LGBTIQ+ Talent in Workspaces: Productivity Beyond Quotas

As an internationalist with postgraduate studies in business administration and several years of experience in the business world, I have learned that the success of a company is complex and systemic, that the different elements that shape our day to day also coexist in our work environment, and that is exactly where we must look to identify the details that lead a company to growth and development, always in close partnership with its associates.

Starting with a bit of theory, we can say that the first approaches of management from the Western perspective were not mainly spontaneous, they have always tried to explain a specific facet of human activities: their interaction, notions of community, the context of productive processes, social groups organization, among others. In prehistoric times, we could say that management was empirical; however, great thinkers contributed to different approaches in administrative theories: the Classical approach (Taylor and Fayol), the Humanistic approach (Mayo), the Neoclassical approach (Drucker), the Structuralist approach (Etzioni), the Behavioral approach (Maslow), the Systemic approach (Bertalanffy), and the Contingency approach (Chandler, Joan Woodward).

Within these major schools of thought, various elements have been prioritized: processes, order, rationality, organization (as a whole or as an isolated entity), objectives and goals, and others. Although people have traditionally been seen as part of the production process in all management theories, fortunately, other approaches have emerged that go beyond this limited view. These theories place people — along with their context, emotions, sense of belonging, existential needs, and interpersonal interactions — at the center of organizational success, complementing rather than replacing scientific management principles.

The theory of human relations (also known as the humanistic school of management), developed by Elton Mayo and his collaborators, emerged in the United States as a movement against classical management theory in the first quarter of 20th century.

By 1940, Maslow and his hierarchical model of needs first appeared as part of a shift in mindsets for understanding the complexity of people, their motivation points that were newly identified beyond basic survival elements, and to include recognition and self-fulfillment as genuine drivers for workers.

Later, refining aspects of Maslow’s theory, American psychologist Clayton Alderfer introduced the ERG theory, reorganizing Maslow’s pyramid into three basic groups of needs:

Existence – Groups material and physiological needs.

Relatedness – Social needs, such as appropriate relationships with the environment, social recognition, among others.

Growth – Personal development and self-fulfilment.

These elements emphasized certain needs but did not prescribe the order to be solved by human beings.

By 1981, William Ouchi developed Theory Z, a methodology based on human relationships that views workers as whole beings who cannot separate personal and professional lives. This theory highlights factors like trust, teamwork, close personal relationships, and collective decision-making, all aimed at achieving higher performance and business productivity, grounded in a new humanistic business philosophy where the company is genuinely committed to its people. Ouchi strongly believed that employment is more than a dry relationship between company and employee, it is the structural foundation of employees’ lives, determining where they live, what they eat, how they dress, and how they age, among others. So, if employment is fully developed within an organization, people get involved with it, creating a sense of belonging that drives them to give their best to achieve company goals, ensuring productivity.

This brings us to the most important point of the article: How can Theory Z impact anyone seeking to join a company, regardless of their sex, sexual orientation, gender expression, or identity? Perhaps if there are some doubts about any of these four elements, understanding them is only the first step to get close to Ouchi’s vision. As we begin to understand that workers' relationships with the company are deep, and that our responsibility is to recognize others' real and genuine needs and motivations — different from our own — we start to see diversity (not just sexual diversity) from a new perspective.

And weren’t we going to talk about sex-gender diversity?

Indeed, one of the biggest challenges faced by people in the LGBTIQ+ community today is the lack of empathy, ignorance, invalidation, or limited openness toward issues inherent to our sexual-affective orientation, to say the least. In fact, the international context is making it clear that personal and professional development for members of the LGBTQ+ community is highly complex in some regions/countries. However, there is hard data that shows how integrating the lives of employees, fostering genuine involvement, strengthening personal relationships, and understanding LGBTIQ+ diversity are key to business success:

1. Companies with high diversity scores reported 45% innovation revenue, compared to only 26% in companies with low diversity scores.

2. Companies with greater gender/sexual diversity are more likely to financially outperform their peers.

3. Companies with 2-D diversity are 45% more likely to report market share growth and 70% more likely to report capturing new markets in the past year.

4. By 2030, it's estimated that 30% of the global workforce will be members of Generation Z; over 22% of Gen Zers in the United States identify as LGBTQ+.

5. 68% of millennials and 73% of Generation Z prefer companies that prioritize diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).

6. If employees experience or witness bias, discrimination, or disrespect, they are 1.4 times more likely to quit.

Beyond reaching a quota, based on Ouchi's Theory Z and the data reviewed, we can conclude that a genuine interest in supporting the full personal development of our associates, including gender and sexual diversity as a vital part of that development, will let us not only increase productivity and profitability, but ensure that we are doing so with motivated and committed talent that drives the company’s growth.

References: 

1. Rocío Lorenzo, et.al; (2018), How Diverse Leadership Teams Boost Innovation, Boston Consulting Group, https://www.bcg.com/publications/2018/how-diverse-leadership-teams-boost-innovation. 

2. Liz, Hilton, et. Al; (2023), Mind the gap, McKinsey & Company, https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/email/genz/2024/06/2024-06-11d.html

3. Silvia Ann Hewlett, et,al; (2013), How Diversity Can Drive Innovation, Harvard Business Review, https://hbr.org/2013/12/how-diversity-can-drive-innovation.

4. Jennifer Noel (2023), EY survey finds global workers feel sense of belonging at their workplaces, yet most are uncomfortable sharing all aspects of their identities, EY, https://www.ey.com/en_gl/newsroom/2023/09/ey-survey-finds-global-workers-feel-sense-of-belonging-at-their-workplaces-yet-most-are-uncomfortable-sharing-all-aspects-of-their-identities.

5. Kylee Stone, (2025), 25+ DEI Statistics You Need to Know, Engagedly, https://engagedly.com/blog/top-dei-statistics-you-need-to-know/ 

6. Estrategia basada en los recursos y capacidades. Criterios de evaluación y el proceso de desarrollo. Revista Forum Doctoral, 113-147.

7. M. Martínez Costa, et.al; (2008). Sistemas de gestión de calidad y resultados empresariales: una justificación desde las teorías institucional y de recursos y capacidades. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa. Núm 34, 007-030.

8. Arianne Medina Macias; et,al; (2002). Evolución de la teoria administrativa. Una visión desde la psicología organizacional. Cubana de Psicología, Vol.19, No.3, 262-271.Cardona, R. A. (2011).

9. Irene Saavedra, et.al; (2010). Modelo de Gestión Ética de Recursos Humanos: Un enfoque basado en la teoría de recursos y capacidades. Revista de Responsabilidad Social de la Empresa, 15-39.

10. Katia Carmen Panta, et.al; (2017). Factores relevantes en las Teorías de la Administración, Universidad de Perú.