Workforce Diversity at IBM - Essay Example

Part One thing that strikes me the most is IBMs attitude towards employee diversity is the fact that the firm was one of the pioneers in implementing Workforce diversity even before there was a legal requirement for the same. IBM had already implemented Workforce diversity as early as 1953 while this only became a requirement over ten years later under the Civil Rights Act of the US in 1964. This shows that IBM has always been committed to implementing workforce diversity unlike other firms who do it because it has to be done. IBM had already realized the importance of diversifying the workforce for the sake of the firm in order to not only increase productivity but also to increase their strategic advantage. The fact that IBM had already embraced the idea of workforce diversity as early as the 1950s is very important in considerations that the globalisation of trade had not begun. Globalisation, which was very fundamental in forcing organisations into embracing workplace diversity, only came much later in the 1980s and it is at this time that most international firms realised they had to diversify their workforce in order to ensure that they are globally competitive and that they can meet the challenges of a global market (Strachan, French and Burgess 4). In this regard, IBM can be regarded as the pioneer of the principle of workforce diversity. Looking at the information provided about IBM workforce diversity in this section, it becomes clear that the person is increasingly clear that implementing workforce diversity should not be driven by the affirmative action of the Civil Rights Act of the US in 1964. Reading this section and the book, a number of issues come up. To begin with, it is evident that diversity in the workplace is something which every firm should be able to implement in the firm. In particular, organisations and businesses should be able to run that implementing workforce diversity not as a way to satisfy the legal requirements but as a way to make their workforce more formidable. As IBM’s actions indicate, businesses should be able to understand that diversifying their workforce is not just a way to conform to the law, but it is a way to increase their competitive advantage. In a modern world, any firm, especially those operating in the global environment should be able to make sure that their work is as diversified as much as possible. A diversified workforce is not only more likely to give the firm more innovations but is also able to meet the needs of the diverse market. IBM was the first to realize that diversifying the workforce would help the reorganisations to be able to be competitive in a global market. In fact, according to Richard (477), modern organisations are realizing that diversifying the workforce is not just the right thing to do, but a requirement for the organisation in order to acquire competitive advantage in the market. This probably explains the reason why IBM went on to become one of the most successful companies in the world. The other issue which comes out from the topic is the fact that implementing workforce diversity is not an easy task and it is a task which must be looked at in a very serious manner. Firms should be able to understand workforce diversity is not just about hiring individuals from all categories of people such as from different races, different abilities etc. Workforce diversity however is being able to look for talents from all walks of life. IBM was the first firms to break the ice at a time when segregation in the workplace was very high. Many firms misunderstand workforce diversity and implement it in the wrong way. Not only do firm misunderstand diversity, but also the legislations which have been made such as the Civil Rights Act of the US in 1964 have the wrong view of what diversity should be. Diversity should not be inspired by giving the minority groups an added advantage over the majority. Equal opportunity employment should be inspired by the need to have all people of all sorts of classes to be in the workforce. Rather, it should be geared towards creating an environment which makes it possible for everyone to have equal opportunity as long as they have the talent without considering other factors such as their race, their disability, their ethnicity and their gender (David 30). Equality in the workplace should not be about handing opportunity to individuals in a silver platter just because they are from a certain minority group. Doing this would not be implementing diversity in the right way. One thing which is the most important is that organisation needs talent and an organisation should not be denied the opportunity to recruit the best talent just in the name of implementing diversity in the workplace. In a nutshell, diversity can be explained by an example of two individuals, one who is from a majority group and another person from a minority group. If the one from a minority group is more qualified than the one from a majority group, the person should be able to be hired regardless of minority status (Roosevelt 100). However, if the person from a majority groups has better qualifications, they should be hired and the one from a minority should not be hired in the name of fulfilling diversity or implementing an equal opportunity work environment. One thing which can be said that IBM is doing well is the fact they seem to understand that workforce diversity is necessary not only as a way to fulfil the legal requirements of equal opportunity employment, but also as a way to create a healthy workforce. IBM has shown a real high level of maturity in terms of its ability to look at the issue of workforce diversity unlike most firms which have been lagging behind and looking at workforce diversity requirements as a problem they have to contend with. IBM can be credited for realizing the importance workforce diversity and implementing it regardless of the legal requirements for the same. This is increasingly important for a firm like IBM especially considering the fact it was and still is an international form with a global market. Given the above analysis and, one thing that can be said that IBM could do better is making sure that they don’t get sucked in the euphoria of workforce diversity just in the wrong way. As already discussed, workforce diversity and equal opportunity employment environment is not about giving those in minority groups opportunities on a silver platter. This is where IBM could be missing the fact that workforce diversity is not just about having everybody in the workplace but creating an environment which is good enough to ensure that everybody has the equal opportunity to get to any position as long as they have the talent and the qualifications. While IBM is a leader in implementing world-class diversity, it is important that they make sure that they are doing it in the right way. IBM should seek to make sure that they are not just implementing workforce diversity by just having people from all minority groups in the workforce, but that those included in the IBM’s workforce are there because they have the best talent and the best qualifications. Part 2 Writing this case study was fundamental in bringing out about a number of important facts with regard to talent management in the context of diversity management in the workplace. One significant lesson that came out was that managing talent is different from managing diversity. Any organisation should not be too oriented in diversifying their workforce and do it at the expense of the talent. It also come out very clearly that it is possible for an organization to have diversity at the workplace and still not do it the right way. This is especially when an organizations implement workforce diversity only to comply with legal requirements. It was also clear that managing diversity is not an easy thing at all and most firms who think that they have implemented workforce diversity are actually doing it wrong. One significant thing was that due to the fact that many managers misunderstand what diversity is all about, they end up implementing workforce diversity at the expense of talent management. This is because these managers are tempted to think that they can or should give up talent in order to achieve diversity. This kind of thinking may make such a manager to choose to hire a person who is less talented and less qualified as long as they are from a minority group just to seem to be having a diversified workforce. This is the wrong approach to implementing workforce diversity because this kind of implementing workforce diversity hurts the talent of the firm. This is very ironical because the very purpose of workforce diversity is to boost the talent of the firm. However, for this to happen, managers should be able to understand that they should approach diversity in a sober way. Works Cited David, Pollitt. Diversity in the Workforce: Volume 14, Issue 3 of Human resource management international digest. New York City, NY: Emerald Group Publishing, 2006. Glenda, Strachan,. Erica, French and John, Burgess. The origins and 1 development of managing diversity. NA: 2012. Print Richard, Daft, et al. Management. Stamford, CN: Cengage Learning EMEA, 2010. Print Roosevelt, Thomas. World Class Diversity Management: A Strategic Approach (Large Print 16pt). New York, NY: ReadHowYouWant.com, 2001. Print Read More