Why Diversity Matters for Everyone.

Diversity does not begin and end with race and gender.

Diversity, with the numerous definitions available, has predominantly focused on more visible characteristics like race and gender. However, diversity has numerous ‘layers’ to it that go beyond the more publicised characteristics. Much like the well-known Gobstopper sweet, what is seen on the outside is not an indication of what lies beneath. Physical traits may be in stark contrast with the characteristics that are assumed to accompany them, the actual diversity that an individual possesses can not be taken at face value. Nowadays, when we see or hear the words ‘diversity and inclusion’ it can be partnered with passionate emotions and mental pictures of movements for equality, rectification for any injustices of the past and making strides towards giving everyone an equal voice and opportunity- particularly in the workplace. In some instances, because of the fiery emotions and sometimes discomfort associated with diversity and inclusion initiatives, diversity is not fully embraced, or it is overlooked for the sake of ‘not shaking the office hornet’s nest’?

Nevertheless, diversity need not be associated with any particular agenda; rather, diversity programs could be re-framed as a long-term, gradual, and permanent part of the corporate strategy where the spirit of diversity is an all-employee inclusive initiative that moves beyond a handful of metrics and selected individuals.

What lies within

Loden and Rosener define diversity as characteristics that differentiate people. (3) They posit that people are differentiated along both primary and secondary dimensions. Primary dimensions are the ones that influence our identity and world-views, characteristics like race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, and mental or physical abilities. Secondary dimensions include education, religion, home-language preference, work and personality style, title, income level and other non-visible characteristics. Yet, the secondary characteristics will undoubtedly influence our primary diversity dimensions and impact our self-esteem and how we see themselves. There are also tertiary dimensions; this is the dimension that is central to our identity and includes our beliefs, assumptions, attitudes, group norms and values. (5)

Depending on our age and where we live in the world, our career choice and the industry we work in, primary, secondary and tertiary characteristics of diversity will interact and carry different priorities both individually and in inter-personal relationships. Yet, when we discuss operationalising diversity, advancing or even revolutionising a work culture and creating a climate that promotes diversity and inclusion we tend to focus on (and often think of) the primary characteristics of diversity-particularly race and gender (which is fair as they are the easiest to see and rectify). Yet, for most people, how they think and process information, their opinions and perspectives are the diversity they want to be respected and valued the most in the workplace.

How people think and process information, their opinions and perspectives are the diversity they want to be respected and valued the most in the workplace.

The ‘diversity dilemma’ presents itself, for example, when a group of five people of similar ethnicity, gender and age may be totally diverse in secondary and tertiary dimensions. Likewise, a group of ethnically diverse people may have very similar education levels, perspectives, upbringings, ideologies etc. Diversity judged at face value is a disservice to the individual and the organisation. Dig deeper.

Can there be too much diversity in the workplace?

It cannot be disputed that increasing diversity in the workplace does not come without potential conflict and complications. According to social identity theory, some of a person’s self-concept is derived from their perceived sense of belonging in a relevant social group. It is then easy to understand how cultural similarities within groups may increase the ease of in-group communication and cooperation and therefore decrease in emotional conflict. (6) Moderate levels of diversity within groups and teams can create clusters of similarly-identifying individuals, thus promoting these barriers to communication, interaction and conflicts can emerge with people outside of these groups and clusters. Whereas, high levels of diversity are productive in breaking down these communication and interaction barriers as people tend to not cluster into pockets of similar groups. (1) 

Operationalising diversity

Diversity has performance advantages over uniform work structures, but how? Diversity is advantageous for performance by attracting minority groups as well as equipping the workforce to better identify with the community or clientele that they serve. (2) Groupthink also diminishes as a result of improved diversity (divergent thinking, wider ranges of perspectives, opinions and experiences) which is advantageous for decisions making and problem-solving. (4) Multicultural organisations are thus better equipped for problem-solving due to the vast ranges of perspectives and interpretations of situations that arise and allow for improved outcomes and strategic interventions. 

Ultimately, diversity and inclusion should not be a tokenised gesture or targeted at certain diversity dimensions, but rather it can be operationalised to become a productive and performance-contributary feature of the workplace when it is inclusive for everyone. 

The real benefits and enjoyment of diversity are harnessed by prioritising the inclusion of both the visible characteristics, the non-visible and more intimate tertiary dimensions of diversity, by engaging the whole workforce in value-adding programs that seek to educate as well as improve relationships in the workplace. Creating a platform for thought diversity to be shared in the boardroom, office or team meeting, perspectives challenged, and knowledge utilised is when improving performance and organisational capacity can occur.

1.Blau, P.M., 1977. Inequality and heterogeneity. New York: Free Press. 

2.Cox, T., Lobel, S.A., McLeod, P.L., 1991. Effects of ethnic group cultural differences on cooperative and competitive behavior on a group task. Academy of Management Journal, 4, pp. 827–847. 

3.Loden, M., Rosener, J.B., 1991. Workforce America! Managing Employee Diversity as a Vital Resource. Illinois: Business One Irwin.

4..Morgan, G., 1989. Creative Organization Theory. Sage Publications. 

5.Rijamampianina, R., Carmichael, T., 2005. A Pragmatic and Holistic Approach to Managing Diversity. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 1 

6.Williams, K., O’Reilly, C., 1998. Forty years of diversity research: A review [in:] Staw, B.M., Cummings, L.L., (Eds.), Research in organisational behavior. CT: JAI Press, Greenwich.