In addition, this thesis was designed to explore the welfare state paradox and the perceptions of female leaders in Norway. In order to study this issue further, semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten female managers. Thematic analysis was utilised in the coding's qualitative analysis.
In the interviews, it became clear that unconscious discrimination against women in the workplace and gender stereotyping processes remain a significant issue. According to the findings of the study, the careers of female leaders have been impacted by a number of barriers and facilitating factors.
The women cited motivation, self-esteem, and structural factors as the most crucial enabling factor, and the absence of these as the most significant barrier. Insight is provided into how the amount of support from spouses influences career progression of the women.
The women's perceptions of Norway's welfare policies seem to be that they facilitate career progression by enabling greater concentration on work. This study contributes to the literature by offering insights into some of the obstacles Norwegian women face in their career progression.
There are a number of steps that businesses can take to increase gender balance in management positions. The businesses may, for example, developing a mentoring programme.
Introduction
In recent decades, the low proportion of women in executive positions and board positions has garnered considerable attention and sparked a public debate in the Nordic nations and across the world.[1] Statistics indicate that when one ascends the corporate hierarchy, female representation decreases.[2]
Women remain significantly underrepresented in positions of power despite progress in many employment areas.[3] The cause of women's underrepresentation in executive positions are many and complex. While women may have the potential to occupy executive roles, current research has identified a number of hindering factors for women's professional advancement. Additionally, new research in this field suggests that the "welfare state paradox," or generous welfare programmes[4], have a negative impact on women's job advancement.[5] In terms of earnings and labour market involvement, women have attained a greater overall degree of gender equality in social democratic nations with well-established welfare states. However, there is still a lack of women in managerial roles.[6]
As previously mentioned, there are multifactorial explanations for the unequal representation of women and men in top positions in the business world. One explanation relates to the imbalance between work and family life; even though women and men are more equal regarding education, work, and family life, inequalities in wages, career choices and childcare discrepancies are still prevalent.[7] Alternative explanations further emphasise the supply side as a vital component, whereby women do not choose the relevant education that lead to management positions.[8]
Since the mid-1980s, the "glass ceiling" metaphor has been utilised in both public and scholarly discourse to explain the underrepresentation of women in managerial roles.[9] The metaphor depicts the unseen barrier of biases and discrimination - an invisible "glass ceiling" – that women encounter as they ascend the corporate hierarchy.[10] It is believed that this barrier impedes the advancement of women to the upper levels of middle management. Although several studies have been conducted on gender stereotyping, its underlying causes have not yet been fully elucidated, according to a review of the relevant literature. The phenomenon will likely persist unless the causes are identified; therefore, it is essential to gain a deeper understanding from Norwegian women who have attained top management positions.
In her study from the 1970s, Kanter (1977) established that organisational culture, not gender, was the cause of disparities between women and men, thereby shifting the focus to institutional conditions.[11] Women and men do not have equal opportunities in the workplace, which can lead to homosocial reproduction, which is a phenomenon in which, for instance, male managers elect new managers who are similar to them.[12] Another explanation places the responsibility on the women themselves and emphasises women's motivation and priorities, or a combination thereof, as an explanation.[13] As demonstrated previously, gender inequality in the workplace is typically the result of a combination of factors, not a single factor.
Research objective
The objective of the thesis is to study the topic of women and management by exploring the experiences of female leaders. The study offers important insights into barriers and the facilitating factors women in Norway face. Although there is already some relevant research in the field, this study aims to contribute to this growing area of research by exploring women’s lived experiences.
Therefore, the research question is:
What obstacles do women in Norway face on their path to top leadership positions?
In order to understand and overcome these barriers the following sub-questions were asked:
- Does gender affect leadership styles?
- Are there any sociocultural barriers?
- Could the lack of self-confidence be a hindrance for women?
- Are there any structural factors holding women back from leadership positions?
Conclusion
This study examined the perspectives of Norwegian female top leaders regarding the obstacles and enabling factors they encountered in their pursuit of leadership roles. Through the use of thematic analysis, responses were categorised into codes and themes, and barriers and enabling variables faced by the women interviewed were identified. In addition, the impact of welfare state programmes was investigated.
Previous research on the glass ceiling and the variables that affect women's career advancement is prevalent in a number of contexts. There is no consensus on how women should advance or how to avoid the glass ceiling. However, this study confirms what numerous other studies have found;[14] a number of factors affecting the professional advancement of women have been identified, with self-confidence and motivation being one of the primary factors in career advancement. This study uncovered several factors that foster women's professional advancement, as well as a few that may impede it.
However, care must be taken not to place excessive blame on women's lack of initiative or leadership preferences. If the focus is predominately on what women are doing incorrectly and their lack of motivation, it is easy to overlook systematic errors associated with the fact that unconscious stereotyping processes continue to favour the male leadership candidate, thereby promoting homosocial reproduction. Based on the findings in the analysis chapter, we find more evidence for skewed gender balance in management based on demand rather than supply side explanations.
According to this study's findings, as previously stated, a significant amount depends on individual characteristics like motivation and self-confidence.[15] In addition, the women interviewed believed that femininity may be advantageous trait in the workplace, and that this may be a result of having the correct attitude: not being fearful, but rather courageous and inquisitive. The average age of the respondents was 57, indicating that they may have gained confidence with age. This is consistent with the empirical data, as some of the women interviewed reported gaining confidence and authority later in their careers. Consequently, according to this research, women's professional advancement may be aided by their age.
Interestingly, the participants did not see the masculine management culture to be a barrier, answering one of the research questions that set out to see if gender affect leadership styles. This is contrary to the conclusions of past studies, which emphasised masculine management as one of the greatest obstacles. Similarly, in-group bias was not a significant problem, contrary to what the literature suggested.[16]
The welfare state policies are the apparent relationship between gender equality from the Norwegian female leaders. The women perceived welfare state programmes as facilitating their job advancement, and the importance of government assistance was emphasised.
As this was a qualitative study, it was possible to capture the genuine emotions of the female leaders, whereas in a quantitative study there would have been a risk of overlooking the stories and examples provided by the women during the interviews. In a quantitative study, it is difficult to detect characteristics such as self-confidence and the perception of luck as a negative factor, which were identified in this study. Overall, this study provided a deeper understanding of the prevalent perceptions of barriers and enabling factors in Norwegian women's careers and filled a gap in the existing literature.
It can be argued that women must take a greater share of the responsibility for their career advancement themselves, but if we retain the current organisational composition, exacerbated through unconscious discrimination and gender stereotyping processes, the measures that are meant to directly affect the female worker will partly be in vain. Arrangements must be made for women to have equal opportunities to take up leading positions, before we possibly criticise the women for not wanting to progress. In conclusion, the obstacles and beneficial variables in this study and previous research appear to share similar characteristics. In addition, the alleged effect of the welfare state paradox was refuted, and at least according to this study, a deterrent effect of this nature does not apply to successful women who are motivated to become leaders. This study contributes to a better understanding of the obstacles women face and could be useful to HR managers when developing their talent.
References
[1] Mandel, H. (2012). Winners and losers: The consequences of welfare state policies for gender wage inequality, European Sociological Review, 28(2), pp.241-262. Sanandaji, N. (2016). The Nordic gender equality paradox: How Nordic welfare states are not only empowering women, but also (un)intentionally holding them back (1st ed.) Stockholm: Timbro.
[2] Oakley, J. (2000). Gender-based Barriers to Senior Management Positions: Understanding the Scarcity of Female CEOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(4), pp.321-334. Dezsö, C. L., and Ross, D. G. (2012). Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation. Strategic management journal, 33(9), pp.1072-1089.
[3] ́Ćorić, B. (2018). The glass ceiling puzzle, legal institutions, and the shadow economy. Feminist Economics, 24(4), 56-82. Eagly, A. H. (2007). Female leadership advantage and disadvantage: Resolving the contradictions. Psychology of women quarterly, 31(1), pp.1-12. Schuh, S., Hernandez Bark, C., Van Quaquebeke, A., Hossiep, S., Frieg, N., and Dick, R. (2014). Gender differences in leadership role occupancy: The mediating role of power motivation. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(3), pp.363-379.
[4] Sanandaji (2016).
[5] Mandel, H., and Semyonov, M. (2006). A welfare state paradox: State interventions and women's employment opportunities in 22 countries. American Journal Of Sociology, 111(6), pp.1910-1949.
[6] Mandel and Semyonov (2006).
[7] Halrynjo, S. (2015). Kjønn, topplederkarriere og familie. I Virkninger av kjønnskvotering i norsk næringsliv. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk. pp.97–119.
[8] Storvik, A. E. L. (2002). Topplederrekruttering i staten: betydningen av kvalifikasjoner, nettverk og kjønn. Rapport-Institutt for samfunnsforskning.
[9] Storvik, A. E., & Schøne, P. (2008). In search of the glass ceiling: Gender and recruitment to management in Norway’s state bureaucracy. The British Journal of Sociology, 59(4).
[10] Eagly, A. & Karau, S. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573-598. Wirth, L. (2001). Breaking through the glass ceiling. Women in management.
[11] Kanter, R. M. (2008). Men and women of the corporation: New edition. Basic books.
[12] Powell, G. N., Butterfield, D. A., and Parent, J. D. (2002). Gender and managerial stereotypes: have the times changed?. Journal of management, 28(2), pp.177-193.
[13] Storvik (2002).
[14] Sandberg, S. (2014). Lean in: Kvinner, karriere og kunsten å lede. Oslo: Gyldendal. p.254.
[15] Simmons, D. (2016) Impostor syndrome, a reparative history. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society, 2, pp.106-127. Sandberg (2014).
[16] Powell and Butterfield (2002).
07 November 2022