Diversity and Globalization in HRD - Essay Example

Running Head: Diversity and Globalization in HRD- how does cultural diversity affect people at work. Student’s Name: Instructor: Course Code and Name: Institution: Date Submitted: Diversity and Globalization in HRD- how does cultural diversity affect people at work? Introduction Due to the exceeding rise of globalization, the culture diversity of organization is experiencing changes. This forces the HR management in any organization to undergo some transformation. With culture diversity changes in place, there is continued existence of organization’s diverse culture. Equally, the management of organizations is becoming easier by day bringing in a positive contribution to the respective duties of the HRD in these organizations (Edgar, 1999; Stephen et al. 1994; Sen, 1999; Ronald, 2006; Morrison, 2002). This paper mainly addresses the changes arising in the culture diversity of an organization because of globalization. It also focuses on the impact of culture diversity on HRD bearing the issues policies change, practices, and values as nature of work has changed. There is a cause of alarm on the influence of HRD of organizations because of the policies change, practices, and values because of the change in nature of work. Such as more women in the work force, the new generation replacing the boomers generation, transmigration in addition to the demographic shift, among other factors. Some images are idolized in some cultures and if used at the work place can affect people from this cultural background (Ronald, 2006). A substantial impact felt on cultural environment of an organization is restructuring. The HRD is facing a problem because there is change in the nature of work force demanding them to restructure. This has had distinguished implication to the HRD activities in reference to the expansion of assignments, jobs loss, new roles, corporate culture, overseas posting, and changes in rewards among others (UNESCO, 2000; Senge, 2005; Nadler & Nadler, 1990; Michael et al. 2004; Chun, 2006; Grieves, 2003). Cultural diversity is exhibiting consequential effects on employees of the organizations in their respective work places. Because of the high integration of diverse cultures in the respective organizations, individuals experience exposure to varying types of cultures a singularly common phenomenon in everyone within these organizations. Transmigration is an element that affects culture diversity of a work place. This is bringing in an element of pluralism forcing HRD to change approaches at the work place. While appreciating the fact each cultures has different expressions and identity and common similarity with others most of the time this might affect the efficiency of people at the work place as people are always on a look out not to infringe on other people culture right (Chun, 2002; Delahey, 2005; Senge, 2006; Sheila et al. 1998; Takeuchi, H. (2000). Cultural pluralism is tremendously prominent in any working environment as it integrates cultures and this is only possible if every group involved is in a position to express their interests socially, economically and politically and in doing so each member should be able to satisfy his basic need i.e. food, shelter, and clothing (Michael, 1999). The HRD is therefore forced to look into measures great to handle cultural pluralism. If one of this happens to lack then even his output at the work place is compromised. Lack of knowledge on different cultural practices leads to disrespect of each other at the work place thus affecting the productivity. Demographic changes are also some of the changes in the cultural make-up of organizations today happen forcing the leaders imperatively to understand the vibrant cultural diversity as well as how it affects their organization. Cultural diversity refers to the perpetual representation, in a particular social system, of individuals from distinctive affiliations in a different group of cultural significance (UNESCO, 2000; Senge, 2005; Nadler & Nadler, 1990; Michael et al. 2004; Chun, 2006; Grieves, 2003). This issue has been in the work place for over decades in the human resource departments. It is a bone to chew for the human resource departments to ensure that it does not affect the organizations negatively but that the organization uses it to benefit the organization positively. In general, the HR management is experiencing transformation because of the changing nature of work. Because of the high technological development, learning different cultures has become easier in a given organization and therefore, cultural relativism is of no use in organizations because it discourages and affects integration within organizations (Edgar, 1999; Stephen et al. 1994; Sen, 1999; Ronald, 2006; Morrison, 2002). Cultures face a problem of integrating with other useful cultural practices that when used well could be of help for people at the work place. The positive attributes include easy problem solving techniques relevant in organizations (Ronald, 2006). With existence of a diverse culture, there are noteworthy implications as well as challenges that the HRD have to deal with. Some researchers go further in defining culture diversity in primary as well as secondary dimensions in order to analyze the effect of changes in organizations from a broad perspective. From the primary dimensions, changes in culture diversity features in terms of age, ethnicity, physical abilities, gender, race, as well as sexual orientation (Mezirow, 1984; Michael, 1999; Morgan, et al. 2004; Mondy, 2008). The primary dimensions of diversity in any given organization have been on the limelight changing drastically because of the globalization process as it features in organizations. The dimensions shape the individual’s basic self-image and his fundamental worldview (UNESCO, 2000; Senge, 2005; Nadler & Nadler, 1990; Michael et al. 2004; Chun, 2006; Grieves, 2003). This means that the individual changes the perceptions of the work place including the tasks mandated to do and the people around him. Additionally, the dimensions influence work groups in respective workplaces as well as the society in general either negatively or positively. It is becoming one of the biggest challenges for the human resource department to handle the issue of change in culture diversity forcing them to change approaches. The changing of secondary dimensions of cultural diversity on the other hand, include geographic location, educational background, income, religious beliefs, marital status and work experience. These changing dimensions are relative to the work place because they affect an individual’s self-esteem including the self-definition (UNESCO, 2000; Senge, 2005; Nadler & Nadler, 1990; Michael et al. 2004; Chun, 2006; Grieves, 2003). It is apparent that the dimensions in diversity are not exact because there are other individual influences affecting the individuals at the work place and determining the result of the effect. The same individual influences have been changing more within work places and human resource departments feature strategies to deal with the same. Dr. Taylor Cox, Jr. appreciates that due to globalization, there have been considerable changes in culture diversity relating to issue on racial ethnicity, gender, nationality, age as well as other areas of diversity in creating the model and explaining how it works (Edgar, 1999; Stephen et al. 1994; Sen, 1999; Ronald, 2006; Morrison, 2002). The culture diversity model shows that individual group affiliations for instance age, race and gender analysis can happen on three levels including individual, group and organizational (UNESCO, 2000; Senge, 2005; Nadler & Nadler, 1990; Michael et al. 2004; Chun, 2006; Grieves, 2003). The analysis of the three collectively defines the culture diversity in an organization, which is of the essence in determining the state of the people at the work place. This cultural climate in any organization is tremendously weighty and it influences organizations as well as individual present in it (Chun, 2002; Delahey, 2005; Senge, 2006; Sheila et al. 1998; Takeuchi, H. (2000). The major effects that the changes in culture diversity have on individuals include productivity and work quality. The two are known mostly as motivated or brought down depending on the state of the culture diversity in a particular organization. From Cox’s model, a set of group, individual and organizational factors end up interacting in a given organization therefore, influencing individual outcomes and in turn, influencing organizational outcomes (Hasna & Handzic, 2003; Shaw et al. 1999; Nadler & Nadler, 1992; Knowles, 2005). Additionally, individuals as well as organizational outcomes develop influences on the affective outcomes and other achievement outcomes. Cox definition of affective outcomes is how people think and feel about their positions and jobs within the organization as well as the feelings they have towards other people in the same working environment (UNESCO, 2000; Senge, 2005; Nadler & Nadler, 1990; Michael et al. 2004; Chun, 2006; Grieves, 2003). It also includes the belief that the individuals hold about the present opportunities within the working environment. It is apparent that when individuals feel valued in any given organization, they dearly commit themselves in contributing more to attaining the goals of the respective organization. In defining achievement, Cox says it is the tangible measures, which are in theory the indexes of the contribution of the employee to a given organization. Some of these measures include ratings in employee performance and promotion rates. Therefore, in understanding the organizations diversity climate predictions can be possible on the effects on individual outcomes as well as effects of organizational effectiveness diversity. The changes in cultural diversity have brought in more changes in processes within the work place for instance problem solving, communications. The HRD must appreciate that the respective processes are essential in any given organization with changes in culture diversity either complementing them or providing challenges that are hard to overcome. Problem solving within the work place where there is diverse cultures, provides different perspectives, more critical analyses and a lesser probability of groupthink (Chun, 2002; Delahey, 2005; Senge, 2006; Sheila et al. 1998; Takeuchi, H. (2000). It is indispensable for the groups to understand the respective differences within the members of the respective group. Otherwise, the individual group may develop conflicts in the pursuit of solving the emerging problems. Creativity is of the essence in such circumstance enhanced by the diversity of the group (Edgar, 1999; Stephen et al. 1994; Sen, 1999; Ronald, 2006; Morrison, 2002). The new generation replacing the boomers generation in many organizations has brought in heavy impacts on the HRD of organizations. Delahey (2005) argues that to endure the pressures of the 21st century organizations must become accustomed to a global mindset as well as transform leadership to be competitive globally. In other words, the organizations including their leaders must learn the approaches of managing transformations in culture diversity within and outside the organization. Grieves (2003) adds that if organizations do not conform to such changes, they risk losing their competitive edge (Mezirow, 1984; Michael, 1999; Morgan, et al. 2004; Mondy, 2008). It is equally beneficial for organizations to learn principles or motivation and changes implementation in the training programs to effect critical culture changes that improve conditions in the work force. There is also need to recognize the contributions of individual members so; the respective individuals develop a will to share the espoused creative ideas among other members in the group. Finally, the element of communications poses at times as an enormous obstacle to diverse culture. The communication differences relating to culture at times become the foremost source of group’s misunderstandings therefore, ultimately lowering workgroup effectiveness, which is essential in any work place. In discussing culture diversity and its change because of globalization, it is indispensable to look into some of the factors behind the diversity and analyze the effect they bring forth. Identity is one of diversity in cultures of an organization that could influence the climate at the work place following a change (Hasna & Handzic, 2003; Shaw et al. 1999; Nadler & Nadler, 1992; Knowles, 2005). A group identity is generally a personal affiliation with particular people that one shares particular things. Identities of such kind are central to explaining how changes in cultural diversity influence behavior in organizations (UNESCO, 2000; Senge, 2005; Nadler & Nadler, 1990; Michael et al. 2004; Chun, 2006; Grieves, 2003). The definition we ascribe to ourselves basis on the group affiliation. For instance, an individual may think of himself as an air force officer, meaning that this will be his group identity. This plays quite a momentous influence of the individual’s definition of himself and the way others see him. With such diversity of cultural identity, shapes the self-esteem as well as personal pride in individuals therefore, bringing down the cohesive affiliation between groups. This makes it exceedingly difficult for the HRD to conceptualize the approach appropriate in enhancing cohesion between individuals. Racial ethnic groups are emerging in many organizations because of issues to do with transmigrations from different regions because it draws people from all corners of the world in particular organizations. Culture differences can affect work distribution in the work place. For example in some cultures, women cannot work (Chun, 2002; Delahey, 2005; Senge, 2006; Sheila et al. 1998; Takeuchi, H. (2000). Communities with culture absolutism might hinder those considered minority in the society developing their skill at the work place, clear example can be those of racism and in some cultures hierarchy systems. Personal identity and self esteem will be dictated by his association with other of his own culture or different if it happens that a particular cultural practices and believes affects ones identity, his efficiency will also be affected (Hatcher, 2002). The HRD do not have boundaries in the modern era on who should work in particular organizations, therefore, they face a challenge of ethnicity in the work place all in an attempt to enhance cultural diversity. Prejudice and Stereotyping activate in many organizations following the phenotype established through cultural diversity in organizations (Edgar, 1999; Stephen et al. 1994; Sen, 1999; Ronald, 2006; Morrison, 2002). Individuals tend to categorize fellow work mates as distinct therefore, widening the gap between individuals at the work place. In bringing in cohesion, the HRD has to go an extra mile and introduce equitable treatments and appreciations within the work place if the organization is to thrive well in a competitive world. One of the impacts of globalization is restructuring, to relate to HRD. This is mostly evident in issues related to the loss of jobs, expansion of assignments, new roles, overseas posting, corporate culture, changes in rewards among others. Companies are sending their managers abroad to acquire new managerial skills and at the same time learn new ways of workplace interactions and in processes increasing their efficiency and ability to manage different cultures. This is what effective HRD should practice in respective organizations (Chun, 2002; Delahey, 2005; Senge, 2006; Sheila et al. 1998; Takeuchi, H. (2000). With the increase in competition many companies are been forced to produce products with an aim to satisfy almost all cultures, in so doing the people at the work place are made to learn new technologies. Some of them might be forced to compromise their cultural beliefs (Michael, Marquardt & Berger, 2004). With regard to the cultural diversity and its impact on HRD, there is an evidence of the changing nature of the work force. Culture diversity also affects the approaches of making polices within organizations at the work place. The HRD faces considerable challenges in making these polices because of the transformation in the global field. The only way out for the HRD is to make the policies in a way that they encompass the divergent believes of diverse cultures within the organization (Hasna & Handzic, 2003; Shaw et al. 1999; Nadler & Nadler, 1992; Knowles, 2005). If ignored, the HRD risks mistrust and a sense of inequality developing in the work place. The cultural group left out in policymaking goes against the organization and might lead to a halt of operations within the work place. The lasting solution for the HRD under such circumstances, is to trickle down the recourses in educating the employees on the organization’s policies ensuring efficiency at the work place and avoiding emerging conflict due to improper interpretation of the same (Chun, 2002; Delahey, 2005; Senge, 2006; Sheila et al. 1998; Takeuchi, H. (2000). If equality and cultural freedom is not exercised in the work place, it might lead to uncalled for strikes, go-slow and other lawlessness or even worse a culture clash. With globalization, many companies and organization are investing a lot of money and recourses in educating their managers on cultural diversity throw exchange programs. There is a need of accommodating the new changes due to cultural, demographic changes, dual income, and equal employment opportunities. Diversity of cultures brings about a diversity of talents as well as skills in the workplace (Hasna & Handzic, 2003; Shaw et al. 1999; Nadler & Nadler, 1992; Knowles, 2005). This is what the HRD should appreciate in dealing with diversity of cultures in a work place and promoting teamwork in the organization enhancing it even more as people are in a position of borrowing the positive attributes of other cultures (Hatcher, 2002). The diversity in culture makes a positive contribution to the human resources development because people are in a position of exchanging ideas. Therefore, they reduce the task of training in as far as the HRD is concerned there is also a positive contribution to the issues that are related to changes in motivation, learning principles and changes in training programs to suit the diverse workforce, careers shift and organizational culture. There are a number of considerations that results to the deduction of the fact that globalization may be consequential to the diminishing of the cultural diversity. The corporations on international standards are known for promoting a consumerism culture. This implies that the standard commodities that are promoted by the campaigns in the global marketing are responsible for the exploitation of the fundamental material desire resulting to the creation of lifestyles that are similar. The current day institutions have a rationalizing thrust that is inherent, that resulted to increases in the level of efficiency of the human efforts as they also become more controllable, predictable as well as exemplified (Hatcher, 2002). Conclusion The HRD in any given organization has been influenced by culture diversity a great deal. Cultural diversity influence HRD is evident in the changing nature of the work force; policies change values and, practices, because the nature of work has changed. For instance, there are now more women in the work force, a new generation of workers has replaced the boomers generation, demographic shift and transmigration, among others. The HRD of organizations need to accommodate all these changes. It needs to appreciate the interaction of people across the boundaries because this is responsible for the creation of a situation of the creation of culture mixes in distinct places as well as practices that is consequential to pluralism. There is a disparity in the process of the occurrence of cultural flows in diverse spheres whose origin may be based from a variety of places (UNESCO, 2000; Senge, 2005; Nadler & Nadler, 1990; Michael et al. 2004; Chun, 2006; Grieves, 2003). The integration as well as the spread of diverse ideas in addition to the images is, responsible for provoking the reactions as well as the resistance otherwise implying contestation. This has particularly expressive implications to the human resource departments in any organization (Michael, 1999). The global norms as well as the practices have got different interpretations based on the locality of the tradition. The HRD should also realize that culture diversity has particularly been a momentous global value on itself. The promotion of diversity is based on international organizations as well as movements in addition to the institutionalization in, the context of the nation states. It is equally pertinent to note that fall out of diversity in any organization is a component of the yardstick that leads to unsuccessful organizations. References Chun, W.C (2006). The knowing organization: how organizations use information to construct meaning, create knowledge, and make decisions. New York: Oxford University Press. Chun, W. C. (2002). The strategic management of intellectual capital and organizational knowledge. New York: Oxford University Press. Delahey, B.L (2005). Human resource development: adult learning and knowledge management. New York: Milton, John Wiley &Sons. Edgar, H. S. (1999). Corporate Culture Survival Guide: Sense and Nonsense about Culture Change. New York: Wiley, John & Sons. Grieves, J. (2003). Strategic Human Resource Development. Sage Publications London Hatcher, T. (2002). Ethics and HRD: a new approach to leading responsible Organizations. NY: Prentice hall. Hasna, H. & Handzic, M. (2003) Australian studies in knowledge management. Wollongong: University of Wollongong Printery Knowles, M. (2005). The Adult Learner: the Definitive Classic in Adult Education and Human Resource development, Chapter 3 Mezirow, J. (1984). A critical theory of adult learning and education: Selected writings on philosophy and adult education. Krieger: p 123-139 Michael J. M., (1999). Developing human resources in global economy. Oxford: OUP Michael, J. et al. (2004). HRD in the age of globalization. Oxford: OUP Mondy, W. (2008). Human Resource Management. Tenth-Edition. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc. Morgan, H. et al. (2004). Leading Organizational Learning. California: Jossey-Bass A Wiley Imprint. Morrison, J. (2002). “Web support material for” The International Business Environment. New York, NY: Palgrave. Nadler, L. & Nadler Z. (1992). Every Manager’s guide to human resource development. London: Sage Publications. Nadler, L. & Nadler Z. (1990). Managing Human Resource Development. London: Sage Publications. Ronald, R. S., (2006). Human resource development: today and tomorrow. New York, NY: Sage Shaw, J. et al. (1999). Human resource management. Boston, USA: Houghton Mifflin Company. Sheila, M et al, (1998). The Globalization of Human Resource Practices. New York, NY: Development Dimensions International. Sen, A., (1999). Development as Freedom. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf. Senge, P. (2006). A fifth disciplines resource: Schools that learn. London: Nicholas Beasley Publishing. Senge, P. (2005). Presence: Exploring profound change in people organizations and society. New York: Current Doubleday. Stephen, B. et al. (1994). Equal Opportunity Climate and Total Quality Management: A Preliminary Study (DEOMI Research Directorate, Patrick AFB FL, 19 Takeuchi, H. (2000). The Knowledge Creating Company: How Japanese Companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press. UNESCO: World culture report (2000). Cultural diversity, conflict and pluralism. Paris.Retrieved from November 12, 2000 from http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?cont entType=Article&Filename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/ 0440170307.pdf Read More