Chapter 6. Ethnicity matters 133 6.5 Lessons and avenues for further research On the basis of the previous discussion, several lessons and avenues for further research can be distinguished. First of all, following Koopmans and Schaeffer (2015) and Jennissen et al. (2018), this study has demonstrated how important it is to use separate measures for ingroup size and outgroup fractionalization to understand the relation between organizational or group compositions and individual outcomes. While many studies in the past have used single measures for organizational homogeneity or heterogeneity, such measures can obscure substantial disparities in how members with different backgrounds experience organizational compositions and how they are affected by them. Moreover, failure to adequately capture and understand these interrelations may easily lead us to draw false conclusions about inherent group differences instead of fully grasping the mechanisms that produce these differences. Next, much work can still be done in further unravelling the black box of mediating and moderating mechanisms that link ingroup size and outgroup fractionalization to membership. For example, Leszczensky and Pink (2019) suggest that homophilic tie-formation is in part dependent on mutual strong ingroup identification. This could imply that for members who are strong ingroup identifiers, ingroup share is important to the extent that it offers ties to peers who are also strong identifiers. For members who are low identifiers, a small ingroup size might be primarily problematic if many of the outgroup members are strong ingroup identifiers. Furthermore, in this dissertation I distinguished between several explanations for why ethnic fractionalization may cause social disarray. I encourage future research to collect the data to study and, preferably, simultaneously test these mechanisms. For instance, if social disarray occurs by putting a higher demand on resources required for social interaction, this can be made visible by collecting data on members’ perceived and experienced costs and benefits of interacting with comembers. Social disarray may also be brought about by differences in network structures and these structures’ capabilities to maintain ties. This may be addressed by collecting data on the ego networks of club members to subsequently map and compare the social networks of clubs in relation to their ethnic composition. Finally, ethnic club compositions may also impact on members’ psychological well-being through invoking or suppressing
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw