Effects of Structural Position on Allocation and Evaluation Decisions for Scientists and Engineers in Industrial R&D

By Nancy DiTomaso, Corinne Post, D. R. Smith, George F. Farris, Rene Cordero. 2007

94 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/97b2cb555e445dac724c30b52824299cf009400d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Gender Studies

1. R. Ely
2. Aparna Joshi
3. Irene Padavic
4. David A. Thomas
5. Andrew P. Knight
6. Emilio J. Castilla
7. D. van Knippenberg
8. S. Jackson

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Aparna Joshi
2. Irene Padavic
3. Emilio J. Castilla
4. R. Ely
5. Andrew P. Knight

Citations in the corpus

• Who Defers to Whom and Why? Dual Pathways Linking Demographic Differences and Dyadic Deference to Team Effectiveness (2015, background): “While the distinction between specific and diffuse cues is an important one, as specific cues may more strongly influence deference than diffuse cues (Bunderson, 2003), the same basic mechanism—expectations about individual task contributions—is at the heart of the status characteristics…”
• Racial Diversity, Racial Asymmetries, and Team Learning Environment: Effects on Performance (2012, background): “…suggests that the unequal distribution of power across racial groups in society affects how members of different racial groups think, feel, and behave at work, even when they occupy equivalent organizational positions (Alderfer,1987; Alderfer & Smith, 1982; DiTomaso et al., 2007b; Ragins, 1997).”
• By Whom and When Is Women’s Expertise Recognized? The Interactive Effects of Gender and Education in Science and Engineering Teams (2014, background): “…a growing number of performance management and compensation practices rely on peer-to-peer evaluations, interpersonal expertise evaluations also have important consequences for the rewards individuals receive and their career success in organizations (TomaskovicDevey, 1993; DiTomaso et al., 2007).”
• Bringing Managers Back In (2011, background): “In this sense, this study expands recent inequality studies that argue for the importance of manager–employee homophily (e.g., Cohen and Huffman 2007; DiTomaso et al. 2007; Gorman and Kmec 2009) by emphasizing that the managerial network influence and the horizontal homophily mechanisms also affect…”