Search results

The purpose of this critical review is to address issues with the current school of thought that diversity must come before inclusion in the diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) process and propose an alternate solution.

This review takes a critical constructionist lens such that changes in social norms have morphed over time, refining the meaning and implementation of DEI initiatives in research and the workplace. This review is framed within the context of hospitality organizations.

The conflicting results in DEI research (whether DEI practices are positive or negative) are explained by diversity being the core factor. It is proposed that inclusion is the starting place and determinant of success in creating a diverse workforce. If inclusion comes first and is followed by equitable treatment, then diversity (and diverse representation) naturally follows.

This review offers a novel perspective on the relationship between diversity, equity and inclusion, which was previously ambiguous. Research rarely includes all three as variables in the past, and does not use diversity as an outcome, but rather as a starting point.

This research suggests that unless an organization begins with an inclusive climate, there will be no benefit to having diverse candidates, nor will there be long-term retention of a diverse staff. It is recommended to begin with inclusion, implement equitable practices and diversity will increase through the enacted and espoused values.

This paper aims to explore how organizations can measure diversity, equity and inclusion, and what are the potential areas where they can take initiatives to meet the diversity, equity and inclusion goals.

This paper explains the distinction among diversity, equity and inclusion. It elaborates on the separate perspectives that organizations need to adopt to define and measure each one of them. It consequently brings attention to their implications for research, practice and society.

This paper reveals that the goals of diversity, equity and inclusion, although related, need to be approached independently. The three concepts need to be measured individually and separate initiatives need to be designed and implemented to attain those goals.

This paper highlights the conceptual differences among diversity, equity and inclusion, and their evaluation. It underscores that diversity itself is not sufficient in ensuring organizational performance. Most of the discussion around implementing diversity pays little attention to steps that need to be taken to ensure equity and inclusion of the diverse workforce. This paper seeks to address this gap.

In the US, a growing number of organizations and industries are seeking to affirm their commitment to and efforts around diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) as recent events have increased attention to social inequities. As health care organizations are considering new ways to incorporate DEI initiatives within their workforce, the anticipated result of these efforts is a reduction in health inequities that have plagued our country for centuries. Unfortunately, there are few frameworks to guide these efforts because few successfully link organizational DEI initiatives with health equity outcomes. The purpose of this chapter is to review existing scholarship and evidence using an organizational lens to examine how health care organizations can advance DEI initiatives in the pursuit of reducing or eliminating health inequities. First, this chapter defines important terms of DEI and health equity in health care. Next, we describe the methods for our narrative review. We propose a model for understanding health care organizational activity and its impact on health inequities based in organizational learning that includes four interrelated parts: intention, action, outcomes, and learning. We summarize the existing scholarship in each of these areas and provide recommendations for enhancing future research. Across the body of knowledge in these areas, disciplinary and other silos may be the biggest barrier to knowledge creation and knowledge transfer. Moving forward, scholars and practitioners should seek to collaborate further in their respective efforts to achieve health equity by creating formalized initiatives with linkages between practice and research communities.

The purpose of this study is to develop a theory that explains how organizations can create a more inclusive atmosphere on the individual, organizational and societal levels. The consequences of an inclusive environment were subsequently developed and explored.

Constructivist grounded theory methods were used to collect and analyze data from interviews with 20 hotel executives and their company websites.

The findings of this study produced a theoretical framework for inclusion in hotel leadership, leadership inclusion theory (LIT). The LIT states organizations must address individual differences, organizational policies and culture and societal norms to develop an inclusive environment. Equity follows inclusion as the value for individual differences makes equitable treatment easier. Finally, diversity increases through increased inclusion and equity.

The LIT describes steps for managers to take to develop an inclusive environment, establish equitable practices and increase diversity within an organization.

The LIT highlights several unintended exclusion practices and generational attitudes that are common among organizations. By making conscious efforts, managers can take deliberate actions to establish a perceived environment of equality.

The LIT is a seminal theory-building effort grounded in hospitality. It explains the when and why of several phenomena related to inequality in the hotel industry and how to overcome such imbalances.

This purpose of this study is to examine the extent to which accreditation of public affairs programs can be a tool to advance social equity, diversity, and inclusion. The paper is presented in the context of the widespread acceptance of the importance of addressing social inequalities in Latin America and the critical role that public policy and public administration can have on advancing these goals.

International and national accreditation standards are compared using content analysis for their reference to social equity and diversity in their standards regarding faculty, students, curriculum content and learning outcomes. The research applies content analysis of key documents and thematic coding.

International accrediting agencies that focused explicitly on programs in public affairs place a much greater emphasis on social equity and diversity than their national counterparts which accredit a full range of programs and institutions. National accrediting agencies assert the value of diversity, but their standards and reporting requirements suggest otherwise.

The research suggests that international accreditation standards have the potential to advance social equity goals more effectively than national standards and that there is great potential to enhance this component of national accreditation standards. Implications for policymakers, accreditation professionals and scholars are identified.

The research is original in its focus on the role of accreditation in promoting social equity and its comparison of national and international standards. Although limited to Latin America and public affairs programs, the research provides a basis for examining similar patterns with respect to other disciplines and professions, and in other regions of the world.

As firms consider initiatives to enhance their social sustainability performance, supplier diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) have become significantly more important. As such, the purpose of this study is to theorize, operationalize and develop an empirical scale to measure supplier DEI.

The following three-phase scale development method was used: first, identification of scale items from the literature; second, a qualitative component involving interviews with expert panels; and third, a psychometric evaluation through two survey rounds with 327 managers from multiple areas of supply chain management.

Although not necessarily a new concept, this study provides a more complete understanding of supplier DEI beyond traditional aspects of supplier diversity (e.g. women and minority-owned suppliers) to feature additional considerations (e.g. LGBTQIAP+) and reflect broader societal considerations, such as human rights. Therefore, validated items for the three dimensions (i.e. diversity, equity [human rights] and inclusion) were identified.

This study provides systematically validated scales to measure supplier DEI based on three dimensions. Each dimension can be developed separately from the others, but they are intertwined, which reinforces the contribution to both scholars and practitioners.

The extreme demographic misrepresentation of organisations is a key business and societal issue in South Africa. This research provides organisations that are committed to the creation of a diverse and inclusive environment with key considerations that need to be managed in order to drive transformation. The final output of this research is a set of diversity and inclusion management considerations. It is a blueprint that organisations can use to move beyond compliance recruitment (employment equity), to a commitment to systemic change, driven at organisational, interpersonal and individual levels.

While academia continuously probes and advocates for a definition of a comprehensive, inclusive ideal, diversity, multiculturalism, and equity are bridging ties elements that must be considered. Currently, liberal arts colleges have the unique opportunity to shape equitable environments for all their members and become role models for other higher educational institutions. If there is an institutional commitment, and people are willing to work for a common goal, small colleges can undoubtedly offer the appropriate academic conditions where all faculty, staff, and students can achieve their highest personal and professional potentials.

This chapter discusses the role of chief diversity officer (CDO) on liberal arts campuses and how the CDO should take the lead as equity advocator and conveyor and help set the desired dialogue conditions. Among the topics examined is the institutional inclusion process which includes innovative and supportive new ideas and programs for equity among all members of the academic community. Also the hiring of underrepresented faculty members is crucial and can support the growth of enrollment and retention of diverse groups of students. Diversity and inclusion create common goals, and liberal arts colleges should rapidly move to allow the best hiring practices during the recruitment of new faculty members. Equitable learning conditions for all are as crucial as the creation of faculty evaluation systems that promote equitable opportunities. Liberal arts colleges have a historic opportunity to lead the way and become exemplary role models in practicing diversity and inclusion on campus.

This case was based on both primary and secondary data. In-depth semidirected interviews were conducted in 2021–2022 after receiving the institutional research board approval. The interviews took an approximate time ranging from 90 to 120 min. They were recorded and transcribed. A thematic analysis was undertaken to identify the most relevant themes for the case. The secondary sources used included various websites, scholarly and trade journals, as well as specific databases, such as Statista.

The case exposes students in multiple disciplines to the challenges created by the COVID-19 crisis at Yale School of Medicine (YSM). It describes its remarkable effects on organizational and community members as they struggled to reimagine more inclusive and supportive spaces. As one of the most severe crises humanity has ever witnessed, COVID-19 exacerbated the existing struggles of the underrepresented communities, creating a double pandemic. It has also amplified inequities among marginalized groups including black, indigenous and people of color; women; immigrants; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning; people with different abilities; working parents; single parents; religious minorities; and people with low income. When COVID-19 hit in 2020, Yale University School of Medicine (YSM), like other pioneering schools in the field of health care, doubled their efforts to face both the public health crisis and the substantial social turmoil (racial tensions after the death of George Floyd, food insecurity, vaccine resistance, social inequalities, etc.). Professor Marietta Vazquez, MD, who was the first Latina to be named Associate Dean for Medical Students Diversity at YSM, launched with Dr Latimore (Chief Diversity Officer) and her other colleagues many strategic initiatives aiming at improving the diversity, equity and inclusion of organizational and community members.

The case is an invitation to graduate students and students in executive education programs to reflect on the grand challenges leaders faced at YSM as well as in other institutions across the nation and the globe. It is also a call to reimagine ways leaders can accelerate the pace of change in their organizational ecosystems.

This case was written for use in graduate-level courses, including executive education dealing with Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Belonging, Leadership and Change, Health-Care Equity/Policy, Health Sciences, Human Resource Management, Organizational Behavior, Crisis Management, Sustainability, Business and Society, Social Issues in Management, Strategy, etc. Faculty members can easily adapt the case to fit the content of the course they teach, the students’ context as well as the specific learning outcomes to be achieved.

Introducing the concepts of equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI), the chapter provides an overview of frameworks and approaches used to manage workforce diversity. First, the authors introduce the notion of the old deal based on the uneven relationship between human diversity, nature, and technological innovation. The chapter then explores the new deal between humans, nature, and technology. The authors are providing cases from the EU, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Iceland to show the emergence of the new deal in managing diversity.