Search

Innovating for the future necessitates a deep theoretical understanding of how individuals cognitively and behaviorally cope with and adapt to shifting paradigms of work and rapid technological advancements. With this in mind, we offer an in-depth examination of the psychological and behavioral mechanisms underpinning how people perceive and react to emerging challenges and opportunities in the new world of work. The first presentation explores independent, creative workers, delving into their unique strategies for navigating non- traditional work structures and their adaptation in terms of both psychological orientation and physical presence. The second presentation challenges conventional views on busyness, proposing that individuals often engage in self-imposed busyness as a deliberate choice that can yield positive outcomes in terms of productivity and well-being. The third presentation introduces a relational theory of microaggressions, a phenomenon increasingly prevalent in modern work settings, and examines the perceptions and responses of individuals and the reactions of perpetrators. The fourth presentation shifts the focus to the perceptions of generative AI in the domain of advice- giving, probing into how individuals may experience the potential benefits and drawbacks of AI tools in the advice generation process. Finally, the last presentation underscores the significance of technology identification as a key factor influencing individuals' willingness to adopt new technologies, demonstrating its role in shaping technological integration in the workplace. Collectively, these presentations will shed light on the multifaceted ways in which human actors are responding to evolving work environments and offer important insights for understanding and navigating the future of work. Self-Care/Self-Extraction: Movement Practices by Independent Workers Author: Margaret Jack; Syracuse U. School of Information Author: Melissa Mazmanian; U. of California, Irvine The Busy Bee Effect: How and Why Self-Imposed Busyness Affects Work-Related Outcomes Author: Elizabeth Nguyen Trinh; U. of Michigan, Ross School of Business Author: Laura Maria Giurge; The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) A Relational Theory of Workplace Microaggressions Author: Basima Tewfik; MIT Sloan School of Management Author: Summer Jackson; Harvard Business School The Role of Task Order in the Evaluation of Human and AI-Generated Advice Author: Erica Bailey; Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley Identity and Technology Adoption Author: Maya J. Cratsley; U. of Southern California - Marshall School of Business Author: Nathanael Fast; U. of Southern California [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Can for-profit firms, occupations, and markets be part of the solution to systemic racism rather than part of the problem? Past research provides considerable reason for doubt. After all, there is voluminous evidence of racial bias in the allocation of opportunities for employment and career advancement (Fernandez & Fernandez-Mateo, 2006; Pager, 2003; Pager, Bonikowski, & Western, 2009; Pager & Pedulla, 2015; Pedulla & Pager, 2019). Moreover, in Ray's (2019) influential theory of "racialized organizations," he argues persuasively that (American) racist schemas have become embedded in organizational rules, routines, and structures. It is in organizations (not via ambient logics alone) that schemas are fused with resource-richness. While social forces act upon the organizations ("racial superstructures"), the reverse path is also well-trod: organizations' resources enable reinforcement of racist schemas in their own fields, markets, and wider classes, and in society writ-large - systemically (Bonilla-Silva, 1997, 2001; cf., Omi & Winant, 2014; Wilson, 1976, 1987). Ray's (2019) diagnosis does not deny that organizations change (for good or ill) at certain times, the underlying racist schemas "remain largely stable." For would-be reformers of for-profit firms, occupations, and markets, this account is daunting because it is a theory emphasizing major stability (amidst minor moves and counter- moves by reformers). For major change ambitions, this implies that organizations should either de-racialize or disband altogether. Yet de-racialization seems impossible given that any cultural expression in an historically racist society--including those by which organizational "spaces" are constructed--are necessarily racialized (Anderson, 2015; 2022). The recognition that it is impossible for firms to de-racialize implies that we should seek alternatives to firms. But it is notable that neither Ray (2019) nor the scholarly publications extending the theory has proposed alternatives to formal organizations as a way to better combat systemic racism. This stands to reason. Research by organizational sociologists and management theorists are unified in noting that while informal groups and networks can achieve remarkable feats of coordination and cooperation over the short term (e.g., Majchrzak, Jarvenpaa, & Hollingshead, 2007; Mollick & Kuppuswamy, 2014; Quarantelli & Dynes, 1977; Wachtendorf, 2004), however, the disquieting potential for informal groups and networks to further systemic racism exists precisely because it is hard to hold them accountable for their actions (Du Bois, 1926). The hierarchical governance mechanisms that constitute formal organizations are essential for providing the "reliability" and "accountability" for efforts that need to be sustained over time and place and in engagement with interested stakeholders (Freeland & Zuckerman Sivan, 2018; Hannan & Freeman, 1984; cf., King, Felin, & Whetten, 2010; Turco, 2016). The potential for reliability (and especially) accountability has been noted as essential (if difficult to achieve) for mitigating discrimination (Castilla, 2015; Foschi, 1996; Lerner & Tetlock, 1999). Accordingly, insofar as recent trends have witnessed a slowly "vanishing corporation" and the "uberization" of the workplace with the rise of the "gig economy," scholars have tended to see these trends as worrisome rather than promising from the standpoint of combating (racial) injustice (Schor & Vallas, 2021). In short, accountability is essential for dismantling systemic racism and formal organizations are creatures of accountability. As such, formal organizations have the unique potential--however rarely realized--to become tools for dismantling systemic racism rather than tools for perpetuating it. This symposium showcases recent research projects focused on the social processes of inequality and interrogates the role of firms, occupations, and markets in redressing systemic racism in society. In particular, the presenters are focused on the guiding question of how firms might realize this potential, and what are the opportunities for organization theorists to provide guidance in this regard. An Organizational Dilemma: Dismantling Systemic Racism by Building Stable Racially Integrated Spaces Author: Summer Jackson; Harvard Business School Author: Ray Reagans; MIT Sloan School of Management Author: Ezra Zuckerman; Massachusetts Institute of Technology The Sources of Persistence for (Good) Diversity Programs Author: Vic Marsh; U. of Toronto, Rotman School of Management What's In It For Me? Explaining Millennials' Support for Corporate Diversity and Inclusion Policies Author: Adia Harvey Wingfield; Washington U. in St. Louis Left Behind: Affordable Housing and Communities of Color in Suburban Chicago Author: John Robinson; Princeton U. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many organizations set-up well-intentioned diversity goals but find that the reality falls short of their expectations. We take up this problem -- how organizations can achieve their diversity goals -- by illuminating how the behaviors of individual actors undermine ambitious goals and well-intentioned practices. In this symposium, we bring together four papers that explore novel mechanisms that elucidate how micro-level actions shape the efficacy of meso-level diversity initiatives and macro-outcomes of interest to DEI scholars. The papers' approaches draw on several perspectives, including those rooted in psychodynamics, culture studies and social networks, and diverse methodologies, including longitudinal data, ethnography, experiments, and interviews. Jennifer Merluzzi is especially fitting as the discussant, as diversity in organizations is one of the major themes in her work. A Systems Psychodynamic Perspective on Racial Inequality in Organizations Author: Sanaz Mobasseri; Boston U. Questrom School of Business Act the Part: Race and Social Class in the Modern Workplace Author: Summer Jackson; Harvard Business School Constrained by Good Intentions: Unintended Consequences of Fair-Minded Hiring Rules Author: Jeraul Mackey; Rady School of Management, U. of California San Diego Do referrals disadvantage non-White applicants? Evidence from Silicon Valley tech firms Author: Elena Obukhova; McGill U. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social inequality, i.e., the unequal opportunities and outcomes based on social group membership, is one of the grand challenges of our time. The current literature on social inequality foregrounds organizational practices and structures that contribute to patterns of social inequality. Given that organizations distribute most of the economic and social resources in our society, this research has yielded important insights into the drivers of social inequality both within and beyond organizational boundaries. However, such studies have predominantly focused on patterns of vertical segregation of individuals across organizational ranks. This focus has distracted from patterns of horizontal segregation of individuals into different occupations and industries, based on their social group membership. In this symposium we seek to develop an occupational lens on social inequality by bringing together organization theorists whose work is exemplar of this new direction. This symposium, which is both timely and relevant, is grounded in recent empirical work. The experts will draw on their own research to discuss how an occupational lens can help us to better understand social inequality. In discussing patterns of intra-and inter-occupational dynamics of social inequality, we seek to generate insights from the rich studies that the panelists have conducted and elaborate on why and how an occupational lens can enrich our understanding of social inequality. The symposium should be immensely useful for researchers and practitioners looking to address social inequality within the workplace by not only focusing on broad patterns of social inequality across occupations but also by addressing some of the micro-dynamics of social inequality within the workplace. We hope that this symposium will provide a forum for discussion about an occupational lens on social inequality and provoke insights into future research direction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a 20-month ethnographic study, I examine how a technology firm, "ShopCo" (a pseudonym), considered 13 different hiring platforms to attract minority engineering talent. I find that when choosing to adopt hiring platforms focused on racial minority candidates, but not when choosing to adopt hiring platforms where the modal candidate on the platform is white, ShopCo decision-makers expressed distaste with the perceived (a) objectification, (b) exploitation, and (c) 'race-based targeting' of racial minorities. These repugnant market concerns influenced which types of platforms ShopCo adopted to recruit racial minorities. ShopCo eschewed hiring platforms that emphasized time, quantity, efficiency, opportunity, and compensation as benefits to candidates (an instrumental approach to candidate recruitment--typically used for white candidates) in favor of platforms that emphasized individuality, ethics, equity, authenticity, and commitment as benefits for candidates (a non-instrumental approach to candidate recruitment). I consider the implications of my findings--specifically, this new demand-side constraint of repugnant market concerns--for organizations looking to create more diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This symposium showcases recent research projects focused on questions of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the workplace. Companies are keenly aware of the business case for diversity and are increasingly interested in adopting policies and practices designed to foster diverse, inclusive, and equitable workplaces. However, for every empirical study finding a positive outcome associated with a specific DEI practice, there are just as many studies demonstrating backlash, negative outcomes, and false progress. The mechanism by which positive outcomes can be achieved in the modern workplace, and negative outcomes are generated, is under-theorized. In this symposium, we will present fresh insights into the different DEI policies and practices. The contexts in which these phenomena are explored are varied, and include an educational institution, a technology firm, and a pharmaceutical company. The researchers draw on rich, deep literatures from multiple disciplines, such as social psychology, economic sociology, and law and society to inform their findings. And finally, the research design adopted by each project highlights the strengths of quantitative and qualitative research -- demonstrating the relationship between hypothesis-generating, inductive qualitative work, and hypothesis-testing, deductive quantitative work. Overall, the symposium will address these goals: (1) highlight new findings and emerging theory on the demand- and supply-side mechanisms of organizational segregation; (2) champion research approaches that integrate qualitative and quantitative research designs and methodologies for conducting research on DEI policies and practices; and (3) provide a forum for discussion of the challenges and opportunities of implementing these policies and practices in the workplace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]