A major goal of Gardner, Ryan, and Snoeyink (Reference Gardner, Ryan and Snoeyink2018) was to determine what steps are needed moving forward in examining gender representation in industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology. Specifically, on the topic of pay differences, we highlight that gender differences in pay are in part due to differences in negotiation behaviors and/or experiences. Prior research demonstrates that female negotiators receive greater backlash than male negotiators—a possible explanation to why men tend to negotiate more often and more successfully than women (Bowles, Babcock, & Lai, Reference Bowles, Babcock and Lai2007). Based on this evidence, one next step in moving forward should involve providing resources and knowledge to improve negotiation skills and practices specifically aimed at eliminating differences between women and men in both propensity to negotiate and the evaluation/consequences of negotiating.
Efforts to explain the persistence of the gender wage gap highlight gender differences in salary negotiation as a key contributing factor in the observed discrepancies (Babcock, Gelfand, Small, & Stayn, Reference Babcock, Gelfand, Small, Stayn, De Cremer, Zeelenberg, Murnighan, Cremer, Zeelenberg and Murnighan2006). In examining the pay divide in the field of I-O, investigation of negotiation behaviors might help to explain differences in pay between male and female I-O psychologists. A study comparing the negotiation behaviors and starting salaries of a cohort of master's-level graduates revealed starting salaries of the male graduates to be 7.6% (nearly $4,000) higher than those of their equally qualified female classmates (Babcock & Laschevar, Reference Babcock and Laschevar2003). The discrepancy in pay could be explained by differences in negotiation behaviors. It was found that only 7% of the female students had negotiated, whereas 57% of the men had asked for more money.
In addition to examining how women and men approach the process of negotiating differently, it is also crucial to consider differences between the outcomes of negotiation attempts made by men versus women. Some research suggests not only that women tend to negotiate less frequently than men, but in addition, women are less successful in their salary negotiations due to how they are evaluated when they do negotiate (Bowles et al., Reference Bowles, Babcock and Lai2007). More specifically, it has been shown that women face backlash when negotiating, which is further shown to uniquely impact women negotiators, as it is based in gender stereotyping. Backlash can come in many forms and can be somewhat subtle. For example, Bowles et al. (Reference Bowles, Babcock and Lai2007) found evidence to support the idea that women are evaluated more negatively when they attempt to negotiate for higher compensation than are men and that evaluators prefer working with women who are perceived to be nicer, less demanding, and who accept their compensation without negotiation. Thus, women are more positively evaluated when they do not negotiate.
Fear of backlash might explain why reluctance to negotiate is more commonly observed in women employees than in men. Attempts to replicate such studies using samples of I-O professionals might prove fruitful in forwarding progress toward gender equality in the field of I-O psychology.
Where Are We Now?
Although many fields within psychology may include research on gender differences in a variety of contexts, gender differences in the workplace is a topic unique to I-O psychology research. It is therefore surprising to find that the gender gap is less represented in a field that is arguably better suited to study the issue than other fields in psychological research.
When searching for publications in the Academy of Management journals, 1,536 published articles include the keyword negotiation and 593 results for the keyword gender negotiation in the past 25 years. The Journal of Applied Psychology yields 165 results for gender negotiation as the keyword search and only 112 in Personnel Psychology. As major sources of reference for I-O psychologists, these search results demonstrate the prevalence of the gender gap issue in research in the field. As the topic is clearly of interest and heavily researched, I-O scholars and practitioners should be disconcerted by our lack of progress in tackling this issue that continues to exist in our own professions.
As the predominant society for I-O psychology, SIOP is arguably in the best position to lead efforts to close the gender wage gap. This can be accomplished by providing resources that might promote salary negotiation and foster negotiation skills. Investigation of past SIOP activities relating to salary negotiations reveal some research on the topic, but there is much that needs to be done in terms of workshops and other training opportunities. In 2010 SIOP reported research by Crystal Harold and Michelle Marks on salary negotiation, which appeared in news stories and other articles and radio stations (Marks & Harold, Reference Marks and Harold2011). The study showed that negotiation increases starting salaries by an average of $5,000, highlighting the significance of effective salary negotiation and why it is important to be upfront with issues, enabling both parties to consider creative ways to find win–win solutions. In 2012, SIOP Organizational Frontier featured The Psychology of Negotiations in the 21st Century Workplace: New Challenges and New Solutions (Goldman & Shapiro, Reference Goldman and Shapiro2012), which explored “challenges and new approaches to workplace negotiations on both an individual and organizational level.” Finally, the 2012 SIOP conference featured “Negotiation Contexts Where Women Outperform Men: An Expectancy Theory” (Birk, Reference Birk2012), a paper that argued that men are more motivated than women by the value placed on negotiation outcomes, which has resulted in male negotiators outperforming female negotiators. Aside from this research, there is a noticeable absence of salary negotiation-related resources offered by the SIOP website. Our search revealed that no consortia, webinars, or workshops directly addressed salary negotiation activities or the development of salary negotiation tactics. Considering the research surrounding the gender wage gap, and reliable tactics to approaching salary negotiations, SIOP should strive to serve as a valuable resource for I-O psychologists to utilize to develop salary negotiation skills.
Looking Forward
As with many issues and systemic problems facing our society today, the best way to solve a problem is to know where to begin. As mentioned, we believe that we can do better as a field, and as I-O psychologists we are arguably the best equipped of all of the social sciences to address fixing the issue of the gender wage gap. In order to deal with this problem in the most effective way possible, we must take a proactive approach rather than a reactive one. To this end, SIOP is an excellent platform to take a lead role in helping the workplace deal with this issue. We propose three key ways that SIOP can be utilized to help close the gender wage gap.
A. Data. SIOP should collect data (e.g., through SIOP member surveys) on the salary negotiation behaviors of I-O psychology practitioners and professors. In order to obtain the most helpful information, potential survey questions could include: “Did you negotiate your salary before you took your current job?”; “Do you perceive yourself to be a negotiator?”; “How often do you believe people should ask for a pay raise at work?” While previous research has found that women are less likely to negotiate salary in general (Eriksson & Sandberg, Reference Eriksson and Sandberg2012; Kugler, Reif, Kaschner, & Brodbeck, Reference Kugler, Reif, Kaschner and Brodbeck2018), it is still incumbent upon I-O researchers and practitioners to investigate to what extent the gender negotiation gap exists within our field.
B. Training. SIOP can be a catalyst for closing the gender wage gap by providing resources (e.g., workshops and seminars) to help educate and inform its members of the value and skill of negotiation. Despite regular research on the topic, no such resources are currently provided on a large scale. Efforts must be put forth to use research findings to design theoretically driven training for male and female negotiators and evaluators. Such resources will assist both the negotiator and the evaluator in ensuring more equitable outcomes for all.
C. Education. SIOP should educate and inform employers and policy makers about the benefits of having a workplace with pay parity. A recent study conducted by the International Monetary Fund found that the U.S. economy could see as much as a 5% increase in gross domestic product (GDP) by reducing gender inequality in the workplace and by increasing the participation of women in the workplace (Jovanović, Reference Jovanović2017). This would equate to a gain of GDP that is roughly equivalent to the economic output of Virginia (Martinelli, Reference Martinelli2015). From a public policy perspective, increasing pay parity, which can be partially done with the use of legislation, will help reduce poverty levels by almost half for families where the mother is working. Further, it is argued that the average woman would see a salary increase of over $6,000 if we can successfully close the wage gap (Martinelli, Reference Martinelli2015).
Not only is having equal pay greatly beneficial for an organization from a public relations perspective, it can also help improve a company's bottom line. The reasoning for this argument can be explained through equity theory (Adams, Reference Adams and Berkowitz1965). The underlying assumption behind equity theory is that employees who believe that they are receiving fair pay are more motivated and committed to their work on both the individual and organizational level. Conversely, researchers have found that high levels of pay inequality in organizations are negatively associated with job performance and satisfaction (Bloom, Reference Bloom1999; Bloom & Michel, Reference Bloom and Michel2002).
Although tackling the issue of the gender wage gap might be one of the greatest challenges facing our generation, we believe that it is not only necessary but that tremendous rewards could also be gained by successfully closing the gap. With the help of SIOP, I-O psychologists can be pioneers in fixing this issue. Through the use of applying I-O principles and best practices in this context, we can further fulfill our mission of helping to educate the public about the value and insights that I-O psychology as a field can offer.
A major goal of Gardner, Ryan, and Snoeyink (Reference Gardner, Ryan and Snoeyink2018) was to determine what steps are needed moving forward in examining gender representation in industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology. Specifically, on the topic of pay differences, we highlight that gender differences in pay are in part due to differences in negotiation behaviors and/or experiences. Prior research demonstrates that female negotiators receive greater backlash than male negotiators—a possible explanation to why men tend to negotiate more often and more successfully than women (Bowles, Babcock, & Lai, Reference Bowles, Babcock and Lai2007). Based on this evidence, one next step in moving forward should involve providing resources and knowledge to improve negotiation skills and practices specifically aimed at eliminating differences between women and men in both propensity to negotiate and the evaluation/consequences of negotiating.
Efforts to explain the persistence of the gender wage gap highlight gender differences in salary negotiation as a key contributing factor in the observed discrepancies (Babcock, Gelfand, Small, & Stayn, Reference Babcock, Gelfand, Small, Stayn, De Cremer, Zeelenberg, Murnighan, Cremer, Zeelenberg and Murnighan2006). In examining the pay divide in the field of I-O, investigation of negotiation behaviors might help to explain differences in pay between male and female I-O psychologists. A study comparing the negotiation behaviors and starting salaries of a cohort of master's-level graduates revealed starting salaries of the male graduates to be 7.6% (nearly $4,000) higher than those of their equally qualified female classmates (Babcock & Laschevar, Reference Babcock and Laschevar2003). The discrepancy in pay could be explained by differences in negotiation behaviors. It was found that only 7% of the female students had negotiated, whereas 57% of the men had asked for more money.
In addition to examining how women and men approach the process of negotiating differently, it is also crucial to consider differences between the outcomes of negotiation attempts made by men versus women. Some research suggests not only that women tend to negotiate less frequently than men, but in addition, women are less successful in their salary negotiations due to how they are evaluated when they do negotiate (Bowles et al., Reference Bowles, Babcock and Lai2007). More specifically, it has been shown that women face backlash when negotiating, which is further shown to uniquely impact women negotiators, as it is based in gender stereotyping. Backlash can come in many forms and can be somewhat subtle. For example, Bowles et al. (Reference Bowles, Babcock and Lai2007) found evidence to support the idea that women are evaluated more negatively when they attempt to negotiate for higher compensation than are men and that evaluators prefer working with women who are perceived to be nicer, less demanding, and who accept their compensation without negotiation. Thus, women are more positively evaluated when they do not negotiate.
Fear of backlash might explain why reluctance to negotiate is more commonly observed in women employees than in men. Attempts to replicate such studies using samples of I-O professionals might prove fruitful in forwarding progress toward gender equality in the field of I-O psychology.
Where Are We Now?
Although many fields within psychology may include research on gender differences in a variety of contexts, gender differences in the workplace is a topic unique to I-O psychology research. It is therefore surprising to find that the gender gap is less represented in a field that is arguably better suited to study the issue than other fields in psychological research.
When searching for publications in the Academy of Management journals, 1,536 published articles include the keyword negotiation and 593 results for the keyword gender negotiation in the past 25 years. The Journal of Applied Psychology yields 165 results for gender negotiation as the keyword search and only 112 in Personnel Psychology. As major sources of reference for I-O psychologists, these search results demonstrate the prevalence of the gender gap issue in research in the field. As the topic is clearly of interest and heavily researched, I-O scholars and practitioners should be disconcerted by our lack of progress in tackling this issue that continues to exist in our own professions.
As the predominant society for I-O psychology, SIOP is arguably in the best position to lead efforts to close the gender wage gap. This can be accomplished by providing resources that might promote salary negotiation and foster negotiation skills. Investigation of past SIOP activities relating to salary negotiations reveal some research on the topic, but there is much that needs to be done in terms of workshops and other training opportunities. In 2010 SIOP reported research by Crystal Harold and Michelle Marks on salary negotiation, which appeared in news stories and other articles and radio stations (Marks & Harold, Reference Marks and Harold2011). The study showed that negotiation increases starting salaries by an average of $5,000, highlighting the significance of effective salary negotiation and why it is important to be upfront with issues, enabling both parties to consider creative ways to find win–win solutions. In 2012, SIOP Organizational Frontier featured The Psychology of Negotiations in the 21st Century Workplace: New Challenges and New Solutions (Goldman & Shapiro, Reference Goldman and Shapiro2012), which explored “challenges and new approaches to workplace negotiations on both an individual and organizational level.” Finally, the 2012 SIOP conference featured “Negotiation Contexts Where Women Outperform Men: An Expectancy Theory” (Birk, Reference Birk2012), a paper that argued that men are more motivated than women by the value placed on negotiation outcomes, which has resulted in male negotiators outperforming female negotiators. Aside from this research, there is a noticeable absence of salary negotiation-related resources offered by the SIOP website. Our search revealed that no consortia, webinars, or workshops directly addressed salary negotiation activities or the development of salary negotiation tactics. Considering the research surrounding the gender wage gap, and reliable tactics to approaching salary negotiations, SIOP should strive to serve as a valuable resource for I-O psychologists to utilize to develop salary negotiation skills.
Looking Forward
As with many issues and systemic problems facing our society today, the best way to solve a problem is to know where to begin. As mentioned, we believe that we can do better as a field, and as I-O psychologists we are arguably the best equipped of all of the social sciences to address fixing the issue of the gender wage gap. In order to deal with this problem in the most effective way possible, we must take a proactive approach rather than a reactive one. To this end, SIOP is an excellent platform to take a lead role in helping the workplace deal with this issue. We propose three key ways that SIOP can be utilized to help close the gender wage gap.
A. Data. SIOP should collect data (e.g., through SIOP member surveys) on the salary negotiation behaviors of I-O psychology practitioners and professors. In order to obtain the most helpful information, potential survey questions could include: “Did you negotiate your salary before you took your current job?”; “Do you perceive yourself to be a negotiator?”; “How often do you believe people should ask for a pay raise at work?” While previous research has found that women are less likely to negotiate salary in general (Eriksson & Sandberg, Reference Eriksson and Sandberg2012; Kugler, Reif, Kaschner, & Brodbeck, Reference Kugler, Reif, Kaschner and Brodbeck2018), it is still incumbent upon I-O researchers and practitioners to investigate to what extent the gender negotiation gap exists within our field.
B. Training. SIOP can be a catalyst for closing the gender wage gap by providing resources (e.g., workshops and seminars) to help educate and inform its members of the value and skill of negotiation. Despite regular research on the topic, no such resources are currently provided on a large scale. Efforts must be put forth to use research findings to design theoretically driven training for male and female negotiators and evaluators. Such resources will assist both the negotiator and the evaluator in ensuring more equitable outcomes for all.
C. Education. SIOP should educate and inform employers and policy makers about the benefits of having a workplace with pay parity. A recent study conducted by the International Monetary Fund found that the U.S. economy could see as much as a 5% increase in gross domestic product (GDP) by reducing gender inequality in the workplace and by increasing the participation of women in the workplace (Jovanović, Reference Jovanović2017). This would equate to a gain of GDP that is roughly equivalent to the economic output of Virginia (Martinelli, Reference Martinelli2015). From a public policy perspective, increasing pay parity, which can be partially done with the use of legislation, will help reduce poverty levels by almost half for families where the mother is working. Further, it is argued that the average woman would see a salary increase of over $6,000 if we can successfully close the wage gap (Martinelli, Reference Martinelli2015).
Not only is having equal pay greatly beneficial for an organization from a public relations perspective, it can also help improve a company's bottom line. The reasoning for this argument can be explained through equity theory (Adams, Reference Adams and Berkowitz1965). The underlying assumption behind equity theory is that employees who believe that they are receiving fair pay are more motivated and committed to their work on both the individual and organizational level. Conversely, researchers have found that high levels of pay inequality in organizations are negatively associated with job performance and satisfaction (Bloom, Reference Bloom1999; Bloom & Michel, Reference Bloom and Michel2002).
Although tackling the issue of the gender wage gap might be one of the greatest challenges facing our generation, we believe that it is not only necessary but that tremendous rewards could also be gained by successfully closing the gap. With the help of SIOP, I-O psychologists can be pioneers in fixing this issue. Through the use of applying I-O principles and best practices in this context, we can further fulfill our mission of helping to educate the public about the value and insights that I-O psychology as a field can offer.