Hospitality industry is among the fastest growing economic sectors worldwide. In fact, the hospitality industry by itself is recognized as multi-billion dollar and still progressing industry (Flora, 1998). While this industry enables the provision of vast services for the clients, work opportunities are also diverse. Indeed, the provisions of the industry for the customers are as unlimited as its opportunities for employees. People are able to work is different areas of interest while still be in a job within the industry. At present, more workers are employed in service provision than in manufacturing, indicating the continuous growth of the hospitality industry. In UK, hospitality industry is among the major economic forces as its enables growth and creation of job opportunities. According to the British Hospitality Association (2002), the business has employed over 1.8 million workers who were distributed within 300,000 hospitality establishments, totalling to revenue generation of more than £64 billion. Further, the hotel industry is the linchpin of the UK's leisure-related service sector: a big business with enormous growth potential. It also contributes to the country's attractiveness as an international business destination (Lovegrove et al, 1994).
Hospitality management involves a wide range of planning, organizing and controlling human and material resources within the business of providing an avenue of good reception and hospitality to customers (Gailliard, 1998). Along with these functions, the hospitality industry includes workers who are equipped with the necessary skills to man the job – both men and women. They serve as managers in all industries related to the said industry. However, researches and current statistics show that there are fewer women who occupy a senior managerial position as to compare with men. But after a decade, women’s representation in the corporate world increased especially to management opportunities (Women and Men in Britain: Management 2002).
This paper aims to discuss the theoretical explanations for there being fewer women in senior management roles and evaluate to what extent equal opportunities policies can improve the situation. Supporting such objective is the claims of Wirth (2001) that: "The recruitment, full development and retention of qualified women are increasingly recognised as being essential to the economic success and competitiveness of firms. Accordingly, one of the main objectives of equal opportunity programmes is to remove the invisible cloak that often shrouds women and their contributions."
Key Facts
These significant statistical data are published in 2002 by the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) and also available online.
Discrimination and Gender Segregation in the Workplace: Men vs. Women
Discrimination in the organizational setting has been regarded in several studies as its focus of investigation. Majority of the existing literature have studied specific companies and organizations with the existence of prejudice, particularly those instigated by gender biases (Hultin & Szulkin 1999; Martell 1996; Broadbent, Hallock & Hendricks 1998; Larwood & Trentham 1998; Guttierez, Loucopoulus & Payur 2002).
Basing it from the aforementioned report, it could be concluded that managerial occupations remain strongly gender segregated (Women and Men in Britain: Management 2002). Occupational segregation is both horizontal and vertical. Horizontally, women are concentrated in specified and particular careers while they are vertically concentrated in lower-status works in particularly specified occupations. For instance, this practice is present in cases of functional managers such as majority of personnel, training, and industrial relations managers. Generally, it is supposed that occupational segregation is dependent on a particular segment of labour. In hospitality industries, a research conducted by Maxwell (1997) and Woods and Viehland (2000) states that these are not necessarily discrete forms of segregation in practice as shown in their studies of female hotel managers. Rubery and Fagan's (1993) suggestion that occupational segregation is weak in the UK compared to France, Italy and Spain is challenged by Burrell et al. (1997) in their study of women in hotels in these countries. Furthermore, Jordan (1997) argues that tourism organizations reproduce and rationalize job segregation in relation to the culture of tourism, where informal recruitment systems serve to reproduce existing organization structures.
Relating on the study of Hultin and Szulkin (1999) gender discrimination is classified into three categories. These categories includes allocative, evaluative, and within-job discrimination. The first kind of discrimination refers to women facing restricted admission to attractive ranks inside a work organization either at the moment of entry or in terms of career progression within the company. On the other hand, evaluative discrimination subsists when jobs executed mostly by women are remunerated less than those jobs of equivalent value that are carried out largely by men. The worth of a job is weighed up by dissimilar characteristics of the work substance that are of significance in the wage-setting procedure, such as demands for credentials and dependability, but there have constantly been considerable and procedural difficulties inherent in the appraisal process. Moreover, within-job discrimination exists to the degree that women are compensated in a lesser amount than men in a given job. This type of prejudice is geared toward individuals and breeds gender gaps inside occupations in a specified organization. The majority of research performed in this field indicates to the fact that within-job discrimination is of partial significance when it comes to amplification of disparities between women and men. A well-established research result is that the gender gap reduces as work-related dissimilarities become finer. These conclusions are not unanticipated, nevertheless, since prejudice within jobs is against the law in most industrialized countries.
Some feminist analysts identified a classification present in some types of work depending on the gender and power of the employees who do the job. They refer it as a social construction in feminism (Phillips & Taylor 1980). This means that there is an actual presence of subconscious discrimination in the working environment of women. From the period of training up to the regularization within the company and the employer, skilled works are mostly expected among male. This assumption was predominantly due to the records of male apprenticeships that involves a significant duration of years. Aside from this, training and on-the-job experience are also included. Meanwhile, unskilled works are preconceived to exist in a typical woman employee. These are works that no longer need to be studied but they naturally occur and most women know how to do (such as cleaning, doing the laundry, and cooking).
Men earn more than women, because every labour market in the EU is gender segregated (Almond and Rubery, 1998). There is a common notion from the nature and characteristics of the existing labour supplies and conditions that provide men and women to be assigned in totally diverse jobs. Generally, women are persuaded to work in part-time jobs due to some other responsibilities such as domestic and the like (Hunter et al. 1993). Hakim (1995) asserts that part-time works are expected to be chosen voluntarily by a significant number of women. This is another theory on why women held senior managerial position in an organisation. However, some experts challenge and argue Hakim’s view. Women’s choice, according to them is constrained by the lack of alternatives and weak bargaining position because they have to accommodate domestic responsibility (Ginn et al. 1996).
Hakim’s belief is considered as one of the main reasons on why few women are actively engaged in the higher stages of management. But the circumstances provided by the traditional roles of women that are preexisting in the society also support the extreme opposite side. In hospitality management, women are relatively better in terms of management regardless of the roles they play particularly in the personnel and employee relations.
Woman as Manager: on Various Perspectives
In an article written in The Independent (2003) states that,
“Chief executives and business leaders have been urged to change their attitude to leadership after a study showed that women were more effective managers. Professor Beverley Alimo-Metcalfe, from the University of Leeds, said executives should "get real" after the study of 2,000 health service and local authority staff, presented to the British Psychological Society, showed women were better at inspiring their staff and creating a culture of development. Men hold nine out of 10 top business jobs.”
However, this claim is highly subjected to further debates and studies as to the reason that it is relative in nature of the opportunity.
Management styles may be gendered. Rutherford's (2001) study of male and female managers in an airline confirms differences in their approach to management. The research found out that men tend to follow a more command and control style with a distancing of personal self, while women are more communicative and caring, with more emphasis on people skills such as listening rather than mere performance of the task. Women treated more leniently than men, raising the possibility of discrimination (Rollinson et al. 1996). Because of the traditional characteristics of woman, their attributes as leaders are softer than men. Increasing reliance on attitudinal characteristics intensify the problem of management because attitude, behaviour and personality tend to interact with gender and racial stereotypes and lead to discrimination in selection. Emotional labour is not gender neutral as work containing significant amounts is dominated by women (Taylor & Tyler 2000). For example, working as cabin crew is defined as women's work by employers, customers and employees.
Physically speaking, the extent of limitation of women in the workplace is manifested in their stress coping mechanisms. Workers can develop coping mechanisms where stress is within their personal capacity to manage. Otherwise prolonged job stress can lead to burn-out or breakdown, which is more likely to affect women than men (Buick and Thomas, 2001). Again, with the biological foundation and nature of women, this limits their capacity to climb a higher position.
Regardless of any perspectives, women are certainly capable of leading and managing an organisation. However, there are unavoidable considerations to be taken at hand such as social, emotional, and physical factors.
Equal Opportunity Policies for Women: the Role of HRM
Equal opportunities policies are voluntary, and depend on a business case argument rather than being based on a social case. Business arguments are conditional (Dickens 1994), resulting in selective and partial action in which employers prioritize gender over race. Putting equal opportunities policies into practice is impeded by men's resistance to sex equality (Wajcman 2000). There are circumstances when women can break through the 'glass ceiling' and achieve senior management positions (Maxwell 1997; Knutson & Schmidgall 1999). An organization-based approach is no use to women in highly feminized employment who remain stuck to a 'sticky floor' because it does not lead to “a transformation in access to power and the nature of it” (Dickens 1994, p.15). Hence the economic benefits of equal opportunities need to be articulated at a level beyond the organization, but may not produce desirable outcomes.
With such dilemma, the role of HRM emerges as the tool for the development of policies and practices that will not perpetuate rather challenge gender inequality into transformation. For instance, in terms of securing employee commitment, assumptions about women being less committed than men will affect the shape of the organisation, and determine which jobs are full-time or part-time. The role of HRM in the emergence of women managers is supported by important factors such as abilities, skills, and management functions present within a candidate for the position.
Considering the reasons on why few women occupy senior managerial positions, it is good to study the root of the matter. Delving into an array of researches conducted to investigate on this condition is a great help to identify such causes. All in all, there are less numbers of women managers in U.K because of some factors involve in the process. May it be traditional, historical, physical, emotional, and other elements involved in selection, the theoretical frameworks underlying the subject is dependent on the responsibility of every participant. The recognizable efforts of women employee to reach the position that they deserve must be acknowledge by employers. Meanwhile, the role of labour policies imposed by the government or entitled authorities is also considered to be factors to materialize the objective. Existing laws on the further promotion and acceptance of women in the corporate world should also be reinforced. Thus, the treatment on men workers will definitely be the same to the women.
References
Almond, P & Rubery, J 1998, 'The gender impact of recent European trends in wage determination', Work, Employment and Society, vol. 12, no. 4, 675-93.
British Hospitality Association 2002, British Hospitality Association’s Chief Executive Industry Review, viewed 16 January 2006,.
Broadbent, E, Hallock, K, Hendricks, W 1998, ‘Discrimination by Gender and Disability Status: Do Worker Perceptions Match Statistical Measures?’, Southern Economic Journal, vol. 65, no. 2, 9-13)
Buick, I & Thomas, M 2001, 'Why do middle managers in hotels burn out?', International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, vol. 13, no. 6, 304-9.
Burrell, J, Manfredi, S, Rollin, H, Price, L & Stead, L 1997, 'Equal opportunities for women employees in the hospitality industry: a comparison between France, Italy, Spain and the UK', International Journal of Hospitality Management, vol. 16, no. 2, 161-79.
Ginn, J, Arber, S, Brannen, J, Dale, A, Dex, S, Elias, P, Moss, P, Pahl, J, Roberts, C & Rubery, J 1996, 'Feminist fallacies: a reply to Hakim on women's employment', British Journal of Sociology, vol. 47, no. 1, 167-73.
Gutierrez, C, Loucopoulos, C, & Payur, R 2002, ‘Insights into Gender Discrimination in Employment Compensation through the Use of Classification Models’, Journal of Managerial Issues, vol.14, no. 3, 14-18.
Hakim, C 1995, 'Five feminist myths about women's employment', British Journal of Sociology, vol. 46, no. 3, 429-55.
Hultin, M & Szulkin, R 1999, ‘Wages and Unequal Access to Organizational Power: An Empirical Test of Gender Discrimination’, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 4, no. 3, 8.
Hunter, L, McGregor, A, MacInnes, J & Sproull, A 1993, 'the "flexible firm": strategy and segmentation', British Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 31, no. 3, 383-407.
Jordan, F 1997, 'An occupational hazard? Sex segregation in tourism employment', Tourism Management, vol.18, no. 8, 525-34.
Knutson, BJ & Schmidgall, RS 1999, 'Dimensions of the glass ceiling in the hospitality industry', Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, vol. 40, no. 6, 64-75.
Larwood, L & Trentham, S 1998, ‘Gender Discrimination and the Workplace: An Examination of Rational Bias Theory’, Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, vol. 38, nos. 1-2.
Lovegrove, NC and Lewis, WW 1998, Why is labor productivity in the United Kingdom so low?, The McKinsey Quarterly, No. 4.
Martell, R 1996, ‘What Mediates Gender Bias in Work Behavior Ratings?’, Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, vol. 35, nos. 3-4.
Maxwell, GA 1997, 'Hotel general management: views from above the glass ceiling', International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, vol. 9, nos. 5/6, 230-5.
Phillips, A & Taylor, B 1980, 'Sex and Skill', Feminist Review, vol. 6, no. 7, 13-21.
Rollinson, D, Hook, C, Foot, M & Handley, J 1996, 'Supervisor and manager styles in handling discipline and grievance, part 2: approaches to handling discipline and grievance', Personnel Review, vol. 25, no. 4, 38-55.
Rubery, J & Fagan, C 1993, 'Occupational segregation of women and men in the European community', supplement to Social Europe, vol. 3/93, 95-105.
Rutherford, S 2001, 'Any difference? An analysis of gender and divisional management styles in a large airline', Gender, Work and Organization, vol. 8, no. 3, 326-45.
Taylor, S & Tyler, M 2000, 'Emotional labour and sexual difference in the airline industry', Work, Employment and Society, vol. 14, no. 1, 77-95.
The Independent, 2003 January 9, ‘Women are better managers, bosses told’, London, England.
Women and Men in Britain: Management 2002, Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) Website, United Kingdom, viewed 16 January 2006,
Woods, RH & Viehland, D 2000, 'Women in hotel management: gradual progress, uncertain prospects', Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, vol. 41, no. 5, 51-4.
Hospitality management involves a wide range of planning, organizing and controlling human and material resources within the business of providing an avenue of good reception and hospitality to customers (Gailliard, 1998). Along with these functions, the hospitality industry includes workers who are equipped with the necessary skills to man the job – both men and women. They serve as managers in all industries related to the said industry. However, researches and current statistics show that there are fewer women who occupy a senior managerial position as to compare with men. But after a decade, women’s representation in the corporate world increased especially to management opportunities (Women and Men in Britain: Management 2002).
This paper aims to discuss the theoretical explanations for there being fewer women in senior management roles and evaluate to what extent equal opportunities policies can improve the situation. Supporting such objective is the claims of Wirth (2001) that: "The recruitment, full development and retention of qualified women are increasingly recognised as being essential to the economic success and competitiveness of firms. Accordingly, one of the main objectives of equal opportunity programmes is to remove the invisible cloak that often shrouds women and their contributions."
Key Facts
These significant statistical data are published in 2002 by the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) and also available online.
- In Spring 2001, Britain has a total of more that 2.6 million men and 1.1 million women composed the managerial and senior officer positions.
- The 14% of the total employment in such group is divided into 18% men and 9% women.
- The total number of managers and administrators increased by 20% within the periods of Spring 1991 and Spring 2001.
- Thirty percent of women are accounted to occupy a manager’s position in 2001.
- Men’s proportion in the eleven managerial sub-groups is higher than women (nine out of eleven in favor of men).
Discrimination and Gender Segregation in the Workplace: Men vs. Women
Discrimination in the organizational setting has been regarded in several studies as its focus of investigation. Majority of the existing literature have studied specific companies and organizations with the existence of prejudice, particularly those instigated by gender biases (Hultin & Szulkin 1999; Martell 1996; Broadbent, Hallock & Hendricks 1998; Larwood & Trentham 1998; Guttierez, Loucopoulus & Payur 2002).
Basing it from the aforementioned report, it could be concluded that managerial occupations remain strongly gender segregated (Women and Men in Britain: Management 2002). Occupational segregation is both horizontal and vertical. Horizontally, women are concentrated in specified and particular careers while they are vertically concentrated in lower-status works in particularly specified occupations. For instance, this practice is present in cases of functional managers such as majority of personnel, training, and industrial relations managers. Generally, it is supposed that occupational segregation is dependent on a particular segment of labour. In hospitality industries, a research conducted by Maxwell (1997) and Woods and Viehland (2000) states that these are not necessarily discrete forms of segregation in practice as shown in their studies of female hotel managers. Rubery and Fagan's (1993) suggestion that occupational segregation is weak in the UK compared to France, Italy and Spain is challenged by Burrell et al. (1997) in their study of women in hotels in these countries. Furthermore, Jordan (1997) argues that tourism organizations reproduce and rationalize job segregation in relation to the culture of tourism, where informal recruitment systems serve to reproduce existing organization structures.
Relating on the study of Hultin and Szulkin (1999) gender discrimination is classified into three categories. These categories includes allocative, evaluative, and within-job discrimination. The first kind of discrimination refers to women facing restricted admission to attractive ranks inside a work organization either at the moment of entry or in terms of career progression within the company. On the other hand, evaluative discrimination subsists when jobs executed mostly by women are remunerated less than those jobs of equivalent value that are carried out largely by men. The worth of a job is weighed up by dissimilar characteristics of the work substance that are of significance in the wage-setting procedure, such as demands for credentials and dependability, but there have constantly been considerable and procedural difficulties inherent in the appraisal process. Moreover, within-job discrimination exists to the degree that women are compensated in a lesser amount than men in a given job. This type of prejudice is geared toward individuals and breeds gender gaps inside occupations in a specified organization. The majority of research performed in this field indicates to the fact that within-job discrimination is of partial significance when it comes to amplification of disparities between women and men. A well-established research result is that the gender gap reduces as work-related dissimilarities become finer. These conclusions are not unanticipated, nevertheless, since prejudice within jobs is against the law in most industrialized countries.
Some feminist analysts identified a classification present in some types of work depending on the gender and power of the employees who do the job. They refer it as a social construction in feminism (Phillips & Taylor 1980). This means that there is an actual presence of subconscious discrimination in the working environment of women. From the period of training up to the regularization within the company and the employer, skilled works are mostly expected among male. This assumption was predominantly due to the records of male apprenticeships that involves a significant duration of years. Aside from this, training and on-the-job experience are also included. Meanwhile, unskilled works are preconceived to exist in a typical woman employee. These are works that no longer need to be studied but they naturally occur and most women know how to do (such as cleaning, doing the laundry, and cooking).
Men earn more than women, because every labour market in the EU is gender segregated (Almond and Rubery, 1998). There is a common notion from the nature and characteristics of the existing labour supplies and conditions that provide men and women to be assigned in totally diverse jobs. Generally, women are persuaded to work in part-time jobs due to some other responsibilities such as domestic and the like (Hunter et al. 1993). Hakim (1995) asserts that part-time works are expected to be chosen voluntarily by a significant number of women. This is another theory on why women held senior managerial position in an organisation. However, some experts challenge and argue Hakim’s view. Women’s choice, according to them is constrained by the lack of alternatives and weak bargaining position because they have to accommodate domestic responsibility (Ginn et al. 1996).
Hakim’s belief is considered as one of the main reasons on why few women are actively engaged in the higher stages of management. But the circumstances provided by the traditional roles of women that are preexisting in the society also support the extreme opposite side. In hospitality management, women are relatively better in terms of management regardless of the roles they play particularly in the personnel and employee relations.
Woman as Manager: on Various Perspectives
In an article written in The Independent (2003) states that,
“Chief executives and business leaders have been urged to change their attitude to leadership after a study showed that women were more effective managers. Professor Beverley Alimo-Metcalfe, from the University of Leeds, said executives should "get real" after the study of 2,000 health service and local authority staff, presented to the British Psychological Society, showed women were better at inspiring their staff and creating a culture of development. Men hold nine out of 10 top business jobs.”
However, this claim is highly subjected to further debates and studies as to the reason that it is relative in nature of the opportunity.
Management styles may be gendered. Rutherford's (2001) study of male and female managers in an airline confirms differences in their approach to management. The research found out that men tend to follow a more command and control style with a distancing of personal self, while women are more communicative and caring, with more emphasis on people skills such as listening rather than mere performance of the task. Women treated more leniently than men, raising the possibility of discrimination (Rollinson et al. 1996). Because of the traditional characteristics of woman, their attributes as leaders are softer than men. Increasing reliance on attitudinal characteristics intensify the problem of management because attitude, behaviour and personality tend to interact with gender and racial stereotypes and lead to discrimination in selection. Emotional labour is not gender neutral as work containing significant amounts is dominated by women (Taylor & Tyler 2000). For example, working as cabin crew is defined as women's work by employers, customers and employees.
Physically speaking, the extent of limitation of women in the workplace is manifested in their stress coping mechanisms. Workers can develop coping mechanisms where stress is within their personal capacity to manage. Otherwise prolonged job stress can lead to burn-out or breakdown, which is more likely to affect women than men (Buick and Thomas, 2001). Again, with the biological foundation and nature of women, this limits their capacity to climb a higher position.
Regardless of any perspectives, women are certainly capable of leading and managing an organisation. However, there are unavoidable considerations to be taken at hand such as social, emotional, and physical factors.
Equal Opportunity Policies for Women: the Role of HRM
Equal opportunities policies are voluntary, and depend on a business case argument rather than being based on a social case. Business arguments are conditional (Dickens 1994), resulting in selective and partial action in which employers prioritize gender over race. Putting equal opportunities policies into practice is impeded by men's resistance to sex equality (Wajcman 2000). There are circumstances when women can break through the 'glass ceiling' and achieve senior management positions (Maxwell 1997; Knutson & Schmidgall 1999). An organization-based approach is no use to women in highly feminized employment who remain stuck to a 'sticky floor' because it does not lead to “a transformation in access to power and the nature of it” (Dickens 1994, p.15). Hence the economic benefits of equal opportunities need to be articulated at a level beyond the organization, but may not produce desirable outcomes.
With such dilemma, the role of HRM emerges as the tool for the development of policies and practices that will not perpetuate rather challenge gender inequality into transformation. For instance, in terms of securing employee commitment, assumptions about women being less committed than men will affect the shape of the organisation, and determine which jobs are full-time or part-time. The role of HRM in the emergence of women managers is supported by important factors such as abilities, skills, and management functions present within a candidate for the position.
Considering the reasons on why few women occupy senior managerial positions, it is good to study the root of the matter. Delving into an array of researches conducted to investigate on this condition is a great help to identify such causes. All in all, there are less numbers of women managers in U.K because of some factors involve in the process. May it be traditional, historical, physical, emotional, and other elements involved in selection, the theoretical frameworks underlying the subject is dependent on the responsibility of every participant. The recognizable efforts of women employee to reach the position that they deserve must be acknowledge by employers. Meanwhile, the role of labour policies imposed by the government or entitled authorities is also considered to be factors to materialize the objective. Existing laws on the further promotion and acceptance of women in the corporate world should also be reinforced. Thus, the treatment on men workers will definitely be the same to the women.
References
Almond, P & Rubery, J 1998, 'The gender impact of recent European trends in wage determination', Work, Employment and Society, vol. 12, no. 4, 675-93.
British Hospitality Association 2002, British Hospitality Association’s Chief Executive Industry Review, viewed 16 January 2006,
No comments:
Post a Comment