Several organizations have adapted formal programs
and initiatives in order to transition from traditionally
homogenous infrastructures to more diversified institutions.
These initiatives are truly commendable and are
a reflection of an evolving leadership that is more
open and has a willingness to embrace a new millennium
trend, which is quickly becoming conventional…globalization.
As
organizations become increasingly inundated with
new techniques and training programs designed to
diversify their employee base, frustrations among
workers increase while consensus decreases. This
reaction should not be surprising though, considering
how diversity was initially introduced in literature
and through method of delivery as a training technique.
Diversity was and is still discussed under multiple
brands including civil rights, affirmative action,
reverse discrimination, quotas, racism, and sexism.
Each of these topics has its protractors and defenders.
They have in common a deep emotional appeal. Groups
favoring diversity feel that they are right in their
call for race, sex, disability and age discrimination
to be remedied by a bold corrective initiative often
referred to as affirmative action. Their detractors
say that it is wrong to discriminate in any form.
They hold that affirmative action places the majority
at a disadvantage by laws favoring minorities and
women in admissions to colleges and in obtaining
employment and promotions, as well as contracts.
There is little if any consensus to be found in
the country between these two groups with opposing
views. Consequently, these opposing groups cannot
discuss the merits of their positions with each
other because this is such an emotionally charged
issue.
Diversity
is a highly intense topic that, while embraced philosophically,
it is quickly challenged once institutionalized.
Of course the aforementioned opposing views are
the underlining reasons; however, let us consider
how most companies approach this topic. Diversity
is recognized as an inevitable strategy for meeting
the ever-changing demographics in society. It is
then studied, is most often adapted as the solution
and often the conclusion to problems of inequality
in the workplace. Most organizations conclude with
a formalized diversity initiative which focus is
on diversity training, diversification (integration
through hiring), and annual maintenance programs.
Each of these initiative components becomes a part
of a continuum, which is replicated annually. While
this is truly deserving of much praise and support,
many corporate leaders are beginning to ask probing
questions… Is this it? What do we do now?
This
leads us to the purpose of this article. Diversity
in retrospect is a first step initiative. It is
commonly accepted as an end product of ambitious
initiatives; however, it is unequivocally the beginning
of a process. Consider the two opposing views discussed
earlier. What is needed is a vehicle to get these
estranged parties together. Cultural understanding
is key but is only the beginning. Therefore diversity
training is necessary to assist in developing acceptance
rather than tolerance. A change in attitude is necessary,
and attitudes are changed when people begin to understand
the "different" members of society and
respect is shown towards them. A reality is that
forward thinking companies have begun to realize
that it is not enough for their employees to appreciate
differences, but rather that the appreciation might
be turned into a company benefit. One approach is
to go "From Diversity to Unity to Community"
(Hunt & Rice, 1998).
The
"corporate house" of the next century
will be made up of people of all different ethnic
groups. The present majority is slowly shifting
and though it will be some time before a wholesale
change takes place in management, the vehicle is
moving in that direction. Experts tell us that the
ones likely to survive are those that become multicultural
in their approach to management. We are told that
management will have to relate better to its employees'
needs and demanding consumers who are more and more
ethnically diverse. Diversity programs aimed at
conflict resolution direct people's actions towards
appreciating culturally different people. Sometimes
these diversity initiatives might go as far as moving
people from a state of diversity (conflict) to one
of unity (solidarity). Ultimately, reaching a state
of unity signifies reaching a state of agreement.
However, what many such projects fail to recognize
is that getting culturally different people to truly
work together should not stop at tolerance or mutual
appreciation at best. People should be trained to
recognize that in the workplace, they are part of
a community, and to achieve community building,
they must be willing to build upon what they have
learned in understanding culturally different people
in order to unify their visions and their goals
of building inclusive communities of workers. Therein,
can we truly begin to see the workings of effective
diversity projects; the end product must be palpable
and must be demonstrated in these workers' contributions
to organizational projects.
The
process of moving along the continuum from diversity
to unity to community can be methodical. If diversity
is not approached as a first step process, it could
result in corporate confusion, and naturally, division.
Diversity by definition is divisive. While an appreciation
of others is promoted, a divided organization will
not be as successful as a cohesive one. The divided
"organization" cannot achieve optimum
efficiency any more than a partnership where two
partners are in sharp disagreement. To save the
partnership, the two must desire to work together
to overcome the forces working against the business's
success. The partners might seek external consultation.
The consultant serves as a mediator between the
two parties. Through mediation, the two are able
to see problems that they did not know existed.
In acknowledging their faults, and seeking reconciliation,
the two avoid the devastation of separation. Likewise,
the organization estranged from its workers must
undergo a form of mediation. It and the workers
must come to agree on what is best for the organization.
Consequently, a type of collaboration is formed.
From
this unified position, employees and management
can go forward in the community building work. Community
or shared vision will not take place uniformly within
the company. Some people will be slower than others
to appreciate differences as a kind of welcomed
variety, while others will hold on to the familiar
because they fear what change might bring. Top management
must take care that all parties are included in
the building process. The critical aspect of the
building work is the company's governance policy.
The policy must reflect the best thoughts, words
and deeds possible to set the right example for
its employees. Good corporate governance is governance
where fair play is ensured for all employees.
Since
community is a heart felt condition and not a well
thought out plan, those who evidence willingness
to community must take the lead. If only one unit
in the company shows a desire toward community,
that unit should be given the support by top management
to proceed. They should be seen as mentors for others
in the company. As they go about their assigned
tasks relating to others in a caring, sharing, and
respectful manner, other units will take note of
their example. When one additional unit begins to
relate in like manner as the mentoring unit, they
too demonstrate the community building work. As
more and more units join in the work, the work takes
on a life of its own. Care must be taken that no
one is left out the building process. The difficult
cases will require special assistance. This is where
community building training comes into play. At
the level of community, training is concerned with
fostering an inclusive community. This is where
ideas are shared at all levels and diversity is
recognized, respected and valued; however, in order
to move forward, people must learn to work cohesively
(unity) towards a true end product which is an inclusive
community.
Thoughts
for the Future…
Thankfully, there are projects at Johnson &
Wales University that are moving us along that continuum
of diversity, unity and community building. John
Bowen, President at Johnson & Wales University's
Providence campus, championed an ambitious endeavor,
which was to develop the university's vision for
2006. While the completion of the vision statements
was noteworthy, the process that he used to include
the views and opinions of employees throughout the
entire organization is truly noteworthy. Irrespective
of position, title or geographical location (multi-campus
locations), the strenuous task of data gathering
within all levels of the organization was accomplished.
In a sense, this is an example of a community building
work whose aim was to be inclusive people at all
levels.
Consequently,
the key to future success at JWU is the process
by which the institution moves from Diversity…to
Unity…to Community. Through various diversity-training
initiatives, we are learning to appreciate culturally
different people; however, this is a continual process
that must be yield tangible results. To do so, we
must continue to tackle projects as a team that
will build a community of JWU students, faculty,
and staff prepared to face the challenges of the
new millennium.
By:
Dr Larry A. Rice, Ed.D.
Dean of Academic Affairs
Johnson & Wales University
*Building
The Inclusive Community, D.G. Hunt, and L. A. Rice,
unpublished manuscript.
**This
article is derived from a collaborative effort of
Larry A. Rice Ed.D and Deryl G. Hunt, Ph.D. Several
excerpts have been taken from their personal manuscript,
which is copy written and cannot be duplicated without
written permission.
