INTERSECTIONALITY AND WORKPLACE DIVERSITY

/in /by

Document Type: Essay (any type)
Subject: Sociology
Citation/Referencing Style: APA
Order Description: Please see assignment requirements below:
This scenario allows you to incorporate the concept of intersectionality as you consider the identities of each participant in this case study.
It takes place at work among a group of fellow employees. As part of this case study, we will take a look at the interaction between a few employees and how these interactions reflect, challenge, or complicate their intersectional identities. To help assess the situation, you will write a response where you consider the approach to take when the behavior of some employees is deemed inappropriate by another employee. What is the importance of each person’s multiple identities in this situation?
Scenario:
You are an employee who overhears conversations among your coworkers. While on break, two male coworkers, Robert and Henry, usually go outside by themselves to talk and smoke a cigarette. Robert is African-American and Henry is Hispanic. One day, Shirley is also outside and overhears bits and pieces of their conversation. Shirley, who is a white woman, is concerned that they regularly have conversations that are inappropriate for the workplace. She says that she overheard these coworkers making crude sexual references about women, sharing images and graphics of a sexist nature on their cell phones.
The matter is brought to the attention of their supervisor, Allen, who is white and male. Allen is also gay. Allen tells Robert and Henry that he is concerned about a potential gender bias in the workplace that makes gender and sexual minorities feel unsafe.
Robert makes a comment to Allen that their conversation was private and that Shirley was not invited into the conversation. He further states that white women are always inserting themselves into other people’s business. He feels that he and Henry are being called out on their behavior because they hold lower paid jobs in the organization.
Shirley replies that as one of the few females in the organization, she is often made to feel unsafe in her work environment and that as the only woman involved in this meeting, she feels as though no one is listening to her point of view.
Assignment:
You have been hired as a consultant to this company and have been asked advice on how to handle the situation.
You will need to incorporate a discussion of intersectionality into your response. Refer to Chapter 14.3 Workplace Identities, Interactions, and Inequalities to inform your response.
In a 500-word (minimum) essay using the concepts that you learned from this week’s readings, analyze the different ways that sexist behavior is handled in the formal and informal bureaucracy. Address the following items in your essay.

  • What are the power dynamics in this situation related to the statuses of racial, gender, and sexual identities?
  • How is each person’s point of view valid?
  • What would you propose as a resolution?

RUBRIC:
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Understanding:
Demonstrate an understanding of how the course concepts of identities, interactions, and inequalities apply to the situation.
Analysis:
Apply concepts from the course material correctly toward resolving the problem.
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Execution:
Write your answer clearly and succinctly using complete sentences and paragraphs and proper grammar. Use citations correctly.

 
Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Coupon Code "Newclient"

UNPACKING CONTINUITY AND CHANGE AS A PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL TRANSFORMATION

/in /by

Organizational Transformation Questions & Answers

We have abundant evidence to suggest that organizational transformations occur through a process of continuity and change rather than disruptive upheaval. In this study, we identify the mechanisms that characterize the process and how they impact upon the organization’s potential to achieve the intended transformation. Based on an in-depth qualitative study of change in three case firms, we make three observations. First, in response to change initiatives the more strongly competing values for continuity and change are expressed, the stronger the simultaneous forces pushing back and pushing for the change, which generates an energy that propels the process of transformation. Energy permeates through the emotions that are provoked. Second, when the energy that develops through the expression of competing values is channeled into awareness-building, it compels actors to confront and debate contradictory perspectives which pave the way for a mutual exploration of change initiatives. On the other hand, when the energy is suppressed leading to awareness-blocking, there is no debate and the tussle between competing values intensifies as though in competition. Third, mutual exploration shapes continuity and change to unfurl as a synthesizing pattern, while competition between competing values invokes a polarizing pattern. A synthesizing pattern creates greater potential for the organization to reach the intended transformation than a polarizing one does. We found that when there is weak expression of competing values, little energy is generated to fuel the transformation, but it tends to stir up a preemptive defensiveness from those tending towards continuity in prevailing values. Continuity and change Management just drift along with little movement away from the status quo.
Introduction- Organizational change and the process by which it occurs continue to be of relevance and interest to both academics and practitioners. One area that has attracted considerable debate is whether organizational transformations that entail a fundamental shift in the core elements of structures, systems, strategy, values and culture (e.g., Nadler and Tushman, 1989; Miller and Friesen, 1984) occur in a revolutionary way or an evolutionary way. Revolutionary and evolutionary change differs on the scale and pace of upheaval and adjustment. Revolutionary change happens swiftly and affects virtually all parts of the organization simultaneously, whereas evolutionary change occurs slowly and gradually (Greenwood and Hinings, 1996). There has been mounting evidence that transformational change can and does occur more evolutionarily through a process of both continuity and change rather than that of rapid indiscriminate upheaval (e.g., Amis et al., 2004; Brown and Eisenhardt, 1997; Child and Smith, 1987; Cooper et al., 1996; Pettigrew, 1987; Pettigrew et al., 1992). Speed and rapidity are not a prerequisite; rather organizations can transform in a gradual and elongated manner (Ford and Ford, 1994; Greenwood and Hinings, 1996; Plowman et al., 2007). Continuity and change as a process of organizational transformation have been supported by studies in a variety of sectors, which signals its importance. We do not understand much about the mechanisms that underlie and shape how these two opposing forces evolve together. More specifically, how do we differentiate one process of continuity and change from another? What is it about managing these contradictory forces that could shape the unfolding process differently and in turn have a differential impact on the organization’s potential of achieving the attempted transformation?
Revolutionary change and evolutionary change have been the dominant and often competing perspectives to describe the scale and pace with which a process of transformation occurs. A revolutionary change perspective is echoed in the punctuated equilibrium model wherein the process of change unfolds as two distinct phases: an early phase of dramatic upheaval, followed by a period of convergence (Tushman and Romanelli, 1985; Romanelli and Tushman, 1994). Almost simultaneously, scholars began to question whether this may not be the only trajectory followed. Child and Smith (1987), in a study of transformational change at Cadbury’s, found “interleaves of change and continuity” involving a combination of managerial receptivity to new ideas with a deeply embedded set of practices that lay at the firm’s historic core. The Greenwood and Hinings (1988) theory of tracks departed from the punctuated equilibrium process and explicated multiple paths of evolution more akin to the notion of continuity and change. Cooper et al. (1996) showed how a change in law firms occurred evolutionarily through a layering of old and new organizational elements. Mintzberg et al. (1998) suggested that the punctuated equilibrium trajectory might apply, say, to large mass-production organizations, while innovative organizations might follow a more balanced trajectory of stability and change. Eisenhardt (2000, p. 703) confirmed that the punctuated equilibrium model conceptualizes change as a quantum leap from one frozen state to the next, but such a view is being superseded by a more evolutionary or continuous view of organizational transformations……………………………………..
 
Place an order with us to get a customized paper similar to this or any related topic. NB: The assignment will be done from scratch and it
will be 100% original

 
Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Coupon Code "Newclient"

Empowerment in Health and Social Care: SH4003

/in /by

Empowerment

  • The term ‘empowerment’ is nowadays familiar & frequently used in health & social care
  • It’s used across relevant disciplines: sociology, psychology, politics, health promotion, public administration (Barnes & Bowl, 2001)
  • It’s applied to diverse groups of people: women, ethnic minorities, gay communities, nurses, students, older adults, etc
  • Some claim that it’s so overused; it has become meaningless (Marland & Marland, 2000)
  • How should the concept of ‘empowerment’ be understood?
  • It has mainly been interpreted in 2 different ways:

 

  1. Collectivist social action
  2. Individualistic consumerism

 

  1. History: the term originally developed out of US socialist theories of collective consciousness in the 1960s, & then in the UK 1970s progressive social movements around ideas of social action, group unity, & developing a collective ‘voice’ (Kendall, 1998).

Collectivism & Empowerment

  • USA 1970s movement against mainstream mental health care argued for service-user rights & autonomy
  • This drew on ideas of power, oppression, collective action & rights, from American civil rights movements (women’s rights, African-Americans, gay liberation)
  • Carol Gilligan (1993) – feminist psychology
  • Promote rights of the oppressed; ideas of self-help, community participation, development (Skelton, 1994)

 

  1. 1980s/90s: ‘empowerment’ was appropriated by ‘new Right’ politics; i.e. an ideology of consumerism in health & social care (Skelton, 1994)
  • This meant seeing ‘empowerment’ as devolving power from professionals & service managers to individual “consumers”.
  • ‘Patient choice’ – government policy
  • Self-care & self-responsibility – individualistic ‘empowerment’ NHS: part-privatization, competitive tendering, internal markets

 

Empowerment in Mental Health

  • The concept of empowerment is especially important in mental health & social care, since those experiencing poor mental health have relatively powerlessness
  • Sufferers often have concurrent poverty & social exclusion (Gomm, 1996)
  • & experience barriers to access to housing, education, employment, social networks, etc (Dunn, 1999)
  • Can principles of empowerment help them?
  • Ideally, policies built on the ideal of ‘empowerment’ will have concrete positive effects on the lives of those experiencing mental ill health
  • However, in practice the provision has been patchy
  • This is because interpretations of ‘empowerment’ within theories and policies differ & are debated
  • There’s no firm agreement on what ‘empowerment’ is exactly & how it should be implemented

 

Different Theories of Power

  • To understand ‘empowerment’, the idea of POWER must be understood
  • Healthcare professionals need a grasp of theories of power, but historically have not addressed this much
  • “Without a clear conceptualization of the concept of power it is difficult to convincingly argue that one form of practice is more or less empowering than another.”

(Gilbert, 1999)

  • In social theory there are different models of power:

Max Weber’s theory: power can be possessed, so it can be grabbed or given. In health & social care, service providers must give over some of their power to service users.
Steven Lukes theory: power has different ‘faces’, & can be hidden. In health & social care, hidden forms of power in relationships must be uncovered. E.g. roles of “expert” in relation to “patient”
Foucault’s theory: certain ‘discourses’ of what is ‘true’ dominate society. These ‘normalise’ certain ‘disciplining’ practices, which control & order society. In health & social care, people who deviate from norms are subject to disempowering forms of control (e.g. psychiatric practices). The discourses must be challenged.
 

Social Inequalities

  • What about social inequalities? How are these related to empowerment practices?
  • “But how can mentally ill people living in severe and perpetual poverty or homelessness be empowered in reality?” (Morrall, 1996)
  • Fair distribution of resources. Reducing poverty & wealth inequality to result in a reduction of mental ill health
  • Health Promotion ideals (Rogers & Pilgrim, 2003)
  • WHO & OECD – a focus on poverty reduction

 

The ‘Empowerment’ Debate

  • The debate about interpretation of the concept continues
  • How you understand ‘empowerment’ directly affects the policies & practices you will develop & promote

You decide:
Should we focus on empowering individuals?
OR
The collective empowerment of groups
 

  • Empowering individuals: usually understood at the psychological level

e.g. foster positive relationships between doctor & patient; have more individual ‘patients’ rights’; communication

  • Empowering collectives: usually understood at the socio-structural level

e.g. allocate resources in a fair way; anti-discrimination laws; grassroots communal action (patients’ groups)
 

References:

Barnes & Bowl (2001), Taking over the Asylum: Empowerment & Mental Health, Macmillan Press
Dunn (1996), Creating Accepting Communities: Report of the Mind Enquiry into Mental Health & Social Exclusion, London: Mind
Gilligan, C. (1993), In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory & Women’s Development, Harvard University Press
Marland & Marland (2000), Power dressing…empowerment, Nursing Times, 96, pp2-8
Kendall (1998), Health & Empowerment: Research & Practice, (pp. 1 – 7) London: Arnold
Skelton (1994), Nursing & Empowerment: Concepts & Strategies, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19 (pp. 415—423)
Gilbert (1999), Nursing: Empowerment & the Problem of Power
Gomm (1999), Mental Health Matters: A Reader, Ch14 (pp.110-120), Macmillan Press
Weber, M., various works – e.g. (2010), “The distribution of power within the community: classes, stande, parties” ,(trans. Waters, D., et el), Journal of Classical Sociology, 137
Lukes, S. (1974), Power: A Radical View, Macmillan Press
Foucault, M. (1981), The History of Sexuality, Harmondswoth (pp. 92-102)
 

 
Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Coupon Code "Newclient"

STIGMA LABELLING AND STEREOTYPING OF MENTAL ILLNESS BY GOFFMAN

/in /by

Key Issues: Stigma Labelling and Stereotyping

Stigma

  • The word originated from the Greeks.
  • Stigma referred to a sign burnt or cut into the body to demarcate slaves, criminals, and social outcasts as “ritually polluted” people.
  • It is currently used to refer to any conditions that mark out the bearer as ‘culturally unacceptable’ or ‘inferior’
  • Stigma refers to a negative attribute that socially discredits an individual and confers a ‘deviant’ status
  • Stigma – a label that associates an individual with some negative characteristics
  • Goffman (1963) describes stigma as the difference between the virtual social identity and the real social identity

GOFFMAN (1959/63): A BRIEF BACKGROUND

  • He is an interactionist and examines the way in which social interaction can, and does break down
  • Dramaturgical theory – The notion that a person’s identity is not a stable and independent psychological entity; it is constantly changed as the person interacts with others.
  • Dramaturgy – Views people as actors who are continually involved in “impression management“in their daily interaction.
  • Goffman differentiates between “front stage” and “backstage” behaviour.
  • Before any interaction with another, an individual usually prepares a role, or impression, that he or she wants to make on the other.
  • Unfortunate infringements may take place, in which a backstage performance is interrupted by someone not meant to see it
  • Goffman (1959) sees embarrassment as a significant social and moral problem
  • Stigmatising conditions are embarrassing and allow for an infringement of the back-stage attributes of individuals

Goffman Theorises That

  • The stigmatised person is seen by the so-called ‘normal’s’ as inferior ‘not quite human’    and as a result discriminated against.
  • The stigmatised individual might also have additional imperfections imputed to them on the basis of the original stigmata – Stereotypes are created.
  • The stigmatised is seen as having a perpetually flawed social identity.
  • Goffman (1963) theorized about courtesy stigma or the discrimination of people associated with the stigmatized

Erving Goffman (1963) identified three types of stigma:

  1. Stigmas of the body – Abominations of the body.
  2. Stigmas of character – Blemishes of individual character
  3. Stigma as applied to social collectivities /socio-cultural groups (The tribal stigmas of race and religion)

 

  • Scambler (2004) differentiates between:
  • ‘Felt stigma’ (i.e, the shame of being identified with a discrediting condition and the fear of encountering enacted stigma)

And

  • Enacted stigma (i.e. actual episodes of discrimination, both formal and informal, against people with a stigmata solely on the grounds of their having a stigmatising condition).

Coping Mechanisms for the Stigmatised:

  • The stigma in some individuals is not known about , but could make them ‘discreditable’ – if publicly known – Task: Passing as normal, Covering and managing expectations
  • The stigmatising condition in some individuals is obvious or ‘widely known about’ – ‘discredited’ – Task: managing tension, information control and withdrawal
  • Goffman’s description of stigma is closely aligned to the ‘Labelling theory’
  • Scambler describes a ‘hidden distress’ model – this is the notion that people with a stigmata are fearful of experiencing enacted stigma and pursue an active policy of non-disclosure.
  • This may also increase the stress of managing their disorder, with the result that stigma has a far more disruptive effect on their lives.
  • Link & Phelan (2001) assert that the disease process is exacerbated by stigma-related stress.
  • Jacoby, Snape & Baker (2005) describe stigma as a potentially major contributor to the illness burden
  • The level of felt and enacted stigma could be influenced by socio-cultural values
  • Deviance – relates to any behaviour or condition that contradicts recognised social norms in society or in a specific group [– see notes from week 1 on definition of illness as deviance and on the sick role and the doctor’s role in managing deviance]
  • Parsons (1951) defined illness as a deviance
  • He perceives illness as capable of fracturing the social system as the sick are unable to perform their social role
  • The doctor’s role is to restore social order by legitimating entry and exit from the sick role
  • Three levels of deviance and the stigmatisation process have been described (Lemert, 1967):

 

  1. Primary deviance – original violation/deviance/ and societal reaction to this non-conformity to societal norms
  2. Secondary deviance – The deviant’s reaction to negative societal reaction (self-fulfilling prophecy)
  3. Tertiary deviance – The stigmatised persons’ reaction to the stigma from others leads to master status; a label that overshadows all other characteristics – the secondary deviant attempts to re-label certain behaviours as normal rather than deviant

 

Labelling

  • Labelling refers to the process of identifying and ascribing a label or negative qualifying attribute to an individual’s characteristics
  • It refers to identifying certain characteristics of individuals and giving it a negative label (Lemert, 1967)
  • Becker, (1963) presents a core assumption of labelling theory:

‘Deviance is not the quality of the act the individual commits    but a consequence of the label that others apply to it’

  • Labeling, stereotyping, separation from others, and consequent status loss are elements of stigma expressed in a power situation
  • Freidson’s (1965) description of illness as deviance from societal norms – or rule-breaking behaviour – dwells largely on the exploration of primary and secondary deviance
  • Scheff (1966) posits that mental illness is a product of societal views and reaction. i.e. mental illness is just a product of being labelled insane and treated as deviant

 

Key Themes from Literature on Stigma

  • Cultural factors are involved in the stigmatisation process
  • Stigmatisation is a product of power imbalance in society – e.g. labelling, stereotyping e.t.c
  • Factors that define the level of stigma suffered include:

(1)    Degree of presumed    complicity of sufferer
(2) Degree of discomfort caused in social relations
 

Selected Bibliography & References

  • Becker (1963)
  • Goffman, E (1963), Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity
  • Scambler, G (2004), Health-related stigma. Sociology of Health & Illness 31 411-455
  • Freidson (1965) Profession of Medicine, New York
  • Scheff (1966) Being Mentally Ill: A Sociological Theory, Chicago
  • Link & Phelan (2001) Conceptualising Stigma, Annual Review of Sociology,
  • 27 363-385
  • Jacoby, Snape & Baker (2005) Epilepsy & Social Identity: the stigma of a
  • Neurological disorder, Lancet Neurology, 4 (3) 171-8
  • Parsons (1951)
 
Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Coupon Code "Newclient"