Glass Ceilings Keep Most State Bureaucracies Sex Segregated, Say UA Researchers

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. — New research from the University of Arkansas shows that women remain underrepresented in administrative and professional positions at state governmental bureaucracies. In fact, the UA analysis indicates that integration of women has progressed so slowly over the past ten years that, at present rate, it will take well over half a century to achieve gender balance across all state agencies.

"If you look anywhere for justice and fairness, you look to the public sector, the government — not to corporations. This would be the first place you’d expect gender parity to occur," said Brinck Kerr, associate professor of political science.

Yet the research that Kerr and his colleagues Will Miller and Margaret Reid have conducted indicates that such parity may be several generations away. Despite greater numbers of women graduating from professional degree programs and despite federal regulations mandating equitable hiring practices, the UA research shows that most state agencies hold alarmingly few women in their top positions and that they have done little to place or promote female employees over the past decade.

"People think the problem of gender equality has been solved. We’ve passed legislation, enacted policies, heard court cases. It’s all taken care of, right?" added Miller. "Our research says otherwise. In fact, this issue is a long way from being solved."

For four years, Kerr, Miller and Reid have scrutinized classified reports from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), analyzing employee demographics in state and municipal governments nationwide. They represent one of only a handful of research teams who have been granted access to the EEOC reports. Access is also limited because few other researchers have succeeded in processing the data into usable, analytical infomation.

Further, what little research has been conducted falls mainly into the fields of economics or sociology. Coming from a political science perspective, the UA researchers have been able to confirm that under-employment of women and ethnic minorities continues in state agencies, leading to adverse effects on equity and limiting diverse representation in public policy. Their latest article, "Sex-Based Occupational Segregation in U.S. State Bureaucracies, 1987-97," appeared in the July/August issue of Public Administration Review.

Assessing the distribution of women across government agencies in all 50 states, Kerr, Miller and Reid intended not only to create a realistic picture of women’s placement and progress over the ten-year period. They also hoped to determine if specific types of agencies — their functions, missions and cultures — tend to exclude or deter women from reaching high ranking positions.

The researchers divided state agencies into three categories. Distributive agencies constitute those that provide maintenance or service to the public. For example, construction and repair of highways and streets, management of forest lands as well as parks and recreation, and conservation of water resources all represent distributive functions. Regulatory agencies include police and fire departments as well as utilities and transportation. Finally, redistributive agencies shift money and services between groups or classes of people. Such agencies oversee social welfare, hospitals or health services.

Examining the EEOC reports from 1987 to 1997, Kerr, Miller and Reid found women adequately represented in only one of these functional areas — the redistributive agencies. Following the precedent of previous research studies, the UA team set a goal of 30 percent female administrators and professionals to represent gender equality. In 1987, each of the redistributive agencies showed percentages at or near the goal. Within ten years, all of these agencies had exceeded the 30 percent mark.

But percentages in the distributive and regulatory agencies revealed a different picture. In 1987, the typical state highway agency contained only six percent female administrators and over the next ten years, climbed to only 14 percent. Among the regulatory functions, police agencies began the study period with six percent women, a statistic they raised to only 15 percent by 1997. And utility/transportation agencies gained only six percentage points over the ten year period, increasing their pool of women administrators from 16 to 22 percent.

"One reason we see more women in the redistributive services may be the fact that they have access to those agencies in a way that they don’t have with transportation or police departments," suggested Miller. "Also, the services these agencies provide fit in line with the traditional policy interests of women — health care, child safety, welfare issues. Many of these social service programs developed out of women’s activism in the first place."

But the researchers suspect that the low percentages of women in other areas of state government may be more than a problem of access. It may be a matter of determent — where internal attitudes and cultures within departments discourage women from obtaining employment in the first place and from advancing once they’re there.

Regardless of the obstacles, the UA political scientists consider it critical that more women break through the glass ceiling to attain high-ranking positions in state agencies. Positioning women within public bureaucracies is critical to the democratic functioning of state and local governments, they assert. Not only does the participation of women provide a more accurate reflection of constituencies and the community, but female professionals and administrators alter the culture, leadership and policy enactment of these agencies, often to the benefit of those they serve.

Furthermore, while few women and ethnic minorities stand a chance of being elected into public office, state bureaucracies provide an opportunity for diverse individuals to participate in the political process. The result of such diversity makes state governments more responsive and representative in the way they serve their constituents.

"Bureaucrats aren’t elected. So to make a bureaucracy democratic, it has to contain people with a variety of viewpoints and backgrounds, all of whom influence the way that policies are implemented," Miller said. "We’re concerned with getting women and minorities into those bureaucracies so that they have a voice in enacting policy."

But as their research indicates, recruiting and integrating women across all state agencies will constitute a long-term challenge, one that likely will require multiple solutions. Kerr, Miller and Reid believe that expanded educational opportunities may help correct the imbalance by preparing more women to enter the workforce in diverse professions.

In addition, agencies can position themselves for long-term diversity by hiring more female professionals, the researchers said. With more women entering at the professional level, their numbers alone improve the odds that a woman will advance to the administrative corps. Further, the input and influence of those professionals may sufficiently change the culture within the agency to make female promotion more likely.

On the federal level, the researchers suggest that equal employment and affirmative action policies be re-examined and more strongly endorsed. Politicians need to set the standard for employment diversity and hold public managers accountable for poor representation, they said. As more and more federal programs and initiatives move under the responsibility of state and local governments, however, public policy becomes fragmented and inconsistent. As a result, research like that conducted by Kerr, Miller and Reid gains greater significance.

"Policies are not self-enforcing. We’ve got laws on paper, but we need managers, activists, theorists to keep checking the progress of these issues," Reid said. "The only reason we know what’s happening is because the EEOC is required by law to maintain employee records and to track the effects of policy around the nation."