Dimensions And Driving Forces Of Workplace Diversity Management

The historical background of workplace diversity

Workplace diversity exercises indicate towards efforts organizations put in to deliver an all-encompassing corporate culture that can value differences and support opportunities for all workforces. Conventionally, diversity programs have consistently stresses on race and gender as well as other physical dimensions. Nevertheless, today’s explanation of diversity can cover up a wide spectrum of individual with group Demographics of workforce have altered significantly over the past 50 years, and persistent changes are anticipated. Economies are at the moment globally ascertained and multinational corporations have become the rule in place of exception (Wrench 2016). Nowadays, majority of organizations is expected to be influenced by these alterations. Consequently, diversity as well as management of diversity within sciences of organizational can be considered to be a dynamic segment for theory building along with research (Trittin and Schoeneborn 2017). Therefore, illustrating diversity calls for a contemplation of its historical background that takes in the civil rights movement together with affirmative activities. Managing the alterations in organizations’ workforces is considered as the concept of diversity management (Barak 2016). However, through the early era of management of diversity, there is little or no theory subsisted to direct the practitioner’s behaviour to create programs to handle people. In spite of inadequacy of premise, substantial research concerning the impacts of diversity within groups subsists, and a multitude of diversity initiatives have been instituted.

The primary focus of the current research is to explore the dimensions that are recently undertaken takes in:

– What are the conceptualised notions of diversity in the working environment?

– What are the driving forces and aspects of diversity management that can be implemented in the workplace?

The specific objectives of the research is

– To examine the zone of diversity, with special stress on the way diversity can be handled in working environment in the globalised world

– To develop a conceptualised notions of diversity in particularly the working environment of global firms

– To analyse different driving forces and aspects of diversity management that can be implemented in global firms 

Defining Diversity Management

As rightly indicated by Harvey and Allard (2015), diversity management from specific organizational perspectives requires a definition of place of work in itself. Essentially, these illustrations of diversity have transformed considerably over the period of time. Early works illustrated diversity almost exclusively with respect to race and gender variances in the workforce. In some sense, the term diversity along with race as well as gender was regarded synonymously during the period 1990s. Since then, the meaning of this term has expanded. Trittin and Schoeneborn (2017) suggest that in addition to race as well as gender, people with disabilities, older workforce along with foreign workforce became known for their contributions to the workforce diversity.  Besides incorporation of supplementary demographic variances, as efforts to deal with organizational diversity enhanced, learners started to comprehend a variety of individual variances as well. Variances in experiences, expertise along with knowledge among team members might perhaps be considered to reflect significant components of diversity.

The conceptualised notions of diversity in the working environment

Early Efforts for addressing diversity in corporations

Similar to the history of illustrating diversity, modern outlines of diversity management can be considered as the consequences of an evolutionary procedure that started with various rudimentary ways of considering demographic variances in the place of work. In response to two important governmental activities, that is to say, the Civil Rights Act of the year 1964 and Executive Order 11246 was sanctioned by the President Johnson in the year 1965 (Sabharwal 2014). This can enhance societal pressures from particularly civil rights and movements of women, the first programs to tackle diversity. In essence, these schemes were not inclusive approaches corporations strive for today. Initial programs were presented as Affirmative Action (AA) as well as Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO). In particular, these programs were mainly aimed at enhancing the total number of understated individuals in the workforce with slight consideration of the influence such alterations might have on the corporation on the whole or on the individual members (Mor Barak 2015). Even though the intent of this kind of program was necessarily to deliver fair chances for qualified members of previously understated groups, their implementation often comprised of quota system or other outlines of preferential treatment. This in turn directed the way towards negative responses and in certain cases to even litigation for reverse discrimination. Subsequently, attitude towards specifically AA programs essentially became highly polarized (Hunt et al. 2015).

Emergence of Diversity Management

During the period of 1990s, several theorists as well as researchers alike altered their way of thinking as regards organizational diversity in a fundamental manner.  Efforts in the field of research and in practice had necessarily conceptualised diversity almost exclusively in terms of total number of women as well as ethnic minorities in the place of work (Hunt et al. 2015). In itself, the concentration therefore, was mainly on developing and employing AA or else EEO programs for the purpose of augmenting the total number of women along with ethnic minorities in corporation. 

Early Models of Diversity Management

The pioneers of the concept of diversity management started with development of what is now regarded as the early models of diversity management. Cox illustrated corporations founded on level of diversity and approach and categorised the same as monolithic (referring to only one culture), pluralistic (counting members of multiple culture but with restrained interaction) and multicultural (indicating towards corporation actively developing diverse workforce) (Buse et al. 2016). The model presented categories in mostly descriptors of scheme of organization and essentially these categories were benign neglect, reactive and proactive.

Driving forces and aspects of diversity management that can be implemented in the workplace

Powell represents organizational stratagem and philosophy regarding diversity. Braun et al. (2016) suggests that models of diversity management delivered a significant alteration for the progression of diversity management. In essence, this new conceptualization reflected a fundamental alteration in the ideas and efforts of both scientists as well as practitioners in this specific field.

Further comprehensive models of diversity management

Özbilgin et al. (2015) suggested that the recognition that diversity was something to be handled was a critical phase in the history of study of diversity. In spite of the categorised descriptions delivered by theorists such as Cox, Thomas and Powell as well as others, very little was acknowledged about the way of transition of a corporation from a less to a more sophisticated phase, or regarding the individual, organizational else wise societal obstacles that might materialize when attempting to adopt such a changeover (Howarth and Andreouli 2016) 

The section on research methodology concentrates on the mechanisms of research that the learner has the intent to pursue. However, for the purpose of reacting to the characterised examination inquest and for the purpose of arriving at a specific point of present study, specific information is obligatory. Nonetheless, the learner has the intention to undertake a deductive approach that again can be linked to design of hypothesis founded on previously existing notions along with premises (Knights and Omanovi? 2016). In particular, for the research at hand, the learner has the aim of undertaking mixed research mechanism that comprise of both quantitative together with qualitative method of examination for acquiring required information (Sabharwal 2014). Basically, this without doubt can help in the process of acquiring and evaluating both quantitative as well as qualitative data, amalgamating the two and attaching importance to two different data classes.

As regards research philosophy, the learner wants to adopt positivism that indicates attainment of scientific along with validated data otherwise positive facts collected from a wide range of sources that can essentially be recognized as empirical evidences (D’Netto et al. 2014). Essentially, the current study at hand selects philosophy of positivism since this considers the entire community as a whole that takes in the physical world operative as per the general set of regulations as well as conventions (Trittin and Schoeneborn 2017).

For itself, the research at hand, the investigator has the intention to amass both primary as well as secondary data. Particularly, the investigator also has the intent to acquire primary data by utilizing questionnaire that can necessarily be circulated all the way by means of electronic mail. Particularly, the investigator can establish an all-encompassing index of appropriate questions in the survey keeping in mind the character of the topic under reflection (Knights and Omanovi? 2016). Apart from this, the investigator has the intention to collect primary data through conduction of interviews for undertaking subjective examination of reaction of respondent (Barak 2016). Additionally, the investigator seeks to accumulate secondary data from particularly journals that are published very in current times, different official websites, previous case studies, particular journals along with well-defined declarations of the government among many others. In addition to this, collected qualitative data can be analysed by way of employment of thematic examination, analysis of case studies and scrutiny of previous scholarly research (Wrench 2016). However, it can also be stated in this case that the examiner can analyse the quantitative data gathered for the research at hand by means of statistical procedures. The target partakers of the research will necessarily take in human resource executives of 6 different firms who will be interviewed over telephone and questionnaire will be distributed to roughly 50 employees operating in 6 different corporations. Apart from this, it can be hereby mentioned that resources of labs along with libraries can be used as a space for the purpose of self study. 

Early models of diversity management

The learner has the intention to undertake the mechanism of survey and consequently has the objective to mail questionnaire to the targeted respondents of the current study. Furthermore, the examiner would like to undertake telephonic interview with aforementioned official permission from human resource executives of 6 diverse corporations. The entire body of information of secondary data can be collected from previously published scholarly literature, books together with journals with official websites (Trittin and Schoeneborn 2017). Additionally, the investigator also has the need to execute own standpoints. Unhindered right to utilize the data for deducing conclusions also aids in building public confidence in both processes and outcomes of research (Hunt et al. 2015). Nevertheless, it can be acknowledged that there are unquestionably certain barriers in accessing requisite data. However, even survey represents that there are numerous circumstances in which accessibility to limited data sometimes become restricted (Harvey and Allard 2015).

Ethical considerations refer to fact that the learner has the need to adopt a universalism stance for making certain success of the process of data acquirement (Harvey and Allard 2015). On the whole, the implication of openness and acquiring consent can be essentially associated to accomplishment of research. Furthermore, the investigator desires to ensure idea reciprocity and inevitably needs to exist between recipient as well as learner for cultivating trust (Braun et al. 2016). Moreover, the investigator is of the view that the research at hand has the need to conform to the directives of the Data Protection Act initiated during the year 1998. The learner also has the intention to make the respondents conscious of subject matter under reflection and send approval forms so that they can willingly participate in the procedure (Trittin and Schoeneborn 2017).  Essentially, in this case, research recipients can make mind up regarding their approval that are without any kind of compulsion. Essentially, this can help in the process of shielding personal data of different partakers that are amassed electronically (Hunt et al.  2015). Furthermore, for this research study, the learner has the intention to ensure that specific communication with respondents, transcripts along with interview recordings are held appropriately in electronic devices in a secured way.

Main Activities	1 week -2 week	3 week-4 week	5 week	6 week	7 week
Adoption of topic of research
Establishing aims as well as objectives and thereafter questions of research
Development of the mechanisms of study
Analysing previous literature
Study of academic literature
Collection of requisite data
Analysing  data
Arriving at specific outcomes of the study

References

Barak, M.E.M., 2016. Managing diversity: Toward a globally inclusive workplace. Sage Publications.

Braun, D.C., Moore, J.W., Candy, J. and Bailey, R.E., 2016. Population diversity in salmon: linkages among response, genetic and life history diversity. Ecography, 39(3), pp.317-328.

Buse, K., Bernstein, R.S. and Bilimoria, D., 2016. The influence of board diversity, board diversity policies and practices, and board inclusion behaviors on nonprofit governance practices. Journal of business ethics, 133(1), pp.179-191.

D’Netto, B., Shen, J., Chelliah, J. and Monga, M., 2014. Human resource diversity management practices in the Australian manufacturing sector. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(9), pp.1243-1266.

Harvey, C.P. and Allard, M., 2015. Understanding and managing diversity: Readings, cases, and exercises. Pearson.

Howarth, C. and Andreouli, E., 2016. “Nobody wants to be an outsider”: From diversity management to diversity engagement. Political Psychology, 37(3), pp.327-340.

Hunt, V., Layton, D. and Prince, S., 2015. Diversity matters. McKinsey & Company, 1, pp.15-29.

Knights, D. and Omanovi?, V., 2016. (Mis) managing diversity: exploring the dangers of diversity management orthodoxy. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 35(1), pp.5-16.

Mor Barak, M.E., 2015. Inclusion is the key to diversity management, but what is inclusion?. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 39(2), pp.83-88.

ÖZBILGIN, F., Jonsen, K., Tatli, A., Vassilopoulou, J. and Surgevil, O., 2015. Global diversity management. The Oxford Handbook of Diversity in Organizations.

Sabharwal, M., 2014. Is diversity management sufficient? Organizational inclusion to further performance. Public Personnel Management, 43(2), pp.197-217.

Sabharwal, M., 2014. Is diversity management sufficient? Organizational inclusion to further performance. Public Personnel Management, 43(2), pp.197-217.

Trittin, H. and Schoeneborn, D., 2017. Diversity as polyphony: Reconceptualizing diversity Management from a communication-centered perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 144(2), pp.305-322.

Wrench, J., 2016. Diversity management and discrimination: Immigrants and ethnic minorities in the EU. Routledge.