IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v18y2022i5p725-744_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The old boy network: are the professional networks of female executives less effective than men's for advancing their careers?

Author

Listed:
  • Lalanne, Marie
  • Seabright, Paul

Abstract

We investigate the impact of professional networks on men's and women's earnings, using a dataset of European and North American executives. The size of an individual's network of influential former colleagues has a large positive association with remuneration, with an elasticity of around 21%. However, controlling for unobserved heterogeneity using various fixed effects as well as a placebo technique, we find that the real causal impact of networks is barely positive for men and significantly lower for women. We provide suggestive evidence indicating that the apparent discrimination against women is due to two factors: first, both men and women are helped more by own-gender than other-gender connections, and men have more of these than women do. Second, a subset of employers we identify as ‘female friendly firms’ recruit more women but reward networks less than other firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Lalanne, Marie & Seabright, Paul, 2022. "The old boy network: are the professional networks of female executives less effective than men's for advancing their careers?," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(5), pages 725-744, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:18:y:2022:i:5:p:725-744_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744137421000953/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:18:y:2022:i:5:p:725-744_2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.