With the gender pay gap proving stubbornly difficult to close, many advocates argue for a system of pay transparency so that those companies not paying equally are named and shamed. Research from Arizona State University suggests this isn’t enough on its own to do the job.

The research looks at employee reviews on Glassdoor changed after pay gap disclosures were made mandatory in the UK for any organization employing over 250 people.

No silver bullet

The hope was that by naming and shaming companies in this way, it would force the pay gap to close as firms would strive to protect their reputations. The research suggests that no such reputational risks emerged, however, as Glassdoor ratings didn’t seem to differ regardless of how the organization performed in terms of the pay gap.

Whether this is because employees aren’t aware of the information or don’t feel it’s important isn’t clear, but the researchers believe that employees who choose to stay in organizations with a large pay gap have come to accept it as the way things are.

Interestingly, however, there did appear to be a reputational boost for firms that did pay men and women relatively equally. Their ratings appeared to improve, and indeed the reviews left of the companies were also more likely to mention gender. This suggests that firms with a low gender pay gap might benefit from making this public, especially given the incredibly tight labor market at the moment.

While that may help those companies, the fact that people aren’t building on more critical findings suggests that transparency legislation should not be viewed as a panacea to the problem. Hopefully, if employees do increasingly gravitate towards firms that do pay more egalitariangly, however, it will slowly move the needle in the right direction.