Scholars have increasingly focused on the role of employers in addressing labour market challenges faced by persons with disability (PWD). While we have gained more knowledge about the motivations, practices and characteristics for hiring PWD, we still lack information on whether these are general organizational features or specific to inclusive companies.
Objective
This study aims to examine the factors that distinguish inclusive from non-inclusive ones, using the COM-B framework (capability, opportunity, motivation) and Human Resource Management (HRM) practices.
Methods
We utilized survey data from a sample of small and medium sized companies (SME) in Norway (N = 1000). We conducted Logistic Regression Estimates (odds ratios) to determine predictive factors of an “inclusive company”.
Results
Inclusive companies scored higher than non-inclusive companies in all dimensions of COM-B and HRM practices. However, only knowledge about work inclusion (capability), availability of resources and positions (opportunity) and the desire to contribute to an inclusive labour market (social motivation) were significant explanatory factors for inclusivity. Among HRM practices, only recruitment showed a significant relationship with inclusivity after considering the COM factors.
Conclusions
This study underscores the importance of utilizing the COM-B framework to understand how companies approach the inclusion of PWD.
IngoldJMcGurkP. Employer Engagement: Making Active Labour Market Policies Work. Bristol: Policy Press, 2023.
2.
Van BerkelRIngoldJMcGurkP, et al.Editorial introduction: an introduction to employer engagement in the field of HRM. Blending social policy and HRM research in promoting vulnerable groups’ labour market participation. Hum Resour Manag J2017; 27: 503–513.
3.
IngoldJStuartM. The demand-side of active labour market policies: a regional study of employer engagement in the work programme. J Soc Policy2015; 44: 443–462.
4.
FrøylandKAndreassenTAInnværS. Contrasting supply-side, demand-side and combined approaches to labour market integration. J Soc Policy2019; 48: 311–328.
5.
World Health Organization. World report on disability 2011. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2011.
6.
van BerkelRBreitE. Organizational practices for the inclusion of people with disabilities. A scoping review. J Occup Rehabil2024: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-024-10228-5
7.
van BerkelR. Predictors of the inclusion of people with disabilities in small and medium-sized enterprises. WORK2024: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/10519815241290599
8.
BeattyJEBaldridgeDCBoehmSA, et al.On the treatment of persons with disabilities in organizations: a review and research agenda. Hum Resour Manage2019; 58: 119–137.
9.
NagtegaalRDe BoerNVan BerkelR, et al.Why do employers (fail to) hire people with disabilities? A systematic review of capabilities, opportunities and motivations. J Occup Rehabil. 2023;33:329–340.
10.
AksnesSYUlsteinJ. Sustainable employment for people with disabilities: a scoping review on inclusive workplace practices and positive employment outcomes. Unpublished manuscript. 2024.
11.
BredgaardT. Employers and active labour market policies: typologies and evidence. Soc Policy Soc2018; 17: 1–13.
12.
IngoldJValizadeD. Employers’ recruitment of disadvantaged groups: exploring the effect of active labour market programme agencies as labour market intermediaries. Hum Resour Manag J2017; 27: 530–547.
13.
HemphillEKulikCT. Which employers offer hope for mainstream job opportunities for disabled people?Soc Policy Soc2016; 15: 537–554.
14.
McGurkPIngoldJ. Conclusion: Making Active Labour Market Policies Work. Bristol: Employer Engagement: Bristol University Press, 2023, p. 231–45.
15.
Van der AaPvan BerkelR. Innovating job activation by involving employers. Int Soc Secur Rev2014; 67: 11–27.
16.
SimmsM. Understanding employer engagement in youth labour market policy in the UK. Hum Resour Manag J2017; 27: 548–564.
17.
BredgaardTHalkjærJL. Employers and the implementation of active labor market policies. Nordic J Working Life Stud2016; 6: 47–59.
18.
RavnRL. Workplace factors associated with employment of refugees–evidence from a survey among danish employers. Soc Policy Soc2022; 23: 1–17.
19.
LindsaySCagliostroEAlbaricoM, et al.A systematic review of the benefits of hiring people with disabilities. J Occup Rehabil2018; 28: 634–655.
20.
Van BerkelR. Employer engagement in promoting the labour-market participation of jobseekers with disabilities. An employer perspective. Soc Policy Soc2021; 20: 533–547.
21.
ØsterudKLVedelerJS. Disability and regulatory approaches to employer engagement: cross-national challenges in bridging the gap between motivation and hiring practice. Soc Policy Soc2022; 23: 1–17.
22.
Van LaerKJammaersEHoevenW. Disabling organizational spaces: exploring the processes through which spatial environments disable employees with impairments. Organization2020; 29: 1018–1035.
23.
DallTLarsenFMadsenMB. Opening the Black Box: Promoting Employer Engagement at the Street Level of Employment Services. Bristol: Employer Engagement: Bristol University Press, 2023, p. 106–25.
24.
KerstenAVan WoerkomMGeuskensG,et al.Organisational policies and practices for the inclusion of vulnerable workers: a scoping review of the employer’s perspective. J Occup Rehabil2023; 33: 245–266.
25.
Schloemer-JarvisABaderBBöhmSA. The role of human resource practices for including persons with disabilities in the workforce: a systematic literature review. Int J Hum Resour Manage2022; 33: 45–98.
26.
AksnesSYBreitE. Varieties of engagement: exploring the micro-practices of managers in employing disadvantaged jobseekers. J Soc Policy2024. Accepted for publication.
27.
ElyRJThomasDA. Cultural diversity at work: the effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and outcomes. Adm Sci Q2001; 46: 229–273.
28.
JansenJvan OoijenRKoningP, et al.The role of the employer in supporting work participation of workers with disabilities: a systematic literature review using an interdisciplinary approach. J Occup Rehabil2021; 31: 916–949.
29.
van OoijenRKoningPWBootCR,et al.The contribution of employer characteristics to continued employment of employees with residual work capacity: evidence from register data in The Netherlands. Scand J Work Environ Health2021; 47: 435–445.
30.
ChanFTanseyTNIwanagaK, et al.Company characteristics, disability inclusion practices, and employment of people with disabilities in the post COVID-19 job economy: a cross sectional survey study. J Occup Rehabil2021; 31: 463–473.
31.
GarrelsVSigstadHWendelborgHM, et al.Work opportunities and workplace characteristics for employees with intellectual disability in the Norwegian labour market. Int J Disability Dev Educ2022; 71: 1–17.
32.
HyggenCVedelerJS. Employer engagement and active labour market policies. Evidence from a Norwegian multi-method study. Soc Policy Soc2021; 20: 548–560.
33.
UlsteinJ. The impact of employer characteristics on sustaining employment for workers with reduced capacity: evidence from Norwegian register data. Soc Policy Soc2023: 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746423000027.
34.
McGurkP.Employer engagement: a human resource management perspective. 2014.
35.
MichieSVan StralenMMWestR. The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement Sci2011; 6: 1–12.
36.
OlejniczakKŚliwowskiPLeeuwF. Comparing behavioral assumptions of policy tools: framework for policy designers. J Comp Policy Anal: Res Pract2020; 22: 498–520.
37.
Wiggett-BarnardCSwartzL. What facilitates the entry of persons with disabilities into South African companies?Disabil Rehabil2012; 34: 1016–1023.
38.
EnehaugHSpjelkavikØFalkumE,et al.Workplace Inclusion Competence and Employer Engagement. Nordic J Working Life Stud2021. https://doi.org/10.18291/njwls.128260.
39.
McDonnallMCCruddenAO'MallyJ. Predictors of employer attitudes toward people who are blind or visually impaired as employees. J Vocat Rehabil2015; 42: 41–50.
40.
BonoliG. Employers’ attitudes towards long-term unemployed people and the role of activation in Switzerland. Int J Soc Welf2014; 23: 421–430.
41.
BakerALarckerDFMcClureC, et al.Diversity washing. Chicago Booth Res Pap2022; 22: 1661–1709.
42.
GrantA. Give and take: Why helping others drives our success. London: Penguin, 2014.
43.
ButlerPPayneJ. Employer engagement with third-sector activation programmes for vulnerable groups: interrogating logics and roles. J Soc Policy2023: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279423000211.
44.
ChanFStrauserDMaherP, et al.Demand-side factors related to employment of people with disabilities: a survey of employers in the midwest region of the United States. J Occup Rehabil2010; 20: 412–419.
45.
McKinneyELSwartzL. Employment integration barriers: experiences of people with disabilities. Int J Hum Resour Manage2021; 32: 2298–2320.
46.
Araten-BergmanT. Managers’ hiring intentions and the actual hiring of qualified workers with disabilities. Int J Hum Resour Manage2016; 27: 1510–1530.
47.
McDonnallMC. Factors associated with employer hiring decisions regarding people who are blind or have low vision. J Vis Impair Blind2018; 112: 197–203.
48.
AllenMREricksenJCollinsCJ. Human resource management, employee exchange relationships, and performance in small businesses. Hum Resour Manage2013; 52: 153–173.
49.
JasperCRWaldhartP. Employer attitudes on hiring employees with disabilities in the leisure and hospitality industry: practical and theoretical implications. Int J Contemp Hospitality Manage2013; 25: 577–594.
50.
KwanCK. Socially responsible human resource practices to improve the employability of people with disabilities. Corporate Social Responsibility Environ Manage2020; 27: 1−8.
51.
GröschlS. Presumed incapable: exploring the validity of negative judgments about persons with disabilities and their employability in hotel operations. Cornell Hospitality Q2013; 54: 114–123.
52.
MeachamHCavanaghJShawA,et al.Innovation programs at the workplace for workers with an intellectual disability: two case studies in large Australian organisations. Pers Rev2017; 46: 1381–1396.
53.
KulkarniMGopakumarKPatelS. How effective are disability sensitization workshops?Employee Relations2018; 40: 58–74.
54.
MeachamHCavanaghJShawA,et al.HRM Practices that support the employment and social inclusion of workers with an intellectual disability. Pers Rev2017; 46: 1475–1492.
55.
CorbièreMVillottiPLecomteT, et al.Work accommodations and natural supports for maintaining employment. Psychiatr Rehabil J2014; 37: 90.
56.
SchurLNishiiLAdyaM, et al.Accommodating employees with and without disabilities. Hum Resour Manage2014; 53: 593–621.
57.
SundarV. Operationalizing workplace accommodations for individuals with disabilities: a scoping review. Work2017; 56: 135–155.
58.
SolovievaTIDowlerDLWallsRT. Employer benefits from making workplace accommodations. Disabil Health J2011; 4: 39–45.
59.
MainiAHeeraS. Exploring disability inclusion in organizations through managerial lens. Vision2019; 23: 144–151.
60.
LuuTT. Engaging employees with disabilities in Vietnamese business context: the roles of disability inclusive HR practices and mediation and moderation mechanisms. Employee Relations2018; 40: 822–847.
61.
KulkarniM. Organizational career development initiatives for employees with a disability. Int J Hum Resour Manage2016; 27: 1662–1679.
62.
KorkmazAVVan EngenMLKnappertL,et al.About and beyond leading uniqueness and belongingness: a systematic review of inclusive leadership research. Hum Resour Manage Rev2022; 32: 100894. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2022.100894
63.
KensbockJMBoehmSA. The role of transformational leadership in the mental health and job performance of employees with disabilities. Int J Hum Resour Manage2016; 27: 1580–1609.
64.
MeachamHCavanaghJBartramT,et al.Ethical management in the hotel sector: creating an authentic work experience for workers with intellectual disabilities. J Bus Ethics2019; 155: 823–835.
65.
HabeckRHuntARachelCH, et al.Employee retention and integrated disability management practices as demand side factors. J Occup Rehabil2010; 20: 443–455.
66.
MorgesonFPHumphreySE. The work design questionnaire (WDQ): developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. J Appl Psychol2006; 91: 1321–1339.
67.
NovakJARoganPM. Social integration in employment settings: application of intergroup contact theory. Intellect Dev Disabil2010; 48: 31–51.
68.
KonradAMYangYMaurerCC. Antecedents and outcomes of diversity and equality management systems: an integrated institutional agency and strategic human resource management approach. Hum Resour Manage2016; 55: 83–107.
69.
AudenaertMVan der HeijdenBConwayN, et al.Vulnerable workers’ employability competences: the role of establishing clear expectations, developmental inducements, and social organizational goals. J Bus Ethics2020; 166: 627–641.
70.
LepakDPSnellSA. Examining the human resource architecture: the relationships among human capital, employment, and human resource configurations. J Manage2002; 28: 517–543.
71.
Diaz-FernandezMPasamar-ReyesSValle-CabreraR. Human capital and human resource management to achieve ambidextrous learning: a structural perspective. BRQ Bus Res Q2017; 20: 63–77.
72.
Van der StedeWA. A manipulationist view of causality in cross-sectional survey research. Accounting Organ Soc2014; 39: 567–574.
73.
HalvorsenKStjernøS. Work, oil, and welfare: The welfare state in Norway. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 2008.
