This research focuses on women in corporate positions “above the glass ceiling” and explores their perceptions on corporate mobility and strategies for success in elite positions. Through interviews with 16 men and women corporate presidents and chief executive officers (CEOs) in Southern California, it is found that while white men promote the dominant ideology of individualism and patriarchal gender ideology as explanations of corporate mobility and success, white women emphasize alternative perspectives by confirming the importance of social networks and peer similarities for succeeding in elite positions. These women strategically attempt to increase their cultural capital to negotiate male-dominated networks and maintain their high-status positions through such measures as obtaining advanced educational degrees or modifying speech and behavior.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bernard, H. Russell
. 1994. Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
2.
Bourdieu, Pierre
. 1986. The forms of capital. In Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education, edited by John Richardson. New York: Greenwood.
3.
Collins, Sharon M.1989. The marginalization of Black executives. Social Problems36:317-331.
4.
Crowly, Helen
, and Susan Himmelweit. 1992. Discrimination, subordination and difference: Feminist perspectives. In Knowing women, edited by Helen Crowly and Susan Himmelweit. Cambridge, MA: Polity.
5.
Deaux, Kay
. 1976. The behavior of men and women. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
6.
Dolbeare, Kenneth
. 1989. The nature of the economic transformation. In The reshaping of America, edited by D. Stanley Eitzen and Maxine Baca Zinn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
7.
Dye, Thomas
. 1995. Who's running America? The Clinton years. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
8.
Epstein, Cynthia Fuchs
. 1975. Institutional barriers: What keeps women out of the executive suite? In Bringing women into management, edited by F. Gordon and M. Strober. New York: McGraw-Hill.
9.
Epstein, Cynthia Fuchs
. 1991. Debate: Ways men and women lead. Harvard Business Review69(January-February)1: 150-160.
10.
Foucault, Michel
. 1980. Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977, edited by Colin Gordon. New York: Pantheon Books.
11.
Freeman, Sue
. 1990. Managing lives: Corporate women and social change. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
12.
Higginbotham, Elizabeth
. 1994. Black professional women: Job ceilings and employment. In Women of color in U.S. society, edited by Maxine Baca Zinn and Bonnie Thornton Dill. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
13.
Kanter, Rosabeth Moss
. [1977] 1993. Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.
14.
Kaufman, Debra
, and Michael L. Fetters. 1983. The executive suite: Are women perceived as ready for the managerial climb?Journal of Business Ethics2:203-212.
15.
Martin, Linda
. 1994. Power, continuity and change: Decoding Black and white women managers' experience in local government. In Women in management: A developing presence, edited by Morgan Tanton. London: Routledge.
16.
Messner, Michael
. 1989. Masculinities and athletic careers. Gender & Society3:71-88.
17.
Moore, Gwen
. 1988. Women in elite positions: Insiders or outsiders?Sociological Forum3:566-585.
18.
Rosener, Judy B.1990. Ways women lead. Harvard Business Review68(November-December)6: 119-125.
19.
Rosener, Judy B.
. 1995. America's competitive secret: Utilizing women as a management strategy. New York: Oxford University Press.
20.
Smith, Dorothy E.
1987. The everyday world as problematic: A feminist sociology. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
21.
Swan, Elaine
. 1994. Managing emotion. In Women in management: A developing presence, edited by Morgan Tanton. London: Routledge.
22.
Sweeney, Paul D.
, Richard Moreland, and Kathy L. Gruber. 1982. Gender differences in performance attributions: Students' explanations for personal success or failure. Sex Roles8:359-373.
23.
Townsend, Bickley
. 1996. Room at the top for women. American Demographics18(July)7:28-37.
24.
U.S. Department of Labor
. 1995. Employment and earnings. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
25.
Von Glinow, M. A.
, and A. Krzyczkowska-Mercer. 1988. Women in corporate America: A caste of thousands. New Management6:36-42.
26.
The Wall Street Journal. 1986. The board game: More women are becoming directors but it's still a token situation. 24 March, section 4, 290.
27.
Ward, Patricia A.
, Peter F. Orazem, and Steffen W. Schmidt. 1992. Women in elite pools and elite positions. Social Science Quarterly73:31-45.
28.
Wiley, Mary Glenn
, Kathleen Crittenden, and L.D. Birg. 1979. “Why a rejection?” Causal attribution of a career achievement event. Social Psychology Quarterly42:214-222.
29.
Wilkie, Jane Riblett
. 1993. Changes in U.S. men's attitudes toward the family provider role, 1972-1989. Gender & Society7:261-279.
Zweigenhaft, Richard
. 1987. Minorities and women of the corporation: Will they attain seats of power? In Power elites and organizations, edited by G. William Domhoff and Thomas Dye. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
