Why don’t we talk about social class?

Professor Michelle Lee delves into an often invisible, but crucial, dynamic at work
By: 
Alan Morantz
Issue: 
Why don’t we talk about social class?

Social class is all about socioeconomic status— income, education and occupation mixed with perceptions of rank. Your social class upbringing can be a powerful predictor of how you think and act at work

Yet, despite a push for greater diversity, social class is an underappreciated force. Michelle Lee, assistant professor of strategy and organization, has studied social class. Here, she discusses the evidence, and why this is a topic of personal interest, with Alan Morantz, senior editor at Smith Business Insight.


Alan Morantz: The role of social class doesn’t seem to come up as often as one would expect given that the class advantage of the more affluent in North America has grown over time. Why is that?

Michelle Lee: For a while, we thought we had gotten rid of the class system. With all the social mobility in the ’60s and ’70s, it didn’t seem relevant. But it’s now recognized as an important topic because we see it’s not a level playing field. There’s more of a gap between the wealthy and poor in the U.S. and Canada, and upward mobility has been declining sharply since 1980.

Class also hasn’t been prominent because it’s been tied in with other issues. In the U.S., race and class are tightly connected. But you have to study class as well because race is not the only factor that contributed to all the issues that came up with the Black Lives Matter movement.

As you move up the ranks in organizations, diversity among managers and executives goes down. In the case of social class, how much is this the result of recruitment and retention practices versus issues already baked in before people enter the workforce?

Education definitely determines whether you’ll even get a chance to enter these organizations, and a good education is often the result of your social class background. But there’s also research that indicates there are organizational practices that advantage those of upper- and upper- middle-class backgrounds.

One might be a matter of hiring. There was a resumé audit study that looked at the type of entry-level candidates that law or consulting firms preferred. They found that class cues on resumés made a significant difference in determining callback rates. If you came from what seemed like a higher social class background—if you played lacrosse versus basketball or track—that influenced the likelihood you’d be given an interview.

And then, even within organizations, researchers have found that those from lower social class backgrounds feel like outsiders, and it’s often because of different cultural cues. It might be differences in your sense of humour, hobbies or how you get along with people. These sorts of cultural similarities matter for hiring and promotion decisions.

Social class experiences also shape perceptions. If people brought up in less advantaged circumstances are asked to compare how they’re doing relative to peers, they tend to place themselves better than they really are. This must have implications for how they negotiate raises, for example.

Interesting that you brought up pay because there’s research showing that if you come from a lower social class background, your pay tends to be lower than your upper-class peers. Even if your skills are the same, those with an upper-class background tend to be perceived as more competent because they seem more confident.

I’m working on a study now that looks at whether class background can influence the pay of executives under conditions of good and bad performance. The results show that when a company performs well, executives from lower social class backgrounds seem to be paid more than their peers from affluent backgrounds. But when the company is not doing as well, their pay is more penalized than their peers and they’re more likely to be dismissed.

What do organizations lose out on when they have few managers or executives with different social class origins?

People with a different class background, who are not as well networked, may be more willing to engage in something considered “deviant” or innovative. There was a fascinating study that looked at the wave of corporate diversifications in the 1960s. It found that CEOs who were from a lower social class background were 38 per cent more likely than upper-class CEOs to initiate a diversifying acquisition. The study also found that having a Jewish CEO [many who were outside the social elite during this period] increased the probability of completing a diversifying acquisition by 79 per cent. Research also shows if you come from a lower social class background, you’re more likely to focus on others and be more pro-social. You might see firms led by CEOs from lower social class backgrounds engaging in more corporate social responsibility.

What can organizations do to be more sensitive to the dynamics of social class?

If you’re hiring based on networks or cultural fit, it can disadvantage those of lower social class backgrounds. As an alternative, when recruiting, you could target different universities than the typical top universities, which tend to have a disproportionate number of people from wealthier backgrounds. The other practice that can help is having a formal mentor system, which can guide people of different backgrounds through social situations.

Recent research also shows that greater teamwork can bring out better team performance, especially for those of lower social class backgrounds. Encourage employees to collaborate more and you might get better results. For the most part, organizations seem to reward star performers rather than prioritize teamwork.

What’s your motivation to research social class?

I’ve always been interested in studying how peoples’ backgrounds affect them later in life. I saw my parents, who emmigrated from Korea [to the U.S.], start at the bottom in what would be considered working-class jobs. In situations like going out to a restaurant or interacting with others, I’ve seen how people treated them based on the way they dress or speak with heavily accented English. They run a souvenir shop now and experienced some social mobility, but they’ve definitely encountered challenges in their mobility.

My parents were barely home when I was younger, so a lot of my time was spent watching TV or reading, rather than in dinner conversations about culturally relevant topics. I didn’t have a background that gave me a social network or the skills to speak well in job interviews. It was through talking to friends and mentors at university that I figured out how to speak in interview situations.

I remember one time, we [a work team] went out on a client dinner after we finished a project. We ate at a steakhouse. I didn’t grow up eating steak and didn’t realize that the cut that I thought was two cuts was actually one, which the waiter corrected me on. Later, I heard my co-workers make fun of me for not knowing this. These are the outsider type of situations that come up with class differences or not being culturally in tune.