Search results

The purpose of this paper is to trace the genealogy of ethnic (white) privilege in US organizations and its continuing significance in organizations today.

The paper relies upon the historical literature on work, culture, and society found primarily in the fields of labor history and sociology. It also references contemporary organization studies and sociological literature to illustrate the continuing significance of ethnic (white) privilege in the workplace.

There is an inexorable link between European global expansion and colonization, industrialization, and the racialization/ethnicization of nineteenth and twentieth century US organizations. Furthermore, the particular manifestations of ethnic (white) privilege today must be understood within its historical development and the new meanings whiteness has acquired within the workplace if scholars and practitioners are to be successful in creating inclusive workplaces.

The focus in this paper is on the USA and ethnic (white) privilege to the exclusion of other forms of difference and contexts. Suggestions for future research are provided along with managerial implications.

This paper provides historical insight into the formation of white privilege in organizations and constitutes a prelude to fully understanding its contemporary manifestations in the workplace. These insights suggest ways to disrupt inequality and create inclusive organizations that do not privilege one ethnic or racial group over another.

Purpose – Are members of socially dominant groups aware of the privileges they enjoy? We address this question by applying the notion of hypocognition to social privilege. Hypocognition is defined as lacking a rich cognitive or linguistic representation (i.e., a schema) of a concept in question. By social privilege, we refer to advantages that members of dominant social groups enjoy because of their group membership. We argue that such group members are hypocognitive of the privilege they enjoy. They have little cognitive representation of it. As a consequence, their social advantage is invisible to them.

Approach – We provide a narrative review of recent empirical work demonstrating and explaining this lack of expertise and knowledge in socially dominant groups (e.g., White People, men) about discrimination and disadvantage encountered by other groups (e.g., Black People, Asian Americans, women), relative what members of those other groups know.

Findings – This lack of expertise or knowledge is revealed by classic cognitive psychological measures. Relative to members of other groups, social dominant group members generate fewer examples of discrimination that other groups confront, remember fewer instances after being presented a list of them, and are slower to respond when classifying whether these examples are discriminatory.

Social Implications – These classic measures of cognitive expertise about social privilege predict social attitude differences between social groups, specifically whether people perceive the existence of social privilege as well as believe discrimination still exists in contemporary society. Hypocognition of social privilege also carries implications for informal interventions (e.g., acting “colorblind”) that are popularly discussed.

This chapter examines the connections between race and class divisions and examines how they shape racial inequities in the distribution of resources, power and privilege. Throughout history, racial identity has been a key factor in determining a person's position in modern capitalist societies. As such, issues of race and class have preoccupied sociologists and other scholars with diverse ideological orientations. This is highlighted in debates around the nexus of race and class in the production of racial structures, laws and institutions that legitimate and perpetuate the normalisation and centrality of whiteness. This chapter summarises some of the historical and ongoing debates, providing a synthesis of how race and class divisions continue to shape contemporary intergroup relations and social policy. It delves into racial capitalism and how race intersects with other social identities to determine socio-economic hierarchy in many western countries.

Children and youth of color in White and adult-dominated societies confront racism and adultism that shapes their peer cultures. Yet, the “new” sociology of childhood lacks the theory and methodology to explore racialized peer cultures. Thus, this chapter aims to sharpen its research tools. Theoretically, this chapter draws from Technologies of the Self (Foucault, 1988) and Critical Race Theory (Delgado & Stefancic, 2012) to enhance Valentine’s (1997) “adult-youth binary” and Corsaro’s (2015) “interpretive reproduction.” Methodologically, it combines the “doing research with children” approach (Greig, Taylor, & MacKay, 2013) with Critical Race Methodology (Solórzano & Yosso, 2002) to do research with youth of color. These enhanced research tools are then used to explore how boys and girls of color (n = 150), 9- to 17-year olds, experience peer culture in suburban schools, under police surveillance, and on social media. In the field, interviewers navigated their adult privilege and racial/ethnic positionalities in relation to that of participants and the racial dynamic in the research setting, ultimately aiming to co-create a safe space for counter-storytelling. As a result, this chapter captured how White-dominated peer cultures used racial microaggressions against youth of color in suburban schools, boy peer cultures navigated racialized policing, and online-offline peer cultures curtailed protective and controlling racialized adult surveillance. Theoretically, the racially enhanced interpretive reproduction and adult-youth binary exposed the adultism-racism intersection that shapes youth peer cultures. Methodologically, counter-storytelling revealed the painful realities that youth of color face and that those with adult and/or White privilege would rather ignore.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effects of the socio-demographic diversity characteristic, racioethnicity, vs the deeper-level socially constructed attribute, awareness of racial privilege (which the authors termed “racial awareness”), on perceptions of organizational justice and on trust in management (TM) (trust) in a US context. The authors predicted that racial awareness would have a greater effect on perceptions of interactional and procedural justice and on trust than would participant racioethnicity. Second, the authors predicted that justice perceptions would influence trust. Finally the authors predicted that justice perceptions would mediate between racial awareness and TM.

The authors surveyed Black, Hispanic and Native American professionals in one industry in the USA. The authors employed regression and bootstrap analyses to test the hypotheses.

Racial awareness influenced justice ratings and TM. Justice perceptions influenced employee trust. Interactional and procedural justice had indirect effects on the relationship between racial awareness and trust, supporting the hypotheses.

Respondents were primarily African-American, so additional research to assess attitudes of other groups is needed. Respondents belonged to a minority networking group which provided the sample. It is possible that their membership sensitized the respondents to racial issues.

The finding suggest that managers can positively influence US minority employees’ trust regardless of the employees’ racial awareness by treating them with dignity and respect and by ensuring fairness in the application of organizational policies and procedures.

This study examined the impact of US minority employee racial awareness on justice perceptions and TM, important variables in the employer-employee relationship. Findings indicated that racial awareness was a better predictor of employee attitudes than was racioethnicity.

This paper introduces the special issue on Race and Accounting and Accountability. In so doing, it explores racism in its historical and contemporary forms, the role of accounting and accountability in enabling racism and racial discrimination and also efforts of redress and resistance.

We reflect on several critical themes to demonstrate the pervasive and insidious nature of racism and, review the literature on race and racism in accounting, focusing on studies that followed the seminal work by Annisette and Prasad (2017) who called for more research. We also review the six papers included in this special issue.

While many overt systems of racial domination experienced throughout history have subsided, racism is engrained in our everyday lives and in broader societal structures in more covert and nuanced forms. Yet, in accounting, as Annisette and Prasad noted, the focus has continued to be on the former. This special issue shifts this imbalance – five of the six papers focus on contemporary racism. Moreover, it demonstrates that although accounting technologies can and do facilitate racism and racist practices, accountability and counter accounts offer avenues for calling out and disrupting the powers and privileges that underlie racial discrimination and, resistance by un-silencing minority groups subjected to discrimination and injustice.

This introduction and the papers in the special issue offer rich empirical and theoretical contributions to accounting and accountability research on race and racial discrimination. We hope they inspire future race research to nurture progress towards a true post-racial society.

This paper examines the efforts of National Health Service (England) (NHSE) to respond to employee-based racial inequalities via its Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES). The WRES constitutes a hybridised accountability initiative with characteristics of the moral and imposed regimes of accountability.

The study conceptualises the notion of responsive race accountability with recourse to Favotto et al.’s (2022) moral accountability model and critical race theory (CRT), and through it, examines the enactment of WRES at 40 NHSE trusts using qualitative content analysis.

Despite the progressive nature of the WRES that seeks to nurture corrective actions, results suggest that trusts tend to adopt an instrumental approach to the exercise. Whilst there is some evidence of good practice, the instrumental approach prevails across both the metric reporting that trusts engage in to guide their actions, and the planned actions for progress. These planned actions not only often fail to coalesce with the trust-specific data but also include generic NHSE or equality, diversity and inclusion initiatives and mimetic adoptions of best practice guidance that only superficially address racial concerns.

Whilst the WRES is a laudable voluntary achievement, its moral imperative does not appear to have translated into a moral accountability within individual trusts.

Responding to calls for more research at the accounting-race nexus, this study uniquely draws on CRT to conceptualise and examine race accountability.

In the United States and other Anglophone countries in the Global North, there exists a rich and lengthy literature on how white teachers and teachers-in-training can and should begin to recognize, question and challenge their own privilege. Indeed, entire literatures have been developed around problematizing whiteness, and teacher education programs regularly incorporate this literature into preservice courses as an expected part of teacher training. However, despite similar proportions of white educators and researchers-in-training in comparative and international education, a similarly thorough discussion and unpacking of privilege is relatively lacking. Comparative and international education graduate programs rarely (if ever) incorporate multicultural education courses similar to those that have become staples in North American teacher education, and the literature interrogating whiteness in comparative education is still nascent. However, in 2015 several significant steps forward were taken into this dearly needed conversation, opening potential lines of continued inquiry. This essay outlines and begins to explore several of these directions for the future of the field: namely, critical self-studies of comparative educators, ethnographic research of racial dynamics in international education development organizations, and critical discourse analysis of prominent documents in international education and their recognition (or lack of such) of the role of race in sustaining global educational inequities.

In 2017, racial minorities made up 18.6% of the population in Appalachia compared to 39.3% of the United States population. Of this 18.6%, Black/African Americans represent the largest minority group, at 9.7% (Pollard & Jacobs, 2019). This chapter focuses on the positionality and experiences of Black women educators teaching critical perspectives at the intersection of race, gender, and class in rural Appalachia. Using Black feminist thought (Collins, 1986, 2000), a coautoethnography is used to highlight the authors' teaching experiences as Black women educators from non-Appalachian areas. Themes and recommendations identified across the authors' experiences are presented.