About

Emilio J. Castilla is the NTU Professor of Management and a Professor of Work and Organization Studies at the MIT Sloan School of Management. He is currently the co-director of the Institute for Work and Employment Research. Castilla joined the MIT Sloan faculty in 2005, after serving as a faculty member in the Management Department of the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. His research primarily focuses on the sociological aspects of work and employment, examining how social and organizational processes influence key organizational and employment outcomes over time. He studies recruitment, hiring, development, and job mobility of employees within and across organizations and locations, as well as the impact of teamwork and social relations on performance and innovation. Castilla has published extensively in top academic journals and edited volumes, and has authored a book on longitudinal methods in social science research. His teaching interests include Strategic Human Resource Management, Strategies for People Analytics, Leading Effective Organizations, Talent Management, Career Management, and Organizational Behavior, and he has taught in various degree programs at MIT Sloan, the Wharton School, and other international universities.

Research topics

• Political Science
• Public relations
• Psychology
• Law
• Sociology
• Social psychology
• Computer Science
• Demography
• Economics

Selected publications

• Gendered Reactions to the Request for Soft Skills

  Academy of Management Proceedings · 2025-07-01

  articleSenior author

  Organizations use job postings to communicate information about open positions, as well as to make requests for certain skills and qualifications. Job seekers use that information to decide whether or not to apply to the firm, and organizations rely on this interaction to attract applicants and populate the candidate pool for consideration. Often included in these advertisements is the request soft skills and interpersonal qualities that do not directly relate to a job task—for example, a flexible attitude, effective time management, and the ability to take initiative. In this study, we look at a firm that changes the content of their job postings. We find that by removing language in job postings surrounding soft skills that are ambiguously connected to concrete job tasks, the firm can attract more applicants. Applications from both men and women increase after the change, but the impact on women is even greater. However, for job postings to a higher organizational level, the effects go away. Our findings are consistent with the idea that at higher hierarchical or status levels in the organization, or later along a career path, workers are less sensitive to requests for soft skills.

  PublisherDOI

• The Meritocracy Paradox

  Columbia University Press eBooks · 2025-11-14 · 2 citations

  book1st authorCorresponding

  Meritocracy—the idea that individuals should be rewarded based on their talent and hard work—is one of the most widely celebrated ideals in education, business, and government. It shapes how organizations recruit, evaluate, and promote, promising a fair system where the best rise to the top. But meritocracy has increasingly come under criticism for deepening inequality and reinforcing bias. How did a once-progressive ideal meant to level the playing field end up contributing to unfairness and privilege? What happens when organizations treat merit as their guiding principle without questioning how it’s defined or applied? Most importantly, how can today’s leaders recognize and fix what’s gone wrong? In The Meritocracy Paradox , Emilio J. Castilla offers timely new answers to these fundamental questions. He analyzes the structure and culture of meritocracy inside organizations, providing real-world examples—from hiring and merit-based bonuses in companies to admissions decisions at elite universities—to show how personal biases and social barriers can undermine the values and outcomes these systems are meant to uphold. Castilla provides practical, research-backed frameworks to help organizations achieve true fairness and opportunity for all. Drawing on successful data-based interventions, he presents concrete strategies for improving recruitment, selection, evaluation, promotion, and compensation processes—revealing how motivated leaders can identify and correct shortcomings with cost-effective, targeted solutions that deliver proven results. The Meritocracy Paradox is essential reading for anyone seeking to understand and improve the intersection of merit, fairness, and equal opportunity in organizations.

  PublisherDOI

• Para la investigación de estructuaras grandes, procesos amplios, y comparaciones enormes

  Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas · 2024-03-13

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  A lo largo del siglo XIX, grandes cambios sociales, políticos y económicos (y su incomprensión) crean el contexto idóneo para el surgimiento de un aparato científico-ideológico peculiar con el que analizar y explicar esa compleja realidad del momento. En el artículo se presenta un análisis crítico de los modelos de estudio adoptados por las Ciencias Sociales para la investigación de grandes estructuras y procesos sociales, muchos de los cuales siguen siendo utilizados en análisis contemporáneos. Se propone un modelo alternativo (un programa de interpretación social que promueva la comparación sistemática y crítica, y el análisis con base histórica). Este innovador método descarta las generalizaciones como objeto último del estudio social en un intento de comprender los procesos de modernización de las últimas décadas.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Practices: Unveiling the Unforeseen Outcomes

  Academy of Management Proceedings · 2024-07-09

  article

  Promoting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) is crucial for organizations, yet these efforts can inadvertently lead to negative consequences for women and racial minorities. This symposium aims to delve into the underlying mechanisms of these unintended outcomes and highlight effective solutions. By inviting leading scholars in this domain to share ongoing research, this platform seeks to dissect the complexities of DEI implementation, paving the way for more nuanced strategies. It also aims to identify proactive measures to minimize negative impacts and amplify positive outcomes. With a forward-looking approach, this symposium endeavors to shape the future trajectory of DEI research and practice, offering valuable insights for fostering inclusive and equitable organizational environments. Gender differences in perceptions of meritocracy Author: Shoshana Schwartz; Christopher Newport U. Author: Isabel Fernandez-Mateo; London Business School Author: Herminia Ibarra; London Business School Author: Dana Kanze; London Business School Parental Leaves and Men’s Communality Advantage at Work Author: Anja Krstic; York U., Toronto Caught Between Female Tokenism And Female Dominance Author: Anthea (Yan) Zhang; Rice U. The Gendering of Job Application Sources: Analyzing Hiring Outcomes across Job Titles, Organizations Author: Emilio J. Castilla; MIT Sloan School of Management Author: Francesco Sguera; UCP - Católica Lisbon School of Business & Economics

  PublisherDOI

• Mérito y discriminación dentro de las organizaciones diferencias en la evaluación y retribución de empleados/as según género y origen étnico

  Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas · 2024-02-08 · 3 citations

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  Este artículo investiga cómo los procesos organizativos que se utilizan hoy en día para fijar la retribución de los trabajadores/as pueden generar des igualdad salarial dentro de las organizaciones. Utilizando datos de la plantilla de una gran organización del sector privado, identifico y examino las dos etapas principales de una práctica común en la empresa ?la retribución variable de los empleados/as utilizando una gratificación por rendimiento? en la que pueden introducirse disparidades por género y origen étnico en la distribución de las subidas salariales. En la primera etapa del programa de la gratificación por rendimiento, este artículo muestra que la fase de evaluación del rendimiento, debido a su subjetividad, se ve afectada por razones de género, grupo étnico o nacionalidad. Además de esta primera etapa, este artículo pone de manifiesto que esos prejuicios afectan a la traducción del rendimiento en aumentos salariales durante la fase de fijación de la retribución salarial: Mi análisis longitudinal demuestra que empleados/ as estructuralmente equivalentes (es decir, en el mismo puesto y unidad de trabajo, con el mismo supervisor/a y el mismo capital humano) obtienen aumentos salariales diferentes incluso después de haber recibido la misma puntuación en la evaluación del rendimiento, simplemente debido a su género, origen étnico o nacionalidad. Concluyo con una discusión sobre la relevancia de estos resultados para la literatura sociológica existente sobre discriminación y desigualdad salarial por género y origen étnico dentro de las organizaciones contemporáneas.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Bringing Worker Voice into Generative AI

  2024-03-27 · 13 citations

  articleOpen access

  The purpose of this article is to identify ways to bring workers’ voices into the development and use of generative artificial intelligence (AI). Drawing on more than fifty interviews we conducted, we identify lessons new deployments of generative AI tools can take from research on worker voice to ensure that the adoption and use of generative AI is beneficial for workers, organizations, and society. Evidence from recent interviews and past research indicates that input from workers can increase the likelihood that organizations use generative AI tools effectively and workers’ job quality improves. The evidence collected also suggests that generative AI is particularly well-suited to “bottom-up” development and use based on workforce experimentation. Moreover, we document the growth in labor union interest in and capacity for collaborating with business, developer, and academic institutions, negotiating new collective bargaining provisions governing use of AI, and educating their members on these issues. We then discuss how workers can be involved throughout the technology development and implementation process. Our recommendations outline steps for ensuring that generative AI will both drive innovation and help shape the future of work to the benefit of all stakeholders.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Collecting, Coding, and Analyzing Observational Records From Real Organizations: “Best in Class” Analytical Techniques

  2023-01-01

  bookSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• The Gendering of Job Postings in the Online Recruitment Process

  Management Science · 2023 · 49 citations

  1st authorCorresponding
  • Political Science
  • Psychology
  • Public relations

  Gender segregation remains a significant problem in many occupations and organizations. To solve this problem, many U.S. employers now seek to craft gender-neutral job postings. In this article, we investigate whether such employer recruitment efforts are successful in encouraging women and men to apply equally for jobs. Specifically, we move beyond the well-studied effects of the gender typing of occupations, organizations, and industries to study the extent to which the recruiting language used in job postings influences the actual preapplication behavior of job seekers of different genders. Using unique data from both a large-sample observational field study (Study 1) and a field experiment study (Study 2) of real online job postings, we first assess the gendered language mechanism by testing whether stereotypical femininity in the wording that recruiters use to advertise otherwise identical jobs differently influences female and male job seekers’ interest in applying. We then assess the recruiter gendering mechanism by testing whether the gender of the recruiter and the femininity in the wording recruiters use when presenting themselves to job seekers further contribute to gender job search disparities. Our analyses ultimately show negligible effects for both the gendering of job postings or of the job poster, and we therefore conclude that, in practice, employers’ efforts to simply tweak the language of recruitment messages do not matter much for gender equality and diversity. This paper was accepted by Olav Sorenson, organizations. Funding: The authors received financial support from the James S. Hardigg (1945) Work and Employment Fund and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Sloan School of Management. Supplemental Material: The data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.4674 .

  PublisherDOI

• The Implications of Gendered Expectations for Worker Outcomes

  Academy of Management Proceedings · 2023-07-24

  articleSenior author

  Whereas feminine stereotypes center on communal characteristics such as helpfulness and cooperativeness, male stereotypes center on agentic characteristics including competence and assertiveness (Abele, 2003; Fiske & Stevens, 1993). Broad beliefs and specific stereotypes about gender do more than just describe common gender differences in behavior, they also prescribe how men and women ought to behave (Gorman, 2005; Heilman, 1983; Perry, Davis-Blake, & Kulik, 1994). Such prescriptions may lead to gender inequality by shaping expectations in two distinct ways. First, evaluators assessing both men and women are apt to interpret behaviors demonstrated by male and female candidates based on the consistency of these behaviors vis-à-vis dominant gendered beliefs (e.g., Correll, Weisshaar, Wynn, & Wehner, 2020). Second, gendered beliefs shape people’s understanding about how others expect them to behave, thus, at times, leading individuals to conform to what they see as the desired, or expected, behaviors based on their gender (e.g., Correll et al., 2017). The aim of this symposium is to deepen and expand our understanding of how such gendered beliefs and expectations both shape the how men and women are evaluated by others and lead men and women to engage differently, specifically in ways that often disadvantage women. This symposium brings together economic sociologists, strategic management scholars, and organizational behavior scholars using a wide range of methods (e.g., observational, natural language processing, experimental) to uncover the processes leading to gender inequalities in the workplace. In line with the annual meeting theme, Putting the Worker Front and Center, each of the papers in this symposium focuses on worker behavior and the ways these behaviors can lead to gender differences in outcomes. Furthermore, the papers in this symposium examine these gender dynamics both at the hiring interface and over time among existing employees within organizations, thus offering insights about worker experiences with inequality at numerous critical moments for organizations seeking to create equitable workplaces. Differential Effects of Transparency: How Transparency Shapes Male and Female Evaluative Behavior Author: Mabel Abraham; Columbia Business School Author: Brittany Bond; Cornell U. Catching Negativity: Gender and the Dynamics of Emotional Contagion in Email Author: Sanaz Mobasseri; Boston U. Questrom School of Business Gender Differences in Career Advancement When Re-entering the Workforce After Entrepreneurship Author: Tristan L. Botelho; Yale School of Management Author: Daniel Fehder; USC Marshall School of Business Author: Milan Miric; U. of Southern California -Marshall School of Business The Intersectional Implications of the Gender Composition of Applicant Pools Author: Claire Daviss; Stanford U.

  PublisherDOI

• Through the Front Door: Why Do Organizations (Still) Prefer Legacy Applicants?

  American Sociological Review · 2022 · 12 citations

  1st authorCorresponding
  • Sociology
  • Political Science
  • Sociology

  When screening candidates, organizations often give preference to certain applicants on the basis of their familial ties. This “legacy preference,” particularly widespread in college admissions, has been criticized for contributing to inequality and class reproduction. Despite this, studies continue to report that legacies are persistently admitted at higher rates than non-legacies. In this article, we develop a theoretical framework of three distinct sense-making strategies at play when decision-makers screen applicants into their organizations—the meritocratic, material, and diversity logics. We then apply this framework to investigate how legacy preferences either support or undermine each organizational logic using comprehensive data on the population of applicants seeking admission into one elite U.S. college. We find strong support for the material logic at the cost of the other two organizational logics: legacies make better alumni after graduation and have wealthier parents who are materially-positioned to be more generous donors than non-legacy parents. Contrary to the meritocratic logic, we find that legacies are neither more qualified applicants nor better students academically. From a diversity standpoint, legacies are less racially diverse than non-legacies. We conclude with a discussion of our study’s implications for understanding the role of family relationships and nepotism in today’s organizational selection processes.

  PublisherDOI

Frequent coauthors

• Ben A. Rissing

  12 shared

• Jordi Caïs

  Universitat de Barcelona

  3 shared

• Hye Jin Rho

  3 shared

• Julie Shah

  2 shared

• Francesco Sguera

  Universidade Católica Portuguesa

  2 shared

• Ethan Poskanzer

  University of Colorado System

  2 shared

• George Lan

  2 shared

• Stephen Benard

  Indiana University Bloomington

  2 shared

Labs

• MIT Sloan ManagementPI

Awards & honors

• Richard Beckhard Memorial Prize (2017)
• Thinkers50 2025 Talent Award Shortlist