The Motherhood Penalty: How Gender and Parental Status

University of Rhode Island University of Rhode Island

DigitalCommons@URI DigitalCommons@URI

Seminar Research Paper Series Schmidt Labor Research Center

2013

The Motherhood Penalty: How Gender and Parental Status The Motherhood Penalty: How Gender and Parental Status

In8uence Judgements of Job-Related Competence and In8uence Judgements of Job-Related Competence and

Organizational Commitment Organizational Commitment

Noël Burgess

University of Rhode Island

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/lrc_paper_series

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation

Burgess, Noël, "The Motherhood Penalty: How Gender and Parental Status In8uence Judgements of Job-

Related Competence and Organizational Commitment" (2013).

Seminar Research Paper Series.

Paper 32.

https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/lrc_paper_series/32

This Seminar Paper is brought to you by the University of Rhode Island. It has been accepted for inclusion in

Seminar Research Paper Series by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information,

please contact [email protected]. For permission to reuse copyrighted content, contact the author

directly.

The Motherhood Penalty: How Gender and Parental Status Influence

Judgments of Job-Related Competence and Organizational Commitment

Noël Burgess

University of Rhode Island

The Motherhood Penalty is an ongoing problem in the United States as many women find

themselves working full-time after becoming mothers. Women who become mothers are

perceived as less competent, less committed, and thus less employable and/or promotable

in the workplace. Unfortunately the status of “mother” has certain perceptions associated

with it that are incompatible with the image of an “ideal worker.” Given this reality, the

purpose of this research, which uses a literature review, is to examine the reasons for the

Motherhood Penalty, the theory behind the negative perceptions of mothers, and how

women and organizations can confront these realities.

Even though female labor force participation

has increase dramatically during the past thirty

years, women still encounter barriers that prevent

them from attaining success as quickly as men

(Hielman & Okimoto, 2008). Mothers face even

greater challenges than childless women owing to

often false judgments about their competence,

which lead to negative workplace outcomes

(Correll, Benard, & Paik, 2007). In comparison, men

do not face the same negative perceptions when

they become fathers (Gungor & Biernat, 2009).

In this paper, I examine how mothers are

perceived in the workplace compared to childless

women and men. The purpose of this literature

review is to compare the relative effects of gender

and parental status on evaluations of work

performance. Prior to reporting the findings of the

literature review, several relevant theories will be

discussed.

PENALTY FOR PARENTHOOD

There is growing evidence that women suffer

additional disadvantages in the workplace when

they become mothers. A Budig and England (2001)

study shows, for example, that employed mothers

in the U.S. experience, on average, a five percent

wage penalty per child even after controlling for

other factors that affect earnings. Regardless of

the precise percentage, the Motherhood Penalty is

detrimental to all women in the workplace.

Research has found that all women of

childbearing age face some disparity because

employers expect they will have children at some

point during their careers (Etaugh and Study, 1989).

Women with children, however, are more

disadvantaged than both men and childless female

employees (Heilman and Okimoto, 2003). This

disadvantage begins early in the employment

process. Despite the Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission prohibiting discrimination

against women on the basis of pregnancy, pregnant

women are still being rejected for employment on

that basis (EEOC, 2013).

Motherhood as a Status Characteristic

Motherhood is a role with a distinct status,

independent of implications associated with gender

(Ridgeway & Correll, 2004). According to Ridgeway

and Correll (2004) women are generally perceived

as less competent than men, and mothers are

perceived as being even less competent than men

and childless women. This perception may be

caused by a belief that a mother could not be an

“ideal worker.” With an “ideal worker” being

defined as one who typically works forty hours a

week or more; works without interruption until

retirement; and focuses the majority of her time

and resources on her job (Ridgeway and Correll,

2004).

As a result of societal expectations of the

inherent responsibilities of motherhood, a penalty

is assessed on mothers who work because of the

violation of workplace norms (i.e. the perception of

an “ideal worker”) and social norms (i.e. raising the

children, housework, etc).

Glass Ceiling

The concept of “glass ceiling” refers to the

“artificial barriers to the advancement of

women…it is unseen, yet an unbreachable barrier

that keeps women from rising to the upper rungs of

the corporate ladder (Federal Glass Ceiling

Commission, 1995).” The glass ceiling comprises

two different components: the first makes it harder

for women to be seen as competent; the other

assesses women’s performance with stricter

standards than men’s.

Women are caught in a paradox--if they are

perceived as too feminine, they are perceived as

not qualified; yet if they are not feminine enough

they are perceived as competent but lacking in

social skills (Williams, 2005). Hence, for women you

can be competent or liked, but not both.

Maternal Wall and Mommy Track

The “maternal wall” is sometimes triggered

when a women is pregnant and decides to take

maternity leave (Williams & Segal, 2003). It is the

continuation of negative associations of glass

ceiling effects but specifically for mothers. Due to

the stereotypes associated with a woman who

works, particularly one who stays employed after

becoming a mother for personal satisfaction rather

than due to financial need, she is considered to be

outside the norm and is looked at negatively by her

those in her organization (Ridgeway & Correll,

2004; Barnet, 2004).

For women to succeed in light of ideal worker

norms, women must forgo having children or be

able to maintain the work habits of men or

childless women, despite the fact that mothers

typically are responsible for most child-rearing

(Crosby, Williams, Biernat, 2004). For many women

this tension is unsustainable and leads to serious

conflict between work and private life.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does parenthood effect judgments of women

and men to the degree that mothers are held to

different employment standards than childless

women and men with or without children? Before

examining the empirical research on this issue,

underlying theory is reviewed.

SOCIAL THEORIES

Social Role Theory

Social role theory suggests that men and

women behave differently in social situations and

take on distinctive roles, because of the

expectations society places upon them (Eagly,

1984). Gender roles are conceptualized as the

beliefs about the characteristics of women and

men (Eagly, 1984). Eagly (1987) asserts that the

classification of roles for men and women—for

example, breadwinner versus homemaker—have

contributed to gender differences through

stereotypes, expectations, beliefs, attitudes, and

skills. This, in turn, leads to differences in behavior

by men and women.

Gender role violations occur when men and

women to cross into counter-stereotypic roles.

Men are generally possessing the status of

breadwinner, which is associated with “agentic”

characteristics such as commitment and

competence. Whereas women traditionally have

the status of caregiver and are associated with

more communal characteristics such as: warmth,

nurturing, and submissiveness (Eagly, 1984). While

some of these perceptions have no doubt changed

since Eagly’s work in the 1980s, many persist.

Consequently, these concepts of social role

influence employers regarding female workers

once they become mothers because women are

expected to be committed more to their children,

thus less committed to their work (Eagly, 1987).

Role Congruity Theory

Role congruity theory addresses the association

between gender roles and other roles. In addition it

points to some of the specific variables that lead to

negative consequences when there is a perceived

lack of congruity (Eagly & Karau, 1991). The less

congruity between the role of women and the role

of worker, the greater are the negative

expectations about a woman’s performance.

Women are prone to discriminatory behavior when

the role of a woman or mother contradicts the

perceptions of a successful worker. Discrimination

may occur when companies perceive mothers as

Burgess – Perception of Competence

workers because of the incongruence between the

communal qualities associated with motherhood

and the agentic qualities associated with being a

successful employee (Eagly & Karau, 1991).

Stereotyping

Stereotypes are characteristics ascribed to

individuals based on their association with a social

group (Dickman & Eagly, 2000). Stereotyping has

led to the idea that men and women are different

with regard to traits associated with commitment

and productivity in the workplace. Therefore, men

are described as strong-minded, independent, and

aggressive, while women are perceived as

sympathetic, helpful, and kind (Heilman &

Okimoto, 2003). These ideas help illustrate how

gender stereotypes contribute to the treatment of

women in the workplace.

Cognitive bias may occur when an employer

disadvantages women by assuming that they will

conform to a stereotype. For example, an employer

assuming that mothers will work fewer hours after

they have children is an example of how

stereotyping is dangerous. This perceived lack of

congruence between being a women and an

employee is incompatible with jobs stereotyped as

requiring agentic (i.e. masculine) qualities. This may

result in reduced expectations of success for

women and reluctance to hire, promote, or train

them (Biernat & Kobrynowicz, 1997).

Descriptive Versus Prescriptive Stereotyping

Descriptive stereotypes are generally shared

attitudes about the different characteristics the

genders have concerning one another (Burgess and

Borgida 1999; Ridgeway and Correll, 2004; Heilman

& Okimoto, 2001). Men are assumed to have

greater agentic qualities, such as competence,

assertiveness, and intelligence, while women are

linked to communal qualities such as warmth,

kindness, and helpfulness. These perceptions lead

to people believing than men are naturally suited

for more agentic higher positions in organizations,

such as in management, while women are best

suited for communal occupations, which are

typically lower in the hierarchy (Burgess and

Borgida 1999; Eagly and Karau 2002; Heilman

2008).

Perceptions associated with descriptive

stereotypes occur when women are seen as unfit

or incompetent to perform a job with agentic

qualities (Eagly and Karau 2002).

Prescriptive stereotyping is the progression of

an assumption to an action (Burgess & Borgida,

1999). For example, prescriptive stereotyping may

occur when an employer sends a new mother

home early because she has a new born, yet keeps

a new father at work because he needs to be a

provider for his family (William & Segal, 2003).

Most high-status jobs are “masculine typed,” that

is, the traits associated with success in these jobs

are agentic traits stereotypically associated with

men (Eagly and Karau 2002; Heilman & Okimoto,

2008).

Shifting Standards Model

The shifting standards model incorporates the

role of stereotypes in the creation of judgment

standards against individual groups. The shifting

standards model suggest that when individuals are

judging group members on dimensions of a

stereotyped nature, perceivers will use within-

category reference points for their estimations

(Biernat & Kobrynowicz, 1997). Therefore, similar

scores on a performance appraisal scale may mean

different things when applied to man versus a

woman.

Objective Versus Subjective Judgments

Objective scales are tied to factors, such as

money or some types of test scores, that cannot be

reconceived based on categorical characteristics of

the evaluator. Thus, because of the invariable

meaning of objective scales they are more likely to

expose an individuals stereotyped perceptions

(Biernat & Vescio, 2002). Conversely, subjective

scale judgments, such as light/dark,

attractive/unattractive, and tall/short are

susceptible the shifting standard patterns of

stereotyped perception (Biernat & Vescio, 2002).

For instance a statement such as “he is good

for a man” can mean something entirely different

than “she is good for a women.” Studies have

supported the view that the shifting standards

model is associated to gender perceptions of job

competence, commitment, and ability due to their

subjective nature (Biernat, 1994, Biernat &

Kobrynowicz, 1997; Biernat & Vescio, 2002).

HYPOTHESIS

Hypothesis 1: Mothers are perceived as less

competent than non-mothers and fathers.

Hypothesis 2: Parents, whether mothers or fathers,

are perceived as less committed to their job than

men and women without children

EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE OF THE MOTHERHOOD

PENALTY

The “ideal worker” in the United States works

long hours, willing to sacrifice personal interests for

the sake of the organization, and does not have

interruptions from home (Blair-Loy, 2005).

Motherhood affects perceptions of competence

and commitment because of the incompatibility of

family and work roles (Blair-Loy, 2005). Even

though long hours are not definitively associated

with higher performance, there is a perception that

time-effort is linked to productivity (Blair-Loy,

2005). Thus, a mother will have fewer resources to

devote to her job (less productivity) and more to

her child.

Competence

The issue of perceptions of competence among

women in the workforce affects women in several

ways. The successful performance of women is

usually more scrutinized and assessed by stricter

standards than that of men. (Foschi, 2001).

Cuddy, Fiske, and Glick (2004) conducted a

study of stereotypes of mothers in the workplace.

They hypothesized that: (1) female workers will be

viewed in the same way that housewives are

viewed (i.e. having communal qualities and being

incompetent); (2) working mothers would be

viewed as warmer than female workers without

children, but less competent than female workers

without children; (3) if the working mother is

viewed as higher on warmth (a communal

attribute) than on competence, then people will be

less interested in hiring, promoting, or training her;

and (4) fathers will not experience the same

disadvantages at working mothers.

Participants were asked to rate three fictitious

consultants on traits reflecting competence and

warmth. In addition participants were also asked to

rate three items that will determine discrimination.

The participants were asked to give their first

impression of the three candidates. Of the three

candidate profiles, the middle profile

operationalized the critical manipulation--it varied

sex and whether the subject was a parent, resulting

in four between-participant conditions.

The measured traits related to competence

were: capable, efficient, organized, and skillful and

the four related to warmth were: warm, sincere,

organized and good-natured. A Likert-type seven-

point scale was used ranging from 1=not at all to 7=

extremely. After rating each consultant the

participant was asked three questions to determine

discrimination: Who would you hire as one of your

consultants? How likely would you be to

recommend Bob or Michelle for a promotion?,

Who would you recommend to the company to

invest in continuing training and education for?

The results were: First, parental status ignoring

sex did not affect competence ratings. However

looking at men and women separately did affect

competence ratings. Second, participants rated

working mothers as less competent than childless

working women. Third, there was no difference in

the perception of competence between working

fathers and childless men. Fourth, parents were

rated as significantly warmer than non-parents but

parental status controlling for sex did not affect

competence. Fifth, looking at female and male

workers separately, working mothers were rated as

significantly warmer than competent, and childless

woman as significantly more competent than

warm. Sixth, fathers were rated equally warm and

competent but childless men were rated

significantly more competent than warm. The three

discrimination proxy items uncovered a significant

interaction (ANOVA reliability .83). Seventh,

working mothers were preferred less than childless

women and working fathers were preferred more

than childless men. Working mothers received a

significantly lower discrimination score than

childless women and fathers. Finally, gaining a child

did not affect male workers, working fathers and

childless men received equal discrimination scores.

In addition the researchers performed a correlation

Burgess – Perception of Competence

analyses to examine if competence ratings

predicted whether a consultant would be

requested, promoted, and trained. Competence

ended up strongly predicting the discrimination

proxy scale even when controlling for sex and

parental status.

The study suggests that working mothers are

not only viewed as less competent and less worthy

of hiring, promoting, and training than childless

women but they are also viewed as less competent

than they were before they had children. Also

possessing communal attributes, such as warmth,

did not help them professionally, but rather had

negative consequences in the workplace. Adding a

child caused people to view the woman as lower on

traits such as capability and skillfulness, and

decreased people’s interest in training, hiring, and

promoting her. Interestingly, their findings revealed

no significant difference in competence for working

mothers compared to working fathers. However

such trait ratings are subjective and therefore

subject to shifting standards that can mask

stereotyping effects. Stereotypes can affect

behavioral predictions (hiring, promoting, and

training) even when they do not affect trait ratings.

Keep in mind that working mothers in this study

were rated lower than working fathers on all three

dimensions of the discrimination items.

One of the limitations of the study is that the

researchers did not measure job commitment,

which may have acted as a mediator in the

evaluation of the discriminatory items on which

working mothers were rated poorly. Opportunity

related decisions, such as promotion or additional

training may be linked to the perceived

commitment in addition to the perceived ability.

So, in conclusion, working mothers in

comparison to working fathers or childless women

are stereotypically assumed to be more distracted

by family commitments and, therefore, more likely

to work fewer hours, be absent more often, or quit.

Thus even though woman may not be perceived as

suddenly losing her intellectual ability when

becoming a mother, she may be deemed an

unlikely candidate for advancement within an

organization.

Warmth and High Status Jobs

A high warmth rating for mothers did not

translate into career opportunities for women.

Following the description of stereotyping above,

high status jobs have agentic qualities attached to

them, while warmth is a communal characteristic

associated with women.

Organizational Commitment

Organizational commitment may be conceived

of as a psychological state that determines one’s

attitude toward continuing membership in an

organization. (Meyers, Allen, Smith, 1993).

In two studies by Heilman and Okimoto (2008),

the authors examined the effects of parental status

on perceptions of men and women in attaining

upper level jobs. They hypothesized that

parenthood is associated with reduced

commitment, yet mothers would experience

greater consequences when it came to perceived

competence than fathers.

In their first study Hielman and Okimoto (2008)

set out to determine if there is a bias against

mothers who are seeking a promotion to an upper

level management position. The participants were

65 undergraduates, 72 percent of whom were

female and who had an average age of 19. The

participants were asked to review four applicants

for the position of assistant vice president of

financial affairs. The four applicants consisted of

one male parent, one female parent, one female

nonparent, and one male nonparent. All the

candidates had MBAs, worked at the company for

two to three years, were in their mid-30s, married,

and currently held finance or accounting positions.

The dependent variables in the study were ratings

of anticipated job commitment, ratings of

anticipated job competence, and screening

recommendations. Commitment was measured

using a nine-point scale that assessed the likelihood

that if the applicant was promoted to assistant vice

president the applicant would be very committed

to the job, be willing to make sacrifices for the job,

and make work a top priority. The measure of

competence was a combination of three nine-point

bipolar scales on which participants evaluated the

applicants expected job performance as competent

or non-competent, productive or not productive

and effective or ineffective. Screening

recommendations were assessed by two measures

on a nine-point scale. The first measure was a

choice between two statements: “I think this

person should be considered for the associate vice

president position” or “this person should be

eliminated from consideration for the job.” The

second measure was the participant’s

recommendation about which of the four

applicants reviewed should be eliminated from

further consideration for the job.

As predicted, anticipated job commitment

revealed that women, regardless of parental status,

were perceived to be less committed to the job

than men. Parents, male or female, were expected

to be less committed than were applicants without

children. Anticipated competence revealed there

was a significant interaction between sex and

parental status. Female applicants who were

described as having children were expected to be

significantly less competent on the job than were

female applicants without children. Differences in

male applicants were expected to be non-

significant. Also participants expected mothers to

be less competent than fathers.

With regard to screening recommendations,

female applicants with children received fewer

significantly weaker screening recommendations

than females without children. There was not a

significant difference in screening

recommendations made about male applicants

with or without children.

In addition, participants chose to eliminate

female applicants with children more often than

females without children. Parental status did not,

however, have an effect on decisions regarding

men.

In summary, the researchers’ hypotheses were

supported. Nonetheless, Heilman and Okimoto

(2008) conducted a second study using older and

more experienced participants to further test the

relationship between judgment of competence and

employment decisions.

In the second study, they recreated the

condition from the first study but also tested the

role of gender stereotyping as a mediating effect in

the perceptions of job competence of employed

mothers. The researchers in this study used one

hundred MBA students, 34 percent of whom were

female with an average age of 29. They were all

full-time employees of a business and had an

average of six years of work experience. The results

were consistent with the previous study, which

found that anticipated job commitment was

negatively affected by parental status and

anticipated job competence, and that screening

recommendations were negatively affected when

the female was a mother. In addition their test of

gender stereotyping as a mediating variable in the

perception of job competence of employed

mothers found that agentic behavior, not

dependability, mediated the relationship between

motherhood and anticipated competence.

SUMMARY OF THE RESEARCH RESULTS

Earlier I hypothesized that a Motherhood

Penalty affects women in the workplace, resulting

in perception woman are less competent than men.

A secondary hypothesis was that parents, both

men and women, are perceived as less committed

to their organizations than childless employees.

Cuddy, Fiske, and Glick’s (2004) research

provides the clearest support for the first

hypothesis. Their study showed that not only are

mothers viewed as less competent that men, but

that women are perceived as less competent

following the birth of child than they were before.

Support for hypothesis two is provided by the

studies done by Heilman and Okimoto (2008),

which found that parents were perceived as less

committed to their organizations than childless

employees.

STRATEGIES FOR COMBATING THE MOTHERHOOD

PENALTY

In recent decades, women’s participation in the

workforce has grown considerably. However,

women are still expected to perform their

traditional roles as wives and mothers (Biernat &

Wortman, 1991). The strain of performing multiple

roles at the same time may result in stress and

conflict. (Rotondo, Carlson, & Kincaid, 2003)

Work/Family Conflict

Work/family conflict is a multidimensional

construct that can be explained as how an

individual’s work role may interfere with his or her

family role, and vice-versa (Greenhaus & Beutell,

Burgess – Perception of Competence

1985). Studies have found that female employees

are more likely to experience strain associated with

conflicting roles than men (Rotondo et al., 2003;

Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). Furthermore mothers

suffer a greater impact than childless women or

men, which increases exponentially the higher the

job status (Brown, 2010). One factor to explain this

is the assumption that women spend more time

with work and family obligations than men

(Rotondo et al, 2003).

Work Engagement

According to Bakker and Demerouti (2008) an

engaged employee is one who is enthusiastic and

fully engaged in his or her work, and, therefore,

behaves in the best interests of the organization.

Work engagement is associated with several

positive organizational outcomes, such as

organizational commitment, and high motivation

and productivity (Bakker and Demerouti, 2008).

Job Demand Resource Theory (JDR).

JDR theory is based on the idea that employee

well-being depends on two factors: job demands

and job resources (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). Job

demands are the aspects of the job that take

continuous effort, which can drain an individual’s

physiological and/or psychological energies

(Bakker, Demerouti, & Euwema, 2005). Role

overload, role conflict, time constraints and stress

are all of examples of job demand (Bakker &

Demerouti, 2007). Job resources are factors that

reduce the drain that job demands place on an

individual, which can be a strong predictor of work

engagement (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; 2008).

The JDR Model, Work/Family Conflict, and Work

Engagement.

Bakker, Veldhoven, and Xanthopoulou, (2007)

expanded the JDR model to include work/family

conflict. Work and family roles are viewed as

incompatible, thus participation in one role hinders

participation in the other. Increased resources can

ameliorate the effects of the demands place on

individual due to work/family conflict leading to

higher levels of engagement (Bakker & Demerouti,

2007:2008)..

Flexible Work Practices

Flexible work practices allow employees to

determine the location and schedule of their work

(Glass & Estes, 1997). Under most flexible work

practices, employees still work forty hours per

week or more, but perhaps not on a standard eight

hour a day, five day a week, schedule (Glass &

Estes, 1997). Formerly, women sometimes chose to

curtail working hours while raising children.

Flexible work arrangements may now allow women

to maintain full-time status, but on a schedule that

meets their needs (Glass, 2004). Flexible work

practices can enable workers with care giving

responsibilities to perform at their peak capacity

instead of conforming to standard work schedules

that stifles their efforts to succeed (Glass, 2004).

These policies are often not expensive to

implement. But, whatever the cost, the expense is

balanced against the benefit of lower turnover,

greater attachment by employees, and public

approval (Glass & Estes, 1997; Ralson, 1989;

Golden, 2001). Further, employees may benefit

from the increased leisure time, reduced stress,

and overall improvements in their well-being

(Glass, 2004; Golden, 2001).

In addition, the advantages of flexible work

arrangements extend beyond the workplace to

decrease work/family conflict through the

provision of more family time and more household

production time.

In a study by Ralston (1990) one hundred

women were interviewed over a 10-month period

after flexible work practices were introduced in two

work sites. Just over 75 percent reported a higher

degree of balance between family/work

responsibilities. Also fifty percent reported their

productivity increasing because of flextime, and

65% decreased their absenteeism as well.

Furthermore, this study suggests that the benefits

of flexible work arrangement are greatest among

parents, but even more so for mothers because

they may have the most to gain from flexible work

practices (Blair-Loy & Wharton, 2002).

Sandberg’s Lean In

How do we take down the barriers that prevent

women from making it to the top of the ladder?

Mothers do not have sufficient access to childcare

arrangements and workplace flexibility in order to

succeed according to Sheryl Sandberg, COO of

Facebook and author of the book Lean In: Women,

Work, and the Will to Lead (2013). Sandberg

understands the external barriers faced by women

in society, but she also addresses the barriers that

exist within women themselves. Sandberg (2013:

8) writes:

We hold ourselves back in ways big

and small, by lacking self-

confidence, by not raising our

hands, and by pulling back when we

should be leaning in. We internalize

the negative messages when we

get throughout our lives—the

messages that say it wrong to be

outspoken, aggressive, and more

powerful than men. We lower our

expectations of what we can

achieve. We continue to do the

majority of the housework and

childcare. We compromise our

career goals to make room for

partners and children who may not

even exist yet. Compared to our

male colleagues, fewer of us aspire

to senior level positions. This is not

a list of what other women have

done. I have made every mistake on

this list. At times, I still do.

(Sandberg, 2013: 8).

Sandberg is not debating whether individual or

institutional barriers are more to blame for the

position of women in the workforce, rather she is

saying that while they are fighting the institutional

battle, women must fight the battle within

themselves. Sandberg dismisses the claim that she

is blaming the victim or that it is easy for her to

make the case for “leaning in” given her financial

situation. Her intention, she writes (Sandberg,

2013: 11), is to “offer advice that would have been

useful to her long before she had heard of Google

or Facebook that will resonate with women in a

broad range of circumstances.”

For example, Sandberg (2013) describes how

society expects women to start looking for

husbands at a young age. As a result, Sandberg

turned down a prestigious international fellowship

because she thought a foreign country would be an

unlikely place to find a suitable mate. Sandberg

admits that there is more to life than promotions

and success in the workplace. However, if these

are the things that a woman values, she should

pursue them as hard as some women go after

marriage and motherhood (Sandberg, 2013).

Run through the finish line

Women start planning their careers long before

they have children. It is not an overnight decision

to leave the workforce; there are many small

decisions along the way that hold women back.

Sandberg (2013: 93-4) states:

An ambitious and successful woman

heads down a challenging career path

with the thought of having children in

the back of her mind. At some point,

this thought moves to the front of her

mind, typically once she finds a

partner. The woman considers how

hard she is working and reasons that

to make room for a child she will have

to scale back. A law associate might

decide not to shoot for partner

because someday she hopes to have a

family. Often without realizing it, the

woman stops reaching for new

opportunities. The problem is that

even if she were to get pregnant

immediately, she still has nine months

before she has to care for an actual

child. By the time the baby arrives, the

woman is likely to be in a different

place in her career than she should

have been had she not leaned back.

(pg. 93-94)

The issue with this scenario is that the woman

may have been on par with her successful male

counterparts but as soon as she started pulling

back she has or will be behind.

Marry a Partner not Just a Husband or Wife

Earlier in this paper I stated that women who

work as many hours as men still do the majority of

Burgess – Perception of Competence

the housework. Sandberg (2013) talks about

finding a true partner in this regard. She freely

admits that men are not biologically capable of

breastfeeding, but breast milk can be refrigerated

and a husband capable of waking up in the middle

of the night and giving his child a bottle. As much as

women need be empowered at work, men need to

be empowered at home. This idea is in sync with

work family/conflict and the problem of limited

resources discussed earlier in this paper. Perhaps if

women had more support in the home, they would

be perceived as not having divided commitments.

CONCLUSIONS

One of my favorite quotes by Gloria Steinem is

“You can’t do it all. No one can have a full-time job,

raise perfect children, prepare meals and be multi-

orgasmic ‘til dawn … Superwoman is the adversary

of the women’s movement.”

The studies I presented illustrate how

perceptions of anticipated competence and

commitment negatively affected employment

outcomes for mothers. These perceptions were not

based on fact or data, but rather assumptions.

These assumptions, in turn, are rooted in expected

social roles to which men and women are expected

adhere. The issue is complicated by the fact that

these assumptions are acted upon and have

extremely negative consequences for mothers, but

don’t appear to have the same affect for males,

childless or not.

Admittedly, there are overwhelming

institutional barriers for women in general.

However, as I addressed in the previous section,

women have to fight the barriers within themselves

that hinder their potential successes in the

workplace. Women cannot, nor should they try, to

do it all, but can affect their position in the

workplace.

REFERENCES

Anderson, D., Binder, M. & Krause, K.. (2002). The

Motherhood Wage Penalty: Which Mothers

Pay it and Why? American Economic Review, 92

(2),354-358.

Anderson, D., Binder, M. & Krause, K. (2003). The

Motherhood Wage Penalty Revisited:

Experience, Hetereogeneity, Work Effort and

Work Schedule Flexibility. Industrial and Labor

Relations Review. 56(2), 273-294.

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a

model of work engagement. Career

Development International, 13(3), 209-223.

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2009). The crossover

of work engagement between working couples:

A closer look at the role of empathy.

Managerial Psychology. 24(3), 220- 236

Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Euwema, M. C.

(2005). Job resources buffer the impact of job

demands on burnout. Journal of Occupational

Health Psychology, 10, 170-180.

Bakker, A. B., Van Veldhoven, M. J. P. M., &

Xanthopoulou, D. (2010). Beyond the Demand-

Control model: Thriving on high job demands

and resources. Journal of Personnel Psychology,

9, 3–16

Barnett, R. C. (2004). Preface: Woman and work:

Where are we, where did we come from, and

where are we going? Journal of Social Issues,

60, 667-674

Bielby, D. D. V., & Bielby, W. (1984). Work

Commitment, Sex-Role, and Women’s

Employment. American Sociological Review, 49,

234-247

Biernat, M. (1994). Shifting standards and

stereotype-based judgments. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 5-20

Biernat, M. & Kobrynowicz, D. (1997) Gender and

race-based standards of competence: Lower

minimum standards but higher ability

standards for devalued groups. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 544-557

Biernat, M. & Vescio, T (2002). She Swings, She

Hits, She’s Great, She’s Benched: Implication of

Gender-Based Shifting Standards for Judgment

and Behavior. Personality and Social Psychology

Bulletin, 28, 67-77

Biernat, M., & Wortman, C. B. (1991). Sharing of

home responsibilities between professionally

employed women and their husbands. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 844-

860

Blair-Loy, M. (2005). Competing devotions: Career

and family among women executives. Harvard

University Press.

Blair-Loy, M. & Wharton, A.S. (2002). The Paradox

of the family-friendly workplace: employees'

use of family-responsive policies and the social

context of work Social Forces, 80 (2002), pp. 1–

Boask, J., Sczensy, S., & Eagly, A. (2011). The Impact

of Social Roles on Trait Judgments: A Critical

Examination. Personality and Social Psychology

Bulletin, 38(4) 429-440

Bridges, J. S., Etaugh, C., & Barnes-Farrell, J. (2002).

Trait judgments of stay-at-home and employed

parents: A function of social role and/or

shifting standards? Psychology of Women

Quarterly,26, 140—150.

Brown, L. M. (2010). The relationship between

motherhood and professional advancement:

Perceptions versus reality. Employee Relations,

32(5), 470-494

Budig, M. & England, P. (2001). The Wage Penalty

for Motherhood. American Sociological Review.

66, 204-225.

Burgess, D. & Borgida, E. (1999). Who Women are,

Who Women Should Be: Descriptive and

Prescriptive Gender Stereotyping in Sex

Discrimination. Psychology, Public Policy, and

the Law, 5, 665-692

Correll, S., Bernard, S., & Paik, I. (2007). Getting a

Job: Is there a motherhood penalty? American

Journal of Sociology. 112, 1297-1338.

Crosby, F. J., Williams, J. C., & Biernat, M. (2004).

The maternal wall. Journal of Social Issues, 60,

675-682

Deutsch, F. M., & Saxon, S. E. (1998a). The double

standard of praise and criticism for mothers

and fathers. Psychology of Women Quarterly,

22, 665—683.

Dickman, A. & Eagly, A. (2000). Stereotypes as

dynamic constructs: Women and men of the

past, present, and future. Personality and Social

Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1171-1188.

Eagly, A.H, (1987). Sex differences in social

behavior: A social role interpretation. Hillsdale,

NJ: Erlbaum.

Eagly, A.H & Karau, S.J. (1991). Gender and the

emergence of leaders: A meta analysis. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 685-

710.

Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender

stereotypes stem from the distribution of

women and men into social roles. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 735-754

Etaugh, C., & Folger, D. (1998). Perceptions of

parents whose work and parenting behaviors

deviate from role expectations. Sex Roles, 39,

215—223.

Etaugh, C., & Moss, C. (2001). Attitudes of

employed women toward parents who choose

full-time or part-time employment following

their child’s birth. Sex Roles, 44, 611—619.

Etaugh, C., & Nekolny, K. (1990). Effects of

employment status and marital status on

perceptions of mothers. Sex Roles, 23, 273—

280.

Etaugh, C., & Poertner, P. (1992). Perceptions of

women: Influence of performance, marital and

parental variables. Sex Roles, 26, 311—321.

Etaugh, C., & Study, G. (1989). Perceptions of

mothers: Effects of employment status, marital

status, and age of child. Sex Roles, 20, 59—70

Federal Glass Ceiling Commission. (1995). Good for

Business: Making Full Use of the Nation’s

Human Capital. U.S. Department of Labor

Foschi, M. (2000) Double Standards for

Competence: Theory and Research, Annual

Review of Sociology,26, 21-42

Foschi, M. (1996) Double Standards in the

Evaluation of Men and Women, Social

Psychology Quarterly 59, 3, 237-254

Glass, J. (2004). Blessing or Curse? Work-Family

Policies and Mother’s Wage Growth Over Time.

Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 23(1),

51-72.

Burgess – Perception of Competence

Glass, J. & Estes, S.B., (1997). The Family

Responsive Workplace. Annual Review of

Sociology, 23, 289-314.

Glass, J. & Noonan, M. (2007) Workplace Flexibility

Policies and Wage Growth: Do Organizational

Characteristics Matter?

Golden, L. (2001). Flexible Work Schedules: Which

Workers Get Them? American Behavioral

Scientist, 44(7), 1157-1178.

Glauber, R. (2007). Marriage and the Motherhood

Wage Penalty among African Americans,

Hispanics and Whites. Journal of Marriage and

Family. 69(4),951.

Gorman, E. (2005). Gender Stereotypes, Same-

Gender Preferences, and Organizational

Variation in the Hiring of Women: Evidence

from Law Firms. American Sociological Review.

70(4), 702-728.

Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of

conflict between work and family roles.

Academy of Management Review, 10, 76-88

Gungor, G. & Biernat, M. (2009). Gender Bias or

Motherhood Disadvantage? Judgments of Blue

Collar Mothers and Fathers in the Workplace.

Sex Roles, 60, 232-246.

Halpert, J. A., Wilson, M. L., & Hickman, J. L. (1993).

Pregnancy as a source of bias in performance

appraisals. Journal of Organizational Behavior,

14, 649-663

Heilman, M. E. & Okimoto, T. G. (2008).

Motherhood: A potential source of bias in

employment decisions. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 93(1), 189-198.

Kalist, D. (2008). Does Motherhood Affect

Productivity, Relative Performance, And

Earnings? Journal of Labor Research, 29(3),

219-235.

Masser, B., Grass, K. & Nesic, M. (2007). We Like

You, but We Don’t Want You. The Impact of

Pregnancy in the Workplace. Sex Roles. 57, 703-

712.

Meyers, J., Allen, N., Smith, C (1993) Commitment

to organizations and occupations: Extension

and test of a three-component

conceptualization. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 78, 538-551.

Ralson, D.A. (1989). The Benefits of flextime:Real or

Imagined? Journal of Organizational Behavior,

10 (4), 369-373

Ralston, D. (1990). How flexitime eases work/family

tensions. Personnel, 67, 45-48.

Ridgeway, C. & Correll, S. (2004). Motherhood as a

status characteristic. The Journal of Social

issues, 60, 683-700.

Robertson, I. T., & Cooper, C. L. (2010). Full

engagement: The integration of employee

engagement and psychological well-being.

Leadership and Organization Development

Journal, 31(4), 324-336

Rotondo, D. M., Carlson, D. S., & Kincaid, J. F.

(2003). Coping with multiple dimensions of

work family conflict. Personnel Review, 32(3),

275-296

Sandberg, S. (2013). Lean In: Women, Work, and

the Will to Lead. Knopf:New York.

Schwartz, F. (1989). Management women and the

new facts of life. Harvard Business Review,

67,65-76.

Williams, J, & Segal, N. (2003). Beyond the

Maternal Wall: Relief for Family Caregivers who

are discriminated Against on the Job. Harvard

Women’s law Journal, 26, 77.