Search results

Graduates of cross-cultural management (CCM) courses should be capable of both tackling international and cross-cultural situations and creating positive value from the diversity inherent in these situations. Such value creation is challenging because these situations are typically complex due to differences in cultural values, traditions, social practices, and institutions, such as legal rules, coupled with variation in, for example, wealth and civil rights among stakeholders. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The authors argue that a scientific mindfulness approach to teaching CCM can help students identify and leverage positive aspects of differences and thereby contribute to positive change in cross-cultural situations.

Scientific mindfulness combines mindfulness and scientific thinking with the explicit goal to drive positive change in the world.

The authors explain how the action principles of scientific mindfulness enable learners to build positive value from cultural diversity. The authors then describe how to enact these principles in the context of CCM education.

This editorial aims to introduce the special issue on employment discrimination against immigrants.

The first part is a commentary on key issues in the study of employment discrimination against immigrants. The second part presents the five articles in the special issue.

The papers in this special issue focus on a variety of issues associated with employment discrimination against immigrants. For example, they consider: discrimination based on accents; differences among justice perceptions among immigrants and non‐immigrants; the effects of negative stereotypes on workplace outcomes; the treatment of Hispanic immigrants; and the reasons for the lack of research on Hispanic immigrants.

The author comments on key issues that researchers of employment discrimination against immigrants have to take into account. These issues include: the appreciation of the diversity among immigrants; an understanding of the complexity of employment discrimination research; openness to cross‐disciplinary approaches; and the consideration of employment discrimination within the context of the immigrant experience. The five articles that make up the special issues vary in their nature (empirical, critical), methodologies (quantitative, qualitative), locations (United States, Germany, and Canada), and implications.

The issues discussed in the papers have important implications for understanding and overcoming employment discrimination against immigrants.

The Journal of Managerial Psychology invited this special issue to initiate psychological research on employment discrimination against immigrants. The intent is to draw the attention of organizational scholars to the large, yet under‐studied immigrant segment of the workforce.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the impact that negative stereotypes have on suitability ratings of Turkish applicants in a simulated hiring scenario.

This paper utilizes a within subjects experimental design in which participants assessed four fictitious male candidates ostensibly applying for a managerial position; two of German descent, two of Turkish descent. Participants also completed a newly developed measure designed to assess the degree to which people endorse negative stereotypes of Turkish males in managerial positions.

The results suggest that the endorsement of a negative Turkish stereotype significantly predicts suitability ratings for highly qualified Turkish candidates.

Stereotype endorsement should be considered when investigating, and making claims about the impact of demographic characteristics on evaluative workplace outcomes.

In the service of diversity, organizations should be acutely aware of how stereotyping may impact human resources processes.

This paper adds to the literature regarding the impact of bias on evaluative workplace outcomes, furthering the notion that explicitly endorsed stereotypes do indeed affect such outcomes.

This paper aims to examine perceived barriers and paths to success for Latin American immigrant professionals in the Canadian job market.

Findings are based on 20 semi‐structured interviews with Latin American graduates of Canadian MBA programs. Interviews were analyzed for emergent categories and common themes.

Despite their strong educational backgrounds, participants perceived several challenges to their success in the Canadian workplace, specifically, language barriers, lack of networks, cultural differences and discrimination. They also identified factors that influenced their professional success in Canada, such as homophilious networks and their Latin American background.

By investigating stories of Latin American immigrant professionals, the study explores subjective views of immigration experiences and discrimination in this unique and rarely examined group. A larger sample will increase the confidence of the study's findings and future studies should examine dynamics of these issues over time.

This paper presents insight onto the labor market experiences and coping mechanisms of the currently understudied group of Latin American immigrant professionals in Canada. The study's qualitative approach enabled the examination of challenges experienced by immigrant professionals beyond those typically studied in this literature (e.g. devaluation of foreign credentials) and led to the finding that being Latin American can act both as a disadvantage in the form of discrimination and as an advantage as it differentiates immigrant professionals from other job seekers.

Though a number of demographics (e.g. sex, age) have been associated with work overload, scholars have yet to consider the potential impact of immigrant status. This is important because immigrants constitute a significant proportion of the workforce, and evidence suggests many employers believe they are easier to exploit. This paper aims to examine work hours, interpersonal justice, and immigrant status as predictors of work overload.

The hypotheses were tested using a large, national random telephone survey of employees in the United States (n=2,757).

As expected, employees who worked more hours tended to perceive more work overload. Importantly, however, this effect interacted with interpersonal justice differently for immigrant and native‐born employees. Justice attenuated the effect of work hours for the former but seemed to exacerbate it somewhat for the latter. Of note, the interactive effect was more than five times larger for immigrants than for natives.

The study shows that supervisors might require their employees to work longer hours without necessarily being perceived as abusive (i.e. overloading them). Doing so, however, requires treating employees justly in the form of respect, courtesy, and dignity. Though this form of just treatment is important for all employees, its effects are especially pronounced for immigrants.

The relationship between the number of hours worked and perceptions of work overload is examined for immigrant and non‐immigrant workers in the USA.

We conceptualize new ways to qualify what themes should dominate the future international business and management (IB/IM) research agenda by examining three questions: Whom should we ask? What should we ask, and which selection criteria should we apply? What are the contextual forces? Our main findings are the following: (1) wider perspectives from academia and practice would benefit both rigor and relevance; (2) four key forces are climate change, globalization, inequality, and sustainability; and (3) we propose scientific mindfulness as the way forward for generating themes in IB/IM research. Scientific mindfulness is a holistic, cross-disciplinary, and contextual approach, whereby researchers need to make sense of multiple perspectives with the betterment of society as the ultimate criterion.

Although statistical evidence clearly demonstrates discrimination against foreign‐accented individuals in the workplace, surprisingly little research attention has been paid to how such individuals are evaluated when they apply for jobs. Thus, the aim of this paper is to examine the effects of applicant accent on access‐related employment decisions across four jobs that differed on job status and communication demands.

The study used a 3 (applicant accent: Standard American English, French, and Japanese) × 2 (job status: low vs high)×2 (communication demands: low vs high) mixed‐factorial design, and data from 286 college students at two different locations.

Results show that in comparison with French‐accented applicants, Japanese‐accented applicants fared worse on employment‐related decisions, especially for jobs that had high communication demands, even after controlling for applicant understandability and location. French‐accented applicants were viewed as favorably as, or more favorably than, Standard American English‐accented applicants.

Applicant accent was confounded with applicant names. Thus, it is not known whether the obtained results are due to applicant accent, names, or both.

It was found that organizations could do one of the following: use structured interviews; train interviewers on potential biases against foreign‐accented applicants; and provide more individuating information to reduce the effects of accent‐based stereotypes on employment‐related decisions.

The paper considers the communication demands of jobs and job status as influences on the evaluation of foreign‐accented applicants.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the invisibility of immigrants in diversity research in the management field.

Reasons for the paucity of immigrant research, focusing on discrimination, exploitation, and abuse of low‐skilled Hispanic immigrants in the USA, are examined. Considerations of what can be applied to the study of immigrants from extant diversity research are explored.

Experiences of Hispanic immigrants to the USA are largely absent from diversity literature even though immigrants are significant contributors to the diversity of the USA. There are clear differences in the employment experiences of native‐born Hispanic‐Americans and those who are immigrants, with the latter, both documented and undocumented, generally faring worse in wages, benefits, and interpersonal treatment when compared with those who are native‐born.

Suggestions for research are provided to increase the inclusion of immigrants in diversity research.

This paper focuses on integrating the experiences of discrimination of low‐skilled Hispanic immigrants, who comprise the bulk of newcomers to the USA, into the mainstream diversity literature in management studies and provides questions to stimulate research in the area.