Upload
yahir-blissett
View
217
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Best Practices or Best Guesses:Best Practices or Best Guesses:Which Corporate Diversity Which Corporate Diversity
Programs Work? Programs Work?
Best Practices or Best Guesses:Best Practices or Best Guesses:Which Corporate Diversity Which Corporate Diversity
Programs Work? Programs Work?
Frank DobbinFrank DobbinHarvard University, Department of SociologyHarvard University, Department of Sociology
Thanks to the National Science Foundation, Russell Sage Foundation, John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, and to my collaborators, Alexandra Kalev, Erin Kelly, and Daniel Schrage
Excellence Empowered by a Diverse Workforce: Achieving Racial & Ethnic Equity in ChemistryArlington, VA, September 26, 2007
White Men and Women in Management
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Year
Perc
ent o
f M
anag
ers
White Men
White Women
National Sample of 829 Firms
Minority Men and Women in Management
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Year
Perc
ent o
f Man
ager
s
Black Men
Hispanic Men
Black Women
Asian MenHispanic Women
Asian Women
Percent of Group Members Who are Managers, 2002
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
White Male White Female Black Male Black Female Hispanic Male HispanicFemale
Asian-American
Male
Asian-AmericanFemale
Perce
nt
Approaches to Diversity
• Establish Responsibility (Theory of Bureaucracy)– Diversity Taskforce– Diversity Manager
• Combat Bias (Cognitive Psychology)– Diversity Training
• Alter Incentives (Agency Theory in Economics)– Diversity Evaluations
• Combat Social Isolation (Network Theory)– Network Program– Mentor Program
National Sample of 829 Firms in 2002
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Perc
ent o
f Fi
rms
DiversityTaskforce
DiversityManager
DiversityTraining
DiversityEvaluations
NetworkProgram
MentorProgram
Popularity of Diversity Programs
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40P
erce
nt
Ch
ang
e
DiversityTaskforce
DiversityManager
DiversityTraining
DiversityEvaluations
NetworkProgram
MentorProgram
Program Effects on Management Diversity
White Men White Women Black Men Black Women
Hispanic Men Hispanic Women Asian Men Asian Women
Which Programs Increase Diversity?
• Establishing Responsibility– Diversity Taskforce– Diversity Manager
• Combating Bias– Diversity Training
• Altering Incentives– Diversity Evaluations
• Combating Social Isolation– Network Program– Mentor Program
• Another Instance of Establishing Responsibility?
Part II: Transparency vs. Targeting
Formal, Transparent, Rules
• Pro: Minimizes Discretion, Bias
• Con: Disconnect – Practice Doesn’t Change
Targeted Solutions
• Pro: Pinpoint Problems
• Con: Elicit Backlash
Bureaucratice Hiring and Promotion
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Year
Perc
ent o
f F
irm
s
Performance Evaluations
Job Description
Internal Job Posting
Salary Classification
Discharge Guidelines
Hiring Guidelines
Job Advertisement
Promotion Guidelines
Peer Evaluations
Job Ladders
Job Tests - Managers
Training and Recruitment
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1971
1974
1977
1980
1983
1986
1989
1992
1995
1998
2001
Year
Per
cent
of
Firm
s
Management Training
Referral Incentives
Recruit Minorities to Mgt.
Recruit Women to Training
Recruit Minorities to Training
Recruit Women to Mgt.
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%P
erce
nt
Ch
ange
Job Posting PromotionLadder
SpecialRecruitment -
Women
SpecialRecruitment -
Minorities
Recruitmentto Training -
Women
ReferralIncentives
Program Effects on Management Diversity
White Men White Women Black Men Black Women
Hispanic Men Hispanic Women Asian Men Asian Women
Part II Conclusions: Transparency vs. Targeting
• Transparency Has Small Effects– Hiring and Promotion Don’t Change?– Bureaucracy May Institutionalize Inequality
• Targeting Increases Diversity– Focuses Attention on Change– Identifies Candidates
What Can Academic Departments Do?
• What Doesn’t Work?– Diversity Training
– Networking– Diversity Performance
Evaluations– Transparency/
Bureaucracy
• What Works in Firms?– Assign Responsibility
Taskforces, Diversity Managers
– Mentoring
– Targeted Recruitment