DEI Flashcards
Nkomo (2021)
Summary: There has been a lack of significant progress
toward positioning race as a core analytical concept in mgmt and org studies. There is still much to do to elevate race to a
significant analytical concept in MOS.
Major Contribution 1: Epistemic violence to reject inclusion of issue on race and minority issues
Major Contribution 2: We need to take an intersectional approach to understand race/gender/class in concert in org studies.
Major Contribution 3: Orgs’ abilities to acquire resources are shaped by race, and org identities are currently studied absent of considering race.
Thomas & Ely (1996)
Summary: Three diversity paradigms that have evolved over time.
Major Contribution 1: Discrimination-and-Fairness
Major Contribution 2: Access-and-Legitimacy
Major Contribution 3: Learning-and-Effectiveness
Ely and Thomas (2020)
Summary: Critiques a broad cooptation of their original learning-and-effectiveness paradigm as overly focused on the “business case” and not focused at all on the inherent value of diversity to individuals and orgs.
Major Contribution 1: Increasing numbers of URG and “stirring” does not produce the effects that most claim it does.
Major Contribution 2: leaders must embrace a broader vision of success that encompasses
learning, innovation, creativity, flexibility, equity, and human dignity.
Major Contribution 3: studies have shown that
making the economic case diminishes people’s sense
that equality is itself important, limits socially conscious
investors’ ability to promote it, and may even increase bias.
Furthermore, focusing on financial benefits sends a message
to traditionally underrepresented employees that they are
worth hiring and investing in only because having “their
kind” in the mix increases the firm’s profitability.
Yadav and Lenka (2020)
Summary: Systematic review of the diversity literature.
Major Contribution 1: Mixed views between diversity as a challenge to be addressed or an opportunity for flourishing and advancement.
Major Contribution 2: Most studies focus on gender and age (other categories emerging) and most studies are done in lab or class settings.
Major Contribution 3: Common consequences:
individual level = turnover inention, job satisfaction, performance
group-level = performance, team turnover, satisfaction
org-level = performance, commitment, competitiveness
Tsui (1992)
Summary: Relational demography theory
Major Contribution 1: Whites and men showed larger negative
effects for increased unit heterogeneity than nonwhites
and women.
Major Contribution 2: proposes that demographic attributes within work units will highly influence an individual’s behavior and
attitudes.
Major Contribution 3:
Varty (2022)
Summary: Explores the relationship between diversity statements and perceived organizational attraction.
Major Contribution 1: The known presence of common diversity statements leads people to be skeptical of their authenticity and undermines org attractiveness.
Major Contribution 2: This dynamic was especially true when statements emphasized the business case for diversity rather than social responsibility.
Major Contribution 3: Practical implication – diversity signaling can actually backfire if it is not executed in an authentic way.
Roberson et al. (2024)
Summary: Increased prevalence of diversity commitments has been met with critiques from both sides – from one side, being too “woke” and from another side, being performative acts meant to boost reputation and resource acquisition capabilities.
Major Contribution 1: Develop a typology for characterizing diversity management performativity: figurative, representative, narrative, conclusive. Based on level of specificity and scope of communications and investments.
Major Contribution 2: Diversity commitments may vary to the extent that leadership and decisionmakers see DEI and business interests as congruent or competing, desire to gain legitimacy, etc.
Major Contribution 3: Echoes Ely and Thomas (2020) that measures of successful initiatives go beyond organization-level profits and productivity.
Smith and Griffiths (2022)
Summary: Subtle Slights at work
Major Contribution 1: Authors split into microaggressions, everyday discrimination, and workplace incivilities.
Major Contribution 2: Question from me – is it worth treating these as separate issues? Especially microaggressions and everyday discrimination, which are both ID-based.
Major Contribution 3: Can lead to serious outcomes like depression, PTSD, sleep loss, nicotine use, weight gain.
Ogunyemi et al. (2020)
Summary: Systematic lit review on microaggressions. Targets of change = attitudes, cognition, emotions, behavior.
Major Contribution 1: Biculturalism = the constant and stressful navigation between two separate cultures based on one’s social and cultural identity.
Major Contribution 2: Institutional microaggressions deal with an institution’s responsibility in creating environments that send signals based on identity categories like race, class, gender, sexual orientation, etc.
Major Contribution 3: Victims of microaggressions experience significant psychological distress, and cope with things such as engagement, self-efficacy, dispositional forgiveness, and improved social connectedness.
Tepper et al. (2004)
Summary: Looks at interpretations of OCB in the context of abusive leadership.
Major Contribution 1: When abusive leadership is present, OCB is perceived negatively. Interpreted as a betrayal.
Major Contribution 2: Parallel to DEI climate – can see where ppl would negatively view active contributors to a climate that is toxic or hostile.
Noon (2018)
Summary: Argues that unconscious bias training does not take into account the type of racism it tries to address and over-emphasizes individual agency.
Major Contribution 1: Blatant racism cannot be addressed by implicit bias training – the bias is explicit and not a source of surprise or shame. So this training does not help address the actions of the most harmful actors.
Major Contribution 2: Some trainings can solidify beliefs and lead to backlash.
Major Contribution 3: UBT ignores sociological and background contexts.
Richard et al. (2021)
Summary: Exploring racial diversity congruence in upper and lower management.
Major Contribution 1: Found that congruence between levels of management positive impacts firm productivity (especially congruence in the high level)
Major Contribution 2: When not congruent, firms w/ higher levels of diversity in upper management outproduced firms w/ higher levels in lower management.
Major Contribution 3: Uses productivity as a DV, Blau’s index of heterogeneity as an IV.
Dennissen et al. (2020)
Summary: Applies an intersectionality lens to single category diversity networks.
Major Contribution 1: Challenges as “one size fits all” approach to diversity, in which identity groups are considered as homogeneous and intersectional identities are ignored.
Major Contribution 2: Found that those with multiple disadvantaged identities are marginalized in diversity networks.
Major Contribution 3: Concepts of structural intersectionality (possession of multiple, intersectional identities) and political intersectionality (collaboration and coalition building between social identity groups around agendas and movements
Wu et al. (2022)
Summary: Looks at gender diversity in the top management team (TMT) and board of directors (BOD)
Major Contribution 1: Interaction effect. Innovation is greatest when both TMT and BOD gender diversity are high.
Major Contribution 2: The effect on innovation improves firm performance, particularly in dynamic environments.
Major Contribution 3: Looks at not TMT and BOD independently, but the interdependence and multiplicative effects of their alignment (or not).
Bernstein et al. (2020)
Summary: Develops a practice-based Theory of Generative Interactions across diversity that builds on empirical findings and conceptual frameworks from multiple fields.
Major Contribution 1: in order to facilitate inclusion, multiple types of exclusionary dynamics
(self-segregation, communication apprehension, and stereotyping and stigmatizing) must be overcome through adaptive
cognitive processing and skill development, and engagement in positive interactions must occur in order to facilitate inclusion
that is created and sustained by contextually relevant sets of organizational practices
Major Contribution 2: conditions for generative interactions: pursuing an important, shared organizational purpose, mixing diverse
members frequently over protracted periods of time, enabling difering groups to have equal standing and insider status in
contributing to success, and providing collaborative interdependence, interpersonal comfort, and self-efficacy
Major Contribution 3: Echoes of Allport (1954) and the explicit acknowledgement that representation alone does not produce positive effects and can in fact produce negative ones.
Beji et al. (2021)
Summary: Board diversity in general is a positive predictor of CSR performance, but the specific elements of diversity influence different facets of CSR (corp gov, human rights, env activism, community involvement)
Khemakhen et al. (2022)
Summary: Looks at gender diversity on BOD COMMITTEES and propensity to disclose ESG scores.
Major Contribution 1: Influence of gender diversity on both the board and specifically on board committees positively predicts ESG disclosures. Presence on the committee is stronger than presence on the board itself.
Boulouta (2013)
Summary: Link between board gender diversity and corporate social performance
Major Contribution 1: board gender diversity significant affects CSP.
Major Contribution 2: especially effects the “concerns” part of KLD (e.g. preventing something bad from happening, rather than actively starting something good)
Major Contribution 3: Draws on social role theory and feminist ethics literature
Roberson et al. (2023)
Summary: Provides a process model for diversity training. “Developments in the science and practice of diversity training have been outpaced by shifts in work environments that have accentuated identity-based differences and complicated interaction across dimensions of difference”
Major Contribution 1: Embedding diversity training within broader diversity initiatives.
Major Contribution 2: Provides frameworks for training three types of personas (Defensive, Anxious, and Overconfident)
Major Contribution 3: Training is an iterative process and outcomes decay over time, so it must be built into mainstream organizational operations and practices.
Liu (2022)
Summary: Epistemic resistance for unlearning whiteness as a norm in the discipline.
Major Contribution 1: In management studies, whiteness is learnt through the discipline’s epistemic norms and conventions, received
intellectual history, conceptual canon, driving logics and institutional frameworks
Major Contribution 2: “Seen invisibility” = nonwhite people are seen as objects of voyeurism, but absent as legitimate contributors to the body of knowledge. (Citing minority scholars = atheoretical)
Major Contribution 3: epistemic revolution must entail continual reflexive interrogation, holding space for the diverse standpoints and voices with anti-racist and decolonial movements,
and led by the interests and needs of our most marginalised members.
Phillips et al. (2022)
Summary: Review of the literature in how race and gender inequity are conceptualized in organizations. Broad argument that focusing on deficit framing ignores many of the mechanisms that produce and perpetuate inequality.
Major Contribution 1: Finds an overwhelming deficit and disadvantage framing in race and gender inequality, which they argue paints an incomplete picture of sources and solutions of inequality. Framing = women deviating from expectations, as opposed to men benefitting from unfair system.
Major Contribution 2: Lit on attractiveness, nepotism, social class all used advantage frames.
Major Contribution 3: AUthors identify helping, permissiveness, structural advantages are common in the advantage framing literature and may be effectively used in race and gender discussions.
Prasad (2023)
Summary: Study of “The Chair” exploring model minorities in the context of double consciousness and the leadership conundrum.
Major Contribution 1: Model minority = Asian American subgroups who have access to high levels of ethnic capital, and the (tangible/intangible) resources that ethnic capital bestows). Comes with processes of social comparison and disengagement from ethnicity.
Major Contribution 2: Double consciousness as model minority – limited scope of actions, negation of achievements, microaggressions. Leadership conundrum – glass cliff, soft power, ethic of care.
Major Contribution 3: Solutions = relying on institutionalized metrics (as opposed to discretionary measures) and establishing allyship w other racialized minorities.
Mobasseri et al. (2023)
Summary: Develops theory about the persistence of racial inequality in U.S. organizations – where persistence of inequality is rooted in work contexts that conflate merit with idealized images of white masculinity.
Major Contribution 1: Organizational members “animate and protect institutional features that help protect them” – deal with internal conflict of shortcomings by assigning the external shortage of meritorious minorities.
Major Contribution 2: Costs of this system – alienates people [men specifically] from themselves and from others, distracts from the real objectives of organizations.
Major Contribution 3: Potential solutions = developmental organizing, and holding environments (both intergroup and intragroup) = identity workspaces, owning anxieties and fears.
DiTomaso (2021)
Summary: Drawing on historical, institutional, and structural accounts of intergroup relations to show the relevance of the past in shaping the present.
Major Contribution 1: Diversity has always been and continues to be associated with hierarchy – particularly along lines of race.
Major Contribution 2: Diversity and inequality are embedded through long processes of institutionalization – patterns of actions, belief systems, rules of behavior. External forces and individual actors combine to maintain the social order.
Major Contribution 3: Intergroup relations are always subject to politics, social change, and possibility of deinstitutionalization. Understanding DEI requires multilevel analysis. A lack of this analysis is a form of epistemological ignorance.
Evans (2014)
Summary: Exploring intersection of institutional theory and radical change in the context of diversity management.
Major Contribution 1: Institutional theory states that people and organizations do things to adhere to institutional norms and shared beliefs (societal level, like marriage or softer, cultural norms).
Major Contribution 2: In orgs, legitimacy rises within fields. DEI spaces draws attention to the social forces that are shaping and reshaping institutions.
Major Contribution 3: How do institutions seek legitimacy with regards to DEI? Given the competing external norms, pressures, and institutions.
Amis et al. (2020)
Summary: Societal inequalities increasing, and orgs provide vast majority of people with their income – ask the question: how are organization practices implicated in growing social and economic inequality?
Major Contribution 1: Practices = hiring, promotion, role allocation, task assignment, organizational structure, discriminatory practices.
Major Contribution 2: Myths of efficiency (shareholder primacy), myth of meritocracy (roots in eugenics), myth of positive globalization (“colonialism was globaliztion”)
Major Contribution 3: Suggests that teaching and research should include the voices of workers, talk about inequality, and reframe the role of managers as societal stewards.
Motro et al. (2022)
Summary: Studies examining the detrimental effects of the angry black woman stereotype in the workplace.
Major Contribution 1: Study 1 – observers more likely to make internal attributions for anger for BW – leading to worse performance evaluations and assessments of leadership capability.
Major Contribution 2: Study 2 – revealed stereotype activation as an underlying mediator
Major Contribution 3: Argued that this stereotype is overlooked in the management literature.
Alberti and Iannuzzi (2020)
Summary: Qualitative study of hotel labor in Venice, exploring “embodied intersectionality.”
Major Contribution 1: Frame diversity as a “political management process reproducing ‘power-laden relations of production between management and employees.’”
Major Contribution 2: Intersection of race, education, gender produced unique and unusual outcomes – where management stereotyped customer preferences and deployed employees in a way to match that.
Major Contribution 3: Both intra-categorical intersectionality (differing experiences among seemingly homogeneous groups) and embodied intersectionality – reappropriation of stereotypical assumtptions through active participation.
Ponce de Leon and Rosette (2022)
Summary: Examining the extent to which Black women’s dual-subordinated identities render them nonprototypical victims of discrimination
Major Contribution 1: Predictions (supported) were that Black women’s categorical nonprototypicality would reduce the believability of their discrimination claims, but that their nonprototypical attributes would lead to divergent treatment dependent on the type of discrimination alleged (race v gender).
Major Contribution 2: BW Claims were believed less as compared to claims by white women (gender) and Black men (race).
Major Contribution 3: Black women received less financial remedy vs white women, but more financial remedy vs Black men
Thatcher et al. (2023)
Summary: Comprehensive review of intersectionality research (153 articles).
Major Contribution 1: Findings = intersectionality is relatively sparse. Most done on race and gender. Outcomes include systemic inequalites, career outcomes, discrimination/harassment.
Major Contribution 2: Responses = org-level (policies and programs, empowering individuals), interpersonal (managers can modify power structures), individual (short-term strategies, tipping point btwn passive and agentic responses)
Major Contribution 3: New paths forward for research = unpacking gender, including disabilities.
Role of identity salience, sociopolitical context of identity study and salience.
Terminology issues around correlation and causality.
Ali et al. (2021)
Upshot: Together, these findings suggest
that increasing the number of female supervisors and middle managers is effective
for bringing more female employees into male-tilted industries. However, the fact
that male-tilted industries showed no significant trickle-down effects from TMT to
LTMM suggests that senior women in these contexts refrain from acting to support
other women’s careers in order to avoid highlighting their gender identity.
Implication: Identity expression, glass cliff, precariousness of leadership positions. Representation at the top does not signify equality.
Cheung et al. (2020)
Summary: Draws on tokenism theory to perform a statistical synthesis (meta-analysis) linking gender composition to evaluative and affective outcomes.
Major Contribution 1: Evidence for simple gender composition effects was weak.
Major Contribution 2: Strong effects for the moderator of task gender type on the relationship between both sexes and many relevant outcomes.
Major Contribution 3: TASK GENDER TYPE = STRONGER INDICATOR OF WORKPLACE NORMS THAN NUMERICAL REPRESENTATION OF MEN AND WOMEN.
Gooty et al. (2023)
Summary: Looking at the academic glass ceiling for women in business schools. Identifies three primary challenges.
Major Contribution 1: Challenge 1 = masculine social structure of business schools. Solutions = publicizing metrics, inclusively celebrate accomplishments (signaling), gender-neutral caregiving policies.
Major Contribution 2: Challenge 2 = Muddy approach to performance evaluations. Solutions = aligning performance measures with strategic objectives, justice advocates on T&P committees.
Major Contribution 3: Challenge 3 = under-representation of research topics that affect women in the workplace. Solutions = wider range of approaches to theorizing about the world of work, USING GENDER AND RACE AS SUBSTANTIVE VARIABLES OF INTEREST, professional development for women.
Furtado et al. (2021)
Summary: Lit review on gender-based affirmative action.
Major Contribution 1: Generally low number of pubs, leaving a gap to be filled on the relationship between Gender AA and employee satisfaction and performance.
Major Contribution 2: “Merit violation” is thought of as both an antecedent (correcting misplaced merit) and outcome (placing women into unearned positions) of gender AA policies.
Major Contribution 3: Stigmatization can have an impact on performance and confirm opponents of AA’s preconceptions of AA-affiliated employees.
Chan and Anteby (2016)
Summary: Study of TSA workers where women were disproportionately allocated to the pat down task.
Major Contribution 1: Led to poorer job quality outcomes for women. Task segregation overexposed women to physical exertion, emotional labor, relational strain. Gave rise to work intensity, emotional exhaustion, and lack of coping resources.
Major Contribution 2: Task segregation exposed female workers to managerial sanctions for taking time off and a narrowing of their skillset that may contribute to worse promotion chances, pay, satisfaction, and turnover rates.
Major Contribution 3: Structural issues contributed to narrow, and nonpromotable task responsibilities for women in this study.
Roberson and Perry (2022)
Summary: Inclusive leadership literature has been independent. Study is an attempt to integrate findings from different literatures.
Major Contribution 1: Explore leaders’ sensemaking process about what it means to be inclusive. Findings highlight the importance of understanding and valuing differences while encouraging a shared identity and collaboration.
Major Contribution 2: Relational leadership – trust building, environment construction with psychological safety to empower workers and get collaborative innovation.
Major Contribution 3: Leadership development and room for the development of skills should be a part of training and developing inclusive leaders.
Ely and Meyerson (2010)
Summary: Gender on oil platform study.
Major Contribution 1: Highly masculine context.
Major Contribution 2: Training can UNDO norms around gendered enactment of jobs and result in INDIVIDUAL and ORGANIZATIONALLY relevant outcomes (safety!!!)
Major Contribution 3: Provides evidence that gendered behaviors are not set in stone and in fact are performed.
Mor Barak et al. (2022)
Summary: Conceptual model, Looks at multi-level leaders (CEO and supervisor) and the decoupling of policies and practices between these levels.
Major Contribution 1: Inclusion climate – a unique construct that is shaped by both experience (what happens) and identity (who one is)
Major Contribution 2: Decoupling between leadership levels signals a lack of commitment to an effort and weakens inclusion climate. At the same time, the same instances of decoupling can be interpreted differently based on identity characteristics.
Major Contribution 3: Space in the literature to contribute to organization-level inclusive leadership.
van Knippenberg and van Ginkel (2022)
Summary: Integrating the literatures on inclusive leadership mindsets and leadership for diversity mindset.
Major Contribution 1: Inclusive leadership mindset = focused on psychological inclusion / diversity leadership = synergistic outcomes in knowledge work.
Major Contribution 2: Inclusion more of an issue for marginalized groups than non. (diversity looks simply at different contributions)
Major Contribution 3: Integrating these two: Leadership needs to focus on ensuring, recognizing, and processing the contributions of members of historically marginalized groups
Roumpi (2022)
Summary: Looking at how CEO political leaning shape attitudes towards work family policies.
Major Contribution 1: Ideology effects not just the presence of, but the inclusiveness of the policy.
Major Contribution 2: Model integrates individual CEO characteristics and broader social context into the policy decision making process.
Major Contribution 3: INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP IDEOLOGY IN ORG DECISION MAKING PROCESSES AND POLICY IMPLEMENTATION.
Do Bu et al. (2023)
Summary: Intergroup time bias in the medical context.
Major Contribution 1: Trainees spent more time forming impressions of, diagnosing, assessing pain, and prescribing opioids for white (v. Black) patients.
Major Contribution 2: This dynamic happens through aversive racism (espousing nonracist views but acting in a different manner).
Major Contribution 3: Time investment leads to health outcome disparities.
Triana et al. (2021)
Summary: Review of diversity and discrimination research in the HRM literature.
Major Contribution 1: Discrimination remains prominent, effective diversity management can lead to positive outcomes, intersectionality increasingly important.
Major Contribution 2: Growing use of experimental designs to investigate causality.
Major Contribution 3: Call to link research with real life policy implementation to effectively enact change.
Bruton et al. (2023)
Summary: Examines articles that address entrepreneurship and race.
Major Contribution 1: Argues that entrepreneurship cannot be understood separately from race – it unfolds in a racialized social context.
Major Contribution 2: Entrepreneurship is both marked by social inequality and a way for racial minorities to navigate around traditionally racist org systems.
Major Contribution 3: Entrepreneurship incorporating race can tailor goods and services that are in tune with customer preferences.
Daniels and Thornton (2020)
Summary: Focuses on cyber incivility and interpersonal incivility as mechanisms through which race leads to perceived discrimination.
Major Contribution 1: Non-White employees experience subtle forms of discrimination through the use of technology and cyber space which accentuate the need for organizations to eradicate workplace incivility so that their employees can evade the adverse outcomes associated with experiencing incivility at work.
Major Contribution 2: Selective incivility = form of modern discrimination.
Major Contribution 3: Identifies incivility as a mediator between racial discrimination and its adverse outcomes.
Kollen (2021)
Summary: Critical and comprehensive review of diversity management practices and their evolution.
Major Contribution 1: Challenges of current strategies = superficial implementation, tokenism, lack of leadership commitment, insufficient integration into main org practices.
Major Contribution 2: Existing frameworks like the business case for diversity fall short because they fail to address deeper issues of systemic inequality.
Major Contribution 3: Call for greater attention to intersectionality, power dynamics, and the socio-political contexts that shape organizational practices. The paper also advocates for more empirical research to understand the long-term impacts of diversity initiatives.
Post et al. (2021)
Summary: Review and presentation of research themes and avenues in diversity management literature.
Major Contribution 1: Addresses the interplay between diversity and inequality. We can’t understand diversity studies without understanding structural inequality.
Major Contribution 2: Need to dig deeper into deep level diversity – class, intersectionality, disability, neurodiversity, more easily concealed variables.
Major Contribution 3: Call for longitudinal studies, multi-method approaches, in order to develop theory to implement and address issues.
Yang and Konrad (2011)
Summary: Reviewing extant literature on antecedents and outcomes of diversity management practices through lenses of institutional and resource-based theory.
Major Contribution 1: Institutional theory = highlights the role of external pressures, such as laws, industry standards, and cultural expectations, in shaping these practices. Organizations may implement diversity initiatives to enhance their public image and ensure they are perceived as socially responsible.
Major Contribution 2: Resource-based theory: organizations can enhance creativity, problem-solving, and innovation, leading to better performance. This theory emphasizes the internal benefits of diversity, suggesting that diverse teams can drive superior outcomes by bringing varied perspectives and skills.
Major Contribution 3: Integrating the two perspectives makes sense, but it needs to be done in a legitimate way. Orgs tend to superficially implement programs to gain legitimacy and resources but they do not have the intended impacts.
Han et al. (2020)
Summary: Authors propose that the use of broad-based stock options granted to at
least half the workforce creates the conditions supporting a positive relationship between
workforce racial diversity and firm outcomes. Panel data from 155 companies who applied for 100 best companies to work for.
Major Contribution 1: racial diversity was positively related to subsequent firm financial performance and individual affective commitment and was not significantly associated with subsequent voluntary turnover rates,
when accompanied by a firm’s adoption of broad-based stock options
Major Contribution 2: under the
nonuse of broad-based stock options, racial diversity was significantly related to higher
voluntary turnover rates and lower employee affective commitment, with no financial
performance gains.
Major Contribution 3: Stock options = proxy for justice in the workplace and creates a communal sense of buy-in and mutual dependences. Goes back to Allport (1954) idea of optimal conditions of intergroup contact.
Johnson and Pietri (2022)
Summary: examine the role of White women as allies in promoting allyship and creating a sense of organizational identity safety for Black women. Study focuses on how the endorsement of White women as allies can influence Black women’s perceptions of allyship and their feelings of safety within an organization.
Major Contribution 1: Allyship = support and advocacy for members of marginalized groups. Identity safety = assurance that one’s social identity will be respected and valued within an organization
Major Contribution 2: ENDORSEMENT of WW as allies = key mechanism driving positive outcomes. Not just promises or signaling, actual endorsement of one’s behavior and intentions.
Major Contribution 3: Practically recommend support for further development of allyship programs. Help enhance the experience and inclusion/ID safety for BW.
Dang and Joshi (2023)
Summary: Explore the concept of ally work within the context of liberalism – 3 levels (self, relational, organizational).
Major Contribution 1: Self ally work = individuals recognizing biases and privileges to act in ways that support marginalized groups.
Major Contribution 2: Relational ally work = building supportive relationships w/ marginalized individuals or groups.
Major Contribution 3: Organizational ally work = implementing policies and practices that promote D and E. Often requires structural changes and leaders’ commitment.
Warren and Warren (2021)
Summary: EThIC model of ally development that goes beyond performative actions to foster deep commitments to DEI.
Major Contribution 1: Holistic approach integrating character development w/ org practices and policies.
Major Contribution 2: Community engagement as a key aspect of the model – bringing real, lived experiences into the process of ally development.
Major Contribution 3: Aims for long-term change as opposed to one-time or superficial acts of allyship.
Radke et al. (2020)
Summary: Goes beyond concept of allyship to look at motivations for members of advantaged groups to support those from disadvantaged groups.
Major Contribution 1: Social ID and group dynamics (identifying through perceived similarities or shared values)
Major Contribution 2: Social norms and behavior of peers (if supportive actions are viewed favorably then group members are more likely to engage).
Major Contribution 3: Sometimes actions are for personal benefits/self-serving. (Enhancing social status or reducing personal feelings of discomfort about inequality).
Bell et al. (2021)
Summary: call for a concerted effort to combat it through collective action grounded in Black feminist principles. Emphasize the need for systemic change to address the structural inequities and biases that Black academics face.
Major Contribution 1: anti-Blackness manifests in various forms within academic settings, from hiring practices and promotion criteria to everyday microaggressions and institutional policies that disadvantage Black scholars.
Major Contribution 2: argues for the application of Black feminist theory as a guiding framework to understand and dismantle these inequities. This approach emphasizes the intersectionality of race, gender, and other social identities, highlighting how these intersecting oppressions uniquely impact Black women in academia. Practical recommendations = hiring and promotion practices, professional support, accountability mechanisms, inclusive culture.
Major Contribution 3: Allies have a responsibility to dismantle anti-Black structures and systems in academia.
Roberson et al. (2021)
Summary: Integrating the neurodiversity and leadership literatures. Previous leadership on research and disability treats content of study as “special cases” and not theory that can be generated about a population.
Major Contribution 1: Leadership defined as: relational, transactional, organizing competencies.
Major Contribution 2: Critical disability theory = akin to CRT in looking at how systems and structures reproduce hierarchy based on ability status.
Major Contribution 3: Differences can potentially be strengths – hypersensitivity, pattern recognition, visual and spatial creativity, structure and routine.
Murrell (2020)
Summary: Looks at bystanders and aversive racism in the context of George Floyd – why did no one intervene?
Major Contribution 1: Psychological drivers – self-image, downplaying severity, rationalization.
Major Contribution 2: Social dynamics and group norms.
Major Contribution 3: We need training programs, responsibility, and accountability.
Johnson and Pietri (2024)
Summary: Social identity complexity theory = subjective interpretation of one’s multiple social identities.
Study manipulated organizational signaling among multiple lines of identity. Found only racially-relevant cues promoted org sagety among Black women.
Contribution 1: Dominance within social identity complexity = primary identity that can supersede others in shaping one’s view of ingroup v. outgroup.
Summary: There has been a lack of significant progress
toward positioning race as a core analytical concept in mgmt and org studies. There is still much to do to elevate race to a
significant analytical concept in MOS.
Major Contribution 1: Epistemic violence to reject inclusion of issue on race and minority issues
Major Contribution 2: We need to take an intersectional approach to understand race/gender/class in concert in org studies.
Major Contribution 3: Orgs’ abilities to acquire resources are shaped by race, and org identities are currently studied absent of considering race.
Nkomo (2021)
Kulich et al. (2021)
Main argument: female leaders are often called upon during times of crisis. Contributes to glass cliff.
Study showed that women are percevied to be better-suited to handle relational crises as opposed to financial. Shows that gendered assumptions are present in assessing one’s fitness to address problems.
Summary: Three diversity paradigms that have evolved over time.
Major Contribution 1: Discrimination-and-Fairness
Major Contribution 2: Access-and-Legitimacy
Major Contribution 3: Learning-and-Effectiveness
Thomas & Ely (1996)
Summary: Critiques a broad cooptation of their original learning-and-effectiveness paradigm as overly focused on the “business case” and not focused at all on the inherent value of diversity to individuals and orgs.
Major Contribution 1: Increasing numbers of URG and “stirring” does not produce the effects that most claim it does.
Major Contribution 2: leaders must embrace a broader vision of success that encompasses
learning, innovation, creativity, flexibility, equity, and human dignity.
Major Contribution 3: studies have shown that
making the economic case diminishes people’s sense
that equality is itself important, limits socially conscious
investors’ ability to promote it, and may even increase bias.
Furthermore, focusing on financial benefits sends a message
to traditionally underrepresented employees that they are
worth hiring and investing in only because having “their
kind” in the mix increases the firm’s profitability.
Ely and Thomas (2020)
Summary: Systematic review of the diversity literature.
Major Contribution 1: Mixed views between diversity as a challenge to be addressed or an opportunity for flourishing and advancement.
Major Contribution 2: Most studies focus on gender and age (other categories emerging) and most studies are done in lab or class settings.
Major Contribution 3: Common consequences:
individual level = turnover inention, job satisfaction, performance
group-level = performance, team turnover, satisfaction
org-level = performance, commitment, competitiveness
Yadav and Lenka (2020)
Summary: Relational demography theory
Major Contribution 1: Whites and men showed larger negative
effects for increased unit heterogeneity than nonwhites
and women.
Major Contribution 2: proposes that demographic attributes within work units will highly influence an individual’s behavior and
attitudes.
Major Contribution 3:
Tsui (1992)
Summary: Explores the relationship between diversity statements and perceived organizational attraction.
Major Contribution 1: The known presence of common diversity statements leads people to be skeptical of their authenticity and undermines org attractiveness.
Major Contribution 2: This dynamic was especially true when statements emphasized the business case for diversity rather than social responsibility.
Major Contribution 3: Practical implication – diversity signaling can actually backfire if it is not executed in an authentic way.
Varty (2022)
Summary: Increased prevalence of diversity commitments has been met with critiques from both sides – from one side, being too “woke” and from another side, being performative acts meant to boost reputation and resource acquisition capabilities.
Major Contribution 1: Develop a typology for characterizing diversity management performativity: figurative, representative, narrative, conclusive. Based on level of specificity and scope of communications and investments.
Major Contribution 2: Diversity commitments may vary to the extent that leadership and decisionmakers see DEI and business interests as congruent or competing, desire to gain legitimacy, etc.
Major Contribution 3: Echoes Ely and Thomas (2020) that measures of successful initiatives go beyond organization-level profits and productivity.
Roberson et al. (2024)
Summary: Subtle Slights at work
Major Contribution 1: Authors split into microaggressions, everyday discrimination, and workplace incivilities.
Major Contribution 2: Question from me – is it worth treating these as separate issues? Especially microaggressions and everyday discrimination, which are both ID-based.
Major Contribution 3: Can lead to serious outcomes like depression, PTSD, sleep loss, nicotine use, weight gain.
Smith and Griffiths (2022)
Summary: Systematic lit review on microaggressions. Targets of change = attitudes, cognition, emotions, behavior.
Major Contribution 1: Biculturalism = the constant and stressful navigation between two separate cultures based on one’s social and cultural identity.
Major Contribution 2: Institutional microaggressions deal with an institution’s responsibility in creating environments that send signals based on identity categories like race, class, gender, sexual orientation, etc.
Major Contribution 3: Victims of microaggressions experience significant psychological distress, and cope with things such as engagement, self-efficacy, dispositional forgiveness, and improved social connectedness.
Ogunyemi et al. (2020)
Summary: Looks at interpretations of OCB in the context of abusive leadership.
Major Contribution 1: When abusive leadership is present, OCB is perceived negatively. Interpreted as a betrayal.
Major Contribution 2: Parallel to DEI climate – can see where ppl would negatively view active contributors to a climate that is toxic or hostile.
Tepper et al. (2004)
Summary: Argues that unconscious bias training does not take into account the type of racism it tries to address and over-emphasizes individual agency.
Major Contribution 1: Blatant racism cannot be addressed by implicit bias training – the bias is explicit and not a source of surprise or shame. So this training does not help address the actions of the most harmful actors.
Major Contribution 2: Some trainings can solidify beliefs and lead to backlash.
Major Contribution 3: UBT ignores sociological and background contexts.
Noon (2018)
Summary: Exploring racial diversity congruence in upper and lower management.
Major Contribution 1: Found that congruence between levels of management positive impacts firm productivity (especially congruence in the high level)
Major Contribution 2: When not congruent, firms w/ higher levels of diversity in upper management outproduced firms w/ higher levels in lower management.
Major Contribution 3: Uses productivity as a DV, Blau’s index of heterogeneity as an IV.
Richard et al. (2021)
Summary: Applies an intersectionality lens to single category diversity networks.
Major Contribution 1: Challenges as “one size fits all” approach to diversity, in which identity groups are considered as homogeneous and intersectional identities are ignored.
Major Contribution 2: Found that those with multiple disadvantaged identities are marginalized in diversity networks.
Major Contribution 3: Concepts of structural intersectionality (possession of multiple, intersectional identities) and political intersectionality (collaboration and coalition building between social identity groups around agendas and movements
Dennissen et al. (2020)
Summary: Looks at gender diversity in the top management team (TMT) and board of directors (BOD)
Major Contribution 1: Interaction effect. Innovation is greatest when both TMT and BOD gender diversity are high.
Major Contribution 2: The effect on innovation improves firm performance, particularly in dynamic environments.
Major Contribution 3: Looks at not TMT and BOD independently, but the interdependence and multiplicative effects of their alignment (or not).
Wu et al. (2022)
Summary: Develops a practice-based Theory of Generative Interactions across diversity that builds on empirical findings and conceptual frameworks from multiple fields.
Major Contribution 1: in order to facilitate inclusion, multiple types of exclusionary dynamics
(self-segregation, communication apprehension, and stereotyping and stigmatizing) must be overcome through adaptive
cognitive processing and skill development, and engagement in positive interactions must occur in order to facilitate inclusion
that is created and sustained by contextually relevant sets of organizational practices
Major Contribution 2: conditions for generative interactions: pursuing an important, shared organizational purpose, mixing diverse
members frequently over protracted periods of time, enabling difering groups to have equal standing and insider status in
contributing to success, and providing collaborative interdependence, interpersonal comfort, and self-efficacy
Major Contribution 3: Echoes of Allport (1954) and the explicit acknowledgement that representation alone does not produce positive effects and can in fact produce negative ones.
Bernstein et al. (2020)
Summary: Board diversity in general is a positive predictor of CSR performance, but the specific elements of diversity influence different facets of CSR (corp gov, human rights, env activism, community involvement)
Beji et al. (2021)
Summary: Looks at gender diversity on BOD COMMITTEES and propensity to disclose ESG scores.
Major Contribution 1: Influence of gender diversity on both the board and specifically on board committees positively predicts ESG disclosures. Presence on the committee is stronger than presence on the board itself.
Khemakhen et al. (2022)
Summary: Link between board gender diversity and corporate social performance
Major Contribution 1: board gender diversity significant affects CSP.
Major Contribution 2: especially effects the “concerns” part of KLD (e.g. preventing something bad from happening, rather than actively starting something good)
Major Contribution 3: Draws on social role theory and feminist ethics literature
Boulouta (2013)
Summary: Provides a process model for diversity training. “Developments in the science and practice of diversity training have been outpaced by shifts in work environments that have accentuated identity-based differences and complicated interaction across dimensions of difference”
Major Contribution 1: Embedding diversity training within broader diversity initiatives.
Major Contribution 2: Provides frameworks for training three types of personas (Defensive, Anxious, and Overconfident)
Major Contribution 3: Training is an iterative process and outcomes decay over time, so it must be built into mainstream organizational operations and practices.
Roberson et al. (2023)
Summary: Epistemic resistance for unlearning whiteness as a norm in the discipline.
Major Contribution 1: In management studies, whiteness is learnt through the discipline’s epistemic norms and conventions, received
intellectual history, conceptual canon, driving logics and institutional frameworks
Major Contribution 2: “Seen invisibility” = nonwhite people are seen as objects of voyeurism, but absent as legitimate contributors to the body of knowledge. (Citing minority scholars = atheoretical)
Major Contribution 3: epistemic revolution must entail continual reflexive interrogation, holding space for the diverse standpoints and voices with anti-racist and decolonial movements,
and led by the interests and needs of our most marginalised members.
Liu (2022)
Summary: Review of the literature in how race and gender inequity are conceptualized in organizations. Broad argument that focusing on deficit framing ignores many of the mechanisms that produce and perpetuate inequality.
Major Contribution 1: Finds an overwhelming deficit and disadvantage framing in race and gender inequality, which they argue paints an incomplete picture of sources and solutions of inequality. Framing = women deviating from expectations, as opposed to men benefitting from unfair system.
Major Contribution 2: Lit on attractiveness, nepotism, social class all used advantage frames.
Major Contribution 3: AUthors identify helping, permissiveness, structural advantages are common in the advantage framing literature and may be effectively used in race and gender discussions.
Phillips et al. (2022)
Summary: Study of “The Chair” exploring model minorities in the context of double consciousness and the leadership conundrum.
Major Contribution 1: Model minority = Asian American subgroups who have access to high levels of ethnic capital, and the (tangible/intangible) resources that ethnic capital bestows). Comes with processes of social comparison and disengagement from ethnicity.
Major Contribution 2: Double consciousness as model minority – limited scope of actions, negation of achievements, microaggressions. Leadership conundrum – glass cliff, soft power, ethic of care.
Major Contribution 3: Solutions = relying on institutionalized metrics (as opposed to discretionary measures) and establishing allyship w other racialized minorities.
Prasad (2023)
Summary: Develops theory about the persistence of racial inequality in U.S. organizations – where persistence of inequality is rooted in work contexts that conflate merit with idealized images of white masculinity.
Major Contribution 1: Organizational members “animate and protect institutional features that help protect them” – deal with internal conflict of shortcomings by assigning the external shortage of meritorious minorities.
Major Contribution 2: Costs of this system – alienates people [men specifically] from themselves and from others, distracts from the real objectives of organizations.
Major Contribution 3: Potential solutions = developmental organizing, and holding environments (both intergroup and intragroup) = identity workspaces, owning anxieties and fears.
Mobasseri et al. (2023)
Summary: Drawing on historical, institutional, and structural accounts of intergroup relations to show the relevance of the past in shaping the present.
Major Contribution 1: Diversity has always been and continues to be associated with hierarchy – particularly along lines of race.
Major Contribution 2: Diversity and inequality are embedded through long processes of institutionalization – patterns of actions, belief systems, rules of behavior. External forces and individual actors combine to maintain the social order.
Major Contribution 3: Intergroup relations are always subject to politics, social change, and possibility of deinstitutionalization. Understanding DEI requires multilevel analysis. A lack of this analysis is a form of epistemological ignorance.
DiTomaso (2021)
Summary: Exploring intersection of institutional theory and radical change in the context of diversity management.
Major Contribution 1: Institutional theory states that people and organizations do things to adhere to institutional norms and shared beliefs (societal level, like marriage or softer, cultural norms).
Major Contribution 2: In orgs, legitimacy rises within fields. DEI spaces draws attention to the social forces that are shaping and reshaping institutions.
Major Contribution 3: How do institutions seek legitimacy with regards to DEI? Given the competing external norms, pressures, and institutions.
Evans (2014)
Summary: Societal inequalities increasing, and orgs provide vast majority of people with their income – ask the question: how are organization practices implicated in growing social and economic inequality?
Major Contribution 1: Practices = hiring, promotion, role allocation, task assignment, organizational structure, discriminatory practices.
Major Contribution 2: Myths of efficiency (shareholder primacy), myth of meritocracy (roots in eugenics), myth of positive globalization (“colonialism was globaliztion”)
Major Contribution 3: Suggests that teaching and research should include the voices of workers, talk about inequality, and reframe the role of managers as societal stewards.
Amis et al. (2020)
Summary: Studies examining the detrimental effects of the angry black woman stereotype in the workplace.
Major Contribution 1: Study 1 – observers more likely to make internal attributions for anger for BW – leading to worse performance evaluations and assessments of leadership capability.
Major Contribution 2: Study 2 – revealed stereotype activation as an underlying mediator
Major Contribution 3: Argued that this stereotype is overlooked in the management literature.
Motro et al. (2022)
Summary: Qualitative study of hotel labor in Venice, exploring “embodied intersectionality.”
Major Contribution 1: Frame diversity as a “political management process reproducing ‘power-laden relations of production between management and employees.’”
Major Contribution 2: Intersection of race, education, gender produced unique and unusual outcomes – where management stereotyped customer preferences and deployed employees in a way to match that.
Major Contribution 3: Both intra-categorical intersectionality (differing experiences among seemingly homogeneous groups) and embodied intersectionality – reappropriation of stereotypical assumtptions through active participation.
Alberti and Iannuzzi (2020)
Summary: Examining the extent to which Black women’s dual-subordinated identities render them nonprototypical victims of discrimination
Major Contribution 1: Predictions (supported) were that Black women’s categorical nonprototypicality would reduce the believability of their discrimination claims, but that their nonprototypical attributes would lead to divergent treatment dependent on the type of discrimination alleged (race v gender).
Major Contribution 2: BW Claims were believed less as compared to claims by white women (gender) and Black men (race).
Major Contribution 3: Black women received less financial remedy vs white women, but more financial remedy vs Black men
Ponce de Leon and Rosette (2022)
Summary: Comprehensive review of intersectionality research (153 articles).
Major Contribution 1: Findings = intersectionality is relatively sparse. Most done on race and gender. Outcomes include systemic inequalites, career outcomes, discrimination/harassment.
Major Contribution 2: Responses = org-level (policies and programs, empowering individuals), interpersonal (managers can modify power structures), individual (short-term strategies, tipping point btwn passive and agentic responses)
Major Contribution 3: New paths forward for research = unpacking gender, including disabilities.
Role of identity salience, sociopolitical context of identity study and salience.
Terminology issues around correlation and causality.
Thatcher et al. (2023)
Upshot: Together, these findings suggest
that increasing the number of female supervisors and middle managers is effective
for bringing more female employees into male-tilted industries. However, the fact
that male-tilted industries showed no significant trickle-down effects from TMT to
LTMM suggests that senior women in these contexts refrain from acting to support
other women’s careers in order to avoid highlighting their gender identity.
Implication: Identity expression, glass cliff, precariousness of leadership positions. Representation at the top does not signify equality.
Ali et al. (2021)
Summary: Draws on tokenism theory to perform a statistical synthesis (meta-analysis) linking gender composition to evaluative and affective outcomes.
Major Contribution 1: Evidence for simple gender composition effects was weak.
Major Contribution 2: Strong effects for the moderator of task gender type on the relationship between both sexes and many relevant outcomes.
Major Contribution 3: TASK GENDER TYPE = STRONGER INDICATOR OF WORKPLACE NORMS THAN NUMERICAL REPRESENTATION OF MEN AND WOMEN.
Cheung et al. (2020)
Summary: Looking at the academic glass ceiling for women in business schools. Identifies three primary challenges.
Major Contribution 1: Challenge 1 = masculine social structure of business schools. Solutions = publicizing metrics, inclusively celebrate accomplishments (signaling), gender-neutral caregiving policies.
Major Contribution 2: Challenge 2 = Muddy approach to performance evaluations. Solutions = aligning performance measures with strategic objectives, justice advocates on T&P committees.
Major Contribution 3: Challenge 3 = under-representation of research topics that affect women in the workplace. Solutions = wider range of approaches to theorizing about the world of work, USING GENDER AND RACE AS SUBSTANTIVE VARIABLES OF INTEREST, professional development for women.
Gooty et al. (2023)
Summary: Lit review on gender-based affirmative action.
Major Contribution 1: Generally low number of pubs, leaving a gap to be filled on the relationship between Gender AA and employee satisfaction and performance.
Major Contribution 2: “Merit violation” is thought of as both an antecedent (correcting misplaced merit) and outcome (placing women into unearned positions) of gender AA policies.
Major Contribution 3: Stigmatization can have an impact on performance and confirm opponents of AA’s preconceptions of AA-affiliated employees.
Furtado et al. (2021)
Summary: Study of TSA workers where women were disproportionately allocated to the pat down task.
Major Contribution 1: Led to poorer job quality outcomes for women. Task segregation overexposed women to physical exertion, emotional labor, relational strain. Gave rise to work intensity, emotional exhaustion, and lack of coping resources.
Major Contribution 2: Task segregation exposed female workers to managerial sanctions for taking time off and a narrowing of their skillset that may contribute to worse promotion chances, pay, satisfaction, and turnover rates.
Major Contribution 3: Structural issues contributed to narrow, and nonpromotable task responsibilities for women in this study.
Chan and Anteby (2016)
Summary: Inclusive leadership literature has been independent. Study is an attempt to integrate findings from different literatures.
Major Contribution 1: Explore leaders’ sensemaking process about what it means to be inclusive. Findings highlight the importance of understanding and valuing differences while encouraging a shared identity and collaboration.
Major Contribution 2: Relational leadership – trust building, environment construction with psychological safety to empower workers and get collaborative innovation.
Major Contribution 3: Leadership development and room for the development of skills should be a part of training and developing inclusive leaders.
Roberson and Perry (2022)
Summary: Gender on oil platform study.
Major Contribution 1: Highly masculine context.
Major Contribution 2: Training can UNDO norms around gendered enactment of jobs and result in INDIVIDUAL and ORGANIZATIONALLY relevant outcomes (safety!!!)
Major Contribution 3: Provides evidence that gendered behaviors are not set in stone and in fact are performed.
Ely and Meyerson (2010)
Summary: Conceptual model, Looks at multi-level leaders (CEO and supervisor) and the decoupling of policies and practices between these levels.
Major Contribution 1: Inclusion climate – a unique construct that is shaped by both experience (what happens) and identity (who one is)
Major Contribution 2: Decoupling between leadership levels signals a lack of commitment to an effort and weakens inclusion climate. At the same time, the same instances of decoupling can be interpreted differently based on identity characteristics.
Major Contribution 3: Space in the literature to contribute to organization-level inclusive leadership.
Mor Barak et al. (2022)
Summary: Integrating the literatures on inclusive leadership mindsets and leadership for diversity mindset.
Major Contribution 1: Inclusive leadership mindset = focused on psychological inclusion / diversity leadership = synergistic outcomes in knowledge work.
Major Contribution 2: Inclusion more of an issue for marginalized groups than non. (diversity looks simply at different contributions)
Major Contribution 3: Integrating these two: Leadership needs to focus on ensuring, recognizing, and processing the contributions of members of historically marginalized groups
van Knippenberg and van Ginkel (2022)
Summary: Looking at how CEO political leaning shape attitudes towards work family policies.
Major Contribution 1: Ideology effects not just the presence of, but the inclusiveness of the policy.
Major Contribution 2: Model integrates individual CEO characteristics and broader social context into the policy decision making process.
Major Contribution 3: INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP IDEOLOGY IN ORG DECISION MAKING PROCESSES AND POLICY IMPLEMENTATION.
Roumpi (2022)
Summary: Intergroup time bias in the medical context.
Major Contribution 1: Trainees spent more time forming impressions of, diagnosing, assessing pain, and prescribing opioids for white (v. Black) patients.
Major Contribution 2: This dynamic happens through aversive racism (espousing nonracist views but acting in a different manner).
Major Contribution 3: Time investment leads to health outcome disparities.
Do Bu et al. (2023)
Summary: Review of diversity and discrimination research in the HRM literature.
Major Contribution 1: Discrimination remains prominent, effective diversity management can lead to positive outcomes, intersectionality increasingly important.
Major Contribution 2: Growing use of experimental designs to investigate causality.
Major Contribution 3: Call to link research with real life policy implementation to effectively enact change.
Triana et al. (2021)
Summary: Examines articles that address entrepreneurship and race.
Major Contribution 1: Argues that entrepreneurship cannot be understood separately from race – it unfolds in a racialized social context.
Major Contribution 2: Entrepreneurship is both marked by social inequality and a way for racial minorities to navigate around traditionally racist org systems.
Major Contribution 3: Entrepreneurship incorporating race can tailor goods and services that are in tune with customer preferences.
Bruton et al. (2023)
Summary: Focuses on cyber incivility and interpersonal incivility as mechanisms through which race leads to perceived discrimination.
Major Contribution 1: Non-White employees experience subtle forms of discrimination through the use of technology and cyber space which accentuate the need for organizations to eradicate workplace incivility so that their employees can evade the adverse outcomes associated with experiencing incivility at work.
Major Contribution 2: Selective incivility = form of modern discrimination.
Major Contribution 3: Identifies incivility as a mediator between racial discrimination and its adverse outcomes.
Daniels and Thornton (2020)
Summary: Critical and comprehensive review of diversity management practices and their evolution.
Major Contribution 1: Challenges of current strategies = superficial implementation, tokenism, lack of leadership commitment, insufficient integration into main org practices.
Major Contribution 2: Existing frameworks like the business case for diversity fall short because they fail to address deeper issues of systemic inequality.
Major Contribution 3: Call for greater attention to intersectionality, power dynamics, and the socio-political contexts that shape organizational practices. The paper also advocates for more empirical research to understand the long-term impacts of diversity initiatives.
Kollen (2021)
Summary: Review and presentation of research themes and avenues in diversity management literature.
Major Contribution 1: Addresses the interplay between diversity and inequality. We can’t understand diversity studies without understanding structural inequality.
Major Contribution 2: Need to dig deeper into deep level diversity – class, intersectionality, disability, neurodiversity, more easily concealed variables.
Major Contribution 3: Call for longitudinal studies, multi-method approaches, in order to develop theory to implement and address issues.
Post et al. (2021)
Summary: Reviewing extant literature on antecedents and outcomes of diversity management practices through lenses of institutional and resource-based theory.
Major Contribution 1: Institutional theory = highlights the role of external pressures, such as laws, industry standards, and cultural expectations, in shaping these practices. Organizations may implement diversity initiatives to enhance their public image and ensure they are perceived as socially responsible.
Major Contribution 2: Resource-based theory: organizations can enhance creativity, problem-solving, and innovation, leading to better performance. This theory emphasizes the internal benefits of diversity, suggesting that diverse teams can drive superior outcomes by bringing varied perspectives and skills.
Major Contribution 3: Integrating the two perspectives makes sense, but it needs to be done in a legitimate way. Orgs tend to superficially implement programs to gain legitimacy and resources but they do not have the intended impacts.
Yang and Konrad (2011)
Summary: Authors propose that the use of broad-based stock options granted to at
least half the workforce creates the conditions supporting a positive relationship between
workforce racial diversity and firm outcomes. Panel data from 155 companies who applied for 100 best companies to work for.
Major Contribution 1: racial diversity was positively related to subsequent firm financial performance and individual affective commitment and was not significantly associated with subsequent voluntary turnover rates,
when accompanied by a firm’s adoption of broad-based stock options
Major Contribution 2: under the
nonuse of broad-based stock options, racial diversity was significantly related to higher
voluntary turnover rates and lower employee affective commitment, with no financial
performance gains.
Major Contribution 3: Stock options = proxy for justice in the workplace and creates a communal sense of buy-in and mutual dependences. Goes back to Allport (1954) idea of optimal conditions of intergroup contact.
Han et al. (2020)
Summary: examine the role of White women as allies in promoting allyship and creating a sense of organizational identity safety for Black women. Study focuses on how the endorsement of White women as allies can influence Black women’s perceptions of allyship and their feelings of safety within an organization.
Major Contribution 1: Allyship = support and advocacy for members of marginalized groups. Identity safety = assurance that one’s social identity will be respected and valued within an organization
Major Contribution 2: ENDORSEMENT of WW as allies = key mechanism driving positive outcomes. Not just promises or signaling, actual endorsement of one’s behavior and intentions.
Major Contribution 3: Practically recommend support for further development of allyship programs. Help enhance the experience and inclusion/ID safety for BW.
Johnson and Pietri (2022)
Summary: Explore the concept of ally work within the context of liberalism – 3 levels (self, relational, organizational).
Major Contribution 1: Self ally work = individuals recognizing biases and privileges to act in ways that support marginalized groups.
Major Contribution 2: Relational ally work = building supportive relationships w/ marginalized individuals or groups.
Major Contribution 3: Organizational ally work = implementing policies and practices that promote D and E. Often requires structural changes and leaders’ commitment.
Dang and Joshi (2023)
Summary: EThIC model of ally development that goes beyond performative actions to foster deep commitments to DEI.
Major Contribution 1: Holistic approach integrating character development w/ org practices and policies.
Major Contribution 2: Community engagement as a key aspect of the model – bringing real, lived experiences into the process of ally development.
Major Contribution 3: Aims for long-term change as opposed to one-time or superficial acts of allyship.
Warren and Warren (2021)
Summary: Goes beyond concept of allyship to look at motivations for members of advantaged groups to support those from disadvantaged groups.
Major Contribution 1: Social ID and group dynamics (identifying through perceived similarities or shared values)
Major Contribution 2: Social norms and behavior of peers (if supportive actions are viewed favorably then group members are more likely to engage).
Major Contribution 3: Sometimes actions are for personal benefits/self-serving. (Enhancing social status or reducing personal feelings of discomfort about inequality).
Radke et al. (2020)
Summary: call for a concerted effort to combat it through collective action grounded in Black feminist principles. Emphasize the need for systemic change to address the structural inequities and biases that Black academics face.
Major Contribution 1: anti-Blackness manifests in various forms within academic settings, from hiring practices and promotion criteria to everyday microaggressions and institutional policies that disadvantage Black scholars.
Major Contribution 2: argues for the application of Black feminist theory as a guiding framework to understand and dismantle these inequities. This approach emphasizes the intersectionality of race, gender, and other social identities, highlighting how these intersecting oppressions uniquely impact Black women in academia. Practical recommendations = hiring and promotion practices, professional support, accountability mechanisms, inclusive culture.
Major Contribution 3: Allies have a responsibility to dismantle anti-Black structures and systems in academia.
Bell et al. (2021)
Summary: Integrating the neurodiversity and leadership literatures. Previous leadership on research and disability treats content of study as “special cases” and not theory that can be generated about a population.
Major Contribution 1: Leadership defined as: relational, transactional, organizing competencies.
Major Contribution 2: Critical disability theory = akin to CRT in looking at how systems and structures reproduce hierarchy based on ability status.
Major Contribution 3: Differences can potentially be strengths – hypersensitivity, pattern recognition, visual and spatial creativity, structure and routine.
Roberson et al. (2021)
Summary: Looks at bystanders and aversive racism in the context of George Floyd – why did no one intervene?
Major Contribution 1: Psychological drivers – self-image, downplaying severity, rationalization.
Major Contribution 2: Social dynamics and group norms.
Major Contribution 3: We need training programs, responsibility, and accountability.
Murrell (2020)
