gender in the workplace a case study approach

(Stanford users can avoid this Captcha by logging in.)

• Send to text email RefWorks EndNote printer

Gender in the workplace : a case study approach

Available online, at the library.

Green Library

More options.

• Find it at other libraries via WorldCat
• Contributors

Description

Creators/contributors, contents/summary.

• Introduction Half a Pie, or None? One Step Forward, Two Steps Back? Did Attorney Evans Bump her Head on the Glass Ceiling? Medical Mentoring The Pregnant Professor Kinder, Kirke, Kuche: Working Mothers in Germany Sexual Harassment in the Military Conclusion.
• (source: Nielsen Book Data)

Bibliographic information

Browse related items.

• Stanford Home
• Maps & Directions
• Search Stanford
• Emergency Info
• Terms of Use
• Non-Discrimination
• Accessibility

© Stanford University , Stanford , California 94305 .

• Kindle Store
• Kindle eBooks
• Politics & Social Sciences

Promotions apply when you purchase

These promotions will be applied to this item:

Some promotions may be combined; others are not eligible to be combined with other offers. For details, please see the Terms & Conditions associated with these promotions.

• Highlight, take notes, and search in the book
• In this edition, page numbers are just like the physical edition

Rent $43.26

Today through selected date:

Rental price is determined by end date.

Buy for others

Buying and sending ebooks to others.

• Select quantity
• Buy and send eBooks
• Recipients can read on any device

These ebooks can only be redeemed by recipients in the US. Redemption links and eBooks cannot be resold.

Image Unavailable

• To view this video download Flash Player

Follow the author

Gender in the Workplace: A Case Study Approach 2nd Edition, Kindle Edition

This brief collection of cases is designed to help students and employees gain a hands-on understanding of gender issues in the workplace and to provide the necessary tools to handle those issues. Based on actual legal cases, nationally reported incidents, and personal interviews, the case studies in Gender in the Workplace address the range and types of gender issues found in the workplace. Completely revised and updated, this Second Edition provides a more international dimension to reinforce the varying impact of different cultures on gender issues.

New to the Second Edition:

• Develops critical thinking skills: A new "Critical Issues" section introduces students to cutting-edge thinking and thought-provoking research.
• Explores gender issues in a wide variety of organizations and in many cultures: Two new cases set outside the United States discuss how cultural settings can change the form of problems and the strategies for addressing them.
• Offers many new concrete examples of gender issues that arise in the workplace: New cases examine harassment in the military and "glass ceiling" issues as well as an updated look at gender stereotypes, promotion and benefits, career development, balancing work and family, sexual harassment, and much more!

Instructor′s Resources!

This helpful CD offers instructor notes, case overviews, learning objectives, teaching recommendations, and discussion questions for each chapter. Available upon request.

Intended Audience:

This text is intended as a supplement for courses in Management, Human Resources, Public Administration, Gender Studies, Industrial Psychology, Social Psychology, and Sociology of Work. It is also useful in consulting and training environments.

• ISBN-13 978-1412928175
• Edition 2nd
• Sticky notes Not Enabled
• Publisher SAGE Publications, Inc
• Publication date January 18, 2007
• Language English
• File size 2841 KB
• See all details
• Kindle Fire HDX 8.9''
• Kindle Fire HDX
• Kindle Fire HD (3rd Generation)
• Fire HDX 8.9 Tablet
• Fire HD 7 Tablet
• Fire HD 6 Tablet
• Kindle Fire HD 8.9"
• Kindle Fire HD(1st Generation)
• Kindle Fire(2nd Generation)
• Kindle Fire(1st Generation)
• Kindle for Android Phones
• Kindle for Android Tablets
• Kindle for iPhone
• Kindle for iPod Touch
• Kindle for iPad
• Kindle for Mac
• Kindle for PC
• Kindle Cloud Reader

Customers who bought this item also bought

Editorial Reviews

About the author, product details.

• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B00Y3J35M4
• Publisher ‏ : ‎ SAGE Publications, Inc; 2nd edition (January 18, 2007)
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ January 18, 2007
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 2841 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Not enabled
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 144 pages
• #529 in Business Ethics (Kindle Store)
• #1,462 in Business Ethics (Books)
• #1,571 in Cultural Anthropology (Kindle Store)

About the author

Jacqueline delaat.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more

Customer reviews

Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.

To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.

• Sort reviews by Top reviews Most recent Top reviews

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. please try again later..

• Amazon Newsletter
• About Amazon
• Accessibility
• Sustainability
• Press Center
• Investor Relations
• Amazon Devices
• Amazon Science
• Start Selling with Amazon
• Sell apps on Amazon
• Supply to Amazon
• Protect & Build Your Brand
• Become an Affiliate
• Become a Delivery Driver
• Start a Package Delivery Business
• Advertise Your Products
• Self-Publish with Us
• Host an Amazon Hub
• › See More Ways to Make Money
• Amazon Visa
• Amazon Store Card
• Amazon Secured Card
• Amazon Business Card
• Shop with Points
• Credit Card Marketplace
• Reload Your Balance
• Amazon Currency Converter
• Your Account
• Your Orders
• Shipping Rates & Policies
• Amazon Prime
• Returns & Replacements
• Manage Your Content and Devices
• Recalls and Product Safety Alerts
• Conditions of Use
• Privacy Notice
• Consumer Health Data Privacy Disclosure
• Your Ads Privacy Choices

• Higher Education Textbooks
• Business & Finance

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet or computer – no Kindle device required .

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera, scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

Image Unavailable

• To view this video download Flash Player

Follow the author

Gender in the Workplace: A Case Study Approach Paperback – 16 March 1999

Return policy.

Tap on the category links below for the associated return window and exceptions (if any) for returns.

10 Days Returnable

You can return if you receive a damaged, defective or incorrect product.

10 Days, Refund

Returnable if you’ve received the product in a condition that is damaged, defective or different from its description on the product detail page on Amazon.in.

Refunds will be issued only if it is determined that the item was not damaged while in your possession, or is not different from what was shipped to you.

Movies, Music

Not returnable, musical instruments.

Wind instruments and items marked as non-returnable on detail page are not eligible for return.

Video Games (Accessories and Games)

You can ask for a replacement or refund if you receive a damaged, defective or incorrect product.

Mobiles (new and certified refurbished)

10 days replacement, mobile accessories.

This item is eligible for free replacement/refund, within 10 days of delivery, in an unlikely event of damaged, defective or different/wrong item delivered to you. Note: Please keep the item in its original condition, with MRP tags attached, user manual, warranty cards, and original accessories in manufacturer packaging. We may contact you to ascertain the damage or defect in the product prior to issuing refund/replacement.

Power Banks: 10 Days; Replacement only

Screen guards, screen protectors and tempered glasses are non-returnable.

Used Mobiles, Tablets

10 days refund.

Refunds applicable only if it has been determined that the item was not damaged while in your possession, or is not different from what was shipped to you.

Mobiles and Tablets with Inspect & Buy label

2 days refund, tablets (new and certified refurbished), 7 days replacement.

This item is eligible for free replacement, within 7 days of delivery, in an unlikely event of damaged or different item delivered to you. In case of defective, product quality related issues for brands listed below, customer will be required to approach the brands’ customer service center and seek resolution. If the product is confirmed as defective by the brand then customer needs to get letter/email confirming the same and submit to Amazon customer service to seek replacement. Replacement for defective products, products with quality issues cannot be provided if the brand has not confirmed the same through a letter/email. Brands -HP, Lenovo, AMD, Intel, Seagate, Crucial

Please keep the item in its original condition, with brand outer box, MRP tags attached, user manual, warranty cards, CDs and original accessories in manufacturer packaging for a successful return pick-up. Before returning a Tablet, the device should be formatted and screen lock should be disabled.

For few products, we may schedule a technician visit to your location. On the basis of the technician's evaluation report, we will provide resolution.

This item is eligible for free replacement, within 7 days of delivery, in an unlikely event of damaged, defective or different item delivered to you.

Please keep the item in its original condition, with brand outer box, MRP tags attached, user manual, warranty cards, CDs and original accessories in manufacturer packaging for a successful return pick-up.

Used Laptops

Software products that are labeled as not returnable on the product detail pages are not eligible for returns.

For software-related technical issues or installation issues in items belonging to the Software category, please contact the brand directly.

Desktops, Monitors, Pen drives, Hard drives, Memory cards, Computer accessories, Graphic cards, CPU, Power supplies, Motherboards, Cooling devices, TV cards & Computing Components

All PC components, listed as Components under "Computers & Accessories" that are labeled as not returnable on the product detail page are not eligible for returns.

Digital Cameras, camera lenses, Headsets, Speakers, Projectors, Home Entertainment (new and certified refurbished)

Return the camera in the original condition with brand box and all the accessories Product like camera bag etc. to avoid pickup cancellation. We will not process a replacement if the pickup is cancelled owing to missing/damaged contents.

Return the speakers in the original condition in brand box to avoid pickup cancellation. We will not process a replacement if the pickup is cancelled owing to missing/ damaged box.

10 Days, Replacement

Speakers (new and certified refurbished), home entertainment.

This item is eligible for free replacement, within 10 days of delivery, in an unlikely event of damaged, defective or different/wrong item delivered to you.

Note: Please keep the item in its original condition, with MRP tags attached, user manual, warranty cards, and original accessories in manufacturer packaging for a successful return pick-up.

For TV, we may schedule a technician visit to your location and resolution will be provided based on the technician's evaluation report.

10 days Replacement only

This item is eligible for free replacement, within 10 days of delivery, in an unlikely event of damaged, defective or different/wrong item delivered to you. .

Please keep the item in its original condition, original packaging, with user manual, warranty cards, and original accessories in manufacturer packaging for a successful return pick-up.

If you report an issue with your Furniture,we may schedule a technician visit to your location. On the basis of the technician's evaluation report, we will provide resolution.

Large Appliances - Air Coolers, Air Conditioner, Refrigerator, Washing Machine, Dishwasher, Microwave

In certain cases, if you report an issue with your Air Conditioner, Refrigerator, Washing Machine or Microwave, we may schedule a technician visit to your location. On the basis of the technician's evaluation report, we'll provide a resolution.

Home and Kitchen

Grocery and gourmet, pet food, pet shampoos and conditioners, pest control and pet grooming aids, non-returnable, pet habitats and supplies, apparel and leashes, training and behavior aids, toys, aquarium supplies such as pumps, filters and lights, 7 days returnable.

All the toys item other than Vehicle and Outdoor Category are eligible for free replacement/refund, within 7 days of delivery, in an unlikely event of damaged, defective or different/wrong item delivered to you.

Vehicle and Outdoor category toys are eligible for free replacement, within 7 days of delivery, in an unlikely event of damaged, defective or different/wrong item delivered to you

Note: Please keep the item in its original condition, with outer box or case, user manual, warranty cards, and other accompaniments in manufacturer packaging for a successful return pick-up. We may contact you to ascertain the damage or defect in the product prior to issuing refund/replacement.

Sports, Fitness and Outdoors

Occupational health & safety products, personal care appliances, 7 days replacement only, health and personal care, clothing and accessories, 30 days returnable.

Lingerie, innerwear and apparel labeled as non-returnable on their product detail pages can't be returned.

Return the clothing in the original condition with the MRP and brand tag attached to the clothing to avoid pickup cancellation. We will not process a replacement or refund if the pickup is cancelled owing to missing MRP tag.

Precious Jewellery

Precious jewellery items need to be returned in the tamper free packaging that is provided in the delivery parcel. Returns in any other packaging will not be accepted.

Fashion or Imitation Jewellery, Eyewear and Watches

Return the watch in the original condition in brand box to avoid pickup cancellation. We will not process a replacement if the pickup is cancelled owing to missing/damaged contents.

Gold Coins / Gold Vedhanis / Gold Chips / Gold Bars

30 days; replacement/refund, 30 days, returnable, luggage and handbags.

Any luggage items with locks must be returned unlocked.

Car Parts and Accessories, Bike Parts and Accessories, Helmets and other Protective Gear, Vehicle Electronics

Items marked as non-returnable on detail page are not eligible for return.

Items that you no longer need must be returned in new and unopened condition with all the original packing, tags, inbox literature, warranty/ guarantee card, freebies and accessories including keys, straps and locks intact.

Fasteners, Food service equipment and supplies, Industrial Electrical, Lab and Scientific Products, Material Handling Products, Occupational Health and Safety Products, Packaging and Shipping Supplies, Professional Medical Supplies, Tapes, Adhesives and Sealants Test, Measure and Inspect items, Industrial Hardware, Industrial Power and Hand Tools.

Tyres (except car tyres), rims and oversized items (automobiles).

Car tyres are non-returnable and hence, not eligible for return.

Return pickup facility is not available for these items. You can self return these products using any courier/ postal service of your choice. Learn more about shipping cost refunds .

The return timelines for seller-fulfilled items sold on Amazon.in are equivalent to the return timelines mentioned above for items fulfilled by Amazon.

If you’ve received a seller-fulfilled product in a condition that is damaged, defective or different from its description on the product detail page on Amazon.in, returns are subject to the seller's approval of the return.

If you do not receive a response from the seller for your return request within two business days, you can submit an A-to-Z Guarantee claim. Learn more about returning seller fulfilled items.

Note : For seller fulfilled items from Books, Movies & TV Shows categories, the sellers need to be informed of the damage/ defect within 14 days of delivery.

For seller-fulfilled items from Fine Art category, the sellers need to be informed of the damage / defect within 10 days of delivery. These items are not eligible for self-return. The seller will arrange the return pick up for these items.

For seller-fulfilled items from Sports collectibles and Entertainment collectibles categories, the sellers need to be informed of the damage / defect within 10 days of delivery.

The General Return Policy is applicable for all Amazon Global Store Products (“Product”). If the Product is eligible for a refund on return, you can choose to return the Product either through courier Pickup or Self-Return**

Note: - Once the package is received at Amazon Export Sales LLC fulfillment center in the US, it takes 2 (two) business days for the refund to be processed and 2- 4 business days for the refund amount to reflect in your account. - If your return is due to an Amazon error you'll receive a full refund, else the shipping charges (onward & return) along with import fees will be deducted from your refund amount.

**For products worth more than INR 25000, we only offer Self-Return option.

2 Days, Refund

Refunds are applicable only if determined that the item was not damaged while in your possession, or is not different from what was shipped to you.

There is a newer edition of this item:

The case studies require the reader to analyze a real situation, and make decisions on the basis of their analysis. Issues covered include: gender stereotypes about work; gender discrimination in pay, promotion and benefits; career development and mentoring; balancing work and family and sexual harassment

The concluding chapter examines the connection between the five types of gender discrimination explored in the cases.

• Print length 112 pages
• Language English
• Publisher SAGE Publications, Inc
• Publication date 16 March 1999
• Dimensions 0.64 x 15.24 x 23.5 cm
• ISBN-10 076191479X
• ISBN-13 978-0761914792
• See all details

Product description

About the author, product details.

• Publisher ‏ : ‎ SAGE Publications, Inc; 1st edition (16 March 1999)
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• Paperback ‏ : ‎ 112 pages
• ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 076191479X
• ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-0761914792
• Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 160 g
• Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 0.64 x 15.24 x 23.5 cm

About the author

Jacqueline delaat.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more

Customer reviews

• Sort reviews by Top reviews Most recent Top reviews

Top reviews from India

Top reviews from other countries.

• Press Releases
• Amazon Science
• Sell on Amazon
• Sell under Amazon Accelerator
• Protect and Build Your Brand
• Amazon Global Selling
• Become an Affiliate
• Fulfilment by Amazon
• Advertise Your Products
• Amazon Pay on Merchants
• COVID-19 and Amazon
• Your Account
• Returns Centre
• 100% Purchase Protection
• Amazon App Download
• Netherlands
• United Arab Emirates
• United Kingdom
• United States
• Conditions of Use & Sale
• Privacy Notice
• Interest-Based Ads

• Professional & Technical
• Business Management

Enjoy Prime FREE for 30 days

Here's what Amazon Prime has to offer:

Buy new: $149.56 $149.56 FREE delivery: Friday, April 12 Ships from: Amazon.ca Sold by: Amazon.ca

Buy used: $27.40.

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet or computer – no Kindle device required .

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera, scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

Image Unavailable

• To view this video, download Flash Player

Follow the author

Gender in the Workplace: A Case Study Approach Paperback – Jan. 18 2007

Purchase options and add-ons.

• ISBN-10 1412928176
• ISBN-13 978-1412928175
• Publication date Jan. 18 2007
• Language English
• Dimensions 15.24 x 0.81 x 22.86 cm
• Print length 138 pages
• See all details

Product description

About the author, product details.

• Publisher ‏ : ‎ Sage Publications; 2 edition (Jan. 18 2007)
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• Paperback ‏ : ‎ 138 pages
• ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 1412928176
• ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-1412928175
• Item weight ‏ : ‎ 200 g
• Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 15.24 x 0.81 x 22.86 cm

About the author

Jacqueline delaat.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more

Customer reviews

• Sort reviews by Top reviews Most recent Top reviews

Top reviews from Canada

Top reviews from other countries.

• Amazon and Our Planet
• Investor Relations
• Press Releases
• Amazon Science
• Sell on Amazon
• Supply to Amazon
• Become an Affiliate
• Protect & Build Your Brand
• Sell on Amazon Handmade
• Advertise Your Products
• Independently Publish with Us
• Host an Amazon Hub
• Amazon.ca Rewards Mastercard
• Shop with Points
• Reload Your Balance
• Amazon Currency Converter
• Amazon Cash
• Shipping Rates & Policies
• Amazon Prime
• Returns Are Easy
• Manage your Content and Devices
• Recalls and Product Safety Alerts
• Customer Service
• Conditions of Use
• Privacy Notice
• Interest-Based Ads
• Amazon.com.ca ULC | 40 King Street W 47th Floor, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5H 3Y2 |1-877-586-3230

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Gender in the Workplace A Case Study Approach

• Jacqueline DeLaat - Marietta College
• Description

This brief collection of cases is designed to help students and employees gain a hands-on understanding of gender issues in the workplace and to provide the necessary tools to handle those issues. Based on actual legal cases, nationally reported incidents, and personal interviews, the case studies in Gender in the Workplace address the range and types of gender issues found in the workplace. Completely revised and updated, this Second Edition provides a more international dimension to reinforce the varying impact of different cultures on gender issues.

New to the Second Edition:

• Develops critical thinking skills: A new "Critical Issues" section introduces students to cutting-edge thinking and thought-provoking research.
• Explores gender issues in a wide variety of organizations and in many cultures: Two new cases set outside the United States discuss how cultural settings can change the form of problems and the strategies for addressing them.
• Offers many new concrete examples of gender issues that arise in the workplace: New cases examine harassment in the military and "glass ceiling" issues as well as an updated look at gender stereotypes, promotion and benefits, career development, balancing work and family, sexual harassment, and much more!

Instructor's Resources!

This helpful CD offers instructor notes, case overviews, learning objectives, teaching recommendations, and discussion questions for each chapter. Available upon request.

Intended Audience:

This text is intended as a supplement for courses in Management, Human Resources, Public Administration, Gender Studies, Industrial Psychology, Social Psychology, and Sociology of Work. It is also useful in consulting and training environments.

See what’s new to this edition by selecting the Features tab on this page. Should you need additional information or have questions regarding the HEOA information provided for this title, including what is new to this edition, please email [email protected] . Please include your name, contact information, and the name of the title for which you would like more information. For information on the HEOA, please go to http://ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html .

For assistance with your order: Please email us at [email protected] or connect with your SAGE representative.

SAGE 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 www.sagepub.com

Sample Materials & Chapters

Chapter 1 - Half a Pie, or None?

Chapter 3 - Did Attorney Evans Bump Her Head on the "Glass Ceiling"?

Chapter 5 - The Pregnant Professor

For instructors

Select a purchasing option.

This title is also available on SAGE Knowledge , the ultimate social sciences online library. If your library doesn’t have access, ask your librarian to start a trial .

We will keep fighting for all libraries - stand with us!

Internet Archive Audio

• This Just In
• Grateful Dead
• Old Time Radio
• 78 RPMs and Cylinder Recordings
• Audio Books & Poetry
• Computers, Technology and Science
• Music, Arts & Culture
• News & Public Affairs
• Spirituality & Religion
• Radio News Archive

• Flickr Commons
• Occupy Wall Street Flickr
• NASA Images
• Solar System Collection
• Ames Research Center

• All Software
• Old School Emulation
• MS-DOS Games
• Historical Software
• Classic PC Games
• Software Library
• Kodi Archive and Support File
• Vintage Software
• CD-ROM Software
• CD-ROM Software Library
• Software Sites
• Tucows Software Library
• Shareware CD-ROMs
• Software Capsules Compilation
• CD-ROM Images
• ZX Spectrum
• DOOM Level CD

• Smithsonian Libraries
• FEDLINK (US)
• Lincoln Collection
• American Libraries
• Canadian Libraries
• Universal Library
• Project Gutenberg
• Children's Library
• Biodiversity Heritage Library
• Books by Language
• Additional Collections

• Prelinger Archives
• Democracy Now!
• Occupy Wall Street
• TV NSA Clip Library
• Animation & Cartoons
• Arts & Music
• Computers & Technology
• Cultural & Academic Films
• Ephemeral Films
• Sports Videos
• Videogame Videos
• Youth Media

Search the history of over 866 billion web pages on the Internet.

Mobile Apps

• Wayback Machine (iOS)
• Wayback Machine (Android)

Browser Extensions

Archive-it subscription.

• Explore the Collections
• Build Collections

Save Page Now

Capture a web page as it appears now for use as a trusted citation in the future.

Please enter a valid web address

• Donate Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape

Gender in the workplace : a case study approach

Bookreader item preview, share or embed this item, flag this item for.

• Graphic Violence
• Explicit Sexual Content
• Hate Speech
• Misinformation/Disinformation
• Marketing/Phishing/Advertising
• Misleading/Inaccurate/Missing Metadata

plus-circle Add Review comment Reviews

4 Favorites

Better World Books

DOWNLOAD OPTIONS

No suitable files to display here.

IN COLLECTIONS

Uploaded by station48.cebu on February 15, 2020

Interventions on gender equity in the workplace: a scoping review

• Andrea C. Tricco 1 ,
• Amanda Parker 1 ,
• Paul A. Khan 1 ,
• Vera Nincic 1 ,
• Reid Robson 1 ,
• Heather MacDonald 1 ,
• Rachel Warren 1 ,
• Olga Cleary 2 ,
• Elaine Zibrowski 3 ,
• Nancy Baxter 4 ,
• Karen E. A. Burns 5 ,
• Doug Coyle 6 ,
• Ruth Ndjaboue 7 ,
• Jocalyn P. Clark 8 ,
• Etienne V. Langlois 9 ,
• Sofia B. Ahmed 10 ,
• Holly O. Witteman 11 ,
• Ian D. Graham 12 ,
• Wafa El-Adhami 13 ,
• Becky Skidmore 14 ,
• France Légaré 11 ,
• Janet Curran 15 ,
• Gillian Hawker 16 ,
• Jennifer Watt 1 ,
• Ivy Lynn Bourgeault 17 ,
• Jeanna Parsons Leigh 18 ,
• Karen Lawford 19 ,
• Alice Aiken 20 ,
• Christopher McCabe 21 ,
• Sasha Shepperd 22 ,
• Reena Pattani 23 ,
• Natalie Leon 24 ,
• Jamie Lundine 17 ,
• Évèhouénou Lionel Adisso 25 ,
• Santa Ono 26 ,
• Linda Rabeneck 27 &
• Sharon E. Straus 1  

BMC Medicine volume  22 , Article number:  149 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

89 Accesses

11 Altmetric

Metrics details

Various studies have demonstrated gender disparities in workplace settings and the need for further intervention. This study identifies and examines evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on interventions examining gender equity in workplace or volunteer settings. An additional aim was to determine whether interventions considered intersection of gender and other variables, including PROGRESS-Plus equity variables (e.g., race/ethnicity).

Scoping review conducted using the JBI guide. Literature was searched in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, Index to Legal Periodicals and Books, PAIS Index, Policy Index File, and the Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database from inception to May 9, 2022, with an updated search on October 17, 2022. Results were reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension to scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidance, Strengthening the Integration of Intersectionality Theory in Health Inequality Analysis (SIITHIA) checklist, and Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP) version 2 checklist.

All employment or volunteer sectors settings were included. Included interventions were designed to promote workplace gender equity that targeted: (a) individuals, (b) organizations, or (c) systems. Any comparator was eligible. Outcomes measures included any gender equity related outcome, whether it was measuring intervention effectiveness (as defined by included studies) or implementation. Data analyses were descriptive in nature. As recommended in the JBI guide to scoping reviews, only high-level content analysis was conducted to categorize the interventions, which were reported using a previously published framework.

We screened 8855 citations, 803 grey literature sources, and 663 full-text articles, resulting in 24 unique RCTs and one companion report that met inclusion criteria. Most studies (91.7%) failed to report how they established sex or gender. Twenty-three of 24 (95.8%) studies reported at least one PROGRESS-Plus variable: typically sex or gender or occupation. Two RCTs (8.3%) identified a non-binary gender identity. None of the RCTs reported on relationships between gender and other characteristics (e.g., disability, age, etc.). We identified 24 gender equity promoting interventions in the workplace that were evaluated and categorized into one or more of the following themes: (i) quantifying gender impacts; (ii) behavioural or systemic changes; (iii) career flexibility; (iv) increased visibility, recognition, and representation; (v) creating opportunities for development, mentorship, and sponsorship; and (vi) financial support. Of these interventions, 20/24 (83.3%) had positive conclusion statements for their primary outcomes (e.g., improved academic productivity, increased self-esteem) across heterogeneous outcomes.

Conclusions

There is a paucity of literature on interventions to promote workplace gender equity. While some interventions elicited positive conclusions across a variety of outcomes, standardized outcome measures considering specific contexts and cultures are required. Few PROGRESS-Plus items were reported. Non-binary gender identities and issues related to intersectionality were not adequately considered. Future research should provide consistent and contemporary definitions of gender and sex.

Trial registration

Open Science Framework https://osf.io/x8yae .

Peer Review reports

Summary box

What is already known on this topic.

Our previous large scoping review of gender equity interventions within academic health research identified more than 560 studies published over 50 years, showing tremendous research interest in gender equity.

What this study adds

This study summarizes the evidence from extensive review and synthesis of randomized evidence on gender equity interventions within workplace settings and shows that such interventions largely succeed and elicit mostly positive conclusions across a variety of outcomes, such as improving academic productivity and increased self-confidence and self-esteem.

Many different outcomes were used to examine the effectiveness of gender equity interventions, suggesting that standardized outcome measures are required that consider specific contexts and cultures.

Equity variables beyond sex or gender, or occupation, such as race/ethnicity, religion and age, are underreported, and notably sex/gender is neither reliably defined, nor are definitions consistently provided. Sex/gender terminology is conflated, and intersectionality is rarely considered. More comprehensive reporting and standardization aligned with growing community expectations for a range of equity variables are needed.

These results can be utilized by researchers, funders, peer reviewers, and journal editors to both enhance, and establish, consistent reporting of gender equity research. More importantly, the findings can be used to inform the development and implementation of interventions to enhance gender equity in the workplace.

Ahead of the 2023 International Women’s Day, the United Nations Secretary General stated that “gender equality is growing more distant with estimates from other organizations (UN Women) placing it 300 years away” [ 1 ]. This suggests that the United Nations Sustainable Development goal five to “achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls” is getting further out of reach [ 2 ]. Furthermore, a recent report (2022) from the Melinda French Gates Foundation estimated that it will be 100 years until gender equality is fully realized [ 3 , 4 ]. If women were equal participants, it is estimated that the global economy would grow by almost US $30 trillion per year [ 5 ]. Women are being left behind in the workplace, and in vital sectors, including in science and technology [ 1 ]. Women are also under-represented in leadership positions with 70.0% of health worker jobs held by women, yet only 25.0% of senior leadership positions held by women [ 6 ]. Solutions are needed to address the observed gender gap [ 1 ].

Recently, we published a large scoping review, including more than 560 studies over a 50-year period, focused on examining gender equity within academic health research [ 7 ]. Most studies (65.0%) did not report how gender or sex were determined/defined or they interchanged/conflated the terms of sex and gender, and all studies classified gender as a binary variable [ 7 ]. Gender is a social construct and as such is constantly in flux. Gender encompasses concepts such as gender roles and gender identity, which are important to consider when we look at gender equity. Sex is a biological construct, which encompasses anatomy, physiology, genes, and hormones. Sex impacts how we are labeled in society, and in research, it is common to adopt a binary understanding of man/woman, which can compromise the validity and generalizability of findings [ 8 ]. In our previous research, only three studies mentioned the intersection of gender and other variables [ 7 ]. Few studies reported the PROGRESS-Plus equity variables (i.e., place of residence, race/ethnicity/culture/language, occupation, gender/sex, religion, education, socioeconomic status, or social capital) [ 9 ], such as race/ethnicity (11.4%), religion (0.2%), and age (7.3%) [ 7 ]. Our review concluded that interventions to achieve gender equity in academia and in all workplace settings that account for actual lived experience are required [ 7 ].

This scoping review sought to summarize the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on gender equity interventions within any workplace setting. Scoping reviews provide a high-level summary of the evidence within a concept (here it is gender equity interventions) and are useful for highlighting definitions, characteristics, and factors related to that concept [ 10 ]. As such, additional objectives were to determine whether any interventions considered the intersection of gender and other variables [ 11 , 12 ] and if any studies reported the PROGRESS-Plus equity variables [ 9 ]. A scoping review approach was used, as our research question was broad, and our goal was to identify and catalogue the evidence on workplace gender equity interventions from randomized trials [ 13 ].

A protocol was developed using guidance on scoping review protocols [ 14 , 15 ]. The JBI (formerly Joanna Briggs Institute) guidance for scoping reviews [ 13 ] informed the conduct of this scoping review. The protocol for this scoping review was registered with Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/x8yae ). Team demographics and positionality are reported in the previous publication [ 7 ]. Prior to beginning this review, a self-reflective equity exercise was completed [ 16 ] to create an inclusive and respectful space for the team to openly share and contribute to the project. Knowledge users from multiple organizations engaged in all aspects of this scoping review. Review results are reported using all relevant reporting guidance: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension to scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR [ 17 ]; Additional file 1 : Appendix 1), Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidance [ 18 ] (Additional file 1 : Appendix 2), Strengthening the Integration of Intersectionality Theory in Health Inequality Analysis (SIITHIA) checklist [ 19 ] (Additional file 1 : Appendix 3), and Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP) version 2 checklist [ 20 ] (Additional file 1 : Appendix 4).

Literature search

The literature search was developed by an experienced librarian (BS) and peer-reviewed by another librarian using the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) checklist [ 21 ]. Electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Index to Legal Periodicals and Books, Public Affairs Information Service (PAIS) Index, Policy Index File, and the Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database were searched from inception to May 9, 2022. To ensure that all gender equity literature search terms were adequately captured, an updated literature search was executed on October 17, 2022, on all databases except for in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. The literature search strategies for all databases can be found in Additional file 1 : Appendix 5. Unpublished and grey literature was searched using the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH)’s Grey Matters guidance [ 22 ]. A full list of grey literature sources is provided in Additional file 1 : Appendix 6. Conference abstracts and dissertations identified through our literature search were screened for eligibility, and attempts were made to locate corresponding publications. Reference lists of all included trials and related reviews [ 7 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 ] were manually scanned for additional trials of interest.

Eligibility criteria

Adults of any gender aged 18 years and above in any employment or volunteer sector, such as academia, government, education, or business.

Intervention

Any intervention designed to promote gender equity that targeted: (a) individuals (e.g., training in diversity, unconscious bias, mentorship, or coaching), (b) organizations (e.g., policies designed to address gender inequity, workplace code of conduct, or implementation of equity, and diversity and inclusion action plan at the government level), or (c) systems (e.g., legislation to publicly report salaries, legislation to mandate equitable representation on committees, or pay equity).

Any comparator was eligible, including no comparator or usual practice.

Any outcome related to gender equity, such as change in attitude, bias, and/or awareness.

Study designs

Only RCTs or quasi-randomized controlled trials were included.

No restrictions were applied based on study year, language of dissemination, or study duration.

A screening form (presented in Additional file 1 : Appendix 7) was developed based on pre-defined eligibility criteria. The reviewers completed a training exercise using 50 citations to ensure adequate agreement was achieved. After completing one training exercise (achieving 75.0% agreement), all remaining titles and abstracts identified in the search were screened independently by expert pairs of reviewers (AP, HM, OC, PAK, RW, RR, VN). Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer.

Similarly, a training exercise (Additional file 1 : Appendix 8) was completed for screening of full-text articles, using 20 articles. Two training exercises were necessary (achieving 65.0% and 85.0% agreement, respectively). The screening form was then revised for clarity and full-text articles were assigned to independent pairs of reviewers (AP, HM, OC, PAK, RW, RR, VN). Discrepancies were consistently resolved by a third reviewer (AP). A glossary of key terms that guided the team is in Additional file 1 : Appendix 9.

Data abstraction

A data abstraction form (Additional file 1 : Appendix 9) was created to capture data on the following items: study characteristics (e.g., country of conduct, country economy levels, settings), population characteristics (e.g., gender, sex, age), intervention characteristics (e.g., intersectionality, sample size, duration of intervention), and outcomes (e.g., culture change, number of publications). To capture outcomes relevant to equity, the PROGRESS-Plus criteria were used [ 9 ]. Additional relevant outcomes included intersectionality theory (defined as “an analytic framework and research paradigm that consider the ways in which connected systems and structures of power operate across time, place, and societal levels to construct intersecting social locations and identities (e.g., along axes such as race, gender, class, and sexual orientation, among others [ 19 ])), definitions (if any) of sex and gender by the authors, and changes in sexism, self advocacy, and financial autonomy. Full data abstraction was completed by independently by two reviewers (AP, VN, PAK, HC, RW, RR, and OC), with discrepancies solved by a third reviewer (AP).

Analysis and presentation of results

Review findings were summarized descriptively using summary tables, figures, and text. As recommended in the JBI guide to scoping reviews [ 13 ], only high level content analysis was conducted to categorize the interventions, which were reported using a previously published framework [ 46 ]. Conclusion statements from each included trial were classified into one of four main categories: (positive, neutral, negative, and indeterminate [ 47 ]). The conclusion statements from the included articles were categorized by one team member (AP) and verified by another (ACT). When hypothesizing the benefit of an intervention (vs. a comparator), conclusion statements were classified as: positive (i.e., non-statistically significant positive, and statistically significant positive with an associated P -value < 0.05); neutral (effect size between 0.95 and 1.05 and the confidence interval (CI) crosses 1); negative, namely, there is an effect in favor of the nonintervention comparator (i.e., statistically significant negative with an associated P -value < 0.05, and non-statistically significant negative), or indeterminate (i.e., not able to judge; e.g., the article lists 10 primary outcomes, all of which have different results). Since this was a scoping review, a formal sex and gender-based analysis was not conducted in keeping with JBI guidance for scoping reviews [ 13 ].

Patient and public involvement

A public partner, defined using the Canadian Institutes of Health Research glossary [ 48 ], was involved in this project from the outset (Additional file 1 : Appendix 4). The public partner came from her lived experience as a woman in the workplace (EZ) and provided input and feedback on the protocol, title, and abstract screening form, full-text screening form, and final manuscript. The burden for the public partner was assessed from the outset to be no more than 2 h per month, which was agreed upon by the partner in advance. Our team uses a compensation policy that was co-produced by patient and public partners, policy-makers, healthcare providers, and researchers [ 49 ]. To support dissemination, the research team prepared and disseminated monthly progress reports to all authors for the project duration. We acknowledged our public partner’s contribution by including her as an author, and the team will involve the public partner in the development of the dissemination plan to access groups and forums the research team may not be aware of.

After screening 8855 citations from the electronic database searches, 803 extracts from grey literature searches, as well as 663 full-text articles, 24 unique trials [ 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 ] (including 3 from the grey literature and 3 from included study reference scanning), and 1 companion report [ 34 ] (i.e., publications that provided supplementary material to the main trial publication) fulfilled inclusion eligibility criteria (Fig.  1 ). Brady 2015 included data on two studies which were considered as unique trials [ 42 ]. One trial within Huis 2019 was classified as a companion report as it was unclear if the sample was independent from another trial within the same article [ 34 ]. All included studies were published in English. A list of studies that were closely related to the inclusion criteria but ultimately excluded is provided in Additional file 1 : Appendix 10.

PRISMA flow diagram

Study characteristics

Most trials were RCTs randomized at the participant level ( n  = 18) [ 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 41 , 42 , 45 ] and four were randomized at the cluster level [ 23 , 40 , 43 , 44 ], while the remaining two were quasi-randomized RCTs [ 26 , 36 ]. The trials were published between 1979 and 2022, with over 50.0% published since 2017. Trials were predominantly conducted in the USA ( n  = 13). Seventeen of the included trials were conducted in high-income countries (HICs) [ 23 , 24 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 35 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 41 , 42 , 45 ], 2 in middle-income countries (MICs) [ 25 , 43 ], 4 in lower-middle income countries (LMICs) [ 29 , 34 , 40 , 44 ], and one in a combination of LMICs and MICs [ 36 ]. Trials were set in workplaces spanning various sectors, including eight in the academic or educational sectors [ 23 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 30 , 39 , 41 , 42 ], five in microfinance [ 33 , 34 , 35 , 43 , 44 ], one in healthcare [ 45 ], five in corporate [ 24 , 31 , 32 , 37 , 42 ], three where the workplace setting was either not clearly described or fictitious [ 25 , 29 , 40 ], one in a military workplace setting [ 38 ], and one in a forestry workplace setting [ 36 ]. Trials conducted in MICs and LMICs were primarily microfinance initiatives where the focus was on increasing the involvement of women in household finance decisions or expanding their small businesses with their husbands. The setting was multi-site in 12 trials [ 23 , 25 , 28 , 29 , 31 , 35 , 36 , 38 , 40 , 43 , 44 , 45 ], single site in 10 trials [ 24 , 26 , 27 , 30 , 33 , 34 , 37 , 39 , 42 ], and 2 trials did not report sufficient information to determine the site setting [ 32 , 41 ]. Nineteen were directed at the individual level [ 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 ], 3 at the organizational level [ 23 , 42 , 45 ], and 2 at both the individual and organizational levels [ 28 , 32 ]. Further details on the included trials as well as the companion report are available in Additional file 1 : Appendix 11.

Participant characteristics

The total number of participants was 14,798 across all RCTs (Table  1 ). The median number of participants was 247 across the RCTs, ranging from 23 to 4356 participants (Additional file 1 : Appendix 12). The average proportion of participants reported as being females or women was 69.1%. At least one element of the PROGRESS-Plus criteria was reported in 96% of the RCTs (23/24 or 95.8%; Table  1 , Additional file 1 : Appendix 13). Most RCTs reported the gender/sex (20/24 or 83.3%) and occupation (18/24 or 75.0%) of the included participants. Nine (37.5%) trials reported race/ethnicity, ten (41.7%) reported on education, five on place of residence (20.8%), six on socioeconomic status (25.0%), and three (13.0%) on religion. No RCTs (0%) reported other elements of PROGRESS-Plus, namely, culture, language, social capital, disability, age, features of relationships (e.g., whether or not an individual had children or aging parents under their care), and time-dependent relationships (e.g., new hires, people coming back from a leave of absence, people with time-limited contracts.)

Most RCTs did not explicitly report a definition of sex or gender (20/24, 83.3%) (Additional file 1 : Appendix 14). Most RCTs also used gender terms (i.e., man/woman) interchangeably with sex terms (i.e., male/female, 22/24, 91.7%). Four trials (4/24, 16.7%) provided a definition of sex or gender [ 33 , 35 , 39 , 40 ]; of those, one trial provided a definition for both terms. One trial (4.2%) did not conflate sex and gender terminology [ 35 ]. Four (16.7%) RCTs reported gender as a variable defined as man/woman [ 27 , 32 , 37 , 38 ], and in these cases, it was unclear how this was determined. Five (20.8%) RCTs reported that gender was determined through self-identification via questionnaire [ 24 , 28 , 33 , 35 , 45 ]. Nine (37.5%) RCTs focused on interventions targeting females or women [ 23 , 25 , 34 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 ]. Two RCTs specifically identified non-binary gender beyond [ 28 ] man/woman with categories including “transgender”, “queer/non-binary”, and “other” [ 35 ]. All RCTs failed to report proportions of their participants according to their gender identities or roles.

One RCT (4.2%) explored the intersection of gender and race in their analysis reporting—reflected as white men and white women compared to “minority men” and “minority women” [ 28 ]. None of the other RCTs reported on intersectionality or the intersection of gender with other variables.

Intervention characteristics

A pre-existing framework was used to categorize the interventions (Table  2 ; Additional file 1 : Appendices 15–16) into six groupings [ 46 ]. The same trial could be categorized into multiple intervention categories. One trial focused on (i) quantifying gender impacts by making data (reported by gender) publicly available on work activity in an academic department [ 28 ]. Fifteen trials [ 24 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 30 , 31 , 33 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 44 ] focused on (ii) behavioural or systemic changes , such as recognizing the need for gender equity solutions at the organizational level [ 27 , 28 , 36 ], use of gender-neutral language in recruitment and requests for proposals [ 30 , 42 ], and use of quotas in terms of number of women and providing training on gender bias [ 36 , 38 ]. Two trials examined (iii) career flexibility interventions [ 23 , 32 ] such as one trial addressing work–family conflict and another trial examining development of flexible scheduling. Nine trials examined (iv) increased visibility, recognition and representation interventions , whereby six studies [ 23 , 25 , 34 , 41 , 43 , 44 ] helped foster careers through interventions to promote manuscript writing in academia and targeted business training in the private sector. In addition, three trials examined leadership programs [ 28 , 29 , 45 ], and one examined role models [ 41 ]. Regarding (v) creating opportunities for development, mentorship and sponsorship interventions, three trials examined career advising plans [ 25 , 34 , 43 ], and one examined a peer mentoring program [ 45 ]. Finally, concerning (vi) financial support interventions , four of the included trials focused on microfinance [ 25 , 29 , 34 , 43 , 44 ]. Of these, three trials focused specifically on females/women [ 25 , 34 , 43 ]. Microfinance studies were included and reported separately as they reported on gender equality and aim to increase gender equality and reduce gender discrimination.

Outcome frequencies

Across the 24 included trials, there were 254 outcomes reported (Additional file 1 : Appendix 17) that we organized into eight categories: (i) microfinance outcome measures were reported 69 times in five (20.8%) trials [ 25 , 29 , 34 , 43 , 44 ] and typically included measures such as business knowledge, sales and profits totals, goal setting, and self-esteem regarding microfinance interventions. Regarding (ii) addressing bias or changes in biases outcome measures , these included use of various scales such as the Neo-sexism scale [ 33 ], as well as self-reporting of reductions in implicit homophobia or transphobia [ 24 ] biases. Addressing bias or changes in biases outcomes were reported 53 times in five (20.8%) trials [ 24 , 26 , 33 , 35 , 40 ]. Next, (iii) workplace culture outcome measures included changes in work self-efficacy, hours worked per week, and perception of workplace fairness. Workplace culture outcomes were reported 52 times in six (20.8%) trials [ 23 , 28 , 32 , 42 , 45 ]. Concerning (iv) gender equity outcome measures , these included number of women short-listed or interviewed for positions, gender attitudes, and female leadership attitudes. Gender equity outcomes were reported 30 times in 20.8% (5/24) of studies [ 30 , 31 , 36 , 38 , 39 ]. Outcome category (v) academic workforce outcome measures included metrics such as tenure stream jobs, tenured positions, and overall teaching evaluations. Academic workforce outcomes were reported 16 times in 8.3% (2/24) studies [ 27 , 41 ]. Category (vi) education outcome measures included measures pertaining to knowledge and comprehension of the subject matter, as well as increased knowledge of terminology and concepts. Education outcomes were reported 12 times in three (12.5%) trials [ 24 , 35 , 40 ]. Outcome category (vii) networking measures included new contacts established and number of LinkedIn connections created after a conference or event. Networking classed outcomes were reported 12 times in 4.2% (1/24) studies [ 37 ]. Finally, (viii) academic output outcome measures included accruing data about individuals in terms of publications, funding, and other productivity measures. Academic output outcomes were reported 10 times in two (8.3%) of trials [ 23 , 41 ].

Conclusion statements (from included studies)

Overall, most conclusion statements according to the abstract “bottom line” were categorized as being positive (21/24, 87.5%), meaning that there was an effect of the intervention. One conclusion statement was categorized as neutral (4.2%) [ 40 ] and two as negative (8.3%) [ 42 ]. No conclusion statements were presented as being indeterminate.

Our comprehensive scoping review on gender equity interventions in the workplace found that although there may be widespread awareness of issues related to gender (in)equity, that while research interest is building over time, very few intervention studies are examining the gender gap through randomized trials [ 7 ], the most methodologically rigorous experimental design. Many of the studies involved a single specific place [ 38 ], such as a specific university [ 23 , 30 ], or a specific conference [ 37 ], or questionnaire [ 27 ]; and almost all were exclusively held in a specific country. As such, the global reach and scope of gender equity issues has been largely neglected.

In this scoping review, most of the studies come from the USA, yet there is a need for understanding of these issues globally, as workplace culture is not universal across countries. An intervention that is effective in one place may not show the same effectiveness elsewhere. Studies on gender equity in the workplace were conducted sporadically in a handful of other HICs and LMICs. The interventions examined in LMICs focused mostly on getting women more involved in household finance decisions or expanding their small businesses with their husbands. In contrast, the interventions from high-income countries did not focus on the family unit.

A major finding of our scoping review is the lack of standardized methods, outcomes, and definitions in this area and indicate that future research is warranted to standardize this research area. To foster common reporting in this field of gender equity research, we suggest adoption of at least minimal reporting standards around data pertaining to patient characteristics, interventions, and outcomes. We consider definitions of sex and gender to be particularly important, as well as explicit reporting of how sex and gender as variables are determined (i.e., medical reporting, self-reporting), if the variables are only considered as binary characteristics, etc. In terms of minimal reporting standards where equity is concerned, we suggest abiding by the PROGRESS-Plus criteria. Where that is not possible, reporting of education, occupation, race/ethnicity, and economic class, are suggested as bare minimums. Regarding reporting of interventions and outcomes—organization into classes or categories based on previous frameworks is encouraged. Despite the development of tools such as SAGER [ 18 ], to support and guide equity reporting, RCTs on gender equity interventions have largely failed to meet these reporting standards. We did not find any improvement over time in reporting.

An additional finding was the lack of rigor associated with sex- or gender-related reporting. Gender, a social variable such as man or woman, was often used interchangeably with the biological variable of sex in the literature we examined. Although definitions were provided in some cases, gender and sex terms were still conflated. Furthermore, just one trial [ 28 ] reported on intersectionality in describing their study population by examining gender with race/ethnicity. Other equity variables such as religion, age, or socioeconomic status were variably reported, and not in an intersectional way.

A major strength of this scoping review was the involvement of a public partner on the project who had lived experience with the topic area. By involving this individual, the team contextualized the results using their expertise and experience. According to the GRIPP-2 checklist, facilitators to the engagement need to be discussed. In our review, a facilitator to engagement by the patient partner was the virtual environment in which this research was conducted. A one-page lay summary written by the patient partner can be found in Additional file 1 : Appendix 18. According to the GRIPP-2 checklist, amendments to patient partner definitions need to be suggested. Regarding the definition of patient partner that the team used from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), no amendments are suggested, as it is very broad and inclusive. There were no harms mentioned by the patient partner and the experience was positive overall for everyone involved.

Limitations

We did not appraise the quality or risk of bias in the included studies, which is consistent with the JBI guide for scoping reviews [ 13 ]. Although the literature search was broad and not limited to English, we may have missed trials, especially for studies written in languages other than English, which are often not well indexed from specific disciplines (although several discipline-focused databases were searched). We identified few trials from LMIC settings, suggesting the results were more applicable to high income economy contexts. In most trials, only gender identity was considered. There was a lack of consideration for the impacts of gender roles, parental status, or caregiver status. By limiting outcomes to gender identity and not taking other gender (and other intersectional) factors into account, we are unlikely to achieve equity in the future. Protocol deviations include not conducting a living scoping review (i.e., routinely updating the literature search) due to a lack of funding and broadening the focus from academic settings to any workplace setting due to the dearth of literature available.

Most interventions took place in an academic or educational setting, this highlights that the education sector has even further to go to reach gender equity. Due to the heterogeneity of intervention settings, it is important to note that interventions that may work (or not) in one workplace setting may have different outcomes in another workplace setting. This highlights the need to test interventions across multiple workplace and societal settings.

Although many of the conclusion statements were positive, this does not imply that the gender equity interventions work. A future systematic review and meta-analysis would need to confirm these preliminary results. The conclusion statements need to be interpreted with caution, as there is the opportunity to “spin” them in a more favorable way [ 50 ] in the abstracts of trials.

While the focus of this review is on formal workplace settings, we would be remiss to not acknowledge that gender inequities are much higher in the informal sector where implementing interventions is difficult [ 51 ]. Nearly 60.0% of informal workers are women [ 52 ]. We suggest this as an area of focus for future research.

There is a paucity of scientific literature on interventions to promote workplace gender equity. Few PROGRESS-Plus items were reported. Non-binary gender identities and issues related to intersectionality were not adequately considered. Future research should provide consistent and contemporary definitions of gender and sex, be explicit in how sex or gender is ascertained, and apply sex and gender correctly and appropriately in their correct context. More trials are required examining gender equity interventions in the workplace and future systematic reviews can examine their related effectiveness.

Availability of data and materials

All of the data are available in Additional file 1 .

Abbreviations

Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health

Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature

Education Resources Information Center Index

Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public

High-income countries

Lower-middle income countries

Middle-income countries

Public Affairs Information Service Index

Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies

Place of residence, Race/ethnicity/culture/language, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, Social capital

Randomized controlled trials

Sex and Gender Equity in Research

Strengthening the Integration of Intersectionality Theory in Health Inequality Analysis

Gender equality still ‘300 years away’, says UN secretary general: The Guardian; 2023. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2023/mar/06/antonio-guterres-un-general-assembly-gender-equality .

Achieve gender equaility and empower women and girls: United Nations; 2023. Available from: https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal5 .

Gender Equality: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; 2023. Available from: https://www.gatesfoundation.org/our-work/programs/gender-equality .

Hoffower H, Thier J. Melinda French Gates on her foundation’s shocking findings that gender equality won’t happen for 100 years: ‘Money is power’: Fortune; 2022. Available from: https://fortune.com/2022/09/13/gender-equality-stalled-pandemic-bill-melinda-gates-foundation-study/ .

Woetzel J, Madgavkar A, Ellingrud K, Labaye E, Devillard S, Kutcher E, et al. The power of parity: how advancing women’s equality can add $12 trillion to global growth. New York: McKinsley Global Institute; 2015.

Google Scholar  

Women in global health. Policy brief: the state of women and leadership in global health. International: Women in Global Health; 2023.

Tricco AC, Nincic V, Darvesh N, Rios P, Khan PA, Ghassemi MM, et al. Global evidence of gender equity in academic health research: a scoping review. BMJ Open. 2023;13(2):e067771.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Johnson JL, Greaves L, Repta R. Better science with sex and gender: a primer for health research. Vancouver: Women’s Health Research Network; 2007.

PROGRESS-Plus: 2023. Available from: https://methods.cochrane.org/equity/projects/evidence-equity/progress-plus .

Munn Z, Pollock D, Khalil H, Alexander L, Mclnerney P, Godfrey CM, et al. What are scoping reviews? Providing a formal definition of scoping reviews as a type of evidence synthesis. JBI Evid Synth. 2022;20(4):950–2.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Crenshaw K. Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. Univ Chic Leg Forum. 1989;1989(1):139–67.

Crenshaw K. Women of color at the center: selections from the third national conference on women of color and the law: mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Rev. 1991;43(6):1241–79.

Article   Google Scholar  

Peters MDJ, Marnie C, Tricco AC, Pollock D, Munn Z, Alexander L, et al. Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid Synth. 2020;18(10):2119–26.

Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;350:g7647.

Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P, Khalil H, Larsen P, Marnie C, et al. Best practice guidance and reporting items for the development of scoping review protocols. JBI Evid Synth. 2022;20(4):953–68.

SPOR Evidence Alliance. Reflective exercise: 2021. Available from: https://sporevidencealliance.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/4.-SPOREA_Reflective-EDI-Exercise-UPDATED_2021.pdf .

Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.

Heidari S, Babor TF, De Castro P, Tort S, Curno M. Sex and gender equity in research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2016;1(2):1–9.

Public Health Agency of Canada. How to integrate intersectionality theory in quantitative health equity analysis? A rapid review and checklist of promising practices: 2022. Available from: https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/phac-aspc/documents/services/publications/science-research-data/how-integrate-intersectionality-theory-quantitative-health-equity-analysis/phac-siithia-checklist.pdf .

Staniszewska S, Brett J, Simera I, Seers K, Mockford C, Goodlad S, et al. GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research. BMJ. 2017;358:j3453.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;75:40–6.

Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Grey matters: a tool for searching health-related grey literature. Ottawa: 2023.

Grisso JA, Sammel MD, Rubenstein AH, Speck RM, Conant EF, Scott P, et al. A randomized controlled trial to improve the success of women assistant professors. J Womens Health. 2017;26(5):571–9.

Matsutaka Y, Otsuka Y, Tsuno K, Iida J, Fuji K. Development and evaluation of a training program to reduce homophobia and transphobia among human resource staff and health professionals in the workplace: a randomized controlled trial. Psychol Sex Orientat Gend Divers. 2022;11(1):153–64.

Bulte E, Lensink R, Vu N. Do gender and business trainings affect business outcomes? Experimental evidence from Vietnam. Manag Sci. 2017;63(9):2885–902.

Rivera LA, Tilcsik A. Scaling down inequality: rating scales, gender bias, and the architecture of evaluation. Am Sociol Rev. 2019;84(2):248–74.

Peterson DA, Biederman LA, Andersen D, Ditonto TM, Roe K. Mitigating gender bias in student evaluations of teaching. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(5):e0216241.

O’Meara K, Jaeger A, Misra J, Lennartz C, Kuvaeva A. Undoing disparities in faculty workloads: a randomized trial experiment. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(12):e0207316.

Shankar AV, Onyura M, Alderman J. Agency-based empowerment training enhances sales capacity of female energy entrepreneurs in Kenya. J Health Commun. 2015;20(Suppl 1):67–75.

Smith JL, Handley IM, Zale AV, Rushing S, Potvin MA. Now hiring! Empirically testing a three-step intervention to increase faculty gender diversity in STEM. Bioscience. 2015;65(11):1084–7.

Webb TL, Sheeran P, Pepper J. Gaining control over responses to implicit attitude tests: implementation intentions engender fast responses on attitude-incongruent trials. Br J Soc Psychol. 2012;51(1):13–32.

Paek E. Manager gender and changing attitudes toward schedule control: evidence from the Work, Family, and Health Study. Community Work Fam. 2022;27(1):98–115.

Bates S, Lauve-Moon K, McCloskey R, Anderson-Butcher D. The Gender By Us® Toolkit: a pilot study of an intervention to disrupt implicit gender bias. Affilia. 2019;34(3):295–312.

Huis MA, Hansen N, Otten S, Lensink R. The impact of husbands’ involvement in goal-setting training on women’s empowerment: first evidence from an intervention among female microfinance borrowers in Sri Lanka. J Community Appl Soc Psychol. 2019;29(4):336–51.

Warren AR. A video intervention for professionals working with transgender and gender nonconforming older adults. 2017.

Cook NJ, Grillos T, Andersson KP. Gender quotas increase the equality and effectiveness of climate policy interventions. Nat Clim Chang. 2019;9(4):330–4.

Bapna S, Funk R. Interventions for improving professional networking for women: Experimental evidence from the IT sector. MIS Q. 2020;45(2):593–636.

Dahl GB, Kotsadam A, Rooth D-O. Does integration change gender attitudes? The effect of randomly assigning women to traditionally male teams. Q J Econ. 2021;136(2):987–1030.

Wiseman JA. Attitude and behavioral change in academic advisors at Montana State University: sex role stereotyping and sexual bias in vocational choice. Montana: Montana State University; 1979.

Chinen M, Coombes A, De Hoop T, Castro-Zarzur R, Elmeski M. Can teacher training programs influence gender norms? Mixed-methods experimental evidence from Northern Uganda. J Educ Emerg. 2017;3(1):44–78.

Ginther DK, Currie JM, Blau FD, Croson RT. Can mentoring help female assistant professors in economics? An evaluation by randomized trial. In: AEA Papers and Proceedings. American Economic Association: Broadway, Suite 305, Nashville, TN 37203; 2020. p. 205–9.

Brady LM, Kaiser CR, Major B, Kirby TA. It’s fair for us: diversity structures cause women to legitimize discrimination. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2015;57:100–10.

Huis M, Lensink R, Vu N, Hansen N. Impacts of the Gender and Entrepreneurship Together Ahead (GET Ahead) training on empowerment of female microfinance borrowers in Northern Vietnam. World Dev. 2019;120:46–61.

Ismayilova L, Karimli L, Gaveras E, Tô-Camier A, Sanson J, Chaffin J, et al. An integrated approach to increasing women’s empowerment status and reducing domestic violence: results of a cluster-randomized controlled trial in a West African country. Psychol Violence. 2018;8(4):448.

Woolnough HM. A longitudinal study to investigate the impact of a career development and mentoring programme on female mental health nurses. United Kingdom: The University of Manchester; 2007.

Tricco AC, Bourgeault I, Moore A, Grunfeld E, Peer N, Straus SE. Advancing gender equity in medicine. CMAJ. 2021;193(7):E244–50.

Tricco AC, Straus SE, Moher D. How can we improve the interpretation of systematic reviews? BMC Med. 2011;9(1):1–4.

Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Glossary of Funding-Related Terms: 2023. Available from: https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/34190.html#p .

SPOR Evidence Alliance. Patient Partner Appreciation Policy and Protocol: 2022. Available from: https://sporevidencealliance.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/SPOREA_Patient-and-Public-Appreciation-Policy_2021.01.14-1.pdf .

Chiu K, Grundy Q, Bero L. ‘Spin’ in published biomedical literature: a methodological systematic review. PLoS Biol. 2017;15(9):e2002173.

Women UN. Progress of the world’s women 2015–2016: transforming economies, realizing rights. New York: UN Women; 2015.

Book   Google Scholar  

International Labour Office. Women and men in the informal economy: a statistical picture. Geneva: International Labour Office; 2018.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Alyssa Austin, Areej Hezam, Marco Ghassemi for screening citations. We thank Kaitryn Campbell, MLIS, MSc (St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton/McMaster University) for peer review of the Medline search strategy, and Raymond Daniel for executing the literature searches, searching for errata and retractions, and Navjot Mann, Brahmleen Kaur, and Kiran Ninan for formatting the manuscript and creating the EndNote library. We also thank Fatemeh Yazdi, Yonda Lai, Patricia Rios, and Nazia Darvesh for their contributions to our previous scoping review that informed this study.

This project is funded by a CIHR Project Grant (grant #PJT-165927), the funder had no part in the design of this manuscript. ACT is funded by a Tier 2 Canada Research Chair in Knowledge Synthesis; HOW is funded by a Tier 2 Canada Research Chair in Human-Centred Digital Health; KB is funded by a PSI Mid-Career Research Award; SES is funded by a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Knowledge Translation and Quality of Care, the Mary Trimmer Chair in Geriatric Medicine; ILB is the holder of a University Research Chair in Gender, Diversity and the Professions; OC was part supported by the Health Research Board (Ireland) and the HSC Public Health Agency (CBES-2018-001) through Evidence Synthesis Ireland and Cochrane Ireland; CM is funded by the Institute of Health Economics; FL is funded by a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Shared Decision Making and Knowledge Translation (FDN-15993), a Fonds de la Recherche du Québec-Santé Appui; JL is funded by SSHRC Canada Graduate Scholarship (CGS) and a scholarship from Coalition Publica; KL is funded by two CIHR Operating Grants (468557 and 477339). RN is funded by a Tier 2 Canada Research Chair in inclusivity and active aging. The study sponsor(s) or funder(s) had no impact on the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. All authors, external and internal, had full access to all of the data (including statistical reports and tables) in the study and can take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, 209 Victoria Street, 7th Floor, East Building, Toronto, ON, M5B 1T8, Canada

Andrea C. Tricco, Amanda Parker, Paul A. Khan, Vera Nincic, Reid Robson, Heather MacDonald, Rachel Warren, Jennifer Watt & Sharon E. Straus

Centre for Health Policy and Management, School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

Olga Cleary

Faculty of Health Studies, Western University, London, Canada

Elaine Zibrowski

Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Nancy Baxter

Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

Karen E. A. Burns

School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada

École de Travail Social, Université de Sherbrooke, Québec, (Québec), Canada

Ruth Ndjaboue

Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

Jocalyn P. Clark

Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (PMNCH), World Health Organization (WHO), Geneva, Switzerland

Etienne V. Langlois

Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Sofia B. Ahmed

Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada

Holly O. Witteman & France Légaré

Centre for Implementation Research, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada

Ian D. Graham

Science in Australia Gender Equity Limited, Greenway, Australia

Wafa El-Adhami

Independent Information Specialist, Ottawa, Canada

Becky Skidmore

School of Nursing, Faculty of Health, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada

Janet Curran

Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

Gillian Hawker

University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada

Ivy Lynn Bourgeault & Jamie Lundine

School of Health Administration, Faculty of Health, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada

Jeanna Parsons Leigh

Department of Gender Studies, Haudenosaunee and Anishinaabek Territories, Queen’s University, Settlement of Kingston, Canada

Karen Lawford

Research and Innovation, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada

Alice Aiken

Institute of Health Economics, Edmonton, Canada

Christopher McCabe

Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, UK

Sasha Shepperd

Department of Medicine, Division of Internal Medicine, St Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Canada

Reena Pattani

Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa

Natalie Leon

Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada

Évèhouénou Lionel Adisso

Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

Linda Rabeneck

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

ACT and SES conceived the study and refined the scope. ACT defined the study design, selection of measures, wrote the protocol, interpreted data, and wrote the manuscript. SES revised the protocol, interpreted data, and revised the manuscript. EZ, NB, KEAB, DC, JPC, IDG, GH, FL, JW, HOW, JC, ILB, JPL, SBA, KL, AA, EVL, CM, SS, BS, RP, NL, JL, ELA, WE, SO, LR, RN were given the opportunity to revise the protocol, revise the screening and charting forms, and revise the manuscript. AP, VN, PAK, HM, RW, RR, and OC screened titles and abstracts as well as full texts and then abstracted data. EZ provided a 1-page written lay summary of the manuscript findings. AP contributed to portions of the draft manuscript. PAK also contributed to revising portions of the manuscript. All authors have read, revised, and approved the final article.

Authors’ Twitter handles

Twitter handles: @ATricco (Andrea C Tricco), @BeckyLSkidmore (Becky Skidmore), @DrIvyBourgeault (Ivy Lynn Bourgeault), @EtienneVincentL (Etienne V Langlois), @hwitteman (Holly O Witteman), @IanDGraham1 (Ian D Graham), @jlundine (Jamie Lundine), @jocalynclark (Jocalyn P Clark), @JParsonsLeigh (Jeanna Parsons Leigh), @karenburnsk (Karen EA Burns), @SDM_ULAVAL (France Légaré), @SofiaAhmedMD (Sofia B Ahmed).

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea C. Tricco .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

As this was a scoping review of primary research, ethical approval was not required.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at http://www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: no support from any organization for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous 3 years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: appendix 1..

PRISMA ScR Checklist. Appendix 2. SAGER Guidelines. Appendix 3. SIITHIA Checklist. Appendix 4. GRIPP2 Reporting Checklist. Appendix 5. Database Search Strategies. Appendix 6. Grey Literature Sources. Appendix 7. L1 Screening Form for Titles and Abstracts. Appendix 8. L2 Screening Form for Full-Text Articles. Appendix 9. Data Abstraction Form. Appendix 10. Closely Related but Ultimately Excluded Studies. Appendix 11. Participants Characteristics. Appendix 12. Participants Characteristics. Appendix 13. PROGRESS Plus Table. Appendix 14. Definitions of Gender and Sex. Appendix 15. Intervention Characteristics. Appendix 16. Details of Intervention Outcomes and Results. Appendix 17. Outcomes Examined in Included Studies. Appendix 18. Patient Partner Lay Summary.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Tricco, A.C., Parker, A., Khan, P.A. et al. Interventions on gender equity in the workplace: a scoping review. BMC Med 22 , 149 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03346-7

Download citation

Received : 28 August 2023

Accepted : 07 March 2024

Published : 05 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03346-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Scoping review
• Occupational health

BMC Medicine

ISSN: 1741-7015

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Exploring the stability of the gender gap in faculty perceptions of gender climate at a rural regional university

Roles Conceptualization, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Department of Psychology, Murray State University, Murray, KY, United States of America

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Murray State University, Murray, KY, United States of America

Roles Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Murray State University, Murray, KY, United States of America

Roles Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Department of Biological Sciences, Murray State University, Murray, KY, United States of America

Affiliation Department of Global Languages and Theatre Arts, Murray State University, Murray, KY, United States of America

• Michael J. Bordieri, 
• Paula J. Waddill, 
• Qiaofeng Zhang, 
• Maeve L. McCarthy, 
• Claire Fuller, 
• David Balthrop

• Published: April 2, 2024
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301285
• Reader Comments

Increasing awareness of gender barriers and biases in academic institutions is an essential component of institutional change strategies to promote equity and inclusion. There is an established perception gap in recognizing gender inequities in the workplace, whereby men faculty under acknowledge the stressors, barriers, and biases faced by their women faculty colleagues. This study explored the gender gap in faculty perceptions of institutional diversity climate at a rural comprehensive regional university in the United States. In addition to gender, differences across academic discipline and time were explored using 2 (men and women) x 2 (STEM and other) x 2 (2017 and 2022) between-groups ANOVAs. Results revealed a gender gap that persisted across time and perceptions of stressors, diversity climate, student behavior, leadership, and fairness in promotion/tenure procedures, with marginalized (women) faculty consistently reporting greater barriers/concern for women faculty relative to the perceptions of their men faculty colleagues. These findings are largely consistent with the extant literature and are discussed both with regard to future research directions and recommendations for reducing the perception gap and addressing institutional barriers to gender equity.

Citation: Bordieri MJ, Waddill PJ, Zhang Q, McCarthy ML, Fuller C, Balthrop D (2024) Exploring the stability of the gender gap in faculty perceptions of gender climate at a rural regional university. PLoS ONE 19(4): e0301285. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301285

Editor: Dan-Cristian Dabija, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, ROMANIA

Received: October 20, 2023; Accepted: March 13, 2024; Published: April 2, 2024

Copyright: © 2024 Bordieri et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: Data cannot be shared publicly because of the sensitive nature of the questions and the possible risks to participants if responses were identified. Further, informed consent from study participants did not cover public deposition of data. The data are available from Murray State University (contact [email protected] ) to researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data and who are approved for access by the Institutional Review Board ( [email protected] ).

Funding: This research was supported by National Science Foundation ADVANCE awards #1608576 (MM, PW, & QZ) and #1935939 (MM, CF, Q., PW, DB, & MB). The sponsor did not play a role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. https://www.nsf.gov/crssprgm/advance/ .

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Gender is a social construct that consists of characteristic norms, roles, and behaviors associated with gender categories, such as women and men [ 1 ]. Gender is also hierarchical [ 1 ], and there is well-documented historical and contemporary evidence of gender inequity in professional occupational contexts, whereby women are both underrepresented and underpaid relative to men, both generally [ 2 – 5 ] and within academia, specifically [ 6 – 8 ]. Gender differences in the perception of these and other gender biases are also well established in both the early [ 9 , 10 ] and contemporary literature [11, 12, as reviewed by 13]. This perception gap appears to persist across professional contexts and workplaces including medical residents [ 14 ], otolaryngologists [ 15 ], and corporate managers [ 16 ]. Of primary relevance to the current investigation, García-González et al. [ 17 ] recently explored perceptions of gender bias in academic research institutions across Spain and found that men were less likely than women to perceive gender bias in their academic workplace; this difference persisted across country, research area, position, and type of institution.

The gender perception gap presents a significant obstacle to addressing systemic inequities and fostering institutional change. In addition to perpetuating misunderstanding and minimizing of the experiences of underrepresented faculty, the perception gap might also undermine the development and implementation of effective policies that address these disparities. Privilege has long been theorized to be invisible to those who possess it [ 18 ], and the impact of privilege in shaping diversity in higher education has been subject to detailed review [ 19 , 20 ]. Upper-level university administrators remain disproportionately men [ 21 ] and thus may be more likely to downplay or fail to recognize the barriers faced by women faculty, including subtle discrimination. Likewise, underrepresented faculty may feel discouraged from voicing experiences and concerns that do not align with the “rosy” climate perceptions held by their majority-identified colleagues and leaders, thereby further minimizing their experiences and limiting the identification of climate barriers. A better understanding of the gender perception gap among faculty in higher education could increase awareness of climate barriers faced by women faculty and help inform efforts to close the gap.

Over the past 20 years campus climate surveys have become a valuable tool for both institutional leaders and equity researchers interested in better understanding the structural and cultural climate barriers faced by underrepresented faculty members in higher education [ 22 – 24 ]. Broadly defined, campus diversity climate surveys aim to elicit feedback from science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM; S1 Table ) faculty and often non-STEM faculty regarding their perceptions of opportunities, barriers, stressors, and other indicators of workplace climate that impact career satisfaction, advancement, and retention. Work-life balance/conflicts [ 25 , 26 ] are often a core focus of climate surveys although institutions often customize surveys to focus on a range of phenomena, including microaggressions [ 25 ], faculty workloads [ 27 ], and fit/inclusion [ 28 ]. Many of these climate surveys are conducted as part of larger institutional change efforts funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) ADVANCE program, which is designed to increase the representation and career success of women in STEM disciplines [ 29 ].

The purpose of the current study was to explore gaps in the perception of campus diversity climate among faculty at a rural comprehensive regional university in Kentucky. Faculty were surveyed on their perceptions of stressors, general department climate for women, students’ behavior towards women faculty, gender equity in leadership/influence, and gender equity in promotion/tenure policies across two time points (2017 and 2022). The addition of a second time point five years after the initial climate survey allowed for the direct exploration of the stability of gaps in perception over time, which to our knowledge has yet to be directly explored in the literature. We hypothesized that the well-established gap between majority identified (i.e., men) and underrepresented (i.e., women) faculty would be present across both climate domain and time point. We also explored whether our hypothesized gender perception gap interacted with academic discipline (STEM vs. non-STEM).

Our variables of interest were drawn from a climate survey we developed by adapting (with permission) items from climate surveys administered under the auspices of ADVANCE programs at Oakland University [ 30 ], University of California—San Diego [ 31 ], University of North Texas [ 32 ], Washington University in St. Louis [ 33 ], and Western Washington University [ 34 ] as well as additional items that we created ourselves. This study was reviewed and approved by the Murray State University Institutional Review Board (IRB) for the protection of human subjects ( S1 File ; IRB# 16–098; S2 File ; &IRB# 20–001; S3 File ). After viewing an initial page with informed consent information that included a description of the participant’s role in the study and notification of approval of the research by the Murray State University IRB, participants provided informed consent by clicking “Continue.” The survey asked questions on a variety of themes including university and department climate, workload, work/family balance, mentoring and networking, and tenure and promotion as well as demographic items. The initial edition of the survey consisted of 71 items and was administered electronically in the spring of 2017 (February 15 th to March 15 th ) by the Survey Research Institute (SRI) at Cornell University. The second edition of the survey consisted of 64 items that included many of the same items from the first edition as well as some new ones; it was administered electronically in the spring of 2022 (February 28 th to March 18 th ) by SRI. Participants responded to items by rating their perceptions on 4- or 5-point Likert scales.

Sample and data.

In both 2017 and 2022, participants were recruited via an invitation email with a link to the survey that was sent by SRI to all full-time faculty. The 2017 survey was sent to 519 faculty, and 373 faculty provided survey responses (a response rate of 72%). The 2022 survey was sent to 484 faculty, and 264 faculty responded (a response rate of 55%). Chi-square goodness of fit tests indicated that the distribution of category frequencies for gender, rank, and race/ethnicity of the survey respondent samples did not differ significantly from those of the original population of all faculty to whom the survey was sent (for 2017, smallest p = .906; for 2022, smallest p = .17). Table 1 presents participant demographics for both surveys.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301285.t001

Independent variables.

The independent variables in the current analysis were gender and discipline (STEM, non-STEM). The determination of a participant’s discipline as STEM was based upon Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) codes that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has designated as STEM disciplines [ 35 ] as well as disciplines related to the programs in the National Science Foundation’s Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences [ 36 ]. As a result, faculty were categorized as STEM if their primary responsibility lay in one of the following programs/departments: agricultural science, animal and equine science, biological sciences, chemistry, computer science and information systems, economics, earth and environmental sciences, engineering and physics, mathematics and statistics, occupational safety and health, political science and sociology, psychology, veterinary technology and pre-veterinary medicine.

Dependent variables.

The dependent variables in the current analysis focused on a subset of items from the larger survey. These items assessed participants’ perceptions of several aspects of the workplace Table 2 presents the items constituting each variable.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301285.t002

Overall stress was evaluated as an average score across 15 items for which participants rated the amount of stress they felt about each item using a 4-point scale (where 1 = none , 2 = very little , 3 = some , 4 = a great deal ). Perceived general department/unit climate for women was evaluated with six items for which participants rated their agreement with each statement on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 = S trongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree . Perceptions of students’ behavior toward women faculty was assessed with two items for which participants rated their level of agreement with each statement on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 = Strongly disagree to 4 = Strongly agree . Respondents also had the option to indicate “Do not know” for each student behavior item; however, do not know responses were not included in subsequent analyses of the student behavior variable. Perceived leadership/influence was measured with four statements for which participants rated their agreement with each on a 5-point scale that ranged from 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly disagree . Perceived equity in tenure and promotion was assessed with two items that were each rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree .

Principal components analyses of each set of items in each of the previously described dependent variables supported our conceptually derived grouping of survey items. Cronbach’s alpha was used to examine the internal reliability of the items for each aspect. Cronbach alpha values ranged from .75 to .94 and confirmed that the items within each aspect were closely related. To assess the role of gender and STEM discipline as well as any differences between 2017 and 2022 response patterns, separate 2 x 2 x 2 between-groups ANOVAs were performed for the items in each aspect with a family-wise significance level set at .05. Table 3 presents the means for the individual items in each group and the pattern of results is summarized in Table 4 .

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301285.t003

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301285.t004

Overall stress

There were no significant main effects of year or STEM discipline nor were there any interactions of these factors with each other or with gender (all F s < 1). The only significant effect was the main effect of gender, F (1, 296) = 6.64, MSE = 82.50, p = .01. Women’s overall stress average across the 15 items ( M = 2.78, SD = 0.58) was greater than men’s overall stress, M = 2.62 ( SD = 0.62). The effect size (Cohen’s d) for this difference was .28.

General climate

To control error rate across multiple testing across multiple items, a Bonferroni correction was applied based on the six ANOVAs (one for each item in this aspect), yielding a per-item significance threshold of .008. There was no significant main effect of year for any of the items nor did year interact with any other factor. Furthermore, with the exception of perceptions regarding difficulty in retaining women faculty, there were no significant main effects or interactions of STEM discipline. For that retention item, faculty in STEM disciplines perceived a significantly greater difficulty by their department in retaining women faculty ( M = 2.46, SD = 1.16) than faculty in non-STEM disciplines ( M = 2.13, SD = 1.02), F (1, 576) = 11.76, MSE = 1.4, p = .0006, Cohen’s d = .30. Although women in general had a greater tendency to perceive that their department had a difficult time retaining women faculty ( M = 2.32, SD = 1.07) than did men faculty ( M = 2.20, SD = 1.11), the main effect for gender did not reach the Bonferroni-adjusted significance threshold ( p = .015). On the other hand, there was a significant main effect of gender in perceptions of the department climate for women, F (1, 578) = 21.67, MSE = 0.89, p < .0001, how serious colleagues are about treated women and men faculty equally, F (1, 593) = 13.67, MSE = 1.10, p = .0002, the extent to which women faculty have to work harder to be seen as competent, F (1, 606) = 66.92, MSE = 1.63, p < .0001, and the commitment of women faculty with young children, F (1, 605) = 59.31, MSE = 1.45, p < .0001.

Overall, women faculty were less likely than men to perceive the climate in their department as good for women (women: M = 3.88, SD = 1.04; men: M = 4.20, SD = 0.85; Cohen’s d = -.33). Women were also less likely than men to perceive that their department was serious about treating women and men faculty equally (women: M = 3.83, SD = 1.06; men: M = 4.11, SD = 1.04; Cohen’s d = -.27). They were more likely to feel that women had to work harder than men to convince colleagues of their competence (women: M = 2.72, SD = 1.42; men: M = 1.90, SD = 1.15; Cohen’s d = .64) and that women faculty with young children were seen as less committed to their careers than men with young children (women: M = 2.57, SD = 1.31; men: M = 1.85, SD = 1.09; Cohen’s d = .60). In contrast, was no significant main effect of gender ( F < 1) or of any other factor nor were there significant interactions of any factors in regard to perceptions about the commitment of men faculty with young children (smallest p = .18).

Student behavior

To control error rate, a Bonferroni correction was applied based on the two ANOVAs (one for each item in this aspect), yielding a per-item significance threshold of .025. There was no significant main effect of year nor did year interact with any other factor in the ratings of perceived student behavior toward women faculty. However, there was a significant main effect of gender that was modified by a significant interaction of gender with discipline for the perception that students treat women faculty differently than men faculty, F (1, 411) = 7.45, MSE = 0.95, p = .0066. Tests of simple effects indicated that a significant gender difference for STEM faculty, F (1, 411) = 21.73, p < .0001, but no difference for non-STEM faculty, F (1, 411) = 1.75, p = .1862. STEM women ( M = 2,86, SD = 1.02) had a stronger perception than STEM men ( M = 2.15, SD = 1.07) that students treat women faculty differently, but the difference between perception of non-STEM women ( M = 2.79, SD = 0.90) and non-STEM men ( M = 2.60, SD = 0.99) was not significant.

The same pattern of a significant interaction of gender and discipline held for the perception that students do not respect women faculty as much as men, F (1, 413) = 5.65, MSE = 0.98, p = .0178. Tests of simple effects indicated a significant gender difference for STEM faculty, F (1, 413) = 19.47, p < .0001, but no difference for non-STEM faculty, F (1, 413) = 2.60, p = .1073. STEM women ( M = 2.74, SD = 1.01) had a stronger perception of less student respect of women than did STEM men ( M = 2.07, SD = 1.04) whereas the difference between non-STEM women ( M = 2.70, SD = 0.93) and non-STEM men ( M = 2.47, SD = 1.01) was not significant.

Leadership/Influence

To control error rate across multiple testing across multiple items, a Bonferroni correction was applied based on the four ANOVAs (one for each item in this aspect), yielding a per-item significance threshold of .0125. There was no significant main effect of year for any of the items nor did year interact with any other factor. Furthermore, with the exception of perceptions regarding efforts made to promote women to leadership positions, there were no significant main effects or interactions of STEM discipline. There was, however, a significant main effect of gender for all items. Overall, women faculty ( M = 3.90, SD = 1.14) were significantly less confident than men faculty ( M = 4.28, SD = 0.97) that most of the faculty in their department would be as comfortable with a woman being department chair as with a man, F (1, 592) = 29.99, MSE = 1.10, p < .0001, Cohen’s d = -.36. Compared to men ( M = 1.84, SD = 1.03), women had a stronger perception ( M = 2.36, SD = 1.17) that women faculty were less likely than men to have influence in their department, F (1, 589) = 36.33, MSE = 1.19, p < .0001, Cohen’s d = .47. Women ( M = 2.66, SD = 1.09) had a stronger perception than men ( M = 2.16, SD = 1.08) that faculty men were more likely than faculty women to be involved with informal department networks, F (1, 587) = 33.84, MSE = 1.18, p < .0001, Cohen’s d = .46, In terms of departmental efforts to promote women to leadership positions, although both women and men faculty agreed such efforts were being made, women overall had a lower perception ( M = 3.68, SD = 1.03) than men ( M = 3.77, SD = 1.00), F (1, 577) = 6.93, MSE = 0.99, p = .0087, Cohen’s d = -.10. In addition, STEM faculty in general ( M = 3.52, SD = 1.05) perceived less effort to promote women into leadership in their departments than did non-STEM faculty ( M = 3.86, SD = 0.97), F (1, 577) = 15.89, p < .0001, Cohen’s d = -.34.

Tenure/Promotion equity

To control error rate, a Bonferroni correction was applied based on the two ANOVAs (one for each item in this aspect), yielding a per-item significance threshold of .025. Ratings for the tenure perception item were collected only from faculty who were tenured or on the tenure track. Ratings for the promotion perception item were collected only from faculty who had been promoted.

There was no significant main effect of year nor did year interact with any other factor in the ratings of either item. However, there was a significant main effect of gender that was modified by a significant interaction of gender with discipline for the perception that tenure criteria are applied equally to men and women, F (1, 502) = 12.15, MSE = 1.05, p = .0005. Tests of simple effects indicated a significant gender difference for STEM faculty F (1, 502) = 38.29, p < .0001, but the difference for non-STEM faculty did not reach the significance threshold, F (1, 502) = 4.44, p = .0356. STEM women ( M = 3.61, SD = 1.18) were less confident than STEM men ( M = 4.48, SD = 0.79) that tenure decision criteria were applied to women and men faculty in their department in the same way; however, non-STEM women ( M = 4.07, SD = 1.14) and non-STEM men ( M = 4.34, SD = 0.95) held more similar perceptions.

In terms of promotion criteria, there was no significant main effect of discipline nor did it interact with any other factor. However, there was a significant gender difference, F (1, 260) = 17.91, MSE = 1.32, p < .0001, Cohen’s d = -.47. Women ( M = 3.96, SD = 1.36) were significantly less confident than men ( M = 4.50, SD = 0.94) that promotion decision criteria were applied to women and men in their department in the same way.

This paper presents the results of two climate studies administered in 2017 and 2022 by the Murray State University ADVANCE team. The studies assessed the perception of gender equality at a regional comprehensive university in rural Kentucky, USA. Overall, there was strong evidence that men and women faculty in STEM and non-STEM disciplines experienced and perceived gender inequities differently, with men faculty consistently perceiving a stronger gender diversity climate than women faculty. This pattern of findings is consistent with the established literature on the perception gap in gender equity in the workplace [ 13 – 16 ]. Further, these findings extend the work of García-González and colleagues [ 17 ] by replicating the gender gap among faculty in a non-research-intensive institution in the United States.

Overall, women faculty were less likely than men to perceive the climate in their department as good for women. Furthermore, the extent to which women faculty have to work harder to be seen as competent and the commitment of women faculty with young children were greater issues of concern for women faculty. Women were also less likely than men to perceive that their department was serious about treating women and men faculty equally. Women were more likely to feel that women had to work harder than men to convince colleagues of their competence and women were more concerned that women faculty with young children were seen as less committed to their careers than men with young children. These findings provide further evidence of the gap between men and women faculty perceptions of gender diversity climate and highlight the “invisible” nature of privilege [ 18 ], with men faculty consistently perceiving a rosier climate for their women faculty colleagues than what their colleagues actually perceived.

Women faculty also reported greater perceived stress than men. The impact of this stress and broader climate concerns may have a cumulative negative effect that is overwhelming for women faculty [ 37 , 38 ]. Further, the impact of stressors and climate may at least partially account for the lack of progress in the representation of women in STEM departments and leadership roles [ 39 , 40 ]. The leaky pipeline continues to be impacted by these issues, and it may be a case of “injury by hundreds of little cuts.” Our findings support this possibility, as we observed relatively small but significant gaps for women faculty that could cumulatively have a significant negative effect on climate, retention, and advancement. Administrators may mistakenly view these concerns in isolation as small and insignificant. Further, administrators might also ignore these concerns because of the gap in perception observed in our findings. For example, they could adopt the faulty view that since the majority of faculty are content with the institutional climate, the overall climate is fine. Institutional change strategies that involve increased awareness and allyship among men faculty and administrators may be especially well-suited to target this perception gap [ 41 , 42 ].

Faculty in STEM disciplines perceived greater difficulties in retaining women faculty. The lack of representation of women in STEM disciplines may be a contributing factor to this issue [ 43 , 44 ]. STEM women were less confident than STEM men that tenure decision criteria were applied to women and men faculty in their department in the same way. Our analysis also indicated that STEM women perceived that students treat women faculty differently than men faculty, and that students do not respect women faculty as much as men faculty. These findings are consistent with well-established bodies of literature documenting gender biases in student evaluations of teaching [ 45 , 46 ] and the promotion and tenure process [ 47 , 48 ]. Women faculty were also less confident that faculty in their department would be as comfortable with a woman department chair as with a man. Additionally, women perceived that they were less likely to have influence in the department and that men were part of informal networks and STEM faculty perceived less effort being made to promote women to leadership positions than non-STEM faculty. These findings are consistent with broader literature regarding challenges faced by women in academic leadership roles [ 39 , 40 ].

Our results show no significant effect of year, indicating that problems with perceptions have not substantially changed in the five years between surveys. This provides direct evidence of the stability of the gender perception gap within an institution. This finding is consistent with indirect evidence from literature that suggested stability in the effect over time across studies and samples [ 9 – 12 ]. While the stability of the effect is not surprising, it is important to consider the broader institutional context during this time frame, as we implemented an ADVANCE Adaptation grant between 2017 and 2022 with the goal of increasing awareness of gender equity and increasing instructional support for women faculty [ 49 ]. In this regard, the observed invariance across time could be seen as an indication that the gender climate did not improve as a result of the ADVANCE initiatives. However, it is important to note that the COVID-19 pandemic also occurred between our survey timepoints, and the pandemic has been linked to a clear increase in barriers and stressors for women faculty [ 50 , 51 ]. Thus, the observed stability in climate could be seen as an indicator of the success of ADVANCE initiatives in protecting against the unequal impacts of the pandemic. Future research is needed to explore the unique impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gender diversity climate as well as the potential for equity interventions to narrow the gender perception gap.

The obtained findings are not without limitations. While survey items were based on previous climate surveys and assessed for construct fit using principal components analysis and internal consistency, they lack formal psychometric validation. As this research area matures, future studies should seek to more rigorously validate climate measures by establishing more robust evidence of reliability and validity, including establishing predictive validity with faculty retention and advancement outcomes. Surveying faculty across two time points is a strength of the current study, as we found that the observed gender perception gap was largely invariant across time. However, due to confidentiality concerns during data collection, it was not possible for us to match faculty responses across time points. Thus, this study is not able to speak to how each participant’s perceptions may have changed over time, and future studies should consider collecting data in a way that allows for robust within-subject comparisons. Another limitation is that this study operationalized gender as a binary and did not assess the intersection of gender with other marginalized identities. In particular, this study measured gender identity using binary gender self-reported by faculty to human resources. Gender identity is fluid, especially among nonbinary individuals [ 52 ]. Future research should assess gender identity concurrent with other survey measures and use a more inclusive measure of identity, including non-binary, transgender, cis-gender, and self-description response options. In addition, research has established that women faculty of color [ 53 ], women faculty who identify as lesbian/bisexual and gender non-binary faculty [ 54 ], and women faculty with disabilities [ 55 ] face additional barriers and challenges. Future climate survey research should employ an intersectional lens to better contextualize the experiences of marginalized faculty.

While the obtained results provide clear evidence of a gender perception gap, they do not identify the cause(s). A recent review by Lee et al. [ 13 ] proposed social dominance theory [ 56 ] as a potential motivation for privileged groups (e.g., men) to downplay the discrimination experiences of members of minority groups. Additionally, Wu and Dunning [ 57 , 58 ] have observed that members of majority groups (including men) display cognitive performance deficits in recognizing discrimination in the first place, so defensive motivations might only partially explain gender differences in the perception of bias. These recent studies highlight possible psychological mechanisms that maintain the gap in gender perceptions in academic environments, and they also support the need for interventions to specifically target and close this perception gap. Meaningful and lasting institutional change to support women and other unrepresented faculty in STEM and non-STEM disciplines requires a focus on transforming both institutional policies and climate [ 29 , 59 ].

The US is projected to become more racially and ethnically diverse in the next decades, continuing the trajectory that started over half a century ago [ 60 ]. Higher education institutions are responsible for advancing the economic and social well-being of all [ 61 ], and they play a critical role in a functional pluralistic society [ 62 ]. The diversity of college campuses in which faculty, staff, and students come together to learn, teach, and grow amid varying viewpoints and perspectives is key to students’ academic and social growth [ 63 ]. This growth and the concomitant institutional satisfaction of all students leads to increased recruitment and retention of members of underrepresented groups [ 64 ]. In addition, a diverse faculty positively impacts graduation rates of not only underrepresented minority students but also students of all races/ethnicities [ 65 ].

Broadening participation in STEM is an important avenue toward meeting the needs of a more diverse and capable workforce [ 43 , 44 ]. Low-income, first-generation, and under-represented minority students face significant barriers to attending and graduating from college, particularly in STEM fields [ 66 – 68 ]. The underrepresentation of women in STEM is well documented in the literature [ 69 , 70 ]. This phenomenon has been attributed to factors like gender stereotypes, lack of social support networks, unwelcoming and sometimes hostile academic climate, and gender biases [ 7 ]. Furthermore, perceptions of sexism within the immediate academic environment are not only detrimental for women but are also associated with a higher sense of academic impostorism and lower self-efficacy and feeling of belonging, all of which could lead women doctoral students in STEM fields to drop out [ 71 ] and thus further reduce the diversity of the pool of future faculty. On the other hand, less bias can be related to better performance. Smeding [ 72 ] found that women engineering students held weaker implicit gender-STEM stereotypes compared to other groups and that those weaker biases were less negatively related to math grades.

Based on findings from 177 institutions that received NSF ADVANCE grants between 2001 and 2018, Casad [ 7 ] identified policies, interventions, and a positive organizational climate as effective approaches to increase the representation of women faculty in STEM fields. The current results add to this growing body of literature that is focused on a more comprehensive consideration of the experiences of women and other underrepresented faculty in STEM (see [ 73 ] for a review). Systemic efforts, including efforts funded by NSF ADVANCE programs [ 29 ], that target the improvement of campus climate and the gender perception gap highlighted in this study have the potential to further improve diversity in the STEM workforce.

In summary, findings from two climate surveys five years apart revealed a persistent perception gap between men and women faculty, particularly in STEM disciplines. Men faculty underestimated the challenges and stressors faced by their women faculty colleagues and overestimated positive indicators of gender diversity climate. These findings are broadly consistent with the existing literature on the gender perception gap, and this study replicated previous research in academic settings by extending the findings to faculty at a rural comprehensive regional institution. Further, this study provided direct evidence of the stability of the perception gap over a five-year interval. Future research is needed to explore the gender perception gap using more psychometrically sound measures that also include a broader intersectional focus on marginalized faculty identities beyond binary gender. Targeted interventions, such as programs that enhance awareness and allyship among men faculty, may help bridge this perception gap and foster increased support for broader institutional change strategies designed to enhance gender equity.

Supporting information

S1 table. list of abbreviations..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301285.s001

S1 File. PLOSOne human subjects research checklist.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301285.s002

S2 File. Human subjects protocol I.D.–IRB # 16–098 approval letter.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301285.s003

S3 File. Human subjects protocol I.D.–IRB # 20‐001 approval letter.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301285.s004

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• PubMed/NCBI
• 18. Mc Intosh P. White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack [Internet]. Peace and Freedom. [cited 2023 Jun 9]. Available from: https://psychology.umbc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/2016/10/White-Privilege_McIntosh-1989.pdf
• 20. Maher FA, Tetreault MKT. Privilege and diversity in the academy. London, England: Routledge; 2013.
• 28. Sheridan J, Pribbenow C, Fine E, Handelsman J, Carnes M. Climate change at the University of Wisconsin-Madison: What changed, and did ADVANCE have an impact? [Internet]. Women in Engineering ProActive Network. [cited 2023 Jun 9]. Available from: https://journals.psu.edu/wepan/article/download/58488/58176
• 30. Oakland University 2017 climate survey [Internet]. Oakland.edu. [cited 2023 Jun 9]. Available from: https://www.oakland.edu/Assets/Oakland/diversity/files-and-documents/2017%20OU%20Climate%20Survey_Executive%20summary.pdf
• 32. Climate survey results [Internet]. Unt.edu. [cited 2023 Jun 9]. Available from: https://idea.unt.edu/climate-survey-results
• 33. Equity, Diversity & Inclusion [Internet]. Wustl.edu [cited 2023 Jun 9]. Available from: https://equity.wustl.edu/
• 34. 2017 HERI Faculty Survey Data [Internet]. Wwu.edu [cited 2023 Jun 9]. Available from: https://crtc.wwu.edu/files/2019-11/2017HERIFacultyData.pdf
• 35. STEM OPT hub [Internet]. Dhs.gov. [cited 2023 Jun 9]. Available from: https://studyinthestates.dhs.gov/stem-opt-hub
• 36. Programs: Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Science [Internet]. Nsf.gov. [cited 2023 Jun 9]. Available from: https://www.nsf.gov/funding/programs.jsp?org=SBE
• 44. National Science Foundation. 2022–2026 strategic plan. NSF 22–068. [Internet]. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation, 2022 [cited 2023 Jun 9]. Available from: https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2022/nsf22068/nsf22068.pdf
• 49. McCarthy M, Fuller C, Zhang R, Waddill P, Balthrop D. ADVANCE Adaptation: Leveling the playing field, strategic equity initiatives at Murray State University [Internet]. National Science Foundation Award 1935939. [cited 2023 Sep 15]. Available from: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/simpleSearchResult?queryText=1935939&ActiveAwards=true
• 56. Sidanius J, Pratto F. Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 2012. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139175043
• 60. Vespa J, Medina, L, Armstrong DM. Demographic turning points for the United States: Population projections for 2020 to 2060. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. 15 p. Report no.: P25-1144. Available from: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/demo/p25-1144.pdf
• 62. Smith DG. Diversity’s promise for higher education: making it work. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2009.
• 66. McGee EO, Robinson WH, editors. Diversifying STEM: Multidisciplinary perspectives on race and gender. Rutgers University Press; 2020.
• 69. Kahn S, Ginther D. Women and STEM. Working Paper 23525. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research; 2017. Available from: https://www.nber.org/papers/w23525

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Creating a Corporate Social Responsibility Program with Real Impact

• Emilio Marti,
• David Risi,
• Eva Schlindwein,
• Andromachi Athanasopoulou

Lessons from multinational companies that adapted their CSR practices based on local feedback and knowledge.

Exploring the critical role of experimentation in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), research on four multinational companies reveals a stark difference in CSR effectiveness. Successful companies integrate an experimental approach, constantly adapting their CSR practices based on local feedback and knowledge. This strategy fosters genuine community engagement and responsive initiatives, as seen in a mining company’s impactful HIV/AIDS program. Conversely, companies that rely on standardized, inflexible CSR methods often fail to achieve their goals, demonstrated by a failed partnership due to local corruption in another mining company. The study recommends encouraging broad employee participation in CSR and fostering a culture that values CSR’s long-term business benefits. It also suggests that sustainable investors and ESG rating agencies should focus on assessing companies’ experimental approaches to CSR, going beyond current practices to examine the involvement of diverse employees in both developing and adapting CSR initiatives. Overall, embracing a dynamic, data-driven approach to CSR is essential for meaningful social and environmental impact.

By now, almost all large companies are engaged in corporate social responsibility (CSR): they have CSR policies, employ CSR staff, engage in activities that aim to have a positive impact on the environment and society, and write CSR reports. However, the evolution of CSR has brought forth new challenges. A stark contrast to two decades ago, when the primary concern was the sheer neglect of CSR, the current issue lies in the ineffective execution of these practices. Why do some companies implement CSR in ways that create a positive impact on the environment and society, while others fail to do so? Our research reveals that experimentation is critical for impactful CSR, which has implications for both companies that implement CSR and companies that externally monitor these CSR activities, such as sustainable investors and ESG rating agencies.

• EM Emilio Marti is an associate professor at the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University. His research focuses on corporate sustainability with a specific focus on sustainable investing.
• DR David Risi is a professor at the Bern University of Applied Sciences and a habilitated lecturer at the University of St. Gallen. His research focuses on how companies organize CSR and sustainability.
• ES Eva Schlindwein is a professor at the Bern University of Applied Sciences and a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Oxford. Her research focuses on how organizations navigate tensions between business and society.
• AA Andromachi Athanasopoulou is an associate professor at Queen Mary University of London and an associate fellow at the University of Oxford. Her research focuses on how individuals manage their leadership careers and make ethically charged decisions.

Partner Center

Assessing Initiatives Taken to Safeguard and Support Victims of Sexual Abuse in Dowa District: A Case Study of the Spotlight Initiative Under the Girls Empowerment Network (GENET)

• Published: 06 April 2024

Cite this article

• Daniel Devoted Matemba   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0000-6301-4897 1 &
• Christina Banda 1  

In Malawi, sexual abuse disproportionately affects girls and young women, emphasizing the need for effective interventions to safeguard their well-being. The Spotlight Initiative, a significant effort to combat violence against women and girls, has been implemented in Malawi, addressing various forms of gender-based violence, including sexual abuse. One funded project, Girls Action to End Violence against Women and Girls (GATEVAWG), aims to empower girls through mentorship in combating gender-based violence. This study assesses the effectiveness of initiatives and support mechanisms for sexual abuse victims in Malawi’s Dowa District. The population size includes data from at least 10 victims or project beneficiaries, 5 community authorities (traditional authorities), and at least 5 organization representatives leading the Spotlight Initiative project. Findings reveal the pervasive nature of sexual abuse in the study area, where men exploit vulnerable women and girls. While community authorities play a crucial role in intervention and support, neglecting some cases leads to adverse consequences for victims and their families. Support provided includes health care, psychosocial, emotional, and social assistance, facilitating recovery and societal reintegration. The study highlights the positive impact of the Spotlight Initiative, empowering girls with knowledge of their rights and sexual reproductive health. However, challenges persist, necessitating continuous efforts to combat harmful social and gender norms. Recommendations include encouraging girls to report abuse, raising awareness among families and community leaders, and strengthening follow-up mechanisms for addressed cases. The study also recommends future investigations into how survivors, supported by community-based initiatives, experience long-term physical, psychological, and emotional well-being.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Data Availability

All data supporting the conclusions of this research are available upon reasonable request.

Amnesty International. (2002). Kenya: Rape-The Invisible Crime. https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr32/001/2002/en/

BC, U. B., Pokharel, S., Munikar, S., Wagle, C. N., Adhikary, P., Shahi, B. B., Thapa, C., Bhandari, R. P., Adhikari, B., & Thapa, K. (2021). Anxiety and depression among people living in quarantine centers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed method study from western Nepal. PLoS One, 16 (7), e0254126. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254126

Article   Google Scholar  

Borumandnia, N., Khadembashi, N., Tabatabaei, M., et al. (2020). The prevalence rate of sexual violence worldwide: A trend analysis. BMC Public Health, 20 , 1835. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09926-5

Chauwa, A. (2019). Malawi: Dowa women protest sexual harassment in AIP depots. Nyasa Times (Leeds).

Chayala, E. T. (2022, March 23). Tackling gender-based violence at project sites in Malawi . The Spotlight Initiative.

Chipokoso, S. (2018). Youth accessing reproductive health services in Malawi: Drivers, barriers and suggestions from the perspectives of youth and parents. Reproductive Health .

Decker, M. R., Wood, S. N., Ndinda, E., et al. (2018). Sexual violence among adolescent girls and young women in Malawi: A cluster-randomized controlled implementation trial of empowerment self-defense training. BMC Public Health, 18 , 1341. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-6220-0

Deschamps, M., Jallow, H. B., & Sooka, Y. (2015). Taking action on sexual exploitation and abuse by peacekeepers: Report of an independent review on sexual exploitation and abuse by international peacekeeping forces in the Central African Republic.  Reliefweb/United Nations.

Fornicola, E., & Peterson, Z. D. (2022). An exploratory study of sexual aggression tactics as a function of perpetrator gender and victim gender. International Journal of Sexual Health, 34 (3), 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/19317611.2022.2053027

Gekoski, A., Gray, J. M., Horvath, M. A., Edwards, S., Emirali, A., & Adler, J. R. (2015). ‘What works’ in reducing sexual harassment and sexual offences on public transport nationally and internationally: A rapid evidence assessment.

Grose, R. G., Chen, J. S., Roof, K. A., Rachel, S., & Yount, K. M. (2021). Sexual and reproductive health outcomes of violence against women and girls in lower-income countries: A review of reviews. The Journal of Sex Research, 58 (1), 1–20.

Hébert, M., Smith, K., Caouette, J., Cénat, J. M., Karray, A., Cartierre, N., Veuillet-Combier, C., Mazoyer, A. V., & Derivois, D. (2021). Prevalence and associated mental health outcomes of child sexual abuse in youth in France: Observations from a convenience sample. Journal of Affective Disorders, 282 , 820–828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.12.100

Lasky, N. V. (2019). Victim precipitation theory. In F. P. Bernat & K. Frailing (Eds.), The encyclopedia of women and crime . Wiley.

McMahon, P. M., Goodwin, M. M., & Stringer, G. (2000). Sexual violence and reproductive health. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 4 , 121–124. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009574305310

NHS, C. (2017). Healthcare careers . National Health Service. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33239117/

Shahali, S., Riazi, H., Alaei, S., Emamhadi, M., & Salmaney, F. (2019). Perceived social support and self-esteem in sexual violence victims. Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 33 , 19. https://doi.org/10.34171/mjiri.33.19

United Nations. (2022). Spotlight Initiative newsletter for Malawi . United Nations Malawi.

Webermann, A. R., & Murphy, C. M. (2022). How can psychology help reduce gender-based violence and misconduct on college campuses? American Psychologist, 77 (2), 161.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The Department of Social Work, DMI, St. John the Baptist University, P.O Box 406, Mangochi, Malawi

Daniel Devoted Matemba & Christina Banda

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Daniel Devoted Matemba or Christina Banda .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Matemba, D.D., Banda, C. Assessing Initiatives Taken to Safeguard and Support Victims of Sexual Abuse in Dowa District: A Case Study of the Spotlight Initiative Under the Girls Empowerment Network (GENET). J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-024-00302-6

Download citation

Accepted : 28 January 2024

Published : 06 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-024-00302-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Sexual abuse
• Spotlight Initiative
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Skip to main content
• Skip to secondary menu
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

Ciudades Sostenibles

Climate Equity in Cities: Governance, Gender and Urban Resilience

April 8, 2024 por Karin Villarroel Leave a Comment

Este artículo está también disponible en / This post is also available in: Spanish

The Division of Housing and Urban Development organized three webinars to understand better the opportunities and challenges associated with subnational climate action.

The second meeting of the series, held on March 27th, focused on the crucial theme of climate equity in cities, addressing governance, gender, and urban resilience. This gathering brought together experts and leaders to explore how climate change disproportionately affects different genders, especially women and girls, and how integrating gender perspectives can strengthen responses to climate change in urban contexts. The main objective was to address inequalities in the distribution of climate change effects and promote more equitable and just climate action, ensuring that mitigation and adaptation measures are inclusive and fair. We share its recording:

Key messages:

• Climate inequity doesn’t affect everyone the same way; it disproportionately impacts men and women, amplifying existing disparities. A gender lens in climate action acknowledges these differences and strives to minimize vulnerabilities while promoting fair opportunities. Understanding how climate change affects individuals based on geographic location and socioeconomic conditions is critical, underscoring the importance of incorporating this perspective into policymaking and planning.

• Successfully integrating gender perspectives into climate projects requires meticulous data disaggregation, active involvement of women in planning processes, and careful consideration of gender-specific impacts in every intervention. Real-world experiences like the City Adapt program in cities in México, El Salvador, and Jamaica showcase how initiatives like crop diversification and water harvesting can offer unique benefits to women and help mitigate climate risks.

• In urban environments and indigenous communities, significant challenges persist in mainstreaming gender into climate action, including the lack of disaggregated data, the need to merge indigenous worldviews and traditional knowledge into urban planning, and the challenge of empowering indigenous women economically through education and active involvement in climate initiatives. Upholding interculturality and fostering participatory spaces are fundamental to designing inclusive and equitable solutions.

Case Studies

The session delved into the global landscape of climate inequity, highlighting gender disparities in climate change impacts and stressing the importance of addressing these differences to foster equity. Practical experiences of integrating gender perspectives into climate action projects in urban settings were explored, emphasizing the necessity for adaptive climate planning and the active participation of women in decision-making processes.

Concrete case studies demonstrated how gender perspectives are woven into different contexts of climate projects. From initiatives fostering inclusive urban mobility in Brazil to innovative programs tackling the impact of extreme heat on vulnerable women in India, these examples underscored the significance of considering gender-specific needs and experiences in planning and executing climate initiatives.

Driving Sustainable Urban Mobility in Brazil

Brazil is making strides in addressing the gender perspective in climate action and mitigation within urban environments. Through participatory walks led by Instituto Caminhabilidade, safe and vulnerable areas are identified, and discussions on gender-based violence in public spaces are initiated. Through this work, they can influence the implementation of solutions such as permeable soil for water absorption, appropriate lighting and furnishings in public spaces, and fare integration in public transport. These measures mitigate carbon emissions and cater to women’s safety and accessibility needs, promoting equity, sustainability, and urban resilience.

Protection against Extreme Heat with Gender Approach in India

In India, efforts have been made to address extreme heat in public spaces with a gender perspective. The project led by the Atlantic Council aims to increase the resilience of women and vulnerable populations through innovative financial solutions. With an integrated approach that includes risk transfer and reduction and early heat warnings, the project implements parametric insurance to recover lost wages due to extreme heat. In Ahmadabad, India, a successful pilot program was conducted to promote financial inclusion and open new bank accounts for over 6,500 community members. This approach improved productivity, reduced medical expenses, and improved long-term sustainability by integrating with national social protection programs.

Conclusions

There are significant challenges in scale, data availability, and cultural aspects when addressing climate equity in cities. To tackle these challenges, it is imperative to promote dialogue and effective collaboration among stakeholders to develop inclusive and equitable climate solutions that benefit all involved parties. Ultimately, climate equity in cities is crucial for addressing the disproportionate impacts of climate change on different population groups and building more resilient and sustainable societies as a whole. This global challenge requires coordinated actions and inclusive policies to ensure a more just and equitable future for all.

Karin Villarroel

Karin Villarroel is a Project Implementation Consultant at the IDB Cities Network in the Housing and Urban Development Division of the Inter-American Development Bank. She is an architect and urban planner specializing in cities and sustainable urban development, with expertise in development projects, urban planning and design, environmental sustainability, and transportation in cities. In her current position, she provides operational and technical support for dialogue opportunities to strengthen and enhance cooperation among cities in Latin America and the Caribbean. Previously, she was the head of the Urban Planning Section at the Municipality of Lo Barnechea in Santiago, Chile, where she led a multidisciplinary team implementing urban design and planning projects. Karin holds a Master's in Public Policy from the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), a Master's in Real Estate Development and Investment from ESE Business School, Universidad de Los Andes in Chile, a Master's in Urban Project and a Bachelor of Arts in Architecture from Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile (PUC).

Reader Interactions

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

Your Message

Blog posts written by Bank employees:

Copyright © Inter-American Development Bank ("IDB"). This work is licensed under a Creative Commons IGO 3.0 Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives. (CC-IGO 3.0 BY-NC-ND) license and may be reproduced with attribution to the IDB and for any non-commercial purpose. No derivative work is allowed. Any dispute related to the use of the works of the IDB that cannot be settled amicably shall be submitted to arbitration pursuant to the UNCITRAL rules. The use of the IDB's name for any purpose other than for attribution, and the use of IDB's logo shall be subject to a separate written license agreement between the IDB and the user and is not authorized as part of this CC- IGO license. Note that link provided above includes additional terms and conditions of the license.

For blogs written by external parties:

For questions concerning copyright for authors that are not IADB employees please complete the contact form for this blog.

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IDB, its Board of Directors, or the countries they represent.

Attribution: in addition to giving attribution to the respective author and copyright owner, as appropriate, we would appreciate if you could include a link that remits back the IDB Blogs website.

Privacy Policy

Privacy Overview

• Middle East
• Asia - Pacific
• Dominican Republic
• South Africa
• Czech Republic
• Netherlands
• Switzerland
• Türkiye
• United Arab Emirates
• New Zealand
• Philippines

Human rights impact assessment in Pakistan

Human rights are inherent to the dignity of human life and a prerequisite for society to prosper. As a global company, we work to uphold human rights within our organization and across our value chain.

To strengthen our due diligence framework, proactively identify risks, and mitigate potential adverse impacts, we have set an ambition to conduct human rights impact assessments (HRIAs) by 2025 in the 10 highest-risk countries in which we operate. In 2023, we partnered with Article One, our external expert advisors, to carry out our eighth country-level HRIA in Pakistan covering our local affiliate’s operations and tobacco leaf supply chain.

Pakistan faces significant socioeconomic challenges, and the country typically scores low on international human rights indicators (such as the United Nations Development Index, the Fund for Peace Fragile State Index, or the Cato Institute Human Freedom Index). The country is also grappling with the ongoing effects of floods in 2022, which led to the displacement of close to eight million people. In addition, gender discrimination is deeply rooted there, and women face barriers in accessing healthcare and education; nearly 60 percent of children not attending school are girls, and four out of five of these girls live in rural areas. 1

With this context in mind, and with the aim to progress PMI’s human rights strategy through a collaborative process, we conducted a gender-sensitive HRIA in Pakistan during 2023, leveraging on sound internal and external stakeholder engagement.

Summary of the HRIA methodology

The HRIA combined desktop research with remote and in-person interviews and focus groups (involving over 100 individuals in total) to help surface country-level human rights risks.

As part of the desktop research, Article One considered PMI group-wide and any additional relevant local policies and sustainability disclosures, as well as credible independent human rights risk reports relating to Pakistan, and other third-party resources. This research helped surface an initial assessment of country-level human rights risks, which is linked to the context in which companies operate in. The second step was initial stakeholder engagement through remote interviews with Philip Morris (Pakistan) Limited (PMPKL) management and suppliers. These interviews contributed to the overall understanding of the local context and enabled the in-country visit to center on direct stakeholder engagement through focus groups with permanent employees, third-party workers on PMPKL sites, leaf farmers and farm workers. In carrying out interviews with all focus groups, our external advisors ensured that participants understood it was a safe space for discussion and that nothing they said would be attributed to them personally. Independent translators assisted our external advisors and the focus groups’ participants.

These engagements allowed Article One to compile key findings, including both risks and positive impacts, and to set actionable recommendations. As with any other HRIA we have completed at PMI, the local management in Pakistan reviewed and analyzed the findings and built up a comprehensive action plan to address the risks and issues identified. This action plan will be subject to status updates twice per year to ensure timely implementation.

Adopting of a gender-lens approach

An innovative feature of this HRIA was to introduce a stronger application of a gender lens across the full cycle of the HRIA. Gender-responsive due diligence, including gender-sensitive HRIAs, entails “recognizing that business processes affect rights holders with different gender identities in different ways.” 2

During this process, our objective was to understand the relationships between women and their access to and use of resources and supports, their activities, and the constraints they face relative to each other. It involved recognizing that women may experience different risks or experience risks in different ways than other groups of a population.

Concretely, we consciously instilled this new lens at every step of the HRIA process, from the pre-field research (e.g., performing a robust gender baseline research and considering the potential gender bias of the research team and engagement plan) to the fieldwork (e.g., conducting several women-only interviews and focus group discussions and gathering gender-disaggregated data) and the post-fieldwork (e.g., accounting for potential gender bias and limitations of the findings gathered or developing targeted recommendations to address gendered risks and impacts).

In Pakistan, the Human Rights Impact Assessment plays a pivotal role in fostering a more equitable environment by reviewing policies and procedures accounting for a human rights and gender-lens approach. The independent and systematic assessment of human rights across our operations and value chain helped us understand the varying perspectives and provided us with an opportunity to address risks, and continue fostering a more equitable and inclusive environment where every individuals' rights are promoted and upheld Sana Enait Hashmi , Company Secretary & Sustainability Coordinator

Overview of the key findings of the HRIA

The scope of the HRIA in Pakistan included the Head Office, selected sales offices, the two factories in Mardan and Sahiwal as well as the leaf supply chain. Efforts to conduct the in-county visit around the time of the harvesting season were made to ensure that the two factories were in operation. To ensure the security of foreign consultants and colleagues, PMPKL’s security and market safety team advised to not visit the farms. Therefore, on-site visits were replaced by focus group interviews with farmers and farm workers that took place at the company’s premises.

Through extensive engagement, spanning remote and in-person internal engagement and discussions with external expert stakeholders, the assessment allowed the highlighting of positive impacts and areas of risks, which are summarized below.

At the Head Office , PMPKL employees praised the positive and empowering working environment, and recognized the competitive wages and benefits provided by the company. They particularly appreciated the support of their line managers and the fact they can benefit from flexible working arrangements. Nevertheless, some employees—especially of higher seniority—stressed the importance of striking a better work-life balance. Furthermore, despite supportive policies and programs in place, female employees only represented 11 percent of PMPKL’s workforce in 2023, showcasing the need to continue efforts to attract and retain more women.

At the manufacturing sites , employees and third-party workers reported concerns about working conditions such as working in high temperatures and, especially during harvesting and threshing season (peak season), in the presence of excessive dust. In addition, some employees reported working extended hours during peak season and commuting long hours between work and their homes due to the remote location of the factories. The value to workers of the company providing transport and accommodation was widely reported. Apprentices, who join PMPKL for a two-year advancement program under specific terms, appreciated the continuous training they receive but reported concerns about their remuneration, which specifically for the apprentice program is above minimum wage but difficult for them to adequately provide for themselves. They also sought job opportunities prospects at PMPKL upon completion of the program.

Third-party workers interviewed reported being previously employed in PMPKL and now are working for third-party suppliers being deployed on PMPKL sites. With this change in their status, they reported deterioration in pay, bonuses, and medical benefits, and lack of accommodation. Third-party workers on PMPKL sites also reported a lack of awareness of the PMI speak-up line or any other grievance mechanism other than engaging with their supervisor at the third-party supplier.

In the sales and distribution operations , employees underlined security as a risk related to their work but this appears to be well managed by PMPKL due to the close collaboration with the local security team. The teams also highlighted feeling that there are opportunities to grow within the organization and seize opportunities based on merit but mentioned difficulty in trying to meet basic personal needs given the current challenging commercial context and high inflationary environment, despite the company’s efforts to support them with wage increases and inflation bonuses.

Sustainability case studies

Specific highlights stemming from the gender lens approach

Pakistan’s context is challenging regarding women. In their daily life, and at work, women often experience discrimination as well as contextual and practical challenges, especially in remote locations. External stakeholders raised the concerns on mobility for women including concerns around physical safety, perceptions of women being “delicate,” and the heavy weight of family expectations.

In 2023, women represented 11 percent of the total permanent employee workforce at PMPKL. Nearly 60 percent of them are based in the head-office, and less than one percent are based in the leaf threshing facility in Mardan. Article One conducted six women-only focus groups across Head Office, and PMI factories in Sahiwal and Mardan. While it was not possible to engage directly with women at leaf farms, our external advisors met with the female social mobilisers engaged by PMPKL who visit women on farms.

Women in PMPKL’s workforce expressed a wide appreciation for the company’s inclusive culture, appreciating the parental leave provisions, flexible working arrangements, and support they receive from their supervisors. They cited feeling heard and included and having equal opportunities for development. However, it was noted that due to cultural differences in the remote areas where the factories are located, and further considering the nature of the work, and the lack of flexible working arrangements which are not widely available for women working at the sites, the number of women is much lower.

One area for potential improvement identified pertains to the low awareness of the existing parental support mechanisms at PMPKL among some employees. Also, in certain sites, the remote location and local culture seem to make it more challenging to recruit and retain women. Lack of female friendly policies especially in remote sites, such as offering hybrid work, contribute to this as well.

Plan to act on the HRIA results

The HRIA in Pakistan, as in all markets before, was complemented with the development by our local teams, of a country-specific, time-bound corrective action plan to address the findings identified. Within this corrective action plan, responsibility for implementation and progress measurement was assigned at the local level.

Key aspects of this plan are set out below:

Continuation of existing good practices: PMPKL aims to continue improving labor relations to better understand employee concerns and is invested in increasing capability building opportunities for line managers to foster a culture for inclusion. PMPKL will continue to review current compensation and benefits to improve total compensation and rewards for its employees.

Factory and operations workers : PMPKL plans to address excessive dust and heat in both its factories with some short-term solutions, as well as long-term feasibility assessments to improve temperatures, and to revamp the de-dusting system in one of them.

Third Party Workers: PMPKL does not have any administrative control over third-party workers as they are not PMPKL employees. However, PMPKL will continue to work with the third-party service providers to ensure that they continue to comply with the labor laws of Pakistan (local labor laws are part of all service agreements), and PMI’s Responsible Sourcing Principles (RSPs) , with heightened focus on working conditions, working hours, issuance of employment related documentation to the service provide personnel, etc. Though PMPKL cannot directly intervene regarding employment related matters, and working conditions of third-party workers, procurement team and third-party vendors applying the PMI RSPs shall contribute towards improving the employment conditions of third-party workers.

In addition to the above and in the short term, PMPKL will work out a mechanism with vendors to increase awareness of speak-up lines for third party workers in case of any grievance(s), and to ensure that this is included as part of every initial request for submitting their service proposals.

Leaf farmers and farm workers: To improve working conditions, PMPKL will continue to provide PPE on credit. PMPKL will also continue the coverage of all PMPKL contracted farmers under ALP initiatives, to run its existing programs to prevent child labor, and to invest to advance safer and more sustainable growing processes in our tobacco supply chain. To ensure farmers feel empowered to discuss pricing and foster fair pricing negotiation conditions, PMPKL plans to raise awareness of grievance mechanisms via flyers and display pricing guidance provided by the Pakistan Tobacco Board at buying stations. The Pakistan Tobacco Board has also established a vigilance committee to monitor compliance of all buying related matters including pricing in the market.

Women: To support attracting and retaining women and improve work life balance, PMPKL is: 1) looking to further enhance the accommodation and daily transport policy for employee and families at the Mardan factory; 2) reassessing the possibility of smart work at sales offices, and the factories; and 3) conducting a study on daycare/aftercare needs. In addition, a project team within PMPKL is assessing ways to upgrade facilities and support available in Mardan to attract women candidates to apply to work there.

For countries like Pakistan where diversity defines the workforce, integrating Human Rights Impact Assessment into corporate practices becomes pivotal. The Human Rights Impact Assessment in Pakistan helped us to bring together the distant parts of the value chain and our operations and listen to their voices with more clarity. We witnessed a very welcoming response from all the stakeholders, and we are committed to continue listening and engaging with our rightsholders, to promote an inclusive culture where all the stakeholders can thrive in an environment that values their rights and well-being. Roman Yazbeck , Managing Director Pakistan & Afghanistan

As with the implementation of all PMI’s HRIA action plans, the PMPKL team will evaluate progress against its action plan twice a year and report to the global team. We will continue to promote and protect human rights in PMPKL operations, in its sales activities and throughout the tobacco supply chain.

This HRIA illustrates the value of listening to our rightsholders and engaging directly with them. It also demonstrates how a challenging economic situation within a country with particularly high inflation impacts on stakeholders’ enjoyment of the right to an adequate standard of living, highlights the importance of applying PMI’s Responsible Sourcing Principles, and the value of considering local economic and cultural contexts in future HRIAs.

1 How can a holistic education policy help bridge the opportunity gap for girls in rural Pakistan? | Brookings  

2   Girls Advocacy Alliance – A gender-responsive Human Rights Due Diligence Tool 2020    

Read more case studies

Share this case study.