Premium
Ranking LGBT inclusion: Diversity ranking systems as institutional archetypes
Author(s) -
Tayar Mark
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
canadian journal of administrative sciences / revue canadienne des sciences de l'administration
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.347
H-Index - 48
eISSN - 1936-4490
pISSN - 0825-0383
DOI - 10.1002/cjas.1433
Subject(s) - inclusion (mineral) , diversity (politics) , transgender , ranking (information retrieval) , lesbian , archetype , set (abstract data type) , checklist , work (physics) , sociology , psychology , political science , public relations , social psychology , gender studies , law , computer science , art , mechanical engineering , literature , machine learning , cognitive psychology , programming language , engineering
This article discusses rankings that evaluate diversity and inclusion programs for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) employees. Rankings promote LGBT issues and reward organizations who work towards “best practice” with a high rating. However, rankings only legitimize one set of practices and often fail to give small organizations a clear path towards inclusion. Corporations are warned against checklist‐based diversity where rankings reward superficial rather than substantive change. Within new institutional theory, the concept of “distorted institutional fit” is introduced to explain distortions preventing “optimal institutional fit.” This article recommends a reprioritization of diversity program evaluations to reward only substantive change by evaluating the impact on the lived experiences of employees. Copyright © 2017 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.