This paper examines the importance of workforce diversity within a small, predominantly white male hospital security department. Drawing on organizational communication literature, the paper first surveys the historical development of diversity initiatives — from affirmative action and tokenism to social justice models — and categorizes organizations as monolithic, plural, or multicultural. It then analyzes the benefits of diverse workforces, including reduced groupthink, stronger problem-solving, and improved public interaction, as well as the challenges of assimilation and cross-cultural communication. In its applied section, the paper proposes a practical, quota-free hiring plan for the hospital security department that emphasizes equal-opportunity advertising, internal recruitment, and a long-term commitment to building a force that reflects the diversity of the broader hospital community.
The paper exemplifies the literature-review-to-application structure common in applied social science writing. By first establishing a theoretical framework — monolithic, plural, and multicultural organization types — and then using those categories to diagnose and prescribe change in a real organizational setting, the writer demonstrates how academic concepts can function as analytical tools rather than mere background reading.
The paper has two clearly labeled parts. Part I serves as a literature review covering the history and theory of workplace diversity, organizational typologies, leadership approaches, and the benefits and challenges of multicultural workforces. Part II applies this framework to a specific case: a 20-officer hospital security department that is almost entirely white and male. The concluding section proposes an incremental, quota-free diversity hiring plan using internal recruitment and equal-opportunity advertising.
Diversity is a significant issue in both life and the workplace. Unfortunately, there are many workplaces where diversity is absent — sometimes deliberately, but often simply because specific applicants did not meet job requirements. Generally, people gravitate toward others who are similar to them (Allen, 1995). When involved in any type of business, especially one that works with the public, it is important to consider how best to build a diverse workforce (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). Diversity can make the job better for everyone and can also help the public when it comes to interactions with employees (Harvey, 2012; Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). The more open people are to diversity, the better they will generally be at understanding and empathizing with others. For a police force, this kind of connection with the public is a critical part of the job. It can deeply affect how officers perform their duties and how the people they interact with feel about those officers.
Beginning in the 1960s, models and legal cases began addressing the value of diversity in the business environment (Brownell, 2003; Cockburn, 1989; Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010). Affirmative action was part of a program of forced diversity, and many of the early models dealing with how a company could become more diverse were centered around that plan (Harvey, 2012). However, there were also other ways of encouraging diversity within companies, which allowed more people to work alongside those who were different from themselves. That exposure provided insight into how they wanted to view the world and helped them focus on the things that truly mattered. Understanding and accepting diversity is not always easy — hence the reason it had to be compelled in many instances before people would agree to it (Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). Much has changed since that time, though, and there is a greater acceptance of diversity than what existed in the past. This has brought many people closer together and helped them focus on the important things in life, including caring for and appreciating others.
One of the biggest problems with using affirmative action to bring new and different people into businesses was that it led to the feeling of tokenism (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). This occurs when a person who differs from the majority becomes the "token woman" or "token Black" in a group — implying that the only reason the person is present is to meet a quota or avoid a legal violation (Fine, 1996). That does not give the person hired much of a chance to become genuinely part of the group or to have his or her ideas heard and appreciated. Since the person was not hired for skills but for an appearance of diversity, the position is not truly appropriate, and very little respect or assimilation results from the other workers (Mumby, 1988; Page, 2007). Diversity does not happen easily in many of today's companies, even when those companies are not violating the law and do not believe they need a "token" person of a particular gender, color, or ethnicity (Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003).
Laws designed to encourage diversity have not fully succeeded, because although they have compelled companies to build more diverse workforces in some cases, those companies do not truly value the diverse workers they have (Harvey, 2012). Because legislation has not produced the genuine desire for diversity that was hoped for, it is important to examine other reasons diversity should exist and other ways it can be encouraged. One model that evolved after affirmative action is the social justice model, which advocated for diversity by arguing that hiring people who were different was simply the right — and sound — business and moral decision (Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). The idea was to hire or promote people who did not fit the dominant culture at the workplace so that diversity would spread. While still containing elements of tokenism in many ways, it also encouraged a better fit between companies and their employees.
Because both the national economy and the global market are constantly changing, it is important for businesses to adapt as well. Too many businesses remain stuck in the past, hiring only certain kinds of people whenever possible. What they fail to recognize is that there are a number of people they will inevitably work with who will not be like them (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010). If a company lacks employees who share similarities with its customers, it can experience communication breakdowns and other problems that stem from a homogeneous workforce (Allen, 1995). That is true for something as simple as a coffee shop, and even more critical for businesses that work closely with people in high-tension situations. Police officers fall into that category, whether they serve on a municipal force or in a private security capacity. Diversity encourages productivity and creates a culture in which people learn from one another (Cockburn, 1989). The more diverse a company is, the more likely its employees will be able to interact effectively with customers and clients.
Issues with diversity are not as straightforward to address as they might seem (Harvey, 2012). Research has identified three different types of organizations, each of which works with and considers cultural diversity in somewhat different ways: monolithic, plural, and multicultural (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010).
In the monolithic organization, there is minimal cultural diversity. Although it is possible to find some employees who do not match the dominant profile of the organization, none of these individuals will be found in real leadership or positions of power (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010). They may be employees, but they will remain at that level — unable to advance to management or any role beyond taking orders from those who set the rules. While unfortunate, such organizations are not difficult to identify and can be avoided by people seeking diverse workplaces (Brownell, 2003; Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010).
By contrast, the plural organization is much more open to hiring people from diverse backgrounds (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). While many diverse employees may remain at the staff level, there are opportunities for promotion into management. A dominant group still exists, but it is willing to be more inclusive and takes active steps to encourage people from different cultures and racial backgrounds (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). These organizations generally view people who differ from the majority as marginalized by society to some degree, and therefore wish to give them opportunities to grow and develop professionally. That can make a significant difference not only in whether a person is hired but also in whether he or she is successful and has realistic opportunities for advancement (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009).
The third type, the multicultural organization, contains a wide variety of people and groups (Harvey, 2012). These companies actively seek out, hire, and encourage diverse employees, recognizing that a more culturally varied workforce can generate ideas that would not otherwise emerge. Thinking outside the box is a highly significant way for individuals to contribute to organizational success, whether as a manager or as an employee. If everyone is the same, groupthink is often the result — and that is harmful to any organization because it stifles growth, eliminates new ideas, and causes every person to think and speak in the same way (Harvey, 2012). In multicultural companies, this does not happen. People from different cultures and racial backgrounds approach problems differently and develop unique solutions (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010; Harvey, 2012).
That diversity of thought can create rivalry and disagreement, but a certain level of productive conflict is actually a good thing — it keeps the organization moving forward with fresh ideas (Allen, 1995). When companies advance because of unique and different perspectives, they are also better positioned to stay ahead of competitors that are less multicultural in their approach. This competitive advantage should be recognized clearly: a company focused on multiculturalism possesses a benefit that homogeneous companies do not have (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010). While the temptation to hire people similar to existing employees is understandable — since like attracts like — any company that wants to grow must focus on more multicultural and diverse hiring options (Brownell, 2003). This can also directly affect how the company relates to its clients and customers, who are themselves likely quite diverse (Allen, 1995).
Allen, B.J. (1995). Diversity and organizational communication. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 23, 143–155.
Brownell, J. (2003). Developing receiver-centered communication in diverse organizations. Listening Professional, 2(1), 5–25.
Cockburn, C. (1989). Equal opportunities: The short and long agenda. Industrial Relations Journal, 20(3), 213–225.
Eisenberg, E.M., Goodall, H.L., Jr., & Trethewey, A. (2010). Organizational communication (6th ed.). Bedford/St. Martin's.
Fine, M.G. (1996). Cultural diversity in the workplace: The state of the field. Journal of Business Communication, 33(4), 485–502.
Harvey, C.P. (2012). Understanding and managing diversity. Pearson Education.
Milliken, F.J., Morrison, E.W., & Hewlin, P.F. (2003). An exploratory study of employee silence: Issues that employees don't communicate upward and why. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1453–1476.
Mumby, D. (1988). Communication and power in organizations. Ablex Publishing.
Page, S. (2007). The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton University Press.
Tatli, A., & Ozbilgin, M. (2009). Understanding diversity managers' role in organizational change: Towards a conceptual framework. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 26, 244–258.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.