the glass ceiling in public relations (pr)

Glass Ceiling in Public Relations 1

Public Relations’ Glass Ceiling

By

Dinean Robinson


Abstract

This study defines the glass ceiling, examines its presence within the public

relations industry and explores gender discrepancies in the industry. A survey was

conducted among public relations students and public relations practitioners regarding

their perceptions of the glass ceiling in public relations. The results of the study are

congruent with those found in past research in terms of gender perception, but differ in

terms of the glass ceiling’s impact on the public relations industry. In the future,

qualitative studies of how (ethnic) minority female practitioners are affected by the glass

ceiling can be conducted to broaden the body of research.


Introduction

In 2002 women made up 70% of public relations practitioners. In the same year,

PR Week reported that female practitioners made approximately 38% less than their male

counterparts. A study in the early nineties shows that over 80% of public relations

students are women (Toth & Grunig, 1993). With the vast majority of new public

relations practitioners being female and the threat of the feminization of the public

relations industry, understanding how the glass ceiling affects female practitioners is

crucial to maintaining the credibility and viability of the industry. Since the early

eighties, when women began appearing in droves in the corporate workforce, there have

been numerous accounts of gender based inequities.

Fourteen years have passed since Hymowitz and Schellhardt (1986) first

reported on the glass ceiling, that invisible barrier faced by middle-

management women who want to attain top-level positions. Although

41.4% of the 2001 United States workforce is comprised of women (U.S

Bureau Of Labor Statistics, 2001), few women have ascended to the top

management level and pay gaps between women and men still exist

(Ragins & Sundstrom, 1989; Tsui, 1998) as cited by Choi and Hon (2002,

p. 230)

These statistics have had significant effects on the public relations industry, an

industry that is predominantly female at the tactical level but overwhelmingly male at the

C-level and upper management levels. For women planning to enter the public relations

industry, how they perceive the glass ceiling, their knowledge of its prevalence within the


industry and they way in which they navigate professionally among male bosses and

leadership may all impact their potential for success and advancement within the field.

Observing the glass ceiling in public relations helps gain insight into how gender

role socialization affects the corporate structure and female employees. The public

relations industry consists of 2 main job functions: tacticians and management. Typically,

public relations managers have a larger income potential than tacticians. Studies show

that the glass ceiling forces women to remain at the tactical level, thereby limiting the

influence they have on their companies (Dozier & Broom, 1995). Studies show that

women in public relations encounter gender based inequalities as a result of gender roles

socialization (Aldoory & Toth, 2002). Men are socialized to be more competitive than

women and to negotiate aggressively. Women however, are taught not to be too pushy or

assertive particularly when dealing with men. The assumption that women are helpers,

sensitive and nurturers, affects how men view their ability to manage (Wrigley, 2002).

Continued study of the glass ceiling helps to gain insight into other phenomenon

within the field. For example, since the first studies of public relations’ glass ceiling the

industry has experienced significant growth in female public relations practitioners

venturing into entrepreneurship with the establishment of boutique agencies. It is here

that women in public relations are able to eliminate any barriers they probably would

experience in corporate communications.

The study of public relations’ glass ceiling is important to the overall health of the

industry. ―If women become the public relations practitioners of tomorrow, they will be

the standard-bearers for the success of the public relations industry‖ (Toth & Grunig,

1993, p.156). These standard-bearers must have the same rights and rewards as their male


counterparts. The significance of such studies is evident in the conversations,

discussions and changes they spark within the industry and in the study of gender. It is of

the highest importance that research continue to take further steps into understand this

phenomenon.


Review of Literature

The following review of literature defines the glass ceiling. It then specifically

explores the glass ceiling in the public relations profession and the effect it has on public

relations practitioners both male and female.

In mainstream media, the phrase ―glass ceiling‖ first appeared in an article

published in the March 24, 1986 issue of the Wall Street Journal. Two journalists coined

the term in an attempt to describe the challenges faced by women in corporate America

(Wrigley, 2002). Earlier uses of the phrase include its appearance in a March 1984

ADweek article by Gay Bryant as well as usage in 1979 by Katherine Lawrence and

Marianne Schreiberm, both then employed by Hewlett- Packard. ―The women used the

term to explain that while on the surface there seemed to be a clear path of promotion, in

actuality women seemed to hit a point where they seemed unable to progress beyond‖

(Wikipedia, 2008). While success and even advancement are possible and do occur for

women at entry level and mid management positions, the theory of the glass ceiling

maintains that gender biases and discrimination increase as one advances in the hierarchy

of corporate America (Cotter, Hermsen, Ovadia & Vanneman, 2001).

Research shows varied definitions of the glass ceiling ranging from simplistic

ones as used by Choi and Hon (2002), to more complex ones like that which is

documented by Cotter et al. (2001). In their analysis of the Panel Study of Income

Dynamics, Cotter et al. (2001) assert that four criteria be used to define the glass ceiling:

1. A glass ceiling inequality represents a gender or racial difference that is not

explained by other job-relevant characteristics.

2. A glass ceiling inequality represents a gender or racial difference that is

greater at higher levels of an outcome than at lower levels of an outcome.


3. A glass ceiling inequality represents a gender or racial inequality in the

chances of advancement into higher levels, not merely the proportions of each

gender or race currently at those higher levels.

4. A glass ceiling inequality represents a gender or racial inequality that

increases over the course of a career. (p. 656-661)

Research shows that for women in the workforce, the glass ceiling creates

obstacles when seeking promotions, raises or when attempting to compete with male

counterparts. Glass ceiling discrimination is not based on nor justified by academic or

professional limitations held by these women. That is to say that the glass ceiling cannot

be cited when women who do not possess equal or better qualifications fail to achieve

success. The glass ceiling speaks only to those who, all things being equal, are prohibited

from advancing due to gender discrimination. Wrigley (2002) notes, that in 1991 the

Department of Labor defined the glass ceiling as ―those artificial barriers based on

attitudinal or organizational bias that prevent qualified individuals from advancing

upward in their organization into management-level positions‖ (p.28).

While individual definitions on how to qualify a glass ceiling may differ, research

shows a consensus when describing its effect on our society. The glass ceiling is

described as a being a hindrance to society and researches agree that the glass ceiling is

an injustice not only to its victims but to the entire corporate culture. In 1991, the

Department of Labor’s secretary Lynn Martin eloquently concluded her annual report by

urging that the Department’s study on the glass ceiling be taken seriously:

The glass ceiling, where it exists, hinders not only individuals, but society

as a whole. It effectively cuts our pool of potential corporate leaders by

eliminating over one-half of our population. It deprives our economy of

new leaders, new sources of creativity – the ―would be‖ pioneers of the

business world. If our end game is to compete successfully in today’s

global market, then we have to unleash the full potential of the American

work force. The time has come to tear down, to dismantle—the ―Glass

Ceiling‖ (as cited by Wrigley, 2002, p.28).


The presence of the glass ceiling is widely accepted with numerous experiences having

been documented and researched.

The Glass Ceiling in the Public Relations Profession

Since the influx of women into the public relations profession in the 1980s

(Serini, Toth, Wright & Emig 1997) public relations scholars have been researching the

occurrence of glass ceiling discrimination. Although female public relations practitioners

comprised over 50% of the industry in as early as the late 1980s, (Aldoory & Toth,

2002), research shows that the glass ceiling, ―the invisible barrier faced by middle

management women‖, (Choi & Hon, 2002, p. 230) has prevented a large number of

female practitioners from reaching ―C‖ level management positions. The number of

women in public relations has been steadily increasing. Business Week reported that in

1997 women represented ―11.2% of officers at large corporations, an increase from the

10.6 % reported in 1996 and 8.7% in 1995‖ (Wrigley, 2002, p.28).

Studies show that inequities in salary, positions and advancement, particularly

between male and female practitioners, are all results of the presence of a glass ceiling

within the public relations profession. Wrigley (2002) notes that in its March 2000 Salary

Survey PRWEEK found that ―women were paid 72% of the salary paid to men, on

average‖ (p. 28). The industry wide income disparity as well as other discrimination has

prompted research into areas including gender perceptions, feminism, job satisfaction,

leadership and the perceived feminization of the public relations profession. As an

industry, public relations has been thoroughly researched and criticized for its gender

inequalities. However, Wrigley (2002) notes that ―men interviewed in public relations

projects have denied the problem is real, even when presented with detailed and well-

researched information‖ (p. 30).


The bulk of research on the glass ceiling affirms its existence in American public

relations firms. However, research on the glass ceiling does not limit its existence to the

American public relations industry. Gender biases as described by Wrigley (2000) have

also been documented in European public relations firms and agencies. In a study of top

management executives, Vianen and Fischer (2002) of the Department of Work and

Organizational Psychology at the University of Amsterdam find that in Europe the glass

ceiling has a direct correlation to business operations as well as hiring motives.

Organizations spouting a desire to employ more women in top management often present

women with positions in which they would be forced to forego personal commitments

and familial aspirations for the sake of their careers. ―As long as companies stress the

need for sacrificing one’s private life in order to be able to fulfill a tom management

position, women will remain the great minority in these positions‖(p.334).

In Germany, research shows that a stereotype of female public relations

practitioners has developed. In their qualitative study of thirteen female public relations

practitioners, Fröhlich and Peters (2007) find that the ―PR Bunny stereotype gathers

several components that in former research have been observed somewhat in isolation:

the marginalization of the public relations function and women’s reduction to physical

attributes: sexism, lookism, ageism‖ (p.242). This reduction is most noticeable when

women are excluded from the higher levels of public relations management. By limiting

women to tactical, middle level management and staff positions, perpetuates the theory

that women in public relations lack the ability to contribute to their company’s financial

and business growth (Aldoory, 2005). At some of the leading public relations firms, for

example women are scarce in upper management. ―Only twenty-five percent of


Edelman’s leadership is female and Strategic, Merritt and Levick, which are all run by

men‖ (Livingston, 2008, p.1-2). It is easy to understand why these facts are crucial to

learning how women are affected by a male led industry that is overly populated by

women. Probably the clearest reason is that when it comes to advancment and income,

positions matter. Dozier and Broom (1995) confirm that positions are linked to salary,

―managers earn significantly higher salaries than technicians‖ (p.54).

Research conducted on the presence of the glass ceiling in public relations is not

surprisingly facilitated in large part by female scholars. This often results in research that

is conducted with the acceptance of the glass ceiling as a constant. Studies show a

woman’s point of view and in some cases studies are documented as having a feminist

approach. Grunig, Toth and Hon (2000) in their exploration of gender and the public

relations professionals analyze the similarities between feminism & feminist values and

the ethical practice of public relations. Grunig et al. maintain that in a feministic approach

to research women are assumed to be effective communicators and skilled practitioners.

Hon (1995) notes, ―Women are treated as individuals whose perceptions, meanings, and

experiences are appropriate and important data for analysis‖ (p. 28). Research has been

conducted to not only evaluate public relations from a feminist point of view but to move

toward the development of feminist theories in public relations. In a profession where

women have often been silent, studies, (e.g. Aldoory, 2005) have been conducted to

―critique the current feminist paradigm in public relations and (re)conceive the three core

concepts of gender, power and diversity‖ (p. 669).

Discussions on the glass ceiling within the public relations profession have, for

the majority of work, been limited to analyzing how the phenomenon affects the public


relations industry and its practitioners. Few studies, however, have been conducted to

determine what causes and perpetuates the glass ceiling. While much of the research that

has been done points to societal causes, Wrigley (2002) identifies 5 factors as possible

contributors to the glass ceiling. Wrigley (2002) held focus groups among female

practitioners who had management experience. Results show that while corporate culture

and gender role socialization were factors, 3 of the five factors related to the women’s

own perceptions, actions or behaviors:

Although the women in this study sometimes initially disagreed that there

is a glass ceiling for women in public relations and communications

management, by the end of their interview or focus group, many had given

examples from their own experiences of others which suggested

otherwise. This denial or rationalization will be examined in terms of the

factors these women suggest contribute to the glass ceiling.

Factor 1: Denial

Factor 2: Gender Role Socialization

Factor 3: Historical Precedence

Factor 4: Women Turning Against Other Women

Factor 5: Corporate Culture (p. 37-41).

The theory that the glass ceiling is sometimes caused and perpetuated by female

practitioner’s own actions, while shocking, is not altogether new. Researchers have been

documented as suggesting that women in public relations have the power to reach upper

management by working within the system that was designed to limit them. Toth and

Grunig (1993) note that in the report, Beyond the Velvet Ghetto women are challenged to

―accept that the velvet ghetto as real, learn to play the game and to develop a career plan

if they wanted to move into public relations management‖ (p.155). The report suggests

that female practitioners are in a position to create opportunities for themselves.

Throughout other corporate institutions women in power also denied the glass ceiling’s

existence. When she became the chairwoman of the board at Hewlett-Packard, Carly


Fiorina asserted that there was no glass ceiling, as evident by her achievement

(Wikipedia, 2008).

The Glass Ceiling in Public Relations and the Study of Gender

Research on the glass ceiling always included studies into gender. Some have

examined income disparities, some perceptions and others gender roles. Chon and Hoi

(2002) note that studies ―which have investigated the organizational roles of public

relations practitioners, have found consistently that gender acts in concert with other

variables to constrain women’s advancement into managerial ranks‖(p. 230). For Serini

et al. (1997) ―gender is an organizing principle used to be classify and differentiate

humans and to give us guidelines for how we are to interact with others‖ (p.100).

Beginning with the Velvet Ghetto study conducted by the International Association of

Business Communications, research found a gap in pay between women and men as well

as the early feminization of an industry (Toth & Cline 1989). Choi and Hon (2002) note

public relations was referred to as the velvet ghetto because corporations would saturate

departments with women hoping to compensate for the lack of women in top

management positions. This funneling of women to tactical and support roles accounts

for pay gaps and other gender based inequities.

Dozier and Broom (1995) also researched how gender could influence pay scales

and roles in public relations. In a comparative analysis of two surveys conducted of

Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) members, results show salary gaps between

female and male practitioners were smaller in 1991 than in 1979. However other studies

of the glass ceiling which were conducted using PRSA members (e.g. Aldoory & Toth,

2002 and Serini et al. 1997) have illustrated significant salary gaps between men and


women public relations practitioners remained prevalent throughout the nineties. After

careful analysis, Dozier and Broom (1995) later determined that ―the smaller sample size

in 1991 provides less precise estimates of the population parameters‖ (p.18). Research

also shows that such disparities exist despite how gender based issues are seen in by men

as compared to women.

In other studies of gender and public relations, Choi and Hon (2002) randomly

selected members of the Public Relations Society of America to participate in a survey to

determine if an increased number of women in powerful public relations positions effects

perceptions on gender differences. Findings show that the number of women in powerful

positions has no effect on how respondents view gender differences. Instead, Choi and

Hon (2002) find that the gender of respondents influenced perceptions of gender

differences. Female respondents perceived larger gender differences and evaluated men

more favorably relative to success than male respondents.

Throughout history women have developed social and cultural roles that isolate

them into certain societal stereotypes. Women are often pegged as the nurturers, the care

givers and the doers while men subscribe to the idea that they are the leaders. However,

women have made crucial advancements despite the fact that societal implications of

years of stereotypes have taken root in corporate America, particularly in public relations.

As a result, in the profession where there exists the very real possibility of women

reversing those roles we continue to see a large percentage of men leave the public

relations industry. Aldoory and Toth (2004) find that this socialization argument was

given by one of their female focus groups. ―Participants argued that men have difficulty


being lead by women. Men have been so socialized to be the ones giving directions and

solving problems‖ (p.177)

One of the earliest studies on gender, the glass ceiling and public relations,

Wright, Grunig, Springston and Toth (1991) finds a correlation between gender and job

satisfaction (as cited by Serini et al., 1997). Results show that women in public relations

were less satisfied with their jobs and witnessed more instances of gender inequalities

(Serini et al., 1997). Results show that men tend to be more competitive and define

themselves by their work. Women however, include a wider range of things that they

view as being important to job satisfaction. Among the most mentioned were flexibility

and the need to feel empowered. The increase of women in public relations contributed to

a minimized level of job satisfaction in both men and women (Wright et al., 1991). Serini

et al. (1997) find that when asked to discuss job satisfaction male respondents mentioned

a skewing of workplace opportunities in favor of women to make up for any past

inequality. ― The results of the inquiry into job satisfaction, although contradictory, leads

to an overall understanding that there are indeed differences between men’s and women’s

levels of satisfaction…‖ (p.101). Male respondents note that since the field had ―become

female dominated, they felt men might be less able than women to achieve higher levels

in organizations‖ (p109).

While research does not directly point to it, balance among the genders is an

underlying theme. Research includes various qualitative studies that illustrate both males

and females willingness to engage in dialogue surrounding gender in the field. Both

males and females have reason to be understanding of the other’s experience. The public

relations industry prides itself on the diversity of its workforce. It ―helps us [practitioners]


better represent our clients‖ (Guiniven, 2007 p.6). Hon (1995) finds that female

practitioners feel that their work environments are dominated by men and that the culture

is overtly male. Many comment about being frustrated by what they perceived as

institutional barriers that are based on gender. Researchers suggest that such a balance

doesn’t begin on the job at public relations firms but in collegiate classrooms where

public relations is first being taught. ―Take a view into any public relations classroom at a

college and you will see more women than men‖ (Anderson, 2006, p.30). Hon (1995)

identified ―the flawed or inadequate college curriculum in public relations‖ (p.45).

Students attributed a deteriorating public relations program to the ―degradation of the

public relations function‖ (p.45).

The current research of the glass ceiling in public relations clearly highlights the

effect such discrimination has on female practitioners and on the industry as a whole. In

an effort to expand the body of knowledge it is important to research how marginalized

groups such as African American and Hispanic women are affected by the glass ceiling.

A study that focuses on how they perceive and are affected by the glass ceiling, both as

women and as people of color, would serve as a unique starting point. Research

examining perceptions held by African American practitioners, specifically males, was

missing from the current research. The current body of research also neglects studies into

how the glass ceiling is perceived by practitioners before and after they enter the field.


Methodology

A survey was conducted to obtain explanatory data. The twelve question survey

was posted online at www.freesurveyonline.com. A the system generated a link which

was emailed to 2 public relations 2 classes at Seton Hall University totaling sixteen,

posted on twitter.com and to select individuals on facebook.com. The survey was a

combination of true and false as well as yes and no questions. Respondents were

sometimes given the option to reply somewhat, unsure and sometimes.

Questions inquired about respondent’s belief in the glass and perceptions on if

and how they are affected. The surveyed purposed to gain insight into how current public

relations practitioners and students, both male and female, perceive the presence of a

glass ceiling within the field. It also researched practitioners’ perceptions of gender

differences within the field.

Respondents were first asked to identify their gender. They were then asked if

they believed in the existence of the glass ceiling in the public relations industry. In order

to gauge how practitioners viewed women in corporate America, participants were asked

whether or not they believed women had the power to go as far as they wanted to in

business.

In order to determine how respondents feel gender affects them, the survey then

asked respondents if they feel they are limited in their profession because of their gender.

To further understand how participants view the glass ceiling and gender discrepancies in

public relations the survey questioned whether or not gender helps to determine salary

and status within the public relations industry and if having more women in upper

management would prevent gender inequality.

http://www.freesurveyonline.com/


The survey went on to examine perceptions of the public relations industry in

terms of its suitability for men and women. To learn how respondents felt about

leadership and gender the survey questioned whether or not PR practitioners with female

bosses were more satisfied with their jobs. Lastly, to gauge the impact women in

powerful positions has on business respondents were asked if powerful women and

female leaders has a positive effect on women in business.


Results

The twelve question survey yielded 33 responses from public relations

professionals and students, twenty-nine (87%) female and four (12%) male. The

following results were obtained. When asked if they believed in the existence of the glass

ceiling in the public relations industry 45% responded no, 24% said yes and 10% said

they were unsure. However, 51% of respondents said they feel that in public relations

gender sometimes determines salary and status. Although the majority of respondents,

(97%), felt the public relations industry is a good one for women to work in, 39%

answered that gender does have an effect on the success of public relations practitioners.

To further explore how respondents view gender and the role it plays in the public

relations industry, participants were asked if they believed that public relations

practitioners with female bosses have more job satisfaction than those with male bosses.

Twenty-eight out of 33 respondents said that statement was false. The remaining

respondents replied true. Although respondents answered questions in a manner which

supports the presence of women in the field and in leadership positions, 97% of

respondents felt that the public relations industry was still a good one for men to work in.

To help gauge how survey participants perceived the presence of women in

corporate America, the survey asked participants if they felt women are more powerful in

business today than they were five years ago. The majority of respondents replied yes, 24

out of 33 (72.7%). Twenty-one percent the respondents said they thought women were

somewhat more powerful while 6.1% said they were unsure. When asked if women had

the power to go as far as they wanted to in business 90.9% of the respondents said yes,

with only 9.1% of respondents answering that women could not go as far as they wanted.


Of the 33 respondents 21 of them felt they are not limited in their profession because of

their gender. However, 30% said they sometimes feel they are limited and 6.2% said they

are limited in their profession because of their gender. They survey then asked if

participants believed that having more women in upper management would prevent

gender income inequality. More than half responded yes. The remaining students were

spilt, with 24.2% responding no and 24.2% responding maybe.

The study showed that while the majority of participants do not believe in the

presence of a glass ceiling in the public relations industry there does exist, at least some

gender based discrimination. Overall, survey participants believe in the ability of women

to advance despite those gender based discrepancies in status and income.


Discussion

This study, in retrospect, had a variety of limitations. Conducted in the midst of

the initial research, the goal of the study was not clearly defined. As a result identifying

questions regarding respondents’ job positions, current professional status, age and race

were not included in the survey. Also, respondents were, for the majority, female but

there were 4 male participants. The study may have been more effective if it included a

strictly female pool of participants or if had a larger number of male respondents. Also,

the mechanism with which the survey was conducted did not allow me to determine

which participant responded in what way.

The results of this study are similar to those highlighted in the review of literature

however; there are some differences in the most recent data. The study found that the

public relations industry does experience some gender discrepancies when determining

status and salary. According to previous research (Wrigley, 2002), ―women were paid

72% of the salary paid to men, on average‖ (p. 28).

This study shows that students and public relations professionals (97%) believe

the public relations industry is a good one for both men and women to work in. This

indicates a level of current or perceived job satisfaction in the field. However, Serini,

Toth Wright and Emig (1997) find that when asked to discuss job satisfaction male

respondents mentioned a skewing of workplace opportunities in favor of women to make

up for any past inequality. ― The results of the inquiry into job satisfaction, although

contradictory, leads to an overall understanding that there are indeed differences between

men’s and women’s levels of satisfaction…‖ (p.101).


When asked about the existence of a ―glass ceiling‖ in the public relations field,

this study found that 45% did not believe it existed. However, in previous research, the

glass ceiling is widely accepted. For example, although female public relations

practitioners comprised over 50% of the industry in as early as the late 1980s (Aldoory &

Toth, 2002), research shows that the glass ceiling, ―the invisible barrier faced by middle

management women‖, (Choi & Hon, 2002, p. 230) has prevented a large number of

female practitioners from reaching ―C‖ level management positions.

The survey finds that while respondents do not admit to the existence of a glass

ceiling, they do recognize that women may face certain gender based inequities. Further

research into the usage and acceptance of the actually term ―glass ceiling‖ may be

required to determine whether or not a younger generation of professionals and students

embrace it.

Unlike those surveyed by Choi and Hon (2002) who support the idea that the

number of women in powerful positions has no effect on how respondents view gender

differences, this study found that 51% of public relations practitioners and students

believe having more women in upper management would prevent gender income

inequity.

This study, while it included participants that were either in the public relations

field or current public relations students, was limited in that it did not allot for

respondents to give explanatory answers to questions. The glass ceiling in public

relations is a broad ranging subject with a number of variables. Perhaps a qualitative

study in which respondents were able to describe his or her personal experiences,

expectations and perceptions would provide more insight into how the glass ceiling


affects practitioners and students. Wrigley (2002), for example utilized focus groups and

interviews do not only determine perceptions of female practitioners but to also develop

factors which contribute to the glass ceilings existence in public relations. Hon (2002)

also used in depth interviews and focus groups to determine that women in public

relations experience marginalization. This study, however found that respondents do not

feel they are limited in the public relations profession because of their gender. In fact,

only 6% of respondents said yes they feel they are limited.

Further studies need to be facilitated to observe perception of female practitioners

before and after they enter the public relations field. A qualitative study which in which

the subjects are female public relations students prior to their entrance into the public

relations workforce and a second portion which includes those same students once

they’ve entered and worked in the field would be useful in understanding what role

public relations education plays in readying female students for the realities of the

workforce as Anderson (2006) suggests. It would also enable researchers to gauge how

perceptions differ from actual experiences.

Other studies should be conducted to learn more about how women of color,

specifically Latinas and African American women are affected by the glass ceiling in

public relations. Studies of these two marginalized groups would provide insight into the

multiculturalism as well into the study of diversity and they role it plays in eliminating

the glass ceiling. Hon (1995) noted that her study did not include a diverse group of

female public relations practitioners. Hon notes, ―These women were middle class and

mostly White and American‖ (p. 41). This study did not identify the race of the

respondents.


The study of the glass ceiling in public relations is a tree with a variety of

branches which research is responsible for covering. Whether it is the study of gender

roles, perceptions, education within the field or the marginalization of women in public

relations, the opportunity scholars researching the topic help practitioners understand the

glass ceiling and possibly, for the greater good of the industry, eliminate it.


References

Aldoory, L. (2005). A (Re) Conceived Feminist Paradigm for Public Relations: A case

for Substantial Improvement. International Commmunication Association.668-

683.

Aldoory, L. & Toth, E. (2002). Gender Discrepancies in a Gendered Profession: A

Developing Theory for Public Relations. Journal of Public Relations

Research,14(2), 103-126.

Aldoory, L. & Toth, E. (2004). Leadership and Gender in Public Relations: Perceived

Effectiveness of Transformational and Transactional Leadership Styles. Journal

of Public Relations Research, 16(2), 157-183.

Anderson, J. Pink Collars, High Heels and The Glass Ceiling: Feminism in the Field of

Public Relations. Public Relations Quarterly, 30-31.

Cotter, D.A., Hermsen, J.M., Ovadia, S. & Vanneman, R. (2001). The Glass Ceiling

Effect.The University of North Carolina Press, 80(2), 655-682.

Choi, Y. & Hon, L.C. (2002). The Influence of Gender Composition in Powerful

Positions on Public Relations Practitioners’ Gender-Related Perceptions. Journal

of Public Relations Research,14(3), 229-263.

Dozier, D.M & Broom, G.M. (1995). Evolution of the Manager Role in Public Relations

Practice. Journal of Public Relations Research,7(1), 3-26.

Fröhlich, R. & Peters, S.B.(2007). PR Bunnies Caught In the Agency Ghetto? Gender

Stereotypes, Organization Factors, and Women’s Careers in PR Agencies.

Journal of Public Relations Research, 19(3),229-254.

Grunig, L.A., Toth, E.L., & Hon, L.C.(2000). Feminist Values in Public Relations.

Journal of Public Relations Research, 12(1), 49-68.

Guiniven, J. (2007, March 1). A Woman’s Profession? Addressing the gender imbalance.

PR Tactics, 6.

Hon, L.C. (1995). Toward a Feminist Theory of Public Relations. Journal of Public

Relations Research, 7(1), 27-88.

Livingston, J. (2008, November 13). www.livingstonbuzz.com.

Serini, A.S., Toth, E., Wright, D. K., Emig, A.G. (1997). Watch for Falling

Glass…Women, Men and Job Satisfaction in Public Relations: A Preliminary

Analysis. Journal of Public Relations Research, 9(2), 99-118.


Toth, E. & Grunig, L. (1993). The Missing Story of Women in Public Relations. Journal

of Public Relations Research, 5(3), 153-175.

Vianen, A. & Fischer, A. (2002). Illuminating the glass ceiling: the role of organizational

culture preferences. Journal of Occupational and Organization Psychology, 75,

315-337.

Wikipedia (2008, November 28). Wikipedia. Retrieved November 23, 2008, from

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_ceiling

Wrigley, B. (2002). Glass Ceiling? What Glass Ceiling? A Qualitative Study of How

Women View the Glass Ceiling in Public Relations and Communications

Management. Journal of Public Relations Research, 14(1), 27-55.

the glass ceiling in public relations (pr)

Documents