Research in Organizational Behavior最新文献

{"title":"Applying the culture cycle to understand anti-DEI resistance and intentionally craft a more egalitarian society","authors":"Abigail M. Folberg ,&nbsp;Hwayeon Myeong ,&nbsp;Linh N.H. Pham ,&nbsp;Linda T. Nguyen ,&nbsp;Mikki R. Hebl ,&nbsp;Eden B. King","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100224","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100224","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Resistance against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), which is often referred to as “backlash,” undermines the effectiveness of DEI and may result in the harassment of marginalized group members, highlighting the need to effectively address it. Typically, scholars study anti-DEI resistance as an individual-level phenomenon. Yet, the current wave of anti-DEI resistance in the U.S. also includes organizational and government actions, including public accusations that DEI is “unAmerican” (<span><span>The White House, 2025</span></span>). Thus, anti-DEI resistance might be better understood as a multi-level phenomenon that involves profound disagreements about cultural values. To better understand anti-DEI resistance, we integrate the backlash literature with the culture cycle framework (Markus &amp; Kitayama, 2010), which suggests that culture comprises individuals, interactions, institutions, as well as broader ideals and values. We argue that integrating these two literatures may provide a better understanding of: (1) the ideas and structures that guide DEI and anti-DEI resistance, (2) the multi-level nature of anti-DEI resistance, including how resistance at one level (e.g., individual actions) may affect resistance at another (e.g., organizational actions), (3) how ambivalent resistance (i.e., simultaneously supporting and resisting DEI) may emerge both within and across levels, producing changes in support for DEI over time, and (4) how to address anti-DEI resistance. We then draw on the seven principles of intentional cultural change (<span><span>Hamedani et al., 2024</span></span>)—an outgrowth of the culture cycle framework—to advance actionable and empirically supported interventions designed to remediate anti-DEI resistance and cultivate inclusive change. We conclude by offering directions for future research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100224"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145531766","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Buckets under a leaky roof: A dual pathway framework of obfuscated anti-egalitarian hierarchies in organizations","authors":"Alexandra Figueroa ,&nbsp;Merrick R. Osborne ,&nbsp;Sa-kiera Tiarra Jolynn Hudson","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100227","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100227","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Arbitrary social hierarchies permeate our working lives in ways not always visible, introducing anti-egalitarian norms which stymie productivity. Reviewing bodies of work that identify and describe systems of oppression, we develop a framework that illuminates the cascading influence of such socio-historical factors on organizational processes. We contend that the literatures converge on a single, sobering logic: because organizations are embedded in—and seek legitimacy from—broader socio-historical contexts, the same arbitrary hierarchies that stratify societies are naturally imported into organizational life. At the same time, individuals are motivated to obscure the influence of these hierarchies to reduce psychological distress. We leverage institutional theory and systems psychodynamics to map how organizations are at the crux of external pressures (from society) and upward pressure (from employees) which both perpetuate and obfuscate the replication of anti-egalitarian hierarchies in organizations. In doing so, we clarify the most appropriate applications of common terminology used to describe the experiences of disadvantaged groups (e.g., discrimination, marginalization, minoritization). Specifically, we redirect scholars’ usage of the term “microaggressions” away from the commonplace or subtle nature of the microaggression to highlight their origin in – and maintenance of – anti-egalitarian organizational power structures. We then utilize this framework to generate recommendations to help organizational leaders “stop the leak” or ameliorate the influence of anti-egalitarian hierarchies in their workplace.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100227"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145553330","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The paradox of privilege: The downsides of masculinity for men and organizations","authors":"Ashley E. Martin,&nbsp;Seung Joo Yoo","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100226","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100226","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Gender research in organizational behavior has primarily focused on understanding and addressing the disadvantages women face in masculine work environments. While this body of work has been essential to understanding gender inequality in the workplace, it has left a critical gap: examining how masculinity both shapes <em>and</em> constrains men’s experiences and outcomes. This paper reverses the traditional focus of gender research in organizational behavior by arguing that masculinity is not only a source of advantage; it is also a system of traits, expectations, and values that imposes psychological and social costs on men. Drawing from interdisciplinary research across organizational behavior, psychology, and sociology, we argue that aspects of masculinity—such as stoicism, risk-taking, aggression, self-reliance, ambition, and dominance—are simultaneously organizationally rewarded as well as personally harmful. These expectations contribute to men’s poorer mental health, weaker social support networks, higher rates of self-harm, and greater exposure to physical danger. Moreover, while these aspects of masculinity are thought to drive organizational and societal growth, success, and power, they can also produce exclusionary cultures that undermine employee well-being. This paper argues that gender equity efforts must account for how masculinity shapes men—not only in the ways it enables their power but also in the ways it restricts their well-being. Addressing the double-edged nature of masculinity is not a diversion from gender progress but rather is an essential step toward creating healthier individuals, organizations, and societies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100226"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145553331","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Workplace inclusion: A social network perspective","authors":"Taurean Butler ,&nbsp;Emily Falk ,&nbsp;Adam M. Kleinbaum","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100221","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100221","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Workplace inclusion is fundamental to fostering diversity and equity in organizations, yet it remains inconsistently defined and operationalized in the literature. This paper integrates research on the psychology of belonging with social network analysis to propose a framework that bridges organizational practices of inclusion, meso-level network dynamics, and individual experiences of belonging. We define inclusion as the organizational structures, policies, and practices that foster a sense of individual belonging; we conceptualize belonging as stemming from an individual's experience of value, reciprocity, and fit. And we argue that organizational practices of inclusion shape individuals’ experiences of belonging in part by re-shaping the social networks that comprise their daily interactions. Drawing from social network research, we posit key structural indicators of individual-level belonging, including network centrality, bidirectional ties, and structural equivalence, which shape employees’ experiences within organizations. Applying this framework, we then highlight how employees from marginalized groups are disproportionately excluded from informal networks, restricting their access to information, mentorship, and advancement opportunities, and changing the affordances of network positions. We argue that social network analysis provides a potential tool to diagnose and address these disparities, enabling organizations to measure and intervene in structural barriers to inclusion. By linking organizational-level practices of inclusion to the richly theorized individual-level experience of belonging, with networks serving as the bridge, we provide a roadmap for future research and practical interventions that promote retention, well-being, and engagement among diverse groups of employees and advance a more coherent and actionable approach to fostering inclusion in the workplace.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100221"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145575640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A theory of stereotype negotiation","authors":"Cydney H. Dupree","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100228","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100228","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Inequality is pervasive, challenging people and organizations. Yet we lack a clear picture of how people navigate inequality in everyday social and organizational life. I propose a theory of stereotype negotiation—whereby people use voice (linguistic expression), body (nonverbal expression), and culture (expressed preferences) to counter stereotypes applied to their own social identity group and comply with stereotypes applied to their audience’s social identity group. I first synthesize research on the function, content, and costs of stereotypes. I then construct a behavioral, multi-level model of stereotype negotiation, including individual, interpersonal, and institutional antecedents and consequences. I close with a future research agenda to nuance our understanding of how people, as informed and agentic actors, navigate an increasingly diverse and unequal world: one interaction at a time.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100228"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145553332","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"ROB preface volume 45, 2025","authors":"Jack Goncalo,&nbsp;Greta Hsu","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100231","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100231","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100231"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145553333","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Selling the self: Neo-normative control and the platform paradox","authors":"Lindsey D. Cameron ,&nbsp;Vanessa M. Conzon ,&nbsp;Laura Lam","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100230","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100230","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The platform economy is an increasingly large segment of the contemporary economy that continues to attract workers, drawing on narratives of self-empowerment and entrepreneurship that are idolized within American culture. Yet, the realized lived experiences of workers are often anything but that of a flourishing entrepreneur, with many describing economic precarity, invasive and unpredictable algorithmic control, and demanding hours. What keeps people invested in returning to platform work? We label this observed contradiction the <em>platform paradox</em>, and we theorize how this paradox is continuously regenerated through neo-normative control, a modern form of workplace control that encourages workers to express their ‘authentic’ selves, individuality, and emotions in ways that align with organizational goals. Drawing on extant scholarship, we identify three neo-normative control mechanisms—framing self-as-product, whole self-integration, and hyper-gamification—that support platform workers in experiencing themselves as independent entrepreneurs while also increasing their control by the platform and its algorithmic management system. We illustrate how these controls collectively contribute to adverse consequences on two core work experiences: worker skill and worker time. We propose future research directions to further unpack this paradox and for the field of platform scholarship at-large, discussing implications for inequality.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100230"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145575639","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Intuitions-at-Work Theory: Understanding the causal loop between intuitions and diversity in organizations","authors":"David P. Daniels","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100225","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100225","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Most strategies designed by managers to increase organizational diversity have failed or backfired. Why? For instance, why have executives in nearly all Fortune 500 firms decided to use diversity training, even though this diversity strategy generally does not work and has actually been linked to less (not more) diversity? To address this puzzle, I introduce Intuitions-at-Work Theory (IWT), which proposes that organizational behavior is fundamentally driven by two types of intuitions: reactive intuitions and proactive intuitions. <em>Reactive intuitions</em> are people’s intuition-driven behavioral responses to triggers in their organizational environments – including traditional economic incentives (i.e., external rewards/penalties), psychological nudges (e.g., framing), and behavioral organization (e.g., how behaviors are structurally arranged across people or sequenced within individuals). <em>Proactive intuitions</em> are people’s intuition-driven behavioral strategies for creating, designing, and reshaping the organizational environment and its triggers – especially in ways that leverage other people’s reactive intuitions – to achieve their goals. IWT argues that managers often choose diversity strategies that fail for the same reason they often choose motivational strategies that fail: their proactive intuitions are systematically biased toward strategies that feel “salient” (rather than “subtle”), strategies that feel “positive” (rather than “negative”), and strategies that feel “certain” (rather than “uncertain”) – even when those strategies are suboptimal. IWT challenges and integrates prior theoretical frameworks by proposing that people are both intuitive decision makers who (mis)react to their organizational environments and also intuitive choice architects who (mis)design those environments. This gives rise to a causal loop between intuitions and diversity in organizations, where diversity triggers intuitions and intuitions shape diversity. But because proactive intuitions are biased toward strategies that feel “salient,” “positive,” and “certain,” managers’ proactive intuitions and targets’ reactive intuitions will be systematically misaligned, leading to three paradoxes: powerful diversity strategies (e.g., diversity reminders just before hiring decisions) can feel too subtle to use, good diversity strategies (e.g., joint evaluation where candidates are assessed side-by-side) can feel too bad to use, and reliable diversity strategies (e.g., anonymizing résumés) can feel too unreliable to use. Strikingly, executives – those with the most power to shape organizations – appear to exhibit the worst proactive intuitions of any sample population studied to date. IWT highlights that diversity researchers and management scholars must expand beyond investigating <em>what works</em> to also investigating <em>intuitions about what works</em> and <em>how to align intuitions with what works</em>.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100225"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145608742","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The aging firm","authors":"Ines Black,&nbsp;Sharique Hasan,&nbsp;Yoko Shibuya,&nbsp;Maria K. Zhu","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100220","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100220","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Prior research suggests that a firm’s workforce age composition is a key factor influencing its performance through effects on technological adoption, organizational learning, employee job satisfaction, and turnover. However, the existing literature often assumes that the phenomenon of the “aging firm” – that is, an older workforce age composition within firms – primarily reflects broader demographic trends such as population aging or immigration patterns. This paper offers a new framework for understanding how firms may actively make strategic decisions about their workforce age composition. We argue that firms may, directly or indirectly, select a balance of younger and older workers based on a range of internal and external factors, including their production function (e.g., task requirements), human capital capabilities (e.g., hiring and training), and shifts in technology and policy (e.g., automation and retirement policy). By integrating these factors into a cohesive framework, we argue that a firm’s workforce composition should result from a system of interrelated decisions that firms make that depend on their internal capabilities and evolve in response to external shocks.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100220"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145753963","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Inequality in startup hiring","authors":"Aleksandra Kacperczyk ,&nbsp;Santiago Campero","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100222","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100222","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Startups are increasingly central to job creation, innovation, and economic mobility, yet research on hiring inequality focuses predominantly on established firms and founders, overlooking the non-founder workforce. We develop a comprehensive framework for understanding how startup hiring practices affect labor market inequality. We propose that startups differ from mature firms in ways that make their hiring dynamics uniquely consequential for inclusion and exclusion. Integrating demand-side perspectives, we advance a four-part analytical framework organized around <em>why, when, how,</em> and <em>who</em> startups hire. We discuss how hiring motivations, timing, and methods interact to determine workforce composition, producing recursive effects that affect long-term diversity trajectories. Finally, we outline a research agenda highlighting the temporal, organizational, and contextual contingencies of startup hiring. By shifting attention from founders to employees and from supply-side to demand-side processes, this framework reconceptualizes startups as pivotal institutions in the reproduction and potential mitigation of inequality. It reveals how the architecture of opportunity in emerging ventures impacts the broader distribution of work and wealth.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100222"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145754025","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}