An excerpt from my dissertation...

Females are underrepresented in leadership roles within the construction industry (Kolko & Miller, 2018). Though females are increasingly entering managerial roles traditionally held by males, research on female leadership continues to be of popular interest and concern. There exists a substantial amount of data and opinion suggesting that modern organizations need non coercive leadership styles to build effective teams and relationships, and coincidentally, these styles are more often naturally employed by females (Thurairajah, Amaratunga, & Haigh, 2007). However, in a study on women leadership in construction organizations, authors Thurairajah, Amaratunga, and Haigh (2007) found that “women are not only underrepresented but also their vertical distribution in organizational hierarchy is highly skewed” (p. 374). Despite many females being well qualified for leadership or top managerial positions, they are unable to advance due to a “glass ceiling” (Lockwood, 2004). The term “glass ceiling” was originally coined on paper in a 1986 Wall Street Journal report by Hymowitz and Schellhardt (Lockwood, 2004), but much credit is given to Marilyn Loden, who verbally used the phrase during a panel discussion at a 1978 Women’s Exposition in New York (Vargas, 2021). The “glass ceiling” came about during the Civil Rights Act, a movement aimed at eliminating barriers and discrimination towards women and minorities. The basic definition of the “glass ceiling” is an invisible barrier that prevents women from obtaining higher positions within organizations and corporate settings. Barriers and discrimination still exist today, including a limitation of female advancement in leadership or corporate opportunities in the twenty-first century. Women make up 10.9% of those employed in construction in the U.S., but “considering that women make up 47% of all employed individuals, this means that the construction industry is only benefiting from about 1.25% of women in the workforce” (BigRentz, 2022). 

Historical Review

To reveal the phenomenon of under-representation of females in top leadership positions in the construction industry, a historical review of women’s roles in construction is necessary (Hatipkarasulu and Roff, 2011). Construction is historically referred to as a non-traditional occupation or vocation for women (Hasan et al., 2021; Hatipkarasulu and Roff, 2011; Lekchiri & Kramm, 2020; McEvoy, 2017; Norberg & Johansson, 2021; Winke, 2022). Hatipkarasulu and Roff (2011) describe how there is limited evidence of females working in construction in the ancient world, and some of the earliest written records are noted in 13th century Spain. Winke (2022) also notes 13th century Spain with official records of a group of women working on stone and wood structures in the city of Navarre. Later in 17th century England, the story of a woman earning half of what her husband earned repairing flags and moving dirt was provided as an example (Hatipkarasulu & Roff, 2011). And though gender segregation and pay scale differences were clearly noted, so too was evidence that females partook in such construction work (Hatipkarasulu & Roff, 2011). 

The voices of several historians have made it apparent that women were discouraged from working outside the home, or busied with any form of manual labor (Hatipkarasulu & Roff, 2011). Females who could not or chose not to conform to this prescription were seen as being of the lowest social class, and barely a step above prostitution. Majority of the women that took up such work were labeled as laborers, craftswomen, or as patrons of building construction. Numerous females who pursued the trade were allegedly single, poor, without family, or slaves. It is interesting to acknowledge the simple lack of documentation and information available, sort of vague recordings of women’s activities and participation in the centuries that followed. It remains unclear the reasoning. Winke (2022) even describes the spotty record-keeping, making it impossible to know for sure how prevalent women’s influence was. The bulk of women may have tried to steer clear of the construction field because of the attached stigma, or historians intentionally or inadvertently avoided or discounted the relevance of chronicling such events or involvement.

Eventually with the Industrial Revolution in the mid-18th century, females seemed to be able to return to construction sites as laborers with an expanded labor market and less social condemnation (Winke, 2022). In the 19th century, Emily Roebling gained national attention in 1876 by playing an essential role in building the famous monument, the Brooklyn Bridge (McEvoy, 2017; Winke, 2022). The opportunity only arose however, after her husband, John Roebling, fell ill (McEvoy, 2017; Winke, 2022). In the years that followed, more and more women slowly began to break barriers. In 1898, Ethel Charles was the first female accepted into the Royal Institute of British Architects (Winke, 2022). Julia Morgan became the first female admitted to the prestigious École Nationale Supérieure des Beaux-Arts school of architecture in 1902, and the first California licensed woman architect in 1904 (Winke, 2022). The American Society of Mechanical Engineers admitted its first female member, Lillian Moller Gilbreth, in 1926 (Winke, 2022).

World War II marked a pivotal moment and turning point for women (McEvoy, 2017; Winke, 2022). While tens of thousands of men shipped out to fight and partake in the war effort, females stepped in to fill the roles they left behind, sometimes taking over entire industries that used to be considered too physically demanding or unsuitable for women. Females publicly operated cranes, welded in shipyards, worked on machinery in factories, became electrical engineers and somewhat abruptly took over sectors that had long been reserved for males. Social dynamics and gender perspectives entered a complex and dicey era when troops returned, consequently causing many women to lose employment. This seemed to fuel the feminist movements of the 1960s. 

Female Executives in Construction

According to Hickey and Cui (2020), women are significantly underrepresented in U.S. engineering and construction executive leadership positions (3.9%), despite the fact that women make up 50.8% of the country's gender population distribution, and 21.9% of civil engineering bachelor’s degrees earned in the last 24 years. Hasan, Ghosh, Mahmood, and Thaheem (2021) also assert that women are underrepresented across all roles and occupations within construction, regardless of title or leadership function. Little research is known or available regarding current female executives within the construction industry, arguably due to the obvious and staggering lack of diversification. Research on women in construction is scarce (Hasan et al., 2021; Norberg & Johansson, 2021).

Dainty, Neale, and Bagilhole (2000) offer up circumstances and thoughts women face in regards to leadership within the construction industry job climate. There seem to be at least two solid reasons women find it extraordinarily difficult to obtain leadership positions: (1) an intentional social isolation created and sustained by male peers and counterparts, and (2) men’s downplaying of women’s contributions in order to maintain their current status and secure positions and ladder climbing opportunities. To cope, “women are typically faced with three possibilities, adjust their behaviors to those of men and begin acting the same; lessen their professional goals and expectations by undertaking inferior jobs that do not match their ambitions and abilities; or give up and change to a more women-friendly industry” (Lekchiri & Kamm, 2020, p. 578). 

Though the impact and influence of professional advocacy groups and trade associations is unclear, many advancements have been made in the formation and support of particular agencies and organizations aimed at assisting women and females in challenging industries. One such group is the National Association of Women in Construction (NAWIC), which provides networking opportunities, scholarships, apprenticeships, and training programs (Craig, 2018; Lekchiri & Kamm, 2020; Norberg & Johansson, 2021). The NAWIC has more than 118 chapters across the country including members that are some of the most accomplished women in the industry, and many credit their career advancements and leadership development to the organization. 

While likely helpful for female individuals, some research points out that the efforts of organizations like the NAWIC are not enough. In 2021 in the U.S., the construction “industry remains highly male dominated with few visible changes” (Norberg & Johansson, 2021, p. 2). Norberg and Johansson (2021) deduce that the support and efforts alone from trade associations and initiatives to increase the amount of female participation in the industry has not made construction “attractive to all individuals irrespective of gender” (p. 2). 

Barriers

Countless research proves and supports at least one conviction: Though barriers and discrimination women face have diminished, they still exist, and in some instances, extraordinarily so (Choi, Shane, & Chih, 2022; Fielden, Davidson, Gale, & Davey, 2000; Hasan et al., 2021; Hatipkarasulu & Roff, 2011; Hickey & Cui, 2020; Kolko & Miller, 2018; Lekchiri & Kamm, 2020; Menches & Abraham, 2007; Norberg & Johansson, 2021; Thurairajah et al., 2007). It is commonly agreed that how females are perceived and their overall status has improved in the 21st century, but barriers still ensue. Menches and Abraham (2007) summarize: 

The top five most frequently cited problems encountered by women

in construction - or barriers to their success - included: 

1. Slow career progression that contributes to disillusionment with the industry and its culture;
2. Difficult work - family balancing act, including primary childcare pressures;
3. Attitude barriers caused by male dominance;
4. “Job hopping” to overcome career barriers caused by slow advancement and an inflexible work structure; and 
5. Overtly masculine culture that consists of conflict and aggression. 

However, the single largest contributor to women leaving the construction industry - and women failing to choose construction as a viable career - was the culture. (p. 702)

Choi, Shane, and Chih (2022) go as far to detail research confirming that limited participation of women in construction and the significant gender wage gap exist with no sign of improvement. 

External and environmental factors appear to significantly contribute to the barriers preventing career fulfillment for women in construction (Ericksen & Schultheiss, 2009). Females face different and unique challenges when entering or working in blue-collar occupations. For example, research has identified some barriers to include limited education and training, work readiness, and technical skills. Additionally, women reported adverse working conditions, experiences of sexual harassment, gender discrimination, less satisfaction and more stress when employed in traditionally male populated blue-collar organizations. Predominantly male-populated or male-dominated industries tend to correlate with higher incidents related to sexual harassment involving employed women (Fitzgerald, Drasgow, Hulin, Gelfand, & Magley, 1997; Stringer & Duncan, 1985). 

A case study on adolescent female leadership by Mullen and Tuten (2004) describes female adolescents as having “apparently honed a leadership style that reflects their societal conditioning” (p. 19). Girls must learn to navigate cultural complexities, and somewhat convoluted and contradictory societal expectations and norms when striving for leadership positions and responsibilities. Navigating when and how to speak up and stand out while simultaneously knowing when and how to refrain or stand back in a leadership opportunity and context, is a unique and required ability that females learn and experience if they are to obtain or hold such roles. Males and females alike are conditioned by internal and external influences that teach how to lead, and where males tend to force their will or stance, females would be disapproved of for similar behavior, and vice versa.

Other research has identified barriers for women entering and working within construction to arise from “the industry’s image; career knowledge amongst children and adults; selection criteria and male dominated courses; recruitment practices and procedures; sexist attitudes; male dominated culture; and the work environment” (Fielden et al., 2000, p. 116). Barriers appear to be enhanced by an outdated industrial view that continuously endorses and nurtures a male only agenda and outlook, further entrenching a culture that diminishes the worth of women. In a UK study, researchers found the construction industry to be the second most male-dominated sector (behind mining and quarrying) and simultaneously appear “to exhibit the greatest degree of vertical segregation by sex” (Fielden et al., 2000, p. 114).