An open access repository of Middlesex University research http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk Ozturk, Mustafa Bilgehan and Tatli, Ahu (2016) Gender identity inclusion in the workplace: broadening diversity management research and practice through the case of transgender employees in the UK.

This paper contributes to a neglected topic area about lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans people's employment experiences in UK business and management schools. Drawing on queer theory to problematize essentialist notions of sexuality, we explore how gay male academics negotiate and challenge discourses of heteronormativity within different work contexts. Using in-depth interview data, the paper shows that gay male academics are continually constrained by heteronormativity in constructing viable subject positions as 'normal', often having to reproduce heteronormative values that squeeze opportunities for generating non-heteronormative 'queer' sexualities, identities and selves. Constructing a presence as an openly gay academic can invoke another binary through which identities are (re)constructed: as either 'gay' (a cleaned up version of gay male sexuality that sustains a heteronormative moral order) or 'queer' (cast as radical, disruptive and sexually promiscuous). Data also reveal how gay men challenge organizational heteronormativities through teaching and research activities, producing reverse discourses and creating alternative knowledge/power regimes, despite institutional barriers and risks of perpetuating heteronormative binaries and constructs. Study findings call for pedagogical and research practices that 'queer' (rupture, destabilize, disrupt) management knowledge and the heterosexual/homosexual binary, enabling non-heteronormative voices, perspectives, identities and ways of relating to emerge in queer(er) business and management schools.

This article investigates the question of where the responsibility for promoting gender equality resides in the Chinese employment context. Utilizing Acker's (2006) inequality regimes framework, the study explores women's underrepresentation in management roles in China and explains the persistence of gender inequalities in managerial echelons of Chinese organizations. Based on 30 interviews with female managers, the findings demonstrate the marketization and individualization of gender equality in organizational activity. The existing gender inequality, and the lack of responsibility for tackling it, has been either legitimized by eluding to the commercial‐only focus of organizations or rendered invisible through a belief in individual choice as the determining factor of career progression for women. Gender inequality in management is also maintained through the compliance of female managers themselves with the presumed legitimacy of gender‐based differential access to managerial roles. References to culture and tradition, market forces, competitive pressures, and individual choices by female managers are often made in explaining the unequal career paths and outcomes for men and women in their organizations. Our findings contribute to the human resource management (HRM) literature by framing macrosocietal context as a dynamic and endogenous aspect of management of human resources in organizations and provide novel insights into the interplay between HRM and societal context. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Inspired by two of Acker's interconnected concepts, inequality regimes and intersectionality, the authors revisit their intersectional research. By exploring their various studies on inequality regimes and intersectionality, the authors propose some novel insights that have emerged from an aggregate appraisal of some 17 empirically researched papers, all shaped by Joan Acker's sociology. While Acker's work on gender and organizations has provided crucial insights into much of this work, this article concentrates on the overarching concept of inequality regimes and then focuses in on less-developed aspects of intersectionality in Acker's work. In doing so, it reconsiders the value of inequality regimes in pushing the boundaries of intersectional insights.

This article explores workplace sexual orientation discrimination in the context of Turkey, a developing country displaying a unique set of gendered intersectionalities permeating the employment sphere. Using a multifarious theoretical backdrop steeped in a combinatorial analytical approach sustained by post-structural constructs, queer theory and relational perspectives, this study locates homophobic practices at work in terms of their variegated determinants, instantiations and possibilities for transformation. Open-ended, unstructured, probing interviews support the exploratory effort in gaining an authentic sense of meaning as evidenced by personal experience, and conditioned by contextual detail in the working lives of 20 lesbian, gay and bisexual individuals. This allows for the emergence of an account of how sexual orientation discrimination is diffused through a plethora of work environments in Turkey and at what particular ideational levels of signification emergent processes may combat such discriminatory practices.

This article explores how heteronormativity shapes the (re)construction of gay male entrepreneurial identities. Drawing on in-depth interview data and utilising conceptual resources from queer theory, this article traces the effects of heteronormative entrepreneurial discourses, evident in the types of gay male sexualities discursively mobilised by study participants to (re)construct normal gay male entrepreneurial identities. Study data reveal the regulatory and normalising impact of heteronormativity along three discursive themes: entrepreneurial gay masculine identities; the entrepreneurial (gay) ‘family type guy’; and repudiating the feminine in women and other gay men. This article contributes to the limited LGBT entrepreneurship literature, in particular, the scholarship on heteronormativity and entrepreneurial identities, showing how heteronormativity retrenches both the heterosexual/homosexual binary and the male norm at the core of dominant entrepreneurial discourses.

This article explores how racialised professionals experience selective incivility in UK organisations. Analysing 22 in-depth, semi-structured interviews, we provide multi-level findings that relate to individual, organisational and societal phenomena to illuminate the workings of subtle racism. On the individual level, selective incivility appears as articulated through ascriptions of excess and deficit that marginalise racialised professionals; biased actions by white employees who operate as honest liars or strategic coverers; and white defensiveness against selective incivility claims. On the organisational level, organisational whitewashing, management denial and upstream exclusion constitute the key enablers of selective incivility. On the societal level, dynamic changes relating to increasing intolerance outside organisations indirectly yet sharply fuel selective incivility within organisations. Finally, racialised professionals experience intersectional (dis-)advantages at the imbrications of individual, organisation and society levels, shaping within-group variations in experiences of workplace selective incivility. Throughout all three levels of analysis and their interplay, differences in power and privilege inform the conditions of possibility for and the continual reproduction of selective incivility.

No abstract