On the trail of easy riders
Lachlan Colquhoun
ISSUE 2, 2006
Exploring a world of difference
AUTHOR: Lachlan Colquhoun DATE: 15.12.06 ISSUE 2, 2006
Diversity may have become a corporate catch cry, but new research shows ignoring differences may be counterproductive.Modern organisations are hugely diverse, complex collections of people from a myriad of backgrounds. Simple categories, such as sex, racial group or age, or more artificial groups such as temporary and permanent employees, executives and non-executives form the basis of this diversity.
In the contemporary corporate world, diversity has even more forms. Global organisations have people from headquarters offshore working alongside locally-engaged staff, and other organisations result from takeovers or mergers which bring people from different corporate cultures together.
People from various functional disciplines, such as marketing or finance, for example, often have a different status in the organisational hierarchy, where there may be an “in-group” which needs the existence of an “out-group” to define itself and draw strength.
In the contemporary corporate world, diversity has even more forms. |
So in a world which has, ostensibly at least, embraced diversity, how does this impact on the organisation and its performance?
Just as we might hope a multicultural community will produce a thriving, tolerant and creative society, does the same hold true for a business organisation? What impact does diversity have, and can its impact be changed in any way for an optimum result?
AGSM Associate Professors Prithviraj Chattopadhyay and Elizabeth George have made this their study, with the ultimate goal of understanding “if difference matters”. Basing their work on research conducted in US corporates, among Australian tertiary students, in an Australian Government organisation and the hospital-based medical profession in Queensland, they have explored areas of demographic difference and self-categorisation, testing the basic hypotheses that the wider the real or perceived differences, the less engaged certain employees will be with the organisation.
“Our research questions are based on how these differences affect how you deal with other people,” says Professor George. “How do they affect how much you like your co-workers, how does it affect your trust or your sense of obligation in the organisation, and your psychological contract with it?
| Associate Professor Prithviraj Chattopadhyay says the research involves understanding how difference impacts on “citizenship behaviour”, also known as “employee engagement”. |
“Our argument is that if difference affects these things negatively – and it can – then organisations need to think about how those differences may be harming the organisation.
Professor Chattopadhyay says an aspect of the research is understanding how difference impacts on “citizenship behaviour”, the concept also known as “employee engagement”.
“Organisations are becoming more flexible so it is harder to actually define roles, and the flipside of that is that there are many things outside of the basic role which are important to the organisation’s performance, so anything that can be done to improve that sense of citizenship is going to have an impact,” he says.
The research of Chattopadhyay and George has covered a range of situations. In one study, Professor Chattopadhyay randomly selected work groups in four US organisations – from a Fortune 500 computer hardware manufacturer with over 12,000 employees to a small transport company with a headcount of 30.Employees filled out questionnaires on their attitudes to organisational citizenship, the trust they felt for the organisation and their coworkers, and their “organisational self-esteem” – how much self-worth employees feel within the organisation. Across the board, the study found both racial and age diversity had a negative impact on organisational self esteem and peer relations.
At the core of this self-categorisation is a quest for identity and belonging.
In an Australian research project, data from 101 research scientists working in a government organisation was used to examine relationships between gender and work group identification, task conflict and emotional conflict.
Some scientists were working with each other in a colocated situation, while others were working remotely through virtual channels. The study found that differences in the gender make-up of the workforce had a more negative influence on the attitudes of the co-located work groups than those working remotely. If you don’t see colleagues on a day-to-day basis, gender differences don’t seem to matter as much.
A current project in Queensland is looking at how the dynamics of relationships change between surgeons and nurses when the proportions of nursing and surgical staff shift. In this context, increasing numbers of nursing staff are positive for both nurses and surgeons, while a higher proportion of surgeons shows a negative impact.
Professors Chattopadhyay and George say that while some differences – such as gender or age – are unchangeable, the impact they have on an individual’s attitude varies, and can change through circumstance.
“For example, we find that women who take on the beliefs and values of a male-dominated group can change their attitudes towards work, become more assimilated into the workgroup and get ahead in the organisation,” says Professor Chattopadhyay. “This is a price some women pay for advancement.
“We find that men expect to have a few women in the organisation… they can point to them and say ‘isn’t it great that we have women and that shows we are all merit-based and not taking unfair advantage,’ but this really becomes problematic when women make up at least 50 percent of the group.
Beyond that, men working in groups dominated by women clearly have a problem, and show a negative impact.”
At the core of this self-categorisation is a quest for identity and belonging. We need to belong to a group that we see positively and that is distinct from other groups, says Professor George.
| “Our research questions are based on how these differences affect how you deal with other people,” says Professor Elizabeth George. |
This is driven by a desire to create a positive sense of oneself through membership in a high-status group and “reduce uncertainty” in a group situation so that a person can arrive at some understanding of their role, and survive. “Identities help us negotiate social and work situations, so these questions are important at a very basic level,” Professor Chattopadhyay says.
Ultimately, the research on difference points the way to organisational performance, although this is not a specific area of study for the researchers. It suggests differences which do exist – such as those of gender, age or race – should be acknowledged and not glossed over. “Often people are told ‘forget that you are male or female, just focus on being an employee in this organisation’ – well that leaves you open to some kind of backlash,” says Professor George. “If you tell someone to stop thinking about something, well they are just going to think about it, aren’t they?
The research on difference points the way to organisational performance.
“You need a solution which recognises that identity but also focuses on another identity which is the common ingroup identity, and to make sure that these dual identities are not in conflict.”
Professor George uses the example of working mothers who have to choose between a school function and a poorly scheduled work meeting. “This makes it hard for women to readily identify with also being a member of the organisation, and it has a sapping effect on them,” she says.
Differences, she says, have a particularly negative effect when they are “salient” in a situation where a person’s identities conflict. “Organisations can put in place measures to minimise value conflict. The differences will always exist but focussing on similar values or common goals can help bring the skill sets of a diverse group of people together, and that has a very real impact on the organisation.”