Purpose The purpose of this paper is to argue that diversity management (DM) interventions, underpinned by principles of justice and fairness, create a powerful force that drives sustainable outcomes. Further, the authors argue that justice and fairness should be embedded at the core of DM. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative case study methodology was used to ascertain how four organizations approached critical issues regarding diversity. Justice and fairness principles were used as a framework to evaluate each organization’s DM interventions. Different approaches adopted by the case study organizations were compared using a cross-case analysis. Findings Justice and fairness principles provide a useful framework to evaluate DM interventions. The findings show that justice and fairness principles have an effect across the continuum of DM, including identifying dimensions of diversity, executing DM programs and realizing outcomes of DM. Research limitations/implications The current study is limited to four case studies using qualitative methods. Practical implications The findings demonstrate the importance of integrating justice and fairness benchmarks when implementing DM programs. Originality/value The findings shed light on the link between DM and justice and fairness, an area lacking empirical studies. It also presents a new area for empirical enquiry—the application of social justice principles in evaluating organizational interventions in DM.
Since the outbreak of COVID-19, reports of racism and racial discrimination towards those of an Asian cultural background have increased in culturally diverse countries around the world. The current study sought to gain clarity about Asian Australian experiences of racism by conducting inferential and descriptive analysis of cross-sectional survey data collected from the Australian state of Victoria (n = 436). Building on previous studies which have identified a range of modalities and consequences of COVID-19-related racism, participants were prompted to consider their experiences of racism in the year prior to the outbreak of COVID-19 as well as their experiences during the pandemic on four measures—Direct Experiences of Racism, Vicarious Experiences of Racism (online and in-person), Everyday Racism and Hypervigilance. For the target group (participants with an East or Southeast Asian cultural background resident in Victoria), analysis showed an increase in experiences across three of the four measures, with small to moderate effect sizes, Everyday Racism (r = 0.22), Vicarious Experiences of Racism (r = 0.19) and Hypervigilance (r = 0.43). Analysis demonstrated that the target group experienced a significant increase in online experiences of racism (r = 0.28). These findings shed light on the contradictory findings of previous research on pandemic-related racism in Australia. We show that the pandemic impacted Victorians likely to be perceived as of Chinese background more than other Asian Australians.
There is a consensus nowadays that the best way to develop students’ academic literacy abilities is within the context of their studies in the disciplines, an approach known as ‘curriculum embedding’. But despite the demonstrable value of this approach, surveys of the field in Australia suggest there has been only limited success over the years in integrating embedding pedagogies into university courses. In the light of this halting progress, there is a need to constantly document initiatives in this area, both to affirm the principles upon which embedding is founded, as well as to show how these principles can be given practical effect on programs. This paper provides an account of one such initiative – a collaborative project between Sociology academics and an academic literacy specialist. The key motif on the project was how the notions of ‘theory’ and ‘critique’ could be made comprehensible to students in the particular disciplinary context they were working in. We also show that an essential element of such programs is developing a common language by which pertinent issues can be explored, both among academics and with students.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.