Unveiling the Canvas Ceiling: A Multidisciplinary Literature Review of Refugee Employment and Workforce Integration

Increasing levels of displacement and the need to integrate refugees in the workforce pose new challenges to organizations and societies. Extant research on refugee employment and workforce integration currently resides across various disconnected disciplines, posing a significant challenge for management scholars to contribute to timely and relevant solutions. In this paper, we endeavour to address this challenge by reviewing and synthesizing multidisciplinary literature on refugee employment and workforce integration. Using a relational framework, we organize our findings around three levels of analysis – institutional, organizational and individual – to outline the complexity of factors affecting refugees’ employment outcomes. Based on our analysis, we introduce and elaborate on the phenomenon of the canvas ceiling ? a systemic, multilevel barrier to refugee workforce integration and professional advancement. The primary contributions of this paper are twofold. First, we map and integrate the multidisciplinary findings on the challenges of refugee workforce integration. Second, we provide management scholarship with a future research agenda to address the knowledge gap identified in this review and advance practical developments in this domain.     

Introspection as intra-professionalism in social and health care

This article analyses two cases from health and social care, adopting a psycho-societal approach. The analysis highlights how professionalism evolves and develops through an introspection of the relational and scenic processes between professionals, as well as between the professional and the client or patient. As a phenomenon at the core of professional practice, it will be argued that introspection needs to recognize and encompass the intra- and inter-psychic responses and understandings of professionals and their clients and patients. The first case places supervision as a learning space, where framing and complex exchanges of loss and confirmation, and of denial and displacement take place between a group of social workers and their supervisor. In the second case, it becomes apparent how the research interview opens up an opportunity for processing the emotions and socially critical experiences involved in hospital work.     

Divided Loyalties? Understanding Variation in Latino Attitudes Toward Immigration*

Objective. In this article, we develop and test a model of competing theoretical explanations of Latino attitudes toward immigration; specifically examining their policy preferences on legal immigration, illegal immigration, and a proposed policy for dealing with illegal immigrants. We also consider whether Latino attitudes toward legal and illegal immigration are related and comprise a single coherent structure. Method. Using data from a 2004 national survey of Latinos, we perform regression, logit, and ordered logit analyses to examine the determinants of Latino attitudes toward immigration. Results. We highlight three important findings. First, our results demonstrate “within‐group” differences in immigration attitudes among Latinos, based on both national origin and generational status; we find that Mexicans are more pro‐immigration than Latinos from other countries and that foreign‐born Latinos have much more positive attitudes about immigration than second‐generation and third‐generation Latinos. Second, we find that Latino support for various aspects of immigration is primarily a function of ethnic and linguistic identity and attachment to American culture, with self‐interest, contextual variables, and political and demographic attributes playing a smaller, more specialized role. Finally, we demonstrate that Latino attitudes toward legal and illegal immigration are highly interrelated. Conclusion. There is a coherent structure underlying Latino attitudes toward legal immigration, illegal immigration, and a policy option for dealing with illegal immigrants. Our tests of competing theoretical approaches reveal the importance of national origin and ethnic attachment and acculturation in explaining differences among Latinos on their attitudes toward immigration.