Page 405 - Discrimination at Work The Psychological and Organizational Bases

372
HEILMAN AND HAYNES
The results of this study raised important questions. Were the negative
ratings of the female group members in the diversity condition unique to
the diversity rationale or would any nonmerit-based criterion for group as­
sembly have had the same consequence? Secondly, were the results found
in study 1 limited to situations in which there is a single diversity di­
mension represented in the group? In order to address these issues, we
designed a second study in which we added a random rationale for group
assembly, one of scheduling time convenience, and also varied the de­
mographic heterogeneity of the group such that there was only gender
heterogeneity (four men and one White woman) or heterogeneity in both
gender and race (three White men, one Black man, and one White woman).
Thus, in all cases there was only one woman in the group, but the men
were either heterogeneous with respect to race or were not. The procedure
used was identical to that used in the first study. A photograph of the
workgroup made apparent the type of demographic heterogeneity in the
group.
Analyses revealed the pattern of results expected. The woman who was
a member of the group assembled for reasons of ensuring diversity was
rated as less competent and expected to be less influential in the group
than the woman who was a member of a group assembled for either rea­
sons of merit or for reasons of scheduling convenience. This indicates that
inferences of incompetence associated with the diversity rationale are not
simply a consequence of any nonmerit-based rationale for group assem­
bly, but rather are specific to the diversity goal rationale and the salience
of demographic group that it promotes. Furthermore, heterogeneity of the
group did not impact the degree of stigmatization for the female target. Ev­
idently, it matters little whether a woman is the sole potential beneficiary
of diversity efforts or if she shares this status with others in the group; she
is seen as equally incompetent and noninfluential.
Both of these studies that examine the consequences of being associated
with a diversity initiative have focused on gender as the demographic
category of interest. However, because the reach of diversity goals often
extends to racial minorities, we thought it important to investigate whether
non-White members of a group are similarly negatively viewed when as­
sociated with diversity goals and whether the degree of heterogeneity is a
factor in how they are perceived. We therefore designed a third study that
replicated study 2, except that participants rated a Black male in the group
as opposed to a White female.
Analyses revealed a similar pattern of results for the Black male as for
the female target in study 2. The Black man was rated as less competent
and was expected to be less influential in the group when the rationale for
group assembly was ensuring diversity rather than merit or scheduling