Managerial Career Success in the Malaysian Public Sector Organizations: Does Gender Matter?

Managerial Career Success In The Malaysian Public Sector Organizations: Does Gender Matter?

Refereed Paper

Mohd Rasdi, Roziah; Ismail, Maimunah

Abstract

The differential career experiences between men and women have implications for understanding the relationships between independent variables and career success (Patton et al., 2004; Ng et al., 2005). Differences in career experiences may be a function of job segregation, more specialized jobs, sex role attitudes, gender stereotypes, interrupted careers and spiral career progress with more profound job changes (Eddleston et al., 2004; Ismail & Mohd Rasdi, 2006). These differences explained men and women inequality in the workplace where women may be treated differently in areas such as promotions, salary raises, organizational rewards and opportunities, which consequently affected their career success outcomes (Aycan, 2004; Eddleston et al., 2004). Ibarra et al. (2010) noted that a 2008 Catalyst survey involving more than 4,000 full time-employed and high potentials men and women who graduated from top MBA programs worldwide indicated that women are paid $4,600 less in their first post-MBA jobs, occupy lower level management positions, and have significantly less career satisfaction. Regardless of the type of industry that they worked with, prior work experience, aspirations and whether they have children or not, Ibarra et al. (2010) also found that women are less likely to advance in their careers. Despite all the effort that has gone into developing women since 2008, the follow-up 2010 Catalyst survey revealed that the men have received 15% more promotions.

Eddleston et al. (2004) noted that studies on gender differences in career success are conflicting and inconclusive. Ng et al. (2005) found differences between male and female managers’ interpretations of career success, while Chenevert and Tremblay (2002) revealed that managers’ number of promotions and speed of promotion did not depend on gender. Furthermore, career success research which studied on gender differences is lacking (Ng et al., 2005) especially in a non-western context such as Malaysia. Therefore, the research question is: Does gender moderates the relationships between the selected independent variables and managers’ career success?

Aims

This study has embarked on a survey involving men and women managers in the Malaysian public sector organizations, with specific aims, to investigate how gender moderates that influence of individual, structural and behavioral factors on objective (number of promotions), and subjective (perceived success) career success.

Methodology

The study was a descriptive correlational career success study conducted on 288 managers of Malaysian public sector organizations. The managers were from various managerial grades starting from the low management level to chief executive level. The data were collected using a quantitative survey from a sample of men and women managers who worked in several public organizations in Putrajaya, the federal administrative center of Malaysia, and managers who attended the training program conducted by the National Institute for Public Administration also known as INTAN.

A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to the respondents who were identified using the stratified random sampling procedures. In this study, career success was assessed using both objective and subjective career success. Objective career success was measured using the two extrinsic indicators of monthly gross incomes and number of promotions; and subjective career success concerns with intrinsic indicator of the individual managers’ perceptions of career success. Specifically, subjective career success was measured using Turban and Doherty’s (1994) perceived career success scale with reported reliability coefficient of 0.86 for this study. The independent variables were grouped into four factors, i.e., individual (self-efficacy, self-esteem, career aspirations, work centrality), organizational (perceived organizational support, organizational socialization), managerial competencies (individual career management, networking behaviors, computer skills) and work adjustment (person-environment fit). They were measured using reliable and established instruments with accepted internal reliability coefficients.

Findings and Conclusion

The findings indicated that there are no differences between men and women managers’ objective and subjective career success. In line with earlier studies, this study also suggested that these findings may be attributed by the sector (public/private) in which the managers work. Women were more likely to succeed in the workplace which enhanced by the policies that are more sensitive to women’s career needs and career paths, such as the public sector organizations. For men, such policies will not affect their career success.

The findings of this study concluded that men and women managers are no difference in the workplace in terms of individual, organizational, managerial competencies and work adjustment. These findings enabled the study to eliminate the possibility of gender differences in the Malaysian organizations in terms of self-efficacy, self-esteem, career aspirations, work centrality, person-environment fit, perceived organizational support, organizational socialization, individual career management, networking behaviors and computer skills. Further, these findings illustrated that in order for women to succeed in the career contest, they have to be at par with what men do in terms of proving their credentials.

Key Words: Managers, Objective and Subjective Career Success, Gender, Public Sector, Malaysia

Introduction

Over the past few decades, the number of women in the labor force has increased considerably. However, women continue to be underrepresented in managerial, particularly in the senior executive positions (Jawahar & Hemmasi, 2006). Although female managers have high levels of education and a desire to progress in their careers, it remains the case that only few have achieved the same status as their male counterparts even in advanced economies such as in the US (Wellington, Kropf & Gerkovich, 2003), Canada (Chěnevert & Tremblay, 2002) and UK (Neathey, Dench & Thomas, 2003).

The differential career experiences between men and women have implications for understanding their career advancement and career success (Patton, Bartrum & Creed, 2004; Ng, Eby, Sorensen & Feldman, 2005). Differences in career experiences may be a function of job segregation, more specialized jobs, sex role attitudes, gender stereotypes, interrupted careers and spiral career progress with more profound job changes (Eddleston, Baldridge & Veiga, 2004; Ismail & Mohd Rasdi, 2006). These differences have explained men and women inequality in the workplace where women were treated differently in areas such as promotions, salary raises, organizational rewards and opportunities, which consequently affected their objective and subjective career success (Aycan, 2004; Eddleston et al., 2004). Ibarra, Carter & Silva (2010) noted that a 2008 Catalyst survey involving more than 4,000 full-time employee and high potentials men and women who graduated from top MBA programs worldwide indicated that women were paid $4,600 less in their first post-MBA jobs, occupied lower level management positions, and have significantly less career satisfaction. Regardless of the type of industry that they worked with, prior work experience, aspirations and whether they have children or not, Ibarra et al. (2010) also found that women were less likely to advance in their careers. Despite all the effort that has gone into developing women since 2008, the follow-up 2010 Catalyst survey revealed that the men have received 15 percent more promotions.

From the reviews, we also found that extensive research have been conducted on gender differences in the Anglo American context, and relatively little research has emerged from Asia. Baruch and Budhwar (2006) differentiated between these two contexts and indicated that career dynamism is typical to the Anglo-Saxon industries, but less apparent in many developing countries. They further noted that the developed countries have moved to more individualistic career systems, whereas the developing countries are just catching up with an application of organizational best practice. The dynamism of career brings impact to career paths of men and women, thus suggesting that gender differences in career progress among Asian managers, particularly Malaysia, are different from the Anglo-Saxon countries. In terms of career success research, available studies on Asian managers’ career success so far have concentrated on personal attributes of Malaysian managers (Mohd Yousof and Siegel, 1994); managers‘ organizational socialization in five Asian countries, namely, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Thailand and Japan (Chow, 2002); managers’ career commitment and emotional perception in Malaysia (Poon, 2004); work centrality and socio-demographic factors of managers in China (Tu et al., 2006); and managers’ career success orientation in South Korea (Kim and McLean, 2008). Apparently, these studies have treated career success as a concept that has been perceived equally by both men and women managers. On the other hand, studies (e.g., Lyness & Thompson, 1997; 2000; Wentling, 2003; Aycan, 2004; Eddleston et al., 2004) found that men prioritize extrinsic career benefits, whereas women focus more on intrinsic career benefits, which consequently determined men and women career success outcomes.

The study also represents an interesting context in terms of its nature and culture. Malaysia has transformed itself from a traditional agricultural economy to an export-driven one, characterized by high technology, knowledge-based and capital intensive industries (MIDA, 2009). Upon independence, the Malaysian public sector inherited the administrative machinery left by the British. The colonial bureaucracy remains characterizing the nation’s public sector until today. The country also has a complex culture representing a mixture of three dominant races, i.e., Malay, Chinese and Indian. There is a need to more fully understand the cross-cultural dimension. Research conducted on Anglo-American managerial employees may not generalize to other populations with distinct national cultural contexts. Given the country’s unique background, it is interesting to learn whether the interplay of its milieu affect gender differences in career success.

With respect to gender differences in career success studies, Eddleston et al. (2004) concluded that most of these studies are conflicting and inconclusive. For examples, Ng et al. (2005) found differences between male and female managers’ interpretations of career success, while Chenevert and Tremblay (2002) revealed that managers’ number of promotions and speed of promotion did not depend on gender. On top of that, career success research which studied on gender differences is lacking (Ng et al., 2005) especially in a non-western context such as Malaysia. Therefore, the research question is: Does gender moderate the influence of the selected predictor variables and managers’ career success? This study has embarked on a survey involving men and women managers in the Malaysian public sector organizations, with specific aim to investigate how gender moderates that influence of individual, structural and behavioral factors on managers’ objective (number of promotions), and subjective (perceived success) career success. Specifically, the individual factors comprise of self-efficacy, self-esteem, career aspirations, and work centrality; the structural factors contain perceived organizational support and organizational socialization; and the behavioral factors include individual career management, networking behaviors, and computer skills. In this study, all variables are collectively analyzed under the three groups of factors. The paper is structured as follows: We initially review the background of the problem, followed by managers’ career success from gender perspective and the three distinct approaches of career success studies, as well as develop appropriate hypotheses. This is followed by a description of the methodology and presentation of the results. Finally, the paper presents a discussion of the research findings and the implications of the study for human resource research and practice.

The career success literatures have classified career success into objective career success and subjective career success. Objective career success refers to the external categories in a profession, which are defined by society, one’s peers or culture, and illustrates the typical steps towards success. The movement may be horizontal (increased job security, longer vacations) or hierarchical (promotion, different job title) (Nabi, 1999). In contrast, subjective career success reflects an individual’s perception of career experience, which is influenced by a person’s own preferences for development, needs and values (Gattiker & Larwood, 1986). Most previous studies have consistently suggested that objective career success and subjective career success are inter-related, and then formed a basic assumption that a successful individual considers himself or herself to have succeeded in both areas (Baruch, 2004). Furthermore, many researchers (e.g., Judge, Cable, Boudreau & Bretz, 1995; Seibert, Crant & Kraimer, 1999; Judge, Kammeyer-Mueller & Bretz, 2004; Ng et al., 2005; Tu, Forret & Sullivan, 2006) found that objective career success was positively related to subjective career success.

Defining career success for managers in the public sector has been more complicated. Flynn (1993) noted that the public sector is not generally run to make a profit, and therefore, there is no competition in the sense of organizations trying to entice customers away from their competitors. In a way, this characteristic of the public sector implicates how managers’ defined their career success. One of the career success criteria that always crops up is the manager’s managerial performance. In the Malaysian public sector, key performance appraisal (KPA) is used to evaluate every public sector employee’s work performance, including managers. This evaluation is greatly determined by the manager’s job performance, efficiency and effectiveness. KPA has influence on managers’ promotions and salary increments, and therefore, it is assumed that KPA has a positive relationship on managers’ objective career success. Since several studies have shown that objective career success relates to subjective career success (e.g., Seibert et al., 1999; Ng et al., 2005; Tu et al., 2006), KPA is thus, expected to affect both the objective and subjective career success of managers. However, since data on KPA is strictly confidential, therefore, in this study we utilized data on managers’ number of promotions to represent the managers’ objective career success.

Managers’ career success can be explained by the three competing conceptual approaches which referred to as individual, structural and behavioral (Aryee, Chay & Tan, 1994; Aryee, Wyatt & Stone, 1996; Nabi, 1999; Ballout, 2007). The individual approach emphasizes the role of individual characteristics and is largely derived from human capital and motivational models. The structural approach highlights the role of organizational characteristics that facilitate the progress for career success; and the behavioral approach proposes that managers are taking in charge of their career progress by engaging in career enhancing strategies (Nabi, 1999; Ballout, 2007). Career success studies (e.g., Judge and Bretz, 1994; Judge and Higgins, 1999; Seibert et al., 1999; 2001; Greenhaus, 2003) have however consider these approaches in an integrated way. Generally career success is studied using a small number of factors (e.g., Gattiker and Larwood, 1988; Judge et al., 1995). In this study, we included these three well-known approaches to career success as Nabi (1999, p. 212) highlighted that these approaches “allow for a critical examination of the differences between predictions of objective and subjective career success”.

Specifically, in this study, we included self-efficacy, self-esteem, career aspirations and work centrality as the individual-related variables; organizational socialization and perceived organizational support as the structural-related variables; and individual career management, networking behaviors and computer skills as the behavioral-related variables. This study contributes to the literature on career success in an international and cross-cultural context through investigation of whether gender is a determinant in managers’ career success. Accordingly, this study adds to the literature of gender studies especially from the perspective of gender differences in career success. This study is also significant to the Malaysian context particularly to the public sector due to the country’s effort in achieving gender equality in the workforce. It is also emphasized in the Ninth Malaysia Plan (2006 – 2010), in which the Government is intensifying their efforts in developing human capital towards the highest level of employees’ performance (Malaysia, 2006).

Gender and Managers’ Career Success

Managers’ personal conceptions of career success are likely to be based on both objective and subjective criteria such as salary, promotions and work satisfaction (Gattiker & Larwood, 1988; Peluchette, 1993; Sturges, 1999; Ng et al., 2005). However, Sturges (1999) and Ng et al. (2005) found differences between male and female managers’ interpretations of career success. These studies suggested that women managers were more likely to describe their success with reference to subjective or internal criteria, especially feelings of accomplishment, achievement and personal recognition. Men managers, on the other hand, expressed their success in terms of pay and promotions, which closely related to objective career success.

The differences between men and women managers could also be explained from the basic theoretical assumptions that have been made about women at work and as managers. In line with that, Parker and Fagenson (1994) have proposed three primary perspectives, namely, (i) gender centered approach, (ii) organizational structure approach, and (iii) gender-organization system. Gender-centered approach argues that gender largely dictates one’s preferences, abilities and skills, and these characteristics will mostly determine one’s behaviors (Riger & Galligan, 1980). Accordingly, each man and woman is expected to think, act and behave in certain prescribed ways. By having the same view, organizations mostly favored men as managers, functioning on the basis that those men alone possessed appropriate qualities for managerial positions. On the other hand, women managers are being seen as incompetent for management jobs. Empirical evidences indicate that this perspective remains alive in today’s managerial practice.

Another version of gender centered approach to management is that women possess important managerial skills for managing the contemporary management such as caring and nurturing (Parker & Fagenson, 1994). This version seems more encouraging to women as the ‘people oriented skills’ are associated with women traditional sex-role expectations (Mohd Rasdi, 2004; Mohd Rasdi & Ismail, 2007). The third version of gender centered approach argues that besides the gender-based differences, men and women are not inherently better managers, but perhaps they are better at specific managerial tasks.