Whether Diversity Management Is Good For Organizations, But Damaging For the Employees - Case Study Example

CRITICALLY EVALUATE THE ARGUMENT THAT DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IS GOOD FOR ORGANIZATIONS, BUT DAMAGING FOR THE EMPLOYEES BY INSTRUCTOR’S NAME DATE OF SUBMISSION Diversity can be defined as differences relating to gender, ethnicity, age, religion, sexual orientation, physical ability or any other cause of difference. With globalization and increase in migration, along with rising competition for jobs, retain and encourage the top employees, organizations around the world have to deal with diverse labor force. Managers come across challenges related to these differences on frequently, because they effect the organizational outcomes. Communicating a number of individual differences is a challenge for numerous managers. The challenge must be dealt with practical solutions to the dynamic national demographic development towards diversity that has been a growing reality with an impact on organizations’ bottom-lines (Capowski, 1996). The top management has a significant role in diversity management. Diversity management is illustrated as the attitude of an organization, the environment of an organization, and the diverse approaches individuals bring to a company due to race, techniques, and disabilities (Reichenberg, 2001). Top management support is indispensable for a number of reasons. For constructive diversity outcomes, company’s starting and maintenance of diversity endeavors results in change of the organizational environment, encouraging individual results, and encouraging approaches regarding diversity (Gilbert, Stead, & Ivancevich, 1999). For diversity programs to be successful, they require support and participation of a company’s executives, who should clearly affirm the significance of diversity as a organizational value and goal (Koonce, 2001). Without dedication from top managers, diversity programs do not succeed (Koonce, 2001). The phrase diversity management has turned out to be buzzword for companies of all kinds and sizes. Organizations participate in diversity management as a guarantee that no group or individual is discriminated against (Amaram 2007). On the other hand, diversity management is not only a dimension of equal employment opportunity (EEO), nor is it just another expression for affirmative action (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002). Diversity management entails managing social settings and structures, along with organizational environment and operations. It also includes identifying, being open to, and making use of individual differences (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002). The aim is to build a positive work environment for all employees (Amaram 2007). Organizations carry out diversity programs for a number of reasons. The first and the foremost is the changing nature of the population in the world. Though affirmative action activities have been practiced in a variety of forms since the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the quickly altering demographics has placed more importance than ever on the requirement to manage diversity in the workplace. It has been estimated that at the advent of the millennium only 15 percent of new entrants to the workforce were white males, which illuminates the drift towards increased workplace diversity. In United States, white males are quickly becoming a minority in the workforce. Thus, the management of diversity results, in part, reactions to the issues varying from employee morale to employee productivity and from acceptable management practices to legal risk factors. In spite of the reasons for diversity management programs, it is understood that decision maker anticipate a range of positive results from the activities (Skalsky & McCarthy 2009). Previous literature has recognized numerous advantages to managing diversity, comprising of attracting and maintaining good employees, enhanced problem-solving and creativity and improved overall performance (Ellen et al, 2008; Von Bergen, Soper & Parnell 2005). In addition, a survey of 3 million employees revealed that developing an inclusive environment was a chief motivator in employee involvement and commitment (Skalsky & McCarthy 2009). Employees, who believed their managers to be dedicated to diversity, also perceived the organization positively and were more loyal to their organizations (Skalsky & McCarthy 2009). Other expectations from diversity management include: Improved personnel efficiency and interpersonal communications among employees Openness to social and demographical changes Decline in lawsuits and faster resolutions of conflicts An environment of justice and equality Enhanced productivity on difficult tasks Increased sales, revenue and profits (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002) With increasing focus aimed at the significance of workplace diversity, organizations deal with the intimidating task of successfully managing diversity. For a number of reasons, diversity and diversity management practices have become widespread in organizations around the world. Effective diversity management is even more important for multinational companies (MNCs) which not only have to deal with the diversity of their employees across geographic locations, but also do so with consideration for the history and customs that are distinctive to each nation within their corporate umbrella. There is considerable literature which suggests that diversity has performance benefits over homogenous work environments (Cox, Lobel and MacLeod, 1991; Cox and Blake, 1991). First, diverse organizations have a benefit in attracting and maintaining the finest talent (Adler, 1991). The abilities of women and minorities provide a wider labor pool (Adler, 1991). Companies those are able to pull towards themselves and keep hold of qualified diverse employees and keep confidence with them through just and equal career advancement treatments, gain competitive edge and obtain high quality human resources bonuses (Adler, 1991). Secondly, a diverse organization is better appropriate to provide a diverse external clientele in the world market (Adler, 1991). Such companies have an improved understanding of the necessities of the legal, political, social, economic and cultural environments of foreign countries (Adler, 1991). Furthermore, in research-based and hi-tech industries, the wide-spread base of talents created by a gender-and ethnic-diverse organization become an invaluable asset (Rotter & O’Connell, 1982). Fourth, diversified organizations are considered better at problem solving, have better ability to take out hidden meanings, and are more likely to exhibit numerous approaches and explanations in dealing with difficult issues (Rotter & O’Connell, 1982). Such companies are less vulnerable to “groupthink” (Rotter & O’Connell, 1982). Lastly, organizations with diverse set of individuals are likely to have more organizational flexibility, and are more competent to adjust to changes (Rotter & O’Connell, 1982). Women, for example, are said to have greater tolerance for vagueness as compared to their male counterparts (Rotter & O’Connell, 1982). Diversity management emphasizes the requirement of appreciating cultural differences among groups of employees, and making sensible allowances for such differences in organizational policies. The phenomenon is that promoting a culturally diverse organization where differences are respected allows individuals to work to their maximum potential in a more creative and productive work environment. A benefit of diversity management is said to be its more positive approach, in contrast to the negative one of merely keeping away from disobedience of anti-discrimination laws. It is said to keep away from some of the criticism related to affirmative action as, unlike earlier equality strategies, diversity management is not considered as a policy exclusively directed towards the wellbeing of excluded or under-represented minorities. Rather, it is considered as an inclusive strategy, one which therefore includes the welfare of all employees (Treven & Treven 2007).  However, efforts at establishing employee diversity have potential negative outcomes for the workforce. Firstly, due to diversity management, devaluation of employees takes place. A problem that adds to devaluation of employees is the association of diversity with affirmative action. McDonald suggests that affirmative action itself entails racist beliefs. Further making the situation difficult, affirmative action in diversity management is the wrong notion that affirmative action requires quotas. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which affirmative action quotas are sometimes based, particularly rejects quotas; even those developed balance the workforce to more accurately mirror a particular population such as the local community, state, etc (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002). The result of people being employed or promoted based on quotas or due to other affirmative action strategies is the belief of such people as ‘token employments’ who could not be appointed or promoted on performance or aptitude alone. One of the most harmful consequences is the resulting unspoken expectations and biases resulting in Pygmalion Effect (the idea that we live up to or down to the expectations others have for us) which can contribute to these people actually performing below others’ expectations and abilities. Studies carried out at New York University revealed those women who believe they have been employed or promoted on the basis of gender rather than ability are likely to devalue their own performance, opt for less challenging task, and devalue other women in the organization (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002). Another disadvantage of diversity management is that along with strategies utilized by less than reputable diversity trainers, has resulted in reverse discrimination. This policy of utilizing discrimination against other groups is usually founded on the wrong idea that any significant disparity among employees is the result of discrimination against the minority group. Where non-whites and females once dreaded being rejected due to discrimination, Business Week revealed that numerous white males believe they will miss an opportunity on hiring and promotions to less competent workers because of the rush to diversify the organization (Thibeaux et al. 2006). Discussions about diversity management are increasingly concentrating on civil rights being more significant, with both sides challenging that their rights have been infringed upon. Both parties are correct. Non-whites and females have experienced historical prejudices resulting from discrimination. In diversity management’s efforts to correct the previous wrongdoings, people at present disfavored under the law can be now discriminated against due to their skin color or their sex (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002). In actuality, a lot of those who are considered to be members of a formerly fortunate group become sufferers of reverse discrimination, even when they have actually never benefitted from the employer’s potential previous discrimination. They are being only discriminated based on the theory that being white-and-male equals advantage and social power; belief to which many impoverished white males could confirm is completely incorrect. Neither is it true that all minority individuals have experienced oppression. Nevertheless, examples abound of instances where employment policies have been founded on these beliefs, to the addition of white males’ rights to not suffer at the hands of discrimination (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002). Making people undergo that they have been rightly indicted or held responsible for inequalities serves only to enhance divisiveness and raise hostility. Any organization looking for diversity management methods which will encourage interpersonal communication among employees, enhances openness to social and demographic transformations, and lessen lawsuits would do well to discover other techniques of generating equal employment opportunities for non-whites and females (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002). Other implications of diversity management programs are that they are supposed to promote harmony and understanding among employees. However, they might have the reverse impact; polarizing the organziation, highlighting differences as compared to accord and worsening problems that are already present among the workforce. On one hand, employees are told that it is improper to base their actions on how they think members of certain groups will respond, that is, they should not stereotype, yet in the same instance they are asked to learn to judge individual behavior as an expression of racial, sexual and cultural difference, that is, they should stereotype (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002). A number of organizations have learned that, rather than the expected result of diminished exposure to legal liabilities, there can be immense harm that can lead directly to legal complexities (Pollitt 2005). Criticisms that offensive and unconventional training methods for diversity management invade employee privacy and disgrace individuals in front of their colleagues are severe (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002). Many have resulted in formal legal actions against employers who authorized the training (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002). Researchers advise against the three main risks related to diversity training: racial, ethnic or sex-based comments made in diversity training sessions might be utilized in discrimination lawsuits as proof of management bias, employers might be required to reveal the results of their diversity-audit in pre-trial discovery and the diversity process might promote groups or individuals to take legal action (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002). Even after so many drawbacks, risks and negative influences related to diversity management efforts, several companies have found their efforts at diversity management to be successful. There seem to be a number of significant success issues involved in diversity management process. Diversity management should become a standard way of conducting business as opposed to just a brief, one-time process. Handled inappropriately, diversity management can easily develop into a losing situation for all involved, resulting in devaluation of the workforce who is believed to be culturally different, reverse discrimination against the members of majority group, demoralization and reinforcement of stereotypes and greater chance of lawsuits (Von Bergen, Soper & Foster 2002). Taking into account the adverse consequences of ineffective attempts, developing the companies’ diversity management efforts correctly the first time is of the greatest significance. When effectively implemented, diversity management facilitates improved working relationships among employees, reduces cost, improves productivity, and fulfills organizational goals. Thus, implementing a proper diversity management program can result in a win-win situation for both the organizations and employees. References Adler, NJ, 1991, International Dimensions of Organizational Behavior, Boston: PWS-Kent Publishing Company. Allen, R, Dawson, G, Wheatley, K, & White, C, 2008, ‘Perceived diversity and organizational performance’, Employee Relations, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 20-33. Amaram, DI, 2007, ‘Cultural diversity: implications for workplace management’, Journal of Diversity Management – Fourth Quarter, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 1-6. Capowski, G, 1996, ‘Managing diversity’, Management Review, pp. 13-19 Cox, TH & Blake, S, 1991, ‘Managing cultural diversity: implications for organizational effectiveness’, The Executive, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 45.56. Cox, TH, Lobel, SA & MacLeod, PL, 1991, ‘Effects of ethnic group cultural differences on cooperative and competitive behavior on a group task’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 827-847. Gilbert, J, Stead B & Ivancevich, J, 1999, ‘Diversity management: a new organizational paradigm’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 15. Koonce, R, 2001, ‘Redefining diversity’, T&D, vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 11 Pollitt, D, 2005, ‘Diversity is about more than observing the letter of the law’, Human Resource Management International Digest, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 37-40 Reichenberg, 2001, Best practices in diversity management. United Nations Expert Group Meeting on Managing Diversity in the Civil Service. Rotter, NG & O’Connell, AN, 1982, ‘The relationships among sex-role orientation, cognitive complexity, and tolerance for ambiguity’, Sex Roles, vol. 8, pp. 1209-1220. Skalsky, P & McCarthy, G, 2009, ‘Diversity management in Australia and its impact on employee engagement’, Sydney Business School – Papers. Retrieved November 16, 2010, from http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1024&context=gsbpapers Thibeaux, S, Tillotson, G, Falls, T & Bell, RL, 2006, ‘Imposition of diversity: the imposition of diversity-training through top down management communication’, Journal of Diversity Management, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1-12. Treven, S & Treven, U, 2007, ‘Training in diversity management’, Journal of Diversity Management, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 29-36. Von Bergen, CW, Soper, B & Parnell, J, 2005, ‘Workforce diversity and organizational performance’, Equal Opportunities International, vol. 24, no. 3-4, pp. 1-16 Von Bergen, CW, Soper, B & Foster, T, 2002, ‘Unintended negative effects of diversity management’, Public Personnel Management, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 239-251. Read More