Upload
pauline-dean
View
218
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
• Examining findings from a research study
• Questioning its implications
Individual and Organizational Causes of Discrimination
• Unequal treatment or behavior toward members of different groups (Stephan & Stephan 02)
Definition of discrimination
• Differences in – Income– Percent in management & senior executive ranks– Recruiting & retention rates– Hiring rates, performance ratings, promotion rates
• Via differential access to social networks, mentoring, training
– Percent allocated to same-race supervisors• See also Dear White boss
– Self-reported discrimination– Satisfaction
• Bystander reports See also Human Rights doc
Measures of discrimination
• Rating of Black applicants’ qualifications
• Number Black applicants hired
Discrimination Measuresused by Brief et al
Organizational Directives
Discrimination
One Organizational Factor: Brief et al Study 1
• Hypothesis (H): Do all comply with directives?
• Finding (F): Yes– Those who received business justification not to
hire Black candidates rated Black candidates lower than those who did not receive such justifications
Study 1
• Organizations provide employees with much needed resources
• Employees believe person-organization ‘fit’ arguments– Cohesiveness leads to better functioning– Clients prefer employees of a certain kind
Why do all employees comply w/directives?
Organizational Directives
Discrimination
Brief et al Study 1
Stereotype
Prejudice
Discrimination
Stephan & Stephan 02 model tested by Brief et al Study 2 & 3
An individual factor: Brief et al Study 2&3
• Negative attitudes Stephan & Stephan 02
– Evaluations & feelings• E.g., Evaluations: They are bad…
• Feelings: I hate..
Traditional definition of prejudice
• Positive + negative feelings • E.g., sympathy & aversion
• Negative feelings + value equality
• Negative feelings+ perceived value differences
• E.g., in self-reliance
Contemporary manifestations of PrejudiceAdding to traditional definitions…
New Prejudice
Stephan & Stephan 02
• Endorse equal opportunity values but oppose equal opportunity policies
• Believe that… • Blacks do not value self-reliance, self discipline• Racial discrimination no longer exists• Blatant racism is bad• Blacks have moved too fast• Discriminate when justified
• E.g., employee-customer match, employee-organization fit
A type of New Prejudice: New Racism
• Modern Racism scale previously validated in other research– Learning Check (from Research Methods):
• What does it mean to be validated?
• What does it mean to be reliable?
• What is the relation between reliability & validity
• Example items – Discrimination against Blacks is no longer a problem
– Blacks age getting too demanding in their push for equal rights
– Over the past few years, Blacks have gotten more economically than they deserve
One measure of new racism
Organizational Directives
Prejudice
Discrimination
Individual & Organizational Causes Brief et al Study 2 & 3
• Non-racists comply even if it conflicts with personal values because they feel obliged to obey authority
• New racists comply because it confirms their attitudes and justifies their discriminatory behavior
• Is acting in line w/own beliefs stronger than obeying authority?
Why do new racists discriminate more?
• H: Do new racists comply more with directives?
• F: Yes, – New racists selected fewer Blacks when they
received business reasons not to hire Blacks when compared to those who were non-racists and those who did not receive justifications
Study 2
• Disperse authority • E.g., Immediate line manager & HR are responsible for
personnel decisions (see also Cox)
• Re-define loyalty of subordinates• Encourage questioning of orders
• Encourage dialogue on how to articulate doubts & respond to troublesome orders
• Create norm of openness
Implications: Implement Principle Disobedience
• “Fit” justifications for hiring should – Not be used or– If “fit” is a bona-fide occupational requirement,
then it dimensions of fit be clearly articulated • Job-person fit
• Person-organization
Implications:Establish clear selection criteria?
Gladwell New Yorker Article suggests this is not a good strategy
• Scores on College entrance exam board/SAT
• Indicators of personal, academic, extracurricular, athletic excellence– Reference letters– Personal essays demonstrating leadership aptitude– List of extra curricular activities– Emissaries’ ratings of character– Indicators of background & breeding
• Speech, dress, deportment, physical appearance
Gladwell article
Changing criteria for admission
• Success DURING college (e.g., law students)
• Success AFTER college (e.g., lawyers)– Personal inner force, personality, athletic ability,
social skills, motivation in addition to academic achievement
• Be good graduates– Be Generous & loyal as alumni
Changing criteria for admission
Gladwell article
• Are they measured well?– Not as well as academic achievement
Validity of admission criteria
• Ability to predict salary– Those admitted into both types of schools but
chose non-ivy League schools earned the same as those who chose Ivy-league schools
– Male athletes with lower SAT scores earn more than peers
• Choice of job: high paying financial services
• Personality traits competitiveness, determination, outgoingness, team player confidence: measurement issues
Validity of admission criteria
• Ability to predict job performance– LSATs don’t predict lawyer success
• Restriction of range on LSAT scores reduces correlation
• LSAT only measure some of the skills needed to become a successful lawyer
Validity of admission criteria
• Establishing clear criteria is not sufficient
• Establishing valid criteria is not sufficient if they result in ‘adverse’ impact– Legal requirement is that if it has adverse impact
it should be a job requirement (i.e. valid)
Conclusions from Gladwell article
• Individuals and organizations can cause discrimination– Individual=prejudicial attitudes– Organizational
• Ability to extract compliance from employees,
• Ability to determine & validate criteria for ‘fit’
Final Conclusions