Diversity Pros and Cons Diversity

Diversity Pros and Cons Diversity has become such a popular buzzword in HR vocabulary it is difficult to truly understand what the word means at times, or rather, what different persons mean when they say that 'diversity' is a universal 'good.' Few persons would dispute today that it is wrong to discriminate against a competent employee, based upon his or her background, gender, or lifestyle preferences, so long as these factors do not impact his or her work.

In fact, to engage in such discrimination is not simply immoral, but illegal, and evidence of doing so will bear serious repercussions for the company. However, taking steps to insure that a workplace mirror a generalized image of America in proportion to the nation's diversity is a slightly different question.

Even the most stalwart defendant of the benefits of diversity cannot refuse to acknowledge the problems that managing a such a diverse workplace may cause, and the necessary shifts in organizational management that must ensue to ensure that all persons benefit from the increase in workplace diversity. Pros On one hand, a proportionately diverse workforce does have many benefits. A more diverse workplace can generate more unique ideas, and prevent an adherence to the kind of 'in the box' thinking that a more homogeneous workplace is likely to generate.

"Homogeneous environments and social groups rarely produce new thinking.

Significant and focused action must be taken to achieve balanced diversity." (Boyd 2006) Also, a proportionately diverse workplace that reflects the demographics of the public that workforce is attempting to serve means that when, for example, a new target market is being explored amongst the African-American population, persons from that demographic within the work environment can weigh in upon likely advertising and promotional 'hooks,' give personal advice about unexpected areas of sensitivity of the target market, and give ideas about possible trends to explore, that persons from outside the demographic might otherwise be unaware of, no matter how solid the company's marketing research.

Proportional diversity creates a rich and often unexpected database of ideas that merely including one or two members of supposedly 'diverse' backgrounds cannot produce.

The use of tokenism (as opposed to proportional diversity), including only one or two members of underrepresented groups, often creates a sense of discomfort in the hearts of the few minority group members, and can cause these workers to either stifle their ideas, or simply cause the larger organizational culture to overlook their input that might not mesh with the current organizational culture -- or worse, cause unintentional discrimination. Finally, there is the reality that America is growing increasingly diverse. The Department of Labor notes that: "By 2050, the U.S.

population is expected to increase by 50% and minority groups will make up nearly half of the population. Immigration will account for almost two-thirds of the nation's population growth. The population of older Americans is expected to more than double. One-quarter of all Americans will be of Hispanic origin. Almost one in ten Americans will be of Asian or Pacific Islander descent.

And more women and people with disabilities will be on the job." (Cited on "Building and Maintaining a Diverse and High Quality Workforce," 2000, Diversity Guide Homepage) Cons The difficulties of creating a diverse workforce in proportion to the larger population should not be underestimated, however necessary a more representational workforce may be.

First there is the question of what 'America' is the workplace mirroring -- that of the regional population, if it is a small company, or that of the international community that a multibillion dollar enterprise strives to serve? Proportional representation must be judged in relation to the type of company, its outreach, and the pool of available competent workers. Secondly, a highly diverse environment may undercut the benefits of a cohesive organizational culture, if steps are not taken to continue to create a sense of common purpose.

Thirdly, too strictly relying upon proportionality can result in hiring persons simply for the sake of increasing an organization's diversity quotient, without truly changing the culture of the organization. Solution Ideally, creating a more diverse culture at an organization that includes, but is not synonymous with more diverse hiring practices, is ideal. One must strive to "create a company brand that communicates the diversity of the organization.

Employees, customers, suppliers, and stakeholders will like it." (Boyd, 2006) Support from higher level members of the organization is critical: "inclusion as part of the organizational strategic plan," and sensitivity training were deemed to be two vital elements of success in creating a diverse workforce that benefited the company as a whole and furthered the aim of creating a positive change in organizational culture that furthered the company's initiatives. (Wentling & Palma-Rivas, 2006) Increased productivity enhances all employee's positive feelings about.