ATHABASCA UNIVERSITY

CREATING DIVERSE ORGANIZATIONS: A GUIDE FOR CAREER DEVELOPMENT

PROFESSIONALS

BY

AVRA DAVIDOFF

A Final Project submitted to the

Graduate Centre for Applied Psychology, Athabasca University

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF COUNSELLING

Alberta

(May) (2009)

i

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

The members of this final project committee are:

Name of Supervisor Dr. Nancy Arthur

Name of Second Reader Dr. Sandra Collins

ii

ABSTRACT

Canada�s organizations are fast transitioning from monocultural to multicultural entities.

Career development professionals are challenged with the task to maximize the benefits of

organizational diversity while limiting its challenges. When left unmanaged, diversity can

threaten the functioning of the organization and foster conflict, hostility, and discrimination.

When managed well, diverse organizations are able to compete effectively and maximize

profits, which are paramount given global competitiveness. The author outlines a systems

model for implementing organizational development initiatives, drawing attention to the

importance of social justice as part of this process.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER I

Introduction�������������������������������...1

Key terms�����������������������������...2 Diversity���������������������������.2 Culture����������������������������3 Ethnocentrism�������������������������3 Non-dominant groups����������������������4 Systemic barriers������������������������4 Affirmative action�����������������������..5

CHAPTER II

Theoretical foundations���������������������������.7 Characteristics of diverse organizations������������������7 Rational for diversity in organizations������������������...8 Canada as the multicultural mosaic����������������...9 Demographics�������������������������9 Immigration�������������������������10

Changing value systems��������������������...11 The new employment contract������������������.11 Globalization�������������������������12 Approaches to managing diversity�������������������...13 Existing research��������������������������..13 Advantages����������������������������...15 Challenges����������������������������....16

CHAPTER III

Applied product: A systems model for organizational diversity initiatives�������18 Global and community influences�������������������...19 Communication��������������������������....20 Trust and respect��������������������������..21 Empowerment and inclusion����������������������22 Social responsiveness������������������������...24 Leadership�����������������������������25

Leadership philosophy���������������������.25 Creating buy-in������������������������26 Vision and mission����������������������...27 Steering and advisory groups������������������...28 External consultants�������������������...��..29 Strategic integration����������������������.31

Assessment���������������������������...�32

iv

Needs analysis������������������������..32 Cultural auditing�����������������������..34 Benchmarking������������������������..35

Measurement plan����������������������....36 Education�����������������������������.36 Diversity training�����������������������.37 Self-awareness����������������������.��37 Communication�����������������������....38 Alignment of organizational systems����������������...��39 Recruitment and selection���������������������...�.40 Recruitment plan���������������������..��40 Advertisement������������������������..40 Selecting candidates for interviews����������������.41 Interviewing candidates�������������������...�42 The interview process���������������������..43 Orientation����������������������������...45 Policies and procedures����������������������..�.46 Career development practices��������������������..�46 Importance of culture and diversity����������������.47 Mentoring�������������������������.....48 Expatriate assignments��������������������.�49 Performance appraisals������������������������51 Compensation and benefits���������������������..�52 Learning and development����������������������...54 The physical environment����������������������....55 Marketing����������������������������.�55 Follow up�����������������������������.56 Accountability������������������������..56 Evaluation�������������������������....57 Integration of outcomes��������������������...57

CHAPTER IV Synthesis and implications������������������������...�59 Strengths�����������������������������..59 Limitations���������������������������...�60 Why diversity initiatives fail���������������������....62

The future of diversity������������������������.63 Additional research����������������������..63 Gathering stakeholder perspective���������������...�64 Interdisciplinary collaboration������������������.64 Expanding role for career development professionals���������.65 Increased institutional leadership����������������.�65

Conclusion���...���������������������.......�����.65 References��������������������������������67

v

LIST OF FIGURES

A Systems Model for Implementing Diversity Initiatives��������...��75

1

CHAPTER I

Introduction

Diversity has become the new buzz word for human resources and other career and

organizational professionals. However, the meanings of diversity often vary, as do the

approaches intended to manage diversity. Management interventions are often approached

through a process of trial and error. It is also evident that Canada�s organizations are quickly

evolving from monocultural to multicultural structures, consequently, working with diverse

individuals is becoming the norm rather than the exception for employees (Sue, Arrendondo,

& McDavis, 1992). As much attention is often concentrated on diversity at the individual

level, the organizations in which individuals work deserve equal attention, particularly to

address systematic discrimination and to ensure that individual and societal behaviours are

addressed with the same scrutiny and importance (Arrendondo et al., 1996).

Russell-Chapin and Stoner (1995) contend that although organizations are becoming

increasingly aware of the importance of diversity, a number of inaccurate assumptions often

prohibit organizations from taking the appropriate steps towards effective diversity

management. Firstly, they suggest differences among diverse individuals are often viewed as

deficiencies and threats to effective organizational functioning, equating differences to

disloyalty or rebellious behaviour. Secondly, there exists the assumption that members of

non-dominant groups would like to or should assimilate and conform to dominant group

standards and behaviours. They suggest that these inferences have contributed to the belief

that equal treatment means the same treatment. Lastly, they argue that organizations have

long adhered to the belief that effective diversity management entails altering the attitudes

2

and behaviours of diverse employees as opposed to altering the organizational culture and

practices.

This discussion will endeavor to address some of these assumptions while offering a

model for effective organizational diversity management. This discussion will begin with an

overview of some key terms, relevant to understanding this discussion and the model�s

implications. Chapter II outlines the theoretical foundations contributing to the need for a

comprehensive model for implementing organizational diversity initiatives and also reviews

approaches to managing diversity, existing research, and the advantages and challenges of

diversity management. Chapter III continues with reference to a proposed model to facilitate

organizational diversity, elaborating on its components and relevance to the process. Chapter

IV concludes the discussion by highlighting some of the strengths and limitations of the

model including its potential impact on the future of organizational diversity.

Key Terms

Although a number of terms are often used interchangeably when referring to

diversity management, they may have vastly different implications given the context it is

being used in. Therefore understanding the key terms relevant to this discussion can be

confusing. To address this, I will offer key terms that are important in understanding the

subsequent discussion.

Diversity. Some have commented on the use of the term diversity, suggesting that it

can be a confusing term, often equated with multiculturalism (Harrison & Sin, 2006; Sue et

al., 1998). Sue et al. suggest that while multiculturalism may exist in diverse groups, it in

itself is not sufficient to create diversity, nor are diverse groups necessarily multicultural in

nature. Harrison and Sin suggest that diversity is often inappropriately used interchangeably

3

with terms such a within-group variability, difference, heterogeneity, and relational

demography. Ambiguity and lack of agreement about the construct complicates the

discussion about approaches to enhancing diversity in organizations. For the purpose of this

discussion, diversity will be defined as �the collective amount of differences among members

within a social unit� (Harrison & Sin, p. 196).

Culture. For the purpose of this discussion, culture is considered to be a broad term

that extends beyond ethnicity, encompassing dimensions of race, ethnicity, language, sexual

orientation, gender, age, ability, socio-economic status, religious, and spiritual orientation

(American Psychological Association, 2002). Although these dimensions are not meant to

represent an exhaustive list of the potential determinants of culture, it is necessary to

demonstrate a broad definition of culture that guides the assumptions that (a) every

individual is a cultural being, (b) culture is learned and transmitted through social interaction,

and (c) culture is dynamic and susceptible to change (Arthur & Collins, 2005a). Given the

above definition and assumptions, one must consider that all interactions are cross-cultural in

nature, including interactions between all the stakeholders within an organization.

Ethnocentrism. Collins and Arthur (2005) define ethnocentrism as �a belief,

conscious or unconscious, that one�s own cultural experience, values, assumptions are

normal or foundational and that what is different is defined in relation to that self-referenced

worldview� (p. 70). Essentially, it is a conclusion that one�s cultural rules are superior or

more correct to those of others (Gardenswartz & Rowe, 1998). Inherent to ethnocentrism are

biases which are inflexible attitudes and belief, either positive or negative, about a given

group of people (Thiederman, 2008). Unfortunately, �isms� (i.e., sexism, racism, ageism) are

predicated on ethnocentrism and biases (Collins & Arthur).

4

Non-dominant groups. Non-dominant groups are groups in society who are typically

marginalized as a result of being different from the dominant power holding Anglo-Saxon,

male, heterosexual culture (Arthur & Collins, 2005a). Although the term minority may have

been used in the past to explain group differences, this term is less useful. It is implied that

minority groups are inherently less equal, fewer in numbers, and incorrectly focuses on the

disadvantaged group as the root of the problem. In contrast, the use of non-dominant groups

draw attention to power dynamics within society and the social positioning of some groups as

being more or less privileged (Arthur & Collins).

Systemic barriers. Systemic barriers are various social, economic, political, and

religious systems that interact in a complex and dynamic manner to adversely impact one�s

personal, social, and career development (Arthur & Collins, 2005a). These barriers are often

relatively transparent to the dominant population, and sometimes even to the individuals who

are impacted by systemic barriers. While some barriers are transparent, others may be more

implicit in our social structure. As a consequence of these barriers, there exists an unequal

power distribution inherent to society and a lack of equal opportunities for non-dominant

groups. Although not an exhaustive list, Arthur and Collins provide a list of systemic barriers

often experienced by members of non-dominant groups, including:

sexual harassment, access to funding for education, daycare for children of working parents and students, occupational discrimination, clustering of subgroups into specific occupations, lack of career mobility, physically accessible buildings, myths and stereotypes about disabilities, restriction in acceptable norms of behaviours, availability of role models, attributions for success, homophobia, biases against older workers, violence, racists remark, pay equity, social policies, acceptance of foreign employment credentials, hiring practices, access to technology, acceptance of accommodation strategies (p. 29).

The examples illustrate the prevalence of institutional bias which is characterized by

the dominance of a homogenous set of norms and values with respect to organizational

5

functioning (Cox, 1993). As an example, Cox illustrates the prevalent expectation of self-

promotion during recruitment and promotion that conflicts with modest norms inherent to

other cultures. Consequently, those people whose cultural norms prevent them from engaging

in self-promotion are likely to be overlooked for opportunities for which they are qualified.

In turn, the search for employees who are similar to those in control of hiring may prevent

employment access by members of non-dominant groups (Purkiss, Perrewe, Gillespie,

Mayes, & Ferris, 2006; Schneider & Northcraft, 2005).

Affirmative action. Unfortunately, much resistance to organizational diversity

initiatives exists due to the confusion between affirmative action and diversity initiatives.

While affirmative action programs may have extended opportunities to members of non-

dominant groups by helping them access employment, such programs did little to ensure their

success and employment retention. These programs also did little to address the

organizational systems within which these non-dominant groups functioned, thus

perpetuating many of the stereotypes and barriers that lead to their exclusion in the first

place. Although affirmative action programs aim to change the numbers of particular groups

within an organization, diversity initiatives attempt to change the organizational culture to an

entity in which everyone and their contributions are valued (Gardenswartz & Rowe, 1998).

According to Gardenswartz and Rowe, affirmative action is legally driven, whereas, diversity

initiatives are strategically driven.

The above list constitutes a select few terms relevant to this discussion. With

subsequent development in the area of organizational diversity, new terms are bound to

appear while others lose their utility and significance. As an example, the term affirmative

action was used heavily in the preceding decades, but its use has since declined as words

6

such as diversity have come into use and our understanding of organizational diversity has

deepened, becoming more dynamic and holistic. With further development, the same

argument may also extend to the theoretical foundations of organizational diversity which

will be addressed in the next chapter.

7

CHAPTER II

Theoretical Foundations

In order to comprehend the purpose of this undertaking and derive utility from the

presenting information, theoretical foundations must be addressed. Understanding theoretical

foundations will also assist in putting the subsequent information into context. In order to

understand the theoretical foundations guiding this discussion, it is necessary to consider

characteristics of diverse organizations, the rational for organizational diversity, approaches

to managing diversity, existing research, and the advantages and challenges of organizational

diversity.

Characteristics of Diverse Organizations

Sue et al. (1998) argue that it is ineffective to strengthen the multicultural competence

and diversity practices of individuals if the organizations in which they operate continue to

adhere to monocultural and biased perspectives. As society has quickly evolved into an

increasingly diverse structure, organizations have failed to keep pace. Sue et al. suggest

�organizational entities that fail to successfully implement diversity into the very structures

of their practice will fail to be relevant to their constituencies, and will fail to compete and

survive� (p. 42). Sue et al. have devised 11 characteristics of multiculturally competent

organizations and include the following:

1. Demonstrate leadership and commitment from all levels which is evidenced by

corresponding behaviours, not just words.

2. Possess and operationalize written policies regarding multiculturalism and diversity.

3. Develop multicultural and diversity action plans with well defined goals and time

frames.

8

4. Create organized groups of stakeholders who are empowered to monitor, develop,

evaluate and influence the organization�s multicultural and diversity goals.

5. Solicit and integrate stakeholder feedback with respect to culture, diversity, goods and

services, organizational culture, policies and procedures, etc,. into organizational

development.

6. Integrate accountability for diversity and multiculturalism goals into organizational

systems.

7. Infuse multiculturalism and diversity criteria into recruitment and retention processes

and procedures.

8. Recognize the positive relationship between �success� and mentoring opportunities

and support networks for non-dominant groups.

9. Support coalition building, affinity groups, and networking of non-dominant groups.

10. Commit to educating stakeholders across all levels about diversity issues.

11. View diversity as part of the community and understand the recursive relationship

between the organization and the community.

These are not static characteristics and further research on Multicultural Organizational

Development (MOD) and organizational diversity may influence subsequent descriptors.

However, this list of organizational characteristics will serve as general guidelines for this

discussion.

Rational for Diversity in Organizations

A number of influences impacting Canada are necessary to consider when

contextualizing the rationality for increased attention to diversity in organizations. Key

factors to consider are the guiding philosophy of Canada as the multicultural mosaic,

9

demographic changes, immigration, changing societal values, the new employment contract,

and globalization.

Canada as the multicultural mosaic. As a country, Canada is viewed as a world

leader in the attempt to integrate and appreciate multiculturalism across all levels of society,

and through legislation, encourages diverse individuals to maintain their cultural

backgrounds (Arthur & Collins, 2005a; Esses & Gardner, 1996). Canada�s identity is largely

rooted in �establishing an environment in which people of all cultural backgrounds are

welcomed and encouraged to participate actively in society while openly maintaining their

distinctiveness� (Arthur & Collins, p. 4). As the benefits and challenges of diversity become

more apparent on a local and international stage, Canadians and Canadian organizations are

well positioned to lead the discussion on diversity and culture, and must continue to do so in

order to stay true to the philosophy inherent to the Canadian Mosaic.

Demographics. Canada wide, provinces, cities, communities, and organizations are

experiencing a clear shift in demographics, transforming society from monocultural to

multicultural. Canada�s workforce is quickly aging and a large portion of the labour force

(i.e., baby boomers) is expected to exit the labour market within the next 10 to 15 years

(Alberta Human Resources and Employment, 2002). Non-dominant groups, such as women

and individuals with disabilities are entering the labour market in unprecedented numbers

(Alberta Human Resources and Employment). While some individuals are electing to work

beyond the traditional age of retirement, others are retiring earlier, and still others are

electing to work past retirement for continued sense of purpose or meaning, or out of

economic necessity. As an example, Carr-Rufino (2005) highlights the struggles of sandwich

10

generations who simultaneously assume responsibility for the health and well being of their

dependent children and aging relatives.

In many ways, it would seem that employers are reluctant to let their experienced

workers go due to their accumulated knowledge and expertise, and also in response to

Canada�s current and projected continuation of labour shortages. As younger generations,

known as Generation X, Generation Y, Echo Boomers, Nexters or Millenials (Loughlin &

Barling, 2001), search for opportunities to get their foot in the door, the result seems to be a

widened generation gap among employees within organizations. As Flynn (1996) suggests,

generational differences are much the same as gender or racial differences and should be

regarded as a diversity issue. At the same time as birthrates of many groups have declined,

Canada�s Aboriginal population, particularly in Alberta, is fast becoming one of Canada�s

quickest growing populations (Alberta Human Resources and Employment, 2002).

Immigration. As Canada�s birth rate has fallen below the replacement level, our

country has become increasingly dependent on foreign labour to address population deficits

and skill shortages (Alberta Human Resources and Employment, 2002). However, as many

immigrants soon discover upon arrival, they are unable to assume the profession they have

been trained for in their country of origin (Chen, 2008). The points system used in

immigration evaluation may have assigned weight to overseas training and experience, and

hence facilitate entry to Canada. However, foreign credentials are not always recognized by

Canadian employers or relevant licensing institutions, leaving many newcomers unemployed,

underemployed (Chen; Neault, 2005) and disillusioned. It is also noteworthy that value

systems of immigrants often differ from the value system of Canadian society (Arthur &

Merali, 2005), creating opportunities for miscommunication and alienation.

11

Changing value systems. According to Sonnenschein (1999), the disparity among

diverse groups in relation to education, health, and socio-economic status portrayed in the

media has in many ways contributed to the changing moral fabric of society. He suggests this

new moral fabric demands increased equality and accountability in order to reconcile social

injustices. The concept of meritocracy which currently pervades North American society and

organizational functioning has been called into question. Sue (2008) argues the myth of

meritocracy, which suggests a positive correlation between hard work and success,

disregards the reality and experiences of many non-dominant persons who experience a

number of barriers to achieving their goals. Sue argues that systemic discrimination and

oppression by dominant groups and ideologies are key forces that work against meritocracy.

For the concept of meritocracy to be genuine in its implications, equal opportunity, support,

and resources must exist for all. However, I will contend that equal opportunity, support, and

resources does not equate to the same opportunity, support, or resources among individuals.

Social trends also need to be considered as employees adopt new attitudes and priorities

which highlight the importance of family, personal development, and work-life balance

(Sullivan & Mainiero, 2007).

The new employment contract. Simonsen (1997) notes the relationship between

employees and organizations is governed by a new employment contract which no longer

guarantees lifetime employment with one company in exchange for loyalty. Consequently,

employees are maintained as long as they add value to the organization and employees stay

as long as they their needs are being met (Simonsen). She argues that the employment

contract and career success is becoming individually defined and no longer equates to the

traditional notion of long term employment with one company or hierarchical advancements.

12

Given that employees are becoming more diverse, one can expect equally diverse definitions

of career success.

Globalization. Organizations are no longer confined to competition or decision

making that only considers the local or national context. Rather, globalization has meant

competition on a world wide scale and has resulted in the intertwining of world economies

and economic interdependence. Unlike the post cold war era isolationist policies of the

United States, it is unlikely that organizations and countries could thrive or effectively

compete globally, by retreating to such practices on any scale. It can be argued with

reasonable confidence that the global economy has in some way, directly or indirectly,

affected every nation (Snow, Miles & Coleman, 1992). This is evidenced by the common

occurrence of economic consequences in one country impacting the economy of another

country (Cambridge, 2001). This can be of particular relevance to multinational corporations

who erect various global locations so as to avoid fostering a dependency on resources,

material or human, in any one country (Cambridge). Unfortunately, this has also meant

exploitation of communities, individuals, and specifically, employees through socially

unacceptable labour practices (Cambridge).

The above mentioned factors have changed the way we live, work, travel, and

purchase. Consequently, Canada is experiencing a cultural diversification among

organizations, employees, and consumers. It should be noted that the impact of these factors

cannot be neatly compartmentalized. Attempting to isolate these influences in the hopes of

dealing with each one individually would overlook the complex and recursive relationship

these factors demonstrate.

13

Approaches to Managing Organizational Diversity

Organizational diversity has been approached from various perspectives, each putting

forth a different agenda (Roosevelt, 1991), often reflecting the current sociopolitical and

economic climate from which they were generated. Roosevelt argues that most approaches

have been based on platforms citing civil rights, women�s rights, humanitarianism, moral and

social responsibilities, and more recently, the needs of the business. Roosevelt states that

while the �perspectives are all different, they are all equally legitimate� (p. 17). While the

legitimacy of the approaches seems to be a valid argument, further research on the

effectiveness of these approaches needs to occur in order for this claim to be substantiated. In

the model presented later, the approach used combines social responsibility and the needs of

the business.

Roosevelt (1991) also points out that traditional approaches emphasized assimilation

and conceptualized diversity as the interplay of only individual and interpersonal constructs.

Current approaches are now transitioning to a perspective of valuing differences, and are

becoming aware of the simultaneous interplay between individual, interpersonal, and

organizational factors (Roosevelt). Going one step further, I would suggest diversity needs to

be conceptualized as the interplay between the aforementioned factors, adding community

(local and global) factors to the mix. Contemporary approaches are also acknowledging the

utility of systems theory and principles in conceptualizing and managing organizational

diversity (Cox, 2001; Kreitz, 2007; Mor-Barak, 2000).

Existing Research

Many have written about the general paucity of research, especially empirical

research, with respect to organizational diversity (Curtis & Dreaschlin, 2008; Pitts, 2009;

14

Shen, Chanda, D�Netto, & Monga, 2009). It would seem from this writer�s perspective that

the majority of research focused on specific diversity interventions such as career

development programs (Bernes & Magnusson, 1996), diversity awareness training and

mentoring (Curtis & Dreaschlin) with outcomes measured across one dimension (e.g.,

turnover, job satisfaction). There was no empirical research discussing the implementation of

a particular model of diversity management with outcomes on either organizational or

individual functioning.

Curtis and Dreaschlin (2008) argue that existing research has produced inconclusive

and contradictory evidence which is too limited for practitioners to extract evidence based

practices from. They also point out that few organizations possess the appropriate knowledge

and resources to conduct research on organizational diversity, and are reluctant to give access

to external researchers due to emotive and potentially litigious complications. Current

research has been described as descriptive versus evaluative (Pitts, 2009) and is often

characterized by quasi-experimental designs, surveys, and qualitative methods (Curtis &

Dreaschlin).

Given the various barriers in gathering empirical evidence to support the

implementations of diversity management models, there are a number of organizational case

studies highlighting diversity management programs, not specific diversity management

models (Cox, 1993; Curtis & Dreaschlin, 2008; Leach, George, Jackson, & LaBella, 1995;

Thomas, 1991). It seemed that many case studies omitted key information such as the

organization, its salient issues, and the components deemed to be part of the diversity

management program. Therefore one cannot easily replicate interventions or draw an

informed conclusion about their utility. However, Curtis and Dreaschlin caution that an

15

organization�s context is relevant and necessary to consider when attributing meaning to

subsequent outcomes as outlined in a case study. As each organizational context is unique,

generalizing the information from case studies to other organizations becomes difficult.

Advantages

It is suggested that diverse organizations are more adept at gaining and maintaining

market shares locally and globally as such organizations are more proficient in understanding

an equally diverse consumer base (Carr-Rufino, 2005; Cox, 1993). Diverse organizations are

more skilled at attracting and retaining talent (Carr-Rufino) which is paramount given noted

and projected labour shortages across a variety of industries. It has also been suggested that a

diverse organization increases organizational flexibility, and in particular, can solve problems

more effectively and creatively (Carr-Rufino; Cox). Diverse groups are less susceptible to

group think and have broader and richer bases of knowledge from which to draw upon (Carr-

Rufino; Cox). Carr-Rufino suggests that when diversity in managed well, employees

perceive that they are valued and cared for, which in turn improves employee morale and

productivity, and reduces absenteeism. Effective diversity management equates to a decrease

in workplace conflicts, including bullying, grievances and lawsuits, decreases health and

safety concerns, and fosters trust and loyalty among stakeholders, and particularly among

employees and consumers, and improves the corporate profile by actively contributing to

social responsibility (Alberta Employment and Immigration, 2008; Carr-Rufino; Cox).

Diverse organizations are more adept at meeting various legal obligations such as Equal

Opportunity Legislation. This may also facilitate an increased access to contracts as in the

case of various federally regulated employers who are mandated to meet the criteria of a

representative workforce in order to maintain government contracts and business (Alberta

16

Human Resources and Employment, 2002). The bottom line is that when organizations are

managed well, diversity has the potential to cut costs and increase profits (Carr-Rufino; Cox).

Although the aforementioned points do not constitute an exhaustive list of the possible

benefits, the business case for an effective model of diversity management is persuasive.

Challenges

Perhaps one of the main excuses organizations use when attempting to avoid

implementing diversity initiatives is the commitment and cost involved, including finances

and time (Gardenswartz & Rowe, 1998; Simonsen, 1997). Although inevitably there will be

costs associated with the change process, misinformation is likely to contribute to false

conclusions regarding the cost of diversity associated activities. It is possible that such

excuses serve as systemic barriers towards needed change. Given the current economic

climate of instability, many would likely argue that such an undertaking is not feasible given

that many organizations are on the brink of bankruptcy or are attempting to balance the

books through restructuring and downsizing. Although financial input may be required (e.g.,

additional training and development, changes to the physical environment, hiring of

consultants), there are also a number of changes that can be made without significant costs,

such as demonstrating consistency and attitude changes. While some benefits may be readily

visible in a short period of time, other benefits may take longer to materialize. Cox (2001)

suggests that for an organization to become a functionally effective diverse organization, the

process may take upwards of five to 10 years, thereafter requiring routine maintenance to the

process. However, given the previously mentioned advantages and subsequent positive

financial and social outcomes effective diversity programs can offer, perhaps the issue is not

17

whether organizations can afford to implement such programs but whether organizations can

afford not to?

Another obstacle is the need to dismantle and challenge the existing institutional

systems which have excluded and marginalized non-dominant groups while serving the

interests of dominant groups well. In essence, these obstacles translate into fear about

decreased competence of staff and quality of work (Gardenswartz & Rowe, 1998), and more

so, a fear of the loss of privilege and power. Although this does not have to be an impossible

feat, it does require ongoing attention to the larger socioeconomic situations contributing to

this obstacle. In order to implement the model and guide it in a purposeful and well

intentioned manner, knowledge regarding organizational diversity is required.

One must also acknowledge that the theoretical foundations presented above

constitute only one perspective. Given the variety of disciplines and perspectives attempting

to tackle the multifaceted construct of organizational diversity, differing opinions and

theoretical rational can be expected. Each perspective needs to be critically analyzed and

researched in order to advance our understanding and refine our interventions. As new

research and trends emerge, the theoretical foundations anchoring the discussion on

organizational diversity will likely evolve to reflect current circumstances and salient issues.

With an increased understanding of the guiding theoretical foundations, we can begin to look

at the integration of these aspects through a systems model for organizational diversity

initiatives.

18

CHAPTER III

Applied Product: A Systems Model for Organizational Diversity Initiatives

Models are needed to guide organizational change. A few models are available in the

literature that conceptualize the integration and management of diversity (e.g., Bernes, 2000;

Cox, 1993, 2001; Leach et al., 1995; Mor-Barak, 2000). The purpose of this discussion is to

provide a new framework for guiding diversity initiatives. The presenting model incorporates

concepts from previous models, while new concepts have been integrated to reflect the

relevant trends and research. New additions reflect the importance of culture to individual

and organizational development, an emphasis on empowerment and holistic approaches, the

recursive nature of the organization with respect to community and global influences, as well

as society�s changing values system which demands accountability and responsibility from

the business sector (Cox, 2001).

The proposed framework is largely influenced by General Systems Theory (von

Bertalanffy, 1968) which suggests that any given system (e.g., an organization) consists of

mutually dependent variables, with the whole being more than the sum of its parts. A system

is comprised of various subsystems (e. g., employees, policies and procedures, goods and

services, organizational culture). Unlike closed systems which are isolated from their

environments, open systems are subject to external influences as well as the influences of

subsystems, the recursive nature of which, can impact other subsystems, the functioning of

the entire system, or other external systems (von Bertalanffy).

Graphically, the model is represented as a large circle with a perforated outer ring to

denote that the system is permeable to community and global influences (i. e., other systems)

including chance occurrences, which influence the functioning of the system. These outside

19

influences are also susceptible to the system�s influences. The outer ring is illustrated by

communication, trust and respect, empowerment and inclusion, and social responsiveness,

which must be demonstrated and reciprocated by the organization�s stakeholders, and

specifically by the organization and its employees. Positioned in the inner circle are

leadership, assessment, education, alignment of the organizational systems, and follow up,

which have been adapted from Cox�s (2001) conceptualization. These components form a

loop which perpetually cycles and contributes to the diversity goals that are represented by a

circle in the centre of the system, denoting its central importance to the organization�s

functioning. A graphic representation of the model can be found in the Appendix. The

respective components of the model will now be discussed.

Global and Community Influences

As open systems do not exist in isolation (von Bertalanffy, 1968), organizations must

consider events and activities outside the organization that could impact organizational or

stakeholder functioning. As an example, natural disasters and health epidemics could gravely

impact the viability of organizations and the wellbeing of stakeholders.

Global and community influences may be seen in examples such as current economic

circumstances, social trends, research on products and services, future employees, employee

assistance providers, and political institutions. It should be noted that while some global and

community influences can be predicted and controlled to varying degrees by an organization,

many influences escape this control; therefore, chance occurrences also need to be

considered. Similar to the influences impacting organizational development, the Systems

Theory Framework of career development suggests that it is counterintuitive to think that

20

career development will always be logical, predictable, or planned (Patton & McMahon,

2006).

Communication

Communication among and between all stakeholders to facilitate a successful change

initiative (Cox, 2001; Lieberman, Simons, Berardo, 2004; Simonsen, 1997) is equally

paramount during diversity initiatives. Lieberman, Simons, and Berardo suggest a constant

stream of communication characterized by transparency, inclusive language, and honesty,

and is delivered via various mediums such as written, spoken or visual representations. As an

example, technically astute and younger employees may be familiar with and prefer

communication modalities such as Twitter and Facebook. It would seem reasonable to

suggest that the format of the information to be communicated may widely vary depending

on the audience. As argued by Cox, communication needs to be accurate, meaningful, and

user friendly. This may require implementing audience specific communication strategies. As

examples, consider individuals who experience communication barriers as a consequence of

low literacy levels, English as a second language, unfamiliarity with local slang and

colloquialism, attention disorders or learning disorders such as dyslexia or dyscalculia to

name a few. If communication is consistently presented in a rigid manner and style, those

with differing communication needs are unable to assign meaning to the information

presented. Consequently, these individuals become distanced from the information and are

disempowered to engage in the change process.

Furthermore, while Lieberman et al. (2004) suggest the importance of communicating

mistakes, Cox (2001) cautions against communication overkill which may subsequently

undermine the legitimacy of the diversity initiative. Simonsen (1997) also draws attention to

21

the paternalistic nature of information hoarding often demonstrated by executives and

management professionals alike in bureaucratic and hierarchical organizations. She suggests

open and honest communication strategies regarding all aspects of the business are warranted

to foster trust and respect among and between stakeholders, allowing employees to

strategically plan their careers. It should also be noted that communication is not solely the

responsibility of management. Employees and other stakeholders should be encouraged and

supported with the provision of appropriate resources and opportunities to engage in the

communication process, free of unreasonable recourse.

Trust and Respect

As Simonsen (1997) contends, without trust and respect, �even the best initiatives

will be suspect, because employees will look for a hidden agenda� (p. 56). Simonsen

suggests that in order to ensure trust and respect, one must recognize individual dignity and

integrity. In some instances, this may mean treating individuals differently in order to extend

the same opportunities. As an example, an individual in a wheelchair may require a modified

workspace, or an individual with a visual impairment may require magnification equipment

or a larger computer monitor for successful tasks to be initiated. Additionally, recognizing

and valuing the inherent dignity and integrity of individuals may require recognizing the

influence of one�s biases. As an example, assuming that all women are excellent

administrators, and subsequently assigning task consistent with this myth, could undermine

the inherent strengths and interests unique to that individual. Such actions can erode the

relationship between the employee, manager, and organization.

Simonsen (1997) further contends that trust and respect must be demonstrated

through straight talk, open and direct communication, listening for understanding, clarifying

22

and attending to the meaning and feelings conveyed by the message, and must be followed

by clear expectations, commitment, reliability, and be built on a solid base of honesty. It is

also important to note the central importance of trust and respect in facilitating

empowerment.

Empowerment and Inclusion

Empowerment and inclusion of stakeholders, and particularly of employees, is central

to the diversity initiative. Many non-dominant groups entering the labour force (e. g.,

immigrants and individuals with disabilities) have typically experienced exclusion and

disempowerment through intentional and unintentional systemic and institutional

discrimination (Thurlow, Mills, & Mills, 2006). For example, consider an executive who

fails to consider women for management positions as he believes women to not be aggressive

enough in terms of achieving sales, marketing, or managing employees. Alternatively,

consider an individual with experience of mental illness who experiences drowsiness from

his medication and would benefit from starting work an hour later than the regular schedule

suggests. Many employers are reluctant to make this accommodation even when such

modifications pose no threat to organizational functioning or profits.

Arthur and Collins (2005a) assert that inherent to society is a differential distribution

of power which contributes to the systemic oppression and disempowerment of non-

dominant groups. They also point out that it can be very difficult to empower individuals

who have experienced oppression across many levels in society due to an acquired attitude of

learned helplessness. However, many have written about the importance of facilitating client

empowerment and encouraging individuals to become active agents in the transition process

(Caporoso & Kiselica, 2004; Gysbers, Heppner, & Johnson, 1998; Hansen, 1996). Lieberman

23

et al. (2004) suggest fostering an environment that is indicative of empowerment and

inclusion. This means having all stakeholders demonstrate ownership of the change initiative.

For this to occur, they suggest communicating the purpose and outcomes of the initiative,

which in a general sense, is aimed to benefit everyone in the organization and encourage and

allow contribution. Lieberman et al. also suggest identifying and implementing individual

motivators. Managers can gather information about motivators through formal and informal

processes such as through casual conversation, surveys, or during orientations and

performance evaluations. Some questions to ask include the following:

• What do you like about your current position?

• What would you change about your current position?

• What motivates you to exceed expectations?

• What incentives would like to see for your accomplishments?

• What conditions are necessary for you to experience role satisfaction?

Such information can be used to foster workplace incentives that match employee interests

and needs.

In addition to the communication, trust, and respect mentioned previously,

empowerment and inclusion are also created through supported risk-taking and innovation, a

reasonable tolerance of failures, absence of fear mongering, organizational and stakeholder

flexibility, and self-awareness (The Harvard Business Essentials Series, 2003). Equally

important are identifying and developing individual strengths, interests, and skills of

employees (Harris & Moran, 2000). Harris and Moran suggest creating a participatory

organization that demonstrates the sharing of authority and responsibility, provides

recognition, validation, visible support, and choice and control over one�s life. Organizations

24

adhering to bureaucratic and hierarchical practices are unlikely to facilitate the empowerment

and inclusion necessary to propel the diversity initiative. The distinction between inclusion

and assimilation should also be noted. Although successful inclusion may require adaptation,

identity and culture should be supported and encouraged to remain distinct.

Social Responsiveness

Systems Theory incorporates a recursiveness within and between other systems and

subsystems (von Bertanlanfy, 1968). It is reasonable to suggest that organizational

functioning, particularly the impact of the organization on its employees and the goods and

services provided, also impact all levels of society (Acar, Aupperle, & Lowry, 2001). As an

example, the invention and evolution of the computer and internet has had a tremendous

impact on all aspects of our lives, extending well beyond the individuals and organizations

that created the technology. Consider the following activities which have sprung up since the

technology�s inception in the last few decades: cyber crime, online education, dating and

social networking sites, online shopping and banking, and videoconferencing.

Due to the influence and profile many organizations exert, as well as society�s

changing values system which demands increased accountability and equity, there is an

increased expectation for organizations to exhibit corporate responsiveness, and specifically

to exercise responsibility and ethical rigor in the provision of goods and services (Heslin &

Ochoa, 2008). Corporate social responsiveness extends beyond the rudimentary and

mandatory compliance to existing legislation such as Equal Opportunity initiatives. Evolving

expectations are predicated on a voluntary moral obligation amongst organizations to

consider their impact on the local and global communities within which they operate. It

would seem inconsistent and hypocritical to attempt a diversity initiative within an

25

organization without acting in complimentary manner towards society, as the company�s

undertakings effect the social system within which its stakeholders (i. e., employees and

consumers) function. It is possible that such inconsistent actions would undermine the

diversity initiative and create a milieu of mistrust among various stakeholders.

Heslin and Ochoa (2008) suggest a number of ways organizations can exhibit social

responsiveness such as through charity work and volunteerism, reducing its impact on the

environment, developing a green supply chain, or by promoting and protecting the welfare of

human and animal labour to name a few. Heslin and Ochoa concede that demonstrating

corporate responsibility can be tedious, and at times, ethical practices may conflict with each

other or with existing business practices. They suggest it is important to predict the short,

medium, and long term impacts of corporate responsibility, and coordinate organizational

initiatives with public policies and corporate regulators.

Leadership

Many would agree that leadership is paramount to effective diversity initiatives (Cox,

1991; Gardenswartz & Rowe, 1998; Lieberman et al., 2004; Roosevelt, 1991). As part of the

leadership component, it is necessary to consider a leadership philosophy, buy-in, vision and

mission statements, steering and advisory groups, consultants, and strategic integration.

Leadership philosophy. As building a multicultural organization is a lengthy and

arduous process, individuals leading such initiatives should value the intended changes as

well as be prepared to commit to and allocate time and resources to the initiative. It has also

been suggested that for such organizational change to succeed, those in leadership positions

should be respected individuals who possess adequate power to allocate resources, and

overtly model diversity attitudes and behaviours (Cox, 2001; Liberman et al., 2004). These

26

attitudes and behaviors include trust and respect, communication, empowerment and

inclusion, and social responsiveness.

Roosevelt (1991) has aptly pointed out that there is a difference between management

and leadership, management typically adhering to a top-down directive style functioning

which is paternalistic and disempowering towards stakeholders, and particularly towards

employees. I would suggest that leadership is characterized by an inclusive and collaborative

approach which empowers stakeholders to get involved and take action. Roosevelt suggests

that those leading diversity initiatives should exhibit an appropriate balance between leading

and managing, and should be encouraged to reflect, rethink, and redefine the meaning of

management towards one of empowerment. The absence of the previously mentioned

conditions is likely to not only undermine the diversity initiative, but hamper the

organization�s ability to achieve buy-in.

Creating buy-in. For effective organizational change to occur, no matter what the

scale, buy-in from stakeholders is a necessary step (Simonsen, 1997). As part of this,

Lieberman et al. (2004) suggest identifying and involving all stakeholders, periodically

reviewing and updating the stakeholder list. As resistance to proposed changes is likely, it is

essential to identify and involve all stakeholders in the change process, as well as possible

resistors and reactions to change (The Harvard Business Essentials Series, 2003; Lieberman

et al.). It would seem likely that those who will resist the most are the individuals who

perceive a loss as a result of the change (The Harvard Business Essentials Series). Change is

not likely to equate to the total and utter abandonment of the past, but will likely be

representative of past successful elements, integrated with new elements necessary for

development.

27

When attempting to achieve buy-in, it is paramount to explain the purpose of the

change as well as emphasize the benefits of change from the perspectives of various

stakeholders (The Harvard Business Essentials Series, 2003). Essentially, stakeholders want

to know, �what�s in it for us?� It should be noted that an individual�s experience of an

organizational change process can be highly emotive, deeply personal, and hence, very

unique (Simonsen, 1997). It is reasonable to assume that stakeholders may need time to

reflect on the changes as well as have opportunities to have their thoughts and feelings

voiced and validated. Leach et al. (1995) also suggest clearly communicating the roles,

responsibilities, and accountability of all stakeholders, and encouraging participation that is

inclusive and collaborative, such as in the development of the organization�s vision and

mission.

Vision and mission. The organization�s vision and mission statements are similarly

integral to diversity initiatives as such information identifies the purpose, goals, and values of

the organization (Sonnenschein, 1999). Simonsen (1997) further contends that values become

beacons for organizational development, and when values are shared and clarified among

stakeholders, productivity and job satisfaction increase. However, this suggests that

stakeholders must have opportunities to clarify their values in an appropriate forum.

Furthermore, Simonsen suggest having clear organizational guiding principles in the form of

a vision and mission statement will foster less resistance to change, as a clear vision and

mission reduces misinterpretation about intended direction. Simonsen states that �if people

can�t look to the past because it�s gone, and the present is in flux, they must have a vision of

the destination� (p. 54).

28

Stakeholders should have opportunities to contribute to the formulation of the vision

and mission statement such as through regular meetings, or by having a cross-section of

stakeholders involved in the process. Once agreed upon, the messages should permeate

diversity, be easily accessible, and in constant view for all stakeholders n order to remind

them of their roles and responsibilities, and the organization�s direction. To prompt

stakeholders� thinking about the importance of diversity to organizational functioning, and

specifically to the vision and mission, Sonnenschein (1999) suggest the following reflective

questions:

How important is diversity in the organization? How can our diversity positively affect the organization�s mission? How do individual values lead to different notions of what being a part of an organization means? How do differences in values shape employees� acceptance of and compliance with organizational values? How do diverse values come together to form the organization�s values? What effect does the diversity of the organization have on the organization�s customer/client base? What effect does the diversity of the organization�s customer/client base have on the organization? (p. 170-171).

Once this information is generated, the task of discussing and creating an inclusive vision

and mission, with an eye on diversity, can begin.

Steering and advisory groups. Depending on the size of the organization, a steering

group or advisory group responsible for diversity related matters may be appropriate. The

purpose of the group is not to assume total responsibility for the diversity initiative, but rather

to provide leadership, stimulate discussion, encourage stakeholder participation, and ensure

follow through and accountability of individuals and tasks. Cox (2001) suggests considering

the following criteria when selecting members for such groups: respected and knowledgeable

individuals; personal interest in diversity; knowledgeable about diversity or willingness to

learn; capacity and desire to expend time and effort on the tasks; diversity of individuals

29

along various domains (e. g., gender, age, position, socioeconomic status, culture) and

representative of the organization�s stakeholders.

External consultants. In some instances, an external consultant may be contracted to

facilitate the process. It is important to contract an appropriate consultant who can offer

services based on your organization�s specific needs. Kretz (2007) argues that such

consultants need to be skilled in a variety of areas including, but not limited to, leadership,

organizational development, change management, psychology, communication and

mediation, facilitation, assessment, and measurement. When looking for a consultant, it is

important to be specific about your concerns, needs, resources, and budget. At minimum, a

proposal should be requested from the consultant detailing the approach and methodology to

be used, roles, responsibilities, and expectations of all relevant parties, a time line, relevant

fees, resources provided and required, services provided, limitations and exclusions, and

expected outcomes. As the professionals offering related services vary in training and

experience, with many operating under the auspice of various regulating bodies,

qualifications and experience of potential contractors should be explored adequately.

Sue (2008) also cautions against the dangers of using consultants who do not possess

adequate self-awareness or sufficient understanding of their worldview or those of others.

Keeping in mind the roles and responsibilities of consultants, Sue argues that �we are all

products of our cultural conditioning and have been socialized into a society in which biases

and prejudices surrounding race and gender are deeply embedded in our psyche� (p. 162).

Without a conscious examination of biases and an awareness of the worldview of self and

others, consultants risk defining organizational problems and solutions in a manner which

disempowers and invalidates the experiences of the characteristically oppressed. Ironically,

30

this preserves the status quo of an organization which consultants are attempting to change. It

is also necessary to consider that in many instances, consultants will be exposed to

organizational information that is sensitive in nature (e.g., stakeholder information,

operational practices and procedures, financials) and possibly become privy to harmful or

illegal activities (Sinclair, 2006). Sinclair suggests that once this information is acquired,

judgements regarding confidentiality and subsequent action (e.g., notification of appropriate

authorities) rest with the consultant. For those guided by professional bodies which espouse

standards and codes of conduct for its members, this decision may be somewhat guided.

However, it raises the importance of informed consent, and specifically the need to discuss

limitations of practice, including limitations of confidentiality, with the contracting parties

before work begins.

It is reasonable to request references from the consultant so that you may contact

organizations who have received similar services for similar needs. Alternatively, you may

begin your research by contacting organizations with existing diversity programs, inquiring

about the services received and recommendations. Cox (1993) also makes a noteworthy point

suggesting that due to the continuous and ongoing process of diversity change programs,

contracting consultants on a permanent or long term basis for the duration of the entire

project may not be financially feasible. As such, he suggests looking for opportunities to

build in-house diversity expertise. Although this is an important step, one must also proceed

with caution as individuals who are inadequately trained or experienced in diversity related

matters may cause harm to the change process as well as to stakeholders. As an example,

consider an individual who after some minimal training and experience attempts to facilitate

a group discussion on discrimination. As such discussions can become very controversial and

31

emotionally laden, a poorly facilitated discussion could have negative effects on the

participants� relationships with each other and the organization, undermining the intended

actions of the undertaking, or causing emotional distress to participants.

It is important to also consider the potential for conflicts of interest and general

cognitive dissonance to result from the roles and responsibilities of in house experts. Change

to a functionally effective diverse organization often requires challenges to power, privilege,

and the systematically oppressive myth of meritocracy (Sue, 2008). Those in positions of

power, or those who fear retribution from those in power, are likely to be hesitant to put forth

such challenges, or may be less likely to recognize such issues in the first place. While

cultivating in house expertise can be a rewarding and cost saving undertaking, it should be

cautioned that such experts must operate within the confines of their knowledge, skills, and

attitudes. The organization should also develop a contingency plan should in house experts

be unable to fulfill all or part of their duties due to conflicts of interest.

Strategic integration. Many would agree that an effective strategy to building diverse

organizations is to make a business case for diversity, integrating diversity into the strategic

plan (Cox, 2001; Roosevelt, 1991). As argued by Roosevelt, many organizations and

managers are reluctant to view diversity as a business issue, instead viewing it solely as a

legal, moral, or social issue. Consequently, the profound impacts of a well managed diversity

initiative are often overlooked. Roosevelt argues that it is essential for key individuals, such

as CEOs and managers, to understand how successful diversity management impacts the

viability of a given department, the business objectives, and the entire organizational

functioning.

32

Although one of the more common arguments supporting diversity initiatives lies

with economic and commercial realities, Pringle, Konrad, and Prasad (2006) argue that it

should not be the only reason to support organizational diversity. They contend that

�diversity is a necessary element of the contemporary social contract that organizations have

with the societies in which they function� (p. 534). Furthermore, they point out that given the

seemingly boundaryless nature or organizational functioning, contemporary organizations

cannot ethically or pragmatically ignore the impact of diversity. Referring back to the

systems model guiding diversity initiatives, you may recall the integration of community and

global influences, and social responsiveness required for effective change to occur.

Assessment

In order to determine how to intervene, a significant amount of information needs to

be gathered so a comprehensive approach to addressing diversity issues can be crafted.

Cox (2001) emphasizes the importance of the change process being data driven, suggesting

the need to gather a comprehensive amount of relevant data from which to guide the

initiative. Three such methods of gathering data can be demonstrated through conducting a

needs analysis, cultural auditing, and benchmarking. These methods will assist the direction

of the change process by highlighting deficits and strengths in organizational functioning.

The gathered information can be subsequently integrated into the measurement plan.

Needs analysis. A needs analysis may take into consideration the organization�s

culture and its ability to accept and integrate change, as well as needs of the stakeholders

across all levels of the organization. Examining the corporate culture and its fundamental

guiding principles is important given that these principles influence the organization�s

perspective on diversity (Roosevelt, 1991). Roosevelt also contends that managers need to

33

reflect on whether or not the �culture that served you well in the past can serve you equally

well in the present and future� (p. 50).

Gardenswartz and Rowe (1998) have devised a number of informal self-report

assessment tools for gathering such information including a questionnaire to assess how open

to change the existing organizational culture is. It encourages reflection across a variety of

organizational facets including �in my organization, change is viewed as a challenge and an

opportunity�there is openness to suggestions from people at all levels of the

organization�when problems emerge, there is a willingness to fix them� (p. 260). They have

also devised the diversity opinionnaire which attempts to gather information regarding staff

attitudes about diversity, and identifies willingness or resistance to dealing with diversity

related issue. Examples of statements from this tool include �diversity brings creativity and

energy to a work group�women and minorities are oversensitive to prejudice and

discrimination�some groups are more suited for or talented at certain jobs� (p. 355). The

staff diversity needs analysis, management diversity needs analysis, and the management

development diversity needs assessment checklist are also self-report assessment tools which

seek to gather information regarding learning and development needs with respect to

diversity awareness, knowledge, and skills.

Albeit more time consuming and expensive, assessment data can also be gathered

through one-on-one interviews. Gardenswartz and Rowe (1998) have devised a number of

sample interview questions for leaders and policy makers, and dominant and non-dominant

group members. These tools are intended to gather information regarding attitudes,

conditions, and problems as they relate to diversity related issues. They suggest that while

these interviews can reveal rich information, caution must be exercised during

34

implementation. They contend that these interviews should ideally be conducted by skilled

individuals who can demonstrate objectivity towards the participating individuals and issues

at hand. They propose the following tips for gathering assessment data through interviews:

(a) select the most appropriate participants who will have the information you are after, (b)

introduce yourself and the purpose of the interview clarifying roles, responsibilities, and

expectations, including issues regarding anonymity and confidentiality, (c) without be overly

intrusive, use purposeful questioning to solicit the information you are after, (d) use your

questions only as a guide, exercising flexibility in the questioning and asking for clarification

or examples when appropriate, (e) be comfortable with silence and allow the participant time

for reflection, (f) note the participant�s non-verbal cues such as body language, facial

expressions, and tone of speech, (g) use effective and accurate methods for recording data

either through note taking or voice recording, being diligent to obtain necessary consents.

Gardenswartz and Rowe (1998) also point out the limitations of using self-report

assessment tools. They argue that most individuals are test wise in that they are able to

deduce what is the right answer. Additionally, they contend that many are uncomfortable or

unaware of their biases and prejudices, thus limiting the utility of self-report measures. For

self-report measures to be maximized, participant honesty and some awareness of one�s

biases and prejudices, including awareness of the impact of biases, is required. This point

highlights the importance of having additional assessment means such as observation, group

discussion, role play, stakeholder feedback, and cultural auditing.

Cultural auditing. Cultural auditing is a process whereby organizational structures,

policies, and procedures are examined to determine to what degree they serve or hinder

various groups representing diverse backgrounds. As objectivity, self-awareness, and the

35

ability to challenge the status quo are required components of this process, those well served

by the existing systems may not be able to sufficiently or accurately detect such hindrances,

thereby necessitating the services of an external consultant. Arthur and Collins (2005b)

suggest a variety of prompts which may assist in the cultural auditing process such as �is

there an overriding mission statement describing how the organization values diversity?...are

staff members encouraged to incorporate diversity objectives in their learning plans and

performance appraisals?...how representative are the photos and pictures on public display?�

(p. 169).

Benchmarking. Benchmarking is an important aspect to the assessment and

evaluation of organizational information. Cox (2001) suggests three different approaches to

benchmarking, including internal benchmarking across and within departments or sectors of

an organization, and external benchmarking against other organizations. Cox argues that a

combination approach to benchmarking may be in order as each method has drawbacks. As

an example, Cox suggests that it may be difficult to obtain diversity related information from

other organizations due to the sensitive nature of such information, and it may be even more

difficult to compare information between organizations due to the range of differences. He

also cautions against blindly comparing information between organizations due to the context

in which information was gathered (e.g., layoffs, pay rises, economic crises) as this will

influence the outcomes substantially. While internal benchmarking does not address all of the

shortcoming of external benchmarking, well documented information can be easily accessed

and manipulated to provide a variety of measures and increased meaning to organizational

functioning (Cox).

36

Measurement plan. Measuring appropriate variables and using adequate measurement

tools and intervals are key steps. One should not be discouraged as some changes may take

longer than others, and some changes may seem less directly related to the overall goal. Cox

(2001) suggest that when gathering data, individual and organizational measures should be

used to illustrate that individuals and behaviours across all levels of the organization are to be

addressed in order to effectively leverage diversity. Although measures and intervals should

be unique to the needs of each organization, Cox suggests the following individual and

organizational measures which may compromise aspects of the measurement plan: amount of

perceived stereotyping, intergroup conflict, quality of intergroup communication, identity of

the organization workforce and stakeholders, organizational culture, organizational systems

and policies, turnover and absenteeism, complaints and costs associated with litigation,

successful job accommodations for individuals with disabilities.

Education

As with other organizational initiatives, education components should be relevant to

the issues impacting the organization and its attempts to leverage diversity, and should

similarly consider the information gathered during the assessment process. It is also

important to use facilitators who have the appropriate knowledge, skills, and attitudes

required to facilitate educative components which may be controversial, emotionally laden,

and highly personal. Cox (2001) also suggests maintaining manageable group sizes, setting

clear expectations and goals, delivering information which is tailored to participants, while

emphasizing that learning is contingent on stakeholder engagement and participation. To

ensure that learning has taken place, participants must also be given opportunities to

implement and demonstrate acquired knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Some topics which

37

may be relevant across a number of organizations include diversity training, self-awareness

training, and communication.

Diversity training. As there are a plethora of topics one could include in a diversity

education initiative, it is paramount to consider the salient issues experienced by the

organization and stakeholders. As examples, issues regarding generational differences (i.e.,

differences in values, use of language and slang) or stereotypes regarding sexual orientation

or mental illness may be prevalent concerns. Information gathered from needs assessments

may assist in narrowing down possible topics. There are a variety of means through which to

educate stakeholders, including the use of videos, role plays, case analysis, small group

exercises and discussion, written and reflective exercises, or guest speakers.

Self-awareness. Worldview is a dynamic construct influenced by experiences such as

family, personal, educational, media influences, and critical incidents to name a few

(Sonnenschein, 1999). One�s worldview is constantly evolving, and thus requires continuous

reflection to determine the influence it projects. One�s worldview conveys a host of

information and is indicative of one�s values, beliefs, strengths, and biases, and determines

how one interprets a given situation. When biases, go unchecked, individuals may

unknowingly perpetuate harmful stereotypes and generalizations based on group membership

or individual characteristics (Thiederman, 2008). However, one must recognize that there is

as much difference between groups as within groups (Arthur & Collins, 2005a). Those who

do not regularly attempt to increase self-awareness may be more likely to demonstrate

selective attention, whereby information confirming existing biases is easily recalled or given

more credibility versus information which challenges one�s biases (self-fulfilling prophecy).

38

Unchecked, biases have the potential to destroy any good intentions proposed by a diversity

initiative, and serves to disempower stakeholders by invalidating alternative worldviews.

Generating increased self-awareness is an ongoing process, and an important step in

addressing harmful stereotypes and biases. Unfortunately, many have not been given

adequate encouragement or access to resources to engage in such a process (Simonsen,

1997). This is evident for marginalized community members who often lack adequate

knowledge and or access to resources necessary to facilitate this process (Henry & Lucca,

2004). Sonnenschein�s (1999) diversity self-awareness questionnaire and Gardenswartz and

Rowe�s (1998) diversity awareness continuum provide individuals with opportunities to

reflect on their self-awareness as it relates to diversity, while generating data to be used in

learning and development programs.

Communication. As organizations are seemingly becoming reliant on the effective

functioning of teams to maintain competitiveness (Simonsen, 1997), communication

becomes a central aspect to this efficiency. Much like the organization works to establish a

vision and mission, so too can teams engage in this process to ensure that team members are

working and communicating from the team�s core values, building cohesiveness.

Giving and receiving feedback may also be difficult for team members who adhere to

different values systems. As an example, while some may view constructive feedback as a

tool to develop further, some may see such an episode as shameful or a loss of face,

indicative of an inherent weakness. The appropriateness of discussing a given topic is also

culturally relevant. As an example, Gardenswartz and Rowe (1998) suggest that some

cultures refrain from sharing feelings as this is seen as too personal. Additionally, while

39

Latinos typically appreciate inquiries about family, Arabs and Asians may find this topic

inappropriate to discuss with colleagues (Gardenswartz & Rowe).

Furthermore, as our communication becomes increasingly international in nature and

dependent on technology such as e-mail, chat rooms, video conferencing, and social

networking sites, miscommunication is likely, although steps can be taken to minimize the

occurrence and impact of miscommunication. Lieberman et al. (2004) suggest collaboratively

setting team norms regarding expectations around the communication tools to be used and

agreeing on common practices to address the challenges of diverse communicators. Topics

for discussion may include how to address people, greetings, how soon to respond, frequency

and length of communication, use of slang, acronyms or abbreviations, level of specificity

required (e. g., measurements, quantity, deadlines, time zones), providing phone numbers in

international formats (Lieberman et al.).

Gardenswartz and Rowe (1998) also discuss the importance of non-verbal

communication which can similarly lead to misunderstandings. As examples, facial

expressions, eye contact, body language, sense of space, and touch are culturally determined

rules of communication.

Alignment of Organizational Systems

As argued by Cox (2001), organizations are systems, and in order for effective

change to occur, all of the system�s components must be modified to reflect the intended

direction. Organizational systems and practices to consider are recruitment and selection,

orientation, policies and procedures, career development practices, performance appraisals,

compensation and benefits, learning and development, the physical environment, and

marketing.

40

Recruitment and selection. Recruiting and selecting employees and contractors can be

a time consuming and expensive initiative, particularly if an appropriate selection is not made

or the process is approached in a haphazard or rigid manner. It is estimated that the average

cost, direct and indirect, associated with replacing an employee is approximately 70 to 200

percent of the individual�s salary (Alberta Human Resources and Employment, 2003). Before

starting the recruitment process, it is critical to strategize the process and create a plan. This

section will discuss a general plan for recruitment and elaborate on advertising, selecting

candidates for an interview, and the interview process.

Recruitment plan. It is worthwhile to consider the following questions before

beginning: Do you know your organization in terms of it culture, values, and what it has to

offer potential candidates? Do you know what your organization already has in terms of

knowledge skills and attitudes? Do you know your hiring needs? Do you know the work

which is being offered and the knowledge, skills, and attitudes are required for the position?

Do you have a plan for evaluating these competencies? Do you know the labour market? Do

you know your talent sources? Do you know your options in terms of the recruitment

strategies available to you and the resources to support each option? How will you evaluate

and measure your outcomes? (Alberta Human Resources and Employment, 2003) Do you

know who will be involved in the process? How will you communicate and include your

stakeholders in the process?

Advertisement. If no existing employee can suitably fill the open position,

organizations must then search for appropriate candidates. Organizations who confine

themselves to advertisements through newspapers or internet postings, largely limit their

candidates to individuals who have sufficient literacy skills and access to technology. It is a

41

reality that many individuals of lower socio economic status do not have access to such

technology. To reach a wide variety of candidates, consider the following methods: internet

and print ads, using recruitment and staffing agencies, radio and television advertisements,

open house opportunities, fostering relationships with community support services (e.g.,

disability support services, immigrant support services, aboriginal support services, youth

employment centers, correctional facilities, senior services) and educational and training

institutions, engaging in work experiences and co-op placements, referrals from existing

employees, developing relationships with government agencies, career fairs, and

international recruitment.

Selecting candidates for interviews. Given the noted changes in Canada�s

demographics, and consequently its labour pool, having diverse individuals involved in the

selection process is prudent. However, it is a reality that the existing homogenous culture of

an organization or its limited resources may limit the range of diversity represented among

those involved in the recruitment and selection process. If adequate diversity among a

selection committee is difficult to achieve, those involved in this part of the process should

be familiar with some of the cultural differences as evidenced by the process. As an example,

Laroche and Rutherford (2007) point out that it is common for some individuals of Muslim

faith to close covering letters with a statement that makes reference to the role of God in

assisting the candidate to be considered for an interview. While this may seem peculiar in

mainstream North American culture, this is culturally appropriate from a Muslim perspective

due to the Islamic beliefs suggesting that God controls the future (Laroche & Rutherford).

Laroche and Rutherford also point out that criteria used to consider whether a candidate is

qualified also differs between cultures, thus reflected in resumes and cover letters. As an

42

example, they suggest that in some countries, educational requirements take precedence over

experience, with a higher qualification indicative of competency level for all positions,

whether or not the position is related to the educational qualification. They also point out that

in some instances a broad range of experience is viewed more positively than narrow, more

specialized range of experience. Software which selects resumes and cover letters on the

basis of key words may also prematurely discard qualified candidates due to different terms

used in different countries.

Additionally, some cultures which are governed by principles of harmony may

downplay accomplishment, typically highlighted in North American resumes (Laroche &

Rutherford, 2007). It is also the case that many individuals experience inconsistent or

transitional periods of employment due to a number of influences such as economic climate,

natural disaster, illness, or immigration. Laroche and Rutherford remind us of the influence

of unchecked biases which may inaccurately equate transition with personality traits. They

also point out that an unfortunate reality associated with immigration is a drop in the level of

responsibility and pay compared to previously held positions. This is not indicative of

decreased competency, but rather various systemic barriers and situational circumstances.

It should be noted that in Canada, over 40 % of the adult population experience some

difficulty with literacy (Literacy Alberta, 2008). While some employers discard applications

citing a single spelling or grammatical error, it may be more appropriate to determine part of

the necessary qualifications for the job in relation to the literacy level required for successful

task performance (Laroche & Rutherford, 2007).

Interviewing candidates. Before contacting candidates to set up an interview, it is

essential to determine the parameters of the interview and identify potential barriers qualified

43

candidates may encounter in attempting to get to interviews. As many interviews are

typically scheduled Monday to Friday during regular business hours, it is essential to

consider reasonable accommodations which can be made such as the time, place, day or use

of facilitative technology such as Skype. Examples of barriers candidates might experience

are current commitments to employment, dependent care responsibilities, lack of

transportation, or lack of interview appropriate clothes. It is also essential to consider other

barriers which could make the interview process a barrier to employment in itself. As an

example, candidates may require translators, or individuals with disabilities (anxiety,

mobility, vision impairment) may a support person or assistive technology to get to and

participate in the interview.

Preparing candidates for their interview can contribute to the success of the process

(Laroche & Rutherford, 2007). Information and expectations which can be conveyed ahead

of the interview may include the time, place and date of the interview, contact information in

case of emergency or need to reschedule, security information, including who to ask for and

procedures to follow in gaining access to the interview location, titles and names of those

who will be present and for what purpose, structure and estimated length of the interview,

items or information the candidate is required to bring, activities the client will be asked to

engage in (e.g., physical, personality test), sample interview questions with suggested

answers, and a more detailed job description.

The interview process. The interview process is perhaps one of the most dangerous

places where unchecked biases can negatively influence the selection process. As an

example, the Attraction-Selection-Attrition (ASA) Theory posits that those in hiring

positions are likely to select candidates similar to themselves and similar to existing

44

employees; those who do not fit in are likely to become alienated and leave the organization

(Schneider & Northcraft, 2005).

While it is generally important for candidates to make a good impression in an initial

interview, such impressions are not necessarily linked to the individual�s competence and

ability to perform the tasks in question (Laroche & Rutherford, 2007). As an example, some

diverse candidates may be guided by cultural norms guiding behaviours such as eye contact,

greetings, gestures, self-promotion, and display of emotion to suggest a few (Laroche &

Rutherford). Laroche and Rutherford suggest that unless those interviewing receive training

to contextualize culturally determined behaviours, candidates demonstrating behaviours

contrary to the accepted Canadian norms will likely be rejected. As examples, Laroche and

Rutherford point out that candidates who stumble or hesitate in answering questions may be

perceived as unintelligent, yet the individual may be translating the conversation in his or her

head, searching for appropriate words. They also suggest that questions such as �do you have

any questions for us?� may seem awkward for individuals from hierarchical cultures where it

is deemed inappropriate to ask questions of those in positions of authority. Therefore, not

engaging in reciprocal interviewing may have more to do with cultural norms as opposed to

the candidate�s level of interest in the position.

It should also be noted that using methods of selection which partly rely on scores

from standardized assessments should be used and interpreted judiciously. According to

Stewart (2005), many assessment instruments, including personality and intelligence tests,

have been developed in North America and have been typically normed using white-middle

class populations. It is not to say that such tools should never be used with non-dominant

groups, but that those administering and interpreting these tests should be sufficiently

45

competent and informed as to what the implications of the test are in regards to non-

dominant groups (Stewart). For those who were unsuccessful in the interview process, or for

those who were successful but subsequently declined the position, it is important to provide

and solicit feedback to improve the recruitment and selection process.

Orientation

Once a candidate accepts a position, the process of integrating the employee into the

organization must continue with an orientation, which may vary depending on the

organizational context. Some orientation procedures implement buddy systems, so the new

employee has a designated contact for any questions or concerns within the first few months

of employment. It may be useful to compile orientation information into a handout, perhaps

guided by a checklist. Alberta Human Resources and Employment (2003) have devised a

sample orientation checklist which is divided into three sections: The organization, general

information for employees, and job-specific information. The organization information

includes areas such as history, products and services, stakeholders, vision, mission, values,

policies and procedures, organizational structure, physical layout and tour of the

organization, and names of key people. General information for employees may include

benefits, pay and pay schedule, vacation and statutory holidays, sick leave, employee training

and development opportunities, and disciplinary policies. Job-specific information may

include job location, roles and responsibilities, probation period, benefits, safety

requirements, hours of work, tools and equipment required, and who to ask for help. Not

included in this checklist but equally useful is community information, especially for those

new to the area. Information may include local services (fire, police, ambulance), health and

support services (hospitals, clinics, senior care, child care, disability and immigrant support

46

services, supports for low income families) educational institutions, ethnic grocery stores,

places of worship, cultural and community centers, transit information, recreation, and

community events.

Policies and Procedures

Organizations which espouse rigid adherence to policies and procedures are unlikely

to facilitate the empowerment and inclusion necessary to propel the diversity initiative.

Given the constantly evolving arena or organizational contexts, rigidity may similarly limit

an organization�s responsiveness to change. Rigid adherence to policies and procedures can

be a major obstacle given that many more employees are reluctant to be assimilated, and

rigid adherence does not permit the flexibility necessary to respect the dignity and integrity

of individual preferences and cultures (Cox, 2001). While rigidness with respect to some

situation may be less negotiable (e.g., theft, assault, sexual harassment, fraud), the idea is to

create a structured environment that is flexible and adaptive. Policies and procedures will be

generated based on the organization�s contextual circumstances. Some ideas to consider are

open door policies to facilitate communication and regular monitoring of organizational

practices such as recruitment, promotion, compensation, and career development (Kosek,

Lobel, & Brown, 2006). In order to maintain a diverse work force, it is essential to know why

they came or did not come, why they stayed, and why they left (Alberta Human Resources

and Employment, 2003).

Career Development Practices

Although organizations that approach career development in a haphazard manner may

miss the mark, those with seemingly robust career development practices may still miss the

mark, and moreover, may be guilty of perpetuating ethnocentric practices inherent to many

47

career development systems. This section will review the importance of culture and diversity

in relation to career development practices, and will make mention of two career

development practices, mentoring and expatriate assignments, common to contemporary

career development systems.

Importance of culture and diversity. Arthur and Collins (2005a) identify a number of

cultural tenets that often guide career development practices yet do not accurately reflect the

experiences of employees from diverse backgrounds, thereby imposing systemic barriers

upon those who do not reflect this reality. As an example, Arthur and Collins identify the

tenet of individualism and autonomy and the tenet of the centrality of work in one�s life.

These tenets suggest individuals make choices to shape the outcome and highlights the

pivotal role employment has in our lives in terms of identity and fulfillment. While these

tenets may resonate with a certain percentage of the population, such tenets are likely to

invalidate and disempower those who emphasize the collective responsibility in decision

making, the belief in the will of a higher power, or other roles relevant to identity formation

such as family and spirituality. Additionally, freedom of choice with respect to one�s career

is not necessarily a privilege that all cultures bestow upon its members and overlooks the

importance of serendipitous opportunities (Mitchell, Levin, & Krumboltz, 1999). Similar to

the myth of meritocracy as referred to previously, many career development practices are

based on the premise of equality. Arthur and Collins (2006) remind us that equal opportunity

or equal choice is not necessarily a universal privilege.

Additionally, many career development practices attempt to compartmentalize

individual experiences, separating career and personal domains. There is increased awareness

of the inherent complexity of career development and the realization that personal and career

48

domains are intertwined; career development practices need to employ a holistic approach

(Hansen, 1996; Krumboltz, 1993), incorporating cultural aspects. Attention to one�s culture

is of particular significance as culture has been demonstrated to be inextricably intertwined

with an individual�s career development (Arthur & McMahon, 2005) and Organizational

career development has demonstrated to be inextricably intertwined with the success of the

business (Bernes, 2000; Simonsen, 1997).

Simonsen (1997) outlines some essential elements of an effective career development

system which is characterized by (a) an integration into organizational functioning, (b) a

philosophy of career development, (c) the integration of the organization�s needs, (d)

communication and education, (e) leadership and management involvement, (f) employee

empowerment and ownership of growth, and (g) available career development resources and

opportunities. Bernes and Magnusson (1999) also suggest the need to design career

development programs which align goals with specific interventions, subsequently evaluating

the career development services. Additionally, they make a noteworthy point highlighting the

importance of implementing career development practices that are representative of the

current context. As an example, they suggest many organizational career development

programs adhere to static and compartmentalized approaches to career development as

opposed to holistic and process oriented approaches. Redekopp (2002) also adds that

effective career development programs provide managers with appropriate training to assist

employees with career development, focus on experiential learning, offer a number of

development options, and demonstrate a culture which values and acknowledges learning.

Mentoring. Mentoring can serve a variety of purposes and assume a variety of

identities. Diverse organizations may serve as mentors to organizations currently in the

49

process of leveraging diversity; cultural mentors can be used to direct culturally responsive

change within the organization and stakeholders. Employees may also participate in a

mentoring relationship either with a mentor external or internal to the organization, or

perhaps both. For non-dominant groups, mentoring can be a useful mechanism increasing a

�protégés visibility, accessibility and promotability� hence contributing to the retention of

such individuals (Gardenswartz & Rowe, 1998, p. 370). Gardenswartz and Rowe also

suggest that depending on the status of the mentor within the organization or community, the

mentor may also assume an advocacy role to advance the case of social justice.

Cox (2001) suggests that for some non-dominant individuals, having a mentor who

belongs to the dominant group can be as equally effective as having a mentor who shares the

protégé�s social or cultural identity. Although it is pertinent to consider the cultural identity

profile of the mentoring relationship, it is as equally important to determine what kind of

relationship and with whom, will offer the greatest outcomes for the mentor and protégé

(Cox). Given the difficulty that may arise when attempting to select the most appropriate

mentor, it is reasonable to suggest the possibility of multiple mentors for multiple purposes.

Expatriate assignments. Due to the increase number of multinational organizations

and increased dependence on foreign relationships, there are more opportunities for

employees to embark on international assignments (Simonsen, 1997). These opportunities

can contribute to an organization�s diversity agenda as such experiences offer participants

insights into other countries and cultures, as well as their own (MacDonald & Arthur, 2004).

However, in many instances, organizations approach international assignments in a

haphazard manner often with varying levels and quality of support between pre-departure,

the experience itself, and repatriation (Neault, 2005).

50

The logistics of such experiences, as well as culture shock, can jeopardize the purpose

of the experience and can put the participant at risk for psychological distress (Neault, 2005).

According to Neault, sufficient pre-departure information may result in a more positive

adjustment as well as more informed career decisions. Harris and Moran (2000) also suggest

that organizations need to be diligent when selecting individuals for these experiences as it is

difficult for some to adjust and work effectively in a different context.

It should also be noted that in many instances, expatriates are accompanied by a

spouse and or children whose experiences and ability to cope with the transition may also

impact the overall experience (MacDonald & Arthur, 2005). It would seem that organizations

have a moral obligation to provide adequate support to their employees and families in order

to reduce the adverse effects of culture shock/reverse culture shock, maintain participants�

wellbeing, promote productivity, reduce costs, and maintain relations with host parties

(Harris & Morran, 2000).

MacDonald and Arthur (2005) argue that expatriate experiences, from departure to re-

entry, often have less to do with the physical change and more to do with the psychological

processes associated with cross-cultural transitions. As an example, it is not uncommon for

repatriating individuals to perceive a sense of loss of prestige and benefits, an inability to fit

in, or perceived invalidation as a consequence of the misperceptions of friends, family, and

colleagues regarding the significance of the experience (Harris & Morran, 2000). Some

suggestions to consider are pre-departure and re-entry counselling for the expat and their

accompanying family, mentors in the host and or home country (Harris & Moran), and

regular communication with the home office to minimize miscommunication and eliminate

surprises (MacDonald & Arthur). A particular focus on career counselling is warranted so

51

that knowledge, skills, and attitudes gained abroad can be understood and integrated into

roles and responsibilities upon return (MacDonald & Arthur).

Performance Appraisals

Performance appraisals can be an anxiety provoking process for all parties involved

and can quickly turn into a negative experience if issues regarding diversity are not

considered. Gardenswartz and Rowe (1998) argue that in order for performance appraisals to

serve their purpose, all parties need to understand the process and view it as constructive. For

this to occur, those conducting performance appraisals need to understand the relevance of

diversity to the process in order to make it a meaningful experience. As an example, cultural

values of harmony and authority may result in agreeableness and avoidance of disagreement

with the manager�s review (Gardenswartz & Rowe).

Gardenswartz and Rowe (1998) also suggest that some individuals may have

difficulty separating themselves from the performance, potentially internalizing negative

feedback. They also suggest that those emphasizing the collective wellbeing or individual

wellbeing may have difficulty understanding the distinction between individual and team

performance. It can also be the case that the criteria being used to assess the performance are

discriminatory. As an example, individuals in a processing plant may have the same

minimum number of parcels to process each shift, but one of the workers� ability to achieve

this quota is impacted by a physical disability. As a consequence, this individual misses the

annual bonus which is based on the rigid quota system. It would be more reasonable to

suggest that the criteria used to evaluate performance are based on an individual�s context

including ability and strengths.

52

Gardenswartz and Rowe (1998) argue that organizations typically use rating scales,

forced distribution, critical incidents or performance-based criteria in the appraisal process.

They argue that while some methods may be more effective at addressing �diversity blind

spots� (p. 20), bias in the appraisal process will continue to exist so long as humans are

conducting the appraisal. They suggest performance based evaluations which outline

objectives, as well as results achieved, are the best method for reducing bias in the appraisal

process. Objectives which are characteristically positive in representation, in the process

form, in the here and now, specific, within the individual�s control, use the client�s language

(Walter & Peller, 1992) and are culturally appropriate, are likely to yields the best outcomes.

Compensation and Benefits

Given the current and continued diversification of Canadian employees, individuals

are likely to have different world views, values, and beliefs, and are likely to manifest them

in the workplace (Chen & Eastman, 1997). One could confidently suggest that different

workers are regulated by different value systems, are motivated differently, and thus, chose

to pursue different goals (Copithorne, 1999). However, many traditional compensation

systems still reward longevity, based on the obsolete concepts of the old employment

contract which emphasizes employment for life with one organization (Simonsen, 1997).

Laroche and Rutherford (2007) argue that it can be extremely difficult to create a system of

compensation which satisfies all stakeholders as schemes which satisfy stakeholders in one

area, may miss the mark in another. This also highlights the struggles of multinational

organizations, including the required diligence and knowledge of culture and diversity to

facilitate a compensation system for diverse organizations and diverse needs. While

compensation may be tied to various aspects of one�s job (e.g., sales, rate of turnover), Cox

53

(2001) suggests that particularly for management, compensation should reflect desired

behaviours and the intended direction of the organization, and specifically, the organization�s

diversity goals.

Depending on the size and variance of employee needs, orchestrating a benefit system

which appeases everyone may be next to near impossible. However, one option, although

perhaps more time consuming and possibly expensive in the short term, is to offer core

benefits (e.g., medical and dental) while allowing employees to choose another two to four

additional areas of coverage from an alternative list. For example, a single parent may elect

additional child care coverage, while another may elect additional elder care coverage. Yet,

another employee not originally from Canada may find the standard two weeks of vacation

insufficient to travel home to visit friends and family, therefore electing additional vacation

time.

It should also be pointed out that benefits do not always have to reflect a significant

cost as in the case of casual dress days, arranging staff car pools, flexible scheduling, or

providing free city library cards. There are a number of other suggestions including:

dependent care allowance, health benefits (e.g., medical, dental, eye glass, prescription,

counselling, acupuncture, massage, chiropractic) advice (financial, legal), recreation passes,

tickets to local events, laundry and dry cleaning services, onsite ATM, employee recognition

programs, pet insurance, well behaved pets in the workplace, maternity leave for new parents

including adoptive parents, bereavement leave, tuition reimbursement, financial assistance to

buy home computers, study leave, sabbaticals, employee volunteer programs, living

allowance, transit passes, free or subsidized parking, interest free loans, RRSP , RESP, and

RDSP contributions, stock options, and profit sharing, product or service discounts, personal

54

or mental health days, allowances for self-development, personal training, smoking cessation,

wellness day or wellness accounts, settlement assistance, staff functions, organization

sponsored clubs and recreation teams, service awards, compressed workweek,

telecommuting, job sharing, job rotation, ergonomic assessments on employee work areas,

employee referral incentives, work exchanges (nationally or internationally) pension and

retirement plans, job coaching, same sex benefits, ESL training, accent reduction.

The above suggestions are not meant to represent an exhaustive list, but merely

possibilities of which to begin thinking about culture and diversity and their relevance to

compensation and benefits. While implementing and extending compensation and benefits

packages to employees can seem burdensome or difficult to manage, it is also useful to

reframe the purpose of the benefit system in terms of keeping staff happy, productive, and

employed while maintaining the competitiveness of the organization.

Learning and Development

Given the noted impact of globalization and unprecedented change within the

workplace, continuous learning and development are necessary in order to maintain

individual and organizational competitiveness (Cox, 2001; Perry & Parlamis, 2006;

Simonsen, 1997). The previously used term, training, has been dropped and replaced by

learning. As argued by Simonsen, organizations �can provide a full training calendar and be

neither a learning organization nor a development culture� (p. 61). She suggests that a

learning and development culture is characterized by the never there yet philosophy,

suggesting the importance of life-long learning and continuous development. She also

suggests that learning and development opportunities need to materialize from a process of

planning and needs assessment. Learning and development must subsequently be followed

55

by opportunities for demonstration of acquired knowledge and measurement to determine

whether or not learning occurred.

The Physical Environment

The physical environment can similarly influence the organization�s ability to

leverage diversity. It can be relatively easy to reinforce status hierarchies by having separate

entrances, reserved parking based on position, varying quality of office furniture and supplies

based on position, and executive areas such as dining rooms and washrooms (Leach et al,

1995). Having a common area which is devoid of derogatory or suggestive literature,

pictures, or music would seem to contribute to an inclusive environment. It is also important

to consider whether relevant stakeholders are able to access the organization and its relevant

facilities, considering whether barriers such as narrow corridors impede access for

individuals with physical disabilities. It is important to consider including magazines or

newspapers in common areas that take into account literacy level, language or interests of

stakeholders. Consider the distribution and access of memos, postings of the organizational

vision or mission, values, code of conduct, instruction manuals, and relevant legislation: Do

they need to be translated into other languages or plain language, or do they need to be

explained by a translator? Are available food choices (vending machines, cafeterias, staff

events) considerate of personal beliefs and dietary restrictions (e.g., vegetarians, vegans,

allergies, ethnic variety)? Depending on employee composition, it may also be appropriate to

provide places for individuals to pray, exercise, or breastfeed.

Marketing

While there are many organizations and consultants whose role it is to piece together

effective marketing strategies for various products, services, and ideas, this discussion does

56

not seek to declare expertise in this area. Rather the purpose or this section is to highlight the

relevance of culture and diversity to organizational marketing. It is noteworthy to consider

the impact of inclusive language, images, and graphics representative of stakeholder

diversity, and various modes of presentation which are accessible, user friendly, and

meaningful to an equally diverse audience. Hence, it may not be inappropriate to suggest that

an organization have multiple marketing strategies to engage specific audiences and for

different purposes.

Recognizing the interdependence between organizational elements can be a tedious

process, however, aligning them in a fashion that supports diversity is invaluable. According

to Simonsen (1997), an absence of organizational alignment will sabotage the process and

frustrate stakeholders.

Follow-up

Cox (2001) argues that often, once new initiatives are launched, momentum and

consistency can be easily lost. Consequently, little follow-up occurs and lack of attention will

undermine the process. As part of this follow-up process, it is noteworthy to consider the

impact of accountability, evaluation, and the integration of outcomes into the system.

Accountability

One of the central components to the systems model presented earlier was inclusion,

emphasizing the participation of all stakeholders in the transition process. Depending on an

individual�s roles and responsibilities within the organization, accountability will vary.

However minimal, accountability is an essential part of the process required to integrate

learning and change, as well as to reinforce the importance of diversity. As Gardenswartz and

Rowe (1998) point out, �credibility is lost when there is no clear accountability� (p. 315).

57

They suggest that tasks, behaviours, and results need to be assigned, measured, and

integrated into performance measurement and evaluations, with leaders demonstrating the

greatest accountability. While some stakeholders may experience extrinsic rewards as a

consequence of demonstrating diversity oriented behaviours and attitudes (e.g., successful

problem solving through team communication), intrinsic rewards (e.g., financial rewards) can

also reinforce desired behaviours.

Evaluation

Without sufficient information to evaluate and measure, one cannot be certain how

successful the initiative has proven, or what could be done to streamline the process.

Information is necessary to refine goal setting and strengthen the efforts of stakeholders

(Cox, 2001). Cox contends that when individuals have tangible targets and can see evidence

of achievement, they are more likely to engage in the processes contributing to these

outcomes. In order for this to happen, communication must be part and parcel of this process.

He also reminds us that we get what we measure, and we don�t get what we don�t measure,

highlighting the significance of well defined goals and measurement plans. It should also be

noted that tools used to gather this information should be administered and interpreted by

competent professionals who have sufficient training and experience in this area of expertise.

Integration of Outcomes

Follow-up and evaluation can yield invaluable information which can be integrated

into the existing process for further refinement and goal attainment. This step may also yield

information requiring further assessment. However, information which is not critically

analyzed and simply taken at face value, may prove less useful or mislead the direction of the

change initiative.

58

Similar to the other model components, follow-up is a necessary and integral step. It

is based in part on the premise of continuous improvement and life long learning. According

to Cox (2001), �the work on diversity is never done�we just keep refining it and journeying

to ever-higher levels of achievement� (p. 131).

The systems model for organizational diversity initiatives has attempted to borrow

ideas from the existing literature while integrating contemporary ideas and concepts relevant

to the current state of diversity management. Such concepts include empowerment, social

responsiveness, and systems principles. Echoing Cox�s (2001) argument, which underscores

the follow-up stage as an integral step to continuous development and refinement, so too

must individuals and organizations explore the model in order to refine and develop it

further. Doing so acknowledges that the individual, the organization, and the contexts in

which they function are not static constructs. Therefore models intended to guide change

must similarly be flexible and open to change. This model serves as a platform from which to

continue the diversity dialogue among and between professions including discussing the

potential implications of the model.

59

CHAPTER IV

Synthesis and Implications

Although the benefits of a successful organizational change process are incalculable

to its stakeholders and the local and global communities, it is a process which also presents a

number of challenges, although arguably surmountable. Cultivating a productive and

efficient multicultural organization is a task that requires fortitude, leadership, patience, and

resources to say the least. It also requires a suitable and descriptive model such as that

presented in this discussion. In considering the implications of the model, it is necessary to

consider the strengths and limitations the model presents, including factors contributing to

failure. It is also necessary to address the model�s potential influence in terms of subsequent

development in the field of organizational diversity.

Strengths

The model presented provides a general framework which could be arguably tailored

to suit a variety of organizations, taking into consideration presenting circumstances such as

the size of the organization, stakeholder demographics, and salient issues. Therefore the

model could be used by various organizations (e.g., not-for-profit, profit, manufacturing,

educational institutions) to address different diversity related issues. The model attempts to

integrate general principles which can be applied to most organizations, granted unique

contextual nuances will require specific adjustments. The model offers a unique interface

between organizational functioning and global and community influences, and also integrates

relevant trends, predominantly the increased awareness of social justice. Incorporating the

systems perspective allows for a more fluid and accurate representation of individual and

organizational functioning which is constantly evolving. It underscores the rights of all

60

community members in an increasingly diverse society, yet highlights the inherent

responsibility all of us must exercise in relation to our abilities in order to realize a diversity

utopia. I would also suggest that increased awareness and exposure to positive diversity

interactions within organizational settings can be carried outside the organization and applied

to other personal interactions, reducing isms (e.g., sexism, racism) and increasing social

harmony.

A variety of individuals with diverse backgrounds, professional experience, and

qualifications profess expertise in the area of diversity management, thus resulting in varied

approaches and outcomes. This model and discussion may stimulate further refinement as to

the competencies and qualifications needed to implement organizational diversity initiatives.

It may also provide the impetus for educational institutions to offer or refine specific learning

opportunities tailored to this professional niche.

Limitations

It would seem that organizations most suited to implement the model are those

committed to the change process, having access to the resources and processes required to

facilitate this transition. Therefore, individuals and organizations looking for a quick fix may

not be well served by the information presented in this discussion. While this model presents

a general framework for diversity, specific interventions and techniques require tailoring to

meet the unique needs of each organization. The onus is on the user to locate necessary

resources and tailor the model to the specific context. Therefore, this discussion can only

serve as base from which to begin the diversity change process. Considering the implications

to stakeholders of a poorly managed intervention and the need to tailor interventions to the

61

specific needs of each organization, the information presented in this discussion is best

operationalized by competent individuals.

Given that the model emphasizes constructs such as empowerment and social justice,

this model may not be applicable to organizations or societies which adhere to ideas such as

censorship or undemocratic philosophies. It is quite possible that this model would be

difficult to implement in non-democratic organizations or cultures were employee

compensation is equal regardless of one�s contribution or where it is unacceptable to

negotiate with or challenge those in authority.

In terms of the assessment and evaluation phase, a significant amount of information

may have to be gathered from stakeholders in order to plan, evaluate, and draw conclusions

as to the model�s impact on organizational and individual functioning. For many, divulging

sensitive information raises questions of confidentiality, retention of information, and may be

perceived as a violation of privacy (Russell, 1991). This may blur professional boundaries in

the workplace by entitling access to information from other areas of an individual�s life

which some regard as personal and confidential.

This model and its constructs have yet to be operationalized, therefore, its applied

value has yet to be validated in a practical or empirical sense. Further research and

experimentation with the model is warranted in order to formulate an informed decision

regarding its utility. Research is also required to make subsequent refinements to the model.

As part of this research, a general consensus regarding the definitions of the model�s various

constructs must be achieved. As mentioned in the introductory section of this discussion,

approaches to diversity and key terms such as diversity, vary in definition and consequence.

62

Why Diversity Initiatives Fail

There are a number of reasons why implementing a diversity program may prove

unsuccessful. Cox (2001) identifies some common pitfalls, including misdiagnosis of the

problem, implementing a narrow solution, lack of consistency, inadequate resources, poor

communication or leadership, inability to be flexible and adapt the change process when

necessary, reluctance to change, not using relevant data to drive the change process, lack of

or poorly defined objectives and goals, quitting the process when progress is made or

declaring victory too soon, lack of follow through, misunderstanding of the commitment

required, and impatience. Gardenswartz and Rowe (1998) also identify the absence of a

relevant context as a contributor to failure. They suggest ignoring macroclimates factors such

as those external to the organization (i.e., community and global influences) will influence

the change initiative and must be given consideration. Perhaps before starting the change

process, conducting a SWOT analysis (identifying the organization�s strengths, weaknesses,

opportunities, and threats) and brainstorming subsequent action to minimize the impact of

potential saboteurs is necessary. Periodic SWOT analyses may be enacted to ensure the new

threats are identified and kept from derailing the diversity initiative.

I would suggest success is not exclusive of failure, however the influence to which

each sabotaging agent will have on the process will vary. As argued by Gardenswartz and

Rowe (1998) �these saboteurs, singularly or collectively, can influence the success or failure

of your initiative (p. 299). Although the above mentioned pitfalls do not represent an

exhaustive list, having a comprehensive model and the skillfull guidance of adequately

trained professionals can limit the failure and maximize the success of diversity programs.

63

The model and suggestions provided in this discussion illustrate methods through which

organizational diversity can be approached and complicating factors minimized.

The Future of Diversity

I would argue that diversity and culture are dominant forces in society, and

organizational change initiatives are likely to increase in momentum in an effort to harness

the skills and strengths of workers. Further work is required to understand the dynamics of

diversity and culture, and their impact across all levels of society, not just organizational

functioning. As diversity and culture are only but two influences in a larger systems network,

the status of these variables is likely to change, and subsequently, create new experiences and

phenomena we have yet to explore. The model presented has the capacity to act as a catalyst

furthering this discussion and development. Some key areas of potential influence are

additional research, interdisciplinary collaboration, expanding roles for career development

professionals, perspective gathering from stakeholders, and increased institutional leadership.

Additional research. It has been suggested that while much of the literature and

research on diversity originates from the United States, it cannot always be generalized with

the same accuracy to other contexts due to varying social, political, and economic climates,

and composite labour markets (Sue at al., 2006). Therefore, further research is required to

address Canada�s increasing diversity and unique needs (Arthur & Collins, 2005a).

One must also note the need to refine measurement and evaluation practices. Further

consistency and agreement of definitions and variables, such as diversity (Kossek et al.,

2006) and culture are required. Additional research is also required on sound quantitative and

qualitative measures required to gather assessment data, assess the impact of change

processes, and evaluate the effectiveness of diversity initiatives (Kossek et al.).

64

Gathering stakeholder perspectives. One of essential features of the systems model

previously presented was inclusion. Our understanding of diversity and culture cannot

proceed effectively if the voices of those impacted by diversity and culture are not given

sufficient opportunity to express their perspectives or are excluded from the information

gathering process. Pringle et al. (2006) suggest that a significant omission in much of the

existing literature is employees� experiences of diversity and culture as it relates to

organizational functioning. They suggest one explanation for this gap in the literature is the

frequent restricted access experienced by researchers. They suggest managers are hesitant to

provide unrestricted access to employees in the event that the research generated identifies

hostile or discriminatory environments for which organizations and managers are

subsequently legally liable.

Interdisciplinary collaboration. A previously presented argument suggested that in

organizations, diverse groups are apt to generate more perspectives, solve problems more

creatively, and are less susceptible to group think than are homogenous groups. It stands to

reason that our understanding of culture and diversity can benefit from this same logic. As it

is often difficult to understand a particular phenomenon from only one perspective, the

continued dialogue and collaboration between diverse fields of practice is necessary to

advance our understanding of diversity and culture (Pringle et al., 2006). There are many

worthwhile perspectives and disciplines making significant contributions to our

understanding of diversity and culture such as psychology, sociology, economics, political

science, human resource management, and education to name a few (Pringle et al.).

Expanding roles for career development professionals. As organizations attempt to

implement culturally appropriate models into their functioning, the required competency and

65

dedication of existing employees to complete this transition is often inadequate, necessitating

the need for external consultants to facilitate this process (Arthur & Collins, 2005b). The

increased recognition of the importance of diversity and the required competence to achieve

this has resulted in expanding roles for career development professionals as they attempt to

offer services to an increasingly diverse clientele (Arthur & Collins). As mentioned

previously, this might also encourage professional and educational institutions to offer

further learning and development opportunities to ensure competent practice.

Increased institutional leadership. As one of the primary requirements for effective

organizational change was adequate leadership, so too must community institutions take on

this role to advance the understanding and infusion of diversity and culture into society

across all levels. Institutions such as government (municipal, provincial, and federal),

education, healthcare, and religion have unique opportunities to role model attitudes and

behaviours that are inclusive and empowering for Canada�s multicultural mosaic.

Conclusion

The purpose of this discussion was to provide career development practitioners with a

systematic and comprehensive model to guide the implementation of organizational diversity

programs. Specifically, it was intended to assist practitioners in minimizing the challenges of

organizational diversity, while maximizing its opportunities. The model�s key components

includes the integration of systems theory, suggesting organizational components do not

function in isolation from the organization, nor does the organization function independent of

its context. While this model presents a general framework for diversity, specific

interventions and techniques require tailoring to meet the unique needs of each organization.

Therefore, this discussion can only serve as base from which to begin the diversity change

66

process. No one process of organizational change will be exactly the same as another

organization�s transition. Each instance will present its own unique advantages and

challenges thus necessitating leadership, competency, and commitment. I suspect there will

be instances when this model will fit, and instances when individuals will not be well served

by this model. However, I suspect creating a model which seeks to effectively explain a

particular phenomena in every instance would be next to impossible, and would be

cumbersome at best.

Given Canada�s multicultural society and current economic volatility, Canadian

organizations are well positioned to lead the way in organizational diversity. Organizations

must exercise these opportunities in order to sustain our economic and social viability.

Facilitating organizational diversity is also necessary in order to adhere to the formal and

informal multicultural ideologies that our country�s functioning is predicated on.

Sue et al. (1998) suggest that a truly multicultural and diverse organization is unlikely

to ever exist due to the sheer multitude of dynamics impacting this goal. While one cannot

deny the inherent complexity of such a goal, I would suggest, that if we cease to dream, we

may cease to try, and that would be a failure of catastrophic proportions for individuals and

organizations in Canada.

67

References

Alberta Employment and Immigration. (2008). Employing a diverse workforce: Making it

work. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.

Alberta Human Resources and Employment. (2002). Diversity: A strategy to meet your

need for skilled workers. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.

Acar, W., Aupperle, K., & Lowy, R. (2001). An empirical exploration of measures of

social responsibility across the spectrum of organizational types. The International

Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9, 26-57.

American Psychological Association. (2002). Guidelines on multicultural education,

training, research, practice, and organizational change for psychologists. Public

Interest, Retrieved November 15, 2008 from

http://www.apa.org/pi/multiculturalguidelines/definitions.html.

Arrendondo, P., Toporek. R., Brown, S., Sanchez, J., Locke, D, Sanchez, J., et al.,

(1996). Operationalization of the multicultural counseling competencies. Journal of

Multicultural Counseling and Development, 24, 42-78.

Arthur, N., & Collins, S. (2005a). Introduction to culture-infused counselling. In N.

Arthur & S. Collins (Eds.), Culture infused counselling: Celebrating the Canadian

mosaic (pp. 3-40). Calgary: Counselling Concepts.

Arthur, N., & Collins, S. (2005b). Expanding culture-infused counselling in professional

Practice. In N. Arthur & S. Collins (Eds.), Culture infused counselling: Celebrating

the Canadian mosaic. (pp.151-212). Calgary: Counselling Concepts.

Arthur, N., & Collins, S. (2006, January). Cultural auditing: A process to enhance

68

multicultural career counseling. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the

National Consultation on Career Development (NATCON), Ottawa, Canada.

Retrieved November 18, 2008 from

http://www.natcon.org/archive.natcon/papers/natcon_papers_2006_e12.pdf.

Arthur, N., & McMahon, M. (2005). A Systems Theory Framework for multicultural

career counseling. The Career Development Quarterly, 53(3), 208-222.

Arthur, N., & Merali, N. (2005). Counselling immigrants and refugees. In N.

Arthur & S. Collins (Eds.), Culture infused counselling: Celebrating the Canadian

Mosaic (pp. 331-360). Calgary: Counselling Concepts.

Bernes, K., & Magnusson, K. (1996). A description of career development services within

Canadian organizations. Journal of Counseling and Development, 74, 569-574.

Bosser, T. (1998). The significance of community to business social responsibility. Rural

Sociology, 63(3), 412-431.

Cambridge, C. (2001). Compassion versus competitiveness: An industrial relations

perspective on the impact of globalization on the standards of employee relations

ethics in the United States. Ethics and Behavior, 11, 87-103.

Caporoso, R. A., & Kiselica, M. S. (2004). Career Counseling with clients who have a

severe mental illness. The Career Development Quarterly, 52(3), 235-245.

Carter, L., Ulrich, D., & Goldsmith, M. (Eds.). (2005). Best practices in leadership

development and organization change: How the best companies ensure meaningful

change and sustainable leadership. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Carr-Rufino, N. (2005). Making diversity work. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education

Inc.

69

Chen, C. (2008). Career guidance with immigrants. In J. Athanasou, & R. Van Esbroeck

(Eds.), International handbook of career guidance (pp. 419-442). New York:

Springer.

Chen, C., & Eastman, W. (1997). Toward a civic culture for multicultural organizations.

Journal of Applied Behavior Science, 33(4), 454-470.

Collins, S., & Arthur, N. (2005). Multicultural counselling competencies : A framework for

professional development. In N. Arthur & S. Collins (Eds.), Culture infused

counselling: Celebrating the Canadian Mosaic (pp. 41-102). Calgary: Counselling

Concepts.

Copithorne, K. (1999, January). Career development in today�s organizations. Paper

presented at the Annual Conference of the National Consultation on Career

Development (NATCON), Ottawa, Canada.

Cox, T. Jr. (2001). Creating the multicultural organization: A strategy for capturing the

power of diversity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cox, T. Jr. (1993). Cultural diversity in organizations; Theory, research, and practice.

San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Gardenswartz. L., & Rowe, A. (1998). Managing diversity: A complete desk reference

and planning guide (Rev. ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Gysbers, N. C., Heppner, M. J., & Johnston, J. A. (1998). Career counseling: Process,

issues, and techniques. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Flynn, G. (1996). Xers vs. boomers: Teamwork or trouble? Personnel Journal, 75, 86-89.

Hammett, C., Greene-Black, J., Salmon, D., Jr., & Mascarenhas, G. (2005).

70

Benchmarking: A guide to hiring and managing persons with learning disabilities.

Toronto: ALDER.

Hansen, L. S. (1996). ILP: Integrating our lives, shaping our society. In R. Feller & G.

Walz (Eds.), Career transitions in turbulent times: Exploring work, learning and

careers (pp. 21-30). Greensboro, NC: Educational Resources Information Centre,

Counseling and Student Services Clearinghouse.

Harris, P. R., & Moran, R. (2000). Managing cultural differences: Leadership strategies

for a new world of business. Houston: Gulf Publishing Company.

Harrison, D. A., & Sin, H. P. (2006). What is diversity and how should it be measured. In

A. M. Konrad, P. Prasad, & J. Pringle. (Eds.), Handbook of workplace diversity (pp.

191-216). London: Sage Publications.

Henry, A. D., & Lucca, A. M. (2004). Facilitators and barriers to employment: The

perspective of people with psychiatric disabilities and employment service providers.

Work, 22, 169-182.

Heslin, P., & Ochoa, J. (2008). Understanding and developing strategic corporate social

responsibility. Organizational Dynamics, 37(2), 125-144.

Jamieson, D., & O�Mara, J. (1991). Managing workforce 2000: Gaining the diversity

advantage. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kossek, E. E., Lobel, S. A., & Brown, J. (2006). Human resources strategies to manage

workforce diversity: Examining �the business case�. In A. M. Konrad, P. Prasad, & J.

Pringle. (Eds.), Handbook of workplace diversity (pp. 53-74). London: Sage

Publications.

Kreitz, P. (2007). Systems principles: Best practices for managing organizational diversity.

71

Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(4), 101-120.

Krumboltz, J. (1993). Integrating career counseling and personal counseling. The Career

Development Quarterly, 42, 143-148.

Lancaster, L., & Stillman, D. (2002). When generations collide: Who they are. Why they

clash. How to solve the generational puzzle at work. New York: Harper Collins.

Laroche, L., & Rutherford, D. (2007). Recruiting, retaining, and promoting culturally

different employees. Burlington: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Leach, J., George, B., Jackson, T., & LaBella, A. (1995). A practical guide to working

with diversity: The process, the tools, the resources. New York: AMACOM

Lieberman, S., Simons, G., & Berardo, K. (2004). Putting diversity to work: How to

successfully lead a diverse workforce. Menlo Park: Crisp Publications.

Loughlin, C., & Barling, J. (2001). Young workers� work values, attitudes, and

behaviours. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 543-558.

Literacy Alberta (2008). Opening doors: A literacy audit tool kit for customer service

excellence. Calgary: Unicom Graphics.

MacDonald, S., & Arthur, N. (2004, January). When international experience throws a

career curve. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the National Consultation

on Career Development (NATCON), Ottawa, Canada. Retrieved February 2, 2009

from:

www.natcon.org/archive/natcon/papers/natcon_papers_2004_arthur_macdonald.pdf.

MacDonald, S., & Arthur, N. (2005). Connecting career management to repatriation

adjustment. Career Development International, 10(2), 145-160.

Mitchell, K., Levin, A. S., & Krumboltz, J. D. (1999). Planned happenstance:

72

Constructing unexpected career opportunities. Journal of Counseling and

Development, 77(2), 115-124.

Mor-Barak, M. E. (2000). The inclusive workplace: An ecosystems approach to diversity

management. Social Work, 45(4), 339-352.

Neault, R. (2005). Managing global careers: Challenges for the 21st century. International

Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 5, 149-161.

Patton, W., & McMahon, M. (2006). The Systems Theory Framework of career

development and counseling: Connecting theory and practice. International Journal

for the Advancement of Counseling, 28(2), 153-166.

Perry, E. L., & Parlamis, J. D. (2006). Age and ageism in organizations: A review and

consideration of national culture. In A. M. Konrad, P. Prasad, & J. Pringle. (Eds.),

Handbook of workplace diversity (pp. 345-370). London: Sage Publications.

Pitts, D. (2000). Diversity management, job satisfaction, and performance: Evidence from

U.S. federal agencies. Public Administration Review, 69(2), 328-338.

Pringle, J. K., Konrad, A., & Prasad, P. (2006). Conclusion: Reflection and future

direction. In A. M. Konrad, P. Prasad, & J. Pringle (Eds.), Handbook of workplace

diversity (pp. 531-539). London, Sage Publications.

Purkiss, S.L., Perrewe, P.L., Gillespie, T.L., Mayes, B.T., & Ferris, G. T. (2006). Implicit

sources of bias in employment interview judgments and decisions. Organizational

Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101(2), 152-167.

Redekopp, D., & The Canadian Career Development Foundation. (2002, February).

Career development in organizations: Origins, concepts, and practices. Paper

prepared for the Canadian Centre for Management Development.

73

Roosevelt, T., Jr. (2006). Building on the promise of diversity: How we can move to the

next level in our workplaces, our communities, and our society. New York:

AMACOM.

Roosevelt, T., Jr. (1991). Beyond race and gender: Unleashing the power of your total work

force by managing diversity. New York: AMACOM.

Russell, J. (1991). Limited contribution: Career development interventions in

organizations. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 38, 237-287.

Russell-Chapin, L. A., & Stoner, C. R. (1995). Mental health counselors as consultants for

diversity training. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 17(2), 146-156.

Shen, J., Chanda, A., D�Netto, B., & Monga, M. (2009). Managing diversity through human

resource management: An international perspective and conceptual framework. The

International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(2), 235-251.

Simonsen, P. (1997). Promoting a development culture in your organization: Using

career development as a change agent. Mountain View: Davies-Black Publishing.

Sinclair, A. (2006). Critical Diversity Management practice in Australia: Romanced or

co-opted? In A. M. Konrad, P. Prasad, & J. Pringle. (Eds.), Handbook of workplace

diversity (pp. 511-530). London: Sage Publications.

Snow, C., Miles, R., & Coleman, H. (1992). Managing 21st century network

organizations. Organizational Dynamics, 20(3), 4-20.

Sonnenschein, W. (1999). The diversity toolkit: How you can build and benefit from a

diverse workforce. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Sue, D. W. (2008). Multicultural organizational consultation: A social justice perspective.

Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 60(2), 157-169.

74

Sue, D.W., Arredondo, P., & McDavis, R., J. (1992). Multicultural counseling

competencies and standards: A call to the profession. Journal of Counseling and

Development, 70, 477-486.

Sue, D. W., Carter, R. T., Casas, J. M., Fouad, N. A., Ivey, A. E., Jensen, M.,

LaFromboise, T., Manese, J. E., Ponterotto, J. G., & Vazquez-Nutall, E. (Eds.).

(1998). Multicultural counseling competencies: Individual and organizational

development. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Sullivan, S., & Mainiero, L. (2007). Benchmarking ideas for fostering family friendly

workplaces. Organizational Dynamics, 36, 45-62.

The Harvard Business Essentials Series. (2003). Managing change and transition.

Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Thiederman, S. (2008). 7 steps for defeating bias in the workplace: Making diversity

work. (Rev. ed.). New York: Kaplan Publishing.

Thomas, R., Jr. (1991). Beyond race and gender: Unleashing the power of your total

work force by managing diversity. New York: AMACOM.

Thurlow, A., Mills, A. J., & Mills, J. P. (2006). Feminist qualitative research and

workplace diversity. In A. M. Konrad, P. Prasad, & J. Pringle (Eds.), Handbook of

workplace diversity (pp. 217-236). London: Sage Publications.

von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General Systems Theory. New York: George Braziller.

Walter, J., & Peller, J. (1992). Well-defined goals. In J. Walter & J. Peller (Eds.).

Becoming solution-focused in brief therapy (pp. 51-63). New York: Brunner-Mazel.

75

Appendix

A Systems Model for Implementing Diversity Initiatives

Global Influences

Community Influences