Eddy S. Ng

Purpose: There is a growing necessity to clearly communicate the importance of impactful research in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), especially as the value and effectiveness of DEI efforts increasingly come under scrutiny. Amidst rising skepticism and backlash, it is essential to move beyond conventional academic measures and demonstrate tangible, real-world change to reaffirm the relevance and credibility of DEI research in driving meaningful social progress. This paper introduces the concept of “Impact Articles” as a new article category, tailored to DEI scholarship. Impact articles focus on how researchers can design, develop, track, and demonstrate impactful outcomes that lead to systemic and sustainable social change. Design/methodology/approach: The following framework outlines the key components to include when writing an impact article to effectively communicate the process and outcomes of your DEI research. (1) An impact article should begin by sharing insights on how the EDI problem or challenge was recognized, and focus on describing the specific changes needed to effectively address the EDI issue. (2) Authors should engage diverse constituents and throughout the research process, detail their roles and contributions to foster genuine collaboration. (3) Describe collaborative and co-creative approaches used to adapt and deepen understanding of impact as the project progressed. (4) Provide evidence of the impact achieved, discussing how you measured and tracked this change over time, including any challenges or unintended consequences encountered. (5) Reflect thoughtfully on the ethical dimensions of impact, addressing questions of ownership, power imbalances, and ensuring that all voices were considered and respected. This structured approach helps convey the real-world significance and sustainability of EDI research. Findings: The journal’s first five invited Impact Articles were utilized as exemplars to showcase impactful EDI research. The authors demonstrate how their research goes beyond scholarly publications to effect concrete changes in policies, practices, and organizational culture. Significant progress results from co-created interventions that center marginalized voices, such as Indigenous methodologies, feminist scholar-activism, and intervention-based research in corporate settings. Key barriers include institutional inertia, lack of resources, and insufficient recognition of non-scholarly impacts. Successful efforts demonstrate the power of inclusive collaboration, ethical engagement, and reflexive language. Research limitations/implications: There are challenges in attributing outcomes directly to research interventions due to complex, multifactorial social dynamics. Measuring impact quantitatively remains difficult, especially for nuanced cultural and identity-related shifts, with traditional metrics inadequate for capturing lived experiences and systemic change. Practical implications: Impactful EDI research emphasizes constituent engagement, co-creation, and diverse methodologies to assess impact, reflecting on the ethical, cultural, and geopolitical nuances essential for meaningful and sustained EDI progress. It underscores the importance of transparent collaboration and continuous evaluation to sustain progress. Social implications: Impact articles highlight how EDI research can be a catalyst for dismantling systemic inequities and promoting inclusive societal structures. Organizations can leverage EDI research to design targeted interventions—such as inclusive hiring, mentorship, and policy reforms—that yield measurable improvements. Impact Articles encourages researchers to document and share their strategies for demonstrating real-world change, guiding practitioners and policymakers in translating EDI research into action while maintaining ethical commitments. Originality/value: EDI Journal champions the integration of research impact as a core element of EDI scholarship, expanding the traditional academic focus towards meaningful societal transformation. The journal launches a new article category, through a structured framework, designed to showcase tangible changes resulting from EDI research, such as advancements in policies, practices, and organizational cultures. These efforts offer an important guide for scholars, institutions, and practitioners seeking to bridge the divide between theory and real-world application.

Purpose: The paper aims to explore the often-overlooked career challenges faced by men from disadvantaged backgrounds, particularly in Western contexts. It seeks to highlight the underutilization of intersectionality frameworks in studying men's vocational and career experiences. By focusing on how gender norms, disadvantages, as well as technological and demographic shifts intersect, the paper intends to uncover unique barriers these men face. It ultimately aims to provide recommendations for organizational and policy interventions and identify avenues for future research to better support disadvantaged men's career development and integration. Design/methodology/approach: The paper employs a critical approach, drawing on interdisciplinary literature from sociology, psychology, management, and cultural studies. It integrates an intersectional framework with a social structural perspective, analyzing existing empirical studies predominantly from Western countries. The authors conduct a broad literature review covering career stages such as vocational preparation and career entry and consider demographic and technological trends affecting disadvantaged men. Empirical examples and critical theoretical concepts are used to illustrate how masculinity intersects with variables such as socio-economic status, race, or migrant status to create unique career hurdles for men. Findings: The paper reveals that men from disadvantaged backgrounds face multiple barriers throughout multiple career stages considered in this paper, rooted in gender norms, socio-economic inequities and systemic biases. These men experience educational disadvantages and career misalignment due to labor market shifts. Structural changes favor cognitive and social skills associated with upper-class masculinity, making physical strength less valued and diminishing opportunities in traditionally male-dominated sectors. These challenges contribute to social exclusion and barriers to joining emerging occupations. Research limitations/implications: The paper primarily relies on data and studies from Western, affluent countries, mainly the USA, UK and parts of the EU, which limits its generalizability globally. Additionally, much of the research cited focuses on specific intersections and contexts; thus, findings may not apply universally. The authors acknowledge the scarcity of intersectional research on disadvantaged men, calling for more studies across diverse geographical and cultural settings to validate and extend current knowledge. Future research should explore the nuanced interactions of gender, class, race and other identity variables relevant to other regions, and to examine institutional practices affecting men's careers worldwide. Practical implications: The paper proposes targeted organizational and policy interventions to support disadvantaged men's vocational and career development. Recommendations include enhancing educational programs that address boys' academic challenges, increasing the visibility of male role models in education and in female-dominated professions, and promoting inclusive workplace cultures that challenge harmful gender norms. These initiatives aim to broaden employment opportunities for disadvantaged men while contributing to gender equity and workforce diversity. Social implications: The paper highlights the social consequences of neglecting disadvantaged men's career challenges, including increased risks of social exclusion, political backlash, and susceptibility to radicalization. It underscores how feelings of victimhood and insecurity linked to masculinity and socio-economic disadvantage can fuel hostility towards marginalized groups and lead to the rise of extremist and antisocial movements. Addressing men's unique career barriers is thus not only a matter of individual well-being but also crucial for social cohesion, equity, and the prevention of social unrest. The research encourages policies that foster inclusion and address intersectional inequities. Originality/value: This paper makes a valuable and original contribution by bringing attention to an underexplored area: the career disadvantages faced by men from underprivileged backgrounds. It challenges prevailing assumptions that men universally benefit from organizational and societal structures, emphasizing the complexity of masculine situations and identities shaped by class, race, and other factors. By advocating for a social structural and intersectional framework, it broadens the scope of gender and career research and provides a foundation for future studies. The integration of technological and demographic megatrends further enriches the understanding of men's evolving career experiences and potential for future growth.

Achieving gender equality remains a pressing global challenge. In response, many organizations and multinational enterprises (MNEs) have adopted gender diversity management (GDM)—human resource practices aimed at promoting gender equity and equality in the workplace. While prior research highlights the importance of institutional context in shaping the implementation and outcomes of GDM, there is limited understanding of how to contextualize and implement these practices effectively across diverse national settings. In this this editorial, we first review existing research in three key areas: (1) the transfer of GDM practices across MNEs, (2) the gender composition of MNEs’ top management teams, and (3) comparative studies of GDM. Our analysis underscores the limitations of universal, “one‐size‐fits‐all” approaches and emphasizes the need for context‐sensitivity. In this context, we then introduce the contributions to the Special Issue. Together, these articles advance our understanding of the complex interplay between organizational practices and local norms in shaping GDM implementation and outcomes. Finally, we outline research directions that can help propel future work, including the need for a deeper understanding of MNEs’ motivations for engaging in GDM, the positioning of gender within broader diversity agendas, and the implications of growing anti‐DEI sentiment.

Purpose: The purpose of the anthology is to explore how major societal shifts or “megatrends” are impacting the world of work and to provide guidance for human resource management (HRM) professionals. Design/methodology/approach: The anthology adopts a varied approach encompassing literature reviews, empirical research and conceptual frameworks to offer informed perspectives on identifying and interpreting megatrends' impact on HRM. Findings: The synthesis highlights several key impacts on the future of work: the transformative power of technological advancements, particularly AI and other new technologies; the challenges posed by globalization and shifting demographics; the lasting effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on work practices; the significant risks of climate change; the negative influence of populism and political polarization on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives; and the need for nuanced HRM approaches to address generational differences. Research limitations/implications: There is inherent subjectivity in identifying and interpreting megatrends. Individual authors’ perspectives and biases might influence their analyses of megatrends and their recommendations for HRM. The analyses predominantly focus on Western contexts, limiting the generalizability of findings to other geographical regions and cultures. Practical implications: The anthology encourages a more proactive, adaptable and inclusive approach to HRM, emphasizing the need for strategic foresight, investment in employee development and a focus on building organizational resilience in the face of significant societal changes. Social implications: The anthology underscores the social responsibility of organizations and policymakers to mitigate negative social consequences arising from megatrends, promoting social justice, equity and the well-being of all members of society, particularly those most vulnerable to disruption. The findings highlight a need for societal adaptation and proactive measures to address potential inequities. Originality/value: The anthology offers a comprehensive and insightful exploration of the significant transformations in the world of work, offering actionable guidance and laying the groundwork for future research into how HRM can successfully adapt to the evolving landscape.

Purpose: This article aims to critically analyse and critique the impact of President Donald Trump’s second term on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives in the United States of America and beyond. It aims to document the policy changes enacted under Trump, explore the resulting consequences for various sectors (government, higher education and private sectors) and assess the broader implications for social justice and global conversations around equity. The article also serves as a call to action, urging continued advocacy and resistance against the rollback of DEI progress. Design/methodology/approach: This viewpoint article offers a range of perspectives on the impact of the anti-DEI agenda from several DEI scholars who edit the journal. This critical approach draws from multiple sources of information to enrich and provide a more nuanced understanding on the impact of Trump’s policies on DEI. Findings: President Trump’s anti-DEI agenda had a profound and far-reaching impact on DEI efforts, creating a climate of fear, exacerbating existing inequalities, intensifying political polarization and having ramifications beyond the borders of the United States of America. The paper also highlights the indirect and unintended consequences, such as the chilling effect on private sector DEI initiatives and the rise of “shadow” DEI programs. Research limitations/implications: The article draws from secondary sources (news articles, policy documents and existing research). The authors’ scholarships on DEI and the Trump administration’s negative stance towards DEI might influence their perspectives and conclusions. Practical implications: The authors close with a strong call to action, encouraging continued advocacy and resistance to the erosion of DEI progress. This pragmatic approach moves beyond simple criticism and offers concrete steps for future action. They suggest that the current anti-DEI sentiment represents a temporary setback in the long-term progress towards equity and inclusion. Social implications: President Trump’s anti-DEI policies have global implications, influencing policy and practice in other countries and impacting international conversations around fairness and equity. Originality/value: The article provides a valuable record of the significant shift in DEI policy and practice under the second Trump administration. This account will be a crucial resource for future researchers studying this period and its impact. This critical analysis also provides valuable insights for both scholars and activists working to advance DEI.

Despite advancements in LGBTQ+ rights, transgender people remain as one of the most socially stigmatized and marginalized members of society. Many continue to face state-sanctioned discrimination. Kerala stands out in supporting and advancing transgender people. We interviewed 15 government officials and 28 transgender women to explore how the Kerala government uplifted and improved the lives of its transgender people. Using a grounded theory approach, we analyze Kerala’s (one of the most progressive states in India) efforts to support transgender people. We found that access to common good—linked with citizenship, active participation, and collective action in society—is key to connect policies with outcomes for socially marginalized groups. Our study emphasizes how representative bureaucracy can empower society’s most vulnerable individuals and help them establish nonprofit organizations for their own support. This discovery allowed us to enhance and develop a process-based theory of representative bureaucracy. Our study extends the theory by establishing the mechanisms by which representative bureaucracy delivers the common good to society’s marginalized members.

We reviewed twenty-three popular indices that report on different dimensions of diversity, equity, and inclusion— including gender, sexual orientation and gender identity, migration and integration, and religion. These indices facilitate comparison between and among countries and employers. They are also helpful to monitor progress over time and can be used as a forecasting tool. They are helpful to inform policy setting and identifying gaps to improve practices. Some indices report on best practices and workplace equity and inclusion outcomes and have been used to attract global talents. A majority of these indices were constructed from secondary data from the United Nations and major national census bodies and consulting firms offering verifiable and reliable data. We caution that readers should consider the potential limitations when interpreting the indices.

Themed editorial: Job crafting – relevance to human resource management - Author: Pauline Stanton, Eddy Ng

Editorial: The great resignation: managing people in a post COVID-19 pandemic world - Author: Eddy Ng, Pauline Stanton