Equity in Human Resource Management: Practices and Theory

Introduction

For a human resource department to be successful, management must put in place clear policies regarding reward systems, motivation, job design, and equity. Job design, motivation, and reward systems are all geared toward increasing employee productivity. The objective of equity in the workplace is to ensure a balance between what workers contribute and the compensation they receive for their efforts. Equity also means that conflicts — which occur frequently in any workplace — are resolved in a fair and just manner.

There must therefore be a neutral party capable of representing the interests of both employees and management. This role falls squarely on the human resources department, which serves as the link between executives and regular employees. HR professionals help remind upper management that an organization does not exist solely to generate profit, but also to care for the needs of its workers. Companies that take the best care of their employees tend to be rewarded with increased productivity. By drafting employee-friendly procedures and policies, and standing by employees who act in accordance with those policies, organizations motivate their workforce to perform at a higher level. The significance of equity in the workplace is increasingly recognized across many companies, and HR departments are under growing pressure to reduce discrimination, a shift that has been found to boost productivity (Torrington et al., 2002).

According to human resource management researchers Torrington, Hall, and Taylor (2005), HRM is essentially the act of hiring the right people for positions best suited to their skills and abilities, and then ensuring they work in the most productive way possible. One of the key ways productivity can be increased is by promoting equity throughout an organization.

Background and Legislative History

In 1943, the U.S. Congress passed legislation calling for equal employment opportunities in the workplace. This was among the most open and formal actions to herald the start of diversity and equity initiatives in the United States. However, many scholars agree that this legislation, and those proposed over the following two decades, were largely ineffective. In 1948, President Harry Truman used his executive powers to desegregate the U.S. Army. Many academics have argued that Executive Order 9981, signed by Truman that year, represented the first true diversity initiative in American society. It has been noted, however, that the order did not expressly forbid segregation; rather, it called for equality of opportunity and treatment in the Armed Services (Judy & D'Amico, 1987; McCormick, 2007). Both Truman and the committee he formed to oversee the order's implementation used it to require desegregation of the U.S. Army.

Real change with respect to equality came in the 1960s, when the civil rights movement succeeded in passing legislation that prohibited discrimination on the basis of national origin, sex, religion, color, race, or age (McCormick, 2007). From the moment this legislation was proposed, many argued that the law should not mandate a particular racial composition of workers. Title VII does not require the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to promote equality with specific racial proportions in mind. Instead, it confines the commission's powers to correcting abuse (United Steel Workers of America v. Weber, 99 S.Ct. 2721, 2728, 1979; McCormick, 2007).

Equity in the Workplace

Individuals differ across many dimensions, including culture, ethnicity, race, personality, religion, sexual orientation, disability, social status, marital status, gender, and age. Many organizations have recognized that hiring individuals from diverse backgrounds allows them to benefit from the wide range of skills, abilities, and talents those employees bring. Different countries face different predominant equity challenges. Globally, the most pervasive equity issue is gender inequality. In countries such as India and neighboring South and Southeast Asian nations, ethnicity and religion play a significant role. In China, household registration status greatly influences workplace advancement. In Western countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada, and France, multiculturalism has long been the central equity concern, as many individuals from diverse cultures have migrated in search of better opportunities. In the United States and South Africa, the predominant equity issue has historically been ethnic discrimination (Shen, Chanda, D'Netto & Monga, 2009).

Many organizations have in the past used effective diversity management as a defensible position against accusations of discrimination — arguing that a workforce reflecting the local community's composition cannot be discriminatory. However, several scholars have drawn a distinction between simply providing equal opportunities and actively managing diversity (Storey, 1999; Harvey and Allard, 2012). More companies are taking advantage of the increasingly multicultural nature of the American workforce, a trend driven by the globalization of business. Equal opportunity initiatives are often driven by external obligations, such as government legislation, whereas diversity management initiatives emerge internally, through efforts to build a workplace culture of equality. Many companies hire from diverse backgrounds to enhance their competitive edge, increase flexibility and creativity, attract a broader talent pool, and improve marketing capabilities (Harvey and Allard, 2012; Shen et al., 2009).

Conclusion

Diversity and inclusion have come to be globally accepted as a core business concern. The key drivers are diverse marketplaces and growing talent shortages. In numerous organizations worldwide, HR departments lead efforts to increase diversity and promote inclusion. Target groups vary by geographic region; however, most regions place strong emphasis on attracting, retaining, and promoting women (The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2009).

Different patterns in diversity and inclusion efforts exist across regions. European companies are more likely to rely on internal persuasion and advocacy, while Asian firms adopt an even more liberal approach, with many trusting that diversity will evolve naturally. National and regional disparities in the availability of personnel demographic data compound the challenge of managing diversity programs on a global scale. Nevertheless, nearly all multinationals agree that diversity initiatives must be adapted to fit local laws, cultural sensibilities, and customs (Shen et al., 2009).

The best practices that have emerged in the field of diversity are therefore culturally determined. Several approaches, however, appear to be common across all regions: conducting ongoing training to foster mutual understanding among workers from different backgrounds, setting the tone from the top of the organization, and creating opportunities for personnel in minority groups — including women where they remain underrepresented — to network with one another (Shen et al., 2009).

References

Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). Academic Press.

Harvey, C. P., & Allard, M. J. (2012). Understanding and Managing Diversity (5th ed.). Pearson Education.

Hatfield, E., Salmon, M., & Rapson, R. L. (2011). Equity theory and social justice. Journal of Management, Spirituality, and Religion, 8, 101–121.

Judy, R. W., & D'Amico, C. (1987). Workforce 2000: Work and workers for the 21st century. Hudson Institute.

McCormick, K. (2007). The evolution of workplace diversity. State Bar of Texas 15th Annual Advanced Employment Law Course.

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.

Shore, T. H. (2004). Equity sensitivity theory: Do we all want more than we deserve? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(7), 722–728.

Storey, J. (1999). Equal opportunities in retrospect and prospect. Human Resource Management Journal, 9(1), 5–8.

The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2009). Global diversity and inclusion: Perceptions, practices and attitudes. Society for Human Resource Management.

United Steel Workers of America v. Weber, 99 S.Ct. 2721, 2728 (1979).