Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Qualitative interview study reveals gaps in supportive human resource practices for LGBTQ+ workers in private financial institutions, highlighting persistent stigma and microaggressions.
Purpose This study aims to examine how LGBTQ+ employees perceive the supportiveness of human resource (HR) practices implemented in Thailand's private financial institutions. Design/methodology/approach The snowball sampling method was implemented to recruit a group of LGBTQ+ employees. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 key informants working in seven financial institutions. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Findings Although most organizations provided a moderately supportive environment, HR practices were found to not fully address the needs of LGBTQ+ employees, resulting in some concerns. These concerns were primarily related to fears of stigma and microaggressions, which appear to be persistent throughout the organizations. Research limitations/implications Although the qualitative approach provided valuable insights, this study encountered challenges in reaching all groups within the LGBTQ+ community. The majority of key informants identified as lesbian or gay, and no transgender participants were included. Therefore, caution is warranted when interpreting the findings, as they may not fully represent the experiences of all LGBTQ+ employees. Practical implications Apart from supportive organizational policies, HR practices, and leadership, fostering a truly inclusive work environment requires comprehensive planning covering all employees. This can help free employees from fear and stress, thereby facilitating their performance. Originality/value Although an organization may believe that its supportive HR practices enable LGBTQ+ employees to feel welcome and safe in expressing their authentic selves, it is crucial to understand the effectiveness of these practices from the perspective of LGBTQ+ employees themselves. This study has made a significant contribution to this vital point.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Viboonsoonthornchoti et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: