Search results

Over the past decade, the U.S. workforce has become increasingly diverse. In response, scholars and practitioners have sought to uncover ways to leverage this increasing diversity to enhance business performance. To date, research evidence has failed to provide consistent support for the value of diversity to organizational effectiveness. Accordingly, scholars have shifted their attention to diversity management as a means to fully realize the potential benefits of diversity in organizations. The principal aim of this chapter is to review the current wisdom on the study of diversity climate in organizations. Defined as the extent that employees view an organization as utilizing fair personnel practices and socially integrating all personnel into the work environment, diversity climate has been proposed as a catalyst for unlocking the full value of diversity in organizations. During our review, we discuss the existent individual- and aggregate-level research, describe the theoretical foundations of such work, summarize the key research findings and themes gleaned from work in each domain, and note the limitations of diversity climate research. Finally, we highlight the domains of uncertainty regarding diversity climate research, and offer recommendations for future work that can enhance knowledge of diversity climate effects on organizational outcomes.

Discrimination is an intergroup as well as an interpersonal phenomenon and is related to fundamental processes associated with social categorization and the development of in-group favoritism. We propose in the Common In-Group Identity Model that by understanding the factors that underlie the development of these inter-group biases, these forces can be redirected to improve intergroup relations. In particular, if members of different groups are induced to recategorize themselves as a superordinate group rather than as two separate groups, intergroup prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination will be reduced through the extension of pro-in-group bias to former out-group members. Moreover, recategorization in the form of a dual identity, in which superordinate and subgroup identities are both salient, can achieve the benefits of a strong superordinate identity without requiring groups to forsake valued ethnic and racial identities. Data reported from laboratory studies, field experiments, and surveys involving a range of different types of groups offer converging evidence in support of the model.

Identities reside not just in objective realities but also in the perceptions of actors and observers, reflecting actual group memberships as well as ideologies about their relevance and significance. Salient group identities can influence perceptions of the justice of social events and policies as well as perpetuating intergroup conflicts. This chapter reviews the relationship between psychological perspectives on identity and beliefs about justice, including new data illustrating the relevance of identity to support for animal rights. Experiences that emphasize shared identities between groups may reduce the deindividuation of outgroup members and promote the resolution of intergroup conflicts.

Two cases recently decided by the U.S. Supreme Court will likely determine the future direction of U.S. higher education. The cases Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger challenge the legality of affirmative action programs in the University of Michigan Law School and in the University of Michigan Undergraduate College. The plaintiffs, supported by the Center for Individual Rights and other conservative organizations, contend that the University of Michigan's affirmative action programs engage in “reverse discrimination” by favoring Black and Latino students for admission over equally or better qualified white students. The University of Michigan, joined by a broad coalition of universities, corporations, and social activist organizations, reject characterizations of affirmative action programs in the Law School and Undergraduate College as “racial preferences” or “racial quotas.” Instead, the University argues that race is but one of several factors legitimately considered in the effort to assemble a diverse student body where the educational benefits of diversity are maximized.

Higher education plays a key role in training leaders who are responsible for enacting a vision of a multi-racial democracy that is equitable, inclusive, and thrives on a healthy exchange of perspectives. How are college students’ cognitive and social cognitive skills linked with their diversity experiences? While the college curriculum may provide the theory and concepts necessary for understanding a multi-racial and multi-ethnic society, students’ experience with others of diverse backgrounds (inside and outside the classroom) provides an opportunity to practice living in a pluralistic democracy among “equal status” peers. Building on previous social science research, evidence presented in the University of Michigan affirmative action cases, this chapter empirically examines the link between interactions with diverse peers and students’ cognitive skills using standardized instruments as well as survey measures in a classroom-based study. Findings indicate that students’ cognitive skills are associated with particular types of interactions with diverse peers and the desire to influence society. Students who had negative interactions with diverse peers also tend to score lower on the disposition to think critically. The implications of these findings suggest that one's capacity for complex thinking skills is linked with the capacity to interact with diverse people and commitment to the public good – all of which are critical to a working, pluralistic democracy.

The United States is becoming more diverse, a trend that is reflected in institutions of higher education; college campuses are filled with various subgroups of “non-traditional students,” many of whom are students from marginalized populations. Throughout history, the United States denied access to education to students from historically marginalized backgrounds and while society promises access to students today, it is not provided equally; gaps in educational access and achievement among marginalized groups persist. Some of the fastest growing subgroups of our population are least likely to succeed in higher education, because they face barriers as they navigate the university experience. This chapter spotlights the key access and persistence-related challenges faced by students from six marginalized populations: African American/Black students, students with disabilities, Hispanic/Latinx students, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) students, undocumented students, and student veterans.

The study of group dynamics was central to the field of organization development at its inception. More recently, there has been a move away from considering irrational and unconscious dynamics in organizational life and more attention focused on rational and observable behavior that can be measured and quantified. We introduce the tool, Beneath the Surface of the Burke-Litwin Model, that invites consideration of how the overt behavior of individuals, groups, and entire systems is linked to covert dynamics. This more comprehensive view of organizational life provides scholar-practitioners with a systemic perspective, a view of covert dynamics by organizational level, and support for the ongoing development of one’s capacity for using self-as-instrument when engaged in organization development and organization change efforts.

This chapter describes a theory of intergroup leadership. Research on reducing prejudice and intergroup conflict identifies a number of conditions, such as empathy, shared goals, crossed categorization, recategorization, and intergroup contact, which can be beneficial. It also identifies social identity threat as a stumbling block – processes intended to reduce conflict often threaten people’s sense of having a unique and distinctive social identity and thus provoke a defensive reaction that sustains conflict. But social psychology says little about the role of group leadership in conflict resolution.

I summarize what we know from social psychology about conditions that attenuate intergroup conflict; then focus on social identity and influence processes to present a new theory of leadership across conflicting groups.

Prejudice and intergroup conflict reduction rests on effective messaging and influence, which is often a matter of intergroup leadership where a leader must bridge and integrate warring factions within a superordinate entity. The challenge of intergroup leadership is to construct an intergroup relational identity that focuses on collaboration and avoids identity threat. I describe a model of intergroup leadership and discuss strategies, such as identity rhetoric, boundary spanning and leadership coalition-building, that such leadership should adopt to effectively reconstruct social identity to reduce conflict and prejudice between groups.

This is a development and extension of a more narrowly focused theory of intergroup leadership in organizational contexts. It will be of value to social psychology, the behavioral and social sciences, and those seeking to reduce prejudice and intergroup conflict through leadership.