ORIGINAL PAPER
Striving for social justice: understanding gender issues at the workplace in India
,
 
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
University of Delhi, New Delhi, India
Submission date: 2015-12-08
Final revision date: 2016-02-06
Acceptance date: 2016-02-07
Online publication date: 2016-04-07
Publication date: 2016-03-04
 
Health Psychology Report 2016;4(3):246–260
 
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Background
Patriarchy dominates not only the mind-set and behavioural patterns of both males and females in India in general but also has a far-reaching impact on work culture as well as quality of work life. Indians not only suffer the archaic gender patterns but also are burdened with a unique system of caste that discriminates people based on their birth in a particular section of society. The government has made an effort to eradicate the adverse impacts of the caste system by making a unique reservation policy (a form of affirmative action) in work and education that tries to promote social justice.

Participants and procedure
The present research study was conducted to assess the perception of public-sector employees of the diversity climate of their organizations (in terms of the diversity created by the affirmative action) and the psychological impact of this perception. Three hundred participants (all employed in public-sector organizations) were categorized into four groups, namely General Category Men, Reserved Category Men, General Category Women and Reserved Category Women. Participants in the reserved category were those who had directly benefitted from the affirmative action. All the participants were given questionnaires to assess perceived diversity climate, work-family conflict and alienation from work. Thirty percent of the participants were interviewed with semi-structured open-ended questions. Quantitative data were analysed using both descriptive and inferential (ANOVA) statistics.

Results
The study’s findings revealed that women in the two categories hold contrasting perceptions of their organisations’ diversity climates. While among the four categories General Category Women hold the worst perception, Reserved Category Women hold the best. The former suffer from severe psychological consequences. Qualitative analysis via thematic analysis of individual interviews revealed themes that explain the findings of the study.

Conclusions
The findings demonstrate the importance of developing a work culture of inclusion rather than assimilation in the organisations adhering to a caste-based quota system, where differences between the categories and gender are recognised, valued and engaged. Different voices are understood as being legitimate and as opening up new vistas; they are heard and integrated in decision-making and problem-solving processes. They have an active role in shaping culture and fostering creativity and innovation and eventually in adding value to the company’s performance, allowing people with multiple backgrounds, mindsets and ways of thinking to work effectively together and to perform to their highest potential in order to achieve organisational objectives based on sound principles. In such an environment different voices are respected and heard, diverse viewpoints, perspectives and approaches are valued, and everyone is encouraged to make a unique and meaningful contribution.
 
REFERENCES (36)
1.
Barak, M. E. M., Cherin, D. A., & Berkman, S. (1998). Organizational and personal dimensions in diversity climate: Ethnic and gender differences in employee perceptions. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 34, 82–104.
 
2.
Bartoleme, F. (1972). Executives as Human Beings. Harvard Business Review, 50, 62–69.
 
3.
Cable, C. (1988). Attributional processes and alienation: A typology of worker responses to unequal power relationships. Journal of Political Psychology, 9, 109–127.
 
4.
Carlson, D. S., & Perrewé, P. L. (1999). The role of social support in the stressor-strain relationship: An examination of work-family conflict. Journal of Management, 25, 513-540.
 
5.
Chalofsky, N. (2003). An emerging construct of meaningful work. Human Resources Development International, 6, 69–83.
 
6.
Chaudhuri, B., & Panigrahi, A. K. (2013). Gender Bias in Indian Industries. The Journal of Industrial Statistics, 2, 108–127.
 
7.
Cox, T. H., & Beale, R. L. (1997). Developing competency to manage diversity. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
 
8.
Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict: Testing a model of the work-family interface. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 65–78.
 
9.
Full text of Sonia’s statement on caste-based reservations. (2014, February 5). The Times of India. Retrieved from http://timesofindia.indiatimes....
 
10.
Government of India. (1950). Article 16, Section 4, Constitution of India. New Delhi: India.
 
11.
Gutek, B. A., Searle, S., & Klepa, L. (1991). Rational versus gender role explanations for work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 560–568.
 
12.
Heilman, M. E. (1994). Affirmative action: Some unintended consequences for working women. Research in Organisational Behaviour, 16, 125–169.
 
13.
Heilman, M. E., Lucas, J. A., & Kaplow, S. R. (1990). Self-Derogating consequences of sex based preferential selection: The moderating role of initial self confidence. Organisational Behaviour and Human Processes, 46, 202–216.
 
14.
Heilman, M. E., Simon, M. C., & Repper, D. P. (1987). Intentionally favoured, unintentionally harmed? Impact of sex based preferential selection on self perception and self evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 62–68.
 
15.
Henry, W. E. (1961). Conflict, age and the executive. Business Topics, 21, 15–25.
 
16.
Korman, A., & Wittig-Berman, U. (1980). A theory of career decision making. Montreal: American Psychological Convention.
 
17.
Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
 
18.
Luk, D. M., & Shaffer, M. A. (2005). Work and family domain stressors and support: Within- and Cross-domain influences on work-family conflict. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 78, 489–508.
 
19.
Maio, G. R., & Esses, V. M. (1998). The social consequences of affirmative action: Deleterious effects on perception of groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 65–74.
 
20.
Mandhana, N. (2012). Reservation bills hit hurdles in parliament. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://india.blogs.nytimes.com....
 
21.
Persson, J. (2009). The impact of a quota system on women’s empowerment: A field study in west Bengal, India. (Master’s Thesis, Department of Economics, University of Lund, Sweden). Retrieved from https://liveatlund.lu.se/intra....
 
22.
Pless, N., & Maak, T. (2004). Building an inclusive diversity culture: Principles, Processes and Practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 54, 129–147.
 
23.
Rajadhyaksha, U., & Smita, S. (2004). Tracing a timeline for work and family research in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 39, 1674–1680.
 
24.
Rana, M. S. (2008). Reservations in India: Myths and Realities. New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company.
 
25.
Schultz, D. (1974). Managing the middle aged manager. Business Management, 7, 8–17.
 
26.
Seeman, M. (1959). On the meaning of Alienation. American Sociological Review, 24, 783–791.
 
27.
Seeman, M. (1967). On the personal consequences of alienation in work. American Sociological Review, 32, 273–285.
 
28.
Seeman, M. (1972). The signals of ’68: alienation in pre-crisis France. American Sociological Review, 37, 385–402.
 
29.
Shepard, J. M. (1972). Alienation as a process: work as a case in point. The Sociological Quarterly, 13, 161–173.
 
30.
Sia, S. K. (2008). A study of perceived diversity climate by employees belonging to different social groups (Doctoral Dissertation) Retrieved from Central Reference Library, University of Delhi, India.
 
31.
Supreme Court of India. (1990). Indra Sawhney and Ors. Vs. Union of India. Write Petition (Civil) No. 930. Retrieved from http://judis.nic.in/supremecou....
 
32.
Tarnowieski, D. (1973). The changing success ethic. New York: The Free Press.
 
33.
Twining, J. E. (1980). Alienation as a social process. The Sociological Quarterly, 21, 417–428.
 
34.
Vloeberghs, D. (2002). An original and data based approach to the Work-family Balance. Equal Opportunities International, 21, 25–57.
 
35.
Williams, K. J., & Alliger, G. M. (1994). Role stressors, mood spill over and perceptions of work-family conflict in employed parents. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 837–868.
 
36.
World Economic Forum. (2013). The Global Gender Gap Report. Retrieved from http://www.weforum.org/reports....
 
eISSN:2353-5571
ISSN:2353-4184