Despite the growing body of research on gender representation, there has been relatively little attention paid to why women are underrepresented in management roles in African governments. This article focuses on Ethiopia to demonstrate that glass ceiling and glass walls are critical factors in government. The study examines impediments to gender representation through two distinct methods. First, quantitative analysis is used to empirically verify whether existing theories of the glass ceiling apply to the Ethiopian context, revealing that a lack of networking and work-life conflicts are significant barriers to women’s representation at both high and low management levels. Second, qualitative analysis uncovers new variables concerning barriers to gender representation, including inconsistent affirmative action implementation, lack of political commitment and accountability, and a lack of desire for managerial roles among women. This research contributes to our empirical knowledge of the barriers to women’s representation in developing countries.
AdhikaryJ. R. (2016). Barriers to career progression: A study of the perceptions of Nepali women employees. Journal of Business and Management Research, 1(2), 17–32.
2.
AnS.-H.MeierK. J. (2021). Gender and the effectiveness of leadership training: Results from a field experiment. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 41(4), 747–770.
3.
AssefaH. S. (2017). The quest for professional civil service in Ethiopia: Practices and challenges. International Journal for Advance Research & Development, 2(7), 100–107.
4.
AymanR.KorabikK. (2010). Leadership: Why gender and culture matter. American Psychologist, 65(3), 157.
5.
BaeK.YangG. (2017). The effects of family-friendly policies on job satisfaction and organizational commitment: A panel study conducted on South Korea’s Public Institutions. Public Personnel Management, 46(1), 25–40.
6.
BarsoumG. (2021). Why is the public sector the employer of choice among women in the Middle East? A gendered qualitative inquiry into PSM in a global context. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 41(4), 771–791.
7.
BekanaD. M. (2020). Policies of gender equality in Ethiopia: The transformative perspective. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(4), 312–325.
8.
BelwalS.BelwalR.Al-HashemiS. E. (2019). Family-friendly policies and the Omani Labour Law: What it entails for women employees in Oman. The International Journal, 42(2), 315–348.
9.
BeyeneH. (2015). National assessment: Ethiopia gender equality and the knowledge society. Women in Global Science. SIDA.
10.
BihagenE.OhlsM. (2006). The glass ceiling–where is it? Women’s and men’s career prospects in the private vs. the public sector in Sweden 1979–2000. The Sociological Review, 54(1), 20–47.
11.
BishuS. G.KennedyA. R. (2020). Trends and gaps: A meta-review of representative bureaucracy. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 40(4), 559–588.
12.
BroadbridgeA. (2008). Barriers to ascension to senior management positions in retailing. The Service Industries Journal, 28(9), 1225–1245.
13.
BrinkM. V.BrounsM.SietskeW. (2006). Does excellence have a gender? A national research study on recruitment and selection procedures for professorial appointments in the Netherlands. Employee Relations, 28(6), 523–539.
14.
Caceres-RodriguezR. (2013). The glass ceiling revisited: Moving beyond discrimination in the study of gender in public organizations. Administration & Society, 45(6), 674–709.
15.
CamarenaL.JungH. (2024). Leadership ambition: The gendered and racialized differences of leadership representation in public organizations. Review of Public Personnel Administration. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X241258201
16.
CharlesN.DaviesC. A. (2000). Cultural stereotypes and the gendering of senior management. The Sociological Review, 48(4), 544–567.
17.
ChoiH.HongS.LeeJ. W. (2018). Does increasing gender representativeness and diversity improve organizational integrity?Public Personnel Management, 47(1), 73–92.
18.
ChoiS.ParkC.-O. (2014). Glass ceiling in Korean civil service: Analyzing barriers to women’s career advancement in the Korean government. Public Personnel Management, 43(1), 118–139.
19.
ChoiS.RaineyH. G. (2010). Managing diversity in US federal agencies: Effects of diversity and diversity management on employee perceptions of organizational performance. Public Administration Review, 70(1), 109–121.
20.
Civil Code of the Empire of Ethiopia of 1960, Negaret Gazeta, Proclamation No.165 of 1960, 19th year No.2.
21.
ConnellR. (2006). Glass ceilings or gendered institutions? Mapping the gender regimes of public sector worksites. Public Administration Review, 66(6), 837–849.
22.
CreswellJ. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
23.
D’AgostinoM. J. (2015). The difference that women make: Government performance and women-led agencies. Administration and Society, 47(5), 532–548.
24.
De AlwisA.BombuwelaP. M. (2013). Effects of glass ceiling on women career development in private sector organizations-case of Sri Lanka. Journal of Competitiveness, 5(2), 3–19.
25.
DeversK. J.FrankelR. M. (2000). Study design in qualitative research—2: Sampling and data collection strategies. Education for Health, 13(2), 263–271.
26.
DrewE.MurtaghE. M. (2005). Work-life balance: Senior management champions or laggards?Women in Management Review, 20(4), 262–278.
27.
ElliottR.TimulakL. (2005). Descriptive and interpretive approaches to qualitative research. In MilesJ.GilbertP. (Eds.), A handbook of research methods for clinical and health psychology (Vol. 1, No. 7, pp. 147–159). Oxford University Press.
28.
EtikanI.MusaS. A.AlkassimR. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4.
29.
FeeneyM.StritchJ. M. (2019). Family-friendly policies, gender, and work-life balance in the public sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(3), 422–448.
30.
FinkelM. K.GrønC. H.HughesM. M. (2023). Moving on up? Effects of leadership training and intersectoral mobility on women’s advancement in Danish public administration management. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 43(2), 215–238.
31.
GipsonA. N.PfaffD. L.MendelsohnD. B.CatenacciL. T.BurkeW. W. (2017). Women and leadership: Selection, development, leadership style, and performance. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 53(1), 32–65.
32.
GroeneveldS.BakkerV.SchmidtE. (2020). Breaking the glass ceiling, but facing a glass cliff? The role of organizational decline in women’s representation in leadership positions in Dutch civil service organizations. Public Administration, 98(2), 441–464.
33.
GruneauM. F. (2021). The persistence of social norms, family formation, and gender balance in politics. Politics and Gender, 18(3), 1–33.
34.
HailuE. (2017). Who speaks for whom? Parliamentary participation of women in the post- 1991 Ethiopia. Journal of Developing Societies, 33(3), 352–375.
35.
HanY.HongS. (2019). The impact of accountability on organizational performance in the US federal government: The moderating role of autonomy. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(1), 3–23.
36.
HanY.TangS. Y. (2022). How quality reporting reduces accountability deficit and overload. Public Management Review, 24(12), 2079–2100.
37.
HarrisD.GiuffreP. (2010). The price you pay: How female professional chefs negotiate work and family. Gender Issues, 27(1–2), 27–52.
38.
HongS. (2016). Representative bureaucracy, organizational integrity, and citizen coproduction: Does an increase in police ethnic representativeness reduce crime?Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 35(1), 11–33.
39.
HongS. (2017). Black in blue: Racial profiling and representative bureaucracy in policing revisited. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(4), 547–561.
40.
HongS. (2021). Representative bureaucracy and hierarchy: Interactions among leadership, middle-level, and street-level bureaucracy. Public Management Review, 23(9), 1317–1338.
41.
IbarraH. (1993). Personal networks of women and minorities in management: A conceptual framework. Academy of Management Review, 18(1), 56–87.
42.
IsmailM.IbrahimM. (2008). Barriers to career progression faced by women: Evidence from a Malaysian multinational oil company. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 23(1), 51–66.
43.
JamaliD.SidaniY.SafieddineA. (2005). Constraints facing working women in Lebanon: An insider view. Women in Management Review, 20(8), 581–594.
44.
JickT. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 602–611.
45.
JohnsonB. J.Crum-CanoB. D. (2011). Glass walls in urban planning: An examination of policy type and gender segregation within a profession. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 31(4), 386–409.
46.
JungH.ChenY.FrandellA.WelchE. (2024). Ties with benefits: Relationship between relational multiplexity, gender, and work-life balance. Review of Public Personnel Administration. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X241237562
47.
Kwaku OhemengF. L.Adusah-KarikariA. (2015). Breaking through the glass ceiling: Strategies to enhance the advancement of women in Ghana’s public service. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 50(3), 359–379.
48.
KebedeG. H. (2017). Gender diversity in management positions and organizational performance: A review of literature. Management Studies and Economic Systems, 3(4), 245–252.
49.
KellyR. M.NewmanM. (2001). The gendered bureaucracy: Agency mission, equality of opportunity, and representative bureaucracies. Women & Politics, 22(3), 1–33.
50.
KerrB.MillerW.ReidM. (2002). Sex-based occupational segregation in US State Bureaucracies, 1987–97. Public Administration Review, 62(4), 412–423.
51.
KiayeR. E.SinghA. M. (2013). The glass ceiling: A perspective of women working in Durban. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 28(1), 28–42.
52.
KonradA.CanningsK. (1994). Of mommy tracks and glass ceilings: A case study of men’s and women’s careers in management. Industrial Relations, 49(2), 303–335.
53.
KrøtelS. M. L.AshworthR. E.VilladsenA. R. (2019). Weakening the glass ceiling: does organizational growth reduce gender segregation in the upper tiers of Danish local government?Public Management Review, 21(8), 1213–1235.
54.
MackA. (2005). Qualitative research methods: A data collector’s field guide. Family Health International.
55.
MetzI. (2009). Organizational factors, social factors, and women’s advancement. An International Review, 58(2), 193–213.
56.
MillerW.KerrB.ReidM. (1999). A national study of gender-based occupational segregation in municipal bureaucracies: Persistence of glass walls?Public Administration Review, 59, 218–230.
57.
NaguibR.MadeehaM. (2023). “Making visible the invisible”: Exploring the role of gender biases on the glass ceiling in Qatar’s public sector. Women’s Studies International Forum, 98, Article 102723.
58.
NutleyS.MuddJ. (2005). Has the glass cliff replaced the glass ceiling for women employed in the public sector?Public Money & Management, 25(1), 3–4.
59.
OakleyJ. G. (2000). Gender-based barriers to senior management positions: Understanding the scarcity of female CEOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(4), 321–334.
60.
O’ConnorK.ShahwanU. (2024). Governing the West Bank: What role do Elite level civil servants actively represent?Review of Public Personnel Administration. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X241242436
61.
OffringaS.GroeneveldS. (2024). Are leadership preferences gendered? A conjoint analysis of employee preferences for manager characteristics in male-and female-dominated public sub-sectors in the Netherlands. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 44(4), 740–767.
62.
OrserB.LeckJ. (2010). Gender influences on career success outcomes. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 25(5), 386–407.
63.
PapalexandrisN.BourantasD. D. (1991). Attitudes towards women as managers: The case of Greece. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2(2), 133–148.
64.
PatiS. P.KakaniR. K. (2023). Explaining high performance among Indian Administrative Service (IAS) Officers: A job demands-resources perspective. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 43(2), 288–308.
65.
Penning de VriesJ.KniesE.LeisinkP. (2022). Shared perceptions of supervisor support: What processes make supervisors and employees see eye to eye?Review of Public Personnel Administration, 42(1), 88–112.
66.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.LeeJ.-Y.PodsakoffN. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
67.
RiccucciN.SaidelJ. R. (1997). The representativeness of state-level bureaucratic leaders: A missing piece of the representative bureaucracy puzzle. Public Administration Review, 57(5), 423–430.
68.
Rodriguez-PlesaE.AlkadryM. G.DimandA. M. (2024). Gender pay disparities in public organizations: The equalizing externality of union membership. Review of Public Personnel Administration. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X241298701
69.
RosserS. V. (2004). Using POWRE to ADVANCE: Institutional barriers identified by women scientists and engineers. NWSA Journal, 16(1), 50–78.
70.
SabharwalM. (2015). From glass ceiling to glass cliff: Women in senior executive service. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(2), 399–426.
71.
SaidelJ. R.LoscoccoK. (2005). Agency leaders, gendered institutions, and representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 65(2), 158–170.
72.
ScheinV. E. (2001). A global look at psychological barriers to women’s progress in management. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 675–688.
73.
ScheinV. E. (2007). Women in management: Reflections and projections. Women in Management Review, 22(1), 6–18.
74.
SmithA.MonaghanK. R. (2013). Some ceilings have more cracks: Representative bureaucracy in federal regulatory agencies. The American Review of Public Administration, 43(1), 50–71.
75.
SneedB. G. (2007). Glass walls in state bureaucracies: Examining the difference departmental function can make. Public Administration Review, 67(5), 880–891.
76.
TeddlieC.YuF. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 77–100.
77.
TlaissH.KauserS. (2010). Perceived organizational barriers to women’s career advancement in Lebanon. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 25(6), 462–496.
78.
Tomaskovic-DeveyD. (1993). The gender and race composition of jobs and the male/female, white/black pay gaps. Social Forces, 72(1), 45–76.
79.
WalkM.ScottC.LittlepageL. (2022). It’s not all the same: Implemented and perceived HR practices in the volunteer context. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 42(3), 492–513.
80.
WenchekoE.TadesseM. (2020). Determinants of Ethiopian women’s attitudes toward wife beating. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 35(1/2), 510–520.
81.
WilkinsV. (2007). Exploring the causal story: Gender, active representation, and bureaucratic priorities. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(1), 77–94.
YangL. K.ConnollyL.ConnollyJ. M. (2022). Is there a glass cliff in local government management? Examining the hiring and departure of women. Public Administration Review, 82(3), 570–584.
85.
YapM.KonradA. M. (2009). Gender and racial differentials in promotions: Is there a sticky floor, a mid-level bottleneck, or a glass ceiling?Industrial Relations, 64(4), 593–619.
86.
YuH. H. (2020). Glass ceiling in federal law enforcement: An exploratory analysis of the factors contributing to women’s career advancement. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 40(2), 183–201.
87.
ZafarullahH. (2000). Through the brick wall, and the glass ceiling: Women in the civil service in Bangladesh. Gender, Work & Organization, 7(3), 197–209.
88.
ZhangC.BashaD. (2023). Women as leaders: The glass ceiling effect on women’s leadership success in public bureaucracies. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 38(4), 489–503.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
