1932

Abstract

The civil rights and women's movements led to momentous changes in public policy and corporate practice that have made the United States the global paragon of equal opportunity. Yet diversity in the corporate hierarchy has increased incrementally. Lacking clear guidance from policymakers, personnel experts had devised their own arsenal of diversity programs. Firms implicated their own biased managers through diversity training and grievance systems and created a paper trail for personnel decisions, but they maintained the deeper structures that perpetuate inequality. Firms that changed systems for recruiting and developing workers, organizing work, and balancing work and life saw diversity increase up the hierarchy, but those firms are all too rare. The courts and federal agencies have found management processes that do not explicitly discriminate to be plausibly unbiased, and they rarely require systemic reforms. Our elaborate corporate diversity programs and public regulatory systems have largely failed to open opportunity, but social science research points to a path forward.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-090820-023615
2021-07-31
2024-04-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/soc/47/1/annurev-soc-090820-023615.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-090820-023615&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Abendroth AK, Melzer SM, Kalev A, Tomaskovic-Devey D. 2017. Women at work: women's access to power and the gender earning gap. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 70:190–222
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Acker J. 1990. Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: a theory of gendered organizations. Gend. Soc. 4:139–58
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Adler L. 2020. From the Job's Worth to the Person's Price: The Evolution of Pay-Setting Practices Since 1950. Presented at the Social Science History Association Meeting online, Nov .
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Alon T, Doepke M, Olmstead-Rumsey J, Tertilt M. 2020. The impact of COVID-19 on gender equality. NBER Work Pap 26947
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Anderson BE. 1996. The ebb and flow of enforcing Executive Order 11246. Am. Econ. Rev. 86:298–301
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bailyn L, Rapoport R, Fletcher JK, Pruitt BH. 2002. Beyond Work-Family Balance: Advancing Gender Equity and Workplace Performance San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
  7. Baron JN, Bielby WT. 1980. Bringing the firms back in: stratification, segmentation, and the organization of work. Am. Sociol. Rev. 45:737–65
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Berrey E. 2015. The Enigma of Diversity: The Language of Race and the Limits of Racial Justice Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  9. Berrey E, Nelson RL, Nielsen LB. 2017. Rights on Trial: How Workplace Discrimination Law Perpetuates Inequality Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  10. Bielby WT. 2000. Minimizing workplace gender and racial bias. Contemp. Sociol. 29:120–29
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bielby WT. 2012. Minority vulnerability in privileged occupations: Why do African American financial advisors earn less than whites in a large financial services firm?. Ann. Am. Acad. Political Soc. Sci. 639:112–32
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Blair-Loy M. 2003. Competing Devotions: Career and Family Among Women Executives Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  13. Bleich E. 2000. Antiracism without races: politics and policy in a ‘color-blind’ state. Fr. Politics Cult. Soc. 18:48–74
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Blumrosen AW. 1993. Modern Law: The Law Transmission System and Equal Employment Opportunity Madison: Univ. Wis. Press
  15. Bobo L, Kluegel JR. 1993. Opposition to race-targeting: self-interest, stratification ideology, or racial attitudes?. Am. Sociol. Rev. 58:443–64
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Bohnet I. 2016. What Works: Gender Equality by Design Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  17. Brady LM, Kaiser CR, Major B, Kirby TA. 2015. It's fair for us: diversity structures cause women to legitimize discrimination. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 57:100–10
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Briscoe F, Safford S. 2008. The Nixon-in-China effect: activism, imitation, and the institutionalization of contentious practices. Adm. Sci. Q. 53:3460–91
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Bromley P, Powell WW. 2012. From smoke and mirrors to walking the talk: decoupling in the contemporary world. Acad. Manag. Ann. 6:483530
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Burstein P, Monaghan K. 1986. Equal employment opportunity and the mobilization of law. Law Soc. Rev. 20:355–88
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Calvert CT. 2016. Caregivers in the workplace: family responsibilities discrimination litigation update2016 Rep., Cent. WorkLife Law., Univ. Calif. Hastings Coll. Law San Francisco, CA: https://worklifelaw.org/publications/Caregivers-in-the-Workplace-FRD-update-2016.pdf
  22. Castilla EJ. 2008. Gender, race, and meritocracy in organizational careers. Am. J. Sociol. 113:1479–526
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Castilla EJ. 2015. Accounting for the gap: a firm study manipulating organizational accountability and transparency in pay decisions. Organ. Sci. 26:311–33
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Castilla EJ, Benard S. 2010. The paradox of meritocracy in organizations. Adm. Sci. Q. 55:543–76
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Chen AS. 2009. The Fifth Freedom: Jobs, Politics, and Civil Rights in the United States1941–72 Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  26. Christensen KE, Staines GL. 1990. Flextime: a viable solution to work/family conflict?. J. Family Issues 11:4455–476
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Cohen PN, Huffman ML. 2007. Working for the woman? Female managers and the gender wage gap. Am. Sociol. Rev. 72:681–704
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Collins SM. 1997. Black mobility in white corporations: up the corporate ladder but out on a limb. Soc. Probl. 44:55–67
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Collins SM. 2011. Diversity in the post affirmative action labor market: a proxy for racial progress?. Crit. Sociol. 37:5521–40
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Coltrane S, Miller EC, DeHaan T, Stewart L. 2013. Fathers and the flexibility stigma. J. Soc. Issues 69:279–302
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Correll SJ, Benard S, Paik I. 2007. Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty?. Am. J. Sociol. 112:1297–338
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Crenshaw K. 1989. Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. Univ. Chicago Leg. Forum 1989.139–67
    [Google Scholar]
  33. DiMaggio PJ, Powell WW. 1983. The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. Am. Sociol. Rev. 48:147–60
    [Google Scholar]
  34. DiTomaso N. 2013. The American Non-Dilemma: Racial Inequality Without Racism New York: Russell Sage Found.
  35. Dobbin F. 2009. Inventing Equal Opportunity Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  36. Dobbin F, Kalev A. 2016. Why diversity programs fail – and what works better. Harvard Business Review, July–August 53–60 https://hbr.org/2016/07/why-diversity-programs-fail
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Dobbin F, Kalev A. 2019a. Do Diversity Initiatives Increase Diversity? Thirty Years of Evidence from Eight Hundred Companies. Presented at Boston Women's Workforce Council Cambridge, MA: Oct. 24
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Dobbin F, Kalev A. 2019b. The promise and peril of sexual harassment programs. PNAS 116:2512255–60
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Dobbin F, Kalev A, Kelly E. 2007. Diversity management in corporate America. Contexts 6:21–28
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Dobbin F, Kelly E 2007. How to stop harassment: the professional construction of legal compliance in organizations. Am. J. Sociol. 112:1203–43
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Dobbin F, Kim S, Kalev A. 2011. You can't always get what you need: why diverse firms adopt diversity programs. Am. Sociol. Rev. 76:386–411
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Dobbin F, Schrage D, Kalev A. 2015. Rage against the iron cage: the varied effects of bureaucratic personnel reforms on diversity. Am. Sociol. Rev. 80:1014–44
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Dobbin F, Sutton JR. 1998. The strength of a weak state: the employment rights revolution and the rise of human resources management divisions. Am. J. Sociol. 104:441–76
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Dobbin F, Sutton JR, Meyer JW, Scott WR. 1993. Equal opportunity law and the construction of internal labor markets. Am. J. Sociol. 99:396–427
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Drago R, Colbeck CL, Stauffer KD, Pirretti A, Burkum K et al. 2006. The avoidance of bias against caregiving: the case of academic faculty. Am. Behav. Sci. 49:1222–47
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Edelman LB. 1990. Legal environments and organizational governance: the expansion of due process in the American workplace. Am. J. Sociol. 95:1401–40
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Edelman LB. 1992. Legal ambiguity and symbolic structures: organizational mediation of civil rights law. Am. J. Sociol. 97:1531–76
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Edelman LB. 2016. Working Law: Courts, Corporations, and Symbolic Civil Rights Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  49. Edelman LB, Abraham SE, Erlanger HS. 1992. Professional construction of the law: the inflated threat of wrongful discharge. Law Soc. Rev. 26:47–84
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Edelman LB, Fuller SR, Mara-Drita I. 2001. Diversity rhetoric and the managerialization of the law. Am. J. Sociol. 106:1589–641
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Edelman LB, Krieger LH, Eliason S, Albiston CR, Mellema V. 2011. When organizations rule: judicial deference to institutionalized employment structures. Am. J. Sociol. 117:888–954
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Edelman LB, Petterson SM. 1999. Symbols and substance in organizations response to civil rights law. Res. Soc. Stratif. Mobil. 17:107–35
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Edelman LB, Petterson SM, Chambliss E, Erlanger HS. 1991. Legal ambiguity and the politics of compliance: affirmative action officers’ dilemma. Law Policy 13:173–97
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Edelman LB, Smyth AC, Rahim A. 2016. Legal discrimination: empirical sociolegal and critical race perspectives on antidiscrimination law. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 12:1395–415
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Edelman LB, Uggen C, Erlanger HS. 1999. The endogeneity of legal regulation: grievance procedures as rational myth. Am. J. Sociol. 105:406–54
    [Google Scholar]
  56. EEOC (US Equal Employ. Oppor. Comm.) 1998. Best Practices of Private Sector Employers Washington, DC: EEOC
  57. EEOC (US Equal Employ. Oppor. Comm.) 2009. Employer Best Practices for Workers with Caregiving Responsibilities Washington, DC: EEOC
  58. Ely R, Padavic I. 2020. What's really holding women back? It's not what most people think. Harvard Business Review March–April 58–67 https://hbr.org/2020/03/whats-really-holding-women-back
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Erdreich BL, Slavet BS, Amador AO. 1995. Sexual Harassment in the Federal Workplace: Trends, Progress, Continuing Challenges Washington, DC: US Merit Syst. Prot. Board
  60. Galinsky AD, Moskowitz GB. 2000. Perspective-taking: decreasing stereotype expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 78:708–24
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Glass JL. 2004. Blessing or curse? Work-family policies and mother's wage growth over time. Work Occup 31:367–94
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Glass JL, Estes SB. 1997. The family responsive workplace. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 23:289–313
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Glass JL, Fujimoto T. 1995. Employer characteristics and the provision of family responsive policies. Work Occup 22:380–411
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Golden L. 2001. Flexible work schedules: Which workers get them?. Am. Behav. Sci. 44:1157–78
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Goodstein JD. 1994. Institutional pressures and strategic responsiveness: employer involvement in work-family issues. Acad. Manag. J. 37:350–82
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Graham HD. 1990. The Civil Rights Era: Origins and Development of National Policy 1960–1972 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  67. Green T. 2016. Discrimination Laundering: The Rise of Organizational Innocence and the Crisis of Equal Opportunity Law Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  68. Griggs v. Duke Power Company 401 U.S 424 1971.)
  69. Guthrie D, Roth LM. 1999. The state, courts, and maternity policies in U.S. organizations: specifying institutional mechanisms. Am. Sociol. Rev. 64:41–63
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Han WJ, Waldfogel J. 2003. Parental leave: the impact of recent legislation on parents’ leave taking. Demography 40:191–200
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Heckman JJ, Hotz VJ. 1989. Choosing among alternative nonexperimental methods for estimating the impact of social programs. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 84:862–74
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Hegewisch A, Deitch CH, Murphy EF. 2011. Ending Sex and Race Discrimination in the Workplace: Legal Interventions that Push the Envelope Washington, DC: Inst. Women's Policy Res.
  73. Hirsh EC. 2008. Settling for less? The organizational determinants of discrimination-charge outcomes. Law Soc. Rev. 42:2239–74
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Hirsh EC. 2009. The strength of weak enforcement: the impact of discrimination charges on sex and race segregation in the workplace. Am. Sociol. Rev. 74:245–71
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Hirsh EC, Cha Y. 2018. For law and markets: employment discrimination lawsuits, market performance, and managerial diversity. Am. J. Sociol. 123:41117–60
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Hirsh EC, Kmec JA. 2009. Human resource structures: reducing discrimination or raising rights awareness?. Ind. Relat. 48:512–32
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Hodson R. 1996. Dignity in the workplace under participative management: alienation and freedom revisited. Am. Sociol. Rev. 61:719–38
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Holzer HJ, Neumark D. 2000. What does affirmative action do?. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 53:240–71
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Ingram P, Simons T. 1995. Institutional and resource dependence determinants of responsiveness to work-family issues. Acad. Manag. J. 38:1466–82
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Ito TA, Chiao KW, Devine PG, Lorig TS, Cacioppo JT. 2006. The influence of facial feedback on race bias. Psychol. Sci. 17:256–61
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Jacoby SM. 2005. The Embedded Corporation: Corporate Governance and Employment Relations in Japan and the United States Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  82. Kaiser CR, Major B, Jurcevic I, Dover TL, Brady LM, Shapiro JR. 2013. Presumed fair: ironic effects of organizational diversity structures. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 104:504–19
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Kalev A. 2009. Cracking the glass cages? Restructuring and ascriptive inequality at work. Am. J. Sociol. 114:1591–643
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Kalev A. 2014. How you downsize is who you downsize: biased formalization, accountability and managerial diversity. Am. Sociol. Rev. 79:109–35
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Kalev A, Dobbin F. 2006. Enforcement of civil rights law in private workplaces: the effects of compliance reviews and lawsuits over time. Law Soc. Inq. 31:855–79
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Kalev A, Dobbin F, Kelly E 2006. Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies. Am. Sociol. Rev. 71:589–617
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Kalleberg AL. 2011. Good Jobs, Bad Jobs: The Rise of Polarized and Precarious Employment Systems in the United States, 1970s–2000s New York: Russell Sage Found.
  88. Kanter RM. 1977. Men and Women of the Corporation New York: Basic
  89. Kanter RM, Roessner J. 2003a. Deloitte & Touche (A): a hole in the pipeline Harvard Bus. Sch. Case 300-012 Harvard Bus. Sch. Cambridge, MA:
  90. Kanter RM, Roessner J. 2003b. Deloitte & Touche (B): changing the workplace Harvard Bus. Sch. Case 300-013 Harvard Bus. Sch. Cambridge, MA:
  91. Kearney LK, Rochlen AB, King EB. 2004. Male gender role conflict, sexual harassment tolerance, and the efficacy of a psychoeducative training program. Psychol. Men Masc. 5:72–82
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Kelly EL. 2003. The strange history of employer-sponsored childcare: interested actors, uncertainty, and the transformation of law in organizational fields. Am. J. Sociol. 109:606–49
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Kelly EL, Dobbin F. 1999. Civil rights law at work: sex discrimination and the rise of maternity leave policies. Am. J. Sociol. 105:455–92
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Kelly EL, Kalev A. 2006. Managing flexible work arrangements in U.S. organizations: formalized discretion or ‘a right to ask. ’. Socio-Econ. Rev. 4:379–416
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Kelly EL, Kalev A, Dobbin F. 2012. Are family-friendly policies woman-friendly? The effects of corporate work-family policies on women's representation in management Work. Pap., Dep. Sociol., Univ. Minn. Minneapolis:
  96. Kelly EL, Kossek EE, Hammer L, Durham M, Bray J et al. 2008. Getting there from here: research on the effects of work-family initiatives on work-family conflict and business outcomes. Acad. Manag. Ann. 2:305–40
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Kelly EL, Moen P. 2020. Overload: How Good Jobs Went Bad and What We Can Do About It Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  98. Kelly EL, Moen P, Tranby E. 2011. Changing workplaces to reduce work-family conflict: schedule control in a white-collar organization. Am. Sociol. Rev. 76:265–90
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Killewald A, Bearak J. 2014. Is the motherhood penalty larger for low-wage women? A comment on quantile regression. Am. Sociol. Rev. 79:350–57
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Kochan TA, Katz HC, McKersie RB. 1994. The Transformation of American Industrial Relations Ithaca, NY: ILR
  101. Konrad AM, Linnehan F. 1995. Formalized HRM structures—coordinating equal-employment opportunity or concealing organizational practices?. Acad. Manag. J. 38:787–820
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Krieger LH, Best RK, Edelman LB. 2015. When “best practices” win, employees lose: symbolic compliance and judicial inference in federal equal employment opportunity cases. Law Soc. Inq. 40:4843–79
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Lamont M. 2000. The Dignity of Working Men: Morality and the Boundaries of Class, Race, and Immigration Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  104. Legault L, Gutsell JN, Inzlicht M. 2011. Ironic effects of antiprejudice messages: how motivational interventions can reduce (but also increase) prejudice. Psychol. Sci. 22:1472–77
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Lieberman RC. 2002. Weak state, strong policy: paradoxes of race policy in the United States, Great Britain, and France. Stud. Am. Political Dev. 16:2138–61
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Lundquist JH, Misra J, O'Meara K. 2012. Parental leave usage by fathers and mothers at an American university. Fathering 10:337–63
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Mason MA, Goulden M, Wolfinger N 2006. Babies matter: pushing the gender equity revolution forward. The Balancing Act: Gendered Perspectives in Faculty Roles and Work Lives SJ Bracken, JK Allen, DR Dean 9–30 Sterling, VA: Stylus
    [Google Scholar]
  108. McDonnell M-H, King BG. 2018. Order in the court: how firm status and reputation shape the outcomes of employment discrimination suits. Am. Sociol. Rev. 83:161–87
    [Google Scholar]
  109. McKay PF, McDaniel MA. 2006. A reexamination of Black-white mean differences in work performance: more data, more moderators. J. Appl. Psychol. 91:538–54
    [Google Scholar]
  110. McLaughlin H, Uggen C, Blackstone A. 2017. The economic and career effects of sexual harassment on working women. Gender Soc 31:333–58
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Meyer JW, Rowan B. 1977. Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. Am. J. Sociol. 83:340–63
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Mong S, Roscigno VJ. 2010. African American men and the experience of employment discrimination. Qual. Sociol. 33:1–21
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Montenovo L, Jiang X, Rojas FL, Schmutte IM, Simon KI et al. 2020. Determinants of disparities in COVID-19 job losses NBER Work. Pap 27132
  114. Mori H, Mori K. 2013. An implicit assessment of the effect of artificial cheek raising: when your face smiles, the world looks nicer. Percept. Mot. Skills 116:466–71
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Mun E, Jung J 2018. Change above the glass ceiling: corporate social responsibility and gender diversity in Japanese firms. Adm. Sci. Q. 63:409–40
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Mun E, Vican S, Kelly E 2020. What do employers do after a mandatory leave policy? The FMLA and women's representation in U.S. organizations Work. Pap. Sch. Labor Employ. Relat., Univ. Ill. Urbana-Champaign, Ill:.
  117. Nelson RL, Bridges WP. 1999. Legalizing Gender Inequality: Courts, Markets and Unequal Pay for Women in America Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  118. Nelson RL, Nielsen LB. 2000. Cops, counsel, and entrepreneurs: constructing the role of inside counsel in large corporations. Law Soc. Rev. 34:457–94
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Nkomo SM 1992. The emperor has no clothes: rewriting “race in organizations.”. Acad. Manag. Rev. 17:487513
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Osterman P. 1995. Work/family programs and the employment relationship. Adm. Sci. Q. 40:681–700
    [Google Scholar]
  121. Ostrow E. 2002. The backlash against academic parents. Chronicle of Higher Education Feb. 2 https://www.chronicle.com/article/the-backlash-against-academic-parents/
    [Google Scholar]
  122. Pager D. 2003. The mark of a criminal record. Am. J. Sociol. 108:937–75
    [Google Scholar]
  123. Paluck EL, Green DP. 2009. Prejudice reduction: What works? A critical look at evidence from the field and the laboratory. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 60:339–67
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Pedriana N, Stryker R. 1997. Political-culture wars 1960s style: equal employment opportunity–affirmative action law and the Philadelphia plan. Am. J. Sociol. 103:633–91
    [Google Scholar]
  125. Perlow LA. 2012. Sleeping with Your Smart Phone: How to Break the 24/7 Habit and Change the Way You Work Cambridge, MA: Harvard Bus. Rev. Press
  126. Plant EA, Devine PG. 2001. Responses to other-imposed pro-Black pressure: acceptance or backlash?. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 37:486–501
    [Google Scholar]
  127. Quillian L, Pager D, Hexel O, Midtbøen AH. 2017. Meta-analysis of field experiments shows no change in racial discrimination in hiring over time. PNAS 114:10870–75
    [Google Scholar]
  128. Reskin BF. 2000. The proximate causes of employment discrimination. Contemp. Sociol. J. Rev. 29:319–28
    [Google Scholar]
  129. Reskin BF. 2003. Including mechanisms in our models of ascriptive inequality. Am. Sociol. Rev. 68:1–21
    [Google Scholar]
  130. Reskin BF, McBrier DB. 2000. Why not ascription? Organizations’ employment of male and female managers. Am. Sociol. Rev. 65:210–33
    [Google Scholar]
  131. Rivera LA. 2015. Pedigree: How Elite Students Get Elite Jobs Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  132. Rivera LA, Tilcsik A. 2019. Scaling down inequality: rating scales, gender bias, and the architecture of evaluation. Am. Sociol. Rev. 84:248–74
    [Google Scholar]
  133. Robb LA, Doverspike D. 2001. Self-reported proclivity to harass as a moderator of the effectiveness of sexual harassment-prevention training. Psychol. Rep. 88:85–88
    [Google Scholar]
  134. Roos P, Manley JE. 1996. Staffing personnel: feminization and change in human resource management. Sociol. Focus 99:245–61
    [Google Scholar]
  135. Roscigno V. 2007. The Face of Discrimination: How Race and Gender Impact Work and Home Lives New York: Rowman and Littlefield
  136. Roth PL, Huffcutt AI, Bobko P. 2003. Ethnic group differences in measures of job performance: a new meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 88:694–706
    [Google Scholar]
  137. Rust M. 2020. How Trump reset the federal judiciary. Wall Street Journal Oct. 15. https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-trump-reset-the-federal-judiciary-11602785250
    [Google Scholar]
  138. Saguy A. 2003. What Is Sexual Harassment: From Capitol Hill to the Sorbonne Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
  139. Scarborough WJ, Lambouths DL, Holbrook AL. 2019. Support of workplace diversity policies: the role of race, gender, and beliefs about inequality. Soc. Sci. Res. 79:194–210
    [Google Scholar]
  140. Schlanger M, Kim P. 2014. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and structural reform of the American workplace. Wash. Univ. Law Rev. 91:1519–90
    [Google Scholar]
  141. Scott WR. 2001. Institutions and Organizations Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
  142. Scott WR, Meyer JW 1983. The organization of societal sectors. Organizational Environments: Ritual and Rationality ed. JW Meyer, WR Scott 129–55 Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
    [Google Scholar]
  143. Selznick P. 1957. Leadership in Administration: A Sociological Interpretation New York: Harper and Row
  144. Shwed U, Kalev A. 2014. Are referrals more productive or more likeable? Social networks and the evaluation of merit. Am. Behav. Sci. 58:288–308
    [Google Scholar]
  145. Sidanius J, Devereux E, Pratto F. 2001. A comparison of symbolic racism theory and social dominance theory as explanations for racial policy attitudes. J. Soc. Psychol. 132:377–95
    [Google Scholar]
  146. Skaggs SL. 2008. Producing change or bagging opportunity? The effects of discrimination litigation on women in supermarket management. Am. J. Sociol. 113:1148–82
    [Google Scholar]
  147. Skaggs SL. 2009. Legal-political pressures and African American access to managerial jobs. Am. Sociol. Rev. 74:2225–44
    [Google Scholar]
  148. Skrentny JD. 1996. The Ironies of Affirmative Action: Politics Culture and Justice in America Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  149. Skrentny JD. 2014. After Civil Rights: Racial Realism in the New American Workplace Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  150. Stainback K, Kleiner S, Skaggs S. 2016. Women in power: undoing or redoing the gendered organization?. Gender Soc. 30:1109–35
    [Google Scholar]
  151. Stainback K, Tomaskovic-Devey D. 2012. Documenting Desegregation: Racial and Gender Segregation in Private-Sector Employment Since the Civil Rights Act New York: Russell Sage Found.
  152. Steeh C, Krysan M. 1996. Trends: affirmative action and the public 1970–1995. Public Opin. Q. 60:128–58
    [Google Scholar]
  153. Stinchcombe AL. 1965. Social structure and organizations. Handbook of Organizations ed. JG March 142–93 Chicago: Rand McNally
    [Google Scholar]
  154. Strang D, Meyer JW. 1993. Institutional conditions for diffusion. Theory Soc 22:487–511
    [Google Scholar]
  155. Stryker R. 2000. Legitimacy processes as institutional politics: implications for theory and research in the sociology of organizations. Res. Sociol. Organ 17:179–223
    [Google Scholar]
  156. Stryker R, Docka-Filipek D, Wald P 2012. Employment discrimination law and industrial psychology: social science as social authority and the co-production of law and science. Law Soc. Inq. 37:777–814
    [Google Scholar]
  157. Sturm S. 2001. Second generation employment discrimination: a structural approach. Columbia Law Rev 101:459–568
    [Google Scholar]
  158. Suchman MC, Edelman LB. 1996. The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Law Soc. Inq. 21:903–41
    [Google Scholar]
  159. Sutton JR, Dobbin F. 1996. The two faces of governance: responses to legal uncertainty in American firms,1955–1985. Am. Sociol. Rev. 61:794–811
    [Google Scholar]
  160. Tetlock PE, Lerner JS 1999. The social contingency model: identifying empirical and normative boundary conditions on the error and bias portrait of human nature. Dual Process Theories in Social Psychology ed. S Chaiken, Y Trope 571–85 New York: Guilford
    [Google Scholar]
  161. Tilcsik A. 2011. Pride and prejudice: employment discrimination against openly gay men in the United States. Am. J. Sociol. 117:2586–626
    [Google Scholar]
  162. Tinkler J, Gremillion S, Arthurs K. 2015. Perceptions of legitimacy: the sex of the legal messenger and reactions to sexual harassment training. Law Soc. Inq. 40:152–74
    [Google Scholar]
  163. Tolbert PS, Zucker LG. 1983. Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: the diffusion of civil service reform, 1880–1935. Adm. Sci. Q. 28:22–39
    [Google Scholar]
  164. Trindel K, Polli F, Glazebrook K 2020. Use technology to increase fairness in hiring. What Works? Evidence-Based Ideas to Increase Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Workplace ed. D Pedulla 30–37 Amherst, MA: Cent. Employ. Equal.
    [Google Scholar]
  165. Vican S. 2012. Effects of corporate childcare programs on workforce gender composition Work. Pap. Dep Sociol., Harvard Univ. Cambridge, MA:
  166. Weeden KA. 2005. Is there a flexiglass ceiling? Flexible work arrangements and wages in the United States. Soc. Sci. Res. 34:454–92
    [Google Scholar]
  167. Williams JC. 2000. Unbending Gender: Why Family and Work Conflict and What to Do About It Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  168. Williams JC. 2010. Reshaping the Work-Family Debate: Why Men and Class Matter Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  169. Williams JC, Dempsey R, Slaughter A-M. 2014. What Works for Women at Work: Four Patterns Working Women Need to Know New York: NYU Press
  170. Williams RM Jr. 1947. The Reduction of Intergroup Tensions: A Survey of Research on Problems of Ethnic, Racial, and Religious Group Relations New York: Soc. Sci. Res. Counc.
  171. Wingfield A. 2019. Flatlining: Race, Work, and Health Care in the New Economy Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
  172. Xie Y, Shauman KA. 2003. Women in Science: Career Processes and Outcomes Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  173. Zippel KS. 2006. The Politics of Sexual Harassment: A Comparative Study of the United States, the European Union, and Germany Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-090820-023615
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error