The goal of this study is to examine whether women in the highest levels of firms’ management ranks help to reduce barriers to women’s advancement in the workplace. Using a panel of more than twenty thousand firms during 1990 to 2003 from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the authors explore the influence of women in top management on subsequent female representation in lower-level managerial positions in U.S. firms. Key findings show that an increase in the share of female top managers is associated with subsequent increases in the share of women in midlevel management positions within firms, and this result is robust to controlling for firm size, workforce composition, federal contractor status, firm fixed effects, year fixed effects, and industry-specific trends. The authors also find that the positive influence of women in top leadership positions on managerial gender diversity diminishes over time, suggesting that women at the top play a positive but transitory role in women’s career advancement.
AignerDennis J.CainGlen G.1977. Statistical theories of discrimination in labor markets. Industrial and Labor Relations Review30 (2): 175–87.
2.
ArrowKenneth. 1973. The theory of discrimination. In Discrimination in labor markets, eds. AshenfelterOrley A.ReesAlbert. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3.
AshenfelterOrleyHeckmanJames. 1976. Measuring the effect of an anti-discrimination program. In Evaluating the labor market effects of social programs, eds. AshenfelterOrleyHeckmanJames. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, Industrial Relations Section.
4.
AtheySusanAveryChristopherZemskyPeter. 2000. Mentoring and diversity. American Economic Review90 (4): 765–86.
5.
BeckerGary S.1957. The economics of discrimination. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
6.
BellLinda A.2005. Women-led firms and the gender gap in top executive jobs. Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) Working Paper, Bonn, Germany.
7.
BlauFrancine D.DeVaroJed L.2007. New evidence on gender differences in promotion rates: An empirical analysis of a sample of new hires. Industrial Relations46 (3): 511–50.
8.
BlauFrancine D.FerberMarianneWinklerAnne. 2006. The economics of women, men, and work. 5th ed.New York, NY: Prentice Hall.
9.
BrownCharles. 1982. The federal attack on labor market discrimination: The mouse that roared? In Research in labor economics, vol. 5., ed. EhrenbergRonald G., 11–68. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
10.
CarringtonWilliam J.TroskeKenneth R.1995. Gender segregation in small firms. Journal of Human Resources30 (3): 505–33.
11.
CarringtonWilliam J.TroskeKenneth R.1998. Sex segregation in U.S. manufacturing. Industrial and Labor Relations Review51 (3): 445–64.
12.
ChusedRichard H.1988. The hiring and retention of minorities and women on American law school faculties. University of Pennsylvania Law Review137 (2): 537–69.
13.
CohenLisa E.BroschakJoseph P.HavemanHeather. 1998. And then there were more? The effect of organizational sex composition on the hiring and promotion of managers. American Sociological Review63:711–27.
14.
DeVaroJed L.WaldmanMichael. 2009. The signaling role of promotions: Further theory and empirical evidence. Cornell University Working Paper, Ithaca, NY.
15.
ElviraMarta E.GrahamMary E.2002. Not just a formality: Pay systems and sex-related earnings effects. Organization Science13:601–17.
16.
ElyRobin J.1994. The effects of organizational demographics and social identity on relationships among professional women. Administrative Science Quarterly39:203–38.
17.
GiulianoLauraLeonardJonathanLevineDavid I.2006. Do race, gender, and age differences affect manager-employee relations? An analysis of quits, dismissals, and promotions at a large retail firm. Institute for Research on Labor and Employment Working Paper, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
18.
HeckmanJames J.WolpinKenneth I.1976. Does the contract compliance program work? An analysis of Chicago data. Industrial and Labor Relations Review29 (4): 544–64.
HultinMiaSzulkinRyszard. 1999. Wages and unequal access to organization power: An empirical test of gender discrimination. Administrative Science Quarterly44:453–72.
21.
IbarraHerminia1993. Personal networks of women and minorities in management: A conceptual framework. Academy of Management Review18:46–87.
22.
KalevAlexandraDobbinFrank. 2006. Enforcement of civil rights law in private workplaces: The effects of compliance reviews and lawsuits over time. Law & Social Inquiry31:855–903.
23.
KanterRosabeth M.1977. Men and women of the corporation. New York, NY: Basic Books.
24.
KonradAlison M.LinnehanFrank. 1995. Formalized HRM structure: Coordinating equal employment opportunity or concealing organizational practice?Academy of Management Journal38:787–820.
25.
LeonardJonathan S.1984a. Anti-discrimination or reverse discrimination: The impact of changing demographics, Title VII and affirmative action on productivity. Journal of Human Resources19:145–74.
26.
LeonardJonathan S.1984b. Employment and occupational advance under affirmative action. Review of Economics and Statistics66:377–85.
27.
LeonardJonathan S.1986. The effectiveness of equal employment law and affirmative action regulation. In Research in labor economics, vol. 8., ed EhrenbergRonald G., 318–50, Greenwich, CT: JAI.
28.
MarsdenPeter V.CookCynthia R.KallebergArne L.1996. Bureaucratic structures for coordination and control. In Organizations in America: Analyzing their structures and human resource practices, eds. KallebergArne L.KnokeDavidMarsdenPeter V.SpaethJoe L., 69–86. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29.
MilgromPaulOsterSharon. 1987. Job discrimination, market forces, and the invisibility hypothesis. Quarterly Journal of Economics102:453–76.
30.
NoeRaymond A.1988. Women and mentoring: A review and research agenda. Academy of Management Review13:65–78.
31.
PhelpsEdmund S.1972. The statistical theory of racism and sexism. American Economic Review62 (4): 659–61.
32.
ReskinBarbara F.BielbyDenise D.2005. A sociological perspective on gender and career outcomes. Journal of Economic Perspectives19 (1): 71–86.
33.
ReskinBarbara F.McBrierDebra Branch. 2000. Why not ascription? Organizations, employment of male and female managers. American Sociological Review65:210–33.
34.
RobinsonCorre L.TaylorTiffanyTomaskovic-DeveyDonaldZimmerCatherineIrwinMatthew. 2005. Studying race or ethnic and sex segregation at the establishment level: Methodological issues and substantive opportunities using EEO-1 reports. Work and Occupations32:5–38.
35.
RothsteinDonna S.1997. Supervisor gender and labor market outcomes. In Gender and family issues in the workplace, eds. BlauFrancine D.EhrenbergRonald G.New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
36.
RothsteinDonna S.2001. Supervisory status and upper-level supervisory responsibilities: Evidence from the NLSY79. Industrial and Labor Relations Review54 (3): 663–80.
37.
ShenhavYehoudaHaberfeldYitchak. 1992. Organizational demography and inequality. Social Forces71:123–43.
38.
StainbackKevinTomaskovic-DeveyDonald. 2009. Intersections of power and privilege: Long-term trends in managerial representation. American Sociological Review74:800–820.
39.
TsuiAnne S.O’ReillyCharles A.III. 1989. Beyond simple demographic effects: The importance of relational demography in superior-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal32 (2): 402–23.
40.
ValianVirginia. 1998. Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
