Introduction
Due to globalization, immigration, and various technological advancements, the companies’ workforce has become increasingly diverse. Contemporary organizations have to face increased competition which mandates collaboration across organizational, temporal, and geographic boundaries while engaging a demographically heterogeneous workforce. To meet the globalization demands, a classical organization can no longer offer the variation vital for solving complex issues, which leads to the incorporation of matrix structures, project and cross-functional teams and other new forms (Kadam et al., 2020). Because of increasing workforce diversity, multicultural teams became ubiquitous within organizations today. However, differences among employees can negatively affect both individual and organizational performance. In this context, this report will focus on the issue of diversity in the workplace. It begins with observing the most popular and the most recent diversity theories. It then elaborates on the current diversity practices that companies undertake to thrive. Finally, the report discusses in detail how a part of HR – a committee for hiring and performance evaluation – should incorporate the diversity concept.
Theoretical Background
Diversity presents a vast opportunity for research and evaluation. Based on the review of existing literature associated with the matter, the most frequently used theoretical frameworks are social identity theory and self or social categorization theory (Steffens et al., 2021). Homophily and similarity attraction theories also tend to be a frequent choice of research, along with attraction-selection-attrition and tokenism (Froehlich et al., 2021). In the meantime, on an organizational level, theories such as a firm’s resource-based view, upper echelons, signaling, and institutional, receive a lot of scholarly attention (Hazarika & Nandakumar, 2020). Additionally, the topic of diversity is often approached from the employment law perspective, namely Civil Rights Act’s Title VII or the Americans with Disabilities Act (Blanck, 2019; Pagano, 2018). These frequently viewed theories are undoubtedly relevant in acquiring a general understanding; however, they are not new to the scholar society. In this context, it might be more helpful to study more recent theories that concentrate on the direct effect of diversity and its management practices on organizations, teams, and individual employees.
In particular, more in-depth analysis and categorization of diversity can yield efficient and practical results. For instance, the typology of diversity in terms of variety, separation, and disparity can help articulate how to conceptualize diversity (Aggarwal & Woolley, 2019). Models like the business case for diversity and the interactional model of cultural diversity might also prove helpful in connecting organizational diversity management and employee diversity to preferable organizational outcomes (Kadam et al., 2020). In turn, a theory of the information/decision-making perspective sheds light on information exchange and sharing as a primary mechanism connecting team diversity to team performance (Mikkonen et al., 2021). Meanwhile, in order to elaborate on the team dynamics concept, one can apply the categorization-elaboration model that combines the logic of the information/ decision-making perspective with several essential concepts from social identity and self-categorization theories (Li et al., 2022). Finally, a contemporary Microdynamics of Diversity and Stereotyping in Teams (MIDST) model can provide a nuanced framework that describes how stereotyping can potentially harm or benefit team functioning, depending on its management (Triana et al., 2020). Overall, these relatively modern approaches efficiently manage to link diversity theory to practice.
Current Practices
The strength of the impact social movements, such as Me Too or Black Lives Matter, can possess resulted in a worldwide recognition of diversity in the business environment. Apart from that, companies across the globe realized that their HR systems should not only provide opportunities, promote fairness, and eliminate discrimination of underrepresented groups but also design these practices in a way that does not threaten the majority groups. Consequently, the utility and usefulness of such diversity practices allowed academics to perceive the intersection of research and practice more clearly.
First of all, when reducing workplace discrimination and managing demographic diversity, one should pay attention to leadership. Leaders that hope to manage diversity issues successfully must focus on creating a collaborative and inclusive context while dealing with both task- and person-related challenges (Homan et al., 2020). According to O’Reilly III et al. (2020), a leader is the main point of reference for the organizational culture. Therefore, their belief system and personality could either foster a collaborative or, conversely, a competitive environment. In this context, a wise suggestion for companies that genuinely intend to create a diverse workplace would be to search for leaders preferring a collaborative style selectively. Given that collaboration, compared to the competition, is more suitable for diversity, such leaders’ personality traits will eventually promote the desired workplace culture with an inclusive climate that would benefit a diverse workforce. It is worth noting that positioning these inclusive leaders in lower and mid-level management in addition to the executive team can accelerate the process.
On a broader scale, more substantial advances in diversity management can be made if inclusive leadership is elevated to the national level. In other words, diversity can thrive ubiquitously when inclusive and, more importantly, proactive leadership efforts are present not only within individual companies but also among government officials that develop policies. They will play a vital role in facilitating an inclusive national culture, which can indirectly impact individual organizations despite these officials’ “external” presence.
In terms of human resource practice, general HR training is necessary but, unfortunately, not sufficient to successfully manage a diverse workforce. In this context, companies should emphasize diversity training with identity-conscious HR practices since general training with identity-blind practices does not account for all the peculiarities a diverse workforce possesses (Roberson et al., 2020). Such training and other associated practices are crucial because they highlight that diversity is more than simply obtaining a broad demographic representation.
In particular, it is more about adequately managing this representation through appropriate practices. For instance, diversity training can teach how to be able to see and comprehend an employee’s perspective. It is particularly important in light of changing negative racial attitudes to positive ones because being open to a racially different point of view is often more than enough (Ragins & Ehrhardt, 2020). Therefore, companies concerned with fostering an inclusive workplace climate should begin by utilizing the recruiting and staffing functions to selectively recruit individuals who already have a perspective-taking mindset. Consequently, these individuals would take diversity training more seriously, empowering their ability to consider different perspectives.
Moreover, a truly integral HR system should go beyond sole training programs facilitating perspective-taking in diversity management. In order to be more efficient, apart from training and development practices, such a system should systematically integrate diversity management into its compensation and appraisal processes (Ng & Sears, 2020). This way, the organizational impact will be apparent not only in HR practices of diversity and equality management but also in various team and individual interactions.
Proper personnel positioning also belongs among frequent diversity practices. In particular, the demographic background of the person charged with dealing with diversity issues in the workforce plays an important role. According to Gardner and Ryan (2020), it is a common mistake when companies pick individuals for such positions based on their minority background, hoping that it will result in more proactive and successful efforts. However, it often backfires with an increased bias toward the minority representative, as others perceive their actions as self-interest based rather than objective (Gardner & Ryan, 2020). Another mistake companies can make is sending an all-minority team as a token of the company’s diversity values. In this case, unfortunately, people might believe a Black recruiter would only hire other Black candidates. In contrast, a white recruiter with a strong sense of diversity would be perceived as more objective and unbiased (Gardner & Ryan, 2020). Therefore, companies that create a demographically diverse department responsible for diversity management and avoid matching staff members’ backgrounds with potential applicants tend to be more successful.
Practical Recommendation
Based on successful contemporary diversity practices, companies should have a demographically diverse team of recruiters and HR managers to reduce the likeliness of negative self-interest perceptions emergence. Such an approach contributes to a more multicultural vision that includes all points of view and improves support and intergroup relations for diversity initiatives (Leslie et al., 2020). Conversely, the committee’s unfamiliarity with diversity, equity, and inclusion might lead to undesired consequences for the company, which is why it becomes increasingly important to adopt them at the committee’s development stage.
In terms of HRM, as mentioned earlier, it is critical for the associated committees to not only value and consider diversity in their actions but also to be diversified themselves. Recent studies have shown there is a direct relationship between the committee’s diversification and registered bias levels. Firstly, homogenous groups have a tendency to gravitate toward candidates replicating their characteristics (O’Meara et al., 2020). Furthermore, underrepresented committee members have a weaker influence in shaping the committee’s actions. Therefore, committee composition belongs among the essential prerequisites of promoting diversity.
In ensuring the representation of unique committee members, one should remember to treat members of particular groups equally. This approach refers to equity – ensuring every individual has what they need to thrive by increasing resources, access, and opportunities (Bhalla, 2019). It is especially significant for historically underrepresented and disadvantaged communities. Given the registered importance of role models in providing examples of career success, aspirations, and persistence, equity is particularly relevant for competitive institutions that value the success of their employees regardless of their attributes.
In this context, sole diversity might not be enough to achieve long-term stability. According to Bhalla (2019), “simply increasing the numbers of underrepresented individuals without re-evaluating our definitions of merit and excellence can lead to tokenization and an inability to retain” a diversified workforce. In other words, the best practice in developing a committee that adheres to the equity principle is not to establish equal merit but to create equal opportunities to achieve excellence.
The two mentioned concepts unite under the banner of what scholars refer to as inclusion. Wong (2019) broadly defines it as a welcoming culture where differences are honoured, and every individual is valued, respected, and has the ability to prosper (Wong, 2019). Despite sharing several features with the ideas of diversity and equity, inclusion also possesses a unique, distinctive feature. In short, inclusion is responsible for ensuring that underrepresented individuals are not simply hired and allowed to succeed – they also deserve to feel genuinely affiliated with their workplace and collective.
The committee responsible for interviewing and evaluating performance will be the first and the most frequent institution that employees interact with. Therefore, its actions must be influenced at various levels to ensure adherence to the inclusion principle. Individually, its members should always seek opportunities to learn about cultural diversity to know how to behave accordingly in various situations (Wong, 2019). Personal communication does not end in merely empowering an individual but extends to identifying and addressing communication barriers. Then, on a broader level, Wong (2019) advises creating meaningful communication channels and safety systems around issues and opportunities related to inclusion. Transparency and willingness to learn are key to establishing trust and forming bonds in a diversified collective.
Only by being built on principles of diversity, equity, and inclusion will the committee responsible for HRM be able to foster these concepts in the future. To value diversity in its operations, internal diversity can become the committee’s reference point. By changing its perceptions regarding success merits, the committee will comprehend the idea of equity. Finally, through building understanding and care, the committee can become genuinely inclusive in its practice.
Conclusion
In a diversified world, companies have to adapt accordingly to be able to face contemporary problems. Thankfully, the research on the topic of diversity is expanding, providing insights into old theories and combining them with new, innovative perspectives. This research is being constantly implemented into companies’ practices, changing the demand for leadership and an approach to positioning within the workforce. As a part of ongoing change, an HR committee responsible for workforce management should be among the first departments to implement diversity ideas into its work to ensure the success and prosperity of its company.
References
Aggarwal, I., & Woolley, A. W. (2019). Team creativity, cognition, and cognitive style diversity. Management Science, 65(4), 1586-1599. Web.
Bhalla, N. (2019). Strategies to improve equity in faculty hiring. Molecular biology of the cell, 30(22), 2744-2749. Web.
Blanck, P. (2019). Why America is better off because of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Touro Law Review, 35, 605.
Gardner, D. M., & Ryan, A. M. (2020). What’s in it for you? Demographics and self-interest perceptions in diversity promotion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(9), 1062. Web.
Hazarika, L., & Nandakumar, M. K. (2020). Corporate entrepreneurship performance from an attention-based view perspective. Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode Working papers, (368).
Homan, A. C., Gündemir, S., Buengeler, C., & van Kleef, G. A. (2020). Leading diversity: Towards a theory of functional leadership in diverse teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(10), 1101. Web.
Kadam, R., Rao, S. A., Abdul, W. K., & Jabeen, S. S. (2020). Diversity climate perceptions and its impact on multicultural team innovation and performance. Measuring Business Excellence, 24(3), 301-318. Web.
Leslie, L. M., Bono, J. E., Kim, Y. S., & Beaver, G. R. (2020). On melting pots and salad bowls: A meta-analysis of the effects of identity-blind and identity-conscious diversity ideologies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(5), 453. Web.
Li, Y., Hsu, J. S. C., Sun, H., & Parolia, N. (2022). Team Leadership and Diversity Management in Information Systems Development Project Teams. Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14(5), 1.
Mikkonen, M., Stenvall, J., & Lehtonen, K. (2021). The Paradox of gender diversity, organizational outcomes, and recruitment in the boards of national governing bodies of sport. Administrative Sciences, 11(4), 141. Web.
Ng, E. S., & Sears, G. J. (2020). Walking the talk on diversity: CEO beliefs, moral values, and the implementation of workplace diversity practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 164(3), 437-450. Web.
O’Meara, K., Culpepper, D., & Templeton, L. L. (2020). Nudging toward diversity: Applying behavioral design to faculty hiring. Review of Educational Research, 90(3), 311-348. Web.
O’Reilly III, C. A., Chatman, J. A., & Doerr, B. (2021). When “me” trumps “we”: Narcissistic leaders and the cultures they create. Academy of Management Discoveries, 7(3), 419-450. Web.
Pagano, W. (2018). Dynamic Values: Confronting and Capitalizing on Religious and LGBTQ Diversity. Marriott Student Review, 2(1), 10.
Ragins, B. R., & Ehrhardt, K. (2021). Gaining perspective: The impact of close cross-race friendships on diversity training and education. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(6), 856. Web.
Roberson, Q., King, E., & Hebl, M. (2020). Designing more effective practices for reducing workplace inequality. Behavioral Science & Policy, 6(1), 39-49. Web.
Steffens, N. K., Munt, K. A., van Knippenberg, D., Platow, M. J., & Haslam, S. A. (2021). Advancing the social identity theory of leadership: A meta-analytic review of leader group prototypicality. Organizational Psychology Review, 11(1), 35-72. Web.
Triana, M. D. C., Kim, K., Byun, S. Y., Delgado, D. M., & Arthur Jr, W. (2021). The relationship between team deep‐level diversity and team performance: A meta‐analysis of the main effect, moderators, and mediating mechanisms. Journal of management studies, 58(8), 2137-2179. Web.
Wong, C. (2019). Changing organizational culture: From embedded bias to equity & inclusion. Professional Safety, 64(08), 26-30.