COMM511: Discussion 3

Human Resource Management, March–April 2015, Vol. 54, No. 2. Pp. 241–264

© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com).

DOI:10.1002/hrm.21669

Correspondence to: Janet A. Boekhorst, School of Human Resource Management, York University, 4700 Keele

Street, Toronto, Canada M3J 1P3, Phone: 416-736-2100 ext. 33672, Fax: 416-736-5188, E-mail: [email protected].

THE ROLE OF AUTHENTIC

LEADERSHIP IN FOSTERING

WORKPLACE INCLUSION:

A  SOCIAL INFORMATION

PROCESSING PERSPECTIVE

J A N E T A . B O E K H O R S T

The extant literature has largely overlooked the importance of a climate for

inclusion as a response to the growing trend of workplace diversity. This

conceptual article contends that an organization-wide change effort compris-

ing several reinforcing processes aimed at creating a climate for inclusion is

needed to institutionalize workplace inclusion. Drawing on social information

processing theory, authentic leaders are posited to transmit social informa-

tion about the importance of inclusion into the work environment through

inclusive leader role modeling. Reward systems that remunerate inclusive

conduct can foster the vicarious learning of inclusive conduct by followers.

Large and diverse workgroups offer a plethora of opportunities for followers

to learn how to behave in an inclusive manner. Authentic leaders and follow-

ers who share cooperative goals related to developing a climate for inclu-

sion can prompt the vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors by followers,

thereby facilitating goal attainment for both parties. Theoretical and practical

implications are discussed. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Keywords: social information processing theory, climate for inclusion, in- tegration-and-learning, authentic leadership, reward systems, group com- position, group size, goal interdependence

Introduction

O rganizations are experiencing a prominent trend of an increas- ingly diverse workforce, thereby underscoring the earnest need for leaders to effectively attend to the

changing nature of the workplace (Chavez &

Weisinger, 2008; Lirio, Lee, Williams, Haugen, & Kossek, 2008; McKay, Avery, & Morris, 2009; Pless & Maak, 2004; Sanchez-Burks, Bartel, & Blount, 2009; Scott, Heathcote, & Gruman, 2011). Through a review of the di- versity literature, Shore et al. (2009) conclude that, until recently, researchers have largely examined diversity from the perspective

242 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

This article presents

a conceptual model

that explains why

authentic leaders

are a key source of

social information

that can significantly

influence the

formation of a

climate for inclusion.

Building upon these dominant themes of inclusion and in line with the general con- ceptualization of work climate (e.g., Reichers & Schneider, 1990; Schneider, 1990), the term climate for inclusion is defined as the shared perception of the work environment including the practices, policies, and proce- dures that guide a shared understanding that inclusive behaviors, which foster belong- ingness and uniqueness, are expected, sup- ported, and rewarded. This article seeks to understand how inclusion can be institu- tionalized in the work environment by draw- ing on social information processing theory as an overarching theoretical framework (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). More specifically, the integration-and-learning paradigm (Ely & Thomas, 2001; Thomas & Ely, 1996) is offered as a prelude to the following discussion. This paradigm posits that when organizations sin- cerely value and embrace diversity by linking it to work processes, tasks, and strategies, the result is a significant improvement in terms of group functioning (Ely & Thomas, 2001; Thomas & Ely, 1996). However, employees will only apply their individual differences if they feel comfortable in the workplace. In support, Tulenko and Kryder (1990) found that employees must feel comfortable in order to be creative, which undoubtedly involves the application of individual differences. Moreover, employees from underrepresented groups often experience discrimination, exclusion, and marginalization (Goldman, Gutek, Stein, & Lewis, 2006). These feelings tend to have a direct negative influence on their desire and capacity to contribute to the organization (L. Roberson & Block, 2001). Henceforth, a climate for inclusion, which engenders a sense of belongingness and uniqueness, provides the comfort needed for employees to apply their individual differ- ences to work processes, strategies, and tasks. It is therefore imperative to understand how a climate for inclusion can be institutionalized.

This article presents a conceptual model that explains why authentic leaders are a key source of social information that can signifi- cantly influence the formation of a climate for inclusion. Authentic leaders can help their followers understand the value of individual

of a single facet, including race, ethnicity, and gender. Often this research has been grounded in its originating paradigms that center mostly on the problems, such as biases and discrimination, associated with diversity (Shore et  al., 2009). However, recently this area of research has focused on examining the value inherent in diversity and workplace inclusion (Bilimoria, Joy, & Liang, 2008; Nishii, 2013; Q. M. Roberson, 2006).

More specifically, there has been a grow- ing interest toward examining how nontradi- tional internal processes can foster workplace inclusion (Shore et  al., 2011). For instance, Wasserman, Gallegos, and Ferdman (2008) assert that leaders are instrumental in cham-

pioning inclusion initiatives. Instead of silencing resistance to inclusion initiatives, lead- ers must engage with such resis- tance to support the vision of an inclusive workplace (Wasserman et  al., 2008). Indeed, inclusion is a nascent construct that is con- ceptually and empirically distinct from diversity (Shore et al., 2011). Broadly speaking, inclusion refers to employee involvement and the integration of diversity into organizational systems and pro- cesses, whereas diversity refers to the variability in the composition of a work group (Q. M. Roberson, 2006). Although several concep- tualizations of inclusion have

been proposed in the literature (e.g., Lirio et al., 2008; Q. M. Roberson, 2006), two gen- eral themes of belongingness and unique- ness emerge from these definitions (Shore et al., 2011). The belongingness theme reflects a sense of acceptance for all organizational members, whereas the uniqueness theme implies that the contributions of all employ- ees are valued whereby each member experi- ences respect and the opportunity for voice in the workplace. The commonalties across these definitions suggest that we need to begin understanding how this type of work climate can be fostered to provide all employ- ees the opportunity to experience a sense of belongingness and uniqueness.

WORKPLACE INCLUSION AND SOCIAL INFORMATION PROCESSING 243

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

This article offers several important theo- retical contributions. First, the social infor- mation processing perspective (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978) is used to understand why authentic leaders are a particularly important determinant in the formation of an inclusive climate. In doing so, this research deepens our understanding of the integration-and- learning paradigm by exploring how authen- tic leaders can foster a climate for inclusion, thereby enabling employees to feel comfort- able so they can apply their individual differ- ences to work processes. Second, the social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) explains how authentic leaders can shape a climate for inclusion by role modeling inclusive conduct for their followers. The central moral value of inclusion is a key individual difference that differentiates the authentic leaders who are the most effective role models. Third, the dynamic formation of an inclusive climate is taken into account by examining how follow- ers who vicariously learn how to behave in an inclusive manner can indirectly help foster a climate for inclusion. Fourth, organizational- and group-level factors (i.e., reward systems, workgroup composition, group size, and goal interdependence) can influence follow- ers’ vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors, thereby deepening our understanding of how important structures and processes can indi- rectly influence the formation of an inclusive climate.

In the following, an overview of orga- nizational climate and culture is presented within the context of workplace inclusion. Thereafter, the social information processing theory and the importance of authentic lead- ership are discussed. The conceptual model is then presented along with the research propositions. This article concludes with a discussion of the theoretical and practical implications along with directions for future research.

Organizational Climate and Organizational Culture

Organizational climate can be defined as the shared perception of the work environment, including the procedures, policies, and

differences by using their elevated status to seek out opportunities to support and encour- age followers to apply their individual differ- ences to improve work processes. Since the integration-and-learning perspective empha- sizes the need for several reinforcing systems and processes (Thomas & Ely, 1996), the role of organizational reward systems, workgroup composition, group size, and goal interdepen- dence are also explored because these factors are fundamental in reinforcing the impor- tance of workplace inclusion. Taken together, this article explores how an organization- wide change effort aimed at institutionalizing workplace inclusion through the formation of a climate for inclusion can enable employ- ees to apply their individual differences to work processes, strategies, and tasks.

In doing so, this article contributes to several calls for this much-needed research. Q. M. Roberson (2006) contends that research is sorely needed pertaining to the determi- nants of inclusive work climates. Shore et al. (2011) assert “much research is still needed to understand how organizations can create inclusive environments that provide oppor- tunities for the variety of people who work together in our global economy” (p. 1275). Moreover, Wasserman et  al. (2008) specifi- cally contend that leaders have a particularly instrumental role in shaping an inclusive workplace. Indeed, researchers have long rec- ognized the importance of leaders in shap- ing climate perceptions (Dragoni, 2005). Leaders communicate their own meanings and interpretations of organizational sys- tems by serving as “interpretive filters” of practices, policies, and procedures (Ostroff, Kinicki, & Tamkins, 2003). In doing so, lead- ers provide a common reference point for employees that in turn limits the variation in employee interpretations of the work cli- mate (Ashforth, 1985). Leaders have thus been coined “meaning managers” (Rentsch, 1990) and “climate engineers” (Naumann & Bennett, 2000). Although there are a num- ber of studies that demonstrate how specific leadership styles can shape facet-specific cli- mates (e.g., Ehrhart, 2004; Hsiung, 2012), limited research has examined how leader- ship can foster a climate for inclusion.

244 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Climate for

inclusion is defined

as the shared

perception of the

work environment

comprising the

practices, policies,

and procedures

that guide a shared

understanding that

inclusive behaviors,

which foster a sense

of belongingness

and uniqueness,

are expected,

supported, and

rewarded.

Organizational culture manifests through three layers that differ in terms of subjectivity and accessibility (Schein, 1990). First, artifacts are highly observable elements (e.g., rituals, dress, myths, stories, symbols, and language) that are underpinned by values, beliefs, and assumptions that represent the outermost layer of culture. Second, espoused values reflect the middle layer of culture and are moder- ately accessible organizational values and philosophies. Third, underlying assumptions are unobservable taken-for-granted assump- tions, values, and beliefs that influence employee perceptions, attitudes, and behav- iors that represent the innermost layer of cul- ture. The culture of inclusion construct has also recently been introduced into the litera- ture (e.g., Mujtaba, 2013; Pless & Maak, 2004; Wasserman et al., 2008). Culture of inclusion is defined as the shared values, assumptions, and beliefs about the importance of unique- ness and belongingness in fostering work- place inclusion that are communicated to newcomers to explain how this has helped the organization address prior issues related to internal integration and external adapta- tion. This definition draws on the meaning of organizational culture (Schneider et al., 2013) and the two core themes of inclusion (Shore et al., 2011).

Climate and culture are distinct, albeit overlapping, constructs (Reichers & Schneider, 1990). Climate is rooted in psychological research concerned with the impact of climate on individuals using predominantly quantita- tive methods that are often employed across multiple organizations (Denison, 1996). In contrast, culture has anthropological roots concerned with understanding how social sys- tems evolve using predominantly qualitative methods in a single organization (Denison, 1996). Henceforth, climate has a personal frame of reference and culture has a system frame of reference (L. R. James et al., 1990). Climate also focuses on relatively enduring surface-level manifestations of organizational life, whereas culture focuses on highly endur- ing beliefs, values, and assumptions that are embedded in organizational life (Denison, 1996; Moran & Volkwein, 1992). In other words, climate involves employee perceptions

practices that guide the expected, supported, and rewarded behaviors (Reichers & Schneider, 1990; Schneider, 1990; Schneider, White, & Paul, 1998). An organizational cli- mate manifests when employees collectively share perceptions of the nature of the work environment (L. R. James, James, & Ashe, 1990). The theoretical and methodological concerns associated with the global concep- tualization of climate have resulted in a shift

toward the focus on a climate for something (Schneider, 1990)— that is, a climate with a specific referent, such as safety (Zohar, 1980), innovation (Anderson & West, 1998), and service (Schneider et  al., 1998). Researchers have recently introduced the construct of a climate for inclusion (e.g., Nishii, 2013; Shore et al., 2011). As previously alluded to, climate for inclusion is defined as the shared perception of the work environment comprising the prac- tices, policies, and procedures that guide a shared understanding that inclusive behaviors, which foster a sense of belongingness and uniqueness, are expected, sup- ported, and rewarded. This defini- tion is based on the widely accepted meaning of work climate (e.g., Reichers & Schneider, 1990; Schneider, 1990) and the two dominant themes of inclusion in the extant literature (Shore et al., 2011).

Schneider, Erhart, and Macey (2013) comprehensively define organizational culture as the shared values, assumptions, and

beliefs that are communicated to newcom- ers through myths and stories about how the organization addressed prior issues of inter- nal integration and external adaptation that have shaped its present form. In other words, employees are taught how they should think, feel, and behave according to the behav- iors that the organization used to over- come prior problems, thereby validating the importance of these actions (Schein, 2010).

WORKPLACE INCLUSION AND SOCIAL INFORMATION PROCESSING 245

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

can transmit social cues in the workplace regarding the importance and expectation for inclusive behaviors. Prior to doing so, the three dominant paradigms that explain how organi- zations can approach diversity are introduced whereby the integration-and-learning para- digm is offered as a prelude to the conceptual model (Ely & Thomas, 2001).

First, the discrimination-and-fairness para- digm asserts that there is a moral responsi- bility to eliminate discrimination to ensure fair treatment and equal opportunities for all employees; however, this approach tends to result in assimilation and poor group func- tioning. Second, the access-and-legitimacy paradigm posits that access to specific target markets can occur by altering the workforce to mirror the primary characteristics of the target markets. Although this approach tends to result in moderate outcomes, employees are made aware of their differences. Third, the integration-and-learning paradigm values diversity as a resource, whereby diversity is linked to work processes, strategies, and tasks. The integration of all employees into the workplace facilitates sharing of diverse perspectives and insights about work-related matters resulting in cross-cultural learning. This approach results in the most beneficial outcomes for employees and the organiza- tion. The integration-and-learning perspec- tive is adopted as a prelude to the conceptual model because a climate for inclusion is pos- ited to foster feelings of comfort, thereby enabling employees to apply their individual differences in the work environment.

Moreover, the meanings and interpreta- tions of the work environment are socially constructed (L. R. James et al., 1990; L. R. James & McIntyre, 1996). The behavioral repertories of organizations are malleable because the information derived from the social environ- ment is fluid (e.g., Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). The prominent sources of social information tend to derive from those with high status (e.g., Copeland, 1994). Status and power dif- ferences are nearly inherent within any group dynamic (Magee & Galinsky, 2008), and these status differences can have a pervasive influ- ence on employee perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors (Bunderson & Reagans, 2011).

of what happens in the organization and cul- ture focuses on why it happens (Ostroff et al., 2003).

Nevertheless, climate and culture both focus on the meaning-making process that individuals use to make sense of their work environment that is learned through social interactions with others (Kuenzi & Schminke, 2009; Schneider et  al., 2013). There is an inherent overlapping nature of these con- structs that occurs through the link between assumptions (culture) and perceptions (cli- mate) (Ashforth, 1985). In short, climate manifests from culture (Schein, 1990) because culture influences organizational procedures, policies, and practices (Ostroff et  al., 2003). In other words, the deeply embedded values, assumptions, and beliefs of culture influence the organizational system that in turn shapes employee perceptions of the work climate (Moran & Volkwein, 1992). Notwithstanding, Moran and Volkwein (1992) also posit that short-term factors, such as leadership style, can also influence climate perceptions. Taken together, culture influences organizational structures that are collectively interpreted by employees, thereby shaping climate percep- tions (Ostroff et al., 2003).

Social Information Processing, Integration and Learning, and Workplace Inclusion

The social information processing perspective (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978) explains that indi- viduals make meaning of their environment based on processing the social information in the workplace. In other words, employees socially construct their perceptions and atti- tudes based on the social cues within the work- place that in turn influences their behavior (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). As previously alluded to, the extent to which a work climate repre- sents a specific facet is contingent on the inter- pretations of the attributes of the work environment (L. R. James et  al., 1990). An established critique of this theory is that it fails to adequately explain how information is dis- persed among individuals (Contractor & Eisenberg, 1990). In response, social learning theory is used to explain how authentic leaders

246 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Leaders are

instrumental in

shaping shared

climate perceptions

because followers

tend to rely on their

daily interactions

with their leaders

to understand

the behavioral

expectations in the

workplace.

rather the leader’s authentic values, beliefs, and behaviors serve to model the develop- ment of associates” (p. 243). In other words, authentic leaders are self-regulating leaders who are positive role models for their follow- ers because they behave in accordance with their morals and values despite contradic- tory pressures (Avolio, Walumbwa, & Weber, 2009).

Broadly speaking, inclusive behaviors that can derive from an authentic leadership style include genuinely eliciting viewpoints from followers (Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing, & Peterson, 2008), seeking follower input to facilitate participative decision- making (Pless & Maak, 2004), and encourag- ing open communication especially among employees whose voices may have other- wise been absent (Nembhard & Edmondson, 2006). Moreover, recent research provides several context-specific examples of inclusive behaviors. For instance, Munir, Yarker, Hicks, and Donaldson-Feilder (2012) explain that leaders can use an array of inclusive behav- iors (e.g., creating a phased return to work schedule; explaining changes to work pro- cesses and/or the job role; revising job duties to allow for a lighter workload) to help an employee transition back to work following a long-term sick leave. In a similar vein, Bell, Özbilgin, Beauregard, and Sürgevil (2011) contend that leaders can use specific inclusive behaviors (e.g., developing a diversity educa- tion program with a sexual orientation com- ponent; creating an open dialogue to reduce sexual orientation misperceptions) directed toward the integration of lesbian, gay, bisex- ual, and transgender (LGBT) employees into the workplace.

Although sufficient evidence supports the importance of authentic leaders as a key source of social influence to initiate and sus- tain an organization-wide initiative aimed at fostering workplace inclusion, several caveats must be noted. Authentic leaders, similar to most other individuals, may not always “do the right thing” and may also have prejudices and biases. However, since ethicality is central to authentic leadership (Avolio & Gardner, 2005), these leaders tend to engage in ethical behaviors that are driven by their values and

Since work climate is learned through social interactions (Reichers & Schneider, 1990), the primary source of social information that can influence the formation of a climate for inclusion must be examined.

Research highlights the critical role of leaders in shaping employee perceptions of the work environment. McKay et  al. (2009) conclude that significant financial gains were achieved when leaders and subordi- nates shared perceptions of a workplace that socially integrated all employees and used fair personnel practices. Indeed, leaders are instrumental in shaping shared climate per-

ceptions because followers tend to rely on their daily interactions with their leaders to understand the behavioral expectations in the workplace (Schneider et  al., 1998). Kozlowski and Doherty (1989) further posit that “an indi- vidual’s immediate supervisor is the most salient, tangible repre- sentative of management actions, policies, and procedures” (p. 547). Organizational practices, proce- dures, and policies are interpreted by leaders and subsequently manifest through their actions and behaviors (Ostroff et  al., 2003). Followers use this informa- tion provided by their leaders to understand the behavioral expec- tations in the workplace (Rentsch, 1990). Henceforth, leaders are par- ticularly instrumental in shaping climate perceptions because they

serve as a salient source of social information for their followers.

Authentic leaders are particularly impor- tant in fostering a climate for inclusion because ethicality is central to this style of leadership (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). Followers tend to perceive these leaders as credible, respectful, and trustworthy because their actions and behaviors are aligned with their convictions and values (Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa, Luthans, & May, 2004). Luthans and Avolio (2003) further state that “the authentic leader does not try to coerce or even rationally persuade associates, but

WORKPLACE INCLUSION AND SOCIAL INFORMATION PROCESSING 247

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Although authentic leaders may not always “do the right thing” all the time, there are several reinforcing mechanisms that can motivate these individuals to support work- place inclusion. Next, the conceptual model is presented.

The Formation of a Climate for  Inclusion: A Social Information Processing Perspective

In the following, the institutionalization of workplace inclusion is delineated through the social formation of a climate for inclu- sion. The conceptual model (Figure 1) depicts the research propositions. First, authentic leaders serve as role models, thereby high- lighting the behaviors that are expected from followers who in turn can positively influ- ence employee perceptions of a climate for inclusion. Second, organizational reward sys- tems that remunerate inclusive behaviors provide an impetus for followers to learn how to behave in an inclusive manner. Third, large and diverse workgroups present greater opportunities for followers to learn how to engage in inclusive conduct. Fourth,

beliefs system. Nevertheless, some authentic leaders may fail to “do the right thing” on occasion. Henceforth, an organization-wide change approach is presented to explain why authentic leaders may be particularly driven to act inclusive even if it is not in their moral imperative.

To illustrate, a reward system that remu- nerates inclusive behaviors provides a direct impetus for authentic leaders to engage in inclusive conduct. In support, Treviño (1990) found that reward systems that indicate the type of acceptable and unacceptable behav- iors tend to result in fewer unethical decisions. Authentic leaders who fail to adhere to these behavioral expectations may be disciplined by their superiors, which could become quite public given their elevated status and high visibility. Henceforth, reward systems can be critical in reinforcing the importance of workplace inclusion. Moreover, this article contends that authentic leaders have differ- ent central moral values, which explains why authentic leaders who value inclusion as a central moral value engage in more inclu- sive behaviors than authentic leaders who do not hold inclusion as a central moral value.

Note: The dashed line refers to the dispositional and behavioral characteristics that derive from authentic leadership.

FIGURE 1. An Organizationwide Approach to Developing a Climate for Inclusion

P6 P7

Inclusive Leader Role Modeling

Vicarious Learning of Inclusive Behaviors

by Followers

Climate for Inclusion

Dispositional Characteristic

- Central Moral Value of Inclusion

Authentic Leadership

Organizational Reward Systems

Workgroup Composition

P1 P2

P3

P4

P5 P8

Behavioral Characteristics

- Visibility - Complexity

- Novelty

Group Size Goal Interdependence

SOCIAL INFORMATION

ORGANIZATIONAL AND GROUP INFORMATION

248 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Authentic leaders

are particularly

important in

institutionalizing

workplace inclusion

because their

inherent ethical

nature drives their

decision-making

processes and

behaviors.

decision despite potential contradictions to his/her personal viewpoint. In other words, authentic leaders strive to make fair decisions by genuinely considering the perspectives of others. Lastly, internalized moral perspective represents a form of self-regulation whereby internalized morals and values guide deci- sion-making processes. Indeed, authentic leaders are particularly important in institu- tionalizing workplace inclusion because their inherent ethical nature drives their decision- making processes and behaviors.

Social learning theory (Bandura, 1977, 1986) further explains how authentic leaders can create a climate for inclusion. The values and belief systems of authentic leaders are embodied through their ethical verbal and nonverbal behaviors (Verplanken & Holland, 2002). Indeed, Sims (1992) defines ethical behavior as actions that are morally “good” as opposed to morally “bad.” Although Sims (1992) notes that this perspective inher- ently involves a grey area, morally “good” behaviors undoubtedly include inclusive behaviors. Henceforth, authentic lead- ers tend to engage in a variety of inclusive behaviors, which as previously  suggested, can broadly include genuinely valuing diverse perspectives, encouraging participa- tive decision-making, and supporting open communication.

More specifically, since authentic lead- ers are role models (Luthans & Avolio, 2003), their behaviors and actions signify the appro- priate and expected behavioral conduct from followers. Followers learn, as opposed to merely mimicking, which behaviors to rep- licate in the workplace through direct and indirect experience (Bandura, 1986). Direct experience occurs when followers replicate the observed behaviors. Authentic leaders who socially approve of these behaviors indi- rectly encourage replication of such behav- iors. In contrast, indirect experience occurs when followers engage in vicarious learning by observing the consequences arising from the behaviors of others, which either facili- tates or impedes followers’ motivation to produce similar behaviors (Bandura, 1986). Behaviors that are perceived to result in favor- able outcomes are usually replicated, while

authentic leaders and followers who share similar goals related to creating a climate for inclusion can entice followers to learn how to behave in an inclusive manner. The theoreti- cal arguments are constructed in detail next.

Authentic Leadership and a Climate for Inclusion

Organizational climate involves the mean- ings employees assign to organizational actions and attributes (L. A. James & James, 1989). In other words, climate reflects the “way things are around here” (Reichers & Schneider, 1990, p. 22). As previously alluded to, leaders play an instrumental role in the

formation of the work climate because it is primarily based on the values and belief systems of leaders (Dickson, Smith, Grojean, & Ehrhart, 2001). Since authentic leaders are role models who behave according to their strong values and belief systems (Avolio & Gardner, 2005), their interac- tions with their followers can per- vasively influence follower behavior (e.g., Buttner, Lowe, & Billings-Harris, 2010). Based on this line of reasoning, authentic leaders are critical in shaping a cli- mate for inclusion through the mediating role of inclusive leader role modeling.

There are four features of authentic leadership (Walumbwa et  al., 2008). First, self-awareness

occurs when a leader has an understanding of his/her strengths, weaknesses, impact on others, and own meaning-making process. In other words, authentic leaders who are self- aware are highly cognizant of their verbal and nonverbal behaviors. Second, relational transparency occurs when a leader behaves in a manner that represents his/her true nature. Stated differently, authentic leaders who are transparent present their genuine self that is in line with their internalized morals and values when leading others. Third, balanced processing occurs when a leader reviews and analyzes all information prior to making a

WORKPLACE INCLUSION AND SOCIAL INFORMATION PROCESSING 249

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Authentic leaders

are particularly

instrumental in

conveying the

expectations for

inclusive behaviors

through inclusive

leader role modeling,

thereby resulting

in perceptions of a

climate for inclusion.

on each value differs by each individual (Twenge, Campbell, Hoffman, & Lance, 2010). Nevertheless, there are central values that are the most influential in driving behav- ior (Deal & Kennedy, 1982). Although all authentic leaders have an internalized moral perspective (Walumbwa et al., 2008), the cen- tral moral value held by each authentic leader differs. There are many different moral val- ues, including trustworthiness, responsibility, and citizenship (Schwartz, 2005); however, authentic leaders who are driven by a moral perspective centered on inclusion are more likely to demonstrate verbal and nonverbal behaviors resembling inclusion than authen- tic leaders with a moral perspec- tive centered on a different moral value.

Since authentic leaders are characterized by relational trans- parency (Walumbwa et al., 2008), leaders with a central moral value of inclusion will tend to pres- ent their genuine self in accor- dance with this deeply held value. Moreover, these authentic leaders are highly self-aware and will also tend to engage in balanced deci- sion-making processes guided by this central moral value of inclu- sion (Walumbwa et  al., 2008). Thus, the salience of inclusion as a central value of authentic lead- ers tends to be highly apparent through their role modeling as evidenced through their actions, gestures, and words. Since values serve as regulatory guides (Lord & Brown, 2001), the central moral value of authentic leaders can moderate the positive relationship between authentic leadership and inclusive leader role modeling.

Proposition 2: The central moral value of inclu- sion will moderate the relationship between au- thentic leadership and inclusive leader role mod- eling, such that strong levels of the central moral value of inclusion will strengthen the positive rela- tionship between authentic leadership and inclu- sive leader role modeling compared to low levels of the central moral value of inclusion.

behaviors that are punished and/or fail to result in any rewards tend not to be replicated (Bandura, 1986). Followers encode this infor- mation into memory and through skill acqui- sition replication of similar behaviors tend to begin (Bandura, 1986).

In essence, authentic leaders are self- aware, transparent, and make balanced deci- sions guided by deeply held morals and values (Walumbwa et  al., 2008). Since leaders are instrumental in shaping a shared perception of the work climate (Dickson et  al., 2001), authentic leaders are particularly instrumen- tal in conveying the expectations for inclu- sive behaviors through inclusive leader role modeling, thereby resulting in perceptions of a climate for inclusion.

Proposition 1: Inclusive leader role modeling me- diates the positive relationship between authentic leadership and a climate for inclusion.

The Moderating Role of the Central Moral

Value of Inclusion

Although authentic leaders naturally demon- strate inclusive behaviors through their role modeling, their central values are a key indi- vidual difference that can result in certain authentic leaders who are more effective role models than others. More specifically, authentic leaders with a central moral value of inclusion are posited to engage in more inclusive leader role modeling than authen- tic leaders who do not prioritize inclusion as a central moral value. Since values drive behavior (Verplanken & Holland, 2002), authentic leaders who strongly value inclu- sion are more likely to exhibit behaviors that resemble a sense of belongingness and uniqueness. Indeed, these leaders tend to exhibit inclusive behaviors more frequently than those with a moral perspective grounded in a different central moral value. Thus, authentic leaders who strongly value inclu- sion as a central moral value are uniquely influential in shaping a climate for inclusion.

Values are lasting beliefs regarding the types of behavior that are most preferred, thereby guiding future actions (Rokeach, 1979); however, the importance placed

250 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

The relationship

between inclusive

leader role modeling

and the formation of

an inclusive climate

requires careful

consideration of the

followers because

they occupy a vital

role in shaping a

climate for inclusion.

and awareness to the observed behaviors (Bandura, 1977). In contrast, covert behaviors are difficult to observe, and thus gathering the needed behavioral information is diffi- cult. Visible behaviors also allow for improved retention of the observed behaviors due to a more accurate cognitive absorption of the behavioral details. This detailed retention of the behavioral characteristics strengthens the rules or codes of the observed behaviors into memory, thereby positively influencing vicar- ious learning by followers (Bandura, 1977). Authentic leaders who engage in highly visi- ble inclusive behaviors can improve the over- all learning process of how to properly enact inclusive behaviors by followers (Bandura, 1977). These arguments are summarized in the following proposition.

Proposition 3a: The visibility of the leader’s inclu- sive behaviors will be positively related to follow- ers’ vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors.

Complexity and Novelty of Behaviors

The complexity and novelty of the inclusive behaviors demonstrated by authentic leaders can also directly influence followers’ vicari- ous learning of such behaviors. When authen- tic leaders engage in complex and novel inclusive behaviors, it becomes very difficult for followers to attend to all of the behavioral details because greater cognitive processing is required. Indeed, Jassawalla and Sashittal (1999) found that collaborative behaviors involving product development processes are complex and difficult for employees to learn. Similarly, authentic leaders who engage in complex and novel inclusive behaviors tend to make it difficult for followers to learn these behaviors, resulting in an associated decrease in vicarious learning. This impaired learning process hinders followers’ ability to learn how to replicate similar behaviors in future work- place interactions.

Since complex and novel behaviors require more thoughtful cognitive pro- cessing, followers can easily overlook criti- cal information, leading to inaccurate or incomplete coding of the observed behaviors (Bandura, 1977). Indeed, early research has reported that nonlinear rules are associated

The Dynamic Interplay Between Leaders and Followers in Forming a Climate for Inclusion

The relationship between inclusive leader role modeling and the formation of an inclu- sive climate requires careful consideration of the followers because they occupy a vital role in shaping a climate for inclusion. There are two overarching processes that underpin how followers can vicariously learn about work- place inclusion (Gioia & Manz, 1985). First, the cognitive process includes follower atten- tion and retention of the observed behaviors demonstrated by an authentic leader (Bandura, 1977). Second, the behavioral pro-

cess relies on cognitive processing and motivation to reproduce the observed behaviors (Bandura, 1977). The following discussion elaborates on this dynamic inter- play between leaders, followers, and the formation of a climate for inclusion.

In line with social learning the- ory (Bandura, 1986), three behav- ioral characteristics of authentic leaders are posited to directly influ- ence followers’ vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors. First, the visibility of behaviors refers to the extent to which leaders’ behaviors are accessible and observable to followers. Second, the complexity of behaviors reflects the extent to which leaders’ behaviors resem- ble an intricate and complicated

arrangement of components that make it dif- ficult for followers to understand the nature of the behavior. Third, the novelty of behaviors refers to the extent to which leaders’ behav- iors are original and unfamiliar to followers.

Visibility of Behaviors

The extent to which authentic leaders’ behav- iors are visible to followers will significantly influence followers’ ability to vicariously learn these inclusive behaviors. Authentic leaders who engage in highly visible inclusive behaviors bestow the opportunity for followers to devote the required attention

WORKPLACE INCLUSION AND SOCIAL INFORMATION PROCESSING 251

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

the role model. In other words, followers must carefully observe the behaviors of authentic leaders with sufficient detail to understand how they can replicate the observed behav- iors. Authentic leaders serve as important role models (Luthans & Avolio, 2003), and their inherent power, visibility, and legitimacy pro- vide the leverage needed to positively influ- ence follower behavior (Wood & Bandura, 1989). For example, recent empirical research found that abusive manager behavior is posi- tively linked to abusive supervisor behavior and in turn is positively linked to interper- sonal deviance at the employee level (Mawritz, Mayer, Hoobler, Wayne, & Marinova, 2012). These researchers used social learning theory to explain why employees often look to their leader’s behavior to guide their own behavior and conduct within the work environment.

Second, followers must engage in the retention of the behaviors of authentic lead- ers in some symbolic form for later replica- tion (Bandura, 1972, 1986). The failure to retain the details of the observed behaviors can make it very difficult for followers to engage in behaviors that are similar to those that have been observed. Henceforth, suffi- cient attention and retention of the observed behaviors by followers enable for successful modeling of inclusive behaviors. Moreover, followers must retrieve the symbolic repre- sentations to guide their reproduction of the observed behaviors (Bandura, 1972, 1986). In other words, followers seek to emulate inclu- sive behaviors based on their observation of the behaviors of authentic leaders. The rep- lication of the inclusive behaviors is likely to occur, provided the followers have the physi- cal and cognitive capacity to replicate the observed behaviors.

Finally, replication of the behaviors of authentic leaders are also contingent upon motivational and reinforcement processes (Bandura, 1972, 1986). Followers must possess a desire to reproduce the observed behaviors, which is partially contingent upon reinforce- ment, in order for modeling of the observed behaviors to occur. As previously alluded to, behaviors that are received negatively by lead- ers (e.g., discipline, punishment) discourages employees from adopting such behaviors,

with greater learning difficulties than lin- ear rules (Brehmer, Hagafors, & Johansson, 1980). Complex and novel behaviors require greater attention and retention of the behav- ioral details because the unfamiliar nature of these behaviors requires greater awareness and attention to leaders’ behavioral processes for successful replication. It may be difficult for some followers to reproduce complex and novel behaviors because they may not have the necessary capabilities needed to effec- tively replicate the observed behaviors. Since successful replication of complex and novel behaviors is difficult, there tends to be an associated decrease in the followers’ motiva- tion to replicate behaviors that are complex and novel (Bandura, 1977). The following propositions are offered in support of these arguments.

Proposition 3b: The complexity of the leader’s in- clusive behaviors will be negatively related to fol- lowers’ vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors.

Proposition 3c: The novelty of the leader’s inclu- sive behaviors will be negatively related to follow- ers’ vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors.

Followers’ Vicarious Learning

Authentic leaders are particularly instrumen- tal in guiding the inclusive conduct of their followers. In further support, Hannah, Avolio, and Walumbwa (2011) found that followers’ moral courage mediated the relationship between authentic leadership and followers’ ethical and prosocial behaviors. In other words, authentic leaders can effectively guide followers toward engaging in ethical behav- iors, refraining from engaging in unethical behaviors, and behaving in a manner that promotes the well-being and integrity of oth- ers (Hannah et al., 2011). In the following, the interplay between inclusive leader role modeling and followers’ learning of inclusive behaviors is examined to understand how the replication of authentic leaders’ behaviors can occur.

There are four conditions that must be satisfied for successful role modeling to occur (Bandura, 1972, 1986). First, followers must devote sufficient attention to the behavior of

252 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Although authentic

leaders play an

important role in

shaping a climate

for inclusion, an

organization-wide

support system is

needed for complete

institutionalization of

workplace inclusion.

organizational and group processes, struc- tures, and strategies) influence the applica- tion of diversity to work processes. In this section, the role of organizational reward sys- tems, workgroup composition, group size, and goal structures are examined on follow- ers’ vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors.

Reward Systems

Organizational reward systems entail mone- tary and nonmonetary means in which to recognize employees for specific behaviors and achievements (Bartol & Srivastava, 2002). Reward systems directly influence the infor- mation in the social environment by indicat- ing the nature of the behaviors expected from employees (Kerr, 1975). As previously alluded to, followers learn how to behave in the work- place by avoiding replicating behaviors that are punished and replicating behaviors that are rewarded (Bandura, 1977). Henceforth, the organizational reward system is a key organizational process that dictates the type of behaviors expected in the workplace by rewarding those behaviors that are expected from employees (Colville & Millner, 2011).

Organizations that adopt an organization- wide change effort aimed at recognizing the value of all employees by meaningfully inte- grating diversity into work processes require a reward system that supports this process. Indeed, the integration-and-learning perspec- tive involves employees sharing their diverse insights in order to offer fresh ideas to improve work processes (Thomas & Ely, 1996). Since this process requires employees to construc- tively challenge and learn from each other, there is an implicit need for inclusive inter- actions. Reward systems that encourage and reward inclusive behaviors can prompt such behaviors from employees (e.g., Podsakoff, Podsakoff, & Kuskova, 2010). In support, Ferrin and Dirks (2003) found that employ- ees shared more knowledge with their peers when the reward system supported knowl- edge sharing; however, competitive reward systems that failed to remunerate knowledge sharing resulted in less information sharing among employees (Ferrin & Dirks, 2003). This research suggests that followers will engage in

whereas behaviors that are received posi- tively by leaders (e.g., praised, rewarded) encourage future replication of such behav- iors (Bandura, 1986). In other words, the con- sequences associated with certain behaviors inevitably signal to employees the expected behavioral conduct in the workplace. For example, an employee who observes a col- league receiving praise for his/her inclusive conduct signals to other employees that the

leader positively views this form of behavioral conduct. This outcome reinforces the acceptableness of the behavior, thereby encouraging others to adopt similar behaviors. The aforementioned arguments are summarized in the following proposition.

Proposition 4: Vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors by followers will moderate the relationship between inclusive leader role modeling and a climate for inclusion, such that strong levels of vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors by followers will strengthen the positive relationship between in- clusive leader role modeling and a climate for inclusion compared to low

levels of vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors by followers.

The Infl uence of Organizational and Group Processes, Structures, and Strategies

The integration-and-learning perspective (Ely & Thomas, 2001) posits that an organization- wide change effort can allow for meaningful integration of diversity into work processes. As previously suggested, a climate for inclu- sion is an important mechanism in which to facilitate feelings of comfort, thereby enabling all employees to apply their individual differ- ences in the workplace. Although authentic leaders play an important role in shaping a climate for inclusion, an organization- wide support system is needed for complete institutionalization of workplace inclusion. This perspective indicates that it is necessary to consider how other social factors (e.g.,

WORKPLACE INCLUSION AND SOCIAL INFORMATION PROCESSING 253

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

whereas culturally homogeneous groups are com- posed of group members that share the same national and/or ethnic background (Watson, Kumar, & Michaelsen, 1993). Culturally diverse workgroups tend to have significant differences in the perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors among group members (Thomas & Ely, 1996). Indeed, these differences provide authentic leaders a greater number of high- quality opportunities to imbue social cues about the importance of workplace inclu- sion into the work environment (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). In other words, authentic leaders can easily seek out opportunities to help employees apply their individual differ- ences to work processes, tasks, and strategies. Subsequently, there are greater opportuni- ties for followers to vicariously learn how to engage in inclusive behaviors by observing the behaviors of authentic leaders. In support, Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, and Gurin (2002) found that students that had more interactions with peers from diverse backgrounds experienced more positive learning outcomes, including intellectual engagement and active thinking.

Conversely, culturally homogeneous work- groups are negatively related to vicariously learning of inclusive behaviors by followers because there are fewer opportunities for fol- lowers to learn how to behave in an inclusive manner. Indeed, homogeneous workgroups tend to be associated with fewer diverse view- points and perspectives (e.g., Hoffman & Maier, 1961). From an integration-and-learn- ing perspective, there are fewer high-quality opportunities for authentic leaders to help followers apply their individual differences to their work processes and tasks that in turn lead to fewer inclusive behaviors. For exam- ple, homogeneous workgroups tend to have relatively similar viewpoints, leading to fewer opportunities to respectfully challenge the viewpoints of others. Indeed, McLeod, Lobel, and Cox (1996) found that culturally similar workgroups had lower-quality ideas than cul- turally diverse workgroups. Taken together, diverse workgroups tend to present more opportunities for authentic leaders to engage in inclusive behaviors. Henceforth, there are more opportunities for followers to vicariously learn how to emulate inclusive behaviors.

greater vicarious learning of inclusive behav- iors if the reward system encourages this type of behavior.

In contrast, reward systems that fail to reward employees for their inclusive behav- iors will unlikely encourage employee learning of inclusive conduct. To illustrate, Hegarty and Sims (1987) found an increase in unethical behavior when these behaviors were rewarded in comparison to when these behaviors were not rewarded. This study pro- vides direct evidence of the importance of the reward system in terms of eliciting specific types of behaviors. The reward system is thus critical in terms of transmitting social infor- mation into the work environment pertain- ing to the expected behaviors from employees (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). In essence, a reward system that remunerates employees for vicar- iously learning how to engage in inclusive conduct can elicit vicarious learning of inclu- sive behaviors from followers. Henceforth, the following proposition is offered.

Proposition 5: Organizational reward systems that reward inclusive behaviors are positively re- lated to vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors by followers.

Workgroup Composition

Diversity in the composition of the work- group can vary in terms of visible and nonvis- ible characteristics of group members (Milliken & Martins, 1996). Workgroup diver- sity can be surface-level, such as gender, or it can be deep-level, such as work values (Harrison, Price, & Bell, 1998). For simplicity, this section is limited to examining work- group composition from a cultural perspec- tive; however, the arguments hold for both visible and nonvisible differences among group members. Since workgroup composi- tion can have a significant influence on employee behavior (Choi, 2007), the nature of the composition of the workgroup on fol- lowers’ learning of inclusive conduct must be examined.

Culturally diverse groups are composed of group members that significantly differ in terms of national and/or ethnic background,

254 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Followers who are

provided more high-

quality opportunities

to vicariously learn

how to behave

in an inclusive

manner can devote

more attention

toward learning the

behavioral details

for subsequent

replication.

toward learning the behavioral details for subsequent replication (Bandura, 1986).

In contrast, small workgroups tend to reflect limited surface- and deep-level diversity because there are simply fewer members that can differ on visible and nonvisible attributes (Jackson et  al., 1991). From an integration- and-learning perspective, authentic leaders of small workgroups usually encounter fewer opportunities to demonstrate a wide range of inclusive behaviors because there are fewer individual differences among followers who can be uniquely applied to work processes. In support, Mooney, Holahan, and Amason (2007) found that group size was positively related to cognitive conflict, thereby suggest- ing that small workgroups tend to have mem- bers with limited variation in experiences and opinions. Authentic leaders thus transmit less social information through their behaviors related to the importance of inclusive behav- iors into the work environment (e.g., Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). Taken together, large work- groups present authentic leaders with more opportunities to demonstrate a wide range of inclusive conduct, thereby positively influ- encing the vicarious learning of inclusive conduct by followers.

Proposition 7: Workgroup size is positively related to vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors by fol- lowers.

Goal Interdependence

Goal interdependence theory (Deutsch, 1973) posits that the interdependence of goals among authentic leaders and followers can have important implications (Johnson & Johnson, 2005). Authentic leaders can con- vey their goals of developing an inclusive cli- mate by imbuing social cues into the work environment related to the importance of workplace inclusion (e.g., Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). Followers retrieve this goal-related information to determine whether their goals are interdependent with their leaders. This assessment can subsequently influence fol- lowers’ attitudes, behaviors, and interactions with others (e.g., Johnson & Johnson, 1989). Henceforth, the interdependent nature of the goals between authentic leaders and

Proposition 6: Heterogeneous workgroup composi- tion is positively related to vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors by followers.

Group Size

Workgroups can differ considerably in terms of the number of group members. Small workgroups tend to range from two to six members, and large workgroups usually have seven or more members (Hare, 1992). Workgroup size is an important group struc- ture, as numerous studies have shown that it can influence important individual and unit- level outcomes (e.g., Colquitt, Noe, & Jackson, 2002; Weege, Roth, Neubach, Schmidt, &

Kanfer, 2008). More specifically, Gill and Ling (1995) explain that the number of group members can influence learning effective- ness. Henceforth, the following discussion examines the role of group size on followers’ vicarious learning of inclusive conduct.

Group size can influence the extent of surface- and deep- level diversity within workgroups (Jackson et al., 1991). An increase in the number of group members is associated with an increase in the likelihood of surface- and deep-level diversity in the work- group. Large workgroups tend to have more followers with unique opinions and experiences result- ing from their differing back- grounds (Bantel & Jackson, 1989). Henceforth, these groups provide more opportunities for authentic

leaders to demonstrate a wide range of inclu- sive conduct because there are usually more high-quality opportunities to help followers apply their differences to work processes. In other words, group size can influence the capacity of authentic leaders to transmit social cues into the work environment per- taining to the importance of inclusive con- duct (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). Followers who are provided more high-quality opportuni- ties to vicariously learn how to behave in an inclusive manner can devote more attention

WORKPLACE INCLUSION AND SOCIAL INFORMATION PROCESSING 255

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Authentic leaders

and followers who

share a cooperative

goal structure

related to creating

a climate for

inclusion can foster

followers’ vicarious

learning of inclusive

conduct because

this learning can

simultaneously help

both parties reach

their goals.

cooperative goal structures have been linked to open-mindedness, whereby group mem- bers share personal viewpoints and seek to understand others’ viewpoints to ensure the most positive outcomes result for both parties (Alper, Tjosvold, & Law, 1998). As previously alluded to, authentic leaders who are driven to create a climate for inclusion tend to dem- onstrate a range of inclusive behaviors aimed at transmitting social cues into the work envi- ronment for followers (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). Followers are more likely to be attuned to these behaviors in order to learn how to properly act in an inclusive man- ner across a variety of contexts (Bandura, 1986). In doing so, fol- lowers can help authentic leaders attain their goal of creating a cli- mate for inclusion and their own goal of fostering inclusive cross- cultural learning among group members to improve workgroup performance.

In contrast, followers are unlikely to vicariously learn how to behave in an inclusive man- ner when their goals diverge from those of authentic leaders. Competitive goal structures can elicit behaviors from followers who impede authentic leaders from creating a climate for inclu- sion (Johnson & Johnson, 2009). Divergent goals are likely to prompt oppositional interaction (i.e., behaviors that are intended to support personal interests and impede goal attainment by the other party) (Johnson & Johnson, 1989), but are unlikely to facilitate promotive interaction (i.e., helping behaviors that are directed toward goal attainment for the other party) (Johnson & Johnson, 2009). In sup- port, Tjosvold (1997) found that competitive goals interfered with productive networking by preventing an open dialogue among a sample of dentists that could have otherwise been used to help solve business and techni- cal issues. Moreover, although independent goal structures are unlikely to elicit follower behaviors that impede authentic leaders from

followers can influence whether followers are likely to engage in vicarious learning of inclu- sive conduct.

There are three types of goal structures: cooperative, competitive, and independent (Johnson & Johnson, 1989). First, cooperative goals occur when authentic leaders and fol- lowers have a positively correlated goal struc- ture. In other words, authentic leaders who progress toward their own goals also have fol- lowers who shift toward reaching their own goals and vice versa. This structure results in win-win situations because both leaders and followers are committed to helping each other succeed (Tjosvold, Tang, & West, 2004). Second, competitive goals occur when authen- tic leaders and followers have a negatively correlated goal structure. Stated alternatively, authentic leaders who progress toward their own goals simultaneously impede followers from attaining their goals and vice versa. This goal structure results in win-lose situations because both leaders and followers are not driven to help each other, as helping can frus- trate and/or delay personal goal attainment (Tjosvold et  al., 2004). Third, independence refers to an unrelated goal structure, such that authentic leaders who move toward reaching their own goals have no impact on follow- ers’ progress toward their own goals and vice versa. Generally speaking, research has found that cooperative goals result in positive inter- actions/outcomes and competitive goals fos- ter negative interactions/outcomes (Johnson & Johnson, 2005).

Authentic leaders and followers who share a cooperative goal structure related to creating a climate for inclusion can fos- ter followers’ vicarious learning of inclusive conduct because this learning can simulta- neously help both parties reach their goals (Deutsch, 1973; Johnson & Johnson, 1989). To illustrate, authentic leaders who have a goal of creating a climate for inclusion can have followers who share a similar goal, such as to improve inclusive cross-cultural learning among group members to increase workgroup performance. The positive inter- dependent nature of these goals tends to elicit behaviors that are beneficial to both parties (Tjosvold et  al., 2004). In support,

256 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Authentic leaders

with a central moral

value of inclusion

are the strongest

inclusive leader role

models because

central values are

influential in driving

behavior.

processing theory (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978) is used to explain why authentic leaders are an important source of social information per- taining to workplace inclusion for their fol- lowers. Authentic leaders are naturally driven to behave in an inclusive manner deriving from their internalized moral perspective. Henceforth, authentic leaders are particularly instrumental in transmitting social cues into the work environment through their verbal and nonverbal behaviors regarding the importance of workplace inclusion. Followers retrieve this social information to understand how they are expected to behave in the work- place, and in turn this shapes their percep- tions of an inclusive work climate. In doing so, this article deepens our understanding of the integration-and-learning paradigm by explaining how authentic leaders can foster the formation of a climate for inclusion that enables all employees to feel comfortable so they can apply their individual differences to work processes, tasks, and strategies.

Second, authentic leaders occupy a partic- ularly unique role in shaping the formation of an inclusive climate due to their empha- sis on ethics, morals, and values (Walumbwa et al., 2008). Drawing on social learning the- ory (Bandura, 1977), authentic leaders can engage in inclusive leader role modeling by demonstrating a range of inclusive conduct for their followers. In doing so, authentic leaders indicate the expected, supported, and rewarded behaviors from followers, thereby facilitating perceptions of a climate for inclusion. However, there are individual differences that can differentiate the authen- tic leaders who are the most fruitful in fos- tering a climate for inclusion. The central moral value of inclusion is posited to be a key individual difference that can have a sig- nificant influence on the inclusive behavior demonstrated by authentic leaders. In other words, authentic leaders with a central moral value of inclusion are the strongest inclusive leader role models because central values are influential in driving behavior (Verplanken & Holland, 2002). In doing so, this research partly responds to a recent call for research: “It would be enormously useful if future research investigated the organizational and

creating a climate for inclusion, this goal structure is also unlikely to trigger any help- ing behaviors (Deutsch, 1973). Henceforth, followers’ vicarious learning of inclusive con- duct can be prompted when authentic lead- ers and followers share a cooperative goal structure related to a climate for inclusion.

Proposition 8: Cooperative goals aimed at foster- ing a climate for inclusion shared by authentic leaders and followers is positively related to vicari- ous learning of inclusive behaviors by followers.

Discussion

There is an ever-increasing trend of workplace diversity (Buttner et  al., 2010; Gonzalez & DeNisi, 2009; Sanchez-Burks et  al., 2009), which is resulting in a growing number of calls

for scholarly attention to under- stand how to attend to this phe- nomenon. In response to these calls, this article presented a con- ceptual model that contributes to the growing body of literature on workplace inclusion (e.g., Bilimoria et  al., 2008; Nishii, 2013; Shore et al., 2011). This article specifically explored how a climate for inclu- sion can foster feelings of comfort, thereby encouraging all employees to directly apply their differences to work processes, tasks, and strate- gies. Drawing on the social infor- mation processing perspective (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978), an

organization-wide change effort aimed at cre- ating an inclusive work climate was examined. Authentic leaders are posited to serve as a sig- nificant source of social information in terms of conveying the importance of workplace inclusion to employees. Organizational reward systems, workgroup composition, group size, and goal interdependence are also critical orga- nizational and group structures, processes, and strategies that can have a key influence on the formation of a climate for inclusion.

Theoretical Contributions

This article offers four significant theoretical contributions. First, the social information

WORKPLACE INCLUSION AND SOCIAL INFORMATION PROCESSING 257

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

of inclusive behavior by followers because this learning can help followers and authen- tic leaders reach their respective goals. Taken together, this research offers several impor- tant theoretical contributions to the litera- ture, yet future research is needed to further extend the workplace inclusion literature.

Avenues for Future Research

Broadly speaking, future research is needed to deepen our understanding of the key deter- minants and outcomes of a climate for inclu- sion. Future research should begin to examine antecedent-based questions, such as: What other forms of leadership can facilitate or impede creating a climate for inclusion? What are other important boundary condi- tions of creating an inclusive climate? The outcomes associated with a climate for inclu- sion should also be examined by addressing outcome-based questions, such as: How do inclusive climates influence conflict, group dynamics, and creativity? How might a cli- mate for inclusion influence performance at the individual, group, and organizational lev- els? In the following, specific avenues for future research are offered.

The conceptual model should be empiri- cally tested using both qualitative and quan- titative methods. In line with calls for more qualitative management research (e.g., Gephart, 2004), case-study methodologies could be used to examine how the social pro- cess of creating a climate for inclusion unfolds in a specific organization. Researchers should use techniques such as participant observa- tion, in-depth interviews with authentic lead- ers and followers, and focus groups to gain rich insights into how authentic leaders can create an inclusive climate (e.g., Marshall & Rossman, 2010). Similar to most work climate studies, researchers should also use quantita- tive methodologies. For example, a longitu- dinal research design that uses multisource questionnaires could be used to test the prop- ositions. Indeed, there are a number of previ- ously validated measures that can be used (e.g., Nishii, 2013; Walumbwa et al., 2008); however, some of these measures may require minor modifications (e.g., Tjosvold et  al., 2004).

individual-level factors that make unit lead- ers more likely to create inclusive climates” (Nishii, 2013, p. 27).

Third, the dynamic formation of a climate for inclusion is taken into account by explor- ing the role of followers, such that followers can help foster perceptions of an inclusive climate by engaging in cognitive and behav- ioral processes to vicariously learn how to behave in an inclusive manner. Followers begin the learning process by devoting sig- nificant attention to observing and retain- ing the behavioral details of the inclusive behaviors of authentic leaders (e.g., Gioia & Manz, 1985). Afterward, followers engage in a behavioral process to emulate the inclusive behaviors of authentic leaders by retrieving previously encoded symbolic representa- tions of the inclusive conduct (e.g., Bandura, 1977). Moreover, authentic leaders who moti- vate followers to behave in an inclusive man- ner through positive reinforcement can help to stimulate vicarious learning of inclusive conduct by followers. Henceforth, followers who vicariously learn inclusive conduct from authentic leaders can help to indirectly shape a climate for inclusion.

Fourth, organizational and group pro- cesses, structures, and strategies can indi- rectly influence the formation of a climate for inclusion by impacting followers’ learn- ing of inclusive behaviors. Organizational reward systems that remunerate inclusive conduct signals to employees that inclusive behaviors are encouraged, supported, and rewarded. This reward system can moti- vate followers to learn how to behave inclu- sively by observing leaders who reinforce the importance of inclusive behaviors through their actions. Workgroups that are large and highly diverse present authentic leaders with more high-quality opportunities to demon- strate inclusive conduct because there tends to be more surface- and deep-level diver- sity in these groups. Followers thus tend to engage in greater vicarious learning of inclu- sive behaviors because followers often look toward their leader for behavioral guidelines. Authentic leaders and followers who share cooperative goals related to creating a climate for inclusion can stimulate vicarious learning

258 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Researchers can

draw on the social

capital perspective

to examine how

star employees

can use their social

ties to disseminate

knowledge about

the importance of

workplace inclusion.

to create a climate for inclusion. These ques- tions provide evidence of the importance and wealth of research needed to begin fur- ther developing the climate for inclusion literature.

Practical Implications

There are also several important insights for managers and human resource (HR) profes- sionals. The recruitment and selection pro- cess should be aimed at identifying authentic leaders based on the key characteristics of self-awareness, relational transparency, bal- anced processing, and an internalized moral perspective (Walumbwa et  al., 2008). Cooper, Scandura, and Schriesheim (2005) posit that authentic leadership can be iden- tified using survey-based methods, experi- ential exercises, and scenario-based exercises (e.g., presenting an ethical dilemma to potential job candidates in order to assess their ethical decision-making abilities). Although some leaders may not require any support to draw out their authentic leader- ship style, many leaders currently employed in organizations need guidance (Avolio & Luthans, 2006). Henceforth, genuine authentic leadership interventions should be offered in order to produce trigger events that stimulate a significant behavioral change in leadership style (Cooper et  al., 2005). These interventions should also include an explicit focus on ethical decision- making processes (Cooper et  al., 2005). Indeed, leaders need to employ their authen- tic selves in order to foster an inclusive cli- mate by role modeling inclusive behaviors for their followers.

Socialization initiatives (e.g., orienta- tion sessions, on-boarding programs) for new hires should communicate the behav- ioral expectations from employees (Bauer & Erdogan, 2012). HR professionals lead- ing these programs should clearly indicate the importance of inclusion by providing examples of inclusive behaviors specific to the organization. Moreover, authentic lead- ers should continue to convey the impor- tance of inclusive behaviors on a daily basis by leading others according to their morals

Although some studies have developed a measure of inclusive behavior for a specific context (e.g., Munir et al., 2012), research is sorely needed to develop a more comprehen- sive measure of inclusive behavior.

Structural equation modeling (SEM) can be used to assess for the mediating (e.g., Proposition 1), moderating (e.g., Proposition 2), and direct main effects (e.g., Proposition 5) in the conceptual model (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2010). SEM is a power- ful multivariate technique that primarily uses confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and path analysis (PA) to test rather complex structures of interdependent relationships (Hair et  al., 2010). SEM is often deemed superior to many

other statistical techniques for a number of reasons, including its flexibility with estimation options and model specification (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). This recommen- dation is in line with many other studies that examine how leader- ship can influence work climate (e.g., Ehrhart, 2004; Shih, Chiang, & Chen, 2012). Researchers who seek to test the model could also further extend this model by examining how other disposi- tional characteristics of authen- tic leaders influence inclusive leader role modeling. For exam- ple, researchers could explore the influence of leader self-efficacy (Hannah, Avolio, Luthans, &

Harms, 2008) because self-efficacy has been linked to performance outcomes (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998).

Future research is also needed to explore the role of “star employees,” who are defined as exceptional performers arising from their extraordinary productivity (Groysberg, Lee, & Nanda, 2008). Researchers can draw on the social capital perspective to examine how star employees can use their social ties to dis- seminate knowledge about the importance of workplace inclusion. Future research is also needed to explore the role of specific char- acteristics of star employees (e.g., benevo- lence) in order to identify which type of star employee is most fruitful in terms of helping

WORKPLACE INCLUSION AND SOCIAL INFORMATION PROCESSING 259

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Leaders should

seek to engage in

visible and simple

behaviors to

facilitate a strong

understanding by

followers of how

to replicate their

behaviors.

change effort comprising several reinforcing processes and practices is needed to institu- tionalize inclusion by fostering a climate for inclusion.

Conclusion

Workplaces are becoming increasingly diverse, thereby underscoring the need for research to investigate how organizations can attend to this trend by fostering workplace inclusion. This article presents an organization-wide change effort whereby authentic leaders, organizational reward sys- tems, workgroup composition, group size, and cooperative goal structures serve as mutually rein- forcing mechanisms that can con- vey the importance of workplace inclusion. These processes interact to create a work climate whereby employees can feel comfortable to apply their individual differences to work processes, tasks, and strat- egies. In doing so, this article offers many important directions for future research aimed at under standing the institutionaliza- tion of workplace inclusion.

Acknowledgment

This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

and values to allow followers to emulate their inclusive behaviors. More specifically, leaders should seek to engage in visible and simple behaviors to facilitate a strong understanding by followers of how to replicate their behav- iors. Workgroups should also be designed to facilitate cross-cultural learning by ensuring significant surface- and deep-level diversity among group members. Training programs should also be offered to teach employees how to interact in a respectful and inclusive manner (Jayne & Dipboye, 2004).

HR professionals should ensure the organizational reward system reinforces the importance of inclusion by rewarding employees for engaging in sincere inclu- sive behaviors to further elicit these types of behaviors (e.g., Colville & Millner, 2011). HR professionals should also seek to provide employees numerous voice opportunities to foster a sense of uniqueness and belong- ingness through various initiatives, such as diversity-enhancing work councils, equality- promoting initiatives, and anonymous feed- back systems (e.g., Bell et al., 2011). Finally, HR professionals should review HR practices, policies, and procedures to ensure there is an inclusive HR system. For example, Boehm, Kunze, and Bruch (2013) explain that age- inclusive HR practices comprise age-neutral recruiting practices, equal access to train- ing irrespective of age, and age-neutral career development and promotion prac- tices. Taken together, an organization-wide

JANET A. BOEKHORST is a PhD candidate in human resource management at York

University in Toronto, Canada. Her primary research interests include diversity and inclu-

sion, human resource management, interpersonal mistreatment, and employee well-be-

ing. Her research has been published in journals such as the Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology, Human Resource Management Review, and the International

Journal of Human Resource Management.

References

Alper, S., Tjosvold, D., & Law, K. S. (1998).

Interdependence and controversy in group deci-

sion making: Antecedents to effective self-man-

aging teams. Organizational Behavior and Human

Decision Processes, 74, 33–52.

Anderson, N. R., & West, M. A. (1998). Measuring cli-

mate for work group innovation: Development and

validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of

Organizational Behavior, 19, 235–258.

Ashforth, B. E. (1985). Climate formation: Issues and

extensions. Academy of Management Review, 10,

837–847.

260 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

age-inclusive HR practices on fi rm-level outcomes.

Personnel Psychology. doi: 10.1111/peps.12047

Brehmer, B., Hagafors, R., & Johansson, R. (1980).

Cognitive skills in judgment: Subjects’ ability to

use information about weights, function forms, and

organizing principles. Organizational Behavior and

Human Performance, 26, 373–385.

Bunderson, J. S., & Reagans, R. E. (2011). Power,

status, and learning in organizations. Organization

Science, 22, 1182–1194.

Buttner, E. H., Lowe, K. B., & Billings-Harris, L. (2010).

Diversity climate impact on employee of color out-

comes: Does justice matter? Career Development

International, 15, 239–258.

Chavez, C. I., & Weisinger, J. Y. (2008). Beyond diver-

sity training: A social infusion for cultural inclusion.

Human Resource Management, 47, 331–350.

Choi, J. N. (2007). Group composition and employee

creative behavior in a Korean electronics com-

pany: Distinct effects of relational demography

and group diversity. Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology, 80, 213–234.

Colquitt, J. A., Noe, R. A., & Jackson, C. L. (2002).

Justice in teams: Antecedents and consequences of

procedural justice climate. Personnel Psychology,

55, 83–109.

Colville, K., & Millner, D. (2011). Embedding perform-

ance management: Understanding the enablers for

change. Strategic HR Review, 10, 35–40.

Contractor, N. S., & Eisenberg, E. M. (1990).

Communication networks and new media in

organizations. In J. Fulk & C. W. Steinfi eld (Eds.),

Organizations and communication technology (pp.

143–172). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Cooper, C. D., Scandura, T. A., & Schriesheim, C. A.

(2005). Looking forward but learning from our

past: Potential challenges to developing authen-

tic leadership theory and authentic leaders. The

Leadership Quarterly, 16, 475–493.

Copeland, J. T. (1994). Prophecies of power:

Motivational implications of social power for

behavioral confi rmation. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 67, 264–277.

Deal, T. E., & Kennedy, A. A. (1982). Corporate cultures:

The rites and rituals of corporate life. Reading, MA:

Addison-Wesley.

De nison, D. R. (1996). What is the difference between

organizational culture and organizational climate? A

native’s point of view on a decade of paradigm wars.

Academy of Management Review, 21, 619–654.

Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of confl ict. New

Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leader-

ship development: Getting to the root of positive

forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16,

315–338.

Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans,

F., & May, D. R. (2004). Unlocking the mask: A look

at the process by which authentic leaders impact

follower attitudes and behaviors. The Leadership

Quarterly, 15, 801–823.

Avolio, B. J., & Luthans, F. (2006). The high impact

leader: Moments matter in accelerating authen-

tic leadership development. New York, NY:

McGraw-Hill.

Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. (2009).

Leadership: Current theories, research, and future

directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60,

421–449.

Bandura, A. (1972). Modeling theory: Some traditions,

trends, and disputes. In R. D. Parke (Ed.), Recent

trends in social learning theory (pp. 35–61). New

York, NY: Academic Press.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood

Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and

action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs,

NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bantel, K. A., & Jackson, S. E. (1989). Top management

and innovations in banking: Does the composi-

tion of the top team make a difference? Strategic

Management Journal, 10, 107–124.

Bartol, K. M., & Srivastava, A. (2002). Encouraging

knowledge sharing: The role of organizational

reward systems. Journal of Leadership and

Organization Studies, 9, 64–76.

Bauer, T. N., & Erdogan, B. (2012). Organizational

socialization outcomes: Now and into the future.

In C. R. Wanberg (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of

organizational socialization (pp. 97–112). New York,

NY: Oxford University Press.

Bell, M. P., Özbilgin, M. F., Beauregard, A., &

Sürgevil, O. (2011). Voice, silence, and diversity in

21st century organizations: Strategies for inclu-

sion of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender

employees. Human Resource Management, 50,

131–146.

Bilimoria, D., Joy, S., & Liang, X. (2008). Breaking bar-

riers and creating inclusiveness: Lessons of organi-

zational transformation to advance women faculty

in academic science and engineering. Human

Resource Management, 47, 423–441.

Boehm, S. A., Kunze, F., & Bruch, H. (2013).

Spotlight on age-diversity climate: The impact of

WORKPLACE INCLUSION AND SOCIAL INFORMATION PROCESSING 261

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B. J., Luthans, F., & Harms, P.

D. (2008). Leadership effi cacy: Review and future

directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 669–692.

Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B. J., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2011).

Relationships between authentic leadership, moral

courage, and ethical and pro-social behaviors.

Business Ethics Quarterly, 21, 555–578.

Hare, A. P. (1992). Groups, teams, and social interac-

tion: Theories and applications. New York, NY:

Praeger.

Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., & Bell, M. P. (1998).

Beyond relational demography: Time and the

effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on work

group cohesion. Academy of Management Journal,

41, 96–107.

Hegarty, W. H., & Sims, H. P. (1987). Some determi-

nants of unethical decision behavior: An experi-

ment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 451–457.

Hoffman, L. R., & Maier, N. R. F. (1961). Quality and

acceptance of problem solutions by members of

homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Journal

of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 401–407.

Hsiung, H.-H. (2012). Authentic leadership and

employee voice behavior: A multi-level psychologi-

cal process. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 349–361.

Jackson, S. E., Brett, J. F., Sessa, V. I., Cooper, D. M.,

Julin, J. A., & Peyronnin, K. (1991). Some differ-

ences make a difference: Individual dissimilarity

and group heterogeneity as correlates of recruit-

ment, promotions, and turnover. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 76, 675–689.

James, L. A., & James, L. R. (1989). Integrating work

environment perceptions: Explorations into the

measurement of meaning. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 74, 739–751.

James, L. R., James, L. A., & Ashe, D. K. (1990). The

meaning of organizations: The role of cognition

and values. In B. Schneider (Ed.), Organizational

climate and culture (pp. 40–84). San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

James, L. R., & McIntyre, M. D. (1996). Perceptions

of organizational climate. In K. Murphy (Ed.),

Individual differences and behavior in organizations

(pp. 416–450). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Jassawalla, A. R., & Sashittal, H. C. (1999). Building

collaborative cross-functional new product teams.

Academy of Management Executive, 13(3), 50–63.

Jayne, M. E. A., & Dipboye, R. L. (2004). Leveraging

diversity to improve business performance:

Research fi ndings and recommendations for

organizations. Human Resource Management, 43,

409–424.

Dickson, M. W., Smith, D. B., Grojean, M. W., &

Ehrhart, M. (2001). An organizational climate

regarding ethics: The outcome of leader values

and the practices that refl ect them. The Leadership

Quarterly, 12, 197–217.

Dragoni, L. (2005). Understanding the emergence

of state goal orientation in organizational work

groups: The role of leadership and multilevel cli-

mate perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology,

90, 1084–1095.

Ehrhart, M. G. (2004). Leadership and procedural jus-

tice climate as antecedents of unit-level organiza-

tional citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology,

57, 61–94.

Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. (2001). Cultural diversity at

work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work

group processes and outcomes. Administrative

Science Quarterly, 46, 229–273.

Ferrin, D. L., & Dirks, K. T. (2003). The use of rewards to

increase and decrease trust: Mediating processes and

differential effects. Organization Science, 14, 18–31.

Gephart, R. P., Jr. (2004). Qualitative research and the

Academy of Management Journal. Academy of

Management Journal, 47, 454–462.

Gill, J., & Ling, J. (1995). Interprofessional shared

learning: A curriculum for collaboration.

In K. Soothill, L. Mackay, & C. Webb (Eds.),

Interprofessional relations in health care (pp.

172–193). London, UK: Edward Arnold.

Gioia, D. A., & Manz, C. C. (1985). Linking cognition

and behavior: A script processing interpretation

of vicarious learning. Academy of Management

Review, 10, 527–539.

Goldman, B. M., Gutek, B. A., Stein, J. H., & Lewis, K.

(2006). Employment discrimination in organiza-

tions: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of

Management, 32, 786–830.

Gonzalez, J. A., & DeNisi, A. S. (2009). Cross-level

effects of demography and diversity climate on

organizational attachment and fi rm effectiveness.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 21–40.

Groysberg, B., Lee, L.-E., & Nanda, A. (2008). Can they

take it with them? The portability of star knowledge

workers’ performance. Management Science, 54,

1213–1230.

Gurin, P., Dey, E. L., Hurtado, S., & Gurin, G. (2002).

Diversity and higher education: Theory and impact

on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational

Review, 72, 330–366.

Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R.

E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

262 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

Milliken, F. J., & Martins, L. L. (1996). Searching for

common threads: Understanding the multiple

effects of diversity in organizational groups.

Academy of Management Review, 21, 402–433.

Mooney, A. C., Holahan, P. J., & Amason, A. C. (2007).

Don’t take it personally: Exploring cognitive con-

fl ict as a mediator of affective confl ict. Journal of

Management Studies, 44, 733–758.

Moran, E. T., & Volkwein, J. F. (1992). The cultural

approach to the formation of organizational cli-

mate. Human Relations, 45, 19–47.

Mujtaba, B. G. (2013). Ethnic diversity, distrust and

corruption in Afghanistan: Refl ections on the crea-

tion of an inclusive culture. Equality, Diversity and

Inclusion: An International Journal, 32, 245–261.

Munir, F., Yarker, J., Hicks, B., & Donaldson-Feilder,

E. (2012). Returning employees back to work:

Developing a measure for Supervisors to Support

Return to Work (SSRW). Journal of Occupational

Rehabilitation, 22, 196–208.

Naumann, S. E., & Bennett, N. (2000). A case for

procedural justice climate: Development and test

of a multilevel model. Academy of Management

Journal, 43, 881–889.

Nembhard, I. M., & Edmondson, A. C. (2006). Making

it safe: The effects of leader inclusiveness and

professional status on psychological safety and

improvement efforts in health care teams. Journal

of Organizational Behavior, 27, 941–966.

Nishii, L. H. (2013). The benefi ts of climate for inclu-

sion for gender diverse groups. Academy of

Management Journal. doi: 10.5465/amj.2009.0823

Ostroff, C., Kinicki, A. J., & Tamkins, M. (2003).

Organizational culture and climate. In W. C.

Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.),

Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organiza-

tional psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 565–594). New York,

NY: Wiley.

Pless, N. M., & Maak, T. (2004). Building an inclusive

diversity culture: Principles, processes and prac-

tice. Journal of Business Ethics, 54, 129–147.

Podsakoff, N. P., Podsakoff, P. M., & Kuskova, V. V.

(2010). Dispelling misconceptions and provid-

ing guidelines for leader reward and punishment

behavior. Business Horizons, 53, 291–303.

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and

resampling strategies for assessing and compar-

ing indirect effects in multiple mediator models.

Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.

Reichers, A. E., & Schneider, B. (1990). Climate and

culture: An evolution of constructs. In B. Schneider

(Ed.), Organizational climate and culture (pp. 5–39).

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation

and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN:

Interaction Book Company.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005). New develop-

ments in social interdependence theory. Genetic,

Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 131,

285–358.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educa-

tional psychology success story: Social inter-

dependence theory and cooperative learning.

Educational Researcher, 38, 365–379.

Kerr, S. (1975). On the folly of rewarding A, while hop-

ing for B. Academy of Management Journal, 18,

769–783.

Kozlowski, S. W., & Doherty, M. L. (1989). Integration

of climate and leadership: Examination of a

neglected issue. Journal of Applied Psychology,

74, 546–553.

Kuenzi, M., & Schminke, M. (2009). Assembling frag-

ments into a lens: A review, critique, and proposed

research agenda for the organizational work

climate literature. Journal of Management, 35,

634–717.

Lirio, P., Lee, M. D., Williams, M. L., Haugen, L. K., &

Kossek, E. E. (2008). The inclusion challenge with

reduced-load professionals: The role of the man-

ager. Human Resource Management, 47, 443–461.

Lord, R. G., & Brown, D. J. (2001). Leadership, values,

and subordinate self-concepts. The Leadership

Quarterly, 12, 133–152.

Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Authentic lead-

ership: A positive developmental approach. In

K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.),

Positive organizational scholarship (pp. 241–261).

San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierar-

chy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and sta-

tus. Academy of Management Annals, 2, 351–398.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2010). Designing quali-

tative research (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mawritz, M. B., Mayer, D. M., Hoobler, J. M., Wayne,

S. J., & Marinova, S. V. (2012). A trickle-down model

of abusive supervision. Personnel Psychology, 65,

325–357.

McKay, P. F., Avery, D. R., & Morris, M. A. (2009). A tale

of two climates: Diversity climate from subor-

dinates’ and managers’ perspectives and their

role in store unit sales performance. Personnel

Psychology, 62, 767–791.

McLeod, P. L., Lobel, A. S., & Cox, T. H., Jr. (1996).

Ethnic diversity and creativity in small groups.

Small Group Research, 27, 248–264.

WORKPLACE INCLUSION AND SOCIAL INFORMATION PROCESSING 263

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

G. (2009). Diversity in organizations: Where are we

now and where are we going? Human Resource

Management Review, 19, 117–133.

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,

1262–1289.

Sims, R. R. (1992). The challenge of ethical behavior

in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 11,

505–513.

Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-effi cacy

and work-related performance: A meta-analysis.

Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240–261.

Thomas, D. A., & Ely, R. J. (1996). Making differences

matter: A new paradigm for managing diversity.

Harvard Business Review, 74(5), 79–90.

Tjosvold, D. (1997). Networking by professionals

to manage change: Dentists’ cooperation and

competition to develop their business. Journal of

Organizational Behavior, 18, 745–752.

Tjosvold, D., Tang, M. M. L., & West, M. (2004).

Refl exivity for team innovation in China: The

contribution of goal interdependence. Group &

Organization Management, 29, 540–559.

Treviño, L. K. (1990). A cultural perspective on chang-

ing and developing organizational ethics. In

R. Woodman & W. Passmore (Eds.), Research in

organizational change and development (Vol. 4, pp.

195–230). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Tulenko, P., & Kryder, S. (1990). Game-playing as an

aid to the creative process in small groups. Journal

of Creative Behavior, 24, 99–104.

Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J., &

Lance, C. E. (2010). Generational differences in

work values: Leisure and extrinsic values increas-

ing, social and intrinsic values decreasing. Journal

of Management, 36, 1117–1142.

Verplanken, B., & Holland, R. W. (2002). Motivated

decision making: Effects of activation and self-cen-

trality of values on choices and behavior. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 434–447.

Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L.,

Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic

leadership: Development and validation of a

theory-based measure. Journal of Management,

34, 89–126.

Wasserman, I. C., Gallegos, P. V., & Ferdman, B. M.

(2008). Dancing with resistance: Leadership chal-

lenges in fostering a culture of inclusion. In K. M.

Thomas (Ed.), Diversity resistance in organizations

(pp. 175–200). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

Rentsch, J. R. (1990). Climate and culture: Interaction

and qualitative differences in organizational mean-

ing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 668–681.

Roberson, L., & Block, C. J. (2001). Racioethnicity and

job performance: A review and critique of theoreti-

cal perspectives on the causes of group differ-

ences. Research in Organizational Behavior, 23,

247–325.

Roberson, Q. M. (2006). Disentangling the meanings

of diversity and inclusion in organizations. Group &

Organization Management, 31, 212–236.

Rokeach, M. (1979). Understanding human values:

Individual and societal. New York, NY: The Free

Press.

Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social informa-

tion processing approach to job attitudes and

task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23,

224–253.

Sanchez-Burks, J., Bartel, C., & Blount, S. (2009).

Fluidity and performance in intercultural workplace

interactions: The role of behavioral mirroring and

social sensitivity. Journal of Applied Psychology,

94, 216–223.

S chein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American

Psychologist, 45, 109–119.

Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leader-

ship (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schneider, B. (1990). The climate for service: An

application of the climate construct. In B. Schneider

(Ed.), Organizational climate and culture (pp.

383–412). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M. G., & Macey, W. H. (2013).

Organizational climate and culture. Annual Review

of Psychology, 64, 361–388.

Schneider, B., White, S. S., & Paul, M. C. (1998).

Linking service climate and customer perceptions

of service quality: Test of a causal model. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 83, 150–163.

Schwartz, M. S. (2005). Universal moral values for cor-

porate codes of ethics. Journal of Business Ethics,

59, 27–44.

Scott, K. A., Heathcote, J. M., & Gruman, J. A. (2011).

The diverse organization: Finding gold at the end

of the rainbow. Human Resource Management, 50,

735–755.

Shih, H.-A., Chiang, Y.-H., & Chen, T.-J. (2012).

Transformational leadership, trusting climate,

and knowledge-exchange behaviors in Taiwan.

International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 23, 1057–1073.

Shore, L. M., Chung-Herrera, B. G., Dean, M. A.,

Ehrhart, K. H., Jung, D. I., Randel, A. E., & Singh,

264 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

organization: The role of task complexity and group

size. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1301–1313.

Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive

theory of organizational management. Academy of

Management Review, 14, 361–384.

Zohar, D. (1980). Safety climate in industrial organiza-

tions: Theoretical and applied implications. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 65, 96–102.

Watson, W. E., Kumar, K., & Michaelsen, L. K. (1993).

Cultural diversity’s impact on interaction process

and performance: Comparing homogeneous and

diverse task groups. Academy of Management

Journal, 36, 590–602.

Weege, J., Roth, C., Neubach, B., Schmidt, K.-H., &

Kanfer, R. (2008). Age and gender diversity as

determinants of performance and health in a public