Work ethic and race relations
Work ethic and race relations explore the complex interplay between attitudes toward work and the perceptions associated with different racial and ethnic groups. The concept of work ethic has historical roots, particularly in the theories proposed by sociologists like Max Weber, who linked the idea of work as a calling to religious foundations. Over time, this notion has evolved to encompass psychological elements, such as the achievement motive described by psychologist David McClelland, which emphasizes a strong desire for achievement beyond material rewards.
In contemporary society, disparities in employment among various racial and ethnic groups often fuel stereotypes about their respective work ethics. For instance, African Americans may face negative stereotypes regarding laziness, while Latino groups are sometimes viewed as more industrious. In contrast, Asian Americans are often labeled as overachievers, perpetuating a different set of expectations and pressures. Furthermore, research indicates that biases in the workplace can influence hiring practices, with white applicants often receiving more favorable assessments of their work ethic compared to African American applicants, regardless of actual performance.
The media also plays a significant role in shaping public perceptions of work ethic and race, often reinforcing stereotypes through selective reporting on welfare and poverty issues. Overall, the perceptions of work ethic in relation to race highlight the societal factors that contribute to these beliefs, suggesting that the conversation around work ethic is deeply intertwined with issues of race and equality.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Work ethic and race relations
The modern notion of a work ethic is closely approximated by psychologist David McClelland’s concept of an “achievement motive” (The Achieving Society, 1961). According to this concept, some children grow up with a strong desire to achieve and find psychological fulfillment in achievement entirely aside from material rewards (such as school grades or cash payments). Such people are more likely than most to become entrepreneurs and inventors, and they are much less likely to develop lifestyles predisposed toward poverty.
The classic theory of the work ethic was developed by the German sociologist Max Weber. Weber’s Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (published in German in 1904 and in English translation in 1930) argued that the teachings of theologians Martin Luther and John Calvin shaped the idea of work as a calling, as a religiously favored activity. McClelland links these ideas with his own by arguing that child-raising practices among Protestants favored children’s learning to read and write, and that such concerns helped form achievement-oriented personalities. The American economist Thorstein Veblen argued for the existence of an “instinct of workmanship” (the title of his 1914 book). In contrast to the individualistic McClelland, Veblen stressed the influence of the social environment on people’s attitudes toward work and money making.
It is the social environment, especially as an influence on children, that links the subject of the work ethic to the issues of racial and ethnic studies. Race and ethnicity can be important elements in children’s environment, viewed as a powerful influence in shaping their personalities and values. Many people view the work ethic as a “good thing”—certainly, most parents and schoolteachers see it that way. Many people attach a moral stigma to persons who do not demonstrate a commitment to the work ethic. The availability of the US public school system and an economic environment in the 1990s in which jobs were abundant and unemployment remarkably low caused many Americans to believe that healthy adults living in poverty could only blame themselves for their low incomes. Important issues such as welfare reform and educational reform are closely related to work ethic.
A review of stereotypes relating to racial and ethnic groups quickly reveals the importance of their supposed attitudes toward work and personal achievement. Compared to other racial and ethnic groups, African Americans have been incorrectly stereotyped as lazy and indifferent to career goals, having negative attitudes toward education, and being willing to tolerate squalid living conditions—all, in the eyes of many who still hold these stereotypes, symptoms of lack of a work ethic on the job, in school, and in the home. In contrast, Latino individuals are often perceived as having a stronger work ethic compared to White and Black Americans. At the other extreme, Asian and Jewish Americans are often stereotyped as overachievers who create unfair competitive conditions for others. In truth, each of these groups contains a wide variety of personality and attitude types. Moreover, recent adult immigrants tend to manifest a high commitment to the work ethic, regardless of their ethnic and racial identifications.
In 2013, Christopher D. DeSante published a study that sought to test whether Black and White Americans “are rewarded equally when adhering to the traditional American norm of hard work.” DeSante found that American norms regarding work ethic and implicit racism privileged White Americans in several ways. For example, in his study, White job applicants were “rewarded more for the same level of work ethic” by test subjects, while African American applicants were “punished more for the same perceived level of ‘laziness.’”
Researchers such as Bas W. van Doorn have also found that ethnic and racial stereotypes about work ethic are reflected in and further perpetuated by media coverage of issues such as government assistance, poverty, and unemployment. Such biased media coverage influences public opinion on these issues. For example, in a 2015 study of media coverage between 1992 and 2010, Van Doorn found that in media portrayals of low-income, Hispanic Americans are underrepresented, while African Americans are overrepresented, especially in articles about government assistance programs that portray its recipients as undeserving. Van Doorn found a correlation between the overrepresentation of African Americans in government assistance articles and an increase in negative popular opinion toward these programs and concludes that both phenomena can be attributed to stereotypes about African Americans’ poor work ethic. He also found that even after the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996, which mandates time restrictions for benefits and job training for welfare recipients, a significant percentage of the respondents surveyed were still opposed to welfare on the basis that its recipients, whom they perceived to be mostly African American, were also perceived as undeserving and as taking unfair advantage of the system.
Research continues to highlight the role of systemic racism and racialized work ethic stereotypes in shaping people’s perceptions of individuals who receive government assistance or are unemployed. While there are no inherent differences in work ethic between races, living in a cycle of systemic racism and experiencing continual discrimination can manifest as higher unemployment or lower productivity. This perception may have an impact on hiring and promotion decisions and performance evaluations in the workplace. Black Americans are also more likely than White Americans to experience discrimination or microaggressions in the workplace. This discrimination can cause an individual to dislike their job or avoid particular tasks, which may be viewed by an unaware superior as a lack of motivation or work ethic.
Bibliography
Agrawal, Shantanu. “Immigrant Exclusion from Welfare: An Analysis of the 1996 Welfare Reform Legislative Process.” Politics & Policy, vol. 36, no. 4, 2008, pp. 636–75, doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2008.00124.x. Accessed 26 Dec. 2024.
Applebaum, Herbert A. The American Work Ethic and the Changing Work Force: An Historical Perspective. Greenwood, 1998.
Brown-Iannuzzi, Jazmin L., et al. “Investigating the Interplay between Race, Work Ethic Stereotypes, and Attitudes toward Welfare Recipients and Policies.” Social Psychological and Personality Science, vol. 12, no. 7, 2021, pp. 1155–64, doi.org/10.1177/1948550620983051. Accessed 26 Dec. 2024.
Butz, David A., et al. “When Do Negative Response Expectancies Undermine Interracial Relations? The Role of the Protestant Work Ethic.” Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, vol. 17, no. 3, 2014, pp. 342–56, doi.org/10.1177/1368430213510191. Accessed 26 Dec. 2024.
DeSante, Christopher D. “Working Twice as Hard to Get Half as Far: Race, Work Ethic, and America’s Deserving Poor.” American Journal of Political Science, vol. 57, no. 2, 2013, pp. 342–56, doi:10.1111/ajps.12006. Accessed 26 Dec. 2024.
Gilens, Martin. Why Americans Hate Welfare. U of Chicago P, 1999.
Leong, Frederick T. L. Career Development and Vocational Behavior of Racial and Ethnic Minorities. Erlbaum Assoc., 1995.
McClelland, David C. Assessing Human Motivation. General Learning P, 1971.
Roberts, Jonathan. Youth Work Ethics. Learning Matters, 2009.
Van Doorn, Bas W. “Pre- and Post-Welfare Reform Media Portrayals of Poverty in the United States: The Continuing Importance of Race and Ethnicity.” Politics & Policy, vol. 43, no. 1, 2015, pp. 142–62, doi.org/10.1111/polp.12107. Accessed 26 Dec. 2024.
Weber, Max. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Scribner, 1958.