Search results

AbstractA sufficient body of research across disciplines (Sociology, Political Science, Public Administration) now exists to address the evolving dynamics of public sector African American/White socio‐economic inequality across the post‐1965 civil rights era. This review synthesizes this research, bringing together an unprecedented amount of evidence to support two primary points: (1) Public sector inequality has been fluid, that is, it has been characterized by varying levels of African American disadvantage. Though African American disadvantage has progressively increased in the post‐1990 period, for now it retains its occupational niche status, and (2) The underpinnings of this fluidity of African American/White inequality are to a considerable degree a product of historically specific responses to inequality dynamics in the private sector that I classify as either compensatory or emulative. I discuss the importance of focusing on inter‐sectoral connections in understanding evolving racial inequality in the public sector and conclude by offering directions for future research.

AbstractThis study reviews and critiques the growing body of sociological research that has dramatically increased our understanding of the dynamics of African American disadvantage in access to managerial positions across the post‐1990 period. This literature, first, identifies both the burdensome barriers to entry faced by African Americans (e.g., a relatively narrow and formalistic route to management which is pronounced in the private sector) and how equal employment opportunity (EEO) directives may reduce them. Second, it establishes that African Americans face more difficulties retaining positions than Whites (e.g., process of downward movement is broad and generalized and is pronounced in the private sector) and formal EEO policy governing the process of downward movement often institutionalizes racial inequalities. Nevertheless, both richer/more definitive empirical insights and theoretical development on this topic remains elusive because of two fundamental shortcomings discussed as follows: (1) the nature and consequences of severe data/evidentiary limitations, and (2) limitations in the scope/breadth of issues examined.

Summary Better partnership working between employers and academic institutions has recently been identified as one of the key developments needed to improve social work education and practice in the UK (Social Work Reform Board, 2010). However, the praxis of collaborative working in social work education remains under-researched and it is unclear what factors are significant in promoting effective partnership. This article contributes to this debate by reporting research that examined the experience of social work academics working with employers to deliver qualifying level social work education in Northern Ireland. Findings This analysis explores key factors in the dynamics of the collaborative process and identifies both congruence and discord in academic and employer perspectives. The findings highlight the collaborative advantage accruing from partnership working, which include the benefits of a centrally coordinated system for the management and delivery of practice learning. However, the results also indicate that engaging in partnership working is a complex process that can create conflict and tensions, and that it is important to ground collaborations in realistic expectations of what can be achieved. Application This article identifies opportunities for achieving collaborative advantage and the challenges. It identifies lessons learned about the value of partnership working in social work education and ways to increase its efficacy.

Data from the 1994-2001 waves of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics are used to examine the theory of "disparate occupational effects," which maintains that among men there are race-specific incidence and determinants of intragenerational mobility from the same occupational origins into managerial positions. Findings support theory: Across both occupational origins considered, lower white collar and blue collar, the two minority groups considered, African Americans and Latinos—relative to Whites—are handicapped along both issues. Specifically, both minority groups suffer from a lower incidence of mobility into managerial slots and attain them in a more narrow and restrictive manner then Whites. Furthermore, the racial gap between Whites and minorities support a qualification to this general finding: Racial differences in the incidence and determinants are greater from those originating at blue collar than lower white collar slots. Implications of the findings for identifying racial inequality in the dynamics of mobility into management positions and advancing theoretical development in racial stratification are discussed.

Data from the 1998 to 2005 waves of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics are used to assess the particularistic mobility thesis, which maintains that among women there is a racialized continuum in the determinants of and timing to mobility into two "upper-tier" occupational categories. Findings support this theory, though racial gaps along the continuum are greater for professional/technical than for managerial/administrative positions. Specifically, the route to mobility for African Americans is relatively narrow and structured by traditional stratification causal factors, including human capital, background status, and job/labor market characteristics. In contrast, the route to mobility for whites is relatively broad and unstructured by the stratification-based causal factors, and they experience mobility the quickest. Along both dimensions, Latinas occupy an intermediate position between African Americans and whites. Implications of the findings for understanding racial inequality among managers, executives, and professionals are discussed. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright The American Academy of Political and Social Science.]

Data from the 1998 to 2005 waves of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics are used to assess the particularistic mobility thesis, which maintains that among women there is a racialized continuum in the determinants of and timing to mobility into two "upper-tier" occupational categories. Findings support this theory, though racial gaps along the continuum are greater for professional/technical than for managerial/administrative positions. Specifically, the route to mobility for African Americans is relatively narrow and structured by traditional stratification causal factors, including human capital, background status, and job/labor market characteristics. In contrast, the route to mobility for whites is relatively broad and unstructured by the stratification-based causal factors, and they experience mobility the quickest. Along both dimensions, Latinas occupy an intermediate position between African Americans and whites. Implications of the findings for understanding racial inequality among managers, executives, and professionals are discussed.