Engendering Change: Organizational Dynamics and Workplace Gender Desegregation, 1975–2005

Abstract

We examine workplace-level sources of gender inequality to explore the link between organizational change and levels of workplace gender integration over time. To do so, we analyze the gender division of labor and key structural aspects of U.S. private-sector work establishments, using longitudinal data from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from 1975 to 2005. We find that women's presence in managerial positions is positively related to gender integration, as is both establishment size and growth. Additionally, the results show that trends toward gender integration are due to change within workplaces rather than new, relatively integrated workplaces entering the population overtime. Our results also provide compelling evidence that the effect of female managers varies dramatically across organizational contexts, with the strongest desegregating effects in larger and growing establishments. Finally, the effect of women's access to organizational power structures has sharply diminished overtime.

The Control of Managerial Discretion: Evidence from Unionization’s Impact on Employment Segregation

“…These studies show many of the relationships that organizational theorists of discrimination have hypothesized. Huffman et al (2010) demonstrate that progress particularly on gender desegregation has been driven by changes within firms over time rather than by the entry of integrated firms and the exit of segregated ones. Kalev et al's (2006) longitudinal study explores the policies behind such desegregation, and argues that policies that establish managerial responsibility through plans, formal committees and staff positions tend to increase managerial diversity; policies that raise awareness of diversity without assigning responsibility for outcomes do not.…”

“…In addition to allowing us to "document desegregation" at a more fine--grained level than before (Tomaskovic--Devey et al 2006; see also Cohen, Huffman, and Knauer 2009), these data have been used to directly test the effects of different organizational practices on the promotion of women and minorities in the workplace (Kalev et al 2006;Kalev 2009;Huffman, Cohen, and Pearlman 2010). These studies set the current standard for research into the effects of limiting managerial discretion on employment discrimination.…”

“…These studies set the current standard for research into the effects of limiting managerial discretion on employment discrimination. A particular advantage of the studies by Kalev et al (2006); Kalev (2009);and Huffman et al (2010) is that they exploit the longitudinal structure of the EEO--1 reports to estimate models that control for unobserved differences between firms. This removes a massive empirical obstacle to identifying causal effects of bureaucratic employment practices, namely, that the spread of such practices and the change in levels of employment discrimination happen alongside changes in the population of firms.…”

“…4 These reports include a matrix that details the race and sex of employees across nine broad occupational categories. These are the most detailed establishment--level data on workforce composition available (Robinson et al 2005), and have been used in multiple studies in particular of women and minorities' progress into management (Kalev et al 2006;Cohen et al 2009;Huffman et al 2010). The focus of this study differs in that I examine the non--managerial workforce described in the reports, as well.…”

Gender essentialism and occupational segregation in insolvency practice

“…Indeed, it has been suggested that the search for gendered ghettos might extend not only to occupational specialisms but also to their fragmentation into specific roles and work tasks (Huffman, Cohen & Pearlman, 2010;Cockburn, 1988 Rendering the micropractices of gender segregation visible requires capturing individual experiences. Hence, the research took the form of semi-structured interviews.…”