The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Diversity Rhetoric and the Managerialization of Law
Abstract
This article examines the rise of diversity rhetoric in U.S. management and how that rhetoric reframes ideas inherent in civil rights law. Quantitative and qualitative content analyses of the professional management literature (mid‐1980s–mid‐1990s) illustrate a managerialization of law, a process by which legal ideas are refigured by managerial ways of thinking as they flow across the boundaries of legal fields and into managerial and organizational fields. The managerial conception of diversity adds a variety of nonlegal dimensions of diversity (e.g., personality traits) to the legally protected categories like race and sex, and it disassociates diversity from civil rights law.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Aldag, R. J., & Fuller, S. R. (1993) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.113.3.533 · Cited by 306
Self-citation
Cited by
Kalev, A., Dobbin, F., & Kelly, E. (2006) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/000312240607100404 · Cited by 2,052
Legitimacy as a Social Process
Johnson, C., Dowd, T. J., & Ridgeway, C. L. (2006) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123101 · Cited by 1,027
How to Conduct a Mixed Methods Study: Recent Trends in a Rapidly Growing Literature
Small, M. L. (2011) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102657 · Cited by 829
Operating Room: Relational Spaces and Microinstitutional Change in Surgery
Kellogg, K. C. (2009) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/603535 · Cited by 574
van Dijk, H., van Engen, M. L., & van Knippenberg, D. (2012) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.06.003 · Cited by 514
Presumed fair: Ironic effects of organizational diversity structures.
Kaiser, C. R., Major, B., Jurcevic, I., Dover, T. L., Brady, L. M., & Shapiro, J. R. (2013) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0030838 · Cited by 405
Ensuring Employment Equity: Are Federal Diversity Programs Making a Difference?
Naff, K. C., & Kellough, J. E. (2003) · International Journal of Public Administration · doi:10.1081/pad-120024399 · Cited by 148
Are Diversity Programs Merely Ceremonial? Evidence-Free Institutionalization
Dobbin, F., & Kalev, A. (2017) · The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism · doi:10.4135/9781446280669.n32 · Cited by 56
Reconfiguring the Deserving Refugee: Cultural Categories of Worth and the Making of Refugee Policy
Shiff, T. (2020) · Law & Society Review · doi:10.1111/lasr.12456 · Cited by 26
The Perceived Values of Diversity, then and Now
Schuck, P. H. (2001) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.273211 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Edelman, L. B., Fuller, S. R., & Mara‐Drita, I.
- Venue
- American Journal of Sociology
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2001-05
- Volume
- 106
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1589-1641
- ISSN
- 0002-9602 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5390
- OpenAlex
- W2027844695
- Cited by
- 614
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 17.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
