What has been the greatest diversity issue you have witnessed or experienced in

a job or any formal/informal organization? Why was this memorable?

I worked in a long-term care facility for eight years and encountered a lack of racial
diversity among employees and residents during my time there. The city I live in is
made up of roughly 75% white, 14% black, and 11% “other” or “multi-racial” individuals.
In eight years of work, there were a total of two black employees at our facility and only
one black resident. I always thought this was too low a concentration. If the workforce
and clientele was composed similarly to the overall city population, at any given time
there should have been approximately 30 black employees and 30 black residents.
During this same time, there was a single employee of Asian descent. There was never
a resident with that background. This is memorable to me because what I saw within the
confines of the organization I worked for did not match when I saw in the community
when I was out shopping or visiting parks.

In his article, Engberg offers these quoted words from another study: “Exposure
to campus diversity, for instance, teaches students to think critically, solve
problems more readily, and value diverse perspectives” (Engberg, 3). SCENARIO:
Accepting Engberg's premise here, you are part of the Graduate College
Admission Committee for a major American university. Recent data shows the
committee there is a disproportionate number of women (65%) among the
applicants. Committee members realize they can only deal with the candidates on
hand. Question: Should they want to see this number change in future years? If
so, why? If not, why?

I do not think the committee should want the number to change. Women have long
been a minority in certain fields, and a minority in higher-level degree programs. Seeing
so many female applicants may speak to the Graduate College’s appeal to diverse
candidates. Additionally, just because 65% of applicants are female does not mean that
there is no diversity within that group. More information would be useful here. This
group of women could encompass many ages, races, religious backgrounds, etc.
Engberg states that “The need for qualified job candidates is exacerbated by the
dramatic increase of women, immigrants, and racial/ethnic minorities entering the
workforce (285). The qualified candidates are those that can successfully interact with
those who are different. I think the best way to ensure this is to accept a variety of
individuals into graduate programs so that they can learn from each other while also
learning the subject matter. This will give the candidates a better chance of success
once they enter the workforce.

Per Engberg’s article, in your collegiate career to date, have you had exposure to
diverse perspectives? Explain your answer.

I believe that I have had exposure to diverse perspectives. My collegiate career has
spanned four universities, so I have been in contact with students and professors from
all over the world. My online education experience has certainly increased the number
of diverse perspectives. I have encountered. Throughout the course of my education, I
have worked with students from different racial and ethnic backgrounds, religions,
sexualities, age groups, geographic locations, and so on. I have also encountered many
people with diverse work histories and perspectives on business and projects. When I
first started college and attended a local university, there was little opportunity to
converse with students inside the classroom. The exception to this was my sociology
class. In that setting, we discussed the major social institutions, and at times students
with divergent backgrounds and pasts got into heated discussions. One such discussion
was about religion and the story of Christmas. Now that I do classes online and
discussions are a major component, as is annotating in Perusall, the exposure to
different thoughts, methods, habits, and customs coming from diverse classmates is
much greater. 

Thomas Sowell, a prominent African American economist writes: “Cultural

diversity, viewed internationally and historically, is not a static picture of
differentness” (Sowell, 38) and “All explanations of differences between groups
can be broken down into heredity and environment” (Sowell, 40). What
evidence/examples does he offer to support these views?

To support the first claim, Sowell elaborates on the assertion that commonly accepted
ways of doing things around the world have been compiled from many cultures, and that
the most efficient methods and tools have replaced others in customary use (38). Books
have replaced scrolls and Arabic numerals have almost entirely replaced Roman
numerals (Sowell, 38). Some cultures’ approaches to handling a specific necessary task
are better than other cultures’ approaches to the same task, and it is the best habits
from among all cultures that find continued use across the globe (Sowell, 38). 
To support the second claim, Sowell writes about the success of cultural groups at a
particular profession, regardless of where that group is located (40). Whether in Italy or
in the United States, Italians are synonymous with quality wine. Likewise, Jews succeed
in the clothing business whether they are in Europe of North America (Sowell, 39-41).
Sowell points out that people of a certain cultural background can be different in
different environments, but that those differences can be based on timing as well as
geography. For example, Jews from two different areas in Europe settled in two
different parts of Australia. All are Jews, but there are significant differences in their
demeanor caused by the location they originated from (Sowell, 41). A similar
phenomenon occurred with Japanese residents of both the United States and Brazil
during WWII. While the Japanese in Brazil staunchly supported Japan during the war,
those in the USA supported the states during the same time. The difference was due to
the times when each group left Japan. When Japanese were migrating to Brazil, it was
a generation that valued patriotism; however, when Japanese were migrating to the
United States, people were more aligned with American ideas and values (Sowell, 41).

Towards the end of his article, Sowell writes: “Advocates of diversity want to
preserve cultures like butterflies preserved in amber” (Sowell, 43). Why does
Sowell reach this conclusion?
Many people feel that a culture is only in-tact if all its original customs are observed, and
all its methods used. To dilute a culture with ideas from another, even if those ideas
increase efficiency or success is seen by some as a bad thing. People who wish to see
a culture remain the same throughout time, regardless of what that means for
survivability, are the ones Sowell refers to when he writes that “Advocates of diversity
want to preserve cultures like butterflies preserved in amber” (43). Butterflies preserved
in amber will never change from what they were at the time of their encasement. They
will look the same forever; they will be stuck in one form with no opportunity to grow or
change. Sowell’s argument that cultures must change and accept ideas from other
cultures to survive does not mesh well with wanting to preserve cultural practices in
their original state.

What are two specific groups that you have observed being subordinated in a job
or organization? Describe the situations. How do you think the involved
individuals were affected?

I have only worked for one organization. Except for our maintenance department and
the facility administrator, the staff was entirely made up of white Christian females
without noticeable disabilities. Because of the similarity of all workers, I feel that the
subordinated groups did not exist within our facility and can only be identified as those
who were most obviously left out. People of different racial and ethnic backgrounds and
those with disabilities were not prioritized for hiring by our company. These groups were
negatively affected by not gaining the benefits of employment. I would often hear about
applications and interviews pertaining to people who did not fit the standard
demographic of our personnel, but none of those people ever made the final cut to be
on-boarded. In the one instance in eight years when an employee with Down syndrome
was hired, they were subjected to behind-the-back ridicule by frustrated coworkers,
rather than given adequate support and training to be successful. I think this disrespect
was detrimental to the employee’s self-esteem.

What is a cultural difference that is likely to engender hostility in the workplace?

Why? What inclusion strategies could be used?

A cultural difference that can lead to hostility in the workplace is difference in religion
among coworkers. People see their religion as the best, and often take issue with
competing religions. To further complicate things, most people only really know and
understand their own religion, so when dealing with someone from a different religious
background, they risk making inaccurate assumptions that can lead to insult. I am
aware that in most places, religion is to be kept out of the workplace, however I worked
in a religiously affiliated healthcare organization, so it was something that came up quite
often. To minimize the negativity surrounding religious differences in such a setting, the
following inclusion strategies could be used: understanding that there are differences of
religion among coworkers, taking the time to listen to the perspectives of others, realize
that all people can make valuable contributions, and understand that innovative ideas
can come from the different perspectives of others (Lecture 1, Slides 21-25).
Leonard details the discrimination gays faced in hiring in the early 21st century.
With major court cases pending when he wrote about the issues individual states
faced absent a federal law regarding discrimination. What evidence did Leonard
present to encourage gays in seeking relief from employment discrimination?

After giving an overview of several court cases involving sexual and gender minority
employees, Leonard describes corporate progress and rights gains that occurred from
the 1970s onward (16). It is reported that some businesses banned discrimination
based on sexual orientation because of being questioned about their policies regarding
the issue (Leonard 16). Leonard states that the 1980s had Human Resource
departments paying particular attention to the challenges gay men faced due to
HIV/AIDS (16). Corporations in the 1990s widened the scope of consideration for sexual
minority employees to include those with alternative gender identities. Building on
previous progress, companies continued to advance rights of LGBT employees by
protecting their privacy. Leonard details a catalyst case for this movement in which an
employee took leave to provide end-of-life support to his partner who suffered from
AIDS (16). In the decades following, sexual minority employees have pushed for
equality in employer provided benefits such as FMLA, medical insurance, and
bereavement leave, and found success in many instances. Leonard states that even
though there is no federal nationwide ban on discrimination based on sexual minority
identification, many companies in several locales across the country are embracing
employee rights for LGBT individuals (16).

Discussing gender and bilingualism in the workplace, Hernández-León and

Lakhani are aware some observers saw second generation Latinos being blocked
in terms of upward mobility while others argue this group will follow in the
footsteps of European immigrants who came to the U.S a century ago (60). What
conclusion do the authors make on these considerations?

The authors of the article conclude that the second generation, both males and females,
have opportunities for upward mobility. Each of the sexes finds advancement in different
sectors and in different ways. The second-generation women complete more post-
secondary schooling than the second-generation men, and often leave the carpet
factories behind in favor of working in the service industry or in retail. These women
advance by recruiting Spanish-speaking clientele to the businesses they work for
(Hernandez 76). The men have largely continued the tradition of working for carpet
manufacturers and advance by using their dual languages to create a flow of efficient
and clear communication between the Spanish-speaking factory floor laborers and the
English-speaking managers (Hernandez 76). The authors of the article note that the
opportunities and success of the second-generation Mexicans depends on the
education they have acquired and is striated by gender. Though they admit that their
study was quite restrictive and therefore not indicative of the whole picture of success of
second-generation Mexicans, they feel they are able to draw some strong conclusions
regarding the small subset of the population they have observed. 
Given the history of affirmative action in the U.S., do you think this policy
promotes or hinders diversity in organizations? Why?

I think that affirmative action is theoretically good. It is supposed to ensure that blacks,
whites, men, women, et cetera are given equal opportunities to learn and to work in our
society. Though the idea is a noble one, the execution is often poor. Affirmative action is
supposed to increase diversity, but I have not seen that come to fruition in my work
experience and have heard from those close to me that even with the laws, hiring
practices and staff makeup do not reflect the goal. In a small city where nearly 20% of
the population is black and another 8% is mixed or multiple races, I spent two years at a
university and never encountered a black or Hispanic student. In the same city, I worked
for 8 years in a healthcare facility and encountered two black employees and no
Hispanic employees. Every school and employer can say that they value diversity and
that they do not discriminate based on race, sex, what-have-you, but proving
discrimination is difficult. I find it hard to believe that in my city there are no minority
applicants who would have been a better fit for my school or my employer than I was. 

Beauchamp concludes: “As long as our choices are formulated in terms of the
false dilemma of either special preference for groups or individual merit,
affirmative action is virtually certain to be overthrown” (158) SCENARIO: You own
500 shares (trading today at $24.28 per share) in the Langston Tech, a well-
performing mutual fund traded on the New York Stock Exchange. Their board of
directors always reflects experienced business and public people. Unlike the
everyday fund managers, board members lend their professional expertise and
reputation to the fund’s prospectus (to reassure investors). The board is elected
by shareholders at their annual meeting. The directors have staggered four-year
terms that allow for rotation. Some small-quantity shareholders complained at
their last annual meeting about the diversity profile of directors being too narrow
– those elected were mostly men and women in their mid-50s. Keeping
Beauchamp’s views in mind, would you support an officer slate reflecting greater
diversity? Why or why not? If you answer in favor of more diversity, what should
it look like? If you answer against diversity, what is your reason?

I think a more diverse board of directors is warranted. The board should represent the
investors. Certainly not all investors in the mutual fund are men or women in their 40s
and 50s. We do not know the ethnic or racial classification of the directors, but I assume
if the shareholders are complaining about lack of diversity that all are white. To me, the
new, diverse board should be made up to represent and reflect the demographics of the
investors. If 25% of investors are over the age of 55, then 25% of the board members
should fall into the same age group. If 30% are women, then 30% of the board should
be female. If 15% are black males under the age of 45… It would be impossible to
perfectly represent the shareholder pool in a small board of directors, but certainly a
much more appropriate board could be elected. Perhaps one issue here is that the
majority shareholders are in fact wealthy white men and women in the middle age
category and that their votes overwhelm those of the other shareholders. Beauchamp
seems to be against the idea of forced affirmative action but believes that overall –
since society is not independently motivated to hire or promote with diversity in mind –
that it is a beneficial policy to keep (Beauchamp 158). 

Anderson quotes former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on
the 1978 Bakke case: “We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial
preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.”
We are now 25 years beyond that landmark affirmative action (AA) decision and
the hiring/admission preferences still stand. What seems to be Anderson’s
opinion about AA, and do you agree with him? Why?

If I am reading Anderson correctly, he has a lukewarm opinion of affirmative action. He

seems to take issue with the fact that it was initially established via executive order
rather than passed through Congress, and that is has been re—imagined and amended
by state officials as well as company leadership. Anderson does give credit to
affirmative action by pointing out that it has increased the number female professionals
allowed more minority individuals to achieve middle-class status (Anderson 127). If
Anderson’s opinion is as I have inferred, then we agree. I can see the benefits and the
necessity for a policy like affirmative action, but I do not believe that it is always carried
out in the best or fairest way. I believe that sometimes the intent to increase diversity
can cause discrimination against other candidates who may be more qualified for a
position. It would be nice if we had progressed enough as a society to bring Justice
O’Connor’s hope to fruition and negated the need to force appropriate diversity or to
regulate practices surrounding it.

As Hopkins, Hopkins and Gross (2005) discuss, “The increased occurrence of

organizations operating across national boundaries, demographic changes that
are occurring around the world, and the embracing of cultural diversity as a
business strategy, represent a variety of recent trends” (p. 949). SCENARIO: You
are named to lead an international team assembled by a major non-government
organization (NGO) to devise a “hands-on” initiative for vocational education in
Third World countries (Africa and Southeast Asia). Itself headquartered on
London; the NGO has said the team need not meet physically all the time. Taking
Hopkins, Hopkins, and Gross into account, what major challenges (cultural and
technological) should you anticipate as a team member? What steps can you take
at the onset to minimize them?

While the team may not need to be meeting face-to-face all the time, I think it is crucial
that the team meet and spend some time together in the formative period so that
members can get to know each other and more accurate assessments of the difference
in technologies and cultures can be made. Only then can an appropriate plan to move
forward be made. Cultural distance will be a factor in this scenario (Hopkins et al 952).
As stated in the reading, the cultural distance between the Mexicans and Chinese would
be like that of the Londoners and the Africans/Southeast Asians (952). Team
effectiveness may be challenged if some members of the team bond more with those
who are like them, leaving others left out (Hopkins et al 953). In this case, the usual
steps a manager would take to prevent or curb the development of in-groups and out-
groups should be implemented. To break down cultural barriers, I would recommend
leaders become familiar with the cultures of those they work with and then institute
appropriate ice-breaking and team-building activities. To reiterate the importance of this
diverse team meeting face-to-face, I think it would go a long way in removing some of
the biases that would be inherent to such a group. Also, considering that we are
discussing a first-world NGO building a team with third-world countries, assessments of
technology that is already in place and what is needed for upgrades so that all members
of the team can be equally present for remote operations is imperative.

Blom and Davis (2016) explore how the U.S. Air Force is working to be more
diverse and inclusive. This is a trend for many organizations in the U.S. today.
Based on what you have read and discussed in this course so far, what are some
methods to promote diversity and inclusiveness in the workplace? In your
discussion, consider whether this can always be accomplished through
corporate policy, or if there are other, more effective methods.

To successfully create a diverse and inclusive organization, there must be dialogue and
discourse. Each person needs to have their concerns heard and addressed. Biases
need to be attacked. We as leaders cannot just say, okay, by this time next month, our
personnel are going to be diversified and inclusive and then leave it at that. Leaders
must lead by example and help others along the way. Blom and Davis (80) mention a
zero tolerance for discrimination policy as part of setting the organizational stage for
diversity. This is important as well as keeping an open dialogue. Another option is to
play up the proven and potential benefits of a diverse team or workforce. Along with the
challenges can come great rewards, but when people are fearful of change, they tend to
only acknowledge the bad things. This is what I think of when reading Blom’s passage
that states “diversity and inclusion are aligned interests” but “will happen only after
individuals experience the tangible benefits” (89). I think in many cases it will be
necessary to make policies at the corporate level (administrative level for smaller
organizations). That helps to ensure that everyone can be equally informed of the
policies. Organization members should be able to ask questions and communicate
concerns or ideas for improvement/advancement of diversification and inclusion. 

You want to review all the PPs, but select 2 of them for answering below

A: Among all the PPs, why did you pick these 2 for discussion?

The PowerPoints I chose to review are “Hearing our Deaf Workforce” by Jake Hulce
and “Law Enforcement and Community Relations” by Evan Peters. I picked Jake’s
presentation because I wanted to learn about how a disability I have never encountered
in the workplace is handled. I picked Evan’s presentation because law enforcement and
its relationship with minorities has been a primary news topic for the past several weeks
and reading an account of someone directly involved in the profession could add insight
to the discussion.
B: What stood out as something entirely new you learned in these 2 PPs?
In the presentation about the deaf workforce, I learned about the underemployment of
deaf people, how their earnings compare to their hearing peers, and that 5% of the
population is hearing-impaired. In the law enforcement presentation, I learned that law
enforcement officials try to conduct community outreach activities to form and keep
connections with the neighborhoods they patrol. This is not something I see done in my
location, so it was new information for me. 

At the end of OGL 350, there is a time for some reflection. The questions below
allow you to influence future offerings of this course.

A: Were the required readings helpful in placing diversity issues in a variety of

contexts? If so, how? If not, why?
The required readings were good for placing diversity issues into historical contexts in
the United States and the world in general. Looking at the publication dates of many of
the journals, I feel that filling in the gaps to the present was required through additional
independent study. For example, there have been many additions to the LGBTQ+
movement since the readings were published. The issue has been in SCOTUS within
the past few weeks as well. 
C: The class member’s PPs were assigned in a way to both play to individual
student interests and to offer a wider view of diversity issues to bring course
concepts to a full circle. Were these PPs effective in opening new insights,
opinions, and concepts?
I think the PowerPoint projects were a great way to expand on diversity issues. I did not
realize the topic I presented was as complex as it is. Reading through all the source
material I used and taking note of the related court cases illustrated that religion – or
lack thereof – in the workplace can be handled in many ways and that the
circumstances surrounding each incident can seem marginally different but lead to
vastly different legal outcomes. I did not previously realize how precarious a position the
employer is in when employees of different beliefs conflict with one another, or how
difficult it is to treat employees equally with accommodations when one employee has
faith and the other does not practice religion. Though conflict over this issue is
something I have experienced in the workplace, personally, I learned a lot more about
the intricacies of the problem. 
D: As a course designed with giving skills to managers (present and future), what
material should be retained and/or discarded in future sections? Any ideas or
concepts that should be added or further emphasized in enhance the learning
experience in OGL350?
In this course, information was presented on LGBTQ+ and ethnic/racial diversity. Male-
female workplace discrimination was also briefly touched upon. These are all good
topics for this class because they are all still relevant and common in today’s
organizations. Teaching new managers and leaders to look out for these issues is
necessary so that fairness among applicants can be increased. The course may benefit
from the addition of case studies and what-if assignments to allow new managers to
spend more time thinking about and describing how they would approach common
diversity issues within their workplaces. 
 
References:
Anderson, Terry H. “The Strange Career of Affirmative Action.” South Central Review,
vol. 22, no. 2, 2005, pp. 110–129., https://www.jstor.org/stable/40039874.
Beauchamp, Tom L. “In Defense of Affirmative Action.” The Journal of Ethics, vol. 2, no.
2, 1998, pp. 143–158., https://www.jstor.org/stable/25115575.
Blom, Gregory M., and Brittany B. Davis. “An Imperfect Understanding: The Air Force's
Transition to Diversity and Inclusion.” Air & Space Power Journal, 2016, pp. 79–94.
Engberg, Mark E. “Educating the Workforce for the 21st Century: A Cross-Disciplinary
Analysis of the Impact of the Undergraduate Experience on Students' Development of a
Pluralistic Orientation.” Research in Higher Education, 2007, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 283–
317.
Hernandez-Leon, R., and S. M. Lakhani. “Gender, Bilingualism, and the Early
Occupational Careers of Second-Generation Mexicans in the South.” Social Forces, vol.
92, no. 1, Apr. 2013, pp. 59–80., doi:10.1093/sf/sot068.
Hopkins, Willie E., Shirley A. Hopkins, and Michael A. Gross. "Cultural diversity
recomposition and effectiveness in monoculture work groups." Journal of Organizational
Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational
Psychology and Behavior 26.8 (2005): 949-964.
Hulce, Jake. "Hearing our Deaf Workforce." PowerPoint.
Leonard, Arthur S. “The Gay Rights Workplace Revolution.” Human Rights, vol. 30, no.
3, 2003, pp. 14–16., http://www.jstor.org/stable/27880384.
Peters, Evan. "Law Enforcement and Community Relations." PowerPoint.
Rubinoff, Michael. "OGL 350: Diversity and Organizations" PowerPoint Slides 21, 25.
Rubinoff, Michael. "OGL 350: Diversity and Organizations Lecture 2 a-d" PowerPoint.
Sowell, Thomas. “A World View of Cultural Diversity.” Society, vol. 29, no. 1, 1991, pp.
37–44.