‘A Blinding Lack of Progress’: Management Rhetoric and Affirmative Action

Abstract

In this study we explore how versions of organizational reality and gender are constructed in management discourse and whether such patterns change over time. Specifically, we examine management explanations and accounts of the gendered nature of their organizations through their commentaries on their affirmative action programmes. In Australia private sector organizations with 100 or more employees are required to report to government on their affirmative action programmes for women. In these documents, management representatives outline objectives for the coming year and report on their progress in reducing employment-related barriers for women. In doing so they account for the 'problem' of gender-based discrimination that affirmative action is designed to address, justify their actions (or lack of action) and reproduce versions of gendered identity. Thus we use affirmative action reporting as cases of management rhetoric to explore how aspects of gender and organization are constructed, taken for granted, challenged or problematized. Comparing reports from the hospitality sector over a 14-year period, we explore whether there is any evidence of discursive change in management accounts of the gendered nature of their organizations.

Trickle‐down effect: The impact of female board members on executive gender diversity

“…Australia exhibits many of the same challenges seen in other countries: Women hold only 22.7 and 9.7% of board and executive roles in the largest 200 organizations (ASX200) listed on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX), despite constituting 45% of the Australian workforce (Australian Bureau of Statistics, ; Australian Institute of Company Directors [AICD], ). Australian equal employment opportunity legislation, introduced in 1986, recognizes that women experience barriers to advancement not experienced by men (Ainsworth, Knox, & O'Flynn, ). The legislation requires organizations to address gender‐based discrimination experienced by women and promote equal opportunities for women (Ainsworth et al, ).…”

“…Australian equal employment opportunity legislation, introduced in 1986, recognizes that women experience barriers to advancement not experienced by men (Ainsworth, Knox, & O'Flynn, 2010). The legislation requires organizations to address gender-based discrimination experienced by women and promote equal opportunities for women (Ainsworth et al, 2010).…”

Editorial: Gendering Change: The Next Step

“…To find ways to change organizations into more gender‐equitable or gender‐balanced workplaces remains one of the core issues in the field of gender, work and organization (Acker, 1992; Ainsworth et al ., 2010). Feminist scholars and practitioners alike have made various kinds of attempts to come up with strategies, policies and practices to realize change towards greater gender equality in organizations (Ferguson, 1984).…”

Gendering Pensions: Making Women Visible

“…This work provided a seminal account of how gendered occupational divisions impact on women's pensions later in life. Since then there have been excellent analyses and critiques of discrimination and policy (Ainsworth et al 2010;Colley, 2003Colley, , 2013Duncan and Loretto 2004;Woodward and Winter, 2006), much of which has been published in Gender Work and Organization and by advocacy groups (such as the Fawcett Society 2007;Working Families, 2010). We have also seen the proliferation of impressive work addressing gender blindness in organization studies (Benokraitis and Feagin, 1995;Husu, 2001;Kantola, 2006Kantola, , 2008Lindvert, 2002;Saari, 2013;) that keep women in disadvantaged positions, and also critiques of how various pension policy reforms have impacted on women disproportionately (Fredericks, 2007;Green, 2005;Leitner, 2001;Loretto and Vickerstaff, 2013;Marier, 2007: Peinado, 2014Sefton et al, 2011;Vara, 2013).…”