(BQ) Part 1 book Diversity in organizations has contents: Introduction, theories and thinking about diversity, legislation, Blacks/African Americans, Latinos/Hispanics, Asians/Asian Americans, Asians/Asian Americans.
Diversity in Organizations SECOND EDITION Myrtle P Bell UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS, ARLINGTON Australia • Brazil • Japan • Korea • Mexico • Singapore • Spain • United Kingdom • United States Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it This is an electronic version of the print textbook Due to electronic rights restrictions, some third party content may be suppressed Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience The publisher reserves the right to remove content from this title at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it For valuable information on pricing, previous editions, changes to current editions, and alternate formats, please visit www.cengage.com/highered to search by ISBN#, author, title, or keyword for materials in your areas of interest Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it Diversity in Organizations, Second Edition Myrtle P Bell Vice President of Editorial, Business: Jack W Calhoun Editor-in-Chief: Melissa Acuna Acquisitions Editor: Scott Person Developmental Editor: Jeffrey Hahn © 2012, 2007 South-Western, Cengage Learning ALL RIGHTS RESERVED No part of this work covered by the copyright herein may be reproduced, transmitted, stored, or used in any form or by any means graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, scanning, digitizing, taping, web distribution, information networks, or information storage and retrieval systems, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the publisher Editorial Assistant: Ruth Belanger Marketing Manager: Jonathan Monahan Content Project Management: PreMediaGlobal Frontlist Buyer, Manufacturing: Arethea Thomas For product information and technology assistance, contact us at Cengage Learning Customer & Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706 For permission to use material from this text or product, submit all requests online at www.cengage.com/permissions Further permissions questions can be emailed to permissionrequest@cengage.com Senior Marketing Communications Manager: Jim Overly Library of Congress Control Number: 2011923665 Production Service: PreMediaGlobal ISBN-13: 978-1-111-22130-0 Senior Art Director: Tippy McIntosh ISBN-10: 1-111-22130-8 Cover Designer: Kim Torbeck, Imbue Design Cover Image: ©Sandra Dionisi, Stock Illustration Source, Getty Images Rights Acquisitions Specialist, Image: Deanna Ettinger Right Acquisitions Specialist, Text: Sam A Marshall South-Western 5191 Natorp Boulevard Mason, OH 45040 USA Cengage Learning is a leading provider of customized learning solutions with office locations around the globe, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico, Brazil, and Japan Locate your local office at international.cengage.com/region Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by Nelson Education, Ltd For your course and learning solutions, visit www.cengage.com Purchase any of our products at your local college store or at our preferred online store www.cengagebrain.com Printed in the United States of America 15 14 13 12 11 Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it Copyright 2010 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it To Earnest, so aptly named Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it Brief Contents Preface xii SECTION I INTRODUCTION, THEORIES, Chapter Chapter Chapter SECTION II Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter AND Introduction Theories and Thinking about Diversity 37 Legislation 63 EXAMINING SPECIFIC GROUPS 10 11 12 13 14 15 SECTION III Chapter 16 LEGISLATION AND CATEGORIES 107 Blacks/African Americans 109 Latinos/Hispanics 147 Asians/Asian Americans 187 Whites/European Americans 223 American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Multiracial Group Members 257 Sex and Gender 283 Work and Family 321 Sexual Orientation 353 Religion 377 Age 399 Physical and Mental Ability 431 Weight and Appearance 459 GLOBAL VISION 489 International Diversity and Facing the Future 491 Name Index 523 Subject Index 533 iv Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it Table of Contents Preface xii SECTION I INTRODUCTION, THEORIES, AND LEGISLATION CHAPTER Introduction Determining “Diversity” in an International Context Multiple Group Memberships and Permeability of Boundaries Terminology The Stimulus for the Focus on Diversity: Workforce 2000 Diversity and Organizational Competitiveness 12 Cost 13 Resource Acquisition 15 Marketing 16 Creativity and Problem Solving 18 System Flexibility 19 Other Areas Where Diversity Can Be Advantageous 20 Moral and Social Reasons for Valuing Diversity 21 Difficulties Resulting from Increased Diversity and Organizational Responses 22 The “Value in Diversity” Perspective versus Negative Impacts of Diversity 23 Individual Benefits of Diversity 24 Diversity, Individual Outcomes, and Organizational Effectiveness 25 Organization of the Book 26 Introduction and Overview 28 Population 29 Education 30 Employment, Unemployment, and Participation Rates 30 Types of Employment and Income Levels 32 Focal Issues 32 Individual and Organizational Recommendations 33 International Feature 33 Other Features 34 Summary 35 Key Terms 35 Questions to Consider 36 Actions and Exercises 36 CHAPTER Theories and Thinking about Diversity 37 What Is a “Minority”? 38 Identifiability 40 Differential Power 40 Discrimination 41 Group Awareness 41 Analysis of the Characteristics 41 Categorization and Identity 42 Social Categorization and Stereotyping 43 Consequences of Social Categorization and Social Identity 45 Aversive Racism, Ambivalent Sexism, and Other New Isms 53 Recommendations for Individuals and Organizations 57 Summary 59 Key Terms 59 Questions to Consider 60 Actions and Exercises 61 v Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it vi Table of Contents CHAPTER Legislation 63 Historical Background 65 Major Federal Acts Related to Diversity in Organizations 66 The Equal Pay Act of 1963 68 Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 71 Affirmative Action in Employment 82 The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 88 The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 89 EEOC Guidelines on Sexual Harassment (1980) 90 Older Workers Benefit Protection Act of 1990 95 Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 96 The Civil Rights Act of 1991 98 The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 100 The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 101 Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 101 The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 102 Other Relevant State, Local, and City Ordinances 102 Future Federal Acts: What’s Ahead? 103 Effects of Diversity on the Judiciary and on Judicial Decisions 103 Summary 104 Key Terms 105 Questions to Consider 105 Actions and Exercises 106 SECTION II EXAMINING SPECIFIC GROUPS CATEGORIES 107 AND CHAPTER Blacks/African Americans 109 History of Blacks in the United States 111 Blacks in the Military 112 The Civil Rights Movement 115 Relevant Legislation 116 Population 117 Education, Employment, and Earnings 118 Education 118 Participation Rates 119 Earnings by Educational Attainment 120 Research on the Employment Experiences of African Americans 124 Access Discrimination 124 Treatment Discrimination 128 The Glass Ceiling and Walls 129 Negative Health Effects of Discrimination 130 Immigrant Blacks and Their Descendants and Native-born Blacks—Similarities and Differences 131 African American Women at Work 133 Discrimination against Customers 136 Recommendations 137 Recommendations for Blacks 139 Recommendations for Organizational Change 140 Consumer/Customer Service Recommendations 143 Summary 143 Key Terms 144 Questions to Consider 144 Actions and Exercises 145 CHAPTER Latinos/Hispanics 147 History of Hispanics in the United States 148 Mexicans 149 Puerto Ricans 151 Cubans 152 Relevant Legislation 154 English-only Rules 154 Population 156 Population by Race for Hispanics and Non-Hispanics 157 Education, Employment, and Earnings 158 Education 158 Employment 159 Earnings 162 Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it 242 Examining Specific Groups and Categories and ideals As a result, Black men, at least in theory, obtained the right to vote in 1870, fifty years before White women did.40 Because White women generally marry White men, married White women’s current economic status benefits from White men’s higher earnings and occupational status, making their individual disadvantages less obvious than those of women of color When viewed as individuals, however, White women’s earnings and occupational status indicate similarities between their experiences and those of other non-dominant groups Currently, White women work, as women of color, in femaledominated jobs and encounter the glass ceiling and walls When compared with White men, White women are more likely to work part-time and to work fewer hours when working full-time Women have been called the “51% minority” and “the oppressed majority” as a reflection of their lower status in organizations and society As mentioned in Chapter 6, a Gallup Poll study found that 12% of Whites reported experiencing some form of discrimination within the prior year Women were considerably more likely to report discrimination—22% compared to 3% of men.41 Discrimination in job placement and steering (female-dominated jobs) is a less visible but no less strong force affecting White women’s earnings and outcomes The most common jobs for White women—including clerical jobs and elementary school teaching—are sex segregated; these are jobs that are “chosen” but that also reflect strong gender role socialization and they pay less than many male-dominated jobs.42 Many of the women featured in key sex discrimination cases described in other chapters are White, like Ann Hopkins and Lilly Ledbetter, whose cases went to the Supreme Court Myth: Because they are White, White women experience few disadvantages at work Reality: Although White women are the least disadvantaged of all women, they are disadvantaged relative to White men, occupying lower-level, lowerstatus, and lower-paid occupations and gaining lower returns on their educational investments 40 The theoretical right to vote did not guarantee Black men the actual right to vote, however; property requirements, poll taxes, literacy requirements, threats of lynching, and other obstacles prevented Blacks from voting well into the 1900s until the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 41 Yen, H (2005, December 8) “Poll: Nearly Out of Workers Claim Bias.” The Associated Press 42 Department of Labor (2008) 20 Leading Occupations of Employed Women Bureau of Labor Statistics, Annual Averages 2008 http://www.dol.gov/wb/factsheets/20lead2008.htm#, accessed November 15, 2010 Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it Chapter 7: Whites/European Americans 243 The Meaning of Ethnicity for Whites Research on ethnic identity development indicates that those with high ethnic identity have positive attitudes toward their own and others’ ethnicities One study found that Whites with high racial identity development—measured as displaying acceptance, appreciation, and respect for racial differences and active involvement in cross-racial interactions—were most comfortable with Blacks.43 Donna ChrobotMason has found support for the relationship between White ethnic identity development and the ability to work with and fairly manage dissimilar others.44 Chrobot-Mason hypothesized that Whites who perceived themselves as members of a White ethnic group would be better at managing diverse employee groups due to their high ethnic identity In her study investigating the effect of White managers’ ethnic identity on minority employees’ perceptions of support, 20% of the White managers reported their ethnicity as something other than White/American, such as Italian American or German American, in response to an open-ended question Chrobot-Mason found that when both White managers and minority employees had developed high ethnic identity, the managers were perceived as more supportive, through listening, encouraging, guiding, being a role model, and fostering a relationship of mutual trust The difference between those who genuinely self-identify as a member of an ethnic group and those whose ethnic ties are symbolic is worth noting Herbert Gans has described the latter as symbolic ethnicity, which is invoked at will but has little meaning in a person’s everyday life, an example being those from Irish backgrounds who emphasize and celebrate St Patrick’s Day, but whose ethnicity has little meaning at other times.45 Symbolic ethnics are less likely to achieve the diversity-related benefits identified by ChrobotMason Caryn Block, Loriann Roberson, and Debra Neuger investigated the racial identity development of White adults They found a complex relationship between levels of racial identity and attitudes toward interracial 43 Claney, D., & Parker, W M (1989) “Assessing White Racial Consciousness and Perceived Comfort with Black Individuals: A Preliminary Study.” Journal of Counseling and Development, 67: 449–451 44 Chrobot-Mason, D (2004) “Managing Racial Differences: The Role of Majority Managers’ Ethnic Identity Development on Minority Employee Perceptions of Support.” Group and Organization Management, 29(1): 5–31 45 Rubin, L B (2004) “Is This a White Country, or What?” In J F Healey & E O’Brien (Eds.), Race, Ethnicity, and Gender Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press, pp 301–310 Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it 244 Examining Specific Groups and Categories situations at work.46 Participants’ levels of identity development were related to their beliefs in the existence of discrimination against Blacks, the need for affirmative action, and the existence of reverse discrimination against Whites and to their support for or resistance to measures taken to increase equity and levels of comfort interacting with Blacks at work or in work-related social settings Block and her colleagues emphasized the importance of measuring Whites’ levels of identity development prior to implementing diversity training, because the type of training needed (e.g., awareness of the existence of inequities and the need for efforts to reduce them versus skills training) would vary based on employees’ level of identity Perceptions of “Quotas” and “Reverse Discrimination” Research consistently shows that the attitudes of White men and women are most negative toward affirmative action programs, which are valuable for increasing diversity in organizations and which have benefited White women more than minorities.47 Faye Crosby’s book Affirmative Action Is Dead: Long Live Affirmative Action examines research on resistance to affirmative action and the continued need for such programs in the United States.48 Frequent use of the term quotas by the media, politicians, and even some researchers in reference to affirmative action and other diversity efforts contributes to misperceptions that quotas are legal and commonly used Myth: Affirmative action frequently results in quotas and reverse discrimination Reality: Quotas are largely illegal and reverse discrimination is uncommon As discussed in previous chapters, employers implementing affirmative action use flexible goals and timetables, not “quotas,” to reduce imbalances in the representation groups (e.g., among women, Blacks, Latinos, or Asians) These efforts may include enlarging the pool of applicants by using different recruitment sources, the training and development of current employees, or other legal means The goals and 46 Block, C J., Roberson, L., & Neuger, D A (1995) “White Racial Identity Theory: A Framework for Understanding Reactions Toward Interracial Situations in Organizations.” Journal of Vocational Behavior, 46: 71–88 47 Corcoran, M (1999) “The Economic Progress of African American Women.” In I Brown (Ed.), Latinas and African American Women at Work: Race, Gender, and Economic Inequality New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp 35–60 48 Crosby, F (2004) Affirmative Action Is Dead: Long Live Affirmative Action New Haven, CT: Yale University Press Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it Chapter 7: Whites/European Americans 245 timetables are flexible, and if they are not met after legitimate efforts, there is no penalty Whites also tend to think that reverse discrimination, the act of giving preference to members of protected classes to the extent that others feel they are experiencing discrimination, is far more common than minorities think it is How common is “reverse discrimination” in organizations? Although we have reiterated that most people not sue when they feel they have experienced discrimination, one gauge of the prevalence of reverse discrimination would be the relative number of lawsuits in which it is alleged Richard Schaefer reports that “fewer than 100 of the more than 3,000 discrimination opinions in federal courts from 1990 to 1994 even raised the issue of reverse discrimination, and reverse discrimination was actually established in only six cases.”49 As discussed previously, multiple audits conducted in major U.S cities confirm the greater likelihood of Whites being preferred over similarly qualified Blacks and Latinos.50 Another measure of the existence of reverse discrimination would be fewer Whites in positions of high power, status, and income compared to minorities and women As we have mentioned, White men’s occupation of those positions far exceeds their representation in the population White males make up a disproportionate number of high-level executives in Fortune 500 companies, university administrators and professors, physicians and surgeons, politicians, and many other high-status positions Although White men constitute less than 40% of the population, more than 90% of corporate executives at the highest level are White men A legitimate question would be to ask if these disproportions came about because White men are more meritorious than other groups and whether they would persist after forty years of reverse discrimination In a study that directly assessed trends in managerial representation after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the year 2000, Stainback and Tomaskovic-Devey found a higher proportion of White men were managers in the private sector in 2000 than in 1966.51 As shown in Table 7.3, 11% of White men were managers and White men were nearly 91% of all managers in 1966; in 2000, nearly 15% of White men were managers and White men were 57% of all managers White women, who comprised 28% of all managers in 2000, gained the greatest share of managerial Schaefer, R T (2002), p 96 See original article: “Reverse Discrimination Complaints Rare, a Labor Study Reports.” The New York Times, March 31, 1995, p A10 50 See Bendick, M., Jr., Jackson, C., & Reinoso, V (1994) “Measuring Employment Discrimination through Controlled Experiments.” Review of Black Political Economy, 23: 25–48; Bendick, M., Jr., Jackson, C., Reinoso V., and Hodges L (1991) “Discrimination Against Latino Job Applicants: A Controlled Experiment.” Human Resource Management, 30: 469–484; Fix, M., & Struyk, R (Eds.) (1991) Clear and Convincing Evidence Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute 51 Stainback & Tomaskovic-Devey (2009) 49 Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it 246 Examining Specific Groups and Categories TABLE 7.3 Trends in the Labor Force Size, Percent Managerial, and Race–Sex Composition of the Private Sector EEO-Reporting Firms, 1966, 1980, 1990, and 2000 1966 1980 1990 2000 19,285,338 28,807,871 30,659,160 37,102,233 7.19 10.15 10.40 9.68 62.27 48.47 42.19 37.62 Total Labor Force Employment Percent managerial jobs White Male Percent of labor force Percent of all managers 90.97 75.69 65.35 57.14 Percent who are managers 10.50 15.85 16.11 14.70 25.51 32.27 34.68 32.32 Percent of all managers 7.14 16.56 24.24 27.79 Percent who are managers 2.01 5.21 7.27 8.32 6.33 6.40 6.22 6.66 White Female Percent of labor force Black Male Percent of labor force Percent of all managers 0.70 2.97 3.08 3.74 Percent who are managers 0.80 4.71 5.16 5.43 Black Female Percent of labor force 2.54 5.48 6.83 7.88 Percent of all managers 0.18 1.27 2.21 3.11 Percent who are managers 0.52 2.35 3.37 3.82 Source: Adapted from Table 1, Trends in the Labor Force Size, Percent Managerial, and Race–Sex Composition of the Private Sector EEO-Reporting Firms, 1966 to 2000 Stainback, K., & Tomaskovic-Devey, D (2009) “Intersections of Power and Privilege: Long-Term Trends in Managerial Representation.” American Sociological Review, 74: 800–820 jobs; in 1966, 2% of all White women were managers and more than 8% were managers in 2000 The researchers concluded that White men’s representation has changed very little in the older and more desirable (higher-paid, higher-status) sectors of the economy and that gains for White women, Black women, and Black men have been disproportionately higher represented in positions where they manage similar others Black women’s gains are most likely to be in the growing (lower-paid, lower-status) service sectors where they manage other Black women.52 Race, quality of education and grades, and “fit.” Evidence from empirical research also questions the veracity of claims that minorities and women are now advantaged over Whites and males In one study of the near absence of Blacks in corporate law firms, researchers found that Blacks with 52 Ibid, p 816 Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it Chapter 7: Whites/European Americans 247 average grades were significantly less likely to be hired than Whites with the same grades.53 To be hired and to excel at elite firms was far easier for Whites who attended average schools than for Blacks who attended such schools Whites with average performance at average schools possessed substitutes for educational qualifications, such as “personality” and “fit.” The authors proposed that stereotypes and unconscious biases in such firms advantage Whites over equally qualified Blacks Race, sex, interview assessments and offer decisions In a study involving 311 pairs of recruiters and applicants, Caren Goldberg assessed the effects of similarity in race and sex on interview assessments and offer decisions.54 The recruiters were managers and human resources professionals in a variety of industries, including banking, telecommunications, manufacturing, services, and retail Goldberg found that White recruiters preferred White applicants, rating them higher in interview assessments and making more job offers to them Black recruiters did not favor Black applicants, however Goldberg suggested that her findings regarding Whites, but not Blacks, preferring similar others are consistent with highstatus group members seeking to maintain their status by overvaluing in-group members (see also Chapter 2) The results for sex similarity indicated that male recruiters preferred female candidates, but female recruiters showed no preference for male or female applicants Data analyses indicated that the physical attractiveness of female applicants affected male recruiters’ ratings of them.55 Race, sex, performance ratings, and salary increases In a study of the relationships between performance ratings and salary increases, Professor Emilio Castilla of Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that women and minorities received lower salary increases than White men even with the same performance.56 Because Castilla controlled for factors other than race, ethnicity, and sex that could contribute to differences in salary increases, any differences could then be attributed to race, ethnicity, and sex (i.e., discrimination) Castilla’s sample of nearly 9,000 employees worked in a large service organization in the United States and received performance evaluations at least once per year by their immediate supervisor Over a six-year period, there were no differences in starting 53 Wilkins, D B., & Gulati, G M (1996) “Why Are There So Few Black Lawyers in Corporate Law Firms? An Institutional Analysis.” California Law Review, 84: 496–625 54 Goldberg, C (2005) “Relational Demography and Similarity Attraction in Interview Assessments: Are We Missing Something?” Group and Organization Management, 30: 597–624 Goldberg also assessed effects of age similarity on interview assessments and offer decisions but found no differences 55 Chapter 14 considers the effects of appearance on organizational outcomes 56 Castilla, E J (2008) “Gender, Race, and Meritocracy in Organizational Careers.” American Journal of Sociology, 113(6): 1479–1526 Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it 248 Examining Specific Groups and Categories salaries based on race, sex, or other ascriptive characteristics (e.g., age and nationality); comparably skilled employees, regardless of their demographic characteristics, received similar initial salaries Over time, however, employees who were carefully matched in terms of human capital characteristics, job experience and performance, job class, work unit, and supervisor but different in demographic characteristics earned different dollar amounts of salary increases These differences resulted in significantly smaller salary growth for women and minorities Castilla speculated that this performance-reward discrimination occurred when employers consciously or unconsciously undervalue the work of minorities in reward situations This type of discrimination highlights the importance of internal monitoring to identify practices that may be discriminatory Effects of Increasing Diversity on Dominant Group Members In a field study of more than 1,700 people working in 151 groups, Tsui, Egan, and O’Reilly found that increasing organizational diversity was associated with lowered psychological attachment among Whites and males but not among women and minorities.57 They speculated that increasing diversity may require changes in behavioral norms, such as in language or behavior (e.g., in case of the presence of more women, this could require changes in sexist language or behavior that may be offensive to women) Such changes could be taxing, stressful, or resisted by the dominant group Tsui and her colleagues also suggested that increased numbers of women and minorities in formerly homogenous groups may signal a lowering of job status to Whites and males This perceived lowering of status may result in decreased attachment to the organization The researchers suggested that future research should more closely examine the effects of increasing diversity on majority group members, rather than solely focusing on minority group members Myth: Women and minorities have difficulty fitting in when organizations become more diverse Reality: In some ways, increasing diversity can be more difficult for Whites and males—members of higher-status groups—than for women and minorities 57 Tsui, A S., Egan, T D., & O’Reilly, C A (1992) “Being Different: Relational Demography and Organizational Attachment.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 37: 549–579 Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it Chapter 7: Whites/European Americans 249 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INDIVIDUALS Whites play distinctive roles in organizational diversity As members of the dominant racial group, Whites have more power to make changes than people of color As members of the dominant group, they may also erroneously view increasing diversity as a lowering of their individual power even though, overall, diversity is beneficial to everyone Along with other groups, Whites should view diversity as a potential source of competitive advantage—something to be embraced rather than feared By working toward diversity proactively, organizations will be able to increase competitiveness through cost savings and through gains in resource acquisition, system flexibility, marketing, creativity, and problem-solving, among other areas This increased competitiveness will result in more opportunities for all, rather than in fewer opportunities and advantages for Whites As subjects of discrimination and disadvantages while also being members of the dominant group, White women are in a unique situation White women in positions of power have an opportunity to make changes through their own positional and organizational power In addition, because their spouses and other male relatives are generally White men, White women have the power to influence the beliefs and behaviors of White men, with whom they can share experiences that may help men view discrimination, the glass ceiling, and at-work harassment and exclusion as real and pervasive problems, rather than a few isolated or unique incidents White men may view White women as more believable and trustworthy sources of diversity-related information than people of color White women should also acknowledge their advantages over women of color, rather than expect women of color to see themselves solely as women working for women’s equality Many women of color view their race, rather than their sex, as their primary impediment to fairness White men and women, even those whose ancestors did not own slaves or who not practice discrimination, should recognize the privileges associated with Whiteness in the United States Whites should acknowledge and work to dismantle systems of unfair advantage and to share the advantages construed as “normal” for Whites among other racial groups Whites should also actively work to dispel myths and stereotypes about nondominant group members When working for equality, Whites, particularly White men, are viewed as more credible than people of color Whites are members of the dominant racial and ethnic group, but they may also belong to non-dominant groups at some points in their lives White men may be older, be gay, be Jewish, be overweight, or have a disability White women experience sex discrimination and harassment and may also be older, be lesbian, be members of a non-dominant religious group, have a disability, or have some other non-dominant group status Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it 250 Examining Specific Groups and Categories Although Whites’ racial dominance likely pervades their learning about and understanding of diversity, active efforts to apply to their racial privileges what they have learned from membership in any non-dominant group would be worthwhile Because Whites are more likely to be executives, managers, and organizational leaders than others, they are in influential positions to create climates favorable to diversity.58 The favorable environment and the diversitysupportive behaviors they model are likely to be also modeled by subordinates, contributing to a positive diversity climate Bill Proudman and Michael Welp joined forces in running “The White Men’s Caucus,” which presents “White Men as Full Diversity Partners” workshops that are specifically designed to engage White men in diversity initiatives Employees at clients such as Shell Oil and Detroit Edison report being enlightened about White male privilege, the dominance of White male cultures in organizations, and other diversity issues to which they were previously oblivious One client realized the need for White men “to get more involved in diversity We tend to think of it as other people’s issues,” rather than being relevant to White men as well as to minorities, women, and other non-dominant groups.59 Frank McCloskey, inaugural vice president of diversity at Georgia Power, who is profiled in Individual Feature 7.3, is one White man who is involved in diversity work, and is genuinely committed to fairness, equality, and inclusion One way that Whites in positions of power can get more involved and be more effective in diversity work is by serving as mentors for nondominant group members Mentoring can be helpful in facilitating the entry of non-dominant group members into positions of power, providing access to resources and insights, to the “unwritten rules” of leadership, to information on power systems and organizational dynamics, and to a host of other benefits Historically, White men have been advantaged by mentoring and networking systems (the “good old boy” network), when compared to women and minorities Active mentoring by Whites in power can open doors to more employees and more widely distribute some of the many benefits of mentoring to both mentor and mentee RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ORGANIZATIONS As we have discussed, for diversity programs to be successful in organizations, it is imperative that Whites be actively involved Whites, who are most likely to be in positions of power, are vital allies in diversity efforts Organizational leaders must recognize that some Whites may resist diversity 58 59 See the focus feature in Chapter on Sharon Allen, chairman of the board of Deloitte Touche, USA Atkinson, W (2001) “Bringing Diversity to White Men.” HR Magazine, 46(9): 76–83 Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it Chapter 7: Whites/European Americans INDIVIDUAL FEATURE 7.3 251 Frank McCloskey, Vice-President of Diversity, 2000–2010, Georgia Power Frank McCloskey, former vice president of diversity at Georgia Power is a White, heterosexual, Christian male who was a three-year letterman in football at Georgia Tech He is one example of how White men can authentically be committed to fairness, equality, and inclusion In a thirty-eight-year career spent primarily in operations, McCloskey became Georgia Power’s first vice president of diversity in 2000, a position he held until retiring in 2010 He was charged with developing a long-term management and organizational culture change strategy affecting diversity and inclusion.60 Recognized by the Society for Human Resource Management as one of the 100 Global Diversity Thought Leaders, McCloskey has received the Willie O’Ree National Hockey League “Black Ice” Diversity Award, the Rainbow Push Coalition Keep Hope Alive Equal Opportunity Award, and the American Institute for Managing Diversity 25th Anniversary Diversity Leader Award He is past chair of the Atlanta Urban League, Leadership Atlanta, the Korea–Southeast U.S Chamber of Commerce, and currently serves on the Anti-Defamation League Board of Directors McCloskey believes corporations must require leadership and work environments to be better than what is currently modeled in society In this time of global competition, U.S corporations must take the lead to close the educational and poverty gap across racial and ethnic lines This is necessary in order to build a future talent pipeline and sustain corporate business models McCloskey also feels that the myth of “postracial” America, the unabated political divisiveness, and the at times irrational fear and fervor of many often well-intended people have combined to dramatically set back race relations and social justice McCloskey believes we are at either a “break” or “breakthrough” point in our country’s history “Whites have the moral responsibility and power to change the current state and the direction we are heading Our country can only expand and remain mighty if all of our citizens are free from injustice, educated, and fully participating in and benefiting from wealth creation.”61 QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER McCloskey believes that corporations must “take the lead to close the educational and poverty gap across racial and ethnic lines” to build a future talent pipeline and sustain corporate business models Do you agree that the racial and ethnic disparities in educational attainment discussed in this book may negatively affect corporations? If so, in what specific ways might corporations get involved with alleviating such disparities? Why might individual investors support corporations’ involvement in such efforts? What is the relationship between a country’s success and the ability of all its citizens to be free from injustice, educated, and participating in and benefiting from wealth creation? McCloskey believes that change must first begin in one’s immediate circle of 60 http://www.insightintodiversity.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=212:frank-mccloskey&catid=15:editorialboard&Itemid=36, accessed November 15, 2010; http://www.georgiapower.com/community/diversity_flash.asp, accessed November 15, 2010 61 Personal communication, July 20, 2010, November 16, 2010 Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it 252 Examining Specific Groups and Categories influence—the family—and recommends adults be careful not to unintentionally teach children subtle forms of bias and prejudice.62 To what kinds of unintentional forms of bias and prejudice are children introduced by well-meaning adults who believe themselves to be unprejudiced? because they feel excluded, that focusing on diversity is a waste of resources, or that the organization is already diverse and supportive to people of color and women Including Whites as active participants in the diversity process is a key step to reducing some resistance Education about the advantages to everyone of increased diversity and about the existence of the glass ceiling and walls, sexual harassment, and other barriers to diversity is also important Whites should be assured that diversity is not an “us or them” situation, but is valuable to everyone In our recommendations for individuals, we suggested mentoring as a way that individual Whites in power could assist with diversity efforts Institutions should facilitate mentoring of non-dominant group members through organizationally sanctioned mentoring programs, mentoring training, and recognition for mentors Goldberg’s finding that White, but not Black, managers and human resources professionals serving as recruiters for a variety of organizations rated racially similar others more highly and were more likely to make job offers to them indicates that interviewer ratings and job offers should be carefully monitored Castilla’s findings that starting salaries for women and minorities were similar to those offered to White males but that salary increases for women and minorities differed from those of White males despite the same performance ratings underscore the need for organizational attention to the outcomes of processes designed to be meritocratic Not only should employers pay attention to initial salaries and to biases in performance evaluation ratings for different demographic groups, they should also monitor salary increases and promotions in terms of equivalent ratings Because research indicates that formalization of human resource practices reduces gender and race discrimination in earnings, practices should be formalized and monitored as much as possible.63 62 Personal communication, July 20, 2010 Anderson, C D., & Tomaskovic-Devey, D (1995) “Patriarchal Pressures: An Exploration of Organizational Processes That Exacerbate and Erode Gender Earnings Inequality.” Work and Occupations, 22(3): 328–357; Elvira, M M., & Graham, M E (2002) “Not Just a Formality: Pay System Formalization and Sex-Related Earnings Effects.” Organization Science, 13(6): 601–617; Konrad, A M., & Linnehan, F (1995) “Formalized HRM Structures: Coordinating Equal Employment Opportunity or Concealing Organizational Practices?” Academy of Management Journal, 38: 787–820; Reskin, B (2000) “The Proximate Causes of Employment Discrimination.” Contemporary Sociology, 29(2): 319–328 63 Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it Chapter 7: Whites/European Americans 253 SUMMARY In this chapter, we have considered the contributions of Whites to diversity in organizations and the history of Whites in the United States, including hostility and exclusion practiced by White ethnic groups and the transition from non-White to White status of some of those groups We also presented research on the relationship between Whites’ perceptions of themselves as members of an ethnic group and their ability to effectively manage non-White group members We considered differences in the experiences of White women and White men and of Whites who belong to other non-dominant groups (such as religious minorities, sexual minorities, or people with disabilities) As the dominant group, Whites play a key role in efforts to achieve organizational diversity Historically, many Whites have aligned themselves with the goals of diversity and they continue to so We suggested ways for individual Whites to participate in and contribute to diversity in organizations and for organizations to facilitate Whites’ inclusion KEY TERMS Myth of meritocracy — the idea that societal resources are distributed exclusively or primarily on the basis of individual merit Performance-reward discrimination — the act of giving different amounts of rewards (e.g., salary increases) to members of different groups who have similar performance evaluations 64 Reverse discrimination — the act of giving preference to members of protected classes to the extent that others feel they are experiencing discrimination Symbolic ethnicity — a form of ethnicity that has little impact on one’s daily life and is invoked at will QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER Many Whites argue that their resistance to affirmative action and diversity programs is due in part to their families’ history of not owning slaves or their not having practiced discrimination.64 What are some ways in which Whites who have not done these things nonetheless benefited from and been advantaged by slavery and discrimination? How does the visibility (identifiability) of groups such as Blacks and Asians contrast with the invisibility of White ethnics in shaping their organizational experiences? Recall from Chapter that many of the Whites who participated in Blacks’ struggle for civil rights were Jewish How were the organizational experiences of Jews and Blacks in the United States similar and dissimilar? Is the transition of Jews and Irish from the non-White to White category surprising to you? Brodkin also discusses the transformations of Mexicans to White then back again Were you For discussions of advantages, disadvantages, oblivion, and consciousness of privilege versus discrimination, see McIntosh (1998) Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it 254 Examining Specific Groups and Categories aware of these changes? In addition to those listed in this chapter, what other changes in race occurred within the U.S Census categorizations? Recall the study by Castilla that found similar starting salaries but differential salary growth for women and minorities compared to White men even when performance ratings were the same What are some possible negative consequences for the organization if these salary differences become widely known? What specific steps would you recommend to avoid “performancereward” discrimination? 6a If you are not White, you know someone well who is White? In what capacity you know this person (e.g., personal friend, manager, classmate, neighbor)? Do you know this person’s ethnic origin (e.g., Italian, Irish, German)? How much time have you spent with him or her? Have you thought about this person as having a race or an ethnicity? Have you discussed race, ethnicity, or other diversity issues with him or her? Explain 6b If you are White, you know your ethnic origin? How much of a role does your ethnic origin play in your everyday life, experiences, and opportunities? Can outside observers discern your ethnic origin by looking at you? 6c How does the ethnicity of Whites differ from visible ethnic differences in its effect on a person’s experiences and opportunities? Individual Whites may report experiences with reverse discrimination, despite little research evidence to support it How such experiences affect support of or resistance toward diversity efforts? What might help such individuals to be supportive of diversity efforts, despite believing they had experienced discrimination? ACTIONS AND EXERCISES Search the EEOC Web site (http:// www.eeoc.gov) for the most recent three or six months for cases of discrimination charges and settlements against Whites In any month that you find a case involving discrimination against Whites, document the events surrounding this case What proportion of cases involved race-based discrimination against Whites? Although “quotas” are generally illegal in the United States, many people believe they are legal and common Prepare an argument to dispel the idea of reverse discrimination basing it on education and earnings and representation in senior and executive management of White men, White women, Black men, and Black women 3a Conduct an informal census of employees in several places: a fast-food restaurant, a sit-down restaurant, a discount store (e.g., Target, Walmart), department store (e.g., Macy’s, Filene’s, Marshall Fields), government office, bank, or other locations in which many employees are visible Document the number of employees overall and the number of White employees visible What is the race and sex of the store manager? Estimate the proportion of the employees who are Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it Chapter 7: Whites/European Americans White in each place How many managers and assistant managers are White? How many are White and male? 3b Choose two nights to watch television for thirty minutes to one hour each night Document the program, type of commercial, and the numbers of White characters in the programs and commercials In what roles are they portrayed? 3c What similarities and differences are apparent between the people in parts a and b? From your data in Exercises 3a and 3b, speculate on the ethnicity of the White employees (3a) or characters (3b) What factors did you use in your speculation? Compare the difficulty in speculating on the ethnicity of the Whites with identifying them by race and sex 255 Use a calculator to make a chart projecting the effects of performancereward disparities (Castilla’s study, discussed in the chapter) in salary growth for White men, White women, and people of color a Make columns for starting salaries of $30,000 for the new employees Use different annual salary increase estimates (e.g., 1%, 3%, 5%, or other estimates) for each demographic group What are the salary differences after 10 years? After 20 years? b What effects would such disparities in salary growth have on each employee’s and the employer’s contributions to the employees’ Social Security, tax-deferred savings plans, and retirement plans? c What effects would such disparities have on other outcomes for these groups (e.g., housing opportunities, investments, children’s education)? Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning All Rights Reserved May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s) Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it ... 13 , 413 ,976 4.4 0 .1 398,835 0 .1 427, 810 Some other race 15 ,359,073 5.5 14 ,992 ,18 8 4.9 Two or more races 6,826,228 2.4 7, 013 ,872 2.3 35,305, 818 12 .5 46,8 91, 456 15 .4 18 2, 211 ,639 10 0.0 200,030, 018 10 0.0... Civil Rights Movement 11 5 Relevant Legislation 11 6 Population 11 7 Education, Employment, and Earnings 11 8 Education 11 8 Participation Rates 11 9 Earnings by Educational Attainment 12 0 Research on the... Library of Congress Control Number: 2 011 923665 Production Service: PreMediaGlobal ISBN -13 : 978 -1- 111 -2 213 0-0 Senior Art Director: Tippy McIntosh ISBN -10 : 1- 111 -2 213 0-8 Cover Designer: Kim Torbeck,