Corporate Diversity Programs and Gender Inequality in the Oil and Gas Industry

Abstract

Since the 1980s, major U.S. corporations have embraced diversity as a management strategy to increase the number of women in top jobs. Diversity management programs include targeted recruitment, hiring, and promotions policies; mentoring programs; affinity groups; and diversity training. Few of these programs have proven effective in achieving gender diversity in the corporate world, despite their widespread popularity. To explore the reasons for this, the authors investigate the experiences of women scientists in the oil and gas industry who are targeted by these programs. In-depth interviews reveal possible reasons why these programs fail to achieve their intended goals. The authors find that these programs can paradoxically reinforce gender inequality and male dominance in the industry. The authors discuss alternative approaches for addressing gender inequality in work organizations and conclude with implications of their findings for corporate approaches to promoting diversity and for future research.

Persistence Is Cultural

“…While this is no doubt a challenging undertaking precisely because the boundary of professional education is so porous, one may envision starting with a program's advisory board, or board of overseers who, after all, bring a commitment to the quality of engineering education at a particular institution. In bringing advisory boards into the conversation it is equally important to migrate away from psychological or individualistic explanations of women's confidence to analyses that situate that confidence in structural and cultural contexts (also see Williams et al 2014). In the face of women's attrition from engineering, the tried and true response is to propose yet another curricular reform.…”

Critical Reflection on the Nature of Campus Female Students’ Aspiration for Leadership Positions

“…However, no significant differences in self-confidence between males and females were found when gender role identity was held constant. Despite several studies having linked self-confidence with masculinity leadership (Bligh, Schlehofer, Casad & Gaffney, 2012;Northouse, 2015;Tate & Yang, 2015;Williams, Kilanski & Muller, 2014), there are further indications that females need more support-building-confidence to feel like they can be leaders and lack of it may affect an array of other activities tied to ultimately becoming leaders. Therefore, females who identify with being leaders in school growing up, feel less confident to lead.…”

“…This means that females need more support in building esteem to feel like they can be leaders and the lack of it affects an array of other activities tied to ultimately becoming leaders. Despite several studies having linked self-esteem with masculinity leadership (Bligh et al, 2012;Northouse, 2015;Tate & Yang, 2015;Williams et al, 2014), indications show that females need to be supported in building self-esteem in order for them to believe in themselves and participate in leadership, females who identify with being leaders in school growing up, feel less esteemed to lead. Therefore, the focus should specifically be put on building their esteem and help them such that their leadership abilities can be boosted.…”

Are Women Affinity Groups Enough to Solve the Retention Problem of Women in the IT Workforce?

“…and 2) address issues of discrimination and inclusion in organizations [14]. Since the 1970's, when the first AGs emerged, organizational diversity efforts evolved from merely valuing diversity (recognizing and appreciating differences) to managing diversity (implementing programs to recruit and retain a diverse workforce) [44]. This shift has been supported by a growing business case for diversity and D&I interventions.…”