The increasing female employment has become one of the most remarkable social transformations across countries. Along with the global trend, respecting gender differences and treating women fairly in the workplace have been increasingly important to accomplish social equity and justice for women. Gender equity in employment, nevertheless, appears to be less salient in Korea than in Western industrialized countries (e.g., the United States). This study analyzes the gender representation and barriers of women’s career advancement in the Korean government in comparison to the U.S. government. We collected the employment data from the Korean government and conducted face-to-face and telephone interviews with female public employees. The statistical data reveal that women are less represented in the Korean government especially in upper ranks than in the U.S. government. The results from interviews suggest that Korean female public employees share similar experiences with U.S. female employees in terms of limited access to upper level ranks and obstacles of women’s career advancement. Cultural differences such as strong influence from Confucian tradition and collectivism in Korean society may be more challenging to female public employees in Korea than in the United States.
AdlerM. (1993). Gender differences in job autonomy: The consequences of occupational segregation and authority position. The Sociological Quarterly, 34, 449-465.
2.
AlkadryM. G.TowerL. E. (2011). Covert pay discrimination: How authority predicts pay differences between women and men. Public Administration Review, 71, 740-750.
3.
BeckerG. S. (1985). Human capital, effort, and the sexual division of labor. Journal of Labor Economics, 3, 533-558.
4.
BlauF. D.KhanL. M. (2000, June). Gender differences in pay (NBER Working Paper No. 7732). Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w7732
5.
BowlingC. J.KelleherC. A.JonesJ.WrightD. S. (2006). Cracked ceilings, firmer floors, and weakening walls: Trends and patterns in gender representation among executives leading American state agencies, 1970—2000. Public Administration Review, 66, 823-836.
6.
CarrollF. O.PattonW. D.AlmL. R. (1995). The glass ceiling in the USDA forest service: Willing to conform, demanding change. Public Administration Quarterly, 18, 457-477.
ConnellR. (2006). Glass ceiling or gendered institutions? Mapping the gender regimes of public sector worksites. Public Administration Review, 66, 837-849.
9.
EaglyA. H.KarauS. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573-598.
10.
FriezeI. H.OlsonJ. E.MurrellA. J.SelvanM. S. (2006). Work values and their effect on work behavior and work outcomes in female and male managers. Sex Roles, 54, 83-93.
11.
GuyM. E. (1992). Women and men of the States: Public administrators at the state level. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
12.
GuyM. E. (1993). Three steps forward, two steps backward: The status of women’s integration into public management. Public Administration Review, 53, 285-292.
13.
GuyM. E.NewmanM. A. (2004). Women’s jobs, men’s jobs: Sex segregation and emotional labor. Public Administration Review, 64, 289-298.
14.
HakimC. (1996). Key issues in women’s work: Female heterogeneity and the polarisation of women’s employment. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Athlone Press.
15.
HaleM. (1996). He says, she says: Gender and worklife. Public Administration Review, 59, 410-424.
16.
HansenS. (2009). Cracks in the glass ceiling?Sex Roles, 60, 748-750.
17.
HofstedeG. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London, England: Macmillan.
18.
HooksB. (1989). Talking back: Thinking feminist, thinking black. Boston, MA: South End Press.
19.
International Labor Office. (2003). Yearbook of labour statistics: On the share of women in managerial jobs in 1996-99 and 2000-02. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labor Organization.
20.
International Labor Office. (2004). Breaking through the glass ceiling: Women in management. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labor Organization.
21.
International Labor Office. (2010). Global employment trends. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labor Organization.
22.
KellyR. M.NewmanM. (2001). The gendered bureaucracy: Agency mission, equality of opportunity, and representative bureaucracies. Women and Politics, 22(3), 1-33.
23.
KimD. (2001). Sociology of sex. Seoul, South Korea: Moonumsa.
24.
KimJ. (2006). The Korean civil service system. Seoul, Korea: Bubmunsa.
KimS. (2004). Individual-level factors and organizational performance in government organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 245-261.
27.
KimS. (2009). Testing the structure of public service motivation in Korea: A research note. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19, 839-851.
28.
LennonM.RosenfieldS. (1994). Relative fairness and the division of housework: The importance of options. The American Journal of Sociology, 100, 506-531.
29.
LipsH.LawsonK. (2009). Work values, gender, and expectations about work commitment and pay: Laying the groundwork for the “motherhood penalty”?Sex Roles, 61, 667-676.
30.
LipsH. M. (2013). The gender pay gap: Challenging the rationalizations. Perceived equity, discrimination, and the limits of human capital models. Sex Roles, 68, 169-185.
31.
LynessK. S.HeilmanM. E. (2006). When fit is fundamental: Performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level female and male managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 777-785.
32.
McDonaldT.ToussaintL.SchweigerJ. (2004). The influence of social status on token women leaders’ expectations about leading male-dominated groups. Sex Roles, 50, 401-409.
33.
MeierK, J. (1993). Representative bureaucracy: A theoretical and empirical exposition. In PerryJ. (Ed.), Research in public administration (pp. 1-35). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
34.
Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs. (2004). 2004 Yearbook of personnel statistics of Korean government. Seoul, South Korea: Author.
35.
Ministry of Public Administration and Security. (2002). Final reports for the survey of gender equity and job satisfaction of female employees in Korean government. Seoul, South Korea: Author.
36.
Ministry of Public Administration and Security. (2011). 2011 yearbook of personnel statistics of Korean government. Seoul, South Korea: Author.
37.
MoonS. (2002). Carving out space: Civil society and the women’s movement in South Korea. Journal of Asian Studies, 61, 473-500.
38.
MorrisonA. M.Von GlinowM. A. (1990). Women and minorities in management. American Psychologist, 45, 200-208.
39.
NaffK. C. (1994). Through the glass ceiling: Prospects for the advancement of women in the federal service. Public Administration Review, 54, 507-514.
40.
NaffK. C. (2001). To look like America: Dismantling barriers for women and minorities in government. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
41.
NewmanM. A. (1993). Career advancement: Does gender make a difference?American Review of Public Administration, 23, 361-383.
42.
NewmanM. A. (1994). Gender and Lowi’s thesis: Implications for career advancement. Public Administration Review, 54, 277-284.
43.
NoonanM. C. (2001). The impact of domestic work on men’s and women’s wages. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 1134-1145.
44.
OmarA.DavidsonM. J. (2001). Women in management: A comparative cross-cultural overview. Cross Cultural Management, 8 (3-4), 35-67.
45.
ParkC. (2010). An empirical study of the representative role concept among female civil servants in Korean government. Korean Public Administration Journal, 19(1), 177-200.
46.
ParkC.JooJ. (2010). Control over the Korean bureaucracy: A review of the NPM civil service reforms under the Roh Moo-Hyun government. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 30, 189-210.
47.
ParkH.RehgM. T.LeeG. (2005). The influence of Confucian ethics and collectivism on whistleblowing intentions: A study of south Korean public employees. Journal of Business Ethics, 58, 387-403.
48.
RiccucciN. M. (2002). Managing diversity in public sector workforces. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
49.
RiccucciN. M. (2009). The pursuit of social equity in the federal government: A road less traveled?Public Administration Review, 69, 373-382.
50.
RiceM. F. (Ed.). (2005). Diversity and public administration: Theory, issues, and perspectives. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
51.
RiordanC.VandenbergR. (1994). A central question in cross-cultural research: Do employees of different cultures interpret work-related measures in an equivalent manner?Journal of Management, 20, 643-671.
52.
SchwartzF. (1989). Management women and the new facts of life. Harvard Business Review, 1, 65-76.
53.
StiversC. (2002). Gender images in public administration (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage.
54.
TompkinsJ. (1988). Sources of measurement error and gender bias in job evaluation. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 9(1), 1-16.
55.
TowerL. E.AlkadryM. G. (2008). The social costs of career success for women. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 28, 144-165.
56.
United Nations. (2011). World fertility report 2009. New York, NY: United Nations Publication.
