Why Female Engineers Stay: Career Growth Outweighs Pay Fairness in South African Study

When a female engineer in South Africa weighs whether to stay with her employer, the deciding factor is often not the size of her paycheck. New research from the University of South Africa, published in Frontiers in Sociology, suggests that women working in the country’s engineering sector are more likely to resign over stalled career development than over perceived pay inequity, even in an industry where a documented gender wage gap of around 28 percent persists. The findings challenge a common assumption that remuneration is the primary lever for retaining female technical talent.

The study, conducted by MaryAnne Williams, Mokgata Alleen Matjie and Sonja Grobler from the Department of Industrial and Organisational Psychology, set out to explore how female engineers perceive remuneration fairness and career growth, and how those experiences relate to their intentions to remain with or leave an organisation. Rather than measuring the magnitude of pay disparities, the researchers adopted a qualitative, phenomenological design aimed at understanding how participants experienced, interpreted and attached meaning to their pay, their professional development and their prospects within a male-dominated workplace.

Data came from semi-structured individual interviews with nine female engineers at a South African engineering organisation employing roughly 250 staff. Participants were recruited through the Engineering Council of South Africa, the statutory body with which practising engineers are registered, and each had at least two years of professional experience. The sample spanned civil, structural and electrical engineering as well as project management, was predominantly Black at 66.7 percent, and averaged 36.8 years of age with 11.5 years of professional experience. Interviews lasting between 30 and 45 minutes were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive thematic analysis supported by the qualitative data analysis software ATLAS.ti, with trustworthiness reinforced through co-coding, member checking and reflective journaling.

The theoretical scaffolding of the study draws on three complementary frameworks. Equity Theory, articulated by John Stacey Adams in the 1960s, holds that employees judge fairness by comparing their input-to-output ratios, such as skills and effort against pay and recognition, with those of relevant peers; perceived imbalance motivates corrective action, from reduced effort to job search. Organisational Justice Theory distinguishes distributive justice, the fairness of outcomes, from procedural justice, the fairness of the processes that produce them, and interactional justice, the fairness of interpersonal treatment. Social Exchange Theory, associated with Peter Blau, frames the employment relationship as a reciprocal exchange in which fair treatment is repaid with commitment, while perceived breach of the psychological contract invites withdrawal.

Against that backdrop, the results were in places surprising. Several participants described their remuneration as relatively fair or broadly consistent with their expectations, with one engineer stating she was compensated fairly in comparison with both male and female peers and even positioned toward the upper bracket of her cohort. The researchers caution, however, that these perceptions should not be read as evidence that objective gender-based pay disparities were absent. Rather, participants’ judgments were shaped by individual expectations, comparison points, workload, career aspirations and limited visibility into what male counterparts actually earned, a dynamic consistent with prior research suggesting that entry- and mid-level STEM roles pay well enough to satisfy many women regardless of possible gaps.

Where dissatisfaction did surface, it centred less on the numbers themselves than on the machinery that produced them. Participants described pay-setting processes that lacked transparency and consistent benchmarking, with salary ranges apparently determined by one or two decision-makers behind closed doors. Under Organisational Justice Theory, such opacity undermines procedural and informational justice, eroding trust in the legitimacy of pay decisions. The interviews also revealed what the researchers term organisationally mediated negotiation: remuneration outcomes appeared to hinge on individual bargaining, and some participants observed that male colleagues actively escalated their pay concerns to senior leadership while women tended to accept whatever increase was announced. The authors are careful to note that these accounts do not support generalisations about women’s negotiation abilities or willingness to accept inequitable pay; instead, negotiation should be understood as socially and organisationally embedded, shaped by hierarchical relationships, gendered expectations and unequal access to decision-makers.

The most striking finding concerns what actually drives women toward the exit. Across the interviews, resignation was more often framed as a development-oriented career move than a pay protest. One participant explained that she had resigned for another opportunity to gain experience in a technical niche and remain relevant, describing her pay as fair but her growth prospects as the real issue. Another said the factors pushing most women out had not been money but access to work or projects, personality clashes with bosses and flexibility. In line with earlier findings that women in engineering value recognition and advancement opportunities more than remuneration, the study’s participants treated pay as one consideration among many, subordinate to meaningful work, professional exposure and long-term skill acquisition.

That said, remuneration was far from irrelevant. The researchers found that inadequate or inequitable pay functioned less as a direct cause of resignation than as a catalyst that opened engineers to external opportunities. Several participants described a psychological shift in which perceived underpayment made them curious about head-hunting approaches they would otherwise ignore, with one noting that even engineers who love their company will at least ask what an external offer is worth. Others reported that a sufficiently large external offer, in one case a doubling of salary, would prompt an immediate departure despite strong attachment to the organisation’s culture and projects. Compensation thus operates alongside career development, management treatment and workplace flexibility as a retention factor, and substantial pay disparities can outweigh otherwise positive organisational attributes.

Perhaps the most nuanced pattern was strategic patience. Rather than making impulsive decisions based on pay dissatisfaction, many participants described deliberately timing their transitions around developmental goals, waiting until they had absorbed the skills, experience, credentials or professional exposure needed for their next move. Some stayed because employers had signalled future salary adjustments tied to professional registration or role changes, though unfulfilled promises were flagged as a trigger for reconsideration. The authors interpret this as evidence that turnover intentions among female engineers are often delayed or moderated when organisations continue to provide valuable developmental opportunities and demonstrate commitment to future reward equity, but that misalignment between career aspirations and organisational roles eventually converts patience into a strategically timed exit.

The study carries clear implications for employers seeking to retain female engineering talent in South Africa, where women constitute roughly 43 to 44 percent of STEM graduates but only 23 to 29 percent of senior professional roles, and just 14.2 percent of registered professional engineers according to the Engineering Council of South Africa. The researchers recommend strengthening transparent remuneration practices, including publishing salary ranges, building equitable career-development pathways, conducting pay equity audits, and empowering employees with negotiation support through training, mentorship and inclusive leadership. They also stress the need to distinguish subjective perceptions of remuneration fairness from objective pay equity, which requires comparative remuneration data accounting for job level, responsibilities, experience, performance and benefits. With South Africa’s engineering sector underpinning infrastructure, energy systems and industrial competitiveness amid persistent skills shortages, the message for organisations is that retention is not solely about competitive pay, but about the ability to support employees’ long-term career objectives while maintaining visible fairness and trust.

Subject of Research: Perceived remuneration fairness, career growth and turnover intentions among female engineers in South Africa

Article Title: Perceived remuneration fairness, career growth and turnover intentions among female engineers in a South African organisation

Article References: Williams, M., Matjie, M. A., & Grobler, S. (2026). Perceived remuneration fairness, career growth and turnover intentions among female engineers in a South African organisation. Frontiers in Sociology, 11, Article 1917717. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2026.1917717

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.3389/fsoc.2026.1917717

Keywords: female engineers, remuneration fairness, career growth, turnover intentions, South Africa, STEM, gender equity, organisational justice, pay transparency, qualitative research, workforce retention, engineering sector