Nijmegen School of Management
Department of Economics Block 4, 2016-2017
Master's Thesis Accounting & Control
Gender bias in the accounting field - a comparative study of KPMG Amstelveen, the Netherlands and KPMG Karachi, Pakistan
Author: Ursallah Shah (s4783786) Supervised by: Dr. Reinald A. Minnaar
Master Thesis for Nijmegen School of Management Master's Thesis in Economics: Accounting & Control Nijmegen, October 2017
Acknowledgements
First off, I would like to thank my thesis supervisor Mr. Reinald Minnaar for offering his insightful comments to improve my thesis. His consistent support, encouragement and most importantly his kindness have been the major driving forces for the completion of my biggest achievement which is my thesis.
Furthermore, I would like to thank all the participants of this research who showed a genuine interest and took time out of their busy schedules to cater to the results. Without their participation, the completion of this research would have been impossible.
I would also like to thank KPMG, my current employer who accommodated me by offering resources and guidance in order to successfully complete my thesis.
Lastly, I would like to express my gratitude towards my family and friends for their constant support and love.
Abstract
This research discusses gender bias in the accounting industry by taking a comparative look between the offices of KPMG in Amstelveen and Karachi. Gender bias is looked at through the lens of the “glass ceiling” for females and male. Affects the glass ceiling takes the form of demographic, position and pay gap. Contributors towards these gaps are identified as cultural, familial and institutional barriers. These forms and contributors are operationalized through the use of Rosser’s (2004) framework. Results are discussed and analyzed, as well as recommendations provided.
Abbreviations
ACA Associate Chartered Accountant
ACCA Association of Chartered Certified Accountants
AFWA Accounting & Financial Women's Alliance
AICPA American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
CA Chartered Accountant
CEO Chief Executive Officer
CNN Cable News Network
CPA Certified Public Accountants
EU European Union
EUR Euro
EY Ernst Young
FTSE Financial Times Stock Exchange
FS Financial Services
HR Human Resource
ICAP Institute of Chartered Accountants of Pakistan
IMF International Monetary Fund
KPMG Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler
MOVE Money, Opportunity, Vital supports, Entrepreneurship
PKR Pakistani Rupee
PwC PricewaterhouseCoopers
RA Registered Accountant
UK United Kingdom
US United States
Table of contents Acknowledgements ii Abstract iii Abbreviations iv 1. Introduction 1 2. Literature review 4
2.1. Gender bias faced by women 4
2.1.1. Gender bias by demographics 4
2.1.2. The “glass ceiling” effect 5
2.2. Discrimination faced by men 9
2.3. Gender bias in developing and developed countries 10
2.3.1. Developing countries 10
2.3.2. Developed countries 10
2.4. The argument for gender diversity 10
2.5. Theoretical framework 11
3. Methodology 12
3.1. Interviews and questionnaire 14
3.1.1. Partner interviews 14
3.1.2. Employee questionnaire 15
3.2. Collection of data 15
3.2.1. Amstelveen, the Netherlands 16
3.2.2. Karachi, Pakistan 16
4. Results 17
4.1. Amstelveen 17
4.1.1. Sample information – Employees and partners 17
4.1.2. Demographic, position and pay gap 20
4.1.3. The glass ceiling: Cultural, familial and institutional barriers 20
4.2. Karachi 24 4.2.1. Sample information – Employees, partners and managers 24
4.2.2. Demographic, position and pay gap 26
4.2.3. The glass ceiling: Cultural, familial and institutional barriers 27
5. Discussion and recommendations 29
6. Conclusion 34
References 37
1. Introduction
Deloitte selected its first female CEO – Cathy Engelbert – in February 2015. She was also the first female CEO of one of the Big Four accounting firms in the US (Fortune, 2015). Two months later, KPMG promoted Lynne Doughtie as their first female chairman and CEO (CNN, 2015). Despite this progress of populating higher ranks to be more diverse, there still remain issues regarding promotions and career progression of a gender that consists of 49.5% of the world population (World Bank, 2016).
This especially when according to Pillsbury and colleagues (1989), a majority of accounting students are females who generally graduate with better grades than their male counterparts leading to accounting firms hiring more entry-level women than entry-level men. However, only a small percentage of upper-level accounting positions are awarded to women and the likelihood of them becoming partner is just as low; lowering diversity overall.
This research contends that despite gender diversity being shown to be beneficial (IMF, 2016) for accounting public firms and providing better audit quality (Gul, Srinidhi & Tsui, 2015), there is still the presence of a mismatch between what should be and what is. Thus, the aim is to investigate why gender bias arises in the first place, whether this is a source of barriers in the accounting profession, and what its impact is. Additionally, recommendations to encourage a gender balanced work force will be presented.
When using terms like “gender bias”, “gender discrimination” etc, the concept of feminism comes to mind which generally in turn leads to stereotypical notions of an extremist ideology which encourages anti-male rhetoric (Washington Post, 2016). According to Inga Schowengerdt (2015), “misconstrues of feminism as anti-male and as the exclusive domain of women are chronic issues” which leads to men and women disassociating or showing unwillingness to support or identify with feminism (Cook, 1993; Renzetti, 1987).
In a research done by Buschman and Lenart (1996), the negative imagery related to the feminist movement could be due to its stereotyping in the general public through mass mediums like the media. Additionally, the radical feminist movement of the mid-60s was deemed a “male versus female” approach which essentially divided the sexes rather than uniting them (Sutherland, 2011
Even though the opening of this thesis begins with a focus on a single gender, the intention is to give both male and female accountants the opportunity to share their experiences with the help of an open questionnaire and interviews. This thesis focuses specifically on two offices in different parts of the world – Amstelveen, the Netherlands and Karachi, Pakistan – belonging to the international accounting firm, Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler (KPMG), better known as KPMG.
According to Hopwood (1987) research has increasingly shifted towards exploring the wider economic, organizational, social and political rationalities which the organizational practice of accounting could be related to. Accounting researchers are analysing and examining accounting, to ask questions of its rationales, origins and both its organizational and social interdependencies. Already 30 years ago he stated that accounting, from the perspective of gender and an explicitly feminist view on organizational and social functioning, has the potential for having a reciprocal relationship with the wider societies that we live in and can potentially partially shape organizational and social values, concerns and modes of operation, and their consequences. From this stance, gender provides a new yet significant axis with which to conduct an examination of accounting in action (Hopwood, 1987).
While the impact helps to change the sexual composition of accountants, a concern with gender also reflects changes in both the intellectual development of accounting itself and some of the bases on which wider analyses are conducted and understandings gained of influential bodies of knowledge and organizational and social practices. This in turn can lead to a genuine reflection of concern leading to the expansion of current understanding of accounting (Hopwood, 1987). Most literature on the topic has focused on various aspects such as the prevalence of gender bias in the accounting profession, a comparative analysis of a first and third-world country or just on a developed or developing economy in the accounting profession. However, there is a dearth of literature doing a comparative analysis of two offices located in different parts of the world that belong to the same organization.
According to Petre & Rugg (2010), “Making a significant contribution means adding to knowledge or contributing to the discourse – that is, providing evidence to substantiate a
conclusion that’s worth making” (p. 14). In this case, because of the lack of research in the specified topic this thesis can provide a new perspective. The findings can offer new information and help accounting firms take into consideration employees’ qualms and formulate regulations and policies catered to helping avoid bias and discrimination related to gender. Additionally, the research does not focus on a particular group or hierarchy – it takes into account all employee levels, genders and backgrounds with the exception that it is focused on two offices of a big four accounting firm.
Lastly, the research delves into barriers – which will be explained in the next section and discussed throughout – as well as offer recommendations that could act as potential catalysts which provide some points of departure for the possible practical transformation of the accountancy profession by not only changing the way audit firms function but also help change mind-sets
To transform an informally viewed phenomenon to a more scientific understanding, this research poses questions that attempt to clarify the historical and present development of this topic and ultimately its impact, using relevant variables. This research gauges the existence and potential role of gender bias in the accounting profession and how it can be resolved.
To investigate what employees experience as a result, a qualitative research using the case study method and with the help of a survey with open questions for employees and in-depth interviews with partners has been used.
The research question is as follows: “Does gender have an influence on careers that are pursued in accounting firms?”
Following are the sub-questions: 1. What is gender bias?
2. Does gender bias exist in accounting firms such as KPMG, and what forms does it take? How can these be quantified?
3. Do other forms of discrimination exist at KPMG?
It must be noted that this is a case-study specific to the firm KPMG and its offices in Amstelveen, the Netherlands and Karachi, Pakistan. Therefore, when referring to accounting firms/industry, it is only based on data gathered from KPMG’s two offices.
The structure of this research is as follows: the next chapter focuses on the theoretical framework which includes the discrimination faced by both men and women, as well as the framework used to analyze gender bias among two offices of KPMG; followed by a chapter elaborating upon the methodology. The chapter after will present the results of the research. The penultimate chapter will discuss the findings, offer policy recommendations; rounding off with the final chapter providing the conclusion. A reference list and appendix is included at the end.
2. Literature review
This chapter discusses the theoretical corpus relating to gender bias faced by women and men at the work place, through a literature review. First, demographic facts are looked at, followed by a theoretical discussion, which starts off by looking at gender bias faced by women in a professional setting. This discussion is divided according to the major thematic aspects used to analyze gender bias in literature, namely, the glass ceiling barrier, cultural barriers, familial barriers and institutional barriers, and focuses on both the professional field in general as well as accounting.
The next sub-section looks at gender bias faced by men, after which a comparative analysis of gender bias at work between developed and developing countries is looked at. The penultimate sub-section elaborates upon the reasons and merits for gender diversity in the workplace, while the final sub-section rounds up the chapter by setting up the theoretical framework to answer the main question of this research as to whether gender has any influence on careers pursued in accounting.
2.1. Gender bias faced by women
2.1.1. Gender bias by demographics
A simple Google search explains gender bias as, “inclination towards or prejudice against one gender” (Google, n.d.). Being gender unequal is the reinforcement of “unbalanced
norms, roles and relations and often leads to one sex enjoying more rights or opportunities than the other” (WHO, 2017); referring to discrimination faced by an otherwise identical person that is treated differently on the basis of their gender when gender itself has no effect on productivity (Heckman 1998, p. 102).
Women account for 63% of all accountants and auditors in the United States (Bureau of Labour Statistics, 2014), while the 2011 United States Census reported 18% more women aged 26-33 joined the accounting field in previous five years (Mills, 2013). Additionally, in Canada 50.5% of auditors, accountants and investment professionals are women (Statistics Canada, 2015), while in the EU, the percentage of women employed in legal and accounting activities are 64.3%; in the UK, the percentage is 54.3% (Eurostat, 2014). Academically, 52.1% of bachelor degrees, 52.7% of master’s degrees and 44.4% of PhDs in accounting are obtained by women in the US (National Centre for Education Statistics, 2013).
These numbers are not promising, however, when it comes to partner or senior level positions: in the US women make up just 22% of partners and principals (AICPA, 2015). The numbers in the UK are dismal too, with woman principals making up of 17%, 15%, 13% and 15% at PwC, Deloitte, KPMG and EY respectively (Financial Reporting Council, 2015).
Additional evidence of the mismatch between gender composition within higher positions in the public accounting industry is elaborated by Tsyiac (2012), contending that only 21% of public accounting industry partners were female, with a further decline to 19% in 2013 (AICPA, 2013). Pay wise, men earn 16% to 26% more than women across various age categories (Schiffel et al., 2013); and the general perception of “the accounting sector as complicated, tough and masculine” (Qasem & Abdullatif 2014, p.147) results in women opting for professions that are less intense.
2.1.2. The “glass ceiling” effect
The lack of evidence related to women’s deficiencies in skills making them less suitable for professional roles compared to men that is convincing enough (Hind & Baruch, 1997). Yet, there are barriers, referred to as the “glass ceiling”, that put women at a disadvantage. According
to Albelda and Tilly (1998, p. 45), “even the most highly educated, privileged women run into the ‘glass ceiling’, the set of invisible barriers to advancement up the corporate ladder”.
The term glass ceiling also appears in literature as invisible or artificial barriers that are obstacles for individual females, not because of their inability to handle higher-level jobs, but because as a group they are held from moving higher up since they are women (Benschop & Brouns 2005). According to Gammie, Gammie, Matson and Duncan (2007, p. 203), “the invisible barriers that make up the glass ceiling include a myriad of attitudinal and belief barriers inter-related with situational barriers that emanate from the societal and organizational culture in which women operate”.
In a report published by Institute of Leadership and Management (2011), it was found that 73% of women felt barriers for women existed who wanted to enter senior management and board-level positions in the UK, whereas only 38% of male respondents believed in the glass ceiling. Kent Business School (2016) found women comprising less than 10% of executive directors at FTSE 100 companies; within these organizations, only five women occupy the role of CEO. Out of the Fortune 1000 companies, only 51 are led by women (Fortune, 2014). In the UK, of the 53,000 best-paid people, only 9% were women in 2013 (Independent, 2016).
Atkinson, Casarico and Voitchovsky (2016) found that the higher up we go, women have a rarer presence. Women are 4.5 times less likely to reach executive groups than men in the same peer group (Financial Times, 2013). Although the representation of women in the top 10% has increased, at the 0.1% the level is much lower. The study also finds that women are less than a quarter of the top 1% in all the countries.
Despite some researchers arguing the diminishment of the ‘glass ceiling’ in the accounting field, continuing evidence suggests otherwise. Research in the late 1980s and early 1990s appeared to show gender disparity at the top of the professional accounting firm (Kinard, Little & Little, 1998).
In the UK, despite women making 14% of the six accountancy firms, the likelihood of them reaching senior positions were minimal with their male colleagues twice as likely to become partners or directors (Boyer, 1995). Further, it was found that irrespective of their experience,
education or qualifications, female accountants occupied less senior positions and salaries (Pierce-Brown, 1996).
These effects and occurrences of minimal female employment in higher positions have seemed to spill out in the 21st century as well making this an on-going phenomenon. Women are less
likely to be promoted to the higher echelons of professional accountancy firms: Gammie et al. (2007) found that women composed only 14% at partner level at the Big 4. These mirror findings of women being found in greater proportion in lower grades than in higher ones across all professions (Kay, 2001) and earn 25% less than men in median weekly earnings among full-time wage and salary workers (Bielby, 2000).
In Grant’s (2003) research it was found that accountancy firms were not doing enough with respect to providing opportunities for women at partner level, with 53% of financial directors reporting that firms had limited opportunities for female partners, and as low as 20% stating that the firms were doing a good job in equal opportunities.
In the Swedish auditing industry for instance, 50% of new employees consist of women. However, at partner level only 18% are female (Jonnergård, Stafsudd & Elg, 2009). “From the early stages of their careers, there are notable differences between women and men. The women achieved less and show lower career ambitions and expectations as well as greater intentions to leave the auditing industry” (ibid, p. 721).
In Denmark, auditors who were also mothers had a major disadvantage in relation to fathers who were auditors in achieving senior levels of employment (Kristensen, Kent, Warming-Rasmussen & Windsor, 2016). Particular to the case study of this thesis, the Netherlands only has 19% of female accountants and auditors representing the total profession (The Accountant, 2017).
- Cultural barriers
According to Rosser (2004), barriers contributing to the glass ceiling can be categorized as cultural, institutional and family-bounded. Cultural barriers include gender stereotypes (Maddock & Parkin, 1993; O’Sullivan & Sheridan, 1999; Still & Timms, 2000), prejudices
(Maddock & Parkin, 1993), discrimination, harassment (Rosser, 2004), and sex-role expectations (Ragins, 1996).
In Asia, despite more women participating in the working arena, they face many barriers such as discrimination and stereotyping. Women are treated as being less capable and weak leaders compared to the opposite sex. In terms of stereotyping, women are deemed to be emotional and incapable of holding positions requiring objective thinking (Low, 2012).
The accounting profession is perceived as being “masculine”, as Maupin and Lehman (1993) show that for American auditors, “being successful in an accounting organization means suppressing or eliminating attitudes and behaviours that would identify them as ‘typically female’” (p. 435). In their research, Watson and France (2011) too deem accountancy as a male dominated occupation.
The demand for a masculine attitude over a feminine one perpetuates an emphasis on competition which is expected of women if they are to advance in the organizational hierarchy. However, this is harder for females because it requires them to suppress their values (Maupin & Lehman, 1993). Additionally, according to Kirchmeyer (1998) and Tharenou (2001), masculinity has a positive effect on women’s income and level whereas femininity has a negative effect. Because of their long-standing majority in the occupation as an accountant, the further image of a classic stereotypical one has been that of a middle-class white male (Lee 2014, p. 1). In Tsyiac’s (2012) research in large firms, 72% of staff consists of white individuals and 79% partners are male.
- Familial barriers
Familial barriers to women’s career such as the responsibility of children and family (Wentling, 2004) also create impediments to their advancement. Women with children are less able to do overtime, which is a necessity for promotion (Hopman & Lord, 2009). For men, marriage and fatherhood are deemed positive indicators for a promotion because it helps in viewing them as stable, reliable and in turn economically viable (Friedman & Greenhaus, 2000).
Additionally, pregnancies are considered as non-events for fathers’ work (Keng-Howe and Liao, 1999) thus perpetuating stereotypes at organizational levels which increases men’s promotion prospects relative while decreasing women’s (Whiting, Gammie & Herbohn, 2014).
- Institutional barriers
Institutional barriers against women’s career progression (Cooke, 2001; Ibarra, 1993; Rindfleish, 2000) include lower level managerial positions (O’Sullivan & Sheridan, 1999), dysfunctional legislations (Rindfleish, 2000), blocked promotion (Okanlawon, 1994), limited access to interaction networks (Ibarra, 1993; Kanter, 1977), gender inequality in recruitment (Cooke, 2001) and a lack of mentors for women, especially in the accounting industry (Hopman & Lord, 2009).
In sum, while the situation is seems to be improving over time, with organizations such as AFWA running projects like MOVE to enable women in accounting and finance field to achieve their full potential and contribute to their profession (AFWA, n.d.), there are still seem to be many issues to be sorted before reaching the stated position of professional equality between men and women in the profession.
2.2. Discrimination faced by men
Early on, boys are generally shown less compassion relative to their female counterparts. When entering a job market, although women earn less than men for the same work, men are expected by employers to relocate, work longer and to keep a smaller portion of their pay to themselves due to social obligations such as mortgages, outings etc. And as men progress to become fathers and husbands, they report that they feel as though they are no longer loved like they once were.
Without nullifying the sexism faced by women and girls, David Benatar’s (2012) work brings to light the existence of discrimination against men and boys. For example, when it comes to sexual assault Benatar argues that it is underreported in case of both sexes; however if the victim is male, the reporting rate is even lower, and if reported, people show lower sympathy to male
victims. According to a study on sexual harassment in the US prison system, the sexual coercion rate for females was 7% while for males it was 22% (Struckman‐ Johnson, Rucker, Bumby & Donaldson, 1996).
In the accounting industry, Riach and Rich’s (2006) research posited that men faced discrimination three and a half times more frequently than women when it came to interviewing. In the interview stages, men were denied interviews on 60% of those occasions, whereas women were denied at a rate of 17%.
2.3. Gender bias in developing and developed countries 2.3.1. Developing countries
In Sudan, it was found that women advancement was mainly hindered by gender discrimination, familial obligations and other social factors. The lack of mentors and role models also played a major role (Obeid, 2016). In Java, Indonesia, it was found that social norms such as what “proper” female behavior constituted, expectations of women’s domestic role versus professional life and a lack of role models were all barriers to advancement in the accounting profession (Lindawati & Smark, 2015).
In Jordan, it was found that women faced discrimination in pay levels and job progress due to characteristics of the Jordanian culture and workplace (Qasem & Abdullatif, 2014).In the case of Lagos State in Nigeria, it was found that familial responsibilities and gender did not affect career advancement. However, gender did influence accountants’ choice to continue in the professional practice of accounting (Dorcas, Obiamaka & Folashade, 2014).
In Mauritius, the findings showed that although there was a substantial increase in the number of female accountants, the same cannot be said for upper-level management positions. It was found that the impediments were due to the glass ceiling and the demands from the personal and professional lives (Ramdhony, Oogarah-Hanuman & Somir, 2013).The same was found for southern Brazil where the role of auditor and accountant was mostly performed by males who also earned more, leading the researchers to conclude that the glass ceiling is present in the accounting profession (Silva, Magro & Silva, 2016).
2.3.2. Developed countries
In a case study by Whiting and Van Vugt (2006) in New Zealand, results showed no effect of gender alone. In Australia, the dwindling number of female accountants had to do with masculine stereotypes causing women’s relatively lesser advancement (Morley, Bellamy, Jackson & O’Neill, 2002). For Ireland, respondents believed they had not faced gender-related barriers; however, they believed that women succeeded in the profession by adapting to masculine occupational values (Flynn, Earlie & Cross, 2015).
2.4. The argument for gender diversity
Broadbent and Kirkham (2008) contend that, while the aspiration of gender equality in the accounting research field is desirable to achieve, it must be clear why this is so and what the benefits of it are. Therefore it is important to understand the underlying reasons for its promotion and support.
At the very least, females and males display similar patterns and levels of capability and achievement (Franklin, 2013). Extending this, according to 2020 Women on Boards (n.d.), there are various advantages to having a board that upholds gender diversity. For example, there is diversity in thought resulting in better decision making.
Secondly, with diversity, corporate boards are bound to have a competitive advantage as they are positioned better to succeed in today’s ever-changing economy. Additionally, senior women executives have experience, skills and knowledge required by boards such as industry knowledge, operational experience, and functional expertise (2020 Women on Boards, n.d.). Further evidence exists to show females make more valuable employees than that suggesting they are less so. According to McKinsey & Company’s (2015) research, companies with higher gender or racial and ethnic diversity are more likely to have higher financial returns than their additional industry medians. Recent research finds that companies in the top quartile for gender or racial and ethnic diversity are more likely to have financial returns above their national industry medians.
In a study conducted by Gallup (2014), it was found that hiring gender-diverse business units led to better financial performance relative to same-gender firms. Additionally, in an analysis carried out by Morgan Stanley (2016), companies with high gender diversity produced slightly better returns with lower volatility compared to other low diverse or sector peers. A study done by Harvard Business Review (2016) found no significant difference in performance of female and male-led start-ups when the financing had been provided by venture capital firms led by female partners.
A chartered psychologist, Ines Wichert (2011) suggested that women have 'an edge' in periods of turbulence or bad governance. Furthermore, it was found that having an evenly gendered office could increase revenue by approximately 41% (Huffington Post, 2014). Further, having diversity in the workplace can also reduce lawsuits and increase marketing opportunities, recruitment, creativity, and business image (Esty et al., 1995), to name a few.
Companies with inclusive cultures also have lower turnover leading to lower direct and indirect costs (Huffington Post, 2016). A firm having a reputation for being a good place to work for diverse groups makes the recruitment of talent easier, faster and cheaper (Harvard University, 2013). As a sign of their economic importance, women make approximately half of purchasing decisions (Huffington Post, 2016) and influence more than 85% of retail decisions (Harvard Business Review, 2013).
2.5. Theoretical framework
From the literature review above, a number of consistent issues arise: gender bias against women manifests in the form of “glass ceiling”, causing differences in total composition of women as a proportion of the workforce, their promotion into higher ranks and wage differentials. There are henceforth referred to demographic, position and wage gaps respectively. Barriers leading to the glass ceiling can be due to a variety, namely cultural, familial and structural, among others. While there may be a difference in type and degree, these manifest overall in developed and developing countries.
Thus, in order to investigate gender bias within the accounting industry in a developed and developing country, this research will use the framework provided by Rosser (2004) to conduct a
comparative case study; to look at how prevalent a demographic, position and wage gap exists among genders, within and between two offices of the same company, namely the KPMG office of the Netherlands and Pakistan; and analysing this through operationalizing the cultural, familial and institutional barriers referred to in this research. Figure 1 below illustrates this approach. The next section looks at the methodology used to set this research up.
3. Research method and design
The methodology chosen for this thesis was a deductive qualitative research, with a comparative case study method used to investigate gender bias. A detailed analysis of the cases was made to provide empirical evidence on the theoretical framework. The extent to which the framework contributes to a satisfactory explanation of gender bias within the accounting industry is indicative of its explanatory power (Yin, 1994).For the research, a digital medium offered by Radboud University by the name of Qualtrics was used to construct and distribute the questionnaire. (The full list of questions asked in the survey and interviews have been included in the appendix).
For the interviews, a face-to-face conversation was arranged in order to have a more personal touch and understanding of the individuals involved and their backgrounds – where did they start from, how did they reach the positions they were in currently, what sacrifices did they have to make etc. Given the short amount of time that the partners and managers had to offer, it was a personal goal of mine to challenge myself to probe and absorb as much relevant information from those involved.
3.1. Interviews and questionnaire 3.1.1. Partner interviews
For the interviews with partners at KPMG, initial questions related to demographic data (e.g. age, marital status etc.). These were followed by questions that required in-depth answers, and focused on their experiences on their journey to becoming partner, and whether gender bias played any role during this time. The time allocated per interview was approximately 30 minutes. The detailed questions consisted asking their opinion of whether and if so, why, there was a difference between proportion of junior and partner level females and the reason it took them longer to reach senior positions; whether they were aware of differences in pay and incentives; whether more work needed to be done to reduce gender bias; and advice to women with careers in accounting.
3.1.2. Employee questionnaire
For the interviews with employees at KPMG, initial questions related to demographic data (e.g. age, marital status etc.). These were followed by questions that required in-depth answers, and focused on their present experiences as employees at the firm, and whether gender bias played any role during this time.
The detailed questions consisted asking their opinion of whether and if so, why, there was a difference between proportion of junior and partner level females and the reason it took them longer to reach senior positions; whether they had faced any discrimination themselves; whether they had faced other forms of discrimination; whether more work needed to be done to reduce gender bias; and advice to women with careers in accounting.
3.2. Collection of data
Data was collected through questionnaires and in-depth interviews. All participants were promised anonymity and confidentiality. The questionnaire was intended for all employees except partners, while face-to-face, in-depth interviews were conducted for partners specifically. The use of multiple sources of evidence (triangulation) enables to crosscheck findings, making conclusions more reliable and convincing (Yin, 1994).
The differing choice for using questionnaires for employees and interviews for partners was two-fold. Firstly, logistically, the larger number of lower level employees meant that a questionnaire would be the most efficient way in gathering data. Secondly, since partners had gleaned far more overarching and subtle experiences over the years, an interview would be the most appropriate medium to sift these out.
The research was carried out in the offices of KPMG at the Audit Financial Services (Audit FS) department in two locations: Amstelveen, the Netherlands and Karachi, Pakistan. The methodology varied in both locations as elaborated below. Staff consisting of both males and females was asked to participate in this research.
3.2.1. Amstelveen, the Netherlands
I was given the opportunity to do my internship at the Amstelveen office, in the Audit FS department for four months. In order to ensure that the survey was representative, all partners and employees that did not work at the Amstelveen office were removed.
The survey was then sent to 172 email-recipients, asking to fill in the questionnaire. 44 responses were recorded from employees at various levels, of which 26 were male and 18 female. For input from partners, I used the KPMG information database. 3 partners responded, all belonging to Audit FS unit, of which 2 were females.
Self-selection bias did not have a role to play for the questionnaire: e-mails were sent to all employees of Audit FS at Amstelveen: those that had willingness and time to spare did so, and it is strongly felt that these were the only constraints. For partners, emails initially only garnered a strong response from females, requiring focused efforts to have at least one male partner’s input, which was successful.
3.2.2. Karachi, Pakistan
Initial contact was made with partners at the Karachi office through direct invitation to participate in the survey, as well as through the personal intervention of HR partner in Amstelveen. Since the latter was scheduled for vacation, my request was forwarded to a partner in Audit FS, who in turn sent an email on my behalf. In the meanwhile, two partners from the Karachi office responded in the affirmative, after which the HR senior manager at KPMG Karachi took over to ensure full availability of information and resources for the research. In Karachi, the mode of research used did not follow the same method as Amstelveen’s; instead of online responses from a representative data sample, I was given recommendations through the personal efforts of the HR senior manager, who advised this to be the most practical way to gain responses.
The printed survey was thus distributed at random around the office by two partners. 16 responses were recorded from employees at various levels, of which 6 were male and 10 female. 2 partners were interviewed over the course of three days, consisting of a male and female each. Additionally, 4 managers at different stages (assistant and senior) were also interviewed. This was deemed necessary due to the lower respondent rate at the Karachi office. The same format as applied for partners at the firm was done so for managers.
The relatively low response rate and a short attendance at the KPMG Karachi office can be attributed to the month of Ramadan that was being followed in Pakistan during the period of research, which results in shorter office timings to accommodate those that are fasting and personal circumstances of my own which required me to take bed rest for two days.
4. Results
This chapter elaborates upon the results of the questionnaire and interviews administered. The first sub-section looks into the findings from the Amstelveen office, as the first case study, followed by the Karachi office, the second case study. Each sub-section starts off by looking at the demographic characteristics of respondents and interviewees. After this, opinions recorded of respondents to demographic, position and pay gaps are provided; followed by the degree of cultural, familial and institutional barriers respondents felt contribute to each.
4.1. Amstelveen
4.1.1. Sample information – Employees and partners
For employees, there were a total of 44 responses to the online questionnaire administered in the Amstelveen office of KPMG filled in. Of the 44, 18 were female and the remaining 26 males (see figure 2).The ages of the respondents (see figure 3 on next page) ranged from 22 to 40 years with the highest number of respondents’ ages being 25 and 29 years. One respondent did not mention their age.
Male; 59.00% Female; 41.00%
Figure 2: Gender composition
22 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 34 37 38 39 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 Figure 3: Age 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 13 7 10 5 7 2
Figure 4: Job designation
Respondents’ job designations positions (see figure 4 above) ranged from trainees up to senior manager. For education (see figure 5 on next page), the highest education completed by the
majority of respondents was a masters. 2 respondents chose ‘others’ meaning that their education qualifications did not match the ones listed. Potentially, their degrees are foreign such as a CA or an ACCA degree.
Bachelor Master CPA RA Other
0 5 10 15 20 25 Figure 5: Education
In terms of the duration spent working for KPMG, the minimum time spent was 2 months while the maximum was 12.5 years with one respondent not answering. Relationship status wise, majority of the respondents (see figure 6) were single. Of the 21 individuals that were committed, 20 employees’ partners/spouses were working.
Single Married Partnership Other 0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 6: Relationship status
Four respondents had children, out of which 3 had the help of their spouse in taking care and looking after their child(ren); one made use of day care. For income, the maximum amount earned was EUR 5600/- per month, and the minimum EUR 2520/- per month. Seven respondents chose not disclose their income.
Three partners from Amstelveen also participated in the interview, of which 2 were females and 1 male. Ages of interviewees’ ranged from 54 to 40. Their tenure of working at KMPG ranged between 15 to 30 years, of which as partners between 4 and 22 years. Two of them were in partnerships while one of them was married and all their spouses/partners were working professionals. Of the three respondents, two did not have children. The one that did, his children were grown up and not under parental care. All respondents were RA qualified.
4.1.2. Demographic, position and pay gap
With regards to demographic gap, a majority of employees were of the opinion that the gender ratio was disproportionately skewed against females; with women in the minority, especially in senior positions. A large minority found the gender mix to be balanced, while one respondent thought there were more women than men.
Position gap-wise, partners had differing accounts as to whether it was the case that it took longer for women to reach higher positions compared to men. One partner stated that this was certainly not the case and although quantitatively it was a male dominated industry, there were certain sectors within that had a female majority.
Another partner however mentioned that they had noticed male colleagues getting earlier promotions, but not so much because of gender. In addition, the partner mentioned how the promotion for the role of partner had changed into a two tier system, whereby there was an increase in the number of partners, but not all had a share in the profits. The position was divided into a salary and equity partner with the former being the first step.
When discussing pay gaps, two partners were firm in their opinion that when it came to annual pay and incentives, there was no difference in rewards based on gender – everything had to do with performance and skills. The third partner however did caution this could still be the case, through men rising faster in the ranks.
4.1.3. The glass ceiling, cultural, familial and institutional barriers
With regards to the demographic gap, there was a mix of reasons as to why employee respondents felt there was a mismatched gender ratio at work. KPMG was viewed by some as
having a macho environment, which meant that women faced cultural barriers by having to conform to a certain gender stereotype. A point of note is that some respondents also felt this was general business environment in the Netherlands, and not particular to KMPG.
A major institutional barrier felt was the initial low cohort of females entering the accounting industry in the first place, leading to gender inequality in recruitment because of an already stunted selection pool. The lack of day care facilities was another institutional mixed with familial barrier that employee respondents felt contributed to a lower ratio.
A further point of note was that a majority felt they had not themselves faced gender discrimination. Interestingly, for those who did, some of them even claiming repeatedly so, most felt that this was subtle rather than blatant or overt. It was rather in the form of a different treatment in a negative sense: perhaps an elaboration of the aforementioned cultural barriers. Firstly, the clients’ way of addressing a male colleague was different from that of a female colleague, which led to women feeling undermined; secondly, they felt that they had to prove themselves to their male colleagues even more so in order to get respect rather than having an equal starting point.
As for the position gap, more than half of employee respondents cited familial barriers for there not being many partners. It was difficult to combine both family life and a career; eventually, one of the two has to be chosen, of which the majority of women choose the former.
This is further compounded by the aforementioned mix of familial and institutional barriers, namely that being the fact that day care is expensive in the Netherlands. Additionally, because of the industry’s institutional characteristics such as long working hours and work load, it is difficult to opt for part-time or a part-time that allows for career growth.
The next top reason proposed by employees related to the again aforementioned fact that, simply because there were low numbers of women in the industry, it was only logical that there would be lesser female partners. Also opined was that accounting is seen as a male dominated profession, a cultural barrier in the form of gender stereotyping; one person further stated that the performance evaluations were more oriented towards typically male characteristics.
Another interesting response from one employee was the belief that being a woman meant it could lead her to being partner “almost for free”; implying that this was a form of institutional barrier that worked to undermine male chances of promotion, while expressly, and unfairly, accelerating that for women. This contrasted with an opposite view, whereby some respondents felt that females faced discrimination in being promoted from supervisor to manager position. While there was a mixed reaction to causes of demographic and position gaps from partners at the Amstelveen office, their responses overlapped considerably with those of their employees. For instance, one partner spoke of the experience in being part of a university’s board and how within post-graduate classrooms the distribution was such that only one-third was female, skewing the initial demographic balance already.
One partner made a slightly contrasting, in that it was not mentioned by others, point about the experience of seeing the practice of recruitment at the grass root level. It was mentioned how in the HR community recruitment was done by male colleagues. This was another form of initial cultural barrier since it increasingly challenged on how to attract and hire female colleagues. Further mentioned by all partners, and resonating with many of the employee respondents, was the oft cited familial barrier: even when women do enter the industry, at a certain point they tend to make different choices by switching to part-time or even quit completely in order to start families. For part time workers this especially affects promotion since only with portfolio of diverse clients and being well traversed could one go ahead in their career.
An intriguing point on the issue of position gap was made by one partner who mentioned how they had noticed male colleagues getting earlier promotions. This was not so much because of gender but because of a supportive partner or family. Included in this was the support of people that one work for: if one’s boss is powerful, willing and deems the person ready for the promotion, it helps.
Further reasons given for the declining number of women in higher job slots touched upon all three types of barriers: the firm had a culture of self-promotion, which female generally disdained from; the industry being historically male-dominated; male colleagues’ over-time deemed as more socially acceptable; high stress, and thus moving to other industries.
An interesting point mentioned that perhaps did not fit neatly into the analysis above was the fact that females sometimes had characteristics of being extremely dedicated and not delegating work like their male peers. This perhaps relates to the earlier point above: women had to work harder to prove themselves, which perhaps becomes a self-fulfilling cycle as they internalize this cultural barrier.
Discussing annual pays and incentives, two partners mentioned that there was no difference based on gender – everything had to do with performance and skills. One of the partners however did caution by saying that it could be the case that men grow faster because of the perception that they are better; a potential case of a cultural barrier in the form of stereotyping. Furthermore, a partner discussed how in their role as a performance manager, they noticed the behaviour of men and women to be different when it came to pays and incentives: male colleagues are focused on salaries, variable bonuses and how to develop themselves best; whereas female colleagues tend to focus on client delivery, own development and not so much on salaries or bonuses.
4.1.4. Other barriers
Some other forms of discrimination in addition to gender were mentioned by a minority of employee respondents: one mentioned that they felt age discrimination from clients who felt that the respondent in question did not have the relevant experience to communicate about certain topics.
Another mentioned that in their perception they felt that they had to prove themselves more because of their non-Dutch background. One responded mentioned an incident where they were asked by a manager to speak no other language other than Dutch and English when noticing that their name was not a Dutch one.
Some mentioned how the Dutch language was a form of barrier with one stating that Dutch over expat employees are preferred in the planning by engagement managers. Another respondent mentioned how as an expat they were excluded from conversations with colleagues continually speaking in Dutch.
Additionally, one participant stated that expats were limited in the jobs that they could be put on and e-mail/portals in Dutch which hinder ability to perform or interact effectively. Also, one respondent mentioned that non-Dutch speaking trainees were not offered audit academy – an internal training.
4.2. Karachi
4.2.1. Sample information – Employees, partners and managers
There were a total of 16 questionnaire and interview responses. The research carried out in Karachi was a little different than in Amstelveen: I also conducted interviews as opposed to questionnaires with manager level employees due to time constraints in the administering of questionnaire.
In total, there were 10 females and 6 male respondents as shown in figure 7 below. The ages of the employee respondents ranged from 21 to 36 years with the highest number of respondents’ ages being 27 (see figure 8 below). 3 respondents did not mention their age.
62.50% 37.50%
21 22 23 24 26 27 33 34 36 0 1 2 3 4 Figure 8: Age
Like in Amstelveen, respondents’ positions (figure 9 on next page) within the firm were also diverse allowing the research to obtain data and understanding of the overall organization.
0 0.51 1.52 2.53 3.54 4.5
Figure 9: Job designation
For education (figure 10), the majority of respondents were CA Finalists. 2 respondents chose ‘others’ as the options offered did not match the ones they had qualified.
0 0.51 1.52 2.53 3.54 4.5 Figure 10: Education
In terms of the duration spent working for KPMG, the minimum time spent was 6 months while the maximum was 13 years. 10 respondents were single whereas the other 6 married as shown in figure 11 on the next page. Of the 6 married individuals, three had working partners and no children while the other three that did have children, had wives that were stay-at-home mothers.
Single Married 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Figure 11: Relationship status
Incomes at the KPMG Karachi office ranged from PKR 98000/- (approximately EUR 800/-) per month to PKR 2500/- (approximately EUR 20/-) per month with the former being the highest salary and the latter being the lowest. Half of employee respondents chose not to disclose their incomes.
Two partners from Karachi participated in the interview: 1 male and 1 female. Neither partner disclosed their age. Both were married and only one of the two partners’ was still working. Both also had children with one partner’s mode of care being their partner and the other, a baby sitter. Both respondents had completed their CA.
There were two female managers and one male manager that took part in the interview, of which two of them were senior managers and the third one an assistant manager. Their ages ranged from 27 to 36 years old and only one of them was married. The married managers’ spouse did not work and took care of the children. One respondent was a qualified CA, another had done their ACA and the third interviewee had finished their ICAP.
4.2.2. Demographic, position and pay gap
With regards to demographic gap, there was a generally equal distribution in the opinion of employees regarding general balance. 4 people stated there was gender-balance in the office, 3 mentioned that although the mix was not proportionate in favour of women, there were things
being done in order to improve the gender-mix. The remaining 5 stated that the gender mix was not proportionate.
Position gap wise, a majority of employees agreed that there was a disproportionate rate of male to female partners. From the side of partners, there was a mixed response. One partner stated that in their experience they did not see recruitment based on gender. The second partner believed otherwise, mentioned further that this was the case for every sector and not just audit firms. Managers also had a mixed response to this query. One manager felt this was not the case, while the remaining opined that this was indeed so. One manager who felt that there was a misbalance further added that while this was the case, the opportunities for advancement were equal.
When discussing pay gaps, both partners differed. For one, it was entirely based on performance, experience and feedback, over gender; the second partner though that this was not so. The managers though were unanimous in that there was no difference; annual pay and incentives were solely decided on performance, designation and qualifications.
4.2.3. The glass ceiling, cultural, familial and institutional barriers
The general consensus among employees for the demographic gap was due to familial barriers of women needing to prioritize family life; and institutional barriers of long working hours and lack of female role models. Interestingly, none of the females felt that they had experienced gender discrimination; rather, it was claimed by a few respondents that men faced discrimination.
This was as they had to stay back later at the office and cover up for their female colleagues’ tasks as well as being allocated to engagements where the clients are at far away locations. Nonetheless, it could be argued that due to society’s general view that it is inappropriate for females to stay out late and unsafe, that these constitute cultural and institutional barriers respectively.
Further reasons given by employees for both the demographic and position gap included time and work pressures causing women to choose other industries, as well as the ever present
familial barrier; marriage is also a big factor as well as having to take care of their families and household in which some women decide to leave due to there being too much on their plate. Just as in the case of the Amstelveen office, while there was a mixed reaction to causes of demographic and position gaps from partners (and managers) at the Karachi office, their responses overlapped considerably with those of their employees.
For instance, one partners stated that in their experience they did not see recruitment based on gender. Gender was only considered when sending staff to audit clients where the sittings would lead to late hours. In case of dangerous locations, no staff – male or female – was sent until security is provided.
However, another partner stated otherwise, by mentioning that because of certain cultural barriers, the interaction of males with females is limited. For example, in Pakistani culture it not the norm for women and men to shake hands; whereas if two men where to meet, they could instantly form a connection. The females thus had to overcompensate. The partner did go on to mention that if proper accounting solutions were provided, the gender difference was put aside. From the manager’s side too there was a mixed response. One of the managers mentioned that they did not feel that promotion chances dwindled for women. The second manager however did feel that at times it was the case that men had it easier. This was in the sense that during engagements, people prefer a male senior as with a female senior that are a lot of constraints such as them not being able to communicate with clients, or being unable to stay till late.
The third manager also deemed the opportunities to be equal but did say that there was a misbalance in the ratio but that it was because of the low number of females studying for accounting courses.
Overall, whether employee, manager or partner, familial barriers were cited most as the reason for the demographic and position gap. The first partner mentioned that a lot of females stop working after marriage. The second partner voiced the same concerns, in how despite more females being hired during their internship period, they tend to discontinue after completing it due to social pressures to get married.
Even if they continue to work after marriage, there are other variables to consider such as in-laws and the husband’s location which could be in a different city or country even to name a few. One manager responded that many girls did not want to continue working and after getting some training, they drop out and get married. The second manager stated that it is difficult to balance family and professional lives, making the females choose one of the two – usually the former. The third manager echoed the same.
When discussing annual pays and incentives, both partners had different views on the matter. One partner mentioned that it was all based on performance, experience and feedback from clients and managers. The second partner felt otherwise, by noticing that employers stalled promotions or increments when women went on maternity leaves.
This was to if the female employee would return, and if so, whether she would resume with the same effort. Thus, familial barriers conspired to potentially obviate equal pay opportunities. To reiterate, managers believed pay to be solely based on performance, designation and qualifications.
5. Discussion and recommendations
What emerges from the comparative analysis of gender bias in the accounting industry of one firm KPMG, in two locations, Amstelveen, the Netherlands, a developed, and Karachi, Pakistan, a developing country, is that gender does seem to influence careers that are pursued within this accounting firm. This existence of gender bias was testified through respondents working at the firm in both locations.
With regards to what forms of gender bias existed, following Rosser’s (2010) framework of analysing bias through cultural, familial and institutional barriers, the case studies of both locations evidenced a mix of all three. Further, these seem to differ neither so much in type, nor degree. Furthermore, there seem to be considerable overlap in between the opinions of all ranks working within this firm.
Gender bias seems to be most tilted against females. Within this, the institutional barriers seem to contribute most to the demographic gap: there is a low initial starting pool of female
candidates applying for accounting positions. Familial barriers then further the position gap through the pressure of marriage in the case of Pakistan, and family with children in the case of the Netherlands. Thus, women face the double whammy of starting from a depleted position, with further attrition as they progress through their careers.
The consequences of this are evinced in Kornberger, Carter and Ross-Smith (2010). They focused on the managerial level in one of the Big Four accounting firms as this is when firms decide who will go onwards in their career to fill partnership position. This is also the moment when organization members, typically females in their late twenties or early thirties, opted to leave the firm.
While respondents replied in a large majority to not facing gender discrimination, studies show that such discrimination is relatively rife. For example, according to Ciccotosto, Nandan and Smorfitt (2008), female accountants felt “sidelined by gender issues” (p. 329) due to parenting responsibilities even if they did not have any children due to child-free women in the field being perceived as lacking empathy and unable to manage others (Gatrell, 2008).
Thus, although studies show that women make up almost half (44%) of employees at CPA firms, according to AICPA, yet only 19% of women account for partner or principal level positions (Fortune, 2015). Additionally, in the EU 64.3% of women are employed in legal and accounting activities (Eurostat, 2016), yet in the UK alone, partners comprise of 13-17% in the big four accounting firms (Financial Reporting Council, 2015). This reflects in the thesis research where majority of respondents agree that the gender balance is disproportionate especially when going higher up in the organization.
Once again, in response to facing other forms of discrimination the majority responded in the negative – however, the few that felt otherwise, there was evidence supporting their issues in other studies. In a study by Huang (2015), it was shown that people were discriminated against on the basis of their ethnicity when entering the accounting profession. Speaking about Dutch society in particular – given that respondents based in the Netherlands mentioned ethnic discrimination – research by Verkuyten (2005) shows that discrimination against ethnic minority groups do exist.
In addition to ethnic discrimination, age discrimination was also mentioned. Women face many career barriers in the labour force, one of them being ageism (Barrett and Strachan, 2006). In their research, Barrett and Strachan (2011) mention how some of the respondents due to their age felt discriminated against.
For Pakistan, favouritism was repeatedly mentioned as a form of discrimination. Although resorting to favouritism individually might be deemed rational, collectively it can prove to be harmful (Loewe, Blume, Schönleber, Seibert, Speer and Voss, 2007). According to Safina (2015), using Russia in its research, it was concluded that favouritism and nepotism lead to brain drain putting the country's social and economic development at risk.
With overlapping answers, both offices agreed that there were three major reasons contributing to the low number of female partners: first, combining a career with a family life is tough; second, long working hours and considerable work load in the auditing profession; and third, the low number of females entering the accounting profession creating an already unbalanced percentage in the classrooms. Also Kornberger et al’s (2010) research showed that female employees faced strong gender barriers at the manager level, lessening the chance of them proceeding through the organizational hierarchy to the position of a partner.
Related to the first point, Dambrin and Lambert (2008) state that being a mother tends to hinder the career development of woman due to two reasons: (1) the loss of customers – pregnancy and maternity leave results in female auditors having to hand over some of their customers to a colleague, with no security of getting them back – and (2) the absence of a time management policy. According to Gammie, Herbohn and Whiting (2013), “if large public accountancy firms better managed firm-level structural obstacles to women’s career progression to partnership, greater proportions of adaptive women may arrive at partnership, albeit a little later in life” (p.41).
Pay gap interestingly, while still seeming to exist, seems to be the most mitigated negative outcome of gender bias despite other surveys and research saying otherwise. This year alone, PricewaterhouseCoopers’ mean gender pay gap was 13.7% and mean bonus gap 37.5% (PwC, 2017). Deloitte revealed that on average it paid its women 17.8% less than its male workers
(Telegraph, 2015). Ernst and Young, Australia too admitted publicly to paying it’s female staff 1.8% less than its male employees (Australian Financial Review, 2015).
In the US, female accountants or auditors earned a weekly median salary of $999, compared to the weekly median salary of $1,236 earned by men in the same fields (Bureau of Labour Statistics, 2014). Additionally, according to a study carried out by accountancy and financial recruiter Marks Sattin (2016), the gender pay gap in the profession was around £17,000 – based on 2015 figures.
However, in this research, most employees, partners and managers overall agreed that remuneration was largely measured on ones’ performance. This is probably the case since this is one factor that is in most direct control of the firm, and can perhaps be most best measured objectively. According to a partner in Amstelveen, the board was always keeping track of the system being used which was based on skills; the speed of promotion, scoring, pay rises associated with performance ratings etc were all observed to ensure there are no major differences.
There were some unique aspects of certain barriers in each location. In the Karachi office for instance, the law and order situation and frowning of late night sittings were actual concerns which otherwise would seem like alien barriers to performance in a first-world location such as that of Amstelveen. Familial barriers also seemed to be more prevalent in contributing to attrition of females from the workforce. In the case of Amstelveen, a unique aspect seemed to be a more “macho, self-promoting culture” as described by a respondent.
Recommendations, or solutions towards these barriers, drew on respondents input on how they dealt or would deal with biases. There was overall agreement that KPMG was making serious and sincere efforts to redress female imbalance at the firm. Day care was recommended especially in being able to increase the possibility of balancing a career and family life. Interestingly, this was suggested by respondents only in the Amstelveen office.
Having on-site day-care benefits both parties involved: it is convenient for parents and companies get to attract and retain staff – especially talented mothers – to name a few (The Guardian, 2016). What’s surprising is that despite the benefits, only 7% of companies in the
US offer on-site day-care to employees and of the Fortune’s Best Companies to Work For list, only one-third offers said convenience (Fortune, 2014).
On-site family centres show employers’ interest in supporting parents and addressing their concerns. Support (or lack thereof) from the workplace can be deemed as a make or break which can be helpful in creating either a new reality, a backup plan or even an exit (Harvard Business Review, 2017).
Additionally, the genuine opportunities to work part-time and from home were also some recommendations. In their research, Dambrin and Lambert (2008) found that although women were offered opportunities to combine professional and personal life, by taking up the offer, it gave off signals that the person had low career ambition thus stigmatizing them. Furthermore, Kornberger et. al’s (2010) findings show how the top management of the firm they based their study on had strategically designed a flexibility program. However, those that opted for flexible working were perceived as having a part-time commitment to the company inadvertently leading to being cast as not being serious about their career, the firm or the needs of their clients.
A recommendation made at both offices and from all positions was to increase the role of female mentors. This flaw has already been acknowledged by AICPA by them stating that women have “limited access to female or diverse role models”. Having a diverse array of leaders shows an organization’s commitment to diversity and also offers emerging leaders role models that they can identify with (Harvard Business Review, 2013).
From the side of the partners (and managers in Karachi), advice consistently centred around keeping “feminine traits” intact rather than considering it a weakness and having to adopt masculine ones, and to remain focused and consistent in their approach to career.
However, research has shown otherwise; leaders in the accounting world reward those with masculine traits through promotions and recognition (MacLean, 2013). Women are told that an ideal executive is a man and that leadership positions are meant for men (Bryant, 2015). Because of this, women feel that the attributes that are feminine are ill-equipped and ill-suited for any potential success in their firm (Maupin, 1993). Therefore, in order to become better at their jobs and to be successful, women deem it necessary to possess male characteristic and skills (Keiran,
2017). Therefore, accounting firms should make extensive efforts to ensure that females are equally rewarded for retaining their feminine traits.
A specific recommendation from this research would be to focus especially on high schools already to increase outreach to women for potential careers in accounting; perhaps through arranging career fairs at school locations, or as visiting guests in special sessions, such as school assemblies. By intervening earlier, as well as imparting a message of accounting as a welcoming rather than threatening career, the industry could perhaps best counter initial low interest.
6. Conclusion
This research conducted a comparative analysis through case study of gender bias in the accounting industry by looking at the conduct within KPMG in Amstelveen and Karachi, a developed and developing country office respectively. Using the frameworks provided by Rosser (2004), this bias is understood to manifest itself through a glass ceiling, a “set of invisible barriers to advancement up the corporate ladder” (Albelda and Tilly, 1998, p. 45).
Contributors towards these gaps are identified as cultural, familial and institutional barriers. All three barriers were identified as arising in both locations, and tilted mostly against females. Institutional barriers seemed to contribute towards demographic gap the most, and familial barriers towards position gap. Despite this, KPMG is making serious efforts to address this challenge, as attested by respondents of this research. Some recommendations are provided to further this.
This research set out to answer whether gender had any influence on careers that are pursued in accounting firms, augmented by questions that elaborated on what gender bias was and what forms they took; whether such bias was evident in accounting firms such as KPMG and what forms it took; whether other forms of discrimination existed; and how various forms of discrimination could be dealt with suggested by respondents to this research.
Comprehensively, gender seems to play a role in influencing careers; with gender bias referring to discrimination faced by an otherwise identical person that is treated differently on the basis of
