Lincoln Electric Case Study Daft

Article | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | October 6, 2015

Compared to Men, Women View Professional Advancement as Equally Attainable, but Less Desirable

Francesca Gino, Caroline Ashley Wilmuth and Alison Wood Brooks

Women are underrepresented in most high-level positions in organizations. While a great deal of research has provided evidence that bias and discrimination give rise to and perpetuate this gender disparity, in the current research, we explore another explanation: men and women view professional advancement differently, and their views impact their decisions to climb the corporate ladder (or not). In Studies 1 and 2, when asked to list their core goals in life, women listed more life goals overall than men, and a smaller proportion of their goals related to achieving power at work. In Studies 3 and 4, compared to men, women viewed high-level positions as less desirable yet equally attainable. In Studies 5–7, when faced with the possibility of receiving a promotion at their current place of employment or obtaining a high-power position after graduating from school, women and men anticipated similar levels of positive outcomes (e.g., prestige, money), but women anticipated more negative outcomes (e.g., conflict, tradeoffs). In these studies, women associated high-level positions with conflict, which explained the relationship between gender and the desirability of professional advancement. Finally, in Studies 8 and 9, men and women alike rated power as one of the main consequences of professional advancement. Our findings reveal that men and women have different perceptions of what the experience of holding a high-level position will be like, with meaningful implications for the perpetuation of the gender disparity that exists at the top of organizational hierarchies.

Keywords: Personal Development and Career; Gender;

performance. Employees are also eligible for annual bonuses, which fluctuate according to the company’s profits, and they participate in stock purchase plans. A worker’s bonus is based on four factors: work productivity, work quality, dependability, and cooperation with others. Some workers at Lincoln have earned more than $100,000 a year. Lincoln’s success is mainly due to an organizational culture based on openness and trust, shared control, and an egalitarian spirit. The company has no layoff policy. The company also has an open-door policy for all top executives, middle managers, and production workers, and regular face-to-face communication is encouraged. Many Lincoln workers stay with the company for life. Lincoln effectively socializes its employees. Cross-functional teams are empowered to make decisions and take responsibility for product planning, development, and marketing. Information about the company’s operations and financial performance is openly shared with workers throughout the company. Although Lincoln’s system worked so well in the United States, it failed miserably in all the eleven plants it built and purchased around the world. II. Problem Identification Lincoln Electric is having a difficult time exporting the Lincoln Management System in its overseas plants, even if the system has proven to be very successful at home. Would it be necessary to follow different positioning strategies for each of the different plants that were opened abroad? If Lincoln pays its U.S. workers their bonuses, it would have to borrow additional money to be able to do so, placing them deeper in debtand adding to the difficulty in recovering financially. If

0 Thoughts to “Lincoln Electric Case Study Daft

Leave a comment

L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *