LGBTQ@NASA and Beyond: Work Structure and Workplace Inequality among LGBTQ STEM Professionals.

IF 4.4 2区 社会学 Q1 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR Work and Occupations Pub Date : 2022-05-01 Epub Date: 2022-02-21 DOI:10.1177/07308884221080938
Erin A Cech, Tom Waidzunas
{"title":"LGBTQ@NASA and Beyond: Work Structure and Workplace Inequality among LGBTQ STEM Professionals.","authors":"Erin A Cech, Tom Waidzunas","doi":"10.1177/07308884221080938","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Scholars are just beginning to understand how organizational processes shape LGBTQ workplace inequality. Using multimethod data from STEM professionals, this article examines how one such factor-the way work tasks are structured within organizations-may impact LGBTQ workers' experiences of marginalization and devaluation. Through interviews with STEM professionals at two NASA space flight centers with different work structures, we find that LGBTQ professionals at the NASA center where work is organized in dynamic project-based teams experienced less inclusive and respectful interactions with colleagues, in part because they had to rapidly establish credibility and develop new status management strategies each time they were shuffled into new teams. The stability of the traditional unit-based structure at the other NASA center, by contrast, allowed LGBTQ professionals time to navigate status management and build trust. This stability also facilitated LGBTQ community building. Analysis of survey data of over 14,000 US STEM professionals (594 who identify as LGBTQ) corroborates this work structure pattern: LGBTQ professionals across STEM disciplines and employment sectors working in dynamic project-based teams were more likely to report interpersonal marginalization and devaluation than LGBTQ professionals who worked in traditional unit-based structures. These findings highlight work structure as an important mechanism of LGBTQ inequality that demands further investigation.</p>","PeriodicalId":47716,"journal":{"name":"Work and Occupations","volume":"49 1","pages":"187-228"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10978047/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Work and Occupations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07308884221080938","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/2/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Scholars are just beginning to understand how organizational processes shape LGBTQ workplace inequality. Using multimethod data from STEM professionals, this article examines how one such factor-the way work tasks are structured within organizations-may impact LGBTQ workers' experiences of marginalization and devaluation. Through interviews with STEM professionals at two NASA space flight centers with different work structures, we find that LGBTQ professionals at the NASA center where work is organized in dynamic project-based teams experienced less inclusive and respectful interactions with colleagues, in part because they had to rapidly establish credibility and develop new status management strategies each time they were shuffled into new teams. The stability of the traditional unit-based structure at the other NASA center, by contrast, allowed LGBTQ professionals time to navigate status management and build trust. This stability also facilitated LGBTQ community building. Analysis of survey data of over 14,000 US STEM professionals (594 who identify as LGBTQ) corroborates this work structure pattern: LGBTQ professionals across STEM disciplines and employment sectors working in dynamic project-based teams were more likely to report interpersonal marginalization and devaluation than LGBTQ professionals who worked in traditional unit-based structures. These findings highlight work structure as an important mechanism of LGBTQ inequality that demands further investigation.

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
LGBTQ@NASA及其他:LGBTQ STEM专业人士的工作结构和工作场所不平等
学者们才刚刚开始了解组织过程如何塑造LGBTQ工作场所的不平等。本文利用STEM专业人士的多方法数据,研究了一个这样的因素——组织内工作任务的结构——如何影响LGBTQ工作者的边缘化和贬值经历。通过对美国国家航空航天局两个工作结构不同的航天中心的STEM专业人员的采访,我们发现,美国国家航空宇航局中心的LGBTQ专业人员在以动态项目为基础的团队中组织工作,他们与同事的互动不那么包容和尊重,部分原因是,每当他们被调到新的团队时,他们都必须迅速建立信誉并制定新的状态管理策略。相比之下,美国国家航空航天局另一个中心传统的单元结构的稳定性,让LGBTQ专业人士有时间进行状态管理并建立信任。这种稳定也促进了LGBTQ社区的建设。对14000多名美国STEM专业人员(594名认定为LGBTQ)的调查数据的分析证实了这种工作结构模式:在充满活力的项目团队中工作的STEM学科和就业部门的LGBTQ专业人员比在传统单位结构中工作的LGBTQ+专业人员更有可能报告人际边缘化和贬值。这些发现突出表明,工作结构是LGBTQ不平等的一个重要机制,需要进一步调查。
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
Book Review: Exit, Voice, and Solidarity: Contesting Precarity in the US and European Telecommunications Industries by Doellgast, Virginia More Than a Match: “Fit” as a Tool in Hiring Decisions The Gender Wage Gap, Between-Firm Inequality, and Devaluation: Testing a New Hypothesis in the Service Sector. Living to Work (from Home): Overwork, Remote Work, and Gendered Dual Devotion to Work and Family Disability and the State Production of Precarity
×
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