Workplace Contextual Supports for LGBT Employees: A Review, Meta‐Analysis, and Agenda for future Research

The past decade has witnessed a rise in the visibility of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. This has resulted in some organizational researchers focusing their attention on workplace issues facing LGBT employees. While empirical research has been appropriately focused on examining the impact of workplace factors on the work lives of LGBT individuals, no research has examined these empirical relationships cumulatively. The purpose of this study was to conduct a comprehensive review and meta‐analysis of the outcomes associated with three workplace contextual supports (formal LGBT policies and practices, LGBT‐supportive climate, and supportive workplace relationships) and to compare the relative influence of these workplace supports on outcomes. Outcomes were grouped into four categories: (a) work attitudes, (b) psychological strain, (c) disclosure, and (d) perceived discrimination. Results show that supportive workplace relationships were more strongly related to work attitudes and strain, whereas LGBT supportive climate was more strongly related to disclosure and perceived discrimination compared to the other supports. Our findings also revealed a number of insights concerning the measurement, research design, and sample characteristics of the studies in the present review. Based on these results, we offer an agenda for future research

When Leaders Are Not Who They Appear: The Effects of Leader Disclosure of a Concealable Stigma on Follower Reactions

Two studies examined follower reactions to disclosure of concealable stigma (i.e., transgender identity) by a leader. Using 109 employed participants, Study 1 showed followers rated leaders disclosing a stigma less likable and effective. This effect was both direct and indirect through relational identification with the leader. Using 206 employed participants, Study 2 found when a leader\u27s stigma was involuntarily found out and disclosed later they received lower ratings of likability and effectiveness compared to leaders who voluntarily came out and disclosed earlier. Method (found out vs. came out) and timing of disclosure (later vs. earlier) had direct relationships with ratings of likability and effectiveness and method of disclosure had an indirect relationship with the outcomes via relational identification

Functional Leadership in Interteam Contexts: Understanding ‘What’ in the Context of Why? Where? When? and Who?

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Elsevier via the DOI in this recordResearch on team leadership has primarily focused on leadership processes targeted within teams, in support of team objectives. Yet, teams are open systems that interact with other teams to achieve proximal as well as distal goals. This review clarifies that defining ‘what’ constitutes functionally effective leadership in interteam contexts requires greater precision with regard to where (within teams, across teams) and why (team goals, system goals) leadership processes are enacted, as well as greater consideration of when and among whom leadership processes arise. We begin by synthesizing findings from empirical studies published over the past 30 years that shed light on questions of what, where, why, when, and who related to interteam leadership and end by providing three overarching recommendations for how research should proceed in order to provide a more comprehensive picture of leadership in interteam contexts