Releasing the Beast: A Study of Compliance with Orders to Use Race as a Selection Criterion

Abstract

Largely drawing on thefindings and reasoning of Milgram (1974). a laboratory experiment was conducted to assess the impact of authoritative directives and actor observability on the use of race as a selection criterion in hiring. A significant main effect for instructions was found, suggesting that, when told by a superior to do so, members of organizations may use race as a criterion in making hiring decisions. The precise form of this compliance effect varied, however, as a function of the type of dependent variable under consideration [attitudinal (i.e., ratings of Black job candidates) vs. behavioral (i.e., number of Black candidates chosen for final job interviews)]. N o effects for actor observability were detected. These results are discussed in terms of their theoretical, methodological, and practical implications in regard to organizational wrongdoing, particularly institutional racism.

Being Different Yet Feeling Similar: The Influence of Demographic Composition and Organizational Culture on Work Processes and Outcomes

“…This may have been due to subjects' reluctance to report or acknowledge conflict, particularly when greater diversity existed, due to concerns over being politically correct (e.g., Brief et al, 1995). But, as predicted in H2b, more conflict existed in individualistic than in collectivistic cultures.…”

“…Ironically, one way that this sample may have biased our results was to increase the conservativeness of our tests. Business school students should be less prone to inappropriate discrimination, or at least more attuned to behaving in a politically correct manner (Brief et al, 1995). Further, the school had recently ranked extremely highly on the Business Week Business School Rankings, which would be expected to create a sense of pride and a common bond among the students (e.g., Elsbach and Kramer, 1995).…”

Strong claims and weak evidence: Reassessing the predictive validity of the IAT.

“…Ziegert and Hanges (2005) did not test whether their participant population considered their six hypothetical candidates to have equivalent qualifications before assigning race to the candidates. Instead, it was assumed that Brief, Buttram, Elliott, Reisenstein, and McCline's (1995) pretesting of these materials with another sample and the random assignment of race and sex to the hypothetical candidates sufficed to equalize the candidates. That left open the possibility that the three applicants labeled Black were perceived as less qualified than those labeled White.…”

Unseen Injustice: Incivility as Modern Discrimination in Organizations

“…Some suggest that these changes may have been effective in reducing blatant or "old-fashioned" discrimination, but subtle discrimination lives on in the world of work (e.g., Benokraitis, 1997;Brief & Barsky, 2000;Brief, Buttram, Elliott, Reizenstein, & McCline, 1995;Deitch et al, 2004;Dipboye & Halverson, 2004). In fact, contemporary antifemale and antiminority bias is sometimes so ambiguous that instigators are unaware of its discriminatory nature, and they typically have rational, nondiscriminatory explanations for their conduct.…”