Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explain the problem with how gender is positioned in hospitality and tourism management studies. It recommends critical theories to investigate how gender is researched in the sector’s academic and institutional systems.

The conceptual study explains contemporary gender theories and gives examples of relevant hospitality and tourism management studies. A four point critical agenda for researching gender is proposed and justified.

The study highlights how the focus on “female leadership” as different from the male norm and the use of traditional theoretical framings reinforce stereotypes about the primacy of women’s domestic commitments to their detriment.

A limitation of this academy focussed study is that it has not recommended specific initiatives to combat specific issues of gender discrimination in hospitality and tourism employment. A further limitation is that the primary focus was on critical management theory to explain heteronormative based gender discrimination. It did not discuss queer theory.

In addition, a new research agenda, steps are proposed to change the masculine culture. Hospitality and tourism universities and research institutions should review men’s/women’s/gender diverse representation at leadership levels. Critical gender research approaches may also be fostered by sectorial conference streams and journal special issues and university graduate research students should be taught to design such studies.

The use of contemporary approaches in gender studies will enable researchers to propose more targeted equality and diversity management actions for industry. They will also assist educators to better design curricula that protect and promote the interests of women studying a hospitality, tourism or events degree and those who identify as gender diverse.

The paper challenges the masculine status quo in hospitality and tourism management gender studies, arguing that adherence to traditional orthodoxies has stifled the development of critical paradigms and methodologies. Its key contribution is to reveal the advantages that critical gender theorising can bring to further the aim of gender equality by showing practical applications.

To introduce critical gender theory to events studies and set an agenda for research in this area. This paper focuses on various contexts, approaches and applications for “doing gender” in critical event studies. It draws upon interdisciplinary frameworks to develop robust theoretical ways of interrogating issues related to power and structural inequalities in events contexts.

A conceptual discussion of “doing gender” and critical gender theory and review of relevant research in this area within event studies. Adopting feminist and intersectional perspectives and applying them to events environments has potential to inform current theoretical developments and wider sector practices, and, ultimately, change the dominant heteronormative patriarchal paradigm of the experiential landscape.

Event studies has been slow to engage with gender theory and gender-aware research, to the detriment of theoretical and practical development within the field.

A call for more gender-aware research within event studies. The goal of this paper is to galvanise gender-aware events research to centralise the marginalised and amplify feminist voices in critical event studies. Feminist and gender-aware frameworks encourage researchers to be critical and to question the underlying power structures and discourses that shape practices, behaviours and interactions. This creates new pathways to find ways to overcome inequalities, which can improve overall events praxis.

The paper introduces critical gender theory as a fruitful framework for future events research. It is an under-researched area of study, representing a significant gap in ways of theorising and representing different aspects of events. We argue it is imperative that researchers take up the challenge of incorporating feminist and/or gender-aware frameworks within their research as a matter of routine.

This study aims to use the gender socialization theory, critical mass theory and legitimacy theory to examine the female gender and environmental disclosure of family and non-family-controlled firms in India.

A sample size of 783 and 177 firm-year observations for family and non-family-controlled firms, respectively, between 2009 and 2020 uses descriptive statistics, a test of difference in means and panel regression with random effect assumptions for data interpretation.

The descriptive statistics show a significant mean difference between family-controlled firms and non-family-controlled firms in India. The first findings show that female chief executive officers (CEOs) and CEO duality have a positive and statistically significant association with environmental disclosure in a family-controlled firm but not in non-family-controlled firms in India. The second findings show that independent female directors have no significant association with environmental disclosure of family and non-family firms in India. The fourth findings with critical mass theory confirm the insignificant association of female directors on environmental disclosure of family and non-family firms in India. The results are robust to controlling firm-level variables.

Firms in the Indian context, through this study, assure stakeholders that family firms are better at improving stakeholder’s expectation of environmental accountability than non-family firms, especially where female CEOs are in charge.

This study adds the family perspective of the relationship between female CEOs and the environmental disclosure of listed firms in India. Also, female CEO duality and environmental disclosure add novelty to the research studies on gender and environmental disclosure.

The importance of board composition, especially female directors’ presence on boards, is thought to influence corporate responsibility performance, has attracted significant scholarly interest. This study aims to examine how board gender diversity (BGD) affects corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance and the moderating factors that influence the relationship. There is a lack of research on the moderating indicators (variable measurement, geographic location, data sets and gender parity score) that impact the BGD and CSR relationship.

This study uses content analysis and meta-analysis to combine the findings of 44 selected papers published from 2010 to 2019, comprehensively reviewing the academic literature on gender diversity in the board composition. Independent and dependent variables are classified based on the variable measurement; this study examines the moderator indicators, such as geographical location, research data sets and gender parity score to investigate the BGD and CSR relationship.

The findings indicated a significant positive relationship between BGD and CSR performance. The meta-method results showed that the measurements of BGD and CSR limited to impact on the relationship. But a significant moderating effect of the geographical location on the BGD-CSR relationship, the BGD-CSR relationship would be stronger in the firms located in North America than firms located in Asia and other areas. Empirical results also showed a significant moderating effect of gender parity score. There would be stronger BGD-CSR relations in the firms located in the countries with higher gender parity score than the firms located in the countries with low gender parity score. This means the female status is an essential indicator of moderating the BGD-CSR relationship.

The main shortcoming is a lack of sufficient articles on the BGD-CSR relationship. In a future study, researchers may use other databases, such as Google scholar or Ebscohost, to increase the number of relevant articles. These studies would offer new insight into the meta-analysis of the relationship between the BGD and CSR. Finally, the authors identify the potential trend in future research, future research on BGD will need for standardized metrics. The Geographic location is an important indicator that will influence the female director role in CSR. A systematic measure and data of gender research are more important for study in this field.

Meta-analysis is conducted on the independent and dependent variables to examine the causality between BGD and CSR performance, which could better explore diversity among different countries’ boards and, more generally, to investigate the degree to which diversity may influence CSR. Firms may try to balance the BGD to improve future development prospects. Specifically, the results of this study have important implications for corporate governance and policymakers.

First, this systematic study uses meta-analysis to combine the findings of previous research on the BGD-CSR. The current research attempts to incorporate mixed empirical results based on the different variable measurements. Second, this study develop and test a contingency model of female on boards and CSR that considers uses the geographic location factors that may enhance or diminish the influence of female on boards on CSR. Specifically, the authors examine whether and under what conditions, boards with more female directors differ for inter-country heterogeneity to which they engage in monitoring roles and are involved with strategy management.

First, this study could be the first systematic study that uses the meta-analysis to combine previous research findings on the BGD-CSR. Second, the current research attempts to incorporate mixed empirical results based on the different variable measurements. Third, this study uses the “gender parity score” to account for inter-country heterogeneity in the BGD-CSR relationship. This study also identifies the potential trend in future research.

It has been suggested that organisations with a better balance, or critical mass, of women would be more tolerant of difference and foster the inclusion of other women. This paper seeks to investigate whether a strategy of critical mass can really work in the engineering sector.

The data are based on research funded by the ESRC, and problematise critical mass theory through semi‐structured qualitative interviews and focus groups with female students from a range of engineering disciplines.

The findings demonstrate that women engineering students accept gender discrimination, view the industry positively, value their “novelty” status, and are critical of other women.

While these attitudes may be a result of women's assimilation into the existing engineering culture, they do little to further women's cause in engineering. Furthermore, it points to both the necessity, and difficulties, of transforming the engineering culture to ensure that the engineering professions are a place where women can not only survive but also thrive.

While previous research has addressed the critical mass of women in science, engineering and technology, this research critiques critical mass theory, not only because women continue to remain isolated within the sector, despite increasing numbers, but also because many women engineers reinforce the masculine culture within engineering.

Purpose – The purpose of this chapter is to examine the field of criminal justice and assess how diversity influences what is taught and, how research is conducted in the field.

Methodology/approach – This chapter looks at the historical exclusion of feminist and integrative theories on crime and criminal justice. A socio-legal analysis of how the increase in the number of women faculty and faculty of color has influenced teaching and research in the field of criminal justice.

Findings – As more women and persons of color become faculty and practitioners in the field of criminal justice, then more diverse perspectives will be promoted. It is not enough to change a discriminatory law or engage in affirmative action to hire more women and persons of color, it is important to understand how preconceived biases about women and non-white persons impact who we define as criminal, how we educate students in the field, and how we respond to the needs of offenders and victims.

Originality/value – Research on diversity in the field of criminal justice has focused on historical discrimination. More research is needed on the impact that diversity has in research performed and what is being taught in the field of criminal justice.

The investigation of the relationship between gender diversity and corporate risk-taking is a recent stream of research. In this study, the authors propose an answer to the following main question: What do the authors know about gender effects in corporate risk-taking and how should we proceed?

In order to ensure the quality and the objectiveness of the literature review, the authors selected articles published in journals that are simultaneously ranked by the Chartered Association of Business Schools (ABS, 2018) and by the Journal Citation Reports (JCR, 2018), focused on the Board of Directors (BoD) and Top Management Teams (TMT).

The literature review reveals that women's presence on the BoD and TMT impacts corporate risk-taking in different ways. Based on the analysis, it is possible to organize the extant findings in two major categories, according to gender measures, firm type and country of origin: (1) universal effects – women decrease firms' litigation risk, failure risk and operational risk while they have no significant effect on insolvency risk and; (2) contingent effects – women have contingent effects on financial risk, manipulation risk, total risk, idiosyncratic risk and systematic risk.

Covering several different research fields, this study provides a comprehensive review concerning what the authors know regarding the effects of the BoD and TMT gender diversity in corporate risk-taking. The authors present a model summarizing empirical findings and propose a number of avenues for future research.

Mats Alvesson is professor of business administration at the University of Lund, Sweden and at University of Queensland Business School, Australia. Research interests include critical theory, gender, power, management of knowledge intensive organizations, leadership, identity, organizational image, organizational culture and symbolism, qualitative methods and philosophy of science. Recent books include Interpreting Interviews (Sage, 2011), Metaphor We Lead By: Understanding Leadership in the Real World (Routledge, 2011, edited with Andre Spicer), Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies (Oxford University Press, edited with Todd Bridgman and Hugh Willmott), Understanding Gender and Organizations (Sage, 2009, 2nd edition edited with Yvonne Billing), Reflexive Methodology (Sage, 2009, 2nd edition edited with Kaj Skoldberg), Changing Organizational Culture (Routledge, 2008, edited with Stefan Sveningsson) and Knowledge Work and Knowledge-Intensive Firms (Oxford University Press, 2004).