Recruitment initiatives aimed at increasing the gender diversity within ITEC employment: Not so “gender neutral”?

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to further critique diversity management initiatives, underpinned by a “business case/best practice” rationale, drawing on a wider investigation into changing recruitment practices aimed at increasing the gender diversity within information technology, electronics and computing (ITEC) organizations.

Design/methodology/approach

Based on the premise that human resource management practices are an essential lever in a diversity management approach this paper revisits organizational accounts of recruitment initiatives adopted, but presented through a more critical lens than in the initial investigation. These accounts were gathered from interviews with human resources (HR) and hiring managers in 18 organizations (12 private, and six public, sector).

Findings

These refer to two specific recruitment initiatives introduced with the assumption that these would enable organizations to build a more gender diverse workforce: revisiting job requirements to make them more appealing/accessible to women and the adoption of competency frameworks, assumed to be “gender neutral”.

Practical implications

In providing further insights into the limitations of diversity “business case/best practice” change, supported by accounts of organizational practices drawn from a specific industry sector, it is hoped that this will provide a reflective lens for those in positions to influence policies aimed at addressing issues of gender inequality.

Originality/value

Drawing on the concept of “ideological cover” this paper offers an alternative theoretical lens from which to critique the underpinning rationale and assumptions held about recruitment practices, thus questioning organizational claims that these are “gender neutral”.

Citation

Evans, C. (2012), "Recruitment initiatives aimed at increasing the gender diversity within ITEC employment: Not so “gender neutral”?", Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, Vol. 31 No. 8, pp. 741-752. https://doi.org/10.1108/02610151211277608