半职业中的性别与集中化

B. Grandjean, Helen Hazunda Bernal
{"title":"半职业中的性别与集中化","authors":"B. Grandjean, Helen Hazunda Bernal","doi":"10.1177/009392857961004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Because direct empirical comparisons of the organizational participation of women and men have been lacking, attempts to incorporate gender as an explanatory variable in theories of organizational authority have had to rely on unverified sex stereotypes. This research examines contentions which have appeared repeatedly in such attempts, namely (a) that there are differences between men and women in four types of work orientation, and (b) that these differences are reflected in greater centralization of authority in predominantly female organizations. To isolate the effects of gender, semiprofessionals in ten very similar organizations were surveyed (Catholic secondary schools). Results show little difference in career commitment, and no support for stereotypes of women as less concerned with intrinsic characteristics of work and more submissive to authority than men. With or without multivariate controls, women do appear to value interpersonal relationships on the job somewhat more highly. However, faculty sex composition is not associated with degree of centralization, disconfirming the major prediction of those theoretical discussions which have suggested that gender is a partial determinant of the authority structure in complex organizations.","PeriodicalId":85554,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of work and occupations","volume":"6 1","pages":"102 - 84"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1979-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/009392857961004","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sex and Centralization in a Semiprofession\",\"authors\":\"B. Grandjean, Helen Hazunda Bernal\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/009392857961004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Because direct empirical comparisons of the organizational participation of women and men have been lacking, attempts to incorporate gender as an explanatory variable in theories of organizational authority have had to rely on unverified sex stereotypes. This research examines contentions which have appeared repeatedly in such attempts, namely (a) that there are differences between men and women in four types of work orientation, and (b) that these differences are reflected in greater centralization of authority in predominantly female organizations. To isolate the effects of gender, semiprofessionals in ten very similar organizations were surveyed (Catholic secondary schools). Results show little difference in career commitment, and no support for stereotypes of women as less concerned with intrinsic characteristics of work and more submissive to authority than men. With or without multivariate controls, women do appear to value interpersonal relationships on the job somewhat more highly. However, faculty sex composition is not associated with degree of centralization, disconfirming the major prediction of those theoretical discussions which have suggested that gender is a partial determinant of the authority structure in complex organizations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":85554,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociology of work and occupations\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"102 - 84\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1979-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/009392857961004\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociology of work and occupations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/009392857961004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology of work and occupations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/009392857961004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

由于缺乏对妇女和男子的组织参与的直接经验比较,试图将性别作为一个解释变量纳入组织权威理论的努力不得不依赖未经证实的性别定型观念。这项研究审查了在这种尝试中反复出现的争论,即(a)男女在四种工作方向上存在差异,(b)这些差异反映在以女性为主的组织中权力更加集中。为了隔离性别的影响,调查了十个非常相似的组织(天主教中学)的半专业人员。结果显示,在职业承诺方面差异不大,也不支持女性不太关心工作的内在特征、比男性更服从权威的刻板印象。无论是否有多变量控制,女性确实似乎更重视工作中的人际关系。然而,教师的性别构成与集权程度无关,这与那些理论讨论的主要预测不符,这些理论讨论认为性别是复杂组织中权力结构的部分决定因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sex and Centralization in a Semiprofession
Because direct empirical comparisons of the organizational participation of women and men have been lacking, attempts to incorporate gender as an explanatory variable in theories of organizational authority have had to rely on unverified sex stereotypes. This research examines contentions which have appeared repeatedly in such attempts, namely (a) that there are differences between men and women in four types of work orientation, and (b) that these differences are reflected in greater centralization of authority in predominantly female organizations. To isolate the effects of gender, semiprofessionals in ten very similar organizations were surveyed (Catholic secondary schools). Results show little difference in career commitment, and no support for stereotypes of women as less concerned with intrinsic characteristics of work and more submissive to authority than men. With or without multivariate controls, women do appear to value interpersonal relationships on the job somewhat more highly. However, faculty sex composition is not associated with degree of centralization, disconfirming the major prediction of those theoretical discussions which have suggested that gender is a partial determinant of the authority structure in complex organizations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信