An AICPA special committee identified obstacles blocking the movement of women into senior positions in the profession. It also made recommendations to clear the path and create opportunities for advancement previously impeded by male bias. A survey reveals how the profession supports these recommendations. An interpretation of the survey indicates the path clearing has proceeded at a relatively slow pace.

The AICPA has been addressing the issue of women's upward mobility since 1984. Brief historical developments are summarized in Table 1. One important development is the report of the AICPA Upward Mobility of Women Special Committee. The report identified seven obstacles to women's upward mobility and made 23 recommendations for overcoming these obstacles.

The AICPA's initial reaction to the special committee report was somewhat passive. After publishing the committee's recommendations, it made the special committee a standing committee, charged with monitoring the issue of women's upward mobility. In 1992, the Committee issued a report of its monitoring activities and went a step further to announce projects being undertaken to advance the upward mobility of women and family issues. Later that year, the AICPA established a new Executive Committee for Women and Family Issues.

Statistics and studies continue to show, however, relatively slow progress in the advancement of women into senior positions in the accounting profession. In 1989, just 4.1% of the partners in the nation's largest accounting firms were women. Figures for 1992 show that amount rising to 4.9%. Is this lack of progress representative of the attitudes of AICPA members?

A survey reveals that, while they strongly support a few of the special committee's recommendations, AICPA members are generally neutral towards the recommendations. Different levels of support, however, are noted among AICPA members depending on gender and organizational level. Some members take significantly stronger positions on the recommendations than others. This information can be useful for those developing strategies to promote women CPAs and sheds light on the likely pace of women's upward mobility in public accounting.

Women in the Accounting Profession

While women have been entering public accounting in substantial numbers over the last 20 years, they still have more difficulty than men in being promoted in CPA firms. The 1993 edition of The Supply of Accounting Graduates and the Demand for Public Accounting Recruits indicates that for the 1991-1992 academic year, women made up 52% of all accounting graduates and 46% of all public accounting recruits. The percent of recruits represented by women was down from 51% and 59%, respectively, for 1991 and 1990. As noted earlier, women in 1992 made up only 4.9% of the partners in the nation's largest accounting firms.

While promotion to partner is especially difficult for women CPAs, obstacles to upward mobility exist for women at all levels in public accounting firms. A study by the American Woman's Society of CPAs found that 40% of women CPAs have been in the profession for more than 10 years, but only 20% of all management positions in CPA firms are held by women. This relatively low number of women managers is not unique to the accounting profession. In 1989, the U.S. Department of Labor, in A Report on the Glass Ceiling Initiative, provided evidence that obstacles to the upward mobility of women exist at middle and lower management levels in most U.S. businesses.

Many researchers have provided comparable evidence. In 1989, Ceil Moran Pillsbury, Liza Capozzoli, and Amy Ciampa reviewed the research on women in public accounting and reported the following:

* Women are not promoted to the highest positions in public accounting firms at the same rate as their male counterparts.

* Women leave public accounting at a higher rate than men.

* Female public accountants are as prepared and as committed to their careers as men.

* Men and women leave public accounting for the same reasons: better opportunities, restricted achievement potential, and long hours.

* Discrimination towards women exists as evidenced by lack of prestigious and developmental assignments and acceptance by clients and superiors, unequal pay, not being taken seriously, and sexual harassment.

Survey and Results

For 1992, a questionnaire was developed to survey CPAs about their attitude towards the recommendations of the AICPA special committee. Participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with each recommendation in Table 3 using a scale from one (strong agreement) to five (strong disagreement); three indicated a neutral position. The questionnaire was sent to all CPAs whose names appeared on a purchased mailing list of 1000 randomly selected AICPA members. Usable responses were received from 384 members (38.4). Statistical tests strongly suggested nonresponse bias did not exist.

Analysis of the data revealed responses were received from a broad section of the AICPA membership and generally represented the AICPA membership. Although 47% of respondents were in the 31 to 40 year-old age group, responses were received from subjects at all ages from 20 to over 60. Similarly, responses were received from persons at all professional levels. Years of professional licensing ranged from less than five years to over 30 years. About 50% of the respondents practiced public accounting while one-third held positions in private industry. The remainder practiced in education, government, and other areas of accounting.

The two right-hand columns of Table 3 show the mean response to each recommendation and a ranking of recommendations based on the strength of CPA support. A majority of the mean responses (14) are in the neutral range of 2.51 to 3.50, five are in the strong support range of 1.00 to 2.00, and another four fall between 2.01 and 2.50 indicating some support.

AICPA members were categorized according to three variables: their organizational level (low, middle, upper), the type of organization in which they are employed (public, private, government, etc.), and their gender. Statistical tests revealed some response means were significantly different depending on category of respondent, but no significant interactive effects were found. Women consistently took a more supportive stand than men on all but three recommendations, and low-level employees were more supportive than middle and upper level employees on 13 recommendations.

TABLE3

SURVEYRESULTS

RECOMMENDATIONSRESPONSERANKING

MEANSBYMEAN

FORTHEAICPA

1.Provideguidanceformembersandtheir

employersonhowtoencouragetheupward

mobilityoffemaleprofessionalstaff.2.85(**)19

2.Monitortrendsandcompileinformationrelating

towomen'supwardmobilityinaccounting.2.66(**)12

3.AppointmorewomentoAICPAcommittees,

boards,andcouncils.2.59(**)11

4.Seekoutopportunitiestofeaturewomenin

AICPAmedia.2.78(**)17

5.Considerwomen'supwardmobilitywhen

developingCPEcourses.3.00(**)22

6.Encouragestatesocietiestoappointmore

womentoleadershippositions.2.87(**)20

7.Communicatewithotheraccountingorgani-

zationsandotherprofessionsaboutissues

relatedtowomen'supwardmobility.2.73(**)15

8.Studyandreportontheeffectofstressonfemale

CPAsasitrelatestocareerdevelopment.2.77(**)16

9.Considerareducedmembershipfeeformembers

whoareprofessionallyinactiveforalengthy

periodoftimebutwhoplantoreturntowork.2.317

10.HavetheAICPApresidentassignthepreceding

recommendationstoappropriate

committeesandstaffforaction.2.72(**)14

11.Establishaprocesstomonitortheabove

recommendations.2.71(**)13

FOREMPLOYERS

1.Establishamentorprocesstoencouragethe

trainingandguidanceoftalentedwomen.2.83(*)18

2.Holdopendiscussionsontheissueofwomen's

upwardmobility.3.02(**)23

3.Appointanombudsmanwithwhomwomen

candiscussproblemsrelatedtotheircareers.2.92(*)21

4.Purgetheirorganizations'writtenmaterialof

allsexistreferences.2.58(*)10

5.Supportwomenemployeeparticipationin

AICPAandstatesocieties.1.90(*)5

6.Establishfairmarriageanddatingpolicies.2.48(*)9

7.Instituteconstructivechildcarepolicies.2.12(**)6

8.Definetheirpositiononpregnancyandchild

careleavewithclearlywrittenpolicies.1.54(**)1

FORWOMEN

1.Becomeinvolvedinofficeactivities.1.67(*)4

2.Becomeinvolvedinbusinessluncheonsand

meetingswithclientsandcustomers.1.62(*)2

3.ParticipateinAICPAandstatefunctions.1.653

4.Joinwomen'ssupportgroups.2.478

*Significantdifferencesfoundonlyforgendervariable.

**Significantdifferencesfoundforbothgenderandorganizationallevel

variables.

A possible limitation of this study in measuring CPAs' attitudes towards women's upward mobility is that the survey was developed based on the special committee recommendations. These recommendations were not exhaustive; they did not address every possible program for fostering women's upward mobility. For example, the 1992 progress report of the standing committee indicates flexible work schedules and leaves of absence are key elements of current programs. The special committee did not explicitly recommend these programs. Thus, the results may not be completely indicative of the attitudes of CPAs towards the upward mobility of women.

Significance of Results

The results are an indication that promoters of women's upward mobility in public accounting are likely to encounter further difficulties when attempting to rally support behind the movement. Continuing difficulties seem to be eminent because--

AICPA Members Are Generally Neutral to the Recommendations. In general, members are neutral on 14 of the 23 recommendations, they mildly support four other recommendations, and they strongly support only five recommendations.

Men CPAs Are Not as Supportive as Women CPAs. While responses to the recommendations are generally neutral, some significant gender differences exist. Women are on average more supportive than men on all but three recommendations. The most notable differences in attitude between men and women are the following:

* Forty percent of the male respondents either disagree or strongly disagree with the second recommendation to employers for open discussions about women's mobility. Forty-nine percent of female respondents agree or strongly agree with this recommendation.

* Forty percent of male respondents either disagree or strongly disagree with the third recommendation to employers regarding the appointment of ombudsmen; about 50% of the female respondents either agree or strongly agree with this recommendation.

* Sixty-two percent of women respondents either agree or strongly agree with the fifth recommendation to the AICPA regarding the development of CPE courses; only 23% of male respondents agree or strongly agree with this recommendation.

Because power in the profession still lies with men, the less supportive posture generally taken by men is more likely to prevail.

Upper-Level CPAs Are Not as Supportive as Others. Tests of differences between the response means for participants at different organizational levels indicate CPAs in low-level positions are more supportive on a majority (13) of the recommendations. Unfortunately, low-level employees do not have much influence for instituting immediate, widespread change. Upper-level CPAs have the power to undertake the most comprehensive and meaningful changes, and their lack of enthusiasm may limit the introduction of programs and activities of the kind suggested by the special committee. This may be particularly true for recommendations with which respondents at the highest organizational level disagree or strongly disagree. This would include recommendations such as those asking employers to establish mentoring processes for women employees, hold open discussions on the upward mobility of women, appoint ombudsmen, and purge written material of sexist references. Fewer problems can be expected with strategies to implement the recommendation regarding constructive child-care policies; a majority of high-level participants agree or strongly agree with this recommendation.

Women Are Held Responsible for Promoting Their Own Upward Mobility. Despite evidence that women are as prepared and committed to their careers as men, women are treated differently in promotions to the highest level. There are few women partners. Ironically, this survey shows the group discriminated against is given the greatest responsibility for changing this situation. AICPA members are most supportive of the recommendations to women, but women alone cannot change discrimination. Women's advocacy by other groups is essential.

AICPA Members Have a Tendency to Favor Low-Cost Efforts to Foster the Upward Mobility of Women. One interpretation of some responses is that members of the profession support those recommendations directed towards improving women's upward mobility that are the easiest to implement and therefore bring with them a relatively low cost. Comparing the average responses to the first and eighth recommendations to employers illustrates this cost-based interpretation of the results. A very neutral overall response is observed for the first recommendation to employers; this recommendation calls for establishing mentoring programs. Mentoring programs involve not only initial time, effort, and capital outlay in the start-up phase, but require continual investment of resources. In contrast, a fairly supportive overall response is observed to the eighth recommendation to employers; this recommendation calls for clearly written definitions of pregnancy and leave policies. This recommendation could require only the fairly low cost of formalizing in writing an already established policy.

Similarly, responses to the recommendations to women can be interpreted in a quick-fix, low-cost framework. For example, respondents generally favored increased female participation in business lunches and AICPA and state functions. These activities not only increase visibility of women but also increase visibility of employers with whom women are affiliated. Through business luncheons and professional meetings, women are exposed to clients, potential clients, and potential sources of referrals. Accordingly, implementation of the second and third recommendations can quickly and easily be done within existing practices at a relatively low cost.

The differences in responses depending on organizational level can also be interpreted in this cost-benefit framework. Persons at higher levels of firms are more likely to be partners and are more likely to bear the direct costs of institutional efforts to improve women's upward mobility. Not surprisingly, respondents at the higher levels are less supportive in their attitudes.

The affect on women CPAs is likely to be the same whether the survey responses are evidence of underlying cost concerns, massive indifference, or male opposition towards women's upward mobility. Faced with the message that recommendations are supported and favored as long as they are easy to implement and carry a relatively low cost, women are not likely to develop or maintain a positive attitude toward the profession. This may lead to job dissatisfaction and reduction of organizational and professional commitment. Some generally acknowledged potential outcomes of reduced satisfaction and commitment include increased withdrawal behaviors like absenteeism, and increased propensity to leave the employing organization.

The results of the survey suggest that progress in women's upward mobility will be evolutionary rather than revolutionary. Promoters who favor rapid change should target partners in CPA firms and members in senior AICPA committees because they have the power to institute policy. Otherwise, change can be expected to occur slowly as the business environment as a whole becomes more receptive to women in leadership positions.

TABLE 1 HOW THE AICPA HAS ADDRESSED THE ISSUE OF WOMEN'S UPWARD MOBILITY

1984 The Future Issues Committee identifies women's upward mobility as one of 14 issues of concern to the profession in its report, Major Issues for the CPA Profession and the AICPA.

1984 The Board of Directors authorizes the establishment of the Upward Mobility of Women Special Committee.

1988 The Upward Mobility of Women Special Committee publishes its initial report, Upward Mobility Women, in which it makes recommendations for promoting women CPAs.

1988 The Board of Directors makes the Upward Mobility of Women Special Committee a standing committee and charges it with monitoring the issue of women's upward mobility.

1991 The May edition of AICPA Strategic Thrusts for the Future emphasizes the importance of promoting women's upward mobility.

1992 The Upward Mobility of Women Committee reports the efforts of its monitoring charge in How the Accounting Profession is Addressing Upward Mobility of Women and Family Issues in the Workplace.

1992 The governing Council authorizes the formation of a new Executive Committee for Women and Family Issues.

TABLE 2 OBSTACLES TO WOMEN'S UPWARD MOBILITY

1. Cultural Attitudes. Outdated attitudes about women still exist in the workplace. Women are sometimes thought of as dependents and not as business colleagues. Because of equal opportunity laws, however, discrimination has gone underground is more subtle.

2. The Perceptual Problem. Some employers deny obstacles to upward mobility exist for women. Women in firms where this attitude prevails may resign as a result of the isolation and frustration created in such an environment.

3. Awareness of Success Criteria. Women are not always aware of the subtle criteria necessary for advancement to top-level positions; a mentor, visibility within the organization, and a successful self image.

4. Child Care and Family Responsibilities. Marriage and family are considered a social asset for a man in business, but they constitute a disadvantage for women. Because women still bear most of the burden for maintaining a home and family, employers sometimes assume a married women is only giving secondary loyalty to her career.

5. Stress. In a profession in which stress is so pervasive, women accountants have more stress. Women must cope with the pressures of family responsibilities and management, cultural prejudice, and the perception that to succeed, they must outperform their male counterparts.

6. Dating and Marriage. When emotional involvement occurs among coworkers, discrimination may exist towards the career of the woman employee.

7. Involvement in Professional Associations. Women have not participated in professional and industry organizations as actively as men. These organizations offer women subtle ways of furthering their careers.

TABLE3

SURVEYRESULTS

RECOMMENDATIONSRESPONSERANKING

MEANSBYMEAN

FORTHEAICPA

1.Provideguidanceformembersandtheir

employersonhowtoencouragetheupward

mobilityoffemaleprofessionalstaff.2.85(**)19

2.Monitortrendsandcompileinformationrelating

towomen'supwardmobilityinaccounting.2.66(**)12

3.AppointmorewomentoAICPAcommittees,

boards,andcouncils.2.59(**)11

4.Seekoutopportunitiestofeaturewomenin

AICPAmedia.2.78(**)17

5.Considerwomen'supwardmobilitywhen

developingCPEcourses.3.00(**)22

6.Encouragestatesocietiestoappointmore

womentoleadershippositions.2.87(**)20

7.Communicatewithotheraccountingorgani-

zationsandotherprofessionsaboutissues

relatedtowomen'supwardmobility.2.73(**)15

8.Studyandreportontheeffectofstressonfemale

CPAsasitrelatestocareerdevelopment.2.77(**)16

9.Considerareducedmembershipfeeformembers

whoareprofessionallyinactiveforalengthy

periodoftimebutwhoplantoreturntowork.2.317

10.HavetheAICPApresidentassignthepreceding

recommendationstoappropriate

committeesandstaffforaction.2.72(**)14

11.Establishaprocesstomonitortheabove

recommendations.2.71(**)13

FOREMPLOYERS

1.Establishamentorprocesstoencouragethe

trainingandguidanceoftalentedwomen.2.83(*)18

2.Holdopendiscussionsontheissueofwomen's

upwardmobility.3.02(**)23

3.Appointanombudsmanwithwhomwomen

candiscussproblemsrelatedtotheircareers.2.92(*)21

4.Purgetheirorganizations'writtenmaterialof

allsexistreferences.2.58(*)10

5.Supportwomenemployeeparticipationin

AICPAandstatesocieties.1.90(*)5

6.Establishfairmarriageanddatingpolicies.2.48(*)9

7.Instituteconstructivechildcarepolicies.2.12(**)6

8.Definetheirpositiononpregnancyandchild

careleavewithclearlywrittenpolicies.1.54(**)1

FORWOMEN

1.Becomeinvolvedinofficeactivities.1.67(*)

4

2.Becomeinvolvedinbusinessluncheonsand

meetingswithclientsandcustomers.1.62(*)

2

3.ParticipateinAICPAandstatefunctions.1.65

3

4.Joinwomen'ssupportgroups.2.47

8

*Significantdifferencesfoundonlyforgendervariable.

**Significantdifferencesfoundforbothgenderandorganizationallevel

variables.

Carl R. Borgia, PhD, CPA, and Peggy D. Dwyer, PhD, CPA, are assistant professors of accounting at Florida Atlantic University.