University of Queensland, Australia

The Vantage 2000 column seeks to provide a forum for discussing the latest in practice, research, and theory especially in relation to emerging views and characteristics of workforces and workplaces. The informative value of the column depends heavily upon your knowledge, experience, and intuition. You can personally help by sending me a note—be it your vision of the future, a problem you are trying to solve, research you are conducting, a consulting tip, something you’d like to hear about, or the name of a person or organization you recommend that I contact. You can also send newspaper clippings, references to a great article or book you read, or areas of emerging controversy (for your organization or for theory). Further, I am seeking organizations or academic departments to profile that provide examples of innovation in philosophy, research, development, application, or implementation aimed at meeting the demands of contemporary and emerging environments. I am eager to receive your ideas and submissions. You can reach me at any of the following: Graduate School of Management, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia; Phone: +61 7 3365-6747; fax: +61 7 3365-6988; email: c.hartel@gsm.uq.edu.au

Recent Advances in Diversity Research: When Diversity has Positive Outcomes for Organizations and When it Does Not

Although a great deal of data is available showing the trends of increasing diversity in the workplace in industrialized nations, relatively little is known about the effects of these trends on the workplace. In fact, much of the published information on the effects of workforce diversity was anecdotal before the 1990s. Since then a number of researchers have focused on developing theories of diversity, identifying the outcomes of diversity in group tasks, and measuring diversity. This issue’s Vantage 2000 column briefly discusses some advances in each of these areas.

Reviews and Theoretical Models of Diversity Effects in Organizations

Diversity effects in organizational groups. From a review of the literature on diversity effects in organizational groups, "common patterns in the processes by which diversity affected individual, group, and organizational outcomes" were identified (Milliken & Martins, 1996, p. 414). The model they derived from their review depicts the long-term consequences of diversity flowing from the short-term consequences of diversity. The model identifies four diversity types, four types of short-term consequences, and three levels of long-term consequences.

One type of diversity is observable diversity which comprises race/ethnic background, nationality, gender, and age. The other three types of diversity in the model are unobservable diversity (i.e., diversity in values, diversity in skills and knowledge, and diversity in cohort membership). The short-term consequences identified were affective consequences (e.g., commitment, role ambiguity, perceived discrimination), cognitive consequences (e.g., innovation, number and quality of ideas), symbolic consequences (e.g., behavior of lower level employees), and communication-related consequences. The long-term consequences derived from the review occurred at the individual, group, and organizational levels. These included absenteeism, performance, turnover, and strategic changes. Milliken and Martins concluded from their review that "diversity in the composition of organizational groups affects outcomes such as turnover and performance through its impact on affective, cognitive, communication, and symbolic processes." (p. 402).

At the recent SIOP conference, Madeline Heilman and Brian Welle of NYU (1998) presented research examining the effects of diversity initiatives on perceptions of competence. They found that "women were rated as less competent and less likely to emerge as the group leader when they were in a group with a diversity-related rationale for assembly than when other rationales were provided." Apparently, telling people that diversity was a consideration in group member selection increases stereotyping.

Mixed effects of diversity on organizational outcomes are observed in the literature (Milliken & Martins, 1996). At the recent Society of Australasian Social Psychologists a model aiming to explain how diversity comes to effect group processes and outcomes was presented (Hrtel & Fujimoto, 1998). The "Dissimilarity-Openness Moderator Model" argues that the effects of diversity in groups depends upon the openness toward dissimilarity present at the individual, group, and organizational level. This model proposes that high levels of openness to dissimilarity result in positive outcomes such as innovation, involvement, and commitment. Conversely, the model proposes that low levels of openness or closedness to dissimilarity result in negative outcomes for the group such as low involvement, job-related tension, and turnover. An investigation of the model’s predictions is currently underway.

Measuring Diversity

Measuring employee’s openness to diversity. Individual’s openness to diversity has been linked to discriminatory behaviors in the workplace. In particular, raters assessed as closed to diversity rated an equally qualified minority candidate significantly poorer than the nonminority candidate (Hrtel, Douthitt, Hrtel, & Douthitt, 1997). But the ratings of the two candidates by diversity open raters were not significantly different.

The concept and measurement of diversity openness was developed in earlier work (Hrtel & Trumble, 1997). Items reflecting actual and perceived cultural differences reported in the literature were developed. The Ideal Employee Inventory (IEI) asked individuals to rate the importance of each item relative to their ideal employee for a named job. Shane Douthitt of the University of Georgia is currently developing a new version of the IEI which is nonjob specific.

Assessing workplace diversity training needs. Kenneth DeMeuse and Todd Jostager of the University of Wisconsin presented their measure of workforce diversity at the recent SIOP conference. Their Reaction-to-Change Inventory "identifies an individual’s overall, basic orientation to workplace diversity." (p. 6; 1998). Subscores help "trainers to more accurately identify sources of resistance and support"—"where an individual resists and/or supports diversity." They believe that the measure "is a basic human resources tool with broad training applications. First, the inventory can be used to assist trainers to diagnose the culture of an organization regarding the perceived merits of diversity. A training program then can be developed to best meet the specific need of employees in that organization. Secondly, the instrument can be employed to measure the impact of a diversity training effort by sampling participant reactions before and after a diversity workshop, seminar, or program. These pre-post insights will assist managers, trainers, and employees in their efforts to reap the full rewards of a diverse workplace. Finally, the R-T-D Inventory can be used to reassess the attitudes of the workforce on a periodic basis to ascertain if additional training is needed."(p. 4; 1998).

Summary

Negative effects of diversity on performance are not inevitable. Neither are positive effects of diversity guaranteed. The research described here indicates that the effects of a diverse workforce are conditional on factors other than the type of diversity. The finding that openness toward diversity affects discrimination suggests that organizations should be working hard to instill a climate of openness in their organizations, workgroups, and employees. The development of measures to assess what aspects of diversity employees support and resist should assist in achieving this goal.

Column Mission and Call for Contributions for Upcoming Columns

My goal for this column is to discuss the future of practice and research related to work and the workplace. I’d like to include perspectives from outside North America as well. To this end, I hope that, no matter where you are in the world, you will email, call, write or fax me (see contact information below) with your suggestions, views, requests and contributions (the name of an organization or academic department I can profile in a manner consistent with the goals of this column, newspaper clippings, company program pamphlets, news of research-in-progress, experience with OD and HR strategies/programs and any other information—nothing is too small). I would also be interested to hear what types of information you would like me to share with you from the Australasia region. Please send any information relevant to the points discussed in this column along with your ideas for future topics to me at: Graduate School of Management, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia; Phone: +61 7 3365-6747; FAX: +61 7 3365-6988; INTERNET: C.Hartel@ gsm.uq.edu.au

De Meuse, K. P., & Hostager, T. J. (1998, April). The "Reaction-to-Change Inventory:" The development and application of a measure of workplace diversity. Paper presented at The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology conference, Dallas, Texas.

Hrtel, C. E. J., Douthitt, S., Hrtel, G. F., & Douthitt, S. (1997). Equally qualified but unequally perceived: General cultural openness as a predictor of discriminatory performance ratings. (Management Paper Series #37). Brisbane, Australia. University of Queensland, Graduate School of Management.

Hrtel, C. E. J., & Fujimoto, Y. (1998, April). Effects of diversity in organisational groups: Development of the diversity-openness moderator model. Paper presented at the Society of Australasian Social Psychologists, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Hrtel, C. E. J., & Trumble, R. B. (1997). IDADA: The individual difference approach to diversity awareness (Management Paper Series #36). Brisbane, Australia. University of Queensland, Graduate School of Management.

Heilman, M., & Welle, B. (1998, April). Perceptions of the members of diverse work groups. Paper presented at The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology conference, Dallas, Texas.