Gender Work and Organization最新文献

The feminist theory of intersectionality has received increasing scholarly application because of its ability to explain inequalities. Intersectionality as applied to entrepreneurship is a framework that highlights how structures and characteristics such as gender, race, class, and ethnicity contextualize women's interest and engagement in enterprise. This approach provides insight regarding the challenges and opportunities faced by women entrepreneurs. There are some conceptual and analytical challenges with an intersectionality-informed account of female entrepreneurship. This study extends the intersectionality approach by developing an “Intersectionality Plus” framework to explore female entrepreneurship in Saudi Arabia. The context is Saudi Vision 2030, a national policy intended to empower women. This study explores the lived experiences of 32 Saudi female entrepreneurs using a qualitative approach. These 32 entrepreneurs had established new enterprises, but the application of an intersectionality approach did not reveal differences that were related to female entrepreneurship. Other factors were at work that were layered over intersectionality. Micro-level analysis revealed that those who became entrepreneurs used different combinations of intersecting personal entrepreneurial qualities such as passion, ambition, and motivation. Intersectionality Plus highlights that intersectionality must recognize individual agency and be placed within the context of broader societal formations.

Research shows that the ideal worker norm—the masculine-gendered expectation of unlimited work devotion—perpetuates class and gender inequality, increases turnover rates, and negatively affects job satisfaction and work–life balance. Occupational research typically measures this norm through the share of employees working full-time or long hours. We advocate for a more comprehensive approach by (1) extracting employers' normative expectations from job adverts using machine learning, (2) separately quantifying the masculine-centric nature of this norm, and (3) tracing the norm's occupation-specific evolution. Further, we introduce the inclusive worker norm to juxtapose against the ideal worker norm. We demonstrate the inclusion of these diverse aspects at the occupational level, employing multi-level factor analyses to evaluate supply- and demand-side data for Switzerland, from 2001 to 2023. The validity of our indicators is supported by (1) factor analysis fit measures, (2) positive correlation with established indicators and part-time and gender pay gaps, and (3) negative associations with preferences for part-time work as estimated by multi-level models. By adopting this nuanced, occupation-specific, and historical lens, and leveraging job advert data, our research provides a novel approach to better analyze, understand, and address gender inequalities, and other work outcomes, perpetuated or mitigated by (shifts in) the ideal worker and inclusive worker norms.

This paper explores the work experience and career trajectories of people working across 12 UK-based universities awarded an Athena Swan Charter, an international scheme that recognizes commitment to gender equality. Despite, or perhaps due to institutional reward leading to gender-washed “peacocking”, everyday sexisms and gender regimes are sustained through acts of gendered microinsults that often go unnoticed and are individualized. Women in “awarded” institutions report being spoken over, disproportionately allocated academic housework, experience re/enforced gendered boundaries, and inadequate equality policy provision. They also identify microinvalidations through exclusion from meetings, mis/appropriation of their ideas, gender inequality denial, and overt or covert resistance to gender equity initiatives. An analysis of these microaggressions determines their interconnected, mutually constitutive, and reproductive nature; it suggests that institutional gender-washing propagates a misconception of current levels of gender inequality which kindles “equity-backlash”. The findings reveal unintended outcomes of gender award schemes that might be mitigated through visibilising and addressing inequality regimes and their impacts.

Building on the social role theory of sex differences and the role congruity theories, we aim to test whether gender and pregnancy discrimination (still) emerge in individual and group decisions, alongside testing four explanatory mechanisms. A sample of 258 individuals (organized in 81 groups) read vignettes that manipulated the gender and the pregnancy condition of hypothetical applicants for a managerial position. Participants were asked to make several personnel selection decisions, first individually and then in groups. Results indicate that male were preferred in all the personnel decisions (intention to hire, salary offer, and competence ranking), both at the individual and group levels. Our results did not offer support for the hypothesis regarding the main effect of pregnancy, yet we found an interaction effect between gender and pregnancy in such a way that male with a pregnant spouse are seen as the most competent and the most preferred for hiring. In contrast, pregnant female are perceived as the least competent and the least preferred candidates for hiring. Our results did not show clear decision polarization tendencies in groups compared to individual choices. The impact of gender and pregnancy on personnel decisions is explained by expectations of counterproductive work behaviors, extra-role performance behaviors, and perceived commitment. This study has valuable theoretical contributions by integrating social role theory and role congruity theory with group decision-making models to explain, using perceived commitment and counterproductive work behaviors, how gender and pregnancy cues shape personnel selection outcomes. It addresses an underexplored intersection, namely, how group dynamics interact with parenthood cues to exacerbate or mitigate discriminatory tendencies in hiring decisions. This study offers valuable insights for building more inclusive organizations and promoting gender diversity in the upper organizational echelons.

Many dual-earner parents face ongoing challenges to securing reliable and accessible childcare, which potentially affect their productivity at work and consequential career rewards. Although productivity can ebb and flow, limited research has examined how productivity changes influence parents' access to organizational rewards, especially when productivity changes result from childcare issues outside their control. The answer to this question is crucial for understanding gender inequality given that childcare issues are more likely to affect mothers' productivity and employers could enact gender biases toward mothers (or fathers) when their productivity changes. Using a novel survey experiment fielded among 975 US managers, we assessed how a parent's productivity changes (because of childcare issues outside their control) influenced managers' recommendations of future organizational rewards (pay, promotions, etc.) to the parent. First, we find that managers assigned lower career rewards to workers whose productivity decreased, relative to workers whose productivity increased or stayed constant. Second, managers more severely penalized mothers, compared to fathers, when their productivity decreased. Third, exploratory analyses suggested that the widened gender gap in career rewards among parents whose productivity decreased was driven by men managers who penalized fathers less than women managers, primarily because men managers did not view fathers' decreased productivity as evidence of reduced competence, professional commitment, or interest in advancement. By revealing pro-male biases that help explain the greater penalties faced by mothers relative to fathers when their productivity declined, our findings expose potential long-lasting impacts of parents experiencing disruptions to childcare on gender inequality in the workplace.

This article explores how nonbinary individuals construct and express their gender identity in Brazil. Drawing on 47 in-depth interviews and integrating queer theory, dramaturgical theory, and the literature on identity play and identity work, we identify a four-stage process (familiarizing, experimenting, testing, and expressing) through which nonbinary individuals navigate gender identity in dynamic context-sensitive ways. First, we show that these stages involve distinct frontstage and backstage performances that vary in intentionality, risk, and audience, challenging assumptions that identity play is always safe or lighthearted. Instead, we demonstrate that identity play can be strategic and risky, often blurring into identity work. Second, we contribute to the literature on indigenous psychology by highlighting the role of jeitinho, a culturally embedded form of informal problem-solving in Brazil. We show how jeitinho enables nonbinary individuals to negotiate gender expression in rigid organizational settings, often through subtle relational strategies. In doing so, we question the universal applicability of inclusion strategies derived from Global North contexts and offer a culturally grounded understanding of nonbinary identity construction in the Global South.