Concepts of Equal Opportunities - Coursework Example

The purpose of this paper is to show my understanding of the similarities and differences relating to the concepts of managing diversity and equal opportunities. An extensive analysis will be provided on these topics including their effectiveness and weaknesses. The report will compare and argue whether they are different paradigms or simply and extension. The management of diversity is a process that tends to take aboard the similarities and differences of every member of an organisation in order to better enhance the organisation’s effectiveness and efficiency towards meeting goals and objectives. Equal opportunity concentrates on eliminating any forms of discrimination and embarks on respect and fair treatment for all. Both the management of diversity and equal opportunities are policies which the human resource department should manage to create strategic plans to implement throughout the organization. Managing diversity recognises that every one is unique and that people have different abilities to contribute to organisational goals and business performance. This is what is termed as a ‘valued-based approach’, which enables organisations progress towards embracing equality. When it comes to equal opportunities organisations aim at following the law and not really harnessing the potential advantage of a diverse workforce or checking to ensure that diversity is not an obstacle to achievement of organisational goals. However, managing diversity is pro-active approach that seeks to root out any unfair bias that affects operational activities, and it goes beyond follow the law to extent it is about being competitive or surviving in the market place. Managing diversity is inseparable from the core functions of the HRM system, as it is connected with the development of communication within the organisation, as well as creating a flexible system of psychological and economic motivation so that to boost the employees’ performance. As the competitive advantage of any company depends upon its staff and their characteristics, diversity becomes crucial to consider while talking about managing personnel. It is essential for the human resource department of companies to integrate the personal attributes of its employees to form a cohesive unit. Social management is therefore an inseparable part of HRM. The end of the 19th century was characterised by a rapid transition from national to multicultural societies, and this transition concerned organisations as well ( ). These changes are extremely important, as they are likely to lead to “greater workforce diversity as older workers, women, ethnic minorities and younger workers all play integral roles in the workforce”, and as a result the HR managers will have to “tailor workplace policies to fit the needs of the increasingly diverse workforce by offering flexitime, sabbaticals, technology training, cultural training, and child care or elder care assistance on a much greater level than now offered”. (Meisinger, S. 2005) Apart from that, the differences between different groups of employees (i.e. young and middle-aged workers, men and women etc.) have an impact on worker satisfaction and motivation and as a result their productivity and loyalty to the company. To my mind, equal opportunities and managing diversity could be viewed in both ways – as different paradigms, as well as interconnected issues. Of course, it is hardly possible to divide the two concepts – that of equal opportunities and managing diversity – because as the society (and consequently, the working teams) become multinational, it is crucial to pay attention to implementing the management methods and theories that would motivate and bring to commitment all members of staff. However, though in this aspect these two concepts interrelate and should be viewed as a part of one process, managing diversity being an extension of equal opportunities principle, there are some aspects of both phenomena that should be considered separately. On the one hand, the problem of equal opportunities is connected with eliminating any inequality at the workplace, that is, ensuring that all potential employees are in the same position when applying for a job and actually working. Though any kind of racial, religious, national, sex or age discrimination, as well as discrimination of people with disabilities, is prohibited by law in all democratic countries, still, regrettably, different kinds of discrimination and oppression still exist. The anti-discrimination laws do not always work, and though blatant oppression occurs quite rarely, some employers tend to discriminate people under the guise of being dissatisfied with their performance, educational background or skills. For example, the number of females working at unstable and low-paid jobs is much higher than the number of men doing the same kind of jobs ( ); racism and national discrimination is very popular as it allows employees to pay less to certain categories of workers; ageism (the oppression of older or younger people) is a topical problem in many countries. In California there was a case involving a gym which excluded access to men to their facilities claiming that the business was a woman’s only gym. The case is California Department of Fair Employment and Housing vs. Santa Rosa Health Club and Body Central (McElroy, 2006). A man wanted access to a gym that was tailored made to satisfy the needs of women with equipment prepared for the exercising needs of a woman. Why would a man want to enter such a place? Interpretation of the anti-discrimination laws in which you are not suppose to discriminate against the opposite sex created an opportunity for a person to file a lawsuit based on economic desires, not a true fight for human rights. The anti-discrimination laws backfired against a businessperson who created a strategy to penetrate a niche market for woman’s health. The majority of gyms are designed with machinery to meet the needs of men, so a specialized gym for woman made sense. Another aspect of the equal opportunity laws that is not working is the overall reach of these laws. The laws are not covering a lot of special groups which need protection from discriminatory stands by society and businesses against them. One such group is the homosexual community. There needs to be specific clauses to include homosexuals to protect them from discriminatory behaviour against people biased against certain sexual orientations. “It is legal for any private employer to fire or not hire people because they are gay or believed to be gay in 39 states”(McCuen, 2000). This position contradicts the constitutional right of U.S. citizens of contributing to society in the workforce regardless of sexual orientation. Another group of citizens that are currently not being protected adequately by equal opportunity laws are people with mental health problems. “It is vital in the UK mental health problems are recognized as coming within the anti-discriminatory legislation so that people do not lose their jobs or become excluded from services when seeking help for their condition” (Allen, 2007). If a person does not have the incentive to speak the truth to his employer about a health condition, his condition will only worsen and could cause serious problems for himself and those around him. Most mental patients when medicated can act as normal member of society. These laws should include this segment of society to protect their rights and avoid discriminatory behaviour against them. Another example of how anti-discrimination laws have at times backfired is affirmative action. Affirmative action was created in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy as a method to readdress discrimination (Brunner, 2007). The laws were created to bring equality in the workplace and in the selection process of organizations to give equal opportunities for minorities to be selected among a large pool. Over the years they have worked, but eventually the system created a new form of discrimination called reverse discrimination. The most notable reverse discrimination cases have occurred in the selection process of university candidates. The two top criteria for selection to universities have always been the entrance exams scores and the students G.P.A. If a minority student is selected with criteria that are substantially inferior to those of a majority class citizen, then the majority class citizen is discriminated for not being a minority. One of the most notarized case of reverse discrimination occurred in 1978 at a medical school. The case was the Bakke case. Allan Bakke was a white male applicant that was rejected on two consecutive years from admission from a medical school due to the school’s affirmative action program of reserving 16% of the available seats to minority students (Brunner, 2007). Mr. Bakke won the case because he was a more qualified candidate and the school discriminated against him. On the other hand, the issue of equal opportunities is sometimes of a contradictory character as there are laws in many countries forcing companies to employ a particular percentage of minorities of any kind, thus restricting opportunities of the majority. In fact, as the demand for jobs has risen, the majorities in many countries (as a rule, white male with no disabilities and of traditional orientation) tend to blame the minorities for competing with them in the struggle for workplaces, and often winning these “battles” not because of their exceptional skills, but because they belong to the minorities that according to the law have the advantage while being employed ( ). If this problem is dealt with correctly, taking into account not only the percentage of minorities that has to be employed by a particular company but also the skills and experience this company actually needs, there might be cases when managing diversity in a company does not become topical. Also, sometimes managing diversity in a company is not connected with the issue of equal opportunities. As an example, let us take the practice of different kinds of trainings for staff, especially college and university graduates, that are meant to make the staff more devoted to the company and at the same time teach them everything that is necessary for good performance. Whereas this is related to managing diversity within a company, it does not really have anything to do with the issue of equal opportunities. Another example might be people with disabilities who are generally oppressed at their workplaces. Though they are often given preferences when applying for the jobs that they do, the ratio of these people working in different companies is appallingly low, apart from those companies designed especially for people with disabilities. Also, even if people with disabilities do get the position in a company, it is difficult for them to reach workplace equity. Therefore, I believe that whether the notions of equal opportunities and managing diversity are different paradigms, managing diversity is an extension of equal opportunities, depends wholly upon every particular company and moreover, any particular situation. In the question of equal opportunities and managing diversity, many people view them as very different philosophies that can be alternatives to each other. From the research I have found that in deed that they are different philosophies but not different to the extent of being alternatives. As CIPD put it, they (equal opportunities and managing diversity) are interdependent, as the concepts of equity and fairness are integral to both. Managing diversity is different than managing equality. To understand the difference one must understand the relationship between both concepts. Equality concentrates on protecting employers from unjust practices due to their race, nationality, gender, age, disability and religion. Diversity includes these aspects but is not limited to them because it also includes dealing with the person’s culture, ethnic background, values, beliefs, education and economic status. The motivations companies have to manage each concept are totally different. Equality is driven by laws which are imposed on businesses which they must comply and by company policies which are created to satisfy social responsibility standards. Managing diversity on the other hand is a practice that is utilized in order to improve the profitability of a business by creating an environment in which employees are more conformable and can perform at higher levels of efficiency. Managing diversity and equality differ in that each practice focuses on benefiting different groups. Equality was created to protect the rights of a minority group. Diversity has a global perspective on the overall operations of an enterprise. All employees in one way or another are targeted by diversity practices. Diversity also differs from equality in that it does not label people into social categories to create results. Good diversity management occurs when the manager looks for ways to improve relationship and communication within the company. A way for a manager to achieve effective diversity management is to analyze how the different cultural perspectives of his employees affect the corporate culture of the enterprise. An example of a simple cultural difference which manager must understand is how eye contact is interpreted by people from different nationalities. The South Asian culture regards eye contact as disrespectful and rude, while people from the Arab culture share a lot of eye contact and too little is considered disrespectful (Bibikova & Kotelnikov, 2007). Understanding the behavioural characteristic of people from different background can help employees avoid misinterpret the actions of others. Managers must intervene if these types of situations arise and act as mediators. A common mistake that companies make when dealing with management of diversity in the workplace is to assume that language barrier is the only and most important issue to attend regarding a diverse workforce. This barrier is an easily identifiable problem which management can resolve with simple solution such as interpreters, bilingual supervisors or by providing language training to the staff. It is not as easy for management to deal with other cross cultural diversity issues such as roles and status, non-verbal behaviour, personal space, reaction to authority figures, religion and personal appearance especially if they don’t make a priority to deal with such issues (New South Wales Government, 2007). A company with good equality policies and effective diversity management has a competitive advantage over the competition. A diverse workforce gives an enterprise a human capital able to understand cultural trends and find solutions for the global marketplace. DuPont is a US based company that took advantage of the diversity of its employees to introduce new products into the market. The company gained $45 million in new business by changing the way decorating are develop and marketed around the world by introducing new colors that were appealing to overseas customers (Bibikova, et.al, 2007). Common grounds between equality and opportunities and managing diversity include the overall purpose of both strategies. Policies are created in these areas in order to improve human rights of employees and improve the cultural mix of the working environment. Equality of opportunities indirectly helps create diversity since its bringing more employees from minority groups into the working environment. The decisions made in the recruiting process by applying equality opportunity measures will affect the workforce composition, thus the diversity management strategy will directly be influence as a consequence of equality of opportunity measures. Both equality and diversity strategies are created by the human resource department, but the implementation measures of managing diversity become the responsibility of the supervisors, middle managers and executives of an enterprise. The study and utilization of equality opportunities and managing of diversity are subjects which are extremely important for professionals in the business world. Learning about equality can prevent managers from committing discriminatory behaviour to eliminate litigation, fines, and bad press. Diversity affects employees of company at all levels. Learning about this discipline can help people better understand the differences between the belief systems of their colleagues. Despite the differences between equality and diversity, the administration of policies regarding these two areas are interconnected and should be treated as related matters. Organizations and society will continue to benefit from good utilization of equal opportunities and proper management of diversity. Bibliography - Books reviewed and to be used Humphries, B. (1996) Contradictions in the Culture of Environment, in critical Perspective on Empowerment, Ventures Press, Birmingham Johnson, L. and S. Johnstone (2003) The Legislative Framework, in the Dynamics of Managing Diversity Kirton, G and Green, A (2006) The Dynamics of Managing Diversity-A critical approach, Oxford, Butterworth Heinemann Noon, M. (2004) Managing Equality and diversity in Beardwell, I., Holden, and Clayton, T (2004) ed., Human Resources – A Cotemporary Approach, Harlow, Prentice Hall Cox, T. and Blake, S (1991) Managing Cultural Diversity: implications for organisation competitiveness, Academy of Management Executives Prasad, P. Mills, A, Elmes, M. and Prasad A. (1997) ed. Managing the Organisational Melting Pot – Dilemmas of Workplace Diversity London, Sage Foldy, EG (2002) Managing Diversity: Identity and Power in Organisation, in Gender Identity and Culture of organisation, eds. I Aaltio and A.J Mills, Routlege. Jewson, N. Mason, D., Lambkin, C., and Taylor, F. (1992) Ethnic Monitoring Policy and Practice: A Study of employers’ Experience, research paper No.89, London: Meisinger, S. R. “Human Resource Management: Adding Value through Vision during Turbulent Times”. Global CFO Magazine. Reprinted by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). Retrieved on March 1, 2007 from: Read More