An Examination of Gender Effects on Career Success of Information Systems Employees

In this paper we examined the differences and similarities in the human capital variables of male and female information system (IS) workers and the affect these differences had on job outcomes. The human capital variables studied included: age, education, organization and job tenure, and number of years in the IS occupation. We found that, even when controlling for the differences in human capital, women in IS still tended to be employed at lower levels of the organization, made less money, and had greater intentions to leave the organization. Center for Digital Economy Research Stern School of Business Working Paper IS-9317 EXAMINATION OF GENDER EFFECTS ON CAREER SUCCESS OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS EMPLOYEES The number of women entering the workforce has grown considerably in recent years. It has been projected that by the year 2000 approximately 47 percent of the workforce will be female, and 61 percent of all women of working age will have jobs (Johnston, 1987). Women are also expected to comprise about three fifths of the new entrants into the labor force in this decade. However, women are, and continue to be underrepresented in the information systems field, especially in positions of power and responsibility. Women make up 30 percent of computer scientists and comprise only 32 percent of systems analysts, 35 percent of computer programmers, 10 percent of IS directors, 18 percent of project leaders, and 14 percent of applications development managers (Frenkel, 1990; Goff, 1992; Johnson, 1990a). There are two related concerns regarding the under representation of women in computing (Pearl, et al., 1990). First, the restricted participation of women in the field of computing may indicate that practices within the field discourages or prevents women from entering or remaining in the profession. These barriers may include male-biased educational programs, and a male-dominated computer "culture". In these cases, and others, women are directed away from the computer industry. Second, the projected demographic shifts in the workforce may produce a severe shortage of computer personnel, unless the participation of women and other underrepresented groups, such as blacks, in the occupation increases significantly. Although research has identified work and individual factors contributing or impeding the participation and career success of minorities in the computing field (Igbaria & Wormley, 1992; Johnson, 1990a; 1990b; Laberis, 1992; Marenghi, 1992; Morrison, et al., 1987; Terborg, 1977), there is little specific empirical research on the obstacles faced by women in the computing field. A number of studies have suggested that minorities, including women, do not fit into the conventional "organizational mold," and as such experience less favorable work outcomes and lower quality of worklife than white males (Ford, 1985; lgbaria & Wormley, 1992; Center for Digital Economy Research Stern School of Business Working Paper IS-9317 Kanter, 1977). it was reported that women and minority groups may be differentially treated in some of the tangible work experiences, such as promotion, salary raises, termination, and layoffs (Ilgen & Youtz, 1986). Some of these experiences may affect their performance and productivity, satisfaction, loyalty, and their decision to stay or leave the organization. Beyond the issue of equality and social justice, if women in the IS occupation are being treated differently from their male counterparts which causes them to leave an organization or affects their performance then this is a serious problem which must be addressed. It is generally recognized that IS employees represent a valuable resource critical to the successful implementation and use of sophisticated information technology in organizations (Amoroso, et al. 1989; Baroudi, 1985; Keen, 1991 ; Niederman, Brancheau & Wetherbe, 1991 ; Watson, 1990). Outlining the critical issues facing the IS profession in the 1 9 9 0 ' ~ ~ Niederman, et a1.(1991) identified human resource management as one of the areas requiring immediate attention. It was ranked as the fourth most important issue facing the IS field. Further, a recent survey of IS executives reported that improving IS human resources jumped to fifth place from 13th in 1991 (Champy, 1992). In general, IS personnel management is likely to become even more critical due to the perennial turnover problem, the high costs of recruiting and training, the chronic shortage of new entrants, and the growth in demand for IS employees (Couger, 1988; Laudon & Laudon, 1992). IS employees have historically displayed a disturbingly high rate of turnover that reached nearly 20 percent in 1987 (Connoily, 1988; Laudon & Laudon, 1992), and is about twice the average for business managers and professilonals (Ludlum, 1988). Employee turnover, although not the only contributor to escalating costs, does play a significant role. Beyond the obvious implication of the direct costs associated with it, there are secondary ramifications to be considered. For example, the constant replacement of personnel could produce a disproportionate ratio of employees in the "introductory" stages of the learning curve instead of the more productive "maturity" stages. And, those employees remaining within the IS department could become somewhat demoralized as a result of an organizational Center for Digital Economy Research Stern School of Business Working Paper IS-9317 malaise that occurs when turnover becomes excessive. Depending on the physical isolation of the IS department, there could even be spin-off morale problems in other departments. Thus, there is a growing need to control the volume of voluntary turnover actions of IS employees. Most of the research in the MIS field examining IS personnel has tended to view study populations as homogeneous entities in which distinctions of gender are either ignored or considered as irrelevant (Baroudi, 1985; Guimaraes & lgbaria, 1992; lgbaria & Greenhaus, 1992). The potential problems raised by the lack of affirmative action and by the historical patterns of discrimination against women and minorities, and the projected demographic changes in the workforce, has been discussed within the professional literature (Fisher, 1992; Johnson, 1990a; 1990b; Laberis, 1992; Liedman, 1992; Marenghi, 1992; Perry, 1992), in most instances, this work has been based upon subjective and anecdotal accounts rather than empirical analysis. While there is considerable research in the organizational and management literatures focusing on career success variables (these have been defined to include job satisfaction, organizational commitment, intention to stay, salary, organization level, promotability etc.) and while we are aware of the role that gender plays within organizational systems, there is very little known about empirical factors that can be used to explain, as well as predict career success among females andlor minority groups in the information technology field (Igbaria & Wormley, 1992). Specifically, the primary purpose of this study is to examine the role gender plays in career success within the IS occupation. GENDER DIFFERENCE THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES Research based in economics and sociology has proposed that wage inequalities and career success outcomes result from differences: in men and women's human capital, the industrial sectors and the type of firms women are employed in, the predomination of women in certain occupational categories and jobs, and other contextual factors (Auster, 1989; Larwood, et al., 1984; Truman & Baroudi, Center for Digital Economy Research Stern School of Business Working Paper IS-9317 1992). This research attempts to explain gender differences by emphasizing differences in voluntary decisions of individuals or in access or treatment discrimination. In this paper we will use the sociological paradigm to frame our argument for why gender differences in career success exist. We will use the human capital paradigm (drawn from the economics literature) to generate the factors which must be controlled for before we can attribute differences in organizational outcomes to differential treatment of personnel due to gender. The Sociological Paradigm The sociological paradigm highlights the role that industry and labor market conditions play in the allocation of wages to men and women (Auster, 1989). It is suggested that men and women tend to be employed in different occupations, with women heavily concentrated in the lower paying administrative support, staff (including clerical) and service occupations. Men, on the other hand, are heavily represented in executive, administrative, and managerial positions. It was also found that when women do enter male-dominated positions, in business, and make it into middle management and beyond, this is most likely to occur in female-dominated industries, such as health care, education, or personnelllabor relations. These categories of firms pay less than the large, private, productive, profitable, capital intensive corporations (Holusha, 1991; U.S. Department of Labor, 1989). This paradigm also employs the dual labor market concept. This concept suggests that the job market consists of a set of better, or primary, jobs and a set of worse, or secondary, jobs. Since firms tend to attach wage rates to occupational categories rather than to individuals, employers can pay women less only by assigning them to lower-paid (secondary) job categories and/or by assigning lower values to predominantly female jobs. From research we know women and minorities are disproportionately employed in lower levels or in staff (vs. line) functions that are lower-paying, lower status, less lucrative specialties, out of the mainstream of the business and which don't lead to top management positions (Jones, 1986; Larwood & Gattiker, 1987; Powell, 1988). Center for Digital Economy Research Stern School of Business Working Paper IS-9317 The sociological paradigm also suggests that two types of groups exist in organizations identity groups (based on race, religion, ethnicity, gender, marital status, or age) and organization groups (based on organizational level, occupation, work experiences, and common work tasks) (Alderfer, 1986; Morrison & Von Glinow, 1990; Thomas & Alderfer, 1989). Individuals who are not in the identity group in power often have fewer opportunities for interesting and challenging work that develop job-related skills and enhance motivation. For example, Kanter (1977) pointed out that women and minorities are "tokens" with few characteristics of the typical top management identity group and therefore have reduced access to opportunity and power within organizations. She views opportunities as growth prospects stemming from the present job and suggests that employees with restricted opportunities ultimately lower their aspirations and commitment, and engage in behaviors that reinforce negative opinions about their potential contributions to the organization and eventually are more likely to leave the organization. Additionally, restricted access to power through routine task assignments or exclusion from informal social networks produces a cycle of disadvantage for minorities who are unable to influence organizational actions or the course of their own careers. Other aspects of the sociological paradigm focuses on the individual's relationships with others in the organization and includes such issues as coaching, networking, sponsorship and mentoring. It is argued that women and minorities may be less likely to have supervisory or peer coaching, counseling, mentoring, sponsorship, andlor networking (minorities are often excluded from informal set of contacts and channels of communications), and therefore, will less likely derive the benefits that these opportunities provide (Cabezas, et al., 1989a; Fisher, 1992; llgen & Youtz, 1986; Liedman, 1992; Perry, 1992; Thomas & Alderfer, 1989). Finally, it is also suggested that executives who had mentors or sponsors earned more money at a younger age and were more satisfied with their work (Greenhaus, et al., 1990; Kanter, 1977; Roche, 1979). This paradigm suggests, therefore, that women in the IS occupation, a traditionally male dominated occupation, will experience differential (and in most cases worse) career outcomes when compared to men. Center for Digital Economy Research Stern School of Business Working Paper IS-9317 The Human Capital Paradigm This second paradigm attempts to explain continued gender and racial discrimination by suggesting that individuals are rewarded in their current jobs for their investment in education and job training (Blau & Ferber, 1987). Specifically, it is assumed that women accumulate less human capital (i.e., knowledge and skills derived from on-the-job training and continuous work experience) than men which accounts for most of the disparity in outcomes. The paradigm suggests that women choose not to invest in accumulating as much human capital (e.g., by investing in less education andlor focusing on less demanding jobs) because they anticipate a lower return on their investment due to career interruptions (due primarily to family and child care responsibilities). Therefore, the human capital explanation focuses on the voluntary choices made by individuals in allocating investment, such as time and effort, to work and family and assumes that investment pays off equally regardless of race or gender. However, recent studies suggest that investment yields greater returns for white men than for women and minorities, irrespective of work efforts and skills. It was reported that discrepancies in organizational level and pay of women and minority groups could not be fully explained by education (Blau & Ferber, 1989; Cabezas, et al., 1989a; Larwood, et al., 1988; Madden 1985). Blau and Ferber (1 989) reported that "it takes considerably more years of schooling for women to achieve the same earnings as men," (p. 44). Further, a survey of AsianAmerican professionals and managers indicated that education and work experiences yield lower returns in promotion and advancement than for white males (Cabezas, et al., 1989b). Thus, while some of the inequality can be explained as a consequence of the differences in human capital formation the remaining discrepancies may be attributed to other factors, including treatment discrimination and other discriminatory practices (Olson & Frieze, 1987). What this paradigm does, is provide us with a list of factors other than gender which must be controlled for before we can attribute differences to gender effects. These variables include: age, education, and experience. Center for Digital Economy Research Stern School of Business Working Paper IS-9317 PROPOSED RELATIONSHIPS AND EFFECTS The Relationship of Gender and Demographics Since women have tended to withdraw from the educational pipeline earlier than men (Pearl, et al., 1990) and entered the IT field in large numbers only in the 1980s, women in the IT workplace are likely to be much younger, less educated, and have a shorter tenure in the technology field, the job, and the organization than men. Empirical studies reported that women were less educated than men in most countries including Japan, Latin America, Switzerland, Sweden and others (Black, et al., 1992). Therefore we expect: H1: Women in IT will be younger than men on average H2: Women in IT will have, on average, lower levels of education than men H3: Women in IT will have, on average, less organizational tenure than men H4: Women in IT will have, on average, less job tenure than men H5: Women in IT will have, on average, fewer years in the IS field than men The Impact of Gender on Career Success Variables The sociological paradigm attempts to explain gender differences in job characteristics using the dual labor market concept, where women are mostly associated with the secondary labor market which consists largely of professional and nonmanagerial positions. Empirical data regarding the IT workforce from the Department of Labor (Johnson, 1990a; 1990b; U.S. Department of Labor, 1989) indicate women are overrepresented in some types of lower-level jobs (e.g., programmers, operators) and underrepresented in higher-level jobs (e-g., project leaders and IS managers). Research has also suggested that women who are Center for Digital Economy Research Stern School of Business Working Paper IS-9317 managers aspire to positions lower in the managerial hierarchy than men. It was also reported that women are less likely to reach top positions mainly because of a lack of experience and due to a concentration in areas that don't lead to top positions (Fisher, 1992; Perry, 1992). According to the human capital paradigm women are likely to receive fewer promotions because they possess less human capital. Other research suggests that women encounter a "glass ceiling" that prevents them from reaching upper levels of management in their organization (Morrison, White & Van Velsor, 1987). The glass ceiling has been used "to describe a barrier so subtle that it is transparent, yet so strong that it prevents women and minorities from moving up the management hierarchy" (Morrison, & Von Glinow, 1990, p. 200). There are different sociological factors contributing to the glass ceiling phenomenon. The sociological paradigm helps in explaining this phenomenon. Since the majority of top executives are males, women are segregated into "women's work which are jobs with lower status, with lower earnings and limited advancement opportunities. Women who do make it are often perceived as "tokens" by their male counterparts and therefore they feel more isolated, and have difficulty gaining the trust of their male peers, have less access to mentors and sponsors, and are excluded from informal networks. These have an impact on women's upward mobility and success. Since women are more often in the outgroup, they are more likely to miss early job challenge opportunities, promotions and greater salary increases. However, to determine if these differences are a result of human capital differences we will need to control for age, education, organizational tenure, job tenure, and number of years in IS field. We hypothesize: H6: Women in IT, on average will hold lower-level positions than men even when controlling for age, education, organizational tenure, job tenure, and number of years in the IS field. H6a: Women in IT, on average will report fewer opportunities for promotion than men even when controlling for age, education, organizational tenure, job tenure, and number of years in the IS field. Center for Digital Economy Research Stern School of Business Working Paper IS-9317 Recent research has confirmed the importance of career experiences salary and promotabilityin promoting high levels of career success (Igbaria & Greenhaus, 1992). lgbaria and Greenhaus found that salary and promotability are positively related to satisfaction, commitment, and intention to stay with the company. According to the human capital paradigm, men generally have more work experience, education and job training, and fewer career interruptions than women, thereby accruing higher returns in their investment. Further, the sociological paradigm suggest that because of social roles, women tend to occupy positions with lower earnings, reduced job training, and less value and status. Other studies also pointed out that individuals within an organization, including executives, middle managers, professionals, and even customers, have discriminatory preferences for white men in the workplace (Becker, 1957; 1964; 1985). Therefore, an organization hires women only at a wage discount large enough to compensate for the loss of utility or level of discomfort associated with employing them (Blau & Ferber, 1987; Morrison & Von Glinow, 1990). Additionally, empirical data indicated that women consistently earn lower salaries across all occupational groups in managerial and professional positions (Devanna, 1987; Dipboye, 1987; Johnson, 1990a; U.S. Department of Labor, 1989). The human capital theory assumes that investment pays off equally for all groups, but recent studies suggests that investment yields higher returns for men than for women (Cabezas, et al., 1989b; Larwood, et al., 1988; Madden, 1985). Drazin and Auster (1 987) found substantial wage differences between men and women in managerial positions. Nelton and Berney (1987) also reported that "women at the vice presidential levels and above earn 42% less than their male peersn (p. 27). Computerworld (1993) also found that women in IT earned only 72 percent of their male counterparts in 1992. Again, it will be necessary to control for differences in human capital variables. We hypothesize: H7: Women in IT, on average, receive lower salaries than men even when controlling for age, education, organizational tenure, job tenure, and number of years in the IS field. Center for Digital Economy Research Stern School of Business Working Paper IS-9317 We also examined the extent of boundary spanning activities involved in the jobs, that is, the opportunity to interact with peers in other departments and organizations. Boundary spanning activities can be a significant source of job power, impact individual's career growth and success, and enhance one's influence and visibility in the organization (Hulin & Roznowski, 1985). It is also reported that without opportunities to take challenging assignments, women may fall behind men in terms of visibility, social contacts, and knowledge and skill development, or they may internalize negative evaluations and stereotypes and engage in 'self-limiting behaviors" for example, refusing a challenging job assignment or declining an opportunity for additional training and development programs (Ilgen & Youtz, 1986; Morrison & Von Glinow, 1990). Based on the sociological paradigm, it was suggested that mentors and sponsors play an important role in individual's career success and tend to choose proteges who are similar to themselves in social background and with whom they can more readily identify. Since women may be less likely than men to have access to mentors and sponsors, and since sponsors and mentors may use their influence to enable their proteges to interact with other groups within the organization and could alleviate most of the barriers and obstacles facing their proteges, women have less opportunities for extra and intraorganizational interactions. Additionally, since women have often settled into the lower paying and lower productivity positions (Taylor & Ilgen, 1981) and into staff or support positions which require little contact, interaction, and organizational communication, they are not assigned into the mainstream of the organization, and are excluded from formal and informal networks of the corporation's primary operations (Ilgen & Youtz, 1986; Kanter, 1977). Thus, we expect that women have less opportunities to interact with peers and other members within and outside the organization than men. H8: Women in IT will have, on average, less opportunities to interact with peers and other members within and outside the organization than men even when controlling for age, education, organizational tenure, job tenure, and number of years in the IS field. Center for Digital Economy Research Stern School of Business Working Paper IS-9317 We anticipate that women will be less satisfied with their jobs, less committed to their organizations, and have fewer intentions to stay with their organizations than their male counterparts. These expectations are mainly based on the sociological paradigm, where self-ratings of job satisfaction and commitment are typically higher and turnover is lower for ingroup members (men) than for outgroup members (women). Further, women are more likely to quit work in high technology fields due to their greater uncertainty regarding their appropriateness to nontraditional jobs. For example, it was reported that turnover among female engineers was twice as high as among men (Fisher, 1992). It was also suggested that educated women are more likely to quit their jobs than men, perhaps because of the greater uncertainties associated with jobs traditionally held by men (Viscusi, 1980). It is also suggested that women are more likely to quit because they often leave the labor market to bear and raise children. It is possible that those women who do marry and have children interrupt their careers and quit their jobs (Schwartz, 1989). Moreover, the economic paradigm suggests that since wives typically earn lower pay than do their spouses and serve as secondary earners, they enter the workforce during periods of temporary economic needs and leave thereafter. Also, as women are more likely to relocate to accommodate their careers to their spouse's, they are less likely to be loyal to their organization and stay with the organization. Thus, it is expected that women will report lower career success. Again, before we can attribute outcome differences to gender we must first control for the human capital variables. We hypothesize that: H9: Women in IT will be, on average, less satisfied with their job than men even when controlling for age, education, organizational tenure, job tenure, and number of years in the IS field. H10: Women in IT will be, on average, less committed with their job than men even when controlling for age, education, organizational tenure, job tenure, and number of years in the IS field. Center for Digital Economy Research Stern School of Business Working Paper IS-9317 H I I : Women in IT will have, on average, more intentions to leave their job than men even when controlling for age, education, organizational tenure, job tenure, and number of years in the IS field.