Do we see the same? Discrepant perception of diversity and diversity management within a company
| Published date | 01 April 2019 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-12-2017-0286 |
| Pages | 389-404 |
| Date | 01 April 2019 |
| Author | Sabine Bacouel-Jentjens,Inju Yang |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Industrial/labour relations,Employment law |
Do we see the same? Discrepant
perception of diversity and
diversity management
within a company
Sabine Bacouel-Jentjens
Department of Management, ISC Paris Business School, Paris, France, and
Inju Yang
EDC Paris Business School, Paris, France
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to paper investigates whether different perceptions exist with regard
to diversity management within an organisation. Additionally, if such differences exist, what contextual
factors influence these perceptions?
Design/methodology/approach –The approach of this study is based on inductive and interpretative case
research, which aims to compare diverse perceptions in two different organisational units of a company.
For this purpose, 30 semi-structured interviews were conducted.
Findings –The findings in this paper highlight the importance of contexts in the study of diversity
management. That is, contexts such as workforce composition and power (e.g. organisational status) in an
organisation as well as the social environment’s impact on social identity processes, which results in
discrepant focusses on and recognition of diversity management within the same organisation.
Research limitations/implications –This study contributes to research on a more nuanced approach
to diversity by proposing an importance of contexts for the process of social identity and further
perceptual discrepancy.
Practical implications –Qualitative research on and findings about perceptual discrepancy help to close
the gap between the practice and rhetoric of diversity management.
Originality/value –Departing from extant empirical research on diversity at the workplace, which relies
predominantly on quantitative methods, a qualitative design of this study allows a refinement of previous
findings. Also, this paper provides deeper insight into the sense-making process, resulting in different
diversity perceptions by different employees according to their work and social environments or contexts.
Keywords Power, Context
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Increasing globalisation, changing workforce demographics and societal pressures for
equality and integration have made diversity management more challenging (Singh et al.,
2013). Consequently, diversity management is increasingly regarded as an important
strategic agenda of an organisation (Theodorakopoulos and Budhwar, 2015) and has
become an important organisational task (Cole and Salimath, 2013). However, the findings in
this area do not provide a clear consensus regarding the effects of diversity at the workplace
( Joshi and Roh, 2009). While some studies report that diversity is beneficial, others state that
diversity is either detrimental for or has no effect on organisations (e.g. Ely, 2004;
Herring, 2009; Leonard et al., 2004).
As organisations cannot rely on specific diversity management initiatives to consistently
produce favourable results (e.g. Kirkman et al., 2004; Kochan et al., 2003), it is logical to ask
“why or how”. A related, important question for an organisation is to understand how
employees perceive diversity management policies, which are designed with certain social
identity groups (e.g. minorities) in mind. However, although the social identity theory (SIT)
and social categorisation are the most widely used theoretical perspectives for framing
Employee Relations: The
International Journal
Vol. 41 No. 3, 2019
pp. 389-404
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/ER-12-2017-0286
Received 1 December 2017
Revised 30 May 2018
10 August 2018
Accepted 10 August 2018
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm
389
Discrepant
perception of
diversity
diversity research (Nishii, 2013), researchers should consider the SIT and diversity
dynamics more in line with situational settings by asking when, where and how they unfold
in workplaces ( Joshi and Roh, 2009). Extant research has alsoacknowledged the importance
of contextual considerations in diversity research (e.g. Nishii, 2017; Hennekam et al., 2017;
Jackson and Joshi, 2004; Martins et al., 2003; Nishii, 2017).
Therefore, since many factors or contexts come into play between diversity-related initiatives
and relevant organisational outcomes, further understanding about why or how such initiatives
work or not may need to consider various contexts more carefully (Nishii, 2017). Therefore,
the aim of the present study is to examine the following research questions:
RQ1. Whether diversity initiatives in the same organisation are perceived differently
by employees?
RQ2. And if they are, what conditions (contexts) influence this difference?
Drawing from the discussion on the importance of contexts in diversity studies ( Johns, 2006;
Joshi and Roh, 2009; Nishii, 2017), this study contributes to research on a more nuanced
approach to diversity by proposing a holistic contextual framework, together with social
identity and perceptual differences. In doing so, we also offer some insights towards
inconsistent findings in the effects of diversity initiatives.
2. Literature review
2.1 Social identity
Social categorisation and SITs (Tajfel and Turner, 1986) suggest that people tend to classify
themselves and others into various social categories based on organisational membership,
religious affiliation, gender and age –answering the question “Who am I?”(Ashforth et al.,
2008). Studies have also shown that individuals continuously shift their circles of
identification according to the audience and context (Ellis and Ybema, 2010), as one’s
identity is constructed in interaction with individuals and social structures (Ybema et al.,
2009). As individuals may identify in different ways with different groups (Terjesen and
Sealy, 2016), identities are contextually, historically and discursively constructed in relation
to relevant others (Essers and Benschop, 2009). In this vein, identities are fluid and multiple
identities can co-exist in one person (Watson, 2008), and the context determines which
identity is made salient.
It is also argued that people categorise themselves in groups based not only on the groups’
relative salience but also on perceived prestige (Ashforth and Mael, 1989). Moreover,
professional or organisational identity may be more pervasive and important than ascribed
identities based on gender, age, or ethnicity (Hogg and Terry, 2000). In this vein, social and
organisational contexts likely play a role in the formation of diversity perceptions of employees
with different statuses (Pugh et al., 2008). Thus, the way employees in an organisation perceive
diversity management may depend on their status and past social environments. Furthermore,
research has begun to emphasise the impact of contexts or situational factors on diversity in an
organisation (e.g. Johns, 2006; Pugh et al., 2008).
2.2 Context
Context has been defined as “stimuli […] that surround and thus exist in the environment
external to the individual”(Mowday and Sutton, 1993, p. 198). Various aspects of context
encourage or impede behaviour and attitudes in organisational settings ( Johns, 2006). For
example, integrating context into diversity research, studies have stressed the importance of
group cultures ( Jehn and Bezrukova, 2004), workplace demography (Nishii, 2017), human
resource (HR) practices (Hennekam et al., 2017), business strategies (Richard, 2000), national
culture (Bacouel-Jentjens and Castro-Christiansen, 2016), institutional environment (Nishii, 2017)
390
ER
41,3
To continue reading
Request your trial