英语论文网

groups influence absolutely or negatively perceptions of leadership. Most of these studies try to identify how the race-ethnicity of either the perceiver or the objective affects who is authorized to be a leader, as well as how leaders are evaluated or treated. In general, in this group, scholars view race-ethnicity as an independent changeable that helps explain how leaders are viewed or experienced. Some studies investigate how the race-ethnicity of the leader impacts the way he or she is viewed by followers, while others investigate how the race-ethnicity of followers (or of a general audience that represents potential followers) impacts their view of the leader, given his or her race-ethnicity.

Studies in this class then respond to this context by focusing on how those discriminations translate into constraints placed on individual leaders of color. (The majority of research has compared whites and African-Americans; however more recent study has investigated Latino/a, Asian and Native American leaders as well.) Some studies have been paying attention solely in establishing that these obstacles exist, while others have also investigated diverse explanations for the drawback, as well as the influence of particular contextual factors that may moderate the effect of race.

In addition to, Bartol, Evans and Stith in 1978 noted that the dominance of evidence from field studies showed black managers was rated more disapprovingly than white managers. However, other studies showed no difference or even, in one study, that African Americans were rated more completely than whites. The authors also point out that there seemed to be a diversity in what leadership features were given more weight: 'across the studies, there does appear to be a tendency to estimate blacks in leadership positions more heavily on interpersonal factors than on content or task-related factors' though little research at that time investigated why this might be the case.

In 2003, Knight, Hebl, Foster, and Mannix compared white and black managers in an experimental study and found that participants tended to give lower ratings to black leaders and white subordinates, and higher ratings to white leaders and black subordinates, 'thus affirming these workers in their conventional public positions'

Furthermore, Rosette, Leonardelli, and Phillips 2008 also compared white and black 'business leaders' in an experimental study, finding that whites were seen as more effective leaders and as having more leadership prospective. In an extensive study of white and black women managers (Bell &Nkomo,2001), a number of the African American participants described incidents of outright racism as well as more subtle challenges to their authority as well as being held to a higher standard.

A lot of these studies also examine or think about why these obstacles exist. Bass (1990) cites early studies to propose that 'stress created by marginality' is likely to be a constraining effect for black leaders, even as he allows that marginality in some situation can be quite useful. He specifies that African American managers may lack contact to important networks and 'appreciation and encouragement' from their superiors. Bass (1990), on the other hand, speculates that racial prejudice, a 'cultural background that stresses modesty' and the stereotype of Asians as 'passive and retiring' may all contribute to the reasons they