Inertia, Progress, or Regress? Observing and Explaining Heterogenous Tech Firm Demographic Diversity Trajectories

IF 4.4 2区 社会学 Q1 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR Work and Occupations Pub Date : 2024-05-24 DOI:10.1177/07308884241252338
JooHee Han, Donald Tomaskovic-Devey
{"title":"Inertia, Progress, or Regress? Observing and Explaining Heterogenous Tech Firm Demographic Diversity Trajectories","authors":"JooHee Han, Donald Tomaskovic-Devey","doi":"10.1177/07308884241252338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Tech firms are under strong pressure to increase their demographic diversity. While activists and scholars have tended to treat the sector as homogenously hostile to women and racialized minorities, recent theory on organizational inequalities stresses heterogeneity in firm-level inequality regimes. Beginning with an inductive exploration of variation in executive, managerial, and professional workforce trajectories, we find that between 2008 and 2016 most Tech firms show little change, but that there are also significant clusters of firms that were becoming either much more or much less diverse for all three occupational levels. We model these trajectories as a function of firm visibility, the regulation of federal contractors by the U.S. Department of Labor, and leadership composition. Multinomial logistic regression models show that firms with an increasing (decreasing) diversity pattern in managerial and executive positions are also more likely to become more (less) diverse in their much more numerous professional jobs. Managers are more influential than executive in this regard. Regulatory pressure is associated with increased executive diversity trajectories, but not with managerial or professional trajectories. We conclude that increased Tech diversity is possible but requires leadership, particularly at the middle manager level. In addition, regulatory and visibility pressures primarily produce symbolic shuffles in top jobs.","PeriodicalId":47716,"journal":{"name":"Work and Occupations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Work and Occupations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07308884241252338","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Tech firms are under strong pressure to increase their demographic diversity. While activists and scholars have tended to treat the sector as homogenously hostile to women and racialized minorities, recent theory on organizational inequalities stresses heterogeneity in firm-level inequality regimes. Beginning with an inductive exploration of variation in executive, managerial, and professional workforce trajectories, we find that between 2008 and 2016 most Tech firms show little change, but that there are also significant clusters of firms that were becoming either much more or much less diverse for all three occupational levels. We model these trajectories as a function of firm visibility, the regulation of federal contractors by the U.S. Department of Labor, and leadership composition. Multinomial logistic regression models show that firms with an increasing (decreasing) diversity pattern in managerial and executive positions are also more likely to become more (less) diverse in their much more numerous professional jobs. Managers are more influential than executive in this regard. Regulatory pressure is associated with increased executive diversity trajectories, but not with managerial or professional trajectories. We conclude that increased Tech diversity is possible but requires leadership, particularly at the middle manager level. In addition, regulatory and visibility pressures primarily produce symbolic shuffles in top jobs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
惯性、进步还是倒退?观察和解释异质性科技公司人口多样性轨迹
科技公司面临着增加人口多样性的巨大压力。虽然活动家和学者们倾向于将该行业视为对女性和少数种族的同质化敌视,但最近关于组织不平等的理论强调了公司层面不平等制度的异质性。我们从归纳探索行政、管理和专业劳动力的变化轨迹入手,发现在 2008 年至 2016 年间,大多数科技公司几乎没有什么变化,但也有一些重要的公司集群,它们在所有三个职业层面的多样性要么大大增加,要么大大减少。我们将这些轨迹建模为企业知名度、美国劳工部对联邦承包商的监管以及领导层构成的函数。多项式逻辑回归模型显示,管理和行政职位多元化模式不断增加(减少)的公司,其数量更多的专业职位也更有可能变得更加多元化(减少)。在这方面,管理人员比行政人员更有影响力。监管压力与行政人员多样性增加的轨迹有关,但与管理或专业人员的轨迹无关。我们的结论是,增加技术多样性是可能的,但需要领导力,尤其是中层管理人员的领导力。此外,监管和知名度的压力主要导致高层职位的象征性调整。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
24.10%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: For over 30 years, Work and Occupations has published rigorous social science research on the human dynamics of the workplace, employment, and society from an international, interdisciplinary perspective. Work and Occupations provides you with a broad perspective on the workplace, examining international approaches to work-related issues as well as insights from scholars in a variety of fields, including: anthropology, demography, education, government administration, history, industrial relations, labour economics, management, psychology, and sociology. In addition to regular features including research notes, review essays, and book reviews.
期刊最新文献
Unsettled Times: The Contestation and Reproduction of Flexible Scheduling in Pandemic-Era Restaurant Work Working for Rehab: Labor Expropriation as Treatment for Addiction Inertia, Progress, or Regress? Observing and Explaining Heterogenous Tech Firm Demographic Diversity Trajectories Forsaking an Organization in Favor of Another: Judgment Change in an Occupational Community Analyzing Trans and Nonbinary Workers’ Response to Workplace Discrimination
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1