The Benefits of a Diverse Labor Force - Book Report/Review Example

Journal Review: Making Differences Matter David Thomas and Robin Ely address what it would take for organizations to fully reap the benefits of a diverse labour force. Managers are on the view that a more diverse labour force will actually increase the effectiveness of the organization. It also raises the morale of employees and enhances the access to new sectors of the market, generally promoting business. The journal article tries to bring forward an explanation on why diversity efforts have not been achieving their potential and presents a new paradigm for understanding and leveraging diversity. According to them, there is a special way of unleashing the powerful benefits of a diverse workforce. Diversity goes beyond growing the amount of different identity-group affiliations. Such effort is simply the first step in working with a diverse labour force for the greatest benefit. Diversity should be viewed from the different approaches to work and various perspectives different identity-groups bring. Two viewpoints on diversity: the discrimination and fairness paradigm and the access and legitimacy paradigm, have directed most of the diversity initiatives to date. A new emerging paradigm approach has been identified, which is also called the learning and effectiveness paradigm. It integrates features from the first two paradigms and goes a step further in actually connecting the diversity approaches to work (Thomas and Ely). Discrimination-and-fairness paradigm This is the most dominant way of addressing diversity. Through this perspective, leaders focus on equal opportunities, recruitment, fair treatment and compliance with federal equal employment opportunities requirements. Under this, progress in diversity is usually evaluated by how well the organization accomplishes its recruiting and retaining goals rather than the level at which it allows the employees to draw upon their personal assets and views to work effectively. The access-and-legitimacy paradigm This paradigm was predicated on the acceptance and the celebration of differences. The strengths of the paradigm are its potential of competitive advantage and market based motivation. Many firms that have used this paradigm have diversified in areas where they interact with specific niche-market sectors. Sometimes the personnel recruited for thus function feel devalued and used (Thomas and Ely). The emerging paradigm A small number of organization that have used the previous paradigms to guide their diversity efforts resulted in believing that they have not been making the most out of their own pluralism. They have thus used the learning-and-effectiveness paradigm for managing their diversity. These organizations have developed a perspective that enables them to integrate the outlooks of their employees into the mainstream activities of the organization. This enhances their work by rethinking about their primal tasks and redefining their markets, strategies, practices, missions, and or even cultures (Thomas and Ely). Journal review: The spirit of Chinese politics Factions in China rarely represent clearly defined generational, geographic or institutional interests. However these considerations usually add to the formation and the maintenance of specific factions. Primal basis for factions are clusters of officials or the power constellations of officials who, for whatever reason feel at ease with each other, believe they can share mutual loyalties and trust, and identify common adversaries. Chinese factions usually lie on the extremes of closely knit cliques and the long-winded mass parties that are present in the politics of other nations. Factions are capable of bureaucratic obstructionism since they are more dormant than manifest (Pye). Some policies could become a trademark for specific factions. New policies could be interpreted as favouring the interests of some cadres in a specific faction and damaging those of others. In this case, factions are related to policies. Chinese politics feature personalized relationships that are orders of magnitude, more powerful, to comprehend why policies can’t be the primary foundation for factions in China. Chinese cadres have way not as much room for manoeuvre (Pye). Critical units of Chinese politics are also loosely designed given the fact that factions are set out of dormant links with different affiliations through introducing very symbolic communications. There are also very vague boundaries between factions with uncertainty on the stands of some officials. Subsequently, when a faction is attacked, there are two possible diametrical opposite reactions. Those at the core may opt to strengthen their bonds and take the siege mentally while those at the periphery opt to fade away and deny any associations they had (Pye). The main ingredient of factions is the guanxi, which describes the personal bonds of mutual belonging and acquaintanceship that represents the close personal associations in the Chinese culture. This has no precise counterpart in other cultures with its dimensions and overtones going beyond relationships like those of patron-client or particularistic bonds; hence it is not readily appreciated by outsiders. Flow of personal influence in the west is chiefly particularistic relationships while in the case of guanxi; social roles are seen as interrelated even when the persons are strangers. Guanxi should not be confused with patron-client relationships which have become popular in describing associations with developing and developed countries in third world regions and rural Asia (Pye). Journal review: The Strength of Weak Ties According to Mark Granovette, the most innate concept of interpersonal ties’ strength should be content with this definition: the strength of an interpersonal tie is a combination of time, intimacy in mutual confiding, emotional intensity, and the reciprocation of services that would characterize a tie. Although the set is clearly inter-correlated, each of them is somewhat independent. Sociologists and anthropologists have carried out a lot of diffusion and bridge studies to fully explain the concept of ties. Most diffusion studies found personal contacts crucial, though none of them undertook socio-metric research. This is so because socio-metric techniques tend to discourage the naming of those weakly tied to the respondent hence minimizing the number of choices available. Normally, when the time an individual adopts a new idea is recorded, as is the total of socio-metric choices available for others in the study. Those who receive many choices are central while those of few marginal. Both may be well motivated to diffuse innovation but it is difficult to evaluate how they can spread the innovation successfully. Many argue that people with weak ties are best placed to diffuse difficult innovations as most of these ties are local bridges. Such diffusion of unpopular innovation is likely to be confined to only a few cliques hence may fail to find its way to diffusion study (Granovetter). All the findings above have a general significance on both the individual and the community. Generally, individual’s strong ties make a dense network while the weak ones a less dense network. There has been no common agreement on whether ego network should be taken as composed of just those a person is tied to directly or should contacts of his or her contacts. However, from an individual point of view, weak ties are very crucial as a resource to make possible mobility of opportunity, and completing social cohesion. In a community made up of many cliques, trust individuals give to a particular leader is greatly determined by the intermediary contacts who from their knowledge and experiences, can assure the trustworthiness and even intercede for them with the leader on their behalf. In general, in order to predict the differential capacity of communities to act towards a given goal, a rough principle is proposed- the more the local bridges per individual in a given community and the larger their degree, the more cohesive the community is and the more its capability to act in concert (Granovetter). Sensemaking in organizations Ordinarily, sensemaking and organizational sensemaking are not identical. This article tries to make the shift from general sensemaking to organizational sensemaking and briefly demonstrate how the structure of the organization is structured by sensemaking processes. Organizations and sensemaking can be said to be cut from the same cloth. From historical backgrounds, different scholars had diverse views on the concept of organization. Organizations generally depicted as open systems are the most relevant to with sensemaking. The greater openness to inputs from their environment indicates that these have more diverse information to deal with and since they feature a looser system structure, the entity involved in sensemaking remains a puzzle. There exists inter-subjectivity when referring to interactions, beliefs, values, mutually reinforcing interpretations, and assumptions. It’s rather apt to describe an organization as quality interaction as it acts as an important property in defining organization, precisely the quality of susceptibility of an interaction to the substitution of interacting persons (Tharp). In this case, when the capacity to make mutually reinforcing interpretations is lost due to replacements of people, neither sensemaking nor organization persists. Sensemaking is normally dedicated in part to the development of socially mutual beliefs that express pertinent sets of rivals and direct tactical choices on how to contest within the set. Even though there is intercultural variation in the mutual beliefs, there’s a central tendency in the beliefs that anchors and also allows members to define their place in the competitive space. The tussles with individual identity appear to involve the root act of sensemaking. One of the definitions of sensemaking is placing stimuli to a form of framework. A combination of enactment and selective perception within competition leads to cognitive oligopoly that takes a form of a limited set of benchmarks made to streamline the business environment. These benchmarks form the frame where identities and strategies materialize. Sensemaking is ongoing with people being thrown into the centre of things with projects never seeming to commence and always seem to be interrupted (Granovetter). That said, organizations and sensemaking have a lot in common. To organize is to impose order, simplify, counteract deviations and the same is true for people trying to make sense. Depictions of organization indicative of retrospect, identity, social activity and ongoing events are also true and viable depictions of sensemaking. Managers and leaders Abraham Zaleznick argues that the difference between leaders and mangers lies between the concepts they hold inside their psyches of chaos and order. Managers tend to hold processes, instinctively try to resolve problems fast and seek stability and control before they fully understand the significance of the problem. Leaders on the other hand tend to tolerate chaos, are willing to delay closure so as to fully understand the problem and often lack structure. This way, business leaders have more in common with scientists, artists and other artistic leaders than with managers. In order to succeed, organizations require both managers and leaders. Generally, a managerial culture focusses on control and rationality, and a manager is usually a problem solver. In this perspective, leadership entails practically directing affairs requiring people to operate efficiently depending on their responsibilities to fulfil tasks. Also, managers tend to take up personal attitudes to accomplish goals. Goals are deeply integrated into the firm’s culture and history and thus come from necessities and not desires (Snook et al). Leaders work from relatively high risk spots and often disposed of to look out for risk and danger especially in cases where chances of rewarding opportunities seem promising. Managers tend to avoid solitary activity and thus prefer working with people. They strive to make win-lose situations win-win situations as a process of reconciling differences among people and balancing power (Zaleznik). Perpetuating and strengthening the existing institutions enhances the sense of self-worth to a manager. They perform their roles in harmony with the ideals of their duties and responsibility. Leaders tend to have two innate personalities, and feel separate from their environment. Their sense of identity doesn’t rely on social indicators like memberships and work roles. Leaders establish and also breakoff intensive one-to-one relationships while managerial personalities form widely distributed and moderate attachments (Scott et al). Another important observation is that, while apparently destined for failure in their careers, individuals that form strong one-to-one relationships are normally able to intensify and speed their development. Psychological readiness to gain from the apprenticeship relies on their experience in life that makes the person turn inward (Zaleznik). Coach K: A Matter of the Heart analysis Coach Mike Kryzewski, a successful college basketball coach, at Duke University. He is known for his autocratic leadership style involving stern and strict discipline. He’s generally a good leader based on his style, consideration and transformational behaviour. He argues that mutual trust is in the eyes, respect for subordinates and consideration of one on one feelings is vital. He has had a transformational leadership attracting admiration for his multiple awards, respect as former player still seek his advice, and trust exemplified by statements such as “can’t fake goose bumps”. He prioritized human and conceptual skills. Environmental influences have contributed a great deal to his success, with his upbringing and interactions with his family influencing his communication and competency in social judgement skills. He’s however deficient in motivation especially on the willingness to dominate(Snook, Scott, Leslie, Perlow, and Brian DeLacey). Coach Knight: The Will to Win Knight was a perfectionist and held that will is more imperative than skill. He argued that winning was the expectation. He was excellent in figuring out what exactly what would work in a given situation and how to modify it if it’s not working. He possessed the two leadership traits had by coach K, conceptual and technical skills. The one trait Knight was deficient in was the human skill. He is very popular for his roughness and use of intimidation, high level of profanity and certainly throwing a chair on the court epitomizes his lack of human skills (Snook, Scott, Leslie, Perlow, and Brian DeLacey) The No-Stats All-Star case Shane Battier of the Houston Rockets does not score many point or have many rebounds, and was even described by his team’s manager as a marginal athlete. Despite this, Battier had what it takes to be the most valuable player and the team leader. His game is a combination of many strengths that build up a whole. He was once called Lego since when he enters the court, everything starts to fit together. This case brings out a clear picture of leadership in that: 1. Team leadership is shared. Leadership in a team revolves among the team members to enable the most capable player lead the team at any point. Excellent players behave this way as they understand this concept. 2. The designated team leader must competently enable and facilitate every team member to play their roles. The leader should strive to bring the best out of anyone involved in the team. 3. Excellent leaders should identify and develop the Battier’s of their organizations. It’s our responsibility to find and develop the great team players we have in our organizations. Qualities such as putting personal gains behind team interests, respect for team members, constructive conflict resolution, visionary thinking and seeing opportunities in problems should be watched out for in employees to make their teams and peers better. Works Cited Granovetter, Mark. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology (1973): 1360-1380. Print. Pye, Lucian W. “The Spirit of Chinese Politics.” The Dynamics of Chinese Politics (1992): 207-212. Print. Scott, Snook, Leslie A. Perlow, Brian J. Delacey. “Coach Knight: The Will to Win.” HBS Premier Case Collection (2005): 1-14. Print. “Sensemaking in Organizations.” Sensemaking in Organizations. n.d. Print. Snook, Scott A., Leslie A. Perlow, and Brian DeLacey. “Coach K: A Matter of Heart.” HBS Premier Case Collection (2005): 1-12. Document. Tharp, Bruce. Defining “Culture” and “Organizational Culture”: From Anthropology to the Office. New York: Haworth, 2009. Print. Thomas, David and Ely, Robin. “Making Differences Matter: A New Paradigm in Managing Diversity.” Havard Business Review (1996): 1-13. Print. Zaleznik, Abraham. “Management and Leaders: Are They Different.” Best of H.B.R (1977): 74-81. Print. Read More