Making Sense of Inequalities

Making Sense of Inequalities: 
A Study of Inequalities within Organizations and Impact on Organizational Dynamics

Inequality is endemic to organizations. It is at core of daily individual experiences- in how we live our lives and the way we organize work (Acker, 2006; Dorling, 2015). It also has a lingering effect. Research indicates childhood experiences with inequality are carried into the organization and impact organizational dynamics, leadership and decision-making (Martin, Cote & Woodruff, 2016; Kish-Gephart & Campell, 2015). Although a majority of recent organizational research focuses on studying economic and income inequalities, we all know that, individuals also experience social inequalities (Dorling, 2015). Acker (2006) argues social (such as gender, class, and race) and economic inequalities intersect within organizations; and through the process of organizing continually reproduce a complex pattern. From this perspective, inequalities within organizations are many, overlapping, fluid, and varied.

We are continually affected by inequality within organizations, yet we know very little about it (Sernau, 2017), particularly in terms of how individuals make sense of the inequalities they face, and how their experiences with inequalities influence the way they interact and/or lead organizations. A lack of awareness may make inequalities invisible and more legitimate within organizations (Acker, 2006) thereby reproducing harmful social relationships, such as lack of collaboration (Piff, 2014), mistrust (Beal & Astakhova, 2017), social distance, selfish behavior (Desai et. al., 2009), workplace absenteeism and aggression (Bapuji, 2015; Gino & Pierce, 2009; Andersson & Bateman, 1997).

The purpose of this study, therefore, is to unpack individual experiences with various forms of inequalities that are both external and internal to the organization. The study aims to explore the lingering effects (Martin, Cote & Woodruff, 2016; Kish-Gephart & Campell, 2015) and evolving nature (Acker, 2006) of inequalities. At the same time, focusing on ‘how’ individual experiences with inequalities impact organizational dynamics will allow us to link individual actions with macro-level inequalities and organizational processes, thus help develop a multi-level and in-depth understanding of inequality (Beal & Astakhova, 2017). The study asks: How do individuals make sense of their experiences with various forms of inequalities inside and outside organizations; and how do these experiences impact their workplace interactions and behaviors?

For the purpose of this study, I define inequality as: systematic disparities in power and control over goals, resources and outcomes (Acker, 2006) that impact an individual’s capability, well-being and motivation (Bapuji, 2015; Sen, 1997). A broader conceptualization of inequality allows us to capture the many forms of inequalities that individuals may experiences within organizations and societies.

Imprinting Theory informed this study. Imprinting refers to the process through which, during one or more sensitive periods and/or key developmental period in a person’s life, that person “develops characteristics that reflect prominent features of the environment, and these characteristics persist despite significant environmental changes in subsequent periods” (Kish-Gephart & Campbell, 2016; 1617). Imprinting theory highlights the powerful influence of the environment, which helps shape essential individual characteristics that persist over time (Marquis & Tilscik, 2013). One may undergo several imprinting during multiple sensitive or transition periods thus may be subject to imprinting throughout one’s life- both inside and outside organizations. This implies that the process of imprinting is both dynamic and complex; and individual experiences with inequality during childhood, adulthood and within various organizations (their norms and cultures) may likely lead to a layering of imprints (Marquis & Tilscik, 2013). The study will therefore allow us to tease out different imprint layers. It will also offer insights into persistence of inequality within organizations, and how individual experiences with inequality within organizations may have a lasting influence on them and the organizations they work in.

For this study, I use sensemaking as a method of analysis (Mills, Thurlow & Mills, 2010). Sensemaking provides insights into how individuals give meaning to events (Weick, 1995), in this case how they experienced inequality. It is appropriate for this study for at least five reasons. First, sensemaking is never-ending. As mentioned previously, inequalities are also fluid and changing. Within organizations, individuals are continually experiencing inequalities as events, decisions or actions, thereby triggering the process of sensemaking. Second, sensemaking is retrospective. So is the process of describing individual experiences with inequality, as will be explored in this study. It has been argued that the behavior of an individual cannot be understood without the purposes and meanings of their daily activities (Lincoln and Guba, 2000). Since this study explores the lingering effect of inequality and how these relate to individual interactions and dynamics, interviews will allow participants to make sense of their experiences with the inequality in retrospect- only after the event. Third, Weick (1995) argues sensemaking is a social and comparative process. “In order to give meaning to the ‘present’ we compare it to a similar or familiar event from our past and rely on the past event to make sense” (Mills, Thurlow & Mills, 2010; p. 184). A study of inequality, with its emphasis on examining disparities, also requires participants to compare with the ‘other’. Fourth, sensemaking offers particular insights into organizational processes, thereby fulfilling purpose of this study to link individual experiences with their actions and behaviors within organizations. Finally, sensemaking is enactive of the environment (Weick, 1995). Hence, as a method of analysis, sensemaking allows participants to describe their experiences within their own environment, both inside and outside their organizations.

I aim to capture a diverse sample in terms of age, economic status, gender and years of tenure within different types of organizations (including non-profit, profit and multinational companies). As per our research questions, a diverse sample would allow us to capture the various forms of inequalities that individuals face within society and organizations. We hope to interview 15-20 individuals, using Seidman’s (2006) adapted 2-interview strategy, particularly with an equal representation of men and women. Regardless of the number of participants or interviews, the goal is to reach saturation of the data, when researcher feels “the new information does not provide further insight” into understanding (Creswell, 2007, p. 160).

References
Acker, J. (2006), “Inequality regimes: Gender, class and race in organizations”, Gender & Society, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 441-464.
Andersson, L.M., & Bateman, T.S. (1997). Cynicism in the workplace: Some causes and effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior 18(5): 449–469.
Bapuji, H. (2015). Individuals, interactions and institutions: How economic inequality affects organizations. Human Relations, 68(7), 1059-1083.
Beal & Astakhova, (2017). Management and income inequality: a review and conceptual framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 142, 1-23.
Creswell, J. W. (2007), Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Desai, S.D., Brief, A.P. & George, J. (2009). Meaner managers: A consequence of income inequality. In: Kramer RM, Tenbrunsel AE and Bazerman (eds.) Social Decision Making: Social Dilemmas, Social Values, and Ethical Judgments. New York: Psychology Press, 315–334.
Dorling, D. (2015). Injustice: Why social inequality still persists. Bristol: Policy Press.
Gino, F., & Pierce, L. (2009). The abundance effect: Unethical behavior in the presence of wealth. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109(2): 142–155.
Kish-Gephart, J., & Campell, J. T. (2015). You don’t forget your roots: the influence of CEO social class background on strategic risk taking. Academy of Management Journal, 58 (6), 1614-1636.
Lincoln and Guba, 2000
Martin, S. A., Cote, S., & Woodruff, T. (2016). Echoes of our upbringing: how growing up wealthy or poor relates to narcissism, leader behavior and leader effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6), 2157-2177.
Marquis, C. (2013). Imprinting: Toward A Multilevel Theory. The Academy of Management Annals, 7 (1), 193.
Mills, J. H., Thurlow, A., & Mills, A. J. (2010). Making sense of sensemaking: the critical sensemaking approach. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal. 5 (2), 182-195.
Piff, P.K. (2014) Wealth and the inflated self: Class, entitlement, and narcissism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40(1), 34–43.
Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. (3rd ed.). New York: Teacher’s College Press.
Sen A. (1997). On economic inequality. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sernau, S. (2017). Social inequality in a global age. (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Weick, K.E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations, London, Sage.