Why So Few Women Lead Fortune 500 Companies

WOMEN CEO AND MANAGERS OF FORTUNE 500 COMPANIES 1
Why Are There So Few Women CEO and Managers of Fortune 500 Companies?
by
Jennifer R. Daniell
This research project is presented to Webster University as partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the MNGT600 Integrated Studies in Management course required for the degree of Master of
Arts in Management and Leadership.
December 2015
Polk County, FL

ABSTRACT
6000 Integrated Studies Research Projects Report
by
Jennifer R Daniell
Webster University
Polk County, FL
In the contemporary 21st century, the workforce in various corporate organizations, firms,
government units, and privately owned companies is no longer dominated by the male gender.
This is because more women are being recruited for different positions in an effort to maintain
gender equality. Even more, in colleges, universities, and other learning institutions, women are
being trained to be future leaders in large numbers. However, the top managerial positions are
still dominated by the male gender, thus revealing that the female gender is still
underrepresented. This study seeks to examine the issues or causes associated with the lack of
women leading fortune 500 companies. This research study also explores possible solutions as it
reveals the importance of opening up more opportunities for women and the need for modern
society to help move them in more CEO and management positions in fortune 500 companies.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................... 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................ 3
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 4
Introduction......................................................................................................................... 4
Statement of the Problem.................................................................................................... 5
Purpose................................................................................................................................ 8
Significance of the Study.................................................................................................... 9
Research Questions and/or Hypotheses .............................................................................. 9
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 10
LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................. 11
Background ...................................................................................................................... 11
Literature Review.............................................................................................................. 14
Definition of Terms........................................................................................................... 17
METHODOLOGY........................................................................................................................ 18
Population and Sampling .................................................................................................. 19
Analysis Plan..................................................................................................................... 22
Validity and Reliability..................................................................................................... 22
Assumptions...................................................................................................................... 23
Scope and Limitations....................................................................................................... 23
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................................... 23
CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................. 27
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 30

INTRODUCTION
Introduction
According to recent statistics on the worldwide workforce, female employees working for
private firms, corporates, and even in nonprofit making organizations account for almost about
50% of the total labor force (Bureau of Labor Statistics and United States Census Bureau, 2013).
In fact, some researchers and scholars in 2011 conducted a number of studies in which they
concluded that the dominant sex in the workforce was no longer men. They also observed that
following increases in the number of women joining training institutions and getting chances to
be recruited in various companies, the world would soon witness the end of male dominance in
companies. The statistics in fact revealed that of the total labor force, women accounted for 47%
(Bell & Nkomo, 2011). However, how has this reflected in CEOs or the managerial positions in
the recent times?
According to Bell and Nkomo (2011), the 2011 statistics have remained steady with little,
if any, progress in number of female leaders in labor force. In fact, it is very clear that more
women are working for companies, firms, and organizations rather than leading them. For those
who have been given the chance to work in a leadership position, studies further reveal that they
are allowed to be in-charge of any other given aspect of the leadership roles except the task of
making crucial decisions (Bureau of Labor Statistics and United States Census Bureau, 2013).
This shows that most firms still do not think that women can be great leaders just like the
men. However, some scholars believe that women, when compared to men, are creative,
intelligent, and honest, and as ambitious as men. Further, in firms where more women hold
managerial positions, the organization or firm is expected to have higher fiscal performance as it
becomes a better place for all employees to work peacefully. Nevertheless, this is yet to be noted

in modern times. This is especially true considering the fact that in the Fortune 500 list of
companies, the female gender is highly under-represented (Chung-Herrera & Lankau, 2005).
Statement of the Problem
Before 1972, the Fortune 500 list had not recorded any female CEO, a trend that was
finally broken by Katherine Graham, the very first female CEO of the Washington Post
Company. In the years that followed, more women started joining the Fortune 500 companies list
and a tremendous improvement was recorded last year, 2014, revealing that the number of
female CEOs is currently at 4.8% (United States Census Bureau, 2012). In 2013, the percentage
was at 4.2%, while in 1998 the number of female CEOs in the list of Fortune 500 companies was
only 0.2% (Bureau of Labor Statistics and United States Census Bureau, 2013). While the
statistics released over the years are somewhat encouraging, especially considering the fact that
over the years the number has been increasing upwards, the 4.8% in 2014 was recorded as the
all-time highest figure in history, the truth remains that the female gender is still under-
represented in the top management team (Sweigart, 2012).
The revelation of the Fortune 500 list is not exactly news in the contemporary 21st
century. However, it is still shocking since inequality in the workforce in various corporate
organizations, firms, government units, and privately owned companies has long been equalized
with more women being trained, recruited, and introduced to take up positions like their male
counterparts. In fact, it has been noted via numerous research studies that when educational
qualifications and certifications are compared, women appear to be more qualified than their
male counterparts. However, they have not been allowed to take up higher positions even in the
Fortune 500 list of CEOs and top managers (Bureau of Labor Statistics and United States Census
Bureau, 2013). Further, the studies also argue that those women in the list of Fortune 500

companies are analytically more qualified and better certified than the male CEOs in the same
list. Hence, it remains a shock why there are few women CEOs and managers in the list and
across the world (Dezso & Ross, 2011).
Case in point, when the female CEOs in the Fortune 500 list were compared to their male
counterparts, it was noted that about 36% of the female CEOs, compared to about 28% of the
male CEOs, have completed their bachelor’s degrees and hold certifications in STEM, which
means that they have certificates in either science, technology, engineering, or even in
mathematics. In addition, the report also revealed that, on average, ranking of the undergraduate
school for females is about 163.5 compared to 167.2 of the males (Bureau of Labor Statistics and
United States Census Bureau, 2013). This is considering the Fortune 500list of 2014 CEOs. This
figure does not change much based on a US news and World Report ranking that reveals that the
female Fortune 500 CEOs still hold a lower average ranking of about 18.1, compared to 20.7 of
their male counterparts (Chung-Herrera & Lankau, 2005).
Therefore, based on the reports and the research findings presented here, it is clear that
female CEOs in the Fortune 500 list of companies are held at different standards. Probably, this
is the reason why there are not as many as there are expected to be in the more modern times.
However, in acknowledging this fact, Chung-Herrera and Lankau (2005) clearly note that it is
not news to discover that female employees and women all over the workforce worldwide are
held at higher standards. In fact, research carried out in the United States reveals that more
women compared to men graduate from colleges, universities, and other higher level training
institutions with bachelor’s degrees annually. However, of this figure, only a few are able to get
employment in higher and better paying positions in various organizations, firms, and
corporations. In addition, of those who succeed in getting higher level jobs, only about 1.1% get

jobs that guarantee them a six figure salary or more when compared to about 5% of their male
counterparts (Sweigart, 2012; Bureau of Labor Statistics and United States Census Bureau,
2013).
In agreement with the views by Chung-Herrera and Lankau, Sweigart, Dezso and Ross
(2011) explain that research findings and reports published on Fortune 500 CEOs reveal that
when initially appointed, female CEOs seem to have more work and experience when compared
to their male counterparts. This is based on the fact that the average age of female CEOs
appointed in the fortune 500 companies is about 52.8 years. On the other hand, the average age
for male CEOs is about 50.2 years. This is about 2 years younger and 2 years less experienced
for men (Bureau of Labor Statistics and United States Census Bureau, 2013).
Dezso and Ross (2011) further note that it is never easy for women CEOs to attain the
appointment to the top positions, and especially, to the CEO posts when compared to their male
counterparts. They have to work their way up within a corporation, firm, or organization before
they have the chance to hold those top jobs. However, the same does not apply to the male CEOs
who can get appointed from other firms or organizations in top management and CEOs position.
In fact, statistics reveal that 20% of females, compared to 26% of their male counterparts, get
appointed from outside the internal employees of a corporate, firm, or organization (United
States Census Bureau, 2012).
Nevertheless, to Dezso and Ross (2011), the modern workforce is no longer dominated
by the male gender. This is with more women in the workforce being recruited to take up
different positions in the efforts to maintain gender equality. Even more, in colleges, universities,
and other training institutions, more women are being trained as future leaders in large numbers.
However, top managerial positions are still dominated by the male gender, thus revealing that the

female gender is still underrepresented. This is the focus of this study that seeks to examine the
issue or cause associated with the lack of women leading Fortune 500 companies. The research
study also explores possible solutions as it reveals the importance of opening up more
opportunities for women and the need for modern society to help move them into more CEO and
management positions in Fortune 500 companies.
Purpose
According to a Pew Research Center survey, most people in America and, as revealed in
the above section, including females are in every single way as capable of becoming great
leaders as their male counterparts. Similarly, they can also dominate the corporate boardroom if
given the chance and hold top managerial positions that includes the position of CEOs (Dezso &
Ross, 2011). It is no wonder that in the recent past most people in America also find females
indistinguishable from their male counterparts, especially with regard to key governance traits
that include intelligence and aptitude for improvement, with most women saying they are as
sturdy and capable of being considerate and organized managers (Bell & Nkomo, 2011).
But, even with the above declarations, in today’s 21st century, with more women in the
workforce and even more that are in college, the pipeline for the future of women leaders is still
alarming. On the corporate front, 26 women now lead as CEOs of Fortune 500 companies; that’s
up from nearly zero in 1995. Yet female CEOs are still only 5% of all Fortune 500 CEOs
(Bureau of Labor Statistics and United States Census Bureau, 2013). According to Pew, and as
hinted in the previous section, the problem is that women still have to do more than men to prove
themselves (Bell & Nkomo, 2011). This finding recommends a troubling hypothesis that we still
do not consider women to be capable to do what men can. We permit that it is probable, but our
standard expectations are that men are more capable. This puts females in the point of having to

go overboard and beyond in order to establish their capability (Chung-Herrera & Lankau, 2005).
The purpose of this study is to examine the issue or cause associated with the lack of women
leading Fortune 500 companies and also it explores possible solutions as it reveals the
importance of opening up more opportunities for women and the need to help move them into
more CEO and management positions in Fortune 500 companies.
Significance of the Study
This research study is crucial to the modern society and to the corporate world in general.
This is because its findings will explore what is holding more women back from becoming CEOs
or top level managers of Fortune 500 companies. This will shed light onto some of the
misconceptions, if any, about female employees leading Fortune 500 companies (Bell & Nkomo,
2011). Further, this will help shed more light on the hidden talent of women leaders that
companies fail to exploit while appointing top managers and leaders in their firms (Bureau of
Labor Statistics and United States Census Bureau, 2013). Thus, this signifies that while the
report here will be more directly useful to the Fortune 500 list of companies, it will go a long
way towards assisting other firms in the corporate world, government bodies, and even the
private sector, to understand the importance of opening up opportunities to female employees to
lead firms (Dezso & Ross, 2011).
Research Questions and/or Hypotheses
In considering the facts highlighted in the previous sections, this paper will focus on
determining the reason why women remain under-represented in the Fortune 500 list of
companies. This is despite the fact that they have been proven to be not only capable, but also
well-equipped to undertake positions, tasks, and duties that most firms think are better off carried

out by men. Hence, the research questions that will be the focus of this research study are as
listed below:
1. What is holding women employees back from running Fortune 500 companies?
2. What is the root cause of this problem?
3. What can be done to see more future women leaders?
The Alternative Hypothesis:
Women already in top managerial positions are likely to prevent the increase in number
of women in other top managerial positions in the same firm.
The Null Hypothesis:
Women already at top managerial positions are not likely to prevent an increase in the
number of women in other top managerial positions in the same firm.
Conclusion
As discussed earlier in this section, women are under-represented in corporate leadership
and more so, in the Fortune 500 list of companies. The purpose of this study is to ensure that
researchers understand the corporate world in general. This is by focusing on the reasons as to
why the percentage of women in the leading positions of the firms and who are in CEO positions
has remained low and stagnant for years. More so, it highlights that the top level managers of
Fortune 500 companies are mostly men with only a few women representing the female gender.
This paper will also shed light on some of the misconceptions, if any exist, about female
employees leading Fortune 500 companies. This will be achieved by highlighting what is holding
women employees back and exploring the root causes of the problems causing women to be left
out when appointing top level managers in Fortune 500 companies.

In focusing on the future, this paper will examine how women can be further represented
in the Fortune 500 companies and more so, in top managerial positions in other related
companies. This will be very helpful as it will offer a solution to the issue of lack of women
leading various companies both in the private and in the government sectors. Hence, in the
process, the study will open up more opportunities for the female gender to be considered for
appointments based on their talents, qualities, attitudes, and academic qualifications. This is not
only for the Fortune 500 list of companies, but also for all other firms in the corporate world,
government bodies, and even the private sector, that have remained skeptical and less interested
in opening up opportunities to female employees to lead their firms.
The next section is the literature review in which different resources, texts, journal
articles, documents from websites, and other documented material will be reviewed. This is to
further shed more light into what could be holding women employees back from taking positions
in leading companies and also into the root cause of few women remaining in top level
managerial positions.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Background
As mentioned earlier in the previous sections, recent statistics on workforce show that
almost 50% of the total labor force is composed of women, hence the dominant sex in the
workforce is no longer men. The studies also reveal women who are working for companies,
firms, and organizations are able to be great leaders just like the men (Bell & Nkomo, 2011).
This is because, compared to the men, they are as creative, ambitious, intelligent, and honest. In
addition, in the areas they are allowed to lead, the firms record higher fiscal performance but

fewer women are in leading positions. Additionally, in the Fortune 500 list of companies, the
female gender is highly under-represented (Sweigart, 2012).
According to a Pew Research Center survey, women are every bit as capable of being
good leaders as men. The same can be said of their ability to dominate the corporate boardroom
(Bell & Nkomo, 2011). While this is witnessed all over the world and in very many companies,
not necessarily in the list of the Fortune 500, in America most people find women
indistinguishable from men on key leadership traits such as intelligence and capacity for
innovation, with many saying they are stronger than men in terms of being compassionate and
organized leaders (Chung-Herrera & Lankau, 2005).
With more women in the workforce and even more in college, the pipeline of the future
women leaders is still alarming. On the corporate front, 26 women now lead as CEOs of Fortune
500 companies; that’s up from zero in 1995 (Chung-Herrera & Lankau, 2005). The female CEOs
are only 5% of all Fortune 500 CEOs. According to Pew, the problem is that women still have to
do more than men to prove themselves. This suggests a worrying hypothesis that society still
does not believe that women are capable of doing what men can do (Sweigart, 2012). Society
allows that it is possible, but the standard expectations are that men remain the best option. This
puts women in the position of having to go above and beyond the standards to which men are
held in order to demonstrate their competence (Chung-Herrera & Lankau, 2005).
Year
Women
Percentage
1972 1998 2013 2014
1 woman 0.2% 4.2% 4.8%
Table 1: Women CEOs in Fortune 500 Companies since 1972

However, this does not make it easier for them and neither does it ensure that women,
even with more experience, more academic qualifications, and more credentials, are allowed to
take up leadership positions in companies and firms in both the corporate government
organizations or private sector firms (Sweigart, 2012). In fact, even for those who have the
chance to work on this given position, they are faced by serious problems. Case in point, they are
only allowed to take up simple tasks and other administrative tasks that exclude the decisive
roles of the top managerial positions (Chung-Herrera & Lankau, 2005). Hence, in further
highlighting and shedding light on the main purpose of this paper, in this section the author will
present a review on a number of resources that include text books, journal articles, documents
from websites, articles from a periodical, as well as any documented but legit material that
discusses the subject of interest in this study. For credibility and authenticity purposes as well as
relevance, the resources used will be dated 2005 and later. One or two older materials with
stronger convictions might also be reviewed for support of the recent findings.
In identifying the materials used in this literature review, some crucial keywords were
used on search engines such as Google, questia.com, and journal libraries. Some of these
keywords include Why Are There So Few Women CEO and Managers of Fortune 500
Companies, Few Women CEO and Managers of Fortune 500 Companies, Few Women top level
management in companies today, CEOs of Fortune 500 Companies, why few women lead
companies, women and leadership, Female participation in top level managerial posts, women in
leadership roles etc. From this search, more than 100 resources were identified and noted to be
useful for the research study. However, only about 15 to 20 resources were considered to be
strong enough and with adequate convictions to support the literature review.

Literature Review
In the recent past, numerous articles have argued that the female gender is highly under-
represented in the leadership positions of the corporate world. In her agreement with these views,
McDermott (2014) states that this is a fact that has been ignored in the 21st century. In fact, to
her, it is clear that while there are numerous women working in corporate firms, organizations,
private sector firms, and government owned companies, most remain as employees in
operational positions. Very few of them have the opportunity of becoming leaders and hence, the
female gender remains part of the team that ‘works for’ the big companies and corporations
instead of being part of the team that leads them. These revelations are saddening as Fairchild
(2014) reiterates. This is because in efforts to increase the number of female leaders in major
corporate firms, a good number of them were appointed to become CEOs in the Fortune 500
companies. However, as noted by the reports provided in 2013, their percentage is still below 5.
In supporting the assertions by McDermott and Fairchild, Solomon (2013) states that the
progress in increasing the number of women leaders in corporate firms is growing at a very slow
rate. However, this is not because female employees do not want to be leaders or hold
managerial positions in corporate firms. In fact, Solomon explains that many women working in
different firms and corporate organizations aspire to be CEOs and top level managers for big
corporations. Nevertheless, they are hardly given the chance to do it. Maybe this is because they
are not sure of what they wish to lead (McDermott, 2014).
To McDermott (2014), there are a couple of issues that could be holding female
employees who are aspiring to be leaders back in their dreams to become managers and CEOs.
For instance, aspiring female leaders need to know the kind of leadership table that they aspire to
be part of in their career paths. This should be part of their long or short term dreams. In

addition, they need to plan out how they can achieve this dream within the stipulated time or the
period they wish to take. Then, afterwards, they have to ensure that they start working right away
towards their dream goals. This is in the sense that they have to build up a strategy or profile of
some sort that depicts the perfect candidate for the position in mind (United States Census
Bureau, 2012).
In support of the above views by United States Census Bureau, McDermott (2014)
reveals that in order to have the perfect profile for any given position in a top leadership job,
females aspiring to be leaders need to gather a team of experts that will help them beat their
records. This team of experts could be composed of coaches, possibly some sponsors, a mentor,
or facilitator who are well informed with their career choices and ready to work with them
towards assisting them to actualize their career dreams.
In addition, women aspiring to be leaders or already in leadership positions should ensure
that they have certain skills as well as talents that give them the opportunity to be noticed and
respected. Some of these skills and talents include a well-established plan that will guide them in
meeting their goals (Bureau of Labor Statistics and United States Census Bureau, 2013). They
should also have the skill to know their dreams as well as their career goals. This will enable
them to remain focused. Finally, the women aspiring to be leaders need to learn how to ‘sell’
themselves and how to promote their values so that they are taken seriously or noticed by the
appointing teams as well as committees (McDermott, 2014).
In fact, according to McDermott (2014), the most important thing for women wishing to
be leaders in major corporate firms is the ability to define their career goals in every step of their
lives. This is not only on short term goals, but most importantly, on the long terms goals. In fact,
he argues that they should ensure that they get rid of the feeling of being afraid to fail. This

would positively translate to their confidence at work and in return, improve on their
performance and leadership skills at their current position.
In support of the assertions by McDermott, Gorman (2006) explains that it is the clear
definition of long term goals that enables people to achieve their dreams. Gorman actually states
that it is easier to implement the plan they have to follow in order to achieve their goals once
they know what it is they crave in a leadership position. In any case, it is the sole responsibility
of the female employees yearning to be leaders in big corporate firms to demonstrate that they
have a right to be appointed. This can be achieved via the acquisition of the right experience,
education, and real life training. Moreover, women need to ensure that they earn recognition that
will definitely result in likeability from the team of professionals who matter and have final say
in appointing leaders and CEOs (Stroope & Hageman, 2011).
However, to Peffley and Hurwitz (2008), women are not necessarily incompetent or
lacking in leadership skills or incapable of making decisions that make them stand out or be
recognized for their qualities, skills, and academic qualifications. In fact, in Peffley and Hurwitz
reveal that there are a number of theories that explain why women are less represented in the list
of Fortune 500 Company CEOs. The theory states that women are few in this given list because
their appointment is highly considered in cases where a firm, corporation, or organization is
failing, in crisis, or at high risk of collapse. This is because the decision makers who appoint
leaders and CEOs often view women as incompetent personnel incapable of leading successful
corporate firms. However, in a weak firm that is performing poorly, their state of sensitivity and
interpersonal skills could serve well in uplifting a failing company.
In support of this assertion, McDermott (2014) explains that for fear that they might
never get a better opportunity to be on the leadership table, aspiring women leaders are likely to

accept these opportunities. However, this does not give them the chance they expect to receive
since they are made to feel that they have to work twice as hard despite the resource deficiency
situation their companies are in and turn the status of the company around. They are hence more
cautious and they in fact have limited control to make any big decisions within the organization
that includes issues regarding the assets of the firm.
While the views by McDermott, Peffley and Hurwitz could be true and have some weight
in light of the recent trend in the statistics of the Fortune 500 list of companies, Powell and
Butterfield (2012) explain that there could be other reasons holding women back and causing
them to not be a part of the top management positions. Case in point, women could be denying
opportunities to each other based on the avoidance behavior that make them prefer to work with
male counterparts than with fellow women. This suggests that the presence of a woman in top
managerial positions could be a huge hindrance for any other woman or a high number of other
women to be appointed in the same positions. Nevertheless, this has not yet been proven and this
is an area that could be exploited in efforts to increase the percentage of female CEOs in leading
corporations.
Definition of Terms
The operational definitions of key terms that will be utilized in the proposed study are as follows:
CEOs – Chief Executive Officers: The highest ranking executive in a company whose main
responsibilities include developing and implementing high-level strategies, making major
corporate decisions, managing the overall operations and resources of a company, and acting as
the main point of communication between the board of directors and the corporate operations.
The CEO will often have a position on the board, and in some cases is even the chair.

METHODOLOGY
As earlier stated in the previous sections, fewer women are in the top management
positions in various companies and, more specifically, in the list of the Fortune 500 companies.
Details from the previous sections reveal that while in some cases it could be because most
women aspiring to be leaders are yet to be at the same level or able to lead huge companies due
to lack of skills, decisiveness, and will power; there are cases whereby they are simply
undermined and hindered from getting appointments to these positions by skeptical personnel
(Chung-Herrera & Lankau, 2005). Additionally, there are instances whereby they are not given
the chance to be in the leadership positions or CEO positions following negative perceptions by
other women already in top managerial positions (Bureau of Labor Statistics and United States
Census Bureau, 2013). Hence, in this paper, the researcher will focus on the research questions
and hypotheses presented earlier in the introduction section. These include:
ResearchQuestion:
1. What is holding the women employees back from running fortune 500 companies?
2. What is the root cause of this problem?
3. What can be done to see more future women leaders?
The Alternative Hypothesis:-
Women already at top managerial positions are likely to prevent the increase in number
of women in other top managerial positions in the same firm
The Null Hypothesis:-
Women already at top managerial positions are likely not to prevent the increase in
number of women in other top managerial positions in the same firm

Population and Sampling
In order to achieve the desired results of this given study, the researcher sought to gather
data on a number of firms and corporations. Due to limitation in the time required to complete
this project, the cost of performing the project, and the possible process to perform the research
study, the review involved 15 companies. The criteria for selecting the companies to be included
in the study involved selection of a couple of top level companies. Case in point, the companies
selected for this given study were all located in capital cities of the countries in which they are
based. In addition, the researcher also ensured that these companies had a representation in the
stock exchange and capital markets of their respective countries. Further, they had to be among
the firms whose shares sell the most and have high value in the capital markets. This ensured that
only firms with high revenue were explored some of which are part of government corporations
and others that were composed of privately owned firms. In order to ensure the data was at least
well represented, the companies considered were chosen from different countries and states. This
is based on the level of development of a country, the level of the firm, and ownership status.
Procedure and Time Frame
Before embarking on the process of collecting the data required for this given study, the
researcher had to work on a time plan or work plan that would aid in controlling the activities
required for attaining the set objectives. The work plan is as shown in the figure 1 below. This
represents the activities needed to be carried out, the time required for performing the activity,
and instruments needed to complete the process.
In any case, this present study in reality is a bit more complicated than meets the eye.
This is based on the fact that in addition to incorporating the process of collecting data and
information first hand from some of the companies, it also requires review of data and theories

that have so far been presented by other scholars. The paper might also require the researcher to
carry out a literature review on a couple of the firms that the researcher cannot go to in order to
acquire the information that the researcher needs.
Hence, in order to be able to achieve the given goals and objectives, the researcher in this
present study will first perform a theoretical background study. This will involve review and
analysis of a couple theories that previous scholars on the same subject have based their
argument on in efforts to explain the reason as to why there are few women in top level
management positions in the big companies and corporations. Since there are two different
hypothetical assumptions in this given study, the researcher will review the theories based on the
two hypotheses. Then, in analyzing the information gathered, present part of the conclusion for
research analysis.
Before backing up any conclusions made by any other scholar in the past, the researcher
will list a couple of companies where data needs to be gathered and embark on a process of
collecting the information needed in order to make conclusions. Case in point, they will list
firms, corporations, and companies in both the private and government sectors. In this, the
researcher needs to be careful to include at least a couple of firms in the Fortune 500 list of
companies since this is the main area of focus in this present study. However, not all companies
have to be part of the list. They could seek to incorporate a number of firms that are big, well
known, advanced, and important, but not necessarily in the Fortune 500 list of companies.
It is this list that will determine the level of literature review that the researcher will need
to carry out and on which companies before setting out to field work. The list will also determine
whether it is necessary to do an interview of some personnel working in the companies listed for
the present study, or simply focus on documented files that present the information on different

companies. This is because in most big corporations and firms the list of top level managers is
always presented to the public. This is via the internet, the company’s websites, in dossiers, in
the daily newspapers, and in company books of records or journals released. Therefore, the data
required here could be simply acquired via carrying out a research on the internet, or via use of
interviews on a couple of persons working with these companies.
In order to ensure that the information is comprehensive and accurate, the researcher will
seek to back up the literature review findings by carrying out a few interview sessions with not
more than five participants. Later, the researcher will incorporate this data and carry out a
comprehensive data analysis using computerized tools that will provide results needed to draw
conclusions to the study.
Research Activity Estimated Time Instruments/ Process to be used
Proposal presentation 5 days Research on internet and
presentation by paper to supervisor
Literature Review 2 weeks Research on internet and other
databases including the physical
libraries and presentation by paper
to supervisor
Theoretical background study and
analysis
3 weeks Review of resources presented on
internet and other databases
including the physical libraries and
presentation by paper to supervisor

Data gathering 4 weeks Interviews and literature review of
company files
Data analysis 4 weeks Use of computerized tools such as
excel, SPSS, or Matlab to get results
Results presentation 8 weeks Analysis and presentation on paper
Project completion and conclusion 8 weeks Creation of PowerPoint presentation
and final copy of the report
Analysis Plan
As earlier mentioned, the data gathered from this given research study will need to be
well analyzed. Therefore, the analysis will have to be comprehensive and accurate. To ensure
reliability of the results findings, the researcher of this study will seek to use a computerized data
analysis software or technique that will provide results needed to draw conclusions to the study.
For instance, they might choose to use SPSS, Excel, or Matlab for the data analysis process.
Validity and Reliability
The data gathered in this research study will be considered valid and reliable for use
based on the accuracy of information presented. This is in the sense that the researcher will have
to prove that the information and data gathered is not only the most updated statistics, but the
latest information regarding the firms. It should not be older than 5 years. This will ensure that
the results presented are credible and thus arguable for the contemporary society.

Assumptions
In any given research study, the researcher has to make a couple of assumptions that will
make their work easier or workable in a real life scenario. This is because sometimes whatever a
researcher theorizes while presenting a proposal for a study, does not actualize in the real world
and this could cause problems when gathering data or drawing conclusions after research
analysis. This case is not in any way different as the researcher will need to assume that the data
presented on the internet is accurate and the most current information on the top management
team of the firms in question. In addition, they will need to assume that the theoretical
background study is correct and although some of it might have been done about three or four
decades ago, it is still concrete and relevant for the current society and present research study.
Scope and Limitations
As earlier stated, the present study focuses on big corporations and firms existing in the
modern times. Hence, in order to ensure that the researcher does not veer off the track and topic
of discussion, they will need to concentrate more on companies in the Fortune 500 list and others
of great importance in the international world. The list of review and analysis will be composed
of not more than 20 firms. The number is small but it will be considered adequate for drawing
the conclusion required here.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In this section, the author presents the results of the present study. This is based on all of
the data and information gathered as described in the previous section. The results are based on
the null and alternative hypotheses also defined earlier in the paper.
H0 : Women already at top managerial positions are likely not to prevent the increase in number
of women in other top managerial positions in the same firm

From the theoretical background study, it was determined that there are a number of
theories that argue that women in management seek to increase the number of female leaders in
their firms as they feel safer and more comfortable when there are many on the team. One of the
theories that presents this assumption was the Tokenism theory presented by Kanter. He argued
that the labor work force has been dominated by the male gender for ages and this has motivated
women to take up the challenge and prove what they are capable of doing (Kanter, 2007). To
him, the first woman to join a management team might face a big challenge and they might have
to meet very high standards in order to get the appointment. However, the second woman and
any other that might follow, are likely to experience fewer challenges. This change is attributed
to the presence of a woman in the top management position and the progress is likely to increase
until their numbers are almost equal to that of their male counterparts (Byrne, 2011).
This argument is supported by the social identity theory that argues that everyone craves
to be part of a social category as this offers an individual the self-image, identity, and
representation they need. As a result, they are likely to ensure that they are biased while choosing
and appointing leaders for top managerial positions (Kanter, 2007). In addition, the social
identity theory also argues that a woman in a top managerial position may act as a great example
for other women aspiring to be leaders and managers and thus motivate even the men in
appointing teams to favor selecting other women to the top positions (Byrne, 2011).
The presence of a woman in top managerial position could also serve as a challenge for
the management team to make a couple of changes that suit the female workers. For instance, it
might influence the inclusion of flexible working schedules as well as the presence of maternity
and paternity leaves. These are important for female workers and once implemented, it becomes
easier for women in the labor team to prove and effectively demonstrate their skills since they

are more comfortable and feel appreciated (Tajfel, 2004). As a result, the chances that the doubts
about their competencies could hinder their appointment to the top most jobs is eliminated.
Therefore, based on these arguments, it is likely that the presence of women in top managerial
positions is not the cause for fewer women to be in CEO and management positions of Fortune
500 companies or in any other firms (South, Bonjean, Markham, & Corder, 2012).
H1: Women already at top managerial positions are likely to prevent the increase in number of
women in other top managerial positions in the same firm
While in the section above the tokenism and social identity theory argue that women in
top managerial positions encourage an increase in number of other female employees joining the
team in the same firm, the contrary could also be true. This is in the sense that the presence of a
woman in a CEO or any other top management team might create hurdles and blocks for other
women to join the team or get close to climbing the managerial ladder.
This hypothesis is supported by the assumptions that women might lack solidarity and
union support of each other. As a result, this will make the women already in top managerial
positions resist appointments of others to the same level. This is because they are likely to be a
threat to them. Case in point, if a woman working as a manager wishes to become a CEO, they
might resist appointment of any other woman to their level as this would in turn increase
competition for the top job or in turn lower their chance of becoming the CEO (Baron & Pfeffer,
2014). This is in the sense that when an opportunity arises within a firm, the first priority for
appointment is always given to the group of individuals that is either disabled, or under
represented. Hence, if the number of women in a management team is average or high, it is likely
that the job will go to either gender. As a result, it is likely that they will be aggressive in actively

resisting the appointment of more women to the top managerial positions (Tavris, Staines, &
Jayaratne, 2014).
Additionally, women in top managerial positions might be reluctant to support the
appointment of other women in similar positions of the same company or firm for fear of being
accused of favoritism and misuse of power. Case in point, a female CEO who is part of the team
appointing a director for the same firm might be reluctant and less supportive of a female
candidate as they might be afraid that the men in the team would accuse them of openly
exercising favoritism. This stereotype would, as a result, hurt the figures and consequently lower
the number of women for the top positions (Blalock, 2007).
Another theory suggests that women might be reluctant and less willing to work with, or
for, other female leaders in top managerial positions. This is in the sense that in a firm where the
CEO and top managerial position is occupied by a female leader, another woman aspiring to be
part of the team or to join the firm might be reluctant to accept appointment as they would not
prefer having a female boss. The argument here is that most female bosses overly express
abusive behavior to their female juniors and thus discourage appointments of other women to the
same positions. This is despite the fact that most women believe that female leaders are better
managers compared to male leaders. Therefore, as a result of the avoidance trait, the number of
women in leadership positions is likely to increase at a very low rate (Baron & Pfeffer, 2014).
The number of women in top managerial positions could also be limited if a woman is
already on this team as they are already represented. This is in the sense that the management
team might ignore and see it as a normal case that satisfies the society. Therefore, they might feel
that there is no need to add another woman when they already have a woman in this given
position. The female leader already occupying this post might hence be used as a representative

to the media and other cases thus serving no urgency or necessity to appoint more women to
leadership positions. From the literature review and interview sessions, it was noted that in the
companies where the CEO was a woman, the number of women in leadership or management
posts of the same company or part of the board committee was less compared to firms where the
CEO was a man (Blalock, 2007).
Therefore, from the findings of the research study, it is clear that the null hypothesis
failed and the alternative hypothesis was proven to be correct. Case in point, women already at
top managerial positions are likely not to prevent the increase in number of women in other top
managerial positions in the same firm. This is from the top most jobs that include the CEO
positions, to top director posts, and line officers or supervisors.
CONCLUSION
The results of this given research study reveal that in any given firm, corporate
organization, or company in the private sector, the possibility that a given managerial position
will be filled by a woman is highly dependent on the presence of another woman in a top
managerial position. This is in the sense that the probability decreases with the presence of
another woman in a higher managerial position. Case in point, if in a company the CEO is a
woman, the number of women in the top management level is likely to be less for the same firm
as compared to a firm in which the CEO of the company is a female. Consequently, based on the
findings presented in this given study, this explains why there are few women in the top
management positions of the Fortune 500 list of companies.
These findings are very interesting as they are in some way in contrast and in other ways
in support of other works and research studies presented by other scholars in the past. In
addition, the results are very interesting in the sense that in other areas and situations, women are

viewed to be more supportive of each other and encouraging, increasing in numbers for
attainment of their goal. Therefore, one would suppose that the same would apply in this given
case and the presence of a woman in a top managerial position to result in an increase in number
of women to similar positions.
While the present study has been clear in exploring the reason why there are so few
women in CEO and top management positions in various firms, it has a number of limitations
that could affect the results of the study. For instance, the study results were mostly based on
theoretical background analysis. Fresh data from the field was simply used to support one of the
hypothesis and deny the other one. However, it has presented a comprehensive argument that
casts no doubt that the presence of women in top managerial positions of the Fortune 500
companies is likely to grow even slower in the future as the resistance for an increase in number
of more female employees to these positions increases.
However, the results of the findings will be of benefit to future researchers focusing to
study the same issue. This is because the present study creates doubts as to whether the presence
of a female leader at top jobs is the only reason why an increase or appointment of another might
be highly resisted in the future. Case in point, in future, researchers might wish to explore the
possibility that women are less aggressive and they evade competing for leadership positions. As
a result, this has caused them to disappear in the lime-light and thus making it difficult to have
more women as CEO’s and managers especially for the Fortune 500 list of companies.

REFERENCES
Baron, J., & Pfeffer, J. (2014). The social psychology of organizations and inequality. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 190-209.
Bell, E., & Nkomo, S. (2011). Our Separate Ways: Black and White Women and the Struggle for
Professional Identity. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Blalock, H. (2007). Toward a theory of minority-group relations. New York: John Wiley and
Sons.
Bureau of Labor Statistics and United States Census Bureau. (2013, November 10). Current
Population Survey: Table PINC-11. Income Distribution to $250,000 or More for Males
and Females: 2013. Retrieved from
https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/cpstables/032014/perinc/pinc11_000.htm
Byrne, D. (2011). The Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
Chung-Herrera, B., & Lankau, M. (2005). Are we there yet? An assessment of fit between
stereotypes of minority managers and the successful-manager prototype. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 2029-55.
Dezso, C., & Ross, D. (2011). Does Female Representation in Top Management Improve Firm
Performance? A Panel Data Investigation. Social Science Research Network, 1-9.
Fairchild, C. (2014). Number of Fortune 500 Women CEOs Reaches Historic High. Fortune, 3-
23.
Gorman, E. (2006). Work uncertainty and the promotion of professional women: the case of law
firm partnership. Social Forces, 865-90.
Kanter, R. (2007). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.
McDermott, L. (2014). Women, Seize your Leadership Role. Human Capital, 29-40.

Peffley, M., & Hurwitz, J. (2008). Perception and Prejudice: Race and Politics in the U.S. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Powell, N., & Butterfield, D. (2012). Exploring the influence of decision makes’ race and gender
on actual promotions to top management. Personnel Psychology, 397-428.
Solomon, S. (2013, April 2). Why So Few Women Reach the Executive Rank. New York Times,
p. 4.
South, J., Bonjean, C., Markham, W., & Corder, J. (2012). Social structure and intergroup
interaction: Men and women of the federal bureaucracy. American Sociological Review,
587-99.
Stroope, S., & Hageman, B. (2011). Women, Water + Leadership: Are we Making Progress? T +
D, 50-9.
Sweigart, A. (2012). Women on Board for Change: The Norway Model of Boardroom Quotas as
a Tool for Progress in the United States and Canada. Northwestern Journal of
International Law & Business, 1-10.
Tajfel, H. (2004). Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information/sur les
sciences sociales., 1-10.
Tavris, C., Staines, G., & Jayaratne, E. (2014). The queen bee syndrome. Psychology Today,, 55-
60.
United States Census Bureau. (2012, November 12). Census Bureau Releases Equal Employment
Opportunity Tabulation That Provides a Profile of America’s Workforce. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/employment_occupations/cb12-225.

Why So Few Women Lead Fortune 500 Companies

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Why So Few Women Lead Fortune 500 Companies

Similar to Why So Few Women Lead Fortune 500 Companies (20)

Why So Few Women Lead Fortune 500 Companies