Benefits and Disadvantages of Workplace Stereotypes - Coursework Example

Benefits and Disadvantages of Workplace Stereotypes Name: Institution: Benefits and Disadvantages of Workplace Stereotypes Introduction Stereotypes can be described as labels, or certain beliefs and characteristics accorded to a particular group of persons. These traits seek to explain why a specific cluster of people behave the way they do. Stereotypes are found in almost all social aspects of a society, from schools to workplaces. Some of them are positive while others are negative (Aina & Cameron, 2011). Their effects are equally varying, as they can be both catastrophic and advantageous at the same time. Workplaces are one of the places that experience diversity in terms or race, culture, gender and religion. Anywhere there is diversity stereotypes are bound to thrive. This paper examines different types of stereotypes in the workplace by looking at their advantages, disadvantages and possible solutions. Stereotypes in the Workplace Diversity is a common feature of most workplaces, especially multinational corporations (Grewal, 2010). One of the most prevalent stereotypes is influenced by racial and cultural differences among employees. People of Asian origin are perceived to be highly intelligent and less social (Grossman, Kim, Tan & Ford, 2008). African Americans are believed to be lazy and mostly unintelligent while those of Latin descent are seen as illegal immigrants even when they are not. Asian workers are likely to be given jobs that comply with the beliefs about them, and are regarded as office treasures due to their resourcefulness. Such employees are retained at the office and not made to interact with the company’s clients. Latino workers on the other hand are not accorded permanent jobs due to the uncertainty of their availability. The government at any moment may deport them back to their respective countries. There are religious beliefs that are also creeping into workplaces. Most Muslims are seen to be radical in their decision-making (Hafiz, 2011). All these different kinds of stereotypes influence various aspects of work. The effects can be either advantageous or detrimental. Marital status has also been the subject of stereotyping at the workplace. Single employees are perceived to be frivolous, irresponsible, and with more concern with their lives than work. This affects their concentration and efficiency when dealing with work related issues. Workers with family responsibilities are thought of as an industrious people, with ability to deliver satisfactory work because of their focus. Single people detest having to cover their married colleagues work in cases where they have to attend to family problems (Solovic, 2010). Age related stereotypes are common in workplaces that employ people of varying ages. Globalization has also contributed to this phenomenon because many people are currently working even in their prime years. Technology and competence are at the core of this type of stereotyping. Technological advances have revolutionized today’s places of work and people of previous generations might not be able to keep up with new trends. Youthful workers often sideline their older co-workers due to their inability to cope with modern day trends (Solovic, 2010). This may be the case, but there are a number of solutions for it, including training. Older workers believe the younger generation is lazy. This is not helped by the fact that employers sometimes target people of a certain age group as their potential employees. A 2011 study by consulting agency Achieve Global showed characteristics of a workplace plagued by age related issues included workers judging one another based on their age (Blauth, McDaniel, Perrin & Perrin, 2011). Gender stereotypes are similarly prevalent in many workplaces (Grewal, 2010). There are different tags given to men and women with the aim of antagonizing each other. Women with blonde hair are perceived to be dumb, as in the case of beautiful ones whom many think have been hired for their looks. Women are said to base their decisions on emotions while men are stoic and can easily suppress their feelings at work. In situations where attractive women secure promotions, the popular belief is that they have flirted with their employers. Men in most cases are guilty of making sexist jokes about their female colleagues. Single women often bear the heaviest brunt of these sexist criticisms. They are perceived to be irresponsible, and to concentrate frequently on their allure to get what they want. However, this does not apply to all women as it also varies with cultural distinctions. All these create a negative environment at the workplace (Kray, Thompson & Galinsky, 2001). Benefits of Stereotyping in the Workplace Although the problems caused by stereotyping are more documented, studies show that there are a few benefits of the same. Stereotyping is for instance, known to increase performance (Sinclair, Hardin & Lowery, 2006). This can be viewed in two dimensions. Workers may increase their levels of productivity to contradict certain stereotypes imposed on them. A group such as African Americans, who are labelled as lazy, may work hard to impress their employers and fight the stigma associated with this stereotype. In addition, workers who are already tagged as possessing high degree of intelligence will work to conform to this ideology, especially in an office setting that does not have a lot of stereotyping. This is because workplaces with stereotypes may demoralize their capability of high achievement. Workplace stereotyping is associated with increased competition that subsequently leads to more productivity. In some cases, workers may be motivated by knowing that another group is considered inferior to them (Walton & Cohen, 2001). Stereotypes often alienate workers into distinctive groups, which then struggle to decrease the antagonistic feelings brought about by their tags. In so doing, they pit themselves against one another and increase competition at the workplace. The eagerness by these workers to impress their managers and employers raises the bar on delivery of quality work. Self-confidence among certain labelled groups is boosted because of stereotyping (Conway, 2005). Asians who are not as intelligent as the belief about them suggests, are elevated in terms of self-perception. This belief makes them more assertive in order to live up to expectations. Asians also feel assured of getting jobs easily as compared to others of different racial and cultural orientations. They are on high demand because of their perceived efficiency and creativity. These workers are able to project themselves to others confidently, making it easier to work efficiently. The stereotype that men are not emotional also increases their self-esteem with regard to delivery of work related matters. They are assured that their confidence will push them up the professional ladder, although this is at the expense of their female counterparts. Disadvantages of Stereotyping Blum (2004) observes that stereotypes are bad because they are “false and unwarranted” (p. 271). Normally, stereotypes come about when people over generalize facts about specific groups. They then consider these facts in a fixed way, meaning that they apply them to all people from the stereotyped group. Additionally, Blum (2004) claims that stereotypes are “a form of morally defective regard of persons” (P. 271). These issues apply to all stereotypes, regardless of the type of profiling they entail or the person doing the labelling. One disadvantage of stereotypes is that they fail to see members of the profiled groups as individuals (Blum, 2004). When a group is stereotyped, the profiler considers all members of the group to be much similar than they actually are. The profiler fails to acknowledge that all members of the group have a wide range of characteristics and features that distinguishes them from each other. This means that there are no facts that fit them all satisfactorily. In some cases, a person may be exempted from the group’s stereotype but this just presents them as an exception (Blum, 2004). The persons exempted from the rest of the group normally find the stereotypes to be just as offensive. For instance, a young black man who is successful and earns his living honestly may take offence from the fact that many law enforcement officers consider other young black men to be criminals regardless of whether or not they actually are lawbreakers. Within the workplace, this disadvantage will play out by preventing people from noticing the unique qualities that their colleagues have. For example, an Asian person may be given accounting roles even if he or she is bad at math, because of the deception that the stereotype created. A second disadvantage of stereotypes is that they make people distance themselves morally from the profiled group (Blum, 2004). When a group is stereotyped, other people are likely to distance themselves from the group. Stereotypes make the subject group’s “otherness” much more apparent than it was or should be. This elicits varying reactions from people outside the specific group. Some will begin to feel that they are more superior to the group, while others will start to see themselves as different from the group in a manner that they previously did not. The surprising thing about these different reactions is that they are negative even when the stereotype is something admirable such as the long held belief that Asians are good at math. Through this moral distancing in the workplace, stereotypes will create divisions within the workers such that employees may segregate themselves into groups that make them feel more comfortable. More often than not, issues such as race, religion and age will determine the composition of these groups. Another disadvantage of stereotyping is that it affects performance in the relevant tasks. Research has revealed that when a group of people is aware of an existing stereotype regarding a certain task, they are likely to perform poorly in that job (Kray, Thompson & Galinsky, 2001). Scientists claim that their performance is affected even when the group does not believe the stereotype that concerns them (Grossman et al., 2008). Stereotypes regarding performance in certain tasks also affect the groups that are not stereotyped (Paul, 2012). For instance, white people are likely to do worse in a mathematics test if they are told that the test is supposed to see if Asians are actually better at math. Within the context of the workplace, these stereotypes are likely to affect the performance of employees in various crucial tasks. This impact may then extend to the firm’s overall performance and have serious repercussions for the company. Stereotyping also prevents people from noticing the variety found within a certain group. Blum (2004) argues that stereotypes lead to the homogenization of a group in that the profiler sees all parts of the group to be similar. For instance, the stereotype that Asians are good at math may blind people from the fact that some Asian people are not good at mathematics. The same applies with African Americans where stereotypes about their criminality prevent members of other groups from noticing the black people who are hardworking and law-abiding citizens. Through the enhancement of these false perceptions, stereotypes fail to take note of the diversity that is naturally found within all groups of people. If such stereotypes are applied in the office, it is possible that some workers will be undermined because of some negative connotations attached to their racial, religious or age groups. Recommendations Kray and Shirako (2009) claim that companies can deal with stereotypes by acknowledging them. Employers need to confront the stereotype threats head on and explain how they start, the effects they have and the harm that they cause in the workplace. For instance, a firm may use stereotype reactance to fight the labels, where the affected group is encouraged to engage in behaviour that is inconsistent with the negative stereotype to dispel the false notions. For example, African-American employees may be encouraged to behave responsibly and avoid crime as a way of fighting the stereotypes that associate them with criminal activity and drug use. Additionally, by challenging these stereotypes an organization encourages its employees to analyze and question them. In some cases, this may increase the employees’ motivation to get rid of the labels, especially the negative ones. As a way of defeating negative stereotypes, Kray and Shirako (2009) propose that companies promote the positive labels. Some studies revealed that when a company promotes positive stereotypes, the labels would encourage the people that they affect to claim the associated responsibilities. Companies can promote the positive stereotypes by manipulating and controlling the messages that employees hear to reinforce praise for admirable attributes. As part of this measure, firms can also provide their employees with training on how to reduce the impact of negative stereotypes. However, the company would have to apply this technique with care because in some cases, positive stereotypes affect the performance of the people that they exempt. Companies can also fight stereotypes by increasing the number of employees that they hire from minority groups (Kray & Shirako, 2009). Most negative stereotypes affect groups that are considered minorities. By hiring more people from these labelled groups, companies send a subliminal message that they encourage diversity in the workplace and that it will not tolerate stereotyping and marginalizing. Some of these employees may act as role models for other members of the profiled groups. Their success will encourage other people to break barriers set by stereotypes, while at the same time discouraging other people. Experts also recommend that organizations value the individual effort of their employees as a way of combating stereotypes (Kray & Shirako, 2009). By valuing individual efforts that certain employees have made, the company will be promoting positive individual traits such as hard work, integrity and creativity, which cut across all groupings. Promoting these admirable values will help reduce the threat that the negative stereotypes create. The values also have the added advantage of References Aina, O.E. & Cameron, P.A. (2011). Why does gender matter? Counteracting stereotypes with young children. Dimensions of early childhood, 39 (3), 11-20. Blauth, C., McDaniel, J., Perrin, C. & Perrin, P.B. (2011). Age-based stereotypes: Silent killer of collaboration and productivity. Florida: AchieveGlobal, Inc. Blum, L. (2004, November). Stereotypes and stereotyping: A moral analysis. Philosophical Papers, 33(3), 251-289. Conway, C. (2005). A psychological effect of stereotypes. Retrieved from http://www.bostonfed.org/economic/nerr/rr2005/q1/section3c.pdf Grewal, D. (2010, November). Reducing the impact if negative stereotypes on the careers of minority and women scientists. Science Careers. Retrieved from http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2010_11_26/caredit.a1000113 Grossman, R.W., Kim, S., Tan, S. & Ford, T.E. (2008). ‘Stereotype threat’ and recommendations for overcoming it. Retrieved from http://sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/files/stereotype_threat_notes.pdf Hafiz, D. (2011, January 1). What’s in a (Muslim) name? HuffingtonPost. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dilara-hafiz/whats-in-a-name_3_b_802429.html Kray, L.J. & Shirako, A. (2009). Stereotype threat in organizations: An examination of its scope, triggers, and possible interventions. Institute for Research on Labor and Employment Working Paper Series. Retrieved from http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers/195-09.pdf Kray, L.J., Thompson, L. & Galinsky, A. (2001). Battle of the sexes: Gender stereotype confirmation and reactance in negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80 (6), 942-958 Paul, A.M. (2012, October 6). It’s not me, it’s you. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/opinion/sunday/intelligence-and-the-stereotype-threat.html Sinclair, S., Hardin, C.D & Lowery, B.S. (2006). Self-stereotyping in the context of multiple social identities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 529-542. Solovic, S.W. (2010, May). Workplace stereotyping: A silent productivity destroyer. HuffingtonPost. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/susan-wilson-solovic/workplace-stereotyping-a_b_564233.html Walton, G.M. & Cohen, G.L. (2003). Stereotype lift. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 456-467. Read More