A Matter of Difference
Diversity and Inclusion:
What Difference Does it Make?
Martin N. Davidson
University of Virginia
Bernardo M. Ferdman
Alliant International University
To choose not to engage in dialogue about diversity in almost any modern
organization is just plain dumb. On the surface, that may seem like a
controversial, even offensive, statement. After all, thoughtful individuals have
grappled with the implications of valuing diversity in a variety of
organizations. For every proponent who argues that diversity is the right and
rational thing to do in a corporation, school, or professional organization,
there is an equally articulate opponent arguing that valuing diversity is
too often a proxy for instituting unjust policies (e.g., quotas) that deny
qualified people opportunities, and harm the underqualified people afforded
opportunities with which they are unprepared to cope (Ferdman, 1997).
This kind of powerful discourse (sometimes conducted in less than civil
tones) pervades modern organizations in the United States, and increasingly, in
other parts of the world. In Europe, the advent of the European Union, in which
numerous countries will operate with unprecedented interdependence, promises to
present diversity challenges at least as complex as those we have struggled with
in the U.S. In South Africa, the downfall of apartheid and what some see as the
inevitable dominance of capitalism makes the negotiation of race of paramount
importance. In Latin America, changing economic conditions and gender roles,
together with increasing consciousness of native peoples, have made
long-standing societal fault lines even more explicit.
Do you notice anything interesting about the exchange described in the first
paragraph? Hopefully it has some face validity, but beyond that, it frames the
discourse around diversity as a debate, with proponents and opponents. This is
not an unusual phenomenon, but that doesnt make it constructive. Even though
many people talk about diversity as a social advancement, as a movement or
principle associated with greater equality and fairness, far too often diversity
becomes associated with scarce resources and competition over what is valued
(Davidson, 1999). Some person or some group is trying to gain something while
some other person in some other group is trying to protect something. This is
the nexus at which so many attempts to generate and nurture diversity have
failed. Yet, in the midst of this and other challenges, the imperative of
dealing with our differences in new and creative ways remains.
The question is How do we do it? Lets look at an
interesting case as a prelude to answering that question. At a Fortune 10
corporation, a top leadership team that increased its racial and gender
diversity with the promotion of a relatively young African-American team leader
was in turmoil. The senior members of the team, all White men, were particularly
disturbed by the leaders appointment of four new African-American team
members to the 15-person team. The two women he appointed, one African American
and one White, were also of concernthey seemed far too young. The younger
White men on the team who were really threatened by all of this expected to rise
to positions of authority through what they perceived as a fair process of
advancement. These personnel moves completely upset that expectation, and they
were unsure where they would land in the midst of it all.
The African Americans on the team were terrified. They felt as if they had
entered the jaws of the whale and though they felt very willing and ready to
take on the responsibilities of their positions, the conflict with the White men
in the team was aggravating and draining. Moreover, some of these men, whom they
had respected and looked up to as professional mentors, were now cool towards
them. Finally, they were acutely aware that the team leader was being tested.
Headquarters was watching to see if this Black man could run a major division
effectively. The African-American members felt a fierce loyalty to one of their
own, and any dissent was taken collectively.
Over the course of 18 months, this team moved from turmoil to a fairly high
level of functioning. Relationships were built across the racial and gender
lines and although every person didnt like every other person on the team,
they began to act and talk about the team as unit, as a collective that had to
act as one, and that had to defer to its leader, given the culture of the
corporation. In their personal lives, few team members crossed racial or gender
lines, perhaps a result of their location in the southeast U.S. Nevertheless,
this team was working, and this division was the most profitable business unit
in the corporation, making record revenues each of 4 consecutive years.
How did they do it? We believe it has to do with directly engaging with
difference as a key to creating inclusion.
The subtleties of this and other such turnarounds will be the topic of this
ongoing column, A Matter of Difference. In the coming 2 years, we will
take up various facets of diversity and inclusion as they apply to organizations
as a whole and to our organization, SIOP, in particular. We hope to inform you,
stimulate you, and sometimes provoke you to think critically about diversity,
how it affects us, and what we can do about and with it.
We think the core of the answer to our question, How do we do it? rests
in a different, inclusive vision of diversity. Consider that the opening
paragraph of this column framed the issue of diversity as a debate. This was
intentional misdirection. Its not that the points raised are not valid and
debatable. They are simply not the main point. We believe in moving beyond
either/or logic and finding ways to link even seemingly contradictory
positions (Ferdman, 1992). Our vision of diversity is not about quotas, nor
about counting the numbers of one type of person or another. Rather, its
about building a broad-scoped, inclusive, and just organization in which trust
and respect are the default options for all the members of the community. This
is an organization that continuously learns how to better use all human capacity
for both individual and collective good. To value diversity, to value difference
in a community means that policies, structures, and norms of behavior must be
aligned in such a way that every member of the community is respected and
included. Honest dialogue among members of almost any community reveals that
there are usually segments of the community that feel disrespected,
misrepresented, or left out of the loop. True inclusion attempts to bring those
people into the mainstream of the community organization. And that is often a
formidable task.
But truly inclusive organizations dont just stop there. They also
emphasize the importance of helping those who are in the mainstream continue to
feel like they are part of the mainstream. Inclusive visions of diversity
dont just focus on redefining who the winner is of the resource at
hand. Rather, they focus on enlarging the resources so that all can benefit from
them. This is the direction of the most sophisticated thinking on diversity
today. Its about the container into which we all fit.
Now, the sharper and more cynical of our readers might give this the sniff
test and say we dont pass. Isnt this vision merely a platitude that
sidesteps the toughest issues about diversityhow do we, as an organization,
increase representation of people of color and White women? How do we create an
intellectual climate in which good research on diversity is actually respected?
How do we train ourselves to engage the larger world on the issues that matter
most to us?
We say: in time. We may not have answers to these and other questions, but
through careful inquiry, we plan to tackle these and other issues head on. Our
ability to understand, value, and benefit from difference in the world and in
our organization matters profoundly. Lets use our best understanding of our
theory, research and practice to give this issue its due attention.
References
Davidson, M. N. (1999). The value of being
included: An examination of diversity change initiatives in organizations.
Performance Improvement Quarterly, 12, 164180.
Ferdman, B. M. (1992). The dynamics of
ethnic diversity in organizations. In K. Kelley (Ed.), Issues, theory and
research in industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 339384). Amsterdam:
North Holland.
Ferdman, B. M. (1997). Values about
fairness in the ethnically diverse workplace. [Special Issue: Managing in a
global context: Diversity and cross-cultural challenges]. Business and the
Contemporary World: An International Journal of Business, Economics, and Social
Policy, 9, 191208.
October 2001 Table
of Contents | TIP Home
| SIOP Home