America’s history is steeped in embedded segregation. The term “segregation”, which was used until the 1970s to refer to the segregation of races, has since been extended to include physical segregation by sex. The process of segregation at work is fundamental to social inequality. It involves the subordination and dominance of men and women and forms the basis for different economic and social treatment. Since sex-typed professions are more suited for women than men, they have been relegated to stereotypically nurturing and empathic work positions such as nurses and teachers in K-12. How do cross-gender mentorship relationships aid female attorneys in achieving partner-level status Is it possible to keep or dissuade female employees from law firms through cultural mentorship?
According to the New York Times’ study “Why do so few women reach the top of big law firms?” (O’Brien 2006), women make up the majority of the top-ranked law school graduates. Law firms should support women’s career paths to partner-level. Despite the rise in women entering law professions since the 1970s (52% males compared to 49% females in 2004), and a steady increase in female law student enrollment (52% females compared to 48% males in 2004, ABA. 2005), there is still a lower chance of women becoming partners than their male counterparts. Many research studies, especially “The Benefits of Mentoring for Female Lawyers”, show that women who wish to excel in male-dominated careers, such as law and medicine, are more likely to become partners if they have mentors. Mentors are able to offer invaluable advice regarding company dynamics, such as internal politics and emotional-stress coping strategies. They can also help with career advising. Mentors can advocate for their proteges in order to get promotions or raises. Others may be able to bring the achievements of the protégés to the attention and earn rewards. The mentor sponsorship benefits proteges but alienates those who are not mentors. Scandura (1997) asks the question “procedural fairness”: how employees perceive fairness in the application rules in resource allocation decisions. These associates don’t see the practice as fair because they receive preferential treatment. They can also be quickly tracked to partner status. While the proteges see this as fair, they feel they were chosen on merit, not nepotism, and forego any possibility that homophily might have played a role in their selection (in some instances).
Like other professions, law, which is predominantly male-dominated, also has a male gender-type where men hold high-ranking positions. Being able to thrive and excel in high-competitive, competitive, and challenging cultures, which often require aggressive behaviors, is often what makes these fields successful (Fagenson & Sander, 1996). These workplace cultures require that associates are allowed to show their ability to do the job well. It is important to have a mentor who is a member of the leadership team and a male mentor in most cases. Female lawyers are not allowed to have mentoring relationships with male senior lawyers. Because senior male lawyers might be more reluctant to mentor female lawyers because of fears over romantic involvement or tension, or even accusations that they have been sexual harassed (Ragins & Sundstrom (1989)), this can limit women’s access and informal mentoring relationships. This environment is advantageous to male colleagues, as they can take advantage of cultural homophily in their workplace. Homophily and stereotyping can also hinder cross-gender mentoring. Mentoring senior males may prove more rewarding if they feel the person is sharing their values and perspective. These commonalities make social encounters more satisfying for all of us and makes it easier to encourage others to join in on future sociable interactions. These repeated encounters can lead to friendships or other long-lasting relationships.
Emotional results. The outcomes of psychosocial functions, which are different from career development functions, are shown by the emotional reactions of proteges to their work or occupation. This study examines four outcomes of emotion: career satisfaction and intent to remain in the profession. It also looks at met expectations and work conflict. A lot of literature on proteges’ emotions focuses on the effect of being mentored on feelings like job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Mentors play a significant role in ensuring that proteges have positive emotional outcomes. Mentors help protégés feel successful in their daily tasks. They also make them feel more fulfilled about their jobs because they constantly learn and improve to reach higher goals. Additionally, employees who feel satisfied in their work are more likely to be committed to it. Mentors can also help to socialize the employee, not just into becoming a member the employing company, but also into the profession. Protéges can also benefit from having a mentor (Kram & Hall 1989). Mentors can help proteges clarify their job tasks and reduce work-related stress. Mentors help their proteges to understand their responsibilities and provide clarity. Mentors offer strategies to help deal with conflicts and excess work demands. They may also suggest ways to balance work and home. McManus and Russell (1997) found that mentoring activities can have both career and psychosocial functions. This is in line with the similarities found between stress-related coping strategies and social support responses. A mentor can be a great help to proteges who are struggling to cope with the demands of practicing law. Work-nonwork Conflict is the amount of time the work pressures interfere with time spent in nonwork roles. Research suggests that women professionals have more work-family conflict than men due to the importance they place on being successful in both their careers and as mothers. Mentoring can help women plan realistic careers and set realistic goals. It also helps them to identify potential work-family conflicts and advise them on ways to manage it. Cox & Harquail, 1991.
Gender composition is an important aspect of mentoring relationships. As we have seen, the legal field is predominantly a male-dominated profession in Canada as well as the United States. Nearly three-quarters, if not all, of the lawyers who practice are men. This has important implications for both the mentorship experience and the likelihood that female lawyers will be mentored. Women are more likely to have cross-gender relationships because of the lack of male mentors in traditionally male-dominated careers like law. In order to determine whether mentoring relationships with male-dominated legal professions benefit female proteges, it is crucial to look at the gender of the mentor. Kanter (1977), says that minority proteges such as women working in male-dominated professions or organizations, may require more career development than their male counterparts. A lack of role models or mentors for women working in male-dominated fields may make it difficult for them to reach the top in their careers. It is essential that mentors have sufficient resources to assist with career development. In fact, women are often less likely than men, to hold the position.
The influence of gender composition in mentoring relationships on the career and emotional outcomes for proteges appears complex. For example, female mentors may be more effective than male mentors. Mentors who are female may be more supportive, empathetic, and comfortable mentoring female protégés. However, female mentors may not be as powerful as male mentors and thus less capable of promoting their proteges’ careers. However, male mentors have a greater chance of being able to provide the resources and legitimacy needed to help their protege succeed (Ragins, 1989). Dreher (1996) and Cox (1996) supported this argument by finding that proteges who had white-male mentors received significantly higher salaries than those who had mentors of other races and genders. Ragins (1998) and Cotton (99) both report that female proteges whose mentors were male earned significantly more money than those whose mentors were female. Female proteges will likely have more success with a male mentor than those who had female mentors.
The literature suggests that mentoring relationships between same-gender men and women should have more role-modeling and psychosocial functions. Mentors and protégés are expected to bond more with each other in same-gender relationships. They are also more likely to have similar social identities as a result of being members of similar social groups. Effective role modeling and psychosocial assistance in mentoring relationships are dependent upon identification. Mentors who are unable to counsel and empathize with their protégés in cross-gender relationships may not be able to do so. Men mentors might be less able than female mentors to understand the unique stress and family conflicts that women face at work (Nelson & Quick 1985). Ragins (1990), McFarlin (1990), and McFarlin (1990), discovered that female proteges had more to do with their mentors than did male mentors. McFarlin suggests that female proteges might benefit from role modeling in helping them to overcome work-family conflicts and other gender barriers.
Female mentors are best equipped to help their female protégés deal with the unique stressors that women face at work, including discrimination, social isolation and dealing with conflict between the home and the office. Mentoring females may be a way for them to socialize and model appropriate work roles. Female mentors who provide guidance to women may help them have realistic career expectations. They can also prepare for potential conflicts between home and work. This could lead to them being happier and more committed to their chosen career. Mentoring in a difficult profession leads to better career outcomes. The career outcomes and experiences of women are significantly less than those of their male counterparts. They are more likely to be dissatisfied with their work and leave the firm at a faster rate. Few ever become partners. Because groups are subject to different rewards systems, segregation allows for unequal treatment. Professional socialization may perpetuate occupational sex segregation.
