Organizational Practices and Second-Generation Gender Bias: A Qualitative Inquiry into the Career Progression of U.S. State-Level Managers

• Author: Al C Johnson-Manning,Helisse Levine,Meghna Sabharwal,Maria D’Agostino
• DOI: 10.1177/02750740221086605
• Published date: 01 July 2022
• Date: 01 July 2022
• Subject Matter: Articles

Organizational Practices and Second-

Generation Gender Bias: A Qualitative

Inquiry into the Career Progression of

U.S. State-Level Managers

Maria D’Agostino

1

, Helisse Levine

2

, Meghna Sabharwal

3

,

and Al C Johnson-Manning

4

Abstract

Ely and Meyerson’s gendered organizations framework reconceptualizes traditional gender differences def‌ined by biology and

lack of structural opportunities, to a complex set of social relations in the workplace. We apply this framework to second-

generation gender bias to further understand impediments to women’s career progression in the public sector workplace. In-

depth interviews of state-level administrators in U.S. public sector agencies indicate that “narratives”perpetuate second-gen-

eration gender bias that is deeply ingrained in organizational practices and policies, especially for women and women of color.

This framework can be applied to future studies examining the gendered nature of organizations in different workplace set-

tings. Moving beyond already identif‌ied barriers, this study offers a comprehensive framework to understand how second-gen-

eration gender bias is central to long-standing workplace inequities.

Keywords

second-generation gender bias, gendered organizations, career progression, barriers to career progression, women in the

workplace

Introduction

Gender-related

1

differences in public sector career progres-

sion are due to a number of organizational practices deeply

ingrained in systemic norms, policies, and structures that

are biased (Acker, 1999; O’Neil & Hopkins, 2015). These

practices support deeply entrenched divisions and inequities

between men and women often in subtle and unintended

ways that appear to be gender-neutral (Ely & Myerson,

2000). Studies document that the gendered nature of organi-

zations negatively contributes to women’s equity in the

workplace, especially as they seek to advance to high-level

management and leadership positions (e.g., Hale, 1999;

Saidel & Loscocco, 2005; Acker, 2012; Olsson & Pringle,

2004; Agarwal, 2018). Despite this considerable literature,

one characteristic of gendered organizations that public

administration scholars have only marginally discussed

(Schacter 2015; Mastracci & Arreola, 2016) is

second-generation gender bias (SGGB). A subtle, less

visible, and oftentimes unintentional form of discrimination,

SGGB is def‌ined as invisible barriers to women’s advance-

ment that arise from cultural beliefs about gender, workplace

structures, practices, and patterns of interaction that inadver-

tently favor men (Batara et al., 2018; Calás & Smircich,

2009; Ely & Meyerson, 2000; Kolb & McGinn, 2009;

Madsen & Andrade, 2018; Sturm, 2001). Indeed, public

administration research on barriers to leadership positions

is not new. From Newman (1993) and Guy (1993, 1994) to

Alkadry and Tower (2014) and Hill et al. (2016), and

others (e.g., Kerr et al., 2002; Riccucci, 2009; Schachter,

2015; D’Agostino, 2017; Sabharwal, 2015; Sabharwal

et al., 2017; Stivers, 2002) public management scholars

who study gender have identif‌ied several barriers for

women to leadership positions (e.g., Alkadry, & Tower,

2014; D’Agostino & Levine, 2010; Newman, 1993; 1994;

Guy, 1993, 1994; Sabharwal, 2015; Stivers, 2002).

However, the extent to which SGGB has been studied in

1

Public Administration, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York, NY,

USA

2

Public Administration, Long Island University, Brooklyn, NY, USA

3

Public Affairs, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, USA

4

School of Economic, Political and Policy Sciences, The University of Texas

at Dallas, Dallas, TX, USA

Corresponding Author:

Maria D’Agostino, Public Administration, John Jay College of Criminal

Justice, 524 West 59th Street, New York, NY 10019, USA.

Email: mdagostino@jjay.cuny.edu

Article

American Review of Public Administration

2022, Vol. 52(5) 335–350

© The Author(s) 2022

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/02750740221086605

journals.sagepub.com/home/arp

public administration is minimal at best, with few exceptions

(D’Agostino et al., 2020; Schachter, 2015). This absence in

the literature lends itself to understanding how SGGB prohib-

its women’s career advancement in the public sector. Moving

beyond the already identif‌ied barriers, research on SGGB is a

critical step in addressing long-standing workplace

inequities.

Based on the themes and subthemes that emerge from

in-depth interviews of state-level administrators, this research

advances the gendered organizational literature by offering a

holistic approach to understand how gender bias is central to

long-standing workplace inequities. First, we consider gen-

dered organizations as a theoretical basis for women’s

career progression in the public sector. Next, we def‌ine

SGGB as a systemic and unintentional barrier to developing

equitable workplaces. We build on Ely and Myerson’s (2000)

framework on gendered workplace practices to describe

SGGB as an iterative process that inf‌luences (1) formal pro-

cedures and practices, (2) informal practices—including

norms and patterns of work, and (3) narratives that perpetuate

gender inequities in organizations. Methods and analysis

follow, concluding with areas for future study.

Literature Review

Gendered Organizations

In 1990, Joan Acker recognized that it was not individuals in

an organization that was gendered, but the organizations

themselves. In contrast to the long-standing way of thinking

about gendered organizations, where women themselves

were considered the problem (Britton & Logan, 2008),

Acker offered a new way of thinking about how gender is

built into the structure of work organizations (Williams

et al., 2012). Acker’s Theory of Gendered Organizations

Acker’s (1992) describes gender as a central component in

organizations that “presents in the processes, practices,

images and ideologies, and distributions of power”

(p. 567). Several studies since have relied on Acker (1990;

1992) to understand gender inequities in the public sector

workplace including representative bureaucracy (Saidel &

Loscocco, 2005; Martin, 1992), higher education, police

departments (Davies & Thomas, 2002; McTavish and

Thomson, 2007), and as a result of exogenous forces, such

as the sociopolitical environment (Ward, 2004). Most

recently, Springer’s (2020) work on gendered theory

focuses on how performance metrics are inherently designed

to favor masculinity leading to gender inequity in perfor-

mance evaluations.

Also building on Acker’s theory, Britton’s (2000) gen-

dered organization typology classif‌ies workplace gender

inequities as (1) being inherently gendered, (2) distributed

disproportionately by gender, and (3) embedded in social

practices. The f‌irst perspective maintains that hierarchies

will sustain and reproduce gender inequities. Public

administration research (e.g., DeHart-Davis, 2009; Baron

et al., 2007; Kmec, 2005) that applies this perspective pro-

poses that bureaucratic practices can reduce bias. The

second perspective argues that the extent to which organiza-

tions are male or female-dominated, that is, regardless of the

organizational form (i.e., bureaucratic), an organization’s

inequities will persist unless men and women are distributed

throughout the organization (Rubin, 2000; Alkadry &

Towers, 2011; Choi, 2018). The third perspective, which

identif‌ies gender in social practices, acknowledges that orga-

nizations are gendered in the behaviors and practices that

they value (Britton 2000; Ely & Meyerson, 2000). Ely and

Meyerson (2000) argue that the unbalanced inf‌luence of

gender within an organization is not due to sex differences,

but rather the result of “a complex social process enacted

across a range of organizational phenomena, from formal

policies and practices to informal patterns of everyday inter-

action, which appear to be gender-neutral on their face, yet

ref‌lect and maintain a gendered order in which men and

various forms of masculinity remain”(p. 590). However,

most public administration research on the topic of bias has

been both descriptive and limited. Mastracci and Bowman

(2015) call for more empirical studies to fully explore how

gendered organizations contribute to inequity, obstructing

women’s career progression in the public sector.

Also inherent in gendered organizations, intersectionality

considers the various ways in which multiple social catego-

ries intersect to shape outcomes for women in the workplace

(Shelby Rosette et al., 2018). According to Acker (2012)

“gendered processes do not stand alone, but intersect with

and are shaped by race and class processes, as well as other

forms of inequality and exclusion”(p. 214).

Intersectionality, coined by Crenshaw in 1989, explains

how race and gender intersect to reproduce racism and

sexism against women of color (Stainback et al., 2016;

Heckler, 2019). According to Bishu et al. (2020) intersection-

ality also describes how gender and race inf‌luence and

contour work-related outcomes in varying ways. Therefore,

it is important to consider and acknowledge that those who

fall within the intersection of race and gender identity f‌ind

themselves in a “double bind”of more pronounced, or com-

pounding, barriers to success (Martinez, 2021).

Second-Generation Gender Bias

Having replaced overt discrimination (e.g., f‌irst-generation

gender bias), SGBB pertains to a stealthy form of discrimina-

tion against women in society and the workplace which lacks

the intent to exclude or to produce direct harm to women in

society (Ibarra et al., 2013a). Unlike implicit bias, which

refers to an individual’s general attitudes or stereotypes

(Greenwald & Krieger, 2006), SGGB is embedded in a “set

of social relations enacted across social practices”(Ely &

Meyerson, 2000, p. 113). SGGB embodies organizational

practices that may appear neutral on the surface, yet ref‌lect

336 American Review of Public Administration 52(5)