Social role theory, gender diversity, and workplace inequality in the U.S. workforce

There has been a lot of progress when it comes to gender diversity. However, a lot of work remains to be done. Indeed, there is a cacophony of issues that keep cropping up including talk about the glass escalator vs. the glass ceiling, the myth that women are on equal status with men to this very day, the historical role of gender and diversity over the course of the history of the United States, the very different definitions of sex and gender and so forth. The recent Supreme Court of the United States decision that ensconced gay marriage as being an equal right that people in the LGBT community should enjoy as a civil right was a milestone moment. While this is an encouraging event and people in the workplace should not allow sexual behavior or gender/sexual identity to become an issue, there is still a lot of ignorance and prejudice out there towards women and other people that remain persecuted for gender or sexual issues. Analysis
There is no doubt that what makes people different is too often a divisive and disruptive force in the workplace. While one might hope that arguments and disagreement do not come up in the workplace, they happen and they absolutely happen along social lines. Whether it be race, gender, sexuality or other things, what makes people different becomes a point of division in arguments and situations that really do not call for as such. At the very least, the differing perspectives should lead to a healthy debate rather than the acrimony and bigotry that ends up occurring all too often. There are many, including Sherry Schneider and Gregory Northcraft, that assert that social identity theory and social role theory should be used to understand the problems and dilemmas that arise so as to develop solutions and resolutions to problems rather than allowing infighting and division-style tactics to ruin any sort of synergy or calm in an organization (Schneider & Northcraft, 1999).

One thing that was mentioned several times in the introduction, and not by accident, is the difference between gender and sex. There is not a question as to what someone is born as from a sexual standpoint at birth. Of course, this construct is entirely physical and the gender or gender identity of a person can be an entirely different thing. As explained by Monash University, sex refers specifically and only to biological characteristics and difference. It pertains to things like chromosomes, hormonal profiles and the sex organs that are physically present. While these can indeed be altered through reassignment surgery and the like, the vast majority of people are born male or female, but this is in terms of biological definitions and traits. What is in the mind and "being" of a person can be along those same lines or they may be different. Indeed, a person's gender references the characteristics of a person and how they dovetail with masculine and/or feminine traits. A common and historical example would be term "tomboy." This, of course, references a person born as a girl that acts and dresses very much like a boy. This does not mean that they are anything other than straight. However, it is a person that is a woman (at birth, anyhow) that exhibits traits that are masculine in nature. Concurrent to that would be the sexual preferences of that person. That person may be inherently attracted to men but they may also be a lesbian or even a transgender. It really depends on the mind state of the person as they age and what direction their mind and biology take them as they age (Monash, 2016).

As for gender and the workforce, women have commonly been subjugated and minimalized in terms of their roles and options for much of the history of the United States. The last century, however, has been pivotal in terms of changes for women. Of course, much progress remaisn to be gained but the overall trend is obviously quite good. In 1920, women were only about a fifth of all workers, as they made up 21% of the workforce at that point. As of 2010, that number had shifted to 47% of employed persons. This is obviously not quite half but it is more than a two-fold increase from four generations prior. The women's suffrage movement, the labor that was necessary during the World Wars and a few other events over the course of American history has served as catalysts for long and sustained social change. Wage gaps remain to this very day but the momentum is clearly moving in the right direction (DOL, 2016).

Now this report comes to the idea of the glass ceiling versus that of the glass escalator. The glass ceiling, as many know, is when a woman appears to hit a "ceiling" once they reach a certain level of management or other power in an organization. This would be typified by a company that might have one or two vice presidents or other high-level executives that are women but the highest echelons of power are all possessed by men. The glass escalator, on the other hand, would be when a woman seems to rise higher and faster when they are in a job field that is dominated by women. As an example, men would quite likely be most of the management (and certainly the top management) in fields like computer programming, engineering and so forth. On the other hand, women would probably do quite well in fields where they are dominant such as in nursing and human resources. While some might think this duality is cancelling, it certainly is not. Concurrent to the fact that there is a wage gap when it comes to men and women, it would be folly to say that this is only because of career "interruptions" such as a pregnancy or some other life event where the woman would tap the brakes on their career so as to take on another role. Indeed, when looking at glass escalator beneficiaries (e.g. female nursing executives) versus glass ceiling beneficiaries (male executives at information technology firms), it becomes even clearer that women are still lagging behind for no good reason because the men usually outweigh the men. Indeed, it is obvious and apparent to many that female-dominated fields tend to earn less than male-dominated fields. In short, women have certainly made inroads but they are not among the elite wage earners even when they exist at the highest points of organizational and/or corporate power (Women Empowered, 2016).

When it comes to the ways that companies and other organizations can take on this problem head-on, the huge thing that needs to be instilled and enforced is the idea of cultural competence and training for the same. As explained by the California Board of Psychology, the teaching of this competence needs to start before people reach their desired career fields. Indeed, they note that students in psychology, just as one example, should be shown how to exist and flourish with people of diverse backgrounds including those that are different from an ethnicity, race, socioeconomic class, sexual orientation, gender or religious standpoint. Indeed, differences can divide with people that have the wrong understandings and backgrounds and those people need to be taught how to do the opposite. However, to just stop there is a bad idea and the lessons that can be taught should be levied by businesses and other organizations as needed. The California Board of Psychology notes that "the perpetuation of racism affects the mental health of all in our society and it is important intervention strategy to address deleterious societal issues. One could just as easily discuss sexism, homophobia and other bigotry using the same statement and context. Perpetuation of hate and in all of its forms needs to be stomped out via any means necessary and organizational leadership and management plays a part in the broader effort to do just that (CBOS, 2016).

However, there are limits to what businesses and even psychologists/psychiatrists can do. Once a person reaches adulthood, there has to be some modicum of acceptance and/or cooperation for any changes to bigotry to be changed. Indeed, if someone is born and raised to see and treat women as anything less than equals, it can be hard to change those habits and set a new pattern. Regardless of the level of dysfunction and problems that a person has from a mental standpoint, they have to be part of the solution and they need to work on themselves as others try to do the same. To use a related example, a drug user that is addicted to heroin or crack cocaine would have to completely change their habits and lifestyle. They would need to avoid their drug-using friends or family in an intentional and unflinching way, they would need to get rehabilitation and counseling to kick their habit and they would then need to remain on the right path once their new life has started. If the person chooses not to make those choices in a complete and honest way, they will likely return to their life of drug use and it will eventually consume them. Racism, sexism and other mental dysfunctions are not all that different. The person has to realize that they have been acting and thinking wrong and they have to want to change. Even if the person happens upon an organization that does not tolerate bigotry in all of its forms, the person could always just decide to not accept the change and leave. In that way, organizations doing the right thing and mandating acceptance and equal treatment of all people (including along gender and sexuality lines) can only do so much. That being said, these organizations doing this more and more over time will lead to social change eventually and the bigots will become more and more of a minority. However, that sort of change can literally take generations to truly see the results of. As noted earlier, the shift from 1920 to now (or even 1960's to now) has been obvious and apparent, albeit still in progress. Conclusion
There is no doubt that women and sexual/gender minorities have made a lot of progress over the last century. The LGBT community in particular has seen a lot of advancement in the last ten to twenty years alone. However, a lot of gaps and problems still exist and there is no reasonable expectation that they will disappear overnight. However, through continued, protracted and focused effort, women will eventually have a true seat at the table of power.

References

CBOS. (2016). Diversity-Based Psychology: What Practitioners & Trainers Need to Know. California Board of Psychology. Retrieved 4 September 2016, from http://www.psychology.ca.gov/forms_pubs/diversity_based.pdf

DOL. (2016). WB - Our History (An Overview 1920-2012). dol.gov. Retrieved 5 September 2016, from https://www.dol.gov/wb/info_about_wb/interwb.htm

Monash. (2016). What is the difference between sex and gender?. Med.monash.edu.au. Retrieved 5 September 2016, from http://www.med.monash.edu.au/gendermed/sexandgender.html

Schneider, S. & Northcraft, G. (1999). Three Social Dilemmas of Workforce Diversity in Organizations: A Social Identity Perspective. Human Relations, 52(11), 1445-1467. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872679905201105

Women Empowered. (2016). The Glass Ceiling vs. the Glass Escalator - Women Empowered. Women-empowered.com. Retrieved 5 September 2016, from http://women-empowered.com/2013/03/the-glass-ceiling-vs.-the-glass-escalator/