See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/239609885

Social Psychological Perspectives of Workforce Diversity and Inclusion

in National and Global Contexts

Article · January 2008

CITATIONS READS

30 9,234

1 author:

Michàlle E. Mor Barak

University of Southern California
79 PUBLICATIONS 6,303 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Michàlle E. Mor Barak on 30 March 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 CHAPTER 11

Social Psychological
Perspectives of Workforce
Diversity and Inclusion in
National and Global Contexts
Michàlle Mor Barak

T he recent focus on diversity in the manage- presence in the U.S. population, with 7% African
ment literature takes on special urgency American social workers, compared to 12% in the
in the context of human services organi- population, and 4% Latinos, compared to 14% in
zations. Human services organizations have tra- the population. This workforce data stands in
ditionally served a wide array of communities contrast to the social workers’ reports about the
with a high representation of diverse, disadvan- diversity of their client population: 83% report
taged, and oppressed groups. This diversity has having black/African American clients in their
not typically been mirrored in the workforce of caseloads and 75% report having Hispanic/
those organizations. A recent study of a nation- Latino clients. In the field of child protective ser-
ally representative sample of 10,000 social work- vices, agencies have been recruiting professionals
ers demonstrates that the profession is not outside of social work in order to increase the
keeping pace with the population it serves in presence of underrepresented groups in their
terms of its ability to attract social workers of workforce (Clark & Jacquet, 2003).
color (National Association of Social Workers, Despite advancement in the representation
2005). The study’s findings indicate that 86% of of women and members of minority groups in
licensed social workers are predominantly non- the human services workforce, there is still a lot
Hispanic whites. Both African Americans and to be done to make the workplace more inclu-
Latinos are underrepresented relative to their sive. The extent to which workers from diverse

239
240——DEVELOPING AND EMPOWERING STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS

backgrounds feel included in the organization Background and

may have a direct bearing on their job satisfac- Diversity Definition
tion and commitment to the organization (Mor
Barak, 2000a). As a result, this sense of inclusion In recent decades, many countries around the
or exclusion as well as the overall organizational world, including the U.S., have made significant
culture and climate may influence the quality of progress, through legislation and public policies,
services that workers provide to their clients toward creating a more equitable work environ-
(Glisson & Himmelfarn, 1998; Glisson & James, ment (Mor Barak, 2005). The combination of
2002) as well as the workers’ health, mental antidiscrimination laws and affirmative action
health, and social functioning (McNeely, 1992). programs have helped more women, members of
Managers of human services organizations ethnic and racial minorities, gays and lesbians,
often assume that because their workers’ education older workers, the differently abled, and mem-
includes sensitivity to and efficacy in dealing with bers of other marginalized groups become part
diverse clients, they should also be skilled in deal- of the labor force. Despite progress in increasing
ing with diversity among their peers, subordinates, the representation of diverse groups in work
and supervisors. This, however, may not necessar- organization, it is the exclusion of these groups
ily be the case. In an interview I conducted in from circles of influence in the organization that
preparation for a large organizational diversity keeps them from fully contributing to, and bene-
study, a manager recounted how disappointed she fiting from, their involvement in the workplace.
was when she had to reprimand one of her work- The definition of diversity commonly used in
ers for making an offensive remark to a colleague the organizational literature refers to specific cat-
from a different ethnic background. The manager egories of human differences such as race, ethnic-
noted that the worker “should have known better; ity, gender, sexual orientation, and disability (see,
after all, he is an experienced social worker!” e.g., Bloom, 2002; Muller & Parham, 1998).
How can we explain both overt and covert However, with increased immigration and worker
incidents of prejudice and discrimination in the migration fueled by the global economy, the
workplace, particularly among trained human number and types of groups who are marginal-
services professionals? What dynamics dictate ized and discriminated against in the workplace
intergroup relations? How can we explain con- continue to increase. Generating a definition of
flicts and hostilities among identity groups? The workforce diversity that will be relevant and
goal of this chapter is to address these questions applicable in various cultural and national con-
by exploring social psychological theories of texts proves to be a challenge. It is important to
diversity and exclusion. The notion of exclusion remember that workforce diversity is not about
can assist in generating a conceptual framework the anthropological differences between people
to clarify our understanding of the personal and that “make them special”; diversity is about
organizational consequences of workforce diver- belonging to groups that are different from what-
sity in human services organizations. ever is considered “mainstream” in society. In
This chapter is organized into five major sec- short, it is about being susceptible to employment
tions: (1) background and a definition for diver- consequences as a result of one’s association
sity in work organizations; (2) exploring some within or outside certain social groups.
theoretical building blocks—prejudice, discrimi- Some scholars advocate focusing only on the
nation, and exclusion; (3) analyzing theories categories that have been most persistently associ-
of diversity and intergroup relations relevant to ated with negative employment consequences
human services organizations; (4) presenting across cultural and national contexts (Essed,
research evidence on diversity and exclusion; and 1996; Linnehan & Konrad, 1999; Nkomo, 2001).
(5) examining the implications for human ser- They specifically identify race, gender, and social
vices management. class as the fundamental diversity categories. For
 Perspectives of Workforce Diversity and Inclusion——241

example, Nkomo (2001) asserts that the most that (a) have a perceived commonality
fundamental divisions in organizations are along within a given cultural or national context,
the lines of race, gender, and class and that diver- and that (b) impact potentially harmful or
sity work must be about ending the domination beneficial employment outcomes such as job
of these systems of oppression. As another exam- opportunities, treatment in the workplace,
ple, Linnehan and Konrad (1999) declare that and promotion prospects—irrespective of
including many distinct groups in the definition job-related skills and qualifications. (Mor
of diversity ends up diminishing the emphasis on Barak, 2005, p. 132)
intergroup inequality and undermining historical
and institutional problems related to stereotyp- This definition provides a broad umbrella that
ing, prejudice, discrimination, and disadvantage. includes any categories that may be relevant to
There are some general distinction categories specific cultural or national environments without
that do seem to cut across many (though not all) pre-specifying the categories. This approach does
national and local cultures. These include gender, not list the distinction categories and therefore
race, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, and disabil- does not limit them to specific categories (e.g., to
ity. However, there are two problems in utilizing only gender, race, and ethnicity), thus allowing
some of these categories to define diversity: First, the inclusion of categories that may be relevant
some of the categories may have either positive or in some cultural contexts and not in others (e.g.,
negative impact on employment and job prospects castes or regional differences). Additionally, this
in different countries. For example, in Western cul- definition emphasizes the importance of the
tures, younger employees are considered more workplace-related consequences of diversity. What
desirable because they are perceived to have new are the main adverse consequences of the diversity
ideas, better technological skills, and a more distinction categories? Prejudice, discrimination,
dynamic and flexible attitude. In Eastern and more and exclusion are all constructs that describe atti-
traditional societies, such as in China and Korea, tudes and behaviors that affect the distribution of
the old are revered and believed to possess resources and privileges in society. They are based
desirable qualities of wisdom and experience. on group membership rather than on employ-
Therefore, although age discrimination may be rel- ment-related characteristics (e.g., level of educa-
evant in both types of societies, its impact might be tion, commitment, and job-related skills) and are
very different. And, second, diversity distinction used as building blocks in the construction of the-
categories are not exhaustive of the domain. Some ories relevant to diversity and intergroup rela-
cultures utilize diversity categories that are not tions, as discussed below.
included on this list. For example, religious affilia-
tion in Ireland, regional location (rural vs. urban)
in China, and caste in India are powerful diversity Theoretical Building Blocks:
categories that are not included in the list. Prejudice, Discrimination,
Perhaps the logical solution to the difficulty of and Exclusion
finding a universal definition for diversity that
can be relevant in different cultural contexts is to This section examines several constructs that are
define diversity not by naming specific categories often used to express psychological processes and
or finding a general rule but by identifying the actual behaviors involved in intergroup relations.
process and the consequences of diversity.1 These constructs are defined as “mechanisms by
Therefore, the definition of workforce diversity which advantaged and disadvantaged group mem-
utilized in this chapter is as follows: bers perceive and interpret interactions that appear
to be based on their category membership rather
Workforce diversity refers to the division of than on their individual characteristics” (Taylor &
the workforce into distinction categories Moghaddam, 1994, p. 159). At the basis of both
242——DEVELOPING AND EMPOWERING STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS

intergroup attitudes and behaviors are the diversity of negative evaluations and characteristics that
(or group affiliation) categories used to make the are attributed to groups perceived as racially
distinction between the advantaged and the dis- and culturally different (Essed, 1995, p. 45). For
advantaged in each society. These constructs are example, in a study of interethnic perceptions,
helpful in clarifying central aspects of diversity in Gilbert, Carr-Ruffino, Ivancevich, and Lownes-
organizations that could lead to the dominance or Jackson (2003) found that African American
advantage of one group over another and, there- males were more likely to be viewed as incompe-
fore, are central to the construction of theories. tent and not as courteous as African American
women and Asian American women and men.
This was despite having similar job-related qual-
Stereotyping and Prejudice ifications and history.
The following definitions summarize the dis-
Often confused, stereotyping and prejudice tinctions between a stereotype and a prejudice:
refer to very distinct psychological processes. All
of us hold stereotypical views of groups other A stereotype is a standardized, oversimplified,
than our own and often about our own group and typically negative mental picture held
as well. For example, “Latino families maintain by a person or persons about members of
close relationships”; “Asian-American students another group and sometimes about their
excel in math and sciences”; “Women are more own group as well.
attentive to human emotions.” These stereotypes
serve a very practical function. Rather than start- A prejudice is a preconceived judgment or
ing with no information when we encounter a opinion held by members of a group; most
person from another group, we begin with a commonly it is an irrational attitude of hostil-
framework that gives us a sense of confidence ity directed against an individual, a group, a
that we know something about the other. race, or their supposed characteristics. (Based
Stereotypes are, therefore, a mental impression on Taylor & Moghaddam, 1994, pp. 159–166)
that we form about members of other groups.
Although the concept originated to denote nega-
tive images of other groups, recent research Discrimination in the Workplace
demonstrates that they could be both positive
and negative (McGregor & Gray, 2002; Slabbert, Negative stereotypes and prejudices make it
2001). For example, having closely knit families is easier to relate to the other person as different and
typically perceived as a positive attribute, but unworthy of equal rights and treatment. The
when it is perceived as a common characteristic most extreme psychological mechanism in per-
of all Latino families, it constitutes a stereotype. ceiving members of other groups as inferior is
The concept of prejudice, on the other hand, dehumanization, and its behavioral manifestation
refers to people’s attitudes toward members of is oppression. Oppression is the unjust or cruel
other groups—expecting certain behaviors from exercise of authority or power, most often used by
them that are mostly pejorative. The word preju- one group to dominate another. The psychologi-
dice, derived from the Latin noun praejudicium, cal process involved in the justification of such
means to prejudge. Although it is possible to have practices includes relating to out-group members
positive prejudice as well—that is, to think well as inferior or fundamentally different in ways that
about others without sufficient justification (e.g., make them undeserving of equal treatment.
reverence for the wisdom of the elderly)—the The word discrimination is generally neutral
word prejudice has acquired a negative connota- in its meaning (e.g., referring to someone as
tion. Prejudice is typically described as a schema “having a discriminating taste”), but it has a clear
 Perspectives of Workforce Diversity and Inclusion——243

negative connotation when applied to the con- process: during the inquiry stage (minority
text of employment and is defined as follows: applicants were told that the job has been filled,
when in reality it was not), the job interview
Discrimination in employment and consumer (minority applicants were asked for more quali-
relations occurs when (a) individuals, insti- fications than other applicants), and during the
tutions, or governments treat people differ- job offer (minority applicants were offered infe-
ently because of personal characteristics rior salary and benefits). A particularly interest-
such as race, gender, or sexual orientation ing facet of this study was that it was able to
rather than their ability to perform their pinpoint the stage during which discrimination
jobs; and (b) these actions have a negative had occurred. Most of the direct discriminatory
impact on access to jobs, promotions, or rejections occurred at the first stage of the appli-
compensation.2 (Mor Barak, 2005, p. 141) cation process, resulting in these applicants being
denied the opportunity to present their creden-
Around the world, gender has been one of the tials. In other words, the discrimination occurred
most commonly used criteria for discrimination as soon as the applicants introduced themselves
in the workplace. The logic used to justify dis- using foreign names that were not typical of their
crimination against women has relied on percep- country of residence.
tions of a difference in their “destiny” in life and
has often cited religious justification. Consider
the following statement made by Justice Joseph P. The Inclusion-Exclusion Continuum
Bradley when the U.S. Supreme Court threw out
a case by a woman who could not become a One of the most significant problems facing
lawyer simply because of her gender: “The para- today’s diverse workforce is exclusion, both the
mount mission and destiny of women are to ful- reality experienced by many and the perception
fill the noble and benign offices of wife and of even greater numbers of employees that they
mother. This is the law of the creator” (Joseph P. are not viewed by management as an integral part
Bradley, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1873).3 One of the organization (Ibarra, 1993; Kanter, 1992;
hundred years later, Japan’s Prime Minister, Mor Barak, 2000b). The inclusion-exclusion con-
Yasuhiro Nakasone, made a similar statement: tinuum is central to the discussion here and is
“First of all, I want women, as mothers, to defined below:5
become 100 percent wonderful mothers. Then I
want them to become good wives. And I want The concept of inclusion-exclusion in the
them to become ladies capable of making contri- workplace refers to the individual’s sense of
butions for society also” (Japan Times, 1984).4 being a part of the organizational system in
Members of ethnic and national minorities both the formal processes, such as access to
have been frequent victims of discrimination. information and decision-making channels,
A multinational study conducted by the United and the informal processes, such as social
Nations International Labor Organization (ILO) gatherings and lunch meetings, where infor-
found that discrimination against migrant and mation exchange and decisions informally
ethnic minority job applicants was widespread take place. (Mor Barak, 2005, p. 149)
(Zegers de Beijl, 1999). The average discrimina-
tion rates (i.e., discrimination incidents per The concept of inclusion-exclusion is an indi-
application relative to the number of job applica- cator of the way employees experience and per-
tions) in the countries studied were around 35%. ceive their position in the organization relative to
The study documented that discrimination its “mainstream.” Sometimes the experience of
occurred in each stage of the job application exclusion is blatant. For example, an interviewee
244——DEVELOPING AND EMPOWERING STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS

in one of my studies, the only woman in a team experience and sense of exclusion, therefore, may
of engineers, shared with me her experience of play a critical role in explaining both their lack of
not being invited to several team meetings and, job opportunities and dissatisfaction with their
when she complained, being told that these were jobs, respectively.
“just informal gatherings, you didn’t really need
to be there.” At other times the experience is
more subtle. Another interviewee, an African Theories of Diversity
American social worker in a large human services and Intergroup Relations
organization, indicated that she was always “the
last to know” about things that were happening The global trends of immigration and worker
in the organization. migration, coupled with diversity legislation and
Though diversity distinction categories vary affirmative action social policies advancements,
from one culture or country to the next, the com- underscore the need to examine theories that were
mon factor that seems to transcend cultural and conceived in different parts of the world and to
national boundaries is the experience of exclu- generate an integrated approach to understanding
sion, particularly in the workplace. Individuals workforce diversity and intergroup relations.
and groups are implicitly or explicitly excluded There are several major theories of intergroup
from job opportunities, information networks, relations that are relevant to human services orga-
team membership, human resource investments, nizations (Taylor & Moghaddam, 1994), including
and the decision-making process because of their realistic conflict theory (RCT), an economic theory
actual or perceived membership in a minority or that assumes that people act in self-interest and,
disfavored identity group. therefore, intergroup conflicts are caused by
Yet, inclusion in organizational information people’s drive to maximize their own or their
networks and in decision-making processes has group’s rewards to the detriment of other groups’
been linked to better job opportunities and career interests (Sherif, 1966; Sherif & Sherif, 1953);
advancement in work organizations (Morrison & equity theory, which emphasizes that people strive
Von Glinow, 1990; O’Leary & Ickovics, 1992), as for justice and view perceptions of injustice as the
well as to job satisfaction and well-being (Mor cause of personal distress and intergroup conflict
Barak & Levin, 2002). Some scholarly work, (Walster, Walster, & Berscheid, 1978; Adams,
though clearly not enough, has examined the 1965); and relative deprivation theory, a theory
interaction between diversity distinction cate- that focuses on perceptions of inequality between
gories, such as race/ethnicity and gender, pointing people’s access to resources and that of others in
to the compounding complexity of understand- the society, resulting in intergroup conflicts and
ing racial prejudice when entangled with sexism oppression (Crosby, 1976; Stouffer, Suchman,
(Bell, 1990, 1992). Research indicates that racial DeVinney, Star, & Williams, 1949). A fourth the-
and ethnic minority women commonly believe ory that explains intergroup relations, social iden-
they are excluded from the organizational power tity theory, stands out as a mega-theory that can
structure and have the least access to organiza- explain the universal effects of social categoriza-
tional resources from among disfavored groups tion and group membership regardless of the spe-
(Kossek & Zonia, 1993; Mor Barak, Cherin, & cific type of group. It is this all-embracing
Berkman, 1998). Similarly, a study of six county orientation of social identity theory that makes it
welfare departments found that African relevant for the study of diversity in human
American women were paid less and had lower services organizations. The next section describes
occupational rank compared to other workers, social identify theory and its usefulness as a tool
controlling for other job-related characteristics for explaining exclusion and discrimination in the
(McNeely, Sapp, & Daly, 1998). Employees’ context of human services organizations.
 Perspectives of Workforce Diversity and Inclusion——245

S O C I A L I D E N T I T Y T H E O RY: C E N T R A L P R O P O S I T I O N S
R E L E VA N T T O W O R K P L A C E D I V E R S I T Y

• People desire to belong to groups that enjoy distinct and positive identities.
• Social identification with certain groups leads to activities that are congruent with the group’s
collective identity and that foster stereotypical perceptions of self and others.
• Through social comparisons between the in-group and out-group, in-group members will make
an effort to maintain or achieve superiority over an out-group in some dimensions.
• The mere categorization of individuals, either voluntary or assigned, is all that is necessary to
create in-group favoritism and out-group discrimination.
• Those who belong to groups with higher perceived social status will accept and include people
they consider to be like them, while excluding and discriminating against those they perceive to
be different from them.

SOURCE: Based on Tajfel (1978); Tajfel and Turner (1986); Turner (1987).

Social Identity Theory—Explaining of out-groups, and the factors that traditionally

Workplace Exclusion and are associated with group formation. Most
Discrimination important, and most relevant to the present dis-
cussion, social identification leads to activities
Social identity theory is a cognitive social psy- that are congruent with the group’s collective
chological theory that originated in Europe and identity, that support institutions that embody
gained popularity in North America and in other their identity, and that foster stereotypical percep-
regions of the world. It provides the connection tions of self and others (Ashforth & Mael, 1989).
between social structures and individual identity A person’s identity has two components:
through the meanings people attach to their a personal component that is derived from
membership in identity groups, such as those idiosyncratic characteristics—such as personal-
formed by race, ethnicity, or gender (Tajfel, ity, physical, and intellectual traits—and a social
1982). The theory postulates that people tend to component derived from salient commonalities
classify themselves into social categories that derived from group memberships, such as race,
have meaning for them, and this shapes the way sex, class, and nationality (Ashforth & Mael,
individuals interact with others from their own 1989; Tajfel, 1982). Social identity is a perception
identity group and from other groups (Tajfel, of oneness with a group of persons (Ashforth &
1978, 1982; Tajfel & Turner, 1986; Turner, 1987). Mael, 1989). Sometimes, however, this percep-
The central propositions of the theory are tion of oneness is the result of being categorized
noted in the box above. by the larger society as members of a particular
Social identity is defined as the individual’s group. For example, despite their distinct cul-
knowledge that he or she belongs to certain social tural heritage and complex historical relation-
groups together with some emotional and value ships, individuals who emigrate from countries
significance to him or her of the group member- such as Korea, China, and Japan are “lumped”
ship (Tajfel, 1978, p. 63). Social identity stems into one group known as “Asian” when they live
from the categorization of individuals, the dis- in the U.S. The differences between these indi-
tinctiveness and prestige of the group, the salience viduals who come from very different countries,
246——DEVELOPING AND EMPOWERING STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS

backgrounds, and histories are overlooked, with occur (for a schematic diagram of social identity
any uniqueness misunderstood at best (Fowler, theory’s basic principles, please see Figure 11.1).
1996). However, over the years, individuals from Research that examined this proposition showed
these countries, and particularly the children that even in a minimal group situation experi-
of these immigrants, have developed a sense of ment (individuals were randomly assigned to
identity that is tied to being Asian Americans. experimental conditions, membership was
Social comparison is the process that people anonymous, and criteria for social categorization
use to evaluate themselves by comparing their were not linked to rewards to be allocated among
group’s membership with other groups. The basic the groups), people tended to discriminate
hypothesis is that pressures to positively evaluate against members of out-groups simply because
one’s own group through in-group/out-group they belonged to a different social category
comparisons lead social groups to attempt to dif- (Taylor & Moghaddam, 1994).
ferentiate themselves from each other (Tajfel, An important limitation of social identity the-
1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1986). The aim of differen- ory that is particularly relevant to the discussion
tiation is to maintain or achieve superiority over here is the theory’s very broad and rather generic
an out-group on some relevant dimension. view of social categories. Because the theory
An important aspect of social identity theory treats all types of categories as equal, it cannot
that is most relevant to this discussion is the account for the heightened significance of diver-
focus on social categorization and its connection sity categories such as race, gender, and class in
to intergroup discrimination. Social categoriza- many cultures and nations due to their deep his-
tion is a cognitive tool that is used to “segment, torical roots in both the Western world and in
classify, and order the social environment, and previously colonized countries. Social identity
thus enable the individual to undertake many theory conceptualizes identity primarily as self-
forms of social actions” (Tajfel & Turner, 1986, defined. It, therefore, downplays the conse-
pp. 15–16). Social categories include groups such quences of other groups defining individuals and
as women, Catholics, social workers, gays, and affecting their sense of inclusion or exclusion.
managers. Although categorization may serve to
simplify the world, people are complex because
of differences in values and norms, as well as Research on Diversity
one’s own group identification, and these differ- and Exclusion
ences may influence social categorization. As a
result, social categories most often do not fit The universal human need to be included in
individuals’ sense of who they are. For example, social systems has its roots in the way people have
with the increased interracial and interethnic traditionally satisfied their basic needs. Because
marriages in recent decades, there is a growing human beings have always depended on cooper-
awareness that racial and ethnic identification ation and collaboration with one another for
often do not conform to the categories used by their basic needs (food, shelter, clothing), they
social institutions in the past. A person born to are motivated to maintain connections with sig-
an African American mother and a Caucasian nificant people and social systems in their lives.
father may identify herself as belonging to both On the other hand, competition for scarce
groups but, depending on her dominant features, resources forced people to identify themselves
others are more likely to categorize her as belong- and others into in-groups and out-groups. Being
ing to one race or to the other. The mere catego- included in a group was central to survival, and
rization of individuals and the creation of sense of inclusion in a group became central to
in-group and out-group is sufficient, according individuals’ self-esteem. As a result, self-esteem fun-
to social identity theory, for discrimination to ctions as a psychological gauge, or “sociometer,” a
 Perspectives of Workforce Diversity and Inclusion——247

Social Individual
Structures Identity

Social Identity

Desire to belong to
Social comparison
groups that enjoy
between in-group
distinct and positive
and out-group
identities

In-group favoritism/inclusion and out-group

discrimination/exclusion

Figure 11.1 A Schematic Diagram of Social Identity Theory’s Basic Principles

personal indicator that allows people to monitor organizational processes and resources (Vonk
inclusion or exclusion reactions toward them & Van Knippenberg, 1995). These processes
from their environment (Baumeister & Leary, increase the likelihood of exclusion of those
1995; Leary, Schreindorfer, & Haupt, 1995). who are different (i.e., women, ethnic and racial
Triggered by an environment that is exclusionary, minorities, and members of groups that may
threats to one’s self-esteem produce behavioral be stereotypically defined or labeled as different).
outcomes that are aimed at rectifying the situa- Research on organizational demography indi-
tion by, for example, compensatory efforts cates that being in the minority has significant
to assimilate or disengaging from the exclusion- effects on individuals’ affective experiences in the
ary system and linking with a more inclusive workplace, including feelings of isolation and lack
environment. of identification in one-on-one relationships (Ely,
Research indicates that individuals from 1994; Ibarra, 1995; Mor Barak et al., 1998).
diverse groups commonly find themselves Milliken and Martins (1996) indicate a strong
excluded from networks of information and and consistent relationship between diversity in
opportunity (Cox, 1994; Ibarra, 1993). The rea- gender, ethnicity, and age and exclusion from
sons are varied. First, overt or covert racism, important workplace interactions. One of the
sexism, ageism, or other forms of discrimination most frequently reported problems faced by
may be the motivation for exclusionary prac- women and minorities in organizational settings
tices. Second, economic self-interest can be the is their limited access to, or exclusion from, infor-
motivation for preventing certain individuals mal and yet vital interaction networks (Miller,
or groups from gaining access to power and 1986; Morrison & Von Glinow, 1990; O’Leary &
economic resources (Larkey, 1996; Morrison, Ickovics, 1992). For example, Bell and Nkomo
1992). And, third, prevalent stereotypical percep- (2001) note that an important barrier experi-
tions and a general sense of discomfort with enced by black women is limited access to infor-
those who are perceived as different can be the mal and social networks in their organizations.
reason for excluding persons from important The African American women they interviewed
248——DEVELOPING AND EMPOWERING STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS

felt they had less access to these networks in their and women in the workplace. For example, men
organizations than did white men and white believe that gender is a cue to competence and
women. As a result, they felt cut off from impor- that, in the absence of any definite information
tant organizational information and less accepted to the contrary, the performer’s gender becomes
as full members of the organization. Many of the relevant in making job-related decisions
women spoke of the critical importance of infor- (Forschi, Lad, & Sigerson, 1994). Women, on the
mal networks, including mentorship, sponsor- other hand, either do not hold that belief, or do
ship, and assistance from co-workers, in career so to a lesser degree. Forschi et al. (1994) con-
advancement. Similarly, the white women man- cluded that this double standard is a subtle
agers also believed that exclusion from the “old mechanism through which the status quo of gen-
boy network” was one of the barriers to women’s der inequality in the workplace is maintained.
advancement (pp. 152–153). Similar results were For a summary chart of the research outcomes
found in human services organizations as well, related to diversity and inclusion, see Figure 11.2.
where women and minorities, particularly African Being in the minority has significant effects
American women, are more likely than other on individuals’ affective experiences in the work-
employees to occupy the lowest-ranking positions place, including isolation in work groups and
(Dressel, 1987; Gibelman & Schervish, 1993; lack of identification in one-on-one relationships
Martin & Chernesky, 1989; McNeely, 1992). (Ibarra, 1995). Similarly, women tend to have less
These networks allocate a variety of instru- access to a variety of measures of status in the
mental resources that are critical for job effective- organization, such as income, position, and
ness and career advancement, as well as expressive information, than do men (Alderfer, 1986).
benefits such as social support and friendship Because leadership and management qualities
(Ibarra, 1993). Although women and members of are defined mostly in masculine terms, these bar-
minority groups have made some inroads into riers persist for women (Nkomo & Cox, 1996). In
traditional non-minority male job domains, the context of human services organizations, real
organizational jobs remain largely structured participation in the decision-making process has
along race, gender, and class lines, with the more been linked to job satisfaction, which in turn can
meaningful and prestigious jobs being held by potentially affect worker retention and effective-
men of the dominant group and of higher social ness on the job (McNeely et al., 1998; Whiddon &
echelons (Beggs, 1995; Tomaskovic-Devey, 1993; Martin, 1989).
McNeely, Blakemore, & Washington, 1993).
Research has demonstrated that the extreme over-
representation of white men in organizational Implications for Human
positions of authority may have a negative impact Services Organizations
on women and nonwhite subordinates. For
example, women in male-dominated organiza- Human services organizations are unique in the
tions may attempt to assimilate—that is, to alter context of diversity and inclusion because they
their thoughts, feelings, behaviors, and expecta- emphasize sensitivity to diversity in dealing with
tions at work to mirror those typically associated their clients but often neglect to be sensitive to
with men (Ely, 1995). The disproportionate rep- the diversity of their own workforce (Beckett &
resentation of men over women in senior organi- Dungee-Anderson, 1998; McNeely, 1992). The
zational positions may highlight for women their theoretical formulations discussed in this chapter
limited mobility and reinforce their perceptions demonstrate that people are motivated to seek
of themselves as in a lower status than men. social inclusion and avoid exclusion. Further,
There is ample evidence of the differential individuals seek to belong to groups that are asso-
treatment experienced by racial/ethnic minorities ciated with higher status and prestige in society.
 Perspectives of Workforce Diversity and Inclusion——249

Women and racial and ethnic

minority group members

Often feel excluded from

networks of influence

Have limited job opportunities and

delayed career advancement

Experience work-related stress,

lower job satisfaction, and
higher turnover

Figure 11.2 Summary Chart of the Diversity and Inclusion Research Outcomes

Belonging to such groups is central to individuals’ When a social group’s status position is per-
identity and to their sense of worth. Other ceived to be low, it affects the social identity of
people’s reactions, particularly the degree to which group members. There are four paths to address-
they accept and include individuals or reject and ing the consequences of social exclusion (see
exclude them, are vital to a person’s physical and Figure 11.3 for a summary):
psychological well-being (Leary & Downs, 1995).
Demographic characteristics of organizations, 1. Individual change: Individual members of
such as race and gender composition, help to the group may attempt to pass from a lower-sta-
shape the meanings people attach to their iden- tus to a higher-status group through disassociat-
tity group memberships at work (Ely, 1994). As ing themselves psychologically and behaviorally
social identity theory has demonstrated, the way from their low-status group. When successful,
we perceive our social reality is significantly such a strategy will lead to a personal solution,
determined by our group memberships. It, there- but it will not make a difference in the excluded
fore, follows that individual experiences vis-à-vis group’s status. For example, an African American
work organizations and their perceptions of woman can rise to the top of an organization
organizational actions and policies will be through exceptional talent, hard work, and luck,
affected by their identity group memberships. but, without an organizational change, other
This social psychological perspective is useful to women, as well as members of minority groups,
the current discussion because it indicates how may not enjoy similar mobility.
identity groups shape worker experiences, per- 2. Group change: Members may seek positive
ceptions, and behaviors. It is particularly relevant status for the group as a whole by redefining or
when membership in an identity group is associ- altering the elements of the comparative situa-
ated with exclusion from employment opportu- tions. This could take place by, for example,
nity and job mobility. changing the values assigned to the attributes
250——DEVELOPING AND EMPOWERING STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS

of the group so that comparisons that were pre- social mobility, it is not enough to combat per-
viously negative are now perceived as positive sistent, institutionalized, and long-term discrim-
(such as the slogan used by African Americans, ination against whole groups. Affirmative action
“Black is Beautiful”). Similarly, with the entry of policies are aimed at (a) righting past wrongs—
more women into management positions and into compensating groups that have been disadvan-
management scholarship, there is an effort to re- taged in the past with better opportunities at
examine the qualities that are essential for effective present, and (b) achieving social goals of increas-
management. Rather than expecting effective ing the representation of traditionally disadvan-
managers to be “assertive” and “aggressive,” quali- taged groups in more lucrative jobs as well as
ties that have traditionally been perceived as male management and leadership positions (Mor
characteristics, there is a focus on “people skills” Barak, 2005). Therefore, the combination of
and “emotional intelligence,” qualities that have antidiscrimination legislation and affirmative
traditionally been perceived as female characteris- action programs can open up social mobility
tics. This shift in emphasis opens the door for opportunities not only to individuals but to
women as a group to be perceived as qualified for whole groups of society and can potentially cre-
management without having to adopt what are ate a society-wide change in group and individ-
considered more traditionally male characteristics. ual social identity.
To provide high quality services to their
3. Organizational change: Organizations can
clients, human services organizations must
implement policies that remove barriers to
develop a well-trained, dedicated, responsive,
advancement and promotion of members of dis-
and flexible workforce (Mor Barak & Travis,
advantaged groups and thus open up ways for
2007). Research demonstrates that a combina-
members of these groups, as well as the groups as
tion of compliance with equal employment legis-
a whole, to improve their social identity. For
lation, active participation in Affirmative Action
example, providing networking opportunities
Programs, and proactive organizational diversity
and mentorship programs for members of
management can have a positive impact on a
diverse groups can open up advancement and
variety of organizational outcomes (Mor Barak,
promotion opportunities. Thus, these opportu-
2005). Such inclusive practices have been shown
nities can enhance their access to power in the
to affect employee attitudes and emotions toward
organizations as well as improve their benefit and
the organization, including organizational com-
salary package. Combined, these elements con-
mitment (Mor Barak, Findler, & Wind, 2001),
tribute to improved group status as well as social
job satisfaction (Greenhaus, Parasuraman, &
identity of group members.
Wormley, 1990; Mor Barak & Levin, 2002;
4. Societal change: Society as a whole can cre- Vinokur-Kaplan, Jayarante, & Chess, 1994), and
ate social mobility of disadvantaged groups general well-being (Ibarra, 1995; Mor Barak,
through legislation and public policies. Equal Findler, & Wind, 2003). They can also impact a
opportunity legislation forbids discrimination variety of financial outcomes, including business
and is, therefore, negative in that it indicates what growth and productivity (Richard, 2000), cost
individuals and organizations are not allowed to saving due to lower turnover, less absenteeism
do. Public policies such as the Affirmative Action and improved productivity (Kirkpatrick,
Program in the U.S. or Positive Action initiatives Phillips, & Phillips, 2003), and company image
in Europe and in many other regions of the world and stock prices (Robinson & Dechant, 1997;
are positive, in that they indicate what steps orga- Wright, Ferris, Hiller, & Kroll, 1995). In short,
nizations should actively take in order to become inclusive practices not only are the right and eth-
more diverse organizations. Although banning ical thing to do, they are beneficial to the effective
discrimination through legislation is essential for management of the organization.
 Perspectives of Workforce Diversity and Inclusion——251

Individual change

Group change

Diversity Exclusion

Organizational
change

Social change

Figure 11.3 Paths to Address the Negative Consequences of Exclusion

Conclusion exclusion can be detrimental to those affected,

their families, the organizations that employ
Within the context of human services organiza- them, and their communities.
tions, the need to understand exclusionary prac- The inclusion-exclusion continuum, a central
tices is particularly important in light of the concept in this chapter, is linked to important psy-
disproportional representation of women and chological processes such as self-esteem, depres-
minorities among their employees (McNeely et al., sion, anxiety, and a general perception that one’s
1993). A systematic approach to needs assessment life has meaning. This is particularly relevant for
and the fit between the community’s needs and its members of disadvantaged groups who may suffer
goals is the key to a successful and mutually ben- the psychological consequences of being excluded.
eficial collaboration. A similar examination of the Therefore, this need to be included in social
relationship between a human services agency groups is a strong motivator in human behavior.
and the community it serves is also helpful, as Though one needs to be aware of the inherent
often tensions develop between a diverse commu- competitive nature of identity groups—what one
nity and a less diverse social work agency that gains in status the other may lose—taken together,
serves it (McNeely, Sapp, & Meyer, 1998). these theories tell us that work organizations may
The work environment is an important arena gain a more loyal, satisfied, and committed work-
in which the mechanisms of intergroup relations force by becoming more inclusive.
are being played out because of individual and
group efforts to gain advantage in the competi-
tion for (real or perceived) limited resources or Notes
out of misguided, ill-informed, or blatantly mali-
1. For a more detailed discussion of this global
cious attitudes toward other groups. Most people definition of diversity, please see Mor Barak, 2005,
derive their livelihood from their jobs, as well as pp. 119–146.
their personal identity, social relationships, and 2. The UN International Labour Organization
sense of self-fulfillment. The consequences (ILO) Discrimination Convention of 1958 (No. 111)
of mechanisms such as discrimination and defines discrimination as “Any distinction, exclusion
252——DEVELOPING AND EMPOWERING STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS

or preference . . . which has the effect of nullifying or Bell, E., & Nkomo, S. M. (2001). Our separate ways:
impairing equality of opportunity or treatment in Black and white women and the struggle for profes-
employment or occupation as may be determined. In sional identity. Boston: Harvard Business School
this convention the grounds for non-discrimination Press.
include race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, Bloom, H. (2002, March/April). Can the United States
national extraction or social origin” (Zegers de Beijl, export diversity.? Across the Board, 47–51.
1999, p. 10). Clark, S., & Jacquet, S. (2003). Demographic profile
3. A Time magazine article from June 4, 1984, of the CalSWEC Title IV-E MSW graduates
“Getting a Piece of the Power: Women Barred From 1993–2002. Berkeley: University of California,
Partnerships Can Now Go to Court,” described the California Social Work Education Center.
1984 Supreme Court unanimous ruling that in decid- Cox, T. (1994). Cultural diversity in organizations:
ing on partnership, it was illegal for law firms to dis- Theory, research and practice. San Francisco:
criminate against women simply because of their Berrett-Koehler.
gender (p. 63). Crosby, F. (1976). A model of egoistical relative depri-
4. Japan Times, May 15, 1984, p. 2. vation. Psychological Review, 83, 85–113.
5. For research scales that assess this construct in the Dressel, P. L. (1987). Patriarchy and social welfare
context of diversity, see Mor Barak, 2005, pp. 293–299. work. Social Problems, 34, 294–309.
Ely, R. (1994). The effects of organizational demo-
graphics and social identity on relationships
References among professional women. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 39, 203–238.
Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In Ely, R. (1995). The power in demography: Women’s
L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social constructions of gender identity at work.
social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New York: Academy of Management Journal, 38, 589–634.
Academic. Essed, P. (1995). Understanding everyday racism.
Alderfer, C. P. (1986). An intergroup perspective on London: Sage.
group dynamics. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook Essed, P. (1996). Diversity: Gender, color, and culture.
of organizational behavior (pp. 190–222). Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Forschi, M., Lad, L., & Sigerson, K. (1994). Gender and
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. S. (1989). Social identity double standards in the assessment of job appli-
theory and the organization. Academy of Manage- cants. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57(4), 326–
ment, 14, 20–39. 339.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to Fowler, E. (1996). San’ya blues: Laboring life in contem-
belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a porary Tokyo. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
fundamental human motivation. Psychological Gibelman, M., & Schervish, P. H. (1993). Who we are:
Bulletin, 117, 497–529. The social work labor force as reflected in the NASW
Beckett, J. O., & Dungee-Anderson, D. (1998). membership. Washington, DC: NASW Press.
Multicultural communication in human service Gilbert, J., Carr-Ruffino, N., Ivancevich, J. M., &
organizations. In A. Daly (Ed.), Workplace diver- Lownes-Jackson, M. (2003). An empirical exami-
sity. Washington, DC: NASW. nation of inter-ethnic stereotypes: Comparing
Beggs, J. J. (1995). The institutional environment: Asian American and African American employees.
Implications for race and gender inequality in the Public Personnel Management, 32(2), 251–266.
U.S. labor market. American Sociological Review, Glisson, C., & Himmelfarn, A. (1998). The effects of
60, 612–633. organizational climate and interorganizational
Bell, E. (1990). The bicultural life experience of career- coordination on the quality and outcomes of
oriented black women. Journal of Organizational children’s service systems. Child Abuse and
Behavior, 11, 459–478. Neglect, 22(5), 401–421.
Bell, E. L. (1992). Myths, stereotypes, and realities of Glisson, C., & James, L. R. (2002). The cross level effects
black women: A personal reflection. Journal of of culture and climate in human service teams.
Applied Behavioral Sciences, 28(3), 363–376. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(6), 767–794.
 Perspectives of Workforce Diversity and Inclusion——253

Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S., & Wormley, W. M. McNeely, R. L., Blakemore, J. L., & Washington, R. O.
(1990). Effects of race on organizational experi- (1993). Race, gender, occupational status and
ences, job performance evaluations, and career income in county human service employment.
outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 33, Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 20(1), 47–70.
64–86. McNeely, R. L. Sapp, M., & Daly, A. (1998). Ethnicity,
Ibarra, H. (1993). Personal networks of women and gender, earnings, occupational rank and job satis-
minorities in management: A conceptual frame- faction in the public social services: What do
work. Academy of Management Review, 18, 56–87. workers say? In A. Daly (Ed.), Work place diversity
Ibarra, H. (1995). Race, opportunity, and diversity of (pp. 144–165). Washington, DC: NASW.
social circles in managerial networks. Academy of McNeely, R. L., Sapp, M., & Meyer, H. (1998). Conflict,
Management Journal, 38, 673–703. cooperation and institutional goal attainment in
Kanter, R. M. (1992). Power failure in management cir- diversity: How to improve relations between for-
cuits. In J. M. Shafritz & J. S. Ott (Eds.), Classics of mal organizations and neighborhood residents in
organization theory (3rd ed., pp. ix, 534). Pacific changing urban communities. In A. Daly (Ed.),
Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole. Work place diversity. Washington, DC: NASW.
Kirkpatrick, D., Phillips, J. J., & Phillips, P. P. (2003, Miller, J. (1986). Pathways in the workplace.
October). Getting results from diversity training— Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
In dollars and cents. HR Focus, 80(10), 3–4. Milliken, F. J., & Martins L. L. (1996). Searching for
Kossek, E. E., & Zonia, S. C. (1993). Assessing diversity common threads: Understanding the multiple
climate: A field study of reactions to employer effects of diversity in organizational groups.
efforts to promote diversity. Journal of Organi- Academy of Management Review, 21(2), 402–433.
zational Behavior, 14, 61–81. Mor Barak, M. E. (2000a). Beyond affirmative action:
Larkey, L. K. (1996). Toward a theory of communica- Toward a model of organizational inclusion. In
tive interactions in culturally diverse workgroups. M. E. Mor Barak & D. Bargal (Eds.), Social services
Academy of Management Review, 21(2), 463–491. in the workplace. New York: Haworth.
Leary, M. R., & Downs, D. L. (1995). Interpersonal func- Mor Barak, M. E. (2000b). The inclusive workplace: An
tions of the self-esteem motive: The self-esteem eco-systems approach to diversity management.
system as a sociometer. In M. H. Kernis (Ed.), Social Work, 45(4), 339–354.
Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem. New York: Plenum. Mor Barak, M. E. (2005). Managing diversity: Toward a
Leary, M. R., Schreindorfer, L. S., & Haupt, A. L. globally inclusive workplace. Thousand Oaks, CA:
(1995). The role of low self-esteem in emotional Sage.
and behavioral problems: Why is low self-esteem Mor Barak, M. E., Cherin, D. A., & Berkman, S. (1998).
dysfunctional? Journal of Social and Clinical Ethnic and gender differences in employee diver-
Psychology, 14(3), 297–314. sity perceptions: Organizational and personal
Linnehan, F., & Konrad, A. M. (1999). Diluting diver- dimensions. Journal of Applied Behavioral
sity: Implications for intergroup inequality in Sciences, 34(1), 82–104.
organizations. Journal of Management Inquiry, Mor Barak, M. E., Findler, L., & Wind, L. H. (2001).
8(4), 399–414. Diversity, inclusion, and commitment in organi-
Martin, P. Y., & Chernesky, R. H. (1989). Women’s zations: International explorations. Journal of
prospects for leadership in social welfare: A polit- Behavioral and Applied Management, 2(2), 72–91.
ical economy perspective. Administration in Mor Barak, M. E., Findler, L., & Wind, L. H. (2003).
Social Work, 13(3/4), 117–143. Cross-cultural aspects of diversity and well-being
McGregor, J., & Gray, L. (2002). Stereotypes and older in the workplace: An international perspective.
workers: The New Zealand experience. Social Journal of Social Work Research & Evaluation,
Policy Journal of New Zealand, 18, 163–177. 4(2), 145–169.
McNeely, R. L. (1992). Job satisfaction in the public social Mor Barak, M. E., & Levin, A. (2002). Outside of the
services: Perspectives on structure, situational corporate mainstream and excluded from the
factors, gender, and ethnicity. In Y. Hasenfeld work community: A study of diversity, job satis-
(Ed.), Human services as complex organizations faction and well-being. Community, Work &
(pp. 224–256). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Family, 5(2), 133–157.
 254——DEVELOPING AND EMPOWERING STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS

Mor Barak, M. E., & Travis, D. J. (2007). Management: Stouffer, S. A., Suchman, E. A., DeVinney, L. C., Star,
Human resources. In T. Mizrahi & L. E. Davis S. A., & Williams, R. M. (1949). The American
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of social work (20th ed.). soldier: Adjustment during army life (Vol. 1).
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Morrison,A. H. (1992). The new leaders: Guidelines on lead- Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation between social groups.
ership diversity in America. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. New York: Academic.
Morrison, A. M., & Von Glinow, M. A. (1990). Women Tajfel, H. (1982). Social identity and intergroup relations.
and minorities in management. American Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Psychologist, 45, 200–208. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity
Muller, H. J., & Parham, P. A. (1998). Integrating work- theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel &
force diversity into the business school curricu- W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup rela-
lum: An experiment. Journal of Management tions (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Education, 22(2), 44–55. Taylor, D. M., & Moghaddam, F. M. (1994). Theories of
National Association of Social Workers. (2005, March). intergroup relations. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Assuring the sufficiency of a frontline workforce: A Tomaskovic-Devey, D. (1993). Gender and racial
national study of licensed social worker. Washington, inequality at work: The sources and consequences of
DC: NASW Center for Workforce Studies. job segregation. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.
Nkomo, S. (2001, July). Much to do about diversity: Turner, J. C. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A
The muting of race, gender and class in managing self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Basil
diversity practice. Paper presented at the International Blackwell.
Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Workforce Diversity: Vinokur-Kaplan, D., Jayarante, S., & Chess, W. A.
The Inclusive Workplace, Bellagio, Italy. (1994). Job satisfaction and retention of social
Nkomo, S., & Cox, T., Jr. (1996). Diverse identities in workers in public agencies, non-profit agencies,
organizations. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. and private practice: The impact of workplace
Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organizations studies conditions and motivators. Administration in
(pp. 338–356). London: Sage. Social Work, 18(3), 93–121.
O’Leary, V. E., & Ickovics, J. R. (1992). Cracking the Vonk, R., & Van Knippenberg, A. (1995). Processing
glass ceiling: Overcoming isolation and dis- attitude statements from in-group and out-group
crimination. In U. Sekeran & F. Leong (Eds.), members: Effects of within-group and within-
Womanpower: Managing in times of demographic person inconsistencies on reading times. Journal of
turbulence (pp. 7–30). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Personality and Social Psychology, 68(2), 215–227.
Richard, O. C. (2000). Racial diversity, business strategy, Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity:
and firm performance: A recourse-based view. Theory and research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 164–177. Whiddon, B., & Martin, P. Y. (1989). Organi-
Robinson, G., & Dechant, K. (1997). Building a busi- zational democracy and work quality in a state
ness case for diversity. Academy of Management welfare agency. Social Science Quarterly, 70(3),
Executive, 11(3), 21–31. 667–686.
Sherif, M. (1966). Group conflict and co-operation: Their Wright, P., Ferris, S. P., Hiller, J. S., & Kroll, M. (1995).
social psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Competitiveness through management of diver-
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1953). Groups in harmony sity: Effects on stock price evaluation. Academy of
and tension. New York: Harper. Management Journal, 38(1), 272–287.
Slabbert, A. (2001). Cross-cultural racism in South Zegers de Beijl, R. (1999). Documenting discrimination
Africa—Dead or alive? Social Behavior and against migrant workers in the labour market.
Personality, 29(2), 125–132. Geneva: International Labour Office.

View publication stats