Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information Leadership, Fifth Edition

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Work and Occupations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by CASSIRER, N.
Right arrow Articles by RESKIN, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

High Hopes

Organizational Position, Employment Experiences, and Women's and Men's Promotion Aspirations

NAOMI CASSIRER

University of Notre Dame

BARBARA RESKIN

Harvard University

Kanter argued that men's and women's positions in workplace opportunity structures, not their sex, shape their career attitudes. Women attached less importance to promotion than men, according to 1991 General Social Survey data. The authors examine the extent to which this difference stems from the sexes' segregation into jobs with unequal opportunities, as Kanter argued. The findings are largely consistent with Kanter's thesis: Men attached greater importance to promotion than women because they were more likely to be located in organizational positions that encourage workers to hope for a promotion. Net of the effects of workers' organizational locations and prior promotion by their employer, sex was not associated with promotion attitudes.

Work and Occupations, Vol. 27, No. 4, 438-463 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/0730888400027004002


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Family IssuesHome page
J. Reynolds and L. Aletraris
Work-Family Conflict, Children, and Hour Mismatches in Australia
Journal of Family Issues, June 1, 2007; 28(6): 749 - 772.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
American Behavioral ScientistHome page
R. A. Smith
Do the Determinants of Promotion Differ for White Men Versus Women and Minorities? An Exploration of Intersectionalism Through Sponsored and Contest Mobility Processes
American Behavioral Scientist, May 1, 2005; 48(9): 1157 - 1181.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Gender SocietyHome page
P. Y. Martin
"Said and Done" Versus "Saying and Doing": Gendering Practices, Practicing Gender at Work
Gender Society, June 1, 2003; 17(3): 342 - 366.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Work and OccupationsHome page
M. Hultin
Some Take the Glass Escalator, Some Hit the Glass Ceiling?: Career Consequences of Occupational Sex Segregation
Work and Occupations, February 1, 2003; 30(1): 30 - 61.
[Abstract] [PDF]