Search results

This chapter starts with two initial questions: Why, despite the fact that most large companies and organizations have protocols and instances for handling complaints to address gender violence, on many occasions, asymmetric relationships persist and no structural changes are observed in most of them? Can the culture of the environment determine resistance to change within organizations, or are the new processes part of an isomorphic organizational response to environmental pressures? To answer these questions, macroeconomic indicators of development and the gender gap are shown, to later explore the relationship between the construction of gender as a product where multiple variables converge and the gap that exists between women and men in organizations. Regardless of the economic wealth of a country, the incorporation of gender protocols does not always yield positive results. From a neo-institutional theoretical perspective and gender studies, the existence of a structural pressure to align subjects in dichotomous categories is proposed. Added to the visible asymmetries are the invisible costs for women and men: violence, invisibility, and underrepresentation. It is proposed to recognize the cultural conditions and the different degrees of organizational porosity to promote an intervention on three levels: from the subject in the organization; in the organizational field, structure, positions, processes, and products, and through a political praxis.