Archives For January 2011

The Gender Stall Effect

Bret Simmons —  January 31, 2011

A fascinating and extremely well done study recently published in Administrative Science Quarterly sheds new light on the integration of women into the workforce using longitudinal data from the US Equal Opportunity Employment Commission between 1975 and 2005. The data clearly show that non-managerial workers are less gender segregated when they work under female managers. As women gain greater representation in managerial roles, the increased political and organizational power they accrue benefits women at all levels.

But simply having a large number of women at work did not equate to more women in managerial roles. The study found that women were more integrated into larger organizations that experienced growth. Women have more opportunity to access significant managerial jobs in larger establishments. The data showed that women have the least opportunity to access non-trivial managerial jobs in organizations with less than 100 employees.

One of the most interesting findings of the study was something the authors call the “gender stall effect.” From 1975 to 2005, women have experienced increasing representation in low-status managerial jobs with little authority. Yet even as the overall representation of women in management has increased, their relative status within management is declining. The effect of women in management on desegregation is waning.

Getting into an organization is one thing, moving up the organization is something altogether different. For example, the next time you are in your neighborhood bank, take a look around. I am going to bet that most of the faces you see behind the teller counter are female. Now look around at the desks occupied by the loan officers, financial advisors, and managers. I bet you are still going to see a large percentage of women in those positions. Now go home and Google that bank and look at the composition of the executive management team and board of directors. Is the percentage of females at the top the same as at the bottom? I doubt it.

We’ve come a long way since 1975, but we still have important work to do. The “level playing field” is much more myth than reality.

Bret L. Simmons, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Management in the College of Business at the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR), where he teaches courses in organizational behavior, leadership, and personal branding to both undergraduate and MBA students. Bret blogs about leadership, followership, and social media at his website Positive Organizational Behavior. You can also find Bret on Twitter, Facebook, and Linkedin.

Related Posts At Positive Organizational Behavior:

Exclusivity Fits

Why We Have Too Few Women Leaders

It’s all about demand. That’s the thesis of Rick Kash and David Calhoun, authors of How Companies Win. In a moment, I’ll tell you how to get a free copy of this book courtesy of the authors and LDRLB.

According to Kash and Calhoun, companies that win are those that are able to discover and exploit unsatisfied customer demands. Those companies who do provide a significant competitive advantage in the market place. If your company does not, never fear. Kash and Calhoun are here to help.

The book itself focuses on processes that business leaders can utilize to discover the market’s needs and develop a plan to exploit them. The strongest points of the book are the case studies. Kash and Calhoun have decades of experience working with a variety of companies. They roll these experiences into illustrations that provide a glimpse into the process and the companies. With the exception of one chapter, the book is long on strategy development, short on execution. This is the major draw back of the text.

Overall, How Companies Win is a worthwhile read if you’re in charge of strategy for a large-scale business operation. If you’re a middle manager or leader at any level of a nonprofit or government organization, there isn’t much here for you. I would, however, look forward to a follow-up focused on the implementation of demand-driven strategy.

Continue Reading…

Timothy Stagich (2001) writes that personnel (HR) departments are “blackholes of human potential, buried under piles of resumes and red tape, while relying on hierarchies and cumbersome procedures to justify their existence in hierarchies (p.114). He also writes that HR departments are typically relegated to the “doers of dirty deeds” as they build walls to protect management from the workers (p.94).

The problem is, I am hard presses to argue against his critiques of HR. It’s a funny profession, with an abundance of opinions about the role of HR professionals (like myself). We (HR Professionals) have lots of opinions about how others should do their work, but aren’t always perfectly organized and strategic ourselves. We investigate and critique with vengeance and fail to understand our own departments.

Unfortunately, HR very easily becomes a roadblock to effective change and strategy, rather than effective strategic partners. Stagich (2001) argues that personnel departments would be most useful facilitating employee training and development (p.111). Other than the obvious question of who then processes the HR-related paperwork (paycheques don’t magically appear; someone has to process them), Stagich is onto something. What if HR was that pillar of service in equipping and developing employees to do their jobs? What if every HR process was filtered through the screen of “does this help or detract from our strategy” question? How much of what we do in HR would still be left? Could we actually contribute to the synergy that Stagich advocates for?

I think it is possible for HR to be that strategic partner, but that requires an honest introspective look at how we operate and contribute. Is HR ready for that?

Stagich, T. (2001). Collaborative leadership and global transformation. Bloomington, IN: 1st Books.

Continue Reading…

Surveying Strategy

David Burkus —  January 25, 2011

This post is the first in a series about the various schools and models of making organizational strategy.

Continue Reading…

Does Human Capital Matter?

Bret Simmons —  January 24, 2011

For your company to achieve high performance, you need to acquire and nurture the best and brightest human capital available and keep these investments in your company. This is the bottom-line conclusion of a study recently published in the Journal of Applied Psychology entitled “Does Human Capital Matter? A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Human Capital and Firm Performance.”

Human capital is the knowledge, skills, and abilities of your employees. Past research has shown that some of the most important aspects of human capital that drive company strategy and performance are the experiences, education, and training of managers.

This study’s analysis of data from 66 previously published studies found that human capital had a significant and positive impact on global measures of company performance (e.g. ROA and Returns on Sales). The relationship between human capital and performance was strongest when the human capital was firm-specific (e.g. years of experience with a firm) vs. general (e.g. a stockbroker). When human capital is general in nature, wages and the threat of turnover are higher because the labor market is more competitive. But specific human capital is more valuable to the performance of your company because it is hard to for you to replace and for your competition to copy.

The study also found that human capital has an even stronger effect on measures of operational performance (e.g. customer service satisfaction, team performance, retention, and innovation). Operational performance, in-turn, had a strong effect on global measures of company performance. This demonstrates that human capital drives the performance of your company through its effect on operational excellence. Your company cannot thrive with crappy operations, and your operations cannot thrive without good people.

When I teach the service-profit chain in my MBA classes, my bottom line is that the single most important thing you need to do on a daily basis if you want to grow revenue and profit in your company is to take care of your employees. Inevitably, there are always a few know-it-all managers that smirk when I say this. Like it or not, it’s an empirical fact that your people are the key to success for you and your company.

Take care of your people. Teach them to take care of each other and your customers. Once you develop this very specific human capital in them, don’t treat them like a commodity. Treat them like the performance of your firm depends on them, because it does.

Related Posts At Positive Organizational Behavior:

The Bathtub Metaphor Applied To Human Capital

The Stock And Flow Of Human Capital

Service-Profit Chain: Managers Matter