A Systematic Review of the Gender Pay Gap and Factors That Predict It

• Published date: 01 January 2017
• Author: Sebawit G. Bishu,Mohamad G. Alkadry
• Date: 01 January 2017
• DOI: 10.1177/0095399716636928
• Subject Matter: Articles

Administration & Society

2017, Vol. 49(1) 65 –104

© The Author(s) 2016

DOI: 10.1177/0095399716636928

journals.sagepub.com/home/aas

Article

A Systematic Review of

the Gender Pay Gap and

Factors That Predict It

Sebawit G. Bishu1 and Mohamad G. Alkadry1

Abstract

This study conducts a systematic review of 98 peer-reviewed journal articles

that empirically investigate the presence of the gender pay gap along with

factors that espouse it in organizations. The purposes of this study are

threefold. First, it aims to explore trends in recurring themes that surface as

factors that engender the gender pay gap in the workforce. Second, based

on identified themes, the review summarizes and compares the gender pay

gap by sector. Finally, the study presents a discussion on how the public

sector fairs out in closing the gender pay gap and factors that predict it.

Keywords

public sector, the gender pay gap, equal employment opportunity, workplace

authority, access to hiring and promotion, gender representtaion

Introduction

Gender research has largely evolved from normative to empirical investiga-

tion over the past few decades. Public administration research also became

more focused on understanding gender and race difference in workplace

opportunities. The study of disparities in access to workplace opportunities is

important because it has social, economic, and physiological implications as it

1Florida International University, Miami, USA

Corresponding Author:

Sebawit G. Bishu, Florida International University, 11200 SW 8th Street, Miami,

FL 33199, USA.

Email: Sbish010@fiu.edu

636928AASXXX10.1177/0095399716636928Administration & SocietyBishu and Alkadry

research-article2016

66 Administration & Society 49(1)

pertains to access to such opportunities (Huffman & Cohen, 2004; Jaffee,

1989; R. A. Smith, 2002; Wright, Baxter, & Birkelund, 1995). Economic

reward is the most frequently measured aspect of rewards related to workplace

opportunities. Besides, what makes workplace disparity (particularly disparity

in economic rewards derived from lack of access to opportunities) important

is that not all disparities can be explained by differences in human capital and

skill competencies. The effect of non-competency and non-work-related traits

(e.g., gender, race, or ethnicity) on access to workplace opportunities creates

advantages to some, while denying these advantages to others who are equally,

or more, qualified. As a measure to address such discriminatory practices in

the workforce in the United States, Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

was instated and has since been implemented through Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission (EEOC) federal level agency. Title IV of the Civil

Rights Act provides protection against employment discrimination based on

race, gender, religion, or country of origin (42 SEC. 2000e-2).

For many years, researchers have been trying to identify forms of work-

place discrimination, particularly gender- and race-based discrimination

practices in the United States and across the globe. These studies have mostly

investigated single types of discrimination, such as the pay gap, access to

promotion, access to authority and others. Very few studies have taken the

challenge of conducting a meta-analysis of past studies that estimate the

effect of gender-based discrimination on women in the workforce. Particularly,

three peer-reviewed journal articles (see Jarrell & Stanley, 2004; Stanley &

Jarrell, 1998; Weichselbaumer & Winter-Ebmer, 2005) conducted meta-

analyses of the gender pay gap in the workforce. However, none have carried

out a systematic review of exiting literature on the pay gap and factors that

induce it. This study addresses the gap in literature by reviewing past studies

to identify recurring themes that are associated with the gender pay gap.

Besides, with an emphasis on the public sector this study provides a compari-

son of how different sectors perform on closing the pay gap.

The purpose of this study is, first, to identify and summarize drivers of

the pay gap as identified in previous studies. Second, we investigate how the

public sector compares with the private and multi-sector environments in the

provision of equal opportunity to its workforce. Finally, we identify and dis-

cuss areas that the public sector has progressed in closing the pay gap and

others where it has lagged behind.

The study has four main sections: The section “Data and Method” presents

a rational for data and methodology used in the study. The section “Recurring

Theme on Drivers of the Pay Gap” presents a general summary on recurring

themes from the systematic review of past studies that investigate the gender

pay gap in the workforce. The section “Sector Comparison by Theme” presents

Bishu and Alkadry 67

a comparison of public sector, private sector and multi-sector organizations as

it pertains to the gender pay gap and factors that predict it. This section also

aims to investigate whether the trends observed in the themes are consistent or

different across the three sectors. By doing so, we intend to identify whether

fundamental sector value differences espouse different outcomes on gender

equity in their workforce. The section “Discussion” presents an in-depth dis-

cussion on where the public sector stands in establishing pay equity and closing

gaps on factors that espouse it. This systematic review therefore addresses the

following three research questions:

Research Question 1: What recurring themes explain the gender pay gap

in the workforce?

Research Question 2: Based on identified recurring themes, are there

sector differences in the gender pay gap and factors that engender it?

Research Question 3: Based on trends that explain the gender pay gap

across sectors, how does the public sector fair out compared to other sec-

tors in terms of providing equal opportunities to women in the workforce?

Data and Method

This section discusses systematic review as a research tool and the rational

for using systematic review in this study. Following that, a discussion is pre-

sented on article selection, inclusion criteria, as well as methodology

employed to review articles included in the study.

Systematic Review

Systematic review is a research tool that helps collect, summarize, and syn-

thesize findings from past studies in a meaningful way. Petticrew and Roberts

(2006) argue that this research tool has become increasingly relevant in the

social sciences to synthesize evidence from past studies “to answer questions

about etiology (causes of problems) or about people’s experiences” (p. xiii-

xiv). It is particularly helpful to form a conclusion about a subject matter

based on findings from past studies, which could have otherwise been diffi-

cult to manage. In the same line of argument, Glass, McGaw, and Smith

(1981) present that such research tools help utilize findings from past studies

to understand trends and predict cumulative findings on the position of a

subject matter of interest. Petticrew and Roberts also argue that

The systematic review by contrast adopts a particular methodology in an

endeavor to limit bias, with the overall aim of producing a scientific summary