Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Double jeopardy: the influence of prevalent race and gender bias on women of color executive leadership promotions
(USC Thesis Other)
Double jeopardy: the influence of prevalent race and gender bias on women of color executive leadership promotions
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Double Jeopardy: The Influence of Prevalent Race and Gender Bias on
Women of Color Executive Leadership Promotions
by
Jason Scott Wagner
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 2021
© Copyright by Jason Scott Wagner 2021
All Rights Reserved
The Committee for Jason Scott Wagner certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Kimberly Hirabayashi
Derisa Grant
Paula M. Carbone, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021
iv
Abstract
It is well documented in the literature that women of color (WOC) are significantly more likely
than their White and male counterparts to experience workplace discrimination based upon the
complexities associated with intersectionality identities and systematic injustice. This systematic
injustice results in fewer women of color advancing to senior-level positions. This study’s
purpose is to explore the experiences of women of color who have attained senior-level positions
within Fortune 500 companies (or highly recognizable branded organizations) and uncover their
insight into what may have shaped their ascent into upper-level leadership. Social cognitive
theory (SCT) forms this study’s framework as a motivational lens where a person’s
intrapersonal, behavioral, and environmental influences combine to create a co-interdependent
relationship routed in triadic reciprocal causation (Bandura, 2012). In an effort to understand
organizational experiences that lead some women of color to advance in the workplace, six
women of color in senior-leadership positions with Fortune 500 (or other recognizable)
companies were recruited into this study and utilizing a semi-structured interview approach
provided their feedback on standardized research questions. All participants attested that they
relied on their self-motivation, persistence, and resolve in gaining knowledge and experience to
help boost their career advancement. Women of color leader participants stated that with their
reliance on the support of their networks and the guidance of mentors and sponsors, the male
dominated workplaces they find themselves in are more manageable in overcoming non-
inclusiveness. This has implications for expanding workplace mentorship and sponsorship
programs, and increasing inclusivity for women of color and other marginalized groups.
v
Acknowledgements
It is not possible, within just a couple of pages, to express the gratitude I have for several
people who have influenced me beyond belief throughout the years. Yet it is possible to at the
very least, convey my love and admiration for them. My loving wife, Bennie, who always lets
me pursue my dreams and supports me effortlessly. My mother, Leona, and step-father, Roger,
have been stellar sources of power and rationale in my life. My best friends in life and eternity,
my children; my son Jaz and my daughter-in-law, Ivy; my daughters, Yesenia and Bella; my
twin sons, Jasper and Jesse, who just recently made their arrival know and began their lives with
us; and my granddaughter Jolie, who I am honored to be their dad (and daddy) and grandpa, are
talented and awesome in every possible way. My sisters Sharan and Eve, who as educators and
big sisters, inspire me daily to remember how valuable teachers (and sisters) are. With a special
thanks to Sharan, who reviewed my entrance application essays and provided me with
constructive feedback accordingly. My dearest niece Janae who has always been the kindest of
souls and helpful in every way, including offering to be a second, third, and fourth pair of eyes
reviewing this study. My step-children, Misty and Ranlie, who I am thankful still consider me a
father-figure for life. My nephews, Ryan and Kyle, and brother in-law, Jim, for their humor and
encouragement. My professional references (and those who I admire immensely) for admittance
into the University of Southern California, Rossier School of Education, EdD program: (a)
Sunita, (b) Brian, (c) Gary, and (d) Maru, who without them, I likely would not be conducting
this important research (or writing this acknowledgements section). My father, Sam, and step-
mother, Ruthe, for their ongoing support. My close-knit study group: (a) Gina, who played a key
role in my journey as my accountability partner in staying on top of the dissertation adventure,
(b) Sarah, (c) Julie, (d) Ahmad, (e) Liz, and (f) MaryAnne; who all shared the course-work
vi
exhaustion, frustration, and tons of reading assignment joy with me. And finally, my dissertation
committee chair, Dr. Paula Carbone, an absolute champion of “better” and “great” in addition to
consistently acting as a pillar of hope, and awesomely talented committee members, Dr. Derisa
Grant (an amazing person who happens to be an expert in diversity, equity, and inclusion) and
Dr. Kim Hirabayashi (our program’s chair who I was thrilled actually accepted the invitation to
join my committee…I was shocked), who have relentlessly guided me towards the “truth”,
regardless how many endless rewrites it took to get there.
vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Context and Background of the Problem ............................................................................ 2
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions .................................................................. 4
Importance of the Study ...................................................................................................... 5
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 6
Definitions........................................................................................................................... 8
Organization of the Dissertation ....................................................................................... 11
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 12
Topic Heading ................................................................................................................... 12
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 42
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 48
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 49
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 49
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 49
Research Setting................................................................................................................ 51
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 51
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 53
Interviews .......................................................................................................................... 53
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 54
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 55
Research Setting................................................................................................................ 55
viii
Data Collection Procedures ............................................................................................... 56
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 58
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 59
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 61
Limitations and Delimiitations ......................................................................................... 61
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 63
Chapter Four: Results or Findings ................................................................................................ 64
Results for Research Question 1 ....................................................................................... 65
Results for Research Question 2 ....................................................................................... 79
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 89
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 91
Discussion of Findings ...................................................................................................... 92
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................... 99
Recommendations for Practice ....................................................................................... 101
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 110
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 111
References ................................................................................................................................... 113
Appendix A: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 129
ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Data Sources ................................................................................................................... 50
Table 2: Participants ..................................................................................................................... 55
Table 3: Summary of Findings for Research Question 1 .............................................................. 66
Table 4: Summary of Findings for Research Question 2 .............................................................. 80
1
Chapter One: Overview of the Study
In support of achieving racial and gender justice and enhanced organizational
performance results, the problem of practice addressed equity for women of color (WOC)
promotions into Fortune 500 senior leadership roles (Eaton et al., 2019; Hewlett et al., 2010;
Sabharwal, 2014; Sherbin & Rashid, 2017). Rosette and Livingston (2012) define double
jeopardy as individuals having more than one subordinate identity (i.e., Black women, Asian
women, and Latinx women). Rosette and Livingston (2012) found that employees with double
jeopardy status are perceived more negatively as organizational leaders when that organization is
facing a failure when compared to those with single subordinate identities (i.e., White women).
Based upon the complexities of double jeopardy identity, the resulting problem is rooted in deep
systemic gender inequality, racism, and further complicated by intersectionality, a combination
of marginalized identities, which women of color may possess based upon their race and gender,
resulting in intersectional experiences equating to greater negative experiences than the
aggregate experience of sexism and racism (Crenshaw, 1989).
There has been significant underrepresentation of WOC in Fortune 500 company C-suite
positions and likewise, subordinate senior leadership positions from which candidates are
promoted from because foundational diversity improvement initiatives have not been effective
(McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2015). Ammer and Ammer (1986) define the C-Suite as
corporate officers and directors, typically representative of the highest-level positions in an
organization and on boards. Only .4 % of Fortune 500 CEOs and 3.2 % of Fortune 500 Boards
were composed of WOC as compared to 4.2 % of Fortune 500 CEOs and 13.7 % of Fortune 500
Boards were reflective of White women, respectively (Carter & Peters, 2016; Warner et al.,
2018). Women held 38% of management roles by which WOC made up approximately 38.3% of
2
the entire female workforce yet filled only 12% of those management roles as compared to
White women who represented 61.7% of the female workforce and held the remaining 26%
(Carter & Peters, 2016; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020; Warner et al., 2018). For all
women, these numbers were discouraging, yet particularly for WOC, systemic organizational
inequality played a crucial role in their equity disparity (Rosette and Livingston, 2012).
Therefore, expanded research in this area may lead to a better understanding of what WOC who
have achieved senior- level positions in Fortune 500 companies (or highly recognizable branded
organizations that may not currently be officially recognized as Fortune 500 companies)
attributed to their ability to overcome systemic organizational inequality and achieve career
success.
Context and Background of the Problem
The abundance of gender discrimination, racism, and intersectionality related treatment
that led to inequity for women of color prevailed in business. However, fairness for all parties in
having access to opportunities for advancement should have existed, and the benefits of gender
and racial equality for all stakeholders was significant, regardless of gender or race (Andrade &
Lundberg, 2018; Bogler, n.d.; Clancy et al., 2017; Georgieva & Bibeau, 2018; Haines et al.,
2016; Hunt et al., 2014; Ladson-Billings, 2013; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2015; Pace,
2018; Sabharwal, 2014; Wodon & de La Brière, 2018; Zenger and Folkman, 2012). An
improvement in equity alone was necessary, yet beyond equity itself, women have proven
themselves as capable and effective leaders. The USA Congress Joint Economic Committee
(2010) found a positive correlation between women in leadership and performance. Also,
Cuberes and Teignier’s (2016) study examining the quantitative effects of gender gaps in
3
entrepreneurship globally determined that aggregate productivity is negatively affected by a lack
of women in leadership.
On a global scale, the lack of women’s leadership representation in business had a
negative effect on the economy. On average, it was estimated through modeling that 15% income
loss was experienced in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
countries due to the underrepresentation of women; across 27 European countries, women
represented only 25% of business owners with staff, 3% of CEOs, and 18% of board members.
According to the World Bank Group, global wealth would have increased by $23,620 per person
for a total of $160 trillion if equal lifetime earnings existed for both women and men; due to the
glass ceiling effect, there has been a negative impact on the world economy (Brière, 2018;
Georgieva & Bibeau, 2018; Wodon & de La). To have achieved racial and gender equity,
organizational support and sustainability of social justice should have been considered a best
business practice and a preferred process embraced by companies to continuously strive for
reinforcement of equitable strategies, behaviors, and outcomes (Aecf.org, 2021; Bogler, n.d.).
Within the United States, several initiatives have been implemented to offset the negative
impact of the glass ceiling effect (U.S. Department of Labor, 1995), though gender and racial
equity in executive leadership have not yet been fully realized. Dating as far back as 1991, the
Federal Glass Ceiling Commission was created to investigate organizational discrimination
against women and minorities. Their goal was to identify recommendations that effectively
address the “invisible barrier” which limited access to career opportunities and advancement
within organizations and kept racial and gender equity from being realized (U.S. Department of
Labor, 1995). Though slight progress has been made to address blatant racism and gender
discrimination, little progress has been made towards gender equality, and the plight of equality
4
of women of color (WOC) dwarfs that of White women due to the slow pace of foundational
diversity improvements (McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2015), which maintained inequities
in advancement for WOC. Therefore, to contribute as a cornerstone of evolution towards
advancing equality for all women, this study centered specifically on addressing race and gender
bias that limits the promotability of WOC into Fortune 500 senior leadership roles.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
Creswell and Creswell (2018) define the purpose of a study as the overall intent of the
research. This study’s purpose was to explore the experiences of women of color who have
attained senior-level positions within Fortune 500 companies (or highly recognizable branded
organizations) and uncover their insight regarding how they viewed organizational conditions,
navigated through hinderances, and recognized affordances that may have shaped their ascent
into upper-level leadership. As a result, other WOC could benefit from the wealth of information
revealed through the experiences of successful WOC leaders, gained an understanding of
possible approaches to maneuver through promotional constraints, for their career advancements
within organizations that have shown preferences in hiring and promoting primarily White males
and occasional White females (Carter & Peters, 2016; Sherbin & Rashid, 2017; Warner et al.,
2018). Also, employers might have better understood how to improve equity in career
advancement for other WOC senior leadership candidates through receipt of information about
systems that unjustly impeded the advancement of WOC.
In an effort to have gained an understanding of the experiences that guided WOC
executives along their career track, the following research questions reflected what Maxwell
(2013) describes as the heart of research, in that they influence all parts of the study:
5
1. What workplace factors, if any, do women of color leaders perceive they encountered
that either supported or hindered them throughout their career journeys?
2. How do successful women of color leaders perceive the importance of help from other
professionals in preparation for their promotability as women of color into senior level
management?
Importance of the Study
The problem of prevalent race and gender bias that prevented equity for WOC’s
promotability into executive leadership roles was vital to address. Without addressing it, social
justice for WOC could not prevail. Kay and Gorman (2012) stated that there are vast
discrepancies in mentorship, career progression, and executive leadership opportunities among
WOC compared to that experienced by men of color and Whites. Additionally, WOC career
advancement was derailed more often by stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination than that of
White women (Eagly & Carli, 2007; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2015; Northouse, 2016).
This phenomenon was substantiated in that the underrepresentation of WOC in senior
management and executive roles was lower than that of White women due to heightened
disparities for WOC caused by a smaller management talent pipeline and the slow pace of
foundational diversity improvements infused with intersectionality components (McKinsey &
Company & LeanIn, 2015; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020). As it was estimated by
2060 that the majority of women will be reflective of WOC, and they will likely represent the
majority of the U.S. workforce (Pace, 2018), WOC promotion equity should have been treated as
a prioritized improvement necessary across the nation in support of equitable social justice.
6
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Social cognitive theory (SCT) (Bandura, 1986; 1977; 1997, 1999, 2000, 2005; 2012;
2018) can play a vital role as the theory of change in improving equity for WOC executive
promotability considering that it is foundationally sound for showing the impact that influential
environmental barriers have on effecting personal and social change. There have been
discriminatory practices that form a systemic inequality problem, such as the dictation of
workplace policy and norm establishment by White men and sexism that hinders gender
inclusion (Haines et al., 2016). To make matters worse for WOC, they suffered a deepened
injustice due to their intersectionality, the effect of multiple marginalized social classifications
such as gender and race (Ladson-Billings, 2013). Clancy et al.’s (2017) four-year study of
discrimination in the scientific community revealed WOC experience a higher frequency of
inappropriate comments, harassment, and assault at work. According to Bandura’s (2005; 2018)
SCT, people self-regulate, have direct control over the events in their lives based upon their
actions, and their surrounding environmental forces influence their agentic internal motivation.
Therefore, dependence on self-motivation, proactiveness in building stronger relationships, and
confidence in pursuing advancement opportunities are essential for WOC to administer,
considering the systemically biased workplaces they have encountered. In correspondence to
Elliot et al.’s (2018) analysis of belonging, social context (how others treat someone) and who
somebody can be in that context, is imperative for people to make sense of as it can lead to
increased motivation when somebody feels that they belong.
A theory of change is related to one’s perspective about how research influences an
adjustment or improvement in practice and policy (Hinga, 2020; Tuck & Yang, 2014). The
essence of my identity memo, useful for assumption and experiential knowledge exploration
7
(Maxwell, 2013), revealed empathy for WOC. I was genuinely concerned about their career
limitations predicament. I am a father and grandfather to Guatemalan-American, Thai-American,
and Filipino-American girls. Therefore, I can appreciate how career barriers within Fortune 500
companies (and other organizations striving to emulate them) are potential roadblocks for my
family too. Considering that my professional contributions towards improving equity have been
intentional, I am dependent upon WOC leadership for further enlightenment. Because White men
have historically dictated workplace policy and practice by which barriers to fair treatment for
marginalized group were maintained, and marginalized groups and Whites’ interest in social
justice needs to align, change will occur once White men demonstrate empathy and action on
behalf and for WOC.
The research design used in this study was qualitative and the data collected within the
field was used to make sense of its meaning, while the research process itself remained flexible
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). This research design aligned well with the purpose statement
because the central phenomenon explored, the self-expression experiences (Creswell & Creswell,
2018) of WOC, aided in better understanding how other WOC could successfully attain
executive leadership roles and organizations could learn from WOC insights and work towards
improving equity. Also, the data and findings should have reflected a high level of credibility
across Fortune 500 (and other large) companies considering that the data is collected from
participants’ lenses, representative of these organizations’ WOC senior leadership engaged in
interactive conversations with the researcher to strengthen trustworthiness (Lincoln & Guba,
1985). Furthermore, in coordination with Lincoln and Guba (1985), the transferability should
have potential, as the research contributed to career advancement studies, other inequities
8
surrounding marginalized people research, and workforce planning studies too, whereby its
usefulness could be assessed as appropriate.
Definitions
This section includes terms (and their associated definitions) that were used throughout
this study. Though they may have been included within the literature review section, they were
collectively assembled here for continuity.
#MeToo Movement
Tarana Burke started the #MeToo movement in 2006 to bring sexual assault and
harassment experiences to light and the movement was inspired particularly by women of color
in low-income communities (Murphy, 2016).
C-Suite
The C-Suite is descriptive of corporate officers and directors, typically representative of
the highest-level positions in an organization (i.e., CEO, COO, CFO, etc.) (Ammer & Ammer,
1986).
Diversity
Diversity is representative of a collective group of identities like gender and race, in
addition to ethnicity, religion, nationality, or sexual orientation, and only exists in relationship to
others (Bogler, n.d.), in support of social justice for those representing minority identities
(Ahmed, 2007).
Double Jeopardy
Double jeopardy is reflective of individuals having more than one subordinate identity
(i.e., Black women, Asian women, and Latinx women) (Rosette and Livingston, 2012).
9
Equity
Equity is defined as fairness, where everybody is provided the same opportunities while
recognizing that advantages and barriers exist for some people, and acknowledging that due to
this imbalance, there needs to be continuous adjustments made to achieve fairness for all parties
(Bogler, n.d.).
Fortune 500 Company
In July 2020, Fortune.com (2020) issued its 66th edition of their ranking of America’s
largest companies, the Fortune 500, representing two thirds of the U.S. economy (including an
aggregate $14.2 trillion in revenue). Fortune.com (2020) identifies a Fortune 500 Company as
one that is incorporated, operates, and files financial statements accordingly in the United States.
It is ranked against other Fortune 500 Companies by its fiscal year total revenues.
Inclusion
Inclusion provides people with diverse identities a strong sense of being welcomed and
valued within an environment (Bogler, n.d.).
Intersectionality
Intersectionality is a combination of marginalized identities that an individual has, like in
the case of a woman of color, whereby the intersectional experience is greater than the sum of
sexism and racism (Crenshaw, 1989). Theoretically, if the identities like gender and race were
treated separately, the effects may be less oppressive (Page, 2019).
Justice
Justice is a transformative practice where the past and current unfair, unequal, or
inequitable treatment within society should be addressed by an entire community.
Transformation occurs when equitable access, treatment, and opportunities are afforded to all
10
regardless of social identities and proactive enforcement of policy, practice, and attitudinal
behaviors supporting such efforts is normalized (Center for the Study of Social Policy, 2019).
Liberation
According to the Center for the Study of Social Policy (2019), liberation enables one to
exist and thrive without restrictions, whereby traditional systems of oppression do not interfere.
It does acknowledge history but avoids disparate outcomes associated with such accounts and
promotes a culture of dignity and respect.
Mentor
A mentor is an experienced person from whom a less experienced person (mentee) seeks
progressive advice (Hewlitt et al., 2010).
Social Justice
Social justice is the elimination of institutional domination by those in power and
oppression that prevents all other groups from achieving equity (Andrade & Lundberg, 2018).
Sponsor
A sponsor is an experienced person who directs and proactively engages a less
experienced person to promote their growth, introduces them to opportunities for exposure, and
advocates on behalf of the less experienced person, in a highly visible capacity (Hewlitt et al.,
2010).
Women of Color
Women of color is defined as a unification of all women with commonly shared race and
ethnicity coupled with their gender marginalization (Women of Color Network, 2018).
11
Organization of the Dissertation
This study’s content was organized into five chapters. Chapter One provided context for
the study, including introducing the problem, the background of the problem, the purpose of the
research, the research questions, the importance of the research, and an overview of the study’s
theoretical framework and methodology. Chapter Two covered topical areas that emerged from
the evaluation of literature related to the problem and introduces and explained the conceptual
framework for this study, inclusive of an overview of the theories and key theoretical principles
used and how they were applied to the study. Chapter Three described the qualitative research
approach, including the research setting, the researcher, sample and population recruitment
approach, data collection and analysis, and validity strategies used to conduct this study. Chapter
Four discussed the findings in detail. Chapter Five analyzed the findings, made recommendations
for practice, and suggested recommendations for future research.
12
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This review covered three main topic areas that emerged from evaluating literature
related to the problem of equity for women of color (WOC) promotions into Fortune 500 (and
other highly-recognizable organization) senior leadership roles. These topic areas were as
follows: inequality for women in executive leadership representation, the disparity of women of
color promotions, and the benefits of women of color in executive leadership. Although the
literature presented here has been applied to various problems, this review focused primarily on
the literature’s application to this specific problem.
Inequality for Women in Executive Leadership Representation
Research supports that gender and race discrimination are not typically experienced
separately by women of color. They may experience bias to a greater extent than White women,
due to intersectionality (Davis & Maldonado, 2015; Sanchez-Hucles & Davis, 2010; Ladson-
Billings, 2013). Yet research also supports that among employed women, of the highest paid
occupational roles tracked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (management, professional, and
related occupations), 50% of Asian women work in these roles as compared to 45% White
women, 36% Black women, and 28% Latinx women (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2018; Yu,
2020).
As another example wherein gender and race discrimination may be experienced
separately by women of color, the #MeToo Movement, became a stage for all women (though
initially focused on women of color in low-income communities) to speak up about their
unimaginable sexual harassment and abuse experiences (Murphy, 2019). It became highly
publicized following multiple accusations of sexual harassment and abuse committed by Harvey
Weinstein, a now disgraced Hollywood mogul; it continues to seek to hold perpetrators
accountable for their actions in work environments across the United States and beyond
13
(Murphy, 2019). Sexual harassment is identified as a common barrier to career advancement that
women and WOC are forced to face within the workplace (Benya et al., 2018; Clancy et al.,
2017; Haines et al., 2016; Ho et al., 2012; Hegewisch et al., 2011; Ladson-Billings, 2013;
Sugerman, 2018). As all women, regardless of color, may have faced similar gender
discrimination and harassment in corporate environments, this section discussed the topic of
prevalent gender bias further to better understand the underlying effect on systemic bias that
ultimately limited WOC’s promotability into higher level roles.
As of 2020, Fortune.com (2020) reports that the number of women Fortune 500 CEOs
reached its highest historical point at 37. Yet though women were at the helm of seven percent of
the Fortune 500 businesses, the majority stem from the smaller companies; only seven women
are leading the top 100 of Fortune 500 Companies (Fortune.com, 2020). Many others oversee
retail operations, and rarely are any present at the top among the tech companies (Fortune.com,
2020). Notwithstanding women’s fulfillment of more than half of all managerial and
professional-level roles, more specifically, 38% of management roles, only 14.6 % of them are
executive officers, 4.6 % of them are Fortune 500 CEOs, and just 16.9 % of them sit on Fortune
500 Boards (Warner et al., 2018; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020).
In consideration of executive-level role opportunities, research conducted by McKinsey
and Company and LeanIn (2020) noted that women’s representation in senior leadership within
the United States was positively trending as of January 2020. Though women still remained
significantly underrepresented, women who attained senior vice president and C-suite level
positions between January 2015 and January 2020 grew from 23% to 28% and 17% to 21%,
respectively (McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020). This research included comprehensive
data from 600 companies and more than 250,000 employees individually surveyed from 2015
14
through 2019, and data from 317 U.S. and Canadian private and public companies, across
multiple industries, whereby talent pipeline and/or other related program or policy data was
submitted, in addition to 40,000 independent employee survey responses from 47 of those
companies (McKinsey and Company and LeanIn, 2020). Due to this research’s robust participant
population and captured data points, it was often referenced here as a foundational source.
Several circumstances feed into the negative long-term impact on corporate talent
pipelines caused by a first level of management promotion barrier; for every 100 men promoted
to management, only 85 women are promoted (McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020).
McKinsey and Company and LeanIn (2020) state that even with senior level promotion rate
improvements for women, men outnumber women at the manager level (62% versus 38%),
creating a smaller pool of women leadership candidates, resulting in fewer women promotions.
Next, women are leaving the workforce at higher rates than men, as compared to previous
research conducted by McKinsey & Company & LeanIn (2020), whereby their departure rate
was not notably higher than that of men. At the time of this study, to further complicate the
matter of there not being sufficient numbers of women to promote into senior-level leadership,
Covid-19’s influence on two million women to consider taking leaves of absence or leave the
workforce completely, may make a further dent against women representation in leadership,
eradicating the promotion gains made over the past several years (McKinsey and Company and
LeanIn, 2010). Their departure weighs heavily on the already devastating effects of the glass
ceiling phenomena and the leadership labyrinth; whereby barriers that hinder women’s
advancement are associated with gender differences and the resulting prejudice associated with
those differences (McKinsey and Company and LeanIn, 2020; Eagly & Carli, 2007; Northouse,
2015; Zimmer, 2015). Therefore, to prevent further diminishing returns related to women
15
holding executive-level roles, it was essential to focus on the foundational gender bias that has
limited women from being promoted into all levels of management.
So-Called Glass Ceiling Effect Contributors
Societal norms have greatly influenced the existence of a so-called glass ceiling, and
many facets of discrimination and prejudice have contributed to the glass ceiling effect.
According to the U.S. Department of Labor (1995), the glass ceiling is defined as attitudinal
(stemming from an individual’s belief) or organizational bias-based barriers that stand in the way
of workforce promotions for women. The lack of qualified candidates and related recruitment
outreach, stereotyping, and the fear of White males in management losing control have all been
identified by the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission report as the main rationale for the existence
of the glass ceiling (U.S. Department of Labor, 1995; Hurley & Choudhary, 2016). Northouse
(2016) points to Eagly and Carli’s (2007) research regarding the labyrinth of women’s leadership
barriers, including gender bias and prejudice.
The establishment of policies and norms within the workplace was dictated by men and
still are largely practiced as societal norms that continue to support the dominant role of woman
as being the home-maker within a family, despite several decades of significant shifts in
women’s roles and opportunities (Haines et al., 2016). Additionally, religion and related faith
belief systems negatively impact gender equality, even in the workplace. According to Seguino
(2011), through an evaluation of the cross-country data included within the World Values
Survey, consisting of over 300,000 respondents, representative of 90% of the world’s population,
spanning across 97 countries and regions, there is an extremely strong correlation between
religious practice and gender inequitable attitudes which influences society’s daily behavior,
including women holding positions of power in the workplace. One hundred percent of the
16
independent gender attitude questions answered in the World Values Survey reflected that
religion in the respondents’ lives was important positively associated with poor gender equity
attitudes (Seguino, 2011).
In Hurley and Choudhary’s (2016) assessment of the likelihood of having a female CEO
in the largest publicly held companies within the United States, a total of 123 CEOs (24 female
and 99 male CEOs representing more than 28 industries) were identified among the Standard and
Poor’s (S&P) 500 (the stock market index that captures the measurement of 500 large public
companies listed on US stock exchanges), along with cross-sectional data published by Dow
Jones were reviewed. Individual factors including management tenure, age, number of children,
and years of education in addition to firm-level factors including number of employees and net
income earnings were analyzed using T-test statistics, correlation analyses, and logit modeling
(Hurley & Choudary, 2016). The results of Hurley and Choudhary’s (2016) research determined
that an increase in the number of children, and higher levels of education, lowered the
probability of the CEO being a woman. An abundance of prior research reveals that having
children and higher education levels is detrimental for women in management holds true, even at
the highest level (Hurley & Choudhary, 2016). The attainment of college degrees and the
advanced progression of women earning degrees, more so than men, has increased over the past
several decades (Northouse, 2016; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2015; U.S. Department of
Education, 2012). By 2021-2022, of the degrees conferred by degree-granting institutions, it is
projected that women will earn 58% of Bachelor, 62% of Master, and 54% of Doctorate degrees
(U.S. Department of Education, 2012). Regardless of their educational success, whether coupled
with hands-on experience in managerial or professional roles or not, women contend with
perceptions regarding gender differences, discrimination, prejudice, and stereotypes that work
17
against their advancement (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Northouse, 2016). Through traditional family
responsibilities, religious beliefs, and negative perceptions associated with higher education,
society has handed down women challenges that are not shared by men (Eagly & Carli, 2007;
Haines et al., 2016; Hurley & Choudhary, 2016; Northouse, 2016).
Gender Discrimination
The provocation of success for women can be derailed by gender discrimination and
prejudice (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Northouse, 2016), which is further supported by the following
research. Women who possess talent, a strong work ethic, a positive attitude, and high moral
character should have what McNamee and Miller (2018) highlight as the key ingredients to being
successful in America. Yet though these attributes make up the foundational theme of
meritocracy, whereby rising to the top is possible if a person has these characteristics, deeming
that person the most qualified for opportunities, women face a double standard (McNamee &
Miller, 2018). Gender is reflective of socially constructed characteristics that are frequently used
to substantiate inequality, subordinate status, and differential treatment towards women (Omi &
Winant, 2015). McNamee and Miller (2018) argued in support that meritocracy is a myth, that
even with discrimination and differential access to opportunities excluded, it cannot be
reasonably possible that White males possess the majority of raw talent coupled with hard work,
great attitudes, and high moral character that supports them actually being the most qualified
applicants for the majority of America’s key leadership roles.
To best gain valuable insight into dispelling meritocratic social equality, through several
perspectives, decades of literature containing theories on cumulative phenomena stemming from
developmental psychology and gerontology to sociology and economics, was evaluated in search
of workplace-related cumulative social inequality mechanisms (Dijk, 2020). Mechanisms that
provided details regarding how initial opportunities and rewards affect subsequent opportunities
18
and rewards via performance, which could account for the accumulation of social inequality, and
were either examined in organizational settings or would likely operate similarly in the
workplace were selected (Dijk, 2020). Dijk (2020) developed a cumulative social inequality in
workplaces (CSI-W) model that reveals ways in which workplaces contribute to social
inequality, such that its dynamics in workplaces tend to exacerbate, legitimatize, and manifest
themselves over time through daily behaviors. As an example, Dijk (2020) points to Sue et al.’s
(2008) microaggression research whereby daily occurrences of disrespectful or discriminatory
treatment based on one’s social group (i.e., women or women of color) when repeated frequently
can contribute to systemic social inequality in workplaces. According to Dijk (2020), these are
characterized through multilevel perspectives consisting of individual, dyadic, network, and
organizational behaviors as follows:
1. At the individual level, mechanisms include knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs), and
motivation. An individual’s competencies are innate and learned, which support their job
performance so the better they perform, the more opportunities and rewards are
accessible. As advantaged social groups have received more rewards than disadvantaged
social groups, it is inevitable that systemic discrimination and racism deepen within the
environment causing the disadvantaged to be forced to unjustly navigate it.
2. Dyadic level mechanisms include stereotypes and status beliefs. Performance,
opportunity, and reward differences between social groups originate from an evaluator’s
perspective of an individual’s competence and associated status.
3. Mechanisms at the network level are reflective of job performance, opportunity, and
reward differences among different social groups and originate in a person’s social
network (known as social capital).
19
4. The evaluative effects of how performance transcends into opportunities and rewards
occur at the organizational level. At this level, organizational and occupational
segmentation (social inequality is influenced through access accorded social groups and
lower performers also have less access), winner-take-all structures (opportunities and
rewards are disproportionately granted to the highest performers and the most talented),
and meritocratic ideology (capturing the extent by which opportunities and rewards
should be based upon performance) are mechanisms that create social group opportunity
and reward differences.
The CSI-W model suggests that over time, though mechanisms do not change, their
consequences become stronger with repetition (Dijk, 2020).
Historically and currently, women were and are not provided with equal privilege and
status as men. This unfair treatment is based upon a sexist ideology that amplifies gender
differences and lends itself to belittle women to the point that they should be considered
subordinate to men and treated as objects of affection, needing the protection of men (Glick &
Fiske, 2001). According to Glick and Fiske (2001), the nature of sexism and prejudice against
women is said to be classifiable as hostile sexism (antipathy toward women who are perceived to
seize power from men) and benevolent sexism (a chivalrous ideology aimed at protecting and
sharing affection with women who embrace tradition), which together support the justification of
gender inequality. Sexism, therefore, thrived in the workplace through gender discrimination. A
Pew Research Center’s (2015) analysis of online and phone surveys regarding discrimination
within the United States, consisting of 1,835 online participants (921 women and 914 men) and
1,004 phone participants (511 women and 493 men), 65% of women state discrimination against
their gender exists within society today as compared with 48% of men who believe the opposite
20
sex does encounter some level of discrimination. Koch et al. (2015) examined 136 independent
effect results from 22,348 experimental studies, isolating the effects of decision-maker gender,
information accessible by the decision maker, and level of motivation leading to decisively
cautious organizational decisions considering gender bias. The study revealed (a) there was a
preference of men for a male-dominated job (substantiating gender-role congruity bias) but no
preference either way for female-dominated jobs, (b) male raters displayed more gender-role
congruity bias than female raters for male-dominated jobs, and (c) when more information about
those being rated was made available, gender-role congruity bias was not reduced other than
when high competence of those being rated was made evident. The baseless perceived
differences between men and women in the workplace counteracted meritocracy and led to an
imbalance of women in leadership. The unfair bias that women experienced is further
exacerbated for WOC, who have had to contend with double jeopardy treatment based upon their
race, in addition to their gender.
The Disparity of Women of Color Promotions
The significance of social construction (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001) on the disparity of
opportunities afforded to those who are not White males cannot be discounted, and throughout
this study, it was very apparent that WOC suffered unjust consequences in senior leadership
promotion opportunities. Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010) argued that due to the density of
barriers created by the combination of sexism and racism, the expansion of WOC into leadership
is a serious problem in the workplace. In an effort to offset the negative impact of the
discriminatory practices, key initiatives have been implemented, though WOC equity in
leadership promotions has not yet been fully realized. Dating as far back as 1991, the Federal
Glass Ceiling Commission was created to investigate organizational discrimination not only
21
against women but minorities as a whole and to identify recommendations to effectively address
the “invisible barrier” that limited access to career opportunities and advancement within
organizations (U.S. Department of Labor, 1995). Davidson (1977) agreed that women face a
“glass ceiling” (U.S. Department of Labor, 1995) throughout their senior-level career attainment
journeys but argues that Black women typically encounter a more dense and less breakable
barrier called a “concrete ceiling” (Wyatt & Sylvester, 2015). McKinsey and Company and
LeanIn (2015) stated implementing diversity programs was intended to bring awareness about
the importance of achieving a diverse workforce and establish an equitable environment for all
parties. Though significant progress has been made to address blatant racism and gender
discrimination, there is still an underrepresentation of WOC in C-suite positions and on boards
due to the slow pace of foundational diversity improvements that help break down the concrete
ceiling, and at the time of this study, the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic at its height, created
further disparities for WOC (Davidson, 1977; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2015;
McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020; Wyatt & Sylvestor, 2015). As the research conducted
by Warner et al. (2018) established, women reflect more than half of all managerial and
professional-level roles, while McKinsey and Company and LeanIn (2020) point out specifically
that they possess 38% of management roles, yet only 4.6%, 14.6%, and 16.9% fill CEO,
executive officer, and board roles within Fortune 500 companies respectively. The
underrepresentation is even far more distinctive for WOC; women of color reflect approximately
38.3% of the entire female workforce yet hold only 12% of management roles (as compared to
White women who represent 61.7% of the entire female workforce and hold 26% of those roles),
.4 % of them are Fortune 500 CEOs, and just 3.2 % of them sit on Fortune 500 Boards (Carter &
Peters, 2016; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020; Warner et al., 2018). Warner et al. (2018)
22
added that over the past few decades, the percentage of women of color versus White women
career advancement progress into mid-management and top management jobs, as well as on
corporate boards, had slowed. Additionally, it was noted that all women are attaining Senior
Vice President and C-suite level positions at a rate of 28% and 21%, respectively. Yet White
women accounted for 23% of Senior Vice President roles and 19% of C-suite level roles attained
as compared to WOC accounting for only 5% and 3% of those roles respectively (McKinsey &
Company & LeanIn, 2020).
In light of McKinsey and Company and LeanIn’s (2020) research, due to the severity of
the Covid-19 pandemic impact, Latinx and Black mothers are more likely to be their family’s
sole breadwinner or to be in a relationship with partners working outside the home during Covid-
19 causing Latinx and Black mothers an additional pressure. The expectations that the dominant
role of women is that of home-makers and family caregivers, is known to be a common systemic
workplace barrier WOC career advancement (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Haines et al., 2016; Hurley &
Choudhary, 2016; Northouse, 2016). Aligned with this barrier, employed Latinx mothers are 1.6
times and working Black mothers are twice as likely as working White mothers to be held
accountable for all childcare and home maintenance (McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020).
Next, though Asian women held 5% more of the highest paying management and professional
jobs than White women (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2018), their success in attaining CEO roles
at Fortune 500 companies, even in industries whereby Asian representation is dominant (such as
technology), is much less than that of White women (.6% versus 6.8% of CEO roles) (Gee &
Peck, 2017; The Wall Street Journal.com, 2021). Gee and Peck (2017) comment that as a
technology hot-spot of the US, the Silicon Valley located in Northern California had much work
to do to improve WOC diversity at all levels, including at the top; its past efforts to attract,
23
retain, and promote Black, Latinx, and Asian talent have failed to reflect its professional
workforce community within its executive ranks. Likewise, in 2020, of the 37 women leading
Fortune 500 Companies from the top, only three represented women of color; Fortune 500
CEOs, Sonia Syngal of Gap Inc., Lisa Su of Advanced Micro Devices, and Joey Wat of Yum!
are all Asian of Indian, Taiwanese, and Chinese descent respectively (Fortune.com, 2020). Yet in
February 2021, Karen Lynch, a White woman, took over as CEO of CVS Health, which
increased the number of women leading Fortune 500 companies to 38. Next, in March 2021,
Rosalind Brewer, a Black woman executive from Starbucks Corporation, was appointed as CEO
of Walgreens Boots Alliance Inc. (Walgreens) (The Wall Street Journal.com, 2021), which
brought the Fortune 500 CEOs who are women of color count up from three to four, out of 39
women. Also, in May 2021, Thasunda Duckett, a Black woman executive and previous CEO of
Chase Consumer Banking, was appointed as CEO of Teachers Insurance and Annuity
Association of America (TIAA), increasing the WOC Fortune 500 CEO count to five, out of 40
women (Fortune.com, 2021). Finally, according to Fortune.com (2021), Vertex Pharmaceuticals
made its debut on the Fortune 500 list in 2021 and Reshma Kewalramini, an Asian woman of
Indian descent, was leading its charge as CEO, which added another WOC to the Fortune 500
CEO list (totaling six) of 41 women. Past Black and Latinx Fortune 500 women CEOs include
former Xerox CEO Ursula Burns and former PG&E CEO Geisha Williams. It is estimated that
women will lead only 7.6% of all Fortune 500 companies by mid-2021, and just 10.5% of those
women Fortune 500 company CEOs will reflect Asian and Black ethnicities (Fortune.com, 2020;
TheWallStreetJounal.com, 2021). As of late 2021, even with 41 Fortune 500s led by women
(8.2%), and six of those were WOC (14.6%), taking into account this information beat the mid-
2021 estimates, coupled with the fact that WOC represent 38.3% of the entire female workforce
24
and hold 12% of the 38% management appointments belonging to women, promotion equity of
women who were Asian, Black, and other non-white racial identities does not exist (Warner et
al., 2018; Carter & Peters, 2016; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020; Fortune.com, 2021).
Racial and Gender Discrimination and its Effect on Women of Color
Omi and Winant (2015) argued that within a society, made of social beings, people feel
the need to determine who is their friend or not and therefore, have established categorizations of
people including gender, nationality, culture, sexuality, religion, and class (to name several) that
tend to be used for justification of inequality, differential treatment, and subordinate status. This
justification leads towards associating oneself to a social hierarchy, which in turn within the
United States, has been affected by race and racism, constituting inequalities linked to White
supremacy (Omi & Winant, 2015). The White supremacy sentiment parallels with Spickard’s
(1992) and Chávez and Guido-Di-Brito’s (1999) findings in that Europeans established
hierarchical groups by physical ability and moral quality, placing Caucasians first in line,
followed by Asians, Native Americans, and then lastly Africans.
The myth of meritocracy (McNamee & Miller, 2018) further supports White supremacy
and male dominancy in that Pinkett et al. (2011) points out meritocracy’s illusiveness in
America. Consideration of the most qualified candidates is in question as to whether or not
decision makers are evaluating candidates based on talent, performance, character, or gender
and/or skin color, due to conscious or unconscious bias. Finally, during daily (even very brief)
interactions between men and women, as well as Whites and non-whites, degrading
communication most often coming from those in power may occur based upon membership in a
marginalized social group (Sue et al., 2008). These microaggressions may be transmitted
automatically and subconsciously (though often dismissed as innocent by those communicating
them) and delivered through dismissive looks, gestures, and tones (Sue et al., 2008). Sue et al.
25
(2008) stress that repeated experiences of devaluation based upon one’s social group
membership can be damaging due to their cumulative nature, resulting in a harmful macro
impact of oppression experienced by the socially devalued groups (Sue, 2017).
Crenshaw (1989) argues that race and gender should not be considered mutually
exclusive and cites discrimination cases whereby intersectionality of gender and race, the
combination of having both as identities, negatively impacts employment experiences of Black
women, and failure to recognize the impact of intersectionality causes injustices to those with
double jeopardy identities (Rosette & Livingston, 2012). The experience of discrimination (or
harassment) based upon race and gender impedes the well-being and career growth of WOC,
more significantly than White women (Benya et al., 2018; Clancy et al., 2017; Hegewisch et al.,
2011; Pew Research Center, 2015; Rosette and Livingston, 2012; Sugerman, 2018). Rosette and
Livingston (2012) define this as double jeopardy, where individuals having more than one
subordinate identity (i.e., Black women, Latinx women, and Asian women) are perceived more
negatively as compared to those with single subordinate identities (i.e., White women, Black
men, Latinx men, and Asian men).
As an example of double jeopardy, in a report released by Stop AAPI Hate, a coalition of
Asian American advocacy groups founded in March 2020 as a result of the worsening Covid-19
pandemic in the United States, it had received over 2,500 reports of anti-Asian discrimination
(Fernando & Mumphrey, 2020). Race was the primary reason suspected for discrimination, with
Chinese people being the ethnic group targeted though 60% of the respondents were not of
Chinese descent. Interestingly, 69.5% of the Stop AAPI Hate respondents were women, 29.1%
were men, and 1.4% were transgender (Fernando & Mumphrey, 2020).
26
Next, according to a study looking at perceptions of women of color competence (Rosette
and Livingston, 2012), its findings confirmed: (a) double jeopardy existed for non-white women
leaders, (b) there is a common perception shared across gender and racial lines that organizations
led by those possessing double jeopardy of identities are more likely to be responsible for a
company’s failure as compared to their male and White female counterparts, and (c) when the
performance of an organization was considered to be a failure, WOC were evaluated more
negatively than men and White women. That study included a total of 228 participants, 50% men
and 50% women, comprised of 164 undergraduate students, 41 graduate students, and 23
additional working adults; the participants were White (98), Black (74), Asian (35), Latinx (8),
and Other (13), and recruited to participate in a 35-minute-long experimental session (Rosette &
Livingson, 2012). Fictitious companies, company executives in charge, and company
performance information was included in articles, along with gender and race specific headshots
of the executives (these were fictitious too) where the participants were asked to rate the
executives’ leadership effectiveness (Rosette & Livingston, 2012), and based upon the rating
results of participants, they depict discriminatory bias against women of color.
Clancy et al. (2017) conducted an internet-based survey study between 2011 and 2015,
including 474 astronomers and planetary scientists (consisting of 11% WOC, 58% White
women, 27% White men, and 4% men of color), whereby it was confirmed that WOC experience
a higher frequency of inappropriate comments, harassment, and assault at work, than White
women. Having a concern of not feeling safe, 18% of WOC as compared to 12% of White
women avoided participating in professional events (identified as being a contributing factor of
missing out on career opportunities due to a hostile climate), and 40% of WOC felt unsafe at
work due to their gender while 28% of the same group also felt unsafe at work due to their race
27
(Clancy et al., 2017). Since many career fields rely upon on-the-job instruction and mentorship
for growth and advancement, harassment can lead WOC to turn down highly-visible projects in
addition to foregoing tenure opportunities to avoid interacting with the perpetrator (Benya et al.,
2018; Hegewisch et al., 2011; Sugerman, 2018). Additionally, a study of 187 Black men (38%)
and Black women (62%) employed at a variety of Houston, Texas based, predominantly White
organizations, was conducted to assess their perception of career opportunities in their
workplaces. Approximately 75% were of the belief that in order to be considered for
management advancement, they needed to have access to those in power (social capital) by
which having a mentor and receiving appropriate training were instrumental (Khosrovani &
Ward, 2011). Yet Khosrovani and Ward (2011) state just less than two-thirds had not been
promoted, due to what many of them claimed was based on racial discrimination, as they were
not afforded the same opportunities that their White counterparts received and were subjected to
biased treatment. If Black women’s (or any racial group) perceptions were that they lack
equitable access to opportunities or rewards, their level of motivation could be negatively
impacted over time while the effect of systemic bias within the environment continued to grow
as well (Dijk, 2020; Khosrovani & Ward, 2011).
The realization of discrimination and harassment can also negatively affect the mental
health of WOC, leading up to and affecting their physical health too. Using Fitzgerald et al.’s
(1995) Sexual Experiences Questionnaire, an examination was conducted analyzing the
relationship among sexual harassment, post-traumatic stress (PTS) symptoms, and psychological
and physical well-being associated to the high-school, college, and work experiences of 95 Asian
and 114 White women enrolled in undergraduate and graduate programs at a state university, all
of whom had reported some level of harassment (Ho et al., 2012). The breakdown of harassment
28
experiences for the entire sample group of women, regardless of color, was 97% experienced at
least one gender harassment event, 96% had unwanted sexual advances made towards them, and
35% confirmed at least one sexual coercion situation occurred (Ho et al., 2012). The specific
type of sexual harassment events (offered as multiple-choice options within the questionnaire)
that were substantiated to be most distressing were as follows: a total of 17% selected, “was
staring, leering, or ogling you in a way that made you feel uncomfortable”, a total of 12%
selected, “touched you in a way that made you feel uncomfortable”, and a total of 11% selected,
“made unwanted attempts to stroke or fondle you” (Ho et al., 2012, p.100). The results of Ho et
al.’s (2012) study suggests that in addition to both sexual harassment frequency and PTS
symptom severities being positively correlated, they also led to depression and overall
psychological and physical symptoms and categorically, Asian women had slightly more severe
PTS symptoms and were more depressed and psychologically distressed overall than their White
counterparts. Furthermore, experiences of discrimination and sexual harassment have been
linked to psychological distress that includes depression, anxiety, substance abuse, eating
disorders, isolation, and also adverse physical health outcomes, including obesity,
gastrointestinal disorders, and reproductive health issues (Littleton et al., 2018; Shaw et al.,
2018).
Experiencing gender and racial bias has been associated with increased rates of obesity,
according to Cozier et al. (2014), who claims the risk of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes,
and death stemming from obesity is greatest for Black women. Obesity in the United States has
increased rapidly over the past several years with Black women facing the most significant
increases; it was estimated that by 2020, over 70% of Black women will be classified as obese
(Cozier et al., 2014). Cozier et al.’s (2014) study of 18,000 Black women under the age of 40 in
29
the United States examined the relationship of incidents of obesity and racism experiences that
were represented through scores created from eight questions asked in 1997 and 2009 (the
questions inquired about everyday racism frequency and lifetime racism, including unfair
treatment at work) coupled with the impact residential racial segregation, using the 2000 and
2010 U.S. Census block group data. In consideration of 4,315 obesity cases cited from 1997
through 2009, having a perception of being mistreated on the job due to race, it was determined
that greater experiences of racism are correlated with higher occurrences of obesity.
According to Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010), extensive leadership research revealed
both promising and not-so promising outlooks regarding the future of women and women of
color leading organizations. They go on to state that regardless of the gender and race barriers in
place within organizational climates, once women and women of color attain top roles, they
prove to be effective at the helm (Eagly, 2007; Sanchez-Hucles & Davis, 2010). Unfortunately,
though evidence is substantial in support of women’s abilities to lead effectively, the following
organizational culture factors work against them (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Sanchez-Hucles & Davis,
2010):
1. Male bosses are preferred over female bosses.
2. Women have consistently and unjustly faced challenges, unlike those faced by men,
to be promoted into higher level roles of responsibility.
3. The perception of women to be seen as more effective leaders than men is negative.
4. Women of color must jump over higher hurdles than White women and men to attain
senior leadership positions due to their intersectionality.
With the significant challenge of overcoming discriminatory and harassment matters, the
odds appear to be stacked against WOC achieving equity elevation.
30
Lack of Mentorship and Sponsorship Opportunities for Women
When it comes to the advancement of WOC in organizations, assistance from others at
the top, including women leaders, in the form of a mentor or sponsor, is often necessary (Davis
& Maldonado, 2015; Khosrovani & Ward, 2011; Kurtulus & Tamaskovic-Devey, 2012; Matsa &
Miller, 2011; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020). Hewlitt et al. (2010) describe a mentor as
an experienced person who provides progressive advice to a less experienced person whereas a
sponsor, as an experienced person, helps a less experienced person gain opportunities for growth,
exposure, and visibility. The lack of proper mentoring, the absence of role models and mentors,
and limited opportunities for social skill development inclusive of branding oneself and
executive relationship building that yields visibility, in addition to implicit bias, have been
identified as critical barriers to women's advancement in leadership (Butkus et al., 2018; Davis &
Maldonado, 2015; Hyun, 2012; Lai & Babcock, 2013; Oguntovinbo, 2014). Of the 40,000
employees, representing 47 companies, who participated in McKinsey and Company and
LeanIn’s (2020) employee experience survey (covering allyship, the state of diversity, and
employee well-being), though more than 60% of employees consider themselves to be WOC
allies, approximately 29% fail to publicly advocate for racial equality, 33% do not confront
discrimination, and only 10% sponsor women of color. Of the senior-level leaders who are
taking action in support of allyship, whereby an ally is an advocate who uses their influence to
help others who are less powerful, McKinsey and Company and LeanIn (2020) stress that: (a)
61% of women versus 42% of men publicly advocate for gender equality, (b) 53% of women as
compared to 40% of men publicly advocate for racial equality, and (c) 38% of women versus
23% of men mentor one or more women of color.
Though women executives statistically advocate on behalf of WOC more frequently than
men do, room for mentorship and allyship improvements are not only required of women and
31
men leaders alike, but overall sponsorship improvements based upon the racial identity of
leadership needs dire attention (Hewlett et al., 2010; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020;
Sherbin & Rashi, 2017). Sponsorship research was conducted through two surveys, seven virtual
strategy sessions, eleven focus groups, and numerous one-on-one interviews among 4,037 men
and women white-collar workers, including multicultural senior leaders, with at least bachelor
degrees and full-time employment at organizations with 5,000 or more employees (Hewlett et al.,
2010; Sherbin & Rashid, 2017). Though 41% of Blacks, 20% Asians, and 18% of Latinx
recognize an obligation to mentor those sharing their identities, only 21% of Blacks, 18% of
Asians, and 25% of Latinx follow through (Hewlett et al., 2010; Sherbin & Rashid, 2017).
Likewise, though 7% of Whites empathize with the notion of the need to mentor women and
minorities in the spirit of strengthening inclusion, only 27% of them follow through (Hewlett et
al., 2010; Sherbin & Rashid, 2017). Based upon the amount of racial and gender bias reflected
towards WOC and the minimal advocacy they receive, it is not surprising that their prominence
in Fortune 500 companies is not more evident.
Benefits of Women of Color in Executive Leadership
A direct correlation between women in leadership and positive performance was
confirmed by the USA Congress Joint Economic Committee (2010). Zenger and Folkman (2012)
surveyed 7,280 public, private, government, and international business leaders by which women
were rated higher in 12 out of 16 leadership qualities, at least the same in three of the four
remaining categories. The only category that men were sightly rated higher than women (a
difference of two mean percentile points) was “develops strategic perspective”. According to
Zenger and Folkman (2012), the 16 leadership qualities have been identified as the most
important leadership effectiveness catalysts and are supported by 30 years of prior research. The
data also revealed the following (Zenger and Folkman, 2012):
32
1. Two of the traits, taking initiative and driving results, that were scored highest on
behalf of women than men (a difference of eight mean percentile points and seven
mean percentile points, respectively), are traits traditionally thought of being
dominantly male strengths.
2. At every level of management, more women were rated as better overall leaders than
their male counterparts; from middle management to the next level, the ratings
increased, and at the highest level of management, the executive level, the mean
percentile scores were at their highest.
This leadership qualities study speaks directly to the fact that when women serve in the highest-
level roles of an organization, their expertise and ability is recognized by those they lead,
support, and inspire; the higher they go, their capabilities as leaders are perceived to be even
more effective than that of their male counterparts (Zenger & Folkman, 2012). The perception
that WOC are not as equally qualified if not more qualified than White men is not supported by
the literature. Therefore, absent blatant discrimination, women of color should be perceived as
talented and capable leaders who can outperform their male counterparts too (Crenshaw, 1989;
Hunt et al., 2014; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2015; Pace, 2018; Rosette and Livingston,
2012; Zenger & Folkman, 2012).
The positive effect of women in senior leadership is complemented when the
concentration of women of color within that organization is high (Eagly and Carli, 2007;
McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2015; Hunt et al., 2014; Pace, 2018; Sanchez-Hucles & Davis,
2010). In an examination of 366 public companies spanning across a variety of industries in the
United Kingdom, Canada, the United States, and Latin America, the connection between
financial results and diversity in top leadership revealed that companies found to be in the top
33
quartile for racial diversity are 35% more likely to have financial returns above their respective
national industry averages and companies in the top quartile for gender diversity are 15% more
likely to have financial returns above their respective national industry averages (Hunt et al.,
2014McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2015). A study conducted across five Texas public
agencies consisting of 198 senior employees, supervisors, and lower managers (out of 815
surveyed) confirmed there is a strong correlation between higher performance and diversity
management coupled with inclusion (Sabharwal, 2014). The results of Sabharwal’s (2014)
research suggest that diversity management alone is not sufficient to promote productive work
environments; greater inclusion of marginalized groups needs to be implemented to best achieve
organizational results. The inherent relationship between increased diversity and inclusion
leading towards improved equity is apparent since within the process of equity itself, recognizing
an imbalance in opportunities exists and continuously striving to improve upon this imbalance is
paramount in achieving equity (Bolger, n.d.). In addition to significant organizational
performance advantages including, stronger talent pools, heightened customer alignment, and
improved decision making, McKinsey and Company, and LeanIn (2020) research uncovered a
statistically significant relationship between leadership reflecting higher diversity and financial
performance.
Women of color are responsible for generating $1 trillion as consumers, $361 billion in
revenue as entrepreneurs (starting up new companies at the rate of four times that of all women-
owned businesses), and it is estimated that by 2060, WOC will make up the majority of women
and likely reflect the majority of the U.S. workforce. It seems reasonable that with a significant
increase in WOC representation among senior business leaders, it can be anticipated that the
global economy can grow more significantly than without an improvement in equity (Pace,
34
2018). Based upon the improved impact that companies gain with more WOC representation, the
negative perceptions that are cast upon WOC, since they possess more than one subordinate
identities (Rosette and Livingston, 2012), are not accurate as indicated by the research and the
promotion restrictions linked to systemically discriminatory practices are irrational. Considering
the positive impact that WOC senior leaders are capable of delivering on behalf of their
organizations, if WOC were to reflect the majority of the U.S. workforce by 2060, as Pace
(2018) suggests, promotion opportunities for WOC into upper-level management should be
significantly improved, and the results of those promotions should benefit all stakeholders.
Efforts to Improve Women of Color Representation in Executive Leadership
In an effort to offset the negative impact of the glass and concrete ceiling effects, several
initiatives have been implemented though WOC equity in leadership roles has not yet been fully
realized. Dating as far back as 1991, the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission was created to
investigate organizational discrimination not only against women, but minorities as a whole and
identify recommendations to effectively address the “invisible barrier” that limited access to
career opportunities and advancement within organizations (U.S. Department of Labor, 1995).
McKinsey and Company and LeanIn (2015) states that implementing of diversity programs was
intended to bring awareness about the importance of achieving a diverse workforce and establish
an equitable environment for all parties.
Though significant progress has been made to address blatant racism and gender
discrimination, there is still an underrepresentation of WOC in C-suite positions, next level
senior leadership roles, and on boards due to the slow pace of foundational diversity
improvements (McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2015). Only .4 % of Fortune 500 CEOs and
3.2 % of Fortune 500 Boards are reflective of WOC compared to 4.2 % of Fortune 500 CEOs
and 13.7 % of Fortune 500 Boards are reflective of White women, respectively (Carter & Peters,
35
2016; Warner et al., 2018). Even highly visible public companies who share their demographics
externally are falling behind. For instance, according to Donnelly (2017), Google’s 2017
employee data revealed that 91% of the employee population is White or Asian while only 31%
of them are women who hold only one in four leadership roles which is supportive of a common
problem recognized across the tech industry where a lack of inclusion for women and minorities
exists. Technology-focused companies commonly face Google’s challenges. According to
Atlassian’s (2018) State of Diversity and Inclusion in the United States: Stats Summary, data of
1,500 tech workers in the United States and 400 tech workers in Silicon Valley (consisting of
54% men, 69% White, 31% non-white, and 56% men, 48% White, and 52% non-white
respectively), staff members are tired of having diversity and inclusion (DI) discussions, have
grown frustrated by the lack of DI improvements, and ultimately are feeling overwhelmed by the
amount of work it takes to address all of the outstanding DI issues. The study’s key findings
include that though 80% of respondents recognized the importance of DI, more than 40% of
respondents believe there is no need for further increases in the number of any underrepresented
groups (Atlassian, 2018). Significant DI progress is stagnant, if not worsened because individual
staff member participation fell by as much as 50% compared to the previous year (Atlassian,
2018). Additionally, Atlassian (2018) reports that there has not been a change in the total number
of companies implementing new initiatives. Overall diversity representation, retention, and sense
of belonging among underrepresented groups remains below 30%.
Quotas are identified as gender and racial equality improvement mechanisms as they are
seen as capable in breaking through tough barriers (Catalyst, 2013; Corporate Boards Taking
Steps to Promote Diversity, 2012; Mölders et al., 2018; Sojo et al., 2016; Terjesen et al., 2016).
De Beaufort et al., (2014) reference Catalyst’s (2013) report of 12 countries (i.e., German,
36
Norway, Finland, Quebec in Canada, Israel, Italy, Spain, Iceland, Belgium, France, Kenya, and
the Netherlands) that implementing quotas. As a result of quota implementation, an increase in
the representation of women in the boardroom is perceived as being effective (De Beaufort et al.,
2014). As a successful example, De Beaufort et al. (2014) reflect on Norway’s four-year increase
from 18% to 40.3% women representation in its company’s boardrooms. Next, in a survey of
U.S. based public companies consisting of 1,850 chairs and governance committees plus 697
Corporate Board Member Research Panel directors, at least 75% of them confirmed even without
legislation, diversity improvements including quotas have been put in place over a period of a
few years and 80% of them recognize the value of race and gender diversity in their ranks
(Catalyst, 2013; Corporate Boards Taking Steps to Promote Diversity, 2012).
Thomas and Reese (2019) communicate that in support of addressing the lack of female
directors sitting on the boards of publicly-held companies headquartered in California, Governor
Jerry Brown signed legislation to this effect; these companies were required to have at least one
female on their board of directors no later than December 31, 2019. Also, no later than
December 31, 2021, if there are six or more directors on the board, there will need to be a
minimum of three females, if there are five directors, there will need to be at least two females,
and if there are four or fewer directors, then one must be a female (Thomas & Reese, 2019). It is
hard to predict if this new legislation will be successful in significantly improving equity beyond
the presence of more female representation on boards as there appears to be no accountability
regarding parallel improvements in inclusion for women nor parallel improvements specifically
for WOC. Surprisingly, what is already known is that even with an increase in the number of
female directors sitting on a board, companies can suffer a decrease in market value, according
to Solal and Snellman (2019), based upon their examination of 14 years of U.S. public company
37
investor panel responses that evaluated the relationship between gender diversity and firm value
(an analysis of 19,418 firm-year data sets including 1,889 unique firms occurred). Additionally,
for those firms recognized for their diversity initiatives, this negative effect is even greater since
investors may perceive the board appointment was made specifically for diversity reasons
(perhaps even tokenism), rather than to increase shareholder value (Solal & Snellman, 2019),
regardless that women executives are rated higher than men in developing others, building
relationships, and exhibiting integrity, all of which are favorable traits nonetheless in establishing
company value (Zenger & Folkman, 2012).
Federally mandated, organizationally instituted, and individually stimulated initiatives to
increase opportunities for WOC to hold senior leadership roles have made some progress
towards improving equity though they have been met with resistance. In light of WOC equity in
senior leadership roles has not been fully achieved, it is crucial that this problem is effectively
addressed through corrective actions.
Defiance of the Odds: Women of Color in Executive Leadership Success
Taking into account examples of progress made through the ranks in government and in
publicly traded businesses is a viable method that inspiring WOC leaders could benefit from,
though there still appears to be a disproportionate number of WOC in high-ranking roles. For
example, on January 20, 2021, Kamala Harris was sworn into office as the Vice President of the
United States, making history as the first female, Black, and Asian to do so (Relman, 2020).
Relman (2020) reports that she also was the first woman of color to serve as San Francisco,
California’s district attorney and California’s attorney general, before becoming in 2016 the
second Black woman and first Asian woman ever to serve in the U.S. Senate. Carol Moseley
Braun became the first Black woman to be elected to the Senate in 1992, and Patsy Mink became
the first Asian woman in 1964 and Shirley Chisholm became the first Black woman in 1968
38
elected to Congress (Pew Research Center, 2021). Vice President Harris’ place in history is
shared by the fact that the highest percentage of women making up 27% of the 117
th
US
Congress membership, including the highest number of women of color (51), occurred when
Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, swore them in on January 3, 2021 (LATimes.com, 2020;
Pew Research Center, 2021).
Starbucks Corporation announced that Mellody Hobson would serve as the company’s next
non-executive chair of its board of directors starting in March 2021. She will become the only
Black woman chairperson of an S&P 500 company (Forbes, 2020; Starbucks.com, 2020).
According to Starbucks (2020), Hobson has served on its board of directors for 15 years, is the co-
CEO of Ariel Investments, a global value-based asset management firm and serves as its publicly
traded mutual funds Chairman of the Board, and also serves as a director of JPMorgan Chase.
Hobson’s appointment is not the only recent “first” for S&P 500 boards. As of 2020, all S&P 500
companies have at least one woman on the board, of the new directors appointed to boards, 47%
of them are women (10% of those are women of color) (Spencer Stewart, 2021). The aggregate
of women directors across all boards is 28%, the highest percentage to date (Spencer Stewart,
2021). Next, a study seeking to assess women’s access to and tenure in the highest-level
leadership positions through the evaluation of how a glass cliff, the saviour effect, and the
diversity of the decision maker affected such access, was conducted through an evaluation of 20
years of CEO transitions in Fortune 500 companies (Cook & Glass, 2014). Ryan and Haslam
(2005) define a glass cliff as a phenomenon in struggling companies where women are more
likely than men to be handed the company’s helm. The savior effect describes when a male
leader will be brought in to save a company being led by a woman, as the company faces
declining growth and/or when a female leader is given less time to prove themself compared to a
39
man, which leads to shorter tenures for women (Cook & Glass, 2014). According to Cook and
Glass (2014), the study’s findings reveal: (a) there is nothing statistically significant that supports
the presence of a glass cliff, (b) when a firm experiences negative results (including shareholder
return), there is only a slight possibility that the saviour effect occurs, and (c) there is a positive
correlation between women CEO having longer tenures and a larger proportion of women on the
board of directors. Cook and Glass’ (2014) study added a positive outlook regarding the value
that future improvements in WOC board representation should have on the representation of
WOC in senior leadership since the more WOC board directors there are, the more likely WOC
senior leaders there are in the organization representative of that board of directors.
Seeking advice and understanding perspectives from women of color who attained high-
level leadership roles through successful navigation within systemically biased workplaces
towards their career advancements may have proved advantageous for up-and-coming WOC
leaders. Though WOC should not be subjected to the adverse effects of the concrete ceiling
(Davidson, 1977) (Wyatt & Silvester, 2015), its formidable navigation is possible. Eagly and
Carli (2007) suggest to better reflect the variety of barriers faced by individuals (or groups like
WOC) throughout their leadership journeys and the complexities involved (similar to systemic
gender and racial bias within the workplace), the concrete ceiling may be more accurately
reflected using a labyrinth metaphor. They argue that “passage through a labyrinth is not simple
or direct, but requires persistence, awareness of one’s progress, and a careful analysis of the
puzzles that lie ahead” (Eagly & Carli, 2007, p.63).
In Davis and Maldanado’s (2015) study examining the experiences of five Black women
who obtained leadership roles at the president, vice president, and dean levels within academic
organizations, the importance of providing guidance to other Black women aimed in support of
40
the growth and success of future Black women leaders was stressed. The study's findings pointed
out that exclusion from informal social networks including the “good old boys club” was a norm
for Black women, yet the study’s participants confirmed that Black women were able to build
relationships with sponsors who were White men and decision makers with authority. These
relationships did open up doors to career opportunities for the Black women leaders. With the
realization that the lack of mentoring opportunities was a significant barrier to career
advancement for women and people of color, the study’s participants recognized they needed to
“pay it forward” by providing a roadmap of sorts to help other up and coming Black women
leaders deal with workplace gender and race discrimination. One participant put into perspective,
“We need to recognize that there is a game. There is the same old game being played, just with
different pieces. We are victims of the race card. Just like we have benefited from the race card
we are also victims of it…we are going to empower a different group of people” (Davis &
Maldanado, 2015, p.16).
According to Raconteur.net (2020), within fintech, only 37 % are women. Of that group,
19% have reached the C-suite level; systemic gender and racial diversity barrier-forming issues,
inclusive of pro-male and pro-White biases, continue to hinder the advancement of women in
fintech. Kahina van Dyke, a Black woman fintech executive, discovered that as she progressed
through leadership roles at Facebook, Mastercard, and Ripple, the pool of women (and women of
color in particular) team members she collaborated with dwindled (Raconteur.net, 2020).
Raconteur.net (2020) states that to overcome the challenges of being the only woman (and
woman of color) in the boardroom, van Dyke embraced her femininity as a unique quality and
strength while working endlessly hard to outperform her male counterparts to pave the way for
other women. Cristina Junqueira, a Latinx woman fintech executive whose company, Nubank,
41
became the first company globally with a female co-founder to hit the $10-billion milestone,
agrees with van Dyke’s use of femininity as a quality and strength (Raconteur.net, 2020). Her
determination to have a protagonist attitude throughout her career was crucial to her success but
she admits it was disheartening that others cared more about how she acted and looked
(suggesting that she needed to fit in like the other male executives) as opposed to her overall
impact. Junqueira became disillusioned as the only woman executive at the largest private
banking group in Brazil following the constant coaching to look and act more like a man in
addition to continuous rejections of her proposals. These factors became her catalyst to launch
Nubank.
Women of color progress in attaining senior leadership roles within non-inclusive and
severely biased organizational cultures, whether in the public or private sector, has been
marginal at best at improving WOC promotion equity at the highest levels within Fortune 500
(and other highly visible) organizations. Yet real progressive momentum can prove reliable
across employers only when gender and race biased barriers are mitigated further through
recalibrating environmental elements that influence WOC career advancement, offering WOC
access to resources and more promotion opportunities, and the integration of unbiased treatment
WOC deserve and have a right to. This study’s conceptual framework helps to put WOC
promotion equity achievement into perspective.
Conceptual Framework
For this study, the conceptual framework, which Maxwell (2013) describes as the
philosophical and methodological paradigms useful to inform research, stems from these
sources: (a) experiential knowledge, (b) existing research and theory, (c) exploratory research,
and (d) thought experiments. While considering the literature review research, supportive or
42
detrimental career achievement campaigns were launched on behalf of women of color (WOC)
who had an end goal of pursuing senior leadership role attainment within Fortune 500 or
similarly large companies. Social cognitive theory (SCT) formed this study’s framework as a
motivational lens whereby a person’s intrapersonal, behavioral, and environmental influences
combined to create a co-interdependent relationship routed in triadic reciprocal causation
(Bandura, 2012). The internalized (self-regulating) belief that a person is capable of recognizing,
organizing, and executing a course of action yielding a desired outcome is self-efficacy (Bandura,
1997).
As the dominant construct derived from SCT, self-efficacy is the strongest predictor of
one’s behavior since experiential information affects assessments of an individual’s future
performance attainments (Bandura, 1977; 2012). According to Bandura (2012), there are four
self-efficacy tenets of capability development:
1. Experience mastery comes from perseverance in overcoming barriers to prevent a
lack of resilience to deal with setbacks and failures. Failure management should be
learned in such a manner that one is not demoralized by its effects (and they can learn
and grow from such failures). Failure management may not be applicable for WOC
working in organizations with embedded systemic bias as the cumulative effects of
gender and race-related discriminatory treatment can negatively affect a WOC’s
motivation to learn (Dijk, 2020; Sue et al., 2008).
2. Social modeling, learning through the observation of successes that others appearing
similar to oneself achieve, enables individuals to gain self-confidence in their own
abilities to succeed. For WOC, an increase in learning can be maximized through
mentorship or sponsorship with other senior WOC, White women, or men, all of
43
whom have access to power (Hewlett et al., 2010; Sherbin & Rashid, 2017). Yet due
to the underrepresentation of WOC in senior leadership coupled with the need for
those WOC already in senior leadership roles to mentor more WOC, it does not
appear likely that future WOC leaders will have ample opportunities for social
modeling (Davis & Maldonado, 2015; Hewlett et al., 2010; Khosrovani & Ward,
2011; Kurtulus & Tamaskovic-Devey, 2012; Matsa & Miller, 2011; McKinsey &
Company & LeanIn, 2020; Sherbin & Rashid, 2017).
3. Social persuasion is influential in that when others convince someone to believe in
their ability to attain success, their perseverance is stronger when challenges arise and
they are encouraged to use self-improvement as the measure of success (versus
beating the competition). In consideration of the abundance of gender and race
discrimination within work environments, WOC appear to be at a disadvantage in
benefiting from social persuasion as compared to their White counterparts (Eagly &
Carli, 2007; Hurley & Choudhar, 2016; Northouse, 2015; Rosette & Livingston,
2012; Zimmer, 2015).
4. Reducing anxiety and depression, increasing physical strength and stamina, and
redirecting negative affective or physiological states help to strengthen efficacy
beliefs. For WOC, working under conditions where they experience more overall
discrimination and harassment than White women, and women are forced to deal with
much more occurrences of sexual harassment than men, it seems to be inequitable
that WOC should possess a heightened ability to maintain anxiety and depression
more so than others are capable of (Ho et al., 2012). The effects of discrimination and
44
sexual harassment on WOC lead to depression and overall psychological and physical
symptoms (Ho et al., 2012; Littleton et al., 2018; Shaw et al., 2018).
The evolution of the prominent systemic WOC executive promotion inequality problem
forms a non-inclusive organizational culture established by White men (inclusive of
discriminatory race practices and sexism) that culminates in a heightened injustice WOC face
due to their intersectionality (Haines et al., 2016; Ladson-Billings, 2013). Through SCT’s
application, the systemic WOC promotion inequality issue can emerge as an equity improvement
catalyst relative to empathetically understanding and concentrating on correcting the unfair
outcomes intersectionality of gender and race produces for WOC, as it is the right thing to do.
There are several examples of internal organizational and external to the organization
initiatives (i.e., diversity programs, mentoring, sponsorship, government mandated employment
laws, etc.) aimed at improving social justice for women and minorities, without significant
success as is evidenced based upon the number of White males still dominating executive
leadership roles (Fortune.com, 2020; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020; Warner et al.,
2018). Therefore, with SCT in mind, it seemed reasonable that when organizations can
experience first-hand the performance benefits that WOC leadership inspires, social justice
shortcomings can improve exponentially. Work environments can be positively stimulated
through a heightened level of esprit de corps whereby WOC and their teams collectively excel
well together, especially since WOC senior leadership has been recognized in a positive results-
oriented light (Hunt et al., 2014; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2015; Pace, 2018; Zenger &
Folkman, 2012).
Within the SCT model, in alignment with social networking advancements, people are
afforded substantial control over their social interactions, communication, self-education, how
45
they relate with others, and how they conduct their business affairs (Bandura, 2012). According
to Bandura (2012), this theory reflects knowledge structure acquisition inclusive of cognitive,
social, and emotional tendencies. Furthermore, SCT expands its human agency to collective
agency whereby a group’s shared beliefs translate to a shared efficacy that together, capitalizing
on their shared knowledge, skills, and the dynamics of their team, they can attain desired results
(Bandura, 2000). Bandura (1999) rationalizes that there is a positive correlation between
perceived collective efficacy and greater performance results as increased motivation, adeptness
in overcoming setbacks, and stress resilience collectively combines their potency, becoming
more powerful than that of the WOC’s self-efficacy on its own.
The nature of the status of women of color representation in senior leadership is
influenced by questionable ethics regarding career advancement barriers related to gender role
differences (social norms), the resulting prejudice associated with those differences, racial
discrimination, the effects of double jeopardy, and fear of losing control from White men (Eagly
& Carli, 2007; Hurley & Choudhar, 2016; Northouse, 2015; Rosette & Livingston, 2012;
Zimmer, 2015). Intersectionality was prominent to the challenges WOC senior leadership
candidates and leaders faced, as portrayed in existing research and this study. Though Guinier
and Torres (2003) point out that solidarity of people sharing similar identities or beliefs can be
useful for social and cultural purposes leading to benefits, those same people have the right to be
individuals with unique perspectives and lifestyles, not reflective by the membership of their
shared identities with others (which may develop into stereotypes) (Ladson-Billings, 2013). Yet
WOC employed by companies with environmental barriers preventing them from equity in
leadership promotability may not be afforded that right.
46
With scrutinization of the bias against WOC leaders and the associated barriers that
prevent promotion equity, through the SCT lens, key concepts including workplace factors,
personal characteristics, and other personal attributes (i.e., homelife, friends, culture, religion,
and community) are factors relevant to existing pertinent research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) and
this study.
Figure 1 captures this framework visually, reflecting how SCT and key concepts
stemming from existing and new research form an interrelationship and are given equal
consideration when combined as contributors of WOC senior leadership promotion equity.
47
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework – Women of Color Senior Leadership Promotion Equity
-
A better understanding of the complex relationships (among personal, behavioral, and
environment determinants) of SCT coupled with the key concepts should lead towards WOC
senior leadership promotion equity. Starting with the right side of the figure above, new (the
findings developed from the participant interviews) and existing research (the findings reviewed
in the literature review) influence the application of social cognitive theory. Self-efficacy, even
when high, alone is not effective and though together with collective efficacy have a more
substantial impact on the organization’s systemic bias (embedded within the environmental
WOC Senior Leadership Promotion Equity
Social
Cognitive
Theory
(SCT)
Key
Concepts
1. Workplace factors
- implicit bias
- non-implicit bias
- legislation
- public pressure
2. Personal Characteristics
- education
- experience
- motivation
3. Other Factors
- family
- culture
- community
KEY
Personal
Determinants
Behavioral
Determinants
Environmental
Determinants
EFFICACIES
SELF
SCT
48
determinants), the environmental determinant’s influence is strong. Next, on the left side of the
figure, both new research and existing research result in which key concepts are addressed for
women of color (WOC) higher-level promotion candidates. Finally, in the middle of the figure,
the interrelationship between SCT and the key concepts (workplace bias, WOC leaders’ work
experience, etc.) are assessed in an effort to lead toward outcomes necessary for WOC senior
leadership promotion equity to exist.
Operation of this conceptual framework begins with an analysis of research related
specifically to SCT by which all determinants were applicable to this study’s problem of
practice. Next, a literature review about WOC and the effect that workplace factors, personal
characteristics, and other factors had on their promotability into senior leadership roles
commences. Analysis of key concepts needed to be determined as beneficial or detrimental to a
WOC’s career based upon many factors, including the glass ceiling effect barriers faced, density
of discrimination experienced, and whether or not mentoring, allyship and sponsorship are
extended. Onwards, the key concepts are assessed using an SCT lens, leading to the discovery of
ways to improve WOC promotion equity, and ultimately achieving it.
Conclusion
As a result of this literature review, the research support there is bias against and negative
effects experienced by WOC, as well as room for improvement relative to efforts to address
senior leadership promotion equity. Therefore, addressing this Fortune 500 (and other high-
performing organization) high-level leadership ranks inequity requires further analysis of those
who have been directly impacted or have the potential of having been directly impacted by bias
and discrimination due to their intersectionality of gender and race while also serving in these or
similar capacities.
49
Chapter Three: Methodology
This study’s purpose explored the experiences of women of color, based upon their
attainment of senior level positions within Fortune 500 companies (or highly recognizable
branded organizations) and examined their perceptions regarding workplace gender and race
bias, how they overcame barriers, and how they valued support that may have shaped their
ascent into upper-level leadership. This chapter described the qualitative research approach,
including the research setting, the researcher, sample and population recruitment approach, data
collection and analysis, and validity strategies that I used to conduct this study.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided this qualitative study:
1. What workplace factors, if any, do women of color leaders perceive they encountered
that either supported or hindered them throughout their career journeys?
2. How do successful women of color leaders perceive the importance of help from other
professionals in preparation for their promotability as women of color in senior level
management?
Overview of Design
The research design used in this study was qualitative. The research process was flexible,
and the data collected within the field was used to make sense of its meaning to answer the
Research Questions (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Due to the central phenomenon explored
consisting of the self-expression experiences (Creswell & Creswell, 2018) of WOC, this could
aid other WOC in approaching their attainment journey towards executive leadership roles while
organizations could use these experiences to support working towards improved equity. In
support of addressing the study’s key concepts (inclusive of workplace factors, personal
50
characteristics, and other personal attributes like culture and community), more details regarding
the data sources were included in Table 1.
Table 1
Data Sources
Research Questions Interviews
RQ1: What
workplace factors, if
any, do women of
color leaders
perceive they
encountered that
either supported or
hindered them
throughout their
career journeys?
There were four interview questions and 13 anticipated probing questions that
focused on workplace factors that supported or hindered WOC leaders
throughout their careers.
RQ2: How do
successful women of
color leaders
perceive the
importance of help
from other
professionals in
preparation for their
promotability as
women of color into
senior level
management?
There were four interview questions and 12 anticipated probing questions that
focused on workplace experiences that either supported or hindered
participants’ careers.
51
Research Setting
Since America’s largest companies, the Fortune 500, represented two-thirds of the U.S.
economy (inclusive of an aggregate $14.2 trillion in revenue in 2020), its status and visibility
among all U.S. companies made it an attractive setting for this research. Within Fortune 500
companies, I targeted WOC holding C-level executive or next level executive or next level
leader (i.e., director or above) positions to gain expertise that can appropriately address my
research questions. Due to the foreseen challenge of a small population to draw upon, I also
targeted WOC, at the same level of leadership, within highly recognizable branded organizations
that may not currently be officially recognized as Fortune 500 companies. Utilizing my existing
personal and professional social media networks that included C-level leaders, human resources
experts, and diversity executives within Fortune 500 companies and other large businesses, in
addition to approaching two decades worth of international business contacts I have made, I was
able to capitalize directly on my connections, and my network’s connections to identify and
solicit willing participants.
The Researcher
The researcher was the key instrument and one of the vital core attributes of qualitative
research (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). As the researcher in this study, I was accountable for
identifying and selecting the site and sample, developing the interview protocols, transcribing the
interviews, and analyzing the data. With my identity in mind, I had a lot of empathy for WOC. I
am a cisgender, heterosexual, White, and Jewish male. My ethnicity is European Jewish and I
was not personally negatively impacted by anti-Semitism to the extent that some of my relatives
were. In particular for women, being raised by a single mother affected by intersectionality
herself (as a White woman and a Jew), I was genuinely concerned about the career limitations
52
for Jewish women, yet their predicament did not appear to be as dire as that of women of color.
With that said, a thorough sense of justice for everybody, regardless of their perceived
differences, rested at the core of my existence. I am a father and grandfather to Guatemalan-
American, Thai-American, and Filipino-American girls. I was acutely aware of the complexities
their intersectionality identities may result in. Therefore, I could appreciate how career barriers
within Fortune 500 companies were potential roadblocks for my family too.
My life experiences with women in my family, friends, and colleagues who were Black,
Asian, Latinx, and other persons of color, has prepared me well to be accepting and
compassionate toward the societal challenges they faced, both personally and professionally.
Therefore, I did not think my outlook, behaviors, and practices were well aligned with the
generalization of perspectives of White men, specifically anchored to the biases against women
of color as the research suggested in this study. Yet I thought about Bogler’s (n.d.) definition of
equity by which it is defined as a process that enables those with marginalized identities to have
the opportunity for growth. Since I have not walked a mile in the shoes of women of color per se,
I cannot claim to have known exactly what they have experienced.
In my professional experience, I recognized that all of the companies I have been
employed by, even those claiming to not have many diversity-related issues, generally have
misunderstood what inclusion and equity mean and would not be able to back up that they have
truly inclusive workplace cultures whereby everybody is afforded the same opportunities
regardless of their social identities. As I could not claim to have experienced what WOC have
experienced throughout their careers, I was dependent upon WOC leadership for further
enlightenment in the past, just as I still am presently. Because White men have historically
dictated workplace policy and practice (Haines et al., 2016), and the interests of marginalized
53
groups and Whites should align in support of social justice, change could occur once White men,
including me, demonstrated empathy and action on behalf and for WOC, and promoted allyship
and sponsorship for them (McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020; Hewlitt et al., 2010).
Data Sources
For this study, WOC participant expressions were valued through a transformative
worldview lens (Maxwell, 2013). While considering the assumptions about what their reality was
through their learned experiences and what they knew was considered right versus wrong
(Saunders, 2019) associated with WOC career advancement, created either a supportive or
detrimental career achievement campaign. Using an interview protocol for consistency
(Burkholder et al., 2019), I conducted virtual interviews with the participants since the central
phenomenon explored consisted of their self-expression experiences (Creswell & Creswell,
2018).
Interviews
The interviews took no more than 90 minutes. They were conducted at convenient early
morning or evening times for the participants’ convenience, as to minimize interference with
their workday or personal schedules. Aligned with Burkholder et al.’s (2019) semi-structured
interview, the planned flow of open-ended interview questions (inclusive of anticipated probes)
that anticipated each participant’s response to be unique (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), were
derived from my research questions. The semi-structured interview process worked well in
examining how factors, experiences, or other dynamics supported or hindered women of color
(WOC) leaders’ ascent into senior leadership positions at Fortune 500 companies (or highly
recognizable branded organizations that may not currently be recognized as Fortune 500
companies). Consistent with Bogdan and Biklen (2007)’s recommendation that good interviews
54
include having transcripts that capture details, a detailed transcript was created. Further, Patton
(2002) points out that note taking, during the interview, on an ongoing basis, allows the
formulation of new questions based upon the interviewee’s responses. Therefore, my reliance on
Zoom’s video recording tool and Rev.com’s transcription service best ensured my capture of the
interview communication activity, verbatim, while I was also taking field notes, as not to miss
important data. Finally, I reviewed transcripts and compared them to the audio to address any
discrepancies.
Participants
In alignment with Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) recommendation of participant selection
within qualitative research, participants were purposefully selected in a non-random fashion.
Creswell and Creswell (2016) suggest that for phenomenological research, three to ten
participants should be included in the study. Participants were identified through my personal,
professional, and social media connections. Introductions were made by my connections if I did
not already know the participants. I followed-up directly via email with all participants. Women
of color representing top-level leaders and near future pipeline talent who were qualified and
eligible to be promoted into senior leadership positions within Fortune 500 companies (or highly
recognizable branded organizations) were my focus to best ensure answers to my research
questions were reflective of the human-side of data. I sought out a minimum of six (representing
at least three different races) to make sure I had adequate data to speak to my research questions
(see Table 2). Finally, as part of the recruitment strategy, in exchange for their participation and
time, participants were provided $50.00 Amazon e-gift cards.
55
Table 2
Participants
Name
(Pseudo
name)
Position level Industry Race Years of experience
Vicky Vice President Services Asian 21
Lisa Senior Director Entertainment Black 28
Tina Director Technology Black/Asian 25
Patty Vice President Manufacturing Other 20
Mandy
Gloria
Senior Vice President
Director
Transportation
Distribution
Latinx
Asian
38
20
Instrumentation
To ensure interview consistency, an interview protocol (Burkholder et al., 2019) was
used. In support of addressing the study’s key concepts (inclusive of workplace factors, personal
characteristics, and other personal attributes like cultural and community experiences stemming
from existing literature), the interview questions were designed accordingly. There were four
interview questions and 13 probing questions focused on workplace factors that either supported
or hindered participants throughout their careers, that would address the first research question,
“What workplace factors, if any, do women of color leaders perceive they encountered that either
supported or hindered them throughout their career journeys?” Next (and finally), there were
four interview questions and 12 probing questions that assisted in identifying the perception
WOC have regarding the importance of help from other professionals to get ahead that parallel
56
the first research question, “How do successful women of color leaders perceive the importance
of help from other professionals in preparation for their promotability as women of color into
senior level management?” The interview protocol was referenced in Appendix A.
Data Collection Procedures
Following the institutional review board’s (IRB) approval of my study’s plan (Creswell
& Creswell, 2018), the data collection process commenced. After identifying potential
candidates through networking with my professional and personal contacts, I recruited women of
color candidates representing a variety of diverse racial and ethnicity backgrounds. Once the
final six potential participants had been identified and vetted through email and social media chat
interaction to ensure that they met the minimum requirements of this study (inclusive that they
self-identified as an other-than White woman, were currently employed or had been previously
employed at Fortune 500 or other well-branded organizations, etc.), the next steps taken included
the following:
1. Each participant was emailed an introductory paragraph that was copied directly from
the first paragraph of my interview protocol’s (Burkholder et al., 2019) introductory
section.
2. Each participant was invited to schedule a five-to-ten-minute conversation via phone
or Zoom to provide an opportunity for their questions about the interview or
associated data collection process to be answered.
3. In adherence with the IRB’s requirements, an information sheet was provided to each
participant via email. The information sheet included participation risks, a guarantee
of confidentiality, withdrawal rights, and contacts if concerns arose regarding the
study (Creswell & Crewsell, 2018).
57
4. Once each of the participant’s questions were addressed, via email, phone, or Zoom
call, I requested that we set up a 90-minute interview at a time that was convenient
for them, and that they provide me with their availability during the week of July 26,
2021 or August 15, 2021. If neither week was convenient, I remained flexible in order
to best accommodate their schedules.
5. I sent Zoom meeting links and calendar invites to each of the participants.
6. I sent out two email reminders a week prior to and a day prior to the scheduled
interview just in case there were any last-minute changes that needed to be
accommodated.
7. Once the interview date and time arrived for each participant, prior to beginning the
interview:
(a) I reminded the participant that I would be requesting to film and record both video
and audio portions of the interview.
(b) While using my interview protocol as a guide, I reminded them of their rights to
confidentiality.
(c) I also stated that the recordings would only be used for transcriptions purposes
(the raw data being their unedited responses) and I offered to provide them with a
copy of their transcript if they wanted it. I let them know that it was my intent to
electronically submit the recorded video and audio files to a professional
transcription service provider immediately following the interview.
8. Prior to officially starting the recording of the interview via Zoom, I asked permission
to record by which they agreed.
58
9. During the interview, I took notes as appropriate in order to identify where follow-up
questions could be needed or to clarify their responses to my inquiries should I have
missed something.
10. Once the interview was completed, I thanked the participant and asked that should
they have any follow-up questions for me regarding the study, I would be pleased to
address them.
11. I set up each participant interview recording in the appropriate submission format
required by the transcription service and submitted my request accordingly.
Weiss (1994) suggests that the transcription of everything allows the mining of
information as needed, and that recordings (audio and/or video) faithfully support transcription.
Also, an essential characteristic of a good interview included having transcripts that included
ample details and examples (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). As the researcher, I established a mutual
understanding with the participants regarding the data collection process.
Data Analysis
The data for this study included interviews that were recorded and transcribed, in addition
to research and reflection notes, and reliance upon deductive data analysis (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). The audio and video interviews were conducted and recorded through Zoom, and then
transcribed via Rev.com’s service. The research and reflection notes were intermittently taken
before, during, and following the interviews in order to flag topics needing further attention. I
deductively analyzed the responses to my research questions and identified themes, with the
process continuing until a comprehensive set of themes existed. As recommended by Creswell
and Creswell (2018), selective reduction of the data occurred to highlight the most important
points while disregarding less important information to narrow down to no more than seven
59
themes. Elemental coding methodology, including NVivo coding (organizing it and writing a
word representing a category in the margins), and then generating participant and setting
descriptions, followed by themes (descriptive coding) commenced (Creswell & Creswell, 2018;
Saldaña, 2016). According to Saldaña (2016), selecting a coding method is typically driven by
the type of research question addressed, and NVivo coding was appropriate for honoring the
participant’s words. As the researcher, annotation of the noteworthiness of participant thoughts
and experiences using NVivo coding helped develop and synthesize the meaning of their
messages (Saldaña, 2016). Once the elemental coding was completed, the code mapping
(reorganizing the full set of codes formed into themes) (Saldaña, 2016) took place, which
resulted in compression into categories and ultimately, narrowed down to one theme for
Research Question 1 and two themes for Research Question 2.
Validity and Reliability
To understand the personal and professional experiences that guided WOC leaders along
their career track, the research questions reflect what Maxwell (2013) describes as the heart of
research, in that they influence all parts of the study. In support of addressing the study’s key
concepts (inclusive of workplace factors, personal characteristics, and other personal attributes
like culture and community), the interview questions were designed accordingly. They aligned
with the conceptual framework as it valued WOC participant expressions through a
transformative worldview lens focused specifically on those experiencing injustice (Maxwell,
2013; Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Next, the interview protocol ensured that all interviewed
participants had a consistent tool used to guide the process (Burkholder et al., 2019). Finally,
having all interviews conducted and recorded via Zoom, and then transcribed via Rev.com’s
60
service, solidified the data collection process as Weiss (1994) suggested since it allowed mining
of information as needed and that recordings faithfully support transcription.
According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), to best ensure that the interview questions are
good, using pilot interviews can assist in eliminating the bad questions. Prior to conducting the
actual research, I conducted two separate pilot interviews with women of color, who at the time
of the study, currently held or previously held senior leadership roles within Fortune 500
companies. Also, as a result of conducting pilot interviews, for those recruits who did participate
in the actual study, the questioning came across more naturally and time management of the
specific set of questions and ideal probing questions that have already been established, were
more effectively handled (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2002). Aligned with Burkholder et
al.’s (2019) semi-structured interview, the planned flow of open-ended interview questions
(inclusive of anticipated probes) that expect each participant’s response to be unique (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016), were derived from my research questions. The semi-structured interview process
worked well in examining how factors, experiences, or other dynamics supported or hindered
women of color leaders’ ascent into senior leadership positions at Fortune 500 companies (or
highly recognizable branded organizations).
The data and findings should reflect a high-level of credibility across Fortune 500
companies considering that the data were collected from participants’ lenses, representative of
Fortune 500 (or other highly recognizable branded) company WOC leaders engaged in
interactive conversations with the researcher to strengthen trustworthiness (Lincoln & Guba,
1985). The research’s validity seemed reasonable because the applicability towards career
advancement, other marginalized people inequality, and workforce planning studies appears to be
vast.
61
Ethics
The institutional review board (IRB) reviewed my study’s plan (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). As part of the IRB approval process, an information sheet was required to be provided to
participants. The information sheet included participation risks, a guarantee of confidentiality,
withdrawal rights, and contacts if concerns arose regarding the study (Creswell & Crewsell,
2018). I reminded the participants of their right (since they were volunteers) to decline to answer
any interview questions they did not want to answer and that they could withdraw from the
interview at any time in their confirmation email regarding their interview appointment time and
also just before commencing the interviews. Because there was a guarantee of confidentiality and
full disclosure of contacts that can be reached regarding participants’ concerns regarding the
study, there was a sense of security and trustworthiness for those participating in the study. To
maintain the highest level of data integrity, I requested to record interviews via Zoom, that the
recordings would only be used for transcription purposes (through another service), and
committed to keeping personal information strictly confidential.
Limitations and Delimitations
Though I have experienced and embraced a broadened range of perspectives due to the
diverse group of family members, friends, and others that have accepted me as one of their own,
and vice versa, I realized I might have been seen by participants as a White man, first and
foremost. As I planned to pursue this research, I recognized I may have had biases, similar to
many White people, that included thinking that all individuals, regardless of gender and race, can
succeed based upon their desire to do so without giving more consideration of the barriers they
faced and how unfair it was. It would have been too risky to minimize the strong influence social
identification yielded so I have had to respect it abundantly. With that said, it might have proven
62
difficult to earn the trust of the participants which potentially could have affected the level of
truthfulness in their responses to my research questions. This was likely to have been the most
significant limitation of this study since not only the research I reviewed could be biased if not
considering multiple perspectives but the data collected was directly related to interviewing
women of color leaders to gain their personal and professional experiences, which my bias could
have affected.
According to Lincoln and Guba (1985), trustworthiness is a critical concern in qualitative
research and therefore, to establish trustworthiness, I used credibility, transferability,
dependability, and confirmability. As included within my interview protocol, I shared with
participants that I was an experienced human resources and global learning and development
executive, entrepreneur, and leadership coach, in addition have been a father and grandfather to
daughters and a granddaughter who are biracial; I expressed my intentions to seek the
participants’ truth and advocate for increased WOC promotion equity. To further address
credibility through truth, value, and validity of this study (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), I conducted
up to 90-minute interviews with each participant, and cross-referenced primary and secondary
research and data. Furthermore, to increase confirmability, I engaged in peer reviewing of this
study’s content with women of color in my doctoral program (Black, Latinx, and Asian
respectively), in addition to receiving coaching and applying feedback from my dissertation chair
and committee members, all three were women possessing double-jeopardy identifies (Jewish,
Black, and Asian respectively).
The transferability of this study aligned well with career advancement study
contributions, marginalized member inequity studies, and overall workforce planning research
(this study’s usefulness could be publicly assessed) (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
63
Conclusion
This study sought to explore women of color experiences, based upon their attainment of
senior level positions within Fortune 500 companies (or highly recognizable branded
organizations) and to examine how their ascent into senior leadership was supported or hindered
by their intersectionality. Data for this study was collected through interviews that were recorded
and transcribed, in addition to research and reflection notes and reliance upon deductive data
analysis. The data analysis process was guided by the application of SCT and the assessment of
key concepts within the conceptual framework.
64
Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of my dissertation was to explore the experiences of women of color (WOC)
who have attained senior level positions within Fortune 500 companies (or highly recognizable
branded organizations). Through their experiences, other WOC might have positioned
themselves better to overcome promotion barriers established within their organizations,
considering that senior level promotion preferences lean towards primarily White males and
occasional White females (Carter & Peters, 2016; Sherbin & Rashid, 2017; Warner et al., 2018).
Additionally, employers could improve career advancement equity for other WOC senior
leadership candidates by recognizing the company’s WOC career advancement shortcomings and
changing their systems that unjustly interfere with WOC advancement. The following research
questions guided this study:
1. What workplace factors, if any, do women of color leaders perceive they encountered
that either supported or hindered them throughout their career journeys?
2. How do successful women of color leaders perceive the importance of help from
other professionals in preparation for their promotability as women of color into
senior level management?
I was curious to learn what WOC determined workplace factors to be unsupportive or
supportive to their career advancement. The abundance of research and literature related to
gender and race bias that influenced the workplace seemed to be indicative that inequity for
WOC promotability is substantial (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Haines et al., 2016; Hurley &
Choudhary, 2016; Northouse, 2016;). I was also interested in understanding the participants’
unique perceptions of their relationships with mentors and sponsors, and how (or if at all) those
relationships impacted their promotability into elevated roles. These perceptions helped clarify
65
the value of such relationships and how participants were able to establish them. Through
existing literature, it became apparent that women of color who were able to establish
relationships with and gain assistance from senior professionals were more effective in attaining
senior leadership roles (Kurtulus & Tamaskovic-Devey, 2012; Matsa & Miller, 2011; McKinsey
& Company & LeanIn, 2020). Overall, through analysis of the WOC leader interviews, I
wondered if their experiences related to handling workplace factors and building auspicious
career-focused relationships aligned or did not align with preceding research and if it was likely
that the findings from this study are transferable elsewhere or not.
As a result of this study, three broad experiences emerged that WOC leaders perceived
important to their senior level management advancement journeys. In addressing the first
research question, a theme was developed substantiating the prominence of how workplace
factors encountered perpetrated WOC career progression. In addressing the second research
question, two themes evolved: (a) one theme focused on the importance that mentorship and
sponsorship relationships with those having power in support of helping WOC advancement and
(b) a second theme emerged that to help other WOC, actions taken by WOC study participants
could be useful adoption. The details of the findings were discussed further in this section.
Research Question 1: What Workplace Factors, if any, do Women of Color Leaders
Perceive They Encountered That Either Supported or Hindered Them Throughout Their
Career Journeys?
One broad theme of experiences emerged that WOC leaders perceived important to
workplace factors that impacted their senior level management advancement journeys. The
theme referenced the salience that inclusive and non-inclusive workplace environments have on
WOC career progression. There were two categories of findings under this theme. The first was
66
that non-inclusive organizational cultures were common impediments. The second was that
inclusive organizational cultures were recognizably more supportive of WOC high-level role
attainment. See Table 3 for the summary of findings for Research Question 1.
Table 3
Summary of Findings for Research Question 1
Theme Categories
Workplace factors encountered, whether
non-inclusive or inclusive, were instrumental
in altering WOC career advancement.
Non-inclusive organizational cultures were
common impediments to WOC career
advancement.
Inclusive organizational cultures were
recognized as being more supportive of WOC
attaining higher-level roles than non-inclusive
organizational cultures.
An analysis of the participants’ interviews revealed a primary theme highlighting that
WOC perceived their workplace environmental factors to be greatly influential over their
promotability into senior leadership. The theme was consistent with my conceptual framework in
that social cognitive theory (SCT) is a motivational lens whereby a person’s intrapersonal,
behavioral, and environmental influences combine to create a co-interdependent relationship
rooted in triadic reciprocal causation (Bandura, 2012). Bandura (2012; 2018) states there is give
and take interaction between the individual, their behaviors, and the infringing environment yet
with self-efficacy in play, the individual may possess the ability to better affect their life’s path,
to some extent. Yet there was a strong influence of environmental determinants (Bandura, 2012),
whereby systemically biased workplace cultures proved to be a deterrence to WOC leader
67
promotions, making this the most salient factor. The participants often and unjustly, had to rely
upon their own resilience or had to figure out how to overcome barriers, to chart a path to their
career advancement success. The theme supported the triadic relationship among intrapersonal,
behavioral, and environmental determinants within SCT (Bandra, 1997; 2012) for WOC to attain
higher level leadership roles in the face of systemically bias-tainted environments. In this
section, evidence was provided for both categories of findings under the first theme.
Non-inclusive Organizational Cultures were Common Impediments to WOC Career
Growth
The myth of meritocracy’s (McNamee & Miller, 2018) presence in all of the participants’
career journeys might have been attributed to their double jeopardy-centric identities (Crenshaw,
1989; Rosette & Livingston, 2012). Haines et al. (2016) and Ladson-Billings (2013) note that
systemic bias is problematic in work environments. This results from White males’ power to
form workplace policies and norms combined with sexism that prevents inclusion, and a higher
frequency of inappropriate harassment for women of color (Haines et al., 2016; Ladson-Billings,
2013). Davis and Maldonado (2015) stress that gender and race play a major role within the
workplace and the workplace may not be welcoming to those who are not members of the “good
old boys club” (referencing White males in power).
All participants in this study had been affected by the hindrance of stereotypes and
experienced varying levels of sexism and a boy’s club culture within their work environments,
excluding them from the fair and impartial treatment experienced by White males. Gloria and
Patty both shared that they heard White males making male-chauvinistic comments about
women. Gloria heard her male counterpart say that women don’t get into engineering because
68
girls don’t get into it. Patty’s male counterpart was overheard saying it was bummer for women
through the pandemic because they are having to drop out of the workforce.
Vicky recalled a conversation with her male counterpart regarding how he was able to
build great personal relationships with customers, leading to more business, but then he
mentioned it was tough for her as a woman. Vicky asked him “What do you mean?" According
to Vicky, he responded that he took his male customers out to dinner and for drinks. Vicky
reflected and agreed that if she were to ask her male customers out to dinner or drinks, there
definitely was a double standard in place. She shared that she would certainly feel uncomfortable
and the situation would not appear the same as if her male counterpart were to do so. Yet she
also recognized that she was able to affect change at times and secure higher-level promotions
without the advantage of taking her customers out as her male counterpart had been able to do
with his customers:
So, when I look back on my 21 years, it's been amazing. It's not that it was easy. It was
extremely tough…there were times when I thought, "Oh my God, what am I doing?" I
think I was also a little bit bold I would say in calling out when some things went wrong.
When I was, you know, offended by something, I called it out clearly, and I got the support
I needed. In one of the cases where I felt like I was actually teaching this very senior person
how to run the business…I said, "I think you either give me that role, or give me something
else. I don't want to be working for someone where I am literally teaching him to be
successful and to survive." So, I think those kinds of bold moves and attempts have made
me come this far.
69
At times, expressing one’s opinion and having her voice heard like in the example Vicky
provided, enabled a WOC to improve circumstances that frequently stood in the way of an
inclusive environment and opportunities to attain a higher-level role.
Unfortunately, there were not always similar chances to challenge the male dominated
promotion status quo. Mandy commented that she had seen several promotions occur in the past
based upon friendships and camaraderie, supporting an all-boys club that women were not a part
of, though the environment eventually improved. Women and women of color were negatively
impacted by scenarios such as this since they were not given such promotion opportunities. Next,
Lisa shared a couple of experiences of hers as well, where she had to voice her opinion to
enlighten others of their racial microaggressions and also demonstrate constraint when being
accused of not earning promotions she received. Lisa mentioned that she ultimately left the
organization at which this happened to overcome the toxic environmental hurdles she faced:
When I was at [a previous employer, a well-known entertainment company] …it was in a
building of 200 professionals and there were only two black females in the department.
There was an executive admin and there was me and a lot of people would say, "Oh, um,
can you get me coffee? Can you get me this, uh, this, you know, we're running out of
paper?" Things like that. And I'm like, "No, no, you don't want me, you want [the other
person]." You know, and [the other person] was the other black female who was the
admin assistant. And I just remember one day I just got fed up with people asking me to
do admin tasks because at that time I was a business analyst. And, you know, that wasn't
work that I did. I responded to the person…"You don't want me, you want the other black
woman, she's the admin assistant, I'm the analyst." And they're like, "Oh, well, I didn't
know." Well, some people just see color. They don't see anything else, even though [the
70
other person] and I were totally different. She was an older woman. She was totally
different complexion, totally different hairstyle, everything but all they saw was, oh, this
is a black female.
And, even though executive leadership at Lisa’s current employer was very supportive of women
of color advancement into senior leadership, there still remained racial bias among some of her
counterparts:
Some negative things that had happened that have been…primarily from male colleagues.
Because they didn't understand why I was getting promoted or why I was offered
opportunities and they weren't. It was more like, oh, um, I'm playing the race card and I'm
not playing the race card, I'm playing the opportunity card. A challenge…perception of
race…they felt as though my promotions were not deserved...that it should have gone to
them and not to me. [I] laid out my plan and worked my plan and did what was expected
of me. I do not like to respond to negativity or negative comments nor did I feel as
though I had to defend myself.
In several of Tina’s roles throughout her career, she traveled for business often as one of
the only women of color leaders and stated she was frequently propositioned and even groped, in
addition to being the object of sexual jokes. This specific example highlights the high frequency
of sexual harassment that women of color have faced within toxic work environments (Ho et al.,
2012; Haines et al., 2016; Ladson-Billings, 2013; Murphy, 2019). She left her last organization
and felt compelled to help strengthen the workplace culture at her current employer as they
demonstrated the desire for social justice progress. She stated,
I volunteered to handle…a D&I [diversity and inclusion] project, and it was all around
belonging, and so this was two years ago, just before COVID hit. We were on this
71
journey for diversity and inclusion, and the idea about belonging wasn't necessarily in our
vernacular, and so I led a project, to put [it] together…the tip of the iceberg about
belonging, what it means, why it's different…how it connects to our overall mission and,
you know, all that good stuff. We worked about eight months on trying to get this thing
right, and it was really great. It showed up really great, and it got me a lot of kudos and a
lot of visibility.
Tina felt fortunate to be able to make a positive contribution towards improving her company’s
culture.
In many situations, if the participants were able to help affect belonging for themselves
and other WOC within their companies, they did so. They did so by capitalizing on their self-
efficacy and voicing their concerns as Vicky and Lisa did or volunteering for initiatives that
supported inclusion like Tina did. Otherwise, if their environments did not evolve, they moved
on to other organizations altogether, as Lisa and Tina followed suit.
Inclusive Organizational Cultures Were Recognized as Being More Supportive of WOC
Attaining Higher-Level Roles Than Non-Inclusive Organizational Cultures
The lag time related to improving women of color representation in senior management
has been attributed to a small talent pipeline rooted in gender and race bias, intersectionality
related treatment, and the slow pace of diversity program effectiveness (McKinsey & Company
& LeanIn, 2015; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020). In order to correct the effects of the
systemic social inequality in the workplace caused by these factors, the restrictions preventing
WOC (a disadvantaged social group) from access to more skill development and promotion
opportunities needed to be removed to align with the skill development and promotion
opportunities that advantaged social groups (i.e., White males) received (Dijk, 2020; Butkus et
72
al., 2018; Hyun, 2012; Lai & Babcock, 2013; Oguntovinbo, 2014; Sue et al., 2008;). Based upon
the contention of perceptions regarding WOC (they faced discrimination, prejudice, and were
associated to stereotypes for being women of color), the probability of advanced career
progression was extremely low due to the discriminatory treatment the WOC participant leaders
received from their employers (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Haines et al., 2016; Hurley & Choudhary,
2016, Northouse, 2016). Adding to that, if the WOC leaders perceived a lack of equitable access
to opportunities, their own motivation to be productive or even remain at the organization was in
decline (Elliot et al., 2018; Khosrovani & Ward, 2011). In alignment with Elliot et al.’s (2018)
analysis of belonging, WOC should experience a sense of belonging within the social context of
their workplace, which includes seeing others who look similar to them within that environment
and being treated respectfully, and it could lead to increased motivation, perhaps even a longer
tenure. Finally, though the use of quotas was not utilized within the majority of participants’
work environments, where a depth of embedded bias existed, to level the playing field for other
up and coming WOC leaders (Catalyst, 2013; Corporate Boards Taking Steps to Promote
Diversity, 2012; Mölders et al., 2018; Sojo et al., 2016; Terjesen et al., 2016), at least 33% of the
WOC leaders experienced the positive effects that quotas had on impacting inclusivity.
All of the WOC participant leaders identified work environments where they were able to
progress to or towards higher-level role attainment since the environments engaged in some level
of inclusion and belonging (Elliot et al., 2018). With WOC inclusivity and diversity initiatives
being better addressed (inclusive of providing opportunities specifically for WOC to grow and
develop) (Atlassian, 2018) at some organizations more so than others, WOC leaders’ potential to
attain higher level roles was increased. As an example, Mandy, Patty, and Vicky continued to
work in the same supportive organizations for 38 years, 21 years, and 20 years and achieved
73
roles of responsibility at the senior vice president, vice president, and vice president roles
respectively. Tina and Lisa were employed at their respective companies for 11 and 14 years and
achieved roles of responsibility at the level of director and senior director respectively. Gloria, on
the other hand, reported that she had no choice but to leave her former company due to lack of
promotion opportunities in a non-inclusive culture. She left her past employer after a decade in
order to join a company that appeared to have a more progressive approach towards inclusion,
and she has been there for only seven months.
Mandy reported that her company was committed to making opportunities accessible to
all staff, regardless of race, gender, etc. Though the organization was not always able to
overcome all of its gender and race inclusivity flaws earlier on, she witnessed their
improvements throughout her tenure there. Mandy commented,
All of us were women of color if you are considering the fact that we are Spanish
speaking people, women of color, regardless of the color of our skin or our ancestry, you
know, minus European. But I also had a colleague who was Afro Latino. So, we were
treated the same regardless of our ancestry. Any new employee, especially if they were
supervisors or managers, when they were promoted, they were immediately given proper
training about equal opportunities, non-discrimination, and inclusion. You know, we try
to balance…it was just our efforts to do that.
She also shared that her company supported her professional development as she pursued her
doctorate-level degree in support being able to meet her industry’s requirements related to her
being able to publicly represent her employer. She stated, “In my latest position, at an
international, very well-known [company]…I [led the divisions] in the United States, Canada,
and the UK. When I separated, I stopped being an employee and I became their [consultant] for
74
various specific areas that they needed help with.” She then added, “I can tell you [eventually] at
one point, another coworker, a male, and I were the two people in charge of the operation center
in the three countries, United States, Canada, and UK.” Mandy perceived that she would have
not been able to fulfill higher-levels of responsibility and ultimately achieve a senior vice
president level role as a WOC within a male dominated industry, if she were working in a non-
inclusive environment.
Patty also perceived that her organization supported her professional development too,
though a handful of its leaders were the main supporters that essentially helped her to navigate
barriers to growth, it was not all of them. According to Patty, “You've got a lot of leaders who
are really good and very supportive, right? And they really, truly embrace diversity, equity, and
inclusion…it's just something that's woven into the fabric of how they lead and the tone they
set.” Patty talked more in-depth about how her work environment was supportive, specifically in
relation to a program she was selected to attend by the leadership mentioned, which led to her
higher-level promotion:
But what I actually loved and I do love the company because you can go in there, right?
And you can work anywhere and move around, and have a career where you can change
jobs and roles, from that standpoint it's, it's fantastic. Actually, with[in] the company that
I most enjoyed was a [specialty] development program [the company’s internal program],
which was an 18-month course, and you went around to different parts of the company.
So, to be introduced to different leaders within the divisions and hear about the divisions
and what they do, all the different terminology or the challenges they face within
[specialty], but knowing that, a lot of the challenges are the same even though the
business is different was really nice. It's big, it's almost like their own certification
75
program and you have to be nominated for that. So, I did that and that was great for me, it
was a wonderful course.
The professional development opportunities that both Mandy’s and Patty’s environments
extended to them, helped them break through barriers to attain opportunities close to but not
identically at the same pace as White males, though both recognized their organizations’
inclusivity progress. Vicky shared information regarding her work environment’s level of WOC
inclusivity and the approach her company has decided to take which appeared to have started to
make WOC inclusivity improvements already:
They never focused on it before, but in the last couple of years, diversity and inclusion
become a big part of the organization. A focus support to bring [on board], women at the
leadership [level]. And then how do we help women to get into the next leadership role?
As an organization, there has been an enormous effort, to bring more diversity into the
mix…other women of color that are at least at the mid-level to upper-level management.
A mandate that I need to bring so many, you know, a percentage of my team should be
women. Mentorship for women is in our crosshair, all women…not specifically women
of color. We don't have a bias as such on the color. And like, you know, if it's African-
American, we need to take so many.
Vicky’s assessment of the company’s decision to use internal quotas complemented by diversity
and inclusion initiatives in support of improving the representation of WOC in more senior level
roles gave her reassurance that the company is on the right track towards making real progress in
supporting WOC promotability. She recalled that she had been the only woman (and woman of
color) leader for quite some time but was pleased to see their WOC management pipeline and
opportunities in support of WOC growth greatly improved.
76
Prior to joining her current organization in a full-time capacity, Lisa did not become a full
time employee elsewhere during her 17 years spent as a consultant. She chose to remain a
consultant at other companies, though she had opportunities to transition to full-time status at
several of them, because she did not experience a strong enough sense of belonging. Lisa said,
“But when I got to [industry leader], one of the reasons why I like the company was because of
the culture. It had a very diverse culture and a very rewarding culture… that's what made me
want to stay there.” She stated that within the course of an eight-year period, she progressed from
managing projects, then programs, then people. Her promotions at the director and senior
director levels occurred within that period of time. She said, “I went from being a project
manager to a program manager, to a director and then senior director, all within, I want to say
eight years.” Here is what she attested to regarding the organization’s commitment to diversity
initiatives:
[There is a] Diversity, Equity and Inclusion [DEI] Committee…programs offered often…
we have various what we call ERG groups (Equity Resource Groups) …you name it, we
have a resource group for it. Whether it's women, whether it's a black employee network,
Asian employee network, or Latina organizations. These are employee groups that are
fully supported…we have a diversity and inclusion executive. We celebrate everything.
You know, whether it be, Black History Month, Women's History Month…every holiday
there is. And it's always something that's done at the corporate level, not just at the
individual department level.
Lisa went on further to talk about her division’s leadership:
My CIO, leads by example. He has the highest number of female directors and a diverse
slate of female directors…he definitely believes in equity and inclusion…director level
77
and above…I'm one of two senior directors who are black females. There are other
women who are at the vice president level, or the SVP [senior vice president] level who
are women. Within the VP [vice president] level women who are women of
color…Indian and Chinese women too.
Lisa realized that her organization, though not perfect, has worked hard to reduce discriminatory
bias that prevents WOC promotability across her division and the broader organization too.
Gloria discussed how the new company that she joined within the past seven months
appeared to be fairly inclusive. She had passed up a next-level promotion opportunity at her
previous employer, where she worked for a decade, to join this company. She shared that she
was tired of the biased environment she became accustomed to working in at the previous
employer. She mentioned, “If anything, it's like very intentionally inclusive to make sure people
have a voice and that includes business processes.” Gloria pointed out that from her first day at
the company, and most days thereafter, when attending meetings, all of the vice presidents made
a point to ask if anybody had anything on their mind. If so, the topic should be brought up, and
the floor would be theirs, regardless of title, race, gender, etc. She also quickly noticed
representation of 50% or more women, with WOC representation estimated to be less. She said,
“You throw in the women of color, that's where it gets a little bit smaller having an intersection
but it definitely is better than any other company I've been at.” It seemed to Gloria that the
organizational culture there was positively supported by an extensive offering of DEI-related
resources including the expectation that when hired into or promoted into management, formal
diversity and inclusion training were mandated. Furthermore, mentoring was highly encouraged
and supported through social accountability which was tied to the company’s internal
technology. A “badge of honor” is associated with directors and vice presidents who had
78
volunteered to be mentors and have also volunteered to support employee resource groups
including those for its marginalized community.
Finally, Tina took a lead role in helping her company to implement effective diversity
initiatives. When asked how she thought her company was doing in its efforts to improve the
company’s culture, making WOC inclusivity a priority, she talked about a quota system they
applied:
It [the culture] has evolved quite a bit. I'd say it's very strong, and for the first time ever,
it just happened this year, there has actually been, quotas, if you will. They, the company,
would never use that word for a lot of reasons, but there have been quotas that most
senior vice presidents and general managers have actually put out, that say things like,
you know, "I will hire x percentage of women. I will hire x percentage of African
Americans or black people. I will hire ..." and they are sticking to that, and that, I'm so
proud of that. I'm so proud of that because, there has been backlash, you know, there has
been challenges, you know, this is illegal, you're discriminating…there's been, you name
it, it has come, and our lawyers are fighting against that. They're not backing down…they
are standing up and saying, "No, that's not true. You know, no, no it is not and here's
what ..."…they are being very fierce and very brave in what they're doing and they all
happen to be white men that are doing this, which is also, um, wonderful, I think. You
know, it’s wonderful for other corporations because other corporations need to see this
and they need to see who's fighting….so I'm very proud. I'm very proud of what my
organization is doing right now. It's late, it's 2021, it's taken this long, but, you know, I'm
going to give them some credit that they are actually doing it.
79
Similar to Vicky’s company, Tina’s company had decided to attempt a more assertive approach
in leveling the playing field for WOC.
According to the WOC leaders, their experiences within organizational
cultures that better supported WOC inclusivity and overall DEI-related improvements were
perceived to be more supportive than the non-inclusive environments in which they served. With
the exception of Gloria, due to her short tenure at her current company, the other participants
recognized the progress their organizations made over time.
Research Question 2: How do Successful Women of Color Leaders Perceive the
Importance of Help from Other Professionals in Preparation for Their Promotability as
Women of Color into Senior Level Management?
Two broad themes of experiences that WOC leaders perceived important in relation to
their senior level management career journeys were developed out of this study’s participant
interviews. The first theme focused on the importance that relationships with mentors and
sponsors (possessing power) had in support of WOC advancement. The second theme emerged
that actions taken by the participants could become useful advice for other WOC to adopt with
respect to their own career development journeys, especially within less inclusive organizations.
The first theme did not have breakout categories of findings and there were two categories of
findings for the second theme. See Table 4 for the summary of findings for Research Question 2.
80
Table 4
Summary of Findings for Research Question 2
Theme Categories
Women of color perceived mentors and
sponsors were capable of acclimating WOC
into the organizational culture in support of
WOC career advancement.
Actions taken by WOC leaders were
perceived as viable advice for other women
of color’s career development journeys.
Scaling the corporate ladder required preparation
for new challenges including navigating WOC
promotion barriers.
Networking was perceived to strengthen a WOC
career advancement support system.
Theme 1. Women of Color Perceived Mentors and Sponsors Were Capable of Acclimating
WOC Into the Organizational Culture in Support of WOC Career Advancement
Based on the findings from the interviews with the participants, the theme that mentors
and sponsors were actively engaged in guiding WOC leaders through the organizational norms
emerged. These WOC leaders were able to have access to and take advantage of building
relationships with organizational leadership (mentors and sponsors). Hewlitt et al. (2010) defines
a mentor as an experienced person that a less experienced person seeks progressive advice from.
A sponsor is defined as an experienced person who in a highly visible capacity, proactively
engages a less experienced person to promote their growth and helps to provide them with
opportunities for exposure (Hewlitt et al, 2010).
Women of color participants perceived they were able to gain visibility within
organizations through mentors and sponsors who were capable of helping clear a path within the
81
organizational culture’s barriers to WOC career advancement whereby WOC were able to
demonstrate their talents. Existing research points towards the lack of role models, mentorships,
and executive relationship building that leads to visibility as contributing elements in the way of
WOC leadership advancement (Butkus et al., 2018; Hyun, 2012; Lai & Babcock, 2013;
Oguntovinbo, 2014). Tina was able to benefit from a relationship with a WOC mentor, Patty
reported to a White woman leader prior to her own most recent senior leadership role, and Lisa
acknowledged there were a few WOC senior leaders in her company but did not mention they
mentored or sponsored her. According to five of the participants, on many occasions, White men
and men of color in senior leadership roles were very supportive of WOC access to
promotability. The category of findings stemmed from the rarity of women of color, along with
White women, holding senior leadership roles in Fortune 500 companies and was aligned with
existing research (Carter & Peters, 2016; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020; Rosette and
Livingston, 2012; Warner et al., 2018). Four of this study’s participants noted instances whereby
their mentors or sponsors were men who demonstrated interest in support of WOC leadership
advancement. Mandy shared that her Chief Executive Officer (CEO) was her mentor. Her CEO
recognized Mandy’s hard work and professional reputation, and she earned her promotions
accordingly.
Lisa discussed how the highest executive-level leaders in her organization were
empathetic and supportive [towards inclusiveness for WOC career advancements]. She stated,
“Everything is pushed down from the top. The company was extremely, extremely supportive.”
She went on to explain about the critical impact her chief sponsor made on her career:
…excellent support from my current CIO [Chief Information Officer], excellent
support… when I first got to the company, I made sure that I introduced myself to him
82
and told him what I was looking for. I figured that, [this company] was a place where I
learned to hang my hat…so having that sponsorship, I think that that's critical, for black
females to have, is to have sponsorship at the senior level. And to make sure that
somebody at the senior level or multiple people at senior level are aware of what you
were doing. So, when those job openings come out, like the last two roles, the last two
promotions I've got [leadership roles] …these weren't jobs that were posted, these are
positions that were created. So, when these positions are created, they have you in mind.
Lisa’s example touched upon how instrumental for visibility it was having a sponsor who
provided a venue for her to demonstrate her skills and abilities. Fast forwarding to her present
role, she said, “The role encompasses leading the global [technology-focused team] …a team of
[over 50 professionals].” Her team spanned across the US, Japan, and China.
Patty also shared a very specific example relative to having gained visibility and
acknowledged that the direct support she received from senior leadership helped catapult her
career as a senior leader herself:
I feel like rather than just focusing on that one thing, I want to be ready for whatever
opportunity comes next. And then it was really neat because when I moved into my first
management position, my director there, who was also very supportive and, you know,
was very much about, "Reach for the stars, you can take on whatever. You have the
capability to do it. Your style is great, so just be open to whatever." But he's the one that
helped sponsor me for the executive MBA [Master of Business Administration] program,
and in doing that he knew it wasn't him that needed to actually be my sponsor. He sent
me in to meet a couple of people to speak with (who were above him), that really needed
to sponsor me. And when, I got to meet the senior VP [vice president] in that role, having
83
a conversation with him, he was the first person where it was so great because I said, "So
many people have asked me, where do I want to be in six years? What do I want to do in
10 years? What's that specific role? And I've had trouble answering that, right? Because I
don't want to limit myself to one role. “He was the first one I actually connected with
because he said, "No, it's about getting all the tools in your toolbox you need. Be ready.
And perform well, build the relationships, and make sure you're ready to take on the next
role, and the next role would present itself." So that's kind of how I viewed it and I've
operated in my career, and things have worked out that way for me.
The best way Patty saw herself being prepared for future opportunities was to increase the
number of tools in her professional toolbox and expand the number of relationships she had.
Tina stated she was lucky to have had the opportunity to be supported by a “brilliant”
engineer as a model:
There was one woman of color, she was a VP [vice president], and she was the person
who was extremely supportive of me getting an MBA [Master of Business
Administration]. I was on the fence about it. No one else was supporting me, actually. I
got it in my mind because I kept hearing about it and I saw other people with it and I saw
other men with it and that kind of stuff. She was the only female vice president…she has
an amazing track record in education, and an amazing record of leading really huge
organizations all around the world, so not just in the United States. So, a very, well-
rounded individual.
By proactively accessing supportive mentors and sponsors who were able to guide WOC
through workplace barriers, the participants’ talents and capabilities were positively
complemented since they contributions were made more visible.
84
Theme 2. Actions Taken by WOC Were Perceived as Viable Advice for Other Women of
Color’s Career Development Journeys
As a result of the participants’ interviews, a second theme consistently appeared as
prevalent in that actions taken by the participants, developed from their experiential learnings
had the potential to advise other WOC’s career advancement. To take advantage of with respect
to their own career development journeys, the two findings were as follows:
1. Climbing the corporate ladder required WOC to navigate through gender and race
bias-based obstacles. The application of courage and asking for help when needed,
and being prepared to take on new challenges, were needed.
2. Woman of color leaders took advantage of networking and gained trusted colleagues;
they built strong career advancement support systems.
In this section, evidence was provided for each category under the final theme.
Scaling the Corporate Ladder Required Preparation for new Challenges Including
Navigating WOC Promotion Barriers
All participants recognized the value of hard work and just as importantly, acknowledged
that they had to be risk takers in accepting new challenges to expand their span of responsibilities
as they had to address workplace bias just as they had to be comfortable in seeking out mentors
and sponsors who were willing to support them. That could require taking the risk to ensure that
their voices be heard when not receiving the same level of respect and credit that their White
male counterparts received. McNamee and Miller (2018) point out that in order for women of
color to be respectfully recognized for their merits by men, WOC might need to assert that their
voices be heard to offset the negative effects that meritocracy produced, in support of proving
meritocracy is non-inclusive to WOC.
85
Mandy summed up some rules of thumb for getting ahead, “Being responsible, applying
yourself, being direct, putting in an honest day of work, being respectful to others, helping
others, and creating teamwork.” She provided an example of how she demonstrated
responsibility and assertiveness:
One of the things that would happen when I would say something and it was like, okay,
and then a man would repeat about the same thing I said and then it was like, oh yes,
people are paying attention. So, when I realized that, then I made that a point for me to be
very strong, very to the point, very direct from the beginning, in order to command
attention, and for people to take me seriously, and it did work. You know, trying to be
soft and subtle did not work.
Mandy’s courage in commanding attention to encourage others to respect her ideas helped her
develop into an assertive leader as she was not seen as an equal and had to encourage that she
been seen as an equal.
Lisa stressed it was about laying out and delivering upon a plan inclusive of doing
what was expected, while having thick skin and humility while working under discriminatory
conditions. That and the support received from high-level sponsors, gave the right visibility and
then next-level opportunities opened up. Yet Lisa cautioned about the reality, “The more you go
up the corporate ladder…doesn't mean you stop learning. You still have to learn. It's just at a
different level…because the situations get more challenging.” Taking on new responsibilities,
especially those with higher stakes, was an important takeaway for Lisa.
Gloria noted that it was an advantage to be unique with a unique perspective and
to represent the true value of diversity. She mentioned, “Your unique background should go just
beyond what you look like, you know, and help people get beyond that…the more you learn, the
86
more diverse you become beyond just your gender and your race.” An example provided was, “If
you're going to be in Southern California on an IT infrastructure account, don't just pigeonhole
yourself there, go do something else, because that increases your diversity of your skillset and
your experience.” Gloria advised that if WOC could use that concept to their advantage, they
should be able to benefit greatly from the experience. A key takeaway from Gloria’s early career
was that she intentionally took on roles requiring her to travel far away from her hometown.
Doing that, expanded her breadth of experience while it also raised her self-confidence
significantly and increased her sense of achievement in being able to navigate around bias. She
related that along the way, there would be people with biases and it would be frustrating. Yet
there were other people out there who will be supportive, they can be found, and willing to help
(just ask).
Vicky reflected on her career and said,
The one thing they could never put me down [for] was my performance, that was God's
grace. Right? So, I always thought that if I could do anything that was given to me or
anything that I take, if I can do extremely well, no one can touch me. No one can say
anything to me. Right? So, my focus was always on that. My focus was to excel in
everything. My focus was, has always been, I want to be different from everyone else…I
want to lead. I want people to see that I'm the leader, I'm the person who's different. So
many of them [men] did support me. And I used to go to them, especially during
meetings or presentations. I would either go take advice or I tell them, "Hey, I want you
to support me. This is what I'm going to do." So, it helped me. I can say I was pushed into
some of the things, which now when I see that's the best thing that could have happened
87
to me, right? Because you learn to survive, it's not just managing, but you're learning to
survive.
Vicky’s authenticity and courage shined through her boldness and determination in taking on any
challenge that came her way as she worked harder to attain next level promotions. The reflection
that all of the participants have committed to has helped them to assess what worked well on
their behalf throughout their careers in overcoming promotion barriers, what worked against
them, and what control they had over situations to progress to the next level.
Networking Strengthened a WOC Career Advancement Support System
The second finding was familiar to all of the WOC leaders in that they all valued their
networking expenses. They indicated that by participating in networking opportunities, they were
better positioned to compete for and attain higher-level leadership roles. Ibarra (2015) comments
that the benefits of personal networking include industry and cohort referrals, information;
potential coaching and mentoring connections; and strategic networking opportunities. At the
strategic level, whereby associates can include those outside of a person’s work environment,
networking can help a person establish relationships and information sources that together can
help them effectively meet their personal and organizational goals (Ibarra, 2015). Gloria
advocated that WOC needed support as she said, “You look at these opportunities…make the
right connections and the opportunities are presented.” She reflected on her recent experience
transitioning into a new workplace:
Moving to my new organization, inclusion is all over the place. You know it. There are
affinity groups and they actually embed it in the interview process when you go through
[the] last round of interviews. And it's somebody that's not part of the interview. It's more
your protected space to ask questions. And they are purposely selected from one of those
88
affinity groups. So, an affinity group is like “Women at [company name]” …so, there's
all these different organizations and the way the company sets it up is that they put a lot
of mechanisms in place. You don't have to go get a vice-president to sponsor something.
It's like, you get six people sitting around a table and they want to do it, then you just go
do it, you know, and you're scrappy and make it happen. So, when people approach me,
that's usually the advice I give. Don't necessarily think about it as a career advancement
thing, the career part will come.
Gloria embraced networking opportunities to complement her long-term career aspirations and
was able to realize the value of her connections.
Lisa and Mandy noted some examples of how to gain access to a network. Lisa
mentioned, “There are a lot of professional groups…find one that fits your need. And if there are
any volunteering opportunities at work, join those groups that will help you. And then, also ask
your boss.” Lisa has reached back to [universities] and the dean of the colleges. She is convinced
that it is important to maintain those connections and feel comfortable asking for their advice.
Patty commented further on the topic of support groups:
Women probably need something different, and women of color most definitely, right?
Because just coming from different countries, cultural upbringing, I've talked to women
and women I mentor. They don't always know what they can say or if things are going on
at work, what's okay to say. So even having like support groups or some type of group
that helps just different cultures. What's an okay behavior? What's an okay action? What's
okay for you to talk about, not talk about or [how to] raise as an issue. I think that's
definitely needed. In my experience where I worked, we had all kinds of groups. There
89
are many groups and DEI [diversity, equity, and inclusion] groups that you can be part of.
That's a great group where you can feel belonging and then have people to talk with.
Mandy said, “Not only do we learn from our colleagues, how they were dealing with
similar problems, but also, you have a group [of] people who, would help you just to stay on top
of information or give you new information.” When asked her advice regarding getting the value
of WOC having supportive professionals behind them, Mandy responded,
I think nowadays what I've seen with other companies is that there are formal programs
about having coaches and mentors to help people…and even more for women and
women of color. And, also, don't be afraid to ask for help, because so many times…many
men will be willing to help, but we have to ask for it. And because we're asking for it,
we're no less. And [there are] so many tests for women, it’s difficult, it's like, okay, if I go
ask for help, they're going to see this woman doesn't know what she's doing and it's not
true. Not everybody's like that. There are many people out there who are willing to
support women of color, and women just need to ask for it, and not be shy about it.
Participating in networking opportunities and building a network of trusted colleagues
lent itself towards establishing a strong WOC career support system. With this in place, the
participants attested they rely upon their efficacy and the guidance of mentors and sponsors, as
they overcame adversity within non-inclusive, biased, and male dominated environments.
Conclusion
The findings validated that the WOC senior leaders experienced organizational cultures
embedded with gender and race discriminatory practices. To overcome workplace systemic bias
and treatment due to a combination of their race and gender, they were forced to navigate the
labyrinth (Eagly and Carli, 2007) of senior leadership advancement. All participants shared
90
common experiences within inclusive and non-inclusive workplaces that were determined to be
supportive or non-supportive respectively in their senior-level leadership attainment journeys.
91
Chapter Five: Discussion
The purpose of this study aimed at understanding the experiences of women of color
(WOC) at Fortune 500 companies (or highly recognizable branded companies) who earned
senior level leadership roles and therefore, could provide perspectives as to how they overcame
workplace challenges that commonly undermine WOC’s promotability efforts into higher ranks.
Considering the problem of gross underrepresentation of WOC in the highest level and next level
leadership roles (Carter & Peters, 2016; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020; Warner et al.,
2018), other WOC are able to benefit from the experiences of WOC leaders interviewed in this
study. According to Carter and Peters (2016), McKinsey and Company and LeanIn (2020), and
Warner et al. (2018), WOC make up approximately 38.3% of the entire female workforce yet
hold only .4 % of Fortune 500 CEO and 12% of management roles. Additionally, with this
study’s contribution towards WOC senior leadership promotion inequity research, organizations
had more research confirming the existence of systemic WOC promotion bias and can use this
study’s recommendations in support of sustainable improvements. The following research
questions steered this study:
1. What workplace factors, if any, do women of color leaders perceive they encountered
that either supported or hindered them throughout their career journeys?
2. How do successful women of color leaders perceive the importance of help from other
professionals in preparation for their promotability as women of color into senior level
management?
For this study, capturing the WOC participants’ experiences was conducted virtually
using a semi-structured interview inclusive of open-ended questions and anticipated probes, and
an interview protocol for consistency (Burkholder et al., 2019; Creswell & Creswell, 2018). To
92
ensure quality detailed data collection, I relied on Zoom’s video recording tool while taking field
notes and I used Rev.com’s transcription service (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Patton, 2002). This
final chapter includes a discussion of findings, recommendations for practice, limitations and
delimitations, and recommendations for future research.
Discussion of Findings
Three broad themes of experiences emerged from the research questions’ corresponding
interview inquiries (see Appendix A), that WOC leaders perceived important in relation to their
senior level management advancement journeys, as follows:
1. The first theme, workplace factors encountered, whether non-inclusive or inclusive, were
instrumental in altering WOC career advancement, addressed the first research question
and included findings categorized under the following two categories: (a) non-inclusive
organizational cultures were common impediments to WOC career growth and (b)
inclusive organizational cultures were recognized as being more supportive of WOC
attaining higher-level roles than non-inclusive organizational cultures.
2. The second theme, women of color perceived mentors and sponsors as capable of
acclimating WOC into the organizational culture in support of WOC career advancement,
stemmed from the data in support of addressing the second research question.
3. The third theme, actions taken by WOC leaders were perceived as viable advice for other
women of color’s career development journeys, evolved from the data and addressed the
second research question and encompassed findings included within the following two
categories: (a) scaling the corporate ladder required preparation for new challenges
including navigating WOC promotion barriers and (b) networking was perceived to
strengthen a WOC career advancement support system.
93
All findings aligned well with existing literature and this study’s conceptual framework.
A discussion of each was further detailed in this section.
Theme 1: Workplace Factors Encountered, Whether Non-Inclusive or Inclusive, Were
Instrumental in Altering WOC Career Advancement
According to Bandura (2012) social cognitive theory (SCT) is a motivational lens
whereby a person’s intrapersonal, behavioral, and environmental influences combine to create a
co-interdependent relationship rooted in triadic reciprocal causation. Bandura (2012) claims
there is give and take interaction between the individual, their behaviors, and the infringing
environment. The strong influence of the systemically biased workplace cultures experienced by
the participants in this study, the environmental determinants (Bandura, 2012), acted as a
deterrence to WOC leader promotions, though there were some workplaces where navigating
equity promotion barriers was more manageable due to the organizational cultures there being
more inclusive. The participants were often at times forced to rely upon their own resilience
(self-reliance) (Bandura, 2012) in an attempt to overcome the dominance of the non-inclusive
elements within the cultures they worked within, and potentially attain higher-level roles.
The findings revealed systemic bias existed in the organizations that WOC leaders
worked and though at times, they were able to navigate through varying levels of barriers to
achieve leadership promotability, they should not be expected to have to endure unfair treatment
as an organizational norm and they should feel a sense of belonging. There were several
instances where stereotypes, sexism, and a boy’s club culture affected the WOC leaders. Gloria,
Patty, and Vicky shared unfavorable gender specific observations, including references that girls
don’t pursue engineering because they are girls, that it was a shame for women that they need to
drop out of the workforce to care for their families, and men can take their clients to dinner and
94
drinks yet if women attempt this, it will not be perceived similarly. Additionally, after receiving
a promotion, Lisa received backlash from her White male counterparts that she did not deserve
the promotion and only received it because she played the race card (since she is Black). Finally,
Tina often found herself the victim of sexual advances, groping, and sexual jokes when she as
the only WOC leader who traveled for business. In the environments that offered an improved
sense of belonging (Elliot et al., 2018) for the WOC leaders, there were skill development and
growth-related opportunities and productive diversity improvement measures in effect, including
the use of quotas, that helped to improve the density of the WOC management promotion
pipeline as well as the level of representation of WOC in senior leadership (Butkus et al., 2018;
Dijk, 2020; Hyun, 2012; Lai & Babcock, 2013; Oguntovinbo, 2014; Sue et al., 2008;). Patty
talked about her experience as a participant in an internal 18-month company program where she
was able to improve her leadership skills, work across multiple business units, work with
different leaders across the organization, and was able to learn about the challenges they faced
and how they overcame those challenges. Next, Mandy shared that her company sponsored her
doctorate-level education to meet the industry’s requirement as their representative and she
ultimately led the company’s divisions along-side her White male counterpart. Lisa commented
that her company had a DEI executive, committee, and programs in addition to a variety of
equity resource groups to support marginalized staff and strengthen the company’s inclusion
efforts, even at the top. Within her division, there were two senior directors and two vice
presidents who are WOC, and a vice president and a senior vice president who are White
women. Vicky discussed that diversity and inclusion become an organizational focus which
included the use of quotas to bring on board more WOC into mid-level and upper-level
management. Tina added that her company too instituted the use of quotas that the majority of
95
senior vice presidents and general managers communicated whereby the percentage of WOC or
other marginalized groups would be increased at all levels. As there was an increased presence of
WOC in management and diversity resources made available, and the participants perceived the
environments to treat them more respectfully and fairly than other less inclusive-focused
workplaces, their motivation and employment tenure were enhanced, aligning with the literature
on inclusive environments (Dijk, 2020; Elliot et al., 2018; Sue et al., 2008). Finally, the findings
addressed the first research question regarding what were workplace factors perceived to be
either supportive (within inclusive environments) or not (within non-inclusive environments)
throughout the WOC leaders’ careers.
Theme 2: Women of Color Perceived That Mentors and Sponsors Were Capable of
Acclimating WOC Into the Organizational Culture in Support of WOC Career
Advancement
In alignment with my conceptual framework, engaging mentors and sponsors reflected
the interplay between intrapersonal and environmental determinants within SCT (Bandura,
2012). Mentors are those experienced people that can provide progressive advice to a less
experienced person (Hewlitt et al., 2010). Sponsors are those experienced people holding highly
visible roles, who through engagement with a less experienced person promotes their growth and
opportunities for visibility (Hewlitt et al., 2010). As supported through extant research, to
overcome a key barrier to WOC career growth identified as the lack of proper mentoring and
executive relationship building, establishing relationships with mentors and sponsors could assist
(Butkus et al., 2018; Davis & Maldonado, 2015; Hyun, 2012; Kurtulus & Tamaskovic-Devey,
2012; Lai & Babcock, 2013; Matsa & Miller, 2011; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020;
Oguntovinbo, 2014). Considering the WOC study participants were forced to go above and
96
beyond what their counterparts had to endure within systemically biased workplaces, their high-
level of self-efficacy (Bandura, 2012) proactively helped stimulate the building of the senior-
level and WOC leader relationships. Dobbins et al. (2013) states that White male executives are
not always proactive in their pursuit of sponsoring or mentoring women or women of color, so it
appeared that the WOC leaders needed to take some matters into their own hands. Absent White
women and women of color mentors and sponsors due to the lack of their presence, engaging
men was commonly practiced in order to stack the odds in their favor, the participants’ self-
motivation to attain career growth inclusive of engaging in promotion supportive relationships
(mentorships and sponsorships) commenced. Mandy had a positive experience by being
mentored by her Chief Executive Officer (CEO), who took her under his wings, helped her
develop her problem framing and solving skillset, and recognized her work ethic by promoting
her accordingly. Lisa benefited by being sponsored by her Chief Information Officer (CIO). He
kept abreast of her ongoing projects and worked with her in building her capabilities leading to
two consecutive promotions up the chain of command (two higher-level roles that she did not
have to apply for). Patty shared an example relative to gaining visibility and learning from the
best in the business, enabling her career to be boosted. Patty’s senior sponsor specifically
focused on Patty having all the right tools in her toolbox and introduced her to other high-level
stakeholders supporting Patty earning a prestigious executive MBA and participating in the
company’s highly visible 18-month program management certification. The findings addressed
the second research question related to their perception of the importance of help from other
professionals had on WOC’s promotability into senior-level management.
Positioning themselves for higher-level positions, the participants’ high-level of self-
efficacy was their impetus in gaining access to and obtaining supportive mentors and sponsors,
97
within systemically discriminatory environments.
Theme 3: Actions Taken by WOC Leaders Were Perceived as Viable Advice for Other
Women of Color’s Career Development Journeys
Considering the advancements of social networking as a component of SCT, a person
should have control over their social interactions, communication, how they relate with others,
and conduct their business interactions (Bandura, 2012). Recognition of the value that a strong
work ethic provides, even if they were forced to work harder to prove their capabilities were
equal to White men, and challenging themselves to be prepared for their next roles was a shared
strategy among all participants. In the face of navigating through the discriminatory barriers that
typically affect WOC’s career advancement journey (Carter & Peters, 2016; Sherbin & Rashid,
2017; Warner et al., 2018), this study’s findings asserted that climbing the corporate ladder
required courage, asking for help when needed, and taking on more responsibilities to be
prepared to tackle new leadership roles while promotion barriers were not easily navigated alone.
Raconteur.net’s (2020) study relative to WOC senior-level career advancement tips included that
WOC should ask for help to seize new higher-level opportunities. This appears to be a necessity
since senior leadership roles are more often awarded favorably to White men based upon their
potential versus their actual accomplishments, which is typically not the case for WOC (Davis &
Maldonado, 2015; Shellenbarger, 2012). Additionally, to highlight the myth of meritocracy,
WOC participant leaders needed to express themselves if not respectfully recognized for their
credibility and capabilities (McNamee & Miller, 2018). Mandy highlighted how when her ideas
were not being taken seriously yet repeated by a man, the ideas were heard. She made it a point
moving forward to command attention through her assertiveness and ensure she was heard (not
to be soft spoken about it). Lisa commented it was important to have a plan and deliver upon it,
98
stressing the need to have humility and thick skin too due to being a WOC within biased
organizational cultures. Lisa also added that as situations get more challenging as one gets
promoted into high-visibility roles, taking on higher stake challenges, and driving results is key.
Vicky noted that her commitment to excelling in her roles gave her a sense of security in that
nobody within the organization would be able to deny her ability to perform at high level. This
aligned with Davis and Maldonado’s (2015) and Shellenbarger’s (2012) argument that White
men are awarded next level typically based on potential and not proven capabilities, as Vicky
had to prove. Yet she did not hesitate to ask men for help when she needed additional support for
getting things done. Gloria discussed that the more a WOC is provided access to higher level of
responsibilities (i.e., taking on new responsibilities job-wise or geographically elsewhere), the
more her abilities, courage, and confidence will add to her band-with of capabilities. Gloria’s
application of courage to not let the environmental challenges get in the way of taking on new
adventures guided her career path. With limited control over their leadership careers within
highly influential organizational cultures tainted by gender and race discrimination, their long-
term focus of expressing themselves to be heard, asking for help when needed, and doing what
was necessary work-wise to climb the corporate ladder kept them grounded.
Networking offers opportunities to gain access to industry and colleague referrals; potential
coaching and mentoring connections, and strategic networking more specifically targeted
achievement of personal or organizational goals (Ibarra, 2015). All participants agreed they
were much better off competing for and attaining higher-level leadership roles with the support
of their networks. Gloria spoke about several affinity groups (including specific women and
women of color groups) that her current company has in place to encourage collaboration on new
projects and support of each other. Even in the interview process, they made available other
99
WOC for Gloria to speak with regarding their experiences and to answer any questions she had.
Lisa, Patty, and Mandy shared ideas of how to gain access to a network. Lisa mentioned finding
a group that specifically fits your need and volunteering to be a member of work groups that you
align with. Lisa said to ask your boss for their recommendations too. Patty commented that
women of color definitely need access to a group that consists of others with similar
backgrounds, and there are many types of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) groups that some
companies promote. According to Patty, it is important to know what behavior is acceptable in
business environments, and what is not and these groups can help with that. Mandy agreed that
learning from colleagues is valuable as many have dealt with similar problems. She concluded
by stating that though many companies may not always actively promote that they have formal
networking, mentoring, or coaching programs in place, it is important to ask. Building a network
of trusted colleagues through participation in networking opportunities led to a strong WOC
career support system, helpful in battling non-inclusiveness and encouraging in that equity in
promotion improvements could be possible.
Implications for Practice
There were at least three diverse stakeholder groups of professionals that this study’s findings
could prove to be impactful for. The findings collectively pointed to a discriminatory disparity
that women of color faced within their workplaces during their senior-level leadership career
advancement journeys as compared to their White and men of color counterparts. The groups
potentially impacted by the findings of this study and how each group may benefit from this
study are women of color, other people with intersectionality, and White women. Women of
color is the group most likely to benefit from this study’s findings. Extant research often focused
on what WOC could do to overcome workplace gender and race bias that prevented their ability
100
to compete for executive roles solely based upon merit (Davis and Maldonado, 2015; Eagly &
Carli, 2007; Pace, 2018; Raconteur.net, 2020). There has been an unfair amount of pressure
placed on WOC to hold themselves accountable for outperforming their counterparts while
having to maneuver through the leadership labyrinth in an attempt to attain senior leadership
roles. Meanwhile, senior leadership roles are more often awarded favorably to White men based
upon their potential versus their actual accomplishments, as the later has been the case for WOC
and White women (Davis & Maldonado, 2015; Industry by Industry: How to Move Forward,
2011; Shellenbarger, 2012). Based upon this study’s findings, with the presence of more
inclusive workplaces, WOC will not be forced to have to work harder to prove their capabilities
and have access to more senior-level promotion opportunities based upon potential just as White
men are. Next, other people with intersectionality (i.e., White women, women of color, or men
of color who are members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and/or questioning,
intersex, asexual, two-spirit and other ways in which self-identification is chosen
(LGBTQIA2S+)) and White women, could benefit from. The prejudiced and biased treatment of
WOC that has been enabled within company environments by those maintaining the majority of
power (White males) may be similar to what members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community and
White women have experienced. Similarly, to WOC, if more inclusivity within work
environments were to be practiced across organizations, these groups would not have to deal
with the bias they face that often stands in the way of them being treat fairly and afforded
opportunities for more representation in the senior leadership ranks. Whether determined by
federally or state mandated reporting, company-wide engagement surveys, roundtable
discussions, or all-hands (or town hall) meetings, it is imperative that each Fortune 500
organization consistently measure and monitor the level of inclusion that WOC have been
101
experiencing, from the top down. The participants of this study worked in environments that
often isolated them from having access to attainment of the highest-level leadership positions
within their companies. It should no longer be acceptable that the publicly traded, Fortune 500
companies, that are consistently monitored by federal, state, and local agencies, are not held
accountable for instituting workplace changes that will advocate justice for WOC (and other
marginalized employees) inclusivity at all levels.
Recommendations for Practice
The dismantling of workplace barriers that have typically prevented WOC advancement
can be best accomplished through the implementation of best practices that have proven to be
successful. Findings were indicative that the WOC leaders interviewed as part of this study
perceived their direct ability to attain the highest-level leadership positions in their companies
was impacted by their work environments. This aligned with Bandura’s (2012) argument that
even with self-efficacy in play, an individual possesses the ability to affect their life’s path, only
to a certain extent. The literature review confirmed many work environments supported
systemically unfavorable gender and race treatment that prevented WOC senior leadership
advancement into the highest leadership roles (Bogler, n.d.; Clancy et al., 2017; Eagly & Carli,
2007; Haines et al., 2016; Hunt et al., 2014; Ladson-Billings, 2013; Sanchez-Hucles & Davis,
2010; Zenger and Folkman, 2012). This study’s quota-related findings, though only revealed
from two of the six participants, Vicky and Tina, aligned well with existing literature. In
consideration that several articles and research point towards the consistency of systemic gender
and race bias within the workplace, it seems that the use of a quota may be an effective equity
tool in breaking down potent WOC promotion barriers whereby other tools have not been as
effective (Catalyst, 2013; Corporate Boards Taking Steps to Promote Diversity, 2012; Mölders et
102
al., 2018; Sojo et al., 2016; Terjesen et al., 2016). Based upon this study’s findings and the
literature, severe intervention within the workplace should take place to correct the inequity of
WOC senior leadership promotions is necessary.
To address this study’s problem of practice (extremely low levels of WOC in senior
leadership roles) (Carter & Peters, 2016; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2020; Sanchez-
Hucles & Davis, 2010; Warner et al., 2018), the following recommendations should be applied:
1. Women of color senior leadership quotas focused on establishing a minimum of 30%
WOC representation should be established through legislation or public policy.
2. Women of color advancement accountability should be applied at the company-level
through the implementation of several diversity initiatives that include social
norming, social accountability, and mentorship and sponsorship commitments tied to
performance.
For consideration of senior leadership position promotability, WOC should be enabled to
demonstrate their talent, work ethic, and overall capabilities to lead just as White women and
men do. Yet quotas and advancement accountability for WOC promotability into senior
leadership roles should rest with an organization and its management. Participants in this study
were making progress towards attaining the highest-level leadership roles in their organizations
but faced an uphill battle against workplace bias factors that often rested outside their influence
and control. Without heightened efficacy, it seems other inspiring WOC senior leader candidates
may be at even more of a disadvantage assuming systemic gender and racial bias is not
mitigated. Bandura (2012) states that social modeling is one of the four sources that develops an
individual’s belief in their capabilities. It occurs when a person can observe another’s success
(who is similar to them relative to social identities) which motivates the observer to believe they
103
too can succeed (Bandura, 2012). To further strengthen one’s efficacy, the deprivation of social
modeling needs immediate attention in parallel with Bandura’s (2012) focus on helping an
observer of a successful social model to be inspired. Therefore, organizations and their
management can more effectively improve upon the deficiency of WOC senior leader
representation.
According to Pruit et al. (2018) and Pace (2018), management should be educated
regarding the challenges faced by WOC. As this study’s findings appeared to support, not all
White male leaders exercised empathy for WOC’s promotion struggles as their mentors and
sponsors did. Ensuring through company policy that WOC are included in the pool of
management development candidates who are provided such growth opportunities is crucial in
strengthening a company’s pro-equity culture. Next, management should be held accountable for
WOC inclusion, sponsorship, and access to growth opportunities. As a segue from company
policy advocating for a pro-equity culture, starting at the top layers of management,
managements’ performance evaluations can be tied to their efforts towards proactively
mentoring, sponsorship, and enforcing that growth opportunities are accessible to WOC (Pace,
2018; Pruit et al., 2018).
Through the insight provided by those interviewed in this study, having more WOC
senior leaders filling senior-level roles as expeditiously as possible should help effectively
address this study’s problem of practice as inclusivity could be positively impacted. Therefore, a
synthesis between justice (transformation where equitable access, treatment, and opportunities
are afforded to all regardless of social constructs) and liberation (whereby a person can thrive
without obstructive and oppressive traditional systems) should occur on behalf of WOC to foster
their senior-level career elevations. Women of color high-level position quotas and diversity
104
initiatives implementation in support of increased representation of WOC holding senior level
roles should prove transformative within the workplace. This section provided more details about
each of these recommendations.
Recommendation 1: WOC Senior Leadership Quotas Should be Implemented
There is a strong influence by environmental determinants (Bandura, 2012), by which
workplace cultures affected by systemic bias deter WOC leader promotions, highly contributing
to low WOC representation in senior leadership roles. Establishing quotas will help more
expeditiously tear down unjust, discriminatory barriers that prevent WOC senior leadership
promotion equity while providing WOC more opportunities to benefit from social modeling
(Bandura, 2012). Borrowing from Dyer et al.’s (2011) best innovation practices in addressing
problems, associating the lack of WOC in senior leadership roles to similar challenges faced in
low representation of women and WOC on company board of director roles, within general
employment, and across the world’s political stages, should be enacted upon. Association is one
of the five capabilities demonstrated by the best innovative problem solvers whereby a solution
to a problem within an unrelated environment can also be effective in the environment needing a
similar solution (Dyer et al., 2011).
The use of quotas is necessary for the ascendancy of equal gender representation justice
and often deemed as a strong measure capable of breaking down overwhelming barriers
(Mölders et al., 2018; Sojo et al., 2016; Terjesen et al., 2016). Critical workplace culture change
can occur in organizations because female leadership quotas challenge the male leadership
dominance status quo (Mölders et al., 2018). Yet Forstenlechner et al. (2012) make an extremely
important point that perceptions of women leadership capabilities can be eroded by the use of
quotas. They encourage solicitation of leadership and employee support of using quotas
105
(including those who may directly benefit from such quotas) is key for quotas to be effective
(Forstenlechner et al., 2012). Mölders et al. (2018) conducted extensive research that identifies
employees’ rationale for supporting women leadership quotas stems from the employees’
understanding of gender stereotypes and how women are perceived through their agency and
communality. Therefore, it is helpful for organizations to create a communication plan
addressing gender and racial stereotypes affecting WOC leaders and the perception of their
agency and communality (Mölders et al., 2018). In direct relation to the WOC leaders in this
study, who recognized their leadership abilities were foundational to their success while being
forced to navigate through promotion barriers, it seemed reasonable that they too would be
supportive of WOC leadership quotas. Their first-hand comprehension of gender and racial
barriers faced in their higher-level role pursuits gave them a solid perspective regarding WOC
agency and communality.
According to Coe (2019), the extent to how accountability is addressed, as it relates to
quotas, could affect the outcome of the intended responsibility mandated. He offers an example
where in December 2014, the Ontario Securities Commission in Canada legislated a requirement
that companies increase the representation of women on their boards to 30% (Coe, 2019). If the
companies did not comply, they need to explain the reason for their failure to comply, yet by late
2018, there was no substantial change in the make-up of boards (Coe, 2019). Many companies
rested on their inability to find qualified women so alternatively if the companies would have
been fined versus being able to explain why they could not comply, the result might have been
quite different. Also, Hughes (2011) noted that if there are not viable consequences for quota
mandates, the mandates may be ineffective. He references that there were little parliamentary
representation changes when Honduras instituted a 30% (female) gender quota without any
106
consequences for noncompliance as the quota were ignored by most parties (Hughes, 2011).
Stoval (2018) suggests that the best way to ensure change is to put somebody’s job on the line
more or less, which though a step well beyond Coe’s (2019) financial penalty alternative, could
make for an impactful change.
Coe (2019) and Centola et al. (2018) highlight studies suggesting that in order for
marginalized groups’ status as an influential body for cultural change to occur, their
representation needs to be about 30% or higher. Specifically, within a study’s trials, minority
populations of 25% or higher were more likely to have influence over a dominant stance
(Centola et al., 2018). As of 2020, there was at least one woman on the board of all Standard and
Poor’s (S&P) 500 companies, and the aggregate account of women directors (board members)
measured 28%, the highest percentage to date (Spencer Stewart, 2021). S&P 500 companies
make up a stock market index that captures the measurement of 500 large public companies
listed on US stock exchanges (Spencer Stewart, 2021).
In 2021, the first female, Black, and Asian, Vice President of the United States was
sworn in (Relman, 2020). Considering the historic events of the first female, Black, and Asian,
Vice President of the United States (Relman, 2020) and the aggregate count of S&P 500 board
members measuring 28% (Spencer Stewart, 2021), coupled with the highest number of women
of color (51) entering into congress in 2021 along with its highest percentage of women
representation (27%) in history (LATimes.com, 2020; Pew Research Center, 2021), it seems like
an ideal time to initiate WOC senior promotion-centric change. Taking advantage of the highest
level of executive women leaders and law makers the US has experienced in its history can
positively encourage necessary WOC quota-related legislation to promote WOC senior-level
advancement.
107
Through an explanation of gender and racial stereotypes, and the perception of WOC
agency and communality, the concern that the use of quotas will delude WOC leadership
capabilities can be mitigated. An organization can better gain support for WOC leadership quotas
from its employees with a solid WOC leadership quota communication plan to peak the
effectiveness of implementing quotas.
Recommendation 2: WOC Advancement Accountability via Diversity Initiatives
In consideration of this study’s problem of practice, social norming can be influential in
impacting change. Women and men alike (regardless of color) who possess talent, a strong work
ethic, a positive attitude, and high moral character should be afforded the same opportunities for
promotion into all levels (including executive levels) within a truly meritocratic environment
(McNamee and Miller, 2018). There appears to be an opportunity to use nudge theory (Thaler et
al., 2008) to help reduce systemic WOC promotion (into senior leadership) bias in the
workplace. Nudging can help establish that promoting WOC into senior leadership should be a
social norm. Thaler et al. (2008) argue that corporate workplaces may benefit from nudges too.
Neilson (2017) adds that promotion decisions are not always based on factual
considerations, and instead, biased judgements are at the heart of the matter. Therefore, to
overcome the underrepresentation of WOC in senior leadership roles, Fortune 500 companies
and other organizations should be pressured by the public, each other, and internally within their
environments to promote more WOC into their highest-level leadership ranks, to attain
promotion equity. Specifically, within their own companies, their C-level executives and other
senior leadership need to be encouraged that as model corporate citizens in support of social
justice, they are expected to advocate for and take necessary actions to ensure increased WOC
senior leadership promotions is a top priority. Industry leaders within the financial services and
108
technology sectors are among many already holding themselves accountable and being
transparent publicly with their diversity numbers (Dobbins et al., 2013), even posting how they
are doing at filling roles with women of color at the highest levels. This demonstration of social
responsibility and model behavior should become a norm.
Shellenbarger (2012) points out that sponsorships, mentorships, and succession planning
should be key diversity initiatives aimed at eliminating women career enhancement barriers;
strategically, allies across functions, levels, and racial groups should be brought into the mix to
best support WOC promotability. Fortune 500 and other large companies should apply the
following diversity initiative strategies in support of WOC career advancement (Industry by
Industry: How to Move Forward, 2011; Shellenbarger, 2012):
1. Include the CEO and establish diversity targets that they, other executives, senior leaders,
and managers are held accountable for through their annual performance reviews. When
their own rewards and recognition (including promotions) are on display, prior
unconscious biased and conscious biased behavior changes should be likely.
2. Employees at all levels should be responsible for embracing diversity awareness and
improvement, as it should be embedded into the company’s culture, and performance
metrics should be used to ensure that diversity policies are applied.
3. Executives (senior vice presidents and other top leaders) should directly nominate women
for leadership development roles.
4. Women advancement should include executive committee invitations.
5. High-potential mid-level women in management should be: (a) identified early on in their
careers, (b) mentored, (c) be encouraged to participate in strategy meetings, (d) given the
109
opportunity to collaborate with other leaders across different functions, and (e) make
presentations in support of visibility.
6. Sponsorships and mentoring (in particular including connecting with proteges a couple of
levels below) should be a required responsibility of those in upper-level leadership
positions, with goals tied to performance and pay. The expectation of upper-level leaders
should be that: (a) they advocate for the next level promotions of the women they
sponsor/mentor; (b) they help ensure the women being sponsored/mentored have the
support they need to demonstrate their potential to be successful and be promoted based
upon their potential, and not their performance (similar to men as they are typically
promoted based upon their potential), and (c) they require regular status progress reports
be incorporated.
7. Social modeling should be active whereby senior women connect with younger women to
promote encouragement and hope.
In parallel with the diversity initiative elements suggested, Dobbins et al. (2013) suggests
organizations (usually stemming from the
CEO’s charge) form diversity task forces made up of volunteer department heads and members
of marginalized groups, to help assess its social accountability. Each quarter, diversity metrics
across the company can be analyzed to determine which areas need to be addressed and after
identifying where problems rest and solutions are developed, improvements can be implemented
(Dobbins et al., 2013).
The recommendation to implement several diversity initiatives discussed in this section
should help to complement foundational diversity improvements that have made little progress
since the formation of the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission back in 1991 and ineffective
110
diversity improvement programs instituted since then (U.S. Department of Labor, 1995;
McKinsey and Company and LeanIn, 2015). By coupling internally launched diversity initiatives
and rolling out WOC leadership quotas, WOC’s likeliness to be promoted into more higher-level
roles across Fortune 500 companies and other progressive organizations should increase
significantly.
Recommendations for Future Research
The underrepresentation of WOC in senior leadership ranks at Fortune 500 companies
and other industry giants is a complex problem to continue to address. The complexity is such
because the problem has been deeply rooted in systemic gender inequality, racism, and
intersectional experiences, equating to greater negative experiences than the aggregate
experience of sexism and racism (Crenshaw, 1989). To effectively address this problem, further
research needs to be aimed at understanding how to replicate the measures that large
organizations have taken resulting in at least 30% representation of WOC in the organization’s
executive ranks.
Hughes’ (2011) analysis of the effect that gender quotas have on representation reveals
that when some groups representation is increased, representation of other marginalized groups
(i.e., men of color) could be negatively impacted. Therefore, companies who have accomplished
30% or more representation of WOC in senior leadership while not negatively impacting the
representation of other marginalized groups (i.e., men of color), should be sought out first.
Stemming from those organizations, it will also be important to study the most effective diversity
initiatives implemented that yielded the highest return related to positive long-term
environmental changes. The changes that were most effective in maintainable sustainable bias-
free environment-based results should be traced back to the diversity initiative/s implemented.
111
Finally, research related to achieving social justice success for marginalized community
members through the use of quotas supported by U.S. legislation and public policy should be
conducted.
This study aligned well with other marginalized member inequity studies and career
advancement studies, and overall workforce planning research. Future research intended to
understand better the similarities between these environments and how to make equitable
changes so the make-up of the US workforce consists of representation at all levels of leadership
aligned with the US demographics will be ideal. Future research findings could help support the
momentum of changes intended to be made from this study’s recommendations.
Conclusion
This study explored women of color experiences, based upon their attainment of senior
level positions within Fortune 500 companies (or highly recognizable branded organizations that
may not currently be officially recognized as Fortune 500 companies) and examined how their
ascent into senior leadership was supported or hindered by their work environments. Through
virtual interviews, data for this study were collected, recorded, and transcribed, in addition to
research and reflection notes taken, and then deductive data analysis took place. Social cognitive
theory guided the data analysis process, and then assessment of key concepts within the
conceptual framework occurred.
Prevalent race and gender bias was at the heart of the problem, as suggested by Kay and
Gorman’s (2012) assessment of the vast discrepancies in mentorship, career progression, and
executive leadership opportunities among WOC versus Whites and men of color. Additionally,
stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination affect WOC career advancement more than White
women (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Northouse, 2016; McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2015). Next,
112
women of color representation in senior management are lower than that of White women due to
their smaller talent pipeline, intersectionality related treatment, and the slow pace of diversity
program effectiveness (McKinsey & Company & LeanIn, 2015; McKinsey & Company &
LeanIn, 2020). With this disparity in place for WOC, their ability to recognize their full potential
as top leaders within companies is in jeopardy.
The reduction and eventual elimination of foundational social barriers that have typically
prevented WOC advancement into senior leadership could be best accomplished when executive
leadership, and human resources and diversity professionals commit to: (a) acknowledging the
struggles that WOC encounter to attain the highest-level positions, (b) improving equity for
WOC so that they will be considered for promotion opportunities equally based upon their
potential just as men are, and (c) launching initiatives to effectively deal with the problem to
ensure that WOC are not treated unfairly throughout their career advancement. As it has been
estimated that WOC will likely represent the majority of women and also the U.S. workforce by
2060 (Pace, 2018), WOC promotion equity improvement should be treated as a priority
nationwide in support of equitable social justice and to ensure their corporate representation can
inspire future generations.
113
References
Aecf.org. (2021, April). Equity vs. equality and other racial justice definitions.
https://www.aecf.org/blog/racial-justice-definitions
Ahmed, S. (2007). The language of diversity. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30(2), 235-256.
Andrade, L. M., Lundberg, C. A. (2018). The function to serve: A social-justice-oriented
investigation of community college mission statements. Journal of Hispanic Higher
Education, 17, 61-75. doi:10.1177/1538192716653503
Atlassian. (2018). State of diversity and inclusion in U.S. tech. Retrieved from
https://www.atlassian.com/diversity/survey/2018
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman & Co.
Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Asian Journal of Social
Psychology, 2(1), 21-41.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9, 75–78. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Bandura, A. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt
(Eds.), Great Minds in Management (pp. 9-35). Oxford: Oxford University.
Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. Journal of
Management, 38(1), 9-44. doi: 10.1177/0149206311410606
Bandura, A. (2018). Toward a psychology of human agency: Pathways and reflections.
114
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 130-136.
Besley, T., Folke, O., Persson, T., & Rickne, J. (2017). Gender quotas and the crisis of the
mediocre man: Theory and evidence from sweden. The American Economic
Review, 107(8), 2204–2242. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20160080
Bell, D. (1980). Brown v. Board of Education and the interest-convergence dilemma. Harvard
Law Review, 93, 513.
Benya, F., Widnall, S., Johnson, P., National Academies of Sciences, Policy and Global Affairs,
Committee on Women in Science, & Committee on the Impacts of Sexual Harassment in
Academia. (2018). Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences
in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (p. 310).
https://doi.org/10.17226/24994
Bogler, M. (n.d.) What’s the difference between diversity, inclusion, and equity in “General
Assembly Blog.” General Assembly. https://generalassembly/blog/diversity-inclusion-
equity-differences-in-meaning/
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2018). Employee tenure in 2018. Retrieved from http://libproxy.usc.
edu/login?url=https://search-proquest.com.libproxy2.usc.edu/docview/2110259174?acco
.untid=14749
Butkus, R., Serchen, J., Moyer, D., Bornstein, S., & Hingle, S. (2018). Achieving Gender Equity
in Physician Compensation and Career Advancement: A Position Paper of the American
College of Physicians. Annals of Internal Medicine, 168(10), 721–723.
https://doi.org/10.7326/M17-3438
Carter, D. R., & Peters, T. (2016). The underrepresentation of African American women in
115
executive leadership: What’s getting in the way. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly,
7(4), 115-134.
Catalyst. (2013). Increasing gender diversity on boards: Current index of formal
approaches. https://www.catalyst.org/research/increasing-gender-diversity-on-boards-
current-index-of-formal-approaches/
Centola, D., Becker, J., Brackbill, D., & Baronchelli, A. (2018). Experimental evidence for
tipping points in social convention. Science (American Association for the Advancement
of Science), 360(6393), 1116–1119. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aas8827
Celis, K., Erzeel, S., Mügge, L., & Damstra, A. (2014). Quotas and intersectionality: Ethnicity
and gender in candidate selection. International Political Science Review, 35(1), 41–54.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512113507733
Center for the Study of Social Policy (2019). Key equity terms and concepts: A glossary for
shared understanding. https://cssp.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Key-Equity-Terms-
and-Concepts-vol1.pdf
Chávez, A. F., & Guido-DiBrito, F. (1999). Racial and ethnic identity and development.
New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1999(84), 39-47.
doi:10.1002/ace.8405
Chin, M. M. (2016). Asian-americans, bamboo ceilings, and affirmative action. Contexts, 15, 70
–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15365042 16628845
Clancy, K. B., Lee, K. M., Rodgers, E. M., & Richey, C. (2017). Double jeopardy in astronomy
and planetary science: Women of color face greater risks of gendered and racial
harassment. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 122(7), 1610-1623.
Coe, I. R., Wiley, R., & Bekker, L.-G. (2019). Organisational best practices towards gender
116
equality in science and medicine. The Lancet (British Edition), 393(10171), 587–593.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33188-X
Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2014). Women and Top Leadership Positions: Towards an Institutional
Analysis: Women and Leadership. Gender, Work, and Organization, 21(1), 91–103.
https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12018
Corporate Boards Taking Steps To Promote Diversity. (2012). PR Newswire.
https://www.spencerstuart.com/who-we-are/media-center/corporate-boards-taking-steps-
to-promote-diversity
Cozier, Y., Yu, J., Coogan, P., Bethea, T., Rosenberg, L., & Palmer, J. (2014). Racism,
segregation, and risk of obesity in the black women’s health study. American Journal of
Epidemiology, 179(7), 875–883. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwu004
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist
critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. The
University of Chicago Legal Forum, 164, 139-167.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cuberes, D., & Teignier, M. (2016). Aggregate effects of gender gaps in the labor market: A
quantitative estimate. Journal of Human Capital, 10(1), 1–32.
https://doi.org/10.1086/683847
Davidson, M. J. (1997) The black and ethnic minority woman manager: Cracking the concrete
ceiling. London: SAGE.
Davis, D. R., & Maldonado, C. (2015). Shattering the glass ceiling: The leadership
117
development of african american women in higher education. Advancing Women in
Leadership, 35, 48-64.
De Beaufort, V., & Summers, L. (2014). Women on boards: Sharing a rigorous vision of the
functioning of boards, demanding a new model of corporate governance. Journal of
Research in Gender Studies, 4(1), 101–140.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York: NYU
Press.
Dijk, K. (2020). Meritocracy a myth?: A multilevel perspective of how social inequality
accumulates through work. Organizational Psychology Review, 10(3-4), 240–269.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386620930063
Dobbin, F., & Kalev, A. (2016). Why diversity programs fail. Harvard Business
Review. Retrieved from https://web-a-ebscohost-
com.libproxy1.usc.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=a64a1c8b-f535-40f1-
9414-3a2fef7940d9%40sdc-v-sessmgr01
Dyer, J., Gregersen, H. B., & Christensen, C. M. (2011). The innovators DNA: Mastering the
five skills of disruptive innovators. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become
leaders. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Eaton, A., Saunders, J., Jacobson, R., & West, K. (2019). How gender and race stereotypes
impact the advancement of scholars in STEM: Professors’ biased evaluations of
physics and biology post-doctoral candidates. Sex Roles, 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01052-w
Elliot, A. J., Dweck, C. S., & Yeager, D. S. (2018). Handbook of competence and motivation.
118
New York: Guilford Press.
Fernando, C., & Mumphrey, C. (2020, December 20). Racism targets asian food, business
during COVID-19 pandemic. Yahoo!News.
https://secureservercdn.net/104.238.69.231/a1w.90d.myftpupload.com/wp-
content/uploads/2020/10/Stop_AAPI_Hate_National_Report_200805.pdf
Fitzgerald, L. F., Gelfand, M. J., & Drasgow, F. (1995). Measuring sexual harassment:
Theoretical and psychometric advances. Basic and Applied Social Psychology,
17, 425–445. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp1704_2
Forbes.com (2020, December). Starbucks names melody hobson board head making her only
black female chair of s&p 500 company.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/elanagross/2020/12/09/starbucks-names-mellody-hobson-
board-head-making-her-only-black-female-chair-of-sp-500-
company/__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!64L9m9dQfcWnQLJhFF-
mSay0GTYZAFQsnVouQxjJSxbzZ2PAuEUYoPsBTRZuR7Y$
Forstenlechner, I., Lettice, F., & Özbilgin, M. (2012). Questioning quotas: Applying a relational
framework for diversity management practices in the United Arab Emirates. Human
Resource Management Journal, 22(3), 299–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-
8583.2011.00174.x
Fortune.com. (2020, July). Fortune 500. https://fortune.com/fortune500/
Gee, B., & Peck, D. (2017). The illusion of asian success: Scant progress for minorities in
cracking the glass ceiling from 2007–2015. Retrieved from
https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.ascendleadership.org/resource/resmg
r/research/theillusionofasiansuccess.
119
Georgieva, K., & Bibeau, M. (2018). This is the global price of gender inequality. World
Economic Forum. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/the-high-
price-of-gender-inequality
Gladman, K., & Lamb, M. (2013). GMI ratings 2013 women on boards survey, GMI, Vol. 37
No. 2, pp. 145 - 164.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism
as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist,
56(2), 109.
Gross, J. (1993). Arizona hopes holiday for King will mend its image. New York Times, January
17, p. 16.
Guinier, L., & Torres, G. (2003). The miner’s canary: Enlisting race, resisting power,
transforming democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Haines, E. L., Deaux, K., & Lofaro, N. (2016). The times they are a-changing… or are they not?
A comparison of gender stereotypes, 1983–2014. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
40(3), 353–363. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684316634081.
Hinga, B. (2020). Week 3 · Ethics and Theory of Change. [Webinar]. 2SC.
https://2sc.rossieronline.usc.edu/ap/courses/2129/sections/8f87db70-481e-4229-a5cc-
6b18f4ad3103/coursework/module/09f01774-b5d4-403b-80ba-
4c7d377bfd8d/segment/1032713f-fa2a-4b09-814c-ed2a7838c28b
Hegewisch, A., Deitch, C., & Murphy, E. (2011). Ending sex and race discrimination in the
workplace: Legal interventions that push the envelope. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1820855189/
Hewlett, S.A., Peraino, K., Sherbin, L., & Sumberg, K. (2010). The sponsor effect: Breaking
120
through the last glass ceiling. Harvard Business Review. Accessed at
https://30percentclub.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/The-Sponsor-Effect.pdf
Hills, J. (2015). Addressing gender quotas in south africa: Women employment and gender
equality legislation. Deakin Law Review, 20(1), 153–.
https://doi.org/10.21153/dlr2015vol20no1art498
Ho, I., Dinh, K., Bellefontaine, S., & Irving, A. (2012). Sexual harassment and posttraumatic
stress symptoms among asian and white women. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment
& Trauma, 21(1), 95–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2012.633238
Hughes, M. M. (2011). Intersectionality, quotas, and minority women’s political representation
worldwide. American Political Science Review 105(3): 604–620.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055411000293
Hunt, V., Layton, D., & Prince, S. (2014, Nov 24). Why diversity matters. McKinsey &
Company. Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/business-
functions/organization/our-insights/why-diversity-matters
Hurley, D. and Choudhary, A. (2016), Factors influencing attainment of CEO position for
women. Gender in Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 250-265.
https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-01-2016-0004
Hyun, J. (2012). Leadership principles for capitalizing on culturally diverse teams: The bamboo
ceiling revisited. Leader to Leader, 2012, 14 –19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ltl.20
Ibarra, H. (2015). Network across and out (Chapter 3). In Act like a leader, think like a leader.
Boston, MA: Harvard Review Press.
Industry by industry: How to move forward. (2011, Apr 10). Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-
121
com.libproxy2.usc.edu/newspapers/industry-how-move-forward/docview/861164726/se-
2?accountid=14749
Kay F. M. & Gorman, E. H. (2012). Developmental practices, organizational culture, and
minority representation in organizational leaderships: The care of partners in large U.S.
law firms, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 639,
Gender and Race Inequality in Management: Critical Issues. New Evidence, 99–113.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41328592.
Koch, A., D’Mello, S., & Sackett, P. (2015). A meta-analysis of gender stereotypes and bias in
experimental simulations of employment decision making. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 100(1), 128–161. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036734
Kurtulus, F. A. (2016). The impact of affirmative action on the employment of minorities and
women: A longitudinal analysis using three decades of EEO-1 filings. Journal of Policy
Analysis and Management, 35(1), 34–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.21881
Kurtulus, F. A., & Tamaskovic-Devey, D. (2012). Do female top managers help women to
advance? A panel study using EEO-1 records. The ANNALS of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science, 639, 173–197. doi:10.1177/0002716211418445
Ladson-Billings, G. (2013). Critical race theory-What it is not!. In M. Lynn & Dixson, A. D.
(Eds.), Handbook of critical race theory in education. Routledge.
Lai, L., & Babcock, L. C. (2013). Asian Americans and workplace discrimination: The
interplay between sex of evaluators and the perception of social skills. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 34, 310 –326. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.1799
LATimes.com (2020, November) 2020 election most women of color 2021 congress.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-11-18/2020-election-most-women-of-color-
122
2021-congress
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
Littleton, H., Abrahams, N., Bergman, M., Berliner, L., Blaustein, M., Cohen, J., ... & Pina, A.
(2018). Sexual assault, sexual abuse, and harassment: Understanding the mental health
impact and providing care for survivors: An International Society for Traumatic Stress
Studies Briefing Paper. International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies.
Matsa, D. A., & Miller, A. R. (2011). Chipping away at the glass ceiling: Gender spillovers in
corporate leadership. The American Economic Review, 101(3), 635–639. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.elon.edu/stable/29783820
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3 rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks: SAGE.
McKinsey & Company & LeanIn (2015). Women in the workplace: 2015. Retrieved from
http://womenintheworkplace.com/ui/pdfs/Women_in_the_Workplace_2015.pdf?v=5
McKinsey & Company & LeanIn (2020). Women in the workplace 2020. Retrieved from
https://wiw-report.s3.amazonaws.com/Women_in_the_Workplace_2020.pdf
McNamee, S. J. & Miller, R. K. (2018). The meritocracy myth (4
th
edition). London: Rowman &
Littlefield, Chapter 2.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4 th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mölders, S., Brosi, P., Bekk, M., Spörrle, M., & Welpe, I. M. (2018). Support for quotas for
women in leadership: The influence of gender stereotypes. Human Resource
Management, 57(4), 869–882. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21882
Murakami, M., & Tsubokura, M. (2017). Evaluating risk communication after the Fukushima
123
disaster based on nudge theory. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health, 29(2_suppl),
193S-200S. https://doi.org/10.1177/1010539517691338
Murphy, M. (2019). Introduction to “#MeToo Movement.” Journal of Feminist Family
Therapy, 31(2-3), 63–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/08952833.2019.1637088
Northouse, P. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. (7
th
ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publishers.
Oguntoyinbo, L. (2014). Breaking through the bamboo ceiling: Despite an overrepresentation in
the academy, Asian Americans in leadership positions are rare. Diverse Issues in Higher
Education, 31, 10 –1
Omi, M., & Winant, H. (2015). Racial formation in the united states (3rd. ed.). New
York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Pace, C. (2018). How women of color get to senior management. Harvard Business Review.
Retrieved from https://hbr. org/2018/08/how-women-of-color-get-to-senior-management.
Page, S. (2019). The diversity bonus: How great teams pay off in the knowledge
economy. In The Diversity Bonus (REV - Revised). Princeton University Press.
Pew Research Center (2015). Women and leadership. Retrieved from: http://
www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/01/14/women-and-leadership/
Pew Research Center (2021). A record number of women are serving in the 117
th
congress.
Retrieved from: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/01/15/a-record-number-of-
women-are-serving-in-the-117th-congress/
Pinkett, R., Robinson, J., & Patterson, P. (2011). Black faces in white places: 10 gamechanging
strategies to achieve success and find greatness. New York, NY:
American Management Association.
124
Raconteur.net (2020, December). The future of fintech is female.
https://www.raconteur.net/finance/fintech/female-fintech-founders/
Relman, E. (2020, Nov 06). Kamala harris makes history as the first female, black, and asian
american vice president-elect. Business Insider. Retrieved from
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-
com.libproxy1.usc.edu/newspapers/kamala-harris-makes-history-as-first-female-
black/docview/2458216468/se-2?accountid=14749
Rosette, A. S., & Livingston, R. W. (2012). Failure is not an option for black women: Effects of
organizational performance on leaders with single versus dual-subordinate identities.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(5), 1162-1167.
Sabharwal, M. (2014). Is diversity management sufficient? Organizational inclusion to further
performance. Public Personnel Management, 43(2), 197-217.
Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. 3rd Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Sanchez-Hucles, J. V., Davis, D. D. (2010, April). Women and women of color in leadership:
Complexity, identity, and intersectionality. American Psychologist, volume 65(3), 171-
181.
Saunders, M. N. (2019). Understanding research philosophy and approaches to theory
development. In Research Methods for Business Students, 5/e. Pearson Education India.
Seguino, S. (2011). Help or hindrance? Religion’s impact on gender inequality in attitudes
and outcomes. World Development, 39(8), 1308–1321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
worlddev.2010.12.004
Shaw, E., Hegewisch, A., & Hess, C. (2018). Sexual harassment and assault at work:
125
Understanding the costs. Institute for Women’s Policy Research Publication, IWPR B,
376.
Shellenbarger, S. (2012, May 07). Women in the economy (a special report) --- the xx
factor: What's holding women back? --- a task force of business, government and
academic leaders set out to confront obstacles that keep women from participating fully
in the economy; Here are their recommendations. Wall Street
Journal http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-
com.libproxy2.usc.edu/newspapers/women-economy-special-report-xx-factor-
whats/docview/1011169427/se-2?accountid=14749
Sherbin, L. & Rashid, R. (2017, Feb. 1). Diversity doesn’t stick without inclusion. Harvard
Business Review. Accessed at https://hbr.org/2017/02/diversity-doesnt-stick-without-
inclusion
Sojo, V. E., Wood, R. E., Wood, S. A., & Wheeler, M. A. (2016). Reporting requirements,
targets, and quotas for women in leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 519-536.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.12.003.
Solal, I., & Snellman, K. (2019). Women don’t mean business? Gender penalty in board
composition. Organization Science, 30(6), 1270-1288. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2019.
1301
Spencer Stewart (2021). 2020 U.S. spencer stewart board index. Retrieved
from:https://www.spencerstuart.com/-
/media/2020/december/ssbi2020/2020_us_spencer_stuart_board_index.pdf
Spickard, P. R. (1992). The illogic of American racial categories. In M. P. P. Root (Ed.),
Racially mixed people in America. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
126
Sue, D. (2017). Microaggressions and “Evidence”: Empirical or Experiential Reality?
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(1), 170–172.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616664437
Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., & Holder, A. (2008). Racial microaggressions in the life
experience of Black Americans. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39(3),
329–336. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.39.3.329
Sugerman, L. (2018). # MeToo in traditionally male-dominated occupations: Preventing and
addressing sexual harassment. Chicago: Chicago Women in the Trades
Retrieved from http://womensequitycenter.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/10/
CWIT-MeToo-in-Male-Dominated-Jobs-003.pdf
Starbucks.com. (2020, December). Starbucks announces the appointment of melody hobson as
non-executive chair of the board. https://stories.starbucks.com/press/2020/starbucks-
announces-the-appointment-of-mellody-hobson-as-non-executive-chair-of-the-
board/?utm_campaign=PostBeyond&utm_source=LinkedIn&utm_medium=Social&utm
_term=%2313360
Stovall, J. (2018, Sep 13). How to get serious about diversity and inclusion in the workplace |
Janet Stovall [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvdHqS3ryw0
Terjesen, S., & Sealy, R. (2016). Board gender quotas: Exploring ethical tensions from a multi-
theoretical perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 26(1), 23–65.
https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2016.7
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and
Happiness. Yale University Press.
TheWallStreetJournal.com. (2021, January). Walgreens to name starbucks executive roz brewer
127
as ceo. https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/walgreens-to-name-starbucks-executive-roz-
brewer-as-ceo-11611700794
Thomas, M. & Reese, K. (2019). New California law mandates female representation on boards
of directors by December 2019. Retrieved from:
https://ogletree.com/insights/2019-04-03/new-california-law-mandates-female-
representation-on-boards-of-directors-by-december-2019/
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2014). R-words: Refusing research. In D. Paris & M. T.
Winn (Eds.), Humanizing research: Decolonizing qualitative inquiry for youth and
communities (pp. 223– 247). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
USA Congress Joint Economic Committee (2010), “Invest in women, invest in America: a
comprehensive review of women in the US economy”, available at:
http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/9118a9ef-0771-4777-9c1f-
8232fe70a45c/compendium-sans-appendix.pdf
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015). Table 11: Employed persons by detailed occupation,
sex, race, and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. Division of Labor Force Statistics. Retrieved
from http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). Table 310:
Degrees conferred by degree-granting institutions, by level of degree and sex of student
1869-70 through 2021-22. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d12/
tables/dt12_310.asp
U.S. Department of Labor. (1995). Good for business: Making full use of the nation’s
human capital: Report from the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission. Retrieved from
http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/history/reich/reports/ceiling2.pdf
128
Warner, J., Ellmann, N., & Boesch, D. (2018). The women’s leadership gap. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/2164080083/
Williams, J. B. (2018). Accountability as a debiasing strategy: Testing the effect of racial
diversity in employment committees. Iowa Law Review, 103(4), 1593–1638.
Wodon, Q., & de La Brière, B. (2018). Unrealized potential: The high cost of gender
inequality in earnings. Washington, DC: World
Women in leadership - The UK may have avoided quotas but is the progress just tokenism?
(2015). M2 Presswire.
Women of Color Network (2018). Women of color. Retrieved from
http://www.wocninc.org/about-wocn/term-women-of-color/
Wyatt, M., & Silvester, J. (2015). Reflections on the labyrinth: Investigating black and minority
ethnic leaders’ career experiences. Human Relations (New York), 68(8), 1243–1269.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726714550890
Yu, H. H. (2020). Revisiting the bamboo ceiling: Perceptions from asian americans on
experiencing workplace discrimination. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 11(3),
158–167. https://doi.org/10.1037/aap0000193
Zenger, J. and Folkman, J. (2012), “Are women better leaders than men?”, Harvard Business
Review, 21 March, available at: https://hbr.org/2012/03/a-study-in-leadership-women-do
Zimmer, B. (2015, April 3). The phrase ‘glass ceiling ’ stretches back decades. A possible start:
A conversation between two women in 1979. The Wall Street Journal Online. Retrieved
from http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-phrase-glass-ceiling-stretches-back-decades-
1428089010
129
APPENDIX A: Interview Protocol
Research Questions:
RQ1. What workplace factors, if any, do women of color leaders perceive they
encountered that either supported or hindered them throughout their career journeys?
RQ2. How do successful women of color leaders perceive the importance of help
from other professionals in preparation for their promotability as women of color into
senior level management?
Respondent Type:
Women of color (women who do not identify as White, thereby possessing the intersectionality
of marginalized gender and race) who are serving (or previously served) in an executive
leadership capacity (a board director role, a C-level role or an executive role that reports directly
into a C-level role) within a Fortune 500 company.
Introduction to the Interview:
Hello and thank you for your participation in this interview. My name is Jey Wagner, a doctoral
student at the University of Southern California (USA). I am an experienced organizational
culture improvement executive with a human resources, learning and development, and
leadership coaching background. Additionally, I am a father and grandfather to daughters and a
granddaughter who are biracial, making the topic of this interview very dear to me. This study’s
purpose is to gain insight from women of color Fortune 500 executives as to how they navigated
organizational conditions that shaped their careers. As a result, other WOC can learn how to
maneuver through their careers and companies can better mitigate systemic bias to improve
equity in promotions for WOC.
Though you have signed an informed consent form, you may decline to answer any interview
questions you do not want to answer and you may withdraw from the interview at any time. To
maintain the highest level of data integrity, I am requesting to record this interview, knowing
with confidence that your personal information will be kept strictly confidential. This recording
will only be used for transcription purposes. Should you have any questions about the interview
process, please let me know. Likewise, if you have any questions about the associated data
collection, do not hesitate to ask. Your participation in this interview is greatly appreciated and I
look forward to working with you.
The recording has started since I have your verbal consent, so let’s go ahead and get started.
Research Questions
Interview Questions Supporting Literature
Context of the study:
Introductory questions:
130
I am really excited to meet
with you today. As you are
probably aware, WOC in
leadership roles within
Fortune 500s is rare. I would
appreciate to hear about your
journey to your current
position.
Could you please share a little
bit about your current role?
How many years have you
been working in your current
capacity?
How long have you been at
your current company and
what other roles did you have
there?
Were there other positions that
you were equally interested in
or even more interested in at
about the same time you were
offered this role? If so, were
you under consideration for
them as well? What happened?
What is the highest education
level you achieved to date?
What is the specific discipline
of your degree/s?
How might this have impacted
your success?
How many years of experience
do you have working in
Fortune 500 companies?
Statement to prepare
participants for the first set of
questions:
The first grouping of
questions is related to
workplace factors that either
supported or hindered you
throughout your career.
Research Question 1:
What workplace factors, if
any, do women of color
leaders perceive they
encountered that either
supported or hindered them
throughout their career
journeys?
1. What motivated you to want
to pursue a top leadership role?
Potential probing questions:
a. Prior to joining your
current company, what
were the surrounding
events that helped you
get ahead?
b. Prior to joining your
current company, what
were the surrounding
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-
efficacy: Toward a unifying
theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review,
84(2), 191-215.
Bandura, A. (2000).
Exercise of human agency
through collective efficacy.
Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9,
131
events that negated
your efforts to get
ahead?
c. With prior companies
in mind, how did their
environments compare
to your current
organization’s when it
comes to advocating
equity in promotability
for WOC?
2. How would you describe
your organization’s corporate
culture as it relates to
supporting belonging and
inclusion for WOC?
Potential probing questions:
a. Are there other WOC
in lower to upper-level
management roles?
b. Is there a diversity,
equity, and inclusion
committee and/or
programs offered?
c. What policies or
practices are in place
the effectively support
WOC advancement
(i.e., recruitment,
leadership
development,
mentorships, etc.?
3. In your time with the
company, have you felt
accepted by those in all racial
and ethnic groups?
Potential probing questions:
a. Have you ever been
challenged in any way
that you perceived to
be race-related?
b. How did you respond
and how might you
75–78. doi:10.1111/1467-
8721.00064
Benya, F., Widnall, S.,
Johnson, P., National
Academies of Sciences,
Policy and Global Affairs,
Committee on Women in
Science, & Committee on
the Impacts of Sexual
Harassment in Academia.
(2018). Sexual Harassment
of Women: Climate,
Culture, and Consequences
in Academic Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine
(p. 310).
Butkus, R., Serchen, J.,
Moyer, D., Bornstein, S., &
Hingle, S. (2018).
Achieving Gender Equity in
Physician Compensation
and Career Advancement: A
Position Paper of the
American College of
Physicians. Annals of
Internal Medicine, 168(10),
721–723.
https://doi.org/10.7326/M17
-3438
Carter, D. R., & Peters, T.
(2016). The
underrepresentation of
African American women in
executive leadership:
What’s getting in the way.
Journal of Business Studies
Quarterly, 7(4), 115-134.
Clancy, K. B., Lee, K. M.,
Rodgers, E. M., & Richey,
C. (2017). Double jeopardy
in astronomy and planetary
science: Women of color
132
recommend others
respond if they have
been in a similar
situation?
c. What was the outcome
of your response?
4. I’m wondering if there are
any other specific experiences
or interactions that stick out to
you as significant hinderances
or catalysts in your rise to
leadership?
Potential probing questions:
a. What challenges, if
any, did you recognize
existed due to you
being a woman of
color?
b. What were some
examples of bias you
encountered related
this?
c. What were some
examples of the support
you received?
d. What part did your
successful past
experiences play in
helping you attain the
opportunities that you
were interested in?
face greater risks of
gendered and racial
harassment. Journal of
Geophysical Research:
Planets, 122(7), 1610-1623.
Cozier, Y., Yu, J., Coogan,
P., Bethea, T., Rosenberg,
L., & Palmer, J. (2014).
Racism, segregation, and
risk of obesity in the black
women’s health study.
American Journal of
Epidemiology, 179(7), 875–
883.
https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/k
wu004
Crenshaw, K. (1989).
Demarginalizing the
intersection of race and sex:
A Black feminist critique of
antidiscrimination doctrine,
feminist theory, and
antiracist politics. The
University of Chicago Legal
Forum, 164, 139-167.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J.
(2001). Critical race theory:
An introduction. New York:
NYU Press.
Dijk, K. (2020).
Meritocracy a myth?: A
multilevel perspective of
how social inequality
accumulates through work.
Organizational Psychology
Review, 10(3-4), 240–269.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2041
386620930063
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L.
(2007). Through the
labyrinth: The truth about
133
how women become
leaders. Boston, MA:
Harvard Business School
Press.
Fernando, C., & Mumphrey,
C. (2020, December 20).
Racism targets asian food,
business during COVID-19
pandemic. Yahoo!News.
https://secureservercdn.net/1
04.238.69.231/a1w.90d.myf
tpupload.
com/wp-
content/uploads/2020/10/St
op_AAPI_Hate_National_R
eport_
200805.pdf
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T.
(2001). An ambivalent
alliance: Hostile and
benevolent sexism as
complementary
justifications for gender
inequality. American
Psychologist, 56(2), 109.
Haines, E. L., Deaux, K., &
Lofaro, N. (2016). The
times they are a-changing…
or are they not? A
comparison of gender
stereotypes, 1983–2014.
Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 40(3), 353–363.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0361
684316634081.
Hewlett, S.A., Peraino, K.,
Sherbin, L., & Sumberg, K.
(2010). The sponsor effect:
Breaking through the last
glass ceiling. Harvard
Business Review. Accessed
at https://30percentclub.org/
134
wpcontent/uploads/2014/08/
The-Sponsor-Effect.pdf
Ho, I., Dinh, K.,
Bellefontaine, S., & Irving,
A. (2012). Sexual
harassment and
posttraumatic
stress symptoms among
asian and white women.
Journal of Aggression,
Maltreatment & Trauma,
21(1), 95–113.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1092
6771.2012.633238
Hurley, D. and Choudhary,
A. (2016), Factors
influencing attainment of
CEO position for women.
Gender in Management,
Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 250-265.
https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-
01-2016-0004
Ladson-Billings, G. (2013).
Critical race theory-What it
is not!. In M. Lynn &
Dixson, A. D. (Eds.),
Handbook of critical race
theory in education.
Routledge.
McKinsey & Company &
LeanIn (2020). Women in
the workplace 2020.
Retrieved from
https://wiw-
report.s3.amazonaws.com/
Women_in_the_Workplace
_2020.pdf
McNamee, S. J. & Miller,
R. K. (2018). The
meritocracy myth (4
th
edition). London: Rowman
& Littlefield, Chapter 2.
135
Pace, C. (2018). How
women of color get to
senior management.
Harvard Business Review.
Retrieved from https://hbr.
org/2018/08/how-women-
of-color-get-to-senior-
management.
Raconteur.net (2020,
December). The future of
fintech is female.
https://www.raconteur.net/fi
nance/fintech/female-
fintech-founders/
Rosette, A. S., &
Livingston, R. W. (2012).
Failure is not an option for
black women: Effects of
organizational performance
on leaders with single
versus dual-subordinate
identities. Journal of
Experimental Social
Psychology, 48(5), 1162-
1167.
Sabharwal, M. (2014). Is
diversity management
sufficient? Organizational
inclusion to further
performance. Public
Personnel Management,
43(2), 197-217.
Seguino, S. (2011). Help or
hindrance? Religion’s
impact on gender inequality
in attitudes
and outcomes. World
Development, 39(8), 1308–
1321.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
worlddev.2010.12.004
136
Sherbin, L. & Rashid, R.
(2017, Feb. 1). Diversity
doesn’t stick without
inclusion. Harvard
Business Review. Accessed
at
https://hbr.org/2017/02/dive
rsity-doesnt-stick-without-
inclusion
Sue, D. (2017).
Microaggressions and
“Evidence”: Empirical or
Experiential Reality?
Perspectives on
Psychological Science,
12(1), 170–172.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745
691616664437
Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C.
M., & Holder, A. (2008).
Racial microaggressions in
the life
experience of Black
Americans. Professional
Psychology: Research and
Practice, 39(3),
329–336.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0735
-7028.39.3.329
Thomas, M. & Reese, K.
(2019). New California law
mandates female
representation on boards
of directors by December
2019. Retrieved from:
https://ogletree.com/
insights/2019-04-03/new-
california-law-mandates-
female-representation-on-
boards-of-directors-by-
december-2019/
137
Zimmer, B. (2015, April 3).
The phrase ‘glass ceiling’
stretches back decades. A
possible start:
A conversation between two
women in 1979. The Wall
Street Journal Online.
Retrieved
from
http://www.wsj.com/articles
/the-phrase-glass-ceiling-
stretches-back-decades-
1428089010
Statement to prepare
participants for the second
(and final) set of questions:
The second set of questions
are related to the value of help
received from other
professionals in support of
your career journey.
Research Question 2:
How do successful women of
color leaders perceive the
importance of help from other
professionals in preparation
for promotability of women
of color into senior level
management?
5. Were there any leaders
during your career progression,
that provided support in your
career advancement?
Potential probing questions:
a. If yes, what did their
support look like?
b. If no, why might that
be? And how did you
go about doing it on
your own?
c. How did you approach
getting allies, mentors,
or sponsors on your
own, if that is what you
did and how did you
motivate yourself to do
this?
6. What did you learn about
other’s career progressions that
assisted you with yours, if that
Atlassian. (2018). State of
diversity and inclusion in
U.S. tech. Retrieved from
https://www.atlassian.com/d
iversity/survey/2018
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-
efficacy: Toward a unifying
theory of behavioral change.
Psychological
Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L.
(2007). Through the
labyrinth: The truth about
how women become
leaders. Boston, MA:
Harvard Business School
Press.
Hewlett, S.A., Peraino, K.,
Sherbin, L., & Sumberg, K.
(2010). The sponsor effect:
Breaking through the last
138
was the case yet if not, why
might that have been the case?
Potential probing questions:
a. Were they also WOC
and if so, did they too
have help from WOC
leaders?
b. What actions did they
take to gain practical
experience in order to
be eligible for
promotions that you
were able to relate to?
c. What were common
promotion achievement
themes of other WOC
who have attained
higher-level leadership
roles, if you have
knowledge of them?
7. What advice, if any, have
you taken from other
professionals to gain the
expertise or experience
required for your past, current,
and future roles?
Potential probing questions:
a. What types of learning
activities did you
pursue?
b. What types of projects
have you volunteered
to lead or assignments
have you handled that
supported your career
growth?
c. What networking
events have you
attended or have been
recommended by
others to attend, and in
either case, what were
the benefits of doing
so?
glass ceiling. Harvard
Business Review. Accessed
at
https://30percentclub.org/w
p-
content/uploads/2014/08/Th
e-Sponsor-Effect.pdf
Kurtulus, F. A., &
Tamaskovic-Devey, D.
(2012). Do female top
managers help women to
advance? A panel study
using EEO-1 records. The
ANNALS of the American
Academy of
Political and Social
Science, 639, 173–197.
doi:10.1177/000271621141
8445
Matsa, D. A., & Miller, A.
R. (2011). Chipping away at
the glass ceiling: Gender
spillovers in
corporate leadership. The
American Economic
Review, 101(3), 635–639.
Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.ezprox
y.elon.edu/stable/29783820
Pew Research Center
(2015). Women and
leadership. Retrieved from:
http://
www.pewsocialtrends.org/2
015/01/14/women-and-
leadership/
Pinkett, R., Robinson, J., &
Patterson, P. (2011). Black
faces in white places: 10
gamechanging
strategies to achieve success
and find greatness. New
139
8. Reflective of the lessons
shared by other professionals
coupled with your own lessons
learned, how would you
recommend other WOC
approach seeking and applying
the guidance of others?
Potential probing questions:
a. What, if any,
challenges should they
be aware of and how
can they best handle
them?
b. If other WOC do not
have access to
professional career
guidance, how should
they approach gaining
such access?
c. What is the best advice
regarding how to get
the most out of the
guidance from others,
would you want to
share with other WOC
in preparation for their
career success?
York, NY: American
Management Association.
Raconteur.net (2020,
December). The future of
fintech is female.
https://www.raconteur.net/fi
nance/fintech/female-
fintech-founders/
Sherbin, L. & Rashid, R.
(2017, Feb. 1). Diversity
doesn’t stick without
inclusion. Harvard
Business Review. Accessed
at
https://hbr.org/2017/02/dive
rsity-doesnt-stick-without-
inclusion
Conclusion to the Interview:
Thank you for your time today. I am grateful for your participation. The valuable insights that
you contributed will be useful towards the progression of women of color promotability into
executive leadership roles equity.
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Black brilliance in leadership: increasing the number of Black women in the senior executive service
PDF
Prescription for change: gender barriers impact on healthcare leadership equity
PDF
Gender role beliefs of male senior leaders in retail and the impact on women’s advancement
PDF
Where are they? The underrepresentation of African or Black American senior executives in the Department of Defense
PDF
The underrepresentation of African American women in corporate leadership roles
PDF
Missed opportunities: lack of advancement of African American females into senior executive healthcare leadership
PDF
Leading as outsiders within the C-suite: a phenomenological study of Black women C-suite executives’ perspectives on White allyship in corporate America
PDF
A phoenix first must burn; how Black women in higher education administration at a private, historically White institution in Southern California implement the reactionary principle of profession...
PDF
Women in information technology senior leadership: incremental progress and continuing challenges
PDF
The employment of retired senior military officers with command experience
PDF
Implicit bias: an advancement opportunity limiter for African American women in entertainment
PDF
Outside the concrete wall: a qualitative study of Black women persisting in technology
PDF
The lack of Black women in higher education executive leadership in four-year colleges and universities
PDF
Chinese-Vietnamese American college students: narratives of educational experiences and college success
PDF
Increasing representation of women in executive technology leadership roles
PDF
Navigating race, gender, and responsibility: a gap analysis of the underrepresentation of Black women in foreign service leadership positions
PDF
Women in executive leadership: a study of the gender diversity gap
PDF
Medical student loan indebtedness and decision-making in the selection of specialty
PDF
The underrepresentation of Black women in the senior executive service of the United States government
PDF
Racial and gender gaps in executive management: a retrospective examination of the problem cause and strategies to address disparities
Asset Metadata
Creator
Wagner, Jason Scott
(author)
Core Title
Double jeopardy: the influence of prevalent race and gender bias on women of color executive leadership promotions
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Degree Conferral Date
2021-12
Publication Date
12/07/2021
Defense Date
10/25/2021
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
biased treatment,Discrimination,double jeopardy,executive leadership,Fortune 500,gender bias,intersectionality,OAI-PMH Harvest,promotion inequity,race bias,senior leadership,social cognitive theory,woman of color,women of color
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Carbone, Paula M. (
committee chair
), Grant, Derisa (
committee member
), Hirabayashi, Kimberly (
committee member
)
Creator Email
jasonwag@usc.edu,jefejey@yahoo.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC18010009
Unique identifier
UC18010009
Legacy Identifier
etd-WagnerJaso-10286
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Wagner, Jason Scott
Type
texts
Source
20211210-wayne-usctheses-batch-903-nissen
(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
Tags
biased treatment
double jeopardy
executive leadership
Fortune 500
gender bias
intersectionality
promotion inequity
race bias
senior leadership
social cognitive theory
woman of color
women of color