Diversity Management: Is It Different From Equal Opportunities Policy - Essay Example

?[Question 2] Diversity Management: Is it really different from ‘Equal Opportunities’ Policy Organisations operate within communities and as such naturally depict the society. One of the areas where this is clearly visible is in the diverse demographics from which organisations source their human capital. Society is inherently diverse in terms of cultures, races and ethnicities, age, gender and many other aspects, and management in an organisation finds itself having to find a way to manage this for the achievement of the set goals besides employee and societal expectations. Management in the 1970s-80s approached this issue through the equality agenda. However, the 1990s saw the dawn of the diversity agenda which was argued from some sectors as a new management paradigm while others saw no tangible differences in this approach in comparison to traditional equal opportunities approach (Liff 1997, pp. 11-26). This study critically explores the two points of view through first discussing the diversity management concept, then the equal opportunities agenda and finally discussing the views of proponents and opponents. Diversity Management According to Kirton (2008, p. 2) diversity management involves systematic and planned commitment by an organisation for the recruitment and retention of employees drawn from diverse backgrounds demographically. The concept of diversity management arose due to the realisation that the labour market was becoming quite diverse in terms of demography (Liff 1997, 11-26). The diversity management idea was strengthened through advent of a business case for it, where taking advantage of the existing diversity in the labour market was argued to be accompanied by access to a wider pool of job candidates, increased flexibility cutting of costs on recruitment and training among other benefits. Other muted pluses for management of diversity include the ability to manage across borders and cultures, maximisation of employee potential, creation of business opportunities and the enhancement of creativity within the organisation. Keil (2005, pp. 36-37) explains that conscious diversity management is based on the recognition of the different strengths that are brought by diversity rather than just complying with rules on equality. She argues that diversity management is an evolutionary process which consists of three stages; anti-discrimination where the organisation seeks to comply with rules; legitimisation, where the organisation seeks to identify market segments based on diversity and use their diverse workforce to operate based on the market; lastly, learning and effectiveness, which is where diversity management actually occurs. Here, diversity is viewed as a resource and pursued, not for political correctness but for its inherent benefits that the organisation would wish to exploit. Equal Opportunities Approach Equality in organisations was characteristic of the 1970s-80s and was centred on equality in access, opportunities, treatment in the organisation and outcomes. Equality is based on the issue of discrimination, which is traditionally a moral, social justice and human rights issue (Dickens 2007, pp. 468). It is debated whether following such utilitarianism is in line with efficiency and competitiveness in firms. The basis of equal opportunities is centred on complying with laws formulated by governments and sometimes, which Dickens (2007) discusses in the form of a timeline, establishing the gradual development of equality and non-discrimination frameworks based on countries or adopted from international bodies. The Debate Although there is consensus that there has been a gradual shift from equal opportunities policies to diversity management, the debate has arisen due to some sectors arguing that diversity management is a new paradigm unique from the traditional equal opportunities policies. The analysis of this debate will first study the arguments of those who support the view that diversity management is a unique concept and then analyse their opponents. According to Gilbert, Stead and Ivancevich (61-76), diversity management is different from traditional equal opportunities approach in its purpose. Whereas equal opportunities are pursued with a bid to comply with industry regulation, diversity management is undertaken for its importance in organisation’s survival. Managers pursue diversity management for the purpose of gaining a competitive edge over their rivals as they seek to cut on costs, increase creativity, improve problem solving capabilities and increase organisational flexibility. Such managers realise that individuals working in a diverse setting are less frustrated and more motivated; hence more productive which translates to overall higher productivity by the firm. The argument here is that diversity management is undertaken for entirely different reasons from the equality agenda, the former being due to its benefits and the latter being due to utilitarian purposes and legal requirements. It is delinked from legal compliance and based on value of diversity. Proponents of diversity management being a paradigm on its own also argue that diversity management results in the creation of a culture within the organisation, something that the equality agenda may not achieve. This is culture which appreciates differences among the workforce and sees value in this, while equality is based on an affirmative action policy in the organisation that insists on sameness and being equal. Analysis of this view indicates that proponents argue that diversity management is different due to appreciation of differences, which may in turn develop into part of the entire organisational culture. Affirmative action (which is the backbone of the equality agenda), on the other hand, is a positive effort towards the elimination of cultural differences, gender and racial issues with a bid to make the workplace an equal place and pursue larger societal justice goals. According to Danullis et al. (2004, p. 39), diversity management is a paradigm shift from traditional equality movement since it requires a totally different way of thinking in management whose implementation resonates throughout the entire organisation. Implementation of diversity management does not just involve setting up a policy in the same way an affirmative action policy would. It involves a change on three levels in the organisation; structural, cultural and behavioural changes. The structural changes focus on formal systems that guide the organisation towards removal of policies that hinder appreciation of diversity. Cultural changes involve addressing assumptions, values, beliefs and ideologies that define the organisation, and centre on addressing the informal hindrances to the goals of diversity. Lastly, behavioural changes target those attitudes and perceptions among individuals and teams that may be contributing to lack of appreciation of diversity in the workplace. This argument essentially revolves around the considerable difference in changes that diversity management has on an organisation in comparison to mere affirmative action policies. On the other side, of the debate, Kirton (2008, p. 3) dilutes the usually highlighted four advantages of diversity; advantage from diversity in the labour market, maximisation of the potential of employees, management across borders and cultures and creation of business opportunities and enhancing creativity. He argues that the only pluses are the advantages gained from diversity in the labour market and flexibility, while the remaining stated advantages are largely unproven, imagined and debatable. On the advantages, he argues that they are obvious issues that are not new since it is known that being inclusive in recruitment allows organisations to access a wider pool of candidates. Cornelius (2011, p. 30) discusses the view that equal opportunity and diversity management should not be viewed as options for organisations against each other. Instead, diversity management built on equal opportunities can be pursued by organisations successfully. In such a case, diversity management then cannot be viewed as an entirely new paradigm since it can be integrated into equal opportunities frameworks. Worman (2005, p. 2) who is a supporter of diversity supports this view when she states that diversity complements equal opportunity initiatives. The reason is that the issues of ethical and fairness in practice (drawn from equality agenda) can be combined with appreciation and valuing of differences for the purpose of business benefits (which is drawn from the diversity argument). Another view that can be used to show that diversity management is not entirely a new paradigm from equality management is in the results of pursuing both methods. Worman (2005, p. 5) states that there is evidence that equal opportunity employers have traditionally outperformed firms that are less aware in terms of equal opportunities. Hence, pursuing the equal opportunities agenda is accompanied by business gains although the priority is not placed on them as it is in diversity management. Moreover, both equal opportunities agenda and diversity management end up improving equality in the wider society since they focus on similar demographics; hence, the latter is not a paradigm management shift from the former but rather a different management approach. Conclusion A gradual shift is occurring in organisations fulfilling equal opportunities regulations in pursuing diversity management, which is motivated by the potential benefits that diversity brings in a business. This shift has been termed the dawn of a new paradigm by some, while others do not see it as strikingly new from traditional equal opportunities approach. Proponents of the view highlight the business case behind diversity management, the cultural change within the organisation and the massive changes required in its implementation as proof of its being new. The opponents argue that the two can be integrated and have similar results hence cannot be seen as different. Opinion based on this discussion is that diversity management is clearly a new way of thinking, but would need more research and evidence before it can be termed a new paradigm. References Cornelius, N 2001, Human resource management: a managerial perspective, Thomson Publishers, UK. Danullis, M, Dehling, S & Pralica, S 2004, Diversity Management: A new paradigm, Dickens, L 2007, ‘The road is long: Thirty years of equality legislation in Britain’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 463–494. Gilbert, JA, Stead, BA & Ivancevich, JM 1999, ‘Diversity management: a new organizational paradigm’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 61-76. Kirton, G 2008, ‘Managing multi-culturally in organizations in a diverse society’, Chapter 8 in Clegg, S & Cooper, C (eds.), Handbook of Macro Organizational Behaviour, Sage, UK. Keil, M 2005, ‘Diversity management: the challenge for the future’, Management Today, pp. 35-38. Liff, S 1997, ‘Two routes to managing diversity: individual differences or social group characteristics’, Employee Relations, vol. 19, no. 1, pp.11 – 26. Worton, D 2005, Managing diversity linking theory and practice to business performance, CIPD, viewed 12 November 2011, Read More