Management and Marketing - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16
-
ItemWhy Does Workplace Gender Diversity Matter? Justice, Organizational Benefits, and Policy(Wiley, 2020)Why does workplace gender diversity matter? Here, we provide a review of the literature on both justice‐based and organizational benefits of workplace gender diversity that, importantly, is informed by evidence regarding sex differences and their relationship with vocational behavior and outcomes. This review indicates that the sexes are neither distinctly different, nor so similar as to be fungible. Justice‐based gains of workplace gender diversity include that it may cause less sex discrimination and may combat androcentrism in products and services. We then consider potential instrumental benefits of workplace gender diversity to organizations, including for team and firm performance, innovation, occupational well‐being, and corporate governance. The evidence of positive association is currently strongest for occupational well‐being and governance. We recommend that policy makers ground gender diversity initiatives in this comprehensive and evidence‐based understanding of the benefits of workplace gender diversity.
-
ItemThe ‘good, bad and merit’ arguments in Australian news coverage of workplace gender diversity(The University of Melbourne and VicHealth, 2020-09-30)Research aims: In this study, we used the machine learning technique of topic modelling, as well as qualitative content analysis, on a large sample of articles published in high-circulation Australian printed media with the objectives to: 1. Explore the ways workplace gender diversity issues are discussed. 2. Identify the most common types of arguments for and against striving for greater workplace gender diversity. 3. Evaluate whether the year and month of publication, the type of diversity discussed and the sex of the author are related to the types of arguments for and against workplace gender diversity. Research contribution: Our findings indicate that the analysed articles were more likely to: • Focus on high-profile women (e.g., politicians, actors and influencers) and their life-styles, including trade-offs they had to make, rather than on discussions of the policies and practices organisations implement to manage workplace gender diversity, or on quantitative descriptions of the extent of gender inequality and lack of gender diversity. • Focus on discussions of sexism in the media industry and in particular high-profile workplace sexual harassment cases. • Present a narrow range of reasons for and against workplace gender diversity initiatives. • Focus on arguments in favour of increased workplace gender diversity when written by women (compared with men) and focus on risks to merit when written by men (compared with women).
-
ItemMore women in workplace leadership could make the difference post-Covid(KIng's College London, 2020-06-05)As we struggle to imagine what a post-Covid-19 world of work might look like, the disproportionate effects that the pandemic has had on women need to be made visible. We could be living through another era where the hard-fought rights and protections female workers currently enjoy are wound back and future efforts made more difficult.
-
ItemProceedings of Gender and Sexuality at Work: A Multidisciplinary Research and Engagement Conference 2020(The University of Melbourne, 2020-06-19)
-
ItemExpressions of masculinity and associations with suicidal ideation among young males(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2020-12)Background Adolescent boys and young men are at particular risk of suicide. Suicidal ideation is an important risk factor for suicide, but is poorly understood among adolescent males. Some masculine behaviors have been associated with deleterious effects on health, yet there has been little quantitative examination of associations between masculinity and suicide or suicidal ideation, particularly among boys/young men. This study aimed to examine associations between conformity to masculine norms and suicidal ideation in a sample of adolescents. Methods A prospective cohort design, this study drew on a sample of 829 Australian boys/young men from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Male Health. Boys were 15–18 years at baseline, and 17–20 years at follow-up. Masculine norms (Wave 1), were measured using the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory (CMNI-22). Suicidal ideation (Wave 2) was a single-item from the Youth Risk Behavior Survey. Logistic regression analysis was conducted, adjusting for available confounders including parental education, Indigenous Australian identity and area disadvantage. Results In adjusted models, greater conformity to violent norms (OR = 1.23, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.03–1.47) and self-reliance norms (OR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.15–1.70) was associated with higher odds of reporting suicidal ideation. Greater conformity to norms regarding heterosexuality was associated with reduced odds of reporting suicidal ideation (OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.68–0.91). Conclusions These results suggest that conforming to some masculine norms may be deleterious to the mental health of young males, placing them at greater risk of suicidal ideation. The results highlight the importance of presenting young males with alternative and multiple ways of being a male. Facilitating a relaxation of norms regarding self-reliance, and encouraging help-seeking, is vital. Furthermore, dismantling norms that rigidly enforce masculine norms, particularly in relation to heteronormativity, is likely to benefit the broad population of males, not only those who do not conform to heterosexual and other masculine norms.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableInter-individual Differences in Intra-individual Variability in Personality Within and Across Contexts(Elsevier BV, 2020-04-01)This study focuses on intra-individual variability in personality at work, and how it relates to job performance. 288 professionals completed contextualised adjective-based personality assessments in work and non-work contexts, and a non-contextualised personality measure. Ratings of their personality were also obtained from colleagues, family members and friends. Supervisors provided performance ratings for 130 participants. Results indicate that personality is context- and source-dependent, and varies systematically within contexts intra-individually regardless of source. Whilst this variability was predictive of some performance criteria when based on other-ratings, overall predictive effects were small in number and size. This study adds to the relatively small body of research on personality variability and performance and contributes to the conceptualisation of personality as a dynamic construct.
-
ItemFrom Apples and Cases to Barrels and Orchards: Macro-Level Drivers of Workplace Abuse(Academy of Management, 2019-08-01)Workplace abuse, broadly defined as interpersonal mistreatment against employees in the workplace that might harm or injure them and contribute to a hostile work environment, is one of the most pervasive and harmful problems faced by organizations worldwide. In the current symposium, we focus attention on the macro-level drivers of workplace abuse that occur within organizations and in society more generally. At the societal level, we will have one paper about important global trends affecting today’s organizations. The paper investigates how, why, and for whom these macro forces have implications when it comes to workplace harassment. At the organizational level, we will have three papers, one dedicated to unpacking the multiple dimensions of organizational tolerance for abuse. Two more papers will focus on structural organizational features, namely the mechanisms of communication, and structural pay inequality that can impact perceptions of interpersonal abuse at work. We argue that a stronger focus on studying the “barrel” and “orchard”, rather than “apples” and “cases”, can enhance our understanding of social and structural factors that underpin everyday workplace interactions and help us identify new avenues of theorizing and practice to prevent interpersonal workplace abuse.
-
ItemPredicting Employee Attitudes to Workplace Diversity from Personality, Values, and Cognitive Ability(Elsevier, 2019)The current study assessed the predictive validity of broad and narrow measures of personality, values, and cognitive ability on employee attitudes to workplace diversity. Australian working adults (N = 731; 66% female; mean age = 43, SD = 12) completed the 200- item HEXACO Personality Inventory, Schwartz's Portrait Values Questionnaire, ACER measures of numeric, verbal, and abstract reasoning ability, the Attitudes Toward Diversity Scale, and four scales measuring prejudice towards female workers, ethnic workers, older workers, and workers with a disability. Results showed that Honesty–Humility, Extraversion, Openness, and cognitive ability (especially verbal) predicted more positive attitudes to workplace diversity. Valuing power, security, and tradition more, and valuing universalism less was associated with more negative attitudes to workplace diversity.
-
ItemRecruit Smarter - Technical Report(Victorian Government, 2018-10-10)Recruit Smarter trialled four pilot interventions across a range of government departments and private sector organisations. The four interventions included two trials of targeted recruitment via modified language use in job advertisements, a CV de-identification program, and the provision of training to address unconscious bias. The pilot program has found evidence that these interventions are beneficial to improving equity of opportunity for diverse Victorian applicants.
-
ItemWho Is the Wolf and Who Is the Sheep? Towards a More Nuanced Understanding of Workplace Incivility(Cambridge University Press (CUP), 2018-01-31)Cortina, Rabelo, and Holland's (2018) perspective on studying victimization in organizations is a welcome contribution to workplace aggression research. We share their believe that considering a perpetrator predation paradigm may advance and proliferate research on issues related to gender harassment, bullying, mobbing, and other explicitly overt forms of victimization where the intent to harm is supposedly clear. However, we propose that, if blindly adopted, neither the dominant victim precipitation paradigm nor the suggested perpetrator predation paradigm will improve research on incivility or other more covert and indirect forms of victimization. In fact, we suggest in our commentary that both models may be counterproductive for understanding and remedying incivility in organizations.