Arguments against racial reparations in the United States often
lean on the assertions that slavery was “a long time ago,” that no one alive
today suffered as a slave in the United States, and that no one alive today
owned any slaves in the United States (at least not legally; we know human
trafficking remains a major problem). The argument generally proceeds that
therefore no one suffered from slavery and no one benefitted so no one deserves
“The past is the past,” they say.
Sociologists and other social scientists disagree. The past may be the past but it continues to have a measurable influence on contemporary social outcomes, and “legacy of slavery” research shows that chattel slavery is directly related to a wide variety of phenomena in the United States: violent crime rates, black election turnout, executions, educational inequality, economic inequality, school segregation. And internationally, researchers find that the slave trade significantly stunted the economic development of places in Africa where slaves were stolen and places where slavery was more widespread historically, with the exception of the United States.
Each year, firms invest millions of dollars in diversity programs aimed at increasing the representation and advancement of women and racial minorities. Sociologists have found that some of these programs work, and some do more harm than good. One key ingredient in whether diversity programs improve, or worsen, the representation of women and racial minorities is if these initiatives are supported by employees. Programs that are viewed positively by workers are more likely to produce the intended results, while those that are resisted may result in a backlash and actually make conditions worse for underrepresented groups.
In a recent study, we explored how people feel about different types of diversity programs and why they feel the way they do. We used data from a TESS (Time-sharing Experiments for the Social Sciences) survey that asked nearly 2,000 working individuals whether they supported eight different diversity policies. The design of the survey allowed us to see if support differed based on whether policies are aimed at women or racial minorities, as well as if support differed based on if the policies were justified to improve diversity, address discrimination, or if no justification is given.
sentiment is alive and growing in America.
Between 2003 and 2014, the share of Americans disapproving of their
child marrying a Muslim increased from 34 to 50 percent, with Muslims
comprising the least desirable marriage partners, compared to atheists, gays,
Jews, and African Americans.
the percentage of Americans reporting that Muslims “do not agree at all with
their vision of American society” increased from 26 to 45 percent, with Muslims
comprising the most distrusted group.
growing animosity towards Muslims, we know very little about the kinds of
neighborhoods where they live. Urban
scholars have had a long-standing interest in where minority groups live
because neighborhoods provide connections to a society’s majority members,
economic and educational opportunities, and enhancements to health and quality
of life. Because we lack data on where people of different religious
backgrounds live in the United States, Muslims’ residential patterns have remained
absent from these studies.
In 2014, CVS CEO Larry Merlo made the controversial
decision to pull tobacco products from the store’s shelves. The decision immediately
caused a 7% drop in stock price and cost the business $2 billion in revenues in
the following year.
Yet, Merlo argued that this short-term sacrifice was
necessary to promote CVS’s long-term competitiveness as the decision allowed
the firm to position itself as a healthcare company, which would not be
possible were the firm to continue selling tobacco products.
Carey and colleagues provide an account for how Merlo and the board of directors were able to promote and achieve a strategy that would cost shareholders in the short-term. First, Merlo had considerable discretion and autonomy as a CEO. Second, Merlo was able to convince the board to see the value of a long-term orientation, in part due to board members’ experiences on other boards facing similar decisions. Merlo and the board developed an approach, built on this understanding, for selling the firm’s strategy to investors and market analysts. The authors also document how other firms, including 3M and Verizon, made significant investments in R&D and innovation that paid off in the long run but at the expense of short-term gains.
Over the last several years, workers and firms have both
come to place an increased premium on internal hiring and mobility. While it
remains rare for workers to spend their entire career within the same
organization, workers would prefer to advance their careers with their current
employer, as internal moves are less risky, provide stability, and allow
workers to take on more new responsibilities than other firms are willing to
Organizations have come to realize that internal hires are
both less expensive and more effective than external hires. As a result, nearly
half of all open jobs are now filled internally, and that percentage is even
higher as one moves closer to the C-suite.
a recent study, I set out to better understand how jobs are filled
internally. It turns out that the vast majority of internal hires are made
through posting or slotting. Posting is a formal, market-oriented process in
which a hiring manager posts an open job to an internal job board and invites
interested internal candidates to apply.
What happens to disaster-affected communities once the
nonprofit organizations (NGOs) and media circus fly off to the next disaster?
Our recently published research on the
work of returnee social entrepreneurs in Haiti addresses this important
Aside from the recent Oxfam scandal where aid workers
exploited sex workers, Haiti’s progress in rebuilding since the devastating
2010 earthquake has been conspicuously absent from the news. Our research explores
how longer-term disaster recovery and rebuilding actually takes shape.
Understanding the means by which communities can
recover from disaster and build better, more resilient institutions (schools,
physical infrastructure, workplaces, etc.) is a non-trivial matter. After most
extreme natural hazards, communities struggle to cope with them and bounce back,
often for years. This is partly because effective institutional support and organizing
templates are frequently absent during the post-disaster recovery.
Our research shows that institutional workers, specifically social entrepreneurs, are key social actors that can fill the institutional voids and build community capacity.
Our spouses, our parents, and our children are often the first lines of defense against challenges in life. We lean on them as we navigate our first jobs or raise funds for a new home. We ask them for help when we fall ill. When their help is not enough, we turn to public safety nets provided by schools, hospitals, and government programs. However, these safety nets are grossly inadequate to catch the vulnerable. What is more, the family support system is threatened by growing divorce, single parenthood, and poor health among vulnerable populations.
Getting and staying married is becoming a phenomenon of the
upper classes. People with less education and less income are increasingly opting
to forgo marriage. Instead, they often enter parenthood alone or within
cohabiting relationships that are unstable with few legal protections. The divorce
rate, while on the decline for upper-class families, is still at a historical
high among couples with the least education.
The Marikana massacre, in which 34 striking mineworkers were shot dead by police on 16 August 2012, was a tragic and historic event in South Africa. A judicial commission of inquiry set up to investigate how it came about put much of the blame on the police.
It was also critical of the mining company, Lonmin. In particular, the commission highlighted the company’s failure to live up to its promise to build 5,500 houses for workers. It only built three. This created a situation, according to the commission, in which “large numbers of Lonmin workers live in squalid informal settlements… creating an environment conducive to the creation of tension, labour unrest, disunity among its employees or other harmful conduct”.
Even a Lonmin executive conceded this link in one of the commission’s hearings.
But how was it possible for Lonmin to renege on its promise to build 5,500 houses? After all, this was a formal commitment made in terms of the Mining Charter of 2002 and thus legally binding.
is it that immigrant women from China work more than immigrant women from
India? An intuitive answer is that women in China are more likely to work than
women in India, which is related to prevailing norms in these countries about
gender and work. When women immigrate to, say, the United States, they bring
these norms with them, which influences their subsequent decisions about
whether to work.
Our research confirms this basic insight but adds an important twist: not all women from a particular origin country share the same beliefs regarding work. Therefore, although the employment behavior of immigrant women stems, in part, from the norms that prevail in their countries of origin, the influence of these norms is likely to vary across individuals from the same country, depending on their personal beliefs and motivations for migrating.
When frontline employees speak up candidly, organizations become more effective. Because such employees are often in direct contact with customers and production processes, they tend to encounter important issues and develop valuable ideas and opinions that can help correct for problems on the horizon. Therefore, when employees freely express their thoughts, organizations benefit by being able to quickly spot errors or mistakes, as well as innovate products and systems.
The problem, however, is that employees frequently fail to speak up or voice their concerns in the workplace. Consequently, problems fail to be escalated in a timely manner to leaders in upper management who can act on them. Often, workplace issues linger for a frustratingly long time, even when everyone on the frontlines knows about them. This becomes evident across a range of domains—from safety concerns with products or equipment to cases of sexual harassment.
Why don’t people speak up about workplace issues that are obvious to everyone around?