University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Institutional discrimination against Black men in Fortune 500 companies: a phenomenological study

(USC Thesis Other)

Institutional discrimination against Black men in Fortune 500 companies: a phenomenological study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Institutional Discrimination Against Black Men in Fortune 500 Companies: A
Phenomenological Study
by
Sherick Fogarthy
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
December 2023

ii
© Copyright by Sherick Fogarthy 2023
All Rights Reserved

iii
The Committee for Sherick Fogarthy certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Helena Seli
Jeffrey M. Mendoza
Esther C. Kim, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract
This study utilized a qualitative, phenomenological design to explore the institutional racial
discrimination experiences of Black males in supervisory leadership positions in Fortune 500
companies. Participants were leaders in the STEM, HR, IT, Government Security Compliance,
and Manufacturing. Using critical race theory to guide literature review, interview protocol
development, and purposive participant sampling, a total of 21 Black male leaders were selected
to contribute first-hand experiences and perceptions detailing their approaches to navigating the
U.S. corporate landscape despite regular experiences of systemic racism. A total of seven major
themes in response to three research questions were uncovered from the data, centering the
participants’ lived experiences with racial discrimination in the workplace, ways of navigating
their career progression in spite of it, and perceived impacts on their careers. Recommendations
for practice are provided on ways to mitigate systemic racism and institutional racial
discrimination for improved career progression probability among Black men in the corporate
sector, as well as the health of U.S. corporations at the Fortune 500 level and others.
Keywords: institutional discrimination, racism, Black men, corporate leadership, CRT

v
Acknowledgements
I want to extend my heartfelt gratitude to all faculty and external committee members
who formed my dissertation committee, with a special acknowledgment to my Chair, Dr.
Jennifer L. Phillips, followed by Dr. Esther C. Kim. Your invaluable insights and unwavering
support throughout the stages of my study proposal, design, and writing were instrumental in
maintaining a focus on the highest standards of scholarship and ethics.
I am also incredibly thankful to Dr. Helena Seli, who joined my committee at a critical
juncture. Her last-minute involvement and valuable insights were pivotal in enhancing the
quality and depth of my dissertation. Thank you for stepping in and stepping up.
I also wish to express my profound appreciation to Dr. Jeffrey M. Mendoza, Sr Tech
Fellow at RTX Technology Research Center! Dr. Mendoza has been an integral part of the
committee from the beginning. His extensive support and guidance, coupled with our
collaborative work relationship, have been a cornerstone of my journey through this academic
endeavor. I count myself privileged to have had his support both on the job and in my doctoral
study.
Together, your collective expertise, feedback, and encouragement have not only shaped
my dissertation but also profoundly influenced my approach to leadership and organizational
change. This journey has equipped me with invaluable skills and insights, which I am committed
to utilizing as I mentor and inspire the next generation of diverse leaders in the corporate world.
Your legacy of guidance and support will resonate through my endeavors, contributing to
meaningful change and inclusivity in the corporate landscape.

vi
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements......................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures................................................................................................................................. x
Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice.................................................................... 1
Background of the Problem ........................................................................................................ 2
Field Context and Mission.......................................................................................................... 4
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions............................................................................ 5
Importance of the Study.............................................................................................................. 5
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology ............................................................ 6
Definitions .................................................................................................................................. 8
Organization of the Dissertation ................................................................................................. 9
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 10
Institutional Racial Discrimination in the United States .......................................................... 11
Societal Impacts of Institutionalized Race-Based Discrimination............................................ 13
Racial Discrimination in the Workplace................................................................................... 15
Institutional Racial Discrimination ....................................................................................... 16
Institutional Discrimination and Disparities in Employee Opportunities......................... 17
Institutional Discrimination Against Black Male Corporate Leaders............................... 19
Institutional Discrimination Against Black Men in Fortune 500 Companies................... 21
Institutional Discrimination Against Black Men in Other Work Environments .............. 23
Institutional Racial Discrimination and Organizational Success.............................................. 26
Coping Mechanisms and Strategies to Counteract Racial Discrimination ............................... 28
Coping Mechanisms for Individuals..................................................................................... 29

vii
Strategies for Organizations.................................................................................................. 31
Theoretical Foundation: Critical Race Theory ......................................................................... 34
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 36
Chapter Three: Methodology........................................................................................................ 37
Research Questions................................................................................................................... 38
Overview of Methodology........................................................................................................ 38
The Researcher...................................................................................................................... 39
Data Source: Interviews........................................................................................................ 39
Participants........................................................................................................................ 39
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 41
Data Collection Procedures............................................................................................... 42
Data Analysis.................................................................................................................... 43
Credibility and Trustworthiness................................................................................................ 43
Ethics 44
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 45
Theme Development................................................................................................................. 45
Findings for Research Question 1............................................................................................. 48
Theme 1: Black Leaders Experienced Inequities in Workplace Privileges, Unlike White
Counterparts.............................................................................................................. 50
Theme 2: Participants’ Organizations Not Fully Committed to Diversity and Inclusion..... 55
Theme 3: Black Leaders’ Experiences of Unconscious Bias ............................................... 57
Findings for Research Question 2............................................................................................. 59
Theme 4: Black Leaders Were Intentional in Their Pursuit of Leadership Roles ................ 60
Theme 5: Black Leaders Had a Support System in Navigating Their Careers..................... 64
Findings for Research Question 3............................................................................................. 67
Theme 6: Black Leaders Practiced Code-Switching............................................................. 68

viii
Theme 7: Black Leaders Pursued Becoming Advocates for Other Persons of Color........... 71
Summary................................................................................................................................... 74
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations......................................................................... 76
Black Male Leaders Experience Inequities in Workplace Privileges ...................................... 77
Organizations Not Fully Committed to Diversity and Inclusion .............................................. 80
Black Male Leaders’ Experiences of Unconscious Bias .......................................................... 81
Black Male Leaders Aggressively Pursue Corporate Leadership Roles .................................. 85
Black Male Leaders Utilized an External Support System to Help Navigate Their Careers ... 87
Black Male Leaders Practice Code-Switching ......................................................................... 90
Recommendations for Practice ................................................................................................. 92
Recommendation 1: Create Socially Conscious Programs and Activities that Support Black
Leadership Advancement in Fortune 500 Companies.............................................. 93
Recommendation 2: Promote Diversity and Inclusion Strategies for Organizational Change
................................................................................................................................... 95
Recommendation 3: Strengthen Access to Mentors for Black Male Leaders .................... 100
Limitations and Delimitations ................................................................................................ 102
Recommendations for Future Research .................................................................................. 103
Implications for Equity ........................................................................................................... 105
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 105
References................................................................................................................................... 108
Appendix A: Interview Protocol................................................................................................. 124
Appendix B: Participant Information Sheet for Exempt Research ............................................. 128

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Participants’ Descriptive Information 40
Table 2: Final Study Themes 50
Table 3: Research Question 1 Themes 50
Table 4: Research Question 2 Themes 60
Table 5: Research Question 3 Themes 68
Appendix C: Code Book 130

x
List of Figures
Figure 1: Data Analysis Hierarchy 48
Figure 2: Thematic Map of Study Findings 49

1
Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice
Institutional discrimination is commonly experienced by Black men in the United States
(Benson et al., 2022; Kim & Scott, 2018; Kline et al., 2021), which creates career challenges that
are not shared by other groups (Amis et al., 2020; Lang & Spitzer, 2020). Institutional
discrimination is defined as the “involvement of institutional systems and structures in racebased discrimination and oppression; it may also refer specifically to racism within a particular
institution” (Braveman et al., 2022, p. 172). Furthermore, institutional discrimination is a type of
systemic discrimination that often goes undetected when ingrained in the structures of the
institution (Bohren et al., 2022). Examples of institutional discrimination in the workplace
include reduced professional development and career advancement opportunities, intensified by
a relative lack of mentors of color, unequal compensation practices, and neglected or nonexistent
diversity and inclusion practices (Braveman et al., 2022).
The experiences of institutional discrimination among Black male leaders of Fortune 500
companies are underreported in the literature. There is a great deal of research on Black women’s
experiences as leaders in U.S. corporate and higher education environments (e.g., Barron, 2018;
Beckwith et al., 2016; Jean-Marie & Tickles, 2018), but very little research on Black male
leaders exists in the same environments. Some of the career challenges Black men who
experience institutional discrimination encounter include a lack of respect and recognition and an
increase in racism-related job stress (Goh et al., 2015). These outcomes have been linked with
increased psychological withdrawal and reduced job satisfaction, which may lead to poor effort
and productivity, increased absenteeism, turnover, reduced job security, and reduced pay and
advancement opportunities when compared to their White counterparts (Amis et al., 2020; Tabor
& Dalton, 2021). Given these problems, there is a need for additional research on Black male

2
leadership and the ways in which Black male leaders experience race and discrimination in their
work environments.
Background of the Problem
Despite being granted access to corporate leadership positions following the Civil Rights
legislation and Affirmative Action, Black men experience organizational structures that are
racially biased, impacting their upward mobility, pay, and effectiveness as leaders (Kelley, 2019;
Wallington, 2021). Researchers have noted that multiple organizations provided leadership
opportunities to Black men after the Civil Rights era, but the progress of moving toward a
diverse workforce stagnated for many of them (Kelley, 2019; Kline et al., 2021). Wahba (2021)
supported this observation, noting that only 19 of 1,800 CEOs in the Fortune 500 list since 1955
have been Black. This discrepancy continues to this day. Currently, 95.5% of the board chair
positions for U.S. corporations are occupied by White men, and only 3.9% of these positions are
occupied by Black men (Wallington, 2021).
Research on the racial discrepancy in leadership has revealed a pipeline problem that is
driven by institutional discrimination. First, Black applicants may be systematically
disadvantaged during the hiring process. Kline et al. (2021) examined this phenomenon by
sending approximately 83,000 fake applications to over 100 of the largest employers in the
United States, many of them on the Fortune 500 list. Analysis of employer contact rates revealed
that applications with distinctively Black names were 2.7 percentage points less likely than those
with White names to receive employer contacts (Kline et al., 2021). When applicants of color are
hired, they may see disproportionately low levels of compensation, an increased likelihood of
firing, and microaggressions (DeSilver, 2013; Pitcan et al., 2018). As a result, fewer Black men
are likely to ultimately ascend to leadership positions.

3
There is a body of research dedicated to gaining insight into the institutional
discrimination faced by Black men (e.g., Pitcan, 2018; Taylor, 2019), but research on the
institutional discrimination specifically experienced by Black leaders in Fortune 500 companies
remains scarce. Two notable examples from this limited type of research are described herein.
First, Pitcan et al. (2018) used in-depth interviews to explore the experiences of racial
microaggressions at work among a sample of 12 Black men who worked at predominantly White
organizations. The results of the qualitative analysis revealed four central themes related to these
experiences: context (i.e., different worlds and different views), experiences (i.e., feelings of
inferiority and cognitive and affective reactions), costs (i.e., career-related and psychological),
and coping (i.e., internal and external coping mechanisms; Pitcan et al., 2018). The consensus
among the study’s participants was that the experience of racial microaggressions led to negative
psychological and career-related outcomes (Pitcan et al., 2018).
In an extensive review of the literature, Taylor et al. (2019) discovered several adverse
outcomes associated with workplace stereotypes, institutional discrimination, and racial
microaggressions experienced by Black men. Some of these outcomes include disproportionate
salaries, higher unemployment rates compared to White men, and poor prospects for
advancement (Taylor et al., 2019). The authors concluded that institutional discrimination and
racism remain major societal issues with significant consequences. Further, Taylor et al.
recommended additional research is needed on the mechanisms of and experiences with
institutional discrimination so that policymakers can make informed decisions regarding the best
way to attend to this problem (Taylor et al., 2019). This study sought to explore the experience of
institutional discrimination among Black men working in Fortune 500 companies.

4
Field Context and Mission
This study focused on Fortune 500 companies. Fortune 500 refers to Fortune Magazine’s
annual list of the top 500 U.S. public and private companies ranked by assets, sales,
capitalizations, and earnings (Wahba, 2021). Examples of Fortune 500 companies, though not
necessarily included in this study, are Walmart, Amazon, CVS Health, Apple, Microsoft, and
Exxon Mobile (Fortune Media IP Limited, 2022). The mission statements of these companies
vary, with parts of each statement reflecting the specific product or service every company
provides (Schaap & Schaap, 2020). Some mission statements also include generic goals, such as
improving profits, growing business globally, or maximizing shareholder value (Schaap &
Schaap, 2020).
In terms of employee demographics, across Fortune 500 companies, approximately 60%
of employees are White; Asian, Black, and Hispanic employees make up approximately 20%,
10%, and 10% of the Fortune 500 workforce, respectively (Talenya, 2021). These percentages
fail to reflect the general U.S. population, where 13% of individuals over 18 are Black and 18%
are Hispanic (Talenya, 2021). At the time of this research, no data were available regarding the
demographic composition of these leaders in Fortune 500 companies. Only Black men were
represented in this study. Neither women and men from other racial/ethnic groups nor Black
women were be represented in this study.
For the proposed study, leaders are defined as individuals with one or more employees in
their direct report. Black male leaders of Fortune 500 companies are the focus of this study
because Fortune 500 companies reflect the pinnacle of leadership and the way that individuals
navigate the environment around them. Additionally, Fortune 500 companies are large enough to
be considered miniature societies, where the distance between a leader and a manager is much

5
greater (Tran, 2017). Therefore, the racial discrepancies in the leadership pipeline that are driven
by institutional discrimination have greater career consequences for Black men.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
This purpose of this qualitative phenomenological study was to explore the lived
experiences that Black male leaders of Fortune 500 companies have had with institutional
discrimination. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were used to collect the data. The following
research questions guided this study:
1. What are the lived experiences of Black male leaders who encounter institutional
discrimination within Fortune 500 companies?
2. How have Black male leaders navigated their career progression despite encountering
institutional discrimination?
3. How do Black male leaders perceive the impact of institutional discrimination on
their leadership in Fortune 500 companies?
Importance of the Study
The problem of practice this study addressed was that institutional discrimination is
overreported among Black men who occupy leadership positions in the U.S. This institutional
discrimination creates career challenges that are not shared by other groups (Amis et al., 2020;
Lang & Spitzer, 2020). The consequence of not examining disproportionate institutional
discrimination suffered Black men is a continued lack of understanding of the impact of racismrelated job stress and bias experienced by Black men in leadership positions (Goh et al., 2015).
The need to address institutional discrimination against Black men and the unique leadership
career challenges associated with it is significant because of the negative effects on organizations
and society as a whole this complex problem of practice creates (Amis et al., 2020).

6
The results of this study may benefit Fortune 500 companies that seek to create more
inclusive work environments by helping in the development of strategies that aim to empower
Black men to overcome the barriers they encounter as they pursue leadership positions or embark
on their leadership journeys. Finally, this study contributes to the body of research in the area of
Black male leadership development and success and will add to the scholarly understanding of
Black males’ racialized experiences at work.
The results of this study may also contribute to a better understanding of how Black male
leaders experience racism at work and how institutional discrimination impacts their leadership
growth and personal development. This improved understanding may be beneficial to
organizations undergoing changes toward a more inclusive and equitable workforce, as well as to
society which depends on a healthy, well-adjusted citizenry to sustain itself. Connectedly, this
study may help in the development of strategies that aim to empower Black men to overcome
barriers as they pursue leadership positions or embark on their leadership journeys.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Critical race theory (CRT) was the theoretical framework that guided this study.
Grounded in the concepts of Bell’s (1987) work, the primary presumption of CRT is that “racism
is endemic, institutional, and systematic; racism is not an aberration but rather a fundamental
way of organizing society” (Sleeter, 2016, p. 3). The notion that racism is ordinary is
supplemented by four additional key principles. First, racism is also characterized by interest
convergence, or that both racism and supposed efforts to reduce racism benefit White groups
(Bell, 1987). Second, race is a social construct, defined variously in society and without any
basis in biology. Third is the notion of storytelling and counter-storytelling, which holds that
racism is perpetuated not by reason or evidence but rather through narratives communicated

7
through society and its institutions, including schools (Bell, 1987; Sleeter, 2016). To confront
this storytelling, counter-storytelling is needed to unweave racist narratives and replace them
with stories that affirm individuals of color. Finally, CRT holds that White people have actually
been the beneficiaries of civil rights efforts, including efforts to integrate schools and ensure
equality in education for students of color (Bell, 1987; Ladson-Billings, 1998).
Critical race theory was chosen as this study’s theoretical framework because it is one of
the most dominant theories used to examine and explain experiences of oppression (Lomotey,
2019). According to Ladson-Billings (1998),
It is because of the meaning and value imputed on Whiteness that Critical Race Theory
(CRT) has become an important intellectual and social tool for deconstruction of
oppressive structures and discourse, reconstruction of human agency, and construction of
equitable and socially just relations of power. (p. 9)
This study’s research methodology was qualitative. Qualitative research is described as
the process of collecting and analyzing non-numeric data to gain insight into individuals’
perceptions, experiences, attitudes, or opinions regarding a phenomenon of interest (Apuke,
2017). A qualitative research methodology is appropriate for this study because its purpose is to
explore the lived experiences of Black male leaders working in Fortune 500 companies with
institutional discrimination using narrative data. The study’s research design was
phenomenological. This design was selected because it focuses on uncovering the essence of
lived experiences through participants’ pre-reflective perceptions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The study’s participants will include Black male leaders with followers under their direct report
who are employed by Fortune 500 companies in the U.S. This population was chosen because

8
members will likely have experience with the phenomenon of interest, which is institutional
discrimination and its influence on leadership.
Definitions
The following concepts are considered integral to understanding the research problem:
• Fortune 500 refers to Fortune Magazine’s annual list of the top 500 U.S. public and
private companies ranked by assets, sales, capitalizations, and earnings (Wahba,
2021).
• Institutional discrimination refers to “the involvement of institutional systems and
structures in race-based discrimination and oppression; it may also refer specifically
to racism within a particular institution” (Braveman et al., 2022, p. 172).
• Leaders are agents of change; they influence the actions of a specific group of people
so that those actions are aimed at achieving a specific goal (Bass, 1990).
• Leadership refers to “having the ability to influence others to act in agreement toward
a collective goal or objective” (Kelley, 2019, p. 6).
• Racism in its most basic sense, is “the assignment of a group of people to a category
deemed inferior by a group of people with a high degree of power” (Kelley, 2019, p.
8). It is a “fundamental way of structuring society” on the basis of race, a social
construction not rooted in biology (Sleeter, 2016, p. 3). Researchers further use the
term interchangeably with institutional racism, systemic racism, racial discrimination,
and any combination of them interchangeably within the context of understanding
that “racism is endemic, institutional, and systematic; racism is not an aberration but
rather a fundamental way of organizing society” (Sleeter, 2016, p. 3)

9
Organization of the Dissertation
Chapter One provided a description of the problem of practice, background of the
problem, purpose of the study, research questions, theoretical framework, nature of the study,
importance of the study, and definitions. Chapter Two includes a comprehensive review of the
literature related to the research topic and the theoretical framework. Chapter Three includes a
detailed description of the research methodology, including the research design, population,
sample, data collection procedures, and data analysis plan. Chapter Four provides the results of
the data analysis. Finally, Chapter Five provides an interpretation of the results, suggestions for
practice, and recommendations for future research.

10
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Limited research investigating how Black male leaders perceive the impact of
institutional discrimination on their leadership in Fortune 500 companies and how they have
navigated their career progression despite encountering discrimination or anti-Black racism
exists. Racism in the form of systematic racial discrimination has permeated American society
and its institutions since long before the United States became an independent nation (Lavalley
& Johnson, 2020). Regarding race, the United States vigorously supported the institution of
slavery, dating back to the 1600s (Thomas & Casper, 2019), but fought a civil war to abolish it
and enacted civil rights legislation designed to protect and uplift African Americans (Lavalley &
Johnson, 2020). Yet, vestiges of institutional racial discrimination remain embedded in U.S.
society (Thomas & Casper, 2019). Anti-Black racism still persists at the institutional and
individual levels in the United States, negatively impacting Black Americans in a range of areas,
including in education (McCluney et al., 2020), healthcare access and health outcomes (Berger &
Miller, 2021), and their opportunities for success in the corporate world (Bento & Brown, 2021).
This chapter provides a review and synthesis of the findings of multiple, previous studies
that have examined racial discrimination and its effects. This literature review will cover several
themes, including the history and persistence of racial discrimination in the United States
(Lavalley & Johnson, 2020; Logan, 2019; Shum, 2020; Whitaker, 2019; Wingfield & Chavez,
2020), the impacts of racial discrimination on African Americans and on broader society (Carter
et al., 2019; Neblett, 2019; Odoms-Young, 2018; Oliver et al., 2020), strategies and coping
mechanisms used to counteract racial discrimination (Bento & Brown, 2021; Ellefsen et al.,
2022; Jacob et al., 2022; King et al., 2022; McCluney, et al., 2020; Randel et al., 2020), and
racial discrimination in the workplace and business enterprises, including Fortune 500 companies

11
(Bell et al., 2018; Kyere & Fukui, 2022; Logan, 2019; Pitcan et al., 2018; Quillian et al., 2020).
This study specifically focuses on the primary theme of institutional racial discrimination and its
impact on corporate leadership in businesses (Abel, 2022; Larcker & Tayan, 2020; Yadon &
Piston, 2018), in particular, on leadership within Fortune 500 companies and how such
discrimination affects individuals and organizations (Bachus, 2004; Livingston, 2020).
The research strategy for this literature review was to discover pertinent sources of
information through a search of online databases, including PsycINFO, ProQuest, and ERIC, as
well as through Google Scholar. Most of the previous research cited in this chapter was
published during the past five years. Key terms used in the searches included racial
discrimination, anti-Black racism, institutional discrimination, institutional racism, Black
executives, Black CEOs, corporate leadership, Fortune 500 companies, career advancement,
career obstacles, wage disparities, coping mechanisms, and strategies to counter discrimination.
Institutional Racial Discrimination in the United States
Racial discrimination can be understood as unfair and differential treatment based on race
or ethnicity (Shum et al., 2020). In the United States, it takes many forms and is built into
existing laws, practices, and institutions. African Americans perceive this kind of institutional
racial discrimination to be more damaging than that based on the biases of individuals
(Wingfield & Chavez, 2020). Anti-Black racism has been consistently maintained over time and
lies at the heart of the United States' legal, economic, business, political, educational, and social
systems (Wingfield & Chavez, 2020). As a result, systemic racism affects many aspects of life
for Black Americans, including racial disparities in education and wealth distribution (McCluney
et al., 2020), health outcomes (Berger & Miller, 2021), policing tactics (Lavalley & Johnson,
2020), scientific funding (Dzirasa, 2020), travel experiences (Benjamin & Dillette, 2021),

12
mortgage costs and loan denials in the housing market (Quillian, Lee, and Honoré (2020), as well
as opportunities for success in the workplace (Bento & Brown, 2021).
Black Americans confront the reality of racial discrimination in their daily lives. In a
systematic review of research that has examined Black people’s experiences in western societies
and how they cope with racism, Jacob et al. (2022) reported that racial discrimination in the
United States is not uncommon, with 69.5% of Black Americans having experienced it on a
regular or occasional basis. The same study found that Black adolescents experience incidents of
racial discrimination on average five times per day. English et al. (2019) studied racial
discrimination as experienced individually, vicariously, online, offline, and through teasing
among Black U.S. adolescents who related their lived experiences over a 14-day period and
reported an average of 5.21 experiences per day. These researchers found that these experiences
of racial discrimination correlated with feelings of depression and poor mental health outcomes
(English et al., 2019).
More specifically, racial discrimination affects African Americans in the workplace,
including instances of bias that are more frequent for Black workers than for other workers (Van
Dyke et al., 2020). According to Logan (2019), the modern U.S. corporation is rooted in racial
oppression, with much corporate power originally based on the significance of slavery and the
Fourteenth Amendment, and with the corporate United States playing a significant role in
shaping discriminatory race relations in the country. Whitaker (2019) reported that, despite a
myriad of laws enacted to protect employees’ rights, workplace discrimination persists in the
United States and continues to negatively influence the employment satisfaction of African
Americans who experience multiple forms of discrimination on the job based not only on race,
but also on age, credit score, and appearance. Racial discrimination limits the ability of African

13
Americans to advance in their jobs and achieve career mobility (Whitaker, 2019). Black workers'
perceptions of workplace racial discrimination are not based solely on them being members of a
minority population on the job, but also on factors such as exclusion from social networks, wage
disparities, and occupational mobility (Wingfield & Chavez, 2020).
Societal Impacts of Institutionalized Race-Based Discrimination
Just as discrimination on the basis of race occurs at the societal and institutional levels, so
too do its effects. Institutional racial discrimination can impact people of color across a wide
range of areas. Previous studies of anti-Black racism have reported that discrimination can be an
accurate predictor of educational achievement (McCluney et al., 2020), opportunities for career
advancement (Bento & Brown, 2021), health outcomes (Berger & Miller, 2021), and other
elements of daily life for African Americans. Anti-Black racism can also affect members of
minority populations in ways that impact society at large.
Lopez and Jean-Marie (2021) concluded that anti-Black racism is embedded in North
American institutions, policies, and practices and continues to have significant negative impacts
on the educational outcomes of Black students. These authors reported high dropout rates for
Black U.S. students and noted that they suffer from low expectations, heightened levels of
policing of their activities and bodies, harsh discipline, and the pathologizing of Black culture.
They further indicated that these experiences could lead to decreased quality of education across
a large group of Black Americans who will eventually enter adult society and some of whom will
become social, organizational, or political leaders. Lopez and Jean-Marie (2021) also suggested
that the poor quality of education provided to these future leaders can negatively impact their
ability to lead and create universally beneficial policies. They called for a social reckoning of the
current oppressive structures in place throughout North America.

14
The field of medicine is another sphere of society where Black Americans experience
racism. While studying the scarcity of Black men in medicine, Oliver et al. (2020) reported that
Black males seeking a career in medicine face many professional challenges on top of racial
discrimination in education and hiring. These challenges can include the difficulties inherent in
overcoming stereotypes and social biases. Oliver et al. (2020) also pointed out that since
minority physicians tend to be the healthcare providers for the United States' underserved
communities, the lack of diversity among healthcare professionals is especially troubling.
The existence of a relationship between racism and health has long been acknowledged
and supported by many researchers (Carter et al., 2018; Desalu et al., 2019; Sexton et al., 2021).
Sexton et al. (2021), for instance, concluded that racial discrimination is directly associated with
poor mental and physical health outcomes and negative perceptions of the U.S. healthcare
system by Black Americans based on personal experience. Racism is acknowledged as a
significant predictor of mental health outcomes (Wei & Bunjun, 2021), and different ways exist
in which racial discrimination can impact the health of members of minority populations. Among
these are an increase in the existence of anxiety-related trauma, including posttraumatic stress
disorder (PTSD; Williams et al, 2018), an increase in depressive symptoms, heightened levels of
anxiety, diagnoses of PTSD, risk of long-term physical illnesses (Jacob et al, 2022), and an
increase in substance abuse (Carter et al., 2019) and alcohol abuse (Desalu et al., 2019).
Cobbinah and Lewis (2018) have determined that racial discrimination has a causal link with the
morbidity and mortality of Black Americans.
One phenomenon related to racial discrimination's impact on society is the experience or
perception among many African Americans of racial fatigue or racial battle fatigue. Quaye et al.
(2019) describes racial battle fatigue as the exhaustion felt by people of color after repeated

15
experiences of racism; it can also refer to the negative impact of racism on emotional,
psychological, and physiological health and well-being associated with repeated experiences of
racial discrimination. For Black men in particular, racial fatigue can be the result of constant
negative racial stereotypes and inaccurate perceptions (Oliver et al, 2020). As more and more
African Americans suffer from some degree of racial battle fatigue, the potential for that fatigue
to affect large swaths of greater society negatively can increase.
Racial Discrimination in the Workplace
In recent years, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the existence of significant racial
disparities in healthcare. Social media has been ablaze with images of Black Americans' deaths
at the hands of the police. Social protest movements, such as Black Lives Matter, have burst onto
the scene. Despite these occurrences, systemic racism persists within U.S. corporations in the
forms of institutionalized White dominance and race-based cultural exclusion (Kyere & Fukui,
2022). In higher-status occupational positions, a heightened likelihood of discrimination based
on age and gender exists. Yet, discrimination based on race is prevalent at all levels of the
working world (Roscigno, 2019). Roscigno (2019) determined that workers identifying as racial
minorities are 4–6 times more likely to experience discriminatory or harassing behaviors than
their White counterparts at all levels in the workplace. For African Americans, high levels of
education and household income are commonly associated with working in a predominantly
White organization, which is in turn associated with higher levels of perceived discrimination
(Assari & Lankarani, 2018). According to Assari and Lankarani (2018), high socioeconomic
status among African Americans is correlated with increased numbers of discriminatory
experiences at work due in part to increased exposure to Whites in the workplace.

16
Previous research has focused on how racial discrimination at work can take a variety of
forms (Daniels & Thornton, 2019; Pitcan et al., 2018). To investigate of workplace
discrimination, Daniels and Thornton (2019) used online surveys with a population of full-time
working adults in a range of industries. They determined that workers from minority populations
experience subtle forms of discrimination from a variety of sources, including biases expressed
in work emails and other forms of incivility expressed through technology. In a study of earlycareer, professional Black men working in predominantly White organizations, Pitcan et al.
(2018) found that most study's participants had experienced a variety of racial microaggressions
at work, such as different rules, assumptions of inferiority, and cognitive and affective reactions
by coworkers and supervisors. These researchers referred to these microaggressions in the
workplace as brief yet constant exchanges that send denigrating messages to people of color
(Pitcan et al., 2018). They found that participants perceived these subtle, racially discriminatory
microaggressions to be more frustrating than overt or unrestrained racism.
Other studies have focused on public perceptions of employing organizations. Sisco
(2020) pointed out, for instance, that many Black men and women have overcome limitations
and unfavorable work situations to achieve success in the corporate United States, but that many
corporations continue to operate as racialized social systems that contribute to the racial division
and workplace inequity that holds back many Black workers.
Institutional Racial Discrimination
Institutional racial discrimination is defined as the “involvement of institutional systems
and structures in race-based discrimination and oppression; it may also refer specifically to
racism within a particular institution” (Braveman et al., 2022, p. 172). Furthermore, institutional
discrimination is a type of systemic discrimination that often goes undetected when ingrained in

17
the structures of the institution (Bohren et al., 2022). Examples of institutional racial
discrimination in the workplace include reduced professional development and career
advancement opportunities, intensified by a relative lack of mentors of color, unequal
compensation practices, and neglected or nonexistent diversity and inclusion practices
(Braveman et al., 2022). Institutional discrimination is not always race-based, nor does it only
occur in the workplace; the discrimination can be gender or disability-based, for example, or
occur in institutions of higher education or financial institutions (Banaji et al., 2021; Milam et
al., 2022). However, only race-based institutional discrimination occurring in the workplace will
be the focus of this literature review.
Institutional Discrimination and Disparities in Employee Opportunities
Multiple studies have focused on institutional discrimination and its relationship with
aspects of the workplace, such as hiring, pay, and career mobility (Bell et al., 2018; Quillian et
al., 2020; Tarasonis & Decreuse, 2020). Quillian et al. (2020) conducted a study on racial
discrimination during hiring processes and focused on whether job applicants receive an
invitation (or a “callback”) to interview for a job. By conducting a meta-analysis of existing
literature, they concluded that White applicants received 53% more callbacks and 145% more
job offers than ethnic minority applicants. They identified several reasons for discrimination in
the callback or job interview, including that employers may have missed clues about the
candidate's race in the resume, employers may respond differently to race in face-to-face
situations such as interviews, interviewers may be different individuals with different personal
levels of racial bias than the individuals who select candidates to be interviewed, and employers
may simply choose employees at the interview stage based at least in part on the candidates'
prospective cultural fit in the organization (Quillian et al., 2020).

18
Institutional racial discrimination also exists in the workplace in the form of wage
disparities between White and non-White workers. Leutwiler and Kleiner (2003) studied wage
discrimination between different groups, including women and racial minorities. They confirmed
that race-based discrimination in rates of pay did exist and that disparities in pay for workers
from different ethnic populations and educational attainment are correlated. Wage disparities
impacted greater society in terms of time and money spent on lawsuits. Over $52 million was
paid out in 2002 by employers found guilty of employment discrimination. Roberts and Mayo
(2019) reported that 55 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, wage disparities still exist
between Black and White workers and continue to increase. Tarasonis and Decreuse (2020)
investigated U.S. work and pay disparities and found that Black workers spent more time
unemployed, lost their jobs more quickly, and earned lower rates of pay than White Americans.
Other studies that have provided information about wage disparities include a project by
Bell et al. (2018), who investigated racial discrimination among Black workers in Mississippi
and concluded that discrimination and exclusion persisted in U.S. organizations, with similarly
educated African Americans generally having higher rates of unemployment and lower earnings
than their White counterparts. These researchers noted that Black workers faced discrimination
in access to jobs and treatment at work, and that wage disparity between Black and White
workers has widened in recent decades. In a study of labor-market dynamics and wage
disparities, Daly et al. (2019) reported that earnings gaps between Black and White males have
widened over the past three or four decades. They also found that gaps in earnings between
Black and White workers doubled over the first 15 years of a worker's career. While studying
Black men working in predominantly White organizations, Pitcan et al. (2018) found that Black

19
men tended to be laid off from their jobs at disproportionate rates to White men, and their
salaries were only 77.1% of those of their White counterparts.
Opportunity for upward career mobility is another focus of research on racial
discrimination. Stereotypes, prejudice, and social categorization processes in the workplace are
related to subtle discrimination at critical junctures that negatively affect the careers of African
Americans (Rosette et al., 2018). Despite laws enacted to protect employees’ rights, workplace
discrimination continues to persist in the United States, limiting the ability of Black Americans
to achieve upward mobility and negatively impacting their perceptions of job satisfaction
(Whitaker, 2019). While undertaking a qualitative phenomenological study of Black academics
seeking or holding executive leadership roles in higher education, Sparkman (2021) found that
many predominately White universities focused on increasing diversity on campus, but
simultaneously blocked access and restricted the development of Black executives.
Institutional Discrimination Against Black Male Corporate Leaders
Insufficient research has occurred on how institutional discrimination impacts the
effectiveness of Black leaders in business. Yadon and Piston (2018) have, however, recently
used cross-sectional and panel survey datasets from a wide range of participants to study the
anti-Black attitudes of White Americans toward Black leaders and, in particular, toward the
presidency of Barack Obama. The researchers found little evidence that Obama's presidency
brought about a decline in White opposition to Black leaders, White opposition to policies
focused on benefiting Blacks, or overall White prejudice against Blacks (Yadon & Piston, 2018).
In fact, they concluded that the influence of racial bias on policy opinion actually increased
during the Obama administration, and Obama's rise to power increased the perception among
many White Americans that Black success is a threat to White dominance in the United States.

20
Several studies have investigated how anti-Black racism correlates with the success of
Black male corporate leaders and have found that many business enterprises do not provide
adequate opportunities for Black men to acquire corporate leadership positions. According to
Roberts and Mayo (2019), only 8% of U.S. business managers and only 3.8% of corporate CEOs
in 2019 were Black. In an investigation of Black male leaders in predominately White
organizations, Small (2020) used a hermeneutic phenomenological study based on critical race
theory (CRT) to find that in 2020, Black male leaders encountered challenges stemming from a
history of White privilege that could be expressed in the workplace through racially insensitive
microaggressions. Larcker and Tayan (2020) noted the lack of gender and racial diversity among
CEOs and other C-level executives in top corporations, and those non-White ethnic minorities
accounted for only 10% of directors among Russell 300 companies.
By digging deeper into racial diversity in corporate leadership, Larcker and Tayan (2020)
determined that many corporations today employ a range of tactics to promote diversity at the
executive level. These include diversity councils that aim to recruit and develop racially diverse
and gender-diverse employees and leaders, financial commitments to diversity, companysponsored mentoring programs, and executive bonuses awarded based on diversity-related
metrics. They found, however, that these efforts have not resulted in adequate numbers of
ethnically diverse executives in C-level positions. They further found that increased
representation along gender and ethnic lines in the boardroom and executive offices improves
corporate decision-making and has demonstrated a company's openness to equity and to
providing leadership opportunities for all qualified members of the workforce, supporting the
significance of diversity in the C-suite. Larcker and Tayan (2020) also determined that
executives promoted to CEO positions almost always have experience in positions such as CFO,

21
in which there lies a good deal of financial responsibility for a company's profits and losses;
however, at the time of their study, only four companies in the Fortune 100 had CFOs who were
not White. They reported that few enterprise-level corporations have racially diverse C-level
executives and most racially diverse executives serve in positions with lower potential for
advancement, which does not bode well for the prospects of increased diversity among corporate
leaders in the coming years (Larcker & Tayan, 2020).
Institutional Discrimination Against Black Men in Fortune 500 Companies
This literature review has uncovered multiple studies that have added to the existing
knowledge about discrimination among Black leaders of business (Larcker & Tayan, 2020;
Yadon & Piston, 2018), but also that few previous research projects have focused specifically on
Fortune 500 companies. Roberts and Mayo (2019) reported that, at the time of their research,
only three Black CEOs existed in Fortune 500 companies and the companies that provided
detailed information about senior executives’ demographics and board members, employ White
men in 85% of their executive position roles. According to Larcker and Tayan (2020), 26
companies in the Fortune 100 were found to have no ethnic diversity in C-level executive
positions in 2020 and non-White ethnic minorities accounted for only 9% of CEO positions in
Fortune 500 companies at that time.
Bachus (2004) used a mixed-method approach to investigate the underrepresentation of
Black executives and CEOs in Fortune 500 corporations. According to Bachus (2004), a
previous study conducted in 1995 found that at that time, 97% of all male executives in Fortune
1000 industries were White and only 0.6% of male executives in those companies were Black,
even though African Americans represented roughly 13% of the total American population.
Bachus (2004) noted that a common factor in overcoming the dearth of Black male executives

22
was the use of mentoring to provide guidance to young Black men attempting to climb the
corporate ladder. They also noted the prevalence of significant discrimination at the executive
level of Fortune 1000 companies and that Black executives attempting to climb the corporate
ladder had been forced to fight battles to counter racial discrimination at several well-known
businesses, including Texaco, Coca-Cola, and American Airlines. Bachus (2004) concluded that
for Black men to reach the top of the U.S. corporate ladder, they must utilize a combination of
talent, education, power, dedication, and mentoring relationships, as well as rely on good luck.
Bachus (2004) further noted the importance of education and reported that the few Black
men who had reached the position of CEO in Fortune 500 corporations all graduated at the top of
their class from prestigious institutions of higher learning. Bachus further highlighted the
significance of mentoring programs for the corporate success of Black male executives, and that
much of the mentoring done in business occurred away from the office at locations such as golf
courses or private clubs. They added that would-be executives were challenged more in the
modern world of business because of the higher level of responsibility and expectation placed on
today's CEOs and other C-level executives.
More recently, Livingston (2020) observed that Fortune 500 companies were autonomous
entities that afforded their leaders a significant level of control over cultural norms and
procedural rules. This situation can promote racial discrimination, but Livingston noted that it
can also make these organizations an ideal place in which to develop and implement policies and
practices that promote racial equality. Specifically, it was found that interventions against racial
discrimination tended to start with a basic understanding of the underlying condition, but then
moved on to create genuine concern about the situation, resulting in a determination to focus on

23
correcting the problem. As stated by Livingston (2020), "corporate leaders may not be able to
change the world, but they can certainly change their world" (p. 67).
Livingston (2020) added that for organizations to increase diversity, equity, and
inclusion, they must invest the necessary time, energy, resources, and commitment. Livingston
further noted that to improve racial diversity and opportunity in business enterprises, business
leaders should not necessarily focus on finding the single best candidate for a position but should
instead choose an ethnically diverse candidate from a group of similarly matched candidates and
that the organization should then invest the time, effort, and resources to help the chosen
individual reach their potential. This notion of top corporations committing the time and
resources needed to develop and support excellent, Black, male corporate leaders could result in
improvements in diversity among executives and board members at Fortune 500 companies.
Institutional Discrimination Against Black Men in Other Work Environments
Although there has been a lack of research specifically focusing on the relationship
between racial discrimination and Black male corporate leaders, other studies of racism in the
workplace have focused on Black workers outside the executive office or corporate boardroom
(Nelson et al., 2019; Smulowitz et al., 2019). While these studies were conducted by researchers
who did not specifically incorporate an examination of anti-Black racism in corporate leadership,
they did provide useful information about how racial discrimination affects the ability of Black
workers to achieve career mobility (Nelson et al., 2019; Smulowitz et al., 2019).
Several of these studies were conducted to investigate racism in the legal profession.
Nelson et al. (2019) observed that racial discrimination perceived by African American attorneys
is widespread and is rooted in the racial biases that pervade society. In their study of
discrimination in the legal profession, these researchers found that attorneys of color are more

24
likely to be targets of discrimination than White attorneys. They also found that African
American attorneys are exposed to discrimination from supervisors and clients and that these
experiences hold true across a range of models controlling for social background, status in the
profession, and status in, and the characteristics of, the organization (Nelson et al., 2019).
Smulowitz et al. (2019) investigated racial diversity in U.S. law firms and found that among the
firms they studied, diversity was less pronounced at the organization’s upper levels. While their
study revealed that diversity can have a positive effect on law firms at all levels, the most
profitable firms concentrated their racial diversity at the lowest (associate) level. Smulowitz et al.
(2019) revealed the need for increased racial diversity and opportunity for Black attorneys at the
midlevel and (top) partner level within law firms.
While studying the career trajectories of African Americans in the hotel industry, Grant
(2018) found that obstacles to career advancement exist for this population, including a dearth of
opportunities for promotion and a lack of industry mentorship. In a study of racial discrimination
in the hospitality sector, Shum et al. (2020) used the framework of self-determination theory with
a population of working students enrolled in an undergraduate hospitality program at a
southwestern U.S. university to find an 18% rise in the filing of racial discrimination charges by
workers occurred between 2016 and 2018 (Shum et al., 2020). Huddleston-Pettiway (2022)
conducted a qualitative study on career advancement experiences of Black leaders in institutions
of higher education to identify obstacles they faced as well as strategies they used for career
success. These researchers reported that Black leaders were underrepresented at predominately
White institutions of higher learning due primarily to institutional racial discrimination
(Huddleston-Pettiway, 2022).

25
Webb et al. (2022) investigated the careers of academic and industry scientists from
underrepresented groups and determined that scientists from ethnic minorities faced institutional
racism in a variety of forms, including a lack of representation in clinical research, experiences
of workplace microaggression, challenges to career advancement, and a lack of mentoring
opportunities. They concluded that minority scientists should not adopt a wait and hope policy
but should take steps to improve their own advancement opportunities; these included taking
active roles in diversity advocation, mentor engagement, and bearing responsibility to face
institutional obstacles head-on and not to avoid or deny their existence. The authors added that
the best ways to create equity in the scientists' workplace are to increase dialogue about systemic
discrimination and institutional awareness of the experience of ethnic minority scientists.
Newman et al. (2019) found that minority faculty members were underrepresented and less likely
to be promoted than their White counterparts. They also noted that women were less likely to
attain tenure or leadership roles than men, and faculty members identifying as ethnic minorities
were promoted to associate professor 3–7 years later than White faculty members.
In a study of healthcare providers, Wingfield and Chavez (2020) found that Black
doctors, nurses, and technicians believed that discrimination adversely affected their ability to
acquire wealth, achieve and maintain job satisfaction, and move up within an organization.
Massaquoi et al. (2021) determined that in the military, non-White family physicians were less
likely to be named chief residents and to be given leadership positions within two years of
residency than White family physicians. Oliver et al. (2020) identified several obstacles to the
successful mentoring of Black men in the healthcare industry. These included a historical
reluctance to discuss race, and high levels of historical cultural mistrust of Black men. They also

26
reported that one key way to improve career advancement for Black men is empathy, or for
others to vicariously experience and have sensitivity for their feelings, thoughts, and experiences.
Further healthcare research has focused specifically on how racism impacts advancement
among Black nurses (Iheduru-Anderson, 2020). Iheduru-Anderson (2020) studied career
mobility among Black nurses in the United States and concluded that they faced notable
challenges in attempting to attain faculty or leadership positions. Iheduru-Anderson found that
overall, the number of nurses in the United States from ethnic minorities had increased, but the
number of Black nurses in leadership or faculty positions remained substantially low. The
authors specifically noted that Black nurses often experienced racial discrimination with no
available mentors or support and that this situation tended to discourage qualified nurses from
pursuing high-level positions in organizations. The following year, Iheduru-Anderson (2021)
utilized a qualitative approach to investigate barriers to career advancement experienced by
Black nurses in the United States and reported on the existence of a multifaceted tightly woven
system of nursing leadership dynamics that continually institutionalized and supported a
White/Black hierarchy and White supremacy at all levels of nursing, including nursing
education. They found that perceptions of the existence of institutional racism in nursing had a
negative impact on the motivation of Black nurses to seek leadership or faculty positions in
nursing or nursing education (Iheduru-Anderson, 2021).
Institutional Racial Discrimination and Organizational Success
The relationship that exists between discrimination and organizational success also
requires academic investigation. Onyeador et al. (2021) found that within organizations,
members from underrepresented populations are often confronted with feelings of exhaustion
and isolation. The researchers noted that these sentiments can affect job performance and job

27
satisfaction and can hinder the retention of otherwise good employees (Onyeador et al., 2021). In
a study on race and diversity within organizations, Ray (2019) determined that the racial makeup
of an organization can be changed to increase diversity through alterations in hiring processes
and through recognition of the profitability offered by having a racially diverse workforce. This
researcher noted that greater diversity in an organization led to improved appeal to broader
markets and new potential customers. Ray (2019) specified that niche marketers can use the
presence of non-White workers to increase profits when selling to minority consumer groups.
Some previous researchers focused on specific results of discrimination, such as lawsuits, and
how they can affect organizational success (Hirsh & Cha, 2018). Hirsh and Cha (2018)
investigated the impact of employment discrimination lawsuits on employing organizations.
They reported that when discrimination lawsuits attract national media coverage, they can result
in a drop in stock prices, an increase in mandates to change organizational policies, and a loss of
consumer confidence in the organization.
Other prior investigators who examined discrimination and organizational success
focused their studies on specific workplaces outside corporate executive offices or on forms of
discrimination other than anti-Black racism (An & Lee, 2021; Sarwar & Muhammad, 2019;
Smulowitz et al., 2019). Sarwar and Muhammad (2019) found that incivility in the workplace
and experiences of procedural injustice had a significant negative impact on organizational
performance (Sarwar & Muhammad, 2019). While studying racial diversity across different
hierarchical levels in U.S. law firms, Smulowitz et al. (2019) found that greater racial diversity
throughout an organization is associated with a firm’s financial performance. They concluded
that an increased presence of Black workers at all hierarchical levels can have a positive
financial impact on an organization. In a study of Korean, government-owned enterprises, An

28
and Lee (2021) conducted empirical research on discrimination and diversity. They focused on
gender diversity rather than racial diversity, determining that increased diversity at all levels of
an organization had a positive Impact on organizational performance.
Coping Mechanisms and Strategies to Counteract Racial Discrimination
Some scientists who study the negative impacts of racial discrimination on health,
society, and organizations have offered suggestions for strategies or coping mechanisms to
address the problem (Jacob et al., 2022; King et al., 2022; Saasa, 2019). King et al. (2022)
studied anti-Black racism in the United States and determined that scholars and practitioners
have sought ways to address this phenomenon and its impacts. They found that critical steps to
fostering an antiracist society include naming, examining, and countering anti-Black racism.
Saasa (2019) reported on the effectiveness of three specific coping strategies among African
immigrants in the United States to counter experiences of racism: active coping, the use of
instrumental support, and religious coping. Saasa (2019) found that at least two forms of coping,
namely active coping and coping with instrumental support, were correlated with the negative
effects of discrimination.
Other prior researchers have provided more specific information about racial
discrimination and coping mechanisms (Jacob et al., 2022). Jacob et al. (2022) conducted a
systematic review of existing literature and reported that many Black people counter racism by
regulating their emotions to counter the negative psychological and physical effects of anti-Black
racism, including elevated levels of stress and trauma. The results showed that Black people used
a variety of mechanisms to cope with racism, including social support in the forms of friends,
family, and support groups; religion in the forms of prayer, church involvement, and spirituality;
avoidance in the form of attempting to avoid stressful situations and individuals; and problem-

29
focused coping, in which victims of racism confronted the situation directly. According to Jacob
et al. (2022), among Black men, coping mechanisms or strategies for dealing with episodes of
racism can include seeking social support, active anger, substance use, planning, religion, not
responding, and acceptance. They noted, however, that it is difficult to determine which of these
coping mechanisms is the most effective or the most widely used by Black men. It should also be
noted that some of these strategies, such as not responding or ignoring the source of the racism,
may not be possible in the workplace or at best may result in no changes being made to an
inherently anti-Black climate.
Coping Mechanisms for Individuals
Much of the literature reviewed for this study reported on research that investigated
various methods used by individuals to navigate career advancement despite racial
discrimination (Quaye et al., 2019; Saasa, 2019; Small, 2020). Several methods for coping with
anti-Black racism were suggested by Quaye et al. (2019), including building a community with
other African Americans with similar jobs, disassociation from people and places that cause
discriminatory harm, taking proper care of one's body, establishing safe spaces, and seeking
therapeutic counseling. Small (2020) determined that many successful African American male
leaders attributed some of their success to the integration of spirituality into their leadership
practices. African American spirituality was a source of resilience and self-determination that
allowed some Black male leaders to transcend existing racial narratives or ideologies ingrained
in the operations of a predominately White organization (Small, 2020). Saasa (2019) also offered
religion or spirituality as a way to navigate career progression despite racism.
Other studies of discrimination and coping have focused on strategies such as
commitment to ethnic identity, disassociation with White-majority work environments, and

30
direct confrontation of racism (Bento & Brown, 2021; Hernández & Villodas, 2020). In a study
of conditional process modeling and its relationship with problem-focused coping methods to
counteract racial discrimination, Hernández and Villodas (2020) determined that daily
experiences of microaggression can be moderated by ethnic identity exploration and
commitment. They examined several coping styles and found them all to be somewhat
productive in mediating the relationship between microaggressions and mental health. They
reported, however, that reflective coping, which focuses on learning and contemplating, was
positively associated with mental health, while other coping styles, such as reactive coping
(confronting racism) and suppressive coping (ignoring racism), were negatively associated with
mental health (Hernández & Villodas, 2020).
Racial discrimination in the workplace has led many Black Americans to pursue selfemployment as a path to economic independence and a way to avoid White-majority corporate
workplaces where institutional racism can hinder the career advancement of Black workers
(Bento & Brown, 2021). Ellefsen et al. (2022) reported that racial discrimination can take many
forms, but they argued that opposition to racial discrimination can also take many forms. They
used a qualitative research approach to study members of ethnic minority populations in Norway,
most of whom were Black, and their efforts to actively resist racism in everyday life rather than
passively accepting or adapting to it. They identified several effective methods of countering
racism, including confronting expressions of racism, sharing experiences about it, reporting
experiences of racism to authorities, and social protest, including media attention. The results
revealed that Black people tend to be less hesitant to actively confront racism than members of
some other ethnic minority groups (Ellefsen et al., 2022).

31
Researchers have also turned their focus to other methods by which individuals can
navigate career progression despite racism (McCluney et al., 2021; Pitcan et al., 2018). While
investigating Black men working in predominately White organizations, Pitcan et al. (2018)
found that participants perceived that Black workers feel the need to conduct themselves in a
way that is beyond reproach to maintain a positive representation of African American workers
and to protect against differences in response to errors between them and their White peers. They
noted that this perception of the need to work harder than White coworkers can have
psychological and emotional costs that negatively affect mental health (Pitcan et al., 2018). For
instance, code-switching involves the management of Black worker's impression on others
through adjustments in self-presentation to mirror the norms, behaviors, and attributes of the
White majority more closely in an organization. In a study of this phenomenon, McCluney et al.
(2021) concluded that Black employees who used code-switching in the forms of changes in
style of speech, name selection, and hairstyle were consistently viewed as having higher levels of
professionalism than Black employees who did not use similar codeswitching tactics.
Strategies for Organizations
In previous studies of racial discrimination and responses to it, researchers have
investigated strategies that have been used, or could be adopted, by organizations to reduce or
eliminate institutional racism (McCluney et al., 2020; Newman et al., 2019; Onyeador et al.,
2021). As Black male leaders seek ways to navigate career advancement in the face of racism,
they can demand their employer make changes that might increase possibilities for career
mobility. In a study of racial discrimination in academic medicine, Newman et al. (2019)
reported, for example, a critical need to focus on achievement barriers, and suggested a
multifaceted strategy that organizations could use to strengthen the environment, recruitment,

32
professional development, and leadership. Business organizations should make efforts to educate
and raise awareness about racial bias and inequality, and business leaders should make effort to
open their insular social and professional networks to professionals of color (Onyeador et al.,
2021). McCluney et al. (2020) proposed that U.S. business organizations should create
antiracism resources and counteract systemic racism by adapting a long-term view for learning
the history of racism, embracing the discomfort inherent in acknowledging racist mistakes, and
systematically assess how organizational structures maintain White supremacy.
Several researchers have made similar recommendations and have proposed more
specific methods that could be used by organizations to moderate discrimination (Onyeador et
al., 2021; Randel et al., 2020). Randel et al. (2020) reported that U.S. corporations tend to
exclude African Americans from key organizational positions and fail to provide Black
employees with a sense of being valued at work. These same organizations struggle to fill the
void of African Americans in upper management through the use of mentor programs and
diversity initiatives. Onyeador et al. (2021) investigated organizational approaches to increase
diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace and reported that U.S. companies spend $8
billion annually on diversity training, but that it is often focused on implicit bias. They suggested
that organizations should move beyond the basics of implicit bias training, since implicit bias is
difficult to change, and training sessions do not result in more diversity and establish structural
practices that block decision maker’s biases. One example given involved the Boston Symphony
Orchestra and its underrepresentation of female musicians. To address this problem, the
orchestra held blind auditions in which the hirer could not see auditioner. The hiring of women
only increased after installation of carpeting on the ramp leading to the audition pit, which
inhibited the evaluators' ability to perceive the gender of auditionees based on the sounds made

33
by their shoes (Onyeador et al., 2021). Thus, organizations can use racism-countering strategies
specific to their industry.
Previous studies have focused on how institutional racial discrimination can be addressed
by both states and organizations. Ellefsen et al. (2022) reported that institutional opposition to
racial discrimination can include state responses through legislation, the work of civic
organizations and social protest movements, and peer group efforts that challenge racism in
everyday life. Ray (2019) studied the racialization of organizations and reported that changes in
the racial makeup of organizations can be affected by external factors, including social
movements, changes in a state's immigration policies, and the degree to which an organization
relies on input from the state. Ray (2019) also identified internal sources within organizations
that can lead to increased diversity, including attempts to attain higher levels of market share,
establishment of diversity programs, and conscious attempts by movement actors to alter the
distribution of resources.
Onyeador et al. (2021) made several suggestions for ways in which organizations can
increase diversity, including preparing for defensive responses from members of dominant
groups, implementing structures that will cultivate organizational responsibility for diversity,
creating opportunities for high-quality contact between groups, establishing affinity groups for
underrepresented populations, providing welcoming and inclusive messaging, and implementing
processes that will bypass interpersonal bias. The same researchers noted that there is no onesize-fits-all solution for increasing diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace. Each
organization should find its own ways to change structures and improve climates with the aim of
creating increased opportunities for workers from ethnic minorities.

34
Mentoring has been identified by several investigators as a beneficial way to counter
racism in a wide range of industries. In a study on racism experienced by Black male healthcare
professionals, Oliver et al. (2020) suggested that improvements in career advancement could be
reached by using mentoring. They reported that mentoring is one of the best strategies for
increasing the number of Black men in physician or leadership positions in healthcare. Newman
et al. (2019) suggested that organizations in the field of academic medicine should implement
larger numbers of mentors and sponsors, and they should support the organizational development
of mentor training programs to counter career advancement barriers. While examining the
benefits of mentoring to increase diversity in the workplace, Randel et al. (2020) studied the use
of cross-race sponsorship of African American protégés and found that, while there remains
significant room for improvement in this practice, the sponsorship of Black workers in cross-race
mentoring relationships can improve career advancement for African Americans.
Theoretical Foundation: Critical Race Theory
The current study is supported by the CRT framework. CRT is based on the concept that
race is not a natural or biologically grounded feature of physically distinct subgroups of humans
but is instead a socially constructed category or demarcation used to exploit and oppress people
of color for many years, particularly in the United States (Bell, 1987). CRT posits that racism is
inherent in U.S. laws and institutions as they function to create and support social, political, and
economic disparities between White Americans and non-Whites, especially African Americans.
Bell and other proponents of this theory have suggested that it can be used to reduce or eliminate
institutional-level race-based injustices. Ladson-Billings (1998) noted that CRT originally
emerged as a legal scholastic counterpoint to the positivist liberal legal discourse of civil rights
and that the theory postulates that racial discrimination and anti-Black racism are normal in

35
American society, with White Americans having been the principal beneficiaries of civil rights
legislation. Ladson-Billings added that CRT can be used to examine ways in which citizenship
and race can interact but noted that the theory's usefulness in understanding or affecting
disparities in education is in its infancy.
Sleeter (2016) reported that CRT postulates that racism is institutional, systematic, and
endemic and that it is not an aberration, but rather a fundamental way of organizing a society.
Sleeter mentioned three tenets of CRT, the first of which is interest convergence, which focuses
on how the interests of White Americans are served through incremental steps. The second tenet
is color blindness, which leads to inquiry into how structures that may seem neutral can, in fact,
reinforce White interests. The third is experiential knowledge, which results in questions about
whose voices are being heard. Critical race theory is one of the key theories currently used to
examine and explain experiences of oppression among Black Americans (Lomotey, 2019).
Mercier et al. (2022) utilized a convergent mixed-methods design over a CRT framework
to study stress-coping mechanisms and psychological distress among Black Americans during
the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of racism. They determined that avoidant coping was
correlated with psychological distress, but socially supported coping was not. They also reported
that the pandemic disrupted the effectiveness or availability of some coping strategies typically
those available to Black Americans due in part to the need for personal isolation and participants'
fears for the safety of other Black Americans. Lopez and Jean-Marie (2021) drew on CRT to
support and frame their research on racism in education and reported that this theory, while
currently under attack in some quarters, calls for the recognition of race and race relations as
social constructs perpetually shaped by political forces, but through which the topic of racial
subjugation by a White majority can be identified, examined, and eventually changed.

36
Conclusion
Institutional racial discrimination especially as a conduit for anti-Black racism has
existed for many years in the United States and in U.S. businesses. The impacts of systemic
racism have resulted in low numbers of Black male leaders in Fortune 500 companies and other
large businesses and disparities in hiring, pay, and career mobility. This literature review reveals
that multiple researchers have investigated the impacts of racial discrimination in ways relevant
to this study of racism and Black male corporate leaders. Few previous studies, however, have
focused on Black male leaders in large corporations and even fewer explored the effects of
racism in Fortune 500 companies. The findings from this study, then, may add new information
to help fill this gap in our current knowledge and help to answer questions about the lived
experiences of racial discrimination among Black male leaders in Fortune 500 companies, how
they have navigated their career progression despite encountering racism, and how they perceive
the impact of racial discrimination on their effectiveness as leaders of Fortune 500 companies.

37
Chapter Three: Methodology
The research methodology of this study was qualitative. Qualitative research is described
as the process of collecting and analyzing non-numeric data to gain insight into individuals’
perceptions, experiences, attitudes, or opinions regarding a phenomenon of interest (Apuke,
2017). A qualitative research methodology was appropriate for this study because its purpose
was to use narrative data to explore the lived experiences of institutional discrimination by Black
male leaders working in Fortune 500 companies.
The research design of this study was furthermore phenomenological. I selected this
design because it focuses on uncovering the essence of lived experiences through participants’
pre-reflective perceptions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Phenomenology is “the study of the
lifeworld—the world as we immediately experience it pre-reflectively rather than as we
conceptualize, categorize, or reflect on it…Phenomenology aims at gaining a deeper
understanding of the nature or meaning of our everyday experiences” (van Manen, 1990, p. 9).
The phenomenological design is commonly used in qualitative research when the objective of
the study is to gain a better understanding of a phenomenon through participants’ perspectives
and personally constructed realities (Moustakas, 1994; Vagle, 2018).
I did not choose other qualitative designs, such as grounded theory, case study, narrative,
or ethnography, because they did not align with the purpose of this study. A grounded theory
design, for example, was not appropriate because it includes the development of a new theory,
which is outside the purview of this study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A case study design was
also not appropriate for this study because the phenomenon of institutional discrimination that I
investigated was not bound by a specific time or place (Yin, 2017). A narrative design did not
align with the study purpose because it requires the collection of more in-depth information from

38
participants than what can be achieved through storytelling (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Finally,
an ethnographic design did not align with the goals of my research because ethnography focuses
on exploring phenomena through a cultural lens rather than utilizing sociological applications
such as inquisition of institutional racism as I am attempting here (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Research Questions
The purpose of this qualitative, phenomenological study was to explore the lived
experiences of institutional discrimination by Black male leaders of Fortune 500 companies.
Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were used to collect the data. The following research
questions guided this study:
1. What are the lived experiences of Black male leaders who encounter institutional
discrimination within Fortune 500 companies?
2. How have Black male leaders navigated their career progression despite encountering
institutional discrimination?
3. How do Black male leaders perceive the impact of institutional discrimination on
their leadership in Fortune 500 companies?
Overview of Methodology
This study included a qualitative research methodology and a phenomenological research
design. Participants included Black male leaders who were employed by Fortune 500 companies
in the United States with employees under their direct report. I chose this population because
members would likely have experienced institutional racial discrimination and its influence on
leadership. Interviews were the sole source of data collection for the three research questions
informing this study. I chose interviews as the source of data because, according to Moustakas
(1994), they allow for the collection of more in-depth narrative data than other sources.

39
The Researcher
I am a middle manager of a Fortune 500 company, and I am in the Black male population
under study. Although I may not know the participants and their organizations personally, there
may be personal biases related to the topic that could influence the research process. For
instance, I may share similar experiences with the participants, which could influence how I
interpret the participants’ experiences. To mitigate the potential influence of personal biases, I
engaged in researcher reflexivity, which is characterized by the researcher acknowledging,
recording, and interrogating experiences, assumptions, attitudes, or worldviews that could
influence the study (Korstjens & Moser, 2018). Additionally, I intentionally blocked personal
experiences while interpreting the lived experiences of participants (Butler, 2016).
Data Source: Interviews
The primary data source for this qualitative phenomenological study was in-depth semistructured interviews. The following subsections provide detailed information about aspects of
the study design. Specifically, the subsections include information about the participants,
instrumentation, data collection procedures, and data analysis.
Participants
The plan was to recruit 12−15 participants, however, 21 comprised the final sample to
reach data saturation. The participants specifically included 21 Black male leaders selected based
on the following inclusion criteria: (a) Black, (b) male, (c) a leader with three followers under
direct report, and (d) employed by a Fortune 500 company in the United States. The participants’
years of relevant work experience, industry, and position are presented in Table 1.
Employee demographics across Fortune 500 companies revealed that approximately 60%
of employees were White. Asian, Black, and Hispanic employees made up approximately 20%,

40
10%, and 10% of the Fortune 500 workforce, respectively (Talenya, 2021). These percentages
fail to reflect the general U.S. population, where 13% of individuals over 18 are Black and 18%
are Hispanic (Talenya, 2021). My research focus on Black male leaders was intended to enrich
academic understanding of how they navigate their experiences in these spaces as an
underrepresented group. At the time of this research, no data were available regarding the
demographic composition of these leaders in Fortune 500 companies.
Table 1
Participants’ Descriptive Information
Participant Years of experience Industry Position
1 19 Engineering Director
2 20 Manufacturing Manager
3 17 Aerospace Executive director
4 27 Sales Vice president
5 >10 Manufacturing Supervisor
6 17 Surveillance Systems Director
7 8 Athletic Apparel Operations manager
8 30 Aerospace Quality control
9 28 Aerospace Quality control
10 25 Automotive General manager
11 26 Aerospace Executive director
12 17 Cross-Functional P&L leader
13 11 Human Resources Director
14 19 Finance Senior director
15 15 Manufacturing General manager
16 20 Engineering Project leader
17 10 Human Resources Director
18 23 Information Technology Vice president
19 20 Security Services Director
20 9 Aerospace Vice president
21 26 Architecture Executive director
The final sample was guided by saturation in the data set, which is the point at which no
new information emerges from participant interviews (Williams & Vogt, 2011). I used a
purposive sampling technique to obtain rich data from the target population. Purposive sampling
is a non-probability technique used to include a sample of individuals who have knowledge of

41
and experience with a specific phenomenon (Williams & Vogt, 2011). Participants were
recruited from LinkedIn professional groups after gaining permission from group administrators.
Since I was able to recruit enough Black men to reach saturation, I had no need to extend
recruitment to other minoritized men to fill in gaps caused by any lack of desired participants.
Instrumentation
In-depth interviews were the sole source of data collection for this study. Each participant
participated in a one-on-one interview that was held on the Zoom video conferencing platform. I
scheduled each interview at a date and time that was convenient for the participant. The
interviews were semi-structured, lasted approximately 60–90 minutes and were audio-recorded
to aid in the transcription process.
I developed an interview protocol that was informed by the literature and designed to
answer each research question in the conduction of the interviews (see Appendix A). Moustakas
(1994) posited that phenomenological interviews are characteristically more in-depth than
interviews used in other qualitative approaches, such as ethnography and case studies, because
they are used to encapsulate the essence of participants’ shared experiences. Smith and Osborn
(2003) noted that most phenomenology researchers use semi-structured interviews as the primary
source of data. During the semi-structured interviews, I engaged in conversation with each
participant using a flexible interview protocol that consisted of open-ended and probing
questions to guide the interview and encourage the participant to speak further about particular
topics relating to my specific research questions (Smith & Osborn, 2003).
I conducted an expert panel review to validate the interview protocol. The expert panel
consisted of my dissertation chair and two committee members, who reviewed the interview
questions and provided feedback, as recommended by Rosenthal (2016). Specifically, the expert

42
panel review was conducted to ensure the interview questions were clear, concise, and free from
bias (Rosenthal, 2016). An additional goal of the expert panel review was to apply feedback to
the interview protocol before I conducted interviews with participants.
Data Collection Procedures
Data collection commenced after obtaining University of Southern California
Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. The next step in the data collection process was to
obtain permissions from LinkedIn professional group administrators to solicit their members for
participation in the study. The LinkedIn groups that I solicited included Diversity and Inclusion
Leadership, Diversity Professionals, and Black Enterprise Networked. After receiving the
permissions, I sought approval from University of Southern California’s Institutional Review
Board (IRB) to conduct this study. Following approval from the IRB, I recruited participants
from the LinkedIn groups by posting an invitation to participate on each group’s page. The
invitation post included information about the study, participation criteria, and my contact
information. The recruitment posts were deleted after all interviews were completed.
Individuals who were interested in participating were able to contact me directly. During
the initial correspondence, I asked if the individual met the criteria for participation, scheduled a
time for the interview for those who met the selection criteria, and then sent them a copy of the
information sheet for exempt research (see Appendix B). All participants reviewed an informed
consent form to document their agreement to the terms and conditions of participation. The
participants were interviewed individually over the video conferencing platform Zoom. Each
interview session was video-recorded for data collection purposes. After the interviews were
transcribed, I sent the transcripts to participants for member checking (Korstjens & Moser,
2018). I informed the participants of the interviewee transcript review process, which entailed

43
their review of the transcripts to check the accuracy. The participants were given seven days to
make changes to the transcripts as they saw fit; otherwise, they were considered approved and
final. Only Participant 1 made revisions to the transcripts in filling out the parts that were marked
as inaudible. The finalized transcripts were then imported to the computer-assisted qualitative
data analysis software (CQDAS) NVivo 12.
Data Analysis
I used Braun and Clarke’s (2019) six-step thematic analysis to extract themes from the
data. The six steps of thematic analysis include: (a) familiarizing oneself with the data, (b)
developing initial codes, (c) developing themes from combined codes, (d) exploring associations
between themes based on underlying theories and the study’s research questions and purpose, (e)
selecting final themes and labeling them, and (f) reporting the results. I began thematic analysis
by reading the interview transcripts multiple times to become familiar with the data. In the
second step, I underlined significant portions of text that directly aligned with at least one of the
research questions and created codes based on that text. The coding process involved generating
initial codes in the first cycle and pattern codes in the second cycle (Saldaña, 2016). NVivo
software was used to help keep me organized during the coding and theming process. In the third
step, I grouped together codes that are similar in nature to represent the themes (Braun & Clarke,
2019). In the fourth step, I assessed whether any themes needed to be modified, merged, or
eliminated due to irrelevance. I identified and labelled the final themes in the fifth step and in the
sixth and last step, developed a narrative report of the themes.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Judgments about the quality and rigor of qualitative research are made based on the level
of trustworthiness in procedures used during investigation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The

44
trustworthiness of a study is evaluated according to its transferability, credibility, confirmability,
and dependability. In qualitative research, a study is considered valid if it is transferable and
credible. Likewise, a study is believed to be reliable if it is confirmable and dependable.
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To increase the trustworthiness of this study, I used a technique
called interviewee transcript review, which is accomplished by sending the interview transcripts
to participants to ensure accurate translation of their answers to interview questions (Korstjens &
Moser, 2018). Furthermore, I practiced researcher reflexivity, which involved documenting and
interrogating personal experiences, opinions, biases, or beliefs that may have influenced the
research process (Korstjens & Moser, 2018). Finally, the trustworthiness of this study was
enhanced by conducting an expert panel review of the interview protocol (Rosenthal, 2016).
Ethics
I did not anticipate any harm to participants or to the population from which they were
selected. Participation in this study was voluntary, which was confirmed in the informed consent
process. Because I am a mid-level manager, I did not include anyone in the study that I
supervise. Each participant was required to agree to the terms of informed consent that were
described in the informed consent document before participating in the interview. The
confidentiality of participant information was maintained by assigning pseudonyms to
participants. These pseudonyms were used in place of participant names in every step of the
research process. The results of this study may be disseminated through publication in an
academic, peer-reviewed journal. Additionally, the results of this study are available to
participants at their request.

45
Chapter Four: Findings
This chapter presents the study findings. The purpose of this qualitative
phenomenological study was to explore the lived experiences of Black male leaders of Fortune
500 companies with institutional discrimination. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were used
to collect the data. Braun and Clarke’s (2019) thematic analysis method was used to analyze the
data, which I interpreted through the theoretical framework of CRT. The following research
questions guided this study:
1. What are the lived experiences of Black male leaders who encounter institutional
discrimination within Fortune 500 companies?
2. How have Black male leaders navigated their career progression despite encountering
institutional discrimination?
3. How do Black male leaders perceive the impact of institutional discrimination on
their leadership in Fortune 500 companies?
The subsections of this introduction to the chapter contain a brief description of the data
and theme development to show how the themes emerged. The next section contains a
description of the 21 Black male leaders in Fortune 500 companies who were interviewed for
this study. The participants’ demographic information is summarized. The subsequent sections
present the findings for the three research questions. In each section, the themes are described.
Finally, a summary is included to end the chapter.
Theme Development
The data analysis procedures were in accordance with Braun and Clarke’s (2019) six-step
thematic analysis: (a) familiarizing oneself with the data, (b) developing initial codes, (c)
developing themes from combined codes, (d) exploring associations between themes based on

46
underlying theories and the study’s research questions and purpose, (e) selecting final themes
and labeling them, and (f) reporting the results. The steps recommended by Braun and Clarke
(2019) are not linear in nature but cyclical, which means that I went back and forth between the
steps until I reached high-level constructs that served as the final themes.
The first step of the analysis was to become familiar with the data. I encountered the data
initially by conducting and transcribing the interviews. I imported the transcripts to NVivo 12
and read the entire dataset three times. The purpose of this initial reading of the entire dataset
was to gain an early impression of the general common patterns. During this step, my
impressions of the data were that the participants differentiated systemic and institutionalized
racism from unconscious bias. They also shared their experiences of inequities at work. In their
pursuit of career advancement, the participants generally reported they utilized their own
resources to build professional networks rather than join out-of-office social activities generally
organized and attended by White men. Instead, they found allies who advocated for them, and as
leaders, they made efforts to be advocates for other Black men and minorities. In the workplace,
they discussed practicing code-switching.
After this initial reading and observation of the common patterns, I proceeded to code the
data. According to Braun and Clarke (2019), coding is a systematic process. To create the coding
system, I used the three research questions (RQs) as a guide. I reread the transcripts focusing on
each line of the text in search of chunks of text that appeared to be meaningful to the RQs.
During this process, I highlighted chunks of text, created codes, assigned descriptive labels, and
assigned the codes to the corresponding RQ. As the coding progressed from Participant 1 to
Participant 21’s transcript, fewer and fewer codes emerged. No new codes emerged after the
initial coding of Participant 16’s transcript, which indicated that data saturation had been

47
reached. During the initial coding phase, 95 codes emerged. I then proceeded to the second cycle
of coding, pattern coding. In this phase, I searched for higher-level constructs that linked the
initial codes. For instance, the surface-level initial codes pertaining to the participants’
experiences of having a mentor, having a coach, and having someone they could trust were
abstracted into having allies who advocated for them. A total of 19 pattern codes emerged.
The pattern codes were further abstracted in the third phase of the analysis, in which I
searched for themes. According to Braun and Clarke (2019), a theme is a recurring pattern of
meaning across a dataset. The recurring patterns were not measured through the quantity of
occurrences across the participants’ transcripts, but rather through parallel concepts (Braun &
Clarke, 2019). The initial themes were visually represented in NVivo using the hierarchy feature.
An example of a hierarchy is shown in Figure 1. In the figure, the initial codes “had difficulties
in making an impact” and “had to have higher credentials than White counterparts” formed the
pattern code “biased measure of standards at work.” Similarly, the initial codes “held to a higher
accountability than White counterparts” and “got blamed for others’ mistakes” supported the
pattern code “held accountable for no valid reason.” Both pattern codes were under the construct
of different standards used in perceiving Black and White leaders.
Twelve initial themes emerged from the third step of the analysis, which were reviewed
and refined in the fourth step. The theme review entailed comparing the themes against the
transcripts to identify how the data supported their emergence. The fourth step also included the
development of a thematic map to determine the narrative of the themes (Figure 2). The fifth step
was to name, define, and finalize the themes. Naming the themes involved consideration of how
participants answered the RQs. The final themes and their definitions are shown in Table 2.

48
Figure 1
Data Analysis Hierarchy
Note. This screenshot captured from the NVivo data file for this study illustrates the analytical
structure utilized throughout Braun and Clark’s (2019) six-step analysis method.
The sixth and final step was to produce a report of the findings, which involved
determining a logical way of presenting the themes. As the themes were derived from recurring
patterns of data, they were organized first according to the RQs and then according to the most
recurring ones.
Findings for Research Question 1
The findings of the first research question addressing the lived experiences of Black male
leaders who encounter institutional racial discrimination within Fortune 500 companies revealed
three themes emergent in the interview data: (a) Black leaders experienced inequities in
workplace privileges, unlike White counterparts; (b) the organization is not fully committed to
diversity and inclusion, and (c) Black leaders experienced unconscious bias. An overview of the
themes, with the number of supporting interviews and coding references is shown in Table 3.

49
Figure 2
Thematic Map of Study Findings

50
Table 2
Final Study Themes
Theme Definition
Black leaders experienced inequities in
workplace privileges, unlike White
counterparts
Experiences of observing the differences
in the standards and resources when
compared to White counterparts
Organization is not fully committed to
diversity and inclusion
Experiences of the organization’s lack of
dedication to increasing the number of
Black men hired and promoted despite
their qualifications
Black leaders’ experience of unconscious
bias
Experiences of non-overt and noninstitutionalized racial discrimination
Black leaders were intentional in their
pursuit of leadership roles
Experiences of planned career navigation
Black leaders had a support system in
navigating their careers
Experiences of having advocates in
navigating career
Black leaders practiced code-switching Experiences of adjusting one’s language,
demeanor, and appearance to fit certain
standards for career advancement
Black leaders pursued becoming
advocates for other persons of color
Experiences of intent to support Black
men and other minorities in their pursuit
of leadership roles
Table 3
Research Question 1 Themes
Theme No. of
supporting
interviews
No. of
coding
references
Black leaders experienced inequities in workplace
privileges, unlike White counterparts.
18 86
Organization is not fully committed to diversity and
inclusion.
14 32
Black leaders’ experience of unconscious bias 12 23
Theme 1: Black Leaders Experienced Inequities in Workplace Privileges, Unlike White
Counterparts
Eighteen of the 21 participants reported their experiences of inequities in the workplace.
Based on the participants’ interview responses, inequities were generally observable when they

51
compared their lack of privileges to their White counterparts. Seventeen participants shared that,
as Black males, they felt they were held to different standards than their White colleagues.
Fifteen participants stated that they experienced biases in measuring the application of work
standards. Specifically, 11 participants reported that, in applying for jobs and promotions, they
had difficulties making an impact in terms of visibility on the hiring personnel. Participant 5, for
example, stated that being considered for jobs and promotions was difficult for individuals with
names that were not typical among White U.S. Americans:
I think it’s very difficult sometimes to just make that initial impact when you don’t have
the experience or when all they know is your name. A name that is not a typical
American name. A name that says before any barriers are considered that this guy is not
White.
Five participants shared that they experienced leaders and other corporate stakeholders
having low expectations of them. Namely, the participants described their experiences of how
others, particularly White male leaders, did not expect them to pursue higher leadership roles.
The institutionalized racial discrimination experienced by Black male executive leaders in this
case made it difficult “to put into [a White colleague’s] head that a Black man wants to be
president of the entire company,” too, even if he has achieved positions higher than Black men
before him in the past. This was the experience of Participant 4, who further stated workplace
leaders tended to be surprised when they hear that a Black man wants to pursue leadership
positions in the organization: “[The HR executive’s] expectations for me were lower than my
expectations for myself. And some Black people get caught up in this, and they lower their own
expectations simply because the organization has lower expectations of them.” The notion that
his or another Black man’s qualifications matter less than their historical social ranking and the

52
associated bias that they have already “gone as far as” they ever have in the past and should be
content there is a prime example of systemic or institutional racial discrimination.
Seven participants shared that they experienced difficulties in being visible because of
their lack of connections or professional networks, which were available to their White
counterparts. Participant 15 experienced not being invited to social events, while Participant 16
expressed that he knew he was not part of the “good old boys’ club,” which he defined as “a set
group of people who go out for dinner and drinks and to play golf, tennis, and other
extracurricular activities.” He elaborated that, because this “club” socialized together both inside
and outside the workplace, they also tended to promote and advocate for each other, thereby
rising in the ranks professionally. However, because being African American meant tending to
be excluded, their “strengths and weaknesses” were not factored into the professional promotion
and advocacy equation. Worse, this participant shared that, “For African Americans, from what I
witnessed early in my career, those opportunities weren’t there for us because everyone was
hesitant to go out with their Black or African American counterparts.”
Eleven participants perceived that another biased measure of standards was the need for
Black men to have higher credentials than their White counterparts even to be considered for
certain roles. Participants 4 and 13, for example, stated that they needed to have higher
educational qualifications despite already meeting the minimum education requirements for the
job and being equally qualified to the White males with whom they were competing. Six of these
participants specifically mentioned that they had to prove themselves repeatedly and experienced
that Black males had a smaller margin of error than their White counterparts. These participants
commented that their achievements were either discredited or discounted. Participant 13 stated

53
that regardless of his years in service, educational attainment, and achievements at work, he was
held to a higher standard than his White counterparts:
I was getting all types of special assignments but could not get promoted beyond a certain
level. I was told it was because of not having a master’s degree, although I was doing the
work of my White counterparts, even more work than they did. I was trusted with more
responsibility than they were, but I was not given the opportunity to progress to the level
of my newly graduated White counterparts, even though I had been in my career for
almost five years.
Other participants also reported that they were held to higher accountability standards
than their White counterparts. For instance, three participants shared their experiences of being
blamed for others’ mistakes, with Participant 11 mentioning that he had experienced getting
blamed since childhood in his “majority White elementary school” in Washington, D.C.
Evidence of the institutionalized nature of this experience is Participant 2’s recounting of his
experience with being implicated in a fight between two subordinates and suspended without any
explanation from the manager—as if a child:
Early in my career, there was an incident in which two employees were having a dispute.
At the time, I was the shift lead of the two employees engaged in the dispute. So, I
interceded and broke it up, deescalating the situation. The following day, I returned to
work and was suspended for three days. I was never given a reason.
The other aspect in which the participants observed inequities was their lack of access to
career advancement tools that were available to their White counterparts. Ten participants shared
that they did not receive the same support as their White colleagues, in that the organization did
not give them the same resources, particularly in providing mentors and allotting budgets.

54
Participant 4 stated, “I found that on multiple occasions, I was given a role that I had sought, and
when I got the role, I had considerably fewer resources than the person who had the role before
me.” Importantly, experiences with the reduction of resources experienced by the Black male
leaders of Fortune 500 companies in this study also included mentorship.
In terms of obtaining mentors, the participants shared that they had to utilize their own
network in seeking mentors, while their White counterparts had someone readily available to
help them navigate the workplace. Participant 7, for instance, stated that new employees who
were White were immediately guided by the White leaders, while new employees who were
Black were expected to learn on their own: “Once that new employee came into the building,
that White manager sent them around the building to different departments, encouraging them to
learn everything,” and “They would progress quicker than their Black counterparts because, at
the end of the day, they’re getting a mentorship.” However, a new Black leader joining the
company “isn’t grabbed by the hand and told [where to go].” Thus, the institutional racial
discrimination at work against Black male leaders in Fortune 500 companies is “plain as day.”
Overall, the experiences of 18 of the 21 participants involved inequities in the workplace
that they observed their White counterparts not experiencing. The participants further expressed
that they tend to lack the privileges afforded to their White counterparts. More specifically, the
participants reported experiencing (a) biases in the job application and promotion and processes,
(b) low expectations from leaders, (c) limited professional networks, (d) higher credential
requirements, and (e) a smaller margin of error compared to their White counterparts. The
participants also shared that, in their workplace experiences, Black men are often held to higher
accountability standards than White men. Lastly, the participants expressed that Black men are
not given the same guidance and mentorship for career advancement as their White counterparts.

55
Theme 2: Participants’ Organizations Not Fully Committed to Diversity and Inclusion
Fourteen participants perceived that while some initiatives for diversity and inclusion
were in place in their organizations, the commitment was lacking in terms of holding others
accountable for racial discrimination and hiring Black employees, particularly for leadership
positions. More specifically, covered in this section are the participants’ experiences of their
organizations’ lack of commitment to diversity and inclusion, which was associated with their
reported beliefs about the organizations’ failure or reticence to build cases on racial
discrimination that would hold racists accountable, as well as the absence of effort to hire people
of color.
Ten participants noted that building racial discrimination cases tends to be inherently
difficult, as evidence of racism is often intangible. Explanations for the lack of support in
stopping or preventing racial discrimination in the workplace varied amongst the participants;
however, two participants discussed their experiences with dealing with discriminatory actions in
indirect or intangible forms. Participant 1 explained, for example, that racism was not easy to
prove, as liable individuals tended to be subtle in their discriminatory practices. Participant 8
shared similar experiences and used the term “microaggression” to refer to the subtle
discriminatory acts against people of color in his workplace. He further expressed that with
institutional racial discrimination, especially in incidences involving microaggressions, cases
were rarely built and filed both because victims may fear retaliation and the organization may be
lenient on racially discriminatory acts:
With these microaggressive things, sometimes I think we just kind of let them slide. We
may have a conversation with people, but we don’t report them as much. To some degree,
we question whether they should be reported or part of a conversation with that person, if

56
it continues. Especially now, sometimes there’s a lot of leniency. Certain people make
mistakes, and I think we don’t report them as much because of the fear of retaliation, to
some degree. But I don’t think it’s direct retaliation from the company… it’s just maybe
retaliation from that person.
In terms of organizations’ commitment to acknowledging and addressing salary
inequities, the participants offered mixed insights. For instance, Participants 1 and 5 perceived
themselves to be paid fairly as Black male leaders. However, Participants 7 and 11 were unsure
if salary inequities existed as they were not aware of others’ compensation. Participant 6 felt that
he was underpaid by industry standards but also stated that his peers in the organization who
entered at the same time as him and held the same leadership level received the same pay range.
Regarding organizations’ lack of commitment to hiring persons of color, Participants 11
and 21 reported that few Black people—and women—were being hired in their organizations,
especially in leadership positions. Participant 21 specified, “For example, if you look at our org
charts, our senior leaders, has anything changed in terms of getting people of color and women
into higher-level positions?” Three other participants further expressed their experiences that,
when minority individuals were hired, their organization may or may not be committing to
diversity and inclusion; they may simply be filling organizational diversity requirements. As
Participant 12 stated, “When it comes to interview slates, it’s still checking the box, and
nobody’s looking at it, how many Black males actually get hired.”
In terms of workplaces’ lack of commitment to diversity and inclusion, 14 participants
reported a lack of effort in holding liable individuals accountable for acts of racism, especially
when discriminatory acts were difficult to prove with hard evidence. The participants shared that
the discrimination they experience in the workplace typically falls into the category of

57
microaggression. Additionally, the participants reported that Black employees tend to avoid
reporting discriminatory acts against them either for fear of retaliation from the liable individual
or a learned expectation that their company would not follow through with addressing racial
discrimination if they did report it. Additionally, these participants also perceived a lack of effort
in hiring and promoting Black individuals. From their experiences, the participants further
expressed feeling doubtful about the genuineness of including Black individuals other than hiring
some for the purposes of meeting diversity requirements. In general, 14 out of the 21 participants
in this study had experiences of low organizational commitment to diversity and inclusion.
Theme 3: Black Leaders’ Experiences of Unconscious Bias
Twelve participants shared their experiences of unconscious bias, which they perceived
to be different from institutional racism. Of the 12 participants, seven stated that unconscious
bias was not systemic, intentional, or overt, while institutional racism involved a structure and an
intent to discriminate against individuals due to their race. Importantly, unconscious bias, though
less painful in that it is absent of intent to discriminate, is toxic and no less professionally
damaging in its consequences of causing microaggressions or limiting chances for promotion.
Thus, six participants shared that, despite their experiences of being discriminated, they were
“fortunate” not to have experienced overt acts of racism.
According to seven participants, unconscious bias in which the discrimination they and
their Black colleagues and subordinates experience is unintentional is typical. Participant 11, for
example, reasoned that “It’s more the unconscious biases we talked about. Because I will be very
candid and say that I don’t believe that there has been a structure like you think about in
institutional racism.” Experiences of unconscious bias included microaggression, as Participant 3
stated, “Everybody has microaggressions, everybody has their own microaggressions. Everybody

58
has their own unconscious biases. Therefore, they always play a role. They play a role in every
interaction every day.” Seven of the 21 participants further perceived that unconscious bias
perhaps cannot be completely eliminated. They reported that they could only let others know
them as individuals in an effort to avoid being perceived in terms of racial stereotypes.
Participant 3 continued:
I think institutional racism is a part of corporate America. Because everybody’s different
biases and experiences have brought them to where they are. It’s just about reading them
to understand their biases and what caused them. And the quicker you can connect with
that biased person and let them know who you really are, the better.
Participant 9 also believed that unconscious bias originates from preconceived notions
about a certain group of people, which then leads to discriminatory behaviors towards the group.
He perceived that the discrimination he has experienced in the workplace was likely the result of
unconscious bias, which he defines as “unintentional systemic processes and procedures” rather
than institutionalized racism, meaning “intentional [processes and procedures] that are
fundamentally designed to disadvantage one group over the next.” He elaborated:
Certainly, I’ve seen instances of unconscious bias. Most frequently, over my career, I’ve
seen it in terms of leadership development or talent development reviews, when the
assumptions that people have about the individuals being evaluated appear not rooted in
fact but rather in assumptions.
Six participants perceived themselves as “fortunate” in that they had not yet experienced
institutional racism. They also perceived that systemic and institutionalized racism is real, overt,
and intentional, though they have only experienced microaggressions due to discrimination from
unconscious bias or no discrimination at all. Participant 5, for instance, shared that where his

59
experiences did not entail intentionally harmful and discriminatory acts against him or occurred
outside of his knowledge and presence, he does not count them as racial discrimination,
explaining, “I’m not blind to biases, racism, and things of that nature, but I think I’ve been
fortunate enough not to have experienced or to knowingly have experienced it.” He elaborated:
And I think that’s the thing about racism. I think a lot of times, it happens in some of our
blind spots where I’m not even in the room where I’m being discriminated against. I’m
not on the phone in the meeting where I’m being discriminated against, but to my face, I
experience it very little, if that makes sense.
Twelve participants reported that their experiences of workplace discrimination was not
entirely systematic and institutionalized, but rather a result of unconscious bias. The participants
differentiated institutional racism from unconscious bias considering that institutional racism is
intentional and overtly systematic, while unconscious bias is unintentional and potentially
sporadic. These participants thought themselves lucky not to have had experiences of
institutional racial discrimination. However, they also shared that unconscious bias against Black
male leaders is difficult to completely eliminate. Two participants suggested unconscious bias
could be mitigated by building relationships with colleagues to increase personal connections.
Findings for Research Question 2
This section contains the themes that answered how Black male leaders have navigated
their career progression despite encountering institutional discrimination. The two themes that
emerged from the interview data to answer RQ2 were: (a) Black male leaders were intentional in
their pursuit of leadership roles, and (b) Black male leaders had a support system in navigating
their careers. The themes with the number of supporting interviews and coding references are
presented in Table 4.

60
Table 4
Research Question 2 Themes
Theme No. of
supporting
interviews
No. of
coding
references
Black leaders were intentional in their pursuit of
leadership roles.
17 57
Black leaders had a support system in navigating their
careers.
17 52
Theme 4: Black Leaders Were Intentional in Their Pursuit of Leadership Roles
In navigating their careers towards corporate leadership, 17 of the 21 Black men
participating in this study reported that they were intentional in their pursuit of leadership roles.
Specifically, 16 participants noted that Black men tended to be intentional in building their
credibility to establish visibility, confidence, and motivation. Five participants shared that they
actively sought opportunities in the corporate setting.
According to the aforementioned five participants, building their credibility in the
corporate setting not only increased their confidence in pursuing higher positions but also made
accessing opportunities for higher positions easier. Eight participants perceived themselves as
developing confidence and motivation in their intent to pursue leadership roles while seven
shared that they were confident in their own skills and credentials, which in turn served to justify
their qualifications for the position as well as their push for a fair compensation package instead
of compromising themselves. Participant 13 shared that Black men should know their worth and
be paid accordingly, which requires that “African Americans know what’s on the table” and
worry less about White executives viewing us “as being difficult” during negotiations. Black
male leaders allowing themselves to be “beaten into not asking for much, beaten into just being

61
happy with the bare minimum, versus demanding what we’re worth,” according to Participant
13, helps to drive pay inequities that lead to income disparities.
Building credibility was described as a part of increasing the visibility of Black males
pursuing career advancement. Six participants, for instance, reported that they boosted their
credentials and focused on doing well at work to increase their credibility. Participant 2 stated
that his STEM degree placed him in a more secure position to compete for a management-level
role in his organization. Alternatively, fifteen participants shared that building credibility could
also be achieved by making themselves known in the professional network. Participant 3 stated,
for example, “I put myself in [as] many situations as possible. I'm out there, and I let people
know who I really am and give them insight into me and let the gravitational work for itself.”
Four participants stated that connections were advantageous in finding sponsors who would
advocate for Black males. Notably, five participants stated that they built their own professional
networks by joining different professional development groups. As Participant 16 described this
process, “It’s been a really intentional piece to have networking components, such as our Black
Excellence Network or other professional development networks, such as Toastmasters.”
Nonetheless, 12 participants shared that they did not engage in political games in the
office and did not choose to vie for attendance at parties or play golf in order to socialize with
White leaders who might advocate for them in the workplace—or not. Instead, as Participant 19
stated, they recognized the importance of politics on the job and how they could be effective
while lacking the level of access to company executives that their White colleagues enjoyed:
I had to understand that it is politics. I had to understand that. I had to understand. So, one
of the things I really had to do better was to sell myself. I do a better job at that. And then
I had to learn how to get access, and then my access wasn't going to be overly informal

62
where we're going golfing and those types of things, but I kept myself in front. Going
around giving briefings, everybody saw me publicly.
In partial agreement, four participants shared that while they chose not to socialize through
parties or activities that were not intended for professional development, they made sure to let
themselves be known and trusted by leaders who could advocate for their promotion. Participant
14 explained, for instance, “I was paired with a mentor in order to facilitate that transition. That
mentoring relationship blossomed, gave me an opportunity to describe the work I was doing, and
created pathways to bigger opportunities.”
According to three participants, actively seeking opportunities entailed making
intentional career plans to provide direction in their search and being vocal in applying for higher
positions. Three participants shared that being a leader in a Fortune 500 company was part of
their goals, and that to achieve their goals, they made intentional plans. Participant 14 reiterated
being “on a very aggressive trajectory” toward reaching his career goals. Participants 1 and 9
similarly shared that they followed the levels of career advancement to reach their leadership
goals. Apart from intentional goals, two participants were also quite vocal towards their
superiors regarding their desire for promotion. Participant 17 stated that he was intentional about
asking for feedback that would give him the advantage he needed to improve even when higher
executives failed to offer the information. He explained that “I told my boss when she started,
like, “Hey, any feedback, let me know. I haven’t really gotten any feedback.” Had he not taken
charge in this way, he may never have improved in order to experience continuous promotions:
And these are VPs, these are executives that need the coaching in order to give feedback,
whether it's performance based or behavioral based, specifically to Black people. I think
that hurts us in [the] end, and I don't know why it is. I think a lot of it is they probably

63
don't want to be seen as racist if they give a performance feedback and the two aren’t
linked. But people feel uncomfortable having those conversations, and I think that
sometimes impacts how far some of us can go.
In addition to asking for the steps required in being promoted like Participant 1,
Participant 4 took the action of being vocal about his compensation package to avoid
being underpaid, stating that he looks “for officers of companies that have similar responsibilities
as me, with similarly sized organizations, and I see how much they are compensated,”
constantly, to ensure that he is being fairly compensated. He further reported that he broadly
researched the salary range of the positions he applied for and negotiated his salary with the
organization based on of the possible data. He also had conversations with his colleagues about
compensation to become aware of whether he was being paid or compensated unfairly because
of his race at their company. Finally, he expressed, “I have friends in my network whose
expertise is compensation and benefits, and I talk to them about my compensation and try to
assess whether I’m being fairly compensated.” Thus, Participant 4 engaged in multiple processes
to prevent institutional racial discrimination from occurring against him in the corporate sector.
In pursuing leadership positions, 17 participants shared that their approaches toward
rising in the corporate ranks were strategic and intentional. Their intentionality focused on
building credibility as vital to making themselves visible to recruiters and executive leaders, as
well as to maintaining self-confidence and motivation. The participants also expressed that they
established career goals and emphasized the building of professional networks for access to
connections and sponsors who could advocate for them. The participants furthermore tended to
vocalize their career intentions to make their goals known to recruiters and leaders. Other actions
included efforts in researching desired role requirements and fair compensation to avoid being

64
overlooked or under-compensated. Overall, these participants’ pursuit of leadership positions
entailed a proactive and intentional approach.
Theme 5: Black Leaders Had a Support System in Navigating Their Careers
Black male leaders in this study navigated their careers with the help of their support
systems, which generally included their spouses, allies or advocates, colleagues, HR personnel,
and leaders of their organization. A combination of these supports create a system that helps the
participants navigate their careers. Seventeen participants contributed to this theme, of which 14
shared that allies are people who advocate for them, while nine expressed that in recent times,
particularly following the George Floyd incident, their colleagues are beginning to have
awareness about potentially racist behaviors. Six participants stated their belief that they have
their organization’s support.
Seven participants stated that allies in the workplace were people they could trust. Their
trust on their allies were built on previous instances of advocating for them, as Participant 16
described: “So I found allies within the organization, and I had some really good managers…
they put me in a position or advocated for me in a position to go into some of those roles that
were at a larger scale.” The participants also stated that allies included people in the workplace
who had ethical practices. Participant 6 shared that he felt at ease raising his concerns to the HR
office at his organization as he believed it to be an ethical channel. The allies of 14 participants
included coaches, mentors, or anyone in the organization who treated them as they treated others
and vouched for them, regardless of whether the ally sought them out or voluntarily advocated
for them.
For instance, apart from advocating for them, nine participants shared that their mentors
supported them by providing feedback about themselves in their pursuit of leadership roles and,

65
in this way, helped them navigate the corporate setting. Participant 15 stated that the words of his
mentors helped him pursue his career goals, with “the most important feedback I’ve received
from my mentors is to just be yourself, be authentic, and stick to what you’re trying to share.” He
continued to express that others will simply “have to appreciate you for what you are” without
consideration of race. Several of the 17 participants who contributed to this theme differentiated
mentors from coaches.
Namely, four participants shared that a coach provides guidance to them as Black male
leaders on dealing with bias and non-diversity in the workplace. Participant 21 shared a powerful
example of bias that he experienced early in his career, which was intercepted by a White
“champion” in the company, and which was impactful throughout the rest of his career:
I would say earlier on in my career, there seemed to be a general bias of my value
proposition in meetings where the majority of the room did not look like me. I was an
anomaly. And it was difficult for me to get my voice heard at the table. And even when I
would bring things up, it appeared that people partially listened or allowed me to speak,
but then didn't interpret that the input [was good] to use for the larger goal. It really took
a champion in the room to get the rest of the table to listen to what it was I was saying
and absorb it. And that champion happened to look like the rest of the room, right? So,
without that champion, it would've been more difficult for me to get my voice heard by
the room. But once they started listening, they actually did start valuing my opinion.
Participant 12 similarly shared that coaches, even non-diverse ones, make an effort to
understand and maximize employees’ talents to help them grow career-wise:
I think it’s about coaching. I think having these conversations and checking with people
makes sense. I think certain people have the right networks and make sure they’re

66
navigating talent to leaders who they think will take care of them. For me, that’s the most
important thing. I want to know within any organization I’m part of who the leaders are.
If they’re non-diverse leaders who are allies, they may not fully get it, but they have an
awareness and are seeking to understand and make changes. They have a level of
consciousness that ensures that they’re putting diverse talent into their organizations and
that this talent has the best opportunity to succeed.
Nine participants shared that their colleagues were beginning to increase their awareness
of acceptable and discriminatory behavior. Eight of these participants mentioned that this change
in their colleagues’ support occurred specifically after George Floyd’s death. Participant 14
expressed that the death of George Floyd resulted in increased consciousness and empathy
towards Black people, stating, “I think when you look at it through the lens of the post-George
Floyd event…you have both an increase in consciousness and an increase in empathy in people
within the workforce.” Participant 15 described the news about George Floyd as “a pivotal
moment” as racism gained attention as if racism was a new phenomenon. He also stated that his
White colleagues gained awareness about the prevalence of racism and engaged in “reverse
mentorship” in which White colleagues sought information from their Black colleagues on how
to mitigate racism in the workplace. Participant 21 had similar experiences of increased inclusion
and diversity efforts within his organization in connection to George Floyd’s tragic death,
stating, “it spiked attention and focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion; felt like a response to
the incident and the company really did something.”
Six participants shared that the support they received was initiated by the leaders of the
organization. Through the leaders’ initiatives, policies were implemented to increase diversity
and address inequities in compensation. Participants 3 and 10, for instance, shared that their

67
organizations began undoing the existing inequities towards people of color in terms of salary.
Participant 10 shared, “I definitely would give credit to this company for taking the action. I
think we did that a few years ago, about 2020 or something like that,” adding that the
organization’s leaders also held discussions around diversity, inclusion, and inequities to raise
awareness. Participant 6 reported that their leaders showed support through developing and
implementing ethical regulations.
All of the 17 participants who presented this theme reported navigating their careers with
the support of mentors, coaches, leaders, and/or other allies in the workplace. A combination of
the supportive individuals create a system in which the participants stated that they are able to
rely on, particularly in being champions of their ideas and initiatives. The participants also
perceived that allies were individuals who had ethical practices. Based on the participants’
statements, mentors were allies that provided valuable feedback and guidance, while coaches
were allies who provided assistance in navigating issues in the workplace. The participants also
noted that their allies noticeably increased following the news about George Floyd’s death. Their
White colleagues reportedly initiated learning about the struggles of the participants as Black
men in the workplace. The participants also shared that the organization’s leaders modified the
policies to emphasize inclusion and diversity.
Findings for Research Question 3
This section contains the themes that emerged from answers to research question three,
which inquired about how Black male leaders perceive the impact of institutional discrimination
on their leadership in Fortune 500 companies. The two themes that were developed from the
interview data to answer RQ3 included the following: (a) Black male leaders practiced codeswitching, and (b) Black male leaders pursued becoming advocates for other persons of color.

68
Study themes with the corresponding number of supporting interviews and coding references are
presented in Table 5.
Table 5
RQ3 Themes
Theme No. of
supporting
interviews
No. of
coding
references
Black leaders practice code-switching. 17 67
Black leaders pursue becoming advocates for other
persons of color.
16 40
Theme 6: Black Leaders Practiced Code-Switching
Seventeen of the 21 total participants in this study further reported that they practice
code-switching to avoid being discriminated. These participants described code-switching as
their practice of adjusting themselves according to the environment to avoid being stereotyped.
Sixteen of them reported that they experienced having to adjust their language, demeanor, and
appearance to perform their leadership roles in Fortune 500 companies. Twelve participants
explained that they knew their boundaries as Black men and that code-switching allowed them to
blend into the workplace. On the contrary, one participant emphasized being true to himself
regardless of the White setting.
Fifteen participants stated that as Black men, they commonly experience being
stereotyped. Thus, to avoid being discriminated against based on racial stereotypes, present
themselves in a way that they perceived would be deemed appropriate in the corporate
environment. Participant 8 stated, for instance, “You don't want to let out too much of yourself
'cause it might not be looked upon well. It could be damaging to your career… people tend to
sometimes judge you based on words you say or things you do.” Five participants shared that

69
code-switching was a practice they had learned in their childhood due to personal experiences or
others’ stories of discrimination. From Participant 6, “I think this goes back to growing up as an
African American, you were told and taught to code-switch… you have to dress a certain way,
you have to look a certain way.”
Three participants reported that code-switching was necessary in their pursuit of
leadership because as leaders, they were expected to make other people feel comfortable, and
adjusting themselves toward Whiteness was a way to make others feel comfortable with them.
Participant 1 shared, “I transform into being what I believe they want to see to be comfortable
around me. I feel like, that it’s part of my job to make them feel comfortable,” whereas
Participants 15 and 21 perceived that they needed to code-switch to increase their confidence in
the workplace and avoid imposter syndrome, suggesting internalized institutional racism. Based
on the participants’ experiences, their understanding of imposter syndrome was their feeling of
anxiety about being in their position despite being fully qualified and capable.
By code-switching, the participants may have compromised their authentic selves to fit
into others’ expectations of them in their roles. Participant 15 explained imposter syndrome,
stating, “Often, we put ourselves in the position of masking a certain part of ourselves in such a
way that we truly feel it’s authentic, but unfortunately, we think it might be looked at
differently.” Participant 13 believed that code-switching for some Black leaders was a necessary
way to take care of themselves in the workplace when no one else would. However, as
Participant 13 explained, their authentic selves may be compromised in the process. He further
explained:
Because there’s some kind of threshold that people have to cross to make it to the
executive level, it’s like they switched in some way, and now everyone needs to stay at

70
arm’s length because they’re only looking after themselves… But most of my experience
observing Black executives is that they almost assimilate towards more Whiteness, and
they forget where they came from.
Three participants shared that they practiced code-switching, particularly in terms of
being conscious of their language and demeanor to avoid the “angry Black person” stereotype or
the stereotype that Black people have the tendency to be aggressive. As Participant 11 explained:
I am more sensitive about others’ perceptions because, as a Black man, I feel I have to
manage my anger a lot more. Because one day, if I were to get super-pissed and show it,
then suddenly, I’m the angry Black man.
Twelve participants perceived that code-switching was a form of setting their boundaries in the
workplace similar to Participant 13. They explained that in their professional settings, they knew
when they should stand up for themselves and when they could choose to compromise based on
the attitudes and actions around them. According to these participants, code-switching ultimately
meant that they were placing their focus on achieving their career goals rather than fighting
unnecessary battles. For instance, Participant 15 commented the following:
You have to be able to understand the playing field and your environment. And you have
to completely understand your audience. I think that one of the most important things is
understanding your audience and that how you react, how you behave, the words you use,
and the things you say impact that audience.
However, in experiences in which the participants felt they were being treated unfairly,
especially when compared to their White counterparts, six participants shared that they were not
keen on compromising themselves and expressed their willingness to leave the organization if
necessary. Participant 2, who was implicated by a manager in a fight involving two of his Black

71
subordinates, believed that he experienced racial discrimination and would not tolerate being
treated unfairly; thus, he chose to leave the organization. To this question, he shared, “The
manager [merely] mentioned that there was an investigation, and I was really disappointed. So,
after giving it some careful thought, I gave him two weeks’ notice, and I left.” Only Participant 5
expressed being true to himself on the subject of code-switching, stating, “I’m true to myself, so
I don’t really compromise in that way. So, no, I don’t feel the need to be different in that way
when it comes to my peers.”
The 17 participants supplying this theme generally reported the necessity of practicing
code-switching in their pursuit of leadership roles. All but one of these participants reported that
code-switching was vital to avoid being stereotyped and discriminated against because of how
they talk, look, or act. According to all of the participants, code-switching involved adjusting
their language, demeanor, and appearance to fit into a professional setting. Sixteen out of 17
participants stated that they needed to present themselves in a way they perceived as appropriate
to avoid discrimination and potential career damage.
Theme 7: Black Leaders Pursued Becoming Advocates for Other Persons of Color
Sixteen of the total 21 participants in this study shared that their experiences of pursuing
corporate leadership roles, and particularly the lack of sponsors who voluntarily advocated for
them, led to their decision to advocate for other persons of color. Most of the participants
mentioned that they had no mentors or had to actively seek them out, which prolonged the
process of their career advancement. Eleven participants thus perceived having an obligation to
serve and represent for other Black men who wish to pursue corporate leadership positions. Eight
participants shared that they are advocates of inclusion and diversity in the workplace.

72
Eleven participants also perceived that they experienced a lack of sponsors mainly due to
the underrepresentation of Black people in leadership positions. Consequently, as the participants
filled leadership roles, they saw themselves as the representation they had previously sought.
Participant 8 stated, for example, “I became an executive later in my career… So I think it shows
that it can be done” and other Black men should know this. Four participants, including
Participant 3, thought of themselves as role models for Black people generally, not just men:
I think I’m a model for people behind me, not in front of me, so they can feel that they
too can be bold in challenging situations when they see a leader who looks like them and
acts like them and isn’t silenced. I have to balance that responsibility to be a model for
others looking up to me for inspiration.
Participant 20 expressed his excitement when he sees Black males in senior level positions above
his role and understanding that Black men under him may feel the same way when they see him.
However, as he looks up to higher level Black male leaders and feels more confident in his
potential to reach the same success, he also considers deeper questions based on personal
knowledge and experiences of institutional racial discrimination. For example, “I’m like, alright,
what are the barriers they overcame to get there? What’s their journey look like?” He shared that
he actively attempts to understand Black men’s journeys to the top in order to succeed and
mentor other people of color to reach their goals despite race-based odds working against them.
For five participants, being a Black leader meant that they were now able to help other
Black people break through into leadership roles. The participants generally perceived that they
could first set a good example so that the organization would be more accepting of Black people
occupying leadership positions. Participant 18 used the analogy of there being “this flag behind
me” to describe the sense of representing the level of excellence imparted to him by his family as

73
well as the long line of African Americans who paved the way in Fortune 500 corporate spaces
before him. For instance, he shared, “And I can [give] a long list of non-African American
advisors and sponsors, but I really am grounded on my family, my roots, my organization and
my people.” For Participant 18, this perspective of being loyal to one’s family and group meant
understanding that “even though it may not be right, people are human and they’re going to do
things regardless,” and thus, focusing on opening more doors for other minorities and less on the
unfairness of institutional racial discrimination is more productive.
Eight participants reported that they became advocates of inclusion and diversity through
their positions as organizational leaders, with six participants sharing that they chose to become
mentors not just for Black males but also for other racial and gender minorities. Participant 4,
like Participant 3, for example, spoke of being a mentor and an ally to other racial and gender
minorities, stating, “I have White mentees, lots of them, Black mentees, women mentees, people
of color… They see me as an ally… who can relate to their experiences and offers something
unique in terms of advice relative to those experiences.” According to these participants,
mentoring means teaching mentees how to navigate the journey towards corporate leadership and
avoid the struggles that they have experienced in their pursuit of career advancement. Participant
13 noted, “I gave [my mentee] visibility into some of the conflicts that I was having so that he
learned... vicariously through me versus having to go through those experiences himself.”
Apart from being mentors, three participants also reported that they volunteered for
various councils and committees related to hiring and promotion to advocate for Black males.
These entities were formal channels for sponsorship programs for Black people aspiring to be
corporate leaders. Participant 8 specified that, “I’m part of the Black Executive Council at
[organization name redacted]…We do a lot of mentoring and sponsorship… provide that

74
pipeline for the next generation,” while Participant 1 volunteered to be part of the corporate
recruitment team to promote the inclusion of Black men in the candidate pool. Participant 1
stated, “I did my best to become part of the corporate recruiting team because that's where you
really can make a difference on hiring people that kind of look like you and I did.” Participant 3
was an ERC leader in the organization and promoted diversity in hiring, similar to Participant 1.
However, in the pursuit of becoming advocates for other minorities, five participants
shared that they felt pressure to succeed. They perceived that, because they felt themselves as
needing to represent their race, they had to do extremely well to open opportunities for the next
generation of minorities. Participant 21 explained, “I know that there’s a group of people who
look like me who are relying on me to help pave the way for them to do bigger things.”
Overall, 16 participants shared that their experiences in pursuing leadership positions
contributed to their advocacy of supporting minorities, not just Black men, in their career
navigation. The participants shared that their experiences of lacking mentors and sponsors
motivated them to extend their mentorship to others. They further stated that the lack of
representation of Black men as corporate leaders led to their beliefs that they, as Black male
leaders, were the representation they sought as young Black men. The participants noted that
they were both role models for young Black men and advocates for minorities in the workplace
especially responsible for actively promoting inclusion and diversity particularly in hiring to
open up opportunities for the next generation of capable minority leaders.
Summary
This chapter presented the findings of institutional racial discrimination among Black
male leaders and how they navigate around it and perceive its impact in the corporate sector in
this qualitative study. Analysis of the data revealed that Black male leaders’ experiences of

75
institutional discrimination and its influence on their leadership while working in Fortune 500
companies involved inequities in standards when compared to their White counterparts; a lack of
organizational commitment to diversity and inclusion; experiences of unconscious bias, which is
distinguished from racial discrimination imbibed from institutional racism; Black male leaders’
intentional efforts in pursuing career advancement; supports sought and received in navigating
their careers; the practice of code-switching; and the pursuit of becoming advocates for other
Black men and minority individuals. The findings of this study will be discussed and interpreted
in the next chapter, along with their implications, limitations, recommendations, and conclusions.

76
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations
This chapter includes a discussion of the findings, limitations and delimitations,
recommendations for practice and for future research, implications for equity, and conclusion.
Although Black men have increased access to corporate leadership positions in the 21st century,
they often face racially biased organizational structures (Kelley, 2019; Wallington, 2021). This
qualitative phenomenological study aimed to explore the lived experiences of institutional racial
discrimination among Black male leaders of Fortune 500 companies. Focusing on how
institutional discrimination influenced their leadership and career progression, this study sheds
light on the lived realities of Black male leaders and how they navigate their experiences in
White-dominated workspaces. The following research questions guided this study:
1. What are the lived experiences of Black male leaders who encounter institutional
discrimination within Fortune 500 companies?
2. How have Black male leaders navigated their career progression despite encountering
institutional discrimination?
3. How do Black male leaders perceive the impact of institutional discrimination on
their leadership in Fortune 500 companies?
The findings confirmed that the participants do, in fact, experience institutional racial
discrimination in terms of being held to different standards than their White counterparts and
having to confront organizational cultures of apathy and lack of commitment to diversity. In
terms of unconscious bias, the responses were varied, and discussions centered around microaggressive experiences. A minority of the participants perceived that institutional discrimination
was not felt acutely in their organizations.

77
The analysis of the participants’ responses revealed that Black male leaders’ experiences
of institutional discrimination and its influence on their leadership in Fortune 500 companies can
be generally grouped around the following themes: (a) inequities in standards when compared to
White counterparts; (b) organizational lack of commitment to diversity and inclusion; (c) the
experience of unconscious bias, which was differentiated from institutional racism; (d) the
intentional efforts in pursuing career advancement; (e) the support sought and received in
navigating careers; (f) the practice of code-switching; and (g) the pursuit of being advocates for
other Black men and minority individuals as they became leaders. In the following sections, each
of these themes are discussed in relation to the research question to which they refer.
Black Male Leaders Experience Inequities in Workplace Privileges
Eighteen of the total 21 participants reported that they had experienced inequities in the
workplace in response to the first research question, such as differences in the standards and
resources available to them as compared to their White counterparts. According to Sisco (2020),
although many Black people overcome considerable challenges and unfavorable work conditions
to succeed, many U.S. corporations still function as racialized social systems that contribute to
workplace inequity and prevent many Black workers from reaching their full potential. Other
researchers have noted that despite the increase in social protest movements, such as Black Lives
Matter and heightened awareness of racism, systemic racism persists at all levels of the working
world (Roscigno, 2019). This racism manifests in U.S. corporations as institutionalized White
dominance and race-based cultural exclusion, with minorities being four to six times more likely
to experience discrimination or harassment than their White counterparts (Kyere & Fukui, 2022).
Eighty-one percent of the total participants in this study (i.e., 17) felt that they were held
to higher standards than their White colleagues; 15 described being subjected to racial bias when

78
the standard of their work was measured. This aligns with previous research findings by Goh et
al. (2015) indicating that the effects of institutional discrimination experienced by Black men
include perceptions that they are not respected and an accompanying increase in racism-related
job stress. Participants also expressed feeling considerable pressure to advance their education,
as they perceived bias in terms of the education levels and credentials demanded of them and felt
the need to continually prove themselves. Bachus (2004) found that Black men who became
CEOs in Fortune 500 corporations all graduated top of their class from prestigious institutions of
higher education, which would account for the importance the participants placed on educational
attainment. However, for African Americans, for whom high levels of education and income are
often associated with working in predominantly White organizations, their higher socioeconomic
status is often correlated with higher levels of perceived discrimination (Assari & Lankarani,
2018). This may be partly due to the increased exposure to Whites in the workplace.
When applying for jobs or promotions, the participants reported difficulties making an
impact and perceived that the White leadership had low expectations of them and did not expect
them to pursue leadership roles. This correlates with the findings of Randel et al. (2020), who
reported that U.S. corporations tend to exclude African Americans from key organizational
positions and hinder their sense of feeling valued at work. In addition, the participants observed
inequities in their access to resources for career advancement and reported that they lacked the
support given to their White colleagues. Oliver et al. (2020) identified several historical obstacles
to the successful mentoring of Black men in the healthcare industry, including a reluctance to
discuss race and high levels of cultural mistrust toward Black men. In their view, one critical way
to improve the career advancement prospects of Black men is for others to empathize with their
situation. In other words, the success of Black men in the workplace is linked to the ability of

79
others to develop sensitivity to their feelings, thoughts, and experiences. This could be fostered
through mentorship; however, the participants in this study noted that their organizations did not
provide access to mentors nor allot budgets to Black leaders in the same way as to their White
counterparts. The participants felt that they mostly had to utilize their own networks for
mentorship, whereas their White colleagues had someone readily available in the workplace.
One participant also described perceiving inequities in the induction of new staff
members, which influenced how quickly Black leaders could progress in the company. New
employees who were White were more easily included in the corporate culture and introduced to
possible mentors. Previous studies on racism in the workplace, which focused on all workers and
not just corporate leaders, found that racial discrimination affects Black workers’ ability to
achieve career mobility (Nelson et al., 2019; Smulowitz et al., 2019). Other studies found that
Black workers faced obstacles to career advancement due to racial discrimination and were thus
underrepresented in leadership at predominantly White institutions (Grant, 2018; HuddlestonPettiway, 2022; Shum et al., 2020). They were also less likely to be promoted and vulnerable to
institutional racism in many forms, including microaggressions in the workplace, challenges in
career advancement, and lack of mentorship (Newman et al., 2019; Webb et al., 2022).
Seven participants noted that since they lacked connections or professional networks,
they experienced difficulties being visible and included in social events and extracurricular
activities. One participant described how social networks benefit their White colleagues, who can
use them to forge connections and raise their visibility. Bachus (2004) pointed out that much of
the mentoring that is done in business occurs away from the office, for example, on golf courses
and in private clubs. Therefore, difficulties in accessing these resources challenge Black leaders
to find other ways to get ahead. Black executives attempting to climb the corporate ladder at

80
Fortune 100 companies have encountered significant racial discrimination at the executive level
and have had to fight to counter it (Bachus, 2004). They must call upon all possible resources,
including their talents, education, dedication, and mentoring relationships, to reach the top.
Organizations Not Fully Committed to Diversity and Inclusion
African Americans often view institutional racial discrimination as more damaging than
individual bias and organizations, therefore have a crucial role to play in dismantling it
(Wingfield & Chavez, 2020). Thus, also in response to research question one, it was unsurprising
that 14 participants in this study noted that while initiatives for diversity and inclusion were in
place in their organizations, there was a lack of commitment in holding others accountable for
racial discrimination and hiring Black persons in leadership positions. Studies have shown that
many corporations do not provide adequate opportunities for Black men to attain leadership
positions and that there is a notable lack of gender and racial diversity among CEOs and other Clevel executives in top corporations (Larcker & Tayan, 2020; Roberts & Mayo, 2019). Several
participants observed their organization’s lack of dedication to increasing the number of Black
men hired and promoted, despite their qualifications.
The participants had mixed feelings in terms of their organizations’ commitment to
acknowledging and addressing inequities in salary. Specifically, 14 felt they were paid fairly or
had no basis for comparison, as they were not aware of others’ salaries. Thus, the participants did
not seem to experience significant discrimination in terms of pay, despite several past studies
indicating wage disparities between White and non-White workers based on race (Bell et al.,
2018; Leutwiler & Kleiner, 2003; Roberts & Mayo, 2019; Tarasonis & Decreuse, 2020).
However, as they pointed out, their White counterparts did not usually discuss their salaries with
them. This could indicate that the relative exclusion of Black executives from the social

81
discourse in the organization has contributed to their perception that pay disparities do not exist
or are minimal.
These participants reported that fewer Black people were hired in their organizations,
specifically in leadership positions. This is borne out by previous studies focusing on the impact
of institutional discrimination on hiring, pay, and career mobility (Bell et al., 2018; Quillian et
al., 2020; Tarasonis & Decreuse, 2020). The participants also felt that their organizations do not
hire minority individuals from a true commitment to diversity and inclusion but merely to fulfill
diversity requirements. The question arose of whether Black individuals are hired because they
are the most qualified or because they are diverse candidates. Institutions might want to be seen
as increasing diversity by hiring Black executives, but at the same time impede their
advancement within the organization in other ways (Sparkman, 2021). As posited by critical race
theory (CRT), White people have been the main beneficiaries of civil rights efforts toward
integration and equality (Bell, 1987; Ladson-Billings, 1998). Larcker and Tayan (2020) found
that, even though many corporations employ various strategies to promote diversity at the
executive level, few enterprise-level corporations have racially diverse C-level executives and
most racially diverse executives serve in positions with lower potential for advancement.
Black Male Leaders’ Experiences of Unconscious Bias
In final response to the major research question, 12 participants relayed their experiences
of non-overt and non-institutionalized racial discrimination, which they saw as different from
institutional racism. They noted that unconscious bias was not systemic, intentional, and overt,
whereas institutional racism was part of a structured attempt to discriminate against individuals
because of their race. They also noted that microaggressions were ever-present and that
unconscious bias played a subtle role in day-to-day working interactions. Discrimination and

82
bias can manifest in various ways, such as in work emails and other social exchanges (Daniels &
Thornton, 2019). This aligns with the research of Pitcan et al. (2018), who found that
professional Black men working in predominantly White organizations experienced brief, yet
constant, incidents of microaggression at work, which they found frustrating, even more so than
overt racism. They observed that these subtle, racially discriminatory microaggressions led to
different rules for Blacks and Whites and assumptions that Black people are inherently inferior.
The constant challenge of confronting discrimination in its various forms can be detrimental to
Black leaders’ career advancement, as well as in other areas. Onyeador et al. (2021) found that
members from underrepresented populations often experience feelings of exhaustion and
isolation when working in organizations where they experience racism, which can affect their job
performance and job satisfaction.
Seven participants perceived that unconscious bias may never be eliminated, stating that
the only way forward was for others to get to know them as individuals rather than racial
stereotypes. Participant 3, for instance, noted that the key was to understand that everyone has
personal biases and experiences that shape them, and that it is important to connect with others in
the corporate workplace to let them know where you are coming from and dispel preconceived
notions. This participant also believed that institutional racism is always going to be part of
corporate America and it is impossible to understand the many roots of all the biases helping to
perpetuate systemic racism that people may hold. Small (2020) indeed found that many of the
challenges Black male leaders face stem from a history of White privilege, which is expressed in
the workplace through racially discriminatory microaggression.
It is difficult to give an exact definition of unconscious bias and to always identify it
when it happens, and thus also difficult to address it directly. In cases involving microaggression,

83
the participants reported that the victim usually avoided confrontation for fear of retaliation from
the offending person. Also, the organization may be more lenient, with an attitude of “let them
slide… we don’t report them as much” (Participant 8). This participant also wondered if
microaggressions should be formally reported or whether there should be a conversation with the
aggressor instead. This is an important consideration given that institutional discrimination
affects the leadership and career trajectories of Black male executives in Fortune 500 companies
in fundamental ways. When examining the racial discrepancy in leadership roles, research has
revealed that there are challenges all along the career paths of these individuals. First, the hiring
practices at many firms are designed to systematically disadvantage Black applicants (Kline et
al., 2021). When Black applicants enter the workplace, they may experience low levels of
compensation, an increased likelihood of firing, and microaggressions (DeSilver, 2013; Pitcan et
al., 2018). This results in fewer Black men potentially ascending to leadership positions.
Pitcan et al. (2018) grouped the racial microaggressions experienced by Black men
working in predominantly White organizations around four themes: 1) context, or dealing with
different views and different worlds, 2) experiences related to feelings of inferiority or cognitive
and affective reactions, 3) costs in terms of career or physical and mental well-being, and 4)
coping mechanisms, both internal and external. These themes are closely related to the key
findings of this study, which pertain to the strategies that the participants have developed to deal
with the corporate culture of predominantly White organizations in both workplace and social
settings. In these contexts, they constantly deal with feelings of exclusion, of being
misunderstood and undervalued. Therefore, they develop coping mechanisms to ensure that their
support systems are functioning optimally and that there is sufficient institutional support,
advocacy, and mentorship in their career progression. The consensus among the participants was

84
that racial microaggression resulted in negative psychological and professional outcomes, as
articulated by Pitcan et al. (2018). These key findings have been incorporated into the
recommendations in the next section.
Few participants reported experiencing institutional discrimination, but they dealt with
unconscious bias, especially in terms of leadership development and talent development reviews,
in which assumptions were often based not on fact, but on racial stereotypes. Participant 9
indicated that the discrimination he experienced in the workplace was most likely due to
unconscious bias and not institutional racism. Several participants saw themselves as “fortunate”
that they had not experienced institutional racism, which they described as overt and intentional.
They instead reported having experienced microaggression, discrimination from unconscious
bias, or no discrimination at all. However, when institutional discrimination is ingrained in the
structures of an institution, it often goes undetected (Bohren et al., 2022). This may very well be
the mechanism at work here in why participants did not report specific instances of institutional
discrimination or racism in their organizations.
None of the studies reviewed to foreground this study focused strictly on the institutional
racial discrimination experiences of Black male leaders only. Furthermore, few studies exploring
institutional racial discrimination have targeted Fortune 500 companies, and none have focused
their investigations on Black male leaders in top corporate organizations. Given the novelty of
this particular research study concerned with Black male leaders’ experiences of institutional
racial discrimination in Fortune 500 companies and how these men successfully navigate around
or through racism to propel themselves forward in their careers, there are unique findings to
consider. Participants’ reports of disingenuous diversity and inclusion commitments, as well as
the functions of code-switching as an effective defense mechanism are two such novel findings.

85
Onyeador et al. (2021) made several suggestions to organizations desiring to increase
diversity, including preparing for defensive responses from members of dominant groups in an
effort to bypass interpersonal bias. However, the researchers did not consider the defense
mechanisms of Black employees, such as ignoring racism or codeswitching, which serve to
undermine focus on dominant group member behavior. For example, while White VPs might
argue against the need for diversity and inclusion hiring and workplace policies, such as priority
promotions or mentorship activities specific to particular groups, Black male leader behavior of
ignoring such arguments may actually preempt change in the workplace. It is critical to consider
the defensive responses of marginalized group members because preempting change by ignoring
or portending to be unaffected by racial discrimination causes expiration of mental and
emotional energy in the long term. Research shows that such cycles ultimately lead to avoidance
of White-dominated spaces rather than diversification of them (Bento & Brown, 2021).
Black Male Leaders Aggressively Pursue Corporate Leadership Roles
In response to research question number two, which was how have Black male leaders
navigated their career progression despite encountering institutional discrimination, the necessity
to make conscious efforts to take charge of one’s public regard and reputation was revealed.
More specifically, it emerged from the findings that Black male leaders had to be overly focused
on pursuing career advancement as they did not have ready support systems or equal access to
senior executives within their organizations on both formal and informal levels to the same
degree as their White counterparts. The participants reported experiences of planned career
navigation and intentionality in pursuing corporate leadership roles. They shared that becoming a
leader in a Fortune 500 company was a major goal they pursued aggressively. This intense focus
seems essential in the face of racial discrimination that persists in U.S. workplaces, which

86
impacts the upward mobility and job satisfaction of Black workers (Whitaker, 2019). Rosette et
al. (2018) showed that subtle discrimination at critical junctures in African Americans’ careers,
such as stereotyping and social categorization, can negatively affect their career progression. The
onus of responsibility to ensure their advancement therefore falls on individual Black leaders.
The participants also reported that they voiced their goals and intentions regarding promotion to
their superiors. This included fair compensation, as they perceived their White colleagues had
regular conversations about compensation among themselves, but not with them.
The participants mentioned that their confidence and motivation had increased in the
process of pursuing leadership roles, which helped them justify their qualifications for these
positions and receive a fair compensation package. They noted that African Americans did not
want to be perceived as difficult and often lacked knowledge of what was possible in negotiation,
thereby compromising themselves. This predicament stems from inequitable systems in general,
such that Black employees are socially coerced into not asking for too much and feeling happy to
receive what they get instead of demanding what they are worth. In a similar vein, a study of
Black nurses found that institutional racism affected their motivation to seek leadership or
faculty positions. The nurses were demoralized by the multifaceted system of leadership in their
industry that institutionalized and supported the White/Black hierarchy and White supremacy at
all levels (Iheduru-Anderson, 2021).
The participants felt that building their confidence and credibility in the corporate setting
made it easier for them to pursue higher positions. They shared that they needed to expand their
credentials to increase their credibility in the workplace and enable them to compete for higher
positions with confidence. Twelve participants commented on how they built relationships to
find sponsors who would advocate for Black males. They shared that since they were not part of

87
social networks or opportunities to socialize outside of work, they lacked opportunities to
cultivate relationships with White leaders who might advocate for them in the workplace. Five
participants noted that they joined different groups to build their own professional development
networks. Four other participants pointed out that although they did not socialize outside the
workplace, they worked at gaining trust and communicating with leaders who could advocate for
their promotions.
Black Male Leaders Utilized an External Support System to Help Navigate Their Careers
Also notable in reflection of research question number two was that support and
mentorship for Black male leaders employed in Fortune 500 companies often had to be sought
outside the workplace. Black male leaders navigated their careers with the help of external
support systems, which generally included their spouses, allies or advocates, colleagues, Human
Resources personnel, and leaders of the organization. Fourteen participants noted that allies
could be coaches, mentors, or anyone in the organization who treated them equally and vouched
for them. Several participants shared that they found allies and mentors who, although White,
understood diversity and did not have unconscious bias. These mentors supported them by
providing feedback in their pursuit of leadership roles and helping them navigate the corporate
setting. This is particularly important, since one of the drivers of institutional discrimination, as
described by Braveman et al. (2022), is the lack of mentors of color in the corporate space.
Bachus (2004) also noted that the shortage of Black male executives could be addressed through
mentoring and providing guidance to young Black men attempting to climb the corporate ladder.
Mentoring has been identified as beneficial in countering the effects of racism and institutional
discrimination and in increasing diversity in many industries (Newman et al., 2019; Oliver et al.,
2020; Randel et al., 2020; Webb et al., 2022).

88
The participants also noted that coaches could provide guidance in dealing with biased
and non-diverse people in the workplace. They expressed that, after the death of George Floyd,
who was an unarmed Black man murdered at the hands of White police officers in Minneapolis
in 2020, there seemed to be an increased awareness of prosocial versus discriminatory behavior
related to racial diversity in the workplace. Eight participants shared that there was a change in
the support they received from colleagues after the death of George Floyd. This aligns with Ray
(2019), who studied the racialization of organizations and reported that changes in their racial
makeup can be affected by external factors. Six participants mentioned that the initiatives of
organizations and leaders led them to receive support in their companies, through policies
implemented to increase diversity and address inequities in compensation. This concurs with the
findings of Larcker and Tayan (2020), who identified the range of tactics employed by
corporations today to promote diversity at the executive level.
The fact that the vast majority of the Black male leaders in this study found success in
their roles in the Fortune 500 space only by (a) exerting concerted effort to be seen and heard for
the contributions they made to their company, and (b) building a mentoring and coaching support
system outside of the majority-White corporation is evidence of disingenuity concerning
commitment to diversity and inclusion standards. There were only three Black Fortune 500
CEOs as recently as 2019, nearly 100% of the senior executives were White men (Roberts &
Mayo, 2019), and Fortune 100s are just as monocultural, with 100% White senior across 26
companies (Larcker & Tayan, 2020). Further, as discovered by, Sparkman (2021), Black men are
often hired as lower-level leaders in Fortune 500s, but then impeded when it comes to promotion.
Williams et al. (2023) provided the following explanation for this trend when they stated that
“Although overt and legalized forms of racism have declined over recent decades, racism

89
remains embedded in our structures as well as in the psyches of many throughout the Western
world” and particularly among the racial majority (p. 2).
Thus, diversity and inclusion remains an uphill battle in largely White-dominated
corporations for the same reason that many of the Black male leaders in this study opted to avoid
the threat of unrequited justice were they to address experiences of racial discrimination at work.
The battle is a structuralized mental issue that must be corrected at the root of institutions and
those who run them rather than a simple conflict easily transfixed into a training moment
following major tragic events, mentor assignment, or chief diversity officer agenda item
addressed by paid guest speakers or policy statements:
Unfortunately, bias and racism have been deeply ingrained in the unconscious of nearly
all people in Western society, regardless of race, and have greatly influenced cultural
norms; these issues must be addressed (Roberts & Rizzo, 2020; Salter et al., 2018). Many
White people have been socialized not to notice the ubiquitous presence of structural
injustice; therefore, even before the injustice can be addressed, they must be taught to
perceive it. (Williams et al., 2023, p. 2)
While it is important to draw meaning from nationally televised tragedies like George
Floyd’s murder, which several of the participants in this study discussed as being meaningful to
their company leadership, to usher in initiatives for change, it is equally important to do the
necessary work to ensure that the moments become movements that resituate cultural norms and
relocate structures from places of injustice and exclusion to justice and inclusion. Doing the real
work of diversity and inclusion requires civil courage, which “entails risks” based in reason for
the larger good of an organization or group (see Williams et al., 2023, p. 2). If the CEOs and
other senior executives of Fortune 500s lack civil courage or willingness to take risks in support

90
of advancing diversity and inclusion as a cause and a calling, then diversity and inclusion
strategies will only exist on the surface organizational structures rather than inside them and
continue to have limited and short-term success.
Black Male Leaders Practice Code-Switching
A complex theme that surfaced in answer to the third research question of how Black
male leaders perceive the impact of institutional discrimination on their leadership in Fortune
500 companies was that of codeswitching. Black male leaders perceived the need to practice
code-switching in order to be accepted as part of the organizational culture. Namely, most of the
participants reported that they experienced having to adjust their language, demeanor, and
appearance to achieve their leadership roles in Fortune 500 companies, with only Participant 5
reporting that he stayed true to himself. The participants described feeling a need to conform to
the culture of their organizations to advance their careers.
Nearly 100% of the participants in this study noted that they had learned from childhood
to code-switch due to the discrimination they experienced, and they now practiced it to meet the
expectations of appropriate behavior in the corporate environment. They also expressed that, as
leaders, they should strive to make others feel comfortable and act in a way that was expected of
a leader, regardless of their race. This sometimes led to assuming a different persona at work
than at home, a corporate identity that they perceived would be acceptable to their colleagues.
This aligns with the notion that White Americans still feel that the rise of Black leaders is a
threat to White dominance in the United States. Therefore, in order to appease this threat, they
require an image of a Black leader that is comfortable for them (Yadon & Piston, 2018).
Code-switching was also perceived to be necessary to avoid imposter syndrome and to
feel more confident in the workplace. Some participants questioned how authentic they were at

91
work and whether they had compromised their authentic selves to fit others’ expectations. They
feared that if they revealed their true selves, they would be misunderstood and looked at
differently. There was also the view that code-switching for some Black leaders was a way to
take care of themselves in the workplace when no one else would. Participant 13 noted that very
few top Black executives were advocates for other Black people, helping them negotiate the
challenges of the workplace. Instead, they seemed to switch their personas, “almost assimilating
toward Whiteness and forgetting where they came from.”
Furthermore, code-switching was reportedly practiced by three participants specifically to
avoid the stereotype of the “angry Black person.” For this reason, the participants were wary of
letting their anger show in the workplace or of reacting negatively to frustrations or challenges.
This perception is supported by Oliver et al.’s (2020) finding of high levels of historical mistrust
of Black men in the healthcare industry. The constant negative perceptions and racial stereotypes
that Black people encounter lead to a state of utter exhaustion called “racial battle fatigue”
(Quaye et al., 2019).
Finally, the participants mentioned that code-switching helps them to set boundaries, to
know the limits of their spheres of influence and when to compromise, and to focus on their
career goals rather than get embroiled in unnecessary battles. This was linked to their
observation that Black leaders had to understand the environment and the appropriate behavior
expected of them. Several participants, however, expressed that they were not willing to
compromise themselves when discriminated against or treated unfairly compared to their White
counterparts, even to the point of leaving the organization. It is for all of these reasons that 16 of
the 21 participants in this study were intentional in supporting fellow Black men and other

92
minorities in their pursuit of leadership roles. The participants had a keen sense of the detriment
that lacking advocates could have on career advancement.
There was strong consensus that lack of mentorship meant that they had to actively seek
out mentors outside of their workplaces even if that meant a slowdown in their career
advancement. Being slowed down was better than being stopped or excluded entirely. Thus, they
felt that it was their responsibility to act as advocates and mentors for other persons of color
starting out in their careers. This finding presents a potentially novel finding in that the
participants’ commitment toward protecting the positions and promotions of fellow people of
color with similar racial discrimination experiences in Fortune 500 environments may help steer
cultural norms and procedural rules to decrease racial discrimination and foster diversity and
inclusion per eos ut sunt, meaning through them as they exist. According to Livingston’s (2020)
study results, minority leadership engaged in diversity and inclusion activities on the job has the
impact of creating changes in organizational culture that benefits everyone.
Recommendations for Practice
Larcker and Tayan (2020) noted that many corporations today focus on a variety of
strategies to promote diversity at the executive level. These include diversity councils aimed at
recruiting and developing racially and gender-diverse employees and leaders, financial
commitments to diversity, company-sponsored mentoring programs, and executive bonuses
based on diversity-related metrics. There are, therefore, mechanisms that can be employed in
addressing the challenges of institutional discrimination faced by Black male leaders in Fortune
500 companies. However, since they fall within the ambit of individual companies or the
personal coping strategies of individual Black leaders, they are outside the scope of this study. In
addition, the implicit racism and institutional discrimination that underpin these challenges are

93
often so embedded in organizational structures that they go undetected, making them difficult to
address in practice (Bohren et al., 2022).
The following recommendations, based on the findings of this study, are based on the
strategies or coping mechanisms for dealing with racial discrimination offered by various
researchers (Jacob et al., 2022; King et al., 2022; Saasa, 2019). Individual Black leaders in
Fortune 500 companies can use these mechanisms to mitigate the negative effects of institutional
discrimination on them personally and on their role as leaders in their companies. Companies can
also adopt the strategies presented below to mitigate the effects of institutional racism and
unconscious bias on Black leaders working in their organizations.
Recommendation 1: Create Socially Conscious Programs and Activities that Support Black
Leadership Advancement in Fortune 500 Companies
Eleven participants indicated that, in the absence of mentors of color in the workplace,
they had to be intentional in planning for leadership roles and advancement within their
organizations. The literature review in this study reported various methods that individuals can
use to navigate their career advancement in the face of institutional racial discrimination (Quaye
et al., 2019; Saasa, 2019; Small, 2020). Quaye et al. (2019) suggested, among other things,
building a community with other African Americans with similar jobs. Five participants
discussed having already taken this step given their membership in professional associations for
the advancement of Black leaders in corporate America. Suggestions from six participants
related to (a) taking care of themselves in the workplace and avoiding places and people that
cause discriminatory harm, and (b) focusing on achieving your own goals and not getting caught
up in unpleasant situations that would shift their focus.

94
In terms of being accepted by the organization and navigating their career progression, 16
participants experienced that code-switching was a form of setting boundaries in the workplace.
Research on code-switching and its impact on the mental health and quality of life of minoritized
individuals who attempt it for extended periods of time—such as over years of career
advancement—indicate mixed findings. Garlington et al. (2023) found that code-switching is an
impression management behavior that resulted in increased experiences of identity threat and
shame as well as reported depression and job turnover probability among 286 Black participants.
However, the 16 out of 21 participants in this study who stated that they knew how to navigate
the workplace, when to stand up for themselves, and when to compromise perceived codeswitching as a strategic tool for their success in the U.S. corporate market. By code-switching,
they perceive that they place the main focus on achieving their career goals rather than engaging
in unnecessary conflict or confrontation.
Webb et al. (2022) advocated that scientists from minority groups should take action to
improve their advancement opportunities and not wait for their organizations to step up. These
actions included participating in diversity education and mentor engagement and facing
institutional obstacles squarely rather than avoiding them or denying their existence. For many
minorities, taking action to advance in their careers has required code-switching. Research has
found, for instance, that code-switching allows Black workers to manage how they are perceived
by others by attempting to mirror the norms, behaviors, and attributes of the White majority in
their organization through adjustments in self-presentation (Pitcan et al., 2018). This aligns with
the recommendations of previous researchers for navigating career progression in situations
where institutional racism prevails and cannot be readily resolved to allow non-White identities
and cultures to succeed without code-switching (McCluney et al., 2021; Pitcan et al., 2018).

95
Similar to the findings of this study, Pitcan et al. found that Black men working in predominately
White organizations felt that their conduct needed to be beyond reproach to model the ideal
representation of a Black leader in order to advance.
Finally, both this study and Pitcan et al. found that Black leaders experienced the drive to
work harder than their White colleagues and code-switching may be a testament of ambition.
McCluney et al. (2021) concluded that Black employees who used code-switching, changing
their style of speech, name selection, and hairstyle, were consistently viewed as having higher
levels of professionalism than Black employees who did not use such tactics. This strategy was
employed by the participants in this study and could be a useful mechanism to advance while
engaging other coping mechanisms suggested in previous studies, including a commitment to
ethnic identity, disassociation with White-majority work environments, and direct confrontation
with racism are possible (Bento & Brown, 2021; Hernández & Villodas, 2020; Webb et al.,
2022). Considering Quaye et al. (2019) and Garlington et al.’s (2023) research alongside the
findings of the present study as well as Pitcan et al. (2018) and McCluney et al.’s (2021) studies,
open discussion of conscious methods of code-switching that can mitigate harm to personal
identity, feelings of depression and shame, and job turnover as part of a larger career
advancement strategy that includes self-care, active participation in trusted Black professional
networks, and focus on career goals might be beneficial to Black leaders in Fortune 500 settings.
Recommendation 2: Promote Diversity and Inclusion Strategies for Organizational Change
The participants indicated that they do not feel completely included in the organizational
culture of predominantly White corporations, which is further evidenced by their perceived need
to code-switch. They reported that the promotion of diversity and inclusion as a policy did not
move far beyond branding and good intentions which most Fortune 500s and other companies

96
tend to be effective at, especially in the United States where “the concept of diversity
management originated” and “has been very popular from the early 1990s” (Jonsen et al., 2021).
However, and as experienced by the participants in this study, in reality there is a lack of
advocates and mentors in organizations who understand racial minorities and can help them
advance their careers as a part of the corporate cultural problem. Importantly, more mentors for
Black men and other minorities may exist in Fortune 500 workplaces if the impediments to
healthy and confident discussions of racial discrimination were removed.
In previous studies of racial discrimination and its responses, researchers have
investigated strategies that have been used or could be adopted by organizations to reduce or
eliminate institutional racism (McCluney et al., 2020; Newman et al., 2019; Onyeador et al.,
2021). Importantly, Black male leaders should demand changes from their employers to increase
the probability of their career advancement. These changes include greater equity in attention
and resources allocated for diversity recruitment and professional development and are part of a
multifaceted strategy that Newman et al. (2019) have suggested organizations can use to
strengthen their commitment to confronting institutional racism in environmental, recruitment,
professional development, and leadership practices. Additionally, both Black men and their
mentors should be assured of job protections and even rewards for having “civil courage” and
challenging areas of growth in diversity and inclusion on the job (Greitemeyer et al., 2007,
Abstract; Williams et al., 2023).
It is recommended that organizations increase their awareness-raising efforts to address
racial bias and inequity to minimize institutional racial discrimination. From this study, it is clear
that many of organizations are simply unaware that they are not doing enough to increase
diversity and manage unconscious bias within the workplace. As noted by 14 participants in this

97
study, not enough is being done to hold organizations accountable for racial discrimination and
inequitable hiring practices. Greater organizational accountability could minimize the impact of
microaggressions and other acts of racism by reducing the pressures and anxieties associated
with addressing institutional racial discrimination alone, including fear of retaliation as discussed
by Participant 8. Organizations could, for instance, provide for anonymous collection of
microaggressive encounters on the job for redress in team meetings or professional development
programming. However, six participants noted that the leaders in their organizations
implemented policies to address inequalities in the workplace. These examples of good practice
in the workplace could guide other organizations to include policy recommendations to address
racial bias and discrimination and increase diversity (Jonsen et al., 2021).
Another recommendation is that business leaders should take concrete steps to open up
currently insular social and professional networks to professionals of color (Onyeador et al.,
2021). Four participants noted that they did not socialize with White counterparts at events
outside of work or general professional development. Thus, access to informal social spaces
needs a transformation to entrenched corporate cultures. This could possibly be achieved through
raising awareness and educating White colleagues about the unconscious bias that drives the
exclusion of Black leaders from informal social spaces like golf courses, informal conversations
and the like. However, as noted by Livingston (2020), organizations must invest the necessary
time, energy, resources, and commitment to increasing diversity, equity, and inclusion.
McCluney et al. (2020) proposed that U.S. business organizations should counteract systemic
racism by creating antiracism resources, gaining knowledge of the history of racism, embracing
the discomfort inherent in acknowledging racist mistakes, and systematically assessing how
organizational structures maintain White supremacy.

98
Other researchers have proposed methods to address discrimination in organizations,
which align with the issues raised by the participants in this study, such as the experience of
exclusion and unworthiness and the subtle effects of unconscious bias (Onyeador et al., 2021;
Randel et al., 2020). In line with the findings of Randel et al. (2020), the participants reported
that they do not feel valued at work and are excluded from key organizational positions. It is thus
apparent that organizations still struggle to address the racial disparities in top management
between White employees and persons of color. According to Onyeador et al., diversity training
in many U.S. companies focuses on implicit bias, which is difficult to change. Companies should
instead focus on establishing structural practices that prevent decision makers’ biases from
influencing their decisions in the hiring and mentoring of Black executives. Corporations should
also institute initiatives that cultivate organizational responsibility for diversity and employ
strategies to counter institutional racism specific to their industry.
Since a key finding of this study was that the participants did not feel included in the
social and work-related culture of their White counterparts, organizations should take active
steps to promote environments where there are opportunities for high-quality contact between
different racial groups. These steps include establishing affinity groups for underrepresented
populations, ensuring that communication and messaging are inclusive and welcoming, and
implementing processes to counter interpersonal bias (Onyeador et al., 2021). For example,
Salter and Migliaccio (2019) refer to allyship as the act of joining cross-racial or cross-cultural
personnel together to work against oppression and discrimination by supporting and advocating
the oppressed or discriminated partner. According to the authors, the concept of allies is popular
amid education, psychology, and sociology circles, but is far less considered in business where it
is sorely needed. In fact, “Allyship can be a crucial diversity management tool for ending

99
discrimination and achieving equal rights” in the workplace (emphasis added; Salter &
Migliaccio, 2019, p. 138).
In a workplace allyship between Black male leaders and White colleagues or senior
executives, for example, the experiences and voices of the Black male leaders would be
centralized and supported without need for building a racial discrimination case to fit a Civil
Rights legislation box. Instead, their allies would stand ready to listen, support, and confront
based on trust and mutual commitment to organizational success including every member of the
organization. The necessary components of allyship which companies would have to be willing
to invest in are (a) knowledge and awareness of the problem being resisted, (b) communication
and confrontation about and against the problem, and (c) action and advocacy toward solutions
for the problem (Salter & Migliaccio, 2019). After an extensive literature review, the researchers
suggested that allyship is a key diversity and inclusion tool that could focus the efforts of ERGs
that are already in place in many Fortune 500 organizations, such as American Express and
Microsoft IBM, although the concept has been extremely understudied for impact in
organizational settings (Salter & Migliaccio, 2019). Such measures could help improve the
organizational climate and create increased opportunities for workers from ethnic minorities.
In terms of hiring practices, three participants in this study noted that organizations hired
minority individuals of color to conform to the company’s diversity requirements and not
necessarily because their executive leadership wanted to show a commitment to addressing racial
inequality and exclusion. One participant expressed the concern that organizations should be
hiring minority candidates because they are the most qualified, and not just to support diversity
quotas. For instance, there is a need for encouraging young Black professionals to pursue
leadership roles in organizations and possibly, there is a way forward through being more

100
purposeful in the roles that minorities are hired for in companies, especially Fortune 500
organizations. Livingston (2020) suggested that instead of focusing on finding the best candidate
for a specific position, companies should refocus on choosing an ethnically diverse candidate
from a group of similarly matched candidates.
Further, organizations should then commit to investing the necessary time, effort, and
resources to ensure that the chosen individual is enabled to reach their full potential and can
advance in the workplace. In terms of the findings of this study, most of the Black male leaders
indicated that they already act as mentors and advocates for new staff of color, and this practice
could be formalized to become part of the incorporation of young Black talent into organizations.
In this way, top corporations can develop and nurture excellent, Black, male, corporate leaders
and enhance diversity and inclusion among executives and board members at Fortune 500
companies. In addition, alterations to the hiring process can increase diversity and foster
increased recognition of how a racially diverse workforce can lead to greater profitability for the
organization through access to broader markets and a new potential customer base (Ray, 2019).
Recommendation 3: Strengthen Access to Mentors for Black Male Leaders
This study has shown that Black male leaders are challenged by the shortage of available
mentors of color within Fortune 500 companies—and by implication, in all U.S. corporations—
and this is borne out in previous research on mentorship (Bachus, 2004; Braveman et al., 2022).
Mentoring can be a beneficial strategy for countering racism in a wide range of industries
(Newman et al., 2019; Oliver et al., 2020; Randel et al., 2020). By supporting the development of
mentor training programs to counter institutional racial discrimination and its consequent barriers
to advancement, companies can support the career progression of Black male leaders (Newman
et al., 2019; Oliver et al., 2020), as well as their mental health against the perceived need to

101
code-switch in the workplace (Garlington et al., 2023). Thus, the creation of advocacy groups
specifically designed to provide racially congruent mentorship for Black male leaders is
important for their success in Fortune 500s.
Bachus (2004) showed that mentorship often takes place outside the workplace, in social
spaces that Black leaders have difficulty accessing. Therefore, the active incorporation of crossrace sponsorship and mentorship of African American protégés within the workplace is also
recommended (Randel et al., 2020). At the moment, cross-racial mentorship seems to be taking
place internally within certain companies but not in any systemic or formalized fashion. Fourteen
participants experienced that there were individuals within their companies who treated them
equally and vouched for them voluntarily, and one participant described his positive experience
of working with a White mentor who had been partnered with him. Participants also experienced
instances of White colleagues being sensitive to unconscious bias and acting as support to them
in their leadership as Black men. Since there is a shortage of Black mentorship within
organizations and Black leaders have had to build their own networks of support, White leaders
in such organizations could work together with Black leaders who are already employed in the
companies to mentor them.
The cross-race mentoring relationship could further be expanded to include the various
committees and councils that provide formal channels for sponsorship of potential Black leaders,
by encouraging White mentors within the organizations to collaborate with them to develop
mentoring systems. This practice could be implemented in the organizational structures of
corporations employing Black executives in leadership positions. Although there is significant
room for improvement, the sponsorship of Black workers in cross-race mentoring relationships
has been shown to improve the career advancement of African Americans (Randel et al., 2020).

102
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are considered weaknesses in a study that cannot be controlled by the
researcher (Simon, 2011). Several limitations were associated with this study. The first is that
study findings which rely on the truthfulness and cooperation of participants in the interview
process run the risk of social desirability bias (Bergen & Labonté, 2020), which is characterized
by participants responding in a way they believe the researcher wants them to (Bergen &
Labonté, 2020). Social desirability bias can lead to the development of themes that do not
accurately represent the essence of the phenomenon.
I tried to minimize the potential for bias by reassuring participants that their answers
would remain confidential. Another limitation associated with this study was the small,
homogenous, and self-selected sample size, which restricts the generalizability of results to a
larger population (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). While there is merit in utilizing qualitative research
methods in a limited focus study given the richness of data and deep insights into the essence of
the lived experiences of participants that these investigations offer, this study was limited by
narrowed generalizability prone to qualitative methodology (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Unlike limitations, delimitations are choices made by the researcher to create boundaries
within the study (Simon, 2011). This study was delimited to 21 participants who were (a) Black,
(b) male, (c) a leader with three or more followers under direct report, and (d) employed by a
Fortune 500 company in the United States. Thus, this study was intentionally restricted to
investigating only Black male leaders’ experiences with institutional racial discrimination in
Fortune 500 companies to the exclusion of Black women and women and men from other
racial/ethnic groups for nuanced understanding of this specific group of minoritized members of
society. Furthermore, this study was delimited to data collected from semi-structured, in-depth

103
interviews that were transcribed and analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s (2019) six-step thematic
analysis. Finally, this study was delimited to focus solely on Black male leaders’ experiences
with institutional racial discrimination in Fortune 500 companies.
Recommendations for Future Research
The qualitative methods used in this research provided rich data on the lived experiences
of Black male leaders in Fortune 500 companies with institutional discrimination. A significant
interest was also placed on the effect of institutional discrimination on the careers of the
participants as leaders. However, the results are limited because the focus of this study was
relatively narrow with exploration of Black male corporate leadership only, and a relatively
small sample size, albeit large in the traditional qualitative research approach.
Thus, this research could be further developed in a quantitative study that encompasses a
broader sample to investigate the attitudes and experiences of a wider range of Black leaders. An
additional study could focus on their White counterparts and managers and determine their
awareness (or not) of institutional discrimination within their organization, and what measures
could be taken to address this. A main theme that emerged in this study was the lack of mentors
or advocates of color available to Black leaders in organizations (Braveman et al., 2022).
Therefore, the theme of mentorship should be a strong focus in future studies. For a start, the
greatest value could lie in approaching the Fortune 500 companies that took part in this study in
the same way that this sample was drawn, and investigating what mentorship structures exist,
informally and formally, and how they could be improved.
An interesting observation of the participants was that their organizations seemed to be
more aware of discriminatory behavior and the importance of workplace diversity after George
Floyd’s death. This raises interesting questions about the changes in the racial makeup of

104
organizations as a result of external events, as previously discussed by Ray (2019). It would be
interesting to conduct a comparative study of the racial composition of Fortune 500 companies
both before and after the Black Lives Matter movement, including an evaluation of current
trends. This could be accomplished through a quantitative study of employment records.
Furthermore, future research should not only consider the demographic changes within
organizations, but also, and perhaps more importantly, the actual promotion trends after the point
of recruiting and hiring diverse talent (Jonsen et al., 2021). As the participants frequently noted
the existence of gaps between diversity and inclusion policies and mission statements, and their
lived experiences of equity and belonging in the workplace, research should begin to look for the
causes and cures of disingenuous and/or misguided diversity plans in Fortune 500 companies.
Jonsen et al. (2021) expressed a similar recommendation, stating that future research
should “examine the territory between ‘true intention’ and pure ‘impression management’ (p.
32). Indeed, Black male leaders and other minorities in Fortune 500 workplaces desire real allies
interested in equity for their personal success and the advancement of organizations and society
as a whole. Thus, research on the best ways to foster allyship that incorporates knowledge,
communication, and actionable strategies against institutional racial discrimination is
recommended. Such research need not reinvent every aspect of organizational culture and
programming and may instead be used to reform or otherwise advance standing diversity and
inclusion strategies such as ERGs, mentorship programs, and diversity training courses or
workshops common in U.S. business today that lack genuine connection to the cause of, or
reason for diversity on a human level (Salter & Migliaccio, 2019; Williams et al., 2023).
The present study could also be expanded to include Black females or other minorities in
leadership roles in Fortune 500 companies. This would enrich the knowledge base of how

105
corporations engage with issues of diversity and inclusion in their organizations. Other
minorities would bring completely different insights to a study of this nature, even if the study
was approached in the same way and similar questions were asked.
Implications for Equity
In examining the experiences of Black male leaders in Fortune 500 companies and
focusing on institutional discrimination in those companies, this study has shed light on the
challenges that still exist in the corporate world in terms of equity and diversity. From the
literature review, it is clear that there is a shortage of Black leaders in top management
throughout the United States. This study found that even when Black males have achieved
leadership positions in top companies, they still face challenges in career progression and in dayto-day activities in the workplace, such as feelings of not being valued, being excluded from
professional and social cultural spaces, resorting to code-switching to model what they believe
are acceptable role models as top managers, and having to forge their own network for advocacy
and support in the absence of mentors of the same race within their organizations. By raising
awareness of these issues, this study advances the drive toward equity and diversity in the
workplace, not only for Black men but for all minorities. The recommendations for practice and
further research above connect to the Rossier mission in terms of contributing to future practice,
research, and policy. In addition, to address disparities that affect historically marginalized
groups by creating corporate spaces where diversity is celebrated and equity across all minority
groups is institutionalized.
Conclusion
Multiple studies on the experiences of Black leaders in business have been conducted
(Larcker & Tayan, 2020; Yadon & Piston, 2018). However, not many studies have focused on

106
Fortune 500 companies, and even fewer on the relationship between racial discrimination and
Black, male corporate leaders (Bachus, 2004; Livingston, 2020; Pitcan et al., 2018; Roberts and
Mayo, 2019; Taylor et al., 2019). Critical race theory, a dominant theory used to explain
experiences of oppression (Lomotey, 2019), was the foundation of this study. This theory posits
that racism is a fundamental way that society is organized and is “endemic, institutional, and
systematic” (Sleeter, 2016, p. 3). The findings of this study and the literature consulted confirm
that in corporate America, the institutionalization of discrimination and racism persists, and that
Black men still commonly experience institutional discrimination, which creates unique
challenges to their advancement (Amis et al., 2020; Benson et al., 2022; Kim & Scott, 2018;
Kline et al., 2021; Lang & Spitzer, 2020).
The study has shown that modern American corporations are rooted in racial oppression
and that racism is embedded in U.S. institutions, policies, and practices (Logan, 2019; Lopez &
Jean-Marie, 2021). CRT posits that racism is perpetuated through the discourses in society and
institutions and that these narratives may obscure the effects of discrimination (Bell, 1987;
Sleeter, 2016). The examination of the experiences of Black leaders in Fortune 500 companies is
a step toward highlighting the counter-narratives that can enable new approaches to the problem
of institutional discrimination and its effect on the leadership of people of color.
The study confirmed that for the Black leaders interviewed, there was no option in
confronting the challenges they face but to forge their own path to success. In intentionally and
strategically confronting these challenges, Black leaders in corporate America should take active
steps to advocate for themselves and improve their opportunities for advancement, rather than
ignoring obstacles or denying their existence (Webb et al., 2022). They should not wait for others
to support them but rather take leading roles in advocating for diversity, engaging mentors, and

107
assuming responsibility for their own careers. In terms of the institutional environment, the best
way to confront these challenges is to increase dialogue and awareness around systemic racism
and discrimination, and thus raise institutional awareness of the experiences of minorities in the
workplace (Webb et al., 2022). Fostering understanding and awareness is a crucial way forward
in creating workplaces in which minorities are welcomed and supported to thrive.

108
References
Abel, M. (2022). Do workers discriminate against female bosses? The Journal of Human
Resources. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.1120-11318R3
Amis, J. M., Mair, J., & Munir, K. A. (2020). The original reproduction of inequality. Academy
of Management Annals, 14(1), 195–230. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2017.0033
An, S., & Lee, S.-Y. (2021). The impact of gender diversity and disparity on organizational
performance: Evidence from Korean local government-owned enterprises. Review of
Public Personnel Administration, 42(3), 395–415.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X21990718
Apuke, O. D. (2017). Quantitative research methods: A synopsis approach. Arabian Journal of
Business and Management Review (Kuwait Chapter), 6(10), 40–47.
https://doi.org/10.12816/0040336
Assari, S., & Lankarani, M. M. (2018). Workplace racial composition explains high perceived
discrimination of high socioeconomic status African American men. Brain Sciences,
8(8), Article 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci8080139
Bachus, N. J. (2004). The underrepresentation of Black male executives and CEOs in Fortune
500 corporations (Publication No. 3162633) [Doctoral dissertation, Capella University].
ProQuest Dissertation Publishing.
Barron, M. (2019). Senior-level African American women, underrepresentation, and career
decision-making. [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. ScholarWorks.
https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations
Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and
managerial applications (3rd ed.). Free Press.

109
Beckwith, A. L., Carter, D. R., & Peters, T. (2016). The underrepresentation of African
American women in executive leadership: What's getting in the way? Journal of Business
Studies Quarterly, 7(4), 115-134. http://www.jbsq.org/
Bell, D. (1987). And we are not saved: The elusive quest for racial justice. Basic Books.
Bell, M. P., Leopold, J., Berry, D., & Hall, A. V. (2018). Diversity, discrimination, and persistent
inequality: Hope for the future through the Solidarity Economy Movement. Journal of
Social Issues, 74(2), 224–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12266
Benjamin, S., & Dillette, A. K. (2021). Black Travel Movement: Systemic racism informing
tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 88, Article 103169.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2021.103169
Bento, A., & Brown, T. N. (2021). Belief in systemic racism and self-employment among
working Blacks. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 44(1), 21–38.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2020.1737170
Bergen, N., & Labonté, R. (2020). “Everything is perfect, and we have no problems:” Detecting
and limiting social desirability bias in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research,
30(5), 783–792. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732319889354
Berger, J. T., & Miller, D. R. (2021). Health disparities, systemic racism, and failures of cultural
competence. The American Journal of Bioethics, 21(9), 4–10.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2021.1915411
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research
in Sport, Exercise, and Health, 11(4), 589–597.
https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

110
Braveman, P. A., Arkin, E., Proctor, D., Kauh, T., & Holm, N. (2022). Systemic and structural
racism: Definitions, examples, health damages, and approaches to dismantling. Health
Affairs, 41(2), 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2021.01394
Butler, J. L. (2016). Rediscovering Husserl: Perspectives on the epoche and the reductions. The
Qualitative Report, 21(11), 2033–2043.
Carter, R. T., Johnson, V. E., Kirkinis, K., Roberson, K., Muchow, C., & Galgay, C. (2019). A
meta-analytic review of racial discrimination: Relationships to health and culture. Race
and Social Problems, 11, 15–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-018-9256-y
Chance, N. L. (2021). Resilient leadership: A phenomenological exploration into how Black
women in higher education leadership navigate cultural adversity. Journal of Humanistic
Psychology, 62(1), 44–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/00221678211003000
Cobbinah, S. S., & Lewis, J. (2018). Racism & health: A public health perspective on racial
discrimination. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 24(5), 995–998.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12894
Crown, A., Berry, C., Khabele, D., Fayanju, O. M., Cobb, A., Backhus, L., Smith, R. N.,
Sweeting, R., Hasson, R. M., Johnson-Mann, C., Oseni, T., Newman, E. A., Turner, P.,
Karpeh, M., Pugh, C., Jordan, A. H., Henry-Tillman, R., & Joseph, K.-A. (2021). The
role of race and gender in the career experiences of Black/African American academic
surgeons: A survey of the Society of Black Academic Surgeons and a call to action.
Annals of Surgery, 273(5), 827–831. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000004502
Daly, M. C., Hobijn, B., & Pedtke, J. H. (2019). Labor market dynamics and Black-White
earnings gaps. Economics Letters, 186, Article 108807.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2019.108807

111
Daniels, S., & Thornton, L. M. (2019). Race and workplace discrimination: The mediating role
of cyber incivility and interpersonal incivility. Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion, 39(3),
319–335. https://doi.org/10.1108/edi-06-2018-0105
Desalu, J. M., Goodhines, P. A., & Park, A. (2019). Racial discrimination and alcohol use and
negative drinking consequences among Black Americans: A meta-analytical review.
Addiction, 114(6), 957–967. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.14578
DeSilver, D. (2013). Black unemployment rate is consistently twice that of Whites. Pew Research
Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/08/21/through-good-times-and-badblack-unemployment-is-consistently-double-that-of-whites/
Devakumar, D., Selvarajah, S., Shannon, G., Muraya, K., Lasoye, S., Corona, S., Paradies, Y.,
Abubakar, I., & Achiume, E. T. (2020). Racism, the public health crisis we can no longer
ignore. The Lancet, 395(10242), e112–e113. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-
6736(20)31371-4
Dzirasa, K. (2020). Revising the a priori hypothesis: Systemic racism has penetrated scientific
funding. Cell, 183(3), 576–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.026
Ellefsen, R., Banafsheh, A., & Sandberg, S. (2022). Resisting racism in everyday life: From
ignoring to confrontation and protest. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 45(16), 435–457.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2022.2094716
English, D., Lambert, S. F., Tynes, B. M., Bowleg, L., Zea, M. C., & Howard, L. C. (2019).
Daily multidimensional racial discrimination among Black U.S. American adolescents.
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 66, Article 101068.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2019.101068

112
Erskine, S. E., Archibold, E. E., & Bilimoria, D. (2020). Afro-diasporic women navigating the
Black ceiling: Individual, relational, and organizational strategies. Business Horizons,
64(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2020.10.004
Fortune Media IP Limited. (2022). Fortune 500. https://fortune.com/fortune500/search/
Francis, J. N. P. (2020). A macromarketing call to action–because Black Lives Matter! Journal
of Macromarketing, 41(1), 132–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276146720981718
Garlington, J., Shum, C., Wong-Padoongpatt, G., & Book, L. (2023). “What it do?” The effects
of racial code-switching on industry turnover intention. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2022-1335
Goh, J., Pfeffer, J., & Zenios, S. (2015). Exposure to harmful workplace practices could account
for inequality in life spans across different demographic groups. Health Affairs, 34(10),
1761–-1768. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2015.0022
Grant, D. A. (2018). Perceptions of career advancement in the hotel industry for African and
Hispanic Americans. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 18(1), 71–
92. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332845.2019.1526532
Greitemeyer, T., Osswald, S., Fischer, P., & Frey, D. (2007). Civil courage: Implicit theories,
related concepts, and measurement. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2(2), 115–119.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760701228789
Hernández, R. J., & Villodas, M. T. (2020). Overcoming racial battle fatigue: The associations
between racial microaggressions, coping, and mental health among Chicana/o and
Latina/o college students. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 26(3),
399–411. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000306

113
Hirsh, E., & Cha, Y. (2018). For law and markets: Employment discrimination lawsuits, market
performance, and managerial diversity. American Journal of Sociology, 123(4), 1117–
1160. https://doi.org/10.1086/694887
Hoggard, L. S., & Hill, L. K. (2018). Examining how racial discrimination impacts sleep quality
in African Americans: Is perseveration the answer? Behavioral Sleep Medicine, 16(5),
471–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/15402002.2016.1228648
Huddleston-Pettiway, L. (2022). Career advancement experiences from Black leaders in higher
education: A qualitative study (Publication No. 29253091) [Doctoral dissertation, Capella
University]. ProQuest Dissertation Publishing.
Iheduru-Anderson, K. (2020). Barriers to career advancement in the nursing profession:
Perceptions of Black nurses in the United States. Nursing Forum, 55(4), 664–677.
https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12483
Iheduru-Anderson, K. (2021). The White/Black hierarchy institutionalizes White supremacy in
nursing and nursing leadership in the United States. Journal of Professional Nursing,
37(2), 411–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2020.05.005
Jacob, G., Faber, S. C., Faber, N., Bartlett, A., Ouimet, A. J., & Williams, M. T. (2022) A
systematic review of Black people coping with racism: Approaches, analysis, and
empowerment. Perspectives on Psychological Science. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916221100509
Jean-Marie, G., & Tickles, V. C. (2018). Black women at the helm in HBCUs: Paradox of
gender and leadership. Advances in Education in Diverse Communities: Research, Policy
and Praxis, 14, 101–124. http://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-358X20160000014006

114
Johnson, D. P. (2019). An examination of the professional experiences and career advancement
perceptions of Black women in higher education (Publication No. 27545482) [Doctoral
dissertation, University of South Alabama]. ProQuest Dissertation Publishing.
Jonsen, K., Point, S., Kelan, E.K., & Grieble, A. (2021). Diversity and inclusion branding: A
five-country comparison of corporate websites. The International Journal of Human
Resources Management, 323, 661–649. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2018.1496125
Kelley, J. (2019). A phenomenological exploration of Black male managers’ perceptions of the
availability of leadership and advancement opportunities in Fortune 1000 businesses
(Publication No. 27995878) [Doctoral dissertation, Johnson University]. ProQuest, LLC.
King, D. D., Hall, A. V., Johnson, L., Carter, J., Burrows, D., & Samuel, N. (2022). Research on
anti-Black racism in organizations: Insights, ideas, and considerations. Journal of
Business and Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-
022-09804-4
Kline, P. M., Rose, E. K., & Walters, C. R. (2021). Systemic discrimination among large U.S.
employers (Working Paper No. 2021-94). Becker Friedman Institute.
Korstjens, I., & Moser, A. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4:
Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 120–124.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375092
Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in a nice field
like education? International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 7–24.
https://doi.org/10.1080/095183998236863
Lang, K., & Spitzer, A. K-L. (2020). Race discrimination: An economic perspective. Journal of
Economic Perspectives, 34(2), 68–89. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.34.2.68

115
Larcker, D. F., & Tayan, B. (2020). Diversity in the C-suite: The dismal state of diversity among
Fortune 100 senior executives. Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford
University Closer Look Series: Topics, Issues and Controversies in Corporate
Governance, No. CGRP-82. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3587498
Lavalley, R., & Johnson, K. R. (2020). Occupation, injustice, and anti-Black racism in the
United States of America. Journal of Occupational Science, 29(4), 487–499.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14427591.2020.1810111
Leath, S., Mathews, C., Harrison, A., & Chavous, T. (2019). Racial identity, racial
discrimination, and classroom engagement outcomes among Black girls and boys in
predominantly Black and predominantly White school districts. American Educational
Research Journal, 56(4), 1318–1352. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218816955
Leedy, P., & Ormrod, J. (2019). Practical research: Planning and design. Pearson. One Lake
Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458.
Leutwiler, J., & Kleiner, B. H. (2003). Statistical analysis for determining pay discrimination.
Equal Opportunities International, 22(6–/7), 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02610150310787559
Livingston, R. (2020). How to promote racial equity in the workplace. Harvard Business Review,
98(5), 64–72. https://socialjustice.nsbe.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/HarvardBusiness-Review.pdf
Logan, N. (2019). Corporate personhood and the corporate responsibility to race. Journal of
Business Ethics, 154(4), 977–988. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3893-3

116
Lomotey, K. (2019). Research on leadership of Black women principals: Implications for Black
students. Educational Researcher, 48(6), 336–347.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X19858619
Lopez, A. E., & Jean-Marie, G. (2021). Challenging anti-Black racism in everyday teaching,
learning, and leading: From theory to practice. Journal of School Leadership, 31(1–2),
50–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052684621993115
Massaquoi, M. A., Reese, T. R., Barrett, J., & Nguyen, D. (2021). Perceptions of gender and race
equality in leadership and advancement among military family physicians. Military
Medicine, 186(Suppl. 1), S762–S766. https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usaa387
McCluney, C. L., Durkee, M. I., Smith, R. E., Robotham, K. J., & Lee, S. S. (2021). To be, or
not to be … Black: The effects of racial codeswitching on perceived professionalism in
the workplace. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 97, Article 104199.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104199
McCluney, C. L., King, D. D., Bryant, C. M., & Ali, A. A. (2020). From “Calling in Black” to
“Calling for Antiracism Resources”: The need for systemic resources to address systemic
racism. Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion, 40(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1108/edi-07-
2020-0180
Mercier, C. M., Abbott, D. M., & Ternes, M. S. (2022). Coping matters: An examination of
coping among Black Americans during COVID-19. The Counseling Psychologist, 50(3),
384–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/00110000211069598
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage.

117
Neblett, E. W., Jr. (2019). Racism and health: Challenges and future directions in behavioral and
psychological research. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 25(1), 12–
20. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000253
Nelson, R. L., Sendroiu, I., Dinovitzer, R., & Dawe, M. (2019). Perceiving discrimination: Race,
gender, and sexual orientation in the legal workplace. Law & Social Inquiry, 44(4),
1051–1082. https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2019.4
Newman, E. A., Waljee, J., Dimick, J. B., & Mulholland, M. W. (2019). Eliminating institutional
barriers to career advancement for diverse faculty in academic surgery. Annals of
Surgery, 270(1), 23–25. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000003273
Odoms-Young, A. M. (2018). Examining the impact of structural racism on food insecurity:
Implications for addressing racial/ethnic disparities. Family & Community Health,
41(Suppl. 2), S3–S6. https://doi.org/10.1097/fch.0000000000000183
Oliver, K. B., Nadamuni, M. V., Ahn, C., Nivet, M., Cryer, B., & Okorodudu, D. O. (2020).
Mentoring Black men in medicine. Academic Medicine, 95(Suppl. 12), S77–S81.
https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000003685
Onyeador, I. N., Hudson, S. T. J., & Lewis, N. A., Jr. (2021). Moving beyond implicit bias
training: Policy insights for increasing organizational diversity. Policy Insights from the
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8(1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732220983840
Phojanakong, P., Brown Weida, E., Grimaldi, G., Lê-Scherban, F., & Chilton, M. (2019).
Experiences of racial and ethnic discrimination are associated with food insecurity and
poor health. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(22),
Article 4369. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16224369

118
Pitcan, M., Park-Taylor, J., & Hayslett, J. (2018). Black men and racial microaggressions at
work. The Career Development Quarterly, 66(4), 300–314.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cdq.12152
Quaye, S. J., Karikari, S. N., Allen, C. R., Okello, W. K., & Carter, K. D. (2019). Strategies for
practicing self-care from racial battle fatigue. Journal Committed to Social Change on
Race and Ethnicity, 5(2), 95–131. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48645357
Quillian, L., Lee, J. J., & Honoré, B. (2020). Racial discrimination in the U.S. housing and
mortgage lending markets: A quantitative review of trends, 1976–2016. Race and Social
Problems, 12, 13–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-019-09276-x
Quillian, L., Lee, J. J., & Oliver, M. (2020). Evidence from field experiments in hiring shows
substantial additional racial discrimination after the callback. Social Forces, 99(2), 732–
759. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaa026
Randel, A. E., Galvin, B. M., Gibson, C. B., & Batts, S. I. (2020). Increasing career advancement
opportunities through sponsorship: An identity-based model with illustrative application
to cross-race mentorship of African Americans. Group & Organizational Management,
46(1), 105–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601120978003
Ray, V. (2019). A theory of racialized organizations. American Sociological Review, 84(1), 26–
53. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122418822335
Roberts, L. M., & Mayo, A. J. (2019, November 14). Toward a racially just workplace. Harvard
Business Review. https://hbr.org/2019/11/toward-a-racially-just-workplace
Roscigno, V. J. (2019). Discrimination, sexual harassment, and the impact of workplace power.
Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, 5.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023119853894

119
Rosenthal, M. (2016). Qualitative research methods: Why, when, and how to conduct interviews
and focus groups in pharmacy research. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning,
8(4), 509–516.
Saasa, S. K. (2019). Discrimination, coping, and social exclusion among African immigrants in
the United States: A moderation analysis. Social Work, 64(3), 198–206.
https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swz018
Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Sage.
Salter, N.P., & Migliaccio, L. (2019). “Allyship as a diversity and inclusion tool in the
workplace.” In Diversity within Diversity Management, Advanced Series in Management,
Vol. 22, 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1877-636120190000022008
Sarwar, A., & Muhammad, L. (2019). Impact of employee perceptions of mistreatment on
organizational performance in the hotel industry. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 32(1), 230–248. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-01-2019-0046
Schaap, J. I., & Schaap, J. L. (2020). Do Fortune 50 companies have compelling mission
statements? We will let you decide! [White paper].
https://www.subr.edu/assets/subr/COBJournal/Final-Mission-Statement-Study641.pdf
Seaton, E. K., & Lida, M. (2019). Racial discrimination and racial identity: Daily moderation
among Black youth. American Psychologist, 74(1), 117–127.
https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000367
Sexton, S. M., Richardson, C. R., Schrager, S. B., Bowman, M. A., Hickner, J., Morley, C. P.,
Mott, T. F., Pimlott, N., Saultz, J. W., & Weiss, B. D. (2021). Systemic racism and health
disparities. Canadian Family Physician, 67(1), 13–14.
https://doi.org/10.46747/cfp.670113

120
Shum, C., Gatling, A., & Garlington, J. (2020). All people are created equal? Racial
discrimination and its impact on hospitality career satisfaction. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 89, Article 102407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102407
Sisco, S. (2020). Race-conscious career development: Exploring self-preservation and coping
strategies of Black professionals in corporate America. Advances in Developing Human
Resources, 22(4), 419–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422320948885
Sleeter, C. E. (2016). Critical race theory and the whiteness of teacher education. Urban
Education, 52(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085916668957
Small, E. (2020). How successful African American male leaders in predominately White
organizations integrate spirituality with leadership practice. Journal of Management,
Spirituality & Religion, 17(2), 184–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766086.2019.1697727
Small, M. L., & Pager, D. (2020). Sociological perspectives on racial discrimination. Journal of
Economic Perspectives, 34(2), 49–67. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.34.2.49
Smulowitz, S., Becerra, M., & Mayo, M. (2019). Racial diversity and its asymmetry within and
across hierarchical levels: The effects on financial performance. Human Relations,
72(10), 1671–1696. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718812602
Simon, M. K. (2011). Dissertation and scholarly research: Recipes for success. Dissertation
Success, LLC.
Smith, J., & Osborn, M. (2003). Interpretive phenomenological analysis. In J. A. Smith (Ed.),
Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 51–80). Sage.
Sparkman, T. E. (2021). Black male executives in higher education: The experience of ascending
the academic leadership ladder. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 23(4), 277–
299. https://doi.org/10.1177/15234223211037752

121
Tabor, F., & Dalton, P. (2021). Perception of racial discrimination in the workplace and its
impact on job satisfaction and job security. Journal of Graduate Education Research,
2(9), 32–47. https://scholarworks.harding.edu/jger/vol2/iss1/9
Talenya. (2021, June). Fortune 500 diversity benchmark report: Key diversity and inclusion
indicators among Fortune 500 companies. https://www.talenya.com/bi-annual-diversityreport/?utm_campaign&utm_campaign=Diversity%20Series&utm_source=website_blog
&utm_medium=how&utm_term=bi_annual_report&utm_content=peoplematters_35%_o
f_women
Tarasonis, L., & Decreuse, B. (2020). Statistical discrimination in a search equilibrium model:
Racial wage and employment disparities in the US (Working Paper Series No. 82 / 2020).
Bank of Lithuania.
https://www.lb.lt/uploads/publications/docs/27822_217e471b496b0e53ad43f770fce12d2
c.pdf
Taylor, E., Guy-Walls, P., Wilkerson, P., & Addae, R. (2019). The historical perspectives of
stereotypes on African-American males. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 4,
213–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-019-00096-y
Thomas, S. B., & Casper, E. (2019). The burdens of race and history on Black people’s health
400 years after Jamestown. American Journal of Public Health, 109, 1346–1347.
https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2019.305290
Vagle, M. D. (2018). Crafting phenomenological research (2nd ed.). Routeledge.
van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experiences: Human science for an action sensitive
pedagogy. SUNY Press.

122
Van Dyke, M. E., Baumhofer, N. K., Slopen, N., Mujahid, M. S., Clark, C. R., Williams, D. R.,
& Lewis, T. T. (2020). Pervasive discrimination and allostatic load in African American
and White adults. Psychosomatic Medicine, 82(3), 316–323.
https://doi.org/10.1097/psy.0000000000000788
Vasquez Reyes, M. (2020). The disproportional impact of COVID-19 on African Americans.
Health and Human Rights Journal, 22(2), 299–307.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7762908/
Wahba, P. (2021, February 1). Only 19: The lack of Black CEOs in the history of the Fortune
500. Fortune Magazine. https://fortune.com/longform/fortune-500-black-ceos-businesshistory/.
Wallington, C. F. (2021). Navigating the C-suite: Exploring the leadership journey of AfricanAmerican male executives in U.S. corporations (Publication No. 28498027) [Doctoral
dissertation, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University]. ProQuest,
LLC.
Webb, T. J., Guerau-de-Arellano, M., Jones, H. P., Butts, C. L., Sanchez-Perez, L., & Montaner,
L. J. (2022). The minority scientists’ experience: Challenging and overcoming barriers to
enhancing diversity and career advancement. The Journal of Immunology, 208(2), 197–
202. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.2101077
Wei, M. L., & Bunjun, B. (2020). “We don’t need another one in our group”: Racism and
interventions to promote the mental health and well-being of racialized international
students in business schools. Journal of Management Education, 45(1), 65–85.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562920959391

123
Whitaker, T. R. (2019). Banging on a locked door: The persistent role of racial discrimination in
the workplace. Social Work in Public Health, 34(1), 22–27.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19371918.2019.1572564
Williams, M., & Vogt, W. P. (2011). The SAGE handbook of innovation in social research
methods. Sage.
Williams, M. T., Davis, A. K., Xin, Y., Sepeda, N. D., Colón Grigas, P., Sinnott, S., & Haeny, A.
M. (2020). People of color in North America report improvements in racial trauma and
mental health symptoms following psychedelic experiences. Drugs: Education,
Prevention, and Policy, 28(3), 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687637.2020.1854688
Williams, M. T., Printz, D. M. B., & DeLapp, R. C. T. (2018). Assessing racial trauma with the
Trauma Symptoms of Discrimination Scale. Psychology of Violence, 8(6), 735–747.
https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000212
Williams, M.T., Faber, S., Nepton, A., & Ching, T.H.W. (2023). Racial justice allyship requires
civil courage: A behavioral prescription for moral growth and change. American
Psychologist, 78(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000940
Wingfield, A. H., & Chavez, K. (2020). Getting in, getting hired, getting sideways looks:
Organizational hierarchy and perceptions of racial discrimination. American Sociological
Review, 85(1), 31–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122419894335
Yadon, N., & Piston, S. (2018). Examining Whites’ anti-Black attitudes after Obama’s
presidency. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 7(4), 794–814.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2018.1438953
Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage.

124
Appendix A: Interview Protocol
Research Questions
1. What are the lived experiences of Black male leaders who encounter institutional
discrimination within Fortune 500 companies?
2. How have Black male leaders navigated their career progression despite encountering
institutional discrimination?
3. How do Black male leaders perceive the impact of institutional discrimination on their
leadership in Fortune 500 companies?
Introduction to the Interview
I appreciate your taking the time to meet with me and agreeing to participate in my
research by answering some questions. I am a doctoral student at University of Southern
California currently exploring institutional discrimination against black men in Fortune 500
companies. Institutional discrimination is defined as the “involvement of institutional
systems and structures in race-based discrimination and oppression; it may also refer
specifically to racism within a particular institution” (Braveman et al., 2022, p. 172).
Examples of institutional discrimination in the workplace include reduced professional
development and career advancement opportunities, intensified by a relative lack of mentors
of color, unequal compensation practices, and neglected or nonexistent diversity and
inclusion practices (Braveman et al., 2022)
Before we begin, I would like to go over the information sheet emailed to you prior to our
meeting today. You will be asked a series of open-ended questions. This interview will last
approximately one hour. A follow-up interview may be planned to clarify certain points.

125
During the interview, and with your permission, I will use audio recording equipment to
capture all your comments accurately and totally. This audio recording will not be shared. The
audio recording will be transmitted to my password-protected cloud file storage account and
erased from the recording device as soon as the transfer is complete. The audio recording will be
transcribed by a third party, and all files will be sent to me once the transcription is complete.
The audio recording will be deleted three years following the approval of my dissertation
defense. All information acquired during the interview is kept strictly secret, your participation is
entirely optional, and you are free to terminate the interview at any moment.
With that, do you have any questions about the study before we get started? If not, please
review the information sheet and then I would like your permission to begin the interview. May I
also have your permission to audio record this conversation? Thank you.
Interview Questions:
1. Tell me about your role/position within your company.
o RQ addressed: Background
o Probe: Can you give me a brief description of your work experience and history?
2. How did you come to work at your current organization?
o RQ addressed: Background
o Probe: Can you tell me about how long you have been working in this organization
and how you came to be in your current position?
3. Think of a time when you experienced or witnessed an instance of institutionalized
discrimination at work. Tell me what happened.
o RQ addressed: RQ1
o Probe: What did you do to address what occurred?

126
4. How, if at all, has institutionalized discrimination affected your career progression, especially
within your current organization?
o RQ addressed: RQ2
o Probe: What have you done to protect your career or succeed despite what you
described?
5. What role do racial stereotypes play in your organization? How have you addressed racial
stereotypes in your work?
o RQ addressed: RQ1 and RQ2
o Probe: How, if at all, do you feel you act differently around your non-Black
colleagues in order to be taken seriously because of stereotypes you have
encountered? Explain.
o Probe: In what ways, if at all, do you feel you have to act as a model for your race
because of these stereotypes? Explain.
6. Tell me about any barriers, if any, you feel you have had to overcome related to your race?
o RQ addressed: RQ2
7. How, if at all, have instances of institutionalized discrimination affected your ability to fulfill
your tasks as a leader within your organization?
o RQ addressed: RQ3
8. How do you navigate your leadership role to ease or overcome any race-related obstacles you
have encountered?
o RQ addressed: RQ3
o Probe: What are some specific tactics, if any, you employ to overcome obstacles
related to your race that you have encountered?

127
9. How have you adjusted your leadership style because of your race?
o RQ addressed: RQ3
10. How do you think your presence as a Black American male leader impacts your Black
American and other minority employees?
o RQ addressed: RQ3
o Probe: What experiences lead you to think this is the case?
11. Tell me about your access to mentors/social networks?
o RQ addressed: RQ1 and RQ2
o Probe: How do you perceive your mentoring/social networking experiences to be
similar or different to that of your White counterparts?
12. What is your experience with pay inequity due to race?
o RQ addressed: RQ1
o How do you perceive your pay to be equitable compared to your non-Black peers?
13. What role do does institutional discrimination plays in health, mental health or confidence as
a leader?
o RQ addressed: RQ3
14. What are your suggestions to reduce institutional discrimination with your company?
15. That covers the items I had planned to ask. However, do you feel there is something I should
have asked you that I did not? Or is there anything you want to make sure you add?

128
Appendix B: Participant Information Sheet for Exempt Research
Study Title: Institutional Discrimination Against Black Men in Fortune 500 Companies: A
Phenomenological Study
Principal Investigator: Sherick Fogarthy
Faculty Advisor: Jennifer L. Phillips, D.L.S.
You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to
you.
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to explore the lived experiences of institutional discrimination
among Black male leaders of Fortune 500 companies. I hope to acquire insight into the impact of
racism-related job stress and discrimination experienced by Black men in leadership positions.
You are invited as a possible participant because you are a Black male leader with followers
under your direct report and employed by a Fortune 500 company in the United States.
Participant Involvement
The participant will engage in a 60-minute interview that will take place either in an online
meeting platform, (e.g., Zoom), over the phone, or in person. The setting for the interview will
be based on the participants preference.
Confidentiality
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects. When the results of the research are published
or discussed in conferences, no identifiable information will be used. Confidentiality will be

129
maintained by assigning a numerical identifier to each participant. The key will only be known to
the principal researcher, stored in a secure digital cloud used exclusively for this study, and will
be destroyed at the conclusion of this study. All transcripts and recordings will be stored in a
secure digital cloud used exclusively for this study and will be destroyed at the conclusion of this
study. Participants have the right to review or edit the audio recordings and transcripts. All paper
notes and documents will be stored in a locked cabinet in a private office for the duration of this
study, then identifiable information will be redacted and shredded, rendering the documentation
destroyed at the conclusion of this study.
Investigator Contact Information
If you have any questions about this study, please contact:
Principal investigator: Sherick Fogarthy, fogarthy@usc.edu
IRB Contact Information
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

130
Appendix C
Code Book
Initial code Pattern code Initial theme Theme No. of
occurrences
Black leaders
experienced
inequities in
workplace privileges,
unlike White
counterparts
86
Different
standards
54
Biased measure of
standards at work
39
Had difficulties in making an
impact
18
Low expectations of others 6
No connections 9
Choosing not to socialize 1
Not interested in socializing 3
Prioritized family 4
Not invited 1
Not part of the “club” 1
Took longer to be promoted
compared to non-POCs
3
Had to have higher credentials
than White counterparts
17
Obtained higher education for
promotion opportunities
2
Need to prove oneself over and
over
8
Achievements are discounted 1
Achievements are discredited 2
Almost discouraged to pursue
career advancement
1
Held accountable for no
valid reason
15
Got blamed for others’ mistakes 3
Experienced since childhood 1
Got suspended for no valid
reason
1

131
Held to a higher accountability
than White counterparts
12
Had a small margin of error 10
Lacked
resources
32
Did not receive the same
support as White
counterparts
17
Did not receive help as a new
hire
4
Not given the same
opportunities as others
3
Not given the same resources as
White counterparts
10
Had no mentors 6
Had to rely on themselves
for resources
15
Had to seek out mentors 11
Had to speak up for oneself 2
Lack of feedback 2
Organization is not
fully committed to
diversity and
inclusion
31
Difficulty in
building racial
discrimination
cases
20
Difficult to determine
racial discrimination cases
Fear of retaliation 2
Felt underpaid but unsure of
inequities
1
Leniency with microaggressions 2
Perceived oneself to be paid fairly
3
Stereotyped 1
Lack of
commitment
8
Poor hiring practices
Few Black people hired 2
Filling a diversity requirement 6

132
Not opening
communication
Racism not spoken of 1
Black leaders’
experiences of
unconscious bias
23
Experiences of
unconscious
bias
Acknowledgment that
unconscious bias is not
institutionalized
11
The bias is not structured or
institutionalized
1
“Fortunate” to not experience
much discrimination
7
Black leaders were
intentional in their
pursuit of leadership
roles
57
Intentional
pursuit
Actively sought
opportunities
6
Asked to apply for higher
position
2
Made concrete goals to be
promoted
3
Talked about compensation and
bonuses
1
Established visibility 43
Built relationships and found
support in and out of the
organization
11
A shared experience among
Black leaders
2
Built own network 2
Loved to play golf 1
Sought sponsorships 2
Proved oneself with credibility 30
Did not engage in office politics 20
Minded own business 7
Not interested in hanging out
with colleagues and superiors
10

133
Proved oneself with outcomes 1
Increased credentials 4
Developed leadership skills 1
Obtained degree to have chance
for promotion
3
Made oneself be known 4
Earned trust 2
Motivated and confident 8
Had confidence 7
Stayed motivated 1
Believed in the purpose of the
organization
1
Black leaders had a
support system in
navigating their
careers
50
Support
Allies who
advocated for
them
27
Had a coach 6
Had a mentor 10
Had someone they could trust 11
Colleagues becoming aware of
unacceptable behavior
13
Organization’s
support
10
Changing organizational
practices
4
Organization started undoing
inequities in salary
2
Organization wanted to
diversify
2
HR VP was female 1
Initiated by leader 6
Ethical regulations 1
Felt respected 2
Was in HR 1
Holding discussions 1

134
Black leaders
practiced codeswitching
67
Codeswitching
Adjust behavior to avoid
being stereotyped
28
Code-switching learned from
growing up
6
Conscious about demeanor 19
Acting professional 3
Adjust appearance 1
“Assimilated into whiteness” 2
Avoid losing temper 3
Felt the need to “transform”
while at work
5
Impostor syndrome 2
Knew their boundaries 32
Knew audience 11
Knew when to compromise and
when to stand up for oneself
11
Willing to leave the
organization where
discrimination was experienced
11
Remained transparent and true
to oneself
7
Does not compromise oneself 1
Treats everyone with respect 3
Was understanding 1
Black leaders
pursued becoming
advocates for other
persons of color
33
Advocate for
others
Perceived oneself as the
representative of POCs
17
A role model 6
Address ignorance 1
Pressure to succeed 6
Promoted inclusion and
diversity
16

135
Became a mentor
8
Black executive council
2
Defended other POCs at work
1
ERG community
3
Volunteered as part of the
corporate recruitment team
1

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The underrepresentation of African American women in corporate leadership roles

PDF

The role of race and racism in Black male medical students’ specialty selection process

PDF

Facilitators for the advancement of Hispanic/Latinx employees in corporate security

PDF

Leading as outsiders within the C-suite: a phenomenological study of Black women C-suite executives’ perspectives on White allyship in corporate America

PDF

Understanding queer leadership in corporate America

PDF

Increasing representation of Black male hip-hop educators in the community colleges in California

PDF

Black women in tech: examining experiences in tech industry workplaces

PDF

Beyond commitments: a qualitative examination of the persistent disparities faced by Black women in executive leadership roles post the 2020 crisis and beyond

PDF

An intersectional examination of inequity in Black Bahamian men’s employment experience: a critical theory and social cognitive perspective

PDF

Europe, we have a problem: the experience of Black female leaders in Europe

PDF

Burnout experienced by the dual identity of being Black and a public health department professional

PDF

An examination of the impact of diversity initiatives and their supporting roles on organizational culture: an experiential study from the perspective of diversity personnel

PDF

A neurodiverse way to hire

PDF

An examination of the perceptions of Latina leaders in STEM: identity, culture, and institutional racism

PDF

Stress and burnout: a qualitative study of the influences on female leaders' decision to leave

PDF

An improvement study of leading a sustainable electric utility future through organizational change effectiveness

PDF

Canaries in the mine: centering the voices of Black women DEI practitioners in a period of DEI resistance

PDF

“Black” workplace belonging: an examination of the lived experiences of Black faculty sense of belonging factors in community colleges

PDF

Evaluating technical support provided in online education for students with disabilities

PDF

Corporate America after Ursula Burns: building a pipeline of Black female executives

Asset Metadata

Creator Fogarthy, Sherick O. (author)

Core Title Institutional discrimination against Black men in Fortune 500 companies: a phenomenological study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-12

Publication Date 11/13/2023

Defense Date 10/17/2023

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Black men,corporate leadership,CRT,institutional discrimination,OAI-PMH Harvest,racism

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Kim, Esther C. (committee chair), Mendoza, Jeffrey M. (committee member), Seli, Helena (committee member)

Creator Email fogarthy@usc.edu,sofogart@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113766176

Unique identifier UC113766176

Identifier etd-FogarthySh-12468.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-FogarthySh-12468

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Fogarthy, Sherick O.

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20231114-usctheses-batch-1106 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu