Diluting Diversity : Implications for Intergroup Inequality in Organization
In the article entitled “Diluting Diversity : Implications for Intergroup Inequality in Organization” by Linnehan and Konrad, they described the factors that are being used as a rationale for investing in diversity initiatives.
The first factor is the relationship between cultural differences and performance. Treating employees with the ways that they do not like to be treated with, can cause emotional distress and reduce performance at work, increase absenteeism and turnovers. Customers that come from different cultural backgrounds also can be effectively treated if organizations could listen and take advantage from the experience and knowledge possessed by employees with diverse cultural background. The second factor is creativity and performance from heterogeneity. It is stated in the article that workforce diversity could enhance creativity in problem solving among the employees. This is because diverse groups usually generates different kind of solutions for different types of problems and therefore the combination of such ideas lead to a better solutions than those from homogenous groups. However, the article also discussed about a problem in a diverse workforce climate which is cohesiveness. The homogenous group is said to be more cohesive and therefore more committed to the group. The last rationale is the climate and performance. Improving the organizational climate for the minorities or historically excluded groups can result in better working experience, productivity and reducing destructive conflicts between managers and employees. However, minority groups are likely to infer the climate-driven performance program as a result of negative stereotypes on the behavior at work. This perception may cause the minority groups to feel inferior as they think that they have done something wrong which leads to the initiation of the program. The textbook also did a similar arguments about the rationale for investing in diversity initiatives. According to the
The first factor is the relationship between cultural differences and performance. Treating employees with the ways that they do not like to be treated with, can cause emotional distress and reduce performance at work, increase absenteeism and turnovers. Customers that come from different cultural backgrounds also can be effectively treated if organizations could listen and take advantage from the experience and knowledge possessed by employees with diverse cultural background. The second factor is creativity and performance from heterogeneity. It is stated in the article that workforce diversity could enhance creativity in problem solving among the employees. This is because diverse groups usually generates different kind of solutions for different types of problems and therefore the combination of such ideas lead to a better solutions than those from homogenous groups. However, the article also discussed about a problem in a diverse workforce climate which is cohesiveness. The homogenous group is said to be more cohesive and therefore more committed to the group. The last rationale is the climate and performance. Improving the organizational climate for the minorities or historically excluded groups can result in better working experience, productivity and reducing destructive conflicts between managers and employees. However, minority groups are likely to infer the climate-driven performance program as a result of negative stereotypes on the behavior at work. This perception may cause the minority groups to feel inferior as they think that they have done something wrong which leads to the initiation of the program. The textbook also did a similar arguments about the rationale for investing in diversity initiatives. According to the