Why not ascription? Organizations' employment of male and female managers

We examine the effects of organizations' employment practices on sex-based ascription in managerial jobs. Given men's initial preponderance in managem ent, we argue that inertia, sex labels, and power dynamics predispose organ izations to use sex-based ascription when staffing managerial jobs, bur tha t personnel practices can invite or curtail ascription. Our results-based o n data from a national probability sample of 516 work organizations-show th at specific personnel practices affect the sexual division of managerial la bor. Net of controls for the composition of the labor supply, open recruitm ent methods are associated with women holding a greater share of management jobs, while recruitment through informal networks increases men's share. F ormalizing personnel practices reduces men's share of management jobs, espe cially in large establishments, presumably because formalization checks asc ription in job assignments, evaluation, and factors that affect attrition. Thus, through their personnel practices, establishments license or limit as cription.