英国dissertation网：Choice, diversity and ‘false consciousnes

International Journal of Training and Development 10:1ISSN 1360-3736
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ,
UK and 350 Main St., Malden, MA 02148, USA.
英国dissertation网Choice, diversity and ‘false consciousness’
41
Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Oxford, UK and Malden, USAIJTDInternational Journal of Training and Development1360-3736Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 20052005
10
14154Articles
Choice, diversity and
‘false consciousness’International Journal of Training and Development
r
Val Caven, Department of Human Resource Management, Nottingham Business School, Nottingham
Trent University, Nottingham NG1 4BU, UK. E-mail: [email protected].
Choice, diversity and
‘false consciousness’ in
women’s careers
Val Caven
The central theme of this paper is that contemporary literatureconcerning women’s careers is based on assumptions held byresearchers and not actually on views held by women themselves.Many feminist researchers are guilty of assuming ‘falseconsciousness’ on the part of their subjects by explaining thesewomen as being victims of gender or patriarchal systemsinstead of making a mindful decision founded on choice. Theempirical work draws on in-depth interviews with 39 womenarchitects. Of the 39 women interviewed, 20 had adopted alternativeways of working in the sense that they had rejected theconventional career within an organization. Their reasons forthis were diverse and ranged from wanting to combine child orelder care with work; involvement in local politics; wantingtime for further study or sporting activities; as well as just notwanting to work full-time. In short, this research demonstratesthat work is not always a central interest in the lives of individualsand supports Hakim’s view of heterogeneity amongwomen.
Introduction
http://www.ukthesis.org/dissertation_sample/Conventional literature regarding women’s careers assumes that women want to workfull-time, and alternative forms of work organization other than an upward, linearprogression within an organization are regarded with a sense of failure (Mallon &Cohen, 2001). Hakim’s (1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2003) contention that women havediffering orientations to work challenged many of these assumptions and became thesubject of much derision from her critics (Bruegel, 1996; Crompton & Harris, 1998;Crompton & Le Feuvre, 1996; Ginnet al
., 1996; McRae, 2003a, 2003b; Procter & Pad42
International Journal of Training and Development
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
field, 1999; Walsh, 1999). The only area of common ground appears to be that McRae
(2003a, 2003b) concurs that most sociological theory is inadequate at explaining
women’s employment decisions.
Sociological theories overemphasize structural factors, and micro-level explanationssuch as preference are ignored (Hakim, 2002). However, many women want to carefor their own families (Meiksins & Whalley, 1998) rather than rely on institutional careand do this by adopting work patterns, which allow them to maximize both theiremployment careers and family life (Meiksins & Whalley, 1998; Tilly, 1996; Walsh,1999). Hakim’s critics have largely overlooked this fact, preferring instead to focus oneconomic and social factors (McRae, 2003a, 2003b) and lack of institutional child careas the major constraints upon women’s employment (Bruegel, 1996; Crompton &Harris, 1998; Crompton & Le Feuvre, 1996; Ginn#p#分页标题#e#
et al
., 1996). This ultimately means
that children are seen as a barrier to a career although the reality is that many womenwant to pursue both a career and motherhood, expecting both to be equally rewarding
(Meiksins & Whalley, 1998; Procter & Padfield, 1999; Walsh, 1999). In addition,
Hakim’s critics focus only on the presence of children as influencing women’s orientationsto work when Hakim (2000) herself mentioned women without children preferringto work reduced hours because they were involved with politics, voluntarywork and the like.
The central theme of this paper is that contemporary literature concerning women’scareers is based on assumptions held by researchers and not actually on views heldby women themselves. Many feminist researchers, especially the critics of Hakim, areguilty of assuming ‘false consciousness’ on the part of their subjects by explainingthese women as being victims of gender or patriarchal systems (see Anderson, 1981),nstead of making a mindful decision founded on choice. The empirical work drawson in-depth interviews with 37 women architects who, to varying extents, representHakim’s three typologies of work-centred, home-centred and adaptive women; butthe main emphasis is on those women who have adapted their career to accommodateeither their caring responsibilities or their involvement with other non-work activitiessuch as politics and voluntary work.Choice and diversity in women’s careers: the current perspectiveExisting economic and sociological theory has a male bias in that it was developed primarily withreference tomalelabour market participation and the characteristics ofmen’swork life histories.Modifications and extensions were added later in an attempt to cover the visibly different patternsof female employment. However, it is not satisfactory to explain women’s employment as a smalldeviation from the employment patterns of men, or under the heading of sex discrimination, as somany textbooks do. Far better is a theory that starts from the substantial body of new researchevidence on women’s work and that focuses on what is distinctive about the choices women make(Hakim, 2000, pp. 1–2).
The value of Hakim’s contribution cannot be overlooked; she challenges dominantthought and argues that because women are different, then different theories apply tothem. Until now, the prevailing view has been that the systems are ‘designed andadministered by and for men – taking men’s careers and attitudes as the norm andnever questioning that this is in the interests of the organization’ (Rothwell, 1982, p.19) nor questioning whether they are in the interests of women or society in general.In mainstream career theory, the belief is that the masculine career pattern is suitablefor women if marriage and childbearing are taken into account (Super, 1984). Super’sexplanation for this is that because career choice is affected by self-concept, which hehypothesized was the same in both men and women; they both make decisions basedon self-concept and their image of the environment in which they live. However, it isargued that this fails to take into account the experiences of women and once againattempts to modify women into ‘quasi men’ (Gilligan, 1979).White males are now a minority in most Western labour markets because of theincrease in working women and increased levels of ethnic minority representation(Baruch, 2004), but these labour markets are still dominated by outdated workingChoice, diversity and ‘false consciousness’#p#分页标题#e#
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
practices and a refusal to adapt. However, the balance of power is still in favour ofwhite males with men holding the majority of managerial (and above) positions andenjoying a substantial pay differential in their favour (Baruch, 2004).t is not just from the masculine perspective that women and their work are attacked;women, too, perpetuate negative images with Coward (1992) accusing women of‘colluding’ with men to maintain the gender imbalance; Crompton and Le Feuvre
(1996) argued that women who work part-time are less committed than those whowork full-time; and that older women have reduced expectations of career and work
(Bruegel, 1996).
The critics of Hakim’s work focus on institutional and structural disadvantagesexperienced by women as explaining women’s orientations towards their careers
(Bruegel, 1996; Crompton & Harris, 1998; Crompton & Le Feuvre, 1996; Ginn
et al
.,
1996; McRae, 2003a, 2003b). Crompton and Harris (1998) suggested that women makechoices about their level of involvement in the labour market but that ‘women’semployment behaviour is a reflection of the way in which women actively constructtheir work life biographies in terms of their historically available opportunities andconstraints’ (Crompton & Harris, 1998, p. 119). Because historically women’s workinglives have been constrained by structural and cultural barriers, Crompton and Harris
(1998) argued that any ‘choices’ made by women would also be limited. Although thismay be the case, it can then be said that all choices are made subject to constraints andrestrictions and that no choice can ever be considered as freely made. In fact, as Hakimpoints out, women do enjoy a greater freedom of choice in their working lives thanmen.
It is notable that there is in practice only one ‘choice’ of work history for men, compared to threefor women. Feminists who emphasize that women’s choices are constrained and not ‘completelyfree’ overlook the fact that women havemorechoices than men (Hakim, 1996, p. 134, emphasis inoriginal).
A further point is that many women actually want to look after their own childrenand not rely upon institutional child care (Meiksins & Whalley, 1998). They do this byadopting work patterns, which allow them to maximize both their employment careersand family life (Meiksins & Whalley, 1998; Tilly, 1996; Walsh, 1999). Hakim’s criticshave largely overlooked this fact, preferring instead to focus on lack of institutionalchild care as a major constraint upon women’s employment (Bruegel, 1996; Crompton& Harris, 1998; Crompton & Le Feuvre, 1996; Ginnet al
., 1996). This ultimately meansthat children are seen as a barrier to a career although the reality is that many womenwant to pursue both a career and motherhood, expecting both to be equally rewarding(Meiksins & Whalley, 1998; Procter & Padfield, 1999; Walsh, 1999).#p#分页标题#e#
Furthermore, there is the question of why very many women who do not havedependent children continue to work part-time. Walsh (1999) found that there were asignificant number (over a quarter of her sample) who did not want to work otherthan part-time and had no dependent children.
They had chosen such arrangements for social contact, financial reasons or because they had nointerest in full-time work. There was no evidence of an unfulfilled or latent demand for full-timework amongst these women. Indeed, over three quarters (79 per cent) indicated that they did not
wish to return to full-time work in the future (Walsh, 1999, p. 190).
It is these women that who are of particular interest and who represent the challengefor human resource development (HRD) in terms of job design and career structures.Hakim’s (2000) explanations, although valuable, are very simplistic as she linksreduced involvement in the labour market purely to women’s homemaker role andignores other explanations.Human capital theoryA further dimension is thus added – once there is a distinction made between primaryand secondary earners, there must also be a differentiation concerning firstly
International Journal of Training and Development
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.the motivation to seek and, secondly, to remain in employment. Primary earnersdo not have the extent of choice regarding whether to seek or remain in employmentthat secondary earners possess. Secondary earners may choose betweendomestic and market work. This is seen as ‘rational’ decision making within ‘newhome economics’; it refers to where a woman (usually) takes responsibility for thedomestic work, thus sacrificing investment in human capital (Becker, 1981). This,
Becker argues, makes economic sense because starting from the assumption thatboth husband and wife are in all ways equal, it improves economic efficiency ifone specializes in paid employment whilst the other assumes responsibility for thedomestic work. This has been interpreted as reinforcing occupational segregationto prevent women from playing an equal part in the workplace because wiveswho do work will seek less demanding jobs (Crompton & Sanderson, 1990; Hakim,996).
Production versus reproduction: feminist theory
Feminist explanations, in particular Marxist, socialist and radical forms, dominatesociological studies; however, there is much diversity and a lack of consensus withindifferent forms of feminism. Although there are problems with women being consideredalongside the masculine model, many studies of women are also biased becauseof the explanations imposed on them.
A major element of both Marxist and radical feminism is the ‘social’ versus the‘biological’ account of sexual inequality. Since Wollstonecraft (1759–97), the early feministshad believed that the subordinate position of women was socially constructedand not, as was commonly believed, the result of the dominant religious teaching.Class divisions, rather than gender, are considered to be the cause of women’s oppression.The family unit also causes problems for Marxist feminism as capitalist societiesrely on women’s biological ability to create future workers, and this contributes towomen’s inferior economic and social status.Radical feminism takes patriarchy as its explanation of female subordination. Thiis the domination of women through male violence and suppression with the resultthat social structures have emerged to maintain this. There is no advantage to men inchanging this situation – society is dominated by men and masculinity – and, historically,women’s roles have existed in order to ‘service’ men. Women possess greater‘value’ to men and masculine society by remaining in these roles. Insurance companiesestimate that the cost of replacing the domestic services provided by a housewife isover £20,000 per year. The solution to this, according to radical feminists, is theseparation of men and women and the creation of separate structures away from thosecreated by men, which amounts to a fundamental refocusing that attempts to reflectwomen’s lives in a feminist context.Liberal feminism takes a less polemic perspective but covers a far wider range ofperspectives. It does not attempt to apportion the subordination and exploitation ofwomen to one single factor but instead tries to explain the situation in terms of eventsand circumstances, which prevent women from taking advantage of the opportunitiesavailable to them. Examples of these are that discriminatory practices within organizationsare the root cause of horizontal segregation and that the organization of society‘encourages’ women into making certain ‘choices’ about their careers. Legislation hasbeen introduced in an attempt to create greater gender equality, with the intention thatif attitudes can be gradually changed and discriminatory practices prevented, thenequality will result. However, liberal feminism does not explain how women’s positionwithin society became established as such in the first instance and is criticized forfailing to deal with deeper issues of subordination.These approaches to feminism have the universal theme of requiring unitarist,collective action in order to challenge women’s oppression, and this contributes towhy they can be problematic concepts (Gamble, 2001). Common to these strands offeminism is the issue of consciousness-raising whereby ‘the move to transform whatis http://www.ukthesis.org/dissertation_sample/experienced as personal into analysis in political terms, with the accompanyingChoice, diversity and ‘false consciousness’#p#分页标题#e#
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
recognition that “the personal is political”, that male power is exercised and reinforced
through “personal” institutions such as marriage, child-rearing and sexual practices’
(Thornham, 2001, p. 30). Heywood and Drake (1997), recognized this lack of plurality
as causing a problem for feminism in that one of the major problems faced by feminism
is that it assumes a female consensus on relationships with men, employment and
belief systems.
However, Greed’s (1991) notion of ‘bourgeois feminism’ approaches the debate in
an entirely different manner. This she defines as a non-radical feminist or in simple
terms, a businesswoman. Greed (1991, p. 10) argued that this type of feminism arose
during the 1980s as a result of ‘wider political changes’, and that it was more appropriate
for women employed in the more conservative professions. She explains that
bourgeois feminists:
. . . seem quite alienated from feminism and may never have read any feminist literature. Yet they
possess some measure of feminist consciousness of their own, but are unlikely to express themselves
in feminist jargon. They may not identify ‘patriarchy’ as the cause of their problems, or even
think in terms of macro-sociological first causes (but undoubtedly experience their effects). They
are more likely to see their problems as being personal, and either their own fault or that of those
who work with them. They may be put off by the false media image of feminism and ‘the way
feminists dress and carry on’ (Greed, 1991, p. 11).
Where this form of feminism radically differs from its more politically motivated
counterparts is that it does not lay the blame solely on men or society. Instead, it
internalizes the difficulties that women face, but it nevertheless reflects how some
women feel. As Greed highlights, such professions as architecture and surveying are
traditional and conservative with the result that they are unlikely to attract recruits of
a more radical or nonconformist nature. However, in the sense that bourgeois feminists
are businesswomen (Greed, 1991), they can be said to have more of a sense of feminist
individuality than collectivity.
Feminism of all diversity provides difficulties for those women who are ‘homecentred’
as these women are supposedly guilty of colluding with men and masculine
structures (Coward, 1992). The role of mothers is devalued, and motherhood becomes
an objective state. The first national British Women’s Liberation conference was held
in 1970, and one of the demands was for 24-hour nurseries, thus removing any form
of maternal (or even paternal) attachment to children. Walsh’s (1999) study showed
that 58 per cent of women chose part-time work because of child care; Meiksins and#p#分页标题#e#
Whalley (1998) contended that women actually wanted to be with their children; and,
Coward (1999, p. 163) cited the need for ‘that feeling of centrality to their children’s
lives’ as being important to women.
Coward (1999, p. 65) argued that ‘feminists are refusing to look at data on the
economy and gender division, and especially what ordinary people might be feeling
about this, in any light which would undermine fundamental beliefs about the multiple
disadvantages of women’. Here she introduced the notion, which provides the
focus of this paper, of what matters to ‘ordinary people’ and acknowledged the fact
that feminists are still concentrating on women being disadvantaged by male power.
While she is a little critical of Hakim’s preference theory on the grounds of its simplicity,
she contends that ‘sometimes decisions are to do with quality of life: either women
are privileged enough to have a choice, or they value time with children above the
strains of full-time employment even if it means economic hardship’ (Coward, 1999,
p. 67).
False consciousness and the challenges for HRD
Greed’s description of bourgeois feminism does not chime with the opinions of academics
who impose their explanations upon women’s position in the workplace arguing
that it is structural and institutional factors that prevent women from competing
with men on truly equal terms. Hakim’s (1998, 2000, 2002, 2003) work on preference
is valuable because it acknowledges the choices that women make although she does
46
International Journal of Training and Development
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
restrict her explanation to the presence or absence of children and does not include
those who are either childless or who no longer have dependent children.
The challenge for HRD is twofold: firstly, to recognize that many of the explanations
for women’s positions in the labour market are as a result of academic researchers
assuming ‘false consciousness’ on the part of their subjects by explaining these women
as being victims of gender or patriarchal systems (see Anderson, 1981), instead of
making a mindful decision founded on choice. The totalitarian way in which these
‘rationalizations’ are imposed upon women runs counter to the emancipation of
women and merely inflicts another form of oppression.
There are no specific sets of techniques that can be labelled as feminist methodology,
but all forms of analysis are acceptable ‘for investigating the condition of women in
sexist society’ (Stanley, 1990). It appears that the role of feminism is more of a way of
seeing, a way of knowing and a way of being in the world (Stanley, 1990). It exists in#p#分页标题#e#
a conceptual sense but manifests itself within the research process. Although there are
no prescribed techniques that comprise a feminist methodology, there are certain
criteria that include the experiences of real people as used for the basis of generating
knowledge and that there is an aim for change in some way. These are supported by
the use of non-abusive research methods within which there is reflexivity between the
researcher and research.
Bryman and Bell (2003) discussed the dilemma of when researchers do not believe
what their subjects tell them and thus seek to impose their own explanations. In the
case of Anderson’s research, she interpreted responses as ‘false consciousness’ but after
her findings were published, she received a letter from her interviewees challenging
her interpretations (Anderson, 1981). Millen, too, experienced similar difficulty where
she said she was aware of sexism affecting the subjects of her research but that ‘the
women . . . did not generally view their interactions in terms of gendered social systems.
There is therefore a tension between their characteristics of their experience and
my interpretation of it’ (Millen, 1997, chapters 5.6, 5.9). Greed (1991) said many women
in professional employment have not read any feminist literature and, as a result, have
not developed a raised consciousness. However, this is passing the ‘blame’ on women
and points to where the source of the conflict lies. As Bryman and Bell (2003) argued,
any explanation or interpretation that is conferred on women that is not shared by
them raises moral and ethical questions.
Secondly, it is apparent that women do want to play an integral part with their
families or non-work activities, and this should not be viewed as a weakness or as
rejecting their career. If, as Hakim (1996, p. 71) stated, ‘virtually all part-time work is
voluntary, in the sense of being preferred over a full-time job’, then are those people
who work reduced (but regular) hours more content and will they display a higher
level of commitment to their employer as suggested by Walsh and Deery (1999)? As
McGoldrick
et al
. (2002, p. 396) stated, ‘HRD will become increasingly concerned with
facilitating the learning of individuals, teams and organizations through the design,
structuring and organization of work itself’, which in itself implies the need for
increased acceptance of diversity in work. The research issues in this study are to
explore whether feminist explanations of women’s involvement in the labour market
accurately reflect the intentions of the women themselves.
Methods
The research focused on the careers of 37 women architects located in the East Midlands
region of the UK. The area comprises a mixture of urban and rural locations,#p#分页标题#e#
and there are almost 200 architectural practices (Royal Institute of British Architects
[RIBA], 2004), which are a combination of regional branches of large national organizations
coupled with local firms of varying size. The mix is representative of architectural
practices located outside the Greater London area (RIBA, 2004). The proportion
of women architects is significantly lower than the national average of 14 per cent
(RIBA, 2004) with only 49 female RIBA members out of almost 1000 architects
employed in the region.
Choice, diversity and ‘false consciousness’
47
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
All 49 female RIBA members were contacted by post, and 37 of these agreed to be
interviewed. Their ages ranged from 27 to 72 and included two women who were
retired but who still retained their membership with the RIBA, a further one was on
a career break and another was unemployed. They were included because their experiences
were considered to be valuable as they represented those who retained a
connection with the profession although not working in it at the time. The two older
women were able to give a useful perspective on the changes that had taken place
over their working lives. Their areas of employment and numbers of dependent
children are shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Occupational status, age and number of children
Name Age Children Occupational status
Sue 27 Childless Director of company
Jo 30 Childless Salaried full-time
Katie 30 1 preschool Salaried full-time
Sophie 30 Pregnant Full-time salaried
Susanne 30 1 preschool Salaried full-time
Zena 30 Childless Salaried full-time
Cindy 31 Childless Salaried part-time/teaching
Sylvia 32 Childless Salaried part-time
Ursula 32 Childless Practice principal
Marlene 32 Childless Salaried full-time
Geraldine 33 1 preschool Sole practitioner
Julia 35 2 preschool Salaried full-time
Kate 35 Childless Labour-only contracts
Rima 35 1 preschool, 1 primary
school
Salaried full-time
Melanie 36 Childless Sole practitioner part-time
Christine 40 Childless Sole practitioner
Lesley 41 1 teenage Salaried full-time
Hannah 42 Childless Practice principal
Paula 42 Childless Practice principal
Susan 42 2 primary school age Career break
Barbara 44 Childless Teaching/drafting/sole practitioner
Karen 44 3 primary school age Salaried full-time development
corporation
Rosie 45 3 secondary school age Sole practitioner part-time
Sheelagh 45 1 primary school age Sole practitioner part-time
Sheila 45 1 primary school age Practice principal
Rachel 45 2 teenage Practice principal
Constantina 46 1 adult son Sole practitioner
Jackie 48 2 adult Sole practitioner full-time
Joanne 48 2 adult Salaried full-time#p#分页标题#e#
Liz 49 4: 2 at school, 2 at
university
Practice principal
Alex 51 2 teenage University lecturer
Pat 53 2 adult Labour-only contracts
Olivia 54 2 adult Salaried in practice
Amy 55 4 adult Unemployed
Phyllis 59 Childless Sole practitioner; garden designer
Evelyn 68 6 adult children Retired
Ella 72 5 adult children Retired
48
International Journal of Training and Development
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
The table shows that, of the 37 women, only 11 are full-time salaried working in an
architectural practice or company; one is full-time salaried as a lecturer in higher
education, and another is full-time salaried but working for a development corporation;
two are part-time salaried. Neither of these two have dependent children: one
teaches part-time in a local school of architecture, and the other is a semi-professional
sportswoman who needs to spend time training. Two are employed on short-term
labour-only contracts, and the remaining 17 (excluding those who are retired or on a
career break) are either principals of practices or sole practitioners. This is significantly
more than the national average of 48 per cent of architects who are principals or sole
practitioners. Overall, those who have adopted a non-standard way of working represent
20 of the 37. Non-standard forms of work are usually taken to mean part-time
and temporary work and self-employment although it has come to encompass any
work, which is neither full-time nor permanent with a formal contract of employment
for an indefinite period, such as subcontracting, flexi-time, fixed term contracts and
the like (Felstead & Jewson, 1999; Yeandle, 1999).
In-depth biographical interviews using a career life history approach were carried
out with the interviewees. The discussion was based on seven subject areas relating
to why they chose architecture as a career, factors that have helped and hindered their
careers, the pressures and satisfactions of an architectural career, life outside work, the
effects of being a woman in a masculine environment and future career plans. The
subject areas were not designed to be specifically question and answer type topics but
areas for discussion where areas of interest could be probed further. The interviews
lasted from 40 min (the interviewee’s time was limited) to over 3 h. Each interview
was taped and transcribed; QSR NUD.IST qualitative research software was used to
help with the coding and ordering of the themes and issues that arose from within the
data.
Choice and diversity in women’s careers: a new perspective?
There are two main themes to be explored here: firstly, there is the attraction of nonstandard
working, which amounts from wanting to do things other than work fulltime,#p#分页标题#e#
as adopted by the women, and the discussion here covers their being more to
life than work and wanting to provide child care; secondly, there is their rejection of
feminism. Non-standard working is adopted by 20 of the women interviewed, most
of whom were childless or had no dependent children. There is an implicit assumption
that self-employment, in the form of sole practitioner, principal in practice or on a
labour-only basis, exists primarily as a solution to the problems of juggling family
and career (Crompton & Le Feuvre, 1996; Goffee & Scase, 1985; Hakim, 1995, 1996).
However, meeting family responsibilities was not the only reason for becoming a sole
practitioner as four of the nine sole practitioners were childless, and the other two
formed their practices after their children were grown up. Their reasons for becoming
self-employed are varied and include needing to be able to work part-time and flexibly
because of ill health. However, the majority of sole practitioners are childless or no
longer have dependent children, which means then that this form of working arrangement
is not entirely because of the need to combine work and child care. Other factors
must come into play in order to attempt to explain the rationale for this type of
working arrangement, and these will now be discussed in the following sections.
Firstly, issues relating to non-work activities will be considered. This will be followed
by an investigation into the integration of child care and career. Thirdly, we will discuss
the meaning (or lack of) that feminist theory has for these women.
There’s more to life than work
This theme was reflected strongly by many of the interviewees; of the four women
below, only Karen has dependent children. Rachel’s children are in their late teens and
are financially dependent but are not in need of child care. Both Barbara and Cindy
are childless.
Choice, diversity and ‘false consciousness’
49
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
I always feel it’s a silly way to organize your life to have to work so hard and not do anything else
(Rachel).
I’d rather dig my allotment than take jobs that I don’t want to do. The career is important but not
the most important part of my life; quality of life is important to me. You don’t have to earn all
this money. Have a life! (Barbara).
I’ve got involved with the local access group through the children, through the NCT, which I got
involved with, representing mothers with children in buggies . . . and then recently [became] the
Chairman, I got involved in East Midlands Training Partnership, which is a training agency, and
I’m a director there. I’ve also been involved with the Play Forum and got involved with the design#p#分页标题#e#
course that they ran (Karen).
I’d expressed an interest when I finished university that it would be quite nice to come back if they
ever needed any tutors or anything and the Prof actually rang up and said, ‘We do need someone
for the first year, would you be interested?’ So it’s just part-time, and it works really well. It’s good
to do something different apart from go to work (Cindy).
While Karen’s other roles could be considered to be work-related, her involvement
is in an unpaid capacity, and her interest arose as a result of having children. Sylvia
is a semi-professional sportswoman and works part-time in order to be able to train;
Melanie has an allotment and is involved with a local ecology group campaigning on
green issues, however, she also has health problems and is unable to work full-time;
Olivia is a charity fundraiser; Barbara also has an allotment and is a local councillor;
Phyllis is taking a garden design course; and Rosie is a school governor and helps out
regularly in class listening to children read. These women have chosen unpaid activities
in addition to their paid work for implicit rewards only. Melanie and Sylvia are
both single (and childless) and have made lifestyle choices while still having to be selfsupporting
without a partner’s salary to help.
Others have additional businesses. Rachel and Ursula both invested in property that
provides them with an income; Sheelagh owns two day nurseries and is actively
involved in the day-to-day running of them. Angela’s teaching work is paid, but it
means she has part-time status for both the local authority and the School of Architecture.
All these women are single and self-supporting but are looking for alternatives
to the full-time career.
We do this development work . . . we had some spare capital that we invested a long time ago, but
we paid very little for it, and it’s never owed us anything and, over the years, we’ve sold them off
or whatever. We sold one off and bought some property in [N____]. We have the income from the
lease, and that’s been fun doing that it’s been nice not to have a client and to do something you
want to do, and it would be fun to do more of that but that depends on all sorts of things. If
you’ve got to do it for a living, it’s slightly different than taking the opportunity when it arises
(Rachel).
I’m not ambitious, I’m there to enjoy myself . . . I mean I’ve been offered some wonderful jobs, and
I don’t want the aggravation . . . quite honestly, I don’t want the hassle. I bought a lot of property
I did sort of mortgage myself rather high but as an investment and I’ve got to the stage now where
. . . that if I don’t work then it doesn’t matter. I’ve got properties rented out that bring in an income#p#分页标题#e#
so I’m at that stage where I think I’m alright (Ursula).
Even without the financial cushion of additional forms of income, there is a desire
to make choices over working time:
If I can get in the car, and it’s 2 min down the road, I’m more interested . . . by and large, I can say
‘no I don’t want to do that’ I don’t struggle to get work by any means. [My career has] been better
since I became self-employed . . . basically nobody can bug you. . . . You are in control of your own
career, and I find it much more pleasant (Christine).
Child care
For the older women, it seems there was never any question whether they would look
after their own children, but they negotiated forms of working that suited their individual
needs. Evelyn, one of the oldest interviewees, married soon after qualifying
and had six children but continued to work on a part-time basis.
50
International Journal of Training and Development
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
I was lucky to find one [part-time job], which really suited me. I could do as many hours as I liked
or as many hours as they wanted. I don’t think it was so easy in those days to get part-time jobs.
I found definitely if you were doing say three days a week you couldn’t do working drawings
because you couldn’t get it finished quick enough; so, that’s why I only did planning drawings
and things like that which only required two or three drawings, and you get them done in
reasonable time. So, it limited what you could do. I didn’t mind that because I wasn’t ambitious
(Evelyn).
The notion of part-time work within a profession at this time was, in a theoretical
sense, non-existent but was operated here in more of an informal context. Two others
(Amy and Olivia) also worked part-time at some stage in their careers, one during the
1970s and the other during the 1980s, displaying an ‘M’ shaped career pattern by
moving back to full-time employment once their children were older (Dex, 1987). This
illustrates the use of part-time employment as a means of combining work and family
either by providing the best solution (Tilly, 1996) or by being prevented from working
full-time because of family responsibilities (Peitchinis, 1989).
I’ve given my all [to my career], and I’ve given my all to the children as well (Olivia).
Amongst the younger women, there was a conviction that they wanted to be
involved with their children during their childhood:
I mean I don’t believe in farming kids out when they’re young, I mean I think people have to do
it. I appreciate that but I don’t think I could (Ursula).
I really wanted to be at home with the children. I really wanted to be there for them. While I found#p#分页标题#e#
it difficult, I mean I did need the stimulus of a job . . . so it just seemed right that if people asked
me to do a job, I could do it around the children; so, it just gradually built up (Rosie).
I think it’s more important to be at home with your children. I’m a member of Full-Time Mothers,
which advocates that people should have a right to stay at home and look after their own children
because I don’t think it’s good for kids to be child minded all the time (Susan).
For me, it’s worked quite well because having started my own practice, which I did when my child
was about a year old. I have been able to work it in with having a child as well (Sheelagh).
英国dissertation网A feminist approach?
The women were asked why they chose architecture as a career knowing that
the construction industry is perceived as a masculine domain and not regarded
as an appropriate field of employment for women (Agapiou, 2002; Ellison, 2001;
Fielden
et al
., 2000; Greed, 2000). The commitment required prior to qualification
in terms of time spent studying would suggest that the choice of architecture as
a career would be made following a thorough examination of individual selfconcept
and the environment in which that individual lives (Super, 1984) or by
the ‘matching’ of the individual and occupation (Hall, 1976). It would suggest
that a certain amount of research would be carried out and career advice was
sought. However, the reality indicated that career choice was resolved along
more subjective lines (Evetts, 1996) determined to a large extent by social factors
(Banks
et al
., 1992).
The most common response to being asked why architecture was chosen was that
it was a ‘basic instinct’ developing in childhood. Certainly, childhood and family
background play an important part in career choice (Banks
et al
., 1992). Firstly, there
is the ‘it was just something I always wanted to do’ type of explanation where an
interest in architecture develops in early childhood without, it seems, any specific
reason for making this choice. Secondly, there is also evidence of both parents’ interests
and parents’ professions playing a significant role in influencing career choice, with
several of the interviewees stating their parents had been employed in the construction
industry in some way.
It is reasonable to expect that these women would be aware of the masculinity
surrounding the industry and to perhaps enter the architecture profession as a feminist
in order to challenge the status quo. However, when they did comment, it was usually
Choice, diversity and ‘false consciousness’
51
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
along the lines of that reported by Greed (1991) by stating that they were not feminists#p#分页标题#e#
in any way:
I’m not an architect because I’m trying to prove women can do it. I’m not remotely feminist or
anything like that. I do it because I thought it would be the most interesting career when it came
to choosing careers (Cindy).
This is supported by Isabel who feels it would have a negative impact on her if she
were to be seen as a feminist:
I’m not one for burning your bra anyway. I’m not that sort but quite honestly I think if you had
that sort of attitude, it would get up their noses anyway. I always thought it would go against me.
I don’t consider myself to be a career woman. It’s just something I enjoy doing, and that’s it as far
as it goes (Ursula).
Paula once worked for a women-only architectural cooperative but has reacted against
the ethos since leaving:
. . . I do try very hard not to analyse everything in terms of feminist analysis . . . the women at [the
cooperative], just because that organization was set up very specifically about women in architecture,
you couldn’t help but address the problems all the time. They were coming to you with the
issue all the time, they were expecting you to have a view (Paula).
The architecture cooperative has a very strong feminist agenda as well as the objective
of challenging the ‘man-made’ environment (Matrix, 1984), and she found the constant
emphasis on feminist issues somewhat demanding. It is apparent that there is a distinct
lack of feminist solidarity or unitarism among these women. Only Alex is prepared to
further the interests of women generally within the profession. She has greater potential
to do this than any of the others as she is course leader at a School of Architecture,
but even then she qualifies her statement by playing down feminism:
My colleagues have got used to me reminding them that when we think of a name, we should be
thinking of a woman not [just] a man, and I mean it’s taken me five years, but they do now know
me well enough to accept what I’m saying and to know that actually I’m not you know a strident
sort of bouncing feminist. I just feel very strongly that you know we’ve got to give people equal
chances (Alex).
Here, Alex regards herself as promoting equal opportunities in the School of Architecture
where she works rather than taking an overtly feminist stance. She says she is not
a ‘bouncing feminist’, but she believes in equality. Many of the interviewees were keen
to stress their rejection of feminism but highlight the role of women:
I’m not a women’s libber but . . . I think we’re more proactive. I notice that with one of my
colleagues here who is the support services manager and if you want anything done anywhere in
this division, you ask her and that happens to me a bit as well. . . . I’m not too worried about#p#分页标题#e#
apportioning roles . . . I don’t think women have got egos the same as men have, which can get
bruised and damaged (Pat).
Greed (1991) said that many professional women had not had their consciousness
raised regarding feminism, once again apportioning ‘blame’ on to women. These
women seem well aware of feminist principles but are choosing to avoid being
involved themselves. They are not denying the role that feminism has played in
gaining equal opportunities, but the way their working lives have evolved going
against feminist hypotheses regarding their careers indicates how much theory
relating to women’s careers is not as relevant as much literature would have us
believe.
Conclusions
This paper reports the stories of the women who took part in this research study. It
has given them their own voice and presented their interpretations of their accounts
rather than having explanations provided on their behalf. These women are working
in a male-dominated profession and industry; they have chosen architecture as a career
and have undergone a lengthy process of training prior to qualification. In addition,
52
International Journal of Training and Development
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
these women have forged a career as architects in contrast to recent research in
architecture, which focuses on those who have left the profession (Adams & Tancred,
2000; de Graft-Johnson
et al
., 2003). The women are exercising choice and introducing
diversity into working practices. The high levels of non-standard working may be a
response to organizational reluctance to providing flexibility and diversity in work,
but contrary to mainstream literature on women’s work, where alternative forms of
work organization other than an upward, linear progression within an organization
are regarded with a sense of failure (Mallon & Cohen, 2001), these women report that
they are content; and, to them, it represents career success because they are able to
balance work and non-work activities.
The point is not to deny that women are not discriminated against or to give the
impression of an overly rosy perspective of women’s careers but to open the debate
to other streams of thought than those that are currently under discussion. Existing
rationalizations of women’s career patterns tend towards being overly pessimistic
and patronizing because of feminist reliance on explanations relating to the masculine
model of employment. Feminist activity has played a valuable part in shaping
women’s current position in society, in achieving autonomy and equality; however,
‘the old feminist equation that being a woman
necessarily
entails low income and low
status is no longer always true’ (Coward, 1999, p. 50). These women have shown how#p#分页标题#e#
they have combined work and non-work activities in order to maximize other opportunities
or for quality of life. They are not rejecting their work or careers
per se
, but
they show that work is not necessarily as great a central life interest as suggested by
feminist literature.
The extent to which the women are adapting their lives to accommodate elements
away from the full-time career and their antipathy towards feminist explanations
suggests that there is more diversity than existing research suggests. These women do
not present themselves as victims of patriarchal systems; they have made choices
within the limits of their own lives and experiences. To this end, they are effectively
rejecting feminist suggestions that they are somehow considered second best to men.
The test for HRD is to be able to recognize and incorporate this diversity into developing
theory based on reflexive practice.
References
Adams, A. and Tancred, P. (2000),
Designing Women: Gender and the Architectural Profession
(Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press).
Agapiou, A. (2002), ‘Perceptions of gender roles and attitudes toward work among male
and female operatives in the Scottish construction industry’,
Construction Management and
Economics
,
20
, 8, 697–705.
Anderson (1981), cited by Reinharz (1992) and Millen (1997).
Banks, M., Bates, I., Breakwell, G., Bynner, J., Emler, N., Jamieson, L. and Roberts, K. (1992),
Careers and Identities
(Milton Keynes: Open University Press).
Baruch, Y. (2004),
Managing Careers: Theory and Practice
(Harlow: FT Prentice Hall).
Becker G. S. (1981),
A Treatise on the Family
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
Bruegel, I. (1996), ‘Whose myths are they anyway?: a comment’,
British Journal of Sociology
,
47
,
1, 175–77.
Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2003),
Business Research Methods
(Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Coward, R. (1992),
Our Treacherous Hearts
(London: Faber and Faber).
Coward, R. (1999),
Sacred Cows
(London: HarperCollins).
Crompton, R. and Harris, F. (1998), ‘Explaining women’s employment patterns: “orientations to
work revisited” ’,
British Journal of Sociology
,
49
, 1, 118–36.
Crompton, R. and Le Feuvre, N. (1996), ‘Paid employment and the changing system of gender
relations: a cross-national comparison’,
Sociology
,
30
, 3, 427–45.
Crompton, R. and Sanderson, K. (1990),
Gendered Jobs and Social Change
(London: Unwin
Hyman).
De Graft-Johnson, A., Manley, S. and Greed, C. (2003),
Why Do Women Leave Architecture?
(London: RIBA/University of West of England Research Project).#p#分页标题#e#
Dex, S. (1987),
Women’s Occupational Mobility: A Lifetime Perspective
(London: Macmillan).
Choice, diversity and ‘false consciousness’
53
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Ellison, L. (2001), Senior management in chartered surveying: where are the women?
Women in
Management Review
,
16
, 6, 264–78.
Evetts, J. (1996),
Gender and Career in Science and Engineering
(London: Taylor and Francis).
Felstead, A. and Jewson, N. (1999), ‘Flexible labour and non-standard employment: an agenda
of issues’, in A. Felstead and N. Jewson (eds),
Global Trends in Flexible Labour
(London: Routledge),
pp. 1–20.
Fielden, S. L., Davidson, M. J., Gale, A. W. and Davey, C. L. (2000), ‘Women in construction: the
untapped resource’,
Construction Management and Economics
,
18
, 1, 113–21.
Gamble, S. (ed.) (2001),
Feminism and Postfeminism
(London: Routledge).
Gilligan, C. (1979), ‘Woman’s place in a man’s life cycle’,
Harvard Educational Review
,
49
,
431–46.
Ginn, J. A., Brannen, S., Dale, J., Dex, A., Elias, S., Moss, P., Pahl, P., Roberts, J. and Rubery, J.
(1996), ‘Feminist fallacies: a reply to Hakim on women’s employment’,
British Journal of
Sociology
,
47
, 1, 167–74.
Goffee, R. and Scase, R. (1985),
Women in Charge: The Experiences of Women Entrepreneurs
(London:
George Allen and Unwin).
Greed, C. (1991),
Surveying Sisters: Women in a Traditional Male Profession
(London: Routledge).
Greed, C. (2000), ‘Women in the construction professions: achieving critical mass’,
Gender, Work
and Organization
,
7
, 3, 181–96.
Hakim, C. (1995), ‘Five feminist myths about women’s employment’, British Journal of Sociology,
46, 3, 429–55.
Hakim, C. (1996), Key Issues in Women’s Work: Female Heterogeneity and the Polarisation of Women’s
Employment (London: The Athlone Press).
Hakim, C. (1998), ‘Developing a sociology for the twenty-first century: preference theory’, British
Journal of Sociology, 49, 1, 137–43.
Hakim, C. (2000), Work-Lifestyle Choices in the 21st Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Hakim, C. (2002), ‘Lifestyle preferences as determinants of women’s differentiated labour market
careers’, Work and Occupations, 29, 428–59.
Hakim, C. (2003), ‘Public morality versus personal choice: the failure of social attitude surveys’,
British Journal of Sociology, 54, 3, 339–45.
Hall, D. T. (1976), Careers in Organisations (Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear).#p#分页标题#e#
Heywood and Drake (1997), cited in Thornham (2001).
Mallon, M. and Cohen, L. (2001), ‘Time for a change? Women’s accounts of the move from
organisational careers to self-employment’, British Journal of Management, 12, 3, 217–30.
Matrix (1984), Making Space: Women and the Man-Made Environment (London: Pluto).
McGoldrick, J., Stewart, J. and Watson, S. (2002), Understanding Human Resource Development: A
Research-Based Approach (London: Routledge).
McRae, S. (2003a), ‘Constraints and choices in mothers’ employment careers: a consideration of
Hakim’s Preference Theory’, British Journal of Sociology, 54, 3, 317–38.
McRae, S. (2003b), ‘Choice and constraint in mothers’ employment careers: McRae replies to
Hakim’, British Journal of Sociology, 54, 4, 585–92.
Meiksins, P. and Whalley, P. (1998), ‘Having it all? Orientations to work and family among parttime
technical professionals’, paper presented at Gender, Work and Organisation Conference,
Manchester, December.
Millen, D. (1997), ‘Some methodological and epistemological issues raised by doing feminist
research on non-feminist women’, Sociological Research Online, 2. Available at www.
socresonline.co.uk/2/3/3 (accessed 1 March 2005).
Peitchinis, S. G. (1989), Women at Work: Discrimination and Responses (Toronto, ON: McClelland
and Stewart).
Procter, I. and Padfield, M. (1999), ‘Work orientations and women’s work: a critique of Hakim’s
Theory of the Heterogeneity of Women’, Gender, Work and Organization, 6, 3, 152–62.
Reinharz, S. (1992), Feminist Methods in Social Research (New York: Oxford University Press).
Rothwell, S. (1982), ‘Women’s career development: an overview of the issues for individuals and
organisations’, in C. L. Cooper (ed.), Practical Issues to Women’s Career Development (Sheffield:
Manpower Services Commission).
Royal Institute of British Architects. (2004), Survey of Employment and Earnings (London:
RIBA).
Stanley, L. (1990), ‘Feminism and the Academic Mode’, in L. Stanley (ed.), Research, Theory and
Epistemology in Feminist Sociology (London: Routledge), pp. 3–19.
Super, D. E. (1984), ‘Career and life development’, in D. Brown, L. Brooks and Associates (eds),
Career Choice and Development (San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass), pp. 121–78.
Thornham, S. (2001), ‘Second wave feminism’, in S. Gamble (ed.), Feminism and Postfeminism
(London: Routledge), pp. 29–42.
54 International Journal of Training and Development
© 2006 The Author. Journal Compilation © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Tilly, C. (1996), Half a Job: Bad and Good Part-Time Jobs in a Changing Labour Market (Philadelphia,
PA: Temple University Press).#p#分页标题#e#
Walsh, J. (1999), ‘Myths and countermyths: an analysis of part-time female employees and their
orientations to work and working hours’, Work, Employment and Society, 13, 2, 179–203.
Walsh, J. and Deery, S. (1999), ‘Understanding the peripheral workforce: an examination of
http://www.ukthesis.org/dissertation_sample/employee diversity in the service sector’, Human Resource Management Journal, 9, 2, 50–63.
Yeandle, S. (1999), ‘Gender Contracts, Welfare Systems and Non-Standard Working: Diversity
and Change in Denmark, France, Germany, Italy and the UK’, in A. Felstead and N. Jewson
(eds), Global Trends in Flexible Labour (London: Macmillan), pp. 141–65.