The past century has paved the way for immense progress in terms of gender equality, consisting not only of women’s suffrage and greater access to education for females, but also of their integration into the workplace and more equitable pay in the professional environment. In recent years, however, this progress has stalled, leaving some speculating whether these residual disparities are just a byproduct of the innate differences between men and women. Even today, only 38% of women hold managerial positions, while 64% deal with microaggressions in the office, and 35% face sexual harassment at work (Ziv, 2021).
Others are convinced that there are underlying reasons for these discrepancies, as more and more information has been released about the effects of external sources, such as cultural norms, social media, and education. Recently, studies have also probed into the repercussions of parenting styles on shaping an individual’s self-esteem, aggression levels, personality, and ambition, among other variables. As these may have direct impacts on personal development and overall success in life, it’s essential to not only fight against external societal pressures, but also to question the traditional family models that have been in place for centuries.
1.2 Problem Statement and Objectives
To date, there have been studies covering a broad range of topics on gender inequalities, workplace discrimination, and parenting styles and techniques. Findings have suggested that children are strongly influenced by the role models around them and retain similar habits, values, and perspectives. Others have confirmed instances of sexual harassment, hiring and promoting biases, and many other obstacles at the office that obtrude on equality between genders. Despite all these findings, it remains ambiguous as to how multifaceted these occurrences are, and exactly how many factors play a role in their development.
Little research explores how values transition from parenting techniques to personal convictions, let alone their impact on success and satisfaction later in women’s careers. To uncover possible flaws that may lead to these inequalities, this paper will examine different parenting techniques, diving into their characteristics and the consequences they may have on the development of an individual.
The research conducted will aim to expose the underlying hindrances to career success and address possible ways to overcome them by answering three main questions:
1. To what extent do parenting styles impact and influence women’s later career success?
2. What are the key indicators of female-empowering versus -suppressing parenting styles?
3. Can gender-neutral parenting apply and contribute to the creation of a more equal future?
The paper will first provide a literature review, using secondary data from articles or reports relating to gender inequality and parenting techniques. As a research design, the primary data will be collected through a survey, using a quantitative, deductive approach that extracts a specific conclusion following a general theory. The intended sampling strategy will include simple random sampling through an online anonymous platform called SurveySwap. As the thesis will be digging deeper into correlations between parenting styles and women’s career success, I will be limiting participation in the survey to only women over the age of 18 (who have been able to start their careers).
The aim will be to survey at least 30 participants to produce representative results. The design will include 43 questions relating to participants’ background, parenting styles experienced, and current or past career success. Questions will incorporate nominal and interval scales, as well as several pre-existing scales relating to parenting techniques, career background, and job satisfaction. The data extracted from the survey will be analyzed to determine any possible correlations between parenting styles and hindrances to career success.
Many pre-existing theories examine the possible consequences that may arise from varying parenting techniques and link the choice of styles to external stimuli such as education, race, income, religion, etc. In addition, many studies have covered topics of career success, job satisfaction, and gender discrimination in the workplace. The research conducted in this paper will closely examine parenting as a possible contributing factor towards lower confidence and, consequently, career success for females. In the case of finding a significant correlation, these results could provide valuable insights as to how to further promote equality in the future.
This study will not only be informative towards parents, but as well towards managers and decision-makers. Political and educational institutions may have more motivation to implement family support and child welfare programs, facilitating healthier environments for raising young women. Organizations may use this information to tailor their discrimination and parental policies to their employees, which may subsequently result in higher organizational success.
1.3 Structure
Following this introduction, the paper will include a literature review, summarizing and criticizing findings from articles on the topics of parenting styles, gender inequalities at home and in the workplace, and facets of career success. To address the gap in the existing literature, the paper will then dive into the methodology, presenting findings and insights from the survey conducted. An analysis of these results will follow, determining whether there is a correlation between parenting styles and female career success.
Next, the paper will include a discussion on possible solutions or improvements parents could make to establish higher gender equality in the workplace. It will also mention alternative parenting styles, such as gender-neutral parenting and its effects. Lastly, the paper will end with a conclusion, recapping the findings and relevance of the research conducted and adding final notes that discuss further steps to encourage the empowerment of young women.
2 Literature Review
2.1 Gender Inequalities in the Workplace
In recent years, many have raised the concern of gender inequalities in the workplace, such as unfair treatment or the wage gap. Differences in the hiring process, negotiations, and career choices between genders have been linked to factors such as education, overall self-esteem, and varying social influences. Due to the complexity of the problem, it remains somewhat ambiguous as to the degree of importance that these elements contribute to these inequalities. To develop a more encompassing understanding, it’s helpful to examine each element separately, starting from the earlier stages of life.
2.1.1 Educational Discrimination
Entering the workforce, women are already placed at a disadvantage regardless of their academic background. Overall, women dominate in most educational fields, earning more than half of all bachelor’s, associate’s, master’s, and Ph.D. degrees (Gould, Schieder, Geier, 2016). Despite this perceived edge, they are still ultimately being paid less than their male counterparts at every level. Women end up earning only 78% of men’s salaries with high school diplomas, 75% with college degrees, and 73% with advanced degrees (Gould, Schieder, Geier, 2016).
Another aspect to consider, is the fact that women more often major in subjects that pay less, including humanities and educational fields, as opposed to STEM fields, which often entail higher salaries. When examining the women who are working in a STEM profession, they occupy a higher percentage of lower-paying jobs related to life sciences or biology, in contrast to occupations such as engineering and computer science that pay more generously.
2.1.2 Societal and Social Pressures
A significant influencer of these outcomes and decisions is the pressure placed on women from social and societal relationships. These include, but are not limited to, parents, peers, teachers, role models, and the media. Many studies have pointed to the fact that parents often hold higher expectations of their sons to ultimately work in STEM fields, as opposed to their daughters. These expectations are constant despite performance, as this holds true even if both genders perform equally well in STEM subjects, such as math and science (Gould, Schieder, Geier, 2016).
The consequence of these perceptions is that girls’ notions of success in these industries are then molded, altering their confidence to strive and perform successfully. Moreover, teachers may contribute to these biases and stereotypes through their teaching methods and understanding of gender roles. An added complication is the issue that less than 5% of CEOs worldwide are women (Millstam, 2020). The lack of female role models in executive positions and higher-paying occupations presents a challenge in raising girls’ ambition and initiative to explore those fields and counter the gender inequalities that are in place today.
2.1.3 Negotiation and Hiring Practices
Regarding the relatively few women who manage to break through these pressures and expectations, they face yet another hurdle along the way when entering hiring and promoting processes. Considering the recruitment stage alone, recruiters tend to rely on their internal biases, showing favoritism for male candidates over females, in addition to a strong intolerance towards women entering scientific fields (Gould, Schieder, Geier, 2016). As a result, men and women are directly filtered into higher- or lower-paying positions and occupations in the very first stages of the application process.
Likewise, employers have been shown to regularly hire males to positions of higher authority and autonomy or to assign different job titles within the same occupation, designating titles to men that constitute greater technical skills required (Jaffee, 1989). As a result, the difference in pay between men and women may greatly be attributed not to the allocation of pay between genders, but rather to the distribution of promotions and segregation of women into organizational positions that entail lower remuneration.
Another layer is added to these inequalities when it comes time to negotiate for raises or promotions. Despite popular belief, women have been found to ask for raises just as often as men, making it difficult to accredit lower wages and positions to higher rates of demand in males. Even still, while men have a 20% likelihood to receive the raise or promotion, women only have a 15% chance (Artz, Goodall, Oswald, 2018). To make matters worse, a double standard is typically applied during negotiations, labeling women as greedy or desperate in their demands, and men as ambitious. Subsequently, women then acquire a higher tendency to accept the initial pay offered without hesitating, as 70% of them acquiesce versus only 52% of men (Wilson, 2019).
2.1.4 Discrimination and Sexual Harassment
Aside from the discrepancies that are present within occupations, 32% of the gender gap corresponds to differences between female- and male-dominated fields. As working in an occupation dominated by the same gender typically reaps greater rewards, each gender more often chooses that type of position, further augmenting the underrepresentation of men and women in specific fields. Those that are female-dominated tend to pay less, resulting in an overrepresentation of women in the lowest-paying jobs (Jaffee, 1989).
Within mixed, or fully integrated, occupations, men usually enjoy greater rewards than women, including higher pay, authority, influence, and rank. Men who work in female-dominated professions additionally have higher rates of hierarchical advancement and exude more influence than women (Jaffee, 1989). On the flip side, women working in male-dominated professions are subject to strict evaluation on the balance of appearing too feminine and under-qualified versus lacking social skills and appearing too masculine (Gould, Schieder, Geier, 2016).
The choice in occupation, however, is not unbiased. A study conducted in 2018 revealed that approximately 38% of women experience sexual harassment in the workplace (Wilson, 2019). A further 63% of women working in STEM fields encounter this harassment, resulting in 52% of them quitting or sometimes abandoning the field completely (Gould, Schieder, Geier, 2016).
2021-5-3-1620060974