2.5 Discussion and concluding remarks

The systematic review revealed that the barriers identified in the literature are interrelated and intertwined. The authors identified recurring patterns in the literature (vicious circles) within and between barriers. One of them is the double bind that results from gender stereotypes. Due to descriptive stereotypes, women are not regarded as competent, but when they have proven to be competent, they are (often) disliked. Another pattern is women’s lack of access to networks. Stereotypes hinder women in their access to social networks,1 which itself constitutes a barrier.2 Another pattern is the lack of self-promotion that has a reciprocal effect. Due to the lack of self-promotion, women can be blamed for not having leadership competencies, but if women promote themselves, they risk being negatively judged based on stereotypes.3 The barriers ‘organizational culture’ and ‘work-family balance/conflict’ are also tightly intertwined. Patriarchal and male-gendered working structures facilitate the association of full-time work, unbroken career paths and long working hours with commitment.4 Women with a family will find it difficult to comply with these norms and so may be regarded as less committed than men and excluded from leadership positions. It also causes women to refrain from applying for promotion opportunities and/or even to – partly or fully – resign from work.5 Therefore, work-family conflict/balance, organizational structures and stereotypes about women all influence women’s career choices and eventually determine whether women will be promoted to the corporate top. A paradox can be found in barrier 6, professional support. The lack of women at the corporate top affects women’s access to female mentors and role models. This can only change when more women enter the corporate top.

The synthesis also revealed that many barriers are multifaceted, i.e. that they have both features relating to the individual (i.e. women refrain from promotion opportunities and corporate top positions by choice or by enforcement) and organizational features (i.e. women are not selected for corporate top positions). Both contribute to women’s underrepresentation at the corporate top. Gender stereotypes impact the selection of women for management positions at the organizational level,6 as well as women’s desire to occupy such positions (individual level).7 Barrier 3, career preferences, has an individual aspect that shows why women refrain from leadership positions. However, as indicated before, it is not clear from the literature whether this barrier also has organizational features. Barrier 4, organizational culture, has organizational aspects: a masculine organizational culture defines commitment in male terms,8 which impacts the selection of women for top positions if they do not (fully) comply with this norm. This barrier also has individual aspects: due to a masculine culture and long-hours culture, women choose to refrain from promotion opportunities or quit their jobs.9 Barrier 5, work-family balance/conflict, also has organizational and individual features. Due to the perception of women to be less committed once they have a family or because of stereotypes, women can be excluded from promotion opportunities.10 At the individual level, women choose or are forced to refrain from their career or resign from their job (possibly rooted in stereotypical norms).11 Barrier 6, professional support, comprises organizational features, as having no access to networks and lack of mentoring both create hurdles for women who wish to be considered for promotion, as well as individual features, as role models steer women’s motivation for top positions.

The aforementioned relationships between the barriers and the multi-faceted nature of the barriers themselves show that it is difficult to regard the barriers in isolation.12 The barriers reinforce each other and further deteriorate women’s disadvantaged position by creating a vicious circle, from which it can be very difficult to escape. The multifaceted nature implies that the barriers cannot be overcome by individual women themselves nor by companies alone.

The barrier ‘gender stereotypes’ seems to be the most persistent barrier, as stereotypes play a role in almost all of the other barriers, as can be seen in Figure 2.3. Stereotypes about women result in prejudice and bias in women’s societal, economic, organizational and working environment and this is constantly reinforced by distorted human perceptions about women from both men and women. This review shows that besides barriers related to the disadvantaged position of women in societal, economic, organizational and work environments, there are also barriers related to women’s own choices, motivations, incentives and self-perceptions pertaining to career preferences. However, those personal preferences are also subject to prejudiced decisions, external and internal bias and the constant struggle of women to balance work and family life. This is also part of the vicious circle explained above.

The findings are partly in line with liberal feminism, which argues that stereo­types constitute a major barrier to gender equality. However, the review also indicates that women’s underrepresentation is attributed to the lack of gender-neutral organizations. This position is not reflected in liberal feminism,13 but belongs to socialist feminism. Therefore, the findings are also in line with socialist feminism.

According to liberal feminism, gender justice is only to be achieved if gender stereotypes are eliminated.14 However, the interrelatedness of the barriers suggests that the elimination of one barrier only such as stereotypes, might not eradicate women’s underrepresentation at the corporate top. However, as stereotypes are shown to be persistent and play a role in the other barriers, even if eliminating stereotypes might not on its own be enough, it would be a good starting point to achieve gender equality. One intervention that could be implemented to effectively eliminate stereotypes, is that companies define clear criteria for performance evaluations and promotion decisions.15