This essay demonstrates two key issues, patriarchy and intersectionality. These chosen issues have been discussed in the Diversity at Work lectures which I have been familiar with prior to class. Throughout this essay, both issues have been related to Diversity at Work, which have been then connected to the evolution from Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) to managing diversity. A critical reflection has been done on my personal experience of patriarchy and intersectionality, as well as how these issues may impact my future. Lastly, there is an explanation on how diversity can deliver human rights and equity.
The concept of diversity includes acceptance and respect. It means understanding that each individual is unique, and recognizing our individual differences. These can be along the dimensions of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, age, physical abilities, religious beliefs, political beliefs, or other ideologies (Patrick & Kumar, 2012).
Managing diversity as a concept means different things to different people (Mavin & Girling, 2000). Wambui, Wangombe, Muthura, Kamau & Jackson (2013)
described managing and valuing diversity as a key component of effective people management, arguing that it focuses on improving the performance of the organization and promotes practices that enhance the productivity of all staff. Dimensions of diversity include gender, race, culture, age, family/career status, religion, and disability. The definition provided also embraces a range of individual skills, educational qualifications, work experience and background, languages, and other relevant attributes and experiences which differentiate individuals (Mavin & Girling, 2000). Whereas, managing diversity is defined by Roger (2002) as using all talents available to the organisation without resorting ethnocentricity and stereotyping. The concept of managing diversity was originated from United States in the 1980s in response to demographic changes within the workforce and global competition. It was also a reaction to the introduction of equity and practices (Strachan, French & Burgess, 2012).
Thomas and Ely (1996) elaborated that ‘diversity should be understood as the varied perspectives and approaches to work that members of identity groups bring.’ Groups such as women, Hispanics, Asian Americans, African Americans, Native Americans and others ‘bring different, important, and competitively relevant knowledge and perspectives about how to actually do work’.
The(EEO) is ensuring that all job-seekers and employees are considered for the employment of their choice and that they have the chance to perform to their full potential (Victoria University of Wellington, 2014). In New Zealand (NZ), there is an equal employment opportunities programme. The EEO programme is aimed at the identification and elimination of all aspects of policies, procedures, and other institutional barriers that cause or perpetuate, or tend to cause or perpetuate, inequality in respect to the employment of any persons or group of persons. Similarly, Ellis (1990) stated that the objective of EEO is to offer a programme to members of the disadvantaged groups, such as women, ethnic minorities and individuals with disabilities, to ensure that all individuals have an equal standing within an organisation (Love, 1994) All and all, it’s an attempt to address the changing demographics of the workplace in NZ (Love, 1994).
The difference between EEO and managing diversity is that managing diversity is for organisations to embrace all talents by maximizing the employee’s potential by valuing diversity. Whereas, EEO is a principle set to provide protection against direct and indirect discrimination for such groups as women, the disabled, older employees and gays and lesbians, as well as other legislation designed to promote career opportunities for women (Burgess, French & Strachan, 2009).
Patriarchy has been an issue which has dominated workplaces globally. Patriarchy has been defined as a gendered power system: a network of social, political and economic relationships through which men dominate and control female labour, reproduction and sexuality as well as defining women's status, privileges and rights in a society (Kalabamu, 2006). Social structures and the individuals within them create and reproduce inequalities linked to sex, race, class, religion, ethnicity and other differences (Becker, 1999).
Women’s contribution has been underrepresented, under counted and undervalued. Firstly, the national statistics fail to reflect the hidden wage of women- as family workers, in home based employment and in the informal economy; secondly, that national statistics do not record women’s domestic work, caring work and voluntary work (Hakin, 2006).
Radical feminists argue that men benefit from domestic labour as a dominant task completed by women in their families. They treat this gender division of labour as the root of patriarchal social relations giving advantages to men over women in employment. An example of patriarchy being deeply rooted is in India. It has been said that the Indian society belongs to the man since time immemorial (Sawant, 2016). “History has shown us that men have always kept in their hands all concrete powers; since the earlier days of the patriarchate they have thought best to keep woman in a state of dependence” Beauvoir 1954). The Hindu moral code, known as ‘The Laws of Manu‟, denies the woman a separate and independent existence apart from that of her male-counterpart. These laws define and decide the place, position and status of the woman in her family and society (Sawant, 2016). This moral code supports patriarchy as it’s places a hierarchy placing women at the bottom and men at the top where all the decision making takes place. Moreover, women that follow the traditional patriarchal system and those who contribute to the economy in India
Furthermore, the patriarchy theory demonstrates the women’s movement that there has to be a separation of struggles, socialism and the workers’ movement fight capitalism, the women’s movement fights a separate struggle against patriarchy (German, 2006). Another theory in relation to patriarchy is the social theory. Wendt, (1999) defines social theory as the fundamental assumptions of social inquiry: the nature of human agency and its relationship to social structures, the role of ideas and material forces in social life, the proper form of social explanations, and so on. This theory relates to patriarchy as it reflects on the relationship it has on social structures.
Patriarchy is evident in workplace environments. Hartmaan (2006) argues that “the material base upon which patriarchy rests lies most fundamentally in men’s control over women’s labour power, it doesn’t rest solely on childbearing in the family, but on all the social structures which enable men to control women’s labour”. Thus, this concept is underlying with patriarchy as it shows that there is a hierarchy where men are in power and women just follow as they say. Whereas, Pease (2016) mentions that structural changes toward gender equality may not necessarily lead to a lessening of patriarchal ideologies among men.
The hierarchical system has clearly been embedded in many businesses and large companies showing that men are at the top with the power of decision making, and there is less opportunity for women to embark to the highest level. For example, in NZ large companies like Fornterra, Fletcher Building, Sky City to name a few have male CEO’S (Shaw, 2017). Hence, the phrase glass ceiling is used in situations like having male CEO’s. Glass ceiling is was first introduced in the 1980s, is a metaphor for the invisible and artificial barriers that block women and minorities from advancing up the corporate ladder to management and executive positions (Johns, 2013).
Patriarchy has meant that there has be stereotypes and implicit bias which has been ingrained and associated with women in the workforce. In a workplace environment, patriarchy has become a barrier for women's advancement and development (Sultana, 2011). In NZ the gender pay gap is 9.4 percent (Ministry of women, 2018). This is an example of patriarchy in the workforce as it shows that men have more power than women despite having the same type of job and qualifications. Moreover, Ministry of women (2018) state that the reasoning to gender pay gap is to do with conscious and unconscious bias, which affects women’s recruitment, and pay advancements.
However, in order to get rid of patriarchal systems in workplaces, organisations can educate its employees more of the concept. It can show the effects it has on individuals and how it can impact their life. Thus, it can help towards breaking the glass ceiling for women. This will allow to show that having a diverse workforce at all levels of the organisations can positively impact the business as it increases productivity and creates a competitive advantage (Saxena, 2014).
My knowledge and understanding of patriarchy has broaden. However, before learning more about patriarchy, I was unaware that there was specific terminology to represent the power men had over women in society. Being a women raised in an Indian family, I have seen the power men have over women in an Indian society and how patriarchy has been deeply ingrained. For example, I have witnessed situations where women cannot leave the house without consulting their partners, or where a young girl cannot go socialise with her friends without seeking permission from their dad. The phrase “go ask your dad” is very common in an Indian household. It’s normal for a patriarchal society, for the man which is known as the head of the house in Indian families to have the last say when decisions are made. I must say, I am lucky as my parents moved to NZ at a young age so there isn’t a gender imbalance at home as my parents didn’t want to experience a patriarchal system in their relationship. However, when I lived with my grandparents, it was evident that my grandad had the last say and decisions could not be made without his approval or if he didn’t like it, we would have to change something so he was okay with it. This experience relates to the patriarchy theory as German (2006) says that there is a separation struggle for women in the patriarchal system. This theory backs up the basis of my grandmother never being able to say no and saying yes to my grandads needs and wants, showing that my grandad had power of her. It reflects the decisions my mother would to take regarding her 4 children but would get quickly shut down as my grandad believed that it’s not part of our culture or religion.
My view on this issue has changed drastically. As a young girl, I had thought men being in control and having more power over the women in the household was a norm. However, growing up in a westernized country in the 21st century, I quickly realised that it was not normal. This has impacted my life in many ways. I am more outspoken in my family when it comes to discrimination towards women. I feel as I am in more control in my relationship, as I don’t want to be part of the patriarchal society where women do not have a say or follow your partner’s instructions. I have made sure I’ve made a stand to ensure that in this day and age, both genders are to make decisions based on partnership and not solely. I have a negative outlook on living with your parent in laws which is common in Asian families.
The concept of patriarchy in the future I believe will lessen. The gap between men and women will decrease as the 21 century consists of strong feminist, meaning that there are movements in place for women to open and up and stand their grounds. The feminism movement is an example that helps women to evolve, change and promote gender equality
With feminist movement, this will help to close the gender pay gap.
This will impact me in the future in my career in Human Resource as I would want to do my job without unconscious bias. I would want employees to progress in their career without any barriers such as the glass ceiling being broken for women. Being educated in this area of diversity, I would help to promote gender equality within the organisation even if it means to put up posters around the office as a gentle reminder for staff. As the individual I am, I would quickly stand up against discrimination against women, even if I am not involved in that situation.
An issue that has affected the workplace all over the world is intersectionality. Intersectionality is a way of understanding and analysing the complexity in the world, in people, and in human experiences. The events and conditions of social and political life and the self can seldom be understood as shaped by one factor. They generally shaped by many factors in diverse and mutually influencing ways (Hill & Bilge, 2016). Similarly, Castro & Holvino (2016) say that intersectionality is a way of thinking that understands gender, race, ethnicity, class, sexuality, religion and other categories of social difference as interlocking and mutually constitutive at the micro level of individual experience and at the macro level of institutional and societal structures and cultural ideologies. Though, Crenshaw (1994) developed the term intersectionality in the context of legal issues, specifically to address the compounding effects of racial and gender discrimination to expose the multiple layers of oppression individuals can experience (Pugach, Gomez-Najarro & Matwos, 2018).
The focus on emerging and varying categories of differences that we see in the critical perspective is also recognized under the label of intersectionality. The goal of the intersectional approach within the critical perspective is to analyse multiple identities in order to “avoid reducing ethnic minority employees to mere representatives of a stigmatized social group” (Janssens & Zanoni, 2014), which risks reproducing the inequality institutionalized in broader society.
Hornsey (2006), defines social theory as those aspects of an individual's self‐image that derive from the social categories to which he/she belongs, as well as the emotional and evaluative consequences of this group membership. As well as Hogg (2016), who agrees that social identity theory is an interactionist social psychological theory of the role of self-conception and associated cognitive processes and social beliefs in group processes and intergroup relations.
Intersectionality’s of social identity dimensions play a significant role in organisational work environments (Pompper, 2014). The concept of social identity offers a means for theoretical prediction and applied understanding of how difference (e.g. age, class, culture, ethnicity, faith/spirituality, gender, physical/psychological ability, sexual orientation, and more) plays out in organisations (Pompper, 2014) and how these combine to shape self-identity perceptions as well as in-group-outgroup treatment by coworkers and managers (Acker, 1999). The social identity theory in context of intersectionality allows stereotyping to emerge into workplaces. Thus, meaning that the theory helps to understand in group favoritism, conformity to group norms and stereotypes in workplaces. Tajfel (1979), argues that humans use social categorisation to categorise humans based on shared characteristics such as race, gender religion and sexual orientation. These characteristics are common in all workplaces.
Intersectionality exists in workplace. However, educating employees, employers and organisations on intersectionality will help to eliminate discrimination on dimensions such as age, gender, ethnicity and more. This will help to get rid of unconscious bias, especially in the recruiting and selecting process. Social identity theory assumes that the perception of oneness with or belonging to a specific social category, such as an organization or a group, can intrinsically motivate individuals to achieve collective good (Tajfel and Turner, 1979). Mooney (2014) proposed a career construct model that identified that factors such as gender, age, ethnicity and class influence the pace of career progression for individual workers. Thus, meaning that teaching the organisation to motivate each other using their intersectionality as it increases productivity and achieves greater outcome. A greater outcome would be for the company to conduct an unconscious bias training. This training is carried out by Diversity Works NZ, who help to manage the issue (Diversity at Work, 2018).
Issues related to intersectionality are illustrated in my experience of a primary student. I had changed schools, despite not wanting too. I was exposed to rich, white kids from a multi diverse school. This was hard for me to adjust too. They were accepting of the “new girl”, however as days past, the terms “curry muncher”, “curry girl” and “bud bud” would come into play especially if I were to get close to the “popular girl”. This experience of discrimination also relates to the social identity theory. Tajel & Turner (1979) research highlights that the social identity theory proposes that individuals are prone to self-categorizing themselves into particular groups. Ojala & Nesdale (2004) research found that the least support for the social identity theory is for the out-group member, hence why bullying was more acceptable. Similarly, Huges, Ambady & Zaki (2016) explain that individuals tend to favor members of their own groups over outsiders and cooperate less with outgroup, when compared with in-group members. Outgroup members are stereotyped as groups to which they don’t belong too (Nawata & Yamaguchi, 2014). In this case, I was the outgroup member, as I was posing a possible threat to the in-group members as I was getting close with the popular girl (Ojala & Nesdale, 2004). I felt that name calling was a way for me to find a new group of friends, as I would feel outnumbered. The in group members perceived outgroup member (myself) as being more homogenous (Nawata & Yamagucchi, 2014). Hence, the name calling to make me feel a negative way and led to moving to a new group who consisted of Indian girls just like myself.
My view on intersectionality has opened me up to a better understanding of what intersectionality is. Before the identity lecture, I had no idea how many aspects were accounted for under intersectionality. I had believed that intersectionality was to do with gender only, however I quickly realised that other attributes were included in intersectionality. As I left high school, I haven’t experience discrimination on social categories, though I had learnt that there are high levels of workplace discrimination in NZ. For example, men in nursing are discriminated by gender as the public image of the nursing profession is that nursing is a female occupation (Zamanzadeh, Valizadeh, Negarandeh, Mondadi & Ali, 2013). This has changed my outlook on NZ’s workplace as being a Kiwi born Indian, I am now afraid of entering the workforce as a full time employee as my skin colour and race may be a barrier to my progression in my career.
Human rights are the basic rights and freedoms that every person in the world should have. NZ takes human rights seriously. The rights became part of NZ law through the Bill of Rights Act in 1990. Human rights under the Act include:” The right to freedom of expression, the right to religious believe, the right to freedom of movement and the right to be free from discrimination”. The Human Rights Act was introduced in 1993 with a focus on protecting NZers against unlawful discrimination (Human Rights Commission, 2018). On the other hand, equity is seen as fairness in every situation (Seo, Hosik, Sul-Seo, Jung, Chung, Yun & Kim, 2017).
Workforce diversity is a public good because the public has invested in educating and developing the quality and the skills of the workforce and because without an educated, skilled workforce that has equal opportunities in employment, a society will invariably be worse off. The social tragedy is induced by non-optimal division of labour and the myriad social problems and unrest that potentially follow from many people being deprived of opportunities to use their talent and to realize their full potential (Jonsen, Tatli, Ozbilgn & Bell, 2014).
Overall, diversity in the workplace can deliver human rights and equity after it manages its diversity by changing how individuals view certain dimensions of diversity, hence organisations educating employees on accepting diversity and how everyone is entitled to be treated in fairness and has equal opportunity. A radical change of perspective would require companies to have multidimensional performance goals including accountability for equality, diversity and inclusion at work to pursue equity in the organisation (Jonsen et al, 2014). Furthermore, Blockman (2003) suggests that to be accepting of diversity in the work environment, solutions must come from those who have authority and influence over businesses and the business environment, and this may take a collective approach including stakeholders such as employees. Pease (2016) agrees that to end issues such as patriarchy, there needs to be social change in accepting dimensions such as gender and women being on the board.