The Economic paper

This comprehensive, integrated teaching resource provides students with the tools and methodologies they need to effectively negotiate the multiple dynamics that emerge from difference, and to appropriately respond to issues of marginalization and social injustice.

Written from an American perspective, the book not only covers the traditional topics of race, gender, ethnicity, and social class, but explores emerging trends around “isms” (racism, sexism). This second edition includes two new chapters: one addressing social identity diversity and leadership in the workforce, and the other examining under-representation of diversity in the scientific, technical, and film workforce. This edition also features an updated chapter on social justice as an emerging diversity paradigm; this includes a conceptual framework to advance the ideology of organizational social justice.

End-of-chapter questions encourage students to engage in difficult conversations, and case studies stimulate students’ awareness of real-world issues that emerge from diversity, helping students to develop the broad range of skills they need to mediate or resolve diversity issues as future professionals. Additional links, slides, multiple choice quizzes, and essay questions can be found online as a part of this book’s Instructor Resources.

Marilyn Y. Byrd is an associate professor of human relations at the University of Oklahoma, Norman, USA, where she teaches diversity and social justice in organizations, organizational behavior, and human resources management. She is a faculty sponsor for the Student Society of Human Relations, a departmental student organization that advocates for social justice.

Chaunda L. Scott is a tenured associate professor and coordinator for the interdisciplinary Graduate Certificate in Human Diversity Inclusion and Social Justice Program at Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA. She teaches workforce diversity and human resource development courses and advises on diversity-focused dissertations. In 2015, she received a prestigious Fulbright Specialist Award, whereby she engaged in diversity education work in Cape Town, South Africa.

Diversity in the Workforce

The second edition of Diversity in the Workforce: Current Issues and Emerging Trends edited by Drs. Marilyn Byrd and Chaunda Scott is a must read for all students as well as diversity, equity, and inclusion leaders. This book provides authoritative research on the historical, current, and emerging challenges in creating truly inclusive work environments. It lays out compelling arguments for social justice and social action to eliminate the oppression of marginalized groups that continues in the U.S. still today.

Monica E. Emerson, Principal, Inclusive Performance Solutions; Former Navy Diversity Officer,

U.S. Department of the Navy; and Retired Executive Director, Daimler Chrysler Corporate Diversity Office

This superb and accessible text written by leading authors in the field, Profs. Byrd and Scott covers all aspects of workplace diversity and is a fantastic resource for students, academics, managers and HR practitioners on how to build a strong inclusive workforce. The book combines an excellent blend of theory and application with case studies and discussion questions designed to encourage deeper reflection on issues of professional and workplace identity.

Dr. David McGuire, Reader, Glasgow Caledonian University, Scotland; and Editor-in-Chief, Industrial and Commercial Training

Co-editors Marilyn Y. Byrd and Chaunda L. Scott have created a vital resource for students of race, gender, ethnic, and social class issues that impact diversity and social justice in the American workforce. This book introduces a number of controversial and important diversity issues that students will be impelled to confront and resolve in their lives as professionals. What are the emerging trends and developing relationships between the organizational culture and diversity in the workplace? Can spirituality and diversity coexist in the workplace? How do language differences and personal and physical appearance play out in the workforce? Are intergenerational differences a cause of workforce tensions?

In my 24 years as an African American physician, working in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area of Minnesota, I’ve never come across a book that examines such a varied spectrum of diversity issues—including the underrep- resentation of diversity in the sciences and technologies—until I read Diver- sity in the Workforce. This skillfully crafted book contains eighteen chapters written by acknowledged experts in the fields of diversity, human resource development, and social justice, including co-editors Byrd and Scott.

Students involved in the study of social diversity will significantly benefit by this must-read book because of its lucidity and concern for social justice. The editors have expertly produced an honest and eloquent presentation that will better prepare students for the daunting challenges of a diverse, 21st-century workforce; helping them to create a workplace that is fair, equitable and accessible to all Americans.

Charles E. Crutchfield III, MD, Clinical Professor of Dermatology, University of Minnesota Medical School; and Medical Director,

CrutchfieldDermatology.com

Diversity in the Workforce Current Issues and Emerging Trends

Second Edition

Edited by Marilyn Y. Byrd and Chaunda L. Scott

Second edition published 2018 by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017

and by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

© 2018 Taylor & Francis

The right of Marilyn Y. Byrd and Chaunda L. Scott to be identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

First edition published by Routledge 2014

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested

ISBN: 978-1-138-73142-4 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-138-73143-1 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-18898-0 (ebk)

Typeset in Bembo by Apex CoVantage, LLC

Visit the eResources: www.routledge.com/9781138731424

Contributors viii Foreword by George Henderson, PhD xiii Preface xvi Acknowledgments xx

PART I

Establishing Foundations of Diversity in the Workforce 1

1 Historical Perspectives for Studying Diversity in the Workforce 3 CHAUNDA L. SCOTT

2 Suggested Theories, Models, and Frameworks Used to Address Emerging Diversity Issues in the Workforce 28 CHAUNDA L. SCOTT

3 Exploring the Relationship between the Organizational Culture and Diversity in the Workforce 49 MARILYN Y. BYRD

PART II

Diversity in the Workforce: Current Issues 63

4 Race and Diversity in the Workforce 65 MARILYN Y. BYRD

5 Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 81 BRENDA LLOYD-JONES, LISA BASS, AND GAËTANE JEAN-MARIE

Contents

vi Contents

6 Ethnicity and Diversity in the Workforce 107 CHAUNDA L. SCOTT AND TERRANCE R. MCCLAIN

7 Developing Human Resource Development Competencies to Manage Sexual Orientation and Transgender Diversity Issues in the Workforce 120 MICHAEL P. CHANEY AND LISA HAWLEY

8 Social Class and Diversity in the Workforce 153 MARILYN Y. BYRD, JOSE MARTINEZ, AND CHAUNDA L. SCOTT

PART III

Diversity in the Workforce: Emerging Trends 171

9 Spirituality and Diversity in the Workforce 173 MARILYN Y. BYRD

10 Intergenerational Tensions in the Workforce 190 BRENDA LLOYD-JONES AND JODY A. WORLEY

11 Linguistic Profiling in the Workforce 214 CLARETHA HUGHES AND KETEVAN MAMISEISHVILI

12 Personal/Physical Appearance Stigmatizing in the Workforce 228 CYNTHIA SIMS

13 Visible and Invisible Disabilities in the Workforce: Exclusion and Discrimination 244 CHAUNDA L. SCOTT AND MARILYN Y. BYRD

14 Re-Emergence of Racial Harassment and Racial Hate Symbols in the Workforce 254 MARILYN Y. BYRD AND CHAUNDA L. SCOTT

15 Cross-Cultural Teams: Workforce Opportunities and Challenges 269 TRAMMELL BRISTOL AND CHAUNDA L. SCOTT

Contents vii

16 Under-Representation of Diversity in the Scientific, Technical, and Film Workforce 278 CHAUNDA L. SCOTT

17 Social Identity Diversity and Leadership in the Workforce 289 MARILYN Y. BYRD

18 Re-Conceptualizing and Re-Visioning Diversity in the Workforce: Toward a Social Justice Paradigm 307 MARILYN Y. BYRD

Index 322

Editors

Dr. Marilyn Y. Byrd is an associate professor of human relations at the University of Oklahoma, Norman. Dr. Byrd earned a BBA and an MBA from Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Texas, and a PhD in Human Resource Development from Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas. She teaches graduate courses in human resource manage- ment, organizational behavior, and diversity and justice in organizations. Dr. Byrd is a member of the Society for Human Resource Management and the Academy of Human Resource Development, where she serves in several leadership positions. She currently serves as an associate edi- tor for Advances in Developing Human Resources (ADHR), one of four journals affiliated with the Academy of Human Resource Development. Dr. Byrd is interested in contributing to research and literature in the area of organizational social justice. Her other scholarly interests include theorizing leadership of Black American women and spirituality in the workplace. She was editor of and a contributing author to Spirituality in the Workplace: A Philosophical and Social Justice Perspective (2016), a progres- sive response to social injustice and moral responsibility.

Dr. Chaunda L. Scott earned a doctorate in Adult Education/Organi- zational Leadership with a focus on diversity education from Teachers College, Columbia University in New York City; and a master’s degree in Administration, Planning and Social Policy with a focus on diversity education administration from the Harvard Graduate School of Educa- tion. She is currently a tenured associate professor in the Department of Organizational Leadership in the School of Education and Human Ser- vices at Oakland University in Rochester, Michigan, and coordinator of the interdisciplinary Graduate Certificate in Human Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice Program. She also serves as the Diversity and Inclusion Specialist in the school for the office of the dean.

In the Department of Organizational Leadership, Dr. Scott conducts research and teaches undergraduate and graduate courses focused on

Contributors

Contributors ix

the areas of diversity education, workforce diversity education, work- force diversity leadership, eradicating racism, human resource develop- ment, organizational leadership, and training and development. She has also published several articles in national and international scholarly jour- nal articles on diversity education and workforce diversity education, contributed book chapters, co-edited books, and presented her research widely in such locations as Beijing, China; Limerick, Ireland; Oxford, England; and Cape Town, South Africa. Dr. Scott is also a recipient of the Academy of Human Resource Development’s premier Cutting Edge Research Award.

In 2013, Dr. Scott was named as one of the Top 25 Education Profes- sors in Michigan by Online Schools Michigan. Most notably, in 2015, she was granted a prestigious Fulbright Specialist Award that took her to Cape Town, South Africa, where she engaged in diversity education work in the area of professional academic staff development at Cape Pen- insula University of Technology. Additionally, in 2015, Dr. Scott received the Educator of the Year Award from the Niagara Foundation (Michigan Chapter) for her exemplary diversity education work.

Contributing Authors

Dr. Lisa Bass is an assistant professor of education at North Carolina State University. She received her PhD in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies and Comparative and International Education from Pennsylvania State University. Her work focuses on education reform through the ethics of caring and equitable education for all students. Her goal is to motivate others to become passionate about caring for all students, meeting their needs, and providing them with a high-quality education. Her most recent research includes study on the ethics of caring from diverse middle- and high-school student perspectives, and on the preparation of exemplary principals. Dr. Bass has published her work in books and education jour- nals, and continues to work toward this endeavor. She co-authored (with Susan C. Faircloth; 2013) the book Building Bridges from High Poverty Com- munities, to Schools, to Productive Citizenship: A Holistic Approach to Addressing Poverty through Exceptional Educational Leadership. More recently (2016), she edited the book Black Mask-ulinity: A Framework for Black Masculine Caring, both with Peter Lang Publishing. Dr. Bass is currently co-editing an ethics textbook for the University Council of Education Administration (UCEA) sponsored series, which is currently under review by Routledge.

Dr. Trammell Bristol is a quality assurance coordinator employed by the Department of Children and Families in New Jersey, where she coor- dinates various adult education initiatives. In 2004, Dr. Bristol received her EdD in Adult Education from Penn State University–Harrisburg. Her scholarly research interests include diversity management and

x Contributors

equity issues. Dr. Bristol has published several articles and has presented her research at several international conference venues, including the Academy of Human Resource Development and the Adult Education Research Conference.

Dr. Michael P. Chaney is an associate professor and coordinator of the Addictions Specialization in the Department of Counseling at Oakland University in Rochester, Michigan. A Licensed Professional Counselor, National Certified Counselor, and Approved Clinical Supervisor, he received his PhD in Counseling from Georgia State University. He is Past President of the Association of LGBT Issues in Counseling and currently serves as Editor-in-Chief for the Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling and is an editorial board member for the Journal of Addictions & Offender Coun- seling. He is a member of the Human Rights Committee of the Ameri- can Counseling Association. Dr. Chaney has demonstrated competencies and expertise working with individuals dealing with substance use and mood disorders, sexual compulsivity, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, male body image, and past trauma. In addition, he has specialized training in counseling individuals who are infected or affected by HIV/AIDS. He has numerous publications in prestigious professional journals in the areas of substance use disorders, sexual compulsivity, sexual orientation, male body image, social justice and advocacy in counseling.

Dr. Lisa Hawley is a full professor in the Department of Counseling at Oakland University in Rochester, Michigan. She received her PhD in Counselor Education at the University of South Carolina. Dr. Hawley’s research interests include group and techniques training, socioeconomic issues and mental health, qualitative research methods, and professional identity and advocacy. She served for 9 years as department chair and in several departmental leadership roles. At Oakland University, Dr. Haw- ley teaches the following courses: An Introduction to Counseling, Mul- ticultural Counseling, Techniques in Counseling, Group Counseling, Advanced Group Counseling, Practicum, Internship, Human Sexuality, Dissertation Preparation, and Applied Research. Dr. Hawley has also pub- lished her research in the following respected journals: The Professional Identity of Counselor Educators, The Clinical Supervisor, The Journal for Spe- cialists in Group Work, The Journal of Humanistic Education and Development, and The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families.

Dr. Claretha Hughes is a professor of human resource and workforce development in the Department of Rehabilitation, Human Resources, and Communication Disorders at the University of Arkansas and for- mer Director of the College of Education and Health Professions’ Hon- ors Program. She received her PhD from Virginia Tech, and her research focuses on value creation through the use of human resource develop- ment and technology development. She is interested in the impact of

Contributors xi

values (a) on teaching and learning processes and motivation; (b) on organizational culture, change strategies, and leadership; and (c) on tech- nology in the workplace environment and employee behavior. In 2012, Dr. Hughes received the R. Wayne Pace HRD Book of the Year Award from the Academy of Human Resource Development for her book Valu- ing People and Technology in the Workplace (2012, IGI Global) and was nomi- nated for the American Academy of Management 2013 George R. Terry Book Award. In 2009, Dr. Hughes was acknowledged by the University Council of Workforce and Human Resource Education as an “Outstand- ing Assistant Professor.” Dr. Hughes has won the College of Education and Health Professions’ Significant Research Award, and the Department of Rehabilitation, Human Resources, and Communication’s Outstanding Researcher Award in both 2016 and 2017.

Gaëtane Jean-Marie, PhD, is Dean of the College of Education and holds the Richard O. Jacobson Endowed Chair of Leadership in Education at the University of Northern Iowa. She is the editor of the Studies in Educational Administration Series, and former editor of the Journal of School Leadership. Her research focuses on educational equity and social justice in K–12 schools, women and leadership in P-20 system, and leadership development and preparation in a global context. She has more than 90 publications which include books, book chapters, and academic articles in peer-reviewed journals. She is the recipient of the 2017 Distinguished Career Alumni Award from her alma mater.

Brenda Lloyd-Jones, PhD, is an associate professor and former associate chair of the Department of Human Relations in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma, Tulsa. Her research focuses on women and leadership in higher education, mentoring, socialization and gender in the professoriate, and diversity policies and inclusion practices in the workplace. Her scholarship has been published in peer-reviewed journals, academic books, and edited volumes. She has received the University of Okla- homa President’s Award for Community Service and is the founder of a 28-year-old, 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that focuses on increasing reading-centered households in underserved communities.

Dr. Ketevan Mamiseishvili is a professor of higher education at the Uni- versity of Arkansas. She also serves as the Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs in the College of Education and Health Professions. She completed her doctorate in Educational Leadership and Policy Anal- ysis at the University of Missouri. Prior to her current position, Ket- evan worked as the head of the Department of Rehabilitation, Human Resources, and Communication Disorders. She also taught English as a foreign language overseas in her home country of Georgia. Her research focuses on foreign-born faculty work life, productivity, and job satisfac- tion in U.S. higher education.

xii Contributors

Dr. Jose Martinez is a retired full professor of sociology from the Uni- versity of Mary Hardin-Baylor in Belton, Texas. He earned his PhD in Sociology from the University of Texas. Dr. Martinez’s research interests include race relations, social theory, and social class. He is a member of the American Sociological Association (Texas); the Association of Chica- nos in Higher Education; the Southwestern Council on Latin American Studies; and the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC).

Dr. Terrance R. McClain earned his doctoral degree in Counseling at Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan. He is also a National Certified Counselor (NCC) and holds memberships in the American Counseling Association; American School Counselor Association; Association for Counselor Education and Supervision; Association for Spiritual, Ethical and Religious Values in Counseling; Association for Specialists in Group Work; Michigan Counseling Association; Michigan Association for Counselor Education and Supervision; Michigan Association for Special- ists in Group Work; and the Association of Michigan School Counselors.

Dr. Cynthia Sims is Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs, College of Education and Human Services, and professor of workforce education and development at Southern Illinois University Carbondale. She holds a Doctor of Education in Adult and Higher Education, a Mas- ter of Arts in Social Work, a Master of Science in Public Service Manage- ment, and a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration. Her research interests include the manifestations of workplace power and privilege and the impact of lookism/colorism on women’s career development and job opportunities.

Dr. Jody A. Worley, an associate professor in the Department of Human Relations at the University of Oklahoma, received his PhD degree in Educational Psychology with emphasis on research methods, measure- ment, and statistics. His primary research interests include research meth- odology (e.g., survey design issues), organizational behavior/work-related issues (e.g., burnout, work–family conflict, workplace diversity), and com- munity psychology (e.g., quality of life issues for children and minorities). His professional affiliations and networks include the Southern Manage- ment Association (SMA), the American Psychological Association (APA), and the American Educational Research Association (AERA).

Foreword

George Henderson, PhD

Words matter! And the words printed in this book should matter very much to college professors, human resources managers and supervisors, and any other individuals who are concerned with cultural diversity and inclusion issues. Professors Byrd and Scott and the other contributors to this edited book present carefully researched, amply documented, and relevant informa- tion in each chapter. Diversity problems and strategies for change that are discussed in early chapters are elaborated on in later ones. This deliberate process of layering on information is an educationally sound way of packing comprehensive information into digestible chunks. Indeed, the introductory chapters provide intellectual road maps to ways in which all organizations can create culturally appropriate work environments. These environments, in turn, can increase employee effectiveness and productivity. There is much to unpack in this book. Below I will unpack a few of the insights that I have garnered from the readings.

Cultural diversity approaches focus on the delicate interplay between culturally different people, the organizations that employ them, and the clients or customers they serve. This frame of reference starts with the basic premise that people are the most important resource of any organi- zation. The challenge is to apply the knowledge, skills, commitment, and energy needed to have congenial organization climates that fuel successful outcomes. Of primary importance for effectively managing diversity in an organization is an understanding of the cultural histories, beliefs, behav- iors, and values of the various employees in an organization. The authors of the chapters in this book correctly point out that there is no single best strategy or approach that managers and supervisors can use to prevent or abate the bigotry, discrimination, or stereotypes that characterize cultur- ally dysfunctional organizations. But there are some tips and techniques that may be helpful. Indeed, the editors of and contributors to this book offer numerous helpful tips and techniques for creating and sustaining culturally diverse workplaces.

According to the editors and contributors, the major diversity focus of any organization should be to hire, train, retain, and when appropriate,

xiv Foreword

promote legally protected class workers, people who have historically been denied equal job opportunities. These workers were and still are, as a whole, victims of discrimination because of their race, ethnicity, gender, disability, national origin, religion, or sexual orientation. The authors of the chapters correctly point out that employers must not assume that cultural differences are synonymous with cultural deficits or inferiority. Relatedly, affirmative action laws, policies, and programs were initially enacted and implemented to correct years of affirmative inaction by recalcitrant organizations. Notwith- standing much progress, too many years have gone by and too little has been done to fully equalize the employment opportunities for most under- represented workers. Simply put, employers and their employees must value cultural diversity and make it an organization norm.

Valuing cultural diversity in the workplace evolves around the moral and ethical imperatives to recognize and appreciate culturally different people. I agree with the central theme of the book: Within all workplaces, the goal should be to incorporate, not eradicate, cultural differences. This “salad bowl” or “gumbo” approach to diversity requires each organization to involve as many of its employees as possible in the creation and perpetuation of a workplace and the spaces within it that endorse a “different but equal” oper- ating philosophy, and otherwise give respect and dignity to all employees. How is that done? For people who want to know how to help in creating organizations that are culturally inclusive, a good starting place would be to read this book. The editors and contributors present practical approaches to the complex societal issues inherent in achieving social justice within organizations. But each organization must find out for itself how to create and sustain its own diversity.

Professors Byrd and Scott are correct: It is important for managers and supervisors to recognize the difference between equal treatment and not treating everyone the same. The former approach requires all employ- ees to fit into an amorphous, homogeneous way of looking, talking, and working. The latter approach recognizes and respects culturally different talents and culturally different workplace interaction styles. Leading-edge managers and supervisors distinguish cultural styles from cultural substance, so that all employees’ cultural styles and approaches are accommodated without sacrificing effectiveness within an organization. Too often, for example, supervisors give an inordinate amount of credence to how their subordinates dress or talk to one another instead of how well they can do their jobs.

In summary, after reading this book, I was reminded once again that there are no angels in this diversity business. Truth be told, good people in organizations sometimes do bad things and bad people sometimes do good things. All of us have at some time been oppressed in the workplace. And all of us have at some time oppressed other people. That is a thought worth remembering as you read this book. Professors Byrd and Scott and the other contributors assiduously share with their readers the agony of being

Foreword xv

denied one’s equal rights and opportunities in the workplace; and the joy that comes from helping to create workplaces and the spaces within them that are culturally inclusive and productive.

George Henderson, Sylvan N. Goldman Professor Emeritus, David Ross Boyd

Professor Emeritus, and Regents’ Professor Emeritus of Human Relations,

Education and Sociology University of Oklahoma

The purpose of this textbook is to bring to light current issues in diversity that have not been adequately addressed, and to recognize emerging trends that are having an impact on diversity in the workforce. The need for this textbook stems from our roles as professors in the fields of Human Resource Management (HRM) and Human Resource Development (HRD). We have become increasingly aware of our students’ curiosity to: (1) know more about the history of diversity and the issues associated with it in order to better understand its significance in the workplace; and (2) learn what spe- cific knowledge and skills they will need to respond to complex human diversity issues and tensions in the 21st century workplace (Thomas, 2005).

This textbook is intended as a primary resource for upper-level under- graduate and graduate diversity courses across the disciplines of HRD, HRM, Adult Education, Business Administration, Communication, Coun- seling, Educational Leadership, Human Relations, Organizational Leader- ship, Public Administration, Teacher Education, Training and Development, and Workforce Education and Development, to name a few. It can also be used as a reference resource for practitioners who are involved in the work of diversity education and diversity training.

The goal of this textbook is to provide students (future business pro- fessionals, practitioners, educators, managers, counselors, etc.) with a more informed perspective on diversity by presenting historical, social, and con- textual accounts of diversity. Our ultimate goal is to stimulate thinking that recaptures the original essence of recognizing diversity in the workforce and to take action-oriented steps toward social justice and social change.

Key Features

This textbook contains several key features that set it apart from similar textbooks on diversity:

1 Students are provided with definitions of historical, current, and emerg- ing terms, theories, and concepts that relate to diversity in the workforce.

Preface

Preface xvii

2 Real-world examples are provided which illustrate tensions that emerge from diversity.

3 A list of website links to organizations that support diversity initiatives and efforts is provided to enhance students’ learning experiences.

4 End-of-chapter critical-thinking application questions offer an oppor- tunity for students to engage in difficult conversations in an instructor- facilitated environment. Students will apply critical-thinking skills in order to make an informed decision about the problem or situation that is encountered.

5 End-of-chapter legal, actual, and/or simulated cases reinforce concepts presented in the chapter, which allows students to experience and apply what has been learned to realistic situations. Using a case-study peda- gogy, students will have the opportunity to test diversity models and frameworks. The case-study pedagogy is not designed to come up with a “right” answer, but rather to engage students in conversation about the choices they make.

New to the Second Edition

The second edition continues to bring a realistic perspective on everyday diversity issues confronting the workforce, using a social justice lens. New to the second edition is “Under-Representation of Diversity in the Scientific, Technical, and Film Workforce” (Chapter 16) and “Social Identity Diversity and Leadership in the Workforce” (Chapter 17).

Chapter 16, “Under-Representation of Diversity in the Scientific, Techni- cal, and Film Workforce” incorporates a unique sector of the workforce that is overlooked in typical discussions of diversity in the workforce. First, the visible representation of marginalized individuals or groups by the media has significant influence on shaping the attitudes of Americans. These attitudes are not filtered, but are transferred to the workplace and have an impact on how marginalized individuals or groups are viewed in their professional/ work environment. Second, the lack of people of color represented in acting roles in motion picture films remains a persistent problem, along with the lack of people of color and women working behind the camera in the role of film makers, screen writers, and directors. Third, given the heightened publicity over the lack of diversity represented on the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences governing board, voting membership committee and the Oscar nominees, we see the film industry as a fruitful workforce sector for presentation.

Chapter 17, “Social Identity Diversity and Leadership in the Workforce,” incorporates new ways of thinking about leadership by offering the perspec- tives and experiences of the marginalized identity leader. The chapter specif- ically emphasizes the exclusion of social groups that are protected under the mandates of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. This chapter introduces

xviii Preface

and applies the notion of “race neutralizing” as a subtle, exclusionary prac- tice. In addition, this chapter contains a special feature, “Celebrating the Successes,” highlighting women from marginalized identity groups who have overcome the challenges of marginalization and excelled to achieve leadership.

This second edition includes updates throughout the entire book. Specific updates include: discussion of the 1896 Plessy versus Ferguson Supreme Court Case, and an extended timeline from 1896 to the pre- sent in Scott’s (2017) Revised Trends in Mandating, Managing, and Lev- eraging Workforce Diversity Framework in Chapter 1; and addition of the Diversity Intelligence conceptual model, developed by Dr. Claretha Hughes, in Chapter 2. Chapter 13 has been updated to include a dis- cussion on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) specifications of illnesses and impairments that fall under its purview. Chapter 18 has been updated to include Byrd’s “Balanced Scale of Organizational Social Justice” conceptual model. Updated references, statistical data, and explanations from recent research have been added to other chapters.

How to Analyze Case Studies

To make informed decisions and choices, students should use an appropriate method for analyzing cases. Students should begin the analysis by reading the cases thoroughly in order to gather the pertinent facts. The following questions are essential to this process:

• What is the situation? • What is my role in the situation? • What more do I need to know about the situation? • What are the relevant facts? • What supporting evidence do I have?

After the fact-finding part of the process, students should consider the options for making an informed decision, and then take the appropri- ate action. According to McDade (1995), a powerful element of the case-study pedagogy is the instructor-facilitated discussion process that follows the analysis—a process that helps students to make important connections and links to the real world. Therefore, instructors play an important part in this part of the process by encouraging student partici- pation, guiding the exploration of the issues from different perspectives, and engaging students in critical debate. The diversity of thought that emerges offers an opportunity for students to learn in a collaborative environment and to consider workforce diversity problems and situations in a variety of ways.

Preface xix

References

McDade, S. A. (1995). Case study pedagogy to advance critical thinking. Teaching of Psy- chology, 22(1), 9–10.

Thomas, R. (2005). Building on the promise of diversity: How we can move to the next level in our workplaces, our communities, and our society. New York: Amacom.

Instructor Resources (Online)

Accompanying this textbook are PowerPoint slides for each chapter, a resource list of supporting organizational websites, a film list, and a compre- hensive test bank of multiple choice and essay questions.

Marilyn Y. Byrd and Chaunda L. Scott

Dr. Marilyn Y. Byrd: I would like to recognize my family, which has been a source of love, inspiration, guidance, support, and encouragement through- out my lifetime: father, the late Luby L. Smither; mother, the late Dorothy M. Smither; son, Shannon Kyle Byrd; and sisters, the late Carolyn A. Moore, and the late Vickie J. Williams. I would also like to recognize my nephews, Blanton D. Moore, Jason L. Williams, and Jarred B. Williams; and my niece, Jessica Y. Williams. Finally, I recognize my best friend, Larry D. Piggee, who believes in my goal to contribute to a more just society. To the contributing authors, thank you for sharing your expertise and academic wisdom. Your contributions are immeasurable. To Dr. George Henderson, thank you for your pioneering efforts in human relations and social justice and for blazing a trail for others to follow. Above all, I acknowledge and give thanks to my Father, in heaven, who continues to bless me in abundant ways.

Dr. Chaunda L. Scott: First, I want to thank all of the contributing authors (subject-matter experts) for being a part of this timely and important pro- ject. Second, I want to thank the reviewers of this textbook for their helpful feedback. Third, I want to thank my graduate assistant, Juanita Tookes, for the outstanding support she provided to this anthology. I want also to acknowl- edge the following individuals: my late parents, Walter R. Scott and Margaret A. Scott, and grandparents, George Smith and Addie Smith, for helping me to keep my eyes focused on achieving personal and professional goals; my wonderful brothers, Anthony R. Scott, Sr., Walter R. Scott, Jr., and George J. Scott; and my amazing nephews, Anthony R. Scott II, and Bryson G. Scott, for their passionate support of this project. And last, but not least, I want to recognize my phenomenal mentors: Dr. Charles V. Willie; Dr. Cornel West; my pastor, Dr. Carlyle Fielding Stewart III; Dr. Terrence E. Maltbia; Dr. Vic- toria J. Marsick; Dr. Lyle Yorks; Dr. Barbara Mabee; and Dr. Robert Homant for their continuous encouragement and heartfelt support of this critical publication.

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgments xxi

Special Acknowledgments

Drs. Byrd and Scott would like to recognize Chelsea Hammett, graduate assistant in the Department of Human Relations, University of Oklahoma; and Juanita Tookes, graduate assistant and doctoral student in the Counseling Program at Oakland University for assisting with developing the Instructor Resources for this textbook.

Part I

Establishing Foundations of Diversity in the Workforce

Chapter Overview

This chapter begins by presenting the learning objectives, the meaning of diversity in the workforce/workforce diversity, diversity, human diver- sity, and a definition of what workforce diversity is not. The importance of knowing the history of human diversity and workforce diversity in the United States will also be discussed, followed by a summary of key pieces of government legislation that have helped to shape and govern the field of workforce diversity. Next, a brief history of human diversity and workforce diversity in the United States will be presented, trailed by a summation of the types of organizations in the United States that have emerged as they relate to managing a diverse workforce. Additionally, several examples will be shared, underscoring the impact that Affirmative Action and Civil Rights laws have had on advancing equal opportunities for minorities and women in the United States. In Table 1.1, Scott’s (2017) Revised Trends in Mandating, Managing, and Leveraging Diversity in the Workforce Frame- work, 1896–Present will be introduced alongside the reasons why workforce diversity should be studied. Chapter 1 concludes with a chapter summary, definitions of key terms, and critical-thinking discussion questions. Please note that the terms diversity in the workforce and workforce diversity will be used interchangeably throughout this chapter.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• define diversity in the workforce/workforce diversity, diversity, human diversity, and what workforce diversity is not;

• explain the reasons why it is important to know the history of human diversity and workforce diversity in the United States;

• describe key historical Supreme Court decisions and pieces of govern- ment legislation that have helped to shape the practice of workforce

1 Historical Perspectives for Studying Diversity in the Workforce

Chaunda L. Scott

4 Chaunda L. Scott

diversity and are directly related to human resource development and human resource management decision making and policy;

• explain how the histories of human diversity and workforce diversity have influenced the practice of workforce diversity to date;

• describe the dynamics and dimensions of monolithic, plural, and multi- cultural organizations;

• explain the ways in which equal opportunities for minorities and women have improved, remained unchanged, or declined in the United States since the Affirmative Action and Civil Rights eras;

• describe Scott’s (2017) Revised Trends in the Mandating, Managing, and Leveraging Diversity in the Workforce Framework, 1896–Present;

• explain why students and practitioners in the 21st century should study workforce diversity.

Diversity in the Workforce

In the United States, what do the terms diversity in the workforce and workforce diversity suggest? Do they just mean hiring qualified men and women in the workplace who represent different races, ages, ethnicities, and sexual orientations? Well, the answer to this question is no, because workforce diversity is not just about the above-mentioned physical characteristics and individualities in the workplace. It is much more than this. However, unfortu- nately, this is what many individuals believe that workforce diversity represents.

To provide a clearer understanding of what diversity in the workforce in the United States symbolizes, this chapter describes workforce diversity as a voluntary strategy used by organizations that value human diversity and are committed to hiring the best and brightest qualified individuals representing a variety of diversity backgrounds (Scott, 2012). Thus, workforce diversity is demonstrated in workplace settings as valuing the myriad ways that lead- ers, business partners, employees, consultants, student workers, volunteers, customers, and visitor groups are commonly viewed as being similar and dissimilar to one another in work environments (Scott, 2012).

For example, these characteristics include, but are not restricted to: gen- der; race; skin color; age; ethnicity; sexual orientation; marital status; partner status; parental status; maternal status; socioeconomic status; dialect; disability; spiritual beliefs; religious beliefs; ancestry; cultural customs, norms, and tradi- tions; choices of cuisine; eye color; hair color and texture; style of dress; pro- fessional appearance; height and weight; educational level; professional work experience; military experience; world view; personality; knowledge, skills, and abilities; work ethic; creative talents; demeanor; mannerisms; profes- sionalism; adaptability to change; handling stress; managing conflict; dealing with emotions; leadership style; followership style; occupation titles; occu- pation responsibilities; weekly schedules; seniority level; salary level; func- tioning in teams; functioning autonomously; cultivating a welcoming work environment; level of personal commitment; degree of professional loyalty;

Historical Perspectives 5

providing feedback; receiving feedback; delivering customer service; receiv- ing customer service; expressing appreciation; conveying disapproval; pro- fessional interest; personal interests; life experiences; where one lives; birth place; style of living; and political views (Scott, 2012).

As shown by the extensive, and still evolving, list of similar and dis- similar characteristics presented above, the construct of workforce diver- sity is one that is wide-ranging in its approach in that it acknowledges not only numerous human ways of being in work environments, but also numerous human ways of knowing, behaving, and communicating in the workforce simultaneously. The descriptive terms similar and dissimilar also play an instrumental role in the definitions of workforce diversity, in that they shift the focus from just being on individual differences to include the variety of ways in which individuals are alike in work set- tings. The definitions of diversity and human diversity likewise follow the same format in that they too focus on “the countless ways human beings are similar as well as dissimilar from one another throughout the world” (Scott, 2012, n.p.).

Workforce diversity is not in any way affiliated with affirmation action and this should be regarded as a myth. Moreover, workforce diversity is not a quota system aimed at hiring a certain number of qualified minori- ties and women in organizations. Finally, the presence of diversity in the workforce does not suggest that there is a lack of professional standards and productivity in the workforce because qualified minorities and women are represented at all levels of the organization (Bennett-Alexander & Hart- man, 2007). Therefore, and to this end, this clearer understanding of what workforce diversity is, and is not, in both theory and practice as highlighted throughout this chapter, offers new insights for advancing the practice of the workforce in the 21st century, specifically in the areas of “leadership, research and measurement, education, alignment of management systems, and follow-up” (Cox, 2001, p. 19).

The Importance of Knowing the History of Human Diversity and Workforce Diversity in the United States

At present, the relatively young and evolving field of workforce diversity in the United States is a popular area of study in a variety of professional academic disciplines. These disciplines include human resource develop- ment, training and development, human resource management, organiza- tional leadership, workforce education and development, human relations, counseling, military education, adult education, and educational leadership, to name a few. Workforce diversity is also an area of study that continues to prosper and be recognized as one of the core guiding principles in many types of organizational settings; for example, Fortune 500 corporations, for- profit and non-profit agencies, mid-size companies, small businesses, institu- tions of higher education, and K–12 academies.

6 Chaunda L. Scott

Yet, in spite of these affirmations, less emphasis has been placed on con- necting it to the history of diversity and workforce diversity in the United States. This is mainly because much of the literature available on human diversity and workforce diversity (e.g., in textbooks, mainstream books, films, and articles) is being presented from a modern-day perspective, with little or no mention of their connection to their historical beginnings. It is also important to connect the historical aspects of human diversity to the current state of diversity in the workforce so that current and future research and practice initiatives may be centered upon our understanding of the fol- lowing questions:

• How will we know and understand what past events in the United States have or have not helped to shape the current state of human diversity and workforce diversity developments?

• How are we going to determine what current efforts in the United States will or will not help to shape our understanding of the future of human diversity and workforce diversity developments?

• How will we know that we are not duplicating past human diversity and workforce diversity behaviors, practices, and events that have been harmful in both theory and practice to individuals and organizations, without being knowledgeable about the history of human diversity and its current relationship to workforce diversity in the United States?

It is also interesting to point out a few little-known historical diversity and workforce diversity facts that are critical to understanding and applying these concepts in practice. For example, did you know that:

• the term “diversity includes everyone” (Thomas, 1991, p. 10)? • the United States has been “culturally diverse for several hundred years”

(McMillan-Capehart, 2003, p.1)? • the earlier terms used to describe different groups of people by race were

“Mongolian, Caucasian, [and] Negro” (McMillan-Capehart, 2003, p. 2)? • diversity issues were not mentioned in the “organizational literature” in

the United States “until the civil rights movement of the 1960s brought about an awareness of African Americans in the workforce” (McMillan- Capehart, 2003, p.1)?

• and finally, the idea of human diversity in the workforce was mainly disregarded by corporations as an important issue until Johnston and Packer’s (1987) groundbreaking research titled Workforce 2000: Work and Workers for the Twenty-First Century raised awareness of its importance (McMillan-Capehart, 2003)?

Given these astonishing facts, there is a need for individuals studying the topic of diversity in the workforce and practitioners working in professional fields to be familiar with the history of diversity and workforce diversity

Historical Perspectives 7

in the United States. This understanding is needed in order to compre- hend more clearly its importance as it relates to valuing and leveraging the current and emerging dynamics of workforce diversity in the 21st century and beyond. In the next section, five key government directives will be presented, followed by an overview of the history of human diversity and workforce diversity in the United States.

Executive Orders, Legislation, and Regulations that Have Helped to Shape the History and Practice of Workforce Diversity

Plessy versus Ferguson 1896 (United States Supreme Court Ruling)

In 1874, the Jim Crow laws were established in the south to segregate Afri- can Americans from Whites and enforce “separate but equal” treatment between these races (United States History, 2017, para. 1). The Jim Crow laws viewed and treated African Americans as inferior by denying them the right to vote, along with refusing them access to public facilities such as restaurants, restrooms, water fountains, churches, theaters, and hotels. In the area of education, under the Jim Crow laws, African American students and White students also attended segregated schools and universities (Constitu- tional Rights Foundation, 2017)

The name Jim Crow came from a popular song and dance in the 1820s (United States History, 2017). Jim Crow was also a derogatory name for African American men during this time period and was popularized by a White man named Thomas Dartmouth, a well-known minstrel dancer in the south whose stage name was Daddy Rice (United States History, 2017). Daddy Rice blackened his face and created stereotypical minstrel dance rou- tines that mimicked an elderly African American man in the south in offen- sive ways by dressing and dancing like him.

In the late 1880s, the term Jim Crow was adopted in the south as the legal name of segregation laws, “The Jim Crow Laws” (Constitutional Rights Foundation, 2017). In 1890, the state of Louisiana passed a law that enforced equal but separate accommodations for African Americans and Whites on its railroad passenger cars (Legal Information Institute, 2017). This rail car law also banned Whites and African Americans from sitting in each other’s rail cars, with the exception of nurses caring for children of the other race. Any passenger or employee who violated this rail car law would be arrested (McBride, 2017).

On June 7, 1892, in New Orleans, Louisiana, Homer Plessy, a light-skinned African American man who could pass for being White, purchased a rail car ticket, and sat in an open seat in the White passenger car section and refused the conductor’s request to move to the African American passenger car sec- tion (McBride, 2017). Homer’s refusal to sit in the African American section of the rail car got him arrested and brought to court before Honorable Judge

8 Chaunda L. Scott

John Ferguson in New Orleans, Louisiana, on April 18, 1896, where Judge Ferguson found Homer to be guilty of breaking the Louisiana railroad car segregation law (McBride, 2017).

Being displeased with his guilty verdict, Homer filed a petition against Honorable Judge Ferguson, arguing that the Louisiana segregation law “vio- lated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which forbids states from denying ‘to any person within their jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws,’ as well as the Thirteenth Amendment, which banned slavery” (McBride, 2017, para. 2). The 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, passed and approved by congress in 1865, states that “neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction” (13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, 2017). Whereas the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, approved in 1868, states that citizenship shall be awarded “to all persons born or naturalized in the United States” (14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitu- tion, 2017, para. 1).

On May 18, 1896, Homer’s petition was reviewed by the Louisiana Supreme Court where they found Homer Plessy guilty based on the argu- ment that segregation was constitutional under the separate but equal doc- trine (McBride, 2017), and the Louisiana state law only implied a legal distinction between African Americans and Whites, and therefore the rail car law did not conflict in any way with the 13th and 14th Amendments (History.com, 2009). The Plessy vs. Ferguson Supreme Court’s guilty verdict in 1896 widened the division between African Americans and Whites in the United States for more than a century (History Fair Project, 2017). In 1954, the race-based separate but equal laws in the south were abolished when the Brown vs. Board of Education case reached its decision, declaring that it was illegal to segregate educational institutions based on race (Congress of Racial Equality, 2013).

Brown versus Board of Education 1954 (United States Supreme Court Ruling)

In 1950, Oliver Brown, an African American man was attempting to enroll his seven-year-old daughter, Linda Brown, into a White elementary school located in Topeka, Kansas, along with other African Americans who were doing the same thing (Oracle Education Foundation, 2013). They were doing this because the White school was closer to their home and it had much better educational resources than the African American school that his daughter was currently attending (Oracle Education Foundation, 2013).

During this same year, all of the African American children applying were denied admission into the White school because of their race. In 1951, Oli- ver Brown, along with other African American parents who were dissat- isfied with the White school’s decision to deny their children admission,

Historical Perspectives 9

decided to sue the state of Kansas over this issue. However, later in 1951, they lost their case because of their race (Oracle Education Foundation, 2013). Then in 1952, Oliver Brown, along with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), other African American parents, and supporters who were also dissatisfied with the current state of educational opportunities for African American children, took this case to the United States Supreme Court (Oracle Education Foundation, 2013).

On “May 17, 1954 the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision that it was unconstitutional [and a violation of the 14th amend- ment] to separate children in public schools for no other reasons than their race” (Congress of Racial Equality, 2013). Even though this ruling passed, schools in the United States moved very slowly in integrating African Amer- ican students along with treating them fairly. This is mainly because many individuals during this time period were still prejudiced against African Americans. Nonetheless, the Brown vs. Board of Education triumph succeeded in reforming educational enrollment practices and policies as we know them today for all students, by bringing “this country one step closer to living up to its democratic ideas” (Congress of Racial Equality, 2013).

Executive Order 10925: First Stage of Affirmative Action

This executive order was issued by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 (Beckman, 2004). The objective of this executive order was to ensure that employment-related procedures funded by the United States government were nondiscriminatory, in an effort to end discrimination, sexism, and racism in employment and promote equal opportunity for all individuals (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2017).

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Amended in 1972 and 1991)

Signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964, this legislation prohibits acts of unfairness and inequality in all forms as they relate to race, color, religion, and national origin (Hasday, 2007). In 1965, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was enforced and regarded as a defining moment in the history of the United States by moving “from 346 years of treating blacks as inferior in every way to treating them as equals in education, housing, employment, public accommodations and receipt of federal funds” (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2007, p. 182).

Executive Order 11246: Affirmative Action—the Implementation Stage

This executive order was signed into law by President Johnson in 1965 for the purpose of mandating that all government contractors (e.g., service providers, freelancers, consultants, and suppliers) utilize non-discriminatory practices in employing, promoting, compensating, and terminating employees based

10 Chaunda L. Scott

on their race, color, religion, sex, and national origin (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2007). Executive Order 11246 further required that all government employers take measures such as the following: (a) posting nondiscriminatory statements in places where prospective applicants and employees can view them; (b) creating employment advertisements which state that qualified pro- spective candidates will be considered for employment opportunities “with- out regard to race, color, religion, gender, or national origin”; and (c) keeping records which document their hiring practices (pp. 188–189). In 1967, this mandate was modified to include gender for the purpose of addressing and monitoring gender inequality issues in employment (Harper & Reskin, 2005).

The Philadelphia Order

In 1969, President Richard Nixon approved and signed the Philadelphia Order. This order required government contractors to use unprejudiced employment procedures and show that fair employment practices were being followed to increase the numbers of qualified minorities and women hired in construction jobs (Kotlowski, 1998). The Philadelphia Order was named after the city of Philadelphia because it was identified by the United States government as a belligerent offender against the equal opportunity regulations for being intimidating and unwilling to hire qualified African Americans and other minorities (Kotlowski, 1998).

A Brief History of Human Diversity and Workforce Diversity

As noted previously by McMillan-Capehart (2003), the United States has a long history of being humanly diverse. The United States also is a society that consists of both U.S.-born minorities (Schaefer, 2011) and immi- grants. Apart from the Native Americans, also known as the first Americans (Schaefer, 2011), the entire populace of the United States has immigrant roots (McMillan-Capehart, 2003). During the 16th and 17th centuries, immigrant groups of “African descent, Spanish descent, and European descent” as well as “Italians, [the] Irish, Russians, Germans, Scandinavians, Norwegians and [individuals of] Native American descent” served as the manual [slave] work- force in the United States (Gossett, as cited in McMillan-Capehart, 2003, p. 3). During the 19th century, the established views of the early English settlers specifically toward African and Indian slaves was that they would conform to the American way of knowing and being by becoming “Chris- tians” (p. 3). What this idea suggests is that the immigrant groups would ultimately take on a new cultural identity and become a part of the melt- ing pot in the United States (Newman, as cited in Schaefer, 2011, p. 23).

After slavery ended in the United States in the late 19th century and through the early 20th century, there were U.S.-born minorities and immigrant groups (e.g., African Americans, African immigrants, Chinese

Historical Perspectives 11

Americans, Chinese immigrants, Mexican Americans, and Mexican immi- grants) who were not allowed to fully participate in American society because of racism, prejudice, and discrimination (Schaefer, 2011). The Jim Crow segregation racial separation laws were also enforced during this time period (Parrillo, 2005). As previously discussed, examples of Jim Crow separation laws include, but are not limited to, the following: “separate hospi- tals for Blacks, separate prisons for Blacks, separate public and private schools for Blacks, separate cemeteries for Blacks, separate restrooms for Blacks, and separate public accommodations for Blacks,” to name a few (Pilgrim, 2012, n.p.). However, in 1920, women were finally granted the right to vote (Fight for Women’s Suffrage, 2013). Many Black communities in the United States, such as Minnesota’s Black community during the 1950s, 60s and 70s were also moving forward with their lives during this oppressive era by obtaining higher education to establish themselves in professional fields such as busi- ness, communications, entertainment, education, government, fine arts and sports to name a few (Scott, 2018).

By the 1960s, the U.S. government under the direction of President Kennedy and his Committee on Equal Opportunity began validating the idea of workforce diversity to end acts of discrimination based on race, color, religion and national origin. Beginning in 1961, President John F. Kennedy created Executive Order 10925—First Stage of Affirmative Action to eliminate racial, cultural, and religious discrimination in employ- ment, supported by the United States government (Beckman, 2004). In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson passed Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which bans discrimination based on race, color, religion, and national origin (Hasday, 2007). Also in 1965, President Johnson delivered a power- ful commencement speech to the graduates of Howard University, a his- torically Black university, where he endorsed the need for a government mandate like Affirmative Action in the United States. In this speech, Presi- dent Johnson noted that the Civil Rights directives by themselves could not eradicate acts of inequality in the United States (Johnson, 1965a). He further highlighted that:

You cannot wipe away the scars of centuries [e.g., slavery, lynching, racism, sexism, inequality, discrimination, unfairness, and prejudice] by saying: now, you are free to go where you want, do as you desire, and choose the leaders you please. You do not take a man [and woman] who for [hundreds of] years has been hobbled by chains, liberate [them and] bring [them] to the starting line of a race, saying “you are free to compete with all the others,” and still justly believe you have been com- pletely fair … This is the next and more profound stage of the battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom but opportunity—not just legal equity, but human ability—not just equality as a right and theory, but equality as a fact and result.

(Johnson, 1965a, para. 12)

12 Chaunda L. Scott

President Johnson’s commencement speech (1965a, 1965b) can be viewed in full text format at http://lbjlibrary.net/collections/selected- speeches/1965/06-04-1965.html. It can also be viewed in its entirety on YouTube at www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcfAuodA2x8).

Additionally, in 1965, President Johnson signed Executive Order 11246— the implementation stage of Affirmative Action to increase employment opportunities for qualified minorities that had been historically denied access to equal employment opportunities based on their race, color, reli- gion, sex, and national origin (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2007). This was a critical move during this time period because it shifted the practice and conversation of Affirmative Action from just focusing on racial issues to focusing on fair employment policies and procedures. Four years later, in 1969, President Richard Nixon introduced the Philadelphia Order to man- date non-discriminatory hiring and employment practices in construction jobs (Kotlowski, 1998). It should be noted that the Philadelphia Order was one of the most critical government orders in assuring equality in hiring practices in construction jobs. This was because the city of Philadelphia was identified by the United States government as a belligerent offender of the equal opportunity regulation for being intimidating and unwilling to hire qualified African Americans and other minorities (Kotlowski, 1998).

Although, government regulations and strategies of the 1960s and 1970s did not have a vast impact on eliminating disparities among diverse groups and eradicating acts of inequality in the workplace (Valdez, 2015), employ- ers and employees have continued to embrace the inclusion of workforce diversity efforts as a result of the development of Affirmative Action and Civil Rights laws. For example, there is: (1) a demand for organizations to be free of prejudice and unfairness; (2) a demand for organizations to treat minorities and female applicants and workers fairly; and (3) an increase in qualified minorities and women applying for jobs and being employed by organizations (Glaser, 1975, as cited in McMillan-Capehart, 2003). However, aside from these positive developments, many organizations recognized that just employing diverse employees did not provide them with the anticipated advantages of workforce diversity (Cox, 1993). There were also signs that declared organizations would have to create a cadre of new practices and policies to truly reap the advantages of a workforce that is diverse demo- graphically, as well as in knowledge, skills, and abilities (Thomas, 2010).

By the 1980s, many organizations began to realize that diversity should be regarded as a core business strategy rather than just as an authorized and legalized practice sponsored by the United States government (Thomas, 2006). Additionally, in the 1980s, the concept of managing workforce diver- sity was viewed as a useful effort that would help workplaces begin to create diverse and inclusive work settings (Thomas, 2006). The concept of diversity training also emerged in organizations during this time period and con- tinued to grow in the 1990s as one approach used to assist employees in understanding their own beliefs, actions, and biases as these relate to working

Historical Perspectives 13

with diverse employee groups (Noe, 2010). Diversity training also assists employees in gaining the competencies needed to work in multicultural and multiethnic work settings (Noe, 2010). Moreover, besides being one of the most popular initiatives being used by organizations to date, diversity train- ing has become a profitable “multi-million-dollar industry” (Hernandez & Field, 2003) that continues to evolve.

Presently, in the 21st century, workforce diversity frameworks and approaches such as diversity management (Thomas, 1991), strategic diversity management (Thomas, 2006), world-class diversity management (Thomas, 2010), and diversity intelligence (Hughes, 2016) are being utilized by many organizations along with a variety of strategies to assist organizations in achieving their diversity goals. For example, these strategies include leader- ship development and career development (Hughes, 2016), vision and mis- sion statements, cultural and climate audits, and strategic planning (Thomas, 1991, 2006, 2010), recruitment and retention efforts, education and training, as well as mentoring and coaching (Cox, 1993, 2001).

Yet in spite of the progress being made by many organizations that wel- come, value, and reap the benefits of a workforce that is diverse, there is still a need for more organizations in the United States to fully embrace the concepts of diversity and workforce diversity beyond just having written diversity mission and vision statements (Scott, 2012). There is also a need for more organizations to draw upon effective and well-known workforce diversity strategies for guidance to create constructive diverse and inclusive work settings (Scott, 2012). For example, the diversity management frame- works previously mentioned, by Hughes (2016) and Thomas (1991, 2006, 2010), are invaluable resources that organizations can draw upon to begin crafting constructive diverse and inclusive work settings (Scott, 2012). Note that a description of the above frameworks by Thomas (1991, 2006, 2010) and Hughes (2016) can be found in Scott’s (2017) Revised Trends in Man- dating, Managing, and Leveraging Diversity in the Workforce Framework, 1896–Present (Table 1.1).

Types of Organizations in the United States

In the United States, there have been three kinds of organizations that have highlighted the specific aspects of human diversity enlargement and change (Cox, 1993). The first type is called the “monolithic organization,” and is described as being a “homogeneous” workforce made up of mainly White men in upper management positions, with a few females and people of color employed in low-ranking positions; for example, typists, cooks, and janitors. Cox (1993) furthermore states that monolithic organizations were “designed by” and for homogeneous individuals. Therefore, in a monolithic organization, attention is not focused on creating workplaces that are diverse. As a result, minorities and women employed in monolithic organizations encounter acts of unfairness and prejudice that are rooted in the “policies

14 Chaunda L. Scott

and practices of the organization” (p. 227). Finally, monolithic organizations are characterized by low levels of conflict due to their largely homogeneous composition (Cox, 1993).

The second type is the plural organization. The plural organization is more liberal in its approach to creating and cultivating a diverse organization because it is more “heterogeneous” (diverse) than the monolithic organiza- tion. The reason for this is that it seeks out human diversity and uses sup- portive practices to do so (Cox, 1993). The practices used include, but are not limited to, hiring and promotion efforts. Various types of diversity train- ing sessions are also used to educate individuals in plural organizations about diversity. For example, these types of organizations may offer manager train- ing on equal opportunity such as “Civil Rights laws, [the Americans with Disabilities Act] ADA, and sexual harassment” (Cox, 1993, p. 227). Yet, “the plural organization tends to be diverse in phenotype, but genuine cultural diversity in these organizations may be limited” (p. 228). One reason for this is that plural organizations rely on standard integration efforts over innova- tive diversity efforts to foster diversity inclusion. Finally, diversity manage- ment guidelines and procedures in plural organizations are often viewed by some White men as a form of Affirmative Action that provides advantages to minorities and women, while limiting opportunities for White men (Cox, 1993).

The third type of organization presented by Cox (1993) is called the multicultural organization. The central features of this type of organization include welcoming human diversity; hiring qualified minorities and women at all ranks; utilizing and appreciating the diverse talents and perspectives that minorities and women bring to the organization; the absence of racism, sex- ism, prejudice, and discrimination in personnel and higher administration- related procedures; and effective diversity management strategies that assist with reducing human diversity-related hostilities (e.g., clashes, disputes, and potential lawsuits) amongst diverse employee groups and the organization (Cox, 1993). To assist organizations which are seeking to become multi- cultural organizations, Cox and Blake (1991, as cited in Cox, 1993) offer a framework for driving change in work settings as it relates to managing and appreciating diversity in the workforce. The components of their five-stage framework examine the areas of “leadership, research and measurement, edu- cation, changes in culture and management systems, and follow-up” (Cox, 1993, pp. 229–241). In Chapter 2, this framework will be discussed in more detail to highlight its theoretical underpinnings and utility as it relates to the construction of multicultural organizations.

Given the evolving history of human diversity and workforce diversity to date, the question to ask now is how have issues related to human diver- sity equality improved in the workplace and society since the Affirmative Action and Civil Rights eras? According to a panel of consultants from the Crossroads Anti-Racism Organizing and Training (1996), there has been great improvement in relation to many issues connected with human

Historical Perspectives 15

diversity equality in society and the workplace; while other issues have remained unchanged, or equality has declined. Below, several examples are highlighted on the aforementioned topics by the Crossroads Anti-Racism Organizing and Training (1996) panel of consultants, along with researchers and scholars.

Diversity Issues since the Affirmative Action and Civil Rights Eras

Examples of How Human Diversity Equality Issues Have Improved in the United States since the Affirmative Action and Civil Rights Eras

• The disassembling of segregation laws (e.g., African Americans and minorities are permitted to drink from any public water fountains, use any public restrooms, and sit on any seat of the bus).

• Increased educational opportunities for people of color and women (e.g., as a result of the Brown vs. Board of Education Supreme Court ruling in 1954 ending race-based school segregation and the dismantling of other segregation laws in general).

• More qualified people of color and women are employed in the work- place (e.g., as a result of the Civil Rights and Affirmative Action legisla- tion and improved educational opportunities).

• Increased employment opportunities are available for people of color and women in a variety of fields and positions (e.g., health care, business, science, education, criminal justice, government, technology, and human service fields).

• There is a growing middle class of people of color and women (e.g., due to improved educational and employment opportunities for these groups).

• More multicultural and human diversity educational resources are avail- able (e.g., books, films, courses, educational trips to different countries, seminars, webcasts, and conferences).

• There is open housing (e.g., people of color can choose where they want to live).

• There is an increased acceptance of inclusivity of human diversity (e.g., more diverse leaders, business partnerships, employees, consultants, stu- dent workers, volunteers, customers, and visitor groups in the workforce (Scott, 2012).

• There are more diverse friendships, relationships, marriages, multicul- tural adoptions, and church memberships; and greater acceptance of homosexuality, same-sex marriages, bisexuality, and the transgendered lifestyle. However, this does not take into account the culture and cli- mate of an organization as being one that is welcoming and support- ive or non-welcoming and unsupportive of a diverse workforce (Scott, 2012).

16 Chaunda L. Scott

• There is more dialogue in organizations, government agencies, universi- ties, K–12 schools, universities, and religious settings on issues related to human diversity (e.g., racism, gender inequality, sexual orientation, age- ism, disability issues and concerns, ethnic bullying, religion and spiritu- ality, immigration, multiculturalism, and diversity and inclusion policies and practices).

• More people of color and women have been elected as government officials (e.g., the election of Barack Hussein Obama in 2008 and re- election in 2012 as the 44th and the first two-term African American President of the United States. Note that President Barack Hussein Obama identifies himself as African American (Washington, 2008), even though his cultural background is biracial. And in 2003 and 2007, Jennifer Mulhern Granholm was elected as the 47th governor of Michigan, Michigan’s first two-term White female governor. Note that Jennifer Mulhern Granholm is a Canadian-born American citizen (Bell, 2012).

Examples of How Human Diversity Equality Issues Have Remained Unchanged in the United States since the Affirmative Action and Civil Rights Eras

• The unemployment gap remains higher for people of color than Whites with the same level of education and work experience.

• Financial support by the government is lower in urban communities as compared to suburban communities.

• The poverty gap is unchanged for people of color. • Displays of activism persist as demonstrated by social justice marches,

protests, and rallies by activist parties such as Black Lives Matter—a racial justice movement, the Me Too movement, the DACA movement, and LGBTQ groups (Morrison, 2017).

Examples of How Human Diversity Equality Issues Have Declined in the United States since the Affirmative Action and Civil Rights Eras

• Affirmative Action laws have been disassembled in several states (e.g., in California, Texas, and Michigan). The question that now remains to be answered is how has the elimination of these laws in several states helped or hindered progress in the United States in achieving equality for all people (Scott, 2012)?

• Racism, and stereotyping, along with various modern forms of dis- crimination are functioning at the institutional level in the United States and internationally, and are embedded within the climate and culture of society (e.g., inadequate work standards and conditions for certain eth- nic groups and their children, unfair financial business transactions and

Historical Perspectives 17

practices, racial hate crimes, racial profiling, linguistic profiling, obesity profiling, age profiling, sexual harassment, sexual orientation profiling, along with racial and ethnic bullying).

• Rapidly changing demographics in the United States represent another important workforce diversity issue that has emerged since the Affirma- tive Action and Civil Rights movements. For example, the legal immi- grant population in the United States has exceeded the numbers of the early 1900s (Schaefer, 2011). A second demographic forecast by Mitra Toossi (2006) suggests that the United States workforce will reflect the following population patterns by the year 2050:

o Ages 16–24 will make up 13.3% of the workforce by 2050. o Ages 25–42 will make up 63.9% of the workforce by 2050. o Ages 55–older will make up 22.9% of the workforce by 2050. o Women will make up 47.0% of the workforce by 2050. o Men will make up 53.0% of the workforce by 2050. o African Americans will make up 13.8% of the workforce by 2050. o Hispanics will make up 24.3% of the workforce by 2050. o Asians will make up 8.3% of the workforce by 2050.

People of multiple racial origins, American Indians, Alaskan Indians, and Pacific Islanders will also make up 4.9% of the labor force by 2050. Even though the population trends presented highlight the fact that the United States is becoming more diverse, the social ills of prejudice, discrimination, and mistrust will more than likely continue to persist (Schaefer, 2011).

Given the profound history of workforce diversity to date, where do we go from here as it relates to addressing current and emerging workforce diversity issues? To answer this question, Table 1.1 introduces Scott’s (2017) Revised Trends in Mandating, Managing, and Leveraging Diversity in the Workforce Framework, 1896–Present, which provides an overview of the government-ordered directives and voluntary organizational strategies used in the United States over the past 100+ years to integrate human diver- sity into the workforce. This framework also provides an opportunity for students and practitioners to critically reflect on the current strengths and limitations of existing workforce diversity efforts as well as consider what new workforce diversity policies and practices will be needed in the future to further leverage workforce diversity.

Why Study Diversity in the Workforce?

Diversity in the workforce should be studied to track and measure the pro- gress it is making toward achieving its organizational mission, vision, and objectives (Scott, 2012). In the 21st century, diversity in the workforce has been a key practice in advancing a variety of organizational goals and

Ta bl

e 1.

1 Sc

ot t’s

( 20

17 )

R ev

ise d

T re

nd s

in M

an da

tin g,

M an

ag in

g, a

nd L

ev er

ag in

g D

iv er

sit y

in t

he W

or kf

or ce

F ra

m ew

or k,

1 89

6– Pr

es en

t

Tr en

d O

ne Tr

en d T

w o

Tr en

d T hr

ee Tr

en d

Fo ur

E ra

Pr e-

A ffi

rm at

iv e

A ct

io n

A ffi

rm at

iv e

A ct

io n

D iv

er sit

y M

an ag

em en

t an

d St

ra te

gi c

D iv

er sit

y M

an ag

em en

t

W or

ld -C

la ss

D iv

er sit

y M

an ag

em en

t an

d D

iv er

sit y

In te

lli ge

nc e

(D Q

)

T im

ef ra

m e

18 96

–1 95

4 19

61 –P

re se

nt 19

80 –P

re se

nt 20

10 –P

re se

nt

H is

to ri

ca l an

d

C o n te

m p o ra

ry

In it ia

ti ve

s th

at

h av

e H

el p ed

to

S h ap

ed

th e

F ie

ld o

f W

o rk

fo rc

e D

iv er

si ty

18 96

: T he

P le

ss y

ve rs

us

Fe rg

us on

S up

re m

e C

ou rt

r ul

in g

up he

ld

th e

Lo ui

sia na

s ta

te r

ac ia

l se

gr eg

at io

n la

w w

hi ch

w

as a

p ar

t of

t he

J im

C

ro w

“ Se

pa ra

te b

ut

E qu

al ”

do ct

ri ne

.

19 54

: T he

B ro

w n

ve rs

us

B oa

rd o

f E du

ca tio

n Su

pr em

e C

ou rt

r ul

in g

le ga

liz ed

t ha

t it

w as

un

co ns

tit ut

io na

l a nd

a

vi ol

at io

n of

t he

1 4t

h A

m en

dm en

t to

h av

e se

pa ra

te s

ch oo

ls fo

r ch

ild re

n fo

r no

o th

er

re as

on s

th an

t he

ir r

ac e.

19 61

: E xe

cu tiv

e O

rd er

10

92 5:

F ir

st S

ta ge

o f

A ffi

rm at

iv e

A ct

io n

w as

di

st ri

bu te

d to

e ns

ur e

th at

a ll

em pl

oy m

en t

ef fo

rt s

fu nd

ed b

y th

e U

.S . g

ov er

nm en

t w

er e

cu ltu

ra lly

n on

- di

sc ri

m in

at or

y.

19 64

: T he

C iv

il R

ig ht

A

ct w

as a

pp ro

ve d

an d

en fo

rc ed

A ct

s w

hi ch

ou

tla w

ed a

ct s

of in

eq ua

lit y

in a

ll fo

rm s

as it

a pp

lie s

to

ra ce

, c ol

or , r

el ig

io n,

a nd

na

tio na

l o ri

gi n.

19 80

–P re

se nt

: D iv

er sit

y m

an ag

em en

t vo

lu nt

ar y

pr og

re ss

iv e

st an

ce s

ad op

te d

by o

rg an

iz at

io ns

t ha

t su

pp or

t w

or kf

or ce

d iv

er sit

y pr

ac tic

es (

T ho

m as

, 2 00

6) .

19 84

: T he

A m

er ic

an I

ns tit

ut e

of M

an ag

in g

D iv

er sit

y w

as

cr ea

te d

by D

r. R

oo se

ve lt

T ho

m as

t o

bu ild

li te

ra tu

re

on t

hi s

to pi

c an

d gu

id e

or ga

ni za

tio na

l d iv

er sit

y pr

ac tic

es in

t he

w or

kf or

ce .

20 10

–P re

se nt

:

W or

ld -C

la ss

D iv

er sit

y M

an ag

em en

t is

a st

ra te

gi c

pr oc

es s

ai m

ed a

t de

ve lo

pi ng

pr

em ie

r po

lic ie

s an

d pr

ac tic

es t

o ad

dr es

s di

ve rs

ity

co nc

er ns

in t

he w

or kf

or ce

w

or ld

w id

e (T

ho m

as , 2

01 0)

.

20 16

: D iv

er sit

y In

te lli

ge nc

e (D

Q )

pr ep

ar es

o rg

an iz

at io

na l

le ad

er s

w ith

c ri

tic al

le

ad er

sh ip

a nd

c ar

ee r

de ve

lo pm

en t

co m

pe te

nc ie

s th

ey n

ee d

to le

ad a

d iv

er se

w

or kf

or ce

( H

ug he

s, 20

16 ).

Tr en

d O

ne Tr

en d T

w o

Tr en

d T hr

ee Tr

en d

Fo ur

19 65

: T he

C iv

il R

ig ht

s A ct

w

as e

nf or

ce d.

I n

19 67

, i t

w as

m od

ifi ed

to in

cl ud

e ge

nd er

.

19 65

: E xe

cu tiv

e O

rd er

11

24 6:

A ffi

rm at

iv e

A ct

io n

w as

im pl

em en

te d

to h

el p

in cr

ea se

m in

or ity

a nd

w

om en

e m

pl oy

ee s

an d

co lle

ge s

tu de

nt s.

19 69

: T he

P hi

la de

lp hi

a O

rd er

w

as e

nf or

ce d

to g

ua ra

nt ee

fa

ir h

ir in

g pr

ac tic

es in

co

ns tr

uc tio

n jo

bs .

20 01

: S tr

at eg

ic D

iv er

sit y

M an

ag em

en t

w as

in

tr od

uc ed

a nd

p ra

ct ic

ed

in t

he w

or kf

or ce

. S tr

at eg

ic

D iv

er sit

y M

an ag

em en

t is

de fin

ed a

s th

e ar

t of

m ak

in g

im po

rt an

t di

ve rs

ity r

el at

ed

de ci

sio ns

in t

he w

or kf

or ce

(T

ho m

as , 2

00 6)

.

B en

efi ts

T he

b en

efi ts

o f t

he 1

89 6

Pl es

sy v

er su

s Fe

rg us

on

Su pr

em e

C ou

rt d

ec isi

on

an d

th e

19 54

B ro

w n

ve rs

us

th e

B oa

rd o

f E du

ca tio

n co

ur t

de ci

sio n

ar e

th at

th

ey la

id t

he fo

un da

tio n

fo r

cr iti

ca l e

xe cu

tiv e

or de

rs a

nd c

iv il

ri gh

ts

la w

s in

t he

U ni

te d

St at

es

to b

e cr

ea te

d an

d pa

ss ed

.

T he

b en

efi ts

o f t

he

ex ec

ut iv

e or

de rs

a nd

A

ffi rm

at iv

e A

ct io

n ar

e th

at t

he y

ha ve

b ee

n th

e le

ad in

g st

ra te

gi es

fo r

in cl

ud in

g an

d as

sim ila

tin g

m in

or iti

es a

nd w

om en

in

to t

he c

or po

ra te

w or

ld

an d

hi gh

er e

du ca

tio n

in st

itu tio

ns .

A b

en efi

t of

D iv

er sit

y M

an ag

em en

t is

th at

it m

us t

be u

til iz

ed b

y pr

of es

sio na

ls th

at h

av e

hi gh

le ve

ls of

di

ve rs

ity m

an ag

em en

t sk

ill s

an d

di ve

rs ity

m at

ur ity

.

A b

en efi

t of

S tr

at eg

ic

D iv

er sit

y M

an ag

em en

t is

th at

it is

a w

el l-

th ou

gh t-

ou t

pr oc

es s

to a

dd re

ss d

iv er

sit y

co nc

er ns

, c on

fli ct

s an

d te

ns io

ns in

t he

w or

kp la

ce

su ch

a s

ra ci

sm a

nd s

ex ism

.

A b

en efi

t of

W or

ld -C

la ss

D

iv er

sit y

M an

ag em

en t

is th

at it

d ev

el op

s w

or ld

-c la

ss

be st

p ra

ct ic

es in

d iv

er sit

y m

an ag

em en

t th

at c

an b

e us

ed g

lo ba

lly .

A b

en efi

t of

D iv

er sit

y In

te lli

ge nc

e (D

Q )

is th

at

it eq

ui ps

o rg

an iz

at io

na l

le ad

er s

w ith

t he

t oo

ls an

d kn

ow le

dg e;

t he

y ne

ed t

o le

ad a

d iv

er se

w or

kf or

ce .

(C on

tin ue

d)

Tr en

d O

ne Tr

en d T

w o

Tr en

d T hr

ee Tr

en d

Fo ur

C h al

le n ge

s A

c ha

lle ng

e ar

ou nd

t he

18

96 P

le ss

y ve

rs us

F er

gu so

n an

d th

e 19

54 B

ro w

n ve

rs us

th

e B

oa rd

o f E

du ca

tio n

Su pr

em e

C ou

rt d

ec isi

on s

is th

at t

he y

ar e

no t

of te

n lin

ke d

to t

he h

ist or

y of

w

or kf

or ce

d iv

er sit

y.

C ha

lle ng

es s

ur ro

un di

ng t

he

A ffi

rm at

iv e

A ct

io n

er a

ar e

th e

fo llo

w in

g:

It is

a n

in co

rr ec

t b el

ie f

th at

A ffi

rm at

iv e

A ct

io n’

s pu

rp os

e w

as to

le ga

lly

em pl

oy u

nq ua

lifi ed

w

om en

a nd

m in

or iti

es

ov er

q ua

lifi ed

W hi

te m

al es

.

It is

a n

in ac

cu ra

te b

el ie

f th

at A

ffi rm

at iv

e A

ct io

n pr

ov id

ed a

dv an

ta ge

s to

un

qu al

ifi ed

B la

ck s,

w he

n in

f ac

t W hi

te w

om en

a re

th

e m

ai n

be ne

fic ia

ri es

o f

A ffi

rm at

iv e

A ct

io n

as it

re

la te

s to

t he

ir in

cl us

io n

in

th e

w or

kf or

ce .

A m

isc on

ce pt

io n

su rr

ou nd

in g

th e

id ea

o f m

an ag

in g

di ve

rs ity

is t

ha t

it is

fo cu

se d

on m

on ito

ri ng

o r

re st

ri ct

in g

di ve

rs e

w or

ke rs

in t

he

w or

kf or

ce , i

ns te

ad o

f b ei

ng

kn ow

n as

a c

on ce

pt t

ha t

en co

ur ag

es a

ll w

or ke

rs t

o pr

os pe

r in

t he

w or

kf or

ce .

A c

ha lle

ng e

su rr

ou nd

in g

St ra

te gi

c D

iv er

sit y

M an

ag em

en t

is th

at it

m us

t be

u til

iz ed

b y

pr of

es sio

na ls

th at

h av

e hi

gh le

ve ls

of

di ve

rs ity

m an

ag em

en t

sk ill

s an

d di

ve rs

ity m

at ur

ity .

C ha

lle ng

es s

ur ro

un di

ng W

or ld

- C

la ss

D iv

er sit

y M

an ag

em en

t in

cl ud

e th

e ab

se nc

e of

ex

pe rt

ise b

y le

ad er

s, su

pe rv

iso rs

, a nd

p ro

fe ss

io na

ls to

a pp

ly a

nd s

up po

rt W

or ld

- cl

as s

D iv

er sit

y st

ra te

gi es

.

A c

ha lle

ng e

of D

iv er

sit y

In te

lli ge

nc e

(D Q

) is

ap pl

yi ng

it

in a

r ea

l- w

or ld

c on

te xt

.

Ta bl

e 1.

1 (C

on tin

ue d)

Tr en

d O

ne Tr

en d T

w o

Tr en

d T hr

ee Tr

en d

Fo ur

G o al

s A

g oa

l o f t

he 1

89 6

Pl es

sy

ve rs

us F

er gu

so n

Su pr

em e

C ou

rt d

ec isi

on w

as t

o de

ny H

om er

P le

ss y,

ot he

r A

fr ic

an A

m er

ic an

s as

w

el l a

s ot

he r

m in

or iti

es

th ei

r C

iv il

R ig

ht s

un de

r th

e “S

ep ar

at e

bu t

E qu

al ”

do ct

ri ne

.

A g

oa l o

f t he

1 95

4 B

ro w

n ve

rsu s t

he B

oa rd

o f E

du ca

tio n

Su pr

em e

C ou

rt d

ec isi

on

w as

th at

it d

em on

str at

ed

th at

r ac

ia l s

eg re

ga tio

n in

p ub

lic sc

ho ol

w as

un

co ns

tit ut

io na

l.

A g

oa l o

f A ffi

rm at

iv e

A ct

io n

Pr og

ra m

s is

to r

ec ru

it an

d hi

re q

ua lifi

ed m

in or

iti es

an

d w

om en

fo r

po sit

io ns

th

at t

he y

ha ve

h ist

or ic

al ly

be

en d

en ie

d ac

ce ss

t o

em pl

oy m

en t.

T hi

s al

so

in cl

ud es

e du

ca tio

na l

op po

rt un

iti es

.

T he

g oa

l o f D

iv er

sit y

M an

ag em

en t

is to

h el

p cr

ea te

a n

or ga

ni za

tio na

l cu

ltu re

t ha

t is

su pp

or tiv

e of

di

ve rs

e in

di vi

du al

s.

T he

g oa

l o f S

tr at

eg ic

D iv

er sit

y M

an ag

em en

t is

to o

ffe r

qu al

ity w

or kf

or ce

d iv

er sit

y de

ci sio

ns a

nd a

dd re

ss

w or

kf or

ce d

iv er

sit y

te ns

io ns

.

T he

g oa

l o f W

or ld

-C la

ss

D iv

er sit

y M

an ag

em en

t is

to d

em on

st ra

te t

ha t

it is

po ss

ib le

t o

es ta

bl ish

a nd

pu

rs ue

W or

ld -C

la ss

D iv

er sit

y M

an ag

em en

t st

an da

rd s.

T he

g oa

l o f D

iv er

sit y

In te

lli ge

nc e

(D Q

) is

to

en ha

nc e

or ga

ni za

tio na

l le

ad er

s’ un

de rs

ta nd

in g

of w

or kf

or ce

d iv

er sit

y le

ad er

sh ip

a nd

c ar

ee r

de ve

lo pm

en t

so t

he y

ca n

em po

w er

a nd

d ev

el op

a

di ve

rs e

w or

kf or

ce .

F u tu

re R

es ea

rc h

Fu tu

re r

es ea

rc h

is ne

ed ed

in

t he

fi el

d of

w or

kf or

ce

di ve

rs ity

t o

lin k

th e

18 96

P le

ss y

ve rs

us

Fe rg

us on

S up

re m

e C

ou rt

de

ci sio

n an

d th

e 19

54

B ro

w n

ve rs

us th

e B

oa rd

o f

E du

ca tio

n Su

pr em

e C

ou rt

de

ci sio

n to

t he

h ist

or y

of

w or

kf or

ce d

iv er

sit y.

Fu tu

re r

es ea

rc h

is ne

ed ed

in

t he

fi el

d of

w or

kf or

ce

di ve

rs ity

t o

di sm

an tle

th

e in

ac cu

ra te

b el

ie f

th at

A ffi

rm at

iv e

A ct

io n

on ly

p ro

vi de

s ad

va nt

ag es

to

u nq

ua lifi

ed A

fr ic

an

A m

er ic

an s,

w he

n in

f ac

t “W

hi te

w om

en ”

ar e

th e

m ai

n be

ne fic

ia ri

es o

f A

ffi rm

at iv

e A

ct io

n.

Fu tu

re r

es ea

rc h

is ne

ed ed

in

t he

fi el

d of

w or

kf or

ce

di ve

rs ity

t o

cl ar

ify t

ha t

m an

ag in

g di

ve rs

ity is

n ot

fo

cu se

d on

m on

ito ri

ng o

r re

st ri

ct in

g di

ve rs

e gr

ou ps

in

th e

w or

kf or

ce .

Fu tu

re r

es ea

rc h

is ne

ed ed

in

t he

fi el

d of

w or

kf or

ce

di ve

rs ity

t o

su pp

or t

th e

be ne

fit s

of W

or ld

-C la

ss .

D iv

er sit

y M

an ag

em en

t.

Fu tu

re r

es ea

rc h

is ne

ed ed

o n

th e

co nc

ep t

of D

iv er

sit y

In te

lli ge

nc e

(D Q

) to

s up

po rt

its

b en

efi ts

.

So ur

ce :

Sc ot

t’s (

20 14

) T he

T re

nd s

in M

an da

tin g,

M an

ag in

g, a

nd L

ev er

ag in

g D

iv er

sit y

in t

he W

or kf

or ce

F ra

m ew

or k,

1 95

4– 20

14 .

22 Chaunda L. Scott

practices as demonstrated by DiversityInc’s Top 50 Companies for Diversity, an annually updated list (DiversityInc, 2017).

Diversity in the workforce is also playing a key role in advancing the economic future of the United States as an increasing number of qualified minorities and women become employed. To recognize some of the eco- nomic advantages of diversity in the workforce, a Fortune magazine article (as cited by Thomas, 2006, p. 70) highlights these examples:

• Diversity improves the corporate culture. • Diversity improves the recruitment of new employees. • Diversity improves the retention of employees. • Diversity decreases complaints and litigations. • Diversity positively affects profitability. • Diversity positively affects productivity. • Diversity maximizes brand identity. • Diversity improves client relations. • Diversity allows organizations to move into emerging markets.

Based on the economic benefits of diversity in the workforce, there is a need for students and practitioners today to be familiar with, as well as understand: (1) the impact that historical, current, and emerging workforce diversity economic trends had, have, or are projected to have in the workforce; and (2) how to develop, implement, and leverage current and emerging economic workforce diversity policies and practices. By studying the diversity in the workforce from an historical and modern-day perspective, students and practitioners in professional fields will be better equipped to thrive within a diversity in the workforce.

Chapter Summary

In this chapter, workforce diversity, diversity, human diversity, and what workforce diversity is not were defined and discussed, along with the impor- tance of knowing the history of human diversity and workforce diversity in the United States. A summary of five key pieces of government legislation was also presented that assisted in advancing the practice of workforce diver- sity as we know it today, alongside a brief history of diversity and workforce diversity in the United States. Next, a summation of the types of organiza- tions in the United States that have emerged as they relate to managing a diverse workforce was highlighted, trailed by several examples that under- scored the impact that Affirmative Action and Civil Rights laws have had on advancing equal opportunities for minorities and women in the United States.

Scott’s (2017) Revised Trends in Mandating, Managing, and Leveraging Diversity in the Workforce Framework, 1896–Present (Table 1.1) was also introduced to emphasize the evolution of the practice of workforce diver- sity and assist the readers of this chapter in critically reflecting on what

Historical Perspectives 23

future strategies could be used to advance the field of workforce diversity beyond its current state. Several reasons were shared as well, explaining why students and practitioners should study workforce diversity in the 21st cen- tury. Chapter 1 concludes by highlighting the definitions of key terms and critical-thinking discussion questions.

Definition of Key Terms

Discrimination—“[T]he denial of opportunities and equal rights to indi- viduals and groups [in society and in the workplace] because of prejudice or for other arbitrary reasons” (Schaefer, 2011, p. 36).

Diverse—The countless ways human beings are viewed by themselves and other individuals as being similar or dissimilar to other individuals throughout the world (Scott, 2012).

Diversity (or Human Diversity)—The countless ways human beings are similar as well as dissimilar to one another throughout the world (Scott, 2012).

Fourteenth Amendment—The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Consti- tution approved in 1868 states that citizenship shall be awarded “to all persons born or naturalized in the United States” (14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, 2017).

Human Diversity (or Diversity)—The countless ways human beings are similar as well as dissimilar to one another throughout the world (Scott, 2012).

Inclusion—“[I]nclusion is the intentional act of making individuals from all diverse backgrounds feel respected, welcomed and a part of a group and organizational culture” (Scott, 2012).

Prejudice—“A negative attitude towards an entire category of people”; for example, pre-judging racial and ethnic groups without just cause (Schaefer, 2011, p. 36).

Racism—“A doctrine that one race is superior” (Schaefer, 2011, p. 13). Sexism—“The ideology that one sex is superior to all others” (Schaefer,

2011, p. 356). Stereotypes/Stereotyping—“Unreliable, exaggerated generalizations

about all members of a group that do not take individual differences into account” (Schaefer, 2011, p. 17).

Thirteenth Amendment—The 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution passed and approved by congress in 1865 states that “neither slavery nor invol- untary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction” (13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, 2017).

Workforce Diversity or Diversity in the Workplace—Workforce diver- sity is a voluntary strategy used by organizations that value human diver- sity and are committed to hire the best and brightest qualified individuals representing a variety of diversity backgrounds (Scott, 2012). Workforce diversity also refers to valuing the myriad ways that leaders, business

24 Chaunda L. Scott

partners, employees, consultants, student workers, volunteers, customers, and visitors’ groups are similar as well as dissimilar to one another in work environments. For example, these categories include, but are not limited to: gender; race; skin color; age; ethnicity; sexual orientation; marital sta- tus; partner status; parental status; maternal status; socioeconomic status; dialect; disability; spiritual beliefs; religious beliefs; ancestry; cultural cus- toms, norms, and traditions; choices of cuisine; eye color; hair color and texture; style of dress; professional appearance; height and weight; edu- cational level; professional work experience; military experience; world view; personality; knowledge, skills, and abilities; work ethic; creative tal- ents; demeanor; mannerisms; professionalism; adaptability to change; han- dling stress; managing conflict; dealing with emotions; leadership style; followership style; occupation titles; occupation responsibilities; weekly schedules; seniority level; salary level; functioning in teams; functioning autonomously; cultivating a welcoming work environment; level of per- sonal commitment; degree of professional loyalty; providing feedback; receiving feedback; delivering customer service; receiving customer ser- vice; expressing appreciation; conveying disapproval; professional interest; personal interests; life experiences; where one lives; birth place; style of living; and political views (Scott, 2012).

Workforce Diversity Is Not—An affirmation action strategy, a quota system aimed at hiring a certain number of qualified minorities and women in organizations, a lack of professional standards and produc- tivity in the workforce because qualified minorities and women are represented at all levels of the organization (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2007).

Critical-Thinking Application

1 Explain the Plessy vs. Ferguson case and decision. 2 Explain how the Brown vs. Board of Education decision has influenced the

current state of education as we know it today. 3 Why was President Kennedy’s role so important in addressing racial

equality? 4 What impact did President Johnson’s speech on Affirmative Action at

Howard University in 1964 have on you? 5 What strategies do you recommend to address acts of inequality in the

workplace? 6 What strategies do you recommend to address acts of racism and dis-

crimination in the workplace? 7 If you were a manager in a non-diverse organization, how would you go

about creating a multicultural organization? 8 How are the terms diversity and workforce diversity similar and different? 9 In your opinion, why is workforce diversity so important in the 21st

century?

Historical Perspectives 25

10 In what way has Affirmative Action been effective in promoting diver- sity and inclusion in organizations and society?

11 In what way has Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 been effective in promoting diversity and inclusion in organizations and society?

12 Explain what diversity is not. 13 Name four specific differences between eras three and four highlighted

in Scott’s (2017) Revised Trends in Mandating, Managing, and Leverag- ing Workforce Diversity Framework, 1896–Present.

14 What are four benefits of workforce diversity?

References

Beckman, S. A. (2004). Affirmative action: An encyclopedia. New York: NY. Greenwood Press.

Bell, B. (2012, September 27). Five questions “this week”: Jennifer Granholm. ABC NEWS. com/Politics. Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/ five-questions-this-week-jennifer-granholm/.

Bennett-Alexander, D. D., & Hartman, L. P. (2007). Employment law for business. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Congress of Racial Equality. (2013). Brown vs. Board of Education. One of the most impor- tant decisions in the civil rights movement. Retrieved from www.core-online.org/ History/brown_vs_board.htm#summary

Constitutional Rights Foundation. (2017). A brief history of Jim Crow. Retrieved from www.crf-usa.org/black-history-month/a-brief-history-of-jim-crow

Cox, T., Jr. (1993). Cultural diversity in organizations: Theory, research and practice. San Fran- cisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Cox, T., Jr. (2001). Creating the multicultural organization: A strategy for capturing the power of diversity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cox, T. H., & Blake, S. (1991). Managing cultural diversity: Implications for organizational competitiveness. The Executive, 5(5): 45–56.

Crossroads Anti-Racism Organizing and Training (Producer and Director). (1996). Ending racism: For a racism-free 21st century [Film]. Plainfield, NY: The First Unitarian Society.

DiversityInc. (2017). DiversityInc Top 50 Companies for Diversity 2017. Retrieved from www.diversityinc.com/the-diversityinc-top-50-companies-for-diversity-2017/

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2017). The law. Retrieved from www. eeoc.gov/eeoc/history/35th/thelaw/

Fight for Women’s Suffrage. (2013). Women’s history. History.com website. Retrieved from www.history.com/topics/the-fight-for-womens-suffrage

Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. (2017). Primary documents of Ameri- can history. Virtual Services and Programs, Digital Reference Section, Library of Con- gress. Retrieved from www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/14thamendment.html

Glaser, N. (1975). Affirmative action: Ethics, inequality and public policy. New York: NY Basic Books, Inc.

Harper, S., & Reskin, B. (2005). Affirmative at school and on the job. Annual Review of Sociology, 31, 357–379.

Hasday, J. (2007). The Civil Rights Act of 1964: An end to racial segregation. New York, NY: Chelsea House Publications.

26 Chaunda L. Scott

Hernandez, D., & Field, K. (2003, Winter). The diversity industry. The past decade has spawned a multi-million-dollar industry of sensitivity. Besides learning to get along, what has this meant for efforts to understand race? Colorlines, 6, 23. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/215539784?accountid=28018

History.com Staff. (2009). History.com. Plessy v. Ferguson. Retrieved from www.history. com/topics/black-history/plessy-v-ferguson

History Fair Project. (2017). Plessy vs. Ferguson. Retrieved from http://plessyvfergu- son1.weebly.com/outcome.html

Hughes, C. (2016). Diversity intelligence: Integrating diversity intelligence alongside intellectual, emotional and cultural intelligence for leadership and career development. New York, NY: Pal- grave McMillan.

Johnson, L. B. (1965a). Commencement address at Howard University: “To fulfill these rights,” June 4, 1965. Courtesy of the Lyndon Baines Johnson Presidential Library. Retrieved from http://lbjlibrary.net/collections/selected-speeches/1965/06-04-1965. html

Johnson, L. B. (1965b). Commencement address at Howard University: “To fulfill these rights,” June 4, 1965. YouTube video courtesy of the Lyndon Baines Johnson Presiden- tial Library. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcfAuodA2x8

Johnston, W. B., & Packer, A. E. (1987). Workforce 2000: Work and workers for the twenty-first century. Indianapolis, IN: Hudson Institute.

Kotlowski, D. J. (1998). Richard Nixon and the origins of affirmative action. The Historian, 60(3), 523+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u= lom_oaklandu&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA20649393&sid=summon&asid=37218 bd3b3efbff559cc471b52bfb843

Legal Information Institute. (2017). Supreme Court. Plessy v. Ferguson. Retrieved from www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/163/537

McBride, A. (2017). Supreme Court history. Landmark cases. Plessy v. Ferguson (1896). Retrieved from www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_plessy.html

McMillan-Capehart, A. (2003). Hundreds of years of diversity: What took so long? Equal Opportunity International, 22(8), 20–37.

Morrison, A. (2017, May 1). May Day 2017: Black Lives Matter activists rally with immi- grant labor and LGBTQ groups. The Movement. Retrieved from https://mic.com/ articles/175539/may-day-2017-black-lives-matter-activists-rally-with-immigrant- labor-and-lgbtq-groups#.0XBnmqfQs

Noe, R. A. (2010). Employee training & development (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Oracle Education Foundation. (2013). Brown v. the Board of Education. Retrieved from http://library.thinkquest.org/J0112391/brown_v__board_of_education.htm

Parrillo, V. N. (2005). Diversity in America (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press. Pilgrim, D. (2012). What was Jim Crow. Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia, Ferris

State University. Retrieved from https://ferris.edu/jimcrow/what.htm Schaefer, R. (2011). Racial and ethnic groups (12th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice

Hall. Scott, C. L. (2012). Winter semester. Cultural diversity in the workplace course: Human

resource development 367. Class lecture topic: Workforce diversity. Past, present and future. Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan.

Scott, C. L. (2014). Historical perspectives for studying diversity in the workforce. In M. Y. Byrd & C. L. Scott (Eds.), Diversity in the workforce (1st ed., pp. 3–33). New York and London: Routledge.

Historical Perspectives 27

Scott, W. R. (2018). The Scott Collection. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Historical Society Press. Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. (2017). Primary documents of Ameri-

can history. Virtual Services and Programs, Digital Reference Section, Library of Con- gress. Retrieved from www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/13thamendment.html

Thomas, R. R., Jr. (1991). Beyond race and gender: Unleashing the power of your total work force by managing diversity. New York, NY: American Management Association.

Thomas, R. R., Jr. (2006). Building on the promise of diversity: How we can move to the next level in our workplaces, our communities and our society. New York, NY: American Manage- ment Association.

Thomas, R. R., Jr. (2010). World-class diversity management: A strategic approach. San Fran- cisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Toossi, M. (2006, November). A new look at long-term labor force projections to 2050. Monthly Labor Review, 19–39.

United States History. (2017). Jim Crow laws. Retrieved from www.u-s-history.com/ pages/h1559.html

Valdez, Z. (2015). The abandoned promise of civil rights. Sociological Forum, 30(51), 612–626.

Washington, J. (2008, December 14). AP: Many insisting that Obama is not black. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/14/ap-many- insisting-that-ob_n_150846.html

2 Suggested Theories, Models, and Frameworks Used to Address Emerging Diversity Issues in the Workforce

Chaunda L. Scott

Chapter Overview

A fundamental question that students and practitioners often ponder and ask is: What exactly are theories, models, and frameworks, and what are they used for? To clarify these terms, I offer the following definitions. First, a theory (or theories) represents a group of expectations or realities that seeks to offer a credible or practical justification “of cause-and-effect relationships among a group of observed phenomenon”; for example, facts, experiences, occurrences, events, or trends (Business Dictionary, 2013a). A model (or models) is best understood as being a visual, condensed, and reader-friendly description of realities in the form of ideas or endeavors in society that serve to offer a meaning by: (1) removing needless factors; (2) creating hypo- thetical situations to question possible outcomes; and (3) clarifying activities or actions based on earlier explanations (Business Dictionary, 2013b). Last, a framework (or frameworks) offers a general synopsis of interconnected components that link to a certain process which has explicit goals and acts as a “guide” in making revisions or in the re-development of an idea (Busi- ness Dictionary, 2013c). Therefore, according to Agars and Kottke (2004, as cited by Stockdale & Crosby, 2004), when we draw upon reliable “theories, models [and frameworks] to guide our research and practices,” (p. 56) we are able to build and expand knowledge on organizational diversity topics that contribute new insights toward furthering the practice of workforce diver- sity beyond its current state. The seven theoretical and practice-based para- digms highlighted in this chapter aim to introduce students and practitioners to the range of current and emerging trends, issues, and concerns relating to diversity in the workforce by providing: (1) a variety of explanations as to why various current and emerging workforce diversity issues and concerns subsist; (2) an opportunity to reflect on the role of managing current and emerging workforce diversity trends, issues, and concerns; (3) an opportu- nity to reflect on what additional workforce diversity factors and trends may need to be further explored; and (4) an opportunity to engage in critical reflection by drawing upon the critical theories, models, and frameworks in this chapter and applying them to the critical-thinking application questions and/or case studies that appear in various chapters throughout this textbook.

Suggested Theories, Models, and Frameworks 29

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, readers will be able to:

• Describe current and emerging workforce diversity trends, issues, and concerns.

• Describe practical strategies that can be used to effectively manage and leverage these workplace organizational ills.

• Describe the circumstances and ways in which current and emerging workforce diversity trends, issues, and concerns should be addressed by organizations.

• Describe the characteristics of organizations that are equipped to embrace and manage current and emerging workforce diversity trends, issues, and concerns.

• Think critically and strategically about current and emerging workforce diversity trends, issues, and concerns and their role in managing and leveraging them in the 21st century.

• Identify appropriate conceptual models and frameworks that could be utilized to help organizations address current and emerging workforce diversity trends, issues, and concerns.

Conceptual Model 1: Critical Racism Pedagogy—A Conceptual Discussion Model

Derived from the critical theory school of thought, Byrd and Scott (2010) introduced the four-step Critical Racism Pedagogy Model to highlight its utility in guiding constructive dialogue on various forms of racism (i.e., individual, institutional, and cultural). This model is long overdue, considering that in a variety of professional fields (e.g., human resource development and human resource management), discussions on racism as well as other types of inequities (e.g., sexism, classism, ageism, and homophobia), often seem to present challenges for many instructors in facilitating meaningful and constructive discussion (Byrd & Scott, 2010). These problems regularly exist due to: (1) instructors being ill-prepared to facilitate discussions on racism and other types of ‘isms’ because they lack knowledge of these content areas; (2) the sensitive and complex nature of these topics which is challenging in and of itself to facilitate; and (3) insufficient existing literature and resources on racism and other parallel inequitable acts within professional disciplines for instructional purposes (Byrd & Scott, 2010).

Since diversity-centered courses are generally where discussions of race and racism take place, it has been our experience in facilitating diversity courses that many of our students have been resistant and reluctant to partic- ipate when racism is introduced under the topics of race, ethnicity, and ineq- uity (Byrd & Scott, 2010). This resistance might stem from the instructors’

30 Chaunda L. Scott

and students’ lack of understanding of how racism historically was deeply rooted in the fabric of the United States, along with how it still lingers today in many contemporary forms in the workplace and society generally.

The resulting lack of constructive classroom discussion on the roots and contemporary forms of racism suggests that students will not graduate with the skills needed for de-racialized thinking in workplace settings and in the broader society (Byrd & Scott, 2010). For example, Byrd and Scott noted that in their academic and professional classroom experiences, students have asked questions such as:

• What is the definition of a racial group, and is White a racial group? • What exactly is racism? • Why is racism being discussed in diversity courses? • What indicators suggest that racism has affected individuals and

institutions? • How does racism continue to affect individuals and institutions? • Can all cultural and ethnic groups be racist too? • What can be done to end racism?

These types of question indicate that students need to become critically con- scious of racism and its impact on individuals and institutions before they can participate in discussions and make meaning of the resulting dialogue. As a result, the challenge for educators is to find and develop the appropriate strategies for guiding constructive discussions on racism in classroom and boardroom settings.

Situating Racism within the Critical Theory School of Thought

Merriam, Caffarella, and Baumgartner (2007) state that “the identification of systems of power and oppression as a lens through which to analyze society is a key component of critical theory” (p. 250). Critical philosophies are also welcome additions to several academic subject areas that seek to address issues of authority and domination in society. For example, these subject areas include “history, law, literature and the social sciences” (Critical Theory, 2013), African American studies, sociology, multicultural education, higher education, human resource development, human resource management, queer studies, women’s studies, White privilege, and workforce diversity, to name a few. As highlighted by the previous subjects listed, critical philoso- phies are also rooted in both historical and contemporary real-world con- texts with their common goals focused on societal change (Questia, n.d.). Given the common focus and aims of critical philosophies, they are deemed to be best suited for understanding and examining issues of racism in society. Examples of the specific critical philosophies that are useful in exploring issues of racism in organizations and educational settings are critical theory, critical pedagogy, and critical race pedagogy. In familiarizing the readers of

Suggested Theories, Models, and Frameworks 31

this chapter with these critical concepts, brief definitions of these theories are provided, beginning with critical theory.

Critical theory in general is a concept that seeks to assist individuals and groups in rising above the societal forces that govern and oppress them (Crit- ical Theory, 2013). As a socio-political instrument, critical theory investigates how and in what ways authoritative and oppressive acts in society affect individual groups (Creswell, 1998). The goal of critical theory is “human emancipation” (Critical Theory, 2013). Critical pedagogy is a teaching and learning concept aimed at raising students’ awareness of “freedom, recogniz- ing authoritarian tendencies, connecting knowledge to power and taking constructive action” that leads to “social justice” (Questia, n.d.). Shor (1996) defines critical pedagogy as an educational tool that assists learners in inquir- ing about the guidelines and procedures that rule over them, and examining their role and place in society so they can better understand their life situa- tions and circumstances in society. Shor (1996) also views critical pedagogy as an instructional method that is devoted to learners because it allows them an opportunity to take control of their learning.

Last, critical race pedagogy (CRP), which originated from critical peda- gogy (Lynn, 2004) is a concept that investigates issues related to and resulting from “racial, ethnic and gender subordination … through the life … experi- ences of educators of color” (p. 154). According to Lynn, CRP also provides opportunities for dialogue to occur among “educators on color” (p. 154) who have had encounters with racism and sexism. Critical race pedagogy also pro- vides an opportunity for faculty of color to develop constructive educational approaches and methods that can be used to address these matters. Because CRP views issues of race and racism as serious universal and persistent social ills, as noted by Solorzano and Yosso (2005), CRP’s central aim, according to Bernal (2002, as cited in Byrd & Scott, 2010), is to expose discriminatory guidelines and procedures in organizations so they can be dismantled.

To date, many educators who teach about race and racism in our global society have relied on viewpoints like the colorblind and reverse discrimina- tion concepts to explain race and racism in society, when in reality they are suppressing the true meanings and negative challenges surrounding race and racism to sustain the existing social order of power and privilege for certain groups in society. With this being said, critical race instruction aims to uncover policies and practices in institutions that have been utilized to dominate and devalue individuals unjustly as well to enable and liberate individuals at the same time (Solorzano & Yosso, 2005). Critical race pedagogy is also grounded in the real-world experiences of educators of color who have encountered racism, and thus, their experiences serve as the foundation for being able to recognize it, understand it, examine it, evaluate it, discuss it, and teach it in courses like workforce diversity and related curricula (Lynn, 2004).

In drawing upon the common themes of critical theory, critical pedagogy, and critical race pedagogy and our own experiences with racism in society

32 Chaunda L. Scott

Figure 2.1 Critical Racism Pedagogy Four-Step Conceptual Model for Integrating Dia- logue on Racism in HRD Diversity Courses

Source: Byrd and Scott (2010).

as African American professional women, we constructed the CRP Model as a facilitation instrument for use in educational and organizational settings to: (1) lead and guide structured, thought-provoking, and beneficial dialogue on racism in its various forms, such as individual racism, institutional racism, and cultural racism (Jones, 1997); (2) give voice to and discuss with students and professionals how racism persists and promotes prejudice, discrimina- tion, stereotyping, unfairness, and injustices; and (3) engage students and professionals in a discourse that stimulates an exchange of ideas on how racism in its various forms (Jones, 1997) can be eradicated for the pur- pose of promoting organizational justice, a form of social justice “that seeks to achieve a state wherein all individuals feel included, and respected and human dignity and equality are practiced and upheld” (Byrd, 2012, p. 120).

Figure 2.1 describes the four phases of our critical racism pedagogy discourse model that offers utility in both educational and organizational settings.

Suggested Theories, Models, and Frameworks 33

Applying the Four-Step Process Using the African and African American Culture as an Example

As will be discussed in Chapter 3, the principle of social justice refers to the active quest for equality and fairness in reaction to behaviors and attitudes that can contribute to a non-inclusive organizational culture. However, there is a need to first educate individuals so that social justice is the desired outcome. Using the African and African American culture as an example, instructors and facilitators would apply the CRP framework by first introducing the concepts of individual and institutional racism and educating participants on the ways in which these systems have emerged from a historical perspective. For example, in Step 1, to demonstrate individual racism, participants could be shown a video clip of a movie such as Alex Haley’s Roots that portrays the captivity of African people taken from their homeland and forced to work in the United States without wages. The enslavement of African people (and later of African Americans who were born in the United States) for more than 200 years demonstrates institutional racism.

In Step 2, participants are educated and enlightened on the recurrence and ongoing systems of individual and institutional racism. For example, the Coca-Cola discrimination lawsuit could be used as a case study to illustrate how race discrimination persisted in a major U.S. beverage industry. In 2001, Coca-Cola settled a race discrimination lawsuit for $192.5 million and was forced to make sweeping reforms in key human resource development and human resource management practices relating to discriminatory pay, pro- motions, and evaluations occurring in 1997 (Wade, 2002). Despite these reforms, the company continued to face race discrimination allegations as evidenced in a 2008 race discrimination lawsuit.

In Step 3, structured dialogue is used to identify and develop strategies for dismantling racism in workplace situations. Structured dialogue is a critical process of the CRP framework. The process of structured dialogue involves moving beyond awareness of diversity to discussing the destructive nature of racists’ actions and practices that continue to pervade organizations and institutions (Kormanik & Apperson, 2002). For example, continuing with the Coca-Cola case, the following questions could be discussed:

1 What indicators of individual racism are apparent in the case? 2 What indicators of institutional racism are apparent in the case? 3 Comment on Coca-Cola’s management responsibility for the persis-

tence of discriminatory human resource practices in the wake of the 2001 lawsuit.

4 Where does the problem exist in allowing these practices to persist? 5 Who is accountable? 6 What strategies could have been used and developed to address the

problems in the Coca-Cola case before the lawsuit?

34 Chaunda L. Scott

Finally, in Step 4, and continuing with the Coca-Cola example, partici- pants are made aware of strategies that were implemented by Coca-Cola in response to the court ruling in 2001. Coca-Cola’s Three Pillars of Diversity Education, which combine the Breaking Down the Barriers training pro- gram, invited speakers, and a diversity library, are action strategies that the company implemented to address race discrimination. Finally, the strategies implemented by Coca-Cola exemplify a quest for social justice aimed at promoting a culture of fairness, equity, and inclusion.

The outcome of applying the four-step CRP framework is responsive diversity education that results in social justice. The CRP framework pre- sents a focused technique whereby academic instructors and practitioners in organizations can guide safe and critical discussions on racism, utilizing the vehicle of diversity education to eradicate acts of racism and promote social justice in work settings simultaneously (Byrd & Scott, 2010).

Conceptual Model 2: Diversity Intelligence (DQ)

As the United States continues to become more diverse, so will the work- force. Moreover, as a result of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and supporting legislation, more individuals from protected classes, as identified by race/ color, sex, age, national origin, disability, and religious affiliation will be employed in the workplace, which creates a new challenge for organiza- tional leaders who have no experience or limited experience in working with and leading a diverse workforce (Hughes, 2016). To prepare today’s organizational leaders with the diversity knowledge they need to effectively lead a diverse workforce, Dr. Claretha Hughes developed a concept in 2016 entitled Diversity Intelligence (DQ) that serves to advance organizational leaders’ understanding of diversity along with their ability to lead a diverse organization.

According to Hughes (2016), when organizational leaders possess DQ, they have “the ability to navigate broad social, cultural, racial and other human differences and to comprehend and appropriately use extensive knowledge of diversity among protected class employees” (Hughes, 2016, p. 5). Diversity Intelligence also prepares organizational leaders to value differences between individuals in the workplace, and it provides organizational leaders with a chance to rethink their behavior and the actions they have been using to guide their diverse employees, and implement new strategies as needed (Hughes, 2016). In order for organizational leaders to demonstrate DQ, they must be able to “appreciate and leverage diversity” in the following ways (Hughes, 2016, p. 6).

1 DQ requires organizational leaders to be able to motivate employees whose background is different from their own.

Suggested Theories, Models, and Frameworks 35

2 DQ requires organizational leaders to recognize their own differ- ences as well as the differences of their employees without it impacting performance.

3 DQ requires organizational leaders to understand their actions and behaviors as well as demonstrate action, not just call for action.

4 DQ organizational leaders must demonstrate an acceptance of human differences as a strength and not as a weakness.

Moreover, to get the maximum benefit of DQ, it must be integrated with existing organizational leadership support strategies such as career develop- ment, intellectual intelligence (IQ), emotional intelligence (EQ), and cul- tural intelligence (CQ) (Hughes, 2016).

The DQ Conceptual Model and theory (see Figure 2.2) was developed from Dubin’s (1976) theory building model and contains two components: leaders and employees (Hughes, 2016). The intersecting variables in the DQ model are intellectual intelligence (IQ), emotional intelligence (EQ), and cultural intelligence (CQ), with the main focus being on the organization, followed by a secondary focus on the global society (Hughes, 2016, p. 7). Propositions of the DQ Conceptual Model are presented in the next section (Hughes, 2016, pp. 7–8).

Global Society

Organizations

Leaders’ Cognitive and Behavioral Perspectives

•

• •

• •

Broadened employees’ thoughts and actions Protected class group integration DQ knowledge applied to improve organization goals and efforts

Intellectual capital Financial success

Leaders’ change of thoughts and actions

IQ EQ CQ

DQ

Figure 2.2 Hughes’ Diversity Intelligence (DQ) Conceptual Model

Source: Hughes (2016, p. 8).

36 Chaunda L. Scott

Propositions of the DQ Conceptual Model

• Proposition 1: When leaders use DQ, leaders and employees will have an improved outlook on employees representing a protected class.

• Proposition 2: When DQ is supported in organizations, the inclu- sion of protected class employees and supporting initiatives will be enhanced.

• Proposition 3: When leaders’ DQ behaviors improve, so will employee productivity.

• Proposition 4: As leaders utilize DQ, they will begin to incorpo- rate intellectual intelligence (IQ), emotional intelligence (EQ) and cultural intelligence (CQ), which will help them to create an inclu- sionary organizational culture and lessen conflict for protected class employees.

• Proposition 5: As leaders utilize DQ, their diversity training efforts will be enhanced and will result in increased organizational profits and intel- lectual capital.

• Proposition 6: When leaders use DQ they can achieve and improve the attainment of organizational goals.

• Proposition 7: When leaders are advocates of DQ in organizations, and employees are familiar with DQ, misunderstandings, ignorance and confusion declines.

(Hughes, 2016, pp. 7–8)

Hughes’ (2016) Diversity Intelligence (DQ) Conceptual Model provides a new approach which underscores that when organizational leaders improve their diversity knowledge, behavior, and actions, it can result in greater inclusion of protected class employees in the workplace, the attainment of more organizational goals, as well as increased organizational productivity and profits.

Theoretical Framework 3: Giving Voice to Polyrhythmic Realities—A Framework

Sheared’s (1999) Polyrhythmic Realities Framework was introduced in the discipline of adult education to emphasize the adversities related to stu- dents’ life encounters as they relate to the “intersection of race, gender, and class” (p. 36). In using the Polyrhythmic Realities Framework as a diagnostic tool, Sheared assessed the perceptions of African American students enrolled in adult basic education (ABE) programs, and found that they were more inclined to be involved in learning if they felt more associated with the edu- cators, their peers, and the curriculum objectives.

Sheared (1999) further uncovered that if African American students’ poly- rhythmic realities and life encounters were recognized by their adult basic education (ABE) “staff, teachers, and administrators” (p. 38), they stayed in the program. However, when African American students felt unsupported by

Suggested Theories, Models, and Frameworks 37

their ABE programs, Sheared noted that they quit the program, based on not having their learning concerns dealt with satisfactorily.

According to Sheared (1999), the concept of polyrhythmic realities signifies how the constructs of “race, class, gender, and language,” as well as other less visible individualities, influence the ways in which pupils view themselves, along with the ways that pupils or educators want to be viewed in educational settings. Grounded in an Afrocentric episte- mological perspective, the Polyrhythmic Realities Framework makes a conscious effort to provide a way through which an individual’s actions and thoughts are understood as being rooted in their life encounters as these relate to their “history, culture, economics, race, gender, language, sexual orientation, and religion” (p. 40), to name a few. In highlighting this point, Sheared’s framework suggests a way to think about the styl- ishness and beauty of Arab American painting, for example, as it forms a relationship with African American art forms, such as music, dance, and sculptures.

Sheared (1999) also acknowledged that utilizing the Polyrhythmic Real- ities Framework to guide culturally-centered educational practices and policies allows learners, such as adult students, to develop the confidence they need to give voice to issues of concern, and most importantly, to persist and succeed in a variety of settings where learning takes place (e.g., profit and non-profit agencies) that are often intolerant of diverse ways of knowing and being.

According to Sheared (1999), in order for all educators to appreciate com- pletely the polyrhythmic realities of African Americans, as well as all other diverse groups, the uniqueness of human diversity must be recognized in educational settings. Sheared further asserted that allowing students to have an opportunity to give voice to their polyrhythmic realities and their life encounters in learning environments can assist them in gaining the knowl- edge and skills they need to succeed in society and confront unsupportive governing practices and policies. Sheared’s cultural framework offers utility in that it helps us to understand how students as well as educators can learn from their intersecting polyrhythmic realities and life encounters in places where teaching and learning take place.

Conceptual Model 4: The Diverse Voices Conference Model

I built it … and they came. (Dr. Chaunda L. Scott)

According to Ukpokodu (2010), today’s higher education students need cul- tural knowledge, skills, and abilities in order to be successful in life and soci- ety in our evolving diverse world. Shorter-Gooden (2013) likewise notes that today’s corporations must aggressively strive to promote “diversity” for the purpose of acting in response “to an unequal playing field and shifting

38 Chaunda L. Scott

demographics” (p. 207). Shorter-Gooden (2013) further acknowledges that one way in which a corporation, including educational academies and uni- versities, can begin to develop human diversity knowledge is when they “infuse diverse perspectives throughout the substantive work of the organi- zation, for example, in educational curricular programming” (p. 207).

In 1999, as a response to educational and organizational needs identified over the years, I created the Diverse Voices Conference at Oakland Uni- versity (OU) in Rochester, Michigan, a predominantly White university. Ukpokodu (2010) and Shorter-Gooden’s (2013) later research is consistent with the objectives and goals that were fundamental to the creation of the Diverse Voices Conference. The aims of this higher education initiative are twofold:

1 To create a safe environment for intergenerational dialogue on topics of diversity and inclusion by engaging students, faculty, staff, business leaders, professionals, and community members in critical discussions on these current issues. Examples of these issues include persisting societal inequi- ties, such as racism, sexual orientation harassment, and bullying, to name a few (Scott, Greer, Willard-Traub, & Johnson, 2003; Scott, 2005, 2011).

2 To encourage the development of solutions that can be used by the indi- viduals in attendance to address human diversity concerns and issues in education, organizations, and society (Scott et al., 2003; Scott, 2005, 2011).

The Diverse Voices Conference is a grant-funded higher education initiative that serves as an extension of diversity education beyond the classroom, as a way to broaden diversity and inclusion discussions by including the groups named above who are interested in and concerned about human diversity issues and dismantling inequities in society (Scott, 2011). The Diverse Voices Conference also supports one of OU’s core values and mission which is “diversity and inclusion” (Oakland University, 2017).

The outcomes of the Diverse Voices Conference focus on expanding all conference participants’ and attendees’ knowledge of:

1 their own cultural, racial, and social identity and the divergent perspec- tives of others who are different from themselves;

2 theories and proven practices that support and value human diversity and address inequalities such as how to reduce prejudice, discrimination, and stereotyping; and

3 the effective strategies that corporate and civic leaders are using, have used, or could use to enhance their organizations and communities by addressing human diversity issues as a critical success factor (Scott, 2005, 2011).

The Diverse Voices Conference also assists in the development of students’ oral and presentation skills, and their overall professionalism as this relates to

Suggested Theories, Models, and Frameworks 39

speaking out publicly in support of valuing all aspects of human diversity. There is also a strong need today in higher education and organizational set- tings to have a public diversity and inclusion forum like the Diverse Voices Conference, where students’ participation and comments are not based on grades, where professionals aren’t required to attend, and where scholarly and practical teaching and learning on diversity and inclusion take place in a supportive environment free of charge (Scott et al., 2003; Scott, 2005, 2011). The Diverse Voices Conference meets this need (Scott, 2005, 2011).

The planning for Diverse Voices begins approximately 10 months prior to the conference date (Scott, 2011). Students pursuing degrees in higher education at OU and other Michigan universities are identified and invited to attend the conference (Scott, 2005, 2011). The student and faculty pre- senters are selected via abstracts vetted by the Diverse Voices Faculty Advi- sory Board (Scott, 2011). The presenters are selected based solely upon the quality of their abstracts along with how these align with and support the conference theme. Also, during the planning period, a keynote speaker (local, national, or renowned) is identified, contacted, and confirmed. Air travel and accommodations are secured for the keynote speaker if need be, supplies are purchased, entertainment and food service providers are contacted (Scott, 2011).

As the conference grew in distinction from 1999 to the present, the venue moved from a lecture hall to an auditorium to accommodate a growing number of attendees who come to listen to speakers, and to actively engage in critical diversity discussions. The most recent Diverse Voices Conference drew just over 400 participants (Scott, 2011).

The Diverse Voices Conference is held annually in March and always on a Saturday from 11:00 am to 3:00 pm (Scott et al., 2003; Scott, 2005, 2011). Past themes have included Diversity Matters, Race Matters, What Does Diversity Look Like?, Diversity at Work, Working Diversity, and The Rela- tionship between Equity and Excellence, to name a few. Previous keynote speakers—such as Marianne Williamson, renowned author and speaker; Dr. Juanita Johnson-Bailey, professor and scholar from the University of Geor- gia; Dr. Elizabeth Tisdale, professor and scholar from Penn State University; and Dr. Carlyle Fielding Stewart, III, pastor, teacher, scholar, and author from Michigan—represent the types of distinguished orators who have shared their diverse perspectives at a Diverse Voices Conference. At the conclusion of the presentations, the audience and presenters engage in a question- and- answer period followed by a fellowship period at the reception (Scott, 2005, 2011).

Prior to the end of the conference, all participants are encouraged to complete a survey, provide suggestions, and evaluate the conference. Sur- veys are collected and analyzed for improving future conferences by the Diverse Voices Advisory Board. Of the surveys collected to date (approx- imately 3,500), over 98% of all evaluations rate the conference as “excel- lent,” and participants overwhelmingly request additional conferences

40 Chaunda L. Scott

on the topic of diversity and inclusion (Scott, 2005, 2011). Table 2.1 provides an overview of the planning process of the Diverse Voices Con- ference model, which offers utility in both higher education and organi- zational settings.

Table 2.1 The Diverse Voices Conference Planning Process

Planning Begins 10 Months Prior to the Diverse Voices Conference Date

Select and Confirm Conference Theme Diverse Voices Advisory Board

Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference [The First Month]

Confirm and Reserve Date, Time Period, and Location Where the Conference and Reception will be Held

Diverse Voices Advisory Board Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference

[The First Month]

Compile a List of Internal University Courses to Invite and External Universities to Invite

Diverse Voices Advisory Board Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference

[The Second Month]

Create an E-Flyer and Application to Invite Students to Apply to Speak at the Upcoming Conference

Send the E-Flyer and Application Out Monthly by Email to the Host University List Serve and to External Universities Diverse Voices Advisory Board

Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference [The First Five Months]

Select and Confirm Renowned Keynote Speaker Along with Lodging and Travel Itinerary if Needed

Diverse Voices Advisory Board Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference

[The Sixth Month]

Select and Confirm Faculty Presenter Diverse Voices Advisory Board

Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference [The Sixth Month]

Select and Confirm Diverse Voices Conference Student Ambassador Diverse Voices Advisory Board

Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference [The Sixth Month]

Select and Confirm Diverse Voices Conference Student Speakers Diverse Voices Advisory Board

Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference [The Sixth Month]

Suggested Theories, Models, and Frameworks 41

Of the 407 conference attendees at the last Diverse Voices Confer- ence, 350 were Caucasian undergraduate and graduate students from Oakland University and other Michigan universities. Thirty participants reported ethnicities including African American, Asian American, Arab American, Hispanic, and Latino. The remaining 27 conference attendees represented faculty, community and business leaders, and parents. With over 99% of attendees reporting their ethnicity as Caucasian, Diverse Voices provides the ideal forum for reaching all who come, but especially the majority, who have never participated in an educational conference

Planning Begins 10 Months Prior to the Diverse Voices Conference Date

Select and Confirm Entertainment, Student Organization Helpers, Order Supplies and Certificates

Diverse Voices Advisory Board Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference

[The Seventh Month]

Confirm Time Allotted for the Question and Answer Period Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference

[The Seventh Month]

Confirm Time Allotted for the Final Thoughts and Thank You Period Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference

[The Seventh Month]

Confirm Time Allotted for the Evaluation Period Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference

[The Seventh Month]

Confirm Refreshment Options and Confirm Time Allotted for the Reception Diverse Voices Advisory Board

Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference [The Seventh Month]

Print Diverse Voices Conference Programs and Evaluation Forms Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference

[The Seventh Month]

Complete and Finalize All Remaining Diverse Voices Conference Tasks Diverse Voices Advisory Board

Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference [Seventh—Ninth Month]

The Diverse Voices Conference Takes Place [Tenth Month]

Send Thank You Notes to the Keynote Speaker, Faculty Presenter, All Student Speakers, Entertainers,

and All Other Individuals and Groups that Assisted with the Diverse Voices Conference Tasks

Founder and President of the Diverse Voices Conference [Tenth Month—One Week After the Diverse Voices Conference]

Source: Scott (2011).

42 Chaunda L. Scott

focused on diversity and inclusion. Future plans include expanding the Diverse Voices Conference within the United States, South Africa, and other countries.

As a human resource development educator, scholar, and diversity and inclusion specialist, my commitment to human diversity inclusion and eradicating racism is sincere and passionate. I am also honored to have the opportunity to engage my students, other students, national scholars, busi- ness leaders, professionals, and community members in an open dialogue on diversity issues in my classroom, in a conference setting, and within an institu- tion of higher education. Moreover, it has been most rewarding to see that my students, along with the public, enjoy the Diverse Voices Conference as much as I do. I want also to thank Oakland University publicly for their continued support of my Diverse Voices work. Given the success of the Diverse Voices Conference to date, I invite educational institutions and organizations alike to consider replicating the Diverse Voices Conference for the purpose of pro- moting human diversity inclusion through the use of constructive and critical dialogue in their own settings, and to assist in the development of strategies to eradicate all forms of human inequalities in society.

The Diverse Voices Conference is another unique model that provides a fresh approach to engage students, business professionals, and the general public in dialogues on issues related to diversity and inclusion and social inequities.

Theoretical Model 5: Model for Creating Diversity

Another theoretical model that is useful for managing and leveraging cur- rent and emerging workforce diversity issues is Allen and Montgomery’s (2001) Model for Creating Diversity (MCD). Based on the earlier work of Kurt Lewin (1951), the MCD serves as a welcome addition to the focused area of diversity management because of its ability to guide organizational development and change strategies that promote and advance diversity inclusion. Lewin’s (1951) organizational development and change model is based on three main components:

1 unfreezing a current organizational position; for example, current organi- zational objectives, efforts, guidelines, and procedures;

2 moving forward to create an innovative organizational position; for example, disassembling, amending, or crafting innovative objectives, ini- tiatives, strategies, and procedures;

3 refreezing an innovative organizational position to meet current and future objectives; for example, original innovative objectives, efforts, strategies, and procedures.

The MCD builds on Lewin’s (1951) model by directing diversity manage- ment change in work environments and emphasizing the outcome of the

Suggested Theories, Models, and Frameworks 43

change strategy. The components of Allen and Montgomery’s (2001) MCD are described as follows:

1 Unfreezing top management’s current commitment, vision, and mis- sion toward diversity management in workplace settings. This also includes unfreezing leaders’ stated efforts as well as diversity-related objectives.

2 Moving or developing new diversity management initiatives, policies, practices, and goals in workplace settings. For instance, develop a variety of workplace diversity-focused training and education programs (e.g., sexual orientation harassment, racial profiling, ethnic profiling, bullying, and disability awareness), mentoring and coaching programs, recruit- ment and outreach programs, and co-op and internship programs, along with new diversity management goals, a time line, and a detailed strate- gic plan to achieve these objectives.

3 Refreezing newly developed workplace diversity management initia- tives, policies, practices, and goals. For example, sponsor—on an ongo- ing basis—diversity-centered training and education programs in the workplace (e.g., sexual orientation harassment, racial profiling, ethnic profiling, bullying, and disability awareness), mentoring and coaching programs, recruitment and outreach programs, and co-op and intern- ship programs. Also, management should regularly communicate with the workplace community by newsletter, e-mail, and annual reports regarding what the new diversity management goals are, their level of attainment, and their lack of success.

4 Competitive advantage is the outcome of refreezing newly developed workplace diversity management initiatives, policies, practices, and goals previously highlighted in phases 1 to 3.

The uniqueness of Allen and Montgomery’s (2001) MCD is that it offers a simplistic and pragmatic approach to guide developmental and change strategies that are focused on promoting and advancing the practice of diversity management in work settings globally in the 21st century and beyond.

Theoretical Framework 6: The Multicultural Organization

According to Cox (1993, 2001), a multicultural organization is one that seeks to assist all of its workers, regardless of their varying backgrounds, in reaching their personal and professional goals, while contributing to the success of the organization. The exclusive characteristics of multicultural organizations offered by Cox (1993) consist of the following:

• a culture that fosters and values cultural differences • pluralism as an acculturation process

44 Chaunda L. Scott

• full structural integration • full integration of the informal networks • an absence of institutionalized cultural bias in human resource manage-

ment systems and practices • a minimum of intergroup conflict due to the proactive management of

diversity. (Cox, 2003, p. 229)

A multicultural organization consists of five components: leadership; research and measurement; education; a culture and management system audit; and follow-up. First, effective leaders are needed at all levels of an organization to act as change agents and to provide the necessary management strategies and practices that support an inclusive work environment. Second, organizations need to conduct relevant research that identifies their diversity needs as well as updating those currently in place. According to Cox (1993), data collec- tion and analysis are needed on related organizational matters such as “equal opportunity, the analysis of attitudes and perceptions of employees, and data that highlights differential career experiences of members from differ- ent cultural groups” (p. 235). Third, education efforts should extend beyond awareness and sensitivity training. Training efforts should include helping all organizational members (including leaders) to acquire the skills they need to help their organization transform itself into a multicultural organization based on the needs determined in the research and measurement process. Fourth, a cultural and management systems audit should be viewed as “a comprehensive assessment on the organizational cultural and human resource management system of the organization” (p. 237). The goal of a cultural and management systems audit is to expose acts of unfairness toward diverse groups, expose organizational actions that are questionable in meeting the needs of diverse groups, and eliminate barriers that may hinder the success of every individual in the organization. Finally, follow-up is needed to evaluate and ensure that organizations are able to demonstrate a “zero correlation of socio-cultural identity with opportunity, motivation, and achievement as well as full capitalization on the potential benefits of workforce diversity” (p. 239).

Theoretical framework 7: Embedded Intergroup Relations Theory (EIRT)

Another theoretical framework that is useful for analyzing current and emerging workforce diversity issues and concerns is Clayton Alderfer’s (1987) Embedded Intergroup Relations Theory (EIRT). The EIRT frame- work explains the effects of diversity in relation to one’s group identity in organizational settings. Identity groups are characterized by sharing com- mon biological traits, sharing historical background and experiences, and sharing similar world views (Nkomo & Cox, 1996.) The dynamics that emerge from diverse groups are characterized by the notion of embedded- ness. Embeddedness means that groups exist inside other groups. Diverse

Suggested Theories, Models, and Frameworks 45

groups and organizations are both open systems that influence and are influ- enced by the environments in which they are embedded (Alderfer & Tucker, 1996). Embedded Intergroup Relations Theory supports Wagley and Har- ris’s (1964) description of diverse groups:

1 Diverse groups receive unequal and differential treatment compared to other individuals with dissimilar characteristics.

2 Diverse groups are easily recognizable because of distinguishing physi- cal and/or cultural characteristics that are not highly regarded by the dominant group.

3 Diverse groups share a sense of community and common bond. 4 Group membership is assigned or socially constructed. 5 Group members generally tend to affiliate themselves with like indi-

viduals because of their social isolation.

Embedded Intergroup Relations Theory brings to light the common experi- ences of diverse groups within the workplace. Experiences are more easily recognized and understood by individuals who belong to the same identity group. When these experiences are perceived as adverse, unjust, or unfair, indi- viduals belonging to diverse groups in workplace settings are most likely to make meaning and find support from group membership. Therefore, the use- fulness of the EIRT model is that it highlights the need for organizations of the 21st century to strengthen intergroup relations among all employees for the purpose of creating a more inclusive, supportive, and productive workplace.

Note: Please see Scott’s (2017) Revised Trends in Mandating, Managing, and Leveraging Diversity in the Workforce Framework, 1896–Present on pages 18–21 of the previous chapter for an overview of the diversity man- agement framework (Thomas, 1991), the strategic diversity management framework (Thomas, 2006), the world-class diversity management approach (Thomas, 2010), and the Diversity Intelligence framework (Hughes, 2016). These additional paradigms by Drs. Claretha Hughes and Roosevelt R. Thomas, Jr. are also instrumental resources that educators and practitioners can use to craft constructive diverse and inclusive work settings (Scott, 2012).

Chapter Summary

This chapter introduced several theories, models, and frameworks that can be used to enhance workforce diversity initiatives, policies, and goals as they relate to: (1) respecting and valuing human diversity in work settings; and (2) managing current and emerging workforce diversity developments. This chapter also provided a variety of explanations as to why various workforce diversity practices exist. Moreover, it provided an opportunity to reflect on what additional workforce diversity issues and concerns may need to be addressed. Last, this chapter encouraged you to think critically about how current and emerging workforce diversity trends can be used to advance the practice of workforce diversity.

46 Chaunda L. Scott

Definition of Key Terms

Framework—A framework (or frameworks) offers a general synopsis of interconnected components that links to a certain process that has explicit goals and acts as a “guide” in making revisions or in the re-development of an idea (Business Dictionary, 2013c).

Model—A model (or models) is best understood as being a visual, con- densed, and reader-friendly description of realities in the form of ideas or endeavors in society that serve to offer a meaning by: (1) removing needless factors; (2) creating hypothetical situations to question possible outcomes; and (3) clarifying activities or actions based on earlier explana- tions (Business Dictionary, 2013b).

Theory—A theory (or theories) represents a group of expectations or realities that seeks to offer a credible or practical justification “of cause- and-effect relationships among a group of observed phenomenon”; for example, facts, experiences, occurrences, events, or trends (Business Dic- tionary, 2013a).

Critical-Thinking Application

1 In general, what is the purpose of a theory, model, and framework? 2 In what three ways could the Critical Racism Pedagogy model be useful

in the classroom and the boardroom? 3 In what three ways could the Diversity Intelligence Conceptual Model

be useful in organizations? 4 What are three purposes of Sheared’s (1999) Polyrhythmic Realities

Model? 5 Name five themes that could be discussed at a Diverse Voices Confer-

ence along with the reasons why you selected each theme. 6 Name four strengths of the Multicultural Organization Model? 7 What are three strengths of the Embedded Intergroup Relations The-

ory (EIRT)? 8 What are four strengths of the Model for Creating Diversity?

References

Agars, M. D., & Kottke, J. L. (2004). Models and practice of diversity management: A his- torical review and presentation of a new integration theory. In M. S. Stockdale & F. J. Crosby (Eds.), The psychology and management of workplace diversity (pp. 55–77). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Alderfer, C. E. (1987). An intergroup perspective on group dynamics. In J. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 190–222). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Alderfer, C. G., & Tucker, R. C. (1996). A field experiment for studying race relations embedded in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 43–57.

Allen, R. S., & Montgomery, K. A. (2001). Applying an organizational developmental approach to creating diversity. Organizational Dynamics, 30(2), 149–161.

Suggested Theories, Models, and Frameworks 47

Bernal, D. D. (2002). Critical race theory, Latino critical theory, and critical raced-gen- dered epistemologies: Recognizing students of color as holders and creators of knowl- edge. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 105–126.

Business Dictionary. (2013a). Theory. Retrieved April 6, 2013, from www.businessdic- tionary.com/definition/theory.html

Business Dictionary. (2013b). Model. Retrieved April 6, 2013, from www.businessdic- tionary.com/definition/model.html

Business Dictionary. (2013c). Framework. Retrieved April 6, 2013, from www.business- dictionary.com/definition/framework.html

Byrd, M. (2012). Theorizing leadership of demographically diverse leaders. In M. Paludi (Ed.), Managing diversity in today’s workplace: Strategies for employees and employers (pp. 103–124). Women and Careers in Management series. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger (ABC-CLIO).

Byrd, M., & Scott, C. L. (2010). A framework integrating dialogue on forms of rac- ism within Human Resource Development workforce diversity courses and work- place settings: Implications for HRD. In Proceedings of the 2010 Academy of Human Resource Development Conference (pp. 1315–1336). Knoxville: University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

Cox, T., Jr. (1993). Cultural diversity in organizations: Theory, research, and practice. San Fran- cisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Cox, T., Jr. (2001). Creating the multicultural organization: A strategy for capturing the power of diversity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Critical Theory. (2013). In the free online dictionary.com. Retrieved April 6, 2013, from http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Critical+theory

Dubin, R. (1976). Theory building in applied areas. In M. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial organizational psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Hughes, C. (2016). Diversity intelligence: Integrating diversity intelligence alongside intellectual, emotional and cultural intelligence for leadership and career development. New York, NY: Pal- grave McMillan.

Jones, J. M. (1997). Prejudice and racism (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Kormanik, M. B., & Apperson, K. S. (2002). Diversity dialogues in the workplace: A study

of implementation issues. In T. M. Egan & S. A. Lynham (Eds.), Proceedings of the Academy of Human Resource Development (pp. 19–26). Bowling Green, OH: AHRD.

Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. New York, NY: Harper Row. Lynn, M. (2004). Inserting the race into critical pedagogy: An analysis of race-based epis-

temologies. The Journal of Educational Philosophy and Theory, 37(2), 153–165. Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A com-

prehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Nkomo, S. M., & Cox, T., Jr. (1996). Diverse identities in organizations. In S. R. Clegg, C.

Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 338–356). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Oakland University. (2017). Role and Mission Statement. Retrieved December 29, 2017, from www.oakland.edu/about/mission/

Questia. (n.d.). Critical pedagogy. Retrieved from www.questia.com/library/education/ curriculum-and-instruction/critical-pedagogy

Scott, C. L. (2005). The Diverse Voices Conference: A framework promoting multicultural education. Conference Presentation. National Association of Multicultural Education (NAME) Fifteenth Annual International Conference, Atlanta, GA.

48 Chaunda L. Scott

Scott, C. L. (2011). The Diverse Voices Conference model: An extension of diversity edu- cation beyond the classroom. Conference Presentation/Abstract. Eleventh Annual Lilly Conference on College and University Teaching and Learning, Traverse City, Michi- gan, September 22–25.

Scott, C. L. (2012). Winter semester. Cultural diversity in the workplace course: Human Resource Development 367. Class lecture topic: Workforce diversity. Past, present and future. Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan.

Scott, C. L., Greer, B. M., Willard-Traub, M., & Johnson, R. (2003). The Diverse Voices program, a best practice in higher education: A collaborative approach. Conference Presentation. First Annual Alumni of Color Conference, Harvard Graduate School of Education, Cambridge, MA.

Sheared, V. (1999). Giving voice: Inclusion of African American students’ polyrhythmic realities in adult basic education. In T. C. Guy (Ed.), Providing culturally relevant adult education: A challenge for the twenty-first century (pp. 33–48). New Directions for Adult Education, No. 82. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Shor, I. (1996). When students have power: Negotiating authority in a critical pedagogy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Shorter-Gooden, K. (2013). Culturally competent organization. Library Quarterly: Infor- mation, Community, Policy, 83(3), 207–211.

Solorzano, D., & Yosso, T. (2005). Maintaining social justice hopes within academic reali- ties: A Freirean approach to critical race/LatCrit pedagogy. In Z. Leonardo (Ed.), Criti- cal pedagogy and race (pp. 69–92). London: Wiley–Blackwell.

Stockdale, M. S., & Crosby, F. J. (Eds.) (2004). The psychology and management of workplace diversity. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Thomas, R. R., Jr. (1991). Beyond race and gender: Unleashing the power of your total work force by managing diversity. New York, NY: American Management Association.

Thomas, R. R., Jr. (2006). Building on the promise of diversity: How we can move to the next level in our workplaces, our communities and our society. New York, NY: American Manage- ment Association.

Thomas, R. R., Jr. (2010). World-class diversity management: A strategic approach. San Fran- cisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Ukpokodu, O. N. (2010). How a sustainable campus-wide diversity curriculum fosters academic success. Multicultural Education, 17(2), 27–36.

Wade, C. L. (2002). Racial discrimination and the relationship between the directo- rial duty or care and corporate disclosure. The University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 63, 389–440.

Wagley, C., & Harris, M. (1964). Minorities in the new world. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Chapter Overview

This chapter promotes organizational social justice as a necessary outcome of an organizational culture that practices inclusive diversity principles. In this chapter, the varying perspectives of organizational culture will first be considered. Second, ways that an organization’s culture can convey a mes- sage of exclusion in today’s multi-diverse workplace will be discussed. Third, the affective reactions and consequences of a non-inclusive organizational culture will be examined. Fourth, leadership and management commitment to an inclusive organizational culture will be addressed. Finally, emerging perspectives advocating organizational social justice will be explored.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• recognize the varying perspectives of organizational culture; • explain how the organization’s culture can convey a message of

exclusion; • explain the affective nature of exclusion in the workplace; • explain leadership and management’s role in ensuring a culture that is

inclusive; • identify emerging trends and perspectives in organizational culture.

Organizational culture is shared assumptions, values, and beliefs of mem- bers within an organization (Schein, 1992). Culture is the organization’s customary way of doing things with the philosophies and assumptions underlying these distinct customs (Burack, 1991). An organization’s culture should be a nurturing environment that welcomes all forms of human dif- ference. An organization’s culture is represented in a number of ways: sto- rytelling, ceremonies, artifacts, and so on. The concept of an organization’s

3 Exploring the Relationship between the Organizational Culture and Diversity in the Workforce

Marilyn Y. Byrd

50 Marilyn Y. Byrd

culture has roots in anthropology and sociology. From this viewpoint, cul- ture can be considered as a way of life within a group that is transferred from one generation to another. Within the culture, individuals share basic assumptions that are passed down, using these assumptions to teach new- comers ways to perceive, think, and feel, and the correct way to apply those perceptions in relation to problems of external adaptation and internal inte- gration (Schein, 1992).

Individuals within the culture usually share common cultural characteristics, uniting them in a way that makes it relatively easy to transfer attitudes and beliefs. Applied to the workplace, culture is the way of life of an organization. The cul- ture plays an integral role in individual, group, and overall organizational behav- ior. The organization’s culture establishes the climate of the organization. The climate is determined by the emotions and attitudes by which members interact with each other as well as reacting to and accepting members from the outside.

Culture is also conveyed through behaviors and attitudes and communi- cated through interactions between people. Embedded within the topic of an organization’s culture are perceived notions of difference based on biases and prejudices of individuals within an organization. When individuals act upon their biases and prejudices, a hostile environment may occur. Hostile working environments can contribute to and produce toxic cultures.

Varying Perspectives of Organizational Culture

There are varying perspectives on how organizational culture exists in the workplace. Traditionally, organizational culture has been addressed in terms of normative beliefs, which focus on expected behavior and conduct in organizations (Cooke & Szumal, 1993).

The organizational culture can be understood as being based on three dis- tinct forms of group membership: culture of differentiation, culture of unity, and culture of integration (Spataro, 2005). These dimensions of organiza- tional culture place emphasis on the characteristics that are salient in group membership.

In a culture of differentiation, positive or negative values are placed on salient forms of difference. For example, an individual having a post-grad- uate degree places that person in a positive, preferred state of being differ- ent. A person who has a handicap, such as a speech impediment, is placed in a negative, lesser-preferred state of difference. Therefore, in this type of culture, some people may experience a preferred status and therefore could enjoy greater privilege and respect than those with a lesser-preferred status. Because the performance of those with a lesser-preferred status may be neg- atively affected, managers are challenged to create a culture where negative reactions are reduced or eliminated.

In a culture of unity, the salient feature is based on a common identity. While this type of culture is intended to unite members under a common bond and purpose, it could have the opposite effect in some professions. For

Organizational Culture and Diversity 51

example, the fire department is a profession that White males traditionally dominate. While this trend is slowly changing, the culture of this profession is responding much more slowly.

In a culture of integration, the salient feature is highlighting difference. Businesses and organizations embrace this type of culture when making a business case for diversity. Gaining new perspectives and ideas are thought to add value to the overall mission and success of the organization.

Diversity is any dimension or characteristic by which individuals are per- ceived as different (Spataro, 2005). Individuals are now defining themselves around varying forms of workplace diversity such as physical or mental dis- abilities, marital status, and so on. In addition, organizations are being chal- lenged to recognize not only emerging forms of diversity in the workforce, but individual situations that can place individuals into non-inclusive situa- tions such as physical appearance (beautyism, obesity, etc.). Emerging forms of difference will continue to influence and challenge cultures to change.

Creating an Organization’s Culture

Discrimination, prejudice, and stereotypes refer to unfair social behaviors, attitudes, or beliefs. These types of behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs involve denying certain “individuals or groups of people equality of treatment which they may wish” (Allport, 1954, p. 51). In the workplace, unfair social behav- iors can contribute to a culture of oppression for individuals and diverse groups. A culture of oppression is counter to the idea of a workplace that embraces and celebrates diversity. From this perspective, the organizational culture can be viewed as a system that can alter or deny rites of passage to newcomers based on bias or prejudice against individuals and groups. Moreover, systemic, institutionalized discrimination results from a system that produces oppressive behaviors.

A culture of oppression is maintained through the organizational social culture. An organization’s social culture is represented through social net- working systems, such as the “good ol’ boy network.” The good ol’ boy network is a social system within workplaces that allows biases to linger and endure, and as a result creates a social stratification of exclusion. Hence, the good ol’ boy network is one way in which the culture maintains exclu- sion. The organization’s social culture determines who is accepted and who remains an outsider. This culture is a socialized system of behaviors that grants visibility to some and relegates others to a state of invisibility. Such behaviors can become engrained in the organization’s culture and produce a poisonous environment that makes it difficult for marginalized groups to thrive and perform to their maximum potential.

Organizations with a positive attitude for diversity will ensure that a climate is maintained which welcomes and supports all individuals. As with many organizations that are embracing and celebrating diversity, the primary goal is to emphasize a culture that is embracing and celebrating diversity to make a

52 Marilyn Y. Byrd

case for diversity for business success, using terms such as embracing diversity, celebrating diversity, enhancing diversity, and so on. An organization’s state- ment or commitment to diversity is often representative of the culture. It is a way to gain trust and demonstrate a concern for a socially safe place to work. There is a general sense that diversity has been adequately addressed by organi- zations, given the various forms of legislation that have been passed. However, the point which is being overlooked is that legislation cannot force behaviors to change. Indeed, legislation does address equality; however, it is not reason- able to expect that legislation can change or control attitudes.

Google is representative of a company with a positive organizational social culture. Google’s statement of diversity (2013) listed on the company’s website reflects a culture that is based on inclusion and respect:

We strive to cultivate a wholly inclusive workplace everywhere we operate in the world. We want all Googlers to love coming to work every day, not just for their projects and the great perks, but for the inclusive culture where they can feel free to be themselves and thrive. …

At Google, we are committed to a supportive work environment, where employees have the opportunity to reach their fullest potential. Each Googler is expected to do his or her utmost to create a respect- ful workplace culture that is free of harassment, intimidation, bias and unlawful discrimination of any kind.

(Google, 2013)

Companies like Google that market their cultures not only on the basis of inclusion, but based on one of respect, are demonstrating a culture of inte- gration as described by Spataro (2005). Regardless of one’s difference, these types of cultures demonstrate a responsibility to creating a climate where one can expect to be received into a culture that is respectful and free from hostility.

The Affective Nature of a Non-Inclusive Organizational Culture

Changing the culture means targeting levels of the organization that are influ- ential in moving beyond awareness toward transforming the culture into one that is more open and receptive to the multiple forms of diversity that are emerging in the workplace. Executives and managers are responsible for con- veying the message and operationalizing the practice of inclusion throughout the organization. Human resource training specialists play a critical role by design- ing a curriculum that is aimed at educating and preparing executives and man- agers to create inclusive environments where individuals from diverse groups have the opportunity to thrive and perform at an optimum level.

Organizational Culture and Diversity 53

While commonly recognized forms of diversity in the workforce (race, gender, and age) are still critical areas for organizational culture change, issues stemming from physical appearance (obesity, attractiveness, disabilities, etc.) are also placing individuals in categories of difference that create bias, and as such, are emerging as new areas where the organization’s culture can be unwelcoming and nonreceptive.

An unwelcoming culture toward diverse members can produce adverse psychological and physiological outcomes. Members of diverse groups often react by trying to prove themselves equal or worthy of inclusion. For exam- ple, in response to racism, a coping strategy known as John Henryism has been associated with African Americans who exhibit high levels of perfor- mance, resulting in high levels of stress and causing poor physical and mental health (James, 1994).

In addition, members from diverse work groups who perceive an unwel- coming culture often react toward their work environment. Examples include:

• having physical reactions when entering the workplace; • associating certain individuals with a specific behavior; • feelings of frustration when experiencing the issue, but being una-

ble to articulate it so that it has meaning to someone not having the experience;

• feelings of embarrassment, anguish, and pain; • feelings of rage.

Considering these types of emotional responses, which in turn can impact personal performance, teamwork, and overall organizational well-being, an unwelcoming culture raises concerns for leadership and management.

Implications for Leaders and Managers

Developing an organizational culture that embraces diversity and inclusion requires executives who are willing to set a vision and managers who are willing to accept the responsibility for placing initiatives into action. Cox’s (1993) widely recognized diversity framework places leadership and edu- cation among the top components needed to transform an organization’s culture into one that welcomes diversity. First, leadership in an organization must understand the implications of how all forms of diversity can positively or negatively impact the organization’s culture. Second, leadership must real- ize that education is broader than training, and should support underuti- lized educational tools such as facilitated dialogue, case analyses, and personal coaching to guide the process of changing the culture.

Leaders and managers who are concerned with building a socially just organization will have a two-fold concern in training. People of color or

54 Marilyn Y. Byrd

minorities will have opportunities to bring issues into open dialogue. Whites, or those from a majority or dominant group, will be held accountable for realizing that their position of privilege allows oppression to remain alive and well.

Furthermore, leadership in an organization that is committed to social justice will encourage and support open discussions that relate to issues of power and oppression. Organizations address diversity, but rarely are social justice and conflicts that stem from a diverse workforce discussed under the heading of diversity. Instead, the emphasis of diversity is that the workplace is representative of all types of people and backgrounds. The topic has been generalized to the point where issues stemming from the fact that differences exist become embedded. Action-oriented leadership is willing to advocate a social justice mission into the organization’s culture. Creating community in a work environment where discriminatory attitudes and behaviors are per- vasive involves the difficult task of “negotiating real divisions, of considering boundaries before we go crashing through, and of pondering our differences before we can ever agree on the terms of our sameness” (Williams, 1997, p. 4). Organizational cultures can be permissive and therefore allow hostile behaviors to thrive. Behaviors that thrive slowly become the norm—that’s just the way we do things around here. Furthermore, those who experience a discriminatory workplace culture and seek to bring about change must do so within a structure and culture of inequality that may respond with denial and resistance, thus compounding the effects of systemic discrimina- tion (Agocs, 1997).

Ethical and Just Organizational Cultures

Organizational justice is typically studied according to equity theory: procedural, distributive, and interactional justice (Colquitt, Greenberg, & Zapata-Phelan, 2005; Cropanzano, Rupp, Mohler, & Schminke, 2001). Procedural justice relates to implementing processes in a fair and unbiased way. Distributive refers to the allocation of resources or rewards in a fair and unbiased way. Interactional refers to interacting with and treating people in a fair and unbiased way. However, social justice goes beyond allocation of resources and requires a shift toward organizational social justice.

Organizational social justice is the “ideology that organizations oper- ating through a representing agent seek to achieve a state whereby all indi- viduals feel included, accepted, and respected, and whereby human dignity as well as equality are practiced and upheld” (Byrd, 2012, p. 120). Organiza- tional social justice is not based on perception; rather, this idea is based on how social justice is applied to diversity. Organizational social justice refers to the quest for equality and rights in reaction to the mindset of power and privilege, which can contribute to a non-inclusive culture.

Central to organizational social justice is non-tolerance for behaviors, attitudes, situations, and issues that target any individual in the workplace.

Organizational Culture and Diversity 55

Special emphasis is placed on socially marginalized work groups who are particularly vulnerable and subjected to an unwelcoming organizational culture. Examples of attitudes and behaviors that create a negative impact on diverse individuals or groups include unfriendly gestures, unwilling- ness to communicate, unwillingness to offer information, unwillingness to acknowledge, name calling, slurs, degrading treatment, and the display of suggestive signs and symbols. Focusing on ways that behaviors, attitudes, and assumptions can contribute to a non-inclusive culture is a concern for organizational leaders.

Viewing organizational culture within an ethical and morally just frame- work gives a different perspective on organizational culture. Organizational leaders who demonstrate social responsibility to a diverse workforce will practice ethical and moral values. A diversity philosophy exemplified through mission statements and other published (internally and externally) state- ments should represent ethical and moral values. First, with roots in Kant’s universality of rights, ethics of rights considers the fundamental and basic rights available to all human beings. Second, with roots in the philosophy of Aristotle, ethics of justice asks the moral question, “Does this action show favoritism and bias?” Third, applying the value of virtue, virtue-based ethics considers the personal traits, qualities, and values that cause a person to act in an ethical manner (emphasis on virtues or morality) or an unethical man- ner (emphasis on vices or immoral values). Finally, emerging from a feminist perspective, the ethics of care is grounded in human relations and valuing relationships (Gilligan, 1982/1993). Human relations is a philosophical prin- ciple that establishes a moral duty to respond to social injustice (Byrd, 2017).

These four ethical and moral frameworks are useful for assessing ethical and just organizational cultures. An organizational social culture that is not grounded in ethical frameworks does not align with a culture based on eth- ics and morals and thereby fails to sustain a culture of dignity and respect.

Assessing the Organizational Culture

Despite legislation such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 1991 that prohibits discrimination against protected classes (race, color, national origin, religion, sex, and later amended to include age and disability), adverse behaviors against these groups persist. The fact that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) (2016) continues to successfully bring suits against organizations and businesses that practice non-inclusive and hostile environments based on discrimination under Title VII of 1964 is evi- dence that these types of environment continue to exist in the workforce. The increasing number of complaints from individuals who perceive that an injustice has been enacted conveys a non-inclusive culture and requires a reactive management strategy. Conducting a cultural audit would be one strategy to gain a perspective of the cultural tone.

56 Marilyn Y. Byrd

A cultural audit is a tool for periodically and consistently assessing the tone and attitudes of organizational members toward more inclusive work- force practices and beliefs. Fundamental to a cultural audit is unveiling the values and beliefs of organizational members through surveys, focus groups, and even direct observation (Jung et al., 2009). A cultural audit can also be a proactive strategy. Organizations that are committed to ethical and just workplaces will show a proactive strategy by building cultural audits into workforce strategic planning processes. An ethical and just organizational culture stresses ethical behavior in codes of conduct and other organizational messages.

Twenty-first century organizations should advocate for more socially just environments and seek strategies for transforming organizations into more open and welcoming environments so that all individuals can experience greater job satisfaction and personal well-being.

Chapter Summary

This chapter presented a social perspective of organizational culture. Tra- ditionally, organizational culture has been studied as the beliefs, symbols, artifacts, and basic assumptions of an organization—the personality of the organization. By viewing organizational culture at the individual level, the focus is centered on the stereotypes and social attitudes of employees. Stere- otypes and social attitudes that are directed toward diverse work groups can create a hostile work environment, which compromises an inclusive organi- zational culture. Shifting the focus to the individual level of an organization’s culture highlights the need for organizational social justice. Organizational social justice was introduced in this chapter as an ideology that seeks social change within organizations and institutions where diverse groups coexist.

Definition of Key Terms

Cultural audits—Process of periodically and consistently assessing the tone and attitudes of all organizational members toward more inclusive work- force practices and beliefs.

Culture—The organization’s customary way of doing things and the phi- losophies and assumptions underlying these distinct customs.

Organizational culture—Shared assumptions, values, and beliefs of mem- bers within an organization.

Organizational justice—Concern for fairness and equality within an organization or workplace as practiced by its human resources.

Organizational social culture—Social networking system; an organiza- tion’s social systems gatekeeper; good ol’ boy network.

Organizational social justice—Ideology that organizations operating through a representing agent seek to achieve a state whereby all individuals

Organizational Culture and Diversity 57

feel included, accepted, and respected, and whereby human dignity as well as equality is practiced and upheld.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 Discuss the ethical implications of a non-inclusive organizational culture.

2 Research companies on Fortune’s Best Places to Work list. Provide exam- ples of two organizations that have statements of diversity which convey organizational social justice. Discuss initiatives these organizations use to practice organizational social justice.

3 Interview a manager or someone with leadership authority in a busi- ness or organization for their insight on the meaning of inclusion in the workplace. Ask them to provide specific examples of ways in which their business or organization practices inclusion.

4 Assume your organization has conducted a cultural audit, and the find- ings indicate the need for a culture change that is more supportive of the varying types of diverse work groups. What type of diversity initia- tive would you implement?

Case Study: Leadership and Organizational Culture at the Rosebud Fire Department

The Rosebud Fire Department (RFD) is an all-White organization located in southeast Texas. Rosebud is the most racially and ethni- cally diverse county in this region of the state. The RFD employees, like all city employees, are provided with an employee handbook that explicitly prohibits discrimination in any form, including ridicul- ing, mocking, or belittling any person. Employees are prohibited from making offensive or derogatory comments to any person, either directly or indirectly, based on race, color, sex, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, or national origin, and from creating or contributing to an offensive or intimidating work environment.

When Fire Chief Wright met with firefighter Harper for the pur- pose of Harper’s annual review, the chief digressed into a conver- sation about his church, saying, “I can’t believe those n— have started coming to my church looking for handouts.” This state- ment made firefighter Harper uncomfortable for the remainder of the meeting. A few days later, Chief Wright, along with two of his subordinates, Robb and Peters, were gathered in the break

58 Marilyn Y. Byrd

room. When the morning’s news reported the recent termination of a local community college president, a Black male, for a first- time offense of driving under the influence, the chief commented, “I’ll bet there was more to that story. You never can tell about n—.” Robb and Peters were shocked. Shortly after that incident, Chief Wright entered the office of firefighter R. Lewis to discuss fire inspection codes. Before getting down to business, Wright engaged Lewis in small talk, then suddenly began talking about the free meal program at his church. Lewis was surprised, but also offended, when Wright complained, “It was a good program until the n— started showing up for handouts.” When Wright repeated the racial slur during that same conversation, Lewis felt compelled to issue a complaint to his immediate supervisor, Lieutenant Ter- rell. When Terrell reported Lewis’s complaint to Captain Martin, second-in-command at RFD, Martin had already learned about the incidents involving Harper, Robb, and Peters. The biggest sur- prise came when Martin revealed that the chief had used the “n” word during a conversation with him. However, Martin was not pre- pared to take the matter further. Since an employee had reported a situation of an offensive nature directly to him, Terrell knew he had to approach the chief. When Terrell contacted the chief, the chief indicated that he would not only meet with Lewis, but with Harper, Robb, and Peters (who had not issued formal complaints) and apologize for his behavior. In the subsequent meeting, the chief apologized for his comments, but attempted to justify his comments with, “I guess I just got caught up in fire station off the record kind of talk.” He tried to rationalize his comments by saying he had been meaning to address the issue of offensive language with his staff because he had recently overheard a fireman using this type of language.

Eventually the union became involved and charged Wright with intentionally and repeatedly using racist language during the course of his official work day, and expressing a racist attitude in the pres- ence of subordinates, thereby compromising his ability to effectively command and supervise the RFD as well as represent the commu- nity of Rosebud. Initially, the chief was placed on a 3-day suspension without pay, pending an investigation by the Police and Fire Commis- sion. He was eventually suspended for 3 months without pay after the investigation was completed.

Organizational Culture and Diversity 59

Discussion Questions

1 Research the history and tradition of the fire department profes- sion for insight on the culture of this industry.

2 Given the demographics, is it questionable why the Rosebud Fire Department is still all White?

3 Do you believe that the chief’s racist behavior calls into ques- tion his ability to effectively advocate for hiring minorities, par- ticularly Black men, to the all-White fire department? Why or why not?

4 Due to his racist comments and attitude, comment on Wright’s ability to enforce the city’s antidiscrimination work rules. Do you believe that Wright has lost the respect of his subordinates? Explain your answer.

5 Given that there are employees within RFD who do not share the chief’s racist attitudes, is this indicative that there are tensions within the culture? Explain your answer.

6 Based on his behavior, comment on the chief’s ability to enforce the city’s antidiscrimination policy. Do you believe that the chief compromised the city’s policy against a hostile work environ- ment, given that there were no Blacks or other protected classes of people employed at RFD? Why or why not?

7 Deliberate change in an organization happens from the top down. But what if the problem is at the top? What about the captain’s attitude?

8 Do you believe that the chief received a just or too severe a pun- ishment? Explain your answer.

9 What needs to happen at RFD—diversity training or diversity education? Justify your conclusion.

Legal Perspectives

EEOC vs. Nordstrom, Inc.

In April 2009, Nordstrom settled an EEOC lawsuit alleging that a hos- tile work environment was permitted, despite complaints by Hispanic and Black employees about a department manager who said she “hated Hispanics,” and that they were “lazy” and “ignorant,” and that she didn’t like Blacks, and told one employee, “You’re Black, you stink.” Under the terms of the settlement, Nordstrom had to pay $292,000,

60 Marilyn Y. Byrd

distribute copies of its antidiscrimination policy to its employees, and provide antiharassment training.

EEOC vs. E&D Services, Inc.

In August 2009, a Mississippi-based drilling company agreed to pay $50,000 to settle a Title VII lawsuit alleging that four employees, three White and one Black, experienced a hostile work environment from racial harassment and retaliation while assigned to a remote drilling rig in Texas. The harassment included being subjected to racial taunts and mistreatment from Hispanic employees and supervisors, and having their safety threatened because the supervisors conducted safety meetings in Spanish only and refused to interpret for them in English. After being told that they needed to learn Spanish because they were in South Texas, the employees said that instead of their complaints of discrimination being addressed, they were fired. The company agreed to establish an effective antidiscrimination policy and to provide antidiscrimination training to its employees.

References

Agocs, C. (1997). Institutionalized resistance to organizational change: Denial, inaction and repression. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(9), 917–931.

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Burack, E. (1991). Changing the company culture: The role of human resource develop-

ment. Long Range Planning, 24(1), 88–95. Byrd, M. (2012). Theorizing leadership of demographically diverse leaders. In M. Paludi

(Ed.), Managing diversity in today’s workplace: Strategies for employees and employers (pp. 103–124). Women and Careers in Management series. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger (ABC-CLIO).

Byrd, M. Y. (2017). Does HRD have a moral duty to respond to matters of social injus- tice? Human Resource Development International, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/136788 68.2017.1344419

Colquitt, J., Greenberg, J., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2005). What is organizational justice? A historical overview. In J. Greenberg & J. Colquitt (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice (pp. 3–56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cooke, R. A., & Szumal, J. L. (1993). The impact of group interaction styles on problem- solving effectiveness. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 30, 415–437.

Cox, T., Jr. (1993). Cultural diversity in organizations: Theory, research and practice. San Fran- cisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D. E., Mohler, C. J., & Schminke, M. (2001). Three roads to organizational justice. In J. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resource manage- ment (pp. 1–113). New York: JAI.

Organizational Culture and Diversity 61

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2016). Significant EEOC race/color cases. Retrieved from www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/initiatives/e-race/caselist.cfm

Gilligan, C. (1993). In a different voice (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1982)

Google. (2013). Google diversity and inclusion. Retrieved from www.google.com/diver- sity/culture.html

James, S. A. (1994). John Henryism and the health of African Americans. Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, 18, 163–182.

Jung, T., Scott, T., Davies, H. T., Bower, P., Whalley, D., McNally, R., & Mannion, R. (2009). Instruments for exploring organizational culture: A review of the literature. Public Administration Review, 69(6), 1087–1096.

Schein, E. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Spataro, S. E. (2005). Diversity in context: How organizational culture shapes reactions

to workers with disabilities and others who are demographically different. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 23, 21–38.

Williams, P. J. (1997). Seeing a color-blind future: The paradox of race. New York: Noonday Press.

Part II

Diversity in the Workforce: Current Issues

Chapter Overview

Race is represented under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act as a pro- tected category of diversity in the workforce. However, limited discussion takes places on racism as a lingering social justice issue that persists as an outcome of race diversity in the contemporary workplace. This chapter will offer an historical perspective on race and will introduce sociological theo- retical perspectives for studying racism as a consequence of race diversity in the workforce.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions, you will be able to:

• explain the distinctions between race and ethnicity; • provide sociological theoretical perspectives of race; • provide historical perspectives of racism in the United States; • provide a social justice advocacy for studying racism.

Race is a socially constructed category that denotes differences among peo- ple. Meanings given to socially constructed categories like race are seen as fluid, historical, and situationally contingent, shifting over time (Browne & Misra, 2003; Omi & Winant, 1994). The word “race” has undergone a vari- ety of meanings, but is generally understood to denote a categorical differ- ence that is politically sustained to label and categorize people according to a specific group (Banton, 2000). The term has not only shifted in meaning, but racial meanings are contested both within groups and between them (Zinn & Dill, 1996). These meanings, constructed within the contexts of power, “overlap and occur simultaneously with multiple and various con- sequences upon the lives of the groups and individuals in question” (p. 4). Skin color is the most salient representation of how a person is judged based on race.

4 Race and Diversity in the Workforce

Marilyn Y. Byrd

66 Marilyn Y. Byrd

New ways of explaining human difference have emerged, but histori- cal perspectives continue to influence racial thinking (Banton, 2000). This position is based on the variety of new ways that the word “race” is used, although the historical ones exist simultaneously. Historically, the word has been used to identify humans in terms of descent, biological type, and subspecies.

A racialized way of thinking has become popularized by a socialized application and through administration and political uses that “support old style racial explanations” (Banton, 2000, p. 53). The “conception of race as subspecies is not easily grasped by man … whereas race as type is much simpler and can be easily twisted to deal with conflicting evidence” (p. 58). Older concepts of race were grounded in notions based upon an individual’s descent, and then later linked to Darwin’s controversial theory of evolution. The contemporary concepts of race generally have been that of “race as type,” although this conception was rendered invalid by Darwin’s theory of evolution. Since the conception of race as descent was not rejected, earlier conceptions are still considered legitimate.

Ethnicity is a term that has emerged and in many cases has been used as an interchangeable term for race. The term ethnicity is a more contemporary way to denote different cultures and origins. But the term does not hold the historical implications for other cultures and origins that are associated with individuals of African descent. Another contemporary term being used is people of color. This term is used to designate groups that are non-White, and as such, it maintains a racial divide among groups (Zack, 2005).

However, the Black/White binary has been central to the discussion of race for several reasons. First, a divided country based on a system of slav- ery gave way to a state of physical freedom, but a segregated country still existed. Second, the struggle continued and led to the Civil Rights Move- ment, an historic period in the United States, advocating for social justice by protesting the segregated practices that denied Blacks equal access and equal opportunity. Finally, the early 1960s was a period of civil unrest in the United States and further highlighted the racial divide between Black and White racial groups and brought about a huge movement for civil rights.

Civil rights are enforceable rights or privileges that, if interfered with by another, give rise to an action for injury (Cornell University Law School, 2010). During this period of time in society, the Black/White binary persisted from the lingering effects of slavery and continues to be the major cause of racism.

Sociological Theoretical Perspectives for Studying Race

A number of social science theorists have sought to offer theories that will lend a better understanding of race and ethnicity. Constructionist and struc- tural theories both acknowledge that race and ethnicity are social constructs that shape how people are situated within the larger society. Further, both approaches are concerned with resolving the dilemma of what race and

Race and Diversity in the Workforce 67

Table 4.1 Contrasts between Constructionist and Structural Approaches to Race and Ethnicity

Constructionist Structural

Focus on group characteristics Focus on antagonisms created by group difference

Narrow view of racism Broad view of racism

Focus on culture, ideology, and identity

Focus on power

By-product of economic, political, and social forces

Product of economic, political, and social forces

Groups contribute in the making and creating of their identities

Groups categorized

Static Changing

Free-floating ideology Structural and embedded

Psychological and irrational Systemic and rational

Historicity Contemporary structure

Overt behavior Overt and covert behavior

ethnicity mean, and how society in general perceives these socially con- structed notions. Both approaches recognize group identity and the catego- rization of a group or population of people. Table 4.1 identifies some major differences between structural and constructionist approaches to race and ethnicity (Bonilla-Silva, 1997; Loveman, 1997).

The constructionist perspective has been the prevailing notion for study- ing race and ethnicity in the social sciences. However, we need a deeper understanding of race that explains the system of racism. The structural approaches to race and ethnicity seek to study how power and privilege continue to sustain a racial structure.

According to the constructionist approach, race and ethnicity are catego- ries and specific identities of human beings “trying to solve problems, defend or enhance their positions, justify their actions, establish meanings, achieve understanding, or otherwise negotiate their way through the world in which they live” (Cornell & Hartmann, 1998, p. xviii). Constructionists empha- size ideological and cultural processes for understanding race and ethnicity. Structuralists will say that constructionist approaches have a narrow view of racism. As a result, the constructionist approach does not adequately address the problem of racism, which is deeply embedded within institutionalized practices within society. Structural approaches challenge systems that allow antagonisms stemming from racism to exist—systems that block mobil- ity for marginalized people who encounter a hierarchy in which Whites have political and economic power (Waters, 1999). Structural approaches to

68 Marilyn Y. Byrd

understanding race and ethnicity suggest that power structures are respon- sible for the gaps in economic disparity, unemployment, poverty, and access to resources that sustain life. Thinking of race in terms of structure means that we are acknowledging the privilege of some and thus giving credence to racial hierarchy.

The constructionists believe that racial and ethnic groups are socially con- structed and are by-products of economic, political, or social forces. As those forces change, so do their racial and ethnic products (Cornell & Hartmann, 1998). Structuralists would add that the creation of racism is a by-product of economic, political, and social forces’ actions upon race and ethnicity.

Constructionists believe in a free-floating ideology—that groups contribute to the making and sustaining of their identities. Therefore, constructionists are concerned with how groups form and construct identity, and how people within groups conceptualize themselves and others (Cornell & Hartmann, 1998). Theorists who speak from the constructionist paradigm believe that as certain groups contend with situations that arise within their social arenas, identities are constructed as people try to make sense of their world. Racial categories then “become socially significant to the extent they are used to organize and interpret experience, to form social relations, and to organize individual and collective action” (p. 24). Structuralists would add that as time passes, categories are subject to change, particularly as people struggle to assign other people to those categories. As products of social change, circumstance, human interpretation, and social action, race and ethnicity are not static, but rather are variable, diverse, and contingent upon social arenas such as politics, labor markets, residential space, social institutions, culture, and daily experi- ence (Cornell & Hartmann, 1998). Furthermore, racial categories are used as a foundation for government action and other practices where justification to distinguish people is presumed necessary.

Some constructionists’ approaches to race and ethnicity are grounded in his- torical conceptions that slavery is responsible for an irrational, rigid, and overt form of racism (Bonilla-Silva, 1997). Structuralist approaches will say that rac- ism today is more covert and subtle in its nature due to its embedded position within institutionalized practices that are controlled by Whites. Theorists who are advancing the structural approach to race maintain that racial discrimination is no longer one of inequality, but rather one of racial mistreatment within the structures of society. The inequality that is taking place now occurs behind closed doors. Those who hold the power are making decisions that affect marginalized people. In the United States, that power typically belongs to Whites.

Selected Theories from the Constructionist and Structural Approaches

The constructionist and structural approaches to race and ethnicity repre- sent the worldviews that generally agree upon basic assumptions. However,

Race and Diversity in the Workforce 69

some theorists, while speaking from these paradigms, advance their own interpretations in an effort to render a deeper understanding of how race and ethnicity shape our lives. Table 4.2 represents six selected theories or interpretations to identify how the different worldviews or paradigms rep- resent the study of race.

Racial Formation

The racial formation theory (Omi & Winant, 1994) suggests that, to some extent, we all learn some technique to categorize people whether we are consciously aware of it or not. This satisfies a need to compre- hend, explain, and determine social actions. But to understand how to combat racial discrimination that might occur through social action, and how to dismantle the systems that tolerate and perpetuate racial discrim- ination, we should consider the socio-historical contexts of race. The racial formation theory seeks to address the topics of historicity, group identity, and social comprehensiveness, as well as account for the way in which individuals and groups have to manage conflictual racial meanings in everyday experiences (Winant, 2000)—an emphasis that is lacking in structural approaches. Racial formation is produced as the meaning of race changes through the practice of societal groups. Racial formation theory suggests that in the United States, race and ethnicity should be understood as constructs of social organization that are politically deter- mined by the state.

Racialization

Racialization is a structural perspective for theorizing race and ethnicity (Banton, 1979; Bonilla-Silva, 1997). Advocates find the concept useful in “describing the processes by which racial meanings are attached to particular issues and the manner in which race appears to be a key factor in the ways they are defined and understood” (Murji & Solomos, 2005, p. 3). Opponents of this perspective, however, challenge the multiple uses of racialization—a problem, framework, or process. In other words, if we cannot be clear about

Table 4.2 Selected Constructionist and Structural Theories

Constructionist Structural

Omi & Winant (racial formation) Feagin (systemic racism: theory of oppression)

Murji & Solomos (racialization) Lewis (Whiteness)

Nagel (ethnic identity) Bonilla-Silva (racialized social systems)

70 Marilyn Y. Byrd

what the process of racialization is, we cannot be clear as to whether the term racialization captures the purpose and essence for which it is intended at a given point in time.

Ethnic Identity

Ethnic identity is a constructionist approach that addresses how ethnic groups are “negotiated, defined and produced through social interaction inside and outside ethnic communities” (Nagel, 1994, p. 152). Ethnic iden- tity emphasizes ethnicity and culture without placing emphasis on race. In doing so, the element of historicity is taken away, but the dimension of boundaries is added. Ethnic identity is useful for accommodating the issue of immigration. “Boundaries determine who is a member and who is not and designates which ethnic categories are available for individual identifica- tion at any point in time” (Nagel, 1994, p.154). But if this is the case, then ethnic identity has structural implications as well. Designation of categories becomes a process that is regulated by the state.

Theory of Oppression

The theory of oppression is a structural approach that points out how dis- crimination has been made illegal, yet institutionalized practices such as employment, education, and other practices within the public domain still allow racism (Feagin, 2006). These structures dominate society because “white officials at all levels of the government who rarely take aggressive action to significantly reduce racial discrimination in the U.S.” (p. 24) typi- cally control them.

The theory of oppression challenges constructionists to broaden their per- spective of historicity and see the reality that oppression experienced during slavery lingers on in a more contemporary form of oppression embedded within structural systems. This oppression is being fed by the large-scale wealth-generat- ing resources of White Americans, and through the resources that grant privilege to some while continuing to marginalize others. Furthermore, the theory of oppression departs from the constructionist view in that it seeks to give voice to the “experiences, views, understandings, and interests of those oppressed as well as the experiences, views, and understanding, and interests of their oppressors” (Feagin, 2006, p. 9). Structural systems such as economic, political, educational, media, and public institutions in the United States continue to oppress because these systems decide who has the power and how groups are situated within these systems and institutions.

Study of Whiteness

All people within society are racialized, including Whites; although stud- ies of race and ethnicity do not adequately account for Whiteness, or how Whites are a part of the structure that has created and sustained a racialized

Race and Diversity in the Workforce 71

society. “Understanding the relationship between the daily performance of race and a larger racial structure is key to our understanding of how race works more generally and to how it shapes the lives of whites” (Lewis, 2004, p. 629). While the structure of racial hierarchy is acknowledged in defining race, a racial hierarchy challenges structural and constructionist approaches that characterize race as structural and embedded, yet superficial, arbitrary, and whimsical, shifting with times and circumstances. The literature on race and ethnicity tends to focus on understanding these constructs from the perspectives of the marginalized groups, leaving us with limited insight on the construct of “Whiteness.”

Racialized/Color-Blind Systems

When race emerged as a social construct, a racialized system resulted in the privileging of some groups over others. In the case of U.S. society, Whites assume a privilege over Blacks and other people of color. Whites are the major actors in sustaining a racial social system, because in doing so, they reap the benefits of a racial order; whereas members belonging to subordi- nate groups struggle to challenge and change the racial status quo (Bonilla- Silva, 1997). “The central problem of the various approaches to the study of racial phenomena is their lack of a structural theory of racism” (1997, p. 465). In order to explain the social construction of race, one must first understand the structural notion of race.

A color-blind ideology (Bonilla-Silva, 1997) is another structuralist approach. A color-blind ideology operates on the notion that difference is seen, but is not acknowledged as being different. Critics say that a color- blind ideology (1) operates on the idea of sameness, with Whiteness being the norm; (2) defines experiences and sets standards according to the norm; and (3) results in an avoidance of the topic of racism.

As a result, a color-blind ideology curtails the topic of racism and accu- sations of racial discrimination, acting as a curtain for racists to hide their racial views. Furthermore, this ideology serves as a tool in challenging and attacking legal rights that have been gained by minority groups. Rather than attempting to sell the idea of nonracism, we should adopt the notion of anti- racism (Bonilla-Silva, 1997). Structural theory contends that race should be studied from the viewpoint of racism, and comes close to presenting a coherent framework for studying race and ethnicity (Bonilla-Silva, 1997). While structural theory does not aim to give a universal explanation of race and ethnicity, the intention is to provoke dialogue that should direct theori- zation toward that goal.

Other Perspectives of Race Categories and Frameworks

A biracial categorization or mixed racial parentage (Black or White) is a reality that is not a new topic. In fact, the act of race mixing dates well before pre-Civil War America, when plantation owners and enslaved women

72 Marilyn Y. Byrd

produced offspring of mixed racial categories. The act was acceptable, though the offspring were more often than not unacknowledged. Theorizing this racial perspective as a topic of race is challenging.

Individuals who construct a border identity consider “biracial” as an entirely new racial category that shifts from relying on the one-drop rule for determining race (Rockquemore, Brunsma, & Delgado, 2009). For the many who fall into this category, the experience of biracial people is character- ized by uncertainty and confusion, as they straddle the volatile and shifting racial divide in the United States (Rockquemore & Brunsma, 2002). Most often, an individual will choose either a singular identity in accordance with one birth parent or will choose a border identity that represents a blending of the two. The multiracial experience has been depicted as between-ness (Ahn, 2016). Multiracial and biracial individuals are considered to have little choice about their racial identity, and their lives are significantly impacted by the apparent absence of that choice (Root, 1990).

Originating in legal scholarship, critical race theory (CRT) emerged dur- ing a period of social unrest in the United States, and is now regarded as a theoretical framework for explaining racism in society (Crenshaw, 2002). Central to the conception of critical race theory (CRT) is the premise that systems of oppression, such as racism, have become so embedded as a norm in U.S. society, that its practice is assumed to be natural (Ladson-Bill- ings, 1998). A key feature of critical race theory is the use of stories and nar- ratives to counter the master narrative, and in the process, unveil the unique experiences of marginalized groups (Bernal, 2002; Byrd, 2012). Stories and narratives are powerful for deconstructing the norm and reconstructing the everyday, lived experiences of marginalization and social injustice. Critical race theory uses a social justice framework that is grounded in activism and social change.

Racism in the United States

Racism is a process whereby socialized racist notions become integrated with actions and practices in such a way that these actions and practices become actu- alized and reinforced through routine situations (Essed, 1991). In the workplace, these situations can occur through individual actions or institutional practices. Although there has been progress, racism continues to persist, and for the most part, people of color are perceived as unequal by White America.

Racism is racial prejudice sustained by power, privilege, and resources (Feagin & Sikes, 1994). This prejudice perpetuates racism and is rationalized by the belief that a group’s abilities, values, and culture are attributed to phys- ical features such as skin color. Modern-day racism encompasses the covert as well as overt acts of White bigots, and is “inescapable in the everyday worlds of African Americans. Almost any encounter with Whites, in work- places, schools, neighborhoods, and public places can mean a confrontation

Race and Diversity in the Workforce 73

with racism” (p. 4). Essed (1991) theorized racism as a process that has become routine in ordinary, everyday actions and practices. The term racism is also related to concepts such as discrimination, prejudice, and stereotypes (Dovidio, Brigham, Johnson, & Gaertner, 1996), but it is more encompass- ing than any of these. Dovidio et al. (1996) further stated that the actions of discrimination, prejudice, and stereotypes can also be viewed as unjust social behaviors, attitudes, or beliefs. In its very essence, racism involves not only negative attitudes and beliefs, but also the social power to disadvantage some groups of people, and at the same time it offers advantages to other groups.

Jones (1997) offered the perspective that there are two types of racism at the social level. The first type is individual racism, which relates to the interplay of stereotypes, prejudices, and discrimination that manifest and support unequal treatment and practices between members of diverse groups. The second is institutional racism, which refers to the non-delib- erate handling or acceptance of institutional procedures (e.g., qualifying for a home mortgage, unfair hiring practices, inequitable admissions criteria) that have unjustly limited the opportunities of certain groups of people.

Individual Racism

According to Brigham (1993), individual racism can be expressed both overtly and covertly. Overt racism is intentional and the perpetrator’s racist motives are clearly expressed (Ridley, 2005). On the other hand, covert racism is more subtle or hidden and the perpetrator’s motives are difficult to detect. Many contemporary approaches to individual racism acknowledge the persistence of overt, intentional forms of racism, but also consider the automatic or uncon- scious processes and indirect expressions of bias as represented by covert racism.

In contrast to overt and covert racism, Dovidio and Gaertner (1998) iden- tified aversive racism, which represents a subtle, often unintentional, form of bias. This bias projects itself through harsh racial feelings and beliefs that are developed unconsciously. Dovidio and Gaertner further asserted that, because of these unconscious biases, aversive racism suggests that individuals may often participate in acts of discrimination while maintaining a positive opinion of self.

McConahay (1986) conceptualized a theory of modern racism that provides a tool to measure the dimensions of cognitive racial attitudes. The theory is based on the notion that negative attitudes formed by Whites regarding African Americans are affective and are acquired early in life. Modern racism posits four assumptions. First, people with rac- ist attitudes maintain the position that racism no longer exists. Second, people with racist attitudes believe that minorities use tactics such as affirmative action to gain access to opportunities that would be other- wise unattainable. Third, people with racist attitudes maintain that Blacks are too aggressive in using laws such as affirmative action to their advan- tage. Finally, people with racist attitudes believe that Blacks who utilize

74 Marilyn Y. Byrd

policies such as affirmative action are undeserving. Racism in overt and covert forms can contribute to social policies that form the basis of insti- tutional racism.

Institutional Racism

According to Klinker and Smith (1999), institutional racism reflects the dif- ferential effects of policies, practices, and laws on members of certain racial groups. Historically, institutional racism developed from intentional racism, such as limiting immigration and the voting rights of certain racial groups. Another historical example highlights how the majority group created and justified laws that enabled them to enslave Africans and African Americans and confiscate property from indigenous tribes (Klinker & Smith, 1999). While Fields (1990) suggested that institutional racism is: (1) independent of individual racism, and (2) requires the active support of individuals who have an awareness or intention to discriminate, Feagin and Vera (1995) stated that the concept of institutional racism is not recognized as racially unfair because it is engrained into policies and laws, which suggests that it is mor- ally right. However, what is seen as fair and just can and does vary according to one’s perspective.

Persistence of Racism in the Workplace

According to Bonilla-Silva (2003), avoiding discussions of racism allows individuals to hide their true racial viewpoints, which is another way that the majority viewpoint remains. Avoiding or ignoring the topic of racism suggests that the topic is either too volatile, or that it is not serious enough to engage in conversations about it.

A popular misconception is that post-civil rights laws and legislation have eradicated racism. Post-civil rights laws and legislation mandating equal opportunity have created a color-blind ideology that operates on the notion of sameness (Bonilla-Silva, 2003). However, this notion is a mechanism for avoiding discussions of racism and conceals the individual and institutional levels at which racism is still prevalent. Acknowledging racism is necessary, not only for those subjected to the experience (indi- vidual level), but also for those involved in policymaking practices and procedures (institutional level).

Another misconception is that the election of the first African Ameri- can president in 2008 and his re-election in 2012 is an indicator that racism no longer exists (Reed & Louis, 2009). However, the election of Barack Obama began a stream of unprecedented assaults on the human dignity of the man who was holding the office, in a barrage of public racial hate speech, stereotypical, racist depictions of his image, and blatant disrespect by those who surrounded him in public service. DiversityInc

Race and Diversity in the Workforce 75

(2012) reported that during the 2012 election, the growing popularity of social media helped to spread racial hatred before and after the re- election of President Obama. Because of the multiple modes of social media available, it is likely that stereotypical images pervade the work- place and threaten the goal of an inclusive workplace, to make all people feel welcomed and respected. According to DiversityInc (2012), deroga- tory depictions of the President as a monkey or with exaggerated physi- cal features, along with other demeaning attacks on the President and Michelle Obama, targeted their identity as African Americans rather than targeting their political views or affiliation. Attacking the President of the United States in such a blatant, stereotypical, racist, and disrespectful way casts a shadow on race relations in U.S. society.

Uncovering Racism in Diversity

Generally, companies, businesses, and organizations recognize and acknowledge their commitments and efforts in promoting diversity in the workplace. In fact, diversity initiatives are recognized as one indicator of success for companies appearing in Fortune’s Best Companies to Work For list. Rarely discussed or acknowledged, however, are the issues that emerge from a diverse workforce. The nature of diversity among groups and the perceptions and assumptions about certain racial groups can produce negative attitudes and behaviors. To truly appreciate, value, and embrace diversity requires changes in the negative attitudes and behav- iors that result in the persistence of racism in institutional and organi- zational settings (Thomas, 1991, 2005). Therefore, moving organizations toward a state of valuing and appreciating diversity is counterproductive if acts of racism continue to persist.

Rarely have the effects of race and racism been used to study diversity and the issues that emerge from diversity in the workplace (Bernier & Rocco, 2003). Consequently, diversity within organizations, in terms of race, cannot be leveraged unless there is an understanding of the historical and contemporary causes of racism. Although organizations are making strides to be viewed as diversity-focused, the state of being diverse often places individuals into categories which leaves them open to being labeled, stigmatized, and vulnerable to actions and perceptions based on that cat- egory. Modern acts of racism, such as unwelcoming attitudes, unwillingness or refusal to cooperate, and avoidance or refusal to acknowledge people, have replaced the more blatant and outward displays of racism (Deitch et al., 2003). However, the reappearance of blatant acts like nooses, racial graffiti, and displaying of the Confederate flag challenges the notion that blatant acts of racism are disappearing. These adverse actions and percep- tions are discriminatory, prejudicial, and stereotypical, and can all permeate from racism.

76 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Changing the State of Race in America

Addressing race as a diversity issue has been a foundation for workforce diversity and education researchers and scholars for a number of years. But the problem is not necessarily race itself. Rather, it is the existence of systemic structures, power, and control that benefit some more than others which feeds racism as a social injustice. Jane Elliott, a noted diversity trainer, says:

[W]e are still conditioning people in this country and, indeed, all over the globe to the myth of white superiority. We are constantly being told that we don’t have racism in this country anymore, but most of the people who are saying that are white.

(PBS, 2003, n.p.)

The use of racialized language and categorizing will continue to emphasize a racialized society. Racialized language also feeds the system of racism and allows a state of injustice to persist through political categorization and insti- tutionalized practices.

Realistically speaking, changing large systems that control the public domain from racialized thinking would be a slow and arduous act. Assign- ing people to a “race” has been engrained in U.S. society for years. We are categorized (racialized) immediately from birth, and the birth document becomes an immediate identifier as to who we are. To contest this catego- rization would still remain a government-controlled process, which means that how a person experiences race remains under the power and control of the state. Shifting this power from the state is a matter for social advocacy and perhaps a new social movement.

Chapter Summary

The word race has had various historical meanings. However, the word has emerged in more contemporary terms to categorize individuals according to groups. In doing so, certain groups maintain a marginalized status in society based on group affiliation. Although legislation was passed to protect individu- als based on race as well as other diverse categories, attitudes and behaviors formed from nonacceptance of individuals continue. In the workplace, these attitudes play out in the form of verbal or physical actions that communicate the practice of racism. Leadership within organizations is responsible for ensur- ing socially just organizations whereby all individuals feel safe and welcomed.

Definition of Key Terms

Civil rights—A civil right is an enforceable right or privilege, which if interfered with by another, gives rise to an action for injury.

Race and Diversity in the Workforce 77

Civil Rights Movement—A social justice movement in the United States in the early 1960s advocating equal access and equal opportunity for Black Americans.

Color-blind—Difference is seen, but not acknowledged as being different; attempting to promote a nonracist policy.

Constructionist theory—Explains racial and ethnic groups as socially constructed, based on by-products of economic, political, or social forces. As those forces change, so do the racial and ethnic by-products.

Critical race theory—Explains racism as a pervasive practice that has become engrained as the norm.

Ethnicity—Ethnicity is a more contemporary way to denote different cul- tures and origins, including people of color.

Individual racism—Interplay of stereotypes, prejudices, and discrimina- tion that manifest and support unequal treatment and practices between members of diverse groups.

Institutional racism—Differential effects of policies, practices, and laws on members of certain racial groups; deliberate or non-deliberate han- dling or acceptance of institutional procedures (e.g., qualifying for a home mortgage, unfair hiring practices, inequitable admissions criteria) that have unjustly limited the opportunities of certain groups of people.

People of color—A term used to designate groups that are non-White. Race—Socially constructed category that denotes differences among peo-

ple and is politically sustained to assign people to categories. Racialization—Processes by which racial meanings are attached to par-

ticular issues and the manner in which race appears to be a key factor in the ways they are defined and understood.

Racism—Process whereby socialized racist notions become integrated with actions and practices in such a way that these actions and practices become actualized and reinforced through routine situations.

Structural theory—Explains racism as a by-product of economic, political, and social forces’ actions upon race and ethnicity.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 Discuss how the historical development of racial groups contributes to sustaining racism in the United States.

2 Compare and contrast the constructionist and structural theories of race.

3 Discuss ways that institutional racism could exist in the workforce. Give specific examples.

4 Discuss ways that individual racism could exist in the workforce. Give specific examples.

78 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Legal Perspectives

In June 2013, allegations of systemic racism were filed against Paula Deen, a world-renowned chef, for using the “n” word. Deen’s employ- ees also reported to the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, a social change organization, that Blacks were paid disproportionately from Whites, and received fewer opportunities for advancement.

In September 2012, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commis- sion (EEOC) obtained a settlement of $630,000 filed against a Cali- fornia trucking firm and its successor on behalf of African American, Latino, and East Indian workers. The workers alleged discrimination on the basis of race, national origin, and religion. In the original com- plaint, management and employees were alleged to have subjected drivers to racial slurs, such as using the “n” word when referring to Black drivers, calling East Indian drivers “Taliban” or “camel driv- ers,” and using the word “spic” when referring to a Latino manager. White workers were also alleged to have been given more favorable job assignments than non-Whites.

In May 2008, the EEOC obtained a settlement of $1.65 million in a racial harassment case filed a class action suit against a general con- tractor and its subsidiaries on behalf of African American employees who were subjected to egregious racial harassment at a construction site in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. The harassment included a life-size noose made of heavy rope hung from a beam in a class member’s work area for at least 10 days before it was removed; the regular use of the “n” word; and racially offensive comments made to Black indi- viduals, including, “I think everybody should own one,” “Black people are no good and you can’t trust them,” and “Black people can’t read or write.” Additionally, racist graffiti was written in portable toilets, with terms and phrases such as “coon,” “if u not white u not right,” “white power,” “KKK,” and “I love the Ku Klux Klan.” Additional remedies were injunctive relief enjoining each defendant from engag- ing in racial harassment or retaliation, antidiscrimination training, the posting of a notice about the settlement, and reporting complaints of racial harassment to the EEOC for monitoring.

Source: www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/initiatives/e-race/caselist.cfm

References

Ahn, J. H. (2016). Mixed race: From pathology to celebration. In C. P. Campbell (Ed.),

The Routledge companion to media and race (pp. 250–258). New York: Routledge.

Banton, M. (1979). Analytical and folk concepts of race and ethnicity. Ethnic & Racial

Studies, 2(2), 127–138.

Race and Diversity in the Workforce 79

Banton, M. (2000). The idiom of race: A critique of presentation. In L. Back & J. Solomos (Eds.), Theories of race and racism (pp. 53–63). London: Routledge.

Bernal, D. (2002). Critical race theory, Latino critical theory, and critical raced-gendered epistemologies: Recognizing students of color as holders and creators of knowledge. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 105–126.

Bernier, J. D., & Rocco, T. S. (2003). Working in the margins of Critical Race The- ory and HRD. In Proceedings of the 2003 Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education (pp. 13–18). Columbus: Ohio State University.

Bonilla-Silva, E. (1997). Rethinking racism. American Sociological Review, 62, 465–479. Bonilla-Silva, E. (2003). Racism without racists: Color blind racism and the persistence of racial

inequality in the United States. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. Brigham, J. C. (1993). College students’ racial attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,

23, 1933–1967. Browne, I., & Misra, J. (2003). The intersection of gender and race in the labor market.

Annual Review of Sociology, 29(1), 487–513. Byrd, M. (2012). Critical race theory: A framework for examining social identity diversity

of Black women in positions of leadership. In C. Scott & M. Byrd (Eds.), Handbook of research on workforce diversity in a global society: Technologies and concepts (pp. 426–439), Hershey, PA: IGI.

Cornell, S. E., & Hartmann, D. (1998). Ethnicity and race: Making identities in a changing world. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

Cornell University Law School. (2010). Civil rights. Retrieved from http://topics.law. cornell.edu/wex/Civil_rights

Crenshaw, K. W. (2002). The first decade: Critical reflections or a foot in the closing door. UCLA Law Review, 49(5), 1343–1373.

Deitch, E. A., Barsky, A., Butz, R. M., Chan, S., Brief, A. P., & Bradley, J. C. (2003). Sub- tle yet significant: The existence and impact of everyday racial discrimination in the workplace. Human Relations, 56(11), 1299–1324.

DiversityInc. (2012). Racist Obama Facebook pages & your office: What do you need to know? Retrieved June 26, 2013, from www.diversityinc.com/diversity-management/ racist-obama-facebook-pages-your-office-what-do-you-need-to-know/

Dovidio, J. F., Brigham, J. C., Johnson, B. T., & Gaertner, S. L. (1996). Stereotyp- ing, prejudice, and discrimination: Another look. In C. N. Macrae, C. Stangor, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Foundations of stereotypes and stereotyping (pp. 276–319). New York, NY: Guilford.

Dovidio, J. E., & Gaertner, S. L. (1998). On the nature of contemporary prejudice: The causes, consequences, and challenges of aversive racism. In J. Eberhardt & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), Con- fronting racism: The problem and the response (pp. 3–32). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Essed, P. (1991). Understanding everyday racism: An interdisciplinary theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Feagin, J. (2006). Systemic racism: A theory of oppression. London: Routledge. Feagin, J. R., & Sikes, M. P. (1994). Living with racism: The Black middle-class experience.

Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Feagin, J. R., & Vera, H. (1995). White racism. New York: Routledge. Fields, B. (1990). Slavery, race and ideology in the United States of America. New Left

Review, 1(181), 95–118. Jones, J. M. (1997). Prejudice and racism (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Klinker, P. A., & Smith, R. M. (1999). The unsteady march: The rise and decline of American

commitments to racial equality. New York: Free Press.

80 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in a nice field like education? Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 7–24. doi:10.1080/095183998236863

Lewis, A. (2004). What group? Studying whites and whiteness in the era of color blind- ness. Sociological Theory, (22)4, 623–646.

Loveman, M. (1997). Is race essential? A comment on Bonilla-Silva. American Sociological Review, 64(6), 891–898.

McConahay, J. B. (1986). Modern racism and ambivalence, and the modern racism scale. In J. E. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 91–125). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Murji, K., & Solomos, J. (Eds.) (2005). Racialization: Studies in theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nagel, J. (1994). Constructing ethnicity: Creating and recreating ethnic identity and cul- ture. Social Problems, 41(1), 152–176.

Omi, M., & Winant, H. (1994). Racial formation in the United States: From the 1960s to the 1990s. London: Routledge.

PBS (2003). An unfinished crusade: An interview with Jane Elliott. Frontline newsletter. Retrieved from www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/divided/etc/crusade.html

Reed, W. L., & Louis, B. M. (2009). No more excuses: Problematic responses to Barack Obama’s election. Journal of Africana Studies, 13(2), 97–109. doi:10.1007/ s12111-009-9088-3

Ridley, C. R. (2005). Overcoming unintentional racism in counseling and therapy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Rockquemore, K. A., & Brunsma, D. L. (2002). Socially embedded identities: Theories, typologies, and processes of racial identity among Black/White biracials. The Sociologi- cal Quarterly, 43(3), 335–356.

Rockquemore, K. A., Brunsma, D. L., & Delgado, D. J. (2009). Racing to theory or retheorizing race? Understanding the struggle to build a multiracial identity theory. Journal of Social Issues, 65(1), 13–34.

Root, M. P. (1990). Resolving “other” status: Identity development of biracial individuals. Women & Therapy, 9(1–2), 185–205.

Thomas, R. R., Jr. (1991). Beyond race and gender. New York: AMACOM. Thomas, R. R., Jr. (2005). Building on the promise of diversity: How we can move to the next

level in our workplaces, our communities, and our society. New York: AMACOM. Waters, M. C. (1999). Explaining the comfort factor: West Indian Immigrants confront

American race relations. In M. Lamont (Ed.), Cultural territories of race: Black and White boundaries (pp. 63–96). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Winant, H. (2000). The theoretical status of the concept of race. In L. Back & J. Solomos (Eds.), Theories of race and racism (pp. 181–190). London: Routledge.

Zack, N. (2005). Thinking about race. Florence, KY: Wadsworth Publishing, Cengage Learning. Zinn, M. B., & Dill, B. T. (1996). Theorizing difference from multiracial feminism. Femi-

nist Studies, 22(2), 321–331.

Chapter Overview

In the 21st century, gender issues are becoming more prominent as women increasingly enter the workforce. This demographic shift has attracted the interest of corporate and government sectors, prompting policy considera- tions and implications regarding these new workers (Powell & Greenhaus, 2010). Like race and ethnicity, gender is pivotal to initiatives seeking to recognize and embrace diversity under the auspices of globalization and the need for marketplace innovation (Kurowski, 2002; Soni, 2000; Wilson, 2014). Dolan (2004) notes that a diverse public sector is important for sym- bolic reasons and should reflect a pluralistic nation. As such, the public will be more responsive to bureaucratic decisions when the workforce “looks like America” (Dolan, 2004).

Women are now an integral part of the diverse workforce, not only sup- plementing family income, but also pursuing careers in formerly predomi- nantly male professions. Men are also exploring new work-related options and rethinking conventional gender-role stereotypes. Thus, some gender issues that primarily mattered to women are now concerns of men as well (DeLaat, 2007). While the increased presence of women in the professional and business world suggests that the struggle for gender equality is over, women and men continue to confront gender inequality due to persistent gender bias in areas including advancement, compensation, benefits, and family obligations (Meyerson & Fletcher, 2000; Reece & Brandt, 2008).

Gender-related issues in the workforce attract considerable attention from researchers and practitioners in an effort to understand the complex issues impacting working women and men. Much of the research literature on the subject of gender focuses on issues related to women (Stewart, Bing, Gruys, & Helford, 2007).

5 Gender and Diversity in the Workforce

Brenda Lloyd-Jones, Lisa Bass, and Gaëtane Jean-Marie

82 Brenda Lloyd-Jones, Lisa Bass, and Gaëtane Jean-Marie

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• apply a social role framework to conceptualize gender and diversity in the workforce;

• chronicle a historical overview of the role of gender and diversity in the earliest periods of the U.S. workforce;

• explain how gender discrimination in the workplace occurs; • describe the myth of equality and distinguish the glass ceiling from the

glass escalator; • understand contemporary issues facing women and men in the work-

place and the implications for policy and practice.

Conceptualizing Gender and Diversity in the Workforce: A Social Role Perspective

In the scholarship on diversity and inequality within organizations, gender issues (e.g., sex differences and similarities, division of labor, stereotypes, dis- crimination, and wage gap inequality) merit considerable attention in framing discussions on diversity in the workforce. Women and men in the workforce confront a number of gender-related issues that manifest themselves in tacit or expressed practices and are steeped in traditional beliefs and values.

Whereas the study of diversity in the workforce draws from sociol- ogy and psychology, it has primarily been examined in the management literature (DiTomaso, Post, & Parks-Yancy, 2007). Similarly, the study of gender draws on psychology, including, but not limited to, social role the- ory, providing a linkage between gender and diversity in the workforce. Social role theory seeks to explain the cause of differences and similarities in social behavior (Eagly, 1987; Eagly, Wood, & Diekman, 2000). Based on meta-analytic methods to aggregate differences between women and men, research suggests that they behave similarly more than 98% of the time (Eagly, 1987; Eagly et al., 2000). However, when differences occur, research also suggests that these differences become stereotypes between the sexes. Furthermore, “these differences, although small, are important because they may emerge more strongly under some conditions and less strongly under others” (Vogel, Wester, Heesacker, & Madon, 2003, p. 519). The body of literature underscores the perspective that the differences between men and women reinforce gender stereotypes in the workplace, benefitting men as women gain more access to opportunities that were previously denied to them.

In considering the experiences of both women and men in the work- force, it is important to distinguish between the terms sex and gender. Sex indicates the binary categories of female and male (Powell & Greenhaus,

Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 83

2010, p. 2). Gender refers to the social construction of differences between women and men, and the social attributes and opportunities associated with being female and male (Gender Guidelines for Mine Action Pro- grammes, 2010; Marini, 1990). From a Western perspective, gender is rooted in societal beliefs that females and males are naturally distinct and more or less opposed social beings (Amott & Matthaei, 2007). Central to the distinction between sex and gender are gender roles, which are traditional beliefs about what functions are appropriate for women and men (Perrone, Wright, & Jackson, 2009; Powell & Greenhaus, 2010), and gender stereotypes, which are deeply embedded assumptions and beliefs about the gender attributes and differences of individuals and/or groups (Fiske-Rusciano & Cyrus, 2005). Hence, gender, race, and class historically constitute fundamental categories that shape the American workforce as basic conduits for social inequalities between women and men (Dovidio, Kawakami, & Gaertner, 2002; Portes & Rumbaut, 1996). Through the development of capitalism, for instance, men’s work included activities such as hunting, farming, and other forms of rigorous manual labor, while women spent much of their time occupied with domestic work such as cooking, cleaning, and making or mending clothes for the family (Lewis, 1999). These role distinctions between women and men existed from the earliest times of U.S. history.

Historical Overview of Gender and Diversity in the Workforce

During the pre-industrialization era, the diversity of the American work- force included African slaves, immigrant workers, and convicts who were primarily men. These groups were the cornerstone of the agricultural labor market. The influence of sex and gender roles and stereotypes in the work- force impacted women’s participation in the agricultural labor market. As the United States became industrialized, the need for labor increased, and the market consisted not only of immigrants, but also rural Americans and very young women (Fullerton, 1993; Johnston & Packer, 1987; Kurowski, 2002). Management theorists, however, discounted the diversity of the work- force in the earlier periods and treated it as inconsequential, assuming that a homogeneous audience understood its role tacitly (Kurowski, 2002, p. 185). Several scholars argue that diversity in the workforce gained prominence because of the social, political, and economic changes that were occurring in the labor force (e.g., DiTomaso et al., 2007; Friedman & DiTomaso, 1996; Johnston & Packer, 1987).

The gradual presence of women in the diverse workforce, beginning as early as the 1900s, reveals that women desired gender equality—a social order in which women and men would share the same opportunities and the same constraints concerning full participation in both the economic and the domestic realms (Bailyn, 2006). In 1909, the first significant strike by working women, called The Uprising of the 20,000 (see Figure 5.1 and Figure 5.2),

Figure 5.1 The Uprising of the 20,000 Slogan: “We’d Rather Starve Quick than Starve Slow.”

Source: Library of Congress Print and Photographs Online Catalog.

Figure 5.2 The uprising of the 20,000, international ladies garment workers union

Source: Library of Congress Print and Photographs Online Catalog.

Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 85

was conducted by shirt-waist makers in New York who protested against low wages and long working hours (Goodman, 1990).

Beginning some 30 years later, from 1940 to 1960, the number of work- ing women and the proportion of working wives doubled. During World War II, large numbers of women entered the workforce, with Rosie the Riveter (see Figure 5.3) becoming a national symbol (Goodman, 1990). The earlier attempts to ignore diversity in the workforce in the management literature could not prevail, given the social transformation occurring in society. Although women workers were met with resistance, caution, and struggle, the workforce progressively began to reflect all people of diverse ethnicity and race.

The notion of diversity in the workforce gained momentum in the 1960s during the Civil Rights Movement as more African Americans entered the workforce (Kurowski, 2002; Soni, 2000). The surge of African American workers meant that their increased presence and visibility could no longer be overlooked, and there was a need to study and understand the experi- ences and attitudes of culturally diverse workers (e.g., Ford, 1985; Fullerton, 1993). In the 1980s, the report Workforce 2000 concluded that by the year 2000, “non-whites” would constitute 15% of the workforce as compared to 11% in 1970 (Johnston & Packer, 1987; Kurowski, 2002). According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, non-Whites constituted 19% of the U.S. work- force in 2011 (Solis & Galvin, 2012).

It was not, however, until the late 1980s that diversity models emerged to respond to changing workplace needs (Soni, 2000). In fact, diversity mod- els act as interventions and are a proactive approach to fully and equitably utilizing, integrating, and rewarding workers of different racial/ethnic and gender backgrounds (Cox, 1993; Loden & Rosener, 1991; Sims & Dennehy, 1993; Soni, 2000). According to Soni (2000, p. 395), “American workplaces appear to be more receptive to diversity in the workforce as they enter the 21st century, though its merits are being debated everywhere.” Diversifying the workforce is an effort to address inequities between women and men; however, women overwhelmingly continue to face discrimination in the workplace.

Gender Discrimination in the Workplace

Sipe, Johnson, and Fisher (2009) define gender discrimination as “gen- dered-based behaviors, policies, and actions that adversely affect a person’s work by leading to unequal treatment or the creation of an intimidating environment because of one’s gender” (p. 342). Gender discrimination is also referred to as sexism, and “occurs when employers make decisions such as selection, evaluation, promotion, or reward allocation on the basis of an individual’s gender” (Heckman, 1998; Powell & Greenhaus, 2010; Sipe et al., 2009, p. 342). Prior to the enactment of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, there was no legislation that prohibited gender discrimination. The

Fi gu

re 5

.3 R

os ie

t he

R iv

et er

: A m

er ic

an W

om en

W or

ki ng

d ur

in g

W or

ld W

ar I

I

So ur

ce :

Li br

ar y

of C

on gr

es s

Pr in

t an

d Ph

ot og

ra ph

s O

nl in

e C

at al

og .

Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 87

U.S. government enacted both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Pay Act of 1963 to eradicate deeply entrenched patterns of discrimination in employment because of race, religion, sex, or national origin. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 amended the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for the protection of pregnant females in the workforce.

Men confront gender issues (e.g., gender stereotypes and gender discrimi- nation) in the workplace; however, research indicates that women face bar- riers far more often than do men (DeLaat, 2007). In a review of empirical studies, Ngo, Foley, Wong, and Loi (2003) identified four indicators of gen- der discrimination in the workplace: (a) women lag behind men in salary and salary advancement; (b) women’s rewards and work conditions (i.e., pay, autonomy, authority) are commonly less favorable than men’s; (c) women tend to work in dead-end jobs, resulting in lack of advancement; and (d) women are less likely than are men to use authority in the workplace (as cited in Sipe et al., 2009, p. 342). Gender discrimination can occur in various settings, but it happens much of the time in employment (e.g., gender wage gap and occupational sex segregation) (Ngo et al., 2003).

The gender wage gap is defined as the difference in earnings received by women and men for performing similar duties or tasks (Peterson & Mor- gan, 1995; Weichselbaumer & Winter-Ebmer, 2005). Historically, the pay gap between female and male workers was distinguished by level of educa- tion and physical prowess, which earned men more income than women (Fry, 2009). Williams, Paluck, and Spencer-Rodgers (2010) attribute this early perspective, which is prevalent even today, to the stereotypical view of men as higher-wage earners than women. Men, in the early periods of American history, acquired more education than women, and their physi- cal strength was viewed as superior (Fry, 2009; Peterson & Morgan, 1995; Weichselbaumer & Winter-Ebmer, 2005).

In addressing the wage gap disparities, in 1963, Congress passed the Equal Pay Act to bridge the gender wage gap between women and men ( Gibelman, 2003; Weichselbaumer & Winter-Ebmer, 2005). Additionally, the educa- tional attainment of women beyond common schooling (i.e., K–12 level) has caused a realignment of educational qualifications between women and men. Women now attend college at rates surpassing that of men (Fry, 2009; Peterson & Morgan, 1995; Weichselbaumer & Winter-Ebmer, 2005). The ratio of men attending college in October 2008 was 37%, while women’s attendance was 42.5% during that same period (Fry, 2009). Women today have more access to higher education, which increases their opportunities for earning a higher income.

Although significant strides toward closing the gender wage gap have been achieved, pay inequality persists (Blau & Kahn, 2007) (see Figure 5.4).

Several factors account for the pay differences between the sexes. First, the number of women in lucrative, upper-level positions within organiza- tions is few, and women tend to be concentrated in lower-echelon posi- tions that have limited opportunities for upward mobility (Alkadry &

88 Brenda Lloyd-Jones, Lisa Bass, and Gaëtane Jean-Marie

Tower, 2006). Similar gaps occur in lower-end wage and salary jobs. In a U.S. Census Report (2017), women who worked hourly had median hourly earnings of $9.89, while men earned $11.63. Men earned $13.46 per hour, while women earned $10.12 per hour. Gaps in earnings between race and gender persist in contemporary statistics and in current analysis. Second, women’s average salaries are only a fraction of what is earned by men at all levels (Bayard, Hellerstein, Neumark, & Troske, 2003). The Bureau of Labor Statistics (2017) reports that in the third quarter of 2017, the median weekly earnings of women was $767, or 81.9% of the $937 median for men.

Finally, the side effects of supply and demand factors further drive salary differentials between men and women (Blau & Kahn, 2007). According to Blau and Kahn, an increase in the demand for jobs that require the skills in which men have more experience than women increases wage inequality.

A Presidential Proclamation (see Figure 5.5) by President Barack Obama declared National Equal Pay Day, garnering support for gender wage equality.

Occupational sex segregation is also associated with perpetuating the gender wage gap and refers to the concentrating of women and men into particular occupations (Mora & Ruiz-Castillo, 2004). For example, women tend to work in certain occupations, firms, and industries with other women more often than with men. Traditionally, organizations are based on norms and beliefs that are more frequently accommodating and adhered to by men than by women (van Vianen & Fischer, 2002). Often,

859 767

965 791 744 658

1147

902 698 597

M en

, 1 6

ye ar

s +

W om

en , 1

6 ye

ar s +

W hi

te m

en

W hi

te w

om en

Bl ac

k or

A fr

ic an

Am er

ic an

M en

Bl ac

k or

A fr

ic an

Am er

ic an

W om

en

As ia

n M

en

As ia

n W

om en

Hi sp

an ic

o r L

a� no

M en

Hi sp

an ic

o r L

a� no

W om

en

2017 Median Weekly Earnings of Full-�me Wage and Salary Workers, 3rd Quarter

Figure 5.4 Despite New Laws, Gender Salary Gap Persists

Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 89

women are excluded from male occupations because of men’s social closure around these jobs (Levine, 2009; Tomaskovic-Devey & Skaggs, 1999). The good ol’ boys network, as an example of social closure, hinders women’s access and entry to prominent positions occupied by men. Coupled with the male-dominated organizational culture is the leisurely progression of women in senior-level jobs. In 2016, women held 51.5% of manage- ment, professional, and related positions, but only 5.2% of CEO positions at Standard and Poor’s 500 companies in the United States (Catalyst Inc., 2017). The underrepresentation of women in senior-level positions is fur- ther evident in the law profession, where women make up 46.7% of law students, but only 34.4% of active lawyers and 18.7% of the law-firm part- ners (Catalyst Inc., 2017). Occupations like high technology, engineering,

The White House Office of the Press Secretary

Presidential Proclamation -- National Equal Pay Day April 20, 2010

A PROCLAMATION Throughout our Nation's history, extraordinary women have broken barriers to achieve their dreams and

blazed trails so their daughters would not face similar obstacles. Despite decades of progress, pay inequity still hinders women and their families across our country. National Equal Pay Day symbolizes the day when an average American woman's earnings finally match what an average American man earned in the past year. Today, we renew our commitment to end wage discrimination and celebrate the strength and vibrancy women add to our economy.

Our Nation's workforce includes more women than ever before. In households across the country, many women are the sole breadwinner, or share this role equally with their partner. However, wage discrimination still exists. Nearly half of all working Americans are women, yet they earn only about 80 cents for every dollar men earn. This gap increases among minority women and those with disabilities.

Pay inequity is not just an issue for women; American families, communities, and our entire economy suffer as a result of this disparity. We are still recovering from our economic crisis, and many hardworking Americans are still feeling its effects. Too many families are struggling to pay their bills or put food on the table, and this challenge should not be exacerbated by discrimination. I was proud that the first bill I signed into law, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act, helps women achieve wage fairness. This law brings us closer to ending pay disparities based on gender, age, race, ethnicity, religion, or disability by allowing more individuals to challenge inequality.

To further highlight the challenges women face and to provide a coordinated Federal response, I established the White House Council on Women and Girls. My Administration also created a National Equal Pay Enforcement Task Force to bolster enforcement of pay discrimination laws, making sure women get equal pay for an equal day's work. And, because the importance of empowering women extends beyond our borders, my Administration created the first Office for Global Women's Issues at the Department of State.

We are all responsible for ensuring every American is treated equally. From reshaping attitudes to developing more comprehensive community-wide efforts, we are taking steps to eliminate the barriers women face in the workforce. Today, let us reaffirm our pledge to erase this injustice, bring our Nation closer to the liberty promised by our founding documents, and give our daughters and granddaughters the gift of true equality.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim April 20, 2010, as National Equal Pay Day. I call upon all Americans to acknowledge the injustice of wage discrimination and join my Administration's efforts to achieve equal pay for equal work.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twentieth day of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand ten, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fourth.

BARACK OBAMA

Figure 5.5 Presidential Proclamation—National Equal Pay Day

Source: www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/DCPD-201000285/pdf/DCPD-201000285.pdf

90 Brenda Lloyd-Jones, Lisa Bass, and Gaëtane Jean-Marie

and the natural sciences show promise as future career fields for women as more women begin to pursue educational opportunities in these high- paying, male- dominated occupations (Heathfield, 2016). According to a U.S. Census report in 2017, 43.9% of social science scientists were women, which is the highest percentage of women among all computer, engineer- ing, and science occupations. Projections by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (2005) indicated that by 2014, more than 50% of all U.S. workers would be women. This increase has the potential to pro- vide a tipping point that will positively transform organizations to level the playing field for women (Kalev, 2009).

The Myth of Equality: Glass Ceiling versus Glass Escalator

In further exploration of occupational sex segregation, an examination of the “glass ceiling” and “glass escalator” effects provides further understanding of the prevailing inequalities between women and men in the workforce. In particular, women’s and men’s career opportunities in sex-segregated occu- pational contexts continue to perpetuate the “glass ceiling” effect, while men benefit from the “glass escalator” effect.

The term glass ceiling symbolizes barriers that are based on attitudinal or organizational bias, preventing qualified women from advancing higher in their organizations (Danziger & Eden, 2007; Powell, 1999; U.S. Depart- ment of Labor, 1991). Danziger and Eden (2007) posit that “the glass-ceiling barrier sustains and reproduces occupational inequality between the sexes, even when individuals possess similar education, skills, and competence lev- els” (p. 130). Schilt’s (2006) synthesis of the scholarly literature concerning the pervasiveness of the glass ceiling depicts the disparities between women and men in white- and blue-collar workplaces, in which women continue to trail behind in opportunities and advancement. In further support of the glass-ceiling effect, Davies-Netzley (1998) and Kalev (2009) contend that, in comparison to men, women continue to cluster near the bottom of organi- zational and professional hierarchies, receive lower wages, and have limited advancement opportunity in the workforce.

With the proliferation of women in the workforce in recent decades, women increasingly have acquired managerial and professional occupations in various sectors (England, 2010). In 1999, Hewlett-Packard appointed Cara Carleton Fiorina as CEO, the first female chief executive officer of a Fortune 500 company. Heralding the dismantling of the glass ceiling, Fiorina claimed that “women face no limits whatsoever. There is not a glass ceiling” (Meyer, 1999, p. 56). In the same year, Catalyst Inc. (1999), in a report on the experiences of women of color in corporate America, underscored the per- sistence of the glass ceiling and concluded that women of color suffer from greater underrepresentation than do majority-group women. While women like Fiorina have ascended to executive-level positions, they have “cracked,” but not shattered the glass ceiling.

Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 91

Although a woman may hold a managerial and/or professional position, which “reflects a twenty-five year pattern of gain in education and job sta- tus,” women in general continue to be underrepresented in high-ranking jobs (Reece & Brandt, 2008, p. 385). While executive-level positions are visible to women in the workplace, the glass ceiling phenomenon blocks their advance- ment and promotion. Further, women working in male-dominated fields such as business, medicine, law enforcement, and engineering face unfavorable treat- ment and impediments with regard to organizational career mobility (Hultin, 2003). Attitudinal and organizational biases that persist, whether overtly or covertly, have economic consequences, both in lost productivity and turno- ver costs (Ragins, 1998). Women who face barriers in terms of advancement often leave, to work in another organization or start their own business. While acknowledging the remarkable progress made by women in the workforce, Meyerson and Fletcher (2000) also criticize the discouragingly slow pace of women’s advancement to top-level positions in which “many women [are] jumping off, becoming frustrated, and disillusioned with the business world” (p. 127). Consequently, the maladaptive nature of organizations is inclusive of women, but remains more accommodating to men (Williams, 2009).

Unlike women who face the glass ceiling in the workforce, men ride the “glass escalator” to ascend the hierarchy specifically within female- dominated organizations. The term glass escalator, coined by the soci- ologist Christine Williams (1992, 1995) refers to the promotion of men over women into management in female-dominated occupations such as nursing, social work, elementary school teaching, and librarianship (Hultin, 2003; Shen-Miller & Smiler, 2015; Williams, 1992, 1995, 2013). Williams (1992) contends that throughout the 20th century, these fields have been identified as women’s work. According to Hultin (2003, p. 31), “men in these positions are able to ride a ‘glass escalator’ up the internal career ladders and at a speed that their female counterparts can hardly enjoy.” In female-dominated lines of work, men escape the negative consequences of tokenism and are treated advantageously by employers, employees, and coworkers (Williams, 1992). The cultural reproduction of men’s advantages in the workforce is

not a function of simply one process but rather a complex interplay between many factors such as gender differences in workplace perfor- mance evaluation, gendered beliefs about men’s and women’s skills and abilities, and differences between family and child care obligations of women and men workers.

(Schilt, 2006, p. 468)

While women are disadvantaged in male-dominated workplaces, men bene- fit from their status in female-dominated fields. In particular, the pay structure of men in female-dominated professions favors men (Budig, 2002). Cognard- Black (2004) asserts that, “gender as a major structural stratification mechanism

92 Brenda Lloyd-Jones, Lisa Bass, and Gaëtane Jean-Marie

privileges men in various setting compositions” (p. 134). Such is the case in female-dominated lines of work in which the glass-escalator hypothesis rests on notions of discriminatory processes in the workplace (Hultin, 2003). The glass escalator provides a dual benefit for men, representing a patriarchal dividend or the advantages that men in general gain from the subordination of women in the workforce (Connell, 1995, p. 79). Whether in male-dominated or female- dominated fields, men are accorded prestige and outpace women in advance- ment to positions of authority and higher pay (Schilt, 2006).

A trend garnering scholarly interest in the last few years is the large number of men entering female-dominated fields. Sally Lindsay (2007) has coined this as the masculinization of women’s work, meaning the movement of men into women’s occupations. An example of this is the field of nurse anesthesia. According to Lindsay (2007), the nurse anesthesia field has “evolved from a low-status, women’s specialty to a high-status profession where males comprise nearly half of all the employees” (p. 429). The masculinization of women’s work is a process of gender transforma- tion in which more men are present in such fields as nurse anesthesia, and the occupation comes to be viewed as men’s work (Lindsay, 2007; Lupton, 2006). Through the transformation process, the female-dominated field goes through three stages: infiltration, invasion, and takeover (Bradley, 1993). While Bradley’s typologies provide a descriptive process, Lindsay (2007) argues that they do not fully capture why the process evolves. Lind- say (2007) offers four key themes that explain what draws men into these professions:

1 First, during times of social and political change, men are inclined to enter women’s work for security or because they have few other alternatives.

2 A second factor identified in the masculinization of work is pay and opportunity to move up the career ladder quickly.

3 Changes in work conditions are a third factor influencing the mascu- linization of an occupation.

4 A fourth and related factor in the movement of men into women’s jobs is the technological change. … Once a job becomes more technically oriented, men tend to gain a foothold.

(Lindsay, 2007, pp. 431–432)

These four factors illuminate the gradual masculinization of women’s work and have implications for the maintenance and reinforcement of the glass escalator. Furthermore, what is yet to be studied in this area of inquiry is the socializing influence that female-dominated fields over time may have on men. The myth of equality (i.e., glass ceiling and glass escalator) suggests that discrimination does not exist; however, it coexists with sexual harassment in the workplace.

Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 93

Contemporary Issues for Women and Men in the Workforce

Demographic shifts in the workforce have significantly changed how American women and men view their roles both inside and outside of the work environment. In recent years, women’s employment has mul- tiplied considerably, and sociologists attribute the increased proportion of women in the workforce to the need for two-paycheck households, due to the decline in men’s wages (England, 2005, p. 265). The exo- dus of women from the home and their entry into the workforce has caused a shift in the traditional roles of women and men at work and home. These changes introduced different gender issues to the United States workforce, including an increase in dual-couple earners and female breadwinners. At the beginning of the 21st century, only a third of U.S. households were traditional, in that the husband provided the primary income through paid work, and the wife managed the home and children (Chapman, 2004). While this percentage of U.S. households fitted the sole- male-earner model, approximately a third more had a female as the pri- mary or sole earner (U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2004, 2008). The presence of dual-couple earners, female breadwinners, and the younger generations X and Y in the workforce has fueled female and male workers’ requests for more autonomy over their work respon- sibilities, in order to better accommodate their personal lives (Powell & Greenhaus, 2010). The introduction of work–life balance initiatives was a response to employees’ requests.

Work–Life Balance

The term work–life balance refers to the equilibrium between the amount of time and effort that individuals commit to work-related and nonwork- related activities (Powell & Greenhaus, 2010). The way in which individuals balance their work and nonwork lives is a central issue in business practices and in academic inquiry, particularly in disciplines such as organizational studies, gender studies, and sociological perspectives (Mescher, Benschop, & Doorewaard, 2010; Powell & Greenhaus, 2010). In the United States, the work–life field began in the late 1970s, when Americans exhibited increased mental and physical stress based on limited job autonomy and lack of sup- port for an overall quality of life (Kossek, Lewis, & Hammer, 2010). Such workplace findings signaled the need for the development of a mutually beneficial balance between organizations’ expectations and employees’ desires.

Although terms such as work–personal life integration, work–life articu- lation, and work–personal life harmonization (Crompton & Brockmann, 2007; Lewis & Cooper, 2005; Rapoport, Bailyn, Fletcher, & Pruitee, 2002) have emerged in recent research, and take into account a broader range of nonwork activities, the term work–family balance is most commonly used in

94 Brenda Lloyd-Jones, Lisa Bass, and Gaëtane Jean-Marie

the literature. However, by concentrating on employees with family respon- sibilities, work–family balance programs in organizations have encountered criticism from some employees who do not have children, and thus, do not have parental commitments (Haar & Spell, 2003). Another criticism of the term work–life balance is the word “balance,” which suggests the presence of a static equilibrium that is achievable between paid employment and a life outside the job.

Work–Life Balance Initiatives

One way in which organizations address contemporary issues is through work–life balance initiatives (see Figure 5.6). The fundamental aim of work– life balance practice and policies is to enable employees to manage work and caregiving (Kossek et al., 2010). Such initiatives consist primarily of flex- ible working practices and family-friendly policies, although good practice demonstrates flexibility as being considerate of all workers, including those without caregiver responsibilities.

Caregiving Options

Finding adequate care for children while parents work is a problem faced by many employed women and men, and is considered the primary reason that employees need work–life balance programs (Kossek et al., 2010; Williams, 2009). Employees who cannot balance the demands of work with available childcare are often disciplined or fired (Reece & Brandt, 2008). A salient role of work–life balance strategies is to focus on ways that working moth- ers and fathers can care for their children while maintaining employment.

Work–Life Balance

Ini�a�ves

Care-giving Op�ons

Flexible Work Schedule Op�ons

The Mommy Track Paternity

Leave

Technology

Figure 5.6 Work–Life Balance Initiatives

Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 95

Some organizations provide subsidized on-site childcare centers for employ- ees. Caring obligations extend beyond children, and often include ageing parents and ailing family members. Employers increasingly recognize the difficulties of generational family problems.

A perspective considered less often in the literature is that men are finding new opportunities to increase involvement with their families, thus shifting the narrow gender role of the male as primary wage earner (Perrone et al., 2009). Also changing is the increase in the number of stay-at-home fathers. Interview responses of 70 fathers revealed that most of them worked part time, studied part time, or considered the time away from work as a way to create another form of work (Doucet, 2004). According to Perrone et al. (2009), as parents adapt to new careers and family roles, problems can occur. For instance, Brescoll and Uhlmann (2005) studied attitudes toward nontraditional parents, and found that stay-at-home fathers and employed mothers were viewed more negatively than stay-at-home mothers and employed fathers. Addition- ally, for stay-at-home fathers, perceived social respect and regard were low. For employed mothers, however, perceived social respect and regard were just as high as for parents in traditional roles, which according to the researchers, may be attributed to women gaining social respect and regard by taking on the traditional male breadwinner role (Brescoll & Uhlmann, 2005).

Flexible Work Schedule Options

To assist employees with a balance between their personal and work lives, some companies make available flexible work schedule arrangements, which include “flextime” options, typically offering employees some choice on arrival and departure times (Reece & Brandt, 2008). The compressed work week is another flexible work choice and usually consists of four 10-hour days. Job-sharing arrangements involve two employees who share the respon- sibilities of one position. The benefit of this arrangement is that one employee might work during the mornings, and the other during the afternoon. Part- time jobs are another means of flexible scheduling. Women with children often secure part-time, rather than full-time, jobs because they often have the major responsibility for children and may not wish to, or might be unable to, work traditional, less flexible, and sometimes excessive work hours and sched- ules (Bailyn, 2006). Unfortunately, part-time jobs are customarily accompa- nied by “low pay, no benefits, no security, limited autonomy, and virtually no opportunities for advancement” (Williams, 2009, p. 290).

The Mommy Track

Some organizations have created the mommy track position, with the idea of providing an opportunity for working mothers to devote time to both careers and families. However, critics of the initiative describe it as puni- tive because working mothers are forced to choose between developing a

96 Brenda Lloyd-Jones, Lisa Bass, and Gaëtane Jean-Marie

career or having a family and a career. If women select the latter choice, then they are relegated to a career path that is considered low status, excluding women from important projects. They also receive lower pay and generally feel ignored by their busier, career-oriented male or female counterparts. Further, studies reveal that mothers experience a per-child wage penalty of about 5% (England, 2005). Whereas the literature highlights work–life bal- ance initiatives that address the needs of mothers in the workplace, better workplace accommodations are warranted.

Paternity Leave

Paternity leave is another work–life balance benefit, and refers to a period of time in which a father is legally allowed to be away from his job to spend time with his child. According to Halverson (2003), men use work–life bal- ance initiatives much less than women do. He asserts that fathers who want to take paternity leave or time away from work to care for children often experience difficulty under the provisions of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). He argues that Congress had the best interests of women, rather than men, in mind when passing the Act. Such a claim reinforces “gender discrimination” in the workplace, which not only impacts women but men also. Additionally, some men fear workplace discrimination and work-related penalties should they rely on the FMLA for extended paternity leave. Like women who have battled maternity-related issues, men also must advocate for family-friendly workplace (FFW) policies, which Hartin (1994) describes as procedures “designed to minimize the impact of work on family life” (p. 76). Important to the discourse on working men and women is the integration of work and family.

As the work–family literature suggests, a number of traditional gender role expectations persist despite the shift in who becomes the primary earner within the family. For example, research in the United States has found that when a husband is economically dependent on his wife, over time he actually does less housework than before (Brines, 1994). Similarly, Bittman, Thompson, and Hoffmann (2004) found that when the wife earns 51% to 100% of household income, the couple tends to retain or return to the traditional gendered divisions of home labor. Managing the responsibili- ties associated with work and nonwork life continues to pose a challenge for many employed individuals.

Technology

The technology option is valuable to some women and men who want to strike a balance between family and work responsibilities. Telecommut- ing permits employees to work from home at a personal computer that is linked to their employer’s computer system, and includes other innovations

Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 97

to perform business away from the traditional office such as laptops, wireless phones, and Internet access to e-mail. Today’s multigenerational workforce presents varied work styles and worker preferences. For instance, Generation X workers (born between 1960 and 1980) prefer to use technology when it offers them less stringent work hours to allow for greater work–life balance (Glass, 2007). In contrast, Generation Y workers (born between 1980 and 2000) are the first generation born into a technologically-based world, and generally favor instant messaging, text messaging, and e-mails rather than having a face-to-face conversation or using the telephone (Glass, 2007).

Limitations of Work–Life Balance Strategies

Although work–life balance strategies aim to improve the relationship between the work and personal lives of employees, they can make work intense, and perpetuate stereotypes of ideal workers who are employees “unencumbered” by family or other nonworking responsibilities (Kossek et al., 2010, p. 9). These researchers argue that organizations and scholars need to frame work–life balance initiatives as part of the “core employment systems to enhance organizational effectiveness,” (p. 1) rather than strate- gies to support disadvantaged, nonideal workers such as those who use the system because they do not have an income sufficient to employ outside help. Additionally, women predominantly appear to use the option, which indicates that flexible working is implicitly seen as an issue of concern for mothers. In short, “[u]ntil work-life initiatives become more mainstream, a right and not a privilege limited to those individuals most in need of care giving assistance, they will continue to be marginalized” (Kossek et al., 2010, p. 6). Stone (2007) concurs with Kossek et al.’s sociological argument and asserts:

Until more men themselves take advantage of [workplace policies], or at least, as senior managers, permit and do not punish those who do, reduced-hour and flexible accommodations are likely to remain stigma- tized and under-utilized, in a never-ending chase-the-tail scenario that rebounds to women’s disadvantage.

(Stone, 2007, p. 225)

Hewlett (2007) tempers both Kossek and colleagues’ and Stone’s argument with an economic explanation, which asserts that corporations will imple- ment flexible policies that accommodate working mothers only when they are convinced that such policies are in their economic interest. Women and men continue to grapple with their work and personal demands. Although some progressive organizations are implementing work–life balance prac- tices, additional accommodations are essential to more effectively address the contemporary roles of women and men.

98 Brenda Lloyd-Jones, Lisa Bass, and Gaëtane Jean-Marie

Chapter Summary

In the 21st century, women and men continue to experience inequality due to gender stereotypes and traditional gender roles in the workforce (Reece & Brandt, 2008). Specifically, these gender roles are in question because more women are educated and entering the workplace. Although women historically have struggled to ascend to senior-level positions, women are increasingly gaining access to professional and managerial posi- tions in organizations. Accordingly, the gap between women and men in salary compensation appears to be narrowing; however, men still consistently out-earn women. Much of the literature identifies gender discrimination as the culprit for the persistent gender wage gap in addition to the masculiniza- tion of women’s work.

Research studies indicate that women are disadvantaged in comparison with men on nearly every known economic indicator. Such instances of gender discrimination extend beyond wages and include underrepresen- tation of women in leadership positions, and men performing traditional women’s work; for example, nursing, elementary teaching, social work, and librarianship (Hultin, 2003). The disparity between women and men in management careers is often attributed to the glass ceiling, which blocks opportunities for women (Danziger & Eden, 2007). In contrast to women who push against the glass ceiling in the workforce, men cruise the glass escalator, which promotes them over women into management positions in female-dominated fields (Hultin, 2003; Williams, 1992, 1995).

Finally, research findings suggest that women and men in today’s workforce seek successful careers in addition to a balanced personal life. Some employers have responded to employees’ needs with initiatives fea- turing family-friendly policies that emphasize flexible work schedules, caregiving options, and technological arrangements. Some researchers (England, 2005; Kossek et al., 2010; Stone, 2007) contend that women and men who utilize work–life benefits are perceived to be less serious about their careers and therefore are often marginalized in the organiza- tion. In contrast, men and women who have a balanced professional and personal life are likely to be more productive in the workplace, which is a benefit for organizations.

The chapter calls attention to the importance of further examination of women’s experience in the U.S. workforce, given that they are dispropor- tionately affected by gender inequality and discrimination in the work- place. Despite laws, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended in 1991, and the Equal Pay Act of 1963 enacted to protect workers from overt discrimination, gender inequalities continue to exist in the workforce. Further, an understanding of the workplace culture as it affects the career development and retention of both women and men provides insight on the pervasive issues of gender discrimination. Minimizing the effect of gender discrimination may generate organizational benefits with regard

Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 99

to increased satisfaction, retention, and advancement of workers (Lloyd- Jones, 2009). Gender inequality and discrimination in the U.S. workforce will require unremitting attention at the individual, organizational, and federal levels.

Definition of Key Terms

Family-friendly workplace policies—Refers to procedures designed to minimize the impact of work on family life.

Flexible work schedule options—Includes flextime choices, typically offering employees some choice on arrival and departure times, such as a compressed work week that usually consists of four 10-hour days and job- sharing arrangements, which involve two employees who share the respon- sibilities of one position.

Gender—The social construction of differences between women and men and the social attributes and opportunities associated with being female and male.

Gender discrimination—Connotes gender-based behaviors, policies, and actions that adversely affect a person’s work by leading to unequal treatment or the creation of an intimidating environment because of one’s gender.

Gender equality—Implies a social order in which women and men share the same opportunities and the same constraints concerning full partici- pation in both the economic and the domestic realms.

Gender roles—Represent traditional beliefs about what functions are appropriate for women and men.

Gender stereotypes—Deeply embedded assumptions and beliefs about the gender attributes and differences of individuals and/or groups.

Gender wage gap—The difference in earnings received by women and men for performing similar duties or tasks.

Glass ceiling—Symbolizes barriers that are based on attitudinal or organ- izational biases preventing qualified women from advancing higher in their organizations.

Glass escalator—Symbolizes the promotion of men over women into management in female-dominated occupations such as nursing, social work, elementary school teaching, and librarianship.

Good ol’ boys network—An example of social closure, which can hinder women’s access and entry to prominent positions occupied by men.

Masculinization of women’s work—The movement of men into wom- en’s occupations.

Mommy track—Denotes a position that some organizations have created with the idea of providing an opportunity for working mothers to devote time to both careers and families.

Occupational sex segregation—The concentrating of women and men into particular occupations.

100 Brenda Lloyd-Jones, Lisa Bass, and Gaëtane Jean-Marie

Paternity leave—A period of time in which a father is legally allowed to be away from his job to spend time with his child.

Sex—The binary categories of female and male. Title VII—Prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, reli-

gion, sex, and national origins. Work–life balance—The equilibrium between the amount of time and

effort individuals commit to work- and nonwork-related activities.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 In what ways do traditional gender roles perpetuate gender inequality and/or inhibit the quest toward equality in the workforce?

2 What kind of problems can occur as a result of the changing role of women and men in careers and family life?

3 What was the principal intent of the enactment of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Pay Act of 1963?

4 What is your perspective on Sally Lindsay’s concept of the masculini- zation of women’s work? Does this concept represent progress toward equality in the workforce? What factors influence men’s entry into female-dominated fields?

5 Compare and contrast the glass escalator and the glass ceiling. 6 In what ways do organizations develop and sustain norms and beliefs

that are more accommodating to men than women? 7 How can employees sustain a healthy balance between their professional

and personal lives?

Additional Assignments

1 As women and men grapple with deciphering their changing roles at work and at home, online resources may prove useful to them. Websites developed by professional organizations like the National Association for Female Executives (www.nafe.com), the Families and Work Institute (www.familiesandwork.org), and At-Home Dad (www.athomedad.org) offer sound support. Visit the site of your choice and write an analysis of how it might help individuals to make an educated decision about their personal and professional life choices. Share your findings with class members. (Adapted from Reece and Brandt [2008].)

2 Identify an organization in your area and schedule an interview with someone in the Human Resources Department to learn about its fam- ily-friendly programs. Inquire about the benefits that working mothers and fathers receive as a result of such initiatives. Write a paper (1–2 pages) describing your interview findings. Present your report to class mem- bers. (Adapted from Reece and Brandt [2008].)

Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 101

References

Alkadry, M., & Tower, L. (2006). Unequal pay: The role of gender. Public Administration Review, 66(6), 888–898.

Amott, T., & Matthaei, J. (2007). The structure of social institutions. In M. L. Andersen & P. H. Collins (Eds.), Race, class and gender: An anthology (pp. 283–291). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Bailyn, L. (2006). Issues of work and family in different national contexts: How the United States, Britain, and Sweden respond. Human Resource Management, 31(3), 201–208.

Case Study: Work–Life Balance

Marsha is a 34-year-old, highly competitive, technology-savvy single parent who works around the clock, taking work home from the office, reviewing global markets while preparing dinner, and reading to her 6-year-old son before she finally goes to sleep. Further, when Marsha awakens each weekday morning, she commutes 1 hour each way from her home in a Chicago suburb to her downtown office in Chi- cago. Currently, Marsha is considering a position at a Fortune 500 healthcare company. Having experienced the fast pace, long hours, and frequent travel associated with a senior-level position, Marsha has reservations about accepting the recently offered executive-level position. Additionally, Marsha has recently established a serious goal of balancing her personal and professional responsibilities more effectively. In anticipation of upcoming negotiations with the prospec- tive employer, Marsha’s executive coach has advised her to develop a list of questions that will assist Marsha in making a decision about the position.

Discussion Questions

1 What work–life balance initiatives might Marsha ask about during negotiations with her prospective employer?

2 What is the basic aim of work–life balance policies and practice?

3 Although Marsha is a parent and wants to divide her attention between work and nonwork commitments, why might she want to avoid the “mommy track”?

102 Brenda Lloyd-Jones, Lisa Bass, and Gaëtane Jean-Marie

Bayard, K., Hellerstein, J., Neumark, D., & Troske, K. (2003). New evidence on sex segre- gation and sex differences in wages from matched employee–employer data. Journal of Labor Economics, 21(4), 887–922.

Bittman, M., Thompson, S., & Hoffmann, S. (2004). Men’s take-up of family-friendly employ- ment provision. Policy Research Paper. Canberra, ACT: Department of Family and Community Services.

Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2007). The gender pay gap: Have women gone as far as they can? Academy of Management Perspectives, 21(1), 7–23.

Bradley, H. (1993). Across the great divide. In C. Williams (Ed.), Doing women’s work: Men in nontraditional occupations (pp. 10–28). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Brescoll, V. L., & Uhlmann, E. L. (2005). Attitudes toward traditional and nontraditional parents. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 436–445.

Brines, J. (1994). Economic dependency, gender, and the division of labor at home. Ameri- can Journal of Sociology, 100, 652–688.

Budig, M. J. (2002). Male advantage and the gender composition of jobs: Who rides the glass escalator? Social Problems, 49(2), 258–277.

Catalyst, Inc. (1999). Women of color in corporate management: Opportunities and bar- riers. Catalyst. Retrieved March 11, 2010, from www.catalyst.org/publication/57/ women-of-color-in-corporate-management-opportunities-and-barriers

Catalyst, Inc. (2017). Statistical overview of women in the workforce. Retrieved from www.catalyst.org/knowledge/statistical-overview-women-workforce

Chapman, T. (2004). Gender and domestic life. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000, P.L. 88–352. (1964). Civil Rights Act of 1991, P.L. 102–166. (1991). Cognard-Black, A. J. (2004). Will they stay, or will they go? Sex-atypical work among

token men who teach. The Sociological Quarterly, 45(1), 113–139. Connell, R. (1995). Masculinities. Berkley: University of California Press. Cox, T., Jr. (1993). Cultural diversity in organizations: Theory, research and practice. San Fran-

cisco: Barrett Koehler. Crompton, R., & Brockmann, M. (2007). Class, gender and work–life articulation. In

D. Perrons, C. Fagan, L. McDowell, K. Ray, & K. Ward (Eds.), Gender divisions and work- ing time in the new economy: Changing patterns of work, care and public policy in Europe and North America (pp. 103–122). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Danziger, N., & Eden, Y. (2007). Gender-related differences in the occupational aspira- tions and career-style preferences of accounting students: A cross-sectional comparison between academic school years. Career Development International, 12(2), 129–149.

Davies-Netzley, S. A. (1998). Women above the glass ceiling: Perceptions on corporate mobility and strategies for success. Gender and Society, 12(3), 339–355.

DeLaat, J. (2007). Gender in the workplace: A case study approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. DiTomaso, N., Post, C., & Parks-Yancy, R. (2007). Workforce diversity and inequality:

Power, status, and numbers. Annual Review of Sociology, 33, 473–502. Dolan, J. (2004). Gender equity: Illusion or reality for women in the federal executive

service? Public Administration Review, 64(3), 299–308. Doucet, A. (2004). It’s almost like I have a job, but I don’t get paid: Fathers at home recon-

figuring work, care, and masculinity. Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research, & Practice about Men as Fathers, 2(3), 277–303.

Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., & Gaertner, S. L. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 62–68.

Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 103

Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123–174). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

England, P. (2005). Gender inequality in labor markets: The role of motherhood and segregation. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society Online, 12, 264–288.

England, P. (2010). The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender and Society, 24, 149–166.

Equal Pay Act of 1963, P.L. 88–38, 77 Stat. 56, 59. (1963). Fiske-Rusciano, R., & Cyrus, V. (2005). Experiencing race, class and gender in the United States

(4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. Ford, D. L., Jr. (1985). Job-related stress of minority professionals. In T. A. Beehr &

R. S. Bhagat (Eds.), Human stress and cognition in organizations: An integrated perspective (pp. 287–323). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Friedman, J. J., & DiTomaso, N. (1996). Myths about diversity: What managers need to know about changes in the U.S. labor force. California Management Review, 38, 54–77.

Fry, R. (2009). College enrollment hits all-time high, fueled by community college surge. Pew Research Centre Report. Retrieved from http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp- content/uploads/sites/3/2010/10/college-enrollment.pdf

Fullerton, H. N., Jr. (1993). Another look at the work force. Monthly Labor Review, 116(11), 31–40.

Gender Guidelines for Mine Action Programmes. (2010). Terms and definitions (pp. 60–63). United Nations Mine Action Service. Retrieved 31 January, 2018, from www.mineaction.org/sites/default/files/publications/MA-Guidelines-WEB.pdf

Gibelman, M. (2003). So how far have we come? Pestilent and persistent gender gap in pay. Social Work, 48(1), 22–32.

Glass, A. (2007). Understanding generational differences for competitive success. Industrial and Commercial Training, 39(2), 98–103.

Goodman, D. (1990). Rediscovering American women: A chronology highlighting women’s history in the United States and update—the process continues. In S. Ruth (Ed.), Issues in feminism: An introduction to women’s studies. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing.

Haar, J., & Spell, C. S. (2003). Where is the justice? Examining work–family backlash in New Zealand: The potential for employee resentment. New Zealand Journal of Industrial Relations, 28(1), 59–75.

Halverson, C. (2003). From here to paternity: Why men are not taking paternity leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Wisconsin Women’s Law Journal, 18, 257.

Hartin, W. (1994) Employment law. Corporate Management, 46(2), 75–76. Heathfield, S. M. (2016). Women and work: Then, now, and predicting the future:

Business women in the workplace. Retrieved from www.thebalance.com/ women-and-work-1919356

Heckman, J. J. (1998). Detecting discrimination. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12(2), 101–116.

Hewlett, S. (2007). Off-ramps and on-ramps: Keeping talented women on the road to success. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Hultin, M. (2003). Some take the glass escalator, some hit the glass ceiling? Career conse- quences of occupational sex segregation. Work and Occupation, 30(1), 30–61.

104 Brenda Lloyd-Jones, Lisa Bass, and Gaëtane Jean-Marie

Johnston, W. B., & Packer, A. H. (1987). Workforce 2000. Indianapolis, IN: Hudson Institute. Kalev, A. (2009). Cracking the glass cages? Restructuring and ascriptive inequality at

work. American Journal of Sociology, 114(6), 1591–1643. Kossek, E., Lewis, S., & Hammer, L. (2010). Work–life initiatives and organizational

change: Overcoming mixed messages to move from the margin to the mainstream. Human Relations, 63(1), 3–19.

Kurowski, L. L. (2002). Cloaked culture and veiled diversity: Why theorists ignored early US workforce diversity. Journal of Management History, 40(2), 183–191.

Levine, J. A. (2009). It’s a man’s job, or so they say: The maintenance of sex segregation in a manufacturing plant. The Sociological Quarterly, 50, 257–282.

Lewis, J. J. (1999). Women and work in early America. Retrieved from http:// womenshistory.about.com/od/worklaborunions/a/early_america.htm?p = 1

Lewis, S., & Cooper, C. (2005). Work–life integration: Case studies of organisational change. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

Lindsay, S. (2007). Gendering work: The maintenance of nurse anesthesia. The Canadian Journal of Sociology, 32(4), 429–448.

Lloyd-Jones, B. (2009). Implications of race and gender in higher education adminis- tration: An African American woman’s perspective. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11(5), 606–618.

Loden, M., & Rosener, J. (1991). Workforce America: Managing diversity as a vital resource. Homewood, IL: Business One Irwin.

Lupton, B. (2006). Explaining men’s entry into female-concentrated occupations: Issues of masculinity and social class. Gender, Work and Organization, 13(2), 103–128.

Marini, M. M. (1990). Sex and gender: What do we know? Sociological Forum, 5(1), 95–120. Mescher, S., Benschop, Y., & Doorewaard, H. (2010). Representations of work–life bal-

ance support. Human Relations, 63(1), 21–39. Meyer, M. (1999, August). In a league of her own. Newsweek, 2, p. 56. Meyerson, D. E., & Fletcher, J. K. (2000). A modest manifesto for shattering the glass ceil-

ing. Harvard Business Review, January–February, 127–136. Retrieved from https://hbr. org/2000/01/a-modest-manifesto-for-shattering-the-glass-ceiling

Mora, R., & Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2004). Gender segregation by occupations in the public and the private sector. The case of Spain. Investigaciones Economicas, XXVIII (3), 399–428.

Ngo, H., Foley, S., Wong, A., & Loi, R. (2003). Who gets more of the pie? Predictors of perceived gender inequity at work. Journal of Business Ethics, 45, 227–241.

Perrone, K., Wright, S., & Jackson, Z. V. (2009). Traditional and nontraditional gender roles and work–family interface for men and women. Journal of Career Development OnlineFirst. doi:10.1177/0894845308327736

Peterson, T., & Morgan, L. A. (1995). Separate and unequal: Occupation- establishment sex segregation and the gender wage gap. American Journal of Sociology, 101(2), 329–365.

Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. G. (1996). Immigrant America: A portrait. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Powell, G. N. (1999). Examining the intersection of gender and work. In G. N. Powell (Ed.), Handbook of gender and work (pp. ix–xx). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Powell, G. N., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2010). Sex, gender, and decisions at the family–work interface. Journal of Management, 36(4), 1011–1039.

Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, Amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000 et seq., P.L. 88–352. (1978).

Gender and Diversity in the Workforce 105

Ragins, B. R. (1998). Gender gap in the executive suite: CEOs and female executives report on breaking the glass ceiling. Academy of Management, 12(1), 28–42.

Rapoport, R., Bailyn, L., Fletcher, J. K., & Pruitee, B. (2002). Beyond work–family balance: Advancing gender equity and workplace performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Reece, B. L., & Brandt, R. (2008). Effective human relations: Personal and organizational appli- cations. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Schilt, K. (2006). Just one of the guys? How transmen make gender visible at work. Gender & Society, 20(4), 465–490.

Shen-Miller, D., & Smiler, A. P. (2015). Men in female-dominated vocations: A ration- ale for academic study and introduction to the special issue. Sex Roles, 72(7–8), 269–276.

Sims, R. R., & Dennehy, R. F. (1993). Diversity and differences in organizations: An agenda for answers and questions. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Sipe, S., Johnson, C. D., & Fisher, D. K. (2009). University students’ perceptions of gender discrimination in the workplace: Reality versus fiction. Journal of Education for Business, 28(4), 339–349.

Solis, H. L. & Galvin, J. M. (2012). Labor force characteristics by race and ethnicity. Report 1036. Retrieved from http://stats.bls.gov/cps/cpsrace2011.pdf

Soni, V. (2000). A twenty-first century reception for diversity in the public sector: A case study. Public Administration Review, 60(5), 395–408.

Stewart, S. M., Bing, M. N., Gruys, M. L., & Helford, M. C. (2007). Men, women, and perceptions of work environments, organizational commitment, and turnover inten- tions. Journal of Business and Public Affairs, 1(1), 1–12.

Stone, P. (2007). Opting out? Why women really quit careers and head home. Berkeley: Uni- versity of California Press.

Tomaskovic-Devey, D., & Skaggs, S. (1999). An establishment-level test of the statistical discrimination hypothesis. Work and Occupation, 26, 422–445.

U. S. Census Bureau, U. S. Department of Commerce. (2017). FFF: Women’s History Month: March 2017. Retrieved January 31, 2018, from www.census.gov/newsroom/ facts-for-features/2017/cb17-ff03.html

U.S. Department of Labor. (1991). A report on the glass ceiling initiative. Washington, D.C.: Author.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2004). Women in the labor force: A databook (Report 973). Retrieved from www.bls.gov/cps/wlf-databook.pdf

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2005). Employment outlook: 2004– 2014. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008). Women in the labor force: A databook (Report 1011). Retrieved from www.bls.gov/cps/wlf-databook-2008.pdf

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2010). Quick stats on women workers. Retrieved from www.dol.gov/wb/factsheets/qs-womenwork2010.htm

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2017). The Economics Daily. Retrieved January 31, 2018, from www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2017/median-weekly- earnings-767-for-women-937-for-men-in-third-quarter-2017.htm

van Vianen, A. E. M., & Fischer, A. H. (2002). Illuminating the glass ceiling: The role of organizational culture preferences. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 315–337.

Vogel, D. L., Wester, S. R, Heesacker, M., & Madon, S. (2003). Confirming gender stereo- types: A social role perspective. Sex Roles, 11/12, 519–528.

106 Brenda Lloyd-Jones, Lisa Bass, and Gaëtane Jean-Marie

Weichselbaumer, D., & Winter-Ebmer, R. (2005). A meta-analysis of the international gender wage gap. Journal of Economic Surveys, 19(3), 479–511.

Williams, C. L. (1992). The glass escalator: Hidden advantages for men in nontraditional occupations. Social Problems, 39, 253–267.

Williams, C. L. (1995). Still a man’s world: Men who do women’s work. London: University of California Press.

Williams, C. L. (2009). Talking ’bout my revolution: Opting-out and the end of feminism. Sex Roles, 6, 287–290. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9496-1

Williams, C. L. (2013). The glass escalator, revisited: Gender inequality in neoliberal times, SWS feminist lecturer. Gender & Society, 27(5), 609–629.

Williams, M. J., Paluck, E. L., & Spencer-Rodgers, J. (2010). The masculinity of money: Automatic stereotypes predict gender differences in estimated salaries. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 7–20.

Wilson, E. (2014). Diversity, culture and the glass ceiling. Journal of Cultural Diversity, 21(3), 83–89.

Chapter Overview

The complexity of the concept of identity confounds the interactions that we as humans have with one another. In reality, we are not one-dimensional, but multidimensional beings. Individual characteristics, family dynamics, his- torical factors, and social and political contexts all influence who we believe ourselves to be. In this chapter, we examine ethnicity as a separate construct from race, although related to it, along with how it impacts the workforce. Although there are other dimensions of our being that also blend with our race and ethnicity, making up our total being—gender, age, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, abilities versus disabilities, and religious or spiritual beliefs—ethnicity is understood “as a group of people who share a culture, nationality, ancestry, and or language [and] physical appearance is not associ- ated with ethnicity” (Fitzgerald, 2017, p. 501).

This chapter begins with a discussion of how ethnicity differs from race, followed by a discussion on how ethnicity is determined in the United States and how it is used to categorize ethnic groups. Next, discrimination against ethnic individuals or groups is discussed, followed by a discussion of perspectives on ethnicity in the workforce and issues surrounding ethnic expression. The chapter concludes with perspectives on employee efforts to support the inclusion of ethnicity in the workforce.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• discuss the differences and similarities between ethnicity and race; • explain the various perspectives on ethnicity in American society; • describe how ethnic characteristics are applied in the United States; • identify and discuss the six characteristics that are criteria for determin-

ing a minority or subordinate group in the United States; • understand discrimination based on ethnicity;

6 Ethnicity and Diversity in the Workforce

Chaunda L. Scott and Terrance R. McClain

108 Chaunda L. Scott and Terrance R. McClain

• discuss ethnicity as diversity in the workforce; • understand the common issues related to workforce diversity.

Ethnicity and Race

A discussion on ethnicity in the workforce cannot begin without a defini- tion of ethnicity and how it differs from race.

Ethnicity is the product of actions undertaken by ethnic groups as they shape and reshape their self-definition and culture; however, ethnicity is also constructed by external social, economic, and politi- cal processes and actors as they shape and reshape ethnic categories and definitions.

(Nagel, 1994, p. 152)

Ethnic groups are identified in relation to the dominant culture. National origin and distinctive cultural patterns encompassing language, religious faith, shared traditions, values, symbols, and literature, music, and food habits are some of the distinctive characteristics that set groups apart. There are distinctions between ethnic groups expressed in language, religion, race, kinship, and geographical isolation. “Ethnicity is revealed when people claim a certain identity for themselves and are defined by others as having that identity” (Kottak, 2006, p. 290). Ethnicity is an expression of collective iden- tity that represents attachment to a group and its associated behaviors, which can vary in intensity. Ethnicity is also an expression of personal identity. Although self-expression is important, it is not the only salient compo- nent of identity. It is argued that there is no such thing as “unilateral eth- nicity,” but only a construct influenced by ethnic relations between those groups of people, who appear to be the same, with others who appear to be different (Jenkins, 2007). Therefore, it cannot be assumed that all people within any particular group are exactly the same as another group. In other words, apparent cultural similarities do not influence ethnicity within group differentiation:

[E]thnicity is not a matter of definable degrees or obvious kinds of cultural similarity or difference. There is no checklist with which to determine whether or not members of Group A are really ethnically different to members of Group B, or whether Group C is an ethnic group or some other kind of collectivity. Enumerating cultural traits or characteristics is not a useful way to understand or identify eth- nic differences. Human beings are distinguished by their voices, and the baseline is always whether a group is seen by its members to be different.

(Jenkins, 2007, p. 2)

Ethnicity and Diversity in the Workforce 109

Race generally represents a group of people who share similar physical characteristics (e.g., skin color, hair texture, facial features, etc.) and a com- mon historical background (Fitzgerald, 2017). The historical shaping of the concept of race sheds deeper insight on its present, practical application.

The idea of race began to take shape with the rise of a world political economy. The onset of global economic integration, the dawn of seaborne empire, the conquest of the Americas, and the rise of the Atlantic slave trade were all key elements in the genealogy of race. The concept emerged over time as a kind of world-historical bricolage, an accretive process that was in part theoretical, but much more centrally practical. Though inti- mated throughout the world in innumerable ways, racial categorization of human beings was a European invention. It was an outcome of the same world-historical processes that created European nation-states and empires, built the dark satanic mills of Britain (and the even more dark and satanic sugar mills of the Brazilian Reconcavo and the Caribbean), and explained it all by means of Enlightenment rationality.

(Winant, 2000, p. 172)

In the United States, race is often confused with ethnicity because of the lack of a clear distinction between the two. For example, the term Hispanic “is an ethnic category that cross-cuts racial contrasts between black and white” (Kottak, 2006, p. 293). In other words, a person who is Hispanic can be perceived as White or Black depending on the hue of their skin tone. Race is also political. In the United States, racial classification is a politi- cized system that determines access to resources (including jobs), voting districts, and federal funding of programs, often having the effect of control- ling and limiting opportunities for minorities. This classification ascribes status onto people based on their perceived ethnic group affiliation. People of mixed race (e.g., Black and White) experience hypodescent, which automatically places them into the minority group regardless of physical appearance.

Ethnicity in the United States

Before discussing ethnicity in the United States, we must first understand American culture and how it affects ethnic identity. Culture is a system of human behavior and thought that is not acquired by biological inheritance, but by growing up in a particular society where exposure to specific cultural traditions (knowledge, beliefs, art, morals, laws, customs, habits, symbols) are learned and shared by individuals as members of a group (Kottak, 2006). Ethnic groups, then, are “groups of people who share certain beliefs, values, habits, customs, and norms because of their common background” (p. 290). The common background in an ethnic group may include “a collective

110 Chaunda L. Scott and Terrance R. McClain

name, belief in common descent, a sense of solidarity, and an association with a specific territory, which the group may or may not hold” (Kottak, 2006, p. 290). In the United States, ethnicity can be treated as a subculture, minority group, or subordinate group based on different and shared learning experiences within the larger culture. For example, people may show loyalty to their neighborhood, school, and religion, and still participate in broader cultural activities such as voting in federal elections.

Before Christopher Columbus arrived, the country that became the United States was already ethnically mixed. Native American tribes were societies of people with different languages, religions, and political systems. The arrival of Europeans, Africans, Chinese, and others only added to the ethnic variations already in existence. What sets ethnic groups apart is their national origin or distinctive cultural patterns. Over time, cultural patterns are introduced into other ethnic groups that cross perceived racial lines, making ethnic groups more difficult to classify. For example, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, and other Latin Americans are grouped together as Hispanic or Latino, although they cross perceived racial lines of Black or White (Schaefer, 2004, 2011). Another example would be the dilemma of a dark-skinned Puerto Rican who is perceived as Black in central Texas, but viewed as Puerto Rican in New York City.

Other examples include:

• Irish, Polish, German, English, French, Scottish, Dutch, Swedish, Rus- sian, Welsh, Portuguese, Armenian, and Norwegian are grouped together as White Americans.

• African (including its varieties of Black ancestry), Haitian, Jamaican, and depending on perceived racial features, those who are Hispanic or Latino are grouped together as Black Americans.

• Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Indian, Korean, and Vietnamese are grouped together as Asian Americans.

• The 567 indigenous tribes which include the Cheyenne, Ojibway, Crow, and others are grouped together as Native or Indian Americans.

Ethnic Classifications

America has often been referred to as a “melting pot,” emphasizing the fact that the United States is a country that is made up of many races, ethnicities, and cultures. It is interesting to note that with migration, at various local levels, systems of racial and ethnic classification and consciousness are not congruent with general principles. The “melting pot” metaphor, ascribed to the United States as a refuge for all people who come to this country, is epitomized in the famous poem written by Emma Lazarus and engraved on a tablet within the pedestal on which the Statue of Liberty stands: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of

Ethnicity and Diversity in the Workforce 111

your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-lost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” This multicultural invitation and immigrant response to it has led to the melding of ethnic cultures. This melding represents an assimilationist model, “the process of change a minority ethnic group may experience when moving to a country where another culture dominates” (Kottak, 2006, p. 303). The assimilationist model suggests that minority ethnic groups adopt the norms of the dominant culture, just as the dominant culture assimilates aspects of the minority cultures, until certain aspects of both are no longer separate cultural units (Kottak, 2006).

One hypothesis is that ethnicity has aspects that are socially constructed, such as boundaries, identities, and cultures that are negotiated, redefined, and emerge as a result of social interaction within and outside ethnic com- munities. The most salient issue of ethnic identity is the issue of boundaries, which are continuously negotiated by members of any ethnic group. “Ethnic identity is a composite of the view one has of oneself as well as the views held by others about one’s ethnic identity” (Nagel, 1994, p. 154). Ethnicity, therefore, is a socially constructed model that “stresses the fluid, situational, volitional, and dynamic character of ethnic identification, organization, and action” (p. 152).

Ethnic identity is salient in various situations and with various audiences because every individual has a portfolio or layering of ethnic identities to draw upon (Nagel, 1994). The U.S. Census not only demonstrates how peo- ple self-identify with a particular ethnic group, but it also demonstrates how self-identification changes through social interaction outside the group. The following examples demonstrate different levels of ethnic identification in many ethnic communities in the United States (Nagel, 1994, pp. 155–156).

• Of the various levels of ethnic identity available to Native Americans (subtribal, tribal, regional, supra-tribal, or pan-Indian), the most salient iden- tity is dependent on the nature of the interaction. For example, on the reservation, an American Indian might identify as “mixed-blood,” or when speaking to someone from another reservation, the person might identify as being from “Pine Ridge.”

• Various levels of ethnic identity are available to Latino or Hispanic Americans. For example, an individual of Cuban ancestry may embrace varied identities based upon their interactions. The chosen ethnic iden- tity is determined by the individual’s perception of the audience, the social contexts, and the setting.

• For Asians, national origin (e.g., Japanese, Chinese, and Vietnamese) remains an important basis of identification, rather than a pan-ethnic identity.

• Among African Americans, the salience of a particular ethnic identifica- tion can be determined by context. At times, it is advantageous for dark- skinned Caribbean immigrants to acknowledge and emphasize color

112 Chaunda L. Scott and Terrance R. McClain

and common ancestry with African Americans. There are other times, however, when people of the Caribbean highlight the distinctiveness between themselves and U.S.-born Blacks.

• White Americans make ethnic distinctions as they negotiate their respec- tive European ancestries, i.e., Italian, German, Polish, French, Irish, etc.; or their native American lineage may be more advantageous, based upon the audience and the perceived advantages of identifying as such.

Ethnic consciousness, like race consciousness, is informed by how aware members of the respective group and members of the larger society are of the ethnic differences that influence human interaction. There are both popular and social scientific understandings of classification and member- ship (Gold, 2007). In spite of the social basis for ethnicity, as is the case with race, there are still powerful consequences within society at large, and within the workforce in particular. Race and ethnicity, as both group and individual identities, influence patterns of social conflict and the degree of opportunity available to various races and ethnicities.

Discrimination and Exclusion Based on Ethnicity

Some ethnic groups have trouble gaining acceptance into American society because of their physical and cultural differences (Schaefer, 2011). The United States has experienced both peace and unrest because of ethnic differences. The Civil War and the Civil Rights Movement are both examples of con- flict caused by ethnic difference. In particular, the Civil Rights Movement, a multiethnic effort, fought against discrimination in America’s policies and practices against minority ethnic groups. “In addition to discrimination, ethnic minority groups experience prejudice from the dominant culture, which devalues a group because of its assumed behavior, values, capabilities, or attributes” (p. 56). One of the results of discriminatory practices and prej- udice against ethnic groups is stereotyping members of an ethnic group based on fixed ideas, often unfavorable, about what members of a group are like (p. 306). Another form of exclusion is intrinsic racism, “the belief that a (perceived) racial difference is sufficient reason to value one person less than another” (Kottak, 2006, p. 297). Each of the examples causes individuals of minority ethnic groups to feel or become excluded for no other reason than their perceived differences from the dominant ethnic group.

The differentiation between ethnic groups in the United States, accord- ing to Schaefer (2011, 2004) is between racial groups, cultural groups, and religious groups. A broader list includes politics, economy, religion, language, culture, and race as differences (Kottak, 2006). These characteristics can be used to classify an individual into a minority ethnic status or subordinate group by the dominant group that results in discrimination, prejudice, and stereotyping. There are many negative effects on minority ethnic groups. For example, members of minority ethnic groups experience unequal treatment

Ethnicity and Diversity in the Workforce 113

and have less power over their lives than members of a dominant group have over theirs. The physical or cultural characteristics of the minority ethnic group can distinguish them from the dominant group, such as skin color or language. Membership in a dominant or minority ethnic group is ascribed upon the bearer born involuntarily into the group. When a group is the object of long-term prejudice and discrimination, the feeling of “us versus them” often becomes intense, strengthening the solidarity of the members in the group. The solidarity encourages marriage within the group and dis- courages marriage to outsiders. Finally, new immigrants may be perceived as lacking knowledge about the ways of working, being, and knowing in American culture. This, therefore, hinders their ability to be more formally accepted in American culture. Prejudice, discrimination, segregation, and even extermination create social inequality experienced by minority ethnic groups around the world.

Ethnicity in the Workforce

How does ethnic diversity that encompasses visible and invisible differ- ences between subordinate groups and the dominant culture complicate interactions in the workforce? One way is the assumption that mem- bers of a specific ethnic group will share common values, behaviors, and world views. While there are similarities within ethnic groups, there must also be an awareness of in-group differences that are not always appar- ent or acknowledged by those outside the ethnic group. Additionally, while similarities are the fabric for weaving a sense of belonging within an ethnic group, they also nurture the perception of not belonging to the dominant group that causes exclusion. Studies on work groups have produced myriad theories, with race and ethnicity as the central vari- able under investigation. There are a few assumptions that have evolved to explain behavior from an individual and/or within a working group perspective (Shore et al., 2009).

• Humans judge each other on surface-level characteristics, such as race or gender, in the absence of additional information.

• Group membership based on these characteristics implies true similari- ties or differences between people, which then creates the formation of in-group and out-group distinctions.

• These judgments ultimately result in outcomes that may have nega- tive effects for minority or out-group members (e.g., lack of men- tors, stalled careers, and lower performance evaluations) or group productivity.

Another perspective is that of “value in diversity,” which focuses on positive predictions or positive outcomes of racial and ethnic diversity. The underly- ing assumptions of this perspective are:

114 Chaunda L. Scott and Terrance R. McClain

• An increase in racial/ethnic diversity means that a work group will experience possible positive outcomes such as increased information, enhanced problem-solving ability, constructive conflict and debate, increased creativity, higher-quality decisions, and increased understand- ing of different ethnicities/cultures.

• Surface-level diversity such as race is indicative of deeper-level differ- ences, such as cognitive processes/schemas, differential knowledge base, different sets of experiences, and different views of the world (Shore et al., 2009, p. 118).

These are especially salient in reference to workforce diversity. Within the workforce, an understanding of the fluidity, variability, flexibility, and nego- tiability of ethnicity and race as a construct must become a part of our col- lective consciousness. This means that, depending upon the cultural context and social situation, ethnicity may or may not be negotiable. When ethnicity does matter to people, it has the capacity to matter significantly and prompt them to action and give birth to extremely powerful emotions. Success- ful workforce diversity encompassing multiple ethnic groups must work to avoid circumstances leading to discrimination, prejudice, and stereotyp- ing through education focused on building a deeper level of knowledge of minority ethnic groups.

Common Issues Surrounding Ethnicity in the Workforce

Ethnic consciousness, like race consciousness, is informed by how aware members of the respective group and members of the larger society are of the ethnic differences that influence human interaction.

There are four common issues relevant to ethnic differences that have negative effects on ethnic minorities in the workforce. The first is language, which can hinder effective communication between management and employee group, management and consumer groups, employee groups in general, and employee and consumer groups. Perceived levels of social inte- gration and communication skills can accelerate the frequency and intensity of conflict in the workplace. There is a growing insistence on requiring Eng- lish as the official national language in the United States, which goes against the ideal that all races and ethnicities can come, and ideally be accepted on their own terms, with their cultures, traditions, and languages being accepted as part of their identity. For many of them, English is a second or third lan- guage, and for some in the workforce, this may lead to misunderstandings and mistakes. Additionally, these communication problems may create an atmosphere for stereotyping ethnic group members as lacking intelligence and being incompetent.

In the workplace, employees who speak a language other than Eng- lish may be considered irritating to others outside that ethnic group. The very same people who would adamantly refuse to use racial slurs

Ethnicity and Diversity in the Workforce 115

are comfortable with expressing anger toward coworkers who don’t speak English fluently. Supervisors and managers should take the initiative to provide support for minority members who struggle with the English language by making inquiries as to whether the employee is interested in improving their English speaking skills, and providing information, ser- vices, and financial support, if feasible, to connect employees to available resources. If the employee expresses no desire to learn and speak the lan- guage more fluently, managers should accept their decision and clearly explain any possible negative consequences that could affect potential advancement. Employers should be familiar with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) regulations (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, n.d.) regarding the kind of nondiscriminatory working atmosphere that must be provided for all employees.

Another issue related to language is accents, which also affect communi- cation in the workplace. Dictionary.com defines an accent as “a mode of pronunciation, such as pitch or tone, emphasis pattern, or intonation and characteristic of speech by a particular person, group, or locality.” Unfortu- nately, an accent has been used as a reason for lower scores on evaluations and performance reviews in the workplace (Esty, Griffin, & Hirsch, 1995). Accents have also been used as criteria for determining the intelligence of a speaker and have been the cause of hostility and ridicule directed toward those who speak with an accent. When an employee has an accent that inhibits his or her ability to effectively fulfill the requirements of the job description, then action must be taken. The first step is to communicate clearly to the employee how problems are arising as a result of his or her accent. At this juncture, several alternatives could be explored, such as chang- ing the person’s responsibilities and/or providing him or her with training to reduce the accent.

Ethnic jokes and ridicule are a common type of humor that can have nega- tive effects on minority ethnic workforce groups. There are as many ethnic jokes as there are ethnic groups; many jokes are the same, substituting different ethnic groups around the punch line. It is also common for employees to make fun of the mannerisms and accents, clothing, and hair styles of coworkers who are from different ethnic groups. Ethnic jokes may be considered harmless in some company cultures and be overlooked or excused. However, just as racial and sexual humor is considered offensive, and should not be tolerated in the workplace, neither should ethnic jokes; ridicule of members of an ethnic group should not be tolerated. Often, the most effective method to combat offensive humor is to stand up and speak out against it.

Finally, stereotypes are the most pervasive problem that ethnic minori- ties confront in the workplace. Stereotypes are usually distortions about various characteristics of a specific group. Of course, people often assume that every person within a particular ethnic group possesses these char- acteristics. For example, tall males from any ethnicity or race are often stereotyped by others as being proficient in basketball. African American

116 Chaunda L. Scott and Terrance R. McClain

men and women are often stereotyped as being good singers and danc- ers. Additionally, many African American men and women report first- hand experience of colleagues expressing genuine surprise at their ability to excel in the workplace, since academia conflicts with the stereotypes. The most difficult aspect of stereotypes is that they’re deeply ingrained in American culture. Stereotypes are so pervasive that they are generally accepted without question. One strategy to deal with ethnic stereotyping is to point it out and initiate a strategy for inquiry to determine its validity in the current case. It is important to consider claims of discrimination, prejudice, and racism on a case-by-case basis by resisting the urge to con- sider the claims of one group over another.

Employee Efforts Supporting the Inclusion of Ethnicity in the Workforce

Ethnic jokes and humor can have negative effects on ethnic groups. There- fore, it is important to learn about an individual’s culture and background first to avoid making ethnic assumptions. Stereotypes fade away over time with daily contact with ethnic groups (Esty et al., 1995, p. 100). Employees must also be willing to:

• Speak up and out against ethnic insults and typecasting in the workplace when they occur.

• Ask international employees questions about their culture rather than make inaccurate statements that lead to stereotyping. International employees welcome the opportunity to share information about their culture with colleagues (p. 100).

Chapter Summary

Although related to the construct of race, ethnicity is separate and has a profound impact on interactions in the workforce. Ethnic groups are identified in relation to the dominant culture of the society in which they live, and their ethnic identity requires shared perceptions that there are within-group similarities and across-group differences. However, all per- sons within any particular group are not necessarily carbon copies of one another. In addition, ethnicity can only emerge in the context of relation- ships and interaction with others. Ethnicity is created and re-created based upon situations and the volition of the individuals engaged in interaction with one another (Nagel, 1994). In reference to workforce diversity, the characteristics of minority or subordinate groups in the United States are unequal treatment, distinguishing physical or cultural traits, involuntary membership, awareness of subordination, in-group marriage, and minor- ity members’ lacking the knowledge about ways of working, being, and knowing in American culture.

Ethnicity and Diversity in the Workforce 117

Definition of Key Terms

Accent—A mode of pronunciation, such as pitch or tone, emphasis pattern, or intonation and characteristic.

Ascribed status—Social status (e.g., race or gender) that people have little or no choice about occupying.

Assimilationist model—The process of change a minority ethnic group may experience when moving to a country where another culture dominates.

Culture—A distinctive human activity which refers to customary behavior and beliefs that are learned through interaction with society and include knowledge, beliefs, arts, morals, laws, customs, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by a person as a member of society.

Discrimination—Actions, behaviors, policies, and practices that harm a group and its members.

Ethnic group—A group of people who share certain beliefs, values, habits, customs, and norms because of their common background.

Ethnicity—A group of people who share a culture, nationality, ances- try, and/or language [and] physical appearance is not associated with ethnicity.

Hypodescent—A rule of descent that assigns social identity on the basis of ancestry, applied mainly in the United States, and used to divide Ameri- can society into groups that have been unequal in their access to wealth, power, and prestige.

Intrinsic racism—Belief that a (perceived) racial difference is sufficient reason to value one person less than another.

Mixed race—A person who has parents of two different ethnic classifications. Multicultural—Opposite of the assimilationist model; encourages the

practice of cultural-ethnic traditions. Prejudice—Devaluing a group because of its assumed behavior, values,

capabilities, or attributes. Race—Generally represents a group of people who share similar physical

characteristics (e.g., skin color, hair texture, facial features, etc.) and a com- mon historical background.

Racial classification—Politicized system that determines access to resources (including jobs), voting districts, and federal funding of pro- grams, often having the effect of controlling and limiting opportunities for minorities.

Stereotypes—Fixed ideas, often unfavorable, about group characteristics.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 How significant is your ethnicity to your individual identity? 2 In what ways do you believe that your ethnic identity has caused you to

be the victim of prejudice or discrimination in the workforce?

118 Chaunda L. Scott and Terrance R. McClain

3 What are some common issues and concerns surrounding ethnicity in the workforce—for example, language, accent, jokes/ridicule, and stereotypes—that you have experienced? How were these situations resolved?

4 In what ways have the projected 2060 population trends changed from the 2014 projected population trends?

5 Has there ever been a time when you were mislabeled ethnically because of racial characteristics?

6 Have there been times when your individual ethnic identity has been in conflict with your collective ethnic identity? If so, how did this manifest itself? How did you resolve the conflict?

7 Name two ways that race and ethnicity differ.

Case Study: Muslim Religious Attire in the Workplace

Ajanta Bashar is a South Asian woman from Bangladesh who has been living in the United States for 12 years. Ajanta speaks English very well and is familiar with American culture and customs. After see- ing a position advertised at a dry cleaner, Ajanta called the dry cleaner and spoke to the manager, who interviewed her over the phone. The manager liked her so much that she offered her the job over the phone. When Ajanta arrived for her first day of work, the manager seemed startled by her appearance. Ajanta has dark skin and wears a hijab (Muslim religious and cultural head cover), but her clothing was consistent with American culture. The manager brusquely stated that she had found someone “better suited for the job,” and sent her home with no other explanation.

Unwilling to give up, Ajanta called the next day to speak with the manager about why she was rejected for the position when she arrived at the dry cleaner, after she had been hired over the phone. The manager responded that she felt that the dry cleaner’s customers might not be comfortable if serviced by someone who was a Muslim after 9/11. The manager told Ajanta that if she were willing not to wear her hijab on the job, she would reconsider hiring her. Ajanta told the manager that her head covering is a part of her ethnic identity and she would not remove the hijab. The manager told her that there was nothing she could do. Ajanta hung up the phone, feeling rejected. “What can I do now?” she thought to herself. “Will other companies reject me for the same reason?”

Ethnicity and Diversity in the Workforce 119

References

Esty, K., Griffin, R., & Hirsch, M. S. (1995). Workplace diversity: A manager’s guide to solving problems and turning diversity into a competitive advantage. Holbrook, MA: Adams Media Corporation.

Fitzgerald, K. J. (2017). Recognizing race and ethnicity: Power, privilege and inequality (2nd ed). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Gold, S. J. (2007). Race and ethnic consciousness. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology online. Available at www.sociologyencyclopedia.com

Jenkins, R. (2007). Ethnicity. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology online. Retrieved March 9, 2010, from www.sociologyencyclopedia.com

Kottak, C. P. (2006). Anthropology: The exploration of human diversity. New York: McGraw- Hill.

Nagel, J. (1994). Constructing ethnicity: Creating and recreating ethnic identity and cul- ture. Social Problems, 41(1), 152–176.

Schaefer, R. T. (2004). Racial and ethnic groups (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Schaefer, R. T. (2011). Racial and ethnic groups (12th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Shore, L. M., Chung-Herrera, B. G., Dean, M. A., Ehrhart, K. H., Jung, D. I., Randel, A. E., & Singh, G. (2009). Diversity in organizations: Where are we now and where are we going? Human Resource Management Review, 19, 117–133.

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (n.d.). EEOC regulations. Retrieved from www.eeoc.gov/laws/regulations

Winant, H. (2000). Race and race theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 169–185.

Discussion Questions

1 What should Ajanta do? 2 What would you do if you were the manager of the dry cleaner? 3 Do you think employees and customers should be more support-

ive of Ajanta’s hijab? Explain your answer. 4 Do you think the employees of the dry cleaner need ethnicity

training regarding how to work with people of different ethnicities? 5 What strategies in the chapter support the inclusion of ethnicity

in the workplace as it applies to Ajanta’s situation?

Chapter Overview

Increasingly, human resource development (HRD) is integrating issues of diversity into theory, research, and training. However, the inclusion of diver- sity typically centers on race and ethnicity. Often excluded from workplace diversity discussions are issues involving lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgen- der, queer, and other non-heterosexual (LGBTQ+) individuals. Culturally competent HRD practitioners must understand the inherent complexities associated with the multiple identities of LGBTQ+ individuals. Therefore, this chapter begins by defining important terms and constructs related to sexual orientation, gender identity and expression. To further enhance HRD workers’ understanding and awareness of LGBTQ+ individuals, this chapter explores models of sexual and transgender identity development. The chapter goes deeper to examine specific demographic trends associ- ated with LGBTQ+ people, such as estimated population sizes, relationship, educational, and employment statuses. How these demographic characteris- tics influence LGBTQ+ individuals especially in the workplace is explored. Societal attitudes toward LGBTQ+ communities and how these attitudes often carry over into the workplace are discussed. Moreover, manifestations of anti-LGBTQ+ attitudes in the workplace in the forms of discrimination, harassment, and heterosexist and transphobic workplace policies are pre- sented. This chapter navigates some of the complex and often difficult chal- lenges that many LGBTQ+ individuals experience in the workplace, such as disclosing sexual orientation and/or gender identity to colleagues. Addition- ally, the chapter highlights the unique needs of transgender and gender non- conforming (TGNC) individuals. Historically, TGNC individuals have been grouped together with the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer (LGBQ) com- munities, which has often resulted in invisibility and within-group oppres- sion. In this chapter, specific workplace policies such as the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) are discussed, as well as issues affecting some TGNC workers such as transitioning in the workplace. To help HRD professionals effectively work with TGNC employees, Competencies for

7 Developing Human Resource Development Competencies to Manage Sexual Orientation and Transgender Diversity Issues in the Workforce

Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 121

Counseling Transgender Clients in the areas of career and lifestyle develop- ment are presented. The chapter concludes with strategies for HRD workers to create nonheterosexist and transpositive work environments.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• know appropriate terms and definitions used to describe individuals who comprise the LGBTQ+ communities;

• be familiar with different models of sexual and transgender identity development;

• have an understanding of the relationships between heterosexual and cisgender privilege, heterosexist and transphobic policies, and oppres- sion, especially as they relate to LGBTQ+ employees in the workplace;

• be aware of workplace issues that are specific to LGBTQ+ employees; • recognize transgender issues in the workplace and be familiar with

transpositive strategies for working with TGNC employees; • identify strategies for creating nonheterosexist and transaffirming work

environments; • describe ethical practices when working with LGBTQ+ employees.

Conceptualizing Identity

Defining identity requires integrating a complex set of variables layered in experience. Arredondo and Glauner (1992) developed a model that describes identity as a set of characteristics or dimensions where some are fluid and others remain static. The model focuses on factors of personal identity and consists of three dimensions. Dimension A consists of identity- based characteristics that one is born with, such as ethnicity, nationality, disability, age, genetics, gender, and sexual orientation. Dimension B consists of characteristics that are changeable and often influenced by the individ- ual, such as religious and spiritual identity, educational background, career choice, and relationship and marital status. Last, Dimension C consists of historical events such as the Great Depression, the Stonewall Uprising, 9/11, natural disasters, and economic downturns. Each of these dimensions influences how one views self as well as others’ perceptions of an individ- ual. For example, a 24-year-old recent college graduate, working in retail and planning to disclose her sexual orientation to her family in the fall, is experiencing financial difficulty due to underemployment. In the context of Arredondo and Glauner’s (1992) identity model, there are characteris- tics such as age and the economic downturn, which are unchangeable. Yet an individual also has choice about career and partnership decisions that influences individual identity. One of the roles of the HRD practitioner is

122 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

to understand the complexity of identity within the dynamics of a work- place. Sexual orientation and gender, as identity characteristics, necessitate knowledge and awareness within the HRD community. Sexual and gen- der minorities, for the purpose of this chapter, include members of the LGBTQ+ communities.

Defining Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identities

Terms used to describe nonheterosexual orientations have changed through the centuries, and received a great deal of attention in the early 1900s when sexual behavior was increasingly studied. One of the most influential of these researchers was Alfred Kinsey, who examined the sexual behavior of men and women. In his research, he attempted to operationalize sexual practices. As a result, the Kinsey Scale, a continuum of sexual behavior, was developed (Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, 1948b). On one end of the continuum is same- sex sexual behavior (homosexuality), and at the other end of the continuum is opposite-sex sexual behavior (heterosexuality). All humans fall somewhere along the continuum as it relates to their sexual and affectional behaviors, feelings, and thoughts. It is important to note that an individual may experi- ence same-sex desires or heterosexual feelings and thoughts and not act on them. Nonetheless, a person’s identity incorporates a sexual orientation that fits their construction of self. In general, a lesbian or gay person is an indi- vidual who is innately inclined to have romantic and/or sexual relationships with a person of the same gender. Heterosexual individuals are innately inclined to have romantic and/or sexual relationships with people of the opposite gender. Bisexuality refers to individuals who experience affec- tional feelings and/or physical attraction to both men and women. It should be noted that the term homosexual has a historically negative connotation. Homosexuality was listed as a mental illness in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders up until 1973. As a result, LGBTQ+ individuals do not typically use the term “homosexual” to describe themselves. The terms lesbian, gay men, and bisexual are generally used. Although the term queer also has a historically negative connotation, some sexual minorities have reclaimed this broad term as a self-identifier to describe those who do not identify as heterosexual. As sexual identity is conceptualized as a more fluid construct, moving away from binary categories, some people describe themselves using terms that eliminate binaries (i.e., gay/heterosexual, male/ female).For example, the term pansexual describes a person whose physi- cal or emotional attractions are not limited to a particular gender identity or sexual orientation. Competent HRD practitioners will always ask their clients how they wish to be referred to. Please note that transgender is defined later in the chapter. Transgender is related to gender identity and expression and is distinct from sexual orientation. Although gender, gender identity, and gender roles may intersect with sexual orientation, each of these constructs are qualitatively distinct (Yarber, Sayad, & Strong, 2010). Sexual identity

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 123

and gender identity are both fluid concepts, which require professionals to understand and educate themselves to increase both their sensitivity and implement work practices that are inclusive of all individuals.

Sexual Identity Development

Currently, there are several identity models that conceptualize marked stages through which LGB individuals often go (Cass, 1979; Troiden, 1989). The Cass Identity Development Model is a framework with six stages. The stages are fluid and not meant to be benchmarks an individual must complete. They are common indicators used to help HRD professionals lend voice to the experiences of a person’s lesbian or gay identity development. The first stage is identity confusion, which is when awareness first takes place that one might be lesbian or gay. Due to societal and social pressures, the individual may minimize her or his feelings or may view the same-sex experience as “experimenting” or “a one-time event.” The overarching question of “who am I?” is often the focus of this stage. The second stage, identity comparison, is marked with a tension between one’s past understanding of self and a cur- rent understanding of self as possibly lesbian or gay. One might self-isolate or deal with grief and loss issues associated with the cost of accepting the new identity. In the workplace, a person might experience difficulties connecting with others or may limit their participation, especially if the individual views the workplace as hostile toward lesbian and gays. In the third stage, identity tolerance, the individual is developing an appreciation of their new identity. They involve themselves more fully in lesbian or gay culture. An individual may develop a new set of friends who are supportive of and/or knowledge- able about lesbian/gay culture. During this stage, the individual may begin disclosing her or his sexual orientation identity (“coming out”) to family, friends, and close coworkers identified as being safe and supportive. In the workplace, an individual will often observe both direct and indirect oppres- sive incidents and make decisions about disclosure. The individual who is increasing contact with others in their sexual group community charac- terizes the fourth stage, identity acceptance. The individual no longer simply tolerates their new identity, but begins to move toward acceptance. Being part of their new identity subculture now plays an important part in their life. However, there is still an element of tension experienced, as the indi- vidual struggles to develop strategies for reducing incongruencies between the public self and private self. The fifth stage is identity pride, which is asso- ciated with positive feelings and reactions to one’s identity as a gay person, as well as a need to share their identity with others. The person also begins to engage in LGBTQ+-related community activities and bring their two worlds together—the newly accepted gay identity and their previous sense of self. The identity synthesis stage is the final stage, in which the individual experiences a sense of wholeness. Their sexual identity is not their defining identity, but an integral part of their identity (Cass, 1979).

124 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

Troiden’s Homosexuality Identity Development Model (1989) focuses on the following stages: sensitization, identity confusion, identity assump- tion, and commitment. Similar to Cass (1979), this model begins with a sense of uncertainty and progresses to an increased sense of self-acceptance, moti- vation, and commitment to develop social connections. In general, sexual identity development models tend to reflect a progression from early internal awareness to congruence between internal awareness and outward actions of identity, such as coming out, partnering, or changing employment to a place affirming of one’s identity. The models also coincide with early domi- nant narratives related to identity development, with a movement toward autonomy. For example, Dillon, Worthington, and Moradi (2011) defined the first stage of sexual identity development as compulsory heterosexuality, but over time, there is movement toward feeling more autonomous in one’s LGBTQ+ identity.

To help understand the identity developmental process of bisexual indi- viduals, recent models have been conceptualized. For example, a four-stage model that resembles the aforementioned identity development models has been developed (Brown, 2002). In the first stage, confusion about one’s identity is experienced. Finding and applying the label of bisexuality is the second stage. In the third stage, a bisexual individual begins settling into the identity. During the fourth and final stage, identity maintenance, the bisexual person is integrated into the bisexual community and may serve as a source of support for individuals looking for others like themselves (Brown, 2002). It should be noted that the preceding stage models are not necessarily linear, and people may skip stages and/or go back and forth between stages.

The identity development of sexual minorities is an important aspect for the HRD manager to consider. Understanding the similarities and differ- ences among the various development models may assist HRD professionals to work more effectively with LQBTQ+ employees and to create a more affirmative workplace culture. If an individual is working at an employee assistance program (EAP) or managing diversity education, using identity development models as a framework will often normalize the individual’s experience. In the next section, the LGB communities are examined more closely.

A Closer Look at Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Communities

Population Analysis

In this section, only lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals are examined because the transgender population is explored later in this chapter. Although there is no way to know for sure how many LGBQ+ individuals reside in the United States because objective assessments of LGBQ+ population sizes at the national level do not exist, historical data and more recent research

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 125

provide estimations. These estimations are disputatious because they proba- bly do not include individuals who are not comfortable disclosing their sex- ual orientations, LGBQ+ children and adults who have not yet realized an LGBQ+ identity, and individuals who are heterosexually married who also identify as LGBQ+. As mentioned earlier, one of the first studies to quantify the number of lesbian and gay people was conducted by Alfred Kinsey. Based on their research, Kinsey, Pomeroy, and Martin (1948a, 1948b) reported that approximately 10% of males and between 2% and 6% of females were pri- marily gay and lesbian, respectively. Another study reported that 9% of men and 5% of women identified as gay and lesbian (Janus, S. S. & Janus, C. L., 1993). As stated above, it is extremely difficult to determine the number of LGBQ+ individuals for two reasons. First, there is a lack of objective esti- mate protocol. For example, although the U.S. Census includes a category for same-sex “unmarried partners,” that category does not take into consid- eration single lesbian and gay individuals, lesbian and gay couples who do not live together or do not label their relationship as “unmarried partners,” or bisexual individuals. Second, bisexual individuals are often excluded from epidemiological studies. However, a 2011 study for the National Center for Health Statistics found that approximately 1% of men between 18 and 44 years old identified as bisexual, 2% identified as gay, and 4% identified as something other than heterosexual or bisexual. In the same study, among women between 18 and 44 years old, 3.5% reported being bisexual and 1% identified as lesbian. Albeit the aforementioned statistics demonstrate dis- crepancies in the number of LGBQ+ individuals, the available data provides HRD practitioners with a general idea of how many Americans may iden- tify as LGBQ+. Overall, it is estimated that 9 million Americans (18 years or older) self-identify as LGBQ+ (Gates, 2011).

Relationships and Educational Status

Culturally competent HRD practitioners must have knowledge about LGBQ+ relationships and the educational trends of LGBQ+ workers because workplace and federal policies often affect these facets of identity.

Contrary to popular belief, many LGBQ+ individuals are not single. In the United States, it has been estimated that there are more than 783,000 same-sex couples (377,903 male couples and 405,197 female couples; U.S. Census Bureau, 2014). Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling (see Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015) that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples, there has been an increase in the number of same-sex marriages. A recent Gallup poll reported that there are approximately 491,000 same- sex marriages in the United States (Gallup, 2016). These results are impor- tant because they debunk a common stereotype that most LGBQ+ people are promiscuous. When same-sex relationships are examined more closely, it has been found that LGBQ+ couples tend to be older and are more likely to be White (Carpenter & Gates, 2008). The fact that LGBQ+ couples tend

126 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

to be older is probably a developmental issue. It is possible that with age comes comfort or acceptance with one’s sexual identity, which allows an individual to be more open to the idea of a relationship. It is also possible that LGBQ+ couples are more likely to be White, because other cultures (e.g., Latin Americans) tend to be more disapproving of LGBQ+ individuals than Whites (Potoczniak, Crosbie-Burnett, & Saltzburg, 2009). This disap- proval would make it less likely for individuals to openly express their sexual orientation, which probably would prevent them from getting into same-sex relationships.

In regard to educational status, lesbians and gay men are generally highly educated. It has been reported that lesbians and gay men are more edu- cated than their heterosexual counterparts (Black, Sanders, & Taylor, 2007). An estimated four in ten LGBQ+ individuals have earned college degrees compared to three in ten heterosexuals (Gates, 2014). Interestingly, although many gay men have college degrees, gay men who attend college are less likely to pursue graduate education. Knowing the patterns of LGBQ+ edu- cational attainment is extremely relevant because higher education has been found to be related to individuals being more likely to identify as LGBQ+ and/or more likely to live in a predominantly LGBQ+ neighborhood (Bar- rett & Pollack, 2005). In their pivotal study exploring the economic trends of lesbians and gay men, Black and colleagues (2007) reported that in regard to academic studies, lesbians were more likely to major in areas that are not “stereotypical[ly] female.” On the other hand, gay men were more likely to focus their studies in areas that were historically associated with females. These results illustrate the complexity of the intersection of gender roles and sexual orientation. Moreover, these results have implications for the employ- ment and social economic status of LGBQ+ workers.

Employment and Social Economic Status

When looking at household incomes of LGBQ+ individuals, interesting patterns emerge. Gay male couples tend to have higher household incomes than heterosexual couples, and lesbians tend to have lower household incomes than heterosexual couples (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014). These types of findings may distort the economic reality of many LGBQ+ people. For example, an estimated 7.6% of lesbian couples live in poverty, compared to 5.7% of heterosexual couples (Badgett, Durso, & Schneebaum, 2013). The same study reported that African American lesbian couples are more likely to live in poverty, compared to heterosexual African American couples. These results illustrate the negative consequences associated with the inter- sectionality of gender, sexual orientation, race, and class. On the other hand, some lesbians report higher earnings than their heterosexual peers. The term lesbian premium has been coined to explain the reasoning behind their higher market earnings (Black et al., 2007). According to this theory, upon realization of a lesbian identity and the possibility of a future that does not

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 127

resemble a “traditional” household, some lesbians and bisexual women may invest more heavily in education and career-oriented activities. This in turn would be likely to lead to higher-paying jobs. The same is not true for many openly gay and bisexual men who earn significantly less than heterosexual men with backgrounds that are similar (McFadden, 2015). Additionally, men working in traditionally “female” occupations often earn lower pay. This phenomenon has been termed the gay male penalty. Employers tend to reward compliance to masculinity and stereotypical male traits (assertiveness, power, strength, etc.) and chasten values of femininity. This illustrates the intersection of heterosexism and sexism.

Attitudes Toward LGBTQ+ Individuals

Societal Attitudes

Societal attitudes toward LGBTQ+ individuals appear to be improving over- all. About 63% of Americans say that sexual minorities should be accepted by society, and less than 28% say that sexual minorities should be discour- aged (Fingerhut, 2016). Though attitudes are becoming more positive, some Americans continue to have negative attitudes toward and beliefs about the LGBTQ+ communities. Sometimes, negative attitudes directed toward LGBTQ+ people can lead to violence. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation 2015 Hate Crime Statistics, there were 1,263 reported hate crimes related to sexual orientation, the third high- est category of all hate crimes. Of these reported hate crimes, 62.2% were anti-gay male, 13.5% were anti-lesbian, and 2.8% were anti-bisexual. These numbers are probably underrepresented because most anti-LGBTQ+ viola- tions go unreported due to shame or fear of further repercussions.

As a result of the divided attitudes and beliefs among Americans, it makes it difficult for LGBTQ+ individuals to know to whom it is safe to disclose sexual orientation and/or gender identity. Research has shown that there are certain factors that predict individuals’ positive and negative attitudes toward LGBTQ+ individuals. A strong predictor of positive attitudes toward LGBTQ+ individuals is prior experience with these communities. That is, the more interaction we have with people who identify as LGBTQ+, the more negative attitudes are decreased (Brown & Henriquez, 2008). Edu- cation has also been shown to affect positive attitudes toward LGBTQ+ individuals. Specifically, a high level of education has a positive effect on anti-LGBTQ+ attitudes (Lambert, Ventura, Hall, & Cluse-Tolar, 2006). Moreover, individuals with advanced education are more likely to extend rights to and interact with LGBTQ+ individuals.

There are also elements that predict negative attitudes toward the LGBTQ+ communities. Race, religiosity, and political conservatism con- tribute to anti-LGBTQ+ attitudes (Brown & Henriquez, 2008). African Americans are more likely than European Americans to have negative

128 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

attitudes about LGBTQ+ people. Additionally, individuals who regularly attended religious services are more likely to have anti-LGBTQ+ feelings. These results are not surprising, given that some churches relay messages that LGBTQ+ people are sinful and immoral. Interestingly, when race is con- trolled for, religiosity emerges as the primary predictor of anti-LGBTQ+ attitudes (Schulte & Battle, 2004).

Attitudes in the Workplace

As described above, societal attitudes toward the LGBTQ+ communities are divided. In some ways, Americans are becoming more tolerant; and in other ways, heterosexist and transphobic beliefs are thriving. Within the work- place, the attitudes of coworkers of LGBTQ+ employees tend to be more negative than that of the general population. This is exemplified by The Wil- liams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy report (2011) which found that up to 43% of LGB workers had been verbally or physi- cally abused or had their workplace vandalized, and approximately 90% of transgender workers experienced workplace harassment (as cited in Burns & Krehely, 2011). It seems that although heterosexual workers may view them- selves as accepting and tolerant of LGBTQ+ colleagues, this is not in fact the case. Some heterosexual workers who express liberal viewpoints, especially as they relate to LGBTQ+ issues, often demonstrate actions that are incon- sistent with their words (Embrick, Walther, &Wickens, 2007). For example, a heterosexual employee may express the view that she has “no problem working with gay men,” but during her lunch hour with colleagues, she tells anti-LGBTQ+ jokes. One explanation given for this behavior is that it maintains heterosexual privilege.

There are three themes that have been identified related to the negative attitudes of heterosexuals toward their LGBTQ+ coworkers (Embrick et al., 2007). The first theme is blatant detestation of LGBTQ+ individuals. This could be due to a lack of exposure to LGBTQ+ individuals, per- sonal beliefs, negative past experiences with LGBTQ+ individuals, or hom- ophobia/transphobia. The second theme is “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” This means that some heterosexual coworkers’ negative attitudes are a result of LGBTQ+ visibility in the workplace. These individuals would rather have their LGBTQ+ coworkers not disclose their sexual orientation or gender identities in the workplace. Disclosure in the workplace for LGBTQ+ indi- viduals is risky, because being open about one’s LGBTQ+ identity has been linked to direct physical threats and sexual harassment (Williams, Giuffre, & Dellinger, 2009). The third theme explaining why some heterosexuals have negative attitudes toward their LGBTQ+ coworkers is ostracism and fear. When a dominant cultural group experiences fear, as a result of another cul- tural group, it is often because the dominant group feels that its privileges are being threatened. Additionally, lack of awareness and knowledge of the non- dominant group can lead to ostracism and fear. With all of this knowledge

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 129

about what contributes to the negative attitudes toward LGBTQ+ workers, HRD practitioners are in a good place to begin working with employers to create work environments that are safe, both psychologically and physically, for all employees.

Workplace Concerns

Discrimination

Common fears and issues experienced by LGBTQ+ employees include fear of dismissal, job discrimination, refused employment, harassment, unequal treatment in promotions, and other work-related insults. The rate of dis- crimination complaints by sexual minorities is comparable to the rate of sex discrimination complaints by women (Badgett, Lau, Sears, & Ho, 2007). Employment discrimination can take the form of wage disparities, hiring and firing policies, and harassment. At the time of writing this chapter, only 20 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, and Puerto Rico have employ- ment non-discrimination policies that protect LGBTQ+ individuals in the public and private sectors. In a sampling of the New Jersey Supreme Courts, discrimination was experienced in the following ways: denied employment (17%), denied promotion (28%), negative performance evaluation (21%), teased or harassed (29%), and received unequal pay (10%).

Four levels of discrimination in work settings for LGBTQ+ employees have been conceptualized (Chojnacki & Gelberg, 1994). Level 1, Overt discrimination and Level 2, Covert discrimination, indicate discrimi- natory practices occurring. Level 3, Tolerance and Level 4, Affirmation, indicate less discriminatory policies and practices. The degree of discrimina- tion within each level influences different expectations of the HRD leaders. Overt discrimination requires quick and transparent actions to eliminate the discrimination. Level 2 requires the HRD leaders to understand the subtle transgressions and address them. Level 3 requires both direct and indirect actions, as well as policies, which are inclusive of sexual minorities. Level 4 requires continued maintenance of antidiscrimination practices and an inclusive positive work environment.

Institutional Discrimination

Institutional discrimination refers to any type of unjust practice or discrimi- natory behavior toward a person or groups of people by the government, agencies, businesses, or public institutions. A salient example of institutional discrimination was the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy adopted by the U.S. Armed Services in 1994. The policy was based on the following premise: If the employer (armed services) did not ask about your sexual orientation or gender identity and an individual chose not to disclose LGBTQ+ identities, then the individual was “safe” from dismissal unless

130 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

a person was observed behaving in such a way. This policy was counter to what we know about sexual and gender identity development; specifi- cally, the more one becomes comfortable with one’s identity, there tends to be an increased need to come out to others. By 2010, approximately 13,500 service men and women had been dismissed since the implementa- tion of DADT. In December 2010, the U.S. Senate voted (65 to 31) to end DADT, and President Barack Obama signed a landmark law repealing the ban on gay men and lesbians openly serving in the military. This action was due in part to LGBTQ+ groups advocating on their own behalf for the policy to be repealed. In August 2017, Donald Trump released a presidential memorandum to the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security banning transgender military recruits, thus revitalizing this form of institutional discrimination.

Harassment

For many LGBTQ+ employees, the workplace is a setting in which many hours are spent and quality productivity is expected. For the manager, the goal is a safe work environment and a positive work culture. These are simple role expectations, yet workplace culture is based on a complex set of human interactions, as well as planned work goals and company expectations. Avoid- ing discrimination, harassment, and violence in the work setting is an impor- tant priority for the HRD practitioner. One task for the HRD practitioner is to gauge the work environment for incidents of harassment and discrimi- nation. Harassment in the workplace may include physical, emotional, and verbal activities to create a hostile environment for the LGBTQ+ worker. Any speech in the workplace that is severe or pervasive enough to create a hostile or abusive work environment based on race, religion, sex, national origin, or sexual orientation is considered harassment (Volokh, 1997). Simi- larly, sexual harassment is offensive or unwelcomed sexual behavior in the workplace. Bullying and physical confrontation are other types of harassment influencing the work environment. Measuring harassment in the workplace is difficult, due to fears of retribution and underreporting. Human resource development workers need to be at the forefront to respond to harassment and take measured steps to deal with reported incidents and the parties involved. Two legal cases dealing with workplace harassment are presented at the end of this chapter. To address harassment, the workplace institution must be committed to policies that identify and address workplace harass- ment as unacceptable and are inclusive of multiple identities.

Family and Employee Benefits

Two of the most practical issues affecting some LGBTQ+ individuals are family issues and employment benefits. Approximately 30% of an employee’s salary comes from benefits (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2017). Therefore,

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 131

many LGBTQ+ employees intentionally seek a workplace setting with LGBTQ+-inclusive benefit policies. Dramatic court cases in recent years changed the landscape of family and employee benefits for LGBTQ+ popu- lations. The Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) Supreme Court decision provided a clearer path for employers to provide benefits for married LGBTQ+ cou- ples. Second, the landmark decision lessened the stigma associated with same-sex couples getting married. The verdict strengthened the family and employee benefit discourse for LGBTQ+ persons. The case strengthened the argument that discrimination based on sexual orientation in work poli- cies, including employee benefits, is a federal violation (Green, 2017). The Human Rights Campaign (2017) benchmarks equality practices at corpora- tions based on ratings and comparisons using the Corporate Equality Index (CEI). Corporations are evaluated and ranked based on a variety of factors, including health benefits that use inclusive language for same-sex couples and policies that explicitly cover medical services such as gender transition- related treatment. An analysis of companies with LGBTQ+-friendly poli- cies using the HRC CEI rating index found that when one publicly traded company in an industry adopts such policies, other firms are also likely to adopt such policies. Moreover, executive boards comprised of more women than men were also more likely to adopt LGBTQ+-friendly HR policies (Everly & Schwarz, 2015).

In general, the importance of LGBTQ+-inclusive employee benefits is related to quality of work life. Human resource development research shows that employee benefits help families to balance work and family life, improve employee retention, and improve work performance (Hornsby & Munn, 2009). Human resource development professionals are also involved in policies to develop and activate benefits. Most commonly, organizations require documentation validating domestic partnerships. Policies differ from organization to organization, yet common documentation includes proof that one is over 18 years old, unmarried, unrelated, in an intimate caring and mutual relationship, and has no other legal marriage/partner relationship, plus documentation of legal and financial commitment including affidavits. Documentation may include shared bank accounts, health directives, and a shared mortgage. Second, the HRD representative often takes on the role of diversity advocate. If partner benefits increase the quality of work–life balance and provide a positive work environment, then advocating within the institution for fair and equitable benefits is another responsibility of the HRD professional. The fact that the most powerful and highly economically resourced companies provide family benefits demonstrates the value placed on such policies.

Career Development Issues

The career development of sexual minorities is an underdeveloped area of research. Gedro (2009) suggested that the current dearth of career

132 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

development research is indicative of the pervasive heterosexist-dominant perspective. Even less research has focused on career development among bisexuals and transgender individuals. In the following section, we briefly explore some of the developmental career concerns of LGBTQ+ individu- als, because the culturally responsive HRD practitioner should advocate for and promote workplace policies that are inclusive of these workers. Work- place environments that are not inclusive of LGBTQ+ workers influence the career development of these communities. In contrast with the career development of heterosexual workers, many LGBTQ+ individuals choose careers based solely on their sexual orientation or gender identity. Sexual and gender identity development and career development often occur dur- ing the same life-span stages of late adolescence to young adulthood. The combination of the fear of disclosure and rejection most likely limits time and effort spent on one’s career achievements.

Inaccurate stereotypes often segment LGBTQ+ individuals into job clas- sifications that are based on preconceived notions of what it means to be LGBTQ+. Gedro (2009) suggested that many gay men experience stere- otyped work roles (e.g., hairdresser, flight attendant) and traditional male gender role expectations that limit their employability. On the other hand, many lesbians tend to have more occupational choices and often do not fit into gender-oriented stereotypes. These occupational stereotypes contribute to some of the workplace limitations experienced by LGBTQ+ workers. The term lavender ceiling is often used to describe the limited advance- ment and inequitable wage earnings of many “out” LGBTQ+ workers. LGBTQ+ individuals experience decreases in job satisfaction in heterosexist environments and increased levels of discrimination in performance reviews and promotions (McFadden, 2015). Though LGBTQ+ populations have increased their visibility, younger generations also experience career develop- ment barriers such as less visible role models and restrictions in career deci- sion-making. For the HRD professional, avoiding mixed messages between workplace policies and the actual working climate assists LGBTQ+ employ- ees to navigate work culture and manage their identities more successfully (Compton, 2016).

Coming Out

Coming out is the process that many LGBTQ+ individuals go through when they self-disclose their sexual orientation and/or gender identity to others. For some individuals, coming out in the workplace can be a positive experience. For other individuals, numerous repercussions might be experi- enced as a result of coming out at work, which could encourage individu- als to remain silent. Coming out at work may remove the invisibility, but not the lack of power, and may create disempowerment associated with identifying with a disenfranchised group (Benozzo, Pizzorno, Bell, & Koro- Ljungberg, 2015).

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 133

In a national sample of LGB employees, fear of stigma was reduced when the work environment was perceived as supportive (Ragins, Singh, & Corn- well, 2007). The cost of disclosing is often based on fear of social isolation, job loss, and career development. Employees fearful of disclosing their iden- tities can experience less positive career attitudes, fewer promotions, and more physical stress-related symptoms. Most importantly, coworker support can buffer feelings of fear associated with disclosure. Indeed, coming out at work has potential value such as job satisfaction (Prati & Pietrantoni, 2014). However, an individual’s anticipation of potential discrimination impacts their ability to come out. Key to an individual’s experience is the underly- ing need to experience a sense of belonging and social support. Of par- ticular importance is supervisor support, which is related to job satisfaction (Huffman, Watrousrodrigues, & King, 2008). Thus, HRD needs to support supervisors to develop greater awareness of their role in affecting fairness and equality in the workplace, especially as it relates to LGBTQ+ employees (McDonald & Hite, 2005).

Transgender Issues in the Workplace

Historically, when issues of sexual orientation were discussed, transgen- der individuals were grouped with LGBQ+ individuals. Workplace issues affecting the transgender community are addressed separately for a couple of reasons. First, transgender individuals are often underrepresented in the professional literature. Although they may be “grouped in” with other sexual minority communities, their unique issues are often neglected. Second, the workplace issues and needs of the transgender community are unique and specific and deserve attention. Davis (2009) referred to transgender issues as one of HRD’s newest challenges and opportunities.

Transgender is an umbrella term used to describe individuals whose anatomy and/or appearance may not conform to traditional gender roles. Transgender as a category used to describe individuals who experience dis- crepancies between biological sex and gender identity. As society under- stands gender in more fluid terms, more inclusive terms are being used to describe individuals who do not identify as cisgender (identity and gender correlated with sex assigned at birth). For example, gender non-conforming, gender fluid, gender expansive, gender queer, and pangender are newer identifiers that move away from the limiting gender binary of male–female. Defin- ing each of these terms is beyond the scope of this chapter, but to better understand the differences between each of these points on the transgender spectrum, consult professional literature and reputable websites. Although the various terms may cause confusion and frustration trying to take it all in, competent HRD professionals should recognize that sexual orienta- tion and gender identity are very complex concepts. To unravel some of the complexity, the next section explores the developmental processes of transgender identity.

134 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

Transgender Identity Development

If you were going on a trip to a place you have never been to before, you would most likely bring a map (do people still use maps?) or use a global positioning system (GPS) to help you to get to your destination quickly and without obstacles. In a similar way, HRD professionals who have knowledge of transgender identity development processes have a “map” and under- standing to effectively work with transgender and gender non-conform- ing (TGNC) workers in a culturally responsive and transaffirming manner. Traditional models of human development are not necessarily applicable to TGNC individuals because these models tend to construct gender and gender roles in traditional, binary, biologically-based conceptions. Mallon (1999) was one of the first researchers to propose that transaffirming, non- stigmatizing models of transgender identity development were needed.

Based on a qualitative examination of transgender adults, Morgan and Ste- vens (2008) described an identity developmental process common among many transgender individuals. Based on themes reported by the participants, the researchers presented the process of transgender identity development in life stages. Starting in childhood, a feeling of mind–body dissonance is experienced (Morgan & Stevens, 2008). In other words, although the child may have male genitalia, the child feels and thinks that he is a female. This causes a significant amount of distress and discomfort. Puberty is another time when the transgender individual often experiences mind–body dis- sonance. The bodily changes that occur during puberty are stressful and sometimes embarrassing for most adolescents; for transgender adolescents, who often feel that their first and secondary sex characteristics do not match the gender that they perceive themselves to be, this can be traumatizing. For many transgender adolescents, discomfort and anxiety during puberty are so intense that it is not uncommon for some to engage in binding prac- tices (binding of developing breasts and penises to make them appear flat or nonexistent) and self-mutilation to attempt to remove sex organs and breasts. According to Morgan and Stevens, in adulthood, many transgender individuals continue to manage the gender dissonance they experience. The researchers described this period as “biding time” until the individual tran- sitions. The final stage in this process is transition. This is the process of adjusting their bodies to their preferred gender (Morgan & Stevens, 2008). Transition for many transgender individuals brings contentment and a sense of wholeness. A limitation of this model of identity development is that it assumes that the only resolution of gender dissonance is transitioning. Moreover, the study from which this model resulted is based on the narra- tives of 11 female-to-male transgender adults and may not be generalizable to all transgender individuals.

The next model, 14-stage Transsexual and Transgender Identity Forma- tion Model (Devor, 2004) is more comprehensive. Although transsexu- alism is just one point on the transgender continuum, most transgender

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 135

individuals go through these same stages and report similar experiences during their developmental processes. Albeit this is a stage model, not eve- ryone goes through the stages in the same way, at the same speed, in the same order; nor will everyone end up in the same place. Every individual’s experience is unique.

The first stage of the Transsexual and Transgender Identity Formation Model is Abiding Anxiety. In this stage, the individual might experience a sense of anxiety about not feeling congruent in their body and/or social/ gender roles. Many transgender individuals report feeling this anxiety as part of their earliest childhood memories. Typically, the anxiety is centered on gender issues and relations (Devor, 2004). Stage 2, Identity Confusion about Originally Assigned Gender and Sex, is characterized by questioning whether or not one is supposed to be the gender or sex into which one was born. In this stage, children may make statements to parents that they are the opposite gender, or that they desire to be the opposite gender. During puberty, when many transgender adolescents’ bodies do not develop into the ones they desire, depression, anxiety, and sometimes suicidal ideation result. It is also during this stage that individuals will attempt to resolve the identity confu- sion by diligently attempting to conform to social standards of appropri- ate gender expression. Stage 3, Identity Comparison about Originally Assigned Gender and Sex, is characterized by individuals attempting to balance living as their originally assigned gender, while at the same time finding ways to express their need to belong to the opposite gender. Individuals in this stage compare themselves to behaviors and identities that they have observed in others of their gender. Learning about the existence of transsexualism or transgenderism is the fourth stage of the model. Discovery of Transsexualism or Transgenderism for many is the moment that everything makes sense to the person. Depending on the individual, some people may accept their transgender identity quickly, while others may take years to get to a point of self-acceptance. Individuals who may not accept a transgender identity quickly, might proceed through the next few stages more slowly. Stage 5, Identity Confusion about Transsexualism or Transgenderism, is marked by indi- viduals wondering if they might be transgender. In order to resolve some of the confusion, they may seek out information via community resources or the Internet. In Stage 6, Identity Comparisons about Transsexualism or Transgen- derism, the individual is engaged in a process of comparing the self to people of the originally assigned gender, other transgender individuals, and indi- viduals who belong to genders to which the individual may be transition- ing (Devor, 2004). The goal of this process is for the transgender person to discover which comparison results in greatest mirroring of the transgender individual’s subjective experience. Once individuals start to realize that they may be transgender, they begin to disconnect from their originally assigned gender or sexual identity. Tolerance of Transsexual or Transgender Identity, Stage 7, is illustrated by individuals beginning to apply the identity of transgender to themselves. They may make statements such as, “I am likely transsexual.”

136 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

They may also begin to tell others that they are transgender. The disconnec- tion from the originally assigned gender or sex is even greater in this stage than in the previous stage as the individual moves closer to transitioning genders. Stage 8, Delay before Acceptance of Transsexual or Transgender Identity, is a stage of information gathering for the individual. They delay making concrete decisions about their identity until they have enough informa- tion about transgenderism to make sure that whatever decision is made will bring them contentment. In this stage, they may seek out transgender peers for support and validation of self. They may also participate in reality-testing experiences to see if they could fully accept their transgender identity. Stage 9, Acceptance of Transsexual or Transgender Identity, is demonstrated by state- ments from the individual such as, “I am transgender.”

Although not all transgender individuals go through physical or social transitions, many do. For those who choose to transition, they may experi- ence a Delay before Transitioning, Stage 10. The delay is due to the individual taking care of practical and logistical tasks that must be accomplished before the transition process can begin (e.g., discussing the process with employ- ers, planning finances, setting up a support system). Transition is the eleventh stage. This stage might involve alterations in physical presentation of the self, counseling, surgical procedures, hormone replacement therapy, and so on. Not all transgender individuals go through the transition process. Stage 12, Acceptance of Post-Transition Gender or Sexual Identity, is very similar to Stage 9. Over time, individuals feel empowered now that their social expres- sion of their gender identity is congruent with how they view themselves. They begin to appreciate what it means to be a person of the gender into which they transitioned. Self-acceptance replaces dissonance. The thirteenth stage, Integration, takes place when the person who has transitioned becomes integrated into society. A person who has reached the final stage, Pride, has achieved a personal sense of pride in their transgender identity. The indi- vidual is able to comfortably and openly discuss their transidentity. Individu- als in this stage may also be involved in political and social change efforts, advocating for the rights of other transgender individuals. It should be noted that the pride stage might be experienced simultaneously with earlier stages (Devor, 2004).

Antidiscrimination Policies for Transgender Workers

Although businesses and organizations are increasingly including sexual orientation in workplace nondiscrimination policies, gender identity and expression frequently are left out. Currently, there is no federal law that bans employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Recent statistics show that 89% of Fortune 500 companies had some form of a nondiscrimination policy in place that included sexual orientation (Human Rights Campaign, 2017). Only 66% of Fortune 500 companies had nondiscrimination policies that included gender identity and expression.

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 137

Another area that illustrates the devaluation of transgender individuals in the workplace is that, as of 2017, it is legal to be fired from a job in 28 states based on sexual orientation; however, in 30 states, an individual can be fired by an employer for being transgender. The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) is a proposed bill in Congress that would provide basic pro- tections against discrimination related to sexual orientation and/or gender identity and expression in the workplace (Civic Impulse, 2018). The bill has been introduced in Congress since the mid-1990s, but it has not successfully passed. It was believed that the bill would pass if transgender issues were not included on the bill, and therefore transgender protections were removed. In 2011, ENDA was reintroduced to Congress, with transgender protections included on the bill, because of the urging of House Representative Barney Frank. In 2013, Senator Jeff Merkley introduced the bill in the Senate, and it passed the Senate in November of that year; however, it died in the House of Representatives.

Transitioning

Transitioning is the process in which some transgender individuals engage to make gender identity and expression congruent. There are three pri- mary steps by which some transgender persons may choose to begin the transition process: hormonal therapy, the real-life experience, or sex reas- signment surgery. In the first phase, individuals may begin the transition process by taking hormones associated with the other sex (i.e., estrogen for men or testosterone for women). Most transgender individuals who begin hormonal treatment, start to experience alterations to their voice, as well as changes in physical appearance. The second phase in the transition process for some transgender people is the real-life experience. During this experience, the person is expected to live full time as the gender into which they are transitioning for an extended period of time, while meeting regularly with a counselor to process the experience. This includes maintaining full-time employment, functioning as a student or volunteering, and legally obtaining a gender-appropriate first name (Coleman et al., 2011). It is during the real- life experience that many transgender individuals experience a tremendous amount of discrimination and harassment in the workplace, because it is typically at this point that many disclose for the first time to employers their transgender identity. Often, the HRD practitioner is the person to whom the disclosure is first made. It is not uncommon for transgender persons to lose their jobs during the transition process due to discrimination. Many transwomen (“male-to-female”) lose positions of power on the job because they are seen as no longer competent once they transition (Griggs, 1998). On the other hand, many transmen (“female-to-male”) are viewed as more valuable than they were as women since transitioning (Schilt, 2006). This demonstrates that transgender individuals can experience both sides of sex- ism, as the privileged and the oppressed. Many transgender individuals report

138 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

being aware of the gender discrimination that takes place in the workplace (Connell, 2010).

The third phase of the transition process for some transgender individuals is gender reassignment surgery (GRS), also called gender confirmation surgery. In order to qualify for phalloplasty or vaginoplasty, an individual must have been involved in successful hormone treatment for 12 months and a successful 12-month, real-life experience (Coleman et al., 2011). Gender confirmation surgery is an individual decision, and not all transgender people feel the need to have surgery to feel whole. Of those individuals who choose to go through sex confirmation surgery, many experience discrimination and prejudice from coworkers post-transition. Schilt and Connell (2007) interviewed transmen and transwomen about their experiences of transitioning in the workplace. Some participants reported that coworkers excluded them from social cir- cles post-transition. Moreover, coworkers even questioned the authenticity of the gender into which participants transitioned. For example, some cowork- ers would reference their transgender peers by their birth gender rather than by the gender into which the employee transitioned. The emotional con- sequences associated with transphobic work environments include anxiety, depression, and relationship difficulties (Dispenza, Watson, Chung, & Brack, 2012). For more detailed information about the transitioning process and how HRD professionals might assist transgender employees, visit the website for the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (www.wpath.org) and read the Standards of Care for the Health of Transsexual, Transgender, and Gender Non-Conforming People (Version 7; Coleman et al., 2011).

Job Training

Other workplace issues relevant to the transgender community include the need for job training. Many transgender individuals have difficulty find- ing employment due to discrimination. One study reported that 47% of transgender individuals believed that their identity and/or their presentation contributed to their inability to find employment (Reback, Simon, Bemis, & Gatson, 2001). The same study reported that 28% of transgender participants had lost a job due to their transgender identity. As a result of the dispro- portionately high rates of unemployment and job discrimination among the transgender community, some transgender individuals get involved with sex work to financially support themselves. It is estimated that between 24% and 75% of transgender individuals participate in sex work (Herbst et al., 2008). A primary social service need of transgender individuals is job training. Human resource development practitioners are in a great posi- tion to meet the job training needs of the transgender community. Because some of the needs of the transgender community are unique, it is recom- mended that HRD practitioners gain knowledge and skills to competently work with this population. The Association for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Issues in Counseling (ALGBTIC), a division of the American

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 139

Counseling Association, has produced a set of Competencies for Counseling Transgender Clients (Burnes et al., 2010). A subsection of the competencies are related to Career and Lifestyle Development. It is recommended that HRD practitioners implement the following competencies:

• Assist transgender clients with exploring career choices that best facili- tate identity formation and job satisfaction.

• Recognize that existing career development theories, career assess- ment tools, employment applications, and career counseling interven- tions contain language, theory, and constructs that may be oppressive to transgender and gender-nonconforming individuals.

• Acknowledge the potential problems associated with career assessment instruments that have not been normed for the transgender community.

• Challenge the occupational stereotypes (e.g., sex work, entertainment careers) that restrict the career development and professional decision making of transgender clients, or respect decisions to remain in enter- tainment careers, while also being prepared to affirm that these are valid jobs for those who are satisfied working in these fields.

• Acknowledge and understand how the interplay of discrimination and oppression against transgender individuals adversely affect[s] career performance and/or result[s] in negative evaluation of their job per- formance, and thus may limit career options resulting in underemploy- ment, less access to financial resources, and overrepresentation in certain careers.

• Demonstrate awareness of the high degree of discrimination that transgender individuals have historically experienced in the workplace and how this discrimination may affect other life areas (e.g., housing, self-esteem, family support).

• Demonstrate awareness of and skill in addressing employment issues and challenges for transgender individuals who have experienced transition, those who may choose to transition, and those who may not opt to transition while in the workplace and recognize the diversity of experi- ences for transgender individuals who choose to transition while in the workplace.

• Explore with clients the degree to which government (i.e., federal, state, and/or local) statutes, union contracts, and workplace policies protect workers against employment discrimination based on gender identity and expression. In cases where there is not protection of transgender employment rights, provide information on advocacy and support efforts.

• Link clients with transgender mentors and resources that increase their awareness of viable career options.

• Provide employers with consultation and education on gender identity issues and ways to facilitate workplace changes, such as restrooms, locker rooms, staff education, and creating a respectful, inclusive environment.

140 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

• Assist with empowering transgender individuals to advocate on their own behalf as appropriate in their workplace context (i.e., micro- level or macro-level) and/or offer to engage in this advocacy with the client’s consent if the client would benefit from a direct work- place psychoeducation/training on transgender issues and safety in the workplace.

• Advocate for gender identity and gender expression antidiscrimination policies in the workplace as they are applicable on both [the] micro-level (e.g., in the workplace) and macro-levels (e.g., in the local and larger communities where we live and with policy makers and legislators).

(Burnes et al., 2010, pp. 148–149)

Creating a Nonheterosexist Work Environment

Language and the Workplace

Returning to Arredondo and Glauner’s (1992) identity model of indi- vidual differences, how a person thinks about their identity often influ- ences how they define themselves. Language is a powerful tool to express inclusiveness and model a safe environment in a work group. The HRD representative is in a position to maximize this tool. To use language as an intervention, one must be knowledgeable about current trends in diversity. For example, when referring to a “homosexual” person, one should consider using lesbian or gay. As previously mentioned, the term homosexual is considered outdated and holds a derogatory connotation. In addition, the term heterosexual is often associated with power and privilege (Rocco, Landorf, & Delgado, 2009). It is recommended that one adopts situational language, the adjusting of language based on the context of the interaction. For example, in a work environment, one may refer to someone’s sexual orientation using terminology appropri- ate for a workplace. If a person refers to himself as a gay man, an HRD professional may inquire, “Are there any issues you experience as a gay man as it relates to your work?” In a more relaxed setting with family or friends, language that is shared and deemed appropriate by the particular norms of the group is used.

The HRD representative needs to consider that some individuals who experience oppression will sometimes reclaim power by using language that is considered derogatory. Whereas this is not always appropriate for the workplace environment, one should note this phenomenon. For example, two self-identified lesbians may use the word “dyke” in a casual lunch con- versation, as they build a sense of camaraderie. If two heterosexual individuals use the same term in a casual lunch conversation, this would be considered offensive. Semantics and definitions are ever-changing and fluid. Educating oneself in appropriate terminology is a valuable exercise to increase one’s cultural competence. More important, the HRD practitioner is to model

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 141

culturally sensitive language, as well as enact interventions when offensive language occurs in the workplace.

Beyond labels, culturally responsive HRD professionals should examine the complexity of sexual and gender identity management and the impact of policies and practices on these identities (Compton, 2016). A person manag- ing their sexual and/or gender identity in the workplace looks for obvious and subtle cues to better understand their place within a company. These cues lead to perceptions of safety and trust within an organization. In gen- eral, it is just as important to examine and manage the microaggressions and implicit mixed messages in addition to more obvious macroaggressions and discriminatory policies.

Ethical Codes and Diversity

The Academy of Human Resource Development Standing Committee on Ethics and Integrity developed a set of ethical standards integrating several codes and inclusive policies for a diverse workplace environment. Specifi- cally, the ethical standards state

where differences of age, gender, race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, or socioeconomic status signifi- cantly affect the work of HRD Professionals as related to particular individuals or groups, HRD professionals obtain the training, experi- ence, consultation, or supervision necessary to ensure the competence of their services, or they make appropriate referrals.

(Academy of Human Resource Development Standing Committee on Ethics and Integrity, 1999, p. 4).

The code requires that an HRD professional must ensure appropriate ser- vices regardless of an individual’s identity. In Section B, the code also states that the “HRD professional respects the rights of others to hold values, atti- tudes, and options,” (p. 4) especially if these differ from those of others. The workplace is an opportune setting for both subtle as well as transpar- ent intentional transgressions, biases, and discrimination. It is therefore cru- cial that the HRD professional maintains objectivity when working with employees, regardless of the workers’ identities, values, and beliefs.

Discourse

Robinson-Wood (2009) described cultural identities as dominant or non- dominant discourses. A dominant discourse is a narrative associated with the dominant voices in society. These are the most common voices heard in the media, or the identities seen in people who hold positions of power in the workplace (e.g., White, male, heterosexual, able-bodied, Christian) and have attributes often viewed as necessary for success. Nondominant

142 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

discourse represents voices of marginalized people who are often viewed negatively, which impacts their influence in the dominant culture. For exam- ple, individuals in the lower economic strata often experience stereotypes of being “lazy” or “lacking proper manners,” perpetuating the practice of limit- ing their power as a group.

In conclusion, the current work environment is not value-free. Yet in HRD, it is our role to recognize values (our own and others) and how they may influence the work experiences and environments of LGBTQ+ employees. Second, if values evolve into discrimination, harassment, and an overall hostile environment, then redirecting the work culture to one that is committed to diversity and devoid of oppressive practices toward particular groups is key.

Chapter Summary

The issue of LGBTQ+ workers is complex. The career development and work- place experiences of these communities include socioeconomic inequalities, employment mobility (Gedro, 2009), and discrimination. The lack of inclusion of LGBTQ+ policies within workplace diversity practices is well documented (Human Rights Campaign, 2017). Throughout this chapter, we described in detail the current issues, workplace practices, and approaches to increase HRD professionals’ competence to work effectively with LGBTQ+ employees.

The HRD professional has a crucial role in understanding and imple- menting a workplace environment that is safe for all workers. Although research in this area is limited, studies suggest that inclusive benefits and poli- cies (Hornsby & Munn, 2009) and education about LGBTQ+ individuals are beneficial to the overall work environment. For the LGBTQ+ worker, this includes implementing inclusive policies, and preventing and disrupting discriminatory behaviors, including harassment. Finally, HRD profession- als have an ethical responsibility (Academy of Human Resource Develop- ment Standing Committee on Ethics and Integrity, 1999) to serve, represent, and advocate for workers from diverse cultural backgrounds, including LGBTQ+ employees. Therefore, exposure to LGBTQ+ communities and education about LGBTQ+ cultural issues is imperative for the culturally competent HRD professional.

Definitions of Key Terms

Affirmation—Level 4 of discrimination in work settings for LGBTQ+ employees that requires continued maintenance of antidiscrimination practices and an inclusive positive work environment.

Arredondo and Glauner’s Identity Model—A model that describes iden- tity as a set of characteristics or dimensions where some are fluid and others remain static. Dimension A consists of identity-based characteristics that one is born with, such as ethnicity, nationality, disability, age, genetics, gender, and

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 143

sexual orientation. Dimension B consists of characteristics that are changeable and are often influenced by the individual, such as religious and spiritual identity, educational background, career choice, and relationship and marital status. Dimension C consists of historical events such as the Great Depression, the Civil Rights Movement, 9/11, natural disasters, and economic downturns.

Bisexuality—Refers to individuals who experience affectional feelings and/or physical attraction to both men and women.

Cass Identity Development Model—A framework of six stages through which lesbian and gay individuals often go. Stage 1 is Identity Confusion, which is when awareness first takes place that one might be gay. Stage 2 is Identity Comparison, which is marked with a tension between one’s past understanding of self to a current understanding of self as possibly lesbian or gay. Stage 3, Identity Tolerance, is where the individual is developing an appreciation of their new identity. Stage 4 is Identity Acceptance, when the individual begins to place positive associations on their lesbian/gay identity and begins to accept their identity. Stage 5 is Identity Pride, which is associ- ated with positive feelings and reactions to one’s identity as a lesbian/gay person, as well as a need to share their identity with others. The final stage is Identity Synthesis, in which the individual experiences a sense of wholeness.

Covert discrimination—Level 2 of discrimination in work settings for LGBTQ+ employees that indicates discriminatory practices are occurring, requiring HRD leaders to understand the subtle transgressions and address them.

Dominant discourse—A narrative beholden to the dominant voices in society, most common identities viewed in the media, or the identities seen in people who hold positions of power in the workplace; for exam- ple, White, male, heterosexual, able-bodied, Christian, etc.

Employment Non-Discrimination Act—A proposed bill in Congress that would provide basic protections against discrimination related to sex- ual orientation and/or gender identity and expression in the workplace, which was introduced in the mid-1990s; it has not successfully passed.

Gay male penalty—Phenomenon where men working in traditionally “female” occupations often earn lower pay due to employers’ rewarding compliance to masculinity and stereotypical male traits and chastening values of femininity.

Gender confirmation surgery—It is the third phase of the transition- ing process, following successful hormone treatment for 12 months and a successful 12-month, real-life experience, in which some transgender individuals engage to make gender identity and expression congruent.

Harassment—In the workplace, it is the physical, emotional, and verbal activities that create a hostile environment for LGBTQ+ workers.

Heterosexual—Individuals who are innately inclined to have romantic and/or sexual relationships with people of the opposite gender.

Heterosexual privilege—Privileges afforded to heterosexual individuals as opposed to LGBTQ+ individuals within the workplace.

144 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

Lavender ceiling—A term used often to describe the limited advancement and inequitable wage earnings of many “out” LGBTQ+ workers.

Lesbian or gay person—Refers to an individual who is innately inclined to have romantic and/or sexual relationships with a person of the same gender.

Lesbian premium—A theory that explains the reasoning behind the higher market earnings of some lesbians, whose wages and income are significantly higher than their heterosexual counterparts. This may be due to lesbian and bisexual women investing more heavily in education and career-oriented activities, therefore leading to higher-paying jobs.

Nondominant discourse—Represents voices of marginalized people who are often viewed negatively, which impacts their influence in the dominant culture; for example, individuals in the lower economic strata often experience stereotypes of being “lazy” or “lacking proper manners,” perpetuating the practice of limiting their power as a group.

Overt discrimination—Level 1 of discrimination in work settings for LGBTQ+ employees that indicates discriminatory practices are occur- ring, requiring HRD leaders to take quick and transparent actions to eliminate the discrimination.

Pansexual—Refers to individuals who do not limit their affectional feel- ings and/or physical attractions to just one sexual orientation and/or gen- der identity.

Queer—A broad term used to describe a person who does not identify as heterosexual; also used by some sexual minorities as a self-identifying descriptor.

Sexual harassment—Offensive or unwelcomed sexual behavior in the workplace.

Situational language—The adjusting of language based on the context of the interaction. In the work environment, reference to someone’s sexual orientation uses her or his terminology appropriate for a workplace. In a more relaxed setting with family or friends, language that is shared and deemed appropriate by the particular norms of the group is used.

Tolerance—Level 3 of discrimination in work settings for LGBTQ+ employees that requires both direct and indirect actions, as well as poli- cies, which are inclusive of sexual minorities.

Transgender—An umbrella term used to describe individuals whose anat- omy and/or appearance may not conform to traditional gender roles.

Transitioning—The three-step process in which some transgender indi- viduals engage to make gender identity and expression congruent. The steps include hormonal therapy, the real-life experience, and/or sex reas- signment surgery.

Troiden’s Homosexuality Identity Development Model—A model that focuses on four stages: Sensitization, Identity Confusion, Identity Assumption, and Commitment. It begins with a sense of uncertainty and progresses to an increased sense of self-acceptance and motivation to develop social connections.

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 145

Critical-Thinking Application

1 Using Arredondo and Glauner’s (1992) identity model, which individ- ual differences related to your own identity are salient in relation to your professional life (e.g., gender, sexual identity, educational experiences)?

2 As a human resource professional, describe the nature in which nondis- crimination policies are written. Second, in your current work, is there a nondiscrimination policy, and does the policy include or exclude sexual orientation and/or gender identity?

3 Describe your use of situational language; specifically, how do you change your language in reference to diversity issues depending on your environment? Or are you consistent in your use of language regardless of situation?

4 Discuss your understanding of the definitions for LGBTQ+ individuals, including the complexity and values attached to these definitions.

5 LGBTQ+ people are at risk of experiencing workplace discrimination. Discuss your role in prevention and intervention to confront discrimi- natory practices.

6 What are some of the stereotypes you have about LGBTQ+ individuals? Where did you learn these stereotypes? Are stereotypes positive or negative?

7 As an HRD professional, what are you able to do to promote positive attitudes in the workplace toward LGBTQ+ coworkers? How would you deal with heterosexist/transphobic employees?

8 What are some of the “privileges” you will bring to your work environ- ment? How will these privileges influence employees from the non- dominant culture?

9 How might you advocate for transgender and gender non-conforming employees?

10 As an HRD worker, who would be most challenging for you to work with: a lesbian, a gay man, a bisexual man, a bisexual woman, or a transgender person? Explain your answer.

Critical Essay Questions

1 How might an individual’s level of sexual identity development relate to their level of job satisfaction?

2 What is (are) the function(s) of heterosexual and cisgender privilege? What are some examples of heterosexual and cisgender privilege in an employment setting?

3 Is it important for an LGBTQ+ employee to “come out” at work? 4 Homosexuality was removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual

of Mental Disorders (DSM) in 1973. Research the term gender dysphoria and explain why you believe this term remains listed as a mental illness in the DSM-V?

5 How does heterosexism and transphobia negatively affect all workers in the workplace?

146 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

Legal Perspective

Workplace case law tends to fall into three main areas: (1) reports of workplace harassment; (2) discrimination for employment at hiring and/or promotion; and (3) accessing equal benefits. The following two court cases describe harassment of sexual minorities in the workplace.

Moreau vs. Qwest Communications Inc.

In 2006, Donald Moreau filed an employment discrimination lawsuit against Qwest Communications Inc. The basis of the lawsuit, accord- ing to public records, is severe antigay harassment by coworkers. The plaintiff described being referred to as a “faggot,” and antigay literature was placed on his desk. He described coworkers’ efforts to get him fired, and feeling unwelcomed. During his employment, the plaintiff received strong performance reviews and reported concerns to man- agement. Following fact-finding by the Denver Anti-Discrimination Office (DADO), the enforcement agency of the city’s antidiscrimina- tion policies found the workplace to be hostile and recommended training for workers. Qwest Communications Inc. did not comply with the DADO report, and Mr. Moreau left his place of employment and filed a lawsuit. The case was resolved out of court in April 2007 with a mutually agreed-upon settlement.

Dunbar vs. Footlocker Inc.

Similarly, in 2004, Kevin Dunbar experienced harassment as an employee of Footlocker Inc. The plaintiff reported being disparaged in front of customers, and receiving harassing comments from coworkers. Following a written complaint to management, the confidential complaint was read in front of coworkers. After transferring to another store, he was soon fired. A lawsuit followed, based on the company not implementing its antidiscrimination policy. A settlement was reached and the company implemented training to “vigorously” train its employees and managers about antigay harassment.

In both cases, settlements were reached. Examining these cases fur- ther, it is clear that the HRD practitioner benefits from being involved at the first complaint filed by an employee. The formal complaint by the employee provides the mechanism for the HRD representative to intervene appropriately. The lack of intervention discussed in each case is evident. Attempts to enact an intervention are not evident. The responsibility of HRDs to implement antiharassment training and make clear the consequences of violating workplace policy at the

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 147

time of the complaint is vital. In each case, a department transfer was the first course of action. Yet both transfers resulted in continued har- assment and/or discrimination. Therefore, changing situations is one response, especially if the environment is intolerable, but this does not change the culture of the workplace environment. Culture chang- ing within the company requires “buy in” from management and the empowerment of the Human Resources Department to develop pol- icy as well as implement procedures when policy is violated. There- fore, if in both cases, the supervisors and managers had acted on the complaint by intervening with the particular employees to resolve the issues, then lawsuits could have been avoided. It is worth noting that in both cases, settlements were reached, indicating that the companies were averse to further pursuit of litigation. Most companies desiring to avoid negative publicity and lawsuits benefit from antiharassment policies with specific procedures and guidelines, provision of training to identify harassment, and techniques to resolve issues for all employ- ees, especially supervisors.

Case Study: Michele

Miguel is a successful, 32-year-old senior project manager at a pres- tigious information technology firm. Miguel is the only Latino individ- ual and the only person of color at the senior level within the firm. Miguel joined the firm 7 years ago as a computer programmer. He is now a well-respected member of the firm. The firm currently has poli- cies in place that protect employees against discrimination based on sexual orientation, but not gender identity.

Ever since Miguel was a young child, he always felt different. As a child, he was rejected by other boys, and as a result, socialized with female peers. When asked what he wanted to be when he grew up, he would say, “I want to be a girl when I grow up.” When Miguel turned 12 years old, he started sneaking into his sister’s closet to wear her clothes when no one else was in the house. The sense of relief and exhilaration that Miguel experienced while wearing his sister’s clothes caused him also to feel isolated and anxious.

It was when he was in college that Miguel began to accept a transgender identity, after working with a LGBT-affirmative counselor for a couple of years. Although Miguel began to accept a transgender

148 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

identity, Miguel had not made a commitment yet to live full time as a woman. Miguel had disclosed to some family members and close friends about being transgender, and in general, he has received sup- port from these individuals. Still, Miguel did not feel entirely complete.

Now 32 years old and a star within the IT firm, Miguel has made the difficult decision to transition, including having gender-affirming surgery. Miguel has been working with a therapist for the past year to help pre- pare for the psychological and physical aspects of the transition. Miguel, who now goes by the name Michele in nonprofessional aspects of her life, has not disclosed to any coworkers or human resources workers that she identifies as transgender and that she has decided to transition. Michele is about to begin her real-life experience. To prepare for the real- life experience and to gradually get her coworkers used to her transition, Michele started to grow her hair longer and gradually began to wear accessories typically associated with women (e.g., earrings, nail polish, neutral-colored make-up). Additionally, Michele began hormone therapy, which has caused feminization of her voice and body. Since Michele has started the transition process, she has found notes addressed to her on her desk and in the men’s bathroom with messages such as “Faggot,” and “Get out Freak!” Because of the escalating harassment, Michele decided to talk to the human resources manager. Michele disclosed to HR that she is, in fact, in the process of transitioning, and that she would like the support of the firm because she has no intention of leaving. Two weeks later, Michele was called into the office of the vice president of the firm. Michele was told that although she was a good worker, she was a representative of the firm, and the firm no longer wanted her to work directly with clients on projects. Additionally, the executives believed that Michele’s transition has caused an overall disruption to the entire firm. Due to these factors, the vice president let Michele go.

Discussion Questions

1 Was letting Michele go the right thing to do? 2 As an HRD professional, how would you have handled Michele’s

case? 3 How do you feel about transgender individuals? 4 How might you advocate for future transgender employees at this

firm?

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 149

References

Academy of Human Resource Development Standing Committee on Ethics and Integrity. (1999). Academy of Human Resource Development Standards on Ethics and Integrity. Retrieved from www.ahrd.org/associations/10425/files/ ethics_standards.pdf

Arredondo, P., & Glauner, T. (1992). Professional dimensions of identity model. Boston, MA: Empowerment Workshops.

Badgett, M. V. L., Durso, L. E., & Schneebaum, A. (2013, June). New patterns of poverty in the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community. The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law. Retrieved from https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/LGB- Poverty-Update-Jun-2013.pdf

Badgett, M., Lau, H., Sears, B., & Ho, D. (2007, June). Bias in the workplace: Consistent evidence of sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination. The Williams Insti- tute, UCLA School of Law. Retrieved from https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp- content/uploads/Badgett-Sears-Lau-Ho-Bias-in-the-Workplace-Jun-2007.pdf

Barrett, D. C., & Pollack, L. M. (2005). Whose gay community? Social class, sexual expres- sion, and gay community involvement. The Sociological Quarterly, 46, 436–456.

Benozzo, A., Pizzorno, M. C., Bell, H., & Koro-Ljungberg, M. (2015). Coming out, but into what? Problematizing discursive variations of revealing the gay self in the work- place. Gender, Work, and Organization, 22, 292–306.

Black, D. A., Sanders, S. G., & Taylor, L. J. (2007). The economics of lesbian and gay fami- lies. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(2), 53–70.

Brown, M. J., & Henriquez, E. (2008). Socio-demographic predictors of attitudes towards gays and lesbians. Individual Differences Research, 6(3), 193–202.

Brown, T. (2002). A proposed model of bisexual identity development that elaborates on experiential differences of women and men. Journal of Bisexuality, 2(4), 67–91.

Burnes, T. R., Singh, A. A., Harper, A. J., Harper, B., Maxon-Kann, W., Pickering, D. L., … Hosea, J. (2010). American Counseling Association competencies for counseling with transgender clients. Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 4, 135–159.

Burns, C., & Krehely, J. (2011). Gay and transgender people face high rates of discrimination and harassment: Data demonstrate need for federal law. Retrieved from www.americanprogress. org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2011/06/pdf/workplace_discrimination.pdf

Carpenter, C., & Gates, G. J. (2008). Gay and lesbian partnership: Evidence from Califor- nia. Demography, 45(3), 573–590.

Cass, V. C. (1979). Homosexual identity formation: A theoretical model. Journal of Homo- sexuality, 9, 105–126.

Chojnacki, J. T., & Gelberg, S. (1994). Toward a conceptualization of career counseling with gay/lesbian/bisexual persons. Journal of Career Development, 21, 3–10.

Civic Impulse. (2018). S.815—113th Congress: Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013. Retrieved from www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s815

Coleman, E., Bockting, W., Botzer, M., Coehn-Kettenis, P., DeCuypere, G., Feldman, J., … Zucker, K. (2011). Standards of care for the health of transsexual, transgender, and gender-nonconforming people, version 7. International Journal of Transgenderism, 13, 165–232.

Compton, C. A. (2016). Managing mixed messages: Sexual identity management in a changing U.S. workplace. Management Communication Quarterly, 30, 415–440.

Connell, C. (2010). Doing, undoing, or redoing gender? Gender & Society, 24(1), 31–55.

150 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

Davis, D. (2009). Transgender issues in the workplace: HRD’s newest challenge/opportu- nity. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 4, 109–120.

Devor, A. H. (2004). Witnessing and mirroring: A fourteen stage model of transsexual identity formation. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Psychotherapy, 8(1), 41–67.

Dillon, F. R., Worthington, R. L., & Moradi, B. (2011). Sexual identity as a universal pro- cess. In S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx & V. L. Vignoles (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research (pp. 649–670). Springer Science+Business Media.

Dispenza, F., Watson, L. B., Chung, Y. B., & Brack, G. (2012). Experience of career-related discrimination for female-to-male transgender persons: A qualitative study. Career Development Quarterly, 60(1), 65–81.

Dunbar vs. Footlocker, Inc., Court of Common Pleas for the Fifth Judicial Circuit State of South Carolina, Complaint. (2004). Retrieved from www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/ cases/dunbar-v-foot-locker-inc

Embrick, D. G., Walther, C. S., & Wickens, C. M. (2007). Working class masculinity: Keep- ing gay men and lesbians out of the workplace. Sex Roles, 56, 757–766.

Everly, B. A., & Schwarz, J. L. (2015). Predictors of the adoption of LGBT-friendly HR policies. Human Resource Management, 54, 367–384.

Fingerhut, H. (2016, May 12). Support steady for same-sex marriage and accept- ance of homosexuality. Pew Research Center Fact Tank. Retrieved from www. pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/05/12/support-steady-for-same-sex-marriage- and-acceptance-of-homosexuality/

Gallup. (2016, June). Same-sex marriages up one year after Supreme Court verdict. Retrieved from http://news.gallup.com/poll/193055/sex-marriages-one-year- supreme-court-verdict.aspx

Gates, G. J. (2011). How many people are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender? The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law. Retrieved from http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/ research/census-lgbt-demographics-studies/how-many-people-are-lesbian-gay- bisexual-and-transgender/

Gates, G. J. (2014). LGBT demographics: Comparisons among population-based surveys. The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law. Retrieved from https://williamsinstitute.law. ucla.edu/research/census-lgbt-demographics-studies/lgbt-demogs-sep-2014/

Gedro, J. (2009). LGBT career development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11, 54–66.

Green, M. W. (2017). Same-sex sex and immutable traits: Why Obergefell v. Hodges clears a path to protecting gay and lesbian employees from workplace discrimination under Title VII. Journal of Gender, Race and Justice, 20, 1–52.

Griggs, C. (1998). S/he: Changing sex and changing clothes. New York: Berg. Herbst, J. H., Jacobs, E. D., Finlayson, T. J., McKleroy, V. S., Neumann, M. S., & Crepaz, T. J.

(2008). Estimating HIV prevalence and risk behaviors of transgendered persons in the United States: A systematic review. AIDS and Behavior, 12, 1–17.

Hornsby, E. E., & Munn, S. L. (2009). University work–life benefits and same-sex couples. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11, 67–81.

Huffman, A. H., Watrousrodrigues, K. M., & King, E. B. (2008). Supporting a diverse work- force: What type of workforce is meaningful for lesbian and gay employees? Human Resource Management, 47, 237–253.

Human Rights Campaign. (2017). LGBTQ equality at the Fortune 500. Retrieved from www.hrc.org/resources/lgbt-equality-at-the-fortune-500

Janus, S. S., & Janus, C. L. (1993). The Janus report on sexual behavior. New York: Wiley.

Sexual Orientation and Transgender Issues 151

Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948a). Sexual behavior in the human female. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.

Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948b). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.

Lambert, E. G., Ventura, L. A., Hall, D. E., & Cluse-Tolar, T. (2006). College students’ views on gay and lesbian issues: Does education make a difference? Journal of Homosexuality, 50(4), 1–30.

Mallon, G. P. (Ed.). (1999). Preface: An ecological perspective of social work practice with transgendered persons. In Social services with transgendered youth. New York: Haworth Press.

McDonald, K. S., & Hite, L. M. (2005). Reviving the relevance of career development in human resource development. Human Resource Development Review, 4, 418–439.

McFadden, C. (2015). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender careers and human resource development: A systematic literature review. Human Resources Development Review, 14, 125–162.

Moreau vs. Qwest Communications Inc. (2006). Retrieved from www.lambdalegal.org/ news/co_20060523_lambda-enters-lawsuit-against-qwest-comm; www.lambdalegal. org/in-court/cases/moreau-v-qwest

Morgan, S. W., & Stevens, P. E. (2008). Transgender identity development as represented by a group of female-to-male transgendered adults. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 29, 585–599.

National Center for Health Statistics. (2011). Sexual behavior, sexual attraction, and sexual identity in the United States: Data from the 2006–2009 national survey of family growth. Retrieved from www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr036.pdf

Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. (2015). Potoczniak, D., Crosbie-Burnett, M., & Saltzburg, N. (2009). Experiences regarding com-

ing out to parents among African American, Hispanic, and White gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and questioning adolescents. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 21, 189–205.

Prati, G., & Pietrantoni, L. (2014). Coming out and job satisfaction: A moderated media- tion model. Career Development Quarterly, 62, 358–371.

Ragins, B. R., Singh, R., & Cornwell, J. M. (2007). Making the invisible visible: Fear and disclosure of sexual orientation at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1103–1118.

Reback, C. J., Simon, P. A., Bemis, C. C., & Gatson, B. (2001). The Los Angeles transgender health study: Community report. Los Angeles: Author. Retrieved from www.friendscom- munitycenter.org/documents/LA_Transgender_Health_Study.pdf

Robinson-Wood, T. L. (2009). The convergence of race, ethnicity, and gender: Multiple identities in counseling. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Rocco, T., Landorf, H., & Delgado, A. (2009). Framing the issue/framing the question: A proposed framework for organizational perspectives on sexual minorities. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11, 7–24.

Schilt, K. (2006). Just one of the guys? How transmen make gender visible at work. Gen- der & Society, 20(4), 465–490.

Schilt, K., & Connell, C. (2007). Do gender transitions make gender trouble? Gender, Work, & Organization, 14(6), 596–618.

Schulte, L. J., & Battle, J. (2004). The relative importance of ethnicity and religion in predicting attitudes towards gays and lesbians. Journal of Homosexuality, 47(2), 127–142.

Troiden, R. R. (1989). The formation of homosexual identities. Journal of Homosexuality, 17, 43–73.

152 Michael P. Chaney and Lisa Hawley

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2017). Employer costs for employee compensation. Washing- ton, D.C.: Author. Retrieved from www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm

U.S. Census Bureau. (2014). Characteristics of opposite-sex and same-sex couple households. Retrieved from www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/same-sex-couples/ ssc-house-characteristics.html

U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2015). 2015 hate crime statis- tics. Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved from https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2015/ topic-pages/victims_final

Volokh, E. (1997). What speech does “hostile work environment” harassment law restrict? Georgetown Law Journal, 85, 627.

Williams, C. L., Giuffre, P. A., & Dellinger, K. (2009). The gay-friendly closet. Sexuality Research & Social Policy, 6(1), 29–45.

Yarber, W. L., Sayad, B. W., & Strong, B. (2010). Human sexuality. New York: McGraw-Hill.

8 Social Class and Diversity in the Workforce

Marilyn Y. Byrd, Jose Martinez, and Chaunda L. Scott

Chapter Overview

This chapter will examine ways in which social class is manifested in the workforce. First, an explanation will be given of the social class economic structure in America, including a description of levels of social class within the economic structure. Next, a discussion on social class in the working environment and ways in which social class can be manifested and perceived from a noneconomic perspective will be given. Examples will be provided of ways that social class can create bias as well as reinforce privilege in the workplace. The chapter will conclude with a discussion on emerging per- spectives of social class in America.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• identify and explain the American social class structure; • define classism and levels of classism; • discuss the noneconomic perspectives of social class; • discuss emerging discourse on social class.

The Social Class Structure in America

Classism is a consequence of social class structures and refers to the differ- ential treatment based on social class or perceived social class.

Classism is the systematic assignment of worth based on social class; policies and practices set up to benefit more class-privileged people at the expense of the less class-privileged people, resulting in drastic income and wealth inequality and causing basic human needs to go unmet; the rationale and the culture which perpetuates these systems and this unequal valuing. … Classism is held in place by a

154 Marilyn Y. Byrd, Jose Martinez, and Chaunda L. Scott

system of beliefs and cultural attitudes that ranks people according to economic status, family lineage, job status, level of education, and other divisions.

(Class Action, 2013)

Classism can be manifested in the workforce through individual (behav- iors and attitudes), institutional (policies and procedures), or cultural (norms) practices. Classism is often misunderstood as being in the same context as social class. Social class refers to one’s economic position in society, while classism refers to a prejudicial, discriminatory consequence of social class. Social class and classism, like race and racism, are co- constructed, interdependent social constructs that should be understood together (Liu, Soleck, Hopps, Dunston, & Pickett, 2004). Historically, social class has represented a socioeconomic social stratification that is measured in terms of education, occupation, wealth, and income. Income refers to wages, while wealth refers to assets minus debts (Kimmel & Aronson, 2009). Social stratification is the process by which resources are distributed in society (Beeghley, 2005). In the United States, social stratification has created biases and prejudices between individuals and groups in workplace settings. Consequently, social class can also refer to the socially disadvantaged status of individuals who have been subjected to racial, ethnic, or cultural bias because of their identity as a member of a group without regard to their individual qualities (U.S. Small Business Administration, 2004).

Six social classes make up the social class structure in the United States: the privileged classes, made up of a capitalist class (1%) and an upper-middle class (14%); a majority class, consisting of a lower-middle class (30%) and a working class (30%); and a lower class that includes the working poor (13%) and the unemployed underclass (12%) (Gilbert, 2008).

Closer examination of the social classes is necessary for understanding and further discussion of the ways in which classism is manifested and operates in the form of privilege and marginalization in the workplace.

Salient Features of the Privileged Classes

The privileged classes represent varying degrees of power in the United States. This group is often classified as having inherited wealth or “old money” (e.g., the Rockefellers) or “new money,” as represented in earned wealth (e.g., Bill Gates, Oprah Winfrey) (SparkNotes Editors, 2006). The privileged classes dominate corporate America and significantly influence the nation’s political, educational, religious, and other institutions (Thomp- son & Hickey, 2008). Moreover, this group exhibits a strong sense of group solidarity by attending the same prestigious private schools and holding membership in the same exclusive clubs. Two distinct categories exist within

Social Class and Diversity in the Workforce 155

this group: the ruling class and the owning class/rich (Leondar-Wright & Yeskel, 2007).

• The ruling class is the stratum of people who hold positions of power in major institutions of the society.

• The owning class/rich is the stratum of families who own income- producing assets sufficient to make paid employment unnecessary.

(Leondar-Wright & Yeskel, 2007, Appendix 13C)

While identifying with this group according to wealth (inherited or accu- mulated) is a fundamental criterion, individuals who become instantly wealthy (e.g., lottery winners who may have originally been working class or working-poor class) do not automatically become an accepted member of the privileged classes. In this instance, status is a perception that accompa- nies social class. Status is a “subjective phenomenon, a sentiment in people’s minds … members of a status group generally think of themselves as a social community, with a common lifestyle” (Gilbert, 2008, p. 8).

Salient Features of the Majority Classes

The majority of the population in the United States is middle class (Beegh- ley, 2005). However, there has been some debate as to how the middle class is defined. The “middle class in America is extremely amorphous due to the sheer variety of definitions that most people in this country use to explain themselves in relation to other people” (Purnell, 2010, p. 34). While income should be a straightforward indicator of the majority class, defining this group has become quite elastic (Haugen, Musser, & Kalambakal, 2010). His- torically, this group has consisted of entrepreneurs, small-business owners, and occupations that controlled their own production. The new middle class now includes professional and managerial occupations that control the labor of others (Gilbert, 2008).

Survival and potential for prosperity are essential features of this group. In a USA Today commentary, former Vice President Joe Biden said, “Quite sim- ply, a strong middle class equals a strong America. We can’t have one without the other” (Biden, 2009). The former Vice President later pointed out in 2017 that middle-class America is not about numbers, it is about values and aspirations. Unfortunately, these aspirations are being diminished within a political warfare (Biden, as cited by Hillyard, 2017).

Although values are salient, the middle class is the most vulnerable group to economic recessions, and therefore trends in the life chances of this group fluctuate. Life chances are the chances throughout one’s life cycle to live and experience the good things in life (Eitzen, Zinn, & Smith, 2014). But the aspirations and hopes that are typically associated with the

156 Marilyn Y. Byrd, Jose Martinez, and Chaunda L. Scott

middle class are highly susceptible to shattered dreams. For example, when unemployment increased after the Great Recession, the middle class was significantly impacted and many from this group were forced into situations like “doubling up” or living with relatives or friends because they could no longer afford their mortgages or rent. Income inequality has also dramati- cally impacted middle-class life chances. For example, in corporate America, CEO salaries over the 30 years up to the year 2012 increased 127 times faster than a significant portion of the middle class (Mishel & Sabadish, 2013). Given that the middle class is generally considered the class of the consum- ers, income inequality across the workforce in general may be indicative that aspirations and prosperity may be shifting towards endurance and survival.

Salient Features of the Lower Classes

The lower class experiences greater inequality and is characterized by strug- gle, insufficiency, and limited education. Leondar-Wright and Yeskel (2007) identify two groups within the lower class: (1) the working group of indi- viduals whose income depends on hourly wages for labor, or on other non- managerial work or very small business activity that does not require higher education; and (2) the poverty class, which is the stratum of families with incomes persistently insufficient to meet basic human needs.

Individuals within this group are either looking for opportunities to “push up,” or have accepted their position in life, and simply work to meet the daily needs of life. Belief in the American Dream is most salient within this group.

Noneconomic Perspectives Emerging from Social Class Identities

From a broad sociological perspective, discussions on social class in the United States generally focus on the capitalist and economic state of Americans. In this section, three noneconomic perspectives of social class will be examined, and examples of individual, institutional (organizational), and cultural classism will be provided. First, stereotyping and the harmful effects on some targeted social groups will be discussed. Second, the intersection of social class with other forms of difference that can create multiple experiences of disadvantage will be examined. Third, the intersection of social class with forms of privilege that can reinforce the power of the power-holder will be explored.

The Psychological and Physiological Effects of Classism

Classism is a consequence of one’s perceived social class. As such, classism is a form of social oppression (Hardiman & Jackson, 2007).

Social oppression perpetuates the belief that some social groups are superior or normal and establishes systems of advantage and privilege

Social Class and Diversity in the Workforce 157

for these groups while simultaneously defining other social groups as inferior and deserving of disenfranchisement, exploitation, and margin- alization. The oppressors are members of dominant social groups privi- leged by birth or acquisition, who knowingly or unknowingly exploit and reap unfair advantage over members of oppressed groups. Members of oppressor groups are also trapped by the system of social oppression that benefits them, and are confined to roles and prescribed behavior for their group.

(Hardiman & Jackson, 2007, p. 37)

In addition to social oppression, classism can produce emotional and psy- chological consequences. For example, the media and popular culture por- tray social groups in negative ways and project negative images that create unintentional social bias. Social groups are groups of people that share physical, cultural, or social characteristics that typically target them for social oppression, and experiences of disadvantage, marginalization, and subordi- nation (e.g., racial, ethnic, immigrant, gender, and even emerging categories such as disabilities) (Hardiman & Jackson, 2007). These images transfer to workplace environments in ways that can be socially damaging and serve to reinforce cultural classism. The negative consequences of cultural classism can be affective to the psychological and physical well-being of individuals who are “looked down on” and disrespected in their workplaces because of their perceived social class. Culturally induced language such as ghetto, trailer trash, low class, and so on, that translates prejudice and bias against persons based on their perceived social class are other negative effects of classism. Another consequence is experiencing isolation and feelings of “not fitting in.” For example, a workplace where conversations in the break room fre- quently bring up the latest designer fashions, the “best” places to order a shrimp dinner, or the best ski resort to spend a winter vacation could be embarrassing to the newcomer who comes from a less privileged back- ground and is looking for ways to connect to and become a part of their new environment.

Consequently, when cultural classism is internalized, the results could be anxiety, stress, low self-esteem, health problems, absenteeism, depression, and experiencing the second-class citizen syndrome. The second-class citizen syndrome refers to feelings of inferiority or experiencing feelings of inadequacy or “not living up” to the standards of others in the group. Indi- viduals who experience this syndrome are often targets of institutional or organizational classism.

In work settings, social class separates the powerful from the powerless. Furthermore, “the ability to achieve goals is highly correlated with class, people with similar interests often act in concert and discriminate against others, even though they are not formally organized into groups” (Beegh- ley, 2005, p. 24). It is presumed that a college degree attained by a poor person becomes a sort of “shield” protecting the person from class-based

158 Marilyn Y. Byrd, Jose Martinez, and Chaunda L. Scott

discrimination (Grusky & Hill, 2017). Still, those living in high-poverty areas graduate from high school at as much as 20% lower rates than those in better-off areas (Children’s Defense Fund, 2012). In addition to educa- tion problems, there is higher stress, as well as more health problems and other outcomes of poverty (U.S. Department of Health and Human Ser- vices, 2014). In fact, there is extreme poverty, where families live on $2 (or less) per person per day (Schaefer & Edin, 2013). At the workplace, among the solutions to poverty are making work pay and jobs more available (Holzer, 2016).There are several practical implications that emerge from social stratification: access (or lack of access) to resources, information, networks, opportunities, and other essentials that are critical for achieving success or fulfillment at work.

The Intersection of Social Class with Other Forms of Difference

Other systems may intersect with social class and thereby create bias toward marginalized social groups. For example, the good ol’ boy network is a social networking system that allows racial prejudice to linger and endure, and as a result creates a social stratification, usually across racial lines. In addition, this system serves to keep a barrier in place that excludes women from social circles where opportunities may exist to advance. In this instance, social class creates a social stratification across gender lines. The following vignette is an example of institutional or organizational classism and highlights ways that bias is manifested through social networking:

Jessica, an African American woman, held a mid-management corporate position. Based on her annual reviews over the past years, she was pro- gressing nicely toward executive management. But when an executive management position became available, Jessica applied, but the position was given to Claudia, a White woman and a former employee of the organization. Claudia had resigned 3 years before for personal reasons. Although she had left the organization, she had maintained contact with some of the top managers in the organization and was still in the social clique. She frequently went to lunch with “higher ups,” in the organiza- tion and attended church with others. In fact, it was during one of these social encounters that Claudia learned about the forthcoming position. So when the position was advertised, she applied as an external appli- cant and got the position. Returning to an executive management posi- tion was simply a matter of Claudia expressing her desire to return to the organization. The fact that Jessica had the qualifications, experience, tenure with the organization, and all those things that are assumed to guarantee advancement appeared to be irrelevant. In Jessica’s mind, she felt like a second-class citizen.

Social Class and Diversity in the Workforce 159

While Jessica’s racial status may not have directly influenced the decision as to who would get the job, Claudia’s association with executive management within her former organization was a clear advantage. In this example, race and social class intersected to create a disadvantage for Jessica. Despite the fact that laws have created more opportunities for protected groups of people based on race, sex, age, religion, and so on, and have sought to bring about greater equal- ity for these groups, social settings such as churches, and social groups such as local women’s clubs, garden clubs, civic clubs, soccer mom’s groups, and others, are still highly segregated. In social settings, people continue to prefer interac- tion with and maintain social relationships with those like themselves. These informal sites are sources for inside information on formal organizations and provide exposure to those seeking to gain entrance.

In addition, access and the freedom to exercise one’s power and author- ity often lie in informal social networking systems (Gostnell, 1996). But in many instances, women, particularly in predominantly male environments, are excluded from this network. The following is an excerpt from one wom- an’s account of the socialization aspect of her job as the Chief Information Officer (CIO) (2008):

My position is CIO in the Information Technology Department of my organization. I am the first woman to hold this position. Currently I am the only woman in an administrative management position. And although my title is CIO, I am not considered part of the executive management team—which is kind of funny in and of itself. And from a socialization perspective, I am not on their (other administrative and executive managers’) social invitation list. For one thing, they all play golf and squash, and these are the type of social gatherings where infor- mation is freely shared. I don’t play golf or play squash. I have often seen guys from my department leave the office to have lunch together in the congenial way that men have when they are together. I am quite sure they end up discussing events of the morning, discussing employees, those sorts of things, over lunch. These are the types of situations that many women are left out of. Many times I discover second-hand infor- mation that directly affects my responsibilities in the department.

In my first job fresh out of college, I learned quickly that after work happy hour is another setting where you can get a lot of information about what is going on in the organization. And sometimes when peo- ple have a couple of drinks, you find out so much! In my current posi- tion, it’s a little bit different—it’s more of social cliques and I am not in the social clique. So the challenge is trying to figure out how to enter the male world. Now there are other social contexts in which I can cross over. For instance, if I joined the local country club, I could place myself into their world. And if they see me they might say, “Hey you want to join us?” But I should not have to go to that extent in order to get the

160 Marilyn Y. Byrd, Jose Martinez, and Chaunda L. Scott

information that I need. One thing I have done is to involve my children in soccer. Two of the department’s executive managers have children who also play soccer. So that is a way I have learned to get to know some of these guys in an outside social setting.

(Byrd, 2008, p. 107)

The above excerpt is another example of institutional or organizational clas- sism. Furthermore, it exemplifies how this CIO’s gender may have played a role in her being intentionally or unintentionally locked out of the male social network. Moreover, this example highlights how this CIO’s position was (intentionally or unintentionally) controlled by excluding her position from the formal executive management team.

Intersection of Social Class and Privilege

The good ol’ boy social networking system supports class privilege, an advantage of power-holders within an organization. Privilege “refers to the rights, benefits, and advantages automatically received by being a mem- ber of the dominant group regardless of intentions” (Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2009, p. 348). Privilege grants advantage to some without acknowledging such advantage (Rothenberg, 2012). Moreover, some higher-status persons “declass” by claiming that they are just “plain folks” (McNamee & Miller, 2013). This system also functions to re-enforce the use of power (e.g., grant- ing favors for friends outside the established rules and regulations that have been established for an organization). This aspect of the good ol’ boy system supports Weber’s (1920/1968) definition of power. Power is the ability of an individual in a social relationship to achieve his or her will regardless of resistance by others (Weber, 1920/1968). The following vignette is an example of ways in which this system is manifested through the use of power.

Kyle is a first-generation college graduate. Despite financial assistance in the form of partial scholarships and student loans, his family struggled to send him to college. His family income was slightly over the limit that would have qualified him for full government grants. He excelled in his grades and graduated with top honors. After graduating, he landed an entry-level management position with a large corporation. Kyle worked hard the first year and was commended during his annual review for his hard work. He was informed that he was on track for the next mid- management position that came open. As it turned out, when the next mid-management position became vacant, the job went to the son of the VP’s good friend and college buddy. Kyle was disappointed, but he refused to let this show of favoritism affect his job performance. Kyle came from a family who believed that hard work pays off and eventually reward will come.

Social Class and Diversity in the Workforce 161

In this vignette, class privilege worked as an unearned advantage through personal contacts to the benefit of the VP’s friend’s son. Furthermore, class privilege in this instance is a manifestation of institutional (organizational) classism.

Moreover, Kyle showed belief in the American Dream, the ideology that education and hard work are the keys to success, and success is the door to wealth. Individuals from lower social classes see education as a way to “be anything you want to be.” The hidden assumption behind the American Dream, however, is that the playing field is even. While higher social classes also ascribe to the notion of the American Dream, education is a taken-for- granted notion, and many times their success in corporate America, or other professions, is already decided (or can be decided) by the social networking system. Early in history, those who were indentured servants, slaves, women, and others were systematically not included in the provisions of the Con- stitution (McNamee & Miller, 2013). A new American Dream is emerg- ing, one that is more realistic and more attainable (Orman, 2011). The new American Dream is rooted less in achieving success that is measured in terms of wealth, and more in being able to meet basic needs and being able to live comfortably, but responsibly.

Occupational Classism: Lines of Difference in the Workplace

The workplace exemplifies distinct lines of class difference. These lines of difference create a profound and decisive effect on social relations in the workplace (Aronowitz, 2003). People tend to co-mingle within their own working class. Professional groups do not socialize with service groups (lower-working-class occupations that require little or no education), and if they do have conversations, they are focused on a matter at hand. In short, they do not occupy the same work worlds or social worlds for that mat- ter (Aronowitz, 2003). Occupational classism refers to staying within work boundaries that are constructed by society’s criteria of who fits one’s image of self-attainment. Whether subconscious or not, classist behaviors project an attitude of distancing designed to keep those of a lower-working-class order in their place.

Occupational classism stigmatizes and morally excludes, distances, and separates lower-working-class people on a daily basis. Compounding occu- pational classism are the devastating effects of racism and other forms of social difference prejudice. Because classism intersects with other forms of difference, it is counterintuitive to consider one without the other. Like racism in society, a person’s social location in the world transfers to the workplace, subjecting that individual to social beliefs and stereotypes that are engrained in society. Moreover, like racism in the broader society, in the workplace, people who occupy high-level positions often exploit and repress those they perceive as being “beneath” their level. The role of power is a salient force in occupational classism. The notion of “power over” (I

162 Marilyn Y. Byrd, Jose Martinez, and Chaunda L. Scott

occupy a role of power and prestige in the organization) rather than “power with” (We all work for the same employer) is often conveyed in subtle ways by those in upper levels.

The working poor are victims of occupational classism in the workplace, in that they have become conditioned to live with less and socialized to accept less (hooks, 2000). Moreover, the service-type jobs that they perform offer limited possibilities for them to improve their occupational status (Chant, 2006). Fur- thermore, the services they perform have come to be known as “class appropri- ate” to the individuals performing “lower-level” work (Petitt, 2008).

A social justice framework is useful for addressing the effects of classism. The goal is to address the behaviors of those who stigmatize, and to begin conversations about the need for human relations to be conveyed as a guid- ing philosophical principle.

The Significance of Discussions on Social Class in Higher Education

Higher education is a vibrant arena in which to identify and dismantle social class bias and prejudice (Class Action, 2013). As universities and colleges increase their efforts to diversify their campuses, consideration needs to be given to the assimilation process for lower-income class and first-generation students. The culture that students will encounter in these settings is usually more representative of and responsive to the middle- to upper-class students. Therefore, creating a model for inclusion in higher education settings is a beginning point for impacting social change.

Unfortunately, in the United States, there have been limited discussions on the topic of classism, including classroom discussions (Borrego, 2011). Discussions on classism in educational settings can provide a valuable learn- ing opportunity for students to understand power and privilege as they relate to working and living productively with diverse colleagues and neighbors. This learning experience is also “important for both working-class students who often feel that they do not fit into the academic environment and for students of relative class privilege who often are unconscious of how certain advantages shape their lives” (p. 2). In order for students to fully understand the concept of social class, their relationship to social class, and the role of social class in the workplace and the greater global society, workforce diver- sity course discussions must be expanded to include a module on classism as a distinct consequence of social class.

New Directions for Discourse of Social Class in the Workforce

The American social class structure is replicated in the workforce as classism through the behaviors, stereotypes, and attitudes directed toward marginalized social groups. But there has been limited discourse on intergroup classism.

Social Class and Diversity in the Workforce 163

For example, there are variations of Hispanics, such as those who are Cuban Americans versus Mexican Americans. For this reason, more discourse on the awareness and understanding of diversity within social groups is needed, because awareness and understanding from that perspective have not material- ized in a substantial way.

In addition, unequal treatment given to individuals within the same eco- nomic social class needs to be considered. For example, middle-class African Americans who are not necessarily treated as middle class experience cul- tural classism. Although economic similarities exist, racial differences over- ride economic similarities.

Another emerging and significant aspect of social class is the working military class, a work group that does not reflect the traditional civilian workforce. The members of the working military class are “warriors who come primarily from rural America and our country’s inner cities” (Glantz, 2009, p. 70). The working military class reflects the poorer background of those who enlist and who are hoping for better opportunities in the military. Salient characteristics of this group are the overrepresentation of minorities and the practical nonexistence of the upper class and bottom class (Halbfin- ger & Holmes, 2003). With the exception of those with a desire to pass on a family tradition of military service, the nation’s educated and wealthy youth have shunned the military. On the other hand, those from the bottom lower class may be underrepresented because they do not meet the requirements for enlistment.

Recent high school graduates with little desire to go to college choose the military because it is alluring, with its offer of benefits and the potential for learning a trade. Others gravitate to the military to pursue a skill. Still others are looking for an opportunity and a “way out” of their existing con- ditions. Some workers who are already in the workforce gravitate toward the military because they are not moving ahead in their current occupation or employment. The military, as a working environment, is described as a “more egalitarian and racially harmonious society, one in which prejudice is trumped by meritocracy, discipline, and the need to survive” (Halbfinger & Holmes, 2003, p. 6). The military is a dynamic working environment, and college graduates entering this setting will need increased social knowledge that is foundational for equal treatment of all types of social groups.

Chapter Summary

This chapter presented the economic structure of social class in America and discussed some of the salient features of American social class structure. The chapter then discussed noneconomic perspectives on social class and ways in which individuals can experience disadvantage or privilege based on their perceived social class affiliation. The chapter concluded with emerging per- spectives on social class and the workforce.

164 Marilyn Y. Byrd, Jose Martinez, and Chaunda L. Scott

Definition of Key Terms

Classism—The institutional, cultural, and individual set of practices and beliefs that assign differential value to people according to their socioeco- nomic class; and an economic system that creates excessive inequality and causes basic human needs to go unmet (Leondar-Wright & Yeskel, 2007, Appendix 13).

Good ol’ boy network—Social networking system that allows bias and prejudice to linger and endure, and as a result, creates a social stratification, usually across forms of difference.

Life chances—Chances throughout one’s life cycle to live and experience the good things in life (Eitzen, Zinn, & Smith, 2014).

Lower classes—Consist of the working poor and the unemployed underclass.

Majority classes—Consist of a lower-middle class and a working class. Power—The ability of an individual in a social relationship to achieve his or

her will regardless of resistance by others (Weber, 1920/1968). Privilege—The “rights, benefits, and advantages automatically received by

being a member of the dominant group regardless of intentions” (Sen- soy & DiAngelo, 2009, p. 348).

Privileged classes—The upper class, which consists of the rich and power- ful, and the upper-middle class, which consists of educated and wealthy professionals.

Second-class citizen syndrome—Refers to feelings of inferiority or experiencing feelings of inadequacy or “not living up” to the standards of others in the group.

Social class—One’s economic position in society. Historically, social class has represented a socioeconomic social stratification that is measured in terms of education, occupation, wealth, and income.

Social groups—Groups of people that share physical, cultural, or social characteristics that typically target them for social oppression, and experi- ences of disadvantage, marginalization, and subordination (e.g., racial, eth- nic, immigrant, gender, and even emerging categories such as disabilities) (Hardiman & Jackson, 2007).

Social oppression—Perpetuates the belief that some social groups are superior or normal and establishes systems of advantage and privilege for these groups, while simultaneously defining other social groups as inferior and deserving of disenfranchisement, exploitation, and marginalization (Hardiman & Jackson, 2007, p. 37).

Social stratification—The process by which resources are distributed in society (Beeghley, 2005).

Status—A “subjective phenomenon, a sentiment in people’s minds … members of a status group generally think of themselves as a social com- munity, with a common lifestyle” (Gilbert, 2008, p. 8).

Social Class and Diversity in the Workforce 165

Working military class—Denotes the poorer background of many vet- erans hoping for better opportunity in the military; warriors who come primarily from rural America and U.S. inner cities (Glantz, 2009, p. 70).

Critical-Thinking Application

1 Compare and contrast social class from an economic and noneconomic perspective.

2 How does the concept of life chances apply in a concrete way to social class?

3 What do you think accounts for the difficulties in defining the middle class?

4 Discuss the impact of social class and ageism. 5 What steps should organizations take to address issues of social class bias

in the workplace?

Case Study 1: Classism at Lake Shore Bank

Jade was very excited about her new job as new accounts adminis- trator at Lake Shore Bank. The job not only paid well, but the posi- tion itself was everything Jade had ever dreamed of. She had worked her way through college, and many of the jobs she had held were menial, manual-labor types of job. She vowed that once she got her degree, she would never look back on those days. Now that she had her degree and had landed a “prestigious” job, Jade felt very pleased with herself. After a few days at the bank, Jade began to pay atten- tion to some of the conversations that took place in the break room, or just conversations in general among the staff. For instance, during lunch one day, she was sitting with a group of ladies who commented on the “trailer trash” who came into the bank to cash their welfare checks. Couldn’t they just go to the local supermarket and cash their checks? Then there was the time she overheard two women con- versing about the tacky clothes that the new teller wore. One of the ladies laughingly suggested that they take the teller shopping since she obviously did not know how to choose classy, stylish clothing. Jade was uncomfortable each time she overheard these comments, but she remained silent. She was actually not surprised about these two women in particular looking down on someone’s clothing. In the short while she had been with the bank, Jade noticed that these two

166 Marilyn Y. Byrd, Jose Martinez, and Chaunda L. Scott

Case Study 2: Degradation of Hispanic Lower Social Class

The Chi Omega sorority chapter of Penn State University was being investigated after a photograph surfaced of a party laden with Mexi- can stereotypes in the fall of 2012 (Murray, 2012). The members were dressed in ponchos and sombreros and wore fake mustaches. One displayed a sign saying, “Will mow lawn for weed and beer,” while another showed a sign that said, “I don’t cut grass. I smoke it.” The president of the sorority issued an apology, while the university public relations director said that the university was appalled that this level of insensitivity would be displayed. The sorority’s communications direc- tor also responded that the behavior was a degradation of a group of people.

This incident brings to light concerns in relation to social class and diversity. The outfits were obviously stereotypical of the Mexican

women were always talking (in a boastful sort of way) about their expensive lifestyles. They were obviously quite taken with themselves.

The incident that really struck a chord with Jade was the day she witnessed a VP demeaning one of the janitorial staff for not watering the plants in her office. The woman screamed at the janitor, “You peo- ple should be glad you have a job. But obviously you don’t appreciate your job very much if you are too lazy to tend to the plants!” Jade was embarrassed for the janitor because she remembered a time when she worked manual-labor jobs. People seemed to think that the type of work you do determines the type of respect you receive. Jade pon- dered what she should do.

Discussion Questions

1. What type of classism is being shown in this incident? Support your response.

2. Why do you think Jade remained silent the first few times she witnessed classism?

3. Do you think Jade should approach the VP about what she wit- nessed? Why or why not?

4. Do you think individuals in work settings have the responsibility to speak out against biased attitudes such as classism?

Social Class and Diversity in the Workforce 167

culture, when in truth, the vast majority of people in Mexico do not wear ponchos or sombreros. Apparently, the point was to classify people of Mexican descent or Mexican origin and convey the assumption that they are yard workers, smoke grass, drink beer, and sport mustaches.

This misconception raises a concern that people of Mexican descent are being depicted in the lowest socioeconomic class, which serves as a denigration of their culture and reinforces the stereotypes of Mexican culture.

In general, U.S. society has tended to treat people in lower socioec- onomic classes in a derogatory manner, regardless of their skin color. The perception that the lower class are less worthy even subjects this group to lower pay, which further perpetuates their economic status. The sorority’s depiction of the Mexican culture is a microcosm of what many in society have come to perceive, given the socialization by the media and others about class positions.

Discussion Questions

1. If you had been a member of the Penn State sorority, would you have gone along with your fellow sisters’ degradation of the Mexi- can culture, or would you have spoken up about the degrading nature of depicting people of Mexican descent in such a manner?

2. Does this incident have implications about the social class of this group or the sorority as a whole?

3. Is it likely that the sorority does not interact with people of Mexican descent, or even have members that are of Mexican descent?

4. What do you think should have been the consequences of their actions?

Source: Murray (2012).

References

Aronowitz, S. (2003). How class works: Power and social movement. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Beeghley, L. (2005). The structure of social stratification in the United States. Boston, MA: Pearson.

Biden, J. (2009, January 30). Time to put middle class front and center [Editorial]. USA Today.

Borrego, S. E. (2011). Class on campus: Breaking the silence surrounding socioeconomics. Diversity Digest, 11(3), 1–4. Retrieved March 19, 2011, from www.diversityweb.org/ DiversityDemocracy/vol11no3/index.cfm

168 Marilyn Y. Byrd, Jose Martinez, and Chaunda L. Scott

Byrd, M. (2008). To enter and lead: Renegotiating meanings of leadership and examining leader- ship theory of social power from the perspectives of African American women leaders in predomi- nantly white organizations (Order No. 3321655). Available at ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global (304332016). Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib. ou.edu/docview/304332016?accountid=12964

Chant, S. (2006). Contributions of gender perspective to the analysis of poverty. In J. S. Jaquette & G. Summerfield (Eds.), Women and gender equity in development theory and practice: Institutions, resources, and mobilization (pp. 87–106). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Children’s Defense Fund. (2012). The state of America’s children’s handbook. Washington, DC: Children’s Defense Fund.

Class Action. (2013). What is classism. Retrieved March 10, 2011, from www.classism. org/about-class/class-definitions

Eitzen, D. S., Zinn, M. B., & Smith, K. E. (2014). Social problems. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Higher Ed.

Gilbert, D. (2008). The American class structure in an age of growing inequality. Los Angeles: Pine Forge Press.

Glantz, A. (2009). The war comes home. Berkeley: University of California Press. Gostnell, G. M. (1996). The leadership of African American women: Constructing realities, shift-

ing paradigms (EdD dissertation, Portland State University). ProQuest Digital Disserta- tions. (UMI No. 9701103)

Grusky, D. B., & Hill, J. (Eds.). (2017). Inequality in the 21st century: A Reader. Hachette UK. Halbfinger, D. M., & Holmes, S. A. (2003, March 30). Military mirrors working-class

America. The New York Times. Retrieved February 1, 2018, from www.nytimes. com/2003/03/30/us/a-nation-at-war-the-troops-military-mirrors-a-working-class- america.html

Hardiman, R., & Jackson, B. (2007). Conceptual foundations for social justice education. In M. Adams, L. A. Bell, & P. Griffin (Eds.), Teaching for diversity and social justice (2nd ed., pp. 35–66). New York: Routledge.

Haugen, D., Musser, S., & Kalambakal, K. (Eds.). (2010). The middle class: Opposing view- points. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.

Hillyard, V. (2017, May 29). Biden slams Democrats for silence on middle-class struggles. Retrieved from www.aol.com/article/news/2017/05/29/biden-slams-democrats- for-silence-on-middle-class-struggles/22114651/

Holzer, H. J. (2016, Winter). Reducing poverty the democratic way. Pathways, 18–22. hooks, b. (2000). Where we stand: Class matters. New York: Routledge. Kimmel, M., & Aronson, A. (2009). Sociology now. Boston, MA: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon. Leondar-Wright, B., & Yeskel, F. (2007). Classism curriculum design. In M. Adams, L. A.

Bell, & P. Griffin (Eds.), Teaching for diversity and social justice (2nd ed., pp. 309–334). New York: Routledge.

Liu, W. M., Soleck, G., Hopps, J., Dunston, K., & Pickett, T. (2004). A new framework to understand social class in counseling: The social class worldview model and modern classism theory. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32(2), 95–122.

McNamee, S. J., & Miller, R. K., Jr. (2013). The meritocracy myth (3rd.ed.). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.

Mishel, L., & Sabadish, N. (2013). CEO pay in 2012 was extraordinarily high relative to typical workers and other high earners. Issue Brief 367. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.

Social Class and Diversity in the Workforce 169

Murray, R. (2012, December 5). Penn State sorority girls busted for offensive photos at Mexican-themed party. New York Daily News.

Orman, S. (2011). The money class: Learn to create your new American Dream. New York: Spiegel & Grau.

Petitt, B. (2008). Academe maid possible: The lived experiences of six women employed as custodial workers at a research extensive university located in the southwest (Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University).

Purnell, B. (2010). The middle class is in debt. In D. Haugen, S. Musser, & K. Kalambakal (Eds.), The middle class: Opposing viewpoints (pp. 30–37). Farmington Hills, MI: Green- haven Press.

Rothenberg, P. (2012). White privilege. New York: Worth Publishers. Schaefer, H.L., & Edin, K. (2013). Rising extreme poverty in the United States and the

response of federal means-tested transfers. Social Service Review, 87(2), 250–268. Sensoy, O., & DiAngelo, R. (2009). Developing social justice literacy: An open letter to

our faculty colleagues. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(5), 345–352. SparkNotes Editors. (2006). Social stratification and inequality. Retrieved June 30, 2013,

from www.sparknotes.com/sociology/social-stratification-and-inequality/ Thompson, V. E., & Hickey, J. V. (2008). Society in focus: An introduction to sociology (6th ed.).

Boston, MA: Pearson. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Admin-

istration, Maternal and Child Health Bureau. (2014). The health and well-being of chil- dren: A portrait of states and the nation, 2011–2012. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

U.S. Small Business Administration. (2004). Small Business Act (15 USC 637). Retrieved January 29, 2018, from www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Small%20Business%20 Act.pdf

Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society. Totowa, NJ: Bedminster Press. (Original work published 1920)

Part III

Diversity in the Workforce: Emerging Trends

Chapter Overview

This chapter discusses the concept of spirituality as an emergent work- force diversity topic. Although it is not a new idea, forms of spiritual- ity are now emerging in more contemporary forms in the workplace. Spirituality will be further examined as a process that can lead to social justice outcomes.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• conceptualize varying definitions of spirituality; • recognize the need for studying workplace spirituality; • discuss the organizational business model of spirituality in the workplace; • discuss social justice as an emerging perspective of spirituality in the

workplace.

Defining Spirituality: Varying Perspectives

Spirituality is the interconnectedness with self and others (Mitroff & Denton, 1999). It is a timeless and universal concept that gives purpose and meaning, encouragement and hope. Spirituality is expressed in various ways at work both for personal support and in making ethical, just decisions (Smith, 2001). Spirituality can take on numerous forms and in this respect, spirituality in itself is diverse. The reality, that the workplace is simply another arena where one shows up as a human being, gives rise to the notion that we are spiritual beings having a human experience (Tolliver, 2016). “When Spirit-ness is not welcomed, accommodated, or ‘allowed’ in the workplace, a number of unde- sired consequences may result, including lowered productivity and decreased morale” (2016, pp. 75–76).

9 Spirituality and Diversity in the Workforce

Marilyn Y. Byrd

174 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Despite being a growing topic in workplace diversity, spirituality is a rela- tively unexplored area in the organizational literature. Whereas spirituality in the workplace is an idea of revolutionary potential, the notion of spir- ituality in that context requires more clarity and theoretical understanding (Butts, 1999). From a diversity perspective, identifying individual differences in expressing spirituality provides a rationale for framing spirituality as a workplace diversity topic. We bring our authentic selves to the workplace (Byrd, 2016). Spirituality opens a space for bringing one’s heritage and full authentic self to the workplace (Tisdell & Tolliver, 2000). This means “being connected to something greater and grander than self and connecting that awareness with culturally and spiritually grounded approaches to [work- ing]” (p. 244). The dynamics between work and life have generated a need for individuals to “achieve personal stability … and realize that our inner wisdom is the only source that will sustain our adaptation and stability in the long run” (Guillory, 2000, p. 218). Often, the authentic self is vulnerable and subjected to injustices derived from social identity categorization that produces adverse, disempowering experiences that attack the soul. There- fore, practicing spirituality in the workplace recognizes the ‘soul’ at both a personal and organizational level.

A renewed interest in the meaning of work is a benchmark for recogniz- ing spirituality as a central human concern (Kuchinke, 2016) that responds to these types of experiences. Work is “an extension of the self where inner values find outward expression, where spiritual growth and professional engagement are mutually reinforcing, and where the spiritual dimension of the self flows easily into work roles and activities” (p. 15).

Because the focus of spirituality is on the whole person, the idea of spir- ituality should include the various and diverse ways that people express their spiritual values (Hicks, 2002). Spiritual diversity is the concern for and acceptance of the multiple ways that individuals express their spirituality in the workplace. Therefore, a universal definition of spirituality does not allow space to negotiate spiritual diversity.

Spirituality conveys a feeling of empowerment that enables one to tran- scend the ordinary and envision that which is sacred in everyday life (Gockel, 2004). Spirituality is not simply a system of religious beliefs. “Rather, spir- ituality comprises articles of faith that provide a conceptual framework for living everyday” (Hill-Collins, 1998, p. 245). It is a source of deep faith and willpower and grants one a sense of calmness and peace. It is that which comes from within, beyond the survival instincts of the mind. Each of us has a spir- itual center, which is our connection to this source of inner knowing (Guil- lory, 2000). Spirituality in the workplace centers on a wide range of individual experiences both within and outside formal religion (Tisdell, 2003).

Having considered these varying perspectives, the question, “What is the need to study spirituality in bringing about more culturally inclusive work- place settings?” will be examined more closely.

Spirituality and Diversity in the Workforce 175

The Need to Study Workplace Spirituality

The growing interest in workplace spirituality is due to the evolution in consciousness we are experiencing as human beings (Miller, D. R. & Miller, W. C., 2005). Furthermore, “spirituality allows people of all religions to work together in harmony, even in the secular world of business” (p. 12). We often face situations or obstacles in our work that are challenging or frustrating. Connecting to our spiritual selves allows us to withdraw and gather strength. When we emerge, we are energized, prepared to face the challenges, and ready to complete the task.

Daniel Goleman’s (2006) well-known concept of emotional intelligence (EI) has contributed to a body of knowledge that suggests that success in work and life depends on cultivating emotional skills. In a similar notion, spiritual intelligence is needed to examine spirituality within the context of the whole person (Vaughan, 2002). In a similar vein, spirituality is the ability to tap into multiple levels of consciousness. Spiritual intelligence emerges as a deep awareness of life, body, mind, soul, and spirit, and the multiple ways these levels of consciousness intersect. Unlike emotional intelligence, spiritual intelligence goes beyond conventional psychological development; it is “awareness of our relationship to the transcendent, to each other, to the earth and all beings” (Vaughan, 2002, p. 19).

Connecting to a spiritual nature provides the stimulus for motivation. In addition, spirituality has motivational qualities, and motivation stimulates creativity and productivity. Motivation to be creative can be clearly under- stood within the context of spirituality (Miller, 1999). Therefore, motivation is a driving force for developing new products, improving customer service, and creating other business or organizational values. Likewise, motivation is a driving force that helps us to overcome challenges to achieving these values. Furthermore, creativity often requires tapping into an inner character (our spirituality) to face and overcome uncertainties and fears (Miller, 1999). As a result, spirituality can be empowering in confronting challenges that can affect work productivity and consequently impact business performance.

Connecting to a spiritual source benefits individuals in work environ- ments in several ways (Guillory, 2000). First, spirituality creates inner mean- ing and motivation about work. Second, it creates inner peace in one’s self. Third, it is a natural desire to help others grow, learn, and succeed. Finally, spirituality respects and values individual and group dignity.

Stephen Covey, celebrated author and professor, makes an important connec- tion to workforce diversity and spirituality. A spiritual dimension of life helps grant meaning and purpose which can then help to achieve a balance between work and life (Covey, 1990). Engaging in spiritual activities helps one to dis- cover and understand the meaning and purpose of work and reinforces com- mitment and values. While individuals may share a common need to engage in spirituality, the path to making a spiritual connection may not be the same.

176 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Current Perspective of Workplace Spirituality: An Organizational Business Model

Some organizations have now adopted a business model that promotes a spiritual workplace (Stanczak & Miller, 2002). Rather than identifying with religious ideals, this model subscribes to optimizing human resource development by valuing trust, faith, justice, respect, and love. The intended outcome is to affect productivity and profitability. Another element of the spiritual workplace is creating a space where workers can connect to a per- sonal source of spirituality and minimize the everyday stress and potential burnout created in the workplace. Furthermore, research suggests that spir- ituality has a therapeutic effect that is useful when experiencing change in workplace settings.

Conflict, pressures of the job, the changing nature of work environ- ments, loss of a job, increased job responsibilities, lack of individual pur- pose, and the like are challenges that produce a spiritual process in search of a resolution (Guillory, 2000). Workplaces do not necessarily set out to create soulful spaces (Groen, 2004). Rather, activities and workshops such as leadership development training and seminars allow spaces for individuals to go “beneath the surface” for greater meaning-making experiences.

Organizations that are spiritually centered might provide activities that sup- port the mental and physical well-being of employees. Spiritual- centered organizations are organizations that recognize the need to provide a means for employees to maintain a healthy balance of work and life. Some organi- zations are offering onsite pastoral care or access to ministers to provide spiritual and religious services to employees who are in need of immediate or ongoing spiritual care due to work or family crises. Involvement in spir- itual activities such as Bible studies, meditation, and contemplative prayer sessions, along with yoga, and relaxation rooms are other examples of ways in which employees can revitalize the soul (Giacalone & Jurkiewicz, 2003). Furthermore, spiritually-centered organizations are more likely to incorpo- rate ethics, character, and values into training programs (Gockel, 2004). In service-based organizations, a spiritual-centered focus might be expressed by encouraging employees to be more empathic to and caring of customers, while managers would be expected to develop more personal relationships with staff (Burack, 1999; Gockel, 2004).

Organizations can create a spiritually-based organizational culture by practicing six key concepts: honesty with self, articulation of the corpora- tion’s spiritually-based philosophy, mutual trust and honesty with others, commitment to quality and service, commitment to employees, and selec- tion of personnel to match the corporation’s spiritually-based philosophy (Wagner-Marsh & Conley, 1999). Spiritual transformation of the workplace itself is a strategic move toward changing cultures.

Spirituality and Diversity in the Workforce 177

Organizations should be proactive rather than reactive in using a spiritually- based philosophy and be willing to engage in activities and actions that illustrate this philosophy.

Starting a business meeting with the Lord’s Prayer or questioning the social message behind a new advertising campaign might have gotten a manager laughed out of the board room in the 1980s, but spirituality in all its forms is experiencing a renaissance in the workplace. … Change of any kind requires a certain amount of faith that allows individuals to let go of what they know and to try something new. The continuous change projected in the modern economy demands the confidence to make decisions in the face of best guesstimates and to retool quickly when an individual’s leaps do not land him or her in a desired place. Helping clients manage stress and cultivate strength through meditation, prayer, and other spiritual practices can provide an anchor to promote resilience in times of great uncertainty.

(Gockel, 2004, p. 165)

In the light of recent scandals and unethical conduct that have occurred in the business world, spirituality is emerging as a movement that is cen- tered on morality and ethics in the workplace (Smith, 2001). For this reason, spiritual-centered organizations are placing emphasis on leadership that is accountable, proactive, and socially responsible.

Furthermore, individuals are beginning to insist that their spirituality be valued in the same way as their knowledge and skills (Smith, 2006). In the same manner that knowledge and skills cannot be separated from the self, so is one’s spirituality a part of the self. Spirituality is formed from life experi- ences beginning from childhood and can be formed with or without reli- gious instruction. As a result, life experiences direct and shape an individual’s spirituality. While spiritual experiences are common in formation, spiritual disciplines or the practices of spirituality in a specific direction can vary.

Models for Applying Spirituality in Work Environments

Until recently, spirituality has been generally associated with religious lit- erature, which did not lend itself to research methodologies (MacDonald, 2000). However, there is a lack of research and theory that explains spiritual- ity in relation to diversity. Spirituality is now appearing in professional lit- erature in relation to physical and psychological well-being in organizational and institutional settings.

Spirituality spans a range of disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, theology, and education. Because of this, varying concepts of the phe- nomenon exist, which has created a lack of knowledge that addresses the

178 Marilyn Y. Byrd

theoretical principles of spirituality. However, the field of education has contributed considerable literature toward spirituality in a learning environ- ment. Because of the similarities between the educational and professional work environment, research from the field of education is useful for explor- ing the nature of spirituality in a diverse workforce.

Elizabeth Tisdell, a leading scholar in the field of education who has con- ducted extensive research on the cultural relevance of spirituality and learn- ing, says that religion is an “organized community of faith that has written codes of regulatory behavior, whereas spirituality is more about one’s per- sonal beliefs and experiences of a higher power or higher purpose” (Tisdell, 2001, p. 1).

Table 9.1 is a representation of Tisdell’s model of culturally relevant spir- ituality and learning.

The trend toward a spiritual awakening in the U.S. workplace is rep- resented in Garcia-Zamor’s (2003) humanistic model of spirituality. This trend is prevalent because more employers are concerned about cre- ating more fulfilling and culturally inclusive work environments. The assumption is that employees who are fulfilled through expressing their spirituality are happy, creative, and productive. On the other hand, when employees are discouraged from expressing their spirituality, a dispirited environment is created and this results in low morale, absenteeism, and greater turnover.

Other proponents of workplace spirituality believe that to treat reli- gion and spirituality as mutually exclusive is problematic. An open non- categorized framework grounded in the concept of belief is advanced by Cash, Gray, and Rood (2000). The use of common terms such as support,

Table 9.1 Representation of Tisdell’s Model of Culturally Relevant Spirituality and Learning

Context & Relevance Explanation

Relationship to religion Not the same; could be inter-related based on the individual

Construction of knowledge Unconscious process; symbolic of culture; process of meaning-making

Nature of awareness Honoring of wholeness and the interconnectedness of all things through the mystery of what many people refer to as the Lifeforce, God, higher-power, cosmic energy, Buddha nature, or Great Spirit.

Environment for learning Always present, often unacknowledged

Development of self Moves toward authenticity

Transformation of self Result of unexpected experiences

Spirituality and Diversity in the Workforce 179

ethics, morals, beliefs, mission, values, spiritual contemplation, and com- munity involvement makes it challenging to distinguish between the two practices. Furthermore, legal mandates that require companies to adhere to religious accommodations may, in fact, promote spiritual practices such as prayer rooms and activities that support a spiritual aspect of one’s religion. Even more problematic is the interpretation as to when one employee’s spiritual expression infringes upon another person’s right. Whereas religion is a protected class under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, an individual’s spir- itual expression may not necessarily constitute a religious practice, although another individual may perceive it as such. Rather than making categorical distinctions, applying the concept of belief “re-interprets religious belief to include religious, spiritual, strongly held values of whatever origin” (Cash et al., 2000, p. 127).

A values framework is advanced by Jurkiewicz and Giacalone (2004). Framing spirituality within ten values of respect, trust, justice, responsibility, benevolence, integrity, receptivity, humanism, mutuality, and generativity can be aligned with fundamental ethical theories: care (Gilligan, 1982); rights (Kant, 1998); justice (Rawls, 2001); virtue (Hursthouse, 1999), and utility (Mill & Bentham, 1982). Table 9.2 is an adaptation of the values framework aligned within these ethical principles.

The values framework illustrates the degree of spirituality that is evident in the organization’s culture and thereby is an expression of these ten values. Organizational cultures that foster these values are believed to have a positive effect on motivation, commitment, and adaptability.

The organizational models of spirituality (Mitroff & Denton, 1999) rep- resent how an organization can be either religious or spiritual. Leadership

Table 9.2 Ethical Principles Aligned with Jurkiewicz and Giacalone’s Spiritual Values

Ethical Principles Spiritual Values

Ethics of Care respect (consideration and concern)

Ethics of Rights trust (creating an environment that encourages loyalty and security)

Ethics of Justice justice (treating others fairly and having expectations of being treated fairly); responsibility (empowerment)

Ethics of Virtue benevolence (showing acts of kindness); integrity (high morals); receptivity (encouraging supportive and open relationships)

Ethics of Utility humanism (bringing about the greater good); mutuality (fostering a feeling of community, common good); generativity (concern for the future of humankind)

180 Marilyn Y. Byrd

plays a fundamental role in establishing the overall commitment and expres- sion of spirituality. Table 9.3 is an adaptation of the organizational spirituality model.

While each of the organizational types depicted in Table 9.3 have varying underlying foundations, each has a fundamental, common principle of hope (Mitroff & Denton, 1999). The principle of hope expresses the organization’s basic principle of trust. If an organization places trust in its values and ethical principles, performance, productivity, and profits should follow.

Emerging Forms of Spirituality in the Workplace

Spirituality is emerging as a topic that empowers individuals in the work- place to challenge and change systems of oppression by embracing the soul and spirit. In this respect, spirituality involves the moral duty to challenge evil in the world (Baskin, 2016). This evil is the ever-present force of oppres- sion. Spiritual people have the responsibility to use spirituality in resisting this forceful presence and work to create a better world. Conflict, stress, and issues emerging from all forms of diversity are rampant within the workplace (English & Cameron, 2016). It therefore seems likely that spirituality can serve to inform organizational leaders for taking action, as well as serving to heal those who are victims to these types of injustice.

Spirituality can be manifested at two levels: individual and organiza- tional (Garcia-Zamor, 2003). At the individual level, the spiritual values

Table 9.3 Mitroff and Denton’s Organizational Model of Spirituality

Type Basic Ideals

Religious-based Can express positive values toward religion and spirituality or positive values toward religion and negative values toward spirituality.

Evolutionary Expresses strong affiliation with a particular religion and later adopts values that are more ecumenical.

Recovering Guided by principles used by programs such as Alcoholics Anonymous as a supportive resource.

Socially responsible Guided by the spiritual values of the founders or heads (e.g., Greyston Bakery).

Values-based Owners or executive leaders are not guided by any particular religion or spirituality; rather prescribe to a specific value.

Source: Adapted from Mitroff and Denton (1999).

Spirituality and Diversity in the Workforce 181

of the individual are expressed even before employment. These individu- als would make known their concerns about whether or not the culture of the organization was accepting of their spiritual values. These spiritual values do not necessarily relate to a specific religion. The issue of concern to management should be focused on how productivity is affected if an individual is not permitted to express his or her spirituality. At the organi- zational level, management understands that spiritual values are connected to the individual and that people connect their spirituality to their work ethics. Therefore, organizational performance can be impacted by an indi- vidual’s spiritual values.

At the individual level, spirituality is one’s personal belief and experiences of a Lifeforce—a higher power or higher purpose (Tisdell, 2001). However, individuals seeking to freely express their spiritual convictions in the work environment may encounter some of the same biases that are experienced by other diverse groups.

Individuals will seek to associate themselves with organizations that are perceived as spiritual workplaces. “When the inner self connects to one’s work, work and the inner self seem to know no limits” (Burack, 1999, p. 284). In a spiritual workplace, individuals feel motivated to reach their fullest potential through creativity, emotions, and intelligence. Ultimately, organizations will be more profitable. Therefore, organizations must learn to capture the spiritual energy of their employees.

Spirituality engages one’s passion. This type of passion is not erotic in nature, but rather an intense feeling that fuels our convictions and beliefs. For instance, spirituality played a large role in the engagement of people’s passion in the Civil Rights Movement (Tisdell, 2001). Individuals who come from diverse and marginalized groups often draw upon some personal element of spirituality that forces them to give voice to their oppressions and their experiences in workplace settings. From this awareness, they are capable of constructing knowledge, which empowers them to take action for a more equitable and just workplace. Therefore, spirituality is one of the ways in which people make meaning of their experiences.

Dialogue and storytelling are spiritual activities that are emerging to address sociocultural issues in the workplace (Groen, 2004). Dialogue is an enactment of a pivotal spiritual value: interconnectedness (Groen & Kawalilak, 2016). Sociocultural refers to the dynamics and power that can be used to oppress, based on one’s gender, race, or social class (Mer- riam & Caffarella, 1999). Moreover, spirituality has been embraced as a source of strength for members of socially disadvantaged groups. Socially disadvantaged refers to being subjected to racial or ethnic prejudice or cultural bias because of identity as a member of a group without regard to their individual qualities (U.S. Small Business Administration, 2004). For example, belief in God has been a source of strength for African American women who seek strength to endure triple social oppressions stemming from race, gender, and social class oppression. In this respect, spirituality

182 Marilyn Y. Byrd

has been utilized as a coping strategy that in many instances has led to an enlightened revelation (Byrd, 2016).

With roots in Kant’s (1998) categorical imperative philosophy of universal individual rights, an enlightened revelation is a process of engaging one’s inner peace to endure the everyday experiences of one’s socially disadvan- taged status. Experiencing a negative event can lead to critical reflection, which can lead to meaning-making as a person tries to make sense of the experience. By taking action, an anticipated and expected outcome is social change and social justice. Social change and social justice have the capac- ity to bring about liberation and emancipation. Figure 9.1 illustrates the enlightened revelation framework.

Emancipatory spirituality seeks to affirm an individual’s compassion for a just society by challenging systems of oppression (Lerner, 2000). Engag- ing in deep and sustained dialogue with those who have experienced an injustice and who turned inward to find healing in the soul is key to under- standing spirituality as a powerful force for confronting negative experiences in the workplace (Dillard, 2016). Although societal and secular frames seek to negatively define the realities of minoritized people, faith is liberating and acts as a natural defense (Edwards & Thompson, 2016).

The following is the narrative of Black American woman, a former leader at a state agency, who described how her deep and abiding faith in God was not only the source of her strength for coping, enduring, and surviv- ing social oppression in her work environment—it was the source of her empowerment for challenging unjust systems that allow social oppression to thrive. This example further illustrates how dialogue is an emerging form of spirituality that brings about spiritual release.

EX: Isolation, alienation, lack of support

~Reflections of the event ~Seeking answers

~Reframing the event ~Opportunities for growth

~Engaging the spirit ~Energized and motivated

Experiencing a negative event

Critical reflection What do I know?

Meaning-making What ought I do?

Enlightened revelation

What can I hope for?

TAKE ACTION Social Change Social Justice

Figure 9.1 Enlightened Revelation: Spiritually Relevant Framework

Spirituality and Diversity in the Workforce 183

The first thing is to trust God to level the playing field. Because if you do not, you will spend a lot of your energy trying to make things right that really you do not have the ability to make right. The second thing is to learn to pack your own emotional chute and take care of yourself. Make sure that you are whole within yourself. Because you cannot control how other people feel about you nor can you control how they react to you. But you can control your inner peace. And that is another part of your spirituality you have to know. For me, it is knowing who God is and knowing He is going to take care of me. In the beginning my boss used little strategies to cut ground from under me. I was already an established manager when she arrived. And because she was also racist, when she came she tried to turn everybody against me (including the employees who reported directly to me). I had gotten everybody to know me and we were all … together. But then she started creating little groups again. She would pull people in for little special meetings, without including me or informing me. She always operated in a crisis mode and every time she came into my office—it was a problem. It was never anything that I had done right. And so the first thing I knew, my blood pressure was racing. I am wondering to myself, What have I got to deal with now? Then the Lord just gave me a strategy … and this was just for me … it was stop, drop, and roll. The stop was to be still and know that God was ultimately in control. Be still and know that I’m God. Stop all this other that’s going on. You need to come to peace. When this adrenalin is going on, that’s not the way God meant for you to live. So the first thing was be still. … I stopped and I was still. And then drop. Your personal investment is you don’t want to look dumb, you don’t want to look incompetent. You don’t want this person to take advantage of you. But you’ve got to trust God that the other person’s motives are not your concern. Your motives are your concern. Have you acted out of a lack of integrity? Or have you done anything … if you have not, the stop, drop—drop your personal investment in the outcome because God has promised to take care of you. And so no matter what is going to come of this, I don’t have to worry about it. And the other was roll—instead of me trying to struggle with whatever this is that comes out of her mouth, and trying to make it right and give her an answer—what I can do is cast my cares on God. That is, trust God to take care of me and then just deal with the situation and leave the results to Him. Because at first my heart is racing, I’m trying to figure out what’s wrong so I can fix it. And then I got so calm when I saw her coming that immediately I went into a biofeedback response. My heart rate would slow down deliberately to keep her from triggering that adrenalin rush in me and getting me all fired up. And once I learned that strategy it was so good for me, and I carried it over into other areas of my life. Stop. Be still and know that I am God. Drop. Drop your personal investment and outcomes because God is going to take care of you. Roll. Cast your cares on God because He cares for you. Not only does He care for you He’s going to do something about it. He has the capability

184 Marilyn Y. Byrd

of doing something about it. But that was the strategy that I stumbled onto and it has helped me finish out my career with great peace. God is responsible for outcomes and I’m responsible to walk it out. That is … I know that it’s going to have a good ending no matter what it is because God has promised to take care of me. But some things you just need to walk through … it doesn’t look very good in the middle. I heard T. D. Jakes say on the TV the other day—he said you know the beginning and the end. But you don’t know the middle. So I’ve learned to walk it out in the middle. And the middle is that the just should live by faith.

(Original interview data, Byrd, 2008; reprinted: Byrd, 2009)

Emancipatory spirituality brings about a spiritual consciousness that has the power to evoke social change. Social change refers to acts of advocacy for the cause of changing society in a positive way (Horton & Freire, 1990). Social change actions can evolve suddenly or over a period of time, affect- ing either a wide or a limited scope of people. Social change is the result of efforts taken to ensure social justice for all members, regardless of race, gen- der, sexual orientation, religion, nation, and so on. Social justice refers to “the process of remedying oppression due to race, ethnicity, interracial con- flict, class conflict, gender distinction, religious differences including exploi- tation, marginalization, and powerlessness. Questions that implicate issues of a power imbalance within society are considered social justice issues” (Edwards & Vance, 2001, p. 63).

Expressing one’s spirituality does not mean enforcing spiritual values. Rather, it means connecting to the spirit within when confronted with disempowering experiences and drawing on spiritual values to advocate for equitable and socially just work environments. When one’s conscience can- not uphold injustice in workplaces or if one can no longer endure its suffer- ings, it is necessary to create a new space for spirituality in which contesting the injustice is a natural part of self-growth and fulfillment of purpose by a Higher Power (Balasuriya, 1978). Our workspaces are no longer safe or hal- lowed spaces where we can freely be our authentic selves. Spirituality gives rise to a new paradigm where individuals are drawing upon their spiritual values as a tool for social change.

Chapter Summary

In this chapter, spirituality was presented from a business perspective and from a social justice perspective. Organizations and businesses are incorporating spirituality for individual well-being in response to the stressors associated with life at work. Individuals are also embracing spirituality as a means of cop- ing with oppression that stems from being identified as socially disadvantaged. The enlightened revelation spiritually relevant framework was discussed as a coping strategy for oppression. As an emerging perspective, the latter has potential for bringing about individual emancipation and organizational social change.

Spirituality and Diversity in the Workforce 185

Definition of Key Terms

Emancipatory spirituality—Seeks to affirm an individual’s compassion for a just society by challenging systems of oppression.

Enlightened revelation—Process of engaging one’s inner peace to endure the everyday experiences of one’s socially disadvantaged status.

Social change—Acts of advocacy for the cause of changing society in a positive way.

Social justice—Remedying oppression due to race, ethnicity, interracial conflict, class conflict, gender distinction, and religious differences includ- ing exploitation, marginalization, and powerlessness.

Socially disadvantaged—Being subjected to racial or ethnic prejudice or cultural bias because of identity as a member of a group without regard to the person’s individual qualities.

Sociocultural—The dynamics and power that can be used to oppress, based on one’s gender, race, or social class.

Spiritual-centered organizations—Organizations that recognize the need to provide a means for employees to maintain a healthy balance of work and life.

Spiritual workplace—Environment whereby individuals feel moti- vated to reach their fullest potential through creativity, emotions, and intelligence.

Spirituality—That which comes from within, beyond the survival instincts of the mind; possessing a spiritual center, which is the connection to this source of inner knowing.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 Visit the website for Greyston Foundation (http://greyston.org/index. php?who_we_are). How does this business illustrate principles of spir- ituality and social justice?

2 Do you believe that organizations should incorporate spirituality into training programs? Why or why not?

3 Discuss how workplace spirituality supports the principle of ethics.

Case Study

Vickie, an administrative assistant who has her own office, likes to listen to contemporary gospel music. Occasionally, Vickie will tune in to her favorite contemporary gospel radio station and listen to gospel music play softly while she works. Melinda, a worker from another office who often comes to Vickie’s office on business-related matters, has complained to Vickie’s boss, saying that she “cannot tolerate” that

186 Marilyn Y. Byrd

kind of music and feels that Vickie should not be allowed to listen to that particular station while at work. Vickie’s boss later approaches her, saying that it is OK to play music softly, but she should listen to a more neutral station.

Discussion Questions

1 Research and explain the EEOC’s statement on religious dis- crimination and religious expression.

2 Based on your interpretation, are Vickie’s rights being violated? Why or why not?

3 How does the EEOC make a distinction between the practice of one’s religion and the expression of one’s spiritual beliefs?

Legal Perspective

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought a religious discrimination suit against ConocoPhillips on behalf of a long-term pipe fitter at the Bayway Refinery in Linden, New Jersey. Clarence Taylor, a deacon and lay leader of his church, was required to work on Sundays for 2 months in 2006. Taylor requested religious accommodation, but was denied and was required to work a schedule causing him to miss Sunday services for 2 months.

The U.S. District Court in Newark found that Taylor’s rights were violated according to Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. This legisla- tion mandates that employers make reasonable accommodations for employees’ sincerely-held religious beliefs. According to the EEOC, employers are expected to explore other alternatives, such as flex- ible work time, shift swapping, etc., as needed, in order to conform to an employee’s request for reasonable accommodations. Taylor was also granted a monetary award in the civil action and provided with 40 hours of additional vacation leave.

ConocoPhillips was further ordered to provide training to all Bay- way management/supervisory employees in federal laws prohibit- ing religious discrimination at an onsite location. Training for all other current employees would be conducted as computer-based training.

Spirituality and Diversity in the Workforce 187

References

Balasuriya, T. (1978). Towards a spirituality of social justice. Logos, 17(4), 1–5. Baskin, C. (2016). Spirituality: The core of healing and social justice from an Indigenous

Perspective. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2016(152), 51–60. Burack, E. H. (1999). Spirituality in the workplace. Journal of Organizational Change Man-

agement, 12(4), 280–291. Butts, D. (1999). Spirituality at work: An overview. Journal of Organizational Change Man-

agement, 12(4), 328–331. Byrd, M. (2008). To enter and lead: Renegotiating meanings of leadership and examining leader-

ship theory of social power from the perspectives of African American women leaders in predomi- nantly white organizations (Order No. 3321655). Available at ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global (304332016). Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib. ou.edu/docview/304332016?accountid=12964

Byrd, M. Y. (2009). Telling our stories of leadership: If we don’t tell them they won’t be told. In M. Byrd & C. Stanley (Eds.), Giving voice: The socio-cultural realities of Afri- can American women’s leadership experiences. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11(5), 582–605. doi:10.1177/1523422309351514

Byrd, M. Y. (2016). The enlightened revelation: Toward a spirit-centered, socially just workplace. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2016(152), 85–94.

Cash, K. C., Gray, G. R., & Rood, S. A. (2000). A framework for accommodating religion and spirituality in the workplace. Academy of Management Executive, 14(3), 124–134.

Covey, S. R. (1990). The seven habits of highly effective people. Melbourne: The Business Library.

Dillard, C. B. (2016). To address suffering that the majority can’t see: Lessons from Black women’s leadership in the workplace. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2016(152), 29–38.

Edwards, K. T., & Thompson, V. J. (2016). Womanist pedagogical love as justice work on college campuses: Reflections from faithful black women academics. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2016(152), 39–50.

Edwards, P., & Vance, S. (2001). Teaching social justice through legal writing. The Journal of the Legal Writing Institute, 7, 63–86.

English, L., & Cameron, P. (2016). Social justice and spirituality: Educating for a compli- cated workplace. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2016(152), 19–27.

Garcia-Zamor, J. (2003). Workplace spirituality and organizational performance. Public Administration Review, 63(3), 355–363.

Giacalone, R. A., & Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2003). Handbook of workplace spirituality and organi- zational performance. New York: ME Sharpe.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Gockel, A. (2004). The trend toward spirituality in the workplace: Overview and implica-

tions for career counseling. Journal of Employment Counseling, 42, 156–167. Goleman, D. (2006). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam. Groen, J. (2004). The creation of soulful spaces and the organizational context. Organiza-

tional Development Journal, 22(4), 19–30. Groen, J., & Kawalilak, C. (2016). Creating spaces for transformative learning in the

workplace. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2016(152), 61–71. Guillory, W. (2000). The living organization: Spirituality in the workplace. Salt Lake City,

UT: Innovations International Publishers.

188 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Hicks, D. A. (2002). Spiritual and religious diversity in the workplace. Implications for leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 379–396.

Hill-Collins, P. (1998). Fighting words: Black women and the search for justice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Horton, M., & Freire, P. (1990). We make the road by walking: Conversations on education and social change. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Hursthouse, R. (1999). On virtue ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jurkiewicz, C. L., & Giacalone, R. A. (2004). A values framework for measuring the

impact of workplace spirituality on organizational performance. Journal of Business Eth- ics, 49(2), 129–142.

Kant, I. (1998). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals (M. J. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Kuchinke, K. P. (2016). Spirituality as foundation of agency in turbulent economic times. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2016(152), 9–18.

Lerner, M. (2000). Spirit matters. Charlottesville, VA: Hampton Roads Publishing. MacDonald, D. A. (2000). Spirituality: Description, measurement, and relation to the five

factor model of personality. Journal of Personality, 68(1), 153–197. Merriam, S. B., & Caffarella, R. S. (1999). Learning in adulthood. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Mill, J. S., & Bentham, J. (1987). Utilitarianism and other essays. London: Penguin UK. Miller, D. R., & Miller, W. C. (2005, September). Interview: Debra and William Miller

on spirituality. Effective Executive, pp. 12–16. ICFAI University Press, India. Retrieved from www.globaldharma.org/Files%20-%20Adobe%20Acrobat/Publications/SBL% 20ICFAI%20Interview%20on%20Spirituality.pdf

Miller, W. C. (1999, October/November). Spirituality, creativity and business. The Inner Edge, 2(5), 20–22. Retrieved January 31, 2018, from http://jenniferchien.com/ wp-content/uploads/2016/11/SpiritualityBusiness.pdf

Mitroff, I. I., & Denton, E. A. (1999). A study of spirituality in the workplace. Sloan Man- agement Review, 40(4), 83–92.

Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Smith, N. (2001). Does spirituality belong in the workplace? Retrieved January 31, 2018, from

https://starly-jobnews.blogspot.com/2010/11/does-spirituality-belong-in-workplace. html

Smith, N. R. (2006). Workplace spirituality: A complete guide for business leaders. Lynn, MA: Axial Age Publishing.

Stanczak, G. C., & Miller, D. E. (2002). Engaged spirituality: Spirituality and social transforma- tion in mainstream American religious traditions, report supplement. Center for Religion and Civic Culture, University of Southern California. Retrieved January 31, 2018, from https://crcc.usc.edu/files/2015/02/EngagedSpiritualityAppendix.pdf

Tisdell, E. J. (2001). Spirituality in adult and higher education. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clear- inghouse on Adult Career and Vocational Education. Retrieved from https://files.eric. ed.gov/fulltext/ED459370.pdf

Tisdell, E. J. (2003). Exploring spirituality and culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Tisdell, E. J., & Tolliver, D. E. (2000). The role of culture and spirituality in teaching

for social change in adult higher education classes. Paper presented at the Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Tolliver, D. (2016). Spiritness at work: Connections between workplace spirituality, trans- formative learning, and social justice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2016(152), 73–84.

Spirituality and Diversity in the Workforce 189

U.S. Small Business Administration. (2004). Small Business Act (15 USC 637). Retrieved January 29, 2018, from www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Small%20Business%20 Act.pdf

Vaughan, F. (2002). What is spiritual intelligence? Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 42(2), 16–33.

Wagner-Marsh, F., & Conley, J. (1999). The fourth wave: The spiritually-based firm. Jour- nal of Organizational Change Management, 12(4), 292–301.

Chapter Overview

The purpose of this chapter is to focus on intergenerational tensions in the workforce. It accomplishes this aim by defining some basic terms and con- cepts essential to the study of generations in the workforce and exploring four theoretical perspectives associated with generations and ageing in the workforce. In addition, this section examines the concept of work values and generational profiles and discusses its critical relation to the development of tensions in the workplace among and between generations. Finally, the chapter provides empirical data on generations in the workplace, presents a diversity model that focuses on generational differences in the workforce, and concludes with strategies for managing intergenerational conflict.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• define the basic terminology used in the literature on generational differences;

• discuss the characteristics associated with each of the four generational cohorts in the workforce;

• identify ways in which theoretical perspectives are used to predict and explain intergenerational tensions in the workforce;

• develop an awareness of generational differences and how they can lead to intergenerational conflict at work;

• understand why organizations are concerned about intergenerational problems and the strategies they use to address intergenerational conflict in the workplace;

• explain communication practices that help to create a successful inter- generational workforce;

• discuss current approaches for understanding and managing genera- tional diversity in the workplace.

10 Intergenerational Tensions in the Workforce

Brenda Lloyd-Jones and Jody A. Worley

Intergenerational Tensions 191

Four distinct generations of American workers currently compose the con- temporary workforce (Lancaster & Stillman, 2002; Reynolds, 2005; Zemke, Raines, & Filipczak, 2000). The age demographic of the workforce has shifted considerably within a few decades (Pitt-Catsouphes & Smyer, 2007), and employees are working with coworkers who are as old as their parents and as young as their children (Zemke et al., 2000). The multigenerational workforce has garnered widespread attention that primarily focuses on comparisons between the generational groupings and the distinctive gen- erational differences that often create tensions among the cohorts (Zemke et al., 2000).

The generations share more similarities than differences; however, the sub- tle differences in their perspectives on work can impact how they view the workplace and potentially generate tensions between generational cohorts in the workplace (Glass, 2007). Research literature suggests that the pres- ence of generational cohort groupings in organizations can have important consequences in terms of employee attitudes, behaviors, and expectations (Dencker, Joshi, & Martocchio, 2007).

Basic Terminology and Distinctions

Generational differences are widely discussed in both the popular press and business-oriented books, and the investigation of generations in the work- force has led to a proliferation of terms used to describe various aspects of the phenomenon. “The nomenclature used to label the generations is not standardized because the various people writing about generational differ- ences have come up with a variety of different names to label the various generations” (Reeves & Oh, 2007, p. 295). Researchers, theorists, and prac- titioners tend to use terms in very different ways. Therefore, it is useful to define some of the terms.

Generation is a recurrent term in the literature on generational differ- ences in the workplace and refers to people born in the same general time span who are approximately the same age and have in common key histori- cal or societal experiences (Kupperschmidt, 2000; Smola & Sutton, 2002). Accordingly, distinct life-defining events (see Figure 10.1) during a genera- tion’s formative years influence and define the generation’s (Zemke et al., 2000) common value systems that distinguish them from people who came of age at different times (Twenge, Campbell, Hoffman, & Lance, 2010).

Twenge et al. suggest that the life-defining events or broad “forces are strongest during an individual’s childhood and adolescence; for example, work values remain relatively stable from early adolescence to young adulthood” (2010, p. 1120). Sociologists indicate that the time span of each generation is approximately two decades, after which it diminishes into the background as the next generation comes of age (Schaeffer, 2000; Shepard, 2004). A generational cohort is defined as a group of people who have grown up (e.g., adolescence or young adult) during the same time, while sharing similar

192 Brenda Lloyd-Jones and Jody A. Worley

external events (e.g., media, critical economic and social events, and popular culture) that create cohesiveness in values, attitudes, and preferences, which remains relatively constant throughout the cohort’s lifetime and results in a social personality distinct to each generational group (Howe, Strauss, & Matson, 2000; Twenge et al., 2010). According to these authors, the effect of the September 11th terrorist attacks will probably vary between people who were, for example, 11 or 31 years old at that particular time.

An alternate perspective on generations in the workforce presumes that despite workers’ ages, life experiences, and career goals, ultimately, employees

1930s:

Figure 10.1 Defining Events

Source: Adapted from Zemke et al. (2000).

Intergenerational Tensions 193

may be “generic” (Jurkiewicz & Brown, 1998, p. 29) in their job expec- tations, and classifying employees by generations may be misguided (Jor- gensen, 2003; Yang & Guy, 2006). According to Gordon and Steele (2005, p. 26), “It is always dangerous to describe or stereotype different generations’ characteristics since individuals within that generation do not always fit the qualities ascribed to them.” “There are much greater differences in job per- formances within age groups than between age groups, and the same is true of the generations” (Twenge et al., 2010, p. 1137). There are basic differences; however, ample variation exists within each generation. There is some disa- greement about which span of years should encompass any one generation, which underscores the large variance among the distinguishing character- istics within any given generation (Reeves & Oh, 2007). Depending on the source, the birth ranges of the four generational groups can vary and overlap by as much as 7 or 8 years (Zemke et al., 2000). Society has given each gen- eration a specific label to separate the cohorts from each other, “although most research suggests that cohort effects are linear rather than categorical, with steady change over time rather than sudden shifts at birth year cutoffs” (Twenge et al., 2010, p. 1120).

Whereas researchers and social scientists who study different age groups acknowledge that the ascribed generational categories are inconsistent and do not align with every individual, there is some agreement that particular qualities and preferences generally apply to each of the generations. Raines (2003) is a primary writer in this area and has developed widely accepted clas- sifications or generational profiles of the generational cohorts. The following section uses Raines’ categories of generational cohorts to briefly describe the four diverse generations that are working together in today’s workplace.

Veteran Generation (born 1921–1940)

Veterans are the oldest generation in the workforce and identified by the label of the “Silent generation” as a result of a perceived quiet, industrious demeanor. This generation, also known as Traditionals or Matures, includes individuals born before 1940. The Veteran generation was influenced by historical defining events such as the Great Depression, the Pearl Harbor Attack, and World War II. The Veterans have been characteristically described as conservative with resources (Jenkins, 2007), as having a sense of obligation, and as observing fiscal restraint (Niemiec, 2000). In the workplace, members of the Veteran generation value loyalty, respect for authority, and hard work. Contrary to popular belief, members of this generation tend to search out technological advancement and are interested in learning new ways of doing work (Zemke et al., 2000).

Baby Boomer Generation (born 1941–1960)

The Baby Boomer generation is currently the largest cohort in the work- force, comprising 44% of the U.S. workforce (Murphy, 2007) and capturing

194 Brenda Lloyd-Jones and Jody A. Worley

individuals born between 1941 and 1960. Occupying many leadership and management positions, the Boomers’ name refers to the baby boom due to the 17 million babies born during that period (O’Bannon, 2001). Defin- ing historical events such as the Civil Rights Movement, the Vietnam War, and the Kennedy and King assassinations influenced the Boomer genera- tion (Zemke et al., 2000). Characterized as optimistic, idealistic, and believ- ing that hard work and sacrifice are the price to pay for success, Boomers are credited with starting the “workaholic” trend (Glass, 2007). They define themselves by their professional achievements, positions, perks, and prestige (Kane, 2009). Work values characteristic of the Boomer generation include teamwork, collaboration, and group decision making (Zemke et al., 2000).

Generation X (born 1961–1980)

Generation X is a significantly smaller cohort compared with the Baby Boomer generation in the workforce and accounts for 33% of the U.S. labor force (Murphy, 2007). Born between 1961 and 1980, members of Generation X range were influenced by defining events such as the global energy crisis, Tandy and Apple PCs, massive corporate layoffs, MTV, AIDS, and technology (Murphy, 2007). Also called Gen Xers, the “X” symbolizes the namelessness of the cohort. Although the members of this generational cohort grouping were aware of their own existence, they were overshadowed by the enormous number of individuals in the Boomer generation (Beutell & Wittig-Berman, 2008). The offspring of the Boomer generation, individuals of Generation X grew up in households in which their parents worked long hours. Subse- quently, Gen Xers learned to fend for themselves (Macky, Gardner, & For- syth, 2008), securing the label “latch-key kids.” They observed their parents contending with a period of a stagnant job market, limited wage mobility, and corporate downsizing. According to Twenge et al. (2010), Gen Xers had a “substantially higher probability of witnessing their parents’ divorce or job loss due to downsizing than had any prior generation” (p. 1120). Conse- quently, members of Generation X are disillusioned with corporate America (Zemke et al., 2000). In the workplace, Generation Xers value work–life balance (Glass, 2007), feedback, continuous learning (Clochesy, 2008), and leadership based on competency (Zemke et al., 2000). Gen Xers have strong technical skills (Zemke et al., 2000), are results-oriented (Crampton & Hodge, 2006), and embrace diversity (Twenge et al., 2000).

Millennial Generation (born 1981–2000)

Members of the Millennial generation include individuals born between 1981 and 2000. The offspring of a supportive home and recipients of parental excesses (Niemiec, 2000), Millennials are described as confident and ambitious (Kersten, 2002). Millennials are also called Generation Y, Nexters, and Generation Me (GenMe). With numbers estimated as high

Intergenerational Tensions 195

as 70 million, Millennials represent the fastest-growing cohort of the U.S. workforce. They have been influenced by defining events such as the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, the Columbine High School shootings, the September 11th terrorist attacks, corporate scandals at WorldCom and Enron, the beginning of the Iraq War, and Hurricane Katrina (Murphy, 2007). Additionally, this generation grew up with technology, including the personal computer, PDAs, laptops, Blackberries, and social networking (e.g., Facebook, Myspace, Twitter), which makes them accustomed to getting access to information quickly (Twenge et al., 2010). At work, they are described as “tech savvy”; they like informality, learn quickly (Twenge et al., 2010), and value teamwork, collective action, and diversity (Zemke et al., 2000). Further, “millennials are more individualistic and self-focused, inspiring the label Generation Me” (Twenge et al., 2010, p. 1118).

Similar to the discourse on race, gender, and class, scholars often con- ceptualize generational differences as another form of diversity and tend to underscore the intersections among the categories that result in misunder- standing and resentment between the generational cohorts at work (Raines, 2003).

Race, ethnicity, and culture are individual differences that are most often overlooked by subject matter experts (Reeves & Oh, 2007). The primary exception to this finding is Twenge (2006), who gives considerable attention to race. With regard to race, her analysis concludes that GenMe (equivalent to the Millennials) “will continue the shift toward equality across race” and “that race will become less important as a defining characteristic” (p. 214).

Theoretical Perspectives

Theoretical frameworks associated with generations and generational diver- sity in the workforce provide a lens by which to examine the ways in which each generation views the world. The significance of theory in this context is its ability to explain and predict intergenerational tensions in the workforce.

Generation Theory

The generational perspective (Mannhein, 1952) emphasizes the importance of social factors in human development. Accordingly, generational models view development as an interaction between the individual and the social events that happen and influence the cohort. People born at the same time share a natural view of the world that stays with that person throughout their lifetime (Scott, 2000). Common life experiences, including historical and social events, create cohesiveness in values, attitudes, and beliefs that result in a social character or personality distinct to each generational cohort. These generational personalities are formed through socialization and remain rela- tively stable throughout the cohort’s lifetime.

196 Brenda Lloyd-Jones and Jody A. Worley

Disengagement Theory

Central to the discussion of generations in the workplace is the intersec- tion of age and work. Social gerontologists, who study the ageing process and its effect on individuals and society, draw from a number of theo- retical perspectives. Among the most popular is disengagement theory (Cumming & Henry, 1961), which submits that there is a mutual pro- cess of withdrawal that happens between ageing individuals and society. Ageing individuals willingly withdraw from society as they experience a decrease in their capacities. Similarly, society withdraws from ageing individuals to permit younger people to occupy the former work roles of older individuals. In this way, the stability of the society is maintained and social roles are passed, without contest, from one generation to the next (Perry, J. A. & Perry, E. K., 2009). Disengagement theory is use- ful in predicting the impact of the shift in age demographics on the workforce as it relates to succession planning in organizations, as well as recruitment within organizations whereby employees who reach retire- ment age (i.e., older generations) exit the workforce and younger people (i.e., younger generations) enter the workforce or transition into vacant positions, which may foster potential for intergenerational tensions and conflict among the workforce. Additionally, many organizations are espe- cially concerned about the retirement of the Boomers who are retiring at a rate of 8,000 per day (Kane, 2009). Apprehension within organiza- tions centers on an unprecedented loss in skilled labor that is predicted to dramatically impact the workforce. Subsequently, many organizations are developing and implementing phased retirement programs to address skills shortages.

Modernization Theory

Another theory that some social scientists use to explain the changing social status of ageing adults is modernization theory. This theory posits that as the society becomes more modern, the status of older people diminishes. In an industrial and postindustrial society like the United States, emphasis is placed on youth and the importance of highly skilled occupations for which the elderly are not prepared. Subsequently, the elderly relinquish sta- tus (Aboderin, 2004). This theory can be extended to contemporary organi- zations that value and seek workers with technological proficiency, therefore providing opportunities for training and development. Furthermore, as Generations X and Y workers bring to the workforce work-related skills that Veterans and Boomers may not have, the younger generations either advance to managerial roles in which they supervise older workers or transi- tion into the positions formerly held by older workers who are now retirees. This scenario, as well, presents the potential for intergenerational conflict at work to occur.

Intergenerational Tensions 197

Activity Theory

Activity theory, the polar opposite of disengagement theory, assumes that older people who remain active, substituting outdated roles with current ones that also require interaction with others are the best adjusted (Dowd, 1975). Activity theory can help to explain the importance placed on train- ing, development, and continuing education in many organizations, pro- viding opportunities for older workers to update existing or acquire new technological skills, which benefit the workers and the organization. Occu- pational analysts, researchers, and practitioners use elements of these four theories to diagnose and explicate the social dynamics of American genera- tions in the workforce.

Generational Differences in the Workplace

Although several generational groupings have simultaneously occupied the same workplace in the past, the distinct generations were usually separated from each other as a result of occupational segregation in the workplace (Kogan, 2001). Traditionally, workplaces were stratified by job positions and generations such that older employees held upper-management positions, middle-aged employees tended to occupy middle-management positions, and younger workers, usually lacking work experience, were commonly placed in entry-level positions (Kogan, 2001). Unlike earlier organizations, members of various generations work more closely together in the mod- ern workplace; this is referred to as generational mixing (Zemke et al., 2000, p. 10). In addition to working together, the distinctive generations compete for advanced opportunities in the workplace. The organizational management literature increasingly underscores a shift in the validity and use of the traditional model that conceptualizes power, resources, and job position flowing from older employees to younger employees in the con- temporary workplace (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2007). Accordingly, advancement in the organization is linked less to seniority and more to merit. For exam- ple, a Generation X employee could manage a Traditional or Baby Boomer employee.

Further, the generational personality or identity is also likely to influence an individual’s work behavior and the expectations of work responsibility of others (Gursoy, Maier, & Chi, 2008). Due to generational differences, these expectations vary from generation to generation. Therefore, peo- ple from different generations may have difficulty understanding others’ perspectives on work, which can be “stressful, confusing, and frustrating in a workplace” (Zemke et al., 2000, p. 11) and possibly lead to intergen- erational conflict. For instance, Veteran employees were influenced by the social experience of the Great Depression and tended to be savers and less likely to take risks because they experienced significant hardships at an informative age (Meredith, Schewe, & Karlovich, 2002). Accordingly, they

198 Brenda Lloyd-Jones and Jody A. Worley

bring their own unique values and perspectives to the workplace, which influence their loyalty to the organization and characterize them as hard- working, respectful, and silent employees. Influenced by the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights Movement, the Baby Boomer generation learned that diligent work over time produces desired outcomes. Subsequently, Boomer employees are credited with inventing the “60-hour workweek” (Meredith et al., 2002); they work long hours to achieve organizational goals, receive recognition of their job performance, and live a lifestyle that reflects their work ethic. Baby Boomer workers tend to be competi- tive in the workplace as a result of the large size of the Boomer genera- tion. Influenced by their parents’ long work hours taking them away from home and their “workaholic” tendencies, Generation X employees tend to avoid extended work hours in an effort to achieve a work–life balance, prioritizing their personal lives over their work lives. These employees are described as independent workers who are self-reliant, resourceful, and outspoken, attributes that are likely to reflect Gen Xers’ social experience as latch-key children. Similar to the other three generational cohorts in the workplace, Millennials manifest a distinct personality profile as well. The Millennials have been influenced by key social events such as the Internet, the September 11th terrorist attacks, and the recession, and at work tend to search out opportunities for professional growth and devel- opment, adapting quickly in the face of change and uncertainty. GenMe and GenXers are found to place a higher value on leisure time than the Boomer generation:

GenX and especially GenMe grew up witnessing these social and labor trends and enter the workforce with the expectation of increasing work hours, the need for a dual-income household, and limited vacation time, it makes sense that the value of additional leisure time is particularly strong among these cohorts. … However, given that GenMe values extrinsic reward more than Boomers did, the combination of not want- ing to work hard but still wanting more money and status verifies the sense of entitlement many have identified among GenMe.

(Twenge et al., 2010, p. 1134)

Millennials most closely resemble the Veteran employees in their perspec- tives (Zemke et al., 2000), although GenMe’s appreciation of leisure time (e.g., not wanting to work overtime) and expectation of more status and compensation is comparably different (Twenge et al., 2010). This can be attributed to GenMe’s sense of overconfidence—not just confidence—that is typical of this generation, also called the Millennials. Additionally, “the importance of intrinsic values has declined slightly over the generations, sug- gesting the younger generations are not necessarily searching for meaning at work. However, intrinsic values are still among the job characteristics rated most highly by GenMe” (p. 1134).

Intergenerational Tensions 199

Intergenerational Tensions in the Workforce

The interaction between members of different generations is known as intergenerationality (Raines, 2003), and intergenerational tensions often result from misunderstandings of and the lack of respect for different gen- erational groups. Intergenerational problems are of concern to organizations because they have been shown to affect job satisfaction, retention, and turno- ver (Zemke et al., 2000). Additionally, theorists predict that organizations which employ a broad spectrum of generations will experience challenges in resolving the conflict that results from the varied needs of each generational cohort. Conflict is a clash between incompatible people, ideas, or interests, and has been described as diametrically opposed to cooperation (Perry, J. A. & Perry, E. K., 2009). In the workforce, conflict between and among generations manifests as intergroup conflict. As an illustration, an older gen- eration and a younger generation arguing over work and life expectations are engaged in intergroup conflict. For example, Boomers may disapprove of Gen Xers because they conclude their workday promptly at 5 pm, which for Boomers reflects an unwillingness to work hard and “go the extra mile.”

By contrast, the Gen Xers frown on the Boomers for remaining late at work, which suggests to Xers a lack of work–life balance and existence outside of work. Gen Xers value extrinsic rewards more highly than the GenMe and Boomers generations (Twenge et al., 2010). Economic factors could explain this work style. For example, the increase in higher educa- tion has resulted in Gen Xers and members of the GenMe maintaining a dual-income household and working longer hours. “The increased desire for extrinsic rewards and more leisure time could be in part a reflection of the increased financial demands and the decrease in leisure time character- izing the U.S. workplace” (p. 1134).

Intergenerational engagement can create tensions in the workplace due to generational differences in values, perspectives, work styles, communica- tion styles, and attire preferences. Unfortunately, the outcome of differences among generational cohorts in the workplace is often intergenerational conflict; “differences in values and views, and ways of working, talking and thinking that set people in opposition to one another and challenge organi- zational best interests” (Zemke et al., 2000, p. 11). A few specific differ- ences between generations include communication styles, work values (i.e., views about loyalty and acceptance of change) and habits, and comfort with technology.

Work Values

Generational theory suggests that fundamental value differences exist between those of different generations. Generational differences in work values can affect the perceived fit of employees with the organization (Twenge et al., 2010, p. 1137). Values are enduring beliefs in a mode of conduct or desired

200 Brenda Lloyd-Jones and Jody A. Worley

outcome (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2007). Whereas espoused values refer to the stated values and norms that are preferred by an organization, enacted val- ues refer to the values and norms that are actually displayed by employees (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2007). Organizational climates often reflect the values and goals of founding members or organizational leaders; at the time, these leaders are largely Boomers. GenMe employees who are newcomers to an organization may experience a person–organization misfit caused by gen- erational differences and differing work values from founding members or organizational leaders (Twenge et al., 2010). The blending of people of differ- ent generations in the workplace suggests that employees can bring their own unique values, which sometimes leads to conflict among the generations. Values, communication styles, dress, worldviews, etc., are all sources of poten- tial conflict. These generation-specific ideals are likely to produce additional conflicts in the workforce (Gursoy et al., 2008). Work ethic is another major workplace value that often results in conflict among generational cohorts in the workplace (Glass, 2007).

Work Ethic

Each generational group has a unique pattern of behavior based on their shared experiences (Kupperschmidt, 2000; Smola & Sutton, 2002; Wester- man & Yamamura, 2007). For instance, Veterans value hard work and believe in paying their dues. They become aggravated when they perceive that younger generations do not work as hard nor as many hours as they do, which is often due to Generation X and the Millennials’ use of technologi- cal options such as telecommuting or having a virtual office, which Veter- ans and Boomers may view as distracting from a unified, productive work environment (Glass, 2007). Veterans often feel that their career, for the most part, defines them (Murphy, 2007). Similar to their Veteran parents, Baby Boomers value hard work. However, the difference between Veterans and Boomers is that Boomers work diligently because they perceive it as neces- sary for upward mobility, whereas Veterans work hard because they believe it is the right thing to do.

While Generation X works hard, their focus is on results and the com- pletion of the assignment on or before the due date. Whereas Boomers are working hard to climb the corporate ladder, Gen Xers are working hard to create more time to balance work and personal obligations. The Millennials’ perspective differs from the older generations in that Millennials value tech- nology as a tool for multitasking, outcome as a priority rather than how or where the work was done, and they value positive feedback more than the other generations (Glass, 2007).

Research into the generational preferences on work environment fit finds that goal orientation has a greater influence on satisfaction and intent to remain with an organization for Generation X, whereas relationship fit has a greater influence for Baby Boomers’ satisfaction and intention to remain

Intergenerational Tensions 201

(Westerman & Yamamura, 2007). Gen Y or Millennials are seen to be influ- enced by technology advances and have observed parents being affected by corporate downsizing similar to the experience of Gen Xers. Gen Y will want even higher salaries, flexible work arrangements, and more financial leverage than Gen X (Smola & Sutton, 2002).

Areas of tension between generations are not related to work, but rather to employment (Vendramin, 2009). The discourse of one generation regard- ing another is more contentious when employment is at stake, and perhaps those who feel more threatened by competition in work are most divisive.

Recently, the link to work ethic and generational issues has been chal- lenged (Zabel, Biermeier-Hanson, Baltes, Early, & Shepard, 2017). Hard work refers to the extent one believes that “working hard will yield desirable results” (p. 302). Once entrenched into the workforce, it is quite plausible that an individual’s perceptions of hard work, desirability, and the satisfaction derived from work play a key role in work ethic and determinism. Emerg- ing career models have revealed a new career pattern based on individual fulfillment, growth, and self-determination, values that are not necessarily bound to a generation (Kuchinke, 2016). While this chapter has presented a thorough overview of the challenges involved in generational relationships in the workforce, discussions are beginning to move away from categoriza- tions and characteristics toward a deeper consideration of how intergen- erational differences contribute to the changing nature of work and careers (Kuchinke, 2016; Lyons & Kuron, 2014).

Communication

Communication is another work value, and the differing modalities of com- munication often produce tension among generational cohorts. Understanding the communication styles and preferences of each generational cohort may help in reducing intergenerational tensions at work. As a group, Veterans are private and typically do not share their feelings and thoughts immediately; hence the label, the “silent generation.” In the workplace, Veterans prefer face-to-face or written communication and value verbal and public acknowledgment of their experience. Similarly, Baby Boomers value highly face-to-face and voice-to- voice communication. While most have acquired computer skills, Boomers use technology less often than younger generations. They prefer an open, direct, and relational style of communication, which allows opportunities for ques- tions (Glass, 2007). Since their technology skills are acquired, Boomers may be less apt to incorporate these skills into their daily work regime (Gordon & Steele, 2005). While Generation X employees have a preference for e-mail as a primary communication tool, they tend to use whatever communication method is most efficient. They appreciate an informal communication style and favor short sound bites rather than lengthy lectures. Most Millennial employees prefer instant messaging, text messaging (or Twitter or Yammer), and e-mails, and often post to various social networking sites much more frequently than

202 Brenda Lloyd-Jones and Jody A. Worley

older generations. They favor an informal, humorous mode of communica- tion and dislike condescending, patronizing language (Zemke et al., 2000). The older generations regard the Millennials’ overreliance on e-mail, particularly in situations where tensions are brewing, as a lack of interpersonal competency. Conversely, the younger generations view the older generations’ preference for face-to face communication as resistance to change, as it relates to digital forms of communication.

Kelly Services, a staffing service, conducted an international survey in 2010 on communication style. The company obtained responses from approximately 100,000 people in 34 countries covering North America, Europe, and Asia Pacific. Survey participants included the three main work- place generations—Gen Y (aged 18 to 29), Gen X (aged 30 to 47), and Boomers (aged 48 to 65). Findings suggest that Gen Y is increasingly using instant messaging; however, all generational cohorts overwhelmingly prefer face-to-face communication. Research findings suggest that by addressing issues such as internal communications, it is possible to manage the genera- tional divide in the workplace, increase performance, and address interper- sonal tensions. The research findings on communication with generations in the workplace indicate that employees of all generations want to be heard and feel respected. Applying an economic model of overlapping genera- tions in organizations that employ at least three generations, research further indicates that seniority solves much of these generational conflicts (Ando & Kobayashi, 2008). The outcome being that future planning can be more sus- tainable in equilibrium (Ando & Kobayashi, 2008).

Strategies for Managing Intergenerational Conflict in the Workplace

Much of the literature on generational differences in the workforce empha- sizes the importance of engaging the best talent of all four generations. Figure 10.2 illustrates specific strategies for handling commonly encoun- tered workplace generation issues.

While generational differences are inevitable, organizations can manage intergenerational tensions by focusing on the strengths, experiences, and potential of each generational cohort.

“Aggressive communication” and “difference deployment” are other strategies that have been determined effective for minimizing tensions in an intergenerational workforce (Zemke et al., 2000). In aggressive conver- sations, generational conflicts and potential conflicts are realized. Underlying assumptions and unrecognized criteria or stereotypes are at the foundation of many generational differences. In aggressive, forward communication, the negative interactions and behaviors in the workplace can be redirected to positive activities where different perspectives and alternative points of view contribute to, rather than detract from, collaborative efforts. Therefore, effec- tive and efficient communication practices often characterize companies

Intergenerational Tensions 203

in which an intergenerational workforce works best. These organizations have created a structure such that small-group discussion, generationally- integrated staff meetings, and conversations about different views and per- spectives are common. Intergenerational conflict is often characterized by passive-aggressive behaviors and verbal attacks. Generational diversity is per- haps best managed when an organizational structure allows time for employ- ees to talk about what members from different generational cohorts find interesting and rewarding about work, and what type of work environment is most productive. For example, views on alternative work schedules, work load, and workplace policies on initiatives like flexibility scheduling and telecommuting may vary across generations. A structure that allows time to communicate alternative views, reflective of diverse sets of values and approaches to work, contributes to a workplace that attracts and retains peo- ple with differing needs and expectations of work and employment.

Difference deployment refers to the strategic use of employees with dif- ferent backgrounds, experiences, skills, and viewpoints to strengthen inter- personal relations in a variety of workplace contexts (Zemke et al., 2000). In organizations that practice difference deployment, there is intentional effort to integrate diverse perspectives and incorporate differences into work practices. “Generationally savvy organizations value the differences between people and look at differences as strengths” (Zemke et al., 2000, p. 154). This notion of difference deployment is consistent with the learning and effec- tiveness paradigm introduced by Thomas and Ely (2001) as a framework for effectively managing diversity in the workplace.

Recognize a personal generational framework. Employees view the world and judge others from their own points of reference. Employers should recognize the importance of minimizing and “decoloring” the lenses that tint how people and circumstances are judged.

Deal with changing work–life expectations.

Employees, particularly Veterans and Boomers follow a philosophy of “live to work” building their self-identity from their work. Gen Xers and Gen Yers are more likely to follow a “work to live” philosophy and view their jobs as a means to experience and enjoy life. Employers should be cognizant of the variances and make adjustments as needed.

Encourage opportunities to build knowledge and skills. Employees, particularly younger workers value training and education, and attainment of skills to become more marketable to employers. Employers should offer improvement programs and assistance with furthering formal education to encourage younger employees to stay with an organization longer.

Figure 10.2 Employer Strategies for Handling Generation Issues in the Workforce

Source: Adapted from Sago (2001).

204 Brenda Lloyd-Jones and Jody A. Worley

Managing Generational Diversity

There are, of course, a variety of approaches for understanding and attempt- ing to manage diversity in the workplace. Each perspective or framework for understanding the issues focuses on slightly different aspects that result in different levels of effectiveness given the context in which it is implemented. Among the various ways for understanding and managing diversity in the workplace are approaches that emphasize assimilation, accommodation, cel- ebration of differences, or education and learning. Key aspects of each of these perspectives are presented in Figure 10.3.

Approaches to diversity management that aim to assimilate are character- ized by intentional efforts to reconcile an imbalanced demography in the workforce. This approach is based on the notion that minority characteristics will assimilate and become more like the mainstream. Organizations that fol- low this approach may actively recruit and hire individuals from each gen- erational cohort, but maintain an underlying assumption that work values and the prioritization of work relative to nonwork will be as alike and easily predictable as possible. In the pursuit of sameness, these approaches often do not take full advantage of the human resources available from individuals

Assimilate • Melting pot • Characterized by intentional efforts to reconcile imbalanced demography in

workforce • Effective model for getting women and minorities “in the door,” but not “up the

ladder”

Accommodate • Recognizes discrimination is wrong • Progress is measured by how well the organization meets recruitment/selection

goals • Idealizes assimilation and conformism to color/gender blindness

Celebrate • Celebrates “difference” but tendency is to overlook “diversity” • Organization seeks to access more diverse clients and attempts to match

organizational demographic to target consumer audience • Possible consequence is marginalizing or exploiting people of different

identity-group affiliations

Educate • Incorporates but expands on discrimination and fairness/access and

legitimacy paradigms by integrating diversity-focused approaches in the workplace

• Focus on how the company defines diversity and what it does with information about diverse experiences

• Enable and empower all members of diverse workforce without advantage or disadvantage of anyone

• Discover ways for system to “work naturally” for everyone without need for special “training” or identity group affiliations

Figure 10.3 Model for Managing Diversity

Intergenerational Tensions 205

who happen to be outside the mainstream identity group. Although assimi- lation approaches are effective for getting diverse populations “in the door,” they have had less success in helping individuals from non-majority identity groups “up the ladder” to supervisory management or leadership positions.

Likewise, approaches that aim to accommodate recognize the injustice inherent in negative discrimination. This discrimination and fairness para- digm idealizes assimilation and conformism to color and gender blindness (Thomas & Ely, 2001). “Generationally blind organizations” also operate as if to homogenize employees and fit them to a single template of the “good employee” (Zemke et al., 2000, p. 154). A generationally-friendly work environment is one in which there is open communication, and dif- ferences are valued and discussed as sources of individual and organizational effectiveness.

A more common model for practice in organizations is one that seeks to access more diverse clients and attempts to match the organizational demographic to target consumer audiences. These approaches celebrate “dif- ferences,” but overlook “diversity” in pursuit of differentiation. Managing diversity by celebrating differences comes with a possible consequence of marginalizing or exploiting people of different identity-group affiliations.

The generational diversity in the current available workforce offers access for organizations to deploy differences in skills, perspectives, and values across the lifespan. Strategic and effective deployment of skills that takes full advantage of the strengths of a diverse workforce requires a willingness to educate and learn about the generational differences.

A legitimacy and learning paradigm incorporates, but expands on, the discrimination and fairness paradigm and the access and legitimacy para- digm by integrating diversity-focused approaches to learning from everyone in the workplace. This approach promotes equal opportunity in ways that work naturally for everyone without imposing special training sessions or workshops designed to orient individuals who are not already viewed as part of the mainstream. The aim is to enable and empower all members of a diverse workforce without advantage or disadvantage to anyone. Learning is the outcome of diversity resources, not despite them. Therefore the focus is on how an organization defines diversity and what it does with information about diverse experiences among the workforce.

Emerging Insights for Managing Generational Differences

Much has been written about the traits and stereotypes associated with the new generation of workers that paints a somewhat unfavorable por- trait of the contemporary workforce (Stewart, Oliver, Cravens, & Oishi, 2017). Rather than focusing on the negative which has already conditioned a mindset of rigid differences, the new norm might focus on embracing the differences which essentially aligns with a longstanding goal of embrac- ing diversity. Re-thinking stereotyping and overgeneralizing of differences

206 Brenda Lloyd-Jones and Jody A. Worley

among the generations is critical to fully represent an appreciation of diver- sity and inclusion (Lyons & Kuron, 2014).

The new generation of workers will be entering a workforce culture that has already been largely shaped by the Baby Boomers. Entering and view- ing this new arena through their own cultural lens could quite naturally result in a clash of expectations. The newer generation are likely to want to know where they fit and how they can contribute to their workplace. A re-designed performance appraisal process could achieve that goal, in that managers have an opportunity to comment on performance as well as link individual performance to the organizational objectives (Stewart et al., 2017). Affirming or re-affirming personal contributions could help the newer gen- eration view their contributions as a motivation to stay.

While it has been useful to consider the dynamics, it is also useful to con- sider social identity as a source of dynamics. As was pointed out in Chapter 1, stereotypes are “unreliable, exaggerated generalizations about all members of a group that do not take individual differences into account” (Schaefer, 2011, p. 17) and are a critical link to understanding social identity. Stereotypes are a tool used to make sense of interactions with those we perceive as “not like” ourselves. For this reason, it seems reasonable that rather than labeling generational tendencies with stereotypes, some situations may need a deeper understanding of how social identity plays a role in generational tensions (Lyons, Urick, Kuron, & Schweitzer, 2015).

Generational differences are a popular topic for researchers and have attracted considerable media attention (Lyons & Kuron, 2014). However, the topic has been highly susceptible to “exaggeration and reductionism” (p. S153). Research is a primary provider of information that is used by practitioners. Therefore, research that collects information through the use of focus groups and other qualitative methods might be fruitful for engaging all facets of the workforce in conversation about the suspected generation gap.

Chapter Summary

Four generations are currently working side by side in the U.S. workforce. The distinct generations are referred to as Veterans (1921–1940); Baby Boomers (1941–1960); Generation X (1961–1980); and Millennials (1981– 2000). Older, middle-aged, and younger employees share common work responsibilities. However, the unique work values, communication prefer- ences, and expectations of these distinct generations may differ seriously. These differences between generations tend to make conflict in the work- place inevitable. Consequently, organizations are becoming increasingly interested in understanding the needs and preferences of each generation in the workplace and in managing generational tensions, particularly since this kind of conflict has been linked to overall job dissatisfaction, ineffective performance, and employee attrition.

Intergenerational Tensions 207

Key to understanding generations in the workforce is awareness of the generational perspective, which posits that individuals born during the same general time span experience significant life events that happened during their formative years and subsequently influenced their worldview. It is this inherent view that characterizes and identifies each generation, and in addi- tion to generating a generational personality, it serves as a relatively stable template for successive experiences. To illustrate this concept, consider the Boomers generation that came of age during the Civil Rights and Women’s Rights era. Many individuals of this generation are revered in today’s society as advocates and activists for human rights and social justice issues.

Generational differences often emerge in the workforce due to the expectations, desires, and views that tend to vary from generation to gen- eration. Employees from one generation, for instance, may have difficulty understanding another generation’s ways of doing work, which can produce feelings of stress, aggravation, and tension. Intergenerational tensions in the workforce are often the result of interaction between generations at work, increasing the potential for conflict over contradictory work values, expecta- tions, and preferences among generations in the workplace.

Managing intergenerational conflict involves a variety of methods, includ- ing practical applications such as minimizing the personal generational frame- work, building knowledge and skills, and dealing with work–life preferences. Researchers identify “aggressive communication” and “difference deploy- ment” as two important tactics in creating a successful intergenerational workforce. The focus is on effective interpersonal and open communication skills. Assimilation, accommodation, celebration of differences, or education and learning are all approaches for understanding and attempting to manage generational diversity in the workplace. The literature on generational differ- ence in the workforce emphasizes the importance of engaging the best talent of all four generations. Although generational differences have received less attention as a dimension of diversity when compared with gender, race, and ethnicity, differences among generations are increasingly impacting the work- force and garnering attention from practitioners, theorists, and researchers.

Definition of Key Terms

Activity theory—The polar opposite of disengagement theory, it assumes that older people who remain active, substituting outdated roles with cur- rent ones that also require interaction with others, are the best adjusted.

Aggressive communication—Proposes that the negative interactions and behaviors in the workplace can be redirected to positive activities.

Baby Boomer generation—Born between 1941 and 1960, this is cur- rently the largest cohort in the workforce, comprising 44% of the U.S. workforce. This generation is referred to as the Baby Boomers due to the 17 million babies born during that period.

208 Brenda Lloyd-Jones and Jody A. Worley

Conflict—A clash between incompatible people, ideas, or interests and described as diametrically opposed to cooperation.

Difference deployment—Refers to the strategic use of employees with different backgrounds, experience, skills, and viewpoints to strengthen interpersonal relations in a variety of workplace contexts.

Disengagement theory—Submits that there is a mutual process of with- drawal that happens between ageing individuals and society. Ageing indi- viduals willingly withdraw from society as they experience a decrease in their capacities. Similarly, society withdraws from ageing individuals to permit younger people to occupy the former work roles of older indi- viduals. In this way, the stability of the society is maintained and social roles are passed, without contest, from one generation to the next.

Enacted values—Refers to the values and norms that are actually displayed by employees.

Espoused values—Refers to the stated values and norms that are preferred by an organization.

Generation—People born in the same general time span who are approxi- mately the same age and have in common key historical or societal experiences.

Generation theory—Emphasizes the importance of the social factor in human development. Accordingly, generational models view develop- ment as an interaction between the individual and the social events that happen and influence the cohort.

Generation X—Born between 1961 and 1980, this is a significantly smaller cohort in the workforce compared with the Baby Boomer generation, accounting for 33% of the U.S. labor force. They are also called Gen Xers.

Generational cohort—Defined as a group of people who have come of age (e.g., adolescence or young adulthood) about the same time, while sharing similar external events that create cohesiveness in values, atti- tudes, and preferences, which remains relatively constant throughout the cohort’s lifetime and results in a social personality distinct to each gen- erational group.

Generational mixing—Refers to the practice of various generations working closely together in the modern workplace.

Intergenerational conflict—Refers to the differences in values, views, ways of working, talking, and thinking that set people in opposition to one another, and which challenge organizational best interests.

Intergenerationality—The interaction between members of different generations.

Millennial generation—Born between 1981 and 2000, Millennials are also called Generation Y, Nexters, and GenMe. They currently comprise 15% of the workforce, with 22 million workers.

Modernization theory—Posits that as the society becomes more mod- ern, the status of older people diminishes. In an industrial and postindus- trial society like the United States, emphasis is placed on youth and the

Intergenerational Tensions 209

importance of highly skilled occupations for which the elderly are not prepared. Subsequently, the elderly relinquish status.

Values—Enduring belief in a mode of conduct or desired outcome. Veteran generation—Born between 1921 and 1940, this is the oldest

generation in the workforce and is identified by the label of the “silent generation” as a result of a perceived quiet, industrious demeanor. This generation includes individuals born before 1940 and is also known as Traditionals and Matures.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 List and describe the four generations in the workforce. 2 Describe the concept of generational personality. 3 Discuss an alternative view of generations. 4 Compare disengagement theory and activity theory. 5 Provide an example of intergroup conflict in the workplace. 6 How might the workplace culture be cultivated to foster positive inter-

generational relations? 7 What are three strategies for managing intergenerational conflict in the

workplace? What is the overarching goal in the process of managing this type of conflict?

8 Compare strategies for managing generational diversity that aim to assimilate with a strategy that celebrates differences.

9 What are specific components of the education and learning approach to managing generational diversity in the workplace?

10 What is the interplay between differences in work values and intergen- erational tension in the workplace?

Case Study 1: Generational Communication Differences

Renate Terrell, vice president for customer relations in a medium- sized electronics company, is concerned about the efficiency and effectiveness of customer service delivery for a few of the company’s most popular products. Ms. Terrell organized a highly functioning work team consisting of members from several different generations to recommend solutions for addressing customer complaints. After several weeks of collecting information from unsatisfied customers and from individuals within the company responsible for direct cus- tomer service delivery, the team discovered a pattern of complaints from younger workers about the curt tone from managers and super- visors. Specifically, younger workers reported feeling disrespected

210 Brenda Lloyd-Jones and Jody A. Worley

when they received commands rather than requests from supervi- sors and managers. The customers reported that customer service representatives were disrespectful and often seemed short with them. When the team reported these findings to Ms. Terrell, she suspected that the tension between younger workers and older managers and supervisors is spilling over to interactions between customer service representatives and the customers.

Discussion Questions

1. What are some strategic approaches that Ms. Terrell might con- sider in working toward resolving the communication differences and generational tensions between younger workers and older managers/supervisors?

2. What generational differences in communication style may be contributing to the tensions experienced in the workplace?

3. While there are a variety of approaches for understanding and attempting to manage diversity in the workplace, which approach (perhaps unintended) may currently be in operation?

Case Study 2: Intergenerational Tensions— Differing Communication Styles

Shannon Keller, general manager of a small debt-consolidation com- pany, is concerned about the interpersonal tensions he has observed building among employees from different generations. All of the staff members are committed to achieving organizational goals, and the company consistently receives strong positive feedback for providing high-quality customer service. However, Mr. Keller has observed sev- eral exchanges during staff meetings that concern him about how well some of the staff will be able to continue to work together as a team. Some of the older employees complain that the younger workers are “self-centered, difficult to interact with, and overly service-focused.” Younger employees respond that the older workers are “stodgy, slow, and resistant to change when it comes to the use of technology.” When Mr. Keller listens to the younger and older employees inter- act, he notices that they use very different language depending on whether they are communicating with coworkers from their own gen- eration or those from an older or younger generation. For example, he notices that when Millennials talk with each other, they use words like sweet, mega, dawg, NOT, whatever, LOL, don’t even, or chill.

Intergenerational Tensions 211

References

Aboderin, I. (2004). Modernisation and ageing theory revisited: Current explanations of recent developing world and historical Western shifts in material family support for older people. Ageing and Society, 24, 29–50. doi:10.1017/S0144686X03001521

Ando, M., & Kobayashi, H. (2008). Intergenerational conflicts of interest and senior- ity systems in organizations. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 65, 757–767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2006.01.005

Beutell, N. J., & Wittig-Berman, U. (2008). Work–family conflict and work–family syn- ergy for generation X, baby boomers, and matures: Generational differences, predic- tors, and satisfaction outcomes. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23, 507–523.

Clochesy, J. M. (2008). A generational shift in the diversity landscape. Diversity Factor, 16, 22–29.

Crampton, S. M., & Hodge, J. W. (2006). The supervisor and generational differences. Pro- ceedings of the Academy of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict, 11, 19–22.

Cumming, E., & Henry, W. (1961). Growing old. New York: Basic Books. Dencker, J., Joshi, A., & Martocchio, J. J. (2007). Employee benefits as context for inter-

generational conflict. Human Resource Management Review, 17, 208–220. doi:10.1016/j. hrmr.2007.04.002

Dowd, J. J. (1975). Aging as exchange: A preface to theory. Journal of Gerontology, 30, 584–594.

Glass, A. (2007). Understanding generational differences for competitive success. Industrial and Commercial Training, 39, 98–103.

Gordon, V. N., & Steele, M. J. (2005). The advising workplace: Generational differences and challenges. NACADA Journal, 25, 26–30.

However, as a Boomer, he remembers using words like groovy, bum- mer, bummed out, and gnarly. It is becoming increasingly clear to Mr. Keller why the employees from the older generation perceive younger people as using too much slang, having poor communication skills, and being difficult, entitled, and service-focused, yet he wonders if they are really that much different. When these now older people were the age of Millennials today, previous generations characterized them in similar ways.

Discussion Questions

1. What strategy would you recommend for Shannon to consider in his attempt to resolve this intergenerational tension?

2. As a general manager, how might Shannon create a successful intergenerational workforce team and manage the generational diversity in his organization?

3. What generational differences in communication style may be contributing to the tensions experienced in the workplace?

212 Brenda Lloyd-Jones and Jody A. Worley

Gursoy, D., Maier, T. A., & Chi, C. G. (2008). Generational differences: An examination of work values and generational gaps in the hospitality workforce. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27, 448–458. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2007.11.002

Howe, N., Strauss, W., & Matson, R. J. (2000). Millennials rising: The next great generation. New York: Vintage.

Jenkins, J. (2007). Leading the four generations at work. Retrieved February 1, 2018, from www.amanet.org/training/articles/leading-the-four-generations-at-work.aspx

Jorgenson, B. (2003). Baby boomers, generation X and generation Y. Policy implications for defense forces in the modern era. Foresight, 5, 41–49.

Jurkiewicz, C. L., & Brown, R. G. (1998). GenXers vs. Boomers vs. Matures. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 18(4), 18–37.

Kane, S. (2009). Managing and motivating a multi-generational workforce. Retrieved January 17, 2018, from www.thebalance.com/the-multigenerational- workforce-2164698

Kelly Services. (2010). Kelly global workforce index. Retrieved February 1, 2018, from www.kellyservices.com.au/au/about-us/2010-kelly-global-workforce-index/

Kersten, D. (2002, November 15). Today’s generations face new communication gaps. USA Today. Retrieved January 17, 2018, from https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/ jobcenter/workplace/communication/2002-11-15-communication-gap_x.htm

Kogan, M. (2001). Bridging the gap. Retrieved 1 February, 2018, from www.govexec. com/features/0901/0901s1.htm

Kreitner, R., & Kinicki, A. (2007). Organizational behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Kuchinke, K. P. (2016). Spirituality as foundation of agency in turbulent economic times.

New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2016(152), 9–18. Kupperschmidt, B. R. (2000). Multigeneration employees: Strategies for effective man-

agement. Health Care Manager, 19, 65–76. Lancaster, L. C., & Stillman, D. (2002). When generations collide: Who they are. Why they clash.

How to solve the generational puzzle at work. New York: HarperCollins. Lyons, S., & Kuron, L. (2014). Generational differences in the workplace: A review of the

evidence and directions for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(S1), S139–S157.

Lyons, S., Urick, M., Kuron, L., & Schweitzer, L. (2015). Generational differences in the workplace: There is complexity beyond the stereotypes. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(3), 346–356.

Macky, K., Gardner, D., & Forsyth, S. (2008). Generational differences at work: Introduc- tion and overview. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23, 857–861.

Mannhein, K. (1952). The problems of generations. Essays on the sociology of knowledge. Lon- don: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Meredith, G. E., Schewe, C. D., & Karlovich, J. (2002). Defining markets, defining moments: America’s 7 generational cohorts, their shared experiences, and why businesses should care. New York: Hungry Minds.

Murphy, S. A. (2007). Leading a multigenerational workforce. Retrieved January 24, 2010, from http://assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org_/articles/money/employers/leading_mul- tigenerational_workforce.pdf

Niemiec, S. (2000). Finding common ground for all ages. Security Distributing and Market- ing, 30(3), 81.

O’Bannon, G. (2001). Managing our future: The Generation X factor. Public Personnel Management, 30, 95–109.

Perry, J. A., & Perry, E. K. (2009). Contemporary society: An introduction to social science. Bos- ton, MA: Pearson.

Intergenerational Tensions 213

Pitt-Catsouphes, M., & Smyer, M. A. (2007, June). The 21st century multi-genera- tional workplace (Issue Brief 09). Chestnut Hill, MA: Center on Aging and Work. Retrieved January 17, 2018, from https://dlib.bc.edu/islandora/object/bc-ir:100449/ datastream/PDF/view

Raines, C. (2003). Connecting generations: The sourcebook for a new workplace. Menio Park, CA: Crisp Publications.

Reeves, T. C., & Oh, E. J. (2007). Generation differences and educational technology research. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. J. G. van Merrienboer, & M. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 295–303). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Reynolds, L. A. (2005). Communicating total rewards to the generations. Benefits Quar- terly, 21(2), 13–17.

Sago, B. (2001). Uncommon threads: Mending the generation gap at work. Business Credit, 103(6), 57–59.

Schaefer, R. (2011). Racial and ethnic groups (12th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Schaeffer, J. (2000). Kemper Reports (Winter–Spring). Chicago: Kemper Distributors, Inc. Scott, J. (2000). Is it a different world to when you were up? The British Journal of Sociol-

ogy, 51, 355–376. Shepard, S. (2004). Managing the millennial. Consultative education in global telecommunica-

tions. Williston, VT: Shepard Communications Group, LCC. Smola, K. W., & Sutton, C. D. (2002). Generational differences: Revisiting generational

work values for the new millennium. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 363–382. doi:10.1002/job.147

Stewart, J. S., Oliver, E. G., Cravens, K. S., & Oishi, S. (2017). Managing millennials: Embracing generational differences. Business Horizons, 60(1), 45–54. doi:10.1016/j. bushor.2016.08.011

Thomas, D. A., & Ely, R. J. (2001). Making differences matter: A new paradigm for man- aging diversity. Harvard Business Review, 74(5), 79–90.

Twenge, J. M. (2006). Generation me: Why today’s young Americans are more confident, assertive, entitled—and more miserable than ever before. New York: Free Press.

Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J., & Lance, C. E. (2010). Generational differ- ences in work values: Leisure and extrinsic values increasing, social and intrinsic values decreasing. Journal of Management, 36(5), 1117–1142. doi:10.1177/0149206309352246

Vendramin, P. (2009, March). Age diversity and intergenerational relationships at the workplace. Paper presented at the 4th Conference of Young People & Societies in Europe and around the Mediterranean, Forli. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from www. ftu-namur.org/fichiers/Forli-Vendramin.pdf

Westerman, J. W., & Yamamura, J. H. (2007). Generational preferences for work environ- ment fit: Effects on employee outcomes. Career Development International, 12, 150–161.

Yang, S. M., & Guy, M. E. (2006). GenXers versus boomers: Work motivators and manage- ment implications. Public Performance & Management Review, 29, 267–284.

Zabel, K., Biermeier-Hanson, B., Baltes, B., Early, B., & Shepard, A. (2017). Generational differences in work ethic: Fact or fiction? Journal of Business & Psychology, 32(3), 301– 315. doi:10.1007/s10869-016-9466-5

Zemke, R., Raines, C., & Filipczak, B. (2000). Generations at work: Managing the clash of Veterans, Boomers, Xers, and Nexters in your workplace. New York: American Management Association.

Chapter Overview

This chapter seeks to provide an understanding of how linguistic profiling has become an issue in today’s workforce. Linguistic profiling is not a new phenomenon. It has existed for centuries; however, as the workplace has become more diverse, the occurrences of this type of profiling have become more prevalent. The chapter provides examples of linguistic profiling in the workplace and presents ways to recognize it and resolve problems that may arise as a result.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• recognize examples of linguistic profiling in the workplace; • analyze linguistic profiling case studies; • identify potential legal and ethical issues related to linguistic profiling in

the workplace; • understand cultural, diversity, economic, and technological implications

of linguistic profiling.

Linguistic Profiling in the Workforce

Native Americans have the only valid claim on the American dialect in the United States. Apart from Native Americans, everyone in America is an immigrant or a descendant thereof. The discussions and debates surrounding linguistic profiling would be null and void if the previous statements were accepted and respected in the American workplace; however, we know this to be untrue, thus the need for this chapter.

What is linguistic profiling? Baugh (2000) stated, “Linguistic profiling is based upon auditory cues that may be used to identify an individual or indi- viduals as belonging to a linguistic subgroup within a given speech commu- nity, including a racial subgroup” (p. 363). Smalls (2004) defined linguistic

11 Linguistic Profiling in the Workforce

Claretha Hughes and Ketevan Mamiseishvili

Linguistic Profiling in the Workforce 215

profiling as the “term used to describe inferences that are often made about a person’s speech. Inferences may include where a speaker is from, whether he/she is male or female, or whether he/she is native born to the United States” (p. 1). More recently, Moyer (2013) referred to linguistic profiling as “the use of speech characteristics to identify a speaker’s race or ethnicity, reli- gion, or social class, typically resulting in the denial of a specific opportunity or service” (p. 126). Baugh (2003) called linguistic profiling the “auditory equivalent of visual racial profiling,” and noted that it may have a detrimental impact on people who spoke with accents that are judged as undesirable (p. 155). Incidents of linguistic profiling have reached the highest office in the United States, the President of the United States of America, since the elec- tion of President Barack Hussein Obama as the first African American presi- dent. It was noted by Heilemann and Halperin (2010) that some citizens believed that had Obama chosen to use or had a noticeable “Negro” dialect during the 2008 presidential campaign, he probably would never have been elected. The history of linguistic profiling goes well beyond the American shorelines, but for this text, we are going to limit our discourse to linguistic profiling in the U.S. workforce.

Linguistic profiling research officially began after the King v. Ann Arbor Black English case of 1979 (Smitherman & Baugh, 2002). Within the King v. Ann Arbor case, the judge ruled that school-aged children must be taught regardless of their speech “deficiencies” as identified by their school district. Linguistic profiling may be one of the most subtle forms of discrimination in the U.S. workplace (Anderson, 2007; Rahman, 2008; Smalls, 2004; Squires & Chadwick, 2006). Baugh (2000) noted that “Linguistic profiling has been accepted as legal in some instances and illegally discriminatory in others” (p. 363). Often, linguistic profiling is accomplished during the interview pro- cess, especially with the introduction of telephone interviews (e.g., Atkins, 1993; Giles, Wilson, & Conway, 1981; Purkiss, Perrewe, Gillespie, Mayes, & Ferris, 2006). Many potential job candidates may have been screened out during the telephone interview, but it is hard to discern whether or not they did not effectively respond to the interview questions, or whether they were discerned to have a dialect or tone of voice that the interviewer did not like or understand. It is a subtle form of bias. According to Rahman (2008), the perceptions of listeners are impacted by the interaction and overlap of meaning. Individuals may have preconceived positive or negative attitudes regarding specific dialects that can impact their decisions.

Three key workplace implications of linguistic profiling that will be dis- cussed are (1) cultural and diversity, (2) workplace and global economic, and (3) technological.

Cultural and Diversity Implications

Within all organizations, there are cultural and diversity implications that pertain to how they function. People within an organization often represent a diversity of cultures and there is diversity within cultures. They may be

216 Claretha Hughes and Ketevan Mamiseishvili

local, regional, national, and/or international. Yet they are all asked to work together and communicate effectively to help the organization succeed. Communication is the thread that links people together within and across organizations, and without effective communication, success may be limited. Diversity intelligence (DQ) is the capability of individuals to recognize the value of workplace diversity and to use this information to guide think- ing and behavior (Hughes, 2016a, 2016b). Diversity intelligence can improve one’s communication ability.

Lippi-Green (1997) explains that at the start of the communication pro- cess, people make immediate social evaluations based on the person’s lan- guage or accent, which is directly linked to that person’s race, ethnicity, or homeland. Rahman (2008) found that racial identity was identified by listeners in 28 seconds; Anderson (2007) showed that the same could be determined in only 16 seconds. Purnell, Idsardi, and Baugh (1999) found that 70% of their race or ethnicity subjects were identified correctly just after listeners heard them say the word “hello.” The impact of the speed of identification is felt when judgments are made almost instantaneously that impact an individual’s potential for employment, ability to purchase or rent a home, and the ability to purchase home insurance (Fischer & Massey, 2004; Massey & Lundy, 2001; Purnell et al., 1999; Rahman, 2008; Squires & Chadwick, 2006).

The short time element suggests that there is an inane, discriminatory culture of linguistic profiling within the American workforce. The ability to routinely reject a person and negatively impact their ability to prosper based on an auditory judgment may not be right, but it may not be illegal either. Baugh (2000) comments that:

The challenge is to have the wisdom and patience to tolerate others whose linguistic backgrounds differ substantially from our own—to accentuate the benefits of preferential linguistic profiling while dis- carding the tradition of discriminatory linguistic profiling that fans the embers of racial discord, to the detriment of fairness.

(Baugh, 2000, pp. 363–364)

This begs us to consider the question of whether linguistic profiling is an ethical or legal issue. Rahman (2008) found that:

Speech that displays the exclusive use of features without regional or African American ethnic association leads to high judgments of stand- ardness with concomitant perceptions of education, higher social class, and appropriateness for use in [the] mainstream business environment.

(Rahman, 2008, p. 167)

Individuals use variations in language to construct themselves as social beings (Lippi-Green, 1997). Based on the analysis of 30 years of empirical

Linguistic Profiling in the Workforce 217

work in sociolinguistics, Lippi-Green concludes that linguistic variations and social identity are naturally linked. Asking individuals to give up their accents means asking them to give up their social allegiances and “suppress or deny the most effective way they have of situating themselves socially in the world” (Lippi-Green, 1997, p. 63). It is illegal to ask people to change their religion, gender, race, or ethnicity. Then why is it acceptable to ask indi- viduals to reject their language if the language is what defines the individual as a social being? As we ponder these issues, there may be legal consequences that have not yet been tested. How is it that we separate language from race and ethnicity without violating current law?

Individuals are often judged on the basis of how they speak and what lan- guage forms they use, rather than the language content (Chin, 2009; Lippi- Green, 1997; Thomas & Reaser, 2004; Zentella, 2014). Certain accents or dialects activate biased perceptions and judgments about a person’s social sta- tus, personality traits, educational attainment, or intelligence (Atkins, 1993; Giles et al., 1981; Lippi-Green, 1997; Nesdale & Rooney, 1990; Purkiss et al., 2006). There is even a perceived link between intelligence and Standard English (e.g., Lippi-Green, 1997; Rahman, 2008); however, there is no sta- tistical proof of this. One has to effectively define intelligence to validate this perception. If the standard is unattainable for those not exposed to the standard, that does not equate with lack of intelligence. It may only require more time to acquire that particular knowledge and/or skill. Or, even bet- ter, a more accurate assessment of intelligence. Slaves did not speak Standard English; yet they were intelligent enough to engineer many institutions and physical structures in America including the White House, the city of Wash- ington, D.C., and the United States Capitol Building.

Linguistic profiling in its present state suggests that, and often requires, those who do not speak “appropriate” Standard English to give up their culture. Why should this be acceptable, especially when the meaning of what is being said and communicated is clearly understood? There is no known economic depreciation that occurs as a result of someone’s dialect or tone; yet, many are discriminated against in the workplace for having this natural difference. Issues of linguistic profiling need to be further researched and rectified to improve the workplace and community environment. Segrega- tion in housing and discrimination in the cost of insurance and real estate has had a negative impact on the socioeconomic status of racial and ethnic communities in the United States (Smalls, 2004).

There is also a dilemma faced by many African Americans in the U.S. workforce. They are often forced to determine how to talk in the workplace by choosing between their community of birth and the “perceived” standard of excellence; in this case, what White America perceives to be best, in order to obtain and/or retain a position for which they are otherwise qualified (Rahman, 2008). The issue of concern is not skill or performance qualifi- cation, but fear that linguistic profiling will be used to legally discriminate against them in the workplace. Smitherman and Baugh (2002) found that

218 Claretha Hughes and Ketevan Mamiseishvili

“racially distinct communities had resulted in linguistically distinct com- munities” (p. 8). Thus, many African Americans and nonnative speakers may become insecure once they realize that they are being judged, based upon their origination from a distinct community, a circumstance over which they had no control.

Nonnative speakers of English are also often subjected to discrimination and prejudice in the workplace based on their foreign accents. A foreign accent, even when it is perfectly well understood and clearly not a barrier to communication, may invoke very negative reactions and emotions from listeners (Lippi-Green, 1997; Munro, Derwing, & Sato, 2006). Stereotyping and discrimination on the basis of foreign accent occur in a wide range of workplace settings, even at academic institutions, where we would expect that a high level of education would bring some protection to foreign-born individuals from accent discrimination and bias (Lippi-Green, 1997; Munro et al., 2006). According to Lippi-Green (1997), “there is a strong resistance in the U.S. to teachers with foreign accents, and nowhere is that resistance so loudly voiced as in the university setting” (p. 124). Foreign-born instructors are often exposed to the same prejudice and stereotypes as any other nonna- tive speakers of English in the United States, because “a Ph.D. cannot render anyone accentless” (Lippi-Green, 1997, p. 126).

Previous research has indicated that perceptions of foreign-born instruc- tors’ accents may influence judgments and evaluations of their teaching effectiveness (e.g., Manrique, C. G. & Manrique, G. G., 1999; Rubin & Smith, 1990; Skachkova, 2007; Thomas, 1999). Skachkova’s (2007) study which examined the academic life of 34 immigrant women professors in the United States suggested that accent was “the most problematic aspect of immigrant professors’ teaching” (p. 707). Foreign-born women in Skachk- ova’s study reported that their accents negatively affected students’ course evaluations of their teaching quality and performance. Similar sentiments are expressed by Rong (2002) who notes that “a foreign appearance accom- panied by an accent may immediately discount an instructor’s credibility” (p. 136). Similar to African Americans, foreign-born faculty members may turn out to be excellent communicators and effective teachers, but they are often immediately discredited and challenged because of their foreign accents (Lippi-Green, 1997).

Of course, there are instances when the lack of language proficiency results in communication failure in the classroom between a faculty member and a student. However, evidence suggests that the problem is generally not the language and communicative competence of the foreign-born instructors, but the perceptions about the accented aspect of their speech (Lippi-Green, 1997; Rong, 2002; Rubin, 1992; Rubin & Smith, 1990; Skachkova, 2007). Evidence suggests that the accent which identifies the instructor as foreign “triggers expectations of poor teaching ability” (Rubin & Smith, 1990, p. 350). For example, Rubin and Smith’s (1990) study is a good illustration

Linguistic Profiling in the Workforce 219

of how listeners’ language attitudes influence their perceptions of foreign instructors’ teaching effectiveness. Based on the matched guise technique, 92 undergraduate students in Rubin and Smith’s study were asked to lis- ten to highly and moderately accented versions of 4-minute classroom lec- tures that were recorded in advance: one on a natural science and one on a humanities topic. Each participant listened to only one lecture topic given with either high or low levels of accent, while simultaneously looking at a photograph of either an Asian- or a European-looking instructor. Neither high- nor low-accented speech affected comprehension in this study, but “the higher the level of perceived accentedness, the lower the teaching rat- ings” were (Rubin & Smith, 1990, p. 349). In other words, “the degree to which subjects believed the speech samples were accented (as opposed to the level of actual accent)” influenced their ratings of foreign-born teaching assistants’ teaching credibility (Rubin & Smith, 1990, p. 349).

Interestingly, not all foreign accents evoke the same reactions and stereo- types from listeners (Zentella, 2014), because often discrimination on the basis of accent or dialect is not about the language itself, but about “the social circumstances and identities attached to that language” (Lippi-Green, 1997, p. 242) and reflects a lack of DQ. Nonnative speakers of Asian, African, and South American languages are subjected to even greater prejudice because these accents are linked to a non-White race and signal “a third-world home- land” (Lippi-Green, 1997, p. 238). When the accent is linked to a specific race or a national origin, listeners’ preconceived stereotypes about that ethnic or racial group are immediately activated and they cannot hear objectively. The results from Hosoda and Stone-Romero’s (2010) study support Lippi-Green’s (1997) observations. The study found that the job applicants with French accents were viewed more positively than applicants with Japanese accents for positions that required high levels of communication skills, even when for some study participants, it was more difficult to comprehend the French than the Japanese accent. Hosoda and Stone-Romero suggest that the stereotypes associated with Asians may have influenced the study participants when mak- ing employment decisions and evaluating the applicants’ fit for the job.

Why should American Blacks or any racially or ethnically different indi- viduals spend their productive work hours worrying about how they sound when their White peers know what they mean when they speak? There are many studies that measure productivity in the workplace. A wonder- ful future study could investigate how much productive time is lost due to linguistic profiling fears. Consider, for example, the time spent by thousands of students filling out faculty evaluations and determining whether or not they could understand their professor’s “spoken language”—at the end of the semester, no less. Then consider the employees who analyze these data based on rating results and the time spent by faculty trying to understand what is actually being evaluated as opposed to focusing on course content, research, or service.

220 Claretha Hughes and Ketevan Mamiseishvili

Workplace and Global Economic Implications

Throughout the world, workplaces are continuously evolving to meet the global economic needs of diverse communities. Success within these work- places is elevating the economic prosperity of people from all walks of life. Yet there are still barriers that must be overcome for continuous improve- ment to occur. One of these barriers is linguistic profiling. There are many workplace and global economic implications that may occur as a result of linguistic profiling and the lack of DQ needed to prevent linguistic profiling. Some implications to consider include:

1 cultural isolationism; 2 diminished productivity; 3 legal discrimination in hiring; 4 reduced team/group effectiveness; 5 reduced global economic activity; 6 individual insecurity regarding job security.

Cultural Isolationism

The culture of an organization is often considered to be its major strength. Every day, struggles of being discounted because of the accent or having to change the way one communicates may put a huge strain on employee morale and create an unnecessary stress (Thompson, 2006). Reduced employee morale adversely affects job performance. When an employee is culturally isolated because of their use of language or accent, their perfor- mance is potentially reduced.

Diminished Productivity

Linguistic profiling can lead to diminished productivity when the employ- ee’s ability to communicate is ridiculed and discounted simply due to a dialect or accent. Not only is the individual’s ability to produce diminished, but also the capability of those who are linguistically profiling their peers is being affected. Their time is spent judging dialect and/or accent and not focusing on the organization’s business processes and procedures.

Legal Discrimination in Hiring

Legal discrimination in hiring occurs because of linguistic profiling. It is a subtle form of bias that is very difficult to detect and prove. While overt forms of discrimination have declined over time, “subtle—often uncon- scious and unintentional—forms continue to exist” (Dovidio, 2001, p. 845). These implicit forms of contemporary prejudice that are often triggered by such subtle cues as accent pose “unique challenges to the legal system” and

Linguistic Profiling in the Workforce 221

“to the equitable treatment of members of disadvantaged groups” (Dovidio, 2001, p. 845). This type of discrimination sometimes leads to the inability to recruit and/or retain the most qualified job candidates (e.g., Atkins, 1993; Dovidio & Gaertner, 2000; Hosoda & Stone-Romero, 2010; Purkiss et al., 2006). Organizations must be aware of the potential loss of revenues and the extra time spent on recruiting efforts after bypassing candidates due to tone, dialect, and/or accent and must engage in “renewed efforts to develop new, effective techniques to combat contemporary racial bias” (Dovidio, 2001, p. 846). One technique is DQ training for all employees.

There is a “relationship between Black education and American eco- nomic policy” (Smitherman, 1981; Smitherman & Baugh, 2002, p. 11). This relationship is actualized through the denial of jobs because of a lack of education and linguistic profiling with an education. The King v. Ann Arbor case may have opened the door for education despite linguistic profiling, but many economic doors may have been closed, and are still being closed, to Blacks because of linguistic profiling.

Reduced Team/Group Effectiveness

Many organizations use teams and/or group work to attempt to boost work- place performance and productivity. Yet teams and groups may be under- mined when diversity within these teams and groups is diminished due to discrimination against members because of dialect or accent. Even uncon- scious and unintentional biases that could be triggered by such subtle cues as ethnic accents can adversely affect group processes (Dovidio, 2001). Interracial groups whose members display implicit or explicit bias against other team members are not only less cohesive and friendly, but they are also less efficient and productive (Dovidio, 2001). Dovidio also found that teams who were free from prejudice solved the problems more quickly and displayed a high level of satisfaction with teamwork and the outcomes. Biased judgments and stereo- types triggered by accents may also affect the selection of the team members. Accents often evoke the stereotypes that listeners hold about a particular eth- nic or racial group that can unconsciously affect their decisions of whom they prefer to work with within the group (Atkins, 1993; Lippi-Green, 1997). For example, Asian Americans are often considered highly competent, but at the same time they are stereotyped as quiet, reserved, and lacking interpersonal and leadership skills (Hosoda & Stone-Romero, 2010; Lin, Kwan, Cheung, & Fiske, 2005; Wu, 1997). These preconceived judgments because of a lack of DQ, when activated by such subtle cues as accents, can affect the team mem- ber selection process or even a specific task assignment.

Reduced Global Economic Activity

Global economic activity has been shown to be the future of revenue growth as the world becomes “flatter” (Friedman, 2005). Yet many organizations will

222 Claretha Hughes and Ketevan Mamiseishvili

lose out on this potential growth because of linguistic profiling. The best- qualified candidate may not sound the way we prefer; thus, the decision must be made to determine what is most important: the way an individual sounds or what the individual can do to enhance the growth of our organizations.

The global economy is intertwined to the extent that there is 24-hour communication amongst people of different cultures and languages. Lan- guage tolerance and inclusion facilitate the expansion of global economic activity. If this communication is hindered, the accelerated growth that has been fruitful for many nations may slow down. Most economic growth is occurring in countries where Standard English is not the norm; thus, coun- tries may become afraid to invest in places where there is a lack of toler- ance of language differences. Linguistic profiling need not be the reason for reduced global economic activity among nations.

Individual Insecurity Regarding Job Security

Individuals collectively come together to form organizations. Each individ- ual must feel valued to provide peak performance within the organization. When an individual is insecure regarding their job security because of their dialect or accent, the organization loses. It loses productivity, employee loy- alty, and cultural cohesiveness. How can an individual be expected to per- form when there is a lack of trust that they will retain their job? How can they provide the best service to customers when they are consistently being judged because of their accents or dialects? The computer firm Dell expe- rienced some of these issues with its call centers in India. Many Americans stopped purchasing Dell computers because they did not want to talk to technical support or customer services representatives who had distinctively Indian accents, regardless of their expertise.

Organizations are going to be tasked to address all of these issues if they hope to remain competitive within the global economy. Human resource development professionals will be called upon to develop training systems and organizational development processes that will enhance the employees’ ability to understand and avoid these potential pitfalls to organizational suc- cess. Diversity intelligence (DQ) provides one way to help employees accept linguistic differences. This is a method that is currently being explored as an additional option for dealing with these implications and many others in the workplace (Hughes, 2014, 2016a, 2016b).

Technological Implications

There are many ways in which technology is being used by organizations and individuals to address linguistic profiling concerns. In the academic environment, minority and foreign faculty are choosing to teach online. Often in this environment, there is no long-term verbal communication with students; yet these faculty members are still subject to evaluations that ask students to evaluate their spoken English even if it is not occurring.

Linguistic Profiling in the Workforce 223

Many organizations are using websites to allow customers to use self- service or receive online chats with customer service representatives (available 24/7) as opposed to telephone conversations. These techniques may not be directly stated to have become standard as a result of linguis- tic profiling, but they are effective techniques that can be incorporated to assist organizations and individuals as they attempt to deal with speech discrimination.

Binary language is the number one form of communication in the world. Throughout the world, it is becoming the language of choice, even if this is unknown to its users. Many individuals who use computers do not know that they are using binary language, but it is the best way to avoid linguistic profiling. Its success is experienced most in social media settings such as Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, and Twitter. There is constant communi- cation without extensive linguistic profiling. Participants do not care how other participants sound; they just receive the information supplied and use it to meet their needs.

As organizations expand the use of technology within the workplace, they have the potential to reduce linguistic profiling. Binary language can be used by organizations as a way to determine content value. For example, individu- als can look for common ground through focusing upon content and not the means of how they receive the content. Is the content less valuable because the person who provided it spoke with a different dialect, tone, or accent? What is the organization’s priority: producing or providing a first-quality product, or top-notch service; or discerning employee dialect, tone, or accent?

Chapter Summary

Linguistic profiling is an evolving issue in the global economy. Many organizations are competing globally for diverse talent. Yet some may be self-sabotaging their success by instinctively discriminating against potential employees based upon their accent, tone, or dialect because they lack DQ. They may not be aware of the extent to which this may be negatively impacting their potential for success. As the world continues to become “flatter” (Friedman, 2005), employers must be aware of the cultural, economic, and technological solutions that can provide them with the most competent employees. Without understanding the impact that linguistic profiling may have on their workplaces, they are open to more legal or ethical dilemmas that may reduce their competitiveness in the global marketplace.

Squires and Chadwick (2006) suggested that by not including linguistic profiling in racial discrimination research, the extent to which discrimina- tion persists will be understated and be “less effective in protecting basic civil rights” (p. 413). They also noted that “the fundamental way people communicate by simply talking to each other, is often the basis today for determining who gets what and why” (p. 413). This statement is powerful, yet it may be perceived as too simplistic. Many workers may think they are

224 Claretha Hughes and Ketevan Mamiseishvili

simply talking to their coworkers and superiors in the workplace, when in fact, they are being discriminated against because of their dialect, accent, and/or natural tone. “To speak freely in the mother tongue without intimi- dation, without standing in the shadow of other languages and peoples” is a basic human right that every person deserves (Lippi-Green, 1997, p. 243).

Definition of Key Terms

Linguistic profiling—Smalls (2004) defined linguistic profiling as the “term used to describe inferences that are often made about a person’s speech. Infer- ences may include where a speaker is from, whether he/she is male or female, or whether he/she is native born to the United States” (p. 1). According to Baugh (2000), “linguistic profiling is based upon auditory cues that may be used to identify an individual or individuals as belonging to a linguistic sub- group within a given speech community, including a racial subgroup” (p. 363).

Diversity intelligence—Hughes (2016a, 2016b) describes diversity intel- ligence as the capability to recognize the value of workplace diversity and to use this information to guide thinking and behavior.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 In what types of career fields is linguistic profiling most likely to occur? 2 Describe a situation in which you or someone you know has been lin-

guistically profiled. 3 Can you think of a situation where you may have linguistically profiled

someone? 4 To what extent does linguistic profiling affect the economic prosperity

of individuals? 5 Is linguistic profiling during the interview process a legal or an ethical

issue? 6 Develop a training program using diversity intelligence to teach inter-

viewers how to avoid linguistically profiling potential employees during the interview process.

7 Describe the key competencies that the interviewer must possess to avoid linguistic profiling.

8 In what ways can technology be used to limit linguistic profiling in the workplace?

9 What can organizations do to develop a culture of linguistic tolerance? 10 Since there are civil rights laws that protect against racial, national origin,

and ethnic bias in the workplace, should the dialect, tone, and accent of these workers also be protected?

Linguistic Profiling in the Workforce 225

Case Study 1: Teacher Fluency

On April 30, 2010, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Arizona Department of Education was grading teachers based upon their flu- ency in the English language. They were judging whether teachers were heavily accented or ungrammatical in their speech. The Depart- ment sent evaluators into schools to assess teachers. Many of these teachers were Hispanics.

The EEOC notes that employment decisions that are made based on foreign accent do not violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 if the job requires effective oral communication in English. The employer has to provide a job description based on an accurate job analysis which explicitly states that effective oral communication in English is a requirement for the job.

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 allows states to determine the meaning of fluency, but the Act requires that students be taught by teachers who are fluent in English to receive federal funds.

Discussion Questions

1 Provide pros and cons regarding Arizona’s decision to fire teach- ers based on their accent.

2 Should there be standards to fire teachers based upon pronun- ciation and/or accent?

3 Should states be allowed to determine the meaning of fluency, especially regarding this case where many of the children are foreign speakers and teachers are trying to meet the school pro- ficiency standards of the NCLB Act? Why or why not?

Case Study 2: Job Candidate Interview

Often, linguistic profiling occurs during the interview process, espe- cially with the introduction of telephone interviews. Many potential job candidates may have been screened out during the telephone inter- view. It is hard for managers and supervisors to discern whether or not candidates are being linguistically profiled. Managers, supervisors, and job candidates do not know if candidates effectively respond to the interviewer’s questions, or whether they were discerned to have a dialect or tone of voice that the interviewer did not like or understand.

226 Claretha Hughes and Ketevan Mamiseishvili

Discussion Questions

1 Describe what would cause someone to linguistically profile a job candidate during a telephone interview.

2 Provide evidence of how an applicant’s accent, tone, or dialect can trigger adverse selection decisions by interviewers.

References

Anderson, K. T. (2007). Constructing “otherness”: Ideologies and differentiating speech style. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 178–197.

Atkins, C. P. (1993). Do employment recruiters discriminate on the basis of nonstandard dialect? Journal of Employment Counseling, 30, 108–118.

Baugh, J. (2000). Racial identification by speech. American Speech, 75, 362–364. Baugh, J. (2003). Linguistic profiling. In S. Makoni, G. Smitherman, A. F. Ball, & A. K.

Spears (Eds.), Black linguistics: Language, society, and politics in Africa and the Americas (pp. 155–168). New York: Routledge.

Chin, W. Y. (2009). Linguistic profiling in education: How accent bias denies equal edu- cational opportunities to students of color. Scholar, 12, 355–384.

Dovidio, J. F. (2001). On the nature of contemporary prejudice: The third wave. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 829–849.

Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2000). Aversive racism and selection decisions: 1989– 1999. Psychological Science, 11(4), 315–319.

Fischer, M. J., & Massey, D. S. (2004). The ecology of racial discrimination. City & Com- munity, 3(3), 221–241.

Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the 21st century. New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.

Giles, H., Wilson, P., & Conway, A. (1981). Accent and lexical diversity as determinants of impression formation and perceived employment suitability. Language Sciences, 3(1), 91–103.

Heilemann, J., & Halperin, M. (2010). Game change. New York: HarperCollins. Hosoda, M., & Stone-Romero, E. (2010).The effects of foreign accents on employment-

related decisions. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(2), 113–132. Hughes, C. (2014). American Black women and interpersonal leadership styles. Rotterdam, the

Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Hughes, C. (2016a). Diversity intelligence: Integrating diversity intelligence alongside intellectual, emo-

tional, and cultural intelligence for leadership and career development. London: Palgrave MacMillan. Hughes, C. (2016b, June). Using diversity intelligence for an inclusive organization. TD,

70(6), 76–77. Lin, M. H., Kwan, V. S. Y., Cheung, A., & Fiske, S. T. (2005). Stereotype content model

explains prejudice for an envied outgroup: Scale of anti-Asian American stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(1), 34–47.

Lippi-Green, R. (1999). English with an accent: Language, ideology, and discrimination in the United States. New York: Routledge.

Manrique, C. G., & Manrique, G. G. (1999). The multicultural or immigrant faculty in Ameri- can society. Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press.

Linguistic Profiling in the Workforce 227

Massey, D. S., & Lundy, G. (2001). Use of Black English and racial discrimination in urban housing markets: New methods and findings. Urban Affairs Review, 36(4), 452–469.

Moyer, A. (2013). Foreign accent: The phenomenon of non-native speech. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Munro, M. J., Derwing, T. M., & Sato, K. (2006). Salient accents, covert attitudes: Con- sciousness-raising for pre-service second language teachers. Prospect, 21(1), 67–79.

Nesdale, A. R., & Rooney, R. (1990). Effect of children’s ethnic accents on adults’ evalu- ations and stereotyping. Australian Journal of Psychology, 42(3), 309–319.

Purkiss, S. L. S., Perrewe, P. L., Gillespie, T. L., Mayes, B. T., & Ferris, G. R. (2006). Implicit sources of bias in employment interview judgments and decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101, 152–167.

Purnell, T., Idsardi, W., & Baugh, J. (1999). Perceptual and phonetic experiments on American English dialect identification. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18(1), 10–30.

Rahman, J. (2008). Middle-class African Americans: Reactions and attitudes toward African American English. American Speech, 83(2), 141–176. doi:10.1215/ 00031283–2008–009

Rong, X. L. (2002). Teaching with differences and for differences: Reflections of a Chi- nese American teacher educator. In L. Vargas (Ed.), Women faculty of color in the white classroom (pp. 125–145). New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Rubin, D. L. (1992). Non-language factors affecting undergraduates’ judgments of non-native English-speaking teaching assistants. Research in Higher Education, 33(4), 511–531.

Rubin, D. L., & Smith, K. A. (1990). Effects of accent, ethnicity, and lecture topic on undergraduates’ perceptions of nonnative English-speaking teaching assistants. Interna- tional Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14, 337–353.

Skachkova, P. (2007). Academic careers of immigrant women professors in the U.S. Higher Education, 53, 697–738.

Smalls, D. L. (2004). Linguistic profiling and the law. Stanford Law & Policy Review (15 Stan. L. & Pol’y Rev 579), 1–22.

Smitherman, G. (Ed.). (1981). Black English and the education of Black children and youth. In Proceedings of the National Invitational Symposium on the King Decision. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Center for Black Studies.

Smitherman, G., & Baugh, J. (2002). The shot heard from Ann Arbor: Language research and public policy in African America. The Howard Journal of Communications, 13, 5–24.

Squires, G. D., & Chadwick, J. (2006). Linguistic profiling: A continuing tradition of discrimination in the home insurance industry. Urban Affairs Review, 41(3), 400–415.

Thomas, E. R., & Reaser, J. (2004). Delimiting perceptual cues used for the ethnic labeling of African American and European American voices. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 8(1), 54–87.

Thomas, J. (1999). Voices from the periphery: Non-native teachers and issues of cred- ibility. In G. Braine (Ed.), Non-native educators in English language teaching (pp. 5–15). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Thompson, C. (2006). Using a language that’s not your own: Experience of multicultural employees. Diversity Factor, 14(2), 30–36.

Wu, D. T. L. (1997). Asian Pacific Americans in the workplace. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press. Zentella, A. C. (2014). TWB (Talking while Bilingual): Linguistic profiling of Latina/os,

and other linguistic torquemadas. Latino Studies, 12(4), 620–635.

Chapter Overview

Are employers allowed to prohibit religious garb? Can certain hairstyles be banned in the workplace? When is it appropriate to require certain physical attributes to qualify someone for a job? These questions will be answered in this chapter as personal and physical appearance stigmatizing is described. Stigmatizing based on one’s outer appearance can result from a lack of understanding and sensitivity to individual expression and diversity, which can lead to discriminatory policies and practices within organizations. As personal and physical appearance discrimination cases increase, human resource development (HRD) and human resource management (HRM) professionals must deliberately explore and address this workforce diversity issue, not only in the United States, but globally.

This chapter begins with a discussion of the significance of appearance. Next, various aspects of appearance stigmatizing are explained, and relevant legislation is presented. The chapter ends with a summary that includes rec- ommendations for preventing and/or eliminating the negative outcomes of personal and physical appearance stigmatizing. A list of key terms and appli- cable legislation is also provided.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• explain the significance of appearance as self-expression; • discuss how appearance conveys one’s dimensions of diversity; • summarize what personal/physical appearance stigmatization encompasses; • identify laws that address personal/physical appearance discrimination; • cite a case that addresses personal/physical appearance discrimination.

12 Personal/Physical Appearance Stigmatizing in the Workforce

Cynthia Sims

Personal/Physical Appearance Stigmatizing 229

Why Is our Appearance So Important to us?

Both literature and clothing capture the spirit of the time in which they are cre- ated. Both are art forms. One is language art and the other one is both an artifact and a mentifact. Literature and clothing both can be nonverbal but a powerful means of communication.

(Skinner & Chowdhary, 1998, p. 175)

One of the most obvious ways we express our identities is through our per- sonal and physical appearance. Although we may desire to look like someone else at different stages in our lives—that is, we want to have the physique of a model or athlete when we are teenagers—we are still unique, and our appearance represents our individuality.

In diversity terms, physical abilities and characteristics are primary dimensions of diversity, along with others, including race, ethnicity, age, gender, sexual orientation, class, income, and spiritual beliefs (Loden Associates, Inc., 2010). These characteristics are primary because they shape our identity, values, and self-image. When people do not like the way we look, for example, we may view ourselves as unattractive or lack- ing. Conversely, when we are told that we are beautiful, our self-image is more positive. The primary dimensions of diversity are immutable— that is, it is highly unlikely that they will be changed (Loden Associates, Inc., 2010). For example, you cannot change your ethnicity or race. Yet, if certain primary dimensions change, our identity may change as well. For example, if you become paralyzed, your lifestyle and self-identity are likely to change. Furthermore, if we are asked to change, hide, or renounce our primary dimensions of diversity, or if others do not accept us due to our primary dimensions of diversity, we can feel insulted and disrespected. If your employer disallows certain hairstyles, for example, you may feel that your physical characteristics are devalued.

Some of these dimensions can be seen by others, but a few cannot. How- ever, through our appearance, we can communicate to others our primary dimensions of diversity. For example, someone’s religious garb can express his/her religion. Secondary dimensions, on the other hand, can change at various points in one’s life; that is, work experience, organization role/level, geographic location, family status, military experience, work style, commu- nication style, education, and most recently added, first language, and politi- cal beliefs (Loden Associates, Inc., 2010). These dimensions are not always as apparent, yet, again, they can be presumed by our appearance. For example, someone’s military experience can be determined by the number of ribbons displayed on his/her uniform.

230 Cynthia Sims

Why Do We Stigmatize?

Stigma is socially constructed and based on person–environment interactions. (Hurley-Hanson & Giannantonio, 2006, p. 455)

In every culture, there are preferred behaviors and appearances. Each culture determines what behaviors and appearances are acceptable and valued or improper and undesirable. When people violate the norms of a culture, they are seen as socially unacceptable, and stigmas are attached. Many times we are stigmatized based on how others perceive our appearance and the assumed associated dimension(s) of diversity. Stigmatize means to label unacceptable based on cultural norms, stereotyping, or prejudice. In the workplace, per- sonal and physical stigmatizing can lead to unlawful practices and policies. Let’s explore examples of personal and physical appearance stigmatizing in the workplace, particularly when appearance is seen as a communication of primary and secondary dimensions of diversity. Let’s also examine what the laws state about appearance in the workplace and why attempts to change, conceal, devalue, and/or ignore dimensions of diversity in the workplace are considered illegal.

Personal Appearance Stigmatization

We dress to establish an identity and to fit in with some subculture while reject- ing others. (Green hair or brown? Dreads or straighteners? Make-up or none? Brooks Brothers suits or T-shirts and jeans? Miniskirt and stilettos or jeans and Birkenstocks?)

(Fisk, 2006, p. 1111)

Personal Appearance

Personal appearance includes the following: clothing, tattoos, piercings, makeup, and hairstyles. These are considered mutable characteristics because they can be changed or voluntarily worn.

Our clothing says a great deal about “how we see and feel about ourselves and how we construct ourselves for the rest of the world to see. Most peo- ple give careful thought to how they dress as a part of defining who they are” (Fisk, 2006, p. 1111). When we choose our clothes and adornment, we choose how we represent ourselves. We may intentionally inform others of our spiritual beliefs, ethnicity, and income, to name a few, by our choice in attire and adornment. However, we do not choose how others will perceive us because of our appearance.

Many organizations have formal dress code policies and/or appear- ance policies, and others have unwritten policies that stem from the culture of the organization. Prospective and current employees are usu- ally informed directly of the organizational dress code or appearance

Personal/Physical Appearance Stigmatizing 231

requirements—which may include the use of uniforms, business attire, and grooming stipulations—during the hiring process, employee orientation, and/or via written company policy. A sense of an organization’s preferred attire and adornment can also be determined by one’s peers, duties, work role/level/status, or general organizational traditions. Some organizations, however, do not consider employees’ primary dimensions of diversity or their need for self-expression through clothing, body art, piercings, and makeup when creating these formal or informal policies. Many times, stigmas are attached to certain forms of expression, so limitations are set. When employers create dress code/appearance policies that stifle the vol- untary or involuntary expression of employees’ dimensions of diversity, it is likely that the policy is unlawful.

Personal appearance stigmatizing can result in policies that consciously or unconsciously discriminate against a person’s dimension(s) of diversity. Examples include, but are not limited to, the following:

• If an employer believes women are more attractive and desirable with revealing clothing and makeup and less so without it, women may be required to wear sexually explicit attire and/or makeup. (gender issue)

• If employers view Muslims as terrorists, they may prohibit religious garb, such as hijabs and other adornment, in the workplace. (religion/spiritual beliefs issue)

• If an employer feels that earrings on males look feminine and therefore inappropriate, men may be discouraged from wearing earrings in the workplace. (gender issue)

• If an employer believes sagging pants and large gold chains are too urban or thuggish, a workplace policy forbidding loose-fitting jeans, limiting jewelry size, and requiring belts on males may be created. (gender, class, race, and ethnic issues)

What the Law States about Personal Appearance-Based Hiring and Dress Codes

More employees are becoming aware of their rights to express them- selves through their personal appearance. Hence, cases involving employ- ment-related discrimination based on appearance are increasing. Cases involving personal appearance can be linked to language in laws (regard- ing race, color, religion, national origin, or sex) that prohibit workplace discrimination.

Race/Color/National Origin

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is clear about what constitutes discriminatory practices in the workplace regarding race, color, and national origin, and considers these as protected classes. Disallowing certain forms of

232 Cynthia Sims

expression can be considered discrimination. Since race is protected under Title VII, for example, limiting certain hairstyles that are worn by those within a specific race can be racial discrimination, especially when the pol- icy is subjective and not evenly enforced.

Religion/Spiritual Beliefs

When employees wear certain clothing or adorn themselves, they may be communicating their religion. An employer is limited by the law when set- ting dress codes. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commis- sion (U.S. EEOC, n.d. e) states:

Unless it would be an undue hardship on the employer’s operation of its business, an employer must reasonably accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs or practices. This applies not only to schedule changes or leave for religious observances, but also to such things as dress or grooming practices that an employee has for religious reasons. These might include, for example, wearing particular head coverings or other religious dress (such as a Jewish yarmulke or a Muslim headscarf), or wearing certain hairstyles or facial hair (such as Rastafarian dreadlocks or Sikh uncut hair and beard). It also includes an employee’s obser- vance of a religious prohibition against wearing certain garments (such as pants or miniskirts).

(EEOC, n.d. e, para. 10)

Sex/Gender

Although employers can require makeup, they cannot perpetuate gender stereotypes by requiring women to use makeup or clothing that objecti- fies them. Employers must have evenly enforced policies that have similar grooming standards for males and females to ensure equality; that is, having a hair length requirement and/or well-kept nails for males when there is a similar policy for women.

Personal Appearance Discrimination Cases

There have been numerous cases of personal appearance discrimination in the workplace, even as more education about Title VII is available. For exam- ple, in 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Muslim woman who filed a lawsuit after she was denied a job at a well-known clothing chain because she wore a hijab for religious reasons. This denial violated Title VII’s protected class of religious beliefs. It is also gender discrimination because the hijab is only worn by women.

Personal/Physical Appearance Stigmatizing 233

Physical Appearance Stigmatization

Physical Appearance

Physical appearance includes the following characteristics: attractiveness, skin tone, facial features, hair texture, weight, height, physical disabilities, age, and pregnancy. These characteristics are considered immutable because you nor- mally cannot change them (your age, weight, height, and pregnancy status will eventually change, but not immediately). In some instances, however, people have sought to change their physical appearance to assimilate, feel accepted, gain power and privilege, or avoid discrimination.

Much of our physical appearance is biologically-based, inherited from our parents. We may like or dislike our physical features, seek to enhance them, or aspire to change them if possible. Some of our physical abilities and dis- abilities may change at certain periods in our lives, yet others will remain. When our employers and co-workers deem our physical appearance unac- ceptable, the workplace can be an uncomfortable environment.

Immutable Physical Characteristics

Certain cultures associate stigmas with certain immutable features, attaching positive and negative values to them. For example, in the Afri- can American culture, a light skin tone is a marker of beauty, and dark skin is viewed negatively. Also, “As in … Asian countries such as Japan, … lighter skin pigment also represents membership of the elite, or the middle class” (Aizura, 2009, p. 311). Other racial and ethnic groups har- bor these beliefs, causing problems in the workplace both within and outside their racial and ethnic groups. For example, “based on the color of their skin, dark-skinned Blacks historically have experienced more [workplace] discrimination—both from Whites and members of their own race—than lighter-skinned Blacks, according to the EEOC” (Mirza, 2003, p. 62). For these reasons and others, some darker-skinned people invest in skin-bleaching creams to try to lighten their skin and become accepted. The term colorism is generally associated with prejudice against people with dark skin tones and a preference for people with lighter skin tones. The term lookism is a similar concept that places value on a person’s physical attractiveness. Lookism is a form of bias or prejudice against people considered unattractive and a preference for those considered more attractive.

Height is another immutable physical characteristic that one does not change (after growth has ended). There are stigmas associated with height, and above-average height is usually valued more than a shorter stature. “Tallness is considered powerful … because of its link to mas- culinity, in that the male body claims more space. On the flip side, the

234 Cynthia Sims

shorter body takes up less space, and is perceived as feminine, which invokes passivity and powerlessness” (Butera, 2008, p. 14). This height- ism is a serious workplace issue in the United States and other coun- tries, as height is associated with power and dominance. In some Asian countries, for example, a certain height is a requirement for many jobs (Coonan, 2006) and even college entrance. Height also grants status and power. For these reasons, some Asians pursue surgery that includes breaking their lower legs and inserting lengthening instruments in order to increase their height.

Physical appearance stigmatizing can result in policies that consciously or unconsciously discriminate against a person’s dimension(s) of diversity. Examples include, but are not limited to, the following:

• If an employer believes that darker-skinned people are less intelligent, s/he may hire a light-skinned person over a dark-skinned person. (skin tone, race, and ethnicity issue)

• If employers deem thin employees to be more capable than overweight employees, they may promote a thin employee with fewer skills over an overweight employee. (weightism or the bias against a person based on weight)

• If an employer feels a pregnant prospective employee will be less availa- ble to work after the child is born, s/he may not hire a pregnant woman.

• If employers believe a 53-year-old employee will have difficulty learning their company’s latest technology, they may not include the employee in training.

What the Law States about Immutable Physical Characteristics

Immutable appearance cases are becoming more common and growing. However, there is “sparse current law on the topic of immutable appear- ance discrimination” (James, 2008, p. 669). When immutable appearance characteristics are linked to language in federal laws (race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability, and pregnancy), cases for discrimination can be filed.

Race/Color

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) statistics show an increasing number of skin-tone discrimination charges since the mid- 1990s. For this reason, Title VII has been updated to include language that broadens the definition of color, expanding the clause under race/ color discrimination to include certain personal characteristics associated with race that include hair texture, skin color, or certain facial features.

Personal/Physical Appearance Stigmatizing 235

The additions make the law more inclusive of the types of discrimination that occur. Furthermore,

Although Title VII does not define ‘color,’ the courts and the Commis- sion read ‘color’ to have its commonly understood meaning—pigmen- tation, complexion, or skin shade or tone. Thus, color discrimination occurs when a person is discriminated against based on the lightness, darkness, or other color characteristic of the person.

(U.S. EEOC, n.d. a, para. 1)

Race and color may also be impacted by less obvious characteristics, includ- ing facial hair. For example, “a ‘no-beard’ employment policy that applies to all workers without regard to race may still be unlawful if it is not job-related and has predisposition to a skin condition that causes severe shaving bumps” (U.S. EEOC, n.d. b, para. 2). This type of case can also be considered a disability according to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 because pseudofolliculitis barbae (shaving bumps) is a common condition that afflicts African American men.

Although Title VII broadened the language under color, courts have shown a narrow interpretation of this law. For example:

Many Title VII cases have arisen when an applicant’s or employee’s non-conformity with an employer’s policy barring certain hairstyles or clothing has resulted in an adverse employment action, such as a denial or termination of employment. Generally, courts have not deemed an adverse employment action resulting from an applicant’s or employee’s non-conformity with an employment policy banning the display of mutable characteristics commonly associated with a particular racial or ethnic group, a violation of Title VII’s proscription against racial, color, or national origin discrimination. These cases have largely been unsuc- cessful because of courts’ narrow interpretations of Title VII’s prohibi- tions against race, color, and national origin discrimination. Courts have viewed these protected categories as encompassing only “Immutable characteristics” such as skin color and, in some instances, hair texture. Courts have also been less inclined to expressly hold that employment decisions based on racial, color, or ethnic stereotypes violate Title VII. Therefore, courts have hindered the efficacy of Title VII to achieve its mandate to ensure that individuals are not denied equal employment opportunities on the basis of race, national origin, and color.

(Greene, 2008, p. 1355)

A well-known legal case of physical appearance discrimination involves the case of a Black woman who filed a case via the EEOC against a prospec- tive employer, a management firm. The woman charged that she had been discriminated against under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when

236 Cynthia Sims

she was told she could not wear dreadlocks (a hairstyle worn mostly by Black people). A district court heard her case and ruled in favor of the com- pany. More recently, in 2016, a Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled and unanimously upheld the lower court’s decision in this case. The Court stated that the firm was within its rights to require the woman to change her hairstyle and ruled that dreadlocks are not an immutable characteristic of Black people.

As employers understand the law more and value diversity, however, they are more apt to address and avoid cases of personal appearance discrimina- tion before lawsuits are filed. In 2017, a manager employed by a popular retail store was fired for requiring a Black employee to remove her braids because they were considered too urban. The corporate office for the store responded quickly when they became aware of this incident, and stated that the company has zero tolerance for discrimination.

Height/Weight/Disability/Medical Condition/Pregnancy

Some employers impose height and weight requirements on their employ- ees. However, “height and weight requirements tend to disproportionately limit the employment opportunities of some protected groups and unless the employer can demonstrate how the need is related to the job, it may be viewed as illegal under federal law” (U.S. EEOC, n.d. b, para 1).

Stigmatization based on weight is a commonly ignored issue in the work- place (Latner, O’Brien, Durso, Brinkman & MacDonald, 2008):

Because it is not widely recognized as a form of prejudice, there is no taboo on weight-biased beliefs. Members of the out-group (in this case, non-overweight individuals) do not question their biased beliefs, and members of the in-group agree that these beliefs are fair, justified and internalize them as truths. If weight bias were rec- ognized as a legitimate and important form of prejudice, then the out-group might be less likely to maintain the stereotype, as people do not wish to be identified as being prejudiced. Furthermore, as is historically the case when social injustices are recognized, the in- group might initiate a mainstream movement toward equality and begin to develop self-pride.

(Latner et al., 2008, p. 1151)

Since federal laws do not specifically address weight, it is difficult to win cases of weight discrimination or unfair treatment in the workplace. Only San Francisco and Washington, D.C., have laws that address weight discrimi- nation, so more legislation is needed regarding this dimension of diversity.

The appearance of pregnancy communicates to others one’s family status, which is a secondary dimension of diversity. Workplace policies that unfairly

Personal/Physical Appearance Stigmatizing 237

target a woman who is pregnant can exist. The Pregnancy Discrimina- tion Act dictates what actions are deemed unlawful. Federal law reads:

Under Federal law, if an employee is temporarily unable to perform her job due to pregnancy or childbirth, the employer must treat her the same as any other temporarily disabled employee. For example, if the employer allows temporarily disabled employees to modify tasks, per- form alternative assignments or take disability leave or leave without pay, the employer also must allow an employee who is temporarily disabled due to pregnancy to do the same.

(U.S. EEOC, n.d. c, para. 3)

Employees with general disabilities are a protected class. When an employer imposes certain restrictions on employees with physical disabilities, they vio- late the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and possibly the Reha- bilitation Act (for federal employees).

Bona Fide Occupational Qualification

A bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) is a personal or physical char- acteristic that is essential to a particular position or occupation. Employers are allowed to use appearance-based hiring if it is a necessity of the business or ser- vice. Many service-oriented organizations that have customers—that is, hotels, restaurants, and retail businesses—must demonstrate that the required appear- ance is reasonably necessary to the normal operation of the business. The EEOC addresses these needs with regard to limiting employees’ age, sex/gender, physi- cal build and capability (ability to lift a certain weight), height, and weight.

Chapter Summary

Our appearance is very meaningful to us, and we want others to respect and value the ways in which we communicate our identities. Even if others do not agree with our forms of self-expression, body type, and/or other physi- cal features, we want our employers to become more aware of how personal and physical stigmatizing can perpetuate policies and practices that devalue and ignore our dimensions of diversity, which can eventually negatively impact how employees interact and work. It is very important, therefore, that employers and employees understand the micro and macro implications of personal and physical appearance stigmatizing in the workplace.

Employers and their personnel must be aware of legislation that addresses unlawful workplace policies and practices that stem from personal and phys- ical stigmatizing. Laws change as appearance discrimination cases increase, so it is also imperative that employers and employees stay informed of evolving diversity language and applicable cases. Relevant diversity training should be

238 Cynthia Sims

utilized to provide opportunities to learn about and discuss these diversity issues and their implications.

Employers must also develop a workplace environment that recognizes and values the diversity of its employees and provides opportunities for them to benefit from their differences. Research has shown that as a result, not only is the bottom line positively impacted, employees are happier, morale increases, and turnover decreases.

Key Terms and Legislation

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990—The law that makes it illegal to discriminate against a qualified person with a disability in the private sec- tor and in state and local governments. It requires that employers reason- ably accommodate the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual with a disability who is an applicant or employee, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the employer’s business.

Colorism—Prejudice against people with dark skin tones and preference for people with light skin tones.

Heightism—Prejudice against people of below or above average stature. Lookism—Prejudice against people considered unattractive and preference

for those considered attractive. Pregnancy Discrimination Act—The law that amended Title VII to

make it illegal to discriminate against a woman because of pregnancy, childbirth, or a medical condition related to pregnancy or childbirth.

Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973—The law that prohib- its employment discrimination against individuals with disabilities in the federal sector.

Stigmatize—to label unacceptable based on cultural norms, stereotyping, or prejudice.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964—The law that makes it ille- gal to discriminate against someone on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex.

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission—The federal body responsible for enforcing laws regarding workplace discrimination.

Weightism—Prejudice against people of below or above an average weight.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 What does our appearance convey about us? 2 Why is physical appearance considered a primary dimension of diversity? 3 Name five secondary dimensions of diversity that can be communicated

through our appearance. 4 Explain how physical appearance can be linked to the language of fed-

eral laws?

Personal/Physical Appearance Stigmatizing 239

5 Discuss why it is difficult to prove discrimination that results from per- ceived personal/physical appearance stigmatizing.

6 Name two laws that prohibit discrimination based on the dimension(s) discussed above?

7 Give two personal examples of both mutable and immutable character- istics. Discuss a time when someone treated you unfairly because of the examples you just identified.

8 Is physical appearance stigmatizing mostly a female or male issue? Explain why.

9 Can employers refuse a request to wear religious garb because it might be offensive to others?

10 Name three ways in which employers can prevent or address unlawful policies and practices that are a result of personal stigmatizing.

Case Study 1: Pregnant Employee at the Front Reception Desk: Is This a Case of Physical Appearance Stigmatizing?

Lucille is an excellent receptionist at Sarah C. Howard School for Girls. She has outstanding oral communication and customer ser- vice skills, which she has enhanced in the 5 years that she has been employed there. The teachers, parents, and students have all com- mended her on how personable she is, and she has even served as a mentor for many of the students.

One day, Lucille announced to her supervisor, Assistant Princi- pal Ann Smith, that she was 4 months pregnant. Lucille explained that she and her boyfriend were very happy about the pregnancy, but she wanted to wait until she was past her first trimester before she shared the news with her colleagues. Ann thanked Lucille for confiding in her.

One month later, Lucille received a letter in her mailbox that she noticed was from Ann. The letter explained that Lucille would be briefly transferred to the back workroom to assist with secretarial duties. Lucille was stunned because she loved the reception area and the duties she performed. She made an appointment to speak with Ann. During her meeting with Ann, the following conversation took place:

Lucille: Thank you for agreeing to meet with me so soon. I am just anxious to know why I am being removed from the front desk. I really enjoy my current position and even excel at it.

240 Cynthia Sims

Ann: Yes, Lucille. I know that. I am concerned, however, that your condition, especially now that your pregnancy is apparent, may send the wrong message to our students. I am also trying to avoid having to move you later to accommodate some of your anticipated needs.

Lucille: I don’t understand. I have close relationships with many of the students. They know me well. What message would I send? And why would you have to move me later?

Ann: I actually have another meeting in two minutes. We can dis- cuss this issue another time. I spoke with the two part-time workroom staff, Ashley and Tyler, last week. They have both agreed to share your hours when you switch jobs. The move will be tomorrow. By the way, I noticed last week that you haven’t been wearing your engage- ment ring anymore.

Discussion Questions and Application

1 Circle the words in the above case that communicate Lucille’s dimensions of diversity. On the bottom of this page, write down the protected class (the legislation discussed in this chapter), if any, to which the dimensions can be linked.

2 Research pregnancy discrimination cases from the EEOC web- site. Explain how your opinion was supported or challenged by the information you found.

3 What dimensions and protected class(es) did you select? Why? 4 Do you believe that this is a case of physical appearance stigma-

tizing? Why or why not? 5 What advice would you give Lucille and Ann?

Case Study 2: The National Basketball Association Player Dress Code: Is This a Case of Personal Appearance Stigmatizing?

In 2005, the National Basketball Association (NBA) implemented a new dress code for its players. Commissioner David Stern established this policy to ensure that players represent the NBA League in a pro- fessional manner, particularly when they are participating in team or league business. The following is a list of items (which has been taken

Personal/Physical Appearance Stigmatizing 241

directly from the NBA website; www.nba.com/news/player_dress_ code_051017.html) that players are not allowed to wear:

• Sleeveless shirts • Shorts • T-shirts, jerseys, or sports apparel (unless appropriate for the

event [e.g., a basketball clinic], team-identified, and approved by the team)

• Headgear of any kind while a player is sitting on the bench or in the stands at a game, during media interviews, or during a team or league event or appearance (unless appropriate for the event or appearance, team-identified, and approved by the team)

• Chains, pendants, or medallions worn over the player’s clothes • Sunglasses while indoors • Headphones (other than on the team bus or plane, or in the team

locker room).

The following is a list of the required “Business Casual” attire:

• A long or short-sleeved dress shirt (collared or turtleneck), and/or a sweater

• Dress slacks, khaki pants, or dress jeans • Appropriate shoes and socks, including dress shoes, dress

boots, or other presentable shoes, but not including sneakers, sandals, flip-flops, or work boots.

Discussion Questions and Application

1 Research the NBA dress code policy and others’ opinions about it. Compare your opinion to what you found. In a 200-word essay, explain whether your opinion was supported or challenged by either more information about the policy or the opinions you found.

2 List the items of clothing and adornment which you feel may com- municate the players’ primary dimension(s) of diversity. Next to each item, write the dimension that it could communicate. Next to the dimension, write the protected class (taken from any of the leg- islation discussed in this chapter), if any, to which it can be linked.

242 Cynthia Sims

3 Why did you identify the item(s), the dimension(s), and the pro- tected class(es).

4 Do you believe this is a case of physical appearance stigmatiz- ing? Why or why not?

5 Do you feel Commissioner Stern’s policy is discriminatory? Why or why not?

6 What changes, if any, would you make to the policy?

References

Aizura, A. Z. (2009, September). Where health and beauty meet: Femininity and racialisa- tion in Thai cosmetic surgery clinics. Asian Studies Review, 33, 303–317.

Butera, L. E. (2008). Height, power, and gender: Politicizing the measured body (Unpublished Master’s thesis). Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH.

Coonan, C. (2006, November 6). Long legs to remain fantasy for petite Chinese. The Independent. Retrieved from www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/long-legs-to- remain-fantasy-for-petite-chinese-5331183.html

Fisk, C. L. (2006, Summer). Privacy, power, and humiliation at work: Re-examining appearance regulation as an invasion of privacy. Louisiana Law Review, 66(4), 1111–1146.

Greene, W. D. (2008, Fall). Title VII: What’s hair (and other race-based characteristics) got to do with it? University of Colorado Law Review, 79(4), 1355–1394.

Hurley-Hanson, A. E., & Giannantonio, C. M. (2006). Recruiters’ perceptions of appear- ance: The stigma of image norms. Equal Opportunities International, (25)6, 450–463.

James, H. R. (2008, Winter). If you are attractive and you know it, please apply: Appear- ance based discrimination and employers’ discretion. Valparaiso University Law Review, 42(2), 629–673.

Latner, J. D., O’Brien, K. S., Durso, L. E., Brinkman, L. A., & MacDonald, T. (2008). Weighing obesity stigma: The relative strength of different forms of bias. International Journal of Obesity, 32(7), 1145–1152.

Loden Associates, Inc. (2010). Primary and secondary dimensions of diversity. Retrieved from www.loden.com/Site/Dimensions.html

Mirza, P. (2003, December). A bias that’s skin deep. HR Magazine, pp. 62–67. Skinner, S. L., & Chowdhary, U. (1998, March). Testing the myths of aging stereotyping:

Reflection through clothing and appearance related information in a compendium. Educational Gerontology, 24(2), 175–181.

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC]. (n.d. a). Facts about race/ color discrimination. Color discrimination. Retrieved from www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/ publications/fs-race.cfm

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC]. (n.d. b). Pre-employment inquiries and height and weight. Retrieved from www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices/ inquiries_height_weight.cfm

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC]. (n.d. c). Pregnancy, mater- nity & parental leave. Retrieved from www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/pregnancy.cfm

Personal/Physical Appearance Stigmatizing 243

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC]. (n.d. d). Race/color dis- crimination. Race/color discrimination & employment policies/practices. Retrieved from www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/race_color.cfm

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC]. (n.d. e). Religious dis- crimination. Religious accommodation/dress and grooming policies. Retrieved from http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/religion.cfm

Chapter Overview

This chapter begins with an introduction, followed by a summary of the his- torical models that inform an understanding of disabilities. Next, the Civil Rights Movement and its relationship to disability rights will be highlighted, followed by a discussion on disability and unemployment. The next sec- tion will discuss technology and its role in improving the quality of life for people with disabilities to participate in the workforce. The last section will discuss disability activism and empowerment as a source to overcome the stigma of having a disability. The chapter concludes with a chapter summary, definition of key terms, critical-thinking application questions, and two case studies.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• describe how the historical models of disability inform understanding today;

• describe how the Civil Rights Movement helped the disability rights movement;

• describe what barriers individuals with disabilities face in unemployment; • describe how technology assists people with disabilities to participate in

the workforce; • describe people with disabilities who have overcome barriers and the

next steps regarding advancing disability rights.

Introduction

The laws can force services for individuals with disabilities, but only time and effort can change public attitudes.

(Gollnick & Chinn, 2002, p. 188)

13 Visible and Invisible Disabilities in the Workforce Exclusion and Discrimination

Chaunda L. Scott and Marilyn Y. Byrd

Visible and Invisible Disabilities 245

The World Health Organization (2001) defines disability as a set of condi- tions, many of which are created by society, that can deny, prevent, or restrict full participation by people with a perceived or self-disclosed infirmity. In the workplace, people with disabilities have a “reduced ability to perform tasks one would normally do at a given stage in life” (Schaefer, 2011, p. 408). Although a comprehensive list of disabilities does exist, due to the wide- ranging nature of a disability, the Equal Employment Opportunity Com- mission (EEOC) also considers cancer, diabetes, and epilepsy as substantially limiting disabilities, along with the conditions of having partially or com- pletely missing arms and legs, autism, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, cerebral palsy, HIV infection, bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and schizophrenia because they limit an individual’s ability to fully partici- pate in physical or mental activities (Society of Human Resource Manage- ment, 2017).

As of 2010, there were roughly 56.7 million individuals in the United States who had a disability, of which 38.3 million were considered severely disabled (Brault, 2012). The U.S. Department of Labor’s (2012) population survey reported that the risks for an individual becoming disabled in his or her lifetime are greater than might be expected. Twenty-five percent of today’s 20 year olds will become disabled before they reach retirement (Council for Disability Awareness, 2012).

The more visible and commonly encountered forms of disability are: blind- ness, deafness, inability to walk, mental incapacity, and other obvious forms of mental or physical impairment that alter a person’s ability to function as a whole person. However, there are some disabilities that are less visible such as the chronic medical conditions previously mentioned, injuries, and learn- ing impairments that cause a person to be unable to function at full capacity (Davis, 2005). Nonetheless, people with disabilities face a daily struggle to overcome discrimination, prejudice, and biases that are associated with their disability. For example, negative labeling is a discriminatory barrier that people with disabilities are confronted with (Schaefer, 2011) that needs to be elimi- nated. People with disabilities are often viewed by non-disabled people “as blind, deaf, [and] wheel chair user …, rather than a complex human being with individual strengths and weaknesses whose blindness or deafness is one aspect of their lives” (p. 410). Moreover, in employment, African Americans and Hispanic people with disabilities are less likely than White people with disabilities to be hired in a full-time position (Schaefer, 2011). This is because people of color with disabilities face dual discrimination: “subordinate-group status as a member of a minority race and having a disability” (p. 410).

People with disabilities will experience prejudice in their communities because: (1) society views these individuals based on what they cannot do rather than what they can do; (2) access to buildings and transportation ser- vices is limited and thus greatly hinders their chances to find and secure a job; and (3) society in general restricts them “in ways that are unnecessary and unrelated to any physical infirmity” (Schaefer, 2011, pp. 409–410).

246 Chaunda L. Scott and Marilyn Y. Byrd

Stigmatizing people with disabilities can be traced back to Biblical times and ancient Greek history (Pelka, 2012). In the scriptures, people with deformities or noticeable defects were considered “unclean,” or “unfit,” and in some way deserving of the fate they had been dealt. Uncleanliness was also equated with ungodliness which translated into meaning that a person was not fit to approach God. Rose (2003) says that the perceptions of the ancient Greeks, with their images and depictions of the perfect body and other notions such as the infanticide of deformed infants, have carried over into our common consciousness, thus maintaining the perception that peo- ple with disabilities are inherently flawed.

Furthermore, the struggle against disability discrimination has been largely ignored in the education curriculum (Office of Disability Employ- ment Policy, n.d.). Advocates for disability rights have sought to encourage the integration of disability history into educational programs to not only increase an awareness of disability discrimination, but to enhance the devel- opment of people and recognize the contributions that some individuals with disabilities can make to the workplace.

Perceptions and biases against people with disabilities represent an his- torical problem that continues to pervade today’s workforce. Given the long history of exclusion of and discrimination against people with disabilities, educators, practitioners, and students should be familiar with historical mod- els of disability that inform an understanding of how disability is perceived: the moral model, the medical model, the rehabilitation model, and the dis- ability model.

Historical Models of Disability

A central aim of disability research along with disability civil rights efforts is to raise awareness of what it means to be disabled in the United States (Kaplan, 2000). Kaplan points out four models of disability that have been used to illustrate how individuals experience various visible and invisible disabilities.

First, the moral model, the oldest of the models, is grounded in the idea that having a disability is a sin and is a source of embarrassment for the per- son with the disability. This model not only fosters exclusion, but promotes a sense of self-disapproval and lack of self-worth. Second, the medical model, emerging during the 19th century, supports the view that a disability is something that needs to be treated medically. Third, as the medical model gained acceptance and support in American society, the rehabilitation model evolved. This model posits that individuals with disabilities should pursue various types of medical “training, therapy, or counseling” to address their disabilities (Kaplan, 2000). Fourth, the most contemporary of the four mod- els, the disability model, regards a disability as a common state of being—as opposed to an uncommon state of being. The disability model also identi- fies societal inequity as a serious social ill “experienced by persons with disabilities and as the cause of many of the problems that are regarded as

Visible and Invisible Disabilities 247

intrinsic to the disability under the other models” (p. 355). This model is most useful in explaining “the role that social circumstances play in creating disabling conditions” (Stein, M. A. & Stein, P. J. S., 2007, p. 1221). Hence, in the workplace, by understanding disability as a common state of being, people with disabilities can be ensured a more inclusive and participatory workplace environment.

The Civil Rights Movement and Disability

The enactment of key pieces of legislation, such as the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), as well as the role that disability activists have played in the disability rights movement have been central to establishing equal rights and opportunities for people with disabilities (Fleischer & Zames, 2011). As was mentioned previously, disability activists have played an influential role in taking politi- cal action in support of disability rights. Therefore, the 1960s Civil Rights Movement provided the perfect backdrop for disability activists to join the quest for equal opportunities for people with disabilities. The most dramatic action taken by this group was the 1977 “San Francisco 504 sit-in.” Activists and supporters staged a sit-in at a San Francisco federal building demand- ing enforcement of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The San Francisco sit-in sparked similar movements across the United States. Sec- tion 504 of the Act protects people with disabilities from being excluded from receiving federal funding and being denied benefits from programs receiving federal funding, based on their disability status.

The ADA was passed by Congress in 1990 for the purpose of prohibiting discrimination against people with disabilities in “private sector employ- ment, public services, public accommodations, transportation and tele- communications” (Gollnick & Chinn, 2002, p. 171). For example, in the workplace, organizations were mandated to provide reasonable accommo- dations for people with disabilities by readjusting, redesigning, reconfigur- ing, or reconstructing workplaces so that this group would have the same rights, privileges, and quality of work life as people without disabilities. Pub- lic transportation vehicles such as buses and trains, along with transportation stations, were also required to become user-friendly to assist the disabled population with their transportation needs (Gollnick & Chinn, 2002) by adding such additions as wheelchair lifts, wheelchair reserved seating areas and wheelchair safety seat belts. However, despite the progress that has been made by legislation and the advocacy of disability activists and supporters, the struggle for disability equality continues.

Disability and Unemployment

As previously highlighted in this chapter, individuals with disabilities, despite their protected class status, represent “about two-thirds of working

248 Chaunda L. Scott and Marilyn Y. Byrd

age people … in the United States [that] are unemployed” (Schaefer, 2011, p. 409). This problem may be related to the fact that individuals with dis- abilities were regularly turned down from being admitted into mainstream educational institutions, unless they were planning to take “special educa- tion” courses (Ryan, 2011). Ryan additionally notes that it has only been 38 years since the passage of such legislation as the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. Both of these Acts were influential in making mainstream educational institutions more accommodating for individuals with disabilities. Because of these laws, edu- cational opportunities have assisted individuals with disabilities in attain- ing employment (Ryan, 2011). To illustrate this point, in 2010, 41.1% of individuals between the ages of 21 and 64 who had a disability gained employment, along with “27.5% of adults with severe disabilities” (Brault, 2012, p. 10).

Results of ongoing research by the Job Accommodation Network (JAN) in partnership with the University of Iowa’s Law, Health Policy, and Dis- ability Center (LHPDC) report that employers can make workplace accom- modations for employees with disabilities at a low cost and high impact. Significant findings of the JAN (2013) ongoing research are:

1 Employers contact JAN for information and solutions for the purpose of retaining valued and qualified employees.

2 The majority of employers report no or little cost in making accom- modations for employees with disabilities.

3 Employers report that the accommodations they implement are effective. 4 Employers report direct and indirect benefits after making accommoda-

tions for employees with disabilities.

This research study concluded that retaining valued employees and increas- ing the employee’s productivity are the top two benefits of making work- place accommodations for people with disabilities (JAN, 2013). Indirect benefits include improved interactions with other employees, overall com- pany morale, and overall company productivity.

Technology and Quality of Work for People with Disabilities

For many individuals with physical and mental impairments, technology has made significant contributions to improving the quality of work, thus helping people with disabilities participate more actively in the workplace. However, the results of a study conducted by Harris, Owen, and De Ruiter (2012) disclosed that for many individuals with disabilities, access to tech- nology posed several problems. For example, the researchers found that the study participants did not have the right technological skills to access and navigate various technologies that they encountered. Second, the study par- ticipants noted that they did not have the financial resources to purchase technological equipment that would accommodate their disability. Third, it

Visible and Invisible Disabilities 249

was often difficult for the study participants to keep their skills current due to the constantly changing technologies. Finally, the researchers found that the study participants gave unfavorable feedback to online links to beneficial resources; primarily because online links are not always updated and conse- quently do not provide the needed information.

The findings of Harris et al. (2012) provide insight on the limitations of technology and other resources that could enhance the quality of work and life for people with disabilities, concluding that “parity of participation in civic engagement enables marginalized groups to be agents of social change” (p. 81). Identifying ways that people with disabilities can be empowered at work is the first step to social change. The next step is a more participa- tory approach to research and greater collaboration among advocacy groups, researchers, scholars, and practitioners to learn of other ways that technology can be improved to meet the needs of individuals with disabilities in the workforce more effectively (Harris et al., 2012).

Disability Rights: Overcoming Barriers

To date, advocacy for disability rights has remained in the forefront through the actions of activists and other champions for the cause. For example, the entertainment industry is noted for publicly portraying the careers of celebrities who have self-disclosed their disabilities. Celebrities such as Ste- ven Spielberg, Stevie Wonder, Magic Johnson, Cher, Tom Cruise, Michael J. Fox, and Danny Glover, to name a few, are celebrities who have chosen to foreground their respective disabilities. Identifying with one’s disability is a source of empowerment and helps to shift the focus toward being success- ful and overcoming the stigma (Johnstone, 2004; Schaefer, 2011). Therefore, celebrity self-disclosure has served to promote not only disability rights, but a sense of identity. However, greater efforts are needed to eradicate the discrimination and biases that individuals with disabilities encounter in the workplace.

Tororei (2009) makes a poignant statement: “persons with disabilities must be able to access the workplace and the work” (p. 12). To achieve this, employers have not only a legal but a moral obligation to offer a workplace environment that creates a feeling of independence, self-worth, job satisfac- tion, dignity, and provides opportunities to interact and connect with others and consequently enjoy the same rights and privileges that are available to individuals in that environment.

Another crucial element of advancing the rights of people with disabili- ties in the workplace is cultivating and developing talent (Stein, M. A. & Stein, P. J. S., 2007). Traditionally, the mindset toward people with disabilities in the workplace has been one of “invisibility” and absence from the every- day routine (Tororei, 2009). However, invisibility “undermines the dignity and self-worth” that enable people with disabilities “to live and express their humanity” (p. 12). Therefore, overcoming barriers requires opportunities for training and development that contribute to more meaningful work.

250 Chaunda L. Scott and Marilyn Y. Byrd

Chapter Summary

Discrimination against and exclusion of people with disabilities has existed throughout the history of Western civilization. Examples from the past have served as models that inform an understanding of disability even today. It is apparent that there are many ways to understand disability, but it is impor- tant to judge who is disabled on an individual basis. Advocates on behalf of people with disabilities have worked to ensure a more inclusive work environment, and as a result, have helped to produce laws to ensure equity and fairness for this group. However, barriers such as biased perceptions and inadequate accommodations, to name a few, still prevent full participation in the workplace for people with disabilities. In addition, the state of unem- ployment for individuals with disabilities is a growing concern, even though many people with disabilities are prepared to contribute to the workforce. Technology has also significantly enhanced opportunities for individuals with disabilities to participate in the workforce, but greater advocacy for equity and fairness is needed.

Definition of Key Terms

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990—This act “prohibits discrimi- nation against people with disabilities in employment, transportation, public accommodation, communications, and governmental activities. The ADA also establishes requirements for telecommunications relay ser- vices” (U.S. Department of Labor, n.d., para. 1).

Disability—A disability is defined as a set of conditions, many of which are created by society, that can deny, prevent, or restrict full participation by people with a perceived or self-disclosed infirmity (World Health Organ- ization, 2001); a “reduced ability to perform tasks one would normally do at a given stage in life” (Schaefer, 2011, p. 408).

Models of disability—Based on four models that are used to ground one’s understanding of how disability is perceived: the moral model, the medi- cal model, the rehabilitation model, and the disability model.

Rehabilitation Act of 1973—Protects disabled individuals from discrimi- nation by employers and organizations that receive federal financial assis- tance (Rehabilitation Act of 1973).

Critical-Thinking Application

1 Discuss the purpose and impact of the key legislation impacting people with disabilities as presented in this chapter.

2 Conduct a web search and locate other legislation that has resulted from the advancement of disability rights, including disability rights in the area of education. Discuss how this legislation has been useful in advancing disability rights.

Visible and Invisible Disabilities 251

3 What are ten conditions that represent a disability as confirmed by the EEOC? Why are these conditions considered to be disabilities?

4 What are four examples of how people with disabilities have been dis- criminated against in society and the workplace?

5 What purpose do disability models serve? 6 Discuss how the medical model of disability has impacted the treatment

of people with disabilities? 7 What recommendation(s) do you have for improving the quality of life

for people with disabilities? 8 What technologies, other than those named in the chapter, could help

people with disabilities perform more effectively in the workplace?

Case 1: Mike’s Story

Mike Doe was a fireman in Texas until 2 years ago. Mike served the last 2 years in Iraq with the United States Army before he was injured in a jeep that turned over while he was in combat. Mike’s injury is severe as he has lost his left arm. Now that Mike is back home in Texas, he needs help finding out how the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) can best serve him. Because you work for ADA as Mike’s counselor, you want to use the ADA laws to provide him with a resource plan regarding what ADA assistance is offered to injured war veterans. Refer to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs website at www.va.gov to develop your three-page resource plan to be presented in a class discussion.

Case 2: Accommodations for a New Hire

Dana Gore has been in a wheelchair since a car accident in 2010 left her paralyzed from below the waist. Looking at this as a minor setback, Dana continued to pursue her education and earned her Bachelor of Science degree in Computer Science online from a public university in South Carolina in 2014. Anxious to work in her field, Dana applied for a network manager position at TelCo, a communications company that provides telecommunication services to the Northwest district of South Carolina. When TelCo’s Human Resources Manager Ellen McDonald saw Diana’s resumé, she knew she was a good candidate for the position and called Dana. After talking for a few minutes about the job requirements and Dana’s qualifications, Ellen requested Dana to come in for an interview.

When Dana arrived for the interview, Ellen was surprised to find Dana in a wheelchair. Ellen decided to hold the interview in a

252 Chaunda L. Scott and Marilyn Y. Byrd

References

Americans with Disabilities Act [ADA] of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101–12213. (2000). Brault, M. W. (2012). Americans with disabilities: 2010. U.S. Department of Commerce

Economic and Statistics Administration. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved April 8, 2013, from www.census.gov

conference room that could accommodate Dana’s wheelchair com- fortably. Ellen took Dana’s coat and hung it in the coat room. After- ward, she sat down across from Dana and began the interview. “I was very impressed by your resumé, Dana ” Ellen said. “Tell me a little about your experience in IT.” Dana told Ellen about her classroom experience developing programs for course assignments, and how she couldn’t wait to put her new skills into practice. While Dana was enthusiastically describing the class assignments, Ellen was consid- ering how she could make accommodations for Dana in the office. She thought, “The hallways are pretty narrow in our office building, but we do have handicap-accessible parking with a ramp and an elec- tronic door. However, I’m not quite sure how I can accommodate the wheelchair in the break room, copy room, and service area.”

After the interview, Ellen thanked Dana for coming to the interview. “Did you have any difficulty finding our building and getting inside?” Ellen asked. Dana replied, “No, actually, your building was very easy to access and your office was easy to find. I had no problems what- soever.” Once alone in her office, Ellen thought about the interview. “Well, she has the skills, but not the experience. And, I’m not real sure about the cost required to make the entire office wheelchair acces- sible. Maybe I’ll talk to Rick in IT and see what he thinks about getting a wheelchair in the service area. I’ll also have to talk to Steve in HR to see what our policies are for people with disabilities.” Ellen began looking through the other applicants’ resumés. “Boy, I wish I had known she was in a wheelchair before I got my hopes up.”

Discussion Questions

1 What are some of the no-cost solutions Ellen can make to accom- modate Dana’s wheelchair?

2 What environmental obstacles can you imagine exist in the break room, copy room, and service area?

3 What are some of the benefits to hiring Dana? 4 How should Ellen handle the decision not to hire Dana?

Visible and Invisible Disabilities 253

Council for Disability Awareness. (2012). Chances of disability: Me disabled. Retrieved April 8, 2013, from www.disabilitycanhappen.org/chances_disability/

Davis, N. A. (2005). Invisible disability. Ethics, 116(1), 153–213. Fleischer, D., & Zames, F. (2011). The disability rights movement: From charity to confrontation.

Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Gollnick, D. M., & Chinn, P. C. (2002). Multicultural education in a pluralistic society (6th ed.).

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Harris, S. P., Owen, R., & De Ruiter, C. (2012). Civic engagement and people with dis-

abilities: The role of advocacy and technology. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 5(1). Retrieved April 8, 2013, from http://jces.ua.edu/civic-engagement- and-people-with-disabilities-the-role-of-advocacy-and-technology/

Job Accommodation Network. (Original 2005, Updated 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013). Workplace accommodations: Low cost, high impact. Retrieved October 30, 2013, from http://AskJAN.org/media/lowcosthighimpact.html

Johnstone, C. J. (2004). Disability and identity: Personal constructions and formalized supports. Disabilities Studies Quarterly, 24(4). Retrieved October 29, 2013, from http:// dsq-sds.org/article/view/880/1055.

Kaplan, D. (2000). The definition of disability: Perspective of the disability community. Journal of Health Care Law and Policy, 3(2), 352–364.

Office of Disability Employment Policy. (n.d.). Disability history: An important part of Amer- ica’s heritage. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Labor.

Pelka, F. (2012). What we have done: An oral history of the disability movement. Amherst: Uni- versity of Massachusetts Press.

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Pub. L. No. 93–112, 87 Stat. 355 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 15 U.S.C., 20 U.S.C., 29 U.S.C., 36 U.S.C., 41 U.S.C., and 42 U.S.C.).

Rose, M. L. (2003). The staff of Oedipus: Transforming disability in ancient Greece. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Ryan, D. J. (2011). Job search handbook for people with disabilities. Indianapolis, IN: JIST Works Publishing.

Society of Human Resource Management. (2017, November). Disability accommoda- tions: Conditions: Does the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) produce a list of conditions that are covered under the act? Society of Human Resource Manage- ment Resource Tools. Retrieved from www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and- samples/hr-qa/pages/cms_011495.aspx

Schaefer, R. (2011). Racial and ethnic groups (12th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Stein, M. A., & Stein, P. J. S. (2007). Beyond disability civil rights. Hastings Law Journal,

58, 1203–1240. Tororei, S. K. (2009). The right to work: A strategy for addressing the invisibility of per-

sons with disability. Disability Studies Quarterly, 29(4), 12. U.S. Department of Labor. (n.d.). Disability resources: Americans with Disabilities Act.

Retrieved from www.dol.gov/dol/topic/disability/ada.htm?inf_contact_key=46f793 3c1c9c6992540d3d9be4b19b1e1b4b568fe1a814e645bf2098bc72e6e1

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2012). Labor force statistics from the Current Population Survey. Retrieved October 27, 2013, from www.bls.gov/cps/ cpsdisability_faq.htm#Identified

World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health: Short version. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.

Chapter Overview

In Chapter 4, race was discussed as a protected class under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In this chapter, the impact of racism and the re- emerging ways in which racism exists are discussed. Racial hate symbols will be examined, and the historical significance of these symbols will be explained. The emotional effect of racism will also be explored. This chapter concludes with a discussion of diversity education as a necessary action for addressing racial harassment.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• distinguish between racial discrimination and racial harassment; • identify the historical significance of racial hate symbols; • discuss the emotional impact of racial harassment; • discuss racial harassment in the work environment; • examine diversity training as adequate for addressing racial harassment.

A perception exists in U.S. society that racism has been eradicated by legis- lation (Byrd & Scott, 2010b). However, actions that constitute racism con- tinue to be a problem in the U.S. workplace. In its very essence, racism involves not only negative attitudes and beliefs, but also the social power that enables these behaviors to translate into disparate outcomes that dis- advantage other races or offer unique advantages to one’s own race at the expense of others (Feagin & Vera, 1995). “Racism is more than a matter of individual prejudice and scattered episodes of discrimination” (p. ix). Rather, it can be further conceptualized as “the socially organized set of ideas, attitudes, and practices that deny African Americans and other people of color the dignity, opportunities, freedoms, and rewards that this nation offers white Americans” (p. 7).

14 Re-Emergence of Racial Harassment and Racial Hate Symbols in the Workforce

Marilyn Y. Byrd and Chaunda L. Scott

Racial Harassment and Racial Hate Symbols 255

Racism has three fundamental components (Jones, 1997). First, racism is rooted in beliefs about group differences (stereotypes) that are assumed to reflect fundamental biological differences. Second, racism involves an individual making well-differentiated negative evaluations and feelings about another racial group (prejudice). Whether or not the other group is described explicitly as inferior, the individual believes his/her group to be superior. Third, racism reflects the disparate treatment of groups (discrimina- tion) by individuals and institutions in ways that perpetuate negative beliefs, attitudes, and outcomes. Racism may be demonstrated in the form of racial harassment or racial discrimination.

Encounters or experiences of racial harassment involve

thoughts, behaviors, actions, feelings, or policies and procedures that have strong hostile elements intended to create distance among racial group members after a person of color has gained entry into an envi- ronment from which he or she was once excluded.

(Carter, 2007b, p. 79)

Racial discrimination is a selectively unjustified negative behavior toward members of a target group that involves denying “individuals or groups of people equality of treatment which they may wish” (Allport, 1954, p. 51). Although both are forms of racism, there is a distinction between racial har- assment and racial discrimination.

Racial discrimination is socialized racist actions captured in attitudes, behaviors, policies, and strategies for the purpose of maintaining racial group separatism (Carter, Forsyth, Williams, & Mazzula, 2007). In addition, racial dis- crimination refers to episodes of avoidance whereas harassment pertains more to experiences of hostility. While racial discrimination is primarily applicable to unfair practices such as hiring, firing, promotion, and so on, racial harass- ment applies to conduct that creates a hostile, offensive, or intimidating work environment that has the potential to negatively impact an individual’s ability to perform his or her job. Targets of racial harassment are subjected to racist actions that are “intended to communicate or make salient the target’s subordinate or inferior status because of his or her membership in a non-dominant racial- group” (Carter & Helms, 2002, p. 5). Examples of racial harassment include ethnic slurs, derogatory statements or insults, and verbal or physical abuse.

Racial profiling is also a good example of contemporary racial harassment in professional work settings and professional fields due to the fact that it also targets individuals based on their race, ethnicity, religious beliefs, or national ori- gin who appear as if they may be dangerous according to the personnel in charge (American Civil Liberties Union, 2018). Instances of contemporary racial profil- ing highlighted by the American Civil Liberties Union (2018) include:

• Law enforcement officers regularly questioning, detaining, and ticketing African Americans and other dark-skinned minorities while driving, for

256 Marilyn Y. Byrd and Chaunda L. Scott

no just cause. These incidents are most commonly known as “driving while Black or Brown.”

• Airline security guards, as a result of September 11th, have been detain- ing and denying Arabs, Muslims, and South Asians entry into the airport because they look similar to past terrorists.

• Airline pilots, also as a result of September 11th, have instructed travel- ers on aircrafts to deplane because one or more traveler’s ethnic back- ground and appearance have provoked fear and concerns among other travelers and the flight crew.

Socialized racist actions can become integrated with everyday practices in such a way that these actions become actualized and reinforced through routine situ- ations as highlighted above (Essed, 1991). Essed developed a theoretical explana- tion for interpreting a situation as stemming from racism. First, the individual experiencing the event should have some general knowledge about the cultural and historical background of racism in order to distinguish an acceptable prac- tice from an unacceptable one. Second, there needs to be a method of making a comparison with some other situation or context in which to fit this particular act. Third, a systemic analysis of the situation should be made that considers the context (place and actors involved), the complication (what was not accept- able), the explanation (what is the indicator[s] that racism was the intent), the argumentation (why the action was racially charged), and the reaction (how the subject responded). The impact of everyday racism in its various forms is racial oppression. Racial oppression is produced by using power and privilege to relegate a racial group to a subordinate status.

Historical Significance of Racial Hate Symbols

The system of slavery in the United States was a period when African natives were captured, transported, and sold as property. During this period, which lasted from the mid-1600s until about 1865, Whites exercised dominance, control, and intimidation over Africans (and subsequently American-born African people). The era of slavery established a racial divide that is ulti- mately the source of racism in the United States.

Racial harassment is a lingering form of historical racism. One way that racial harassment is practiced is through the use of racial hate symbols. These symbols reflect hostile, violent, degrading, intimidating, or offensive racist acts against African Americans, some of which trigger images of death. Nooses are an example of a racial hate symbol. Nooses date back to the slavery era when Africans and African Americans were lynched as a form of punishment for rebelling against their owners, or for reasons that demonstrated the perceived authority and superiority of Whites over African Americans. In the post-Civil War era, nooses were linked to mob-like lynchings carried out by the Ku Klux Klan, a White

Racial Harassment and Racial Hate Symbols 257

supremacist group formed initially as a social fraternity organization. During that time, the Klan’s mission was to maintain social order and preserve White supremacy. The organization later evolved as a terrorist group. To African Americans, nooses symbolize this period in history when they were targets for racial violence merely because of their skin color. In addition, nooses depict a period of segregation and subjuga- tion, which were the essence of racism and discrimination in the United States (Hudson, 2008).

Since the Jena Six episode, the re-appearance of nooses has become a re-awakening of this symbol of hatred toward African American people. The Jena Six were a group of African American teens who were arrested in December 2006 after a fight in which a White student was beaten and suffered multiple bruises. The fight was the result of racial tensions at the Jena, Louisiana, high school where nooses (in school colors) were discovered hanging from a tree on school property. Immediately follow- ing Jena Six, there was an outbreak of noose-related incidents involving institutions of learning. A noose was found hanging on the office door of a Black professor at Teachers College, Columbia University in Octo- ber 2007. In July 2010, a noose was found hanging in a campus building at the University of California, San Diego. During Black History Month, a KKK-style hood was found draped over a campus statue at that same university.

Cross burning is another form of racial harassment that has historical roots and is commonly associated with the ideology of the Ku Klux Klan. The burning of crosses was often part of Klan rallies, and in some instances, served as a ritual at the site of a lynching.

Klansman burned churches and schools, lynching teachers and edu- cated blacks. Black landowners were driven off their property and mur- dered if they refused to leave. Blacks were whipped for refusing to work for whites, for having intimate relations with whites, for arguing with whites, for having jobs whites wanted, for reading a newspaper or hav- ing a book in their homes. Or simply for being black.

(Wormser, 2003, p. 25)

During the early period of desegregation, crosses were burned on the lawns of Black families to communicate the message that these families were not welcome in White neighborhoods. State courts have negotiated First Amendment challenges to cross-burning statutes. Rather than being treated as a hate crime, which should be prosecuted, cross burning has been deemed as constitutionally protected hate speech (Bell, 2004). In addition to nooses and cross burning, racist graffiti, posters, cartoons, drawings, pictures, Con- federate or swastika signs, and other similar visual displays of a racial nature against African Americans are invading the U.S. workplace (Thomas, 2010).

258 Marilyn Y. Byrd and Chaunda L. Scott

Another way that racial harassment is conveyed is through the use of technology. The media and the Internet are sources that provide an avenue for hate sentiment to be sustained. Blogs and websites which invite and encourage racist sentiments used to demean, degrade, insult, and offend Blacks and other ethnic groups are common. These media sources allow access to individuals who advocate racist sentiment. However, because the First Amendment “gives voice” to this type of sentiment, racial harassment lingers.

The subjection of racial harassment and the appearance of racial hate symbols are re-enactments of a mandated segregated era in the United States referred to as the days of Jim Crow. Jim Crow was

synonymous with a complex system of racial laws and customs in the South that ensured White social, legal, and political dominance of Blacks. Blacks were segregated, deprived of their right to vote and subjected to verbal abuse, discrimination and violence without redress in the courts or support by the White community.

(Wormser, 2003, p. xi)

In light of the allegations of racial harassment in work and public places, with the exception of segregation, the 21st century bears a strong resem- blance to the Jim Crow era.

In The Souls of Black Folks, W. E. B. Du Bois (1903) made the now famous statement, “for the problem of the 20th century is the problem of the color- line” (p. 24). It is not without notice that the problem of the 20th century has spilled over into the 21st.

Re-Occurring Messages of Racial Hate in the Workplace

Despite being forced to pay a $4 million settlement in 2012 for the display of racial hate symbols, African American employees at Turner Industries, a pipe factory in Paris, Texas continue to experience racial harassment and dis- crimination in employment practices. An African American male employee at the pipe factory described finding the letters “KKK” and a swastika drawn on his jacket and work apron and another worker alleged pay disparities between Black and White employees (Shipp, 2016).

Black firefighters also continue to experience incidents involving racial hate symbols. In Miami, Florida, family photos belonging to a Black lieuten- ant were found defaced with lewd drawings and draped with a hangman’s noose (Cerullo, 2017). To African American people, these symbols are con- nected to a period of time in the United States when African American people were subjected to inhumane and egregious acts of hate. Therefore, the recurrence of these symbols in contemporary times revives the historical meaning of racism.

Racial Harassment and Racial Hate Symbols 259

Emotional Impact of Racism

The emotional impact of racism, in general, on an individual’s well-being is a topic that has received little attention in discussion of workforce diversity. Given the chronic and pervasive nature of racism that stems from the his- tory of the United States, it seems reasonable to argue that racism can cause people to become physically and emotionally vulnerable (Carter, 2007b). Furthermore, because racism is hostile, aggressive, and takes the form of physical as well as verbal assaults, this conduct can be dangerous and criminal.

Encounters with racial harassment can produce nonpathological, race- based traumatic stress injury, a condition that involves emotional or physical pain or the threat of physical and emotional pain (Carter, 2007b). Research indicates that racial harassment has the potential for producing stress and stress-related psychological and physiological conditions. Race-based trau- matic stress is a condition that results from racial harassment. This condition occurs suddenly, is beyond the target’s control, and is emotionally painful (Carter, 2007b). The reactions to the event can be manifested through men- tal, physical, or emotional means.

Racial harassment can also be associated with demeaning situations where individuals are made to feel inferior. Racism should be labeled according to the actions taken (avoidance or hostility) so that specific psychological and emotional reactions can be addressed (Carter, 2006). An example of racism associated with avoidance would apply to situations where minorities were told there were no job openings. On the other hand, racism that is hostile in nature and illustrates demeaning and degrading conduct is enacted as racial harassment. This type of conduct involves situations and encounters where the target is humiliated and subjected to racial epithets, jokes, slurs, or taunts. Generally speaking, these are situations where the intent is that the individual (target) is made to feel inferior because of the color of their skin.

In the workplace, racial harassment is intended to communicate or make salient an inferior status because of membership in a nondominant racial group (Carter & Helms, 2002). In addition to physical and verbal assaults, racial harassment could take the form of assigning stereotypes such as being lazy or unintelligent (Carter, 2007a). Reactions to racial harassment evoke emotions such as anger, rage, shame, guilt, reduced self-esteem, and self-doubt.

Victims or targets of racial harassment have the option of filing a lawsuit or complaint through their organization, seeking the services of a mental health professional, or simply trying to cope with the situation and any lingering effects (Carter, 2007a). Linking the type of racial encounter to the individual’s emotional and psychological reactions is a critical factor in assessing treatment as well as documenting emotional and psychological harm for pursuing litigation.

260 Marilyn Y. Byrd and Chaunda L. Scott

Racial harassment and racial discrimination should be treated as distinct events (Carter, 2007a). Should a complaint be filed, the target of the act must provide evidence that the intent to discriminate or harass is specifically ascribed to race. Organizations commonly respond to complaints of racism (discrimination or harassment) by trying to justify the idea that factors other than race were responsible for the action. This strategy makes the person making the allegation appear to look foolish or overly sensitive. These types of tactics can produce additional stress for the individual having the experi- ence because their perception of a racial event is challenged.

Racial Harassment in U.S. Work Environments

The election of Barack Obama set off a plethora of hate crimes that have been noted in a variety of settings, including religious and governmental venues, non-profit agencies, universities, and retail stores (Jacobs & Scott, 2010). In March 2010, customers at a Walmart Supercenter in New Jersey were angered, offended, and embarrassed when an unidentified voice came over the public address system ordering all Blacks to leave the store. The vic- tims of this racial harassment were not only customers who were shopping at the store, but the Black employees of the Supercenter. The alleged perpetra- tor, a 16-year-old male, is further indication that racism is not dying out, but is being passed on through generations. Moreover, this incident suggests that racism is adopting new forms of harassment.

Ironically, a significant portion of workplace diversity research centers on the business case for diversity enhancing the bottom line (Bell, Connerley, & Cocchiara, 2009). In the example of Walmart, the context of a retail store impacts both customers and employees. In this example, the business case for promoting diversity in the workplace is challenged. Derogatory racial comments in this context can result in a loss of customers as well as result in lowered commitment from and perhaps even turnover of employees. Given reports of racial harassment in the form of hate symbols and hate speech that has pervaded workplaces where multiple stakeholders are offended, it is obvious that the business case for diversity has failed to make a difference.

Racial harassment is “unconsciously” being taught in public schools. In May 2010, a Lumpkin County, Georgia, teacher allowed students to dress in KKK outfits, depicting the White supremacist hate group that had large chapters in Georgia, as part of a history class project. A Black student was approached and asked to assist in the re-enactment of a lynching.

White Americans view racism as a thing of the past, insisting that they view people as human beings rather than assigning them to a spe- cific race, ethnicity, or other diverse group (Bonilla-Silva, 2006). If that is so, does this simply mean that the word “racism” is no longer being used, but racist practices are still being played out? Chapter 4 presented a discussion on race as a protected status under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This same legislation mandated the establishment of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The

Racial Harassment and Racial Hate Symbols 261

purpose of the EEOC is to investigate complaints of discrimination on behalf of members of a protected status. The EEOC has the power to file suit against employers found to be in violation of Title VII. In 2016, the EEOC reported almost 32,309 reports of race-based discrimination cases (U.S. EEOC, 2016).

Table 14.1 shows selected cases of Title VII violations settled by the EEOC from 2012 to 2015. The context of the complaints is provided to give an overview of the types of environments as well as the types of complaints.

Table 14.1 Violations of Title VII Settled by the EEOC from 2012 to 2015

Year Employer Industry Complaint Action

2015 Oil and Gas Permitted patterns or practices of hostile work environment harassment, disparate treatment discrimination and retaliation against Hispanic, Latino, Black, American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander and other minority workers in locations nationwide.

Monetary settlement; creation of executive EEO professional position mandated to facilitate training, management evaluation, minority outreach, and other remedial measures.

2015 Building Contractor

Permitted racially offensive comments and physical assault on Black workers; failed to properly investigate; resorted to firing workers for complaining.

Monetary settlement; race-based discrimination training; maintain record of complaints; reports to EEOC.

2014 Food Service Distributor

Permitting racial slurs, including the “N” word, egregious race- based hostile work environment.

Monetary settlement; management training; regular reports to EEOC.

2013 Transportation Permitting use of the “N” word and other racial slurs; engaging in retaliation

Monetary settlement; anti-discrimination policy; mandatory training; upper management training; periodic, written reports to EEOC.

2012 Manufacturing Permitted violent, racist graffiti and racial slurs, display of nooses, threats of death to Black employees; complaints unheeded.

Monetary settlement; enactment of graffiti abatement policy; annual reviews by EEOC.

262 Marilyn Y. Byrd and Chaunda L. Scott

Is Training a Solution for Addressing Racial Harassment?

As shown in Table 14.1, training is often mandated as a remedial action for race-based discrimination. However, despite diversity training and race- relations programs conducted by corporations, racial bias and hatred are increasing in the U.S. workplace (Tahmincioglu, 2008). As discussed in this chapter, acts such as the appearance of nooses, burning crosses, and graffiti— along with the use of racial epithets and insults—are signals that racial harassment is flourishing.

Diversity training is now inclusive of a number of workplace diver- sity issues. The problem with diversity training programs is that many are “canned” and do not capture the specific issues that are occurring within a work environment. A primary reason why diversity training is not achiev- ing remedial goals is the ambiguity of the term itself (Byrd, 2017). From a business perspective, the rhetoric of diversity has taken on a valuing philosophy effect that is intended to convey the impression of a commit- tal to diversity efforts (embracing diversity, promoting diversity, appreciat- ing diversity, etc.). Therefore, an organization’s training efforts are devoted toward capitalizing on difference. From a social perspective, a valuing phi- losophy conceals the lived experiences of unjust, egregious acts like rac- ism. Training efforts with the purpose of changing racist behaviors require difficult conversations to unmask the specific behavior that is related to human difference.

The multidirectional focus of diversity initiatives in organizations has shifted from the original objective of legal awareness to sensitivity training programs that focus on having difficult conversations (Byrd, 2007). How- ever, training may not be an effective remedial solution for organizations that are experiencing problems with racial harassment. Searching for causal and contributing elements may yield greater results. Organizations that offer diversity training in an attempt to correct racial issues may be unsuccessful in their attempt. Human resources professionals might explore interven- tions such as distributing surveys to assess instances of reported mistreatment and conducting organization-wide workshops that focus on behavior modi- fications to induce modern racists to reconstruct discriminatory attitudes (Deitch et al., 2003).

The Black/White binary forms the primary paradigm for race relations in the United States and represents the major source of racial friction in the U.S. workplace. The racial harassment directed toward Blacks maintains a racial division and will continue to break down and destroy race relations. Improv- ing race relations in organizations will require more than a training effort (Byrd, 2007). It will require creative and innovative efforts such as the one introduced at Motorola, management that is willing to recognize that racial behaviors do exist, and leaders who are willing to engage in organization- wide efforts to address the persistence of racial harassment. Indeed, diversity

Racial Harassment and Racial Hate Symbols 263

training is one of the top training interventions in organizations today, because it is intended to expose differences in people in hopes of creating greater har- mony among the workforce. Differences in people are obvious. The problem is that the concept of diversity now encompasses a growing list of ways that people differ, which has tended to diffuse oppressive issues such as racism that can stem from racial differences. The late Elsie Cross, a pioneer in the field of diversity, explained, “While other differences may be important, these differences haven’t led to the most egregious forms of discrimination in this country,” as has discrimination based on race (as cited in Caudron & Hayes, 1997, p. 122). Without real discourse about racism, diversity training will hold little value other than being another training effort.

Organizations’ approach to diversity training generally speaks from a dis- crimination and fairness paradigm or an access and legitimacy paradigm in terms of practices and processes of employment (Thomas & Ely, 2000). However, few diversity training programs in organizations approach diver- sity training from a social justice and emancipatory paradigm (Byrd & Scott, 2010a). Social justice is a moral obligation and reflects the highest stand- ard by which individuals within organizations are treated (Mill & Bentham, 1987). For this reason, diversity training programs should reflect the realism and existence of social justice issues, such as racism, that derive from diversity in the workplace. Because the word racism evokes fear and implies blatant and deplorable forms of hatred, diversity training programs tend to skirt the topic.

Leadership and management in workplace settings should be willing to take action against all types of racial oppression (Byrd, 2007). In light of the persistence of racial oppression such as racial harassment, the following ques- tions should be considered.

• Are diversity training programs inclusive of antiracist content? • Do diversity training programs, videos, orientation programs, and the

like discuss racial harassment in terms of racist undertones? • Are organizations willing to implement social justice content into

diversity training? • Do leadership and management training programs include content for

leaders on addressing and problem-solving racial harassment? • Are diversity training programs designed to build race relations?

Alderfer, C. P., Alderfer, C. J., Bell, and Jones (1992) conceptualized a Race Relations Workshop as the educational component of a management edu- cation program to improve race relations. The catalyst for this undertaking was the premise of education as a tool for change. Forming the framework for this project was a manager’s race relations competence. Race relations competence is “an element of overall managerial competence. A manager

264 Marilyn Y. Byrd and Chaunda L. Scott

who is competent in race relations possesses certain kinds of knowledge about key issues in race relations and acts in specific ways with respect to racial issues” (p. 1263). Companies such as Motorola are also implementing diversity initiatives in an effort to improve race relations. The Cross-Country Diversity Network, consisting of human resources professionals from differ- ent organizations, was born from Motorola’s efforts to respond to the needs and frustrations of a diverse workforce (Mai-Dalton, 1993).

The reality is that deplorable forms of hatred are actually being experi- enced in the workplace. As a result, the avoidance of discussions of racism allows individuals to hide their true racial viewpoints, which allows acts of racial harassment to thrive (Bonilla-Silva, 2006).

To address racial harassment, organizations will need to move from diver- sity training to diversity education targeting all levels of the organization (Byrd & Scott, 2010a). Shifting the focus to diversity education means mov- ing beyond awareness that inappropriate racial conduct exists toward trans- forming the culture into one that is more open and receptive to the multiple forms of diversity that are emerging in the workplace. Providing diversity education in academic preparation and professional development training is necessary. Executives and managers are responsible for conveying the mes- sage and operationalizing the practice of a hostile-free, stress-free climate where all individuals have the opportunity to thrive and perform at an optimum level.

Chapter Summary

Racial harassment is a form of racism that is practiced through hostile and aggressive physical and verbal conduct and hate symbols. The growing num- ber of complaints handled by the EEOC is indication that racial harassment continues to be a problem in U.S. society. Because the workplace simulates the broader society, racism is a pervasive and destructive force in the workplace.

There is no simple solution to social problems such as racism. However, organizations should begin examining the problem as a need for more inclu- sive and direct diversity education initiatives that directly target and address issues such as racial harassment.

Definition of Key Terms

Racial discrimination—Unjustified negative behavior toward members of a target group that involves denying individuals or groups of people equality of treatment which they may wish.

Racial harassment—Conduct that creates a hostile, offensive, or intimi- dating work environment that has the potential to negatively impact an individual’s ability to perform his or her job.

Racial hate symbols—Symbols such as nooses, drawings, cross burning, and Confederate or swastika signs that are associated with hostile, violent, degrading, intimidating, or offensive racist acts against African Americans. Some of these symbols have historical roots that trigger images of death.

Racial Harassment and Racial Hate Symbols 265

Racial oppression—The outcome of racism by using power and privilege to relegate a racial group to a subordinate status.

Racial profiling—A form of racial harassment that targets individuals based on their race, ethnicity, religious beliefs, or national origin who appear as if they may be dangerous according to the personnel in charge (American Civil Liberties Union, 2018).

Racism—Accepted racist ideology and the use of power to deny other racial groups the basic dignity and freedoms awarded to one’s own group.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 How have companies such as Home Depot, Lockheed Martin (see below), and others that have settled racial harassment lawsuits worked to improve their organization’s image?

2 Do you think organizations should have policies that explicitly address racial hate symbols? Why or why not?

3 Is racial harassment addressed by the EEOC? Explain your answer. 4 What are some of the remedies available for victims of racial harassment?

Case Study: The Recurring Problem of Nooses in the Workplace

The emergence of nooses in the workplace as a symbol of racial harassment began in the 1990s (U.S. EEOC, 2000). The presence of nooses in the workplace represents not only a resistance to diversity, but is a hostile example of racial harassment at the individual level (Thomas, 2010). When management does not address these types of incidents, resistance to diversity is now reflected at the organiza- tional level. For example, Reginald Smith, an assembly plant worker, entered his work area one morning and was appalled to see a noose hanging from his equipment locker. Smith, the only African Ameri- can worker in the plant’s assembly area, immediately confronted his immediate supervisor, who downplayed the incident. Weeks later, a second noose appeared on Smith’s locker. This time Smith filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Discussion Questions

1 Identify the workforce diversity problem. 2 Describe the feelings Reginald may be experiencing given that

he is the only African American worker and he is well aware of symbolic meanings associated with nooses.

266 Marilyn Y. Byrd and Chaunda L. Scott

References

Alderfer, C. P., Alderfer, C. J., Bell, E. L., & Jones, J. (1992). The race relations competence workshop: Theory and results. Human Relations, 45(12), 1259–1273.

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. American Civil Liberties Union. (2018). Racial profiling: Definition. Retrieved Janu-

ary 30, 2018, from www.aclu.org/other/racial-profiling-definition Bell, J. (2004). O say, can you see: Free expression by the light of fiery crosses. Harvard

Civil Rights, Civil Liberties, 39, 335–389. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from www.law. harvard.edu/students/orgs/crcl/vol39_2/bell.pdf

Bell, M., Connerly, M. L., & Cocchiara, F. K. (2009). The case for mandatory diversity education. Academy of Management, Learning & Education, 8(4), 597–610.

Bonilla-Silva, E. (2006). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Byrd, M. (2007). Educating and developing leaders of racially diverse organizations. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 18(2), 275–279.

Byrd, M. Y. (2017). Does HRD have a moral duty to respond to matters of social injus- tice? Human Resource Development International, 21(1), 1–9.

Byrd, M., & Scott, C. L. (2010a). Changing the culture: Diversity education for execu- tives and managers of a multi-diverse workforce. Session presented at the 4th annual

3 Discuss the actions of Reginald’s supervisor. 4 How could this problem be corrected? What framework pre-

sented in Chapter 2 would be useful in addressing this problem? Explain your response.

Legal Perspective

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission vs. Lockheed Martin

In August 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a race discrimination lawsuit against Lockheed Martin on behalf of Charles Daniels. Lockheed Martin, the largest military contractor in the world, was alleged to have subjected Daniels to a racially hostile work environment and severe racial harassment where he was threatened with lynching. In addition to physical and death threats, Daniels was subjected to physical threats of violence and verbal abuse by coworkers and supervisors who used racial slurs and other offensive references to Blacks. Despite officials being aware of the harassment, the perpetrators were not disciplined. The EEOC settled a $2.5 million lawsuit with Lockheed Martin in January 2008 for racial harassment (U.S. EEOC, 2008).

Racial Harassment and Racial Hate Symbols 267

meeting of the George Mason University Workforce Diversity Research and Practice Conference, Arlington, VA.

Byrd, M., & Scott, C. L. (2010b). Integrating dialogue on forms of racism within human resource development workplace diversity courses and workplace settings: Implica- tions for HRD. In C. Graham (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2010 Academy of Human Resource Development Conference of the Americas (pp. 1315–1336). Knoxville, TN: Academy of Human Resource Development.

Carter, R. T. (2006). Race-based traumatic stress. Psychiatric Times, 23(14), 37–38. Carter, R. T. (2007a). Clarification and purpose of the race-based traumatic stress injury

model. The Counseling Psychologist, 35(1), 144–154. Carter, R. T. (2007b). Racism and psychological and emotional injury: Recogniz-

ing and assessing race-based traumatic stress. Counseling Psychologist, 35, 13–105. doi:10.1177/0011000006292033

Carter, R. T., Forsyth, J., Williams, B., & Mazzula, S. (2007). Racism as a predictor of psy- chological injury: Implications for psychology and the law. Law Enforcement Executive Forum, 7, 131–156.

Carter, R. T., & Helms, J. E. (2002, September). Racial discrimination and harassment: A race based traumatic stress disorder. Paper presented at the American College of Forensic Examiners Conference, Orlando, FL.

Caudron, S., & Hayes, C. (1997). Are diversity programs benefiting African Americans? Black Enterprise, 27(7), 121–128.

Cerullo, M. (2017, November 3). Six Miami firefighters dismissed after noose appears hanging over black colleague’s photos. Retrieved from www.nydailynews.com/news/ national/6-miami-firefighters-dismissed-noose-incident-article-1.3604786

Deitch, E. A., Barsky, A., Butz, R. M., Chan, S., Brief, A. P., & Bradley, J. C. (2003). Sub- tle yet significant: The existence and impact of everyday racial discrimination in the workplace. Human Relations, 56(11), 1299–1324.

Du Bois, W. E. B. (1903). The souls of Black folk. New York: New American Library. Essed, P. (1991). Understanding everyday racism: An interdisciplinary theory. Newbury Park,

CA: Sage. Feagin, J. R., & Vera, H. (1995). White racism. New York: Routledge. Hudson D., Jr. (2008, Winter). Banning the noose. Intelligence Report, 132, Southern Pov-

erty Law Center. Jacobs, J., & Scott, C. (2010, February). Workplace violence—The persistence of hate

crimes: Implications for HRD. In Proceedings for the 2009 AHRD International Research Conference of the Americas (pp. 4128–4158). Washington, DC: AHRD.

Jones, J. M. (1997). Prejudice and racism (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Mai-Dalton, R. R. (1993). Managing cultural diversity on the individual, group, and

organizational levels. In M. M. Chemers & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and directions (pp. 189–215). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Mill, J. S., & Bentham, J. (1987). Utilitarianism and other essays. Edited by A. Ryan. New York: Penguin Group.

Shipp, B. (2016, November 21). Residents allege racism revival in Paris, Texas. Retrieved from http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/investigates/workers-claim-racism-being- ignored-at-paris-companies/353892536

Tahmincioglu, E. (2008, January 13). Racial harassment still infecting the workplace. NBC News. Retrieved July 23, 2010, from www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22575581/

Thomas, D. A., & Ely, R. J. (2000). Making differences matter: A new paradigm for man- aging diversity. Harvard Business Review, 74(5), 79–90.

268 Marilyn Y. Byrd and Chaunda L. Scott

Thomas, Y. (2010). Racial discrimination in the workplace. Retrieved July 24, 2010, from www.you-can-learn-basic-employee-rights.com/racial-discrimination.html

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC]. (2000). EEOC chairwoman responds to surge of workplace noose incidents at NAACP Annual Convention. Retrieved October 4, 2010, from www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/7-13-00-b. cfm

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC]. (2008). Lockheed Martin to pay $2.5 million to settle racial harassment lawsuit. Retrieved July 24, 2010, from www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/1-2-08.cfm

U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC]. (2016). EEOC releases fis- cal year 2016 enforcement and litigation data. Retrieved January 30, 2018, from www. eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/1-18-17a.cfm

Wormser, R. (2003). Rise and fall of Jim Crow. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Chapter Overview

This chapter will address the challenges associated with cross-cultural teams. While there can be success when culturally diverse members of the workforce function as a cross-cultural team, there can also be challenges. Therefore, it is imperative that organizations are willing to manage diver- sity in the workplace in an effective manner. This chapter will explore the challenges that cross-cultural teams can encounter managing diversity across cultures.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking application questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• discover how cultural diversity has impacted the workforce; • develop an understanding of the significance of managing diversity in

order to facilitate cross-cultural teams in the workforce; • identify the characteristics that are needed for cross-cultural teams to be

effective.

Cross-Cultural Teams and Diversity

A team encompasses a set of people who are working together to con- tribute to a project for the good of the organization (Maznevski & Peter- son, 1997). The team functions to: make sense of and respond to a task that was assigned by the leadership of the organization; analyze informa- tion; and respond in accordance with what the implications may be for their internal group process as well as the functioning of the organiza- tion. Culturally diverse (e.g., race and gender) teams have been important in the modern business environment as companies seek to understand and make inroads into various niche markets (Ely & Thomas, 2001). The

15 Cross-Cultural Teams Workforce Opportunities and Challenges

Trammell Bristol and Chaunda L. Scott

270 Trammell Bristol and Chaunda L. Scott

significance of culturally diverse teams has been discussed in the Ameri- can management literature which has emphasized how groups with a similar cultural identity have a similar understanding of the world (Cox, 2001). Therefore, the team that lacks diversity lacks the ability to oper- ate as effectively in an environment that is culturally diverse. In order for groups to be effective, there needs to be representative numbers of those who are marginalized within the organization. “When group members share common goals and values, cultural diversity leads to more beneficial outcomes” (Ely & Thomas, 2001, p. 234).

A cross-cultural team can be defined as a team that brings together people who have information that relates to specific functions or aspects of an organization’s operations. What makes an effective cross-cultural team is the integration and building of knowledge from varied cultural perspectives. Cross-cultural teams also help organizations to achieve the autonomy and flexibility needed to serve culturally diverse customers in various regions of the world (Snell, Snow, Davidson, & Hambrick, 1998).

Cross-cultural teams are usually assembled when organizations are operating in other countries, which results in a mix of cultural values and ideals. However, cross-cultural teams can encounter challenges that result from the mixing of cultural identities, particularly when one cul- tural group assumes a position of power. “Cultural identity [is] associated in the larger society with certain power positions such that some cultural identity groups have greater power, prestige and status than others” (Ely & Thomas, 2001, p. 231). For example, in Western societies, there are cer- tain groups that have higher status and positions of power. Those with power are typically White men, and in general, they hold more positions of power in organizations. As a result, in order for cross-cultural teams to be effective, a structure that mitigates these power issues needs to be implemented. Strategies for managing diversity must be implemented so that potential challenges to cross-cultural teams can be minimized. Man- aging diversity refers to planning and implementing systems and prac- tices in the workplace that acknowledge and value cultural differences. This process integrates the knowledge of diverse members as a learning opportunity and allows the organization to be responsive to its different stakeholders.

Framework for Understanding Cross-Cultural Teams

Culture is “the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or society from those of another” (Berger, 1996, p. 3). Culture provides a lens for understanding relationships, especially in the workplace, and the nature of how work is to be carried out across cultural similarities and differences. Hofstede’s (1983) four dimensions of culture offer a framework for cross-cultural teams to understand power dynamics

Cross-Cultural Teams 271

and work more effectively: (1) power distance, (2) uncertainty avoidance, (3) individualism, and (4) masculinity.

• Power distance—assesses the extent to which members of a society accept that power is unequally distributed. A large power distance denotes that employee involvement is difficult to implement because of the auto- cratic management style. In this type of management style, employees look to management for approval. On the other hand, with a small power distance, employees are more independent and leadership is shared. In fact, employees collaborate and consult with leadership.

• Uncertainty avoidance—measures the degree to which people feel threat- ened by ambiguous situations; it can impact the creation of beliefs and institutions to avoid uncertainty. In cultures with high uncertainty avoidance, rules are important and they invent rituals, rules, and regula- tions to counteract risks. Risks are only taken within secure parameters. Conversely, in low uncertainty avoidance cultures, formality and paper- work are viewed as disruptive and unnecessarily bureaucratic. This low- scoring culture values risk-taking as part of the norm.

• Individualism—explores the extent to which people believe that their primary concern in life is the well-being of individuals and their immediate family, or the well-being of a wider grouping with a more extended network of support and loyalty. In highly individualistic cul- tures, meetings are seen as a waste of time. While the individual may be part of a group, they see themselves as part of a team, but may look for individual recognition. Additionally, this type of society values a com- petitive approach which is more individualistic because there is more of a focus on the individual. It demands that individuals produce in order for them to be rewarded. Most Western societies fall into this category. In contrast, collective cultures value consultation and collaboration; they operate as a team. The structure of the workplace encourages people to be productive and management listens to its employees. The team also shares in goal setting and is rewarded accordingly.

• Masculinity—measures the extent to which masculine values, such as success, money, and possessions, are given priority over “caring” values (or less masculine values), such as nurturing and sharing.

The framework is particularly useful for understanding how cultural differ- ences may impact organizations that are expanding into areas where differ- ences in cultures may have an impact on successful outcomes.

Impact of Cross-Cultural Teams

There are several studies that offer findings on the impact of cross-cultural teams and their impact on successful outcomes. Snell et al. (1998) stud- ied 31 companies that utilized cross-cultural teams. Prior to implementing

272 Trammell Bristol and Chaunda L. Scott

cross-cultural teams, two of the companies, Ford and Glaxo Wellcome, con- ducted cross-cultural team-building programs. These programs involved traditional cultural awareness training, but added facilitated dialogue on cul- tural differences and cultural norms. In addition, these companies designed team-building programs that established ground rules and protocols for team members as they began developing intercultural relationships.

Matveev and Milter (2004) examined cross-cultural teams and found that in order for teams to be effective, the cross-cultural skills of the team mem- bers need to be developed. Failure of the team related to team members being ill-prepared to work with other cultures. In the past, companies devel- oped training programs to provide relevant knowledge to their employees about foreign cultures. These educational programs were created to provide the employee with intercultural competence (IC). Effective cross-cultural teams can be developed by using the IC model (Matveev & Milter, 2004). The IC model has three components: (1) cultural knowledge, (2) skills that are culturally relevant for the foreign culture, and (3) personality orientation.

First, cultural knowledge refers to information about cultural practices, such as the exploration of the differences in communication and interac- tion styles of the different cultures. In addition, team members have a level of comfort when communicating with different cultures and demonstrate flexibility in resolving conflicts. Second, members demonstrate skills that are perceived by different cultures as engaging. This would include using decen- tering (learning to consider multiple perspectives) and recentering (applying what was learned in a specific context) as a means to be inclusive and obtain a diverse set of perspectives. Team members also possess valued skills such as the ability to understand and communicate team goals and roles. Third, team members possess a personality that exhibits empathy to foreign nationals and conveys an understanding of their perspective of the world.

Effective cross-cultural teams need to manage diversity; this is accomplished by incorporating structures and processes which facilitate open communi- cation. Understanding how teams function is another aspect of managing diversity in the workplace; organizations need to provide an understanding of the research that has been conducted on effective cross-cultural teams. For instance, employees need to be skilled in promoting intercultural compe- tence. Possessing knowledge, respect, and understanding of different cultures is imperative. This type of learning opportunity requires specialized training from a training specialist. Cross-cultural teams must engage in communica- tion that is sensitive to cultural differences. Communication methods (both verbal and nonverbal) need to ensure that the members of the team are in agreement. Using the IC framework to develop intercultural competence is integral to cross-cultural teams.

Cross-Cultural Team Effectiveness

For cross-cultural teams to be effective, senior leadership needs to plan and implement structures and practices that maximize the advantages of diversity

Cross-Cultural Teams 273

while minimizing its barriers. Bringing in outside experts who can provide some direction and guidance on how to manage diversity in the workplace and utilize cross-cultural teams effectively is one possible strategy.

Diversity among groups can lead to misunderstandings. Open commu- nication is essential to minimizing cross-cultural conflict. When language is a barrier, team members must look for methods to effectively communi- cate. Creating an environment where cultural diversity is embraced and the knowledge from those who are diverse is utilized and valued are crucial for team effectiveness.

Chapter Summary

Cross-cultural teams have become more prevalent with the expansion of organizations into other areas of the world. However, the lack of properly managed cross-cultural teams has serious consequences which could result in a loss of opportunity for organizations to maximize successful outcomes. In order to capture the benefits, organizations must establish a structure that values cultural diversity. This structure begins with enhancing the skills of the team members, including the ability to analyze integral dimensions of culture, facilitate knowledge of the culture, develop effective communication skills, and exhibit culturally sensitive skills (e.g., engagement, empathy, etc.).

Definition of Key Terms

Cross-cultural teams—Encompasses a culturally diverse set of employ- ees who work together and build knowledge from various cultural perspectives.

Culture—Culture encompasses the collective basic norms and values. It helps us to understand life, or helps to make meaning of daily occurrences within a particular group. Manifestations of culture can be uncovered in the group’s music, language, dress, and so on.

Managing diversity—Planning and implementing systems and practices in the workplace that acknowledge and value cultural differences. This facilitates a workplace that integrates the knowledge of diverse members as a learning opportunity and allows the organization to be responsive to its different markets.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 What are some of the aspects of communication that you would attend to when working with those who are culturally different? Discuss how you would address the concerns.

2 When exploring Hofstede’s framework for understanding cultural diversity, what are the differences between the individualist and collec- tivist cultures? What are some of the challenges that team members from these different cultures may face?

274 Trammell Bristol and Chaunda L. Scott

3 Suppose that you were asked to assemble a global cross-cultural team for Acme Manufacturing (which is headquartered in Philadelphia, Penn- sylvania). This corporation will be expanding its plant in Mexico and needs to explore how this will work best. The members of this team have not worked together previously; what would you do to create intercultural competence among the team members?

Case Study

The Acme Company, a U.S. corporation, recently merged with one of its foreign competitors in France. This merger was done because it would enable them to expand their product offerings and reach niche markets. Neither partner held overall control because there was an agreement on equal shareholding. The company maintains its divi- sions on both continents, but there is a plan to decentralize the com- pany and much of the decision making. Human Resources (HR) had to work diligently because there was a need to maintain the company’s competitive edge by collaborating with the French and U.S. managers. In fact, the company had plans to expand their customer base and compete for business in other European countries. Therefore, they created a cross-cultural team that would include managers from both the United States and France. These managers were charged with developing a plan to enter the market in the southern region of France.

The company wanted to prepare the managers who would be part of the cross-cultural team. As a result, HR created a 3-month training program that would enhance the cultural knowledge of the manag- ers; this included several components. This training was conducted with the managers who would participate in the cross-cultural team. The foreign-language classes took place at the managers’ physical location, but the other training elements were taken together by the managers over the course of several seminars. The objectives of the training included the following:

• to develop some level of proficiency in your non-primary lan- guage (either French or English);

• to develop an understanding of culture and how culture can impact the functioning of the team and how work is carried out;

• to develop skills to facilitate communication within the cross- cultural team;

• to develop skills that exhibit cultural sensitivity when working with different cultures (e.g., empathy, decentering, recentering, etc.).

Cross-Cultural Teams 275

The first component of the training was intense foreign-language learning courses. The learning would focus on acquiring the skills of listening, speaking, writing, and reading the language. The primary goal of the foreign-language learning was stressing the importance of listening skills. Human Resources reasoned that in the context of business, with time constraints, developing effec- tive communication is essential to understanding culturally diverse team members. Next, the learning focused on expressing one’s ideas in a more commonly understood style; they felt that this was paramount for ensuring that team members could communicate most effectively during discussions. Last, HR felt that in interna- tional business, written skills in a foreign language may be less significant.

The second component of the training focused on understanding the role that culture would play in the team. The team members were given information about how to understand and analyze one’s culture as well as the culture of others. Each member then identified some potential challenges that may impact the team as a result of their differences and then engaged in problem-solving to diminish those problems. Third, the training focused on developing skills that would illustrate sensitivity to cultural diversity. The managers learned how to understand the world from the point of view of another culture and anticipated how to convey respect for other cultures.

Overall, the managers found that the training was helpful. Some of the managers complained that the motivation to learn a different language varied. The language-learning component of the training was contingent upon the learners practicing the material outside the classroom. When team members felt that others were not motivated to learn the language, problems in the team resulted.

Initially, this cross-cultural team had difficulty communicating because language was a barrier. The team found that they had to take the time to communicate when there were differences in the level of language proficiency. Over time, the team members found that clarification in written and verbal communication was needed. This required the team to take the time to do this and ensure that culturally responsive communication took place. Team members also demonstrated the use of decentering and were able to express the concerns of other team members in a respectful manner. However, when team members chose to communicate via e-mail, this wasn’t necessarily the case. As a result, e-mails between managers using different languages were at times confusing.

276 Trammell Bristol and Chaunda L. Scott

In addition, the corporation made a mistake in their level of involvement. The corporation failed to communicate how cul- tural diversity would be utilized within the company and/or out- line its significance for gaining entry into different markets. As a result, there was a breakdown in the level of commitment to this endeavor.

The final error was that the training did not result in team members developing a set of culturally relevant skills.

Discussion Questions

1 Human Resources developed several objectives for the training. Do you think that the objectives were sufficient to help the man- agers participate in the cross-cultural team? Why or why not? What training objectives would you have suggested?

2 Since the managers spoke different languages, what are some of the methods that could have been implemented to facilitate writ- ten and verbal communication?

3 How could the corporation have improved this endeavor and cre- ated a more effective cross-cultural team experience?

4 You are a consultant hired to develop a cross-cultural train- ing program for Acme employees who will be employed at the French location. Develop a program proposal that you will submit to Human Resources. Include purpose, goals, training content, training outcomes, and a method that you will use to evaluate training effectiveness.

References

Berger, M. (1996). Introduction to cross-cultural team building. In M. Berger (Ed.), Cross- cultural team building: Guidelines for more effective communication and negotiation (pp. 1–10). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cox, T., Jr. (2001). Creating the multicultural organization: A strategy for capturing the power of diversity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ely, R., & Thomas, D. (2001). Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspec- tives on work group processes and outcomes. Administration Science Quarterly, 46(2), 229–273.

Hofstede, G. (1983). The cultural relativity of organizational practices and theories. Journal of International Business Studies, 14(2), 75–89.

Matveev, A., & Milter, R. (2004). The value of intercultural competence for performance of multicultural teams. Team Performance Management, 10(4/5), 104–111.

Cross-Cultural Teams 277

Maznevski, M., & Peterson, M. (1997). Societal values, social interpretation, and multina- tional teams. In C. Granrose & S. Oskamp (Eds.), Cross-cultural work groups (pp. 61–89). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Snell, S., Snow, C., Davidson, S., & Hambrick, D. (1998). Designing and supporting trans- national teams: The human resource agenda. Human Resource Management Journal, 37, 147–158.

Chapter Overview

Since the beginning of the 21st century, the benefits of having a diverse workforce in the United States as it relates to increasing organizational sales, profits, innovation, and creativity have been widely confirmed by numer- ous organizational leaders, scholars, and researchers. While many professional industries in the United States have reaped the benefits of having a diverse workforce, many have not. For example, over the past several decades and recently, much has been written publicly by the media and scholars about the lack of minorities and women represented in the film workforce and the scientific and technical workforce, commonly known as the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) workforce. Yet, the under- representation of diversity in the workforce (STEM and film industries) persists.

To explore the problem of the persistent lack of diversity in the STEM and film workforce, this chapter will begin by presenting the learning out- comes. Next comes a discussion on why the lack of diversity in the STEM and film workforce are critical lingering problems that need to be addressed. Following this discussion, several strategies will be offered that could be explored by the STEM and film workforce to address the problems of their lack of diversity representation.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• define the role of the STEM workforce; • explain why the under-representation of diversity in the STEM work-

force is a critical lingering problem; • describe strategies that the STEM leadership can explore to address the

under-representation of diversity in their workforce; • define the role of the film workforce;

16 Under-Representation of Diversity in the Scientific, Technical, and Film Workforce

Chaunda L. Scott

Under-Representation of Diversity in the STEM and Film Workforce 279

• explain why the under-representation of diversity in the film workforce is a critical lingering problem;

• describe strategies that the film industry leadership can explore to address the under-representation of diversity in their workforce.

The Lack of Diversity in the STEM Workforce: A Critical Lingering Problem

The STEM fields (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) are industries that are interrelated and feed off one another to “understand how the world works and solve problems” (Vilorio, 2014, p. 3). For example, math provides the preliminary work for physics, which falls under the category of science. Physics provides the initial work for engineering. Engineers test physics theories, and these theoretical test results are then used to make further progress in the fields of engineering and technology (Vilorio, 2014).

Currently in the STEM fields, there is a lack of trained professionals to fill open and new positions due to rapidly evolving new technologies (Xue & Larson, 2015). These open and new STEM positions include: computer spe- cialists, engineers, STEM managers, life science and physical science tech- nicians, life scientists, STEM professors and researchers, physical scientists, mathematical science specialists, architects, physicists, surgeons and cartog- raphers, with the national average salary for these STEM positions ranging from $87,570.00 to $118,500.00 (Fayer, Lacey, & Watson, 2017).

In addition to a lack of trained professionals in the STEM fields, the STEM workforce remains un-reflective of the rising minority demographic trend in the United States as demonstrated by the field remaining over- whelmingly White, male, Asian and under-represented in cultural, ethnic, and gender diversity (Marcus, 2015; Nilsson, 2017). This lack of diversity, along with the lack of diverse knowledge and viewpoints, limits the creative and problem-solving potential of the STEM field to uncover solutions to world problems such as global warming, cyber security, and medical illnesses, to name a few (Nilsson, 2017). To gather a variety of perspectives on why the lack of diversity in the STEM workforce persists, a brief discussion on what recent studies, the media, researchers and scholars have uncovered about this problem will be presented, along with what they are recommending to address this quandary.

In 2016, Wei-Cheng J. Mau published an article entitled “Characteristics of U.S. students that pursued a STEM major and factors that predicted their persistence in degree completion.” This study tracked 34,073 diverse under- graduate students attending seven regent universities over a 5-year period (2008–2013). The demographic make-up of these students were as follows: 48% were male, 53% were female, 74.9% were white Americans, 1.0% were Native American and Alaskan, 3.5% were African American, 3.7% were Asian Americans, 5.5% were Hispanic Americans, 7.7% were resident immi- grant students and did not declare a race or ethnicity.

280 Chaunda L. Scott

Mau’s (2016) findings revealed that female and minority undergraduate students were less likely to declare a STEM major than Asian American and White male American students. They also disclosed that a small percent- age of female and minority undergraduate students who did declare STEM majors took 5 years to complete their undergraduate degree, as compared to their Asian American and White American male peers who completed their undergraduate STEM degree in less time. However, even though recent enrollment numbers of females and minorities graduating in undergradu- ate STEM fields have increased, they will remain under-represented in the STEM workforce (Mau, 2016).

In August 2015, President Obama developed a new program called White House Demo Day to highlight minorities and women founders in tech- nology and raise awareness of the need for more diversity in the STEM workforce (Marcus, 2015). Because of this program, tech companies such as Facebook, Google, IBM, Microsoft, and Amazon began publicizing their new diversity recruitment efforts to demonstrate their pledge to increasing diversity in their workforce (Marcus, 2015). Similar to the previously named tech companies, Pinterest, a web and mobile application company launched in 2010, also publicly shared their 2016 recruitment goals for employing minorities and women to demonstrate that they were serious about advanc- ing diversity in their organization (Marcus, 2015). Although tech companies such as Google and Facebook have recently been publicizing their diversity data, their lack of diverse employees remains an issue.

In 2014, USA Today reported the results of a Taulbee Survey, which provides enrollment and employment data on individuals with PhDs in computer science and computer engineering (Weise & Guynn, 2014). The survey collected data from 179 U.S. and Canadian top universities that offered doctorate degrees in computer sciences and engineering science (Weise & Guynn, 2014). The survey results disclosed that top universities are graduating African American and Hispanic PhD students in the disci- plines of computer science and computer engineering at twice the rate that computer and engineering companies are hiring them (Weise & Guynn, 2014). However, computer science and computer engineering companies are blaming their lack of diversity problem on the pool of applicants who apply for these positions, which lacks gender and ethnic diversity (Weise & Guynn, 2014).

Another challenge that has kept the STEM workforce from attracting and retaining minorities and women is hidden and overt racial and gender bias (Marcus, 2015). For example, Karen Snyder, CEO of Textio, collected interview data from 716 women who left the tech industry to uncover their reasons for leaving (Marcus, 2015). Snyder’s findings revealed that their reasons for leaving included feeling stressed and unsupported in their work environment, being discriminated against (because of their race, gender, age, or sexual orientation), low salaries, parenting responsibilities, along with no flex time options (Marcus, 2015).

Under-Representation of Diversity in the STEM and Film Workforce 281

Suggested Strategies that STEM Academic Programs and the STEM Workforce Could Explore to Address their Under-Representation of Diversity Problem

In this section, several strategies are offered that could be utilized to address the under-representation of diversity in STEM academic disciplines and the STEM workforce.

For faculty teaching undergraduate students in STEM fields, Mau (2016) suggests:

• developing or replicating early intervention programs such as Gear Up, and Upward Bound STEM education initiatives to better prepare female and minority high-school and undergraduate students interested in pursuing STEM majors;

• developing STEM mentoring and tutor programs for female and minority undergraduate students that are impartial and considerate of their learning needs;

• developing and utilizing cadre of support systems such as school coun- seling services, federal funding and local funding to assist female and minority students throughout their undergraduate program in complet- ing their bachelor degree in STEM disciplines.

For STEM professors and researchers working in academia, Nilsson (2017) suggests:

• taking social attitude quizzes to become aware of and resolve minority- and gender-related hidden biases and macroaggressions;

• serving as a mentor for female and minority colleagues and students as a way to get to know them and make them feel included and supported.

For STEM professionals working in the STEM workforce, I suggest:

• developing partnerships with university internship programs at all levels and with university career centers as a way to meet and attract prospec- tive diverse new hires;

• posting open and new STEM positions on popular online career search engines such as LinkedIn, Google, Monster, and Glassdoor where diverse candidates can easily find them;

• making sure your company has a welcoming and inclusive organiza- tional culture before you hire diverse employees so that they will not leave the company;

• offering regular company-wide training programs on how unconscious biases about minorities and women working in the STEM field can create a hostile work environment for minorities and women that may cause them to leave the company;

282 Chaunda L. Scott

• informing minorities and women working in entry-level STEM posi- tions of career development and leadership development opportunities to help them to advance their careers in STEM;

• offering flex time options to women who have children and/or who are caring for their parents;

• highlighting the successful contributions that minorities and women are making in the STEM workforce in your company newsletter and in STEM external publications to raise awareness that diversity is wel- comed and needed in the STEM workforce.

While the strategies presented to increase diversity in STEM academic and professional fields are attainable, it remains the responsibility of STEM professionals in academia and the workforce to utilize and build upon the proposed suggestions to increase diversity in STEM degree programs and STEM organizations.

The Lack of Diversity in the Film Workforce and Film: A Critical Lingering Problem

Despite the fact that changing demographics in the United States reflect more racial and ethnic diversity than ever before, the film workforce, along with the films they produce, continues to fall short of mirroring the diverse population it serves. Even though this is a reality, the film workforce con- tinues to play a leading role in shaping the American culture in unique ways by producing films that allow its audience to escape, dream, imagine the impossible, as well as create their own ending to a story within a 2-hour timeframe or less.

Films produced by the film industry also relate to many people because they can personally identify with what the actors and actresses have expe- rienced or are experiencing. Moreover, films possess the power to educate and persuade people in positive or negative ways. However, what the film workforce and their films are lacking is racial and ethnic minorities in acting, screen writing, directing, and creating (Erigha, 2015); women in directing and screen writing (Lauzen, 2016); and minority and female members on the Oscars governing and voting board (Hunt & Ramon, 2015).

In 2016, the lack of diversity represented in the film industry reached a boiling point when several African American and White actors such as Brad Pitt (Samuels, 2016), Will Smith, Jada Pinkett Smith, Spike Lee, Viola Davis, George Clooney, Don Cheadle, Reese Witherspoon, and Chris Rock, along with President Obama, called on the film industry publicly to diversify its workforce and actors (Ryan, 2016). What ignited this public call for action from actors in Hollywood and President Obama was the following:

Under-Representation of Diversity in the STEM and Film Workforce 283

• the persisting lack of racial and ethnic minorities working in the film workforce as actors, writers, directors, and creative artist (Erigha, 2015);

• the persisting lack of racial minority and ethnic Oscar nominees and award winners—(in the 88 years that the Academy Awards have been in existence, only 14 African Americans, five Latinos, and three Asians have won Oscars (Lauzen, 2016);

• the persisting lack of women in technical behind-the-scenes positions such as directors and writers (Lauzen, 2016);

• the fact that the Oscars nominees in 2015 and 2016 in all categories in front of the camera and behind the scenes were all White (Lauzen, 2016);

• the Oscars governing board members who vote on the Oscar nominees being 94% White and 100% male (Hunt & Ramon, 2015);

• the #OscarsSoWhite protests and boycotts, in which many actors stated publicly that they could not support the Academy Awards any longer due to their persisting lack of diversity representation at all levels in the film workforce (Ryan, 2016);

• research conducted over the past two decades on this topic which also confirms that racial and ethnic minorities and women continue to be under-represented in the film workforce “far below their proportion of the U.S. population” (Erigha, 2015, n.p.).

Within a short period, after the 2016 Academy Award winners were announced, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences held a special board meeting to identify ideas and solutions to begin the process of increasing diversity within the Acad- emy’s membership (Cieply, 2016). The solutions that were agreed to by the Academy’s board members were that major modifications would be made to the Academy’s “voting requirements, recruitment process and governing structure” to help close the racial, ethnic, and gender imbalance in the Acad- emy (Cieply, 2016, para. 1). For example, according to Oscars.org (2016), the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences proposed to immediately: (1) create a global campaign to attract and recruit new diverse members; (2) increase diversity on its governing board by establishing three new govern- ing board member seats in which the president will nominate these new members and the governing board will vote on them to approve them; and (3) add diverse members on its executive board where important member- ship and governance decisions are made.

Additional strategies suggested by Samuels (2016, para. 5) that the film workforce could explore regarding how to address this under-representation of diversity include the film workforce being “rewired” “inside and out” and at all levels, not just at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences executive level. Gaining the support of White celebrities, as well as minority celebrities, to help make diversity a reality in the film workforce is another

284 Chaunda L. Scott

suggestion. Hollywood should also stop hiring their family and friends as interns and office assistants, and start hiring qualified minority interns and office assistants from university film programs so they can have an oppor- tunity to learn about the film industry first hand, as well as by contributing their new knowledge to the film workforce. Finally, a workforce diversity organization needs to be created and supported by a qualified workforce diversity specialist who would be responsible for increasing diversity at all levels in the film workforce (Lauzen, 2016). According to Samuels (2016), achieving diversity in the film industry and in motion picture films “is not rocket science, [but rather] a simple commitment to the reality that most films are focused on some aspect of real life, and real life doesn’t just happen to white people” (para. 5).

In October 2017, another diversity-related situation was exposed publicly by more than 50 women, including teenage girls, in the film workforce who had been sexually harassed by well-known film executive Harvey Weinstein (Puente & Mandell, 2017). Harvey Weinstein, co-founder of the Weinstein movie and television studio has been connected with the film industry for several decades. After an investigation of these allegations by the board mem- bers of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, Harvey Wein- stein was fired. As a result of this situation, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences released this public statement: “sexual predatory behavior and workplace harassment in our industry is over” (Barnes, 2017, n.p.). The Academy also announced that it is going to develop “ethical standards of conduct” for all of its members to abide by (Barnes, 2017, n.p.).

The discussions in this chapter regarding the under-representation of diversity in the STEM and film workforce highlight the need for these industries to develop robust diversity recruitment and retention strategies so they can start increasing and sustaining diversity in their workforce at all levels. Moreover, given the lack of women represented in the STEM and film workforce, along with the recent sexual harassment scandal publicized in the film workforce, sexual harassment training needs to be incorporated in both the STEM and film workforce to reinforce that it is a serious ethical violation in the workforce with legal consequences.

Chapter Summary

In this chapter, the role of the STEM workforce was defined along with an explanation as to why the under-representation of diversity remains a critical lingering problem. Strategies were also proposed that the STEM leadership could explore to increase diversity in their workforce. The role of the film workforce was also defined, followed by a discussion as to why the lack of diversity at all levels persists. The chapter also proposed strate- gies that the film industry leadership could explore to address the under- representation of diversity in their workforce. This chapter concludes by highlighting the definition of key terms, critical-thinking discussion questions and two case studies.

Under-Representation of Diversity in the STEM and Film Workforce 285

Definition of Key Terms

Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences [also known as the Academy]—The leading American film organization that governs and advances the film industry. The Academy also gives annual Oscar awards for best motion picture productions and acting performances.

Film workforce [or film industry]—Consists of studios and skilled film makers, actors, writers, directors, technical crews, and supporting staff members who work collaboratively together to produce motion picture films.

Hollywood—The headquarters of the American film industry located in Los Angeles, California.

STEM fields—The acronym STEM represents the fields of Science, Tech- nology, Engineering, and Mathematics.

Under-Representation of Diversity in the Workforce—The lack of cultural and ethnic minorities, women, people with disabilities, and sexual minorities serving in the role of employees at all levels in the workforce.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 STEM is the acronym for which professional fields? 2 What are five diversity-related challenges in the STEM workforce? 3 What are five suggestions that the STEM workforce could begin utiliz-

ing to increase diversity? 4 What are five suggestions that STEM academic programs could utilize

to increase diversity? 5 What five suggestions do you recommend to increase diversity in STEM

academic programs and the STEM workforce? 6 Why do you believe that the lack of diversity in the film workforce

remains a lingering problem? Give three examples. 7 What are four suggestions that the film workforce could begin utilizing

to increase diversity? 8 What are additional strategies, other than sexual harassment training,

that the STEM and film workforce could use to educate their employ- ees about preventing sexual harassment in the workforce?

Case Study 1: Diversifying the Engineering Plus Company

Recently, the well-known Engineering Plus Company located in Houston, Texas, hired three experienced Hispanic women engineers to further advance their global warming research. This is the first time in the his- tory of the Engineering Plus Company that women have been hired. The

286 Chaunda L. Scott

Engineering Plus Company has been in business for 8 years and has won two national engineering awards for advancing the world’s under- standing of global warming. The company is also small, comprising a total of 52 male employees: 50% are White, and the remaining 50% are Asian.

On June 1, 2017, the first day the three Hispanic women engi- neers began working at the Engineering Plus Company, they found a hand-written posting in the women’s restroom that said, “HISPANIC WOMEN ENGINEERS ARE NOT WELCOMED AT THE ENGINEER- ING PLUS COMPANY!” Immediately, the three Hispanic women engi- neers took a picture of the posting. They also brought the male HR director into the women’s restroom to show him the posting. While the Engineering Plus Company has a current code of conduct policy, it does not include guidelines for addressing gender harassment and intimidation. The three Hispanic women engineers were really upset about this incident, and are planning to leave the Engineering Plus Company because they do not want to work in an unwelcoming and intimidating work environment.

Discussion Questions

1 What should the HR director do to address this matter? Give three examples.

2 What message should the HR director give to the male employ- ees regarding this incident? Give three examples.

3 Should the three Hispanic women engineers leave the Engineer- ing Plus Company or stay? Explain your answer in detail.

4 What information should be added to the Engineering Plus Com- pany code of conduct policy as a result of the incident? Give an example of what it should say.

5 Should a company apology be given to the three Hispanic women engineers or not? Explain your answer in detail.

Case Study 2: Diversifying Acting Roles

In September 2017, the Children’s Acting Club in Atlanta, Georgia, attended their third movie premiere entitled The Queen and the Squir- rel, which was a spinoff of the popular Disney movie, The Princess and the Frog. The 20 children who are a part of this 2-year-old acting club represent a diverse group of girls (aged 11 to 16) who are White, Chinese, African American, Hispanic, and Arab American; some have

Under-Representation of Diversity in the STEM and Film Workforce 287

disabilities. The girls in this acting club also aspire to be professional actresses when they grow up. The leaders of the club as well as the girls were excited to see this movie premiere because The Princess and the Frog was one of their favorite Disney movies.

As the girls began watching the movie, The Queen and the Squir- rel, they immediately noticed that the queen in the movie was played by a Chinese disabled actress and the squirrel was played by an African American actor. After the movie was over, the Chinese disa- bled girl in the club told the other girls in the club that she was so excited to see a Chinese disabled actress in a leading motion picture role. She also shared with the girls that by seeing this, it encouraged her to pursue her acting career to the fullest because the role of the queen could really be played by her in the near future. The girls in this club were also pleased to see other diverse actors and actresses in this movie because it was reflective of the diversity that exists in the United States. Moreover, the girls agreed that they prefer seeing mov- ies that have diverse actors and actresses because it allows you to see the power of diversity in action in the film industry.

Discussion Questions

1. In what ways did the movie The Queen and the Squirrel embrace diversity?

2. In what ways do you perceive that the audiences who watched this movie learned something about diversity in the film workforce and the workforce in general?

3. In what ways could the girls’ reflection on the movie The Queen and the Squirrel be encouraging to the film industry as it relates to them increasing diversity in the film workforce and motion pic- ture films?

References

Barnes, B. (2017, October 14). Harvey Weinstein ousted from motion picture acad- emy. The New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2017/10/14/business/ media/harvey-weinstein-ousted-from-motion-picture-academy.html

Cieply, M. (2016, January 16). Academy board endorses change to increase diversity in Oscars nominees and itself. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://kipcurrier- diversityinclusion.blogspot.com/2016/01/academy-board-endorses-changes-to.html

Erigha, M. (2015). Race, gender, Hollywood: Representation in cultural production and digital media’s potential for change. Sociology Compass, 9(1), 78–89. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/soc4.12237/full

288 Chaunda L. Scott

Fayer, S., Lacey, A., & Watson, A. (2017, January). STEM occupations: Past, present, and future. Spotlight on Statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retrieved from www.bls.gov/spotlight/2017/science-technology- engineering-and-mathematics-stem-occupations-past-present-and-future/pdf/ science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics-stem-occupations-past-present- and-future.pdf

Hunt, D., & Ramon, A. C. (2015). 2015 Hollywood diversity report. Ralph J. Bunche Center for African American Studies at UCLA. Retrieved from www.scribd.com/ doc/270333038/2015-hollywood-diversity-report-2-25-15#

Lauzen, M. M. (2016). MPAA must lead—or be led—in battle to improve diversity. Variety, 331(7), p. 19. Retrieved from http://variety.com/2016/voices/columns/ diversity-in-hollywood-1201731113/

Marcus, B. (2015, August 12). The lack of diversity in tech is a cultural issue. Forbes. Retrieved from www.forbes.com/sites/bonniemarcus/2015/08/12/the-lack- of-diversity-in-tech-is-a-cultural-issue/#b6e8dd179a21

Mau, W. J. (2016). Characteristics of U.S. students that pursued a STEM major and factors that predicted their persistence in degree completion. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(6), 1495–1500. Retrieved from www.hrpub.org/download/20160530/ UJER30-19506512.pdf

Nilsson, M. R. (2017). Diversity in STEM: Doctor, heal thyself. Journal of College Science Teaching, 46(4), 8–9. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/ pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=9ea8bb74-8c5e-441b-ad13-e9aba56ea56b%40sessionmgr4009

Oscars.org. (2016, January 22). Academy takes historic action to increase diversity. Acad- emy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Retrieved from www.oscars.org/news/ academy-takes-historic-action-increase-diversity

Puente, M., & Mandell, A. (2017, October 23). Harvey Weinstein scandal: Total accusers pass 50 women. USA Today. Retrieved from www.usatoday.com/story/ life/2017/10/23/harvey-weinstein-scandal-ny-attorney-general-opens-civil-rights- investigation-weinstein-company/790366001/

Ryan, P. (2016, February 2). #OscarsSoWhite controversy: What you need to know. USA Today. Retrieved from www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2016/02/02/ oscars-academy-award-nominations-diversity/79645542/

Samuels, A. (2016). If Hollywood really wants to fix the diversity problem, ask Brad Pitt. Variety, 331(4), p. 53. Retrieved from http://variety.com/2016/film/news/ hollywood-diversity-brad-pitt-oscarssowhite-1201712342/

Vilorio, D. (2014). STEM 101: Intro to tomorrow’s jobs. Occupational Outlook Quarterly, Spring, 1–12. Retrieved from www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2014/spring/art01.pdf

Weise, E., & Guynn, J. (2014, October 12). Tech jobs: Minorities have degrees, but don’t get hired. USA Today. Retrieved from www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/10/12/ silicon-valley-diversity-tech-hiring-computer-science-graduates-african-american- hispanic/14684211/

Xue, Y., & Larson, R. (2015). STEM crisis or stem surplus? Yes and yes. Monthly Labor Review, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.21916/ mlr.2015.14

Chapter Overview

This chapter will extend beyond the typical discussions of leadership. Rather, this chapter will focus on the person who performs the role of leader. Because leadership is a dyadic relationship, social identity bias could impede the leader–follower relationship. In this chapter, leaders who are marginalized as a consequence of their social group affiliation or categoriza- tion will be the primary interest group.

The study of leadership naturally resides in the management and organi- zational behavior literature (van Knippenberg & Hogg, 2003). The experi- ences and voices of marginalized leaders who are protected under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act will shift the discussion of leadership to the social systems of the organization and the effects of social cognition. The social perception of an individual can act to obscure and overpower an indi- vidual’s position of leadership.

As a matter of diversity in the workforce, marginalized leaders are gen- erally perceived as referring to women, people of color, and other socially constructed images that presume a status of difference. In that Whiteness is not a Title VII protected category, White men can assume a Title VII protec- tion under categories such as disability, religion, national origin, age (and in some instances, sexual orientation). However as pointed out in Chapter 4, Whiteness is a privilege that, even when combined with other social identity categories, is a salient identity advantage.

Caveat: Sex as a social identity has undergone varying translations since Title VII was mandated in 1964. Sexual orientation is now a commonly encountered social identity issue, particularly when it involves issues of a person’s right to identify themself in society with an identity counter to their birth identity. Although Title VII does not explicitly address sexual ori- entation, in some instances, sex has been used to uphold the rights of a sexual minoritized individual.

In recent years, the business case for diversity has practically consumed the notion of diversity as a competitive advantage, adding perspectives such as diversity of thought, diversity of perspectives, diversity innovation, etc.

17 Social Identity Diversity and Leadership in the Workforce

Marilyn Y. Byrd

290 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Therefore two dichotomies of diversity exist simultaneously: the social case and the business case. Although it is acknowledged that the business case for diversity is essential for profit maximization, the business perspective silences social identity issues that are critical for understanding the dilemmas for marginalized leaders.

The foundation of this chapter is grounded in the social case for diver- sity to develop a deeper sense for the impact of social identity diversity within the practice of leadership. The chapter will emphasize how social cognition emphasizes the leader’s identity and minimizes their position as the leader.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the chapter critical-think- ing application questions and case study questions, you will be able to:

• distinguish between singular and multiple perspectives for defining a leader and the act of leadership;

• recognize how power can produce a dilemma of bias within a position; • recognize sociocultural models that offer an alternative perspective of

leadership theorizing; • acquire a new way of thinking about developing leaders for social jus-

tice outcomes, a topic that has been given little space in the discussion of leadership.

Defining the “Reality” of the Leader

Leadership is a social phenomenon that is most often examined in terms of traits and styles, and even how an individual uses power and authority to influence followers. There is an enormous body of research that examines these aspects of leadership. However, less emphasis has focused on the social identity of the person who leads. Traditional basic principles and the numer- ous definitions of leadership that have been published presume a homogene- ous model of leadership with little (if any) consideration to social identity diversity.

Social identity diversity refers to groups which have been historically marginalized as a consequence of their group identity (Byrd, 2012). To be marginalized means to be relegated to the sidelines, to be rendered invisible, and to assume a voice of silence. The term marginalized is not used in this chapter as a descriptor of the quality of leadership. Rather, it refers to a state of reality that exists for some groups of people whom society has categorized as not being the standard by which a phenomenon is recognized. For lead- ers who are subjected to marginalization as a consequence of social identity diversity, leadership is often not an examination of how they lead, but rather a question of their right to lead. Furthermore, the varying leadership styles,

Social Identity Diversity and Leadership 291

strategies, and even the abundance of leadership definitions involve a com- plexity of organizational, social, and personal processes that limits representa- tion of social identity groups at this higher level (Bolden, 2004).

The commonly held assumptions of leadership that have emerged from research studies and theory development have not focused on the processes that give meaning to leadership as a social phenomenon (Allen, 1995). In this regard, ways of knowing about leadership have been limited to a priori assumptions about the phenomenon (Byrd, 2009). Social identity challenges us to redirect a priori assumptions and connect to the social and cultural implications of being a leader. In doing so, the marginalization of leaders within the constraints of social identity is brought into the discourse on leadership. As the social identity of the leader becomes more pronounced within the scope of leadership in organizations, more attention to their dilemmas and experiences is needed to counter and challenge existing mod- els of leadership that do not define their reality.

Because the perceptions and definitions of leadership that have accumu- lated over the past century have been from a homogeneous perspective, socially marginalized leaders may find it difficult to identify with universal- ized perspectives of leadership (Parker, 2005; Rost, 1991); particularly when leadership is defined in terms of the leader having a position of power and influence—a notion that is challenged from a position of marginalization. Redirecting the discourse of leadership to the social systems of an organi- zation disrupts the universal perspective that implies a singular reality, and renders visible the multiplicity of social perspectives that have been silenced.

Social Cognition and Social Identity Bias

Social cognition is recalling a stereotype, bias, or unfavorable opinion about a social group and activating that perception during social or work- related encounters. A state of unconscious bias that is often held in check by members of the dominant group can be psychologically projected upon a marginalized person who now has a position of power.

Within an organization’s formal structure, leadership is practiced within a context where members are held to a culture of traditions, norms, values, and beliefs that are unique to that organization (Schein, 1992). The problem this presents is that biased, prejudicial, and stereotypical images that are grounded in social identity often clash with cultural ideals (Byrd, 2016a). When the image of the leader is inconsistent with previously formed biases and stereo- types formed from dominant culture ideals in respect to the leader’s social identity, leadership authority, influence, and effectiveness are jeopardized.

Leadership is a relational phenomenon. In organizational contexts, leader–follower relations involve a (perhaps unconscious) tendency or urge to protect, enhance, or preserve relationships which are familiar (Graen & Schiemann,1978; Hogg, 2001; van Knippenberg & Hogg, 2003). The reality that we tend to follow those most like ourselves produces a countering effect for

292 Marilyn Y. Byrd

marginalized leaders in a dominant culture society. Social cognition plays a critical role in non-acceptance for non-prototypical leaders (not fitting the norm) than for prototypical leaders (the “normal” image of a leader). Non-prototypical leaders are likely to experience a higher degree of non- acceptance when: (1) there has been little previous interaction with the leader’s social identity group; and (2) society at large reflects biased attitudes toward the leader’s social identity group through media sources with far- reaching effects (Avery, McKay, Volpone, & Malka, 2015). Judgements are often made about an individual based on an unconscious (or conscious, for that matter) bias toward that individual’s social group affiliation (Biernat & Manis, 1994). Preconceived notions are highly speculative and prone to mis- judgment without first becoming familiar with that individual.

Society dictates what is accepted and what is not. The normalized identity of a leader has been engrained in society for centuries: middle-aged, White male. The writings of Thomas Carlyle captured that ideal with the Great Man Theory, the notion that society has been greatly impacted by highly influential, intelligent, and charismatic White male leaders, an image that has become normalized as to “who leads.” When a leader who does not fit the ideal enters to lead, they are often met with resistance. Moreover, marginalized identity leaders often face speculation and criticism, as being biased toward and favoring others like themselves, when they themselves are victims of that same bias. Their actions are closely scrutinized for signs that show support for those who do not represent the status quo, and which are atypical to the organizational norm. Ironically, marginalized identity leaders lead with caution so as not to project a bias of sameness.

Leadership does not automatically diminish bias and prejudice. Nor does it automatically shift non-acceptance and preconceived notions to accept- ance and transformed notions. It should be pointed out that perceptions of a leader’s social identity are often derived from personal biases and will therefore vary from one workplace to another. But to deny the effects of the social identity of the leader in essence denies the effect of bias. Leaders from diverse groups are painfully aware of differential treatment. By adding previ- ously silenced voices to the conversation of leadership may offer a perspec- tive on leadership not previously considered.

Power, Authority, and the Organizational Culture

Traditional theories of leadership have advocated the notion of “power over” which

encompasses not only direct control but more subtle forms of power, including control over the rules within a social setting and the capacity to shape what symbolic interactionists have described as the definition of the situation, or the meaning an event has for oneself and for others.

(Powers, 2007, p. 159)

Social Identity Diversity and Leadership 293

Traditional theories of power, such as French and Raven’s (1959) social power theory, are fixed and do not lend themselves to sociological aspects of being a leader. These theories have generally described power as a system that a leader utilizes. On the one hand, they do not explain or take into account how power interplays with social identity which then becomes a system of disempowerment for socially marginalized leaders. Power is a necessary tool for leaders to communicate authority (Parker, 2005). On the other hand, power can be a tool used to oppress and dominate those from marginalized groups. In the workplace, leaders are perceived as having a position of power and authority to fulfill their leadership roles (French & Raven, 1959). Leaders whose social identity does not fit the norm of society frequently encounter opposition to their leadership authority. Studies consistently report that lead- ers whose social identity does not conform to the standard perception of leader (White, middle-age male) often encounter opposition and resistance that impede the leadership process beyond the ordinary dilemmas and issues faced by a leader. Therefore, perception of the leader’s power is essential to acceptance of the leader’s power and influence (Byrd, 2012).

Leadership Paradigms: Authenticity and Care

In the workplace, we bring our authentic selves, although often, the authen- tic self is vulnerable, and subjected to injustices derived from social identity designation (Byrd, 2016a). When work and the authentic self are in sync, work can be a meaningful pathway to self-fulfillment and self-actualization (Byrd, 2016a; Maslow, 1968; Mathieson & Miree, 2015).

But if the workplace becomes a site of social injustice, work and the authentic self are no longer in sync. People are then more likely to abandon individual pursuits in search of meaning-making responses to the injustice (Mathieson & Miree, 2015).

Leaders are individuals first and leaders of people second. Individual experiences of marginalization exist simultaneously with the role of being a leader. When individuality is subjected to social injustice, the need for mean- ing is salient. It is not unusual for leaders who experience social injustice to assume an authentic leadership style. Authentic leaders are characterized as having a deep awareness of self and others in the context of the work envi- ronment (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). Authentic leadership affirms bringing the whole self to practicing leadership. Central to authentic leadership is being anchored in a deep sense of self and the notion that values, beliefs, and actions will positively impact on followers (e.g., role modeling). Typically, authentic leadership has represented the dominant, traditional leaders who are seeking to embrace matters of diversity and inclusion within their prac- tice of leadership. Rarely does authentic leadership relate to the experiences of marginalized leaders who are aware of not only the need for inclusiveness in the practice of leadership, but who also have a vision (from a marginalized reality) of how leaders can use their influence to enact social change.

294 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Another paradigm of leadership that represents a double lens is the ethi- cal framework of care. Generally speaking, marginalized leaders lead with an ethics of care. Having experienced bias and often hate, marginalization equips leaders with a greater sense for using care and concern as a principle of leadership. Care is enacted, but it is also accepted “with an understand- ing of the particular views and needs of all parties and a concern for their safety and well-being” (Wallace, Hoover, & Pepper, 2014, p. 320). But the enactment of care is easily misconstrued in the case of marginalized lead- ers. For example, leaders who make decisions that have a favorable impact on the leader’s own social group are often met with speculation.

Leaders who are themselves marginalized have an astute sense for recog- nizing bias and social injustice as a moral problem of human relations. There- fore, the search for a voice in a dominant discourse represents a dilemma for marginalized leaders: to turn the tide of false and disillusioned perceptions that are cast upon those who have been deemed “the other,” or to remain silent for fear of being perceived as advancing their own agenda. Therefore, marginalized leaders tend to lead with caution—walking a fine line. As lead- ers, they are still the oppressed.

The [marginalized] suffer from the duality which has established itself in their innermost being. They discover that without freedom they cannot exist authentically. Yet, although they desire authentic existence, they fear it. They are at once and the same time themselves and the oppres- sor whose consciousness they have internalized. The conflict lies in the choice between being wholly themselves or being divided; between ejecting the oppressor within or not ejecting them; between human sol- idarity or alienation; between following prescriptions or having choices; between being spectators or actors; between acting or having the illu- sion of acting through the action of the oppressors; between speaking out or being silent, castrated in their power to create and re-create, in their power to transform the world.

(Freire, 1970/2000, pp. 32–33)

Much has been written about leaders’ accountability for upholding social justice in the workplace. Adding previously silenced voices of leaders to the mainstream discussion of leadership shifts leadership knowledge to a more reflexive, inclusive, and collective position and brings into sight an alter- native worldview of leadership (Allen, 1995). Silencing the experiences of certain groups from the study of a phenomenon grants privilege to others and consequently produces the dominant perspective that determines what is accepted as the norm.

Women and Leadership

The experiences of women, in general, have not been effectively captured within the traditional, dominant discourse of leadership, although feminist

Social Identity Diversity and Leadership 295

advantage models (Friedan, 1963; Helgesen, 1990) pioneered an effort that challenged traditional ways of thinking about a woman’s position in the work- place. However, feminist advantage models represent a “race-neutral, universal representation, based on the socialized experiences of White, middle-class women” (Parker, 2005, p. 10). Race-neutral models fail to recognize that organizations are not neutral settings where all leaders are the same and are subjected to the same type of historical and cultural experience (Parker, 2005). As a consequence, the lived experiences of women of color have become fur- ther hidden as “diversity within diversity.” In addition, White women who do not experience other forms of marginalization can benefit from their White privilege, an opportunity that is not available for women of color.

Although early feminist movements of the 1950s and 1960s advanced the issue of gender equality, these movements did not make an issue for equality in terms of racial oppression, the primary goal being to equalize women’s rights with those of White men. Moreover, White women dominate and articulate feminist discourse, but have little or no understanding of White privilege as a racial politic (hooks, 1984). Another goal of early (and present) feminist movements has been upward mobility; whereas for women of color, in addition to fighting for upward mobility, social identity and the associated behaviors and attitudes remain a constant barrier.

Black American Women Leaders

We have risen from darker days and have found our voice. We have endured and continue to overcome adversity. We are above and never beneath … we do not require validation to claim our rise to excellence.

(Dr. Marilyn Y. Byrd, Academy of Human Resource Development Town Hall Forum, 2017)

Black American women leaders have emerged from a legacy of struggle that has centered upon five themes: survival, resistance, social activism, community uplift, and transformation (Parker, 2005). Involvement in church and commu- nity is an influential source that has nurtured, shaped, and empowered the Black woman’s leadership (Byrd, 2012). In 1974, Black women community lead- ers, educators, and scholars organized a social movement to find voice within the broader landscape of feminist activism. The Combahee River Collective Statement is a phenomenal document that was issued by this group:

Above all else, our politics initially sprang from the shared belief that Black women are inherently valuable, that our liberation is a necessity not as an adjunct to somebody else’s but because of our need as human persons for autonomy. This may seem so obvious as to sound simplistic, but it is appar- ent that no other ostensibly progressive movement has ever considered our specific oppression as a priority or worked seriously for the ending of that oppression. Merely naming the pejorative stereotypes attributed to Black women (e.g. mammy, matriarch, Sapphire, whore, bulldagger), let alone

296 Marilyn Y. Byrd

cataloguing the cruel, often murderous, treatment we receive, indicates how little value has been placed upon our lives during four centuries of bond- age in the Western hemisphere. We realize that the only people who care enough about us to work consistently for our liberation are us. Our politics evolve from a healthy love for ourselves, our sisters and our community which allows us to continue our struggle and work.

(Combahee River Collective, 1982, p. 16)

Also emerging from Black women’s collectivism is the concept of inter- sectionality. Fundamental to intersectionality is recognizing that “iden- tity categories are fluid, contingent, interactive, and indivisible … and using this knowledge to advocate for social change” (Hulko, 2009, p. 53). Black feminist theory (Collins, 1990) is a commonly used framework that explains how Black women leaders are located simultaneously within two or more socially constructed systems (race, gender, social and/or economic class, age, disability, and sexual orientation, to name a few). Intersectional frame- works are beneficial for understanding and examining the ways that social identity diversity converges from multiple, varying forms of social identity and therefore represents the most fully articulated rendering of intersec- tionality (Browne & Misra, 2003). However, the experiences of racism (as associated with the construction of race) make the leadership experiences of Black women more susceptible to bigotry and social injustice than those experienced by their White counterparts.

A progressive example of Black women’s leadership is Michelle Obama, who emerged as a leader in her own right during her role as the 44th First Lady of the United States. Despite being ostracized and disrespected and often depicted in humiliating images, Michelle Obama rejected and de- mythed (disrupted) stereotypical cognitions by representing the values of all womanhood. Black women’s leadership is supported by a cultural and social epistemology based on the determination for liberation and social change.

The collective spirit of the Combahee River group reflects the motto of the National Association of Colored Women’s Clubs (NACWC), lifting as we climb. “Because we are all in this together, no one woman shall rise without benefitting the other” (Byrd, 2016b, p. 189).

Chicana Women Leaders

Similar to Black feminist theory, Chicana feminist theory (Anzaldua, 1987; Delgado-Bernal, 1998) applies intersectionality to the experiences of Chicana women leaders. Compounding the experiences of Chicana women leaders is the notion of a multilayered reality. The term “Chi- cana” is used here as a preferred term from the perspective of researchers who are seeking to develop new perspectives for women’s leadership. Also similar to intersectionality, Chicana women leaders experience a multi- layered social reality (Hurtado, 2005). Multilayered social reality refers to experiences such as being expected to have knowledge of more than

Social Identity Diversity and Leadership 297

two languages, needing to navigate more than two cultures, the varying degrees of internal differences among Chicana women that stem from self-identity, and being subjected to involuntary “naming” (Latina, His- panic, etc.) (Arredondo, Hurtado, Klahn, Nájera-Ramírez, & Zavella, 2003).

Chicana women leaders actively seek to challenge the silencing that has been a part of their lived reality. As a result, they use their position of leadership and become activists to disrupt systems of injustice that operate counter to human dignity, agency, and worth (Arrendondo et al., 2003).

Native American Indian Women Leaders

There has been limited research on Native American Indian women leaders; however, the perception is that Native American women are not raised to be competitive and assertive, an attribute that is consistently linked to leader- ship ability (Muller, 1998). The assumption is that Native American Indian customs dictate that interactions with others in the workplace are based on consensus and agreement. This assumption, though, can be examined as a positive leadership attribute. Native American Indian women nurture leadership from a sacred connectedness and strength in relationships. Rela- tionships are considered to serve the common good of the society. “The relationship between one woman and another forms the basis for a tra- ditional Native worldview toward what it means to be a ‘leader’ ” (Port- man & Garrett, 2005, p. 286). Native American Indian women’s leadership is not governed by notions of the wise, male, all-knowing chief. Instead, they have been consistently involved in a shared vision of leadership throughout indigenous history. “Their leadership provides a strong, nurturing influence passed down from generation to generation” (p. 284).

We are a matriarchal society. Even our language honors the women. It is a female language. When we dance, the men dance on the outside of the circle. The inside of the circle is to honor the women. When you dance to the ceremonial sounds of the Earth, you are tickling Mother Earth, and giving her joy for all the things she gives us to stay alive.

(Kanaratitake [Lorraine Canoe], Mohawk, as cited in McFadden, 1994, p. 24)

Celebrating the Successes

Women are beginning to emerge and gain visibility as leaders in various sectors of the workforce. However, when one woman succeeds in an area not previously held by a woman, the perception is that the glass ceiling has been shattered or the concrete wall has been bulldozed. In reality, the bar- rier has been removed for that individual, not the collective (Byrd, 2016b). Table 17.1 represents women who have made phenomenal strides for all women in leadership.

298 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Other Perspectives of Social Identity, Marginalization, and Leadership

In Chapter 7, Chaney and Hawley discussed sexual orientation as a diversity issue. Another perspective on sexual orientation relates to the individual who is a leader and affiliates with this social identity group. Authentic leadership supports goals of transparency, self-awareness, and concern for all; however, sexual minority leaders may find it challenging to fully engage and embody these principles without critically re-envi- sioning authentic leadership (Fine, 2017). Given the status quo which favors a normative, heterosexist perspective of leadership, sexual minori- ties (even those who are secure in their identities) may encounter resist- ance as they “come out” as their authentic selves and embrace the notion of authenticity (Fine, 2017).

The social identity of some sexual minority leaders is “openly known or easily inferred, whereas for others, their identity remains hidden or

Table 17.1 Women Who Are Changing the World

Name Achievement

Mary Barra First woman CEO of a major car company

Hillary Rodham Clinton First woman to win major party nomination for President

Gabby Douglas First American gymnast to win solo and team all-around gold medals at one Olympics

Nikki Haley First Indian American woman to be elected governor

Mazie Hironio First Asian American woman to be elected to U.S. Senate

Mae Jemison First woman of color in space

Loretta Lynch First Black woman to become U.S. Attorney General

Ilhan Omar First Somali-American Muslim to become a legislator

Danica Patrick First woman to lead in the Indy 500 and Daytona 500

Nancy Pelosi First woman Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives

Barbara Walters First woman co-anchor of network evening news

Serena Williams First tennis player to win 23 Grand Slam singles titles in the open era

Source: Adapted from Time Firsts: Women who are changing the world (http://time.com/collection/ firsts).

Social Identity Diversity and Leadership 299

undisclosed for a variety of reasons” (Fassinger, Shullman, & Stevenson, 2010, p. 202). Less known are the enactment of the leadership role and the response of followers. Many sexual minorities engage in activism and consequently are considered leaders in that regard (e.g., professional gay or gay professional). The sports profession is exemplary for forging the path for sexual minority leaders. Sports figures are considered leaders in their own right for their high-profile status and professional skill. An example is Jason Collins, a retired NBA player, who became a forerunner in coming out as a gay professional athlete. Denouncing the repression of his authentic self, Collins is now an activist for LGBT players in sports.

In Chapter 13, Scott and Byrd discussed disability as a diversity issue that has received limited attention in the workforce diversity literature. By the same token, little has been written about disability and leadership from the experiences of individuals who live with some type of impairment. Mary Wilkinson’s (2009) book, Defying Disability: The Lives and Legacies of Nine Disabled Leaders, offers a personal account of disability from their stories, giving insight into how they refused to be defined by their impair- ment, the discrimination they endured, and their activism to achieve social justice.

Disabled people are not special; we are people with different experi- ences and challenges. Because of this we are able to offer a different point of view and perspective. We can bring authentic inspiration to leadership. We do not want to be recognised from a patronising and or ‘hero model’ perspective, but from an ideology that is focused on our ability to achieve, contribute and lead.

(West, 2015, para. 19)

Disabilities range in depth as well as type, and the lived experiences of a leader suffering from an impairment create a different type of leadership experience. These experiences are practical and can be reflected upon for meaning-making purposes (Siebers, 2011). They are political because they establish the basis of social identity and grant an intimate perspective on leading with a disability.

Frameworks for Social Identity Diversity Leadership

Examining the ways that socially constructed phenomena (leadership, race, gender, disability, sexual minorities, and other social identities) interact with power structures in organizations may support the need for more sociocultural, inclusive perspectives of leadership. The term sociocultural refers to theoretical perspectives that consider social identity in analyzing power dynamics within bureaucratic and other sys- tems where power can be used to oppress (Merriam & Caffarella, 1999).

300 Marilyn Y. Byrd

The intersectional frameworks discussed earlier are being utilized in a number of disciplines such as education and sociology for explaining the interconnectedness of social identity with the organizational culture, which in turn influences the broader organization’s environment. Con- sequently, intersectional frameworks disrupt the commonly held notion advanced by a singular reality of leadership.

From a systems-thinking perspective (e.g., social systems), a little-known but nonetheless valuable framework that is useful for explaining social iden- tity diversity, leadership, and the experiences that emerge is the Responsible Leadership for Performance (RLP) model (Lynham, 2000). Two key propo- sitions of this model are:

1 As responsibleness (effectiveness, ethics, and endurance) increases, performance of the whole performance system can be expected to increase.

2 Leadership is a purposeful, focused system not an individual or a process managed by an individual.

(Lynham, 2000, pp. 177, 179)

The RLP model decenters the person and the rigidly held constructs of leadership that are engrained in notions and images of the person who leads. A major benefit of applying a systems-thinking perspective on leadership is that the social systems become a part of the system and render visibility to social issues that can disrupt the efficiency and performance of the system. Additionally, the RLP promotes connectivity between existing theories by rethinking leadership from more than one perspective and reframing the purpose which leadership has to fulfill (Lynham, 2000). Hence, the theory of RLP can “bridge the gap between two or more leadership theories and can be used to explain something between the domains of the existing theo- ries” (p. 193). Furthermore, the RLP model could be used as an initial step for bridging the gap between traditional and sociocultural perspectives on leadership. In the process, the social identity of the leader is no longer the elephant at the back of the room, but is an engaged participant front and center.

Chapter Summary

This chapter has produced a counter-narrative to the traditional assump- tions of leadership and the images of the leader. The social case for diversity brings the concept of social identity diversity to the conversation to disrupt those images and render visible the experiences of the marginalized identity leader. The concept of intersectionality was applied to social identity diver- sity to emphasize how two or more social identities (as prescribed by Title VII) converge and produce multiple realities of a leader’s identity that have

Social Identity Diversity and Leadership 301

been absent from previously held notions of the leader and the practice of leadership.

Social cognition was discussed as a societal perception formed against a social group that is passed on to a group member who is now in a position of leadership. Sociocultural models, in particular the framework of intersec- tionality emerging from Black women’s scholarship, were discussed as a use- ful way to explain social identity diversity and leadership. The topic of social identity and leadership is an unfolding topic in the social sciences.

Definition of Key Terms

Authentic leadership—Affirms bringing the whole self to the practice of leadership; being anchored in a deep sense of self and the notion that values, beliefs, and actions will positively impact followers.

Combahee River Collective—Social movement formed by Black women whose voices were excluded from mainstream feminist movements.

Intersectional frameworks—Commonly used framework based on the concept of intersectionality that is useful for explaining how marginalized leaders can be located simultaneously within two or more socially con- structed systems (race, gender, social and/or economic class, age, disability, and sexual orientation, to name a few).

Intersectionality—Identity categories are fluid, contingent, interactive, and indivisible.

Marginalized—A state of reality that exists for some groups of people whom society has categorized as not being the standard by which a phe- nomenon is recognized.

Social cognition—Recalling a stereotype, bias, or unfavorable opinion about a social group and activating that perception during social or work- related encounters.

Social identity diversity—Refers to groups who have been historically marginalized as a consequence of their group identity.

Social power theory—Fixed, universal assumptions that describe power as a system that a leader utilizes; excludes ways that power interplays with social identity which then becomes a system of disempowerment for socially marginalized leaders.

Sociocultural—Refers to theoretical perspectives that consider social iden- tity in analyzing power dynamics within bureaucratic and other systems where power can be used to oppress.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 Leaders from marginalized social identity groups often find themselves in situations where the social group they affiliate with has experienced a social injustice, but clearly the leader needs to show an attitude of

302 Marilyn Y. Byrd

neutrality that supports the greatest good for the greatest number. What theoretical models or other principles, learned in this chapter or throughout this textbook, would you use to explain how a marginalized identity leader could mediate successful outcomes?

2 Promoting discussions of the social case for diversity in the workplace is the foundation of this textbook. However a 2017 survey by Ernst & Young indicated what many have assumed all along: White men feel threatened by discussions of diversity and inclusion. Yet White men represent the ide- als by which leadership is imagined and still dominate top positions in organizations. Discuss Byrd and Scott’s Critical Racism Pedagogy model (see Chapter 2) and identify specific features of the model as a useful tool for leadership development programs. Show how the model benefits both marginalized identity leaders and normalized identity leaders.

3 Do you believe Thomas Carlyle would have included leaders such as Martin Luther King as exemplary of his Great Man Theory? Support your response.

4 Herbert Spencer, 19th-century educator, sociologist, and philosopher countered Carlyle’s Great Man Theory, suggesting that great men are the products of their environment:

You must admit that the genesis of a great man depends on the long series of complex influences which has produced the race in which he appears, and the social state into which that race has slowly grown. … Before he can remake his society, his society must make him.

(Spencer, 1895, p. 31)

What is your interpretation of Spencer’s philosophy? How does his counter- narrative support social justice? Discuss Spencer as perhaps an early proponent of sociocultural models.

5 Much has been written and studied in academic literature about women of color, specifically Black American women leaders, in terms of bias, unfair treatment, non-acceptance, and lack of opportunity. Less has been written about the acceptance of Black male leaders in organizations. The visibility of Black males taking leadership roles is more prominent in sports and film, industries where Blacks are accepted for their abil- ity to perform, a less threatening attribute to societal norms. How have social identity models explained and disrupted stereotypical images? Or is this more of a social justice issue of race as was discussed in Chapter 4? Justify your responses with examples from the chapter readings.

6 When it comes to social identity diversity and leadership, what are the most dominant forces that work against acceptance of the person as leader? Is race the most salient factor (as opposed to other simultaneous forms of marginalization, if they exist) when it comes to who is readily accepted and who is not? Support your response with justification from this chapter and other chapters in the textbook.

Social Identity Diversity and Leadership 303

Case Study 1

Veronica is a 42-year-old White female administrator responsible for several departments of a large, reputable corporation. Veronica not only administers several departments, she is highly visible to com- pany stakeholders and represents the company to a number of stake- holder groups. Recently, Veronica disclosed to the executive team her decision to “come out,” a primary reason being that she and her part- ner wish to be married. She has made it clear that her coming out involves acknowledging her partner and soon-to-be wife at all com- pany functions.

Veronica explained that she was disillusioned with leading a double life, and hiding her true self was beginning to affect her performance. She further rationalized that a new generation is entering the work- force who should not have to experience hiding one’s true self. She believes that as a leader, she can also be a role model.

Discussion Questions

1 What is the most diplomatic way for this situation to be handled? Discuss the impact of social identity diversity at the individual and organizational levels. Use examples from this chapter and other chapters of the book to support your discussion.

2 What aspects of authentic leadership are present in this sce- nario? If needed, search for more information about authentic leadership in Avolio and Gardner (2005).

Case Study 2

Jayla is a 32-year-old Native American Indian woman who has just landed her dream job as the head of marketing for a well-known phar- maceutical company. When Jayla was introduced to her staff, she received a lukewarm reception, but she realized it would take time for them to know her better. But the real challenge involved the woman who was Jayla’s assistant, Lena Smith. From the beginning, Jayla sensed that this woman felt she should have been promoted to the position rather than Jayla. For example, whenever Jayla issued her instructions, she would either change them or issue new instructions without Jayla’s knowledge. On numerous occasions, Jayla would address the situation with Lena, but the woman would only stare at

304 Marilyn Y. Byrd

her and offer no compliance. As department administrator, Jayla was required to meet with vendors and service providers. These meetings would take place in her office and her assistant was required to be present in order to document the meeting. Jayla noticed that, without fail, the woman would dominate the meetings, and often the other party would address Lena rather than Jayla.

Things came to a head when, during a staff meeting, Jayla was informing her staff about a new project that they would be working on in the upcoming weeks. She noticed during her presentation to the staff that Lena was in a side conversation with another staff member, also a White woman, and the two were being amused over something that Lena was showing to the other woman. Jayla was generally the last one to leave the conference area after a meeting. As she was gathering her things, she noticed what she recognized as the paper that had held the attention of the two women during her presentation, appearing to be noticeably left behind. It was a disrespectful, humili- ating caricature of an American Indian woman in traditional, native dress, cleaning floors.

Discussion Questions

1 Applying what you have learned in this chapter and previous chapters, how does Jayla address a situation whereby she is the victim of the mistreatment?

2 Discuss the role of power and the assertion of power. Apply con- cepts to support your discussion.

3 Apply a theoretical model that was presented in this textbook to this situation and demonstrate how the model provides a guiding compass.

References

Allen, B. L. (1995). Black female leadership: A preliminary step toward an alternative theory. Iowa State University. Retrieved from ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (UMI No. 9540870)

Anzaldua, G. (1987). Borderlands/La frontera: The new mestiza. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books.

Arredondo, G. F., Hurtado, A., Klahn, N., Nájera-Ramírez, O., & Zavella, P. (2003). Chi- cana feminisms: A critical reader. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Avery, D. R., McKay, P. F., Volpone, S. D., & Malka, A. (2015). Are companies beholden to bias? The impact of leader race on consumer purchasing behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 127, 85–102.

Social Identity Diversity and Leadership 305

Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315–338.

Biernat, M., & Manis, M. (1994). Shifting standards and stereotype-based judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(1), 5–20.

Bolden, R. (2004). What is leadership? Research Report. Exeter, UK: Centre for Leader- ship Studies, University of Exeter.

Browne, I., & Misra, J. (2003). The intersection of gender and race in the labor market. Annual Review of Sociology, 29(1), 487–513.

Byrd, M. (2009). Telling our stories: If we don’t tell them they won’t be told. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11(5), 582–605.

Byrd, M. (2012). Theorizing leadership of demographically diverse leaders. In M. Paludi (Ed.), Managing diversity in today’s workplace: Strategies for employees and employers (pp. 103–124). Women and Careers in Management series. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger (ABC-CLIO).

Byrd, M. Y. (2016a). The enlightened revelation: Toward a spirit-centered, socially just workplace. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2016(152), 85–94.

Byrd, M. Y. (2016b). Women of color in leadership: Rendering the invisible visible. In R. Alavi (Ed.), Ethics and leadership (pp. 187–200). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.

Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empow- erment. New York: Routledge.

Combahee River Collective. (1982). A black feminist statement. In G. T. Hull, P. Scott, & B. Smith (Eds.), All the women are white, all the blacks are men, but some of us are brave (pp. 13–22). New York: Feminist Press.

Delgado-Bernal, D. (1998). Using a Chicana feminist epistemology in educational research. Harvard Educational Review, 68, 555–582.

Ernst & Young. (2017, 6 October). EY studies race, gender and exclusion: The top takea- ways. Retrieved from www.ey.com/us/en/newsroom/news-releases/news-ey-studies- race-gender-and-exclusion-the-top-takeaways

Fassinger, R. E., Shullman, S. L., & Stevenson, M. R. (2010). Toward an affirmative les- bian, gay, bisexual, and transgender leadership paradigm. American Psychologist, 65(3), 201–215.

Fine, L. E. (2017). Gender and sexual minorities’ practice and embodiment of authen- tic leadership: Challenges and opportunities. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 19(4), 378–392.

Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th Anniversary ed.). New York: Continuum. (Original work published 1970)

French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, Univer- sity of Michigan.

Friedan, B. (1963). The feminine mystique. New York: Norton. Graen, G. B., & Schiemann, W. (1978). Leader–member agreement: A vertical dyad link-

age approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 206–212. Helgesen, S. (1990). The female advantage. New York: Doubleday. Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology

Review, 5(3), 184–200. hooks, b. (1984). Feminist theory: From the margin to center. Boston, MA: South End Press. Hulko, W. (2009). The time- and context-contingent nature of intersectionality and

interlocking oppressions. Affilia, 24(1), 44–55. Hurtado, A. (2005). The transformative power of Chicana/o Studies: Social justice and

education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 18(2), 185–197.

306 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Lynham, S. A. (2000). The development of a theory of responsible leadership for performance. University of Minnesota. Retrieved from ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (UMI No. 9972991)

Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. New York: Van Nostrand. Mathieson, K., & Miree, C. E. (2015). Illuminating the invisible. In R. A. Giacalone & C.

L. Jurkiewicz (Eds.), Handbook of workplace spirituality and organizational performance (pp. 321–325). New York: M. E. Sharpe.

McFadden, S. (Ed.). (1994). The little book of Native American wisdom. Rockport, MA: Element.

Merriam, S. B., & Caffarella, R. S. (1999). Learning in adulthood. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Muller, H. J. (1998). American Indian women managers: Living in two worlds. Journal of

Management Inquiry, 7(1), 4–28. Parker, P. S. (2005). Race, gender, and leadership: Re-envisioning organizational leadership from

the perspectives of African American women executives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Portman, T. A. A., & Garrett, M. T. (2005). Beloved women: Nurturing the sacred fire of leadership from an American Indian perspective. Journal of Counseling & Development, 83(3), 284–291.

Powers, J. M. (2007). The relevance of critical race theory to educational theory and practice. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 41(1), 151–166.

Rost, J. C. (1991). Leadership in the twenty-first century. New York: Praeger. Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Siebers, T. (2011). Disability theory. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Spencer, H. (1895). The principles of sociology (Vol. 6). New York: Appleton. van Knippenberg, D., & Hogg, M. A. (2003). A social identity model of leadership effec-

tiveness in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 243–295. Wallace, H., Hoover, K., & Pepper, M. (2014). Multicultural ethics and diversity discourse.

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 33(4), 318–333. West, D. (2015, May 11). Social model of leadership: Why disabled people are the lead-

ers of tomorrow (edited by Shannon Kelly). Disability Horizons. Retrieved from http://disabilityhorizons.com/2015/11/social-model-of-leadership-why-disabled- people-are-the-leaders-of-tomorrow/

Wilkinson, M. (2009). Defying disability: The lives and legacies of nine disabled leaders. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Chapter Overview

This chapter will re-conceptualize and re-vision the purpose, need, and goals for diversity in organizational and institutional workforce settings. A social justice paradigm will be introduced as a platform for organizations and insti- tutions to enact organizational social justice.

Learning Outcomes

After reading this chapter, along with completing the critical-thinking appli- cation questions and the case discussion questions, you will be able to:

• re-conceptualize the meaning and focus of diversity; • re-vision a paradigm shift for diversity from inclusion to organizational

social justice; • discuss principles of an emergent model for organizational social justice; • describe a practical application of organizational social justice.

Re-Conceptualizing the Meaning of Diversity

The commonly understood meaning of diversity is the state of being differ- ent. The term diversity became popularized in response to legislation that was enacted to bring about more equal representation for the socially mar- ginalized. The term socially marginalized refers to individuals protected by Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act who are subjected to racial or ethnic prejudice or cultural bias because of their identity as a member of a group, without regard to their individual qualities (U.S. Small Business Administration, 2004). People who are perceived as deformed, mentally ill, retarded, obese, or unattractive are socially stigmatized and also subjected to cruel or unjust treatment because of their social disadvantage in society (Crocker & Major, 1989). Examples of other ways that people are socially marginalized or stigmatized are perceptions of their sexual orientation, reli- gious affiliation, physical ability, or age (others may also apply).

18 Re-Conceptualizing and Re-Visioning Diversity in the Workforce Toward a Social Justice Paradigm

Marilyn Y. Byrd

308 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Initially, the term diversity was applied to acknowledge the presence of a diverse workforce and the legislation that protected the rights of selected groups. Over the last 20 years, phrases such as valuing diversity, appreciat- ing diversity, promoting diversity, embracing diversity, etc., became commonly encountered buzz phrases as organizations and the business world in general sought to convey a message of compliance to their constituents. Gradually, the term “diversity” has broadened and now encompasses an array of diverse perspectives as businesses and organizations have realized the competitive advantage that diversity brings to the bottom line. In this respect, the focus on diversity has shifted from the individual level to the organizational level as businesses and organizations have discovered how the diversity of the people benefits the interests of the organization. The new focus on diversity is being captured in terminology such as diversity of perspectives, diversity of thought, diversity of experience, diversity of education, etc. While achieving a competitive advantage through diversity has become the new focus, in the process, the lived experience of “being different” is rendered silent. Lived experience refers to the ways that people experience life based on their socially marginalized or socially stigmatized everyday reality.

Because topics such as racism, sexism, classism, intergenerational differ- ences, racial harassment, etc., are not being appropriately captured under the more contemporary discussions of diversity as a competitive business advan- tage, the need to return the focus of diversity onto the lived experiences of diverse groups has been the aim and goal of this textbook. Discussing the way diversity is experienced (by social groups), rather than how it is used (by the organization), creates space for diversity to be envisioned from a histori- cal and contextual perspective. Therefore, it seems appropriate and necessary to re-affirm the original focus and the need to have conversations about the lived experiences of diversity—not to relive past transgressions, but rather to confront past and emerging transgressions and social oppression that continue to deny full and equal participation, respect, and dignity to socially marginal- ized and socially stigmatized groups.

The preceding chapters laid the foundation for a social justice paradigm that is dedicated to addressing social oppression. Social oppression was described in Chapter 8 as “the belief that some social groups are superior or normal and establishes systems of advantage and privilege for these groups while simultaneously defining other social groups as inferior and deserv- ing of disenfranchisement, exploitation, and marginalization” (Hardiman & Jackson, 2007, p. 37). We expand that definition to include the “fusion of institutional and systemic discrimination, personal bias, bigotry, and social prejudice in a complex web of relationships and structures that shade most aspects of life” (Bell, 2007, p. 3). The outcome of social oppression is social injustice. Social injustice is the repression of an individual’s right to full participation or capacity to realize their full potential in an organizational or institutional setting, regardless of their perceived social identity, lifestyle, cultural expression, or any other perceived category of difference. Because

Re-Conceptualizing/Re-Visioning Diversity 309

the discussions of diversity in the workforce have moved toward a com- petitive advantage, it is necessary to shift discussions of diversity to a social justice paradigm to capture the lived experiences of socially marginalized and socially stigmatized groups. In that way, we will have a clearer vision of how to respond and act with action-oriented practices that offer a remedy for social oppression.

Philosophical Foundations for a Social Justice Paradigm

Social justice originates from philosophical discourse (Jost & Kay, 2010). Philosophical discourse unveils the lived experiences of social injustice for a clearer understanding of a moral duty to respond and act (Byrd, 2018). Lived experiences are ways that people experience life from a socially assigned or self-identified location within society (Byrd, 2014). Reflection on lived experience is always in retrospect (van Manen, 1997). A person cannot reflect on experience while living through the experience (p. 9). For this reason, philosophical discourse is needed to establish foundations for a social justice paradigm. Three philosophical concepts converge and interact in a systemic way to guide and inform our thoughts and actions: ontology (how we see and view a phenomenon); epistemology (how we try to understand the phe- nomenon); and axiology (how we act upon that understanding) (Ruona & Lynham, 2004).

First, ontology provides a foundation for how we see and view lived experiences that emerge from social oppression. To understand one’s expe- riences, we should reflect upon the historical as well as the cultural and social contexts of a person’s world. The “direct conscious description of an experience and the underlying dynamics or structures that account for that experience” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 9) are central to understanding the essence of the experience. We are constructed by a world in which, at the same time, we are constructing this world from our lived experiences in connection to the lived experiences of others (Laverty, 2003). Lived experi- ences bring the “elephant at the back of the room” front and center, there- fore allowing for deeper and more meaningful conversations about issues of social injustice.

Second, philosophy contributes to an epistemological understanding of the moral duty to respond to social injustice. The moral duty to respond is grounded in ethical consciousness (Hatcher, 2002). Ethical consciousness is grounded in an individual’s moral compass for “doing the right thing.” Working as a community of individuals to eradicate social injustice, ethi- cal consciousness is reflected in shared beliefs and a commitment to social justice. Social justice holds that organizations and institutions have a moral duty to uphold impartiality, fairness, and justice (Rawls, 2001). Therefore, philosophy imposes an ethical responsibility on professionals and practition- ers to challenge social injustice and to continuously seek ways to ensure that workplace policies, practices, and rules are equitable and fair.

310 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Third, philosophy contributes to an understanding of ways in which indi- viduals enact their moral duty, take action, and become advocates for social justice. The primary strength of using philosophical discourse in social jus- tice advocacy is that it helps to clarify personal values, beliefs, and assump- tions that are fundamental to its practice and application (Hytten & Bettez, 2011). Social justice activists are moral agents and have the capacity to look beyond self and regard human rights as the end in itself (Kant, 1998). Draw- ing parallels from the philosophy of Kant, social justice activists reflect upon the following questions:

• What can I know? (about social injustice) • What ought I to do? (to challenge systems that are unjust) • What may I hope? (will happen to change the systems that are unjust)

While these questions represent the limits of our knowledge about a phe- nomenon (Roth, 2000), they also acknowledge that there is something more that we can participate in that can challenge oppressive systems and create opportunities for social justice and social change.

A Social Justice Paradigm for Action-Oriented Organizations

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. (Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.)

A paradigm provides a worldview of shared beliefs for a community of people to identify problems and create solutions (Kuhn, 1996). Three paradigms have essentially framed diversity goals throughout the litera- ture: discrimination/fairness, access/legitimacy, and learning/integration (Thomas & Ely, 1996). The discrimination/fairness and access/legitimacy paradigms support legislation designed to enforce equal representation. The learning/integration paradigm focuses on learning from differences, and recognizing multiple perspectives and culturally relevant informa- tion that certain groups bring to achieving competitive advantage. In recent years, organizations have begun adopting the term “inclusion,” which focuses on developing an environment that enables all people to feel a part of the organization, to have equal access to opportunities that enable development and growth, and to contribute fully to the organiza- tion’s success (Society for Human Resource Management, 2009; Thomas, 1992). The inclusion paradigm highlights a sense of belongingness, feel- ing respected and valued, and conveys a level of supportive energy and commitment from others so that a person feels empowered do their best work (Miller & Katz, 2002).

While the foregoing paradigms have served to represent perspectives of diversity in the workforce, none of these give voice to social justice. When

Re-Conceptualizing/Re-Visioning Diversity 311

current worldviews do not respond to current and emerging problems and dilemmas, a paradigm shift is needed (Kuhn, 1996). Social justice is a democratic, participatory, inclusive process for affirming human agency and working collaboratively to create change (Bell, 2007). It is a vision of a society where “all members are physically and psychologically safe and secure … able to develop their full capacities … and capable of interacting democratically with others” (p. 1). The purpose of a social justice paradigm is to create a platform to have conversations about “organisational undis- cussables such as sexism, racism, patriarchy, and violence” (Bierema & Cseh, 2003, p. 24) that cause social oppression. Therefore, to fulfill the promise of valuing diversity, celebrating diversity, appreciating diversity, promoting diversity, and embracing diversity, we need to hear, understand, and appreciate the voice of social justice (Miller, 1994).

A social justice paradigm would be an appropriate worldview to study the effects of microaggression. Microaggression is an overarching categori- cal term for prejudicial behaviors that are demeaning, humiliating, unethi- cal, disrespectful, and unjust, and target socially marginalized and socially stigmatized groups. The term microaggression was coined in the 1970s by Chester Pierce, a psychiatrist who initially referred to racial microaggres- sions, particularly in referring to the African American race. Racial micro- aggressions are “commonplace verbal or behavioral indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults” (Sue et al., 2007, p. 280). Researchers are now applying the term in a broader sense to include indignities, insults, and assaults directed toward other socially marginalized and socially stigmatized groups. It is emphasized and should be understood that microaggression is not a substitute term for specific behaviors such as racism, sexism, ableism, classism, etc. Rather, the term categorizes the ways that specific behaviors are operationalized in context. Three categories, or levels, of microaggres- sion occur that can inflict psychological and possible physical harm to the target: microinsult (demeaning remarks or comments); microassault (violent verbal or nonverbal attacks); and microinvalidation (attempts to devalue, dis- credit, minimize, negate, and/or nullify the background, culture, education, or expertise of the target) (Sue et al., 2007).

For example, at a public event representing the university where he then worked, the image of Dr. Christopher Head, a Black surgeon, was projected during a slide show as a gorilla being sodomized by his White supervi- sor. This action could be categorized as all three forms of microaggression. Furthermore, based on the social identity of Dr. Head, the root of these behaviors could likely stem from racism. Depicting Dr. Head as a gorilla is a symbolic, demeaning, racial hate gesture. The act of being physically trauma- tized in public by his White supervisor is humiliating. Finally, disrespectful treatment of Dr. Head in a gathering of his peers is professionally devalu- ing to his achievements and expertise as a surgeon at a prestigious teaching university. As has been emphasized in various chapters throughout this book, individuals who are targets of racism and other types of microaggression

312 Marilyn Y. Byrd

have an innate sense of perception and a cultural sense of diversity intel- ligence (Hughes, 2016) to recognize behaviors that inflict social injustice.

Despite legislation that has placed more mandates against discriminatory workplace processes and practices, microaggression transcends to a degree that inflicts harm—physical or mental, consciousness or unconscious, inten- tional or unintentional—which is an injustice to human dignity and worth. Furthermore, microaggression can occur in varying degrees of severity, which can contribute to an unpleasant and hostile working environment. A hostile working environment is a facts-driven phenomenon that is based on the judgment of the decision-maker and his or her “understanding of morality, social justice, history, and the legislative purpose of Title VII” (Ford, 2009, p. 7). The law broadly defines prejudicial behaviors that contribute to a hostile work environment according to Ford (2009) as:

• antilocution—feelings are freely expressed and shared with other like- minded individuals;

• avoidance—members of a disliked group are avoided altogether; • discrimination—actions openly express dislike for certain groups; • physical attack—extreme expression of dislike and hatred; • extermination—drawing parallels to historical examples by displaying

symbols of annihilation (nooses, swastikas, racist graffiti).

Law and legislation do not clearly define prejudicial behaviors; nonetheless, employers are held accountable and liable for preventing a hostile workplace environment. The central purpose of enforcing the law in respect to a hostile work environment is to “inject morality and social justice into the work- place” (Ford, 2009, p. 5).

Another point that should be addressed is the context of work. For exam- ple, utility workers, delivery drivers, door-to-door salespeople, etc., perform their work outside of the traditional bricks and mortar environment, but are still subjected to microaggression in the conduct of their work. In addition, healthcare providers (doctors, nurses, nursing assistants, etc.) are subjected to microaggression in their duty to care for patients who refuse services (or someone refuses service on their behalf) because of the service worker’s social categorization.

Social justice has roots in philosophical and moral basic principles upon which the United States was founded. Acts of social injustice like microag- gression counteract principles of social justice. Advancing conversations that question and challenge acts of microaggression are not easy to integrate within the vague, obscure concept of diversity. A social justice paradigm also creates a platform for discussions that expose social power. Social power is a force that “results in some social groups having privilege, status, and access, whereas other groups are stigmatized, oppressed, and denied access” (Hardi- man & Jackson, 2007, p. 58). Discussions of social power and its dominance in sustaining social oppression unveil the historical and contextual state of

Re-Conceptualizing/Re-Visioning Diversity 313

diversity. In doing so, valuing diversity, celebrating diversity, appreciating diversity, promoting diversity, and embracing diversity appear to be dichotomous state- ments in respect to the lived experience of diversity. For that reason, this textbook has promoted a paradigm that shifts discussions of diversity to one that emphasizes organizational social justice and establishing an organiza- tional culture that extends beyond inclusion toward one that upholds human worth, respect, and dignity.

In Chapter 3, organizational social justice was introduced as a state that organizations should seek to achieve so that everyone feels included, accepted, and respected, and whereby human dignity as well as equality are practiced and upheld (Byrd, 2012). Organizational social justice represents a shift from viewing diversity in terms of representation and inclusion toward a new horizon that invokes a sense of agency and inspires individuals to reflect and take action against everyday microaggressions that deny them respect and dignity. Emerging from the concept of organizational social jus- tice is Byrd’s Balanced Scale of Organizational Social Justice (BSOSJ) con- ceptual model (Figure 18.1).

The foundational level of the BSOSJ is the inalienable rights clause of the United States Declaration of Independence: “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” These are rights given to all people by the Creator. The second level of the BSOSJ is Rawls’s (2001) theory of justice which is grounded in principles of equality, fairness, and impartiality. The top level advances the concept of organizational justice (Greenberg, 1987), a procedural concept of justice in organizations. Previous applications of organizational justice have emphasized how procedures, dissemina- tion of information, and distribution of resources can be unjust and work

Figure 18.1 Byrd’s Balanced Scale of Organizational Social Justice

314 Marilyn Y. Byrd

unfavorably toward marginalized groups. A major feature of the BSOSJ is that behavior determines how justice is upheld and how the merits of justice should be balanced between the privileged (relinquishing power) and the marginalized (pushing back to gain power).

The BSOSJ is a framework that holds significance for building human relations at all levels of the organization. Human relations was introduced in Chapter 3 as a philosophical principle that establishes a moral duty to respond to social injustice. In the context of higher education, human rela- tions represents an avenue of preparation that teaches students to see one another as different, yet equal (McFarland, 2017). Grounded in research and theory, human relations supports critical literacy skills needed for practical application in the workforce.

There are variations among all people, but there are also commonalities. In this respect, human relations in academic settings opens up space for conversations of lived experiences that reveal the nature of marginalization. However, human relations is more than an academic field—it is a philo- sophical principle that represents the interconnected nature of humankind. As represented by the BSOSJ, human relations prepares a future workforce to become socially aware, organizational citizens.

Action-Oriented Ways that Organizations Can Practice Social Justice

Organizations with social justice goals are concerned with eliminating oppres- sion and are committed to “participatory democracy as the means of this action” (Murrell, 2006, p. 81). Furthermore, organizations with social justice goals pro- actively seek to ensure a diversity social climate that is supportive of socially marginalized and socially stigmatized groups. A diversity social climate is a pattern of attitudes and behaviors that represents the overall culture of an organization. A major influence on a diversity social climate is management’s proactive stance against social oppression and social injustice. Some action strat- egies that demonstrate a concern for organizational social justice are: utilizing employee resource groups; practicing corporate social responsibility at the indi- vidual (employee) level; and creating a workforce social justice council.

Employee Resource Groups

Employee resource groups (ERGs) are gaining recognition as an oppor- tunity that encourages employees to give voice or speak out about issues in the workplace. Research conducted by Roberson and Stevens (2006) sug- gests that allowing people from socially marginalized and socially stigmatized groups to describe incidents that pertain to ways in which “discrimination, representation, management treatment, work relationships, levels of respect, and the diversity climate are salient” (p. 389) influences how individuals within these groups make meaning of their experiences. A progressive way in which ERGs can be used in supporting social justice is by holding periodic

Re-Conceptualizing/Re-Visioning Diversity 315

forums that are designed for sharing lived experiences. Sharing lived expe- riences is a way in which an individual learns from having encountered or endured an oppressive event in an effort to make sense of that experience by reliving it with another person who is similarly located in society.

Corporate Social Responsibility

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is an ethical practice that businesses and organizations undertake to illustrate responsibilities to stakeholders. Typically, organizations demonstrate CSR to stakeholders through external strategies such as charitable donations, environmen- tal initiatives, and various community outreach initiatives. However, addressing CSR at the wider level minimizes the “social” aspect of inter- nal issues at the individual and/or group level that could create a hostile environment for the socially marginalized and the socially stigmatized. Action strategies that demonstrate CSR at the individual level—for instance, implementing policies that illustrate responsibility to employee social justice—are needed.

A progressive strategy that allows organizations to demonstrate CSR at the individual level is to issue a statement of conduct or revise current state- ments of conduct to reflect a moral obligation to respond to and take action against acts of social injustice in the workplace (including the virtual work- place). Another action strategy that demonstrates CSR at the individual level is incorporating specific language into mission and vision statements that demonstrates a proactive approach to social justice.

Workforce Social Justice Councils

Organizations that commit to being socially responsible to their workforce could support a social justice paradigm by creating a workforce social justice council (WSJC). The WSJC is an advisory board that works in con- junction with the human resources department to ensure that organizational social justice is practiced and upheld. In an advisory capacity, the WSJC reviews internal issues that are related to behaviors intended to inflict harm toward socially marginalized groups. The WSJC makes recommendations for proactive policies, procedures, and changes as well as being involved in designing and implementing awareness workshops to address social injustice. The WSJC periodically solicits feedback from the entire workforce on the state of the organization’s diversity social climate and empowers victims of social injustice to report occurrences to a higher authority.

Chapter Summary

This chapter explained the need to return the focus and need for having conversations on diversity to the lived experiences of social oppression.

316 Marilyn Y. Byrd

A shift to a social justice paradigm was explained as an emerging worldview that captures this experience. Organizational social justice was described as a goal for a paradigm shift. Practical ways that organizations can practice organizational social justice were provided.

Definition of Key Terms

Corporate social responsibility (CSR)—Refers to an ethical practice that businesses and organizations undertake to illustrate responsibilities to stakeholders.

Diversity social climate—A pattern of attitudes and behaviors that repre- sents the overall culture of an organization.

Employee resource groups—Encourage employees to give voice or speak out about issues in the workplace; useful for providing upper management with insight on issues that could improve the organization’s culture; also a useful source for mentoring and focusing on issues that relate to a par- ticular community.

Inclusion—A sense of belonging: feeling respected, valued for who you are; feeling a level of supportive energy and commitment from others so that you can do your best work (Miller & Katz, 2002, p. 147).

Lived experience—Refers to the ways that people experience life based on their socially marginalized or socially stigmatized everyday reality.

Microaggression—Refers to prejudicial behaviors that are demeaning, humiliating, unethical, disrespectful, and unjust, and that target socially marginalized and socially stigmatized groups.

Organizational social justice—The ideology that organizations operat- ing through a representing agent seek to achieve a state whereby all indi- viduals feel included, accepted, and respected and whereby human dignity as well as equality is practiced and upheld (Byrd, 2012).

Racial microaggression—Commonplace verbal or behavioral indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, deroga- tory, or negative racial slights and insults (Sue et al., 2007, p. 280).

Social injustice—Repression of an individual’s right to full participation or capacity to realize their full potential in an organizational or institu- tional setting, regardless of their perceived social identity, lifestyle, cultural expression, or any other perceived category of difference.

Social justice—A “vision of society in which the distribution of resources is equitable and all members are physically and psychologically safe and secure” (Bell, 2007, p. 1).

Social oppression—The belief that some social groups are superior or normal; establishes systems of advantage and privilege for these groups while simultaneously defining other social groups as inferior and deserv- ing of disenfranchisement, exploitation, and marginalization (Hardiman & Jackson, 2007, p. 37).

Re-Conceptualizing/Re-Visioning Diversity 317

Socially marginalized—Refers to individuals protected by Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act who are subjected to racial or ethnic prejudice or cul- tural bias because of their identity as a member of a group, without regard to their individual qualities (U.S. Small Business Administration, 2004).

Socially stigmatized—Refers to individuals or groups who are perceived as deformed, mentally ill or retarded, obese, or unattractive and who are often subjected to cruel or unjust treatment because of their social disad- vantage in society.

Workforce social justice council—Refers to an advisory board that works in conjunction with the human resources department to ensure that organizational social justice is practiced and upheld.

Critical-Thinking Application

1 Discuss how a social justice paradigm differs from the inclusion paradigm. 2 Conduct an Internet search of companies on DiversityInc’s Top 50 list.

Report on three companies that are practicing social justice advocacy and describe the type of social justice initiative being practiced (www.diver- sityinc.com/the-diversityinc-top-50-companies-for-diversity-2017/)

3 Visit the EEOC website (www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/initiatives/e-race/ caselist.cfm#customer) and search for two incidents whereby cus- tomer/patient preference has created a hostile working environment. How would the social justice paradigm provide a platform for address- ing this type of discrimination?

Legal Perspective One

In December 2012, an Atlanta-based manufacturing company was ordered to pay $500,000 in a race discrimination suit to 14 Black employees who worked at the company’s mill in South Dallas, Texas. The company reached a settlement with the EEOC on behalf of the plaintiffs who complained of being subjected to a hostile work envi- ronment and being exposed to violent, racist graffiti (“die, n—r, die”), racial slurs, the display of racist insignia such as swastikas, Confederate flags, “White power” and “KKK” logos, including the display of nooses at an employee workstation. Supervisors were aware of the incidents, but allowed the behavior to continue according to the complaints. The company was required to enact a graffiti abatement policy and undergo annual reviews of its compliance for 2 years.

(Source: www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/initiatives/e-race/caselist. cfm#systemic)

318 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Legal Perspective Two

In September 2012, Delano Regional Medical Center in Delano, Cal- ifornia, was ordered to pay $975,000 to around 70 Filipino-American hospital workers in a landmark EEOC language discrimination law- suit. The workers complained of a hostile working environment that subjected them to being berated, harassed, ridiculed, and reprimanded for speaking with an accent or using Filipino language. The lawsuit originated in 2006 when a “Filipino-American only” staff meeting was called. During this meeting, the workers were threatened and issued with consequences for noncompliance with Delano’s “Eng- lish only” language policy. The workers were also subjected to being monitored by surveillance equipment, although other non-Filipino- speaking workers who spoke other languages such as Spanish were not subjected to such treatment. Some Filipino workers reported being humiliated and threatened with arrest if they did not speak English. One Filipino employee’s food was sprayed with air freshener when someone complained of hating Filipino food. Although more than 100 Filipino workers signed a petition to report the harassment, man- agement failed to investigate or take action. In addition to the mon- etary relief, Delano Regional Hospital was ordered to adopt a Title VII-compliant language policy and to hire an EEO monitor to assist with developing terms of the settlement that comply with legislation. The hospital was also required to conduct antiharassment and antidis- crimination training at all levels.

(Source: www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/9-17-12a.cfm)

Case Study 1*

In June 2013, a postal service worker, an African American male, was the victim of a prank that was alleged to have been initiated by a col- lege fraternity. The postal worker delivered a large number of boxes addressed to “Reggin Toggaf” at the fraternity house. After delivering the boxes, he was told it was a prank, and to read the name of the addressee in reverse order. The two words transposed revealed a racial slur and a slur directed toward gays. The postal worker admit- ted to being humiliated and insulted. The fraternity denied involve- ment, but the postal worker believed he was owed an apology.

*This case is based on an actual incident.

Re-Conceptualizing/Re-Visioning Diversity 319

Discussion Questions

1 Do you believe the university or the postal system is responsible for investigating this situation? Support your answer.

2 What type of microaggression does this represent? Support your answer.

3 Discuss the incident in terms of the workplace that is not the tra- ditional bricks and mortar environment.

Case Study 2

Shameka, an African American woman, was in charge of a city tree- trimming crew that was working to remove dead tree limbs near a neighborhood power line. One of the property owners, a White man in his early 60s, approached the workers, complaining that they were getting too close to his property and were going to damage his fence. The workers (all men) tried to ignore the property owner who was becoming more irate and agitated by the minute. Shameka, who was standing close by, noticed the encounter and had taken out her phone to record the encounter. She then approached the property owner with the intention of trying to assure him that her crew was abiding by city ordinances and was staying the proper distance from his property. The resident suddenly became belligerent and hostile, yelling a derogatory racial slur and sexually demeaning insult at Shameka. Catching her off guard, the resident spat in her face, and then pushed her. Shameka immediately phoned her supervisor and reported the incident.

Discussion Questions

1. Do you think Shameka acted appropriately? Why or why not? 2. If you were Shameka’s supervisor, how would you respond? 3. What type of microaggression does this incident describe? Sup-

port your answer. 4. Does the concept of the hostile work environment apply here?

Why or why not?

References

Bell, L. A. (2007). Theoretical foundations for social justice education. In M. Adams, L. A. Bell, & P. Griffin (Eds.), Teaching for diversity and social justice (2nd ed., pp. 1–14). New York: Routledge.

Bierema, L. L., & Cseh, M. (2003). Evaluating AHRD research using a feminist research framework. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(1), 5–26.

320 Marilyn Y. Byrd

Byrd, M. (2012). Theorizing leadership of demographically diverse leaders. In M. Paludi (Ed.), Managing diversity in today’s workplace: Strategies for employees and employers (pp. 103–124). Women and Careers in Management series. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger (ABC-CLIO).

Byrd, M. Y. (2014). Diversity issues exploring ‘critical’ through multiple lenses. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 16(4), 515–528.

Byrd, M. Y. (2018). Does HRD have a moral duty to respond to matters of social injus- tice? Human Resource Development International, 21(1), 3–11.

Crocker, J., & Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective proper- ties of stigma. Psychological Review, 96, 608–630.

Ford, R. O. (2009). A speech on hostile work environment. Human Resources/Labor Rela- tions Law Review, 1(1), 5–16.

Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Manage- ment Review, 12(1), 9–22.

Hardiman, R., & Jackson, B. (2007). Conceptual foundations for social justice education: Conceptual overview. In M. Adams, L. A. Bell, & P. Griffin (Eds.), Teaching for diversity and social justice (pp. 35–43). New York: Routledge.

Hatcher, T. (2002). Ethics and HRD: A new approach to leading responsible organizations. Cam- bridge, MA: Perseus Publishing.

Hughes, C. (2016). Diversity intelligence: Integrating diversity intelligence alongside intellec- tual, emotional, and cultural intelligence for leadership and career development. New York: Springer.

Hytten, K., & Bettez, S. C. (2011). Understanding education for social justice. The Journal of Educational Foundations, 25(1/2), 7–24.

Jost, J. T., & Kay, A. C. (2010). Social justice: History, theory, and research. In S. T. Fiske, D. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., Vol. 2; pp. 1122– 1165). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Kant, I. (1998). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals (M. J. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Laverty, S. M. (2003). Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: A compari- son of historical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Qualita- tive Methods, 2(3). Retrieved from www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/2_3final/pdf/ laverty.pdf

McFarland, J. (2017). Spring semester class lecture: Defining human relations. HR 5053 Diversity and Justice in Organizations. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma.

Miller, F. A. (1994). Why we choose to address oppression. In E. Y. Cross, J. H. Katz, F. A. Miller, & E. W. Seashore (Eds.), The promise of diversity: Over 40 voices discuss strategies for eliminating discrimination in organizations (pp. xxv–xxix). New York: Irwin.

Miller, F. A., & Katz, J. H. (2002). The inclusion breakthrough: Unleashing the real power of diversity. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. London: Sage. Murrell, P., Jr. (2006). Toward social justice in urban education: A model of collaborative

cultural inquiry in urban schools. Equity & Excellence in Education, 39, 81–90. Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Roberson, Q. M., & Stevens, C. K. (2006). Making sense of diversity in the work-

place: Organizational justice and language abstraction in employees’ accounts

Re-Conceptualizing/Re-Visioning Diversity 321

of diversity-related incidents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(2), 379–391. doi:10.1037/0021–9010.91.2.379

Roth, G. (Ed.). (2000). Philosophical foundations of human resource development prac- tice. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 2(3), v–ix.

Ruona, W. E., & Lynham, S. A. (2004). A philosophical framework for thought and prac- tice in human resource development. Human Resource Development International, 7(2), 151–164.

Society for Human Resource Management. (2009). Global diversity and inclusion. Retrieved from www.shrm.org/hr-today/trends-and-forecasting/research-and-sur- veys/Documents/09-Diversity_and_Inclusion_Report.pdf

Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M., Holder, A. M. B., Nadal, K. L., & Equin, M. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. The American Psychologist, 62(4), 271–286.

Thomas, D. A., & Ely, R. J. (1996). Making differences matter: A new paradigm for man- aging diversity. Harvard Business Review, 74(5), 79–90.

Thomas, R. (1992). Beyond race and gender: Unleashing the power of your total work force by managing diversity. New York: AMACOM.

U.S. Small Business Administration. (2004). Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637). Retrieved January 29, 2018, from www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Small%20Business%20 Act.pdf

van Manen, M. (1997). Researching lived experiences: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy (2nd ed.). London: The Althouse Press.

Note: Page numbers in bold type refer to tables Page numbers in italic type refer to figures

Index

ABE (adult basic education) 36–37 Academy of Human Resource

Development (AHRD), Standing Committee on Ethics and Integrity 141

Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences 283, 284, 285

accent, definition 115, 117 accommodation 247, 249, 251–252;

acting roles 286–287 action-oriented leadership 54 action-oriented organizations 310–314 activists, disability 247 activity theory 197, 207 age demographic, workforce 191 aggressive communication 202, 207 agricultural labor market, women 83 ALGBTIC (Association for Lesbian, Gay,

Bisexual, and Transgender Issues in Counseling) 138–139

American Counseling Association (ACA) 138–139

Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) 237, 238, 247, 250, 251

antidiscrimination policies, TGNC individuals 136–137

Arredondo and Glauner’s Identity Model 121, 140, 142–143, 145

ascribed status, definition 117 assimilationist model 110–111, 204–205 Association for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,

and Transgender Issues in Counseling (ALGBTIC) 138–139

authentic leadership 293–294, 301 authentic self 174, 293

Baby Boomer generation, definition 193–194, 207; Balanced Scale of

Organizational Social Justice (BSOSJ) 313–314, 313

barriers, disability 249 BFOQ (bona fide occupational

qualification) 237 bias: gender 81; unconscious 291 bisexual individuals 124, 125 bisexuality, definition 122, 143 Black American women leaders 295–296,

302, 319 bona fide occupational qualification

(BFOQ) 237 Brown v. Board of Education (1954) 8–9 Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) 85, 88 Byrd, M. Y. 160, 295, 313; and Scott, C. L.

29, 30, 299, 302

career development issues, LGBTQ+ individuals 131–132

Cass Identity Development Model 123, 143

Chaney, M. P., and Hawley, L. 298 Chicana feminist theory 296 Chicana women leaders 296–297 Children’s Acting Club in Atlanta,

Georgia 286–287 civil rights, definition 66, 76 Civil Rights Act (1964) see Title VII of

the Civil Rights Act (1964) Civil Rights Movement 66, 77, 181, 247 class-privileged people 153–154 classism, definition 153–154, 164; color-blind systems 71, 74, 77 colorism, definition 233, 238 Combahee River Collective 295–296, 301 coming out 123, 130, 132–133, 303 communication: aggressive 202, 207; skills

114–115, 273, 274–276

Index 323

Competencies for Counseling Transgender Clients 139–140

consciousness: ethical 309; ethnic 114 constructionist theory, definition 77 Corporate Equality Index (CEI) 131 corporate social responsibility (CSR) 315,

316 covert discrimination, definition 143 covert racism 73 critical race pedagogy (CRP) 31, 32, 32,

33–34, 302 critical race theory (CRT) 72, 77 critical theory, definition 31; Cross-Country Diversity Network 264 cross-cultural teams, definition 270, 273;

Crossroads Anti-Racism Organizing and Training 14–15

cultural audit, definition 56 cultural classism 157 cultural isolationism 220 cultural knowledge 272 Culturally Relevant Spirituality and

Learning Model (Tisdell) 178–179, 178

culturedefinition 49–50, 56, 109–110, 117, 270, 273; Hofstede’s four dimensions 270–271; see also organizational culture

DADT (“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”) 128, 129 Declaration of Independence 313 Defying Disability (Wilkinson) 299 demographic changes 17 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental

Disorders 122 different deployment 203, 208 differentiation, culture of 50–51 disability, definition 245, 250; disability

model 246–247 disclosure issues, LGBTQ+ individuals

127, 129–130, 132–133 discrimination, definition 23, 117;

disengagement theory 196, 208 distributive justice 54 Diverse Voices Conference 37–42 diversity intelligence (DQ) 34–36, 35,

216, 219, 220, 223, 224 diversity social climate, definition 314,

316 diversity in the workforce, definition 4–5,

23–24 DiversityInc 22, 74–75 “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) 128, 129 DQ (diversity intelligence) 34–36, 35,

216, 219, 220, 223, 224 dress code polices 230–231

driving while Black or Brown 255–256 Du Bois, W. E. B. 258 dual discrimination 245 dual-couple earners 93 Dunbar v. Footlocker Inc. 146–147

ED Services Inc. 60 EAP (employee assistance program) 124 economic advantage of diversity 22, 270,

309 EEOC see Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission (EEOC) EEOC v. E&D Services Inc. 60 EEOC v. Nordstrom Inc. 59–60 EIRT (Embedded Intergroup Relations

Theory) 44–45 emancipatory spirituality 182–184, 185 Embedded Intergroup Relations Theory

(EIRT) 44–45 emotional intelligence 175 emotional skills 175 employee resource groups (ERGs)

314–315, 316 employment discrimination, LGBTQ+

individuals 129–130 Employment Non-Discrimination Act

(ENDA) 120, 137, 143 enacted values 200, 208 ENDA (Employment Non-

Discrimination Act) 120, 137, 143 Engineering Plus Company 285–286 enlightened revelation 181–182, 182, 185 entertainment industry 249 Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (EEOC lawsuits 55, 59–60, 78, 186, 261, 261, 317, 318; Equal Pay Act (1963) 87

equality, gender 82–83, 99 equity theory 54 espoused values 200, 208 ethical consciousness 309 ethnic classifications 109, 110–112 ethnic consciousness 114 ethnic groups, definition 109–110, 117;

discriminatory policies and practices 112–113; self-identity 111–112; stereotyping 115–116

ethnic identity 70, 111–112 ethnicity definition 66, 77, 107, 117;

exclusion, and discrimination 112–113 executive management, informal social

networking 158, 159–160

Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA, 1993) 96

324 Index

family-friendly policies 98, 99 family-friendly workplace (FFW) 96 feminist advantage models 294–295 feminist theory, Chicana 296 film workforce 282–284, 285 First Amendment 257, 258 Fourteenth Amendment 8, 9, 23 framework, definition 28, 46

gay men, definition 122, 144; pay penalty 127, 143; stereotyping 132

gender, definition 82–83, 99; gender confirmation surgery 138, 143

gender discrimination, definition 85, 99 gender equality, definition 82–83, 99 gender reassignment surgery (GRS) 138 generation, definition 191, 208 generation theory 195, 208 Generation X (born 1961–1980):

communication preferences 201–202; definition 194, 208; technology options 200

generational cohort 191–192, 208 generational mixing 197, 208 glass ceiling 90–91, 98, 99, 297 glass escalator 91–92, 98, 99 good ol’ boy network 51, 89, 99, 158, 160,

164 Great Man Theory 292, 302

harassment: LGBTQ+ individuals 130, 143; by police 255–256; sexual 130, 144, 284, see also racial harassment

Hate Crime Statistics 2015 (FBI) 127 hate symbols (racial), definition 264;

Dr. Head (victim) 311; historical significance 256–258; nooses 75, 256, 265–266; racist graffiti 317

Hawley, L., and Chaney, M. P. 298 heightism 233–234, 236, 238 heterogeneous workforce 14 heterosexual individuals, definition 122,

143 heterosexual privilege 128, 143 Hofstede, G., four dimensions of culture

270–271 Hollywood 284, 285 homogeneous workforce 13, 14 Howard University, President Johnson’s

speech 11–12 Hughes, C. 13, 34, 36, 45, 224 human diversity, historical aspects 6 human emancipation 31 Human Rights Campaign (2017) 131 hypodescent 109, 117

IC (intercultural competence) 272 ICT (information communication

technology): advantage to different speech communities 222–223; disabled workers 248–249; racial harassment 258; work-life balance 96–97

identity: characteristics 122; conceptualizing 121–122; ethnic 70, 111–112; ethnicity 109, 109–110; group 67; sexual 123–124, see also leadership and social identity

identity development, TGNC individuals 134–136

Identity Development Model (Cass) 123, 143

Identity Model (Arredondo and Glauner) 121, 140, 142–143, 145

Inclusion, definition 23, 316; paradigm 310–311

individual racism 73–74, 77 information communication technology

(ICT) see ICT injustice, social 55, 308, 312, 316 institutional discrimination, LGBTQ+

individuals 129–130 institutional racism 73, 74, 77 intelligence 175, 217, see also diversity

intelligence (DQ) interactional justice 54 intercultural competence (IC) 272 intergenerational conflict, definition 208 intergenerationality, definition 199, 301 intergroup conflict 199 intersectional frameworks 296, 301 intrinsic racism 112, 117 isolationism, cultural 220

JAN (Job Accommodation Network) 248

Jim Crow laws 7–8, 11, 15, 66, 258 Job Accommodation Network (JAN) 248 John Henryism 53 Johnson, President L. B. 9–10, 11–12 judgment, surface-level characteristics

113 justice 54–55, 56, 313, 316, see also social

justice

Kant, I. 55, 182, 310 Kennedy, President J. F. 9, 11 King v. Ann Arbor 215, 221 Kinsey Scale 122 knowledge, cultural 272 Ku Klux Klan 256–257, 260

Index 325

lavender ceiling 132, 144 Law, Health Policy, and Disability Centre

(LHPDC) 248 leaders, Black American women 295–296,

302, 319 leadership: action-oriented 54; authentic

293–294; development training 176; duality 294; studies 290; and women 294–298, 298

legal discrimination, and linguistic profiling 220–221

legal immigrant population 17 lesbian premium theory 126–127, 132,

144 lesbians, definition 122, 144 LGBTQ+ couples 125–126 LGBTQ+ individuals: career

development issues 131–132; employment discrimination 129–130; employment and social economic status 126–127; family and employee benefits 130–131; harassment 130; multiple identities 120; societal attitudes towards 127–128; terminology and distinctions 122

LHPDC (Law, Health Policy, and Disability Centre) 248

life chances, definition 155–156, 164 life-defining events 191, 192, 192,

197–198, 207 linguistic profiling, definition 214–215,

224 lived experience, definition 308, 316;

self-identity 309; sharing 315 lookism, definition 233, 238 lower class 154, 156; definition 164

majority class 154, 155–156; definition 164

managing diversity, definition 270, 273 marginalized, definition 290, 301 masculinization of women’s work 92, 99 matriarchal society 297 MCD (Model for Creating Diversity)

42–43 medical model of disability 246 Merkley, Senator Jeff 137 Microaggressions, definition 311, 316;

racial 311–312, 316 middle class, people of color/women 15 military roles, and social class 163 Millennial generation (born 1981–2000):

communication preferences 201–202; definition 194–195, 208;

mind-body dissonance 134

Minnesota’s Black community 11 minorities and immigrant groups 10–11 mixed race parentage 71–72, 109, 117 model, definition 28, 46 Model for Creating Diversity (MCD)

42–43 modern-day racism 72, 73, 75 modernization theory 196, 208–209 mommy track 95–96, 99 monolithic organizations 13–14 moral duty, social injustice 55 moral model of disability 246 Moreau v. Qwest Communications Inc. 146 multicultural model, definition 117 multicultural organizations 14, 43–44 multigenerational workforce 97

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) 9

National Association of Colored Women’s Clubs (NACWC) 296

National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) 125

National Equal Pay Day 88, 89 Native Americans 10, 110, 111, 214;

women leaders 297, 303–304 NCLB (No Child Left Behind Act) 225 New Colossus, The (Lazarus) 110–111 Nixon, President R. 10 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) 225 nondominant discourse 141–142, 144 nooses 75, 256, 265–266 Nordstrom Inc. 59–60

Oakland University 38–42 Obama, Michelle 75, 296 Obama, President B. H. 16, 74–75, 88,

130, 215, 260, 280 Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) 131 occupational classism 161–162 occupational sex segregation 88–90, 91, 99 one-drop rule 72 oppression, social 156–157, 164, 182–184,

308, 312–313, 316 oppression theory 70 organizational culture, definition 49–50,

56 organizational justice 54, 56 organizational leaders, social responsibility

55 Organizational Model of Spirituality

179–180, 180 organizational social culture 51, 56 organizational social justice, definition

54–55, 56, 313, 316

326 Index

organizations: action-oriented 310–314; monolithic 13–14; multicultural 14, 43–44; spiritual-centered 176, 185; types 13–15, 176

Oscars: governing board 282, 283; nominees 283

overt discrimination 98, 129, 144 overt racism 73

pansexual, definition 122, 144 paternity leave 96, 100 people of color, definition 66, 77 personal appearance, definition 230–231 Philadelphia Order 10, 12 philosophical principles: constructionist/

structuralists approaches 67–72, 67, 69; human relations 55; re-conceptualizing/re-visioning diversity 309–310

physical appearance, definition 233 physical attractiveness 233 physical characteristics: bona fide

occupational qualification (BFOQ) 237; diversity dimensions 229; immutable 233–234; race 109

Plessy, Homer 7–8 Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) 7–8 plural organization 14 Polyrhythmic Realities Framework 36–37 Pregnancy Discrimination Act (1978) 87,

237, 238 prejudice: contemporary forms 220–221;

definition 23, 117 privilege, definition 160, 164; heterosexual

128, 143 privileged classes, definition 164;

population analysis 154; salient features 154–155

procedural justice 54 productivity, and linguistic profiling 220

Queen and the Squirrel, The (film) 286–287

queer, reclaimed term 122, 144 quota systems 4

race, definition 65–66, 117; race relations: Black/White binary 262; competencies 263–264

race-neutral models 295 racial categorization 109 racial classification, definition 117 racial discrimination, definition 255, 264 racial formation theory 69 racial harassment, definition 255, 264

racial hate symbols: cross burning 257; definition 264; graffiti 127; historical significance 256–258; nooses 75, 256, 265–266

racial hierarchy 68, 71 racial microaggressions 311–312, 316 racial oppression, definition 256, 265 racial profiling 255–256, 265 racial separation laws 7–10, 11 racial slurs 57–58, 318–319 racialization perspective definition 69–70,

77 racism, definition 23, 265 racist graffiti 317 racist language 57–58, 76, 78, 260 Rainbow/PUSH Coalition 78 Rehabilitation Act (1973) 235, 237, 238,

247, 248, 250 rehabilitation model of disability 246 religion: Culturally Relevant Spirituality

and Learning Model (Tisdell) 178–179, 178; negative attitudes to LGBTQ+ individuals 127–128

religious discrimination 186 religious garb 228, 229, 231, 232 Responsible Leadership for Performance

(RLP) 300 Revised Trends in Mandating, Managing,

and Leveraging Diversity in the Workforce Framework 13, 17, 18–21, 22–23, 45, 53

rights: disability 249; inalienable 313; universality 55, 182

Roots (Haley) 33 Rosie the Riveter 85, 86 ruling class 155

same-sex couples 125–126 San Francisco sit-in 247 Sarah C. Howard School for Girls

239–240 Science, Technology, Engineering, and

Mathematics (STEM) see STEM Scott, C. L. 37, 281–282; and Byrd, M. Y.

29, 30, 299, 302 Scott, W. R. 13, 17–21, 22–23, 45 second-class citizen syndrome 157, 164 segregation: educational institutions 8–9;

laws 7–8, 15, 66; occupational sex 88–90, 91, 99

self, authentic 174, 293 self-identity, ethnic groups 111–112 sex segregation, occupational 88–90, 91,

99 sexism, definition 23

Index 327

sexual behavior continuum 122 sexual harassment 130, 144, 284 sexual identity development 123–124 sexual minorities: activism 299;

appropriate terminology 140; identity development 123–124; leadership roles 298–299, 303; slurs against 318–319

sexual orientation, historical perspectives 15

sexual orientation and transgender issues: career development issues 131–132 disclosure issues 127, 129–130, sexual orientation and transgender issues 146–147transgender issues 133–140

sexually explicit attire 231 situational language 140, 144, 145 skills: communication 114–115, 273,

274–276; emotional 175 skin tone 233, 234 slavery 256 slurs 57–58, 318–319 social activism 16 social change, definition 184, 185 social class, definition 154, 164; social

cliques 159–160 social closure 89, 99 social cognition, definition 291, 301 social experiences: Baby Boomer

generation 207; generational cohorts 191, 192; Millennial generation 198; Veteran generation 197–198

social groups: bias 158; definition 157, 164 social identity 216–217, 289, 290–291, see

also leadership and social identity social identity diversity, definition 290,

301 social injustice, definition 308, 316; moral

duty 55 social justice: activists; definition 184,

185, 311, 316 moral and philosophical principles 312; social justice paradigm 308, 309

social media 75, 222–223 social networking 51, 158, 159–160 social oppression 156–157, 164, 182–184,

308, 312–313, 316 social role theory 82 social stratification 51, 154, 164 socially disadvantaged, definition 181, 185 socially marginalized, definition 307, 317 socially stigmatized, definition 307, 317 sociocultural, definition 181, 185, 299,

301 sole-male-earner model 93 Souls of Black Folks, The (Du Bois) 258

spiritual intelligence 175 spiritual workplace 181, 185 spiritual-centered organizations 176, 185 spirituality, definition 173–174, 185;

Standard English 217, 222 status, definition 155, 164; STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering,

and Mathematics), definition 278, 285; female and minority undergraduates 280; lack of diversity 279–280; strategies to address under- representation 281–282

stereotyping: accents and dialects 218–219; Black women 295–296; definition 23, 117; ethnic groups 112, 115–116; fancy dress party 166–167; gender 82, 83, 99; ideal workers 97; intergenerational tensions 206; LGBTQ+ individuals 132, 145; Mexican 166–167; occupational 139; and racism 16–17, 255

stigmatization see personal/physical appearance stigmatizing

stigmatize, definition 230, 238 structural theory, definition 77

technological implications, linguistic profiling 222–223

technology, and disability 248–249 TGNC (transgender and gender

non-conforming) individuals: antidiscrimination policies 136–137; Competencies for Counseling Transgender Clients 139–140; identity development 134–136; theories, definition 28, 46

theories, models, and frameworks: Critical Racism Pedagogy Model 29; critical- thinking application 46; Diverse Voices Conference 37–42, 40, 41; diversity intelligence (DQ) 34–36, 35; Embedded Intergroup Relations Theory (EIRT) 44–45; Model for Creating Diversity (MCD) 42–43; multicultural organization framework 43–44; racism and critical theory 30–32

Thirteenth Amendment 8, 23 Tisdell, E. 178; Culturally Relevant

Spirituality and Learning Model 178–179, 178

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (1964): gender discrimination 85–87, 100, 289; hairstyles 232; language discrimination 318; linguistic profiling 225; prejudicial

328 Index

behaviors 312; President L. B. Johnson 9, 11; protected classes 34, 55, 238; race, color, national origin 231–232, 234–236; religious accommodations 179; religious discrimination 186, 232; violations settled by EEOC (2012–2015) 261;

tokenism 91 tolerance, definition 144 transgender: adolescents 134; definition

133, 144, see also sexual orientation and transgender issues

transgender and gender non-conforming (TGNC) individuals see TGNC

Transsexual and Transgender Identity Formation Model 134–135

Troiden’s Homosexuality Identity Development Model 124, 144

Trump, President D. 130

under-representation of diversity in the workforce, definition 285

under-representation in scientific, technical and film workforce: acting roles 286–287; film workforce 282–284; lack of diversity 279–280; strategies to address under- representation 281–282

United States (U.S.): Armed Services 128, 129–130; Census Report (2017) 88, 90, 125; Department of Labor, population survey (2012) 245; Supreme Court 9

values, definition 199–200, 209 Veteran generation (born 1921–1940),

definition 193, 209

wage gap: gender 87, 88, 98, 99; race 258; sexual minorities 126–127, 132, 143, 144

weightism 234, 236 White Americans 110, 112 White privilege 295 White supremacist group 256–257 Whiteness: study 70–71; Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation

Law and Public Policy 128 women’s suffrage 11 work-life balance, definition 93, 100;

Workforce 2000 (Johnston and Packer) 6 workforce, age demographic 191 workforce diversity, definition 4–5, 23–24;

frameworks 13 workforce social justice council (WSJC)

315, 317 working military class 163, 165 workplace accommodation, disabled

persons 247, 249, 251–252 workplace culture, discriminatory 54 work–family balance 93–94, see also

work–life balance World Health Organization (WHO),

disability definition 245 World Professional Association of

Transgender Health (WPATH) 138 WSJC (workforce social justice council)

315, 317