Increasing Senior Leadership Diversity: Process Insights from a Global Set of Qualitative Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Members of historically marginalized groups continue to be underrepresented in many of the most lucrative positions within the largest and most impactful organizations. For decades, organizations have worked to diversify their senior leadership levels, often as a result of pressure from governments and advocacy groups. The slow pace of change indicates that increasing diversity among the holders of the most senior leadership positions is a difficult task. The purpose of this symposium is to contribute to understanding of this challenge. The papers leverage qualitative research methods to build process theories explaining the movement of historically marginalized groups into leadership. They consider key factors such as identifying the supports needed to diversify senior leadership feeder pools, developing diversity and inclusion effectiveness among current leaders, constructing organizational processes that channel a more diverse set of talented individuals into senior leadership, and the critical role of senior leadership diversity effectiveness for achieving strategic goals. The presentations are enriched by in-depth qualitative stories, video and comments by one of the involved executives. By focusing on processes for developing senior leadership diversity, this symposium identifies new factors influencing organizational effectiveness in the area of diversity and inclusion. Developing Elite Leaders across Gender and Socioeconomic Diversity: A Process Metaphor Presenter: Jennifer Sharon Jones-Morales; International Labour Organisation Presenter: Alison M. Konrad; Western U. Leading the Way: One Universitys Response to Recent Events that Threaten an Inclusive Climate Presenter: Donna Chrobot-Mason; U. of Cincinnati Diversifying Leadership in Intercollegiate Athletics: Challenges Experienced by Female Leaders Presenter: Mark E. Moore; East Carolina U. Presenter: Lana Huberty; Concordia U., St. Paul Gender (In)equality at Work: How Different Logics Lead to Competing Institutional Work Presenter: Shreyashi Chakraborty; Indian Institute of Management, Calcutta Presenter: Amit Jain; Indian Institute of Management, Calcutta Diversity and Inclusion as a Dynamic Capability Presenter: Mami Taniguchi; Waseda U. Presenter: Parshotam Dass; U. of Manitoba
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".