Gender differences in speed of advancement: An empirical examination of top executives in the Fortune 100 firms

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 708-737 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rocio Bonet ◽  
Peter Cappelli ◽  
Monika Hamori
2020 ◽  
pp. 002087282096221
Author(s):  
Junseob Shin

This exploratory study examined gender differences in perceptions of policy advocacy activities performed by top executive leaders in social work organizations. A nationwide survey of 233 top executives from two types of social work organizations in South Korea revealed gender differences in the perception of the level of one’s policy advocacy activities, where male executives were more likely to recognize their policy advocacy performance activities than were female executives. These gender differences were also confirmed in multiple regression analyses, which showed that gender was the only significant determinant for all three dependent variables of policy advocacy activities.


1991 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 177-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert M. Midkiff ◽  
Joy Patricia Burke

Using path analysis, the present investigation sought to clarify possible operational linkages among constructs from social learning and attribution theories within the context of a self-esteem system. Subjects were 300 undergraduate university students who completed a measure of self-esteem and indicated expectancies for success and minimal goal levels for an experimental task. After completing the task and receiving feedback about their performance, subjects completed causal attribution and self-esteem questionnaires. Results revealed gender differences in the degree and strength of the proposed relations, but not in the mean levels of the variables studied. Results suggested that the integration of social learning and attribution theories within a single conceptual model provides a better understanding of students' behaviors and self-esteem in achievement situations.


2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 970-992 ◽  
Author(s):  
Biao Luo ◽  
Qiong Wang ◽  
Yuan Lu ◽  
Liang Liang

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine how subsidiary managers gain attention from top executives at headquarters for their desired issue in order to initiate a bottom-up change. Specifically, it focuses on relationships among a change issue’s characteristics, environmental threats and top executives’ attention. Design/methodology/approach – An empirical test of hypotheses by a hierarchical regression approach has been applied to analyse the data collected through a survey of 81 headquarters-subsidiary dyads in China. Findings – There are three main findings, including first, the headquarters’ attention is positively related to the organizational benefits of an issue; second, there exist inverted U-shaped curves between an issue’s legitimacy or novelty and the headquarters’ attention; and third, the headquarters’ attention to an issue is also moderated by environmental threats. Originality/value – The present study has noted that the headquarters’ attention to the issue varies not only according to the issue’s distinctive characteristics but also to their perception of environmental threats. It contributes to the advancement of organizational change theory by focusing on the empirical examination of an issue-selling process which is a key component part in a bottom-up change.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 322-324
Author(s):  
Thomas F. Burke

Purpose The purpose of this article was to describe a model for “hybrid speech telecoaching” developed for a Fortune 100 organization and offer a “thought starter” on how clinicians might think of applying these corporate strategies within future clinical practice. Conclusion The author contends in this article that corporate telecommunications and best practices gleaned from software development engineering teams can lend credibility to e-mail, messaging apps, phone calls, or other emerging technology as viable means of hybrid telepractice delivery models and offer ideas about the future of more scalable speech-language pathology services.


2006 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-31
Author(s):  
C ZUGCK ◽  
A FLUEGEL ◽  
L FRANKENSTEIN ◽  
M NELLES ◽  
M HAASS ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document