Organizational Genealogies and the Persistence of Gender Inequality: The Case of Silicon Valley Law Firms

Abstract

Using a study on foundings of Silicon Valley law firms, I propose and test an organizational theory on the genealogical persistence of gender inequality that emphasizes the routines (or blueprints) and experiences that founders transfer from their parent firms to their new firms. This transfer links the parent firm's gender hierarchy to women's advancement opportunities in the new firm. Founders from parent firms that historically had women in leadership positions, such that female leadership is institutionalized, are more likely to found firms that promote women into prominent positions. Conversely, founders from firms that historically had women in subordinate positions, such that female subordination is institutionalized, are less likely to promote women into prominent positions. Findings are consistent with the theory and also show that the persistence effect is stronger for founders who were previously lower-ranked employees and for founders who institute an organization of work similar to their parent firm. The study suggests that future research should investigate routines and structures that not only generate gender inequality unintentionally but are in turn replicated across generations of organization through the mobility of employees.

Sink or Swim: The Role of Workplace Context in Shaping Career Advancement and Human-Capital Development

“…Early-career individuals are more susceptible to environmental influence (Marquis and Tilcsik 2013) and to learning new skills, work routines, and practices, and these influences persist through their careers. Early professional training influences individuals' norms and habits (Bercovitz and Feldman 2008) and their likelihood of adopting certain types of organizational practices; early social networks and socialization also influence subsequent career decisions (McEvily et al 2012;Phillips, 2005). External contexts also shape the learning managers develop on the job: managers tend to acquire a different set of skills if they learn their trade during a period of resource scarcity than if they do so when resources are abundant (Schoar and Zuo, 2011;Malmendier and Nagel, 2011) and the more similar the initial level of organizational munificence to subsequent periods, the higher managerial performance will be (Tilcsik, 2014).…”

How do Entrepreneurial Bosses Influence their Employees’ Future Entrepreneurship Choices?

“…This is remarkable given that most entrepreneurs are born in existing organizations (Bhide, 1994;Sørensen and Fassiotto, 2011). Incumbent firms may indeed be arenas for learning about the entrepreneurial process (Gompers et al, 2005;Phillips, 2005;Elfenbein et al, 2010). A few studies have, yet, analyzed the influence of coworkers and confirmed that the nature of an individual's career experiences not only exerts a direct effect on her own knowledge and attitudes, but also "spills over" to colleagues, by influencing the informational and normative environment in which employees make entrepreneurial entry decisions (e.g., Nanda and Sørensen, 2010).…”

Heroes Today - But What about Tomorrow? Gazelles and Their Long-Term Performance

“…The literature on new firm survival stresses that the founder or the founding team plays a significant role in the process of overcoming the liability of newness. The founder plays a key role in outlining the initial strategy by defining the organization's culture, implementing routines, and so on (see, e.g., Phillips (2005)). As we argue above, the organizational blueprint is indisputably key to high firm performance and is not easily altered, rendering the founder's initial imprint on the organization highly significant for long-term performance.…”

“…First, it is argued that entrepreneurs often build on organizational routines familiar to them, adapting the organizational features of their previous employer (Hannan and Freeman, 1986;Baron and Hannan, 2002;Phillips, 2005). This argument indicates that the parent firm plays a role in shaping the new organization.…”

“…This definition includes i) the formal structure of the organization, ii) the patterns of activity within the organization, and iii) normative order (Hannan and Freeman, 1977). According to the imprinting hypothesis, it is the environment (external and internal circumstances at the time of founding) that shapes -or imprints -a firm's unique organizational characteristics (Delacroix and Carroll, 1983;Phillips, 2005;Beckman and Burton, 2008). This hypothesis suggests not only that origin matters but also that imprinting has long-term or even lifelong effects on the organization.…”