Skip to main content
Log in

Behind closed doors: Sex bias at professional and managerial levels

  • Articles
  • Published:
Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

U.S. companies have made important strides in combating sex discrimination in the workplace over the last two decades, but more subtle forms of sex bias still exist, often in decisions and behaviors that occur behind closed doors. This paper focuses on sex bias at professional and managerial levels. It explores sources of sex bias in the informal culture, selection and recruitment, task assignment, performance appraisal, promotion, and salary allocation, and then suggests action steps to help reduce sex bias in each of these areas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, S. H. (1987). Men's clubs pressed to open doors for women.The New York Times, February 1, Section, IV, p. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argote, L., Seabright, M. A., & Dyer, L. (1986). Individual versus group use of baserate and individuating information.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 38, 65–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argote, E. R. (1987a). Task characteristics as a bridge between macro and micro research on salary inequality between men and women. Paper presented at the National Academy of Management Meetings, New Orleans, Louisiana.

  • Auster, E. R. (1987b). Readers report: Women who take the corporate climb.Business Week, July, 13, 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auster, E. R., & Drazin, R. (1988). Sex inequality at higher levels in the hierarchy: An intraorganiational perspective.Sociological Inquiry.

  • Baron, J. W., & Bielby, W. T. (1980). Bringing the firms back in: Stratification, segmentation and the organization of work.American Sociological Review, 46, 737–765.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baum, L. (1987). Corporate women: They're about to break through to the top.Business Week, June 22, 72–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benokraitis, N. & Feagin, J. (1986).Modern Sexism. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernardin, H. J. (1986). Subordinate appraisal: A valuable source of information about managers.Human Resource Management, 25(3), 421–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumenthal, K. (1986). Room at the top.The Wall Street Journal, March 24, 7–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burchett, S. R., & DeMeese, K. P. (1985). Performance appraisal and the law.Personnel, July, 29–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiNisi, A., Gardner, T., & Cafferty, T. (1987). The organization of information used for performance appraisals: The role of diary-keeping. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Meetings, New Orleans, Louisiana.

  • Drazin, R., & Auster, E. R. (1987). Wage differences between men and women: Performance appraisal ratings versus salary allocation as the source of bias.Human Resource Management, 26, 157–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumaine, B. (1987). The new art of hiring smartFortune, August 17, 78–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, H. S., & Holley, W. (1982). The relationship of performance appraisal system characteristics to verdicts in selected employee discrimination cases.Academy of Management Journal, 25, 392–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerdes, E., & Garber, D. M. (1983). Sex bias in hiring: Effects of job demands and applicant competence.Sex Roles, 9, 307–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutek, B. (1985).Sex and the Workplace. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutek, B., & Cohen, A. G. (1987). Sex ratios, sex role spillover, and sex at work: A comparison of men's and women's experiences.Human Relations, 40(2), 97–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutek, B., Larwood, L., & Stromberg, A. (1986). Women at work. In Cooper, C. L. & Robertson, I. (Eds.)International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chichester, England: Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, F. S., & Hall, D. T. (1976). Effects of job incumbents' race and sex on evaluations of managerial performance.Academy of Management Journal, 19, 476–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harriman, A. (1985).Men/Women Management, New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilman, M. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model.Research in Organizational Behavior, 5, 269–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hymowitz, C., & Schellhardt, T. (1986). The glass ceiling: Why women can't seem to break the invisible barrier that blocks them from top jobs.The Wall Street Journal, Special Report,March 24, 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kane, J. S., & Lawler, E. E. (1979). Performance appraisal effectiveness: Its assessment and determinants. In Staw, B. (Ed.),Research in Organizational Behavior, 1, 425–478. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, R. M. (1977).Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larwood, L., Gutek, B. A. & Gattilker, U. (1984). Perspectives on institutional discrimination and resistance to change.Group and Organization Studies, 9(3), 333–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. (1986). Training for women: Where do we go from here?Training December, 29–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenney, E., Mitchell, L., & Browning, C. (1983). The effects of clear evaluation criteria on sex bias in judgments of performance.Psychology of Women Quarterly, 7, 313–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loden, M. (1986).Feminine Leadership: How to Succeed in Business Without Being One of the Boys. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loden, M. (1986). Disillusion at the corporate top: A machismo that drives women out.The New York Times, February 9, Section III, p. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. (1984). Notes on ambiguity and executive compensation.Seandinavian Journal of Management Studies, August, 53–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mai-Dalton, R., & Sullivan, J. (1981). The effects of managers' sex on the assignement to a challenging or a dull task and reasons for the choice.Academy of Management Journal, 24(3), 603–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGoldrick, B., & Miller, G. (1985). Wall Street women: You've come a short way, baby.Institutional Investor, June, 85–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meacham, C. (1977). Sex discrimination in employment-the law-where it is and where it's going. In Hamner, W. C., and Schmidt, F. L. (Eds.),Contemporary Problems in Personnel, pp. 131–141. Chichester, England: St. Clair Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagao, D. H., Tindale, R. S., Hinsz, V. B., & Davis, S. H. (1985). Individual and group biases in information processes. Paper presented at American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, California.

  • Nieva, V., & Gutek, B. (1980). Sex effects on evaluation.Academy of Management Review, 5, 267–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pervasive sex bias found in courts. (1986).The New York Times, April 20, Section I, p. 1.

  • Rogan, H. (1984). Top women executives find path to power is strewn with hurdles.The Wall Street Journal, October 25, 35, 44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rynes, S. L. (1988). Recruitment, organizational entry, and early work adjustment. Working paper. Cornell University.

  • Schmitt, E. (1986). Female entrepreneurs thrive.The New York Times, August 18, D1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, C., and Moore, K. (1985). Executive women-20 years later.Harvard Business Review, 5, 42–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, A. (1986). Why women are bailing out.Fortune, August 18, 16–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilmington club rejects women. (1987).The New York Times, February 22, Section 1, p. 42.

  • Zimmer, L. (1987). Tokenism and women in the workplace: The limits of gender-neutral theory.Social Problems, 35, 64–77.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Auster, E.R. Behind closed doors: Sex bias at professional and managerial levels. Employ Respons Rights J 1, 129–144 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01385042

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01385042

Key Words

Navigation