对妇女领导方案的定性评价:一项全球性、多部门的系统审查

IF 3.6 4区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Australian Journal of Psychology Pub Date : 2023-05-24 DOI:10.1080/00049530.2023.2213781
Ann Τ. Gardiner, A. Chur-Hansen, Deborah Turnbull, C. Semmler
{"title":"对妇女领导方案的定性评价:一项全球性、多部门的系统审查","authors":"Ann Τ. Gardiner, A. Chur-Hansen, Deborah Turnbull, C. Semmler","doi":"10.1080/00049530.2023.2213781","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objective The contribution of women’s leadership programs to gender change in organisations is controversial, and evidence of programs’ effectiveness is siloed across countries, sectors and industries. This systematic review aimed to provide a summary of current global efforts to evaluate women’s leadership programs. Method A systematic review protocol was registered with Open Science Framework prior to data extraction. Eight databases from multidisciplinary fields including (but not limited to) behavioural, social, physical, health and life sciences, management and business, and gender and women’s studies were searched for academic papers examining the outcomes of women’s leadership programs. Twenty-four studies were appraised for methodological quality using Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and 16 studies (11 peer reviewed articles and five theses) were included in the review. Results Data were synthesized using an updated Kirkpatrick typology with seven categories used to classify evaluation outcomes. Subjective outcome levels were addressed more frequently than objective levels. Promotion to a leadership position was the sole objective outcome addressed, but methodological limitations of the included studies mitigate a link between programs and women’s career advancement. Conclusions Currently, the global evidence of women’s leadership programs’ impact on individuals and organisations is inconclusive. This systematic review emphasises the need for enhanced methodological and theoretical rigour to guide the development of future women’s leadership programs and their evaluation. Key Points What is already known about this topic: Reasons for the persistent underrepresentation of women in leadership are multiple and complex, and women leaders face both structural and individual barriers in their efforts to ascend to the top levels of organisations. Research has largely moved away from a micro-level focus on how best to assimilate women into existing, male-dominated workplaces, to a focus on dismantling structural barriers to women’s leadership such as meso-level organisational policies and practices and macro-level national and societal factors such as culture and legislation. In practice, however, micro-level strategies to address gender imbalance in leadership are frequently employed, and there is much debate regarding their capacity to contribute to gender change in organisations. Our knowledge about the impact of women’s leadership programs is limited and fragmented, as is our understanding of how this impact is assessed. What this paper adds: This systematic review is the first to map the quality and nature of women’s leadership program evaluations globally, demonstrating the applicability of a systematic review methodology to leadership, management, and organisational psychology research. Our paper challenges the premise that individual level strategies can affect organisational and cultural change by examining the evidence of the effectiveness of micro-level approaches to women’s leadership development. The paper includes practical recommendations to advance women’s leadership program evaluation practice and research, emphasising the need for enhanced methodological rigour and realistic expectations regarding both the program and the evaluation.","PeriodicalId":8871,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Qualitative evaluations of women’s leadership programs: a global, multi-sector systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Ann Τ. Gardiner, A. Chur-Hansen, Deborah Turnbull, C. Semmler\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00049530.2023.2213781\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Objective The contribution of women’s leadership programs to gender change in organisations is controversial, and evidence of programs’ effectiveness is siloed across countries, sectors and industries. This systematic review aimed to provide a summary of current global efforts to evaluate women’s leadership programs. Method A systematic review protocol was registered with Open Science Framework prior to data extraction. Eight databases from multidisciplinary fields including (but not limited to) behavioural, social, physical, health and life sciences, management and business, and gender and women’s studies were searched for academic papers examining the outcomes of women’s leadership programs. Twenty-four studies were appraised for methodological quality using Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and 16 studies (11 peer reviewed articles and five theses) were included in the review. Results Data were synthesized using an updated Kirkpatrick typology with seven categories used to classify evaluation outcomes. Subjective outcome levels were addressed more frequently than objective levels. Promotion to a leadership position was the sole objective outcome addressed, but methodological limitations of the included studies mitigate a link between programs and women’s career advancement. Conclusions Currently, the global evidence of women’s leadership programs’ impact on individuals and organisations is inconclusive. This systematic review emphasises the need for enhanced methodological and theoretical rigour to guide the development of future women’s leadership programs and their evaluation. Key Points What is already known about this topic: Reasons for the persistent underrepresentation of women in leadership are multiple and complex, and women leaders face both structural and individual barriers in their efforts to ascend to the top levels of organisations. Research has largely moved away from a micro-level focus on how best to assimilate women into existing, male-dominated workplaces, to a focus on dismantling structural barriers to women’s leadership such as meso-level organisational policies and practices and macro-level national and societal factors such as culture and legislation. In practice, however, micro-level strategies to address gender imbalance in leadership are frequently employed, and there is much debate regarding their capacity to contribute to gender change in organisations. Our knowledge about the impact of women’s leadership programs is limited and fragmented, as is our understanding of how this impact is assessed. What this paper adds: This systematic review is the first to map the quality and nature of women’s leadership program evaluations globally, demonstrating the applicability of a systematic review methodology to leadership, management, and organisational psychology research. Our paper challenges the premise that individual level strategies can affect organisational and cultural change by examining the evidence of the effectiveness of micro-level approaches to women’s leadership development. The paper includes practical recommendations to advance women’s leadership program evaluation practice and research, emphasising the need for enhanced methodological rigour and realistic expectations regarding both the program and the evaluation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8871,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530.2023.2213781\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530.2023.2213781","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Qualitative evaluations of women’s leadership programs: a global, multi-sector systematic review
ABSTRACT Objective The contribution of women’s leadership programs to gender change in organisations is controversial, and evidence of programs’ effectiveness is siloed across countries, sectors and industries. This systematic review aimed to provide a summary of current global efforts to evaluate women’s leadership programs. Method A systematic review protocol was registered with Open Science Framework prior to data extraction. Eight databases from multidisciplinary fields including (but not limited to) behavioural, social, physical, health and life sciences, management and business, and gender and women’s studies were searched for academic papers examining the outcomes of women’s leadership programs. Twenty-four studies were appraised for methodological quality using Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and 16 studies (11 peer reviewed articles and five theses) were included in the review. Results Data were synthesized using an updated Kirkpatrick typology with seven categories used to classify evaluation outcomes. Subjective outcome levels were addressed more frequently than objective levels. Promotion to a leadership position was the sole objective outcome addressed, but methodological limitations of the included studies mitigate a link between programs and women’s career advancement. Conclusions Currently, the global evidence of women’s leadership programs’ impact on individuals and organisations is inconclusive. This systematic review emphasises the need for enhanced methodological and theoretical rigour to guide the development of future women’s leadership programs and their evaluation. Key Points What is already known about this topic: Reasons for the persistent underrepresentation of women in leadership are multiple and complex, and women leaders face both structural and individual barriers in their efforts to ascend to the top levels of organisations. Research has largely moved away from a micro-level focus on how best to assimilate women into existing, male-dominated workplaces, to a focus on dismantling structural barriers to women’s leadership such as meso-level organisational policies and practices and macro-level national and societal factors such as culture and legislation. In practice, however, micro-level strategies to address gender imbalance in leadership are frequently employed, and there is much debate regarding their capacity to contribute to gender change in organisations. Our knowledge about the impact of women’s leadership programs is limited and fragmented, as is our understanding of how this impact is assessed. What this paper adds: This systematic review is the first to map the quality and nature of women’s leadership program evaluations globally, demonstrating the applicability of a systematic review methodology to leadership, management, and organisational psychology research. Our paper challenges the premise that individual level strategies can affect organisational and cultural change by examining the evidence of the effectiveness of micro-level approaches to women’s leadership development. The paper includes practical recommendations to advance women’s leadership program evaluation practice and research, emphasising the need for enhanced methodological rigour and realistic expectations regarding both the program and the evaluation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Australian Journal of Psychology
Australian Journal of Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: Australian Journal of Psychology is the premier scientific journal of the Australian Psychological Society. It covers the entire spectrum of psychological research and receives articles on all topics within the broad scope of the discipline. The journal publishes high quality peer-reviewed articles with reviewers and associate editors providing detailed assistance to authors to reach publication. The journal publishes reports of experimental and survey studies, including reports of qualitative investigations, on pure and applied topics in the field of psychology. Articles on clinical psychology or on the professional concerns of applied psychology should be submitted to our sister journals, Australian Psychologist or Clinical Psychologist. The journal publishes occasional reviews of specific topics, theoretical pieces and commentaries on methodological issues. There are also solicited book reviews and comments Annual special issues devoted to a single topic, and guest edited by a specialist editor, are published. The journal regards itself as international in vision and will accept submissions from psychologists in all countries.
期刊最新文献
Beyond physical recovery: investigating athletic identity as a mediator between social support and psychological readiness for return to sport Prevalence of dyslexia related to mental health problems and character strengths among primary school students in northwest China Best practice assessment methods for the undergraduate psychology program: a narrative review of the literature The association between gratitude and distress tolerance in undergraduate students: the mediating effect of hope and fear of COVID-19 The experience of young carers in Australia: a qualitative systematic review and meta-ethnographic synthesis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1