Group Members:

Azeem Bari
Haider Nawab
Syed Naqi Haider

Abstract

World Bank conducted Enterprise surveys in which the indicator that we

selected was GENDER and we considered a sample of 50 countries for
data, randomly. The time period of which the data was incorporated was
from 2005 to 2013. The major purpose of conducting these surveys was to
predict the level of women empowerment and to determine the promotion of
gender equality.

Introduction
Gender issues are now at the forefront of development debates but with little
formal evidence on, for example, what are the sorts of sectors and firm-types
that are more open to female workers, managers and owners. Do younger
firms hire more females than older firmspossibly because younger firms
are less tied to tradition? Due to space constraints, this note touches only on
some of the most important issues. It is hoped that the exercise serves to
illustrate the importance of compiling reliable data in developing countries.

GENDER
Benchmarking female participation in firm ownership, management, and the
workforce is important to achieving gender equality promotion and
empowerment of women. The gender topic provides information about
women's entrepreneurship and economic participation in the labor force.

SAMPLING
The five indicators measure women's participation in businesses in 135
countries. The results are based on surveys of more than 130,000 firms.

Literature Review
The Case of Gender
Studies have shown that firms owned or managed by women tend to lag
behind those owned or managed by men in firm-size (annual turnover) and

firm-efficiency (productivity measures)the so-called female-firm under

performance hypothesis. Difficulties

faced specifically by women in

establishing and running a business such as unfavorable social attitudes and

the need to balance work with caregiving activity could be among the
reasons for this lag. In the five countries of interest, we find some but limited
evidence in support of the hypothesis, i.e., on average, a firm with a female
top manager is smaller in size (number of full-time permanent employees
and annual sales) than a firm with a male top manager. For example, a
typical firm with a female top manager employs 8 full-time permanent
employees (median value) compared with a much higher figure of 14
employees (median value) for male-managed firms.

Presence of Women in Top Managerial Positions

Gender disparity is now recognized as a pervasive phenomenon across the
world (Hausman et al. 2006). A number of studies show that women lag
behind men in areas such as education, health, political empowerment, wage
rates and incomes, and labor force participation rates. Consequences of
gender disparity do not stop with lower well-being of women relative to men
but may extend to lower growth and lower economic development (see for
example, Klasen 2002). As a response, a common policy pursuit is the
alleviation of constraints that impede womens labor force participation. One
concern with focusing on participation rates is that increased womens
employment is often concentrated in low paying and vulnerable jobs. Hence,
it is crucial to examine the presence of women in not only high paying jobs

but in jobs with significant decision making responsibilities which are thus
less vulnerable (Elson 1999).

Female Managers in the Retail Sector

While having more female managers of firms contributes directly to the
cause of gender equality and better opportunities for women, other indirect
effects cannot be ruled out. For example, anecdotal evidence suggests that
females in top positions tend to serve as role models for other women
encouraging them to seek education and jobs; females in top managerial
positions are also less likely to discriminate against other females seeking
jobs (the so called Revolving door hypothesis). In fact, in our sample, we do
find that female employment is significantly higher among firms with female
managers than male mangers. The broader positive effects of gender
equality on the economy have been well documented in the literature
(Klasen and Lamanna, 2009; Dollar and Gatti, 1999).

Descriptive Statistics
Cross Region
East Asia & Pacific

Middle East & North Africa

Mean

36.45

Mean

8.725

Standard Error

2.731452605

Standard Error

1.747080899

Median

37.8

Median

9.05

Standard Deviation

5.46290521

Standard Deviation

3.494161797

Range

12.8

Range

Minimum

28.7

Minimum

4.4

Maximum

41.5

Maximum

12.4

Percent of firms with female participation in ownership

Sub-Saharan Africa; 42.6; 16%

East Asia & Pacific; 42.8; 16%

South Asia; 14.7; 6%

Eastern Europe & Central Asia; 30.9; 12%
Middle East & North Africa; 17.9; 7%

Latin America & Caribbean; 39.8; 15%

High income nonOECD; 38.2; 15%

High income: OECD; 32.6; 13%

Cross Country
Bangladesh
Mean
Standard
Error
Median
Standard
Deviation
Range
Minimum
Maximum

China

13.1
3.487358
121
13.25
6.974716
243
16.3
4.8
21.1

Mean
Standard
Error
Median
Standard
Deviation
Range
Minimum
Maximum

India
33.475
5.363048
729
37.9
10.72609
746
23.1
17.5
40.6

Mean
Standard
Error
Median
Standard
Deviation
Range
Minimum
Maximum

12.925
1.836833
779
12.85
3.673667
559
8.2
8.9
17.1

Cross country analysis showing the comparison of leading economies to

understand the gender equality and the role of females in the economy.
Scatter Plot

Percent of firms with female participation in ownership

90
80

79.8

70
60

69.4
64.2
56.6 55.3
50.2

58.3

61.9

65.3
57.8

59.2
56.2
51.449.8

51.6
50.8
49.4
47.3
47.1 48.8
47
45.1
44.2
43.6
43.5
43.5
43.3
42.9
42.8
42.7
41.6
41.3
40.4
40.2
40
39
38.2
38
36.3
35.9 37.8
35.3 35.8
35.3
34.5
34.1
33.9
33.4
32.1
32.132.7
31.831.5
31.6
30.7
30
30
30
29.8
29.7
29.630.8
29.2
28.7
28.6 26.6
28.5
28.3
27.3
27.3
27.2
26.3
26.1
25.7
25.3
24.725.4
24.4 24.7
24.1
23.9
23.1
22.6
22.3
21.8
20
20
18.3
17.6
15.7
15.7
15.1
14.4
13.113.1
12.6
12.512.7
10.7 11.1
10
7.9
6.8
6.7
6.6
2.2 4.1
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
50

Axis Title

76

Axis Title

120

Random Selection of
Countries
Afghanistan (2014)

Ecuador (2010)

Paraguay (2010)

Albania (2013)

Georgia (2013)

Philippines (2009)

Angola (2010)

Ghana (2013)

Rwanda (2011)

Argentina (2010)

India (2014)

Senegal (2007)

Armenia (2013)

Kazakhstan (2013)

Slovenia (2013)

Azerbaijan (2013)

Lebanon (2013)

South Africa (2007)

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Lithuania (2013)

Spain (2005)

Madagascar (2013)

Sri Lanka (2011)

Moldova (2013)

St. Vincent and the

(2013)
Botswana (2010)
Brazil (2009)
Bulgaria (2013)
Chile (2010)
Colombia (2010)
Costa Rica (2010)
Croatia (2013)
Dominican Republic
(2010)

Mongolia (2013)
Morocco (2007)

Grenadines (2010)
Syrian Arab Republic
(2009)

Mozambique (2007)
Tajikistan (2013)
Myanmar (2014)
Ukraine (2013)
Namibia (2006)
Uruguay (2010)
Nicaragua (2010)
Vanuatu (2009)
Panama (2010)
Venezuela, R.B. (2010)

Vietnam (2009)

West Bank and Gaza

(2013)

Yemen, Rep. (2013)

Zimbabwe (2011)

Descriptive Analysis of Randomly selected Sample

Percent of firms with female
participation in Ownership
Mean
Standard Error
Median
Mode
Standard Deviation
Sample Variance
Range
Minimum
Maximum

33.72174
2.77014
33.9
43.5
13.28512
176.4945
52.5
4.1
56.6

Percent of firms with a female Top

Manager
Mean
Standard Error
Median
Mode
Standard Deviation
Sample Variance
Range
Minimum
Maximum

16.17391
1.609817
16
19
7.720411
59.60474
30
2
32

Proportion of Permanent Full-Time

Workers that are female (%)
Mean
Standard Error
Median
Mode
Standard Deviation
Sample Variance
Range
Minimum
Maximum

34.78261
1.883941
36
36
9.035066
81.63241
36
15
51

Proportion of Permanent Full-Time

Production Workers that are female
(%)
Mean
Standard Error
Median
Mode
Standard Deviation
Sample Variance
Range
Minimum
Maximum

31.30435
3.033043
34
35
14.54596
211.585
58
11
69

Proportion of Permanent Full-Time

Non-Production Workers that are
female (%)
Mean
Standard Error
Median
Mode
Standard Deviation
Sample Variance
Range
Minimum
Maximum

43.08696
2.520989
44
50
12.09024
146.1739
54
17
71

Bivariate Relationships
Independent Variable:

Percentage of Females as Top Managers

Dependent Variable:

Percent of Females as Owners

Proportion of Females as Full Time Workers
Proportion of Females as Full Time Production Workers
Proportion of Females as Full Time Non- Production Workers

Percent of firms with a female (Ownership)

50
40
30
Top Managers

20
10
0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Ownership

This scatter plot shows that there is a very weak relationship between the
both variables negating the concept that the more the females are top
managers they are also owners of the companies.

80

Proportion of permanent full-time workers that are female (%)

60
50
40
Top Managers 30
20
10
0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Permanent Workers

The displayed plot refers to the statement that there are better chances for
females to become top managers if they are full time employees of a
company.

Proportion of permanent full-time production w orkers that are female (%)

80
60
Top Managers 40
20
0
0

10

15

20

25

30

Production workers

35

40

45

Again here there are fewer chances for females to become top managers if
they have been working as full time production workers.
Correlation
We did correlation in order to determine the acceptability of our model of
hypothesis as explained above.

Correlations

Percent of

Percent of firms with

Pearson

female participation in

Correlation

ownership

Sig. (2-tailed)
N

Percent of firms with a

Pearson

female top manager

Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Pearson
Correlation

Proportion of

Proportion of

Proportion of

permanent

permanent

permanent

full-time

full-time non-

firms with

Percent of

full-time

production

production

female

firms with a

workers that

workers that

workers that

participation

female top

are female

are female

are female

in ownership

manager

(%)

(%)*

(%)*

.515**

.398**

-.036

.048

.000

.004

.803

.741

50

50

50

50

50

.515**

.561**

.303*

.217

.000

.032

.129

.000
50

50

50

50

50

.398**

.561**

.653**

.570**

Proportion of permanent

Sig. (2-tailed)

full-time workers that are N

female (%)
Proportion of permanent

Pearson

full-time production

Correlation

workers that are female

Sig. (2-tailed)

(%)*

Proportion of permanent

Pearson

full-time non-production

Correlation

workers that are female

Sig. (2-tailed)

(%)*

.004

.000

.000

.000

50

50

50

50

50

-.036

.303*

.653**

.747**

.803

.032

.000

50

50

50

50

50

.048

.217

.570**

.747**

.741

.005

.000

.000

50

50

50

50

.000

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

This shows the following results:

The entire hypothesis will be accepted and the relationship strength is given
below:
Top Manager Ownership= Moderate Positive relationship
(Assumption: Females can be top managers as well as being owners as in the
case of SMEs)
Top Managers- Full Time Workers= Moderate Positive relationship
(Clarification: It is very true as for females there are good chances to become
top managers if they are serving as full time employees)
Top

Managers-

Relationship

Full

Time

Production

workers=

Weak

Positive

50

(Clarification: From production side it very rare seen in women to become top
managers, as both fields are irrelevant)
Top Managers- Full Time Non-Production Workers= Weak positive
relationship
(Assumption: It is evident though the scenario discussed but this discrepancy
is due to standard error observed in the data given by World Bank and also
some social issues can lead to negating our statement).