COLLEGE
PARK, Md., Aug. 5, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Fighting
for social justice often takes root in the workplace—evidenced when
there is advocacy for pay equity, diversity and inclusion, and
similar initiatives. But to ensure that this advocacy is effective,
who should be doing the advocating?
Debra Shapiro at the
University of Maryland's Robert H.
Smith School of Business has co-authored research that answers this
question. "Social justice movements aren't going away anytime soon
because they're needed," she says. "We wanted to reconcile the
mixed findings regarding who tends to garner more support for
social justice issues."
Shapiro, the Dean's Chair in Organizational Behavior and the
Clarice Smith Professor of Management for the Smith School,
collaborated with Jigyashu Shukla, assistant professor at the
Willie A. Deese College of Business and Economics at North Carolina A&T State University and
Deshani Ganegoda, associate
professor at the Melbourne Business School at the University of Melbourne. They investigated when and
why a social justice appeal gains support depending on "who" is
issuing the appeal.
The advocate is either someone who belongs to the marginalized
group seeking social justice— a disadvantaged group advocate
(DGA)—or an ally. That's someone who doesn't belong to the
marginalized group. There have been several studies on allyship,
but Shapiro says, "No one until our paper has looked at how
strongly the people receiving the social justice appeal identify
with the disadvantaged group named in it." Their paper finds when
the appeal receiver identifies with the group, the DGA is more
persuasive. When the receiver does not identify with the group, the
ally is.
What also separates this study from others is that it measures
perceptions of the social justice appeal's credibility and the
empathy of the person targeted for the appeal. "Because we know
once both of those are strong, that's when you're going to get
support for the appeal," says Shapiro. Both the empathy and
credibility of the appeal are higher when the person receiving it
feels they are similar to the advocate. This similarity can relate
to demographics like gender or race or relate to another
commonality such as a shared experience. For example, a remote
worker who feels excluded from in-person meetings could better
convince another remote worker who feels the same to support more
hybrid meetings.
Shapiro thinks the power of similarity suggests that "Similarity
triggers trust and once you trust the messenger, whatever the
messenger says has more credibility and evokes more empathy." It's
a characteristic of tribalism that can bolster support.
Research like this – on allyship – is increasing but remains
scarce. Shapiro says these studies are burgeoning because
"organizations are becoming more aware of their corporate social
responsibility which includes treating all of their employees
fairly."
Read "Garnering Support for Social Justice: When
and Why is 'Yes' Likelier for Allies Versus Disadvantaged Group
Advocates?" in press at the journal, Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes.
About the University of Maryland's Robert H.
Smith School of Business
The Robert H. Smith School of Business is an internationally
recognized leader in management education and research. One of 12
colleges and schools at the University
of Maryland, College Park, the Smith School offers
undergraduate, full-time and flex MBA, executive MBA, online MBA,
business master's, PhD and executive education programs, as well as
outreach services to the corporate community. The school offers its
degree, custom and certification programs in learning locations
in North America and Asia.
Contact Greg Muraski, gmuraski@umd.edu
View original
content:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/study-examines-factors-for-effective-social-justice-advocacy-in-the-workplace-302213945.html
SOURCE University of Maryland's
Robert H. Smith School of Business