Defining Diversity in a Global Context Prejudice and Discrimination

• Defining Diversity in a Global Context Prejudice and Discrimination
• 
  

a.     In this chapter, we explore how group distinction categories, what we commonly call diversity, are being defined around the world, and offer a global definition of diversity.

b.    We also examine the attitudes and behaviors that are associated with the varied distinction categories that encompass diversity globally, including stereotypes and prejudice, dehumanization, and oppression as well as employment-based discrimination.

    II.         Workforce Diversity Defined

1. The concept of workforce diversity does not travel well across cultural and national boundaries.
2. While the U.S. human resource connotation to the word diversity is gradually catching on in many parts of the world—the European Community, South Africa, and India are some examples—specific definitions may be different.
3. In recent years, research and scholarly work on diversity has been generated in parts of the world other than the United States.
4. Consequently, there is a growing need for a broader and more inclusive definition of diversity that will allow both scientists and practitioners to communicate clearly across cultural and national boundaries.
5. A review of the business, organization, and human resource literature produced three types of definitions of diversity:

                                               i.     Narrow, category-based definitions (e.g., gender, racial, or ethnic differences);

                                             ii.     Broad, category-based definitions (e.g., a long list of categories including such variables as marital status and education); and

                                            iii.     Definitions based on a conceptual rule (e.g., variety of perspectives, differences in perceptions and actions).

3. Toward a Global Definition of Diversity

1. As a backlash to the all-inclusive definitions of diversity, some scholars have argued that such broad diversity categories dilute the real meaning of diversity.

                                               i.     They advocate focusing only on the distinction categories that have been most persistent over the years, and that have had the most serious impact on employment, as a barometer of other societal consequences.

                                             ii.     These scholars specifically identify race, gender, and social class as the fundamental diversity categories.

2. Generating a definition of workforce diversity that will be relevant in different countries and applicable in various cultural and national contexts proves to be a challenge, since trying to name specific diversity categories that can be relevant across cultures and nations is a futile effort.

                                               i.     There are some general distinction categories that do seem to cut across many (though not all) national and local cultures, including gender, race, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, and disability.

                                             ii.     However, there are two problems in utilizing some of these distinction categories to define diversity.

1.     Some of the distinction categories may have either positive or negative impact on employment and job prospects in different countries.

2.     These distinction categories are not exhaustive of the domain, since many countries utilize diversity categories that are not included on this list.

3. The logical solution to the dilemma of finding a global definition for diversity that can be relevant in different cultural and national contexts is to define diversity by:

                                               i.     the process of generating distinction categories—groups with a perceived common denominator in a specific national or cultural context, and

                                             ii.     the consequences of belonging to these groups—the potential harmful or beneficial impact on employment and job prospects.

4. The definition of workforce diversity in the global context utilized in this book is as follows: Workforce Diversity refers to the division of the workforce into distinct categories that:

                                               i.     have a perceived commonality in a cultural or national context, and

                                             ii.     impact potentially harmful or beneficial employment outcomes such as job opportunities, treatment in the workplace and promotion prospects, irrespective of job-related skills and qualifications.

e.     This definition addresses the limitations encountered in applying some of the previous definitions on the global context.

                                               i.     First, it provides a broad umbrella that includes any distinction categories that may be relevant to specific cultural or national environments without pre-specifying the categories and limiting the content of the domain.

                                             ii.     Second, this definition emphasizes the importance of the consequences of the distinction categories and thereby overcomes the limitation of the broad definitions that include benign and inconsequential characteristics in their diversity categories.

4. Stereotypes and Prejudice

1. Each one of us holds stereotypical views of groups other than our own, and sometimes about our own group as well.

                                               i.     These stereotypes serve a very practical function by giving us a sense of confidence that we know something about the other person.

                                             ii.     These impressions have been formed by a combination of social, cultural, and political influences that include previous chance encounters with people of that group, popular media images, cultural norms of tolerance and partial truths, as well as distortions of the truth that we have picked up from various other sources.

                                            iii.     These perceptions are often inaccurate when applied to an individual member of a group as well as to the group as a whole. Yet, these perceptions and categorizations steer the expectations of an individual or group and serve to justify actions that may turn out to be harmful or immoral.

2. Often confused, stereotyping and prejudice are distinct concepts and their definitions differ.

                                               i.     A stereotype is a standardized, oversimplified mental picture that is held in common by members of a group.

1.     The stereotype concept was originally developed with respect to ethnic groups and has been perceived as morally wrong.

2.     Stereotypes were originally considered undesirable because they were thought to be either: (a) the result of an inferior cognitive process—that is a process that utilizes overgeneralization or oversimplification; or (b) were morally wrong because they categorized people who had no desire to be categorized.

3.     There are two kinds of stereotypes.

a.     The first are heterosterotypes—perceptions about members of the other group and the

b.    Second—autostereotypes—perceptions about one’s own group

                                             ii.     A prejudice refers to a preconceived judgment or opinion held by members of a group. Most commonly, a prejudice is perceived as an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics.

1.     The two important elements in understanding prejudice are that it involves passing judgment on the other without sufficient warrant and that it involves negative feelings.

2.     Prejudice is a schema of negative evaluations and characteristics that are attributed to groups perceived as racially and culturally different.

3.     Negative attributes are associated with members of other groups, or out-groups, and people tend to perceive their out-group as mostly homogenous.

4.     Positive characteristics are associated with members of one’s own group, or in-group. People typically perceive members of their in-group as heterogeneous.

3. More recent studies put less emphasis on the negative aspects of stereotyping and view stereotyping as a basic cognitive process that is not necessarily bad and not necessarily informed by prejudice.

To Complete Question Below