Lessons Learned from Community Organizations: Inclusion of People with Disabilities and Others
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12034 |
| Author | Charmine E. J. Härtel,Huong Le,Ruth Rentschler,Yuka Fujimoto,David Edwards |
| Published date | 01 July 2014 |
| Date | 01 July 2014 |
Lessons Learned from Community
Organizations: Inclusion of People with
Disabilities and Others
Yuka Fujimoto, Ruth Rentschler, Huong Le, David Edwards and Charmine E. J. Härtel1
School of Management and Marketing, Deakin University, Burwood East, VIC 3125, Australia, and
1UQ Business School, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia
Corresponding author email: fujimoto@deakin.edu.au
Workforce diversity requires broader vision and scope in managing diversity so that
there is greater inclusion inside and outside organizations. This paper provides this vision
by extending the stream of workforce diversity research to community-oriented inclusion
and its processes. The authors interviewed 34 people with disabilities and 40 people
without disabilities who were stakeholders of community arts and sports organizations.
The participants with disabilities were mainly arts audiences, artists and sports athletes,
and the participants without disabilities were mainly managers and government officials.
The key findings report the importance of inclusion through common interest groups
being facilitated by (1) non-minority specific communal activities, (2) listening to minor-
ity voices, (3) multidimensional accessibility, (4) availability of organizational and
natural champions and (5) cross-boundary networks and collaborations. In order to
create more inclusive organizations, the authors suggest that private organizations need
more community-oriented values, goals and strategies that foster boundaryless inclusion
of people with disabilities and other minority groups in organizations and society.
Introduction
This study applies a sociological community
approach to diversity inclusion with the aim of
extending the organizational perspective of work-
oriented inclusion. The findings advocate commu-
nity approaches to diversity inclusion, suggesting
that the internal focus of workforce diversity lit-
erature may be too narrow, inadequately address-
ing the gap between the privileged and the less
privileged in organizations and society. By exam-
ining community-oriented inclusion of arts and
sports organizations based upon Vaisey’s (2007)
sociological community theory, the Community-
oriented Inclusion Framework is established for
work organizations. We argue that a community
perspective of inclusion widens workforce diver-
sity research and provides organizations with a
framework for acting as communities of influence
in organizations and in society.
Work-oriented inclusion processes have largely
involved human resource management interven-
tions, which have not been particularly effective in
developing inclusive organizations and reaping
economic benefits (Kalev, Dobbin and Kelly,
2006; Shen et al., 2009). Unfortunately, work dis-
crimination continues with growing social inequi-
ties in income and opportunities (International
Labour Office, 2007). Organizational demo-
graphic research also confirms that minority
groups feel isolated and excluded from organiza-
tional social networks (Gray et al., 2007; Lopez,
Hodson and Roscigno, 2009; Sanchez and Brock,
1995). The study reported here responds to calls
for a new way to manage workforce diversity,
providing a community perspective to diversity
We would like to thank Associate Editor Professor Stella
Nkomo and three anonymous reviewers for their time
and valuable suggestions for this article.
bs_bs_banner
British Journal of Management, Vol. 25, 518–537 (2014)
DOI: 10.1111/1467-8551.12034
© 2013 The Author(s)
British Journal of Management © 2013 British Academy of Management. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd,
9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA, 02148, USA.
inclusion (e.g. Bilimoria, Joy and Liang, 2008;
Ferdman, 2003; Flynn, 2005; Linnehan and
Konrad, 1999).
People with disabilities were selected as the
target group for inclusion in this study, as they
are among society’s poorest (World Health
Organization, 2005). Today, one in every six
people – about one billion – is reported to have
a disability, facing disproportionate exclusion,
underemployment, unemployment and poor
health outcomes (International Labour Office,
2012). They are particularly disempowered and
isolated in organizations and communities (Barnes
and Mercer, 2005; Kulkarni and Lengnick-Hall,
2011). Studying the inclusion process for people
with disabilities therefore provides insight into the
inclusion of marginalized people in organizations
and society.
As arts and sports activities are encouraged as a
means of creating inclusion worldwide (UNESCO,
2003; United Nations, 2012), we listened to the
voices of 74 stakeholders of community arts and
sports organizations. In doing so, we develop
the Community-oriented Inclusion Framework,
extending the organizational inclusion literature.
Conceptualization of community
and inclusion
In the workforce diversity literature, Lorbiecki
and Jack (2000) called to move diversity manage-
ment away from the business case argument,
while Tatli (2011) called for complementary social
justice and managerial approaches. The business
perspective for diversity focuses on ‘leveraging
marketplace opportunities, greater creativity,
higher quality team problem solving’ for obtain-
ing competitive advantage (Cox and Blake, 1991;
Robinson and Dechant, 1997, p. 26). However, a
community perspective has been nascent in the
workforce diversity literature for the past decade
(e.g. Mor Barak, 2010; Özbilgin, 2009; Ragins
et al., 2012). Our study takes the community per-
spective one step further towards creating more
inclusive organizations.
The term community is defined variously
(Marquis and Battilana, 2009). It is acknowledged
as part of a shared social identity (e.g. Southerton,
2002), with a common location (e.g. Mulroy and
Shay, 1997), common interests in events such as
arts and sports (e.g. Secker et al., 2009; Young
et al., 2006) and as a process of developing the
subjective experience of ‘we-feeling’ or ‘natural
belonging’ in communal groups (Vaisey, 2007).
Vaisey’s (2007) theory used the locale of the
commune for his study of community, joining his-
torically divided concepts of the social world
(Tönnies, 1988) between Gemeinschaft (i.e. sub-
stantive community) and Gesellschaft (i.e. struc-
tural community). Substantive community refers
to shared values, moral order and shared group
identity for social interaction. Structural commu-
nity refers to the associations between individuals,
social network infrastructures such as the pres-
ence of authority, provision of physical space,
common meeting places, demographic similarity
and setting regular meeting times. Historically,
social capital and network theories (e.g. Brint,
2001; McPherson and Rotolo, 1996; Putnam,
1993) emphasize structure as a basis for social
interaction. The structural community, however,
was contested by other sociologists, on the basis
that the absence of shared values, norms and
meanings is insufficient to create moral order and
may, in fact, encourage exclusion (e.g. Etzioni,
2001; Sandel, 1996; Taylor, 2003).
By testing the effect of structural and substan-
tive communities on members’ experiences across
60 urban communes, Vaisey (2007) revitalized
substantive community discourse, signifying an
authentic relational life beyond rationality. His
study found that substantive community life was
associated with structural community: namely,
frequent interactions, the presence of authority
and investment, but not social homophily (i.e.
similar age, education and father’s occupation).
We applied Vaisey’s theory of community
(Vaisey, 2007) to another type of community
setting: namely, the context in which arts and
sports organizations enable people with disabili-
ties to engage in community activities. Arts and
sports community organizations include both
substantive and structural dimensions of commu-
nity based upon the common passion for and
interest in arts and sport. Arts organizations’
community activities include local community fes-
tivals and other amateur arts-related events such
as music, dance, exhibitions and film. Sports
organizations’ community activities refer to
amateur sports activities such as baseball, foot-
ball, trampoline and bowling activities.
On the whole, organizational diversity inclusion
frameworks are silent on the meaning and process
Lessons from Community Organizations 519
© 2013 The Author(s)
British Journal of Management © 2013 British Academy of Management.
To continue reading
Request your trial