Women in the workforce

WOMEN EMPLOYEES AND HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: Nalini Sastry, Subrata Pandey - Editors; Universities Press (India) Ltd., 3-5- 819, Hyderguda, Hyderabad-500029. Rs. 335.

HUMAN RESOURCE in organisations today comprises women employees almost in equal measure to men. The editors have done well to offer a timely compilation where the contributors deal with their management at the macro level, the dual role played by women employees and their integration into the corporate sector, in three parts.

Nalini Sastry, Associate Professor of Psychology, Indian Institute of Technology, Mumbai, in her paper, ``Women employees, an emerging issue of HRM in organisations'' discusses the major factors that influence women's growth in the organisation under three broad areas, namely, socialisation process, individual characteristics and organisational practices and policies. Under socialisation for gender roles, Rubin et al, (1974) observe that parents make sex- typed judgments about their newborn sons and daughters. Contrary to researchers' findings regarding their weight, length, strength and alertness not having a significant difference, parents characterised boys as more alert, stronger, larger featured, more coordinated and firmer. Girls were found less attentive, weaker, finer featured, less coordinated, softer, smaller, more fragile and prettier. This perception coloured by sex-stereotyping influences parents' behaviour towards their children, which subsequently shapes the children's self-concept and gender-role expectation followed by choice of occupation and specialisation later in life. Individual characteristics and personal styles of behaviour include: self-concept and self- confidence, achievement orientation and career aspiration, and influence styles.

Under the first, research shows that both men and women describe a good manager as having distinctly masculine characteristics (Powell and Butterfield 1979) and it is interesting to mention Schwartz' statement in this connection. He states, ``Women who compete like men are considered unfeminine and women who emphasise family are considered uncommitted... It is absurd to put a woman down for having the very qualities that would send a man to the top.'' Similarly as regards the second, sex role conflict was minimum if women adopted androgynous sex role orientation. Where influence style was concerned, Morgan (1978) found that men tended to use threatening and coercive tactics, whereas women tended to use rational discussion and verbal confrontation.

Organisational practices and policies show women face a differential treatment not only in recruitment and selection but in placement too. Towards the end of the paper the author suggests a number of strategies for development of individual characteristics, and mentions some areas for future research to gain insight into certain practices of each organisation.

Barbara A. Gutek, McClelland Professor and Head of the Department of Management and Policy, University of Arizona, in her paper ``Women in management: change, progress or an ephemeral phenomenon?'' deals with women at different levels of management in the U.S. The U.S. has been a leader in moving women into management ranks and, according to a report by Fagenson and Jackson, in 1900, women accounted for 4.4 per cent of all U.S. managers, in 1950, they represented 13.6 per cent; in 1980, 26.1 per cent and by 1990, 40 per cent of all managers, administrators and executives in the U.S., were women. This rapid increase of women in management and administration is attributed to the opportunity for obtaining management specific training (MBA). Despite this rapid increase, women occupy less than five per cent of positions of power and formal authority in the U.S. For instance women make up 0.002 of the CEOs of the 500 largest corporations, and only one Fortune 500 Corporation is headed by a woman. Next to the U.S., Canada fares well with 34.5 per cent of its managers being women. Great Britain follows with 22 per cent, Germany with 20 per cent and France with nine per cent.

Women are found to fare slightly better in the U.S. Federal Government. Approximately 46 per cent of the employees in the Federal Civil Service are women, but only 6.4 per cent are executive managers. Finally, the report notes that the United Nations mirrors the rest of the world: Women constitute only 3.6 per cent of the top management positions in the U.N., but almost 45 per cent of the junior professionals, ``the only level at which staff are recruited on the basis of competitive examinations.'' The author offers four models to explain women's work status viz., the individual deficit model, the structural model, the sex-role model and the inter-group model and suggests ways to overcome existing barriers, self- imposed or otherwise to effect change in women's work status.

Uma Sekaran, Emeritus Professor of Management in Southern Illinois University of Carbondale, in her paper ``Indian women's progress in the world of work: implication for organisation redesign'' traces the changes in the workforce participation by the late 1960s and women's progress through the late 1980s. While in the 1960s and 1970s most women were content being at the junior management level, in the 1980s more women aspired for careers which enabled them to make a significant mark as contributors to the development of their nation or which would take them on a fast track up the organisation ladder. Sekaran's interview with 150 women in Mumbai, Calcutta, Hyderabad and Chennai in early and mid -1980s indicated women had to work hard to assert themselves regarding their priorities.

Sekaran suggests organisational redesign should include alternative work patterns and revised leave policies, the last should include ``paternity leave'' for men, (she says it may appear inappropriate for Indian conditions, but it is necessary).

In their paper ``Antecedents and outcomes of work family conflict (WFC): Testing a model of the work-family interface'', in the second part of the volume, the contributors, who are research scientists and the third, a professor of psychology (all from the U.S.) try to examine fully the relationship of the WFC to well being and its potential to integrate the study of work and family stress. They do so within the context of a multivariate model (though a complex one) that meets four major criteria - assessment of key work and family-related anticedence of both the WFC and well being; examination of both domain - specific and general measures of well being; addressing the bi-directional nature of the WFC; and a large sample, heterogeneous and representative of employed adults. The results of the study revealed new insights into the WFC and its integrative role in models of the work-family interface. They clearly underscored the fundamental importance of distinguishing between W R F and F R W conflict and support the use of multivariate models in future research on the work-family interface.

The editors, in their paper, ``Women employees in the corporate world: suggestions for practice and research'' in the last part are very down to earth in their approach to the issue. HRD functions will have to accept the reality of women's influx into the workplace as inevitable and recognise the need for a new working environment responsive and compatible to both men and women. Planning and implementation of any policy that ignores the organisational, and intra and inter-personal constraints liable to hinder women's participation could be harmful, even if they are well intended, they maintain. In order to identify and to deal with these constraints, the writers focus on gender specific socialisation processes, and consequent individuals' attitudes and behavioural patterns, and organisational processes sensitive to gender issues. They also provide valuable suggestions for individual level interventions, departmental level interventions, organisational level interventions and national level change strategies to deal with constraints created due to socialisation and organisational processes, that would help integrate women into the corporate mainstream.

N. MEERA RAGHAVENDRA RAO

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Features
Previous : Improving the lot of women
Next     : BJP and the RSS