L3: Perspectives on diversity Flashcards
how do different individuals differ in their perception of diversity?
- minorities (black ppl, women) tend to agree more with diversity statements & have higher diversity treshholds than dominant group
- so dominant groups tend to declare an organization as “divers” at lower levels of representation of nondomination groups, compared to the nondominant groups themselves
why do dominant groups perceive diversity differently than ND groups?
underlying group serving biases, as dominant groups generally aim to preserve their higher social standing, while ND groups advocate for greater representation to reduce social hierarchies
what is the difference in diversity definition in dominant vs ND groups?
- dominant groups tend to prefer proportional representation where representation of each group mirrors their proportion in society or the relevant applicant pool
- non dominant groups more likely to support equal representation,r egardless of their proportion in the population (50/50).
what are moderators for diversity treshhold of ppl?
- baseline diversity (whats the makeup of the industry)
- degree to which it feels threatening to status
- for members of nondominant groups, equal representation is relatively more important than for dominant
how does knowledge of baseline diversity adjust ppls perception of diversity?
- if participants are told that a certain industry has very low representation of a certain group, dominant groups tend to declare that diversity has been achieved at even lower treshholds
- while nondominant groups are less likely to adjust their treshholds based on such contextual info
- this shows that dominant groups strategically adjust their treshholds of diversity in ways that favor their ingroup, especially when low outgroup representation is the norm
how does perceived social threat impact diversity approach?
- when members of dominant groups feel their social status is threatened (like when representation of nondominant groups is increasing), they are more likely to declare that sufficient diversity has been achieved at lower levels of representation
- ND groups especially those feeling that their group’s social status is under threat, push for higher levels of representation before they consider diversity to be achieved
what is descriptive diversity vs sufficient diversity?
descriptive: whether an organization can be described as diverse (simply acknowledge whether some diversity exists)
sufficient: whether an organization has achieved enough diversity (implies that no further efforts are needed to increase diversity)
are group based differences more pronounced in perceptions of sufficient or descriptive diversity?
- more pronounced group based differences when participants asked about sufficient diversity
- nondominant groups more likely to withhold declaring sufficient diversity until their representation reaches a higher level
what is the diversity line?
percentage of dominant vs non dominant group representation at which an organziation can be considered divesrse
- number seems objective but interpretation of those numbers is subjective
what is the method of drawing the diversity line?
when looking at a picture of everyone in organization, do u think that organization is (sufficiently) diverse?
answer depends on who u ask
what is social dominance theory?
- group status is a driver of the differences in our perception of diversity
- dominant groups ( w greater access to resources, power, and opportunity) want to preserve or enchance existing hierarchy
- vs non dominant group wants to change, attentuate the differences
- so both strive for greater relative presentation
what are the dominant organizational perspectives/approaches on diversity & DM?
- discrimination & fairness: everyone needs to be treated equally, and we need to work to have minorities not be disrciminated agains
- access & legitimacy: we are living in increasingly multicultural world, so more diverse workforce helps us gain access to full consumer spectrum
- learning & effectiveness (or integration & learning: we are all on the same team, w our differences not despite them
what are the pros & cons of the “discrimination & fairness” approach to DM?
pros: increases diversity, promotes fair treatment, is often successful
cons: blindness ideals (lec5), differences do not count, diversity is not being utilized
what are the pros & cons of the “access & legitimacy” approach to DM?
pros: easy to support
cons: emphazises the role of differences w/o knowing what these are & how these work, minorities have prescribed roles more so than majorities, minorities might feel used rather than appreciated
what are the pros of the “learning & effectiveness” approach to DM?
pros: includes fairness, recognizes value in differences, organization learns and grows fromt hese differences
business case!
