Equity in Human Resource Management: Practices and Theory
This paper examines the role of equity in human resource management, tracing its development from early U.S. legislation and executive orders to contemporary diversity and inclusion practices. It discusses how organizations implement equity through recruitment and selection, training and development, performance appraisal, and pay structures. The paper also explores Adams' Equity Theory as a framework for understanding how employees perceive fairness, and considers how organizational culture shapes the success of equity initiatives. Drawing on international perspectives, the paper highlights regional differences in diversity management while identifying best practices common across global contexts.
- Introduction: Defines equity's role in HRM and productivity
- Background and Legislative History: U.S. equity legislation from 1943 to civil rights era
- Equity in the Workplace: Global diversity issues and organizational benefits
- Current Industry Practices and Equity Measures: Recruitment, training, appraisal, and pay equity tactics
- Adams' Equity Theory and Organizational Culture: Fairness perceptions and culture-driven equity programs
- Conclusion: Global diversity patterns and shared best practices
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Provides historical grounding by tracing equity initiatives from the 1943 U.S. legislation through the civil rights era, giving the reader a clear timeline for understanding modern HRM practices.
- Balances theoretical content (Adams' Equity Theory) with practical HRM application areas such as recruitment, training, appraisal, and pay, making the argument both conceptually and operationally relevant.
- Incorporates an international perspective by comparing equity practices across North America, Europe, and Asia, demonstrating awareness of regional variation in diversity management.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper effectively synthesizes multiple scholarly sources to build a layered argument. Rather than relying on a single authority, it cross-references researchers such as Shen et al. (2009), Harvey and Allard (2012), and Shore (2004) to support each claim, a strategy that strengthens credibility and reflects the interdisciplinary nature of HRM scholarship.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a conceptual introduction defining equity and its organizational importance, then moves to a legislative history section that contextualizes current law. The body is organized around specific HRM functions (recruitment, training, appraisal, pay) before turning to theoretical grounding via Adams' Equity Theory and a discussion of organizational culture. The conclusion synthesizes global patterns and best practices, providing a forward-looking close.
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).
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).
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.