¶ … Glass Ceiling Cost You?
Peggy Stewart's article What Does the Glass Ceiling Cost You is getting into the problems related to gender faced in the 1980s and the early 1990s from the point-of-view of total costs. She uses the numbers from statistics results to support her argument in favor of excluding the glass ceiling to maximize profits.
The decision not to hire women based only on biases or hiring women in a corporation that is not prepare to use them will prove to be harmful to that company, corporation or institution because of the financial losses it will produce. The author uses the most effective way of proving her point-of-view, using numbers that speak in terms of losses. The first audit to "determine the costs to an organization of systemic gender bias" (Stewart) determined the audited company to become aware of the gender bias problems within and undertake measures to eliminate the glass ceiling in order to eliminate the related financial losses. Stewart uses the conclusions the consulting and training firm aha! that led such audits, starting with the impressive figure of $6.7million, the cost of sexual harassment suits for a company that had around 27,000 employees. Using reports statistics, conclusive studies led both on women and men employees regarding gender bias, Stewart identifies the place where they generate problems and how much it costs the companies.
The recruiters and managers who are conducting an interview for an upper management position are the starting point in perpetuating a gender bias they brought from home. However, even if women are hired in position where they will cooperate and compete with male workers, they are still facing discriminatory opportunities in training and development methods, despite equal or superior evaluations of their skills and competencies. Third, women themselves may be their own enemy in advancing in a carrier due to their self-image.
