Meritocratic Explanations Of Advancement -Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Meritocratic Explanations Of Academic Advancement? Answer: Introduction A multinational corporation/company is an enterprise that operates in many countries but is managed from one point, home country. A company that gets more than a quarter of its revenue from operations outside the home country is classified under MNC. Coca-Cola, BMW, and Total are among the most common MNCs globally. Through investing in other countries, MNCs have led to the growth of the host countrys economy, the flow of capital, development of infrastructure, the introduction of new technologies and creation of employment opportunities. On the other hand, MNCs have been blamed for; influencing the policies of host countries, providing poor working conditions, providing limited access to training, giving low pay and encouraging gender-based discrimination. Recently, there have been complaints concerning discrimination against women in MNCs. Therefore, this report shows how KPMG, a company that operates in more than one continent, instigates gender-based inequalities. This will entai l focusing on the economic theory of labor market discrimination, gender inequality issues faced by KPMG and impact on women. The conclusion shall summarize the report and call for action by organizations operating across borders. Economic Theory of labor market discrimination The theory of labor market discrimination investigates why particular groups in the labor market are disadvantaged. Certain characteristics such as race, gender, age or religion count a lot in labor market. For example, why do women and minority ethnic groups have poor wages and low opportunities? This theory states that discrimination is consumption good of the firms management and that firms that discriminate are those willing to pay more than the prevailing market wage (Baron, 2013, p. 24). They are also willing to pay less than the market-available talent level. This implies that firms that practice discrimination make less than those that do not condone it. Wage difference occurs because of two reasons. People from the disadvantaged group are given less for doing a particular job and all of them are crowded in a particular job resulting in low pay. Secondly, the level of unemployment is higher for particular groups compared to others. KPMG and gender discrimination in India A report by the Gender Diversity Benchmark in 2011 showed that Indian MNCs have fewest women staff. They looked at 21 leading multination companies and discovered that the country was last among 6 Asian countries analyzed. Also, the study discovered that not only did India have the lowest number of women staff, but also lost most women employees as they went along. The participation of women in the workforce in India is currently at 24.43%. This is very low compared to other countries such as China (49.79%) and Malaysia (47.35%) (Adityanath, 2015, p. 2). Although MNCs are considered to have flexible working hours and inclusive policies, judging by statistics, the number of women staff is very low. This begs the question: why are women few in MNCs? Inequality between men and women starts at education; when both of them are seeking equal opportunities in education. This is instigated by the peoples culture which seems to view men as superior to women. In India, women outperform in care-taking qualities while men impress in taking-charge qualities (Nielsen, 2016, p. 2044). This mentality is encouraged in educational institutions thus making women shy away from jobs which require them to take charge. Another reason for low participation of women in the workforce in India is because women looking for more balanced lives lack interest in entering the workforce in MNCs (Kini, 2012, p. 900). Most of them choose a happily married life and let their husbands work. Surveys show that only 4 out of 10 CEOs in India view women advancement as instrumental in their organizations (Wittels Heisler, 2011, p. 2). This could be because, today, most international firms in India still practice institutional sexism which holds that men are abler tha n women. Gender-discrimination in India can also be analyzed from the wage perspective. There are wage differences in male and female jobs. Men in India earn 25% more than women. This gap increased from 24.1%, in 2015, to 27.2%, in 2016 (Allen, 2012, p. 10). This proves that gender is still a strong parameter in determining salaries in India. Pay gaps in MNCs stem from choices an individual has to make in relation to education, occupation, profession, sector, working hours and size of the company. For example, a woman in India would choose to work part-time so as to fulfill her obligations as a wife back at home. The disparity in working hours translate into pay, Meaning, a man who does the same job but working for more hours will be paid more (Geva, 2011, p. 560). However, this is just one scenario of a pay gap. There are also situations where women and men may be having the same responsibilities, same working hours, same education level but different pay. Similarly, a report by National Commission for Women showed that there was a rise in sexual harassment at workplace in India. For example, in 2013, there were 249 complaints of sexual harassment at work (Eagleman, 2015, p. 234). The number of complaints doubled in 2014. All these happen despite the clear guidelines provided by the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act that seeks to protect women against sexual harassment at their workplace. The literature on gender discrimination in India is a representation of what women working in MNCs go through. This could be the reason behind India having the fewest women in the workforce. MNCs may attract them by convincing them that they have flexible working hours and offer the best chance in advancing their careers (Greenwood, 2013, p. 355). But they choose to stay at home because of sexual harassment, low pay, and mistreatment at work. Aditi Bojkar was a Chartered accountant working with KPMG in India. Allegedly, she faced sexual harassment in 2006. Sadly, the firm declined to create an internal committee, as provided in the Vishakha guidelines, to look further into the charges (Wittels Heisler, 2011, p. 2). Frustrated by how the company was handling this issue, she resigned. However, the company refused to accept her resignation, instead, they terminated her services. This slowed down her career growth. The company set up a committee to investigate the matter only after when the media caught wind of the issue and started doing some inquiry. The victim failed to show up before the committee claiming that the whole process was not valid since there was no employer-employee relationship.Because the issue continued to catch the attention of many people and countries, the accused, a senior partner at the firm, resigned. Despite being asked to comment on this, the firm refused to issue any statement regarding the conne ction between his resignation and the sexual harassment claims. KPMG and gender discrimination in the U.S. Most MNCs are based in the U.S. However, this does not imply that the country does not host foreign companies. For example, the number of subsidiaries of Japanese companies operating in the U.S. is on the rise (Andelic, 2011). Often, this increase is analyzed from their impact on the economy and their influence on women staff is underrated. Compared to other countries, U.S. is doing well in ensuring equality, between men and women at workplace, is achieved. For instance, equality in pay has improved drastically since 1997 when women earned 38% less compared to men (Houchins, 2015). Also, the participation of women in the workforce has increased to 60% (Green, 2011, p. 9). Although statistics from the U.S concerning the participation of women in the labor force is encouraging, there are still cases where women are discriminated or sexually abused. For example, women are still relegated office support and administrative positions like clerk typists, administrative assistants, and secretaries. Employers who practice discrimination at workplace justify their actions by stating that women lack skills to perform non-traditional and higher-paid positions. In the case where women are promoted to managerial and supervisory posts, they are prevented from attaining higher-level roles through every means, including intimidation. Also, most women in MNCs in the U.S are given work responsibilities stereotyped as female roles. Most women who fall in this category are paid less than the males in those job categories. Employers justify the reason for the pay gap by stating that women are the weaker sex unable to perform well in a business or corporate work environment (Andelic, 2011, p. 95). Moreover, they claim that men have family responsibilities hence they need to earn more than women to take care of their families. Clearly, gender discrimination at the workplace in MNCs is purely and simply based on gender and the general perception of the society that women are not as able as men. Meaning, even if the firm was in its home country, women will still be paid less than their male colleagues and have higher risks of being sexually harassed at the workplace. Donna Kassman, a former female senior manager filed a 350 million dollar class action discrimination lawsuit against KPMG in the U.S.,District Court for the Southern District of New York, 2011. She resigned from the company, after seventeen years, because of gender discrimination (Wittels Heisler, 2011, p. 3). She claimed that the company engages in systematic discrimination against its female managers,-senior managers and managing directors. The plaintiff said that the lawsuit was directed towards ending systematic gender discrimination at the company; discriminatory pay, promotion practices and policies, and failure to investigate and resolve discrimination and harassment complaints. In her statement, Kassman claimed that KMPG refused to promote her. Her supervisor repeatedly gave her false hopes that she was next in line to be promoted between 2008 and 2009 (Wittels Heisler, 2011, p. 3). It is also during the same period that two of her male colleagues complained that she was unapproachable. These claims drastically derailed her career advancement. She was advised to meet with a specialist to advise her on how she could work on her issues and the two male colleagues who forwarded complaints against Kassman were promoted (Wittels Heisler, 2011, p. 3). Kassman also recalled when her base salary was cut down by $20,000 when she was on maternity leave. The company gave no reasons for slashing her salary. When she enquired further, her supervisor told her that she did not need that amount because she had a nice engagement ring. This shows how KPMG tolerates and perpetuates gender discrimination. In October.2010, Kassman resigned because she could no longer tolerate the discrimination and harassment anymore (Wittels Heisler, 2011, p. 3). Plus, it was so clear that KPMG had no intentions of addressing the situation. In October 2015, 9,000 more women joined the class lawsuit against KPMG law firm, Sanford Heisler, on behalf of Donna Kassman. Her complaints were amended in 2012 to accommodate the additional plaintiffs. 900 of these women have signed to be part f the suit by the end of 2014.Those that had not made this request had until 31st January 2015, to do so. In their response, KPMG stated that they did not intend to comment on the ongoing litigation. However, they said that they have reviewed all complaints brought forward against them and found them unsupported by facts. Additionally, the company insisted that, in line with their vision and mission statements, they are committed to the advancement of women and addressing the challenges women go through in their workplaces. One explanation for gender discrimination by MNCs is traditional notions that men are more capable than women hence they work more resulting to them being paid more. In the case of Donna Kassman, former senior manager at KPMG, U.S firm, she realized that she was being paid less than her male colleagues. Her salary was cut down without explanation or provocation while she was on a maternity leave. When she enquired from her supervisor, he told her she did not need that much money judging from her engagement ring. Meaning women are paid less and the society does not expect them to complain since they have men to take care of them (Hyde, 2014, p. 375). Her not being consulted about a salary cut shows how much MNCs does not value womens opinions, even on issues that concern them directly and could affect their lifestyle. The theory of labor market discrimination states that wage difference occurs where a particularly disadvantaged group may be crowded in one job. However, the findings of this study point to a different direction regarding wage difference; women are paid less because they are women, not because they are many in the same job (Willstrop, 2015, p. 3) .For example, KPMG has very few women in leadership positions, yet they pay them less compared to their male counterparts. Also, the findings of this study show that MNCs are more concerned about their image to the external publics than internal publics. For example, in Bojkars case, the company was silent on addressing her sexual harassment complaints. In fact, no inquiry committee was set up to look into the matter. However, when the media started covering the story, KPMG set up an inquiry committee. Clearly, they did not want to look bad to the external publics who love and support companies that respect and protect their employees regardless of race, gender and class. Impact of Gender Inequalities practiced by MNCs According to statistics, 68% of women believe that discrimination at work, based on gender, still exists (Tienari, 2014, p. 435). Despite the protections put forward by the government such as the Equal Pay Act of 1963 in the U.S., gender discrimination still exists, probably more rampant than it did 10 years ago (Madhani, 2014, p. 36). In this section, we shall discuss what has been written on the effects of gender discrimination by MNCs. Gender discrimination leads to lost productivity. Those who have been discriminated lose the morale and energy to carry out their responsibilities (Naude, 2013, p. 20). Among things that could lead to the individual losing morale are; pranks offensive jokes about the persons gender or implying that the persons performance is sub-par because of her gender. Similarly, discrimination based on gender can make supervisors deny passing a person over for promotion by virtue of that person being female (Elo, 2015, p. 26). Admittedly, this happens to both genders; however, women experience it more often than their male colleagues. This is because of preconceived perceptions on their roles and responsibilities in the society. For example, most supervisors recommend men working in industries for promotion. The woman who has been discriminated may feel some form of strong resentment towards the culprit or the company. Thus, she may resort to wanting to destroy those who mistreated her (Andelic, 2011, p. 97). This manifests itself in form of violent behavior towards other, destruction of property or spreading malicious lies about the company that could end up destroying the companys image to a point of no-return. The law prohibits any form of gender discrimination at the workplace. This also applies to MNCs in host countries. They have to respect and protect their women staff (Randall Leavy, 2014, p. 35). Respect and protection mean equal pay, fair treatment, and no harassment. Unfortunately, most MNCs discriminate women based on gender (Rumens, 2016, p. 117). Some victims are lucky to receive compensation after filing complaints, but they constitute a very small percentage. Many culprits walk away free and their careers continue to flourish while their victims wallow in sadness and depression. Conclusion The purpose of this report was to provide the role of Multinational Companies (MNCs) in creating gender-based inequalities like wage gap, discrimination and workplace sexual abuse. Gender inequalities are among organizational issues in a global context. KPMG Company is a multinational organization with branches in India and U.S. It was used as a case study in this report and it helped in concluding that MNCs create and encourage gender-based discrimination by not taking action when their female employees complain of discrimination or sexual harassment. Although the constitution has pledged to protect and empower women, the latter continues to live in bondage in her own country because the society is not willing to change its position on her place in this world. Therefore, this report recommends that companies operating the global business context should develop and implement gender equality policies to protect staff from discrimination. References List Adityanath, Y., 2015. Most Indian Companies and MNCs not Compliant with the Sexual Harassment Act. [Online] Available at: https://www.dnaindia.com [Accessed 21 March 2017]. Allen, R. C., 2012. Technology and the great divergence : Global economic development since 1820. Journal of Economic History, pp. 1-16. Andelic, G., 2011. The impact of Globalization on the Insurance and Reinsurance Market of Eastern Europe. South East European Journal of Economics and Business, pp. 95-112. Baron, J. N., 2013. Empathy wages?: Gratitude and gift exchange in employment relationships. Journal metrics, pp. 24-30. Eagleman, A., 2015. Constructing gender differences: Newspaper portrayals of male and female gymnasts at the 2012 Olympic Games. Sport in Society, pp. 234-247. Elo, M., 2015. Diaspora Networks in International business: A review of emerging stream research. Handbook on International Alliance and Network Research, pp. 13-40. Geva, D., 2011. Different and Unequal? Breadwinning, Dependency Deferments, and the Gendered Origins of the US Selective Service System. Armed Forces Society, pp. 598-618. Green, J., 2011. How Does Globalization Affect an Organization's Business Approach?. Small Business.chron, pp. 8-12. Greenwood, M., 2013. Ethical analyses of HRM: A review and research agenda. Journal of Business Ethics, pp. 355-366. Houchins, M., 2015. This Day in History: Equal Pay Trailblazer Lilly Ledbetter Turns 77. [Online] Available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov [Accessed 7 October 2016]. Hyde, J. S., 2014. Gender Similarities and differences. Annual Review of Psychology, pp. 373-398. Kini, D., 2012. Materials management: The key to successful project management. Journal of Management in Engineering, pp. 865-876. Madhani, P. M., 2014. Corporate governance of Indian firms: An Industry Perspective. International Business Review, pp. 34-50. Naude', W., 2013. Entrepreneurship and economic development: Theory of evidence and policy. Browser Download This Paper, pp. 15-43. Nielsen, W. M., 2016. Gender inequality and research performance: Moving beyond individual-meritocratic explanations of academic advancement. Studies in Higher Education, pp. 2044-2060. Randall, R. Leavy, B., 2014. India: MNC Strategies for growth and Innovation. Strategy Leadership, pp. 30-39. Rumens, N., 2016. Sexualities and accounting: A queer theory perspective. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 35, pp. 111-120. Tienari, J., 2014. 17. no gender, please, we're international management scholars!. Research Handbook on women in International management, pp. 435-439. Willstrop, J., 2015. The Long and Slow Journey towards equal pay and attention for women's sports. [Online] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com [Accessed 12 October 2016]. Wittels, S. Heisler, L., 2011. Accounting Giant KPMG LLP Faces $350 Million Gender Discrimination Class Action. [Online] Available at: https://www.prnewswire.com [Accessed 21 March 2017].