Academy of Management

Transparency Alone Doesn’t Solve Unequal Pay

By Daniel Butcher

Are pay-transparency laws the answer to fix the problem of women earning less than men? It’s complicated.

Academy of Management Scholar Carol Kulik of the University of South Australia said she would be reluctant to remove the discretionary part of executives’ pay packages, as performance bonuses have benefits and removing them wouldn’t necessarily close the gender pay gap.

“It is certainly true that in sectors that have less discretionary elements in pay packages, we tend to see smaller gender pay gaps,” Kulik said. “For example, in general, the pay gap in the public sector is smaller than pay gaps in the private sector.

“But I don’t think we want to say, ‘Just get rid of discretionary pay,’” she said. “Incentive pay is important for motivating effort and good performance, so we don’t want to remove that.”

Evidence does show that pay transparency narrows gender pay gaps. Several U.S. states and cities have pay-transparency laws, and in February 2024, the Australian government made information about individual companies’ gender pay gaps available for the first time. But rather than raising women’s pay, transparency often leads to compression of compensation toward the middle.

“Australia is getting on a bandwagon that we see in other countries, suggesting that one of the first steps you should take is find out how big the gap is, and to look at that requires pay transparency,” Kulik said. “But it’s really interesting to see what happens when countries have made pay gaps transparent; what we find is that, over time, pay gaps get narrower.

“But it doesn’t necessarily mean that women’s wages are getting higher; it often means that men’s wage growth is slowing,” she said. “If you’re an individual manager and you know that your pay decisions are going to get scrutinized, you become a little reluctant to pay anybody on the high end, so you start creating some compression at the top.

“Now, that’s not necessarily a bad thing, if you’ve got a pay system that’s really gotten out of whack, and you’ve got a few star performers who are really pulling the whole compensation system too far to the high end—on the other hand, you don’t want to eliminate all the motivating potential of your pay system because managers are reluctant to pay what it takes to recruit and retain top performers.”

A sample of Kulik’s AOM research findings:

Author

  • Daniel Butcher is a writer and the Managing Editor of AOM Today at the Academy of Management (AOM). Previously, he was a writer and the Finance Editor for Strategic Finance magazine and Management Accounting Quarterly, a scholarly journal, at the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Prior to that, he worked as a writer/editor at The Financial Times, including daily FT sister publications Ignites and FundFire, as well as Crain Communications’s InvestmentNews and Crain’s Wealth, eFinancialCareers, and Arizent’s Financial Planning, Re:Invent|Wealth, On Wall Street, Bank Investment Consultant, and Money Management Executive. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado Boulder and his master’s degree from New York University. You can reach him at dbutcher@aom.org or via LinkedIn.

    View all posts
Click here for sharing