Some organizations make no effort to promote diversity and do not even bother to comply with affirmative action and EEOC standards. These organizations send a clear message to their employees that the dynamics of difference are unimportant. By ignoring EEOC policies, they send their managers the even more detrimental message that it is permissible to maintain exclusionary practices.

Some organizations base their diversity strategies solely on compliance with affirmative action and EEOC policies. They make no attempt to provide education and training for employees, nor do they use the organization’s reward system to reinforce managerial commitment to diversity. Managers in some companies in this category breach company affirmative action and EEOC policies with impunity. When top management does not discipline them, the likelihood of costly legal action against the organization increases.

Some organizations go so far as to enforce affirmative action and EEOC policies but provide no organizational support for diversity education or training. Managerial commitment to a diverse workforce is either weak or inconsistent.

Other organizations fully comply with affirmative action and EEOC policies but define these policies quite narrowly. Organizational systems and structures are inadequate to support real organizational change. In addition, education and training in diversity are sporadic, and managerial rewards for implementing diversity programs are inconsistent or nonexistent. Although these organizations may design some useful programs, the programs are unlikely to result in any long-term organizational change, and thus the organizational climate never becomes truly receptive to diverse groups.

Some organizations effectively implement affirmative action and EEOC policies, provide ongoing education and training programs pertaining to diversity, and tie managerial rewards to success in meeting diversity goals and addressing diversity issues. However, such companies may still make only a minimal attempt to cultivate the kind of inclusive and supportive organizational climate in which employees will feel comfortable.

The most effective diversity efforts are based on managerial implementation of affirmative action and EEOC policies that are developed in conjunction with an organization-wide assessment of the company’s systems and structures. Such an assessment is necessary to determine how these systems and structures support or hinder diversity goals.

Generally, for such a comprehensive assessment to take place, top management must “buy” the idea that diversity is important to the company. Actually, support from the top is critical to all successful diversity efforts and underlies tying organizational rewards to managers’ commitment to diversity. Ongoing assessment and continuing programs are also necessary to create an organizational climate that is inclusive and supportive of diverse groups.

The “Golden Rule” approach to diversity relies on the biblical dictate “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”³⁷ The major strength of this approach is that it emphasizes individual morality. Its major flaw is that individuals apply the Golden Rule from their own particular frames of reference without knowing the cultural expectations, traditions, and preferences of the other person.

One African American male manager recalled a situation in which he was having difficulty scheduling a work-related event. In exasperation, he suggested scheduling the event for a Saturday. He was then reminded by a coworker that many of the company’s Jewish employees go to religious services on Saturday. He was initially surprised but then somewhat embarrassed that he had simply assumed that “all people” attend “church” on Sunday.

The assimilation approach advocates shaping organization members so that they fit in with the existing culture of the organization. This approach pressures employees who do not belong to the dominant culture to conform—at the expense of their own cultures and worldviews. The end result is a homogeneous culture that suppresses the creativity and diversity of views that could benefit the organization.

One African American woman in middle management said, “I always felt uncomfortable in very formal meetings. I tend to be very animated when I talk, which is not the norm for the company. Until I became more comfortable with myself and my style, I felt inhibited. I was tempted to try to change my style to fit in.”

“Righting-the-wrongs” is an approach that addresses past injustices experienced by a particular group. When a group’s history places its members at a disadvantage for achieving career success and mobility, policies are developed to create a more equitable set of conditions. For example, the original migration of African Americans to the United States was forced on them as slaves. Righting-the-wrongs approaches are designed to compensate for the damages African Americans have suffered because of historical inequalities.

This approach most closely parallels the affirmative action policies to be discussed in Chapter 10. It goes beyond affirmative action, however, in that it emphasizes drawing upon the unique talents of each group in the service of organizational productivity.

The culture-specific approach teaches employees the norms and practices of another culture to prepare them to interact with people from that culture effectively. This approach is often used to help employees prepare for international assignments. The problem with this approach is that it usually fails to give employees a genuine appreciation for the culture they are about to encounter.

Stewart Black and Hal Gregerson, in their study of managers on assignment in foreign countries, found that some managers identify much more with the parent firm than with the local operation.³⁸ For instance, one male manager, after spending two years opening retail outlets throughout Europe, viewed Europeans as “lazy and slow to respond to directives.” Obviously, his training and preparation had failed to help him adjust to the European host countries and to appreciate their peoples and cultures.

The multicultural approach gives employees the opportunity to develop an appreciation both for differences of a culture and for variations in personal characteristics. This approach focuses on how interpersonal skills and attitudinal changes relate to organizational performance. One of its strengths is that it assumes the organization itself—as well as the individuals working within it—will be required to change in order to accommodate the diversity of the organization’s workforce.

The multicultural approach is probably the most effective approach to pluralism because it advocates change on the part of management, employees, and organization systems and structures. It has the added advantage of stressing that equity demands making some efforts to “right the wrongs” so that underrepresented groups are fairly included throughout the organization.