This paper examines two surveies, one of the Gender and Organizational Rule Abidance by Portillo and DeHart- Davis ( 2009 ) and the other Gender differences in Chief Executive Officer ( CEO ) compensation: grounds from the USA by Adams et Al. ( 2007 ) . The common subject of both articles is gender differences. Portillo and DeHart – Davis peculiarly focused on the differences in rule-abidance between female and male metropolis employees. In contrast, Adams et Al. concentrated on the gender based differences in compensation at the CEO place. The partial support for the CEO compensation research was received from the Women ‘s Leadership Institute at Bentley College, while the patron of the former research is non given in the text. The intent of this paper is to compare and contrast both surveies from the research methodological analysis and design point of position. First, the paper reappraisals and identifies the research methods, the research design, the attacks to informations analysis, the ethical issues and handiness of the Hagiographas that were used ( represented ) in each of the two research-based texts by utilizing the ‘quality ‘ standards ; secondly, it reports the chief findings of both articles ; thirdly, it criticises the execution of the quantitative research scheme in the two surveies and explicate its disadvantages and advantages ; eventually, it concludes that both documents are of a high-quality in the chance and context of societal surveies.
Gender and Organizational Rule Abidance
Portillo and DeHart – Davis ( 2009 ) carried out a quantitative research utilizing informations from a mail study to analyze through empirical observation the gender dimensions of regulation conformity. The writers hypothesized foremost, that among adult females and work forces public retainers, the latter were less rule abiding ; secondly, higher-level female employees were less rule – staying than lower-level female employees, because regulation conformity will associate to their hierarchal position. There are two chief concepts/ facets in these hypotheses that were measured: gender-based unsimilarity in the organizational position and hierarchal position among females merely ( Portillo & A ; DeHart – Davys, 2009, p.341 ) . The research workers influenced and guided their informations aggregation by utilizing a deductive attack to the relationship between theory and informations ( Bryman, 2008, p.22 ) . The writers used the background stuff as theory ( Bryman, 2008, p.8 ) . They illuminate the public direction literature, where they found a deficiency of old research in term of empirical surveies. Portillo and DeHart – Davis mentioned several positions from bookmans in gender surveies of public disposal back uping the statement that adult females abide by regulations because of a deficiency of organisational power. Bryman argued that among societal research workers, replicability is highly valued, in peculiarly for those who work within quantitative research ( 2008, p.32 ) . The chief grounds of this research is that the 2nd hypothesis of the survey was tested by retroflexing the regulation conformity among females and afterwards, as a point of comparing merely among males. This means that this survey is replicable.
Furthermore, all ethical issues were to the full observed in the mail study, which was conducted from June 2005 to December 2006 by inquiring inquiries refering perceptual experiences of workplace regulations, peculiarly behaviour towards regulation bending. The research workers sent: “ an watchful missive showing support for the survey ; a screen missive explicating the grounds for the research and supplying warrants of confidentiality of consequences ; a stamped addressed envelope to the research worker ‘s university ; and to boot a post card with a study designation figure, its intent non to associate responses to employee individualities ” ( Portillo & A ; DeHart – Davys, 2009, p.341 ) . Therefore, the mail study procedure included all necessary stairss related to ethical rules in this research ( Bryman, 2008 ; Black, 1999 ) . The consequence of the mail study was 49 per centum ( n=645 ) of the overall response rate ( Portillo & A ; DeHart – Davys, 2009, p.341 ) . Mangione argues that a response rate of below 50 per cent is non acceptable ( 1995, as cited in Bryman, 2008, p. 220 ) . Therefore, the inquiry might look here about the representativeness of the achieved sample. To counter Mangione ‘s statement 49 per cent is about 50, so it could non be considered as a low response rate.
This survey was defined as a cross – sectional design utilizing societal study research instrument in quantitative research ( Bryman, 2008, pp.44, 216-229 ) . Quantitative information was collected by a mail study which covered all employees of 4 metropoliss in a midwestern province ( Portillo & A ; DeHart – Davys, 2009, p.341 ) . In conformity of the ethical issues, confidentiality of information was maintained ( the name of the metropoliss and administrations ) , the namelessness of respondents was respected in the research procedure, for illustration as regarded the inquiries about the employees ‘ income ( Bryman, 2008, p.112-133 ) . Furthermore, the information was gathered from a gender-representative sample of all hierarchal degrees. This might hold been considered by the writers in order to raise sample size and at the same time, it might hold reduced sample mistake. In contrast, Bryman claimed that the size of a chance sample can non increase the preciseness of a sample ( 2008, p. 179 ) .
Harmonizing to the ‘quality ‘ standards, it is by and large believed that there are 4 traditional standards for quantitative research: cogency, dependability, replicability and generalisability ( Bryman, 2008 ; Bryman et al. , 2008 ; Black, 1999 ; Jupp, 2006 ; Silbergh, 2001 ; Sarantakos, 2005 ) . In this survey the research workers used internal consistence dependability measured by Cronbach ‘s alpha, which is “ the most common step of graduated table dependability ” ( Field, 2005, pp.667-668 ) . Hence, it could be concluded that this step was dependable. Harmonizing to Duerst-Lahti and Kelly, the dichotomous variable of gender is a weak placeholder ( 1995, as cited in Portillo & A ; DeHart – Davys, 2009, p.341 ) . Therefore, to mensurate the independent variable, gender, sex was used as the placeholder variable in the survey. In order to mensurate the regulation conformity, the writers used ordinal measuring, from 0 which indicated strong dissension, to 3 which indicated strong understanding ( Jupp, 2006, p. 168 ) . Rule conformity was measured by nine study inquiries concerned with place and purpose toward regulation conformity ( 2009, p. 341 ) . The intent of coding the closed inquiries in this survey allowed the research workers to diminish the sum of informations collected and to prove the relationship between variables ( Bryman, 2008, p.142 ) . It was argued that conformance, hazard antipathy and formalization are the basal factors in regulation conformity ( Gordon, 1970 ; Knapp, 1963 ; Mulder, 1971 ; Thomas et al. , 1986 as cited in Portillo & A ; DeHart – Davys, 2009, p.342 ) . For that ground, the first control variable, conformance was measured on a five-point graduated table between opposite descriptions: “ Traveling along-Arguing ; Accepting the system – Questioning the system ; Accepting authority- Questioning authorization ; and Conforming – Rebeling ” ( Portillo & A ; DeHart – Davys, 2009, p.342 ) . The inquiries asked whether the individual like taking hazard at work was measured hazard antipathy, the 2nd control variable by utilizing ordinal measuring. To mensurate formulization, the 3rd control variable, the research workers drew on Aiken and Hage ‘s statement “ Whatever state of affairs arises, my section has written policies and processs to follow ” ( taken from Portillo & A ; DeHart – Davys, 2009, p.342 ) . The most dramatic characteristic of the survey is that the research workers used three ordered probit theoretical accounts to prove the relationship between gender and regulation conformity in general ; and so, hierarchal position and regulation conformity for female and work forces employees individually. Long claimed that “ an extension of logistic arrested development, ordered probit is appropriate for patterning dependent variables that are ordinal, in which distances between degrees of impact are unknown ” ( 1997, taken from Portillo & A ; DeHart – Davys, 2009, p.341 ) . Therefore, the writers used appropriate research techniques and methods in order to happen the reply of their research inquiries.
In add-on, harmonizing to handiness of the authorship, the text of the survey might be understood by a broad audience. However, the tabular arraies are confounding, even when an account of the footings significance is given by the writers. The construction of the article is really apprehensible excluded its undertakings, since the research workers mentioned four undertakings, but explained merely 2 of them. On the other manus, this research was published in Public Administration Review ( PAR ) , which is a scholarly diary which appears every two months and is well-known in the public disposal sphere ( Stillman & A ; Raadschelders, 2008 ) . Therefore, the research-text is available in an easy accessible format both electronic version and published.
Gender differences in CEO compensation: grounds from the USA
Adams et Al. ( 2007 ) have besides covered the quantitative research method based on the secondary analysis, as the collected information has been presented in a statistical signifier ( Bryman, 2008, pp.295-296 ) . The beginning of the quantitative information was the ExecuComp database of executives at 1,500 big American corporations between 1992 and 2004 ( Adams et al. , 2007, p.208 ) . The purpose of the research was to place adult females CEOs and to analyze gender unsimilarities in compensation of executives from 1992-2004 ( Adams et al. , 2007, p.208 ) . Specifically, the information was compiled over that period ; it could be claimed that the writers used both cross-sectional and longitudinal ( comparing ) research designs ( Bryman, 2008 ; Bouma & A ; Atkinson, 1995 ) . It is noticeable that the primary information has besides been implemented in this survey by utilizing content analysis from company imperativeness releases and regulative filings in order to happen excess information about the backgrounds of adult females CEOs ( Adams et al. , 2007, p.208 ) . Therefore, it is questionable whether this was more a secondary or primary analysis.
Bryman claimed that “ a research worker ‘s position of the theory or literature may hold changed as a consequence of the analyses of the collected information ” ( Bryman, 2008, p.10 ) . As a starting point the writers used the information from Bertrand and Hallock ( 2001 ) , who did non happen any spread in compensation at the CEO degree between females and males from 1992-1997 ( taken from Adams et al. , 2007, p.211 ) . Therefore, the writers successfully re-updated and extended their research in order to turn out that the being of a gender spread had significantly narrowed compared with the mid 1990s ( Adams et al. , 2007, p.211 ) . This could be considered as a logical extension of background findings.
In the context of quantitative research, the collected information demands to be summarised and reported to public right ( Bryman, 2008 ; Bouma & A ; Atkinson, 1995 ) . So that, in this survey the information about age, salary, length in the workplace of metropolis employees was quantified by utilizing descriptive statistics and indicated in the tabular arraies.
Adams et Al. ‘s survey did non to the full adhere to moralss. A peculiarly interesting fact is that table III shows the feature of female CEOs, where merely one adult female had a high-school instruction ( HS ) , which means that she did non finish university. However, she was founder-executive ( see Appendix A ) . In this instance, whether this stuff is ‘sensitive in nature ‘ to this peculiar adult female and whether the writers had asked her before doing it publically available is a questionable affair. There might look to be a problematic issue about moralss, chiefly sing the invasion of privateness ( Bryman, 2008 ; Black, 1999 ) .
As was mentioned before, dependability is one of the chief of import standards for measuring societal research ( Bryman, 2008 ; Bryman et al. , 2008 ; Jupp, 2006 ; Silbergh, 2001 ) . In order to look into the dependability of CEO public presentation measures the writers have included the 3-year growing rate in gross revenues and the 3-year return to stockholders. Furthermore, they used 9 dummy variables for the chief types of industry ( excepting industry ) to pull off unsimilarities in compensation over the researched period ( Adams et al. , 2007, p.215 ) . To measure different types of compensation, for case wage, bonus stock options, the writers used the Black-Scholes process, where a dollar figure was regulated harmonizing to the rising prices in 2004 ( Adams et al. , 2007, p.215 ) . Heckman and Polachek claimed that in arrested development analyses the natural logarithm of entire compensation is a better dependant variable than the dollar value ( 1974, as cited in Adams et al. , 2007, p.215 ) . The writers focused on the natural logarithm of entire compensation because “ it minimizes the impact of outliers and consequences in a distribution of values more closely come closing the normal distribution, a status of import for empirical trials ” ( Adams et al. , 2007, p.215 ) .
As the old research sing to rule-abidance, this survey is besides easy accessible by the cyberspace, every bit good as the printed journal archive of Women in Management Review ( WIMR ) . The description, account, reading non merely of the informations and the text, but besides the tabular arraies and the figures are more apprehensible for non-researchers comparing with Portillo and DeHart – Davis ‘s survey.
Taking all assorted research methods and the information inside informations of both articles into history, it could be summarised that Portillo and DeHart – Davis ( 2009 ) and Adams et Al. ‘s ( 2007 ) surveies were conducted utilizing quantitative research and cross-sectional design, but the research techniques were different: 1 used a study, while the other was used a statistical attack. Furthermore, Portillo and DeHart – Davis conducted the primary study research, whereas Adams et Al. conducted both secondary and primary research: statistics and content analysis. Indeed, both surveies were used the background literature as a placeholder for theory ( Bryman, 2008, p.8 ) . However, there is a problematic issue concerned to moralss in Adams et Al. ‘s survey, while Portillo and DeHart – Davis ‘s survey to the full followed the ethical rules. In add-on, transparence in processs wholly obeyed in both surveies: the statistical, study methods and variables used, which could be considered as a ‘good tantrum ‘ of the research ( Field, 2005, p.2 ) . Harmonizing to another ‘quality ‘ standards, Portillo and DeHart – Davis ( 2009 ) and Adams et Al. ‘s ( 2007 ) articles are relevant to a broad assortment of people and the texts are easy accessible and apprehensible.
Findingss of the surveies
In a survey of rule-abidance, the first hypothesis was wholly confirmed, whereas the second was merely partly confirmed. The writers found that adult females employees are more regulation staying than their male co-workers ; adult females who are section caputs are more rule – staying than adult females who are frontline workers ; the hierarchal place does non act upon regulation conformity among male respondents ( Portillo & A ; DeHart – Davys, 2009, p.344 ) . Furthermore, the writers provided informations of back uping their first hypothesis which indicated that female metropolis employees show higher regulation conformity ( score 20-27 ) than male metropolis workers ( hit 11-17 ) . On the footing of the informations, the 2nd hypothesis contradicted the research workers outlooks, as the consequences of remodelling show that female supervisors and section caputs had the higher tonss in regulation conformity than females in frontline places ( 2009, p.343 ) . These findings may belie the averment that the research workers do non ever find what they expect to happen ( Bryman, 2008, p.8 ) .
In the instance of Adams et Al. ‘s findings research, foremost, that the figure of adult females below executive place has increased since 1992 and at the same time female CEOs represented less than 2 per centum of this degree in 2004 ; secondly, it was found that chief sectors in which females are employed include fabrication, service and trade sectors, and chief sectors in which males are employed include are agriculture, excavation, building and pudding stones ; thirdly, on norm, adult females CEOs are younger than their male colleagues, they are largely caputs of little houses and produce a smaller per centum return on their investing than the male stockholders ; fourthly, it was found that the gender spread in compensation at the CEO degree does non be, whereas at the senior executive place the spread reaches about 16 per centum ; and eventually, it was concluded that at the top place compensation is likely to be similar and the gender-based compensation appears to be contracting from twelvemonth to twelvemonth ( Adams et al. , 2007, p.220 ) .
A review: the deductions and restrictions of both surveies
There are both advantages and disadvantages within the two surveies, peculiarly in the procedure of implementing quantitative research methods. The deduction of Portillo and DeHart – Davis ‘s research is that gender unsimilarity in regulation conformity could non be applicable in more gender-balanced administrations. The 2nd disadvantage of this research is that to see hazard in a context of the civil service. In fact, sing hazard is non relevant in peculiarly this sector, because non all regulations in administrations are hazardous. Finally, the decision of this empirical trial of gender differences could non be appropriate in different sectors, except the civil service. Bryman argued that “ an obvious solution to the jobs with utilizing study research to look into behavior is to detect people straight, utilizing observation research ” ( 2008, p.256 ) . In this peculiar survey it might be seen as a solution to this job. In contrast to Portillo and DeHart – Davis ‘s research, Adams et Al. observed different sectors of American society in their research, such as agribusiness, excavation, building, trade. Besides, Portillo and DeHart – Davis were non wholly right when they concluded that “ hierarchal position among male metropolis employees does non significantly act upon regulation conformity ” ( 2009, p.343 ) . This statement is non clear because the same consequences were found among female. It is of import to determine why research workers focused their attending on work forces, while rule conformity among female was slightly similar. Related to this point, it would look that the research workers take the female ‘s side, because both writers are adult females ( Bryman, 2008, p.131-133 ) . Another point to see is that Adams et al. combined both primary and secondary research. The advantages of the secondary analysis instead than the primary include such factors as clip economy, high quality informations, the chance for longitudinal analysis every bit good as similar informations being collected over clip. The account of Adams et Al. ‘s pick is that the tendencies can be identified from twelvemonth to twelvemonth ( Bryman, 2008, pp. 297-298 ) . On the other manus, the disadvantage of the CEO in the compensation survey is that the research covered merely a considerable figure of publically traded companies in the USA and excluded smaller private houses ( Adams et al. , 2007, p.208 ) .
To sum up, there are both differences and similarities between the two surveies. First, the two surveies were conducted utilizing quantitative research and cross-sectional design, but the research techniques were different: 1 used a study, while the other used a statistical attack. Second, for Portillo and DeHart – Davys it was primary study research, whereas for Adams et Al. it was both secondary and primary ( assorted ) research, as they used statistics and content analysis. Third, the subject of both documents related to gender differences. However, the research of Portillo and DeHart – Davis peculiarly focused on the unsimilarities in rule-abidance between female and male employees and Adams et Al. concentrated on the gender based differences in the compensation at the CEO place. Fourthly, in the survey of compensation the writers investigated a big figure of companies in different parts of the USA. While, the study of the gender unsimilarities of rule-abidance was carried out merely in a midwestern province among public retainers merely. Fifthly, despite the fact that the documents are written by different bookmans, in general sing to the quality issues both surveies are well-designed ; the tabular arraies and figures are really intelligibly described and shown ; besides the appropriate methods used ; and they are apprehensible to a broad constituency of people. Finally, the findings of both surveies have a significance and significance to society in general. Harmonizing to the research involvements of Portillo and DeHart – Davis their survey could be considered as the first theory-driven analysis of organizational rule-abidance in public disposal literature of gender surveies ( Brandenburger, 2008, p.4 ; KU The University of Kansas, 2009 ) . Furthermore, Adams et Al. claimed that their survey is a serious part to the gender – specific literature and a elaborate counsel for adult females who choose to follow the executive calling ladder ( 2007, p.220 ) . Adams et Al. wrote ( 2007, p.221 ) : “ This is an encouraging image for adult females who expect, or hope for, just intervention… [ and ] … the increasing figure of extremely qualified adult females as CEO can function to queer negative stereotypes of adult females executives ” . Taking these assorted lines of quality issues into history, it could be concluded that both surveies are of a high quality and the same clip meaningful to our just and merely societies.
- Adams, S.M. , Gupta, A. , Haughton, D.M. , & A ; Leeth, J.D. ( Eds. ) . ( 2007 ) . Gender differences in CEO compensation: grounds from the USA. Women in Management Review, 22 ( 3 ) , 208-224
- Black, T.R. ( 1999 ) . Making Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences: An Integrated Approach to Research Design, Measurement and Statistics. London: Sage.
- Blaikie, N. ( 2000 ) . Planing Social Research: the logic of expectancy. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
- Bouma, G.D. , & A ; Atkinson, G.B.J. ( Eds. ) . ( 1995 ) . A Handbook of Social Science Research. 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Brandenburger, P.W. ( 2008 ) . Comings & A ; Going. The public direction research association newssheet, 6 ( 1 ) , 2-4. Retrieved November 23, 2009, from hypertext transfer protocol: //www.pmranet.org/docs/ManagementMattersv6n1.pdf
- Bryman, A. ( 2008 ) . Social Research Methods. Third edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Bryman, A. , Becker, S. , & A ; Sempik, J. ( Eds. ) . ( 2008 ) . Quality standards for quantitative, qualitative and assorted methods research: a position from societal policy. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11 ( 4 ) , 261-276
- Field, A. ( 2005 ) . Detecting Statistics Using SPSS. London: Sage.
- Jupp, V. ( 2006 ) . The Sage Dictionary of Social Research Methods. London: Sage.
- KU The University of Kansas ( 2009 ) . Department of Public Administration: Leisha DeHart-Davis. Retrieved November 23, 2009, from hypertext transfer protocol: //www2.ku.edu/~kupa/faculty/ldavis.shtml
- Potillo, S. & A ; DeHart-Davis, L. ( Eds. ) . ( 2009 ) . Gender and Organizational Rule Abidance. Public Administration Review, 69 ( 2 ) , 339-347.
- Sarantakos, S. ( 2005 ) . Social Research. Third edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Silbergh, D.M. ( 2001 ) . Making Dissertation in Politics: A Student Guide. London: Routledge.
- Stillman, R.J & A ; Raadschelders, C.N. ( Eds. ) . ( 2008 ) . Wiley Knowledge for coevalss. Public Administration Review: the premier diary of Public Administration. Retrieved November 23, 2009, from hypertext transfer protocol: //www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp? ref=0033-3352