Strategic Communication in Organizations (SCiO) – Exam 2, week 7 - 12
- Lecture notes + assignments (study questions) of week 7 to 12
- Summaries of all articles
- Exam question examples + answers
Lecture 7. Diversity – Notes
Diversity management
New director of Schiphol airport will be a man. Departing director Jos Nijhuis’ successor will
definitely be a man, because they want to retain the M/F-ratio (50-50) that they currently have
in the board.
What is diversity?
Diversity is about differences between people. Examples: gender, race, ethnic background,
age, religion, language, education, communication style, knowledge, experience, work style,
everything basically, etc. Visible and invisible differences. Cultural diversity has both.
Diversity in the workplace
Example: football team. A football team with only goalkeepers is not going to win any
matches. Diversity is necessary in order to win matches. However, it is not always that easy.
Diversity can also have negative consequences. If you have a team with different
backgrounds, people are going to have different thoughts, feelings, etc. which can lead to
clashes.
Diversity is a double-edged sword
In literature, we find both positive and negative outcomes
Conceptual model of article 7.1
Categorization-elaboration model of work group diversity and group performance.
Diversity leads to performance in teams through elaboration. The more diverse you are as a
team the better they are at doing that. However, it is not always that simple. There is also a
negative side. Diversity can lead to a cultural clash via (social) categorization. Categorization
simplifies the reality.
Social psychology of the multicultural workplace
Social identity theory and self-categorization theory
We divide our social world into groups (categorization), and identify with some of them
(social identity). Which groups do we identify with? Country, gender, etc. Groups that we feel
identified with because they are similar to ourselves (there are similarities). Similarity-
attraction hypothesis.
Belonging to an in-group feels good. To strengthen the in-group identity people for example
all wear orange in the Netherlands during national events. In-group: friends, trustworthy,
competent, predictable (biased towards these people).
,Outcomes of cultural diversity
Diverse teams can come up with more ideas and better quality of those ideas.
Diversity climate
An organizational climate, which is characterized by:
Room for employees to display cultural heritage / be different
Allowed to wear crosses or scarfs, get free to celebrate different holidays than
Christmas and Easter (such as Chinese new year for example)
Recognition of the added value (positive outcomes) of diversity
Effective diversity management needs a strong diversity climate
Diversity climate appears to:
Reduce effects of categorization
(less conflict / discrimination, stronger identification)
Enhance elaboration
(increases innovation, creativity)
Article 7.2
- How does diversity climate affect these outcomes?
- What communication processes are involved in increasing elaboration and reducing
effects of categorization?
Effects of diversity climate mediated by workgroup communication:
1. Trust
Honesty, sincerity, psychological safety, perceived comfort in communication
2. Openness
Diversity approaches
Colorblindness:
Downplays or ignores differences between people. Assumes that this will promote
equal opportunities. Don’t look at a person’s background, only their competences.
Everyone will be judged based on their performance. It’s about how people behave
themselves.
Multiculturalism (colorful):
Actively promotes differences between people. Recognizes added value of diversity.
We think diversity is good for our company. All employees should be allowed to
be who they want to be.
Assignment 7. Diversity
Argue why a colorblind approach has better outcomes for organizations.
A colorblind approach stresses that people should be treated equally as individuals and that
group differences should be ignored when making decisions, such as hiring and promotion.
Individual accomplishments and qualifications are stressed over any other factor. In contrast,
a colorful approach emphasizes that differences between cultural groups should be
acknowledged.
, The present-day world we are living in is striving for decades towards a society in
which people are treated equally and group differences are ignored. In the history this wasn’t
always the case, and differences between cultural groups were acknowledged (e.g., racism,
emancipation, feminism). But as Nelson Mandela stated: “apartheid is a crime against
humanity”. For this reason, the colorblind approach towards diversity management in
organisations can be considered the best approach because people are treated equally and
group differences are ignored. Values that humankind has tried to establish for a long time.
Furthermore, a colorblind approach towards diversity can be considered the best
approach because it has a positive influence on work outcomes in organisations. The study of
Jansen et al. (2015) showed that for majority members, perceptions of a colorblind approach
were positively related to feelings of inclusion, which in turn predicted job satisfaction and
innovation.
However, for minority members, perceptions of a colorblind approach were not
positively associated with feelings of inclusion and work outcomes. But even though minority
members perceive the colorblind approach as being insincere, in reality little or nothing is
done to support these goals (Jansen et al., 2015, p. 3).
The choice between a colorblind or colorful approach towards diversity actually comes
down to a choice between majority or minority members of an organisation. Majority
members prefer a colorblind approach, whereas minority members prefer a colorful approach.
A choice that is positive for majority members is negative for minority members, and vice
versa. In this case, the most logical decision would be to choose for the colorblind approach,
thus: for majority members who represent the majority of the employees. It would not make
sense to go for an approach that has a positive influence on a smaller group, rather than a
bigger group.
Moreover, no distinction is made between people with a colorblind approach, whereas
the colorful approach does make a distinction. People are equal and should be treated equally.
Summary of articles for lecture 7
7.1 Knippenberg (2004) - Work group diversity and group performance
Abstract
Research on the relationship between work group diversity and performance has yielded
inconsistent results. To address this, the authors propose the categorization-elaboration model
(CEM), which reconceptualizes and integrates information/decision making and social categorization
perspectives on work-group diversity and performance. CEM incorporates mediator and moderator
variables that typically are ignored in diversity research and incorporates the view that information/
decision making and social categorization processes interact such that intergroup biases flowing from
social categorization disrupt the elaboration (in-depth processing) of task-relevant information and
perspectives. In addition, the authors propose that attempts to link the positive and negative effects
of diversity to specific types of diversity should be abandoned in favor of the assumption that all
dimensions of diversity may have positive as well as negative effects. The ways in which these
propositions may set the agenda for future research in diversity are discussed.
Work-group diversity is a fact of organizational life. Because work-group diversity may have
positive as well as negative effects on group performance, the questions of which processes underlie
these effects of diversity and how to manage these processes pose challenges to organizational theory
and practice. To meet this challenge and to advance our understanding of the effects of work-group
diversity on group performance, the authors introduce a model of the processes underlying the positive
and the negative effects of diversity that they believe has greater predictive power and opens up new
directions in research on diversity and group performance.
, Work-group diversity and performance
Diversity refers to differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the perception
that another person is different from self. In practice, diversity research has mainly focused on gender,
age, race/ethnicity, tenure, educational background, and functional background. The most important
difference underlying diversity dimensions is that between social category diversity (differences in
readily detectable attributes such as sex, age, and ethnicity) and informational/functional diversity
(differences in less visible underlying attributes that are more job-related, such as functional and
educational background). There are two main traditions in research in work-group diversity and
performance:
The social categorization perspective
The social categorization perspective holds that similarities and differences are used as a basis for
categorizing self and others into groups, with ensuing categorizations distinguishing between one’s own
in-group and one or more out-groups. People tend to like and trust in-group members more than out-
group members and thus generally tend to favor in-groups over out-groups. Work group members are
more positively inclined toward their group and the people within it if fellow group members are
similar rather than dissimilar to the self.
Moreover, categorization processes may produce sub-groups within the work group (‘us’ and
‘them’), and give rise to problematic inter-subgroup relations. As a result, the more homogeneous the
work group, the higher member commitment and group cohesion will be, the fewer relational conflicts
will occur, and the less likely membership will be to turn over. Together, these processes are proposed
to result in higher overall group performance when groups are homogeneous rather than heterogeneous.
The information/decision-making perspective
The information/decision-making perspective arrives at different predictions, holding that diverse
groups should outperform homogeneous groups. The idea is that diverse groups are more likely to
possess a broader range of task-relevant knowledge, skills, and abilities that are distinct and to have
different opinions and perspectives on the task at hand. This not only gives diverse groups a larger pool
of resources, but may also have other beneficial effects. The need to reconcile conflicting viewpoints
may force the group to more thoroughly process task-relevant information and may prevent the group
from opting too easily for a course of action on which there seems to be consensus.
In addition, exposure to diverging and potentially surprising perspectives may lead to
more creative and innovative ideas and solutions. Corroborating this analysis, some studies found an
association of diversity with increased task conflict and higher performance and innovation.
Whereas the social categorization perspective focuses more on relational aspects, the information
/decision-making perspective concentrates on task-related aspects of group processes. One could thus
argue that diversity negatively affects relationships within the group while simultaneously contributing
to group performance. However, this is difficult. An alternative way to integrate social categorization
and information/decision-making perspectives is to take the dimensions of diversity into account.
Social categorization theories outline how categorizations are more likely to be used if category
markers are readily detectable, such as in the case of differences in sex and race. Moreover,
categorizations that are more cognitively accessible are more likely to be used.
The positive effects of diversity are linked to differences in information, expertise, viewpoints,
and so forth. Thus, one may argue that diversity only has positive effects on group performance to the
extent that it covaries with informational differences. However, more job-related dimensions such as
functional and educational background (informational diversity) are more likely to be associated with
(job-relevant) informational differences. The positive effects of diversity, therefore, would be more
likely to occur for diversity on underlying job-related attributes.
The Categorization-Elaboration Model
Previous research has not been able to adequately account for the positive and negative effects
diversity in work groups can have or to integrate the social categorization and information/decision-
making perspective in a satisfactory way. To address this problem, the authors propose the CEM
(categorization–elaboration model). The reconsideration of the nature of information/decision-making
and social categorization processes suggests that each dimension of diversity may in principle elicit
- Lecture notes + assignments (study questions) of week 7 to 12
- Summaries of all articles
- Exam question examples + answers
Lecture 7. Diversity – Notes
Diversity management
New director of Schiphol airport will be a man. Departing director Jos Nijhuis’ successor will
definitely be a man, because they want to retain the M/F-ratio (50-50) that they currently have
in the board.
What is diversity?
Diversity is about differences between people. Examples: gender, race, ethnic background,
age, religion, language, education, communication style, knowledge, experience, work style,
everything basically, etc. Visible and invisible differences. Cultural diversity has both.
Diversity in the workplace
Example: football team. A football team with only goalkeepers is not going to win any
matches. Diversity is necessary in order to win matches. However, it is not always that easy.
Diversity can also have negative consequences. If you have a team with different
backgrounds, people are going to have different thoughts, feelings, etc. which can lead to
clashes.
Diversity is a double-edged sword
In literature, we find both positive and negative outcomes
Conceptual model of article 7.1
Categorization-elaboration model of work group diversity and group performance.
Diversity leads to performance in teams through elaboration. The more diverse you are as a
team the better they are at doing that. However, it is not always that simple. There is also a
negative side. Diversity can lead to a cultural clash via (social) categorization. Categorization
simplifies the reality.
Social psychology of the multicultural workplace
Social identity theory and self-categorization theory
We divide our social world into groups (categorization), and identify with some of them
(social identity). Which groups do we identify with? Country, gender, etc. Groups that we feel
identified with because they are similar to ourselves (there are similarities). Similarity-
attraction hypothesis.
Belonging to an in-group feels good. To strengthen the in-group identity people for example
all wear orange in the Netherlands during national events. In-group: friends, trustworthy,
competent, predictable (biased towards these people).
,Outcomes of cultural diversity
Diverse teams can come up with more ideas and better quality of those ideas.
Diversity climate
An organizational climate, which is characterized by:
Room for employees to display cultural heritage / be different
Allowed to wear crosses or scarfs, get free to celebrate different holidays than
Christmas and Easter (such as Chinese new year for example)
Recognition of the added value (positive outcomes) of diversity
Effective diversity management needs a strong diversity climate
Diversity climate appears to:
Reduce effects of categorization
(less conflict / discrimination, stronger identification)
Enhance elaboration
(increases innovation, creativity)
Article 7.2
- How does diversity climate affect these outcomes?
- What communication processes are involved in increasing elaboration and reducing
effects of categorization?
Effects of diversity climate mediated by workgroup communication:
1. Trust
Honesty, sincerity, psychological safety, perceived comfort in communication
2. Openness
Diversity approaches
Colorblindness:
Downplays or ignores differences between people. Assumes that this will promote
equal opportunities. Don’t look at a person’s background, only their competences.
Everyone will be judged based on their performance. It’s about how people behave
themselves.
Multiculturalism (colorful):
Actively promotes differences between people. Recognizes added value of diversity.
We think diversity is good for our company. All employees should be allowed to
be who they want to be.
Assignment 7. Diversity
Argue why a colorblind approach has better outcomes for organizations.
A colorblind approach stresses that people should be treated equally as individuals and that
group differences should be ignored when making decisions, such as hiring and promotion.
Individual accomplishments and qualifications are stressed over any other factor. In contrast,
a colorful approach emphasizes that differences between cultural groups should be
acknowledged.
, The present-day world we are living in is striving for decades towards a society in
which people are treated equally and group differences are ignored. In the history this wasn’t
always the case, and differences between cultural groups were acknowledged (e.g., racism,
emancipation, feminism). But as Nelson Mandela stated: “apartheid is a crime against
humanity”. For this reason, the colorblind approach towards diversity management in
organisations can be considered the best approach because people are treated equally and
group differences are ignored. Values that humankind has tried to establish for a long time.
Furthermore, a colorblind approach towards diversity can be considered the best
approach because it has a positive influence on work outcomes in organisations. The study of
Jansen et al. (2015) showed that for majority members, perceptions of a colorblind approach
were positively related to feelings of inclusion, which in turn predicted job satisfaction and
innovation.
However, for minority members, perceptions of a colorblind approach were not
positively associated with feelings of inclusion and work outcomes. But even though minority
members perceive the colorblind approach as being insincere, in reality little or nothing is
done to support these goals (Jansen et al., 2015, p. 3).
The choice between a colorblind or colorful approach towards diversity actually comes
down to a choice between majority or minority members of an organisation. Majority
members prefer a colorblind approach, whereas minority members prefer a colorful approach.
A choice that is positive for majority members is negative for minority members, and vice
versa. In this case, the most logical decision would be to choose for the colorblind approach,
thus: for majority members who represent the majority of the employees. It would not make
sense to go for an approach that has a positive influence on a smaller group, rather than a
bigger group.
Moreover, no distinction is made between people with a colorblind approach, whereas
the colorful approach does make a distinction. People are equal and should be treated equally.
Summary of articles for lecture 7
7.1 Knippenberg (2004) - Work group diversity and group performance
Abstract
Research on the relationship between work group diversity and performance has yielded
inconsistent results. To address this, the authors propose the categorization-elaboration model
(CEM), which reconceptualizes and integrates information/decision making and social categorization
perspectives on work-group diversity and performance. CEM incorporates mediator and moderator
variables that typically are ignored in diversity research and incorporates the view that information/
decision making and social categorization processes interact such that intergroup biases flowing from
social categorization disrupt the elaboration (in-depth processing) of task-relevant information and
perspectives. In addition, the authors propose that attempts to link the positive and negative effects
of diversity to specific types of diversity should be abandoned in favor of the assumption that all
dimensions of diversity may have positive as well as negative effects. The ways in which these
propositions may set the agenda for future research in diversity are discussed.
Work-group diversity is a fact of organizational life. Because work-group diversity may have
positive as well as negative effects on group performance, the questions of which processes underlie
these effects of diversity and how to manage these processes pose challenges to organizational theory
and practice. To meet this challenge and to advance our understanding of the effects of work-group
diversity on group performance, the authors introduce a model of the processes underlying the positive
and the negative effects of diversity that they believe has greater predictive power and opens up new
directions in research on diversity and group performance.
, Work-group diversity and performance
Diversity refers to differences between individuals on any attribute that may lead to the perception
that another person is different from self. In practice, diversity research has mainly focused on gender,
age, race/ethnicity, tenure, educational background, and functional background. The most important
difference underlying diversity dimensions is that between social category diversity (differences in
readily detectable attributes such as sex, age, and ethnicity) and informational/functional diversity
(differences in less visible underlying attributes that are more job-related, such as functional and
educational background). There are two main traditions in research in work-group diversity and
performance:
The social categorization perspective
The social categorization perspective holds that similarities and differences are used as a basis for
categorizing self and others into groups, with ensuing categorizations distinguishing between one’s own
in-group and one or more out-groups. People tend to like and trust in-group members more than out-
group members and thus generally tend to favor in-groups over out-groups. Work group members are
more positively inclined toward their group and the people within it if fellow group members are
similar rather than dissimilar to the self.
Moreover, categorization processes may produce sub-groups within the work group (‘us’ and
‘them’), and give rise to problematic inter-subgroup relations. As a result, the more homogeneous the
work group, the higher member commitment and group cohesion will be, the fewer relational conflicts
will occur, and the less likely membership will be to turn over. Together, these processes are proposed
to result in higher overall group performance when groups are homogeneous rather than heterogeneous.
The information/decision-making perspective
The information/decision-making perspective arrives at different predictions, holding that diverse
groups should outperform homogeneous groups. The idea is that diverse groups are more likely to
possess a broader range of task-relevant knowledge, skills, and abilities that are distinct and to have
different opinions and perspectives on the task at hand. This not only gives diverse groups a larger pool
of resources, but may also have other beneficial effects. The need to reconcile conflicting viewpoints
may force the group to more thoroughly process task-relevant information and may prevent the group
from opting too easily for a course of action on which there seems to be consensus.
In addition, exposure to diverging and potentially surprising perspectives may lead to
more creative and innovative ideas and solutions. Corroborating this analysis, some studies found an
association of diversity with increased task conflict and higher performance and innovation.
Whereas the social categorization perspective focuses more on relational aspects, the information
/decision-making perspective concentrates on task-related aspects of group processes. One could thus
argue that diversity negatively affects relationships within the group while simultaneously contributing
to group performance. However, this is difficult. An alternative way to integrate social categorization
and information/decision-making perspectives is to take the dimensions of diversity into account.
Social categorization theories outline how categorizations are more likely to be used if category
markers are readily detectable, such as in the case of differences in sex and race. Moreover,
categorizations that are more cognitively accessible are more likely to be used.
The positive effects of diversity are linked to differences in information, expertise, viewpoints,
and so forth. Thus, one may argue that diversity only has positive effects on group performance to the
extent that it covaries with informational differences. However, more job-related dimensions such as
functional and educational background (informational diversity) are more likely to be associated with
(job-relevant) informational differences. The positive effects of diversity, therefore, would be more
likely to occur for diversity on underlying job-related attributes.
The Categorization-Elaboration Model
Previous research has not been able to adequately account for the positive and negative effects
diversity in work groups can have or to integrate the social categorization and information/decision-
making perspective in a satisfactory way. To address this problem, the authors propose the CEM
(categorization–elaboration model). The reconsideration of the nature of information/decision-making
and social categorization processes suggests that each dimension of diversity may in principle elicit
