Positions attained. In 1992, 31 percent of black women had attained top positions (CEO or COO/Senior vice president); in 1997 this proportion was reduced to 23 percent. In contrast, white woman retained their share of top positions--about 35 percent. Hispanic women today occupy about as many top positions as blacks but Asian women are the least likely to be found in top management (15 percent). With the exception of Asian women, these data are corroborated in the number of levels away from the CEO that respondents reported. (Refer to Table 3.)

The position information comparing men shows that both black and white men are less likely to be in top positions in 1997 than they were in 1992. In fact, a higher proportion of white men dropped out of top positions (14 percent) than black men (5 percent). Hispanic men fell between whites and blacks in the proportion that had top positions; Asian men, like their female counterparts had the lowest proportion of top positions (36 percent) among males in the study.

Area of Responsibility. In 1992, about half of black and white women were general managers. But black women were twice as likely to be executives of special healthcare sectors including HMO/PPOs, ambulatory services and associations. Whites were disproportionately managing clinical and ancillary services.(Refer to Table 4) Today, the proportion of black women in general management dropped to about a third while nearly half of white women retained their general management responsibilities. Blacks doubled their proportion in sector management in the past five years; whites nearly tripled their presence in sector management--reflecting the growing opportunities in non-hospital settings. For the most part, Hispanic women are in positions similar to whites while Asian women approximate the distribution of the blacks.

For men, the 1992 differences between blacks' and whites' area of responsibility was more pronounced. Half of the black men and nearly three quarters of the whites were in general management. Today however, about half of both groups are in general management; the bulk of those who left are now found in sector management.

Employing organization. Table 5 shows that black and white females, in 1992, were found in similar types of organizations. By 1997, more whites had retained positions in hospitals while blacks were found in other organizations including non-providers such as consulting and education. Hispanic women are disproportionately employed by public health agencies and Asian women are most likely to be in "other provider" settings including ambulatory and long term care facilities. Black and Hispanic women were more likely than whites and Asians to work in governmental organizations.

Fewer black men than white men in healthcare management today find work in hospitals but the gap is narrowing compared to 1992. Black men have shifted from working more in freestanding hospitals to system hospitals. White men continue to be fairly evenly divided between these two hospital types. Fewer black men today than in 1992 work in non provider (e.g., consulting or education) settings while more white men have taken on jobs in these organizations.

Hispanic men, like Hispanic women are disproportionately found in public health settings under governmental auspices. Among all the males, the modal employing organization continues to be the system hospital. Blacks and whites typically work in not for profit secular settings; Hispanics and Asians are typically employed in governmental settings.

Role as Mentor. Women, regardless of race/ethnicity, are about equally likely to serve as mentors. (Table 6) This was true for approximately 60 percent of respondents both in 1992 and today. Men, in contrast, vary more by race/ethnicity. About 70 percent of black men compared to less than 60 percent of white men serve as mentors. Hispanic and Asian males fall midway between blacks and whites in serving as mentors.

Blacks are more likely to acquire black protégés; whites attract white protégés, Hispanics attract Hispanic protégés and Asian females attract Asian female protégés while Asian males attract Asians of either gender.

Salary. Table 7 displays a key outcome in this career attainment study--the salary earned in 1996 including bonus, if any, from professional work from their employers before deducting retirement contributions and taxes. In calendar year 1991, black women earned 8 percent less than white women. In 1996, black women earned 17 percent less than white women, while Hispanic women earned 19 percent less and Asian women 20 percent less than white women. Thus, white women earned an average of $80 thousand compared to others who earned in the mid $60s. These salaries as not necessarily representative of the actual salaries earned by healthcare executives today since survey responses from executives earning higher salaries may have been disproportionately low.

The story for men is quite different. The blacks in calendar year 1991, earned on average, 18 percent lower salaries than the whites. Today, the gap is narrowing, blacks earn on average, 12 percent less than whites. Hispanic men earn 11 percent less than whites; Asian men earn 4 percent less than white men.

To a great extent, salary is dependent on position attained. Table 8 considers the salary differentials within position group. Thus, if individuals attain high level positions, can they expect to receive comparable pay irrespective of their race/ethnicity? The table shows that with the sample size in this study, incomes within position groupings are quite comparable with two exceptions: female Hispanic COOs or senior vice presidents earn significantly less than female whites in the same or similar positions. Also, among male CEOs, blacks earn significantly less than Asians.

In Table 9 we carry this idea one step further. Within these positions, what would the expected salary be for the race/ethnic groups if we controlled for "human capital" features such as level of education attained and years of experience as a healthcare manager? The findings show that among women, in 1992, few differences of note exist; by 1997 however, black and Hispanic women overall fare more poorly than whites. This pattern is repeated among the men.

Comparisons within position group are hampered by few observations and by several outliers that skewed the groups' means upward. The data suggest however, that if blacks and Hispanics obtain the same amount of education and years of experience as whites, they will not be as well remunerated as whites at senior level positions.

Job satisfaction. In 1992, and again in 1997, black women expressed less satisfaction than the whites relative to pay and fringe benefits, security, sanctions and treatment received when they made a mistake, respect from supervisors and autonomy. Only in respect they received from subordinates did black and white women not differ in 1992; in 1997, their responses were not too different in this regard again. Hispanic women's satisfaction generally fell between the level of blacks' and whites'. Asian women appear to be more satisfied with the autonomy they are given and the security of their positions than the others. But they are less satisfied with the respect they receive from their subordinates. (Refer to Table 10)

Men showed a mixed picture with respect to job satisfaction. For example, in 1992, blacks and whites did not differ in regard to satisfaction with pay and fringe benefits nor with regard to supervisors' respect. But by 1997, black men despite the narrowing of the pay differential, expressed significantly less satisfaction with their pay and fringe benefits that whites or Hispanics did. Likewise, blacks today are less satisfied than other groups with the respect they received from their supervisors.

Job Commitment. Using a previously validated scale, the data show that overall, black women and men express lowest levels of commitment and whites express highest levels (Table 11). In most cases, Hispanic and Asian respondents fell between those of the whites and the blacks.

For example, compared to the others, blacks are less likely to say they have a strong feeling of belonging to the organization, nor do they feel as emotionally attached to it. Black men are somewhat more committed than black women. For example, more of the men said the organization had great personal meaning for them and more said they would be happy to spend the remainder of their careers with their current employer. Significantly, there were no differences in the groups' responses to the ease of becoming attached to another organization--most--including black respondents--expressed doubt about this.

Overall, the findings of career attainment showed that while hospitals continue to hold the main employer role, other providers are attracting sizable proportions of minorities with Hispanics disproportionately present in public health agencies. Growth areas for the 1997 respondents were notably "sector management" including ambulatory centers, associations and other non-generalist positions. With the exception of Asian women, all respondent groups indicated involvement as serving as mentors--focusing especially on protégés from their own race/ethnic group.

We noted that the salary gap between white and black women grew in the past half decade, the reverse was true for men. Within position levels, salaries among the race/ethnic groups were roughly comparable although sample size precluded a definitive statement on this issue. Despite some improvements in comparability of incomes between black and white males, blacks today express less satisfaction with regard to their pay and fringe benefits. Black women showed declining satisfaction in their job security and how they are treated when they erred. Finally, job commitment is generally lower among the blacks when compared to the other race/ethnic groups.