Building on the work of Adam Herbert, this research examines how minority managers navigate the pressures of their organization versus the pressures of their community. Organizational socialization suggests that the socialization process will introduce employees to the goals and priorities of the organization and result in similar behaviors among managers. However, social identities (i.e., race, gender) also significantly influence the values, attitudes, and behaviors of a public servant. Navigating these two competing pressures, minority managers often experience role conflict in their work. We theoretically explore and empirically examine how race affects minority managers’ perceptions, networking behaviors, and hiring outcomes. We test our hypotheses using 6 years of school superintendent survey data. We find that racial minority managers behave in similar ways to their White peers as they have similar perceptions of their role in the organization and engage in professional networking behavior at similar rates. However, minority managers separately address the interests of their same-race minority community by hiring same-race street-level bureaucrats. As public organizations have grown increasingly diverse, this research revisits the experiences of minority public administrators and contributes to our understanding of how race and social identities contemporarily influence public managerial behaviors.

Although the United States spends more on health care than comparable nations, many Americans suffer from poor health. Many factors are emphasized as being important for improved health outcomes, including social and economic indicators, living and working conditions, and individual-level behavior. However, I argue the overwhelming attention to male health outcomes—compared to female health outcomes—and focus on factors that are “traditionally understood” as important in shaping health are two limitations of existing health-related research. I adopt an innovative approach that combines the theory of representative bureaucracy, gender concordance, and symbolic representation to argue that increase in female physicians contribute to improved female health outcomes. Using an originally collected dataset that contains information on female physicians, health outcomes, and state and individual-level factors, I study how female physicians influence the health outcomes of non-Hispanic White women, non-Hispanic Black women, and Latinas in the United States from 2000 to 2012. The findings suggest female physicians contribute to improved health outcomes for non-Hispanic White women and non-Hispanic Black women, but not Latinas. Supplemental Analysis bolsters confidence that the findings are not the result of increased access to health care professionals. This study highlights the importance of applying the theory of representative bureaucracy and symbolic representation to health care, the promise of greater female representation in health, and the insight gleaned from incorporating intersectionality in public administration research.

No abstract

Political scientists have long been interested in studying the elective office-holding of disadvantaged groups. However, this line of research primarily focuses on the representation of ethnic minorities in the U.S. Congress and identifies three types of determinants of minority candidates' electoral success: the demographic and political make-up of constituents, candidates' personal traits, and macro-level electoral rules. Much less attention is given to minority candidates' electoral success in statehouses. In this paper, we ask: what factors promote the electoral success of minority candidates in state legislatures? Beyond voter characteristics and electoral rules, we attribute minority candidates' electoral success to the social capital possessed by their in-group constituents. We theorize that social capital manifested as civic engagement and social connectedness, can become political capital for minority candidates. Using the Current Population Surveys Civic Engagement Supplement, we validate state-level measures of social capital by race and ethnicity. Linking group social capital to state legislative election outcomes, we find the stock of minority social capital contributes to the electoral success of minority candidates, while white social capital decreases minority candidates' electoral success. Key findings suggest social capital is a form of political capital for disadvantaged groups with private benefits for in-group candidates.

No abstract