The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Perspective—The Black Box of Organizational Demography
Abstract
Since its definition in the early 1980s, organizational demography has become an influential research area. Scholars map the relationship between demographic variables and organizational outcomes, examining such questions as whether increasing work group diversity leads to greater turnover and whether decreasing tenure similarity within a top management team leads to more numerous strategic reorientations. Asking such questions requires only a demographic predictor and an outcome, but answering them often requires additional theoretical constructs. For example, the relationship between work group diversity and turnover might be explained by communication and conflict. As work group diversity increases, communication within the group may become more difficult, resulting in greater conflict and thus increasing turnover. Despite the important, sometimes critical, role of such additional theoretical concepts, researchers often leave them loosely specified and unmeasured, creating a “black box” filled with vague, untested theories. This article presents a critical analysis of this approach. The results show that simple demographic explanations may generate multiple, mutually exclusive, often implicit theories involving numerous additional concepts. An evaluation of these more complex theories against previous research shows that they receive only weak support. Hence, the black box approach to organizational demography presents serious theoretical problems. Examples are provided to illuminate these problems. Four directions are suggested for research in organizational demography: deepening current variance explanations, creating dynamic models, exploring factors that produce demographic distributions, and moving beyond the variance model.
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
Some Effects of Proportions on Group Life: Skewed Sex Ratios and Responses to Token Women
Kanter, R. M. (1977) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/226425 · Cited by 3,154
Levels issues in theory development, data collection and analysis
Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. (1994) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258703 · Cited by 1,607
Demographic Diversity, Conflict, and Work Group Outcomes: An Intervening Process Theory
Pelled, L. H. (1996) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.7.6.615 · Cited by 1,489
Cited by
Is the Resource-Based “View” a Useful Perspective for Strategic Management Research?
Priem, R. L., & Butler, J. E. (2001) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2001.4011928 · Cited by 4,461
Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict and Performance
Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667029 · Cited by 2,971
What Differences Make a Difference?: The Promise and Reality of Diverse Teams in Organizations
Mannix, E., & Neale, M. A. (2005) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2005.00022.x · Cited by 1,276
Stahl, G. K., Maznevski, M. L., Voigt, A., & Jonsen, K. (2010) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2009.85 · Cited by 1,248
MAKING USE OF DIFFERENCE: DIVERSITY, DEBATE, AND DECISION COMPREHENSIVENESS IN TOP MANAGEMENT TEAMS.
Simons, T., Pelled, L. H., & Smith, K. A. (1999) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256987 · Cited by 1,235
Founding the Future: Path Dependence in the Evolution of Top Management Teams from Founding to IPO
Beckman, C. M., & Burton, M. D. (2008) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1070.0311 · Cited by 605
Price, K. H., Harrison, D. A., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T. (2002) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/3069328 · Cited by 583
Somech, A. (2006) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206305277799 · Cited by 563
Webber, S. S., & Donahue, L. M. (2001) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920630102700202 · Cited by 518
Ibarra, H., Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. (2005) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0129 · Cited by 518
Perceived organizational support, career satisfaction, and the retention of older workers
Armstrong‐Stassen, M., & Ursel, N. D. (2009) · Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1348/096317908x288838 · Cited by 473
Matveev, A. V., & Nelson, P. E. (2004) · International Journal of Cross Cultural Management · doi:10.1177/1470595804044752 · Cited by 204
Hensellek, S., Kleine-Stegemann, L., & Kollmann, T. (2023) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113544 · Cited by 94
Kunze, F., & Menges, J. I. (2017) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.2129 · Cited by 77
Chatman, J. A., Greer, L. L., Sherman, E., & Doerr, B. (2019) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2018.1268 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- Lawrence, B. S.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 1997-02
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-22
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2118907328
- Cited by
- 708
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 29.71
- 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.