Gender Diversity: A Work in Progress - Literature review Example

GENDER DIVERSITY: A WORK IN PROGRESS Student’s Name Course Tutor Date GENDER DIVERSITY: A WORK IN PROGRESS Introduction Following a media article written by Williams (2011, pp 1-4) on gender diversity in the Australian companies, based on released new figures detailing the proportion of female workers on their employee lists and managerial positions. It is stated that most firms have done so as a necessity to comply with the new guidelines of corporate governance. The report has been released amid uproar on the lack of gender diversity in relation to most senior ranks in the Australian corporate ladder.A analysis done by Weekend Business in regard to annual reports of the ASX100 firms so far rates highly only a single company, Ramsay Health Care, in which female senior managers are more than men, thus its workforce is about 84 % female, including 75 % women in senior positions. But Ramsay, like Primary Health Care, has no female director. According to labour issues study commissioned the Australian Financial Services Institute, just a paltry 28 % of ASX100 companies had well stipulated policies of equal opportunity and diversity comprehensive enough to be regarded as satisfactory. The sheer lack of gender diversity in corporate managerial positions has grown from what Williams (1) describe as peripheral issue with no meaningful action to a subject of heated debate in corporate governance. Early explanations in relation to this trend attributed it to psychological defects in the economic rationale of Human Capital theory (Williams, Ruth. 2011).They have been rejected by the views that recognize the role of work and patriarchy interrelationships. For example, there has been identification of certain development by men in relation to work strategies so as to maintain job clear job demarcation with women. This has been witnessed in skills mystification. Many research writers have over the time described ways in which the Australian family and division of labour ideology literary shape the subordination of women in paid work, when considered in terms both in a material and ideological way. The paper therefore addresses the theoretical backgrounds of gender diversity in regard to the role of human resource in personnel development in organisations. Gender disparity in organisational management Williams (2011, pp 1-4) has brought to public attention the reassertion of the role of power play in the context of contradictory and interdependent relations of power. This is important in explaining the widespread sex segregation and challenges that women face in work organisations. The fundamental links that emerges between the values and male stereotype that characterises the dominance of many ideas in relation to the nature of business and non-business organisations are overwhelming. In the modern world, organisations are more often than not encouraged to be analytical, ethical, rational, strategic, tough, aggressive and decision-oriented, and so is the prominence of men. This has significant implications for the feminine gender. Although considerable progress is being made in the Australian organisations with respect to gender diversity in organisational management as more women are being elevated to managerial levels, gender diversity in relation to management has not received enough attention. Researchers of strategic management have mostly studied diversity basically in terms of education, tenure and functional background, leaving about other impotant aspects such as demographic perspective. It has also been noted by some scholars that different types of management diversity have divergent impacts within organisations(Williams, Ruth. 2011).The most striking question that has been and is still being asked concerns evidence of clear differences in styles of management between men and women. As reported by Vinnicombe (1987, pp 14-23) about the differences in terms of preferences in Myers Brigg Indicator (MBTI), she limitedly puts emphasis on the notion of women managers as primarily traditionalist in their management style decision making, which is based on their emphasis on sensing as opposed to intuition and judging as opposed to perceiving. Greater emphasis is also highlighted in regard to transformational approach to organizational leadership among women compared with men, which ideally involves motivation by inclusion, participation and power by charisma as opposed to transactional approach that basically involves motivation as a result of favours and rewards as well as power by position. It also argued that women leaders have the tendency of yearning for broader in their pursuit of success by making their work environment to be more fulfilling for all people involved in the organization. Studies carried out recently have revealed that for women satisfaction and challenge in a certain job are more significant as opposed to promotions without any due meaning. According to Powell (1988, p 22), in terms of behavior differences, for instance, if there is undesirable performance amongst the workforce, men have the ability to adapt their way of response to a perceived likely cause, thus if the problem is diagnosed to be inefficiency then they may recommend training and if the problem is perceived to be lack of concerted effort then they will counter it with punishment. In sharp contrast, women on the other hand have the likelihood of adopting a more consistent approach by either punishing or using training in each case. As reported, women are also less likely to make use of closed doors and secretaries as intentional barriers to members of staff. In terms of communication, women have a greater potential to aptly use communication to establish rapport or connect, while men have the likelihood of communicating with the fundamental aim of displaying expertise, relaying information and challenging for purposes of status. Women leadership are thought to be more open to negotiations as they are fond of using phrases such as “isn’t it?” and “don’t you think?” Men are known to perceive such noble leadership behaviour as indecisive, unconfident and halting. They are known to deliver statements rich with certainty tones expecting audience and to challenge, which in totality is a style that women managers may perceive as lacking respect and competitive for no apparent reasons. Management and leadership theories of organisational gender diversity In relation to theories of effective organisational management, it is situational and behavioural theories that have more credibility in the modern context as opposed to earlier concepts of traits. In recognition of the variety and complexity of business and non-business organisational settings, it is widely proposed that there is no globally effective style, rather, it only depends people and situation of management. Stereotypically and traditionally, a people-centred approach style is closely linked to feminism and a task-oriented approach linked to masculine culture (Williams, Ruth. 2011). As business organisations are under pressure to adopt styles and cultures of controlling management as well as using team work and forms of decision making marked by consensus, in theory, it may appear that values and characteristics that have been traditionally associated with the feminine leadership are gaining significance.Currently, managerial suites are becoming more communicative, consensual and more concerned with the way things are executed, with organizational executives getting motivated by company vision instead of individual power interest. It is further argued Brenner and Ramas (1984, pp 33-71) that distinctive talents of women have the upper hand of enduring stress, problem solving and managing numerous tasks and problem solving. What has to be noted is that there is lack of harmony between theoretical conceptions of effective leadership qualities that have in certain quotas been recognised at levels of strategy and the views of commonsense that are widely held as mostly masculine and which an effective organisational manager should adequately adopt. The theoretical concepts therefore strongly perceive feminine behaviour as not effective and inadequate for management. There is clear evidence that existence of gender diversity in terms of leadership styles in work place can not be ignored. It is also clear how stereotypes of masculinity and femininity abound and despite the fact that, in theory, both masculine and feminine styles of management can be strength, the overriding perception is that masculine characteristics are more beneficial to an organization (Williams, Ruth. 2011).The implications for women can be attributed to stem from the organisational unconscious practices that result from tradition and consequently maintained by practices of human resource selection and pressure thus creating a picture of unbiased approach. There are also more contradictions in terms of integration of gender differences with organisational power relations. The assumptions and values of individuals who occupy seats of power significantly depend on the perpetuation and creation of organizational culture, practices and norms. When applied to criteria of employment, the male dominance in power positions and adoption of masculine management approach in carrying out roles can overwhelmingly lead to the absurd assumption that it is the right way of doing things. This is reflected when a job falls vacant as person specification and job description only suits masculine approach as the only effective and normative way to perform the work. This in essence has continued to disadvantage millions of qualified women to rise to managerial positions in organisations. Given that such line of thinking are applied to promotion and appraisal when masculine management styles are the bench mark, desirable feminine styles are mostly judged as lacking in ability. For instance, the greater potential and proportion of women to seek consultation in regard to decision making may be taken a weakness by appraising managers as well as staff or peers if in any case they happen to perceive it as an abdication of leadership responsibility (Williams, Ruth. 2011). This may take place despite the fact that the business organisation might greatly benefit from such decision making approach, which may encourage a climate of interdependence as opposed to independence. The indirect organisational discrimination therefore operates in two fundamental ways, thus through the manner in which the values of the dominant end up in guiding norms and practices of an organization and also the use of stereotypes as final thus masking the reality of people. It is therefore noted that most organizations base their decisions of promotion on past performance evaluations and future potential of the individuals. Such evaluations are mostly based on general beliefs on the nature of the individual that are influenced by whether the person is a man or a woman. Due to this, stereotypical beliefs that men are good leaders and women are primarily nurturant can have deceiving and non-factual influence on evaluations than what the real facts may say. The issue of workplace visibility has a lot of relevance in regard to promotion and appraisal. If, for example, a feminine approach is considered not flamboyant, or if a masculine approach is to fail in noticing the role of women in their leadership style, then it is a potential source of disadvantaging women. There are clear implications of the human resource management here in terms of selection and recruitment and for policies of organisational development if companies are to treat women with equal measure to men and thus avoid wasting their abilities and skills. In theory, if diversity and difference were to be critically considered, business organisations could be very effective and in the due course making it relatively easier to recruit appropriate talents for the job demands without gender biasness by rising above the traditional practices and norms. However, such a scenario is devoid of power relations in terms of gender. Work constitutes the key social arena that men display their needs for authority, influence, status, power, and material needs. He therefore argues that business organisations are fundamentally structured to offer protection to the male power and consequently reward masculinity in the best ways possible. A review of men’s response to equal job opportunity initiatives in four big business organisations, Cockburn (1983, p. 215) concluded that just a small proportion of men have made substantial contributions to the critical need gender equality as there is overwhelming resistance to it. Men therefore generate what is termed as institutional barriers to stall the advancement of women in organisations. Significance of organizational culture in gender diversity Organisational culture plays a significant role in the level of diversity amongst employees in relation to openness as it shapes the actions as well as meanings of the workforce as well as being shaped by staff through their relationships at work. The most common assumptions that underlie the culture of an organisation are penultimate causal determinant of attitudes, feelings, overt behavior and espoused values. Thus, organisational culture has a lot of impact the nature of prejudice and perception, which differ remarkably across cultures. Consequently, an organisational culture where the needs of employees for identity and affiliation are adequately met and arguably provide a psychological sense of safety can tremendously encourage a positivity and healthiness where the organisation as well as its members thrive and flourish. Despite the significance of business organisational culture, previous research noted the existence of organisational norms but their influence across the broader social units have been assumed. Culture therefore only exists if individuals are accorded the power to manage the common organisational deviations and assumptions. It is a fact that organisations differ greatly in their culture that encompasses the view of differences within their set-ups. Organisational symbols and practices indicate to members of the organisation how actual differences in relation to its membership can be viewed. Normally, diversity of employees is expected to converge to the existing culture. Assimilation, though in this context has a before hand idea of the nature of the culture, it is supposed to be close to organisational diversity. Therefore, companies that expect culture convergence to be dominat are not wholly open the ideals of diversity. For example, the image of traditional American diversity has been characterised by assimilation where migrants should for convenience sacrifice their cultural beliefs and identities in order to move ahead (Guest 1987, pp 503-521). In sharp contrast, companies whose mission and objectives assert their fundamental will to recognise and value diversity, the systems of performance appraisal generously reward leaders who uphold the value. Organisations whose management leadership appears to embrace the concept of diversity are most likely to be perceived by members of staff and outsiders as relatively open to perceived differeneces. When the culture of an organisation is perceived to be open to diversity, it is in the event expected to have an influence over the behaviour, cognitions and emotions of organisational members at both group and individual levels. Being highly open to emerging differences is closely linked to the use of wide range of ideas and perspectives available in a company that in turn results in higher quality of innovative outcomes and decision making processes, learning diversity and integration perspective. It has been found that business organisations having diversity focused and oriented human resource procedures and policies have recorded lower rates of prejudice. On the other hand, low levels of openness to perceived differences are more often than not expected to result in discouragement of the perceived organisational minorities to potentially exercise their abilities. The theoretical base of human resource in development of gender diversity The theoretical foundations of the management of human resource are both interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary. The focal point of human resource management is the vital link with strategic management and business policy. In addition, human resource management may best be viewed as involving a thorough synthesis of elements from personnel management, international business, industrial and organizational behaviour. Human resource management has been found to be very distinct in its mechanisms of approach to diverse work systems. Participative arrangements are mostly encouraged in most organisations. But, as is the case currently, most organizations are trying to encourage systems of high commitment, which is important in helping to define the significant focus of organizations in terms of diversity by differentiating it from traditional management of personnel. In order to be meaningful and effective, there should be adequate linking between the work systems and elements of human resource. A significant factor that affects the management human resource and one that has the likelihood of growing in significance in the future time is the concept of globalisation. This includes activities which that stretch beyond national borders and have essentially originated from growth of big corporations. It is therefore not surprising that there are numerous insights concerning the evolution of organizational human resource management. In fact, businesses globally have increased the evolution of personnel management as a critical source of diverse strategies of human resource that occasions a cultural clash between the firm and the nation. For example, human resource management involves the day to day management of workforce in the big corporations. The role of HRM in organisational diversity In the traditional concepts, achievement of equal opportunities is a clear reflection of moral concern for organisational social justice, which ideally involves the implementation of rational measures in order to crush disadvantage and discrimination in the workplace. This is in line with most organizations’ aim of justice and fairness to all employees. Human resource should essentially support equality policies of recruitment. However, experience has shown that from the ladders of management, this rationale of social justice is one of the key criticisms of lack of equal opportunities for men and women and in contrast the organizational case of gender diversity only inclines towards the concerns of the employer. Although it has not been clearly understood, gender diversity advocates have not relented on abandoning principles of morals in relation to equal opportunities. It is therefore suggested that gender diversity management is the noble way forward. The foundation of gender diversity is that it is expected to deliver a host of benefits to the firm. The organisational gender diversity approaches should generally emphasise on maximum utilization of diversity in present in the labour market, employee potential maximization as well as creativity enhancement (Arvey 1979, pp 736-765). I n reference to (Noon, M. & Hoque, K. 2001) Organisations , however, at times may have some levels of sympathy with the fundamental needs of diversity as arguments and resentments may be scaled up in relation to selectivity, contingency and partiality in solving gender inequalities at work. Organizations should therefore be concerned with labour commodification as a critical resource for achieving organisational objectives in the context of diversity. The focus on gender differences, the diversity issue should put more emphasis on individual difference as opposed to difference based on sex. This has been a big problem for a greater attention on individual difference may essentially mean less focus on policy thus discrimination is done on a patterned manner to disadvantage women. For example, within the current organisational diversity approach, there is no meaningful emphasis on standardized company procedures to do away with discrimination as noted in job evaluation as well as personalized techniques, most notably performance appraisal and promotions. In contrast, most managers consider collective agreements as the best vehicle for solving disadvantage and discrimination at work (Noon, M. & Hoque, K. 2001) Another uncomfortable policy implication conforms to the fact that gender diversity approach may correlate to the abandonment of desirable action measures, notably initiatives of recruitment and training courses that targets specific underprivileged groups such as women. Organisations should consider positive action principle as it a sure way of solving the historic disadvantage of gender issues at work place(Noon, M. & Hoque, K. 2001) The main position of gender diversity as should be emphasized by organisational visiona and leadership should concern effective communication and commitment, where staff involvement appears in gender diversity models in a harmonized way to promote ethical growth. However, the extension of the critique of the need of gender diversity in organisations, it is often argued that theoretically, the issue of diversity approach may threaten to marginalise women as most organisational leaders are men. This therefore sharply contrasts the notion of ideal model that rallies for practices of equal opportunities as the role of women in organizational leadership is viewed as very vital to make up for the need of workplace equality. The marginal and selective role of HRM therefore comes to the fore as it perpetuates the unethical concept of gender disparity in managerial positions in organizations. The notion that organisations should be held up as good examples of furthering gender diversity are mostly unfounded as most of them does not reflect on this position. Indeed, management of gender diversity in organizations should be viewed as the human resource strategy to achieve equality measures at the workplace. The shift in the direction of a management-led equality parameter is especially ironic in the present day organizations where there is a silent indication of masculine preference in leadership as opposes to feminism. In summary three key features of the “diversity” discourse have been identified which would theoretically cause concern for unions because they are likely to impact on the content and processes of equality bargaining and threaten joint regulation of this important dimension of the employment relationship. The findings section of the paper discusses the views of union equality officers on these key features (Dickens 1997, pp 282-289). Human resource management of workplace diversity In regards to (Guest, D. 1987) a gender diversity management approach is argued to be a potential way of making good organizational sense to many businesses. For example, organizations that have the reputation for staff development without due regard to their backgrounds as well as seeking to capitalise upon recognition on the diversity may have higher chances of working with the minority by retaining them and the base growth. This may become more significant at a time when there is exponential growth of the underprivileged such as women. Organisations which encourage and foster differences in views may therefore promote creativity, learning, and innovation as opposed to those that attempt to thwart importance of such diversity. According to Noon and Hoque (2001, pp 105-106), organisations that seek to satisfy the demands of different cultural and gender needs in terms of efficiency and work stability may have the likelihood of enjoying a competitive advantage in regard to recruitment as well as retention of workforce. While most of the arguments may yield desirable results for individuals and the organization, human resource management must play a crucial role in ensuring competitive advantage in the valuing and management of gender diversity and what it brings to organisations. For example, it has been argued that proper management of gender diversity may lead to resource acquisition, creativity, flexibility, problem solving and minimization of costs as there would be maximum productivity of the workforce in consideration of the conducive work environment. Women will, in particular be interested in applying for positions in such organizations as there are sureties of upward mobility. Organizational experts have argued that heterogeneity of staff having diverse resources and perspectives have the ability of being innovative and creative, and therefore gender diversity has the potential of giving rise to greater organisational adaptability and flexibility. However, some research has casted doubts on the levels of success of in regard to the management of diversity by raising numerous concerns in relation to the concept as well as its application. Such concerns encompass whether management of diversity may have some differences from good management by having good knowledge and appreciation of an individual not based on gender. It is also queried whether there are really some significant differences in motivation, style and others between men and women (Guest, D. 1987)It is also querried whether the gender concept may not end up in just rpresenting the interests of old stereotypes in regard to cultural groups in a positive way and whether it may diffuse attention away from discrimination, bad management, and poor working practices towards gender and cultural misunderstandings and differences and misunderstandings, which may result in presentation of a more complicated context of blaming individual victims. The main consideration in organisational management of diversity is whether tensions and difficulties are due to erroneous misperceptions and interpretations of individual behaviour. If the concept is potentially viewed as fixated and inappropriate then it only likely to benefit a section of the workforce or totally disadvantaged the under-represented people. A weaker part of diversity management perspective, besides comprehensive positive action programmes and equal opportunity initiatives involves management of values (Guest, D. 1987)Considering approaches of organisation development and human resource strategic management to the need of equal opportunity management may be an indication of a positive move. The approach of managing gender diversity may have with its basis the need of promoting ethical developments, if in any case any recommendations are treated with seriousness by management. Intercultural competence and gender diversity Most organizations that are operating on ethnocentric and parochial formations have been attempting either to suppress or totally ignore the cultural and gender differences presented by big corporations. It is a fact that most of such organisations may present difficulties of comprehension as well as communication, perhaps resulting into conflict, tension and general confusion. However, if cultural and gender differences are actively managed by resources and assets, particularly where a business enterprise needs to explore fresh ideas, look for new perspectives and concurrently carry out expansion on the existing ones. If in any case cultural and gender differences can be adequately recognised and valued to the advantage of the organisation, then there may be greater synergy(Brenner, J. & Ramas, M., 1984) In order to realise this, members of an organization must display in totality individual and cross-cultural awareness, which are critical in diversity competence in order to work with gender differences. Management of organizational diversity may result in a greater understanding of employee ad customer preferences. Culturally appropriate organisational human resource practices have the potential of working with differences, most notably in communication, leadership style, training, recruitment and appraisal. Employees are therefore more likely to incline towards an organization and also retained if they can acknowledge recognition of their cultural background instead of being ignored. Many organisations are on the path of recognizing that valuing gender and cultural diversity by incorporating it into the work ethics is no doubt a key source of competitive advantage. Competencies in gender diversity may therefore play important roles in selection, recruitment, development, training, and practices of performance management in building cross-cultural team (Brenner, J. & Ramas, M., 1984) A case in example is given of the British Airways which in its European operations has sought to develop its workforce to recognise and value cultural difference. In its Egyptian operations, the company has ensured that its cabin services and products offer a full reflection of local Egyptian culture so as to attract potential local workforce as well as local customers. According to Williams, (2011).Companies have development the culture of outdoor activities to supplement the more traditional indoor-based educational and teambuilding sessions in order to develop the workforce and individuals so as to be well equipped in managing gender and cultural diversity. For example, it has been noted that the Global Leadership Program Consortium (GLPC) normally take senior managers of organizations into month long action learning programme that mainly focuses on business opportunities assessment. It involves action learning, pre-work and small teams that focuses on areas of accountability for outcomes by providing feedback and follow-ups facilitated by professional team. Such initiatives are mainly intended for helping managers to focus on planning, teamwork, decision making, conflict resolution, leadership, and self-confidence in an organisational situation. If a workforce team is in essence multicultural then issues of diversity, communications across cultures and genders, sensitivity and negotiations are bound to be raised. For example, managing gender diversity has become very important for the American based Whirlpool Corporation with over 37,000 workforce spread globally (Kochan & Barocci 1985, pp 126-154). Promotion of gender diversity in career development Ensuring equal job opportunities for career and advancement development for men and women is therefore a critical element of ensuring creation of a feminine-friendly work environment. While most organizations have radical policies that discourages discrimination, research studies still shows that unconscious biases towards women is still rife and negatively impacts on performance evaluations of women(Arvey, R.D., 1979)When compared to men, women are not fully appreciated or recognised for their organizational capabilities. This is attributed lack of inequitable job classification that is witnessed in salary and grade between men and women. It is more often assumed that there is gender parity in organizations as most of them promote equity in opportunities for development of careers. As mentioned by Bamber and Lansbury (1989, pp 56-78), opportunities therefore should include adequate resources for organisational research, professional exposure both inside and elsewhere outside the organization, equal job opportunities for purposes of promotion, and equal opportunities in ascending to demanding fresh challenges that entirely contribute to organisational professional development. For instance, a study carried out recently the US by Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) indicated that women scientists were generally allocated jus a half the laboratory space compared to men, they get salaries that are at least twenty percent lower than their male counterparts, and to make matters worse have been excluded from some of the most powerful leadership positions as well as powerful boards or committees (Cockburn, C., 1986).Such factors have been known to decrease the morale of female workers and productivity. Such biases are widespread not only in the scientific industry but also in many other organisations. Organisational policies of human resource administration should clearly spell out employee grade levels and classification positions. Remuneration should be primarily pegged on level of grade. Reviews of performance should be substantially based on consistent criteria so as to eliminate biasness. Conclusion In conclusion, Promotions in the work place should be absolutely based on transparent processes and criteria. The values and norms that govern quality, competence and success of any given work should have clear definitions. As noted by Williams (2011, p 3), both men and women should therefore be in equal measure entitled to constructive and on-going feedback in relation to their performance. Executives of organizations should then have an all-round understanding of gender related issues by closely and carefully monitoring as well as guard against the negative influence of gender behaviors, which is the norm in Australian corporate arena. Bibliography Cockburn, C., 1986. Machinery of Dominance:Women, Men and Technical Know-how, Pluto Press, London. Dickens, L. 1997, “Gender, race and employment equality in Britain: inadequate strategies and the role of industrial relations actors”, Industrial Relations Journal, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 282-289. Powell, G.N., 1988. Women and Men in Management, Sage, CA, p. 147 Noon, M. & Hoque, K. 2001, “Ethnic minorities and equal treatment: the impact of gender, equal opportunities policies and trade unions”, National Institute Economic Review, Vol. 176, pp. 105-16. Kochan. T.A. & Barocci. T.A. 1985. Human Resource Management and Indtistrial Relations. Boston: Little Brown. Bamber. G. & Lansbury, R. 1989. New Technology: International Perspectives on Human Resources and Industrial Relations, London: Unwin Hyman. Arvey, R.D., 1979. “Unfair Discrimination in the Employment Interview – Legal and Psychological Aspects”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 86 No. 4, 1979, pp. 736-765. Guest, D. 1987, “Human resource management and industrial relations”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 503-521. Brenner, J. & Ramas, M., 1984. “Rethinking Women’s Oppression”, New Left Review, Vol. 144, pp. 33-71. Williams, Ruth. 2011. Gender diversity: a work in progress. Retrieved from Read More