Business, government and civil society want to benefit from 100% of the talent pool, but unconscious bias ingrained in minds and embedded in organizational practices and procedures can get in the way. These ten evidence-based practices can help organizations level the playing field by making all stages of the employee lifecycle less biased and more inclusive.
This literature review is an overview of the academic literature relating to diversity and inclusion in organizations. It does not claim to be comprehensive as the existing body of academic work in this somewhat undefined space is vast. Rather, this document aims to focus on individual and organizational levers to promote gender equality. As such, it largely emphasizes recent scholarship from the last 10 years. Earlier, seminal works are included selectively where their influence continues to be felt and where they remain relevant to current conceptions of diversity and inclusion.
The tension between providing services to marginalized groups and organizing them for advocacy to challenge power structures is a fundamental dilemma for Social Change Service Organizations (SCSO). This dilemma exists in many civil society organizations, especially those that work with indigenous communities, such as the Bedouin in Israel, where providing immediate services and advocating for policy change are crucial. Literature shows the tensions that arise from combining service provision and advocacy. However, there are very few studies showing how these organizations manage and overcome these tensions sustainably. The present study is an exploratory case study using the AJEEC (Arab‐Jewish Center for Empowerment, Equality, and Cooperation) in the Naqab as an instrumental single case. It provides an in‐depth understanding of the tensions AJEEC is facing and reveals AJEEC’s unique approach and strategies for managing these tensions effectively and sustainably within the social, political, and cultural contexts. It presents implications for research, policy, and practice.
Representative bureaucracy examines how identity impacts bureaucratic decision-making. Under certain circumstances, identity congruence between government officials and citizens will result in positive outcomes. This article explores how representative bureaucracy literature studies the effects of gender identity and matching. Although studies demonstrate that context and organizational environment impact identity, scholars don’t systematically analyze how outcomes are affected by gender, rely predominantly on binary gender variables, seldom acknowledge organizations as masculine spaces, and don’t problematize masculinity. Using critical gender theory, we offer new proposals for how to expand our understanding of institutionalized gender norms as they relate to public sector decisions.
Public discourse on current inequalities often invokes past injustice endured by minorities. This rhetoric also sometimes underlies contemporary equality policies. Drawing on social identity theory and the employment equity literature, we suggest that reminding people about past injustice against a disadvantaged group (e.g., women) can invoke social identity threat among advantaged group members (e.g., men) and undermine support for employment equity (EE) policies by fostering the belief that inequality no longer exists. We find support for our hypotheses in four studies examining Canadian (three studies) and American (one study) EE policies. Overall, we found that reminders of past injustice toward women undermined men’s support for an EE policy promoting women by heightening their denial of current gender discrimination. Supporting a social identity account, men’s responses were mediated by collective self-esteem, and were attenuated when threat was mitigated. Reminders of past injustice did not influence women’s support for the EE policy.
In this chapter, we explore ways in which affective experience and expression might moderate effects of gender on negotiation, particularly in masculine-stereotypic and male- dominated (MSMD) contexts. We argue that, in MSMD contexts (as compared to more gender- equitable situations), men are likely to have a more chronic experience of power than women and that such gender differences in actual, perceived, and felt power are likely to reinforce gender stereotypes favoring men in negotiation. We articulate a set of propositions about the potential effects of anger and anxiety—two power-linked affective states—on gender in negotiations in MSMD contexts. We consider implications for negotiators’ social and economic outcomes. In conclusion, we suggest practical considerations for managers in MSMD work environments.
We propose a conceptual framework for expanding the scope of future research on the role of gender in career negotiations. Extant research on gender in career negotiations emphasizes women’s disadvantages relative to men in compensation negotiations. We present an inductive study of what and how women negotiate for career advancement and the attainment of leadership positions in organizations, drawing on data from diverse samples of negotiation accounts by senior-executive, mid-level, and early-career professionals from the public, private, and non- profits sectors and six world regions. Integrating insights from six studies, we propose a more comprehensive perspective on what men and women negotiate for career advancement, including their role development and work-family conflicts, as well as compensation. We also identify three distinct negotiating strategies—asking, bending, and shaping—that vary in the extent to which the negotiator conforms to, deviates from, or attempts to redefine organization norms. Our analyses suggest that the choice of negotiating strategy has implications for men’s and women’s career progression, particularly for women’s navigation of nontraditional career paths and men’s and women’s leadership claiming. We suggest new directions for research on the role of negotiation in career advancement and in promoting and mitigating gender inequality in organizations.We propose a conceptual framework for expanding the scope of future research on the role of gender in career negotiations. Extant research on gender in career negotiations emphasizes women’s disadvantages relative to men in compensation negotiations. We present an inductive study of what and how women negotiate for career advancement and the attainment of leadership positions in organizations, drawing on data from diverse samples of negotiation accounts by senior-executive, mid-level, and early-career professionals from the public, private, and non- profits sectors and six world regions. Integrating insights from six studies, we propose a more comprehensive perspective on what men and women negotiate for career advancement, including their role development and work-family conflicts, as well as compensation. We also identify three distinct negotiating strategies—asking, bending, and shaping—that vary in the extent to which the negotiator conforms to, deviates from, or attempts to redefine organization norms. Our analyses suggest that the choice of negotiating strategy has implications for men’s and women’s career progression, particularly for women’s navigation of nontraditional career paths and men’s and women’s leadership claiming. We suggest new directions for research on the role of negotiation in career advancement and in promoting and mitigating gender inequality in organizations.
This article explores what behaviour change, with its associated methods, approaches and policy prescriptions, can offer gender and politics. After outlining the key elements of behaviour change, it considers the potential of its associated methods, primarily field experiments. The third section considers the potential contribution of behaviour change approaches by examining one area – social norms – that has recently become more salient for gender and politics. Finally, it examines behaviour change's gender equality policy implications ('nudges'). It concludes that despite significant problems, a critical, pluralist and problem-driven gender and politics scholarship should engage critically with behaviour change while remaining aware of its limitations.
All 193 member nations of the United Nations agreed in September 2015 to adopt a set of seventeen “Sustainable Development Goals,” to be achieved by 2030. Each of the goals—in such areas as education and health care —is laudable in and of itself, and governments and organizations are working hard on them. But so far there is no overall, positive agenda of what new things need to be done to ensure the goals are achieved across all nations.
In a search of fresh approaches to the longstanding problems targeted by the Sustainable Development Goals, the Japan International Cooperation Agency and the Global Economy and Development program at Brookings mounted a collaborative research effort to advance implementation of Agenda 2030. This edited volume is the product of that effort.
The book approaches the UN’s goals through three broad lenses.
The first considers new approaches to capturing value. Examples include Nigeria’s first green bonds, practical methods to expand women’s economic opportunities, benchmarking to reflect business contributions to achieving the goals, new incentives for investment in infrastructure, and educational systems that promote cross-sector problem solving.
The second lens entails new approaches to targeting places, including oceans, rural areas, fast-growing developing cities, and the interlocking challenge of data systems, including geospatial information generated by satellites.
The third lens focuses on updating governance, broadly defined. Issues include how civil society can align with the SDG challenge; how an advanced economy like Canada can approach the goals at home and abroad; what needs to be done to foster new approaches for managing the global commons; and how can multilateral institutions for health and development finance evolve.
Using Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) microdata over the 1980-2010 period, we provide new empirical evidence on the extent of and trends in the gender wage gap, which declined considerably during this time. By 2010, conventional human capital variables taken together explained little of the gender wage gap, while gender differences in occupation and industry continued to be important. Moreover, the gender pay gap declined much more slowly at the top of the wage distribution than at the middle or bottom and by 2010 was noticeably higher at the top. We then survey the literature to identify what has been learned about the explanations for the gap. We conclude that many of the traditional explanations continue to have salience. Although human-capital factors are now relatively unimportant in the aggregate, women's work force interruptions and shorter hours remain significant in high-skilled occupations, possibly due to compensating differentials. Gender differences in occupations and industries, as well as differences in gender roles and the gender division of labor remain important, and research based on experimental evidence strongly suggests that discrimination cannot be discounted. Psychological attributes or noncognitive skills comprise one of the newer explanations for gender differences in outcomes. Our effort to assess the quantitative evidence on the importance of these factors suggests that they account for a small to moderate portion of the gender pay gap, considerably smaller than, say, occupation and industry effects, though they appear to modestly contribute to these differences.
This study analyzes detailed minutes of board meetings of business companies in which the Israeli government holds a substantial equity interest. Boards with at least three directors of each gender are found to be at least 79% more active at board meetings than those without such representation. This phenomenon is driven by women directors in particular; they are more active when a critical mass of at least three women is in attendance. Gender-balanced boards are also more likely to replace underperforming CEOs and are particularly active during periods when CEOs are being replaced.
Scientific and engineering research is increasingly global, and international collaboration can be essential to academic success. Yet even as administrators and policymakers extol the benefits of global science, few recognize the diversity of international research collaborations and their participants, or take gendered inequalities into account. Women in Global Science is the first book to consider systematically the challenges and opportunities that the globalization of scientific work brings to U.S. academics, especially for women faculty.
Kathrin Zippel looks to the STEM fields as a case study, where gendered cultures and structures in academia have contributed to an underrepresentation of women. While some have approached underrepresentation as a national concern with a national solution, Zippel highlights how gender relations are reconfigured in global academia. For U.S. women in particular, international collaboration offers opportunities to step outside of exclusionary networks at home. International collaboration is not the panacea to gendered inequalities in academia, but, as Zippel argues, international considerations can be key to ending the steady attrition of women in STEM fields and developing a more inclusive academic world.