Explicit Versus Implicit Stereotypes: “What Biases Do I Really Hold?”

Morgan, Melanie

doi:10.1080/17404620802154683

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Few perpetrators will admit to actions that inflict harm since this could contradict an image of being ethical and moral (Sue et al, 2007). Furthermore, ethical and moral thinking people are not likely to admit that they hold negative attitudes that produce stereotyping, although they may (Morgan, 2008). Instead, it is more politically correct to convey a perspective of consciousness of equality.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconciling the Business Case and the Social Justice Case for Diversity: A Model of Human Relations

Byrd

Sparkman

2022

Human Resource Development Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are two dichotomous rationales for valuing diversity in organizational contexts: the business case and the social justice case. Arguments for the business case for diversity and the social justice case are both supported by valuing philosophies. However, lacking in either of these philosophies is a human relations component that recognizes the role of relationships in achieving the intended goals. In this article, we propose that reconciling the tensions between the business case and the social justice case is contingent upon adopting an organizational strategy that includes a human relations valuing philosophy. The organizational strategy suggested reaffirms a strategic role of human resource development.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconciling the Business Case and the Social Justice Case for Diversity: A Model of Human Relations

Byrd

Sparkman

2022

Human Resource Development Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The moral question is no longer, “Why are people not treated fairly?” Rather it has become, “Why are people treated unjustly (Byrd, 2018)?” Few perpetrators will admit to actions that inflict harm upon another person because this could contradict an image of being ethical and moral (Sue et al, 2007). Furthermore, ethical and moral thinking people are not likely to admit that they hold negative attitudes that produce stereotyping, although they may (Morgan, 2008). Instead, it is more politically correct to convey a perspective of consciousness of equality.…”

Section: Valuing Diversity: a Matter Of Organizational Social Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity Branding Strategy: Concealing Implicit Stereotypes and Biased Behaviors

Byrd

2018

Advances in Developing Human Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Problem. From a business perspective, the expression valuing diversity is commonly used as a branding strategy to enhance an organization's competitive advantage. The problem with diversity branding is its potential to decenter biased behaviors that could actually conceal the detrimental effects of unfair treatment under the banner of valuing difference. Presenting diversity as a utopian state without an ethical and moral concern for the people it represents is a misnomer and is in itself a misrepresentation of value. This article will argue for a more holistic philosophy of diversity that is concerned with the value of people as well as the value diversity brings to an organization's financial success. The Solution. Socially responsible leadership and the action efforts of those seated at the strategic planning table are key to reframing a more holistic philosophy for valuing diversity. Human resource development (HRD) professionals are strategically positioned in multiple roles within the organization to participate in matters of diversity and bringing about social change. Diversity intelligence will be discussed as an emerging model for guiding leaders and decision makers toward upholding an antidiscrimination commitment through the integration of business and social justice perspectives of valuing diversity. The Stakeholders. HRD researchers, practitioners, and educators who are committed to social justice outcomes for marginalized groups in the workplace; and organizational leaders responsible for developing and implementing diversity strategy.

show abstract

Explicit Versus Implicit Stereotypes: “What Biases Do I Really Hold?”

Cited by 2 publications

References 6 publications

Reconciling the Business Case and the Social Justice Case for Diversity: A Model of Human Relations

Reconciling the Business Case and the Social Justice Case for Diversity: A Model of Human Relations

Diversity Branding Strategy: Concealing Implicit Stereotypes and Biased Behaviors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About