Theorizing Status Distance: Rethinking the Micro Theories of Representation and Diversity in Public Organizations

Abstract

Through bringing the concept of status distance to representative bureaucracy and diversity management literature, this article develops new hypotheses that can guide future studies on representation and diversity in public organizations. First, including status distance brings consideration of the tensions that minority representation creates between integration within the workforce and the pressures on minority bureaucrats to actively represent clientele. Second, the way status distance plays out in the interaction of bureaucrats with co-workers and citizen-clients depends on characteristics of the national and organizational environment and type of service.

Intergovernmental Representation at Different Levels of Government: The Effect of Gender Representation

“…Yet, questions arise whether the effect of passive representation is limited to individual minorities or could be expanded to, most notably, nonminority members within an organization and/or the society. Recent studies present several pathways that involve an impact on nonminority bureaucrats and minority clientele (Favero and Molina Jr 2018; Groeneveld et al 2015; Groeneveld and Meier 2021; Guul 2018; Vinopal 2018). The effect of bureaucratic representation may also depend on the intraorganizational interaction between minority bureaucrats and their nonminority colleagues within the bureaucracy, and the effect may increase as the relationship becomes highly interactive (Groeneveld and Meier 2021).…”

“…A recent meta‐analysis indicated that street‐level bureaucrats with expertise and discretion have a greater impact on citizens/clients and bureaucratic performance (Ding, Lu, and Riccucci 2021). However, only a few studies have examined both the supervisory‐level and street‐level representation within a bureaucratic organization (e.g., Agyapong 2018; Keiser et al 2002; Meier and Stewart Jr 1992; Wilkins and Keiser 2006, among others), and demographic congruence between supervisors (managers) and subordinates (frontline bureaucrats) (e.g., Grissom and Keiser 2011; Grissom, Nicholson‐Crotty, and Keiser 2012; Groeneveld and Meier 2021).…”

“…Although not exclusive and exhaustive, they include minority role acceptance (Selden 1997; Sowa and Selden 2003), organizational socialization (Meier 1993; Wilkins and Williams 2008, 2009), administrative discretion (Andrews, Ashworth, and Meier 2014; Meier and Bohte 2001; Sowa and Selden 2003), critical mass within an organization (Keiser et al 2002; Meier 1993; Nicholson‐Crotty, Nicholson‐Crotty, and Fernandez 2017; Park 2020; Kanter 1977), and policy issues/areas salient to demographic characteristics in question (Keiser et al 2002; Meier 1993; Selden 1997; Wilkins and Keiser 2006). As an effort to advance the micro‐theory of representative bureaucracy, scholars have increasingly noted the role of identity matching or demographic congruence between bureaucrats and clients as it creates shared experiences and values, which improves the interactions between them (Groeneveld and Meier 2021; Guul 2018; Meier and Nicholson‐Crotty 2006; Theobald and Haider‐Markel 2009).…”

“…Recent studies present several pathways that involve an impact on nonminority bureaucrats and minority clientele (Favero and Molina Jr 2018; Groeneveld et al 2015; Groeneveld and Meier 2021; Guul 2018; Vinopal 2018). The effect of bureaucratic representation may also depend on the intraorganizational interaction between minority bureaucrats and their nonminority colleagues within the bureaucracy, and the effect may increase as the relationship becomes highly interactive (Groeneveld and Meier 2021). The indirect mechanisms are mightily important at the organizational level, such as nonminority bureaucrats’ role in changing formal and informal institutions within an organization or changing policy priorities for minority citizens (Favero and Molina Jr 2018; Vinopal 2018).…”

“…The interactions among minority bureaucrats sharing the same demographic identity may increase the potential of active representation compared to those with dissimilar characteristics, and the positive effect of gender representation at different levels of government may be synergistic when they closely and frequently interact with each other. Groeneveld and Meier (2021, 15) articulate that frequent interaction between minority and majority groups “facilitates a learning process,… reduces prejudice…. [and] intergroup threat and anxiety, … [and] enables majority group members to empathize with and take the perspective of the minority group.”…”