weLEAD Online Magazine
leadingtoday.org
Copyright
2005 ã weLEAD, Inc.
The Importance of Diversity in
the Workplace - Part 1
By Alicia Kenyon
The United
States is often thought of as “the great melting pot” where anyone from any
background can assimilate into a single society. Most Americans hold the belief that every
human being is of equal worth, entitled to the same privileges and opportunities,
regardless of race, gender or age. As
Americans continue to value and maintain this cultural expectation, the concept
of diversity will permeate the workplace and become a necessity to the success
of organizations large and small. As
American businesses compete in a more global arena, the value of different
perspectives and talents will be vital to an organization’s survival and
growth. This fundamental belief forces
managers to embrace and comprehend the concept of workplace diversity, its
barriers and benefits. Workplace diversity is a multi-faceted concept that will
continue to evolve as more industries move toward a global marketplace. The globalization of business is changing the
face of the American workforce thereby emphasizing the importance of effective
leadership in managing diversity in the workplace. Managers will be expected to have a firm
understanding of managing a diverse workforce to be effective in positioning
organizations for future business opportunities.
Learning to effectively manage and embrace the concept
of diversity must initiate from an understanding of the concept.
According
to Church (1995):
We define diversity in an
organizational setting in terms of a collective of individuals who differ from
each other on one or any number of dimensions including culture, values,
education, gender, marital status and age. Diversity deals with visible and
invisible characteristics. (p. 3)
According to Parvis (2003),
Dimensions of diversity include but are not limited to: age, gender, race, sexual orientation,
religious beliefs, work experience, ethnicity, physical abilities/qualities,
educational background, geographic locations, income, marital status, military
experience, parental status and job classification (p.37). In the context of the workplace, valuing
diversity means creating a workplace that respects and includes these
differences, recognizing the unique contributions that individuals with many
types of differences can make, and creating a work environment that maximizes
the potential of all employees.
Diversity is about having the long-term goal that the organization’s
workforce should generally reflect the population of the state it serves in all
dimensions. The concept of diversity
highlights our differences as individuals; however, the value of workplace
diversity is that these differences create an entity that is far more powerful
and greater than the sum of its individual parts. Employers must broaden their concept of what
diversity is, how it will impact their organization and what they need to do to
prepare for the inevitable future.
The concept of diversity and the term affirmative
action are often used interchangeably.
When defined there is a clear difference.
According
to Bean (2003):
Affirmative action is grounded in
moral and social responsibility to amend wrongs done in the past to those
Americans who were not of the majority population. These legal obligations are based on
numerical measures and were designed to increase the representation of minorities
and women in areas of employment where they were previously underrepresented.
This effort was a direct result of the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s. (p.
64)
The focus of affirmative action was and has been on
increasing the representation of minorities and females in the workforce. The intent of affirmative action was to
rectify social injustices experienced by the nation’s minority population. To insure implementation of affirmative
action the Federal government created the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC).
According to the Civil Rights
Organization (2002):
The Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC) is the federal agency with the responsibility for enforcing
the anti-bias employment provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 but also
the Equal Pay Act, the Age Discrimination Act and the Americans with
Disabilities Act. (n. p.)
Affirmative action was designed to break the cycle of
discrimination and increase opportunities for minorities in the
Because the concept of diversity is frequently confused
with affirmative action, it is necessary to examine their innate
differences.
According
to Simmons, Clemons & Bennett (2003):
Differences
between affirmative action and diversity are critical to understanding today’s
business environment. Affirmative action
refers to the laws,
regulations, programs and steps used in the
Affirmative action is legally driven and is about the
effort to achieve equality of opportunity by focusing on specific groups. Affirmative action is about taking positive
steps to prevent discrimination. The
concept of diversity focuses on a broader set of issues than does affirmative
action. Diversity efforts concentrate on
managing the workforce you already have, which just happens to be diverse in
its dimensions. Diversity is not
government mandated; however, managing and valuing diversity gives an
organization a competitive edge.
According to Simmons, Clemons, and Bennett (2003), “One is to right wrongs, the other is a strategic advantage and a business
imperative. The more diverse your workforce, the better your
decision-making” (p. 82).
Understanding the concept of diversity is the prelude
to answering why diversity in the work place is significant. Many thought the concept of diversity to be a
“fad” that would be significant for a while then fade. Diversity is not based on one person’s ideas
or on one interesting way of looking at things.
Instead, it is a concept that should matter to every single one of us,
both personally and professionally. When
a group or segment of the population is excluded or oppressed, all are
denied. For businesses and communities
to survive and flourish, a society must be aware and sensitive to all members
within. When all society segments are
respected and utilized it is beneficial to the whole. When we as individuals are not considered
part of the mainstream, we find ourselves struggling to find our place.
According
to Pellet (2004):
In
this nation, our popular culture, or ideal for business success is white, young
heterosexual, Christian and male. This
means if you are a woman,
have ANY ethnic background that is non-white, are not a heterosexual, are not a
Christian and are not between the ages
of
twenty-one and fifty you are outside the “margins”. This means that there are obstacles, prejudices and
stereotypes about YOU as an
individual. Considering most of us live
outside the “margins” of mainstream culture, and do not fit the societal
prescription of
what is normal and acceptable we must learn to accept and
respect what is different from us and incorporate it into our organizations. (p. 50)
Since
According to Cole (2003):
“Nothing is so sure as
change!” As antiquated as the concept of
diversity may strike
us, the notion has real and immediate relevance to today’s business communities.
The case for embracing diversity in the workplace is built on the
changing labor force demographics.
Consider the following facts: The
traditional hierarchical, large, white male-dominated corporate structure is
not the norm any longer. By 2010, the Hispanic labor force is projected to be
larger than the African-American labor force.
Asians will continue to be the fastest growing group in the labor force
(projected to increase by nearly 45% this decade). Women currently comprise
nearly half of the labor force. The majority of workers entering the workforce
this decade will be woman, minorities and foreign nationals. The labor shortage
that began in the 1990’s will continue to grow and is projected to reach 10
million workers by 2010. (p. 48)
ConAgra Foods, Inc.
is a company that employs over forty thousand people. According to the above statistic, twenty
thousand of ConAgra’s employees are women.
Since the majority of workers entering the workforce will be minorities,
including women, by the year 2010, over 65% of the employees within the
organization will be minorities. It is
evident by the changing demographics that diversity consciousness must be an
integral part of a corporate culture.
Diversity is a business issue rooted in real measurable dynamics
occurring in both the workforce and in the marketplace. This new workforce will, of course, mirror
the changing demographics of the country.
As a result, the new workforce will be comprised of older workers, more
women and greater numbers from minority groups.
According
to Alpert (1998):
The workforce will be increasingly
composed of “minority” populations. By
the year 2005, projected changes in the ethnic composition of the American
Workforce include 51% of new entrants into the workforce will be minorities to
include women. Looking at women alone
(minority and white) will make up 62% of new entrants. These demographic changes will significantly alter
the composition of the population as a whole and the workforce. In addition, these changes will have a major
affect on who has “buying power” and the definition of the markets that will
provide growing business opportunities. (n. p.)
As demographics continue to change, the importance of
successfully managing workplace diversity will continue, however, not without
overcoming barriers. Nobody ever really
said or believed that diversity was easy.
Creating, sustaining and valuing a diverse workforce, is hard work,
which requires diligence, knowledge and a great deal of courage. Barriers to diversity consist of systemic and
emotional characteristics that can hinder diversity efforts. According to Thiederman
(n. d.), fear, unrealistic objectives and goals and the “like me” syndrome are
the most pronounced barriers to diversity resolutions (n. p.). Fear generally exists when implementing a
change. The key is not to let fear
stifle efforts and implementation.
According to Thiederman
(n. d.):
Of course there is always the danger
that you might offend an individual or group, initiate an ineffective strategy
or even set an inappropriate goal. Each
of these fears is understandable. The
key to success is not to deny the reality of the danger but to find ways to
minimize the risk and proceed despite it.
Fear, for example, 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 group and more on designing
approaches that will benefit all potential members regardless of background. (n. p.)
The second barrier to effective diversity efforts is
the temptation to set unrealistic objectives and goals. Goals and objectives must be appropriate for the organization and not overly
ambitious in their timeframe.
According
to Thiederman (n. d.):
Benchmarking with other
organizations will help set realistic objectives. There is much to learn in terms of strategies
and policies from trend-setting organizations.
Just as diversity teaches us to be who we are and that difference is to
be valued; your organization needs to remember that it is unique and will be
best served by learning from but not imitating others. One of the biggest barriers to success of
diversity efforts within the corporate world has been to set goals that are
unobtainable. When the goals are not
reached, critics are fueled and people become discouraged. Err in the direction of setting goals that
are short term, conservative in scope and as measurable as possible. (n. p.)
A third barrier to diversity efforts is termed the
“Like Me” syndrome. According to Theirderman (n. d.), the “Like Me” syndrome refers to the
axiom of human nature that people prefer to associate with other people who are
like them. (n. p.)
This syndrome can lead to cultivating a culture of bias and hinder
willingness to give open and honest feedback.
As per
Should the notion
of the “Like Me” syndrome persist, resistance to diversity will continue to
exist. Barriers to diversity will arise
and can create a hostile environment. As
per Parvis (2003), “These challenges, if not detected
and resolved via constructive leadership, will lead to loss of innovative
potential in diversity efforts and ultimately to failure in the undertakings of
an organization” (p. 38).
References
Alpert,
R.T. (1998). Gaining competitive advantage: the case for diversity. Retrieved
April 24, 2004, from http://www.diversityresources.compadvan.htm.
Anand, R. (2004). Make diversity part
of the business plan. Restaurants &
Institutions, 114,
22.
Retrieved May 22, 2004 from ProQuest
database.
Bean, L.
(2003, August). Affirmative action after
the Supreme Court decisions, the debate goes
on. DiversityInc, pp. 64-68.
Belcher, O.F. (2003). Why diversity
matters in a global economy. Cost
Engineering, 45, 3.
Retrieved April 14, 2004 from ProQuest database.
Carp, D.
(2004, May).
Diversity at Kodak. DiversityInc, p. 51.
Church,
A.H. (1995). Diversity in workgroup settings:
a case study. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 16, pp. 3-9. Retrieved February 16, 2004 from ProQuest
database.
Civil Rights Organization
Staff. (2002). Affirmative action. Retrieved
April 14, 2004 from
http://www.civilrights.org/library/permanent_collection/resources/glossary.html.
Cole, Y.
(2002, November/December). Why diversity matters: market driven approach produces
Results. DiversityInc. pp. 45-52.
Cox, P. (2004). A
different track. Chief
Executive, 198, 53. Retrieved May 22, 2004 from
ProQuest database.
Dessler, G. (2004). Management principles and practices for tomorrow’s
leaders. Upper Saddle
River: Prentice Hall.
Kersten, A. (2000). Diversity
management dialogue, dialectics and diversion. Journal of
Organizational Change Management,
13, pp. 235-248. Retrieved
from ProQuest
database.
Moore, S.
(1999). Understanding and managing diversity among groups at work: key issues for
organizational training and
development. Journal of European
Industrial Training, 23,
pp.
208-217. Retrieved January 13,
2004 from ProQuest database.
Pellet, J.
(2004). Driving diversity: diverse work
forces make for better companies. Chief
Executive, 198, pp. 48-55. Retrieved January 13, 2004 from ProQuest
database.
Parvis, L. (2003). Diversity and
effective leadership in multicultural workplaces. Journal
of
Environmental Health,65, pp.37-38. Retrieved January 13, 2004 from ProQuest
database.
Pope, A.
(2004). Diversity key in strategic planning. American
Water Works Association
Journal, 96, pp. 63-64. Retrieved May 16, 2004 from ProQuest
database.
Santana,
J. (2003). Learn to harness the full potential of a diverse workforce.
Retrieved
April 22, 2004
from http://techrepublic.com.com/5100-6314-505405.html.
Simmons,
C., Clemons, J. &Bennett, C. (2003, July). Does your company discriminate?
Black
Enterprise, pp. 80-90.
Thiederman, S. (n. d.). Opening gateways to
understanding. Retrieved
from http://www.thiederman.com/articles_detail.php?id=57.
Comments
to: editor@leadingtoday.org
BACK TO weLEAD HOME PAGE
About
the author:
Alicia Kenyon is a Category
Manager-Packaging for a major food company responsible for the negotiation
and purchasing of over 20 million dollars in annual spend. Alicia is
currently a member of the company's Diversity Council with recent
attendance at the National Supplier Diversity Conference in
Washington D.C. Alicia will graduate from Bellevue University
in May 2005 with a BA in Business Management.