Barriers to Overcome for Diversity to Flourish in an Organization - Literature review Example

Running head: BARRIERS TO DIVERSITY Barriers To Overcome For Diversity To Flourish In An Organization (School) & number) (Date) Introduction Diversity refers to differences. In an organization, diversity can have both positive and negative effects depending on how it is managed. Positive effect means diversity benefits the organization. However, to reap diversity’s potential reward, organization must address barriers, the factors that prevent diversity to flourish in an organization, and focus its resources and energy on making use of diversity to its maximum advantage. This is what the essay is all about. The four layers of diversity is also presented to broaden our idea of what diversity means beyond the traditional aspects of race and gender. Meaning of Diversity Lee, Rowe, Digh & Bennett(2003) argued that each organization focused on diversity issues creates its own definition of what diversity means in its particular context: The American Society for Training and Development (ASTD) has defined diversity as “the mosaic of people who bring a variety of backgrounds, styles, perspectives, values, and beliefs as assets to the groups and organizations with which they interact.” For the Pillsbury Company, diversity is defined as “all the way in which we differ.” Kraft Foods Inc. spells out its commitment to diversity in metaphors with which people can identify: “A stellar meal requires contrasting and complementing textures and tastes. A winning sports team depends of the different talents of its members. A first class orchestra needs many variety of thought, energy, and insight to attain and maintain a competitive edge.” (pp. 25) Diversity, Simmons (2003), refers to variety of difference related to factors such as age, culture, disability, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, socio-economic level or thinking style. In business context diversity includes business background or function. Diversity is a process that corrects inequities and brings fairness and inclusion on all fronts and as broadly defined, carries an inherent benefit for every employee. As Simmons argued, only in this context it is realistic to expect a positive view and an active contribution from every employee. Organization alignment, Simmons continued, is the goal of every culture change process, including diversity. You wont achieve that alignment unless every person can benefit from it. In his book, Johnson (2003, 399-400) explained that in every relationship you decide how to manage the differences between the two of you. Diversity among your acquaintances, classmate, coworkers, neighbors, and friends is increasingly inevitable. Such diversity is an opportunity that can have positive or negative consequences, depending on your engaging in an eight-step program: The first step is to recognize that diversity exists and is a valuable resource. The second step is to build cooperative relationship with diverse individuals. Cooperation promotes a process of acceptance while competitive and individualistic efforts tend to promote a process of rejection. The third step is to include your historical and cultural heritage in your identity. The fourth step is to respect and appreciate the historical and cultural heritage of others. The fifth step is to establish a super ordinate identity that write all relevant groups into one. The sixth step is to reduce the internal cognitive barriers to building positive relationship with diverse individuals. The seventh step is resolving all conflicts that arise from cultural clashes and other aspects of diversity in constructive ways. Finally, you must learn and internalize a set of pluralistic values including the commitment to the equal worth of all persons and each individual’s inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Overcoming Barriers to Diversity Johnson (2003, 355) identified internal cognitive barriers to valuing diversity such as stereotyping, prejudice, and blaming the victim. Unless you are aware of the dynamics of such cognitive barrier, you may not be able to interact positively and effectively with diverse members of the group. Thiederman (2003) in her article titled: Barriers to Diversity: Overcoming Hurdles to success cited three emotional and systemic barriers to diversity which according to her are fear, unrealistic objectives and goals, and member and community backlash. She mentioned the case of pioneering institutions such as the American Association of Museums, the American Physical Therapy Association, and the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, have all learned that creating, sustaining, and valuing a diverse membership is achievable and that the end result is worth every effort, every penny, and even every uncomfortable moment: Fear – Fear of offending individuals or groups is probably the most debilitating concern faced by diversity committees today. The danger of this happening can be minimized by focusing, less on the needs of a particular and more on designing approaches that will benefit all potential members regardless of background. Anyone who has ever worked in the diversity field has also worried that they will address the needs of a particular group insensitively or inaccurately. If it is necessary to focus on one population, this risk can be minimized by taking the extra time and effort to consult with many people about what the needs of the group might be. Anyone individual is not qualified to speak for the entire group. Consult with a variety of people from various parts of the country and remember to include diversity consultants who have had experience designing diversity programs or training in the area. Unrealistic Objectives and Goals – The second barrier to effective diversity efforts is the temptation to set unrealistic objectives. This can happen in two ways: setting objectives which are inappropriate to your association, and setting objectives that are too ambitious in terms of scope or time-frame. It is your obligation to your group to design a program that is specific to your needs, members and concerns. Another error made when setting objective is attempting to move too far to fast. One of the biggest barriers to success of diversity efforts within the corporate world has been to set goals that are unobtainable. When these goals are not reached, critics of the program are given fuel and people become discouraged. Member and Community Backlash – The following should be done to minimize backlash within your organization so that you will be able to achieve full support and participation from membership and staff alike: Include all groups on your diversity committee. Do not exclude the dominant group in your industry just because the committee is focused on diversity. If you wish to obtain the all-important buy-in from all members of your association, you must empower and invite everyone to participate in the effort; Avoid the temptation to indulge in the excesses of political correctness. It is one thing to eliminate clearly exclusionary or offensive terms from your vocabulary, but quite another to trip all over yourself to indulge individual idiosyncrasies; Never lower your standards and/or always avoid the appearance of lowering your standards. The Society for Human Resources Management discovered that 70% of the reason for the failure of diversity programs in the corporate world was the real or perceived lowering of standards to accommodate diverse employees. Simmons (2003) in his article on Overcoming Barriers to Diversity, explained the three barriers that are frequently encountered and must be overcome or you will make almost no meaningful progress. They have nothing to do with individual prejudices . instead they are all strategic in nature: Failure to make the business case for diversity – By business case means lining up diversity with the mission and business of the organization. Why are we here? What are we doing? How do we make a profit? How do we serve our customers? And how does attention to diversity help us do all this? Without a hard-core, very specific business rationale it is almost impossible to hold employees accountable for achieving diversity-related goals. The wrong people are asked to lead the process – The only people who can really lead diversity in a meaningful way are the organization’s CEO and top executive group. They are the only people who have the organizational clout to hold others accountable for achieving the desired results. “One-size fits all” education – Different job groups require different diversity skill sets, which must be delivered in different training programs and/or using different educational approaches. If the goal is to have everyone implementing diversity in their jobs, they need education specifically designed to deliver those skills. Enhance(2003) explained some organizational barriers that impede cultural diversity efforts as follows: The myth that there are no qualified candidates from underrepresented groups; The CEO as sometimes the last person to learn of a problem in the organization. Solutions: Dialogue with top team members, staff groups or departments about difficulties and/or have a vehicle for expressing concerns; Fear of retribution (e.g., loss of career mobility) if people speak up about sensitive issues. The main way around that, according to Eby, is to set up a culture that rewards people for constructively speaking up; Ongoing nature of the work and the importance of embedding the concepts and practices within the organization. Enhance in explaining this barrier cited Alvarado: “It is not something you do just once. It is important to recognize that organizational culture is constantly evolving, is not set in stone, and therefore the manager has to be aware enough to tap into and encourage good ideas...(and) to remove some of the stressful elements that can cause dissatisfaction and loss of productivity;” and “The slow, arduous process of organizational change. Organizational culture is so deep rooted and so poorly understood,” says Cohen. “The differences between practices and policies and the behavioral dimensions of how organizations function is so huge that it’s hard when you don’t see changes in daily behavior.” Workforce Development Group (2000) specifically explained barriers to recruiting and retaining a diverse workforce into five major categories: The “Like Me” syndrome – it refers to the axiom of human nature that people prefer to associate with other people who are like themselves. If left unchecked, this leads to a tendency to be more open and provide fuller information to those that they perceive as belonging to a common social group. Insider/outsider Dynamics – Groups of insiders are formed by people who see themselves as most like each other. Those who are perceived as different becomes “outsiders”. Research shows that outsiders are given less access to information, less opportunity to influence decisions, and less reinforcements for efforts directed toward learning new skills or high levels of job performance. Stereotyping – It refers to the process of unconsciously or consciously making implicit assumptions about a group of people. Such stereotypes can adversely affect individuals who are members or non-members of any of the numerous diverse groups in our society and in the workplace. Misunderstood Cues – It refers to different meanings ascribed to the same action or reaction. While conversation cues vary greatly from culture to culture as well as from individual to individual, all individuals can learn techniques to assure accurate understanding. Perceptions of Loss by Persons Threatened by Diversity – As the workplace becomes more diverse, and special voluntary efforts are made to recruit, hire, develop and retain employees from all groups, some white males (or others who have traditionally been members of a predominant group) may grow axioms and perceive themselves as losing employment control and opportunity. Four Layers of Diversity The Four Layers of Diversity, created by the book’s co-authors Lee and Rowe (2003,p.26-27) is a widely used model of dealing with domestic diversity and broadens our perception of what diversity means beyond traditional issues of race and gender. At its center is personality – the innately unique aspect that give each of us our own particular style. The next layer include internal dimensions of diversity over which we have little or no control, such as gender, age and race. The next layer, external dimensions, include outside influences such as where your grew up or live now, whether you have children, and your personal habits. The final layer, organizational dimensions, includes your level, department, seniority, and worksite in the organization. Using this model has helped corporations identify and understand the filters through which we all see the world and which could create barriers to accepting others. Yet, tackling issues of global diversity requires an even newer and broader model of diversity and definitions that includes national and civilizational cultures. Figure 1. Four Layers of Diversity Conclusion When we reduce or eliminate prejudice, stereotyping, discrimination, as we avoid blaming the victim and overcome other barriers, the stage is set for diversity to flourish in an organization. References Johnson, D.W.(2003). Reaching out. (355-369). NY: Pearson Education. Enhance.(n.d.). The Newsletter of the Alliance for Non-profit Management. Retrieved December 16, 2003, from www.allianceonlice.org. Lee, G., Rowe, A., Digh, P., & Bennett, M.F. (2003). Global diversity desk reference. ( ). USA: John Wiley & Sons. Simmons, T.(2003, December 8). Overcoming barriers to diversity. Business Strategies Magazine. Simmons Associates, Inc. http://simmonsassoc.com/pdf/OvercomingBarriers.pdf. Thiederman, S.(2003). Making Diversity Work. http://www.thiederman.com/articles_detail.php?id=57. Workforce Development Group(2000). http://www.workforcedevelopmentgroup.com/termsdefinitions.html. Read More