Making Differences Matter: A New Paradigm for Managing Diversity

Introduction 

An analysis of the article Making Differences Matter: A New Paradigm for Managing Diversity by David A. Thomas and Robin J. Ely points to the fact that diversity is perhaps one of the essential elements that define success in any given organization. Ely & Thomas (1996) argue that having a much more diverse workplace will experience a significant increase in its efficiency, as the workplace helps in lifting morale, as well as, bring greater access to new market segments. Consequently, this points to the need for having to embrace diversity as one of the key expectations for any given workplace environment with the sole focus being towards bringing out a sense of connection to the set strategic goals. However, one of the critical questions raised about the different diversity paradigms revolves around which of the paradigms makes the most sense in the global workplace of the future.

Paradigm Making the Most Sense 

After comparing the different diversity paradigms, it is clear that the discrimination-and-fairness paradigm makes the most sense about how work environments are embracing diversity in the future. The discrimination-and-fairness paradigm creates a lens through which to focus on areas that include “equal opportunity, fair treatment, recruitment, and compliance with federal Equal Employment Opportunity requirements” (Ely & Thomas, 1996, p.38). In other words, this means that the paradigm seeks to ignore all aspects that create diversity within the workplace with the aim being towards promoting fairness. Embracing this paradigm gives managers an easy way out in their bid to deal with diversity as one of the main issues that are likely to impact performance in the workplace. It serves towards bringing together the persons that may consider themselves as being diverse while in the workplace environment in a bid to paving the way for higher levels of success.

One of the key aspects to note when dealing with the discrimination-and-fairness paradigm is that it does not create an environment through which to accept and embrace the differences that are brought out by workers in the workplace environment. Instead, it seeks to create an environment in which managers are expected to ignore all the differences with the sole intention being towards bringing out fairness. That means that all workers will be treated in an equal manner regardless of their existing differences that may serve as critical determinants of diversity. From that perspective, it is clear that indeed this paradigm gives managers the most excellent platform through which to embrace diversity; thus, serving as a clear indication that indeed it makes the most sense in a future workplace environment.

The use of this paradigm can also be quantified from the fact that it creates an environment in which every employee is treated as equal regardless of his or her background and experiences. Managers embracing the use of the discrimination-and-fairness paradigm tend to believe in the fact that one’s background and experiences do not have any form of bearing on one’s potential contribution to a company. That builds on the perspective that all employees ought to be treated in a manner that is reflective of equality and fairness in the workplace. A review of the workplace environment of the future indicates that most managers have embraced the use of this paradigm in trying hard to manage diversity. That can be seen from the fact that most managers tend to brush off different aspects that define diversity and differentiation to help build on equality and fairness.

A paradigm that I would not suggest 

I would suggest that no company or organization should embrace or use the access-and-legitimacy paradigm as part of its approach to working hard in dealing with diversity issues in the workplace. Ely & Thomas (1996) build on the understanding that the use of the access-and-legitimacy paradigm is essential for companies operating within the competitive environment, as it creates an environment through which to gain market share in diverse markets. In my understanding of this paradigm, I took note of the fact that it does not have any benefits for the employees or workers working within diverse workplace environments. Instead, it only emphasizes companies being able to build on their success by using the notion that they remain diverse about the employment of workers from different backgrounds. From that perspective, I tend to believe that this should not be a paradigm that ought to be considered as part of any given workplace environment.

Conclusion 

Diversity is vital towards ensuring that companies and organizations can build on their success, as it helps towards improving organizational efficiencies. From the analysis of the different diversity paradigms, it is clear that the paradigm that makes the most sense for the global workplace of the future is the discrimination-and-fairness paradigm. In this paradigm, the expectation is that managers ought to ignore all differences among employees and instead, adopt a strategic approach through which to promote equality and fairness. The paradigm that I would not suggest that an organization pursue is the access-and-legitimacy paradigm, as it only focuses on the success of the company while ignoring the workplace environment.

References

Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. (1996). Making differences matter: A new paradigm for managing diversity.  Harvard Business Review ,  74 (5), 33-66.