A QUANTITATIVE STUDY OF GLASS CEILING BARRIERS TO PROMOTION

OF WOMEN IN MEDIUM-SIZED BUSINESSES

by

Hugh C. Adamson

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Management in Leadership

UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX

July 2012
 UMI Number: 3537799

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI 3537799
Published by ProQuest LLC (2013). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code

ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
© 2012 by HUGH C. ADAMSON
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
 Abstract

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Federal Glass Ceiling Commission (FGCC) issued two

reports in 1995 that showed glass ceiling barriers blocking females’ promotions to

executive-level positions in American businesses. In 2011, glass ceiling barriers

continued to be identified in the literature as a means of excluding all but a minority of

females from CEO positions in American companies. The purpose of this quantitative

study with a correlational research design was to determine if significant relationships

exist between the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women in small and

medium-sized businesses in Georgia and Florida and three process variables thought to

impede or foster the selection of female candidates. The processes that were tested are

impediments to promotion, operating policies, and policy enforcement activities. A web-

based survey was used to collect data.

The sample population was drawn from human resources executives. A priori and post

hoc power analysis were performed to establish an adequate size sample based on

statistical analyses, not population. The actual number of complete responses was 72. Of

the 72 subjects, 60 were female (83%) and 12 were male (17%). Spearman rho

correlation tests revealed a statistically significant relationship between the percentage of

senior leadership positions filled by women and the number of perceived impediments as

well as compliance activities. There was no statistically significant relationship between

the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women and operating policies.
 iv

Dedication

For the women who set me on this path…

My mother

My paternal grandmother

My Aunt Nancy

And the lady who keeps me on the straight and narrow…

My much-loved wife, Lynda

 v

Acknowledgements

I wish to acknowledge the support of my dissertation chair, Dr. Vicki Purslow,

whose patience, unfailing support, and wise counsels shepherded me through this

process. I wish to express my deep appreciation to my committee members, Dr. Rachel

Dilts and Dr. Ron Hutkin, for the detailed feedback and encouragement they provided.
 vi

Table of Contents

List of Tables ............................................................................................................. x

List of Figures ........................................................................................................... xi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 1

Background of the Problem ....................................................................................... 2

Problem Statement ..................................................................................................... 6

Purpose of the Study .................................................................................................. 8

Significance of the Study ........................................................................................... 9

Significance of the Study to Leadership .................................................................. 10

Nature of the Study .................................................................................................. 11

Research Question and Hypotheses ......................................................................... 14

Theoretical Framework ............................................................................................ 16

Definition of Terms.................................................................................................. 19

Assumptions............................................................................................................. 19

Scope, Limitations, and Delimitations ..................................................................... 20

Summary .................................................................................................................. 21

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................. 23

Documentation ......................................................................................................... 23

Historical Review..................................................................................................... 24

Gender Equity Legislation ........................................................................... 24

Affirmative Action Legislation .................................................................... 25

Affirmative Action Policies ......................................................................... 27

Current Findings ...................................................................................................... 28

 vii

Glass Ceiling Phenomenon .......................................................................... 29

Gender-Based Barriers ................................................................................. 35

Workplace Discrimination ........................................................................... 42

Gender Discrimination Lawsuits ................................................................. 53

Conclusions .............................................................................................................. 56

Summary .................................................................................................................. 57

CHAPTER 3: METHOD ......................................................................................... 60

Research Method and Design Appropriateness ....................................................... 60

Population ................................................................................................................ 62

Sampling .................................................................................................................. 63

Data Collection Procedures...................................................................................... 63

Pilot Study Procedures ............................................................................................. 65

Data Analysis ........................................................................................................... 67

Summary .................................................................................................................. 70

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ......................................................................................... 71

Pilot Study................................................................................................................ 71

Pilot Study Data Collection Method ............................................................ 72

Pilot Study Data Collection ......................................................................... 72

Pilot Study Data Analysis ............................................................................ 73

Type I and Type II Errors ............................................................................ 74

Pilot Study Population and Sample.............................................................. 75

Pilot Study Findings ..................................................................................... 75

Pilot Study Descriptive Statistics ................................................................. 75

 viii

Pilot Study Inferential Statistics................................................................... 80

Pilot Study Survey Instrument ..................................................................... 81

Pilot Study Summary ................................................................................... 83

Study ...................................................................................................................... 84

Study Data Collection .................................................................................. 84

Study Data Analysis ..................................................................................... 88

Study Population and Sample ...................................................................... 89

Study Findings ............................................................................................. 92

Study Descriptive Statistics ......................................................................... 92

Study Inferential Statistics ........................................................................... 98

Study Null Hypotheses Test....................................................................... 107

Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 108

Summary ................................................................................................................ 109

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................... 111

Findings.................................................................................................................. 111

Descriptive Statistics .................................................................................. 112

Impediments to the Promotion of Women ................................................. 114

Operating Policies ...................................................................................... 120

Compliance Policies................................................................................... 121

Inferential Statistics ................................................................................... 122

Assumptions........................................................................................................... 126

Limitations ............................................................................................................. 127

Suggestions for Further Study ............................................................................... 127

 ix

Recommendations for Business Owners and Company Executives...................... 129

School of Advanced Studies Objectives ................................................................ 132

Concluding Comments........................................................................................... 132

References .............................................................................................................. 135

Appendix A: Final Survey ..................................................................................... 155

Appendix B: Letter of Introduction and Informed Consent................................... 168

Appendix C: Pilot Study Subject Letter of Introduction and Informed Consent ... 170

Appendix D: Pilot Study Survey............................................................................ 172

Appendix E: Data Code Book................................................................................ 189

Appendix F: Subjects’ Feedback on Other Impediments ...................................... 201

 x

List of Tables

Table 1. Pilot Study Perceived Impediments to the Promotion of Women .............. 77

Table 2. Pilot Study Feedback on Other Impediments to the Promotion of Women 77

Table 3. Pilot Study Operating Policies that Foster the Promotion of Women ....... 78

Table 4. Pilot Study Other Operating Policies that Foster the Promotion of Women79

Table 5. Pilot Study Compliance Activities Fostering the Promotion of Women .... 79

Table 6. Participation Selection Criteria................................................................. 84

Table 7. E-mail Campaign E-mail Delivery Report ................................................ 86

Table 8. A Priori Power Analysis Protocol ............................................................. 89

Table 9. Post Hoc Power Analysis Protocol ............................................................ 90

Table 10. Exact Correlation Power Analysis .......................................................... 91

Table 11. Ethnicity of Subjects................................................................................. 93

Table 12. Education Level of Subjects ..................................................................... 93

Table 13. Subject Job Title....................................................................................... 94

Table 14. Company Size ........................................................................................... 94

Table 15. Perceived Impediments to the Promotion of Women ............................... 95

Table 16. Operating Policies Fostering the Promotion of Women ......................... 97

Table 17. Compliance Policies Fostering the Promotion of Women....................... 98

Table 18. Tests of Normality: Subscale Scores ........................................................ 99

Table 19. Perceived Impediments Stem-and-Leaf Plot ............................................ 99

Table 20. Operating Policies Stem-and-Leaf Plot ................................................. 101

Table 21. Compliance Activities Stem-and-Leaf Plot ............................................ 103

Table 22. Total Score Stem-and-Leaf Plot ............................................................. 105

Table 23. Null Hypotheses Spearman Correlation Test Results 0 105

 xi

List of Figures

Figure 1. A Priori Power Analysis .......................................................................... 90

Figure 2. Post Hoc Power Analysis ......................................................................... 91

Figure 3. Exact Correlation Power Analysis Bivariate Normal Mode .................... 92

Figure 4. Perceived Impediments Histogram and Normal Distribution Curve ..... 100

Figure 5. Normal and Detrended Q-Q Plot of Perceived Impediments ................ 101

Figure 6. Perceived Impediments Box Plot ........................................................... 101

Figure 7. Operating Policies Histogram and Normal Distribution Curve ............. 102

Figure 8. Normal and Detrended Q-Q Plot of Operating Policies ........................ 102

Figure 9. Box Plot of Operating Policies............................................................... 103

Figure 10. Compliance Activities Histogram and Normal Distribution Curve ..... 104

Figure 11. Normal and Detrended Q-Q Plot of Compliance Activities ................ 104

Figure 12. Box Plot of Compliance Activities ...................................................... 105

Figure 13. Total Score Histogram and Normal Distribution Curve ...................... 106

Figure 14. Normal and Detrended Q-Q Plot of Total Score.................................. 106

Figure 15. Box Plot of Total Score ........................................................................ 107

 1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

In the years following the enactment of the Glass Ceiling Act as Title II of the

Civil Rights Act of 1991, gender equity in senior executive positions within the American

business sector remains unrealized (Carter & Silva, 2010). The number of female chief

executive officers (CEO) in Fortune 500 companies was 28 in 2009 (Fortune 500, 2009c,

para. 1) versus 24 in 2008 (Fortune 500, 2008, para. 1). Female CEOs numbered 13 in

2007 (Fortune 500, 2007, para. 1), 20 in 2006 (Fortune 500, 2006, para. 1), and 19 in

2005 (Fortune 500, 2006, para. 1). By the end of 2009, the number of female CEO

Fortune 1000 companies had decreased to 18 (Catalyst, 2010c, p. 10). At the end of 2010,

the number of female CEOs in Fortune 500 companies had fallen to 12 (Fortune 500,

2011, para. 1).

In contrast, in 2007, females held at least 51% of the equity or stock in the small

and medium-sized business sector (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2007b, para. 2). In

2007, the small and medium-sized business sector included 7.8 million women-owned

nonfarm businesses, an increase of 20.1% over 2002 numbers (U.S. Bureau of Labor

Statistics, 2007b, para 1). Women-owned business accounted for 28.7% of all nonfarm

companies in the small and medium-sized business sector of the U.S. economy (U.S.

Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2007, para. 1).

Chapter 1 contains the background, the problem statement, and the purpose of the

study. The significance of the study in general and to leadership, the nature of the study,

the research questions, and the hypotheses follow. The chapter includes details of the

theoretical framework of the study, the definitions of terms, the assumptions, the

limitations, the delimitations, and a summary.

 2

Background of the Problem

Organizational structures in corporate environments have evolved over time to

reflect both social and economic changes, but traditional male leadership styles continue

to dominate modern corporate operating environments (Spurgeon & Cross, 2006). United

States law protects women’s rights (Kelly, 2008). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (2009)

prohibits discrimination in the workplace based on gender. The U.S. Department of

Labor’s Federal Glass Ceiling Commission (FGCC) issued two reports in 1995 (1995a,

1995b) that showed glass ceiling barriers blocking females’ promotions to executive-

level positions in American businesses. In 2010, glass ceiling barriers continued to be

identified in the literature as a means of excluding all but a minority of females from

CEO positions in American companies (Catalyst, 2010c).

Affirmative action legislation on the glass ceiling phenomenon, built on the

FGCC’s recommendations, has resulted in an increase in females' holding senior-level

executive and CEO positions (Iyer, 2008). Perhaps the increase is an indicator of

generalized progress in the elimination of glass ceiling barriers (U.S. Department of

Labor Statistics, 2010), but senior-executive position appointments still favor men

(Catalyst, 2007a, 2007b). Males continue to outnumber females in senior-level executive-

line and CEO positions. Executives holding line positions by functional definition

dominate business decision-making processes, governing the selection of candidates for

senior-level executive-line and CEO positions (Barreto, Ryan, & Schmitt, 2008; P. Berry

& Franks, 2010).

Gender bias may be an underlying cause of the exclusion of females from senior-

level executive positions in American business (Pichler, Simpson, & Stroh, 2008). An
 3

increased awareness of gender bias leads males to accept the need to achieve gender

equality (Prime & Moss-Racusin, 2009b). Focusing gender-equality initiatives on the

need to change both male and female attitudes toward leadership styles is likely to lessen

the gender imbalance between male and female leaders (Prime & Moss-Racusin, 2009b).

The balance may result in changes that reflect female-specific attitudes toward work and

workers (Catalyst, 2009; Gibbons, 2009). A more balanced male-female approach by

corporate executives will likely require changes in male attitudes toward female

coworkers.

The number of females in managerial-administrative positions rose from 13.8% in

1950 to 26.1% in 1980 to 51.4% in 2009 for management, professional, and related

occupations (Catalyst, 2010d, p. 1f). The number of females holding senior executive-

level positions in Fortune 1000 companies increased from 1 in 1972 (Catalyst, 2010c, p.

10) to 18 in 2010 (Catalyst, 2010c, p. 1). The typical stereotypes that women are less

ambitious than men (M. Berry, 2007) and fewer women are eligible for promotion exist,

but have no basis in fact (Carter & Silva, 2010). Executive-level succession planning in

Fortune 1000 companies is normally a male dominated board-level committee

responsibility (Greer & Virick, 2008).

Male and female aspirants who apply for senior executive-level positions but

depart from the unwritten rules underlying the traditional selection process normally

disqualify themselves as candidates (Sabattini & Dinolfo, 2010). An unwritten rule, for

example, is the idea that business decisions should never be confused with personal

decisions. Most men respond with censure and the unspoken thought that something must

be wrong with other men who take business matters personally (Feldhahn, 2009). Most
 4

men tend to differentiate between personal matters and business matters, whereas many

women tend to view the world holistically and therefore blur the distinction between

what is personal and what is business (Feldhahn, 2009).

The disproportionately low number of females occupying CEO positions within

corporate America proved so intractable that the phenomenon was labeled the glass

ceiling (Nair & Geetha, 2011; Womack-Gregg, 2010). In 1995, the U.S. Department of

Labor commissioned the FGCC to investigate factors preventing females from advancing

to the highest offices within corporate America (U.S. Department of Labor Federal Glass

Ceiling Commission, 1995a). The FGCC published two reports that same year.

The first report, Good for Business: Making Full Use of the Nation’s Human

Capital: A Fact-Finding Report of the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission (U.S.

Department of Labor Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, 1995a), involved gathering

information about the glass ceiling phenomenon. Three prime artificial barriers emerged

as obstacles preventing females’ ascension to senior-level executive office positions.

First, there are societal barriers that may lie beyond the control of business leaders.

Second, there are internal structural impediments that lie within the direct control of

business. The third barrier is the failure of government agencies to enforce compliance

with the law.

The second FGCC report, A Solid Investment: Making Full Use of the Nation’s

Human Capital: Recommendations of the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission (U.S.

Department of Labor Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, 1995b), indicated a number of

recommendations aimed at eliminating the glass ceiling. The scope of the term glass

ceiling was extended to include racial and ethnic minorities, and recommendations
 5

classified under the headings of business and government. The FGCC called for

businesses to adopt operating practices deemed conducive to eliminating the glass

ceiling. Specifically, businesses needed to offer mandated diversity training for

corporate-level employees, present affirmative action as part of diversity objectives

within strategic plans, expand beyond conventional promotion candidates through

inclusion of non-customary sources, and adopt work-life and family-friendly policies.

The FGCC report stipulated that the government should “lead by example” (U.S.

Department of Labor Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, 1995b, p. 15) to enforce

antidiscrimination laws and to improve diversity data collection and dissemination.

Some progress has been made in the 21 years since the enactment of the 1991

Glass Ceiling Act. Corporate America has done much to eliminate the more obvious

forms of gender discrimination (Falk, 2010). Blatant gender discrimination has, however,

been replaced by more subtle, hard to detect forms (Falk, 2010). The glass ceiling

phenomenon is still a barrier to the advancement of females beyond middle-management

ranks (Carter & Silva, 2010; Catalyst, 2010a, 2010b, 2010c, 2010e). The number of

female CEOs in Fortune 500 or 1000 companies remains significantly lower than the

number of male officeholders.

Middle management has benefited from including more female managers in

management ranks (Desvaux, Devillard-Hoellinger, & Meaney, 2008). Stakeholders

profit from greater numbers of female executives by way of improved performance

(Francoeur, Labelle, & Sinclair-Desgagné, 2008). However, the appointment of women

as board directors neither increases or decreases company performance (Francoeur, et al.,

2008).
 6

The U.S. Census Bureau and other government agencies do not track the number

of female CEOs in the small and medium-sized business sector of U.S. businesses. Small

and medium-sized business sector businesses employ fewer than 500 people (Small

Business Administration, 2011). For the study, small and medium-sized business sector

businesses are considered to be companies that employ between 50 and 499 people.

The growing number of female CEOs in the small and medium-sized business

sector may be unrelated to the FGCC recommendations. Verification of the reasons for

the increasing number of female CEOs in the small and medium-sized business sector

may assist American businesses in continuing to increase the number of female CEOs.

Identification of the reasons may also be of value to women in the area of personal career

planning.

Problem Statement

In the years following the enactment of the Glass Ceiling Act as Title II of the

Civil Rights Act of 1991, gender equity in senior executive positions in the American

business sector remains unrealized (Carter & Silva, 2010). The general problem is that,

despite FGCC recommendations for the elimination of the glass ceiling phenomenon, the

number of female CEOs remains lower than the number of male CEOs (Catalyst, 2010c;

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2007a, 2007b). Despite evidence of programs designed

to increase access for females to executive-level positions, the number of female senior-

level executives remains significantly lower than the number of males occupying senior

executive positions (Catalyst, 2010c). The glass ceiling phenomenon continues to impede

the promotion of women to senior executive positions (Rosenfeld, 2009). Research by

 7

Pichler et al. (2008) indicates the need for human resources (HR) professionals to provide

advice to executive decision-makers on policies that will resolve the general problem.

The specific problem is the existence of glass ceiling impediments to the

promotion of females to senior-level executive positions in the small and medium-sized

business sector (P. Berry & Franks, 2010; Pichler, et al., 2008). Problematic also is the

absence of research on the small and medium-sized business sector’s adoption of

operating policies, and policy enforcement activities that foster the promotion of females

to senior-level executive positions. The extent to which HR professionals in the small and

medium-sized business sector perceive the existence of glass ceiling impediments to the

promotion of females to senior-level positions within the sector is unknown. Likewise,

HR professionals’ perceptions of the effect of operating policies and policy enforcement

activities that foster the promotion of females to senior-level executive positions are

unknown.

A quantitative method with a correlational research design was used in the current

study. A survey data collection design was appropriate because statistics can be generated

about a target population (Fowler, 2009). The population included male and female HR

professionals employed in the small and medium-sized business sector in Georgia and

Florida. The objective of the research was to determine if significant relationships exist

between impediments to promotion, operating policies, policy enforcement activities

processes perceived by HR professionals and the selection of female candidates to

senior-level executive positions. A web-based survey was used to gather data (see

Appendix A).
 8

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this quantitative study with a correlational research design was to

determine if significant relationships exist between three processes that impede or foster

the selection of female candidates for senior-level executive positions in the small and

medium-sized business sector in Georgia and Florida. The three processes that were

tested are impediments to promotion, operating policies, and policy enforcement

activities that affect the promotion of female candidates to senior-level executive

positions. A quantitative research method was appropriate because the problem required

the identification of the processes influencing the selection of senior-level executive

candidates (Creswell, 2009). A web-based survey was used to gather data.

A correlational research design is appropriate when two or more dependent

variables are subject to statistical testing (Creswell, 2009). A survey was appropriate

because the purpose of the research was to produce statistics by asking questions and

analyzing responses (Fowler, 2009). Moreover, a survey data collection method is

appropriate for sample populations (Fowler, 2009).

Descriptive statistics were appropriate to describe sample demographics and the

research variables used in the analysis of collected data (Creswell, 2009). The

independent variable was the percentage of senior-level female executives reported by

each subject. The study had three dependent variable processes. The dependent variables

were impediments to promotion, operating policies, and policy enforcement activities

processes that influence the selection of female candidates for senior-level executive

positions. The specific research population was comprised of 3,956 HR professionals in

the small and medium-sized business sector in Georgia and Florida.

 9

Significance of the Study

The significance of the present quantitative study to both men and women is that

the study discoveries may contribute to increased understanding, endorsement, and

support of the need to promote increasing numbers of females to senior-executive

positions (Prime & Moss-Racusin, 2009b). Analysis of the study discoveries revealed

that there is a statistically significant relationship between the percentage of senior

leadership positions filled by women and perceived impediments. A statistically

significant relationship exists between the percentage of senior leadership positions filled

by women and compliance activities. There is no statistically significant relationship

between the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women and operating

policies.

Organizational structures in corporate environments have evolved over time to

reflect both social and economic conditions. However, traditional male leadership styles

continue to dominate modern corporate operating environments (Higginson, 2010; Rusch

& Marshall, 2006; Sosa, 2010). The current study may be significant to business leaders

because the discoveries may assist in the development of policies that align more closely

with the requirements of the Glass Ceiling Act (Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1991)

and other U. S. antidiscrimination laws.

HR professionals in the small and medium-sized business sector identified

perceived glass ceiling impediments to promotion, operating policies, and policy

enforcement activities processes for females working toward senior-level executive

positions. Clear identification of impediments to promotion, operating policies, and

policy enforcement activities processes that correlate with the number of women holding
 10

senior executive positions may help companies focus on programs that may overcome

glass ceiling barriers. The correlation of perceived impediments and compliance activities

with the number of female senior-level executives may encourage the development of

compliance activities that will lead to increased numbers of female executives.

Reduction or elimination of glass ceiling barriers may result in the promotion of

an increased number of females to executive-level positions. The acknowledgement of

leadership attributes more closely associated with females than with males may lead to

increased corporate performance (Doll, 2007). Identifying the process impediments to

promotion to senior executive-level positions for females working in small and medium-

sized companies in Georgia and Florida may help female leadership candidates in all

small and medium-sized business sector companies plan and execute personal promotion

strategies.

Significance of the Study to Leadership

Gender bias continues to impede the promotion of women to senior-level

executive positions in business (P. Berry & Franks, 2010; Good & Rudman, 2010).

Songini and Gnan (2009) determined that the presence of women within executive ranks

did not significantly influence the number of women promoted to senior-level executive

or governance roles within the small and medium-sized businesses. The study was

significant because the literature appears to indicate an absence of research on the

processes that affect the selection of female candidates for senior-level executive

positions in the small and medium-sized business sector of the U.S. economy.

Identification of HR professionals’ perceptions of glass ceiling processes that affect the

 11

selection of female candidates for executive positions in the small and medium-sized

business may add to leadership knowledge and thereby fill a gap in the literature.

Nature of the Study

Quantitative studies are appropriate when the purpose of the research is to collect,

analyze, and interpret survey data (Creswell, 2009). This quantitative study was

appropriate because data were collected from HR professionals with respect to the

common problems posed by the glass ceiling phenomenon. The objective of the

quantitative method study was to explore HR perspectives on the processes that affect the

selection of female candidates for senior-level executive positions in medium-sized U. S.

companies. The three processes included impediments to promotion, operating policies,

and policy enforcement activities that affect the selection of females to senior-level

executive positions.

The intent of this quantitative study was to determine if significant relationships

exist between the processes that affect the selection of female candidates for senior-level

executive positions in small and medium-sized business sector companies. HR

professionals’ perspectives on the types of impediments to promotion, operating policies,

and policy enforcement activities that relate to the glass ceiling phenomenon in small and

medium-sized business sector companies were collected. Statistical tests were conducted

to determine if relationships existed between the processes and the percentage of females

holding senior-executive level positions.

A web-based survey instrument was used to collect the research data. A pilot test

was administered to validate the survey questions proposed for the study and to confirm
 12

the feasibility of uniform administration to the sample population (Creswell, 2009). The

pilot test was conducted after ARB/IRB approval.

Quantitative studies are used to test a theory or to identify and explain processes

using closed-ended questions (Creswell, 2009). When information may be measured

numerically and the results tested statistically, quantitative approaches may be utilized.

Quantitative studies test relationship between variables. A quantitative approach is

appropriate for testing hypotheses (Creswell, 2009).

The quantitative research design was appropriate because the problem required

the identification of glass ceiling processes influencing the selection of senior-level

executive candidates. Closed ended questions were used in the survey instrument. The

intended quantitative research design provided unbiased numeric data for objective

analyses through statistical testing. Test results were used to accept or reject the null

hypotheses.

A survey was appropriate because the purpose of the research was to generate

statistics by asking questions and analyzing the answers (Fowler, 2009). Surveys are an

appropriate data collection method for sample populations (Fowler, 2009). A survey data

collection method allows the extrapolation of sample discoveries to the population under

study (Creswell, 2009).

Other research methods considered but not selected included qualitative and

mixed methods. Qualitative studies are appropriate when the study seeks to explore and

understand the meaning attributed by individuals or groups to a common problem

(Creswell, 2009). Analysis of the collected views may reveal similarities in HR

approaches to the elimination of glass ceiling barriers. Qualitative research permits in-
 13

depth contextual exploration and discovery of subjects’ perceptions (Marshall &

Rossman, 2006). Qualitative studies use open-ended questions to explore meaning

(Creswell, 2009).

Qualitative research is designed around one or a combination of

phenomenological, ethnography, case study, narrative, or grounded theory approaches

(Creswell, 2009). Qualitative studies focus on a single concept or phenomenon without

reference to numerical measurement suitable for statistical testing. A qualitative approach

was not appropriate for the study because of the intended use of closed-ended questions

and the need to test hypotheses. External validity is one major weakness of the qualitative

approach (Marshall & Rossman, 2006).

Qualitative research requires open-ended questions (Creswell & Plano Clark,

2011). Open-ended responses are subjective. Determination of statistical relationships

between variables is not possible (Creswell, 2009). A qualitative research design was,

therefore, inappropriate for the intended research.

Mixed methods studies require the collection of qualitative and quantitative data.

Data collection can be by a study or by multiple studies (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011).

A mixed methods approach was inappropriate because the study did not collect

qualitative data. A case study method was inappropriate because it is limited to the in-

depth exploration of a project, activity, or process involving one or more people

(Creswell, 2009).

Grounded theory studies require multiple stage data collection and subsequent

refinement and re-categorization of interrelationships to maximize similarities and

differences of the emerging data set (Creswell, 2009). Grounded theory was inappropriate
 14

because it deals with individual events grounded in the individual experience set of each

person. A phenomenological research method was unsuitable because the intended

research was not designed to discover the effect of the glass ceiling on individual HR

professionals. Ethnography focuses on one or more unique cultural sets (Creswell, 2009).

Ethnography was inappropriate because the quantitative study tested variables and

hypotheses, versus a unique cultural set such as gender.

Research Question and Hypotheses

The research question used in this quantitative correlational study was intended to

inquire about the relationship between dependent and independent variables (Creswell,

2009). The study had one independent variable and three dependent variables. The

independent variable was the percentage of females holding senior-level executive

positions. The dependent variables were perceived glass ceiling impediments to

promotion, operating policies, and policy enforcement activities that foster the promotion

of females to senior-level executive positions.

The research question was designed to determine in what ways the glass ceiling

phenomenon impedes the promotion of females to senior-level executive positions in the

small and medium-sized business sector of the economy. The research question was

intended to determine what operating policies small and medium-sized business sector

companies have implemented to foster the promotion of females to senior-level executive

positions. The design of the research question permitted the identification of policy

enforcement activities implemented by senior-level executives in support of the selection

of females to senior-level executive positions. The research question evolved from the

three theoretical frameworks that ground this study: the transformational servant-
 15

leadership model (Demir, 2008), social learning theory (Coogan & Chen, 2007), and

feminist theory (Biklen, Marshall, & Pollard, 2008; Cudd & Andreasen, 2007).

The research question and hypotheses of this quantitative method web-based

survey with a correlational research design follows:

What statistically significant relationships exist between the percentage of senior-

level female executives within each company and the total number of processes

that affect selection to senior-level executive positions (impediments to

promotion, operating policies, and compliance activities)?

Ho: No statistically significant relationships exist between the percentage of senior-

level female executives within each company and the total number of processes

that affect selection to senior-level executive positions (impediments to

promotion, operating policies, and compliance activities).

Ha: A statistically significant relationship exists between the percentage of senior-

level female executives within each company and the total number of processes

that affect selection to senior-level executive positions (impediments to

promotion, operating policies, and compliance activities).

The intent of the research was to discover if significant relationships exist between the

three dependent variables and the percentage of senior-level female executives in small

and medium-sized business sector in Georgia and Florida.

 16

Theoretical Framework

Three theoretical frameworks ground the study:. the transformational servant-

leadership model (Demir, 2008), social learning theory (Coogan & Chen, 2007), and

feminist theory (Biklen, et al., 2008; Cudd & Andreasen, 2007). Servant-leaders strive to

serve as professional and personal models for the followers entrusted to their care and, in

so doing, influence the growth and development of each individual as a future leader

(Demir, 2008). In social learning theory, followers learn from superiors and emulate

those who lead them (Coogan & Chen, 2007; Kretchmar, 2008). Feminist theorists

address gender-equality inequities (Beetham & Demetriades, 2007). Cudd and Andreasen

(2007) summarized feminist theory as “the attempt to make intellectual sense of, and then

to critique, the subordination of women to men” (p. 1).

Transformational servant-leaders, through the power of their own inspirational

example, attempt to align and influence the behavior of followers in ways that will realize

their potential as future leaders (Clawson, 2006). Transformational servant-leaders should

attempt to incorporate key component aspects of current leadership theories and practices

in ways that allow flexible transfer of essential aspects of leadership skills, knowledge,

and practice to followers (Demir, 2008). At the heart of such follower-stewardship is an

implicit trust in the authenticity of the leader’s mentorship skills, experiences, and

competencies (Wang, Tomlinson, & Noe, 2010). The leader should practice servant-

leadership in ways that empower followers in the achievement of self-efficacy (Melchar,

Bosco, & Cantrell, 2008).

Social learning theory derives from Bandura’s (2006) social cognitive theory,

according to which “people create social systems, and these systems, in turn, organize
 17

and influence people’s lives” (p. 164). Social learning theorists characterize human

learning as a function of inner cognitive processes and external environmental influences

(Kretchmar, 2008). Current social learning theorists focus less on the cognitive aspects of

learning and more on self-efficacy (Kretchmar, 2008)

Self-efficacy theory is a subset of social learning theory. Self-efficacy is the belief

by an individual that he or she possesses the ability to discharge fully the actions

necessary for the achievement of a goal or set of goals (Rudman & Webb, 2009). As a

psychological construct, self-efficacy assumes both individual and general dimensions.

Situational individual self-efficacy is limited to belief in personal ability to discharge a

task. General self-efficacy is the belief by an individual that he or she possesses a range

of abilities sufficient for the discharge of a wide variety of situational tasks (Nielsen &

Munir, 2009). General self-efficacy is an essential element in the assumption of

leadership roles (Allen & Hartman, 2008).

Ruderman and Ohlett (2004) found that women do not lack self-efficacy, in that

they aspire to CEO and other senior-level executive positions. Failure of significant

numbers of women to achieve such career objectives is evidence of negative stereotypical

discrimination toward women (Bible & Hill, 2007; Metz & Moss, 2008). Alternately, it

may be evidence of women making different choices than men regarding the ways

women wish to live their lives (Pinker, 2008). Baxandall (2009) hypothesized that second

wave feminism gave women the right to choose. Some women elect to seek personal

fulfillment outside of business operating environments (Pinker, 2008). Cudd and

Andreasen (2007) stipulated that third wave feminism extended the scope of feminist

theory to include women’s diversity as a central tenet.

 18

Although progress is evident in the identification and lessening of overt forms of

the glass ceiling barrier phenomenon, more subtle forms of discrimination and

stereotyping of females remain in-situ (Barreto, Ellemeres, Cihangir, & Stroebe, 2008;

Cikara & Fiske, 2008; Zhang, Schmader, & Forbes, 2008). Feminist theoreticians point to

sexism as one of several overt forms of discrimination against women (Cudd &

Andreasen, 2007). Traditional stereotypes label females with characteristics such as

warmth, loyalty, and sincerity. Organizations may use these characteristics covertly to

label females as less competent, or less suitable for promotion than male counterparts

possessing identical traits (Cikara & Fiske, 2008; Kumar, 2008).

Zhang et al. (2008) argued that failure to recognize and address subtle forms of

discrimination against women seeking advancement to senior corporate line positions

serves to discourage women from such office(s). Tacit acceptance of subtle forms of

discrimination serves to reinforce the acceptability of discriminatory behavior. In

essence, discriminatory behaviors are learned behaviors (Chick, 2005).

Confronted with subtle forms of gender discrimination, many women choose to

leave corporate employment, never to return (P. Berry & Franks, 2010). One of the main

motivational reasons cited by women for departure from corporate life is the failure of

leadership to meet female expectations for learning and growth (Ruderman & Ohlott,

2004). Some women choose to become entrepreneurs, and in so doing, acquire leadership

roles by sidestepping perceived corporate gender bias (P. Berry & Franks, 2010).

Traditional approaches by people to the elimination of the glass ceiling focus

mainly on changing women in ways that align them more closely with male norms of

leadership (Prime & Moss-Racusin, 2009b). Feminist theorists would argue that focusing
 19

on the need for women to adapt to established male patterns of behavior serves only to

maintain the status quo (Kay, Czaplinski, & Jost, 2009). Eradication of glass ceiling

barriers will require approaches that remove biases stemming from male hegemony in the

selection and promotion of executive-level office holders (Eagly, 2007). Men must do

more than acknowledge the existence of gender discrimination as a source of glass

ceiling barriers (Prime & Moss-Racusin, 2009a). Men must actively serve as change

agents (Prime & Moss-Racusin, 2009b). The transformational servant-leadership model

would seem compatible with the foregoing need for men to become change agents.

Definition of Terms

Glass Ceiling: The FGCC defined the glass ceiling as a hidden, impassable,

artificial barrier that, regardless of individual merits and accomplishments, blocks the

promotion of females to senior C-level executive positions within business organizations

(U.S. Department of Labor Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, 1995a). Since 1995, the

term has been expanded to include minorities (Johnson, 2006; Mona, 2006; Tan, 2008),

and others, such as gays and lesbians (Arwood, 2006), and white males (Kormanik, 2005)

who believe they are excluded from promotion to executive office. Unless otherwise

stated, the term glass ceiling refers to the original FGCC meaning.

Assumptions

A major assumption implicit in the study was that survey subjects will respond

honestly to the survey. The e-mail survey instrument and the privacy warranties of the

SurveyMonkey web-based response channel (SurveyMonkey, 2010a, 2010b) were

selected to permit subjects to reply honestly to survey questions. A central assumption

inherent in the study was that the assurance of anonymity would allow both female and
 20

male individuals who chose to participate to share new insights into the role, if any, of

FGCC glass ceiling elimination recommendations in medium-sized U.S. companies. A

further assumption implicit in the study was that a sample of HR professionals’

perspectives on the glass ceiling phenomenon will suggest new intervention programs

and policies suitable for adoption throughout the small and medium-sized business sector.

The survey questions were assumed to be consistent with postmodernist

philosophy. Namely, “determinism suggests that examining the relationships between

and among variables is central to answering questions and hypotheses through surveys”

(Creswell, 2009, p. 145). Use of the correlational method did not assume that

relationships are causal.

Scope, Limitations, and Delimitations

The scope of this quantitative correlational study was limited to determining if

significant relationships exist between impediments to promotion, operating policies, and

policy enforcement activities processes that affect the selection of female candidates for

senior-level executive positions. For the purposes of the study, small and medium-sized

business sector companies were defined as businesses having between 50 and 499

employees. The study was limited to the small and medium-sized business sector in

Georgia and Florida.

Limitations included the time available within the dissertation process. The

reliability of the survey instrument may have limited the validity of the study, and

subjects’ level of honesty in responding to survey questions may have limited the

reliability of the survey outcomes. Two limitations of a quantitative survey are the
 21

inability to capture individual voices and the work context in which individuals speak

(Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011).

A quantitative instrument was used to identify if significant relationships exist

between impediments to promotion, operating policies, and policy enforcement activities

processes that affect the selection of female candidates to senior-level executive positions

by gender, age, and title. Other possible variables not selected included subject ethnicity,

highest education level, the gender of the primary shareholder or business owner, and

geographic location. Inclusion of one or more of the foregoing excluded variables would

have expanded the scope beyond the time limits of the dissertation process.

The targeted population may compromise the generalizability of study discoveries

to the larger business community because HR professionals’ perceptions are limited to

individual experiences and competencies. Individual HR professional experiences and

competencies may not reflect the full range of business function views on the glass

ceiling phenomenon. Sampling error and bias delimit this survey (Fowler, 2009). Self-

selection non-response bias may influence the results of the study because of the

smallness of the sample (Fowler, 2009). Random variation is limited because only those

HR professionals providing opt-in access to an e-mail address were invited to participate

in the study.

Summary

The glass ceiling limits the advancement of females to positions of power and

authority within American businesses (Catalyst, 2010d). Underrepresentation of females

in senior-executive leadership positions may prevent further development of

organizational performance and growth (P. Berry & Franks, 2010). A general problem is
 22

that despite FGCC recommendations for the elimination of the glass ceiling phenomenon,

the number of female CEOs in American companies remains significantly lower than the

number of male CEOs (Catalyst, 2010c; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2007a, 2007b).

The specific problem is the absence of research on glass ceiling impediments to the

promotion of females to senior-level executive positions in the small and medium-sized

business sector.

This quantitative correlational study was designed to determine if significant

relationships exist in the perceptions of HR professionals in Georgia and Florida of the

processes that affect the selection of female candidates for senior-level executive

positions. The discoveries of the study may stimulate an increase in coworker

endorsement and support of female candidates for promotion to senior-level female

executive positions. Identification of HR professionals’ perceptions of glass ceiling

processes may assist leaders in formulating new approaches to the elimination of glass

ceiling barriers to the advancement of females to senior-executive office positions. The

literature review contained in Chapter 2 documents current research studies dealing with

the glass ceiling phenomenon and the affirmative action laws promoting gender equality.

Chapter 2 also contains a review of current discoveries relating to the glass ceiling

phenomenon, including gender-based barriers, workplace discrimination, and gender

equity legislation.
 23

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

The purpose of this quantitative method web-based survey with a correlational

research design will be to determine if significant relationships exist between the three

processes that affect the selection of female candidates for senior-level executive

positions in the small and medium-sized business sector in Georgia and Florida. Chapter

2 begins with the documentation of the title searches undertaken on subject areas relevant

to the research. The chapter contains a historical review of gender equity legislation,

affirmative action legislation, and affirmative action policies relating to the glass ceiling

phenomenon. The chapter also contains a review of current findings relating to the glass

ceiling phenomenon, including gender-based barriers, workplace discrimination, and

gender equity lawsuits. The chapter ends with a summary of reviewed documents and

conclusions drawn therefrom.

Documentation

In an EBSCOhost search on the primary search term, glass ceiling, 954 peer-

reviewed articles between 1966 and 2011 were listed. Of these, 265 (28%) were

published between January 2006 and May 2011. The ProQuest Dissertation and Theses

database returned 78 doctoral dissertations containing the key words glass ceiling from

2006 to 2011. An EBSCOhost search on the terms glass ceiling and small- medium- sized

business produced no returns that were relevant to the selection of female candidates for

senior-level executive positions in small- medium-sized businesses.

The ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database returned 29 doctoral dissertations

containing the key words small- medium-sized business published from 2006 to 2011. Of

these, none of the doctoral dissertations contained the key words gender equity and small
 24

and medium-sized business. Other key word searches focused on the terms: gender equity

legislation, affirmative action legislation, workplace discrimination, and gender-based

glass ceiling barriers.

The U.S. Census Bureau does not identify the gender of individual company

CEOs. A number of private research organizations (Catalyst, 2010c; Fortune 500, 2009a,

2009b) do indicate the gender of Fortune 500 or 1000 CEOs (Catalyst, 2010c; Fortune

500, 2009a, 2009b). Comparable gender-identity census data are not available for the

small and medium-sized business sector.

Historical Review

This section contains a historical review of gender equity legislation, affirmative

action legislation, affirmative action policies, and glass ceiling policy development. The

section also reviews current publications relating to the glass ceiling phenomenon. Glass

ceiling phenomenon topics that were researched include workplace discrimination, and

gender-based barriers as well as gender equity lawsuits.

Gender Equity Legislation

The U.S. Constitution of 1787 is gender neutral (Meese, et al., 2005). Meese et al.

(2005) claimed the Constitution delegated questions of enfranchisement to state

legislators. The first gender-specific reference in the Constitution was in 1868 following

the ratification of the XIV Amendment (Section 2) relating to state actions.

Although most scholars point to the Seneca Falls, New York, gathering of 1848 as

the point of origin of the suffrage movement, Chapman and Mills (2006) point to an

earlier 1834 petition to the federal government to abolish slavery and enfranchise both

slaves and women. However, Meese et al. (2005) underscored that it was not until
 25

Congress enacted Reconstruction legislation in 1869 that the suffrage movement began to

have any influence on civil equality policies.

Among the achievements of Reconstruction was the passage of Section 1 of

Amendment XV (1869), which prohibited race-related discrimination with respect to

voting but left women disenfranchised (Meese et al., 2005). Full enfranchisement of

women as voting members of American society did not occur until 1920 with the passage

of Amendment XIX. The Amendment stated, “The right of citizens of the United States

to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of

sex” (Meese, et al., 2005, p. 417).

Meese et al. (2005) noted that Amendment XIX has proved remarkably stable

insofar as it has generated “a remarkably small body of case law… and even fewer

federal cases” (p. 418). In itself, Amendment XIX legislation proved insufficient to

secure gender equality in areas outside the right to vote. The full panoply of gender

equality issues has been left to legislators to embed in law by way of affirmative action

legislation (Braun, 1995).

Gender equity practices are not restricted to the United States. The European

Union has adopted its own set of gender equity policies and practices. Gender equity is

known in Europe as gender mainstreaming, primarily because of the absence of the word

gender in many European languages (Rees, 2005). Rees (2005) claimed the 1997 Treaty

of Amsterdam introduced gender mainstreaming into European Union law.

Affirmative Action Legislation

Although preceded by earlier legislation, President Kennedy’s March 1961

issuance of Executive Order (EO) 10925 is generally held to mark the formal
 26

introduction of the term affirmative action into the lexicon of gender-related labor law

(Kathuria, 2009). Unlike earlier legislation that prohibited discrimination, the Kennedy

administration introduced penalties for non-compliance in contractors soliciting

government business (Kathuria, 2009). The penalties paved the way for the evolution of a

number of President’s Committee Equal Employment Opportunity derived laws,

primarily under the Johnson administration. President Johnson’s EO 11246 identified and

embedded sex discrimination as a contravention of human rights. The Johnson

administration enforced the elimination of sex discrimination by extending its cover to

include federal contracts of $50,000 and up (Wittig, 1998).

A number of powerful Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) laws followed the

issuance of the Kennedy-Johnson executive orders. For example, the Equal Pay Act

(EPA) of 1963 (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2011a) mandated

wage equity for people employed in the same company who performed substantially the

same work (Lockwood, 2007). The intent of the EPA was augmented by the 1964

passage of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (U.S. Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission, 2011b). Title VII prohibited discrimination based on

nationality, religion, gender, skin color, or racial origins. Title I and Title V of the

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission, 2011c) extended protection to those with disabilities (Lockwood, 2007).

Enforcement of the foregoing legislation is the responsibility of the U.S. Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission, 2011b).
 27

Affirmative Action Policies

Advocates of Equal Employment Opportunity laws, which mandated affirmative

action employment laws and policies have sought to redress organizational discrimination

based on gender and race. In so doing, the laws and policies have sought to promote

strategies that will equalize the status of disadvantaged groups such as women and other

minorities (Iyer, 2008). Equal opportunity initiatives were introduced to provide a level

playing field on which individuals receive equal treatment under the law. In contrast,

affirmative action legislation was designed to supersede good intentions as a means of

achieving fairness proactively. Affirmative action policies prohibit structural

impediments. Organizational performance is monitored by the Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission and non-compliance is punished by the imposition of financial

penalties (Iyer, 2008).

Studies conducted in various countries over the last three decades have confirmed

two positive ongoing outcomes of affirmative action laws and policies (Iyer, 2008). Iyer

suggested the first outcome was an increase in the number of female employees across a

range of middle-management occupations. A second outcome was that organizations

conforming to affirmative action requirements employ proportionately higher numbers of

female employees than do companies operating without reference to such programs (Iyer,

2008).

Critics of affirmative action argue that increased representation of women in

corporate America is the result of a generalized societal trend toward gender equality.

The trend, however, has no direct, measurable correlation to affirmative action policies

(Iyer, 2008). Although the number of women occupying middle-management positions

 28

has increased significantly since the introduction of affirmative action, Iyer (2008)

claimed the number falls short of placing all qualified female applicants in the labor pool.

Affirmative action supporters have argued the shortfall is due in large measure to

the absence of consistent, full accountability by senior executives for the achievement of

established hiring goals. Critics have posited the approach fails because it is flawed by

virtue of “human folly” (Iyer, 2008, p. 274). Subtle gender bias remains a transcendent,

negative factor in the proportionate advancement of qualified women to the highest levels

of executive management. Another problem with affirmative action approaches is held to

be the imposition of subtle but powerful negative, stereotypical images of women as

qualified only by virtue of their gender, not innate meritocracy (Barreto, Ellemeres, et al.,

2008; Barreto, Ryan, et al., 2008; Zhang, et al., 2008).

The European gender mainstreaming model is the source of United Nations and

World Bank gender equity policies and practices (Rees, 2005). Gender mainstreaming is

accepted as essential policy within the European Union and major world organizations.

Practical application and implementation, however, are often relegated to handbooks and

manuals rather than mandated operating procedure. Rees (2005) noted that gender

mainstreaming occurs despite European Union laws promoting gender equity, European

national governments appear unwilling to support the concept, “except where there is a

statutory duty so to do and a political will” (p. 569).

Current Findings

In this section, four topics are addressed. First, current research about the glass

ceiling phenomenon is reviewed. The second topic consists of an examination of research

findings in the area of gender-based barriers. The third topic is focused on current
 29

research on workplace discrimination. The final topic reviews a number of important

individual and class action gender discrimination lawsuits from the 1990s onward.

Glass Ceiling Phenomenon

The FGCC defined the glass ceiling as barriers impeding the progress of five

groups of people into decision-making positions within the private sector. Specifically,

glass ceiling groups are “women of all races and ethnicities, and African American,

American Indian, Asian and Pacific Islander, and Hispanic American men” (U.S.

Department of Labor Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, 1995a, p. 5). Since 1995, a

number of additional groups have associated themselves with the glass ceiling

phenomenon. Glass ceiling phenomenon groups include, but are not restricted to, the pink

ceiling or the glass closet (gays and lesbians) and the stained glass ceiling (women

seeking high office within church hierarchies). Various subcategories of the glass ceiling

phenomenon have been delineated in the two and a half decades following the issuing of

the original FGCC reports. The subcategories include designations such as brass ceiling,

concrete ceiling, glass cliff, and others.

Bihagen and Ohls (2007) conducted empirical research to evaluate Swedish panel

data of 1.1 million workers in an attempt to determine if women were barred from high-

level executive roles because they occupied “dead-end jobs” (p. 167). Dead-end jobs are

those positions offering little or no opportunity for promotion and low wage mobility.

Analyses of the data showed the top ranked dead-end jobs were those involving personal

care, for example, human resources. Fully 90% of personal care jobs in 2003 were held

by women, which may point to one reason more women are not promoted to higher-level

management positions (2007, p. 167).

 30

In an attempt to determine if sex stereotyping prevented women from promotion

into the highest levels of executive management in business, Pichler, Simpson, and Stroh

(2008) undertook a quantitative survey of 902 HR professionals. Survey subjects’

responses indicated female HR professionals are concentrated in lower-level managerial

positions in companies emphasizing employee involvement. Pichler et al., did not report

the number subjects by gender. Analyses of subjects’ responses revealed stereotypical

feminine managerial people skills as the underlying bias restricting women to support

roles. Male HR professionals were judged according to perceived masculine

characteristics as competent to assume higher managerial roles.

In a qualitative study, Broughton and Miller (2009) considered if the glass ceiling

phenomenon were present in four European countries and the United States. Broughton

and Miller sought to determine whether glass ceiling barriers were the same in each

country. Selected for the study were Germany, Sweden, Greece, the United Kingdom,

and the United States. Broughton and Miller conducted 32 semi-structured telephone

interviews with senior female executives and concluded that the glass ceiling

phenomenon existed in all five countries.

In quantitative research undertaken by Weyer (2006), multi-source feedback was

examined as a potential source of social role, expectation state, and leadership

categorization bias factors contributing to the glass ceiling phenomenon. Weyer analyzed

a sample of 1,600 questionnaires drawn from 60,000 questionnaires in an already existing

data set. Weyer selected leadership ratings as dependent variables. The rater’s gender

served as independent variables. The literature review conducted by Weyer predicted

multi-source feedback would prove a source of gender bias contributing to the glass
 31

ceiling phenomenon. However, analyses of the responses indicated the multi-source

feedback instrument to be bias-free. Weyer concluded that multi-source feedback does

not contribute to the glass ceiling phenomenon.

In a subsequent study, Weyer (2007) compared and contrasted expectation states

and social role theory as key structural and cultural theoretical determinants underlying

and supporting the glass ceiling. Weyer concluded both expectation state and social role

theory predicate structural negative male gender bias toward women. As such, the glass

ceiling will continue to persist until women are accorded “greater social significance and

general competence” (Weyer, 2007, p. 486).

Hutchins-Eberhardt (2009) conducted qualitative inductive analysis using focus

groups to explore the attitudes and perceptions among 34 male and female university

students toward women holding leadership positions within business. Specifically,

Hutchins-Eberhardt examined gender role congruency, leadership style, and leadership

context theories as contributing factors in glass ceiling barrier creation. Qualitative

thematic analysis of subjects’ responses to 12 leadership scenarios revealed the

leadership context as the sole common determinant of leadership effectiveness. Subjects

deemed role congruency and leadership style to be irrelevant to the promotion of females

to senior positions.

Arwood’s (2006) mixed method study explored the experiences of gay men and

lesbians seeking higher-level executive roles within their respective organizations.

Arwood adapted an earlier study by substituting the words gay or lesbian for the word

women. The initial sample consisted of 363 gays and lesbians, who received an e-mail

inviting them to complete a web-based survey posted on a secure website. Of the 441
 32

people who accessed the site, 111 answered all of the survey questions. Responses were

analyzed using descriptive statistical techniques and Chi-square tests. Arwood concluded

gays and lesbians encounter the same glass ceiling barriers to promotion as those

experienced by heterosexual female and minority aspirants.

Thompson-Taylor (2009) conducted a quantitative study of female Baptists

seeking promotion to senior pastorate positions. The objective of the survey was to

determine if three Baptist congregations believed female pastors were competent to

discharge senior pastorate duties historically discharged exclusively by males. Likert-type

scale questionnaires were distributed to 850 members of three Baptist congregations; 218

questionnaires completed by 151 men and 67 women were included for data analysis, the

remainder being discarded due to lack of responses to one or more questions.

Subjects were differentiated in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, education level,

and employment status using descriptive statistics. Correlation analysis showed no

relationships between age and female selection of female senior pastors. Congregation

members with experience with female managers expressed stronger support for the

promotion of women to the position of senior pastor than did people with no experience

with female managers. Thompson-Taylor concluded that the findings of the study were

consistent with role congruity and motivational expectancy theories. Furthermore,

Thompson-Taylor posited that the findings of the study confirmed the existence of the

stained glass ceiling barriers preventing the elevation of women to senior pastoral

positions.

Iskra (2007) undertook a qualitative biographical narrative survey and interview

study to establish the strategies used by female soldiers, with general or flag officer
 33

status, that might be employed by lower rank female soldiers seeking to break through

the brass ceiling. Iskra’s literature review contained a comparison of promotion strategies

adopted by civilian women and military women. A sample of 153 female officers

participated in the study; of these, 21 were selected from a cross-section of military

branches to participate in in-depth personal interviews. Active and retired female

personnel representing all branches of the U.S. military were included in the study.

Survey questions included multiple choice questions, open-ended questions, and

comment areas.

Survey data were analyzed using a number of descriptive statistical groupings,

including demographic data, military rank, active/retired status, occupational status, and

family status. The data were coded and open-ended question responses analyzed for key

words or phrases. A major conclusion was that female soldiers face glass ceiling barriers

exceeding those confronting their civilian counterparts. Restrictions related to wartime

deployments and the legal constraints on their assignment to certain combat roles hamper

female soldiers (Iskra, 2007).

Judge (Ryan, Haslam, & Kulich, 2010) asserted companies with women on their

boards underperformed compared with those with male-only boards. Citing serious

methodological issues with the findings, Ryan and Haslam (2005) undertook an archival

study of 100 Financial Times Stock Exchange companies to identify those appointing

women as board directors in 2003. Ryan and Haslam identified 17 companies that had

appointed 19 female board directors. A mixed-model ANOVA of the share price

performance of the 100 companies preceding and following the selection of a female or
 34

male board director was used to correlate the appointment of female directors with

changes in share prices.

The analysis of gender appointments in down and up stock market periods was

performed separately. In contrast to the claim made by Judge (2003), the appointment of

a female director in periods of financial downturn resulted in a sharp rise in the

appointing company’s share prices. In periods of financial growth, both male and female

appointments had no effect on companies’ share prices. Ryan and Haslam (2005) inferred

that women have a higher probability than men to be appointed to leadership positions in

times of general financial downturn. Ryan and Haslam identified the phenomenon as a

glass cliff.

Ryan, Haslam, and Postmes (2007) subsequently conducted another qualitative

study to analyze male and female reactive explanations of the glass cliff phenomenon.

The study contained data generated by 164 self-selected subjects (129 men, 31 women,

and 4 gender-unspecified persons) who completed a web-based survey. Seven-point

Likert-type scale responses were analyzed using descriptive statistical techniques.

Of the respondents, 52% of the males denied women are appointed to glass cliff

positions (2007, p. 188). Only 5.4% of female respondents took the same position (2007,

p. 188). Of the 31 female subjects, 13.2% believed that women were expendable (2007,

p. 188). None of the male subjects expressed that view. Some 16.3% of female

respondents expressed the view that company factors were a deterrent to their progress,

22.6% of males expressed that opinion (2007, p. 188). Those upholding the existence of

the glass cliff phenomenon asserted a number of traditional gender-based explanations.

 35

Among the reasons preventing women from appointment to senior management,

28.7% of female respondents cited a lack of opportunity as a major barrier (2007, p. 188).

Only 9.7% of male respondents shared that opinion (2007, p. 188). Female subjects

identified sexism (23.3%) and gender stereotype (16.3%) as barriers to their progress

(2007, p. 188). Male subjects also viewed sexism (6.5%) and gender stereotype (9.7%) as

barriers (2007, p. 188). Over 12% of female respondents identified equality as a factor,

compared to 3.2% of male subjects (2007, p. 188).

Bruckmueller (2007) examined the glass cliff phenomenon in an experimental

study, based on the assumption women are more likely than are men to be selected for

promotion to CEO positions in companies confronting financial or performance crisis.

The role of the CEO in such companies is a high-risk position. Failure to resolve the

crisis normally results in the discharge of the CEO. Bruckmueller’s experiment was

conducted via a web-based survey of 122 subjects (61 females and 61 males). Subjects

were presented with a scenario and asked to select one of two candidates for the role of

CEO in a company characterized as either very successful or in crisis. Of the subjects,

66% selected a male CEO to lead the successful company, whereas 62% chose a female

CEO 62% to lead the at-risk, in-crisis company (2007, p. 52). Bruckmueller concluded

selection decisions are influenced by the attribution of stereotypical traits to candidates.

Gender-Based Barriers

Linehan and Scullion (2001) conducted a qualitative survey to identify overt and

covert barriers limiting women’s promotion to senior positions in both domestic and

international (expatriate) operations. Interviewed were 50 female European Community

expatriate executives from 12 industry sectors. Nine barriers were identified in the study.
 36

An important barrier was the need by most women to honor the desire to balance

home life with career demands. Attempting to achieve the balance resulted in a reduction

in the time available for networking. Limited access to male executive networking with

male coworkers and organizational superiors resulted in fewer opportunities for

promotion. Many women felt the need to solicit consideration for promotional

opportunities on both the domestic and international fronts.

Coincident with limited access to male networks was the unremitting, oppressive

knowledge of being a female operating in a male domain (2001). Many women felt

emotionally isolated and lonely. Finally, women believed they must work more

efficiently and effectively than did their male counterparts to be considered for executive

job openings.

Lockwood (2007) conducted a meta-analysis and identified 12 gender-based

barriers impeding the advancement of women to senior executive positions or high

income jobs. Among the more egregious of the barriers were old boy networks

controlling corporate polices on compensation, career development training, and

promotion policies. Lockwood concluded HR executives should spearhead domestic and

international policy initiatives to develop female leaders and eliminate gender bias.

Prime and Moss-Racusin (2009b), based on a mixed method research, indicated

increased awareness of gender bias leads to increased acceptance by men of the need to

achieve gender equality. The study was focused on surveys and in-depth interviews with

senior male businesspersons. The objective of Prime and Moss-Racusin’s study was to

identify men’s suggestions about how to raise men’s awareness of the pernicious impact

of gender bias on corporate performance. Prime and Moss-Racusin sought to identify

 37

ways in which men could be motivated to eliminate gender bias from executive ranks. A

conclusion reached in the study was that when gender equality initiatives are focused on

the need to change both male and female attitudes toward leadership styles, the gender

imbalance between male and female leaders is likely to lessen. This focus may introduce

changes reflecting female-specific attitudes toward work and workers.

Prime and Moss-Racusin (2009a) subsequently conducted qualitative research in

an effort to identify ways in which men might be encouraged to become change agents.

One conclusion reached in the study was the need for men to become proactive in the

creation of corporate environments conducive to the promotion of women to senior

executive positions within industry. The impact of a more balanced male-female

approach is likely to call for changes in male attitudes toward female coworkers. A web-

based survey of 294 male executives sought to establish subjects’ willingness to engage

in diversity and inclusion training as a way to foster greater male endorsement,

acceptance, and support of women executives.

Four predictors of male interest and support were identified. One, male interest

and support for diversity and inclusion training hinged on the degree to which male

managers as a group evinced interest. Two, males were more likely to participate in

diversity and inclusion training if they believed it would improve service to external

communities affecting corporate performance. Third, participation in diversity and

inclusion training was dependent on male perceptions of the alignment of diversity and

inclusion training with the discharge of current job responsibilities. Finally, males who

perceived diversity and inclusion training as a zero-sum activity that might result in the
 38

loss of promotional opportunities for men were less likely to support or participate in

gender diversity training.

A quantitative survey by Foust-Cummings and Pomeroy (2009) of 465

international companies from 11 industry sectors was focused on benchmarking corporate

commitment to diversity and inclusion training initiatives. The survey sought to identify

diversity and inclusion training initiatives aimed at increasing the number of females

holding senior executive positions. Of the 179 companies reporting career-development

training initiatives, 116 reported formal diversity and inclusion training initiatives. Other

female specific initiatives included employee resource groups, mentoring, and

identification of high-potential employees as well as the inclusion of females in

succession plans, cross-functional job training, and gender-equity job rotation.

Foust et al. (2009) concluded growing numbers of companies are instituting a

variety of diversity and inclusion training programs to support female career

advancement. Companies including diversity and inclusion training as an integral part of

their corporate strategies show improved corporate performance. Moreover, companies

with active diversity and inclusion training programs gain human capital competitive

advantage from their abilities to recruit high caliber male and female talent.

Yap and Konrad’s (2009) multivariate quantitative analysis of a company data set

of 22,338 employees sought to establish links between the number of promotions and

race and gender. The number of promotions gained by an employee served as the

dichotomous dependent variable. Race and gender served as the key independent

variables. Yap and Konrad concluded promotion rates of visible minority women were

significantly lower than were those of white men, white women, and visible minority
 39

men. Moreover, initial hire rates for visible minorities were lower than were the rates for

white men.

In addition, Yap and Konrad found that visible minorities held lower ranking jobs

than white men with similar qualifications and experience. The net effect of such race

and gender bias has been the creation of a lower tier of middle management employees

who are passed over for higher-level managerial positions. Yap and Konrad ascribed the

promotion bottleneck caused by race and gender bias to the sticky floor phenomenon.

Meta-analysis conducted by Carter and Silva (2010), contradicted longstanding

claims about the management pipeline holding too few women who are qualified for

promotion to senior executive positions (Helfat, Harris, & Wolfson, 2006). Carter and

Silva’s analysis was drawn from a web-based survey of 9,927 male and female MBA

graduates. Of these, 4,143 male and female MBA graduates who were employed fulltime

when the survey was administered and comprised the sample upon which the discoveries

were based. Carter and Silva found that despite equal numbers of male and female mid-

level managers, women continued to fall behind men in the realization of senior

executive- position career objectives.

Proponents of capabilities theory would argue some women make a choice not to

pursue promotional opportunities. Cornelius and Skinner (2008) conducted a qualitative

research survey of 40 senior executives to identify differences in the way men and

women measure career success. Based on capabilities theory, Cornelius and Skinner

explored the link between lower levels of women in senior executive positions and

conscious decisions by women not to pursue promotion in favor of other life-style goals.
 40

Cornelius and Skinner concluded that male respondents measured personal

success in terms of career-related progress and achievement. Female respondents defined

personal success in relation to the achievement of personal quality of life objectives and

were willing to adjust upward career objectives to fit personal lifestyle goals. Cornelius

and Skinner further concluded male respondents were beginning to question traditional

measurements of career success in favor of the ability to devote more time to family.

Most men were apparently unwilling to challenge the status quo openly.

In a case study by Weissinger (2009), another dimension to gender discrimination

was added through the identification of ways in which social class, race, and gender

funnel individuals into certain career tracks. Weissinger based a case study on a content

analysis of legal documents relating to the class action lawsuit against Wal-Mart. In

addition, Weissinger undertook biographical analysis of personal data provided by 110

women associated with the lawsuits as a means to understand the experiences of other

female plaintiffs.

Weissinger (2009) identified six biographical factors common to the majority of

complainants. Of these, Weissinger postulated social class, gender, and race as the

dominant impediments blocking career advancement. In addition, Weissinger noted age

and family composition as barriers obstructing promotion to managerial positions.

Weissinger concluded Wal-Mart fostered an operating environment predisposing the

acceptance of behavior conducive to discrimination against female employees. Moreover,

white women received more favorable career advancement consideration than did black

and minority co-plaintiffs.

 41

Not everyone chooses to litigate. Lee’s (2005) mixed method convenience sample

survey of 150 police officers produced 101 responses (24 females and 85 males). Almost

60% of female officers stipulated the need for equal employment opportunity and

affirmative action legislation as necessary for the advancement of female officers (2005,

p. 66). Slightly more than a quarter of male officers evinced similar convictions about the

need for equal employment opportunity and affirmative action legislation as a means of

ensuring promotion equity for male and female officers. Lee concluded equal

employment opportunity and affirmative action has not imbued law enforcement agencies

with the resolve to implement the law, despite the law enforcement agencies covered in

the study having equal employment opportunity and affirmative action policies in place.

Gender equity discrimination is not limited to the United States, as demonstrated

in an empirical study of Fortune 1000 companies in the United Kingdom (2006).

Structured interview questionnaires were administered to 80 companies in the UK’s

small-medium business sector. The questionnaire was designed to identify HR policies

and practices promoting and supporting gender-based equal opportunity goals and

objectives within the companies. In the survey, respondents were asked about

implementation levels of gender-based equal opportunity goals and objectives. A final

research objective was to answer the question of whether companies employing HR

professionals developed and implemented formal gender-based equal opportunity policies

and practices.

Ten of the 80 respondents surveyed did not know if their companies employed an

HR specialist. Survey responses from those individuals were eliminated from data
 42

analysis. Of the remaining 70 respondents, only 24 had formal training in the

requirements of equal opportunity law.

The Woodhams and Lupton (2006) survey revealed, while the presence of HR

professionals influenced the creation of gender equity policies, the presence of HR

professionals did not guarantee the implementation of such policies. In the survey, 31

subjects acknowledged posing different questions to male and female job applicants, and

23 admitted applying different selection criteria to candidates according to the gender of

the applicant. Fourteen acknowledged asking female candidates about childcare

commitments, and 25 stated they would not employ a pregnant applicant. Finally, 13

subjects indicated they were taking steps to align more closely the number of men and

women in their workforce to address gender imbalance.

Woodhams and Lupton (2006) concluded that HR professionals in small and

medium-sized businesses have enough managerial influence to insure the inclusion of

gender-based equal opportunity policies. However, HR professionals lacked the

organizational power to implement the policies. Woodhams and Lupton (2006)

concluded that the high levels of gender-based bias would seem to indicate many HR

professionals are guilty of gender bias. Woodhams and Lupton offer no reasons for the

disparity between policy and practice.

Workplace Discrimination

The next generation of females in line to enter the workforce is Generation Y

(Gen Y) (Eisner & Harvey, 2009). Gen Y is comprised of people born from the early

1980s onward (Eisner & Harvey, 2009). On entering the workforce, Gen Y women

expect promotion to higher-level managerial roles within two years. Fully two-thirds of
 43

Gen Y women anticipate promotion from entry-level managerial positions by moving to

new employment within five years of entering the workforce (Eisner & Harvey, 2009, p.

21).

In a qualitative survey, Eisner and Harvey (2009) questioned 253 Gen Y business

undergraduate students (137 men and 116 women) about gender equity in the workplace.

Specifically, Eisner and Harvey researched the degree to which Gen Y perceptions of

gender equity align with prevailing glass ceiling phenomenon realities. The study applied

descriptive statistics to analyze findings in comparative studies.

Eisner and Harvey (2009) found the majority of respondents perceived gender

discrimination to be an issue but still expressed a preference for male bosses over female

bosses. Over two-thirds of the respondents pointed to lack of flexibility by women, not

overt gender discrimination, to be the major cause underlying the low promotion rate of

women to senior-management positions (Eisner & Harvey, 2009, p. 20). A simple

majority of the respondents expressed the view that women must be prepared to sacrifice

their personal lives if they wish to succeed to higher-level positions. Failure to rank work

commitments above personal lifestyle choices is a major barrier to the formation of the

networks essential for promotion to higher-level executive positions.

In a mixed method three-part, multi-national study, Major et al. (2002) explored

the role of group status in the ideological legitimization of gender discrimination as a

workplace barrier to upward mobility. Some 421 undergraduate university students (183

men, 236 women, and 2 of unspecified gender) responded to a three-part survey

questionnaire. The study population was comprised of racial groupings (161 European

Americans, 133 Latino Americans, and 127 African Americans). Major et al. examined
 44

the connections between dependent variables perceptions of personal discrimination and

upward organizational mobility and independent variables group status in study 1,

ethnicity in study 2, and gender in study 3.

Statistical analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) for the three studies confirmed

endorsement of upward mobility potential by low-status individuals removed negative

attributions of discrimination toward higher-group status individuals. Conversely,

endorsement of upward mobility potential by higher-status individuals resulted in the

attribution of discrimination against lower status groups. Based on the results of study 3,

males’ endorsement of individual mobility correlated strongly with males’ denial of

workplace gender discrimination when men were promoted to managerial positions. In

contrast, males ascribed workplace discrimination to situations in which women were

promoted to managerial positions.

A separate quantitative survey of 537 female and 506 male employees of a

multinational company found women at all managerial levels perceived gender

discrimination as a primary barrier to personal career advancement (Metz & Moss, 2008).

Logistic and hierarchical multiple regression analysis of the survey data revealed males

advanced more rapidly than did their female counterparts. The conclusions to the analysis

found that factors such as commitment to family and concomitant reduced career

aspirations did not appear to account for the under representation of women. As such,

gender discrimination per se cannot be discounted as an impediment to the advancement

of women to executive positions.

Hoyt conducted an experimental quantitative survey and concluded women who

adopt a “think-leader think-male” (2005, p. 3) attitude stimulate negative gender

 45

stereotype responses in male colleagues. Subjects in the study were 85 university women

split into two groups. One group was administered a questionnaire designed to activate

stereotyped male trait-leadership efficacy. The other, non-activated group was

administered a gender-neutral questionnaire. The gender-neutral questionnaire was used

as a control against which to measure gender biased responses by the activated group.

Hierarchical linear regression analysis used the variance of the slope as a

predictor of the leadership efficacy stereotype of respondents. ANCOVA tests further

identified the relationship between pre- and post-leadership efficacy. The adoption of the

think-leader think-male stereotype designated traditional female stereotype qualities such

as sensitivity, nurturing, and communality as unsuited in leaders. However, women who

adopt the think-leader think-male persona are subject to criticism with respect to the

abrogation of female qualities.

In a qualitative research study, Hoobler, Wayne, and Lemmon (2009)

administered a 7-point Likert-type scale questionnaire to a sample population comprised

of 178 subjects drawn from a Fortune 100 company. Of these, 52 were managers (44

males and 8 females), and 126 were subordinates (83 males and 43 females). The study

was designed to discover male and female perceptions of gender-based barriers to

promotion. Factor analysis revealed managers discounted female subordinates’

minimization of family-conflict influence on work performance and suitability for

promotion.

Hoobler et al., (2009) concluded that male and female executives perceived

family-work conflicts as a deterrent to the promotion of female subordinates to high-level

executive positions. Some 76% of managerial and 73% of subordinate respondents

 46

indicated they had children (2009, p. 944). Managers ascribed negative attributes to

female subordinates based on their family status and judged them less fit for promotion to

leadership positions.

Women are particularly vulnerable to discrimination linked to motherhood. Two

quantitative experimental studies by Heilman and Okimoto (2008) explored the influence

of gender and parenthood on promotion decisions. The first study was comprised of 65

undergraduate students, 47 of whom were female. The second included 100 subjects, 34

of whom were female, employed fulltime in the business community.

Both studies used a series of 9-point composite questions in tandem with a forced

choice question. Hypotheses were tested by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and between-

cell comparisons. Both studies concluded that the applicant’s gender did not influence

promotional decisions. However, female applicants who were mothers received more

negative screening recommendations than did childless female applicants (Heilman &

Okimoto, 2008). Screening recommendations of male applicants with children did not

refer to their roles as fathers, thereby confirming the status female as a key determinant in

promotion decisions.

Dencker (2008) examined the effect of corporate reductions in workforces on the

number of males and females promoted to management positions prior to, during, and

after restructuring in a longitudinal discrete-time event study. The 25-year data set was

comprised of 23,937 managers (18,262 males and 5,675 females). To the data set,

Dencker added contextual analysis of internal corporate documents and interviews with

several of the company’s HR managers.

 47

Dencker (2008) found male promotions declined during restructuring, while the

number of female promotions increased. Following restructuring, the number of female

promotions diminished to former pre-restructuring levels as compared to male

promotions. However, over the 25-year data-set period, the total number of males

promoted consistently exceeded that of females.

In an experimental quantitative study, Garcia-Retamero and López-Zafra (2006)

examined the influence of role congruity theory in determining evidence of gender bias in

the selection of female leaders in male-congenial environments. The sample population

was comprised of 326 men and 379 women. Subjects read a descriptive scenario in which

a male or a female candidate with similar work experience was under consideration for a

promotion to a managerial position.

Scenarios described a male-congenial, female-congenial, or an unspecified

environment. A Likert-style questionnaire was used to determine the influence of gender

on subjects’ perceptions of a candidate’s suitability for the stipulated leadership role.

Analysis centered on four response clusters: Work-related, trait-related, causal

attributions, and perceptions of the candidates’ leadership style congruity. Using

ANOVA tests, differences between age-differentiated subject groups were established.

Garcia-Retamero and López-Zafra (2006) concluded gender stereotype processes

favor the promotion of male over female applicants into leadership positions. Candidates’

selections also favored males irrespective of industry gender congruity. In essence,

stereotyped perceptions of leadership as a male domain led to bias against the selection of

female candidates.
 48

A meta-analysis undertaken by Eagly (2007) concluded that gender bias

influences the selection process in favor of males, regardless of the gender of the

person(s) making the promotion decision. Although research pointed indirectly to the

perception that women manifest effective leadership styles more than men do, the

perception does not lead to increases in the number of women appointed to executive

leadership roles. Some form of prejudice against women exists when considering

appointing women to leadership positions. Eagly (2007) noted studies showed clearly

both men and women prefer to work for a male boss.

In a multimedia, quantitative, experimental field research study conducted by

Warning and Buchanan (2009), 226 male and female adults were surveyed to determine

gender bias in female workers with respect to male versus female managers. Social

identity theory was used to ground the research. Subjects viewed a video vignette and

were asked to complete a survey containing a dispositional index and attitudinal

measures. Descriptive statistical, ANOVA, and regression analysis tools were used to

analyze the data collected. Contrary to the predictions of social identity theory,

membership in a group failed to influence women toward female supervisors positively.

Based on the research, Warning and Buchanan (2009) concluded negative female bias

might originate from experience, not gender stereotypes.

In a multivariate quantitative analysis study, Good and Rudman (2010)

investigated the influence of benevolent and hostile sexism on male interviewers’ hiring

recommendations of female applicants for managerial positions. The sample included

102 female and 103 male undergraduate psychology students. A transcript of one of three

job interviews by a male executive of a potential female candidate was given to subjects.
 49

Interviews were manipulated to present the interviewer as sexist in either a hostile or

benevolent sense.

Survey subjects were asked to judge if an applicant were qualified and deserved

to be hired based on individual acceptance or rejection of the benevolent sexist treatment

displayed by male interviewers. Good and Rudman (2010) concluded, with one

exception, that benevolent sexism did not necessarily result in unfavorable evaluations of

either the competence or suitability of women for managerial positions. The exception

occurred when applicants exhibited open hostility to benevolent sexism by the male

interviewer. Applicants displaying open hostility received low competency ratings and

were deemed unsuitable for hire.

Callahan and Tomaszewski (2007) undertook qualitative analysis of interview

transcripts collected in a previous mixed method study. They selected nine transcripts

with the aim of isolating how women perceived female participation in male-dominated

working and operating environments. According to Callahan and Tomaszewski (2007),

male-dominated informal networks, sometimes referred to as old boys clubs, are well

established in organizations.

The long-standing domination of “informal communities of practice” (Callahan &

Tomaszewski, 2007, p. 259) within organizations by males, with the concomitant

exclusion of most women, has resulted in women forming female informal communities

of practice. The practice has served to marginalize women’s participation in male-

dominated informal decision-making processes. The exclusion of most women from

inner circle discussions reduces personal visibility and the ability to build personal
 50

relationships with male decision makers, two strategies held by both sexes to be essential

to career advancement (Sabattini & Dinolfo, 2010).

A qualitative survey by Sabattini (2008) identified a number of unwritten

workplace rules and personal behaviors associated with positive career advancement. The

survey population was comprised of 65 men and women drawn from a cross-section of

functional executive roles, industries, and geographic locations. Networking and

relationship building were identified as the primary unwritten rule governing personal

advancement. Visibility was found to be an important key to career advancement. Only

20% (Sabattini, 2008, p. 5) of those interviewed encouraged the development of a career

plan.

Drawing from earlier quantitative web-based research, Sabattini and Dinolfo

(2010) identified the exclusion of most women from male networks as a serious

impediment to career advancement by women. The survey was comprised of 700

respondents (339 female, 248 men, and 133 persons of unspecified gender). Building

networks and forming relationships with internal and external organizational superiors

were identified as the most important factors in securing promotion to executive

positions.

Two other factors ranked high in the hierarchy of strategies for securing

promotion. One, female candidates must make themselves visible to key decision makers,

most of whom are male. Two, female candidates must actively engage in organizational

politics by lobbying male superiors about their work contributions and performance.

In addition to glass ceiling barriers faced by females seeking promotion to senior

executive levels, the progress of black women is impeded by two additional barriers; race
 51

and class (Johnson, 2006). Based in grounded theory, Johnson (2006) initiated a

qualitative study to investigate factors contributing to the low number of African

American females in senior executive positions. Johnson also examined the influence of

race, gender, and class on the promotion of black females.

Johnson (2006) interviewed 10 African American women employed in middle-

management positions. Interviews consisted of demographic, semi-structured, and open-

ended questions drawn from an interview guide. The discoveries of the study confirmed

race, gender, and class act as barriers impeding the progress of African American females

to senior executive positions. The small sample size prevented generalization of study

findings.

Race negatively affects the advancement of women to senior executive positions.

Ortiz and Roscigno (2009) concluded in a meta-analysis of qualitative and quantitative

data that black and white women are subject to discriminatory dismissal practices. The

data analyzed by Ortiz and Roscigno was obtained from the Ohio Civil Rights

Commission’s discrimination archives. Ortiz and Roscigno admitted the potential for data

bias insofar as claimed discrimination does not equate to actual discrimination. To

preclude such bias, Ortiz and Roscigno limited the study to cases determined by the Ohio

Civil Rights Commission to be discriminatory. Cases settled out of court in favor of the

plaintiff(s) were also included in the research.

Notwithstanding possible data bias, Ortiz and Roscigno concluded black women

are more likely to experience higher levels of negative discrimination during hiring and

promotional reviews than are white females. Black females attribute discrimination to

their race and gender; white females interpret discrimination as gender-based. No matter
 52

the perceived attribution, Ortiz and Roscigno concluded, “Lower status women and

others who feel vulnerable are less likely to file a charge of discrimination” (p. 342).

A mixed methods study by Das (2009) examined sexual harassment in the U.S.

workplace. One purpose of the study was to query “the prevalence and risk factors of

lifetime workplace sexual harassment among both women and men” (p. 909). A sample

of 4,366 men and women were asked if they would be willing to be interviewed on the

subject of sexual harassment in the workplace. The sample was representative of the

national population of the adult population (aged 18-59) of the United Sates. Of these,

3,432 (78.6%) agreed to be interviewed. The sample was further limited to subjects who

had worked; thereby reducing the sample to 2,999 subjects (1,692 women and 1,307

men).

A two-phase approach was used to obtain responses from subjects. A face-to-face

interview between the subject and an interviewer initiated the process. The second phase

afforded subjects an opportunity to respond privately to potentially sensitive questions

using a self-administered questionnaire. Responses were analyzed using age-adjusted

univariate and multivariate logistic models for both men and women.

Das reported a statistically significant gender difference in the incidence of sexual

harassment experienced by the subjects participating in the study. Regression analysis of

sexual harassment against the gender of subjects in the study revealed that women were

46% (2009, p. 917) more likely to be the subject of sexual harassment over the course of

a working lifetime than were their male counterparts. The study did not assess the

prevalence rate of sexual harassment in the workplace.

 53

A self-reporting questionnaire study by Nielsen, Bjørkelo, Notelaers, and

Einarsen (2010) investigated the prevalence of and effects of sexual harassment in

Norway. Three estimation methods were used in the analysis of the data collected from

subjects. The sample population of 4,121 Norwegian employees was drawn from a

population of 4,500 employees registered with the Norwegian Central Employment

Register. The sample was taken as representative of working population at the time of

administration. Anonymous self-report questionnaires were delivered to subjects through

the Norwegian postal service.

Of the 2,349 respondents who responded (57% response rate), 52% were female

and 48% were male (2010, p. 257). Twenty percent of those who completed the

questionnaire held leadership positions. The mean age of the sample population was

43.79 years.

In addition to a count of self-labeled victimization and self-reported perceptions

of exposure to sexual harassment behaviors, the data were examined for the incidence or

prevalence of sexual harassment using the latent class cluster analysis technique.

Incidences of self-labeled sexual harassment were 1.1% over the subject populations’

lifetime workplace employment as this compared to a last six months exposure rate of

18.4% (2010, p. 252). Latent class cluster analysis estimated that 2.2% of the sample

population were the target of frequent sexual harassment. Nielsen et al., found that

women (72.9%) were subjected to higher rates of sexual harassment than men (27.1%)

(2010, p. 262).

Gender Discrimination Lawsuits

The passage of the equal employment and affirmative action legislation in the
 54

1960s and 1970s prohibited discrimination based on race and gender. The laws devolving

from the two Acts offered women and minorities the possibility of legal action against

employers perceived to operate environments conducive to race and gender

discrimination. A number of individual and class action gender discrimination lawsuits

began appearing in the courts in the 1990s and after 2000.

Stamato’s (2000) empirical review of individual gender discrimination cases

presage the kinds of class action suits that subsequently emerged. In 1998, Allison K.

Schieffelin, a bond salesperson with Morgan Stanley, filed a complaint with the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging she had been denied an

executive promotion based solely on her female gender. The EEOC brought a suit against

Morgan Stanley on Schieffelin’s behalf in 1999. Subsequent EEOC discovery revealed a

pattern of gender discrimination by Morgan Stanley. In 2001, the EEOC expanded the

suit to include a class of similarly situated female employees within Morgan Stanley. In

2004, Morgan Stanley made an out-of-court settlement for $54 million, of which

Schieffelin received $12 million.

In 2005, Seligman (2005) undertook an empirical review of a class action brought

by six female Wal-Mart employees. The suit alleged wage and promotion discrimination

by Wal-Mart against 1.6 million women in 3,400 Wal-Mart stores since 1998. A federal

judge certified the class action in 2004. Wal-Mart’s subsequent appeal was dismissed in

April 2010 when the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed the lower court judgment of

discrimination with respect to wages and promotion accorded to female employees.

Subsequently, the Supreme Court agreed to consider an appeal lodged by Wal-Mart

asking for the Circuit Court’s decision to be overturned. Wal-Mart’s appeal was upheld
 55

by the Supreme Court in a decision rendered on June 20, 2011 (Wal-Mart v. Dukes et al.,

2011).

The question of whether women can best enhance their career prospects by way

of litigation remains open. Kalev and Dobbin’s (2006) mixed method survey of 833 HR

managers investigated if the company employing the HR manager had been the subject of

an Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) review. The study also

asked if the company had been the object of a lawsuit. Descriptive statistical analysis was

used to categorize the responses that were then compared to annual EEOC EEO-1 returns

in 1999, the latest data publically available. Managerial diversity served as the dependent

variable, namely, the percentage of white men and women and the percentage of African

American men and women who held managerial positions. Independent variables were

comprised of regulatory events, namely, one or more OFCCP compliance reviews or

Title VII litigation on management diversity. The main objective of the research was to

compare and contrast the influence of regulatory events and lawsuits on the establishment

of diversity within management ranks.

Two-thirds of the surveyed companies had been the subject of Title VII lawsuits.

Kalev and Dobbin (2006) concluded lawsuits produce uniform positive increases in the

number of white women and African American men and women in managerial positions.

However, gains made are subject to reversal by presidential appointments of justices who

did not support the enforcement of diversity by legal means. One third of the companies

had undergone compliance reviews. Compliance reviews also served to increase the

numbers of white women and African American men and women in managerial

positions. Long-term, Kalev and Dobbin (2006) speculated compliance reviews

 56

conducted in the 1970s introduced positive changes in behavior. Subsequent compliance

reviews undertaken in the 1980s and 1990s have failed to maintain the increases made

during the 1970s.

Kalev and Dobbin (2006) concluded both compliance reviews and litigation have

a role to play in the creation of diversity within management ranks. Interventions based

on compliance review policy result in permanent corporate policies aimed at increasing

the numbers of white women and African American men and women in managerial

positions. Litigation serves to punish companies that discriminate. Faced with

punishment, companies alter corporate policy to effect less permanent compliance with

the current law. Future modifications of such laws result in diminishing the number of

covered parties. However, Kalev and Dobbin (2006) concluded both approaches have a

role to play in mitigating workplace discrimination.

Conclusions

Despite legislation proscribing gender as a means of excluding women from

senior executive positions within organizations, decision makers continue to exclude

most women from such positions (Pichler, et al., 2008). In addition, affirmative action

legislation has not succeeded in securing senior executive positions for women as a group

(Iyer, 2008). The development of policies designed to remove glass ceiling barriers have

likewise proved effete (Falk, 2010). Workplace discrimination and gender-based barriers

remain strong deterrents to the advancement of women to senior executive positions

within business (Eisner & Harvey, 2009).

Elimination of the glass ceiling phenomenon as a barrier to the advancement of

women to senior executive positions is essential if gender equity in the workplace is to be

 57

realized (Carter & Silva, 2010). Government agencies maintain statistical data on the

number of women in the workforce as well as the number of women who own a small or

medium-sized business. Private sector companies maintain statistical data on the number

of women occupying CEO positions in Fortune 1000 companies, but not in the small and

medium-sized business sector. A review of the literature appears to indicate an absence of

research on the impact of the FGCC’s recommendations on the promotion of women to

senior-level executive positions in the small and medium-sized business sector. There is

also an absence in the literature of research on the processes that influence the promotion

of women to senior executive levels in small and medium-sized businesses.

The absence of research on the impact of the FGCC’s recommendations on the

promotion of women to senior-level executive positions in the small and medium-sized

business sector lead to the conclusion that further research was required. The aim of this

quantitative study was to discover the perspectives of HR professionals on the effect of

the FGCC’s recommendations as a means to eliminate the glass ceiling in the medium-

sized business sector. It is anticipated that the research will provide a better

understanding of HR professionals’ perspectives on glass ceiling related processes in

medium-sized businesses. In so doing, the research may also reveal new approaches to

the elimination of glass ceiling barriers in the medium-sized business sector.

Summary

Three subject areas were presented in Chapter 2. First, primary search terms,

database sources, government, and private data sources were documented. Second, a

historical review was conducted in three topic areas: Gender equity legislation (Braun,

1995; Reynolds, 1987), affirmative action legislation (Kathuria, 2009), and affirmative
 58

action policies (Iyer, 2008) relating to the glass ceiling phenomenon. Third, current

findings relating to four glass ceiling related topic areas were reviewed. The four topic

areas were the glass ceiling phenomenon (U.S. Department of Labor Federal Glass

Ceiling Commission, 1995), gender-based barriers (Prime & Moss-Racusin, 2009a,

2009b), workplace discrimination (Eisner & Harvey, 2009), and gender discrimination

lawsuits (Kalev & Dobbin, 2006).

The chapter also contained a number of conclusions. First, legislation proscribing

gender as a means of excluding women from senior executive positions within

organizations has proved ineffective (Pichler, Simpson, & Stroh, 2008). Second,

affirmative action legislation has not succeeded in securing senior executive positions for

women as a group (Iyer, 2008). Nor has the development of policies designed to remove

glass ceiling barriers proved effective (Falk, 2010). Workplace discrimination and

gender-based barriers remain strong deterrents to the advancement of women to senior

executive positions within business (2009). Elimination of the glass ceiling phenomenon

as a barrier to the advancement of women to senior executive positions is essential if

gender equity in the workplace is to be realized (Carter & Silva, 2010).

There is an absence in the literature of research on the impact of the FGCC’s

recommendations on the promotion of women to senior-level executive positions in the

small and medium-sized business sector. Moreover, a gap exists in the literature

pertaining to the processes that influence the promotion of women to executive levels in

small and medium-sized businesses. The absence of research in the foregoing two areas

led to the conclusion that further research was required. Chapter 3 contains an outline of

the research method used in the study, the data collection and validation procedures, the
 59

target population, the sample population size, the data analysis plan, and justification of

the data analysis plan.

 60

CHAPTER 3: METHOD

The purpose of this quantitative method study was to determine if significant

relationships exist between the glass ceiling processes that affect the selection of female

candidates for senior-level executive positions in medium-sized U. S. companies. The

glass ceiling continues to be a barrier obstructing the promotion of women to senior

management positions within American businesses (Rosenfeld, 2009). The goal of this

quantitative study was to investigate the perspectives of HR professionals employed at

medium-sized companies on company initiatives to eliminate the glass ceiling. The

specific purpose of the study was to determine whether the FGCC’s recommendations

aimed at increasing the number of female senior-level executives have proved effective in

medium-sized American companies.

Chapter 3 contains an outline of the research method used in the study. The

rationale for the quantitative method used for the study is described in detail. The

appropriateness of the quantitative method used for the study is set out in detail. Also

discussed are reasons why a qualitative method was inappropriate for the study. The

chapter also contains an elaboration of the data collection procedures and the data

validation procedures as well as the target population, the sample population size, the

data analysis plan, and justification of the data analysis plan. The chapter finishes with

conclusions and a summary.

Research Method and Design Appropriateness

A quantitative method is appropriate when the objective of the research is to test

the relationship among dependent and independent variables (Creswell, 2009). The

objective of this quantitative method study was to explore HR professionals’ perspectives

 61

on the glass ceiling processes that affect the selection of female candidates for senior-

level executive positions in medium-sized U. S. companies. Quantitative studies are

appropriate when the purpose of the research is to test the relationship among measured

variables, provide unbiased numeric data for objective analysis, and the generalization of

results across the population (Creswell, 2009). The intent of the study was to test HR

professionals’ perspectives on the relationship among three glass ceiling processes that

affect the selection of female candidates for senior-level executive positions in medium-

sized U. S. companies. Subject to the limitations of the study, the quantitative method

allows for the generalization of results across the population.

Other research methods considered but not selected included the qualitative and

mixed methods research designs. The qualitative methodology permits the collection and

analysis of subjects’ subjective views (Creswell, 2009). Qualitative studies are

appropriate when the study is designed to allow exploration and understanding of the

meaning attributed by individuals or groups to a common problem (Creswell, 2009). A

qualitative research design facilitates in-depth, contextual exploration and discovery of

subjects’ perceptions, but external validity is one major weakness of the qualitative

approach (Marshall & Rossman, 2006). Mixed methods studies are appropriate when

both qualitative and quantitative data are available (Creswell, 2009). The absence of prior

quantitative research in the areas under investigation by the study obviated the mixed

methods approach.

A correlational research design was appropriate for the study because the research

involved “the measurement of two or more relevant variables and an assessment of the

relationship between or among those variables” (Stangor, 2010, p. 16). The study has a
 62

maximum of six levels and three dependent variables. One benefit derived from the use

of a correlational research design is the ability to assess human behavior in everyday

work environments and based thereon to predict future behaviors (Stangor, 2010).

Other research designs, including case study, grounded theory, phenomenology,

and ethnography were deemed inappropriate for the study. The case study approach was

not be suitable for the study because the approach requires access to documents and

artifacts as well as an opportunity to interview and observe respondents (Yin, 2009). A

qualitative grounded theory design was not apposite because the study did not intend to

formulate new theories (Bryant & Chamaz, 2007). The phenomenological approach was

not fitting because the approach limits research to an examination of how individual

respondents make sense of research-specific life experiences (Smith, 2009). The

ethnographic approach was not suitable because such research requires observation of

subjects over a long period, which would lie beyond the timeframe required for a

dissertation (Jones & Watt, 2010).

Population

Population is an aggregate of units from which a sample can be drawn for

investigation (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010). A sample population for the study was drawn

from the small and medium-sized business sector in the states of Georgia and Florida.

The primary goal of this quantitative study was to determine if significant erlationships

exist between the processes that affect the selection of female candidates for senior-level

executive positions in the small and medium-sized business sector.

The target population consisted of 3,956 HR professionals with known opt-in e-

mail addresses in medium-sized businesses in the states Georgia and Florida.

 63

Demographic information was collected to allow demographic grouping of subject

responses by age, gender, ethnicity, highest level of education attained, and company

size. No minimum qualification was required of subjects.

Sampling

The research project involved a number of statistical analyses including a Pearson

product-moment correlation. Power analysis for a Pearson product-moment correlation

was performed to establish an adequate size sample based on statistical analyses, not

population. A power of 0.80, a medium effect size ( f 2 = 0.30) and an alpha significance

level of 0.05, were used to determine the sample size (Erdfelder, Buchner, & Klang,

2009). Empirical validity required a subject response rate of 84.

Data Collection Procedures

A web-based survey is an appropriate means of collecting data (Fowler, 2009).

The administration of the survey and subsequent data collection was web-based.

SurveyMonkey was used to host the survey. An e-mail list was rented from a commercial

marketing list service provider. The e-mail list provider provided a report of the number

of e-mails sent, the number delivered, the number that were opened, and the number of

click-throughs to the link page.

The e-mail list contained the names of 3,956 HR professionals employed by

companies in Georgia and Florida that employ between 50 and 499 employees. To limit

the study to the small and medium-sized business sector, excluded from the list were

educational services, government offices, membership organizations, museums, art

galleries and gardens, social services, and the U.S. Post Office. All recipients had

indicated their willingness to receive e-mails from third parties renting the service
 64

providers e-mail list by an opt-in agreement. The e-mail list provider allowed people

included in its lists to unsubscribe at any time.

A Letter of Introduction and Informed Consent (see Appendix B) was provided to

the marketing list service provider, who e-mailed both to prospective subjects. The letter

of introduction introduced the purpose of the study. The e-mail also contained informed

consent information. Both the letter of introduction and the informed consent information

were in the body of the e-mail. The final section of the e-mail contained a URL link to

the web-based survey.

The URL link allowed subjects access to the survey gate-entry page, which

contained identical informed consent information to the information received by the

subject in the marketing list service provider e-mail. Access to the survey required

subjects to give informed consent electronically. SurveyMonkey recorded a respondent

time stamp indicating that the participant had given informed consent. The marketing list

service provider does not disclose e-mail addresses to renters. SurveyMonkey does not

collect personal information or other identifiable electronic information such as IP

addresses from survey subjects.

Subjects who gave informed consent in question one were allowed access to the

survey page. Invited subjects who did not give informed consent saw a screen that read

Thank You, and exited them from the survey. Subjects could elect not to answer

individual questions.

The final paragraph of the survey allowed respondents to withdraw. Respondents

who withdrew saw a screen thanking them and exiting them from the survey. If at any

stage of the online process respondents elect to withdraw from participation, their entire
 65

answer set will be deleted from the server. Because no personal information will be

collected it will be impossible for subjects to withdraw after clicking the submit survey

button. Subjects will be advised that survey submissions cannot be expunged in a

statement above the submit survey button.

In the event that the response rate fell below the required sample response rate,

provision was made to send follow-up e-mails. Follow-up e-mails were sent only to

original e-mail recipients who did not click-through following receipt of the previous

invitation. Subjects who unsubscribed from the list at any time after the original mailing

did not receive a follow-up e-mail.

Parsons (2007) found turnaround time for web surveys averaged 5.97 days. The

follow-up e-mails used in the study were designed to remind recipients of the original

invitation and repeat the invitation to participate in the survey. Follow-up e-mails

contained the same wording as the first letter of introduction and informed consent with

the exception that the subject line was changed to include the words follow-up along with

a brief introductory reminder statement.

Pilot Study Procedures

The validity of a questionnaire design determines “relevance of the design or

measure for the question being investigated or the appropriateness of the design or

measure for coming to accurate conclusions” (Vogt, 2007, p. 118). A valid research

design provides accurate information about the subject under enquiry. Validated survey

questions provide accurate insight into the survey populations beliefs and opinions (Vogt,

2007).
 66

There is an absence in the literature of research on the effect of the FGCC’s

recommendations on the promotion of women to senior-level executive positions in the

small and medium-sized business sector. Moreover, there is also an absence in the

literature of research on the relationship between the processes influencing the

promotion of women in the small and medium-sized business sector. The combined

effect of those factors means that the study appears to be the first to attempt to determine

if relationships exist between the processes that affect the selection of female candidates

for senior-level executive positions in the small and medium-sized business sector.

Survey questions used in this research will require validation before administration to the

sample population.

A pilot test was deemed necessary to validate the survey questions proposed for

the study. The pilot test was conducted following ARB and IRB approval. A Pilot Study

Letter of Introduction and Informed Consent (see Appendix C) was e-mailed to 12 HR

professionals who work for small and medium-sized business sector companies. The

letter of introduction and informed consent invited their participation in the pilot study.

The e-mail explained the purpose of the pilot study and invited the recipient to participate

in the pilot study. The letter of introduction and informed consent introduced the purpose

of the study and the nature of the pilot study phase. The e-mail will also contained

Informed Consent information. The final section of the e-mail contained a URL link to

the web-based survey.

The URL linked those agreeing to take part in the pilot study to a survey gate-

entry page. The pilot study process duplicated the proposed survey process. The gate-

entry page contained identical informed consent information to that received by the
 67

subjects who subsequently participated in the study. Access to the survey required pilot

study subjects to give informed consent electronically. SurveyMonkey recorded a

respondent time stamp indicating that each subject had given informed consent.

Pilot study subjects who gave informed consent in question one were allowed

access to the survey questions. Subjects who do not give informed consent saw a screen

that read “Thank You,” and exited them from the survey. Each survey question contained

a no response option. The final paragraph of the survey allowed respondents to withdraw.

Respondents who withdrew saw a screen thanking them and exiting them from the

survey. The survey questions were contained on a web page. If at any stage of the online

process subjects elected to withdraw from the pilot study, their entire answer set was

deleted from the server.

Pilot test subjects were excluded from the study, although their responses were

presented and comments discussed in Chapter Four to demonstrate how their feedback

improved the survey questions. The pilot study solicited subject feedback on the

appropriateness of the questions and what changes subjects might suggest to strengthen

the survey instrument (Arain, Campbell, Cooper, & Lancaster, 2010). In addition, pilot

test subjects were asked to record the time taken to complete the questionnaire and

whether subjects thought the completion time was reasonable. The final survey

instrument was amended to reflect pilot test subject feedback.

Data Analysis

Data were entered into version 18.0 IBM Predictive Analytics Software (PASW)

for Windows. Descriptive statistics were performed to describe the sample demographics.

The research variables that will be used in the study were subjected to descriptive
 68

statistical analysis. Relative class frequencies and percentages were calculated for

nominal data. Nominal data were categorical and dichotomous. Central tendency

statistics (means/standard deviations) were computed for continuous (interval/ratio) data

(Howell, 2011).

Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) test was used to examine the research

question. Specifically, one Pearson product-moment correlation was conducted to assess

the relationship between the total number of processes that effect selection to senior-level

executive positions and the reported percentage of female executives in the company. A

Pearson correlation coefficient (r) test is the appropriate analysis because all variables are

continuous (interval/ratio data) and the hypothesis seeks to assess the relationship

between the two variables (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2011).

The number of impediments to promotion that effect the selection to senior-level

executive positions was measured by the count of the answers to survey question 10. The

number of operating policies that foster the promotion of women to senior-level

executive positions was measured by the count of the answers to survey question 11. The

number of compliance activities that effect the selection to senior-level executive

positions was measured by the count of the answers to survey question 12. The responses

to the number impediments to promotion, operating policies, and compliance activities

were summed together to create a total number of processes that effect selection to

senior-level executive positions. The number of female executives was measured by the

percentage of executive positions that are occupied by females. All variables in the

analysis will be treated as continuous data.

 69

The strength of relationships between two sets of interval-scaled variables is

described by the coefficient of correlation statistic. The coefficient of correlation statistic

is designated r and is frequently referred to as a Pearson product-moment correlation

coefficient. Pearson product-moment correlation is an appropriate bivariate statistic

because all variables in the study will be continuous (interval/ratio data) with Hypotheses

that seek to determine the relationships (Lind, et al., 2011).

Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients fall within a range of -1 (perfect

negative linear relationship) and +1 (perfect positive linear relationship) (Lind, et al.,

2011). An r-value of zero indicates that no relationship exists between the variables.

Negative r-values indicate an inverse relationship between the tested variables. A

negative r-value indicates that an increase in one variable coincides with a decrease in the

other variable. Positive r-values indicate a direct relationship between the tested

variables. A positive r-value indicates that an increase in one variable coincides with an

increase in the other variable (Lind, et al., 2011).

Cohen’s standard was used to evaluate the strength and direction of the

correlation coefficient. An r-value of .10 indicates a weak association, whereas an r-value

of .50 indicates a strong correlation between the two values. A correlation coefficient of

.30 represents a medium level of association (Cohen, 1988, 1992). Pallant (2010)

expanded the specificity of Cohen’s standard: An r-value less than .30 represents a weak

association, .30 to .49 indicates a medium association, and .50 or larger a strong

association.
 70

Summary

An outline of the research method used in the study was presented in this chapter.

The chapter contained a description of the quantitative research method. The

appropriateness of the quantitative research method was presented and supported.

The web-based survey method was supported as an appropriate means of

collecting data (Fowler, 2009). A pilot study will validate the web-based survey prior to

administration (Creswell, 2009; Fowler, 2009). The suitability of the data collection

procedures used to survey the sample population was validated (Vogt, 2007). Data

validation procedures as well as the target population and the sample population size

were set out and determined to be appropriate (Erdfelder, et al., 2008).

The chapter also contained the data analysis plan and justification of the

approach. The data analysis plan was supported and deemed appropriate. The Pearson

product-moment correlation statistic was described. The product-moment correlation

statistic was deemed appropriate for the determination of a significant relationship

between the processes affecting the selection of females to senior-level executive

positions (Lind, et al., 2011).

Chapter 4 contains the data collected during the web-based survey. The data were

analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. The analysis was used to

validate the research data collection method to support or reject the hypotheses.
 71

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS

The purpose of this quantitative study was to determine if three internal processes

that affect the promotion of women to executive positions correlate with the number of

female executives in small and medium-sized businesses, in Georgia and Florida. The

three internal processes selected for analysis were impediments to promotion, operating

policies, and policy enforcement activities. The absence of a relevant study to investigate

the effect of the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission’s (1995a, 1995b) recommendations

on the advancement of women to executive levels in small and medium-sized businesses

led to the creation of a survey tool specific to the goals of the study. A pilot study was

conducted to validate the proposed survey instrument (see Appendix D).

Chapter 4 contains a description of the data collection methods, data analysis,

population and sample, findings, conclusions and summaries for both the pilot study, and

the final survey administered to the sample population. The chapter contains two parts.

The first part relates to the pilot study. The second section reports the findings of the

study.

Pilot Study

The pilot study had five main objectives. The first objective was to validate the

web-based survey as a method of data collection. The next objective was to verify the

suitability of the data collection procedures used to survey the sample population. The

third objective was to identify data collection and analysis procedures that needed

revision based on what the pilot testing revealed. A fourth objective was to obtain subject

feedback on the appropriateness of the survey questions and ways in which the
 72

questionnaire might be improved. The fifth objective was to determine the time taken to

complete the survey.

Pilot Study Data Collection Method

The pilot study was administered via SurveyMonkey to 10 human resources

executives from Georgia. Subjects were advised that participation in the pilot study

would exclude them from participation in the study. Five sets of data were collected

during the pilot study:

1. Demographic data

2. Data relating to subject perceptions of the three internal areas of operation

identified as the focus of the study (impediments to promotion, operating

policies, and policy enforcement activities)

3. Feedback from subjects on the appropriateness of the survey questions

4. Suggestions from subjects about how the survey questions may be improved

5. The time required to complete the survey (as recorded by subjects) and

feedback comments about the reasonableness of the time required to respond.

Pilot Study Data Collection

An e-mail was sent to 10 human resources executives inviting their participation

in the pilot study. The e-mail contained a letter of introduction and informed consent (see

Appendix C) and a URL link to the pilot study. The URL link took the pilot study

subjects to the survey entry page, which contained identical informed consent

information to the information in the e-mail. Access to the pilot study required subjects to

give informed consent electronically. SurveyMonkey hosted the survey.

 73

SurveyMonkey recorded a respondent’s time stamp, indicating the subject had

given informed consent. The respondent’s time stamped record was entered into a

confidential master code identifier file as evidence of informed consent. Subjects who

gave informed consent advanced to the survey page. The pilot study URL link on

SurveyMonkey was set to expire at the end of two weeks. The pilot study deactivated on

the expiry date. Ten subjects responded during the two-week period.

Pilot Study Data Analysis

Following deactivation of the pilot study, data were downloaded in in IBM-SPSS

format for analysis. Unique numeric codes were assigned to individual pilot subject

response sets. A confidential code identifier file was created. Numeric codes were

assigned to the respondent time stamp recorded by SurveyMonkey and entered into the

identifier file. The unique personal identifier information provided by the pilot subjects

was entered into the identifier file.

Data were entered in IBM-SPSS for statistical testing. Descriptive statistics were

performed to describe the sample demographics and research variables. Relative class

frequencies and percentages were calculated for nominal data. Frequencies and

percentages were calculated for gender, age, ethnicity, job title, education, and the gender

of the company’s primary shareholder. Mean and standard deviation tests were conducted

on the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women, as estimated by the

pilot study subjects.

Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) test was used to examine the research

question. Specifically, one Pearson product-moment correlation was conducted to assess

the relationship between the number of processes that affected selection for promotion to
 74

senior-level executive positions and the estimated percentage of female executives in the

company. Cohen’s standard was used to evaluate the strength and direction of the

correlation coefficient. Corrections were made for Type I and Type II errors.

Type I and Type II Errors

Two types of errors (Type I/Type II) can occur when testing hypotheses (Howell,

2011). A Type I error occurs when data results are interpreted as showing a significant

relationship (correlation) between data responses when no such relationship exists. Type

II errors occur when a researcher interprets data as showing no significant relationship

between data, when a relationship does exist.

Type I and Type II errors can result in researchers rejecting or failing to reject the

null hypotheses, based on an invalid interpretation of the significance or lack of

significance of the analyzed data. Significance levels are governed by the degree of

certainty (expressed as a probability ratio) required to accept a statement of fact as fact.

The probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when it is true (Type I error) can be

regulated by the assignment of an appropriate α (alpha) level.

An alpha level of 0.05 equates to a 95% probability that data relationships did not

occur by chance. Type II errors (the probability of failing to reject the null hypothesis

when it is false) can be controlled by the assignment of an appropriate β (beta) level. An

inverse relationship exists between Type I and Type II errors (Pallant, 2010). Setting a

stringent (small) alpha level to lower the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when

it is true increases the probability of a Type II error.

 75

Pilot Study Population and Sample

Ten pilot study subjects were recruited by e-mail using an InfoUSA e-mail list.

The data were analyzed with IBM-SPSS. Of the 10 subjects who took part in the pilot

study, one subject answered only the demographic questions; the subject was removed

from the pilot data for analysis.

Pilot Study Findings

Pilot study findings were analyzed in two ways. First, descriptive statistics

procedures were used to examine demographic data. Second, a one Pearson product-

moment correlation (r) inferential statistics procedure was used to test the null

hypothesis.

Pilot Study Descriptive Statistics

Of the nine remaining subjects, eight were female, and one was male. The age of

22% of subjects was between 36 and 50. Six respondents (66.7%) reported their ages as

between 51 and 65. One respondent reported an age of 66 or older. None of the subjects

reported ages younger than 35. Seven subjects (77.8%) reported their ethnicity as

Caucasian/White. The remaining subjects (22%) declined to state their ethnicity.

Four levels of human resources (HR) management were represented in the

sample: One vice president, one director, two managers, and one other HR title. One pilot

study subject reported a non-HR job title.

None of the respondents had less than a 4-year bachelor’s degree. Two reported

education at the bachelor’s degree level and six at a master’s level. One subject reported a

professional HR qualification (not herein specified to protect the anonymity of the

subject). None reported doctoral-level education.

 76

Question 11 (see Appendix D) was designed to obtain an estimate of the

percentage (ratio) of senior leadership positions filled by women as reported by subjects.

Initially, consideration was given to asking subjects to disclose an exact number of senior

female leaders. On consideration, asking subjects to report an exact number was deemed

inappropriate because the range in the number of employees within a sampled company

would invalidate direct numeric comparisons. For example, four senior female leaders in

a company employing 50 people are 8.0% of the total workforce, whereas four senior

female leaders in a company employing 499 people are 0.008% of the total workforce.

The use of a ratio (percentage) allows meaningful comparative analysis of collected data.

The number of female executives reported by the pilot study subjects was

measured by the percentage of executive positions occupied by females. All variables in

the analysis were treated as continuous data. Central tendency statistics (means/standard

deviations) were computed for continuous data collected with the pilot study. The mean

percentage of senior positions filled by women was 22.78 and the standard deviation was

22.19.

Table 1 contains subject responses to question 13 (see Appendix D). Question 13

asked subjects to indicate their perceptions of one or more of 15 possible impediments to

the promotion of women to senior-level positions within their current company. A “don’t

know” option was included as a sixteenth option. Nine subjects responded to question 13.

Twenty-six perceived impediment options were selected.

 77

Table 1.
Pilot Study Perceived Impediments to the Promotion of Women
Impediments N = 26 %
There are no impediments to promotion to senior-level positions 3 33.3
within my current company
Gender bias on the part of the CEO—The CEO prefers a team of 2 22.2
male leaders
Potential candidates do not meet educational requirements
stipulated in company policy
Parental status—possibility of pregnancy 1 11.1
Commitment to family—childcare issues 1 11.1
Lack of leadership experience 1 11.1
Lack of mentoring 2 22.2
Senior executive leadership positions are reserved for members of 1 11.1
the owner’s family
Exclusion from internal promotion related decision-making 3 33.3
process
Exclusion from internal informal executive level networks 3 33.3
Absence of diversity and inclusion training initiatives within the 2 22.2
company
Lack of experience outside professional field
Lack of cross-functional job rotation opportunities within the 2 22.2
company
Potential candidates do not to seek promotion to senior-level 1 11.1
executive positions outside my professional field
Potential candidates choose not to pursue promotion in favor of 2 22.2
other personal life-style goals
Don’t know 2 22.2

Question 14 (see Appendix D) provided pilot study subjects an opportunity to

comment on question 13 and offer additional perceived impediments to the promotion of

women to senior-level positions. Table 2 contains subject responses to question 14. Four

subjects offered comments and suggestions regarding changes or amendments to the

options offered as impediments.

Table 2.
Pilot Study Feedback on Other Impediments to the Promotion of Women
Subject responses (N = 4)
…can you ask questions about the outside “bonding” activities which are usually male
oriented therefore mentoring of women is difficult
Table continues…
 78

Table 2 …continued
Pilot Study Feedback on Other Impediments to the Promotion of Women
This company was started by a woman, however, the only woman in a senior position at
the time that are woman are family of the owner that I know of
The question appears to be bias. They assume that there is an issue. For example: I
perceive the following impediments to the promotion of women to senior-level
positions within my current company (check all that apply): While you have a
response that states it's not a problem, by the wording of the sentence it implies its
(sic) a problem. Consider asking if it is a problem, then if "yes", are any of the
following impediments?
The questions are relevant. However, I do think that questions around the subject of
sexual harassment, intimidating behaviour (sic) by executive management
towards women in business should also be covered in some form

Question 15 (see Appendix D) asked subjects to indicate if one or more of four

possible operating policies designed to foster the promotion of women had been

implemented in their respective companies. A “don’t know” option was included as a

fifth option. Table 3 contains subject responses to question 15. Nine subjects responded

to question 15. Fifteen operating policy options were selected.

Table 3.
Pilot Study Operating Policies that Foster the Promotion of Women
Identified operating policies N = 15 %
Inclusion of policies that facilitate the promotion of women to 3 33.3
senior-level executive positions
Established specific policies mandating that all qualified individuals 7 77.8
have equal access and opportunity to compete based on ability and
merit
Inclusion of specific diversity training goals and objectives in 2 22.2
annual plans that facilitate the promotion of women to senior-level
executive positions
Creation of a gender-equity policy in respect to remuneration 1 11.1
Don’t know 2 22.2

Question 16 (see Appendix D) provided an opportunity for subjects to comment

on pilot survey question 15. This question offered subjects an opportunity to offer

comments or suggestions with respect to other unlisted operating policy options. Two of
 79

the nine subjects offered feedback to question 16. Table 4 contains the feedback offered

by subjects.

Table 4.
Pilot Study Other Operating Policies that Foster the Promotion of Women
Subject responses (N = 3)
Flat organizational structure; CEO strongly pushes hire/opportunity/promotion of ALL
regardless of gender, race, etc.
Do not have just a don't option—please add in a "do not have the policy"
Although policy is in place such as affirmative action, it is purely window dressing. The
policies are not carried through to action.

Question 17 (see Appendix D) asked subjects to identify one or more of eight

possible compliance activities undertaken to enforce conformity with company policies

aimed at fostering the promotion of women to senior-level positions. A “don’t know”

option was included as a ninth option. Table 5 contains subject responses to question 17.

Table 5.
Pilot Study Compliance Activities Fostering the Promotion of Women
Subject responses N = 14 %
They hold executive management accountable for the achievement 2 28.6
of specific diversity training objectives and goals
They mandate companywide participation in diversity training 3 42.9
initiatives
They provide diversity-training programs on a voluntary 1 14.3
participation basis
They offer women formal leadership as a means of preparing them 1 14.3
for senior positions within the company
They encourage senior executives in the mentoring of women as a 1 14.3
means of preparing them for senior positions within the company
They promote only from within exiting employee ranks to senior- 3 42.9
level executive positions
They hold executive management accountable for the enforcement 2 28.6
of the company’s gender-equity policy in respect to remuneration
Don’t know 1 14.3

Question 18 (see Appendix D) provided subjects an opportunity to comment on

the question as well as offer comments or suggestions about unlisted compliance activity
 80

options. One of the nine pilot study subjects offered feedback to question 18. The subject

indicated that as written, the question implied that all companies had de facto compliance

activities in place, whereas no such compliance activity requirement exists.

In response to question 19, regarding the appropriateness of the survey questions,

six respondents answered affirmatively. Three subjects did not respond to the question.

Six subjects indicated that the amount of time required to respond to the survey questions

was appropriate. All nine subjects recorded the time taken to complete the entire pilot

survey. The average time required by the pilot study subjects to respond to the survey

was calculated to be seven minutes.

Pilot Study Inferential Statistics

The research question under consideration in the study asked if there is a

statistically significant relationship between the percentage of senior-level female

executives within each company and the number of processes that influence selection to

senior-level executive positions. A one Pearson product-moment correlation (r) was

conducted to assess the relationship between the number of processes that influence

selection to senior-level executive positions and the reported percentage of female

executives in the company. There was a negative correlation between the two variables,

r = -.21, n = 9, p = .586.

The number of impediments to promotion that affect the selection of women for

promotion to senior-level executive positions was measured by the count of the answers

to survey question 13. The number of operating policies that foster the promotion of

women to senior-level executive positions was measured by the count of the answers to

survey question 15. The number of compliance activities that affect the selection to
 81

senior-level executive positions was measured by the count of the answers to survey

question 17. The number of responses to impediments to promotion, operating policies,

and compliance activities were summed, thereby creating a total of the processes that

influence selection to senior-level executive positions.

Cohen’s standard (d) was used to evaluate the strength and direction of the

correlation coefficient. The calculated Pearson product-moment correlation (r = -.21, p =

.586) represents a weak association between the two variables. The null hypothesis—that

no relationship exists between the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by

women and the number of processes that influence selection for promotion—cannot be

rejected.

Pilot Study Survey Instrument

The pilot study confirmed that the survey analysis is feasible provided a number

of changes were made in the survey instrument. The changes recommended by the pilot

study subjects were:

1. To modify question 13 (perceived impediments to promote women) as follows:

a. The addition of a response indicating that the subject does not perceive

any barriers to the promotion of women (i.e., not just within their current

company)

b. The inclusion of an option linking the exclusion of women from male

bonding activities such as hunting and fishing trips as an impediment to

promotion
 82

c. The addition of a statement on the part played by sexual harassment in

discouraging women from pursuing promotion to senior-level executive

positions

d. The insertion of a “prefer not respond” option, allowing the removal of

subjects who choose not to participate in this section of the survey

2. To modify question 15 (operating policies implemented to foster the promotion of

women) as follows:

a. The inclusion of the statement; "My company has no operating policies to

foster the promotion of women to senior-level executive positions”

b. The addition of a “prefer not to respond” option, thereby allowing the

removal of subjects who choose not to participate in this section of the

survey

3. To modify question 17 (compliance activities designed to enforce conformity with

company policies regarding the promotion of women) as follows:

a. The addition of a response; "My company has no compliance enforcement

policies in place"

b. The inclusion of a “prefer not to respond” option, thereby allowing the

removal of subjects who choose not to participate in this section of the

survey

4. To change the expected response time to seven minutes based on subjects’

feedback.

The pilot study contained two unintentional errors. The first was the inadvertent

omission from the questionnaire of a question about company size. The second was the
 83

unintentional failure to activate the “do not collect IP addresses” switch. Both errors were

corrected in the survey administered to subjects who participated in the study. Finally, as

an incentive, subjects who complete the survey will have the opportunity to enter into a

drawing for a $250 gift card.

Pilot Study Summary

The purpose of the pilot study was to validate the survey in five areas. The first

area was to validate the web-based survey as a method of data collection. Second was to

verify the suitability of the data collection procedures used to survey the sample

population. Third was to identify procedures that needed revision based on what the

testing revealed. A fourth objective was to obtain subject feedback on the appropriateness

of the survey questions and ways in which the questionnaire might be improved. Finally,

subjects were asked to report the time taken to complete the survey.

Subject to the changes noted in the survey instrument section, the pilot study

results confirmed the validity of the web-based survey as a research tool for the study.

The suitability of the data collection procedures used to survey the sample population

was validated. Subjects determined the survey was appropriate. The average time

required to complete the survey was seven minutes.

To evaluate the research question, “Is there a statistically significant relationship

between the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women and the number of

impediments to promotion,” a Pearson product-moment correlation was conducted.

Cohen’s standard (d) was used to evaluate the strength and direction of the correlation

coefficient. The correlation was not significant. The calculated Pearson product-moment

correlation r = -.21, p = .586, suggested a weak relationship between the percentage of

 84

senior leadership positions filled by women and the number of impediments to promotion

does not exist. The null hypothesis—that no relationship exists between the percentage of

senior leadership positions filled by women and the number of impediments to

promotion—could not be rejected.

Study

The survey administered to the study subjects contained the corrections noted in

the pilot study section of this chapter. Appendix D contains a facsimile of the survey

instrument. This section contains a description of the data collection methods, data

analysis, population and sample, findings, conclusions and summary of the final survey.

Study Data Collection

A web-based survey instrument was used to collect quantitative data for statistical

analysis. SurveyMonkey hosted the survey instrument. Subjects were recruited by e-mail

from HR professionals contained in a marketing list owned by a commercial marketing

list service provider. The subjects of the study were human resources professionals in

Georgia and Florida. Subjects were selected from the list to meet the criteria set out in

Table 6. Pilot study subjects were excluded from participation in the study.

Table 6.
Participation Selection Criteria
Contact title Human Resources Executives
Contact person Records with contact names allowing (opt-in) e-mail
contact from third parties
Business type All businesses excluding Educational Services,
Government Offices, Membership Organizations,
Museums, Art Galleries & Gardens, Social Services, and
the U.S. Postal Service
Business employee size 50 to 499 employees
Business location Georgia, Florida
 85

The e-mail list provider had no access to the survey data. All e-mail address

owners in the list had opted-in to receive e-mail from third party list renters thereby

granting permission to approach them via e-mail. E-mail address owners were offered an

option to unsubscribe (opt-out) in the e-mail header.

No known stressors or risks were associated with the study as they may affect the

subjects. The survey collection did not include gathering any identifying information,

such as the subject’s name. IP address collection was disabled. Stress was further

mitigated in that subject participation was voluntary and subjects were allowed to

withdraw from the study at any point.

A letter of introduction and informed consent was provided to the list provider,

InfoUSA Inc. The list provider placed the letter of introduction and informed consent in

an e-mail and sent it electronically to opt-in list subscribers. InfoUSA was authorized to

distribute the email using the researcher’s name and a proxy domain

(maptobusiness.com). The content of the e-mail contained an introduction to the study,

informed consent and an invitation to participate in the survey.

A series of e-mails were sent to human resources executives inviting their

participation in the study. The first e-mail set contained a letter of introduction and

informed consent (see Appendix A) and a URL link to the study. The second and third e-

mail sets were undertaken when the response rate of the first e-mail set failed to reach the

number of responses required for empirical validity (84 responses).

SurveyMonkey recorded a respondent’s time stamp, indicating the subject had

given informed consent. The respondent’s time stamped record was entered into a
 86

confidential master code identifier file as evidence of informed consent. Subjects who

gave informed consent advanced to the survey page.

Table 7.
E-mail Campaign E-mail Delivery Report
1st Mailing Follow-up Mailings
02/01/2012 02/17/2012 02/29/2012 Combined
No. of e-mails Total % Total % Total % Totals %
Sent 3956 100.00 3811 100.00 3753 100.00 11520 100.00
Received 2779 70.25 2862 75.10 3238 86.28 8879 77.07
Undelivered 1005 25.40 847 22.23 325 8.66 2177 18.9
Unsubscribes 0 0.00 6 0.21 11 0.34 17 0.15
Opens 179 6.44 173 6.04 274 8.46 626 7.05
Unique opens 126 4.53 121 4.23 197 6.08 444 5.00
Click-throughs 41 1.48 17 0.59 56 1.73 114 0.96
Unique click- 29 1.04 13 0.45 34 1.05 76 0.86
throughs

The first e-mail campaign was sent to 3,956 HR professionals (see Table 7).

Because of a server domain name error (maptobusiness.com) on the part of the list

provider, only 2,779 subscription members received the e-mail. Of these, 29 subjects

responded to the invitation. One subject unsubscribed and was removed from subsequent

mailings.

The combination of the domain name error and the failure to reach the required

response rate necessitated the sending of a follow-up e-mail using a different domain

name (egroupbusiness.com). The second mailing was sent to 3,811 subjects (received by

2,862). The second mailing contained identical content to the first with the exception that

it included a participation incentive. The introductory paragraph of the second e-mail

read:

I am looking for human resource professionals who are willing to complete a brief
survey—those who do will be entered into a drawing for a $250.00 gift card. If
you have already participated, I offer my sincerest thanks. Instructions for
completing the survey, including a link to the survey website, are below.
 87

The second mailing produced an additional 13 responses; bringing the total unique

responses to 42.

Given an ideal subject response rate of 84, a third and final mailing of 3,753 e-

mails was sent. The third mailing was identical in content to the second. One subject who

clicked-through did not consent to participate and was not allowed access to the survey.

Thirty-four subjects consented to participate, thereby raising the total unique responses to

76.

One subject withdrew before completing the survey. Data associated with the

incomplete response set were excluded from the analysis. The number of completed

surveys was 75.

The data were examined for the presence of outliers. Outliers were tested for by

the creation of standardized residuals or z scores. Standardized values were created for

each subscale score and cases were examined for values that fell above 3.29 and values

that fell below -3.29 (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2012). Two cases were removed because of

abnormally high z scores (3.63379), thereby reducing the number of responses to 73.

A third subject was eliminated due to his status as a consultant. The subject

reported his title as a paid HR consultant. The removal of this subject from the data set

reduced the number of completed surveys to 72. A fourth mailing was considered.

Because of the additional costs that would have been incurred, the mailing was not

undertaken. The survey was deactivated at 04:17 hours on March 7, 2012.

Digital survey data were stored online by SurveyMonkey. SurveyMonkey did not

collect personal information or other identifiable electronic information such as IP

addresses from survey subjects. The researcher had sole access to the online data. All
 88

digital data downloaded from SurveyMonkey were stored on a secure password

protected, encrypted hard drive. Paper copies of file data are stored in a locked file

cabinet. A third party statistician, Statistics Solutions (SS), analyzed subject data. Upon

completion of the research project, all digital data were erased from the third party server.

Study Data Analysis

Following deactivation of the study, data were downloaded in IBM-SPSS format

for analysis. To allow subjects to withdraw after completion of the survey, a unique

numeric code was assigned to individual subject response sets. A confidential code

identifier file was created. Numeric codes were assigned to the respondent time stamp

recorded by SurveyMonkey and entered into the identifier file. The unique personal

identifier information provided by the subjects was entered into the identifier file.

Data were entered in IBM-SPSS software for statistical testing. Data responses

were coded to allow for analytical analysis. The codes are delineated in Appendix E.

Descriptive statistics were performed to describe the sample demographics and

research variables. Relative class frequencies and percentages were calculated for

nominal data. Frequencies and percentages were calculated for gender, age, ethnicity, job

title, education, number of employees, and the gender of the company’s primary

shareholder.

Mean and standard deviation tests were conducted on the percentage of senior

leadership positions filled by women, as estimated by subjects. Cohen’s standard was

used to evaluate the strength and direction of the correlation coefficient. Corrections were

made for Type I and Type II errors.

 89

Study Population and Sample

A priori power analysis for a Pearson product-moment correlation was performed

to establish an adequate size sample based on statistical analyses, not population. A

power of 0.80, a medium effect size ( f 2 = 0.30), and an alpha significance level of 0.05,

were used to determine the sample size (Faul, Erdfelder, Buchner, & Lang, 2009).

Empirical validity required a subject response rate of 84 (see Table 8 and Figure 1). The

actual number of complete responses was 72.

Table 8.
A Priori Power Analysis Protocol
Exact—Correlation: Bivariate normal model
Options: Exact distribution
Analysis: A priori: Compute required sample size
Input: Tail(s) Two
Correlation ρ H1 0.3
α err prob 0.05
Power (1-β err prob) 0.8
Correlation ρ H0 0
Output: Lower critical r -0.2145669
Upper critical r 0.2145669
Total sample size 84
Actual power 0.8003390
 90

Figure 1. A Priori Power Analysis

Cohen’s post hoc analysis allows statistical power (1 – β ) to be “computed as a

function of significance level a, sample size, and population effect size” (Faul et al.,

2009, p. 1149). Both Onwuegbuzie and Leech (2004), and Oyeyemi, Adewara, Adebola

and Salau (2010) recommended the use of post hoc power analysis in situations where a

priori analysis requires a sample size that exceeds budgeted funds. A post hoc power

analysis for a Pearson product-moment correlation was performed using GPower 3.1.2

(Faul et al., 2009). The post hoc protocol used a sample size of 72, a medium effect size

( f 2 = 0.30), and an alpha significance level of 0.05 to determine a power (1 – β) of

0.7354137 (see Table 9 and Figure 2).

Table 9.
Post Hoc Power Analysis Protocol
Exact—Correlation: Bivariate normal model
Options/Analysis: Exact distribution / Analysis: Post hoc: Compute achieved power
Input: Tail(s) Two
Correlation ρ H1 0.3
α err prob 0.05
Total sample size 72
Correlation ρ H0 0
Output: Lower critical r -0.2318834
Upper critical r 0.2318834
Power (1-β err prob) 0.7354137
 91

Figure 2. Post Hoc Power Analysis

A shortfall of 12 respondents increased the probability of a Type I error. The

smaller actual sample size of 72 decreased the power by 0.0645863 (see Table 10 and

Figure 3). A lack of additional funds precluded continued research. While less than ideal,

the diminished probability of rejecting the null hypothesis if true was deemed acceptable

within the constraints imposed by a finite research budget.

Table 10.
Exact Correlation Power Analysis
Sample size Power
N (1 – β err prob)
70.0 0.723043
72.0 0.765414
74.0 0.758784
76.0 0.758784
78.0 0.769804
80.0 0.780396
82.0 0.790571
84.0 0.800339
 92

Figure 3. Exact Correlation Power Analysis Bivariate Normal Mode

Study Findings

Study findings were analyzed in two ways. First, descriptive statistics procedures

were used to examine demographic data. Second, inferential statistical test were used to

assess research question 1. Four Pearson product-moment correlations were conducted to

determine if a relationship existed between the three subscale scores (perceived

impediments, operating policies, and compliance activities) and their total scores with

survey question eight.

Study Descriptive Statistics

Seven classes of demographic data are presented in this section: Gender, age,

ethnicity, education, job title, company size, and the gender of the owner or primary

shareholder. Central tendency statistics were analyzed and the results presented. The

section also contains an analysis of the percentage (ratio) of senior leadership positions

filled by women. Subject responses to question 10, question 11 and question 12

 93

(perceived impediments, operating policies, and compliance activities) are discussed in

this section.

Of the 72 subjects, 60 were female (83%) and 12 were male (17%). Thirteen

subjects reported an age of less than 35. Thirty subjects were between 36 and 50 years of

age. Twenty-four reported ages between 51 and 65. Four were older than 65, and one

preferred not answer. Table 11 contains the ethnicity of subjects. Responses to question 5

(see Appendix A) regarding the education level attained by respondents are summarized

in Table 12.

Table 11.
Ethnicity of Subjects
Cumulative
N = 72 % %
Asian 1 1.4 1.4
African American/Black 15 20.8 22.2
Caucasian/White 49 68.1 90.3
Hispanic/Latino 5 6.9 97.2
Preferred not to answer 2 2.8 100.0

Table 12.
Education Level of Study Subjects
Cumulative
N = 72 % %
Some college 6 8.3 8.3
2-Year Associates Degree 10 13.9 22.2
4-Year Bachelor’s Degree 39 54.2 76.4
Master’s Degree 14 19.4 95.8
Doctoral Degree 1 1.4 97.2
Prefer not to answer 2 2.8 100.0

Four levels of human resources (HR) management were represented in the

sample: HR supervisors were not represented in the study. Three subjects (4.2%)

indicated other HR titles: Benefits Director, HR Business Partner, and VP Controller.

 94

Table 13.
Subject Job Title
Cumulative
N = 72 % %
HR Vice President 22 30.6 30.6
HR Director 17 23.6 54.2
HR Manager 28 38.9 93.1
Prefer not to answer 2 2.8 95.8
Other subject specified titles 3 4.2 100.0

Question 7 (see Appendix A) asked subjects to indicate the number of employees

in their company. Subjects had a choice of seven company size-range groupings. Table

14 contains the company size option selected by subjects.

Table 14.
Company Size
Cumulative
Number of Employees N = 72 % %
Less than 50 1 1.4 1.4
50 – 99 13 18.1 19.4
100 – 199 16 22.2 41.7
200 – 299 9 12.5 54.2
300 – 399 11 15.3 69.4
400 – 499 15 20.8 90.3
500 or more 7 9.7 100.0

Survey question eight related to the percentage of senior leadership positions

filled by women. Subject responses ranged from 0.0% to 80.0%. The mean of the

reported percentage of leadership positions filled by women was 12% (11.8750%). The

standard deviation of the mean was 18.37477.

Thirty-seven subjects reported a male owner or primary shareholder. Twenty-five

subjects did not know the gender of the owner or primary shareholder. The remaining

subjects (10) reported a female owner or primary shareholder.

Table 15 contains subject responses to question 10, which asked subjects to

indicate their perceptions of 18 possible impediments to the promotion of women to

senior-level positions within their current company. Subjects were asked to choose one of
 95

four response options: Agree, disagree, don’t know, or prefer not to answer. The first

choice asked subjects to indicate their perception of impediments to the promotion of

women to senior-level positions in most US businesses. All remaining choices asked

subjects to provide their perceptions within the company in which they were employed.

Table 15.
Perceived Impediments to the Promotion of Women
N = 72
Don’t
Impediment Agree % Disagree % Know %
There are impediments to the 58 80.6 11 15.3 3 4.2
promotion of women to senior-level
positions in most US businesses
In my company
There are impediments to the 31 43.1 36 50.0 5 6.9
promotion of women to senior-level
positions
Gender discrimination (bias) on the 29 40.3 36 50.0 7 9.7
part of senior management is an
impediment to the promotion of
women to senior-level positions (male
leadership is preferred etc.)
The parental status of women who are 32 44.4 37 51.4 3 4.2
eligible for promotion to senior-level
positions is an impediment to
promotion (e.g. possibility of
pregnancy etc.)
Commitment to family on the part of 41 56.9 30 41.7 1 1.4
women who are eligible for promotion
to senior-level positions is an
impediment to promotion (e.g.
childcare issues etc.)
Potential female candidates who are 46 63.9 24 33.3 2 2.8
eligible for promotion to senior-level
positions generally lack leadership
experience
There is a lack of mentoring for 50 69.4 21 29.2 1 1.4
female executives
Senior executive leadership positions 14 19.4 44 61.1 1 14
are reserved for members of the
owner’s family

Table continues…
 96

Table 15 …continued
Perceived Impediments to the Promotion of Women
N = 72
Don’t
Impediment Agree % Disagree % Know %
In my company
Potential female candidates for 30 41.7 35 48.6 7 9.7
promotion to senior-level positions are
excluded from internal promotion
related decision-making processes
Potential female candidates for 33 44.4 33 45.8 7 9.7
promotion to senior-level positions are
excluded from internal informal
executive level networks
There is an absence of diversity and 52 72.2 19 26.4 1 1.4
inclusion training initiatives
Potential female candidates for 43 59.7 23 31.9 6 8.3
promotion to senior-level positions
lack experience outside their
professional field
Potential female candidates for 34 47.2 31 43.1 7 9.7
promotion to senior-level positions do
not to seek promotion to senior-level
executive positions outside their
professional field
Potential female candidates for 3 4.2 60 83.3 9 12.5
promotion to senior-level positions do
not to seek promotion to senior-level
executive positions because of sexual
harassment
There is a lack of cross-functional job 56 77.8 12 16.7 4 5.6
rotation opportunities for women
Potential female candidates for 19 26.4 35 48.6 18 25.0
promotion to senior-level positions
choose not to pursue promotion in
favor of other personal lifestyle goals
The exclusion of potential female 23 31.9 48.6 18 25.0
candidates for promotion to senior-
level positions from traditional male-
bonding activities (e.g. fishing and
hunting trips etc.) is an impediment to
promotion

Six respondents provided feedback on other perceived impediments. The

feedback was qualitative. The feedback is tabulated in Appendix F.

 97

Question 11 asked subjects to indicate if four possible operating policies designed

to foster the promotion of women had been implemented in their respective companies.

Subjects were asked to choose one of four response choices: Yes, no, don’t know, or

prefer not to answer. Table 16 contains subject responses to question 11 (see Appendix

A).

Table 16.
Operating Policies Fostering the Promotion of Women
N = 72
Prefer
Don’t not to
Identified Operating Policies YES % NO % Know % Answer %
My company
Has policies that facilitate the 4 5.6 64 88.8 2 2.8 2 2.8
promotion of women to senior-
level positions
Has a gender-equity policy 43 59.7 27 37.5 2 2.8
mandating that all qualified
individuals have equal access
and opportunity to compete
based on ability and merit
Specific diversity training 2 2.8 67 93.1 3 4.2
goals and objectives in annual
plans that facilitate the
promotion of women to senior-
level executive positions
A gender-equity policy in 16 22.2 54 75.0 2 2.8
respect to remuneration

Question 12 (see Appendix E) asked subjects to identify the contribution of nine

possible compliance activities undertaken to enforce conformity with company policies

aimed at fostering the promotion of women to senior-level positions. Subjects were asked

to choose one of four response choices: Yes, no, don’t know, or prefer not to answer.

Table 17 contains subject responses to question 12.

 98

Table 17.
Compliance Policies Fostering the Promotion of Women
N = 72
Don’t
Identified Compliance Policies YES % NO % Know %
My company:
Has compliance enforcement policies 16 22.2 54 75.0 2 2.8
Mandates companywide participation 8 11.1 63 87.5 1 1.4
in diversity training initiatives
Promotes only from within existing 11 15.3 58 80.6 3 4.2
employee ranks to senior-level
executive positions
Holds executive management 9 12.5 57 79.2 6 8.3
accountable for the enforcement of
the company’s gender-equity policy
in respect to remuneration

One respondent provided feedback on other compliance policies. The feedback

was qualitative. The subject stated, “My company says we are all equal and the cream

will rise to the top.”

Study Inferential Statistics

Prior to analysis, the assumptions of a Pearson correlation were assessed,

including linearity and homoscedasticity. Linearity requires that independent and

dependent variables change proportionally and are represented graphically by a straight

line. Homoscedasticity relates to data that are normally distributed about a regression

line. Scatter plots and normality plots are an accepted method of assessing the linearity

and homoscedasticity of a data set (Stevens, 2009).

Pallant (2010) noted that a Sig. value of .05 or more indicates normality. The

Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of the normality of all three subscale scores (perceived

impediments, operating policies and compliance activities) returned Sig. values below .05

suggested a violation of the assumption of normality. Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-

 99

Wilks normality test results for subscale scores for perceived impediments, operating

policies, compliance activities and total scores are presented in Table 18.

Table 18.
Tests of Normality: Subscale Scores
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Perceived Impediments .106 72 .046 .967 72 .054
Operating Policies .256 72 .000 .877 72 .000
Compliance Activities .286 72 .000 .784 72 .000
Total Score .126 72 .006 .948 72 .005
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

The Shapiro-Wilks test returned a Sig. value of .054 for perceived impediments

suggesting normality. Operating policy subscale, compliance activity subscale, and total

score Sig. values fell well below the .05 normality value. The results of the assessment

indicated that the assumptions of homoscedasticity for all subscale variables were not

met.

Scatter and normality plots for perceived impediments are presented in Figure 5

and Figure 6. A stem and leaf plot is represented in Table 19. Visual examination of the

histogram (Figure 4) indicated a nearly normal distribution curve. The visual examination

confirmed the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Sig. value of 0.046 that approximated the 0.05 Sig.

value required for normality.

Table 19.
Perceived Impediments Stem-and-Leaf Plot
Frequency Stem Leaf
0.00 1
6.00 1 578899
25.00 2 0000011111122222223333344
35.00 2 55555555666666777777788888889999999
6.00 3 000111
Stem width 10.00 Each leaf 1 case(s)
 100

Figure 4. Perceived Impediments Histogram and Normal Distribution Curve

The normal Q-Q plot of perceived impediments (Figure 5) appeared also to

confirm the normality of the perceived impediments data. A detrended normal Q-Q plot

(the difference between the actual and predicted values of a normal distributed) of the

data revealed data points above and below the X-axis (Figure 5). The detrended normal

Q-Q plot confirmed that the assumption of homoscedasticity for perceived impediments

was not met.

 101

Figure 5. Normal and Detrended Q-Q Plot of Perceived Impediments

The box plot of perceived impediment subscales (Figure 6) provided additional visual

evidence of the irregular distribution of the data within percentiles.

Figure 6. Perceived Impediments Box Plot

Stem and Leaf plot data for operating policies are presented in Table 20.

Table 20.
Operating Policies Stem-and-Leaf Plot
Frequency Stem Leaf
1.00 2 0
2.00 3 00
32.00 4 00000000000000000000000000000000
18.00 5 000000000000000000
16.00 6 0000000000000000
2.00 7 00
1.00 8 0
Stem width 10.00 Each leaf 1 case(s)

Scatter plots for operating policies are shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8. The box plot of

operating policies subscales provided graphic evidence of outliers outside the normal
 102

range (see Figure 9). Visual examination of the results of the assessments indicated that

the assumption of homoscedasticity for operating policies was not met.

Figure 7. Operating Policies Histogram and Normal Distribution Curve

Figure 8. Normal and Detrended Q-Q Plot of Operating Policies

The box plot of perceived impediment subscales (Figure 9) provided additional visual

evidence of the irregular distribution of the data within percentiles.

 103

Figure 9. Box Plot of Operating Policies

Stem and Leaf plot data for compliance activities are presented in Table 21.

Table 21.
Compliance Activities Stem-and-Leaf Plot
Frequency Stem Leaf
1.00 Extremes (=<6.0)
5.00 8 00000
00 8
37.00 9 0000000000000000000000000000000000000
00 9
13.00 10 0000000000000
00 10
7.00 11 0000000
9.00 Extremes (>=13.0)
Stem width 10.00 Each leaf 1 case(s)

Scatter plots for compliance are shown in Figure 10 and Figure 11. Visual examination of

the results of the assessments indicated that the assumption of homoscedasticity for

compliance activities was not met.

 104

Figure 10. Compliance Activities Histogram and Normal Distribution Curve

Figure 11. Normal and Detrended Q-Q Plot of Compliance Activities

The box plot of perceived impediment subscales (Figure 12) provided additional visual

evidence of the irregular distribution of the data within percentiles.

 105

Figure 12. Box Plot of Compliance Activities

Stem and Leaf plot data for total subscale scores are presented in Table 22.

Table 22.
Total Score Stem-and-Leaf Plot
Frequency Stem Leaf
1.00 Extremes (=<26)
00 3
4.00 3 2333
9.00 3 444555555
11.00 3 66677777777
7.00 3 8888899
14.00 4 00000000111111
16.00 4 2222222222333333
10.00 4 4444455555
Stem width 10.00 Each leaf 1 case(s)

Scatter plots for total subscale scores are shown in Figure 13 and Figure 14. Visual

examination of the results of the assessments indicated that the assumption of

homoscedasticity for total subscale scores was not met. Because of the violation of the

assumptions, four Spearman rho (non-parametric) correlations were conducted instead of

Pearson correlations.
 106

Figure 13. Total Score Histogram and Normal Distribution Curve

Figure 14. Normal and Detrended Q-Q Plot of Total Score

The box plot of total score subscales (Figure 15) provided additional visual

evidence of the irregular distribution of the data within percentiles.

 107

Figure 15. Box Plot of Total Score

Study Null Hypotheses Test

The Spearman correlation of perceived impediments was significant (see Table

23). An rs value of -.346 indicated a medium negative relationship, or strength, of the

relationship. As perceived impediments decreased or increased, the percentage of senior

leadership positions filled by women increased or decreased.

An rs value of .249 indicated a small positive relationship, or strength between

compliance activities and the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women.

The relationship was significant. As compliance activities increased or decreased the

percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women increased or decreased.

The Spearman correlation of operating policies was not significant (p = .300). The

p value of total scores was .074. The Spearman correlation of total scores was not

significant. The results indicated the absence of a relationship between either operating

policies or total scores and the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women.

Table 23.
Null Hypotheses Spearman Correlation Test Results (n = 72)
Independent Variable Dependent Variable rs) p
% of Female Executives Perceived Impediments -.346** .003

Operating Policies .124 .300

Compliance Policies .249* .035

Total Scores -.212 .074

Note. p > .05 not significant, p < .05 significant: **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *.
Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
 108

The null hypothesis posits that a statistically significant relationship does not exist

between the percentage of senior-level female activities within each company and the

total number of processes that affect selection to senior-level executive positions. Based

on the Spearman correlation findings, the null hypothesis must be partially rejected.

There is a statistically significant relationship between the percentage of senior leadership

positions filled by women and the number of perceived impediments as well as

compliance activities. The null hypothesis is valid for the remaining process. There is no

statistically significant relationship between the percentage of senior leadership positions

filled by women and operating policies.

Conclusions

Scatter plots and normality plots of the survey data revealed that the data did not

meet the requirement of homoscedasticity for a Pearson correlation test. Because of the

violation of the homoscedasticity requirement, four Spearman rho (non-parametric)

correlations were conducted. The Spearman correlations were conducted to determine if a

relationship existed between the three subscale scores (perceived impediments, operating

policies, and compliance activities) and their total scores with survey question eight.

The result of the first Spearman correlation (perceived impediments and survey

question eight) was significant, rs (72) = -.346, p = .003, suggesting that as perceived

impediments decreased, the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women

increased. The outcome of the second Spearman correlation (operating policies and

survey question eight) was not significant, rs (72) = .124, p = .300, indicating there is not

a relationship between operating policies and the percentage of senior leadership

positions filled by women. The result of the third Spearman correlation (compliance
 109

policies and survey question eight) was significant, rs (72) = .249, p = .035, suggesting

that as compliance activities increased, the percentage of senior leadership positions filled

by women increased. The outcome of the fourth Spearman correlation (total scores and

survey question eight) was not significant, rs (72) = -.212, p = .074, indicating there is not

a relationship between the total score and the percentage of senior leadership positions

filled by women.

The null hypothesis states that a statistically significant relationship does not exist

between the percentage of senior-level female activities within each company and the

total number of processes that affect selection to senior-level executive positions. Based

on the Spearman correlation findings, the null hypothesis was partially rejected. A

statistically significant relationship exists between the percentage of senior leadership

positions filled by women and perceived impediments. In addition, there was a

statistically significant relationship between the percentage of senior leadership positions

filled by women and compliance activities. The null hypothesis is valid for the remaining

process (operating policies). There is no statistically significant relationship between the

percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women and operating policies.

Summary

Chapter 4 presented the findings of the pilot study and the amendments made to

the final survey instrument derived from the pilot study findings. The chapter contained

an overview of the data collection, findings and analysis methods used in the study. Data

were collected and analyzed to determine if significant relationships existed between the

processes that affect the selection of female candidates for senior-level executive

positions in small and medium-sized business sector companies.

 110

The study was comprised of 72 HR subjects in small to medium-sized business in

Georgia and Florida. Subjects provided their professional perspectives on the types of

impediments to promotion, operating policies, and policy enforcement activities that act

as glass ceiling barriers to the promotion of women to senior-level positions. Statistical

tests were conducted to determine if relationships existed between the processes and the

percentage of females holding senior-executive level positions. Because the data did not

meet the requirement of homoscedasticity for a Pearson correlation test, four Spearman

rho (non-parametric) correlations were conducted.

Study findings are discussed in Chapter 5. The discussion draws on the literature

on glass ceiling barriers to the promotion of women and presents conclusions that may be

drawn from the study. The assumptions and limitations of the study; the possibilities for

future research, and recommendations for business owners and company executives are

presented.
 111

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The purpose of this quantitative study with a correlational research design was to

determine if significant relationships exist between the percentages of senior leadership

positions filled by women in small and medium-sized businesses in Georgia and Florida

and three processes thought to impede or foster the selection of female candidates. The

processes tested are impediments to promotion, operating policies, and policy

enforcement activities affecting the promotion of female candidates to senior-level

executive positions. Spearman rho correlation tests revealed a statistically significant

relationship between the percentages of senior leadership positions filled by women and

the number of perceived impediments and compliance activities. No statistically

significant relationship exists between the percentage of senior leadership positions filled

by women and the operating policies of a company. The focus of the chapter is on a

discussion of the study findings; the descriptive and inferential statistics used to test the

hypotheses, assumptions, and limitations of the study; the possibilities for future

research; and recommendations for business owners and company executives.

Findings

The statistical tests conducted on data collected by the online web survey are

described in this section. The findings of the statistical tests presented in Chapter 4 are

discussed. Spearman rho correlation tests were used to rank relationships between the

dependent variable, the percentage of senior-level female executives, and four

independent variables. The independent variables tested were, perceived impediments to

the promotion of women to senior level positions, operating policies fostering the
 112

promotion of women, and compliance activities designed to enforce company policies

relating to the promotion of women. The fourth variable tested was the total score.

The data collected during the study was analyzed using descriptive and inferential

statistics. Descriptive statistics were performed to describe the sample demographics and

research variables. A Pearson correlation parametric test had originally been judged

appropriate to test relationships between the dependent and independent variables, but

was ruled inappropriate when the data were found to lack linearity and homoscedasticity.

The absence of linearity and homoscedasticity in a data set requires the use of non-

parametric tests such as Spearman’s rho (Pallant, 2010). Four Spearman rho correlations

were conducted instead of Pearson correlations.

Descriptive Statistics

Of the 72 subjects, 60 were female (83%) and 12 male (17%). According to the

Department of Labor (2010), 68.8% of human resources (HR) executives are female (p.

28). The ratio of female to male respondents participating in the study is higher than is

the national data reported for 2010 by the U.S. Department of Labor (2010). The

discrepancy between the national ratio of female HR managers and the ratio determined

in the current study may be the result of the relative smallness of the sampled population.

Alternatively, it may represent volunteer response bias on the part of males.

The ethnicity of study subjects was 68.1% white, 20.8% African American, 6.9%

Hispanic, and 1.4% Asian. The Department of Labor reported the ethnicity of the U.S.

workforce to be 72.8% white, 12.3% Hispanic, 10.7% African American, and 4.1% Asian

(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010). The discrepancy between the national and current
 113

study demographics for ethnicity may relate to the relative smallness of the sampled

population.

The selection criteria provided to the e-mail list provider restricted participation in

the study according to company size. The intention was that subjects would be drawn

from companies employing between 50 and 499 employees. Eight subjects (11.1%)

reported a company employment size outside the selection criterion. Consideration was

given to excluding data falling outside the selection criterion. Because there was no ex

post facto way to determine the magnitude of the shortfall or overage or, establish

whether a subject had misreported the company size deliberately or unknowingly, the

data sets were included in the analysis.

The percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women reported by

subjects in the study ranged from 0.0% to 80.0%. The mean of the reported percentage of

leadership positions filled by women was 11.87%. The standard deviation of the mean

was 18.37477. A comparison of the study finding to the number of female executives in

Fortune 1000 companies was not possible because Fortune 1000 companies report exact

numbers of female executives, whereas the method used in the current study relied on the

collection of ratio data.

Thirty-seven (51.4%) subjects reported a male owner or primary shareholder

headed the company for which they worked. Ten subjects (13.9%) reported a female

owner or primary shareholder. The remaining 25 (34.7%) subjects did not know the

gender of the owner or primary shareholder.

The number of male-owned businesses reported by subjects corresponds roughly

with the national data reported by the U.S. Department of Commerce (U.S. Department
 114

of Commerce, 2010). In 2007, the Department of Commerce reported that males owned

52.9% (p. 5) of all businesses, women owned 29.6% (p. 6), and the remaining 17.5%

were owned equally by both genders (p. 5). The discrepancies in the numbers reported by

study subjects may be attributed to the number of “don’t know” answers. Disclosure of

the ownership of a small business is not required by law (Chen, Chen, & Cheng, 2008).

Impediments to the Promotion of Women

Over four-fifths (80.6%) of subjects indicated impediments to the promotion of

women were present in most U.S. businesses. Less than half (43.1%) the subjects agreed

impediments to the promotion of women were present within their companies. Fifty

percent of the subjects disagreed that the statement that impediments to the promotion of

women applied to their companies. This contrasted sharply with the 15.3% who felt that

on a national or generic level, impediments to the promotion of women existed. It lies

beyond the scope of the study to speculate about the reason(s) underlying the disparity

between external and internal perceptions of impediment levels.

Of importance is the general agreement of the study findings with those

determined by the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission (FGCC) that impediments do exist

(U.S. Department of Labor Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, 1995a), and subsequent

analysis by Catalyst (2010) and others (Pichler, Simpson, & Stroh, 2008; Weissinger,

2009). Half of the subjects reported gender discrimination (bias) on the part of senior

management was an impediment to the promotion of women within their companies.

Two-fifths expressed the opinion gender discrimination was not an impediment barring

women from promotion to executive-level positions.

 115

The close balance between the number of subjects reporting the existence of

gender discrimination on the part of senior management (50.0%) and the number of

subjects (40.3%) holding the opposite view may support Eisner and Harvey’s (2009)

findings. Eisner and Harvey found blatant gender discrimination has been replaced by

more subtle, hard to detect forms of discrimination. No formal definition of what

constituted more subtle, hard to detect forms of gender discrimination was offer by Eisner

and Harvey. Civil rights laws and the threat of litigation were suggested as one possible

explanation of the shift from overt to covert forms of discrimination. Eisner and Harvey

noted current social mores do not tolerate blatant forms of gender discrimination thereby

making gender equity issues difficult to identify, articulate, prove, and eliminate.

The findings of the current study support another of the findings of Eisner and

Harvey’s (2009). More specifically, 40.3% of the subjects in the current study expressed

the opinion male leadership was preferred over female leadership. Eisner and Harvey

found that the majority of their respondents perceived gender discrimination to be an

issue, but still expressed a preference for male bosses over female bosses.

Leadership experience is normally a prerequisite for candidates aspiring to

promotion to senior-level executive positions. Slightly more than three-fifths (63.9%) of

the subjects in the current study perceived women’s lack of leadership experience to be

an impediment barring women from promotion to senior positions within their present

companies. One-third (33.3%) of the subjects expressed the view that women did not lack

the experience required for promotion to executive management positions. The number of

subjects who believed potential female candidates to senior-level positions lacked

experience outside their professional field was roughly equivalent (59.7%) to those
 116

expressing the view that women generally lack leadership experience (63.9%). Subjects

who disagreed (31.0%) with the statement that women lacked experience outside their

professional field approximated the third who were of the opinion that women did not

lack leadership experience.

Proponents of capabilities theory would argue some women choose not to pursue

promotional opportunities (Cornelius & Skinner, 2008). Cornelius and Skinner (2008)

found male respondents measured personal success in terms of career-related progress

and achievement. Female respondents defined personal success in relation to the

achievement of personal quality of life objectives and were willing to adjust upward

career objectives to fit personal lifestyle goals. In addition, Cornelius and Skinner

concluded male respondents were beginning to challenge traditional measurements of

career success in favor of the ability to devote more time to family. The current study

findings offered mixed support of capabilities theory.

Subjects were divided almost equally on the question of whether women chose

not to seek promotion to executive positions. Forty-seven percent expressed the opinion

that women did not seek promotion to senior-level positions outside their professional

fields. Slightly less (43.1%) were of the view that women did seek promotion to

executive management levels outside their professional fields.

Only 26.4% of the subjects in the current study were of the opinion women

choose not to pursue promotion in favor of other lifestyle goals. Almost half (48.6%)

disagreed with the statement. One-quarter (25.0%) did not know if women choose not to

pursue promotion because of other non-career related lifestyle factors.

 117

Some 56.9% of the subjects agreed with the statement that commitment to family

on the part of women (e.g., childcare issues) was an impediment to promotion. Forty-two

percent (41.7%) held the opinion that commitment to family on the part of women was

not an impediment. Subject’s responses on the parental status of women seem to

contradict the foregoing insofar as 44.4% agreed parental status was an impediment,

while 51.4% disagreed.

A survey by Woodhams and Lupton (2006) revealed gender discrimination in the

questions asked of male and female job applicants. Male and female candidates were

asked different questions. A majority of the Woodhams and Lupton survey respondents

admitted applying different selection criteria to candidates according to the gender of the

applicant. More than 20% acknowledged asking female candidates about childcare

commitments, and 36% stated they would not employ pregnant applicants (p. 76). This

would suggest that career advancement decision-making processes play some part in the

creation of impediments to the promotion of women.

Experimental studies by Heilman and Okimoto (2008) concluded the applicant’s

gender did not influence promotional decisions. However, Heilman and Okimoto found

female applicants who were mothers received more negative screening recommendations

than did childless female applicants. This may account for the opinion held by 56.9% of

the subjects participating in the current study that commitment to family was an

impediment to promotion.

Research by Callahan and Tomaszewski (2007) and Sabattini and Dinolfo (2010)

independently concluded corporate decision-making involves both formal and informal

elements. Both studies identified the exclusion of most women from male networks as a
 118

serious impediment to career advancement by women. Forty-nine (48.6%) of the subjects

in the current study expressed disagreement with the statement that the exclusion of

women from formal decision-making processes was an impediment to the promotion of

women. Approximately the same number (45.8%) disagreed the exclusion of women

from informal decision-making networks impeded the promotion of women (see Table

15). The findings are inconclusive when compared to the findings of both Callahan and

Tomaszewski (2007), and Sabattini and Dinolfo (2010).

Opinions on the exclusion of women from traditional male-bonding activities,

such as fishing and hunting trips, as an impediment to promotion was divided almost

equally among those who agreed (31.9%) and disagreed (30.6%) with the statement.

Because women are excluded from traditional male-bonding activities, it is not surprising

37.5% of the subjects did not know if this factor was an impediment to the promotion of

women. This may account for the difference between subjects’ responses to this survey

and the findings of Callahan and Tomaszewski (2007) and Sabattini and Dinolfo (2010).

Closely associated with factors relating to formal and informal networks is the

positive role of mentoring in overcoming impediments to the promotion of both men and

women to senior-level positions (Melchar, Bosco, & Cantrell, 2008; Wang, Tomlinson, &

Noe, 2010). Sixty-nine percent of the subjects in the current study were of the opinion a

lack of mentoring is an impediment to the promotion of women to senior-level positions

in their companies. Twenty-one (29.2%) expressed the opinion mentoring is present in

their companies.

A corollary of the need for mentoring was the FGCC’s stipulation businesses

should offer mandated diversity training for corporate-level employees. Although the
 119

FGCC’s recommendation was directed primarily toward large corporations, the findings

of the current study seem to indicate the absence of diversity training may well be a

factor impeding the promotion of women in small and medium businesses. The majority

of subjects in the current study indicated an absence of diversity and inclusion training

initiatives (72.2%) and a lack of cross-functional job rotation opportunities (77.8%) for

women are impediments to the promotion of women.

One implication of the lack of training and cross-functional job rotation was

identified by Foust-Cummings and Pomeroy (2009). Foust-Cummings and Pomeroy

concluded companies including diversity and inclusion training as an integral part of their

corporate strategies show improved corporate performance. Moreover, companies with

active diversity and inclusion training programs gained human capital competitive

advantage from their abilities to recruit high caliber male and female talent. The small

and medium-sized business community may benefit from the implementation of such

training.

Over four-fifths (83.3%) of subjects in the current study rejected the statement

that potential female candidates for promotion to senior-level positions did not seek

promotion to senior-level executive positions because of sexual harassment. Nine

(12.5%) subjects did not know. Only 4.2% held the view that sexual harassment is a

factor preventing women from seeking promotion to senior-level executive positions.

Nielson, Bjørkelo, Notelaers, and Einarsen (2010) conducted a study in Norway

and found 72.9% of women and 27.1% of men reported experiencing some form of

sexual harassment over the duration of their employment (p. 262). Das (2009) found

women were 46% more likely to be the subject of sexual harassment over the duration of
 120

their employment than were their male counterparts (p. 917). Neither of the foregoing

studies assessed the degree to which such high levels of sexual harassment affected

women’s career aspirations or the choices associated therewith.

Nadler and Stockdale (2012) found 24% of the U.S. workforce had been subjected

to some form of unwanted sexual harassment in the workplace (p. 287). The level of

perceived sexual harassment (4.2%) as an impediment preventing women from seeking

promotion to senior executive positions reported by subjects in the current study may

indicate that women tolerate high levels of sexual harassment over the course of their

working life as a necessary admission price to higher office. The finding may support

research that has found that by preference, both males and females continue to allow

traditional male leadership styles to dominate modern corporate operating environments

(Higginson, 2010; Rusch & Marshall, 2006; Sosa, 2010).

Operating Policies

In the second FGCC report (U.S. Department of Labor Federal Glass Ceiling

Commission, 1995b), a number of recommendations aimed at eliminating the glass

ceiling were made. The FGCC called for businesses to adopt operating practices deemed

conducive to eliminating the glass ceiling. Specifically, businesses were asked to offer

mandated diversity training for corporate-level employees, present affirmative action as

part of diversity objectives within strategic plans, expand beyond conventional promotion

candidates through inclusion of non-customary sources, and adopt work-life and family-

friendly policies.

Less than 6% of subjects in the current study reported the existence of operating

policies that facilitated the promotion of women to senior-level positions in their

 121

companies. Almost nine-tenths (88.8%) of the subjects indicated the absence of operating

policies facilitating the promotion of women to senior-level positions in their companies.

The perception that operating policies designed to facilitate the promotion of women are

largely absent is inconsistent with reports about the percentage of specific policies

elsewhere in the study. For example, 59.7% of the respondents indicated the existence of

gender-equity policies mandating all qualified individuals have equal access and

opportunities to compete based on ability and merit while 22.2% acknowledged the

existence of gender-equity remuneration policies. This result may indicate HR

professionals who took part in the current study do not correlate operating policies and

gender discrimination unless the terms are linked.

The acknowledgement of the existence of two operating policies fostering the

promotion of women by three-fifths of the subjects in the current study is

disproportionate to the number of subjects indicating the lack of such operational

policies. An attempt to explain this discrepancy would be speculative and lies outside the

scope of the study. However, one possible explanation may lie in the fact that 93.1% of

subjects reported an absence of specific diversity training goals and objectives designed

to facilitate the promotion of women to senior-level executive positions.

Compliance Policies

The first report published by the FGCC (U.S. Department of Labor Federal Glass

Ceiling Commission, 1995a) identified the failure of government agencies to enforce

compliance with the law as a major factor contributing to the glass ceiling phenomenon.

The second FGCC (U.S. Department of Labor Federal 1995b) report stipulated the

government should “lead by example” to enforce antidiscrimination laws and to improve

 122

diversity data collection and dissemination (p. 15). Operating policies unsupported by

compliance policies are unlikely to result in the elimination of the glass ceiling

phenomenon.

The findings of the current study indicate that 75.0% of subjects in the surveyed

companies believed policies fostering the promotion of women did not exist. Failure to

mandate companywide participation in diversity training initiatives (87.5%) or to hold

executive management accountable for the enforcement of their companies’ gender-

equity policy with respect to remuneration (79.2%) are consistent with the lack of

compliance activities. A failure to promote from within (80.6%) the companies as a

means of fostering the promotion of women failed to address the gender of those outside

hires filling executive positions.

Inferential Statistics

The research question and hypotheses for this quantitative, web-based survey with

a correlational research design were as follows:

What statistically significant relationships exist between the percentage of senior-

level female executives within each company and the total number of processes

that affect selection to senior-level executive positions (impediments to

promotion, operating policies, and compliance activities)?

Ho: No statistically significant relationship exists between the percentage of senior-

level female executives within each company and the total number of processes

that affect selection to senior level executive positions (impediments to

promotion, operating policies, and compliance activities).

 123

Ha: A statistically significant relationship exists between the percentage of senior-

level female executives within each company and the total number of processes

that affect selection to senior-level executive positions (impediments to

promotion, operating policies, and compliance activities).

Prior to testing for correlations of the percentage of senior-level female executives

and the total number of processes that affect selection to senior-level executive positions,

Spearman rho correlation tests were conducted on the three subscale scores that

comprised the total number of processes. The three subscales were perceived

impediments, operating policies, and compliance policies. Based on Spearman rho

findings relating to the three subscale score totals, the null hypothesis was rejected

partially.

A statistically significant relationship exists between the percentage of senior

leadership positions filled by women and perceived impediments. A statistically

significant relationship also exists between the percentage of senior leadership positions

filled by women and compliance activities. The null hypothesis is valid for the remaining

process, namely, operating policies: No statistically significant relationship exists

between the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women and operating

policies.

The result of the first Spearman correlation, namely, perceived impediments, was

significant, rs (72) = -.346, with p = .003. An rs value of -.346 indicates a medium

association, or strength, of the relationship. As perceived impediments decreased, the

percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women increased. The finding would

appear to support the FGCC’s (U.S. Department of Labor Federal Glass Ceiling
 124

Commission, 1995a) finding that glass ceiling barriers serve to impede the career

advancement aspirations of women.

The result of the second Spearman rho correlation, namely, operating policies,

was not significant. The Spearman rho correlation findings were rs (72) = .124, p = .300.

The results indicated no relationship exists between operating policies and the percentage

of senior leadership positions filled by women. Analysis of the demographic data relating

to operating policies revealed 88.8% of the subjects participating in the current study

indicated an absence of operating policies facilitating the promotion of women to senior-

level positions in their companies. Less than 6% reported the existence of such policies in

their current companies.

The finding would seem to support the FGCC’s (U.S. Department of Labor

Federal 1995b) call for businesses to adopt operating practices deemed conducive to

eliminating the glass ceiling as a means of increasing the number of female executives.

Specifically, businesses needed to offer mandated diversity training for corporate-level

employees, present affirmative action as part of their diversity objectives within strategic

plans, expand beyond conventional promotion candidates through inclusion of non-

customary sources, and adopt work-life and family-friendly policies. The low level of

adoption of such operating policies by companies in the sample population may be a

reason women fill only 11.7% of the executive positions in these companies.

The result of the third Spearman correlation (compliance policies) was significant.

The Spearman rho correlation findings were rs (72) = .249, p = .035. An rs value of .249

indicates that as compliance activities increased, the percentage of senior leadership

positions filled by women increased.

 125

The second FGCC report (U.S. Department of Labor Federal 1995b) stipulated

the government should “lead by example” (p. 15) to enforce antidiscrimination laws and

improve diversity data collection and dissemination. By inference, it would seem

reasonable to assume elimination of glass ceiling impediments within businesses requires

the adoption of compliance policies enforcing the implementation of the operating

policies fostering increased numbers of female executives. The result of the third

Spearman rho correlation (rs = .249) indicated that as compliance activities increased, so

did the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women. The findings would

seem to support the efficacy of the FGCC’s call for compliance activities.

The result of the fourth Spearman rho correlation (total scores) was not

significant. An rs value of -.212 suggested a relationship between the total score and the

percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women did not exist. The null

hypothesis posits a statistically significant relationship does not exist between the

percentage of senior-level female activities within each company and the total number of

processes that affect selection to senior-level executive positions.

Based on the Spearman rho correlations, the null hypothesis must be partially

rejected. A statistically significant relationship exists between the percentage of senior

leadership positions filled by women and the number of perceived impediments, and a

statistically significant relationship exists between the percentage of senior leadership

positions filled by women and compliance activities. The null hypothesis is valid for the

remaining process. No statistically significant relationship between the percentage of

senior leadership positions filled by women and operating policies exists.

 126

Assumptions

A major assumption implicit in the study was the assurance of anonymity would

allow both female and male individuals who chose to participate to share new insights

into the effect, if any, of the FGCC (U.S. Department of Labor Federal 1995b) glass

ceiling elimination recommendations in small and medium-sized U.S. companies. Subject

responses indicated a number of the FGCC recommendations had been adopted by the

small and medium-sized business sector in Georgia and Florida. In addition, subjects’

responses revealed that some companies contained in the sample population had not

adopted a number of the FGCC recommendations. Analysis of the data did not reveal

evidence of dishonest responses to the questions contained in the survey instrument.

A further assumption implicit in the study was a sample of HR professionals’

perspectives on the glass ceiling phenomenon would suggest new intervention programs

and policies suitable for adoption throughout the small and medium-sized business sector.

The findings of the study are inconclusive with respect to the identification of specific

new intervention programs and policies suitable for adoption by the small and medium-

sized business sector. However, analysis of the data did identify statistically significant

relationships between the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women and

perceived impediments, and the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by

women and compliance activities. Examination of the data showed no statistically

significant relationship between the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by

women and operating policies. The use of a correlational method did not assume

relationships were causal but the correlational relationships uncovered in the course of

analysis point to the need for further research.

 127

Limitations

Budget and time constraints limited the scope and scale of the study. The low

e-mail open rates, click-through rates, and unique response rates may indicate a self-

selection response bias. The use of an incentive to increase the response rate may have

introduced a self-selection response bias. Increasingly sophisticated SPAM filters limit

delivery rates and may have lowered response rates. An actual response rate (72) below

that required for statistical power of .80 (84) increased the probability of Type II errors.

Moreover, perceptions may not equate to reality, thereby limiting the generalizability of

the study results.

Suggestions for Further Study

The study attempted to fill a gap in the literature by identifying HR professionals’

perceptions of glass ceiling processes identified by the U.S. Department of Labor’s

Federal Glass Ceiling Commission (1995a, 1995b) that might affect the selection of

female candidates to executive positions in the small and medium-sized businesses in

Georgia and Florida. Considerable research is available about corporate responses to the

recommendations made by the FGCC. The absence of a relevant study investigating the

effect of the FGCC’s recommendations on the advancement of women to executive levels

in small and medium-sized businesses led to the creation of a survey tool specific to the

goals of the study. Four suggestions for further study devolve from the exploratory nature

of the study.

First, the survey instrument questions could be refined in light of the findings of

the study. The partial rejection of the null hypothesis points to the need for further

research into the relationship of the three processes affecting the promotion of women to
 128

senior-level executive positions. In addition, research is required to identify specific

operating and compliance policies that lead to increased numbers of senior-level female

executives.

Second, subject to budget constraints, the survey could be administered to

different sample populations (additional states, entire geographic regions, or the nation as

a whole). The sample population could be restricted to a specific industry or industries

known for employing few female executives. The sample population could be widened to

capture the perceptions of other executive decision makers such as business owners,

board members, CEOs, and other executives involved in decisions relating to the

promotion of company executives.

Third, further insights could be gained through broadening the research method

used to collect data. For example, in depth qualitative interviews with one or more

company owners, board members, CEOs, or other executives involved in decisions

relating to the promotion of company executives might facilitate further understanding.

Data obtained from such interviews might provide further insight(s) into the rationale

underlying promotion decision making and candidate selection processes. Alternatively, a

mixed methods study might offer greater insight(s) into the relationship between the

dependent variable and independent variables examined in the study.

Fourth, explanation of two outlying demographic statistic findings fell outside the

scope of the study. Further insights could be obtained by research into the reasons for the

significant disparity between the study findings and other research in two areas.

Specifically,

1. The disparity between external and internal perceptions of the glass ceiling
 129

phenomenon as an impediment (see Table 15, rows 1 and 2)

2. The discrepancy between perceived levels of sexual harassment reported by

subjects in the study (see Table 15, row 14) and the levels reported by Nielson,

Bjørkelo, Notelaers, and Einarsen (2010), Das (2009), and Nadler and Stockdale

(2012).

Recommendations for Business Owners and Company Executives

Analysis of the study findings confirmed the existence of glass ceiling

impediments within small and medium-sized businesses in Georgia and Florida. As

defined in the second report published by the FGCC (U.S. Department of Labor Federal

1995b), glass ceiling impediments are internal structural impediments lying within the

direct control of businesses. In that report, the FGCC made a number of

recommendations designed to overcome the more overt influences supporting the glass

ceiling phenomenon.

Specifically, the FGCC (U.S. Department of Labor Federal 1995b) recommended

to businesses the need to undertake mandated diversity training for corporate-level

employees, to present affirmative action as part of diversity objectives within strategic

plans, to expand beyond the selection of conventional promotion candidates through

inclusion of non-customary sources, and to adopt work-life and family-friendly operating

policies. The FGCC stipulated the government should lead by example through enforcing

antidiscrimination laws and improving diversity data collection and dissemination. By

inference, the FGCC appears to be calling on business leaders to enforce internal

operating policies designed to eliminate glass ceiling barriers with appropriate

compliance policies. Again, by inference, such compliance policies must perforce hold
 130

senior-level management accountable for the enforcement of all aspects of the company’s

gender-equity operating policies.

If small and medium-sized business owners or senior-level executives wish to

mitigate the effects of the glass ceiling phenomenon within their businesses, they must

begin by accepting the possibility that one or more of the glass ceiling phenomenon

identified in the current study exist within their companies. In addition, owners and

executive leaders must concede overt gender discrimination has been replaced in many

instances by more subtle, hard to detect forms and the elimination of glass ceiling barriers

will not be easy or straightforward. The challenge of identifying glass ceiling barriers

within a company is made more difficult by the uniqueness of its human capital. Glass

ceiling barriers that exist in one company may be absent, or of a slightly different variant

to those found in other businesses. Any attempt by business owners or senior executives

to address the glass ceiling phenomenon in their businesses should begin with the

identification of the glass ceiling barriers that exist within their companies.

The findings may assist business leaders in the identification of areas perceived to

be glass ceiling barriers by the subjects in the sample population. Examination of the

findings may serve to alert business owners and company executives to glass ceiling

barriers within their own businesses. The findings may provide a useful starting point for

the creation of company specific operating and compliance policies.

A general recommendation deriving from the study is business owners and senior-

level executive leaders should incorporate the FGCC’s (U.S. Department of Labor

Federal 1995b) glass ceiling recommendations in their strategic and tactical plans relating

to the operation of their respective businesses. Specific recommendations devolving from

 131

the study that may assist business owners and senior-level executive leaders to mitigate

the effects of the glass ceiling phenomenon include creating the following:

1. Operating policies designed to:

a. Promote diversity training for senior-level executive employees

b. Include affirmative action as part of diversity objectives within strategic plans

c. Include female candidates in the human capital pool from which senior-level

executives are drawn

d. Increase the number of cross-functional job rotation assignment opportunities

open to women

e. Insure all qualified individuals have equal access and opportunity to compete

based on ability and merit

f. Actively encourage women to acquire experience outside their area(s) of

professional competence

g. Mentor women

h. Include women in formal and informal

i. decision-making processes

ii. executive networks

i. Promote work-life and family-friendly policies that do not discriminate

against women.

2. Compliance policies designed to enforce glass ceiling related operating policies by

holding executive management accountable for the implementation and execution of

the companies’ operating policies.

 132

School of Advanced Studies Objectives

One objective of the School of Advanced Studies (SAS) is to assist scholar

practitioners acquire “skills as a scholar and make a difference in the community through

the use of research, theory and practical experience” (University of Phoenix, 2012, para.

2). The study fulfills SAS’s mission in three areas. First, the study fills a gap in the

literature relating to the glass ceiling phenomenon in small and medium-sized businesses

in Georgia and Florida. Second, the study findings add to the general body of knowledge

on the glass ceiling phenomenon as perceived by HR executives. Finally, the research

undertaken in the study addresses a real-world problem confronting both women and

organizational management (University of Phoenix, 2012, para. 6)

Concluding Comments

Glass ceiling impediments exist in the small and medium-sized business sector in

Georgia and Florida. Gender bias continues to impede the promotion of women to senior-

level executive positions in business. The findings from this study were important

because the literature indicates an absence of research about the processes affecting the

selection of female candidates for senior-level executive positions in the small and

medium-sized business sector of the U.S. economy. Identification of HR professionals’

perceptions of glass ceiling processes affecting the selection of female candidates to

executive positions in the small and medium-sized business may add to leadership

knowledge and thereby fill a gap in the literature.

The findings of this study may contribute to an increased understanding of,

endorsement of, and support for the need to promote increasing numbers of females to

senior-executive positions. Organizational structures in corporate environments have

 133

evolved over time to reflect both social and economic conditions. However, traditional

male leadership styles continue to dominate modern corporate operating environments.

The findings may be significant to small and medium-sized business leaders because the

discoveries might assist in the development of policies aligning more closely with the

requirements of the Glass Ceiling Act (Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1991) and other

U. S. antidiscrimination laws.

Specifically, the Spearman rho correlation tests revealed a statistically significant

relationship between the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women and

two of the three processes thought to impede or foster the selection of female candidates.

The processes that were tested were impediments to promotion, operating policies, and

policy enforcement activities that affect the promotion of female candidates to senior-

level executive positions. A statistically significant relationship was found between the

percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women and the number of perceived

impediments, and the percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women and the

number of compliance activities. No statistically significant relationship between the

percentage of senior leadership positions filled by women and operating policies was

apparent.

Further identification and clarification of specific impediments to promotion,

operating policies, and compliance enforcement activities processes that correlate with

the number of women holding senior-executive positions is necessary if the glass ceiling

phenomenon is to be eradicated or mitigated. The correlation of perceived impediments

and compliance activities with the number of female senior-level executives may

encourage the development of compliance policies. Operating policies devoid of

 134

compliance policies are unlikely to mitigate the effects of the glass ceiling phenomenon.

Reduction or elimination of glass ceiling barriers may result in the promotion of an

increased number of females to executive-level positions.

The acknowledgement and acceptance of the validity of leadership approaches

more closely associated with females than with males may lead to increased numbers of

women in senior-level executive positions. Identifying the process impediments to

promotion to senior executive-level positions for females working in small and medium-

sized companies in Georgia and Florida may help female leadership candidates in all

small and medium-sized business sector companies plan and execute personal promotion

strategies.
 135

References

Allen, S. J., & Hartman, N. S. (2008). Leadership development: An exploration of

sources of learning. SAM Advanced Management Journal (07497075), 73(1), 10-

62.

Arain, M., Campbell, M. J., Cooper, C. L., & Lancaster, G. A. (2010). What is a pilot or

feasibility study? A review of current practice and editorial policy. BMC Medical

Research Methodology, 10, 67-67. doi:1471-2288/10/67

Arwood, T. (2006). Sexual orientation and leadership: The pink ceiling. Spalding

University, Louisville, KY. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 151 p.

http://search.proquest.com/docview/304918298?accountid=35812

Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on

Psychological Science (Wiley-Blackwell), 1(2), 164-180. doi:10.1111/j.1745-

6916.2006.00011.x

Barreto, M., Ellemeres, N., Cihangir, S., & Stroebe, K. (2008). The self-fulfilling effects

of contemporary sexism: How it affects women's well-being and behavior. In M.

Barreto, M. K. Ryan & M. T. Schmitt (Eds.), The glass ceiling in the 21st

century: Understanding barriers to gender equality (pp. 99-123). Washington,

DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/11863-005

Barreto, M., Ryan, M. K., & Schmitt, M. T. (Eds.). (2008). The glass ceiling in the 21st

century: Understanding barriers to gender equality. Washington, DC: American

Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/11863-000

 136

Baxandall, R. (2009). Feminist coalitions: Historical perspectives on second-wave

feminism in the United States. The Journal of American History, 96(1), 283.

doi:10.2307/27694863

Beetham, G., & Demetriades, J. (2007). Feminist research methodologies and

development: Overview and practical application. Gender & Development, 15(2),

199-216. doi:10.1080/13552070701391086

Berry, M. (2007). The role of stereotypes, social cognition and emotions in judgments of

agentic women. Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA. ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses, n/a. http://search.proquest.com/docview/-

304836084?accountid=35812

Berry, P., & Franks, T. J. (2010). Women in the world of corporate business: Looking at

the glass ceiling. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 3(2), 1-9.

Bible, D., & Hill, K. L. (2007). Discrimination: Women in business. Journal of

Organizational Culture, Communications & Conflict, 11(1), 65-76.

Bihagen, E., & Ohls, M. (2007). Are women over-represented in dead-end jobs? A

Swedish study using empirically derived measures of dead-end jobs. Social

Indicators Research, 84(2), 159-177. doi:10.1007/s11205-006-9078-y

Biklen, S., Marshall, C., & Pollard, D. (2008). Experiencing second-wave feminism in

the USA. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 29(4), 451-

469. doi:10.1080/01596300802410185

Braun, C. M. (1995). Affirmative Action and the glass ceiling. Black Scholar, 25(3), 7.
 137

Broughton, A., & Miller, L. (2009). Women in senior management: Is the glass ceiling

still intact? IS, GUC: The Journal of Industrial Relations & Human Resources,

11(4), 7-23. doi:10.4026/1303-2860.2009.0122.x

Bruckmueller, S. (2007). Gender stereotypes and the glass cliff: Reduced importance of

male attributes results in more frequent selection of female leaders in times of

crisis. University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS. ProQuest Dissertations and

Theses,http://search.proquest.com/docview/304860168?accountid=35812

Bryant, A., & Chamaz, C. (2007). The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Sage,

Thousand Oaks, CA.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2010). Labor force demographics, 2008. Retrieved from

http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2010/ted_20100105_data.-htm#ted_20100105a

Callahan, J. L., & Tomaszewski, L. (2007). Navigating the good ol' boys club: Women,

marginality, and communities of practice in a military non-profit organization.

Studies in Continuing Education, 29(3), 259-276. doi:10.1080/0158037070-

1403324

Carter, N. M., & Silva, C. (2010). Pipeline's broken promise: The promise of future

leadership: A research program on highly talented employees in the pipeline

Research Report. New York, NY: Catalyst. Retrieved from http://-

www.catalyst.org/publication/372/pipelines-broken-promise

Catalyst. (2007a). 2006 census of women corporate officers and top earners of the

Fortune 500 (Vol. 2009). New York, NY: Catalyst. Retrieved from

http://www.catalyst.org/publication/18/2006-catalyst-census-of-women-

corporate-officers-and-top-earners-of-the-fortune-500
 138

Catalyst. (2007b). 2007 census of women corporate officers and top earners of the

Fortune 500 (Vol. 2009). New York, NY: Catalyst. Retrieved from

http://www.catalyst.org/publication/13/2007-catalyst-census-of-women-

corporate-officers-and-top-earners-of-the-fortune-500

Catalyst. (2009). Women in their 20s and 30s. Catalyst Quick Take (pp. 2). New York,

NY: Catalyst. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/publication/237/women-in-

their-20s-30s

Catalyst. (2010a). Statistical overview of women in the workplace Catalyst Quick Take

(pp. 2). New York, NY: Catalyst. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/-

publication/219/statistical-overview-of-women-in-the-workplace

Catalyst. (2010b). U.S. Women in business. Catalyst Pyramids (pp. 1). New York, NY:

Catalyst. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/publication/132/us-women-in-

business

Catalyst. (2010c). Women CEOs of the Fortune 1000 1972-2010 (PDF ed.). New York,

NY: Catalyst. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/publication/322/women-

ceos-of-the-fortune-1000

Catalyst. (2010d). Women in management in the United States, 1950-present. Catalyst

Quick Take. New York, NY: Catalyst. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/-

publication/207/women-in-management-in-the-united-states-1950-present

Catalyst. (2010e). Women in U.S. Management. Catalyst Quick Take (pp. 2). New York,

NY: Catalyst. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/publication/206/women-in-

us-management
 139

Chapman, M., & Mills, A. (2006). Eighty years and more: Looking back at the

Nineteenth Amendment. Canadian Review of American Studies, 36(1), 1-15.

doi:10.1353/crv.2006.0022

Chick, G. (2005). Are prejudice and discrimination learned? A comment on Stodolska.

Leisure Sciences, 27(1), 41-43. doi:10.1080/01490400590886006

Cikara, M., & Fiske, S. T. (2008). Warmth, compertence, and ambivalent sexism:

Verticle assault and collateral damage. In M. Barreto, M. K. Ryan & M. T.

Schmitt (Eds.), The glass ceiling in the 21st century: Understanding barriers to

gender equality (pp. 73-96). Washington, DC: American Psychological

Association. doi:10.1037/11863-004

Clawson, J. G. (2006). Level three leadership: Getting below the surface (3rd ed.). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.).

Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155-159.

doi:10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155

Coogan, P. A., & Chen, C. P. (2007). Career development and counselling for women:

Connecting theories to practice. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 20(2), 191-

204. doi:10.1080/09515070701391171

Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2011). Business research methods (11th ed.). New

York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
 140

Cornelius, N., & Skinner, D. (2008). The careers of senior men and women–A

capabilities theory perspective. British Journal of Management, 19, S141-S149.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2008.00579.x

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods

research (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Cudd, A. E., & Andreasen, R. O. (2007). Feminist theory: A philosophical anthology. In

A. E. Cudd & R. O. Andreasen (Eds.), Blackwell philosophy anthologies (1st ed.,

Vol. 2nd Print, pp. x, 432 p.). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Das, A. (2009). Sexual harassment at work in the United States. Archives of Sexual

Behavior, 38(6), 909-921. doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9354-9

Demir, K. (2008). Transformational leadership and collective efficacy: The moderating

roles of collaborative culture and teachers' self-efficacy. Eurasian Journal of

Educational Research (EJER)(33), 93-112.

Desvaux, G., Devillard-Hoellinger, S., & Meaney, M. C. (2008). A business case for

women. McKinsey Quarterly(4), 26-33.

Doll, Y. (2007). United States Army women general officers: A phenomenological study

of their career ascension and leadership. University of Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ.

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, http://search.proquest.com/docview/-

304731986?accountid=35812
 141

Eagly, A. H. (2007). Female leadership advantage and disadvantage: Resolving the

contradictions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31(1), 12. doi:10.1111/j.1471-

6402.2007.00326.x

Eisner, S., & Harvey, M. (2009). C-change? Generation Y and the glass ceiling. S.A.M.

Advanced Management Journal, 74(1), 13.

Erdfelder, P. E., Buchner, A., & Klang, A. G. (2008). G*power versio 3.1.2. Kiel,

Germany: Univität Kiel.

Falk, G. (2010). Is there a crack in the glass ceiling? Proceedings of the Business, Society

& Government Consortium of the Midwest Business Administration Association,

23-29.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. (2009). Statistical power analyses using

G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research

Methods, 41(4), 11. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149

Feldhahn, S. C. (2009). The male factor: The unwritten rules, misperceptions, and secret

beliefs of men in the workplace (1st ed.). New York, NY: Broadway Books.

Fortune 500. (2006). Women CEOs for Fortune 500 companies. Retrieved from

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/womenceos/

Fortune 500. (2007). Fortune 500 women CEOs. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/-

galleries/2007/fortune/0704/gallery.F500_womenCEOs.fortune/index.html

Fortune 500. (2008). Women CEOs. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/-

fortune/fortune500/2008/womenceos/

Fortune 500. (2009a). CEOs. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/-

fortune/fortune500/2009/ceos/
 142

Fortune 500. (2009b). CEOs (female). Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/-

fortune/fortune500/2009/womenceos/

Fortune 500. (2009c). Women CEOs. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/-

fortune/fortune500/2009/womenceos/

Fortune 500. (2011). Women CEOs. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/-

fortune/fortune500/2011/womenceos/

Foust-Cummings, H., & Pomeroy, E. (2009). 2009 Catalyst member benchmarking

report. Research Report. New York, NY: Catalyst. Retrieved from

http://www.catalyst.org/publication/345/2009-catalyst-member-benchmarking-

report

Fowler, F. J. (2009). Survey research methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Francoeur, C., Labelle, R., & Sinclair-Desgagné, B. (2008). Gender diversity in corporate

governance and top management. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(1), 83-95.

doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9482-5

Garcia-Retamero, R., & López-Zafra, E. (2006). Prejudice against women in male-

congenial environments: Perceptions of gender role congruity in leadership. Sex

Roles, 55(1/2), 51-61. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9068-1

Ghauri, P. N., & Grønhaug, K. (2010). Research methods in business studies (4th ed.).

New York, NY: Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Gibbons, P. C. (2009). The women’s initiative: Driving success through diversity

investment. Catalyst Award Winner (January 2009 ed.). New York, NY: Catalyst.

Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/publication/337/gibbons-pcthe-womens-

initiative-driving-success-through-diversity-investment
 143

Good, J., & Rudman, L. (2010). When female applicants meet sexist interviewers: The

costs of being a target of benevolent sexism. Sex Roles, 62(7/8), 481.

doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9685-6

Greer, C. R., & Virick, M. (2008). Diverse succession planning: Lessons from the

industry leaders. Human Resource Management, 47(2), 351-367.

doi:10.1002/hrm.20216

Heilman, M. E., & Okimoto, T. G. (2008). Motherhood: A potential source of bias in

employment decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 189-198.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.189

Helfat, C. E., Harris, D., & Wolfson, P. J. (2006). The pipeline to the top: Women and

men in the top executive ranks of U.S. Corporations. Academy of Management

Perspectives, 20(4), 42-64. doi:10.5465/AMP.2006.23270306

Higginson, N. (2010). Preparing the next generation for the family business: Relational

factors and knowledge transfer in mother-to-daughter succession. Journal of

Management & Marketing Research, 2, 1-18.

Hoobler, J. M., Wayne, S. J., & Lemmon, G. (2009). Bosses' perceptions of family-work

conflict and women's promotability: Glass ceiling effects. Academy of

Management Journal, 52(5), 939-957. doi:105465/AMJ.2009.44633700

Howell, D. C. (2011). Fundamental statistics for the behavioral sciences (7th ed.).

Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Hoyt, C. L. (2005). The role of leadership efficacy and stereotype activation in women's

identification with leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies

(Baker College), 11(4), 2-14. doi:10.1177/107179190501100401

 144

Hutchins-Eberhardt, L. (2009). Perceptions of multi-contextual leadership roles:

Reflecting on gendered leadership preferences. The University of Nebraska,

Lincoln, NE.

Hymowitz, C., & Schellhardt, T. D. (1986). The glass ceiling, Wall Street Journal (1889-

Current file), p. 61.

Iskra, D. (2007). Breaking through the brass ceiling: Elite military women's strategies for

success. University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, MD. ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses, http://search.proquest.com/docview/-

304852638?accountid=35812

Iyer, A. (2008). Increasing the representation and status of women in employment: The

effectiveness of affirmative action. In M. Barreto, M. K. Ryan & M. T. Schmitt

(Eds.), The glass ceiling in the 21st century: Understanding barriers to gender

equality (pp. 257-279). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

doi:10.1037/11863-001

Johnson, N. M. (2006). An examination of the concrete ceiling: Perspectives of ten

African American women managers and leaders in corporate America and non-

profit organizations. Capella University, Minneapolis, MN. ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses, 128 p. http://search.proquest.com/docview/-

304911563?accountid=35812

Jones, J. S., & Watt, S. (2010). Ethnography in social science practice. New York, NY:

Routledge.
 145

Kalev, A., & Dobbin, F. (2006). Enforcement of civil rights law in private workplaces:

The effects of compliance reviews and lawsuits over time. Law & Social Inquiry,

31(4), 855-903. doi:10.1111/j.1747-4469.2006.00038.x

Kathuria, S. (2009). Best practices for compliance with the new government contractor

compliance and ethics rules under the federal acquisition regulation. Public

Contract Law Journal, 38(4), 803-856.

Kay, A. C., Czaplinski, S., & Jost, J. T. (2009). Left-right ideological differences in

system justification following exposure to complementary versus

noncomplementary stereotype exemplars. European Journal of Social

Psychology, 39(2), 290-298. doi:10.1002/ejsp.500

Kelly, M. (2008). Undergraduate race/ethnicity unknowns: Demographics, reasons for

nondisclosure, attitudes, and preferences regarding postsecondary admissions

criteria. University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC. ProQuest Dissertations and

Theses, http://search.proquest.com/docview/304459793?accountid=35812

Kim, Y. (2009). The dynamic structure of group inequality. Brown University,

Providence, RI. Retrieved from http://repository.library.brown.edu:8080/fedora/-

objects/bdr:163/datastreams/PDF/content

Kormanik, M. B. (2005). White males in transition: Describing the experience of a

stalled career. The George University, Washington, DC. ProQuest Dissertations

and Theses, 179 p. http://search.proquest.com/docview/-

304999026?accountid=35812

Kretchmar, J. (2008). Social learning theory. Toledo, OH: Great Neck.

 146

Kumar, N. (2008). Three essays in institutional reforms and Indian economic

development. Boston University, Boston, MA.

Lee, T. P. (2005). The myth and reality of affirmative action: A study using the

perceptions of female police. Race, Gender & Class, 12(3/4), 56-72.

Lind, D. A., Marchal, W. G., & Wathen, S. A. (2011). Basic statistics for business &

economics (7th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Linehan, M., & Scullion, H. (2001). European female expatriate careers: Critical success

factors. Journal of European Industrial Training, 25(8), 392.

doi:10.1108/03090590110407191

Lockwood, N. (2007). The glass ceiling: Domestic and International perspectives. SHRM

Research. Alexandria, VA.

Major, B., McCoy, S. K., Schmader, T., Gramzow, R. H., Levin, S., & Sidanius, J.

(2002). Perceiving personal discrimination: The role of group status and

legitimizing ideology. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 82(3), 269-

282. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.82.3.269

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2006). Designing qualitative research (4th ed.).

Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.

Meese, E., Reagan, R., Forte, D. F., Spalding, M., Bond, J., Lawson, G., et al. (Eds.).

(2005). The heritage guide to the Constitution. Washington, D.C.: Heritage

Foundation.

Melchar, D. E., Bosco, S. M., & Cantrell, C. (2008). Leadership for the next generation.

Proceedings for the Northeast Region Decision Sciences Institute (NEDSI), 498-

503.
 147

Metz, I., & Moss, S. (2008). Workplace gender discrimination: Do women over-attribute

slow advancement in management to gender discrimination? Melbourne Review,

4(2), 60-66.

Mona, Y. (2006). The glass ceiling--isn't glass. Business Renaissance Quarterly, 1(1), 93.

Nair, J. G., & Geetha, J. (2011). The glass ceiling: An inquiry into the status, causes and

the road ahead. Paper presented at the National Conference for ISRO Women

March 8, 2011, Balanagar, Hyderabad, India. Conference Paper retrieved from

http://www.nrsc.gov.in/NCIW2011_tech_proc.pdf#page=94

Nielsen, M. B., Bjørkelo, B., Notelaers, G., & Einarsen, S. (2010). Sexual harassment:

prevalence, outcomes, and gender differences assessed by three different

estimation methods. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 19(3), 252-

274. doi:10.1080/10926771003705056

Nielsen, K., & Munir, F. (2009). How do transformational leaders influence followers'

affective well-being? Exploring the mediating role of self-efficacy. Work &

Stress, 23(4), 313-329. doi:10.1080/02678370903385106

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2004). Post hoc power: A concept whosetime has

come. Understanding Statistics, 3(4), 201-230. doi:10.1207/s15328031us0304_1

Ortiz, S. Y., & Roscigno, V. J. (2009). Discrimination, women, and work: Processes and

variations by race and class. Sociological Quarterly, 50(2), 336-359.

doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.2009.01143.x

Oyeyemi, G. M., Adewara, A. A., Adebola, F. B., & Salau, S. I. (2010). On the

estimation of power and sample size in test of independence. Asian Journal of

Mathematics & Statistics, 3(3), 139-146. doi:10.3923/ajms.2010.139.146

 148

Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS Survival Manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using

SPSS (4th ed.). Maidenhead, Berkshire. U.K. ; New York, NY: Open University

Press/McGraw-Hill Education.

Parsons, C. (2007). Web-based surveys: Best practices based on the research literature.

Visitor Studies, 10(1), 13-33. doi:10.1080/10645570701263404

Pichler, S., Simpson, P. A., & Stroh, L. K. (2008). The glass ceiling in human resources:

Exploring the link between women's representation in management and the

practices of strategic human resource management and employee involvement.

Human Resource Management, 47(3), 463-479. doi:10.1002/hrm.20227

Pinker, S. (2008). The sexual paradox: Men, women and the real gender gap. New York,

NY: Scribner.

Prime, J., & Moss-Racusin, C. A. (2009a). Engaging men in gender initiatives: Stacking

the deck for success. Research Report. New York, NY. Retrieved from

http://www.catalyst.org/publication/349/engaging-men-in-gender-initiatives-

stacking-the-deck-for-success

Prime, J., & Moss-Racusin, C. A. (2009b). Engaging men in gender initiatives: What

change agents need to know. Research Report. New York, NY: Catalyst.

Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/publication/323/engaging-men-in-gender-

initiatives-what-change-agents-need-to-know

Rees, T. (2005). Reflections on the uneven development of gender mainstreaming in

Europe. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7(4), 555-574.

doi:10.1080/14616740500284532
 149

Rosenfeld, E. (2009). The ascent of women to senior leadership positions in the financial

services industry: A phenomenological study. Capella University, Louisville, MN.

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, http://search.proquest.com/docview/-

288213099?accountid=35812

Ruderman, M. N., & Ohlott, P. J. (2004). What women leaders want. Leader to Leader,

2004(31), 41-47. doi:10.1002/lt.62

Rudman, N., & Webb, P. (2009). Self-efficacy and the recognition of prior learning.

Africa Education Review, 6(2), 283-294. doi:10.1080/181466209032754589

Rusch, E., & Marshall, C. (2006). Gender filters and leadership: Plotting a course to

equity. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 9(3), 229-250.

doi:10.1080/13603120600741862

Ryan, M. K., & Haslam, S. A. (2005). The glass cliff: Evidence that women are over-

represented in precarious leadership positions. British Journal of Management,

16(2), 81-90. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2005.00433.x

Ryan, M. K., Haslam, S. A., & Kulich, C. (2010). Politics and the glass cliff: Evidence

that women are preferentially selected to contest hard-to-win seats. Psychology of

Women Quarterly, 34(1), 56-64. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009.01541.x

Ryan, M. K., Haslam, S. A., & Postmes, T. (2007). Reactions to the glass cliff. Journal of

Organizational Change Management, 20(2), 182. doi:10.1108/095348107107-

124748

Sabattini, L. (2008). Unwritten rules: What you don't know can hurt your career.

Research Report. New York, NY. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/file/-

209/ur_final_web.pdf
 150

Sabattini, L., & Dinolfo, S. (2010). Unwritten rules: Why doing a good job might not be

enough. Research Report. New York, NY: Catalyst. Retrieved from

http://www.catalyst.org/publication/388/unwritten-rules-why-doing-a-good-job-

might-not-be-enough

Seligman, B. (2005). Patriarchy at the check-out counter. New Labor Forum (Routledge),

14(1), 40-47. doi:10.1080/1095760590900965

Small Business Administration. (2011). What is a small business? Eashington, DC: U.S.

Small Business Administration. Retrieved from http://www.sba.gov/advocacy/-

7495/8417

Smith, J. A. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and

research (1st ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Society for Human Resource Management. (2008). 2008 managing your HR career.

Alexandria, VA: Society for Human Resource Management. Retrieved from

http://www.shrm.org/Pages/default.aspx

Songini, L., & Gnan, L. (2009). Women, glass ceiling, and professionalization in family

SMEs: A missed link. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 17(4), 497-525.

doi:10.1142/SO218495809000461

Sosa, T. (2010). Dealing with dissonance in the research process. Advancing Women in

Leadership, 30(2), 1-13. Retrieved from http://advancingwomen.com/awl/-

awl_wordpress/

Spurgeon, P., & Cross, V. (2006). Gender differences in management behaviour and

leadership style. International Journal of Diversity in Organisations,

Communities & Nations, 5(6), 221-231.

 151

Stamato, L. (2000). Dispute resolution and the glass ceiling: Ending sexual

discrimination at the top. Dispute Resolution Journal, 55(1), 24-31.

Stangor, C. (2010). Research methods for the behavioral sciences. Belmont, CA:

Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

SurveyMonkey. (2010a). Privacy policy. Retrieved from http://www.surveymonkey.com-

/privacypolicy.aspx

SurveyMonkey. (2010b). Security statement. Retrieved from http://www.surveymonkey.-

com/Monkey_Security.aspx

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2012). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Boston:

Pearson Education. doi:10.1177/014662168400800412

Tan, J. (2008). Breaking the "bamboo curtain" and the "glass ceiling": The experience of

women entrepreneurs in high-tech industries in an emerging market. Journal of

Business Ethics, 80(3), 547. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9454-9

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2007a). Survey of business owners--men-owned firms:

2007. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved from

http://www.census.gov/econ/sbo/get07sof.html?9

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2007b). Survey of business owners--women-owned

firms: 2007. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved from

http://www.census.gov/econ/sbo/get07sof.html?8

U.S. Department of Commerce. (2010). Women-owned businesses in the 21st Century

(Vol. 2012). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and

Statistics Admininstration for the White House Council of Women and Girls.
 152

Retrieved from http://www.esa.doc.gov/sites/default/files/reports/-

documents/women-owned-businesses.pdf

U.S. Department of Labor Federal Glass Ceiling Commission. (1995a). Good for

business: Making full use of the nation's human capital: A fact-finding report of

the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission. Washington, D.C.: The Commission: U.S.

Government Printing Office, Federal Glass Ceiling Commission. Retrieved from

http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/history/reich/reports/ceiling.pdf

U.S. Department of Labor Federal Glass Ceiling Commission. (1995b). A solid

investment: Making full use of the nation's human capital: Recommendations of

the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission. (0160455472). Washington, D.C.: The

Commission: U.S. Government Printing Office, Federal Glass Ceiling

Commission. Retrieved from http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/history/-

reich/reports/ceiling2.pdf

U.S. Department of Labor Statistics. (2010). Women in the labor force: A databook.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/-

cps/wlf-databook2010.htm

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2011a). Equal Pay Act (EPA) of

1963 (pub. L. 88-38) Retrieved from http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/-

index.cfm

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2011b). Title VII of the Civil Rights

Act of 1964 (pub. L. 88-352). Retrieved from http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/-

index.cfm
 153

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2011c). Titles I and V of the

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 (pub. L. 101-336). Retrieved

from http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/index.cfm

Vogt, W. P. (2007). Quantitative research methods for professionals. Boston, MA:

Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.

University of Phoenix. (2012). About the school of advanced studies, from

http://www.phoenix.edu/colleges_divisions/doctoral.html

Wal-Mart v. Dukes et al., No. 10-277 (June 20, 2011). Retrieved from

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-277.pdf

Wang, S., Tomlinson, E. C., & Noe, R. A. (2010). The role of mentor trust and protégé

internal locus of control in formal mentoring relationships. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 95(2), 358-367. doi:10.1037/a0017663

Warning, R., & Buchanan, E. R. (2009). An exploration of unspoken bias: Women who

work for women. Gender in management: An International Journal, 24(2), 14.

doi:10.1108/17542410910938817

Weissinger, S. E. (2009). Gender Matters. so do race and class: Experiences of gendered

racism on the Wal-mart shop floor. Humanity & Society, 33(4), 341-362.

doi:10.1177/016059760903300405

Weyer, B. (2006). Do multi-source feedback instruments support the existence of a glass

ceiling for women leaders? Women in Management Review, 21(6), 441.

doi:10.1108/09649420610683453
 154

Weyer, B. (2007). Twenty years later: Explaining the persistence of the glass ceiling for

women leaders. Women in Management Review, 22(6), 482-496.

doi:10.1108/09649420710778718

Wittig, M. (1998). The 1997 SPSSI presidential address: Affirmative Action: A

compelling state interest. Journal of Social Issues, 54, 225-235.

Woodhams, C., & Lupton, B. (2006). Gender-based equal opportunities policy and

practice in small firms: The impact of HR professionals. Human Resource

Management Journal, 16(1), 74-97.

Womack-Gregg, A. (2010). The perception of the glass ceiling phenomenon and women

in senior executive service leadership roles. University of Phoenix D.M.,

University of Phoenix, United States--Arizona. ProQuest Dissertations and

Theses, http://search.proquest.com/docview/814716619?accountid=35812.

Yap, M., & Konrad, A. M. (2009). Gender and racial differentials in promotions: Is there

a sticky floor, a mid-level bottleneck, or a glass ceiling? Relations

Industrielles/Industrial Relations, 64(4), 593-619.

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA:

Sage.

Zhang, S., Schmader, T., & Forbes, C. (2008). The effects of gender sterotypes on

women's career choice: Opening the glass door. In M. Barreto, M. K. Ryan & M.

T. Schmitt (Eds.), The glass ceiling in the 21st century: Understanding barriers to

gender equality (pp. 99-123). Washington, DC: American Psychological

Association. doi:10.1037/11863-006
 155

Appendix A: Final Survey

156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
 168

Appendix B: Letter of Introduction and Informed Consent

Dear sir or madam,

My name is Hugh Adamson and I am a doctoral candidate at the University of Phoenix
working on a Doctor of Management degree. I am conducting a research study entitled a
quantitative study of glass ceiling barriers to promotion of women in medium-sized
businesses. The purpose of the research study is to discover the perspectives of human
resources professionals on the effects of the glass ceiling in medium-sized companies. I
extend to you the opportunity to participate in the research.
Your participation will involve responding to a web-based survey on a secure website.
The expected duration of your participation is approximately 10 minutes. Your
participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to participate or to withdraw
from the study at any time, you can do so without penalty or loss of benefit to yourself.
The results of the research study may be published but your identity will remain
confidential and your name will not be disclosed to any outside party. Every effort will be
made to preserve the confidentiality of your responses. All data will be stored
electronically in a password protected electronic format. To protect your privacy, the
survey collection will not include gathering any identifying information, such as your
name or IP address (IP address collection will be disabled).
In this research, there are no foreseeable risks to you. Although there may be no direct
benefit to you, one possible benefit of your participation is the understanding of
perceptions about the glass ceiling specific to medium-sized companies.
If you have any questions concerning the research study, please call me at 912-655-0031,
or e-mail me at hcadamson@email.phoenix.edu.
As a participant in this study, you should understand the following:

1. You may decline to participate or withdraw from participation at any time

without consequences.
2. Your identity will be kept confidential.
3. Hugh Adamson, the researcher, has thoroughly explained the parameters of the
research study and all of your questions and concerns have been addressed.
4. Data will be stored in a secure and locked area. The data will be held for a period
of five years, and then destroyed.
5. The research results may be used for publication.
The following URL will take you to a web-based version of this letter. Access to the
survey is conditional on your electronic consent. You will be asked to acknowledge that
you have read the foregoing material, that you are at least 18 years of age, and that your
participation is voluntarily.
www.surveymonkey.com/...
Electronic consent indicates that you acknowledge that you understand the nature of the
study, the potential risks to you as a participant, and the means by which your identity
will be kept confidential. Your electronic consent also indicates that you are 18 years old
 169

or older and that you give your permission to voluntarily serve as a participant in the
study described.
Sincerely,

Hugh C Adamson
Doctoral Candidate
 170

Appendix C: Pilot Study Subject Letter of Introduction and Informed Consent

Dear sir or madam,

My name is Hugh Adamson and I am a doctoral candidate at the University of Phoenix
working on a Doctor of Management degree. I am conducting a research study entitled a
quantitative study of glass ceiling barriers to promotion of women in medium-sized
businesses. The purpose of the research study is to discover the perspectives of human
resources professionals on the effects of the glass ceiling in medium-sized companies. I
extend to you the opportunity to participate in the research. I extend to you the
opportunity to participate in the pilot study phase of the research.
As a participant in the pilot study you will be allowed online access to the survey that
will be administered to human resources executives in the states of Georgia and Florida.
Participation will involve responding to the survey questions as well as commenting on
the appropriateness of the survey questions and offering your suggestions as to how they
may be improved. You will also be asked to record the time it took you to complete the
survey and whether you felt it was reasonable. The expected duration of your
participation in answering the questions is approximately 10 minutes.
Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to participate or to
withdraw from the study at any time, you can do so without penalty or loss of benefit to
yourself. The results of the research study may be published but your identity will remain
confidential and your name will not be disclosed to any outside party. Every effort will be
made to preserve the confidentiality of your responses. All data will be stored
electronically in a password protected electronic format. To protect your privacy, the
survey collection will not include gathering any identifying information, such as your
name or IP address (IP address collection will be disabled).
In this research, there are no foreseeable risks to you. Although there may be no direct
benefit to you, one possible benefit of your participation is the understanding of
perceptions about the glass ceiling specific to medium-sized companies.
If you have any questions concerning the research study, please call me at 912-655-0031,
or e-mail me at hcadamson@email.phoenix.edu.
As a participant in this study, you should understand the following:

1. You may decline to participate or withdraw from participation at any time

without consequences.
2. Your identity will be kept confidential.
3. Hugh Adamson, the researcher, has thoroughly explained the parameters of the
research study and all of your questions and concerns have been addressed.
4. Data will be stored in a secure and locked area. The data will be held for a period
of five years, and then destroyed.
5. The research results may be used for publication.
The following URL will take you to a web-based version of this letter. Access to the
survey is conditional on your electronic consent. You will be asked to acknowledge that
 171

you have read the foregoing material, that you are at least 18 years of age, and that your
participation is voluntarily.
www.surveymonkey.com/...
Electronic consent indicates that you acknowledge that you understand the nature of the
study, the potential risks to you as a participant, and the means by which your identity
will be kept confidential. Your electronic consent also indicates that you are 18 years old
or older and that you give your permission to voluntarily serve as a participant in the
study described.
Participation in the pilot study will exclude you from participation in the final survey.
However, your unattributed responses and comments will be presented in the final
research document, along with how your feedback improved the survey questions. As
compensation for your participation I will, at your request, share with you a summary of
the survey findings. Your participation in the pilot study is an important element in the
validation of the final survey. Thank you!
Sincerely,

Hugh C Adamson
Doctoral Candidate

1. Click "Yes" if you give your consent to participate

Click "No" if you do not wish to participate
 172

Appendix D: Pilot Study Survey

173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
 189

Appendix E: Data Code Book

Table E1
Informed Consent
IBM-SPSS ID q0001
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 72 100.0
2.00 No

Table E2
Subject’s Gender
IBM-SPSS ID q0002
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Female 60 83.3
2.00 Male 12 16.7
3.00 Prefer not to answer

Table E3
Subject’s Age
IBM-SPSS ID q0003
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 18-35 13 18.1
2.00 36-50 30 41.7
3.00 51-65 24 33.3
4.00 66 or older 4 5.6
5.00 Prefer not to answer 1 1.4
 190

Table E4
Subject’s Ethnicity
IBM-SPSS ID q0004
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Asian 1 1.4
2.00 African American/Black 15 20.8
3.00 Caucasian/White 49 68.1
4.00 Hispanic/Latino 5 6.9
5.00 Prefer not to answer 2 2.8

Table E5
Subject’s Highest Level of Education
IBM-SPSS ID q0005
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Some college 6 8.3
2.00 2-Year Associates Degree 10 13.9
3.00 4-Year Bachelor's Degree 39 54.2
4.00 Master's Degree 14 19.4
5.00 Doctoral Degree 1 1.4
6.00 Prefer not to answer 2 2.8

Table E6
Subject’s Job Title
IBM-SPSS ID q0006
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 HR Vice President 22 30.6
2.00 HR Director 17 23.6
3.00 HR Manager 28 38.9
4.00 HR Supervisor
5.00 Prefer not to answer 2 2.8
6.00 Other specified job titles 3 4.2
 191

Table E7
Company Size
IBM-SPSS ID q000)
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Less than 50 1 1.4
2.00 50 – 99 13 18.1
3.00 100 – 199 16 22.2
4.00 200 – 299 9 12.5
5.00 300 – 399 11 15.3
6.00 400 – 499 15 20.8
7.00 500 or more 7 9.7
8.00 Prefer not to answer

Table E8
Gender of Owner or Primary Shareholder
IBM-SPSS ID q0009
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Female 10 13.9
2.00 Male 37 51.4
3.00 Don’t know 25 34.7
4.00 Prefer not to answer

Table E9
Impediments: US Businesses
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0001
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Agree 58 80.6
2.00 Disagree 11 15.3
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 3 4.2
 192

Table E10
Impediments: My Company
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0002
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Agree 31 43.1
2.00 Disagree 36 50.0
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 5 6.9

Table E11
Impediments: Gender Discrimination
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0003
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Agree 29 40.3
2.00 Disagree 36 50.0
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 7 9.7

Table E12
Impediments: Education
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0004
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Agree 10 13.9
2.00 Disagree 55 76.4
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 7 9.7

Table E13
Impediments: Parental Status
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0005
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 3 4.2
1.00 No 37 51.4
2.00 Yes 32 44.4
 193

Table E14
Impediments: Commitment to Family
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0006
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 1 1.4
1.00 No 30 41.7
2.00 Yes 41 56.9

Table E15
Impediments: Lack of Leadership Experience
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0007
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 2 2.8
1.00 No 24 33.3
2.00 Yes 46 63.9

Table E16
Impediments: Lack of Mentoring
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0008
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 1 1.4
1.00 No 21 29.2
2.00 Yes 50 69.4

Table E17
Impediments: Executive Positions Reserved for Family
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0009
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 14 19.4
1.00 No 44 61.1
2.00 Yes 14 19.4
 194

Table E18
Impediments: Exclusion from Decision-making Processes
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0010
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 7 9.7
1.00 No 35 48.6
2.00 Yes 30 41.7

Table E19
Impediments: Exclusion from Internal Executive Networks
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0011
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 7 9.7
1.00 No 33 45.8
2.00 Yes 32 44.4

Table E20
Impediments: Absence of Diversity & Inclusion Training
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0012
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 1 1.4
1.00 No 19 26.4
2.00 Yes 52 72.2

Table E21
Impediments: Women Lack Outside Leadership Experience
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0013
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 6 8.3
1.00 No 23 31.9
2.00 Yes 43 59.7
 195

Table E22
Impediments: Women do not seek promotion to senior positions
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0014
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 7 9.7
1.00 No 31 43.1
2.00 Yes 34 47.2

Table E23
Impediments: Women do not to seek promotion because of sexual harassment
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0015
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 9 12.5
1.00 No 60 83.3
2.00 Yes 3 4.2

Table E24
Impediments: Women lack cross-functional job rotation opportunities
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0016
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 4 5.6
1.00 No 12 16.7
2.00 Yes 56 77.8

Table E25
Impediments: Women choose not to pursue promotion
in favor of other personal lifestyle goals
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0017
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 18 25.0
1.00 No 35 48.6
 196

Table E25
Impediments: Women choose not to pursue promotion
in favor of other personal lifestyle goals
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0017
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 18 25.0
1.00 No 35 48.6
2.00 Yes 19 26.4

Table E26
Impediments: Women are excluded from traditional
male-bonding activities
IBM-SPSS ID q0010_0018
Code Input N = 72 %
0.00 Don't know or Prefer not to answer 27 37.5
1.00 No 22 30.6
2.00 Yes 23 31.9

Table E27
Operating Policies: Policies Facilitating the Promotion of Women
IBM-SPSS ID q0011_0001
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 4 5.6
2.00 No 64 88.9
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 4 5.6
 197

Table E28
Operating Policies: Gender-Equity Policies
IBM-SPSS ID q0011_0002
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 43 59.7
2.00 No 27 37.5
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 2 2.8

Table E29
Operating Policies: Diversity Training Policies
IBM-SPSS ID q0011_0003
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 2 2.8
2.00 No 67 93.1
3.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 3 4.2

Table E30
Operating Policies: Gender-Equity Remuneration Policies
IBM-SPSS ID q0011_0004
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 20 27.8
2.00 No 48 66.7
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 4 5.6

Table E31
Compliance Policies: Enforcement Policies
IBM-SPSS ID q0012_0001
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 16 22.2
2.00 No 54 75.0
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 2 2.8
 198

Table E32
Compliance Policies: Mandatory Diversity Training Policies
IBM-SPSS ID q0012_0002
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 8 11.1
2.00 No 63 87.5
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 1 1.4

Table E33
Compliance Policies: Voluntary Diversity Training Policies
IBM-SPSS ID q0012_0003
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 11 15.3
2.00 No 60 83.3
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 1 1.4

Table E34
Compliance Policies: offers women formal leadership training
IBM-SPSS ID q0012_0004
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 7 9.7
2.00 No 65 90.3
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer
 199

Table E35
Compliance Policies: Formal Gender Issue Sensitization Training
IBM-SPSS ID q0012_0005
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 6 8.3
2.00 No 66 91.7
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer

Table E36
Compliance Policies: Executive Management held accountable for the achievement
specific diversity training objectives/goals
IBM-SPSS ID q0012_0006
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 5 6.9
2.00 No 64 88.9
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 5 6.9

Table E37
Compliance Policies: Mentoring Policies
IBM-SPSS ID q0012_0007
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 9 12.5
2.00 No 62 86.1
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 1 1.4
 200

Table E38
Compliance Policies: Promote from Within Policies
IBM-SPSS ID q0012_0008
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 11 15.3
2.00 No 58 80.6
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 3 4.2

Table E39
Compliance Policies: Gender-Equity Remuneration Policies
IBM-SPSS ID q0012_0009
Code Input N = 72 %
1.00 Yes 9 12.5
2.00 No 57 79.2
0.00 Don't know or prefer not to answer 6 8.3
 201

Appendix F: Subjects’ Feedback on Other Impediments

Table F1.
Study Subjects’ Feedback on Other Impediments to the Promotion of Women
Subject responses
Most barriers exist on inter-personal communication differences between
male/female workers and nothing to do with familial, education, or
hobbies.
Our industry does not have many females as a general rule. This is changing
as we recruit new engineers.
There are not visible career tracks or career paths.
Travel—Senior-level positions require extensive travel, difficult for
families.
Women aren't part of what is referred to here at ""The Boy's Club.
In my organization women lack the skills and experience necessary to
compete at the senior-level. My industry is predominately male
dominated and women have not penetrated this industry at the mid
management level in sufficient numbers to be competitive for the
select few jobs at the top. The National Sales Director at my
organization is one of only a handful of females in this industry. She
oversees the efforts of over 80 sales representatives of which only
one is female. The barrier is the absence of qualified women to
promote.