Striving for inclusion: evidence from China using a latent profile approach

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to identify profiles of inclusion in the workplace to provide evidence-based guidance to build an inclusive organization. Design/methodology/approach Latent profile analysis (LPA), a person-centred classification analytical tool, was applied to determine the subtypes of inclusion with Mplus 7.4, using two-wave data collected from 368 employees in 8 Chinese companies. Findings Three subgroups were identified: identity inclusion group (the highest level of inclusion, 34.0%), value inclusion group (the moderate level of inclusion, 47.5%) and low inclusion group (the lowest level of inclusion, 18.5%). The findings indicate that groups with male, aged and highly educated members, as well as members from developed areas generally tend to feel more included and greater inclusion relates to more favourable outcomes and fewer detrimental consequences. Research limitations/implications As this study was conducted only in China, the results may not be generalizable to non-Chinese contexts. Practical implications The results may help organizational leaders develop a deeper understanding of the significance and the crux of inclusion. To address the duality of workforce diversity, managers can take initiatives to create an inclusive organization. To achieve inclusion, managers should pay attention to ways of improving the perceptions of inclusion among all employees. Originality/value This is among the first studies to identify the variants in inclusion in China using LPA. It reveals the subtypes and characteristics of inclusion and can serve as a starting point to explore how to realize organizational inclusion in theory and practice.

A gender perspective on counter-terrorism. (c2022)

“…Inclusion: many researchers, scholars and practitioners such as Mor Barak et al (1998), Shore et al (2011), Mor Barak (2011) have developed in their models, several constructs who all fall under the same concept of inclusion, such as "work group inclusion, leader inclusion, perceived organizational inclusion, organizational practices inclusion, and inclusion climate" (Shore et al, 2018, p. 178). At a later stage, these models and inclusion constructs were used in other studies by researchers who have built on them and further developed them such as Chung et al (2020) and Qu et al (2021).…”

“…Furthermore, diversity can be a two-edged sword with both advantages and disadvantages (Shore et al, 2011;Mor Barak et al, 2016;Shore et al, 2018). However, the role of inclusion comes to prevent the disadvantages of diversity such as discrimination, conflicts and lower cohesion and communication (Shore et al, 2018) and at the same time to help diversity produce more positive and beneficial organizational consequences (Qu et al, 2021). The International Labour Organization (2019) as well as Le et al (2021) stress on the importance of fostering inclusion in today's organizations taking into account that millions of employees worldwide still suffer from discrimination at work.…”

“…Moreover, Belongingness occurs when individuals have similar characteristics to those of the group members and consequently, tend to feel more accepted. This need can be satisfied when organizations allow their participation in decision-making processes (Qu et al, 2021). On the other hand, uniqueness only occurs when individuals do not show traits that are too similar -or approximately the same -to others in the same group (Snyder & Fromkin, 1980) but rather, have their own distinct characteristics.…”

“…Considering inclusion's importance, it is critical to have a clear understanding of the factors and causes that enable its occurrence in organizations. However, many researchers have indicated that although the outcomes and contributions of inclusion have been identified in many studies, its determinants and the factors contributing to it remain unclear and not defined to the fullest (Brimhall et al, 2016;Qu et al, 2021;Workman-Stark, 2021). In their model, Shore et al (2011) have identified 3 predictors of inclusion: (1) a climate that includes diversity and fair systems,…”