Embedding gender equity in organisational restructuring
By Helena Wacko, Equity, Diversity & Inclusion Researcher
The hidden risks to gender equity in organisational restructures
Organisational restructures are often seen as a chance to streamline operations, but they are also a pivotal moment to reset inclusion.
Too often, equity amidst restructure is treated as a “nice-to-have” bolt-on after the fact. The impact? If leaders don’t intentionally re-design for inclusion, the opposite happens: hard-won diversity gains are erased.
As one restructuring guide warns, if equality considerations yields “to other pressing matters” during change, firms risk “reinforcing and prolonging an unfavourable gender equality and diversity” for decades to come. [i] In other words: equity should not be parked on the sidelines during a restructure – it must drive the process from day one.
The risks of “bolt-on” equity
Without intentional equity planning, restructures often deepen existing inequalities. Evidence shows women and marginalised groups exit at higher rates during upheaval – especially those at intersecting identities – undermining diversity pipelines. This pattern repeats in reorganisations unless actively addressed.
Similar studies have further confirmed that marginalised groups disproportionately bear the brunt of cuts. “Too often, marginalised employees – particularly women, ethnic minorities, disabled and LGBTQ+ staff – are disproportionately affected.”[ii] Black and minority ethnic workers, for instance, were more likely to report being made redundant during organisational changes (and only 38 percent felt the process was fair).[iii] Disabled employees were 25 percent more likely than others to feel excluded from the decision-making.
In short: if restructuring is not done carefully, staff vulnerable to not fitting the “ideal worker” mould – women, caregivers, people on part-time contracts or in less-visible roles – are far likelier to be pushed out (see our recent blog on thinking beyond the ideal worker here).
Even ‘voluntary’ redundancy schemes can reinforce inequality. Those with caring responsibilities, or who have historically had weaker bargaining power (often women) may be more likely to accept early-exit offers. This self-selection drains diversity. Empowering teams during change means scrutinising who opts out and why. Without safeguards, a voluntary scheme can end up accelerating the very turnover organisations are trying to avoid.
Hidden biases in role mapping and redeployment
Beyond exit rates, bias often creeps into the nuts and bolts of a restructure. When leaders map old roles into new ones, or decide who moves where, unstated assumptions can skew outcomes. Decision-makers may unconsciously favour those who mirror their own path, often overlooking competent women and minorities.[iv]
Workplace bias research shows how damaging this is: mothers face a “maternal wall,” with white mothers 47 percentage points more likely than fathers to report doubts about their commitment.[v] Black and Latina women are also 3.5 times more likely than white men to feel they must constantly “prove themselves”.[vi]
These biases matter in a restructure. A woman returning from maternity leave may be viewed as “less available,” while a high‑potential woman of colour can face harsher judgments. Even subtle choices – such as who is consulted on roles, how performance is read – can tilt against marginalised staff. Unless leaders confront this, the new structure simply recycles old prejudices, steering talented women into dead‑end roles or out of the company altogether.
The business case for inclusive change
Embedding gender equity is not just the right thing to do, it is also smart business. Data shows that diverse, inclusive organisations outperform their peers on retention, innovation and reputation.
Catalyst research shows ‘champion’ companies – where leaders openly support gender equity – retain women at equal or higher rates than men.[vii] In fact, businesses with strong gender diversity and equity policies see lower turnover than less diverse peers. [viii]
Diverse teams also drive innovation. One study found organisations with more diverse management earned 38 percent more of their revenues from innovation than those with less diversity.[ix] In practice, this means that companies who keep women and minorities engaged during change are more likely to uncover new ideas and tap broader markets.
Ignoring equity brings real risks. Employees notice unfair cuts. Over half (64 percent) say they’d be less likely to recommend their employer if layoffs disproportionately affect minorities.
There are legal costs too: the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission reported a 12 percent rise in discrimination claims after the last major public-sector cuts.[x] Not to mention poorly managed redundancies can also worsen the gender pay gap.
Equity and success go together. Inclusive restructuring protects talent, trust, innovation, reputation, and compliance. When boards and HR embed gender equity in strategy, organisations emerge stronger – not just leaner.
The principles of equity, such as diverse voices, clear communication and data-driven decisions, can turn restructuring into an opportunity.
For example, Catalyst’s CEO’s Champions study illustrates how transparent, inclusive cultures retain female talent even in change. The Chartered Management Institute has also found that employees are 45 percent more likely to stay engaged through a restructure when leaders communicate clearly and acknowledge inclusion concerns.
Practical steps to mitigating equity risks in organisation restructures
How do organisations embed equity into the restructure by design? Here are key steps to include:
- Intersectional impact assessments
At each phase – from planning to execution – analyse how changes will affect different groups. Use data (headcount, identity group ratios, roles, pay) broken down by gender, race, disability and other characteristics. Identify disparities early: for example, run a gender impact assessment when drafting the new organisational charts. Look for patterns (e.g. are mostly women in part-time roles being cut?), then adjust accordingly.
- Bias reviews in role mapping
Audit the criteria and panels used to assign people to new roles. Watch out for masculine coding in job design and selection processes, i.e. overuse of male traits and unnecessary unflexible terms of employment. Ensure selection rubrics are objective and that diverse leaders or advisors help make decisions. Anonymous CV reviews or structured panels can help prevent ‘fit’ bias. If redeploying people into fewer roles, double-check that protégés of female managers or members of employee networks are not accidentally overlooked.
- Transparent, inclusive consultation
Engage staff networks, unions and affected employees early. Transparency about the process – who is consulted and why – builds trust. Give forums for feedback and explain decisions. This is not just window-dressing: employees understand that inclusive dialogue means your organisation values their perspective. It also helps leaders spot blind spots (for example, whether certain teams carry extra diversity).
- Equity-informed communication
How leaders talk about the restructure sets the tone. Emphasise that fairness and support are top priorities.Offer career support or training slots for anyone losing a role, with outreach to underrepresented staff.
- Monitor & rebalance
After changes are implemented, continue tracking the data. Check whether the gender balance in each department or pay quartile has shifted. If you offered rehire or posting slots later, prioritise diverse candidates who were lost in the first wave. Essentially, use the recovery phase to rebuild any equity gaps, (for instance: create sponsorship opportunities focused on women or minority groups, to replenish the pipeline).
Each of these steps should explicitly consider intersectionality. Women of colour, disabled women, LGBTQ+ women and others at multiple margins face interlocking risks. [xi] In a restructure, those hurdles magnify.
Embedding equity means asking, “How will these changes impact our employees differently?” – and then taking proactive steps (like targeted redeployment offers, flexible-role redesigns or additional leave cover) to mitigate those impacts.
Restructuring does not need to be a backward step on equality. With intentional design, it can become a chance to codify inclusion at the design stage, rebuild more equitable career paths and send a powerful message: that your organisation does the right thing and sticks with its values, even when under pressure.
Companies that do this emerge from change with more engaged staff, a stronger reputation and a legacy for fairness. They sustain the very diversity they fought so hard to build.
For HR and EDI leaders, the call is clear: redesign with equity at the core, not the fringes. Start your next restructure by asking, “How can this be an equitable process from Day One?”
By conducting impact assessments, checking biases, engaging diverse voices, and communicating transparently throughout, you anchor the change process in your values. In doing so, you not only avert a potential backlash, but you also safeguard talent and innovation.
When senior decision-makers put gender equity in every step of restructuring, organisations do not just survive the storm of change, they emerge stronger, fairer and more resilient for the future.
At Shape Talent, we deliver Reorganisation Impact Assessments to help organisations navigate change while safeguarding equity and inclusion progress. If you’re interested in learning more, please get in touch. We’d love to explore how we can support you.
References
[vii] https://www.catalyst.org/insights/2024/champions-for-change
[viii] https://www.catalyst.org/insights/2024/champions-for-change
[ix] https://www.catalyst.org/insights/2020/why-diversity-and-inclusion-matter