Barriers in women's career progression in Kazakhstan: The experience of women in upper management.
Akbota Omirkhanova
SOC 499 Capstone Seminar in Sociology Advisor: Doctor Snezhana Atanova
May 4, 2023
Submitted to the Department of Sociology and Anthropology in partial fulfilment of the B.A.
at Nazarbayev University
ABSTRACT
This study investigates the barriers that prevent women from progressing to upper management echelons in the workplaces in Kazakhstan. Using the qualitative method, namely semi-structured interviews, with six female top and upper managers in middle to large-sized companies, the paper examines the types of obstacles that they have faced in their career paths and ways they used to overcome them. The respondents were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling methods, while interviews longed for 30-60 minutes. The research found that they have experienced prevention from continuing education, subtle forms of discrimination in workplaces, and biased behaviour of colleagues. The study also identified that family-friendly practices such as remote work and flexible schedule conditions were effective in assisting women balance their job responsibilities and parenting. Moreover, the study found that women have to adopt social norms of behaviour for men such as
assertiveness in order to see a progress in their careers. In general, the study points to the necessity to put greater attention to the obstacles in the career paths of women, and creates a vector for studying this issue further for other scholars.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction p. 4
Background Information p. 5
Literature Review p. 6
Methodology p. 11
Findings p. 13
Conclusion p. 22
References p. 23
Appendices p. 25
INTRODUCTION
Despite the global diligence to eradicate gender inequality in all aspects, gender disparity in managerial positions is still a subject to a substantial improvement worldwide, including Kazakhstan. The Global Gender Gap Index (World Economic Forum, 2021, 237) demonstrated that Kazakhstan takes 47th place out of 156 countries by the parity of females and males in ‘economic participation and opportunity’ with a score of 0.728 out of 1, which means full parity. The first subsection ‘legislators, senior officials and managers’ shows the percentage of females and males in managerial positions, and it revealed that there are almost twice more men than women in management positions in Kazakhstan (238). This is a
significant issue, since it leads to lower diversity and more one-sided decisions, which results in the violation of human rights and neglection of it. This paper will try to understand factors and give recommendations for the improvement of the involvement rate of women in upper positions in Kazakhstan.
The main purpose of the study is to explore the barriers that women face in their career that result in the underrepresentation of women in upper positions in Kazakhstan. To achieve that goal, a qualitative research method, semi-structured interviews, will be used. The target population for this study is women in upper positions, who will be selected through purposive and snowball sampling methods. Women in upper positions are targeted with an assumption that they will be able to provide the list of factors that helped them in their career progression along with the information on what types of barriers they have faced. Their work experience and knowledge will help to construct a model for an organization’s environment that is inclinable for women’s career advancement.
Barbara Risman’s “gender as a structure” theory (Risman & Davis, 2013) will be implemented to interpret the data. Since this study covers numerous issues at once, this theory helps to organize and analyse data by splitting them into individual, interactional, and organizational levels.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
In order to explain why the particular theoretical framework was chosen to investigate the issues of the underrepresentation of women in managerial positions, it is important to have a background knowledge about other theories in this field. Generally, the concepts of sex and gender became a focus of scientific research from the beginning of the 20th century, when biologists and psychologists explained sex and gender, masculinity and femininity in terms of the allegedly existing differences in hormones and brain activities and capabilities of two legally recognized genders at those times, females and males (Risman & Davis, 2013, 734-735). It was mid-20th century, when social scientists started investigating this matter, and there have been various explanations for sex and gender, as well as for related issues such as gender inequality. Almost in one time two major theories were developed that explained these concepts from two different sides. Notable sociologists, Kanter (1977, as cited in Risman & Davis, 2013) and Epstein (1988, as cited in Risman & Davis, 2013) argued for the favour of the gender structuralism theory, which reads that gender is constructed through social institutions and structures. By stating that there would be gender equality, if both genders were given similar opportunities, this theory conceals the importance of the gender itself. However, this theory has met criticism, when empirical studies showed that white men get privileged with glass escalator in a pink-collar segment, because of their belonging to that gender. This case showed that labour market and workplaces cannot be studied purely in the scope of gender structuralism theory (740).
Meanwhile, other researchers have drawn attention to how “gender is done” by actively reinforcing, confining, and regulating behaviours of people. On this part, Acker (1990, 1992, as cited in Risman & Davis, 2013) has advanced this theoretical framework by exploring that gender is deeply ingrained in the structures of workplaces and organizations.
She argued that the very structure of organizations is built in favour of men, while the fact of hiring women into these organizations does not mean that these organizations eradicate all barriers that keep women from entering higher job positions through career progression (741). However, “doing gender” theory has its limitations in a sense, that it is difficult to classify cues on the strength of the absence of a systematically gendered behaviour.
In addition to these theories, integrative theory (Risman & Davis 2013, 742) has arisen that urges to take intersectionality into consideration, since not only gender, but a set of other social background characteristics in tote, creates the ways how gender is constructed, displayed, reinforced, and what consequences it has on an individual’s life path.
These are theoretical frameworks that serve as a basis for the “gender as a structure”
theory that will be defined and elaborated below.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Including the latter theory and incorporating the previous two, Barbara Risman came up with a theory that views gender as a social structure that acts and “has consequences at the individual, interactional, and institutional levels of analysis” (Risman & Davis, 2013, 743).
One notable moment is that this theory does not only rely on structuralism theory, which reads that systems and structures act on people, police and confine them, but it also
incorporates voluntarist theory, which states that humans are agents with total freedom, and they act on structures by constructing things (743). This nuance of the theory allows
researchers consider individuals not only as subjects that these institutionalized structures are acting upon, but also as the agents that change and construct these very systems.
Because this specific theoretical framework was not applied in studying gender inequality in Kazakhstan, this section will review related literature by classifying previous papers into three levels depending on their focus. On the figure below the three levels of analysis are shown in a systematised way. This table carries a purpose of only illustratively showing the dimensions of the gender as a structure theory, thus the list under each section can be complemented by other social processes.
Figure 1. Dimensions of the gender as a structure theory (Risman & Davis, 2013, 746).
Individual level of analysis
According to the table, the individual level of analysis includes socialization,
internalization and the construction of selves within the society. In other words, this level of analysis should be investigated by exploring social norms in this society that continuously manifests gender inequality. Social norms are values, beliefs, consequently practices that allocate power dynamics between gender groups. It is because the process of the socialization of gender proceeds in the environment where these norms are embedded. Therefore, they should be studied to find what gender norms were socialized to people and how the power allocation by genders through gender norms impact the career progression of women. This part will also assist in understanding how gender norms are internalized and creates gender equality in labour.
In contextualising gender norms in Kazakhstan, it is important to include their
historical and cultural dimensions. Recognized historian, Kundakbayeva (Sattarov, 2021), has focused on the study of the gender relations and norms in Kazakh society, especially by investigating the matter of how an identity of a “a new Soviet Woman” was constructed. She
considers gender norms of Kazakh people before the 20th, as “a mechanism of a balance maintenance in the system of social relations under the conditions of nomadic life”, but not as a form of exercising power by one group to the other (Sattarov, 2021, para. 2). She further states that a Kazakh woman used to be socialized into an accepted line of behaviour, duties and rights within the society. Kazakh woman projected her life in accordance with the social norms, where she had not had an authority in decision-making and freedom in actions in return for the prosperity of her family that is on a man’s shoulders. She took a decision- making authority in the absence of the “head” of the family – her husband, - but maintained the authority of the father in front of their children by stating phrases as “the final decision if after your father; your father will decide” (para. 5). It is important to note that women were given more responsibility in household activities starting from the activities regarding the livestock, housekeeping, preparing meals, caregiving and etc. However, she could only get a relatively more authority and recognition in accordance with the number and biological sex of children she gave birth to and raised.
Kundakbayeva refers to the works of a sociologist Tartakovskaya I. in saying that one of the main focuses of policies created by the Soviet Union was to undermine these gender relations to make both men and women direct subordinates of the state (Sattarov, 2021).
Therefore, they were actively engaged in increasing the significance of the work and
education institution on the Kazakh steppe, while also advocating for high fertility rates. The Soviet Union achieved universal literacy in targeted regions by 1980, while its result was that Kazakhstan saw 54% of enrolled students to higher education were women (Gunduz 2015, as cited in Durrani et.al., 2022, 3). However, with such active participation in education and workforce, women in Kazakh society were still bound to fully executing their roles as mothers and their traditional household duties. They were imposed with ideas about motherhood as a social duty in the society and were seen as mere workers in the labour market, thus they were not empowered enough to take decision-making roles in labour (3).
These were the gender relations and norms half a century ago, which are still being socialized and continued as Durrani et.al. (2022) showed in their findings. In their massive work on the imagery of men and women in school textbooks in Kazakhstan, they found explicit examples of how power, roles, and abilities are attributed to a certain gender. Along with normalizing gender binary, they attribute hegemonic masculinity to males, assigning roles as “the protector, the leader, the STEM expert, and the knowledgeable” to men (9-10).
Meanwhile, females are displayed with emphasized femininity and are ascribed roles such as the mother and carer, the reproducer of national identity and tradition, the delightful beauty, and the vulnerable (10-12). This study reveals that despite the long time period, traditional social norms attributed to genders are still being socialized and imposed on younger generations.
There might be a dispute that every individual in a society is raised differently and might not be generally biased towards people because of their gender. The gender norms and power distribution in Kazakh society were thus analysed above to show that gender
inequality has been persistent and was shaped differently in accordance with the political conditions. The analysis of the general portraits of men and women in school textbooks were given to show that even though there might be different gender socialization, children are taught what are the gender and social roles of men and women on the national level. The
patriarchal environment and marginalization of women in Kazakhstan is also shown on the Gender Social Norms Index from 2010 to 2014 (UNDP, 2020, 20) that showed that the share of people with at least 1 bias and 2 biases about the abilities of people assigned as men or women were about 96% and 79% respectively, while biases on their abilities in terms of the political, economic, educational and physical integrity composed 75%, 67%, 22% and 58%.
Adding to the studies of gender relations in the USSR, the educational part shows the least amount of biased people towards men and women’s abilities in studying. But in other spheres women are believed to have less potential than men, which could still be a product of social norms that have been in Kazakhstani context for centuries.
When discussing the matter of gender norms in Kazakh society, it is significant to consider the institution of honour-and-shame, because it is the framework within which these norms have been and can be enacted. Harris (2004, as cited in Levitanus, 2020) has
succinctly summarized the essence of this institution: “What is crucial ... is to understand how men and, by extension, the family, can be shamed by even a hint of female non-
compliance. Masculine gender identities and with them men’s honor are highly dependent on the visible demonstration of their ability to control their womenfolk” (47). As was discussed above, Kazakh women were taught to be conforming to gender norms, and exchange their rights and freedom for the prosperity of their family. On this part Kundakbayeva (Sattarov 2021) notes that disobedience of a woman to her husband (and any other men, in general) was considered a sin. In general shame-and-honour context, where the highest form of punishment was a contempt from the society, women were raised to be docile.
Applying Goffman’s (1963, as cites in Levitanus, 2020) conceptualization of stigma
“the phenomenon whereby an individual with an attribute deeply discredited by his/her society is rejected as a result of the attribute” (69), the conclusion would be that women might deeply held to socialized gender norms and roles in Kazakh culture, because of the fact that they will be stigmatized a moment they show any attribute that is not accepted by the society. This stigmatization does not only result in internalization of constraining stereotypes about women, but also leads to misogyny as a form of policing women with deviant
behaviour.
Interactional level of analysis
It should be noted that all three levels of analysis are deeply intertwined with each other. For example, developing the topic of gender biases, the interactional level of analysis offers a room for investigating how these biases are expressed and how it impacts women’s progression at work. In this regard, a prime example of the oppressing women’s social role in Kazakh culture takes the form of the kelin institution. Even though the word is simply
translated as a daughter-in-law, this role concludes the essence of what is expected from women: obedience, giving birth to male children, caregiving to her family and parents of a husband’s parents, housekeeping, and other domestic duties (Kudaibergenova, 2018). Kelin is supposed to be “invisible”, while providing all the necessary unpaid work (382). She cites the statements of an anthropologist Ismailbekova (2016, as cited in Kudaibergenova, 2018), and argues that kelin is a marginalized and unprivileged group in Kazakh society, who are supposed to advance in their own kelin career. If girl’s mother teaches her how to be a “good kelin” before the marriage, mother-in-law serves as an authority for a young kelin after the
marriage. Both of them, especially the latter serves as an agent for creating patriarchy and policing a young woman in case she does not behave as a subordinate and obediently. Even though the severity of this institution might vary from case to case, this institution enhances patriarchy in Kazakhstan in general. This status ascribed to women after marriage with its following roles is a solid expression of what is expected from young women in Kazakh culture: continuing the paternity line from husband’s side, caregiving to his parents, doing household activities, and childcare. However, there is not enough study on how kelin status might distract women from building a career. Therefore, this paper will try to understand the intensity of this institution in current times, and its role as a barrier in women’s careers.
It is highly possible that women in higher positions might not follow kelin statuses or are unmarried and/or have no children. In this case, a notion of “gender penalty” will be discussed. This concept is used by Kuzhabekova et.al. (2017) to describe a pattern, where unmarried or divorced women see progress in their careers, while married women, especially with children, are burdened by the “unpaid work” at home, thus experiencing “gender
penalty”. Sometimes child-care and house-care make women to choose part time-jobs, lower their career aspirations, leave their jobs for months, and shorten the working hours. These might not be because of direct discrimination, rather a result of social expectations from women. Moreover, they argue that social attributions of “soft” qualities to women create an association of women with caring spheres, usually low-paid (4). All of these show that the primary expectations from women as mothers and wives can interfere them from building a career towards higher positions. If there are married women with children, the paper will discuss how they responded to “the gender penalty” as mothers and partners.
Organizational level of analysis
The institutional level of analysis considers legal policies and organizational practices that might either favourably or negatively affect women’s career progression. The basic component of a professional career for women is the attainment of a higher education.
Kazakhstan’s government is succeeding in providing access to school and university education for women. It is verified by the enrolment rate of women to higher education, which was 58% in 2013, and 54% in 2018 (Kireyeva, 2021, 203). Moreover, a new law was added to Labor Code of Kazakhstan, that allows parents to choose any member of their immediate family, including themselves, to take up to 3 years of childbirth leave from their workplaces. Article 14 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan clearly states that
“No one shall be subject to any discrimination for reasons of origin, social, property status, occupation, sex, race, nationality, language, attitude towards religion, convictions, place of residence or any other circumstances” with legal penalties for the violation of the law
(Berikkhan, 2021). However, according to the winner of the International Women of Courage Award 2018, lawyer Aiman Umarova: “There are many cases of discrimination against women, but no one maintains official statistics. Women rarely report such cases” (Berikkhan, 2021).
Therefore, even though rights of women are protected by the general law, the policies of organizations should be closely studied, since discrimination in workplaces might be normalized or simply not considered an important aspect by the management. Such policies not only include trainings, mentorship and programs for women, but includes systems of
reporting, hiring, and rewarding. These policies can be done under the administration of the diversity management group in companies.
Schoen and Rost (2021) have found that the more policies and practices companies use for diversity management, the more the representation of women is observed in
managerial positions. The diversity management includes networking and mentoring programs for women, as well as having committees or officials, who would be responsible for transparency and accountability of the company (97). They came to this conclusion after examining almost 700 small and mid-size companies in the U.S. However, they also found that such practices are not implemented in 86% of all the investigated companies, which was explained by the high cost of such programs for small and mid-size companies. These authors also found that family-friendly practices such as offering flexible working hours and remote working conditions for the period of maternal leave and for working mothers help mitigate the negative effects of maternity on their careers, and support their upward mobility to the top positions (104). The topic of working mothers is important, since motherhood as we
discussed is viewed as an essential norm for women in the society. Moreover, Rhode (2016) argues that even though taking time from the career to commit for their families may not have a major negative effect on the careers of women, but it decreases the chances of
reaching the top positions for women (66). Rhode (2016) also notes that by choosing flexible schedule or part-time work, women would have lower chances for proving their leadership abilities (68). However, in contrast to this notion, by examining 72 organizations in the U.S.
Dreher (2003, as cited in Rhode, 2016) found that such family-friendly practices as flexible working hours and provisions for childcare facilitate women’s career progression. This paper will examine whether companies, where they work have such practices to understand whether there is an auspicious environment for women’s career created on the organizational level.
The paper will also examine how the absence or existence of such policies affect the progression of women.
Analyzing these literatures, the paper will attempt to systematize the the barriers that women face in their career advancement. Moreover, the main difference of the paper from the existing literature will be the study of how women in managerial positions have overcome the obstacles. Even though some literature of this kind exists, they are conducted in the context of other distinct locations, and the paper fills the gap in the study of labour inequality in the context of Kazakhstan.
METHODOLOGY
The most suitable methodology for the purposes of this study is the qualitative research approach, namely semi-structured interviews with managers in the upper management in companies in Kazakhstan. Inclusion criteria are composed of three
components: women over 18 years old, currently working or previously working in an upper management sector of a company, and having a minimum of two years of experience
working full-time as a manager. Exclusion criteria include those, who do not meet the
inclusion criteria and those, who will not be willing to participate in the study. On the light of the low representation of women in senior positions, I acknowledged that the finding people that meet the requirements and the recruitment process itself would take time and effort.
Because of that, the projected time spent on each interview was 30-60 minutes, or
approximately 2000-6000 words for the transcriptions of these interviews. For confidentiality and convenience purposes an online media, zoom, was selected. They were asked to turn off their videos, but were allowed to turn it on, on their request. The interview questions were prepared in English, Russian, and Kazakh languages, thus the choice of language was on the interviewees.
The required number of participants was 8-10, and they were selected through non- probability sampling methods, such as purposive and snowball sampling methods. Therefore, the researcher has reached out to people in her social environment, and asked them whether they would be able to tell their acquaintances about this research and give them the
researcher’s contacts. After conducting first interviews, respondents were asked whether they could ask their acquaintances, women in upper management, if they could participate in this research. There were people, who postponed the interview several times, and were those, who rejected the offer because of the time shortage.
Before starting the interviews, participants were sent an informed consent form to their emails or WhatsApp accounts, and were asked to get familiarized with the content. They were asked if a researcher can record the interview before its start, and every interview was recorded with their consent. They were asked if they give their consent to conduct the interview before and after the recording started. The questions were divided into three sections, where the first section included questions about their background information and their opinions on the positions of women in their environment. The second part was
composed of questions on types of barriers they have faced in their careers, including their maternity leave experiences or their plans for the future in terms of maternity. They were asked about barriers they face within the family, within the workplace, and within the society in general. The third part was directed at finding the methods they used to overcome these barriers, and their recommendations for organizations and creating more supportive environment for women.
For now, six interviews were conducted with the representatives of the target
population. However, there was one respondent, who could not finish the interview, because of the distractions in her workplace. All of the interviews were manually transcribed, and they were read several times to get familiarized with the subject. Narratives that seemed interesting and valuable; points that were emphasized by the interviewees; aspects that were purposefully asked in the interview were then highlighted. After this process, a file was created in Microsoft Excel, where the first column was filled with pseudo names for
respondents, and in the first row of further columns were filled as follows: “Obstacles”,
“Counter methods”, “Recommendations”, “Additional Insights”. Then, the coded information from transcriptions were put in the cells accordingly including important quotes from the interviews. This is how the interview transcriptions were systematized. For the analysis of barriers, all the points that were gathered under the column “Obstacles” were grouped together depending on what topics bring them together. Using both inductive and deductive coding and analysis, five categories of themes where found: Cultural patterns, barriers on education, invisible discrimination, prioritizing men, and others.
The first limitation of this methodology is that even though it gives a deep understanding of cases and respondents, it does not allow to cover a greater pool of
respondents because of the high time-consumption of the method. Moreover, the analysis of interviews cannot be fully objective, since there are points that could be missed or interpreted differently. Another limitation of the methodology is in the target audience. Even though the target audience was chosen with a purpose of identifying how people were able to overcome the barriers, the interviewees came to be mostly single and holders of a higher education diploma mostly from recognized universities. Therefore, the study might show only the surface of barriers, while a study with a target on women with or without higher education and/or in a married status and/or with children should be studied to reveal the real picture of obstacles that women face that hold them back from obtaining higher positions in their careers. Lastly, the study did not cover LGBTQIA+ people, which leaves a wide gap for further studies in the Kazakhstani context.
FINDINGS
Name substitution
Age Marital Status
Child- ren
Education Bachelor’s degree
Education Master’s degree
Educ ation PhD
Position # of years on that position
Aikorkem 26 Single - + +
(diploma program)
- Director of the
Marketing Department
2+
Akbota 21 Single - + + - Director of
the
Developme nt
Department 2
Shugyla 42 Single - + + + Adjunct
Banker
11+
Zhuldyz 46 Married 3 + + - Chief
Financial Officer
10+
Malika 24 Single - + - - Chief
Director
3+
Dariya 28 Single - + - - HR
Education Manager
3+
Figure 2. Background information of respondents.
The table above is given for demonstration purposes. It shows that the age range of respondents has varied from 21 to 46, and it is evident that the majority of the respondents were single, and all of them have completed their Bachelor’s degree, while most of them hold Master’s degree. During the interview they have shared valuable information on the positions of women in Kazakh society, in families and in the labor market. After the coding and
systematization of the interview transcriptions, the barriers were grouped into three levels of analysis, and findings are discussed below in corresponding sub-sections.
Individual level of analysis
The thematic analysis of their answers shows that according to their observation, women in Kazakh society are primarily seen as mothers and matriarchs, whose
responsibilities are to expand the family and perform socially expected roles from women.
This observation was succinctly expressed by Akbota, who told that:
“It is more of a refined, but still about a traditional opinion, where a girl still has t… not has to, but she is perceived through the lens of
femininity in its classical and traditional gender notions, and essentially a
girl will be considered self-sufficient not only when she succeeded in her career, but when everything is goo… good at home, right, when she is in happy relations with children”.
This observation creates a ground for further explaining and discussing other
discriminatory barriers in education and career that are imposed on women. This observation is persistent throughout the interviews, and finds its real case scenario in the answer of Malika:
“…if I tell about my family, [women’s] main duty is to sit at home, give birth to children and bring [them] up.”
Complementing this context, most of the unmarried respondents, when asked about their plans for the future, told that they are either looking forward or expect to have children in the future. Even though building a family and the pregnancy might require a pause from the career, they told that they try to adapt their work obligations in a way that they either do not interfere with or rather support their roles as mothers and wives. Dariya has expressed her reflection on motherhood and her personal opinion on it:
“But in general, it is understandable, that it is nature… That is [women]
need to balance in some places. But I think, that [one] can build a career and at 40, and at 50. In case of that child-bearing age, and in a family there
is a question that perhaps everything more or less should be done. That is why I think, that it is no big deal to commit two years, for example, only to
a family continuously”.
Such adoption of a social norm within the limit of a social status as a woman might be a demonstration of the internalized social norms and expectations by women in Kazakhstani society. Because the individual level of analysis examines the context, where individuals were socialized into accepted lines of behaviour, these quotes are given to show the general representation of the society and a women’s place in that society according to the words of these individuals. It was discussed above that women in Kazakh society are primarily seen as future mothers, wives, kelins, and as a result of the USSR policies, as an important member of the labour force. Even though these social expectations have been being constructed over centuries with some features being added or falling off, Durrani et.al. (2022) showed that school textbooks all over Kazakhstan contain a strong gender socialization factor. On this regard, the analysis of interviews show that feminine features and traditional women’s roles are prioritized in Kazakhstani context. The persistence of this perception might be explained by the existence of strong social institutions as schools that socialize children into gender norms. However, the focus of the study should be on what biases are translated to and internalized by individuals, and how it affects the career progression of women.
Shugyla shared another information that coincides with the existing literature on the gender norms for men.
“…in traditional Kazakh family, man takes the main position. He is like a breadwinner, he is a defender of the society”.
Positions of men and women in the social context of Kazakhstan that were described by respondents corresponds closely with the existing literature, specifically with the findings of Durrani (2020) in the scope of this paper. This position of men, and corresponding
obedient position of women in the traditional sense can be expanded to the workplace realm in Kazakhstan. Kundakbayeva (Sattarov, 2021) notes that disobedience of a woman to her husband was considered a sin. However, it should be highlighted that the authoritative position is not given only to a husband, but a woman is also taught to be obedient to any other men in her family. Such upbringing might result in the socialization of a position and stereotypes that keep women from having high confidence and other factors that affect their careers. According to Shugyla:
“But I had such an upbringing, that “men are always right”, “one must not argue back to older person”, yes. ….[he was] a foreman banker. That was a
person, master strategist, he could talk in a way, that all of his merit, well that all of his projects are his merit. It seemed to the administration, that he
was the one solving all the problems, but actually no one took him seriously [among colleagues]. But he could present to the administration in a way that it was him solving all the problems. But only because I have this internal honouring to a person as to an older person, yes, he was older than
me for 8 years. And that he was a man, that interfered me from telling that it was not so”.
She then continued that because of this retarding stereotype, she was not paid enough since he received more bonuses than her for a job that was done by her. This is the case when an internalized stereotype has affected her career. However, she then told two cases, where she was able to behave outside of social norms expected from a woman, and because of such a deviant behaviour she was able to close the project successfully. One case was related to the invisible expression of power over women in formal meetings, when Shugyla was constantly disrupted by men colleagues while giving a speech. Instead of being docile and ignoring it, she spoke up asking others to let her communicate her message first. She concludes that:
“That is, in other Kazakh societies a woman never says so, right”.
Moreover, she then tells about one more case, where she could realize those biased thinking and go against the biases, names against the stereotype “not losing a face”, which means “avoiding situations, where you may be ashamed”. Back then she again spoke up among the board that mainly consisted of men, when everyone was silent, which led to a success in their project. One could argue that this is only one case, but this pattern, when a woman sets her boundaries, and steps out of the boundaries set by the society, was inherent to all respondents, although in different ways. Women in managerial positions could negotiate their work schedules, work volume, and other work-related questions with confidence. As an example, Aikorkem and Akbota told that they work either remotely, or with a flexible
schedule. A working mother, Zhuldyz, shared that she leaves the workplace exactly at six o’clock in the evening and does not do any work-related activities until nine in the morning.
According to their answers, they set such rules before starting to work in a company.
These findings align with the discussions of Eagly & Johenessen-Schmidt (2001, as cited in Kuzhabekova et.al., 2017), on the acceptance of women into the upper management echelon, when they adopt and display the norms that are usually expected from men. Even though women have to be authoritative in workplaces, they are still expected to be feminine and obedient in the cultural realm. This misalignment might be the barrier in the career path of women, while it also might become the source of stigmatization of women in the society.
If some respondents showed that they display authority in the workplace, Akbota told that in times, when she worked as an auditor in the upper management, she was the only woman in the board of directors. She shared that she felt light mistrust in her abilities due to her age and gender. However, in contrast to showing social norms for men, she tried to take light
feminine features, and she tells that:
“…because she did not try to be on a par with them, they perceived her as a professional”.
She then added that she felt more comfortable when working in female-dominated collective, which was the reason why she changed her position to the position of the director of the development department. This case might be related to ageism and to the stereotypical context in the workplace, where “older people and men are always right” and a woman is accepted as long as they conform to this invisible pressure. Nevertheless, these cases show that in order to acquire leadership and key decision-making positions, women have to adopt social norms for men.
In this section, the stereotypes and socially institutionalized gender norms in Kazakhstan were contextualized. The misalignment between the expectations from upper management bodies and social expectations from women were discussed as one of the key barriers in career progression of women. The main finding of on this level of analysis was that women in upper management confidently negotiated their schedules and working conditions, while also adopting values that are usually ascribed to men in the society. One more finding was that respondents were willing to create families and have children in the future, while acknowledging that they will commit a significant portion of their time to childcare at a sacrifice of their career.
Interactional level of analysis
Applying Goffman’s (1963, as cites in Levitanus, 2020) conceptualization of stigma
“the phenomenon whereby an individual with an attribute deeply discredited by his/her society is rejected as a result of the attribute”, the conclusion would be that women might deeply held to socialized gender norms and roles in Kazakh culture, because of the fact that they will be stigmatized a moment they show any attribute that is not accepted by the society (69). This stigmatization does not only result in internalization of constraining stereotypes about women, but also leads to misogyny as a form of policing women with deviant
behaviour. If the last quote from the interview with Akbota can be explained as her method of avoiding misogyny, Malika shared that she was policed by her female colleagues for
behaving on a par with their male colleagues.
“…but there is a thing as passive aggression, right… woman… it came from women’s side, who worked with me. It is like they are, for example, married or their principles are… These were women, who held
principles like “a woman should not compete with a man”. Then I felt something like passive aggression [and] envy from their side”.
These cases show that there is a policing from both men’s and women’s sides that might be an obstacle in the career path of women, especially when taking into consideration that those women might not be empowered or confident enough to constantly overcome this social pressure. Malika shared her dialogue with her male colleague, where she found that there is a stigmatization of women in workplaces according to their educational background.
“and he says: “she should have gotten married, why would she need to progress?” like that. When I asked “why?”, “what about me?”, [he responded] “your path is different, you got an education” … that is, the
society divides women according to their received education”
According to Malika, the society stigmatizes women, who did not graduate from higher education as lacking for further developing their educational background and advancing in their careers. On the other hand, graduates of universities, especially of those recognized or from abroad, are considered eligible for progressing in their careers. Adding to this deduction, she emphasized that once colleagues get to know her educational background, they immediately start referring to her with respect and in accordance with her expertise. As was discussed by Kireyeva (2021), enrolment rate of women to higher education institutions is higher than of men in Kazakhstan. However, such statistics might not show the real picture, since these numbers do not show the purpose and social backgrounds of enrolled women. Aikorkem, Shugyla and Malika discussed the topic of education. Aikorkem shared that in her family, education for women is valued, but its purpose lies not in the career success of a girl, but rather on finding a merited partner:
“Yes, a woman should be given an education, but not for building a career.
But for she could stand for herself, was educated, and found a matching partner”
However, other two respondents shared a more negative perception of education for women in their families and surroundings. Shugyla shares that despite the resistance of surrounding people, her father saw a quality education as a good start for her career, thus he allowed her to study in another city going against their relatives. She explains that her father valued education, because he succeeded in his career due to receiving a high education.
“I remember there was a family counselling meeting when I was entering [a university] … And those relatives gave an advice to father to not send a girl
further than [a city name where they resided] at all…
…among all my [girl] classmates, I am the only one, who received a higher education; only one, who worked in an international company; only one, who studied abroad; only one, who makes a doctoral dissertation. That
is, I am more of an exception than a rule”.
By the last quote she emphasizes that there are other women, who could not receive a proper education because of the retarding mindset of the society in relation to women and education. Malika, who is from the same region as Shugyla, now holds a higher education
diploma, but she says that she and her younger sister constantly encounter retarding opinions further studies from the surrounding people, such as:
“…all people from here say like “that’s enough, are you going to further study? About what kind of studying you are talking about? Remove your
brain”. [If I] say abroad, [they] say “abroad [?], get married” …”
One observation from the interviews was that every respondent received a higher education, while almost all of them worked in areas that were corresponding with either their bachelor’s or master’s degree education. It means that one should be competent and expert in their spheres, which can be attained by foundational knowledge that they get from higher education institutions. However, it was found that information on the social background of women in upper echelon, especially on their education and work experience, is lacking. This points to the substantial gap in the literature regarding the importance of these two variables in the career positions of women. Nevertheless, there are many scholars such as Diehl and Dzubinski (2016), who tried to investigate the reason behind the underrepresentation of women in upper management positions despite the abundance of educated and qualified women in the labour market. There is no one explanation for the subject, but rather they argue that even though women are well educated, they may face gender-based barriers that are invisible. In their analysis of 38 interviews with 26 women working in the executive board of colleges and universities and 12 women working in the executive board of mission organizations, they found 27 barriers, and distributed them across three levels of analysis on micro-, meso-, and macro-levels (185). They argue that even though blatant expression of sexism is not displayed in workplaces due to the law for human rights protection, sexism and discrimination in workplaces “have just gone underground” (Meyerson & Fletcher 2003, 231, as cited in Diehl and Dzubinski, 2016). Therefore, they accentuate the demonstrations of sexism towards women in the social interactions of women in executive positions with their surroundings. Some of their findings show that women are excluded from unofficial social events, male gatekeeping, discrimination, and workplace harassment. Such cases were repeatedly told by interviewees in this study as well. Developing the topic of education, Malika shared that she is noticing a stigmatization of women by their education status i.e. the more prestigious one’s educational background, more she deserves to continue her career.
Meanwhile, women without higher education “should better get married” instead of building her own career.
Other than this, Aikorkem told about a biased attitude of a male executive director, when she worked as a stuff in that company. She shared:
“He used to tell that, that why he would like to [hire] male managers to the company is because they were, they do not… they do not react to emotions,
they are not as emotional as women, they would not make decisions [based] on emotions. That is they are more stress resistant and objective.
That is, he said, “you, women, you are emotional, you make very like emotional decisions, you [show] emotions too much, when [you] should be
calmer…”
This shows that a biased behaviour and decision making of male executives may lead to the proportion of women and men in a company in favour of men. Moreover, Aikorkem then added that he was very emotional, aggressive, and allowed himself to say inappropriate words, when she expressed her willingness to leave the service. The main reason for that was the sexism and discrimination of the director, who also used to devalue women by repeating the narrative above frequently in the workplace. A clear discrimination of women was in the
case of Akbota, who worked in a consulting department, and used to analyse the market and propose effective ways for solving business related issues. However, she told that they worked with one of the leading oil and gas companies, because of which her projects were conducted by her, but the projects were given to a man to present in front of the clients, because of the assumption that a woman would not inspire confidence and trust. She shared that she would get some rewards for her project, but she was not the one actually presenting it. These cases might give an answer to the question of why women with quality education still cannot progress to upper or top positions in their careers. The main reason is that sexism, indeed, has gone underground as was states before, it is expressed not only in the attitudes, but also in the actions of main decision-making bodies in the company, whose decisions play a substantial role in the career progression of women. Other than that, there can be cases of subtle discrimination and negative attitude from co-workers.
One of the main findings of the paper is that in contrast to the existing literature that highlight the strength of the role of women as caregivers, childcaring and housekeeping figures in the family, almost all respondents shared that they either already delegate housekeeping and childcaring tasks or expect to do so in the future. According to Dariya:
“If we talk not in the context of the country, but of my surroundings, then I see a tendency, that nowadays there is going on more of an equal relationship in a family… On this regard it is great that by creating a family
they like delegate obligations in a team, right, for that, a woman have an opportunity to, I don’t know, to have a maternal leave during the year by leaving the workplace. If she wants she can hire a babysitter, right, and quite continue building a career and somehow self-realize or generally just get a satisfaction from what she does even if she if not a career person, but just a social [incomprehensible]. That is why I think that there may be a
balance”
This tendency is observed in answers of Akbota and Aikorkem, who told that even though they create a family and have children, they will be able to continue their careers since they do not have much pressure to only focus on one aspect of their lives. Zhuldyz told that the society has now been reconstructed in a way, that she can choose between her roles as a professional, a mother, a wife, and a housekeeper.
“I hire helpers, right, one helps with housekeeping, I had a babysitter when I had to... That is, on this regard it is easier in the society these days, there
is an opportunity to hire workers”
She told that because she realizes that she cannot carry four roles at the same time, she decided to delegate housekeeping tasks to other women. Analysing the answers of all respondents on this regard, one common tendency is noticed. That is the diminishing importance of the kelin status, namely on the part of housekeeping and childcare. However, the issue here is that these particular women respondents were able to get to higher positions because of the lack of social constraints regarding the kelin status. Perhaps, these people are more of exceptions since this study does not show the positions of women, who were or still are confined by being married and mothers. Therefore, despite the majority of the
respondents experience changing norms for women in marriage in Kazakhstan, this common tendency along interviews is not sufficient for making clear conclusions.
Organizational level of analysis
Even though the respondents told that they were not obliged to fulfil household activities, they still believe that they can continue their careers during the pregnancy and maternity leave periods mainly due to the flexible time and remote working conditions. For example, to the question about the maternity leave, Aikorkem answers:
“Yes, I understand that this is going to impact my life quite strongly, but because I work remotely, I do not visit the office and I have a very flexible
schedule. I think this will not have a strong impact on me personally, because I can continue working remotely just for several hours per day”
It should be highlighted that Aikorkem and Akbota have an opportunity to choose their schedule and their working hours depend on their results. They are planning to spend as much time for working as they do currently. Regarding the effectiveness of family-friendly systems, the findings support the conclusions of Dreher (2003, as cited in Rhode, 2016), which read that they impact women’s career progression positively. It is supposed that Rhode’s (2016) statement might be more related to women in workplaces in general, than women in upper echelons, who already have progressed into the higher positions.
Nevertheless, according to Zhuldyz, flexible working hours would be beneficial for mothers, who also work.
“It would be good, if women were offered flexible schedule, right. It would be good, if women were let to work out the same 8 hours, for example, but
for women were able to choose, for example, from 8 to 5, from 10 to 7.
That is, some flexible schedule for working mothers, especially with little children under the school age. When they are school age, it is not that
critical”
Generally, these viewpoints were somehow supported by three above discussed respondents. Schoen and Rost (2021) who have investigated about 700 companies also confirmed that family-friendly practices are favourable for women in building their careers and maintaining their positions. These researchers have also found that diversity management practices lead to more representation of women in higher positions. On this regard, Shugyla shared that her company offered a mentoring program six or seven years ago, that had a crucial favourable impact on her career advancement, since they were taught by senior workers how to effectively communicate with colleagues, clients and partners. Even though she does not have mentors officially, Aikorkem mentioned that she works directly with the female founders of her company, which might serve as a networking or mentoring program for her. In contrast to her case, Akbota left her position because of the fact that she was the only woman in the executive board of directors, who also displayed subtle discrimination.
She shared that she felt more comfortable working in the environment of women. Dariya’s main responsibility in her company is the creation of different courses, programs and trainings based on the needs of their employees. Even though the extent to which those trainings were effective on Dariya’s progression was not identified, she told that they are free of charge and are always modified based on the analysis of issues that employees face. It is believed that such programs might be helpful for people in advancing in careers. Even though only three companies out of six had diversity management policies and practices to some extent, their effect cannot be evaluated either because of the lack of clear descriptions of their effect or the lack of descriptions. Nevertheless, as Schoen and Rost (2021) have argued, such practices might be costly for middle to small sized companies despite their effectiveness in promoting women in their careers. One notable moment is that along with flexible working
hours, trainings on the physiological and psychological differences between men and women for men, and trainings on the effective communication methods between people in general were proposed by respondents as methods that could have helped them in their career advancements.
The interviews show that family-friendly conditions can indeed help women mitigate the negative effects of maternity leave and help them maintain their positions in the company.
However, the study could not detect the extent to which diversity management practices were effective in promoting women in workplaces in Kazakhstan. Therefore, there should be massive study on the effectiveness of certain organizational practices on the proportion of women in upper management positions.
CONCLUSION
After analysing the interviews with six women in upper and top management positions in Kazakhstan, and integrating the findings with the existing body of literature, several findings can be listed as the main barriers in the career path of women. It was found that in Kazakhstan women are seen through the lens of femininity, and mainly as mothers and wives. However, social expectations from women as housekeeping, caregiving, and
childcaring figures are diminishing, which allow women to better integrate their personal and professional spheres. Nevertheless, because women are raised to be obedient, they meet dual expectations because of the necessity to be assertive to advance in careers and maintain positions. Moreover, it was identified that women experience subtle forms of discrimination at work either because of their internalized biases or biases of the surrounding people. Such biased behaviour generates stigmatization of women, male gatekeeping, control of women’s voices and choices, and other forms of obstacles that might seem invisible until examined closely. Regarding the control of choices, despite Kazakhstan’s achievements in the enrolment rate of women into higher education institutions, it was found that some female school students experience control over their education choices. The last finding of the paper was that family-friendly practices were chosen as conditions that create an environment for women to better combine working and personal life aspects. These are the results of
interviews with women from different companies, and can add on to the existing body of literature about the position of women in the labour market in Kazakhstan. Even though some findings might confirm the arguments in the literature, others show that there should be done more detailed research in some areas such as the access to education for women,
discrimination in the workplace, and the decreasing importance of women’s involvement in household activities. The potential implications of the research for policymakers and the scientific community would be that these findings can be used to further develop the research scope in this sphere. However, this research is based on the interviews with only six people, which might not give a full understanding of the issue. Therefore, further research should cover a greater pool of respondents from different backgrounds.
REFERENCES
Berikkhan, N. (2021). Kazakhstan: How gender stereotypes prevent women from building a career. Central Asian Bureau for Analytical Reporting.
https://longreads.cabar.asia/gender_stereotypes
Diehl, A. B., & Dzubinski, L. M. (2016). Making the invisible visible: A cross-sector analysis of gender-based leadership barriers. Human Resource Development Querterly 27(2), 169-307. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21248
Durrani, N., CohenMiller, A., Kataeva, Z., Bekzhanova, Z., Seitkhadyrova, A., & Badanova, A. (2022). ‘The fearful khan and the delightful beauties’: The construction of gender in secondary school textbooks in Kazakhstan. International Journal of Educational Development, 88(102508). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102508
Kireyeva, A. A., Kenzhegulova, G. K., & Osama R. (2021). Gender equality and women participation in government: the case of Kazakhstan. Journal of the Institute of Economics, 2(16), 197-205. https://doi.org/10.51176/1997-9967-2021-2-197-205 Kudaibergenova, D. T. (2018). Project Kelin: marriage, women, and re-traditionalization in
post-soviet Kazakhstan. In M. Najafizadeh & L. Lindsey, Women of Asia (pp. 379- 390). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315458458-28
Kuzhabekova, A., Janenova, S., & Almukhambetova, A. (2018). Analyzing the experiences of female leaders in civil service in Kazakhstan: Trapped between economic pressure to earn and traditional family role expectations. International Journal of Public Administration, 41(15), 1290-1301. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2017.1387142 Levitanus, M. (2020). Regulation and Negotiation of Queer Subjectivities in post-Soviet
Kazakhstan. [Postgraduate degree thesis, The University of Edinburgh].
https://era.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/37065
Rhode, D. L. (2016). Women and Leadership. Oxford University Press.
Risman, B., & Davis, G. (2013). From sex roles to gender structure. Current Sociology Review 61(5-6), 733-
755. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epub/10.1177/0011392113479315
Sattarov, D. (2021, July 14). Modernization of the early Soviet era in the destinies of women in Kazakhstan, 1920-1930. Interview with the author of the monograph. Central Asian Analytical Network. https://www.caa-network.org/archives/22003/modernizacziya- rannej-sovetskoj-epohi-v-sudbah-zhenshhin-kazahstana-1920-1930-gody-intervyu-s- avtorom-monografii
Schoen, C., & Rost, K. (2021). What really works?! Evaluating the effectiveness of practices to increase the managerial diversity of women and minorities. European Management Journal 39, 95-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2020.06.005
UNDP. (2020). Tackling social norms. A game changer for gender inequalities.
https://hdr.undp.org/system/files/documents/hdperspectivesgsnipdf_1.pdf World Economic Forum. (2021). The Global Gender Gap Report.
https://www.weforum.org/reports/global-gender-gap-report-2021/
APPENDICES Appendix A:
Oral Informed Consent Form
Introduction. Hello, my name is Akbota Omirkhanova. I am conducting a research entitled
“Barriers in women's career progression in Kazakhstan: Experience of female managers”. The research is a mandatory part of my Bachelor degree completion in Nazarbayev University.
Procedures. This research is aimed at revealing the barriers that women face in their career path that make them quit and be underrepresented in upper managerial and leadership
positions. The issue of the underrepresentation of women in upper positions shows that this is the result of many entangled and systematic obstacles that women meet in their careers. To study the issue, these obstacles will be investigated from three dimensions, which are
individual obstacles (such as confidence level, qualifications), interactional obstacles (such as childcare, housekeeping, relationships with colleagues, social pressure), and obstacles put by law (such as maternity/paternity leave, social security, employment security). In this
interview, respondents will be asked questions about their career path, the influence of stereotypes and beliefs about gender and labour on their careers, as well as the impact of dual expectations (as a mother/wife and an employee). Moreover, this interview will ask questions about their maternity leave experience (if such is true for the respondent) and its effect on respondents' career perspectives. This interview will be recorded and will take approximately 30-90 minutes to complete.
Risks. The potential risks of participating in this study are: The questions are structured in a way that will exclude any potential harm to psychological and social aspects of respondents.
However, there might be some harm resulting from the changes in respondent’s emotions while talking about their family status and maternity leave experiences if these are pre-
connected with some traumatic cases in their lives. However, to prevent such harms, they will be asked before moving to other sections if it is fine for them to talk about these matters. In regard to the confidentiality policy, names and any other cues will be replaced with
identifiers after the data collection, and details will be known only to the researcher and her advisor to the extent permitted by the law.
Benefits. Anticipated benefits from this study are their contribution to the development of gender studies in Kazakhstan that potentially may lead to the improvement of gender equality in workplaces. The project is expected to be useful for policy makers as well as other
researchers, who could draw their further policies and studies using the valuable insights that this research project will offer.
Compensation. No tangible compensation will be given. A copy of the research paper will be available by the end of the study and be sent by email to the respondents.
Confidentiality & Privacy. Any information that is obtained during this study will be kept confidential to the extent permitted by the law. All efforts, within reason, will be made to
keep your personal information in your research record confidential but total confidentiality cannot be guaranteed.
Voluntary Nature of the Study. Participation in this study is strictly voluntary, and if agreement to participation is given, it can be withdrawn at any time without prejudice. You can also skip answering to questions that you do not feel comfortable with, and still continue the interview. Please, be free to ask any questions, if you need clarifications or explanations.
Points of Contact. It is understood that should any questions or comments arise regarding this project, or a research related injury is received, the researcher, Akbota Omirkhanova, +8 778 215 4641, [email protected] should be contacted. Any other questions or concerns after the interview may be addressed to the Nazarbayev University Institutional Research Ethics Committee, [email protected].
I need to audio record your agreement to conduct this interview with you. Could you please say whether you agree? If you have any questions before we start, please be free to ask.
Appendix B:
Preliminary questions:
Pt.1
1. How old are you?
2. Your family status? (single, married, children, divorced etc.) 3. Can you tell me about your childhood and family background?
4. Where did you grow up and did that have any impact on your career choices?
5. What were your family's expectations for your career?
6. What was your educational background before entering the workforce?
7. What was your first job after completing your education?
8. How does your current or most recent job relate to your educational background?
9. What is the role of women in the context of our society?
Pt.2
1. What is your position in this company?
2. How many years have you been working here?
3. Your career path within this company?
4. Can you describe the obstacles you faced while trying to advance in your career?
5. Have you ever experienced gender-based biases being imposed on you personally?
6. Have you ever faced discrimination or bias in your career?
7. Have you ever felt that you had to work harder than your male colleagues to be recognized for your abilities?
8. Have you ever felt that you were not given the same opportunities or support as your male colleagues?
9. How do you balance your work and personal life?
10. How is house labour divided in your family? (if applicable)
11. If you already have children, how having children affected your career? (if applicable) 12. Are you planning to have children? Do you think it can somehow affect your career?
(if applicable)
13. Have you ever experienced gender-based pay discrimination?
Pt.3
1. Can you describe some methods you have used to overcome these barriers?
2. Have you ever taken a course or training to improve your skills or confidence?
3. Have you ever taken a leave of absence or lower workload to achieve a work-life balance? What were the consequences of it?
4. Have you ever participated in trainings or programs aimed at promoting women in your organization? How did that help you?
5. What would you recommend for other women facing similar obstacles in their careers?
6. How do you think organizations can better support women in overcoming career obstacles?
Appendix C:
Transcriptions of interviews:
Interview N1:
The duration is 30 minutes 5 seconds. The interviewee was asked if I can record the meeting before starting the recording, and then received the copy of the oral consent form to her gmail, and then got familiarized with it. The question below contains her consent to give an interview.
Interviewer: Все, супер, сейчас.
Speaker: Хорошо.
Interviewer: Я вам на почту отправила информированное согласие. Я могу Вам прочитать вслух, либо можете сами прочитать. Как вам удобнее будет?
Speaker: Так хорошо. Давай я сама прочитаю.
Interviewer: Аха, хорошо.
Speaker: Все, хорошо, прочитала.
Interviewer: Мне нужно озвучить вот эту часть. Мне нужно записать ваше согласие на проведение интервью с вами. Не могли бы вы сказать согласны ли вы? Если у вас есть какие либо вопросы, пожалуйста, не стесняйтесь задавать их. Вы можете задавать их в любое время, а также вы можете прекратить весь интервью без объяснения причин.
Speaker: Хорошо, да, я согласна пройти интервью.
Interviewer: Хорошо, отлично. Вас плохо слышно.
Speaker: Меня плохо слышно? Сейчас. Але? А сейчас слышно?
Interviewer: Сейчас. Але?
Speaker: Плохо слышно?
Interviewer: Да.
Speaker: [непонятно]. Сейчас тоже?
