Search results

Lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) employees constitute one of the largest, but least studied, minority groups in the workforce. This article examines what we know, and what we need to know, about the career and workplace experiences of this understudied population. The construct of sexual identity is defined, followed by a review of the research on sexual orientation in the workplace. Then an analysis of the differences between LGB employees and other stigmatized groups is presented. Three unique challenges facing LGB employees are identified, and conceptual models are developed that explain underlying processes. Finally, career theories are critically analyzed, and an identity-based longitudinal theory of LGB careers is presented.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the influence demographic factors have on the way lesbians and gay men manage their sexual orientation at work.

Based on data taken from a cross-sectional survey of 1,308 gay and lesbian employees working in Germany, four regression models are proposed. The means of handling one’s homosexuality at work was measured by the 31 items containing Workplace Sexual Identity Management Measure from Anderson et al. (2001).

Results indicate that being in a relationship is related to increased openness about one’s homosexuality at work. Furthermore, it appears that the older and the more religious lesbian and gay employees are, the more open (and therefore less hidden) about their sexuality they are. Having a migratory background is related to being more guarded about one’s sexual orientation, whereas personal mobility within the country is not related to the way one manages one’s sexual orientation at work. Lesbians tend to be a little more open and less guarded about their homosexuality compared to gay men.

The focus of this research (and the related limitations) offers several starting and connecting points for more intersectional research on workforce diversity and diversity management.

The study’s findings indicate the need for an intersectional approach to organizational diversity management strategies. Exemplified by the dimension “sexual orientation”, it can be shown that the impact each dimension has for an employee’s everyday workplace experiences and behavior in terms of a certain manifestation of one dimension of diversity can only be understood in terms of its interplay with other dimensions of diversity.

It is shown that manifestations of demographic factors that tend to broaden the individual’s coping resources for stigma-relevant stressors lead to more openness about one’s homosexuality in the workplace.

Amidst the backlash against gay rights in the U.S., a rapidly expanding number of companies are instituting inclusive policies. While in 1990 no major corporations provided health insurance for the partners of lesbian and gay employees, by early 2004, over 200 companies on the Fortune 500 list (approximately 40%) had adopted domestic partner benefits. This study of Fortune 1000 corporations reveals that the majority of adopters instituted the policy change only after facing pressure from groups of lesbian, gay, and bisexual employees. Despite such remarkable success, scholars have yet to study the workplace movement, as it is typically called by activists. Combining social movement theory and new institutional approaches to organizational analysis, I provide an “institutional opportunity” framework to explain the rise and trajectory of the movement over the past 25 years. I discuss the patterned emergence and diffusion of gay employee networks among Fortune 1000 companies in relation to shifting opportunities and constraints in four main areas: the wider sociopolitical context, the broader gay and lesbian movement, the media, and the workplace. Next, using the same wide-angle lens, I explain the apparent decline in corporate organizing since 1995. My multimethod approach utilizes surveys of 94 companies with and without gay networks, intensive interviews with 69 networks and 10 corporate executives, 3 case studies, field data, and print and virtual media on gay-related workplace topics. By focusing on not simply political but also broader institutional opportunities, I provide a framework for understanding the emergence and development of movements that target institutions beyond the state.

The purpose of this paper is to understand how gay employees, as labeled deviants, cope with heterosexist harassment at work in an Asian culture of hegemonic heterosexual masculinity, using the modified labeling theory.

Using qualitative research approach, in-depth interviews were carried out with 16 self-identified gay employees.

Results revealed how the coping strategies of gay employees, in the face of harassment, are entwined with the labeling and stigma leading to diverse and complex coping strategies. Several broader coping strategies were thus identified based on whether the participants accepted the label of deviance and stigma and whether they were open about their sexuality. These broader coping strategies are support seeking, confrontation, inaction, quitting and, stigma and labeling avoidance strategies. Under these broader strategies, there were also sub strategies such as seeking social support, organizational support, legal support the support of the wise, as well as secrecy and social withdrawal.

These findings will advance the knowledge in coping strategies of heterosexist harassments at work as well as knowledge in harassment of gay employees, in hegemonic heterosexual cultures.

Hospitality firms adopted diverse hiring policies and public declarations of support for LGBTQ+ causes through brand activism. The impact of activism on LGBTQ+ employees’ workplace experiences has been ambiguous. This study aims to examine the hospitality and tourism employees’ perceptions of gay and lesbian leaders as token-hires among hospitality employees and the spillover effect on company’s motives for hiring the leaders. This study further explores LGBTQ+ employees’ reactions to token-hiring as a form of activism, and how workplace interactions as passing/revealing LGBTQ+ individuals shaped their career development.

This research adopted a sequential mixed-methods design. An experiment examines how employees judge gay vs lesbian hospitality leaders as token hires, contingent on their own gender identity. It further tests the conditional mediation of tokenism on company’s egoistic motives for activism. A qualitative study explores the reactions to token-hiring as activism from the perspective of LGBTQ+ leaders who reflect on their own careers and workplace experiences.

Tokenism in the hospitality workplace is recognized as the phenomenon attributed to groups at the intersection of identities (e.g. gay men). Findings demonstrate the spillover effect of tokenism perceptions of gay male leaders by other men on company’s egoistic motives for activism. This effect is not observed for a lesbian female leader. Results from interviews suggest that hospitality and tourism LGBTQ+ employees predominantly take the post-gay vs political approach when managing their sexual identities at work and feel ambivalent toward token-hiring as LGBTQ+ brand activism.

This research contributes to understanding workplace challenges of LGBTQ+ employees and how they are perceived by others contingent on gender identity. It also explores the role of tokenism in their experiences.

Researchers have explored the extent to which consumers belonging to minority, ethnic, marginalized, and sub‐cultural groups experience discrimination in retail settings. This study aims to explore the converse of retail racism – namely, reverse retail discrimination. The work shows that gay men in the USA and Turkish people in Germany often secure relational benefits, or “family allowances,” from like employees, for no reason other than that they share a socio‐collective trait.

The study employs grounded theory methodology to put forth a framework regarding five types of family allowances. The framework emerges from two in‐depth interview studies conducted with gay and Turkish people. A third qualitative study reveals insights into how majority groups view family allowances.

This study reveals that consumers who share ethnic and sexual orientation traits with like employees obtain family allowances; these are complementary products, monetary discounts, service improvements, customer comfort, and the sharing of information. The study also reveals that consumers from majority groups realize that reverse retail discrimination exists; however, they react negatively to having their thoughts confirmed.

This study is limited in that respondents were gay men and Turkish people. Studies are needed to further develop understanding of reverse retail discrimination and to investigate the extent to which managers realize that this phenomenon occurs.

Managers should realize that the potential for reverse discrimination exists and that discriminatory victims may become discriminatory agents.

This study develops the concept of family allowances. In addition, the study expands knowledge regarding a new type of marketplace discrimination.

This paper aims to investigate consumer reactions to minority retail employees. The paper argues that despite the persistence of racism and homophobia in society, the vast majority of the population is strongly against these forms of discrimination. Because of the profound negativity of such behavior, the study hypothesizes that consumers will be motivated to see themselves unequivocally as individuals free of prejudice. As a result, rather than treating all people equally, the study proposes that consumers will overcompensate and exhibit favoritism toward a retail employee when the latter is a member of a minority group.

This study presents ten studies in which participants evaluated employees who were a member of a minority or majority group. Studies 1a–1d use sexual orientation to contrast reactions to majority or minority bank managers in four countries (USÀ, Germany, Italy and South Korea), whereas Studies 1e and 1f use ethnicity (White vs Black) to examine the same question (UK and Canada). Study 1g offers a single-paper meta-analysis, testing the robustness of the observed effect. Studies 2 and 3 examine the roles of political ideology and its associated values, and Study 4 examines choice of an advisor in an online, but consequential setting.

Across several contexts and countries, the study finds a consistent pro-minority bias in evaluations of service employees. The study show that, in the USA, this bias is prevalent among liberals, but not among conservatives. This difference in the impact of political ideology is explained by adherence to traditionalism.

This paper investigates consumer reactions to gays and Blacks and do not test for consumer reactions to other minority groups. Regarding employees’ sexual orientation, the findings of this study are limited to gay men only.

To elicit favorable evaluations from customers, managers may consider the match between employees’ sexual orientation or ethnicity and consumers’ liberal beliefs. In particular, managers may want to hire people from those minority groups in areas known for their liberal values. On the other hand, the findings suggest that managers should not worry about their new recruits’ sexual orientation and ethnicity in conservative areas, because the results suggest that conservatives show no favoritism toward employees in response to their group status.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first paper in marketing investigating consumer reactions to employees who belong to minority groups. The study reports a pro-minority bias that holds across samples and countries, thereby attesting to the population validity of the hypotheses. Further, the study identifies boundary conditions of the effect of employees’ group status by identifying managerially relevant moderators (i.e. political ideology and traditionalism).

The paper aims to focus on the activism of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) people and their allies within work organisations. Specifically, it explores whether LGBT trade union groups and company employee network groups provide mechanisms for visibility, voice and activism for LGBT employees within UK organisations.

This paper is based on in‐depth interviews with 149 LGB employees within 14 UK case study organisations. These took place within four local authorities, three fire and emergency services, two national voluntary sector organisations and five private sector organisations between 2004‐2006. In addition, 55 in‐depth interviews with management, trade union and LGBT company employee network group representatives within the organisations plus analysis of company and trade union web sites and publications provided information on organisation policy and practice. Interviews were conducted using a semi‐structured interview schedule and the data collected were coded and analysed with the assistance of Nvivo software.

This paper outlines the history of LGBT trade union groups and company employee network groups within the UK. It found that both LGBT trade union groups and company employee network groups have provided important and at times complimentary mechanisms for visibility, community and voice for LGBT employees. However, the paper recognised that LGBT company network groups were relatively “new actors” within the case study organisations and suggests that some early gains may have been those which companies were willing to concede. It concludes that more research will be needed to see whether both LGBT trade union and company employee network groups can maintain their momentum during a time of economic recession as equality and diversity budgets are squeezed.

A decline in trade unions and increasing non‐unionisation despite labour movement revitalisation campaigns has meant that there is growing interest in whether employee network groups can provide meaningful avenues for “employee voice” in both unionised and non‐unionised workplaces. The paper addresses a gap in knowledge by focusing firstly on LGBT activism in the workplace and secondly on the rationale for and development of LGBT trade union and company employee network groups as mechanisms for “employee voice” for LGBT employees.

There is currently very little research to support the popularly held claim that “closeted” homosexual workers will have a less positive work‐related attitude and no empirical investigation of companies that prohibit discrimination on grounds of sexuality. This study used data from a survey of 744 homosexual employees to determine the relationships of reported disclosure of sexual orientation, anti‐discrimination policies and top management support for equal rights with relevant work attitudes. All three independent variables were found to be significantly related to affective organizational commitment and conflict between work and home. Additionally, anti‐discrimination policies and top management support were related to job satisfaction. However, none of the independent variables were significantly associated with continuance organizational commitment or job stress. It is suggested that human resource managers concerned with integrating gay and lesbian employees begin by educating top managers and creating a work environment in which disclosure of homosexual orientation is supported.

The inclusion of LGBTQ + persons (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and having other sexual orientations and gender identities) is a crucial step in improving gender diversity in the workplace; however, till date, it remains a significant challenge for human resource management professionals. The current study critically examines this issue of an inclusive workplace for LGBTQ + people through a systematic review of the existing research that has empirically studied their experiences at the workplace. It also examines the resistance and challenges organizations face in LGBTQ + diversity training and provides future research avenues.

For systematically reviewing the literature, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) model has been used. A total of 101 empirical studies have been reviewed.

The result shows that LGBTQ + people encounter multiple negative workplace experiences, including proximal (hiring discrimination and housing discrimination) and distal workplace discrimination (unsafe work climate, microaggressions and harassment). These aversive experiences lead to work stress while also mandating that people manage their sexual identity and style of dressing. This stress, in turn, impacts their work–family outcomes, job satisfaction and decision-making with regard to their careers.

The paper provides a holistic understanding of the aversive workplace experiences encountered by sexual minorities.