Growing workforce diversity increases the likelihood that supervisors and subordinates will differ along demographic lines, a situation that has important implications for their relationship quality and individual outcomes. In a sample of 1,253 employees from 54 work units, we investigate the effects of differences in disability status between supervisors and subordinates on leader–member exchange (LMX) quality and subsequent performance ratings, and find that incongruence in general is related to lower LMX quality and lower performance. In addition, we propose and find an asymmetrical effect of disability incongruence, such that LMX quality is worse in dyads in which the supervisor has a disability than in dyads in which the subordinate has a disability. Furthermore, we investigate the moderating role of unit-level climate for inclusion on this relationship and find support for a buffering effect of inclusive climates on the negative incongruence-LMX relationship for scenarios in which the supervisor, but not the subordinate, has a disability. We build relevant theory for the relational demography, disability, LMX, and organizational climate literatures by predicting these effects on the basis of status mechanisms. These findings have important practical implications, as they provide companies with a feasible way to manage their diverse workforce.

The present study extends knowledge of the performance consequences of workgroup diversity climate. Building upon Kopelman, Brief, and Guzzo's () climate model of productivity, we introduce workgroup discrimination as a behavioral mediator that explains the positive effects of diversity climate on workgroup performance. In addition, we investigate group size as a moderator upon which this mediated relationship depends. We test these moderated‐mediated propositions using a split‐sample design and data from 248 military workgroups comprising 8,707 respondents. Findings from structural equation modeling reveal that diversity climate is consistently positively related to workgroup performance and that this relationship is mediated by discrimination. Results yield a pattern of moderated mediation, in that the indirect relationship between workgroup diversity climate (through perceptions of workgroup discrimination) and group performance was more pronounced in larger than in smaller workgroups. These results illustrate that discrimination and group size represent key factors in determining how a diversity climate is associated with group performance and, thus, have significant implications for research and practice. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Human resource practitioners play a crucial role in promoting equitable treatment of persons with disabilities, and practitioner's decisions should be guided by solid evidence‐based research. We offer a systematic review of the empirical research on the treatment of persons with disabilities in organizations, using Stone and Colella's seminal theoretical model of the factors influencing the treatment of persons with disabilities in work organizations, to ask: What does the available research reveal about workplace treatment of persons with disabilities, and what remains understudied? Our review of 88 empirical studies from management, rehabilitation, psychology, and sociology research highlights seven gaps and limitations in extant research: (a) implicit definitions of workplace treatment; (b) neglect of national context variation; (c) missing differentiation between disability populations; (d) overreliance on available data sets; (e) predominance of single‐source, cross‐sectional data; (f) neglect of individual differences and identities in the presence of disability; and (g) lack of specificity on underlying stigma processes. To support the development of more inclusive workplaces, we recommend increased research collaborations between human resource researchers and practitioners on the study of specific disabilities and contexts, and efforts to define and expand notions of treatment to capture more nuanced outcomes.

Disability is typically perceived negatively, and employees with a disability are viewed as a burden that requires accommodation. We draw from creativity theory to challenge this view and propose that disability can make workplace imperfections salient, can function as a situational cue that increases coworkers’ cognitive flexibility, and thus can be a catalyst for creativity. We apply a multi-study, multi-method approach to test these predictions. First, results from time-lagged and objective data in a sample of 7,037 employees from 425 units of a large German car manufacturer show that units with people with disabilities generate more ideas, particularly when employees engage in perspective taking. Second, an experiment with 954 employees shows that having a colleague with a disability has a positive individual-level effect on idea generation. Third, we extend these findings with a full model test in a second experiment of 1,314 employees, which shows that having a colleague with a disability (compared to not having a colleague with a disability) leads to more idea generation and higher idea novelty. Increased cognitive flexibility mediates these effects. Together, our findings contribute to the disability, diversity, and creativity literatures by integrating disability and creativity theory and showing that disability has the potential to serve as a catalyst for creativity and, ultimately, innovation.