Token Status and Management Aspirations Among Male and Female Employees in Public Sector Workplaces

AuthorVibeke Lehmann Nielsen,Mikkel Bo Madsen
DOI10.1177/0091026018808822
Published date01 June 2019
Date01 June 2019
Subject MatterArticles
/tmp/tmp-18UhQOkWOpg8Yd/input 808822PPMXXX10.1177/0091026018808822Public Personnel ManagementNielsen and Madsen
research-article2018
Article
Public Personnel Management
2019, Vol. 48(2) 226 –251
Token Status and
© The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
Management Aspirations
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026018808822
DOI: 10.1177/0091026018808822
journals.sagepub.com/home/ppm
Among Male and Female
Employees in Public
Sector Workplaces
Vibeke Lehmann Nielsen1 and Mikkel Bo Madsen2
Abstract
This study brings the literature on tokenism together with multiple theoretical lenses
on the formation and social construction of men’s and women’s career aspirations.
The study builds on comprehensive survey data from the Danish public sector. Results
show that, after controlling for alternative explanations with respect to both personal
life situation and differences between occupations, token status has a significantly
negative effect on women’s management aspirations, while it has no effect on men’s
aspirations to management. Furthermore, these findings are generalizable across
occupational contexts. At the same time, however, analysis across occupations show
that token women are mainly to be found in occupations where women have relatively
high managerial aspirations. Token women are therefore characterized by aspirations
to management positions, but their status as tokens minimizes these aspirations.
Keywords
career aspirations, token, gender studies, public management
Introduction
The extensive vertical gender segregation in the labor market exclude women from
the top of the hierarchical structures and limits the resource pool from which society
can pick future managers (Charles, 2003; Hultin, 2003; Reskin, 1993; Reskin,
McBrier, & Kmec, 1999; Tomaskovic-Devey et al., 2006). The leaky pipeline theory
describes the progressive attrition of women between job entry and managing career
1Aarhus University, Denmark
2Metropolitan University College, Copenhagen, Denmark
Corresponding Author:
Vibeke Lehmann Nielsen, Aarhus University, Bartholins Allé 7, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
Email: vln@ps.au.dk

Nielsen and Madsen
227
positions (Mariani, 2008). Despite government efforts and interventions to promote
gender equality (e.g., employment equity, pay equity, nondiscrimination acts, etc.),
women continue to be underrepresented in management positions. As Schweitzer,
Ng, Lyons, and Kuron (2011) point, equal opportunities for advancement might for-
mally reduce gender inequality, but if male and female employees do not use the
opportunities equally because of different levels of aspirations, it does not solve
matters of recruitment. To better explain the gendered career gap, Schweitzer et al.
(2011) suggest we consider the career aspirations of those within the pipeline. In this
article, we focus on gender differences in career aspirations with a particular focus
on the correlation between gender token status and management aspirations. Hence,
we explore the association of vertical gender segregation in the labor market with
another feature of the labor market, namely, horizontal gender segregation. Because
of persistent—both vertical and horizontal—gender segregation of the labor market,
researchers from different social sciences have brought considerable attention to
exploring the experiences of norm-breaking individuals in gender-atypical jobs and
occupations (Cognard-Black, 2004; Floge & Merrill, 1986; Kanter, 1977a, 1977b;
Williams, 1992; Yoder, 1994; Zimmer, 1988). Employees, who are minority repre-
sentatives of their gender in the workplace (e.g., female firefighters), are known as
“tokens” (Kanter, 1977a), and the interactional patterns and social processes specific
to tokens are known as tokenism.
Often building on case studies utilizing qualitative methods, gender tokenism
research finds that token women typically experience isolation, stereotyping, and
other difficulties that restrain their integration in the workplace and even more their
ascension up the hierarchies (Floge & Merrill, 1986; Greed, 2000; Kanter, 1977a,
1977b; Turco, 2010). Conversely, token men often appear to benefit from the token
position (Fairhurst & Snavely, 1983a; Williams, 1992, 1995; Yoder & Sinnett, 1985).
Referring metaphorically to the possibilities for hierarchical ascension, it has been
stated that female tokens hit a “glass ceiling” (Bendl & Schmidt, 2010; Yoder, 1991)
or stick to a “sticky floor” (Yap & Konrad, 2009), whereas token men as, for exam-
ple, male nursery teachers, nurses, or midwifes ride a “glass escalator” (Williams,
1992). In contrast to case studies exploring work-related experiences among gender
tokens, quantitative studies on tokenism focus on the effects of token status on out-
comes like wages, promotions, and turnover (Budig, 2002; Cognard-Black, 2004;
Hultin, 2003; Maume, 1999). The quantitative studies show mixed findings regard-
ing effects of gender token status. Hence, there seems to be a need for studies that
focus on gender token status effects not just across men and women but also across
different occupational contexts.
This quantitative—cross-sectional—study brings the literature on tokenism together
with recent theories and research on the formation and social construction of men’s and
women’s career aspirations in gendered organizational work contexts (Cohen & Swim,
1995; Correll, 2001, 2004). We explore the following questions:
•• Does workplace token status affect management aspirations of women and
men?

228
Public Personnel Management 48(2)
•• Does workplace token status affect men’s and women’s management aspirations
alike?
•• Are the effects of workplace token status to men and women generalizable across
different occupational contexts?
The study analyzes unique survey data from workplaces within a wide range of
public sector occupations in Denmark (13 in all, see list of occupations in Table 1).
The data consists of an equal number of women and men from each of the 13 occu-
pations. This sample composition allows us to compare workplace tokens with
nontokens and women with men across a range of highly different occupational
settings, each representing different opportunity structures with regard to, for
example, career ladders, occupational responsibilities, and salary.1 Further con-
trolling for working hours, tenure, and family situation, our study has good pros-
pects for determining whether workplace token status has implications that are
generalizable across different gender and occupations. Hence, empirically, our
study expands on existing token research by exploring the possible associations
between gender token status and men’s and women’s career aspirations, with a
particular view to the generalizability of gender token processes across a range of
occupational settings. Theoretically, our contribution lies in the joining of theories
on tokenism with theories on the formation of career aspirations in gendered work
contexts.
Research on Workplace Tokenism
Token Experiences
In her seminal study of Fortune 500 Company “Indsco,” Kanter (1977a, 1977b) finds
that token female sales managers shared numerous experiences related to their token
status. The token women at “Indsco” felt they had to work harder (than their male
peers) to receive recognition for individual achievements, and any mistakes were
closely scrutinized and criticized. Highly visible female tokens felt pressured to
prove their professional worth as compared with their male peers. Kanter concluded
that the token “Indsco” women were restrained and did not enjoy the same career
opportunities as men.
Kanter’s observations and theoretical analyses laid the ground for many later stud-
ies of tokenism in organizations, and her results have been tested and reproduced
among token women in a number of organizational settings: female police officers
(Gustafson, 2008; Ott, 1989), firefighters (Yoder & McDonald, 1998), engineers
(McIlwee & Robinson, 1992), construction workers (Greed, 2000), Wall Street profes-
sionals (Roth, 2004), and female physicians (Floge & Merrill, 1986). Many of these
studies confirm that women in gender-atypical occupations encounter the negative
experiences described by Kanter. Some studies also present results contradicting
Kanter’s perspective, however, most notably Hammond and Mahoney’s (1983) study
of seemingly well-placed and confident female Appalachian coal miners.

Nielsen and Madsen
229
In her original interpretation, Kanter theorized that the token processes were uni-
versal and ascribable solely to the numerical relationships between social categories
in the workplaces. In Kanter’s definition, token persons belong to the 15% minority
in skewed groups, while the 85% majority, according to Kanter, make up the “domi-
nants.” Later tokenism researchers have defined tokens differently. Some have
emphasized the importance of being a single representative for ones’ group (Konrad,
Kramer, & Erkut, 2008), while others have utilized more relaxed statistical measures
(Budig, 2002).
Kanter (1977a) assumes that “the same pressures and processes can occur around
people of any social category who find themselves few of their kind among others of
a different social type” (p. 240). According to this understanding, all token persons
(females and males, Whites and Blacks, etc.) should expect to encounter the same
hardships found among female tokens at “Indsco.”
Gender Differences in Tokenism
Kanter’s expectation to...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT