Between diversity and meritocracy: employer and skilled immigrant perspectives from the Canadian context
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose This study aims to empirically investigate and extend the diversity-meritocracy paradox outlined by Konrad et al. (2021) using skilled immigrants in Canada as a case study. Despite their significance in knowledge-based economies, immigrant voices are often marginalized in diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) literature and management research. By focusing on skilled immigrants, who embody both diversity and meritocratic principles, this research addresses this gap. Through semi-structured interviews, we examine whether diversity and meritocracy are perceived as contradictory or complementary for skilled immigrants. Our findings not only contribute to theoretical understanding but also offer practical insights into the complexities of diversity and meritocracy in contemporary organizations. Design/methodology/approach This study utilizes qualitative, semi-structured, interviews and focus groups to gather data from both employers and skilled immigrants. Thematic analysis, guided by Braun and Clarke (2006), is employed to analyze the data. Participants include skilled immigrants and human resource (HR) professionals/managers. Data are collected through interviews and focus groups conducted between December 2018 and February 2020 in person and via video-conferencing. Findings This study unveils a discrepancy in perceptions between employers and skilled immigrants on DEI in Canada’s labor market. While employers prioritize meritocracy, emphasizing Canadian qualifications and experience, immigrants feel undervalued, encountering barriers due to cultural differences. Employers focus on past work experience over credentials, using behavioral interviews and proficiency tests for assessment. However, immigrants often perceive the selection process as opaque, and encounter explicit preferences for Canadian education and experience, which they view as discriminatory. Challenges in onboarding, training and workplace culture further exacerbate their experiences. These findings highlight the nuanced dynamics between meritocracy and diversity, underscoring the need for systemic change. Originality/value Despite employers’ claims of valuing diversity, our findings reveal a preference for “Canadian-ness” over immigrants' international expertise, perpetuating systemic barriers. Employers prioritize meritocracy but often conflate it with cultural conformity, hindering immigrant integration. Our analysis underscores the disconnection between organizational rhetoric and practices, urging a reconceptualization of diversity and inclusion policies. To foster truly inclusive workplaces, both surface-level and deep-level diversity must be considered. Policy interventions and enhanced intercultural competence are essential for leveraging the talents of skilled immigrants and promoting equitable employment practices.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,034 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».