Valuing different shades of blue

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine Australian efforts to promote gender equality in policing, suggesting that future police leaders will be confronted with the challenge of ensuring that their organisations are not only demographically diverse, but more importantly, that they are inclusive. Design/methodology/approach The paper utilises current Australian efforts to promote gender equality (case study), as a means of examining the way in which the conceptual distinction between diversity and inclusion plays out in practice. Findings The paper finds that current efforts to promote gender equality are being used as a proxy for diversity more broadly and are overly focussed upon demographic diversity. Less attention is being paid to the development of inclusive work environments, which will present a challenge to future leaders who are required to manage more heterogenous workforces. Research limitations/implications Research into the efficacy of existing strategies, which will further theoretical debate, is proposed, with a call for research by those from a wider range of disciplines, in addition to psychology and management studies, being made. Practical implications It is recommended that policing organisations utilise language focussed upon inclusion rather than diversity and foster cultures of learning, beginning at the academy. Originality/value The paper contributes to the global debate on workforce diversity by drawing on a Southern Hemisphere perspective on contemporary efforts in policing. This complements extant studies on diversity which emanate primarily from the UK and USA, and provides an important reflection for police organisations across the world as they proceed with good intentions around creating much needed cultures of difference in thinking and operating.

Gender equality reform and police organizations: A social justice approach

“…In relation to supporting these forms of justice, McLeod and Herrington (2017, p. 184) note the importance of creating a culture of learning within policing organizations where “polite dissent” is valued, as they state:

Courteous insubordination should be a characteristic that is nurtured, not eliminated, at the academy. Classes and formal schooling in “being” a police officer should include knowing when and how to challenge the orthodoxy.

…”

“…Inclusive and democratic cultures may also be created through communities of practice, which are informal learning contexts where relevant ideas, knowledge, and practice are shared in meaningful, supportive, and interactive ways (Li et al., 2009). For policing organizations, these communities can generate a range of benefits, such as connecting people who share common interests and concerns, fostering collaboration, and allowing polite dissent (McLeod & Herrington, 2017). These communities are an important part of creating learning organizations (McLeod & Herrington, 2017, referred to again in the next section) because they are spaces for fostering critical and innovative thinking about good practice.…”

“…Amid this culture, there is an implicit and explicit othering (maligning, trivializing, and exclusion) of women and “the feminine,” which (as explained earlier) plays out in multiple ways, but especially in gendered assumptions and the gendering of particular roles. Transforming this culture is difficult because it tends to be taken for granted and thus invisible to many (McLeod & Herrington, 2017). An important starting point in any transformation, then, is bringing to consciousness the biases embedded in masculinized policing (McLeod, 2018).…”

“…It is well recognized, for example, that challenging masculinized cultures (especially with men) can incite resistance and backlash because it seeks to change deeply ingrained and cherished ways of thinking and doing gender (see Flood, 2019; Keddie & Bartel, 2021). Resistance, however, is a healthy feature of organizational change (McLeod & Herrington, 2017) and can be mobilized in productive and educative ways if approached sensitively. Procedural and interactional justice are important here in setting a tone to navigate and transform this resistance—fairness, trust, transparency, accountability, and inclusion (Fridell et al., 2021; Wolfe & Piquero, 2011) are central to creating “safe” spaces where resistance can become visible and discussable in ways that encourage vulnerability and self‐reflection on issues of power, privilege, and equality (McLeod, 2018; van den Brink & Benschop, 2018; Keddie & Bartel, 2021).…”

“…This “polite dissent” is not about abandoning the “process of command and control” (McLeod & Herrington, 2017, p. 184). According members greater opportunity to participate in decision‐making can occur within this process through embedding a greater range of democratic inputs within and across policing organizations that involve mechanisms for genuine consultation about decisions that affect members.…”