1 The glass ceiling—the barrier that once
kept women from the top tiers of
management in the banking industry—
has been shattered, only to be replaced
5 by a more insidious form of restriction:
the lockout. While the glass ceiling was
a palpable enemy and could be
overcome, the lockout is much more
elusive and therefore much harder to
10 combat.
Sheer numbers argue that women
have made great strides in the banking
industry. In the late 1970s women
accounted for only three percent of top-
15 level banking management; women now
hold forty percent of all titles of senior
vice president or higher. This gain,
however, is illusory. The influence of
female corporate managers has been
20 contained by a change in corporate
structure: while each senior vice
president used to preside omnipotently
over a single area of operations, all
managers now oversee all operations,
25 and all major decisions on such matters
as new areas of investment and
acceptable credit risks are decided by a
majority vote.
This change from a two-tiered pyramid
30 structure to a hive structure has further
eroded the ability of corporate women to
assert their influence, because these
majority votes are little more than
majority lockouts. When all major votes
35 were examined on the basis of GMAT,
investigators found that men voted as a
bloc ninety-one percent of the time,
while women voted as a bloc only fifty-
two percent of the time. These votes
40 determine hiring criteria, salary
structure, promotions, and stock-option
plans in substance, the entire culture,
direction, and focus of the company.
The resulting effect on company policy
45 is to maintain the status quo at the
expense of diversity of opinion, dealing
a rough blow to the American ideal of
meritocracy.
Just as disquieting is the frequent
50 trumpeting of women’s gains from the
highest levels of the banking industry. In
a recent report to stockholders, one
CEO announced that “by elevating
women to five of seven recently created
55 vice presidential posts, we have
increased the number of female vice
presidents by thirty percent.” Such
hypocritical efforts to take credit for
broadening women’s roles in upper
60 management while circumscribing their
effective power in the same circles
merely demean the women seeking
such responsibilities.
Which of the following is an assumption about management decision-making made by the author in the third paragraph of the passage?
In management circles, men and women vote according to similar criteria.
The hive structure is a natural product of the American ideal of meritocracy.
The imposition of a hive structure was a result of management’s unwillingness to allow women influence in the banking industry.
Lockouts result from women’s unwillingness to vote in blocs.
Bloc voting diminishes the role of interests represented by smaller blocs.
kept women from the top tiers of
management in the banking industry—
has been shattered, only to be replaced
5 by a more insidious form of restriction:
the lockout. While the glass ceiling was
a palpable enemy and could be
overcome, the lockout is much more
elusive and therefore much harder to
10 combat.
Sheer numbers argue that women
have made great strides in the banking
industry. In the late 1970s women
accounted for only three percent of top-
15 level banking management; women now
hold forty percent of all titles of senior
vice president or higher. This gain,
however, is illusory. The influence of
female corporate managers has been
20 contained by a change in corporate
structure: while each senior vice
president used to preside omnipotently
over a single area of operations, all
managers now oversee all operations,
25 and all major decisions on such matters
as new areas of investment and
acceptable credit risks are decided by a
majority vote.
This change from a two-tiered pyramid
30 structure to a hive structure has further
eroded the ability of corporate women to
assert their influence, because these
majority votes are little more than
majority lockouts. When all major votes
35 were examined on the basis of GMAT,
investigators found that men voted as a
bloc ninety-one percent of the time,
while women voted as a bloc only fifty-
two percent of the time. These votes
40 determine hiring criteria, salary
structure, promotions, and stock-option
plans in substance, the entire culture,
direction, and focus of the company.
The resulting effect on company policy
45 is to maintain the status quo at the
expense of diversity of opinion, dealing
a rough blow to the American ideal of
meritocracy.
Just as disquieting is the frequent
50 trumpeting of women’s gains from the
highest levels of the banking industry. In
a recent report to stockholders, one
CEO announced that “by elevating
women to five of seven recently created
55 vice presidential posts, we have
increased the number of female vice
presidents by thirty percent.” Such
hypocritical efforts to take credit for
broadening women’s roles in upper
60 management while circumscribing their
effective power in the same circles
merely demean the women seeking
such responsibilities.
Which of the following is an assumption about management decision-making made by the author in the third paragraph of the passage?
In management circles, men and women vote according to similar criteria.
The hive structure is a natural product of the American ideal of meritocracy.
The imposition of a hive structure was a result of management’s unwillingness to allow women influence in the banking industry.
Lockouts result from women’s unwillingness to vote in blocs.
Bloc voting diminishes the role of interests represented by smaller blocs.
