F a l lF a l lF a l lF a l lF a l l22222 0 00 00 00 00 0 33333

E dE dE dE dE d i i i i i ttttt iiiii ooooo nnnnn

Integrating Culture and Management in Global Organizations

INSIDE

People Like Usby Frank Landy

Volume 4, Number 2

GenerationalDiversityby Carol Ochs

Book Review:Generations at Work:Managing the Clash...

A quarterly publication producedby the Intercultural ManagementQuarterly and the Intercultural

Management Institute,School of International Service

at American University

Announcing the IMISpring Conference

High PHigh PHigh PHigh PHigh Performance Hiring Acrerformance Hiring Acrerformance Hiring Acrerformance Hiring Acrerformance Hiring Across Cultural Linesoss Cultural Linesoss Cultural Linesoss Cultural Linesoss Cultural Linesby Britta Stromeyer

A Model for DivA Model for DivA Model for DivA Model for DivA Model for Diversity Managersity Managersity Managersity Managersity Management: The “Business Case”ement: The “Business Case”ement: The “Business Case”ement: The “Business Case”ement: The “Business Case”and the Bottom Lineand the Bottom Lineand the Bottom Lineand the Bottom Lineand the Bottom Line

��

��

�����������Continued on page 4

��

��

�����������Continued on page 10

3

7

12Managing the diversity of the Americanworkforce has become an economic imperativefor companies who wish to stay competitive inan increasingly global marketplace. Recent de-mographic shifts have increased the number ofminorities in the United States and in the Ameri-can workforce: currently, one in four Americansis a “minority,” which will increase to one inthree by 2050, and “minorities” are the majorityin six out of the eight largest metropolitan areasin the United States. If these demographic shiftscontinue along their current trajectory, non-His-panic whites will fast become a minority group.The purchasing power of minorities has grownin turn: it is estimated that minorities buy more

than $1 trillion worth of products and ser-vices annually. In order to “tap in” to thesegrowing markets, organizations need diverseviewpoints to give their productsmulticultural appeal.

Several American companies have madestrides to manage diversity more effectively.Ford Motor Company, recently named thenumber one company for diversity in theUnited States by DiversityInc magazine, rec-ognized the rapid growth of the U.S. Latinopopulation and responded accordingly. Bytargeting advertising towards Latinos, theyincreased sales in the Latino market by 50

A firm’s reputation is often a result of the em-ployees it recruits and the people it retains. Cul-tural and generational differences affect not onlythe hiring process, but also the process of doingbusiness, including daily management. Today’smedia has broadcast that we should understandand value individual differences. “Valuing Di-versity” has been the slogan for the past decade.We must ask then..How does valuing diversityaffect the hiring process? In short, by stating thatwe should value diversity, it proves that our so-ciety has moved far beyond affirmative actionprograms!

To succeed in today’s competitive 21st centurymarket of high performance hiring, we must firstdevelop an awareness of our own culture, beforewe can be sensitive to other individual culturesand know how to transfer that sensitivity to theorganization.

We must operate on a number of differentcultural levels at any given time. These lev-els arise from our own cultural heritage, theprospective employee’s cultural backgroundand the organizational culture of the firm thatemploys us. The same product or servicemay have a different meaning for each per-son in the organization, depending upon eachperson’s cultural perspective. The focus ofhigh performance hiring today, in additionto a detailed job description, must be on anawareness and sensitivity to cultural and gen-erational differences.

Culture is a shared system of meanings. Inan organizational context, it indicates whatwe pay attention to, how we manage ourworkforce and what we value. Culture is likean onion. A thorough and well conducted

by Emily Gildersleeve

6

2

Intercultural Management QuarterlySchool of International Service

Phone: (202) 885-1846Fax: (202) 885-133

E-mail: imqeditor@american.edu

AMERICAN UNIVERSITY

W A S H I N G T O N , D C

4400 Massachusetts Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20016-8177

Publisher • Dr. Gary R. WeaverManaging Editor • Sherry ZarabiPublication Manager • Anna Lee

Contributing WritersEmily Gildersleeve

Frank LandyCarol Ochs

Britta StromeyerMaria Trujillo

Editorial Review BoardDr. Gary R. Weaver, Sherry Zarabi, Anna Lee,

Heidi Ashton, Darrel Onizuka,

IMQ STAFFIMQ Update

© 2003 Intercultural Management Quarterly

IMQ CONTACTIntercultural Management Quarterly

School of International Service4400 Massachusetts Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20016-8177Phone: (202) 885-1846

Fax: (202) 885-1331

Subscriptions/Submissions:E-mail: imqeditor@american.edu

Editor’s Welcome

REPRODUCTION POLICYAll articles, advertisements and other materials

published in the Intercultural Management Quarterlymay not be reprinted without the express written

permission of the Publication Manager. All article

reprints should include a printed reference to IMQ.

The Interculutral Management Quarterly (IMQ) ispublished by the Intercultural Management Institute atAmerican University. IMQ combines original researchconducted in the field of interculutral management withthe applied perspectives of industry experts, professorsand students.

EDITORIAL POLICY

SUBMISSION POLICYIMQ submissions are open to all students, professors, andprofessionals interested in the integration of internationalrelations and business.

Contributing authors are expected to submit articles- noless than 1000 words and no more than 1500 words-fo-cused on related topics. Article submissions are refereedby the editorial review board. Articles and materials ac-cepted for publication are subject to editing by the edito-rial review board and become property of the Intercul-tural Management Quarterly.

Welcome to the Fall 2003 edition of the Intercultural Manage-ment Quarterly (IMQ). This issue of IMQ explores the dynam-ics of managing workforce diversity while continuing our tradi-tion of combining original research with the applied perspectiveof industry experts.

As Emily Gildersleeve points out, in her article “A Model forDiversity Management: ‘The Business Case’ and the BottomLine”, recent demographic shifts have made managing workforcediversity “an economic imperative for companies who wish tostay competitive in an increasingly global marketplace.” Thisdevelopment has encouraged professionals to review their hir-ing and training practices to ensure compliance with their goalof workforce diversity. Hiring managers can utilize BrittaStromeyer’s article “High Performance Hiring Across CulturalLines” as a tool for determining some of the affects of culturaldifferences on the hiring process.

The Fall 2003 edition presents authors with diverse backgrounds.Emily Gildersleeve’s article is based on her substantial researchon diversity training programs. Her article illustrates a modelfor managing a diversity plan. Frank Landy’s article “PeopleLike Us” is based on his extensive experience as an industrialpsychologist. He challenges readers to understand that our “viewof the world is simply one of many alternative views.” In herarticle, “Generational Diversity,” Carol Ochs illustrates currentissues in a generational diverse workforce, and Maria Trujilloreviews a book on managing generational diversity, entitled“Generations at Work: Managing the Class of Veterans, Boomers,Xers and Nexters in Your Workplace.” We believe this collec-tion of articles will be useful and of interest to trainers, profes-sionals and students.

Thank you for your interest in the IMQ. As always we welcomeyour comments and suggestions. Without your feedback wecannot become your knowledge source on intercultural man-agement.

Best Regards,

Sherry Zarabi

Managing Editor

3

People Like Usby Frank Landy

��

��

�����������Continued on page 8

In the September issue of the AtlanticMonthly, in a piece called “PeopleLike Us,” David Brooks highlights thetendency of like-minded individuals toform homogeneous clusters. He makesthe generally accurate observation thatneighborhoods, educational institu-tions, even whole cities tend to attractpeople with similar values and inter-ests. He presents the example of Boul-der, Colorado (where I happen towork) as a haven for politically pro-gressive mountain bikers who “madethe place so culturally pure that it hasbecome practically a parody of itself.”By inference, he implies that Boulder(I realize that Boulder is simply anexample he uses to make his point)talks the diversity talk but does notwalk the diversity walk, because it isa city of “politically progressivemountain bikers.” To be sure, there aresome politically progressive mountainbikers in Boulder, there are also reac-tionary construction workers, politi-cally regressive real estate agents, anddetermined “know nothings” whowork in the administration of variouseducational institutions ranging frompreschool centers to the University ofColorado in Boulder. In fact, in choos-ing Boulder for one of his examples,he managed to pick one of the fewcommunities in which the wheels arestill on the “diversity wagon.” In theendless meetings of authorities,boards, and commissions that are usedto “run” the city of Boulder (affection-ately known as the Soviet SocialistRepublic of Boulder by many of itspolitically non-progressive residents),one can see both the strengths and theburdens of diversity. People disagree– about anything and everything.What’s worse, they think that disagree-ment is good and are willing to keepcoming back week after week to dis-agree about the same issue until there

is some common understanding of theissue, if not consensus.

Nevertheless, Brooks makes a goodpoint about the natural tendency ofpeople to avoid the hard work of dis-agreement by clustering with those ofsimilar values. And it is remarkablehow quickly and easily we can do this.Brooks uses the example of friendswho have advanced degrees by citingthe example of Herrnstein and Murrayin The Bell Curve. If you think of yourtwelve closest friends, the chances ofsix of those twelve having advanceddegrees is less than one in a million.It is a safe guess that most of the read-ers of this article would have six closefriends with advanced degrees. But theexamples can be even simpler. Wait-ing at the local quick-shop to pay forgas, two strangers watching the youngcashier with blue hair and variousrings protruding from parts of her faceand head trying to make correctchange exchange a knowing glance,roll their eyes, and silently agree thatthe younger generation has gone tohell – well maybe not their kids whoare part of that generation, but mostother kids.

I would agree with Brooks that cul-tural and intellectual and political“segregation” will often occur whenpeople or institutions do not acknowl-edge the tendency and recognize theinherent value in simple disagreementand discussion. Of course Brooks,anxious to make the unsurprising leapto demographic and political diversity,talks about housing patterns and zipcodes and liberal college faculties. Butthis issue is not about race, or color,or gender, or even political affiliation— it is about how much disagreementpeople are willing to endure for thesake of a “better” life (“better” can

be translated as interesting or produc-tive or even morally fulfilling but itcannot be translated as peaceful in thiscontext).

I would like to take Brooks’ observa-tions one step further, to the workingworld. Brooks’ view of this naturalhuman tendency to hang out withpeople like yourself is a somewhatpassive phenomenon, made active byoccasional choices of where to live,where to shop, and where to go toschool. In the work setting, one findsa much more aggressive strain of thistendency toward homogenization.Applicants for jobs, and the organiza-tions to which they apply, often gothrough an elaborate dance to deter-mine if they are compatible. Thisdance is performed through recruiting,plant visits, interviews, and so forth.If a compatibility of values is appar-ent (assuming, of course, that the ba-sic credentials/ abilities/skills are alsopresent in the applicant), an offer ismade and often accepted. But thingsare not always as they seem. Organi-zations do not always portray theirvalues accurately, and applicants havea tendency to provide a view of them-selves that would most likely result inan offer. Then the fun begins. In mostcases the organization takes increas-ingly direct steps to eliminate the non-conforming hire. This might take theform of withholding information fromthe new hire to limit accomplishments,or providing stultifying or doomed-to-failure assignments. If these tacticsdon’t work, the strategies becomemore direct—poor performance re-views, public criticism, and so on.Eventually the new hire “gets it” andleaves. This often occurs within thefirst 12 months of employment.

4

interview process helps us to peel offonion layers one by one and learnmore about an applicant’s differentexperiences and essentially determinewhether a candidate will be able tocontribute to our organization.

order to advance quickly within theorganization. Generally speaking,Generation Xers value knowledge,whereas Baby Boomers valueexperience.

To develop your interculturalawareness you need to be able torecognize the behavioral expectationsof different generations and learn toapply them to your organizationalcontext. Intercultural awareness helpsus to recognize and appreciate avariety of attitudes, values andexpectations. This awareness will giveyou the competitive edge required toestablish a rapport with yourapplicants and interview themeffectively.

During an interview we have toidentify and evaluate different styles

of verbal and non-verbalcommunication. Bodylanguage and facialexpressions such assmiling, eye movementsand gestures can varyfrom culture to culture. Ifthe cultural context is notunderstood, some gest-ures may be misint-

erpreted or be considered offensive.

For example, as interviewers we valuedirect eye contact. Eye contact givesus the impression that the applicant isattentive, interested and respectful.However, some cultures considerdirect eye contact with an elder orsomeone in a superior position (suchas an interviewer) as rude. Unless weunderstand such cultural differences,we may completely misinterpret a

continued from page 1

candidate’s abilities and truthfulness.

Being German myself, I cannot resistpresenting the following example ofcultural adjustment that I experiencedwhen I moved to Washington, D.C.American informality and the habit ofcalling each other by the first namemakes most Germans uncomfortable.This is particularly evident whenyoung people or junior staff addressthe elders or their superiors by theirfirst names. In Germany it takes a verylong time to get on a first-name basis.Using someone’s first name is a matterof respect and is a process involvingtrust and should not be rushed.Generally speaking, Germans aremuch more serious than Americans.Germans do not expect to have fun atwork; work is serious business andshould be separated from one’spersonal or social life. In fact, forthese reasons I am still uncomfortablewith the concept of small talk in theoffice. Small talk does not fit into theseriousness of business. Consequently,if you had interviewed me six or sevenyears ago and started your interviewwith a casual chat about the weatherto calm my nervousness, you wouldhave, in fact confused me and mademe more nervous.

Cultural differences are evident in theresumes of Americans and Europeans.Typically, Americans load theirresumes with great detail and as manyeducation credits as possible. In fact,often Americans resumes are soinflated that they are to some extentdiscredited. European resumes, on theother hand, provide very little detail.Europeans believe in a modest resumeto avoid appearing braggadocious. Inthe United States, the behavioral styleinterview focuses on past experiences.The European applicant, however,expects questions about his or her

High Performance Hiring

What is your culture?

As hiring professionals in today’smarket we must raise our own culturalawareness to enable us to recognizecultural differences and allow us tocompare different communicationstyles effectively. The “cookie cutterapproach” does not work anymore.

As an interviewer you should askyourself what are your basic values,beliefs, assumptions and worldviewand how do they correspond to theinterviewee’s cultural background?What is your firm’s business culture?What are the dominant managementstyles, manager’s expectations andhow do they correspondto the expectations of theprospective employee?What is the firm’shierarchical structure andwhat is the decision-making process?

For example, if youconsider yourself amember of the “Baby Boomer”generation and you interview amember of “Generation X,” yourexpectation of the position and careerpath differs significantly from thoseof your Generation X candidate.While you value the time you havespent in a particular position to buildyour expertise, the Generation Xcandidate likely wants to know whathe or she needs to do and know in

“The ‘cookie

cutter approach’

does not work

anymore”

When cultures collide

5

hiring a candidate whose focus ismore on relationships and collectiveachievement.For instance, Chineseculture places a significant empha-sis on relationships. Team work andcollective decision making arehighly valued. From a “cookie cut-ter” perspective, in an interview youmay perceive a lack of ambition oreven a lack of expertise when evalu-ating a candidate from this culturalbackground.

It may appear that hiring a diverseworkforce takes more effort; hiring

someone froma different cul-tural back-ground may re-quire differentmanagementpractices andstronger inter-personal skillsfrom the team

and the organization as a whole. Alltoo often cultural differences, ratherthan the applicant’s job competence,dominate the hiring decision. Asyou decide if this candidate is amatch, take into consideration thecultural framework your applicantworks from and how he or she canadd value to your team, your orga-nization and your clients so that yourfirm can become a more successfuland truly global organization.

As hiring professionals in the newglobal market, we must be aware ofand exhibit the sensitivity and skillsto identify attitudes, values and ex-pectations in the cultural context ofthose being interviewed. We mustbe able to recognize cultural andgenerational differences in the inter-

view and know how to use them towork effectively and accomplish thebusiness goals of the firm.

Intercultural awareness gives you theability to set the performance barhigher on two dimensions: quality oflife and business success. There arenumerous concepts of communicatingacross cultures today. When select-ing candidates in the workplace, weneed not only be aware of cross-cul-tural differences; we must be able tointegrate these differences into theorganization and its hiring practices.

Britta Stromeyer is the non-legalrecruitment coordinator at ShawPittman LLP. She is a frequent speakeron the subjects of communication skillsand recruitment. Ms. Stromeyerreceived her M.A in InternationalCommunications at AmericanUniversity.

extracurricular activities with theassumption that the US interviewer willautomatically fill in the missinginformation on the resume.

We follow a certain structure and tech-nique in the interviewing and hiring pro-cess, but do we ask ourselves if certainquestions or frameworks that we workwith actually translate across culturallines? Do you askyourself what yourperception or inter-pretation of a ques-tion or answer iscompared to some-one else’s?

Our cultural diff-erences are based ona variety of differentnotions, such as the meaning of powerand competition, our time orientation,our notice of space (physical proxim-ity), individual-ism (relationship withothers), our performance, our needs forformality, and structure, etc.

We need to modify our hiring practicesand interviewing techniques to accom-modate different perspectives on howwe relate to each other, to time andspace, and to our environment. For in-stance, when managing your employ-ees is your emphasis on individualismor community? Do your team membersregard themselves as part of a group oras individuals? If the team for whichyou are recruiting values individualachievement, how could that team ben-efit by adding a more collective perspec-tive and thereby benefit from a teammember who values relationships andgroup efforts? If you decide to add adiversity of perspectives consider thata very task oriented team may experi-ence significant adjustment stress when

Re-printed with permission from CapitalConnection.

“All too often cultural

differences, rather than the

applicant’s job competence,

dominate the hiring

decisions.”

The Cross-cultural Hiring SkillsInventory

Communicating andInterviewing Across Cultural

Lines

6

or hierarchy. The newest group in thework force is the Millennial Genera-tion. Although we are just now seeingmembers from this group, they willundoubtedly have a tremendous im-pact in the future. Born between 1981and 1999, they number 76 million.They are best described as realistic.

To get some understanding of the dif-ferences between each of these gen-erations, let’s take a look at the wayeach group looks at diversity itself. Afew decades ago, when the work forcewas composed almost entirely of Tra-ditionalists, your work group was con-sidered diverse if four workers werefrom Manhattan, three were from theBronx, two were from Brooklyn, and

one was from New Jersey. In the early1950s, 99.9 percent of the workerswere male and predominately white.When the Baby Boomers entered thework force in the 1960s and 1970s, theconcept of diversity began to includewomen and people of color. The defi-nition of diversity took on a whole newmeaning with the Generation Xers.Because of their exposure to manydifferent people, through televisionand daycare programs, this generationdid not distinguish between male andfemale, and the differences in race ex-panded to include Asians and Hispan-ics and countless ethnic groups. Ac-cording to the American Federation ofTeachers, in today’s classrooms inAmerica there are over seventy differ-

��

��

�����������Continued on page 9

Generational DiversityDiversity is not a new concept to us.Diversity simply means the conditionof being different. Our most obviousdifference is whether we are male orfemale. After all, that is the very firstthing we hear when we enter thisworld (although, of course, we don’tremember)- “It’s a boy!” or “It’s agirl!” As we grow up, we becomeaware of many more qualities thatmake us different from one another.Our differences are most commonlydescribed in terms of gender, age, race,religion, ethnicity, socioeconomic sta-tus, and educational background.These differences were once consid-ered a real challenge in the work en-vironment. Many of us remember atime when our mothers (and certainlyour grandmothers) were restricted intheir choices. How many older femaledoctors, lawyers, engineers or archi-tects do we know? Thankfully, wehave come a long way. We have facedand conquered so many of these ear-lier challenges of diversity. But thereis a very great force descending uponus and this may present the biggestchallenge yet in the work place. It isGenerational Diversity.

For the first time, we now have fourseparate and distinct generations in thework force the Traditionalists, theBaby Boomers, and Generation Xersand the Millennial Generation. TheTraditionalist number about 75 mil-lion. They were born between 1900and 1945 and can best be described asloyal. The Baby Boomers were bornbetween 1946 and 1964. They remainthe largest group in the population-about 80 million. They are best de-scribed as optimistic and are often ide-alistic as well. The smaller group isthe Generation Xers. Born between1965 and 1980, they number only 46million. Skepticism describes how theyview things. They believe employeesshould be judged on merit, not status

ent languages spoken daily! Up untilnow, however, diversity has been agradual evolution. That is about tochange with the Millennial Genera-tion. In their book “When GenerationsCollide,” Lynne C. Lancaster andDavid Stillman write:

Millennials have spentthousands of hours watch-ing every imaginable typeof person sashay acrosstheir television screens.They have mixed with oneanother in day care, inclassrooms, in after-schoolprograms, and in enrich-ment sessions. Even theirfamilies have become morediverse than any we’veseen in history.

Never mind what they seein their classrooms or onTV in their living rooms;stop and think whom theyare meeting in chat rooms.This generation is travelingfirst class via the WorldWide Web and is talking tocitizens in all corners of theglobe. Even Iran nowboasts a thriving Internetcafe culture! Imagine whatthis does to the Millennials’definition of diversity.1

Lancaster and Stillman also predictthat the Millennials “will not limit di-versity to just race, ethnicity, or evensex anymore, they will also define di-versity by thinking style, educationalbackground, geographic location, gen-eration, avocation, lifestyle, sexualorientation, work experience, andmore.” This future generation of work-ers will go beyond merely acceptingdiversity; they will expect it.

As employers, we will shortly be con-fronted with both a battle for limitedtalent and a clash of culture along gen-erational lines. The majority of Tra-ditionalists have already retired. Eventhose born at the end of the Tradition-alist generation will be retiring within

by Carol Ochs

“ We will shortly be

confronted with both a

battle for limited talent

and a clash of culture

along generational lines.”

7

Book ReviewGenerations at Work: Managing the Clash of Veterans,Boomers, Xers, and Nexters in Your Workplace

Review by Maria Trujillo

��

��

�����������Continued on page 12

Generational diversity is upon us andis only going to grow as more Nextersjoin the job market. Managers acrossindustries are going to find that theynot only to have to manage one butfour generations simultaneously. Itwill be necessary for the average man-ager to understand the unique perspec-tive of each generation and how to tapinto their individual strengths andskills in order to manage effectively.Any manager who is faced with thechallenge of effectively bridging thegenerational gap in their office willfind the book Generations At Work:Managing the Clash of Veterans,Boomers, Xers, and Nexters in YourWorkplace a significant resource.Zemke, Raines and Filipczak applyseveral of the principal diversity train-ing techniques and models to providea guide on how to manage a genera-tional diverse work force.

Before attempting to manage genera-tional diversity, the book clearly de-fines the generations today’s manag-ers are facing. The U.S population isdivided into four generational cohorts,the Veterans (1922-1943), the BabyBoomers (1943 – 1960), GenerationXers (1960-1980), and GenerationNexters (1980-2000). The authors di-visions differ slightly with other re-searchers, but are made based on the“face and the feel” of the generationalcohorts, which is based upon furtherresearch and interviews conducted bythe authors. For example, the BabyBoomer generation is typically con-sidered by demographers to rangefrom 1946-1964; however, based ontheir research the authors realized thatpeople born between 1943-1946 sharefar more values and beliefs with the

Baby Boomer generation than withthe Veteran cohort.

The book is divided into three well-organized sections that can be usedas a quick reference. Part one is di-vided into four chapters, one for eachgenerational cohort. Each chapterprovides a historical background ofthe generational culture, a summaryof the differences between peopleborn at the beginning of the genera-tions versus those who were born to-wards the end, personality character-istics of the generation, fictionalcharacters that represent a typical per-son from that generation (such asGeorge – the veteran and Li – the GenXer), a summary of their workingstyle, key principles on managing thegeneration and future predictions.These chapters provide an overallframework for each generation, whichhelps the reader understand the gen-erational perspective. These chaptersalso include tidbits of informationfrom the generation such as culturalsayings (“Hell, No, We Won’t Go” –Baby Boomers), cultural memorabilia(Beanie Babies – Nexters), heroes ofthat era (Franklin Delano Roosevelt –Veterans) and defining events in his-tory (Fall of the Berlin Wall – GenXers). These additions provide thereader with a better sense of events andcultural phenomenon that shaped thevalues and thought patterns of eachgeneration.

Part two of the book provides themethods for creating a comfortablecross-generational working environ-ment. One of the author’s methods forillustrating how to create a comfort-able cross-generational working envi-

ronment is referred to as the ACORNimperatives: Accommodate employeedifferences, Create workplace choices,Operate from a sophisticated manage-ment style, Respect competence andinitiative and Nourish retention. Afterlaying the foundation for their method,the authors present case studies of sev-eral real-life companies that have suc-cessfully applied these ACORN im-peratives within their company. Thecompanies state that they, “…are tap-ping into the positive potential of theirgenerationally diverse workforces,[and are able to] harness the power inthe convergence of diverse viewpoints,passions and inspirations” (155). Thecompanies that the authors highlightrepresent several different industries,providing the reader with a variety ofviewpoints from a boomer driven com-pany, such as Ben & Jerry’s, to a vet-eran run company, such as the WestGroup (a large legal information firm).The case studies are helpful in thateach of the companies illustrate a realworld application of one or more ofthe authors’ ACORN imperatives. Thecase studies give managers several ex-amples of how companies modifiedtheir working environments in order

By Ron Zemke, Claire Raines, Bob Filipczak

8

comes at a cost. This cost includes the willingness to ac-knowledge the value of “other” ways of thinking and do-ing and the possibility of dealing with the complexity oflife rather than simplifying it by creating ideological walls.It is tough work to sit and listen to others with whom you

disagree, to suspend disbelief andentertain the possibility that some-one else might just have an idea orsolution to a problem equal to or bet-ter than yours. Brooks suggests thatthe simple act of “experiencing” thediversity of the human condition (forexample, go to Branson, subscribeto The Door, go to a megachurch)might be the first step—like tryinga new cuisine. Values, interests, andways of thinking are not that easilymodified. What is more likely tohappen is that this cultural “slum-

ming” will simply strengthen the ties to one’s own group.No. What is necessary is the confidence to shut your piehole, really listen to what one of the “others” is saying,and entertain the possibility that your view of the world issimply one of many alternative views. Demographic di-versity is simply a boxcar for values, interests, and moregenerally “culture.” Like the movie Field of Dreams, buildit and they will come. If any institution – a corporation, aschool, a city, a neighborhood – can set up a forum for acivil exchange of values and interests – i.e. culture – de-mographic diversity will follow.

This model has been dubbed the attraction-selection-at-trition model by behavioral scientists—most prominentlyBen Schneider and his colleagues at the University ofMaryland. Their model identifies the personality of afounder or a strong leader as the “core” of the homogene-ity. A founder or CEO surrounds himor her self with people who share hisor her values. These deputies, in turn,recruit and hire people who are simi-lar to them (and, by extension, to thefounder/CEO). Thus the organiza-tion becomes populated by peoplewith the same interests and values,who tend to think alike (the“groupthink” phenomenon). Whilepaying lip service to “diversity,” theorganization sets about creating andmaintaining homogeneity.

Some implications of this model are interesting. Organi-zations commonly endorse changing their “culture”through various interventions (organizational change anddevelopment programs, seminars, workshops). In fact cul-tures change with new leadership. The legendary “turn-around leader,” credited with single-handedly changingthe culture, actually sweeps in like the lead biker in a packof Hells Angels, collecting trusted (that is, like-minded)deputies from earlier corporate lives. So what actuallyhappens is more like corporate cleansing than a Herculeaneffort by a single person to persuade incumbents to changetheir way of thinking; for example, Bill Bratton becamethe new police chief in Los Angeles earlier this year. Whenhe arrived, he announced that he was the “new sheriff” intown, and that anyone who didn’t sign on to his vision ofa reformed department should “put in their papers” (retireor quit). A similar phenomenon occurs with a merger oran acquisition. Two organizations vow to form a strongerunion from the diversity of approaches and opinions ofthe leaders of those organizations. Six months later theweaker of the two leaders is gone, along with his or herdeputies.

Schneider asserts that “people make the place.” He ap-pears to be right. Brooks observes the same phenomenonin non-work settings. Central to both settings is the desireto associate with people who share one’s values. Withoutthe random variation of diversity, social groupings andorganizations will inevitably succumb to external forcesand fail to realize their respective potential. Diversity

Continued from page 3

People Like Us

Q o t e

“What actually happens is

more like corporate cleansing

than a Herculean effort by a

single person to persuade

incumbents to change their

way of thinking”

Frank Landy is an industrial psychologist by training.Mr. Landy has also taught Applied Psychology at PennState University. Currently, Mr. Landy directs alitigation support practice for SHL North America.

9

Generational Diversity

the next decade. Within the next de-cade, the first of the Baby Boomerswill also be retiring. Those who willbe ready and able to replace the Tra-ditionalists and the Baby Boomers(Generation Xers) number just a littleover half the population of the BabyBoomers. And while the Millennialsare strong in number, they are still adecade or more away from having theexperience to fill many higher levelpositions. The result is that employ-ers will have to fight harder to recruitand retain good employees. Here’s aninteresting fact-Over the next thirtyyears, the demand for bright, talentedthirty-five to forty-five year olds willincrease by 25 percent, while the sup-ply is predicted to decrease by 15 per-cent2

The economic downturn has createda tight job market, but economic con-ditions do not change the fact thatemployees of different generationshave different perspectives and moti-vators. Understanding these genera-tional differences in attitudes and be-havior is going to be essential if anemployer wants to attract and retainthe best employees. In theBridgeWorks Survey that Lancasterand Stillman conducted, they askedpeople from the different generationswhether they thought they could makemore money if they changed jobs.Those that answered yes were thenasked why they stayed in their currentjob when they knew they could makemore money elsewhere. Among theTraditionalists surveyed, the top tworeasons for staying were loyalty tocustomers and the amount of time thatthey had off. The number one reasonthat Baby Boomers stayed was “mak-ing a difference.” There were threemain reasons given by GenerationXers for staying in their current job-

first was autonomy; second was hav-ing a good schedule; and third wastime off.3 Clearly, Generations Xersvalue freedom and control over theirwork and their schedules. MostMillennials are not yet in the workforce and those that are have just be-gun working. If the predictions turnout to be true, it is the Millennials whowill provide the biggest challenge forall of us- Traditionalists, BabyBoomers and Generation Xers alike.It is predicted that the Millennials willgo through as many as ten careerchanges, not job changes, in their life-times.

Imagine this scenario for a moment.The year is 2010. You have just beenpromoted and are now the Director ofHuman Resources for an internationallaw firm, with offices throughoutNorth America, Europe, the Far Eastand the Middle East. You are 39 (aGeneration Xer). You look forward toyour new position where you will bein charge of HR. To you that meansthat you will be totally autonomousand can work the hours you feel youneed to. Your report to the firm’s ChiefOperations Officer, who is 59 (a BabyBoomer). She expects that this will beher final position before retiring andreally wants to make a difference atthe firm in the next few years. She hasa number of initiatives that she wantsto put into place in the next 12-18months. The CFO of the firm is a Tra-ditionalist who is old enough to retirebut doesn’t want to. He has been withthe firm for over 20 years and feels asense of loyalty to the attorneys andclients. He also stays with the firmbecause he is comfortable there. Hethinks that everything runs well andreally doesn’t want to have to gothrough any major changes at thispoint in his career. Your newest mem-

Carol Ochs is the Legal AssistantCoordinator at Thelen Reid & PriestLLP.

Re-printed with permission from the Capi-tal Connection.

ber of the management team is theDirector of Marketing. She is 29 (aMillennial) and an MBA graduate ofthe University of Tokyo. This is herthird career since graduating. Sheworked for two years for the TokyoStock Exchange but grew tired of theearly hours, so she returned to school(Harvard this time) for a degree inMiddle Eastern languages. For the pastfour years she has worked as an inter-preter for the State Department. Yoususpect that this will not be a perma-nent home either, since she plans toenroll in law school as a night student.All I can say is GOOD LUCK!

1 Lancaster, Lynne C. and Stillman,David. When Generations Collide.New York, NY: Harper Collins Pub-lishers, Inc., 2002.2See id. at 6.3 See id. At 245-46.

Continued from page 6

10

firms are unsure about how to go aboutdoing it. Given past problems and cur-rent criticism, a model is needed toguide companies through the difficult,but ultimately rewarding process ofmanaging diversity. The remainder ofthis article will focus on such a modeldeveloped by the author, based on re-search from several diversity scholars.

The first step for organizations is todevelop realistic expectations of diver-sity management’s effects, especiallywhat it cannot accomplish. Diversityprograms cannot wipe out historicalinequities, eradicate racism or sexism,or force employees to get along. Al-though training might focus on chang-ing attitudes as well as behavior, theseattitudes are deeply rooted and will notchange easily. In addition, companiesneed to realize that diversity shouldnot be added just for diversity’s sake,but only if it is clear that performancewill be enhanced as a result.

The second step for organizations isto develop a broad and inclusive defi-nition of diversity. Diversity not onlyincludes age, ethnicity, race, mental/physical abilities and gender, but alsoother characteristics such as sexualorientation, education, family/maritalstatus, religion, geographic location,income, work style, and organizationalrole/level. It is important that all em-ployees, including white males, feelincluded within the organization’sdefinition of diversity in order for theinitiative to be a success.

Once these steps have been accom-plished, experienced diversity consult-ants should be hired to assess theorganization’s “readiness” for diver-sity. It is important to establish wherethe organization lies along the “diver-sity continuum”: Does the organiza-tion equate managing diversity withaffirmative action? Have steps beentaken to implement diversity into re-cruitment, hiring, and promotion pro-cesses? The consultant should survey

percent in the last five years.1 Com-panies have also recognized the im-portance of diversity training in affect-ing the way employees interact witheach other and with customers. A re-cent study found that the percentageof companies that have, or plan to havediversity training increased from 40%to 75% between the years of 2000 and2002 alone.2

Despite these statistics, however, somecompanies remain skeptical of diver-sity. Many of their concerns stem frommisconceptions about diversity thatare rooted in the movement’s past. Thediversity movement stemmed fromEqual Employment Opportunity(EEO) and affirmative action legisla-tion in the 1960’s and early 1970’s,which caused organizations to look atdiversity as a legal obligation ratherthan a source of potential gain. In thelate 1970’s and 1980’s, the focuschanged to “valuing” the diversity ofeach employee. Rather than seeingdiversity as a requirement, it was seenas “the right thing to do.” Employees“discovered” their feelings about raceand ethnicity through training pro-grams that encouraged open discus-sion. Problems arose, however, whensome inexperienced diversity trainerschanged training sessions into whitemale bashings in environmentscharged with racial and ethnic tension.A wave of reverse discrimination suitsfollowed.

In order to distance itself from its con-troversial past, today’s concept of“managing diversity” focuses on the“business case,” that is, how the ef-fective leverage of diversity within afirm leads to a more committed, pro-ductive, and creative workforce, in-creased organizational flexibility, andincreased financial performance. Al-though the business case for diversitymanagement continues to grow, many

A Model for Diversity.. Continued from page 1

employees and managers to gain im-portant quantitative data, as well asobserve workplace relationships first-hand to gain qualitative knowledge.Understanding the organization’sstarting point can allow the consult-ant to work with management to de-velop a realistic diversity managementplan.

Close cooperation between the diver-sity consultant and management is es-sential to the creation of a diversityplan: without the full support of lead-ership, the plan will most likely fail.When leadership is committed to di-versity, employees are more likely to“participate in training whole-heartedly, apply its lessons, and gen-eralize to situations training did notspecifically address.”3 Managementcan show this commitment in severalways. First, they should be clear aboutthe rationale for diversity in their or-ganization and decide their role incommunicating the message to em-ployees. Because managers are oftenunwilling to give up the dominant cul-ture of the organization, it is impor-tant that they think about how far theyare willing to go. Second, managementneeds to communicate commitmentthrough symbolic moves that will sig-nal their seriousness, such as attend-ing diversity training programs, writ-ing memos to employees, or acting ashead of a diversity council.

After a diversity plan has been devel-oped and management has clearlyshown its support, it is time for imple-mentation and institutionalization.Diversity is “institutionalized” into anorganization when it becomes part ofall its practices and processes. Train-ing and education are the crux of anydiversity initiative, planting the seedsof corporate change as they informemployees about diversity and its im-portance. History has shown, however,that diversity training can often causemore harm then good. It is essentialthat training is carefully planned, led

11

to minorities affects their financialsuccess and ultimately their qualityof life. Managers and recruiters mustunderstand how institutionalized rac-ism, stereotypes, and biases have in-fluenced these processes in the past,and make concerted efforts to see di-versity as a strength and somethingto look for in future employees.

Stereotypes and biases also influencethe promotion of minority groups, asthey often cloud a manager’s judg-ment in objectively assessing thequalifications of each individual. Or-ganizations may choose to tie a re-wards system to the achievement ofdiversity goals, which gives manag-ers an incentive to consider minori-ties for promotion. Once minoritiesare recruited and hired, retainingthem is often very difficult. Althoughthe aforementioned changes willhelp, minorities need to feel valuedin their organizations. One way to dothis is to create affinity or diversitynetwork groups, which enable em-ployees with similar characteristicsto meet and support each other.Microsoft’s “employee resourcegroups” range from those based onrace or cultural identity to gender,disability, sexual orientation, andfamily status.7 It is important thatmembership in these groups is vol-untary and the groups are not allowedto become too autonomous. Programsassisting minorities in career plan-ning, skills training, tuition remis-sion, and mentoring with senior em-ployees are also advisable.

The final step for effective diversitymanagement is constant monitoringof the initiative’s effectiveness andmodifying the process where needed.How can companies know if theirdiversify efforts are paying off? Evi-dence can be found by looking atquantitative evidence such as lowerturnover and absentee rates, in-creased profitability and productiv-ity, retention of staff, reduction of the

by trainers who are experienced andknowledgeable about the organ-ization’s needs, and is followed byshort-term and long-term assessmentsof its effectiveness. Some questionsmanagement needs to ask before train-ing begins are: “What are the goals ofthe training? Do we want to teachskills or change attitudes?” “Whoshould participate in the training?”“Should our trainers be representativeof the diversity in our organization?”“How will we evaluate the effective-ness of the training?”

In addition to training, institutional-ization occurs in recruitment, hiring,and promotion policies, as well as pro-grams aimed at retention. Biases inrecruitment and hiring processes of-ten prevent minorities who do not fitthe dominant organizational culturefrom entering organizations.Schneider’s Attraction-Selection-At-trition hypothesis suggests that “orga-nizations tend to attract, hire, and re-tain similar types of people.”4 AsFrank Landy explains, “A founder orCEO surrounds him or her self withpeople who share his or her values.These deputies, in turn, recruit andhire people who are similar tothem...Thus the organization is popu-lated by people with the same inter-ests and values...While paying lip ser-vice to “diversity,” the organizationsets about creating and maintaininghomogeneity.”5

This tendency to associate with peoplewho share one’s values is not onlyevident in the workplace, but in theneighborhoods in which we live, con-tends David Brooks in his recent At-lantic Monthly article. In his opinion,“people show few signs of being trulyinterested in building diverse commu-nities,” and new neighborhoods tendto develop ethnic “personalities” asthey age.6 According to Landy, how-ever, “In the workplace this homog-enization is a great deal less benign,”as “old boy networks” create barriers

Emily Gildersleeve received her M.A inInternational Communication at Amer-ican University. She works at the ForeignService Institute.

number of reported incidents of inap-propriate remarks, and glass ceilingreports, among other sources.8 Quali-tative data can be measured through as-sessing behavioral changes in staff,looking at the integration of diversityinto recruiting, hiring, promotion, andretention processes, and monitoring theworkforce through employee surveysand focus groups. It is important thatsuch qualitative assessments occur notonly immediately after training pro-grams, but several months afterward inorder to see whether training had last-ing effects.

As the “business case” for diversity hasdeveloped, organizations are eager toreap the benefits of managing diversitywhile avoiding the pitfalls of diversity’spast. By following a model such as theone presented in this article that focuseson organizational assessment, carefulplanning, support from management,institutionalization, and long-termmonitoring and modification, diversitymanagement initiatives will be morelikely to succeed, and organizationsmore likely to see a clear connectionbetween diversity and the bottom line.

1“The Business Case for Diversity: Findings from the FourthEdition,” DiversityInc, Jun/July 2003: p. 20

2 CW Von Bergen et. al., “Unintended negative effects of di-versity management,” Public Personnel Management, 31, No.2 (Summer 2002): p. 240.

3 Mark Bendick, Jr. et. al., “Workforce diversity training: Fromanti-discrimination compliance to organizational develop-ment,” Human Resource Planning, 24, no. 2 (2001): 16.

4 Orlando C. Richard and Nancy Brown Johnson, “Under-standing the impact of human resource diversity practices onfirm performance,” Journal of Managerial Issues, 13, no. 2(Summer 2001): 178.

5 Landy, Frank, “Letters to the Editor: People Like Us,” At-lantic Monthly,( November 2003): 14

6 Brooks, David, “People Like Us,” Atlantic Monthly,( Sep-tember 2003): 29-32

7 Microsoft Corporation, “Employee Resource Groups,” avail-able from http://www.microsoft.com/diversity.dac.asp

8 Katrina Jordan, “Diversity training in the workplace today:A status report,” Journal of Career Planning and Employ-ment, 59, no.1(Fall 1998): 48.

12

Announcing the Intercultural Management InstituteSpring 2004 Skills Institutes and Annual Conference

To be held on the campus of American University in the nation’s capital, Washington, D.C.

Global Human Resource ResearchMarch 9-10, Tsila Zalcman, Partner and Managing Director, Dynamic Systems Design

ANNUAL CONFERENCE:The Global Diversity Advantage: A Forum for Business, Education and Training ProfessionalsMarch 11-12, Gary Weaver, Executive Director, Intercultural Managment Institute

Diversity in the WorkplaceMarch 13-14, Robert Carey, President, RPC Associates, Inc.

to meet the needs of several generations.

The last section entitled Advice-O-Plenty provides justthat, plenty of advice on how to effectively manage gen-erational diversity through the use of case studies andanswers to the most frequently asked questions that man-agers have posed. This section is helpful in providingreal-life examples to compliment the methods and gen-erational background that are given throughout the book.

In reading the sections profiling each generation thereis a sense that the profiles will become a bit outdated.This is disheartening because the book was publishedjust three years ago. This is most noticeable in readingthe sections regarding the Nexters. Since the Nexter gen-eration is still quite young, it is difficult to predict howtheir generational values will change and form due toan ever-rapidly changing world (i.e. 9/11, and the sec-ond war in Iraq). Their depiction of this group wasslightly amiss due to the fact that the generation is stillvery malleable and has not yet taken complete form.

The author’s approach is subject to job market condi-tions. The book is directed at an economic period whenjobs were widely available and employees had their pickof employers. The way generations approach work andthe way employers try to manage generational diversity

in today’s job market has changed significantly becauseof a tight job market. Unfortunately, the book does notaddress such issues.

Although generalizations are a necessary starting pointin understanding a different culture, the authors shouldhave given real-life depictions of each generation ratherthan the fictional characters that are found in the book.Since generalizations are often used, it is important thereader understands that there are always people who donot fit within the authors’ created generational picture.As managers and trainers utilize this book when devel-oping training on generational diversity, it is essentialthat they realize that there are always exceptions.

Generations At Work can be used in a variety of ways.For the manager who is just beginning to work with thegenerational diversity of his/her employees, Part Oneof the book is a great place to start. The generationalprofiles allow the manger to start understanding the cul-tural perspective of each generation. For the managerwho is ready to create a more generational friendly of-fice, the company case studies are the place to find somehelpful advice. The last section can be used as a pointof reference for the manager who is working throughspecific generational diversity problems. In conclusion,this book is a useful guide for managers who are facedwith the challenges that generational diversity creates.

For more information or to register, contact Anna Lee atimi@american.edu or 202-885-6439.

Registration forms and additional information availablewww.imi.american.edu

Maria Trujillo is an M.A Candidate in InternationalCommunication at American University. She is currentlydoing an internship with Health Volunteers Overseas.

Generations at Work.. Continued from page 7