Diversity management as navigation through organizational paradoxes

Abstract

PurposeAccumulated evidence suggests that efforts at diversity management (DM) yield mixed results or even fail in terms of promoting workforce diversity. Previous scholarly attempts to explain the mixed results of DM initiatives provided only partial understanding. This study applies a paradox perspective to better understand the challenges of DM from the vantage point of diversity managers, who play a central role in the promotion and implementation of diversity initiatives.Design/methodology/approachIn-depth interviews with diversity managers in large business organizations in Israel explored practitioners' conceptions of the challenges underlying the implementation of diversity initiatives. A grounded theory approach was utilized.FindingsThe findings reveal the emergence of paradox: diversity initiatives generate organizational tensions that undermine their success and hence amplify the need for further diversity interventions. Three distinct paradoxes are identified: necessary change vs desire for stability; bureaucratic control vs flexible procedures; and long-term business gains vs short-term losses. Diversity managers utilize two opposing strategies to contend with these paradoxes.Research limitations/implicationsThis study does not represent voices of diverse employees or of top executives. The data focused on mid-level practitioners' descriptions of DM challenges and their methods of contending with them.Practical implicationsThe findings shed light on an effective strategy of contending with paradox. Recognizing paradox and navigating it properly may greatly advance the success of costly DM change interventions. Implications are suggested regarding the academic education and training of DM practitioners.Originality/valueBased on the paradox framework, which offers a novel vantage point for understanding the challenges of implementing DM, the findings contribute to the scholarly understanding of the limited success of DM interventions.

Reflections on the continuing denial of the centrality of “race” in management and organization studies

“…Her words point to the difficulty of being an outsider within and whether one can claim to speak from the margins without being suspect or compromised (Ellis et al, 2020;Collins, 1986;Spivak, 1988). Yet, what I am clear about is that in its current dominant paradigmatic form, diversity sustains the power of the "emperor" (Ahmed, 2007;Bell and Hartmann, 2007;Nadiv and Kuna, 2020;Zanoni et al, 2010). It seems the detour to diversity did not help the "emperor" recognize that MOS is not race neutral.…”

Tensions in talent: A micro practice perspective on the implementation of high potential talent development programs in multinational corporations

“…Theoretically, scholars have utilized a variety of lenses to understand the implementation of practices in MNCs. Important in this regard are: institutional perspectives which have, in particular, surfaced issues related to the gaining and maintaining of legitimacy (Jacqueminet, 2020; Kostova & Zaheer, 1999) and the dialectic surrounding the desire to standardize or localize HRM practices in MNC units operating across multiple contexts (Ferner, Belanjer, Tregaskis, Morley, & Quintanilla, 2013; Parry, Dickmann, & Morley, 2008); process perspectives, increasingly calling attention to the complexity surrounding implementation (Van Mierlo et al, 2018); and more recently paradox perspectives which underscore some of the contradictions inherent in different organizational settings and the efforts actors engage in to navigate them (Keegan, Bitterling, Sylva, & Hoeksema, 2018; Nadiv & Kuna, 2020).…”

Pending Issues on Professionals’ Well-Being: The Living and Working Together in Organization Perspective

“…As pointed out earlier, assuming that an organization is a living system and, therefore, a system of relationships aimed at producing (goods or services), we believe that research works must fill two relevant gaps in the well-being literature: the tendency to put in contrast well-being and performance [5,25,26]; the fact that few studies consider the difference as a crucial element to promote (or, at least, sustain) well-being [31][32][33].…”

“…The second relevant issue is that, even if many studies have focused on individual, relational, and organizational dimensions, as yet little attention has been given to diversity [31][32][33]. Thus, organizations have a twofold condition, with constrictions on the one hand (i.e., employees have to work with colleagues that they do not choose) and opportunities on the other (i.e., employees can improve together).…”