Promoting diversity at the workplace

[Big_Fat_Panda]

I think diversity is vital at the workplace. Employers need to rise above the gender, race, religious biases and hire people from all walks of life. It helps in creating an all-inclusive environment where workers enjoy their day to day life.

Also, the staff needs to be compensated justly for the work they do. The female staff is at a serious disadvantage when it comes to remuneration.

[NuckingFutz]

Couldn't agree more

[Kirk Lazarus]

What if I'm a dude playing a dude disguised as another dude. Will I still be eligible?

[I_No_Scoped_JFK]

How could you? After all, he's a dude playing a dude disguised as another dude!

[BlimeyHarry!]

This comment section is EPIC

[Gerhard]

Cue Aerosmith's "Dude Looks Like a Lady" please LOL

[ItsYoBoiSteveIrwin]

On a serious note tho...I think people should be selected based on their ability rather than the color of their skin. Its the 21st century. Stagnated thought has no place in society these days.

[Lou]

I agree with this. People should not be discriminated against their color, race, or social status. Ones skills, ability, and intelligence is not and shall not be measured against these societal norms.

I still want to believe that the world is getting better, with more people learning to value others regardless of race, skin color, or social status. Although we still have a long way to go, I am hopeful.

[kdy]

I think promoting diversity goes further than the hiring process and handbook policies . While one of the benefits of diversity allows a bigger pool of ideas, it can also cause conflicts due to different backgrounds and opposing perspectives. We can't deny that this still happens. The important key players in promoting diversity in the workplace include employees as well . Respect, consideration and open-mindedness are a must-have to make a diverse workplace succeed.

[Bjun]

I agree. It's weird The Voice came into mind when I was reading your comment. It's the same concept, isn't it? You're picked based on your singing ability and not how you look like (let's face it, a lot of singers don't really know how to sing, they just look good and auto-tune does the rest).

[stan]

Diversity only enriches us. The world is so small now. We can be anywhere in 24 hours or less and we can talk and be in touch in seconds. We live in times unlike any other that our ancestors lived in! I say embrace it! Its here to stay. We are all one human race at the end of the day.

[Bjun]

Well put. I find it surprising that some people still think some jobs are only done by people of a specific race, colour or gender. Diversity in the workplace requires an open mind and when we accept this, this will not only improve the environment at work but how we deal with everyday life as well.

[Big_Fat_Panda]

stan The reality tho is different. there's all sorts of stereotyping going around. Many professional coaches have been sacked because they openly commented in front of the media that black players have higher performance levels in the field and are suitable for ground work only, and not suited for desk jobs!

The reality is horrendous and we will have to wake up to it sooner or later imo

[JerryYan]

What's important is that we accept this diversity and not make it a qualifying factor for roles, especially skill-based roles. Not seeing differences is very different from seeing past it. Focusing on experiences, skills, and development by applicants and how those may contribute due to their differences is what's gonna matter.

[Rchou89]

Have you guys seen the conversations on social media centered around the disabled community? Many people are speaking up about the lack of accommodation for disabled people -- mainly disabled people being denied the ability to work remotely (because that's too difficult to manage) or even being denied the opportunity to interview. Meanwhile, companies have literally jumped at the chance to have their employees work remotely and even interview for jobs remotely during this pandemic because otherwise they have to shut down. So clearly, it was never about being able to mange it. It just wasn't worth doing for disabled people.

We're learning a lot about remote capabilities during this pandemic and we're learning a lot about obstacles placed in front of disabled workers. Obstacles that seem to have been nonissues in reality. And this is just one group of people who face difficulties due to access issues and stereotyping (disabled workers can't meet the job requirements, etc.).

Diversity combats this. When you have a more diverse workforce, you have a better understanding of the differing needs of different populations. For example, a disabled hiring manager has a better understanding of the capabilities of other disabled interviewees and what can be done to accommodate the needs of others. A person of color on the board of directors has a better understanding of the obstacles other people of color face climbing the corporate ladder and can help remove some of them. A woman in a supervisor position in a traditionally male-dominated industry understands the needs and obstacles of other women in her team and can help them achieve growth as well.

While we still have a long way to go, when these problems are highlighted in a public way (such as the conversation on disabled obstacles in the workforce), change begins. It's slow, but it happens.

[sammie83]

I agree with what you are saying. More diverse workplaces lead to a broader understanding of needs and the to allow the company to have their "fingers on the pulse" so to speak when it comes to understanding stakeholders and the needs of its customer base.

[mjmnl]

I believe that working with a diverse workforce also boosts each person's morality which results in a more peaceful and productive work environment. Having members of different races, genders, and religions show that the company believes that your identity doesn't solely speak of what you can contribute to the company but rather, your skills and knowledge are your strengths. There are a lot of benefits that a company may get from a diverse workforce. This article even vouched that you can increase your profitability just by embracing this widely accepted practice. Read it here: https://www.thebalance.com/cultural-diversity-3306201

[JerryYan]

I believe you meant morale (the sense of happiness, contentment, engagement, etc.) as against morality (right vs wrong). Diversity does improve morale in communities like the workplace by increasing 'trust', 'inclusion', and 'wellness'. Read about it here https://ceoworld.biz/2018/02/27/how-...tied-together/

I believe this even applies to remote workspaces. Sharing this article describing diversity 'types' here https://diversity.social/workplace-diversity-types/

[sammie83]

I thought this video captures the essence of promoting diversity in the workplace. Worth a few minutes of your time if you can spare it. What are your thoughts about this?

[Indelible_Mark]

Diversity in the workplace stands (and falls) on trust.

Imagine how much more challenging trust has become now that work-from-home is the norm. It took a pandemic to force the paradigm shift that people working from home can remain accountable. What about diversity and culture? An article says, "The manner in which a company’s culture embraces a diverse group of people—including those with disabilities—may as well be its flagship product." (https://remote.co/championing-divers...n-remote-work/) Web tools and cameras glueing an otherwise literally distant team of workers in different time zones (maybe even across planets and universes in the future!)

One wonders how this 'culture' becomes a 'shop window' to clients now only accessible through the web...

[mjmnl]

In the workplace, it shouldn't matter what your ethnicity is as long as you produce results that will benefit the company and in turn, benefit your clients. Being with other ethnicities can help you learn new things about them including their cultures, beliefs, and morality. We are all human being in each other eyes. Teaching and learning from other people can also improve your relationship with them. It's always good to learn new things in life.

The problem is that hiring can't be free from bias and stereotyping. There are tips to truly diversify hiring that was discussed in this blog (https://theundercoverrecruiter.com/h...y-seven-words/) and it might be of help to the recruitment specialists

[Lou]

I agree. Ethnicity should not matter in the workplace, especially in a remote setting. It is your skills and the results that you produce that should speak for you. In the end, what matters is what you can do for the company and what benefits you can provide to the company.

No matter how good you say you are or no matter how much you polish your image for others to see, your character, skills, and results will overpower your polished image.

[JerryYan]

Sensitivity Training..has anyone been on one? Apparently it is the same as Diversity Training. (see https://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-diversity-training.htm) It's a growing practice apparently. It reads like the 'training' is a 20-minute video on Diversity, Gender Sensitivity, and Mediation in the workplace.

[Kamille]

I think diversity at a workplace supports innovation, among other benefits. When differences or individuality is welcomed at a workplace, people will be more comfortable to let their guards down and truly engage in their work. Multiple perspectives bouncing off of each other will generate creativity and profitability. People from different demographics usually have a different view on a problem and how to solve them, thus generating more options and avenues of progress.
Also, diversity equals a work culture based on respect for individuals set to work on a shared goal. The old adage of "united we stand, divided we fall" is an adage because it works. Only when true unity among different individuals will goals and objectives be met.

[JerryYan]

TBH while I agree Lou with the need for structures in the workplace, diversity does NOT mean 'everyone agrees' with changes, ideas, innovation or not. Albeit differences in opinion is a hallmark of diversity.

Working through the differences with equal respect is a fruit of diversity. I'm sure you know that among many intangible things respect is first 'given' before it is 'earned'. EQ and IQ say the same thing about respect. "Judging characters" in the workplace can only mean work is not getting done. You have too much time in your hands to be analyzing words and sentences let alone judging!

THAT ought to be part of the 'structures in the workplace': no judging and spend your time 'working it out' with your team.

[Lou]

Exactly JerryYan. It is expected that not all are open to changes, let alone acknowledge their mistakes and indifferences. That is why structured procedures are a must in any organization/institute as it serves as the fine line between diversity.

Everyone believes in whatever they believe in and not everyone is open to listening to other's ideas, more so their predicaments. Following rules and regulations in a group, as I have mentioned previously, cancels or at least minimizes unnecessary drama and whatnots.

Furthermore, in an organization/institute, everyone is deemed to be professionals. Ergo, everyone is expected to think and act as one. On another note, your character plays a great deal in how you communicate and work with the members of your group. Before you can demand respect from everyone, make sure that you are ready to give one as well.

If you really want to "work it out" with your team, start with proper communication, be transparent, stay professional, and stick to the issue at hand. In addition, abide by the rules and regulations set by your company/ organization/ institute.

In a real-life scenario, there will always be misunderstandings. There will always be questions and confusion. Therefore, proper communication and decorum are a must. Use your company's rules and regulations as your guide. Company policies are created to ensure proper and harmonious workflow. They are not meant to be written decorations. They are meant to be used as your guide, especially when things get challenging.

[jcoppi29]

One thing I can perhaps add in this narrative is the idea that the success of solid company regulations, workplace protocols, and other workforce communications policies and all of that HR-esque stuff, including the motion for diversification and unity, would depend on the implementation phase methodology.

In simpler terms, if the people motioning it do not work on their charismatic, persuasive, "people" skills, it's unlikely cooperation with imposed changes would be observed. This is often generally observed in populations that have gaps in intelligence, proficiencies, and competencies. A lot of people really know things more than some other group, but this does not automatically make them the most likable, or effective channel of implementation via persuasion.

There's a difference between an unpersuasive knowledgeable person and a persuasive, averagely knowledgeable person -- the former is generally perceived as a know-it-all by the layman, pretentious even (gosh, I've been this one for a time, old days), and the latter is understandable, relatable, bearable to listen to.

For changes to happen, there has to be an emphasis on the science of persuasion, for example, (and I can't say how frustrating it is that this aspect of communication, policy implementation, correction, and conflict resolution is very underrated), there are ineffective teachers, instructors, trainers and there are effective counterparts. Their key difference is their charm, or charisma, people skills, or their relatability and persuasion skills.

Effective "mentors" or "channels of implementation" or catalysts know that being called wrong is already naturally evolutionarily painful, even more so if done in the midst of a bigger group (we kinda inherited that fear of isolation from centuries of exile and death). Because they know they're already in the right and they're about to make changes that include calling out one side, instead of going directly to the bad parts of a policy or whatever they're changing, they're going to praise the person first, then delivery the areas of improvement portion. Sound familiar? Yes. That's the sandwich method.

Ineffective mentors or channels, however, most of the time, have little empathy or understanding of others and would often resort to a tactic that works well with robots. I mean, we're human, our emotional modules in the brain have developed waaaaaay earlier than our thinking functions, so we can assume that emotional responses are the average expected reaction -- and should be anticipated risk of how we're going to persuade people to a "change" such as workplace diversity.

An example --, it's also psychologically bad practice to deliver negative feedback for a person in a group setting. Most times, this just makes things worse. The person, in the situation, would only build more hostility and get emotionally stirred to the point that any point provided, regardless of good intent or not, will only register as an attack, thus it will be denied.

This is the backfire effect and a lot of "persuaders" fall for this. It's the pitfall of intending to attack and modify beliefs, perceptions, knowledge but end up attacking emotions, and then, wondering why the well-intended gesture of guiding someone developed a harsh emotional resistance instead.

This phenomenon is widely observed, but most times, the smarter, or "better" people tend to stick to pride than humbly work on being effective persuaders and implementors of change.

Being told you're wrong is naturally painful enough. Being "corrected" by someone that is harshly blunt, abrasive, or haughty about being in "right" hurts more, to the point, that its just the emotions that change -- the idea that's supposed to be changed, gets stronger.

Link for reference:

https://youtu.be/wm_NgnZrGbg

[jcoppi29]

I generally think that a key step in promoting diversity in the workplace is understanding one of its least noticed hindrances -- tribalism.

It is mainly the evolutionary tendency of the human being to dehumanize others that aren't part of their "tribe" in order to justify severing ties, belittling or even harming them. This is widely observed in typically and heavily divided identity groups online like social media. In general, considering that the emotional and aggressive modules of our brains developed years earlier than our thinking module (the prefrontal cortex), the tendency and potential for tribalism is often the most convenient (genetically speaking) when responding to a perceived "different" people, in terms of religion, beliefs, political alignments, favorite NBA teams, favorite shows and games and all.

To disarm tribalism to pave the way to workplace diversification, one must know themselves to the point of helpful awareness. Most times, we're not exactly aware that we're exhibiting tribalistic responses to seemingly divisive topics or situations because it's almost an automatic reaction. There's a space wherein one will step back to ask if they're going tribalistic.

Additionally, and sadly, ironically, there had been instances where the movement to workplace diversification has become reliant on group identity politics, wherein, it becomes excessively about diversity with minimal or no emphasis on the required skill set for a particular workplace or field. So what happened is societal pressure for inclusion that ignores meritocracy, making it a populist narrative rather a moderate balance of diversity and job market value.