LAUSR

Purpose The study focuses on the inclusion practices and processes of five large organizations across diverse sectors where women are underrepresented. The purpose of this paper is to examine how organizations facilitate changes in behavior and mindset through formal and informal practices. Design/methodology/approach In-depth interviews of CEOs, HR team members, and diversity and inclusion leaders in the five organizations were used as data in this study. Coding was done over several rounds via content analysis for the development of themes around how organizations work toward women’s inclusion. Findings The findings indicate that in their inclusion practices, all five organizations took into consideration societal biases that often render women at a disadvantage. Some of the cultural biases regarding family role expectations and safety-related norms were recognized and incorporated in their practices, while other gender-based stereotypes impeding inclusivity were addressed with zero tolerance of prejudicial behaviors. Organizations achieved this balance through various communicative practices including lateral and informal communication, generalized and particularized conversations, and creation of alternate spaces for dialogue. Practical implications By examining women’s inclusivity initiatives of five large organizations working in India, this study helps create an understanding of how organizations can bring about such change, keeping in mind the societal and cultural context, for a more nuanced and achievable inclusion. This study also demonstrates how informal narratives enable deep-rooted organizational change such as inclusion. Such narratives facilitate in enhancing employee’s readiness to change, thereby laying foundations for a sustained impact. Originality/value Very few studies that focus on women’s inclusion practices also take into consideration both the demands of the organization as well as the societal expectations placed upon women. This study highlights how organizations try to manage this tension and refrain from “homogenizing” or fitting women into existing practices and routines.