One Minute HR Consultant

If you are confused about the business case and justification for workplace diversity don’t worry; you are not alone.  The fact of the matter is that workplace diversity when viewed from an ethical-moral “lens” has pros and cons.  Furthermore, when workplace diversity viewed from an empirical basis to justify the business case, there again is both pro and con. 

To put it straight-forward: Workplace diversity is a complex, contemporary organizational challenge that continues to be the source of misinformation, misguided perception, and uneven research findings (Van De Ven, Rogers, Bechara, Kangyong, 2007; Jayne & Dipboye, 2004). Business leaders, government employees, mid-level practitioners, non-profit members, and even the business start-up owner all have justified questions concerning the morale value, and business utility of workplace diversity. The question no matter how stated, simply boils down to “What is the business value and potential benefit of workplace diversity?”   

Six key points of consideration are hereby presented:   

Point 1 – There is a tendency to equate demographic diversity with federal equal opportunity and affirmative action laws.  This is done in error because of research and organizational initiatives that link the concept of diversity with federal equal opportunity and affirmative action laws.  This error leads to resistance and reinforcement of stereotypes, having a reverse, unintended consequence on justifying the business need for diversity.  

Point 2 – Most workplace diversity initiatives consider only demographic components of diversity.  In considering only the demographic aspects of diversity, organizations do not go far enough.  As a matter of fact, organizations have in many cases only increased the likelihood that any diversity business case and subsequent initiative will be met with resistance.

Point 3 – Cognitive Diversity along with the business need is the root starting point when exploring the organizational benefit of diversity.  Cognitive Diversity, as I define it, is the observed and unobserved attributes that distinguish individuals and their accompanying value and belief system.  Of course there are varying views of Cognitive Diversity; yet, the properties of this definition allow us to include both the demographic components, and beliefs and attitudes components of diversity.    

Point 4: Workplace diversity must be centered on a business need (perceived threat, rare opportunity, or a combination of the two).  The moral case as unfortunate as it may sound is not enough.  Research shows that organizations that succeed at diversity base it on sound business considerations such as entrance or expansion within a market segment, product and services aimed toward diverse segments of the marketplace, exploitation of unexpected demand (or potential for demand) in an untapped or under-performing market (Note: Under-performing in the sense that demand for product or service was not foreseen; yet is empirically proven to show consideration for increase “presence”).

Point 5: Not all organizations should pursue diversity, especially based upon demographic consideration.  Diversity should not be pursued (despite what many tell you) to correct moral wrongs or to “reflect society.”   There are laws (both passed and under consideration) and other causes that serve such purposes.  As for “reflecting society;” your market may only represent a unique, defined niche of our collective society and any efforts to “represent society” will be viewed as insincere or not justifiable if your products and services appeal only to specific segments of the marketplace. 

Point 6:  If organizational diversity initiatives are pursued, it is essential to focus more on cognitive diversity vice the demographic components of diversity.  Highlighting differences, based on research and experience of organizations that pursue diversity (successful and otherwise), show that when demographic understanding is sought, the inverse happens – more confusion and increased hostility often results (Van de Ven, Rogers, & Kangyong, 2008; Jayne & Dipboye, 2004).  Furthermore, appreciation of demographic diversity naturally results when diversity is pursued at the deeper, cognitive level.   

 So what are the benefits of diversity if the business case warrants worthy of pursuit?  There is no shortage of benefits, if your organizational business case (considering the above) is conducted with rigor.  Some of the benefits of workplace diversity may include:

Goodwill of the Community. If diverse segments of your customer base are diverse and your organization reflects this diversity, your efforts will not go unnoticed. 

Potential increase in earnings and profitability.  Directly related to the above benefit, customers show appreciation represented via “buying power” and increased sales.  Quite simply: They buy more from you and less from your competitors. 

Increase readiness.  If you are a government organization, diversity efforts are appreciated through increased contribution or increased willingness to join your organization or cause. 

Outreach into potential talent pools.  With increased outreach and appreciation of diversity, you have increased individuals looking to contribute their talents to your organization.  If competitive advantage is embedded within human capital, which I argue this is so, than deeper, richer pools of talent with unique ideas and perspectives will enable you to leverage this diversity – resulting in, ideally, innovative products and services delivered faster and better than your competitors – for the foreseeable future. 

References/Further Reading

Jayne, M., & Dipboye, R. (2004). Leveraging diversity to improve business performance: Research findings and recommendations for organizations. Human Resource Management, 43(4), 409-424.

Van de Ven, A., Rogers, R., Bechara, J., & Kangyong, S. (2008). Organizational diversity, integration and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29 (3), 335-354. doi:10.1002/job.511.

Having been a member of the Twitter community now for nine months, I started to keep a notebook on the different styles of “tweeting,” and the many personalities behind the tweets.  Suffice it to say, that I came up with a unscientific method of matching twitter and leadership styles.  Here are a few humorous conclusions that one can derive from your twitter updates and what it says about your leadership style/personality.

Note:  This is just a humorous look on my unscientific approach; however, please take the time to realize that being an effective leader does not mean you follow any set pattern of leadership or some preconceived notion of someone’s notion of being an effective leader.  Effective leaders are found with varying personalities and traits.  They possess a keen sense of who they are and are aware of their strengths and weakness, maximizing the former and supplementing the latter.

Auto-follows on keywords/Auto Tweets:

Strength:  Someone that values automation and one time effort to gain leverage.  Once system in place and/or value discovered, it is likely that you don’t want to reinvent the wheel.  In addition, you are extremely well-organized (there is a word for that), and you are also very methodical.  You will quickly move-on from one project to the next and likely are very good at starting businesses, setting a system, and moving on to the next project/phase.  Likely considered a very efficient leader who makes decisions in an effective manner.

Weakness:  Details make your eyes glaze and sometimes you are too quick to delegate.  Because you often have more than one project/program/concept going, those working on supporting initiatives are often confused as to just what is your priority. Continue reading »

Like it or not, we are in a ‘New Economy’ and your workplace may become impacted as a result.  Like many HR professionals, I am witnessing former middle and senior managers take what is being termed by the mainstream media and business press as “survival jobs.”  The challenge for us is how to handle these professionals, their goals, and their aspirations.

The complexities of managing this emerging, dynamic workforce and the accompanying labor pool are the diverse needs and aspirations of the people behind the numbers.  I predict that many will find happiness in their new roles and will want to grow with your organization.  Others are already working on consulting projects and/or planning new businesses during their spare time.  There will be others that will try to find happiness in both worlds (with your organization and on their own).  The result will be something more complex than just managing across generations and inherent skill sets; it will mean finding the right plan and approach down to the individual level. Continue reading »

For years, I have observed, developed, and participated in performance review-performance appraisal discussions, work-focus groups, and processes.  I have actively engaged in and observed work groups and subject matter expert forums as passionate managers and functional experts debate heavily over the meaning of words, accuracy of forms and processes, and the fairness of performance appraisals tools.  Within all this we have seen arguments made in linking the performance appraisal and accompanying reviews to rewards, organizational strategic objectives, and/or workplace culture.  There were and are differing opinions as to actual responsibilities of executing performance reviews/appraisals between HR and line managers.

Considering all the factors above, my argument-opinion is simple: Performance Reviews-Appraisals are not your enemy.  The performance review-appraisal process cannot and should not become the scapegoat reason for delaying performance feedback nor management’s resistance to utilizing it as a legitimate performance management tool. Continue reading »

This is a post that I struggled to write because it brings to task, so to speak, us as HR professionals.  However, at the same time, I feel a great need to share with you my thoughts on how we can actually seize and demonstrate value during this challenging economic cycle. Let me put it simple: This is a rare opportunity for HR, across the board, to add significant value and change the perception of our profession as a CRITICAL value-added function in the organization. In writing this, I thought about the ground-breaking work conducted by Brian Becker, Mark Huselid, and Dave Ulrich in their landmark work ‘The HR Scorecard”.  One of their observations is that HRM either adds value or does not (reference pg. 38, HR Scorecard). 

Any middle-ground has no significant impact.  Many of us can personally attest to this research in the real world as  organizations either put the thumb on us as merely daily tacticians or those that let us flourish.  Here is a time for us to flourish. Before revealing the Five Activities that we, as HR professionals, should be considering-undertaking, I want to share this observation:  A serious lack of judgment, conscious or not, is occurring each and every day amongst us as HR professionals that has potential dire consequences (or at least significant) to our organizations, which can set-up our organizations (and ourselves) up for failure – in some areas. As reported in the January issues of HRMag, EEOC complaints are up, training budgets are down, and complaints will be thrown our way from every angle from recruiting to talent management to outplacement and employee assistance.  Continue reading »