To what extent are gender differences in promotions due to working-time choices, care obligations, and firm policies?
The current picture of gender inequalities in the labor market appears rather complex. Most
experimental studies show little evidence of gender discrimination in hiring across different countries
(Birkelund et al. 2022; Lippens et al. 2022). At the same time, the gender wage gap both across and
within jobs (Penner et al. 2022) as well as the just gender wage gap are persistent (Auspurg et al. 2017): women receive lower wages than men and these lower wages are perceived as fair.
Being promoted to a leadership position is often accompanied by a pay rise but it also means an
increase in other job values such as autonomy, prestige, and power. Interestingly, findings on the
gender promotion gap are less consistent than those on the wage gap. For instance, Baert et al (2016) find that women receive fewer interview invitations than men for jobs implying a promotion. However, two recent factorial surveys on parenthood biases and flexible work arrangements in Spain focusing on economists (Fernandez‐Lozano et al. 2020) and in Germany focusing on accounting managers (Beham et al. 2019) found fatherhood rather than motherhood penalties.
Against this backdrop, we investigate gender gaps in promotions with a factorial survey experiment integrated into the 2022 wave of the BIBB Training Panel—a representative employer survey conducted in Germany. Our sample of more than 1770 employers allows us to go beyond previous research by studying employer preferences regarding promotions across different organizational and regional contexts. Each employer was randomly assigned to evaluate seven vignettes which were descriptions of hypothetical employees. Employers were asked how likely it is that they would promote the employee in question to team leader (scale from 0% to 100%). All hypothetical employees have a vocational qualification and have been working for the company since at least three years. In the vignettes, eight dimensions were experimentally varied in their levels: gender, age, professional and social competencies, working time, care obligations, partnership, and wage claim. Our factorial survey experiment is based on a D‐efficient sample including 455 vignettes à seven blocks (vignette universe: 1296). The order of the vignettes and the vignette attributes within each block were randomly varied.
We just got access to the data and can only present some very preliminary results. We find that female employees received significantly higher ratings than male employees. This female advantage, however, seems to be driven by organizations with larger shares of female employees. We cautiously interpret this result as being at least partly in line with theoretical accounts of tokenism. Men seem to be disadvantaged in contexts in which women dominate. As next steps, we will conduct further checks to test this and other explanations for the positive female effect. According to Booth et al. (2003) women might not be disadvantaged in comparison to men when it comes to promotions but they might not get the same remunerations as men. Moreover, we will apply alternative regressions models to achieve a better fit to our data and to tackle the nonlinear nature of the dependent variable.
experimental studies show little evidence of gender discrimination in hiring across different countries
(Birkelund et al. 2022; Lippens et al. 2022). At the same time, the gender wage gap both across and
within jobs (Penner et al. 2022) as well as the just gender wage gap are persistent (Auspurg et al. 2017): women receive lower wages than men and these lower wages are perceived as fair.
Being promoted to a leadership position is often accompanied by a pay rise but it also means an
increase in other job values such as autonomy, prestige, and power. Interestingly, findings on the
gender promotion gap are less consistent than those on the wage gap. For instance, Baert et al (2016) find that women receive fewer interview invitations than men for jobs implying a promotion. However, two recent factorial surveys on parenthood biases and flexible work arrangements in Spain focusing on economists (Fernandez‐Lozano et al. 2020) and in Germany focusing on accounting managers (Beham et al. 2019) found fatherhood rather than motherhood penalties.
Against this backdrop, we investigate gender gaps in promotions with a factorial survey experiment integrated into the 2022 wave of the BIBB Training Panel—a representative employer survey conducted in Germany. Our sample of more than 1770 employers allows us to go beyond previous research by studying employer preferences regarding promotions across different organizational and regional contexts. Each employer was randomly assigned to evaluate seven vignettes which were descriptions of hypothetical employees. Employers were asked how likely it is that they would promote the employee in question to team leader (scale from 0% to 100%). All hypothetical employees have a vocational qualification and have been working for the company since at least three years. In the vignettes, eight dimensions were experimentally varied in their levels: gender, age, professional and social competencies, working time, care obligations, partnership, and wage claim. Our factorial survey experiment is based on a D‐efficient sample including 455 vignettes à seven blocks (vignette universe: 1296). The order of the vignettes and the vignette attributes within each block were randomly varied.
We just got access to the data and can only present some very preliminary results. We find that female employees received significantly higher ratings than male employees. This female advantage, however, seems to be driven by organizations with larger shares of female employees. We cautiously interpret this result as being at least partly in line with theoretical accounts of tokenism. Men seem to be disadvantaged in contexts in which women dominate. As next steps, we will conduct further checks to test this and other explanations for the positive female effect. According to Booth et al. (2003) women might not be disadvantaged in comparison to men when it comes to promotions but they might not get the same remunerations as men. Moreover, we will apply alternative regressions models to achieve a better fit to our data and to tackle the nonlinear nature of the dependent variable.