For All Solve Worker

12-1. Diversity: Differences That Matter

Workplace diversity as we know it is changing. Exhibit 12.1 shows predictions from the U.S. Census Bureau of how the U.S. population will change over the next 40 years. The percentage of white, non-Hispanic Americans in the general population is expected to decline from 61.7 percent in 2015 to 43.7 percent by 2060. By contrast, the percentage of black Americans will increase (from 12.4 to 13%), as will the percentage of Asian Americans (from 5.3 to 9.1%). Meanwhile, the proportion of Native Americans will slightly decline (from 0.7 to 0.6%). The fastest-growing group by far, though, will be Hispanics, who are expected to increase from 17.7 percent of the total population in 2015 to 28.56 percent by 2060. Other significant changes have already occurred. For example, today women hold 46.8 percent of the jobs in the United States, up from 38.2 percent in 1970. *  Furthermore, white males, who composed 63.9 percent of the workforce in 1950, hold just 42.8 percent of today’s jobs. *

These rather dramatic changes have taken place in a relatively short time. And, as these trends clearly show, the workforce of the near future will be increasingly Hispanic, Asian American, and female. It will also be older, as the average baby boomer approaches the age of 70 around 2020. Because many boomers are likely to postpone retirement and work well into their 70s to offset predicted reductions in Social Security and Medicare benefits, the workforce may become even older than expected. For instance, between 1994 and 2024, 16- to 24-year olds (16.5 to 11.3%), 25- to 34-year olds (26.2 to 22.5%), and 35- to 44-year-olds (26.9 to 21.3%) will have become a smaller part of the U.S. labor force. By contrast, those 45- to 54-year-olds (18.6 to 19.4%), 55- to 64-year-olds (6.5 to 16.6%),65- to 74-year-olds (2.4 to 6.5%), and 75 years and older (0.5 to 1.7%) will all have become larger parts of the U.S. labor force. *

Diversity means variety. Therefore, diversity exists in organizations when there is a variety of demographic, cultural, and personal differences among the people who work there and the customers who do business there. With 5,700 locations in 110 countries, few business have the diversity of locations and customers that Marriott Hotels has. *  But Marriott’s Executive Global Diversity and Inclusion Council still expects each hotel to have diversity in terms of its local workforce, customer, and vendor communities. For instance, the Marriott Marquis Washington, DC, which is just two years old, filled 58 percent of its jobs with applicants from eight inner city neighborhoods, hired 200 disadvantage applicants with limited work experience who completed a joint Marriott/Goodwill Jobs Training Partnership, and is already doing millions of dollars of business with women-and minority-owned businesses. *  CEO and Chairman Bill Marriott says that everywhere Marriott does business, “We are broadening how we think about global diversity and inclusion, reaching across cultural borders to compete for customers and talent worldwide.” *  Marriott is regularly recognized as one of the top ten most diverse firms in the world.

You’ll begin your exploration of diversity by learning 12-1a that diversity is not affirmative action and 12-1b that diversity makes good business sense.

12-1a. Diversity Is Not Affirmative Action

A common misconception is that workplace diversity and affirmative action are the same, yet these concepts differ in several critical ways, including their purpose, how they are practiced, and the reactions they produce. To start, affirmative action refers to purposeful steps taken by an organization to create employment opportunities for minorities and women. *  By contrast, diversity has a broader focus that includes demographic, cultural, and personal differences.

A second difference is that affirmative action is a policy for actively creating diversity, but diversity can exist even if organizations don’t take purposeful steps to create it. A local restaurant located near a university in a major city is likely to have a more diverse group of employees than one located in a small town. So, organizations can achieve diversity without affirmative action. Conversely, affirmative action does not guarantee diversity. An organization can create employment opportunities for women and minorities yet not have a diverse workforce.

A third important difference is that affirmative action is required by law for private employers with 50 or more employees, whereas diversity is not. Affirmative action originated with Executive Order 11246 but is also related to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which bans discrimination in voting, public places, federal government programs, federally supported public education, and employment. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act ( www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/titlevii.cfm ) requires that workers have equal employment opportunities when being hired or promoted. More specifically, Title VII prohibits companies from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Title VII also created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or EEOC ( www.eeoc.gov ), to administer these laws. By contrast, there is no federal law or agency to oversee diversity. Organizations that pursue diversity goals and programs do so voluntarily.

Fourth, affirmative action programs and diversity programs have different purposes. The purpose of affirmative action programs is to compensate for past discrimination, which was widespread when legislation was introduced in the 1960s; to prevent ongoing discrimination; and to provide equal opportunities to all, regardless of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Organizations that fail to uphold affirmative action laws may be required to

· hire, promote, or give back pay to those not hired or promoted;

· reinstate those who were wrongly terminated;

· pay attorneys’ fees and court costs for those who bring charges against them; or

· take other actions that make individuals whole by returning them to the condition or place they would have been had it not been for discrimination. *

Consequently, affirmative action is basically a punitive approach. *  By contrast, the general purpose of diversity programs is to create a positive work environment where no one is advantaged or disadvantaged, where “we” is everyone, where everyone can do his or her best work, where differences are respected and not ignored, and where everyone feels comfortable. *  So, unlike affirmative action, which punishes companies for not achieving specific sex and race ratios in their workforces, diversity programs seek to benefit both organizations and their employees by encouraging organizations to value all kinds of differences.

Despite the overall success of affirmative action in making workplaces much fairer than they used to be, many people argue that some affirmative action programs unconstitutionally offer preferential treatment to females and minorities at the expense of other employees, a view accepted by some courts. *  The American Civil Rights institute successfully campaigned via state ballot initiatives to ban race- and sex-based affirmative action in college admissions, government hiring, and government contracting programs in California (1996), Washington (1998), and Michigan (2006). Led by Ward Connerly, the institute backed similar efforts in Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska, and Oklahoma in 2008. In a 2014 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-2 that state ballot initiatives banning race- and sex-based action are constitutional. *  Opponents of affirmative action, like Connerly, believe that affirmative action policies establish only surface-level diversity and, ironically, promote preferential treatment. *

Research shows that people who have gotten a job or promotion as a result of affirmative action are commonly viewed as unqualified, even when clear evidence of their qualifications exists. *  This effect is so robust that those benefitting from affirmative action experience doubts about their competence. * So, while affirmative action programs have created opportunities for minorities and women, they unintentionally produce persistent doubts and self-doubts regarding the qualifications of those who are believed to have obtained their jobs as a result of affirmative action.

12-1b. Diversity Makes Good Business Sense

Those who support the idea of diversity in organizations often ignore its business aspects altogether, claiming instead that diversity is simply the right thing to do. Yet diversity actually makes good business sense in several ways: cost savings, attracting and retaining talent, and driving business growth. *

Diversity helps companies with cost savings by reducing turnover, decreasing absenteeism, and avoiding expensive lawsuits. *  Because of lost productivity and the cost of recruiting and selecting new workers, companies lose substantial amounts of money when employees quit their jobs. In fact, turnover costs typically amount to more than 90 percent of employees’ salaries. By this estimate, if an executive who makes $200,000 leaves, the organization will have to spend approximately $180,000 to find a replacement; even the lowest-paid hourly workers can cost the company as much as $10,000 when they quit. Because turnover rates for African Americans average 40 percent higher than for whites, and since women quit their jobs at twice the rate men do, companies that manage diverse workforces well can cut costs by reducing the turnover rates of these employees. *  And, with women absent from work 60 percent more often than men, primarily because of family responsibilities, diversity programs that address the needs of female workers can also reduce the substantial costs of absenteeism.

Diversity programs also save companies money by helping them avoid discrimination lawsuits, which have increased by a factor of 20 since 1970 and quadrupled just since 1995. In one survey conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management, 78 percent of respondents reported that diversity efforts helped them avoid lawsuits and litigation costs. *  In fact, because companies lose two-thirds of all discrimination cases that go to trial, the best strategy from a business perspective is not to be sued for discrimination at all. When companies lose, the average individual settlement amounts to more than $600,000. *  And settlement costs can be substantially higher in class-action lawsuits, in which individuals join together to sue a company as a group. For example Qualcomm, a maker of computer chips, reached a court settlement to pay $19.5 million to 3,300 women in science, technology and engineering positions who accused the company of giving them lower pay and chances for promotion than men. *

Diversity also makes business sense by helping companies attract and retain talented workers. *  Female employees at Google were once twice as likely as male employees to quit the company. Company data revealed that many of the women who left were young mothers. Google head of human resources Laszlo Bock responded by substantially increasing parental leave at the company. Biological mothers now get 18 weeks of fully paid leave for the birth of a child, and mothers who experience complications during childbirth receive 22 weeks. Primary caregivers, adoptive caregivers, and surrogate caregivers are also eligible for 12 weeks of fully paid time off. Now, a new mother is no more likely to leave Google than the average employee. *  Diversity-friendly companies tend to attract better and more diverse job applicants. Very simply, diversity begets more diversity. Companies that make Fortune magazine’s list of the 50 best companies for minorities or are recognized by Working Women and Diversity Inc. magazine have already attracted a diverse and talented pool of job applicants. But, after being recognized for their efforts, they subsequently experience big increases in both the quality and the diversity of people who apply for jobs. Research shows that companies with acclaimed diversity programs not only attract more talented workers but also have higher performance in the stock market. *

The third way that diversity makes business sense is by driving business growth. In the United States today, there are 43 million African Americans, 57 million Hispanic Americans, and 18 million Asian Americans with, respectively, $1.2 trillion, $1.3 trillion, and $825 billion in purchasing power. Given the size of those markets, it shouldn’t be surprising that a survey conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management found that tapping into “diverse customers and markets” was the number-one reason managers gave for implementing diversity programs. *  Demand for air travel in Asia is exploding as 100 million new passengers fly every year. To meet surging demand, the region’s airlines will need to add 226,000 pilots over the next 20 years—far more than the current pool of job candidates. Despite needing more pilots, many Asian airlines won’t hire women out of concern about male and female pilots sharing bunk space on long flights (which are common in the region). However, some carriers like Vietnam Airlines have begun actively recruiting women by creating flexible, family-friendly schedules. Mireille Goyer, founder of the Institute for Women of Aviation Worldwide, believes that refusing to recruit women is shortsighted: “Arbitrarily reducing the potential pool…has strangled growth and led to today’s situation.” * Boeing executive Sherry Carbary, whose team assists Asian airlines in training pilots, agrees: “There is such an enormous demand that the gender bias will have to be pushed aside.” *

Diversity also helps companies grow through higher-quality problem solving. Though diverse groups initially have more difficulty working together than homogeneous groups, diverse groups eventually establish a rapport and can a better job of identifying problems and generating alternative solutions, the two most important steps in problem solving. *  When Arnold Donald became CEO of Carnival Corporation, his first mission was to fix operational issues and diversify the customer base. To accomplish this, he hired a wide variety of new executives at seven of the company’s 10 cruise lines. Now, Carnival’s leadership team is a broader mix of ethnicities, genders, and sexual orientations. Emboldened by Donald’s focus on diversity, president of Princess Cruises Jan Swartz worked with her team to redesign bedding for its typical customer—a 53-year-old woman going through menopause and suffering from night sweats and hot flashes. While luxurious, the new bedding doesn’t trap heat and is layered so that it can easily be taken on and off. Attention to different customers’ needs is exactly what Donald was aiming for: “I guarantee if you get a diverse group of people aligned around a common objective with a process to work together, they will out-engineer, out-solution a homogeneous team 90 percent of the time.” *  Carnival’s stock price has risen 53 percent under Donald and its profits are up 15 percent to $1.2 billion.

12-2. Surface-Level Diversity

A survey that asked managers “What is meant by diversity to decision makers in your organization?” found that they most frequently mentioned race, culture, sex, national origin, age, religion, and regional origin. *  When managers describe workers this way, they are focusing on surface-level diversity. Surface-level diversity consists of differences that are immediately observable, typically unchangeable, and easy to measure. *  In other words, independent observers can usually agree on dimensions of surface-level diversity, such as another person’s age, sex, race/ethnicity, or physical capabilities.

Most people start by using surface-level diversity to categorize or stereotype other people. But those initial categorizations typically give way to deeper impressions formed from knowledge of others’ behaviors and psychological characteristics such as personality and attitudes. *  When you think of others this way, you are focusing on deep-level diversity. Deep-level diversity consists of differences that are communicated through verbal and nonverbal behaviors and are learned only through extended interaction with others. *  Examples of deep-level diversity include personality differences, attitudes, beliefs, and values. In other words, as people in diverse workplaces get to know each other, the initial focus on surface-level differences such as age, race/ethnicity, sex, and physical capabilities is replaced by deeper, more complex knowledge of coworkers.

If managed properly, the shift from surface- to deep-level diversity can accomplish two things. *  First, 95 percent of studies on this issue show that getting to know and understand each other reduces prejudice and conflict. *  Second, it can lead to stronger social integration. Social integration is the degree to which group members are psychologically attracted to working with each other to accomplish a common objective, or, as one manager put it, “working together to get the job done.”

Because age, sex, race/ethnicity, and disabilities are usually immediately observable, many managers and workers use these dimensions of surface-level diversity to form initial impressions and categorizations of coworkers, bosses, customers, or job applicants. While not always immediately known, sexual orientation and gender identity (often referred to as LGBT, meaning lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender) may also be a form of surface-level diversity. Whether intentional or not, sometimes those initial categorizations and impressions lead to decisions or behaviors that discriminate. Consequently, these dimensions of surface-level diversity pose special challenges for managers who are trying to create positive work environments where everyone feels comfortable, and no one is advantaged or disadvantaged.

Let’s learn more about those challenges and the ways that 12-2a age, 12-2b sex, 12-2c sexual and gender identity, 12-2d race/ethnicity, and 12-2e mental or physical disabilities can affect decisions and behaviors in organizations.

12-2a. Age

Age discrimination is treating people differently (for example, in hiring and firing, promotion, and compensation decisions) because of their age. The victims of age discrimination are almost always older workers, and the discrimination is based on the assumption that “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks.” Perhaps this is why, according to comedian Bill Maher, “Ageism is the last acceptable prejudice.” *  Indeed, it’s commonly believed that older workers are less motivated, less productive, more prone to illness and accidents, not interested in learning new things, cost more, and make greater—more expensive—use of health care benefits. *  Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg once said, “I want to stress the importance of being young and technical…Young people are just smarter.” *  Consistent with that stereotype (and the fact that the average age of employees at Google, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Apple are 20, 28, 29, and 31 respectively), Apple and Dropbox are among the companies that have specified preferences for “new grads” in job openings. Because that clearly violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, companies such as Zipcar, Panasonic, and, yes, Facebook, now list being a “digital native” as a job requirement. *  Ingrid Fredeen of NAVEX Global, a supplier of ethics and compliance programs, says the term makes her cringe because it implies that “only young applicants need apply.” *  The increase in age discrimination claims filed with the EEOC, 20,857 in 2016, up from 15,785 in 1997, suggests that discriminatory attitudes like this still exist. *

So, what’s reality and what’s myth? Do older employees actually cost more? In some ways, they do. The older people are and the longer they stay with a company, the more the company pays for salaries, pension plans, and vacation time. But older workers cost companies less, too, because they show better judgment, care more about the quality of their work, and are less likely to quit, show up late, or be absent, the cost of which can be substantial. * A meta-analysis combining the results of 118 individual studies also found that older workers are more likely to help others at work and are much less likely to use drugs or alcohol at work, engage in workplace aggression, or be involved in accidents. The authors of this study concluded, “The stereotype of older workers as difficult colleagues, then, seems largely unfounded.” *

As for the widespread belief that job performance declines with age, the scientific evidence clearly refutes this stereotype. Performance does not decline with age, regardless of the type of job. *

What can companies do to reduce age discrimination? *  To start, managers need to recognize that age discrimination is much more pervasive than they probably think. Whereas “old” used to mean mid-50s, in today’s workplace “old” is closer to 40. When 773 CEOs were asked, “At what age does a worker’s productivity peak?” the average age they gave was 43, which is concerning because the median age (half above, half below) of U.S. workers is 42. *  Thus, age discrimination may be affecting more workers because perceptions about age have changed. In addition, with the aging of the baby boomers, age discrimination is more likely to occur simply because there are millions more older workers than there used to be. In 1992, 1 in 12 women worked beyond the age of 65. In 2016, 1 in 7 do. By 2024, 1 in 5 women age 65 and older will work. *  And, because studies show that interviewers rate younger job candidates as more qualified (even when they aren’t), companies need to train managers and recruiters to make hiring and promotion decisions on the basis of qualifications, not age.

Companies also need to monitor the extent to which older workers receive training. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics found that the number of training courses and number of hours spent in training drop dramatically after employees reach the age of 44. *  Finally, companies need to ensure that younger and older workers interact with each other. One study found that younger workers generally hold positive views of older workers and that the more time they spent working with older coworkers, the more positive their attitudes became. *

12-2b. Sex

Sex discrimination occurs when people are treated differently because of their sex. Sex discrimination and racial/ethnic discrimination (discussed in section 12-2d) are often associated with the so-called glass ceiling, the invisible barrier that prevents women and minorities from advancing to the top jobs in organizations.

To what extent do women face sex discrimination in the workplace? Almost every year, the EEOC receives between 23,000 and 30,000 charges of sex-based discrimination. *  In some ways, there is much less sex discrimination than there used to be. For example, whereas women held only 17 percent of managerial jobs in 1972, today they hold 52 percent of managerial and professional jobs, and they hold 47 percent of all jobs in the workplace. * Likewise, women own 38 percent of all U.S. businesses. Although women owned 2.8 million businesses in 1982 and 5.4 million businesses in 1997, today they own 11.3 million businesses, generating $1.6 trillion in sales and employing more than 9 million people! *  Finally, though women still earn less than men on average, the differential is narrowing. Women earned 81 percent of what men did in 2014, up from 63 percent in 1979. *

Although progress is being made, sex discrimination continues to operate via the glass ceiling at higher levels in organizations, as shown in Exhibit 12.2. For instance, while the trends are going upward, women were the top earners in just 9.5 percent of companies in 2016. *  Likewise, only 18 percent of corporate officers (that is, top management) were women, and the numbers were even lower for women of color. Indra K. Nooyi, PepsiCo’s CEO, is the only women of color heading Fortune 500 companies. *  In fact, only 27 of the 500 largest companies in the United States have women CEOs. * Similarly, only 20.6 percent of the members of U.S. corporate boards of directors are women. *

Finally, a meta-analysis of 97 studies covering 378,850 employees in multiple industries over three decades found that, “Across occupations ranging from bank tellers to accountants, industries ranging from IT to healthcare, and jobs ranging from mundane to challenging, our results show that sex differences in organizational rewards were almost 14 times larger than sex differences in performance evaluations. Moreover, performance differences did not explain reward differences between men and women.” *

Is sex discrimination the sole reason for the slow rate at which women have been rewarded and promoted to middle and upper levels of management and corporate boards? Some studies indicate that it’s not. *  In some instances, the slow progress appears to related to choices of college major, jobs, and careers. After examining 47,000 resumes over seven years, jobs site  Glassdoor.com  found that, “Many college majors that lead to high-paying roles in tech and engineering are male dominated, while majors that lead to lower-paying roles in social sciences and liberal arts tend to be female dominated, placing men in higher-paying career pathways, on average. Nine of the 10 highest paying majors we examined are male dominated. By contrast, 6 of the 10 lowest-paying majors are female dominated.” *  For, example women earn just 21 percent of engineering degrees, but nearly 78 percent of psychology degrees. *  Likewise, men’s career and job choices are often driven by the search for higher pay and advancement, while women are more likely to choose jobs or careers that also give them a greater sense of accomplishment, more control over their work schedules, and easier movement in and out of the workplace. *  For instance, 82 percent of women without children are interested in being promoted to the next level, compared to 73 percent of women with two or more children. *  Likewise, a survey by LeanIn. Org and McKinsey & Co. of 30,000 people in 118 companies found that 78 percent of men and 75 percent of women wanted to be promoted, but just 43 percent of women wanted to be top executives compared to 53 percent for men. *

As those numbers suggest, women are historically much more likely than men to prioritize family over work at some time in their careers. Even Indra Nooyi, PepsiCo’s CEO, says, “My observation…is that the biological clock and the career clock are in total conflict with each other. Total, complete conflict. When you have to have kids you have to build your career. Just as you’re rising to middle management, your kids need you because they’re teenagers, they need you for the teenage years…And as you grow even more, your parents need you because they’re aging. So…we cannot have it all.” *

Beyond these reasons, however, it’s likely that sex discrimination does play a role in women’s slow progress into the higher levels of management. And even if you don’t think so, many of the women you work with probably do. In fact, studies indicate that 90 percent of women believe the glass ceiling hurts their careers, and 80 percent said they left their last job because of the glass ceiling and that starting a business allows them to avoid the career limitations of the glass ceiling. *  Discrimination is believed to be the most significant factor behind the lack of women at top levels of management. *

So, what can companies do to make sure that women have the same opportunities for development and advancement as men? One strategy is mentoring, or pairing promising female executives with senior executives from whom they can seek advice and support. *  Salesforce, a leading customer relationship management software company, has a mentoring program for women. So, cofounder Parker Harris, who encourages Salesforce managers to speak up about their ambitions, was surprised when he discovered that Leyla Seka, who ran their mobile apps unit, was preparing to leave. Seka wanted to lead a larger division but thought her bosses didn’t think she was capable, so she didn’t share her aspirations. In fact, her bosses found her so capable, they hired her to run  Desk.com , a company recently acquired by Salesforce, and coached her as she developed her leadership skills. “I’ve never had more fun at work, and I’ve never felt more challenged,” she says. “I almost missed this opportunity by shutting the doors on myself.” *  In fact, 91 percent of female executives had a mentor at some point and felt their mentor was critical to their advancement.

Another strategy is to make sure that male-dominated social activities don’t unintentionally exclude women. Nearly half (47%) of women in the workforce believe that “exclusion from informal networks” makes it more difficult to advance their careers (by contrast, just 18% of male CEOs thought this was a problem). For instance, at company conferences, Rockwell Automation has replaced cocktail receptions (that is, hanging out at the bar), which are a traditional social function at conferences, with alternative activities, such as chili cook-offs. *  Another is to designate a go-to person other than their supervisors that women can talk to if they believe that they are being held back or discriminated against because of their sex. That person, of course, must have the knowledge and authority to conduct a fair, confidential internal investigation. *

12-2c. Sexual and Gender Identity

Sexual orientation indicates an individual’s attraction to people of the same and/or different sex. Sexual orientation discrimination occurs when people are treated differently because of their sexual orientation. Usually, sexual orientation discrimination occurs toward lesbians, gays, or bisexuals. Though less frequent, straight or heterosexual people can be discriminated against, too. According to the EEOC, examples of sexual orientation discrimination include not hiring, not promoting, firing, awarding a lower salary, denying spousal health insurance, or making derogatory, sexually oriented, or disparaging comments because of someone’s sexual orientation. *

A transgender person is someone whose personal and gender identity differ from the person’s birth sex—for example, someone born female who identifies as male. Gender identity discrimination occurs when people are treated differently because of their gender identity. According to the EEOC, in addition to typical discriminatory acts, examples of gender identity discrimination include firing an employee who is planning, making, or has completed a gender transition, denying equal access to a common restroom corresponding to the employee’s gender identity, or intentionally not using the name and gender pronoun corresponding to the person’s gender identity. *

Federal, state, and city laws regarding workplace discrimination in terms of age, sex, race/ethnicity, and mental or physical disabilities have been in place for 20 to 50 years (See Exhibit 11.2, Summary of Major Federal Employment Laws in Chapter 11). By contrast, laws and regulations regarding sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination are new, in question, or not yet in place. Since Title VII of the Civil Rights Act explicitly prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, a strict interpretation is that Title VII does not cover sexual orientation or gender identity. *  However, the EEOC has ruled that Title VII’s sex discrimination provision prohibits, “discrimination against employees on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.” *  In April 2017, a federal appeals court upheld that ruling *  But, the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to rule on this decision.

Although there is currently some uncertainty regarding federal law, 22 states have laws preventing sexual orientation discrimination, and 17 states have laws addressing gender identity discrimination. *  Rather than wait for the law to settle, many companies have proactively changed their policies to prohibit sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination. Todd Sears, who founded Out Leadership, a nonprofit organization that partners with companies to develop LGBT-inclusive workplaces, says, “Big business was way out ahead of government when it came to creating domestic partner benefits for their teams—and they remain way out in front when it comes to non-discrimination policies.” *

To what extent do LGBT individuals face sexual orientation discrimination or gender identity discrimination in the workplace? Twenty-nine states do not prohibit sexual orientation discrimination, and 33 states do not prohibit gender identity discrimination. With federal law being uncertain, that means that in roughly 30 or more U.S. states, LGBT employees can be fired, not promoted, or not hired just because they are LGBT. Not surprisingly, 53 percent of LGBT employees hide their sexual orientation or gender identity at work, while 35 percent lie about their personal lives. *  Thirty-five percent who were open about their sexual or gender identity have reported being harassed at work. *  Sixty-two percent of LGBT employees have heard disparaging jokes about gays or lesbians, 42 percent have heard jokes about bisexuals, and 40 percent have heard jokes about transgender people. *  In 2015, the EEOC received 1,412 charges of sexual identity or gender identity discrimination, up 28 percent from 1,100 charges in 2014. *  A national survey of nearly 28,000 transgender people found that 27 percent were fired, not promoted, or not hired because of sexual identity; 15 percent were verbally harassed, physically attacked, or sexually assaulted at work; 15 percent were unemployed;13 percent had lost a job because of gender identity; and that 77 percent took steps at work to hide or delay their gender transition. *

What can companies do to make sure that LGBT individuals have the same opportunities as others? Start by including sexual orientation and gender identity in nondiscrimination and equal opportunity policies. Ben Hladilek, executive director of human resources at JPMorgan Chase, said, “What we have found in our recruiting efforts is that individuals will often look for signals about what a culture is like; having gender identity protection signals we are a diversity leader and are serious about providing an inclusive environment.” *  Organizations can reduce the isolation that LGBT employees often feel at work by connecting LGBT employees to mentors and creating employee resource groups where LGBT employees can learn from and support each other. *  Most organizations are unable to track whether LGBT employees are treated fairly because they don’t ask employees about LGBT status. Companies can fix this by giving LGBT employees the opportunity to confidentially self-identify their sexual orientation or gender identity as part of the normal gathering of demographic information. *

A few additional steps are required to be sure that transgender employees are treated the same as other employees. A small but critical step is changing the employee’s name on all official records, including badge, office and phone numbers, email, corporate directory, business cards, and anywhere else the employee’s name appears. Chloe, a copy writer at the Leo Burnett advertising agency, transitioning from male to female, had to wait five months for a court date to officially change her name. When the human resources department learned of the delay, it changed her name in all company records months before the court made the change official. *  Companies can also publish guidelines and protocols for gender transitions that make clear the responsibilities for the transitioning employee, as well as their subordinates, colleagues and managers. *  For example, EY, a global accounting firm, has a set of transition guidelines that specify everything from appearance (dressing consistent with one’s new gender and unisex restroom and locker access), to identifying a support team, medical leave, and health benefits. *  Finally, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health has published Standards of Care to assist companies in providing medical care for transitioning transgender employees. *

12-2d. Race/Ethnicity

Racial and ethnic discrimination occurs when people are treated differently because of their race or ethnicity. To what extent is racial and ethnic discrimination a factor in the workplace? Every year, the EEOC receives between 26,000 and 36,000 charges of racial discrimination, which is more than any other type of charge of discrimination. *  However, it is true that since the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and Title VII, there is much less racial and ethnic discrimination than there used to be. For example, 22 Fortune 500 firms had an African American (4), Hispanic (9), or Asian (9) CEOs in 2017 whereas none did in 1988. *  Nonetheless, strong racial and ethnic disparities still exist. For instance, whereas 11.9 percent of employed Americans are black, only 7.5 percent of managers and 3.4 percent of CEOs are black. Similarly, 16.7 percent of employed Americans are Hispanic, but only 9.9 percent are managers and 6 percent are CEOs. By contrast, Asians, who constitute 6.1 percent of employed workers, are better represented, holding 6.1 percent of management jobs and 5.6 percent of CEO jobs. *

What accounts for the disparities between the percentages of minority groups in the general population and their smaller representation in management positions? Some studies have found that the disparities are due to preexisting differences in training, education, and skills. When African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans, and whites have similar skills, training, and education, they are much more likely to have similar jobs and salaries. *

Other studies, however, provide increasingly strong direct evidence of racial or ethnic discrimination in the workplace. For example, one study directly tested hiring discrimination by sending pairs of black and white males and pairs of Hispanic and non-Hispanic males to apply for the same jobs. Each pair had résumés with identical qualifications, and all were trained to present themselves in similar ways to minimize differences during interviews. The researchers found that the white males got three times as many job offers as the black males, and that the non-Hispanic males got three times as many offers as the Hispanic males. *  Another study, which used similar methods to test hiring procedures at 149 different companies, found that whites received 10 percent more interviews than blacks. Half of the whites interviewed then received job offers, but only 11 percent of the blacks. And when job offers were made, blacks were much more likely to be offered lower-level positions, while whites were more likely to be offered jobs at higher levels than the jobs they had applied for. *

Critics of these studies point out that it’s nearly impossible to train different applicants to give identical responses in job interviews and that differences in interviewing skills may have somehow accounted for the results. However, researchers at the University of Chicago mailed thousands of résumés to employers that were identical except for the candidate’s name, which was either stereotypically black, such as “Jamal,” or stereotypically white, such as “Brendan.” Applicants with the “white” name were called back for interviews 50 percent more often those with “black” names. *  Comparable studies in the United Kingdom with Indian and Pakistani applicants and in Australia with Greek and Vietnamese applicants produced similar results. *  In short, the evidence indicates that there is strong and persistent racial and ethnic discrimination in the hiring processes of many organizations.

What can companies do to make sure that people of all racial and ethnic backgrounds have the same opportunities. *  Start by looking at the numbers. Compare the hiring rates of whites with the hiring rates for racial and ethnic applicants. Do the same thing for promotions within the company. See if nonwhite workers quit the company at higher rates than white workers. Also, survey employees to compare white and nonwhite employees’ satisfaction with jobs, bosses, and the company as well as their perceptions concerning equal treatment. Next, if the numbers indicate racial or ethnic disparities, consider employing a private firm to test your hiring system by having applicants of different races with identical qualifications apply for jobs in your company, or by data mining your application criteria. *  Data analysis software showed Xerox that customer-service employees with the shortest daily commutes stayed with the company the longest. Nevertheless, managers stopped screening job applicants for commute times because they thought that doing so would put applicants from minority neighborhoods, which were generally farther from Xerox offices, at a disadvantage. *

Another step companies can take is to eliminate unclear selection and promotion criteria. Vague criteria allow decision makers to focus on nonjob-related characteristics that may unintentionally lead to employment discrimination. Instead, selection and promotion criteria should spell out the specific knowledge, skills, abilities, education, and experience needed to perform a job well. Finally, as explained in Chapter 11, “Managing Human Resource Systems,” it is also important to train managers and others who make hiring and promotion decisions.

12-2e. Mental or Physical Disabilities

According to the Americans with Disabilities Act ( www.ada.gov ), a disability is a mental or physical impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. *  Approximately 40 million Americans—12.6 percent of the population—are disabled. *  Disability discrimination occurs when people are treated differently because of their disabilities. To what extent is disability discrimination a factor in the workplace? Similar to studies examining racial discrimination, researchers sent out 6,000 fictitious résumés and cover letters for jobs (in accounting). One résumé was for a highly qualified candidate with six years of experience, and another was for an inexperienced candidate a year out of college. One of three different cover letters accompanied each résumé: one for an applicant with no disabilities, one for an applicant with an injured spinal cord, and one for an applicant with Asperger’s Syndrome, which makes interpersonal relationships and communication difficult. Overall, applicants with disabilities were 26 percent less likely to be contacted by an employer for further steps in the hiring process. Interestingly, experienced applicants were 34 percent less likely to be contacted by employers. *  Indeed, while 65 percent of the U.S. population was employed in 2015, only 35.2 percent of disabled people had jobs. Individuals with sensory disabilities, such as blindness (42%) or deafness (51.8%), had the highest employment rates; those with self-care disabilities (15.8%), who can’t dress or bathe themselves, or with independent living disabilities (16.3%), who can’t do basic errands such as shopping or go to the doctor without assistance, were the least likely to work. *

disabilities can do their jobs. Studies show that as long as companies make reasonable accommodations for disabilities (for example, changing procedures or equipment), people with disabilities perform their jobs just as well as people without disabilities. Furthermore, they have better safety records and are not any more likely to be absent or quit their jobs. *  At a recent disability summit sponsored by the state of Michigan, speakers from Walgreens, Meijer, and Trijicon said that, compared to employees without disabilities, disabled employees were more dependable, took less time off, and had better safety records. *

What can companies do to make sure that people with disabilities have the same opportunities as everyone else? Beyond educational efforts to address incorrect stereotypes and expectations, a good place to start is to commit to reasonable workplace accommodations such as changing work schedules, reassigning jobs, acquiring or modifying equipment, or providing assistance when needed. Accommodations for disabilities needn’t be expensive. According to the Job Accommodation Network, 59 percent of accommodations don’t cost anything at all, while those with costs are typically just $500. *

For about $1,000, the JAWS (Job Access With Speech) app uses Braille and speech to “read” the contents of a computer screen to a blind employee. JAWS can also be paired with screen magnification software or a keyboard with large font, boldfaced easy-to-read letters. Color identification apps and currency identification apps also help blind employees. Lee Huffman, editor of AccessWorld magazine, says, “You simply wave your phone camera over the piece of clothing [for color identification] or the currency, and it tells you what it is. Five years ago, these programs might have cost $125 or more, but now you can download these apps at low or no cost and have all that accessible technology on one device in your pocket.” *

Some of the accommodations just described involve assistive technology that gives workers with disabilities the tools they need to overcome their disabilities. Providing workers with assistive technology is also an effective strategy to recruit, retain, and enhance the productivity of people with disabilities. According to the National Council on Disability, 92 percent of workers with disabilities who use assistive technology report that it helps them work faster and better, 81 percent indicate that it helps them work longer hours, and 67 percent say that it is critical to getting a job. *  To learn about assistive technologies that can help workers with disabilities, see AbleData ( www.abledata.com ), which lists 40,000 products, or the National Rehabilitation Information Center ( www.naric.com ), which provides information for specific disabilities.

Finally, companies should actively recruit qualified workers with disabilities. Numerous organizations, such as Mainstream, Kidder Resources, the American Council of the Blind ( www.acb.org ), the National Federation of the Blind ( http://nfb.org ), the National Association of the Deaf ( www.nad.org ), the Epilepsy Foundation ( www.epilepsy.com ), and the National Amputation Foundation ( www.nationalamputation.org ), actively work with employers to find jobs for qualified people with disabilities. Companies can also place advertisements in publications, such as Careers and the disABLED, or on online job boards, such as Recruit  AbilityJobs.com  or  RecruitDisability.org , that specifically target workers with disabilities.

12-3. Deep-Level Diversity

As you learned in Section 12-2, people often use the dimensions of surface-level diversity to form initial impressions about others. Over time, however, as people have a chance to get to know each other, initial impressions based on age, sex, race/ethnicity, and mental or physical disabilities give way to deeper impressions based on behavior and psychological characteristics. When we think of others this way, we are focusing on deep-level diversity. Deep-level diversity represents differences that can be learned only through extended interaction with others. Examples of deep-level diversity include differences in personality, attitudes, beliefs, and values. In short, recognizing deep-level diversity requires getting to know and understand one another better. And that matters, because it can result in less prejudice, discrimination, and conflict in the workplace. These changes can then lead to better social integration, the degree to which organizational or group members are psychologically attracted to working with each other to accomplish a common objective.

Stop for a second and think about your boss (or the boss you had in your last job). What words would you use to describe him or her? Is your boss introverted or extraverted? Emotionally stable or unstable? Agreeable or disagreeable? Organized or disorganized? Open or closed to new experiences? When you describe your boss or others in this way, what you’re really doing is describing dispositions and personality.

A disposition is the tendency to respond to situations and events in a predetermined manner. Personality is the relatively stable set of behaviors, attitudes, and emotions displayed over time that makes people different from each other. *  For example, which of your aunts or uncles is a little offbeat, a little out of the ordinary? What were they like when you were small? What are they like now? Chances are that she or he is pretty much the same wacky person. In other words, the person’s core personality hasn’t changed. For example, as a child, Kip Tindell, CEO of the Container Store, would reorganize the pantry or closets when his parents were out of the house. “If your house is unbelievably messy, I probably won’t come back to visit. I’ll meet you at a restaurant. I’m just not comfortable around mess. You don’t have to be obsessive-compulsive about it. Well, OK, maybe just a tiny bit.” * Research conducted in different cultures, different settings, and different languages has shown that five basic dimensions of personality account for most of the differences in peoples’ behaviors, attitudes, and emotions (or why your boss is the way he or she is!). The Big Five Personality Dimensionsare extraversion, emotional stability, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experience. *

Extraversion is the degree to which someone is active, assertive, gregarious, sociable, talkative, and energized by others. In contrast to extraverts, introverts tend to be focused, thoughtful, quiet, reserved, and energized by ideas. For the best results in the workplace, introverts and extraverts should be correctly matched to their jobs. Research shows that being talkative and assertive is not correlated with greater insight, and that those who speak first and more often (usually extraverts) are not more capable than less talkative people. *  Professor Stephen Garras is often frustrated by the premium placed on extraversion, saying, “I worry that there are people who are put in positions of authority because they’re good talkers, but they don’t have good ideas. It’s so easy to confuse schmoozing ability with talent…we put too much of a premium on presenting and not enough on substance and critical thinking. *

Emotional stability is the degree to which someone is not angry, depressed, anxious, emotional, insecure, or excitable. People who are emotionally stable respond well to stress. In other words, they can maintain a calm, problem-solving attitude in even the toughest situations (for example, conflict, hostility, dangerous conditions,or extreme time pressures). By contrast, emotionally unstable people find it difficult to handle the most basic demands of their jobs under only moderately stressful situations and become distraught, tearful, self-doubting, and anxious. Emotional stability is particularly important for high-stress jobs such as police work, firefighting, emergency medical treatment, piloting planes, or commanding Tragically, investigators found emotional stability was a factor in the deliberate crash of a Germanwings flight that killed 150 people. The copilot, who had previously with depression used Google just days before the crash to search for ways to commit suicide. *  When the pilot left the cabin for a bathroom break, the copilot locked the cabin door and set the plane’s auto pilot to descend to a lower altitude where it slammed into a mountain. While most Asian airlines conduct regular psychological assessments of their pilots, U.S. and European airlines only screen for emotional stability issues during initial pilot recruitment and training, or if staff members report unusual behavior. *

Agreeableness is the degree to which someone is cooperative, polite, flexible, forgiving, good-natured, tolerant, and trusting. Basically, agreeable people are easy to work with and be around, whereas disagreeable people are distrusting and difficult to work with and be around. A number of companies have made general attitude or agreeableness the most important factor in their hiring decisions.

Conscientiousness is the degree to which someone is organized, hardworking, responsible, persevering, thorough, and achievement oriented. One management consultant wrote about his experiences with a conscientious employee: “He arrived at our first meeting with a typed copy of his daily schedule, a sheet bearing his home and office phone numbers, addresses, and his email address. At his request, we established a timetable for meetings for the next four months. He showed up on time every time, day planner in hand, and carefully listed tasks and due dates. He questioned me exhaustively if he didn’t understand an assignment and returned on schedule with the completed work or with a clear explanation as to why it wasn’t done.” *  Conscientious employees are also more likely to engage in positive behaviors, such as helping new employees, coworkers, and supervisors, and are less likely to engage in negative behaviors, such as verbally or physically abusing coworkers or stealing. *

Openness to experience is the degree to which someone is curious, broadminded, and open to new ideas, things, and experiences; is spontaneous; and has a high tolerance for ambiguity. Most companies need people who are strong in terms of openness to experience to fill certain positions, but for other positions, this dimension is less important. People in marketing, advertising, research, or other creative jobs need to be curious, open to new ideas, and spontaneous. By contrast, openness to experience is not particularly important to accountants, who need to apply stringent rules and formulas consistently to make sense out of complex financial information.

Which of the Big Five Personality Dimensions has the largest impact on behavior in organizations? The cumulative results of multiple studies indicate that conscientiousness is related to job performance across five different occupational groups (professionals, police, managers, salespeople, and skilled or semiskilled workers). *  In short, people “who are dependable, persistent, goal directed, and organized tend to be higher performers on virtually any job; viewed negatively, those who are careless, irresponsible, low achievement striving, and impulsive tend to be lower performers on virtually any job.” *  The results also indicate that extraversion is related to performance in jobs, such as sales and management, that involve significant interaction with others. In people-intensive jobs like these, it helps to be sociable, assertive, and talkative and to have energy and be able to energize others. Finally, people who are extraverted and open to experience seem to do much better in training. Being curious and open to new experiences as well as sociable, assertive, talkative, and full of energy helps people perform better in learning situations. *

12-4. Managing Diversity

How much should companies change their standard business practices to accommodate the diversity of their workers? What do you do when a talented top executive has a drinking problem that seems to affect his behavior only at company business parties (for entertaining clients), where he has made inappropriate advances toward female employees? What do you do when, despite aggressive company policies against racial discrimination, employees continue to tell racist jokes and publicly post cartoons displaying racist humor? And, because many people confuse diversity with affirmative action, what do you do to make sure that your company’s diversity practices and policies are viewed as benefiting all workers and not just some workers?

No doubt about it, questions like these make managing diversity one of the toughest challenges that managers face. Nonetheless, there are steps companies can take to begin to address these issues.

As discussed earlier, diversity programs try to create a positive work environment where no one is advantaged or disadvantaged, where “we” is everyone, where everyone can do his or her best work, where differences are respected and not ignored, and where everyone feels comfortable.

Let’s begin to address those goals by learning about 12-4a different diversity paradigms, 12-4b diversity principles, 12-4c diversity training and practices, and 12-4d what works

12-4a. Diversity Paradigms

There are several different methods or paradigms for managing diversity: the discrimination and fairness paradigm, the access and legitimacy paradigm, and the learning and effectiveness paradigm. *

The discrimination and fairness paradigm, which is the most common method of approaching diversity, focuses on equal opportunity, fair treatment, recruitment of minorities, and strict compliance with the equal employment opportunity laws. Under this approach, success is usually measured by how well companies achieve recruitment, promotion, and retention goals for women, people of different racial/ethnic backgrounds, or other underrepresented groups. According to a workplace diversity practices survey conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management, 66 to 91 percent of companies use specialized strategies to recruit, retain, and promote talented women and minorities. The percentages increase with company size, and companies of more than 500 employees are the most likely to use these strategies. Of companies with more than 500 employees, 77 percent systematically collect measurements on diversity-related practices. *  One manager says, “If you don’t measure something, it doesn’t count. You measure your market share. You measure your profitability. The same should be true for diversity. There has to be some way of measuring whether you did, in fact, cast your net widely and whether the company is better off today in terms of the experience of people of color than it was a few years ago. I measure my market share and my profitability. Why not this?” *  The primary benefit of the discrimination and fairness paradigm is that it generally brings about fairer treatment of employees and increases demographic diversity. The primary limitation is that the focus of diversity remains on the surface-level diversity dimensions of sex, race, and ethnicity. *

The access and legitimacy paradigm focuses on the acceptance and celebration of differences to ensure that the diversity within the company matches the diversity found among primary stakeholders, such as customers, suppliers, and local communities. This is similar to the business growth advantage of diversity discussed earlier in the chapter. The basic idea behind this approach is to create a demographically diverse workforce that attracts a broader customer base. For example, the diversity strategy at Oshkosh, a maker of specialty trucks and truck bodies, states, “We operate and sell our products and services in over 100 countries on six continents, each with its own culture, customs, and business practices. We seek employees who are passionate about serving customers and who reflect our diverse customer base so that we can truly understand our customers to better serve and delight them.” *

The primary benefit of this approach is that it establishes a clear business reason for diversity. Like the discrimination and fairness paradigm, however, it focuses only on the surface-level diversity dimensions of sex, race, and ethnicity. Furthermore, employees who are assigned responsibility for customers and stakeholders on the basis of their sex, race, or ethnicity may eventually feel frustrated and exploited.

Although the discrimination and fairness paradigm focuses on assimilation (having a demographically representative workforce), and the access and legitimacy paradigm focuses on differentiation (having demographic differences inside the company match those of key customers and stakeholders), the learning and effectiveness paradigm focuses on integrating deep-level diversity differences, such as personality, attitudes, beliefs, and values, into the actual work of the organization. One sign that a company hasn’t yet created a learning and effectiveness paradigm is that people withhold their opinions for fear of being seen as different. For example, while Helena Morrissey is the CEO of Newton Investment Management, a London firm that invests $71 billion for its clients, she admits to sometimes keeping her business opinions to herself for fear of being seen as “the annoying” woman at the table. She says, “At a recent meeting, I wasn’t comfortable with a controversial point and I spoke up, but I also had a different view on the next item on the agenda but instead of speaking up I held back.” Says Morrissey, “I have been conscious of feeling that where I did have different views from the rest of the [all-male] group, I may be being perceived as the ‘difficult woman’ rather than being listened to for what I was saying.” She felt this way despite there being “no evidence that the men were actually feeling that.” *

The learning and effectiveness paradigm is consistent with achieving organizational plurality. Organizational plurality is a work environment where

· (1)

all members are empowered to contribute in a way that maximizes the benefits to the organization, customers, and themselves

· (2)

the individuality of each member is respected by not segmenting or polarizing people on the basis of their membership in a particular group. *

The learning and effectiveness diversity paradigm offers four benefits. *  First, it values common ground. Former Harvard Business School professor David Thomas explains, “Like the fairness paradigm, it promotes equal opportunity for all individuals. And like the access paradigm, it acknowledges cultural differences among people and recognizes the value in those differences. Yet this new model for managing diversity lets the organization internalize differences among employees so that it learns and grows because of them. Indeed, with the model fully in place, members of the organization can say, ‘We are all on the same team, with our differences—not despite them. *

Second, this paradigm makes a distinction between individual and group differences. When diversity focuses only on differences between groups, such as females versus males, large differences within groups are ignored. *  For example, think of the women you know at work. Now, think for a second about what they have in common. After that, think about how they’re different. If your situation is typical, the list of differences should be just as long as the list of commonalties, if not longer. In short, managers can achieve a greater understanding of diversity and their employees by treating them as individuals and by realizing that not all African Americans, Hispanics, women, or white males want the same things at work. *

Third, because the focus is on individual differences, the learning and effectiveness paradigm is less likely to encounter the conflict, backlash, and divisiveness sometimes associated with diversity programs that focus only on group differences. Taylor Cox, one of the leading management writers on diversity, says, “We are concerned here with these more destructive forms of conflict which may be present with diverse workforces due to language barriers, cultural clash, or resentment by majority-group members of what they may perceive as preferential and unwarranted treatment of minority-group members.” *  And Ray Haines, a consultant who has helped companies deal with the aftermath of diversity programs that became divisive, says, “There’s a large amount of backlash related to diversity training. It stirs up a lot of hostility, anguish, and resentment but doesn’t give people tools to deal with [the backlash]. You have people come in and talk about their specific ax to grind.” *  Not all diversity programs are divisive or lead to conflict. But by focusing on individual rather than group differences, the learning and effectiveness paradigm helps minimize these potential problems.

Diversity Apps

Information technology has helped us in countless ways, but we’re just beginning to discover how it can help us create a workforce that is talented, capable, and diverse. Check out these three new apps developed to increase diversity in the workplace:

· Textio is a diversity spell checker that scans job listings for biased language that might discourage a diverse applicant pool. And just like a regular spell checker, Textio suggests different wordings to help increase the number and diversity of applicants.

· GapJumpers helps companies review job applications without knowing candidates’ sex or race. GapJumpers also provides companies with a number of online performance auditions so they can see how candidates perform tasks that pertain to the job in question.

· Unitive is a complete recruiting/hiring platform that tracks job applicants and assesses their fit within the company and job throughout the entire hiring process. Unitive provides visual data for easier analysis and reminds managers to implement best practices at each step to reduce bias and increase the size and quality of the applicant pool.

Finally, unlike the other diversity paradigms that simply focus on surface-level diversity, the learning and effectiveness paradigm focuses on bringing different talents and perspectives (that is deep-level diversity) together to make the best organizational decisions and to produce innovative, competitive products and services.

12-4b. Diversity Principles

Diversity paradigms are general approaches or strategies for managing diversity. Whatever diversity paradigm a manager chooses, diversity principles will help managers do a better job of managing company diversity programs. *

Begin by carefully and faithfully following and enforcing federal and state laws regarding equal opportunity employment. Diversity programs can’t and won’t succeed if the company is being sued for discriminatory actions and behavior. Faithfully following the law will also reduce the time and expense associated with EEOC investigations or lawsuits. Start by learning more at the EEOC website ( www.eeoc.gov ). Following the law also means strictly and fairly enforcing company policies.

Treat group differences as important but not special. Surface-level diversity dimensions such as age, sex, gender orientation and sexual identity, and race/ethnicity should be respected but should not be treated as more important than other kinds of differences (that is, deep-level diversity). Remember, the shift in focus from surface- to deep-level diversity helps people know and understand each other better, reduces prejudice and conflict, and leads to stronger social integration with people wanting to work together and get the job done. Also, find the common ground. Although respecting differences is important, it’s just as important, especially with diverse workforces, to actively find ways for employees to see and share commonalties.

Tailor opportunities to individuals, not groups. Special programs for training, development, mentoring, or promotion should be based on individual strengths and weaknesses, not on group status. Instead of making mentoring available for just one group of workers, create mentoring opportunities for everyone who wants to be mentored. DuPont Corporation’s mentoring program, for example, is voluntary and open to all employees. Through candid and confidential conversations, DuPont’s mentors help younger workers and managers with problem solving and career and leadership development. *

Maintain high standards. Companies have a legal and moral obligation to make sure that their hiring and promotion procedures and standards are fair to all. At the same time, in today’s competitive markets, companies should not lower standards to promote diversity. This not only hurts the organizations but also feeds the stereotype that applicants who are hired or promoted in the name of affirmative action or diversity are less qualified. After a knee injury ended the career of WNBA player and Olympic medalist Becky Hammon, she became a coaching intern for the NBA’s San Antonio Spurs. While rehabbing her knee, Hammon attended coaches’ meetings, gave instructions during practices, and, when asked, willingly shared her opinions with head coach Gregg Popovich, who has led the Spurs to five NBA championships. Popovich told her, “As cool as it would be to hire you [as a full-time assistant coach], you’d have to be qualified, and I’d have to make sure you’re qualified.” She agreed. When Popovich hired her after the completion of her internship, Hammon said, “Honestly, I don’t think he gives two cents that I’m a woman. And, I don’t want to be hired because I’m a woman…I’m getting hired because I’m capable.” *  In 2015, Hammon became the first female head coach to win the NBA’s summer league title. The summer league, which starts after the completion of the regular NBA playoffs, is made up of teams’ rookies, second-year players, and unsigned free agents. *

Solicit negative as well as positive feedback. Diversity is one of the most difficult management issues. No company or manager gets it right from the start. Consequently, companies should aggressively seek positive and negative feedback about their diversity programs. One way to do that is to use a series of measurements to see if progress is being made.

Set high but realistic goals. Just because diversity is difficult doesn’t mean that organizations shouldn’t try to accomplish as much as possible. The general purpose of diversity programs is to try to create a positive work environment where no one is advantaged or disadvantaged, where “we” is everyone, where everyone can do his or her best work, where differences are respected and not ignored, and where everyone feels comfortable. Even if progress is slow, companies should not shrink from these goals.

12-4c. Diversity Training and Practices

Organizations use diversity training and several common diversity practices to manage diversity. There are two basic types of diversity training programs, skills-based and awareness. Skills-based diversity training teaches employees the practical skills they need for managing a diverse workforce, skills such as flexibility and adaptability, negotiation, problem solving, and conflict resolution. *  By contrast, awareness training is designed to raise employees’ awareness of diversity issues and to challenge underlying assumptions or stereotypes we may have about others. Dell Inc. enrolled several male executives in a six-month program run by Catalyst, a nonprofit group that tracks and advocates for women’s advancement. The program teaches managers to recognize the hurdles facing women in the workplace. As a result of the training, Doug Hillary, a Dell vice president, checked in with a female staff member with two young children and asked her if he was adequately accommodating her family needs. She told him that, actually, he was regularly scheduling staff conference calls at an hour when she was dropping her children off at school. He changed the meeting times, saying that, previously, “He didn’t pay as much attention.” *

Some companies use the Implicit Association Test (IAT) for awareness training. *  The IAT measures the extent to which people associate positive or negative thoughts (that is underlying assumptions or stereotypes) with blacks or whites, men or women, homosexuals or heterosexuals, young or old, or other groups. For the race IAT (versions also exist for weight, age, sexuality, and other ethnic groups), test takers are shown black or white faces that they must instantly pair with various words. IAT proponents argue that shorter responses generally indicate stronger associations and that the patterns of associations indicate the extent to which people are biased. For example, an early study showed that 88 percent of whites have a more positive mental association toward whites than toward blacks, but surprisingly, 48 percent of blacks showed the same bias. Do the biases measured by the IAT mean we’re likely to discriminate against others? Thankfully, no, according to the consistent results of a number of critical studies that indicate that IAT scores are not consistent over time and are not related to discriminatory behavior. *  But the IAT does can help us become aware of our potential biases so that we monitor our workplace behavior and decision making. So, taking the IAT can increase awareness of diversity issues.

Companies also use diversity audits, diversity pairing, and minority experiences for top executives to better manage diversity. Diversity audits are formal assessments that measure employee and management attitudes, investigate the extent to which people are advantaged or disadvantaged with respect to hiring and promotions, and review companies’ diversity-related policies and procedures. Writing in The New York Times against age discrimination, Ashton Applewhite says that any manager serious about diversity should start with the “shoe test.” She says, “Look under the table, and if everyone’s wearing the same kind of shoes, whether wingtips or flip-flops, you’ve got a problem.” In other words, measurement and data are at the core of diversity audits. *  According to Harvard Professor Iris Bohnet, “Using data to learn about the possible disparate treatment of employees shouldn’t be controversial. No company runs its finances based just on intuition, and the same should hold for personnel decisions.” *  One manager whose company uses metrics for assessing diversity says that he has asked he team, “‘How come, in the last month, you’ve gone after a large number of new people, and you haven’t interviewed one woman for the position?’ I started asking questions like this — I am not expecting them to have the answers. I’m expecting them to know that the next time I ask these questions, you better have the answers because I already have the data.” *

Earlier in the chapter, you learned that mentoring is a common strategy for creating learning and promotional opportunities for women. Diversity pairing is a special kind of mentoring. In diversity pairing, people of different ages, cultural backgrounds, sexes, or races/ethnicities are paired for mentoring. The hope is that stereotypical beliefs and attitudes will change as people get to know each other as individuals. *  Phyllis Korkki, a New York Timesassignment editor in her mid-50s approached Talya Minsberg, age 27, and asked, “Will you mentor me?” *  Minsberg said, “Korkki is a longtime Timesemployee, an accomplished journalist and an author. So the fact that she was approaching me for mentorship was unexpected.” *  Korkki wanted Minsberg to “reverse mentor” her so she could learn SnapChat. Minsberg leads the Times’ efforts to attract younger readers via SnapChat stories. Korkki said, “I sought a mentor to help me develop a specific new skill—and something entirely outside my comfort zone—namely, how to use Snapchat, the smartphone-based photo and video service that is popular among teenagers and young adults.” *  While awkward at first, both benefited from the relationship. Minsberg said, “I realized our mentorship provided me with something unexpected: a chance to take what amounts to a leadership position I had not seen coming.” *  Korkki said that being mentored, “…made me realize that organizations and individual workers could do a lot more to bridge the gaps between generations. Each age group has untapped resources that can benefit others at a different stage of life.” *

Because top managers are still overwhelmingly white and male, a number of companies believe that it is worthwhile to have top executives experience what it is like to be in the minority. This can be done by having top managers go to places or events where nearly everyone else is of a different sex or racial/ethnic background. For example, managers at Raytheon are required to spend an entire day in the office in a wheelchair so that they have a better understanding of the challenges faced by their disabled colleagues. Managers and executives at Sodexho Alliance are asked to spend time working with organizations that represent minorities. One male manager became the sponsor of a women employees group at Sodexho and accompanied a female colleague to a meeting of the Women’s Food Service Forum. The manager called the experience, in which he was at a conference with 1,500 women, “profound” and said that it taught him what it feels like to be different. He also described how his experiences working with women made him more sensitive to women’s feelings and even led him to change the social activities that he plans with coworkers from golf to dinner cruises. Rohini Anand, Sodexho’s chief diversity officer, endorses this experiential approach, saying, “To really engage people, you have to create a series of epiphanies and take leaders through those epiphanies. *

12-4d. Diversity: What Works?

Finally, while there’s a wealth of data on what is being done to address diversity issues, there’s not much clear, consistent, scientifically rigorous evidence on effectiveness. *  So what do we know at this time? Let’s start with what does not work. A review of 985 studies examining ways to reduce prejudice or bias toward others (similar to awareness training) concluded, “Psychologists are a long way from demonstrating the most effective ways to reduce prejudice,” and that the evidence, so far, “does not reveal whether, when, and why interventions reduce prejudice in the world.” *  A recent survey of 829 companies suggests that the most popular programs, diversity training, diversity performance audits (assessing how well managers are addressing diversity issues), and network programs (company sponsored affinity groups for women and minorities) “have no positive effects in the average workplace,” * . In fact, not only does diversity training not work, but it may also produce negative effects. According to professors Frank Dobbin and Alexandra Kalev, who studied 30 years of data across 800 companies, “The positive effects of diversity training rarely last beyond a day or two, and a number of studies suggest that it can activate bias or spark a backlash. Nonetheless, nearly half of midsize companies use it, as do nearly all the Fortune 500.” *  Why? Because training is required, and the message is, “We don’t trust you to treat people fairly.” As a result, they say, “Trainers tell us that people often respond to compulsory courses with anger and resistance—and many participants actually report more animosity toward other groups afterward.” *

So what does work? Ironically, the two least frequently used programs, diversity mentoring and appointing diversity managers responsible for diversity programs, “were among the most effective.” *  Finally, focusing on deep-level diversity appears to have strong positive effects. According to professors Jonathan Haidt and Lee Jussim, “In a review of more than 500 studies, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, authors Thomas Pettigrew and Linda Tropp concluded that when people of different races and ethnicities mix together and get to know each other, the effect is generally to reduce prejudice on all sides. This is a good justification for increasing diversity.” *

Study Tools