Research in Transportation Business & Management xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Research in Transportation Business & Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rtbm

Modeling of career entry barriers for women in male dominated

occupations: A case of Indian railways
Leena Sachdeva a, *, Kumkum Bharti b, Gaurav Kumar Badhotiya c
a
Amity School of Business Administration, Amity University Punjab, India
b
Indian Institute of Management Kashipur, India
c
Faculty of Management Studies, Marwadi University, Rajkot, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Purpose: This study aims to identify, prioritize and establish the relationship among the set of career entry
Career entry barriers of women employed in the male dominated occupations. It addresses the following research questions:
Barriers What are the key barriers that restrict the career entry of women in male dominated occupations? Which are the
Women
most significant barriers and how these barriers are related to each-other?
Male dominated occupations
ISM
Methodology: A literature review method was used to identify the career entry barriers that was further validated
MICMAC through semi-structured interviews of women employed in the Indian railways. The interpretive structural
modeling (ISM) method was used to establish a hierarchical relationship among the set of identified barriers. The
Matrice d’Impacts Croisés Multiplication Appliquée á un Classement (MICMAC) analysis was administered to
classify the barriers based on their driving and dependence power.
Findings: A set of eleven career entry barriers are found crucial for restricting women’s career entry in the male
dominated occupations. Three barriers namely ‘social norms’, ‘organizational policies and procedures’ and ‘job
description’ emerged as the most influential barriers. Therefore, any action performed on these barriers can have
a multiplier effect on the remaining barriers identified in this study. The ISM model helped in asserting the inter-
linkage among the career entry barriers that dampen the participation and attractiveness among women to enter
such occupations.
Practical implications: The proposed ISM model for interaction and ranking of barriers can provide the acade­
micians, practitioners, and policymakers a more realistic representation of the reasons for the negligible ratio of
women in the male dominated occupations. Gender and discrimination theories can validate the findings of this
study using case study method. The findings will be beneficial as it promotes more studies of similar nature in
other divisions of Indian Railways as well as in the developing countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh and other
South Asian countries to find the commonality and differences. Practitioners can use ISM model and MICMAC
analysis to better understand women’s career entry barriers and explore as where to channelize their efforts and
resources towards change in the organizational structure, system, and processes to facilitate women’s ratio in the
male dominated occupations.
Originality: A key contribution of this study is the development of a contextual relationship among identified set
of career entry barriers. As per the researchers’ knowledge, this study is one of the first attempts to provide a
hierarchical relationship among the career entry barriers from the world’s fourth-largest railway network context
(Ministry of Railways, 2021).

1. Introduction male dominated occupations. This daunting task can be achieved by

encouraging gender diversity at the workplace (Treanor & Marlow,
The change in business trends due to globalization and increased 2021). Gender diversity enhances creativity, resource acquisition, cost
competition mandates a steady engagement of women employees in reduction, effective marketing, fosters problem-solving and

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: leenasachdeva1989@gmail.com (L. Sachdeva), kumkum.bharti@iimkashipur.ac.in (K. Bharti), gkb.choudhary@gmail.com, gkb.choudhary@
gmail.com (G.K. Badhotiya).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2022.100871
Received 23 July 2021; Received in revised form 22 July 2022; Accepted 1 August 2022
2210-5395/© 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Please cite this article as: Leena Sachdeva, Research in Transportation Business & Management, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2022.100871
L. Sachdeva et al.
organizational flexibility (Biswas, Boyle, & Bhardwaj, 2020; Cox &
Blake, 1991). Over the decades, considerable progress has been made
towards gender inclusion in male dominated occupations. It is important
to note that, despite government, businesses, trade unions, and devoted
efforts of women friendly organizations, affirmative actions, and
frequent media accounts by government and non-government entities,
career entry of women in male-dominated occupations are skewed as
women constitute approximately 6.97% of total workforce (Indian
Railways Statistical Publications, 2020–2021). Resultantly, this makes it
an interesting area to investigate and analyze the reasons for the weak
enrolment of women in such occupations. Kim, Lee, and Kim (2015)
discussed that most research on gender diversity stressed on its positive
and negative aspects while less attention is given to their under-
representation in the male dominated occupation. This lack of parity
across male dominated occupations motivated social scientists across
the world to investigate the career entry barriers of women in such oc­
cupations (Ahuja, 2002; Elliott, Mavriplis, & Anis, 2020; Falco & Sum­
mers, 2019; Heilman & Caleo, 2018; Klettner, Clarke, & Boersma, 2016).
Hulme (2006) explored the nature and extent of women’s employ­
ment in the trades and male dominated occupations. Ismail and Ibrahim
(2008) investigated several families, organizational and societal barriers
experienced by women working in Malaysian Oil Company. Worrall,
Harris, Stewart, Thomas, and McDermott (2010) identified barriers
related to under-representation of women in the UK construction in­
dustry. The author used mixed method approach to collect the data
regarding barriers experienced by women in these occupations. Using
semi-structured interviews and further keyword analysis, it was found
that male-dominated organizational culture and inflexible working
practices were the two main barriers restricting women’s access in such
occupations.
Furthermore, Kaewsri and Tongthong (2011) investigated the ex­
periences of women engineers in the construction industry. The findings
suggest that working in non-contractor companies is a suitable option
for women engineers. Ibáñez (2017) concludes that the women’s career
barriers are associated with the types of organization and accordingly
government policies should be defined. Through systemic literature
review, Navarro-Astor, Román-Onsalo, & Infante-Perea (2017) extrac­
ted barriers that hinder the career development of women working in
the construction industry. Mate, McDonald, & Do, (2018) identified
barriers and enablers affecting women’s career and leadership devel­
opment using qualitative research methodology. The relationship be­
tween career and leadership development and workplace culture was
highlighted using experience of Australian and Vietnamese female par­
ticipants. Saifuddin, Dyke, and Hossain (2019) discussed the barriers
experienced by women high-tech professionals in Bangladesh using an
in-depth interview method of thirty-five participants. The outcome of
the study suggested that with effective government and organizational
policies, some of the barriers can be removed. The extant literature on
women’s career entry (Ahuja, 2002; Klenke, 2003; Rutherford, 2011;
Sachdeva, Maheshwari, & Joseph, 2020; Simon, Wagner, & Killion,
2017), diversity (Adriaanse & Schofield, 2014; Herring, 2009; Jonsson
& Österberg, 2017; Mao, Xinyan, & Liu, 2021; Wellalage & Locke,
2013), and male dominated occupations (Adriaanse & Schofield, 2014;
Campero, 2021; Germain, Herzog, & Hamilton, 2012; Makarova, Aes­
chlimann, & Herzog, 2016) supports this claim.
It can be observed from the literature review that research work on
women in male dominated occupations is generally based on the qual­
itative approach majorly from the information technology, construction,
and manufacturing domain (Mate, McDonald, & Do, 2019; Rocha & Van
Praag, 2020; Treanor & Marlow, 2021). However, the qualitative
approach provides deeper insights into the problem; it fails to establish
the relationship among variables. The interpretive structural modeling
(ISM) technique, on the other hand, aids in the establishment of inter-
relationships among a set of variables validated by expert opinions. To
the best of authors’ knowledge, there is limited research on the modeling
and investigation of interaction among the career entry barriers of
2
Research in Transportation Business & Management xxx (xxxx) xxx
women from the Indian railways’ context. To address this gap, the
present study aims to identify, prioritize and establish the relationship
among the set of career entry barriers of women employed in the male
dominated occupations within Indian Railways. The male dominated
occupations for women in Indian railways comprises of jobs such as loco
pilot, motor woman, train guard, station manager, junior engineer, se­
nior section engineers and assistant program coordinator. Therefore, the
objectives of this study are as follows:
• Identification of barriers restricting career entry of women in the
male dominated occupations;
• Establishment of interaction among identified barriers of career
entry of women in such occupations using ISM methodology; and
• Classification of barriers into four categories namely autonomous,
dependent, driver, and linkage using MICMAC analysis.
According to the Ministry of Railways Report (2021), Indian Railway
is known as the world’s fourth-largest railway network having em­
ployees’ strength of 1.308 million. Despite being the world’s fourth
largest network and largest public sector employer in India, women
constitute a mere 6.97% of the total workforce (Committee on
Empowerment of Women Report, 2015) in Indian Railways. Though, it
provides various staff welfare schemes and benefits to its women em­
ployees; still, women’s attraction towards Indian Railways is lower as
compared to other ministries (ibid.). Therefore, it would be interesting
to explore the interaction among identified barriers as it limits gender
diversity initiatives and restricts women’s career entry in such
occupations.
This paper begins with literature review that helps to identify the
career entry barriers of women in the male dominated occupations.
Secondly, ISM methodology is administered leading to the formation of
an interaction model followed by MICMAC analysis. Findings, discus­
sions, conclusions, implications, limitations and future research di­
rections are presented in the last sections of this study.
2. Identification of barriers restricting women’s career entry in
male dominated occupations
A gender diversified organization facilitates the attainment of
competitive advantage and enhanced organizational effectiveness
(Herring, 2009; Wang, Wang, Shao, Jia, & Xiang, 2020). World over,
organizations are struggling to increase the women ratio at the work­
place (Germain et al., 2012; Heilman & Caleo, 2018). While on the other
hand, women, a not fully tapped resource presently aspires to grow and
claim equality in work-life domain (Campero, 2021; Collica-Cox &
Schulz, 2018). Despite key initiatives to increase gender diversity,
women face a plethora of career entry barriers as identified from the
literature review (Elliott et al., 2020; Khilji & Pumroy, 2019; Torre,
2017). The extant literature review is useful in identifying barriers
restricting women’s career entry in such professions. After extraction of
the relevant barriers and discussion with women experts employed in
the Indian railways, 11 barriers are finalized for consideration of further
modeling and analysis as given in Table 1.
Lack of Self-Efficacy (LSE) (B1) - A lack of belief in one’s ability to
achieve goals. People with LSE are more likely to give up and fail
(Germain et al., 2012). Due to lack of self-esteem, women consider
themselves unsuitable for male dominated occupations and they become
their own enemy by not applying for career entry opportunities in such
occupations (Jones, Clair, King, Humberd, & Arena, 2020). It is inter­
esting to note that self-prejudices play a crucial role in inhibiting the
self-efficacy of women that demotivates them from joining the male
dominated occupations (Fouad, Singh, Cappaert, Chang, & Wan, 2016;
Schweitzer, Ng, Lyons, & Kuron, 2011).
Lack of Investment in education for girls (B2) - Due to dispropor­
tionate share of household work and caring responsibilities, women’s
career is considered less important by their family that leads to limited
L. Sachdeva et al.
Table 1
Barriers Restricting Career Entry of Women in Male-Dominated Occupations.
Barriers References
Lack of Self-Efficacy (LSE) (B1) Jones et al. (2020); Fouad et al. (2016); Germain
et al. (2012); Eccles (2011); Schweitzer et al.
(2011); Gray and O’Brien (2007); Thom,
Pickering, and Thompson (2002); Swanson and
Woitke (1997); Betz and Hackett (1981)
Lack of Investment in Treanor and Marlow (2021); Levanon & Grusky
education for girls (B2) (2016); Torre (2017); Carlson & Knoester (2011);
Schweitzer et al. (2011); Estevez-Abe (2006);
Acker (2006);
Inadequate Career Knowledge Frear et al. (2019); Van Tuijl and van der Molen
(B3) (2016); Mutekwe et al. (2011); Amaratunga et al.
(2006); Albion and Fogarty (2002); Auster and
Auster (1981)
Prioritizing Gender Roles over Rocha and Van Praag (2020); Heilman and Caleo
Job Roles (B4) (2018); Simon et al. (2017); John Kolade and
Kehinde (2013); Schweitzer et al. (2011)
Job Description (B5) Mao et al. (2021); Khilji and Pumroy (2019); Torre
(2017); Makarova et al. (2016); John Kolade and
Kehinde (2013); Rutherford (2011); Amaratunga
et al. (2006); Ahuja (2002); Jurik (1985); Jurik
and Halemba (1984)
Lack of Family Support (B6) Lawson (2021); Wang et al. (2020); Collica-Cox
and Schulz (2018); Mutter & Thorn (2018); Simon
et al. (2017); John Kolade and Kehinde (2013);
Germain et al. (2012); Greenhaus & Powell
(2006); Amaratunga et al. (2006); Thom et al.
(2002)
Masculine Image of Sachdeva et al. (2020); Khilji and Pumroy (2019);
Occupation (B7) Brunet Icart and Santamaria Velasco (2018); Torre
(2017); Makarova et al. (2016); Mastracci and
Arreola (2016); Carli, Alawa, Lee, Zhao, & Kim
(2016); John Kolade and Kehinde (2013);
Rutherford (2011); Soe and Yakura (2008);
Estevez-Abe (2006); Amaratunga et al. (2006);
Acker (1990)
Organizational Policies and Yu and Jyawali (2021); Hideg and Shen (2019);
Procedures (B8) Brunet Icart and Santamaria Velasco (2018);
Miner et al. (2018); Mastracci and Arreola (2016);
Stamarski and Son Hing (2015); John Kolade and
Kehinde (2013); Rutherford (2011); Soe and
Yakura (2008); Amaratunga et al. (2006); Ahuja
(2002); Acker (1990); Jurik (1985)
Gender-Stereotypes Campero (2021); Burnette et al. (2020); Miner
(B9) et al. (2018); Brunet Icart and Santamaria Velasco
(2018); Simon et al. (2017); Torre (2017);
Makarova et al. (2016); Mastracci and Arreola
(2016); Stamarski and Son Hing (2015); Heilman
et al. (2015); John Kolade and Kehinde (2013);
Rutherford (2011); Germain et al. (2012); Trauth,
Quesenberry, and Huang (2009); Amaratunga
et al. (2006); Adya and Kaiser (2005); Ahuja
(2002); Thom et al. (2002); Acker (1990)
Social Norms (B10) Sachdeva et al. (2021); Falco and Summers
(2019); Valk and Srinivasan (2011); Soe and
Yakura (2008); Estevez-Abe (2006); Heilman
(2001)
Difficulty in finding Women Elliott et al. (2020); Van Tuijl and van der Molen
Role Models (B11) (2016); John Kolade and Kehinde (2013);
Germain et al. (2012); Trauth et al. (2009);
Amaratunga et al. (2006); Adya and Kaiser (2005);
Thom et al. (2002); Ahuja (2002)
investment in their education, training, skills, and experiences (Carlson
Eccles, 2011; Levanon & Grusky (2018). This mindset is prevalent in
economies with high economic inequalities and social differences.
Acker’s, (2006) research also focuses on the mutual reproduction of
class, gender, and racial inequalities and the role of human capital in­
vestment in addressing these inequalities. Treanor and Marlow (2021)
highlight the role of prevailing masculinities in limiting the investment
in education for girls. The extant literature emphasize that education
and career counseling create the greatest awareness as well as higher
aspirations among women for gaining access to male dominated
3
Research in Transportation Business & Management xxx (xxxx) xxx
occupations (Levanon & Grusky, 2016).
Inadequate Career Knowledge (B3) - It delineates inadequate and
gender prejudice career knowledge of agents of socialization (such as
family, friends, peers, and mass-media) towards male dominated occu­
pations (Frear, Paustian-Underdahl, Heggestad, & Walker, 2019).
Although in the internet era, the situation is changing and women are
exploring the latest updates about job roles but still the limited infor­
mation and job and gender association negatively influence women’s
career entry decisions (Amaratunga, Haigh, Shanmugam, Lee, & Elvi­
tigala, 2006; Mutekwe, Modiba, & Maphosa, 2011). Van Tuijl and Van
der Molen (2016) highlight the importance of affective values, ability,
beliefs, self-efficacy, and the role of parents’ and teachers’ knowledge
about science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields in
limiting career choice and career development of the girl child.
Prioritizing Gender Roles over Job Roles (B4) - Gender role repre­
sents a set of learned behavior by an individual based on prevailing
socio-cultural norms. While job role epitomizes the duties and re­
sponsibilities of the job (Rocha & Van Praag, 2020; Simon et al., 2017),
the inconsistencies between the job roles and gender roles lead to
perceived mismatch between the stereotypical communal attributes of
women (such as caring, nurturing, and dependent) in contrast to the
agentic attributes of men (such as aggressive, assertive and indepen­
dent). These job and gender attributes are perceived to be required for
career entry in the male dominated occupations (Manzi & Heilman,
2021). Due to the perceived lack of fit, women are expected most likely
to fail in male dominated occupations as they prioritize their gender
roles (Koenig Eccles, 2011, Heilman & Caleo, 2018).
Job Description (B5)- It describes the general task, job duties, re­
sponsibilities, reporting relationship, and job location (Khilji & Pumroy,
2019; Rutherford, 2011; Torre, 2017). According to Makarova et al.
(2016) and Manzi & Heilman (2021), women prefer to avoid career
entry in male-dominated occupations due to nature of the job, working
conditions, duty hours, shift timings, and health hazards as they assume
that they are not comfortable with the job description. Mao et al. (2021)
suggest that job description mentioned in the advertisement discourages
women job seekers to enter into male dominated occupations.
Lack of Family Support (B6) - It represents a lack of family support
to women who aspire for a career in male dominated occupations
(Collica-Cox & Schulz, 2018; Wang et al., 2020). According to Green­
haus & Powell (2006), inadequate family support acts as the main
reason for work-life imbalance resulting in conflict, stress, and impaired
well-being of women. The extant literature on work-family conflict and
career success also supports the claim (Simon et al., 2017). Mutter &
Thorn (2018) Kaleidoscope career model tool highlights the women’s
changing preferences at different stages of their careers. Lawson (2021)
depicts that family support during the early socialization years and
educational stages plays the crucial role in developing interest among
women towards male dominated occupations.
Masculine Image of Occupation (B7) - It includes physical artifacts,
portraying ‘manly’ images during advertisements, displaying long
working hour culture, use of metaphors and humor at the workplace
(Rutherford, 2011). The masculine image of occupations exhibits the
workplace realities of segregated work culture (Brunet Icart & Santa­
maria Velasco, 2018; Khilji & Pumroy, 2019). The varying perception of
‘tasks to be done’ creates an image of perceived lack of fit for women.
According to Carli et al., (2016) masculine image of occupations create
discrimination and prejudice for women scientist often leading to
devaluation of women’s job performance. Additionally, the negative
image of masculine organization further creates a question on women’s
integrity and confidence level (Torre, 2017). Moreover, the unsafe work
environment and positioning of ‘such’ women as powerful and inde­
pendent deter them to find good marriage proposals (Sachdeva et al.,
2020).
Organizational Policies and Procedures (B8) - A set of principles,
rules, or guidelines formulated or adopted by an organization to achieve
its long-term goals (Miner et al., 2018). The demand (employer) side
L. Sachdeva et al.
perspective emphasizes that gender biased prejudices provide limited
career entry opportunities to women as they are considered high-cost
employees due to long working hour constraints, absenteeism, late
coming and high turnover rates (Stamarski & Son Hing, 2015; Levanon
& Grusky, 2016; Hideg & Shen, 2019). Yu and Jyawali (2021) discuss
that some organizations hold ideological orientations towards gender
that gets reflected in their recruitment and selection policies and
practices.
Gender-Stereotypes (B9) - An overgeneralization or prejudices
about an individual’s attributes based on their gender is considered as
gender-stereotypes (Burnette et al., 2020). The soft and emotional image
of women provides them limited opportunities thereby negatively
impacting their career aspirations in such occupations (Mastracci &
Arreola, 2016; Torre, 2017). Furthermore, it adversely affects women’s
morale and job satisfaction in the long run (Brunet Icart & Santamaria
Velasco, 2018; Miner et al., 2018). According to Campero (2021) gender
stereotypes restricts women’s hiring and perpetuates intra-occupational
gender segregation at the workplace.
Social Norms (B10) - It represents the informal understanding based
on widely held values and common practices which govern the attitude,
beliefs, and behavior of members of the society (Sachdeva, Bharti, &
Maheshwari, 2021; Valk & Srinivasan, 2011). It provides socio-
psychological and cultural explanations regarding gender prejudices at
the workplace (Soe & Yakura, 2008). It is based on the premise that an
individual’s socialization process plays a key role in learning social
norms, attitudes and culture orientations that influence women’s career
entry decisions (Eccles, 2011; Falco & Summers, 2019; Heilman, 2001).
Difficulty in finding Women Role Models (B11) - A person that in­
spires others to be like her/him in present or near future is considered as
a role-model. As per Ahuja (2002), the role models act a source of
motivation and their lack of presence negatively impacts the women’s
career entry decisions. The junior women consider them as guides and
the absence of such guides makes them feel lost and vulnerable (Elliott
et al., 2020). Additionally, the presence of women employees at all
levels in such occupations develops a positive notion about the organi­
zation’s orientation towards gender diversity (Manzi & Heilman, 2021;
Van Tuijl and van der Molen (2016)). Armstrong et al. (2018) study on
women employed in the information technology profession too supports
this claim.
3. Research methodology
The selection of research methodology depends upon the need and
scope of the research problem. The established methodologies for
prioritizing and modeling barriers were interpretive structural modeling
(ISM), analytical hierarchy process and analytic network process (Rana,
Dwivedi, & Hughes, 2021; Sage, 1977). Among the available method­
ologies, ISM was chosen as it helped in identifying the order and inter­
action among the complex identified set of barriers (Sage, 1977). This
ISM technique was proposed by Warfield (1974) to investigate the
contextual inter-relationship among various elements of a defined set of
problems. It uses a pairwise comparison relationship among elements to
develop a hierarchical ISM model (Watson, 1978) which portrays the
complex relationship among identified barriers in a comprehensive
systemic model (Sage, 1977). ISM technique is widely used in the field of
operations, supply chain and marketing (Chauhan, Badhotiya, Soni, &
Kumari, 2020; Hughes, Rana, & Dwivedi, 2020; Vatankhah & Ilkhani­
zadeh, 2021; Xu & Zou, 2020). Walton, Gupta, and Mau (2021) used the
ISM technique to assess the financial attributes of the air cargo industry
whereas Mathivathanan, Mathiyazhagan, Rana, Khorana, and Dwivedi
(2021) analyzed the barriers to the adoption of blockchain technology in
business supply chains.
Surprisingly, despite its application in prioritizing and establishing
the relationship among a set of factors, limited work is done by using
ISM technique in the field of gender and career studies (Agarwal,
Agrawal, & Srivastava, 2021). Literature posits the use of ISM technique
4
Research in Transportation Business & Management xxx (xxxx) xxx
in identifying the imperatives for improving entrepreneurial behavior
among women and for investigating key dimensions for the develop­
ment of women-owned enterprises (Agarwal et al., 2021; Jabeen &
Faisal, 2018). However, as per the authors’ knowledge of the extant
literature, there is no study that prioritize and establish the relationship
among the set of career entry barriers of women employed in the male
dominated occupations. Thereby leaves a scope for this study to fill the
methodology gap.
Additionally, the ISM technique integrated with MICMAC analysis
strengthens the results by categorizing the barriers based on their
driving and dependent power (Rana et al., 2021). The MICMAC analysis
is used to avoid the complexity and ambiguity due to the increased
number of barriers and to obtain the unbiased level partitioning (Wat­
son, 1978). The flow chart of the research methodology adopted in this
study is presented in Fig. 1.
4. Defining research objectives
This study aims to identify, prioritize and establish the relationship
among the set of career entry barriers of women employed in the male
dominated occupations.
4.1. Identification of career entry barriers
Research papers published in the Scopus database were considered
for this study. Based on the literature review, a total of 11 barriers were
identified and listed as B1 to B11 in the Table-1 mentioned in the
literature review section.
4.2. Determine contextual relationship between barriers
Barriers identified from the previous steps were arranged in a matrix
form to determine the contextual relationship between any two vari­
ables and their direction (i and j) in terms of ‘V’, ‘A’, ‘X’, or ‘O’. These
symbols represented the unique relationship between barriers based on
the direction. The meanings of these four symbols are explained as
follows:
(1) V: Barrier ‘i’ will lead to Barrier ‘j’.
(2) A: Barrier ‘i’ will be achieved by Barrier ‘j’.
(3) X: Barriers ‘i’ and ‘j’ will facilitate to achieve each other.
(4) O: Barrier ‘i’ and Barrier ‘j’ are not related.
The expert opinions of 44 women employees selected via snowball
and purposive sampling were considered for validating the contextual
relationship (Table 2). These women were appointed as loco pilot, as­
sistant loco pilot, motor woman, train ticket examiner, train guard,
station manager, junior engineer, senior section engineer, assistant
programmer and ticket booking supervisor in the Mumbai division, In­
dian Railways. The semi-structured interviews were conducted in the
English language and transcripts were prepared at the end of each
interview on the same day. Thematic analysis was used for data analysis.
Member check and data triangulation methods were used for ensuring
the reliability and validity of the findings (Creswell & Miller, 2000). The
findings provide important insights for the subsequent stages of the
study:
4.3. Development of Self Structural Interaction Matrix (SSIM)
The SSIM was developed based on the contextual relationship among
identified barriers and is presented in Table 3.
4.4. Formulation of initial reachability matrix
The Initial Reachability Matrix was developed by transforming the
symbolic representation of each cell of the SSIM Matrix into binary digits
L. Sachdeva et al. Research in Transportation Business & Management xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 1. Flow Chart of Research Methodology.

such as ‘0’ or ‘1’. The substitution rules for binary digits (Watson, 1978),
Table 2
are as follows:
Demographic Profile of Women Experts.
Variable Categories Experts (in %) a) If (i, j) entry in the SSIM is V, then (i, j) entry in the initial reachability
Age (in years) 21–30 20 matrix changes to 1 and the (j, i) entry changes to 0.
31–40 30 b) If (i, j) entry in the SSIM is A, then (i, j) entry in the initial reachability
41–50 36 matrix changes to 0 and the (j, i) entry changes to 1.
51–60 14
Marital Status Unmarried 25
c) If (i, j) entry in the SSIM is X, then (i, j) entry in the initial reachability
Married 57 matrix changes to 1 and the (j, i) entry changes to 1.
Widow 9 d) If (i, j) entry in the SSIM is O, then (i, j) entry in the initial reachability
Divorcee 4 matrix changes to 0 and the (j, i) entry changes to 0.
Remarried 5
Experience (in years) ≤ 10 41
>10, and ≤ 20 20 As per these rules, the initial reachability matrix for career entry
>20, and ≤ 30 39 barriers of women was developed and is shown in Table 4.
Mode of Joining Competitive Entrance Exam 89
Compensatory Ground Appointment 11

Table 3
SSIM Matrix. Table 4
Barriers (i j) 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Initial Reachability Matrix.

1 O A X A A X O V V O Barriers (i,j) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
2 O A A O A A O O X 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
3 X O A O A X O V 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 O A A O A A A 3 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
5 V O O A V O 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 A A A A A 5 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1
7 O O V A 6 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
8 O A O 7 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
9 O X 8 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0
10 O 9 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0
11 10 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0
11 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

5
L. Sachdeva et al. Research in Transportation Business & Management xxx (xxxx) xxx

4.5. Transitivity check barriers.

It is one of the crucial parts of the ISM technique, where the rela­
tionship among barriers is based on assumptions. It indicates, if there are
n barriers then there would be n(n-1)/2 relationships among the iden­
tified set of barriers. For instance, if there are three barriers P, Q, and R,
and if Barrier P is related to Q, and Barrier Q is related to R, then Barrier
P is necessarily related to Barrier R. This assumption was used for
validating transitivity in the initial reachability matrix.
4.6. Formulation of final reachability matrix
The final reachability matrix was developed after checking transi­
tivity for the initial reachability matrix. The transitivity relationship for
the barriers is indicated as 1* and shown in Table 5.
4.7. Identification of dependence and driving power of each barrier
The ranking of the career entry barriers was done in the final
reachability matrix (Table 5) to identify driving and dependent power.
This ranking of barriers was used in the MICMAC analysis for catego­
rizing barriers based on their driving and dependence power.
4.8. Level partitioning
The level partitioning was performed to identify the hierarchy of
relationships among the identified set of 11 barriers. To obtain the level
partitioning, the reachability, and antecedent set of each barrier and
their interaction were identified from the final reachability matrix. The
career entry barriers having the same set of reachability and interaction
set were given the top-level position in the ISM model. For achieving the
next level partitioning, these top-level position barriers were removed
from the consecutive iterations and the same procedure was repeated till
the attainment of a particular level of all remaining barriers was
determined. The level partitioning of career entry barriers along with
reachability set, antecedent set, interaction set, and level ranking is
presented from Tables 6-12.
4.9. Developing conical matrix
This matrix was formed by rearranging the career entry barriers
based on their levels. In this matrix, career entry barriers representing
the same level were clubbed together. For instance, prioritizing gender
roles over job roles (B4) was categorized at Level 1, lack of investment in
education for girls (B2), inadequate career knowledge (B3), and lack of
family support (B6) at Level 2, while lack of self-efficacy (B1), and dif­
ficulty in finding women role model (B11) were at Level 3. Similarly, all
remaining barriers clubbed based on their level partitioning as shown
from Table 6 to Table 12. According to the above-mentioned rear­
rangement, the conical matrix is shown in Table 13. It was helpful in
building an ISM based model representing a hierarchy of career entry
5. Findings
5.1. ISM based model
Fig. 2 provides the ISM-based model for the career entry barriers of
women employed in the male dominated occupations in Indian Rail­
ways. 11 barriers are categorized into 7 levels, with the seventh level
indicating the topmost priority. The arrow from each barrier in the ISM
model indicates the same.
The main career entry barrier indicated by the model is social norms
(B10). This barrier is highly significant as it forms the base of the ISM
hierarchical model. While the organizational and social barriers such as
B8, B5, B7, and B9 situated at Level 6, 5, and 4 are related to each other.
Prioritizing gender roles over job roles (B4) is the crucial career entry
barrier on which the effectiveness of other career entry barriers of
women employed in the male dominated occupations overall depends.
B4 appears at level-1 and forms the top of the ISM hierarchy.
The social norms barrier at the base of ISM hierarchy (i.e. Level 7)
lead to other Level-6 career entry barrier i.e. organizational policies and
procedure (B8) that further leads to the job description (B5). A robust
relationship between organizational and social barriers should be
maintained as it influences the individual related barriers and collec­
tively determines the women’s career entry in such occupations (Miner
et al., 2018). For instance, masculine image of occupation (B7) and
gender stereotypes (B9) precedes the lack of self-efficacy (B1) and dif­
ficulty in finding role-model (B11) as mentioned at Level-3. These two
barriers presented at Level-3 are interrelated to each other. The gender
organization system (GoS) framework propounded by Fagenson (1990)
also supports this claim.
Lack of investment in education for girls (B2), inadequate career
knowledge (B3), and lack of family support (B6) propagate through B1,
and B11, as shown at Level 2. B2, B3, and B6 are interlinked and collec­
tively lead to prioritizing gender roles over job roles (B4) as mentioned at
Level 1. Furthermore, career knowledge and lack of job and gender role
association are required for increased investment in education for girls
(Estevez-Abe, 2006; Heilman, Manzi, & Braun, 2015; Mutekwe et al.,
2011; Schweitzer et al., 2011). Acker’s (1990) theory of gendered or­
ganizations also focuses on the mutual reproduction of class, gender,
and racial inequalities and the role of human capital investment in
addressing these inequalities.
5.2. MICMAC analysis
The MICMAC analysis is a cross-impact matrix multiplication
(Kumar & Dixit, 2018). It is used to classify barriers based on their
driving and dependence power (Jabeen & Faisal, 2018). In this study,
the MICMAC analysis categorizes career entry barriers into four clusters
based on their driving and dependence power. The four clusters are
shown in Fig. 3 followed by the description of each cluster:

Table 5
Final Reachability Matrix (After Transitivity Check).
Barriers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Driving Power

1 1 1* 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1* 1* 8
2 0 1 1 1* 0 1* 0 0 0 0 1* 5
3 1* 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 6
4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1* 1 0 1* 0 1 9
6 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1* 0 1* 7
7 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1* 1* 9
8 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 1 1* 0 1* 10
9 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1* 1 1 1* 9
10 1 1 1* 1 1* 1 1* 1 1 1 0 10
11 1* 1* 1 1* 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 6
Dependence Power 9 10 10 11 3 10 4 3 7 4 9

6
L. Sachdeva et al. Research in Transportation Business & Management xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 6
Level Partitioning: Iteration-1.
Barriers Reachability Set Antecedent Set Intersection Set Level

1 1,2,3,4,6,9,10,11 1,3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 1,3,6,9,10,11

2 2,3,4,6,11 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 2,3,6,11
3 1,2,3,4,6,11 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 1,2,3,6,11
4 4 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 4 I
5 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,11 5,8,10 5
6 1,2,3,4,6,9,11 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 1,2,3,6,11
7 1,2,3,4,6,7,9,10,11 5,7,8,10 7,9,10
8 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,11 8,9,10 8,9
9 1,2,3,4,6,8,9,10,11 1,5,6,7,8,9,10 6,8,9,10
10 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 1,7,9,10 1,7,9,10
11 1,2,3,4,6,11 1,2,3,5,7,8,9,11 1,2,3,11

Table 7 Table 12
Level Partitioning: Iteration-2. Level Partitioning: Level-7.
Barriers Reachability Set Antecedent Set Intersection Set Level Barriers Reachability Set Antecedent Set Intersection Set Level

1 1,2,3,6,9,10,11 1,3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 1,3,6,9,10,11 10 10 10 10 VII

2 2,3,6,11 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 2,3,6,11 II
3 1,2,3,6,11 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 1,2,3,6,11 II
5 1,2,3,5,6,7,9,11 5,8,10 5
6 1,2,3,6,9,11 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 1,2,3,6,11 II Table 13
7 1,2,3,6,7,9,10,11 5,7,8,10 7,9,10 Conical Matrix or Lower Triangulation Matrix.
8 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,11 8,9,10 8,9
Barriers 4 2 3 6 1 11 7 9 5 8 10
9 1,2,3,6,8,9,10,11 1,5,6,7,8,9,10 6,8,9,10
10 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,10 1,7,9,10 1,7,9,10 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 1,2,3,6,11 1,2,3,5,7,8,9,11 1,2,3,11 2 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
3 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
6 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1
Table 8 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Level Partitioning: Iteration-3. 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1
9 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
Barriers Reachability Set Antecedent Set Intersection Set Level
5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
1 1,9,10,11 1,5,7,8,9,10,11 1,9,10,11 III 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
5 1,5,7,9,11 5,8,10 5 10 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1
7 1,7,9,10,11 5,7,8,10 7,9,10
8 1,5,7,8,9,11 8,9,10 8,9
9 1,8,9,10,11 1,5,7,8,9,10 8,9,10 5.3. Autonomous barriers
10 1,5,7,8,9,10 1,7,9,10 1,7,9,10
11 1,11 1,5,7,8,9,11 1,11 III
The autonomous barriers have weak dependence and driving power.
These barriers have barely any links with other barriers. In this study,
there are no autonomous barriers.
Table 9
Level Partitioning: Iteration-4.
5.4. Dependent barriers
Barriers Reachability Set Antecedent Set Intersection Set Level

5 5,7,9 5,8,10 5 This cluster represents barriers having strong dependence power but
7 7,9,10 5,7,8,10 7,9,10 IV weak driving power. In this study, there are two dependent barriers
8 5,7,8,9 8,9,10 8,9
namely lack of investment in education for girls (B2), and prioritizing
9 8,9,10 5,7,8,9,10 8,9,10 IV
10 5,7,8,9,10 7,9,10 7,9,10 gender roles over job roles (B4).

5.5. Linkage barriers

Table 10
Level Partitioning: Iteration-5. The linkage barriers have strong dependence and driving power.
These are highly volatile in nature. Resultantly, a small change in the
Barriers Reachability Set Antecedent Set Intersection Set Level
linkage barriers can have a multiplier effect on other career entry bar­
5 5 5,8,10 5 V riers. There are five linkage barriers in this study such as lack of self-
8 5,8 8,10 8
efficacy (B1), inadequate career knowledge (B3), lack of family sup­
10 5,8,10 10 10
port (B6), gender stereotypes (B9), and difficulty in finding role models
(B11).

Table 11
5.6. Independent or driving barriers
Level Partitioning: Level-6.
Barriers Reachability Set Antecedent Set Intersection Set Level This cluster presents barriers having weak dependence power but
8 8 8,10 8 VI strong driving power. The key barriers restricting women’s career entry
10 8,10 10 10 are presented in this cluster. The barriers possessing high driving power
are job description (B5), masculine image of occupation (B7), organi­
zational policies and procedures (B8), and social norms (B10).

7
L. Sachdeva et al.
Fig. 2. ISM Based Hierarchical Model.
Fig. 3. MICMAC Analysis.
6. Discussions
India, an emerging superpower, is witnessing a transition wherein
women are breaking stereotypes by entering into diverse unconven­
tional professions such as science, technology, engineering, and math­
ematics (STEM), transportation, sports, and defense (Agarwal et al.,
2021; Elliott et al., 2020; Jonsson & Österberg, 2017; Miner et al., 2018),
besides the existence of socio-cultural prejudices and rigid gender role
categorization. Despite frequent media reports of increased women
empowerment and initiatives of key stakeholders, women representa­
tion remains marginalized in such occupations (Campero, 2021; Jones
et al., 2020). Therefore, the objective of this study was to identify, pri­
oritize and explore the contextual relationship among the various career
entry barriers for women in male dominated occupations. This is
attained using ISM and MICMAC analysis. The ISM technique helped in
asserting the inter-linkage among the barriers that dampened the
8
Research in Transportation Business & Management xxx (xxxx) xxx
participation and attractiveness among women to enter the male
dominated occupations. Based on the literature review presented in
Table 1 and the expert opinion of forty-four women experts, eleven
career entry barriers are found crucial for restricting women’s career
entry and are classified into seven levels of a hierarchical model. The
‘social norms’, ‘organizational policies and procedures’ and ‘job
description’ emerged as the main barriers. Acker (1990) gendered or­
ganization theory also supports this claim. Several important in­
terrelations earlier obscure from plain observations are also detected
from this ISM model. For example, the lack of fit approach (Heilman,
1983; Heilman & Caleo, 2018) highlights that due to perceived
mismatch between gender stereotypes and job characteristics, very few
women enter into male dominated occupations thereby causing diffi­
culty in finding role models. Fagenson (1990) argues that gender dif­
ferences and discrimination are embedded in the systemic context that
restricts women’s career entry in such occupations.
L. Sachdeva et al.
The MICMAC analysis (Figure-3) provides information about the
dependence and driving power of each career entry barrier. The
Quadrant-A of MICMAC analysis (Fig. 3) exhibits the absence of an
autonomous barrier in the study which indicates that all 11 barriers
contribute in restricting career entry of women in such occupations.
Therefore, policymakers and practitioners should pay attention to all 11
barriers to enhance the women ratio at the workplace. In Quadrant-B,
career entry barriers such as lack of investment in education for girls
(B2), and prioritizing gender roles over job roles (B4) are possessing
weak driving powers but strong dependence power on other barriers.
These barriers are mentioned at the top of the ISM model (Fig. 2). The
above-mentioned barriers hold unfavorable outcomes for women em­
ployees, managers, and society by practicing unequal treatment to
women over men since childhood. The unequal treatment is observed by
distinguishing educational preferences, and choices for the girl child.
The lower acceptance of male dominated occupations by women is an
indication of fear among women to maintain their self-efficacy,
continued motivation, and proving themselves worthy for the organi­
zation (Eccles, 2011; Fouad et al., 2016; Germain et al., 2012). In
Quadrant-C, five barriers i.e. lack of self-efficacy (B1), inadequate career
knowledge (B3), lack of family support (B6), gender stereotypes (B9), and
difficulty in finding role models (B11) are volatile and categorized as
linkage barriers. These barriers are presented at Level 2, Level 3, and
Level 4 in the ISM hierarchy. Any action performed on these barriers can
have a multiplier effect on other barriers represented in different
quadrants. Therefore, organizations can rework on the job awareness
programs and conduct drives to change women’s perceptions about jobs.
In Quadrant-D, the independent barriers such as job description (B5),
masculine image of occupation (B7), organizational policies and pro­
cedures (B8), and social norms (B10) are presented at the bottom of the
ISM hierarchical based model. These barriers may be considered as the
most important barriers because of high driving power.
Though several Scandinavian countries top the list of gender
equality, certainly the adoption of practices making organizations
gender diversified have not hit the global south including India.
Therefore, in a shifting economy, organizations must have undergone
transformation by making a collegial work environment in order to
attract and retain the gender diverse workforce. However, despite being
the world’s fourth largest railway network and the world’s fourteenth
largest employer (List of largest employers, 2021), the Indian Railways
is not in the list of gender equal companies. According to McKinsey &
Company report (2015); Hunt, Layton and Prince (2015), organizations
that are maintaining a strong focus on diversity, equality, and inclusion
by supporting the evolving needs of employees are winning the war of
talent in this competitive era, which is critical for their business growth
and success. The findings highlight the importance of women leader­
ship, talent pipeline, equal pay parity, inclusive culture, anti-harassment
and women friendly policies in increasing the women ratio in male
dominated occupations (Hunt, Layton, & Prince, 2015). Therefore, it is
high time for Indian Railways to benchmark these parameters and
accordingly formulate their gender inclusion and diversity strategies for
bridging the gender gap.
Policy level interventions to change stereotypes, social norms, and
attempts to develop gender neutral organizational structure, processes,
and practices in terms of recruitment, retention, career advancement,
safety and security, flexible working, and changing the organizational
masculine culture should be the topmost prerogative for the Indian
Railways.
Literature posits the career entry barriers of women in the male
dominated occupations from both developed and developing countries
perspective (Elliott et al., 2020; Khilji & Pumroy, 2019; Valk & Srini­
vasan, 2011). However, as per the researchers’ knowledge of extant
literature, this study is one of the first attempts to provide a hierarchical
relationship among the set of career entry barriers of women from the
Indian Railways context. The factors presented in Table-1 were available
in the extant literature in the scattered form. Researchers compiled these
9
Research in Transportation Business & Management xxx (xxxx) xxx
factors by bringing them together. Furthermore, an identification of the
hierarchical relationship was established and made it contextually
relevant by taking experts’ opinion.
7. Conclusions
This study clarifies the existing ambiguity over career entry barriers
of women in the male dominated occupations. Based on the ISM model,
it has been identified that ‘social norms’, ‘organizational policies and
procedures’ and ‘job description’ play a crucial role in increasing the
women ratio in Indian Railways. Therefore, it is suggested to modify
recruitment policies for the positive influx of women at the workplace.
Since, Indian Railways recruitment policy consisting of compassionate
ground appointment is a unique attempt by management to make a
significant influence on women career entry in these occupations
(Committee on Empowerment of Women Report, 2015). This compas­
sionate ground appointment recruitment policy in Indian Railways
makes this study different from private sector organizations operating in
gig economic context where there is limited job security and no provi­
sion for compensatory ground appointments. Though the barriers such
as social norms, and gender stereotypes appear very specific and skewed
towards developing countries, yet these are prevalent in the developed
countries too. The representation of women in Congress, Senate,
parliament, and other important roles in the male dominated occupa­
tions is hampered by the social norms. Therefore, at the policy level,
such issues need to be addressed and made vocal at the top management
level besides the societal level. The contribution of both organizations
and society will lead to a healthier representation of women ratio in
these occupations.
8. Implications, limitations and future research directions
A key contribution of this study is the development of a contextual
relationship among identified set of career entry barriers. The proposed
ISM model for interaction and ranking of barriers can provide the aca­
demicians, practitioners, and policymakers a more realistic representa­
tion of the reasons for the negligible ratio of women in male dominated
occupations. Since, the findings were based on the expert opinions of
forty-four women employed at various designations such as loco pilot,
motor woman, train guard, station manager, junior engineer, senior
section engineer and assistant program coordinator within Mumbai
Division, Indian Railways. The results can be generalized to understand
career entry barriers of women employed at similar occupations in other
divisions of Indian Railways. Interestingly, the ‘social norms’ rooted in
the Indian context, ‘organizational policies and procedures’ and ‘job
descriptions’ emerged as the main career entry barriers. Thereby the
findings can be generalized to explore the under-representation of
women in other male dominated occupations such as aviation, con­
struction, sports and military. This ISM model can be used by the aca­
demicians in the development of case-based studies on career entry of
women in such occupations. Gender and discrimination theories can
validate the findings of this study using case study method.
The findings will be beneficial as it promotes more studies of similar
nature in other divisions of Indian Railways as well as in the developing
countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh and other South Asian countries to
find the commonality and differences. Practitioners can use this ISM
model and MICMAC analysis to better understand women’s career entry
barriers and explore as where to channelize their efforts and resources
towards change in the organizational structure, system, and processes to
facilitate women’s ratio in the male dominated occupations.
Like any other research, this study is not free from limitations. The
proposed model has not been statistically tested and validated. There­
fore, future studies can be done to empirically check the validity of this
model by using the structural equation modeling technique. The other
barriers restricting women’s participation in male dominated occupa­
tions can be identified and their inter-relationship can be explored based
L. Sachdeva et al.
on various multi-criteria decision-making techniques. Since, the appli­
cation of ISM methodology is limited as it is unable to interpret the
different links or relationships. Thus, future studies can be conducted by
using the TISM technique. This paper is written from the context of the
world’s fourth-largest railway network but it takes into account the
barriers of women employed in the male dominated occupations from
the railway’s context all over the world.
Author statement
All the authors have participated sufficiently in concept, design,
analysis, writing, and revision of the manuscript.
Data availability
The data that has been used is confidential.
References
Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender &
Society, 4(2), 139–158.
Acker, J. (2006). Inequality regimes: Gender, class, and race in organizations. Gender and
society, 20(4), 441–464.
Adriaanse, J., & Schofield, T. (2014). The impact of gender quotas on gender equality in
sports governance. Journal of Sport Management, 28(5), 485–497.
Adya, M., & Kaiser, K. M. (2005). Early determinants of women in the IT workforce: A
model of girls’ career choices. Information Technology & People, 18(3), 230–259.
Agarwal, S., Agrawal, V., & Srivastava, A. P. (2021). Investigating key dimensions for the
development of women-owned enterprises: Interpretive structural modeling and
MICMAC approach. Journal of Modelling in Management, 16(4), 1230–1251.
Ahuja, M. K. (2002). Women in the information technology profession: A literature
review, synthesis and research agenda. European Journal of Information Systems, 11
(1), 20–34.
Albion, M. J., & Fogarty, G. J. (2002). Factors influencing career decision making in
adolescents and adults. Journal of Career Assessment, 10(1), 91–126.
Amaratunga, D., Haigh, R., Shanmugam, M., Lee, A. J., & Elvitigala, G. (2006).
Construction industry and women: A review of the barriers. In Proceedings of the 3rd
International SCRI Research Symposium.
Auster, C. J., & Auster, D. (1981). Factors influencing women’s choice of nontraditional
careers: The role of family, peers, and counselors. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 29
(3), 253–263.
Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (1981). The relationship of career-related self-efficacy
expectations to perceived career options in college women and men. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 28(5), 399.
Biswas, K., Boyle, B., & Bhardwaj, S. (2020). Impacts of supportive HR practices and
organisational climate on the attitudes of HR managers towards gender diversity–a
mediated model approach. In Evidence-based HRM: A global forum for empirical
scholarship. Emerald Publishing Limited.
Brunet Icart, I., & Santamaria Velasco, C. (2018). Gender system and organizations.
International Journal of Organizations/Revista Internacional de Organizaciones, 20.
Burnette, J. L., Pollack, J. M., Forsyth, R. B., Hoyt, C. L., Babij, A. D., Thomas, F. N., &
Coy, A. E. (2020). A growth mindset intervention: Enhancing students’
entrepreneurial self-efficacy and career development. Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, 44(5), 878–908.
Campero, S. (2021). Hiring and intra-occupational gender segregation in software
engineering. American Sociological Review, 86(1), 60–92.
Carli, L. L., Alawa, L., Lee, Y., Zhao, B., & Kim, E. (2016). Stereotypes about gender and
science: Women∕ = scientists. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(2), 244–260.
Carlson, D. L., & Knoester, C. (2011). Family structure and the intergenerational
transmission of gender ideology. Journal of family issues, 32(6), 709–734.
Chauhan, A. S., Badhotiya, G. K., Soni, G., & Kumari, P. (2020). Investigating
interdependencies of sustainable supplier selection criteria: An appraisal using ISM.
Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, 13(2), 195–210.
Collica-Cox, K., & Schulz, D. M. (2018). Of all the joints, she walks into this one: Career
motivations of women corrections executives. The Prison Journal, 98(5), 604–629.
Committee on Empowerment of Women Report. (2015). Available at http://164.100
.47.193/lsscommittee/Empowerment%20of%20Women/16_Empowerment_of_Wo
men_3.pdf [Accessed 2 Nov. 2018].
Cox, T. H., & Blake, S. (1991). Managing cultural diversity: Implications for
organizational competitiveness. Academy of Management Perspectives, 5(3), 45–56.
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory
Into Practice, 39(3), 124–130.
Eccles, J. (2011). Gendered educational and occupational choices: Applying the Eccles
et al. model of achievement-related choices. International Journal of Behavioral
Development, 35(3), 195–201.
Elliott, C., Mavriplis, C., & Anis, H. (2020). An entrepreneurship education and peer
mentoring program for women in STEM: mentors’ experiences and perceptions of
entrepreneurial self-efficacy and intent. International Entrepreneurship and
Management Journal, 16(1), 43–67.
10
Research in Transportation Business & Management xxx (xxxx) xxx
Estevez-Abe, M. (2006). Gendering the varieties of capitalism. A study of occupational
segregation by sex in advanced industrial societies. World Politics, 59(1), 142–175.
Fagenson, E. A. (1990). At the heart of women in management research: Theoretical and
methodological approaches and their biases. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(4),
267–274.
Falco, L. D., & Summers, J. J. (2019). Improving career decision self-efficacy and STEM
self-efficacy in high school girls: Evaluation of an intervention. Journal of Career
Development, 46(1), 62–76.
Fouad, N. A., Singh, R., Cappaert, K., Chang, W. H., & Wan, M. (2016). Comparison of
women engineers who persist in or depart from engineering. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 92, 79–93.
Frear, K. A., Paustian-Underdahl, S. C., Heggestad, E. D., & Walker, L. S. (2019). Gender
and career success: A typology and analysis of dual paradigms. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 40(4), 400–416.
Germain, M. L., Herzog, M. J. R., & Hamilton, P. R. (2012). Women employed in male-
dominated industries: Lessons learned from female aircraft pilots, pilots-in-training
and mixed-gender flight instructors. Human Resource Development International, 15
(4), 435–453.
Gray, M. P., & O’Brien, K. M. (2007). Advancing the assessment of women’s career
choices: The career aspiration scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 15(3), 317–337.
Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of
work-family enrichment. Academy of management review, 31(1), 72–92.
Heilman, M. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 5, 269–298.
Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent
women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4),
657–674.
Heilman, M. E., & Caleo, S. (2018). Combatting gender discrimination: A lack of fit
framework. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21(5), 725–744.
Heilman, M. E., Manzi, F., & Braun, S. (2015). Presumed incompetent: Perceived lack of
fit and gender bias in recruitment and selection. In Handbook of gendered careers in
management: Getting in, getting on, getting out (pp. 90–104). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Herring, C. (2009). Does diversity pay? Race, gender, and the business case for diversity.
American Sociological Review, 74(2), 208–224.
Hideg, I., & Shen, W. (2019). Why still so few? A theoretical model of the role of
benevolent sexism and career support in the continued underrepresentation of
women in leadership positions. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 26
(3), 287–303.
Hughes, D. L., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2020). Elucidation of IS project success
factors: An interpretive structural modelling approach. Annals of Operations Research,
285(1), 35–66.
Hulme, K. (2006). Making the shift from pink collars to blue ones: Women’s non-
traditional occupations. Labour/Le Travail, 57(1), 144–165.
Hunt, V., Layton, D., & Prince, S. (2015). Diversity matters. 1(1) pp. 15–29). McKinsey &
Company.
Ibáñez, M. (2017). January. Women in the construction trades: Career types and
associated barriers. Women’s Studies International Forum, 60, 39–48.
Ismail, M., & Ibrahim, M. (2008). Barriers to career progression faced by women:
Evidence from a Malaysian multinational oil company. Gender in Management: An
International Journal, 23(1), 51–56.
Jabeen, F., & Faisal, M. N. (2018). Imperatives for improving entrepreneurial behavior
among females in the UAE: An empirical study and structural model. Gender in
Management: An International Journal, 33(3), 234–252.
John Kolade, O., & Kehinde, O. (2013). Glass ceiling and women career advancement:
Evidence from Nigerian construction industry. Iranian Journal of Management Studies,
6(1), 77–97.
Jones, K. P., Clair, J. A., King, E. B., Humberd, B. K., & Arena, D. F. (2020). How help
during pregnancy can undermine self-efficacy and increase postpartum intentions to
quit. Personnel Psychology, 73(3), 431–458.
Jonsson, E., & Österberg, J. (2017). Effective recruitment of military women: Developing new
methods. Res Militaris.
Jurik, N. C. (1985). An officer and a lady: Organizational barriers to women working as
correctional officers in men’s prisons. Social Problems, 32(4), 375–388.
Jurik, N. C., & Halemba, G. J. (1984). Gender, working conditions and the job
satisfaction of women in a non-traditional occupation: Female correctional officers
in men’s prisons. Sociological Quarterly, 25(4), 551–566.
Kaewsri, N., & Tongthong, T. (2011). An investigation of women engineers in non-
traditional occupations in the Thai construction industry. Australasian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 11(2), 1–21.
Khilji, S. E., & Pumroy, K. H. (2019). We are strong and we are resilient: Career
experiences of women engineers. Gender, Work and Organization, 26(7), 1032–1052.
Kim, H. K., Lee, U. H., & Kim, Y. H. (2015). The effect of workplace diversity
management in a highly male-dominated culture. Career Development International,
20(3), 259–272.
Klenke, K. (2003). Gender influences in decision-making processes in top management
teams. Management Decision, 41(10), 1024–1034.
Klettner, A., Clarke, T., & Boersma, M. (2016). Strategic and regulatory approaches to
increasing women in leadership: Multilevel targets and mandatory quotas as levers
for cultural change. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(3), 395–419.
Kumar, A., & Dixit, G. (2018). An analysis of barriers affecting the implementation of e-
waste management practices in India: A novel ISM-DEMATEL approach. Sustainable
Production and Consumption, 14, 36–52.
Lawson, K. M. (2021). Women’s daily performance, enjoyment, and comfort in male-
dominated majors: The role of social interactions in classes. Research in Higher
Education, 62(4), 478–497.
L. Sachdeva et al.
Levanon, A., & Grusky, D. B. (2016). The persistence of extreme gender segregation in
the twenty-first century. American Journal of Sociology, 122(2), 573–619.
Levanon, A., & Grusky, D. B. (2018). Why Is There Still So Much Gender Segregation?. In
Inequality in the 21st Century (pp. 371–379). Routledge.
List of largest employers. (2021). Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_
largest_employers Accessed 10 January 2022.
Makarova, E., Aeschlimann, B., & Herzog, W. (2016). Why is the pipeline leaking?
Experiences of young women in STEM vocational education and training and their
adjustment strategies. Empirical Research in Vocational Education and Training, 8(1),
1–18.
Manzi, F., & Heilman, M. E. (2021). Breaking the glass ceiling: For one and all? Journal of
personality and social psychology, 120(2), 257–277.
Mao, J.-Y., Xinyan, M., & Liu, X. (2021). Discouraging gender-biased job seekers by
adapting job advertisements. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 36(2), 170–182.
Mastracci, S., & Arreola, V. I. (2016). Gendered organizations: How human resource
management practices produce and reproduce administrative man. Administrative
Theory & Praxis, 38(2), 137–149.
Mate, S. E., McDonald, M., & Do, T. (2018). The barriers and enablers to career and
leadership development: An exploration of women’s stories in two work cultures.
International journal of organizational analysis, 27(4), 857–874.
Mate, S. E., McDonald, M., & Do, T. (2019). The barriers and enablers to career and
leadership development: An exploration of women’s stories in two work cultures.
International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 27(4), 857–874.
Mathivathanan, D., Mathiyazhagan, K., Rana, N. P., Khorana, S., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2021).
Barriers to the adoption of blockchain technology in business supply chains: A total
interpretive structural modelling (TISM) approach. International Journal of Production
Research, 1–22.
Miner, K. N., Walker, J. M., Bergman, M. E., Jean, V. A., Carter-Sowell, A., January, S. C.,
& Kaunas, C. (2018). From “her” problem to “our” problem: Using an individual lens
versus a social-structural lens to understand gender inequity in STEM. Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, 11(2), 267–290.
Ministry of Railways Report. (2021). Available at https://indianrailways.gov.in/railwa
yboard/uploads/directorate/stat_econ/Annual-Reports-2019-2020/Year-Book-
2019-20-English_Final_Web.pdf (Accessed on 15 January 2022).
Mutekwe, E., Modiba, M., & Maphosa, C. (2011). Factors affecting female students’
career choices and aspirations: A Zimbabwean example. Journal of Social Sciences, 29
(2), 133–141.
Mutter, J., & Thorn, K. (2018). Women’s careers: Navigating with a kaleidoscope. New
Zealand Journal of Human Resources Management, 18(2), 33–42.
Navarro-Astor, E., Román-Onsalo, M., & Infante-Perea, M. (2017). Women’s career
development in the construction industry across 15 years: main barriers. Journal of
engineering, design and technology, 15(2), 199–221.
Rana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Hughes, D. L. (2021). Analysis of challenges for blockchain
adoption within the Indian public sector: An interpretive structural modelling
approach. Information Technology & People, 1–29.
Rocha, V., & Van Praag, M. (2020). Mind the gap: The role of gender in entrepreneurial
career choice and social influence by founders. Strategic Management Journal, 41(5),
841–866.
Rutherford, S. (2011). Women’s work, men’s cultures: Overcoming resistance and changing
organizational cultures. Palgrave Macmillan.
Rutherford, S (2011). Women’s Work, Men’s Cultures: Overcoming Resistance and Changing
Organizational Cultures. Palgrave Macmillan.
Sachdeva, L., Bharti, K., & Maheshwari, M. (2021). A five-decade review of gender-based
occupational segregation: A bibliometric study of influential authors, institutions,
and research clusters. Australian Journal of Career Development, 30(2), 117–128.
Sachdeva, L., Maheshwari, M., & Joseph, J. (2020). “women-as-employees” & the
reproduction of regimes of exclusion. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 55(4),
559–571.
11
Research in Transportation Business & Management xxx (xxxx) xxx
Sage, A. (1977). Interpretive structural modeling: Methodology for large-scale systems (pp.
91–164).
Saifuddin, S., Dyke, L., & Hossain, M. S. (2019). Walls all around: Barriers women
professionals face in high-tech careers in Bangladesh. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion:
An International Journal, 38(7), 705–726.
Schweitzer, L., Ng, E., Lyons, S., & Kuron, L. (2011). Exploring the career pipeline:
Gender differences in pre-career expectations. Relations Industrielles/Industrial
Relations, 66(3), 422–444.
Simon, R. M., Wagner, A., & Killion, B. (2017). Gender and choosing a STEM major in
college: Femininity, masculinity, chilly climate, and occupational values. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 54(3), 299–323.
Soe, L., & Yakura, E. K. (2008). What’s wrong with the pipeline? Assumptions about
gender and culture in IT work. Women’s Studies, 37(3), 176–201.
Stamarski, C. S., & Son Hing, L. S. (2015). Gender inequalities in the workplace: The
effects of organizational structures, processes, practices, and decision makers’
sexism. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1400.
Swanson, J. L., & Woitke, M. B. (1997). Theory into practice in career assessment for
women: Assessment and interventions regarding perceived career barriers. Journal of
Career Assessment, 5(4), 443–462.
Thom, M., Pickering, M., & Thompson, R. E. (2002). Understanding the barriers to
recruiting women in engineering and technology programs. Frontiers in Education,
32, 6.
Torre, M. (2017). Attrition from male-dominated occupations: Variation among
occupations and women. Sociological Perspectives, 60(4), 665–684.
Trauth, E. M., Quesenberry, J. L., & Huang, H. (2009). Retaining women in the US IT
workforce: Theorizing the influence of organizational factors. European Journal of
Information Systems, 18(5), 476–497.
Treanor, L., & Marlow, S. (2021). Paws for thought? Analysing how prevailing
masculinities constrain career progression for UK women veterinary surgeons.
Human Relations, 74(1), 105–130.
Valk, R., & Srinivasan, V. (2011). Work–family balance of Indian women software
professionals: A qualitative study. IIMB Management Review, 23(1), 39–50.
Van Tuijl, C., & van der Molen, J. H. W. (2016). Study choice and career development in
STEM fields: An overview and integration of the research. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education, 26(2), 159–183.
Vatankhah, S., & Ilkhanizadeh, S. (2021). Understanding airline organizational
attractiveness using interpretive structural modelling. Advances in Hospitality and
Tourism Research, 9(2), 444–466.
Walton, R. O., Gupta, A., & Mau, R. R. (2021). Interpretive structural modelling approach
to assess financial attributes of the air cargo industry. International Journal of Logistics
Systems and Management, 38(1), 30–44.
Wang, L., Wang, H., Shao, S., Jia, G., & Xiang, J. (2020). Job burnout on subjective well-
being among chinese female doctors: the moderating role of perceived social
support. Frontiers in Psychology, 11.
Warfield, J. N. (1974). Toward interpretation of complex structural models. IEEE
Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 5, 405–417.
Watson, R. H. (1978). Interpretive structural modeling—A useful tool for technology
assessment? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 11(2), 165–185.
Wellalage, N. H., & Locke, S. (2013). Women on board, firm financial performance and
agency costs. Asian Journal of Business Ethics, 2(2), 113–127.
Worrall, L., Harris, K., Stewart, R., Thomas, A., & McDermott, P. (2010). Barriers to
women in the UK construction industry. Engineering Construction and Architectural
Management, 17(3), 268–281.
Xu, X., & Zou, P. X. (2020). Analysis of factors and their hierarchical relationships
influencing building energy performance using interpretive structural modelling
(ISM) approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 272, Article 122650.
Yu, A., & Jyawali, H. (2021). Job crafting as dynamic displays of gender identities and
meanings in male-dominated occupations. Gender, Work and Organization, 28(2),
610–625.