Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to consider whether golf functions as a networking barrier for women in professions that require networking for career success.Design/methodology/approachData from 496 golf courses, in addition to demographic data and data about salaries in sales, managerial, and marketing and sales professions in the USA, were used to assess if differences in tee box placement between men's and women's tees would predict participation and salaries in networking‐oriented professions.FindingsThe analyses indicate that differences in tee box placement between men's and women's tees did predict differences in participation and salaries in networking‐oriented professions. It was found that the greater the distance between men's and women's tees, the lower the salaries and participation rate for women. This effect was greatest for the marketing and sales profession.Research limitations/implicationsGolf is one networking barrier among many, and so other networking barriers that have deleterious effects on women's advancement and success should be explored. Further research might include observational studies of mixed‐gender golf groups, and might also explore whether women choose not to pursue networking occupations or women are not selected for jobs that require networking on the golf course.Social implicationsCompanies should be aware of how venues selected for networking might have disparate impacts for men and women, and select venues that are as gender‐neutral as possible.Originality/valueThis paper is, to the authors' knowledge, the first empirical investigation of gender relations in non‐traditional work settings with female participation and earnings in occupations that require networking for career success.

AbstractWe examine the relationship between political environments and perceptions of women's physical abilities. Using a sample of 496 golf courses located in the United States, we find a significant relationship between state political affiliations, ratings of senators and congressional representatives on a liberal to conservative continuum, and perceptions of gendered physical abilities. Institutional theory is presented as an explanation for the regional variation in perceptions of women's golfing abilities. Implications and results are discussed. Suggestions for further research are presented.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to report the results of a study comparing perceptions of discrimination for immigrant and US‐born Hispanics, focusing on Hispanic business professionals.Design/methodology/approachData were collected via nationwide survey of over 1,500 Hispanic business professionals and analyzed via analysis of variance.FindingsNo significant differences with regard to perceptions of discrimination were found, although both groups reported some level of discrimination. Immigrants had comparatively lower salaries and higher levels of Hispanic identity, yet, no differences in job satisfaction between groups were found. Post hoc analyses found that immigrants were significantly more likely to seek out mentors and US‐born Hispanics were more likely to join affinity groups at work.Practical implicationsToo often, immigrants are misunderstood and mistreated in the workplace. The present study provides an examination of how immigrants might perceive these differences and potential avenues for employers to assess this valuable segment of the workforce are suggested.Originality/valueThe present study creates the groundwork for more future in‐depth studies of the immigrant work experience. To this point, little research has been done on the discrimination perceptions of immigrant populations. The present study compares the perceptions of US‐ and foreign‐born Hispanic professionals.