Subjective vs. Objective Discrimination in Government: Adding to the Picture of Barriers to the Advancement of Women

Abstract

Using the results of a recent survey of federal employees across the country, this paper examines the causes and consequences of "subjective discrimination" in the federal bureaucracy. It begins with the premise that perceptions of discrimination can be just as harmful to women and their organizations as the existence of any "objective" barriers to their advancement. It explores the roots of two types of perceptions: that women in general face disparate treatment, and that a woman has personally experienced sex discrimination. Work-related experiences are the most important predictors of both types of perceptions, while working with more men than women increases the likelihood that women will believe women are discriminated against, and age plays a significant role in perceptions of personal discrimination. Moreover, subjective discrimination is found to have an impact on the career choices made by women. While such perceptions are positively related to the likelihood that a woman will apply for promotion within her agency, it is more likely that she will choose to leave her agency altogether.Considerable scholarly research has demonstrated that women face barriers as they attempt to advance into elite ranks, whether in politics or in the bureaucracy

Going up? Perceived career progress of female general staff across New Zealand universities

“…These results mirror the previous research documenting the general/academic staff divide (Conway, 1998;Eveline, 2005;Strachan et al, 1994;Szekeres, 2004;Whitchurch, 2006). While the women did not appear to feel a twofold disadvantage in terms of being a woman and a general staff member, the fact that role discrimination was perceived means barrier behaviours, for example, turnover (Naff, 1995) and low selfesteem (Eccleston & Major, 2006) may occur if these issues were left unaddressed.…”

“…According to Hopkins (1980), 'subjective discrimination' can be just as harmful to performance as objective discrimination because once unfairness is perceived, groups will exhibit barrier behaviour, for example, through job resignations, regardless of whether acts of discrimination actually exist or not. Although gender-driven subjective discrimination has been commonly examined in the literature (Naff, 1995;Taylor, Wright, & Porter, 1994), the perception of career opportunities of general staff compared with their academic counterparts has been a prevalent theme (Castleman & Allen, 1995;Dobson, 2000;Dobson & Conway, 2003;Mcinnis, 1998;Szekeres, 2004;Wallace & Marchant, 2011). General staff can gain promotion only by leaving their jobs and applying for a new higher role (Szekeres, 2004), and success is often accompanied by an increase in complexity and responsibility.…”

Nine to Five: Skepticism of Women’s Employment and Ethical Reasoning

“…Previous research shows that sensitivity and diversity training can enhance such attitudes by building greater acceptance of women and minorities in the organization (e.g., Cooper and Lewis, 1995;Cox, 1991;Snavely, 1993;Soni, 2000). Mentoring programs might also be utilized so that women are better prepared to perform effectively on the job (e.g., Fine and Pullins, 1998;Naff, 1995;Simonetti et al, 1999;Whelan-Berry and Gordon, 2000), thereby reducing the likelihood that negative stereotypes are reinforced and encouraging women's continued advancement in the company.…”

Representative Bureaucracy in the Public Service? A Critical Analysis of the Challenges Confronting Women in the Civil Service of Ghana

“…Subjective discrimination "exists when an individual or group, on the basis of their own subjective perceptions, define their situation as discriminatory" (Hopkins, 1980, p. 131). Naff (1995) sees it "as the perception that a work-irrelevant criterion-in this case sex-affects how one is treated or evaluated on the job" (p. 538). Objective discrimination, on the other hand, is a matter of the exact number of discrimination cases in workplaces.…”