University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) leadership positions

(USC Thesis Other)

The underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) leadership positions

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

The Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics (STEM) Leadership Positions

Matthew Hayes

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

December 2022

© Copyright by Matthew Hayes 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Matthew Hayes certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Melanie Brady
Maria Ott
Alan Green, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv
Abstract
In this study, I applied Bem’s (1981) gender schema theory, Eccles and Wigfield’s (1995)
expectancy-value theory, and Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory to examine the
underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
leadership. Additionally, I used Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis to identify the knowledge,
motivational, and organizational factors stemming from overlapping key concepts of modeling
and mentoring, self-efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and employee values. In this study, I aimed
to examine women’s perspectives of organizational support for women seeking advancement to
STEM leadership positions and to identify any new barriers brought on by the COVID-19 global
pandemic. I conducted a semistructured qualitative study using interviews with 13 women at
various stages in their careers working at New World Company, a STEM employer.
Additionally, I used researcher field notes, member checking, and secondary data for
triangulation. I conducted all interviews remotely, and I analyzed data using thematic coding.
Findings from this study indicated that perceptions of organizational support varied by
participant. Additionally, though this study did not indicate any significant challenges to career
advancement brought on by the COVID-19 global pandemic, this pattern may have been due to
an unplanned study limitation related to participant selection, and I recommended future targeted
research. Nevertheless, this study suggested the significance of modeling and mentoring, self-
efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and employee values. Based on these findings, I provided
recommendations to improve knowledge, motivational, and organizational factors to support the
advancement of women in STEM.

v
Acknowledgments
Family has many different meanings. For instance, family can mean “spouse and
children” (Merriam-Webster, n.d., Definition 1b) or a “group of persons of common ancestry”
(Merriam-Webster, n.d., Definition 3a). However, family can also refer to “a group of people
united by certain convictions or a common affiliation” (Merriam-Webster, n.d., Definition 4a). I
dedicate this dissertation to my family, including my Cohort 17 classmates who endured with
me; my friends Lauren and Amy, who challenged me; Karen and Justin, who supported me; and
Paula and Maureen, who inspired me by serving as strong female role models. I also dedicate
this dissertation to my son William, for all the missed bedtimes and soccer games, and to my
daughter Lauren, who, at the age of 6, inspired me by stating, “Daddy, I didn't realize girls could
be bosses?” Finally, I dedicate this dissertation to Colette—you are the best friend, wife, and
mother anyone could hope for and we are lucky to have you. This program changed me; I am a
better friend, husband, father, and leader, and I have you all to thank for it.

vi
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. x
Context and Background of the Problem ........................................................................................ 1
Importance of the Study .................................................................................................................. 3
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions ................................................................................ 5
Overview of Theoretical Frameworks ............................................................................................ 6
Literature Review............................................................................................................................ 8
History of Women in STEM and Women in Leadership ................................................... 9
Known Benefits of Women in Leadership ........................................................................ 12
Social Cognitive Theory and the Pipeline of Women Into the STEM Workforce ........... 13
Self-Regulation of Goals and Values for Women Pursuing STEM Degrees ....... 14
Self-Efficacy, Modeling, and Mentoring of Women Pursuing STEM Degrees ... 15
Expectancy Values and Workplace Deficits of Women in STEM and Leadership ......... 17
EVT and Professional Achievement ..................................................................... 17
EVT and Stereotype Threat .................................................................................. 19
Self-Efficacy and Women in STEM and Leadership ........................................... 20
Mentoring and Women in STEM and Leadership ................................................ 20
Goals and Women in STEM and Leadership ....................................................... 21
Self-Regulation and Goal Setting ......................................................................... 21
Historical Gender Diversity Initiatives and COVID-19 Global Pandemic Impacts ......... 22
Literature Review Summary ............................................................................................. 26
Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................................. 27

vii
Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 31
Data Collection Procedures ............................................................................................... 32
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 33
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 34
Findings......................................................................................................................................... 36
Perceptions of Support ...................................................................................................... 36
Varying Degrees of Support and Lack of Awareness for Modeling and Mentoring
Programs ............................................................................................................... 36
Lack of Direct Support for Self-Efficacy Contributes to Lower Self-Efficacy of
Some Employees ................................................................................................... 40
Improving Leadership Support for Self-Regulation of Goals for Newer
Employees ............................................................................................................. 42
Lack of Alignment Between Employee Values and Organizational Goals .......... 45
COVID-19 Global Pandemic Impacts on Career Advancement Are Still Unknown ....... 47
Participant Suggestions for Leadership Support of Women in STEM and Leadership ... 51
Summary of Findings ........................................................................................................ 53
Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 56
Knowledge and Skill Support Recommendations ............................................................ 58
Motivational Support Recommendations ......................................................................... 59
Organizational Support Recommendations ...................................................................... 60
Recommendations for Future Research ............................................................................ 61
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 62
References ..................................................................................................................................... 64
Appendix A: Participating Stakeholders With Sampling Criteria ................................................ 80
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 80
Sampling Criteria .............................................................................................................. 80

viii
Appendix B: Credibility and Trustworthiness .............................................................................. 81
Appendix C: Ethics ....................................................................................................................... 82
Institutional Review Board ............................................................................................... 82
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 82
Appendix D: Interview Protocols ................................................................................................. 83
Introduction to the Interview ............................................................................................ 83
Conclusion to the Interview .............................................................................................. 84
Interview Questions .......................................................................................................... 84
Appendix E: Case-by-Case Comparison of Interview Participants .............................................. 88
Appendix F: The Researcher ........................................................................................................ 93
Appendix G: Limitations and Delimitations ................................................................................. 94

ix
List of Tables
Appendix E: Case-by-Case Comparison of Interview Participants 88

x
List of Figures
Figure 1: Percentages of Women in STEM Jobs: 1970–2019 2
Figure 2: Comparison of Barriers in STEM and Women in Leadership 11
Figure 3: Changes in Labor Force Participation, Unemployment, and Work Hours Among
Married Couples 25
Figure 4: Conceptual Framework 30

1
The Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics (STEM) Leadership Positions
Despite recent and historical gender diversity initiatives, women remain underrepresented
in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) leadership positions in the United
States (Barber, 1995; McKinsey & Company, 2021; Pantella, 2021; U.S. Census Bureau, 2021).
On average, studies show 74% of the overall STEM workforce identify as men and that women
are 30% less likely to be promoted to leadership positions, but men currently fill more than twice
as many leadership positions in STEM (Bilimoria et al., 2014; Chisholm-Burns et al., 2017;
Landivar, 2013). According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2020a, 2020b), STEM fields
are among the fastest-growing industries in the United States, and staffing projections indicate a
growing gap in filling forecasted STEM vacancies. The lack of diversity in leadership roles
adversely impacts organizations’ abilities to fill vacant positions, negatively impacting the U.S.
economy (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2020b).
Context and Background of the Problem
Research dating back to the 1970s shows an underrepresentation of women in STEM
fields, demonstrating these gender disparities are an ongoing problem, as shown in Figure 1
(Miriti, 2020; Shulman, 1994). Evidence suggests that although individuals have made notable
progress in promoting diversity in STEM fields, most leadership positions continue to be held by
men (Barber, 1995; McKinsey & Company, 2021). As the U.S. job market grows, the need for
workers to fill positions increases. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2020a) expects the
STEM field job market to grow by more than 8% between 2019 and 2029, compared to 3.4% for
non-STEM occupations. Additionally, more than 99% of STEM occupations require formal
training or a college degree, but U.S. universities are only expected to graduate students for 29%

2
of the forecasted STEM job openings (Fayer et al., 2017; Ryan, 2020). Compounding this
problem, only 38% of women who work in majority-male workplaces say, “women are treated
fairly in promotions and advancement” (Parker, 2018, para. 7). Although many of these statistics
are recent, the underrepresentation of women in STEM and leadership positions is not new. Past
research and corporate initiatives have not sustainably addressed the causes perpetuating the
issue. Leaders need to identify and implement further research and new solutions as the world
evolves and new challenges emerge.

Figure 1
Percentages of Women in STEM Jobs: 1970–2019

Note. From Women Are Nearly Half of U.S. Workforce but Only 27% of STEM Workers, by U.S.
Census Bureau, 2021 (https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/01/women-making-gains-in-
stem-occupations-but-still-underrepresented.html). In the public domain.

3
Importance of the Study
The underrepresentation of women in STEM leadership positions is important to address
for many reasons. Some of the most significant and recurring reasons include: (a) women
positively contribute to organizations, (b) the need to increase gender diversity, (c)
disproportionate challenges of women in the workplace, and (d) the necessity to address failed
gender diversity initiatives and new challenges for women in the workplace due to the COVID-
19 global pandemic (Almukhambetova et al., 2021; Barabino et al., 2020; Bateman & Ross,
2020; Bouteska & Mili, 2021; Offermann & Foley, 2020).
First, research demonstrates women in leadership positively contribute to increased
organizational performance, growth, and innovation. Offermann and Foley (2020) conducted a
study to determine the advantages of women in leadership positions. The study found that
organizations with female leaders demonstrate unique leadership traits that boost employee
morale, positively impacting employee behaviors and productivity (Offermann & Foley, 2020).
Additionally, female-led organizations tend to experience higher levels of employee diversity,
which positively impacts growth and innovation (Ozgen, 2021).
Second, increasing gender diversity in STEM leadership can positively impact STEM-
candidate recruitment and retention and thus help fill projected future STEM vacancies. Studies
show that leaders who establish and nurture a sense of employee belonging can positively impact
the recruitment and retention of employees (Botella et al., 2019; Brown, 2019). Additionally,
Botella et al. (2019) studied the multiple factors that impact gender diversity in STEM, finding
that role modeling and mentoring by women in STEM leadership positions positively impacts
retainment of women enrolled in STEM disciplines. Increasing the percentage of women in

4
STEM leadership positions and mitigating the growing and projected vacancies in STEM fields
improves organizational performance.
Third, women face more challenges in STEM fields than men. Funk and Parker (2018)
found at least 20% of women in STEM believed their gender had been a barrier to success
compared to only 7% of men who felt their gender was a barrier. Specifically, the study found
that female employees faced discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace more
frequently than men, where 50% of women in STEM reported having experienced gender
discrimination compared to only 19% of men. These challenges limit advancement into
leadership roles for candidates that identify as women, which can negatively influence future
generations from entering STEM fields as working professionals. This research demonstrated the
need to expand the population of candidates pursuing STEM degrees to fill future vacancies.
Finally, given the persistence of gender diversity gaps in STEM and STEM leadership
positions, leaders of gender diversity initiatives have not sustainably addressed this problem. The
belief in meritocracy, a term that describes how intelligence and effort determine one’s place in a
dystopian society, directly challenges the effectiveness of gender diversity initiatives (Konrad et
al., 2021; Sealy, 2010; Trevisan et al., 2022). Though decades-old research informing corporate
diversity initiatives has led to some improvement, women in STEM continue to experience
challenges at a higher rate than men (McKinsey & Company, 2016, 2021). Additionally, the
COVID-19 global pandemic created additional challenges for the U.S. workforce. Families with
school-aged children had to transition to remote schooling. Many employers transitioned to a
work-from-home posture to reduce the spread of the virus, and many small business owners had
to close their doors permanently, including business that offered childcare services (Stang,
2021). Bateman and Ross (2020) found that during the COVID-19 global pandemic, working

5
mothers spent 50% more time caring for children than fathers working full time. Additionally,
“mothers of children 12 years old and younger lost 2.2 million jobs compared to 870,000 jobs
lost among fathers” (Bateman & Ross, 2020, para. 16).
Recent and historical gender diversity initiatives have not effectively addressed this
problem. Additionally, new solutions may be required given the COVID-19 global pandemic's
impacts on the U.S. job market. With women making up approximately 50% of the college-
educated U.S. workforce, the growth rate of STEM fields in the United States, and the projected
employment vacancies in STEM, further research is necessary to identify potential actions that
address the underrepresentation of women in STEM leadership positions (Fry, 2022).
Sustainable solutions will help improve organizational performance and mitigate future
economic impacts of this problem.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
In this study, I examined women’s perceptions of the influence of gender diversity
programs on women seeking STEM leadership roles. I believed evaluating the impacts of gender
diversity initiatives on women in STEM would help develop more effective corrective actions to
close this gap. The COVID-19 global pandemic also created new challenges for women in the
workforce, including families transitioning to remote schooling, individuals facing work-from-
home requirements, and people caretaking for family members impacted by the coronavirus. In
this study, I addressed the following research questions:
1. How do women in STEM perceive organizational support for career advancement?
2. How did the COVID-19 global pandemic impact female employees’ career
progression into STEM leadership positions?

6
3. How can leaders support women in STEM in various states of their careers following
the shifts created by the pandemic?
Overview of Theoretical Frameworks
In this study, I used Bem’s (1981) gender schema theory and Clark and Estes’s (2008)
gap analysis to examine the underrepresentation of women in STEM leadership. Gender schema
theory refers to the phenomenon where people in a society convert men and women into
masculine and feminine traits. Gender schema theory suggests that a large portion of society
bifurcates the world into masculine and feminine components while thinking of themselves
primarily in those terms. This phenomenon occurs in adolescents carrying on through adulthood,
impacting and reinforcing societal gender norms (Bem, 1981; Liben & Bigler, 2015). The
primary tool people use to measure gender schema, the Bem Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI),
originally included 60 personality traits segregated into masculine, feminine, and neutral scales
(Agosto, 2004; Bem, 1981). Individuals employed the BSRI to evaluate themselves on each of
the 60 different personality traits using a 7-point Likert scale. The survey results categorize the
individual as either masculine, feminine, androgynous, or undifferentiated (Bem, 1974, 1981). In
recent years, researchers have shifted toward using expressive instead of feminine and
instrumental instead of masculine (Agosto, 2004). Agosto (2004) posited that “regardless of
whether or not these are the defining characteristics of femininity and masculinity, women in
general tend to have more strongly feminine or expressive personalities, and men in general tend
to have more strongly masculine or instrumental personalities” (p. 40).
Eccles and Wigfield’s (1995) expectancy-value theory (EVT) addresses how motivation
influences achievement by studying the specific roles of an individual’s performance expectancy
and how they value the task. EVT includes two types of expectancies: outcome expectancies and

7
efficacy expectancies (Eccles & Wigfield, 1995). Outcome expectancies focus on the belief that
a specific outcome will occur given a set of actions, whereas efficacy expectancy focuses on an
individual’s belief they will successfully complete a task (Ambrose et al., 2010; Maddux et al.,
1982). Elliot et al. (2017) discussed the various ways outcome expectancy influences choice.
Expectancy influences choice, whereas value influences persistence and mental effort (Eccles &
Wigfield, 1995; Pintrich, 2003). Under EVT, one can break down value into attainment,
intrinsic, and utility values and can further analyze them to understand impacts on persistence
and mental effort (Elliot et al., 2017). According to Eccles and Wigfield (1995), attainment value
relates to an individual’s identity; intrinsic value relates to the satisfaction people feel when
working on or completing a task. Utility value reflects the alignment between a task and an
individual’s goals (Eccles & Wigfield, 1995). Understanding how expectations and values affect
motivation can help people identify interventions that will have the biggest effects on one’s
performance.
Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory (SCT) presents the reciprocal relationship
between learning and individual (personal), behavioral, and social/environmental factors. SCT
references the process of self-regulation to influence behaviors, beliefs, and actions as they relate
to individual goals (Bandura, 2001; Schunk & Usher, 2019). Through self-regulation, individuals
continuously assess themselves against their goals and form new beliefs that alter their behavior
and actions. Schunk and Usher (2019) also discussed SCT using self-efficacy and modeling to
influence behavioral and environmental factors through cognitive, motivational, and affective
processes. As a result, the relationships between personal factors and behaviors, behaviors and
environment, and environment and behaviors are reciprocal, creating a triadic reciprocity model
of these three factors (Schunk & Usher, 2019).

8
Individuals have attributed the underrepresentation of women in STEM and leadership to
pipeline and deficit theories. Pipeline theory stems from the “leaky pipeline” metaphor people
use to describe the various reasons women drop out or change academic paths from secondary
school through college (Blickenstaff, 2005). Gartstein and Hancock (2021) explained that deficit
theory focuses on the relationship between career outcomes and barriers women face in STEM.
Both theories consider barriers, including support resources, modeling or mentoring, self-
efficacy, and stereotype threat (Gartstein & Hancock, 2021).
Clark and Estes (2008) provided a framework for evaluating performance problems
through a gap analysis. Clark and Estes conducted an extensive evaluation of performance
improvement models to develop an effective method for solving problems. Understanding the
knowledge, motivational, and organizational causes of gender disparity in STEM leadership is
critical to developing effective solutions and addressing current and future STEM employment
deficits. With men holding most STEM leadership positions, people need to identify specific
actions to help these men view the lack of gender diversity as an issue and not a threat (Fayer et
al., 2017; Funk & Parker, 2018; Landivar, 2013). Finally, additional research is necessary to
identify the knowledge, motivational, and organizational drivers, and specific actions that
individuals can take to sustainably close this gap (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Literature Review
In this literature review, I incorporate Bem’s (1981) gender schema theory, Eccles and
Wigfield’s (1995) EVT, Bandura’s (1986) SCT, and workplace deficit and pipeline theories to
examine the underrepresentation of women in STEM leadership positions. The literature review
focused on five areas: (a) the history of women in STEM and women in leadership, (b) known
benefits of women in leadership, (c) the pipeline of women into the STEM workforce, (d)

9
workplace deficits of women in STEM and women in leadership, and (e) historical gender
diversity initiatives and COVID-19 global pandemic impacts. In this review, I identified
modeling and mentoring, self-efficacy, self-regulation, and employee values as contributors to
the underrepresentation of women in STEM leadership positions. In this study, I expanded upon
previous research by focusing on gender diversity initiatives and impacts from the COVID-19
global pandemic to address women’s advancement into STEM leadership positions sustainably. I
used these contributors to form a conceptual framework to guide this research study.
History of Women in STEM and Women in Leadership
Considering Bem’s (1981) gender schema theory, one can explain the
underrepresentation of women in STEM and in leadership positions by society’s perception of
women and feminine traits. For instance, Piatek-Jimenez et al. (2018) studied 499 college
students to understand the impact gender stereotyping had on students’ choices toward STEM
careers. Piatek-Jimenez et al. found that though students believed men and women possessed
traits that allow them to be strong academically, they perceived men as more likely to have traits
to be highly successful beyond academics. These beliefs impacted academic and career choices,
resulting in fewer women earning STEM degrees and entering the STEM workforce.
Botella et al. (2019) highlighted survey results of barriers women faced in technology
fields, including a lack of female role models (42%), gender bias in the workplace (39%),
unequal growth opportunities compared to men (36%), gender pay gaps (35%), difficulties
establishing work-life balance (14%), and the lack of support and encouragement from academic
institutions (14%). In addition, the U.S. Census Bureau (2021) published results showing that
although the percentage of women in STEM fields increased from 8% in 1970 to 27% in 2019,
men still lead the field. Men represent 52% of all U.S. workers but 73% of all STEM workers

10
(U.S. Census Bureau, 2021). Compounding the problem, the percentage of women earning
computer science degrees, the largest growth sector in STEM occupations, has dropped from
37% to 25% from 1983 to 2018, but 75,978,000 women represent 46.9% of the U.S. workforce
(Catalyst, 2019; Fayer et al., 2017; Ouimet, 2018).
Though recent studies show women’s overall representation in leadership positions is
rising, less progress has been made in STEM fields (Boatman et al., 2011; McKinsey &
Company, 2021). For example, McKinsey & Company (2021) conducted studies of 423
organizations, surveying more than 65,000 employees, and found a 9% increase in the
advancement of women from entry-level positions to manager-level over the last 5 years.
Furthermore, the studies found a 6% increase in the advancement of women from manager to
senior manager/director over the same period of time (McKinsey & Company, 2021). However,
the advancement rate of women in STEM leadership positions has decreased since 2009
(Boatman et al., 2011; McKinsey & Company, 2021).
McCullough (2011, 2019) studied the proportion of women in STEM leadership positions
and barriers to advancement via a sampling of academic institutions across the United States.
McCullough’s (2011, 2019) studies focused on mathematics, chemistry, biology, and physics
disciplines and noted men held more than 70% of the department chair positions at premier
academic institutions. Additionally, McCullough (2019) found 30% of women’s PhDs were in
STEM compared to 56% of men’s PhDs. McCullough (2019) illustrated the proportion of
women employed in academia (22%–26%) compared to men (12%–13%), suggesting that
though women were present in departments and eligible for these positions, they were
underrepresented in STEM academic leadership roles. Finally, McCullough (2020) found similar
barriers existed for women in STEM and women in leadership positions, as I show in Figure 2.

11
Figure 2
Comparison of Barriers in STEM and Women in Leadership

Note. From “Barriers and Assistance for Female Leaders in Academic STEM in the U.S.,” by L.
McCullough, 2020, Education Sciences, 10(10), Article 264
(https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10100264). CC BY 4.0.

Lyness and Grotto (2018) found that although 44.3% of employees in the Standard and
Poor 500 companies identified as women, women held only 36.4% of first- to middle-level
management positions, 25.1% of senior-level executive positions, 19.9% of the corporate board
seats, and 5.4% of the CEO positions. Lyness and Grotto conducted empirical studies of the
barriers and facilitators of female leader empowerment (BAFFLE) model as a framework to
organize their research. The study concluded that historical biases related to societal and
organizational structures, processes, practices, and perceptions are so engrained in society that
they may not even be on a conscious level for individuals.

12
Known Benefits of Women in Leadership
The inclusion of women in leadership positions contributes to higher organizational
performance in financial performance, value, growth and innovation, business risk, and
organizational culture (Chisholm-Burns et al., 2017). A study performed by Catalyst (2004)
demonstrated that companies with a higher representation of women in senior leadership
positions experienced a 35% higher return on equity and 34% total return to shareholders.
Additionally, Boatman et al. (2011) posited that women in leadership positions support a culture
of improved employee morale, motivation, and performance due to the transformational
leadership styles most often employed by women in leadership.
Sadinovna (2021) conducted a meta-analysis of recent studies to examine the impacts of
women in leadership on workplace performance. Sadinovna’s research found that increasing
feminine qualities in leadership positions resulted in new organizational strategies and business
models. The author attributed this finding to increased cooperation and engagement in the
workforce. Additionally, organizations with women in senior leadership positions had (a) more
diversity in staff recruitment, selection, and development; (b) more innovative problem solving
and decision making; and (c) higher rates of organizational success (Sadinovna, 2021). Fine et al.
(2020) also found that gender diversity in senior leadership teams directly resulted in improved
knowledge combination capability and innovation in a cross-sectional study of small- and
medium-sized enterprises. However, when gender diversity was low, employees’ capacity to
absorb and combine information and transfer knowledge diminished, and innovation suffered
(Fine et al., 2020).
Chadwick and Dawson (2018) examined the impacts of female leaders in upper
management on organizational performance in family-controlled businesses by analyzing data

13
from large firms from Standard and Poor’s 500 from 2009 to 2013. The Chadwick and Dawson
(2018) study showed that female representation in senior leadership positions was positively
associated with financial and nonfinancial performance (B = .05, p < .05). Additionally, a study
conducted by Bouteska and Mili (2021) of 75 banks from 2002 to 2018 on the risk and
profitability effects of women in senior leadership positions found that female-led banks were
less risk averse and more profitable in terms of return on assets and equities.
Social Cognitive Theory and the Pipeline of Women Into the STEM Workforce
Pipeline issues for women entering the STEM workforce contribute to the persistent
underrepresentation of women in STEM leadership. Reinking and Martin (2018) outlined three
concepts contributing to the lower graduation rates of women with STEM degrees. The concepts
described include peer influence, gender stereotypes, and gender socialization. The study
addressed how peer group acceptance and gender stereotyping impacted adolescents’ academic
performance and choices. In addition, the study highlighted one important aspect relative to
gender socialization: women received less encouragement from mentors, friends, and family
members than men when pursuing STEM interests. Thus, these three concepts directly contribute
to the leaky pipeline of women pursuing STEM education. Bandura’s (1986) SCT can help
explain Reinking and Martin’s (2018) findings, offering further insight into the academic
pipeline of women pursuing STEM degrees related to the three concepts of pipeline theory.
Additionally, Micari and Pazos (2021) showed that a collaborative and supportive
learning environment with role models could improve students’ self-efficacy. Micari and Pazos
surveyed 1,280 students on social-cognitive factors related to their experience in introductory-
level STEM courses. The study found students without peer support experienced significant
decreases in self-efficacy (F = 8.946, p = 0.003) and self-regulation scores (F = 11.316, p =

14
0.001), which could adversely impact the graduation rates of women pursuing STEM degrees.
Relatedly, studies have shown that students are more likely to feel motivated and achieve their
academic pursuits in supportive learning environments, fostering increased self-efficacy (Caprara
et al., 2008; Mega et al., 2014; Pajares, 1996).
Self-Regulation of Goals and Values for Women Pursuing STEM Degrees
Almukhambetova et al. (2021) used social cognitive career theory, an adaptation of
Bandura’s (1986) SCT, to explore interest development, career choice, performance attainments,
and persistence of female students pursuing STEM education. Almukhambetova et al. (2021)
suggested that women choosing to pursue careers in STEM are often driven by “social utility
values, altruistic motivations, and the desire to make a meaningful impact on society” (p. 14). In
addition, their study presented that women were often more driven toward careers aimed at
helping humanity and interacting with people (i.e., communal goals). In contrast, men were often
motivated by potential financial gains, prestige, and recognition (i.e., agentic-power goals).
Furthermore, the study highlighted the relationship between a growth mindset and student
persistence in STEM and found self-confidence to be a primary distinction between men and
women pursuing STEM degrees. Furthermore, the authors described how successful female
students’ goal-setting, self-motivation, and self-regulatory coping strategies improved STEM
persistence. Finally, Almukhambetova et al. found that occupational values and aspirations
directly influenced academic choices and significantly predicted women pursuing STEM careers.
Park et al. (2019) conducted a study of 755 STEM students to analyze the extent to which
self-regulation predicted STEM persistence. First, the authors examined whether minority status,
such as being a woman in STEM, moderated their self-regulation’s associations with STEM
persistence by evaluating the “cognitive, behavioral, and emotional skills that allow individuals

15
to work efficiently toward their desired goals, especially when under stress” (Park et al., 2019, p.
91). Next, the authors explained how self-regulation skills supported a person’s achievement of
goals, such as the achievement of higher end-of-year grade point averages for first-year college
students. Additionally, the authors sought to understand why nonunderrepresented minorities
pursuing STEM careers were twice as likely as underrepresented minorities to graduate with a
bachelor’s degree in STEM. Finally, the study highlighted factors that predicted STEM
persistence among college students, including goal-directed behaviors and student interest in
STEM subjects.
Finally, Concannon et al. (2019) examined how interests, self-efficacy, and self-
regulation impacted six undergraduate preengineering students’ persistence in STEM education.
Concannon et al. described self-regulation as a cyclical process consisting of forethought,
performance control, and self-reflection. For example, a female student or employee establishes
goals as part of the forethought process. The student or employee then performs tasks aimed at
meeting these goals and adjusts personal, behavioral, and environmental factors as part of the
performance control and self-reflection processes. The study found that self-regulatory
processes—particularly self-reflection, action planning, and mentoring focused on having a
growth mindset—play a critical role in self-efficacy and persistence in STEM.
Self-Efficacy, Modeling, and Mentoring of Women Pursuing STEM Degrees
McKinney et al. (2021) studied why women chose STEM majors to understand the
relationships between major, personality, interests, self-efficacy, and anxiety. The quantitative
study examined 128 female undergraduate students, including STEM and non-STEM majors,
finding that for female STEM majors, self-efficacy positively predicted STEM interest and
negatively predicted math anxiety. These findings supported Bandura’s (1986) SCT’s argument

16
that self-efficacy mediated avoidance behavior (McKinney et al., 2021). Ultimately, McKinney
et al. (2021) suggested that an increase in female students’ self-efficacy in STEM could
positively impact enrollment and completion rates of women pursuing STEM degrees.
Scholars have included peer group influence and gender stereotyping as variables in
many studies involving women in STEM. For example, Ertl et al. (2017) studied the impact of
gender stereotypes on the self-concept of female students in STEM subjects with an
underrepresentation of women. Their study included 296 women in STEM, focusing on the
student academic impacts caused by individual stereotypes, support in school, and family. The
study revealed that all three aspects (i.e., individual stereotypes, support in school, and family)
contributed negatively to the academic achievement of women pursuing STEM degrees (Ertl et
al., 2017). In addition, according to a study by Kuschel et al. (2020), “82% of women with male-
dominated career aspirations in their senior year of high school chose to change careers
aspirations by age 25 to a gender-neutral or female-dominated career” (p. 6).
Finally, Wilson et al. (2011) conducted a 6-year graduation rate study of STEM field
undergraduates and concluded that female students participating in a formal mentoring program
had a 62% graduation rate compared to only 55% for those without assigned mentors. In
addition, Packard (2004) conducted a study of 79 upper-level college students pursuing STEM
majors and found career mentoring was a significant difference between the 56 students that
graduated with a STEM degree and the 23 that switched to a nonscience major before
graduation. Thus, though many factors influenced the pipeline for women pursuing STEM
degrees, an effective mentoring program and a more diverse population of STEM mentors
provided a greater opportunity for a personal connection and, theoretically, higher retention of
STEM candidates.

17
Expectancy Values and Workplace Deficits of Women in STEM and Leadership
Although one contributor to the underrepresentation of women in STEM leadership
positions is the leaky pipeline of women into the STEM workforce, another contributor is the
workplace deficits women experienced that challenged their advancement into STEM leadership
positions (Barabino et al., 2020; Eagly & Carli, 2007). In 1986, writers at the Wall Street Journal
coined the term glass ceiling to describe the invisible barrier preventing women from reaching
top positions in their organizations (Jackson, 2001). Since that article’s publication, researchers
have conducted thousands of studies to understand better the extent and degree of influence that
the glass ceiling impacts women and other minoritized groups (Pai & Vaidya, 2009; York et al.,
2008). Additionally, research conducted by Eagly and Carli (2007) challenged the idea of a glass
ceiling by suggesting that a “leadership labyrinth” exists for women in the workplace that limits
women from getting entry-level positions and advancing into leadership positions. Researchers
also sought to understand why the glass ceiling and leadership labyrinth exist and proposed
solutions to mitigate or eliminate these barriers. For example, both Goodman et al. (2003) and
Hansen (2009) published articles titled “Cracks in the Glass Ceiling” to explore the current state
of women in leadership and the effectiveness of diversity actions. Whether a glass ceiling or a
leadership labyrinth, research has proven the existence of workplace deficits or barriers that
women must overcome to be promoted into leadership positions. Similarly, deficit theory
explores the relationship between career outcomes and barriers women face in STEM (Gartstein
& Hancock, 2021).
EVT and Professional Achievement
Eccles and Wigfield’s (1995) EVT describes how expectancies and task values influence
motivation, impacting personal and professional achievement. Wang and Degol (2013)

18
conducted empirical studies using EVT to understand motivational pathways to STEM career
choices. According to Wang and Degol (2013):
When individuals believe that ability is an innate trait, they become frustrated when
confronted with a challenging task, give up more easily, and attribute their struggles or
failures to a lack of talent. … Research has found that girls are vulnerable to these
differences in ability beliefs, especially when confronted with challenging tasks in math
or science-related fields. (p. 5)
Beliefs about ability can continue from adolescent and academic environments into STEM work
environments as members of society have perceived women as less capable leaders than men.
This finding exemplified the relationship between values (i.e., attainment, intrinsic, and utility)
and challenges women face working in STEM fields. Wang and Degol explained how gender
differences in occupational preferences can be important predictors of underrepresentation of
women in STEM careers. Their research showed that women put more value on “jobs that allow
them to help others and benefit society” (Wang & Degol, 2013, p. 7), whereas men focus on
power-based jobs. Wang and Degol concluded that a main psychological factor influencing
women’s career decisions to pursue STEM versus non-STEM fields is their occupational
preference related to outcome expectancies, efficacy expectancies, and values.
Additionally, Sealy (2010) performed studies on the perceptions of 33 female senior
executives from six global investment banks on the influence of meritocracy on their careers.
Individuals used the term meritocracy in the 1950s to describe how intelligence and effort
determine one’s place in a dystopian society. Proponents claim that merit is based on one’s
ability to perform and is not influenced by sex, race, or social class. However, Sealy’s study
found women’s adherence to the notion of meritocracy eroded over time, as people seemed to

19
define merit less by human capital and more by social capital. The research also revealed how
people interpreted the concept of meritocracy on two levels: first, on a symbolic level,
demonstrating how the organization defines and rewards success; and second, on a personal
level, demonstrating how meritocracy influences an individual’s cognitions, emotions, and self-
belief. These findings relate to the relationship between expectancies, task values, and
professional achievement of women in STEM and leadership.
Finally, Parker et al. (2020) conducted a meta-analysis of 176 research studies to examine
gender differences and similarities in STEM for professional achievement, success, and the task
values of intrinsic, utility, attainment, and cost. The authors identified that although women are
generally underrepresented across STEM domains, the effect sizes vary by EVT dimension.
Specifically, the study found gender differences were more significant for expectancies and
intrinsic values and minor for extrinsic variables (e.g., utility value and cost). Furthermore, the
authors inquired as to why female undergraduate enrollment in some STEM areas remains low,
implying that macho cultures in particular STEM fields, as well as a lack of familiarity with
computer science, engineering, and physics for girls, were significant factors.
EVT and Stereotype Threat
Stereotype threat is another aspect of EVT contributing to the underrepresentation of
women in STEM leadership positions. Female employees interested in STEM leadership
positions may be anxious about confirming a stereotype relating their identity to their leadership
abilities (Casad & Bryant, 2016). For example, Settles (2014) explained women experience more
significant performance pressure than men in STEM fields, feeling stereotyped as less intelligent,
less competent, and not as objective or rational as men. Additionally, Settles (2014) found that

20
“feelings of isolation and perceptions of a negative workplace climate mediated the relationship
between gender discrimination and job satisfaction” (para. 6).
Self-Efficacy and Women in STEM and Leadership
Liberatore and Wagner (2022) expanded on self-efficacy studies in academic
environments by conducting a quasi-experimental field study to determine whether self-efficacy
differences exist between men and women and whether there are differences between genders
when performing various tasks. The study found significant differences between men and
women regarding self-efficacy and concluded that the STEM gender gap is not a product of
differences in capabilities or training but perhaps influenced by the lack of support and
mentors/female exemplars in academia, adversely affecting women pursuing STEM degrees
(Liberatore & Wagner, 2022). Pekmezi et al. (2009) suggested that people consider past
performance to be the most powerful method for developing self-efficacy.
Mentoring and Women in STEM and Leadership
Another method to develop self-efficacy is observing others perform a task successfully.
This method is more influential when the person shares similar identities as the observer
(Pekmezi et al., 2009). Many organizational leaders have implemented mentoring initiatives to
address gender diversity in the workplace. Mentoring helps employees secure positions and
advance in their careers by providing a system of guidance and support designed to develop and
mature an individual. For example, Didion (1996) found women were 3.6 times more likely to
pursue a career in science after graduation if they received career mentoring.
Additionally, Hughes (2015) and Noe (1988) found women with female mentors in the
STEM fields were statistically more likely to remain or advance in a STEM career than those
without mentors. Finally, Straus et al. (2013) found employees with effective mentorships were

21
(a) more productive than those without mentors, (b) promoted more quickly, and (c) more likely
to stay with their employer. Thus, mentoring plays a vital role in the retention and progression of
female employees in the STEM field. However, individuals have paid attention to some of these
strategies more than others. Additionally, people have yet to fully understand the impacts of the
COVID-19 global pandemic; therefore, more research is necessary to understand the overall
impacts of each initiative.
Goals and Women in STEM and Leadership
Garr-Schultz and Gardner (2018) conducted research focused on the self-presentation
strategies of women, given the tension between female and STEM attributes. Garr-Schultz and
Gardener’s study explored whether female STEM professionals have different goals and
behaviors when introducing themselves to and interacting with professional male peers versus a
group of other women. The studies revealed women included “significantly more competence-
related goal content” than warmth-related goal content (F [1, 238] = 7.26, p = 0.01, partial n
2
=
0.19) when interacting with a group of male STEM peers versus a group of women (Garr-Schultz
& Gardner, 2018, p. 5). Additionally, the study found women in STEM presented themselves
differently based on situational and environmental context, with evidence that women who
engaged in “self-presentational tuning” (Garr-Schultz & Gardner, 2018, p. 9) may experience
emotional fatigue and decreased authenticity in the workplace. These factors related to self-
presentation can directly impact women’s self-efficacy, goal setting, and achievement in STEM.
Self-Regulation and Goal Setting
Additionally, Burnette et al. (2013) performed a meta-analysis of research articles where
authors reported at least one regulatory process or outcome and tied them to a quantifiable
assessment regarding goal setting, goal operating, and goal monitoring. The study found

22
individuals who believe human attributes are malleable (incremental theorists) rather than fixed
(entity theorists) significantly predicted goal setting, operating, and monitoring. The study also
found people were more motivated to pursue a goal “when the means of pursuing it fits their
preferred means of goal pursuit” (Burnette et al., 2013, p. 676). The authors suggested that some
entity theorists set performance goals to “avoid looking stupid” (Burnette et al., 2013, p. 676;
avoidance) instead of seeking challenging opportunities. Finally, the authors concluded that the
effects of self-regulatory processes on the achievement of goals were weaker in the presence of
stereotype threat and failure feedback. These findings and conclusions presented the negative
impacts of gender stereotyping women face in the STEM workforce and leadership.
Historical Gender Diversity Initiatives and COVID-19 Global Pandemic Impacts
In the last several decades, organizational leaders have attempted to improve the diversity
of their workforce through gender diversity initiatives, such as corporate diversity training aimed
at influencing employee views on equality. Konrad et al. (2021) explored the relationship
between diversity initiatives, belief in meritocracy, and organizational challenges in improving
opportunities for marginalized groups without compromising views of fairness for advantaged
groups. One specific challenge was the frustration that advantaged groups see diversity measures
benefiting underprivileged groups. According to Konrad et al., people conflict meritocracy,
which is associated with the interests of privileged groups, with diversity, which is associated
with the interests of marginalized groups. These authors explored why corporate diversity
initiatives have failed to sustainably address the underrepresentation of women in STEM
leadership positions.
Additionally, a 2-year study conducted by Rohde et al. (2020) explained how an
individual’s belief in meritocracy was related to gender equality in STEM. Rohde et al. examined

23
the relationship between a belief in meritocracy and students’ success rates in pursuing
engineering degrees. The study found that although most students believed that “anyone,
regardless of race, class, and gender, can reach success through hard work” (Rohde et al., 2020,
p. 94), the belief in the equality of access remained ubiquitous. Students went on to qualify their
beliefs in equality and hard work by citing grit, effort, difficulty, and motivation as attributes
required to succeed in STEM. However, most students failed to consider how the challenges
faced by women and other minoritized groups influence those essential attributes. Rohde et al.
found that meritocracy in engineering encourages exclusion in engineering education.
Finally, Razack et al. (2020) examined the relationships between meritocracy and gender
equality in the medical field. The authors looked at the portrayal of diversity in medicine as a
problem medical practitioners and educators must address in the framework of merit. Razack et
al. suggested that current and historical gender diversity initiatives are ineffective due to societal
beliefs in meritocracy.
Other gender diversity initiatives focus on maximizing diversity by minimizing
discrimination women face. Greider et al. (2019) described gender-specific barriers that impede
women’s advancement in STEM fields, including “unconscious biases that negatively influence
the perception of women’s abilities, as well as social and cultural factors” (p. 692). Additionally,
women experienced sexual harassment more often than men, which challenged retention and
advancement of women in many STEM fields (Greider et al., 2019). Countless employers have
instituted policies to eliminate harassment in the workplace and improve gender equity and
inclusion. These policies include the establishment of organizational diversity hiring goals,
employee performance evaluations based on work quality, minoritized employee resource groups
and mentoring programs, and education of employees on the importance of diversity, equity, and

24
inclusion (Greider et al., 2019; Holvino et al., 2004; Singleton et al., 2021). These policies
challenge the belief in meritocracy, which means they often fail to gain needed support from
advantaged groups.
Other gender diversity initiatives focus on increasing the career pipeline for women and
minoritized groups to enter the STEM workforce. Tsui (2007) analyzed 10 strategies individuals
commonly use to increase diversity in STEM fields. Gender diversity strategies aimed at
improving gender diversity included precollege summer bridging programs, mentoring
programs, research experience opportunities (e.g., internships), tutoring, career counseling,
vocational education or learning centers, workshops and seminars, academic advising, additional
financial support, and curriculum and instructional reform. Tsui suggested an integrated
approach to these initiatives would be the most effective means of increasing gender diversity in
STEM. People have implemented these initiatives at several institutions but fail to sustainably
address the pipeline gap for women in STEM.
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2020c), 29% of women in the
workforce had to work remotely because of the COVID-19 global pandemic. Additionally, as
schools and daycares closed to facilitate social distancing, parents of younger children had to
adjust their work schedules to provide additional oversight and support for their children
(Kantamneni, 2020). Considering the American Time Use Survey found that women spend more
time on household activities than men (84% compared to 69%, respectively) and that women
spent twice as much time providing childcare as men (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019), the
impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have had an adverse effect on women seeking advancement
in the workplace (Kantamneni, 2020). Figure 3 shows the disproportionate gender impacts of the
pandemic on the labor force in the United States (Landivar et al., 2020).

Figure 3
Changes in Labor Force Participation, Unemployment, and Work Hours Among Married Couples

Note. From “Early Signs Indicate That COVID-19 is Exacerbating Gender Inequality in the Labor Force,” by L. C. Landivar, L.
Ruppanner, W. J. Scarborough, and C. Collins, 2020, Socius, 6 (https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023120947997). CC BY 4.0.
25
26

Finally, women in STEM fields continue to experience incentive differences, including
wages and compensation, which impacts the ratio of women in STEM. For example, Martínez
and Gayfield (2019) examined the results of a 5-year study on STEM workforce pathways and
earning potentials concluding that women with STEM bachelor’s degrees were less likely to
enter the STEM workforce than men. In addition, the authors concluded that men outearned
women in STEM and STEM-related occupations by as much as 48% (Martínez & Gayfield,
2019). These discrepancies contribute to the barriers women face in career progression and
advancement into STEM leadership positions, together with challenging the recruitment and
retention of women in STEM fields.
Literature Review Summary
Existing literature has shown the benefits of women in STEM and leadership positions. In
addition, scholars have conducted research to identify barriers women face when pursuing
STEM and STEM-related education and challenges preventing women from equitably advancing
in the workplace. However, recent and historical gender diversity initiatives have failed to
address these barriers and challenges sustainably to realize the benefits of the STEM industry.
Meanwhile, the COVID-19 global pandemic has created new challenges requiring new research,
ideas, and initiatives to address the problem. In summary, although individuals have made
progress in improving gender diversity in STEM and the representation of women in STEM
leadership positions, more research is necessary to understand why gender diversity initiatives
have not sustainably resolved these important gaps. Additionally, research is necessary to
identity the impacts of the COVID-19 global pandemic on women in STEM and women in
STEM leadership positions.
27

Conceptual Framework
Bem’s (1981) gender schema theory describes how society divides the world into
masculine and feminine characteristics. This phenomenon occurs in early adolescence and
continues through adulthood, influencing how societal members perceives themselves and others
(Bem, 1981). This phenomenon impacts women pursuing STEM degrees, contributing to the
leaky pipeline theory and impacts the perception of women working in STEM fields (Agosto,
2004; Bond, 2016). Gender stereotyping of these masculine and feminine traits adversely
impacts recruitment, hiring, and retention of women in STEM, which directly impacts women’s
career progression and advancement into STEM leadership positions (Chisholm-Burns et al.,
2017; Glass & Minnotte, 2010; Hymowitz & Schellhardt, 1986).
Eccles and Wigfield’s (1995) EVT describes motivational influences on outcomes.
Accordingly, scholars have used EVT for decades to analyze and better understand the
challenges women face in STEM and leadership positions (Ball et al., 2017; Feather, 1987;
Gillard & Okonjo-Iweala, 2021). Motivational drivers (e.g., self-efficacy and mentoring,
employee values, expectancies for success, and enthusiasm) directly influence individual
performance and impact success outcomes (Ambrose et al., 2010; Elliot et al., 2017; Pintrich,
2003). Ultimately, these aspects continue to present challenges for women working in and
seeking leadership roles in STEM fields, as individuals perceive women differently than their
male counterparts (Moè et al., 2021; Wang & Degol, 2013). Therefore, scholars should continue
to consider Eccles and Wigfield’s (1995) EVT to identify causes related to the motivation and
performance of women in STEM fields. Though researchers have used EVT to understand
“gender differences in adolescents’ achievement choices” (Elliot et al., 2017, p. 117) related to
why girls may not pursue careers in math and science, more research is necessary to comprehend
28

why they do not receive equitable promotion opportunities to leadership positions once they are
in STEM fields. Specifically, scholars should expand research to understand better how outcome
expectancies, self-efficacy expectancies, and the various types of values change throughout a
career and what actions leaders can take to increase the throughput of women into STEM
leadership positions. Additionally, new research may be important to understand changes to
expectancies and values given the COVID-19 global pandemic to comprehend the potential
future impacts on women in STEM leadership.
Bandura’s (1986, 2001) SCT describes the reciprocal relationship between individuals,
behaviors, and social or environmental factors. For example, SCT focuses on how modeling,
personal learning differences, learning environment challenges, learning behaviors, and self-
regulation influence the learning environment (Ambrose et al., 2010; Elliot et al., 2017; Schunk
& Usher, 2019). Micari and Pazos (2021) used SCT to correlate how learning environments
(e.g., modeling, self-efficacy, and self-regulation) influence college students’ social-cognitive
outcomes in STEM. Additionally, McKinney et al. (2021) used SCT to understand the
relationship between personality, interests, self-efficacy, and anxiety in female college students’
degree choices. Researchers should evaluate the underrepresentation of women in STEM
leadership positions using Bandura’s (1986) SCT to identify causes related to personal,
behavioral, and environmental factors. Scholars should perform additional research on how an
organization’s work environment influences its employees’ experiences, beliefs, and actions
related to goals. Moreover, assessing modeling, self-efficacy, and self-regulation in the
organization can also help individuals identify causes leading to the underrepresentation of
women in STEM leadership positions. Once organizational leaders understand these causes, they
29

can develop and implement corrective actions to sustain gender diversity and fill projected
vacancies in STEM industries.
In this study, I used Eccles and Wigfield’s (1995) EVT to identify workplace deficit
factors of women seeking advancement into STEM leadership positions. Additionally, I
evaluated Bandura’s (1986) SCT to highlight factors contributing to the leaky pipeline of women
in STEM. As I show in Figure 4, a comparison of these constructs allowed me to identify several
overlapping key contributors to the underrepresentation of women in STEM leadership positions.
Specifically, modeling and mentoring, self-efficacy, self-regulation, and employee values
directly impact the advancement of women into STEM leadership positions by influencing
women pursuing STEM degrees and women seeking advancement into STEM leadership
positions. As I outlined in the literature review, modeling and mentoring can positively impact
the pipeline of women into STEM fields and support career progression into leadership positions.
In addition, self-efficacy is an essential factor in both academic and STEM workforce
environments allowing women to display confidence and influence the gender discriminated
perceptions of performance (Liberatore & Wagner, 2022). At the same time, self-regulation of
goals and employee attainment, as well as intrinsic and utility values remain important
considerations for women pursuing and working in STEM.

30

Figure 4
Conceptual Framework

Note. Figure 4 incorporates theoretical framework constructs of Bem’s (1981) gender schema
theory, Eccles and Wigfield’s (1995) EVT, Bandura’s (1986) SCT, and Clark and Estes’s (2008)
gap analysis. EVT and workplace deficits are shaded in yellow, with SCT and the ‘leaky
pipeline’ shaded in blue. I represent the overlapping of these two constructs in green, displaying
the four key concepts: modeling and mentoring, self-efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and
employee values. These key concepts have knowledge, motivational, and organizational factors
that impact the underrepresentation of women in STEM leadership.
31

Bem’s (1981) gender schema theory acts as an overarching influence on Eccles and
Wigfield’s (1995) EVT and Bandura’s (1986) SCT as they apply to the underrepresentation of
women in STEM and women in leadership. According to Gartstein and Hancock (2021), pipeline
theory and deficit theory are the two predominant and competing theories explaining the
underrepresentation of women in STEM. However, if scholars view them as complementary,
these theories and the associated mitigation strategies could sustainably impact the
underrepresentation of women in STEM and women in STEM leadership positions. In Figure 4, I
illustrate the influence of gender schema on these theories, together with highlighting the
overlapping key contributors across workplace deficits and the pipeline of women into STEM
fields. Utilizing Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model as a conceptual framework, I had
the ability to assess these key contributors for knowledge (K), motivation (M), and
organizational (O) barriers and recommendations in an organization. In this research, I sought to
understand how knowledge, motivational, and organizational gaps related to mentoring, self-
efficacy, self-regulation, and employee values impacted women’s career advancement into
STEM leadership positions at New World Company.
Methodology
In this study, I used Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framework to examine the
experiences of women working in STEM fields. Through this study, I sought to identify the
knowledge, motivational, and organizational factors related to mentoring, self-efficacy, self-
regulation, and employee values and identify potential solutions to impact women’s career
advancement into STEM leadership positions. In this semistructured qualitative study, I used
remote interviews of women in various career stages working in STEM at New World Company.
Qualitative research stems from constructionism, phenomenology, and symbolic interactionism
32

to gain an understanding of a problem or situation from the participant’s view (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).
Data Collection Procedures
The interviews lasted approximately 60 to 90 minutes, varying on the interview flow and
the follow-up or clarifying questions I asked. I partnered with the Women in STEM employee
resource group to identify interview participants and schedule the interviews, as I describe in
Appendix A. Additionally, I summarized and synthesized key takeaways, concepts, and themes
with the participant to build and maintain trust with them, as I describe in Appendix B. Finally,
as I describe in Appendix C, I provided participants with an information sheet for exempt
research that outlined consent and confidentiality of the study.
To adhere to COVID protocols, I conducted interviews remotely using Microsoft
Teams© or Zoom©, which depended on the interviewer’s and participant’s technology
restrictions and software familiarity. In addition, remote meeting platforms such as Microsoft
Teams© or Zoom© allowed for free transcriptions of the interviews, which I used to keep
interview notes. The interviews were semistructured to allow participants to feel comfortable and
relaxed when answering questions. I used the interview questions I list in Appendix D to answer
the following research questions:
1. How do women in STEM perceive organizational support for career advancement?
2. How did the COVID-19 global pandemic impact female employees’ career
progression into STEM leadership positions?
3. How can leaders support women in STEM in various states of their careers following
the shifts created by the pandemic?
33

Instrumentation
Appendix D includes the interview introduction, conclusion notes, and interview
questions related to the knowledge (K), motivational (M), and organizational (O) gap analysis
approach for this study. I designed interview questions to elicit detailed responses with real
examples with context from the participants (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell,
2016; Robinson & Leonard, 2019). The key concepts I addressed included modeling and
mentoring, self-efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and employee values as they relate to Eccles
and Wigfield’s (1995) EVT and Bandura’s (2001) SCT.
I developed interview questions using the constructs from Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap
analysis, Eccles and Wigfield’s (1995) EVT, and Bandura’s (2001) SCT. For instance, Interview
Questions 7, 8, 10, 14, and 15 explored the modeling and mentoring programs. Additionally,
according to Bandura (1986, 2001), there are four primary sources of self-efficacy: experience,
social modeling, social persuasion, and psychological responses. I evaluated these sources by
exploring (a) the participants’ experiences related to problem solving and leadership (Questions
2 and 4); (b) the participants’ experiences in previous leadership roles (Questions 8 and 12); (c)
the participants’ perception of shared identities with identified influential leaders (Questions 10
and 11); (d) the participants’ engagement with social persuasion from supervisors and mentors
(Questions 7 and 8); and (e) the participants’ ability to perform under pressure or with additional
stresses (Questions 3, 13, and 14). I examined self-regulation of goals and employee values by
exploring the relationship between participants’ goals and values (i.e., attainment, intrinsic, and
utility), as one can see in Questions 5, 6, 10, 13, and 14.
34

Data Analysis
Similar to Step 1 of Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis, I performed an initial
assessment of knowledge, motivational, and organizational barriers related to the career
advancement of interview participants. I then asked for specific examples of these barriers using
open-ended and follow-up questions described in step two of Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap
analysis. Appendix D shows the alignment between interview questions, knowledge, motivation,
organizational factors, and the four key concepts of role-modeling and mentoring, self-efficacy,
self-regulation of goals, and employee values.
I examined interview responses using thematic analysis, including two levels of coding
(Belotto, 2018; Gibbs, 2018). In the first level of coding, I sought to identify patterns of themes
related to modeling and mentoring, self-efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and employee values.
For example, emerging themes from first-level coding identified 11 out of 13 participants were
unaware of or could not describe any aspects of New World Company’s formal mentoring
program. In fact, when I asked them to rate New World Company’s mentoring program, 8 of the
13 participants responded they were unaware that New World Company had a mentoring
program. When I asked them to describe any strengths or weaknesses in the program, several
participants (i.e., Anonymous Participants 7, 11, 12, 13) cited a lack of advertisement as a
weakness. The remaining participants stated they chose not to participate in the mentoring
program citing past experiences when they found no benefit due to the program’s lack of
structure.
In second-level coding, I analyzed data analyzed based on participants’ career
demographics. For instance, I classified interview participants with less than 5 years in the
STEM workforce as early career, those with 5 to 15 years as midcareer, and those with greater
35

than 15 years as late career. Additionally, I grouped participants’ responses by their contribution
level in the organization (i.e., officer, director, manager, supervisor, or individual contributor).
For example, emerging themes from second-level coding suggested that participants promoted to
higher leadership levels in the organization demonstrated stronger evidence of modeling and
mentoring throughout their careers. Moreover, although all participants rated themselves high in
self-efficacy, only four articulated similar examples throughout the interviews. The participants
with higher self-efficacy scores each held leadership positions at New World Company
compared to those who could not articulate examples. Additionally, participants who were
serving in leadership roles demonstrated strong self-regulation of goals compared to those who
were in an individual contributor capacity. Finally, all participants varied in demonstration of
attainment, intrinsic, and utility values. The participants with the strongest demonstration of
employee values were those filling senior leadership positions (i.e., officer or director) in the
organization. In contrast, the remaining participants filled either manager, supervisor, or
individual contributor roles.
I conducted triangulation of findings by cross referencing researcher field notes and
coding memos, member checking of interview transcripts, and validating through secondary
data, including a review of New World Company’s mentoring program and diversity, equity, and
inclusion strategy (Gibbs, 2018). Finally, I assessed findings to identify knowledge,
motivational, or organizational factors related to the research questions, similar to Step 3 of
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis. I include a case-by-case comparison of participant
responses and interview observation notes in Appendix E. Appendix F presents background
information on the researcher, including potential researcher bias. I discuss limitations and
delimitations of this study in Appendix G.
36

Findings
In this study, I aimed to examine women’s perspectives on gender diversity support for
women seeking advancement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
leadership positions at New World Company. The semistructured qualitative study included
remote interviews of women working at New World Company in STEM positions at various
stages of their careers, seeking to answer the following research questions:
1. How do women in STEM perceive organizational support for career advancement?
2. How did the COVID-19 global pandemic impact female employees’ career
progression into STEM leadership positions?
3. How can leaders support women in STEM in various states of their careers following
the shifts created by the pandemic?
Perceptions of Support
Through Research Question 1, I explored the women’s perception of organizational
support for career advancement at New World Company. The study involved identifying the
knowledge, motivational, and organizational factors related to career navigation and workplace
deficits focusing on modeling and mentoring, self-efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and
employee values.
Varying Degrees of Support and Lack of Awareness for Modeling and Mentoring Programs
In this study, I found varying degrees of organizational support for women in STEM at
New World Company. For example, though modeling and mentoring are key concepts that
support individuals (Bandura, 1986; Schunk & Usher, 2019; e.g., women in STEM), I found that
in 11 of 13 cases, participants were unaware that New World Company had a formal mentoring
program. Additionally, those who knew of New World Company’s mentoring program found it
37

unhelpful or ineffective. For instance, when I asked how they would rate New World Company’s
mentoring program, Participant 4 responded:
So, I think when I first started working at New World Company, there was a mentoring
program where you had to voluntarily, you know, put your name in the hat to find a
mentor. And then it kind of went away, and I think in maybe a year or two ago, or I guess
3 years with COVID, and they kind of ramped it up again, and I put my name in the hat
as a mentor.
Participant 4 further described that if she were to rate the efficiency of mentorship, she would
lean toward a low score, stating:
If [I were to] rate from 1 to 10, 10 being very efficient and one being like almost
nonexistent, I would say it’s almost like [a] three or four, but that’s [my] personal
experience. As a mentor, I got solicited once or twice… it kind of put the responsibility
on the mentors and the mentees to kind of go through the process and make that
connection. Of the three people I had reached out to when I reached out to them, they
never responded back.
Participant 12 had a mentor at New World Company but clarified she was unaware that
the company had a formal mentoring program. However, she shared learnings from a recent
mentoring session, stating:
My mentor says leadership is kind of like parenting, where, like everybody has a style
and everybody thinks their style is right. But no parenting style or leadership styles are
necessarily right or wrong. You kind of have to just, like figure out what works best for
you or best for your team and go by that. I want to kind of gain these types of insights a
lot more often from leadership.
38

However, when I asked how often she met with her mentor to discuss progress against
development goals, Participant 12 stated:
I will say probably not often enough. One of my biggest mentors works on a completely
different team. We kind of just crossed paths and grew a mentorship and a friendship out
of it. Even though we rarely interact on a regular basis when it comes to work.
Alternatively, participants who were serving in senior leadership positions provided
examples related to strong modeling and mentoring. For example, Participant 2 described the
positive impact that mentors have had on her life from a young age:
I’m a survivor. I’ve pretty much been on my own since I was 17 and I had to figure out
how to get myself through college. So, when I was ready to give up on being a college
swimmer, I had a great coach and mentor who encouraged me to work through my
shoulder injuries and continue to swim. So, I got a full ride for swimming.
She went on to describe how mentors have taught her to thrive in high-pressure scenarios,
stating:
I’m very grateful for the incredible mentors I have had throughout my career. What I
really appreciate about them, and the ones that have been the best, [is] they challenge me
and push me outside my comfort level. They encourage me to to look at opportunities,
even provided me [with] opportunities that I never had considered or thought of. You
know the wildfire one, I mean, I can remember the call that veteran’s day weekend and I
almost dropped my phone. He's like you can go create a lot of impact and he pushed me,
you know? And I was like, hesitant to be honest, but he said you’ve got this, go make it
happen!
39

All other participants who were serving in senior leadership positions also provided numerous
examples of positive impacts on their careers from role models and mentors. That said, the lack
of a known, helpful, structured, and efficient mentoring program across the company challenged
the perception of organizational support for women seeking career advancement in STEM.
Finally, all 13 participants stated they were either working for or had worked for a female leader
or role model and found the experience generally positive. This pattern demonstrated a culture of
strong modeling that New World Company’s continued recognition has been reinforced as a top
50 company for diversity (Diversity Incorporated, 2020).
Upon finishing interviews, my review of secondary data suggested New World Company
recently updated the company’s mentoring system and webpage. The mentoring web page cited
six types of mentoring based on individual needs and preferences. The six types of mentoring
listed include: (a) onboarding buddy mentoring, (b) career development mentoring, (c) diversity
equity inclusion and belonging mentoring, (d) mentoring circles, (e) new leader mentoring, and
(f) leadership mentoring. Each of these mentoring programs included job aids with roles and
responsibilities, mentoring forms, templates, and worked examples for both the mentee and
mentor. In addition, the mentoring webpage included the following program description:
Mentoring at New World Company offers development opportunities and networking
connections that help employees navigate their careers and accomplish professional
goals. Mentorship has been proven time and time again to be one of the most effective
tools to develop and strengthen skills, increase engagement, and expand knowledge and
expertise amongst New World Company coworkers.
As of September 7, 2022, this new web page, created in early 2022, showed only 367 page
views. These findings indicated that the organizational and motivational support for modeling
40

and mentoring was strong; however, knowledge of New World Company’s mentoring resources
was low and could benefit from better advertising and training on the available resources.
Lack of Direct Support for Self-Efficacy Contributes to Lower Self-Efficacy of Some
Employees
Another key concept related to women in STEM and leadership is self-efficacy (Bandura,
1986; Eccles & Wigfield, 1995). In this study, I found all participants rated themselves highly on
self-efficacy, scoring 4 or 5 on Likert scale questions ranging from 1–5. However, only a few
participants provided answers or examples of high self-efficacy. Through second-level coding, I
identified that only those participants who were holding senior leadership positions at New
World Company also demonstrated high self-efficacy, including positive examples of past
performance, social persuasion, and watching others succeed. In all other cases, participants
demonstrated attributes of lower self-efficacy throughout the interviews, as I noted in interview
transcripts and interviewer observation notes. For instance, when I asked Participant 11 about
applying for leadership positions, she stated:
Something that would prevent me from applying to another leadership role? Ummm,
yeah, I wonder if it’s the same as the previous one, which was just like fear, and I think
coming from a technical background, there are some kind of like, you know, stereotypes
like if you go down a leadership track, then you’re not, you know, coding anymore.
You’re not like technical anymore, [which is] looked on more favorably than being like a
leader. Which I guess is dumb, but just like how you’re like, perceived by your field.
In another example, Participant 12 discussed adverse physiological effects on self-efficacy,
stating:
41

If I’m asked to work under pressure, I start feeling like [a] mild headache. … If I’m doing
two or three things, I’m just like, doing. I’m still able to do what is supposed to be done,
but the quality or the quantity or the time, something is gonna [sic] be compromised.
Other examples of lower self-efficacy participants provided included adverse
physiological effects during high-pressure situations. For example, Participant 13 stated:
Whenever I’m given a very short timeline, I feel like I spend so much time in putting the
deck together that I have not rehearsed enough to present . . . whereas if you give me 6
hours I can definitely present. But if you tell me, “You have only six hours, then you
have [to] present no matter what happens,” I start screwing up a little bit, which tells me
that it’s something to do with the pressure.
Finally, my interviewer observation notes captured prolonged pauses before answering
questions, and, in some cases, participants would ramble in their interview responses or fail to
answer the question. For example, in one case, Participant 3 would stop answering the question
entirely any time I would make eye contact with her.
Conversely, participants who were serving in senior leadership positions provided direct
and succinct responses describing examples of strong self-efficacy related to physiological
effects, past successes, social persuasion, and watching others succeed. For example, Participant
2 described thriving in high-pressure scenarios, stating, “The balance of being a competitive
swimmer, ironman triathlete, marathoner, and student is mental toughness under stressful
conditions, which has conditioned me well to do my best under pressure.” Additionally,
Participant 2 described examples where she led large teams through complex problems with
specific time requirements, including those requiring cross-functional team support and direct
engagement with state and federal regulators. She went on to summarize, stating, “[These were]
42

absolutely incredible leadership development opportunities. I grew from all those, especially in
the last 2 years.”
In summary, although all participants rated themselves high in self-efficacy, only those
who were holding leadership positions articulated corresponding answers based on past
performance, physiological effects, social persuasion, and watching others succeed. In addition,
other participants could benefit from additional modeling and mentoring. This finding indicated
that although participant perceptions of organizational support related to self-efficacy were high
overall, more work was necessary to improve knowledge and skills related to self-efficacy of
female employees at New World Company.
Improving Leadership Support for Self-Regulation of Goals for Newer Employees
A third key concept of the conceptual framework was self-regulation of goals. The study
found most participants with less than 5 years in the STEM workforce lacked a growth mindset,
goal setting, or action planning related to their 5-year plans, and those who were midcareer or
already in leadership positions exhibited stronger self-regulation of goals. For instance, when I
asked her about a 5-year plan, one participant with less than 5 years in the STEM workforce
stated, “In 5 years, I would like to be an upper-level data scientist. I want advancement. I would
like to be like considered a subject matter expert in my field.” However, when I asked her if she
was working on a professional development plan, the same individual gave the following
response:
Hmm. Kind of. I think we like [sic] have to do one? So, my manager is having me do
one. Umm, but I think I’m normally just in general trying to learn new things. Get more
experience within my projects. Uh. working with other people. I don’t really have any
goals or like actions that I’m taking.
43

Additionally, when asked about the frequency of mentoring sessions, Participant 12 stated:
I think we are all just so busy that I don’t have time to work with mentors during the day.
But yeah, I would hope to eventually get to a point where I am a lot more confident and
just asking for more or something like that.
Alternatively, participants who were serving in senior leadership positions described detailed
development plans with frequent check-ins with their supervisor and mentors to monitor progress
and to adjust actions and goals as appropriate.
A review of secondary data suggested that New World Company required leaders to meet
with their employees quarterly to discuss and document check-ins related to progress against
performance metrics. New World Company’s performance management system included a
single-point entry system where the organization required employees and their supervisors to
document performance goals annually and discuss progress at least quarterly. The quarterly
check-ins require leaders to document meaningful discussions related to employee performance.
These conversations include question prompts such as:
• Goals: Are these goals and metrics still the right ones? Describe the organizational
value or impact of them to date. What recent achievement stands out? Are there
barriers to achieving the desired results?
• Virtues: Looking ahead to next quarter, are there any Virtues that stand out as unique
strengths or any that may need extra attention?
• Development: What development activities have been beneficial? What others might
be beneficial going forward?
• Next Quarter: What will need to be the main focus of work in the coming quarter?
What deadlines are coming up? What challenges will need to be overcome?
44

Review the secondary data led to the discovery of a leadership and employee development
(LED) webpage in the New World Company’s intranet. The LED webpage contained many tools
to help employees and leaders create, track, and review employee development plans. For
instance, the employee development section stated:
As New World Company strives to improve as an organization, it is increasingly
important that you continuously develop the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to
perform your job. It all starts with your annual development plan. A robust plan helps
you take action to achieve your career goals. Your plan should focus on 1-3 clear
measurable goals that build on your strengths or areas to improve, as well as how you
will achieve them and a timeline. Don’t forget the 70/20/10 rule–70% of your learning
should come from on-the-job experience, 20% from the knowledge and expertise of
others, and 10% from formal training. It is equally important that leaders participate in
development coaching and planning activities to enhance engagement and retention.
Quarterly check-ins are a great time to have a conversation on how employees are
progressing on their plan, address any concerns, provide helpful feedback, and discuss
any changes to the plan.
The page included development plan templates, worked examples, and a simple five-step process
to develop, track, and discuss employee development plans. Additionally, the webpage included
instructional videos for employees and leaders to guide them through the process and offer
additional tips and insights. Finally, New World Company had a generous tuition assistance
program and partnerships with LinkedIn Learning ©, the Institute of Management Studies ©, and
ExecOnline © to offer opportunities to all employees. Other than New World Company’s tuition
45

assistance program, follow-up discussions with several participants found most employees were
unaware of the resources available.
Though New World Company’s performance management system contained a prompt for
development discussions and a separate section where employees and leaders documented and
tracked professional development goals, the use of this section was not a required or audited
process at New World Company. Additionally, company leaders recently updated the LED
webpage, which contained employee development resources, in early 2022; yet, the site only
showed 389 page views as of September 7, 2022. In my follow-up discussions with participants,
I found most participants were unaware of these resources and had not heard of the LED
webpage.
All participants could discuss New World Company’s performance management process,
including quarterly check-ins with their supervisors to discuss goal progress. However, most
participants stated they did not have formal development goals or plans or discussions with their
supervisors on these items. These examples demonstrated some evidence of organizational
support for those actively pursuing leadership positions. However, company leaders should do
more work to raise employee knowledge of the available resources and to formalize the use of
employee development plans.
Lack of Alignment Between Employee Values and Organizational Goals
The final key concept from the conceptual framework was employee values. The study
found most participants who were serving in leadership positions expressed strong evidence of
attainment, intrinsic, and utility values. However, participants serving in individual contributor
roles demonstrated lower evidence of alignment between employee and company values. For
46

instance, when I asked her about alignment between personal goals and professional goals,
Participant 3 responded:
I like to work in projects which where I have some passion in it. So, the moment I lose
passion in the work is when I start switching jobs and notice that in the past. When I am
not interested in anything, then I, you know, I wake up in the morning like [it’s] time to
move on. I have done that in the past.
Although this response demonstrated a higher attainment value, it also potentially correlated to a
lower utility value. Additionally, Participant 3 demonstrated lower intrinsic value when she
added, “There are positions that I should be at least applying for. … If there are 10 things the job
requires, and two things I can’t do, then I don’t apply. … I’m one of those people.”
When I asked her to describe any challenges that might prevent her from applying for a
leadership role, Participant 8 responded:
One of the biggest challenges that I experienced was on my rotation, it’s kind of [an]
unwritten [rule] but people expect you to be on the clock all the time. So, a lot of us get
every other Friday off, but when I was on my rotation, I worked all my Fridays and it’s
all because it was kind of expected that you should be there whenever any employee is.
You should be there when they have questions, and you should be able to answer right
away. That will be the biggest challenge because females tend to be more of the family
person that takes care of the kids more. They wanna [sic] be able to have time off with
their family, and if you are expected them to be there and not have an RDO [regular day
off] and to work longer than your normal work schedule, how would anybody wanna
[sic] be a supervisor?
47

However, when I asked them the same question, participants who were serving in leadership
positions succinctly replied: “No.” In addition, Participants 2 and 6 demonstrated high intrinsic
and utility values when describing their balance between raising families and supporting the
company by citing examples of high self-efficacy, self-confidence and action planning. Finally,
Participant 2 shared examples of returning to full-time employment after taking time off to raise
her family. She had since been promoted to an officer-level position, adding that she was
“encouraged by how many fathers on [her] team are on family bonding leave to help raise their
families.”
These data support the theory that workers who experience high levels of personal job
satisfaction and a sense of congruence between their personal and professional career aspirations
have a greater chance of career advancement (Eccles & Wigfield, 1995). Furthermore, I found
that employees who found value in their work were more likely to perceive better organizational
support linked to career advancement, which is a pattern that employee satisfaction surveys can
prove. Therefore, creating individual employee development plans can help align employee
values and organizational goals.
COVID-19 Global Pandemic Impacts on Career Advancement Are Still Unknown
Through Research Question 2, I sought to understand how the COVID-19 global
pandemic might have impacted interview participants’ career progression into STEM leadership
positions. Many U.S. companies transitioned their workforce to a remote, work-from-home or
hybrid status due to the COVID-19 global pandemic. Additionally, workers may have had to take
time off work due to the COVID-19 global pandemic, which may have impacted their careers.
Finally, school districts throughout the state closed, forcing some dual-working families to
provide childcare during typical work hours. Although these aspects could have adversely
48

impacted the careers of female employees seeking advancement at New World Company, I
found most interview participants reported little or no perceived career impacts from the
COVID-19 global pandemic.
I asked interview participants questions related to (a) goal tracking, (b) work location
designation such as work from home or hybrid, (c) leader and team relationship impacts, and (d)
family challenges stemming from remote schooling for adolescents or family care needs. For
instance, when I asked how they tracked goals with their supervisor or how frequently
participants met with supervisors or mentors, most participants responded they used New World
Company’s performance management/goal-tracking software. They also said that using remote
meeting technology had improved their ability to meet with supervisors who previously worked
in a different location and would have had to prearrange a meeting in advance.
Only four participants provided examples of where they felt the pandemic may have
negatively impacted their career advancement. For example, when I asked her about work
relationship impacts from the pandemic, Participant 13 stated:
My manager had been changed during the pandemic, so we never met in person. I don’t
even know like what works best, what timings work best or like what are their interests.
So, it did impact [me] in terms of not being able to understand the working nature of the
manager. Not being able to talk and explain where and what works well, because these
remote check-ins are obviously not helping a lot. So yes, it did impact me.
Additionally, when asked about career impacts due to family care challenges, Participant 13
responded:
I went back to my home country and got COVID. I was supposed to be back, but I
couldn’t come back. I had to take time off. I couldn’t travel and all that. When I came
49

back, every everything was changed, my team project, everything. I was not even
informed about it. I come back and I log in and I joined the team meeting and there’s
someone was [sic] replaced me in the same meeting where I used to go like daily, and
weekly. Then I reach out to the manager and he’s like “Oh yeah, we had to replace you
on the team.” No one even told me what’s happening. So, it did impact my career and I’m
so scared to take time off after that incident because I don’t wanna [sic] be placed
somewhere I don’t want to be.
The only other potential career progression challenges were due to concerns about the
lack of personal connection with their teams and leaders. For example, Participant 5 stated:
I think there are some new challenges. As for progressing my career, maybe a bit. I could
see some of those things like connecting in the hallway, doing your elevator pitch kind of
thing; you don’t really get as much of an opportunity for that working at home. So, I can
see that being a challenge. And sometimes just, you know, you hear about opportunities
at, you know, in the break room or passing by you see somebody posted something on the
on the corkboard or something like that. It’s like those kind[s] of things aren’t really
there, but I think if I continue to want to get into a leadership role. I don’t necessarily
think it’s gonna [sic] stop me.
Additionally, Participants 8 and 12 shared similar concerns. Participant 8 communicated:
So, one of the biggest things that has helped me before was that when we were in the
office, right, you run into different coworkers, you’ll get to talk to people, you get to
network with one another more. And now that we’re working from home. You don’t
know anybody other than the people that you work today and day in and day out, right?
50

And that really hinders your ability to kind of market yourself and sell yourself to for if
you’re interested in certain positions.
Similarly, Participant 12 stated:
The biggest challenge is probably we’ve been virtual, and you don’t really like meet
people the same way you would have in person. It’s not as natural of a meeting. Yeah.
And that like connection doesn’t happen organically. I think that that kind of doesn’t help
my case.
These examples related to the loss of connection employees felt working from home. Second-
level coding suggested that each of the four participants who described potential impacts of the
COVID-19 global pandemic were not as comfortable using remote technology and preferred
working from an office.
Upon completion of the interviews, through member checking, I identified that prior to
the COVID-19 global pandemic, a large portion of New World company’s workforce already
worked remotely or in different offices than their supervisors or teams due to the company’s
sizeable operating territory. This fact could explain why the remaining participants did not feel
the same lack of connection with their supervisors and teams. Those participants shared
examples where their supervisors could now “drop in” with them for a quick check-in between
meetings. Prior to the COVID-19 global pandemic, when working in person, they might have
spent that time from one meeting to another.
None of the participants shared career progression concerns related to childcare needs
brought on by the COVID-19 global pandemic. Through their interview responses and the
second-level coding process, I identified that participants did not have school-aged children,
which explained this finding. Regardless, many participants agreed that if an employee had to
51

take time off to provide childcare, they might have missed out on some employee development
or career advancement opportunities.
Participant Suggestions for Leadership Support of Women in STEM and Leadership
Through Research Question 3, I sought to understand how leaders can best support
women in STEM in various states of their careers following the shifts created by the COVID-19
global pandemic. I asked interview participants what suggestions they had for leaders to support
women seeking career advancement and if different actions were necessary based on employee
demographics (i.e., early-, mid-, and late-career). In nearly every case, participants responded
that New World Company should provide more rotational assignments opportunities. For
example, Participant 9 responded:
Giving them [female employees] opportunities to take on a leadership roles like vacation
relief or rotations. Give them an opportunity to take on special projects so that they can
gain more experience doing something that they don’t normally do and their day-to-day
responsibilities. And then, when they do either of those opportunities, support them,
either through making sure that their direct supervisor in their new role or their new
project and not just have them thinking that like I gave them the opportunity, it’s up to
them to sink or swim. I know I would have appreciated that when I was a new leader.
Additionally, Participant 1 suggested:
Offer opportunities more than once. Oftentimes they [female employees] have to be
asked three times or more by others to even consider it. Their first reaction is “oh no, oh
no, that’s not me. No, I can’t do that, I have this. Oh, no.” Sometimes it takes prodding
and reinforcing to have a woman stop and reflect and consider. Whether it was something
52

that they would step up to do so. Give folks more than one opportunity and then. Yeah, I
just think a lot of times women, we place limitations on ourselves.
Participant 6 provided other suggestions, stating, “Ask them [to apply for a leadership position],
tell them why you think they would be a good leader, and engage them and help them build a
development plan.” Additionally, Participant 10 suggested:
You know that they have that saying, “you can’t be what you can’t see, right?” I do
realize that we actually do have a number of female leaders, including our CEO.
However, I think because I’ve always been an operational side, there’s still very few
women at the first line supervisor and middle manager levels. You know, it’s great to see
our officers and directors, but at some point, when you’re starting out, you just to need to
see a supervisor or a manager because you wanna [sic] know that you can get to that next
step or next level.
Finally, when I asked her if women seeking career advancement needed different actions
to support them at various points of their career, Participant 1 suggested:
I would say early in the career, providing opportunities that help women become aware
of and rise above [or grow/expand] their comfort zone. In the midcareer, I think women
probably are, you know, having families. [So] assuring them that they will not lose
ground during that period of their lives, during their reproductive years and having young
families. And then in the later, more mature part of their careers, really just reinforcing
women’s ability to make an impact. [It] does not require them to try to be somebody else,
meaning just really allow women that have had a lifetime of experience to apply that
experience and their wisdom in a way that’s consistent with who they are. So, meet them
where they are and celebrate what they bring.
53

Additionally, Participant 9 added:
So, I think early career, definitely making sure they have a mentor or a buddy who can
support them when they're taking on that new project or that new leadership role. I think
midcareer, you know, maybe not needing the buddy as much, but just maybe making sure
they have a mentor, or their supervisor is willing to put in the extra effort to support them
when they're taking on that project or that assignment to a leadership role. Well, actually,
no. I take that back because, I mean, if it if they're new to leadership, it shouldn't really
matter whether they're early, mid, or late in their career
These suggestions named the importance of engaging female employees in creating and tracking
development plans, providing more visible development opportunities, and offering positive
performance reinforcement. Finally, by creating more rotational opportunities and highlighting
successes, New World Company could improve modeling and self-efficacy for women seeking
advancement into leadership positions.
Summary of Findings
The findings for this study were evaluated using an analysis similar to Clark and Estes’s
(2008) gap analysis to identify recommendations that address perceived knowledge and skill,
motivational, and organizational barriers related to modeling and mentoring, self-efficacy, self-
regulation of goals, and employee values. The significance of modeling and mentoring, self-
efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and employee values differed between employees as each had
different needs based on external influences. Not unexpectedly, this study showed varying
degrees of organizational support for women in STEM at New World Company. Specifically, in
this study, I found that although the company has extensive programs and resources related to
mentoring, knowledge of available mentoring and employee development resources was almost
54

nonexistent. In nearly every case, participants were unaware New World Company had a formal
mentoring program. This finding indicated organizational, knowledge, and skill gaps that
negatively influenced gender schema and self-efficacy.
Additionally, I found all participants rated themselves highly on Likert scale questions
related to self-efficacy; however, only a few provided answers or examples correlating to high
self-efficacy. Through second-level coding, I identified that only those participants who were
holding senior leadership positions demonstrated high self-efficacy, including demonstrating
positive examples of past performance, experiencing social persuasion, and watching others
succeed. In all other cases, participants demonstrated lower self-efficacy throughout the
interviews, as I noted in interview transcripts and interviewer observation notes. It is possible the
title and purpose of the study influenced participant responses and they may have felt it was
more appropriate to share examples related to challenges they have faced in their careers.
Societal gender norms as explained in Bem’s (1981) gender schema theory may have also
influenced this pattern.
I also found that six out of seven participants with less than 5 years in the STEM
workforce or those currently filling individual contributor roles lacked a growth mindset, goal
setting, or action planning related to their 5-year plans. Conversely, those participants who were
already in leadership positions exhibited stronger self-regulation of goals. In reviewing
secondary data, I identified a LED webpage in the New World Company’s intranet. The LED
webpage contained many tools to help employees and leaders create, track, and review employee
development plans. However, follow-up discussions suggested that no study participant had
heard of the webpage or used the development plan tools, indicating additional organizational,
knowledge, and skill gaps.
55

Finally, I found that individual motivation and alignment of employee values to
organizational goals varied from one employee to another. One could attribute the lack of
alignment between employee values and organizational goals to the lack of development plans
and mentoring shared by study participants. Nevertheless, the study indicated that motivated
employees found mentors outside of the formal mentoring program and took charge of creating
and maintaining their development plans. In addition, through second-level coding, I found these
participants, regardless of time in STEM or time at the company, received more opportunities for
career advancement. These findings suggested that modeling and mentoring, self-efficacy, self-
regulation of goals, and employee values are essential factors that can support the advancement
of women in STEM leadership positions.
On the topic of how participants perceived the COVID-19 global pandemic impacting
career progression, the study did not indicate any significant findings—although this fact may be
due to an unplanned study limitation. Prior to the COVID-19 global pandemic, New World
Company operated over a large territory where many employees had limited or infrequent one-
on-one time with their supervisors. Through second-level coding, I identified that many of the
study participants had no kids, or their kids were grown and no longer living at home. Therefore,
childcare challenges brought on by the COVID-19 global pandemic did not impact them. These
patterns likely explained the minimal impact experienced by interview participants.
Finally, participant recommendations for support of women in STEM and leadership
included (a) greater engagement in action planning and career development; (b) more
development opportunities being made available with better; and (c) the need to reward good
performance to boost self-confidence, self-efficacy, and support modeling. Participants outlined
56

these as the most beneficial methods for New World Company to better support women’s
advancement into leadership positions.
Recommendations
This study explored women’s perspectives of organizational support for women seeking
advancement into STEM leadership roles. Evaluating the impacts of gender diversity initiatives
on women in STEM and any potential challenges created by the COVID-19 global pandemic
will help develop more effective corrective actions to close this gap. In this study, I sought to
answer the following research questions:
1. How do women in STEM perceive organizational support for career advancement?
2. How did the COVID-19 global pandemic impact female employees’ career
progression into STEM leadership positions?
3. How can leaders support women in STEM in various states of their careers following
the shifts created by the pandemic?
The semistructured qualitative study included remote interviews with women working at New
World Company in STEM positions at various stages of their careers.
New World Company prides itself as an equal employment opportunity employer and
diversity-focused company. With a female chief executive officer, a board of directors made up
of mostly women or people of color, and more than 10 employee resource groups that promote
minoritized individuals, I anticipated finding stronger organizational support for mentoring and
self-regulation of goals. Additionally, because the study participants were volunteers from the
women in STEM employee resource group, I anticipated strong participant knowledge, skills,
and motivation related to self-efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and employee values. The study
indicated the following findings:
57

• According to this study, New World Company supported women in STEM to varying
degrees. For example, most participants were unaware New World Company offered
a mentoring program. Furthermore, those that knew of New World Company’s
mentorship program considered it ineffective.
• All participants rated themselves highly on self-efficacy Likert scale questions, but
few provided supporting examples. Only those in leadership roles showed strong self-
efficacy, including past success, social persuasion, and witnessing others succeed. In
all other cases, participants shared examples supporting weak self-efficacy during
interviews, according to transcripts and interviewer notes.
• Six out of seven participants in individual contributor roles or those with less than 5
years working in STEM lacked a growth mindset, goal setting, or action planning
connected to their 5-year plans.
• Midcareer participants and those in leadership positions exhibited stronger self-
regulation of goals demonstrated by development plan creation and tracking,
individual and organizational goal achievement, and career growth. These
participants also communicated strong organizational support for development
opportunities.
• Alignment between employee values and organizational goals varied from one
participant to the other, which may have been due to the lack of development plans
and mentoring shared by some participants.
• The study did not indicate any significant or systemic challenges to career
advancement brought on by the COVID-19 global pandemic. Although two
participants shared they felt some disconnection with other workers due to remote
58

meetings, others shared the use of technology allowed them to meet more frequently
with their leader. Only one of the participants felt that exposure to the COVID-19
virus might have negatively impacted their career.
• Recommendations for leadership support of women in STEM and leadership
included: (a) more engagement in career development and action planning, increased
visibility of development opportunities, and (b) the need to recognize excellent
performance to increase self-confidence, self-efficacy, and role modeling.
New World Company should address these findings to provide better support for female
employees, which would then improve lacking perceptions of organizational support and thus
counter negative impacts from gender schema theory and meet organizational diversity goals.
The following sections provide recommendations to address knowledge, motivational, and
organizational causes and contributors to these findings.
Knowledge and Skill Support Recommendations
In this study, I found many participants provided answers that demonstrated weak self-
efficacy throughout the interview process. Accordingly, New World Company should provide
communications training to improve interview skills of women seeking advancement into
leadership positions. For example, although all participants rated themselves highly on Likert
scale questions related to self-efficacy, most participants shared stories associated with lower
self-efficacy (e.g., previous failures, negative social persuasion, and some examples of poor
modeling). Additionally, New World Company should partner with various employee resource
groups to gain insights and provide feedback to employees after interviewing for leadership
positions. For example, a study by Ammentorp et al. (2007) evaluated the effect of
communication skills training on doctors’ and nurses’ self-efficacy and found that
59

communication skills training positively impacts self-efficacy. Similarly, Erozkan (2013)
examined the impacts of communication and interpersonal problem-solving skills training on
self-efficacy. The study included 494 randomly selected participants, including 226 women, and
found a strong positive correlation between communication skills and self-efficacy (R = .43, R
2
=
.18, F = 27.83, p < 0.001). Furthermore, New World Company should expand the use of
temporary and rotational assignments to provide more opportunities for demonstrating successful
job and task performance and improving self-efficacy, as described by Didion (1996) and
Pekmezi et al. (2009). Finally, Eccles and Wigfield's (1995) and Wang and Degol's (2013)
research shows that intrinsic motivation increases when employee development plans align with
company goals. Accordingly, employees and leaders seeking advancement into leadership
positions should receive training on how to write effective development plans that align
employee values with organizational goals.
Motivational Support Recommendations
In this study, I found that six out of seven participants with less than 5 years working in
STEM or those currently working in individual contributor roles lacked a growth mindset, goal-
setting skills, and action-planning skills related to self-regulation of goals. For example,
participants either did not have a 5-year plan or could not articulate goals or actions they were
working on to achieve these goals. As a result, New World Company should revise the quarterly
employee check-in process to require employees and leaders to use the development section of
the company’s performance management system to develop and track progress against
meaningful employee development goals. The use of development plans that align with
employee goals can improve individual and organizational performance goals, which can build
or improve self-efficacy, as found by Helm et al. (2007). Helm et al. (2007) sought to determine
60

the effectiveness of aligning individual goals with institutional goals through a meta-analysis of
performance management practices across various industries along with a survey of the
effectiveness of pay-for-performance programs. While the study also considered the link
between compensation and performance management, the study found that employee recognition
and the alignment between individual employee goals and organizational goals can significantly
influence performance outcomes more than traditional pay-for-performance programs in
healthcare (Helm et al., 2007).
Finally, New World Company should partner with employee resource groups to ensure
leaders frequently communicate development opportunities to employees seeking advancement
into STEM leadership positions. In addition, diversity, equity, and inclusion training for leaders
should highlight recommendations provided by participants, such as frequently encouraging
female employees to apply for development opportunities and publicly recognizing strong
performance of women in STEM and women in leadership to improve modeling. The use of
employee resource groups combined with leadership support helps employees build affinity with
coworkers and leaders and can raise awareness of development opportunities to improve the self-
efficacy of female employees.
Organizational Support Recommendations
The benefits of an effective mentoring program include the attraction and retention of
women in STEM industries (Hughes, 2015; Noe, 1988). Additionally, Liberatore and Wagner
(2022) and Straus et al. (2013) demonstrate how mentoring helps build self-efficacy, ensures
effective self-regulation of goals, and can help shape employee values. Regrettably, I found
nearly all (11 out of 13) participants were unaware of New World Company’s mentoring
program and resources. Additionally, newer employees did not have mentors to help them
61

develop and grow into future leaders. Nevertheless, a review of secondary data suggested that
New World Company had the elements of an effective mentoring program; accordingly, New
World Company should train employees and leaders on the advantages of and how to use the
available mentoring program resources. Additionally, company leaders should incorporate
extensive communication and advertising of program resources into new employee onboarding
and annual diversity, equity, and inclusion training to sustainably support women in STEM.
Recommendations for Future Research
Scholars should conduct future targeted research focused on modeling and mentoring,
self-efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and employee values for other employee demographics,
including participant age and family composition. Researchers conducting future studies could
identify specific findings and recommendations related to knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational barriers based on other employee demographics.
Additionally, although this study did not suggest any significant career progression
impacts brought on by the COVID-19 global pandemic attributed to childcare or family
healthcare, this reality may be due to an unplanned limitation of the study related to participant
demographics. Therefore, future research studies should focus on women in STEM with school-
aged children or other pandemic-related healthcare challenges to identify potential career
advancement impacts brought on by the COVID-19 global pandemic. Furthermore, it is likely
that scholars and organizational leaders have not fully understood the effects of the COVID-19
global pandemic. Thus, future researchers should concentrate on potential pandemic impacts on
modeling and mentoring, self-efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and employee values to identify
the knowledge, motivational, and organizational barriers that challenge the advancement of
women into STEM leadership positions.
62

Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to examine women’s perspectives on gender diversity
initiatives at New World Company related to women interested in advancing their careers in
STEM leadership positions. In addition, through this study, I sought to answer the following
research questions:
1. How do women in STEM perceive organizational support for career advancement?
2. How did the COVID-19 global pandemic impact female employees’ career
progression into STEM leadership positions?
3. How can leaders support women in STEM in various states of their careers following
the shifts created by the pandemic?
In answering Research Question 1, I identified gaps and recommendations related to
knowledge, motivation, and organizational challenges associated with modeling and mentoring,
self-efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and employee values. Specifically, I found varying levels
of organizational support for female employees at New World Company, including (a)
ineffective mentoring programs, (b) low self-efficacy of female employees not currently in
leadership positions, and (c) weak self-regulation of goals and employee values of newer female
employees and those serving in individual contributor roles.
Though this study did not indicate any significant challenges to career advancement
brought on by the COVID-19 global pandemic, this reality may be attributed to potential study
limitations, as I described in Appendix G. Accordingly, the study provided recommendations for
future research to examine potential challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally,
through this study, I identified recommendations for improving support of women seeking
advancement in STEM leadership, including (a) creating and tracking development plans, (b)
63

providing more visible rotational and development opportunities, and (c) providing positive
performance reinforcement to improve modeling and self-efficacy for women seeking
advancement into leadership positions.
In this study, I highlighted the importance of building organizational support for women
seeking career advancement in STEM fields. As the U.S. job market grows and the population of
workers in STEM fields declines, the need to fill STEM positions and future vacancies increases.
Concurrently, the lack of gender diversity within STEM leadership positions directly correlates
to the lack of diversity in the STEM workforce. Therefore, focusing on actions to improve role
modeling and mentorship, self-efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and employee values would
help New World Company and other STEM companies support female employees more
effectively and narrow the gender gap while also improving organizational culture and
performance.
64

References
Agosto, D. E. (2004). Using gender schema theory to examine gender equity in computing: A
preliminary study. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 10(1),
37–54. https://doi.org/10.1615/jwomenminorscieneng.v10.i1.30
Almukhambetova, A., Torrano, D. H., & Nam, A. (2021). Fixing the leaky pipeline for talented
women in STEM. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. Advance
online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10239-1
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How
learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. Jossey-Bass.
Ammentorp, J., Sabroe, S., Kofoed, P.-E., & Mainz, J. (2007). The effect of training in
communication skills on medical doctors’ and nurses’ self-efficacy: A randomized
controlled trial. Patient Education and Counseling, 66(3), 270-277.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2006.12.012
Ball, C., Huang, K.-T., Cotten, S. R., & Rikard, R. V. (2017). Pressurizing the STEM pipeline:
An expectancy-value theory analysis of youths’ STEM attitudes. Journal of Science
Education and Technology, 26(4), 372–382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-017-9685-1
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Barabino, G., Frize, M., Ibrahim, F., Kaldoudi, E., Lhotska, L., Marcu, L., Stoeva, M., Tsapaki,
V., & Bezak, E. (2020). Solutions to gender balance in STEM fields through support,
training, education and mentoring: Report of the international women in medical physics
65

and biomedical engineering task group. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(1), 275–292.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00097-0
Barber, L. A. (1995). U.S. women in science and engineering, 1960-1990: Progress toward
equity? The Journal of Higher Education, 66(2), 213–234.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1995.11774773
Bateman, N., & Ross, M. (2020, October). Why has COVID-19 been especially harmful for
working women? Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/essay/why-has-covid-19-been-
especially-harmful-for-working-women/
Belotto, M. J. (2018). Data analysis methods for qualitative research: Managing the challenges of
coding, interrater reliability, and thematic analysis. The Qualitative Report, 23(11),
2622–2633. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3492
Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 42(2), 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036215
Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological
Review, 88(4), 354–364. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354
Bilimoria, D., Lord, L., & Marinelli, M. (2014). An introduction to women in STEM careers:
International perspectives on increasing workforce participation, advancement and
leadership. In D. Bilimoria & L. Lord (Eds.), Women in STEM careers: International
perspectives on increasing workforce participation, advancement and leadership (pp. 3–
15). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781954072.00009
Blickenstaff, J. C. (2005). Women and science careers: leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gender
and Education, 17(4), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250500145072
66

Boatman, J., Wellins, R., & Neal, S. (2011). Women work: The business of closing the gender
gap. Development Dimensions International.
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/38861808/women-work-the-business-
benefits-of-closing-the-gender-gap
Bond, B. J. (2016). Fairy godmothers > robots. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 36(2),
91–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467616655951
Botella, C., Rueda, S., López-Iñesta, E., & Marzal, P. (2019). Gender diversity in STEM
disciplines: A multiple factor problem. Entropy, 21(1), 30.
https://doi.org/10.3390/e21010030
Bouteska, A., & Mili, M. (2021). Women’s leadership impact on risks and financial performance
in banking: evidence from the Southeast Asian Countries. Journal of Management and
Governance. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-021-09594-6
Brown, J. (2019). How to be an inclusive leader: Your role in creating cultures of belonging
where everyone can thrive. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Burnette, J. L., O’Boyle, E. H., VanEpps, E. M., Pollack, J. M., & Finkel, E. J. (2013). Mind-sets
matter: A meta-analytic review of implicit theories and self-regulation. Psychological
Bulletin, 139(3), 655–701. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029531
Caprara, G. V., Fida, R., Vecchione, M., Del Bove, G., Vecchio, G. M., Barbaranelli, C., &
Bandura, A. (2008). Longitudinal analysis of the role of perceived self-efficacy for self-
regulated learning in academic continuance and achievement. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 100(3), 525–534. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.525
67

Casad, B. J., & Bryant, W. J. (2016). Addressing stereotype threat is critical to diversity and
inclusion in organizational psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 8.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00008
Catalyst. (2004, June 24). Quick take: The bottom line: Connecting corporate performance and
gender diversity. https://www.catalyst.org/research/the-bottom-line-connecting-
corporate-performance-and-gender-diversity/
Catalyst. (2019, August 29). Women in the workforce: United States (quick take).
https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-in-the-workforce-united-states/
Chadwick, I. C., & Dawson, A. (2018). Women leaders and firm performance in family
businesses: An examination of financial and nonfinancial outcomes. Journal of Family
Business Strategy, 9(4), 238–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2018.10.002
Chisholm-Burns, M. A., Spivey, C. A., Hagemann, T., & Josephson, M. A. (2017). Women in
leadership and the bewildering glass ceiling. American Journal of Health-System
Pharmacy, 74(5), 312–324. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp160930
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Publishing.
Concannon, J. P., Serota, S. B., Fitzpatrick, M. R., & Brown, P. L. (2019). How interests, self-
efficacy, and self-regulation impacted six undergraduate pre-engineering students’
persistence. European Journal of Engineering Education, 44(4), 484–503.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2017.1422695
Cooper, Y. (2017, June 1). Intersectionality. National Career Development Association.
https://www.ncda.org/aws/NCDA/pt/sd/news_article/139052/_PARENT/CC_layout_deta
ils/false
68

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Didion, C. J. (1996). Motivating women students: The pivotal role of faculty as mentors. Journal
of College Science Teaching, 25(6), 439–439. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42990967
http://www.jstor.org.libproxy1.usc.edu/stable/42990967
Diversity Incorporated. (2020). The 2020 Diversity Inc top 50 companies for diversity.
https://www.diversityinc.com/the-2020-top-50-diversityinc/
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become
leaders. Harvard Business Press.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: The structure of adolescents’
achievement task values and expectancy-related belief. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 21(3), 215–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167295213003
Elliot, A. J., Dweck, C. S., & Yeager, D. S. (2017). Handbook of competence and motivation:
Theory and application (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
Erozkan, A. (2013). The effect of communication skills and interpersonal problem solving skills
on social self-efficacy. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13(2), 739-745.
https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/effect-communication-skills-interpersonal-
problem/docview/1350964365/se-2?accountid=14749
Ertl, B., Luttenberger, S., & Paechter, M. (2017). The impact of gender stereotypes on the self-
concept of female students in STEM subjects with an under-representation of females.
Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 703. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00703
Fayer, S., Lacey, A., & Watson, A. (2017, January). STEM occupations: Past, present, and
future. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2017/science-
69

technology-engineering-and-mathematics-stem-occupations-past-present-and-
future/pdf/science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics-stem-occupations-past-
present-and-future.pdf
Feather, N. T. (1987). Gender differences in values: Implications of the expectancy-value model.
In F. Halisch & J. Kuhl (Eds.), Motivation, intention, and volition (pp. 31–45). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-70967-8_4
Fine, C., Sojo, V., & Lawford‐Smith, H. (2020). Why does workplace gender diversity matter?
Justice, organizational benefits, and policy. Social Issues and Policy Review, 14(1), 36–
72. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12064
Fry, R. (2022, September 26). Women now outnumber men in the U.S. college-educated labor
force. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/09/26/women-
now-outnumber-men-in-the-u-s-college-educated-labor-force/
Funk, C., & Parker, K. (2018, January 9). Women and men in STEM often at odds over
workplace equity. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-
trends/2018/01/09/women-and-men-in-stem-often-at-odds-over-workplace-equity/
Garr-Schultz, A., & Gardner, W. L. (2018). Strategic self-presentation of women in STEM.
Social Sciences, 7(2), 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7020020
Gartstein, M., & Hancock, G. (2021). Professional development programs for women in
academic Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) fields: Enhancing
retention and promotion. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology,
13(1), 43–63. http://genderandset.open.ac.uk/index.php/genderandset/article/view/760
Gibbs, G. R. (2018). Analyzing qualitative data (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
70

Gillard, J., & Okonjo-Iweala, N. (2021). Women and leadership: real lives, real lessons. The
MIT Press.
Glass, C., & Minnotte, K. L. (2010). Recruiting and hiring women in STEM fields. Journal of
Diversity in Higher Education, 3(4), 218–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020581
Goodman, J. S., Fields, D. L., & Blum, T. C. (2003). Cracks in the glass ceiling. Group &
Organization Management, 28(4), 475–501. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601103251232
Greider, C. W., Sheltzer, J. M., Cantalupo, N. C., Copeland, W. B., Dasgupta, N., Hopkins, N.,
Jansen, J. M., Joshua-Tor, L., McDowell, G. S., Metcalf, J. L., McLaughlin, B.,
Olivarius, A., O’Shea, E. K., Raymond, J. L., Ruebain, D., Steitz, J. A., Stillman, B.,
Tilghman, S. M., Valian, V., . . .Wong, J. Y. (2019). Increasing gender diversity in the
STEM research workforce. Science, 366(6466), 692–695.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz0649
Hansen, S. B. (2009). Cracks in the glass ceiling?: Through the Labyrinth: The truth about how
women become leaders. Sex Roles, 60(9–10), 748–750. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-
008-9546-8
Helm, C., Holladay, C. L., Tortorella, F. R., & Candio, C. (2007). The performance management
system: Applying and evaluating a pay-for-performance initiative. Journal of Healthcare
Management, 52(1), 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1097/00115514-200701000-00011
Holvino, E., Ferdman, B. M., & Merrill-Sands, D. (2004). Creating and sustaining diversity and
inclusion in organizations: Strategies and approaches. In M. S. Stockdale & F. J. Crosby
(Eds.), The psychology and management of workplace diversity (pp. 245–276). Blackwell
Publishing.
71

Hughes, R. (2015). An investigation into the longitudinal identity trajectories of women in
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Journal of Women and Minorities in
Science and Engineering, 21(3), 181–213.
https://doi.org/10.1615/jwomenminorscieneng.2015013035
Hymowitz, C., & Schellhardt, T. D. (1986, March 24). The glass ceiling: Why women can’t
seem to break the invisible barrier that blocks them from the top jobs. The Wall Street
Journal.
https://www.proquest.com/docview/397974878/fulltext/A47BC6C386484120PQ/1?acco
untid=14749
Jackson, J. C. (2001). Women middle managers’ perception of the glass ceiling. Women in
Management Review, 16(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1108/09649420110380265
Kantamneni, N. (2020). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on marginalized populations in
the United States: A research agenda. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 119(2020),
103439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103439
Konrad, A. M., Richard, O. C., & Yang, Y. (2021). Both diversity and meritocracy: Managing
the diversity-meritocracy paradox with organizational ambidexterity. Journal of
Management Studies, 58(8), 2180–2206. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12752
Kuschel, K., Ettl, K., Díaz-García, C., & Alsos, G. A. (2020). Stemming the gender gap in
STEM entrepreneurship – insights into women’s entrepreneurship in science, technology,
engineering and mathematics. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal,
16(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00642-5
72

Landivar, L. C. (2013). Disparities in STEM employment by sex, race, and Hispanic origin
(Report No. ACS-24). U.S. Census Bureau.
https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2013/acs/acs-24.html
Landivar, L. C., Ruppanner, L., Scarborough, W. J., & Collins, C. (2020). Early signs indicate
that COVID-19 is exacerbating gender inequality in the labor force. Socius: Sociological
Research for a Dynamic World, 6, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023120947997
Liben, L. S., & Bigler, R. S. (2015). Understanding and undermining the development of gender
dichotomies: The legacy of Sandra Lipsitz Bem. Sex Roles, 76(9–10), 544–555.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0519-4
Liberatore, M. J., & Wagner, W. P. (2022). Gender, performance, and self-efficacy: A quasi-
experimental field study. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 62(1), 109–117.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2020.1717397
Lyness, K. S., & Grotto, A. R. (2018). Women and leadership in the United States: Are we
closing the gender gap? Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and
Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 227–265. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-
032117-104739
Maddux, J. E., Sherer, M., & Rogers, R. W. (1982). Self-efficacy expectancy and outcome
expectancy: Their relationship and their effects on behavioral intentions. Cognitive
Therapy and Research, 6(2), 207–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01183893
Martínez, A., & Gayfield, A. (2019). The intersectionality of sex, race, and Hispanic origin in
the STEM workforce (Working Paper No. SEHSD-WP2018-27). U.S. Census Bureau.
https://www.census.gov/library/working-papers/2019/demo/SEHSD-WP2018-27.html
73

McCullough, L. (2011). Women’s leadership in science, technology, engineering and
mathematics: Barriers to participation. Forum on Public Policy Online, 2011(2), 1–11.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ944199
McCullough, L. (2019). Proportions of women in STEM leadership in the academy in the USA.
Education Sciences, 10(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10010001
McCullough, L. (2020). Barriers and assistance for female leaders in academic STEM in the US.
Education Sciences, 10(10), Article 264. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10100264
McKinney, J., Chang, M.-L., & Glassmeyer, D. (2021). Why females choose STEM majors:
Understanding the relationships between major, personality, interests, self-efficacy, and
anxiety. Journal for STEM Education Research, 4(3), 278–300.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-021-00050-6
McKinsey & Company. (2016). Women in the workplace 2016. Lean In.
https://womenintheworkplace.com/2016#
McKinsey & Company. (2021). Women in the workplace 2021. Lean In.
https://leanin.org/women-in-the-workplace-report-2021/the-state-of-women-in-america
Mega, C., Ronconi, L., & De Beni, R. (2014). What makes a good student? How emotions, self-
regulated learning, and motivation contribute to academic achievement. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 106(1), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033546
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Family. Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved September 14,
2022, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/family
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
74

Micari, M., & Pazos, P. (2021). Beyond grades: improving college students’ social-cognitive
outcomes in STEM through a collaborative learning environment. Learning
Environments Research, 24(1), 123–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-020-09325-y
Miriti, M. N. (2020). The elephant in the room: Race and STEM diversity. BioScience, 70(3),
237–242. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biz167
Moè, A., Hausmann, M., & Hirnstein, M. (2021). Gender stereotypes and incremental beliefs in
STEM and non-STEM students in three countries: Relationships with performance in
cognitive tasks. Psychological Research, 85(2), 554–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-
019-01285-0
Neville, H. A., Lilly, R. L., Duran, G., Lee, R. M., & Browne, L. (2000). Construction and initial
validation of the color-blind racial attitudes scale (CoBRAS). Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 47(1), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.47.1.59
Noe, R. A. (1988). Women and mentoring: A review and research agenda. The Academy of
Management Review, 13(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.2307/258355
Offermann, L. R., & Foley, K. (2020). Is there a female leadership advantage? In Oxford
Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.61
Ouimet, M. (2018). 5 numbers that explain why STEM diversity matters to all of us. Wired.
https://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/05/5-numbers-explain-stem-diversity-matters-us/
Ozgen, C. (2021). The economics of diversity: Innovation, productivity and the labour market.
Journal of Economic Surveys, 35(4), 1168–1216. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12433
75

Packard, B. W-L. (2004). Mentoring and retention in college science: Reflections on the
sophomore year. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice,
6(3), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.2190/rukp-xgvy-8lg0-75vh
Pai, K., & Vaidya, S. (2009). Glass ceiling: Role of women in the corporate world.
Competitiveness Review, 19(2), 106–113. https://doi.org/10.1108/10595420910942270
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research,
66(4), 543–578. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066004543
Pantella, V. (2021). From girls to women in STEM: A qualitative phenomenological study
(Publication No. 20.500.12520/105) [Doctoral dissertation, American College of
Education]. ScholarWorks. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12520/105
Park, C. L., Williams, M. K., Hernandez, P. R., Agocha, V. B., Carney, L. M., Depetris, A. E., &
Lee, S. Y. (2019). Self-regulation and STEM persistence in minority and non-minority
students across the first year of college. Social Psychology of Education, 22(1), 91–112.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-018-9465-7
Parker, K. (2018, March 7). Women in majority-male workplaces report higher rates of gender
discrimination. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-
tank/2018/03/07/women-in-majority-male-workplaces-report-higher-rates-of-gender-
discrimination/
Parker, P. D., Van Zanden, B., Marsh, H. W., Owen, K., Duineveld, J. J., & Noetel, M. (2020).
The intersection of gender, social class, and cultural context: a meta-analysis.
Educational Psychology Review, 32(1), 197–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-
09493-1
76

Pekmezi, D., Jennings, E., & Marcus, B. H. (2009). Evaluation and enhancing self-efficacy for
physical activity. ACSM’S Health & Fitness Journal, 13(2), 16–21.
https://doi.org/10.1249/fit.0b013e3181996571
Piatek-Jimenez, K., Cribbs, J., & Gill, N. (2018). College students’ perceptions of gender
stereotypes: making connections to the underrepresentation of women in STEM fields.
International Journal of Science Education, 40(12), 1432–1454.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1482027
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Razack, S., Risør, T., Hodges, B., & Steinert, Y. (2020). Beyond the cultural myth of medical
meritocracy. Medical Education, 54(1), 46–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13871
Reinking, A., & Martin, B. (2018). The gender gap in STEM fields: Theories, movements, and
ideas to engage girls in STEM. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research,
7(2), 148–153. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2018.7.271
Robinson, S. B., & Leonard, K. F. (2019). Designing quality survey questions. SAGE
Publications.
Rohde, J., Satterfield, D. J., Rodriguez, M., Godwin, A., Potvin, G., Benson, L., & Kirn, A.
(2020). Anyone, but not everyone: Undergraduate engineering students’ claims of who
can do engineering. Engineering Studies, 12(2), 82–103.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19378629.2020.1795181
Ryan. (2020, May 20). The state of STEM education told through 14 stats. iD Tech.
https://www.idtech.com/blog/stem-education-statistics
77

Sadinovna, B. L. (2021). The role of females in leadership and their impacts on workplaces. Web
of Scientist: International Scientific Research Journal, 2(10), 5–10.
https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/RCNSQ
Schunk, D. H., & Usher, E. L. (2019). Social cognitive theory and motivation. In R. M. Ryan
(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation (2nd ed., pp. 10–26). Oxford
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.2
Sealy, R. (2010). Changing perceptions of meritocracy in senior women’s careers. Gender in
Management: An International Journal, 25(3), 184–197.
https://doi.org/10.1108/17542411011036392
Settles, I. H. (2014, October). Women in STEM: Challenges and determinants of success and
well-being. Psychological Science Agenda.
http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2014/10/women-stem
Shulman, B. J. (1994). Implications of feminist critiques of science for the teaching of
mathematics and science. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering,
1(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v1.i1
Singleton, K. S., Murray, D., Dukes, A. J., & Richardson, L. N. S. (2021). A year in review: Are
diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives fixing systemic barriers? Neuron, 109(21),
3365–3367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2021.07.014
Stang, S. (2021, July). Impact of the coronavirus pandemic on businesses and employees by
industry. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2021/impact-of-
the-coronavirus-pandemic-on-businesses-and-employees-by-industry/home.htm
Straus, S. E., Johnson, M. O., Marquez, C., & Feldman, M. D. (2013). Characteristics of
successful and failed mentoring relationships: A qualitative study across two academic
78

health centers. Academic Medicine, 88(1), 82–89.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31827647a0
Trevisan, F., Rusconi, P., Hanna, P., & Hegarty, P. (2022). Psychologising meritocracy: A
historical account of its many guises. Theory & Psychology, 32(2), 221–242.
https://doi.org/10.1177/09593543211057098
Tsui, L. (2007). Effective strategies to increase diversity in STEM fields: A review of the
research literature. The Journal of Negro Education, 76(4), 555–581.
http://www.jstor.org.libproxy2.usc.edu/stable/40037228
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019). American time use survey summary.
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/atus_06252020.pdf
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2020a). Employment projections.
https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/stem-employment.htm
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2020b). Fastest growing occupations.
https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/fastest-growing-occupations.htm
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2020c). Supplemental data measuring the effects of the
coronavirus (COVID‐19) pandemic on the labor market. https://www.bls.gov/cps/effects-
of-the-coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic.htm
U.S. Census Bureau. (2021). Women making gains in STEM occupations but still
underrepresented. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/01/women-making-gains-
in-stem-occupations-but-still-underrepresented.html
Wang, M.-T., & Degol, J. (2013). Motivational pathways to STEM career choices: Using
expectancy–value perspective to understand individual and gender differences in STEM
fields. Developmental Review, 33(4), 304–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2013.08.001
79

Wilson, Z. S., Holmes, L., deGravelles, K., Sylvain, M. R., Batiste, L., Johnson, M., McGuire, S.
Y., Pang, S. S., & Warner, I. M. (2011). Hierarchical mentoring: A transformative
strategy for improving diversity and retention in undergraduate STEM disciplines.
Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(1), 148–156.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9292-5
York, K. M., Tyler, C. L., Tyler, J. M., & Gugel, P. E. (2008). The ever-changing face of sex
stereotyping and sex discrimination in the workplace. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 15(2), 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051808321692
80

Appendix A: Participating Stakeholders With Sampling Criteria
In the subsequent sections, I describe how I approached the process of selecting
participants for the research.
Participants
The stakeholder group for this study was women in STEM at various stages of their
careers at New World Company. Additionally, in this study, I included five women who had
been promoted to senior leadership positions in the organization so that I could compare and
contrast them against the other participants. I recruited the remaining women through a
collaboration with the Women in STEM (W-STEM) employee resource group (ERG). At the
time of the study, the W-STEM ERG had approximately 150 members, all of whom were
women who worked in STEM or STEM-related positions.
Sampling Criteria
According to Creswell and Creswell (2018), individuals use purposeful sampling to select
participants that will “best help the researcher understand the problem and research question[s]”
(p. 185). As such, I engaged in purposeful sampling in this study by soliciting and choosing 13
women in collaboration with the W-STEM ERG. In addition, to ensure adequate representation
across career stages, I collaborated with the president of the W-STEM ERG to solicit participants
that met the targeted demographics. I determined the selection size of 8–12 to evaluate
qualitative phenomenology or saturation (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016),
and I screened participants into three career stages: less than 5 years, 5–15 years, and greater
than 15 years of STEM work experience. Finally, by providing an information sheet for exempt
research describing consent and confidentiality, I sought to build and maintain trust while
minimizing any power dynamics or coercion that could impair the study’s validity or credibility.
81

Appendix B: Credibility and Trustworthiness
Research ethicality drives credibility and trustworthiness in qualitative research (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). Given the research problem and methodology (qualitative with a small
population), consent and confidentiality were critical to ensuring participants felt comfortable
sharing their experiences. Additionally, I am a senior leader whom participants may know;
accordingly, I partnered with the Women in STEM employee resource group to recruit
participants prior to distributing consent documents and conducting participant interviews.
Finally, to ensure credibility and trustworthiness, I conducted member checking by summarizing
and synthesizing key takeaways and concepts/themes with participants.

82

Appendix C: Ethics
In the sections that follow, I detail how I attended to ethical concerns in the dissertation
study.
Institutional Review Board
Given the research problem and methodology (i.e., qualitative with a small population),
consent and confidentiality were critical to ensuring participants felt comfortable sharing their
experiences. Therefore, I partnered with the Women in STEM employee resource group to
identify and select interview candidates and distribute an information sheet for exempt research
that described both consent and confidentiality. In addition, the interview introduction in
Appendix D included reminders on voluntary consent, confidentiality, and permission to record
and store data.
Ethics
This research benefits New World Company and the STEM industry as I sought to
understand why previous actions have not sustainably addressed the underrepresentation of
women in STEM leadership positions. An improved understanding of challenges could result in
specific solutions that can help to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion of women in STEM
fields. I have outlined the research methodology, but I also expected research questions and
methodology to evolve throughout the study. In addition, I hope to publish and share this
research with the New World Company senior leadership team to raise awareness of the
findings, gain leadership support for the recommendations, and potentially identify new actions
to advance the progression of women into STEM leadership positions.

83

Appendix D: Interview Protocols
The following text presents the script I used in my interviews with participants.
Introduction to the Interview
Thank you for agreeing to meet with me today. My name is Matt Hayes, and I am a
doctoral candidate at the University of Southern California. I am researching the
underrepresentation of women in STEM leadership positions. My study aims to examine
women’s perspectives on organizational support for women seeking advancement to STEM
leadership positions and to identify any new barriers brought on by the 2020 pandemic.
I would like to record our conversation today to facilitate our note taking. Only
researchers on the project will be privy to the recordings, which will be eventually destroyed
after they are transcribed. Therefore, I am providing you with an information sheet for exempt
studies. Essentially, this document states that: (a) all information will be held confidential; (b)
your participation is voluntary, and you may stop at any time if you feel uncomfortable; and (c) I
do not intend to inflict any harm.
I have 15 interview questions for you. There are no “right” or “wrong” answers, as I am
just seeking to learn from your experience and perspectives. If you see me looking down and
writing, it is not meant to be disrespectful; I am actively listening and trying to capture notes. If
you need any clarifications on our questions, would like to skip or come back to a question or
have additional information to add, please feel free and speak up. I have planned this interview to
last about an hour, so if time begins to run short, it may be necessary to interrupt you to push
ahead and complete the interview. Again, I want to thank you for your agreeing to participate!
Do you have any questions before we get started, or are you ready to begin?
84

Conclusion to the Interview
Thank you again for agreeing to participate in this important research. As we have
discussed, your responses will remain anonymous, and I will be using a pseudonym for our
organization. I want to sincerely thank you for your candor, as it will help ensure that this
research project contributes to this very important topic. If you have any questions or additional
thoughts, please reach out to me.
Interview Questions
The following interview questions will be used to solicit participant responses and
identify Knowledge (K), Motivational (M), and Organizational (O) factors as they relate to
modeling and mentoring, self-efficacy, self-regulation of goals, and employee values.
1. How long have you worked in the STEM industry? (Self-Efficacy)
a. How would you describe your experience working in STEM?
i. Why?
2. On a scale of 1 (not at all confident) to 5 (very confident), how confident are you in
your ability to solve complex problems? (M; Self-Efficacy)
a. What experiences, if any, helped you to arrive at this number?
i. How so?
3. On a scale of 1 (not well at all) to 5 (very well), how well do you perform under
pressure? (M; Self-Efficacy)
a. Why did you provide this score?
b. What experiences, if any, helped you to arrive at this number?
i. How so?
85

4. On a scale of 1 (not at all confident) to 5 (very confident), how confident are you in
your leadership skills and abilities? (M; Self-Efficacy)
a. What experiences have you had that might impact how you rated this
question?
5. Where do you see yourself in 5 years (professionally), and why? (M; Self-Regulation;
Values)
a. Are you actively working on a development plan?
b. Do you anticipate any barriers to achieving this?
6. How do your personal goals align with any professional development goals identified
by you and your supervisor or mentor? (M; Self-Regulation; Values)
7. How often do you and your supervisor or mentor meet to discuss progress against
your goals? (K; O; Modeling and Mentoring; Self-Efficacy)
a. How do you and your supervisor or mentor track your goals (personal and
professional)?
b. How has the 2020 pandemic impacted this process?
8. How have you and your supervisors or mentors prepared you or worked to develop
you professionally, if at all? (M; O; Modeling and Mentoring; Self-Regulation; Self-
Efficacy)
a. If they have not, why do you believe that is?
b. Do you ever meet with anyone other than your immediate supervisor or
mentor to discuss your goals?
c. What other practices have you engaged in that support your professional
development and career advancement?
86

9. How would you rate New World Company’s mentoring program? (K; O; Modeling
and Mentoring)
a. What, if any, strengths or weaknesses have you found with New World
Company’s mentoring program?
b. Have you ever used or experienced mentoring programs outside of New
World Company?
i. If so, how did it compare to New World Company’s mentoring
program?
c. Do you have any suggestions that could improve New World Company’s
mentoring program?
10. In your experience, what are the attributes of the most influential leaders? (K; Self-
Efficacy; Values)
a. Do you share any identities with those leaders?
b. How would you characterize your leadership styles against these attributes?
11. Have you ever worked for a female leader? (M; Self-Efficacy)
a. How would you describe this experience?
b. Did you learn anything from this experience?
12. Have you ever been given a leadership development opportunity within your
organization (e.g., a rotational/temporary position or a led project)? (M; O; Self-
Efficacy; Self-Regulation)
a. If so, tell me more about that.
i. How do you feel you performed in that role?
b. If not, why do you think that is?
87

13. Can you describe any personal challenges that you feel might prevent you from
applying for a leadership position? (M; Self-Regulation; Self-Efficacy; Values)
a. Have you ever felt frustrated or held back because of your gender?
i. Tell me more about that.
b. Do you feel you might have challenges being perceived as an effective leader
because of your gender or any home-life responsibilities?
i. If so, why?
14. Have you experienced or are you aware of any new challenges to your career
progression brought on by the 2020 pandemic? (M; O; Modeling and Mentoring;
Self-Regulation; Self-Efficacy; Values)
a. Did you transition to a work-from-home status?
i. How did that impact your relationships at work (with your leaders,
mentors, and teams)?
b. Did you or your family experience challenges due to remote schooling for
adolescents?
i. If so, how did this impact your career?
c. Have you or your family experienced challenges in family care due to
exposure to COVID-19 that might have impacted your career?
i. If so, can you describe those impacts?
15. What suggestions do you have for leaders to help support women seeking leadership
positions at New World Company? (K; O; Modeling and Mentoring)
a. Are there different actions needed based on employee demographics (i.e.,
early- mid-, and late-career)?

Appendix E: Case-by-Case Comparison of Interview Participants
Participant
Years in
STEM
Position level
description
Modeling and
mentoring
Self-efficacy (SE)
assessment
Self-regulation of
goals (SRG) Employee values
Anonymous
Participant
1
>15 Officer Strong evidence
of both
modeling and
mentoring;
although she
wishes for
more, she met
more
frequently with
her mentor.
Strong
sponsorship
Demonstrated high
SE throughout the
interview with
examples related
to past
performance,
social persuasion,
and watching
others succeed
Strong evidence of
SRG as
demonstrated
through action
planning, growth
mindset, self-
confidence, self-
reflection, and
career motivation
Strong evidence of
employee values
as demonstrated
with multiple
examples of
attainment,
intrinsic, and
utility values.
Prioritized career
over having
children
Anonymous
Participant
2
>15 Officer Strong evidence
of both
modeling and
mentoring
Demonstrated high
SE throughout the
interview with
examples related
to past
performance,
social persuasion,
watching others
succeed, and
physiological
effects
Strong evidence of
SRG as
demonstrated
through action
planning, growth
mindset, self-
confidence, self-
reflection, and
career motivation
Strong evidence of
employee values
as demonstrated
with multiple
examples of
attainment,
intrinsic, and
utility values.
Prioritized family
over work during
mid-career
88

Participant
Years in
STEM
Position level
description
Modeling and
mentoring
Self-efficacy (SE)
assessment
Self-regulation of
goals (SRG) Employee values
Anonymous
Participant
3
>15 Individual
contributor
Some evidence
of mentoring is
primarily
acting as a
mentor versus a
mentee. Low or
no evidence of
modeling
Rated herself as
high in SE, but
interview answers
and observation
notes
demonstrated low
SE
Some evidence of
SRG as evidenced
by a growth
mindset but a lack
of action planning
and low self-
confidence
Little evidence of
attainment or
utility values.
Some evidence of
intrinsic values
Anonymous
Participant
4
5–15 Individual
contributor
Some evidence
of mentoring
but low or no
evidence of
modeling
Rated herself as
high in SE, but
interview answers
and observation
notes
demonstrated low
SE
Low evidence of
SRG as evidenced
by the lack of a 5-
year plan (i.e., low
growth mindset),
lack of action
planning, and low
self-confidence
Little evidence of
attainment or
utility values.
Some evidence of
intrinsic values
Anonymous
Participant
5
>15 Individual
contributor
Strong evidence
of both
modeling and
mentoring
Rated herself as
high in SE, but
interview answers
and observation
notes
demonstrated low
SE
Low evidence SRG
by the lack of a 5-
year plan, low
growth mindset,
lack of action
planning but high
self-confidence
Strong evidence of
employee values
as demonstrated
with multiple
examples of
attainment,
intrinsic, and
utility values.
Good work-life
balance

Anonymous
Participant
6
>15 Officer Strong evidence
of both
modeling and
mentoring
Demonstrated high
SE throughout the
interview with
examples related
Strong evidence of
SRG as
demonstrated
through action
Strong evidence of
employee values
as demonstrated
with multiple
89

Participant
Years in
STEM
Position level
description
Modeling and
mentoring
Self-efficacy (SE)
assessment
Self-regulation of
goals (SRG) Employee values
to past
performance,
social persuasion,
and watching
others succeed
planning, growth
mindset, self-
confidence, self-
reflection, and
career motivation
examples of
attainment,
intrinsic, and
utility values.
Prioritized family
over work during
mid-career
Anonymous
Participant
7
<5 Individual
contributor
No evidence of
mentoring (i.e.,
does not have a
mentor and has
never had a
mentor). Low
evidence of
modeling
outside of
graduate school
Rated herself as
high in SE, but
interview answers
and observation
notes
demonstrated low
SE
Low evidence of
SRG as evidenced
by the lack of a 5-
year plan (i.e., low
growth mindset)
and lack of action
planning. Has low
self-confidence
related to technical
skills
Some evidence of
attainment and
intrinsic values
but low or no
evidence of
utility values.
Focusing on
improving work-
life balance
Anonymous
Participant
8
5–15 Individual
contributor
Strong evidence
of mentoring.
Low evidence
of modeling
Rated herself as
high in SE, but
interview answers
and observation
notes
demonstrated low
SE
Low evidence of
SRG as evidenced
by the low growth
mindset and low
action planning.
Five-year plan
focuses on honing
technical skills
(which are already
high) versus
identifying and
developing new
skills. Low self-
confidence
Strong evidence of
employee values
as demonstrated
with multiple
examples of
attainment,
intrinsic, and
utility values
90

Participant
Years in
STEM
Position level
description
Modeling and
mentoring
Self-efficacy (SE)
assessment
Self-regulation of
goals (SRG) Employee values
Anonymous
Participant
9
>15 Director Strong evidence
of both
modeling and
mentoring
Rated herself as
high SE with
demonstrated
high SE
throughout the
interview with
examples related
to past
performance,
social persuasion,
and watching
others succeed
Strong evidence of
SRG as
demonstrated
through action
planning, growth
mindset, self-
confidence, self-
reflection, and
career motivation
Strong evidence of
employee values
as demonstrated
with multiple
examples of
attainment,
intrinsic, and
utility values.
Good work-life
balance
Anonymous
Participant
10
>15 Director Strong evidence
of both
modeling and
mentoring
Rated herself as
high SE with
demonstrated
high SE
throughout the
interview with
examples related
to past
performance,
social persuasion,
and watching
others succeed
Strong evidence of
SRG as
demonstrated
through action
planning, growth
mindset, self-
confidence, self-
reflection, and
career motivation
Strong evidence of
employee values
as demonstrated
with multiple
examples of
attainment,
intrinsic, and
utility values
Anonymous
Participant
11
5-15 Manager/
Supervisor
Strong evidence
of modeling but
low or no
evidence of
mentoring
Rated herself as
high in SE.
Interview
responses
indicated strong
SE related to past
performance and
Strong evidence of
SRG as evidenced
by action planning,
growth mindset,
and self-
confidence. Lower
evidence of self-
Some evidence of
attainment and
intrinsic value but
weak or no
evidence of
utility values.
Some examples
91

Participant
Years in
STEM
Position level
description
Modeling and
mentoring
Self-efficacy (SE)
assessment
Self-regulation of
goals (SRG) Employee values
watching others
but lower social
persuasion and
physiological
effects
reflection and
career motivation
of challenged
work-life balance
Anonymous
Participant
12
<5 Manager/
Supervisor
Strong evidence
of both
modeling and
mentoring
Rated herself as
high in SE, but
interview answers
demonstrated
some examples of
low SE
Strong evidence of
SRG as
demonstrated
through action
planning, growth
mindset, self-
confidence, self-
reflection, and
career motivation
Strong evidence of
employee values
as demonstrated
with multiple
examples of
attainment,
intrinsic, and
utility values
Anonymous
Participant
13
<5 Individual
contributor
Low evidence of
modeling or
mentoring
Rated herself as
high in SE, but
interview answers
and observation
notes
demonstrated low
SE
Low evidence of
SRG as evidenced
by the lack of a 5-
year plan (i.e., low
growth mindset),
lack of action
planning, and low
self-confidence.
Stated higher
career motivation
Little evidence of
attainment or
utility values.
Some evidence of
intrinsic values
92
93

Appendix F: The Researcher
I identify as a 40-year-old white, cisgender male who holds a senior leadership position
in the STEM sector. Cooper (2007) referred to these identities as “privileged-domination” on the
“Intersectionality Axes of Privilege, Domination, and Oppression” (para. 6). After growing up in
a low-income neighborhood, I previously believed that “everyone who works hard, regardless of
color, has an equal chance to become rich” (Neville et al., 2000, p. 62). However, my belief has
changed as my understanding of privilege expanded.
In my current position, I contribute to the statistical majority classification (i.e., White,
male) in the STEM industry. At various times in my career, I have had female employees work
for me; however, until 2016, I had never worked for a female leader. Since 2016, I have selected
and engaged a female mentor and worked for two female leaders I consider two of the most
competent and engaging leaders in my career. I acknowledge I have not experienced the same
challenges as female employees and realize that employees in my organization may not look to
me for support or guidance as they navigate their careers due to my racial, gender, and
socioeconomic identities. However, as a senior leader in the STEM industry, I have the ability
and responsibility to address the lack of gender diversity in STEM leadership positions.
When conducting this study, I had to consider how my biases would help me design new
actions to help address this problem and likely limit my ability to view and understand other
causes and contributors. Though I have not personally observed gender discrimination, I started
to understand that the true causes of this problem are deeper rooted than what occurs in a hiring
decision meeting; this problem is a systemic problem that individuals will not solve without
significant changes.
94

Appendix G: Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations of this study might have included participants who were not truthful or did
not share enough information, or participants that did not share enough details of their
experiences if those who had discriminated against them were still employed at New World
Company. Additionally, sharing the study title and purpose might have elicited responses
associated with negative perspectives related to gender diversity initiatives, the COVID-19
global pandemic, or leadership support for the advancement of women into STEM leadership
positions. Furthermore, participants might not have felt that they had experienced gender
discrimination or career impacts attributed to the COVID-19 global pandemic. Finally, the
interview questions may not have elicited anticipated responses, requiring changes to the scripted
interview questions to remain aligned with the research questions.
Delimitations of this study included the decision to solicit volunteer participants currently
associated with the Women in STEM employee resource group. At the time of the study, New
World Company had more than 25,000 employees, and not all female employees chose to be
associated with this employee resource group. Additionally, the research methodology included
using open-ended questions in interviews that I conducted remotely to limit impacts on
participants, but these remote interviews may have impacted participant responses. Furthermore,
second-level coding focused on participant time in the STEM workforce and participant job level
within the organization but could have included other participant demographics, such as age,
socioeconomic status, and family situations. Accordingly, upon completion of the interviews, the
researcher noted none of the participants had school-aged children or family healthcare
challenges brought on by the COVID-19 global pandemic. Finally, the interviewer is male and a
senior leader in the STEM industry; thus, using a third party could have produced different
95

results. Furthermore, this study and the recommendations are focused on a specific organization,
so the study findings should not be generalized. Accordingly, I recommend that future studies
based on additional employee demographics be conducted.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Addressing the underrepresentation of women in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math: a focus on African American and Hispanic women in community college and university programs

PDF

Women in information technology senior leadership: incremental progress and continuing challenges

PDF

Gender barriers towards women on the career path and within executive leadership

PDF

Mathematics Engineering Science Achievement (MESA) and student persistence in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) activities and courses: the perceptions of MESA teacher advis...

PDF

The challenges teachers face effectively implementing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) curricula: an evaluation study

PDF

Mathematics, Engineering, Science, Achievement (MESA) and student persistence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) activities and courses: the perceptions of MESA teacher a...

PDF

Gender-based leadership barriers: an exploratory study of the underrepresentation of women of color in technology

PDF

Cultural wealth exploration of Black female executives and its additive value in STEM corporations: a cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) analysis

PDF

Profiles of successful persistence for women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)

PDF

Gender role beliefs of male senior leaders in retail and the impact on women’s advancement

PDF

An examination of the perceptions of Latina leaders in STEM: identity, culture, and institutional racism

PDF

Counselors and teachers’ perceptions of underrepresentation of female secondary students in STEM

PDF

Increasing representation of women in executive technology leadership roles

PDF

Women Chief Information Officers (CIOs): how did they make it?

PDF

Increasing the effectiveness of African-American male mentorship

PDF

Women in executive leadership: a study of the gender diversity gap

PDF

The lack of Black women in higher education executive leadership in four-year colleges and universities

PDF

Leadership, accountability, and decision-making: An examination of first-responder experience and self-efficacy in real-time decision-making to improve community outcomes

PDF

Shattering the glass ceiling: examining invisible barriers to women’s career progression in South Korean international schools

PDF

An exploration of the effect of the development of spatial awareness as a prerequisite science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) skill on the STEM gender achievement gap: an innovation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Hayes, Matthew Benjamin (author)

Core Title The underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) leadership positions

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-12

Publication Date 11/28/2022

Defense Date 11/01/2022

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag leadership diversity,OAI-PMH Harvest,STEM,STEM diversity,women in engineering,women in leadership,women in mathematics,women in science,women in STEM,women in technology

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Green, Alan (committee chair), Brady, Melanie (committee member), Ott, Maria (committee member)

Creator Email matthayes3741@gmail.com,mbhayes@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC112542504

Unique identifier UC112542504

Identifier etd-HayesMatth-11334.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-HayesMatth-11334

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Hayes, Matthew Benjamin

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20221201-usctheses-batch-993 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu