Page 105 - Discrimination at Work The Psychological and Organizational Bases

4. GROUP-LEVEL EXPLANATIONS
75
In summary, research suggests that group composition can play a sig­
nificant role in either increasing or decreasing the barriers that women and
minorities face in the workplace as a result of stereotyping, discrimina­
tion, and bias. The results of studies that suggest that majority dominance,
minority distinctiveness, and limited access to organizational power and
resources all contribute to individual and institutional discrimination may
help to explain the detrimental and cumulative negative impact discrimi­
nation can have on minority satisfaction and success. Continued research
in this area may help us to better understand why there are consistent
findings in the organizational literature that report that minorities are less
satisfied with their jobs, receive lower performance ratings, and demon­
strate slower promotion rates (see review by Cox, Welsch, & Nkomo, 2001).
Future research on the effects of group composition on group dynamics and
perceived threat will continue to become more complicated as workforce
demographics continue to shift and in many regions of the country, Whites
become the minority group, and Hispanics become the majority group. Ad­
ditionally, researchers are just beginning to examine the impact of group-
based discrimination and injustice on the individual as chronic stressors
that can have long-term psychological and physical health outcomes for
the individual employee (e.g., Clark, Anderson, Clark, & Williams, 1999).
Another source of workplace stress and possible explanation for the preva­
lence of group-based discrimination in the workplace is conflict both be­
tween and among identity groups. Research and theory on group conflict
is presented in the next section.

Intra- and Intergroup Conflict

Conflict between members of different social identity groups and between
social identity groups themselves is likely to emerge within a multicul­
tural workplace and may have a negative effect on work process variables
and ultimately impede overall team performance (De Dreu & Van Vianen,
2001). Campbell (1965) theorized that social identity groups must compete
for scarce resources (e.g., power, status, and opportunities in the work­
place) and as a result, groups are engaged in very real conflicts involving
high stakes for both the winner and the loser. Realistic group conflict theory
(Campbell, 1965) suggests that when groups must compete for scarce re­
sources, discrimination, bias, hostility, and prejudice against the outgroup
is likely to occur.
In a now-famous study of the theory of realistic group conflict, Sherif
and his colleagues (Sherif, Harvey, White, Hood, & Sherif, 1961) conducted
an experiment at a summer boys' camp. The boys were assigned to two
groups (the Eagles and the Rattlers) and competed against each other in