Yesterday the Virginian-Pilot ran a story about the potentially negative consequences of workplace diversity training. A 2005 study from the Society for Human Resource Management concluded that about two-thirds of companies engage in diversity training, but that most of these efforts backfire, resulting in a more homogeneous workforce. The source of the trouble appears to be that most sessions are mandatory rather than voluntary, and focus solely on the legal dangers and not on the benefits of diversity in business settings.
Call in the sociologists to break down the problem…
“They force their workers and managers to sit through this training, and they hit them in the head with the possible legal sanctions,” said one of the researchers, Alexandra Kalev, an assistant sociology professor at the University of Arizona.
Kalev and Frank Dobbin, a sociology professor at Harvard University, reviewed the types of diversity training programs and the composition of the work force at the companies. They found that optional sessions are more likely to lead to increased numbers of women and minorities in the workplace.
That’s because mandatory sessions might trigger resentment and unintentionally “activate biases,” Kalev said. When they’re voluntary, she said, employees are more likely to search for the positives to justify the use of their time.
A better idea….
Too many diversity training programs, [Kalev] said, are designed as “a ticket out of jail” – a way to bolster a company’s defense if it faces discrimination suits. Too often, [she] said, the sessions concentrate on legal minefields. “You have to behave this way,” she said, “otherwise we will get sued and we’ll have bad publicity.” That also turns off employees. “The legal content is so boring and so intimidating,” she said, “and it’s usually exaggerated.”
Better, she said, to focus on how diversity helps them achieve their strategic goals.
Comments