EC

Praise for Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

“Experts provide clear guidance on how to design and implement initiatives that will truly connect and engage diverse individuals in the workplace.” Ann Marie Ryan, Ph.D., professor, Michigan State University and past president, SIOP

“A must read for leaders who want to understand both the academic background and practical D&I approaches to driving systemic change.” Candi Castleberry-Singleton, Chief Inclusion and Diversity Officer, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center

“Comprehensive and data informed, yet personal and practical, this is a must-read book for those interested in both the science and practice of diversity and inclusion in the workplace. Perfect to jump start a discussion with the managers in your organization or for teaching a class to the managers of the future!” Ana Mari Cauce, Ph.D., provost and professor, University of Washington

“Brilliant! The editors and contributors deliver penetrating insight into today’s meaning of diversity and inclusion.” Manny Gonzalez, CEO, National Society of Hispanic MBAs

“This book succeeds not just in combining theory with practice but also in bringing together a variety of different approaches and disciplines. The writers are the best in the field and they refresh our knowledge whilst challenging our thinking.” Binna Kandola, Ph.D., OBE, senior partner, PearnKandola, and former chair, Division of Occupational Psychology, British Psychological Society

“This impressive volume fills an important gap in the diversity and inclusion literature by bringing together research and practice. The contributors—from both academia and practice—have the depth of experience, insight, and credibility that make this volume especially valuable for both audiences.” Nancy DiTomaso, Ph.D., vice dean, Rutgers Business School; author, The American Non-Dilemma: Racial Inequality without Racism

The Professional Practice Series The Professional Practice Series is sponsored by The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc. (SIOP). The series was launched in 1988 to provide industrial and organizational psychologists, organizational scientists and practitioners, human resources professionals, managers, executives, and those inter- ested in organizational behavior and performance with volumes that are insightful, current, informative, and relevant to organiza- tional practice. The volumes in the Professional Practice Series are guided by five tenets designed to enhance future organizational practice:

1. Focus on practice, but grounded in science 2. Translate organizational science into practice by generating

guidelines, principles, and lessons learned that can shape and guide practice

3. Showcase the application of industrial and organizational psy- chology to solve problems

4. Document and demonstrate best industrial and organizational- based practices

5. Stimulate research needed to guide future organizational practice

The volumes seek to inform those interested in practice with guidance, insights, and advice on how to apply the concepts, findings, methods, and tools derived from industrial and orga- nizational psychology to solve human-related organizational problems.

Previous Professional Practice Series volumes include:

Published by Jossey-Bass

Developing and Enhancing Teamwork in Organizations: Evidence-Based Best Practices and Guidelines Eduardo Salas, Scott I. Tannenbaum, Debra J. Cohen, Gary Latham, Editors

Managing Human Resources for Environmental Sustainability Susan E. Jackson, Deniz S. Ones, Stephan Dilchert, Editors

Technology-Enhanced Assessment of Talent Nancy T. Tippins, Seymour Adler, Editors

Advancing Executive Coaching: Setting the Course for Successful Leadership Coaching Gina Hernez-Broom, Lisa A. Boyce, Editors

Going Global: Practical Applications and Recommendations for HR and OD Professionals in the Global Workplace Kyle Lundby with Jeffrey Jolton

Strategy-Driven Talent Management: A Leadership Imperative Rob Silzer, Ben E. Dowell, Editors

Performance Management: Putting Research into Practice James W. Smither, Manuel London, Editors

Alternative Validation Strategies: Developing New and Leveraging Existing Validity Evidence S. Morton McPhail, Editor

Getting Action from Organizational Surveys: New Concepts, Technologies, and Applications Allen I. Kraut, Editor

Customer Service Delivery Lawrence Fogli, Editor

Employment Discrimination Litigation Frank J. Landy, Editor

The Brave New World of eHR Hal G. Gueutal, Dianna L. Stone, Editors

Improving Learning Transfer in Organizations Elwood F. Holton III, Timothy T. Baldwin, Editors

Resizing the Organization Kenneth P. De Meuse, Mitchell Lee Marks, Editors

Implementing Organizational Interventions Jerry W. Hedge, Elaine D. Pulakos, Editors

Organization Development Janine Waclawski, Allan H. Church, Editors

Creating, Implementing, and Managing Effective Training and Development Kurt Kraiger, Editor

The 21st Century Executive: Innovative Practices for Building Leadership at the Top Rob Silzer, Editor

Managng Selection in Changing Organizations Jerard F. Kehoe, Editor

Emlving Practices in Human Resource Management Allen I. Kraut, Abraham K. Korman, Editors

Individual Psychological Assessment: Predicting Behavior in Organizational Settings Richard Jeanneret, Rob Silzer, Editors

Performance Appraisal James W. Smither, Editor

Organizational Surveys Allen I. Kraut, Editor

Employees, Careers, and Job Creating Manuel London, Editor

Published by Guilford Press

Diagnosis for Organizational Change Ann Howard and Associates

Human Dilemmas in Work Organizations Abraham K. Korman and Associates

Diversity in the Workplace Susan E. Jackson and Associates

Working with Organizations and Their People Douglas W. Bray and Associates

The Professional Practice Series

SERIES EDITORS Allan H. Church

PepsiCo Inc.

Janine Waclawski Pepsi-Cola North America

EDITORIAL BOARD Dave W. Bracken

Kenexa

Bernardo M. Ferdman Alliant International University

Michael M. Harris University of Missouri, St. Louis

Allen I. Kraut Baruch College

Jennifer Martineau Center for Creative Leadership

Steven G. Rogelberg University of North Carolina, Charlotte

John C. Scott Applied Psychological Techniques, Inc.

Carol W. Timmreck The Timmreck Group

Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion Bernardo M. Ferdman, Editor

Barbara R. Deane, Associate Editor

Cover design: Wiley Cover image: photos courtesy of Bernardo Ferdman

Copyright © 2014 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Published by Jossey-Bass A Wiley Brand One Montgomery Street, Suite 1200, San Francisco, CA 94104-4594—www.josseybass.com

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400, fax 978-646-8600, or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, 201-748-6011, fax 201-748-6008, or online at http://www .wiley.com/go/permissions.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. Readers should be aware that Internet websites offered as citations and/or sources for further information may have changed or disappeared between the time this was written and when it is read.

For additional copies/bulk purchases of this book in the U.S. please contact 800–274–4434.

Wiley books and products are available through most bookstores. To contact Wiley directly call our Customer Care Department within the U.S. at 800-274-4434, outside the U.S. at 317-572-3985, fax 317-572-4002, or visit www.wiley.com

Wiley publishes in a variety of print and electronic formats and by print-on-demand. Some material included with standard print versions of this book may not be included in e-books or in print-on- demand. If this book refers to media such as a CD or DVD that is not included in the version you purchased, you may download this material at http://booksupport.wiley.com. For more information about Wiley products, visit www.wiley.com.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Diversity at work: the practice of inclusion / Bernardo M. Ferdman, editor, & Barbara R. Deane, associate editor. 1 online resource. – (The professional practice series) Includes index. Description based on print version record and CIP data provided by publisher; resource not viewed. ISBN 978-1-118-41782-9 (pdf) – ISBN 978-1-118-41515-3 (epub) – ISBN 978-0-470-40133-0 (cloth) 1. Diversity in the workplace. 2. Corporate culture. I. Ferdman, Bernardo M. II. Deane, Barbara. HF5549.5.M5 658.3008–dc23 2013027688

Printed in the United States of America

HB Printing 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

ix

Contents

List of Tables, Figures, and Exhibits xiii Foreword xvii

Allan H. Church and Janine Waclawski

Preface and Acknowledgments xxi Bernardo M. Ferdman and Barbara R. Deane

The Editors xxxiii The Authors xxxv

Part One: Frameworks for Understanding Inclusion 1

1 The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations: Toward a Systemic and Inclusive Framework 3 Bernardo M. Ferdman

2 Communicating About Diversity and Inclusion 55 V. Robert Hayles

Part Two: Individual and Interpersonal Perspectives and Practices 91

3 Creating Inclusion for Oneself: Knowing, Accepting, and Expressing One’s Whole Self at Work 93 Bernardo M. Ferdman and Laura Morgan Roberts

4 Strengthening Interpersonal Awareness and Fostering Relational Eloquence 128 Ilene C. Wasserman

5 Intercultural Competence: Vital Perspectives for Diversity and Inclusion 155 Janet M. Bennett

x Contents

6 The Work of Inclusive Leadership: Fostering Authentic Relationships, Modeling Courage and Humility 177 Plácida V. Gallegos

Part Three: Organizational and Societal Perspectives and Practices 203

7 From Diversity to Inclusion: An Inclusion Equation 205 Mary-Frances Winters

8 Inclusive Human Resource Management: Best Practices and the Changing Role of Human Resources 229 Lynn R. Offermann and Tessa E. Basford

9 Inclusive Organization Development: An Integration of Two Disciplines 260 Allan H. Church, Christopher T. Rotolo,

Amanda C. Shull, and Michael D. Tuller

10 The Development of Inclusive Leadership Practice and Processes 296 Lize Booysen

11 Creating Inclusive Climates in Diverse Organizations 330 Lisa H. Nishii and Robert E. Rich

12 Models of Global Diversity Management 364 Karsten Jonsen and Mustafa Özbilgin

13 Fostering Inclusion from the Inside Out to Create an Inclusive Workplace: Corporate and Organizational Efforts in the Community and the Global Society 391 Michàlle E. Mor Barak and Preeya Daya

Part Four: Key Application Issues and Domains 413

14 Global Benchmarks for Diversity and Inclusion 415 Julie O’Mara

Contents xi

15 The Chief Diversity Officer’s View of the Diversity and Inclusion Journey at Weyerhaeuser 431 Effenus Henderson

16 Creating Diverse and Inclusive Colleges and Universities 451 Kumea Shorter-Gooden

17 Fostering Inclusion from the Outside In: Engaging Diverse Citizens in Dialogue and Decision Making 482 Carolyn J. Lukensmeyer, Margaret Yao, and Theo Brown

18 Building a Culture of Inclusion: The Case of UNAIDS 506 Alan Richter

19 Inclusion at Societal Fault Lines: Aboriginal Peoples of Australia 520 Charmine E. J. Härtel, Dennis Appo, and Bill Hart

Part Five: Moving Forward 547

20 Inclusion as a Transformational Diversity and Business Strategy 549 Michael L. Wheeler

21 An I/O Psychologist’s Perspective on Diversity and Inclusion in the Workplace 564 Angelo S. DeNisi

22 Inclusion: Old Wine in New Bottles? 580 Stella M. Nkomo

23 Practicing Inclusion: Looking Back and Looking Ahead 593 Bernardo M. Ferdman and Barbara R. Deane

Name Index 601 Subject Index 613

xiii

List of Tables, Figures, and Exhibits

Tables 1.1 Concepts of Inclusion 22 1.2 Elements of the Experience of Inclusion 37 1.3 Inclusive Behaviors for Everyone and for Leaders;

Inclusive Organizational Policies and Practices 42 6.1 Behavioral Manifestations of Inclusive Leadership 192 9.1 A Sample of Diversity and Inclusion Items Used in

PepsiCo’s Organizational Health Survey from 2002 to Present 270

9.2 “Creating an Inclusive Culture” Items from PepsiCo’s Leadership and Individual Effectiveness Model, by Level 277

10.1 Differences Between Traditional Entity-Based and Inclusive Relational-Based Leadership 304

11.1 Steps Involved in the Change Process 346 12.1 Three Strategies of GDM 368 13.1 A Three-Stage Continuum of Practices: From

Corporate Philanthropy Through Corporate Social Responsibility to Value-Based Inclusion 398

13.2 A Framework Linking Corporate Inclusion Strategy and the Inclusive Workplace Model 400

14.1 Levels of Progress Toward Diversity and Inclusion Goals 423

14.2 Sample Benchmarks in Various Categories 425 15.1 Weyerhaeuser’s Strategic Diversity Framework 437 15.2 Focus Areas for Inclusive Leaders 448 16.1 Four Components of Diversity and Inclusion in

Universities 456

xiv List of Tables, Figures, and Exhibits

16.2 Alliant International University’s Multicultural/ International Competencies 459

18.1 Global Diversity Survey Matrix 509 19.1 Barriers to Aboriginal Contractor Engagement and

Potential RTIO Solutions 530 19.2 Key Performance Indicators 536

Figures 1.1 Inclusion as a Systemic and Dynamic Process 15 1.2 Systems of Inclusion: A Multilevel

Analytic Framework 17 1.3 Organizational-Level Inclusion Assessment Matrix 44 3.1 Exploring the Sources of Our Identity 106 4.1 My Social Group Affiliations Influencing

This Chapter 132 4.2 Daisies in Relationship 133 4.3 Susan and Rosa 134 4.4 Hierarchy Model: Susan and Rosa 142 5.1 Developmental Model of Intercultural

Sensitivity (DMIS) 165 7.1 The Inclusion Equation 210 8.1 Marriott’s Holistic Culture Wheel 238 10.1 A Leadership Development System of

Inclusion Model 311 10.2 A Process Model for Inclusive

Leadership Development 313 11.1 Action Planning Template 353 11.2 From . . . To . . . Because: Action Planning Template 354 11.3 The Logic Model 355 11.4 The Measurement Grid 356 11.5 The Change Process: Toward Inclusion 357 12.1 A Model for Organizational Perspectives of

Diversity as a Potential Strategic Issue 367 12.2 A Process Model of GDM 371 12.3 A Contextual Model of GDM 372 12.4 GDM Activities in Organizational Change 375 12.5 Shell’s Global D&I 377 12.6 The Diversity and Inclusion House 379

List of Tables, Figures, and Exhibits xv

12.7 Reality Versus Rhetoric: Diversity 381 12.8 Reality Versus Rhetoric: Consistency Path 382 14.1 GDIB Model 421 19.1 Aboriginal Contractor Engagement 533 19.2 Aboriginal Contractor Engagement: Revised Process 537 19.3 Benchmarking to Identify Viable Business Solutions 538

Exhibits 1.1 Questions to Generate and Co-Construct

Descriptions of Inclusive Behavior and Inclusive Organizational Practices 35

3.1 Sharing Experiences of Inclusion and Success 112 7.1 Bendick and Egan Study Findings of Key

Success Factors 208 7.2 Developing Inclusive Behaviors 212 7.3 Sample Items to Assess Inclusion 220 7.4 Steps in the Personal Diversity Journey 225 8.1 Diversity and Inclusion Best Practices 239 9.1 Sample Items from the 2001 Diversity and

Inclusion Survey at PepsiCo 268 14.1 Benchmarks at 100 Percent for Category 7:

Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) Training and Education 424

16.1 Diversity-Related Student Learning Outcomes in Alliant’s Clinical Ph.D. Program, Fresno Campus 468

xvii

Foreword

From our perspective, diversity and inclusion (D&I) represent some of the core values of the fields of I-O psychology and orga- nization development (OD). As a result, as scientist-practitioners we have a dual responsibility both to dimensionalize and research these constructs to continue to build our understanding of them, and to assist others in driving these values deep into the business and people strategies of the organizations in which we work and consult. Given the ubiquity of the war for talent, with its increas- ing emphasis on shifting demographics and generational differ- ences in the workplace and on concepts such as global thinking, learning agility, and cultural dexterity, it is no wonder that D&I have become the epicenter of the talent management agenda of many prominent and forward-thinking organizations today.

That said, if D&I are indeed at the center of talent manage- ment and at the forefront of many corporate sustainability efforts, where then are the explicit linkages to the fields of I-O, OD, and human resource management (HRM)? This was the question we asked ourselves several years ago during one of our annual Profes- sional Practice Series Editorial Board planning meetings at the annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organiza- tional Psychology (SIOP). After years of having experienced D&I efforts at PepsiCo as being at the core of our HR agenda, we wondered why they were not more fully integrated with the fields of I-O, OD, and HR in general. As we discussed with Bernardo Ferdman (who was one of our board members at the time), there was little in the literature directly linking the different fields of practice, aside from some key early efforts such as the original volume by Susan Jackson and Associates in the early 1990s, even though many of the philosophical underpinnings and workplace practices of D&I overlap and have a shared heritage with I-O and OD efforts. Despite some more recent targeted efforts in the field

xviii Foreword

to create these connections (for example, see recent focal articles in the Industrial-Organizational Psychologist: Perspectives on Science and Practice), there remains no single definitive source that effec- tively integrates D&I efforts with the fields of I-O, OD, and HRM. That is, until now.

This volume you hold in your hands, Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion, represents a needed comprehensive and holis- tic approach to bridging the gap in the literature between these different but related fields. Bernardo Ferdman and his coeditor, Barbara Deane, have moved the needle forward with this addition to the Professional Practice Series by incorporating perspectives from both academics and practitioners across multiple disciplines to focus not just on the concepts of D&I (recognizing both old and new dimensions), but also on the actual application or prac- tice of inclusion in the workplace. In many ways it represents the next step in the combined evolution of D&I and I-O.

Starting with the introduction of new frameworks for concep- tualizing inclusion (that is, going beyond diversity alone, which is a notion that some organizations continue to struggle with), we are then presented with a range of different individual and organizational perspectives or lenses on the practice of inclusion as integrated specifically with key areas of I-O as well as other related disciplines in psychology and business. Some of the topics here focus on inclusion as applied to personal identity, commu- nication, leadership, organizational culture, human resource management, organization development, work group climate, and corporate strategy. The volume then includes a discussion of some important aspects of practice in the world of D&I, such as benchmarking D&I efforts across different organizations, future trends in the field, and insightful case studies from a variety of chief diversity officers and practitioners.

As with any effort of this magnitude, it is important to recog- nize all the work that has gone into the development and execution of this edition. A heartfelt thank-you to Bernardo and Barbara for delivering an excellent volume in the series. Thanks also to our editorial team (Dave W. Bracken, Michael M. Harris, Allen I. Kraut, Jennifer Martineau, Steven G. Rogelberg, John C. Scott, Carol W. Timmreck, and of course Bernardo M. Ferdman) for their original feedback on Bernardo’s proposal. Thanks as well to

Foreword xix

our successor, Allen Kraut, and his editorial team (Seymour Adler, Neil R. Anderson, Neal M. Ashkanasy, C. Harry Hui, Elizabeth B. Kolmstetter, Kyle Lundby, William H. Macey, Lise M. Saari, Handan Sinangil, Nancy T. Tippins, and Michael A. West) for keeping the momentum going during their tenure with the series. Finally, thanks to Matt Davis at Jossey-Bass for helping keep the process on track, as always.

D&I is a critically important topic to organizations in general and a core value of I-O and OD in particular. In our opinion, it has not yet been given the full attention or level of integration it deserves in the I-O arena. This important volume serves to close that gap. Although it has been some years in the making, the topic is as significant and timely as it ever was, and we are very pleased to see it finally completed. We enjoyed working with Bernardo in the early formation of the book concept and outline and watching it continue to develop all the way through the various phases of the effort. In many ways it is ironic that this volume represents our last as Professional Practice Series Editors and Allen Kraut’s final volume, as we all feel like we have been actively involved, invested, and engaged in the outcome. And isn’t that what being inclusive is all about? Enjoy!

September 2013 Allan H. Church Janine Waclawski

Original series editors for this volume

xxi

Preface Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion Bernardo M. Ferdman and Barbara R. Deane

Much has been said and written—especially in recent years— about diversity at work. The idea that people vary on a range of identity and cultural dimensions and that this diversity matters for organizations and society is now widely accepted and dis- cussed, not only in industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology, in human resources, in management, and in related fields, but also in the world at large.

We have learned a great deal about the role of diversity in organizations and about the interactions in the workplace among individuals and groups with different social identities and back- grounds; increasing scholarly and practical effort has been applied to describing the dynamics of these relationships and to docu- menting ways to manage them productively. In part, this is because intergroup relations often can be problematic; indeed, much diversity scholarship and practice has focused on the problems associated with diversity and on ways to avoid or surmount them. This has been important and generative work. In today’s and tomorrow’s societies and workplaces, it is imperative to reduce and prevent invidious bias and discrimination, to eliminate nega- tive conflicts, to avoid waste, to increase fairness, and to take better advantage of all possible resources, in ways that ideally result in creativity, innovation, and better outcomes for more people, for their organizations, and for society as a whole.

Yet, working with and managing diversity in ways that are productive, healthy, growthful, and empowering—for both

xxii Preface

individuals and organizations—often remains an elusive goal. How can groups and organizations best use and benefit from the diversity that is inevitably present in and around them? What can individuals, leaders, and organizations do to work with diversity not simply as a reality that must be addressed, but rather as an opportunity and a gift? How might diversity truly be put to work on our individual and collective behalf? What can individuals, leaders, and organizations do to make this happen?

In this book, we present a fresh perspective and approach to understand and benefit from diversity. We focus on inclusion—and specifically the practice of inclusion—as a fundamental approach for benefitting from diversity, in a way that works for everyone, across multiple dimensions of difference. Inclusion involves creating, fostering, and sustaining practices and conditions that encourage and allow each of us to be fully ourselves—with our differences from and similarities to those around us—as we work together. To be inclusive, these practices and conditions should also permit and elicit everyone’s full contributions to the collective (Ferdman, 2010; Ferdman & Sagiv, 2012), in a virtuous cycle that is beneficial both for individuals and the larger groups and/or organizations to which they belong (as well for their various social identity groups). The practice of inclusion is what individuals, leaders, and organizations do to bring this experience and process to life. Essentially, our claim, as documented and supported throughout this book, is that the practice of inclusion permits applying the collective wisdom regarding diversity—developed through theory, research, application, and experience—and does so in a way that focuses on recognizing and realizing the positive contributions of diversity. Rather than assuming diversity is a problem to be solved, practitioners of inclusion assume that it is a rich resource to be tapped and enjoyed.

This view is in evidence today to some degree—as seen, for example, in the typical pairing of the terms diversity and inclusion, as in Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer, or Office of Diversity and Inclusion. But it is a perspective that evolved over time, as the field developed, and it is in many ways still in its infancy. In 1992, SIOP published Diversity in the Workplace: Human Resources Initia- tives, by Susan Jackson and Associates, as the second volume of its then newly launched Professional Practice Series, in which this

Preface xxiii

current volume now takes its place. Jackson’s book exemplified the goal of the series, which is to provide practitioners in organiza- tions—particularly I-O psychologists, HR professionals, managers, executives, and others who address human behavior at work—with resources, insights, information, and guidance on how to address key organizational issues by applying the best of what organiza- tional psychology has to offer. Diversity in the Workplace combined the voices of scholars and practitioners to document effective ways to conceptualize and address the challenges of diversity. Along with other work emerging at the time (for example, Cox, 1993; Cross, Katz, Miller, & Seashore, 1994; Ferdman, 1992, 1994; Fer- nandez, 1991; Jamieson & O’Mara, 1991; Loden & Rosener, 1991; Morrison, 1992; Thiederman, 1990; Thomas, 1990; Thompson & DiTomaso, 1998; Triandis, Kurowski, & Gelfand, 1994) produced by both academics and practitioners, Jackson’s book provided some theory and structure, grounded in psychology and related fields, for the emerging field of diversity in organizations. From an initial focus on addressing historical inequities, targeting oppression, and bringing the promise of civil rights to the work- place—with a primary emphasis on gender, race, ethnicity, and sometimes cultural and national origin, and combined with the goal of preparing for demographic shifts in the workforce and increasing globalization—the field developed to incorporate attention to reaping the potential business benefits of diversity of various types, both visible and invisible, including sexual orienta- tion, ability status, age, social class, religion, life experience, and a myriad of other dimensions.

More than twenty years after Jackson’s (1992) book, knowl- edge about both the role and dynamics of diversity in organiza- tions and the practice of diversity management has dramatically developed and expanded. Many of the challenges posed by Jackson and her collaborators remain, but they are no longer seen as unusual or new—they have become part of the “normal” work of organizations. For example, recruitment, retention, and assess- ment that account for diversity are now focal topics in I-O psychol- ogy and human resource management, thanks in part to the efforts of pioneers such as Jackson and the contributors to her volume. At the same time, attention to diversity has become a global phenomenon, and the dimensions of diversity that matter

xxiv Preface

have expanded and become more complex and nuanced. With globalization, new forms of exchange and collaboration have pro- liferated across cultural boundaries of all sorts. I-O psychologists and diversity practitioners are often asked to help global organiza- tions navigate, in both broad and systematic ways, through the tensions associated with difference. Beyond addressing these ten- sions, professionals find themselves supporting organizations in a time of shrinking resources and great competition and must seek proactive ways to ensure that all people’s contributions can be used effectively and wisely for the benefit of the organization and its many stakeholders.

Given these trends, and in line with work grounded in what has become known as positive organizational scholarship and with new insights on multiple identities and their intersections across a range of dimensions of diversity, the concept and practice of inclusion provide a frame to permit addressing the dynamics of diversity in more complex, expansive, and productive ways. Through an inclusion lens, we can continue to incorporate our prior insights regarding diversity and also highlight the practices needed so that individuals, groups, and organizations can truly benefit from that diversity. Through an inclusion lens, we can attend to the complexity of individual experience and identity, without losing sight of intergroup relations, intercultural dynam- ics, and systemic processes and structures.

Today, then, the cutting edge of diversity practice for organi- zations addresses the challenge of inclusion—the degree to which organizations and their members are able to fully connect with, engage, and utilize people across all types of differences. Diversity can provide advantages only when it is combined with fundamen- tal changes in individual behaviors and attitudes, group norms and approaches, and organizational policies, procedures, and practices that result in people feeling appreciated, valued, safe, respected, listened to, and engaged—both as individuals and as members of multiple social identity groups. This is the work of inclusion, which is both theoretically and practically different from diversity. Inclusion is a key driver and basis for reaping diversity’s potential benefits.

Nevertheless, theory and practice have not kept pace with the needs of organizations to attend to diversity and its implications,

Preface xxv

particularly in regard to inclusion, in spite of the growing use of the term. I-O psychologists, human resource professionals, man- agers and executives, and related practitioners need clearer guid- ance regarding best practices for inclusion. This book provides practitioners with an understanding of and a way to navigate the new challenges posed by the need for inclusion amidst diversity, a challenge that has yet to be taken up in a systematic way by the bulk of I-O psychologists, or with any consensual definition or approach by the bulk of practitioners. The book’s key premise is that inclusion is a core element for leveraging the advantages of diversity at the individual, interpersonal, group, organizational, and societal levels. To elaborate on this premise, we provide a state-of-the-art perspective on inclusion and its practice: what it is and how it is manifested in individual and collective behavior and in organizational practices (Chapter 1), how it can be created and fostered (Chapters 2 through 13), how it can be applied in a variety of settings (Chapters 14 through 19), and what this means for the future of the field (Chapters 20 through 23).

This volume is unique for practitioners because it provides an applied focus while emphasizing the lens and grounding provided by research and theory in industrial and organizational psychology and related fields. It contains a reliable compendium of informa- tion and experiences on the practice of inclusion from topic experts, including internal and external change agents and aca- demics. By including and combining the perspectives of both scholars and practitioners, the book not only provides a bridge between I-O psychology and related fields to the practice of inclu- sion in organizations but also exposes both sets of professionals to each other’s thinking and work. In putting this volume together, we sought to exemplify the value and practice of inclusion, in particu- lar by incorporating a range and variety of voices, approaches, and styles. The thirty-four authors of the book’s twenty-three chapters represent not only I/O psychology but also other areas of psychol- ogy as well as various other fields, including management, leader- ship, intercultural communication, social work, and public policy. The authors live, work, or have extensive experience in over ten countries and span a range of identities on various dimensions.

Our illumination of inclusion is consistent with the growing emphasis on positive organizational scholarship and practice.

xxvi Preface

A focus on eliminating invidious forms of discrimination, while important, is insufficient. There is growing recognition by scholars and practitioners that great benefits can be derived for organiza- tions and their members by focusing on excellence, strengths, and vitality. Attending to and practicing inclusion permits organiza- tions and their members to proactively replace discrimination with a much more positive and productive approach that can serve to release potential and result in more optimal outcomes for all.

Audience This book is intended for a broad range of readers. Seasoned practitioners seeking a textured and well-founded compendium of cutting-edge approaches grounded in theory, research, and experience, as well as novices seeking to understand what diversity and inclusion at work are all about, together with everyone in between, will find a great deal of relevant and useful knowledge in these pages. For example, professionals (whether internal or external to an organization) who must plan, design, and/or implement an inclusion initiative or who want to learn more about such initiatives will find this book indispensable. Addition- ally, this book will be useful to managers and executives as they work to define and carry out strategic initiatives related to diver- sity and inclusion.

Thus industrial-organizational and consulting psychologists, HR professionals, organization development (OD) practitioners, management consultants, training professionals, and diversity and inclusion leaders, practitioners, and consultants will all benefit from the range of material presented in the book’s chap- ters. Organizational leaders and practitioners, whether specializ- ing in diversity and inclusion or not, will be able to find a great deal of useful information and applicable suggestions. Finally, instructors and graduate students in I-O and consulting psychol- ogy, HR, OD, organizational behavior, management, business administration, public administration, and social work are also an intended audience for the book, which can be used as a text for courses focused on diversity or as a supplementary text for courses on organizational behavior, organization development, human resource management, and related courses.

Preface xxvii

Overview of the Book

This volume addresses the key issues in framing, designing, and implementing inclusion initiatives in organizations and in devel- oping individual and collective competencies for inclusion, with the goal of fully benefiting from diversity. The chapters are grouped into five major parts, covering foundational frameworks, individual and interpersonal perspectives and practices, organiza- tional and societal perspectives and practices, applications, and integrative reflections and commentaries.

Part One, “Frameworks for Understanding Inclusion,” intro- duces the concept of inclusion and effective ways to communicate about it in organizations. In Chapter 1, Bernardo Ferdman tackles defining inclusion and explains how it connects to diversity, yet differs from it; he also develops a multilevel systemic framework for inclusion that links the psychological experience of inclusion to interpersonal, group, organizational, and societal practices, norms, and values. In Chapter 2, Robert Hayles provides another essential framework: how to communicate about diversity and inclusion so that a broad audience sees their benefits, using a developmental model that encourages a strategic and tailored approach to communicating about inclusion.

Part Two, “Individual and Interpersonal Perspectives and Practices,” addresses the work that individuals, including leaders, must do to foster inclusion for themselves and others. In Chapter 3, Bernardo Ferdman and Laura Morgan Roberts explore how individuals can include themselves, especially their multiple iden- tities, and how they can bring more of their whole selves to work. In Chapter 4, Ilene Wasserman moves into the interpersonal realm and argues that effective and inclusive communication involves a relational responsibility to create shared meaning. She explores new competencies and processes to minimize destructive conflict and to leverage diversity so that it is mutually beneficial. In Chapter 5, Janet Bennett continues in the interpersonal realm with the concept of intercultural competence. Pointing to cogni- tive, affective, and behavioral skills and characteristics, Bennett contends that this competence not only supports effective interac- tion in a variety of cultural contexts but also can be developed to enhance inclusion. Her chapter exposes readers to the field of

xxviii Preface

intercultural communication, a body of knowledge and practice quite relevant to diversity and inclusion. In the final chapter of Part Two, Chapter 6, Plácida Gallegos calls for a new type of lead- ership—inclusive leadership—which she describes as a relational approach that fosters authentic relationships and models courage and humility. This chapter serves as a bridge to Part Three, because inclusive leadership is a key component for translating inclusion across levels of analysis.

The seven chapters of Part Three, “Organizational and Soci- etal Perspectives and Practices,” explore a range of approaches that organizations can use to practice inclusion systematically and systemically. In Chapter 7, Mary-Frances Winters introduces a model (the inclusion equation) that depicts four interrelated variables for creating and sustaining inclusive organizational cul- tures. In Chapter 8, Lynn Offermann and Tessa Basford address inclusive HR management and show how successful organizations advance inclusion in a variety of ways, in the process changing how they manage and develop their people. In Chapter 9, a team of authors from PepsiCo—Allan Church, Christopher Rotolo, Amanda Shull, and Michael Tuller—delve into inclusive organiza- tion development by focusing on four OD processes: organiza- tional and employee surveys, 360-degree feedback, performance management, and talent management. Each process is explored with extensive examples of how it was addressed at PepsiCo. In Chapter 10, Lize Booysen describes how to develop leaders to foster inclusive behavior and practice, and she explains how lead- ership development can be done more inclusively. In Chapter 11, Lisa Nishii, from an academic background, and Robert Rich, from a practitioner background, share their conceptualization of inclu- sive climates and provide details on how to design change efforts to foster such inclusive work climates. In Chapter 12, Karsten Jonsen and Mustafa Özbilgin describe various models for global diversity management based on evidence from a number of field studies of practitioners. The final chapter in Part Three, Chapter 13, by Michàlle Mor Barak and Preeya Daya, examines how, using what the authors call corporate inclusion strategies, organizations can and should go well beyond corporate social responsibility to extend inclusion to their surrounding communities and societies.

Preface xxix

Part Four, “Key Application Issues and Domains,” incorpo- rates six chapters; each addresses the practice of inclusion in a particular context or provides a key application tool or perspec- tive. In Chapter 14, Julie O’Mara describes a very useful frame- work and tool she co-developed, the Global Diversity and Inclusion Benchmarks, which organizations can use to determine the level of inclusive best practices they are using. In Chapter 15, Effenus Henderson, chief diversity officer at Weyerhaeuser, explains the details of his company’s multiyear strategy to build a more diverse and inclusive culture, as well as its inclusive leadership training program. In Chapter 16, Kumea Shorter-Gooden, now chief diver- sity officer at the University of Maryland, addresses the goals and key components necessary to create diverse and inclusive higher educational settings, and shares examples from her experience in her previous role as the chief diversity officer of Alliant Interna- tional University. In Chapter 17, Carolyn Lukensmeyer, Margaret Yao, and Theo Brown describe how AmericaSpeaks, a leading organization in the deliberative democracy movement, practices inclusion in all aspects of its efforts to engage diverse citizens in dialogue and decision-making about complex issues that affect them at local, state, and national levels. Alan Richter, in Chapter 18, examines how a global organization, UNAIDS, has worked to build a culture of inclusion in its workplace and in the societies where they operate. Finally, in Chapter 19, Charmine Härtel, Dennis Appo, and Bill Hart, authors representing diverse experi- ences, share a case study of how Rio Tinto pioneered a new orga- nizational approach to include aboriginal contractors, both socially and economically, in the Pilbara region of Australia.

In Part Five, “Moving Forward,” the book concludes with four chapters that provide overall reflections on the practice of inclu- sion, each from a different perspective. In Chapters 20, 21, and 22, key thought leaders—Michael Wheeler, a well-regarded cor- porate diversity officer and practitioner; Angelo DeNisi, a promi- nent I-O psychologist; and Stella Nkomo, a noted diversity scholar—reflect on the value of the book, the field as a whole, and the challenges they see for practitioners going forward. Finally, in Chapter 23, we share our comments about the book’s themes and our experience in editing it, implications for the practice of inclusion, and thoughts about the future of the field.

xxx Preface

Acknowledgments

A book such as this reflects the efforts and contributions of many people. Indeed, a key tenet of inclusion is that we cannot accom- plish great work alone, and this book is no exception. In particu- lar, we would like to thank the contributors to the volume, who not only shared their ideas and expertise but were also willing to go above and beyond to be responsive to our many editorial demands. We very much appreciate the contributions of Jennifer Habig, who initially was to be a partner in this project and was instrumental in helping to formulate the initial book proposal and outline, before she had to take a different path for her career and education. Sergio Valenzuela-Ibarra, Liz Barat, Maggie Sass, and Sarah Maxwell provided Bernardo with helpful and productive research assistance for the project at various stages. Allan Church and Janine Waclawski, our Professional Practice Series editors, provided ongoing encouragement and insights and have been kind and responsive, for which we are grateful; we also appreciate the input on the original proposal provided by the rest of Allan and Janine’s editorial board. We owe much appreciation to the subsequent series editor, Allen Kraut, who took a special interest in this volume and inspired (as well as cajoled, prodded, and encouraged) us to keep it moving and get it done. The rest of Allen’s editorial board—Seymour Adler, Neil R. Anderson, Neal M. Ashkanasy, C. Harry Hui, Elizabeth B. Kolmstetter, Kyle Lundby, William H. Macey, Lise M. Saari, Handan Sinangil, Nancy T. Tippins, and Michael A. West— provided useful input on an updated proposal and outline for the book. Matt Davis, the acquisitions editor at Wiley, was both patient and insistent at the right times; Ryan Noll, his editorial assistant, made sure that we got all the final pieces right; and Kristi Hein, our copy editor, carefully and brilliantly made sure to catch and help us address errors, ambiguities, and inconsis- tencies both large and small. The members of the Diversity Collegium, some represented among the chapter authors and others not, have been consistently supportive, cheering us forward and providing input, ideas, and connections whenever requested. Our greatest debt and gratitude is reserved for our life partners and for our children (and Barbara’s grandchildren),

Preface xxxi

who provided both support and distraction, and primarily mean- ing; they encouraged us to stick with it when we thought we couldn’t and pulled us away when we couldn’t stop, and they made sure that each of our lives is full of all that makes inclusion worthwhile in the first place.

March 2013 Bernardo M. Ferdman San Diego, California

Barbara R. Deane Seattle, Washington

References Cox, T. H., Jr. (1993). Cultural diversity in organizations: Theory, research,

and practice. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Cross, E. Y., Katz, J. H., Miller, F. A., & Seashore, E. W. (Eds.). (1994).

The promise of diversity: Over 40 voices discuss strategies for eliminating discrimination in organizations. Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin.

Ferdman, B. M. (1992). The dynamics of ethnic diversity in organiza- tions: Toward integrative models. In K. Kelley (Ed.), Issues, theory and research in industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 339–384). Amsterdam, Netherlands: North Holland.

Ferdman, B. M. (Ed.). (1994). A resource guide for teaching and research on diversity. St. Louis, MO: American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business.

Ferdman, B. M. (2010). Teaching inclusion by example and experience: Creating an inclusive learning environment. In B. B. McFeeters, K. M. Hannum, & L. Booysen (Eds.), Leading across differences: Cases and perspectives—Facilitator’s guide (pp. 37–50). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Ferdman, B. M., & Sagiv, L. (2012). Diversity in organizations and cross- cultural work psychology: What if they were more connected? (Focal article). Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5(3), 323–345. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434 .2012.01455.x

Fernandez, J. P. (1991). Managing a diverse workforce: Regaining the competi- tive edge. New York: Lexington.

Jamieson, D., & O’Mara, J. (1991). Managing workforce 2000: Gaining the diversity advantage. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Jackson, S. E. & Associates (1992). Diversity in the workplace: Human resources initiatives. New York: Guilford.

xxxii Preface

Loden, M., & Rosener, J. B. (1991). Workforce America! Managing employee diversity as a vital resource. Homewood, IL: Business One Irwin.

Morrison, A. M. (1992). The new leaders: Guidelines on leadership diversity in America. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Thiederman, S. (1990). Bridging cultural barriers for corporate success: How to manage the multicultural workforce. New York: Lexington.

Thomas, R. R., Jr. (1990). From affirmative action to affirming diversity. Harvard Business Review, 68(2), 107–117.

Thompson, D. E., & DiTomaso, N. (Eds.). (1998). Ensuring minority success in corporate management. New York: Plenum.

Triandis, H. C., Kurowski, L. L., & Gelfand, M. J. (1994). Workplace diversity. In H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunnette, & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 769– 827). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

xxxiii

The Editors

Bernardo M. Ferdman, Ph.D., consults, writes, speaks, teaches, and conducts research on diversity and inclusion, multicultural leadership, Latinos/Latinas in the workplace, and bringing one’s whole self to work. He is full professor in the Organizational Psy- chology Program at the California School of Professional Psychology of Alliant International University, where he has taught since 1993, and a leadership and organization development con- sultant with almost three decades of experience. Dr. Ferdman works with organizational leaders and employees to foster inclu- sion, to develop and implement effective ways of using the talents and contributions of every member of the organization, and to build multicultural and cross-cultural competencies on the part of individuals, teams, and the whole organization, as well as to inspire individuals to find their own voice and make their full contribution. Ferdman earned his Ph.D. in psychology from Yale University and his A.B. from Princeton University, and he is a Board Certified Coach. He has published and presented widely in the areas of diversity, inclusion, leadership, and Latino identity, and conducts research on the assessment of inclusion and on its antecedents and consequences. Ferdman is a SIOP Fellow and a Fellow of three other divisions of the American Psychological Association, a Charter Fellow of the International Academy for Intercultural Research, a member of the Diversity Collegium (a think tank of diversity practitioners), and a network associate with AmericaSpeaks. He served as president of the Interamerican Society of Psychology, as well as chair of the Academy of Manage- ment’s Gender and Diversity in Organizations Division and chair of its Diversity and Inclusion Theme Committee. In 1991, Ferdman received the Gordon Allport Intergroup Relations Prize, and in 2011, the Ph.D. Project Management Doctoral Student Associa- tion recognized him with its Trailblazer Award. Ferdman, a native

xxxiv The Editors

Spanish speaker with a great deal of international experience, lives in San Diego, California, with his family, where he is involved in various community activities, including co-chairing the San Diego Latino-Jewish Coalition, and previously served as trustee of the San Diego Repertory Theatre.

Barbara R. Deane, M.A., is a writer, editor, consultant, and speaker on diversity and inclusion and cross-cultural business issues. She is editor-in-chief for DiversityCentral.com and the Cultural Diver- sity at Work Archive, an online database of articles, tools, and resources. Deane cofounded Cultural Diversity at Work, one of the first national and international publications on workforce diver- sity, in 1988. She is the author of more than one hundred articles on topics related to workforce diversity, diversity management, intercultural communication, cultural differences, and inclusion. She is also vice-president of The Gil Deane Group, Inc., a His- panic and woman-owned firm in Seattle, Washington, that pro- vides consulting and training services on domestic and international diversity, inclusion, and intercultural effectiveness to Fortune 500 companies, government agencies, and not-for-profit organiza- tions. Deane is the cofounder of the NW Diversity Learning Series, a collaborative venture on the part of progressive companies and organizations to build a diversity education resource in the Greater Seattle Area. The Series, now under new management, continues its fifteenth year in 2013. Deane now offers the Diversity Learning Series model (DLS) as a limited-term licensing opportunity for other cities and metropolitan regions. She has a bachelor’s degree, cum laude, in organizational communication from The Ohio State University, and a master’s degree from the University of Washington, where she specialized in interpersonal and intercul- tural communication. Deane is a member of the board and coor- dinator of The Diversity Collegium, a think tank of internal and external diversity professionals based in the United States, Canada, Switzerland, and South Africa. Deane lives in Seattle, where she enjoys her extended family and being actively engaged with Baila- dores de Bronce, a Mexican folkloric dance group. She speaks Spanish fluently and has lived in Mexico for several extended periods.

xxxv

The Authors

Dennis Appo, Ph.D., (of the Mamu People) was the first Aborig- ine to be awarded a Ph.D. in the business faculty at the University of Queensland. He has over two decades of experience writing and contributing to Australian Aboriginal policy and working with Aboriginal communities across Australia. Dr. Appo is recognized internationally for his extensive pioneering of indigenous issues into the management arena at universities, and for government policy work aimed at developing indigenous communities within Australia and New Zealand. He is one of the very few Aborigines in Australia who have been involved in constructing indigenous paradigms for management education. He has made significant contributions to the available research on indigenous Austra- lians—in particular, the juxtaposition of Anglo-Australian and indigenous Australian values, beliefs, and behaviors, with a par- ticular focus on the social, legal, political, and economic context of cross-cultural perspectives.

Tessa E. Basford, Ph.D., earned her doctorate in industrial/orga- nizational psychology from the George Washington University. Through her research, Dr. Basford contributes to advancements in our understanding of leadership, followership, diversity, and impression management. Her work appears in the Journal of Lead- ership, Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, and Journal of Management and Organization, among other outlets. She fre- quently presents her research at conferences of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology and the American Psy- chological Association.

Janet M. Bennett, Ph.D., is executive director of the Intercultural Communication Institute (ICI) and director of the ICI/University of the Pacific Master of Arts in Intercultural Relations program.

xxxvi The Authors

Her Ph.D. is from the University of Minnesota, where she special- ized in intercultural communication and anthropology. For twelve years Dr. Bennett was chair of the Liberal Arts Division at Maryl- hurst College (now Marylhurst University), where she developed innovative academic programs for adult degree students. As a trainer and consultant, she designs and conducts intercultural competence and diversity training for colleges and universities, corporations, NGOs, government, and social service agencies. She teaches courses in the training and development program at Port- land State University and has published many articles and chapters on the subjects of developmental “layered” intercultural training and adjustment processes. She co-edited The Handbook of Intercul- tural Training (3rd edition) and recently authored the chapter “Cultivating Intercultural Competence: A Process Perspective” for The SAGE Handbook of Intercultural Competence. Bennett is currently editing The SAGE Encyclopedia of Intercultural Competence.

Lize Booysen, Ph.D., is a full professor of leadership and organi- zational behavior at Antioch University, teaching in its Ph.D. in Leadership and Change program. Dr. Booysen is an internation- ally recognized scholar in the field of diversity, race, gender, and leadership, an executive coach, and a management consultant. She holds a doctorate in business leadership from the University of South Africa, as well as master’s degrees in clinical psychology, research psychology, and criminology, all with distinction. Booysen is also adjunct faculty at the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) in Greensboro, North Carolina, and has been involved in the twelve-nation Leadership across Differences (LAD) research project steered by CCL. She also participated in the GLOBE sixty- five-nations research project on leadership, national culture, and organizational practices, steered by Wharton Business School at the University of Pennsylvania. Booysen recently served as chair of the Business Leadership Member Interest Group of the Inter- national Leadership Association (ILA). Prior to joining Antioch in 2009, Booysen was full professor at the Graduate School of Business Leadership (SBL), University of South Africa since 1992. She served on the SBL board of directors from 1999 to 2006 and held the portfolios of Director of Human Resources Development and Academic Director and Research Manager at the SBL.

The Authors xxxvii

Theo Brown has more than thirty-five years of experience as an organizer, administrator, and facilitator for organizations that work to educate citizens and get them more involved in efforts to improve society. He has worked for dozens of local, state, national, and international organizations that focus on issues relating to social justice, human rights, political reform, peace, and conflict resolution. Since 1998, he has been a senior associate with Ameri- caSpeaks, where he has supervised recruitment for many different projects. He has helped to organize large AmericaSpeaks 21st Century Town Meetings on a range of issues in New York City; Washington, DC; New Orleans; Los Angeles; Albuquerque; Dallas; and many other cities around the country. Brown has a bachelor’s degree from Baylor University and a master’s degree from Duke University Divinity School. For fifteen years he was an adjunct professor at the University of Southern California’s Washington Semester Program and later taught for four years in the Washing- ton Semester Program at American University.

Allan H. Church, Ph.D., is VP of Global Talent Development for PepsiCo, where he is responsible for leading the talent manage- ment and people development agenda for the enterprise. Previ- ously he spent nine years as an external OD consultant with Warner Burke Associates, and several years at IBM. Concurrently, he has served as an adjunct professor at Columbia University, a visiting scholar at Benedictine University, and past chair of the Mayflower Group. Dr. Church received his Ph.D. in organizational psychology from Columbia University. He is a Fellow of the Society for Indus- trial and Organizational Psychology, the American Psychological Association, and the Association for Psychological Science.

Preeya Daya, Ph.D., is a senior lecturer in human resources (HR) and organizational behavior at the University of Cape Town’s Graduate School of Business (in South Africa). She joined the GSB following an international corporate career in HR, in which her focus was on enhancing business performance through transforming HR and organization development initiatives, including diversity and inclusion, leadership, performance man- agement, employee engagement, and human resource informa- tion systems. Dr. Daya is an advisory board member in the GSB’s

xxxviii The Authors

Women in Leadership Program and holds a senior consulting position at the Achievement Awards Group, where she optimizes and designs HR business solutions for clients through her research in this field. Through her research and industry alliances, Daya is passionate in her pursuit to enhance organizational and insti- tutional excellence through strategic engagement and utilization of people. She completed her undergraduate degree in HR and specialized in organizational behavior for her master’s and Ph.D. degrees. Daya’s research focuses on understanding diversity and inclusion in emerging market contexts and on building tools for creating more inclusive workplaces. Her second research interest relates to employee engagement/disengagement and organiza- tional culture.

Angelo DeNisi, Ph.D., is the Albert Harry Cohen Chair in Business Administration at Tulane University’s A. B. Freeman School of Business. He previously served on the faculties of Texas A&M Uni- versity, Rutgers University, University of South Carolina, and Kent State University. Dr. DeNisi’s research interests include perfor- mance appraisal, expatriate management, and work experiences of persons with disabilities; his research has been funded by the Army Research Institute, the National Science Foundation, and several state agencies. He has published more than a dozen book chapters, several books, and more than sixty articles in refereed journals, most of them in top academic journals such as Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, and Psychological Bulletin. DeNisi’s research has been recognized with awards from the OB and OCIS Divisions of the Academy, and SIOP named him the cowinner of its 2005 Distinguished Scientific Con- tribution Award. He also serves or has served on a number of edito- rial boards, including JAP, AMJ, and AMR, and as editor of the Academy of Management Journal. DeNisi is a Fellow of SIOP, the American Psychological Association, and the Academy of Manage- ment. He has served as chair of both the OB and HR Divisions of the Academy of Management and as president of the Academy.

Plácida V. Gallegos, Ph.D., is a professor in the School of Human and Organizational Development at Fielding Graduate University

The Authors xxxix

and has conducted research in the areas of transformational lead- ership, career development of women and people of color, and creating inclusive organizations. She is also an organization devel- opment consultant who has spent the past thirty years engaged in supporting diverse individuals, groups, and organizations in thriv- ing and achieving optimal outcomes. Dr. Gallegos’ work spans a wide range including corporations, non-profits, educational insti- tutions, and government agencies. In her consulting work, she has led large change projects and partnered with executives to develop sustainable interventions that align with their values and with their business and organizational objectives. Gallegos designs and conducts workshops, presentations, and interventions based on sound assessment practices and customization to fit clients’ needs and goals. Rather than emphasize an “expert” model when working with leaders, she operates on the philosophy of true partnership wherein the client organization or individuals are fully engaged in each step of the change effort. Gallegos has pub- lished widely on interpersonal and intercultural communication, leadership development, and building inclusive cultures that support the full engagement of all employees.

Bill Hart, M.B.A. (University of Chicago), is currently vice presi- dent of Global Marketing at Cliffs Natural Resources and has over twenty-five years’ local and international experience across the resources sector. Prior to joining his current employer, he held the position of general manager communities at Rio Tinto Iron Ore. Hart’s involvement with managing agreements with the Tra- ditional Owners of the Pilbara began in 2006.

Charmine E. J. Härtel, Ph.D., is management cluster leader and chair of Human Resource Management and Organisational Devel- opment for UQ Business School at the University of Queensland. Dr. Härtel is a registered member of the College of Organiza- tional Psychologists (Australia), Fellow and past president of the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management, and chair- elect of the Gender and Diversity in Organizations Division of the Academy of Management. She has won numerous awards inter- nationally for her research, including five awards for innovation in organizational practice. Härtel is recognized internationally as

xl The Authors

a leading expert in the areas of diversity management, ethical leadership development, and workplace well-being. Her pioneer- ing work on the characteristics of positive work environments has identified a number of the individual, group, and organizational drivers of exclusionary and toxic work environments along with the leadership and human resource management strategies and practices to turn such situations around. Her work appears in thirteen books, over sixty book chapters, and eighty-six refereed journal articles. Härtel earned her Ph.D. in industrial and orga- nizational psychology at Colorado State University.

V. Robert Hayles, Ph.D., effectiveness/diversity and inclusion con- sultant, assists people and organizations in becoming more effec- tive. He has served more than 150 clients in the private, public, and civic sectors in more than fifteen different countries. Dr. Hayles was formerly vice president, human resources and diversity, with Pillsbury. His human resource responsibilities included tax, treasury, and technology and his worldwide diversity role covered Pillsbury, Green Giant, Häagen-Dazs, and GrandMet Foods Europe. Prior to that position, Hayles was director, human resources, for the Pillsbury Technology Center. Before joining Pillsbury he was manager, valuing differences, at Digital Equip- ment Corporation for Sales, Services, Marketing, and Interna- tional. Other previous positions include associate professor of engineering administration at George Washington University; director, research and human resources at the Office of Naval Research; and research scientist at Battelle’s Human Affairs Research Center. Hayles was the first behavioral scientist to manage the U.S. Department of Navy Technology Base, with an annual budget of more than $1 billion. He has an undergraduate degree in the behavioral and physical sciences, a doctorate in psychology, and postgraduate education in business. Hayles was the 1996 chair of the board of directors, American Society for Training and Devel- opment. He is co-author of The Diversity Directive: Why Some Initia- tives Fail and What to Do about It (McGraw-Hill, 1997).

Effenus Henderson, as chief diversity officer for Weyerhaeuser Company (based in Federal Way, Washington), advises the CEO and senior management team on diversity, inclusion, and

The Authors xli

affirmative-action-related matters. An internationally recognized diversity thought leader, Henderson has been invited by numerous companies and organizations to share his expertise. He addressed members of the General Assembly of the United Nations on inter- cultural and interreligious diversity and advised members of the United Nation’s Alliance of Civilizations and Global Compact on emerging issues. In 2010, he was appointed to the advisory board of the Global Dialogue Foundation, Melbourne, Australia. Named as one of the top diversity officers in corporate America by Diver- sity Best Practices/Working Mother Media, Henderson received its first Diversity Officer Leadership Award in 2007. In 2011, Black Enterprise magazine named him as one of the Top Executives in Diversity for his outstanding business achievements. In 2011, Hen- derson became co-chair of a Diversity and Inclusion Standards Project (with co-chair Cari Dominguez, former head of EEOC) sponsored by the Society of Human Resources Management to develop an ANSI-approved standard for chief diversity officer competencies, diversity programs, and diversity metrics. A gradu- ate of North Carolina Central University and Stanford University’s Executive Program, Henderson is married to Helen Skinner Hen- derson and is the father of three sons, Kevin, Justin, and Marcus.

Karsten Jonsen, Ph.D., is a research fellow in organizational behavior at IMD, Switzerland. Before coming to IMD in 2002 he held European management positions in the IT industry. He earned an M.Sc. in economics from CBS in Copenhagen, an MBA from ESCP-EAP in Paris, France, and a Ph.D. from the University of Geneva. Dr. Jonsen’s research interests and publications cover a variety of issues in cross-cultural business, including workforce diversity, gender, team performance, virtual teams, stereotyping, globalization trends, research methodology, career mobility, Gen- eration Y, and cross-cultural communication. Jonsen has served as advisor to large corporations in the field of workforce diversity and is the winner of the 2010 Carolyn Dexter Award for best international research paper at the Academy of Management.

Carolyn J. Lukensmeyer, Ph.D., is the first executive director of the National Institute for Civil Discourse at the University of Arizona. She previously served as founder and president of

xlii The Authors

AmericaSpeaks, where she made her mark as an innovator in deliberative democracy, public administration, and organization development. Under Dr. Lukensmeyer’s leadership, AmericaSpeaks earned a national reputation as a leader in the field of deliberative democracy and democratic renewal. The organization has success- fully applied its 21st Century Town Meeting process to a number of health care-related topics, including state-wide health care reform in California and Maine and the national childhood obesity epidemic. Prior to founding AmericaSpeaks, Lukensmeyer served as consultant to the White House Chief of Staff from November 1993 through June 1994, as the deputy project director for manage- ment of the National Performance Review (NPR), on Vice President Al Gore’s reinventing government task force, and as chief of staff to Governor Richard F. Celeste of Ohio from 1986 to 1991. She also led her own successful organization development and man- agement consulting firm for fourteen years. In this capacity, she worked with public and private sector organizations on four con- tinents. Lukensmeyer holds a doctoral degree in organizational behavior from Case Western Reserve University.

Michàlle Mor Barak, Ph.D., is the Lenore Stein-Wood and William S. Wood Professor in Social Work and Business in a Global Society at the University of Southern California, with a joint appointment at the School of Social Work and the Marshall School of Business. A principal investigator on several large research projects, Dr. Mor Barak has published extensively in the areas of global diversity and inclusion and has authored numerous articles and books. Her research was funded by national and international founda- tions and corporations, including TRW-Aerospace and Defense, Nike, Edison, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Wellness Foundation. Mor Barak has received various awards of distinction, including a Fulbright award, the Lady Davis award, the University of California Regents Award, and the Franklin C. Sterlin Distin- guished Faculty Award for Research and Scholarship. She has been invited to give keynote addresses and received grants to lead several prestigious conferences around the world, including the Rockefeller Foundation’s award to lead an international confer- ence on global workforce diversity in Bellagio, Italy, and the Bor- chard Foundation’s grant to lead a global think tank of scholars

The Authors xliii

in France. Mor Barak’s most recent book, Managing Diversity: Toward a Globally Inclusive Workplace (3rd edition, 2013), received accolades and favorable reviews in academic journals from several disciplines, both nationally and internationally; it was named an Outstanding Academic Title in 2006 by Choice, a publication of the Association of College and University Libraries, and received the prestigious George Terry Book Award from the Academy of Management for “the most significant contribution to manage- ment knowledge.”

Lisa H. Nishii, Ph.D., is an associate professor in the Human Resource Studies department at the ILR School, Cornell Univer- sity. She holds a Ph.D. in organizational psychology from the Uni- versity of Maryland and a B.A. in economics from Wellesley College. Dr. Nishii’s most active body of research includes multilevel proj- ects on diversity and inclusion, in which she examines the conflu- ence of climate, leader characteristics, and group demography on group processes, group performance, and individual outcomes. She has received substantial grants from the U.S. Department of Labor, the U.S. Department of Education, and the SHRM Founda- tion for her research. Her research suggests that the “value in diversity” emerges only in inclusive environments, in which sub- group disparities are minimized and there are strong norms for people to cultivate cross-boundary relationships. Nishii actively publishes in top-tier management journals, including Academy of Management Review, Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Personnel Psychology. She serves on the editorial boards of AMJ, AMR, JAP, Journal of Management, and Organizational Psychology Review. She is also serving a three-year term on the execu- tive committee of the Academy of Management’s Human Resources Division, and is part of the leadership rotation to be division chair for the Gender and Diversity in Organizations Division.

Stella M. Nkomo, Ph.D., is a professor in the Department of Human Resource Management at the University of Pretoria in South Africa. She received her Ph.D. in human resource manage- ment from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Dr. Nkomo’s internationally recognized research on race and gender and diversity in organizations has been published in several journals

xliv The Authors

including Academy of Management Review, Academy of Management Learning and Education, Academy of Management Executive, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Orga- nization, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Stra- tegic Management Journal, Work and Occupations, and Sex Roles. She is associate editor for Organization: The Critical Journal of Organiza- tion, Theory and Society and the British Journal of Management. Nkomo is the co-author of two books: Our Separate Ways: Black and White Women and the Struggle for Professional Identity (Harvard Busi- ness School Press, 2001) and Courageous Conversations: A Collection of Interviews and Reflections on Responsible Leadership by South African Captains of Industry (Van Schaik Publishers, 2011). Nkomo received the 2009 Sage Scholarly Contributions Award from the Academy of Management’s Gender and Diversity in Organizations Division for her research on gender and diversity in organizations.

Lynn Offermann, Ph.D., is professor of industrial and orga- nizational psychology in the Department of Organizational Sci- ences and Communication and the Department of Management, George Washington University. Her research focuses on leader- ship and followership, teams, organizational processes and influ- ence, and diversity issues. Dr. Offermann is a Fellow of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, the American Psychological Association, and the Association for Psychological Science, and her work has appeared in the Journal of Applied Psy- chology, American Psychologist, Academy of Management Journal, Lead- ership Quarterly, Harvard Business Review, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Human Performance, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, and the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, among other outlets. Offermann holds a Ph.D. in applied social psychology from Syracuse University.

Julie O’Mara, president of O’Mara and Associates, an organiza- tion development consulting firm, serves clients in several sectors and specializes in leadership, managing diversity, and fostering inclusion. O’Mara is considered a pioneer for her work in D&I, having been engaged in numerous successful initiatives with major clients. She is active in several organizations and often collabo- rates with others to advance the field. A former national president

The Authors xlv

of the American Society for Training and Development, O’Mara was instrumental in developing professional competencies for the training and development field. She has received several awards for her leadership and diversity work and has taught at University of California Berkeley Extension, John F. Kennedy University, and Golden Gate University. Along with seventy-nine expert panelists, she and Alan Richter are co-authors of Global Diversity and Inclusion Benchmarks. O’Mara is also co-author of Managing Workforce 2000: Gaining the Diversity Advantage, a best seller published by Jossey- Bass in 1991, and author of Diversity Activities and Training Designs, published by Pfeiffer in 1994.

Mustafa Özbilgin, Ph.D., is professor of organizational behavior at Brunel Business School in London, UK, and co-chair of Diver- sity and Management at University of Paris Dauphine. He researches in the field of equality, diversity, and inclusion at work from comparative and relational perspectives. Dr. Özbilgin’s research is published in journals such as the Academy of Manage- ment Review, Academy of Management Learning and Education, British Journal of Management, Human Relations, Journal of Vocational Behav- ior, and Social Science and Medicine. He has authored or edited more than ten books and is the editor-in-chief of the British Journal of Management and the editor of the book series Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (Emerald Press). Özbilgin is the founder of an international conference series, Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion. He earned his Ph.D. in social sciences at the University of Bristol.

Robert E. Rich has been a practitioner of action research for almost forty years. His early work was done with Fred and Merre- lyn Emery, Eric Trist, and later William Foote Whyte and Davydd Greenwood. Rich retired from Cornell’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations in 2005 after a long affiliation with its well-known Program for Employee and Workplace Systems (PEWS). He con- tinues his practice through the Ithaca Consulting Group on a part-time basis.

Alan Richter, Ph.D., is president of QED Consulting, a twenty-five- year-old company based in New York. He has consulted to corpora- tions and organizations for many years in multiple capacities,

xlvi The Authors

primarily in the areas of leadership, values, diversity and inclusion, culture and change. Dr. Richter is the creator of many successful training tools such as the award-winning Global Diversity Game, the Global Diversity Survey—a self-assessment tool that measures how we deal with difference—and the Global Leadership Survey, a leader- ship style self-assessment tool. He is also co-author, with Julie O’Mara, of Global Diversity and Inclusion Benchmarks. Richter has worked closely with many multinational organizations in both the private and public sectors in Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Ameri- cas. He has also been a presenter at many conferences in the United States, Africa, Asia, and Europe. Richter is on the board of the South African Chamber of Commerce in America. He has an M.A. and a B.A.B.Sc. from the University of Cape Town, and a Ph.D. in philosophy from Birkbeck College, London University.

Laura Morgan Roberts, Ph.D., is professor of psychology, culture, and organization studies in Antioch University’s Ph.D. in Leader- ship and Change Program. She has served on the faculties of several business schools, including Harvard, Georgia State Uni- versity, and AVT in Denmark. Dr. Roberts’ research and teaching focus on increasing personal and professional alignment by con- structing, sustaining, and restoring positive identities at work. She has published her work on authenticity, identity, image manage- ment, diversity, strengths, and value creation in her edited book, Exploring Positive Identities and Organizations (Roberts and Dutton, Eds., Taylor & Francis, 2009), and in numerous articles, book chapters, and case studies. Roberts earned her B.A. in psychology from the University of Virginia and her M.A. and Ph.D. in orga- nizational psychology from the University of Michigan.

Christopher T. Rotolo, Ph.D., is the senior director of Organiza- tion Measurement & Assessment for PepsiCo, where his team is responsible for PepsiCo’s core survey research processes, such as the Organization Health survey, On Boarding survey, and Exit Survey, as well as PepsiCo’s enterprise-wide high-potential assess- ment process and competency modeling. Prior to joining PepsiCo, he managed the Leadership Strategy and Research team at IBM. Dr. Rotolo has also served in government and external consulting roles and is an adjunct professor in New York University’s I-O

The Authors xlvii

Psychology master’s program. Rotolo earned his Ph.D. in indus- trial/organizational psychology at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia.

Kumea Shorter-Gooden, Ph.D., was appointed the first chief diversity officer and associate vice president at the University of Maryland, College Park in January 2012. Formerly, she served as associate provost for international-multicultural initiatives at Alliant International University, as professor and coordinator of the Multicultural Community-Clinical Psychology Emphasis Area at the Los Angeles campus of the California School of Profes- sional Psychology, and as director of the student counseling center at the Claremont Colleges. Dr. Shorter-Gooden is co-author of Shifting: The Double Lives of Black Women in America (HarperCollins, 2003), a winner of the 2004 American Book Awards. A Fellow of the American Psychological Association, Shorter-Gooden has pre- sented and published on African American women and identity, psychotherapy with diverse populations, and multicultural and diversity issues in higher education. Shorter-Gooden is a consult- ing editor for Professional Psychology: Research and Practice and for Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, and a member of the editorial board of Consulting Psychology Journal. She received a bachelor’s degree magna cum laude from Princeton University with its first class of women, and earned a Ph.D. in clinical/community psychology from University of Maryland, College Park.

Amanda C. Shull, Ph.D., is manager of Talent and Organization Capability at Guardian Life. Her primary responsibilities include managing employee engagement, succession planning, perfor- mance management, and select leadership development pro- grams. Prior to joining Guardian, Dr. Shull was manager of Organization and Management Development at PepsiCo, where she managed all organization-wide employee feedback surveys and leveraged survey results to drive action. Previously, Shull held positions as a survey consultant at Sirota and internal roles at New York Life and Morgan Stanley. She completed her Ph.D. in social- organizational psychology at Teachers College, Columbia Univer- sity. She continues to teach as an adjunct faculty member at Columbia University.

xlviii The Authors

Michael D. Tuller, Ph.D., is a manager at PepsiCo with the enter- prise Organization and Management Development team. He plays a key role in the execution and management of the organi- zation’s 360-degree feedback processes as well as several other organizational feedback processes, including the MQPI, Hogan personality assessment, and a targeted development “check-in” tool. Dr. Tuller received his Ph.D. in I/O psychology from the University of Connecticut and is a member of SIOP.

Ilene C. Wasserman, Ph.D., founder and president of ICW Con- sulting, has over thirty years of experience in organizational consulting, strategic planning, change management, leadership development, and executive coaching. As founder and president of ICW Consulting, Dr. Wasserman helps leaders and teams throughout organizations leverage multiple dimensions of domes- tic and global diversity by enhancing communication and collabo- ration. Her approach is appreciative, based on the principles that we transform organization cultures through engaging the whole system, and that the culture of organizations is created and per- petuated in the stories people tell and live and through organiza- tional structures and processes. Wasserman received her Ph.D. in human and organization development from Fielding Graduate University. She also holds master’s degrees in both counseling psychology and social work from Washington University and a bachelor’s degree in human development from Cornell Univer- sity. She is a member of the Board of Governors of the Center for Creative Leadership, where she chairs the Research, Innovation, and Program Development Committee. She also co-chairs the Human Relations Commission for Lower Merion Township in Pennsylvania. Wasserman is a member of the Taos Institute and NTL and is a Fellow of the Kurt Lewin Center.

Michael L. Wheeler has been recognized internationally for lead- ership roles throughout his career. He has written and published extensively on the topic of diversity, has been cited in newspapers around the world, and has appeared on Larry King Live. He was named a “Pioneer in Diversity” by Diversity Journal. Charged with leading Omnicom Media Group’s diversity strategy in the role of Chief Diversity Officer, Wheeler brings twenty years of experience

The Authors xlix

providing expertise to government, not-for-profit, and Fortune 500 companies. Prior to joining Omnicom Media Group, Michael founded OEStrategies, Inc., and was previously a program direc- tor for the Conference Board, where he launched their first exec- utive Council on Workforce Diversity, their annual Diversity Conference and Workshops, and their diversity research area of expertise. He wrote various pioneering reports on diversity pub- lished by the Conference Board and has published in Harvard Business Review and BusinessWeek. Wheeler currently serves on the Society for Human Resources Management’s national committee for establishing standards and competencies for the diversity exec- utive role. In the past, he was adjunct professor for the Graduate School of Management, New School University. Wheeler earned a B.A. in organizational communication, California State Univer- sity and an M.S. in human resources management, Milano Gradu- ate School of Management, New School University.

Mary-Frances Winters is president and founder of the Winters Group, a twenty-nine-year-old organization development and diversity consulting firm, and specializes in research, strategic planning, training, and public speaking with an emphasis in ethnic and multicultural issues. Prior to founding the Winters Group in 1984, she was affirmative action officer and senior market analyst at Eastman Kodak Company, where she worked for eleven years. Among her many awards and distinctions, Winters was named a diversity pioneer by Profiles in Diversity Journal in August 2007. A life member of the board of trustees of the Uni- versity of Rochester, Winters has served on the boards of the Greater Rochester Metro Chamber of Commerce and United Way of Greater Rochester, and on the National Board of the Girl Scouts of the U.S.A. She has served as a mentor for the Emerging Leaders Program sponsored by the Centers for Leadership and Public Affairs at Duke University and the University of Cape Town, South Africa. Winters is a frequent contributor to USA Today’s Forum column on workplace and diversity issues. She has been published in the International Personnel Management Association Newsletter, Profiles in Diversity Journal, DiversityInc Magazine, Executive Excellence Magazine, the Society of Human Resource Manage- ment’s Mosaics newsletter, and EMA Reporter. Winters is the author

l The Authors

of three books: Only Wet Babies Like Change: Workplace Wisdom for Baby Boomers, Inclusion Starts With “I,” and CEO’s Who Get It: Diversity Leadership from the Heart and Soul.

Margaret Yao is deputy vice president for the Department of Administration and Finance for the Millennium Challenge Cor- poration (MCC). MCC is an innovative and independent U.S. Government foreign aid agency that fights global poverty through the promotion of sustainable economic growth. Prior to joining MCC, Yao ran her own organization change consulting practice of fifteen years, where she led federal, state, and local government agencies and non-profit organizations to innovative performance solutions. Blending federal and private-sector management expe- rience, she led organizational turnarounds, strategic planning, collaborative interagency service delivery, and public delibera- tion. Yao’s work achieved national best-practice recognition in performance-based accountability in government and state and local innovation and team awards for her clients. She is published in Memos to the President: Management Advice from the Nation’s Top Public Administrators (2001). While at the Office of Management and Budget from 1991 to 1995, Yao helped to establish the Presi- dent’s Management Council (PMC), worked toward passage of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), and received “reinventing government” and other leadership awards. Prior to joining OMB, Yao pursued her interest in management and innovation first as a staff reporter for the Wall Street Journal and later as cofounder of an automotive innovation company. She earned an M.B.A. from the University of Texas at Austin, where she was a University Fellow and a Sord Scholar, and a B.A. in economics from the University of Michigan. Yao lives in Washing- ton, D.C., where she volunteers in her community and tries to improve her Mandarin.

Frameworks for Understanding Inclusion

Part One

3

CHAPTER ONE

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations Toward a Systemic and Inclusive Framework Bernardo M. Ferdman

In the last twenty years or so, organizations have considerably expanded attention to diversity at work; this has been accompa- nied by growth not only in the number and range of diversity practitioners, but also in the interest in diversity shown by orga- nizational and other psychologists, by specialists in organizational behavior and human resources, and by other scholars, research- ers, and practitioners. What is the role of diversity at work? How can organizations and their leaders best manage and leverage the range of differences in the workforce in ways that lead to positive outcomes for the organizations, their members, and other stake- holders? What conditions can maximize the benefits of diversity? These and similar questions permeate both practitioner and aca- demic discussions on diversity.

Research and practice suggest that diversity—the representa- tion of multiple identity groups and their cultures in a particular organization or workgroup—by itself may not necessarily result in positive benefits without the presence of additional conditions. Inclusion has emerged as a core concept in relation to diversity; in particular, it is now considered by diversity practitioners as a key approach to benefit from diversity (see Ferdman & Deane, Preface) and is in many ways at the forefront of contemporary

4 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

diversity practice. Yet how inclusion relates to diversity, what inclu- sion is, and how it operates are not always clear or precisely speci- fied. In this chapter, after briefly discussing its relationship to diversity, I develop the concept of inclusion and its various facets, as well as its manifestation in individual and collective behavior and in organizational practices.

Inclusion involves how well organizations and their members fully connect with, engage, and utilize people across all types of differences. In this chapter, I argue that the core of inclusion is how people experience it—the psychological experience of inclusion, operating at the individual level (and often collec- tively as well). This experience of inclusion is facilitated and made possible by the behavior of those in contact with the individual (such as coworkers and supervisors), by the individ- ual’s own attitudes and behavior, and by the values, norms, practices, and processes that operate in the individual’s organi- zational and societal context. Thus inclusion can involve each and all of the following: an individual or group experience; a set of behaviors; an approach to leadership; a set of collective norms and practices; or a personal, group, organizational, or social value.

The terms diversity and inclusion are now often used together and inextricably bound—as in “diversity and inclusion (D&I) practice” (for example, Hays-Thomas & Bendick, 2013), “Office of Diversity & Inclusion” (for example, http://www.opm.gov/ policy-data-oversight/diversity-and-inclusion), or “chief diversity and inclusion officer”; indeed, one can often see D&I used as a singular noun. In many ways, diversity and inclusion are now often treated almost like two sides of the same coin. Yet in spite of (or perhaps because of) this usage, the distinctions and relationships between them are not always sufficiently specified. Related to this, there has been a great deal of work focusing on diversity, but much less on inclusion. Because there is a growing area of professional practice in organizations commonly referred to as diversity and inclusion (or D&I), more conceptual and practical clarity regarding what inclusion means and how it can be cultivated in diverse organizations and groups will be helpful not only in providing more coherence to this growing field, but also in establishing a foundation for

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 5

more effective practice and a basis for empirically testing its assumptions.

Inclusion as the Key to Diversity’s Benefits What is the connection of diversity and inclusion? Why are they tied so closely together? To varying degrees, diversity is a fact of life in work groups and organizations. Inclusion is grounded in what we do with that diversity when we value and appreciate people because of and not in spite of their differences, as well as their similarities. More important, it involves creating work con- texts in which people are valued and appreciated as themselves and as integrated and complex—with their full range of differ- ences and similarities from and with each other. Essentially, inclu- sion is a way of working with diversity: it is the process and practice through which groups and organizations can reap the benefits of their diversity.

Diversity at Work

What makes diversity so important? On the one hand, much of the focus in the field of diversity in organizations has been on reducing or eliminating undesirable, unfair, and illegal bias and discrimination and on increasing equity and social justice (Ferdman & Sagiv, 2012). On the other hand, many theorists, researchers, and practitioners (for example, Davidson, 2011; Ely & Thomas, 2001; Ferdman & Brody, 1996; Mor Barak, 2011; Page, 2007) have emphasized the benefits that individuals, groups, orga- nizations, and societies can derive from diversity. This understand- ing forms the foundation for many organizational diversity initiatives.

In the United States and elsewhere, much of the focus on and work on diversity in organizations began in the context of efforts to expand social justice and civil rights across lines of race, gender, age, disability, and other dimensions of identity that had often formed (and in many cases continue to form) the basis for sys- tematic exclusion and discrimination. As societies and organiza- tions expanded the degree to which members of previously excluded groups were represented in different institutions, in

6 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

different types of jobs, and at various hierarchical levels, issues of authenticity and effectiveness became more important. In many cases, members of previously excluded groups were not willing (or able or allowed) to assimilate to dominant norms and styles as a price of admission or promotion; in other cases, the quantity of newer members made intergroup differences more notable; and in still other cases, people who were already members but had needed to blend in and perhaps submerge aspects of them- selves to be accepted began to be more willing to “come out” regarding previously hidden differences. These processes have meant that, as diversity has become more discussed, recognized, and valued, we seem to find and see more and more of it, along a greater number of dimensions.

Simultaneously, it became clearer that these differences, when viewed and managed as potential assets, could bring sub- stantial benefits to organizations. Because diversity is not simply about supposedly superficial demographic facts or labels, but rather about identities, cultures, and the varied meaning and ways of thinking about and approaching situations that these represent (Ferdman, 1992; D. A. Thomas & Ely, 1996), theorists and practitioners developed descriptions of organizations that treated differences more positively. Cox (1991), for example, dis- tinguished among monocultural, plural, and multicultural orga- nizations, and R. R. Thomas (1990) discussed the importance of creating work environments “where no one is advantaged or dis- advantaged .  .  . [and] where ‘we’ is everyone” (p. 109). Miller and Katz (1995), based on earlier work by Bailey Jackson and others, described a path from exclusive to inclusive organiza- tions. Holvino (1998; see also Holvino, Ferdman, & Merrill- Sands, 2004) described the differences and transitions between monocultural exclusionary organizations, transitional compliance- focused organizations, and finally truly multicultural organiza- tions, which “seek and value all differences and develop the systems and work practices that support members of every group to succeed and fully contribute” (Holvino et al., 2004, p. 248). Similarly, D. A. Thomas and Ely (1996) described what they called the “learning and effectiveness paradigm” or later the “integration and learning perspective” (Ely & Thomas, 2001) for addressing diversity in organizations; this approach involves

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 7

viewing and treating cultural and other identity-based differ- ences as resources from which the whole organization can benefit and learn, rather than as something to be ignored for the purpose of avoiding discrimination or highlighted solely for the purpose of accessing niche markets.

In spite of the many arguments for the benefits of diversity at work (for example, Cox & Blake, 1991; Stahl, Mäkelä, Zander, & Maznevski, 2010), scholars have also pointed out that diversity can be associated with negative outcomes. Mannix and Neale (2005), for example, reviewed research on diversity in teams. They sum- marized the premise of their work as follows: “[T]here has been a tension between the promise and the reality of diversity in team process and performance. The optimistic view holds that diversity will lead to an increase in the variety of perspectives and approaches brought to a problem and to opportunities for knowl- edge sharing, and hence lead to greater creativity and quality of team performance. However, the preponderance of the evidence favors a more pessimistic view: that diversity creates social divi- sions, which in turn create negative performance outcomes for the group” (p. 31). Based on their review of relevant theory and research, Mannix and Neale concluded that, in general, identity- based differences—those based on gender, age, race, and ethnic- ity, for example—tended to result in more negative effects on group functioning; in contrast, what they called “underlying dif- ferences”—those grounded in characteristics such as education or functional background—were more likely to result in perfor- mance benefits, but only by carefully managing group process. They conclude that the key to effects of diversity on group per- formance is most likely to be found in the context and in a more nuanced understanding of the processes involved. Other review- ers (for example, Horwitz & Horwitz, 2007; S. E. Jackson & Joshi, 2011; van Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007) also report mixed results with regard to the effects of diversity in work groups on a range of processes and outcomes, including communication pat- terns, conflict, cohesion, commitment, turnover, creativity, inno- vation, and performance. Similarly, Kochan et al. (2003), in a series of studies over five years investigating the connections of business performance with gender and racial diversity, found that the effects of diversity on performance were not consistent and

8 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

in part appeared to depend on the organizational context and group processes.

In sum, it is clear from both research and practice that more diversity does not, by itself, necessarily lead to more positive out- comes for groups and organizations. Simply representing a greater variety of differences in an organization or group is not a magical path toward greater performance, for example. The frameworks mentioned earlier, proposed by Cox, by Holvino, by Miller and Katz, and by D. A. Thomas and Ely, all take this into account and describe the type of organizational cultures and group processes that are more likely not only to incorporate and value greater diversity, but also to derive its benefits. In these accounts, it is not the presence of diversity by itself but rather how it is addressed that leads to positive outcomes.

Building on this perspective, Ferdman, Avigdor, Braun, Konkin, and Kuzmycz (2010) proposed that, rather than treating diversity as a predictor of performance, it may better be viewed as a moderator of the relationship between the group’s approach to differences—and more specifically inclusion—and its out- comes; in this approach, inclusion is seen as the key factor increasing performance, with the relationship expected to be stronger in more diverse groups, in which the presence of more varied resources makes inclusion especially useful. Whether or not inclusion is a predictor (see Ferdman et al., 2010), a modera- tor (see Nishii & Mayer, 2009), or both, it has become clearer that it is quite critical in the context of diversity. This view of inclusion as a fundamental practice for realizing the benefits of diversity in groups and organizations is addressed in the next section.

Inclusion as Essential to Support and Work with Diversity

Although scholars have only recently begun to highlight inclu- sion as a focal construct in understanding diversity and its pos- sible outcomes, diversity practitioners began doing so somewhat earlier (along with a few researchers, such as Mor Barak; see, for example, Mor Barak & Cherin, 1998, and Mor Barak, 2000a). In 1995, for example, Miller and Katz’s (1995) path model

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 9

highlighted the importance of inclusion, and Marjane Jensen (1995) developed a list of key behaviors for inclusion to support diversity; beginning in 1996, their consulting firm, the Kaleel Jamison Consulting Group, supported the design and implemen- tation of Dun & Bradstreet’s Inclusion Initiative (see Gasorek, 2000). Also in 1996, Ferdman and Brody pointed out various models of inclusion in the context of different rationales for diversity initiatives, and in 1999, Davidson highlighted the idea that “[i]f diversity initiatives address ways of building structural and psychological inclusiveness for organizational members, they are more likely to be successful” (p. 174). Miller and Katz’s 2002 book, The Inclusion Breakthrough: Unleashing the Real Power of Diver- sity, highlighted ways of doing this through systemic change in organizations, including new competencies on the part of leaders and members, and policies and practices to encourage, enable, and support these behaviors. They forcefully summarized the connection of diversity and inclusion this way: “If an organization brings in new people but doesn’t enable them to contribute, those new people are bound to fail, no matter how talented they are. Diversity without inclusion does not work” (p. 17, italics in original).

Davidson (1999) aptly pointed out how members of organiza- tions can have a different “expectation of being included” on the basis of their varying histories of oppression or privilege. In other words, members of more dominant groups, historically, have gen- erally been more likely to expect that they will be able to join groups and organizations, and that once they have joined, they will be fully accepted and made to feel that they are equal and valued participants. Inclusion, in the sense described by Miller and Katz, has always been more likely for members of more pow- erful groups.

This connection of inclusion to inequality and the hierarchi- cal aspects of intergroup relations in a societal and organizational context is quite important because it reminds us of some of the original goals of diversity initiatives related to addressing societal inequities and systematic discrimination. In other words, the roots of inclusion are intertwined with those of diversity in organiza- tions, and it is in this connection that inclusion derives its power. Whether the focus of an inclusion initiative is on first making sure

10 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

that there is broad and equitable representation of multiple groups at various levels of an organization, or whether such an effort extends to addressing how differences and similarities in the now more diverse organization are viewed and treated, as well as to how the members of multiple groups experience the work- place, it is important to not lose sight of the underlying values and the intergroup context for the initiative.

Indeed, Pless and Maak (2004) addressed inclusion as an ethical imperative for diversity management. They grounded their analysis on what they called the founding principle or moral basis for inclusion—“mutual recognition” of humans for each other—which incorporates “emotional recognition, solidar- ity and legal and political recognition” (p. 131, italics in original). For Pless and Maak, “legal and political recognition” includes equal- ity, particularly with regard to freedom and the rights of organi- zational citizenship. They argue that these types of recognition are developed through “reciprocal understanding, standpoint plurality and mutual enabling, trust, and integrity” (p. 129), which together support development and maintenance of an “intercultural moral point of view” (p. 131). Their analysis points out that noticing differences and being open to them are insufficient “especially if intellectual traditions induce people to find the one right way” (p. 133); what is necessary is what they call “standpoint plurality,” which involves creating processes, in light of what are typically unequal power distributions in groups and organizations, to foster true dialogue that allows consider- ation of all points of view, including those that may be margin- alized in less inclusive contexts.

To further understand the connections and differences between the concepts of diversity and inclusion, Roberson (2006) surveyed human resource officers in fifty-one large public com- panies and asked them for their definitions of both inclusion and diversity. Through content analyses, Roberson found that “definitions of diversity focused primarily on differences and the demographic composition of groups or organizations, whereas definitions of inclusion focused on organizational objectives designed to increase the participation of all employees and to leverage diversity effects on the organization” (p. 219). Specifi- cally, respondents described diversity in terms of “the spectrum

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 11

of human similarities and differences” and conceived of diversity in organizations primarily as representation of people across this spectrum. Her respondents described inclusion, in contrast, as “the way an organization configures its systems and structures to value and leverage the potential, and to limit the disadvantages, of differences” (p. 221).

In sum, the concept of inclusion has developed as a way to capture and communicate how people and organizations must be and what they must do to benefit from diversity, both indi- vidually and collectively. Focusing on inclusion not only allows doing diversity work that emphasizes reducing negative and problematic processes—such as those grounded in prejudice, discrimination, and oppression—but also fosters a positive vision of what might replace those undesired behaviors, policies, and systems. The concept of inclusion also allows and encourages practitioners to simultaneously take into account and address multiple dimensions of diversity; inclusion recognizes the various ways in which people are different—particularly on the basis of socially and culturally meaningful categories, many involving sys- tematic patterns of intergroup inequality—and at the same time facilitates approaches that view these categories as coexisting in whole people. Rather than focusing on individuals as representa- tives of only one group at a time and on one identity at a time, an inclusion lens highlights multiplicity and integration, in the context of empowerment and equality. Inclusion allows and encourages us to learn about, acknowledge, and honor group- based differences while at the same time treating each person as unique and recognizing that every identity group incorporates a great deal of diversity (Ferdman, 1995; Ferdman & Gallegos, 2001).

Inclusion has also become a key approach for working with diversity because it is global and it is scalable. It works for everyone. People—across cultures and across identities—resonate to inclu- sion. Inclusion can be less polemical and political than some other approaches—particularly those focused on ensuring repre- sentation, such as affirmative action, or those focused on specific group identities or “protected” groups—but it does not negate or undermine those approaches; rather, it complements them and provides a lens and practices that can help make them more

12 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

successful. Indeed, when people understand and work toward inclusion, as both a value and a practice, they can become ener- gized and more excited about diversity and about eliminating invidious bias and discrimination. They can discover new and previously unexplored connections with other people across mul- tiple dimensions of difference and learn valuable perspectives and skills that are personally beneficial as well as helpful to their work- groups and organizations.

The challenge for both practitioners and scholars, then, is to develop clarity about what inclusion is in the context of diverse workplaces, a topic that I now turn to.

What Is Inclusion? A Multilevel Perspective Inclusion at work has to do with how organizations, groups, their leaders, and their members provide ways that allow everyone, across multiple types of differences, to participate, contribute, have a voice, and feel that they are connected and belong, all without losing individual uniqueness or having to give up valuable identities or aspects of themselves. Inclusion involves recognizing, appreciating, and leveraging diversity so as to allow members of different cultural and identity groups—varying, for example, across lines of ethnicity, race, nationality, gender, age, sexual ori- entation, ability/disability, cultural background, and many other dimensions—to work together productively without subsuming those differences and, when possible, using those differences for the common good (Ferdman, 2010).

Inclusion also means reframing both what it means to be an insider in a work group or organization and who gets to define that. Rather than treating membership and participation as a privilege granted by those traditionally in power to those previ- ously excluded—often with assimilation to established norms as a condition of full acceptance—inclusive practices redefine who the “we” is in an organization or work group so that all have the right to be there and to have an equal voice, both in managing the boundary and in defining (and redefining) norms, values, and preferred styles for success (Ferdman & Davidson, 2002a; Miller & Katz, 2002). This can be challenging because in many cases it requires ongoing reexamination of previously accepted or

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 13

taken-for-granted ways of working and interacting. It means devel- oping skills and practices for collectively reevaluating notions of what (and who) is “normal,” appropriate, and expected in ways that incorporate more voices and perspectives, many of those unfamiliar or uncomfortable for those previously in power.

The practice of inclusion is dynamic and ongoing: because inclusion is created and re-created continuously—in both small and large ways—organizations, groups, and individuals cannot work on becoming inclusive just once and then assume that they are done; it is a recursive and never-ending approach to work and life.

In this section, I review concepts of inclusion in diverse orga- nizations in the context of an emergent framework for the practice of inclusion that spans multiple levels of analysis and incorporates multiple voices and perspectives.

Toward a Systemic Inclusion Framework

The concept of inclusion can be quite simple. Many people can quickly describe, for example, what it feels like when they are being included and how that contrasts with exclusion. In many of my workshops (see, for example, Ferdman, 2011), I ask partici- pants to think about and then describe to a neighbor a situation at work or elsewhere in which they have felt fully present, engaged, and included; in most cases, the immediate positive energy in the room is quite palpable, and participants are very quickly involved in animated conversations about their inclusion experience, which they can easily recall and recount.

Essentially, people often see inclusion as synonymous with a sense of belonging and participation. Schutz (1958) considered inclusion (along with control and affection) to be a central inter- personal need—albeit varying in intensity across individuals—and described it as comprising the desire to belong, to feel important, and to feel cared about. Baumeister and Leary (1995), based on a review of theoretical and empirical literature, described a basic human need to belong as a “powerful, fundamental, and perva- sive motivation” (p. 497). Fiske (1994, cited in Levine & Kerr, 2007) saw belonging as a core social motive supporting people’s ability to be part of and contribute to groups.

14 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Inclusion is also complex. It can be conceptualized and operate at multiple levels, including the individual, inter personal, group, organizational, and societal, and may be experienced dif- ferently by different individuals and in different situations (Ferdman & Davidson, 2002b). A straightforward focus simply on belonging can be deceptive, because it can hide many of the subtleties and nuances of inclusion and its practice, and it may not necessarily address the intergroup aspects of inclusion that are most relevant in the context of diversity. Focusing solely on individuals’ motivation to belong does not fully address how group or social identities play a part in the dynamics of inclusion (and exclusion). I may, for example, be part of a work group in which I feel valued, heard, and treated as an equal, full, and important member, but to achieve this, perhaps I had to change important aspects of how I communicate to become more like other members of the group, or perhaps I decided to change my name so that it would be easier for my fellow group members to pronounce, or perhaps I am reluctant to reveal aspects of myself that are quite important to me but that I believe may be misun- derstood or not valued by my colleagues.

Some of this complexity is addressed by Shore, Randel, Chung, Dean, Ehrhart, and Singh (2011), in their review of theory and research on inclusion and diversity in work groups. They base their approach on Brewer’s (1991) optimal distinctive- ness theory, which indicates that, in general, people look for a balance between being subsumed into a larger social unit and also standing out within that unit with regard to their unique social identities. According to Brewer’s theory, everyone needs to feel sufficiently connected to others, so as to be accepted and to belong, and also sufficiently individuated and different, so as not to be absorbed. Shore et al. conclude that inclusion exists when individuals’ simultaneous needs for belonging and uniqueness can both be satisfied (in the context of being “an esteemed member of the work group,” p. 1265). Their approach is useful because it highlights the importance of considering the interplay of multiple social identities in individual experience. In other words, my experience is typically related not just to one of my identities (such as being a man, a professor, or a middle-aged

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 15

person) but also to the unique configuration of all of my identi- ties (Ferdman, 1995).

Another key aspect of its complexity has to do with the frame of reference for defining what constitutes inclusion. Say an orga- nization or person decides that they would like to become more inclusive. What defines whether a particular organizational prac- tice or individual behavior is inclusive? I believe that, ultimately, it should be based on whether or not those affected by the prac- tice or behavior feel and are included. At the core, and particu- larly from a psychological perspective, inclusion needs to be conceptualized phenomenologically—in other words, in terms of people’s perceptions and interpretations. A set of objective facts cannot necessarily determine whether inclusion exists; it must be assessed based on the experience of those involved; therefore it could vary from person to person and situation to situation. In a study related to this point, Stamper and Masterson (2002) found that how many hours employees worked and how long they had been in the organization—which the researchers referred to as “actual inclusion”—were not associated with how much the employees perceived themselves to be “insiders” in the organization.

Inclusion is also not static or a one-time achievement; because it is created anew in each situation (Ferdman & Davidson, 2002b) through the relationship of the individual with the surrounding social system, inclusion involves a dynamic and interrelated set of processes, as depicted in Figure 1.1. In other words, “inclusion

Figure 1.1. Inclusion as a Systemic and Dynamic Process

Society, organizations, leaders, work groups, individuals • Inclusive values, policies,

practices, behaviors

Individuals and social identity groups • Experience of inclusion

16 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

is a momentary, even evanescent creation, which depends on the particular people and the particular situation involved. At the same time, the behavior and attitude of the moment may not mean much without a history and a future, without a structure and system around them that give them the appropriate meaning and weight” (Ferdman & Davidson, 2002b, pp. 83–84). It is in this sense that inclusion is a practice—an interacting set of struc- tures, values, norms, group and organizational climates, and indi- vidual and collective behaviors, all connected with inclusion experiences in a mutually reinforcing and dynamic system. Indi- viduals, groups, organizations, and even societies adopt values and policies and engage in practices geared toward fostering inclusion; when these result in individual and collective experi- ences of inclusion, then those approaches can be considered to be inclusive. As more people and groups experience inclusion, they are more likely to have a shared sense of what it takes to create more inclusion for themselves and others and to incorpo- rate this learning into the ongoing processes and practices of the groups and organizations of which they are a part. This will in turn increase confidence that the behaviors, policies, and practices are indeed inclusive, in a recursive and ongoing virtu- ous cycle.

Inclusion at Multiple Levels

This framework (Figure 1.1) can be further analyzed to consider the various levels at which inclusion can be conceptualized, assessed, and practiced, as shown in Figure 1.2. It is important to consider multiple levels of analysis in conceptualizing inclusion because, even though individual experience plays a key role in assessing inclusion’s existence or potency, that alone is not suffi- cient. For example, an individual may say that she has not faced discrimination and that, on the contrary, she feels very included in her work group. But that may not be the case for other people who share one or more identity groups with her. To understand inclusion at the group level, we would need to assess how common her experience is within her work group as well as among others sharing some of her identities. It may also be possible that she is not aware of discrimination or patterns of participation that

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 17

objectively exist. If we are talking about a young African American woman, is her experience similar to that of other African Ameri- can women and/or other young people? Additionally, fostering inclusion experiences requires particular behaviors on the part of leaders and other work group members, as well as suitable policies and practices in the organization. Moreover, it is more likely that experiences of inclusion will be noticed and valued and that the vocabulary for describing and sharing them will be developed in the context of inclusive practices and climates of inclusion. To fully practice inclusion, we need to simultaneously consider and address these multiple levels (depicted in Figure 1.2).

Individual Experience As discussed previously, the foundation for inclusion is individual experience. At the individual level, I have defined the experience

Figure 1.2. Systems of Inclusion: A Multilevel Analytic Framework

Society: inclusive policies, practices, values, ideologies

Organization: inclusive policies, practices, climates

Leaders and leadership: inclusive

practices

Groups and teams: inclusive

practices, norms; collective

experience of inclusion

Individuals: inclusive

interpersonal behavior

Experience of inclusion: individual

18 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

of inclusion as the degree to which individuals “feel safe, trusted, accepted, respected, supported, valued, fulfilled, engaged, and authentic in their working environment, both as individuals and as members of particular identity groups” (Ferdman, Barrera, Allen, & Vuong, 2009, p. 6). In this view, I experience inclusion when I believe not only that I am being treated well individually, but also that others who share my identities and those groups as a whole “are respected, honored, trusted, and given voice, appre- ciation, power, and value” (Ferdman, Barrera, et al., 2009, p. 6).

These experiences of inclusion both lead to and stem from inclusive practices at other levels—particularly the interpersonal and group levels.

Inclusive Interpersonal Behavior To help create this experience, individuals can engage in a range of inclusive behavior as they relate to others around them and can also be the recipients of such behavior. For example, to be inclusive, I can seek others’ opinions, be curious about who they are and what matters to them, treat them in ways that to them signify respect, and work with others to arrive at jointly satisfying solutions rather than impose my approach or direction. (Later, I give more examples of inclusive behavior; see also Bennett, Chapter 5, and Wasserman, Chapter 4, this volume.)

Group-Level Inclusion Groups create inclusion by engaging in suitable practices and establishing appropriate norms, such as treating everyone with respect, giving everyone a voice, emphasizing collaboration, and working through conflicts productively and authentically. Addi- tionally, it is possible to consider the collective experience of inclusion in the group in terms of the aggregate of individuals’ experiences (Ferdman, Avigdor, et al., 2010), again framing it as a construct grounded in perception and interpretation—in this case at the group level. For example, I worked with a client to develop an assessment of employees’ perceptions of inclusion and then was able to compare their overall sense of being included as a function of various identity categories, such as gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, type of job, unit, and location.

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 19

Inclusive Leaders and Leadership Leaders play an important role in fostering inclusion (see Booysen, Chapter 10; Gallegos, Chapter 6, this volume; also Chrobot-Mason, Ruderman, & Nishii, 2013, and Wasserman, Gallegos, & Ferdman, 2008), and one can identify critical practices to that effect. Beyond the interpersonal behaviors that everyone can put into practice, leaders have additional responsibilities, including holding others accountable for their behavior and making appropriate connec- tions between organizational imperatives or goals—the mission and vision of the organization—and inclusion. Beyond the par- ticular practices of individual leaders, the approach to leadership that is preferred or valued in an organization also plays an impor- tant role in the practice of inclusion. For example, leadership may emphasize a positive approach that is strengths-based and looks for ways to bring out the potential contributions of as many people as possible. In many ways, inclusive leadership is the linch- pin for inclusion at other levels of the multilevel framework; it can facilitate (and perhaps even be considered a key part of) inclusion in groups, organizations, and societies, as well as help translate and spread inclusion across these levels.

Inclusive Organizations Organizational policies and practices play a critical role in foster- ing a climate of inclusion and provide a context in which indi- vidual behavior and leadership are displayed, cultivated, and interpreted. This level of analysis is perhaps the one that has received the most attention on the part of both scholars and practitioners (see Church, Rotolo, Shull, & Tuller, Chapter 9; Nishii & Rich, Chapter 11; Offermann & Basford, Chapter 8; O’Mara, Chapter 14; and Winters, Chapter 7, this volume; also Kossek & Zonia, 1993, and Holvino, Ferdman, & Merrill-Sands, 2004). The organization’s culture—its values, norms, and pre- ferred styles—as well as its structures and systems, provide the container in which individuals interact and interpret their experi- ence. Holvino et al. (2004) described an inclusive organization as one where “the diversity of knowledge and perspectives that members of different groups bring . . . has shaped its strategy, its

20 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

work, its management and operating systems, and its core values and norms for success; .  .  . [and where] members of all groups are treated fairly, feel and are included, have equal opportunities, and are represented at all organizational levels and functions” (p. 249). Inclusive policies and practices to achieve this can be incor- porated in most if not all of the organization’s systems, including, for example, how work is organized and done; how employees are recruited, selected, evaluated, and promoted; how, by whom, and on what bases decisions are made, implemented, and evaluated; and how the organization engages with the surrounding commu- nity and other stakeholders.

Inclusive Societies Finally, these experiences, behaviors, policies, and practices all occur in the context of broader societal frameworks, including policies, practices, values, and ideologies that may or may not be supportive of inclusion (see Jonsen & Özbilgin, Chapter 12; Lukensmeyer, Yao, & Brown, Chapter 17; and Mor Barak & Daya, Chapter 13, this volume). For example, in the United States, as in other societies, there have been many debates about whether it is valuable or appropriate for individuals and groups to remain culturally distinct within the larger society (Ferdman & Sagiv, 2012). Communities and societies (as well as interna- tional organizations) can take proactive steps to promote inclu- sion. Inclusive communities and societies incorporate values and practices that encourage individuals and groups to main- tain and develop their unique identities and cultures while con- tinuing to fully and equally belong to and participate in the larger community.

Conceptualizing Inclusion . . . Inclusively

The multilevel perspective described in the previous section pro- vides a framework for organizing and developing some clarity among the many descriptions and definitions of inclusion that have begun to appear in both academic and applied work. Because the concept of inclusion can be so broad and encompass so many aspects, it can sometimes unfortunately appear that the term is not quite precise. Yet, when we sort the concepts and definitions

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 21

according to their focus and level of analysis, I believe that a much clearer and useful picture can emerge. In Table 1.1, I present many of these conceptualizations, sorted both by level of analysis and by year of publication.

The perspectives on inclusion listed in Table 1.1 are impor- tant not only because they represent a historical overview of the development and application of the concept, but also because viewing them together and in juxtaposition helps high- light key themes regarding an emergent comprehensive inclu- sion framework.

One such emergent theme is that there are many useful defi- nitions of inclusion, all of which make sense in some context. I would argue that it is not necessary or even productive to arrive at one single definition of inclusion, because ultimately the suit- ability of a particular version of the concept will depend on our frame of reference, our purpose, and our level of analysis. At the same time, if we are to advance the field, it may be helpful and perhaps is even imperative that both practitioners and scholars seek to be clearer and more specific about how their particular or preferred approach fits into the larger system or framework of inclusion, and at which level(s). Particularly when seeking to generalize from research, but also from one applied setting to another, considering the particular operationalization of inclu- sion that is involved can also be helpful.

This requires knowing more about and acknowledging what others are doing and saying; being precise, where possible, about one’s own perspective; and describing (or at least being aware of) how one’s position or view relates to that of others. This point is somewhat analogous to the practice of inclusion itself, in that inclusion is grounded in the idea that we are all better off— collectively and individually—with a broader range of interdepen- dent and mutually reinforcing contributions and perspectives. Bailey Jackson (1994) eloquently described it this way: “My attempts to construct a vision of a multicultural system were extremely frustrating until I realized it is impossible for me or any other single person to construct such a vision of a multicultural organization, community, society, or other social system. .  .  . To create a vision of a multicultural system, a diversity of perspectives must be represented in a group of people who are engaged in a

T ab

le 1

.1 .

C on

ce pt

s of

I nc

lu si

on

L ev

el o

f A

na ly

si s

C on

ce pt

So ur

ce

In di

vi du

al s

“I n

cl us

iv en

es s

en co

ur ag

es i

n di

vi du

al s

of a

ll id

en ti

ty g

ro up

s to

c on

tr ib

ut e

al l

th ei

r ta

le n

ts , s

ki lls

, a n

d en

er gi

es t

o th

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

, n ot

m er

el y

th os

e th

at c

ou ld

b e

to le

ra te

d or

a cc

ep te

d w

it h

in a

n ar

ro w

r an

ge o

f m

on oc

ul tu

ra l

st yl

e an

d ex

pe ct

at io

n s.

”

M ill

er a

n d

K at

z,

19 95

, p . 2

78

In cl

us io

n i

s “t

h e

de gr

ee t

o w

h ic

h i

n di

vi du

al s

fe el

p ar

t of

c ri

ti ca

l or

ga n

iz at

io n

al

pr oc

es se

s, ”

in di

ca te

d by

t h

ei r

ac ce

ss t

o in

fo rm

at io

n a

n d

re so

ur ce

s, w

or k

gr ou

p in

vo lv

em en

t, an

d ab

ili ty

t o

in fl

ue n

ce d

ec is

io n

m ak

in g.

M or

-B ar

ak a

n d

C h

er in

, 1 99

8,

p. 4

8 In

cl us

io n

i s

“t h

e de

gr ee

t o

w h

ic h

a n

e m

pl oy

ee i

s ac

ce pt

ed a

n d

tr ea

te d

as a

n

in si

de r

by o

th er

s in

a w

or k

sy st

em .”

U se

d “t

h re

e in

cl us

io n

i n

di ca

to rs

: ( 1)

de

ci si

on -m

ak in

g in

fl ue

n ce

, t h

at i

s th

e in

fl ue

n ce

t h

at a

n e

m pl

oy ee

h as

o ve

r de

ci si

on s

th at

a ff

ec t

h im

/h er

o r

th e

w or

k th

at s

/h e

do es

.  . .

; (2

) ac

ce ss

t o

se n

si ti

ve w

or k

in fo

rm at

io n

, t h

at i

s th

e de

gr ee

t o

w h

ic h

a n

e m

pl oy

ee i

s ke

pt

w el

l-i n

fo rm

ed a

bo ut

t h

e co

m pa

n y

bu si

n es

s ob

je ct

iv es

a n

d pl

an s;

a n

d (3

) jo

b se

cu ri

ty , t

h at

i s

th e

lik el

ih oo

d th

at a

n e

m pl

oy ee

w ill

r et

ai n

h is

/h er

jo b.

”

Pe lle

d, L

ed fo

rd ,

an d

M oh

rm an

, 19

99 , p

. 1 01

4–

10 15

“O n

e’ s

ex pe

ri en

ce o

f in

cl us

io n

i n

t h

e co

lle ct

iv e

is a

p ow

er fu

l de

te rm

in an

t of

ac

ti on

. .  . 

. O n

e’ s

se n

se o

f fe

el in

g in

cl ud

ed i

s m

os t

cr it

ic al

b ec

au se

i t

st re

n gt

h en

s af

fe ct

iv e

co m

m it

m en

t to

t h

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

. I f

on e

fe el

s in

cl ud

ed , o

n e

pe rc

ei ve

s on

es el

f as

p sy

ch ol

og ic

al ly

l in

ke d

to t

h e

or ga

n iz

at io

n , e

xp er

ie n

ci n

g th

e su

cc es

se s

an d

fa ilu

re s

of t

h e

or ga

n iz

at io

n a

s on

e’ s

ow n

.”

D av

id so

n , 1

99 9,

p.

1 72

T h

er e

is “

a ra

n ge

o f

as pe

ct s

of t

h e

ex pe

ri en

ce o

f in

cl us

io n

, s uc

h a

s fe

el in

g va

lid at

ed , a

cc ep

te d,

h ea

rd , a

n d

ap pr

ec ia

te d;

u si

n g

on e’

s ta

le n

ts a

n d

m ak

in g

a di

ff er

en ce

( in

cl ud

in g

be in

g pa

rt o

f so

m et

h in

g th

at i

s w

or ki

n g

an d

do in

g a

m ea

n in

gf ul

t as

k) ; h

av in

g so

m e

w or

k au

to n

om y;

r ec

ei vi

n g

fe ed

ba ck

; h av

in g

on e’

s in

pu t

so lic

it ed

a n

d us

ed ; i

n vo

lv em

en t

in c

ol la

bo ra

ti on

; o pe

n n

es s

fo r

di al

og ue

; an

d w

an ti

n g

to l

ea rn

f ro

m o

th er

s. . 

. . [

W ]h

ile t

h er

e ar

e co

m m

on al

it ie

s or

ge

n er

al t

h em

es i

n t

er m

s of

w h

at p

eo pl

e ex

pe ri

en ce

a s

in cl

us io

n —

fe el

in g

va lu

ed ,

re sp

ec te

d, r

ec og

n iz

ed , t

ru st

ed , a

n d

th at

o n

e is

m ak

in g

a di

ff er

en ce

— n

ot

ev er

yo n

e ex

pe ri

en ce

s th

es e

in t

h e

sa m

e w

ay .”

Fe rd

m an

a n

d D

av id

so n

, 20

02 b,

p . 8

1

In cl

us io

n i

s “a

n i

n di

vi du

al ’s

c ol

le ct

iv e

ju dg

m en

t or

p er

ce pt

io n

o f

be lo

n gi

n g

as a

n

ac ce

pt ed

, w el

co m

ed a

n d

va lu

ed m

em be

r in

t h

e la

rg er

o rg

an iz

at io

n u

n it

s, s

uc h

a s

a w

or k

gr ou

p, d

ep ar

tm en

t, an

d ov

er al

l or

ga n

iz at

io n

.”

H ay

es a

n d

M aj

or , 2

00 3,

p.

5 D

efi n

es “

be lo

n gi

n g”

a s

h av

in g

tw o

re la

te d

as pe

ct s:

“ T

h e

fi rs

t is

s oc

ia l

co n

n ec

ti on

or

a ffi

lia ti

on , i

n cl

ud in

g bo

n ds

o f

lo ve

, f ri

en ds

h ip

a n

d sh

ar ed

p ur

po se

, a s

w el

l as

th

e ba

si c

ab ili

ty t

o co

m m

un ic

at e

an d

re la

te t

o ot

h er

s. . 

. . T

h e

se co

n d

as pe

ct i

s so

ci al

a cc

ep ta

n ce

, w h

ic h

e n

ab le

s a

pe rs

on t

o be

w it

h a

n d

am on

g ot

h er

s w

it h

a

se n

se o

f co

m fo

rt a

n d

en ti

tl em

en t,

or i

n s

h or

t, a

se n

se t

h at

s h

e be

lo n

gs a

n d

th at

sh

e h

as a

r ig

h tf

ul p

la ce

i n

t h

e w

or ld

.”

H ub

ba rd

, 2 00

4,

p. 2

18

“W or

kp la

ce S

oc ia

l In

cl us

io n

.  . .

c ap

tu re

s th

e ex

te n

t to

w h

ic h

e m

pl oy

ee s

h av

e in

fo rm

al s

oc ia

l ti

es w

it h

o th

er s

at w

or k

an d

fe el

a s

if t

h ey

b el

on g

an d

ar e

so ci

al ly

in

cl ud

ed b

y ot

h er

s in

t h

ei r

w or

kp la

ce .”

Pe ar

ce a

n d

R an

de l,

20 04

, p.

8 4

“I n

cl us

io n

r ep

re se

n ts

a p

er so

n ’s

a bi

lit y

to c

on tr

ib ut

e fu

lly a

n d

ef fe

ct iv

el y

to a

n

or ga

n iz

at io

n .”

R ob

er so

n , 2

00 6,

p.

2 15

“A n

o rg

an iz

at io

n i

s in

cl us

iv e

w h

en e

ve ry

on e

h as

a s

en se

o f

be lo

n gi

n g;

f ee

ls

re sp

ec te

d, v

al ue

d an

d se

en f

or w

h o

th ey

a re

a s

in di

vi du

al s;

a n

d fe

el s

a le

ve l

of

su pp

or ti

ve e

n er

gy a

n d

co m

m it

m en

t fr

om l

ea de

rs , c

ol le

ag ue

s an

d ot

h er

s so

t h

at

al l

pe op

le —

in di

vi du

al ly

a n

d co

lle ct

iv el

y— ca

n d

o ou

r be

st w

or k.

”

M ill

er a

n d

K at

z,

20 07

, p . 2

22

T ab

le 1

.1 .

C on

ce pt

s of

I nc

lu si

on

L ev

el o

f A

na ly

si s

C on

ce pt

So ur

ce

In di

vi du

al s

“I n

cl us

iv en

es s

en co

ur ag

es i

n di

vi du

al s

of a

ll id

en ti

ty g

ro up

s to

c on

tr ib

ut e

al l

th ei

r ta

le n

ts , s

ki lls

, a n

d en

er gi

es t

o th

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

, n ot

m er

el y

th os

e th

at c

ou ld

b e

to le

ra te

d or

a cc

ep te

d w

it h

in a

n ar

ro w

r an

ge o

f m

on oc

ul tu

ra l

st yl

e an

d ex

pe ct

at io

n s.

”

M ill

er a

n d

K at

z,

19 95

, p . 2

78

In cl

us io

n i

s “t

h e

de gr

ee t

o w

h ic

h i

n di

vi du

al s

fe el

p ar

t of

c ri

ti ca

l or

ga n

iz at

io n

al

pr oc

es se

s, ”

in di

ca te

d by

t h

ei r

ac ce

ss t

o in

fo rm

at io

n a

n d

re so

ur ce

s, w

or k

gr ou

p in

vo lv

em en

t, an

d ab

ili ty

t o

in fl

ue n

ce d

ec is

io n

m ak

in g.

M or

-B ar

ak a

n d

C h

er in

, 1 99

8,

p. 4

8 In

cl us

io n

i s

“t h

e de

gr ee

t o

w h

ic h

a n

e m

pl oy

ee i

s ac

ce pt

ed a

n d

tr ea

te d

as a

n

in si

de r

by o

th er

s in

a w

or k

sy st

em .”

U se

d “t

h re

e in

cl us

io n

i n

di ca

to rs

: ( 1)

de

ci si

on -m

ak in

g in

fl ue

n ce

, t h

at i

s th

e in

fl ue

n ce

t h

at a

n e

m pl

oy ee

h as

o ve

r de

ci si

on s

th at

a ff

ec t

h im

/h er

o r

th e

w or

k th

at s

/h e

do es

.  . .

; (2

) ac

ce ss

t o

se n

si ti

ve w

or k

in fo

rm at

io n

, t h

at i

s th

e de

gr ee

t o

w h

ic h

a n

e m

pl oy

ee i

s ke

pt

w el

l-i n

fo rm

ed a

bo ut

t h

e co

m pa

n y

bu si

n es

s ob

je ct

iv es

a n

d pl

an s;

a n

d (3

) jo

b se

cu ri

ty , t

h at

i s

th e

lik el

ih oo

d th

at a

n e

m pl

oy ee

w ill

r et

ai n

h is

/h er

jo b.

”

Pe lle

d, L

ed fo

rd ,

an d

M oh

rm an

, 19

99 , p

. 1 01

4–

10 15

“O n

e’ s

ex pe

ri en

ce o

f in

cl us

io n

i n

t h

e co

lle ct

iv e

is a

p ow

er fu

l de

te rm

in an

t of

ac

ti on

. .  . 

. O n

e’ s

se n

se o

f fe

el in

g in

cl ud

ed i

s m

os t

cr it

ic al

b ec

au se

i t

st re

n gt

h en

s af

fe ct

iv e

co m

m it

m en

t to

t h

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

. I f

on e

fe el

s in

cl ud

ed , o

n e

pe rc

ei ve

s on

es el

f as

p sy

ch ol

og ic

al ly

l in

ke d

to t

h e

or ga

n iz

at io

n , e

xp er

ie n

ci n

g th

e su

cc es

se s

an d

fa ilu

re s

of t

h e

or ga

n iz

at io

n a

s on

e’ s

ow n

.”

D av

id so

n , 1

99 9,

p.

1 72

T h

er e

is “

a ra

n ge

o f

as pe

ct s

of t

h e

ex pe

ri en

ce o

f in

cl us

io n

, s uc

h a

s fe

el in

g va

lid at

ed , a

cc ep

te d,

h ea

rd , a

n d

ap pr

ec ia

te d;

u si

n g

on e’

s ta

le n

ts a

n d

m ak

in g

a di

ff er

en ce

( in

cl ud

in g

be in

g pa

rt o

f so

m et

h in

g th

at i

s w

or ki

n g

an d

do in

g a

m ea

n in

gf ul

t as

k) ; h

av in

g so

m e

w or

k au

to n

om y;

r ec

ei vi

n g

fe ed

ba ck

; h av

in g

on e’

s in

pu t

so lic

it ed

a n

d us

ed ; i

n vo

lv em

en t

in c

ol la

bo ra

ti on

; o pe

n n

es s

fo r

di al

og ue

; an

d w

an ti

n g

to l

ea rn

f ro

m o

th er

s. . 

. . [

W ]h

ile t

h er

e ar

e co

m m

on al

it ie

s or

ge

n er

al t

h em

es i

n t

er m

s of

w h

at p

eo pl

e ex

pe ri

en ce

a s

in cl

us io

n —

fe el

in g

va lu

ed ,

re sp

ec te

d, r

ec og

n iz

ed , t

ru st

ed , a

n d

th at

o n

e is

m ak

in g

a di

ff er

en ce

— n

ot

ev er

yo n

e ex

pe ri

en ce

s th

es e

in t

h e

sa m

e w

ay .”

Fe rd

m an

a n

d D

av id

so n

, 20

02 b,

p . 8

1

In cl

us io

n i

s “a

n i

n di

vi du

al ’s

c ol

le ct

iv e

ju dg

m en

t or

p er

ce pt

io n

o f

be lo

n gi

n g

as a

n

ac ce

pt ed

, w el

co m

ed a

n d

va lu

ed m

em be

r in

t h

e la

rg er

o rg

an iz

at io

n u

n it

s, s

uc h

a s

a w

or k

gr ou

p, d

ep ar

tm en

t, an

d ov

er al

l or

ga n

iz at

io n

.”

H ay

es a

n d

M aj

or , 2

00 3,

p.

5 D

efi n

es “

be lo

n gi

n g”

a s

h av

in g

tw o

re la

te d

as pe

ct s:

“ T

h e

fi rs

t is

s oc

ia l

co n

n ec

ti on

or

a ffi

lia ti

on , i

n cl

ud in

g bo

n ds

o f

lo ve

, f ri

en ds

h ip

a n

d sh

ar ed

p ur

po se

, a s

w el

l as

th

e ba

si c

ab ili

ty t

o co

m m

un ic

at e

an d

re la

te t

o ot

h er

s. . 

. . T

h e

se co

n d

as pe

ct i

s so

ci al

a cc

ep ta

n ce

, w h

ic h

e n

ab le

s a

pe rs

on t

o be

w it

h a

n d

am on

g ot

h er

s w

it h

a

se n

se o

f co

m fo

rt a

n d

en ti

tl em

en t,

or i

n s

h or

t, a

se n

se t

h at

s h

e be

lo n

gs a

n d

th at

sh

e h

as a

r ig

h tf

ul p

la ce

i n

t h

e w

or ld

.”

H ub

ba rd

, 2 00

4,

p. 2

18

“W or

kp la

ce S

oc ia

l In

cl us

io n

.  . .

c ap

tu re

s th

e ex

te n

t to

w h

ic h

e m

pl oy

ee s

h av

e in

fo rm

al s

oc ia

l ti

es w

it h

o th

er s

at w

or k

an d

fe el

a s

if t

h ey

b el

on g

an d

ar e

so ci

al ly

in

cl ud

ed b

y ot

h er

s in

t h

ei r

w or

kp la

ce .”

Pe ar

ce a

n d

R an

de l,

20 04

, p.

8 4

“I n

cl us

io n

r ep

re se

n ts

a p

er so

n ’s

a bi

lit y

to c

on tr

ib ut

e fu

lly a

n d

ef fe

ct iv

el y

to a

n

or ga

n iz

at io

n .”

R ob

er so

n , 2

00 6,

p.

2 15

“A n

o rg

an iz

at io

n i

s in

cl us

iv e

w h

en e

ve ry

on e

h as

a s

en se

o f

be lo

n gi

n g;

f ee

ls

re sp

ec te

d, v

al ue

d an

d se

en f

or w

h o

th ey

a re

a s

in di

vi du

al s;

a n

d fe

el s

a le

ve l

of

su pp

or ti

ve e

n er

gy a

n d

co m

m it

m en

t fr

om l

ea de

rs , c

ol le

ag ue

s an

d ot

h er

s so

t h

at

al l

pe op

le —

in di

vi du

al ly

a n

d co

lle ct

iv el

y— ca

n d

o ou

r be

st w

or k.

”

M ill

er a

n d

K at

z,

20 07

, p . 2 C on

tin ue

d

23

24

L ev

el o

f A

na ly

si s

C on

ce pt

So ur

ce

“W e

de fi

n e

th e

ex pe

ri en

ce o

f in

cl us

io n

in a

w or

kg ro

up a

s in

di vi

du al

s’ p

er ce

pt io

n o

f th

e ex

te n

t to

w h

ic h

t h

ey f

ee l

sa fe

, t ru

st ed

, a cc

ep te

d, r

es pe

ct ed

, s up

po rt

ed ,

va lu

ed , f

ul fi

lle d,

e n

ga ge

d, a

n d

au th

en ti

c in

t h

ei r

w or

ki n

g en

vi ro

n m

en t,

bo th

a s

in di

vi du

al s

an d

as m

em be

rs o

f pa

rt ic

ul ar

i de

n ti

ty g

ro up

s”

Fe rd

m an

, B

ar re

ra , e

t al

., 20

09 , p

. 6

“[ I]

n cl

us io

n i

n vo

lv es

b ot

h b

ei n

g fu

lly o

ur se

lv es

a n

d al

lo w

in g

ot h

er s

to b

e fu

lly

th em

se lv

es i

n t

h e

co n

te xt

o f

en ga

gi n

g in

c om

m on

p ur

su it

s. I

t m

ea n

s co

lla bo

ra ti

n g

in a

w ay

i n

w h

ic h

a ll

pa rt

ie s

ca n

b e

fu lly

e n

ga ge

d an

d su

bs um

ed ,

an d

ye t,

pa ra

do xi

ca lly

, a t

th e

sa m

e ti

m e

be lie

ve t

h at

t h

ey h

av e

n ot

c om

pr om

is ed

, h

id de

n , o

r gi

ve n

u p

an y

pa rt

o f

th em

se lv

es . T

h us

, f or

i n

di vi

du al

s, e

xp er

ie n

ci n

g in

cl us

io n

i n

a g

ro up

o r

or ga

n iz

at io

n i

n vo

lv es

b ei

n g

fu lly

p ar

t of

t h

e w

h ol

e w

h ile

re

ta in

in g

a se

n se

o f

au th

en ti

ci ty

a n

d un

iq ue

n es

s. ”

Fe rd

m an

, 2 01

0,

p. 3

7

“W e

de fi

n e

in cl

us io

n a

s th

e de

gr ee

t o

w h

ic h

a n

e m

pl oy

ee p

er ce

iv es

t h

at h

e or

sh

e is

a n

e st

ee m

ed m

em be

r of

t h

e w

or k

gr ou

p th

ro ug

h e

xp er

ie n

ci n

g tr

ea tm

en t

th at

s at

is fi

es h

is o

r h

er n

ee ds

f or

b el

on gi

n gn

es s

an d

un iq

ue n

es s.

”

Sh or

e, R

an de

l, C

h un

g, D

ea n

, E

h rh

ar t,

an d

Si n

gh , 2

01 1,

p.

1 26

5 L

ea de

rs “M

an ag

er s

an d

le ad

er s

ro ut

in el

y us

e a

va ri

et y

of t

ec h

n iq

ue s,

s uc

h a

s en

co ur

ag in

g in

fo rm

al s

oc ia

l in

te ra

ct io

n a

n d

cr ea

ti n

g an

d m

ai n

ta in

in g

st ro

n g

or ga

n iz

at io

n al

cu

lt ur

es , t

o h

el p

pe op

le f

ee l

a pa

rt o

f th

e w

h ol

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

.”

D av

id so

n , 1

99 9,

p.

1 72

L ea

de r

in cl

us iv

en es

s: “

w or

ds a

n d

de ed

s by

a l

ea de

r . .

 . th

at i

n di

ca te

a n

i n

vi ta

ti on

an

d ap

pr ec

ia ti

on f

or o

th er

s’ c

on tr

ib ut

io n

s. L

ea de

r in

cl us

iv en

es s

ca pt

ur es

at

te m

pt s

by l

ea de

rs t

o in

cl ud

e ot

h er

s in

d is

cu ss

io n

s an

d de

ci si

on s

in w

h ic

h t

h ei

r vo

ic es

a n

d pe

rs pe

ct iv

es m

ig h

t ot

h er

w is

e be

a bs

en t.”

N em

bh ar

d an

d E

dm on

so n

, 20

06 , p

. 9 47

“B ui

ld in

g a

cu lt

ur e

of i

n cl

us io

n i

n vo

lv es

a n

ew s

et o

f le

ad er

sh ip

q ua

lit ie

s an

d sk

ill s

in cl

ud in

g fl

ex ib

ili ty

, fl ui

di ty

, s el

f-a w

ar en

es s

an d

m in

df ul

n es

s, c

ou ra

ge , a

n d

th e

ca pa

ci ty

t o

be v

ul n

er ab

le i

n a

p ow

er fu

l w

ay ."

W as

se rm

an ,

G al

le go

s, a

n d

Fe rd

m an

, 2 00

8,

p. 1

80 G

ro up

s “I

n cl

us iv

e gr

ou ps

e n

co ur

ag e

di sa

gr ee

m en

t be

ca us

e th

ey r

ea liz

e it

l ea

ds t

o m

or e-

ef fe

ct iv

e so

lu ti

on s

an d

m or

e- su

cc es

sf ul

a da

pt at

io n

s to

a c

h an

gi n

g en

vi ro

n m

en t.

In st

ea d

of p

re ss

ur in

g m

em be

rs t

o le

av e

th ei

r in

di vi

du al

a n

d cu

lt ur

al d

if fe

re n

ce s

ou ts

id e,

i n

cl us

iv e

gr ou

ps a

sk e

ve ry

on e

to c

on tr

ib ut

e to

t h

e fu

ll ex

te n

t of

t h

ei r

be in

g. ”

M ill

er , 1

99 4,

p.

3 9

“I n

cl us

io n

i s

th e

pr ac

ti ce

o f

em br

ac in

g an

d us

in g

di ff

er en

ce s

as o

pp or

tu n

it ie

s fo

r ad

de d

va lu

e an

d co

m pe

ti ti

ve a

dv an

ta ge

s in

t ea

m w

or k,

p ro

du ct

q ua

lit y,

a n

d w

or k

ou tp

ut .”

K at

z an

d M

ill er

, 19

96 , p

. 1 05

“[ I]

n cr

ea si

n g

in cl

us io

n w

ou ld

r eq

ui re

d ev

el op

in g

th e

sk ill

s to

a llo

w o

ur se

lv es

a n

d ot

h er

s to

s ee

m or

e of

t h

e co

m pl

et e

an d

co m

pl ex

p ic

tu re

o f

ou r

in te

rg ro

up

re al

it ie

s, a

s th

es e

ar e

ex pr

es se

d in

o ur

e ve

ry da

y co

lla bo

ra ti

on s.

I t

is a

bo ut

al

lo w

in g

fo r

bo th

s im

ila ri

ti es

a n

d di

ff er

en ce

s at

b ot

h t

h e

in di

vi du

al a

n d

th e

gr ou

p le

ve ls

a t

th e

sa m

e ti

m e

th at

w e

ar e

jo in

ed t

og et

h er

i n

a c

om m

on e

n de

av or

. . .

 . [I

t is

a bo

ut a

vo id

in g

fu si

on , i

n w

h ic

h I

a ct

a s

if w

e ar

e th

e sa

m e,

a s

w el

l as

av

oi di

n g

di sc

on n

ec ti

on , i

n w

h ic

h I

b el

ie ve

a n

d ac

t as

i f

w e

ar e

co m

pl et

el y

di ff

er en

t.”

Fe rd

m an

a n

d D

av id

so n

, 2 00

4,

p. 3

3– 34

T ab

le 1

.1 .

C on

ti nu

ed

25

L ev

el o

f A

na ly

si s

C on

ce pt

So ur

ce

“W e

de fi

n e

th e

ex pe

ri en

ce o

f in

cl us

io n

in a

w or

kg ro

up a

s in

di vi

du al

s’ p

er ce

pt io

n o

f th

e ex

te n

t to

w h

ic h

t h

ey f

ee l

sa fe

, t ru

st ed

, a cc

ep te

d, r

es pe

ct ed

, s up

po rt

ed ,

va lu

ed , f

ul fi

lle d,

e n

ga ge

d, a

n d

au th

en ti

c in

t h

ei r

w or

ki n

g en

vi ro

n m

en t,

bo th

a s

in di

vi du

al s

an d

as m

em be

rs o

f pa

rt ic

ul ar

i de

n ti

ty g

ro up

s”

Fe rd

m an

, B

ar re

ra , e

t al

., 20

09 , p

. 6

“[ I]

n cl

us io

n i

n vo

lv es

b ot

h b

ei n

g fu

lly o

ur se

lv es

a n

d al

lo w

in g

ot h

er s

to b

e fu

lly

th em

se lv

es i

n t

h e

co n

te xt

o f

en ga

gi n

g in

c om

m on

p ur

su it

s. I

t m

ea n

s co

lla bo

ra ti

n g

in a

w ay

i n

w h

ic h

a ll

pa rt

ie s

ca n

b e

fu lly

e n

ga ge

d an

d su

bs um

ed ,

an d

ye t,

pa ra

do xi

ca lly

, a t

th e

sa m

e ti

m e

be lie

ve t

h at

t h

ey h

av e

n ot

c om

pr om

is ed

, h

id de

n , o

r gi

ve n

u p

an y

pa rt

o f

th em

se lv

es . T

h us

, f or

i n

di vi

du al

s, e

xp er

ie n

ci n

g in

cl us

io n

i n

a g

ro up

o r

or ga

n iz

at io

n i

n vo

lv es

b ei

n g

fu lly

p ar

t of

t h

e w

h ol

e w

h ile

re

ta in

in g

a se

n se

o f

au th

en ti

ci ty

a n

d un

iq ue

n es

s. ”

Fe rd

m an

, 2 01

0,

p. 3

7

“W e

de fi

n e

in cl

us io

n a

s th

e de

gr ee

t o

w h

ic h

a n

e m

pl oy

ee p

er ce

iv es

t h

at h

e or

sh

e is

a n

e st

ee m

ed m

em be

r of

t h

e w

or k

gr ou

p th

ro ug

h e

xp er

ie n

ci n

g tr

ea tm

en t

th at

s at

is fi

es h

is o

r h

er n

ee ds

f or

b el

on gi

n gn

es s

an d

un iq

ue n

es s.

”

Sh or

e, R

an de

l, C

h un

g, D

ea n

, E

h rh

ar t,

an d

Si n

gh , 2

01 1,

p.

1 26

5 L

ea de

rs “M

an ag

er s

an d

le ad

er s

ro ut

in el

y us

e a

va ri

et y

of t

ec h

n iq

ue s,

s uc

h a

s en

co ur

ag in

g in

fo rm

al s

oc ia

l in

te ra

ct io

n a

n d

cr ea

ti n

g an

d m

ai n

ta in

in g

st ro

n g

or ga

n iz

at io

n al

cu

lt ur

es , t

o h

el p

pe op

le f

ee l

a pa

rt o

f th

e w

h ol

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

.”

D av

id so

n , 1

99 9,

p.

1 72

L ea

de r

in cl

us iv

en es

s: “

w or

ds a

n d

de ed

s by

a l

ea de

r . .

 . th

at i

n di

ca te

a n

i n

vi ta

ti on

an

d ap

pr ec

ia ti

on f

or o

th er

s’ c

on tr

ib ut

io n

s. L

ea de

r in

cl us

iv en

es s

ca pt

ur es

at

te m

pt s

by l

ea de

rs t

o in

cl ud

e ot

h er

s in

d is

cu ss

io n

s an

d de

ci si

on s

in w

h ic

h t

h ei

r vo

ic es

a n

d pe

rs pe

ct iv

es m

ig h

t ot

h er

w is

e be

a bs

en t.”

N em

bh ar

d an

d E

dm on

so n

, 20

06 , p

. 9 47

“B ui

ld in

g a

cu lt

ur e

of i

n cl

us io

n i

n vo

lv es

a n

ew s

et o

f le

ad er

sh ip

q ua

lit ie

s an

d sk

ill s

in cl

ud in

g fl

ex ib

ili ty

, fl ui

di ty

, s el

f-a w

ar en

es s

an d

m in

df ul

n es

s, c

ou ra

ge , a

n d

th e

ca pa

ci ty

t o

be v

ul n

er ab

le i

n a

p ow

er fu

l w

ay ."

W as

se rm

an ,

G al

le go

s, a

n d

Fe rd

m an

, 2 00

8,

p. 1

80 G

ro up

s “I

n cl

us iv

e gr

ou ps

e n

co ur

ag e

di sa

gr ee

m en

t be

ca us

e th

ey r

ea liz

e it

l ea

ds t

o m

or e-

ef fe

ct iv

e so

lu ti

on s

an d

m or

e- su

cc es

sf ul

a da

pt at

io n

s to

a c

h an

gi n

g en

vi ro

n m

en t.

In st

ea d

of p

re ss

ur in

g m

em be

rs t

o le

av e

th ei

r in

di vi

du al

a n

d cu

lt ur

al d

if fe

re n

ce s

ou ts

id e,

i n

cl us

iv e

gr ou

ps a

sk e

ve ry

on e

to c

on tr

ib ut

e to

t h

e fu

ll ex

te n

t of

t h

ei r

be in

g. ”

M ill

er , 1

99 4,

p.

3 9

“I n

cl us

io n

i s

th e

pr ac

ti ce

o f

em br

ac in

g an

d us

in g

di ff

er en

ce s

as o

pp or

tu n

it ie

s fo

r ad

de d

va lu

e an

d co

m pe

ti ti

ve a

dv an

ta ge

s in

t ea

m w

or k,

p ro

du ct

q ua

lit y,

a n

d w

or k

ou tp

ut .”

K at

z an

d M

ill er

, 19

96 , p

. 1 05

“[ I]

n cr

ea si

n g

in cl

us io

n w

ou ld

r eq

ui re

d ev

el op

in g

th e

sk ill

s to

a llo

w o

ur se

lv es

a n

d ot

h er

s to

s ee

m or

e of

t h

e co

m pl

et e

an d

co m

pl ex

p ic

tu re

o f

ou r

in te

rg ro

up

re al

it ie

s, a

s th

es e

ar e

ex pr

es se

d in

o ur

e ve

ry da

y co

lla bo

ra ti

on s.

I t

is a

bo ut

al

lo w

in g

fo r

bo th

s im

ila ri

ti es

a n

d di

ff er

en ce

s at

b ot

h t

h e

in di

vi du

al a

n d

th e

gr ou

p le

ve ls

a t

th e

sa m

e ti

m e

th at

w e

ar e

jo in

ed t

og et

h er

i n

a c

om m

on e

n de

av or

. . .

 . [I

t is

a bo

ut a

vo id

in g

fu si

on , i

n w

h ic

h I

a ct

a s

if w

e ar

e th

e sa

m e,

a s

w el

l as

av

oi di

n g

di sc

on n

ec ti

on , i

n w

h ic

h I

b el

ie ve

a n

d ac

t as

i f

w e

ar e

co m

pl et

el y

di ff

er en

t.”

Fe rd

m an

a n

d D

av id

so n

, 2 00

4,

p. 3

3– 34 C

on tin

ue d

26

L ev

el o

f A

na ly

si s

C on

ce pt

So ur

ce

“W e

de fi

n e

C ol

le ct

iv e

Ex pe

ri en

ce o

f In

cl us

io n

(C ol

le ct

iv e

E O

I) a

s th

e ov

er al

l or

ad

di ti

ve s

en se

o f

th e

ex te

n t

to w

h ic

h p

eo pl

e in

a g

ro up

f ee

l ac

ce pt

ed , e

n ga

ge d,

sa

fe , a

n d

va lu

ed —

es se

n ti

al ly

t h

e ag

gr eg

at ed

e xp

er ie

n ce

o f

in cl

us io

n a

cr os

s al

l in

di vi

du al

s in

a g

ro up

.”

Fe rd

m an

, A

vi gd

or , e

t al

., 20

10 , p

. 1 6

M em

be rs

a re

“ tr

ea te

d as

.  . .

i n

si de

r[ s]

a n

d al

so a

llo w

ed /e

n co

ur ag

ed t

o re

ta in

un

iq ue

n es

s w

it h

in t

h e

w or

k gr

ou p.

” Sh

or e

et a

l.,

20 11

, p . 1

26 6

O rg

an iz

at io

ns

an d

C om

pl ex

Sy

st em

s

“.  . 

. f ro

m t

h e

pe rs

pe ct

iv e

of t

h e

m or

al i

m pe

ra ti

ve , i

n cl

us io

n i

m pl

ie s

n ot

o n

ly

el im

in at

in g

ba rr

ie rs

t o

op po

rt un

it y

ba se

d on

g ro

up d

if fe

re n

ce s

bu t

al so

su

pp or

ti n

g ev

er y

in di

vi du

al t

o re

ac h

h er

o r

h is

f ul

l po

te n

ti al

.  . .

w it

h ou

t re

qu ir

in g

as si

m ila

ti on

.” “I

n cl

us io

n a

s se

en f

ro m

t h

e pe

rs pe

ct iv

e of

l eg

al a

n d

so ci

al p

re ss

ur es

p ri

m ar

ily

in vo

lv es

r em

ov in

g ill

eg al

b ar

ri er

s . .

 . or

o bs

ta cl

es p

er ce

iv ed

t o

be u

n fa

ir . .

 .  .

[T h

is ]

ap pr

oa ch

t en

ds t

o be

p ri

m ar

ily r

ea ct

iv e

. .  .”

“F ro

m t

h e

va n

ta ge

p oi

n t

of b

us in

es s

su cc

es s,

i n

cl us

io n

i s

ab ou

t m

ak in

g su

re t

h e

or ga

n iz

at io

n u

se s

al l

pr od

uc ti

ve c

ap ac

it y

an d

po te

n ti

al t

o th

e fu

ll ex

te n

t. . .

 . [I

t]

is n

ot l

im it

ed t

o pa

rt ic

ul ar

g ro

up s

or c

at eg

or ie

s of

p eo

pl e.

A ll

in di

vi du

al s

m us

t be

i n

cl ud

ed i

n t

h ei

r fu

ll un

iq ue

n es

s an

d co

m pl

ex it

y. ”

Fe rd

m an

a n

d B

ro dy

, 1 99

6,

p. 2

86

p. 2

87

p. 2

89

“I n

st it

ut io

n al

a n

d sy

st em

ic b

ia s

ca n

a ls

o se

rv e

as a

n i

m pe

di m

en t

to c

ul ti

va ti

n g

an

in cl

us iv

e en

vi ro

n m

en t.”

D av

id so

n , 1

99 9,

p.

1 72

”T h

e in

cl us

iv e

w or

kp la

ce i

s on

e th

at : v

al ue

s an

d us

es i

n di

vi du

al a

n d

in te

rg ro

up

di ff

er en

ce s

w it

h in

i ts

w or

k fo

rc e;

c oo

pe ra

te s

w it

h a

n d

co n

tr ib

ut es

t o

it s

su rr

ou n

di n

g co

m m

un it

y; a

lle vi

at es

t h

e n

ee ds

o f

di sa

dv an

ta ge

d gr

ou ps

i n

i ts

w id

er

en vi

ro n

m en

t; co

lla bo

ra te

s w

it h

i n

di vi

du al

s, g

ro up

s, a

n d

or ga

n iz

at io

n s

ac ro

ss

n at

io n

al a

n d

cu lt

ur al

b ou

n da

ri es

.”

M or

B ar

ak ,

20 00

b, p

. 3 39

In cl

us io

n a

dd re

ss es

t h

e de

gr ee

t o

w h

ic h

( a)

e m

pl oy

ee s

ar e

va lu

ed a

n d

th ei

r id

ea s

ar e

ta ke

n i

n to

a cc

ou n

t an

d us

ed , (

b) p

eo pl

e pa

rt n

er s

uc ce

ss fu

lly w

it h

in a

n d

ac ro

ss d

ep ar

tm en

ts , (

c) c

ur re

n t

em pl

oy ee

s fe

el t

h at

t h

ey b

el on

g an

d pr

os pe

ct iv

e em

pl oy

ee s

ar e

at tr

ac te

d to

t h

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

, ( d)

p eo

pl e

fe el

c on

n ec

te d

to e

ac h

ot

h er

a n

d to

t h

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

a n

d it

s go

al s,

a n

d (e

) th

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

co

n ti

n uo

us ly

f os

te rs

fl ex

ib ili

ty a

n d

ch oi

ce , a

n d

at te

n ds

t o

di ve

rs it

y.

G as

or ek

, 2 00

0

“E xp

er ie

n ce

s of

i n

cl us

io n

r es

ul t

w h

en p

ol ic

ie s,

s tr

uc tu

re s,

p ra

ct ic

es , a

n d

n or

m s

of b

eh av

io r

ar e

al ig

n ed

i n

s uc

h a

w ay

t h

at e

ve ry

m em

be r

of a

g iv

en c

ol le

ct iv

e (c

om m

un it

y, o

rg an

iz at

io n

, o r

n et

w or

k) h

as a

f ai

r an

d eq

ua l

op po

rt un

it y

to a

cc es

s th

e jo

in t

re so

ur ce

s of

t h

at c

ol le

ct iv

e. ”

D av

id so

n a

n d

Fe rd

m an

, 2 00

2,

p. 1

T ab

le 1

.1 .

C on

ti nu

ed

27

L ev

el o

f A

na ly

si s

C on

ce pt

So ur

ce

“W e

de fi

n e

C ol

le ct

iv e

Ex pe

ri en

ce o

f In

cl us

io n

(C ol

le ct

iv e

E O

I) a

s th

e ov

er al

l or

ad

di ti

ve s

en se

o f

th e

ex te

n t

to w

h ic

h p

eo pl

e in

a g

ro up

f ee

l ac

ce pt

ed , e

n ga

ge d,

sa

fe , a

n d

va lu

ed —

es se

n ti

al ly

t h

e ag

gr eg

at ed

e xp

er ie

n ce

o f

in cl

us io

n a

cr os

s al

l in

di vi

du al

s in

a g

ro up

.”

Fe rd

m an

, A

vi gd

or , e

t al

., 20

10 , p

. 1 6

M em

be rs

a re

“ tr

ea te

d as

.  . .

i n

si de

r[ s]

a n

d al

so a

llo w

ed /e

n co

ur ag

ed t

o re

ta in

un

iq ue

n es

s w

it h

in t

h e

w or

k gr

ou p.

” Sh

or e

et a

l.,

20 11

, p . 1

26 6

O rg

an iz

at io

ns

an d

C om

pl ex

Sy

st em

s

“.  . 

. f ro

m t

h e

pe rs

pe ct

iv e

of t

h e

m or

al i

m pe

ra ti

ve , i

n cl

us io

n i

m pl

ie s

n ot

o n

ly

el im

in at

in g

ba rr

ie rs

t o

op po

rt un

it y

ba se

d on

g ro

up d

if fe

re n

ce s

bu t

al so

su

pp or

ti n

g ev

er y

in di

vi du

al t

o re

ac h

h er

o r

h is

f ul

l po

te n

ti al

.  . .

w it

h ou

t re

qu ir

in g

as si

m ila

ti on

.” “I

n cl

us io

n a

s se

en f

ro m

t h

e pe

rs pe

ct iv

e of

l eg

al a

n d

so ci

al p

re ss

ur es

p ri

m ar

ily

in vo

lv es

r em

ov in

g ill

eg al

b ar

ri er

s . .

 . or

o bs

ta cl

es p

er ce

iv ed

t o

be u

n fa

ir . .

 .  .

[T h

is ]

ap pr

oa ch

t en

ds t

o be

p ri

m ar

ily r

ea ct

iv e

. .  .”

“F ro

m t

h e

va n

ta ge

p oi

n t

of b

us in

es s

su cc

es s,

i n

cl us

io n

i s

ab ou

t m

ak in

g su

re t

h e

or ga

n iz

at io

n u

se s

al l

pr od

uc ti

ve c

ap ac

it y

an d

po te

n ti

al t

o th

e fu

ll ex

te n

t. . .

 . [I

t]

is n

ot l

im it

ed t

o pa

rt ic

ul ar

g ro

up s

or c

at eg

or ie

s of

p eo

pl e.

A ll

in di

vi du

al s

m us

t be

i n

cl ud

ed i

n t

h ei

r fu

ll un

iq ue

n es

s an

d co

m pl

ex it

y. ”

Fe rd

m an

a n

d B

ro dy

, 1 99

6,

p. 2

86

p. 2

87

p. 2

89

“I n

st it

ut io

n al

a n

d sy

st em

ic b

ia s

ca n

a ls

o se

rv e

as a

n i

m pe

di m

en t

to c

ul ti

va ti

n g

an

in cl

us iv

e en

vi ro

n m

en t.”

D av

id so

n , 1

99 9,

p.

1 72

”T h

e in

cl us

iv e

w or

kp la

ce i

s on

e th

at : v

al ue

s an

d us

es i

n di

vi du

al a

n d

in te

rg ro

up

di ff

er en

ce s

w it

h in

i ts

w or

k fo

rc e;

c oo

pe ra

te s

w it

h a

n d

co n

tr ib

ut es

t o

it s

su rr

ou n

di n

g co

m m

un it

y; a

lle vi

at es

t h

e n

ee ds

o f

di sa

dv an

ta ge

d gr

ou ps

i n

i ts

w id

er

en vi

ro n

m en

t; co

lla bo

ra te

s w

it h

i n

di vi

du al

s, g

ro up

s, a

n d

or ga

n iz

at io

n s

ac ro

ss

n at

io n

al a

n d

cu lt

ur al

b ou

n da

ri es

.”

M or

B ar

ak ,

20 00

b, p

. 3 39

In cl

us io

n a

dd re

ss es

t h

e de

gr ee

t o

w h

ic h

( a)

e m

pl oy

ee s

ar e

va lu

ed a

n d

th ei

r id

ea s

ar e

ta ke

n i

n to

a cc

ou n

t an

d us

ed , (

b) p

eo pl

e pa

rt n

er s

uc ce

ss fu

lly w

it h

in a

n d

ac ro

ss d

ep ar

tm en

ts , (

c) c

ur re

n t

em pl

oy ee

s fe

el t

h at

t h

ey b

el on

g an

d pr

os pe

ct iv

e em

pl oy

ee s

ar e

at tr

ac te

d to

t h

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

, ( d)

p eo

pl e

fe el

c on

n ec

te d

to e

ac h

ot

h er

a n

d to

t h

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

a n

d it

s go

al s,

a n

d (e

) th

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

co

n ti

n uo

us ly

f os

te rs

fl ex

ib ili

ty a

n d

ch oi

ce , a

n d

at te

n ds

t o

di ve

rs it

y.

G as

or ek

, 2 00

0

“E xp

er ie

n ce

s of

i n

cl us

io n

r es

ul t

w h

en p

ol ic

ie s,

s tr

uc tu

re s,

p ra

ct ic

es , a

n d

n or

m s

of b

eh av

io r

ar e

al ig

n ed

i n

s uc

h a

w ay

t h

at e

ve ry

m em

be r

of a

g iv

en c

ol le

ct iv

e (c

om m

un it

y, o

rg an

iz at

io n

, o r

n et

w or

k) h

as a

f ai

r an

d eq

ua l

op po

rt un

it y

to a

cc es

s th

e jo

in t

re so

ur ce

s of

t h

at c

ol le

ct iv

e. ”

D av

id so

n a

n d

Fe rd

m an

, 2 00

2,

p. 1

C on

tin ue

d

L ev

el o

f A

na ly

si s

C on

ce pt

So ur

ce

“A c

ul tu

re o

f in

cl us

io n

r eq

ui re

s . .

 . a

n ew

s et

o f

ac ti

on s,

a tt

it ud

es , p

ol ic

ie s,

a n

d pr

ac ti

ce s

de si

gn ed

t o

en ab

le a

ll pe

op le

t o

co n

tr ib

ut e

th ei

r en

er gi

es a

n d

ta le

n ts

t o

th e

or ga

n iz

at io

n ’s

s uc

ce ss

. C on

fl ic

t be

co m

es c

on st

ru ct

iv e

de ba

te . P

eo pl

e ar

e so

ug h

t be

ca us

e th

ey a

re d

if fe

re n

t.”

M ill

er a

n d

K at

z,

20 02

, p . 1

6

“I n

cl us

io n

i n

m ul

ti cu

lt ur

al o

rg an

iz at

io n

s m

ea n

s th

at t

h er

e is

e qu

al it

y, ju

st ic

e, a

n d

fu ll

pa rt

ic ip

at io

n a

t bo

th t

h e

gr ou

p an

d in

di vi

du al

l ev

el s,

s o

th at

m em

be rs

o f

di ff

er en

t gr

ou ps

n ot

o n

ly h

av e

eq ua

l ac

ce ss

t o

op po

rt un

it ie

s, d

ec is

io n

m ak

in g,

an

d po

si ti

on s

of p

ow er

, b ut

t h

ey a

re a

ct iv

el y

so ug

h t

ou t

be ca

us e

of t

h ei

r di

ff er

en ce

s. I

n a

m ul

ti cu

lt ur

al , i

n cl

us iv

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

, d if

fe re

n ce

s of

a ll

ty pe

s be

co m

e in

te gr

at ed

i n

to t

h e

fa br

ic o

f th

e bu

si n

es s,

s uc

h t

h at

t h

ey b

ec om

e a

n ec

es sa

ry p

ar t

of d

oi n

g it

s ev

er yd

ay w

or k.

” In

a n

in cl

us iv

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

, “ th

e di

ve rs

it y

of k

n ow

le dg

e an

d pe

rs pe

ct iv

es th

at

m em

be rs

o f d

if fe

re n

t g ro

up s

br in

g . .

 . h

as s

h ap

ed it

s st

ra te

gy , i

ts w

or k,

it s

m an

ag em

en t a

n d

op er

at in

g sy

st em

s, a

n d

it s

co re

v al

ue s

an d

n or

m s

fo r

su cc

es s.

.  . .

[M

]e m

be rs

o f a

ll gr

ou ps

a re

tr ea

te d

fa ir

ly , f

ee l i

n cl

ud ed

a n

d ac

tu al

ly a

re in

cl ud

ed ,

h av

e eq

ua l o

pp or

tu n

it ie

s, a

n d

ar e

re pr

es en

te d

at a

ll or

ga n

iz at

io n

al le

ve ls

a n

d fu

n ct

io n

s. ”

D iv

er si

ty is

w ov

en “

in to

th e

fa br

ic o

f t h

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

.”

H ol

vi n

o,

Fe rd

m an

, a n

d M

er ri

ll- Sa

n ds

, 20

04 , p

. 2 48

(i

ta lic

s in

or

ig in

al )

p. 2

49

In a

c ul

tu re

o f

in cl

us io

n , “

di ff

er en

ce s

ar e

re co

gn iz

ed , v

al ue

d an

d en

ga ge

d.

D if

fe re

n t

vo ic

es a

re u

n de

rs to

od a

s be

in g

le gi

ti m

at e

an d

as o

pe n

in g

up n

ew v

is ta

s;

th ey

a re

h ea

rd a

n d

in te

gr at

ed i

n d

ec is

io n

m ak

in g

an d

pr ob

le m

s ol

vi n

g pr

oc es

se s;

th

ey h

av e

an a

ct iv

e ro

le i

n s

h ap

in g

cu lt

ur e

an d

fo st

er in

g cr

ea ti

vi ty

a n

d in

n ov

at io

n ; a

n d

ev en

tu al

ly i

n a

dd in

g va

lu e

to t

h e

co m

pa n

y’ s

pe rf

or m

an ce

. .  . 

. [ A

cu

lt ur

e of

i n

cl us

io n

i s]

a n

o rg

an iz

at io

n al

e n

vi ro

n m

en t

th at

a llo

w s

pe op

le w

it h

m

ul ti

pl e

ba ck

gr ou

n ds

, m in

ds et

s an

d w

ay s

of t

h in

ki n

g to

w or

k ef

fe ct

iv el

y to

ge th

er

an d

to p

er fo

rm t

o th

ei r

h ig

h es

t po

te n

ti al

i n

o rd

er t

o ac

h ie

ve o

rg an

iz at

io n

al

ob je

ct iv

es b

as ed

o n

s ou

n d

pr in

ci pl

es . I

n s

uc h

a n

e n

vi ro

n m

en t

di ff

er en

t vo

ic es

a re

re

sp ec

te d

an d

h ea

rd , d

iv er

se v

ie w

po in

ts , p

er sp

ec ti

ve s

an d

ap pr

oa ch

es a

re v

al ue

d an

d ev

er yo

n e

is e

n co

ur ag

ed t

o m

ak e

a un

iq ue

a n

d m

ea n

in gf

ul c

on tr

ib ut

io n

.”

Pl es

s an

d M

aa k,

20

04 , p

. 1 30

– 13

1

In cl

us io

n i

s “t

h e

w ay

a n

o rg

an iz

at io

n c

on fi

gu re

s it

s sy

st em

s an

d st

ru ct

ur es

t o

va lu

e an

d le

ve ra

ge t

h e

po te

n ti

al , a

n d

to l

im it

t h

e di

sa dv

an ta

ge s,

o f

di ff

er en

ce s.

” R

ob er

so n

, 2 00

6,

p. 2

21 “I

n cl

us io

n i

s th

e se

t of

o rg

an iz

at io

n al

n or

m s

an d

va lu

es t

h at

p ro

m ot

e th

e de

ve lo

pm en

t of

a n

i n

st it

ut io

n al

c ul

tu re

i n

w h

ic h

d iv

er si

ty i

s va

lu ed

a n

d pr

om ot

ed

an d

in di

vi du

al s

fe el

e m

po w

er ed

w it

h in

a n

a tm

os ph

er e

of t

ru st

, s af

et y,

a n

d re

sp ec

t. A

n i

n cl

us iv

e w

or k

pl ac

e is

o n

e th

at : a

cc ep

ts , v

al ue

s an

d ut

ili ze

s in

di vi

du al

an

d in

te r-

gr ou

p di

ff er

en ce

s w

it h

in i

ts w

or kf

or ce

. A w

ar m

a n

d w

el co

m in

g at

m os

ph er

e ea

se s

th e

pr oc

es s

of ‘

le ar

n in

g th

e ro

pe s’

f or

t h

e n

ew m

em be

r an

d ai

ds i

n m

ak in

g th

e m

em be

r co

m fo

rt ab

le i

n t

h e

n ew

g ro

up e

n vi

ro n

m en

t.”

Fu tu

re W

or k

In st

it ut

e, n

.d .,

p. 6

“F or

u s,

a c

ul tu

re o

f in

cl us

io n

r ec

og n

iz es

, r es

pe ct

s, v

al ue

s, a

n d

ut ili

ze s

th e

ta le

n ts

an

d co

n tr

ib ut

io n

s of

a ll

th e

or ga

n iz

at io

n ’s

p eo

pl e—

cu rr

en t

an d

po te

n ti

al —

ac ro

ss

m ul

ti pl

e lin

es o

f di

ff er

en ce

[ . 

. . ]

. I n

o rg

an iz

at io

n s

w it

h c

ul tu

re s

of i

n cl

us io

n ,

pe op

le o

f al

l so

ci al

i de

n ti

ty g

ro up

s h

av e

th e

op po

rt un

it y

to b

e pr

es en

t, to

h av

e th

ei r

vo ic

es h

ea rd

a n

d ap

pr ec

ia te

d, a

n d

to e

n ga

ge i

n c

or e

ac ti

vi ti

es o

n b

eh al

f of

th

e co

lle ct

iv e.

”

W as

se rm

an ,

G al

le go

s, a

n d

Fe rd

m an

, 2 00

8,

p. 1

76

T ab

le 1

.1 .

C on

ti nu

ed

28

L ev

el o

f A

na ly

si s

C on

ce pt

So ur

ce

“A c

ul tu

re o

f in

cl us

io n

r eq

ui re

s . .

 . a

n ew

s et

o f

ac ti

on s,

a tt

it ud

es , p

ol ic

ie s,

a n

d pr

ac ti

ce s

de si

gn ed

t o

en ab

le a

ll pe

op le

t o

co n

tr ib

ut e

th ei

r en

er gi

es a

n d

ta le

n ts

t o

th e

or ga

n iz

at io

n ’s

s uc

ce ss

. C on

fl ic

t be

co m

es c

on st

ru ct

iv e

de ba

te . P

eo pl

e ar

e so

ug h

t be

ca us

e th

ey a

re d

if fe

re n

t.”

M ill

er a

n d

K at

z,

20 02

, p . 1

6

“I n

cl us

io n

i n

m ul

ti cu

lt ur

al o

rg an

iz at

io n

s m

ea n

s th

at t

h er

e is

e qu

al it

y, ju

st ic

e, a

n d

fu ll

pa rt

ic ip

at io

n a

t bo

th t

h e

gr ou

p an

d in

di vi

du al

l ev

el s,

s o

th at

m em

be rs

o f

di ff

er en

t gr

ou ps

n ot

o n

ly h

av e

eq ua

l ac

ce ss

t o

op po

rt un

it ie

s, d

ec is

io n

m ak

in g,

an

d po

si ti

on s

of p

ow er

, b ut

t h

ey a

re a

ct iv

el y

so ug

h t

ou t

be ca

us e

of t

h ei

r di

ff er

en ce

s. I

n a

m ul

ti cu

lt ur

al , i

n cl

us iv

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

, d if

fe re

n ce

s of

a ll

ty pe

s be

co m

e in

te gr

at ed

i n

to t

h e

fa br

ic o

f th

e bu

si n

es s,

s uc

h t

h at

t h

ey b

ec om

e a

n ec

es sa

ry p

ar t

of d

oi n

g it

s ev

er yd

ay w

or k.

” In

a n

in cl

us iv

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

, “ th

e di

ve rs

it y

of k

n ow

le dg

e an

d pe

rs pe

ct iv

es th

at

m em

be rs

o f d

if fe

re n

t g ro

up s

br in

g . .

 . h

as s

h ap

ed it

s st

ra te

gy , i

ts w

or k,

it s

m an

ag em

en t a

n d

op er

at in

g sy

st em

s, a

n d

it s

co re

v al

ue s

an d

n or

m s

fo r

su cc

es s.

.  . .

[M

]e m

be rs

o f a

ll gr

ou ps

a re

tr ea

te d

fa ir

ly , f

ee l i

n cl

ud ed

a n

d ac

tu al

ly a

re in

cl ud

ed ,

h av

e eq

ua l o

pp or

tu n

it ie

s, a

n d

ar e

re pr

es en

te d

at a

ll or

ga n

iz at

io n

al le

ve ls

a n

d fu

n ct

io n

s. ”

D iv

er si

ty is

w ov

en “

in to

th e

fa br

ic o

f t h

e or

ga n

iz at

io n

.”

H ol

vi n

o,

Fe rd

m an

, a n

d M

er ri

ll- Sa

n ds

, 20

04 , p

. 2 48

(i

ta lic

s in

or

ig in

al )

p. 2

49

In a

c ul

tu re

o f

in cl

us io

n , “

di ff

er en

ce s

ar e

re co

gn iz

ed , v

al ue

d an

d en

ga ge

d.

D if

fe re

n t

vo ic

es a

re u

n de

rs to

od a

s be

in g

le gi

ti m

at e

an d

as o

pe n

in g

up n

ew v

is ta

s;

th ey

a re

h ea

rd a

n d

in te

gr at

ed i

n d

ec is

io n

m ak

in g

an d

pr ob

le m

s ol

vi n

g pr

oc es

se s;

th

ey h

av e

an a

ct iv

e ro

le i

n s

h ap

in g

cu lt

ur e

an d

fo st

er in

g cr

ea ti

vi ty

a n

d in

n ov

at io

n ; a

n d

ev en

tu al

ly i

n a

dd in

g va

lu e

to t

h e

co m

pa n

y’ s

pe rf

or m

an ce

. .  . 

. [ A

cu

lt ur

e of

i n

cl us

io n

i s]

a n

o rg

an iz

at io

n al

e n

vi ro

n m

en t

th at

a llo

w s

pe op

le w

it h

m

ul ti

pl e

ba ck

gr ou

n ds

, m in

ds et

s an

d w

ay s

of t

h in

ki n

g to

w or

k ef

fe ct

iv el

y to

ge th

er

an d

to p

er fo

rm t

o th

ei r

h ig

h es

t po

te n

ti al

i n

o rd

er t

o ac

h ie

ve o

rg an

iz at

io n

al

ob je

ct iv

es b

as ed

o n

s ou

n d

pr in

ci pl

es . I

n s

uc h

a n

e n

vi ro

n m

en t

di ff

er en

t vo

ic es

a re

re

sp ec

te d

an d

h ea

rd , d

iv er

se v

ie w

po in

ts , p

er sp

ec ti

ve s

an d

ap pr

oa ch

es a

re v

al ue

d an

d ev

er yo

n e

is e

n co

ur ag

ed t

o m

ak e

a un

iq ue

a n

d m

ea n

in gf

ul c

on tr

ib ut

io n

.”

Pl es

s an

d M

aa k,

20

04 , p

. 1 30

– 13

1

In cl

us io

n i

s “t

h e

w ay

a n

o rg

an iz

at io

n c

on fi

gu re

s it

s sy

st em

s an

d st

ru ct

ur es

t o

va lu

e an

d le

ve ra

ge t

h e

po te

n ti

al , a

n d

to l

im it

t h

e di

sa dv

an ta

ge s,

o f

di ff

er en

ce s.

” R

ob er

so n

, 2 00

6,

p. 2

21 “I

n cl

us io

n i

s th

e se

t of

o rg

an iz

at io

n al

n or

m s

an d

va lu

es t

h at

p ro

m ot

e th

e de

ve lo

pm en

t of

a n

i n

st it

ut io

n al

c ul

tu re

i n

w h

ic h

d iv

er si

ty i

s va

lu ed

a n

d pr

om ot

ed

an d

in di

vi du

al s

fe el

e m

po w

er ed

w it

h in

a n

a tm

os ph

er e

of t

ru st

, s af

et y,

a n

d re

sp ec

t. A

n i

n cl

us iv

e w

or k

pl ac

e is

o n

e th

at : a

cc ep

ts , v

al ue

s an

d ut

ili ze

s in

di vi

du al

an

d in

te r-

gr ou

p di

ff er

en ce

s w

it h

in i

ts w

or kf

or ce

. A w

ar m

a n

d w

el co

m in

g at

m os

ph er

e ea

se s

th e

pr oc

es s

of ‘

le ar

n in

g th

e ro

pe s’

f or

t h

e n

ew m

em be

r an

d ai

ds i

n m

ak in

g th

e m

em be

r co

m fo

rt ab

le i

n t

h e

n ew

g ro

up e

n vi

ro n

m en

t.”

Fu tu

re W

or k

In st

it ut

e, n

.d .,

p. 6

“F or

u s,

a c

ul tu

re o

f in

cl us

io n

r ec

og n

iz es

, r es

pe ct

s, v

al ue

s, a

n d

ut ili

ze s

th e

ta le

n ts

an

d co

n tr

ib ut

io n

s of

a ll

th e

or ga

n iz

at io

n ’s

p eo

pl e—

cu rr

en t

an d

po te

n ti

al —

ac ro

ss

m ul

ti pl

e lin

es o

f di

ff er

en ce

[ . 

. . ]

. I n

o rg

an iz

at io

n s

w it

h c

ul tu

re s

of i

n cl

us io

n ,

pe op

le o

f al

l so

ci al

i de

n ti

ty g

ro up

s h

av e

th e

op po

rt un

it y

to b

e pr

es en

t, to

h av

e th

ei r

vo ic

es h

ea rd

a n

d ap

pr ec

ia te

d, a

n d

to e

n ga

ge i

n c

or e

ac ti

vi ti

es o

n b

eh al

f of

th

e co

lle ct

iv e.

”

W as

se rm

an ,

G al

le go

s, a

n d

Fe rd

m an

, 2 00

8,

p. 1

76

29

30 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

dialogical process. .  .  .” (p. 116). Building on Jackson’s view, I believe that understanding of inclusion and its dynamics will be enhanced and deepened to the extent that those of us engaged in it share our views and approaches with each other and know about and build on each other’s work. Because each of us holds just one or at most a few of the many jigsaw puzzle pieces neces- sary to build the full picture of inclusion, we must be able and willing to put in our piece(s), while at the same time being careful not to confuse our part with the whole picture.

In this sense, a prerequisite for inclusion that is not men- tioned in the quotes is perhaps humility. To the extent that individuals—whether individual contributors or leaders—believe and accept that no one person can see, understand, and know everything, and then act accordingly by creating opportunities for learning and action based on multiple inputs, contributions, and perspectives, the likelihood of creating inclusion will be greatly enhanced.

A second key theme is that inclusion has both individual and collective components; in other words, it can be viewed as something that has to do with how individuals experience their life, work, and interactions, and it can also be looked at in terms of how social groups collectively experience the world. Both components are important for a complete picture of inclu- sion. In this context, inclusion involves growth and freedom, and eliminating the psychological, behavioral, and systemic bar- riers that can stand in the way. Addressing this at both the individual and collective levels, in the context of work groups and organizations, as well as society more generally, means attending both to the complex ways in which individuals are interconnected with (and in part defined by) social identity groups (see Ferdman & Roberts, Chapter 3, this volume) and to intergroup relations—how social identities play a role in indi- vidual and interpersonal situations as well as in organizations more generally. In prior work, I described it this way: “to create and increase inclusion, individuals must have appropriate com- petencies and demonstrate corresponding behaviors. Inclusion cannot exist without individuals who seek it and behave accord- ingly. At the same time, those individuals choose, display, and interpret their behavior and that of others in the context of

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 31

organizational, intergroup, and socio-historical dynamics that are also very much part of the puzzle of inclusion” (Ferdman & Davidson, 2004, p. 36).

A final notable theme is that, even though the definitions provided are often framed in terms of workplaces, inclusion is a concept and practice that can more or less apply to everyone in all locations and social systems, across multiple differences; it is not limited to workplaces or to particular groups or types of diver- sity. Indeed, this is what makes inclusion in many ways quite easy for people to understand and particularly appealing as an approach to diversity. Because it is a concept that intuitively makes sense to people, however, it is relatively easy to focus on only one or some of the levels of system and ignore or even avoid the others, even when they may be quite important. For example, an organization can pay a great deal of attention to corporate poli- cies that create barriers for certain groups more than others, but very little to how people actually treat each other every day. Or people in a workgroup can be extremely competent in handling multiple differences in ways that are quite satisfying to and very inclusive of all members, yet avoid any and all attention to whether or not they are fostering inclusion in a larger societal or organi- zational sense (for example, because their task or product is one that privileges particular societal groups over others). A systemic, dynamic, and inclusive perspective on inclusion incorporates attention to these and similar issues, as well as to ongoing learning over time.

Contributions from Inclusive Education and Social Inclusion

Although inclusion has recently gained prominence in connec- tion with diversity in organizations, historically, the concept of inclusion was first developed and used extensively in the field of education, particularly of children with disabilities, and later expanded in relation to people with disabilities more generally. In the context of disability rights, inclusion has signified the perspective that people with disabilities should be able to fully participate in all aspects of society and its institutions. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in the United States and

32 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (http://www.un.org/disabilities/convention/conven tionfull.shtml) are both major examples of this approach and perspective.

In education, inclusion goes beyond notions of mainstream- ing and integration, which privilege students without disabilities and consider those with disabilities as having “special needs.” Rather, it refers to the rights of all students to participate fully in all aspects of the school and to have full access to education, without being separated from other students or being seen as less than others (see, for example, Bossaert, Colpin, Pijl, & Petry, 2013; Hick & Thomas, 2008). UNESCO, in a document emphasizing education as a basic human right for all people, defined inclusion “as a dynamic approach of responding posi- tively to pupil diversity and of seeing individual differences not as problems, but as opportunities for enriching learning” (2005, p. 12). It goes on to describe inclusion “as a process of address- ing and responding to the diversity of needs of all learners through increasing participation .  .  . and reducing exclusion within and from education. It involves changes .  .  . in content, approaches, structures and strategies, with a common vision . . . and a conviction that it is the responsibility of the regular system to educate all children” (p. 17). Particularly interesting and rel- evant here is the emphasis on changing the educational system and the school itself, rather than focusing on the children with “special” needs as the source or locus of problems or difficul- ties. In a similar way, inclusion in organizations is about creat- ing work environments and processes that “work” for everyone, across all types of differences, rather than ones that emphasize assimilation.

A third and overlapping use of the term, social inclusion, is more typical in a larger societal context and from the vantage point of public policy, economics, political science, and sociology. Here the focus is on eliminating social exclusion as manifested in individual and particularly collective social disadvantages of poor or otherwise marginalized people in society—including those in the economic, political, health, housing, educational, labor, and similar arenas (see, for example, Atkinson & Marlier, 2010); social

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 33

inclusion seeks to improve the material and economic conditions of such groups, as well as their full enfranchisement in society and their participation in its institutions. Boushey, Fremstad, Gragg, and Waller (2010) explain that “[s]ocial inclusion is based on the belief that we all fare better when no one is left to fall too far behind and the economy works for everyone. Social inclusion simultaneously incorporates multiple dimensions of well-being. It is achieved when all have the opportunity and resources necessary to participate fully in economic, social, and cultural activities which are considered the societal norm” (p. 1). The Australian Social Inclusion Board (2012) described social inclusion in this way: “Being socially included means that people have the resources, opportunities and capabilities they need to: Learn (participate in education and training); Work (participate in employment, unpaid or voluntary work including family and carer [sic] responsibilities); Engage (connect with people, use local services and participate in local, cultural, civic and recre- ational activities); and Have a voice (influence decisions that affect them)” (p. 12). This approach has elements that relate well with the practice of inclusion in diverse organizations, but it places less emphasis on individual experience, group processes, and interpersonal interactions, and more on social and economic policies and their effects.

Elements of Inclusion at Work So far, I have presented various ways to conceptualize inclusion in the context of an emergent multilevel framework. From a prac- tical perspective, the question then arises as to how to operational- ize inclusion at each of these levels. What are the specific elements of inclusion? As exemplified in many of the quotes in Table 1.1, there are multiple ways to describe these, and the particular elements that are addressed can vary. In this section, I provide illustrative examples of such lists from my own research and con- sulting work as well as from other sources. First, I briefly discuss the importance of involving stakeholders in generating their own operational descriptions of inclusion, and I give an example of how this can be done.

34 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Co-Constructing Inclusion

It is important to be specific about the elements of inclusion, especially in the context of inclusion initiatives, so that those involved can be clear about what is being addressed and what the goals are. My aim here, however, is not to provide a defini- tive list of all that the practice of inclusion encompasses, because rich descriptions are available in the academic and practitioner literature, and more important, as discussed earlier, these may vary from organization to organization or even from person to person.

Organizations and groups that wish to systematically embark on inclusion initiatives should carefully develop their own account of the specific ways that their current and prospective members and stakeholders experience inclusion, and of the behaviors, poli- cies, and practices that foster those experiences, in the context of shared understanding of the concept of inclusion and its multiple facets. This is because lists of inclusive behaviors and practices will be most meaningful and useful when they are generated and discussed locally, among the people who will be involved in prac- ticing those behaviors or benefiting from them, even if those lists are initially based on prior work. I suspect that inclusion that feels imposed will not be experienced as inclusion!

Another reason for developing one’s own list of inclusion ele- ments is that the process of creating localized operational defini- tions can itself provide a vehicle to begin practicing the very same desired behaviors and to test the expectation that they are the appropriate and best focus for an inclusion effort. For example, in one group, spending more time carefully listening to others may be an area that requires particular attention to foster more inclusion among its members. In another group, this may already be a behavior that is practiced well but other areas—such as making sure that those affected by decisions have a voice in making them, or increasing the group’s skill in bringing out dif- ferences and handling conflict well—may need more attention. In yet other groups, the core inclusion issues may involve fairness and equity and their association to social identities, such as gender, race, or class. This understanding can be developed in the process of discovering the key issues for the group; at the same time, the

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 35

group can test how it is doing in terms of acting on its expressed goals and values.

How can a group or organization generate its own detailed list of the elements of inclusion? Essentially, it can be done by involv- ing key stakeholders in a process of describing their own experi- ences, perspectives, and hopes, and systematically combining the information generated to arrive at a collective picture of inclusion. Exhibit 1.1 provides examples of questions—generated using an appreciative inquiry approach—that can be adapted to engage individuals and groups in describing the specific behaviors and practices that they believe would result in more inclusion. (Prior to addressing these questions, it may be helpful to first spend some time discussing what participants consider inclusion to be.)

Exhibit 1.1. Questions to Generate and Co-Construct Descriptions of Inclusive Behavior and Inclusive Organizational Practices

• What behaviors—from yourself and from others—help you experience more inclusion?

• What behaviors help others around you experience more inclusion?

• Imagine that you’ve waved a magic wand and now everyone in the world behaves inclusively, in a way that brings inclusion to life in every encounter with others. What inclusive behaviors do you see around you?

• Imagine the most inclusive organization in the world, one in which everyone’s talents, beliefs, backgrounds, capabilities, and ways of living—their uniqueness—is engaged, valued, and leveraged. What are one or two vital inclusive organizational policies and practices in that organization?

A few years ago, Frederick Miller and Christine Boulware brought together a number of practitioners and others interested in developing inclusion as a core idea for organizations and society. The result was the formation of a group called the Insti- tute for Inclusion. In that context, a team composed of myself,

36 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Judith Katz, Ed Letchinger, and C. Terrill Thompson—using a collaborative process of co-construction based on input from con- ference participants in response to questions very similar to those in Exhibit 1.1—created a list of inclusive behaviors and organiza- tional policies and practices in three categories: (1) inclusive behaviors suitable for everyone, (2) inclusive behaviors for leaders, and (3) inclusive organizational policies and practices (Ferdman, Katz, Letchinger, & Thompson, 2009). Later, I give a summary of these lists; what is relevant here is the process we used, which can be adapted to different settings. Participants were first asked to generate individual responses to the questions. These responses were then compiled. Small groups were assigned to look for key themes and to assign behaviors and practices to one of the three buckets, as well as to add additional points as they saw fit. The working group took the material from the small groups and com- bined it into a document that was shared with everyone in the group, who then could provide additional suggestions, edits, and comments. The idea is to create a process that is itself inclusive and that permits generating an operational perspective for the practice of inclusion among those participating, a perspective in which everyone can feel ownership and see themselves reflected.

Elements of the Experience of Inclusion

In the context of developing and testing a measure of workgroup inclusion, my students and I (Ferdman, Barrera, et al., 2009; Hirshberg & Ferdman, 2011) defined the experience of inclusion, which, as discussed earlier, we conceptualized as involving feelings of safety, respect, support, value, trust, fulfillment, engagement, and authenticity within the workgroup. Based on that work, we can identify six key operational elements of the experience of inclusion and the associated issues, which are listed and described in Table 1.2. What is interesting about the elements and issues listed is that, while they cover a lot of ground, they are not neces- sarily all-encompassing; it may be possible in some contexts to produce lists that vary from the one here in terms of adding addi- tional components or changing some of them to emphasize some- what different issues. Nevertheless, the overall themes are likely to be quite similar.

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 37

Table 1.2. Elements of the Experience of Inclusion

Element Examples of Issues Addressed

Feeling safe (self and group)

Do I feel physically and psychologically safe? Do I feel secure that I am fully considered a member of the group or organization? Can I move about and act freely (literally and figuratively)? Can I (and others like me) share ideas, opinions, and perspectives—especially when they differ from those of others—without fear of negative repercussions? Do I believe that others who share one or more of my identity groups are also safe from physical and/or psychological harm in the group or organization?

Involvement and engagement in the workgroup

Am I treated as a full participant in activities and interactions? Am I—and do I feel like—an insider? Do I have access to the information and resources that I need to do my work (and that others have)? Do I enjoy being part of the group or organization? Can I rely on others in my group or organization (and they on me)? Do I feel like we are part of the same team, even when we disagree? Can I (or people like me) succeed here?

Feeling respected and valued (self and group)

Am I (and others like me) treated in the ways I (they) would like to be treated? Do others in the group care about me (and people like me) and treat me (and them) as a valuable and esteemed member(s) of the group or organization? Am I trusted? Am I cared about? Are people like me trusted and cared about?

Influence on decision making

Do my ideas and perspectives influence what happens and what decisions are made? Am I listened to when weighing in on substantive issues?

Authenticity/ bringing one’s whole self to work

Can I be truly myself around others in my group or organization? Do I need to conceal or distort valued parts of my identity, style, or individual characteristics? Can I have genuine conversations with others without needing to involuntarily hide relevant parts of myself? Can I be open, honest, and transparent about my ideas and perspectives? Can I make my contributions in ways that feel authentic and whole?

Continued

38 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Building on this approach, I worked as an external consultant for a multinational corporation that wanted to generate a global inclusion survey. With my input, they created a four-item inclusion index, grounded in the organization’s values and success factors, to assess employees’ experience of inclusion. In addition to a global item assessing the individual’s overall sense of being included, we also asked about how much the respondent felt that the company valued his or her unique contributions and strengths, to what degree the respondent believed that he or she (or others who are similar) could succeed at the company, and to what degree the respondent believed that he or she had equitable access to necessary information, tools, and resources. This index could then be statistically regressed on other items measuring inclusive behavior at other levels of analysis to discover the key drivers of inclusion in the organization, as well as compared across various demographic categories.

Elements of Inclusive Behavior

Inclusive behavior can be operationalized in a variety of ways, in part depending on who we are talking about. For example, there are behaviors that most people can practice in a range of situa- tions as a way to build inclusion for themselves and others. There are additional behaviors that may be suited for particular settings; for example, in a work group. And there are behaviors that are

Element Examples of Issues Addressed

Diversity is recognized, attended to, and honored

Am I treated fairly, without discrimination or barriers based on my identities? Can I (and others) be transparent about and proud of my (our) social identities? Can we address differences in ways that lead to mutual learning and growth? Does the group or organization notice and value diversity of all types?

Note: Elements are adapted from Ferdman, Barrera, et al., 2009, and Hirshberg and Ferdman, 2011.

Table 1.2. Continued

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 39

associated with particular roles, especially that of leaders. Descrip- tions of inclusive behavior are particularly important because they can provide people with suggestions about what they can specifi- cally do to foster inclusion.

Marjane Jensen (1995) was an early pioneer in explicitly listing behaviors for inclusion. Her list, later developed and expanded by Katz and Miller (2011), highlighted the importance of the fol- lowing types of behavior for creating inclusion:

• Authentically greeting other people • Fostering a feeling of safety • Listening and understanding • Communicating clearly and honestly • Working through and learning from conflicts • Seeking and listening to multiple voices and perspectives • Noticing when exclusion occurs and intervening to address it • Being intentional about individual and collective choices

when working in groups • Being courageous

In an application of this approach, The Hartford Financial Services Group (The Hartford, 2006) highlighted and stressed the following elements of inclusive behavior to its employees:

• Listen to all individuals until they feel understood • Accept others’ references as true for them • Be honest and clear • Build on each other’s ideas and thoughts • Take risks • Speak up for oneself

Pless and Maak (2004) listed the following as key inclusive behaviors, based on a set of inclusion competencies:

• Showing respect and empathy; • Recognizing the other as different but equal; • Showing appreciation for different voices, e.g. by

– Listening actively to them; – Trying to understand disparate viewpoints and opinions;

40 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

– Integrating different voices into the ongoing cultural discourse.

• Practising and encouraging open and frank communication in all interactions;

• Cultivating participative decision making and problem solving processes and team capabilities;

• Showing integrity and advanced moral reasoning, especially when dealing with ethical dilemmas;

• Using a cooperative/consultative leadership style [p. 140]

In the work to create a workgroup inclusion measure described earlier (Ferdman, Barrera, et al., 2009), we also developed an operationalization of inclusive behavior, based on the following categories:

• Creating safety • Acknowledging others • Dealing with conflict and differences • Showing an ability and willingness to learn • Having and giving voice • Encouraging representation

Creating safety involves having and using clear ground rules for respectful behavior, avoiding belittling others, and speaking up about issues that matter to people and the organization. Acknowledging others involves not only greeting people but also recognizing contributions and asking for input, in a manner that also connects to coworkers in personal and human ways. Dealing with conflict means being able and willing to address it as it arises, developing skills for effectively working through and learning from conflict, and developing cultural competence for working with those who may think and behave quite differ- ently. Being able and willing to learn includes such behaviors as asking for and providing feedback, sharing information, and using multiple perspectives to arrive at collaborative solutions. Voice-related behaviors involve speaking up and making one’s full contributions to the group and organization, and providing opportunities for others to do so, as well as showing others that

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 41

their contributions are valued; research by Major, Davis, Sanchez- Hucles, Germano, and Mann (2005) indicates that this can be done through both affective support, such as listening and being sympathetic, and instrumental support, such as helping with work responsibilities or switching schedules. Finally, encouraging rep- resentation means taking proactive steps to ensure that multiple voices and people of different identity groups and perspectives are present and involved. This last category includes many of the behaviors highlighted in traditional diversity initiatives that focus on making sure that groups and organizations actually incorpo- rate diversity along multiple dimensions and across functions and hierarchical levels.

In working to develop a global inclusion survey with the company mentioned earlier, I used a similar perspective on inclusive behavior, but first I generated an overarching list of inclusion elements, which could then be translated into assess- ment items focused on specific groups. For example, participants rated their own inclusive behavior, that of members of their work group, that of their supervisors, and that of company leaders. The broad elements that we incorporated were collaboration/ interdependence (feeling valued), fair and unbiased treatment, leadership and accountability, open communication, support, authenticity, trust, and work-life balance. We then ensured that there were items measuring the various elements for the differ- ent groups. Ratings of inclusive behavior could then be com- puted for the various groups (that is, self-ratings, work group ratings, supervisor ratings, and so on) as well as for each of the elements.

Finally, I turn to the work of the Institute for Inclusion (Ferdman, Katz, et al., 2009) introduced earlier. In that process, as mentioned, we generated two lists of inclusive behavior, one for everyone and one for leaders. The behaviors for everyone are those that anyone can practice to foster inclusion. Behaviors for leaders are complementary to those in the first list and are particularly geared for individuals holding positions of authority. The two lists are summarized in Table 1.3 (together with organizational policies and practices, which I discuss next).

42 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Table 1.3. Inclusive Behaviors for Everyone and for Leaders; Inclusive Organizational Policies and Practices

Inclusive Behavior for Everyone Acknowledge, connect, and engage with others. Listen deeply and carefully. Engage a broad range of perspectives. Openly share information and seek transparency. Be curious. Lean into discomfort. Increase self-awareness. Be willing to learn and be influenced by others. Be respectful and demonstrate fairness. Foster interdependence and teamwork.

Inclusive Behavior for Leaders Hold oneself and others accountable for creating an inclusive culture. Invite engagement and dialogue. Model bringing one’s whole self to work, and give permission for and encourage others to do so. Foster transparent decision making. Understand and engage with resistance. Understand and talk about how inclusion connects to the mission and vision.

Inclusive Organizational Policies and Practices Create an environment of respect, fairness, justice, and equity. Create a framework for assessing and implementing organizational policies and practices. Build systems, processes, and procedures that support and sustain inclusion. Enhance individual and collective competence to collaborate across cultures and groups. Define organizational social responsibility (internally and externally). Foster transparency throughout the organization. Promote teamwork. Create a diverse organization. Foster continual learning and growth.

Source: Adapted from Ferdman, Katz, Letchinger, and Thompson, 2009.

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 43

Elements of Inclusion at the Organizational Level

At the organizational level, there are many practices organizations can adopt to create, foster, and sustain inclusion. Table 1.3 includes a broad list of these, generated by Ferdman, Katz, et al. (2009) using the process described earlier. Other detailed exam- ples can be found in Holvino et al. (2004) and in various chapters in this volume, so I do not repeat those here. The key is for the organization to have a clear approach to inclusion and that this approach be translated into specific strategies, policies, and prac- tices that can be observed and assessed. These practices should not only build inclusion systemically but also encourage leaders and all members of the organization to practice inclusion in their individual and collective behavior, both to support the overall culture of inclusion as well as to ensure that as many people as possible regularly experience inclusion.

One way to do this is to decide on the key dimensions of inclusion for the organization and how these can be addressed for each of the key dimensions, functions, or systems of the organization. In Figure 1.3, I present an Inclusion Assessment Matrix that my students and I (Ferdman, Brody, Cooper, Jeffcoat, & Le, 1995) developed almost two decades ago and that contin- ues to be quite relevant. Across the top row we list the various systems of the organization, and down the left side we list the various dimensions of inclusion we identified at the time. For each of these dimensions of inclusion, we created illustrative general assessment questions or topics, which are also included in the figure.

Once the dimensions of inclusion are identified and defined, then they can be operationalized for the organization as a whole and for each of the relevant systems or functions of the organization.

Facing the Challenges and Paradoxes of the Practice of Inclusion This chapter has covered much ground, and the book’s other chapters provide a great deal of additional texture and rich per- spectives and detail for the practice of inclusion. I conclude by

44 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Figure 1.3. Organizational-Level Inclusion Assessment Matrix

Dimensions of Inclusion

Dimensions of the Organization

Socialization C

areer planning

R ecruitm

ent, selection, prom

otion

T raining and

education Perform

ance appraisal R

ew ard system

s

W ork/life policies

and practices

C om

m unication

M easurem

ent

Structural and inform

al integration

Openness Openness: How much are variability, complexity, and ambiguity embraced? To what extent are the system and its boundaries open rather than hard? How acceptable is rigidity? Are there multiple solutions and many best ways? Is there a broad bandwidth of acceptance? Representation/Voice: To what extent are differences, both apparent and not, attended to and represented across situations? Is there a critical mass of diverse members, with a mix of dimensions represented, in making decisions and bene�ting from them? Climate: How valued do individuals and groups feel? Are they fully present, free to express themselves, accepted and integrated? How does it feel to be in the organization? Fairness: To what extent do individuals and groups receive what they need and deserve? How much and in what ways is fairness considered? Are there mechanisms for resolving or addressing fairness? To what extent and in what ways has oppression and its effects (such as unearned privilege) been eliminated or reduced?

Continuous Improvement: What is the capacity, ability, and mindset regarding necessary and possible improvement? How much and in what ways are employees empowered to be responsible for continuous improvement? What is the capacity to take advantage of all resources?

Leadership/Commitment: To what degree and in what ways are the strategies, vision, and mission of the organization connected to inclusion? How are resources allocated? How well do leaders model inclusion? How accountable and committed is leadership? How strategically is inclusion positioned and addressed? How central is inclusion to the core values and strategy of organization?

Social Responsibility: How much awareness is there of the world outside the organization? What is the vision of the organization as a member of a larger community? What kinds of contributions (such as time and resources) are made to societal needs?

Representation and voice

Climate

Fairness

Leadership and commitment

Continuous improvement

Social responsibility

Source: Adapted from Ferdman, Brody, Cooper, Jeffcoat, and Le, 1995, Inclusion Assessment Matrix, unpublished document, California School of Professional Psychology, San Diego, CA.

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 45

very briefly discussing a few of the challenges of inclusion. Overall, the practice of inclusion involves being able to acknowledge, rec- ognize, value, and work with diversity, in ways that benefit indi- viduals, groups, organizations, and society, at multiple levels and across multiple identities. As discussed throughout this chapter, to do this well, we need to understand and engage with a good deal of complexity, while also making sure to address the essential and basic aspects of our common humanity and our needs for connection, consideration, respect, appreciation, and participa- tion. Many of the challenges of inclusion involve attending to and engaging with seeming polarities or paradoxes, in the process of creating connections and practices that can work for everyone and allow everyone to work to their full potential. They also involve being willing to reexamine and test assumptions and to join with others with different perspectives and contributions so as to together weave an emergent and textured reality that none of us could have created or anticipated alone.

∘ The practice of inclusion is about both everyday behavior and organizational and social systems. The practice of inclusion addresses both micro and macro levels (and everything in between). Inclusion must occur in terms of individual experience and everyday interpersonal behavior, and also in terms of intergroup relations and patterns of experience at the level of complex organizational and societal systems. We need to make sure that inclusion is experienced not just by those who are most similar or most near to us, but also those who are different on key dimensions or who are not part of our proximal social system, such as those in other organizations, communities, and societies. Individual experience and interpersonal behavior, in the moment, are critical to inclusion, but so are addressing and redressing embedded and persistent systems of intergroup injustice and oppression (and the relationships among the two) in organizations and society. ∘ The practice of inclusion is about both structures and processes. To address inclusion, we need a dynamic perspective that attends to multiple processes over time. Inclusion is about patterns of behavior and experience in the context of relationships between individuals, between people and their

46 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

groups and organizations, and between groups. At the same time, the structures within which these dynamic relationships are created, enacted, interpreted, reproduced, and developed are also critical. Who is where in what parts of the system? What is the distribution of power? How is work organized? The answers to these and many similar questions are important for understanding the processual aspects of the practice of inclusion. How we treat each other, how we communicate, how we engage with others are all critical to inclusion as well, and over time can help change the structures within which these patterns occur. Indeed, the relationship between structure and process is perhaps much like that between a flowing river and its banks: the banks of the river certainly channel and shape where and how the river flows; yet, simultaneously, the flowing waters slowly and surely shape and change the river’s seemingly solid and stationary banks. ∘ The practice of inclusion is about both comfort and discomfort. In many ways, inclusion involves creating more comfort for more people, so that access, opportunity, and a sense of full participation and belonging are facilitated across a greater range of diversity than ever before, for the benefit of all. At the same time, practicing inclusion means distributing discomfort more equitably. Frederick Miller (1994) provocatively and creatively described it this way: “Inclusion turns comfortable upside out and inside down” (p. 39, italics in original). We need to move out of our individual and collective comfort zones, yet do so in a way that leads to growth, learning, and mutual and collective benefit.

Let me explain: It is not very difficult to behave inclusively with people with whom we are familiar or who are most like ourselves. Historically, however, this has happened in the context of exclusive organizations and groups. For example, once college students are able to get through the hazing typically imposed to be invited to join a fraternity or sorority, they can feel very much a part of the group. The problem is that inclusion of that type typically comes at a price: to experience inclusion, members of selective and therefore exclusive organizations or groups must assimilate to the dominant norms, styles, and practices, and subsume the ways

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 47

in which they are different from the accepted or dominant ways of doing things. This means that those from less represented, less familiar, or less dominant groups and backgrounds will typically be more uncomfortable and less at ease than their colleagues.

In diverse groups, organizations, and societies, inclusion becomes both more important and more challenging and uncomfortable, because the key is to expand the experience of inclusion while maintaining and enhancing diversity. Essentially, the practice of inclusion requires becoming more comfortable with discomfort, both individually and collectively. More of us must be willing to take on the discomfort of being less than fully secure as we engage with each other to create inclusion. We must be willing to learn continuously and recognize that the practice of inclusion is never done; it requires ongoing alertness and engagement. As we notice and work across more and more types of diversity, this stance will be even more critical. ∘ The practice of inclusion is about both deriving practical benefits and about doing what is right and just. Certainly, a key motivation for practicing inclusion is based on the premise that it will lead to tangible benefits for individuals, groups, organization, and societies. This assumption has begun to receive empirical support and is also based on existing and emergent theories and practical experience. At the same time, the practice of inclusion will be enhanced (and perhaps even greater benefits will be derived), if we simultaneously acknowledge that it is simply right, just, and moral.

Facing the challenges and paradoxes of the practice of inclu- sion will require ongoing learning and contributions from mul- tiple perspectives and disciplines. It is an evolutionary journey and it will be very exciting to see how the emergent framework described here develops and changes as others add their voices and views to our collective understanding and practice.

Acknowledgments I am greatly indebted to Barbara R. Deane and Sergio Valenzuela- Ibarra for very helpful comments on earlier versions of this

48 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

chapter and for their support throughout the process of writing it. Barbara R. Deane in particular provided invaluable editorial advice, without which this would have been a much poorer chapter. Sergio, as well as Liz Barat, Sarah Maxwell, and Maggie Sass, provided valuable and much-appreciated research assistance at various points. I would also like to express my great apprecia- tion to Derek Avery, Liz Barat, Victoria Barrera, Stacey Blake- Beard, Donna Blancero, Lize Booysen, Christine Boulware, Sari Brody, Catherine Buntaine, Chin-Chun Chen, Donna Chrobot- Mason, Dennis DaRos, Martin Davidson, Nancy DiTomaso, Angel Enriquez, Darcy Hanashiro, David Hayes-Bautista, Plácida Gal- legos, Jeremy Hirshberg, Evangelina Holvino, C. Douglas Johnson, Judith Katz, Jennifer Habig, James A. Kimbrough, Ed Letchinger, Patrick McKay, Fred Miller, Michàlle Mor Barak, Stella Nkomo, Lisa Nishii, Kopitzee Parra-Thornton, Laura Morgan Roberts, Andrea Szulik, Kecia Thomas, Terrill Thompson, Cláudio Torres, Ilene Wasserman, Heather Wishik, and the late Marjane Jensen, as well as to my many other students, research collaborators, teachers, and consulting colleagues over the years, with whom I have had many conversations and from whom I’ve learned so much about inclusion. The many participants in my workshops have also been instrumental in teaching me about inclusion over the years, and I am very grateful to them for all they have shared.

References Australian Social Inclusion Board. (2012). Social inclusion in Australia:

How Australia is faring (2nd ed.). Canberra, Australia: Common- wealth of Australia. Retrieved from www.socialinclusion.gov.au

Atkinson, A. B., & Marlier, E. (2010). Analysing and measuring social inclu- sion in a global context. New York: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529.

Bossaert, G., Colpin, H., Pijl, S. J., & Petry, K. (2013). Truly included? A literature study focusing on the social dimension of inclusion in education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(1), 60–79. doi:10.1080/13603116.2011.580464

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 49

Boushey, H., Fremstad, S., Gragg, R., & Waller, M. (2010, August). Social inclusion for the United States. Working Paper, Center for Economic Policy and Research, Washington, D.C. Retrieved from www .inclusionist.org.

Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5), 475–482. doi:10.1177/0146167291175001

Chrobot-Mason, D., Ruderman, M. N., & Nishii, L. H. (2013). Leader- ship in a diverse workplace. In Q. M. Roberson (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of diversity and work (pp. 315–340). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Cox, T. H., Jr. (1991). The multicultural organization. Academy of Man- agement Executive, 5(2), 34–47.

Cox, T. H., Jr., & Blake, S. (1991). Managing cultural diversity: Implica- tions for organizational competitiveness. Academy of Management Executive, 5(3), 45–56.

Davidson, M. N. (1999). The value of being included: An examination of diversity change initiatives in organizations. Performance Improve- ment Quarterly, 12(1), 164–180.

Davidson, M. N. (2011). The end of diversity as we know it: Why diversity efforts fail and how leveraging difference can succeed. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Davidson, M. N., & Ferdman, B. M. (2002). The experience of inclusion. In B. Parker, B. M. Ferdman, & P. Dass (Chairs), Inclusive and effec- tive networks: Linking diversity theory and practice. All-Academy sym- posium presented at the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Denver.

Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. (2001). Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and out- comes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(2), 229–273. doi:10.2307/ 2667087

Ferdman, B. M. (1992). The dynamics of ethnic diversity in organiza- tions: Toward integrative models. In K. Kelley (Ed.), Issues, theory and research in industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 339–384). Amsterdam: North Holland.

Ferdman, B. M. (1995). Cultural identity and diversity in organizations: Bridging the gap between group differences and individual unique- ness. In M. M. Chemers, S. Oskamp, & M. A. Costanzo (Eds.), Diversity in organizations: New perspectives for a changing workplace (pp. 37–61). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ferdman, B. M. (2010). Teaching inclusion by example and experience: Creating an inclusive learning environment. In K. M. Hannum,

50 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

L. Booysen, & B. B. McFeeters (Eds.), Leading across differences: Cases and perspectives—Facilitator’s guide (pp. 37–50). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Ferdman, B. M. (2011). The inclusive workplace. In G. N. Powell, Man- aging a diverse workforce: Learning activities (3rd. ed., pp. 123–127). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ferdman, B. M., Avigdor, A., Braun, D., Konkin, J., & Kuzmycz, D. (2010). Collective experience of inclusion, diversity, and perfor- mance in work groups. Revista de Adminstraçao Mackenzie, 11(3), 6–26. doi:10.1590/S1678–69712010000300003

Ferdman, B. M., Barrera, V., Allen, A., & Vuong, V. (2009, August). Inclusive behaviors and the experience of inclusion. In B. G. Chung (Chair), Inclusion in organizations: Measures, HR practices, and climate. Symposium presented at the 69th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Chicago.

Ferdman, B. M., & Brody, S. E. (1996). Models of diversity training. In D. Landis & R. S. Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (2nd ed., pp. 282–303). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ferdman, B. M., Brody, S. E., Cooper, K. J., Jeffcoat, K. A., & Le, S. (1995). Inclusion assessment matrix. Unpublished document, Califor- nia School of Professional Psychology, San Diego, CA.

Ferdman, B. M., & Davidson, M. N. (2002a). A matter of difference— Diversity and drawing the line: Are some differences too different? (Or: who’s in, who’s out, and what difference does it make?). The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 39(3), 43–46.

Ferdman, B. M., & Davidson, M. N. (2002b). A matter of difference— Inclusion: What can I and my organization do about it? The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 39(4), 80–85.

Ferdman, B. M., & Davidson, M. N. (2004). A matter of difference— Some learning about inclusion: Continuing the dialogue. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 41(4), 31–37.

Ferdman, B. M., & Gallegos, P. I. (2001). Racial identity development and Latinos in the United States. In C. L. Wijeyesinghe & B. W. Jackson III (Eds.), New perspectives on racial identity development: A theoretical and practical anthology (pp. 32–66). New York: New York University Press.

Ferdman, B. M., Katz, J. H., Letchinger, E., & Thompson, C. (2009, March 9). Inclusive behaviors and practices: Report of the Institute for Inclusion Behavior Task Force. Presentation at the Institute for Inclu- sion 4th Conference, Arlington, VA.

Ferdman, B. M., & Sagiv, L. (2012). Diversity in organizations and cross- cultural work psychology: What if they were more connected?

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 51

Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 323–345. doi:10.1111/j.1754–9434.2012.01455.x

Future Work Institute (n.d.). Inclusion: A journey in progress (Hot Topics Research). Retrieved from http://www.futureworkinstitute.com.

Gasorek, D. (2000). Inclusion at Dun & Bradstreet: Building a high- performing company. The Diversity Factor, 8(4), 25–29.

The Hartford. (2006). Diversity and inclusion. Web page at www.the hartford.com, retrieved February 25, 2006.

Hayes, B. C., & Major, D. A. (2003, April). Creating inclusive organizations: Its meaning and measurement. Paper presented at the 18th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psy- chology, Orlando, FL.

Hays-Thomas, R., & Bendick Jr., M. (2013). Professionalizing diversity and inclusion practice: Should voluntary standards be the chicken or the egg? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 6(3), 193–205. doi: 10.111/iops.12033

Hick, P., & Thomas, G. (Eds.). (2008). Inclusion and diversity in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hirshberg, J. J., & Ferdman, B. M. (2011, August 16). Leader-member exchange, cooperative group norms, and workplace inclusion in workgroups. In M. Shuffler, S. Burke, & D. Diaz-Granados (Chairs), Leading across cultures: Emerging research trends from multiple levels. Symposium presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, San Antonio, TX.

Holvino, E. (1998). The multicultural organizational development model. Unpublished training materials, Chaos Management, Brattleboro, VT.

Holvino, E., Ferdman, B. M., & Merrill-Sands, D. (2004). Creating and sustaining diversity and inclusion in organizations: Strategies and approaches. In M. S. Stockdale & F. J. Crosby (Eds.), The psychology and management of workplace diversity (pp. 245–276). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Horwitz, S. K., & Horwitz, I. B. (2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33(6), 987–1015. doi:10.1177/014920630 7308587

Hubbard, A. (2004). The major life activity of belonging. Wake Forest Law Review, 39, 217–259.

Jackson, B. W. (1994). Coming to a vision of a multicultural system. 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 dis- crimination in organizations (pp. 116–117). Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin:

52 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Jackson, S. E., & Joshi, A. (2011). Work team diversity. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 651–686). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Jensen, M. (1995). Eleven behaviors for inclusion. Unpublished document. The Kaleel Jamison Consulting Group, Inc., Troy, NY.

Katz, J. H., & Miller, F. A. (1996). Coaching leaders through culture change. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 48(2), 104–114. doi:10.1037//1061–4087.48.2.104

Katz, J. H., & Miller, F. A. (2011). 12 behaviors for inclusion. The Kaleel Jamison Consulting Group, Troy, NY. Downloaded from www.kjcg .com.

Kochan, T., Bezrukova, K., Ely, R., Jackson, S., Joshi, A., Jehn, K., .  .  . Thomas, D. A. (2003). The effects of diversity on business perfor- mance: Report of the diversity research network. Human Resource Management, 42(1), 3–21. doi:10.1002/hrm.10061

Kossek, E., & Zonia, S. (1993). Assessing diversity climate: A field study of reactions to employer efforts to promote diversity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 61–81.

Levine, J. M., & Kerr, N. L. (2007). Inclusion and exclusion: Implications for group processes. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 759–784). New York: Guilford Press.

Major, D. A., Davis, D. D., Sanchez-Hucles, J., Germano, L. M., & Mann, J. (2005). IT workplace climate for opportunity and inclusion. Paper presented at the 65th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Manage- ment, Honolulu.

Mannix, E., & Neale, M. A. (2005). What differences make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse teams in organizations. Psycho- logical Science in the Public Interest, 6(2), 31–55.

Miller, F. A. (1994). Forks in the road: Critical issues on the path to diversity. In E. Y. Cross, J. H. Katz, F. A. Miller, & E. W. Seashore (Eds.), The promise of diversity: Over 40 voices discuss strategies for elimi- nating discrimination in organizations (pp. 38–45). Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin.

Miller, F. A., & Katz, J. H. (1995). Cultural diversity as a developmental process: The path from monocultural club to inclusive organiza- tion. In J. W. Pfeiffer (Ed.), The 1995 Annual (Vol. 2, Consulting, pp. 267–281). San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer.

Miller, F. A., & Katz, J. H. (2002). The inclusion breakthrough: Unleashing the real power of diversity. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

The Practice of Inclusion in Diverse Organizations 53

Miller, F. A., & Katz, J. H. (2007). The path from exclusive club to inclusive organization: A developmental process. Retrieved from http://blogs .ces.uwex.edu/inclusiveexcellence/files/2011/11/Path-from- Exclusive-Club-to-Inclusive-Organization-Article.pdf.

Mor Barak, M. E. (2000a). Beyond affirmative action: Toward a model of diversity and organizational inclusion. Administration in Social Work, 23(3/4), 47–68.

Mor Barak, M. E. (2000b). The inclusive workplace: An ecosystems approach to diversity management. Social Work, 45(4), 339–352.

Mor Barak, M. E. (2011). Managing diversity: Toward a globally inclusive workplace (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mor Barak, M. E., & Cherin, D. A. (1998). A tool to expand orga- nizational understanding of workforce diversity: Exploring a measure of inclusion-exclusion. Administration in Social Work, 22(1), 47–64.

Nembhard, I. M., & Edmondson, A. C. (2006). Making it safe: The effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psy- chological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 941–966. doi:10.1002/job .413.

Nishii, L. H., & Mayer, D. M. (2009). Do inclusive leaders help to reduce turnover in diverse groups? The moderating role of leader-member exchange in the diversity to turnover relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1412–1426. doi:10.1037/a0017190

Page, S. E. (2007). Making the difference: Applying a logic of diversity. Academy of Management Perspectives, 21(4), 6–20.

Pearce, J. L., & Randel, A. E. (2004). Expectations of organizational mobility, workplace social inclusion, and employee job perfor- mance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(1), 81–98. doi:10.1002/ job.232

Pelled, L. H., Ledford, G. E., Jr., & Mohrman, S. A. (1999). Demographic dissimilarity and workplace inclusion. Journal of Management Studies, 36(7), 1013–1031.

Pless, N. M., & Maak, T. (2004). Building an inclusive diversity culture: Principles, processes and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 54(2), 129–147. doi:10.1007/s10551–004–9465–8

Roberson, Q. M. (2006). Disentangling the meanings of diversity and inclusion in organizations. Group and Organization Management, 31(2), 212–236. doi: 10.1177/1059601104273064

Schutz, W. C. (1958). FIRO: A three dimensional theory of interpersonal behav- ior. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

54 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Ehrhart, K. H., & Singh, G. (2011). Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A review and model for future research. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1262–1289. doi:10.1177/0149206310385943

Stahl, G. K., Mäkelä, K., Zander, L., & Maznevski, M. L. (2010). A look at the bright side of multicultural team diversity. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 26, 439–447.

Stamper, C. L., & Masterson, S. S. (2002). Insider or outsider? how employee perceptions of insider status affect their work behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(8), 875–894. doi:10.1002/ job.175

Thomas, D. A., & Ely, R. (1996). Making differences matter: A new para- digm for managing diversity. Harvard Business Review, 74(5), 79–90.

Thomas, R. R., Jr. (1990). From affirmative action to affirming diversity. Harvard Business Review, 68(2), 107–117.

UNESCO. (2005). Guidelines for inclusion: Ensuring access to education for all. Paris, France: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cul- tural Organization.

van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515–541. doi:10.1146/annurev .psych.58.110405.085546

Wasserman, I. C., Gallegos, P. V., & Ferdman, B. M. (2008). Dancing with resistance: Leadership challenges in fostering a culture of inclu- sion. In K. M. Thomas (Ed.), Diversity resistance in organizations (pp. 175–200). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

55

CHAPTER TWO

Communicating About Diversity and Inclusion V. Robert Hayles

Communicating about diversity and inclusion so that organiza- tional members are inspired and engaged is challenging. Yet, like all successful initiatives, diversity and inclusion efforts gain more credibility and support when the communication strategy and tactics are well-crafted.

This chapter will help diversity and inclusion practitioners, human resource professionals, and leaders communicate in ways that affirm diversity, facilitate inclusion, and improve indi- vidual and organizational outcomes. The approach involves cognitive, affective, and behavioral (head, heart, and hand) components of communication and is grounded on current knowledge and practice in organization development. The materials describe how we can best communicate with the broadest possible audiences to nurture inclusion. My instrumen- tal goal is to enhance the work of practitioners and researchers focused on inclusion. The ultimate goal is that they achieve better results.

My perspective comes from doing and managing research and working internally and externally as a practitioner. I weave these experiences together to help practitioners and researchers understand each other and advance their work. I hope to show the results of practitioners dancing well with researchers.

56 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

The Work Other authors in this book present definitions of diversity and inclusion. In this chapter, diversity is taken to mean a mixture of “differences, similarities, and related tensions,” as defined by Thomas (2004, p. 3). Inclusion is taken to signify the full partici- pation of all relevant elements in that mixture. Although this chapter focuses primarily on inclusion, related practices like those promoting equal opportunity, affirmative action, equity, anti-bias, and diversity all contribute to progress on inclusion. No single approach is superior to another; the choice must be guided by the situation. Because inclusion is the least well-developed of these practices and the focus of this book, it gets more attention here. I refer to “the work” when indicating the preceding full constellation of practices.

Research and Practice-Based Models In writing this chapter, I was motivated by a strong desire to see that what we have learned during the past several decades is implemented to get the best results. Much of what we know has been summarized in research- and practice-based models and approaches that focus on individual and organization develop- ment and change. Such research and practice together provide the basis for powerful tools that move organizations through predictable stages of development as they traverse the past, current, and desired future states. In the process of unfreezing, changing, and freezing described by Lewin (1947), individuals and organizations adapt in some predictable ways. Here I take a comprehensive approach that addresses cognition, affect, and behavior, more clearly expressed as head, heart, and hand. The goal of this chapter is to make communicating about the work more powerful by selectively drawing on the current knowl- edge base.

Structure of This Chapter First, I briefly address why the facts are not adequate to per- suade audiences to pursue inclusion. Second, I describe support

Communicating About Diversity and Inclusion 57

for designing communication about this topic based on indi- vidual stages of development. Third, I address techniques that reduce bias and prejudice. Fourth, I provide communication approaches and content for advancing inclusion at different organizational stages of development. Finally, I give examples and information and point to resources regarding how to com- municate in ways that are oriented to facts, feelings, and behav- ior, respectively.

Why Fact-Based Communication Is Not Enough If one takes a purely cognitive approach to diversity and inclusion by defining terms and stating the desired outcomes, then fact- based communication should work. However, people and organi- zations are not driven by facts alone. Emotions also cause behavior. Therefore, a “just the facts” approach is insufficient. Some authors, such as Kochan et al. (2003), argue that diversity can have strong negative effects on performance. Others (such as Carfang, 1993; Corporate Leadership Council, 2003; Florida, 2005; Johansson, 2006; Ziller, 1972) argue for positive effects on performance. The most concise critique of such writings is to say that of course diversity alone does not cause better or worse outcomes. I strongly agree with researchers and practitioners like Ferdman, Barrera, Allen, and Vuong (2009; see also Ferdman, Avigdor, Braun, Konkin, & Kuzmycz, 2010) who make a compelling argument that inclusion facilitates a positive relationship between diversity and performance.

Diversity with inclusion can lead to better outcomes. I provide support for that belief throughout this chapter. Although I include a sample of data and studies regarding potential positive impacts, facts, even when true, are insufficient to motivate appropriate behavior. For example, we know that smoking, poor nutrition, inadequate hydration, skipping vacations, and being sedentary all have proven negative consequences. Even so, most of us do not always or even frequently behave in ways that reflect this knowl- edge. The same is true for advocating inclusion. Hearing about, believing in, or even knowing the benefits of diversity and inclu- sion do not consistently lead to supportive actions. Think of all the times a strong rationale for an initiative has been presented

58 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

in your organization, followed by inaction. Positive actions and healthy outcomes require comprehensive and systemic approaches. How we communicate about diversity and inclusion is an influen- tial element of this overall process.

The following section explains how to shape communication based on what we know about individual development.

Communication Based on Individual Development To communicate effectively (that is, to influence attitudes and behaviors) with an individual it is useful to know where that person is situated according to several models of development. Some intercultural researchers and practitioners (such as M. J. Bennett, 1998) believe that human beings, as they grow and develop, move through predictable stages regarding how they deal with cultural diversity. Generally, when work that is charac- teristic of a given stage is completed, the individual then moves to the next stage. Regression occurs when work remains incom- plete or life circumstances bring too much challenge. Under- standing the concept of developmental stages allows professionals to choose the most effective messages for each person and situa- tion. Skillfully selected messages facilitate continued growth toward the next stage.

Following, I briefly discuss models, concepts, and approaches to guide message selection. They are first: (1) identity models; (2) head, heart, hand; (3) unconscious competence; and (4) intercultural sensitivity. This group is followed by a set of addi- tional approaches for reducing individual bias and prejudice: (5) contact hypothesis; (6) cognitive complexity; (7) cultural assimi- lator; (8) defeating bias; (9) psychotherapy; (10) meditation and mindfulness; and (11) communication in education and training.

Identity Models

These models address how individual identity or identities develop. Identity can pertain to ethnicity, race (as a social iden- tity), gender, disability, age, culture, and more. Early stages in the development of an identity typically reflect ignorance or lack of

Communicating About Diversity and Inclusion 59

awareness. In these stages individuals are not aware of who they are, or they have a very narrow view of their own identity; this sounds like “I am just an American,” or “I’m just a woman.” Middle stages show engagement and conflict: “I am an indepen- dent woman yet interdependent with my family while seeking more freedom and a broader definition of my roles.” Advanced stages show integration or resolution: “I have multiple identities or components of my identity and am comfortable behaving in different ways as situations change.”

From a practical standpoint, this is especially useful when communicating one-on-one or with a homogeneous group, assum- ing the communicator is sophisticated enough to apply this knowledge. When addressing more diverse groups, the speaker must cover the full range of stages. Communication directed at receivers in the early stages should focus on acknowledging who they are and on increasing self-awareness. For example, one can affirm the identity and acknowledge the contribution from that perspective, as in, “The contribution of many women is making us very successful.” In the middle stages, facilitating nonjudgmen- tal exploration of the issues can be helpful, as in, “I’m pleased to see both men and women participate in nurturing young talent.” In the later stages, it is more useful to emphasize how that person can lead and contribute, as in, “We appreciate individuals like you, who can develop people who are different from you in sig- nificant ways.”

Head, Heart, and Hand

In education, training, and development the head, heart, hand concept (Hayles & Russell, 1997) is often described as addressing cognitive, affective, and behavioral components. The approaches for the three aspects are as follows:

• Head: knowledge, data, factual information • Heart: awareness, empathy, values, emotional understanding • Hand: interpersonal interaction and communication skills

Comprehensive communication approaches for individuals and groups must involve all three components. My experience in

60 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

designing, implementing, and evaluating diversity training con- firms this belief (Hayles, 1996). It is also consistent with the social psychological literature on attitude and behavior change, which suggests that effective interventions regarding any two of the components will lead to progress on the third (Hayles, 1978). For example, if you love someone (affective) and they tell you that using their middle name will cause others to discriminate against them (cognitive information), you will probably comply (behav- ior) with their request to avoid using their middle name. Another example would be if you are (1) forced to treat another person respectfully with regard to the words and nonverbal messages you use (behavior), and (2) informed that if you use inappropriate words your organization will be sued and you will be disciplined (cognitive information), then (3) over time you will either change how you feel about that person or be inclined to leave the environment.

This works in part because of the positive feedback loop and psychological dynamics that can be created when we choose the appropriate words. It also works by facilitating consistency (or creating tension) among head, heart, and hand. Compli- cated questions about effective sequencing and speed of change remain to be answered. Based on my research and practice, I currently believe that all three components should be addressed to maximize the probability of creating inclusion. Until researchers can tell us more about sequence, I suggest starting with the most available and least threatening com- ponent. In most public situations this will mean head first, hand second, and heart last.

Unconscious Competence

Many experienced diversity and inclusion practitioners say that, in learning to be inclusive, people need to go from unconscious incompetence to conscious incompetence to conscious compe- tence to unconscious competence (Howell, 1982; Tung, 1993). This process parallels similar models used regarding results and method of achievement, challenge and support, tasks and rela- tionships, information known to self and known to others, and so on. From a practical standpoint, this means practitioners must

Communicating About Diversity and Inclusion 61

help learners get feedback about unknowns, learning opportuni- ties about what they need to know, and sufficient practice with feedback to internalize the expanding competence. Diversity competence supports the individual in creating inclusion. Although the research literature is not clear on this point, I believe that diversity practitioners must consistently make this connection between diversity competencies and inclusion.

Intercultural Sensitivity

Another model that describes stages of development in this arena is Milton Bennett’s (1993) Developmental Model of Inter- cultural Sensitivity (DMIS). An excellent resource that guides application of the model was created by Janet Bennett (2006; see also Bennett, Chapter 5, this volume). She describes exactly what can be done or said to facilitate growth with respect to this model. There is also a psychometrically sound instrument devel- oped by Milton Bennett and Mitch Hammer (Hammer, 1999) to measure individual development using this model. Although using an instrument provides greater accuracy in determining stages of development, one can also do an excellent job in applying it by using the model to make careful behavioral observations:

• Early-stage behavior demonstrates a denial that differences exist or even hostility to such differences. Training is not an effective intervention here. Clear communication of policies and guidelines with enforcement is best. Emphasizing the many similarities we share is also beneficial.

• Middle stages show a primary focus on similarities, such as telling an immigrant that they speak English as well as any American and suggesting that we treat others as we treat ourselves. Middle stages also show acceptance of some minor differences. Here one can begin to introduce nonthreatening differences and graduate to more significant ones. Learning more about the self (for example, identity, culture, beliefs, and values) is also helpful here.

• Advanced stages reflect curiosity about others, pursuit of new experiences, and the intention to treat others as they wish to

62 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

be treated. At these stages, it is healthy to provide opportunities (such as intense personal interactions and international travel) to learn about significant differences. More details to guide application can be found in J. M. Bennett (2006) and Hayles and Russell (1997, Chapter 3).

Other Approaches for Reducing Individual Bias and Prejudice

One of the goals of the work (equal opportunity, affirmative action, anti-bias, diversity, pluralism, inclusion, and so on) is to reduce negative attitudes and behaviors targeted at individuals and groups with diverse identities. Practitioners use many tech- niques to do so. Here I provide a brief description of a few of the many research- and evidence-based approaches for commu- nicating in ways that reduce prejudice, bias, and accompanying negative behavior. Reducing bias makes it easier to create inclu- sive environments, but doing so is not sufficient to create inclu- sion. Additional processes addressed in other chapters of this book—such as accessing important identities (Chapter 3), creat- ing a safe environment (Chapter 4), developing competencies (Chapters 5 and 6), and designing comprehensive diversity and inclusion initiatives (Chapters 7 to 11)—are also necessary. If one is designing programs, workshops, presentations, newsletter arti- cles, video material, online content, e-learning, and the like, with a goal of reducing bias and prejudice, then applying the knowl- edge generated by some of the research noted here can enhance effectiveness.

The next six subsections note specific tools, concepts, and approaches selected to demonstrate the broad range of fields that contribute to inclusion.

Contact Hypothesis By creating specific conditions for human interaction among and between members of different identity groups, prejudice can be measurably reduced (Allport, 1954; Amir, 1976; Dixon, Durrheim, & Tredoux, 2005; Hewstone, Caims, Voci, Hamberger, & Niens, 2006; Pettigrew, 2011; Pettigrew, Christ, Wagner, & Stellmacher,

Communicating About Diversity and Inclusion 63

2007; Shelton & Richeson, 2006). Allport (1954) thought that intergroup contact under favorable conditions could reduce prej- udice, and he suggested policy changes to accomplish this. Amir developed a list of specific conditions for accomplishing this, including equal status and interdependent goals. Other scholars continued to contribute by refining the list, expanding applica- tions, and getting more specific about how, when, and for whom the recommended conditions work. Pettigrew (2011) believes applications are lacking because social psychologists have “failed to make our work widely visible” (p. 147). Pettigrew also notes the expansion of the contact hypothesis literature to identities other than race, such as religion and ethnicity. I also know colleagues who apply this theory in the areas of generational diversity and people with disabilities.

A full chapter or book could now be written applying this knowledge to our work. For example, the entire volume 62, number 3, 2006 issue of the Journal of Social Issues is titled and devoted to “Reducing Prejudice and Promoting Social Inclusion: Integrating Research, Theory and Practice on Intergroup Rela- tions.” Based on all of the preceding citations and my own experi- ence using the contact hypothesis, I note two specific application ideas:

∘ To reduce prejudice by improving the conditions of contact, create as many of the following conditions as reasonably possible: Minimize status differences, emphasize interdependence, talk about goals shared by everyone, demonstrate the value of cooperation, show majority group members modeling positive contact with minority group members, and promote contact that is more than casual. To supplement this with our knowledge of how to develop intercultural sensitivity, the practitioner should begin with the most comfortable differences and work up to the least comfortable ones. As the differences become more challenging, incorporate more of the recommended conditions for contact. For example, start with differences in style (such as those highlighted by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) and later address issues like religion and sexual orientation.

64 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

∘ Engage in indirect intergroup contact. Because contact with other ingroup members who have positive relationships with outgroup members is effective in reducing prejudice, this means that when your friends and colleagues have healthy interactions with others who are different, you also may experience a reduction in bias regarding those same different individuals and groups. One way to apply this knowledge is to show leaders, both live and using media venues, enjoying interactions with others who are different. This can facilitate the reduction of prejudice among participants in the organizations they lead.

Cognitive Complexity Training participants in dealing with a broad range of relevant considerations (qualifications, experience, education, training, background, knowledge) and the interactions among such inputs helps them look beyond “surface” characteristics (such as race and gender) and behave in less prejudiced ways (Gardiner, 1972). Note that Gardiner takes the view that race and gender are surface characteristics. In applying this technique, I find it more useful to speak of physical appearance (color, sex charac- teristics, languages spoken, weight, height, age appearance, evi- dence of physical ability, and so on). This technique works by creating tension between potential stereotypes and actual skills, knowledge, and abilities. This is very similar to what Rokeach (1971) did to address negative attitudes by highlighting inconsis- tencies between validated facts and personal beliefs. Again, start with less contentious issues and work up to more volatile ones. When combined with other techniques noted in this chapter, I believe that communicating about complexity merits addition to the practitioner’s toolkit.

Cultural Assimilator In a cultural assimilator, participants are presented with many scenarios involving diversity (in paper and digital computer–based formats). The participant then selects, from a multiple-choice list, the behavior he or she believes to be correct or most effective. For example: When a German man meets an Asian-American woman in an American business setting, should he: (a) vigorously

Communicating About Diversity and Inclusion 65

shake her hand, (b) kiss her on one cheek, (c) gently shake her hand, or (d) nod to acknowledge her presence? After individuals choose behavioral options in a wide range of situations involving cultural diversity and then receive feedback on the effectiveness of different choices, their real-time interaction skills measurably improve (Slobodin, 1972; Triandis, 1975). This approach has been used with both international cultural differences and social identity and cultural differences within the United States.

A variation on this theme is the use of games (such as Ghetto, Starpower, Barnga, and Bafa Bafa) to put the participant into roles simulating cultural differences, dominance, oppression, and sub- ordination. The designers see these experiences as nurturing empathy and understanding. Rather than a simulated or virtual experience, Albert and Adamopoulos (1976) recommend immers- ing participants in real cultures that are different from their own. I see this latter technique as a high-risk, high-impact approach that should be considered only for individuals in or approaching advanced stages of individual development. Using it with individu- als at earlier stages of development is likely to reinforce negative views of differences rather than educate the participant about similarities and differences.

Defeating Bias Sondra Thiederman (2008) presents a comprehensive approach to defeating bias, grounded in selected recent research on human processes that lead to reduction in bias. Thiederman examined research on how the brain functions, evidence-based counseling, sociological research on intergroup violence, social psychological studies of beliefs and attitudes, and tools used to manage diversity in organizations. She shows how mindfulness, triage, understand- ing benefits, dissecting bias, and finding similarities can help us behave in less biased ways. Thiederman provides explicit details about how the path for each of these techniques leads to unbiased behavior.

Psychotherapy By participating in evidence-based psychotherapy or other clinical diagnostic and therapeutic processes, individuals can become more personally and interpersonally competent. If the therapist

66 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

has intercultural, diversity, inclusion, pluralism, multicultural, or related skills, the increased competence extends to interactions with those who are significantly different. Most diversity and inclu- sion professionals are careful not to label what they do as “therapy” of any kind. However, some of the leaders in our field are trained in the therapeutic disciplines and appropriately use those skills in their diversity and inclusion practices. Most of the professional associations with clinical arms now advocate evidence-based thera- pies. Some of the techniques used in such therapies filter into the practices of competent diversity and inclusion practitioners. They can be safe and appropriate. Included are principles for giving feedback, dealing with stereotypes, using “I” messages for effective communication, and guided cognitive breakdown processing of prejudices.

In diversity and inclusion, I believe we should move toward adopting a standard for our practices that is similar to the one operating in the clinical arena. Evidence-based practice standards have been in place there for more than a decade. They are grounded in qualifications imposed by science, standardized, rep- licable, and effective (Drake, 2001).

Meditation and Mindfulness Moving out of the therapy arena, one relatively safe nonclinical technique for helping individuals gain insight into their biases and prejudices is to teach participants (volunteers only) how to meditate or be mindful. Significant effects have been demon- strated on avoiding unwanted thoughts (Winerman, 2011), reduc- ing anxiety about dealing with people perceived as difficult (Price, 2011), focusing more on others and less on self (Azar, 2010), and improving interpersonal interactions and response flexibility (Davis & Hayes, 2012).

Communication in Education and Training In many efforts to communicate about diversity and inclusion, a starting place is often to educate and train for at least tolerance of people, with an emphasis on differences. Enough research has been done now to know that this approach works for some learners but not others. In particular, this approach is less effec- tive in reducing prejudice of high social dominance–oriented

Communicating About Diversity and Inclusion 67

and right-wing authoritarian individuals (Esses & Hodson, 2006). Creating and emphasizing common ingroup identities is more effective for such individuals: for example, “we are all members of this group, qualified students for admission to this university, valued employees of this company, and/or citizens of this nation.”

The process used to communicate or learn about common- alities and differences is also an important variable. Active learn- ing is more effective than learning content from lectures and readings (Nagda, 2006). Active learning involves interactive pro- cesses that engage participants both as individuals and in groups (such as dialogue, action research, sharing personal stories, live encounters). Such two-way communication is more powerful in reducing bias than lectures, films, and readings. Interaction is more effective especially for issues that are complex and have emotional content, such as diversity and inclusion. Active learn- ing of this type can reduce prejudice and also demonstrate inclu- sive practices.

Communication to Fit Organizational Stages of Development: A Generic Organization Development Diversity and Inclusion Model Organizations also go through predictable stages of development with regression under stress or change (Hayles & Russell, 1997). This section describes generic stages of organization develop- ment specific to diversity, cultural competence, inclusion, and pluralism. Many practitioners and organizations have used devel- opmental models of organizations to diagnose and guide the work of diversity and inclusion. This and the next section are designed to help practitioners know what to communicate within an organization at different stages of development. First, I describe a generic developmental model for organizations, with three stages. In the following section, I recommend communica- tion approaches based on facts, values, and actions, suitable for each stage.

I have synthesized many of the models developed and used since the 1980s (for example, Cox, 1991; Holvino, Ferdman, & Merrill-Sands, 2004; Jackson & Holvino, 1988; Katz & Miller,

68 Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

1988) and describe a generic one shortly. In general, these models describe early, middle, and later stages in the journey from less diverse and more exclusive to high-performing, diverse, and inclusive organizations. I provide a brief descrip- tion of these stages, followed by recommended communication interventions for each stage. The suggested interventions are based on what I have learned and heard from colleagues regard- ing what works at each stage. The theoretically correct commu- nication at the appropriate stage is projected to have a more positive impact on inclusion and thereby performance. This is offered in the context of very limited research on the effective- ness of any particular model. It is based on knowing many prac- titioners (and their models) and the externally visible results in the organizations involved. In other words, the recommenda- tions that follow are based on synthesizing knowledge from theory and application.

The next sections discuss three different generic stages of development. To determine which stage an organization fits, a multifaceted assessment is important. This might include using internal data, focus groups, surveys, and tools such the Global Diversity and Inclusion Benchmarks (O’Mara, Chapter 14, this volume; O’Mara & Richter, 2011).

Early Stages

Words like resistant, exclusive, passive, club, and segregated describe the early stages. There is little visible diversity, and invisible diver- sity is typically undisclosed. Individuals who are members of certain groups need not seek entry. Intolerance and hostility are quite evident.

Effective communication designed to bring about change from the outside involves letters, emails, calls, complaints, articles and stories in the media, and threats of boycotts. Governments can speak of compliance and/or positive action (if such laws exist). Peer organizations in the same sector or region can tout lower risks and/or higher performance. At these stages it is often difficult for internal participants to be heard. Sometimes surveys and anonymous auditory or electronic channels can work. At this stage, internal leaders who support moving to inclusion must