Purpose
In management research, little is known about how ethno-racial minority leaders interact with similar employees in supervisor–subordinate relationships. This study aims to examine and provide a deeper understanding of individuals’ negative reactions to similar others, thus highlighting the double-edged nature of demographic similarity which has historically predicted positive affective reactions.
Design/methodology/approach
Using a survey design, the authors collected data from supervisor-subordinate dyads from multiple companies from the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex in Texas, USA. They used ordinary least squares regression and conditional process analysis to test the hypotheses, including a two-stage moderation and moderated mediation.
Findings
Incorporating social context, i.e. minority status, as a moderator, the results show that ethno-racial minority leaders supervising ethno-racially similar subordinates were more vulnerable to relationship conflict than non-minority dyads. This, in turn, is linked to a reduction in the leaders’ feelings of trust toward their ethno-racially similar subordinate.
Originality/value
This study draws on social identity theory and status characteristics theory to explain the contradictory processes and outcomes associated with dyadic ethno-racial similarity and suggests the conditions under which dyad racial similarity is connected with unfavorable outcomes. This framework helps to broaden the boundary conditions of relational demography to provide a more nuanced explanation of when and why minority leaders in demographically similar hierarchical dyads experience more relationship conflict, which ultimately diminishes trust.
This article examines the existence of the crabs in the barrel syndrome (CBS) in organizational settings, as well as the affiliated intragroup, intergroup, and organizational dynamics. CBS is a metaphoric representation that describes the mentality and behaviors of in-group members that violate prescribed social norms of helping and support. Two qualitative studies are juxtaposed to capture the essence of CBS and associated socially complex issues that thrive in hypercompetitive and politicized work environments, resulting in negative collective and individual outcomes. This study provides a working definition of CBS and encourages further exploration of the phenomenon.
This chapter serves as a research framework for academics and practicing managers interested in understanding the conditions in which diversity, especially visible attributes such as race, gender, age, and nationality, positively or negatively affects organizational performance. This chapter differs from previous articles and books with a predominantly micro approach because the focus shifts from the individual, dyadic, and team diversity levels of analysis to diversity in large groups, subunits, and organizations. The key assumption throughout this chapter is that diversity represents a unique and valuable resource for organizations. The chapter concludes with suggestions for future research on other contextual factors that might aid in unleashing a “diversity advantage.”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.