Does Demographic Dissimilarity Matter for Perceived Inclusion? Evidence From Public Sector Employees
| Published date | 01 March 2017 |
| Author | Evan Berman,Amy E. Smith,Kwang Bin Bae,Meghna Sabharwal |
| DOI | 10.1177/0734371X16671367 |
| Date | 01 March 2017 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2016
Article
Review of Public Personnel Administration
2017, Vol. 37(1) 4 –22
Does Demographic
© The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions:
Dissimilarity Matter for
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0734371X16671367
journals.sagepub.com/home/rop
Perceived Inclusion?
Evidence From Public Sector
Employees
Kwang Bin Bae1, Meghna Sabharwal2,
Amy E. Smith3, and Evan Berman4
Abstract
This study examines the relationship between individual dissimilarity and perceptions
of organizational inclusion. Data from a national survey of public agencies conducted
in Florida and Texas show that gender dissimilarity is negatively associated with
perceptions of inclusion and the negative relationship is more acute for men than
for women. In contrast, tenure dissimilarity is positively related to perceptions of
inclusion and this positive association is more acute for those with longer tenure than
for those with shorter tenure. These results suggest that the effect of dissimilarity
on the perception of inclusion depends on both the observability of individual-level
characteristics and the status of the demographic group. In particular, dissimilarity
along characteristics that are easily observable (such as gender) is more likely to
influence perceptions of inclusion and dissimilarity is more influential for higher status
groups (such as men or long-tenured employees).
Keywords
demographic dissimilarity, gender dissimilarity, tenure dissimilarity, organizational
inclusion, hierarchical linear modeling (HLM)
1North Carolina Central University, Durham, USA
2University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, USA
3University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, USA
4Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand
Corresponding Author:
Kwang Bin Bae, Department of Public Administration, North Carolina Central University, 215 Whiting
CJ Building, Durham, North Carolina, 27707, USA.
Email: kbae@nccu.edu
Bae et al.
5
Introduction
Past studies on diversity in the public sector have generally focused on issues such as
discrimination, affirmative action, reverse discrimination, and valuing and managing
diversity (Kellough & Naff, 2004; Naff & Kellough, 2003; Pitts, 2006, 2009; Riccucci,
2002; Wise & Tschirhart, 2000). This body of research has revealed several important
issues related to employee diversity and policies to address changing demographics in
the workplace. Concurrently, a recent stream of research in psychology and business
examines ways in which diverse populations can be integrated in an organization (Mor
Barak, 2000; Mor Barak & Cherin, 1998; Pless & Maak, 2004; Roberson, 2006; Shore
et al., 2011). The concept of inclusion—defined as “the degree to which individuals
feel part of critical organizational processes” (Mor Barak & Cherin, 1998, p. 48)—is
thus gaining popularity among business communities. In recent years, public manage-
ment literature has also explored the concept of inclusion examining the relationship
between diversity or representativeness and inclusion (Andrews & Ashworth, 2014;
Selden, 2006; Shore et al., 2011).
Previous organizational diversity literature has explored the effect of group demo-
graphic composition on organizational performance, job satisfaction, or turnover
intention (Choi, 2009, 2013; Choi & Rainey, 2010; Pitts, 2006, 2009). A drawback of
this organizational approach, however, is that it assumes that all individuals of the
same group will behave the same way regardless of the social context (Cunningham,
2007). In response to this argument, studies have recognized that attention to the
impact of diversity at the individual level is also important. O’Reilly, Caldwell, and
Barnett (1989) defined individual dissimilarity as individual-level demographic differ-
ences with others. Individuals use demographic characteristics, such as sex and age, to
categorize others as in-group or out-group, with in-group members viewed more
favorably than out-group (Tsui & Gutek, 1999). Moreover, existing studies, focused
primarily on private sector firms, have found that individual dissimilarity is negatively
related to organizational inclusion (Pelled, Ledford, & Mohrman, 1999; Tsui, Egan, &
O’Reilly, 1992).
To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to analyze the association
between individual dissimilarities and organizational inclusion in the public sector.
Although Andrews and Ashworth (2014) examined the relationship between represen-
tativeness and inclusion using civil service organizations within the United Kingdom,
they do not consider individual-level demographic characteristics. Our study extends
previous research by examining the relationship between multiple individual dissimi-
larity variables and employee inclusion in public organizations. Our study builds on
this work by creating four individual-level measures of dissimilarity focused on gen-
der, age, tenure, and education level. We use these measures to examine how differ-
ences in demographic characteristics influence the perception of inclusion at the
individual level while accounting for differences in agency type and size. We use a
hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) approach to examine both individual- and organi-
zational-level factors. Next, we present the theoretical foundations that informed our
study—self-categorization theory and organizational inclusion—and the hypotheses
6
Review of Public Personnel Administration 37(1)
derived from existing literature. We then describe our data and analytic method fol-
lowed by a discussion of our findings and concluding remarks.
Theoretical Background
Self-Categorization Theory
According to self-categorization theory, individuals recognize themselves through
their group membership (Hogg & Terry, 2000). People categorize themselves and oth-
ers into social groups as in-group or out-group based on characteristics such as gender,
age, or organizational membership (Tajfel, 1982). People prefer homogeneous groups
(Messick & Mackie, 1989; Schneider, 1987) and regard members of an out-group less
favorably than members of an in-group (Kramer, 1991). In addition, belonging to
one’s in-group results in a high level of self-esteem and a positive self-identity
(Kramer, 1991). In contrast, interacting with those who are considered out-group may
result in anxiety. As Stephan and Stephan (1985) suggested, “people who regard them-
selves as superior experience anxiety concerning interaction with others who are
regarded as inferior” (p. 163).
Furthermore, the perception of similarity or dissimilarity can affect the attitude of
an individual in a psychological group. For example, Hoffman and Hurst (1990) found
that individuals have the highest satisfaction in an organization comprised of members
with the same gender. This indicates that individuals prefer homogeneity over hetero-
geneity in a group, and job satisfaction increases in a homogeneous group. Similarly,
if individuals categorize themselves by age, job satisfaction is the highest when people
work with a similar-age group (McCain, O’Reilly, & Pfeffer, 1983). Ultimately, indi-
vidual preferences for interacting with homogeneous groups and more favorable eval-
uations of in-group members conflict with increasing diversity in the workplace.
In addition to examining how dissimilarity affects individuals, existing research
has also found individual’s demographic dissimilarity to be negatively associated with
organizational outcomes such as turnover, communication, and social integration.
Here, dissimilarity can be defined as “the extent of which an employee’s demographic
profile differs from the demographic profiles of others in his/her work unit” (O’Reilly
et al., 1989, p. 21). Jackson et al. (1991) revealed that if top managers were dissimilar
to their teammates in terms of age, education level, or industry experience, they were
more likely to leave. Other studies suggest that individual age dissimilarity has a nega-
tive relationship with communication (Zenger & Lawrence, 1989) and social integra-
tion (O’Reilly et al., 1989).
Organizational Inclusion
Many studies on diversity have focused on the effects of gender or racial diversity on
organizational performance (Choi & Rainey, 2010; Frink et al., 2003) and job satisfac-
tion (Choi, 2013; Pitts, 2009). However, recent studies have begun to take an interest
in the degree to which women and non-White workers have been accepted and treated
Bae et al.
7
as insiders by others in an organization (Andrews & Ashworth, 2014; Selden, 2006).
The effect of such inclusion on organizational performance has also been recently
examined in the public sector (Sabharwal, 2014). Inclusion has been conceptualized as
the extent to which people in an organization feel engaged in the practices most crucial
to the organization (Mor Barak & Cherin, 1998). More specifically, inclusion can be
described as “access to information, connectedness to co-workers, and the ability to
participate in and influence the decision making process” (Mor Barak, 2000, p. 341).
Pelled et al. (1999) examined the relationship between individual dissimilarity and
three inclusion indicators—decision-making influence, which is the influence that an
employee has over decisions that affect the work that he or she does; access to sensi-
tive work information, indicating the degree to which an employee is kept well-
informed about the...
To continue reading
Request your trial