Page 129 - Discrimination at Work The Psychological and Organizational Bases

GELFANDETAL
98
"champions for diversity" are needed to enact change—and the CEO is in
a very good position to passionately pursue change, to role model the be­
haviors required for change, and to help the organization to move forward
(Loden & Rosener, 1991). Such a leader can help to establish an inclusive
organizational culture through persistent communication of and visible
support for all programs and policies aimed at reducing discrimination
(Stoner & Russell-Chapin, 1997). In addition, when successes occur, he
or she would provide rewards and retrospective interpretations consis­
tent with the desired values (Gagliardi, 1986; Trice & Beyer, 1991). In this
manner, a CEO who demonstrates commitment to eliminating all forms
of discrimination throughout the organization may play a crucial role in
transforming an organization from monolithic (unicultural) to multicul­
tural (Cox, 1994).
Mid-level Management and Direct Supervisors Whereas top management
serves a symbolic function and makes decisions that affect the organiza­
tion as a whole, most employees' daily experiences with organizational
leaders are with direct supervisors or mid-level departmental (unit) man­
agers. These instrumental leaders interpret organizational strategies, poli­
cies, and practices (Zohar, 2000), and therefore act as a "lens" through which
employees perceive the organization. Immediate supervisors set the tone
for what behaviors are acceptable and what behaviors are not acceptable
(Yukl & Van Fleet, 1992); thus when management fails to punish discrimi­
natory behaviors, employees may assume that such discriminatory actions
are acceptable, which then perpetuates such acts.
Furthermore, mid-level management and supervisors make decisions
about access to organizational rewards (e.g., pay, promotions, access to
training, performance appraisals), and this acts as a proximal determinant
of the extent to which discrimination exists in a particular department. As
will be described in more detail below, evidence suggests that because of
stereotyping, prejudicial attitudes, and the similar-to-me bias, supervisors
are more likely to reward those employees who are similar to themselves
(Fadil, 1995; Ilgen & Youtz, 1986). If most supervisors are White, male,
able-bodied, and heterosexual, these negative attitudes and the similarity-
attraction effect may lead to systematic biases against those who are dif­
ferent. In other words, personnel decisions (i.e., selection, promotion) in
a single department may not appear discriminatory, yet in the aggregate
across an entire organization where this same process occurs repeatedly,
the end result is organizational-level patterns of discrimination.
The quality of leader-subordinate relationships is also an important
consideration for discrimination in organizations. High-quality leader-
member exchanges (LMX) may be less likely to develop between leader-
subordinate dyads composed of individuals who are demographically