Gender and work relations: a new research agenda

During the annual meeting of the Brazilian Academy of Management (ANPAD) held in 2023 - the XLVII EnANPAD - in São Paulo, gender debates took center stage in several sessions across different divisions, spanning from public administration to organizational studies. Despite scholars’ differing ontological views and epistemological choices, one consensus emerged: the issue of gender remains far from being fully explored.

In a particular session within the division of “People Management and Labor Relations,” discussions delved into the diverse perspectives of feminism, drawing from the works of Beauvoir (1978), Butler (2024), Fraser (2010), Gonzales (2020), and hooks (1994). These discussions also referenced other seminal works (Bell et al., 2020; Broadbridge & Hearn, 2008). However, overarching studies on gender and the workplace consistently revolve around patriarchy as a central axis (Benschop & Doorewaard, 1998; Bourabain, 2021; Calás et al., 2014).

Empirical research has shed light on acts of violence against women across various contexts, including military environments (Alvinius & Holmberg, 2019), corporations (Allan, 2019), and non-profit organizations (Baines & Cunningham, 2011). These incidents are often linked to the manifestation of toxic masculinity (Soundararajan & Taylor, 2021), which typically stems from struggles around economic power. While terms like “androcentrism,” “violence,” and “harassment” are commonly employed in such studies (Mandalaki & Pérezts, 2023), the term “misogyny” is notably underutilized as both an empirical descriptor and a conceptual framework (McCarthy & Taylor, 2024).

Exceptions to this trend are scarce, with notable examples including the work of Mavin and Williams, who explore female misogyny. They define it as “negative behaviours and responses from women to other women in organizations and management,” suggesting that as women ascend the management hierarchy, they provoke resistance from both men and women conditioned to view management as a masculine domain (Mavin & Williams, 2013, p. 189).

Additionally, Fotaki (2023) contends that women are consistently marginalized as the “other” within organizational contexts, often facing retaliatory misogynistic rhetoric and actions when they express dissent.

The primary gap identified in studies on gender and labor relations revolves around the pervasive presence of misogyny in management theory. According to Fotaki and Harding (2018, p. 31), this harmful discourse of misogyny persists in both corporate environments - such as workplaces, written materials, and business media - and academic realms - including theses, dissertations, and published articles in the field of business or public administration.

Furthermore, Pagan (2023) argues that confidentiality agreements serve as a covert mechanism for silencing women, with significant ramifications. The author observes that this legal tool effectively perpetuates structural sexism and misogyny. Kenny and Fanchini (2024) built upon Pagan’s ideas in their research on female whistleblowers, examining how legal mechanisms deny or erase their testimonies.

While existing studies cover various perspectives, including feminism (Palmer, 2020), harassment (Seymore, 2009), violence (Bell & Sinclair, 2014; Fotaki et al., 2017), and humiliation (Varman et al., 2023), there is a need to expand research into gender in administration by focusing on the concept of misogyny. This pervasive phenomenon influences social and work relationships on a daily basis.

Misogyny infiltrates organizations (Costas & Grey, 2019) through both physical and psychological violence (Irigaray et al., 2023), as well as social violence. This social violence is evidenced in professional norms and the deliberate exclusion of experiences and concepts that provoke discomfort, particularly within powerful groups (Dar et al., 2021).

Our call for a fresh perspective on gender and work relations was prompted by Fotaki and Harding’s (2018) probing question: is our field of knowledge inherently misogynistic? Consequently, we echo McCarthy and Taylor’s (2024) observation that feminist (Bell et al., 2020), black or decolonial (Dar et al., 2021), and queer (Rumens et al., 2019) experiences, theories, and knowledge are often overlooked or erased. This pattern suggests a deliberate exclusion of uncomfortable aspects of organizational dynamics or perspectives that challenge the mainstream within our academic community.

The dominance of masculine theorization (Cunliffe, 2022, p. 2) persists in spaces purporting to showcase our field’s finest articles. Those who dare to think and write differently from the narrow paradigm of the most prestigious journals face policing by disciplinary practices and microaggressions from influential gatekeepers (Prothero, 2023).

We are delighted for the chance to present this issue, which delves into significant topics such as corporate sustainability, organizational justice, social movements, work values, and gender.

The first article, “Business strategies and corporate sustainability: an ethical linkage,” written by Claudio Pitassi, addresses how business ethics can help reformulate corporate sustainability strategies.

In the second article, “Female refugees: the most vulnerable of the vulnerable, according to the theory of social reproduction,” Janaina de Mendonça Fernandes and Fernanda Mitsue Soares Onuma focus on the phenomenon of the feminization of forced migrations.

Next, in “Personal values, organizational justice, and counterproductive behavior: connections, reflections, and research agenda,” Thaís Pinto da Rocha Torres, Kely César Martins de Paiva, and Milka Alves Correia Barbosa reflect on individuals’ values, organizational justice, and counterproductive behaviors within organizations, highlighting avenues for further research.

“Social movements: does activism lead to emancipation?” is the title of the work by Helga Midori Iwamoto, Airton Cardoso Cançado, Armindo dos Santos de Sousa Teodósio, and Flávio Ayres Marinho, in which the ideas of Boaventura de Sousa Santos are used to identify social movements with emancipatory potential.

In the fifth article, “Dynamics of institutional sustainability logics in organizations: a systematic literature review,” Fernanda Cervi and Tania Pereira Christopoulos apply institutional logic to develop frameworks aimed at enabling actors to establish a common language for reconciling conflicting logics and fostering shared values for stakeholders beyond the organization.

“Work values in the context of the creative economy: a study of female artisan-entrepreneurs in natural cosmetics” is the sixth article, authored by Francisco Edson Rodrigues da Silva, Augusto Cézar de Aquino Cabral, Sandra Maria dos Santos, and Conceição de Maria Pinheiro Barros, suggests that professional achievement and social relationships are the most prominent values, particularly in the aspects of engaging in creative work and contributing to societal development.

The seventh article, titled “Agribusiness is male-dominated: professional discrimination of women in the sector,” authored by Cássia da Silva Castro Arantes, Ana Heloísa da Costa Lemos, Gabriel da Silva Medina, and José Elenilson Cruz, aims to examine the professional integration process of graduates in agricultural sciences and technology into the agribusiness sector, shedding light on gender discrimination within the industry.

Gender is also the focus of the eighth and ninth articles. “Women in high leadership positions at the Central Bank of Brazil,” authored by Mariane Santiago de Souza and André Luis Silva, examines the professional obstacles women faced in senior leadership roles at the Central Bank of Brazil. Following this, “Women in politics in Brazil: Inclusion and political capital of female federal deputies,” by Marcella Barbosa Miranda Teixeira and Carolina Maria Mota-Santos, delves into the factors shaping and impeding the participation of women in Brazilian politics.

Finally, Átila de Assis Ribeiro, Jefferson Rodrigues Pereira, and Nairana Radtke Caneppele present “Occupational stress in the banking sector: implications for worker’s health and organization functionality,” identifying the main implications of occupational stress on worker health and the functionality of a banking organization.

This issue includes two teaching cases. The first, “The Ju Bochner case: born, raised, and globalized on Instagram,” by Clarice Kogut, Luíza Neves Marques da Fonseca, and Angela da Rocha, presents the dilemmas faced by a small jewelry brand, Ju Bochner, in its quest for international growth. The second, “BRK: digital transformation to delight consumers,” written by Lucas Sciencia do Prado and Carlos Eduardo Lourenço, explores the dilemmas of one of Brazil’s largest private sanitation companies, BRK, initiating a discussion on how to prioritize and maintain consumer satisfaction in a utility segment where such a focus is unusual.

We wish you a pleasant read

REFERÊNCIAS

• Allan, A. (2019, September 16). How businesses can take the lead in combatting gender-based violence. Stanford Social Innovation Review https://ssir.org/articles/entry/how_businesses_can_take_the_lead_in_combatting_gender_based_violence
  » https://ssir.org/articles/entry/how_businesses_can_take_the_lead_in_combatting_gender_based_violence
• Alvinius, A, & Holmberg, A. (2019). Silence-breaking butterfly effect: resistance towards the military within #MeToo. Gender, Work & Organization, 26(9), 1255-1270. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12349
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12349
• Baines, D., & Cunningham, I. (2011). White knuckle care work: violence, gender and new public management in the voluntary sector. Work, Employment and Society, 25(4), 760-776 https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017011419710.
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017011419710
• Beauvoir, S. (1978). O segundo sexo Nova Fronteira.
• Bell, E., & Sinclair, A. (2014). Reclaiming eroticism in the academy. Organization, 21(2), 268-280. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508413493084
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508413493084
• Bell, E., Taylor, S., Tienari, J., & Meriläinen, S. (2020). Dangerous knowledge: the political, personal, and epistemological promise of feminist research in management and organization studies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 22(2), 177-192. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12221
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12221
• Benschop, Y., & Doorewaard, H. (1998). Covered by inequality: the gender subtext of organizations. Organization Studies, 19(5), 787-790. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069801900504
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069801900504
• Bourabain, D. (2021). Everyday sexism and racism in the ivory tower: the experiences of early career researchers on the intersection of gender and ethnicity in the academic workplace. Gender, Work & Organization, 28(1), 248-267. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12549
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12549
• Broadbridge, A., & Hearn, J. (2008). Gender and management: new directions in research and continuing patterns. British Journal of Management, 19(S1), S38-S49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2008.00570.x
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2008.00570.x
• Butler, J. (2024). Who is afraid of gender? Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
• Calás, M. B., Smircich, L., & Holvino, E. (2014). Theorizing gender-and-organization: changing times, changing theories. In S. Kumra, R. Simpson, & R. Burke (Eds.), Handbook of gender in organizations Oxford University Press.
• Costas, J., & Grey, C. (2019). Violence and organization studies. Organization Studies , 40(10), 1573-1586. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0170840618782282
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0170840618782282
• Cunliffe, A. (2022). Must I grow a pair of balls to theorize about theory in organization and management studies? Organization Theory, 3(3), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877221109277
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877221109277
• Dar, S., Liu, H., Martinez, D. A., & Brewis, D. (2021). The business school is racist: act up! Organization, 28(4), 695-706. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508420928521
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508420928521
• Fotaki, M. (2023). Why do we desire and fear care: toward developing a holistic political approach. Organization Theory, 4(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877231159683
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877231159683
• Fotaki, M., & Harding, N. (2018). Gender and the organization: women at work in the 21st century Routledge.
• Fotaki, M., Kenny, K., & Vachhani, S. J. (2017). Thinking critically about affect in organization studies: why it matters. Organization, 24(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508416668192
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508416668192
• Fraser, N. (2010). Scales of justice: reimagining political space in a globalizing world Columbia University Press.
• Gonzalez, L. (2020). Por um feminismo afro-latino-americano Zahar.
• Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress: education as the practice of freedom First Thus.
• Irigaray, H. A., Stocker, F., & Mancebo, R. C. (2022). Gaslighting: the art of driving minority groups mad at work. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 63(1), e2021-0277. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020230105
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020230105
• Kenny, K., & Fanchini, M. (2024). Women whistleblowers: examining parrhesia, power and gender with Sophocles’ Antigone. Organization Studies, 45(2), 275-296. https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406231187073
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406231187073
• Mavin, S., & Williams, J. (2013). Women’s impact on women’s careers in management: queen bees, female misogyny, negative intra-relations, and solidarity behaviours. In S. Vinnicombe, R. J. Burke, S. Blake-Beard, & L. L. Moore (Eds.), Handbook of research on promoting women’s careers Edward Elgar.
• McCarthy, L., & Taylor, S. (2024). Misogyny and organization studies. Organization Studies, 45(3), 457-473. https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406231213964
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406231213964
• Pagan, V. (2023). 21st century bridling: non-disclosure agreements in cases of organizational misconduct. Human Relations, 76(11), 1827-1851. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267221119129
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267221119129
• Palmer, L. A. (2020). Diane Abbott, misogynoir, and the politics of black British feminism’s anticolonial imperatives: ‘in Britain too, it’s as if we don’t exist’. The Sociological Review, 68(3), 508-523. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038026119892404
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/0038026119892404
• Prothero, A. (2023). Me, the patriarchy, and the business school. Journal of Management Studies, 61(3), 1152-1159. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12985
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12985
• Rumens, N., Souza, E. M., & Brewis, J. (2019). Queering queer theory in management and organization studies: notes towards queering heterosexuality. Organization Studies, 40(4), 593-612. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617748904
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617748904
• Seymour, K. (2009). Women, gendered work, and gendered violence: ‘so much more than a job’. Gender, Work & Organization, 16(2), 238-265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2009.00437.x
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2009.00437.x
• Soundararajan, V., Sharma, G., & Bapuji, H. (2023). Caste, social capital and precarity of labour market intermediaries: the case of Dalit labour contractors in India. Organization Studies https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406231175319
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406231175319
• Varman, R., Al-Amoudi, I., & Skålén, P. (2023). Workplace humiliation and the organization of domestic work. Organization Studies, 44(11), 1853-1877. https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406231157034
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406231157034

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  27 May 2024
• Date of issue
  2024