Search results

This paper aims to answer the following research questions: Does the Canadian Arts Summit's membership (i.e. Canada’s largest cultural institutions) reflect Canada's diversity? What is the state of diversity among leadership roles within Canada's largest cultural institutions when viewed through a geographical, gender and racial diversity, and intersectional lens?

Employing a geographic, gender, racial diversity and intersectional lens, the authors investigated the largest and most influential arts and cultural organizations in Canada (n = 125) to examine their leadership diversity. The authors found that there is a disconnect between the diversity of Canada and the leadership representation among the largest arts organizations. The authors rationalize the management implications of a lack of diversity leading Canada's cultural sector.

The leadership of major arts organizations in Canada does not reflect the diversity of Canada's population. For example, among 125 Canadian Arts Summit organizations, only 5.7% of CEOs are racialized compared to 94.3% who are White. The findings show similar results for lack of diversity in the Artistic Director and Chair of the Board roles.

There is limited research using this methodology to investigate leadership diversity, especially in the arts and culture sector. This research can create a benchmark for the sector to improve the status quo. The value of this research aims to encourage policy actors and arts leaders to address diversity and inclusion within their organizations and the communities they aim to serve. This research provides the foundation for future studies exploring leadership diversity and representation in the Canadian arts sector.

In the US, a growing number of organizations and industries are seeking to affirm their commitment to and efforts around diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) as recent events have increased attention to social inequities. As health care organizations are considering new ways to incorporate DEI initiatives within their workforce, the anticipated result of these efforts is a reduction in health inequities that have plagued our country for centuries. Unfortunately, there are few frameworks to guide these efforts because few successfully link organizational DEI initiatives with health equity outcomes. The purpose of this chapter is to review existing scholarship and evidence using an organizational lens to examine how health care organizations can advance DEI initiatives in the pursuit of reducing or eliminating health inequities. First, this chapter defines important terms of DEI and health equity in health care. Next, we describe the methods for our narrative review. We propose a model for understanding health care organizational activity and its impact on health inequities based in organizational learning that includes four interrelated parts: intention, action, outcomes, and learning. We summarize the existing scholarship in each of these areas and provide recommendations for enhancing future research. Across the body of knowledge in these areas, disciplinary and other silos may be the biggest barrier to knowledge creation and knowledge transfer. Moving forward, scholars and practitioners should seek to collaborate further in their respective efforts to achieve health equity by creating formalized initiatives with linkages between practice and research communities.

Boards presently are considered the most critical component in improving corporate governance (CG). Board diversity is increasingly being recommended as a tool for enhancing firm performance. Academic research and regulatory action regarding board diversity are focussed mainly on gender and ethnic composition of boards. However, the perspective of board members on board diversity and its impact is mostly missing. Moreover, while strategic leadership perspective suggests that a broader set of upper echelon’s characteristics may shape their actions, empirical evidence investigating the impact of less-explored attributes of diversity is almost non-existent. While the research on the input–output relationship between board diversity and firm performance remains equivocal, an intervening relationship between board diversity and board effectiveness needs to be understood. The purpose of this paper is to address all three limitations and explore the subject from board members’ perspective.

The paper presents the findings of qualitative, exploratory research conducted by interviewing 42 board members of FTSE 350 companies. The data are analysed thematically.

The findings of the research suggest that board members of FTSE 350 companies consider the diversity of functional experience to be a critical requirement for boards’ role-effectiveness. Functionally diverse boards manage external dependencies more effectively and challenge assumptions of the executive more efficiently, thus improving CG. The findings significantly contribute to the literature on board diversity, as well as to strategic leadership theory and other applicable theories. The research is conducted with a relatively small but elite and difficult to approach set of 42 board members of FTSE 350 companies.

The paper makes a unique and significant contribution to praxis by presenting the perspective of practitioners of CG – board members. The findings may encourage board nomination committees to seek board diversity beyond the gender and ethnic characteristics of directors. The findings may also be relevant for policy formulation, as they indicate that functionally diverse boards have improved effectiveness in a range of board roles.

Board diversity is about building a board that accurately reflects the make-up of the population and stakeholders of the society where the company operates. The aim of board diversity is to cultivate a broad range of attributes and perspectives that reflects real-world demographics as boards need to continue to earn their “licence to operate in society” as organisations have a responsibility to multiple constituents and stakeholders, including the community and the wider society within which they exist. Building social capital through diversity has value in the wider context of modern society and achieving social justice.

The paper makes an original and unique contribution to strategic leadership theory by strengthening the argument of the theory. The paper explores beyond widely researched attributes of gender and ethnicity on boards and explores the impact of a less-researched characteristic of directors – their functional experience. Moreover, the paper opens the “black box” of CG – boards, and presents the perspectives of board members. The findings indicate that board members in FTSE 350 boards define diversity more broadly than academics and regulatory agencies often do.

Besides diversity's positive effects, groups of “we” against “them” may form in accordance with social categorization theory, showing diversity's negative consequences. The authors aim to reconcile these results and examine their boundary conditions.

The authors studied 584 working professionals from five contexts (transnational companies dealing with multicultural interactions) and analyzed data using moderated-mediation procedures.

A leader-promoting diversity climate plays a crucial role in moderating the negative relationship between perceived dissimilarity and group identification, which is mediated by value dissimilarity.

This study mainly contributes by treating dissimilarity as a multicomponent construct, emphasizing the crucial differences embodied in various conceptualizations of dissimilarity – namely visible and value dissimilarity. For dissimilarity to result in group identification, the results highlight leaders' crucial role, beyond that of organizations and individuals, in stimulating a diversity-embracing climate in work units.

This research sought to determine if there existed a common set of courses amongst undergraduate leadership degree programs, provide guidance for new program development and program revision, promote discussion about future leadership curriculum development and provide a starting point for developing common leadership curriculum expectations nationally.

Content analysis was performed.

Program course similarities appear to represent the organic development of unofficial common core requirements within undergraduate leadership programs. Further, there appeared to be no significant trend as to which academic department leadership programs were placed.

This study identifies commonly occurring classes in traditional leadership degrees, offering insights for the development of new programs and assessment of current leadership degrees.

Structural mentoring barriers are policies, practices and cultural norms that collectively disadvantage marginalized groups and perpetuate disparities in mentoring. This study aims to better understand structural mentoring barriers at the postdoctoral training stage, which has a direct impact on faculty diversity and national efforts to retain underrepresented groups in research careers.

A diverse sample of postdoctoral scholars (“postdocs”) from across the USA were asked to participate in focus groups to discuss their training experiences. The authors conducted five 90-min focus groups with 32 biomedical postdocs, including 20 (63%) women and 15 (47%) individuals from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups (URG).

A social-ecological framework was used to categorize both the upstream and downstream manifestations of structural mentoring barriers, as well as mentoring barriers, overall. Notable structural barriers included: academic politics and scientific hierarchy; inequalities resulting from mentor prestige; the (over) reliance on one mentor; the lack of formal training for academic and non-academic careers; and the lack of institutional diversity and institutional mentor training. To overcome these barriers, postdocs strongly encouraged developing a network or team of mentors and recommended institutional interventions that create more comprehensive professional development, mentorship and belonging.

For postdoctoral scientists, structural mentoring barriers can permeate down to institutional, interpersonal and individual levels, impeding a successful transition to an independent research career. This work provides strong evidence for promoting mentorship networks and cultivating a “mentoring milieu” that fosters a supportive community and a strong culture of mentorship at all levels.

Drawing on the transformational leadership (TL) and knowledge-based view (KBV) theory, the present study investigates the impact of TL on radical innovation (RI) through the mediation of knowledge management capabilities (KMCs) and moderation of competitive intensity (CI) of textile and apparel industries with an Asian context.

Data were collected from the relevant stakeholders of the industry-university collaboration teams with a structured survey questionnaire. Working with 304 textile and apparel industry respondents, structural equation modeling based partial least square (PLS-SEM) is used to test the conceptual framework. PLS-SEM technique was applied to test the hypothesis using Smart-PLS 3.8 packages program.

The results proposed TL has a positive impact on KMC and RI. Furthermore, the study reveals KMC positively mediated the relationship between TL and RI. This mediation is conditional on the moderating role of CI for the KMC (knowledge acquisition capability + knowledge-sharing capability) path to RI. Conversely, moderation of CI is insignificant and does not influence on fostering RI.

Leaders and managers have realized creative and innovative culture is built within the organizations by leader-follower collaboration through actual knowledge acquisition and knowledge sharing. Moreover, industry policymakers and practitioners establish the knowledge management department to enhance the innovation culture among the firms' stakeholders to encourage RI to sustain the global business market.

The study has introduced KMC as a mediator and CI as a moderator in the proposed model between TL-RI and KMC-RI. Further, it explores the linkages between TL, KMC, CI and RI.

Diversity management is seen as a decisive factor for ensuring the development of socially responsible innovations (Beacham and Shambaugh, 2011; Sonntag, 2014; López, 2015; Uebernickel et al., 2015). However, many diversity management approaches fail due to a one-sided consideration of diversity (Thomas and Ely, 2019) and a lacking linkage between the prevailing organizational culture and the perception of diversity in the respective organization. Reflecting the importance of diverse perspectives, research institutions have a special responsibility to actively deal with diversity, as they are publicly funded institutions that drive socially relevant development and educate future generations of developers, leaders and decision-makers. Nevertheless, only a few studies have so far dealt with the influence of the special framework conditions of the science system on diversity management. Focusing on the interdependency of the organizational culture and diversity management especially in a university research environment, this chapter aims in a first step to provide a theoretical perspective on the framework conditions of a complex research organization in Germany in order to understand the system-specific factors influencing diversity management. In a second step, an exploratory cluster analysis is presented, investigating the perception of diversity and possible influencing factors moderating this perception in a scientific organization. Combining both steps, the results show specific mechanisms and structures of the university research environment that have an impact on diversity management and rigidify structural barriers preventing an increase of diversity. The quantitative study also points out that the management level takes on a special role model function in the scientific system and thus has an influence on the perception of diversity. Consequently, when developing diversity management approaches in research organizations, it is necessary to consider the top-down direction of action, the special nature of organizational structures in the university research environment as well as the special role of the professorial level as role model for the scientific staff.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how Ontario principals make sense of difference within student populations and how this sensemaking influences how they do their work.

The paper reports on a qualitative study in Ontario, Canada that included 59 semistructured interviews with school principals from English public, secular school districts in Southern Ontario.

Four themes emerged in principals’ descriptions of student populations: perceiving everyone as the same, or homogeneous; perceiving visible differences associated with particular religions, race and cultures; perceiving invisible or less visible differences, such as academic differences, socioeconomic status, mental health issues, gender identity and sexual orientation; and perceiving both visible and less visible differences through an inclusive lens. When asked about how their understanding of difference influenced how they did their work, principals’ responses varied from not influencing their work at all to influencing practices and activities. Participants’ context – both personal and local – influenced some of the work they did in their role as school principal. Lastly, multiple sources of disconnect emerged between how principals understood difference and the practices that they engage in at their school site; between their sensemaking about difference and diversity and preparing students for the twenty-first century competencies as global citizens; and between principals’ understanding of difference and diversity and existing provincial policy.

Study insights not only contribute to an existing body of literature that examines principals’ sensemaking around difference, but also extend this line of inquiry to consider how this sensemaking influences their professional practice. These findings pose additional research questions about how to approach principal professional learning for inclusive and equitable education. For example, even though principals are contractually responsible for students in their care, why is it that their efforts toward equitable and inclusive schooling appear to be limited to the school site and not the wider community?

Study findings can be used to inform principal preparation programs and professional learning opportunities. Namely, these programs should provide the skill development required as well as the time needed for principals to reflect on their local context and beliefs, and to consider how their local context and beliefs are connected to larger societal efforts to create a more inclusive and equitable society.

School leadership is integral to creating and building more inclusive and equitable public education that improves all students’ success at school. As Ontario’s general population becomes increasingly diverse, it is imperative that principals support success for all students; this can only happen if they understand the complexity of difference within their student populations and beyond, how to address these complexities and how their own understandings and beliefs influence their leadership practices.

Although other papers have examined how principals make sense of difference and diversity in student bodies, this paper also explores how this sensemaking influences how school leaders do their work.

This paper aims to focus on the relationship between female leadership and the environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance of firms. Specifically, the study examines if firms with women as chief executive officers (CEOs) and/or board chairpersons have higher environmental and social scores.

The study uses data on publicly listed Nordic firms in a panel regression approach to establish the relationship between female leadership and the environmental and social performance of firms.

The result of this study shows that women have a leadership characteristic that increases the weighted average of environmental (E) and social (S) performance of a firm. In particular, pillar score results indicate a positive relationship between female CEOs and the social scores of a firm but no relationship between a female board chairperson and the environmental or social scores of a firm. This implies that gender-based differences affect the CEO’s success, especially in a firm’s social performance. Further analyses show a more significant impact on the E and S performance when a woman replaces a man as CEO of a firm.

While prior research has explored various aspects of gender diversity in corporate leadership and its potential impact, the focus on the Nordic context in this study provides a unique perspective, given the region’s distinct business environment and societal factors. In addition, by examining the collective influence of female leaders and both female CEOs and board chairpersons separately, this study provides a nuanced understanding of how different leadership roles may impact a firm’s ESG performance.