S11 ~23045 gender diversity A PROGRAM OF THE CONSULTATIVE GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH (CC AR) Wlorkiing with A , Diversity A FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION P R E PA R E D B Y: DEBORAH MERRILL-SANDS EVANGELINA HOLVINO WITH JAMES CUMMING Centerfor Gender in Organizations (CCO) SIMMONS Graduate School of Management Chaos Management, Ltd. IL \l rcn lL- e X onL Cten toS Acknowledgments v Executive Summary vii CHAPTER I: DIVERSITY IN ORGANIZATIONS 2 DIVERSITY IN THE CGIAR CENTERS 3 PURPOSE OF THE PAPER 4 FRAMEWORK FORTHE PAPER 4 USING THE PAPER 5 Ideas and concepts 5 Approaches 5 Potential next steps 6 CHAPTER II: l Force= 7 ENHANCING INNOVATION, CREATIVITY AND PROBLEM-SOLVING 8 STRENGTHENING PARTNERSHIPS, ALLIANCES AND TEAMS 9 GAINING BROADER ACCESS TO CLIENTS, INVESTORS AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS 12 RESPONDING TO CHANGING WORKFORCE DEMOGRAPHICS 12 IMPROVING RETENTION OF HIGH QUALITY STAFF 13 ENHANCING OPERATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS 14 PROMOTING SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EQUITY 15 RESPONDING TO ORGANIZATIONAL MANDATES AND DIRECTIVES 16 EXCELLING IN PERFORMANCE AND INDUSTRY REPUTATION 16 SUMMARY 17 CHAPTER III: Ana1ydca( Framework 19 LENSES ON DIVERSITY 20 z SOCIAL DIFFERENCES LENS 21 0 o Identities are socially constructed 23 Identities are multidimensional 23 Identity is defined by self and others 24 .i. 0 0 0 A FRAMEWORK FOR ACT~ON Gender and Diversity Program of the Consultative Group on Intemational Agricultural Research (CGIAR) PREPARED BY: DEBORAH MERRILL-SANDS EVANGELINA HOLVINO WITH JAMES CUMMING Centerfor Gender in Organizations (CGO) SIMMONS Graduate School of Management Chaos Management, Ltd. .-A p _ Lm gTJ>G Soa.V Diverse social categories and identities embody differences in power and status 27 Identities shape cognitions, experiences, world views and perspectives 28 Relative emphasis on dimensions of identity 30 Summary 30 CULTURAL DIFFERENCES LENS 31 Culture 32 National culture and organizational culture 32 Cross cultural comparisons 33 International management 38 Working with cultural differences 39 Other streams of cultural differences research 39 Summary 40 COGNITIVE-FUNCTIONAL LENS 41 Linking diversity with organizational functions and areas of specialization 42 Cognitive styles 42 Neutrality of differences 43 Summary 45 APPLYING THE LENSES 45 Intersecting lenses 46 Power 46 Integrating the lenses 47 CHAPTER IV: Dver&sty Change Strategoks 49 OVERVIEW 50 CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESS 51 ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT APPROACH 52 Multicultural organizational development model 52 Visions to guide the diversity change process 53 Sequence of change:A helpful process 54 Strengths and limitations of the organizational development approach to diversity 59 z ACTION RESEARCH AND COLLABORATIVE INQUIRY APPROACHES 60 Approach 60 0 Strengths and limitations of collaborative inquiry approaches to diversity 64 _ iii TYPES OF INTERVENTIONS AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS IN DIVERSITY PLANNING 65 Types of interventions 65 Selecting specific interventions 69 IMPLEMENTING DIVERSITY: ADDITIONAL LESSONS FROM THE FIELD 71 Deployment and involvement of change agents 71 Avoiding common diversity "traps" 72 Tips for international organizations 72 Indicators of progress 73 References 74 Glossary 95 Annex 100 Endnotes 103 0 iv T H I S PA P E R WA S C O M M I S S I0 N E D by the Gender and Diversity Program of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). We are grateful for the opportunity to providc this input into the strategic thinking on working with diversity into the CGLR. Given the wide-ranging and disparate literature on worling with diversi- ty in an international context. this paper has been a challenge to put together. We acknowledge that much of the research and experience reviewed in the paper comes from developed countries, the source of much of the published work in the field, as well as from South Africa. We would appreciate guidance and feedback on relevant sources from coun- tries in the South. We are very grateful for extensive and thoughtful comments received from several review- ers of earlier drafts of this paper. Particularly, we wish to thank Anne Acosta (Centro Internacional de Mejorainiernto (ie Maiz y Trigo [CIMMYT]); Sue Caniey Davison (Con- sultant and expert in international teams); Carol Colfer (Center for International Forestry Research [CIFOR]); Robin Ely (Associate Professor, Columbia University and Affiliated Faculty with the Center for Gender in Organizations, SIMMONS Graduate School of Man- agement); Erica Foldy (Research Associate, Center for Gender in Organizations, SIM- MONS Graduate School of Management); Roselyne Lecuyer (International Centre for IResearch in Agroforestry [ICRAF]); Gerdient Meijerink (Interniationial Service for Nation- al Agricultural Research [ISNAR]); Laura Moorehead (Principal, Joppa Consulting); Sara Scherr (Adjunct Professor, University of Maryland); Ragnhild Sohlberg (Vice President, External Relations and Special Projects, Norsk Hydro ASA and Board Chair, Internation- al Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics [ICRISAT]); Linda Spink (Senior Consultant, Training Resources Group); and Y7icki Wilde (Program Leader, Gender and Diversity Program, CGIAR). Feedback from Focal Points and members of the Advisory Board of the CGIAR Gender and Diversity Program has been most helpful. We also wish to acknowledge the excellent research support provided by Erica Foldy and by Bridgette Sheridan in the early stages of the project. In addition, we wish to acknowl- edge the conscientious editing and production work of Bonnie Gamache throughout the various revisions of this paper. Authors The paper was prepared through a partnership between the Center for Gender in Orga- z nizations at the SIMMONS Graduate School of Management and Chaos Management, Ltd. 0 z U Dir. Deborah lMerrill-Sands is Co-Director of the Center for Gender in Orgariizations and Adjunct Associate Professor at the SIMMONS Graduate School of Management in Boston, MA (www.simmons.edu/gsm/cgo). Formerly, she was a Senior Research Officer at the International Service for National Agricultural Research and served as the first Pro- gram Leader of the CGIAR Gender Staffing Program. (E-mail: dmsands@together.net). DDr. Evangelina Holvino is President of Chaos Management, Ltd. (www.chaosmanage- ment.com) and a Senior Researcher and Faculty at the Center for Genider in Organizations at t he SIMMONS Graduate School of Management in Boston, MA. (E-mail: chaos@sover. net). Dr. James Cumming is Director of Chaos Management, Ltd. (uWw.chaosmanage- ment.com) and an Adjunct Faculty at the School for International Training in Brattle- boro, VT. (E-mail: jcumming@sover.net). z c: C z vi PURPOSE OF PAPER The CGIAR Centers have committed to working with diversity in their organizations in an explicit and intentional way. This new diversity initiative builds on earlier work on gender staffing while developing new concepts, approaches, methods and tools to engage the more complex challenges of working effectively with multiple dimensionis of diversity. This paper provides the first building block in this effort. It synthesizes rcscarch and experience in working with organizational diversity in a way that is meaningful for the context and needs of the Centers. The intent is not to provide a blueprint for how the CGIAR shiould proceed. Such a plan, developed by scholars and practitioners outside of the system, would be inappropriate. Rather, the aim is to provide a solid foundation of knowledge and understanding from which the individual Centers, as well as the CGIAR System as a whole, can craft a unique approach to working with diversity tailored to their specific needs, aspirations and contexts. CONCEPT OF DIVERSITY Maniy organizations worldwide are grappling with the opportunities and challenges of working with diversity. Diversity is a complex concept. While diversity efforts have the potential to strengthen organizational effectiveness and efficiency, and to advance social justice, experience has shown that realizing the full benefits of diversity is neither a sim- ple nor a straiglhtforward process. It is one thing to create diversity by recruiting people of different nationality, cultural baclkground, race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, discipline or work style. It is quite another to develop a supportive work environment that enables people of diverse backgrounds to perform at their highest levels, contribute fully to the organization and feel professionally satisfied. It is an even greater challenge to inte- grate fully the varied knowledge, experiences, perspectives and values that people of diverse backgrounds bring into an organization's strategy, goals, work, products, systems and structures. The ultimate goal in workingwitll diversity is to weave it into the fabric of the organization-into all the different dimensions of work, structures and processes. It is this kind of comprehensive approach that experience and research indicate is needed for an organization to reap the fullest benefits from diversity in terms of enhancing equity, 5 effectiveness and efficiency. u x vii With this vision of diversity, we refer to '&'orking with diversity", rather than 'managing diversity", the term that is most common in the literature. Working with diversity con- nects directly to the work of the organization and the people within it. It implies that diversity is the work and responsibility of everyone, not just of the managers and leaders. It suggests that diversity is an asset to be used and developed, rather than a problem to be managed. And, it projects a sense of dynamism and continuity. STRUCTURE OF THE PAPER To guide the Centers, we have structured the paper around three guiding questions. o Motive forces: What are the motive forces driving our need to work more inten- tionally with diversity? o Analytic approach: How do wc define and understand diversity in a way that is meaningful for this organization? o Change strategies: Which change strategies, methods and tools will be most effec- tive given our objectives and approach to working with diversity? MOTIVE FORCES Diversity efforts are most effective and sustainable when they are tied explicitly to the strategic objectives of the organization. This means that each organization needs to undertake a strategic analysis to define the key reasons-or motive forces-for working with diversity in a meaningful way. This is what many experts call "building the business case" for diversity. In Chapter II, we identify nine motive forces, relevant to the CGIAR, for focusing explicit attention and resources on diversity. We review the potential benefits as well as the challenges of each. ° Enhantcintg innlovation, creativity, and problem-solving o Strengthening collaborative modes of working o Caining broader access to clients, beneficiaries, investors and other stakeholders o Responding to changing work force demographics o Improving retention of high quality staff o Enhancing operational effectiveness o Promoting social justice and equity o Responding to organizational mandates and directives o Excelling in performance and industry reputation The review of research and experience summarized in the discussion of these motive forces shows clearly that diversity can bring significant benefits to organizations. Howev- >_ er, it also brings challenges. The clear lesson is that diversity is unlikely to lead to S improved organizational performance or equity unless it is recognized explicitly as an in asset and is worked with intentionally and systematically throughout all aspects and areas of the organization. U x Vtll ANALYTIC APPROACH Once an organization has carried out an analysis of its motive forces for working with diversity, it is important for the organization to ground its vision of diversity in its specif- ic context. It needs to develop an operational definition that focuses on the dirmelnsions of diversitythat are most salientfor strengthening its organizational effectiveness and effi- ciency. The analytic framework in Chapter III focuses on various dimensions of diversity and different approaches for working with diversity. To assist the Centers in selecting the most relevant approach. we have synthesized the literature and experience on diversity and define(d t hree primary approaches, or lenses: the social differences lens, the cultural differences lens and the cognitive-functional lens. These lenses represent distinct and major streams of work on diversity. When applied to organizations, all three lenses exam- ine how differences in group affiliation affect the organization's work culture, systems and work practices; its social relations; and individuals' behaviors and work and career outcomes. The lenses differ primarily in the types of group differences treated. We describe each lens, discuss the major ways in whicli it has been applied in organizations, and give our assessment of its specific advantages and disadvantages. It is important to underscore that the three lenses on diversity can intersect and inform one another. o The socWal dfifferences lens focuscs on differences shaped by membership in iden- tity groups that reflect salicnt social categories, such as race, gender, ethnicity, class, age or sexual oricntation. An identity group is a group whose members have partic- ipated in equivalent historical experiences, are currently subjected to similar social forces and, as a result, have consonant world views. From the perspective of the social differences lens, these identity group categories are viewed as socially marked or valenced, meaning that they are significant in shaping how societies are organ- ized and how individluals within societies categorize themselves and others. Often these categories shape the distribution of roles, power, opportunities and resources in societies. As a result, in many societies, these identity categories are "legislated" to prevent discrimination and ensure equal opportunities. The focus of this lens is on how differences among group identities affect social relations, work behaviors, distribution of opportunities and work outcomes in organizations. It also focuses on the way in which social identity shapes perspectives, experiences andl values, and how these differences can be fully utilized within organizations. o The cultural dMfferences lens focuses on cultural differences of diverse nationali- ties or etlhic groups and their implications for organizations. Culture is defined as a patterned way of thinking, acting, feeling and interpreting. It is comprised of norms, values, beliefs and expressive symbols that members of a group use to create meaning and interpret behaviors. This lens examines both how culture and cultilr- al differences affect social relations, work behaviors, communications and expecta- tions in organizations, as well as how differences in values and norms shaped by a society's culture affect organizational culture and norms of effective management. From the perspective of this lens, culture influences almost all aspects of manage- ment. including organizational factors, management and leadership behaviors and x .x styles, and management systems and functions. Work on cultural differences has increased with the recent expansion of globalization. We review two major approach- es: the cross cultural comparative approach and the international management approach. 0 The cognitive-functional lens focuses on diversity in task-related knowledge, skills and experiences as well as differences in styles by which individuals access information and acquire knowledge. Task-related knowledge and skills are shaped primarily by educational background, disciplinary training, organizational tenure, or organizational function, specialization and level. Functional and disciplinary diversity works with differences in the content and skill aspects of task-related dif- ferences (e.g. what is known). In contrast, cognitive diversity focuses attention on differences in ways of knowing and learning in relation to specific tasks. Cognitive diversity includes the range of styles people employ to access information and knowledge, analyze it and apply it. Because of its focus on task-related diversity, work using this lens emphasizes the link between diversity and organizational and work group performance. Differences tend to be seen as neutral and objective and this lens gives limited attention to the impact of cognitivc-functional diversity on individuals' career outcomes. CHANGE STRATEGIES A comprchcnsive diversity initiative needs to incorporate multiple objectives. o Achieve organizational justice - to ensure fairness and equity for all organiza- tional stakeholders. o Reduce bias - to help individuals and groups in the organization recognize and address the prejudices that impact their behaviors, attitudes and organizational out- comes at work. o Develop cultural competence - to help individuals learn ablout their own culture and identity and that of others and to learn how to interact effectively across such differences in the work environment. o Act on the added value that diversity brings - to learn to incorporate and use the value that different perspectives and beliefs bring to all the different dimensions of work and organizations. Withliln this framework, Chapter IV focuses on how a diversity initiative should be designed and implemented once the specific objectives and approach to working with diversity have been defined. The key components of a diversity initiative are: o defining a vision of the desired outcome, that is, a successfully diverse organization; a understanding the dynamics of change and establishing an appropriate strategy for change, which is tailored to the organization; and 0 selecting and combining the most effective interventions and best practices in order to achieve the goals for diversity change. x From our review of the literature we suggest that there are two major change approaches under which most diversity initiatives fall: 1) long-term, planned, systemic organizational development approaches; and 2) action research, collaborative inquiry approaches. The organizational development approach to diversity is an integrated, planned, system- wide and long-term process that addresses a complexity of organizational dimensions and levels. Organizational development approaches are characteristically managed from the top. cascade down the organization to other organizational levels and make use of exter- nal consultants as experts who support the organization throughout the process of change. Iii uniderstanding this process, Holvino's Multicultural Organizational Development Model provides a useful framework of the stages of an organization moving from a mono- culture, an exclusionary organization where the values of one group, culture or style are dominant, to multicultural, an inclusive organization where the values of diverse people are valued and contribute to organizational goals and excellence. Most organizations using the organizational development approach to designing and implementing a diversi- ty initiative follow a five-step process: 1) preparing for the initiative; 2) assessing needs related to diversity; 3) developing a vision, goals and a strategic plan; 4) implementing the interventions selected; and 5) monitoring and evaluating progress and results. The strengths of the organizational development approach to diversity are that it provides a clear focus; it is similar to other planninig processes and is, thus familiar; it is manage- nieiit driven; and the logical and deliberate pace of change promotes a sense of organiza- tional securitv amidst potentially threatening change. Some of the disadvantages of the approach are that unforeseen organizational changes can derail the initiative; the long- term effort can be difficult to sustain; and there is a tendency to rely too heavilv on edu- cational programs, policy changes and accountability measures at the expense of cultural change intcrventions. The action research and collaborative inquiry approaches to organizational change focus- es on joint inquiry and learning between internal and external change agents. These approaches are usually more fluid and iterative than organizational development approaches to diversity. Nevertheless, action research and collaborative inquiry usually include the following phases: 1) entry and set-up; 2) data collection and inquiry; 3) analy- sis; 4) feedback and action planning; 5) implementation and experimentation; 6) moni- toring and evaluation; and 7) learning, adaptation and further experimentation. Some of the strengths of action research and collaborative inquiry approaches to diversity are that they involve many stakeholders; strengthen the internal capacity to sustain change; pro- mote organizational dialogues; generate less resistance; and integrate the expertise of internal and external change agents. Some of the limitations are that it may be more dif- ficult to get leadership commitment and resource-; the participatory process may gener- ate too many change ideas and create unrealistic expectations; and the unhoujnded nature of the process may require on-going negotiation. 'Whatever approach is used, diversity initiatives require a multilevel approach that 5 addresses different types of organizational change: structural change, cultural change and x xi behavioral change. 'These three types of change operate synergistically, becoming the key leverage points for intervention. One of the principle challenges of a diversity initiative is to include the right mix of interventions that will maximize change by supporting or rein- forcing each other. Finally, based on our review of the literature and organizations' experiences, we have dis- tilled 13 conditions for success for a (liversity initiative. o Work from an inclusive definition of diversity. o Develop a strategic vision and plan with clear objectives. o Align the initiative to the core work of the organization and its strategic goals. o Engage many forces and people to create a broad sense of ownership. o Have clear leadership and involvement of senior management in the change process and identify internal champions with explicit responsibilities for implementation. o Pay attention to internal and external factors (such as external pressure groups or budgetary conditions) that may support or hinder the initiative. o Build the change strategy from a solid analysis of diversity issues in the organiza- tion. o Provide freedom to pilot and experiment with changes. o Convey the importance of engaging in a dynamic and systemic process, not a "quick- fix" solution. o Encourage an open climate that allows for the expression of passion, compassion and forgiveness throughout the change and learning process. ° Assign accountability across all levels and types of employees, including senior man- agement. o Ensure the competence of consultants engaged in designing and facilitating initia- tives. o Recogilize, celebrate ald connect "small wins" in order to aggregate small changes into a larger change process with more impact. With respect to international organizations, we add the following suggestions: 1) make special efforts to identify and utilize in-country resources to provide demographic data, cultural and social science research, and other relevant diversity information; 2) partner local resources with external resources in order to develop the capacity of country nation- als to work on organizational diversity and to ensure that external consultants understand and respond to the local context; and 3) pay attention and respond to the national social context, but also accept responsibility for providing leadership in changing accepted pat- terns of social behavior that are no longer suitable in a multicultural and global environ- ment. xii Lo i, a r >D at // ME RGA I Z .7 : ::> / CC A PROCESS. q , / / < Wlifle it hias the potential to strengthen organizational effectiveness and efficiency and to advance social justice, experience has slhown that realizinig the full benefits of diversity is not a sirnple or straightforward process. With accumulating experience, we bave learned that it is one thing to create diversity in an organization by recruiting people of different nationality, cultural background, race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, discipline or w^ork style. But it is quite another to develop a supportive work environment that enables people of diver-se backgrounds to performi at tbeir Ihigliest levels, colitribilte flillly to the organization and feel professionially satisfied. And, it is even a greater challenge to inte- grate fully the varied knowledge, experiences, perspectives and values that people of diverse backgrounds bring into an organization's strategy, goals, work, products, systems and structures. Frorn our perspective, the ultimate goal in wvorking with diversity is to weave it into the fab- ric of the organization-into all the different dirnensions of work, structures and processes. We picture an organization that constantly seeks to recognize, reflect upon, learn from and de.velop diversity as a perspective that permeates its work. In such an organization, diversi- ty shapes, for example. how the organization: defines opportunities anid clhalleiiges in its environment; defines its strategy; identifies its clients, partners and beneficiaries; recruits its staff and leaders; does its work; builds partnerships a nd alliances and puts together teams; defines success and competence; motivates people; shares informnation and knowl- edge; and deploys its management systems. F,xperience and research indicate that this kind of comprehensive approach is needed for an organization to reap thle fullest beinefits froii diversity in terms of enhancing equity, effectiveness and efficiency. i ~~~~~~~~With this vision of diversity, we refer to "working with diversity", rather than 'rnanaging I ~~~~~~~diversity", the term that is most common in the literature. Working with diversity connects 2 .> directly to the work of the organization and the people within in it. This implies that diversi- ty,is the work and responsibility of everyone, nut just of the maniagers aitl leaders. It suggests that diversity is an asset to be used and developed, rather than a problem to be iianaged. Anid, it projects a sense of dynamism and continuity, rather than of stasis and insularity. Dkvers$ty in t2e CGAR centers T H E I N T E R N AT I O N A L C E N T E R S supported by the Consultativc Group on Inter- national Agricultural Research (CCIAR) have a long history of working with staff of diverse national backgrounds. Three recent trends have catalyzed renewed interest in working intentionallv and systematically with diversity: 1) the increased supply and par- ticipation of women from all over the world and of women and men from developing countries in scientific, professional and managerial fields relevant to the Centers: 2) the significant expansion in the reliance on collaborative modes of research through partner- ships and teams; and 3) the resource pressures that call for ensuring impact, increased efficiency, and "doing more with less". In response to these trends. the Centers decided that they needed to work with their staff diversity in a more explicit way to ensure that they are reaping the full benefits of their diverse staff and providing work environments that are equitable, motivating and satisfying to staff of diverse backgrounds. In 1998, the Chairperson of the CGIAR, Ismail Serageldin, in opening remarks at the Inter-Center Consultation on Gender Staffing held in The Hague, offered a vision for working with diversity in the CGIAR: As the CGIAR moves into the 21st century, agricultural researchfaces critical technical, institutional, political and social challenges. To meet them, we need to attract (and retain) the highest quality human resources, women anda men, com7nitted to promotirng scientifrc advances arnd strengthlenr.ing globalpartnerships... WVe have to ensure that our organizations change in fundamitental ways tat allow7the joining of this diverse mix of brainpower to thrive so that we can work together to effectivelypromote sustainable agri- cultural development.' The Centers laid out five concrete goals for working with diversity when they launched the new CGIAR Gender and Diversity Program in 1999: IThe centers' vision is to create wvorkplaces that: a) attract high quality staff I 4 }d of diverse cultural, racial, and ethnic backgrounds; b) stimulate theirfullest productivity and creativity; r) harness the wealth of skills, experiences, and talents that members of diverse identity groups can contribute; d) value diverse contributions and ways of working; and e) engage men and women of diverse backgrounds in decision-making that shapes both the work and the - C ~ . work environment. 0 C) The new diversity effort is designed to build on the earlier work carried out on gender. It 2 will draw on the learning from that program initiative as appropriate. while developing z 3 new concepts, approaches, methods and tools to engage the more complex challenges of working effectively with multiple dimensions of diversity. urpose of the paper TH I S PA PE R RE PRESE NT S afirst buildingblockindevelopirig (corn(epts, approach- es and tools for working with diversity in the context of the CGIAR system and individual Centers. The intent is to synthesize research and experience in working with organiza- tional diversity in a way that is meahingful and appropriate for the context and needs bf the Centers. This is not a blueprint for how the CGIAR should proceed; such a plan., devel- oped by scholars and practitioners outside of the system, would be meaningless and would more likely hinder than galvanize action. Instead, the aim is to provide a solid foundation of knowledge and understanding from which the leaders, staff and managers in individ- ual Centers and the CGIAR System as a whole can make strategic choices and craft a unique approach to working with diversity tailored to their specific needs, aspirations and contexts. This paper aspires to synthesize a wide range of research and experience to provide a rich knowledge base of concepts, ideas, experiences and methods for working with diversity. It is designed to challenge and stimulate new ways of viewing diversity and its meaning for organizations. However, the real work and excitement of working with diversity will not come from reading this paper. It will come from exploring the ideas and knowledge pre- sented, interacting with colleagues, leaders and partners about their implications, and reflecting on how they can be used to stimulate effective work with diversity in the Cen- ters. This should be viewed as one input into what could potentially be a dynamic process of change. Framework for the paper TO GUIDE THE CENTERS in their thinling about how to work with diversity, we have structured the paper around three guiding questions central to designing an effective diversity initiative. o Motive forces. What are the motive forces driving our need to work more inten- tionally with diversity? Diversity efforts are most effective and sustainable when they are tied explicitly to the strategic objectives of the organization. This means that each organization needs to undertake a strategic analysis to define the key reasons- or motive forces-for working with diversity in a meaningful way. The material in Chapter II helps Centers define why they should commit to working intentionally with diversity. o Analytic approach. How do we define and understand diversity in a way that is meaningfulfor this organization? It is important for organizations to ground their X vision of diversity in their specific context and develop an operational definition u 4 that focuses on the dimensions of diversity that are most salient for strengthening their organizational effectiveness and efficiency. The material in Chapter III helps Centers decide which dimensions of divcrsity should be addressed and how diversi- ty should be defined. Change strategies. Which change strategies, methods and tools will be most effec- tive given our objectives and approach to working with diversity? A range of change strategies can be used to strengthieni an organization's capacity to work with diversi- ty effectively. These need to be tailored to the specific context and goals of the organ- ization. Often, several of these need to be used together to make significant progress. 'he material in Chapter [V helps Centers define how their diversity initia- tive should be designed and implemented. Using th~e paper T H E PA P E R P ROV I D E S a knowledge base of research and experience for reflecting on diversity and its implications at each level of the organization, specific work groups, interpersonal relations and individual experiences. We suggest that this paper can be most useful and serve as a catalyst for advancing work on diversity if readers, preferably of diverse backgrounds, review the following questionis together (as a start) and engage each other in reflection and discussion. IDEAS AND CONCEPTS o What insight does the paper generate ahouit your own meaninlgs and ways of working with diversity? o What insight does the paper generate about diversity dynamics within your Center or work group? o What intrigues you about the ideas presented? What ideas attracted you? What ideas disturbed you? o What ideas were most relevant to your organization and its context? What ideas were less appropriate or relevant? o What things would you like to know more about, understand better and get more information on? 2 APPROACHES o What are the strategic forces for working on diversity most relevant to your Center? o Which dimensions of diversity are most relevant for your Center or work group? o What approach for working with diversity would or would not work in your Center? Challenge each other about your initial assessments. 0 o What types of specific interventions have already been implemented? What other ° U interventions might be most usefuil for your organization? z 5 POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS • Develop and discuiss scenarios about how to use the knowledge you have gained from reading this paper. D What are you willing to do, personally, to act upon the ideas and actions suggested by this paper? o What suggestions do you want to make to the leaders and managers in your Center or work group about how to proceed in developing an initiative to work on diversity? o Think about: What would such an initiative look like? How would it work? What would you and your Center want out of it? How much wouild it cost? How would the organization start? Whatwould the Centergain? Whatwould individuals gain? What could people and the organization lose? Should the Center work on this internally or are external sources of expertise also needed? What would be the motivating forces for working on diversity? What would be the greatest obstacles or sources of resistance? I 6 /) 3o>;o0 I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\ f : /~~~~~~~~ / 4 / / , I ,_ A /, a: \ X / f / ' ~ / K w-/ mot'we forces AN ORGANIZATION SETTING OUT TO WORK WITH DIVERSITY NEEDS TO DEVELOP AN APPROACH THAT IS RESPONSIVE TO ITS SPECIFIC CONTEXT, MISSION AND STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES. Experience has shown that a diversity effort needs to serve an organization's strategic goals if it is to be effective and sustained. A crucial first step, therefore, is identifying the key reasons-or motive forces-for working with diversity in a systematic and intentional manner. This is what many experts call "building the business case" for diversity. 2 Draw- ing on the literature and other organizations' experiences, we identify nine motive forces for focusing explicit attention and resources on diversity (see Box 1). We have selected tilose IllOSt relevalit to tlle CGIAR. Uiider eaclh motive force, we briefly summarize the benefits that the organizationr can accrue from diversity and some of the cautions and challenges that have become evident from research and experience. 3 The CGIAR System and individual Centers can uise these as a starting point for engaging staff in de.velopuing a coiipelliijg visioni anid rationiale for workinig on diversity. Enhanng mnovatmn, creatmVty D I V E R S I TY C A N E N H A N C E creativity and innovation. It can broaden and deepen the reservoir of ~skilIls, taleiits, ideas, work styles, aiid professional and community net- works upon which an organization can draw. 4 Trhis becomes increasingly important as organizations address more complex problems and seek to respond nimbly to rapid changes and new opportunities in their environments. Enhancing innovation and cre- ativit,v is obviously of central and specific importance to research organizations such as 0: ~~~~~~~the Centers. Diversity in perspectives, knowledge and experiences derives from discipli- > ~~~~~~~nary and professional training and occupation specialization. But, it also derives from u ~~~~~~~~diverse dermographic characteristics, siich as age, race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, elass 8~~~~~~K> and sexual orientation, which shape the life experiences, expectations and world views of individuals.S "In short, (group identities) provide the lenses through which people view and experience their world" (Thompson and Cooler, 1996:404). With respect to working with diversity in practice, research on the link between diversity and innovation has shown mixed results. Results vary depending on the diminenisions of diversity examined, the type of task, the tiiie frame for the project, the proportional rep- resentation of different groups, and the organizational context.6 At the macro organiza- tional level, several studies have shown positive correlation between innovation and the systematic use of heterogeneous worlforces and management teams in terms of function- al specialization, age and sector experience.7 Most of the research on the relationislhip between diversity, on the one hand, anid inniovation and creativity, on the other, has been conducted on teams or work groups. The research on a variety of dimensions of diversity shows that, in general, diverse groups excel in generating a wide range of high quality ideas and alternative solutions in problem-solving and decision-making. However, they perform less well than homogeneous groups in generating final solutions.8 The research further suggests that in more complex and long-term tasks, such as those typ- ical of research, the bencfits of diversity for innovation and creativity can best be realized when diversity is addressed specifically and group processes are managed to ensure inclu- sion, mediation of conflict and transparent decision-making.9 Research conduicted byWat- son, et al. (1993) illustrates this point. They examined the inipact of racial-ethnic diversi- I K 1 l ty on the performance of teams undertaking complex tasks over a long period. The teams were given periodic feedback and coaching on their team process and performance over I the duration of the task. They found that, initially, homogeneous teams had more effec- tive team processes and higher performance than the teams with diverse membership. t < _ -- However, by the end of the task period, the two groups reported equally effective team processes an(d overall performance was the same. Consistent with other research, the diverse teams scored significantly higher on the breadth of perspectives and alternatives generated for problem-solving. These findings reflect the challenge of working with diversity. While diversity broadens the resource pool of ideas, perspectives, knowledge and work styles, it can also reduce team cohesion, complicate communication and heighten conflict (sec below). Recent research from Jehn, et al. suggests that shared values that are related to the task or the work to be carried out can reduce the potential for conflicts in diverse groups. These shared values, which are often found in mission-based organizations suchi as the Centers, provide a foundation from whiclh iiemiibers can engage in "the difficult and conflictual process that may lead to innovative performance" (Jehn, et al., forthcoming: 37). Strengthen?ng partnersNps0 aikces and teams INCREASINCLY, ORGANIZATIONS ARE using project teams and strategic 2 partnerships to address complex work challenges, access broader pools of knowledge, 0 reach a wider range of clients, respond to their environments with more flexibility, and z 9 Motive forces for attending to diversity * Enhancing innovation, creativity and prob- * Enhancing operational effectiveness. lem-solving. Organizations are seeking to Experience has shown that a focus on diversity is expand the knowledge resources and perspectives often a catalyst for reviewing established opera- available for addressing problems, developing tions and management systems and identifying innovative approaches and solutions, and identify- opportunities for improving their effectiveness and ing new opportunities. efficiency. New systems developed to make global . Strengthening collaborative modes of operations more effective often open up new working. Organizations are relying increasingly ways of thinking and working. on work tasks and strategies that bring people * Promoting social justice and equity. Many together to produce a common or interrelated set organizations hold social justice and equity as a of products or services. The need to work effec- core value. For social and economic development tively with diversity is accentuated with the organizations, social justice is often central to greater interdependence among members of their mission. These organizations focus on diversi- teams, partnerships and alliances. ty because they believe that they need to align . Gaining broader access to clients, benefici- their values and foster equity both within their aries, investors, and other stakeholders. organization as well as in their programs, products, Organizations committed to innovation and and services. impact are seeing diversity as instrumental to tap- * Responding to organizational mandates and ping into new knowledge networks, gaining access directives. Some organizations take on diversity to new clients, markets or bases of operation, or initiatives in response to priorities established by attracting new types of investors or stakeholders. boards, funders, clients or other stakeholders. This * Responding to changing work force demo- type of external pressure can also include graphics. Organizations committed to recruiting responding to legal pressures and mandates, such high quality staff are responding in a systematic as complying with governmental mandates and way to the changing composition of the work country laws against discrimination. force. Changes reflect expanding globalization and * Excelling in performance and industry repu- increased participation of women and members of tation. Organizations are increasingly viewing other social groups that have historically suffered their work with diversity as a critical factor in from discrimination in diverse countries of the establishing their reputations as progressive and world. innovative places to work in the industry. This in I Improving retention of high quality staff. turn strengthens their ability to attract the "best Organizations seeking to retain high quality staff and the brightest" in competitive global and in a competitive marketplace are investing signifi- national markets. cantly in creating work environments that are supportive for staff of diverse backgrounds. Significant savings accrue from reduced turnover. improve quality and quantity of work outputs. 1' The movement towards teams and part- nerships accentuates issues of managing diversity because it brings together people of diverse backgrounds and areas of expertise who have become accustomed to working independently or in clear hierarchical relationships. 1 l 'he opportunities technology now offers for "virtual" teams also increases the frequency and means by which people of diverse backgrounds are brought together to share information and work on common problemils. 12 The moveinent towards partnerships further accentuates diversity by bring- ing together people who not only have diverse backgrounds and areas of expertise, but also come from different organizations with distinct traditions, cultures and operating systems.i3 10 As noted above, diversity within these collaborative arrangements creates a paradox. On the one hand, it is the driving force for collaboration-the desire to bring diverse perspectives, knowledge and experiences to bear on complex problems and opportuni- ties. On the other hand, it raises significant challenges for managing collaborationl anld optimizing performance. The very differences Chat enriclh the potential for teams and partnerships to inniovate and do new kinds of work are the same differences that can untdermiinle team cohesion, member satisfaction and overall team functioning.'4 This correlation between team diversity and reduced team cohesion has been found for dif- ferent dimensions of diversity, including age, tenure, functional and disciplinary spe- cialization, as well as race and ethnicity. Diversity in gender has yielded mixed results.15 McGrath, et al. (1995) gives three explanations for the impact of diversity on group or team interaction. The first is based on what Sessa and Jackson (1995) call one of the most robust principles in psychology-that people are attracted to others with similar atti- tudes. " Since group cohesion is defined by the attraction of members to others in their group, homogeneous groups will be more cohesive. The second is that demographic dif- ferences (e.g., race, nationality, gender, sexual orientation) evoke expectations by other group members that can result in in-group biasing and stereotyping of others. 7 And third, members of different demographic categories come to the group with varying statuses and levels of power. These are based on differential access to resources and influence b)oth within the organization and in the larger society. Members of dominlant gr'oups have greater influence in shaping interactions and outcomes. Members of subordinate groups may lose their voice and becomre marginalized within the group."8 Steps that have been found to mitigate such "process losses" include: explicitly recognizing differences rather thani ignoring themii; building shared values and norms; defining superordinate goals for the group; establishing process and decision-making rules; reducing hierarchy and status differenices; sharing power; providing external feedback to the group on team functioning; enstrirng group accountability; fostering equal participation and mutual respect; and developing effective communications. In sum, the research on diversity in teams and work groups is quite consistent in showing that while heterogeneous teams may have the potential for higher performance, they tend to have less cohesion and function less effectively than homogeneous groups. Again, the research suggests that negative impacts are reduced and benefits enhanced when explicit attention is given to ensuring effective group process.21' Adler (1986:111), reflecting on the interaction of cultural diversity on work team performance in international settings, underscores the importance of working intentionally with diversity: Highly productive and less productive teams dijfer in hot wthey-manage their diversity, not, as is common1y believed, in the presence or absence of diversi- ty. Whenwell managed, diversitybecomesaprodutctiveresource to the team. When ignored, dtverstty causes process problems that diminish the team's productivity. Since diversity is more frequently ignored than managed, cul- o turally diverse teams often perform below expecta.tions and below the orga- nization 's norms. C 11 Ga3ng broader access to chents9 hvestors end other stkehokders A S O R G A N I Z AT I0 N S R E S P O N D to changing demographics in the countries in which they operate and/or become more global, they see diversity as a means to enhance their ability to gain access to new markets or bases of operation, respond effec- tively to new clients or beneficiaries, and engage new types of investors or stakeholders. Many organizations want to ensure that they have staff with relevant knowledge of the locations in which they are working and mechanisms to use that knowledge in strategic and operational decision-making. They also want to ensure that the diversity of their clients is represented when they are designing, evaluating, marketing and delivering services and products.2' Diversity can also enhance an organization's ability to interact with and respond effectively to its environment.22 Greater diversity among staff mem- bers' networks makes it more likely that information of strategic importance will be brought to the organization in a timely way and that a greater number of potential clients and investors will learn about the organization. Competence in working with diversity is also becoming increasingly important as an asset for attracting and develop- ing international strategic partnerships, which is an issue of particular importance with- in the CGIAR.23 While all of this is highly beneficial to an organization, research and experience have shown that care must be taken to ensure that the diverse staff members, who are recruit- ed to help develop new markets, expand the client base or develop new regional activities, do not get marginalized as niche contributors.24 Often the ability of these staff to move up or move horizontally in an organization is constrained because top managers see their competence lying in their regional or client expertise, not in the full set of skills and com- petencies they bring to the organization. Responding to changhng work force demographics THE COMPOSITION OF THE WORK FORCE in countriesaroundthieworld has altered dramatically in the past two decades.25 The most dramatic change has been in gender composition. Women have moved increasingly into the formal employment sector and upward into professional and managerial positions. Related to this trend is the dra- matic rise in dual career couples. In addition, with globalization, the immigration of eth- nic groups and improved career opportunities for ethnic or racial minorities, organiza- tions in many countries are increasingly engaged in recruiting high quality staff from diverse pools around the world. Age diversity is also becoming more pronounced in organ- izations as workers retire later.26 In international agricultural research, specifically, the participation of women professionals as well as male and female scientists from develop- ing countries has increased dramatically since the 1970s.27 12 The change in demographics has direct implications for recruiting practices. Many organ- izations recognize that being able to attract and retain the best talent available in the world market is critical to maintaining excellence in staffing and competitive advantage. Developing a reputation as a supportive place for staff members of diverse backgrounds to develop their careers is a valuable asset when competing for high quality talent.28 mprovlng retention of hgh quaHty staff ORGANIZATIONS OFTEN GIVE PRIORITY to recruitment in their diversity efforts. However, retention is equally, if not more, important. Organizations that have sought to work effectively with diversity have learned that it takes more than simply incor- porating people of different backgrounds, areas of cxpertise and perspectives, and assum- ing that they will fit. Often significant changes in management systems, work practices and organizational norms and values are needed to create work environments in which all employees feel valued and supported in making their fullest contribution.29 If diversity is not attended to and such changes are not made, retention can become a problem. Orga- nizations can incur significant costs from higher than average attritioni and absentee rates for non-dominant employees.30 Employees who do not feel valued or supported, or whose values and work norms differ from those dominant in the organization, generally have less commitment to the organi- zation. The dominant group may bc dcfined, for example, by social identity (e.g. race or gender), culturc or nationality, function, or discipline. The dominance can be shaped by proportional representation, the extent to which a specific group holds power, or the extent to which a group (or groups) defines the cultural norms and values of the organi- zation. Research consistently documents higher turnover rates for employees who are dif- ferent from the dominant group across a range of dimensions, including age, teriure, gen- der, race, ethnicity, nationality, occupational specialization or educational backgrouand.3' Similar patterns have been fotnd for tie relationship between diversity and absen- teeism.32 In more heterogeneous environments. individuals also tend to accentuate those cultural and behavior aspects that identify them as members of a specific group (e.g. their nationality, gender or race).33 Interestingly, research has also shown that as organizations or work groups become more diverse, even at modest levels, members of the dominant group also experience psychological discomfort and reduced commitment.34 As a result of these group dynamics, Cox (1993) found that culturally heterogeneous groups often per- \v I | ceive their work environments as less hospitable. Thiese patterns reflect the tendency dis- cussed above for individuals to identify with those who are similar to them on some per- sonal attributes. This identification in turn increases attraction, enhances communica- tion and reduces conflict, all of which foster cohesion and commitment to the group.35 _ > ~~~Greater cohesion and commitment rcducc attrition. High attrition rates result in obvious costs of recruiting and replacing employees who leave. For example, at Corning Incorporated in the United States, women and people of color were resigning at twice the rate of white men. Corning estimated the cost of replac- o 13 ing them was $2 to $4 million per year. 36 Similarly, Deloitte and Touche, LLP, a global accounting and consulting firm, launched its well-known Initiative for the Retention and Advancement of Women specifically to reduce the 30 percent annual attrition rate of wormiern. The coumipany estimates that their success in cutting the attrition rate by half and retaining more high quality women translated into a 10 percent increase in profitability for the partnership.37 Turnover also results in the less tangible, but potentially more significant, cost of losing valuable knowledge and experience pertinent to the organization's business. This is par- ticularly significant for professional firms or research organizations where the tacit knowl- edge of individuals is the organization's primary asset. For example, the CGIAR Centers reported a reasonable average annual attrition rate of 12 perwent for interntationially- recruited staff as a group between 1995-97. However, the attrition rate for scientists was much higher at 23 percent.38 This represents a very high cost in the loss of tacit research knowledge to the Centcrs. It also represents a significant operational cost of an estimated US$3.6 million.39 It would be very useful to examine the diversity aspects of this high attri- tion rate. 40 In sum, diversity in work groups creates challenges for building commitment and cohe- sionI, particularly in cases where one group is dominant and other groups are seen as "the other" who are expected to fit into the dominant culture. The challenge is to create work environments that foster cohesion in the context of diversity. These are workplaces where norms are negotiated and policies, work practices and systems are sufficiently flexible to support people of diverse backgrounds and different ways of working and succeeding. Enhlnang operatinOa[ effectvenk(ss RESEARCH AND EXPERIENCE HAVE SHOWN that a focus on diversity is often a catalyst for reviewing established operations and management systems and identi- fying opportunities for improving their effectiveness and efficiency. It stimulates new ways of looking at established processes and often reveals innovative avenues for improve- ment.41 Moreover, as organizations become more global, they are compelled to become more flexible and fluid in order to respond to diverse, complex and changing environ- ilents.42 Policies and procedures are broadened and operating procedures become less standardized as they are adapted to different contexts. Firms that possess healthy multicultural envir-0on17ments will be much more likely to be able to respond to new pressures. Suchfirms will also be more like- ly to avoid the view that there is only one way to achieve success. (KOSSEK AND LOBEL, 1996:15) A useful illustration comes from a large global technology company that redesigned its entire employee benefit package based on an analysis it carried out to develop domestic partner benefits for gay and lesbian employees.43 The analysis revealed that few employ- Ll ees lived in the model family on which the company's long-standing benefits program had 14 been based (breadwinner with spouse at home or working a secondary job and two chil- dren). Moreover, many employees had dependents outside of their immediate families wholm thiey wished to cover tinder their benefits policies. These data showed that the ben- efits policy was based on outdated assumptions of families that were inaappropriate not only for gay and lesbian employees, but also for many other employees. In response, the company instituted a "cafeteria-style" benefits policy that kept costs bounded. but maxi- mized flexibility and responsiveness to employees' specific needs. In another example from Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo (CIM- MYT), the analysis of work practices through a gender lens revealed deeply entrenched norms that were undermining effective communications up and down the hierarchy and across worlc grouEps. Changes introduced were seen to enhance organizational effective- ness througlh the greater inclusiorn of relevant expertise in strategic decision-making, clearer understandings of and support for management decisions, anid stronger feelinigs of inclusion and commitment by a wide range of staff.44 Similar improvements have been documented across the CGIAR Centers for changes stimulated by gender concerns in recruitment practices, promotion critcria, job categorization, performance appraisal and spouse employment policies.45 Promotng socl& justlice and equity A COMMITMENT TO SOCIAL JUSTICE and equity is a driving force behind many organizations' efforts to work with diversity.46 For corporations this may represent a core value. For developmcnt and social changc organizations, social justice and equity are often central to their mission and integral to their work. These organizations focus on diversity because they are seeking to achieve greater congruence between their mission and values and the realities of their internal culture, structures and work practices.47 We have learned from work on gender that the organizations that have been most successful in addressing gender equity in their research and/or programming areas have also made an explicit commitment to address gender issues within their own workplace. The impor- tance of congruenit values would apply to other dimiienlsionis of diversity as well. Both external and internal stakeholders can exert pressure on organizations to integrate diversity into a change agenda. For cxamplc, sevcral CGIAR leaders have argued explicit- ly that, given its humanitarian mandate, its concern for equity and its international char- acter, the CGIAR System should be providing leadership in creating work environments that are gender equitable and culturally pluralistic. They believe that this will benefit the Centers as well as the staff who work within them.48 This echoes the findings of recent researclh conrducted in more thani 40 mianufacturing organizationis in tlhe UJnite(d States.49 The study indicates that workplace practices that promoted worker participation and involvement in decision-making produced benefits such as increased productivity, better financial performance and higher target wages for workers, as well as reduced inventory, space requirements and excess labor costs. These findings suggest that economic fairness and political justice in the workplace can also enhance organizational performance. 0 15 Respond'ng to orgaMxatdonai mandates nd dkectvs CLEARLY A DRIVING FORCE FOR ORGANIZATIONS in many Western countries (and countries such as South Africa and Australia5" that are seeking to counteract histories of oppression) to work with diversity has been the legal require- ments for equal opportunity and appropriate representation of members of groups that have previously suffered (liscrimination, such as women and people of color. In other contexts, organizationis have begun to work with diversity in response to exter- nal pressure from stakeholders, investors or activist groups in the society advocating for equity in opportunities fDr people of diverse social and cultural backgrounds.51 Experience has shown that external support and, in some cases, pressure for equal opportunitics for diverse employees is an important motivator for organizations to address diversity. The caution emerging from these experiences, however, is that when organizations are responding to external mandates and pressures alone, they tend to focus solely on issues of representation, or what Kossek and T,obel (1996) call "diversity enlargement." The focus on numbers, while useful for monitoring change, does not necessarily lead to the kind of in-depth inquiry and sustained organization- al chanuge required to work with diversity in a comprehensive and meaningful way (see Chapter IV). Exceng M prformance and Mdustry reputath(:n ORGANIZATIONS ARE INCREASINGLY viewingtheirworkwithdiversityasa critical factor in establislhinig their reputation as high performing, progressive and inno- vative places to work in the industry. Some recent research has shown a positive corrcla- tioin between diversity and the economic performance of companies.52 This reputation in turn strengthens their ability to attract the "best and the brightest" in competitive global and national markets. In the United States, for example, many major companies seek actively to bc recognized through nationally-recognized awards as the best places for women and/or people of color to work. A good illustration of how organizations connect diversity and industry reputation comes from the International Monetary Fund's (1999:2) policy on diversity: The Fund is highly regarded for its economic expertise and technical work. To maintain the excellence in its technical quality, the Fund must strive to achieve and preserve the same high standards in its management and lead- ership, including excelUence in diversity -management. In order to be an 'employer offirst choice"for the strongest candidates, as well as for current staff the Fund is committed to serving as a modelfor professionalism, adapt- < ability diversity (and)fairness. u 16 To build a reputation as a supportive and stimulating place for people of diverse back- grounds to work and succeed, organizations need to ensure that diversity is reflected at all levels of the hierarchy, as well as horizontally across departments and operational areas. Potential employees need to be able to see staffing patterns and conclude that they will be able to take on meaningful work and advance in the organization no matter what their race, sex, nationality or sexual orientation. A diverse leadership group suggests that an organization has drawn a wide pool of talent up through its ranks and is opening itself to a variety of views and ideas.53 In contrast, if the top management of the organization is populated largely by people of similar backgrounds and areas of expertise, this signals that only certain types of people can succeed. This is still an issue for the CGIAR, for example, where in 1998, 70 percent of the leadership positions were filled by white W`estern men. 54 Organizations such as the Centers can enhance their reputations as innovative and inclu- sive organizations by ensuring that they have representation of women and men of diverse racial and national backgrounds from countries of the North and South across all levels of the hierarchy. Summay IN SUMMARY, THERE ARE STRONG motive forces for organizations to address diversity. These reflect commitment to both equity and excellence. As is clear from the research and experience reviewed in this chapter, diversity can bring significant benefits to organizations. But, diversity also brings challenges. The clear lesson from this review is that diversity is unlikely to lead to improved organizational performance or equity unless it is recognized explicitly as an asset and is worked with intentionally and systematically throughout all aspects and areas of the organization. To integrate work on diversity into the fabric of the organization, staff and managers need to reflect oni anid be very explicit about why thiey are addressing diversity and wvhat outcomes they expect. Without such clarity, it will be difficult to overcome resistance to change and sustain commitment to the diversity efforts. The motive forces reviewed in this chapter provide a starting point for the CGIAR Centers to develop their strategic rationale for working with diversity. In the fol- lowing chapter, we provide a framework to help the Centers reflect on how they want to define diversity, given their strategic objectives for working with diversity and the specific context(s) in which they are operating. 1 1 7 11 'd31dVHD CO C H APT E R H [ h o 1tX 0X2 g } ' E L$t X /J,~~~~~7 ZI/~~~~~~~~~~~1 -: l 7, / ,,K / / Z/.~~~ LZ'.- enses ON d- ver-fty xxIS TO >NE-AN PPROACHAND UNDERSTANDING OF DIVERSITY APPRO- 7~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ION.~~~' While there are many aspects of diversity, we believe it is iimportant for an organization to focus on those aspects that are iiiost salient for its mission, its strategic organizational objectives, its work, its historical context and its operational objectives for working with diversity. For example, an organization with a largely western, Caucasian, male profes- sional work force may elect to focus on working with gender diversity or functional diver- sity during the initial stages of a diversity initiative. Alternatively, an organization that has recently had a significant change in the composition of its staff by race and ethnicity may elect to focus on that aspect of diversity first. Diversity in international organizations, such as the CGIAR, is among theTnnost co mplex. Staff members are diverse along multiple dirnensions of identity. Stakeholders, partners, clients and beneficiaries represent a wide range of c ultural, social, economic and political systems. And, the Centers' work is tar- geted to a plurality of regions and couintrics with diverse agro-ecological and socio-eco- nomic conditions. This is why it is so important to tailor a diversity initiative to a specifie context. To assist the CGIAR Centers in developing an operational definition of diversity and selecting an approach that is most relevant, we have synthesized the literature and expe- rience on diversity into three primary approaclies, or lenses. 0 Social differences lens - focuses on differences shaped by membership in identity groups that reflect salient social categories. 0 Cultural differences tons - focuses on cultural differences of diverse nationalities or ethnic groups. - o~~~~~~~ Cognitive-functional lens - focuses on diversity in task-related krnowledge, skills s ~~~~~~~~~and experiences as well as di fferences in styles bv which individuals access informa- < I ~~~~~~~~~tion and acqluire kinowledge. 20 These leises represent distinct and major streams of work on diversity. 'When focused on organizations, all of these lenses help to shine light on how differences in group affilia- tion affect the organization's work culture, systems and work practices, as well as its social relations. They also reveal the effect on the behavior, and work and career outcomes of individual staff ineiiibers. The lenses differ primiiarily in thie types of group differenices treated. Each lens illuminates specific dimensions of diversity and occludes others, as in a figure ground in which one image is predominant over another depending on the angle of viewing. The variations in emphasis of the three lenses can be seen through definitions of diversity employed (see Box 2). Below we describe each lens with a discussion of the major ways in which it has been applied in organizations and our assessment of its specific advantages and disadvantages. We conclude with a section on strategic issues that need to be considered when selecting and using any of these lenses for working on diversity. SocWal differences ens T H E S O C I A L D I F F E R E N C E S L E N S focuses on identities, specifically identities that are based on membership in groups that reflect salient social categories, such as race, gender, ethnicity, class, age or sexual orientation. These are categories that can be viewed as socially marked or valenced, meaning that they are significant in shaping how societies are organized and how individuals within societies categorize themselves and others.55 Often these categories shape tie dlistribiitiorn of roles, power, opporhtiilites aid resources in societies. As a result, in many societies, these identity categories are "legislated" to pre- vent discrimination and ensure equal opportunities.56 The social differences lens draws primarily on the fields of sociology and organizational behavior. It reflects three primary streams of research and practice: 1) social identity the- ory; 2) race and gender research and practice; and 3) organizational demography.57 This lens foci]ses on how differences among group identities affect social relations, work behaviors, distribution of opportunities and work outcomes in organizations. The lens recognizes that "individuals do not leave their racial, gender or ethnic identities at the door when they enter an organization" (Nkomo and Cox, 1996:342). A clear concept of identity is fundamental to this lens. Alderfer and Hlurtado both offer useful definitions: an (identity) group (is a group) whose members ... have participated in equivalent historical experiences, are currently subjected to similar social forces, and as a result have consonant world views. (ALDERFER, 1987) 0 Social identity is deemed as those aspects of the individual's self-identity that derive from one's knowledge of being part of categories and groups, together =with the value and emotional significance attached to those memberships. (HURTADO, 1997:307) z 21 Definitions of diversity using different lenses SOCIAL DDWFERENCES LENS "The term multicultural diversity competence refers to the ability to demonstrate respect and "Diversity refers to diversity in identities based on understanding, to communicate effectively, and to membership in social and demographic groups and work collaboratively with people from different how differences in identities affect social relations in cultural backgrounds". (GARCIA, 1995) organizations. We define diversity as a mixture of peo- ple with different group identities within the same social system". (NKOMO AND COX, 1996:338) "Diversity focuses on issues of racism, sexism, het- COGiNMlT)VE-FUINlCTlOhlAL LEHS erosexism, classism, ableism, and other forms of dis- crimination at the individual, identity group, and "Cgiiedvestyouesosh a pol aei c n n i g sys- information, the way they internalize the information tem lvl"(COETand analyze it, and the way they apply the informa- "Diversity should be understood as the varied per- tion. Cognitive diversity embraces the spectrum of spectives and approaches to work that members of styles by which individuals acquire knowledge. At the different identity groups bring". heart of cognitive diversity is the appreciation and (THOMAS AND ELY, 1996:80) acceptance of differences in perceiving, reasoning, and "The concept of diversity.., can encompass a problem solving". (IDEA CONNECTIONS, TRAINING broad range of differences. ... But it is those features MATERIALS, COPYRIGHT PROTECTED) that make us like some specified group of people and "New sources of diversity from within the organi- different than other groups that constitute the princi- zation (include) employees from nontraditional lines pal thrust of much (of the) current work on diversity of business, functions that have an historically subor- in organizations. Thus, diversity in organizations is typ- dinate role, or a newly acquired subsidiary with a dis- ically seen to be composed of variations in race, gen- tinctive culture". (KOSSEK AND LOBEL, 1996:2) der, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, physica. abilities, social class, age, and other socially meaning- ful categorizations, together with the additional differ- ences caused by orsignified by these markers (emphasis R EllTIOhlS added)". (FERDMAN, 1995:37) Diversity among people reflects the many character- istics that make us who we are, including nationality, race, culture, ethnic background, gender, age, religion, CULTURAL UFFERENCES LENS native language, physical ability, sexual orientation, education, and profession. "Diversity exists both within and among cultures; (INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND, 1999) however, within a single culture certain behaviors are "Diversity refers to any mixture of items character favored and others repressed. The norm for a society is ized by differences and similarities ...Diversity refers the most common and generally acceptable pattern of to the cobiective (all-indusive) mixture of differences values, attitudes, and behavior. ... A cultural orientation to t c ( m o describes the attitudes of most of the people most of and similarities along a given dimension". the time, not all of the people all of the time. Accurate (THOMAS, 1995:246) stereotypes reflect societal or cultural norms". (ADLER, 1986:17) Hurtado emphasizes that identity is partially defined through the relationships among diverse groups. She sees social identity as shaped by both social categorization and social comparison in which characteristics of one group (e.g., status or power) achieve signifi- cance in relation to perceived differences from other groups. Drawing on the various streams of theory and practice that inform the social identity lens, we have distilled five elements that are critical when using this lens to work withi diversity u 22 so~~~~~~i organizations: ° identitics are socially constructed; o identity is multidimensional; o identity is defined by self-identification as well as categorization by others; o social categories and identities embody differences in power and privi]ege; and o identities shape cognition, experiences, world views and perspectives. The following sections offer an expanded explanation of these five elements. IDENTITIES ARE SOCIALLY CONSTRUCTED Identity is not innate or essential, but socially constructed.58 Identity is defined by the cul- tural, historical, social and political context in which an in(dividual or a group is operat- ihg. It is this context that shapes the meaning and import of different social categorics and the experiences of members who identify with specific groups. For example, the identity df being black in South Africa is constructed very differently from that of being black in Ethiopia where there has not been a potent legacy of colonial oppression and apartheid. The differences in social construction of black identity in these two contexts will result in different identity experiences for individuals and have different impacts on the opportu- iiities available to them. As Cock and Bernstein (1988:23) argue, "Considering differ- ences in an ahistorical, sociopolitical vacuum lacks any explanatory power, and renders 'diversity' an empty concept." The socially constructed nature of group identities can result ill structural differences in societies and organizations that create privilege for some and disadvantage for others.59 Gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, class, religion and age are all identity cate- gories that have operated in this way across different social and historical contexts. Apply- ing this lens in an organizational context helps to illuminate the source and impact of both overt and subtle structural differences on work and career outcomes of members of different identity groups. Historically this has been the dominant focus of scholars and practitioners using this lens. However, it is important to stress that social construction of identity also shapes the cognitions, experiences, perspectives, values and world views of people belonging to specific identity groups. 6t In this way, this lens also illuminates "tlhe varied perspectives and approaches to work that members of different identity groups bring by virtue of their different life experiences" (Thomas and Ely, 1996:80). This vari- ety in perspectives and experiences is a knowledge asset that organizations are increasing- ly trying to leverage (see Chapter II). 2 IDENTITIES ARE MULTIDIMENSIONAL Identity is multifaceted and fluid. Individuals have multiple identities and "identities intersect to create an amalgamated identity" (Nkomo and Cox, 1996).hl How identities interact and which aspects of identity are salient depend on the organizational context in which the person or group is functioning. Hence, being a foreign national might become a salient dimension of one's identity in a work group or organization where the majority z 23 of members represent a single nationality. But in a multicultural work group of profes- sionals from similar fields, the individual's age or gender identity might be a more pro- found marker of difference or similarity. Similarly, individuals within social groups and across different contexts differ in the relative importance they assign to any particlular social identity based on their self-concept.62 Attention to the multifaceted nature of identity has important implications for working with diversity in organizations. It focuses attention on the variability of experiences amonig people sharirng one cornmon dimension of identity such as gender, but differing in other dimensions such as ethnicity or race. It also underscores the complexity and chal- lenge of working with diversity in organizations. Research in the United States and South Africa, for example, shows how women of color and working class women tend to be "dis- appeared" in organizational change efforts aimed at promoting gender equity (see Box 3).63 Issues, experiences and concerns of white, middle-class, heteriosexual and professional women as the dominant identity group have tended to capture the change agenda. Even among professional women as a group, the experiences of white women have overshad- owed those of women of color.64 The lesson is that when multiple identities are not attend- ed to, the experiences of some groups inevitably become marginalized and silenced. Recognizing multiple dimensions of identity also helps us understand why it is often dif- ficult to form alliances among members of diverse identity groups along a single dimen- sion of identity, such as gender or race.65 For example, focusing again on gender, the expe- riences and priority concerns of women at upper and lower levels of the hierarchy in organizations are usually very different. Women at senior levels may focus on "glass ceil- ing" issues of advancemrent, opportunities for mentoring and access to informal networks. Women at the lower levels may focus on issues of support for childcare, work schedule flexibility, sexual harassment and salary parity. Blindness to these differences sets up false expectations of shared interests as the basis for forming coalitions for change (see Box 3). 3 IDENTITY IS DEFINED BY SELF AND OTHERS Identity is defined relationally. It is a category with which individuals identify and a cate- gory to which others assign the individual.66 It is important to recognize that not all indi- viduals within a group view a specific dimension of identity in die same way or as equally important. Regarding categorization by others, it is important to understand that even when people do not self-identify with particular identity groups, others often categorize them as belonging to those groups, especially when physical or other markers are visible.67 This, in turn, can affect others' expectations of an individual's values, work practices or interpersonal styles (whether or not these are justified). These dyaiiiics can be thought of in terms of stereotyping, schemas and dominant group identities. Stereotyping Stereotyping is the most blatant result of identitv defined by others. Stereotyping is the < u process of making generalizations about a person or a group based on a perceived difference 24 m Implications of multiple dimensions of identity for ° fostering gender equity in organizations - Case examples THE FOLLOWING TWO EXAMPLES FOCUS ON ISSUES OF WORK-PERSONAL LIFE INTEGRATION. THEY ILLUSTRATE THE CHALLENGES AND IMPORTANCE OF WORKING WITH MULTIPLE DIMENSIONS OF IDENTITY IN DIVERSITY INITIATIVES. ORGANIZATIONAL INTERVENTIONS AIMED AT FOSTERING GENDER EQUITY CAN HAVE VARIED IMPACTS ON DIFFERENT GROUPS OF WOMEN DEPENDING, FOR EXAMPLE, ON THEIR RACE OR CLASS. RACE AND GENDER RACE AMD CENDER ]MbTERSECT(OII$S, USA DhITERSECTAOIk$. SOUTH AIFRICA Ely and Meyerson (1998:3) illustrate how aspects of Marks (forthcoming) illustrates the impact of multiple identity, such as race and ethnicity, shape some dimensions of identity on a gender equity initiative in women's experiences in the organization differently a parastatal in South Africa. As a part of its organiza- from others: "atthough women of alt ethnicities had tional transformation process after the dismantling of difficulty moving ahead, the patterns of derailment apartheid, the organization reviewed its internal struc- were different for white women than for women of tures and operating systems. In response to equity color. In particular, stereotypes about white women- concerns raised by a women's forum, management that they are organized, efficient and productive-kept created two positions: a gender coordinator for the them in front-office, nine-to-five, staff jobs. In con- Gender Unit and an officer for the Affirmative Action trast, stereotypes about women of color-that they Unit. The two units were expected to integrate their are [ess productive but more willing to work nontradi- work as far as possible. Over time, however, the racial tional hours-kept them in equally low-level staff jobs, differences among women in the organization became but doing the kinds of behind-the-scenes, around-the- more visible and expticit. The work of the Gender Unit clock work that the organization ostensibly required and the women's forum became associated with the to keep it running smoothly. Needless-to-say, these issue of white women, who were generally at higher two forms of 'ghettoization" had different impacts on levels of the organization. Black secretaries, for exam- the two groups of women. Although both groups were ple, did not feel that "real issues" of career advance- essentially sealed in dead-end jobs, these placements ment, salaries and work schedules that they found created more childcare problems for women of color most pressing were being addressed by the Gender than for white women, whose nine-to-five jobs made Unit. At the same time, the work of the Affirmative it easier for them to rely on traditional childcare Action Unit focused on issues of black staff, but here arrangements. Women of color were absent from work women were a less privileged constituency than men. more often than their white counterparts because of Again, their priority issues were not at the top of the the difficulties they had finding reliable, affordable change agenda. Because both these "disappearing" childcare during their work hours, which further rein- processes focused on gender as white and race as forced the perception of them as less efficient and masculine, women of color and the issues that less productive." concerned them most remained marginal in the organization. and little information about them. But it is important to remember that the process of cate- gorizing is often subtle and unconscious, based on an insdiviiuial's past experiences with members of a specific identity group or cultural and familial learning that have been part of their socialization process. The more comtipelitive the relationship between the in-group and out-group, the more niegative the stereotypes that each group has about the other.68 Schemas Valian (1998), in her concept of schemas, stresses that we all carry a set of implicit, or U unconscious, hypotheses about different social groups. We draw on these hypothcscs, or cognitive frameworks, to categorize new individuals. These schemas also shape our expec- 25 tations of people of different identity grouips, our evaluation of their work and our inter- pretations of their behaviors. Schemas are natural ways of organizing the world. Howev- er, as long as they operate at the unconsciou]s aiid unarticulated level, they inadvertently influence our interpretation and evaluation of othiers' behaviors in either an overly posi- tive or negative manner. For example, Ferrari (1972). studying international teams in an intergovernmental organization, found that schemas about people from developed or developing countries defined perceptions of competence. At the forrtlation of new teams, individuals a priori assessed those members who were from developed coultries as more competent and qualified. Once people had worked together in team context, these iinplic- it rankings disappeared.69 Alderfer (1992), in a long-term study on race relations in a major corporation in the United States, shows how race schemas shape staff perceptions of equity of opportunities in advancement. He found, for example, that the vast majority of white women and men agreed with the statement that "Qualified blacks are promoted Making white privilege visible "WHITE PRIVILEGE: UNPACKINC THE INVISIBLE KNAPSACK" IS A POWERFUL REFLECTIVE ESSAY BY PEGGY MCINTOSH (1990). ASA FEMINIST SCHOLAR AND PRACTITIONER SEEKING TO UNDERSTAND THE INVISIBILI- TY OF MALE PRIVILEGE, SHE ADOPTED THE VIEWPOINT OF A WHITE PERSON AND UNDERTOOK A REFLEC- TIVE EXAMINATION OF HER OWN UNEARNED PRIVILEGE,AS AWHITE PERSON IN THE UNITED STATES. SHE RECOGNIZED THAT AS A WHITE PERSON SHE HAD BEEN TAUGHT ABOUT RACISM AS SOMETHING THAT PUTS OTHERS AT A DISADVANTAGE. SHE HAD NOT BEEN TAUGHT TO SEE THE COROLLARY THAT WHITE PRIVILEGE IS SOMETHING THAT PUT HER AT AN ADVANTAGE. SHE CONCLUDES THAT WHITES ARE CAREFUL- LY TAUGHT NOT TO RECOGNIZE WHITE PRIVILEGE, JUST AS MEN ARE TAUGHT NOT TO RECOGNIZE MALE PRIVILEGE, "FOR ME WHITE PRIVILEGE HAS TURNED OUTTO BEAN ELUSIVE AND FUGITIVE SUBJECT.THE PRESSURETO AVOID IT IS GREAT, FOR IN FACING IT I MUST GIVE UPTHE MYTH OF MERITOCRACY." To make privilege visibLe and tangible, she constructed a list of 50 advantages that she experiences on a daily basis as a white person in the United States, including the following: * I can open the front page of the paper and see e I am never asked to speak for all the people of my people of my race widely represented. racial group. * I can be pretty sure of having my voice heard in a e I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk to the group in which I am the only member of my race. "person in charge," I will be facing a person of my e I can be casual about whether or not to Listen to race. another person's voice in a group in which s/he is a If I have low credibility as a leader, I can be sure the only member of his/her race. that my race is not the problem. * I can do well in a challenging situation without e I can take a job with an affirmative action being called a credit to my race. employer without having co-workers on the job suspect that I got it because of my race. McIntosh and other scholars argue that white privilege and other forms of dominance, such as male privilege or the privilege conferred to nationals of countries in the North, are embedded in the social and organizational systems that we take for granted. "I was taught to see racism only in individual acts of meanness, not in invisible systems conferring dominance on my group." These systems appear neutral and natural, yet they inevitably and systemati- < . cally reproduce advantage for some and disadvantage for others. 26 more rapidly than equally qualified whites," while the vast majority of black women and men agreed with the statement that "Qualified whites are promoted more rapidly than equally qualified blacks." These examples illustrate the importance of understanding the schemas that are shapinig individual's categorization and expectations of others in any given organizational context as a critical first step in working with diversity. Dominant identities One of the most interesting dynamics in self-identification and categorization by others is the tendency for those who belong to traditionally dominant groups in organizations (such as white professional men in organizations of Western industrialized countries) not to iden- tify consciously with their identity group. They perceive their identity group implicitly as "the norm" by which every other group is categorized as "tIhe other" (see Box 4).7° r _ - > s 11 A recurrent finding in the study of whiteness is the fact that white respondents do not consider their 'whiteness" as an identity or marker of group member- ship per se. That is, whiteness is a 'natural identity" because it has not been problematic and therefore salient to most respondents in these studies. In fact. most white respondents are hardpressed to define whiteness and the privileges L? t17' 2 that it brings to those who own it. Interestingly enough. whiteness becomes much more definable wlhien the privilege it accords its ou!ners is lost. (HURTADO AND STEWART, 1996:299) Yet, the experience of members of dominant identity groups in organizations is very much shaped by their and others' schemas, or expectations, of the opportuniities, power anid sta- tus that accrue to members of such groups. There is a significant body of research on diversity in work groups in Western countries and international teams, for example, that shows that members of dominant and higher status identity groups typically display more aggressive noniverbal behaviors, speak inore often, interrupt others more often, state more commands and have more opportunity to influence.71 The implications for work on diversity is that attention should not be restricted solely to seeking to understand the schemas that shape expectations and interpretations of behav- iors of people in identity groups with minority representation or "newcomer" status. It is equally im)portantt to understanid anid try to make more explicit the schemas that define norms and expectations of members of dominant or established groups.72 This type of analysis deepens understanding of the subtle processes that can lead to accrued privilege and status for some while disadvantaging others (see Box 4). It can also help to identify areas of shared interest, so that members of dominant groups can ally with other groups in promoting organizational change aimed at supporting diversity.73 DIVERSE SOCIAL CATEGORIES AND IDENTITIES EMBODY 0 DIFFERENCES IN POWER AND STATUS The social categories that flow from social differences are rarely neutral. These categories U often mark differences in status and social power among groups and determine specific groups' relative access to resources and power within organizations and the broader social 27 system. In this way, not all dimensions of diversity have equal import for shaping social relations and work outcomnes in organizations. To understand diversity dynamics and work effectively with differences in organizations, it is important to give explicit attention to the nexus betwcen social differences and power relationships within organizations and the larger society(ies) in which they are embedded. These status and power differences get reproduced in organizations and are embedded in organizational structures, policies, norms and work practices. In this way, they subtly confer privilege to some groups and dis- advantage to others. As a result, different identity groups have very different experiences and opportunities within organizations and these differences tend to accumulate and expand over time.74 Nkomo (1996:245) argues: Diversity (in organizations) has its effects exactly because distinctions made on the basis of identity are not benign... It is important to be aware of the 'relational' dimension of diversity. Dichotomies are created (black versus white, men versus women). Ilowever dichotomies are not sy7mmetric. Someone or some group becomes the bther, 'and otherness has a very unique meaningfor the socto-historically embedded categories of race, ethnicity and gender. Differences between people based on these categories are grounded within structures ofpower inequalities and unequal access to resources. Voiced in another way by an organizational practitioner, Dawn Cross, the Director of Diversitv at Corning, Inc. in the United States, observes: Because images of success in many organizations are based on traits [consid- ered as norms]Jbr white men, even the best-intentionedpeople try to getpeo- ple of color and white womren tofit the old image rather than creating new images of success. (IN MORRISON, ETAL., 1993:13) Y IDENTITIES SHAPE COGNITIONS, EXPERIENCES, WORLD VIEWS AND PERSPECTIVES Historically, the social differences lens has been used to illuminate and address inequali- ties in organizations and to ensure equal opportunities for people of diverse identity groups. However, while not diminishing the importance of equality and justice in organi- zations, it is also important to view social identity differences as an asset, rather than sole- ly as a problem to be fixed. Social identity shapes the way individuals are socialized and their experiences in families, communities anid the larger society. In this way, it influences theit world view, perspectives, values and cognition. As discussed in Chapter II, this plu- rality of ways of viewing, experiencing and knowing the world is a valuable asset to organ- izations seeking to be flexible, innovative and responsive to diverse clientele or stake- holders. Considerable research has explored the link between specific traits and identities, as, for example, in the field of women in management. Yet, results have been inconclusive.'5 I This ambiguity in findings most likely derives from lack of attention to the influence of 28 social andl organizational context (see Box 5) and to the impact of ml]ltiple i(lentitygroilp affiliation (see "Identities are multidimenisional" above). Moreover, traits, such as collab- oration, performed by members of different identity groups, are perceived and interpret- ed differently, depending on the context of the organization and larger society. f'or exam- ple, Fletcher (1999) observed in her study of software engineers in the United States that collaborative or supportive work behaviors demonstrated by women were invisible and generally construed as "natural and nice". These were expected behaviors for women under the gender schemas operating in the organization and larger society. When men pre- sented these same behaviors, they were more visible and recoanized as contribthtina to effectiveiness. Tlhey were labeled witli terms suchi as "fostering team work", "aiticipatinig problems", and "coaching". tn x Changing culture to harness the benefits of diversity COX, ET AL., (1991), drawing on Hofstede's (1990) than groups comprised solely of Anglos. Importantly, work on cultural differences (see next section), exam- however, they found that the difference was much ined whether members of ethnic minorities in the more marked in contexts where the groups expected United States (African Americans, Hispanics and the other group to cooperate. The authors conclude Asians) with collaborative-cooperative cultural norms that organizations cannot strengthen cooperative would opt more often for cooperative behavior in behavior and work practices in the workplace by sim- group settings than Anglos who operate from more ply hiring more members of ethnic groups with coop- individualistic-competitive norms. In a laboratory set- erative-collective norms as is sometimes assumed. ting, they found that members of minority ethnic Organizations will only benefit from this if the organi- groups had significantly stronger cooperative orienta- zational culture changes and provides signals that tions. They also found that the ethnically diverse cooperation can lead to mutual gain and will be recip- groups made significantly more cooperative choices rocated by cooperation. Given the analytic complexities of associating specific traits with specific id entity groups, we believe it is snore useful to recognize Llsat idesitity shapes experiences and to focus on how organizations can learn from the different perspectives, sources of knowledge. professional networks or ways of working that members of different identity groups bring to the organi- zation. From this perspective, for example. Thomas and Ely (1996:80) argue the importance of link ing social identity differences directly to the work of the organization (see Box 6): (Diverse staff) brinlg differenit, importantt, and competitively rele vant know7l- edge andperspectives about houm to actually do work-howu to design process- es, reach goals, frame tasks, create effective teams, communicate ideas, and lead. When allowed to, members of these groups can help companies grow and improve by challenging basic assumptions about an organization 'sffunc- tions, strategies operati Jns, practices, andprocedures. Aid in doing so, they 0 are able to bring more of their whole selves to the workplace and identift v more fully with the work that they do, setting in motion a virtuous cir- cle.... Only when companies start thinking about diversity holistically-as providingfresh and meaningful approaches to work... will they be able to reap itsfitll rewards. 29 Connecting diversity and work practices THOMAS AND ELY (1996) stress the importance of It revealed that the first and third most profitable working with diversity in the context of the actual employees were women who used a very different work to be done. They illustrate this point with an sales technique. Rather than cold calts, they slowly but example of a financial services firm where the widely surely built up long-term relationships with clients. held assumption, or norm, was that the only way to The review concluded that "the company's top man- develop successful sales was through aggressive, rapid, agement has now made the Link between different cold calls. On this assumption, the company rewarded identity groups and different approaches and has sates staff based on the number of calls made. An come to see that there is more than one right way to internal review of their diversity initiatives, however, get positive resutts." challenged this assumption about effectiveness. RELATIVE EMPHASIS ON DIMENSIONS OF IDENTITY Age, sexual orientation and class are identity dimensions that have not received as much attention in research or practice on diversity. They are all clearly important and valenced categories influenfcing individuals' experiences in organizations and career and work out- comes. Social class and sexual orientation are more challenging to work with since visible markers are usually less salient.76 In many cases, individuals have to make explicit choic- es about whether to identify themselves as homosexual or heterosexual, or as affluent or working class, and, thus, open themselves up to categorization by others. Inclusivity is a challenge when visible identities trigger potentiallyjudgmen- tal or divisible reactions.....A distinct set of challenges arises when employees bring invisible, marginalized, or even stigmatized aspects of their identity into the workplace (Creed and Scully, forthcoming). Working with class differences in organizations is also challenging because acceptance of class inequities is so embedded in organizational concepts and norms of hierarchy, meri- tocracy and wage labor.77 Acker (1999), for example, is calling for researchers and practi- tioners to give renewed attention to class as a critical dimension of organizations. In other cultural contexts where class differences are socially recognized, such as Latin America, it nmay be importanit and easier to include class as a significant dimension of organizational diversity as it is already part and parcel of the social structure in which the organization is operating. In spite.of the difficulty in addressing these other dimensions of identity, they are critical dimensions of diversity that need to be incorporated more fully into working with social differences in organizations. SUMMARY The social differences lens has been the doriiianit perspective gaiding research and practice focused on diversity in organizations, particularly in the U.S. The social lens has been applied v______ in many different ways and, from our perspective, has both advantages and disadvantages. 30 Advantages of using the social differences lens It helps increase understanding and knowledge of one's own and others' identities, group affiliations, and the imupact these have on work behtaviors antd outcomnes andl the organization of work itself. It helps identify tacit schemas and norms that subtly shape perceptions, expectations and evaluations of the work behaviors and per- formance of members of different identity groups. This understanding can help reduce prejudice, tensions and miscommunication that inhibit productivity, upward mobility anid job satisfactiont of miniority or historically disadlvalntaged groups. o It focuses attention on the benefits that accrue to an organization when the wealth of experiences, knowledge and perspectives that diverse staff members bring to the workplace is recognized as an asset and used, rather than driven underground by pressures to assimilate into the dominant culture. o It supplements attention to the individual as the locus for chanae with a focus on group, intergroup and systemic processes and norms in the organization that create opportunities for some identity groups and disadvantage others. o It more readily accommodates working with differences in status and power rela- tionships among distinct identity groups as defined by their specific socio-cultural and historical contexts. o It can focus attentioin orn sources of privilege, Iow thlese get reproduced in organiza- tions, and on the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion that these privileges, on the one hand, and deprivations, on the other, engender. Disadvantages, or potential pitfalls, of using the social differences lens o It can reinforce individual stereotypes and interpersonal tensions if the process is dealt with superficially or is not well facilitated, especially in the context of educa- tional programs. o It can result in a misguided emphasis on issues of representation and numbers of minority, or non-dominant, group members, rather than on the work practices and organizational culture and how they relate to differences, identity and power rela- tions. o Often only one dimension of identity is focal at a time and the complexity of a per- son's identity and affiliation with many diffcrent social identity groups is either not acknowledged or is dealt with superficially. o It may exacerbate inter-group tensions and majority group backlash if not presented appropriately. o It needs to be carefully monitored and aligned with the organizational vision, cul- ture and strategies so that it clearly addresses effectiveness issues as well as equity issucs. CukturaL dffferences ens7 THE CULTURAL DIFFERENCE L E N S focuses on: 1) how culture and cultural dif- u ferences affect the social relations, work behaviors, expectations and outcomes in organi- < zations; and 2) how differences in values and norms shaped by a society's culture affect 31 the organiizational culture and norms of effective management. Research and practice using this lens draw primarily on the fields of international management, comparative organizational behavior and anthropology. Interest in understanding the impact of cul- tural differences within organizations has intensified in recent years with the dramatic expansion of globalization.79 While the work encompassed by the social differences lens is heavily influenced by research and practice carried out in the United States, European scholars have developed much of the work on cultural differences in organizations. Drawing on this broad and diverse literature, we focus on two of the most influential streams of work: cross-cultural comparisons and international management. We also hligh- light several other emerging streams of research and analysis. CU LTU RE A conceptual difficulty underlying this work is the concept of "culture" which has been defined in many different ways. Ting-Toomey (1985:72) provides a definition that is com- monly accepted by anthropologists: Culture is patterned ways of thinking, acting, feeling, and interpreting. Cultture guides our understanding of behavior, it shapes how we approach the world. Culture is comprised of the norms, values, beliefs, and expressive symbols that members of a group use to create meaning (and interpret behavior). Cultttre is both enduring and changing. Researchers and practitioners working in organizations tend to define the concept of cul- ture according to how they want to make it operational.t0 For example, behaviorists treat culture as observable actions and events; functionalists focus on the underlying structure or rules which explain observable events; and bilingual educators and many anthropolo- gists are interested in the categories of ideas, behaviors or products whichl are shared by members of a given group. Funakawa (1997) argues that, given the encompassing nature of culture, it influences almost all aspects of management. including organizational fac- tors (such as structure and strategy); management behaviors and styles (such as meeting management and decision-making); and functional (such as marketing or human resources). While most of the work carried out under this lens focuses on diffcrcnces in national cul- tures, it is important for researchers and practitioners to be aware of the different levels at which culture and cultural differences are enacted, for example, at the individual level, the group or relational level, the level of national culture, or any combination of these. NATIONAL CULTURE AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE The research suggests that cultural patterns prevailing in an organization's social envi- ronment can affect its c-ulture and accepted ways of working and managing in three pri- I mary ways.t1 First, governments and institutions lay down procedures and rules which affect an organization's functioning. These rules usually incorporate the norms and val 32 ues of the larger national society and affect behavior directly by providing guidelines and expectations for organizational unieinbers. Influence of a variety of stakeholder groups, such as the board, funding agencies and beneficiaries, also shapes organizational culture. These stakeholder groups tend to uphold the prevailing cultural valucs and apply them in evaluating the organization's effectiveness. For an international organization operating in malny different national contexts, the issues become very complex and have particular implications for diversity. IBM's global diversity is an example of oue way to approach this issue: I IBM has a general policy of "We clon't discriminate against anyone... the individual countrv team implements that general vieLwpoint in a manner most appropriate to the customs, practices, and laws within that country. l We ask our gener-al manLagers to identifJ those people twho are disadvan- n [ _ 2 taged in their coutntry and to find an appropriate response to themn " x ,c_____ - (CROSS AND BLACKBURN WHITE, 1996:230) Second, most organizations tend to be designed and developed according to the prefer- ences and cultural values of an organization's founder(s).82 For examriple, an organization founded by a Chinese person (or group) in JKenya would be more oriented towards Chinese cultural patterns than Kenyan ones. The assumption cannot be made that the dominant norms and values of an organization in a particular country will necessarily be those of the hlost counitry. As (Iiselussed in Chapter IV on change strategies, cultural audits are a useful tool for finding out about an organization's history and the cultural values of its fouiiders, and how it may, or may not, match with the culture of the country in which the organiza- tion is located. Third, organizational culture is also a product of the values of organizational participants, wlho may be different from and even in opposition to those of the dominant designers. In this respect, parts, of thie organization may be redesigned to fit miore closely with the val- ues of the people who occupy those roles or groups (such as administrative sections staffed primarily by locally hired personnel). The kinds of tensions this produces in an organiza- tion may well be a reflection of the class structure of the society as well as of the organi- zatiorl itself.83 The fact that a plurality of cultures, subcultures or counter-cultures oper- ates within societies and organizations needs to be acknowledged and worked with. This fact complicates the picture of organizational culture and how it relates to national cul- ture, and it points to issues discussed in the previous section on the social differences lens. CROSS CULTURAL COMPARISONS Much of the work on understanding the implications of culture and cultural differences in organizations is based on the approach of cross-cultural comparisons. Predetermined categoroes are used to examine selected aspects of the culttires being studied. The objec- tive is not to understand the cultures as their members understand them, but to determine how the cultures compare with respect to some particular quality, such as leadership, man- 84 Lens , e 0 ~~Cultural ~ _ V ~~Differences < ~~Lens, Embedded intergroup relations theory is useful for working with this intersection. The theory provides a framework for understanding group relations in organizations-concep- tualizing race, gender or class relations, for example, as a special class of group rela- tions. 14 The theory differentiates between identity groups and organizational groups and focuses attention on the relations between the two. People in organizations are simulta- neously members of identity groups and organizational groups and thus, "are continually attempting, consciously and unconsciously, to manage potential conflicts arising from the interface hetween identity and organization group memberships" (Thomas and Proud- ford, 2000:53). Intergroup theory also suggests that organizational conflicts between groups can be understood better by paying attention to the extent to which power differ- ences between groups at the societal level are mirrored, or not, in the relations between these grouEps in the organizational system. While the complexity of intergroup theory requires more discussion than is possible within the limits of this paper, we believe that an intergroup perspective is very valuable in understanding conflicts among groups or between members of different identity groups, especially those which seem apparently unexplainable or intractable."15 POWER = We believe that it is essential to think explicitly about power within the context of diversi- ty. Approaches to working with diversity vary widely in the extent to which they recognize u power differentials within their analyses and change strategies. As noted above, the social 46 differences lens is the most explicit in embracing power issues. Work using this approach builds from the assumption that some social identities are privileged in relation to others. In contrast, the cognitive-functional lens tends to ignore power differences. Work carried out under this lens tends to view all differences as equal and symmetrical in their impacts on work. Similarly, work using the cultural differences lens pays limited attention to power, but as Canney Davison and Ward (1999:65) argue: Culturaldifferences rarelyplayout on an equalplayingfield and this applies to diJferences in organizational, fitrctional and ethnic cultures as much as to differences in nationality. Differences in power, wealth, economic and education levels, for inistance, often underscore cultural differences. Differences such as age, job status, gender, length of tenure, motivation, reward, knowledge and shills create inequalities in all teams, including inter- national teams. They need to be managed well to prevent themfrom being dysfnctional. The extent to which an organization is willing to recognize power relations and address these within a diversity initiative will have an important impact on the type of diversity change strategy it adopts. From our perspective, the kind of deep cultural change we believe is required to work effectively with diversity can only occur if power relations are addressed. INTEGRATING THE LENSES In the previous two chapters, we reviewed the motive forces for working with diversity (i.e., the why) and three major approaches, or lenses, that have been used to define diversity and its relevance for organizations (i.e., the what). In the following chapter, we focus on how to develop a diversity initiative. We review two major types of change strategies that organizations can adopt to develop their capacity to work effectively with diversity. Throughout we seek to distill lessons learned from research and experience from other organizations. Abramms and Simons (1996) offer a corripreliensive model that integrates the key contri- butionis of the different lenses to organizational diversity efforts and suggest four dimen- sions of change that a diversity initiative must address given the complexity of issues raised in this chapter. o Achieve organixational justice - to ensure fairness and equity for all organiza- tional stakeholders. o Reduce bias - to help individuals and groups in the organization recognize and address the prejudices that impact their behavior, attitudes and organizational olt- comes at work. o Develop cultural competence - to support individuals to learn to work with dif- < fereiices and others who are different from them by learning about their own culture U and that of others and how to effectively interact across such differences in the work environment. <: 47 o Act on the added value that diversity brings - to learn to incorporate and use the value that different perspectives and beliefs bring to all the different dimensions of work and organizations. An example of how organizations can translate what is learned from the different lenses and models presented throughout this chapter and develop a practical statement to guide a diversity initiative follows: DDiversity means that each person brings individual characteristics of race, gender, nationality; religion, age. physical ability, sexual orieniatio71, and ethnicity to the workptace. In order to leverage, that is, effectively use diver- sity, the organization does ntot merely recognize, manage, or accept the indi- vidual differences of each person. The organization encourages and values diversity (a multinational corporate statement, private communication with one of the authors). 4 I U 48 0clpil. 0p/o,XeCC) (5 grzte Ove rAew AUTHORS AND PRACTITIONERS VARY WIDELY IN THEIR SPECIFIC RECOM- MENDATIONS AND APPROACHES TO DIVERSITY INITIATIVES BECAUSE AS ZANE (1994) POINTS OUT,THEY COME FROM VERY DIFFERENT DISCIPLINARY BACKGROUNDS SUCH AS ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR, ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIOLOGICAL AND FEMINIST DISCIPLINES. Considerable differences exist in several areas including: o visoion of a successful anid diverse organilzation; o degree and type of change required to accomplish diversity; o levels of the system the change effort should focus on (individual, group, organiza- tional, societal); o uiieasuores of clhange anid success used; anid o, kind of change required, whether long or short term, radical or evolutionary. As argued in Chapter II, comprehensive diversity programs are implemented as part of a strategic, integrated and intentional organizational change effort, whereas other diversity programs are isolated anid piecenieal. However, in spite of the many differenaces and the plethora of strategies and activities recommended to achieve and successfully work with diversity, we summarize here some of the common elements among them. We also offer some cautionary suggestions and identify the key choices an organization faces when ini- tiating a diversity effort. It is important to uinderscore that we uinderstand diversity to be more than a human resource strategy or an approach for managing the work force. Instead, diversity refers to a perspective that permeates the work and work processes of the orgfanization and requires a comprehensive change effort. This is what we have called w;orking with diversity. The key components of a diversity initiative are: o defining a vision of the desired outcome, that is, a successfully diverse organization; o understanding the dynamics of change and establishing an appropriate strategy for U change, which is tailored to the organization; and 50 o selecting and combining the most effective interventions and best practices in order to achieve the goals for diversity change. From our review of the literature, we suggest that there are two major change approaches under which most diversity initiatives fall: 1) long-term, planned, systemic organization development approaches; and 2) action research, collaborative inquiry approaches. Both of these approaches, or a creative combination of them, can deliver on the 13 conditions of success discussed below. Condkt'ns for success WE I DENT IF Y BELOW 1 3 con(ditions for success for diversity initiatives. These are common elements gathered from the literature and our own experience which we believe makc an initiative more likely to succeed and less likely to fail.' 16 o Work from an inclusive definition of diversity, which, for example, goes beyond race and gender issues to include other dimensions of difference (see Cbapter III). o Develop a strategic vision and plan with clear objectives, focus and appropriate financial and human resources to support it. Communicatc the plan widely. o Align the initiative to the core work of the organization and its strategic goals. Connect it to a clear statement of needs that conveys the urgency and bene- fits the organization will derive from ernbracing change (see Chapter II). o Engage many forces and people to create a broad sense of ownership, for exam- ple, by supporting the dcvclopment of a cadre of internal change agents and build- ing alliances and coalitions among diverse internal constituencies and networks to support change. Engage respected and credible people to help guide and champion the change. o Have clear leadership and involvement of senior management in the change process beyond verbal and symbolic support. Identify internal champions with defined responsibilities for implementing the initiative. o Pay attention to internal and external factors that may support or hinder the initiative, such as budget constraints, changes in the internal and external political climate, and potential alliances with external pressure groups, such as clients, donors or partners. o Build the change strategy from a solid analysis of diversity issues in the organi- zation. Develop the analysis from multiple perspectives throughout the organization. o Provide freedom to pilot and experiment. Enicourage an environimenit of learn- ing from experience where flawless implementation is not expected. C I o Convey the importance of engaging in a dynamic and systemic process, not a static program or a single "quick-fix" solution. z o Encourage an open climate that allows for the expression of passion, compassion and forgiveiness throughout the change and learning process. Assign accountability across all levels and typcs of employees, including senior management. 51 o Ensure the competence of consultants and other resources in designing and facilitating rclevant initiatives aligned to the organizational culture and strategic imperatives. o Recognize, celebrate and connect "sma1l wins" in order to aggregate smnall changes into a larger change process with more impact. 117 Organzat'onai devekopment approach THE ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (OD) approachtodivcrsityisan integrated, planned, system-wide and long-term process of change that addresses a com- plexity of organizational dimensions and levels. Multicultural organizational develop- ment (MCOD) is a process of change that supports an organization moving from a mono- cultural, or exclusive, organization to a multicultural, or inclusive, organization. MCOD is an example of an organizational development approach to diversity.118 Organizational development approaches are characteristically managed from the top, cascade down the organization to other organizational levels, and make use of external consultants as experts wtho support the organization throughout the process of change. MULTICULTURAL ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT MODEL The organizational development approach requires an initial assessment of where the organization is, in relation to diversity, and its vision of where it wants to be in the future. From an analysis of the gap between where the organization is and where it wants to be, specific interventions are then designed to accomplish the identified change goals. Holvi- no's MCOD model provides a useful way for an organization to frame an initial diagnosis and vision of diversity (see Box 12).119 Holvino's model suggests that organizations go through six phases when moving from monocultural, an exclusionary organization where the values of oric group, culture or style are dominant, to multicultural, an inclusive organization where the values of diverse peoples are valued and contribute to organizational goals and excellence. In the first stage, exclisive, organizations base their business and processes on one cultural group's norms and values and advocate openly for the privileges and dominance of that group. Today, not maniy public organizations are exclusive in this way. In the passive club stage, organizations are based on one cultural group's informal rules, systems and ways of doing things and only admit those who are similar or closely fit the dominant group. In this stage, organizations operate as private social clubs where the norms include passive exclusion and ignoring of differences. Organizations in the third stage of compliance are passively committed to including members of non-dominant groups, but do not make any changes in the ways of managing the organization so as to iniclude those who are different. At this stage, differences are more symbolic than real, such as in a predominantly Christian organization with one or U two Muslims where the cultural symbols and celebrations remain Christian. In the posi- 52 tive action stage, organizations are actively committed to including members of non- dominant groups, making special efforts to attract them and be toleraint of the differenlces they bring. But subtle ways in which the norms, structures and ways of doing work still favor those in the dominant group make it hard for others to feel that they can contribute and advance in the organization. At this stage, a critical mass of non-dominant group members exists. They begin to question and change some ways of doing things. Though there is tolerance and targeted use of differences, not eniough culture aind structural change has occurred to include and offer equal opportunities to all people. In the redef ining stage, organizations actively try to include all differences and to change the subtle and not so subtle barriers to inclusion in norms, practices, relationships, struc- ture and systems. At this stage there may be acceptance of differences, but not full "uti- lization'', as uentibers of both domninant and non-dominant groups are still learning to deal with differences and diversity. In the multicultural, or inclusive and diverse stage, the ideal stage in the multicultural organizational development process, organizations seek and value all differences and develop the systems and work practices that support members of every group to succeed and contribute fully to the organization. VISIONS TO GUIDE THE DIVERSITY CHANGE PROCESS The vision of a diverse and fully multicultural organization embedded in Holvino's MCOD model is similar to other visions provided in the literature. For example, Foster, et al., (1988:40) define a multicultural organization as: r2 x The multicultural organizational development model' _MOMOC T[LTRAHISDTDCHbAL MHLVO1CULTULAL Exclusionary Passive Club Compliance Positive Action Redefining Multicultural Actively excludes Actively or pas- Passively commit- Committed to Actively works to Inclusive and in its mission and sively excludes ted to including making a speciaL expand its defini- diverse. ActiveLy practices those those who are not others without effort to include tion of inclusion includes a diversi- who are not members of the making major others, especially and diversity. Tries ty of groups, members of the dominant group. changes. Includes those in designat- to examine and styles and dominant group. Includes other only a few ed target groups. change practices perspectives. members only if members of other Tolerates the that may act Continuously they "fit". groups. differences that as barriers to learns and acts to those others members of non- make the sys- bring. dominant groups. temic changes required to value and include all kinds of people. z Values the dominant perspective of Seeks to integrate others into systems Values and integrates the perspectives 5 one group, culture or style. created under dominant norms. of diverse identities, cultures, styles and groups into the organization's work and systems. 53 (one) that 1) reflects the contributions and interests of the diverse cultural and social groups in the organization's mission, operations, products, or services; 2) commits to eradicate all forms of social discrimination in the organization; 3,) sharespower and influence so that n1o one group is put at an exploitative advantage. 4) follows through on its broader social responsibility tofight social discrimination and advocate social diversity. Cox (1991) defines a multicultural organization as one characterized by pluralism, full structural and informal integration, absence of prejudice and discriminatioll, low levels of intergroup conflict, an(d similar levels of identifications with the organization from both majority and minority employees. In essence, we define a multicultural organization as one in which: 1) the diversity of knowledge and perspectives that different groups bring to the organization has shaped its strategy, its work, its management and operating systems, and its core values and norms for success; antd 2) members of all groups are treated fairly, feel included, have equal opportunities and are represented at all organizational lcvels and functions. SEQUENCE OF CHANGE: A HELPFUL PROCESS While many organizations come up with their own blueprints for developing and imple- menting a diversity initiative, the following five-step process is representative of common practices in the organizational development approach.'21 The steps are: o preparing for the initiative; o assessing needs related to diversity; o developing a vision, goals and a strategic plan; o implementing the interventions selected; and o monitoring and evaluating progress and results. Each of these steps is briefly described below. It is important to note, however, that while the steps appear to be linear, in reality this is a cyclical process in which the last step informs prior work. Because diversity is so complex, it is recommended that especially in its initial stages, the plan remains open and flexible, until data gathering, learning and needs assessment have taken place to better inform the initial decisions made. For exam- ple, the concept of diversity is usually unclear in the beginning and much of the learning that takes place during data collection is about the barriers to, the mcaning of, and the vision of inclusion and diversity that will galvanize members to work towards and embrace the change effort. Preparing for an initiative This step involves securing leadership support and involvement; developing an initial plan of action-who will be in charge, what is the initial charge or objective, when will the effort stari, what is the target for completion of the initial stages, how will an initial plan of action be developed, how much time and resources are available, and what are the moti- vators for change, i.e., the strategic organizational imperatives. u 54 Hayles and Russell (1997) call this step "preparation"; Loden (1996) calls it "laying the groundwork". Communicating the intent of the initiative, allocating resources, assigning responsibilities and framing the initial task are the most important elements of laying the groundwork for a diversity effort. Ensuring that the initiative responds to the organiza- tional imperatives for diversity is a major element of this first step in the process (see Chapter II). Assessing needs through data coL[ection Once the intent of a diversity initiative has been identified, data needs to be gathered I j ~~~~~about the state of the organization in important areas of diversity. Cultural audits, employ- ee surveys and focus groups are typical interventions or activities that help an organiza- tion gather information about which aspects of diversity should be explored given the a strategic imperative.122 The information collected is fed back to selected members of the -^, _ organization. They, in collaboration with a consultant, analyze anld make recommenda- tions. The purpose of the data analysis and feedback process is to connect interrelated themes into a meaningful picture that suggests important areas of need and change goals. Strengths as well as limitations should be identified and categorized under some broad areas of change. T'he MCOD model (see Box 12) helps define the diversity change goal by providing a framework to interpret the data collected into a picture of the current level of multicul- tural development. Usually the change goal becomes the means to move the organization to the next stage of development. In doing an assessment, one needs to look at all of the imlportanit diiiensions of an organization and all the social groups that may need to be included in order to determine the level of current multiculturalism. For example, how do the mission, culture, language, informal systems, policies, structures, leadership and reward systems support, or not support, an inclusive and diverse organization for women, for racial, ethnic, language or religious minorities, for gays and lesbians, for disabled per- sonis and for other social groups? While it is not possible to address all these issues or all identity groups in the beginning stages of an initiative, it is important to understand that being able to respond to new demands and expand the agenda for change will increase support for the overall change effort. As a critical mass of internal and external change increases, gradually incorporating the needs and perspectives of new stakeholders also helps to reduce resistance of those who feel that they may not benefit from the change effort. Developing a strategic plan An organizational change strategy is a comprehensive plan based on a thorough analysis of organizational needs and goals. It is designed to bring about specific changes and to ensure that appropriate steps are taken to maintain those changes. Included in it are def- initions of end objectives, outlines of specific actions designed to produce the desired out- comes, time frames, and an evaluation or monitoring system. A strategy must specify the priority goals, primary interventions, a sequence of activities, and resources and respon- sibilities. It also needs to take into consideration the power dynamics and the culture of 55 The diversity adoption process DRAWING ON THE WORK of Everett Rogers with makes sure that the different rates of adoption are Floyd Shoemaker (1971), Loden (1996) suggests that, considered when particular goals and interventions when planning a diversity initiative, findings about are chosen. For example, a mentoring program should how innovations move through an organization should start with those who fall in the innovator and change be taken into account. An adoption curve generally agent end of the curve. Only after the program has follows the introduction of an innovation based on been successfulLy piloted and endorsed by the leaders how much risk and opportunity people feel the inno- should skeptics and traditionalists be expected to par- vation will bring them. PeopLe in organizations fall into ticipate. five segments distributed along a bell shaped curve. Other variables affecting adoption shouLd also be con- The innovators are a small group of people who sidered in a diversity initiative. For example, how embrace the change in its initial stages; the change compatible are the values of diversity with the pres- agents take an active role in speeding up the wave of ent organizational culture? How simple is it to adoption. The pragmatists and skeptics make up understand and implement a particular diversity goal? the majority of people in organizations and are slow Can the idea be tested before full adoption is expect- to adopt an innovation. The pragmatists have to be ed? Are the positive results of embracing a diversity convinced that the change is for the best, and the strategy easily observable? Can it be shown that a skeptics require a lot of support to adopt and inno- diversity innovation represents an advantage over vate. The traditionalists fall on the other extreme of other paradigms or ways of working in the organiza- the curve. This minority will take up the innovation tion? These are the questions that should be explored after almost everybody else. A diversity initiative plan as part of developing a strategic plan. the organization. When deciding what to do first and how to procecd, Loden (1996) sug- gests that the strategic plan also take into account knowledge gathered from the behav- ioral sciences about how innovations are adopted in organizations (see Box 13). A well developed strategic plan guides a diversity initiative by: a) informing the organiza- tion about thc importance and flow of the change effort; b) defining goals for manage- ment and targets of change; c) providing a structure, clarity and accountability for the ini- tiative; and d) linking the effort to the competitive advantage and gains that will be derived from the initiative. Arredondo (1996:96) states that the strategic plan is "tlie doculimenlt that can reflect the goals and actions that will respond to concerns and recommendations that emerge from needs assessments and other relevant sources." Part of the strategic plan (though this may also be an additional phase in the process) must include a vision and definition of diversity. Tt is especially important that the diversity vision be made part of the organizational vision, or at least, expands on it. The important task at this point is to explore, come to terms with and provide a definition of diversity for the organization that is inclusive and that guides and connects to the core vision and mis- sion of the organization (see Chapter III, page 32). Many times, the vision and definition of diversity is generated too early in the process and is vague or incomplete, becoming an easy target of criticism. Thus, we recommcnd that organizations do not attempt to devel- op a diversity vision before assessing needs and collecting information and examples through educational and benchmarking activities. A good examiple of an aspirations state- menrit that iricorporates diversity is the one developed by Levi Strauss, a retail company, for u______ its leadership: 56 (Th leadership of Levi Strauss) values a diverse work force (age, sex, ethnic ozgoup etc.) at all levels of the organization, diversity in experience. and diver- sity in perspectives. We have committed to taking fil1 advantage of the rich S rK t3c kis\4> bac/cgrotnd.s and abilities of all our people and to promoting a greater diver- S ty posiltons of influence. Differing points of view will be sou,ght; diversity will be valued and hionestly rewarded, not suppressed. 123 Roosevelt Thomias (1999) suggests that strategic plans in diversity-mature organizations have the following characteristics: 1) they derive from compelling and strategic motives as identified in Chapter II) they identify the diversity-related issues that must be addressed in response to an organizational assessment; and 3) they delineate a clear sequence in which the tasks must be implemented. Imptementing the ptan of interventions As with any other organizational action plani, the key questions in the implementation stage are: Who; What; When; For Whom and With Whom; and Where? A variety of options is available here. For example, in answer to Who?, leadership and accountability for the intervention can he provided by a task force, committee or council; departments, business units or occupational groups; the office of the designated diversity leader and staff, such as a Gender Unit; the most senior levels in the organization, such as the chief executive; or other key stakeholders, such as the board of directors anid Uanions. The type of interventions, activities and programs to be selected, the timelines and sequence of events, who will participate, what their roles will be, in which locations and at what organizational levels different interventions will take place are the essence of the implementation plan. A multicultural development model such as Holvino's can guide these decisions best. It is expanded upon on page 65. Regardless of the specifies, the key enablers of a strategic plan are communication, credi- bility and accountability. 124 Without appropriate communication throughout thc organiza- tion to all employees and at all levels, without a plan of action that makes sense and sets clear priorities, and without clarity about responsibilities, accountability and measures of success, the best intervention plan will fail. Thus, a key aspect of implementing a strategic plan is defining communication and rollotnt strategies, assigning responisibilities to credi- ble nienibers of the organization, and identifying clear targets of change and measures of success for different organizational members andl divisions. Clearly, the involvement of those affected in the planning process will be crucial to the success of the plan. In addition, we want to emphasize the importance of visible leadership from the top, engagement of middle managers responsible for operations, and involvement of "everyday" leaders- "seed carriers"-who will lead the effort through everyday activities and work practices. 125 Monitoring and evaluating Monitoring and evaluating are the two components of the evaluation process of a diversi- ty initiative, and often, both components are lacking. By monitoring, we mean being sure that what was planned is being accomplished. By evaluating, we mean determining the impact and results of the planned interventions. Evaluation is one of the most neglected a 57 aspects in diversity initiatives and also requires careful planning.126 For example, what is the scope of the evaluation, what information will he sought from the evaluationl process, how will information be gathered and from whom, how will the data be used and to whom will it be fed back? When goals and cxpected outcomes havc bccn made clear during the initial planning process and data has been collected that can serve as a base-line to assess change over time, evaluation is easier to implement, because it provides its own measure- ments of comparison for before and after the interventions. Monitoring the representation, advancement and retention of diverse groups is the most common method of assessing diversity efforts, but this approach to monitoring is more appropriate for organizations in the positive action stage of the MCOD model. In com- prehensive long-term initiatives, other areas to evaluate should include: a) changes in indi- vidual attitudes and behavior; b) the impact of specific interventions to promote change in organizational cuIlture; c) the integration of particular diversity strategies in the daily business systems and structures; d) gains in profitability and reduction in costs; and e) the level of satisfaction of members of particular groups in the organization. Specific evalua- tion methods that can be used are: program evaluations, such as evaluation of training or career development programs; organizational surveys to assess workplace climate;'27 benchmarking with other organizations for comparison purposes; surveys of external recognition and reputation awards such as "best employer" or "community service"; and analysis of indicators of overall performance such as profits, market share and new mar- kets, and of executive performance such as leadership and business unit or departmental performance. (See Box 14 for additional suggestions on evaluating diversity.) It is important to note that evaluation is crucial if organizational learning on diversity is to occur. Moreover, not paying attention to this step in the process of developing a diver- Evaluating diversity through employee surveys, *: not numbers COMER AND SOLIMAN (1996) state that very few organi- m Do employees have ability to influence decision- zations that have invested in diversity efforts monitor and making? assess whether they are actuaLly achieving their objec- tives and promoting multiculturalism. They suggest sever- tDoacquires pevelop ney ave ties al indicators that move beyond monitoring numerical representation and promotions of diverse groups. These careers? indicators can be grouped in two areas: 1) employee * Do employees perceive that they have opportunities assessment of a positive working climate; and 2) assess- for formal and informal mentoring and coaching? ment of increased organizational performance. It is important to collect data for different groups of employ- ave absenteesm ees so as to determine the impact of changes on employ- among all employees? ees who are different. New questions to be explored are: * Has patronage of diverse customers or clients flour- * Do all employees consider systems of performance ished? > appraisals, rewards and promotions to be fair and * Has creativity and innovation blossomed? unbiased? unbiased? * Has organizational responsiveness and flexibility * Do employees have access to important information? increased? 5 58 sity initiative can undo important progress made and sends a message that diversity is not as serious as other organizational goals. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT APPROACH TO DIVERSITY The strcngths of the organizational development approach to diversity are that: o it provides a clear focus to the change effort; o it is similar to other planiiing processes commonly used in organizations and thus, more familiar; o it is management driven; and o the logical and deliberate pace of change promotes a certain amount of organiza- tional security amidst potentially threatening change. But successful multicultural organizational development approaches also need to consid- er how they differ from more traditional OD change efforts.'28 They pay more attention to - An example of an organizational development approach x to diversity: The training and development center of an international organization THE INITIATIVE STARTED with a request from the direc- and focus groups; and 8) reviewing recruitment, place- tor of the Center, via his human resource manager, to ment, advancement policies and other human resource engage in "diversity management". After initial conversa- practices. tions with members of the top management team, the The third set of activities implemented during the sec- following plan of action was impLemented during the ond and third year were: 9) analysis of the survey and first three years. focus groups results and preparation of a report with Activities for the first year focused on developing an ini- recommendations by the consultants; 10) discussion of . tial strategy with the top management team that key data and recommendations from the report in joint included: 1) defining the overall global business context session with the top management team, the advisory and determining the organizational imperative for diver- group and selected interviewees from representative sity; 2) informing the work force of the initiative and the groups in the organization; and 11) agreement on a plan intention to begin to collect information; 3) forming and of action to respond to the recommendations. These developing.a diversity advisory group composed of rep- included: a) in-depth diversity education sessions for resentatives of diverse groups in the organization across managers and advocates; b) changes in recruitment levels and functions; and 4) identifying and educating practices, deveLopment of new career development the internal liaison for the initiative in the office of a paths and implementation of a 360-degree feedback Manager for Inclusion and Organizational Change. system; and c) and interventions invoLving large numbers The set of activities implemented at the end of the first of staff in-country to address issues of workplace culture year and during the second year included: 5) refining, and climate. developing and disseminating the "business imperative" Responsibility for implementation of the selected diver- for diversity which identified work force skills needed for sity initiatives was assigned to the department heads the future, requirements for a successful organizationaL and other working unit heads. The diversity advisory culture, and leadership competencies required for the group, the Office of Inclusion and Organization Change, z future; 6) implementing education and awareness ses- and the consultants acted as resources. The top manage- I sions with the top management team and the advisory ment team continued to receive reports and monitor group; 7) selecting three country sites, plus headquar- the implementation and results during the first three ters, for initial data collection through employee surveys years. 59 the role of conflict, intergroup dynamics, coalition and alliance building, and power and resistance issues within the context of change. Some of the limitations to the organizational development approach to diversity are that unforeseeni organizationial clhaniges, suclh as top leadership slhifts, restructuring or a bad economic year, can derail the initiative. If the organization is not able to adapt, learn from the implementation process and revise the initial plans, the effort will be difficult to sus- tain. It is also important not to rely too heavily on educational programs, policy changes and accotntability measures, all common interventions in the organizational develop- ment approach, as a way of changing the organizational culture. Moreover, the effort should not be viewed as a human resource initiative, because this removes the managers and other staff from their responsibility to provide leadership. Box 15 provides an example of an OD organizational development approach to diversi- ty. 29 Organizational development approaches to diversity are particularly suitable for organizations operating in stable environments, in hierarchical organizations where there is strong leadership championing the diversity change agenda, and when there is a critical mass of people who desire change. Collaborative approaches to change offer an alterna- tive that may work best uinder a different set of organizational conditions. 130 Act o rsearch and coLaboratova loquwry approadches A C TI 0 N RE SEAR C H I S A collaborative approach to organizational change that focuses on joint inquiry and learning between internal and external change agents.'3' Rapoport (1970:499) provides the following definition: Action research aims to contribute to the practical concerns of people in an immediateproblematic situation and to the goals of social science byjoint col- laboration within a mutually acceptable ethicalframework. APPROACH Collaborative inquiry approaches are usually more fluid than organizational development approaches to diversity. Nevertheless, action research usually proceeds with the following seven phases. 132 o Entry and set-up - the inquiry and change goals are agreed upon and internal and external research collaborators develop an initial design and "contract" to collect information. o Data collection and inquiry - information is collected through interviews, focus > groups, surveys and other mechanisms. H- o Analysis - thie data are assembled, suniunarized and organized according to identifi- able patterns. U 60 o Feedback and action planning - the analysis of the data is shared with the organi- zation in order to develop a joint interpretation, identify change goals and develop action plans. o Implementation and experimentation - actions agreed upon are implemented and organizational experiments to support the change goals are conducted. ° Monitoring and evaluation - data are collected to assess the impact of the change initiatives and experiments. o Learning, adaptation and further experimentation. This process of data collection, analysis and experimentation initiates another cycle of action research, engaging the organization in a continuous and iterative process of inquiry and change. Central to the process of action research is that learning derives from intro- ducing changes or experiments into the system and observing their effects. This may then lead to further adaptations or new interventions. Although less is published on action research and collaborative inquiry approaches to diversity initiatives, Curmning and Holvino (1997) and Merrill-Sands, et al. (1999a, BEC: An example of collaborative inquiry with a social 0 change organization"3' BEC IS A SMALL ORGANIZATION whose mission is to An edited 15-minute version of the videotape was pro- advocate on a variety of social issues that affect a very duced containing four problematic moments, which were diverse community with a high population of immi- identified in the course of the two-hour meeting.The grants in the heart of a major USA city. A multicultural tape was shown to the board during a one-day retreat. board made of representatives of the key groups in the Analysis of each moment helped the members assess community and an executive director, a white bilingual strengths and areas of improvement in the way the male, manage the affairs of the organization with a board managed itself and its differences. Based on the skeleton staff of part-time staff and community volun- assessment and discussions, the group drew up action teers. plans designed to improve the board's work and multi- Consultants were enlisted to assist the board of direc- cultural relations. As a result of the analysis of the prob- tors in becoming more sensitive and effective at man- lematic moments, the following sustainable improve- aging the cultural, language and class differences ments were brought to the operation of BECs board. among its members. The monthly board meetings were * Responsibilities and rotes were clarified and an conducted in English and simultaneously translated internal board structure was set up consisting of: a into three other languages-Portuguese, Spanish and community outreach committee; a program/staff Khmer. The board was having trouble working effec- committee; and a financial/fund raising committee. tiveLy, yet recognized the importance of learning from, * A glossary of multicultural terms used frequently by and finding better ways of working with, their very rich board members was produced. Interpreters now sit e'nd representative social differences. behind, not next to, people receiving interpretation. A way for non-English speaking members to have A collaborative inquiry approach was agreed upon. A videotape was made at a regular board meeting. After more input into the agenda was formalized. the meeting, board members attending the meeting * The board members worked on improving their u were asked to identify at least one problematic meeting skills and developed multicultural norms moment they had observed in the meeting and to for their meetings. The board now meets every assess the effectiveness of the meeting using a short month to discuss S to 6 issues instead of every two z evaluation form. A problematic moment is a moment months with 10 to 12 issues. I when the group has the opportunity to creatively * Experienced board members began mentoring new struggle with its differences and solve a particular board members on key issues affecting the commu- problem. nity. 61 Action research project on gender equity and organizational effectiveness at the Centro International de Mejoramiento de Mafz y Trigo (CIMMYT)'34 CIMMYT, an international agricultural research center identified include the undervaluing of "support" cited headquartered in Mexico, had a strong norm in its above, and the persistent valuing of hierarchy as the organizational culture that valued individual achieve- best way to get things done despite the organization's ment and tangible products, such as new plant vari- commitment to move to a team-based structure. eties.This norm resulted in the undervaluing of "sup- The researchers presented their analysis to the entire port" work done by scientists in disciplines such as staff and conducted several days of workshops. Staff biotechnology, pathology and economics, as well as by had the opportunity to work with the analysis, develop administrative staff and technicians. This had direct it further, and identify critical leverage points for gender consequences, since higher percentages of change. This collaborative process unleashed a tremen- women were in these roles. It also had consequences dous amount of energy as staff engaged in designing for effectiveness, since CIMMYT was seeking to change projects and action steps. A participatory strengthen systems-oriented research, move to a proj- method was used to set priorities among the many ect-based team approach, as well as reinforce its change proposals generated. capacity in biotechnology. CIMMYT decided to focus energy and resources on six This was one of the issues revealed through a three- change experiments. Some of these, such as strength- year action research project undertaken by the Center ening communications between senior management to improve gender equity. CIMMYT chose the action and staff, addressed long-standing problems in fresh research approach because it was interested in explor- ways. Others, such as developing a 360-degree per- ing the more subtle aspects of how gender inequities formance appraisal system to give better recognition are manifest in organizational structures, systems, work to collaborative and facilitative work behaviors, were practices and cultural norms. Moreover, the approach new proposals to address newly understood issues. All explicitly linked gender equity with organizational the change experiments we redesigned to "interrupt" effectiveness concerns and this served to galvanize the negative effects for equity and effectiveness of the broad support and energy to undertake change. norms surfaced through the analysis. A team of action researchers designed the project in In the end, four of six the proposals were implemented, collaboration with a Task Force comprised of staff from monitored, adapted and evaluated. Important changes diverse parts of the organization. The research team were incorporated into core work and management interviewed more than seventy staff from various processes at the Center. While the process was not backgrounds, workgroups and levels. The researchers easy nor straightforward, follow-up evaluations indi- then developed a cultural analysis. The analysis focused cate that the changes have indeed helped CIMMYT to on deep-seated norms in CIMMYT's culture that had reposition itseLf strategically, become more effective, been beneficiat to CIMMYT in the past but were now and develop a work environment that better supports hindering its ability to move towards its new strategic the productivity, job satisfaction, and career opportuni- objectives and to develop a more gender equitable ties of women, as well as men, and of diverse staff in work environment. Examples of the types of norms general. 1999b) provi(de two concrete examples from the practice of collaborative action research with a multicultural board development intervention and a gender-equity initiative (see Boxes 16 and 17). Because collaborative approaches to change are more fluid and are planned in distinct cycles of inquiry, analysis and iimplemientation, Holvino (2000) suggests that an action research approach to diversity may be more appropriate than long-term and more tradi- tional organizational development approaches. This may bc cspecially so for social Im change organizations where more stakeholders expect to participate in key organizational 62 decisions, where human and financial resources are scarcer, and where changes in the external environment such as donors' priorities or national politics are less predictable and more frequent. Large group collaborative interventions for organizational change, such as future search conferences'35 and appreciative inquiry'36 methodology, could also prove to be very pow- erful in diversity efforts. A unique characteristic of large group interventions is that they simultaneously involve internal and external stakeholders in the change effort and bring thc whole system into the room to work together, energizing and involving many organi- zational members in the process of change.' A future search conference is a three-ay large group event that helps stakeholders create their shared future vision for their organization. Typically, 60 to 70 participants go through a highly structured meeting to explore the past, present and future of the whole system under consideration. The meeting enables all stakcholders to discover shared intentions and common ground around such issues as how multicultural they want their organization to be. It encourages participants to take responsibility for their own action plans and to make their visions happen. Appreciative inquiry has led to some notable successes in organizations seeking to better capitalize on staff diversity (see Box 18). The appreciative inquiry process consists of a cycle: discovery, dreaming, design and delivery.'38 What distinguishes this from other approaches is its assumption that in every organization, and for every member thereof, something is going right, and that there have been at least occasional high points of per- formance and achievement. Rather than diagnose problems and shortcomings in the dis- 3 From sexual harassment to best cross-gender relations: x 0 An appreciative inquiry case'39 A LARGE MANUFACTURING organization located in opment in cross-gender relations, and methods of Mexico wanted to make a dramatic cut in the inci- career advancement. dence of sexual harassment. In conversations with the A large-group forum was held after the stories had appreciative inquiry consultants, the purpose of the been collected and disseminated, with the interview intervention was redefined as ''develop a model, of benclctdadismntd,whteitrvw interentio wasredefned s 'deelopa modl of stories providing the fuel to develop proposals for the high-quality cross-gender relationships in the work- strepovdnthfulodvlppooasfrte hhality ncr enery oreations t future. Some 30 practical proposals were created, such plcotenwcetrrgnzto." as "Every task or committee, whenever possible, is co- A small pilot project started with pairs of women and chaired by a cross-gender pair." Changes in systems men who worked together nominating themselves to and structures were made in order to implement the share their stories of creating and sustaining high-qual- propositions. One of the most dramatic examples of ity cross-gender workplace relationships. Hundreds of the impact of the appreciative inquiry intervention was pairs nominated themselves and one hundred people the change made in the composition of the senior were trained in appreciative inquiry interviewing. leadership group to include more women. In 1997, the During the next several weeks, 300 interviews were organization was chosen the best company in the completed, using volunteer interviewees to interview country for women to work. a new pairs. The stories collected and documented pro- vided examples of achievement, trust building, joint leadership, practices for effective conflict management, (This intervention was designed and facilitated by ways of dealing with sex stereotypes, stages of devel- Marge Schiller and Marcia Worthing.) 63 covery phase, appreciative inquiry sets out to doctliment the organization's best moments Qz t-W;>1 and the conditions and individual contributions that made themii possible. Ilere the /3 _< > < process resembles an internal benchmarking of best practices, identified and narrated by the people who experienced them. As the organization amasses these stories, it can cre- ate a new image of itself based on the qualities it has manifested in its moments of __ t W J §, excellence. Some of the resulting actioni steps to piut the "dream" in operation may involve extending the conditions that eniabled successful practices, so that these become the norm rather than the exception. Bat the very process of appreciative inquiry frequently leads to break- througlhs in an organization's own sense of what it is capable of achieving, and in its mem- bers' awareness of the richness of resources that were previously latent. Several apprecia- tive inquiry scholar-practitioners attribute this to the deep dialogue of the interview process, which enables the members of an organization to talk about their successes in their own terms. 14t) Appreciative inquiry proponents argue that this approach does not generate the defensiveness that typically comes with organizational "change" because, rather than asking people to change what they have been doing wrong, it encourages them to do more of what they've already been doing right. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF COLLABORATIVE INQUIRY APPROACHES TO DIVERSITY The strengths of action research and collaborative inquiry approaches to diversity are that they: ° involve many stakeholders in the stages of the change effort, thus generating energy and commitment throughout the whole system; o develop internal capacity by increasing knowledge and skills of internal change agents; o promote organizational dialogues, which help identify and surface deep norms affecting equity and effectiveness an(d the practices thlat reinforce them; o generate less resistance than top-down approaches because they tend to involve those likely to be affected by the changes; ° provide access to important information rapidly; and o integrate the expertise of internal and external change agents. The limitations of the action research and other collaborative inquiry approaches are: o it may be difficult to get leadership commitment and resources because specific out- comes are not predictable or set at the beginning of the initiative; ° the participatory process may generate too many agenda items and create unrealis- tic expectations about change throughout the organization; o the unbounded nature of the process requires on-going negotiation; and > 0 lack of grounding in the culture of the organization and an established long-term relationship with the organization and its leadership may hinder the on-going via- _____ bility of the initiative. 64 Types of interventions and other cons'deratlons hn dlvers$ty pannhng TYPES OF INTERVENTIONS Diversity initiatives rieed to address three different types of organizational change: struc- tural change, cultural change and behavioral change.'41 Structural, cultural and behav- ioral changes are synergistic. They become the key leverage points for intervening in a planned diversity initiative. For example, structural changes such as equitable perform- ance and advancement systems may remove "glass ceiling barriers" to the participationi of women in organizations, but if the cultnire of the organization does not support the advancement of womeen and the individual behavior of managers who promote them, the overall change goal for gender equity in thc organization will not be achieved. 142 While these types of changes are interrelated in a complex and mutually reinforcing manner, we identify below the scope and examples of specific interventions that are representative of each type. One of the key challenges of a diversity initiative is to include the right lix of interventions that will maximize change by supporting or reinforcing each other. Structural change interventions These interventions address changes in the groupings of positions and departments in an organization and in the formal systems that guide and control the work of the organiza- tion. These changes require interventions which target policies, practices and structures that support or hinder the goals of diversity such as recruitment practices, equal pay and benefits, work-family balance policies, and achievement of proportionial heterogeneity in positions across rank, departmeints and specialization. Cox (1993) states that structural integration, thc integration of "minority" group mem- bers in key positions, vertically and horizontally across the organizational hierarchy, is an important component of working with diversity effectively. In addition to providing access to decision-making and organizational power, structural integration inmay help reduce stereotypes and prejudice, provide iniiportant role models for the incorporation of other groups into the organization, and diminish the dynamics of tokenism143 that many times reduce the effectiveness of employees from non-dominant groups. Recruitment, advance- ment and retention programs usually accompany structural integration goals. These can include advising and mentoring, recruiting from new pools of talent, and setting up career development programs and career paths. They can also include changes in current recruit- ment practices, such as requiring that all interview panels be diverse in their make-up, changing the weight of the interview in the selection process, and reviewing jobs and job descriptions to focus on requirements as opposed to preferences.'44 Nevertheless, struc- U tural integration is not a sufficient component for diversification and when mishandled through practices, such as rigid quotas and non-standard procedures, it may harm more than benefit a diversity initiative. 65 Other formal processes, which act as barriers to the inclusion, advancement and effec- tiveness of diverse employees, must also be changed. For example, flexible work sched- ules, part-time scheduling, compressed work week, job sharing and job rotation, and flex- ible vacation and sick-leave policies have been shown to bring about the inclusion of dif- ferent groups by providing more flexibility and helping attract and retain a diversity of employees such as working mothers and fathers, employees with elder care responsibili- ties and employees from non-dominant religions. While this is not an cxhaustivc list, other important policies that should be reviewed or implemented are pay equity, benefits for domestic partners of gay and lesbian workers, and employee support programs which address special nieeds of employees and enhance the quality of life in the workplace, such as counseling services and health and exercise clinics. Culture change interventions Cultural change interventions address changes that alter the basic assumptions, values, beliefs and ideologies that define the organization's view of itself, its effectiveness, and its environment. These types of interventions, thus, target the informal norms, or "mental models", 145 thiat support or hinder the goals of diversity and that have differential impact on different groups in the organization. Changing the culture of an organization to value diversity and differences is one of the most difficult challenges in a diversity initiative. Cox suggests that the change goal is to develop a pluralistic culture "characterized by tolerance for ambiguity, an acceptance of a wide range of work styles and behaviors, and the encouragement of diversity in thought, practice, and action." 146 As Reynolds (1987:38) advises, the difficulty with changing orga- nizational culture is that: culture is 7not the official system of values promulgated by mantagement but a whole range of shared models of social action containing both real and ideal elements. Each laryer of the cultural onion is affected by the social con- text and the channel of communication: the observed behavior; the official document; the things said at meetings; the things said when alone with one's boss; the things said to one's boss when the boss's boss is present, the verbal expression of what the ideal situation should be; and humorous rendering of all of the above. Many attempts have been made to study and characterize organizational cultures accord- ing to major traits exhibited such as a power culture, a role culture, a support culture and an achievement culture. 147 Prescriptions are then made about needed changes according to the strengths and weaknesses of the identified organizational culture type. Education and training interventions also may be implemented with the purpose of changing the cul- ture of an organization, but it is important to understand that training interventions do not change organizational culture. From our perspective, the best way to achieve organi- zational culture change is to identify the informal practices and beliefs that make up the culture of the organization; analyze the consequences of those beliefs and ways of being and doing, especially how they may impact different groups of employees; and then design I 66 and introduce small experiments to change the everyday practices tllat make up the orga- nizational culture and which sustain the deep structures of belief that underlie it. 148 Action research methods can be very effective for understanding an organization's culture and the impact of specific cultural norms and assumptions on both diverse groups of peo- ple as well as on the organization's performance. 149 Another specific diagnostic interven- tion at this level of change, often used in the organizational development approach. is the cultural audit. A cultural audit is a series of data collection activities to understand the cultural paradigmns operating in an organization. It usually involves studying the social- ization of new mernbers, analyzing responses to critical incidents in the organization's his- tory, analyzing artifacts, symbols, rites and rituals, beliefs, values, stories and even the physical layout, and jointly exploring the meaning of these and their impact on organiza- tional climate and effectiveness. 151 The purpose of a diversity cultural audit is to identify key elements or characteristics of the organizational culture and how these influence the treatment and success opportunities of members of different groups. For Powell (1993:248), the goals of a cultural audit are to: uncover biases in decision making regarding recruitment, performance appraisals, promotions, compensation, and other management activities if present, and to identiJf ways in whtichi the organi-ational culture, especially if it is monolithic or plural, mayput some employees at a disadvantage. Another intervention that supports organizational culture change includes: sanctioned affinity, support or interest groups and alliances which meet to share problems and solutions, learn the organizational norms, develop supportive relations and change strate- gies; and ideological negotiations and forms of rnulticultural conflict resolution that help resolve conflicts of interest by directly or indirectly addressinig value arid ideo- logical differences and settling disputes in democratic and participatory ways. 151 Behavioral change interventions Behavioral change interventions address changes in behaviors, attitudes and perceptions among individuals. between individuals, and among and between work groups that sup- port or hinder the goals of diversity, especially those among peers and those of managers and organizational leaders. These behaviors include stereotyping, disrespectful interper- sonal interactions, and group attitudes reflected in language use and humor, which whether subtle, intentional or not, have the effect of creating a hostile or undermining cli- mate for minority group members. These behaviors have been called "micro-inequities" because they support exclusion and differential treatment towards some people in prac- tices such as restricted information and feedback from supervisors and coworkers, inequitable delegation of tasks, and exclusion from informal social networks and peer Sl]pport. 52 I A common intervention to address individual and interpersonal behavior is education anLd training(see Box 19). While many organizations and consultants equate diversity with train- ing programs, we want to emphasize that training is just one of the intcrventions that focus 67 Training: A rich and focused intervention THERE ARE MANY OPTIONS FOR IMPLEMENTING TRAINING AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS TO SUPPORT A DIVERSITY INITIATIVE. SOME AUTHORS AND CONSULTANTS DEFINE EDUCATION AS A MORE GENERAL APPROACH TO GAINING KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES AND SKILLS IN DIVERSITY. THEY DIFFERENTIATE EDUCATION FROM TRAINING INTERVENTIONS. OTHERS DEFINE COMPETENCY-BASED TRAINING AS KNOWLEDGE-BASED AND BEHAVIORAL IN NATURE, ESPECIALLY TARGETED TO DEVELOP "PROVEN" SKILLS THAT SUPPORT DIVERSITY.TO HELP DECIDE WHICH TYPE OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING PROGRAM TO IMPLEMENT, ELEMENTS SUCH AS THE OVERALL PURPOSE, THE AUDIENCE, THE CONTENT AND DELIVERY STYLE DESIRED SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. PURPDO§IES OF TRANIINIDG PROGRAiMS Dialogue groups: To increase the opportunity for candid conversations to occur between individuals Awareness training: To increase knowledge, ability and groups in a reLatively unstructured format on an to empathize, and understanding of the differential ongoing basis. impact of the corporate culture by sharing stories and hearing about others' experiences and challenges. Deals with emotional and rational content of human TVPES OF COItITEIt7T interactions, exploring how people feel and act in the Cross-cultural training, bias reduction, manag- face of differences. ing diversity and general policy orientation Skill building: To increase skills in behaving and programs are just a few of the types of content acting in ways that promote diversity, such as cross- areas that differentiate training programs. cultural communication and conflict resolution. Orientation and information dissemination: TARGET AUDIE CI) E To increase knowledge by disseminating information about new policies that impact diversity such as Programs may be developed for different target sexual harassment or communicating the status of a populations such as mid-level managers, first line diversity initiative. supervisors, technical staff, working teams, general population and internal change agents. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ARE OFF-THE-SHELF OR CUSTOMIZED TRAINING, INTERNALLY DELIVERED OR DELIVERED BY EXTERNAL CONSULTANTS, OFF-SITE OR ON-THE-JOB; SHORT OR LONGER DURATION, STRETCHED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME OR ONE-TIME; PHASED INTO A SEQUENCE OF PROGRAMS,AND VOLUNTARY OR MANDATORY. on changing individual behavior and is limited to that level of change. For example, train- ing cannot change organizational culture, except indirectly when a critical mass of people go through intense and successful training programs and become internal change agents that pressure the organization to implement struictiural and culture changes. Ellis and Son- nenfeld (1994) identify some of the advanitages of training such as raising awareness about indirect discriminiation and conferred privilege, providing voice to those who have been historically underrepresented, substituting knowledge and facts for myths and stereotypes about coworkers, and sending a message that diversity is an important initiative through- out the organization. On the other hand, ill-designed and inappropriately conducted train- > ing may do considerable harm to diversity efforts. For example, they can create additional stereotypes if the content is too simplistic, or they can alienate dominant groups if the oz process of training is perceived as favoring some groups at the expense of others. Training 68 interventions can also backfire if they are delivered as a one-shot deal without appropriate follow-up or reinforcement through other interventions. Other important interventions to change behaviors for increased diversity are coaching and muulticultural team building. Coaching provides one-on-one support to managers, especially senior managers, to help them identify areas that need development and sup- porting their taking action on those areas. Multicultural team building enhances the effectiveness of working teams by paying special attention and developing skills in maniag- ing cultural and other social differences that are impacting the task, the roles members play, the relationships between them and the methods and procedures used to accomplish their work. One important note of caution with behavioral change interventions is that they may rely too much on "fixing the people"154 or "equipping the minorities", Is 5 ignoring the systemic structural and cultural factors that influence individual and group behavior. SELECTING SPECIFIC INTERVENTIONS For each of the types of changes described above there exists a wide range of specific inter- ventions or activities. Many interventions, such as mentoring, impact more than one level of change (see Box 20). In addition, different interventions are more appropriate for different stages of multicul- tural organizational development (see page 52). For example, in the exclusive stage, organizations benefit most from legal interventions and having to respond to external pressures for change. In the passive club stage, organizations will benefit from revising and opening up the recruitment process to increase the numiibers of under-represented groups, making a special effort to recruit "pioneers" who are willing to lead organization- al change, and adopting policies to prevent socially-based harassment. In the compliance stage, mentoring, networks and education programs help create a climate for change and foster a critical mass of employees to support change. In the posi- tive action stage. an expanded vision of diversity, identifying and developing inter- nal change agents, working with pockets of readiness to initiate culture change exper- iments, and instituting diversity accountability measures in performance evallations have proven to be successful interventionis. In the redefining and multicultural stages, inclusive policies and structures such as self-managed teams, win-win conflict skills training, organizational learning. reviewing and renegotiating norms, and involvement of external stakeholders are interventions that support a continuous change process for inclusion and diversity. 0 In all, effective diversity efforts require a multilevel approach that includes structural, t cultural and behavioral change and a variety of specific interventions that reinforce and augment each other. Morrison (1993) summarized the ten most important diversity inter- ventions identified in her benchmarking research with corporations in the United States. They appear here in the order of importance assigned by her tcam based on their survey and interview information: 69 Diversified mentoring programs MENTORING ISAN EXAMPLE of an intervention that example, Thomas (1990, 1993) found that same-race can address three levels of organizational change - relationships provided significantly more psychosocial behavioral, structural and cultural. That is why it is con- support than cross-race relations. In one study, Ragins sidered a powerful and attractive intervention in diver- (1995) found that prot6ges from higher socioeconomic sity efforts. But mentoring is also a complex interven- backgrounds had higher promotion rates than proteges tion that requires careful planning. In a diversity initia- from lower socio-economic backgrounds. In spite of tive, the purpose of mentoring programs is to support these difficulties, cross-mentoring or diversified rela- the career development of "targeted" groups by help- tions have a positive impact on proteges and mentors. ing identify and develop specific individuals in the They can also help strengthen the culture of diversity organization. The assumption is that members of non- in an organization by: a) providing examples of suc- dominant groups do not have the same access to cessful diverse relations; b) encouraging in-depth informal mentoring opportunities that may accrue knowledge of individuals across race and gender more easily to members of dominant groups. Catalyst, boundaries, for example; and c) modeLing norms of a non-profit research organization focusing on gender deveLopmental support and collaboration in the organ- issues in corporations, found out that the single great- ization. If successfuL mentoring programs are institu- est barrier to advancement as reported by women of tionalized, the organization also benefits from changes color in the United States was the lack of mentors.156 in its structure, norms and practices, which benefit all The importance of mentoring for individual advance- members. ment, effectiveness and well being has been well Various authors identify the following characteristics of established. Ragins (1995), for example, identified that successful mentoring programs: 1) anchor them in the individuals with mentors receive more promotions, organizational imperative for change; 2) set clear and advance faster and receive greater compensation than t m T realistic expectations and understanding among partic- those without mentors. They also report greater posl-1 ipants about the process of mentoring and mentoring tional power, greater access to important people and relations; 3) provide ongoing support to both mentors more influence over organizational policy. Kram (1985) and proteges involved in the program such as skilL and David Thomas (1990, 1993) suggest that mentors building training; 4) develop reward systems and insti- have two basic functions: career functions and psy- tutionaLize the mentoring functions in performance chosocial functions. Career functions include giving appraisal and staff development systems 5) use a career advice, advocating and sponsoring, securing selection and matching process that empowers both exposure and visibility, coaching, providing perform- mentors and proteges 6) involve the participant's ance feedback and giving challenging assignments to supervisors in appropriate roles, 7) start with a proto- the protege. Psychosocial functions include role model- type or pilot; 8) avoid common mistakes by research- ing, heLping proteges maintain self-esteem and profes- plt 8) avoid ommon mistaks by search- sional identity, counseling and providing friendship. ing and benchmarking other programs; 9) select cham- pions to administer and sponsor the program; and 10) Cross-gender or cross-race mentoring relations have monitor the progress of participants and incorporate been recognized as more difficult to estabLish and Learnings from the program into its ongoing implemen- maintain than same-gender or same-race relations. For tation. 17 o personal involvement of the top management and organizational lcaders; o recruitment of diverse staff in managerial and non-managerial positions; o internal advocacy and change agent groups; ° emphasis on collection and utilization of statistics and diversity organizational pro- files; o inclusion of diversity in performance appraisal and advancement decisions; > 0 inclusion of diversity in leadership development and succession planning; 0 diversity training programs; I ° support networks and internal affiliation groups; 70 o work-family policies; and o career development and advancement. While organization-wide interventions such as training programs and support networks are an important part of a diversity change initiative, diversity initiatives must also include interventions that address the needs and opportunities of work within specific work units; for example, conducting a multicultural team-building intervention with a virtual project team. It is often in the smaller work units that experiments can be designed and tested. Innovations can then be dispersed throughout the organization. 0rmpkmrenthMg dversky: addkhonaI tessons from t~he t%eM I N CL0S I NG TH I S SECTIO N, wethinkit isimportantto share some of thelessons and insights that have emerged from working with diversity in practice. We have drawn on our own experience as well as that of otlier external and internal change agents who have worked extensively with diversity. DEPLOYMENT AND INVOLVEMENT OF CHANGE AGENTS In order to maximize the impact of a diversity change effort, it is important to involve and deploy external and internal change agents in the selection and implementation of spe- cific interventions, as their different perspectives, roles and skills can complement each other. Usually, the role of an external consultant is to provide expertise and support to the designated persons accountable for the initiative. S/he will recommend particular approaches and help develop a strategy for the effort, including how to organize internal resources, involve different constituencies and design and implement specific interven- tions. But an organization may also choose to imnplement a diversity initiative only with internal resources. In this case, a good way to organize human resources is to have a direc- tor of diversity, a diversity council and an executive group sharing responsibility and accountability for the initiative. It is difficult for internal change agents to have the organizational credibility, enough power and influence, and the overall support required to create and manage a diversity initiative on their own. The strength of internal clhange agents lies in their knowledge of the organizational culture and systems and their ability to access resources and organize targeted interventions such as recruitment, inientoring, statistical analysis of the work force, and training. But, large organizational change efforts require the support of exter- nal change agents who bring an outsiders perspective and external credibility and experi- ence. In our opinion, the combination of internal change agents, external consultants, executive leadership and other key stakeholders produces the best results for developing and implementing a successful diversity initiative. (See Annex for inore on the specific roles each of these groups can play in a diversity change effort.) X 71 AVOIDING COMMON DIVERSITY "TRAPS" We have identified common mistakes to avoid in trying to bring about diversity change, learned from experience and from practice, especially in the context of United States-based organizations and their international affiliates. 59 Some of the "traps" identified are: o assuming that short-term training will be enough; o failing to relate diversity to the organizational mission and key products; o waiting to collect all possible data and ignoring employee perceptions as data for tak- ing action; o waiting for everyone important to be thoroughly behind the effort; o not paying attention to the impact of resistant people in important positions; o isolating the effort in one department (such as human resources) or under one per- son; o nxot differenitiatinig between the intent, usually verbal, to support diversity and the reality of the effect of institutional actions that go against diversity in spite of the intent; o not building coalitions and support among different stakeholders that may fear that the diversity effort will not include them; o assuming that managing diversity is just "good common sense and people skills"; o measuring success by the quantity and magnitude of diversity activities and events, rather than the impact on work and people. TIPS FOR INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS Based on our experience initiating, designing and implementing diversity change efforts in international contexts, we want to add the following tips. o Hake special efforts to identify and utilize in-country resources to provide demographic data, cultural and social science research, and other relevant diversity information on an on-going basis. National universities, local research organizations and think tanks, social action groups and other profit and non-profit organizations working on diversity are often overlooked, but are importanit local resources to be integrated into a diversity initiative, especially at the beginning of the change effort. o Partner local resources with external resources in order to develop the capaci- ty of country nationals to work on organizational diversity and to ensure that exter- nal consultants understand and respond to the local context. Nurture and provide the opportunity for these partnerships to become role models of successful cross- mentoring and multicultural teamwork. o Pay attention and respond to the national social context and constraints but also accept responsibility for providing leadership in changing accepted patterns of social behavior that are no longer suitable in a multicultural and global environ- > ulient. For example, low accountability fromii government agencies in regards to anti- discrimination laws should not be taken as a reason for "not taking action" by inter- national organizations initiating diversity efforts. 72 INDICATORS OF PROGRESS To guide and instill momentum into the change effort, it is important to ideiLtify suxccess indicators and develop realistic, but not complacent, measures of progress. This is essen- tial for working with diversity in a way that responds to the organizational vision and to the social and cultural realities of the specific organizational context. Box 21 provides an example of indicators of diversity progress that can be adapted to specific organizational and national realities. i Indicators of Progress in EffectiveLy Managing Diversity"60 THE ORGANIZATION IS WORKING CREATIVELY WITH DIVERSITY WHEN THE FOLLOWING ARE IN EFFECT. * Diversity strategies are integral to organizational * Information flows unencumbered to those who strategies and objectives. need it to work effectively. * Diversity is viewed as contributing to organization- * Expertise is trapped in strategic decision-making no al effectiveness. matter where it resides in the organization. * Diversity is recognized as a long-term organization- * Individuals hold themselves accountable for their al investment that naturalLy involves complexity actions. and constructive conflict. * Managers are trained, assessed, held accountable * Managers take ownership for the strategy by set- and rewarded for managing people of diverse back- ting visible goals and by serving as positive role grounds effectively. models. models. * Managers are rewarded for integrating diversity * People of diverse backgrounds work at all levels objectives and practices within their work initia- and departments of the organization. tives and programs. * Diversity is an explicit goal in recruitment strate- * The organization is viewed by its employees, gies. clients, and other stakeholders as an ethical player in its professional area and in the community * There is equity in employment actions and sys- where it is located. tems. . Diversit is integral to the organization'soperating * The organization is viewed as a benchmark for best * Diversity IS Integral to the organization's operating prcieindvstybymloesadyth principles and values and these are recognized as driving organizational behavior. public. * The organization's products and outputs reflect a * Diversity objectives are set and met, from the top oad andzdivers cts and patneretwork to th botom ofthe rganiatio. broad and diverse client base and partner network. to the bottom of the organization. * Organizational issues and personnel grievances are * The organization continually assesses and learns resolved effectively, with active, appropriate input/ about the dynamics of diversity and their impact participation from all levels. on the people and the work of the organizations. * Employee issues are raised and heard with respect and honesty, and are resolved in an effective, time- ly manner. ' 73 D Abramms, B. and Simons, C. F. (1996). Diversity-getting real: Where are we? Where are we going? In B. Abramms and G. F. Silmons (eds), The Cultural Diversity Sourcebook: Getting Real about Diversity. Amherst, MA: ODT, pp 491-504. Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodics: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender and Society. Vol. 4, pp 139-158. Acker, J. (1999). Revisiting Class: Lessons from Theorizing Race and Gender in Organizations. Working Paper No. 5, Boston, MA: Center for Gender in Organizations, SIMMONS Gradu- ate School of Management. Adler, N. and Izraeli, D. (1994). Competitive Frontiers: Women Mlanagers in a Global F.conomy. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers. AgoCs, C. and Burr, C. (1996). Employment equity, affirmiiative action and managing diversity: Assessing the differences. International Journal of Manpower. Vol. 17, No. 4-5, pp 3046. Albert, M., Cagan, L., Chomsky, N., Hahnel, R., King, M., Sargent, L., and Skylar, H. (1986) Liberating Theory. Boston, MA: South End Press. Alderfer, C. (1987). An intergroup perspective on group dynamics. In J. Lorsch (ed), Handbook of Organizational Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, pp 190-222. Alderfer, C. (1992). Changing race relationis embedded in organizations: Report on a long-term project with the XYC Corporation. In S. Jackson and Associates (eds), Diversity in the Work- place: Human Resources Initiatives. New York: The Guilford Press, pp 138-166. Alderfer, C., Alderfer, C. J., et al. (1980). Diagrlosinig race relations in management. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. Vol. 16, No. 2, pp 135-166. Alderfer, C. and Smith, K. (1982). Studying intergroup relations embedded in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly. Vol. 27, pp 35-65. Alexander, J., Lichtenstein, R., Jinnett, K., and Aunno, T. (1996). The effects of treatment team diversity and size on assessments of team functioning. Hospital and Health Services Administration. Vol. 41, No. 1, p 37. Alvesson, M. (1994). Talking in organizations: Managing identity and impressions in an adver- tisinig agency. Organization Studies. Vol. 15, pp 535-63. Amabile, T.M. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Busin ess Review. September-October, pp 77-87. Ancona, D. and Caldwell, D. (1992). Dcmography and design predictors of new product team u z performance. Organization Science, Vol. 3, No. 3, August, pp 321-341. Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., et al. (2000). Mlanufacturing Advantage: Why High Performance 74 Work Systems Pay Off: New York: Cornell University Press. Arredondo, P. (1996). Successfurl Diversity Management Initiatives: A Blueprint for Planning and Imptementation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Avigor, R. (1953). Etudes experimentales de la geneses des stereotypes. Cahiers Internmationale de Sociologie, Vol. 5, pp 154-168. Bantel, K. and Jackson, S. (1989). Top management and innovation in banking: Does the com- position of thc top team makc a difference? Strategic Management Journal Vol. 10, pp 107- 124. Bartlett, C. and Ghoshal, S. (1987). Managing across borders: New strategic requirements. Sloan Management Revieu; pp 7-17. Bartlett, C. and Ghoshal, S. (1989). Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Baugh, S. and Graen, G. (1997). Effects of team gender and racial composition on perceptions of team performance in cross-functional teams. Group and Organization Management. Vol. 22, No. 3, p 366. Bell, E. L, Denton, T. C, and Nkomo, S. M. (1993). NVomen of color in management: Toward an inclusive analysis. In E. A. Fagenson (ed), Women in Management: Trends, Issues and Challenges in Managerial Diversity Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pplO5-130. Bell, E. L. and Nkomo, S. M. (1992). Re-visioning women manager's lives. In A. J. Mills and P. Tancred, Gendering OrganizationalAnalysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp 235-247. Berresford, S. (1991). KeynoteAddress to the First Senior Managers Workshop on Gender Issues in the CGLAR System. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, CGLAR Secretariat: CGIAR Gender Staffinjg Prograni. unpublishe(d mimeo, 1991. Boags, R. S. (1998). Twelve keys to a successful mentoring program. Cultural Diversity at Work. Vol. 10, No. 4, p 11. Bond, M. and Pyle, J. (1998). Diversity dilemmas at work. Journal of Management Inquiry. Vol. 7, No. 3, pp 252-269. Briggs Myers, l. (1990). Introduction to Type. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Brown, C. D., Snedeker, C., Sykes, B. (1997). Conflict and Diversity. Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Brumfit, C. J., Ed. (1982). Englishifol Internatioaal Coinmaunication. Oxford: Pergamoiin Press. Bunker, B. B. (1990). Appreciating diversity and modifying organizational cultures: Men and women at work. In S. Srivasta, D. Cooperrider and Associates (eds), Appreciate Mllanage- ment and Leadership: 'The Power of'Positive Thought and Action in Organizations. San Franicisco: Jossey-Bass, pp 126-149. Bunker, B. B. and Alban, B. T. (1997). Large Group Interventions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. Bushe, G. (forthcoming). ThelNewBasics: Interpersonal Competence and OrganizationalLearn- ing. (chapters can be accessed via http://wwwv.hus.sfu.ca/homes/gervase/gervase.html). Byrne, D. (1971). Th e Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic Press. Canney Davison, S. and Ward, K. (1999). Leading International Teams. London: McGraw Hill Publishing Co. 75 Carr-Ruffmo, N. (1996). ManagingDiversity San Francisco, CA: Thomiipson Executive Press. Catalyst (1999). Women of Color in Corporate Management: Opportunities and Barriers. New York: Catalyst. Center for Creative Leadership. (1995). Work teams and diversity. Issues and Observations. Vol. 15, No. 1, pp 1-5. Center for Gender in Organizations. (2000). Conference Report. Gender at Work: Beyond lWhite. Western, Middle-Class, Heterosexual, Professional Women. Boston, MA: Center for Gender in Organizations, SIMMONS Graduate School of Management. CGIAR Gender Program. (1995). Gender Staffing in the CGIAR: Achievements, Constraints, and a Frameworkfor Future Action. Working Paper No. 12, Washington, DC: CGIAR Geii- der Program. Chatinan, J. (1991). Matching people and organizations: Selection and socialization in public accounting firms. Administrative Science Quarterl: Vol. 36, pp 459-484. Chemers, M., Oskamp, S. and Costanzo, M. (1995). Diversity in Organizations: New Perspec- tivesfor a Changing Workplace. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Chesler, M. (1994). Organization development is not the same as multicultural organizational development. In E. Y Cross, J. H. Katz, F. A. Miller and E. W. Seashore (eds), The Promise of Diversity. New York: Irwin/NTL, pp 240-251. Chcsler, M. and Delgado, H. (1987). Race relations training and organisational change. In J. W. Shaw, P. G. Nordlie and R. M. Shapiro (eds), Strategiesftr Improving Race Relations: The AngloAmerican Fxperience. Manciester, UK: University Press, pp 182-204. Chang, W. (1997). Auditing the organizational culture for diversity: A conceptual framework. In C. D. Brown, C. C. Snedeker and B. Sykes, (eds), Conflict and Diversity. Cresshill: Hamp- tonI Press, pp 63-83. Cock, J. and Bernstein, A. (1988). Diversity and disadvantage: Feminist perspectives from the USA and South Africa. Politikon. Vol. 25, No. 2, pp 17-29. Cohen, C. (1981). Goals and schemata in person perception: Making sense from the stream of behavior. In N. Cantor and J. Kihlstrom (eds), Personality, Cognition, and Social Interac- tion. Hillsdale. NJ: L.awrence Erlbaum Associates, pp 45-68. Cole, J. R. and Singer, B. (1991). A theoretical explanation. In H. Zuckerman, J. Cole, and J. Bruer (eds), The Outer Circle: Women in the Scientific Community. New York: W. W. Nor- ton & Company, pp 277-310. Collinson, D. and Hearn, J. (1994). Naiiiing iille as men: Implications for work, organization, and management. Gender, Work, and Organization. Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 2-22. Comer, D. and Soliman, C. (1996). Organizational efforts to manage diversity: Do they really work? Journal of Management Issues. Vol. 8, No. 4, pp 470-483. Cook, M. (1999). The Women 's Initiative at Deloitte and Touche. Presentation to the Organiza- tional Gender Issues Network (ORIGTN), Paris, France, June 11, 1999. Cooperrider, D. (1990). Positive image, positive action: The affirmative basis of organizing. In S. Srivasta, D. Cooperrider, and Associates (eds), Appreciative Management and Leader- ship: The Power of Positive Thought andAction in Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass, pp 91-125. 76 Cooperrider, D. L. and Srivasta, S. (1987). Appreciative inquiry in organizationial life. In WA. Pasmore and R. W Woodman (eds), Research in Organizational Change and Development. Greenwich: JAI Press. Vol. 1, pp 129-169. Cox, T. (1991). The multicultural organization. Academy ofManagemnent Erecutive. Vol. 5, No. 2, pp 34-47. Cox, T. (1993). Cultural Diversity in Organizatiorns: Theory, Research, and PIractice. San Fran- cisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Cox, T. (1996). 'The complexity of diversity: Challenges and directions for future research. In S. Jackson and M. Buderman (eds), Diversity in Work Teams:Research Paradigmisjor u Chang- ing Workplace. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp 235-245. Cox. T. and Blake, S. (1991). Managing cultural diversity: Implications for organizations. Acad- emy of Management Executive. Vol. 5, No. 3, pp 3447. Cox, T. and Finley, J. (1995). An analysis of work specialization and organization level as dinsienisions of work force diversity. In M. Chemers, S. Okampo, M. Costanzo (eds), Diversi- ty in Organizations: New Perspectivesfrom a Changing Workplace. Thousand Oaks and London: Sage Publications. pp 62-71. Cox, T., Lobel, S. and McLeod, P. (1991). Effects of ethnic groul) cultural differelnces oil coop- erative and competitive behavior on a group task. Academy of Management JournaL Vol. 34, No. 4, pp 827-847. Cox, T. and Nkomo, S. (1990). Invisible men and women: A status report on race as a variable in organization behavior research. JournalofOrganizationalBehavior. Vol. ll, pp 419-431. Cray, D. and Mallory, G. (1998). Making Sense of Mlarnagintg Culture. London: International Thomson Business Press. Creed, D. and Scully, M. (forthcoming). Songs of oursclves: Employees' deployment of social identity in everyday workplace environments. Journal ofMiUanagement Inquiry. Crenshaw, KI (1992). Race, gender, and sexual harassment. Southern California Low, Reviewv. Vol. 65, pp 1467-1476. Crenshaw, K. (1993). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critiquie of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist policies. In D. Kelly Weisberg (ed). Feminist Legal Theory: Foundations. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, pp 383- 95. Cross, E. (1992). Managing diversity-A continuous process of change. The Diversity Factor. Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 2-5. Cross, E. and Blackburn White, M., Eds. (1996). The Diversity Factor: Capta ring the Compet- itive Advantage of a Changing Workforce. Chicago: Irwin Professional Publishing. Cross, E., Katz, J., Miller, E and Seashore, E. (1994). The Promise of Diversity: Over 40 Voices Discuss Strategies for Eliminating Discrimination in Organizations. Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin Professional Publishing. Crowfoot, J. and Chesler, M. (1996). White men's roles in multicultural coalitions. In B. Bows- er and R. Hunt (eds), Impacts of Racism on W1hite American. Thousand Oaks and London: Sage Publications, pp 202-229. Crystal, D. (1997). English as a Global Langttage, Cambridge: University Press. 77 Cumming, J. and Storer, G. (1993). Language training in development: New strategies and roles. System. Vol. 20, No. 4, pp 507-516. Cumming, J. and Holvino, E. (1997). Unpublished handout, Brattleboro, VT: Chaos Manage- ment. Czarniawska-Joerges, B. and Joerges, B. (1990). Linguistic artifacts at the service of organi- zational control. In P. Gagliardi (ed), Symbols and Artifacts: Views of the Corporate Land- scape. Berlin: de Gruyter. Dearborn, D. and Simon, H. (1958). Selective perception: A note on the department idenltifi- cation of executives. Sociometry, pp 140-144. Digh, P. (1998). The next challenge: Holding people accountable. Human Resource Manage- ment Magazine. Vol. 43, No. 11, pp 63-69. DiTomaso, N., Cordero, R. and Farris, G. (1996). Effects of group diversity on perceptions of group and self among scientists and engirieers. In M. Rudermani, M. Hughes-James, and S. Jackson (eds), Selected Research on Work Team Diversity. Greensboro, NC: Center for Cre- ative Leadership and the American Psychological Association, pp 99-120. Eigel, K. and Kuhnert, KL (1996). Personality diversity and its relationisliip to maniagerial team productivity. In M. Ruderman, M. Hughes-James and S. Jackson (eds), Selected Research on Work Team Diversity Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership and the American Psychological Association, pp 75-98. Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P. and Davis-LaMastro, V. (1990). Perceived organizational support arid emlopoyee diligence, commllitmenit, and innovation. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 75, No. 1, pp 51-59. Elliott, C. (1999). Locating theEnergyfor Change:An Introduction toAppreciativeInquiry. Win- nipeg, Canada: The International Institute for Sustainable Developmenit. Ellis, C. and Sonnenfeld, J. A (1994). Diverse approaches to managing diversity. Human Resource Managenment. Vol. 33, No.], pp 79-109. Elsass, P. and Graves, L. (1997). Demographic diversity in decision-rmakirng groups: Tlle expe- riences of women and people of color. Academy of llanagemeat Review. Vol. 22, No. 4, pp 946-973. Ely, R. (1994). The effects of organizational demographics and social identity on relationships among professional women. Administrative Science Quarterly. Vol. 39, pp 203-238. Ely, R. (1996). The role of dominant identity and experience in organizational work on diversi- ty. In S. Jackson and M. Ruderman (eds), Diversity in Work Teams: Research Paradigms for a Changing Worlkplace. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp 161- 186. Ely, R. and Meyerson, D. (1998). Reflections on moving from a gender to a broader diversity lens. CG Gender Lens, Vol. 3, Issue 2, pp 5-6. Washington, D.C.: CGIAR Gender Program. Also printed as CGO Insights, No. 4, Boston, MA: Center for Gender in Orgainizations, SIM- MONS Graduate School of Management, March 1999. Essed, P. (1990). Understanding Everyday Racism. Alameda, CA: Hunter House. Essed, P. (1996). Diversity: Gender, Color, and Culture. Amherst, MA: tJniversity of Massachu- setts. 78 Faruqui, A. M., Hassan, M. H. A., and Sandri, C. (1988). The Role of Women in the Develop- ment of Science and Technolo3y in the Third World. Singapore: World Scicntific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. Ferdman, B. (1995). Cultural identity and diversity in organizations: Bridging the gap betweeii group differenices and individual uniqueness. In M. Chemers, S. Oskamp, and M. Costanzo (eds), Diversity in Organizations: NVew Perspectives for a Changing Workplace. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, pp 37-61. Ferdman, B. and Gallegos, P. (forthcoming). Racial identity developmnent and Latinos il thle United States. In C. Wijeyesinghe and B. Jackson (eds), Reflections on RacialIdentityDevel- opment: Essays in Theory, Practice, and Discourse. New York, NY: University Press. Ferarri, S. (1972). Human behaviour in internationial groups. Management International Revieu; Vol. XII, No. 6, pp 31-35. Fine, M. (1995). Building Successful Multicultural Organizations. Westport, CT: Quorum Books. Fine, M. (1996). Witnessing whiteness. In M. Fine, L. Powell, L. Weis, and M. Wong (eds), Off White: Readings on7 Society, Race, and Culture. New York: Routledge, pp 297-311. Fletcher, J. (1999). Disappearing Acts: Gendei; Power, and Relational Practice at Work. Cam- bridge, MA: The MIT Press. Fletcher, J. and Merrill-Sands, D. (1998). Looking below the surface: The gendered nature of organizations. CG Gender Lens. Washington, DC: CGIAR Gender Program, Vol. 3, No. 1, p 3. Also printed as CGO Insights, No. 2, Bostoln, MA: Center for Gender in Organizations, SIMMONS Graduate School of Management, November, 1998. Foldy, E. (1999). Managing diversity: Identity and power in organizations. Proposal for Disser- tation Researchi, Carroll School of Management, Boston College, August 5, 1999. Manu- script. Foster, B. G., Jackson, G., Jackson, B, and Hardiman, R. (1988). Work force diversity and busi- ness. Training and Development Journal. Vol. 42, No. 4, pp 38-42. Frye, M. (1983). The Politics of Reality: Essays in Feminist Theory: NY: The Crossing Press. Fulakawa, A. (1997). Transcultural Management. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Garcia, M.H. (1995). An anthropological approach to multicultural diversity training. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. Vol. 31, No. 4, pp 490-504. Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Ctltures. New York: Basic Books, Iric. Gentile, M. (1994). Differences that Work. Cambridge: Harvard Business Review. Gergen, K. J. (1995). Global organization: From imperialism to ethical vision. Organization. Vol. 2, No. 3/4, pp 519-532. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Gioia, D. A., Donnellon, A., et al. (1989). Communication and cognition in appraisal: A tale of two paradigms. Organization Studies. Vol. 10, pp 503-29. Gordon, A. F. (1995). The work of corporate culture: Diversity management. Social Text #44. Vol. 13, No. 3, pp 3-30. 79 Gordon, G., DiTomaso, N., and Farris, G. (1991). Managing diversity in R&D groups. Research Technology Management. January-February, pp 18-23. Gottfredson, L. (1992). Dilemmas in developing diversity programs. Ifi S. Jackson and Associ- ates (eds), Diversity in the fWorhplace: Hu man Resources Initiatives. New York: The Guilford Press, pp 279-305. Grace, P. (1994). Danger - diversity training ahead: Addressing the myths of diversity training and offcring alternatives. In J. W Pfeiffer (ed), The 1994 Annual: Developing Human Resources. San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer and Company, pp 189-200. Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding Common Groundjfor Multiparty Problems. San Francis- co: Jossey-Bass. Greenhaus, J., Parasuraman, S. and Wormlcy, W. (1990). Effects of race on organizational experiences, job performance evaluations and career outcomes. Academy of Management Joumral. Vol. 33. No. 1, pp 64-86. Greenwood, D. J. and Levin, M. (1998). Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for Social Change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Guinier, L. (1998). Lessons and challenges of becoming gentlemen. New York UniversityReview oJfLaw and Social Change. Vol. 24, No. 1, pp 1-16. Guzzo, R., Salas, E. and Associates. (1995). Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Orga- nizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Hall, E. (1966). The Hidden Dimension. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday. Hammond, S. (1996). The Thin Book ofAppreciative Inquiry, Plano, TX: Thin Book Publishing Co. Hammond, S. and Royal, C. (Eds), (1998). Lessons from the Field: Applying Appreciative Tnquiry, Plano, TX: Practical Press, Inc. Hampden-Turner, C. and Trompenaars, F. (1993). The Seven Cultures of Capitalism: Values Systems for Creating Wealth in the ULnited States, Britain, Japan, Germany, France, Swveden, and the Netherlands. New York: Doubleday. Harrison, R. and Stokes, H. (1992). Dittgnosing Organizational Culture. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Hassim, S. (1999). Institutionalising gender in South Africa: Inclusion and transformation. In Marks, R. et al. (2000), CGO Working Paper, No. 9. Boston, MA: Center for Gender in Orga- nizations, SIMMONS Graduate School of Management. Hayles, V. R. and Russell, A. M. (1997). 7he Diversity Directive: Why some Initiatives Fail and What to do About it. Chicago, IL: Irwin/ASTD. Henderson, L. J. (1994). Managing diversity in organizations: Empirical, normative, and public policy issues. In E. Y. Cross, J. H. Katz, F. A. Miller and E. W. Seashore (eds), The Promise of Diversity. New York: Irwin/NTL, pp 267-271. Hickson, D. and Hinings, C., et al. (1974). The culture-free context of organizational structure: A tri-national comparison. Sociology. Vol. 8, pp 59-80. u z Hillman, A., Cannella, A., and Paetzold, R. (forthcoming). The board of directors as an envi- ronmental link: Stragegic adaption of board composition in response to environmental change. Journal of Mlranagement Studies. 80 Hirsh, S. K. and Kummerow, J. M. (1990). Introduction to Type in Organizations. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, inc. Hoecklin, L. (1995). Mtanaging C(ultutral Differences. Wokingham, England: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Hoffman, E. (1985). The effect of race-ratio composition on the frequency of organizational communication. Social Psychology Quarterly Vol. 48, pp 17-26. Hoffman, L. and Maier, N. (1961). Quality and acceptance of problem solutions by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Journal ofAbnormal and Social Psychology. Vol. 62, No. 2, pp 401-07. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture 's Consequences: InternationalDifferences in Work-Related Values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sagc.. Hofstede, G. (1985). The interaction between national and organizational value systems. Jour- nal of MlanugernerLt Studies. Vol. 22, pp 347-357. Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and Organizations: Software oftheMind. London: McGraw and Hill. Hofstede, G. and Bond, M., et al. (1993). Individual perceptions of organizational cultures: A methodological treatise on levels of analysis. Organizational Studies, Vol. 14, pp 483-503. Hofstede, G., et al. (1990). Measuring organizational cultures: A qualitative and quantitative study across twenty cases. Administrative Science Quarterly. Vol. 35, pp 286-316. Ilogan Garcia, M. (1995). An anthropological approach to multicultural diversity training. Journal ofApplied Rehavioral.Science. Vol. 31, No. 4, pp 490-504. Holman, P. and Devane, T. (1999). The Change Handbook: Group Methiodsfor Changing the Future. San Francisco, CA: Berrertt-Koehler. Holvino, E. (1993). Organization Developmentftrom the Margins: Reading Class, Race and Gen- der in OD. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Amherst, University of Massachusetts. Holvino, E. (1994). Womeni of color in organizations: Revising our models of gender at work. In E.Y Cross, J. H. Katz, F. A. Miller and E. W. Seashore (eds), The Promise of Diversity. NY: Irwin/NTL, pp 52-59. Holvino, E. (1999). Class.: The unmentionable difference in T-groups. Reading Book for Human Relations Training. Alexandria, VA: NTL Institute, pp117-119. Holvino, E. (2000). Social diversity in social change organizations: Standpoint learnings for organizational consulting. In R. T. Carter (ed), Addressing Cu.ltural Issues in Organizations: Beyond the Corporate Context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Holvino, E. (forthcoming). Class and gender in organizations: How do we begin to address the intersection. CGO Insights, No. 7. Boston, MA: Center for Gender in Organizations. SIMMONS Graduate School of Management. Hoppe, M. (1993). The effects of national culture on the theory and practice of managing R&D professionals abroad. R&D Management. Vol. 4, pp 313-326. Howard, R. (1990). Values make the company: An interview with Robert Haas. Harvard Busi- ness Review. September-October, pp 133-44. u Huang and Harris Bond. (1974). Altruism and imitation in Chinese and Americans. Journal of Social Psychology. Vol. 93, pp 193-]95. 81 Human, L. (1996). Managing work force diversity: A critique and example from South Africa. International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 17, No. 4/5, pp 46-65. Hurtado, A. (1989). Relating to privilege: Seduction and rejection in the subordination and rejection of white women and womeni of color. Signs. Vol. 14, pp 833-855. Hurtado, A. (1997). Understanding multiple group identities: Inserting womiieni into cultural transformations. Journal of Social Issues. Summer, Vol. 53, No. 2, pp 299-329. Hurtado, A. (1999). Disappearing Dynamics of Women of Color. CGO Working Paper, No. 4. Boston, MA: Center for Gender in Organizations, SIMMONS Graduate School of Manage- ment. Hurtado,A. and Stewart, A. (1996). Through the looking glass: Implications of studying white- ness for feminist methods. In M. Fine . L. Powell, L. Weis, and M. Wong (eds), Off White: Readings on Society, Race, and Culture. New York: Routledge, pp 297-311. Hiuxham, C. (1996). In C. Huxham (ed), Creating Collaborative Advantage. London: Sage Pub- lications. Ibararra, H. (1993). Personal networks of women and minorities in management: A conceptual framework. Academy of MIanagement Review. Vol. 18, No. 1, pp 56-87. Idea Connections. Copyrighted training materials. Rochester, NY. Permission to quote granlted September 2000. International Monetary Fund. (1999). What is Diversity? Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund, Brochure. Jackson, B. and Hardiman, R. (1994). Multicultural organization development. In E. Cross, J. H. Katz, F. A. Miller and E. W. Seashore (eds), T7he Promise of Diversity; New York: Irwin/NTL, pp 221-239. Jackson, B. and Holvino, E. (1988). Developing multicultural organizations. Journal of Reli- gion and the Applied Behavioral Sciences.Vol. 9, No. 2, pp 14-19. Jackson, S. (1991). Team composition in organizational settings: Issues in managing an increas- ingly diverse work force. In S. Worchel, W. Wood, and J. Simpson (eds), Group Process and Productivity. London: Sage Publicationis, pp 138-173. Jackson, S. and Associates. (1992). Diversity in the Workplace: Human Resources Initiatives. New York: The Guilford Press. Jackson, S., Brett, J., Sessa, V., Cooper, D., Julin, J. and Peyronnin, K. (1991). Some differ- ences make a difference: Individual dissimilarity and group heterogeneity as correlates of recruitmenit, promotions, and turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 76, No. 5, pp 675-689. Jackson, S., May, K and Whitney, K. (1995). Understanding the dynamics of diversity in deci- sion-making teams. In R. Guzzo, E. Salas and Associates (eds), Team Effectiveness and Deci- sion-Making in Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, pp 204-262. Jackson, S. and Ruderman, M. (1995). Introduction: Perspectives for understanding diverse work teams. In S. Jackson and M. Ruderman (eds), Diversity in Work Teams: Research Par- adigmsfor a Changing Workplace. Washington, D.C.: Amiericaln Psychological Association, pp 1-16. Jacques, R. (1999). What about us? The challenge of diversity. CG Gender Lens. Washington, D.C.: CGIAR Gender Program, Vol. 4, No. 1. 82 Jehn, K., Northeraft, G., Neale, M. (forthcoming). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quar- terly. Jeruchim, J. and Shapiro, P. (1992). Wonten, Mentors, and Success. New York: Fawcett Columbine. Joplin, J. and Daus, C. (1997). Challenges of leading a diverse work force. Acadermy of Man- agement Executive. Vol. 11, No. 3, pp 32-47. Joshi, J. and Merrill-Sands, D. (1998). The Role of Boards irt Addressing Gender Staffing Issues. Worling Paper No. 16, Washington, DC: CGIAR Gender Program. Joshi, J., Goldberg, E., Scherr, S., Merrill-Sands, D. (1998). Toward Gender Equity: Model Policies. Working Paper No. 18, Washington, DC: CGLAR Gender Program Kabacoff, R. 1998. Gender Differences in Organizational Leadership: A Large Sample Study. Portland, ME: Management Research Grotup. Kanter, R. M. (1977). illen and Women of the Corporation. NewYork: Basic Books. Kanter, R. M. (1983). The Change Masters: Innovation & Entrepreneurship in theAmerican Cor- poration. New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc. Katz, J. H. and Miller, F. A. (1988). Between monoculturalism and multiculturalism: Traps awaiting the organization. OD Practitioner. Vol. 20, No. 3, pp 1-5. Kirkham, K (1992). Destination 2000: Six traps in managing diversity. T'he Diversity Factor. Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 6-8. Kirkham, K. (1996). Managing in a diverse work force: From incident to 'ism'. In E. Cross, E. and M. Blackburn White, The Diversity Factor. Chicago: Irwin Professional Publishing, pp 24-46. Kolb, D., Fletcher, J., Meyerson, D., Merrill-Sands, D. and Ely, R. (1998). Making change: A framework for promoting gender equity in organizations. CGO Insights, No. 1. Boston, MA: Center for Gender in Organizations, SIMMONS Graduate School of Management. Kolb, D. and Merrill-Sands, D. (1999). Waiting for outcomes: Anchoring a dual agenda for change to cultural assumptions. Women in Management Review. Vol. 14, No. 5, pp 194- 202. Kolb, D. and Meyerson, D. (1999). Keeping gender in the plot: A case study of the Body Shop. In A. Rao, R. Stuart, and D. Kelleher (eds), Gender at Work: Organizational Change for Equality. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press, pp 129-155. Kossek, E. and Lobel, S. (1996). Introduction: Transforming human resource systems to man- age diversity-an introduction and orienting framework. ln E. Kossek and S Lobel (eds), Managing Diversity: Human Resource Strategies for Transformtitng the Workplace. Cami- bridge, MA: Blackwell, pp 1-19. Kossek, E. and Zonia, S. (1993). Assessing diversity climate: A field study of reactions to employer efforts to promote diversity. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Vol. 14, pp 61- 81. Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review. March-April, pp 59-67. 83 Kram, K. E. (1985). Mentoring at Work. Clenview: Scott, Foresman. Kroeger, 0. with Thuesen, M. (1992). Type Talk at Work. New York: Dell Publishing. Kuczynski, S. (1999). If diversity, then higher profits? HR Magazine. Vol. 44, No. 13. Lammars, C and Hickson, D. (1979). Organizations Alike and Unlike. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. La urent, A. (1983). The cultural diversity of Western conceptions of management. Internation al Studies of Management and Organization. Vol ume XIII, No. 1-2, pp 75-96. Laurent, A. (1986). Cross-cultural puzzle of global human resource management. In P. Orange (ed), Human Resource Management. Vol. 25, No. 1, pp 91-102. Lincoln, J. and Miller, J. (1979). Work and friendship ties in organizations: A comparative analysis of relational networks. Administrative Science Quarierbv Vol. 24, pp 181-199. Lindenberger, J. G. and Zachary, L. J. (1999). Play "20 Questions" to Develop a Successful Mentoring Program. Training and Development. February, pp 12-14. Litvin, D. (1997). The discourse of diversity: From biology to management. Organization. Vol. 4, No. 2, pp 187-210. Loden, M. (1996). Implementing Diversity. Chicago, IL: Irwin. Mahony, P. and Zmroczek, C. (1997). Class Matters: "Working-Class" Women's Perspectives on Social Class. London: Taylor and Francis. Marks, Ruby. (forthcoming). The Politics and Practice of Institutionalizing Gender Equity in a Post Apartheid South Africa. Working Paper, Boston, MA: Center for Gender in Organiza- tions, SIMMONS Graduate School of Management. Martin, Patricia Yancey. (1996). Gendering and evaluating dynamics: Men, masculinitics, and managements. In D. Collinsois and J. Hearn (eds.), Men as Managers, Managers as Men. London: Sage Publications, pp 186-209. Maznevski, M. (1994). Understanding our differences: Performance in decision-making groups with diverse members. Human Relations. Vol. 47, No. 5, p 531. McCain, B., O'Reilly, C. and Pfeffer, J. (1983). The effects of departmental demography on turnover: The case of a university. Academyof Management Journal. lol. 26, No. 4, pp 626- 641. MeEnrue, M. P. (1993). Managing diversity: Los Angeles before and after the riots. Organiza- tional Dynamics. Vol. 21. No. 3, pp 18-29. McGrath, J. (1984). Group Interaction and Performanice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. McGrath, J., Berdahl, L. and Arrow, H. (1995). Traits, expectations, culture, and clout: The dynamics of diversity in groups. In S. Jackson and M. Ruderman (eds), Diversity in Work Teams: Research Paradigms for a Changing Workplace. Washington, D.C.: American Psy- chological Association, pp 17-46. McIntosh, P. (1990). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. Tndependent School. Winter Issue, pp 31-34. (http://ww.seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/Imcisaac/emc598ge). McLeod, P. and Lobel, S. (1992). The effects of ethnic diversity on idea generation in small groups. Academy of Managementt Annual Mleetings Best Paper Proceedings, pp 227-231. 894 Mead, R. (1990). Cross-C.ulturalA Management Communication. Chichester: John 'Wiley and Sons. Merrill-Sands, D. (1998). Moving towards gender equity: Strategies for change. Paper present- ed at the Inter-Center Consultation on Gender Staffing: Lessons Learned and Future Direc- tions, April 28-30, 1998, ISNAR, The Hague, The Netherlands. Nairobi, Keniya: CGIAR Gender and Diversity Program. Unpublished manuscript. Merrill-Sands, D. and Fletcher, J. (1998). Looking below the surface: The gendered nature of organizations. CGO Insights, No. 2. Boston, MA: Center for Gender in Organizations, SIMMONS Craduate School of Management. Merrill-Sands, D., Fletcher, J., Acosta A. (1998). Putting the 'dual agenda' to work: Strength- ening dommunications at CIMMYT. CGIAR Gender Lens. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, CGIAR Gender Program, Vol. 3, Issue 2, p 11. Merrill-Sands, D., Fletcher, J., and Acosta, A. (1999a). Engendering organizational change: A case study of strengthening gender-equity and organizational effectiveness in an interna- tional agricultural research institute. In A. Rao, R. Stuart, and D. Kelleher, Gender at Work: Organizational Changefor Equality. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press, pp 77-128. Merrill-Sands, D., Fletcher, J., Acosta, A., Andrews, N., Harvey, M. (1999b). Engendering Organizational Change: A Case Study of Strentgtheninlg Gender Equity and Organizational Effectiveness at CIMMYT Working Paper, No. 20, Washington D.C.: The World Bank. CGIAR Secretariat, CGIAR Gender Staffing Program. Merrill-Sands, D., Sheridan, B. (1996). Developing and Managing Collaborative AUliances: -Lessons from a Review of the Literature. Organizational Change Briefinig Note No. 3, Boston, MA: Support Program in Organizational Change for the CGIAR Centers, SIMMONS Institute for Leadership and Change. Merrill-Sands, D., Spink, L., Baldini, KL and de la O., M. (1999c). CIMMYT completes experi- ment with multi-source performance assessment. CGL4R Gender Lens. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, CGIAR Gender Program, Vol. 4, Issue 1, p 7. Meyerson, D. anid Fletcher, J. (2000). A modest manifesto for shattering the glass ceiling. Har- vardBusiness Review. January/Fehruary, pp 12i-136. Meyerson, D. and Scully, M. (1999). Tempered radicalism: Changing the workplace from witlh- in. CGO Insights, No. 6. Boston, MA: Ccnter for Gender in Organizations, SIMMONS Grad- uate School of Management. Miller, E A. (1998). Strategic culture change: The door to achieving high perforiliance and inclusion. Public Personnel Management. Vol. 27, No. 2, pp 151-161. Miller, F. A. and Katz, J. II. (1995). Cultural diversity as a developmental process: The path from monocultural club to inclusive organization. In J. Pfeiffer (ed), Dte 1995Annual: Vol- ume Z, Consulting. San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer and Company, pp 267-281. Milliken, E and Martins, L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding the multi- ple effects of diversity in organizatiumial groups. Academy of Management Review. Vol. 21, No. 2, pp 402433. (AMR special issue on diversity). Mohrman, S., Cohen, S., and Mohrman, A. (1995). Designing Team-3Based Organizations. San Francisco: Jossev Bass. Moorehead, L, (1999). Indicators of Progress in Effectively Managing Diversity. Joppa Consult- ing. Unpublished Training Materials. 85 Morrison, A. (1996). The INew Leaders: Leadership Diversity in America. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass Publishers. Morrison, A, Ruderman, M. and HTughes-James, M. (1993). Making Diversity Happen: Con- troversies and Solutions. Greensboro, NC: The Center for Creative Leadership. Nemeth, P. and Christensen, S. (1996). 'The challenge of cultural diversity: Harnessing a diver- sity of views to understand multiculturalisin. Academy ofManagement Review. Vol. 21, No. 2, pp 434-462. (AMR special issue on diversity). Nkomo, S. (1992). The emperor has no clothes: Rewriting 'race in organizations.' Academy of Management Review. Vol. 17. No. 3, pp 487-513. Nkomo, S. (1996). Ideintities and the complexity of diversity. In S. Jackson. and M. Ruderman (eds), Diversity in Work Teams: Research Paradigrns for a Changing Workplace. Washing- ton, D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp 247-253. Nkomo, S. and Cox, T. (1996). Diverse identities in organizations. In S. Clegg, C. Hardy and W. Nord (eds), Handbook of Organization Studies. London and Thousand Oaks: Sage Publica- tions, pp 338-356. Northeraft, G., Polzer, J., Neale, M., and Kramer, R. (1995). Diversity, social identity, and per- formance: Emergent social dynamics in cross-fufictional teams. In S. Jackson and M. BIud- erman (eds), Diversity in Work Teams: Research Paradigms for a Changing Workplace. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp 69-96. Olsson, M. (1985). Meeting Styles for Intercultural Groups. AFS Occasional Paper No. 7, Febru- ary. O'Reilly, C., Caldwell, D., and Barnett, W. (1989). Work group demography, social integration and turnover. Administrative Science Quarterly. Vol. 34, pp 21-37. O'Reilly, C., Chatman, J. and Caldwell, D. (1991). People and organizationial culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. Academy of Management Jour- nal. Vol. 34, No. 3, pp 487-516. Palmer, C. (1994). The Equitable Company: Social justice in business. In R. Boot, J. Lawrence and J. Morris, (eds), Managintg the Unknown by Creating New Futures. London: McGraw and Hill, pp 59-77. Palmer, J. D. (1989). Three paradigms for diversity change leaders. OD Practitioner, pp 15-18. Pardey, P., Roseboom. J., and Anderson, J. (1991). Agricultural Research Policy: Internation- al Quantitative Perspectives. Cambridge, UK: The Cambridge University Press. Parker, B. (1999). Evolmmtion and Revolution: From International Business to Globalization. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy and W. R. Nord (eds), Managing Organizations. London: Sage, pp 234-256. Pelled, L. (1996). Demograplhic diversity, conflict and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science. Vol. 7, No. 6, pp 615-631. Potts, J. (1995). The diversity assessment survey. The Diversity Factor. Vol. 3, No. 2, pp 2-10. Powell, G. (1993). Women and Men in Management. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Prasad, P., Mills, A., Elmes, M. and Prasad, A. (1997). Managing the Organizational Melting Pot: Ddemmas of Workplace Diversity. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. 86 Proudford, K. (1998). Notes on the intra-group origins of inter-group conflict in organizations: Black-white relations as an exemplar. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Labor and Empkoynent Law. Vol. 1, No. 2. Ragins, B. (1995). Diversity, power, and mentorship in organizations: A cultural, structural, and behavioral perspective. In M. M. Chemers, S. Oskamp, and M. A. Costanzo (eds), Diversity in Organizations: New Perspectives for a Changing Workplace. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp 91-132. Ragins, B. (1997). Diversified Inentoring relationships in organizations: A power perspective. TheAcademy of lanagement Review. Vol. 22, No. 2, pp 482-521. Rao, A., Stuart, R., and Kelleher, D. (1999a). Gender at Work: Organizational Change for Equality. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press. Rao, A., Stuart, R., and Kelleher, D. (1999b). Building gender capital at BRAC: A case study. In Gender at Work: Organizational Change for Equality West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press, pp 31-77. Rapoport, R. N. (1970). Three dilemmas in action research. Human Relations, 1ol. 23, pp 488- 513. Reagan, M. (1999). Managing Diversity as a Change Management Process: Preparingfor the Workplace and the Workforce of the Future. Presentation given at the Society for Human Resources Management Conference on Workplace Diversity: New Challenges and New Opportunities, October 13-15, Washington, D.C. Redding, S. G. (1994). Comparative management theory: Jungle, zoo or fossil bed? Organiza- tion Studies, Vol. 15, pp 323-359. Reynolds, P. C. (1987). Imposing a corporate culture. Psychology Today, pp 33-38. Robinson, G. L. N. (1985). Cross Cultural Understanding. New York: Pergamon Press. Robinson, G. and Dechant, EL (1997). Building a business case for diversity. Academy of Man- agemeat Executive. Vol. 11, No. 3, pp 21-31. Rodgers, J. 0. (1994/1996). Getting the best results from a diversity action council. In B. Abramms and G. F. Simons (eds), The Cultural Diversity Son rcebook: Getting Real About Diversity. Amherst, MA: ODT, pp 225-226. Rogers, E. M. anld Shoemiiaker, F. F. (1971). Commtluntication of Inniovuatiois: A C-oss-Cultural Approach. NewYork: The Free Press. Roseboom, J. (1996). Taking count: Female agricultural researchers in sub-Saharan Africa. CG Gender Lens. Vlol. 1, Issue 1, p 8. Rosener, J. (1990). Ways women lead. Harva7d Business Review. November-December, pp 119- 125. Ruderman, M., Hughes-James, M., Jackson, S. (1996). Introduction. In M. Ruderman. M. Hughes-James and S. Jackson (eds), Selected Research on Work Team Diversity. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership and the American Psychlological Association, pp 1-5. Ryan, W. (1981). Equality. NY: Pantheon Books. Salaman, G. (1978). Towards a sociology of organizational structure. The Sociological Revieie. Vol. 26, pp 519-54. 87 Scherr, S. (1998). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding cultural diversity in business-A book review. CG Gender Lens. Washington, D.C.: CGIAR Gender Program. Vol. 3, Issue 2. Scherr, S. and Merrill-Sands, D. (1998). Taking Stock of Gender Staffing in the CGLtR, 1998. Working Paper No. 20, Boston, MA: Center for Gender in Organizations, SIMMONS Grad- uate School of Management. Scully, M. and Creed, D. (1999). Restructured families: Issues of equalitv and need. The Annals of the American Academy. Vol. 562, pp 45-65. Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of 'the Learning Organization. New * York: Currency Doubleday. Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Smith, B. (1994). The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook: Strategies and Tools for Building a Learning Organization. New York: Bantam Doubleday Publishing Group. Sessa, V. and Jackson, S. (1995). Diversity in decision-making teams: All differences are not cre- ated equal. In M. Chemers, S. Oskamp and M. Costanzo (eds), Diversity in Organizations: New Perspectives for a Changing Workplace. London: Sage Publications, pp 133-156. Shaw, M. (1981). Group Dynamics: The Psycholtgy of Group Behavior. New York: McGraw and Hill. Sinclair, A. (1998). Doing Leadership Differently. Victoria, Australia: Melbourne University Press. Snith, P. and Paterson, M. (1988). Leadership in Context. London: Sage. Smiuth, K. and Berg, D. (1997). Cross-cultural group at work. European Management Journal. Vol. 15, No. 1, pp 8-15. Stnith, K., Simmons, J. Thames. (1989). Fix the women: an intervention into an organization- al conflict based on parallel process thinking. Journal of 'pplied Behavioral Science. Vol. 25, No. 1, pp 11-29. Sondergaar, M. (1994). Research note. Hofstede's consequences: A study of reviews, citations and replications. Organization Studies. Vol. 15, pp 447-456. Spink, L., Merrill-Sands, D., Baldini, K., and de la 0, M. (1999). Summary Report: CIMMYT Pilot on Multi-Source Performance Assessment. Working Paper No. 23, Boston, MA: Center for Gender in Organizations, SIMMONS Graduate School of Managemient. Stephenson, K. and Krebs, V. (1993). A more accurate way to meastire diversity. In B. Abramms and G. Simons, The Cultural DiversitySourcebook. Amherst: ODT, pp 247-255. Stout, L. (1996). Bridging the Class Divide: Grassroots Organizing. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Tajfel, II. (1982). Social Identity and Inter-group Relations. New York: Cambridge University Press. Teicher, J. and Spearitt, K. (1996). From equal employment opportunity to diversitv manage- mcnt. 'l'he Australian experience. International Journal of Manpower. Vol. 17, No. 4-5, pp 109-134. Thomas, D. A. (1989). Mentoring and irrationality: The role of racial taboos. Human Resource Management. Vol. 28, No. 2, pp 279-290. 88 Thomas, D. A. (1990). The impact of race on managers' experiences of developmental relation- ships (mentoring and sponsorship): An intra-organizational study. Journal of Organization- alBehavior. Vol. 11, pp 479-492. Thomas, D. A. (1993). Racial dynamics in cross-race developmental relationships. Administra- tive Science Quarterly Vol. 38. pp 169-194. Thomas, D. A. and Proudford, K. L. (2000). Making sense of race relations in organizations: Theories for practice. In R. T. Carter (ed), Addressing Cultural Issues in Organizations: Beyond the Corporate Context. Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp 51-68. Thomas, D. and Ely, R. (1996). Making differences matter: A new paradigm for managing diver- sity. lIarvaard Busirness Reuiew. September-October, pp 79-90. Thomas, R. (1990). From affirmative action to affirming diversity. Haruard Business Review, No. 2 (March-April), pp 107-117. Thomas, R. (199L). Beyond Race and Gender: Unleashing the Power of your Total Workforce. New York: Amacon. Thomas, R. (1992). Managing diversity: A conceptual framework. IrI S. Jacksoni and M. Ruder- man (eds), Diversity in Work Teams: Research Paradigmsfor a Changing Workplace. Wash- ington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp 306-318. Thomas, R. (1995). A diversity framework. In M. Chemers, S. Oskamp and M. A. Costanzo. (eds), Disversity in Organizations: Neuw Perspectivesfor a Changing Workplace. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp 245-263. Thomas, R. with Woodruff, M. (1999). Building a Housefor Diversity. New York: AMACOM. Thompson, D. and Gooler, L. (1996). Capitalizing on the benefits of diversity through work teams. ln E. Kossek and S. Lobel (eds), Mtanoging Diversity: Human Resouirce Strutegiesfor Transforning the Workplace. Cambridge, MA. USA and Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing, pp 392-437. Ting-Toomney, S. (1985). Toward a theory of conflict and culture. In W Gudykunst, L. Stewart and S. Ting-Toomey (eds), Communication, Culture, and OrganizationalProcesses. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, pp 86. Training and Development Journal. (1993). Leading diversity: An interview with Ann Morri- son. Special Issue on Diversity. Vol. 47, No. 4, pp 29-60. Triandis, H. (1995). The importance of contexts in studies of diversity. In S. Jackson and M. Ruderman (cds), Diversity in WVork Teams: Research Paradigrnsfor a Changing Workplace. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp 225-233. Trice, H. and Beyer, J. (1993). The Cultures of Work Organizations. Esiglewood Cliffs, NJ: Pren- tice Hall. Trompenaars, F. (1993). Riding the Waves of Culture: Understanding Cultural Diversity in Busi- ness. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing. Tsui, A., Egan, T. and O'Reilly, C. (1992). Beiiig different: Relational demography and organi- zational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly Vol. 37, pp 549-579. Tsui, A., Egan, T. and Xin, K. (1995). Diversity in organizations: Lessons from demography research. In M. Chemers, S. Okampo, M. Costanzo (eds), Diversity in Organizations: New Perspectivesfrom. a Changing Workplace. Thousand Oaks and Londoin: Sage Publicationis, pp 191-219. 89 Tsui, A. and O'Reilly, C. (1989). Beyond simple demographic effects: The importance of rela- tional demography in superior-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp 402-423. Tung, R. L. (1988). Toward a conceptual paradigm of international business negotiations. Advantces in International Coinparative Management, Vol. 3, pp 203-219. Valian, V. (1998) Why so Slow? The Advancement of Wornen. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Van den Berghe, P.L. (1978). Race and Racism: A Comparative Perspective. (Second edition). NY: John Wiley. Wagner, W., Pfeffer, J. and O'Reilly, C. (1984). Organizational demography and turnover in top-management groups. Adtministrative Science Quarterly. Vol. 29, pp 74-92. Walker, P., Ed. (1979). Between Labor and Capital. Boston, MA: South End Press. Wanous, J. and Youtz, M. (1986). Solution diversity and the quality of group decisions. Acade- my of Management Journal. Vol. 29, pp 149-158. Wasserman, I. C., Miller, F. A., et al. (1991). Diversity Skills in Action: Cross Cultural Mentoring. Cincinnati: The Kaleel Jamison Consulting Group. Watson, W., Johnson, L. and Merritt, D. (1998). Team orientation, self-orientation, and diver- sity in task groups: Their connections to team performance over time. Group and Organi- zation Management. Vol. 23, No. 2, p 161. Watson, W., Kumiar, K. and Michaelson, L. (1993). Cultural diversity's impact on interaction process and performance. Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 36, No. 3, p 590. Weick, K. (1984). Small wins: Redefining the scale of social problems. American Psychologist. Weisbord, M. R. (1989). Future search: Toward strategic integration. In W. Sikes, A. B. Drexler and J. Gant (eds), 7he Emerging Practice of OD. Alexandria, VA: NTL Institutc/University Associates, pp 165-177. Weisbord, M. R., Ed. (1992). Discovering Common Groind. San Francisco, CA: Berrett- Koehler. Weisbord, M. R. and Janoff, S. (1995). Future Search: An Action Guide to Finding Common Ground in Organization1s. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler. Wells, L. (1982). Effects of ethnicity on the quality of student life: An embedded interg-roup analysis. Boston, MA: Yale University. Wharton, A. (1992). The social construction of gender and race in organizations: A social iden- tity and group mobilization perspective. Research in the Sociology of Organizations. Vol. 10, pp 55-84. White, M. B. (1996). Strategies for success: The San Diego story. The DiversityFactor. Summer, pp 2-10. Whyte, W. E, Greenwood, D. J., and Lazes, P. (1991. Participatory action research: Through practice to science in social research. In W. F. Whyte (ed), ParticipatoryAction Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp 19-55. Wiersema, M. R and Bantel, K. A. (1992). Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy ofVManagement Journal. Vol.35, pp. 91-121. 90 Wiersema, M. and Bird, A. (1993). Organizational demography in Japanese firms: Group het- erogeneity, individual dissimilarity, and top management team turnover. Academy of Man- agement Journal. Vol. 36. No. 5, p 996. Wood, W. (1987). Meta-analytic review of sex differences in group performance. PsychologyBul- letin. Vol. 102, pp 53-71. Wright, P., Ferris, S., Hiller, J. and Kroll, M. (1995). Competitiveness through management of diversity. Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 38, No. 1, p 272. Zane, N. C. (1994). Theoretical considerations in organizational diversity. In E. Y. Cross, et al., The Promise of Diversity. NY: Irwin/NTL, pp 339-350. z 91 Assimilation: Usually refers to the loss of the original ethnic identity, as a person is absorbed into the dominant culture in an attempt to adjust to what is required. Acculturation: The multiple aspects and processes by which an individual or group from one culture enters and negotiates in a different culture for an extended period 6f time. The following aspects are related to the process of acculturation: lan- guage use and preference; generational distance; cultural identity with or alien- ation from a dominant culture; association with members of one's own culture. Bicultural/ Multicultural: The ability of an individual to participate actively in several cultures without having to negate one's ethnic identity. Classes: Groups of people who share sufficiently similar economic circumstances to have common interests and the potential to recognize and act on those com- mon interests as collective agents. Classism: A system of oppression that gives one group power and privilege over another group based on income and access to resources (Stout, 1996). Cross cultural management: Includes the following approaches and types of studies: a) unicultural: those which focus on the management of organizations in any country other than the US, such as motivating workers in Israel; b) comparative: those which focus on a comparison between (among) the organizations in any two or more coun- tries or cultures, such as a comparison between leadership styles in Brazil and Japan; and c) intercultural: those which focus on the interaction between (among) organization members from two or more countries or cultures, such as a description of the process of negotiation between the Chinese and the French. Cultural identity: Seeing and addressing oneself in relation to one's own ethnic or cultural group. Discrimination: The behavior, act or unequal treatment towards a person because s/he is a member of a particular social group. Usually involves determining accessibili- ty of goods and services as well as rights and privileges for the targeted group by the dominant group (Essed, 1996). Indirect discrimination is equal treatment in equal circumstances, but under unequal social conditions. When one group is the norm for whom insti- tutional rules are formulated, which are then applied to everybody else includ- ing different ethnic groups that have other norms, e.g., food served in the can- teen. 92 Direct discrimination is unequal treatment in equal circumstances under racially unequal social conditions, implicitly or explicitly, e.g., "No blacks alLowed in this club", vs. "Sorry, members only". Domestic pertnership: A life attachment between two people that is not legally declared a "marriage." Domestic partner benefits usually apply to same sex partners for whom mar- riage is not a legal option. lcquallity: In a liberated society, equality includes the following aspects of egalitarianism: equality of opportunity, equal satisfaction of basic needs, legal equality, eco- nomic equality and political equality. Equity thecry: Argues that actors in exchange relationship expect to receive rewards or out- comes that are roughly proportional to their inputs or contributions. In other words, a "fair rate of exchange." Ethrnic group: A group socially defined on the basis of cultural characteristics of diverse types such as language, religion, kinship organization, dress and mannerism, or any other set of cultural criteria deemed relevant to the actors concerned. Ethnacentrism: The attitude that one's own ethnic group-its patterns of interaction and its cul- ture-is superior to other groups. Gay: Males who are primarily attracted to and have their primary affectional and sexual relationships with other men. Gender: The social organization of the relation between the sexes; the meanings social- ly attributed to the differences between wDmen and men. HonmoplDobiai: The fear of homosexuality. Homophobia can be seen as part of the dynamics of sex marking needed to sustain sexism. ldentity groups: Members of social identity groups share common biological and/or socio-cul- tural characteristics, participate in equivalent historical experiences and, as a result, share similar world views and interests. Institutional racism/sexism: When the outcome of organizational policies, practices and arrangements results in unequal distribution of benefits and opportunities based on race/sex. In these situations, the values, norms, beliefs, standards and expectations of a dominant group (such as white, heterosexual, maLes) become the basis for organizational arrangements, policies, practices and appropriate behaviors The power to control resources, determine access, reward and punish behaviors, dis- tribute benefits and privilege is lodged in norms of the dominant group and access is denied to people of different identity groups, such as people of color and white women. Justice: Appropriate distribution throughout society of sufficient means and goods that society produces in order to sustain life and preserve the liberty of all its mem- bers. Leslbian: Women who have their primary affectional and sexual relationships with other women. [Hincrity: A group that, because of its physical or socio-cultural characteristics, is singled 0 out from others in the society for differential and unequal treatment, and who d 93 therefore regard themselves as objects of collective discrimination. In the USA, as defined by EEO-AA legislation, minorities are the "protected classes": African Americans, women, Hispanics or Latinos, Asian/Pacific Islanders, Native Amer- ican Indian/Eskimo, the disabled and Vietnam-era veterans. Oppression: A system of domination involving institutionalized collective (policy and struc- tures) and individual and interpersonal modes of behavior through which one (powerful) group attempts to dominate and control another (weak) group in order to secure political, economic, and/or social-psychological advantages. Paltriarchy: The power of the fathers: a familial-social, ideological, political system in which men by force, direct pressure or through ritual, tradition, law and language, cus- toms, etiquette, education and the division of labor, determine what part women shall, or shall not play, and in which the female is everywhere sub- sumed under the male. peopRe of color/ Third World peopFe: Political term which attempts to categorize non-whites (i.e. people of color) and citizens of the world's economically developing countries (i.e. Third World) as social groups with special interests. Both terms do not fully describe these two groups, yet they provide a category that is intended to stress the similari- ties in their oppressed status. Prejudice: Conscious or unconscious preconceived attitudes and beliefs about members of a particular social group. Race: A social construct which attributes differences based on skin color and other physical characteristics or "phenotypes." Raciall group: A group that is socially defined on the basis of physical criteria. "In practice, the distinction between a racial and an ethnic group is blurred...Cultural traits are often regarded as genetic and inherited; physical appearance can be culturally changed; and the sensory perception of physical differences is affected by cul- tural definitions of race. However, the distinction between race and ethnicity remains analytically useful." Racial-ethnic prejudice: An attitude, an element of common sense, based on false and rigid generaliza- tions of negatively valued properties attributed to racial ethnic groups other than one's own. Common sense notions about racial-ethnic groups enable an understanding in the ordinary flow of daily activities. The dominant common sense about race and ethnicity does not explicitly adhere to a goal of confirm- ing and perpetuating inequality, but neither does it include elaborate notions of opposition against racism (Essed, 1996). Racism: Racism is transmitted through acts generated from a social attitude that takes the legitimacy of the racial ethnic social order for granted. Discrimination includes all acts, verbal, nonverbal and paraverbal, that result in negative or unfavorable consequences for the dominated racial-ethnic groups (Essed, 1996). >_ Paternalistic racism is, for example, the racism practiced by the Dutch against the Indonesians after the second world war where Indonesian c' immigrants were to be "absorbed." Characteristics of paternalistic racism include; 94 benevolent repression: racial ethnic groups are forced to assimi- late; no claims for equalUy: unequal roles and status of dominant group are not questioned; condescending sympathy: racial-ethnic groups are pictured as childish, uncivilized, ignorant, impulsive, immature; and irciac -ehnnic groups ar-e perceived as having probliems: inferiority complex, poverty, social ignorance, Competitive racisrn is, for example, the racism practiced by the Dutch towards the Turks and Moroccans (1960s) and Surinamese (1970s and later). Characteristics of competitive racism include: hostile rejection: racial-ethnic groups are perceived in terms of imaginary or real competition; equality claims: roles and status of dominant group are questioned and contested by the racial-ethnic groups; an&agonismn or hatred: representation of racial ethnic groups includes images such as aggressive, intrusive, insolent, oversexed, dirty, inferior, and threatening to the national culture; racieR-ethnic groups are perceived as creating problems and hence, being a problem: they protest against inferior status and they claim equal social access and opportunities Sexism: The oppression and/or exploitation of women based on gender. Social power: The relative access to resources and privileges within a society and its institu- tions, including the privilege of being ignorant. Social reproduction: All the various social relations and institutions that serve to reproduce society without any fundamental change. Sociocultural differences: Differences in ways of seeing, perceiving, being and acting in the world which arise from one's social position. They are cultural because they are an expres- sion of learned ideas and social because they are directly or indirectly carried out in sets of interpersonal and intergroup relations. Stereotypes: Images and beliefs about a group, which are attributed to all members of that social group irrespective of their individual characteristics and which serve to justify, confine or privilege a particular group of people based on their belong- ing to that group and not on their individual or personal characteristics, atti- tudes and skills. REFERENCES Albert, et al., (1986); Adler, (1983); Essed, (1996); EY. Cross and Associates, (1996); Frye, (1983); Holvino, (2000); Ryan, (1981); Stout, (1996);Van den Berghe, (1978);Walker, (1979). Compiled by Evangelina Holvino Chaos Management, 1998 9 95 oes and functiMns Hn ogazn'atkna veVrsity change effort ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERS Role 'T'o develop and articulate an organizational vision for inclusion and diversity and guide the development and implementation of a strategy for change. Tasks o Scope the environmlent and maintain the relevance of inclusion and diversity for the organization. o Develop and approve an organizational change strategy for inclusion and diversity. o Enable the work of specialists and managers throughout the organization in imple- menting and refining an inclusion and diversity strategy. ° Model and champion inclusion and diversity tfirouglout the orgallzatioli. o Attend to and reward inclusion and diversity. o Respond and set limits. o Develop and implement criteria for recruitment, selection and performance apprais- al consistent with the vision at their level. o Partner with the diversity council(s), specialists, leaders and other key actors throughout the organization to support and advance the diversity effort and its dif- ferent initiatives. o Regularly assess the effectiveness of the diversity strategy. StructLure Line managers at each of the different levels of the organization including the CEO, COO and his/her direct reports. 2 HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONALS AND OTHER u SPECIALISTS z Serve as a resource to the diversity effort in their area of expertise. 96 Tasks o Partner with diversity specialists, line management, advocates and others to support the diversity strategy with particular attention to their area of expertise. o Provide information, identify issues and make recommendations to support the diversity effort, especially to managers and dedicated resources. Structure Informal and formal partnerships throughout the organization. DIVERSITY COUNCILS We Provide advice and support to the organizational leaders in developing and implementing a vision and change strategy for inclusion and diversity in the organization. Tasks o Monitor progress of change plans and initiatives. o Support (and pilot) the education of the organization. o Voice diversity issues and concerns. o Partner with consultants, leaders and others in specific initiatives. o Integrate aiid conuimanicate efforts and initiatives throughout the organization. Structure 15-30 persons functionally, hierarchicalLy and socially representative of the organization. ADVOCATES AND/OR INTERNAL RESOURCES Role Help shape, lead and support the inctlsion aind diversity effort and initiatives, paying par- ticular attention to their specific units. Tasks o Work with dedicated resources and leadership to implement the diversity change strategy. o Voice and communicate relevant inclusion and diversity issues, drawing on infor- mation throughout the organization, but specifically in their organization. z o Make recommendations to the leadership and diversity council representatives on u z diversity strategy. • Model and teach inclusion and diversity. z ° Scrvc as a resource, initiate and seize opportunities for change, dialogue and learn- 0 ing on diversity. 97 Structure Business units line or staff representatives who participate in advanced training and work on a ratio of 1:20 in their organization. Selected for their credibility and commitment to diversity. DIVERSITY SPECIALISTS AND OTHER DEDICATED RESOURCES Rote Support, advise and coach leadership on inclusion and diversity issues and on the devel- opment and implementation of a sound organizational change strategy for inclusion and diversity. Tas[s o Participate in developing and recommending an inclusion and diversity organiza- tional vision, change strategy and initiatives. o Identify., organize, and oversee the integration of initiatives and resources needed to implement the inclusion and diversity strategy. o Serve as liaison between the leaders, internal and external resources and other actors involved in the diversity effort throughout the organization. o Partner with external consultants and other professional resources to plan, imple- ment and assess efforts and initiatives. o Manage and use internal and external organizational information to support change, monitor progress and make recommendations to the diversity strategy. o Model inclusive behavior and commitment to the diversity vision and strategy. ° Ensure alignment between local strategies and initiatives and the corporate strategy and vision. o Provide "state of the art" information to the organization on issues of inclusion and diversity. Structure 3-6 corporate specialists working in close collaboration with business unit dedicated resources, other specialists and organizational leaders. (By Evangetina Holvino, 0 Chaos Management, Ltd, 1998) z C z z . o 98 1. CGIAR. (1999). A proposal for the CGIAR gender and diversity program, 1999-2001. Washington, D.C.: CGIAR Gender Program. February, 1999. 2. Cox and Blake (1991); Henderson (1994); Kossek and Lobel (1996); Morrison, et al. (1993); Robinson and Dechant (1997). 3. We gratefully acknowledge the excellent research support provided by Erica Foldy, Research Associate at the Ccnter for Gender in Organizations, in reviewing the literature for this chapter. 4. Cox (1993); Thomas and Ely (1996); Jehn et al. (forthcoming); Morrison (1996); Thomp- son and Gooler (1996). 5. Alderfer (1987); Cox, (1993); Cox, Lohel, and MuLoed (1991); Fine (1995); Jackson (1991); Kossek and Lobel (1996); Nkoiio and Cox (1996); Thompson and Gooler (1996). Jackson (1991:152) notes that "TIhere is considerable empirical evidence showing that attitudes are not randomly distributed throughout the population. Instead, attitudes, values, and beliefs vary systematically with several demographic variables." 6. Cox (1996); Jackson (1991); Pelled (1996). 7. Bantel and Jackson (1989); Hillman, (forthcoming); Kanter, (1983). 8. Amabile (1998); Ancona and Caldwell (]992); Cox (1993); Cox, Lobel, and McLoed (1991); Fine (1995); Guzzo et al. (1995); Hoffmiani and Maier (1961); Jackson (1991); Kossek and Lobel (1996); McGrath (1984); McLeod and Lobel (1992); Maznevski (1994); Nemeth and Christensen (1996); Nkomo and Cox (1996); Shaw (1981); Tsui et al. (1995); Watson et al. (1993): Wanous and Youtz (1986); Wood (1987). 9. Ancona and Caldwell (1992); Maznevski (1994); Northeraft et al. (1995); Thompson and Gooler (1996); Watson et al. (1993). 10. Center for Creative Leadership (1995); Cox (1991); Jackson et al. (1991); Jackson and Rud- erman (1995); Jehn et al. (forthcoming); Mohrman et al. (1995); Thompson and Gooler (1996). 11. Guzzo et al. (1995); Jackson and Ruderman (1995); Merrill-Sands and Sheridan (1996); Ruderman et al. (1996). 12. Canney Davison and Ward (1999). 0 13. Bartlett and Ghoshal (1987); Huxham (1996); Jackson et al. (1995); Merrill-Sand(s and z Sheridan (1996). z 99 14. Alexander et al. (1996); Ancona and Caldwell (1992); Bantel and Jackson (1989); Baugh and Graen (1997); Cox (1993); Cox and Finley (1995); Elsass and Graves (1997); Gordon et al. (1991); Jackson (1991); Jehn (forthcoming); McGrath et al. (1995); Millikii and Martins (1996); Nkomo and Cox (1996); Pelled (1996); Ruderman et al. (1996); Sessa and Jackson (1995); Smith and Bcrg (1997); Watson et al. (1993); Watson et al. (1998). 15. Adler (1986); Alexander et al. (1996); Ancona and Caldwell (1992); Cox and Blake (1991); Cox (1993); Jackson (199i); Jackson et al. (1995); Maznevski (1994); Nkomo and Cox (1996); Sessa and Jackson (1995); Thompson and Gooler (1996); Tsui et al. (1995); Watson et al. (1993). 16. Byrne (1971). 17. Alderfer (1987); Nkomo (1992); Nkomo and Cox (1996); Sessa and Jackson (1995). 18. Canny Davison and Ward (1999); Jackson et al. (1995); Gray (1989). 19. Adler (1996); Cannev Davison and Ward (1999); Funakwa (1997); Maznevski (1994); Thompson and Gooler (1996). 20. Watson et al. (1998). 21. Cox (1993); Cox and Blake (1991); Jackson and Ruderman (1995); Kossek and Lobel (1996); Morrison (1996); Thomas and Ely (1996). 22. Thomas and Ely (1996); Northeraft ct al. (1995). 23. Funakwa (1997); Hillman et al. (forthcoming); Jackson et al. (1995). 24. Thomas and Ely (1996). 25. Adler and Izraeli (1994); Cox and Blake (1991); Jackson et al. (1995); Morrison. et al. (1993); Sinclair (1998). 26. Jackson et al. (1995); Reagan (1999). 27. CGIAR Gender Program (1995); Faruqui et al. (1988); Pardey et al. (1991); Roseboom (1996). 28. Cox (1993); Morrison (1992). 29. Comer and Soliman (1996); Cox (1993); Cox and Blake (1991); Fine (1995); Kolb et al. (1998); Kossek et al. (1996): Meyerson and Fletcher (2000); Morrison et al. (1993); Thomas and Ely (1996). 30. Chatman (1991); Jackson (1991); Joplin and Daus (1997); Morrison (1992); McCain et al. (1983) and Milliken and Martins (1996); O'Reilly et al. (1989); O'Reilly et al. (1991); Pelled (1996); Tsui et al. (1992); Wagner et al. (1984); Wiersema and Bird (1993). 31. Chatmani (1991); Jacksonl (1991); Morrison (1992); O'Reilly et al. (1989); O'Reilly et al. (1991); Tsui et al. (1992). 0 32. Eisenberger, et al. (1990); Kossek and Lobel (1996). 100 33. Adler (1986); Canney Davison and Ward (1999); Huang and Harris Bond (1974); Laurent (1986). 34. Di Tomaso et al. (1996); Kosek and Zonia (1993); Pelled (1996); Tsui et al. (1992). 35. Byrne (1971); Hoffman (1985); Lincoln and Miller (1979); O'Reilly et al. (1989); Tsui and O'Reilly (1989); Tsui, et al. (1995). 36. Morrison (1992). 37. Cook (1999). 38. Joshi and Merrill-Sands (1998), p. 3. 39. Estimated 120 scientists leaving per year with a minimum replacement cost of $30,000. 40. For example, the attrition data show a higher rate of attrition for women (15%) than men (12%). This is accentuated at the managerial level where the attrition rate for women was 14% compared to 9% for men. 41. Cox and Blake (1991); Kolb et al. (1998); Kossek and Lobel (1996); Merrill-Sands (1998); Meyerson and Fletcher (2000); Scully and Creed (1999). 42. Adler (1986); Bartlett and Ghoshal (1989); Funakawa (1997); Cergen (1995). 43. Scully and Creed (1999). 44. Merrill-Sands et al. (1999a, 1999b); Merrill-Sands et al. (1998). 45. Joshi and Merrill-Sands (1998); Merrill-Sands (1998); Merrill-Sands, et al. (19991); Mer- rill-Sands et al. (1999c); Scherr and Merrill-Sands (1998); Spinik et al. (1999). 46. See example of Thle Body Shop in Kolb and Meyerson (1999); Palmer (1994) 47. Berresford (1991); Holvino (2000); Rao et al. (1999b). 48. Ismail Serageldin, Speech to International Centers' Week, 1995. 49. Applebaum et. al. (2000). 50. Teicher and Spearitt (1996). 51. Kossek ari(d Lobel (1996). 52. Hillman et al. (forthcoming). 53. Kuczynski (1999). 54. Includes Directors General, Board Chairs, and formal CGLAR leadership roles, such as Chairperson, Co-sponsors, and Chairs of major committees. 55. Kirkham (1996); Nkomo and Cox (1996); Wharton (1992). 56. Cross and Blackburn White (1996); Kirkham (1996); Thomas and Ely (1996). z 57. Nkomo and Cox (1996). 101 58. Essed (1990, 1996); Nkomo and Cox (1996); Wharton (1992). 59. This is what Cross, et al., (1994) have referred to as the "irns:" classism, racism, sexism, heterosexism, and ethnocentrism. 60. Alderfer (1992); Cox (1993); Cox and Blake (1991); Ely and Meyerson (1998); Nkomo and Cox (1996); Thomiias and Ely (1996). 61. See also Alderfer (1992); Bell, Denton & Nkomo (1993); Bell & Nkomo (1992); Holvino (1994); Hurtado (1989). 62. Nkomo and Cox (1996); Ferdman and Gallegos (forthcoming); Foldy (1999); Wharton (1992). 63. Center for Gender in Organizations (2000); Crenshaw (1993); Ely and Meyerson (1998); Catalyst (1999); Holvino (1999); Huirtado (1999); Hurtado and Stewart (1996); Marks (forthcoming); Proudford (1998) 64. Catalyst (1999). 65. Center for Gender in Organizations (2000); Hurtado (1989, 1999); Marks (forthcoming); Proudford (1998). 66. Ferdmani (1995); Foldy (1999); Nkomo and Cox (1996); Ragins (1997); Wharton (1992). 67. Jackson et al. (1995); Kirkham (1996); McGrath, et al. (1995). 68. Avigor (1953) cited in Triandis (1995). 69. Cited in Canney Davison et al. (1999), p. 59. 70. Acker (1990); Collinson and Hearn (1994); Crenshaw (1993, 1992); Crowfoot and Chesler (1996); Ely (1996); Essed (1990); Fine (1996); Fletcher and Merrill-Sands (1998); Guinier (1998); Hurtado (1989, 1997, 1999); Hurtado and Stewart (1996); Jacques (1999); Kirlkham (1996); Kolb et al. (1998); McIntosh (1990): Martin (1996); Tajfel (1982). 71. Canney Davison and Ward (1999); Sessa and Jackson (1995). 72. Crowfoot and Chesler (1996); Ely (1996); Fine (1996); Hurtado and Stewart (1996); Kossek and Zonia (1993); McIntosh (1990); Nkomo and Cox (1996); Tsui, et al. (1992); Valian (1998). 73. Crowfoot and Chesler (1996); Proudford (1998); Scully and Creed (1999). 74. Acker (1990); Alderfer (1992): Bond and Pyle (1998); Cole and Singer (1991); Cross and Blackburn White (1996); Ely and Meyerson (1998); Fletcher and Merrill-Sands (1998); Greenhaus et al. (1990); Kirkham (1996); Kolb et al. (1998); Meyerson and Fletcher (2000); Morrison, et al. (1993); Sessa and Jackson (1995); Nkomo (1992); Nkomo and Cox (1996); Ragins (1995); Valian (1998). 75. Gilligan (1982); Kabacoff (1998); Powell (1993); Rosener (1990). z 76. Creed and Scully (forthcoming). 102 77. Holvino (2000); Holvino (1999); Mahony and Zmroczek (1997). 78. This section has been written by James Cumming who took the lead in reviewing the lit- erature and drafting this section with significant contributions from Sue Canney Davison. 79. Adler (1986); Canney Davison and Ward (1999); Funakawa (1997); Parker (1999). 80. Robinson (1985). 81. Lammers and Hickson (1979); Hall (1966). 82. Hofstede (1985). 83. Salamiiani (1978). 84. We note, however, that some researchers question whether cultures are comparable at all. They claim that the specific meaning of all concepts, such as power, leadership and organ- ization, is fully determined by the cultural context that gives it meaning. Therefore, you cannot meaningfully compare these concepts across cultures. Instead, they try to under- stand the behavior of people in a culture from their point of view and believe that ulti- mately to understand someone from another culture hinges on the internal development of new or synthesized meaning for each learner (Geertz, 1973). 85. Sondergaard (1994); Redding (1994). 86. Based on Funakawa (1997) and Hofstcdc (1980). 87. This section on Trompenaars draws heavily on a review of his work by Sara Scherr (1998). 88. Tung (1988). 89. Nkomo and Cox (1996). 90. Cray and Mallory (1998). 91. Adapted from Olsson, 1985. Copyright 1995, Chaos Management, Ltd. 92. Hickson et al. (1974). 93. Bartlett and Ghoshal (1989); Funakawa (1997); Gergen, (1995). 94. Parker (1999). 95. Alvesson (1994). 96. Czarniawaka-Joerges and Joerges (1990). 97. Gioia et al. (1989). 98. Research on the use of English for international communication is being conducted in the Cultural Learning Institute of the East-West Center in Hawaii and much has becn pub- lished about what makes a language useful in the global context. A book by David Crys- tal (1997) manages to steer even-handedly through the minefield of political debate about 0 the cuiltural h1gemony of English. z 103 99. Ancona and Caldwell (1992); Jackson, et al. (1995); Northcraft et al. (1995). 100. Research by Cox and Finley (1995) and reported in Box 4 is an exception. 101. KInowledge worlkers are people with highly developed and of specialized knowledge sets, such as scientists, engineers, marketers, lawyers and doctors. "Most have gone through extensive education and training, becoming steeped in the 'thought-world' of their disci- pline. They have learned to attend to certain aspects of their environments, to value par- ticular approaches to work, and ways of thinking, to filter information to conform to their paradigms of understand and action, and to value particular outcomes" (Mohrman et al., (1995), p. 16). 102. Alexander et al. (1996); Ancona and Caldwell (1992); Bantel and Jackson (1989); Wierse- ma and Bantel (1992). This lens reflects much of the earlier research on the impact of diversity on team and work group outcomes; see Hoffman (1985), Hoffman and Maier (1961); McGrath (1984); Shaw (1981). 103. Thomas and Proudford (2000), p. 53. 104. Jackson, et al. (1995); McGrath et al. (1995); Northcraft et al. (1995). 105. Trice and Beycr (1993). 106. Cohen (1981); Dearborn and Simon (1958). Often, specific occupational specializations tend to be populated by specific identity groups which may also contribute to distinct work cultures (Alderfer 1987). 107. Jackson et al. (1995). 108. Bantel and Jackson (1989); Ancona and Caldwell (1992). 109. dea Connections Consulting, Rochester, NY. 110. Briggs Myers (1990); Eigel and Kuhnert (1996); Hirsh and Kummerow (1990j; Kroeger and Thuesen (1992). 111. Jackson (1992); Sessa and Jackson (1995). 112. For example, differences in Myers-Briggs types have been used explicitly in several CGIAIR management training courses to help participants understand and build skills in working with diversity in teams. 113. Cox and Finley (1995). Pelled (1996) argues that differences based on visible traits (such as race, gender, age) are more likely to generate affective conflict with more severe conse- quences for team performance, while those traits that are less visible and more job relat- ed (e.g. functional specialization or educational background) are more likely to generate substantive conflict. 114. Alderfer (1987); Alderfer et al. (1980); Alderfer and Smith (1982); Wells (1982). o 115. Proudford (1998); Thomas (1989); Thomas and Proudford (2000). z 116. Kotter (1995); Hayles and Russell (1997); Loden (1996); Merrill-Sands (1998). 104 117. Weick (1984); Meyerson and Fletcher (2000). 118. Chesler (1994); Jackson & Holvino (1988); Katz and Miller (1988), Miller and Katz (1995) 119. This model is similar to those developed by Adler (1983); Cox (1991); Jackson and Holvi- no (1988); Katz and Miller, (1988); and Kolb, et al. (1998). Also, work by authors such as Roosevelt Thomas (1990); Palmer (1989); and Thomas and Ely (1996) on paradigms of diversity, such as affirmative action, valuing differences and managing diversity, imply that different perspectives and visions of diversity guide the process of organizational change. 120. By Evangelina Holvino, © Chaos Management, Ltd., 1998 121. Arredondo (1996); Cross (1992): Jackson & Hardiman (1994); Katz & Miller (1988); Loden (1996); Miller (1998); and Thomas (1992). 122. See Potts, The Diversity Assessment Survey, for an example of a data collection instru- ment focusing on race and gender issues in organizations. 123. Howard (1990) cited in Kossek and Lobel (1996). 124. Arredondo (1996). 125. Senge (1990); Meyerson and Scully (1999). 126. Comer and Soliman (1996); Digh (1998); McEnrue (1993): Stephenson and Krebs (1993). 127. Kossek and Zonia (1993) define diversity climate as the individual's perceptions and atti- tudes regarding the importance of divcrsity in the organization and the perceived qualifi- cations of women and racio-ethnic minorities. 128. Chesler (1994); Chesler and Delgado (1987); Prasad, et al. (1997). 129. See also White (1996). 130. Bunker and Alban (1997), Chesler (1994). and Holvino (1993), for example, make this case. 131. Greenwood and Levin (1998); Rapoport (1970): Whyte (1991). 132. Merrill-San'ds et al. (1999a. 1999b); Greenwood and Levin (1998): Whyte (1991). 133. By James Cumming and Evangelina Holvino, © Chaos Management, 1997. 134. Merrill-Sands et al. (1998; 1999a, 1999b, 1999c). For other examples of action research change projects using a similar methodology. see Kolb and Merrill-Sands (1999) and Mey- erson and Fletcher (2000). 135. Weisbord (1992); Weisbord and Janoff (1995). 136. Bunker (1990); Cooperrider (1990); Cooperrider and Srivasta (1987); Elliot (1999). z0 7 z 105 137. Stakeholders refer to actors or parties who have some involvement or interest in the out- comes or business of an organization. Weisbord and Janoff (1995) identify stakeholders important to consider in an organizational intervention as people with information, peo- ple with authority and resources to act, and people affected by what happens. 138. Elliott (1999), pp 3-4; Hammond (1996); Hammond and Royal (1998). 139. In Holman and Devane (1999), pp 250-251. 140. Elliott (1999); Bushe (forthcoming). 141. Ragins (1995). 142. Acker (1990); Kolb, et al. (1998); Merrill-Sands (1998); Meyerson and Fletcher (2000); Thomas and Ely (1996). 143. Kanter (1977) explored four key dynamics of tokenism that occur when minority members are in the position of being a small proportion of a group or organization: increased visi- bility, pressures to assimilate, emphasis on differences from the dominant group, and stereotyping. See also Ely (1994). 144. Structural change interventions that have been proposed and/or used in the Centers are summarized in Joshi and Merrill-Sands (1998); Joshi et al., (1998); and in Scherr and Mer- rill-Sands (1999) 145. Mental models are "deeply ingrained images and assumtFlptions ... which we carry in our minds of ourselves, other people, institutions.... Like panes of glass, framing and subtly distorting our vision, mental miodels determine what we see and how we act. Because mental mo(lels are usually tacit, existing below the level of awareness, they are often untested and unexamined" (Senge et al, 1994: 235-236). 146. Ragins (1995). 147. Harrison and Stokes (1992). 148. Kolb and Merrill-Sands (1999); Merrill-Sands et al. (1999a); Meyerson and Fletcher (2000); Rao et al. (1999a). 149. Kolb and Merrill-Sands (1999); Merrill-Sands et al. (1999b); Merrill-Sands and Fletclher (1998) 150. Chung ( 1997). 151. Jackson and Holvino (1988); Chesler (1994). 152. Ragins (1995); Cole and Singer (1991). 153. Grace (1994). 154. Smith et al. (1989). o 155. Kolb et al. (1998). 156. Catalyst (1999) 106 157. Boags (1998); Jeruchim and Shapiro (1992); Kram (1985); Lindenberger and Zachary (1999); Wasserman, Miller and Johnson (1991). 158. Merrill-Sands et al. (1999a); Meyerson and Fletcher (2000). 159. Katz and Miller (1988); Kirkham (1992); Thomas, R. et al. (1999). 160. Revised and adapted from Laura Moorehead, Joppa Consulting, traininig miiaterials, 1999 0 z 107 gender diversit A 'ROGRA- OF I A CON5ULTATIVE GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL ACRICULTURAL RESEARCH (CCIAR) CGIAR In 1999, this program was broadened to include diversity. The The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research program provides support to the Centers through small grants, (CGIAR) was created in 1971 from an association of pubLic and technicaL assistance, and rnanagement consuLting, training, and private members that support a system of 16 international agri- information servces. The CCIAR Gender and Diversity Program is cultural research centers known as Future Harvest Centers. hosted by ICRAF (Nairobi, Kenya) and the Program Leader is Vicki Working in more than 100 countries, The Future Harvest Centers Wilde (v.wilde@cgiar.org). mobilize cutting-edge science to reduce hunger and poverty, The Gender and Diversity Program seeks to use diversity to improve human nutrition and health, and protect the environ- strengthen internal and externaL partnerships that enhance the ment. The Centers are located in 12 developing and 3 developed relevance and impact of the Centers, by creating and maintaining countries and are sponsored by The WorLd Bank, the Food and an organizational culture that: Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the United Nations o Attracts and retains the world's best women and men; Development Program (UNDP) The CGIAR budget in 2000 was US $340 miLlon. All new technoLogies arising from the Center's s Encourages the recrutment and promotion of under-repre- research are freely available to everyone. For more information sented groups; about the CGIAR, see: www.cgiarorg * EstabLishes a workplace climate of genuine respect, equity and high morale; GENDER AND DIVERSITY PROGRAM m Promotes a healthy balance between professional and private The CGIAR Gender and Diversity Program serves to cuLtivate a lives; workplace where diversity is celebrated and all staff are empow- * Inspires world-class competency in multi-cuLtural teamwork, ered to give their best to enrich future harvests. Its overall goal is cross-cultural communication and international management; to assist the 16 CGIAR Centers to seek out and collectively gain from the diversity inherent within the globaL organization. The i Empowers and enthuses all women and men in tne system to Gender and Diversity Program grew out of a 1991 CGIAR initiative maximize professional efficacy and colLectively contribute on gender staffing aimed at assisting the Centers to promote the their best; and recruitment, accomplishment, advancement and retention of o Rewards leadership, creativity and innovation that employs women scientists and professionals. and celebrates diversity in the Centers. CIAT Centro InternacionaL de Agricultura Tropical (COLOMBIA) CIFOR Center for International Forestry Research (INDONESIA) CIMMYT Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo (MEXICO) CIP Centro Internacional de la Papa (PERU) ICARDA InternationaL Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (SYRIA) z ICLARM International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management (MALAYSIA) z ICRAF International Center for Research in Agroforestry (KENYA) I ICRISAT International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (INDIA) IFPRI International Food PoLicy Research Institute (USA) IWMI InternationalWater Management Institute (SRI LANKA) v IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (NIGERIA) z ILRI International Livestock Research Institute (KENYA) C IPGRI International Plant Genetics Resources Institute (ITALY) o IRRI International Rice Research Institute (PHILIPPINES) ISNAR International Service for National Agricultural Research (THE NETHERLANDS) z WARDA West Africa Rice Development Association (COTE D'IVOI RE)