Savita Kumra

International manager development – Cross‐cultural training in highly diverse environments

Examines the issues involved in providing relevant cross‐cultural training to MBA students, the epitome of the “new” international manager. In particular, it addresses the pedagogical challenges of moving students away from a reliance on “hard” skills to a facility with “soft” skills.

The Oxford handbook of gender in organizations

PART I. THEORIZING GENDER AND ORGANIZATIONS PART II. GENDER IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT PART III. GENDER AND CAREERS PART IV. MASCULINITIES IN ORGANIZATIONS

Exploring career “choices” of work‐centred women in a professional service firm

– The purpose of this paper is to challenge Hakims work‐centred category and empirically tests its applicability in a professional service firm., – The information was gathered through 19 in‐depth interviews with women in an international consulting firm. The analysis was conducted using Nvivo software., – The paper shows that contrary to the contentions of preference theory, work‐centred women do not face unfettered choice in their career advancement. Findings reveal a number of structural constraints within the firm – namely the prevailing model of success, the need for high‐level sponsorship and the need to network, which impact their choices. The findings also problematise the nature and formulation of the work‐centred category itself., – The paper surfaces a number of contradictions in the work‐centred category and calls for further work in this area. The paper also surfaces the presence of structural constraints which impact on womens career choices. Further research to develop these themes and provide broader contextual analysis is called for., – Hakims preference theory has taken responsibility for womens career advancement away from society and organisations and placed it on individual women. The paper challenges this positioning and calls for organisations to audit their policies and processes to ensure they are not “gender oppressive”., – The paper adds to the debate on the applicability of preference theory through empirical evaluation of the one of the three categories at its heart – that of work‐centred women. The theory is found to be wanting on a number of issues and problematises not just the category but key tenets of the theory itself.

The Teflon effect: when the glass slipper meets merit

Purpose This paper aims to draw on Ashcraft’s (2013) metaphor of the “glass slipper” (which highlights the need for alignment between occupational identity and embodied social identities of workers) to show how merit may not adhere to individuals when social identity in the form of gender, race or class fails to fit the definition and perceived characteristics of the job. Design/methodology/approach This is a conceptual paper. Findings This study develops the notion of the Teflon effect to describe the way merit may go unrecognised and may therefore not “stick” to the bodies of women in management and leadership roles. Research limitations/implications This study provides an explanation for the persistence of the glass ceiling and the barriers women face as they undertake or aspire to management and/or leadership positions in organisations. Practical implications This study introduces a more embodied notion of merit which relies on both performance and recognition to “take effect”. Professionals must see beyond “objective” measures of merit in performance reviews and/or in recruitment and promotion decisions to include reflection on the significance of merit’s subjective, “performed” dimensions. Social implications This study adds to understandings of women’s positioning in organisations. Originality/value This study develops the notion of the Teflon effect. This highlights the significance of the recognition, performance and embodiment of merit and how merit may fail to adhere to the bodies of women in management and leadership roles.

Really saying something: Exploring conceptions of merit in women’s experience of career based tensions inspired by my friend Ruth Simpson

Purpose This paper aims to examine how the work of Ruth Simpson and the subsequent collaborations have contributed to understanding of the gendered constructions of meritocracy, as they apply in organizations. Design/methodology/approach This paper is a personal analysis of the work of Ruth Simpson and her colleagues and the way in which her work has resonated with me and influenced our joint collaborations. The key questions our work has addressed, both when we work together and with others, include how merit is constructed. Is it gendered? How does it influence organizational outcomes? How is merit recognized? Is merit “performed”? Key theoretical constructs and frameworks are used to address these issues; including, gendered organizational structures and regimes (Acker, 1990; Ely and Meyerson, 2000; Gherardi and Poggio, 2001), the gendered nature of meritocracy (Thornton, 2007; Sommerlad, 2012, Brink van den and Benschop, 2012) and the performance and “stickiness” of meritocracy (Ashcraft, 2013, Bergman and Chalkley, 2007). Findings The paper reveals alternative ways of interrogating the discourse of meritocracy. Usually taken for granted, as an objective and fair mechanism for the allocation of scarce resources, the concept is examined and found to be much more contingent, unstable and subjective than had previously been considered. The gender-based implications of these findings are assessed. Research limitations/implications The implications of the work are to broaden the field and develop frameworks within which we can understand more clearly the way in which merit is understood. Through the work we have done, we have highlighted that merit far from being an objective measure of ability is deeply rooted in contextual and we argue, gendered understandings of contribution, worth and desert. Practical implications The practical implications are that firms can no longer rely on discourses of meritocracy to evidence their commitment to equality and fairness. They will need to go further to show a direct link between fairness in the design of processes as well as fairness in the outcomes of these processes. Until these objectives are more clearly articulated, we should continue to shine a light on embedded inequalities. Social implications The social implications are that a call for wider societal understanding of meritocracy should be made. Rather than simply accepting discourses of merit, key constituent groups who have not benefitted from the prevailing orthodoxy should seek to examine the concept and draw their own conclusions. In this manner, the author develops societal mechanisms that do not just purport to ensure equality of outcome for all; they achieve it. Originality/value This paper offers an examination of the development of ideas, how we can learn from the work of influential scholars within the field and, in turn, through collaboration, advance understanding.