| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| Employee Diversity Training Doesn't Work |
| 2007-04-27 |
| Another Great Scam of the Twentieth Century...and in Time Magazine, no less Some decades ago, the powers that be declared that employee diversity was a good thing, as desirable as double-digit profit margins. It's proving just as difficult to achieve. Companies try all sorts of things to attract and promote minorities and women. They hire organizational psychologists. They staff booths at diversity fairs. They host dim-sum brunches and salsa nights. The most popular--and expensive--approach is diversity training, or workshops to teach executives to embrace the benefits of a diverse staff. Too bad it doesn't work. But it keeps a lot of Human Resources people in a job. A groundbreaking new study by three sociologists shows that diversity training has little to no effect on the racial and gender mix of a company's top ranks. Frank Dobbin of Harvard, Alexandra Kalev of the University of California, Berkeley, and Erin Kelly of the University of Minnesota sifted through decades of federal employment statistics provided by companies. Their analysis found no real change in the number of women and minority managers after companies began diversity training. That's right--none. Networking didn't do much, either. Prepare the show trials! These three have betrayed us! Mentorships did. Among the least common tactics, one--assigning a diversity point person or task force--has the best record of success. "Companies have spent millions of dollars a year on these programs without actually knowing, Are these efforts worth it?" Dobbin says. "In the case of diversity training, the answer is no." The law is one reason that employers favor diversity training. In the wake of whopping settlements in race-discrimination suits against large companies, including Texaco and Coca-Cola, over the past decade, employers believe that having a program in place can show a judge that they are sincerely fighting prejudice. But this too is a myth, says Dobbin: "I don't know of a single case where courts gave credit for diversity training." Social psychologists have many theories to explain why diversity training doesn't work as intended. Studies show that any training generates a backlash and that mandatory diversity training in particular may even activate a bias. Researchers also see evidence of "irresistible stereotypes," or biases so deeply ingrained that they simply can't be taught away in a one-day workshop. Say, Johnson, you look like an idiot. I'm going to send you to this class so you can learn how to treat people. Jeez, y'know boss, you're right. This one week of classes should turn me into a loving, caring, nuturing human being who is tolerant of everybody instead of the loutish Cro Magnon man I appear to be now. Like when the Three Stooges took those etiquette lessons. Can we have a big pie fight when it's over too? Consultants on diversity insist that the training they give has value. R. Roosevelt Thomas, founder of the American Institute for Managing Diversity, says corporate America must first redefine the word. "Diversity means differences and similarities," he says, be they in race, gender or corporate culture. He teaches executives to focus on skills and not familiarity. "In a foxhole, I want someone who can shoot," he says. "I don't care where they're from. Some folks have to be reminded of that." ...and I wanna keep my well paying phoney baloney job, godammit! So what does work? The study's findings in this area were striking too: at companies that assigned a person or committee to oversee diversity, ensuring direct accountability for results, the number of minorities and women climbed 10% in the years following the appointment. Mentorships worked too, particularly for black women, increasing their numbers in management 23.5%. Most effective is the combination of all these strategies, says Dobbin. In practice, companies find that a multipronged approach leads to results. General Electric initiated an aggressive diversity strategy under former CEO Jack Welch that included employee networks, regular planning forums, formal mentoring, and recruiting at colleges popular with minorities. Perhaps most significantly, GE appointed a chief diversity officer, Deborah Elam. In 2000, women, minorities and non--U.S. citizens made up 22% of GE's officers and 29% of senior executives. By 2005, their ranks swelled to 34% among officers and 40% of senior execs. "Training just to train is not enough," says Elam. "You've got to have accountability at the top." Accountability for the careers of women and minorities requires a substantial commitment of time, staff and money--but so does diversity training. And only one works. |
| Posted by:tu3031 |
| #8 'Diversity' is usually 'mananged' by HR, you know those offices, and departments, full of white suburban women who have zero tolerance for diversity in their area. |
| Posted by: Black Bart Glinesh2086 2007-04-27 19:30 |
| #7 Their analysis found no real change in the number of women and minority managers after companies began diversity training. That's right--none. Networking didn't do much, either. No different in academia. They demand, contrive, and out right break the law in the name of diversity - for the students. However, when it comes to faculty, the old standard of 'one set of rules for thee and another set of rules for me' applies, hiding behind their tenure. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-04-27 17:33 |
| #6 I've spent a reasonable amount of my employer's time trying to figure out just exactly what "diversity in the work place" means. I've come up with two possible answers: 1. It is something to be said in order to keep the likes of Jessie Jackson, et el from blackmailing the organization. or 2. It means the some people really can dance better than others. This is based on the guidance that "different groups/cultures" bring "different points of view/strengths" (why this is good is never explained) to the organization. The first seems to be the most likely as I have serious doubs about the second possibility as I have seen no evidence to support the thesis. But then I am just a bottom feeder, so what do I know? |
| Posted by: kelly 2007-04-27 16:15 |
| #5 In my case, it was an excellent opportunity to feel bad about being born a white guy. I passed on that |
| Posted by: Frank G 2007-04-27 15:54 |
| #4 "Diversity means differences and similarities," he says, be they in race, gender or corporate culture. Diversity is difference and similarity. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Intellectuals are morons. |
| Posted by: The Doctor 2007-04-27 15:51 |
| #3 “R. Roosevelt Thomas, founder of the American Institute for Managing Diversity, says corporate America must first redefine the word. Diversity…” Perhaps we should find a way to prevent the charlatans of social experiment to stop “redefining definitions” to their liking every time the little- people catch on to their boondoggles. We need ahhhh…ummm…what’s the phrase again…oh yeah…we need a “paradigm shift”. |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2007-04-27 14:25 |
| #2 They really avoid the biggest issue: accession to the top ranks requires top performance. The popular misconception is to pretend that top corporate executives just hang out with their buddies for martinis and golf, doing a job that anyone could do. It goes hand in hand with statements like Al Gore's that the rich have "won life's lottery". Which in a way is like criticizing a heart surgeon because "what he does isn't any different than what a plumber does". Yes, well, in both cases, plumbing is involved. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-04-27 14:11 |
| #1 Pick the best people you can find for the job, and treat them all with respect, and "diversity" takes care of itself. |
| Posted by: Mike 2007-04-27 14:06 |