Diversity In The Workplace
Conduct a short literature review on the following topic as they relate to the workplace and work behaviour: diversity in terms of gender; sexual or religious orientation; You may move beyond these topic - with permission from your tutor.
The topic of diversity in the workplace has been thoroughly researched and analysed. A variety of concepts and theories have been established to try and explain the impact and implications of having a diverse workforce in the workplace. The term diversity covers a plethora of demographics, however this review
will be attempting to focus on one of the most widely discussed and debated workplace diversity issues of today’s society: sexual orientation. In order to explore how diversity in sexual orientation can affect the workplace and work behaviour, there are three key themes that can be applied and reviewed. These themes are: respecting diversity, accommodation of identity differences and a need for continuous education and training. These three key themes are then able to create the following attitudes, that are positive contributors to success in a diverse workforce; an organisations ability to learn from errors and mistakes, an organisations ability to adapt to both constant and changing variables within the work environment, the importance of employees interpersonal communication skills and the compatibility between an employee and their work environment. Although the literature presents sexual orientation diversity; as well as the themes and attitudes, in a wide variety of contexts; this paper will predominantly focus upon reviewing the affects that employee diversity has on the workplace and more significantly work behaviour.
In the US the importance of further research into the influence of sexual orientation diversity in the work environment has recently been on the rise. As stated by Johnston & Malina (2008), there are three crucial reasons why sexual orientation diversity research differs from typical workplace diversity studies, and therefore needs more investigation. Firstly, where race, gender and religion are federally protected grounds for discrimination; federal law does not dictate discrimination by sexual orientation. Secondly, a significant segment of society
support the gay stigma in organisations, and agree that homosexuality is not an acceptable lifestyle choice. Finally, compared to apparent characteristics of race and gender, sexual orientation is not something that is clearly evident and must self-‐ identify as diverse in this way for it to be acknowledged.
Throughout this review I will be making reference to the optimal level possible of workplace diversity, which is the positive diversity climate. The definition of organizational climate by Hicks-‐Clarke and Iles (2000, p.326), can be used to assist in defining, a positive diversity climate ‘ [a positive] perception of [diversity in] the organisation, based largely on organisational rules, regulations and individuals ' interpretation of those rules and regulations’. The broad concept of a positive diversity climate can be broken down into two major components. These components established by Luijters, Van Der Zee and Otten (2008) are: openness to diversity and appreciation of diversity. An organizations ability to possess the first component of ‘Openness to diversity’ is ‘reflected in the possibility to choose one’s own work style and maintain important cultural habits, even though these habits may differ from what is perceived as normal’ (Hofhuis, Van Der Zee and Otten, 2012). Openness to diversity also encompasses the ability of employees to openly express and communicate mutual differences and the possible difficulties that may potentially occur as a result of them. (Luijters et al., 2008). The second component of a positive diversity climate, Appreciation of diversity, is defined as the impression of added value of diversity within an organization (Hofhuis et al. 2012). Strong appreciation of diversity is seen as an advantage compared to that of weak appreciation of diversity, which has been linked with greater absenteeism levels among workers with diverse characteristics.
In recent years, studies have shown significant improvements in equal working rights for employees, with differing sexual orientation. In a report by Hunt (2011), workers unions worldwide have rallied for non-‐discrimination policies both internal and external to the workplace, and have lobbied for ‘broader social-‐political-‐ legal change’. Despite the fact that these developments are predominantly in public
unions of first-‐world western civilizations, this progression can only be of benefit to the worldwide advancement of equity in the workforce. This trend of respecting diversity, for those with differing sexual orientation, creates a positive diversity climate within the organization. By respecting diversity, in this case sexual orientation, organizations are demonstrating the ability to change and adapt to organizational variables. As Choi (2011), discovered, respecting individual differences within the organization creates a more positive and willing environment; ‘when employees are well-‐ informed about their role and the goings-‐on … and when they feel included …they are likely to be open to [organizational] change’. The current upward trends of ability to change within organizations can only be sustained if foundational structures of accommodation are created within the organizations.
Most studies have shown that to introduce a positive diversity climate in the workplace, the first step is to accommodate the employees. As suggested by Hicks-‐
Clarke
and Iles (2000), to establish a positive diversity climate, there needs to be a focus on accommodating diversity policies and procedures, reasoning that accommodation of employees sexual differences, should be an expectation. To incorporate policies and procedures to manage a workforce with sexual orientation diversity, as stated by Johnston and Malina (2008), there are a number of options including: offering domestic partner benefits (DPB’s) and the adoption of policies focused upon non-‐discrimination. As a result of creating these guidelines, the culture around the business will become more positive as it is understood that all employees are seen as equal and are to be treated equally, which in turn improves the relationship between employee and business and performance results increase as employees want to stay in the organization. Research has found though that some organizations that attempt to create an ‘accommodating’ workplace for those with diverse identities, are unable to do so, as a result of the staff they employ. This is why it is pivotal for organizations to employ workers that have a high quality person-‐ environment fit. As discovered by Kristof-‐Brown, Zimmerman and Johnson (2005), worker-‐environment fits have been connected with greater organizational outcomes. In spite of organizations best efforts to create a workforce that is
accommodating of sexual orientation diversity, continuous education is required on the issue.
In addition to having the ability to respect and accommodate diversity, to achieve a positive diversity climate, there must be underlying education systems to provide continuous support and guidance. As Groggins and Ryan (2013) discovered in their in-‐depth analysis of Diverseplace, creating an environment where employees willingly ‘[admit] that one does not know everything’, in turn creates an altered perspective of errors. Supporting this notion Keith and Frese (2008) found, that organizations that had openness to error, had a positive relationship with successful performances. The benefits of a continual learning process proposed by Raeburn (2004) are highlighted by Johnston and Malina (2008), as the’ condense that ‘employee resource groups generally provide support and networking, educate other employees about GLBT issues, and advocate change’. This openness and continual learning within the organization fosters high interpersonal skills, which is another key attribute of successful work and work behavior. The research of Hoever, van Knippenberg, van Ginkel & Barkema (2012) supports this notion, as strong interpersonal skills within diverse teams achieve greater performance benefits. Despite, the importance of sexual orientation diversity being more widely recognized at an organizational-‐level, there are major holes in the federal framework.
One final common theme that is apparent in the literature is the need for international recognition of the issue. Notwithstanding the evidence of a positive relationship between accommodation of sexual orientation and organizational benefits, the International Labor Organization (ILO), has still neglected to include sexual orientation on the list of grounds for non-‐discrimination. As discussed by Johnston and Malian (2008), The issue of sexual orientation in the workplace still has considerable ground to improve upon, however as the evidence of the encouraging relationship connecting accommodation of diversity and positive organizational outcomes, becomes more apparent, workplace diversity will be internationally encouraged.
Whilst there is increasing literature reviewing sexual orientation diversity within the workplace, there are still some flaws and areas that can be improved upon. One such issue is the current lack of specific study on sexual orientation diversity within the workplace. Whilst there are many studies that have researched the impact of sexual diversity in workplaces on a general scale, there is currently a lack of in-‐depth analyses. Additionally, a problem highlighted by Johnston and Malina (2008), is the ability to locate those within workplaces that align with being LGBT to make any judgments.
Despite there being a wide variety of literature that examines the impact of sexual diversity in the workplace, as the issue is constantly evolving and developing, further analysis and reviews are crucial. Current literature provides clear evidence that organisations that foster a positive diversity climate for those of varying sexual orientation through accommodation, ability to change and continuous education; are more successful in their ability to achieve organisational outcomes.
References:
– Choi, M. (2011). Employees’ attitudes toward organizational change: a literature review. Human Resource Management, 50, 479–500. –
Groggins, A. & Ryan, A. (2013). Embracing uniqueness: the underpinnings of a positive climate for diversity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 1-‐19.
–
Hoever, I. J., van Knippenberg, D., van Ginkel, W. P., & Barkema, H. G. (2012). Fostering team creativity: Perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity’s potential. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 982–996. –
Hofhuis, J., van der Zee, K. I., & Otten, S. (2012). Social identity patterns in culturally diverse organizations: the role of diversity climate. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 964–989. –
Hicks-‐Clarke, D., & Iles, P. (2000). Climate for diversity and its effects on career and organizational attitudes and perceptions. Personnel Review, 29, 324–345. –
Hunt, G. (2011). International framework agreements and sexual orientation discrimination. Journal of International Management Studies, 11.1, 103
–
Johnston, D. & Malina, M. (2008). Managing sexual orientation diversity: the impact on firm value, Group & Organization Management, 33.5, 602-‐625.
–
Keith, N., & Frese, M. (2008). Effectiveness of error management training: a meta-‐analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 59–69.
–
Kristof-‐Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individual’s fit at work: A meta-‐analysis of person-‐job, person-‐organization, person-‐group, and person-‐supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342.
–
Luijters, K., van der Zee, K. I., & Otten, S. (2008). Cultural diversity in organizations: enhancing identification by valuing differences. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 154–163.
The topic of diversity in the workplace has been thoroughly researched and analysed. A variety of concepts and theories have been established to try and explain the impact and implications of having a diverse workforce in the workplace. The term diversity covers a plethora of demographics, however this review
will be attempting to focus on one of the most widely discussed and debated workplace diversity issues of today’s society: sexual orientation. In order to explore how diversity in sexual orientation can affect the workplace and work behaviour, there are three key themes that can be applied and reviewed. These themes are: respecting diversity, accommodation of identity differences and a need for continuous education and training. These three key themes are then able to create the following attitudes, that are positive contributors to success in a diverse workforce; an organisations ability to learn from errors and mistakes, an organisations ability to adapt to both constant and changing variables within the work environment, the importance of employees interpersonal communication skills and the compatibility between an employee and their work environment. Although the literature presents sexual orientation diversity; as well as the themes and attitudes, in a wide variety of contexts; this paper will predominantly focus upon reviewing the affects that employee diversity has on the workplace and more significantly work behaviour.
In the US the importance of further research into the influence of sexual orientation diversity in the work environment has recently been on the rise. As stated by Johnston & Malina (2008), there are three crucial reasons why sexual orientation diversity research differs from typical workplace diversity studies, and therefore needs more investigation. Firstly, where race, gender and religion are federally protected grounds for discrimination; federal law does not dictate discrimination by sexual orientation. Secondly, a significant segment of society
support the gay stigma in organisations, and agree that homosexuality is not an acceptable lifestyle choice. Finally, compared to apparent characteristics of race and gender, sexual orientation is not something that is clearly evident and must self-‐ identify as diverse in this way for it to be acknowledged.
Throughout this review I will be making reference to the optimal level possible of workplace diversity, which is the positive diversity climate. The definition of organizational climate by Hicks-‐Clarke and Iles (2000, p.326), can be used to assist in defining, a positive diversity climate ‘ [a positive] perception of [diversity in] the organisation, based largely on organisational rules, regulations and individuals ' interpretation of those rules and regulations’. The broad concept of a positive diversity climate can be broken down into two major components. These components established by Luijters, Van Der Zee and Otten (2008) are: openness to diversity and appreciation of diversity. An organizations ability to possess the first component of ‘Openness to diversity’ is ‘reflected in the possibility to choose one’s own work style and maintain important cultural habits, even though these habits may differ from what is perceived as normal’ (Hofhuis, Van Der Zee and Otten, 2012). Openness to diversity also encompasses the ability of employees to openly express and communicate mutual differences and the possible difficulties that may potentially occur as a result of them. (Luijters et al., 2008). The second component of a positive diversity climate, Appreciation of diversity, is defined as the impression of added value of diversity within an organization (Hofhuis et al. 2012). Strong appreciation of diversity is seen as an advantage compared to that of weak appreciation of diversity, which has been linked with greater absenteeism levels among workers with diverse characteristics.
In recent years, studies have shown significant improvements in equal working rights for employees, with differing sexual orientation. In a report by Hunt (2011), workers unions worldwide have rallied for non-‐discrimination policies both internal and external to the workplace, and have lobbied for ‘broader social-‐political-‐ legal change’. Despite the fact that these developments are predominantly in public
unions of first-‐world western civilizations, this progression can only be of benefit to the worldwide advancement of equity in the workforce. This trend of respecting diversity, for those with differing sexual orientation, creates a positive diversity climate within the organization. By respecting diversity, in this case sexual orientation, organizations are demonstrating the ability to change and adapt to organizational variables. As Choi (2011), discovered, respecting individual differences within the organization creates a more positive and willing environment; ‘when employees are well-‐ informed about their role and the goings-‐on … and when they feel included …they are likely to be open to [organizational] change’. The current upward trends of ability to change within organizations can only be sustained if foundational structures of accommodation are created within the organizations.
Most studies have shown that to introduce a positive diversity climate in the workplace, the first step is to accommodate the employees. As suggested by Hicks-‐
Clarke
and Iles (2000), to establish a positive diversity climate, there needs to be a focus on accommodating diversity policies and procedures, reasoning that accommodation of employees sexual differences, should be an expectation. To incorporate policies and procedures to manage a workforce with sexual orientation diversity, as stated by Johnston and Malina (2008), there are a number of options including: offering domestic partner benefits (DPB’s) and the adoption of policies focused upon non-‐discrimination. As a result of creating these guidelines, the culture around the business will become more positive as it is understood that all employees are seen as equal and are to be treated equally, which in turn improves the relationship between employee and business and performance results increase as employees want to stay in the organization. Research has found though that some organizations that attempt to create an ‘accommodating’ workplace for those with diverse identities, are unable to do so, as a result of the staff they employ. This is why it is pivotal for organizations to employ workers that have a high quality person-‐ environment fit. As discovered by Kristof-‐Brown, Zimmerman and Johnson (2005), worker-‐environment fits have been connected with greater organizational outcomes. In spite of organizations best efforts to create a workforce that is
accommodating of sexual orientation diversity, continuous education is required on the issue.
In addition to having the ability to respect and accommodate diversity, to achieve a positive diversity climate, there must be underlying education systems to provide continuous support and guidance. As Groggins and Ryan (2013) discovered in their in-‐depth analysis of Diverseplace, creating an environment where employees willingly ‘[admit] that one does not know everything’, in turn creates an altered perspective of errors. Supporting this notion Keith and Frese (2008) found, that organizations that had openness to error, had a positive relationship with successful performances. The benefits of a continual learning process proposed by Raeburn (2004) are highlighted by Johnston and Malina (2008), as the’ condense that ‘employee resource groups generally provide support and networking, educate other employees about GLBT issues, and advocate change’. This openness and continual learning within the organization fosters high interpersonal skills, which is another key attribute of successful work and work behavior. The research of Hoever, van Knippenberg, van Ginkel & Barkema (2012) supports this notion, as strong interpersonal skills within diverse teams achieve greater performance benefits. Despite, the importance of sexual orientation diversity being more widely recognized at an organizational-‐level, there are major holes in the federal framework.
One final common theme that is apparent in the literature is the need for international recognition of the issue. Notwithstanding the evidence of a positive relationship between accommodation of sexual orientation and organizational benefits, the International Labor Organization (ILO), has still neglected to include sexual orientation on the list of grounds for non-‐discrimination. As discussed by Johnston and Malian (2008), The issue of sexual orientation in the workplace still has considerable ground to improve upon, however as the evidence of the encouraging relationship connecting accommodation of diversity and positive organizational outcomes, becomes more apparent, workplace diversity will be internationally encouraged.
Whilst there is increasing literature reviewing sexual orientation diversity within the workplace, there are still some flaws and areas that can be improved upon. One such issue is the current lack of specific study on sexual orientation diversity within the workplace. Whilst there are many studies that have researched the impact of sexual diversity in workplaces on a general scale, there is currently a lack of in-‐depth analyses. Additionally, a problem highlighted by Johnston and Malina (2008), is the ability to locate those within workplaces that align with being LGBT to make any judgments.
Despite there being a wide variety of literature that examines the impact of sexual diversity in the workplace, as the issue is constantly evolving and developing, further analysis and reviews are crucial. Current literature provides clear evidence that organisations that foster a positive diversity climate for those of varying sexual orientation through accommodation, ability to change and continuous education; are more successful in their ability to achieve organisational outcomes.
References:
– Choi, M. (2011). Employees’ attitudes toward organizational change: a literature review. Human Resource Management, 50, 479–500. –
Groggins, A. & Ryan, A. (2013). Embracing uniqueness: the underpinnings of a positive climate for diversity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 1-‐19.
–
Hoever, I. J., van Knippenberg, D., van Ginkel, W. P., & Barkema, H. G. (2012). Fostering team creativity: Perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity’s potential. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 982–996. –
Hofhuis, J., van der Zee, K. I., & Otten, S. (2012). Social identity patterns in culturally diverse organizations: the role of diversity climate. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 964–989. –
Hicks-‐Clarke, D., & Iles, P. (2000). Climate for diversity and its effects on career and organizational attitudes and perceptions. Personnel Review, 29, 324–345. –
Hunt, G. (2011). International framework agreements and sexual orientation discrimination. Journal of International Management Studies, 11.1, 103
–
Johnston, D. & Malina, M. (2008). Managing sexual orientation diversity: the impact on firm value, Group & Organization Management, 33.5, 602-‐625.
–
Keith, N., & Frese, M. (2008). Effectiveness of error management training: a meta-‐analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 59–69.
–
Kristof-‐Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individual’s fit at work: A meta-‐analysis of person-‐job, person-‐organization, person-‐group, and person-‐supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342.
–
Luijters, K., van der Zee, K. I., & Otten, S. (2008). Cultural diversity in organizations: enhancing identification by valuing differences. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 154–163.