Managing Diversity Affiliation - Literature review Example

Managing Diversity Affiliation Managing Diversity The term diversity in the current American culture and other civilizations is one that has many misconceptions and that is clouded with confusion. To some, the term is synonymous with affirmative action and the focus it receives the same as that of affirmative action. The term has often elicited reaction in circles and arguments that center around gender, race and ethnicity. The reality however is that the term is quite different in meaning and construct than it has been made to be in the past. Diversity is not a concept to overlook in workplaces and organizations. According to many scholars, diversity refers to the differences and otherness of human qualities of other people or groups other than one’s own or those of the groups that one belongs to. Some of the dimensions that are captured by the term diversity, in fact, overlap with dimensions of affirmative actions and equal employment opportunities. Diversity dimensions include gender, age, ancestry, ethnicity, physical qualities, sexual orientation, race and marital status. Additionally, educational background, military experience, parental status, work experience, income differences and geographical location among many other elements form the basis of diversity dimensions. These elements are vital in the management of workforce and in determining the interaction with others, motivation, performance and success. If they are handled properly, they lead to increased motivation and fulfilment whereas if they are not handled properly, they cause employee dissatisfaction. Different researchers in the past have found out conflicting results on the issue of diversity and workforce. For example, Rynes & Rosen, (1995) found out that training managers on the value of diversity did not improve the diversity on the top levels of management or the overall organization setup. There is a recognition in the business circles that diversity is of great value in the success of a business and the establishment of a lasting business culture. The innovativeness and the creativity that diversity brings to firms is a concept that is largely adopted by many scholars. The above findings are a clear pointer that the problem of diversity as experienced in the American and other cultures is not that of accepting and recognizing the value of diversity. Instead, it is a culture that is inclusive and diverse (Bassett-Jones, 2005). The issue at hand is the creating of a culture that ensures that managers and leaders are committed to diversity and inclusiveness. The emphasis of equal employment opportunities and affirmative action have for such a long time been used by organization in their defense against discrimination. However, diversity management focuses on appreciating the differences among all workforce as being a positive element. The defining aspect of diversity management is that it starts internally and not through external legislation. It is driven by business case and the changing nature of markets. The desire for an organization to create an inclusive culture that embraces diversity is the root of diversity. Given that diversity is neither equal employment opportunities nor affirmative action, it is important to consider the strategies that are best for the attainment of this element in the workplace. The aim of the strategies that enhance workforce diversity is to increase representation, numerically of the groups that historically have been excluded. Moreover, it empowers the workforce present in the organization to be at the verge of making decisions that depict the diversity. The inclusion of the formally excluded groups should also ensure that it is done in every level and aspect of the organization. According to the international labor organization, globalization has created tremendous economic opportunities around the world. However, ILO also recognizes that the social inequalities that existed in the past have continued to deepen among societies in the same work environment. According to the ILO 2009 survey report of the unemployment rates, the gap of unemployment, for example, has continued to worsen. The rate of unemployment of women in developing regions and most other regions of the world is lower than that of men. The rate of men unemployment in developed economies remains higher than that of women. The shift of the type of work that these two genders involved in over the course of 2002 through 2007, according to ILO, has changed immensely. In the past, for example, women were confined in the agricultural sector while men were involved in the service sector. Recent events show that the dynamics of sectorial preference have changed and majority of women are joining the service sector especially in advanced economies. Diversity management at the workplace has to capture both the shifts in the behaviors that are depicted by the two genders as well as manage the shift to ensure equilibrium and inclusion. The way to ensure diversity lies in the enactment of policies centered on people. However, to do this without the construct of human resource management that functions based on processes will be in vain. Diversity management and human resource have to be dealt with as overlapping concepts in business strategy. Studies in the past that have used the tools of human resource management have indicated the possibility of dealing with diversity management using the processes of human resource management. Processes like hiring, recruitment, advancement, appraisal and rewarding have greater chances of creating diversity and enhancing the inclusion in the workforce. Such can happen if they are dealt with in the light of diversity management as opposed to if the two concepts are handled differently (Goodman, Fields, & Blum, 2003). With many businesses across the globe adopting the element of diversity management under the umbrella of human resource management, the results remain unfulfilling. On the one hand, many businesses continue to preach the gospel of diversity while they experience fatigue in the area of diversity. On the other hand, many other businesses that have adopted diversity management have enjoyed increased benefits. The question on the minds of many researchers is why this is the case. Dr. Martin Davidson suggests that the reason this has been the case is found in the basic assumptions that organizations have adopted in grounding their understanding of diversity and its benefits (Davidson, 2011). Many of the organizations that report poor results and outcome concerning diversity management have systems with positions created that have managers in charge of diversity management. Dr. Martin argues that the failure of these organizations to ground the adoption and implementation of diversity management in the culture of the organization is the beginning of the downfall. It is not enough to leverage the idea of diversity management in the workplace. The management has to go the extra step and leverage diversity while developing skills of personnel and the environment of work to be inclusive. Dass & Parker, (1999) suggests that the best strategies in dealing with diversity management are the use of human resource management processes. She recommends evaluating the difference and similarities between affirmative action ad equal employment opportunities in order to appreciate the use and value of diversity. She divides the effective strategies into categories of strategic level, tactical level and the operational level of human resource management. In strategic level, she advocates cultural diversity that is etched in vision and philosophy of the organization. In regards to tactical level practices, she advocates training, staffing, remuneration, development and appraisal processes as a vehicle through which human resource management can be used to effect diversity management. These are then translated to the operational level practice, which focuses on educating the employee, communication with stakeholders and creation of a flexible employment balance. This model is one that is adopted widely by many researchers that use human resource approach in dealing with diversity management. This approach is compared below with the results that were seen in top fifty companies with best diversity management practices in 2014 according to DiversityInc. In 2014 companies that were ranked top fifty with regards to diversity by DiversityInc were considered on the basis of the following aspects: talent pipelines, talent development with equitable measures, leadership commitment and supplier diversity. The existing talents, mentoring programs, resource groups of employees, personal communication and other minor elements were also considered as the criteria for ranking. The companies that were top had some common elements about diversity management. These included a clear value of diversity attached in the organizations communication of its mission, philosophy and vision and goals. The organizations also had clear drivers that had been identified for diversity. These drivers were ways that assessed and evaluated how diversity could improve the outcome of the business. Some of the specific drivers included supplier strengths, creativity and innovation, growth of markets and satisfaction of the customer if diversity was implemented (DiversityInc, 2014). In addition, these organizations had the top-level management involved in the marketing and advocating diversity management. It is in contrast to having a mere manager in charge of diversity in the human resource department. It does ensure that diversity and diversity management is given the right attention at all levels in the organization including the board level where decision-making, and policies that influence the culture of the organizations are made. Other strategies that were seen in these companies were those of having advisory boards, diversity councils and resource groups of employees in the organization. The importance of these was the creation of mentoring programs that ensure the sustainability and continuity of diversity management in line with the business vision and mission. From the analysis of these firms, it was clear that diversity management was more than a function of human resource. Rather it was depicted as an obligation of every stakeholder in the organization. The commitment level that is needed to make diversity management a reality and beneficial to organizations requires the involvement of partners and stakeholders to make inclusion a success (Hays-Thomas, 2004). In addressing the issue of inclusion in diversity management, it is important to consider the strategies adopted to manage diversity in human resource by different organization. These strategies include resistance perspective, fairness, discriminatory perspective, legitimacy, access perspective, and the learning perspective. The responses to these strategies are key models in explaining the effectiveness of diversity management. These responses include reactive, defensive, accommodative and proactive models (Yang & Konrad, 2011). Choosing the best approach that an organization can use in diversity management is influenced by several factors. They include the prevailing pressure on the organization to adopt diversity, the type of diversity that the organization aims to adopt diversity together with the attitude of the management towards diversity and inclusion (Barak, 2013). These elements make diversity management diverse in every organization even within the organizations that use human resource management processes as a tool for implementing and monitoring diversity management. Examples of the pressures that face organizations in diversity management include external and internal pressure. An example of external pressure is a legislation that targets increased hiring of employees of color in an organization to increase their ratio and reduce their discrimination. These pressures, whether internal or external are responsible cumulatively for the structural organizations, priorities, perspectives and managerial strategies that are adopted by the organization in diversity management. The perspective of the management changes in the face of these pressures from resistance perspective to the learning perspective (Harvey & Allard, 2009). The shift in strategies also causes a myriad change in responses adopted from reactive responses to proactive responses. In equal measure, changes in perspective and response lead to changes in the implementation of diversity change from an episodic approach to a systemic approach. Resistance perspective and reactive response Throughout history, different managers have managed change differently. In the 1960s in America, the civil rights movements fighting against color discrimination faced a lot of resistance from the majority of the whites in America. The reason for the resistance then was the fear of displacement by the minority black population. In this modern age, organizations are still resisting to change in diversity. Though color may not be a bad issue in the present American setup, other elements such as political party affiliations and sex orientation (gay and lesbian) are still the basis of diversity resistance. These groups do perceive increased pressure from within and without as a threat to the already established structure of functionality. Managers in such situation have responded through reaction through denial or avoidance or manipulation (Triana, Garcia, & Colella, 2010). Some of the reasons that organizations in such cases give are that changes are either the claim of ineffectiveness or the claims that diversity modification is too expensive for shareholders to adopt. However, research has shown that there are instances where a reactive response pays of in the organization. The special conditions for this truth are when the pressure is low (Kirton & Greene, 2010). For example, a female club where the pressure to hire a male worker is low and resistance is easy to maintain, as the marketing point of the club is that it is exclusively female. Discrimination perspective and defensive response The discrimination and fairness as a perspective have also been in operation in the business circles as a strategy to deal with diversity management. This perspective is founded on the assumption that the rule of law is a remedy to the inclusion of minority groups that have been left out in the organization. The problem with this perspective in dealing with diversity management is that it bases its argument on the affirmative action plans and equal employment opportunities. As such, the creation of a culture that enhances diversity management is not considered (Klarsfeld, 2010). Using this paradigm in solving diversity problem in the workplace focuses on individuals and groups that have been excluded historically. An example is having the diversity manager in an organization come from one of these groups. This method is common in most organizations without even the organization knowing that they are applying it. A good example is manifested when organization advertise for positions and specify that female applicants will be preferred (Kumra & Manfredi, 2012). A common problem of this paradigm is the unfairness it creates in the organization. Since its basis is the legal requirements, employees in the organization are bound to view their managers as posing barriers to their career advancement in order to be fair to others as stipulated by the law. Equally, if the management takes up the role of diversity management through quota enforcement, there is likely to be incidences of hiring unqualified or unfit personnel (Nel, 2011). Legitimacy and access perspective and accommodative response The other perspective in diversity management that is widely advocated is the perspective of legitimacy and access. It is widely accepted that diversity brings variety. This element of tapping into diverse customers through tapping into diverse workforce markets has been the greatest motivator in adopting diversity in the workplace. With regards to the legitimacy, companies and business may decide to adopt diversity as a marketing strategy. The adoption strategy may encourage their customers to look into their company and see people like themselves well represented in the structure of the company. The overriding similarities of businesses that use legitimacy and access perspective have the tendency to put emphasis on reasons that are bottom-line. To such management structures, diversity is merely a business necessity with business objectives like reducing turnover, reducing costs and increasing profitability. Whether it is the right perspective or not is under debate. The fact is that this perspective brings on board diversity weather it is a requirement of the law or otherwise and has diverse elements of inclusion are both recognized and valued by organizations that choose this perspective. Unlike the other two perspectives above, this perspective is closely associated with accommodative response, which is informed by the demographic pressure within the environment of operation (Konrad, Pringle, & others, 2006). Learning perspective and proactive response Finally, there are organizations that apply the learning perspective in diversity management. IT is unique in that it views differences and similarities as dual elements in workforce diversity. This perspective also seeks numerous objectives from diversity including innovation, social responsibility, efficiency, employee development and customer satisfaction among others. In addition, this perspective evaluates the short term and the long-term implications of diversity. While this perspective, the element does encourage legal compliance of an organization with diversity requirement. It also offers opportunities to employees to engage in training and adaptation of better ways to embrace diversity beyond the requirement of the law. Its approaches are similar to multiculturalism as it emphasizes the unity in the face of diversity. Organizations that employ the use of this perspective are regarded as early adopters of the concept of diversity management. They require advanced creativity to make all the elements included in diversity to develop a similarity sense in the functioning and culture of the business (McMahon, 2011). The pressures within and without the environment vary in intensity and even in conflict. While adjusting to these pressures and using the above perspectives and responses in diversity management is important, it is the priority that managers attach to diversity and the different types of diversity elements that make them worthwhile. Whereas there are managers that view diversity in its many forms as strategic, other managers prefer to deal with diversity from the various elements of diversity. According to the later managers, race, for example, as an element of diversity might only be a marginal issue in his or her priority list. The priority managers attach to diversity and the pressures to adopt diversity leads to three approaches that are used in implementing diversity management. These are the systemic approach, freestanding approach and the episodic approach (Goodman et al., 2003). Episodic approaches are viable in the face of minimum pressures to diversity and where the managers think of diversity as a marginal issue. The implementation of diversity management is, therefore, disjointed, separate and isolated from the core activities of the organization. Freestanding approach can be used in organizations that are under moderate pressure to adopt diversity and where the management value the issue of diversity but still consider it as a side issue to the prospects of the organization. In this implementation approach, managers may formalize diversity in the organization yet still keep it partially integrated to the core business activities. This implementation approach produces an extreme diversity of issues and sanctions as opposed to increased benefits and rewards from diversity. The systemic approach is implemented mostly in organizations that are situated in a high-end pressure environment and where the managers in the organizations value diversity and chose diversity. Since diversity is viewed as being strategic, initiatives of diversity are likely to be integrated fully into the core values and practices of the organization (Dass & Parker, 1999). Conclusion Diversity as a concept in business and human resource management requires strategies, policies and systems for its implementation and its effectiveness. The inclusion of diversity management approaches in the overall goal of the organization makes it easier to create a culture in the organization that employs diversity in operation. The priority that managers attach to diversity is equally important to the strategies that they adopt in diversity management in an organization. References Barak, M. E. M. (2013). Managing diversity: Toward a globally inclusive workplace. Sage. Bassett-Jones, N. (2005). The paradox of diversity management, creativity and innovation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 14(2), 169–175. Dass, P., & Parker, B. (1999). Strategies for managing human resource diversity: From resistance to learning. The Academy of Management Executive, 13(2), 68–80. Davidson, M. N. (2011). The End of Diversity as We Know it: Why Diversity Efforts Fail and how Leveraging Difference Can Succeed. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. DiversityInc. (2014). The DiversityInc Top 50 Companies for Diversity. Retrieved from http://www.diversityinc.com/the-diversityinc-top-50-companies-for-diversity-2014/ Goodman, J. S., Fields, D. L., & Blum, T. C. (2003). Cracks in the Glass Ceiling In What Kinds of Organizations Do Women Make it to the Top? Group & Organization Management, 28(4), 475–501. Harvey, C. P., & Allard, M. J. (2009). Understanding and managing diversity. Pearson Education. Hays-Thomas, R. (2004). Why now? The contemporary focus on managing diversity. The Psychology and Management of Workplace Diversity, 3–30. Kirton, G., & Greene, A.-M. (2010). The dynamics of managing diversity. Routledge. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=dtAzf3- q0poC&oi=fnd&pg=PR1&dq=managing+diversity+in+workplace&ots=WzsOPEvSn0& sig=7h8oW1m3Nsh-1pENxB0PZoLuzNE Klarsfeld, A. (2010). International Handbook on Diversity Management at Work: country perspectives on diversity and equal treatment. Edward Elgar Publishing. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=9Y8GlM2WIuIC&oi=fnd&pg=PR1&dq=+huma n+resource+diversity+management&ots=F6g5WcA5Oq&sig=KgqRuJfgmX5- goEjmyMtHtIf4vE Konrad, A. M., Pringle, J., & others. (2006). Handbook of workplace diversity. Sage. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=zUYHDw_detEC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq =manag ing+diversity+in+workplace&ots=GRCMjrnt7I&sig=CBIJTtYtbP1_oIMh0qHfA4PtVbQ Kumra, S., & Manfredi, S. (2012). Managing Equality and Diversity: Theory and Practice. Oxford University Press. McMahon, A. M. (2011). Does workplace diversity matter? A survey of empirical studies on diversity and firm performance, 2000-09. Journal of Diversity Management (JDM), 5(2). Nel, P. S. (2011). Human resources management. Oxford University Press. Rynes, S., & Rosen, B. (1995). A field survey of factors affecting the adoption and perceived success of diversity training. Personnel Psychology, 48(2), 247–270. Triana, M. del C., Garcia, M. F., & Colella, A. (2010). Managing diversity: how organizational efforts to support diversity moderate the effects of perceived racial discrimination on affective commitment. Personnel Psychology, 63(4), 817–843. Yang, Y., & Konrad, A. M. (2011). Understanding diversity management practices: Implications of institutional theory and resource-based theory. Group & Organization Management, 36(1), 6–38. Read More