Abstract
In this exploratory study, we present findings from semi-structured interviews with 11 self-identified lesbian and gay (LG) humanitarian aid workers of Doctors without Borders (MSF). We investigate their perceptions of workplace inclusion in terms of perceived satisfaction of their needs for authenticity and belonging within two organizational settings, namely office and field. Through our combined deductive and inductive approach, based on grounded theory, we find that perceptions of their colleagues’ and supervisors’ attitudes and behaviors, as well as organizational inclusiveness practices play a role in LGs’ perceived authenticity, but not belonging, in the workplace. However, these organization-level characteristics do not account for between-participant differences in perceived authenticity. Therefore, we inductively construct a typology of three groups, which we coined conscious first-missioners, authentic realists, and idealistic activists, based on how LG humanitarian aid workers assess and deal with not being able to be their authentic selves when they are in the field, because homosexuality is illegal in many project countries. Conscious first-missioners are separated from the other two groups based on having gone to the field once, whereby they felt in control over the decision on how to manage their sexuality. Alternatively, authentic realists and idealistic activists alike felt they did not really have a choice in how to manage their sexuality, but handled that differently. We find the importance of one’s sexuality as well as adherence to the overarching organizational mission relevant individual-level factors herein. Furthermore, we find disclosure of sexual identity to be strongly context-dependent, as participants are ‘out of the closet’ in the office, but go back into the closet when they enter the field, with different country contexts even leading to different decisions concerning self-disclosure, thus demonstrating the importance of careful sexual identity management. This so-called disclosure dilemma, we find, may not be merely an individual choice, but rather a shared dilemma involving multiple stakeholders, such as the organization and fellow team members. We discuss the findings’ contributions to existing literature on LGs’ workplace experiences and implications for future research on inclusion of sexual and other invisible minorities in the workplace.
Highlights
Many lesbian women and gay men (LGs) across the globe work in legal and sociocultural contexts where their sexual orientation is illegal or rejected, including international lesbian and gay (LG) originating from Western countries
How does this latter group of employees, coming from an environment that is relatively ‘friendly’ toward sexual minorities, experience working in contexts where their sexual orientation can be a threat, and where they cannot be who they are? how may this play a role in their workplace inclusion, i.e., individuals’ perceived satisfaction of their needs for belonging and authenticity in the workplace (Shore et al, 2011; Jansen et al, 2014)? Through this study, we aim to provide insights into these issues, by conducting semistructured interviews with 11 self-identified LGs of Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), one of the world’s leading international non-governmental organizations specialized in the provision of humanitarian aid
A number of countries, including most EU countries, Canada, Australia, and several US states, have adopted laws that serve to protect the workplace rights of LGs, thereby formally prohibiting employment discrimination based on sexual orientation (e.g., Colgan and McKearney, 2012; Ozeren, 2014)
Summary
Many lesbian women and gay men (LGs) across the globe work in legal and sociocultural contexts where their sexual orientation is illegal or rejected, including international LGs originating from Western countries. A number of countries, including most EU countries, Canada, Australia, and several US states, have adopted laws that serve to protect the workplace rights of LGs, thereby formally prohibiting employment discrimination based on sexual orientation (e.g., Colgan and McKearney, 2012; Ozeren, 2014) This development aligns with recent surveys that demonstrate generally more positive global attitudes toward Sexual and Gender Minorities (SGM; e.g., PEW Research Center, 2013; ILGA, 2016). The situation for LGs in many Western societies has improved in recent times (e.g., Colgan and Wright, 2011), the workplace remains a context in which sexual minorities run the risk of being targeted by unfair treatment, discrimination, and social exclusion (Ng and Rumens, 2017; Webster et al, 2017) This is even more so the case in many other national contexts, as LGs around the globe still face dangerous contexts because of their sexual identity. Legal punishments include imprisonment, ranging from 1 month up to life sentence, and the death penalty, which is currently enforced in eight countries
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.