Engaging Gatekeepers, Optimizing Decision Making, and Mitigating Bias: Design Specifications for Systemic Diversity Interventions

Abstract

In this contribution to the Journal of Applied Behavioral Science Special Issue on Understanding Diversity Dynamics in Systems: Social Equality as an Organization Change Issue, I develop and describe design specifications for systemic diversity interventions in upward mobility career systems, aimed at optimizing decision making through mitigating bias by engaging gatekeepers. These interventions address the paradox of meritocracy that underlies the surprising lack of diversity at the top of the career pyramid in these systems. I ground the design specifications in the limited empirical evidence on "what works" in systemic interventions. Specifically, I describe examples from interventions in academic settings, including a bias literacy program, participatory modeling, and participant observation. The design specifications, paired with inspirational examples of successful interventions, should assist diversity officers and consultants in designing and implementing interventions to promote the advancement to and representation of nondominant group members at the top of the organizational hierarchy.

Myriad potential for mentoring: Understanding the process of transformational change through a gender equality intervention

“…Academic ‘excellence' is a social construct that implies that academics should excel in all qualifications, emphasizing masculine‐gendered traits as independence and competitiveness represented by lengthy publication track records, research grants and international mobility (Herschberg, Benschop, & Van den Brink, ; Lund, ; Rees, ; Uhly, Visser, & Zippel, ; Van Arensbergen, Van der Weijden, & Van den Besselaar, ; Van den Brink & Benschop, , ). This creates an increasingly competitive culture of ‘publish or perish' in which academics are mainly focused on securing their individual results (Vinkenburg, ). These gendered norms and work practices should therefore be the target for transformational change in academia when implementing an organizational gender equality intervention.…”

“…The norm of the 'ideal academic' represents 'the dedicated intellectual, who lives and breathes academia, and is engaged in his (naturally) studies practically 24 hours a day' (Benschop & Brouns, 2003, p. 200), which is gendered since it leaves little room for caring obligations (Bleijenbergh, Van Engen, & Vinkenburg, 2012 . This creates an increasingly competitive culture of 'publish or perish' in which academics are mainly focused on securing their individual results (Vinkenburg, 2017). These gendered norms and work practices should therefore be the target for transformational change in academia when implementing an organizational gender equality intervention.…”

“…Despite a growing body of scholarly work on organizational change towards gender equality (e.g., Coleman & Rippin, ; De Vries & Van den Brink, ; Ely & Meyerson, ; Eriksson‐Zetterquist & Renemark, ; Van den Brink & Benschop, ), little is still known about the process of transformational change and what type of gender equality interventions are actually effective (Benschop, Holgersson, Van den Brink, & Wahl, ; Benschop, Mills, Mills, & Tienari, ; Dobbin & Kalev, ; Kalev, Dobbin, & Kelly, ; Vinkenburg, ). Ely and Meyerson () and Meyerson and Kolb () criticize traditional gender equality interventions for being slow, partial and/or superficial (e.g., Benschop & Verloo, ; Eriksson‐Zetterquist & Styhre, ) and argue that transformational change requires interventions that involve a continuous discussion and revision on the (gendered) norms that underlie work practices in organizations.…”

“…Drawing upon an empirical case study of a mentoring programme for women academics in a Dutch university, we explore three dimensions of transformational change: organizational members (i) discussing and reflecting upon gendered organizational norms and work practices; (ii) (Benschop, Holgersson, Van den Brink, & Wahl, 2015;Benschop, Mills, Mills, & Tienari, 2012;Dobbin & Kalev, 2016;Kalev, Dobbin, & Kelly, 2006;Vinkenburg, 2017). Ely and Meyerson (2000b) and Meyerson and Kolb (2000) criticize traditional gender equality interventions for being slow, partial and/or superficial (e.g., Benschop & Verloo, 2006;Eriksson-Zetterquist & Styhre, 2008) and argue that transformational change requires interventions that involve a continuous discussion and revision on the (gendered) norms that underlie work practices in organizations.…”

The Perils of Gender Beliefs for Men Leaders as Change Agents for Gender Equality

“…The potential for quotas or targets to redress the imbalance has been acknowledged (Storvik and Teigen, 2010) but at the same time have proved highly controversial and divisive (Tienari et al, 2009;Seierstad, 2013;Terjesen et al, 2015). Quotas and targets need to be analysed in a context where the rhetoric of merit and choice are strong in the business community (Broadbridge and Simpson, 2011;Vinkenburg, 2017). This creates the ideal of organizations as meritocracies, a social system where talent and merit alone dictate who receives advancements or rewards (Scully, 1997;Castilla and Benard, 2010) without influence from other factors such as gender.…”