Gender Differences As A Predictor Of Salaries In Leadership Roles Literature Review Example

Acknowledgement

Chapter 1
Introduction
Statement of Problem
Statement of Purpose
Research Questions
Significance of the Study
Definition of Terms:
Chapter 11
History of pay inequality
Chapter 111
Laws
Chapter 1V
Women in leadership roles
Chapter V
Research Methodology
Conclusion

Bibliography

Abstract
Gender Differences as a Predictor of Salaries in Leadership Roles.
Salaries have increased drastically in the past 50 years but still there is a salary disparity between men and women. In today’s workplace, leadership roles are very competitive. Applicants must have many qualifications to be considered for leadership positions. Workforce found that women needed a Ph.D. to equal the lifetime earnings of men with bachelor’s degree (Lane & Flowers, 2015). This research seeks to explore why highly qualified women are still paid less than their male counterpart do.
The disparities in salary are very evident between men and women. Women are almost a half of the workforce and they are only making 79 cents for every dollar earned by men, there is a gender wage gap for the other 21 percent. Here we are more than fifty years after the equal pay act of 1963, and there still exist disparities between male salaries and female salaries.
In this research, I will look on the salaries disparities between genders and the position that are held by both. It will examine some of the challenges women encounter in history and even today, as women leaders in the workforce, and inequality for women in leadership position. My research is limited to journals, articles and the data that are published about five or ten years ago to present. It will focus on the experience of a leader, the barriers, and challenges women faced and knowledge based on personal experience with those in leadership roles.
Background
Numerous studies have been conducted on the pay differences between genders for many years. When we look across discipline, the gender salary gap is visible. To understand women and pay inequality, it is important to understand women in today’s workforce. Today’s labor force has the highest levels of employment participation ever by women. Women’s labor force participation has grown dramatically over the past few decades. Currently, women account for 47 percent of the labor force. In absolute numbers, this means that approximately 72, 713,000 women over the age 16-year-old are in the labor force today, compared to 82, 450, 000 of men over age 16, who account for 53 percent of the labor force (Burns, Barton & Kerby, 2012).
It is predicted that by 2020 the number of women in the workforce is expected to grow to 77,232,000, an increase of 6.2 percent from today. Moreover, by 2020 women participation rate in the labor force is expected to be greater than that of men. In terms of employment, the current unemployment rate for women is also lower than of men where 7.4 percent of women are unemployed, compared to 7.8 percent of men (Burns, Barton, & Kerby, 2012).
Notably, the percentages are nearly identical to the working age population of this subgroup. Sixty-six percentage of working women are Hispanic white, 14 percent are Hispanic, 13 percent are black, 5 percent are Asian and 2 percent are others (Burns, Barton, & Kerby, 2012).
All though our history of women in the workforce have been the topic of discussion when it comes to salary disparity, even the women who are educated, trained and have the same experience as men are not been paid equally. While there is evidence that women in the workforce have increased in great numbers and some progress have been made, in regards, to their presence in management and other leadership roles, there is still an unfair balance that exists today. The findings corroborate research from other occupational fields, showing that a discontinuous work history has a negative influence on career success and that human capital variables are better rewarded for men than for women (Ever & Sieverding, 2014).
According to the Institute for Women Policy Research and equality discrimination, women are almost half of the workforce. They are the equal, if not main, breadwinners in four out of ten families. They receive more college and graduate degrees than men receive, on average women continue to earn less than men do. Women, on average, earn less than men in virtually every single occupation for which there is sufficient earnings data for both men and women to calculate an earnings ratio (Hayes, J. 2010).
The Institute for Women Policy Research tracks the gender wage gap over time in a series of fact sheets updated twice per year. According to their research, if change continues at the same slow pace as it has done for the past fifty years, it will take another 44 years for women to finally reach pay parity. Institute for Women Policy Research annual fact sheet on the gender wage gap by occupation shows that women earn less than men in almost any occupation do. Institute for Women Policy Research status of Women in the States project tracks the gender wage gap across states. Institute for Women Policy Research report on sex and race discrimination in the workplace shows that outright discrimination in pay, hiring, or promotions continue to be a significant feature of working life (Hayes, J. 2010).
Pay equity may be affected by the segregation of jobs by gender and other factors. Institute for Women Policy Research shows that irrespective of the level of qualification, jobs predominantly done by women pay less on average than jobs predominantly done by men.
According to a recent regression analysis of federal data by Institute for Women Policy, women have made tremendous strides during the last few decades by moving into jobs and occupations previously done almost exclusively by men. However, during the last decade, there has been very little progress in the gender integration of work. In some industries and occupations, like construction, there has been no progress in forty years. This persistent occupational segregation is a primary contributor to the lack of significant progress in closing the wage gap (Hayes, J. 2010).
There is the History of the Battle for Equal Pay for American Women. In February 1869, a letter to the editor of the New York Times questioned why female government employees were not paid the same as male employees. “Very few person denied the justice of the principle that equal work should command equal pay without regard to the sex of the laborer”, the author wrote. “But it is one thing to acknowledge the right of a principle and quite another to practice it.” The author noted that the US government employed 500 women in the treasury department, but that they made only half as much as their male colleagues (Alter, C., 2015).
Research tells us that my of these women are now performing the same grade of work at $900 per annum for which men received $1800. Most of them, too, have a family to support; being nearly all windows or orphans maybe the war. That year, a resolution to ensure equal pay to government employees passed the house of representative by 100 votes but was ultimately wanted down by the time it passed the senate in 1870 (Alter, C., 2015).
In 1882, communication across the country slowly stopped when the majority of the workers for Western Union Telegraph Company went on strike, partly to ensure “equal pay for equal work”. The strike was not ultimately successful, but it was very early public demand for fair pay for women (Alter, C., 2015).
In 1911, significant progress had been made, New York teachers were finally granted pay equal to that of their male counterparts, after a long and contentious battle with the Board of Education (Alter, C., 2015). In the 20th century, the war was good for women workers. In 1918, at the beginning of World War 1, the United States Employment Service published lists of jobs that were suitable for women in order to encourage men in those occupations to switch to jobs that supported the war effort. “When the listed have been preparedit is believed that the force of public opinion and self-respect will prevent any able-bodied man from keeping a position officially designated as, “woman’s work”, the Assistant Director of the U.S. Employment Service said in 1918. “The decent fellows will get out without delay; the slackers will be forced out and especially, I think, by the sentiment of women who stand ready” (Alter, C., 2015).
After the war ended, the demand for equal pay seemed to lose some steam because the focus was on other things like rebuilding. In 1947, Secretary of Labor Lewis Schwellenbach tried to get an equal (The equal pay act. (n.d.) December 25, 2015) pay amendment passed that would apply to the private sector, arguing. “There is no sex difference in the food she buys or the rent she pays; there should be none in her pay envelope (Alter, C., 2015).
Statement of Problem
More women are also working in positions and fields that were previously occupied by men but not being less than their predecessors are. Pay differences according to gender may be affected by education, work experience, and career interruptions. Career success is usually measured by promotions and salary and since there still exist a difference in pay due to gender, it points to less success for women. This research seeks to explore why highly qualified women still earn less than their male counterparts do. It will also investigate why women in leadership roles are being paid less than men in leadership roles. The research question is: Do there still exist a difference in salaries, due to their gender, in a highly qualified individual who holds a leadership role?
Statement of Purpose
The purpose of this project is to and analyzed evidence-based articles to investigate if gender plays a role in salaries. This project will be investigating individuals how to have a leadership role of both the male and female gender. This disparity can be found across the board but it will be focused in a human services office.
Research Question.
The purpose of this research is to investigate if gender results in salary differences, if salary differences are because of other factors and if there is a salary difference in leadership roles.
The research question is: Is there a salary difference in a highly qualified individual? This question is reflected in the findings of the literature review. The literature review includes findings that show trends of salary disparities in gender in individuals who are highly qualified for their position. This question focuses on the female and male gender.
The second research question is: Are salary differences because of other factors? The question is a necessary question for this investigation because sometimes other factors may play a role in how salaries are determined and how they may be reflected. Some of the findings from the literature review support education being a factor of how much an individual are paid. Work experience was also reflected in the literature as another factor in salaries. For women, interruption in career may result in differences in salaries. Career interruptions such as maternity leave may cause a negative influence on a women’s career success, especially when disputing salaries. The number of children is also a factor because it determines the length of career interruptions.
The final research question is: is there a pay difference factor based on gender for individuals in leadership roles? In the literature review, one particular article explains that sex moderates career success. Prior research has found that human capital variables are more strongly related to career success in men than in women (Evers & Sieverding, 2013). Women’s managerial advancement is influenced strongly by training, education and work experiences. These factors are powerful influences on salaries of individuals in leadership roles.
The chapters to be presented will provide a literature review, and a detailed description of the methodology that will be utilized to investigate the hypothesis. Upon completion of this investigation, the finding of this research will be revealed as well as the impact and the implications of these findings.
Hypothesis
The salary disparity is evident amongst male and female. Women are not pay fairly despite their education and years of experience. As a result, of the investigation, a hypothesis can be formed that gender disparity does exist in individuals who are highly qualified. This investigation predicted that education; work experience, and work interruption can be a negative influence on women in the workplace causing a marked difference in salary between men and women an a hypothesis that sex moderates the relationship between men and women salaries in leadership roles can be formed.
Significance of the Study
This investigation serves a resource for women nationally, that there exist a disparity in salaries due to different factors. With this resource, a new policy can be formed or even an amendment of the Equal Pay Law can be done to help to close the gap formed due to gender. Even though this investigation focused on the Human Services, it serves on a boarder plane for women as a whole.
-First, this research is important because the data it reveals will validate the importance of the need to have equality in pay regardless of gender.
-The second focus of this research is to get a better understanding of why women are still being paid less than their male counterpart is, even though they are highly qualified and possess the same education.
-Finally, this research will open a forum for ways that a woman can maintain the same level of career success as her male counterpart regardless of whether she has a work interruption due to maternity family leave.
Definition of Terms
Career
Career is an individual journey through learning, work and another aspect of life.
Equal Pay Law
“The Equal Pay Law of 1963 is a United State federal Law amending the Fair Labor Standard Act, aimed at abolishing wage disparity based on sex. It was signed into law on June 10, 1963, by John F. Kennedy as part of his New Frontier Program.”
Pay Gaps
Pay Gap is the ratio of female to male median yearly earning among full time, year around workers.
Gender
Gender is the range of characteristic pertaining to, and differentiating between masculinity and femininity.
Leadership
Leadership is the action of leading employees to achieve goals. It plays an important role in employee performance and productivity.
Salary Disparity
Salary Disparity is the difference between the incomes of the richer and poorer parts of society. The more unequal the distribution of wealth in an economy, the greater the income disparity, which will add to the problem of pay inequality in our current society.
Interruption
The interruption means the delay, inactivity resulting in something being put off until a later time.
Assumption
Salary Inequality is very important not just for women, but also for the all gender in the workforce. The study of salary disparity is important to understand why women in leadership roles are still being paid unfairly. It is assumed that the result of this study was accurate and truthful during the time of the writing and reporting. This result will serve as a tool to provide an opportunity to present opinions on salary disparity with the non-for profit sector.
Limitations
This study will examine and analyze salary disparity for women in a leadership role in the area of Human Services. This study has a number of limitations: that must be identified. First, the information found were gear to only the field of Social Work and Nursing. Additionally, it will look at the barriers, challenges, because for the salary disparity, and look at the recommendation and preventative measures will be a review. There is the decade of research and studies on equal pay still shows a gender gap in pay even after the Equal Pay Law.
Literature Review
There are many theories and studies on the pay inequality for women in the workforce and for women in leadership roles. These studies explore the history of women in the work force and pay inequality. There is evidence of how the gender pay gap persists, why women were more likely to have career interruption and why it may have affected their earnings. This review will analyze evidence-based articles to investigate if gender plays a role in salaries. This process will be investigating individuals who have a leadership role of both the male and female gender. This disparity can be found across the board but it will be focused in the area of Human Services.
The review of this study will begin with the history of women in the workforce and laws that were put in place to address issues that might have affect women in the past. This study specifically examines pay gaps. Many studies on the predictions of salary disparity have been conducted.
The main goal of our study is to predict the career success of highly educated women and men in a prospective study spanning 10 years. Many precious studies on the predictors of career success analyzed multiple occupational fields in one analysis. However, this study will focus only on a single area, which is Human Services. It will analyze positions that are held by women in leadership roles and focus on career interruption. We analyzed all periods of employment and no employment since their certification. We further investigated agency and other career-relevant factors. Because larger gender differences have been found in salaries than in promotions, we choose salary as our criterion of objective career success (Evers and Sleverding, 2013).
Prior research has found that human capital variables are more strongly related to career success in men than in women. In a sample of managers, for example, training education, and work experience were identified as powerful influences on men’s managerial advancements that were better rewarded for men than for women. Another possibility is that children and / or career interruptions have stronger (negative) effects on the career success of women than of men (Evers and Sleverding, 2013).
Career interruptions
In the other occupational fields, research has shown that even highly qualified women have longer career interruptions than their male colleagues. Similarly, our second opening hypothesis predicts a gender difference in career interruptions than men. We followed this prediction with two sub-hypotheses designed to further understand predictors of career interruptions Prior research has found that human capital variables are more strongly related to career success in men than in women
Fifteen years after physicians, the second year at medical school, highly fulfilled women earned less than men earn and interrupted their careers for longer times than men. Even female physician with high career achievements motivation, high agency and good qualification interrupted their career for about three times longer than did their male counter parts. When my sister told me that some women in her company are told to post pound their family, I was shocked. There is a clear division when it comes to career and gender roles, as women are expected to reduce or interrupt our career for family reasons. Findings indicate that women seem to face higher career obstacles, not just in congruity with pay, because human capital variables are better rewarded for men than they are for a woman (IWPR, Sept 2015).
The gender gap in 2014, gender differences in salary were found the more men than women average earning is much more than women. The ratio of women and men’s median annual earnings was 78.6 percent for full time. This means that the gender wage gap for full time worker is 21.4 percent women median (IWPR, Sept 2015).
Looking at the millennial women, a new cohort of young women has now entered the work force. At the starting of their career, they are better educated than their mothers are and grandmothers had been. However, when they look ahead, they see roadblocks to their success.
Biases
The purpose of this study is to explore how women throughout history experience many forms of discriminations, such as culture, race, gender, and equal rights. However, even though we have evolved and became more accepting as the years went on, some of these forms of discrimination still exist, such as how fair wages for women. People have came to the understanding that women and men have equal education levels and are able to accomplish jobs like men do, however, men are still popular and efficient according to companies.
There are many different point a view when it comes to gender and pay equality. Many people believe that nothing is wrong with men making more money than women. Others understand and believe that there is a problem, however they do not think it is huge issue as others make it to be. I believe it is a huge problem and it is unfair. As a woman in a leadership role, it is my expectation that I will be paid fairly based on my experience and my education and not by gender.
This could be bias to still have more men in power at the top. We need to find a positive effect of reducing gender inequality and wage compressing institution on the relative pay of men, controlling for their measured, as opposed to actual, human capital levels. On the other hand, high wage floors might be encouraging to women’s force participation, raising their relative experience levels. Of course, the wages floor could still reduce women’s employment if labor demand effects important. In any case wage induces female qualifications could produce a positive or negative bias on our estimates of the impact of wage compression.
Methodology
My research methodology requires gathering relevant data from specific documents and compiling database, in order to analyze evidence-based articles to investigate if gender plays a role in salaries. This project will be investigating individuals how to have a leadership role of both the male and female gender. This disparity can be found across the board but it will be focused in a human services office. It is my hope that I will be able to get answers for the following questions: 1. is there a salary difference in a highly qualified individual? 2. Are salary differences because of other factors? 3. Is there a pay difference based on gender for individuals in leadership roles?
For this research, I will be using a mixed methodology to include quantitative and qualitative research using the ground theory approach. In order to extract the data that is needed to support my literature review, several databases were utilized.  Database searched were RefWorks and EBSCO web. In using RefWorks it did not result in articles that strongly support my topic, therefore EBSCO was used.  The search criteria was a restriction of 5 to 10 years old, free full text, peer reviewed studies.  Keywords used included, women, men, right, inequality, wages, workforce, and leadership. The keywords that were used with the Booleans of “AND and “OR” in various combinations to reduce the size of the final yield of articles (Melynk and Fineout-Overholt 2011, p 53).   The studies found were critically appraised using three questions according to (Melynk and Fineout-Overholt 2011, p.83), Are the results valid? Reliable? In addition, Applicable.  The type of study would provide the best answer to the fairness, inequality, or leadership for women in the workforce.  Using this information the hierarchy of Evidence according to (Melynk and Fineout-Overholt 2011, p.83), was used to rank this literature review. The literature selected as seen in the literature review supported the questions that this research investigated.
Empirical Evidence of the Remunerative Differences between Genders in Leadership Positions
Leadership roles entail positions relating to high-level management positions and executive positions relating to the governance of companies and top political offices (Pew Research Center, 2015). This include roles that require a lot of education, experience and ethical compliance. And they are sensitive because personnel at such leadership roles take decisions and make choices that move the company from one point to another. In spite of the closing gaps between females and males in these positions, there is evidence that there is a huge pay gap that is still existent amongst the genders, with women gaining less than their male colleagues in similar roles.
There have been some positive transformations towards the reduction of the pay gap between men and women. Whilst the earning of women was just 64.5% of what men earned in the 1960s, today, it is just 75.7% to what men earn (Lips, 2013). In executive positions, this gap is stretched by the fact that these positions are remunerated on the basis of performance results. Unlike operatives, leadership and executive positions are remunerated on the basis of the volume of work done and achievements made in a certain period. Thus, a person in a leadership position is likely to earn more from profit-sharing and target-meeting achievements they make each year. These are often predetermined and the ability to meet these goals are based on the opportunity a person gets to do more and achieve better results.
A study of 1,660 business school graduates by Harvard Business Review indicated that males have projects twice as big and with staffers three times more than women in top leadership positions and this influenced the case for higher salaries for males than women in such positions (Harvard Business Review, 2013). This clearly shows that women are given less work to do due to certain inherent problems in the workplace. There is some kind of discrimination that exists in the volume of work given to women in leadership positions. This indicate a fundamental problem that is within the very structure of the leadership positions and must be addressed from that level.
Women with children are less preferred and women with children on the average earn $11,000 less than those without children (Harvard Business Review, 2013). This is because executive positions are often demanding and requires a lot of sacrifice to achieve the top positions. Thus, due to the fact that women are more likely to take time off to give birth, they are limited in their ability to achieve high levels of remuneration in leadership positions. This is because the requirements in leadership roles – in the corporate world and in politics require the entire personality of a person. Thus, women are discriminated against because of their status as people who play leading social roles in society.
In spite of all these problems, there is a move toward higher pay but it is so slow and it is projected that women will not see equal pay until the year 2059 (Hartmann, 2015). This is a reflection of the fact that women have limited opportunities to rise to higher leadership roles. This is because remuneration in the top positions are almost always based on performance. And since women earn less, there will always be an excuse to turn them down and prevent them from achieving top remuneration in top positions. In spite of this situation, women are learning and improving their competencies. For instance, in 2009, 57% Bachelors’ degrees were awarded to women (Furchtgott-Roth, 2014, p. 41). This is however no guarantee that a woman will gain a remuneration that is representative of her qualification. Leading roles have inherent challenges that make it almost impossible for women to earn the same amount as their male counterparts. There are hurdles and limits that are placed in the environment that provide excuses and justifications for the rejection of higher paying roles and higher paying opportunities. Due to this, women continue to earn less than what males earn in executive and leading roles.
Intervening Factors that Lead to Salary Differences across Genders
There are several pointers and elements that lay the foundation for the creation of a system whereby women in leading positions earn significantly less than men. The rationality of academic meritocracy is relaxed when it comes to promoting women due to certain widespread factors (Morley, 2013). These factors are steeped in the belief that top leadership remuneration is justified by the performance of an individual. Thus, organizations and political authorities find excuses on the pretext of performance to ignore the academic competencies of women and focus on their performance. This includes the utilization of some performance targets as opposed to the actual competency and the actual ability of a woman.
Pew Research identified that 43% of companies held women in a leadership position to a higher standard whilst 38% of leaders in political positions believed women are to be held to a higher standard (Pew Research Center, 2015). This outlines there is some kind of unwritten view and perception that women are less productive and do not produce more. This is because they think women are traditionally excluded from top leadership positions. And if they ever get to such positions and roles, they will have to be monitored closely. This says a lot of things. First of all, it shows that performance targets are not favorable in the demand of women for better positions. Hence, it is used as an unconscious pointer for denying women a place in top positions. And this is also used as a basis to justify lower salaries.
The demands for more surveillance and evaluation of women requires a lot of demands and expectations which causes most women to either settle for less demanding roles or quit these top positions altogether (Hartmann, 2015; Sandberg, 2013). This is because there is a perception that women are less competent and can do less – the weaker gender. Therefore, they are harassed and given demands that most men will not be required to do in top positions. This creates a basis for pay discrimination which is used as a basis to “tolerate” women and try to dissuade them in various subtle and sometimes not so subtle forms.
There is a woman’s world and sector which has been created and linked to women only and this creates a basis for sexist ideology and thought which justifies low salaries (Connell, 2015). This is particularly serious because most people in executive positions in the 21st Century are people who formed their worldview in the 20th Century where pay disparities between genders were the norm rather than the exception (Connell, 2015). Therefore, most policies towards paying workers do not take into account the special needs of women and the need to ensure equality. These leaders continue to utilize old measures that are outmoded, archaic and incompatible with activities and processes of the 21st Century (Hartmann, 2015; Neck, 2014)
“Women are much more likely than men to be clustered in just a few occupations, with nearly half of all working women—44.4 percent—employed in just 20 occupations” (Glynn, 2014, p. Para 4). This statement goes on to identify that due to the fact that women are represented in the work environment, they are clustered in a few sectors. This shows that there is a traditional view that women do not belong to conventional leadership positions in most entities and industries. This therefore lays the foundation for the justification of lower salaries in top leadership positions.
Remuneration in leadership and executive roles are based on experience, familiarity with the industry and links to important figures relevant to the economy a company operates within (Dunne & Morris, 2015; Holgate & Buckley, 2012). Due to the fact that women are traditionally not operational in most of these sectors and industries, there is always a reason to cut down on their earnings because they are often seen to be less productive. The lack of a strong background in leading and the use of stringent measures to evaluate the activities of women ensures that they are often paid less and given less opportunities to progress to higher positions where they can earn more money and achieve better results.
Furthermore, there is the biological requirement for women to take time off to attend to family matters and pursue a social life. Home and child-care causes women to work an average of 35 minutes less than males each day (Glynn, 2014). This is because women will always have to do other things to keep their homes going and also help to raise their children and promote better attention in their social circles. Therefore, they work less hours than men in top positions and this leads to major problems in the need for higher or respectable salaries.
There is also the need for women to interrupt their careers from time to time. Executive positions require a high degree of continuity and a logical approach to things in order to ensure a level of consistent returns and better operations of a company (Dunne & Morris, 2015). These pointers are taken into account in hiring and promoting leaders in an organization. This explains why a company will be willing to pay more to invest in a man who holds just a Bachelor’s degree and pay less to a woman with a doctorate degree because there is always the notion that the woman might have social commitments and requirements that will keep her away from the work at hand. This gives room for chauvinistic thoughts and other negative perceptions that keep women on low earnings in top positions.
The need for life-balance and stereotypical views on some jobs being reserved for men keep women in low-paying roles even in the same company (Barbulescu & Bidwell, 2012). Therefore, women are subjected to various forms of discrimination that is meant to provide a framework of stagnation that prevents women from carrying out their activities.
Pay Difference Factors Based on Gender for Individual Career Progression
Individually, women will have to build a career in the work place in order to earn higher salaries that are competitive enough to attract higher wages. Career progression in the workplace is almost always based on the performance and results that are gained in a given work position (Holgate & Buckley, 2012). Therefore, a productive individual is likely to gain a higher position and a higher remuneration that comes with it. A less productive person is paid less.
Investment and outcomes are assessed on the basis of performance and this does not support a gender-neutral evaluation (Lips, 2013). Aside the fact that performance and returns on investment is vital, there is an element of perception that plays a role in career development and career advancement. In a study, 23% of relevant people interviewed indicated that women do not have enough time to do what is required of them in leadership positions because they have family commitments (Pew Research Center, 2015). This means that most women are likely to be rejected from promotions and other salary scales. This is because there is a perception that women are going to be challenged in various points and at various levels. There will be major problems and challenges in growing the business in the first place.
Aside that, there is also the need to set up a home and this affects the career progression of women. Most women have to get married and build a career as they build a home. This prevents them from rising in leadership roles. This trend is evident from a study which showed a lot of differences between men and women. When faced with choosing between marriage and a career progression to a senior positon, 18% of men chose to marry whilst 38% of women chose to marry (Sandberg, 2013, p. 204). This means women are by nature willing to make some sacrifices to seek social fulfillment that men will not do. Due to this, women are more likely to earn less than men in the top level positions due to the possibility to rise up the ranks and achieve higher job titles.
Another aspect is with ambition and what the society causes people to aspire for across the gender. In another study, it was identified that 19% of men in the workplace set their sights on becoming a CEO or company partner whilst only 9% of women had such ambitions (Sandberg, 2013, p. 190). This shows that by default, women are less likely to be inspired and put on a track to build up from moderately high leading roles to senior positions. This affects the income generation and earning potential of these women.
Also, in relation to the performance targets and standards, men are more likely to engage in overwork than women and this causes higher pay (Cha & Weeden, 2014). This is because men are not tied down socially on the same level as women who have more social obligations than men. Overwork causes men’s wages to increase by approximately 10% over that of women (Cha & Weeden, 2014)
A more radical explanation to these differences lie in the fact that women are more likely to be moderate in taking risks than men in the competitive landscape. This comes with its ethical consequences, but most men get away with these high risks which grow companies and are often preferred by shareholders and hence, rewarded in various ways and forms. Many CEO salary rises are due to some rather aggressive policies aimed at increasing profits and most of the directors investigated in the recent financial crisis were male (Lips, 2013). This confirms the fact that women are more likely to be sidelined due to their insistence on ethics and the rules which grow companies rather slowly, as compared to men who are willing to take higher risks and gain a favorable posture before shareholders and directors.
Conclusion
Women are more likely to earn up to 25% less than men in leading positions in the corporate world and in political life. This seem to be an improvement over the 1960s, but it is a slow change that is expected to be completed in some 40 years into the future. The change is slowed further by the fact that there are some institutionalized views about women being less productive and less competent. Other reasons are steeped in stereotypical views that women should not be taking up top executive and leading positions. The main reason why women earn less than men is seen to be in the need for a work and social life balance for these women in top positions. This is because by nature, women are more likely to get married and play a leading role in raising children. Due to this, they have to draw tighter balances and are less likely to get top standards. Institutionalized marginalization is based on the fact that top positions are often remunerated on the basis of performance. Thus, all forms of gender equality is blocked by top level leaders who are often male who built their careers in the 20th Century. These men assess women on the basis of higher standards and this is almost always steeped to lead to lower wages for women. This pushes out women who seek other roles that are simpler and less hostile. Career progression which increases the chances of getting a better remuneration amongst women is also limited significantly because women often build careers with the view of also building a family. Also, society makes it imperative for women to think less of getting higher leadership roles. Women often work less to maintain a balance between work and social life and in most cases, women take less risk and breach ethics which is more popular to shareholders and directors who use that as a basis for promotion.
In my personal opinion, gender gap have been treated unfairly in the past, however, progress has been made where many women are in leadership roles and are been paid fairly. I believe more can be done. It can be concluded that a hypothesis that there exist a pay gap in the workforce today that is based on gender. A literature review was conducted and evidence was discovered based on the information obtained from the literature researched that supported the hypothesis that there is still a difference in how highly qualified individuals are being paid in society today. This is based on their gender.
References
Burns, C., Barton, K., & Kerby, S. (2012, July). The State of diversity in today's workplace.
Retrieved from https://www.americanprogress.org
Alter, Charlotte. "History Feminism." Http://times.com3774661/equal-payhistory/. 14 Apr. 2015.
Web.
The equal pay act. (n.d.). Retrieved December 25, 2015, from http://www.infoplease.com/spot/equalpayact1.html
Barbulescu, R., & Bidwell, M. (2012). Do Women Choose Different Jobs from Men? Mechanisms of Application Segregation in the Market for Managerial Workers. Organization Science, 737-756.
Bimrose, J., McMahon, M., & Watson, M. (2014). Women's Career Development Throughout the Lifespan: An International Exploration. London: Routledge.
Cha, Y., & Weeden, K. A. (2014). Overwork and the Slow Convergence in the Gender Gap in Wages. American Sociological Review, 3-37.
Connell, R. W. (2015). Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
Dunne, P., & Morris, G. D. (2015). Non-Executive Directors' Handbook (4th ed.). London: Elsevier.
Melynyk, B.M. & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2011). Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing
Healthcare. A Guide to Best Practice. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Philadelphia, PA.
Hayes, PH.D, J. (2010). Gender Segregation in the Labor Market and the Gender Wage Gap -
The Gender Wage Gap: 2014. (September 2015). Institute for Women's Policy Research, 1-4.
Retrieved from http://www.iwpr.org/publications
Evers, A., & Sieverding, M. (2013). Why do Highly Qualified Women (Still) Earn Less? Gender
Differences in Long-Term Predictors of Career Success. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38(1), 93-106.
Furchtgott-Roth, D. (2014). Women's Figures: An Illustrated Guide to the Economic Progress of Women. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Glynn, S. J. (2014, May 19). Explaining the Gender Wage Gap. Retrieved from Center for American Progress: https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/report/2014/05/19/90039/explaining-the-gender-wage-gap/
Hartmann, H. (2015, September 22). America's gender pay gap is at a record low, but hold the celebration. Retrieved from Fortune: http://fortune.com/2015/09/22/americas-gender-pay-gap-is-at-a-record-low-but-hold-the-celebration/
Harvard Business Review. (2013). Women in the Workplace: A Research Roundup. Retrieved from Harvard Business Review: https://hbr.org/2013/09/women-in-the-workplace-a-research-roundup
Holgate, P., & Buckley, E. (2012). Accounting Principles for Non-Executive Directors (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lane, S. R., & Flowers, T. (2015). Salary Inequity in Social Work. Journal of Women and Social Work, 730-739.
Lips, H. M. (2013). The Gender Pay Gap: Challenging the Rationalizations. Perceived Equity, Discrimination, and the Limits of Human Capital Models. Sex Roles 68 (3), 169-185.
Morley, L. (2013). The rules of the game: women and the leaderist turn in higher education. Gender and Education 25(1), 116-131.
Neck, C. (2014). Disappearing women: Why do women leave senior roles in finance? Australian Journal of Management 40 (3), 488-510.
Pew Research Center. (2015, January 14). Women and Leadership. Retrieved from Pew Research: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/01/14/women-and-leadership/
Sandberg, S. (2013). Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead. New York: Random House.
Williams, M. J., Paluck, E. L., & Spencer-Rodgers, J. (2010). The Masculinity of Money:
Automatic Stereotypes Predict Gender Differences In Estimated Salaries. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34(1), 7-20.