Search

Finding ways of breaking the gender‐based glass ceiling is an important human resource issue in companies today. Employing a sample of over 200 retail stores, we explore multiple moderating and mediating factors to explain when and why women store leaders perform better, equal to, or worse than men. Results reveal that (a) women are assigned to lead stores that are positioned closer to competitive rivals than men and (b) women receive unfair distributive pay outcomes in that they are generally paid less than their male counterparts. When accounting for these factors, performance (i.e., productivity) differences between stores with men and women leaders diminished. Further, organizational tenure and store‐unit size (i.e., number of employees) were positively associated with sales performance among stores with women leaders. The findings unveil why some store‐units led by women underperform but also offer contingency factors that delineate when women‐led and men‐led stores excel in sales productivity. Implications for recruiting and retaining both women and men in leadership are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given the mixed evidence that having both women and men in the top management team (TMT) or in the board of directors (BOD) has a significant influence on organizational innovation, we resolve this issue by conceptualizing TMT–BOD gender diversity as part of a multiteam system, that has joint effects which impact organizational innovation. Evidence from the study of both Chinese firms and UK firms confirm our conceptualization by showing an interaction effect between TMT gender diversity and BOD gender diversity such that innovation is greatest when both are high. The positive TMT–BOD gender diversity interaction effect on innovation improves subsequent firm performance particularly in dynamic environments. The findings refine current thinking by going beyond research that tests intra‐team TMT or BOD diversity independently and instead considers inter‐team diversity across both leadership teams within the strategic leadership upper echelons. In sum, findings show that high levels of TMT and BOD gender diversity result in more organizational innovation, which ultimately improves firm performance. We offer implications for women's inclusion in leadership as well as for research on the upper echelons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The physical attractiveness stereotype maintains that what is beautiful is good. Does this also apply to Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) and influence their compensation? There are numerous debates on CEO compensation, and scholars have long been interested in understanding the factors that impact CEO compensation. Of the empirical studies investigating the antecedents of CEO compensation, little attention has been paid to CEO facial attractiveness. Drawing mainly from the physical attractiveness stereotype, we argue that CEO attractiveness increases CEO compensation, and the effect becomes stronger when the CEO has worked as a CEO in other firms, but weaker when the CEO is female or works for a high‐technology firm. We tested our hypotheses by coding facial attractiveness for all CEOs in S&P 500 firms over 10 years (861 CEOs and 4,395 firm‐year observations). Results partly support our predictions and show that the effect of CEO facial attractiveness on compensation is not only robust but also economically significant. Moderating effects were found using prior CEO experience and high tech industry as moderators. However, we found no moderating effect of CEO gender on the relationship between CEO facial attractiveness and compensation. This study suggests that CEO compensation is not an entirely rational process, and compensation committees appear to be biased in favor of beautiful individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examine whether matching levels of racial diversity in upper management and lower management (i.e., racial diversity congruence) impact firm productivity. In a sample of high-tech firms, we found that congruence between upper-management racial diversity and lower-management racial diversity positively impacts firm productivity, supporting knowledge-based view perspectives. Furthermore, organizations with high levels of racial diversity in both upper and lower management (i.e., high-high racial diversity congruence) realized superior productivity compared to organizations with low levels of racial diversity in both upper and lower management (i.e., low-low racial diversity congruence). Results also revealed differences across levels of racial diversity incongruence between upper management and lower management (i.e., asymmetry effects) where by firms with a more racially diverse upper management than lower management out produced firms with a more racially diverse lower management than upper management. A supplemental sample of Fortune 500 firms enhanced generalizability, as the pattern of findings was very similar to that of the high-tech sample. We discuss the study's implications and make a call for future research that simultaneously considers the upper echelons and the lower echelons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates how firm structure, chief executive officer (CEO) power, and federal legislation influence hiring of corporate directors from a diverse background. Combining the value‐in‐diversity hypothesis and the similarity‐attraction paradigm, we examine the impact of economically rational (i.e., business need) and social preference (i.e., similar‐to‐me bias) drivers of board diversity post‐the Sarbanes‐Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX). Using a sample of S&P 1500 firms from an eight‐year period spanning SOX, we find that SOX is positively correlated with board diversity. Although SOX was not intended to increase board diversity, the changes it put in place have subsequently facilitated more board diversity. Results show that the economically rational predictor (firm operational complexity) had a positive and statistically significant effect on board diversity pre‐SOX but that effect disappeared post‐SOX. Meanwhile, CEO power, a social preference inhibitor of board diversity, had a negative and statistically significant relationship with board diversity pre‐SOX which also disappeared post‐SOX. It appears that SOX has mitigated both economically rational drivers to want more diversity as well as social preference drivers to want less diversity. Implications of these findings for research and practice are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reviews discrimination and diversity research published in Human Resource Management (HRM) over the past 60 years. While discrimination and diversity are very different constructs, it is often informative to study them together, because when people recognize each other's diversity, this can result in bias, stereotyping, and discrimination. We conducted bibliographic searches for terms related to discrimination and diversity as well as a manual search through every title and abstract published in HRM over the last 60 years to assess article relevance. The search resulted in 135 research articles with 136 unique studies (i.e., samples) which are reviewed in this article. Sex and race are the demographics that have been examined the most in HRM, while religion has been examined the least. Moreover, the number of studies examining lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) employees in the workplace in HRM has grown quickly within the past 10 years, culminating in a recent meta‐analysis. Our review looks at some of the earliest research published, the most recent research published, and the overall trends we identified in the research over the years for both discrimination and diversity articles. We then make future research suggestions and recommendations to advance the study of discrimination and diversity in the coming years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Algorithms might prevent prejudices and increase objectivity in personnel selection decisions, but they have also been accused of being biased. We question whether algorithm‐based decision‐making or providing justifying information about the decision‐maker (here: to prevent biases and prejudices and to make more objective decisions) helps organizations to attract a diverse workforce. In two experimental studies in which participants go through a digital interview, we find support for the overall negative effects of algorithms on fairness perceptions and organizational attractiveness. However, applicants with discrimination experiences tend to view algorithm‐based decisions more positively than applicants without such experiences. We do not find evidence that providing justifying information affects applicants—regardless of whether they have experienced discrimination or not. Practitioner points: Algorithms evaluating digital interviews violate applicants' fairness perceptions and diminish organizational attractivenessApplicants with discrimination experiences tend to view algorithm‐based decisions more positively Information about the use of algorithms in hiring could be detrimentalThe use of algorithms could be an alternative to hiring prior victims of discrimination [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines whether and how perceived overqualification affects the relationships between perceived age discrimination from one's supervisor and two outcome variables: job withdrawal and somatic symptoms. Using a paired sample (of employees and a paired participant who knew them well, N = 235 pairs), results show that employees who feel overqualified, compared to those who do not feel overqualified, react more negatively to perceived age discrimination by engaging in greater withdrawal behaviors and experiencing higher somatic symptoms. Findings extend both relative deprivation theory and the age discrimination literature by indicating that perceived overqualification is not only a trigger for relative deprivation, but also a factor that seems to lower an employee's threshold for tolerating discriminatory treatment. We conclude with a discussion on practical implications that incorporate strategies for reducing perceptions of age discrimination and overqualification. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We draw on relative deprivation theory to examine how the context influences the relationship between employees' perceptions of gender discrimination and outcomes at work using a meta-analysis and two complementary empirical studies. Our meta-analysis includes 85 correlations from published and unpublished studies from around the world to assess correlates of perceived workplace gender discrimination that have significant implications for employees. We extend relative deprivation theory to identify national differences in labor laws and cultural norms as contextual factors that affect the threshold for feeling deprived and moderate the relationship between perceived workplace gender discrimination and employee outcomes. Findings show that perceived gender discrimination is negatively related to job attitudes, physical health outcomes and behaviors, psychological health, and work-related outcomes (job-based and relationship-based). Correlations between perceived workplace gender discrimination and physical health outcomes and behaviors were stronger in countries with more broadly integrated labor policies and stringently enforced labor practices focused on promoting gender equality. Correlations were also stronger in countries with more gender-egalitarian cultural practices across multiple employee outcomes of perceived workplace gender discrimination. Further, results from two complementary studies (one employee survey and one experiment) supported the meta-analytic findings and provided evidence of the relative deprivation rationale central to our theory. Implications for research and practice include the need to consider the influence of the country context in organizational decisions to prevent and address gender discrimination and its consequences for employees and ultimately, for employers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Grounded in role congruity theory, we examine how status incongruence (when the subordinate is older, has more education, work experience, and/or organizational tenure than the supervisor) in subordinate-supervisor dyads affects transformational leaders' ability to foster affective organizational commitment among their subordinates. Across two field studies, our findings show that the relationship between transformational leadership and subordinate affective organizational commitment is less positive when status incongruence is high. Furthermore, in both field studies we found a 3-way interaction among transformational leadership, status incongruence, and supervisor gender predicting subordinate affective organizational commitment. Specifically, in Study 1 (pink-collar employees in Turkey), low status incongruence strengthened the positive relationship between transformational leadership and subordinate affective organizational commitment for male leaders. In Study 2 (pink-collar employees in the United States), low status incongruence strengthened the positive relationship between transformational leadership and subordinate affective organizational commitment for female leaders. Furthermore, Study 2 also revealed that collective identity was a mediator of both the significant 2- and 3-way interaction effects on subordinate affective organizational commitment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]