Designing robust and revisable policies for gender equality: lessons from the Australian construction industry

Abstract

The construction industry remains the most male dominated sector in Australia. Several decades of formal gender equality initiatives by government and business have failed to bring about any meaningful change to the hierarchical and numerical representation of women in the sector. Drawing on new institutionalism, particularly the concepts of 'robustness' and 'revisability', the nature and intent of formal policies and programs that impact on gender equality are analysed in two large Australian multinational construction firms. Through in-depth interviews with senior management and a document analysis of formal policies, it is concluded that gender equality initiatives and broader policies are primarily focused on increasing the numbers of women in construction rather than addressing gender practices and outcomes. These policies lack many of the qualities of robustness and revisability, which impacts on their capacity to genuinely challenge the gendered norms, practices and narratives of the sector.

‘Black Boxes’ and ‘fracture points’: the regulation of gender equality in the UK and French construction industries

“…Sexism and long hours are the key reasons given, a point echoed by Galea, Powell, Loosemore, and Chappell (2015). Clarke et al 's (2005) survey reported employers' organisations as stating lack of facilities for women and working hours that were incompatible with childcare as being major barriers to women's increased participation.…”

“…Clarke et al 's (2005) survey reported employers' organisations as stating lack of facilities for women and working hours that were incompatible with childcare as being major barriers to women's increased participation. However, as Galea et al (2015) report, work-life balance and flexible working are coming onto the agenda, not as a strategy to address the lack of women in the industry, but to meet demands from men as domestic family roles evolve. Galea et al (2015) also report that while diversity is considered a core principle, it is not prioritised in the same way as safety, as it lacks the 'crisis' drivers of safety breaches, which can prove costly for organisations, financially, reputationally, or for moral and ethical reasons.…”

“…However, as Galea et al (2015) report, work-life balance and flexible working are coming onto the agenda, not as a strategy to address the lack of women in the industry, but to meet demands from men as domestic family roles evolve. Galea et al (2015) also report that while diversity is considered a core principle, it is not prioritised in the same way as safety, as it lacks the 'crisis' drivers of safety breaches, which can prove costly for organisations, financially, reputationally, or for moral and ethical reasons. The industry is naturally 'conservative' and 'pander(s) to a discourse of gender equality … [while hiding behind] the theoretical equality of women and men in the labour market … [thus] showing more commitment in principle than in practice' (Clarke et al, 2005, p. 173).…”

The Resilience of Public Policies in Economic Development

“…In recent years, we have witnessed an explosion of quantitative methodologies for analyzing the resilience and robustness of socioeconomic systems [9,10]. However, the literature of policy analysis at the process level is mainly qualitative [11][12][13]. Consequently, the tools and recommendations in this line of research are based solely on case studies and on an informal treatment of complexity.…”

October 2018

“…This issue of the poor representation of female in the construction industry is a concern among construction stakeholders. Previous studies posit that issues such as bad company policies with respect to recruitment and promotion, inadequate or unsafe working conditions, the tasks, the number and variability of hours worked, the monotony of the job, time pressures, targets, the consequences of mistakes, and family commitment constitutes some of the intrinsic factors that impose barriers to female under-representation in construction industry (Lingard and Francis, 2002;Loosemore and Waters, 2004;Lingard and Lin, 2004;Galea et al, 2015). The masculine nature of the construction industry, which is mostly characterized by its high levels of conflict and confrontational practices as well as its recruitment practices, has been known for some time to be a source of frustration for its female employees (Gale, 1994;Fielden et al, 2000;Fielden et al, 2001).…”