Page 387 - Discrimination at Work The Psychological and Organizational Bases

354
HEILMAN AND HAYNES
identify are likely to differ for women and other affirmative action targets
(and indeed the research that focuses on race bears that out), it is impor­
tant to keep our focus on women in mind when reviewing the research
presented here. Also, readers should recognize that the investigations pre­
sented throughout this chapter are limited to those that address the ques­
tion of how individuals who are believed to have benefited from affirmative
action are viewed by others. There has, however, been a great deal of work
on other unintended by-products of affirmative action—particularly those
that concern its effects on the self-view and the work attitudes and behavior
of intended beneficiaries. Generally, this work supports the idea that asso­
ciation with affirmative action can negatively influence self-evaluations
of ability and performance effectiveness (Heilman, Lucas, & Kaplow,
1990; Heilman, Simon, & Repper, 1987; Major, Feinstein, & Crocker, 1994;
Nacoste, 1985), the choice of task difficulty (Heilman, Rivero, & Brett, 1991),
actual performance effectiveness (Brown, Charnsangavej, Keough, New­
man, & Rentfrow, 2000), reactions to others in the work setting (Heilman,
Kaplow, Amato, & Stathatos, 1993), and assumptions about others' expec­
tations of oneself and ensuing task decisions and self-regard (Heilman &
Alcott, 2001). Because this volume is about discrimination in organizations,
however, we chose not to focus on the direct impact of affirmative action on
those targeted to be beneficiaries, but rather to focus on how their associa­
tion with affirmative action can affect the way in which others react to them.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 marked a critical milestone in the
fight for justice and equality for women and minorities in the workplace.
Specifically, Title VII prohibited discrimination on the basis of race, color,
religion, national origin, and gender. In addition, Title VII specified the
creation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a
government agency charged with monitoring and investigating employ­
ment practices in violation of Title VII.
By 1967, President Lyndon Johnson had issued executive orders 11246
and 11375. In tandem, these orders required organizations wishing to enter
contracts with federal agencies to take "affirmative action" to ensure that
all current and future potential employees were employed in fair num­
bers and treated fairly on the job. Furthermore, regulations set forth by
the Secretary of Labor required organizations to develop internal mon­
itoring to identify problem areas and, should underutilization be identi­
fied, required organizations to develop goals and timetables for remedying
such problems. Examples of such affirmative action might include targeted