Search results

The unprecedented exigencies of COVID-19 and the subsequent spotlight on systemic racial, social and economic disparities have brought workplace equity to the forefront of organizational dialogue. These discontinuities set the stage for discussions about possible limitations of traditional diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) approaches that may have overlooked disparities in specific organizational systems. In response, we conducted an exploratory study to examine a new framework that focuses attention on the equity of employment systems that contextualize employees’ experiences of equity at the workplace.

This paper introduces a framework that focuses on the equity of ten key employment systems (job structures, compensation and benefits, recruitment and hiring, orientation and onboarding, supervision and mentoring, training and career development, employee performance assessment and feedback, employee resources and supports, promotion and separation). Combining the indices that measured the equity of these ten employment systems, we created an Overall Equity of Employment Systems Index and examined antecedent variables and outcomes related to the index. Data were gathered from HR leaders of 1,062 workplaces in the US.

Utilizing multivariate analyses, this research found that lower scores on the Organizational Pressures Index were consistently linked to higher levels of equity across all of the employment systems. Furthermore, higher percentages of women and employees of color were positively associated with increased equity in most of the employment systems and in the Overall Equity of Employment System Index. There was a significant positive relationship between the Overall Equity of Employment Systems Index and organizational resilience, while a negative relationship was observed with employee stress.

This study extends the existing DEI literature by offering a new framework that employers can use to: (1) assess the equity of specific employment systems and (2) strengthen the equity components of the employment systems.

The framework used for this exploratory study offers an alternative approach to the study of systemic equity in the workplace.

At issue in the debate over home employment is whether paid work performed in the home exploits workers or enables them to decide when and where to do their work. Converting the terms of the debate into a set of variables, I compare blue‐collar workers in manufacturing industries by work location. Although observed differences are open to varying interpretations, I conclude that as a group the home workers in this sample may be choosing to work at home. However, my analyses also demonstrate the diversity of home working arrangements, and that worker's ‘choices’ are socially shaped such that home employment has different meanings and consequences for different groups of workers. I further argue that the exploitative potential in home work cannot be dismissed because the findings are controversial, and the sample most likely underrepresents home workers, especially those most vulnerable to exploitation. Evidently, more research is necessary on the diversity of home working arrangements and their implications.

The major conclusions of this study of professional and clerical women who work at home are as follows. Women who work at home as a way of balancing child care and paid employment typically live in traditional two‐parent households, where the father is the major breadwinner. These women work part‐time, primarily for “bonus” money and the psychological benefits of doing something other than being a full‐time home‐maker and mother. Second, they do not work and care for their children simultaneously. They most often work when their partners can care for the children, or when their children are at school or asleep. When a professional woman has dependable, steady work, she is apt to employ paid child care. Third, corporations that hire home‐based workers as independent contractors run the risk of creating second‐class corporate citizens.

It has been 34 years since the passage of Title IX. Yet women in academia are still underpaid and underrepre-sented in the full professor ranks nationwide. Why is this still an operative convention? Identities, roles, and perceptions leave some wondering if the old male guard isn’t still guarding.

The main focus of this paper is upon the use of computers and other elements of Information Technology (IT) in the daily practice of social work, specifically in relation to the impact which it has upon the service user and the social workers and upon the outcome of service delivery. But it is also necessary to stray into other territories; notably management uses of computing in social work agencies, and to the more abstract area of the relationship between service‐users, social work and society.

We are seeing a basic transformation of the technology underlying one of our most fundamental economic activities, information handling. In particular, that major part of information handling that we call “office work” (in both industry and government offices) is being automated. Office automation is not just an incremental improvement in office equipment, analogous to electric typewriters and bookkeeping machines, and it is not accomplished by installing hardware, even complex electronic systems. It also requires redefining work and tasks, and restructuring the work flow and the work organization to fit the logic of the computer and the full range of its capabilities.

The purpose of this paper is to review a group of books focusing on work‐family research and applications.

The paper takes the form of a summary and critique of recently published books centering on work‐family issues.

Significantly expanded views of work‐family issues are represented in the multicultural, multidisciplinary perspectives presented in a series of books.

By considering a number of different publications, the researcher, instructor, or practitioner can learn about advances in the work‐family domain.

The recent years have been marked by the increasing participation of women in the labour force internationally. Especially in the industrialised countries of Western Europe and North America, this labour force participation is now well over 40%. Globally, however, the estimate is around 33%. A large number of these women are still found in the agriculture sector and the informal sector of industry. For those working in the formal industrial sector, a significant portion work in the shopfloor of assembly line operations for products ranging from electronics to textiles. Women in management comprise less than 1% of all economically active women. For the purposes of this paper, a “manager” is defined as a person who has latitude in decision making as to the allocation and use of organisational resources, including physical, financial, and human resources.

This paper uses a representative sample of U.S. workers to examine how self-employment may reduce work-life conflict. We find that self-employment prevents work from interfering with life (WIL), especially among women, but it heightens the tendency for life to interfere with work (LIW). We show that self-employment is connected to WIL and LIW by different causal mechanisms. The self-employed experience less WIL because they have more autonomy and control over the duration and timing of work. Working at home is the most important reason the self-employed experience more LIW than wage and salary workers.

Although integrated marketing communication (IMC) is generally accepted as the way forward by academics and practitioners, there is a shortage of research into the challenges that clients face in implementing the process, particularly in the UK. This paper aims to address these issues by examining how UK clients perceive the barriers to implementation, with reference to the conflict theory of decision-making and the social exchange theory from the change management literature.

The study adopted a critical realism approach and collected data through an on-line questionnaire to an expert panel of UK clients, which generated some rich qualitative data. The experts were asked to comment on four statements developed from the literature which captured the main challenges identified in previous research.

The results indicate that UK clients are facing similar barriers to those evident in other countries more than a decade ago. Three main obstacles are identified. First, some clients still find IMC difficult to understand and therefore may avoid change because of the high level of risk involved. Second, marketing departments lack control or influence over other parts of the organisation, due in some cases to lack of representation at board level. Finally, agencies do not have a clear role in the implementation of IMC.

The paper is of value because it specifically investigates the UK client perspective, which is presently sparse in the literature and updates the knowledge on barriers to implementation. It underpins this discussion with reference to change management theories. The paper also examines the support being provided by industry bodies and questions their effectiveness.