Diversity Training: The Positives and Negatives

Nowadays, the world experiences increased rates of globalization. Alongside with the benefits this development provides for businesses and individuals, it poses significant challenges for organizations operating at both local and international levels. The difficulty brought by globalization and blurring physical and cultural borders is best conceptualized through the need to adapt to the increasing diversity of workplace and society in general. Needless to say, this issue has not been left unnoticed in the corporate world as well as among the governmental and not-for-profit organizations. One of the common approaches towards addressing the challenges brought by diversity is diversity training which is considered virtually mandatory in many companies. However, a close look at the research done in the area of diversity training reveals that its effectiveness is limited, to say the least. In fact, to make the program worth its costs, employers must assess their employees’ need and readiness for diversity training. 

To start with, it is safe to say that nowadays diversity is considered to be a strength for an organization. However, numerous organizations keep learning the hard way that a perceived asset can easily turn into a liability when handled poorly. It is the reason why employers increasingly resort to diversity training as the way to boost the performance of their respective workforces. Bezrukova, Spell, Perry, & Jehn (2016) define the method as “ a distinct set of instructional programs aimed at facilitating positive intergroup interactions, reducing prejudice and discrimination, and enhancing the skills, knowledge, and motivation of participants to interact with diverse others ” (p. 1233). Even a brief look at this definition is sufficient to grasp one of the key challenges in evaluating the effectiveness of diversity training: the broadness of the concept. Bezrukova et al. (2016) confirm this observation by pointing to the fact that the significant discrepancies in the results of the studies aimed at evaluating various diversity training program is associated with the wide variety of approaches and measures taken into consideration by the researchers. In other words, the result of the evaluation depends heavily on the area of workplace relationships the researchers choose to analyze. 

However, the observations presented above do not mean that the effectiveness of a diversity training program cannot be assessed at all. It rather suggests the necessity for defining the program under study and its expected results as clearly as possible. The same point applies to the programs themselves. It means that diversity training designed with a specific goal in mind is more likely to be effective than the one created with the purpose of general improvement of relationships among diverse groups of employees. For instance, Lindsey, King, Hebl, & Levine (2014) report that people with low empathy react more positively to the diversity training based on motivation adjustment compared to their counterparts who possess higher rates of this trait. This observation implies that diversity interventions should be tailored individually for each category of employees to be effective. 

That point, in its turn, leads to the conclusion that diversity training is associated with significant expenses as resources should be spent on designing and implementing the program within a workplace. At the same time, there is no general agreement concerning the effectiveness of such programs within the research community. For example, Brewis (2018) is optimistic about the impacts of diversity training focused on the idea of the “inclusive subject” on the employees of UK based companies. The author argues that this approach is likely to address the issue of employee resistance and unconscious bias properly. 

At the same time, Noon (2017) expresses pronounced skepticism towards the increasingly popular unconscious bias diversity trainings. The researcher argues that such an intervention is pointless in most of the cases because it puts excessive emphasis on the phenomenon of agency instead of focusing on structural factors that may contribute to racism and other forms of discrimination at a workplace. This observation is consistent with the data obtained by Bezrukova et al. (2016) who registered the gradual decrease of the training’s effects over time. Noon (2017) further warns against overreliance on unconscious bias training “given there are already a wide range of longer-standing diversity training interventions that seek to educate, influence attitudes and impact behaviour … and which create important, safe, reflexive conditions for participants to explore group dynamics” (p. 205). In other words, the decision on which diversity training program to apply must be based on careful analysis of the workplace rather than emotions or the desire to follow current trends. 

The issue outlined above is worth paying close attention to because the negative effects of a misused diversity training are not limited to wasting organizational resources on an inefficient intervention. In the worst case scenario, it may even damage the performance of a team of employees instead of boosting it. Thus, Homan, Buengeler, Eckhoff, Ginkel, & Voelpel (2015) report that in some instances diversity training interventions may damage the creativity of multinational teams. In their research on the subject, Homan et al. (2015) argue that the mere existence of such an intervention does not guarantee a positive outcome; instead of making such an assumption it is vital to assess the current level of diversity and the attitude towards working with people from other nations within the team. The interventions impact diverse team with comparatively less positive pertaining diversity beliefs more positively than their counterparts for more homogenous teams or the ones in which the members embrace diversity already (Homan et al., 2015). This observation further supports the claim that diversity training is not a one-size-fits-all solution and that it should be applied as a part of long-term development strategy rather than means for achieving immediate improvement for employee performance. 

The question naturally stemming from the discussion presented above is what are the characteristics of the workforce pointing at the need for diversity training, and, if such need exists, what are the most appropriate interventions to be applied in the context of a specific organization or team. Chung, Gully, & Lovelace (2017) answer the former question, at least partially, by analyzing the correlation between perceived ethnic discrimination among employees and their readiness for diversity training. The researchers conclude that employees who are ethnically dissimilar to their supervisors show significant readiness and willingness for diversity training when they perceive ethnic discrimination at their organization (Chung et al., 2017). Notably, this correlation works even when the employees under question do not perceive the discrimination to be aimed at themselves. In other words, such employees see diversity training as the opportunity for meaningful change at their workplaces. As a result, there is no need to spend time and effort to motivate them to participate and persuade them on the probable benefits of the respective interventions. 

To sum it up, diversity training poses both opportunities and threats to every organization that decides to apply it. The available research on the effectiveness of such interventions indicates that it varies significantly depending on the organizational context, personal attitudes of the employees towards the matter of diversity, and the particular training programs applied in each individual case. Therefore, it is safe to say that diversity training must be considered and designed carefully in order to meet the individual needs of the organization’s employees and ensure that the investments made in the intervention are used with the maximum efficiency achievable. 

References 

Bezrukova, K., Spell, C. S., Perry, J. L., & Jehn, K. A. (2016). A meta-analytical integration of over 40 years of research on diversity training evaluation.  Psychological Bulletin ,  142 (11), 1227–1274. doi: 10.1037/bul0000067 

Brewis, D. N. (2018). Duality and fallibility in practices of the self: The ‘inclusive subject’ in diversity training.  Organization Studies ,  40 (1), 93–114. doi: 10.1177/0170840618765554 

Chung, Y., Gully, S. M., & Lovelace, K. J. (2017). Predicting readiness for diversity training.  Journal of Personnel Psychology ,  16 (1), 25–35. doi: 10.1027/1866-5888/a000170 

Homan, A. C., Buengeler, C., Eckhoff, R. A., Ginkel, W. P. V., & Voelpel, S. C. (2015). The interplay of diversity training and diversity beliefs on team creativity in nationality diverse teams.  Journal of Applied Psychology ,  100 (5), 1456–1467. doi: 10.1037/apl0000013 

Lindsey, A., King, E., Hebl, M., & Levine, N. (2014). The impact of method, motivation, and empathy on diversity training effectiveness.  Journal of Business and Psychology ,  30 (3), 605–617. doi: 10.1007/s10869-014-9384-3 

Noon, M. (2017). Pointless diversity training: Unconscious bias, new racism and agency.  Work, Employment and Society ,  32 (1), 198–209. doi: 10.1177/0950017017719841