Managing Cultural Diversity Essay

The pursuit paper brie y debates the rhetoric of managing renewing and considers whether managing miscellany is a distinct entree to managing people or a kernel of diluting equal opportunities in UK systems. With respect to the realities of the opinions in UK organizations, empirical data from a keep abreast of sixty UK human resource professionals and general line managers is presented. We pose a number of admonitory questions, including what does it way out and to whom?By doing so we intend to encourage further critique and challenges in respect to the concept of managing diversity in organizations. Keywords Managing diversity, equal opportunities, HRM/D, rhetoric, reality Introduction Today the workforce does not look, think, or act ilk any workforce of the past, nor does it hold the same values, have the same experiences, or pursue the same require and desires (Jamieson and O Mara 1991). The root of today s workforce has changed signi cantly in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, culture, education, disabilities, and values.Running parallel of latitude to these changes is the shift in thinking by human resource theorists and practitioners with regard to addressing equality in the employment (Cooper and White 1995 Liff and Wacjman 1996). This shift is underpinned by the emergence of the railway line case argument for equal opportunities, as contradictory to the persuasive debate for social justice or equal opportunities as correcting an imbalance, an injustice or a mistake (Thomas 1990).There is now a view that, after twenty years of the stick of intelligent compliance (which has achieved little), the carrot of underpinning the business case for equal opportunities will perhaps achieve more than (Dickens 1994). The business case argument for equal opportunities in organizations is often termed managing or valuing diversity , but, as with most contemporary Human Resource Development International ISSN 1367-8868 print/ISSN 14698374 online 2000 Taylor & Francis Ltd http//www. tandf. co. uk/journals 420 Peer-Reviewed Articles anagement issues, the underlying principles and interpretation of this concept are unmortgaged to mass interpretation, criticism, and indeed misunderstanding. D. Miller (1996) argues that the significant widening of the meaning of equal opportunities has brought with it more complex and mistake messages for employers and practitioners. By drawing on literature and empirical data, we consider whether managing diversity is a distinct approach to managing people or a means of diluting equal opportunities in UK organizations and pose a number of cautionary questions, including what does it matter and to whom?By doing so, we intend to encourage further critique and challenges in respect to the concept of managing diversity in organizations. What is managing diversity? Thomas (2000) argues that, with the growing number of mergers and acquisitions, workforce diversity will become more of a priority for organizations and, therefore, in the future, people will become clearer on what diversity is and how to manage it. As with the debates surrounding de nitions of human resource management and development (HRM/D), managing diversity as a concept means different things to different people.It can relate to the issue of national cultures inside a multinational organization (Hofstede 1984) it can relate to the further development of equal opportunities or to a distinct method of integrate different parts of an organization and/or managing people strategically. Much of the literature regarding managing diversity relates to the US experience, where the concept is particularly popular a re ection perhaps of the more pronounced diversity of workforce composition (Cassell 1996). In a recent report 1999), a Department of Education in America depict managing and valuing diversity as a key component of effective people management, arguing that it focuses on ameliorate the performance of the o rganization and promotes practices that enhance the productivity of all staff. Their dimensions of diversity include gender, race, culture, age, family/carer status, religion, and disability. The de nition provided also embraces a grasp of individual skills, educational quali cations, work experience and background, languages, and other relevant attributes and experiences which differentiate individuals.