While many studies have explored the issue of women’s representation among top management, little is known about the gender gap in compensation among those who reached the top. Using data on 7,711 executives at 831 U.S. firms, this study investigates social-psychological factors that explain the gender gap in executive compensation. Consistent with theories on social identity and demographic similarity effects, the gender gap in executive pay is smaller when a greater number of women sit on the compensation committee of the board, which is the group responsible for setting executive compensation. However, the presence of a female chief executive officer (CEO) is not associated with the compensation of female non-CEO executives working under the female boss. The findings highlight the need to study women’s representation on corporate boards.
BebchukLucianFriedJesse M.2004. Pay without performance: The unfulfilled promise of executive compensation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2.
BergerJosephRosenholtzSusan J.ZelditchMorris. 1980. Status organizing processes. Annual Review of Sociology6:479–508.
3.
BertrandMarianneHallockKevin F.2001. The gender gap in top corporate jobs. Industrial and Labor Relations Review55 (1): 3–21.
4.
BlauFrancine D.KahnLawrence M.2000. Gender differences in pay. Journal of Economic Perspectives14 (4): 75–99.
5.
CarpenterMason A.SandersW. M. Gerard. 2002. Top management team compensation: The missing link between CEO pay and firm performance?Strategic Management Journal23:367–75.
6.
Catalyst. 2010. 2010 Catalyst census: Fortune 500 women executive officers and top earners. New York, NY: Catalyst.
7.
ColvinGeoffrey. 25June2001. The great CEO pay heist. Fortune.
8.
DeversCynthia E.CannellaAlbert A.ReillyGregory P.YoderMichele E.2007. Executive compensation: A multidisciplinary review of recent developments. Journal of Management33 (6): 1016–72.
9.
EaglyAlice H.CarliLinda L.September2007. Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 63–71.
10.
The Economist. 23July2005. The conundrum of the glass ceiling.
11.
The Economist. 11March2010. Skirting the issue.
12.
ElligBruce. 2007. The complete guide to executive compensation. 2nd ed.New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
13.
ElyRobin J.1994. The effects of organizational demographics and social identity on relationships among professional women. Administrative Science Quarterly39:203–38.
14.
FinkelsteinSydneyHambrickDonald C.CannellaAlbert A.2009. Strategic leadership: Theory and research on executives, top management teams, and boards. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
15.
GormanElizabeth H.KmecJulie A.2009. Hierarchical rank and women’s organizational mobility: Glass ceilings in corporate law firms. American Journal of Sociology5:1428–74.
16.
GouldnerAlvin W.1960. The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review23 (2): 161–78.
17.
HardinJames W.HilbeJoseph M.2007. Generalized linear models and extensions. College Station, TX: Stata.
18.
HoggMichael A.TerryDeborah J.2000. Social identity and self-categorization process in organizational contexts. Academy of Management Review25 (1): 121–40.
19.
KanterRosabeth Moss. 1977. Men and women of the corporation. New York, NY: Basic Books.
20.
KaplanSteven N.2008. Are U.S. CEOs overpaid?Academy of Management Perspectives22 (2): 5–20.
21.
KulichClaraTrojanowskiGrzegorzRyanMichelle K.HaslamS. AlexanderRenneboogLuc D. R.2010. Who gets the carrot and who gets the stick? Evidence of gender disparities in executive remuneration. Strategic Management Journal32 (3): 301–21.
22.
LeichtKevin T.2008. Broken down by race and gender? Sociological explanations of new sources of earnings inequality. Annual Review of Sociology34:237–55.
23.
MainBrian G. M.O’ReillyCharles A.WadeJames. 1995. The CEO, the board of directors and executive compensation: Economic and psychological perspectives. Industrial and Corporate Change4 (2): 293–332.
24.
MavinSharon. 2008. Queen bees, wannabees, and afraid to bees: No more “best enemies” for women in management?British Journal of Management19:S75–S84.
25.
Muñoz-BullónFernando. 2010. Gender-compensation differences among high-level executives in the United States. Industrial Relations49 (3): 346–70.
26.
OakleyJudith G.2000. Gender-based barriers to senior management positions: Understanding the scarcity of female CEOs. Journal of Business Ethics27:321–34.
27.
OldmeadowJulian A.PlatowMichael J.FoddyMargaretAndersonDonna. 2003. Self-categorization, status, and social influence. Social Psychological Quarterly66 (2): 138–52.
28.
PetersonCraigPhilpotJames. 2007. Women’s roles on U.S. Fortune 500 boards: Director expertise and committee memberships. Journal of Business Ethics72 (2): 177–96.
29.
PfefferJeffrey. 1983. Organizational demography. Research in Organizational Behavior5:299–357.
30.
RaginsBelle Rose. 1989. Barriers to mentoring: The female manager’s dilemma. Human Relations42 (1): 1–22.
31.
RaudenbushStephen W.BrykAnthony S.2001. Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. 2nd ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
RennerCeliaRivesJanet M.BowlinWilliam F.2002. The significance of gender in explaining senior executive pay variations: An exploratory study. Journal of Managerial Issues14 (3): 331–45.
33.
SealyRuth H.SinghVal. 2010. The importance of role models and demographic context for senior women’s work identity development. International Journal of Management Reviews12 (3): 284–300.
TajfelHenri. 1982. Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology33:1–39.
36.
TajfelHenriTurnerJohn C.1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In The social psychology of intergroup relations, eds. AustinWilliam G.WorchelStephen, 39–47. Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.
37.
TsuiAnne S.O’ReillyCharles A.1989. Beyond simple demographic effects: The importance of relational demography in superior-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal32 (2): 402–23.
38.
WadeJamesO’ReillyCharles A.ChandratatIke. 1990. Golden parachutes: CEOs and the exercise of social influence. Administrative Science Quarterly35 (4): 587–603.
39.
WalshJames P.2008. CEO compensation and the responsibilities of the business scholar to society. Academy of Management Perspectives22 (2): 5–20.
40.
WestphalJames D.ZajacEdward J.1995. Who shall govern? CEO/board power, demographic similarity, and new director selection. Administrative Science Quarterly40:60–83.
41.
YoungMichael N.BuchholtzAnn K.2002. Firm performance and CEO pay: Relational demography as a moderator. Journal of Managerial Issues14 (3): 296–313.
