Ranking LGBT inclusion: diversity ranking systems as institutional archetypes

Mark Tayar*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)


This article discusses rankings that evaluate diversity and inclusion programs for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) employees. Rankings promote LGBT issues and reward organizations who work towards “best practice” with a high rating. However, rankings only legitimize one set of practices and often fail to give small organizations a clear path towards inclusion. Corporations are warned against checklist-based diversity where rankings reward superficial rather than substantive change. Within new institutional theory, the concept of “distorted institutional fit” is introduced to explain distortions preventing “optimal institutional fit.” This article recommends a reprioritization of diversity program evaluations to reward only substantive change by evaluating the impact on the lived experiences of employees.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)198-210
Number of pages13
JournalCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2017


  • institutional fit
  • LGBT employees
  • diversity and inclusion
  • diversity rankings


Dive into the research topics of 'Ranking LGBT inclusion: diversity ranking systems as institutional archetypes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this