Asia Pacific Journal of Management

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 229–249 | Cite as

An exploratory study of sexual harassment in Pakistani organizations

  • Faiza AliEmail author
  • Robin KramarEmail author


Despite prior research on the influence of national regulatory and cultural factors on sexual harassment (SH) in the workplace, few studies have examined SH, its impact on victims and redress processes in Muslim majority countries (MMCs) such as Pakistan. This study uses neo-institutional theory to develop a more comprehensive framework to explore SH experienced by women in the workplace in Pakistan. Qualitative methodology is adopted to examine employees’ and managers’ perceptions of SH. Drawing on interviews with working women and human resource managers in six Pakistani organizations, this study demonstrates that even when there are formal policies designed to prevent SH, cultural factors influence policy implementation. It reveals that there is a tension between traditional culture and behavior consistent with SH policies in the workplace. This study identifies three major factors which influence SH redressal; these are socio-cultural factors (e.g., female modesty), institutional factors (e.g., inappropriate redress procedures), and managerial expertise/bias.


Sexual harassment Muslim women Pakistan Socio-cultural factors Equal employment opportunity 



The authors would like to thank Professor Anil Neir for his advice and feedback to improve the quality of this article.


  1. AASHA. 2002. Situational analysis of sexual harassment, Annual Report. Islamabad: AASHA.Google Scholar
  2. Ahmad, I., & Ahmad, N. (no date). Pakistan: National studies in employment situations and workers protection. International labour organisation., accessed Aug. 5, 2012.
  3. Ali, F. 2010. A comparative study of EEO in Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. In M. Ozbilgin & J. Syed (Eds.). Managing gender diversity in Asia: A research companion. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  4. Ali, F. 2013. A multi-level perspective on equal employment opportunity for women in Pakistan. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 32(3): 289–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ali, F., & Knox, A. 2008. Pakistan’s commitment to equal employment opportunity for women: A Toothless tiger?. International Journal of Employment Studies, 16: 39–58.Google Scholar
  6. Alvesson, M., & Sköldberg, K. 1999. Toward reflexive methodology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. 1966. The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  8. Blumenthal, J. A. 1998. The reasonable woman standard: A meta-analytic review of gender differences in perceptions of sexual harassment. Law and Human Behavior, 22(1): 33–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burns, T. R., & Dietz, T. 1992. Cultural evolution: Social rule systems, selection, and human agency. International Sociology, 7: 250–283.Google Scholar
  10. Chamberlain, L., Crowley, M., Tope, D., & Hodson, R. 2008. Sexual harassment in organizational context. Work and Occupations, 35(3): 262–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. CIA (Central Intelligence Agency). 2013. The world factbook,, accessed Oct. 10, 2013.
  12. Cortina, L. M. 2001. Assessing sexual harassment among Latinas: Development of an instrument. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 7(2): 164–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cortina, L. M., & Wasti, S. A. 2005. Profiles in coping: Responses to sexual harassment across persons, organizations, and cultures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 182–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). 1994. Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  15. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). 2000. Handbook of qualitative research (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. DeSouza, E. R., Solberg, J., & Elder, C. 2007. A cross-cultural perspective on judgments of woman-to-woman sexual harassment: Does sexual orientation matter?. Sex Roles, 56(7/8): 473–482.Google Scholar
  17. EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission). 2009., accessed June 22, 2010.
  18. Ferdoos, A. 2005. Social status of urban and non-urban working women in Pakistan— A comparative study. Unpublished Dissertation, University of Osnabrueck, Germany.Google Scholar
  19. Fielden, S. L., Davidson, M. J., Woolnough, H., & Hunt, C. 2010. A model of racialized sexual harassment of women in the UK workplace. Sex Roles, 62: 20–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fitzgerald, L. F. 1993. Sexual harassment: Violence against women in the workplace. American Psychologist, 48(10): 1070–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fitzgerald, L. F., Drasgow, F., Hulin, C. L., Gelfand, M. J., & Magley, V. J. 1997. Antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment in organizations: A test of an integrated model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82: 578–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fitzgerald, L. F., Gelfand, M. J., & Drasgow, F. 1995. Measuring sexual harassment: Theoretical and psychometric advances. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17: 425–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fitzgerald, L. F., & Hesson-McInnis, M. 1989. The dimensions of sexual harassment: A structural analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 35: 309–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fitzgerald, L. F., Shullman, S. L., Bailey, N., Richards, M., Swecker, J., Gold, A., Ormerod, A. J., & Weitzman, L. 1988. The incidence and dimensions of sexual harassment in academia and the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 32(4): 152–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Frazier, P. A., Cochran, C. C., & Olson, A. M. 1995. Social science research on lay definitions of sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 51(1): 21–37.Google Scholar
  26. Global Gender Report. 2011. Geneva: World Economic Forum Press.Google Scholar
  27. Gutek, B. A., & Done, R. 2001. Sexual harassment. In R. K. Unger (Ed.). Handbook of the psychology of women and gender: 367–387. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  28. Gutek, B. A., Murphy, R. O., & Douma, B. 2004. A review and critique of the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ). Law and Human Behavior, 28(4): 457–482.Google Scholar
  29. Hall, P. & Taylor, R. 1996. Political science and the three new institutionalisms, Political Studies, 44: 936–957.Google Scholar
  30. Hartley, J. 2004. Case study research. In C. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.). Essential guide to qualitative methods in organisational research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Hofstede, G. 2001. Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Hoque, K., & Noon, M. 2004. Equal opportunities policy and practice in Britain: Evaluating the ‘empty shell’ hypothesis. Work, Employment & Society, 18: 481–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hunt, C. M., Davidson, M. J., Fielden, S. L., & Hoel, H. 2010. Reviewing sexual harassment in the workplace—An intervention model. Personnel Review, 39(5): 655–673.Google Scholar
  34. ILO (International Labour Organization). 2011. Guidelines on sexual harassment prevention at the workplace,, accessed June 12, 2012.
  35. Katou, A. A., Budhwar, P. S., Woldu, H., & Al-Hamadi, A. B. 2010. Influence of ethical beliefs, national culture and institutions on preferences for HRM in Oman. Personnel Review, 39(6): 728–745.Google Scholar
  36. Liff, S., & Dale, K. 1994. Formal opportunity, informal barriers: Black women managers within a local authority. Work, Employment and Society, 8: 177–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Limpaphayom, W., Williams, R. J., & Fadil, P. A. 2006. Perceived differences in sexual harassment between business school students in the US and Thailand. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 13(1): 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. MacKinnon, C. A. 1979. Sexual harassment of working women: A case of sex discrimination. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Malik, A., & Khalid, G. K. 2008. Work/life conflicts and desired work hour adjustments: Banking perspective in Pakistan. International Review of Business Research Papers, 4(5): 267–276.Google Scholar
  40. Mauthner, N. S., Parry, O., & Backett-Milburn, K. 1998. The data are out there, or are they? Implications for archiving and revisiting qualitative data. Sociology, 32: 733–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McCann, D. 2005. Sexual harassment at work: National and international responses. Geneva: International Labour Organization.Google Scholar
  42. Mecca, S. J., & Rubin, L. J. 1999. Definitional research on African American students and sexual harassment. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23: 813–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mellor, S., & Golay, L. M. 2014. The conditional indirect effect model of women’s union participation: The moderating effect of perceived union tolerance for sexual harassment. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 148(1): 73–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Merkin, R. 2008. Cross-cultural differences in perceiving sexual harassment: Demographic incidence rates of sexual harassment/sexual aggression in Latin America. North American Journal of Psychology, 10(2): 277–290.Google Scholar
  45. Meyer, J. W. 2009. Reflections: Institutional theory and world society. In G. Kruecken & G. S. Drori (Eds.). World society: The writings of John W. Meyer. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. 1977. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83: 340–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. North, D. C. 1990. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Patel, R. 1991. Socio-economic political status, and women and law in Pakistan. Karachi: Faiza Publishers.Google Scholar
  49. Powell, W. 2007. The new institutionalism, in the international encyclopedia of organization studies. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  50. Prasad, A. & Prasad, P. 2002. The coming age of interpretive organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 5(1): 4–11.Google Scholar
  51. Pryor, J. B., DeSouza, E. R., Fitness, J., Hutz, C., Kumpf, M., Lubbert, K., Pesonen, O., & Erber, M. W. 1997. Gender differences in the interpretation of social-sexual behaviour: A cross-cultural perspective on sexual harassment. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28(5): 509–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Raver, J. L., & Gelfand, M. J. 2005. Beyond the individual victim: Linking sexual harassment, team processes, and team performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3): 387–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Reskin, B. F. 2000. The proximate causes of employment discrimination. Contemporary Sociology, 29: 319–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rospenda, K. M., Richman, J. A., Ehmke, J. L. Z., & Zlatoper, K. W. 2005. Is workplace harassment hazardous to your health?. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20: 95–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rousseau, D., & Fried, Y. 2001. Location, location, location: Contextualising organisational research. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 22: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sakallı-Uğurlu, N., Salman, S., & Turgut, S. 2010. Predictors of Turkish women’s and men’s attitudes toward sexual harassment: Ambivalent sexism, and ambivalence toward men. Sex Roles, 63: 871–881.Google Scholar
  57. Samir, N., Mohamed, R., Moustafa, E., & Abou Saif, H. 2012. Nurses’ attitudes and reactions to workplace violence in obstetrics and gynaecology departments in Cairo hospitals. Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, 18(3): 198–204.Google Scholar
  58. Sandberg, J. 2005. How do we justify knowledge produced within interpretive approaches?. Organisational Research Methods, 8(1): 41–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schwandt, T. A. 1998. Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.). The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  60. Scott, W. R. 2001. Institutions and organizations, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  61. Sidiqi, D. M. 2003. The sexual harassment of industrial workers: Strategies for intervention in the workplace and beyond. CPD-UNFPA working paper series no. 26, Centre for Policy Dialogue, United Nations Population Fund Publication.Google Scholar
  62. Syed, J. 2008. From transgression to submission: Implications of moral values and societal norms on emotional labour. Gender Work and Organization, 15(2): 182–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Syed, J., Ali, F., & Winstanley, D. 2005. In pursuit of modesty: Contextual emotional labour and the dilemma for working women in Islamic societies. International Journal of Work, Organisation and Emotion, 1: 150–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Syed, J., Özbilgin, M., Torunoglu, D., & Ali, F. 2009. Rescuing gender equality from the false dichotomies of secularism versus Shariah in Muslim majority countries. Women’s Studies International Forum, 32: 67–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Syed, J., & Pio, E. 2010. Veiled diversity? Workplace experiences of Muslim women in Australia. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 27(1): 115–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tata, J. 1993. The structure and phenomenon of sexual harassment: Impact of category of sexually harassing behaviour, gender, and hierarchical level. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23: 199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Terpstra, D. E., & Baker, D. B. 1986. Psychological and demographic correlates of perceptions of sexual harassment. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 112(4): 461–478.Google Scholar
  68. Thacker, R. A. 1992. A descriptive study of behavioural responses of sexual harassment targets: Implications for control theory. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 5: 155–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Till, F. J. 1980. Sexual harassment: A report on the sexual harassment of students. Washington, DC: National Advisory Council on Women’s Educational Programs.Google Scholar
  70. Toker, Y., & Sumer, H. C. 2010. Workplace sexual harassment perceptions in the Turkish context and the role of individual differences. Applied Psychology, 59(4): 616–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Tomlinson, J. 2007. Female part-time workers’ experiences of occupational mobility in the UK service industry. Women in Management Review, 22: 305–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tyler, A., & Boxer, D. 1996. Sexual harassment? Cross-cultural/cross-linguistic perspectives. Discourse and Society, 7(1): 107–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wasti, S. A., Bergman, M. E., Glomb, T. M., & Drasgow, F. 2000. Test of the cross-cultural generalizability of a model of sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5): 766–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Weeden, R., Rosen. C., Carberry, E. & Rodrick, S. 2001. Current practices in stock option plan design, 2nd ed. Oakland, CA: The National Center for Employee Ownership.Google Scholar
  75. Welsh, S. 1999. Gender and sexual harassment. Annual Review of Sociology, 25: 169–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Yin, R. K. 1981. The case study as a serious research strategy. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 3(1): 97–114.Google Scholar
  77. Zippel, K. 2006. The politics of sexual harassment: A comparative study of the United States, the European Union and Germany. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kent Business SchoolUniversity of KentCanterburyUK
  2. 2.Human Resource ManagementAustralian Catholic UniversitySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations