Human resource practitioners play a crucial role in promoting equitable treatment of persons with disabilities, and practitioner's decisions should be guided by solid evidence‐based research. We offer a systematic review of the empirical research on the treatment of persons with disabilities in organizations, using Stone and Colella's seminal theoretical model of the factors influencing the treatment of persons with disabilities in work organizations, to ask: What does the available research reveal about workplace treatment of persons with disabilities, and what remains understudied? Our review of 88 empirical studies from management, rehabilitation, psychology, and sociology research highlights seven gaps and limitations in extant research: (a) implicit definitions of workplace treatment; (b) neglect of national context variation; (c) missing differentiation between disability populations; (d) overreliance on available data sets; (e) predominance of single‐source, cross‐sectional data; (f) neglect of individual differences and identities in the presence of disability; and (g) lack of specificity on underlying stigma processes. To support the development of more inclusive workplaces, we recommend increased research collaborations between human resource researchers and practitioners on the study of specific disabilities and contexts, and efforts to define and expand notions of treatment to capture more nuanced outcomes.

Few readers will be unfamiliar with the controversy regarding the practical relevance of academic research. The topic has been the subject of a number of articles, books, and special issues in academic journals (i.e.,

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Academy of Management is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Academy of Management Review.Although the Americans with Disabilities Act requires most employers to provide reasonable accommodation, there is reason to believe that people with disabilities are often unwilling to make such requests. We therefore focus on factors influencing the requester's likelihood of seeking an accommodation. By drawing upon the theories of planned behavior, help-seeking, and distributive justice, we propose a framework identifying several salient beliefs that may influence request likelihood and then explore the role of select situational characteristics in shaping these beliefs as a way to more fully understand the requester's assessment process.We thank Blake Ashforth, Melissa Foreman, Deb Kidder, Michael Lubatkin, Luis Martins, John Mathieu, and three anonymous reviewers for their insightful suggestions on earlier drafts of this article. We also express our gratitude to Steven Floyd, Sharon Foley, and Gary Powell for their valuable input in the initial formulation of this article. Academy of Management Review January accommodation usefulness, image cost, fairness, compliance, appropriateness, and social obligation to request likelihood. Finally, we offer these beliefs as plausible mediators of the relationship between situational characteristics and request likelihood, and we discuss the broader role of situational characteristics in shaping a requester's beliefs.

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) has not achieved its potential, in part, because those it sought to help have shown a reluctance to request accommodations. Using survey data from 229 hearing-impaired employees and an expert panel, logistic regression confirmed that monetary costs and impositions on others negatively influence the likelihood of requesting recurring accommodations. Furthermore, monetary costs and impositions on others negatively influence the requester’s assessments of the social consequences of making such requests. These consequences, in turn, can also negatively influence future disability accommodation requests.

Through this interview-based study with 40 respondents in the United States we have outlined enablers of career transitions and sustainable careers for professionals who have experienced severe hearing loss as adults. To sustain careers after adult onset disability, respondents engaged in a quest for meaning and big picture answers to ‘who am I?’ and ‘am I still successful?’ This included redefining themselves – e.g. I am now both a person with a disability (disability identity) and a successful professional (professional identity) – and career success (e.g. now I care about service to society as much as I care about material artifacts). Respondents also adopted new work roles where disability was a key to success (e.g. becoming an equal employment officer) and utilized social networks to continue being successful. Such redefining of work and networks supported the aforesaid quest for meaning and big picture answers. Findings not only indicate how individuals experience career success after a life-changing event but also help defamiliarize extant notions of ableism in workplace contexts.