{"title":"Racial Inequality in Organizations: A Systems Psychodynamic Perspective","authors":"Sanaz Mobasseri, William A. Kahn, R. Ely","doi":"10.5465/amr.2021.0446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper uses systems psychodynamic concepts to develop theory about the persistence of racial inequality in U.S. organizations and to inform an approach for disrupting it. We treat White men who aspire to emulate hegemonic masculine ideals as the dominant group and Black people as the archetypal subordinate group. In our theory, persistence is rooted in work contexts that conflate merit with idealized images of White masculinity, which provokes unconscious distress in White men who aspire to meet those ideals. To keep this distress at bay, they covertly construct an unconscious, multilevel defense system, comprising projective identification at the individual level bolstered by a social defense at the organization level. This system is selfsealing: It diverts attention away from the real culprit—work contexts that threaten White men’s self-worth—by contriving a substitute problem—a shortage of meritorious Black people; at the same time, the social defense fuels aspects of the work context that give rise to such threats in the first place. The upshot is the persistence of racial inequality. We offer guidance on how to disrupt these dynamics by building mutually-reinforcing holding environments where organization members can engage in intrapsychic and intergroup reparative work. We conclude by offering theoretical contributions to organizational inequality, systems psychodynamics, and masculinity literatures.","PeriodicalId":7127,"journal":{"name":"Academy of Management Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":19.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academy of Management Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2021.0446","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper uses systems psychodynamic concepts to develop theory about the persistence of racial inequality in U.S. organizations and to inform an approach for disrupting it. We treat White men who aspire to emulate hegemonic masculine ideals as the dominant group and Black people as the archetypal subordinate group. In our theory, persistence is rooted in work contexts that conflate merit with idealized images of White masculinity, which provokes unconscious distress in White men who aspire to meet those ideals. To keep this distress at bay, they covertly construct an unconscious, multilevel defense system, comprising projective identification at the individual level bolstered by a social defense at the organization level. This system is selfsealing: It diverts attention away from the real culprit—work contexts that threaten White men’s self-worth—by contriving a substitute problem—a shortage of meritorious Black people; at the same time, the social defense fuels aspects of the work context that give rise to such threats in the first place. The upshot is the persistence of racial inequality. We offer guidance on how to disrupt these dynamics by building mutually-reinforcing holding environments where organization members can engage in intrapsychic and intergroup reparative work. We conclude by offering theoretical contributions to organizational inequality, systems psychodynamics, and masculinity literatures.
期刊介绍:
The mission of AMR is to publish theoretical insights that advance our understanding of management and organizations. Submissions to AMR must extend theory in ways that develop testable knowledge-based claims. To do this, researchers can develop new management and organization theory, significantly challenge or clarify existing theory, synthesize recent advances and ideas into fresh, if not entirely new theory, or initiate a search for new theory by identifying and delineating a novel theoretical problem. The contributions of AMR articles often are grounded in “normal science disciplines” of economics, psychology, sociology, or social psychology as well as nontraditional perspectives, such as the humanities.