FREE ESSAY ON DIVERSITY IN THE WORKPLACE

DIVERSITY IN THE WORKPLACE

Workplace Diversity: Fact or Fiction?
Are today's corporate diversity programs truly effective? That question, posed by Robert
J Grossman in an article carried by the Wall Street Journal Online on June 28, 2000, will
be explored as part of the review of Mr. Grossman's article.
The concept of diversity goes well beyond the historical employment equity legislation
enacted in both federal and local jurisdictions. It calls for the recognition of the
contributions that individuals can make as individuals, not just as members of
legislatively designated groups. It calls for management of organizations to be totally
inclusive, not just tolerating those who are different but celebrating those differences.
It calls for the opening of non-traditional occupations to men and women of all creeds,
colors, religions, races and social groupings and for making reasonable accommodations
the workplace and worklife for this to happen. It calls for diversity beyond just gender,
race, or physical and intellectual abilities to include diversity in opinions, sexual
preferences, social customs and mores, and other aspects of the variations in lives and
lifestyles. (Conference Board of Canada. 1995, p. 1) 
There is a compelling generic business case for achieving and managing diversity in the
workplace. Diversity can help organizations: identify and capitalize on opportunities to
improve products and services; attract, retain, motivate and utilize human resources
effectively; improve the quality of decision-making at all organizational levels; and
reap the many benefits from being perceived as a socially conscious and progressive
organization. These benefits should be manifested in an improved bottom line and
maximization of shareholder value. (Gandz and Ivey, 2000) 
Achieving diversity does nothing for an organization unless that diversity is managed
effectively. It is not a natural thing for people of different cultural backgrounds,
religious or moral upbringings, cognitive styles, or even genders, to communicate
effectively, appreciate what shapes each other's viewpoints, debate with each other
without giving offense, or otherwise get along together. When a manager says this
diversity thing would be easy if only everyone reacted and behaved the same way or I must
be totally consistent in what I do; surely I should be expected to treat everyone the
same, then he or she is reflecting the real challenge of managing diversity.
Equality in the context of managing diversity means treating each person's needs with an
equal amount of respect and attention. (Society of Management Accountants of Canada,
1996, p. 10) 
The facts present a compelling case for corporate embracing of workplace diversity. But,
does the real world bear out this case? Grossman (2000) states that employers are
reporting that diversity programs are making a difference and are quick to point to the
success of efforts at their companies. But outside observers say that the efforts of
these individual employers are not enough to address the persistent problem of workplace
discrimination. Most diversity activities, experts say, have not been held to the same
level of accountability as other human-resource activities. If they were evaluated
vigorously the results would be disturbing, says Carol Kulak, management professor at
Arizona State University in Tempe, Ariz. How would you feel if you invested all this
money and found out that it had no effect? Companies do it for other reasons: legal
protection, symbolism.
Grossman continues that although overt discrimination has declined, minorities and women
remain a small cohort of professional organizations. According to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, in 1983, 3% of engineers and attorneys were black. In 1999, blacks made up 5%
for each profession. In 1983, 3% of physicians were black; in 1999, between 5% and 6%.
Over the years, blacks in marketing, advertising and public relations rose from 3% to 5%;
financial managers from 4% to 7%.
From a financial perspective, blacks were twice as likely as whites to be unemployed in
1999. The ratio has remained the same since the 1970s. And for every dollar a white male
earned in 1979 (the first year figures are available), a black male earned 78 cents. In
1999, the numbers were identical. In 1979, black women earned 58 cents for every dollar a
white male earned; in 1999, 64 cents. 
Diversity often takes a backseat in the hiring process. It's not a priority for a search
firm that's racing to find qualified executives to keep with a client's timetable, says
Willie E. Carrington, an executive recruiter in Chicago. We go to the candidate pool we
know; identify the best candidates we can find at that particular time. Then we look for
diversity.
Some professionals find the emphasis on diversity a distraction that shifts the focus
away from excellence. For corporations like Clorox, Microsoft, and General Electric, the
quest for top performers is guided more by brainpower than race or gender. Their stance
has been that diversity will take care of itself if people are hired and promoted based
on their abilities. (pp. 1 - 3)
Mentoring and access to informal work groups are crucial to career advancement. But
establishing these relationships continues to prove daunting for people of color and
women. For example, John Fernandez, author of Race, Gender & Rhetoric (McGraw Hill,
1998), found that 72% of blacks in 1978 and 78% in 1995 reported they were excluded from
informal work groups and unable to find sponsors and mentors. In its recent study of
women of color in the workplace, Catalyst (1999), a nonprofit research and women's
advocacy organization in New York, found that only 50% of African American women in
upper-level jobs had mentors. The percentage fell to 37% for mid-level positions and 34%
at lower levels. Overall, 47% cited lack of access to a mentor as a barrier to
advancement.
Mr. Grossman's article clearly states the opinion that for many corporations, workplace
diversity is largely rhetoric-- a "photo op", a chance to get some publicity, to let the
troops know that the company cares about the "little guy", and his statistics seem to
bear that position out. Still other corporations engage workplace diversity initiatives
as a defensive measure to help head off employee lawsuits and government prosecution. 
Despite corporate efforts, bias in the workplace still exists today. Today's bias is
subtler however; people are smarter, more politically correct. People have learned to
hold their tongues. In some companies, a stigma still exists concerning diversity
initiatives, with minority employees wary about becoming associated with such programs,
fearing retaliation or blacklisting. Until all employees of a corporation embrace
workplace diversity as a tool for change - change for the better - it will remain largely
as a set of affinity groups within the corporation formed around special interests that
lack mainstream support and participation.
Bibliography
Grossman, Robert J., (June 28, 2000) Are Diversity Programs Truly Effective? The Wall
Street Journal, 
Online Edition. Available:
http://public.wsj.com/careers/resources/documents/20000628-grossman.htm
The Society of Management Accountants of Canada. Toronto (1996). Measuring the Impact of
Diversity. 
The Conference Board of Canada. Ottawa. (1995). Dimensions of Diversity in Canadian
Business: Building a Business Case for Valuing Ethnocultural Diversity. 
Dr. Jeffrey Gandz Professor, & Associate Dean Richard, (2000). Ivey School of Business,
The University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, Canada. 
Available: http://www.equalopportunity.on.ca/enggraf/gandz/gandz.html