The Production of Merit: How Managers Understand and Apply Merit in the Workplace

References

• Anteby M (2016) The ideology of silence at the Harvard Business School: Structuring faculty’s teaching tasks for moral relativism. Cohen LE, Burton MD, Lounsbury M, eds. The Structuring of Work in Organizations (Emerald, Bingley, UK), 103–121.Google Scholar
• Bailyn L (1977) Research as a cognitive process: Implications for data analysis. Qual. Quant. 11(2):97–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barley SR, Bechky BA, Nelsen BJ (2016) What do technicians mean when they talk about professionalism? An ethnography of speaking. Cohen LE, Burton MD, Lounsbury M, eds. The Structuring of Work in Organizations (Emerald, Bingley, UK), 125–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beatty RW (1973) Black as supervisors: A study of training, job performance, and employers’ expectations. Acad. Management J. 16(2):196–206.Google Scholar
• Bechky BA (2011) Making organizational theory work: Institutions, occupations, and negotiated order. Organ. Sci. 22(5):1157–1167.Link, Google Scholar
• Behfar K, Okhuysen GA (2018) Perspective—Discovery within validation logic: Deliberately surfacing, complementing, and substituting abductive reasoning in hypothetico-deductive inquiry. Organ. Sci. 29(2):323–340.Link, Google Scholar
• Bell JM, Hartmann D (2007) Diversity in everyday discourse: The cultural ambiguities and consequences of “happy talk.” Amer. Sociol. Rev. 72(6):895–914.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bohnet I (2016) What Works: Gender Equality by Design (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cappelli P (1999) The New Deal at Work: Managing the Market-Driven Workforce (Harvard Business Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Castilla EJ (2008) Gender, race, and meritocracy in organizational careers. Amer. J. Sociol. 113(6):1479–1526.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Castilla EJ (2011) Bringing managers back in: Managerial influences on workplace inequality. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 76(5):667–694.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Castilla EJ (2015) Accounting for the gap: A firm study manipulating organizational accountability in pay decisions. Organ. Sci. 26(2):311–333.Link, Google Scholar
• Castilla EJ (2016) Achieving meritocracy in the workplace. Accessed November 22, 2019, https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/achieving-meritocracy-in-the-workplace/.Google Scholar
• Castilla EJ (2017) Meritocracy. Moghaddam FM, ed. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Political Behavior (Sage Publications, Los Angeles), 479–482.Google Scholar
• Castilla EJ, Benard S (2010) The paradox of meritocracy in organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 55(4):543–676.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cech EA, Blair-Loy M (2010) Perceiving glass ceilings? Meritocratic versus structural explanations of gender inequality among women in science and technology. Soc. Problems 57(3):371–397.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chan C, Anteby M (2016) Task segregation as a mechanism for within-job inequality: Women and men of the transportation security administration. Admin. Sci. Quart. 61(2):184–216.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charmaz K (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis (Sage Publications, London).Google Scholar
• Cooper M (2015) The false promise of meritocracy. The Atlantic Daily (December 1), https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/12/meritocracy/418074/.Google Scholar
• Corbin, J, Strauss A (1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques (Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA).Google Scholar
• Corbin J, Strauss A (2007) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (Sage Publications, Los Angeles).Google Scholar
• Cox T, Nkomo SM (1986) Differential performance appraisal criteria: A field study of black and white managers. Group Organ. Stud. 11(1-2):101–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davidson MN (2011) The End of Diversity as We Know It (Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Dencker JC (2009) Relative bargaining power, corporate restructuring, and managerial incentives. Admin. Sci. Quart. 54(3):453–485.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dobbin F (2009) Inventing Equal Opportunity (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elvira MM, Graham ME (2002) Not just a formality: Pay system formalization and sex-related earnings effects. Organ. Sci. 13(13):601–617.Link, Google Scholar
• Eskew D, Heneman RL (1996) A survey of merit pay plan effectiveness: End of the line for merit pay or hope for improvement? Human Resource Planning 19(2):12–19.Google Scholar
• Ferguson J-P (2015) The control of managerial discretion: Evidence from unionization’s impact on employment composition. Amer. J. Sociol. 121(3):675–721.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fernandez RM, Fernandez-Mateo I (2006) Networks, race, and hiring. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 71(1):42–71.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiss PC (2011) Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Acad. Management J. 54(2):393–420.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flick U (1998) Managing Quality in Qualitative Research (Sage Publications, Los Angeles).Google Scholar
• Gorman EH (2005) Gender stereotypes, same-gender preferences, and organizational variation in the hiring of women: Evidence from law firms. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 70(4):702–728.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guetzkow J, Lamont M, Mallard G (2004) What is originality in the humanities and the social sciences? Amer. Sociol. Rev. 69(2):190–212.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guinier L (2016) The Tyranny of the Meritocracy: Democratizing Higher Education in America (Beacon Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Heneman RL, Werner JM (2005) Merit Pay: Linking Pay to Performance in a Changing World (Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT).Google Scholar
• Huck JR, Bray DW (1976) Management assessment center evaluations and subsequent job performance of white and black females. Personnel Psych. 29(1):18–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H (1999) Provisional selves: Experimenting with image and identity in professional adaptation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(4):764–791.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jackson M (2001) Non-meritocratic job requirements and the reproduction of class inequality: An investigation. Work Employment Soc. 15(3):619–630.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jackson M (2007) How far merit selection? Social stratification and the labour market. British J. Sociol. 58(3):367–390.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johansson M, Śliwa M (2013) Gender, foreignness and academia: An intersectional analysis of the experiences of foreign women academics in UK business schools. Gender Work Organ. 21(1):18–36.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kalev A (2009) Cracking the glass cages? Restructuring and ascriptive inequality at work. Amer. J. Sociol. 114(6):1591–1643.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kalev A, Dobbin F, Kelly E (2006) Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 71(4):589–617.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan S, Orlikowski W (2013) Temporal work in strategy making. Organ. Sci. 24(4):965–995.Link, Google Scholar
• Kelle U, Prein G, Bird K (1995) Computer-Aided Qualitative Data Analysis: Theory, Methods and Practice (Sage Publications, London).Google Scholar
• Kluegel JR, Smith ER (1986) Beliefs About Inequality: Americans’ Views of What Is and What Ought to Be (de Gruyter, New York).Google Scholar
• Kmec JA (2005) Setting occupational sex segregation in motion: Demand-side explanations of sex traditional employment. Work Occupations 32(3):322–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kunovich S, Slomczynski KM (2007) Systems of distribution and a sense of equity: A multilevel analysis of meritocratic attitudes in post-industrial societies. Eur. Sociol. Rev. 23(5):649–663.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ladd EC, Bowman KH (1998) Attitudes Toward Economic Inequality (EI Press, Washington, DC).Google Scholar
• Lamont M (2010) How Professors Think: Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgment (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Lazear EP (2000) Performance pay and productivity. Amer. Econom. Rev. 90(5):1346–1361.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lemann N (1999) The Big Test: The Secret History of the American Meritocracy (Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux, New York).Google Scholar
• Longoria RT (2009) Meritocracy and Americans’ Views on Distributive Justice (Lexington Books, Lanham, MD).Google Scholar
• McAdams DP (1996) Personality, modernity, and the storied self: A contemporary framework for studying persons. Psych. Inquiry 7(4):295–321.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McCoy SK, Major B (2007) Priming meritocracy and the psychological justification of inequality. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 43(3):341–351.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McNamee SJ, Miller RK (2004) The Meritocracy Myth (Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD).Google Scholar
• Mohr JW (1998) Measuring meaning structures. Annual Rev. Sociol. 24(1):345–370.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Noe RA, Hollenbeck JR, Gerhart B, Wright PM (2008) Human Resource Management: Gaining a Competitive Advantage, 6th ed. (McGraw Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Ospina S (1996) Illusions of Opportunity: Employee Expectations and Workplace Inequality (ILR Press/Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ospina S, Foldy E (2009) A critical review of race and ethnicity in the leadership literature: Surfacing context, power and the collective dimensions of leadership. Leadership Quart. 20(6):876–896.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Osterman P (1999) Securing Prosperity: The American Labor Market. How It Has Changed and What to Do About It (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Petersen T, Saporta I (2004) The opportunity structure for discrimination. Amer. J. Sociol. 109(4):852–901.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petersen T, Saporta I, Seidel M-DL (2000) Offering a job: Meritocracy and social networks. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(3):763–816.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Posselt JR (2016) Inside Graduate Admissions: Merit, Diversity, and Faculty Gatekeeping (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pratt M (2009) For lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Acad. Management J. 52(5):856–862.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ragin C (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies (University of California Press, Berkeley).Google Scholar
• Ragin C (2008) Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reskin BF, McBrier DB (2000) Why not ascription? Organizations’ employment of male and female managers. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 65(2):210–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rissing B, Castilla E (2014) House of green cards: Statistical or preference-based inequality in the employment of foreign nationals. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 79(6):1226–1255.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rivera LA (2012) Hiring as cultural matching: The case of elite professional service firms. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 77(6):999–1022.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rivera LA (2015) Pedigree: How Elite Students Get Elite Jobs (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rivera LA, Tilcsik A (2016) Class advantage, commitment penalty: The gendered effect of class signals in an elite labor market. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 81(6):1097–1131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roth LM (2006) Selling Women Short: Gender and Money on Wall Street (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Scully MA (1997) Meritocracy. Freeman RE, Werhane PH, eds. Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Business Ethics (Blackwell Business, Cambridge, MA), 413–414.Google Scholar
• Scully MA (2000) Meritocracy and the legitimation of inequality in internal labor markets and beyond. Leana CR, Rousseau DM, eds. Relational Wealth: The Advantages of Stability in a Changing Economy (Oxford University Press, New York), 199–214.Google Scholar
• Shwed U, Kalev A (2014) Are referrals more productive or more likeable? Social networks and the evaluation of merit. Amer. Behav. Sci. 58(2):288–308.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Śliwa M, Johansson M (2014) The discourse of meritocracy contested/reproduced: Foreign women academics in UK business schools. Organ. 21(6):821–843.Google Scholar
• Spence JR, Keeping LM (2013) The road to performance ratings is paved with intentions: A framework for understanding managers’ intentions when rating employee performance. Organ. Psych. Rev. 3(4):360–383.Google Scholar
• Spradley JP (1979) The Ethnographic Interview (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York).Google Scholar
• Stryker R, Danielson T, Schrank Z (2011) Equal employment opportunity, affirmative action and the social construction of merit in the United States. Presentation, SASE Annual Conference, November 25, Autonomous University of Madrid, Madrid.Google Scholar
• Tavory I, Swidler A (2009) Condom semiotics: Meaning and condom use in rural Malawi. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 74(2):171–189.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wilson KY (2010) An analysis of bias in supervisor narrative comments in performance appraisal. Human Relations 63(12):1903–1933.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang T, Aldrich HE (2014) Who’s the boss? Explaining gender inequality in entrepreneurial teams. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 79(2):303–327.Crossref, Google Scholar