Corporate Values vs. Diversity
A question has been raised in my mind by a colleague of mine who specialises in Diversity. During her explanation (a very good one) of Diversity, she explained how the mirroring effect (hiring people who are similar to the recruiter - even down to looks and body language) can prevent an organisation exploring and embracing diversity. Large corporates encourage this by listing the values they would like their people to have. Without thought or training managers can easily revert to subjective selection based on what they preceive as “having the same values as us”.
The question I would like to raise would be in searching for the same values are we missing out on a diverse workforce by hiring the same people? Is this where focusing on the behaviour, the evidence of performance is more key?
January 20th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Ok - first I must declare that I am the colleague that Suzie so generously refers to above. My interest is in making equality and diversity work for organisations. All organisations must comply with employment and equality legislation - many see this as an unwanted burden. However, there are real benefits to recruiting and retaining a diverse workforce. I can bore people for hours with these - but I will stick to the point Suzie made about corporate and individual values vs. diversity:
There is no denying that an organisation with a strong and well communicated mission, vision and values is more likely to engage its workforce in a common purpose, which is a powerful factor in improving orgnisational performance. However, there is a wider context here which relates to individual values, and the fact that many people in today’s society feel that their values are under threat. This provokes defensive and insular attitudes towards groups and individuals whose values are perceived to be different from ours. However, most people, regardless of their cultural or religious background, share values which centre around family, security and the search for some sort of fufillment - this is what binds us rather than divides us.
In terms of recruitment, many managers go by ‘gut instinct’. This often means recruiting someone that the manager feels will fit into the team. But as Suzie suggests, this is inevitable a subjective response. What organisations need is the right person for the job, based on a defined set of skills and competencies. What individuals need is the removal of barriers which have previously prevented the full participation of all individuals in the workforce. These barriers can include the stereotypical views of managers (sometimes a result of ‘gut instinct’), working patterns that make it nearly impossible for carers of children to fully participate and organisational cultures that don’t value diversity and fear change.
We are not talking about altruism or political correctness here - we are talking about improving organisational performance: recruiting the best person for the job, taking advantage of new opportunities and opening up your organisation to new clients in groups previously ignored. This can have real financial benefits, particularly in an economy where survival depends on innovation, adaptation and recognising new opportunities.
January 20th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Thanks Amanda, I love listening to what you have to say on Diversity and you have hit the nail on the head - the “gut instinct” reaction. The baine of HR professionals lives to be honest. However - I am not saying a manager should not trust that gut feeling but learn to ask constructive and objective questions which test what your gut is instinctively telling you to do!
January 29th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
This is just what I was looking for. Thanks for sharing