Raewyn Connell
University of Sydney
Essays on Equity, Gender, and Diversity
Raewyn Connell is Connell is university professor at the University of Sydney. Formerly, Formerly, she was professor of education at the University of Sydney and professor of sociology at the University of California, Santa Cruz and at Macquarie University. A researcher on gender, masculinities, education, social class, intellectuals, and social theory, she is the author of Gender (2002 (2002), ), The Men and the Boys (2000 (2000), ), Masculinities (1995 (1995), ), Schools and Social Justice (1993 (1993), ), Gender and Power (1987 (1987),), and other books.
E-mail: r.con
[email protected] [email protected]..
Glass Ceilings or Gendered Institutions? Mapping the Gender Regimes of Public Sector Worksites
Te “glass ceiling” model of gender equity has its weaknesses. Terefore, a multiple-dimensions approach to gender is proposed. Tis essay reports on a field study of organizational gender arrangements in 10 public sector worksites in New South Wales, Wales, Australia. Despite equal opportunity measures, gender divisions of labor persist in several forms. Processes that sustain and undermine these divisions are identified. Authority patterns are being reconfigured, with restructuring and rising numbers of women in management resulting in local turbulence in gender relations. Emotions of gender transition are identified, with considerable diversity in reactions among men. An emerging pattern, the “depolarized workplace,” is described. A cultural trend toward workplace gender neutrality is observable. Proposals are made for better practice in gender equity work, including including richer ways for public organizations to study their own gender regimes. regimes.
G
ender equality is now a widely accepted goal in public administration. In pursuing this goal, an important requirement is to understand the gender arrangements of public sector organizations. We need an approach that is i nformed by modern research on gender and helpful for policy and practice. In this article, I propose such an approach, illustrated by a field study of public sector agencies.
antidiscrimination measures. One of the main goals of Western W estern feminism has been to open the top levels levels of public administration and politics to women, and progress on this count has become the most visible symbol of gender reform across society society.. Change has certainly occurred, but the results have been modest. A decade ago, Hale (1996) lamented lamented the slow progress toward equality in the United States, and the problem was common across the developed countries (Stetson (Stetson and Mazur 1995) 1995 )— with the notable exception of Scandinavia (Borchorst (Borchorst and Siim 2002) 2002 )—across Latin America (V (Valdés and Gomáriz 1995), 1995), and elsewhere. Change in the last decade has been incremental and uneven at best despite an international trend toward the “mainstreaming” of gender g ender equality, whereby the issue is built into all policies and administrative procedures rather than focused in a special-purpose program (Mackay (Mackay and Bilton 2000). Around the world and in most spheres of public sector activity, women remain seriously underrepresented in positions of political and administrative authority (for a small sample of the evidence, see Borrelli 2002 on the U.S. cabinet; Gierycz 1999 on UN organizations; InterParliamentary Union 2006 on world legislatures; Kerr,, Miller, and Reid 2002 on U.S. state bureaucraKerr cies; and Meier and Wilkins 2002 on a U.S. state school system).
Te principle of equal rights for women and men is now embedded in international law (e.g., in the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women) and in common administrative practices, such as equal opportunity procedures in promotion and appointment. Tis principle was articulated and these practices adopted to transform an old pattern of inequality. As Stivers (2002) has shown in classic style, the U.S. administrative state, though using women women’’s labor and shaped by women’’s reform politics, historically excluded women excluded women from authority. Te same has been true in other countries and in global arenas.
Duerst-Lahti and Kelly (1995) rightly observe that the way we think about gender is a key to the way way we act on gender reform. Te metaphors of “barrier “barrier,” ,” “glass ceiling,” and “glass wall” arise from a particular way of thinking about gender inequality in the public realm. Guy (1992), (1992) , editing a survey of women and men in U.S. state government administration, nicely summarizes this focus: Te question driving her book is whether structural barriers in the organizations— organizations—as opposed to societal or individual factors— factors—have prevented women advancing into high-level positions.
Since the 1970s, the “glass ceiling” has been persistently challenged by a range of equal opportunity and
Te key points in the glass ceiling approach are as follows: (1) Tere has been discrimination against Glass Ceilings or Gendered Institutions?
837
women, proved by the statistics of unequal access to states and the gender system. A large body of research the top; this reflects traditional stereotypes and prejushows how state agencies and policies regulate the dices against women in authority. (2) Tis discrimina- lives of women, both in the family and in the public tion is irrational—it leads to an underuse of women’s realm (Borchorst 1999; Mikanagi 2000), and this talent and conflicts with rational administration. (3) It research has widened to include the gendered lives can be overcome by organizational measures that of men (Scourfield and Drakeford 2002). Concern remove the barriers to women’s advancement, such as with the state as a gendered actor has emerged across eliminating prejudice and enforcing equal employdiverse policy fields from international relations ment opportunity rules in promotion. (Zalewski and Parpart 1998) to social welfare (O’Connor, Orloff, and Shaver 1999). Links between Tis critique fits well with other reform movements gender and public administration, far from revealing that seek to increase the efficiency of the public sector. irrational bias, seem to be part of the established Accordingly, equal employment opportunity has been logic of modern state activity (Connell 1990). an accepted part of the New Public Administration for some time. Te great virtue of this approach is that Tese debates about the public sector draw on an it gives public organizations a way of studying themimportant development in organization studies selves and monitoring progress. Collecting equal (Martin and Collinson 2002). In the approach opportunity statistics, especially on the percentages of pioneered by Acker (1990) and Burton (1987), women in senior positions, is now routine, and the organizations themselves—not just the people within quality of these data has been rising. them—are seen as the bearers of gender. Specifically, organizations create and reproduce gender divisions of But is this really an adequate way of understanding labor, cultural definitions of masculinity and femininthe problem? On two important counts, it is not. ity, and ways of articulating men’s and women’s inter According to the glass ceiling approach, gender is ests (Grant and ancred 1992). Organizational understood as two fixed categories of persons—men arrangements often sustain gendered occupational and women—defined by biology. Te statistical marcultures, from the masculinity of the printing worker gin of difference between these two categories is the and the manager (Cockburn 1983; Wajcman 1999) measure of any gender problem. It is now recognized to the femininity of the secretary or “office lady” in gender research that this categorical approach to (Ogasawara 1998; Pringle 1988). Organizational gender is profoundly inadequate. Gender is a dynamic gender arrangements are active, not passive. As system, not a fixed dichotomy; the categories themGherardi and Poggio (2001) document, women’s selves are not simple or stable (contrary to common entry into masculine domains triggers complex adjustsense); and many gender issues concern patterns of ments in which symbolic gender dichotomy may be interaction and relationship, preserved while other changes are having little to do with differIt is increasingly recognized that conceded. ences in personal characteristics. gender patterns affect relations It is increasingly recognized that Tough the pioneering studies of among men and among gender patterns affect relations organizational gender mainly women, as well as relations among men and among women, concerned the corporate world, between them. as well as relations between them comparable findings have ( Alsop, Fitzsimons, and Lennon emerged from the public sector. 2002; Connell 2002; Lorber 1994 ). Newman (1995) shows with particular clarity how groups of public sector agencies have different gender Te need to go beyond the categorical approach is divisions of labor and different promotion possibilities illustrated by the case of sexual harassment, a chronic for women. Barrett (1996), in a close-focus study of problem in public sector organizations, as well as in the U.S. Navy, shows how different versions of mascuthe private sector. Te gender issue here is no t just linity are defined in three different sectors of that that women experience a much higher level of harassorganization. Whitehead and Moodley (1999) document than men, although this is true (Newman, ment diverse gender patterns in public sector manage Jackson, and Baker 2003). It is also about which ment in the United Kingdom, and Jensen (1998) women are harassed and by whom; about the power traces the complex gender dynamics in public sector relations that are brought into play in the act of organizations’ adjustments to change. harassing; about the objectification of women’s bodies; and about the impact on women’s identities and their As these examples from the growing literature show, confidence in organizational settings. there is much diversity and sometimes internal contradiction in the gender patterns of public sector workBy the glass ceiling approach, administration is places. Yet public policy is usually couched in thought to be, in principle, independent of gender. standardized terms and expected to apply across a But there are underlying connections between modern whole organization, even a whole sector. Tis is 838 Public Administration Review • November | December 2006
specifically the case for most gender equity policies (i.e., state policies that are explicitly concerned with justice in the gender arrangements of government and society). How can we understand the gender complexities of public sector organizations in a way that is helpful for gender equity policy and practice? In this article, I report on a research project designed around this question. It is an empirical inquiry built on contemporary gender theory, with practical purposes. One of its goals is to develop a method by which public administrators can move beyond the glass ceiling framework, study their own organizations in new ways, and think more effectively about the processes that produce gender equity outcomes. Te basis of this study is the relational approach to gender mentioned previously. Gender is, above all, a pattern of social relations in which the positions of women and men are defined, the cultural meanings of being a man and a woman are negotiated, and their trajectories through life are mapped out. Gender relations are found in all spheres of life, including organizations. Tere is no aspect of gender relations that is the foundation of all the others; rather, gender relations are always multidimensional (Connell 1987; Walby 1990). Te overall pattern of gender relations within an organization may be called its gender regime. Tis continuing pattern provides the context for particular events, relationships, and individual practices. A local gender regime may reproduce, but in specific ways may also depart from, the wider gender order (i.e., the whole societal pattern of gender relations). A gender regime involves all the dimensions of gender relations. In the model used here (Connell 2002, 53–68), four dimensions are distinguished: Gender division of labor—the way in which production and consumption are arranged along gender lines, including the gendering of occupations and the division between paid work and domestic labor ● Gender relations of power—the way in which control, authority, and force are exercised along gender lines, including organizational hierarchy, legal power, and collective and individual violence ● Emotion and human relations—the way in which attachment and antagonism among people and groups are organized along gender lines, including feelings of solidarity, prejudice and disdain, and sexual attraction and repulsion ● Gender culture and symbolism—the way in which gender identities are defined in culture, the language and symbols of gender difference, and the prevailing beliefs and attitudes about gender ●
Tis fourfold model provides a template for describing any organization’s gender regime, as well as a frame work for data collection in interviews and observation.
The Study: Background and Method Te research reported here was conducted in New South Wales, Australia. Australia is a federal liberal-democratic state with a constitutional structure partly based on that of the United States, though with a parliamentary government based on the British model. At the time of the study, the state government of New South Wales was controlled by the Australian Labor Party, a social-democratic party not unlike the British Labour Party. Te historical basis of public administration in the state is the classic bureaucracy, organized along departmental lines, emphasizing seniority, and dominated by men. Several waves of reform in recent decades have changed this structure, including the partial corporatization of public services, the introduction of equal employment opportunity, and the creation of a Senior Executive Service. Gender equity has been a prominent component of Australian public sector reform, with women’s agencies gaining unusual influence by international standards (Eisenstein 1996). Nevertheless, women continue to be underrepresented in Parliament, public bodies, and the Senior Executive Service. Tis is the issue that triggered our research. Te Gender Equity in Public Institutions research program was a joint university–government initiative managed by a steering committee with representatives from all participating agencies, plus central agencies concerned with gender equity issues. Te program involved several projects, including a study of sector wide gender statistics, a study of gender dynamics in policy making, and a study of gender equity “successes.” Te project that is the basis for this article explored the gender regimes of a set of worksites using a combination of statistical, observational, and interview data. Te research strategy here was to “go deep” in specific sites. en sites were studied, two in each of the five agencies participating in the study. Te agencies included central and line agencies, covered a variety of industries and governmental functions, included both departmental and corporate constitutions, and varied markedly in size. In each agency, two contrasting sites were chosen: one concerned with central administrative or policy-making processes, the other more directly concerned with the operations and delivery of the agency’s services on the ground. Te sites differed in internal organization and scale. Some were fairly homogeneous (in terms of the work performed), whereas others were internally diversified. Some had strongly marked and long-established boundaries between subunits; others had shifting boundaries and flexible groupings of staff. Glass Ceilings or Gendered Institutions?
839
Te fieldwork was done over an 18-month period of confidentiality, which we must respect, yet an adfrom May 2001 to October 2002. Four interviewers equate qualitative interpretation requires considerable conducted the fieldwork—two women and two men. factual detail. For this reason, the individual site case A focused interview technique was used. Interviewers studies cannot be published. In this article, the identifollowed a set of topics that had been agreed upon by fying details are omitted, and the sites are referred to the project’s “Working Party” (a subset of the steering simply as Site 1, Site 7, and so on. We present the committee that included a representative from material according to the four dimensions of gender each agency studied). Most interviews lasted 40 to rather than case by case. Nevertheless, care has been 80 minutes. With the agreement of the respondents, taken that the interpretations offered are based on the interviews were tape-recorded for transcription. At conclusions of the detailed site reports. two sites, a researcher also spent approximately three weeks as a participant-observer. Tis role involved Gender Division of Labor unstructured time at the worksite, plus attendance at a Te 10 sites provide abundant evidence of a shift in variety of meetings involving the staff of the site. Te the New South Wales public sector toward a reduction fieldworker had a broad mission to observe the labor in the gender division of labor. Several of the sites process, interactions, and transactions between the site were in industries in which there has historically been and other public sector units. a stark gender division of labor. In all these cases, both men and women commented on the blurring of tradi A total of 107 interviews were completed and trantional divisions. Asked whether work in a particular scribed, yielding 1,720 single-spaced pages of tranarea was currently divided by gender, a respondent script, which are the main data source for this article. from Site 1 remarked, “No I don’t think it is. I think As the gender balance in small worksites varies widely, we might be beyond it.” no attempt was made to interview equal numbers of women and men at each site, but some men and some Tat the public sector is getting “beyond” old-style women were interviewed at each site. Overall, a total of gender divisions is a widespread belief, as well as a 58 women and 49 men were interviewed, not far from clear-cut management intention. “Te public service the gender ratio in the New South Wales public sector almost bends over backwards in relation to gender as a whole. Respondents were sought from all levels equity,” said a respondent from Site 7, and this effort and all major occupational groups at each worksite. was visible in all the participating agencies. Gender equity—conceived as degendering, the opening of all Te taped interviews were transcribed by a confidenforms of work to both women and men—undoubttial typist experienced in this kind of research work. edly holds sway as a principle. Te old “breadwinner” Each interview was then summarized and indexed, ideology, which for more than a century had justified following an indexing plan based on the interview the preference for men over women in public sector schedule and the conceptual model of gender. Te employment, was mostly absent from our interviews. same indexing plan was applied to the field notes from Nevertheless, a gender division of labor was visible in the participant observation. all 10 research sites. It took several forms. For each of the 10 sites, a full-scale case study of the gender regime was written, summarizing and illustrating the evidence provided by our respondents. Te site reports followed a standard pattern, which was linked to the indexing plan. Te draft site reports were discussed with representatives of the agencies concerned to correct errors of fact and interpretation and then circulated to all members of the Working Party and examined in workshops. During these meetings, comparisons across sites began to emerge. Te common framework for the site case studies enabled a systematic comparison to be undertaken. Tis was written up in a general report of the project, which again was scrutinized in workshops by the Working Party before being adopted by the steering committee. Tis general report forms the basis of the present article. Reporting a study of this kind presents a dilemma over disclosure: Te interviews began with a promise 840 Public Administration Review • November | December 2006
Forms of Gender Division of Labor
First, some sites had a marked occupational gender division of labor. For some, the work done at the site centrally involved a trade or a profession that historically had been “men’s work” or “women’s work” and was still mostly performed by either men or women. Tree of the sites showed this pattern strongly, with substantial parts of the local workforce in strongly gendered occupations. All three were operating sites rather than central sites. Tere is little reason to think these gender divisions are being reduced, as recruitment in these occupations continues to be over whelmingly one gender. Second, there were sites with a residual gender division of labor in which elements of occupational or other divisions persisted on a small scale. For instance, some sites had a librarian or two, who were women; a driver or two, who were men; and some building caretakers, who were almost all men. Te most widespread such pattern was the residue of a classic feminized job, the
secretary (Pringle 1988). Tis no longer exists as an occupational category in the New South Wales public sector. Nevertheless, at a number of our sites, there were offi cers whose work mainly consisted of secretarial functions, combining keyboard work, reception, telephone answering, filing, and general office services. In virtually every case, these employees were women.
but the lifting machine was chosen and mainly operated by a man. Sustaining the Gender Division of Labor
Te case studies identified a number of processes that tend to sustain the gender division of labor. Some involve the symbolism or ideology of gender. For instance, masculinity is associated with jobs that are defined as dirty, physically laborious, or involving heavy machinery or high technology. Femininity is associated with jobs that are defined as repetitive and undemanding and with jobs involving children or care work.
Tird, there were persistent details in the daily life of the worksites that amounted to a micro gender division of labor. At Site 4, we interviewed an offi cer who had responsibility related to the motor industry, and we also interviewed a colleague, in the same unit and with Other processes involve the nature of the labor process exactly the same kind of appointment, who had resitself, especially the way it is carved up into “jobs.” ponsibility related to the beauty industry. Te former Distinctions between jobs involving “inside” and was a man, the latter a woman. At Site 9, there was a “outside” work (Site 2), between jobs dealing with broad gender balance, yet the professional officers young children and jobs dealing with adolescents dealing with human resources and community affairs and adults (Site 4), between jobs involving routine were mainly women, whereas the professional officers data entry and jobs involving varied problem solving dealing with economic issues were mainly men. Such (Site 6), are still to a large extent distinctions between microdivisions of labor may arise episodically. At Site women’s work and men’s work. 9, when a problem dealing with computer services came up, it was a group of men who dealt with it. Te design of the labor process may also tend to When a social event came to be held—a fund-raiser reproduce gender patterns. For instance, managerial for charity—it was two women who organized it. work in a central agency involves short deadlines, long hours, and frequent travel (Site 10). Tis would Fourth, there were emergent gender divisions of labor. be difficult, not for women as such but for people New technologies and labor processes can be the with major child care responsibilities— which, in occasion for the creation of new gender divisions of practice, mainly means married women in the early labor. Tis is particularly important to recognize because of the widespread belief that gender inequality is stages of their careers. On the other hand, work with strictly limited hours, located in a suburban site, and simply a hangover from tradition. However, gender requiring no preparation would exactly suit those relations are dynamic (Brewis 1999; Gherardi and with major child care responsibilities. So it is not Poggio 2001); new divisions, accommodations, and surprising that at Site 6, these were understood as interpretations are constantly being produced. jobs for mothers. At several sites, it was clear that information technolReducing the Gender Division of Labor ogy was predominantly a male-dominated field, at least in computer hardware installation and repair and Te case studies also revealed processes that tend to reduce the gender division of labor. Te first is delibspecialized software work. Where routine data entry erate recruitment across an existing gender division. was specialized, however, that was predominantly For instance, at Site 8, an occupation that was tradi women’s work. Te growth of human resources as a tionally a male-dominated field was being transformed specialty in management, with an emphasis on psyin a number of ways, one of which was the purposeful chology and personnel selection, is another example. recruitment of women. Because the recruits were Tis was predominantly a female-dominated field, as mostly young, this change also meant a generational seen at Site 6. However, “industrial relations,” which is concerned with union and management negotiation turnover. Te gender change was made easier because the environment in which Site 8 operated was also over wages and conditions, remains predominantly a changing. Te industry with which Site 8 dealt had a man’s field—though the two were located within the rising number of women in management positions same division of the same agency. with whom Site 8 officers had to negotiate. New technology, however, may be appropriated in terms of an old division of labor. At Site 2, where a A second degendering force is restructuring that rereorganization of the labor process that had the poten- organizes the labor process and its internal divisions. tial to break down traditional divisions had occurred, Te gradual elimination of secretarial jobs and the strength for lifting remained a point of gender distinc- absorption of a good deal of keyboard and communition. A lifting machine was installed, making it poscation work into professional and managerial jobs is sible for women to do everything that men had done, an important case. Tis altered labor process, with all Glass Ceilings or Gendered Institutions?
841
administrative staff equipped with personal computers, was visible at most of our “central” sites. Sometimes a merging of roles occurs through retraining. At Site 1, one small unit had the traditional pattern of a woman secretarial worker “out front” and professionally qualified men in offices behind her. Tere was another small unit that followed the same pattern until a male manager encouraged the secretary to re-skill herself as a professional. She went on to become part of the site’s professional team.
distinction between managers and nonmanagerial staff. Nevertheless, a broad reform agenda has modified the traditional picture of bureaucratic authority. What is sometimes called “New Public Management” (Riccucci 2001; Tomas and Davies 2002) deemphasizes formal hierarchy, replacing it with a focus on objectives and performance, organizational fluidity, and professionalization of management.
A third degendering force is organizational fluidity. In some of the case studies, rather than having a fixed division of functions, work was constantly being reorganized on a project basis. Tis process was most common in central sites and perhaps reflects a contemporary style of policy work. It was visible at Site 9, Site 8, and Site 3, and reached an extreme at Site 10, where it had gone far toward eliminating the stable gender division of labor. At this site, men and women were freely drawn on as project groups were formed, reformed, and dissolved. Tis was made possible by the nature of the site’s work (diverse, policy related) and its workforce (highly s elected and mostly university trained); it is not a strategy that could be followed in all organizational contexts.
At the study sites, we were told that two main changes had resulted. One was a trend toward “flat” organizations, reducing (in some cases sharply, as at Site 1) the number of levels of management. Tis brought senior management socially—and sometimes physically—closer to their staff. Te other change was a shift from authoritarian or autocratic management styles toward more consultative and inclusive styles of management. At many of the worksites, consultation occurred regularly through unit staff meetings. At Site 2, an interesting dual structure of authority seemed to have developed. Te day-to-day running of the site was mostly handled by lateral discussion among the operating staff, with little reference to management. However, budgets, staffing, and long-term planning remained in the hands of managers. Some tendencies toward this pattern existed at other sites, too.
Te substitution of women for men and vice versa can occur at the group level, as well as the individual level. At Site 7, for instance, a small unit existed that had once been “almost all men,” then became “all-women,” then moved toward gender balance. One respondent commented, “It just happened that way, it is not any conscious decision by anybody.” Each change was, of course, the result of decisions made by managers; the point is that changes in gender balance may occur without the intention to produce gender effects.
With the exception of one agency, the majority of managerial positions were held by men. At Site 9, for instance, men outnumber women two to one in senior positions, and that was an agency with a relatively high representation of women near the top. At another site, noted for its supportiveness of women and currently headed by an experienced female manager, it was still possible for a respondent to comment on the concentration of men in promotion positions in her unit and to remark that in her career, “I haven’t been to a [unit] that wasn’t like that.”
It follows that men were making most of the organizaGender Relations of Power Public sector agencies generally have well-defined tional decisions, or at least collectively had much structures of authority. Forms of power include the greater weight in shaping the future of these organizadelegation of legal authority, control over budgets, tions. In cases such as Site 6, where there was a clearly control over hiring of staff, the right to “sign off” on marked hierarchy of authority, most of the managers documents, and the right to direct other people’s work. were men, and there was a concentration of women in routine low-level jobs, something very much like the In a classic bureaucracy, such powers are arranged traditional bureaucratic patriarchy survived. hierarchically, with a concentration at the top and delegated downward only under close supervision. In one of the agencies, however, women had arrived in Classic bureaucracies typically have many levels with management at all levels in considerable numbers, formally defined differences in authority, seniority, including the top. Tis was a topic of much discussion and salary. Classic bureaucracies are also markedly at the two worksites in this agency. It was recognized as gendered, with top levels occupied by men, and a historic change: Here, the glass ceiling seems to have women present only (if at all) in relatively powerless been breached. Similar processes had occurred in the subordinate positions. other agencies. In fact, most sites in the study had seen a rise in the numbers of women in management. At Formal structures of authority remain important. In Site 3, for instance, a respondent spoke of the strong all the sites we studied, there was a reasonably clear presence of women in agency management, enough to 842 Public Administration Review • November | December 2006
reach a “critical mass”—though the majority at the senior director level in this agency were still men. Tese findings do not closely follow the pattern of agency type identified in U.S. research (Kerr, Miller, and Reid 2002; Newman 1994). Site 6 was in a “redistributive” agency, whereas the agency with the most women at the top was a “regulatory” agency. Te patterns are, however, explicable in terms of the occupational cultures that were predominant in each agency (an issue that underlies some interpretations of the U.S. findings), plus the specific political history of each agency (for instance, interventions by ministers and top managers to change organizational structure and culture).
men at Site 2 had adjusted to the arrival of women in their industry, believing that women had proved their capacities and earned the right to be there. A sense of changing gender relations could be found in all the participating agencies. Most of the clear-cut emotional patterns around gender in our data concern this change. Terefore, we might call them the emotions of gender transition. Tese emotions include resentment about change. Where restructuring had disrupted an older, male-dominated organizational culture, the men who had loyally served the organization for many years in the expectation of succession to top positions—but who now felt sidelined or blocked for promotion—may have felt bitter about this turn of events. Te implicit bargain on which such men had built their careers was no longer recognized by the organization. Indeed, they were likely to be regarded as dinosaurs, anachronisms in the world of the New Public Management. On their side, they regarded the smarter, better-educated, young managers as lacking loyalty to the organization. Tis was true in the old sense of “loyalty” as lifetime career commitment. New-model managerial careers involve movement between organizations, not just up the ladder within the same organization (Connell and Wood 2005).
Te arrival of women in public sector management has been turbulent. Te collective memory of the study sites, going back 30 years in some cases, includes stories of bitter struggles by groups of women for access and by groups of men resisting change. Just as the wider Australian culture is still not comfortable with women holding power over men, women’s authority in the public sector is still contested or debated in various ways. Some critics of recent changes at Site 8, for instance, thought that women had moved up too fast, lacked background, and had produced conflict. At other sites, we encountered men who plainly had difficulty taking instructions from women and Where the new-style management includes many women who had, as managers, experienced particular women, or is led by women, or where equal employresistance from men. Yet this is far from uniform; other ment opportunity is used as a tool of organizational men at the same sites were happy with the change. reconstruction, resentment and distrust on one side and exasperation and anger on the other may develop along gender lines. One of our respondents, reflecting Emotion and Human Relations Emotions are often thought to belong in the private on such a process, spoke of the “poisonous atmorealm and to be no business of rational, goal-oriented sphere” that had existed in the particular agency organizations. Tere is abundant evidence in closeduring the process of transition. focus organizational research, however, that emotions and emotional relationships are a significant part of Emotional conflict may also develop around the use organizational life (Hearn and Parkin 2001; Mills of antidiscrimination and sexual harassment rules and and ancred 1992). Emotional connections and procedures. At one of our sites, an antidiscrimination antagonisms are unquestionably a significant dimencase had been unsuccessfully brought against an indision of gender regimes. Tis is true regardless of vidual, and it was remembered that the complainant whether the workforce is involved in what Hochschild had moved. At another site, charges of sexual harass(1983) famously defined as emotional labor, in which ment had been laid. Our respondent, a woman, felt the management of emotions enters into the labor they were unjustified and was very angry about what process itself. she saw as an abuse of these procedures. At a third site, another woman respondent described the diffiMany of the study sites revealed a history in which culty of making antidiscrimination rules work and most occupations and career paths were gender segresuggested that many women kept their mouths shut gated. Patterns of emotional solidarity and distance because it was still too difficult to speak out. Neverderived from this history persisted in some of the sites. theless, this respondent also said that she had never For instance, at Site 2, historically an all-male workexperienced inappropriate remarks herself: “You’re place with a strong occupational culture, interviewees mad to do that to me, because I am going to say recounted the discomfort men had when the first something back!” Tis points to another major women arrived as co-workers (i.e., not in traditional conclusion of our research. In important respects, women’s work as secretaries in the unit office). Antagon- the emotions of gender transition have diminished ism or suspicion about the women’s presence continbecause the transition has worked, and another ued, though only among some of the men. Other pattern is emerging. Glass Ceilings or Gendered Institutions?
843
The Depolarized Workplace
At about half our sites, we found units in which relations between men and women were not emotionally polarized (i.e., attachments and antagonisms did not follow gender lines). At Site 7, which typified this situation, a respondent remarked that in this agency, men and women got on well together “ninety-eight percent of the time,” and that seemed to be the general view. Relationships at this site were low key and easygoing. “We treat everybody as, I suppose, colleagues, and we have a workplace to be in, and you want to make it as nice as possible.” Te depolarized workplace, to give this development a name, seems to have certain characteristics. It has a limited or declining gender division of labor. If there has been a gender transition, older employees, accustomed to sharper gender divisions, have been carefully incorporated into the new order of things. Te depolarized workplace is likely to have a cool tone (for instance, a formal, professional style of speech), a focus on being businesslike, and an ethic of mutual respect among staff. Tis is likely to mean there is less strong bonding among the staff. (At one site, we were told that drinking lunches had been replaced by morning teas.) Tere is likely to be more individualism, more focus on personal careers, and less on loyalty to an organization. If there is emotional solidarity in the workplace, it cuts across gender lines. We hypothesize that the depolarized workplace may become predominant in the New South Wales public sector, as this pattern is consistent with popular understandings of gender reform, current career trends, and recent restructuring initiatives. Yet even if this is true, two kinds of difficulty remain.
Gender Culture and Symbolism Tere are also transitions in the cultural dimension that concern the way in which gender is understood, spoken of, and marked or symbolized. Some of the sites provided evidence of the persistence of strongly gendered local cultures within the agencies concerned. One example is a group of manual workers whose traditional workplace solidarity had formerly been expressed in physical horseplay, the use of pornography, uninhibited swearing, and sexist humor. Te arrival of women in the workplace was felt as an inhibition. Tey felt it improper to swear in a woman’s presence, so their language was curtailed. And they could not display sexist images to a woman, so the “girlie posters” were relocated to the men’s locker room. At another site, a strongly defined masculine culture used to exist among managers. Tere was a network of senior men based on drinking parties and football clubs, sometimes extending to sexual exploitation of female staff. At yet another site, networks still existed among male managers whose token of membership was the exchange of sexist humor in e-mail messages. Women could join if they were good sports and willing to play along on the men’s terms. Te hegemony of these patterns is, however, under challenge. At the same sites, we spoke to respondents who were critical of the masculine organizational culture and angry about the glass ceiling for women and who emphasized gender integration and equality. Tese views were most often expressed by women, but there was also a significant number of men who shared them. Tese critical views are inflected in two ways. One emphasizes the question of justice, criticizes old-style public service male chauvinism as unfair, and tends to see private sector employers as even more unfair. Te other emphasizes modernity, criticizes sexism as old-fashioned and inefficient, and is likely to see the private sector (because of its individualism) as a model for public sector agencies.
First, the depolarized workplace may reduce but does not eliminate gendered emotions, including emotions of transition. Even at Site 7, the respondent who said that men and women got along well 98 percent of the time was also saying that 2 percent of the time, they got on badly. Tere was some residual antagonism among men to the advent of women in management. One woman Gender Neutrality commented, “I wouldn’t call it a backlash as such, I At some sites, the local culture of gender had moved would certainly call it a rumble.” On their side, the strongly away from the old dichotomies. Here, gender women had memories of men who were “real bullies.” practices deemphasized difference and tended toward neutrality. Tis was very noticeable at Site 10. Here, Second, the depolarized workplace, though it exists as men and women were mixed in the geography of the a practical reality, has not become a positive ideal. In worksite (e.g., where their work stations were, where the agencies we studied, it seemed that the negative they sat in meetings). Te dress code was relatively (i.e., what people were required not to do) was more neutral (e.g., women tend to wear trouser suits, not alive in people’s imagination that any positive ideal of flowered dresses, and little or no makeup). Language gender equity. Gender equity work seeks to eliminate, was a little more guarded and formal: One respondent in the words of the UN Convention, all forms of discrimination against women. But what, positively, is commented that Site 10’s agency was more “proper” the form of life, the character of relations among women than the style encountered in a previous public sector job. Gender was, in the words of another respondent and men, that gender equity is working toward? Tis from Site 10, “not something we think about here.” was by no means clear to many of our respondents. 844 Public Administration Review • November | December 2006
A practice of gender neutrality need not reflect a belief in gender similarity. A belief in fundamental gender differences was widespread among our respondents— as it is in Australian society more widely. In interviews from diverse sites, women and men were said to have different physical capacities (men stronger), character traits (women more patient, men more ambitious), interests (men technical, women human relations), and skills (men understand machinery).
as the consequences of individual “choices” (e.g., women’s “choice” to interrupt a career and have a baby). Tey include a desire to be seen as balanced, judicious, and not extremist. “I am just sort of middle of the road, I am not rabid in any way,” as a respondent from Site 3 put it, after foreseeing an end to men ruling the world. Tey may also include a view of the public sector as serving all interests, so that appearing to favor one—even if it is the disadvantaged— would be improper.
More diversity appeared in views about gender equality. Te default position, frequently expressed in inter- Conclusions from the Study views and more or less official in the agencies, was that As I noted at the beginning of this article, gender men and women should be equally respected, should equity policy debates often take a simplified, categorihave equal opportunities for promotion, and should cal view of gender. Tis is often a politically effective never be discriminated against because of their gender. way of representing issues—for example, the underFurthermore, this equality should be achieved by representation of women in management. It fits the scrupulously equal treatment. Tis is especially true of syntax of policy statements, which commonly state appointment and promotion. If personnel decisions general rules or intentions, and it fits with the New are made purely on merit, gender equity is thought to Public Management approach, which requires explicit be achieved. and measurable policy outcomes. Many respondents evidently thought this was the current situation. Tis belief often goes with a degendered approach to practice: If gender is systematically deemphasized, gender equity would seem to be achieved. Gender is “not something we think about here”—and more, it seemed to be something they didn’t want to think about. Not everyone agreed. Some people, most of them women, thought that gender neutrality was more apparent than real. o these respondents, “boys’ clubs” still existed, exclusion and harassment did occur, and women faced a tougher climb. Some other respondents, most of them men, thought that there was now a bias against men. Tis was popularly expressed through the metaphor of a gender discrimination pendulum: Te pendulum used to be against women, has now swung back, but it has swung “too far,” so men and boys are now suffering. Tere needs to be a correction so the pendulum is exactly in the middle, where gender equity will have been achieved.
Yet this is a very limited way of “seeing” gender, in that it ignores the known complexities of gender categories, identities, and practices. Tis study has focused on organizational gender practices and has shown something of their significance. We did not encounter a single worksite in which there was not a well-defined gender regime. Yet each gender regime was different: produced by a different organizational history and associated with a different configuration of personal experience and consciousness. Tis diversity was nevertheless intelligible, within the approach advocated here—seeing gender as a multidimensional structure, in which four different kinds of relationships and processes coexist. Te case studies in this project demonstrate that is possible to analyze organizational realities systematically in this way. I will try to summarize the conclusions and issues that emerged. Gender Division of Labor
Te gender division of labor remains a powerful presTese diverse views converged on one political ence in organizational life, even in a sector that has conclusion. Opinions among our respondents were long been committed to “equal opportunity” and has almost unanimously against a recent history of restructuring. “affirmative action.” Equal In this respect, our results are in Te gender division of labor opportunity, yes; exactly the accordance with the U.S. remains a powerful presence same procedures, yes; antidisresearch mentioned previously in organizational life, even crimination, yes; appointment (e.g., Kerr, Miller, and Reid 2002; in a sector that has long been by merit alone, yes; positive Newman 1994), which docuredistribution to correct existing ments gender differences among committed to “equal opportuinequalities, no. groups of public sector agencies, nity” and has a recent history linked to their organizational of restructuring. Te reasons for the predomifunction and occupational culnance of this view are complex. tures. We can go further and Tey include the growing individualism of public identify specific forms of gender division of labor sector culture. Career outcomes are increasingly seen (called occupational, residual, micro, and emergent). Glass Ceilings or Gendered Institutions?
845
Tere is often a patchwork quality about the local combinations of these patterns in actual worksites. Te case study method revealed in detail the dynamic character of the gender division of labor. Te position at any given time is the result of multiple processes that sustain gender divisions (including the cultural coding of different jobs, the design of the labor process, and organizational hierarchy itself), and processes that undermine a given division of labor (including cross-gender recruitment, labor process reengineering, and organizational fluidity). o understand the current situation in any organization, we must appraise the balance between these forces.
suggests that strong emotions are stirred up by gender transitions. Tey include feelings of injustice, resentment about change, and feelings of betrayal when implicit gender bargains are discarded by modernizing organizations. Conventional policy discourse does not easily incorporate this dimension, but it must not be ignored. Out of the current transitions, an emotional pattern has emerged that I call the depolarized workplace. A decline in the salience of gender divisions and gender solidarities is associated with a cooler emotional tone in the workplace, an individualization of identities, and a decline in old patterns of organizational loyalty.
Gender Relations of Power
Te structure of authority is a crucial feature of gender inequality and remains an important issue within public sector organizations. Te arrival of women in top management is the sector’s emblem of gender reform. It is this, more than anything else, that seems to convince people that things have really changed. Not a few are so impressed that they exaggerate how many women have actually been promoted.
Gender Culture and Symbolism
Obviously associated with these emotional changes is a tendency to deemphasize gender difference in workplace culture. Tough the belief in natural gender difference has not vanished, many of the worksites practice a kind of cultural neutrality, refusing to mark gender difference or marking it only in limited ways. Tis, in turn, would seem to be connected with an approach to gender equity that seeks to achieve justice by scrupulously equal treatment—a degendering strategy. Te predominant view in the sites that we studied was to endorse “equal opportunity” but not “affirmative action.”
Tere are still problems in establishing the au thority of women managers. It is clear that there are some men who do not easily take direction from women, as well as some who suspect women have got to the top only because the rules were bent and that their toorapid promotion is damaging to the public service. Te rejection of anything resembling affirmative Some women managers have established excellent relations with the workers in their units, and some are action is an important limit to support for gender equity activism within the state. as effective in organizational Feminism has long faced a dipolitics as any of their male Feminism has long faced a lemma between emphasizing colleagues, in terms of masculine dilemma between emphasizing difference and emphasizing norms of managerial behavior equality, a dilemma that recurs in ( Whitehead and Moodley 1999). difference and emphasizing Nevertheless, an undercurrent of equality, a dilemma that recurs equal opportunity politics in the resentment and doubt remains. in equal opportunity politics in public sector (Eisenstein and Jardine 1980; Stivers 2002). Te the public sector. data from this study point clearly An underlying reason concerns to organizational degendering as the gender meanings of organizathe path of least resistance. But that path risks the tional power. A generation ago, the masculinity of disappearance of the issue from the agenda of public bureaucratic authority was undoubted. Old-style bureaucratic hierarchies have been under attack for 30 debate and forecloses other strategies that pursue justice through the recognition of difference. years, and they have been demolished at some of the sites in this study, yet a cultural connection between power and masculinity remains. It is striking, for Even such a brief summary as this makes one example, how many stories circulate about women conclusion very clear: Te pattern and extent of genmanagers that emphasize how rough and tough they der division—and the pattern and pace of change—is are (“hardball,” “feral”). far from identical in the different substructures of gender. Having an explicitly multidimensional model Emotion and Human Relations of gender allows us to see that incoherencies and lags Te emotional dimension is not usually seen as an are common. For example, changes occur in the labor issue in policy discourse, but it is important to the process without corresponding changes in conscious way people experience gender relations. Solidarities ness, and patterns of emotion persist that grate against and antagonisms associated with old patterns of genchanges in authority. Te emergence of the emotionder division do not quickly fade away. Our evidence ally depolarized workplace appears consistent with the 846 Public Administration Review • November | December 2006
trend toward degendering in the labor process, but it is inconsistent with the forces reproducing gender divisions of labor and wider cultural emphases on gender difference. Limited and uneven outcomes of gender equity policy are entirely predictable. Te difficulty of achieving workplace gender equality is well recognized by practitioners, and at least some of this difficulty arises from the incoherence and complexity of gender relations in the worksite.
Proposals for Gender Equity Strategy What advice can be given for gender equity efforts? Here, I necessarily move beyond the agreed-upon conclusions of the research itself into the realm of judgment. Nevertheless, it seems important to offer proposals for strategy, and here I offer five. Gender Equity Both Routine and Visible
Gender inequalities are embedded in multiple ways in the labor process, culture, and routine practices of organizations. Gender equity is likely to be successful to the extent that it ceases to be a specific policy, pulled off the shelf from time to time, and becomes embedded in organizational culture. When this is achieved, gender equity becomes one of the routine grounds for action. Public sector workers acting in accordance with gender equity will feel con sistently supported rather than pressed to provide specific justifications for their actions. But if gender equity goes too far into the wallpaper, it ceases to exist. Tat is the risk in some current degendering trends. An important part of equity work is naming inequality, making issues visible, and catching people’s attention. Te task for organizations wishing to promote gender equity, therefore, is to achieve a balance in which equity issues are both made visible and become routine grounds for action. Te capacity of public sector agencies to study their own gender regimes is clearly important in achieving this balance. Tis article has offered a model for such study that goes beyond the collection of equal opportunity statistics. Other models are certainly possible. Whatever the method chosen, creating a routine of study and reflection is important for the future of gender equity in public sector organizations. Support from the Top
Respondents in many of our sites spoke of the importance of gender equity being promoted by managers, including the most senior executives. Tey had in mind something more than a rhetorical endorsement of principles. Tey were aware that some ma nagers really regard gender equity as “a bit of a luxury,” not core business.
What makes the difference is sustained endorsement, commitment of resources, and specific actions—such as the creation of child care centers or the actual promotion of women to responsible positions. Specific managers who have done these things were prominent in our respondents’ accounts of organizational change. Te point does not only concern senior management. Immediate supervisors and (especially in large agencies) regional managers seem to be equally important. Yet management support cannot substitute for rankand-file “ownership” of the issue. Organizations need to work out combinations of local initiative and top-down policy. Mesh with Experience
Gender equity measures are likely to be most acceptable—and make most sense to public sector workers— when they mesh with other experience. Many of our respondents were conscious of ongoing changes in gender arrangements in the broader society. When workers can see that workplace reforms connect with these changes or help them handle change, they are likely to support the measures. Tis reinforces the importance of meshing gender equity measures with local gender regimes. Because public sector workplaces are diverse in their gender division of labor, structures of authority, and emotional patterns, a one-size-fits-all approach is unlikely to command respect. Te point is reinforced when we take regional differences, local communities, ethnic backgrounds, and economic situations into consideration. Te difficulty is that local adaptation can mean a watering down of central policy. Te more “permissive” a policy is in its framing, the more its effectiveness depends on an active local constituency. Constituency for Gender Equity
In several of the sites we studied, there was significant support for gender equity measures, reflecting organizational memory of past campaigns by women, personal experiences of programs or events, leadership by particular people, and links with gender equity struggles in other arenas. Where such an informal constituency is lacking, it seems that central gender equity policies will be implemented more selectively or reluctantly. Tough the constituency for gender equity in our worksites was mainly women, it also included some men. Finding ways to engage men in measures such as flexible work arrangements, antiharassment, and labor process restructuring is an important direction for the future. Very recent policy discussions are highlighting exactly this issue (UNCSW 2004). Public Sector Ethos
In workplaces in which gender equity is relatively successful, there is likely to be pride in the fact. It can Glass Ceilings or Gendered Institutions?
847
be part of an organization’s self-image that this is a good place for both women and men to work—that fairness reigns. Tis is likely to benefit from awareness of other issues about equality and social exclusion (e.g., ethnicity and disability).
Borchorst, Anette, and Birte Siim. 2002. Te Women-Friendly Welfare States Revisited. Nordic
Journal of Women’s Studies 10(2): 90–98. Borrelli, Mary A. 2002. Te President’s Cabinet:
Gender, Power, and Representation . Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
Gender equity is also likely to benefit from an ethos of public service. Tough against the trend of contemporary market ideology, in many of the worksites we studied, there was a significant commitment to the idea of the public interest, a sense of the shared benefits for society achieved through public sector action. Where this consciousness existed, it seemed to be interwoven with a commitment to gender equity in a broad sense. Gender equality is part of the model of a good society that public sector actions should seek to build. A renovated ethos of public service may, therefore, be an important long-term condition for gender equity measures in the public sector.
Acknowledgments Tis article is based on research done as part of the Gender Equity in Public Institutions project. I am grateful to the respondents from five public sector agencies for their gift of time, information, and trust, as well as to the many colleagues who worked on this project over its lifetime. Tose most involved in this part of the project include coinvestigators oni Schofield and Sue Goodwin; project staffers Kathy Edwards, Celia Roberts, Virginia Watson, and Julian Wood; industry partners Philippa Hall and Jennifer Perry; and agency representatives who regrettably cannot be named because of confidentiality undertakings. Te Gender Equity in Public Institutions project was funded principally by the Australian Research Council, with industry partner funding from two New South Wales government agencies and in-kind contributions by seven New South Wales government agencies and the University of Sydney. Te opinions expressed in this article are those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect the view of any participating agency. References Acker, Joan. 1990. Hierarchies, Bodies, and Jobs: A Gendered Teory of Organisations. Gender and
Society 4(2): 139–58. Alsop, Rachel, Annette Fitzsimons, and Kathleen Lennon. 2002. Teorizing Gender . Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Barrett, Frank J. 1996. Te Organizational Construction of Hegemonic Masculinity: Te Case of the U.S. Navy. Gender, Work and Organization 3(3): 129–42. Borchorst, Anette. 1999. Feminist Tinking about the Welfare State. In Revisioning Gender , edited by
Brewis, Joanna. 1999. How Does It Feel? Women Managers, Embodiment and Changing PublicSector Cultures. In ransforming Managers:
Gendering Change in the Public Sector , edited by Stephen Whitehead and Roy Moodley, 84–106. London: UCL Press. Burton, Clare. 1987. Merit and Gender: Organisations and the Mobilisation of Masculine Bias. Australian
Journal of Social Issues 22(2): 424–35. Cockburn, Cynthia. 1983. Brothers: Male Dominance
and echnological Change . London: Pluto Press. Connell, R. W. 1987. Gender and Power: Society, the
Person, and Sexual Politics . Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. ———. 1990. Te State, Gender, and Sexual Politics: Teory and Appraisal. Teory and Society 19(5): 507–44. ———. 2002. Gender . Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Connell, R. W., and Julian Wood. 2005. Globalization and Business Masculinities. Men and Masculinities 7(4): 347–64. Duerst-Lahti, Georgia, and Rita M. Kelly, eds. 1995.
Gender Power, Leadership and Governance . Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Eisenstein, Hester. 1996. Inside Agitators: Australian
Femocrats and the State . Sydney, Australia: Allen and Unwin. Eisenstein, Hester, and Alice Jardine, eds. 1980. Te
Future of Difference . Boston: G. K. Hall. Gherardi, Silvia, and Barbara Poggio. 2001. Creating and Recreating Gender Order in Organizations.
Journal of World Business 36(3): 245–58. Gierycz, Dorota. 1999. Women in Decision-Making: Can We Change the Status Quo? In owards a
Women’s Agenda for a Culture of Peace , edited by Ingeborg Breines, Dorota Gierycz, and Betty A. Reardon, 19–30. Paris: UNESCO. Grant, Judith, and Peta ancred. 1992. A Feminist Perspective on State Bureaucracy. In Gendering
Organizational Analysis , edited by Albert J. Mills and Peta ancred, 112–28. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Guy, Mary E., ed. 1992. Women and Men of the States:
Public Administrators at the State Level . Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe. Hale, Mary M. 1996. Gender Equality in Organizations: Resolving the Dilemmas. Review of
Public Personnel Administration 16(1): 7–18. Hearn, Jeff, and Wendy Parkin. 2001. Gender,
Myra Marx Ferree, Judith Lorber, and Beth B. Hess,
Sexuality and Violence in Organizations: Te
99–127. Tousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Unspoken Forces of Organization Violations .
Publications.
London: Sage Publications.
848 Public Administration Review • November | December 2006
Hochschild, Arlie R. 1983. Te Managed Heart:
Commercialization of Human Feeling . Berkeley: University of California Press. Inter-Parliamentary Union. 2006. Women in National Parliaments: Situation as of 31 May 2006. www.ipu.org/wmn-e/world.htm [accessed August 3, 2006]. Jensen, Hanne N. 1998. Gender as the Dynamo: When Public Organizations Have to Change. In
Is Tere a Nordic Feminism? Nordic Feminist Tought on Culture and Society , edited by Drude von der Fehr, Bente Rosenbeck, and Anna G. Jónasdóttir, 160–75. London: UCL Press. Kerr, Brinck, Will Miller, and Margaret Reid. 2002.
Federal Workplace. Public Administration Review 63(4): 472–83. O’Connor, Julia S., Ann Shola Orloff, and Sheila Shaver. 1999. States, Markets, Families: Gender,
Liberalism, and Social Policy in Australia, Canada, Great Britain, and the United States . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ogasawara, Y. 1998. Office Ladies and Salaried Men:
Power, Gender, and Work in Japanese Companies . Berkeley: University of California Press. Pringle, Rosemary. 1989. Secretaries alk: Sexuality, Power, and Work . London: Verso. Riccucci, Norma M. 2001. Te “Old” Public Management versus the “New” Public
Sex-Based Occupational Segregation in U.S. State
Management: Where Does Public Administration
Bureaucracies, 1987–97. Public Administration
Fit In? Public Administration Review 61(2):
Review 62(4): 412–23. Lorber, Judith. 1994. Paradoxes of Gender . New Haven, C: Yale University Press. Mackay, Fiona, and Kate Bilton. 2000. Learning from
Experience: Lessons in Mainstreaming Equal Opportunities . Edinburgh, UK: Governance of Scotland Forum. Martin, Patricia Y., and David Collinson. 2002. “Over the Pond and Across the Water”: Developing the Field of “Gendered Organizations.” Gender,
Work and Organization 9(3): 244–65. Meier, Kenneth J., and Vicky M. Wilkins. 2002.
172–75. Scourfield, Jonathan, and Mark Drakeford. 2002. New Labour and the “Problem of Men.” Critical
Social Policy 22(4): 619–40. Stetson, Dorothy M., and Amy G. Mazur, eds. 1995. Comparative State Feminism . Tousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Stivers, Camilla. 2002. Gender Images in Public
Administration: Legitimacy and the Administrative State . 2nd ed. Tousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Tomas, Robyn, and Annette Davies. 2002. Gender
Gender Differences in Agency Head Salaries: Te
and New Public Management: Reconstituting
Case of Public Education. Public Administration
Academic Subjectivities. Gender, Work and
Review 62(4): 405–11. Mikanagi, Yumiko. 2000. A Political Explanation of
Organization 9(4): 372–97. United Nations Commission on the Status of Women
the Gendered Division of Labor in Japan. In
(UNCSW). 2004. Agreed Conclusions on the Role
Gender and Global Restructuring , edited by Marianne H. Marchand and Anne S. Runyan,
www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw/csw48/
116–28. London: Routledge.
ac-men-auc.pdf [accessed August 3, 2006].
Mills, Albert J., and Peta ancred, eds. 1992.
Gendering Organizational Analysis . Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Newman, Meredith A. 1994. Gender and Lowi’s Tesis: Implications for Career Advancement.
Public Administration Review 54(3): 277–84. ———. 1995. Te Gendered Nature of Lowi’s ypology; or, Who Would Guess You Could Find Gender Here? In Gender Power, Leadership, and
Governance , edited by Georgia Duerst-Lahti and Rita Mae Kelly, 141–64. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Newman, Meredith A., Robert A. Jackson, and Douglas D. Baker. 2003. Sexual Harassment in the
of Men and Boys in Achieving Gender Equality.
Valdés, eresa, and Enrique Gomáriz, eds. 1995. Latin
American Women: Compared Figures . Santiago, Chile: Instituto de la Mujer/FLACSO. Wajcman, Judy. 1999. Managing Like a Man; Women
and Men in Corporate Management . Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Walby, Sylvia. 1990. Teorizing Patriarchy . Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell. Whitehead, Stephen, and Roy Moodley, eds. 1999.
ransforming Managers: Gendering Change in the Public Sector . London: UCL Press. Zalewski, Marysia, and Jane Parpart, eds. 1998. Te
“Man Question” in International Relations . Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Glass Ceilings or Gendered Institutions?
849
