google Scholar 

  15. Frankel L (2004) Nice girls don’t get the corner office. Business Plus, New York

    Google Scholar 

  16. Tannen D (1994) Talking from 9 to 5: how women’s and men’s conversational styles affect who gets heard, who gets credit, and what gets done. William Morrow, New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gilligan C (1998) In a different voice: psychological theory and women’s development. Harvard University Press, Harvard

    Google Scholar 

  18. Garcia-Retamero R, Lopez-Zafra E (2006) Prejudice against women in male-congenial environments: perceptions of gender role congruity in leadership. Sex Roles 55(1–2):51–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hewlett SA, Marshall M (2011) Does female ambition require sacrifice? 25 Feb 2011. Retrieved from http://blogs.hbr.org/hbr/hewlett/2011/02/does_female_ambition_require_a.html 26 May 2011

  20. Wilde ET, Batchelder L, Ellwood DT (2010) The mommy track divides: the impact of childbearing on wages of women of differing skill levels. National Burea of Economic Research, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Kimmel MS (2000) The gendered society. Oxford, New York, p 127

    Google Scholar 

  22. McKinsey and Co. Survey (2011) Striking a balance. Wall Street Journal Journal Report, 11 April 2011. Print Edition, R3

    Google Scholar 

  23. Bowen GL (1998) Corporate supports for the family lives of employees: a conceptual model for program planning and evaluation. Family Relations 37(2):183–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Galinsky E, Aumann K, Bond JT (2008) Times are changing: gender and generation at work and at home, 2008 National Study of the Changing Workforce, Families and Work Institute, New York

    Google Scholar 

  25. Linkow P, Civian J (WFD Consulting), and Lingle KM (2011) (WorldatWork’s Alliance for Work-Life Progress), “Men and work-life integration: a global study, WFD Consulting, Alliance for Work-Life Progress, WorldatWork

    Google Scholar 

  26. O’ Marleen MA (2005) Corporate social responsibility for work/family balance. St Johns Law Rev 79:1193

    Google Scholar 

  27. Blumenstein R (2011) A blueprint for change. Wall Street J. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576250900113069980.html?KEYWORDS=women+in+the+economy+task+force Retrieved on May 23, 2011

  28. Stock K (2011) What do women on wall street want? Men. FINS Finance, 12 April 2011. Retrieved from http://www.fins.com/Finance/Articles/SB130100114751597623/What-Do-Women-on-Wall-Street-Want-Men?Type=48&idx=1. 24 May 2011

  29. Hewitt SA (2011) The real benefit of finding a sponsor. Harvard Bus Rev Blog: http://blogs.hbr.org/hbr/hewlett/2011/01/the_real_benefit_of_finding_a.html. 26 Jan 2011. Retrieved 24 May 2011

  30. Barsh J, Yee L (2011) Unlocking the full potential of women in the U.S. economy. McKinsey and Co., Special Report for the wall street journal executive task force for women in the economy 2011

    Google Scholar 

  31. Wall Street Journal Executive Task Force on Women in the Economy. Industry by industry: how to move forward. Wall Street J Report. 11 April 2011. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703280904576247131232952542.html, 24 May 2011

  32. Wall Street Journal Executive Task Force on Women in the Economy. Where are all the senior-level women? Wall Street Journal. Journal Report. 11 April 2011, p R3. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704013604576246774042116558.html

  33. Hewlett S (2007) Off-ramps and on-ramps: keeping talented women on the road to success. Harvard Bus School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  34. Eagly A, Carli L (2007) Through the Labyrinth: the truth about how women become leaders. Harvard Bus School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  35. Rohde DL (2007) The subtle side of sexism. Columbia J Gender Law 16:613

    Google Scholar 

  36. Davis GF, Yoo M, Baker WE (2003) The small world of the American corporate elite, 1982–2001. Strategic Organization 1(3):301–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Devora Shapiro Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this entry

Cite this entry

Shapiro, D., Bramer, M. (2013). Gender Issues in Corporate Leadership. In: Luetge, C. (eds) Handbook of the Philosophical Foundations of Business Ethics. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1494-6_74

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1494-6_74

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1493-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1494-6

  • eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and Law

Publish with us

Policies and ethics