Search results

This chapter starts with two initial questions: Why, despite the fact that most large companies and organizations have protocols and instances for handling complaints to address gender violence, on many occasions, asymmetric relationships persist and no structural changes are observed in most of them? Can the culture of the environment determine resistance to change within organizations, or are the new processes part of an isomorphic organizational response to environmental pressures? To answer these questions, macroeconomic indicators of development and the gender gap are shown, to later explore the relationship between the construction of gender as a product where multiple variables converge and the gap that exists between women and men in organizations. Regardless of the economic wealth of a country, the incorporation of gender protocols does not always yield positive results. From a neo-institutional theoretical perspective and gender studies, the existence of a structural pressure to align subjects in dichotomous categories is proposed. Added to the visible asymmetries are the invisible costs for women and men: violence, invisibility, and underrepresentation. It is proposed to recognize the cultural conditions and the different degrees of organizational porosity to promote an intervention on three levels: from the subject in the organization; in the organizational field, structure, positions, processes, and products, and through a political praxis.

Spirituality in the workplace is a concept that has been emphasized a lot in recent years. However, the relationship of this concept with gender and discrimination has not been adequately addressed. Individual and organizational positive outcomes of spirituality in the workplace cannot be obtained when discrimination is in question. This is because the concepts of spirituality and discrimination in the workplace are completely opposite to each other. In order to prevent discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation, race, age, religion, disability and to establish spirituality in the workplace, organizations should follow awareness and training programs to eliminate prejudices of their management and employees, give importance to differences, develop an understanding of democracy and justice within the organization and development egalitarian and anti-discrimination policies and application. In this direction, while the differences are managed correctly, spirituality will be established in the workplace.

This chapter offers a comprehensive review the literature on authentic leadership (AL). The authors employ a bibliometric approach to identify, classify, visualise and synthesise relevant scholarly publications and the work of a core group of interdisciplinary scholars who are key contributors to the research on AL. They review 264 journal articles, adopting a clustering technique to assess the central themes of AL scholarship. They identify five distinct thematic clusters: authenticity in the context of leadership; structure of AL; social perspectives on AL; dynamism of AL; and value perceptions of AL. Velt and Sinkovics assert that these clusters will help scholars of AL to understand the dominant streams in the literature and provide a foundation for future research.

This chapter proposes a sustainable trajectory for leadership and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) organizational change in higher education. Leadership practices and strategies necessary to construct and implement change and cultivate diverse, equitable, and inclusive educational environments are deliberated, with particular emphasis on transformational leadership theories and practices. These types of organization development practices produce concrete transformation in institutions that have long-established, inert, and deeply entrenched cultures in which discriminatory or even racist practices have been deeply embedded and accepted over time. The complex dynamics of transformation in higher education, brought on, in part, by the rigidity of its organizational structure coupled with its history and foundation in racism and racist practices, makes achieving sustainable change difficult in higher education. Transformational change requires the creation of new mental models through meaning making and perspective sharing that allow individuals in higher education to think differently about how higher education institutions should operate given the rapid shifts in our society. Organizational change leaders must engage in deep, purposeful, and critical reflection and examination of the organization's culture to lay the groundwork for significant change. The chapter explores topics such as leading change through transformational leadership and the styles, practices, and capabilities associated with it, leadership development, strategic diversity leadership, and the Chief Diversity Officer (CDO) as change leader in higher education. The internal and external environmental trends demanding substantive change in higher education continue to intensify over time. The demand for pervasive transformation in higher education is resounding, and institutional leaders must be open to and even drive new and innovative approaches to shifting its very core – its DNA, its culture – to meet those demands.

We study how one form of wrongdoing behavior – gender-based discrimination – evolved and steadily grew amongst longshoremen over seven decades (from 1947 to 2017), despite changes in the nature of work and technological innovations that made the occupation increasingly accessible to women. Using data collected from 72 interviews with retired and active longshoremen and their employers, supplemented with archival and observational data, we find that although women were permitted into the occupation at the beginning of the period (1947 to the 1960s), they were progressively, completely excluded by male longshore workers. We find that after experiencing imprinting (the idea that early experience exerts a crucial influence on later behavioral phenomena) (Immelmann, 1975) during early decades, longshoremen instrumentalized their fear of occupational decline and voluntarily engaged in organizational wrongdoing by discriminating against women. Men rationalized their exclusion of women through two means: first, by adapting the “Madonna vs temptress” paradigm of framing women, and second by strategically emphasizing self-serving justifications. This study contributes to the literature on gendered work and the difficulty of eliminating imprinted, entrenched behaviors in gendered occupations.

Work-life flexibility policies (e.g., flextime, telework, part-time, right-to-disconnect, and leaves) are increasingly important to employers as productivity and well-being strategies. However, policies have not lived up to their potential. In this chapter, the authors argue for increased research attention to implementation and work-life intersectionality considerations influencing effectiveness. Drawing on a typology that conceptualizes flexibility policies as offering employees control across five dimensions of the work role boundary (temporal, spatial, size, permeability, and continuity), the authors develop a model identifying the multilevel moderators and mechanisms of boundary control shaping relationships between using flexibility and work and home performance. Next, the authors review this model with an intersectional lens. The authors direct scholars’ attention to growing workforce diversity and increased variation in flexibility policy experiences, particularly for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality, which is defined as having multiple intersecting identities (e.g., gender, caregiving, and race), that are stigmatized, and link to having less access to and/or benefits from societal resources to support managing the work-life interface in a social context. Such an intersectional focus would address the important need to shift work-life and flexibility research from variable to person-centered approaches. The authors identify six research considerations on work-life intersectionality in order to illuminate how traditionally assumed work-life relationships need to be revisited to address growing variation in: access, needs, and preferences for work-life flexibility; work and nonwork experiences; and benefits from using flexibility policies. The authors hope that this chapter will spur a conversation on how the work-life interface and flexibility policy processes and outcomes may increasingly differ for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality compared to those with lower work-life intersectionality in the context of organizational and social systems that may perpetuate growing work-life and job inequality.