Share what you know with millions of people
Focus is the best place to turn what you know into remarkable content
0
What are some of the biggest myths or misconceptions about diversity in today’s workplace?
This question was asked during last night's #TChat. More information about #TChat can be found on TalentCulture.com.
Events
- Dos and Don'ts of Small Business Marketing May 29 @ 11 am PT
- Lead Nurturing 202: The Next Generation May 31 @ 11 am PT
- The Tricks to Paid Media June 6 @ 11 am PT
- Display Advertising for Brand Awareness June 20 @ 11 am PT
Related Activity
27 Answers
For me the biggest myth is that we value diversity. I don't think most people, ahem leaders really value diversity. If they did, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Myth 1: There is equal opportunity for all in the workplace. Sorry, but we know that racism still exists and can negatively impact a person's ability to move up the corporate ladder.
Myth 2: Gender is no longer an issue. Oops, again. In the White, heterosexual, male-dominated world of business of the past and present, men still prefer to hire and to promote other White, heterosexual men.
Myth 3: Promoting "minorities" to positions that work on diversity issues is a great idea. Not so fast. Not everyone from a so-called "minority" background has any greater experience dealing with a variety of co-cultures than anyone else and such a promotion can potentially lead to failure.
Myth 4: Creating diverse teams can always lead to greater success. While the idea is wonderful, research suggests that TOO MUCH diversity can slow a project down.
Myth 5: The best common way to get a project completed on time is to establish firm guidelines. Again, diverse backgrounds can put a damper on THIS idea. People may come from monochronic (linear time) oriented backgrounds or polychronic (non-linear time) oriented backgrounds,. Monochronic cultures, like the overarching U.S. culture, may work directly toward a deadline. Employees from a polychronic culture (for instance, a Latin American culture) may do any number of tasks in between the times they focus on the specific project. Deadlines are not considered as "firm" to those from polychronic cultures. The severity or looseness of the deadline should be considered before the team is assembled.
Myth 6: Affirmative Action benefits all folks from "minority" cultures. Well, not exactly. There are a VERY large number of small businesses that are completely unaffected by Affirmative Action rules and, therefore, are not under any obligation to hire people from cultures other than their own.
Myth 7: We've gotten past appearances. REALLY? A young person with a large number of or particularly visible tattoos and/or body piercing is not likely to get a job when that job has to do with customer contact, no matter HOW badly s/he might wish to work in retail, upscale restaurants, etc. Clothing should also not be ignored. For a Muslim woman wearing a Burqa, being hired in a similar position is highly unlikely (especially in today's current climate).
It's political BS. Pandering to self-interest groups and media do-gooders. "Diversity" is best when it happens naturally not forced by government, shakedown hacks or other agenda driven opportunists.
Business owners and CEO's aren't running social clubs. Their bottom-line is priority not skin shade, sexual orientation or whether or not you have a catchy Spanish last name. I want the best and brightest for my business.
Let's be honest here - the purveyors of the diversity movement only care about gender, race, sexual preference or if you're Latino. If you are gay or black and you don't share the same politics as the one's on the Ivory Tower than you get kicked out of the protected class.
How many gay owned or black owned businesses are scrutinized for their lack of straight white guys on the rolls? Exactly! There is no substance to diversity programs or even diversity training. It's symbolic nonsense.
I have to agree with Thomas on this: "Business owners and CEO's aren't running social clubs. Their bottom-line is priority not skin shade, sexual orientation or whether or not you have a catchy Spanish last name. I want the best and brightest for my business."
Most business owners are first and foremost concerned with the success of their business and will hire anyone regardless of their demographic status insofar as the person is the most qualified for the job. This is at least true for smaller organizations. I do believe that hiring and promotions can become more biased (in any direction) the larger the organization. The smaller the company the more important any one person is, hence the incentive to focus on qualifications rather than preferences.
First, you really have to define what you mean by "diversity".
If you are referring to "diversity" as superficial factors like gender, ethnicity or sexual orientation, then I think that will lead you to a variety of misconceptions. The real diversity that companies should be looking for (but which is often rejected) is diversity of thought, but that definition leads to myth.
As for the misconception, we can start with the premise that if you hire a bunch of people of the same gender, age, sexual orientation, etc., you will have a group that is fairly homogeneous. This will likely produce a team of people who all think in unison and rarely have divergent points of view, but this is not guaranteed.
On the other hand, just because you hire a bunch of people of different gender, age, sexual orientation, etc., you will not necessarily have a group that is heterogeneous. Because again, if you are relying on superficial factors to tell you about who a person is or what a person thinks, you are making a huge mistake.
That being said, hiring people of diverse appearance will not result in the true diversity that is really (theoretically) desired. But as William stated above, the biggest myth of all is that business leaders actually WANT diversity. Far too many prefer their coterie who think exactly like they do and always say what they want to hear.
The biggest problem with "diversity" at this point is that it is turning into an all purpose euphemism.
The word used to have a specific meaning, associated with variery and difference. Yet we now see such things as "diverse people want" or "a diverse person wants". How can an individual be diverse?
That usage is illogical, low on content, and annoying.
This is not just a grammatical quibble. If you really mean "non white" or "black" or "asian" it would be far better not to begin by establishihg that in your mind "non white" etc. needs a euphemism.
A euphemism is the substitution of a pleasing word for an unpleasant one. So the move to euphemism demonstrates that you find "non white", "black", "asian" etc. to be unpleasant.
If that is not what you had in mind I suggest you stop using unnecessary euphmisms.
I think the biggest myth is that diversifying your workforce automatically makes it better. Remember the story of the Tower of Babel? People need to learn how to accept and work with others from different cultural backgrounds. It's not human nature to do so. Managers need to be trained on how to coach diverse workforces. Only then can the benefits of a diverse workforce be achieved.
And hiring someone solely for the color of their skin, national origin, sexual orientation, or religion is just as discriminatory as not hiring them for those reasons. The main standard of who gets hired should be which worker has the best skills to do the job. Hiring should have absolutely nothing to do with anything else; it's blindness to these factors that we should be seeking, not quotas.
The biggest myth is that diversity refers only to race or gender or what have you. I think a better definition of diversity would include differences people have with regards to working style. For example, one person may do their best work in the morning, another in the evening after the kids go to bed. Someone may be more responsive by email, another person may prefer meeting face to face. Some people are uncomfortably outspoken, others are hilarious (or have no sense of humor whatsoever), others are serious and conscientious. All of these things impact how we work together, irrespective of gender, race, etc. And it is how we work through these differences while playing to people's strengths that represents the power and the challenge of diversity.
A truly diverse workforce is one that includes different races, genders and generations without giving them a second thought, where people work together around the world toward a common goal and Boomers roll up their sleeves next to new grads.
The biggest myth in my opinion is usually when people say of their own organizations " of course we are a very diverse organization".
I think the biggest myth is that if an employee has global experience, it follows that they are skilled at intercultural communication. Intercultural understanding needs to be taught and supported in an organization and very few spend the time and resources.
I actually respectfully disagree with John, though. There are several studies which show that more diverse teams have more innovative and creative output and that homogenous teams tend to get stuck in ruts. The difference in success and failure of diversity is often how the teams are built, the leadership of the teams, the true commitment organizationally to diversity, and general communication and talent management and development initiatives.
Where I agree with John, though, is that diversity is larger than race or sex or ethnicity - diversity of thought and of ideas as well will make a big difference when building a successful team.
@ Larry Edmonds
Interesting post regarding the myths you've identified. I'd like to comment on several of them.
Myth 1-I agree that there isn't equal opportunity, but racism is really only one small fraction of the issue, bias is the real problem here, not just racism.
Myth2- You focused on gender, white males, but that's a very large group. How about cultural bias or ethnic bias, not all white people are created equal. I wonder if you would feel the same if you were in another country. By the way, this is changing rapidly, just look at the growth of the Hispanic culture in this country, the average white male is going to be a lot like the dinosaur.
Myth 4- I'd be curious about the research, I've never come across any, however, that doesn't mean anything. I can tell you that diversity of thinking is very powerful and if you look at the great inventions you will find that they come from groups of diverse thinkers.
Myth 5- I have to disagree with you on this particular comment. I've worked with individuals from 122 countries, speaking 26 languages. I've worked with mixed groups of individuals and haven't experienced what you've described. I will say that the values are different from culture to culture. Deadlines are considered as important and as firm in either of the two cultures you described, I find this too be a bit of a stereotype.
Myth 7- I agree with your comment, but the example you used is perhaps not the best. Tattoos are socially acceptable, we've crossed that great divide, just look at television, especially the entertainment industry. We no longer believe that tatoos are just for sailors, they are considered socially acceptable personal expressions, albeit not for every industry.
A better example would be looks and body weight. There is clearly bias when it comes to these groups of individuals and that will never change, it's our bias and perceptions that guide as, shallow as that may seem.
One of the biggest misconceptions about "diversity" in the workplace is that it can be conscripted by driving the semi tractor trailer of "diversity" up the most displeasureable orifice of the workers.
It is all in the approach that one takes to bring about an understanding of "diversity" that either makes such a concept suceed or fail. The "Brute Force" or "Sledgehammer" approach is doomed to failure from the onset.
Most responsible workers approach their job interactions with other workers with reason and logic. They are apt to consider and give thought to ideas, such as "diversity", if they are approached in a non-combatitive, non-threatening, casual manner. Casual discussion in brief, logical, reasoned forums with inclusive input and interaction tends to work best.
People who work in the same environment daily, tend to understand others in their environment, regardless of their sex, religion, race, beliefs, etc., better than they do someone not in their line of work. But, that does not mean that they are not curious of differences, and, understanding and tolerant of those differences, when approached in a non-threatening manner.
It is the differences in all individuals that leads to the "spice" in the workplace, after all. If we were all the same, what a boring place our work environments would be. It is with that thought in mind that one must approach the concept of "diversity".
Bob, I don't agree that hiring for diversity means, hiring less qualified applicants, even though that's what may happen and often does with many organizations. You can find very qualified diversity candidates, you just have to look at little deeper.
Caty, for me the biggest myth is that there is going to be a ROI if you adopt diversity. Even though some will say that there are clear examples of financial impact they are few and far between. I've heard interviews from several CEO's, some of which were forced into becoming diverse because of stupidity and even after they've turned their organization around and are highly regarded for being diverse, will tell you that it had next to no impact on their organization.
I believe that our understanding and views about diversity are very skewed, and many of us need to start from scratch. Diversity in concept needs to be much more than just race or ethnicity, it has to encompass experience and thought, but this would probably be a stretch for most people. I think that affirmative action did more harm than good in the long run.
Bob, your right, I was poking you in the ribs.
Great question Caty. I'd add that people often see diversity as something to address when someone has already slighted some other person or group or some other problem has arisen. The idea that people can relearn old thoughts and behaviors in one training or by being told what to do is prevalent in many workplaces. Diversity doesn't just happen, it takes concerted effort over time and attention to how people think and behave toward each other. One approach that seldom works is pretending that diversity isn't an issue or minimizing one's own inability to promote diversity by pointing at others who don't know how to do it either.
The biggest myth is that diversity is a desirable or honorable end in itself.
If I'm looking for someone who is, say, analytical (to make the criteria simple for this example) and I have a "non-diverse" applicant who is highly qualified, what value is there in "looking deeper" for a "diverse"' candidate as John Prpich wrote ("You can find very qualified diversity candidates, you just have to look at little deeper")?
Let's say I have an analytical white man. In the interview he talks about his wife and kids. What value is there in my continuing to look for a man who mentions is boyfriend or husband?
Really, what is the value of diversity as an end in itself when have a lot on my plate I'm trying to run my business?
The same would be true if I have a highly qualified "diverse" candidate. There's no value in me spending time looking for a "non-diverse" candidate.
Hiring for diversity does not necessarily mean that you have to go find people and/or drop standards in order to let in the rabble. The biggest problem for diverse people is simply the barriers based on unrealized or denied prejudice.
If everyone would just clear their mind and appreciate every applicant for the special skills, personality, and experience that they bring to the table, and quit thinking that everyone has to be alike, then that would solve the problem pronto. With time, the numbers would catch up and we'd have a diversified society in every sector.
Diverse people just want an open door to walk through, that's all.
In my opinion, it is that the federal government and/or state governments have created laws that require companies over a certain size to have a diverse workforce.
Statistics still prove gender inequality at all levels. What percentage of women are in politics? How many of them are racialized women?
Fighting prejudice and discrimination attacks a peron's self-esteem and wears the individual down. Add to this mix lack of opportunities when people are hand picked for certain stepping-stone openings.
It's pretty interesting how many posts talk about "our country". It shows we still live in very closed cultures, even while we are moving more towards a global workforce.
Implementing Diversity in our workforce is to recognise the fact that the world is made up of diverse people and we should make full use of that.
Rather than playing towards our biases, we can recognise our own preconceived ideas about people and try to break through them. Even more, we can develop policies which are friendlier to a wider group of people, rather than geared towards a very narrow definition of who is a good player or who belongs or who we can identify with.
And we're not just talking about minorities here. If we lock women out of our workforce through our policies and attitudes, then we are cutting down the available talent by half!
Karn, your comment, "And we're not just talking about minorities here. If we lock women out of our workforce through our policies and attitudes, then we are cutting down the available talent by half!" should be printed on cardboard, highlighted in yellow, laminated, and taped to the desktops of all hiring managers so that they can read it daily if not more frequently.
@Hania
The idea of reverse racism is interesting. So here we have a group of individuals who have been discriminated against based on their race or culture and when the tables turn, the other group yells reverse discrimination. So what does that tell us?
Racism will never go away and for one simple reason, the values of one generation are passed on to the next. Just look at the Klu Klux Klan, here they are still in this day and age as strong as ever. I hear people saying that the generations behind us are color blind and I have experienced that in many forms, but at the end of the day, very little will change.
We've lived in a country that is typically run by old Caucasian males, now, we may believe that this is going to change, but we will have to wait and see. Does the concept of one generation preparing the next, also apply to corporations, will it be business as usual. Clearly there are more diverse organizations and CEO's, however, they appear to be the minority so I'm not convinced that the old boys network is going to go anywhere, at least for a while.
About tattoos, lets' remember one important point. Yes you do have to hire employees that reflect your company's image, but more importantly, you have to hire individuals that reflect your customer base, if not, you may not have any customers, so it really goes both ways.
The way the person dresses for an interview is a direct reflection of who they are, not who you would like them to be. We have to step back and realize that the world is changing and that the way we perceive people and business today is very different.
Based on your comment, you would never have hired Mark Zuckerberg, he wears t-shirts and sandals. Of course there are multiple examples just like this, so the question becomes, what's really important and what was important yesterday, may not be as important today. Maybe it's time to stop judging individuals by what they wear and what they look like and focus on who they are, if we don't, aren't we also discriminating.
It's quite the slippery slope and there are no easy answers. We take our ques in business from what happens in society and that's changing quite rapidly, the real question is, are we ready to accept that type of change.
@Hania
I didn't miss your point, I understood what you were saying. What I was suggesting is that the standards or norms for selection are changing. The traditional paradigms are quickly dissipating, we no longer tend to judge a book by it's cover, however, if we do, we miss a big opportunity. Perhaps the concept of a conservative job interview needs to go away, especially if it blinds us to the potential we seek.
I'm not certain what Mark would wear to his friends wedding, whose to say but he himself. I agree with you that there have been changes in gender bias, but it's moving at a snails pace. Look what recently happened at Wal Mart and the suit that was brought on by the female employees who felt they were discriminated against when it came to pay raises and opportunities, they make up 72% of the Wal Mart workforce. The Supreme Court ruled 5/4 in favor of Wal Mart, is that justice or merely politics, and is that another example of severe gender bias, quite frankly, I felt this was another example of who really runs this country, big business.
I got to lead Diversity&Inclusion in one multinational company and before even starting I have asked employees what is D&I. Answers were mostly funny such as- it's when we get along with our colleagues or it's when we don't fight among each other...Just 23% answered like when people from different nations or religions or different skin color work together and those differences do not present a problem.
So practically, how can people respect something they do not know so much about?
It's on leaders to show what this is and how people and organizations can benefit out of it.
Yes, it's true, many companies are just "pretending" to respect this, but this is just sad.
We still have a lots of racism, minorities do not have equal opportunities and yes, when coming to promoting women to high level positions there is always a question "but she might get pregnant and go long maternity leave", etc.
So, I guess it's a bit better then 30, 40 years ago, but when it comes to Diversity we still have long road in front of us.
During this Pride Week, I was invited to Toronto's City Hall for the launching of Access Alliance's community-based research project report "Working Rough, Living Poor" which is all about the impact on health of racialized groups who experience discrimination and live in the Jane and Finch area of Toronto and must combat employment and income insecurities, food and housing insecurities, harassment and discrimination at work, jobs without benefits, unsafe working conditions, temp agencies that keep workers on call, unstable jobs or piece-meal jobs.
How does this impact their health and well-being? Many negative outcomes are described such as low self-esteem, high blood pressure, addictions, exhaustion, leg pain, stress, ulcers, diabetes, disempowerment, family tension etc. What happens to an individual who faces precarious employment with no opportunities for benefits and good wages from their teen years right into their old age?
Hiring for diversity means hiring less qualified applicants.
Michael, hiring the most qualified is a sure fire way not to hire the best employees.
Answer This Question