Much research has been done on the 
phenomenon of the glass ceiling, but over the last decade we have witnessed many women shatter it. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), gender segregation among occupations in the United States is lessening to a small degree.
CNNMoney.com reported that in 2011 there were 12 FORTUNE 500 companies headed by women (although that was down from 15 in 2010). Thus, some women have broken through the glass ceiling. Lynn L. Elsenhans at Sunoco, Ursula M. Burns at Xerox, and Ellen J. Kullman at DuPont are a few.
The Glass Escalator Defined
The flip side of this phenomenon is what is coined the glass escalator, or glass elevator, which refers to the precipitous promotion of men over women into management positions in female-dominated fields such as nursing, education, social work, and even ballet. The chart below offers an example of the disparity in K-12 education.
To be fair, I must indicate that, according to Christine Williams (1992) in her seminal study titled The Glass Escalator: Hidden Advantages for Men in “Female-Dominated” Professions, it is not always a bowl of cherries for men working in female-oriented occupations. However, because the glass ceiling is so widely known, the glass escalator is often not discussed, but I submit that it is a topic worthy of attention.
As conversations about the importance of women to economic prosperity are being had world-wide and organizations of all sizes tout the importance of diversity this begs the question of why do we not see more women in charge not just in male-dominated professions, but in female-dominated occupations? Is it solely gender discrimination or self-imposed limitations? I offer that it is a combination of the two. Here’s why:
Structural
Men, even when they work within female-dominated professions, are often pushed toward administrative tracks where they are the beneficiaries of unofficial mentoring by other men in leadership positions. In addition, those making promotion decisions are often male.
Societal
Despite the acceptance of women working outside of the home, we are still expected to do it all. Bring home the bacon, fry it up in a pan, and wash the dishes after everyone has eaten. With all of this on one’s plate, the idea of pursuing additional job responsibilities can be quite unattractive.
Personal
Women are relational and we don’t like to be uncomfortable. Thus, we want everyone to like us, and we avoid stepping outside of our comfort zones. As you likely know, being the leader sometimes means having to speak up and be unpopular. Although we have limited ability to quickly change the structural and societal issues, the personal issues are completely within our control.
Why does it matter?
In a nutshell – economics. It has been shown that those working in managerial and leadership positions often out-earn their subordinates. And, as Barbara Stanny so eloquently put it, “prince charming isn’t coming”. According to statistics provided by the U.S. Census Bureau for 2010, for every 100 unmarried women there are 88 unmarried men. Thus, some women may never marry. For those who do, it is likely that we will outlive our spouses.
Divorce is also a consideration leading women to be heads of households. Thus, it is important that women receive equal opportunities to enhance not only their career positions, but also their incomes.
What do you think? Did I miss anything? Are any of these reasons holding you back?
This article is confusing. It seems that the statements are either so obvious that they don’t really add anything to the discussion of the gender gap, or they are simply said without tying back at all to the analysis of the problem. “Women are relational and we don’t like to be uncomfortable.” Does anyone like to be uncomfortable? Does ‘relational’ mean that women value emotional bonds and social reverence? I don’t understand the “Why Does It Matter?” section, either. How can it not matter?
“It has been shown that those working in managerial and leadership positions often out-earn their subordinates.” Who thinks that managers make less than the people below them? This is totally obvious.
“Divorce is also a consideration leading women to be heads of households. Thus, it is important that women receive equal opportunities to enhance not only their career positions, but also their incomes.” Okay? This article could be summed up by saying gender differences exist because of societal/structural and sometimes internal limitations and that’s bad because women make less for the same work. End of article.
I’m not trying to be unfair, but as a woman in business who wants to see income equality and equal respect for women leaders, I think that overly broad articles like this with poor support or little analysis are not helping.
Hello Adrienne,
I appreciate your critique and I will certainly take some of the points you made into consideration for future articles.
In the “Why Does It Matter?” section my goal was to point to the economic consequences that under-earning has not just for women, but children and families. This in turn affects society as a whole.
To address your question regarding “Who thinks that managers make less than the people below them?”…. In some settings, education which was provided as the example in the article, teachers or professors with some years of experience can out-earn individuals in some administrative positions. In addition, the fewer hours required to be present onsite frequently leaves time to engage in other income-producing activities. Thus, the switch to go from the classroom to administration could mean a cut in income, but increased hours on one endeavor.
As far as summing up the article “by saying gender differences exist because of societal/structural and sometimes internal limitations and that’s bad because women make less for the same work”. I would not agree that it is that simple. My point in listing these issues was to draw focus to those things that we can readily impact, which includes the willingness to step out of our comfort zones and pursue higher positions when doing so makes sense for us individually. Of course a deep analysis of these issues would require much more than space provided here.