By Preston Williams
Affirmative action policies in the workforce have increased diversity, while often stigmatizing the very workers the policies are designed to help, according to a George Mason University researcher.
New research, conducted by George Mason School of Business professor David Kravitz and colleagues from two other universities, finds that a deeper understanding of what triggers feelings such as resentment, stigmatization and “stereotype threat” can help companies prevent these negative reactions and make diversity efforts more successful.
The study, “The Stigma of Affirmative Action: A Stereotyping-Based Theory and Meta-Analytic Test of the Consequences for Performance,” is scheduled for publication in the Academy of Management Journal this month. The Wall Street Journal reported on the research this week.
Kravitz and management professors Lisa Leslie of New York University and David Mayer of the University of Michigan built on previous studies that found that affirmative action recipients were viewed as less competent, which creates feelings of self-doubt for recipients.
The new research—based on a meta-analysis of 45 studies on the subject that includes 6,432 individuals—found additional drivers of the stigma that affirmative action program recipients face. For example, they are also viewed as competitors for company resources and therefore seen as less likeable by their colleagues, which can lead to negative assessments of their performance.
To counteract this effect, organizations should emphasize the qualifications of new hires, the researchers said, and allow the staff to know them as a person—their interests, hobbies, and such. Companies also should reinforce the message that a stronger, more diverse team helps the whole organization succeed.
“When a person is a member of a group targeted by an affirmative action plan, anyone who believes affirmative action involves preferences may not know why they were hired,” Kravitz says. “Maybe they were hired because they’re great. Or maybe the corporation wants to hit a target. To eliminate stigmatization, make sure everyone knows that the affirmative action program does not involve preferences and highlight the competence and credentials of the new hires.”
Those hired through affirmative action programs also need to be reminded that they were selected for their qualifications and that others know of their qualifications.
None of the drawbacks made Kravitz and his colleagues conclude that companies should abolish affirmative action programs. Instead, they conclude that such programs should be implemented more effectively and also that positive outcomes, such as having high-level minority role models in business organizations, should be studied.
“One reaction might be we ought to eliminate affirmative action,” Kravitz says. “But in-group bias is alive and well, and whoever the ‘in’ group is tends to favor others like themselves. It’s a human characteristic, and affirmative action is needed to give members of underrepresented groups a real chance. It has had a positive impact.”