Gender Mainstreaming, Diversity Management and Inclusive Excellence: From Similarities and Differences to New Possibilities

2010 ◽  
pp. 351-362
Author(s):  
Mary Ann Danowitz ◽  
Regine Bendl
Keyword(s):  
Diversity Management ◽  
Gender Mainstreaming ◽  
Inclusive Excellence ◽  
Similarities And Differences

The Oxford Handbook of Diversity in Organizations

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Diversity Management ◽  
Gender Mainstreaming ◽  
Equal Opportunities ◽  
Exclusion Processes ◽  
Diverse Field ◽  
Sexual Orientations ◽  
The World ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Diversity Studies

Diversity and its management has become a feature of modern and postmodern organizations. Different practices have spread around the globe focusing on the organizing and management of inclusion and exclusion of persons and identities based on different genders, sexual orientations, racial and ethnic backgrounds, ages, and (dis)abilities, as well as religious beliefs. Different diversity dimensions are identified and different explanations provided as to how and why these dimensions should be organized and ‘managed’ professionally. The discourses of equal opportunities, gender mainstreaming, and diversity management address these inclusion and exclusion processes each in their own ways while also intersecting. However, although increasingly recognized as important, the discourses of diversity are multifaceted and not without controversy. Furthermore, diversity management discourses and practices have the potential to reproduce both inclusion and exclusion. This book covers the rich and diverse field of diversity studies in organizations in one book. It presents the foundations of organizing and managing diversities, offers multidisciplinary, intersectional and critical analyses on key issues, and opens up fresh perspectives in order to advance the diversity debate. It also inspires new debates on diversity by encouraging scholars to broaden their research agendas and assists students and scholars to increase their understanding of the field and its current discussions. The authors are leading experts in the field from all over the world.

Diversity management and organizational change

2014 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 482-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Evans
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Theory ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Diversity Management ◽  
Institutional Innovation ◽  
Gender Mainstreaming ◽  
Content Type ◽  
European Social Fund ◽  
Social Fund ◽  
Collaborative Working ◽  
Women In Information Technology

Purpose – Set against a background of numerous institutionally funded programmes with a focus on gender mainstreaming, the purpose of this paper is to draw on institutional theory as an alternative lens to explain why such programmes often fail to achieve the desired outcomes. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is based on a case of a European Social Fund EQUAL Programme aimed at enhancing employment opportunities for women in Information Technology, Electronics and Communication and related sectors. The paper focuses on the partnership working aspect, which is a fundamental mobilizing structure of European Commission programmes. Insights into the experiences of partnership working were gathered from interviews with 18, out of the 24 participating partners, on this specific programme. Findings – Tensions with partnership working are exposed and discussed: frustration with intra-organizational collaborative working and structures and outputs that promote a mimetic approach to change, legitimized through the symbolic use of “best practice”; findings more consistent with “institutional isomorphism”, as opposed to “institutional innovation”. Social implications – Given that partnership working remains a key mobilizing structure of gender mainstreaming programmes, both within Europe and in other contexts, the paper concludes with recommendations aimed at those responsible for commissioning and overseeing such programmes. Originality/value – This paper draws on institutional theory as an alternative lens to examine and explain why gender mainstreaming programmes do not always achieve the intended outcomes. To date, as others acknowledge, there has been limited work that has applied organizational theory to this problem.

„Gleichmacherei“ ausdrücklich erwünscht!

2018 ◽  
Vol 52 (6) ◽  
pp. 430-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Lison
Keyword(s):  
Diversity Management ◽  
Gender Mainstreaming

Zusammenfassung Gender-Mainstreaming hat als wichtiges gesellschaftspolitisches Ziel im Kontext des Diversity-Management auch Einzug in die strategischen Handlungsfelder und auch in die operative Arbeit der Stadtbibliothek Bremen gefunden. Die diesbezügliche Konzeption der Stadtbibliothek geht von einer der grundlegenden Prämissen des Gender-Mainstreaming aus, die besagt, dass es keine geschlechtsneutrale Realität gibt. Daher müssten bei allen gesellschaftlichen Vorhaben und Entscheidungen die unterschiedlichen Lebenssituationen sowie Interessen von Männern und Frauen konsequent berücksichtigt werden.

scholarly journals Beyond gender to intersectionality in NCD policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
O Hankivsky
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Gender Mainstreaming ◽  
Explicit Recognition ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Key Policy ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Policy Strategies ◽  
Policy Shifts ◽  
Research And Policy

Abstract Olena Hankivsky, PhD (School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne) will present an analysis of key policy shifts in the NCDs field internationally, which reflect more nuanced thinking about gender, and the explicit recognition that gender intersects with other factors. She will outline key issues that need to be addressed for further movement to be made on the intersectionality front including clarification of the similarities and differences between gender mainstreaming and intersectionality and how to accurately apply intersectionality in the analysis of NCDs. The presentation will include suggestions and research and policy strategies for how to addressing operational challenges and advance intersectionality in the context of NCDs related policies and how to draw on intersectionality to improve the development of comprehensive multi-sectoral approaches to national and international NCD policies.

Orosensory Perception, Speech Production, and Deafness

1973 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milo E. Bishop ◽  
Robert L. Ringel ◽  
Arthur S. House
Keyword(s):  
High School ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Poor Performance ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
The Other ◽  
Functional Disorders ◽  
Form Discrimination ◽  
School Subjects ◽  
Oral Form ◽  
Similarities And Differences

The oral form-discrimination abilities of 18 orally educated and oriented deaf high school subjects were determined and compared to those of manually educated and oriented deaf subjects and normal-hearing subjects. The similarities and differences among the responses of the three groups were discussed and then compared to responses elicited from subjects with functional disorders of articulation. In general, the discrimination scores separated the manual deaf from the other two groups, particularly when differences in form shapes were involved in the test. The implications of the results for theories relating orosensory-discrimination abilities are discussed. It is postulated that, while a failure in oroperceptual functioning may lead to disorders of articulation, a failure to use the oral mechanism for speech activities, even in persons with normal orosensory capabilities, may result in poor performance on oroperceptual tasks.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document