Search results

This chapter explores the many dynamics of diversity initiatives and presents a central argument that diversity initiatives are most effective when organizational leaders create and strategically implement them to form an inclusive organizational culture. This chapter addresses diversity from a global perspective in three ways. First, it defines diversity and emphasizes one goal: diversity of perspectives. Second, it advocates for creating an organizational culture to overcome conflicting aspects of traditional, demographic-centered, or individual-centered diversity initiatives. Third, it introduces the DURCI Diversity Model, which stands for Define, Understand, Review, Communicate, and Implement, as a five-step method to foster a diverse, inclusive organizational culture. This chapter begins with a definition of diversity as efforts to synchronize unique demographic groups. It emphasizes the importance of defining diversity as it applies to an organization and ultimately creating an organizational culture that transcends individual demographics and defines diversity by what it means explicitly to the organization, including what diversity the organization already possesses. This chapter proceeds to use nonprofit, private, and public organizations, such as the US Department of Health and Human Services, Google, the American Red Cross, Cisco Systems, Americans for the Arts, the National Diversity Council, and the Gates Foundation, to illustrate the wide applicability of the DURCI Diversity Model to frame successful organizational diversity initiatives.

“Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.” When Sir Walter Scott penned these words, he probably did not have diversity or universities on his mind. Those of us that are genuinely engaged in diversity, inclusion, equity, social justice, and/or multicultural education work can ruminate on his words and think of how university campuses tout their diversity initiatives and sometimes brag about being the “most diverse” are in actuality deceiving themselves and the constituents they serve. Even though diversity awareness has become an important topic in academe in recent years, so many campuses have largely failed to address it in any substantive way, thus creating an environment where students and even employees sometimes become disengaged. Davies (2007) argues that “university leaders who claim openness to diversity do not acknowledge the presence or participation of Others in activities that are characteristic of a free and democratic society” (p. 154).

Many institutions of higher learning honestly believe that in showcasing a campus program based around food, festival, or fun, they can check the diversity box. Yet, when diversity practitioners push the campus in becoming multicultural competent by addressing diversity outside the proverbial realm of “race,” questions like, “Why are they doing this?” arise. The struggle to sustain a comprehensive and meaningful campus diversity program is real for many agents for change. In order for diversity advocates to have a seat at the table, the campus attitude and practice of “diversity need not apply” cannot continue to exist.

Leaders within academia must be cognizant of their campus culture, which governs the law of the land. More importantly, it is vital to understand that sometimes your campus culture may not be receptive to cultural differences, although university verbiage may state, “We will promote diversity and maintain an environment that celebrates and values the many perspectives, cultures, and […]” Institutions of higher learning in this new millennium (twenty-first century) are deeply entrenched in organizational culture that has become its cornerstone over time, and is resistant to change.

Campus culture is real. Stewart and Dottolo (2005) state that universities should strive to ensure that any groups that fall outside of the traditional culture do not encounter an unwelcoming and threatening institutional environment. However, not every university strives or desires to create a campus climate where diversity is welcomed, celebrated, and/or embraced. It is paramount that educational institutions that serve diverse populations strive to become proficient in multiculturalism (Roach, 2004). Institutions of higher education are socially obligated to provide a learning environment for students with varied backgrounds (Bridges et al., 2008). It is essential that universities take a very close look at how they can contribute to the greater good of society by instilling a sense of worth in all students, regardless of ethnicity and other features of student identities. Williams and Swail (2005) argue that “attending college can be a liberating, developmentally powerful experience with the potential to increase individual productivity and, to some degree, the quality of life of the larger society” (p. 222). This can only occur if or when all aspects of diversity can apply and become an integral part of the university.

Diversity management is seen as a decisive factor for ensuring the development of socially responsible innovations (Beacham and Shambaugh, 2011; Sonntag, 2014; López, 2015; Uebernickel et al., 2015). However, many diversity management approaches fail due to a one-sided consideration of diversity (Thomas and Ely, 2019) and a lacking linkage between the prevailing organizational culture and the perception of diversity in the respective organization. Reflecting the importance of diverse perspectives, research institutions have a special responsibility to actively deal with diversity, as they are publicly funded institutions that drive socially relevant development and educate future generations of developers, leaders and decision-makers. Nevertheless, only a few studies have so far dealt with the influence of the special framework conditions of the science system on diversity management. Focusing on the interdependency of the organizational culture and diversity management especially in a university research environment, this chapter aims in a first step to provide a theoretical perspective on the framework conditions of a complex research organization in Germany in order to understand the system-specific factors influencing diversity management. In a second step, an exploratory cluster analysis is presented, investigating the perception of diversity and possible influencing factors moderating this perception in a scientific organization. Combining both steps, the results show specific mechanisms and structures of the university research environment that have an impact on diversity management and rigidify structural barriers preventing an increase of diversity. The quantitative study also points out that the management level takes on a special role model function in the scientific system and thus has an influence on the perception of diversity. Consequently, when developing diversity management approaches in research organizations, it is necessary to consider the top-down direction of action, the special nature of organizational structures in the university research environment as well as the special role of the professorial level as role model for the scientific staff.

Although there is great potential for diversity, library and information science (LIS) is a relatively homogenous profession. Increasing the presence of librarians of color may help to improve diversity within LIS. However, recruiting ethnic minorities into LIS has proven to be difficult despite various initiative including scholarships, fellowships, and locally focused programs. The central questions explored in this research can be divided into two parts: (1) Why do ethnic minorities choose librarianship as a profession? (2) What would motivate members of minority groups to join a profession in which they cannot see themselves?

The research was conducted through semi-structured, qualitative interviews of 32 ethnic minority students from one of four ethnic minority groups (African American, Asian American, Hispanic/Latino, and Native American) currently enrolled in an LIS graduate program. Eleven themes emerged from the data: libraries, librarians, library work experience, LIS graduate program, career plans and goals, education and family, support, mentors, ethnicity and community, acculturation, and views of diversity.

The findings seem to support many assumptions regarding expectations and career goals. The findings related to libraries, librarians, mentors, and support illustrate that many recruitment initiatives are starting in the right place. However, the most noteworthy findings were those that centered on identity, acculturation, and diversity because they dealt with issues that are not often considered or discussed by many in the profession outside of ethnic minority organizations.

Several comprehensive reviews are united in drawing the conclusion that the cumulative research evidence on work team diversity is equivocal. Rather than review the extant state of diversity research, in this paper we redirect attention to the context of workplace diversity as a possible explanation for these mixed findings. We discuss how diversity context may be conceptualized, specify various aspects of this context at multiple levels of analysis, and consider how contextual variables can shape the outcomes of work team diversity. We present findings from a literature review (1999–2006) to identify key trends and patterns of results reported in recent research as well as contextual factors that have received attention to date. This paper also considers how the non-significant, positive, negative, and curvilinear effects of diversity reported in studies can be explained by the contextual factors outlined. Implications for future research are also discussed.

Managing diversity requires an understanding of culture. The majority of businesses have realised that competitiveness no longer stems from formal organisational structures but rather from the mindsets, competencies, and functioning of individuals who create, develop, and support the organisation and who frequently come from different cultural backgrounds. Understanding the essence of a culture, its components, variations, and how all these things effect the business and the managerial process is very beneficial for international managers. Businesses in global value chains need cross-cultural management practices to obtain a competitive advantage. Global value chains make it possible to benefit from the comparative advantages of other nations, and without cross-cultural management, these multinational corporations would be unable to carry on with their business operations. Although there are many explanations on global value chains in the literature, there is no study on the effect of different cultures in value chain management and how different cultures can be managed in global value chains.

In this chapter, the definition of the concept of culture, which is comprehensive and crucial in managing differences, will be depicted. Then, the concept of cross-cultural management will be emphasised and what cross-cultural management means and why and to what extent it is important will be explained. In addition, the impact of cross-cultural management in the inclusive global value chain will be discussed, emphasising the value chain analysis, how it emerged, its basic concepts, and its importance in the international context.