By Eliza Wong (21-22)

The Bamboo Ceiling, derived from the “glass ceiling”, describes an organisational barrier that impedes ambitious Asian professionals from reaching executive positions in the workplace (Hyun, 2005). Previous research on the Bamboo Ceiling has informed that Asians are disproportionately underrepresented in the US, as explained by the cultural differences and ‘model minority’ myth.

What is the evidence? 

Asians comprise 13% of the professional workforce yet only 5.6% of Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) in the Fortune 500 (Zewigenhaft, 2021). Similarly, Asians contributed 7.5% of the workforce in the UK, however, only 3.3% of FTSE 100 chairs, CEOs and CFOs are from an ethnic minority background, of which none were ethnic Chinese or Asians (Telegraph, 2015).

On the surface, Asians have achieved relative success in educational, socio-economic, and professional status compared to other minorities. Although Asian Americans are most likely to be hired in entry-level and nonmanagerial roles in companies in Silicon Valley, they are half as likely as white men and white women to be promoted to senior leadership positions (Gee & Peck, 2017).

Furthermore, a recent survey of 10,000 people conducted by the management consultancy, Bain & Company, has found across all geographies (including the US, Canada, UK, and France), industries and demographic groups, Asian workers reported feeling the least included at work (Bain & Company, 2022).This finding revealed that Asian professionals in western societies don’t feel included in the workplace which provided evidence of the Bamboo Ceiling phenomenon.

More recently, emerging evidence has suggested that the Bamboo Ceiling phenomenon is not an issue for all Asians, but a cultural issue of assertiveness that is exclusive to East Asians (EAs) (Lu et al., 2020). Furthermore, the researchers conducted a systematic review and concluded these findings showed that EAs are consistently underrepresented in leadership roles but not SAs. Moreover, they noted that there is a scarcity of EA CEOs in the US whilst there are plenty of SA CEOs from well-known companies such as Citigroup, Google, Microsoft, MasterCard and PepsiCo.

Why are Asians not in leadership positions?

The fundamental principle of Implicit leadership theory (ILT) is that leadership is a socially contract process and it operates within constraints offered by its followers as they determine the definition of a leader and what a leader should be (Lord et al., 1984).

When group members identified a potential leader, their implicit expectations and assumptions about personal characteristics, traits, and qualities in a leader are activated and subconsciously they compared the perceived qualities of the potential leader to the prototypical leader attributes in their ILT (Kono et al, 2012). As a result, an individual is less likely to attain a leadership position if they don’t meet the leader schema i.e., there is incongruence between their characteristics and the cultural prototype of a leader, hence group members won’t be categorised as leaders albeit the individual is motivated to be a leader (House, Javidan & Hanges, 2002).

According to Social identity theory (SIT), a group is shaped by a collection of people who identified themselves with the same social category and the group’s social identity attributes to define and evaluate themselves in which these attributes capture and accentuates intragroup similarities and intergroup differences (Tajfel & Turner, 2004). Moreover, SIT viewed that out-groups are always perceived as being more homogeneous than in-groups and this potentially accounts for the scarcity of Asians at the upper levels of organizations.

New research:

A new qualitative study aims to examine the experience of Asian professionals’ career progression and unearth the barriers of the “bamboo ceiling” in the U.K (Wong, 2022). Comprehensive semi-structured interviews with 12 Asian professionals from China, Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore as well as second-generation British-born East and South Asians were conducted.

What are the results?

Across different white-collar industries in the UK, Asian professionals are hindered by various individual, cultural, and structural hindrances when reaching a leadership role. These disadvantages and challenges were often perceived by themselves and others as products of cultural differences and language barriers. Moreover, their careers were also hindered by stereotypes and organisational barriers at work. The four prominent themes include ‘Culture assimilation’, ‘Language and communication mastery and ‘Asians as good workers, not leaders’ and ‘Organisational barriers’. The themes and subthemes are shown in figure 1.

How can organisations address Bamboo Ceiling in the U.K.?

Firstly, organisations should be mindful of the cultural differences in processes such as performance management, promotion, and recruitment. This is especially important in creating a more equitable and inclusive environment.

Secondly, organisations can consider providing theory-based, cross-cultural training interventions such as cultural assimilator (CA), relational ideology (RI) and unconscious bias training to the workforce. Therefore, managers can identify and understand the cultural differences and can provide strategic support and appropriate tasks for Asians to stretch and improve skills in certain areas, for example, developing their presentation skills. In addition, organisations should evolve their implicit prototype of leadership to match a diversifying workforce and recognise the benefits of having more than one successful leadership style.

Furthermore, instead of lumping Asians into the BAME category, it is necessary that they are identified separately from other minority groups. The formal recognition of the Asian community would aid to create a sense of belonging and inclusion. If possible, companies should review the diversity and inclusion policy in the annual hiring and promotion target so Asians can become more well-represented in all levels of the hierarchy and different departments.

Another idea is to organise a series of firm-wide cultural events on an annual basis, that promotes Asian culture to the company, such as Chinese New Year and Mid-Autumn Festival; similar to the Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) heritage month, Black History Month and Pride. Furthermore, organisations can consider setting up a mentorship programme that pairs junior Asian employees with senior Asian employees.

At an individual level, Asians might benefit from increased awareness of the differences in the Implicit Leadership Theory cultural dimension and their communication styles such as the inclination to self-effacement, harmony, and non-assertiveness. Moreover, diversifying their social networks at work may enhance their objective leadership emergence (Lu, 2022).   

Conclusion

The Bamboo Ceiling is not the culpability of Asians. As diversity is one of the most important initiatives in companies’ agendas, organisations should depart from the ‘traditional melting pot’ approach in which fusing ethnic minorities into the mainstream at the expense of their cultural identities. Instead, they should recognise and value cultural differences among ethnic groups.

Reference

Anderson, E. (2015). Ethnic diversity among FTSE 100 chiefs nosedives. United Kingdom: Retrieved from The Telegraph. website: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/ftse100/11690229/Ethnic-diversity-among-FTSE-100-chiefs-nose-dives.html

Gee, B. P. D. W. J. (2015). HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT: Asian American Leaders in Silicon Valley.

House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P., & Dorfman, P. (2002). Understanding cultures and implicit leadership theories across the globe: an introduction to project GLOBE. Journal of World Business, 37(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-9516(01)00069-4

Hyun, J. (2005). Breaking the bamboo ceiling: Career strategies for Asians. HarperBusiness

Kono, T., Ehrhart, K. H., Ehrhart, M. G., & Schultze, T. (2012). Implicit leadership theories in Japan and the US. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 50(3), 367–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7941.2012.00026.x

Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & de Vader, C. L. (1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34(3), 343–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(84)90043-6

Lu, J. G. (2022). A social network perspective on the Bamboo Ceiling: Ethnic homophily explains why East Asians but not South Asians are underrepresented in leadership in multiethnic environments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(6), 959–982. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000292

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In Political psychology (pp. 276-293). Psychology Press.

Venkataraman, K., & Yee, P. (2022). Greater Inclusion Can Help Asian Americans Crack the Bamboo Ceiling. United States: Retrieved from Bain & Company. website: https://www.bain.com/insights/greater-inclusion-can-help-asian-americans-crack-the-bamboo-ceiling/

Zweigenhaft, R. (2022). Maximizing Corporate Profits or Doing the Right Thing? White Male Fortune 500 CEOs, New CEOs, the Ukraine Morality Test, and the Right to Abortion.

By Aathira Jojy (21-22)

“Over 2 million moms left the labour force in 2020 according to new global estimates” (International Labour Organization, 2022)

Globally, 55% of mothers and overall, 62.1% of women participated in the workforce in 2019. This is comparatively lower than fathers’ participation at 97.1% (ILO, 2022). The pressures of juggling work and family life during the pandemic meant that more women left the workforce to attend to these family needs in 2020, dropping the participation of women to 53.4% (Financial Times, 2021; ILO, 2022). The World Economic Forum’s, Gender Gap Report (2022), highlights a greater reduction in the working hours of women in this period, while the unpaid labour (household work) of women increased, with men spending a third (19%) of the time women spend on unpaid labour (55%).

Several factors are thought to drive this imbalance, such as the gender pay gap, motherhood penalty, stereotypes and lack of provision and uptake of parental leave by fathers.

The lack of uptake of parental leave by fathers is driving a multitude of gender inequalities. The above literature review shows that many policies aren’t fit for purpose, often parents are not eligible, and complicated to understand. Alongside this, the research that expectant mothers’ worry over finances and the potential negative consequences of fathers’ careers as the main barriers to uptake (Twamley & Schober, 2019).

The research has been largely atheoretical in this field, therefore existing broad theories of psychology will be used to look at parental leave policies. The Person-Environment (P-E) fit (Edwards et al., 1998) describes when a misfit between the person and their environment occurs, stressors are induced. Likewise, taking a similar lens to look at parental leave policies might help identify a way to design policy so there is not a misfit between parents and policies, alleviating the potential stress.

Qualitative methodology for data gathering via semi-structured interviews was undertaken. This method allows flexibility in interviewing and the use of open-ended questions allows an exploration deeper into their feelings about parental leave (DeJonckheere &Vaughn, 2019).

Thematic analysis identified an overarching context of ‘Can’t escape the system’, which was nicely summed up by Jancy “the way the system is, you’re naturally put into that stereotypical manner where the men have to go work and the women are home looking after the baby”. Two main themes, each of which contained three sub-themes were identified within this context: ‘Having free choice’; Financial choice, Policy choice and Stereotypical Choice and ‘Winners and Losers’; as a parent, as a partner and as a careerist.

Following thematic analysis of the 12 interviews with 14 participants, the following themes were developed; ‘Having free choice’ and ‘Winners and Losers’ within the context of ‘can’t escape the system’. Findings indicate that systemic barriers through policy design negate a free choice in taking parental leave, leading parents to compromise on aspects of their life to either be a winner or a loser in domains of parenthood, relationship and career.

The practical implications of this study speak to optimising the outcomes of parental leave by allowing parents to be winners through having free choice in their decisions rather than being forced into a losing situation by the system. There are foundational steps that need to be in place for parents to be able to escape the system and the additionally what parents need to consider to achieve free choice and be winners.

Firstly, the findings highlight the need for policy reform at the government level to increase statutory entitlements for the length of leave and financial aid. Adopting a ‘use-it-or-lose-it scheme’ could be one way to encourage fathers to take up more leave as the whole family would lose out from their total entitlement (Unterhofer & Wrohlich, 2017).

Secondly, organisations while adopting the statutory requirements also will have the flexibility to enhance the allowance. This should be done considering the P-E fit model (Edwards et al., 1998) to ensure policies are designed to meet parents’ needs. Policy knowledge and awareness should be highlighted by employers, this can be done at the start of recruitment by detailing what is offered in job adverts. Also, HR and managers need to take a proactive approach in providing parents with all policies when they report pregnancy so a fully informed choice can be made. Another layer to consider for employers is to be aware of the assumptions made about parents’ needs, especially mothers’ career ambitions and fathers’ involvement in childcare.

Thirdly, assessing and being aware as an individual of their priorities and needs for career, relationship and family to be able to optimise the leave options available to impact long-term outcomes.

Finally, as partners, have open conversations about their priorities and shared priorities.  Being open and flexible to changes in needs and priorities at different stages of parental leave. Additionally, discussing their child’s needs and how best to navigate parental leave to support each other to be winners in the areas they each choose to be.

In conclusion, this study analysed the system within which parents make decisions about parental leave under the constraints of finances, policy and stereotypes. This in turn leads them to be winners or losers in the domains of parenthood, relationship and career. Parents who had longer leave often fared better in the above domains but still operated within the systemic barriers. As a result, practical implications suggest various steps for governments and employers to have in place to ensure parents have a range of flexible options to choose from. Once this base is established, individuals and parents can consider their priorities and values and have open discussions about the impact of their parental leave decision on long-term outcomes. Thus, allowing parents to be winners by having choices in the areas they wish to win in. There is scope for future research to explore whether, increasing parental leave could also have benefits for closing many gender gaps, such as pay, career progression and division of labour.