In the second of a three-part series, Tim Mickleburgh explains why working-class accountants face barriers to success – and what they are.
In last month’s PQ magazine I described the lack of working-class representation in what is a finance profession dominated by people from professional backgrounds. So, why are finance professionals more likely to come from professional backgrounds?
People from professional backgrounds are far more likely to have familial or professional connections who can advise on entry routes into finance and assist in accessing all-important work experience. Research by KPMG finds that four in 10 people working in financial services have parents working in the same occupation.
Recruitment practices that assess candidates on the basis of ‘cultural fit’ may favour those from more affluent backgrounds – who are likely to ‘match’ the predominantly higher socio-economic organisational culture – while excluding those from working-class backgrounds.
The disadvantages don’t stop there.
Research by the Bridge Group finds that finance professionals from higher socio-economic backgrounds get promoted six months faster than those from lower socio-economic backgrounds. As a result, nine in 10 senior-level employees come from higher socio-economic backgrounds, and almost half attended fee- paying or selective schools.
There is nothing to indicate that people from working-class backgrounds perform worse in their roles than their more affluent peers – they perform the same, if not better – which would imply that they are no less deserving of a promotion. So, what’s causing the progression gap?
Career progression can be aided by polish, visibility, gravitas and confidence – among other makers of presentation, speech and style – which are often conflated with perceptions of talent, despite having zero link to performance.
This can have an advantageous effect for professionals from more affluent backgrounds, who are likely to display what are inherent forms of higher socio-economic behaviour.
Professionals from higher socio-economic backgrounds may find it easier to form connections with senior colleagues – with whom they are likely to share ‘exclusive’ social and cultural experiences – who can offer mentorship and sponsorship to aid their career progression.
Some working-class professionals may even exclude themselves from promotion for fear of not fitting in at the top.
The lack of working-class representation in senior roles – which are, of course, more lucrative – causes a disparity in earnings.
According to research by the Bridge Group, finance professionals from lower socio-economic backgrounds are paid on average £17,500 less per year than those from higher socio-economic backgrounds. This is the widest pay gap across all sectors.
In next month’s issue I will discuss why the UK government must mandate socio- economic background reporting to prompt employers to take action to boost working-class representation across all levels of seniority in their workplaces.
