IBP
Culture and Diversity At Work
Feb-March 2021
Week 1
Roberge & van Dick (2010)
, • Distinguishes between surface-level and deep-level diversity.
• Uses social psychological theories to draw a model of managing diversity.
• Diversity is bene cial when people learn from one another’s identity.
• Two different levels of mechanisms: individual and group level.
• When certain social psychological mechanisms are activated, diversity will lead to an
increase in group performance.
• A salient collective identity and a safe psychological climate activate these
mechanisms (= they moderate the effects).
• Multi-level psychological mechanisms mediate the relationship between group
composition (= diversity) and group performance.
Roberge & van Dick (2010)
1.The psychological mechanisms
• empathy (individual level)
• self-disclosure (individual level)
• quality of the communication (group level)
• group involvement (group level)
• trust (group level) mediate the relationship between diversity and group performance.
2.The effects of diversity on psychological mechanisms (at individual and group levels) are
Kanter (1976)
There are no sex differences in work behavior, only in work attitudes that stem from
organizational structures.
Effects of structure:
• Opportunity Structure
• Power structure
• Segregation
Impact of opportunity structure on aspirations
people in low mobility or blocked mobility situations limit their aspirations and
seek satisfaction outside of work, this often applies to women which is why they are
less involved
Impact of opportunity structure on value for social relations
Women hold interpersonal relationships at work at higher value than men
People in low-mobility positions tend to seek social interactions due to need to
form groups and receive immediate rewards from it in the present situation
People in high-mobility positions are interested in instrumental relationships
which leads to closes cliques.
Impact of power on attention to social-emotional side of leadership Concept of re ected
power
• Good human relations + power = high morale
• Organizational power: close contact and good relations with power holders, high
opportunities
• Even if women manages to be high in these structures, she still has less in uence
through her isolation and minority
, Conclusion
By looking at the larger organizational context in which relationships and interactions occur,
we can account for the behavior of both men and women who nd themselves in similar
positions in an opportunity or power structure or in a similar sex ratio. Complex
organizations whose opportunity and power structures routinely disadvantage some kinds of
people are likely to generate the behavioral consequences of such disadvantaging. It is the
nature, form, and degree of hierarchy that should bear the burden of change.
Week 2
Fiske & Lee (2008) I
• Intergroup stereotypes and prejudice hinder workplace diversity.
• Categorization processes and social identity theory help explain how stereotypes are
formed.
o Stereotypes help distinguish between ingroup and outgroup.
• Stereotypes are sometimes functional, but also have problems: main one is
discrimination.
• Discusses various forms of discrimination and prejudice:
o blatant, ambivalent, aversive, contemporary (symbolic, modern, and racial
resentment).
Blatant: highly prejudiced employers who are unwilling to hire immigrants and minorities
even if it compromises their business pro ts
Ambivalent: On the one hand, a white person might think of black people as inherently
deviant because they are stereotypically lazy or incompetent, but simultaneously perceive
them to be disadvantaged in society and therefore feel sympathy. Ambivalent attitudes re ect
a distinction people make between responsibility for a problem and responsibility for nding
a solution for that problem
Aversive: . While they might consciously consider themselves to be fair and non-prejudiced
people – and even sympathize with and support minorities’ equal rights movements – they
harbor negative attitudes toward minority groups, producing layered attitudes and
consequently avoidant behaviors,
Symbolic: ‘‘blend’’ of anti-black sentiments and conservative values. These attitudes are
abstract and moralistic because they did not form from direct contact with the target but
instead, constitute part of the perceiver’s value system
Modern: acknowledged contemporary racism’s connection to old-fashioned racism by
recognizing that it also was rooted in socialization and in moralistic belief
Racial resentment: emphasizes the role of values in contemporary racism.
• Gender stereotypes create shifting standards.
knowledge of egalitarian norms discourages expressed hostility toward the target group, but
the norms are not internalized enough that the neosexist or the subtle racist can successfully
guard against leaking animosity
Modern sexism, similar to modern racism, expresses doubts about the current prevalence of
sexism (e.g., ‘‘Discrimination against women is no longer a problem in the United States’’)
and disapproves of those who disagree.
Fiske & Lee (2008) II
• Focuses on gender stereotypes and discrimination
Culture and Diversity At Work
Feb-March 2021
Week 1
Roberge & van Dick (2010)
, • Distinguishes between surface-level and deep-level diversity.
• Uses social psychological theories to draw a model of managing diversity.
• Diversity is bene cial when people learn from one another’s identity.
• Two different levels of mechanisms: individual and group level.
• When certain social psychological mechanisms are activated, diversity will lead to an
increase in group performance.
• A salient collective identity and a safe psychological climate activate these
mechanisms (= they moderate the effects).
• Multi-level psychological mechanisms mediate the relationship between group
composition (= diversity) and group performance.
Roberge & van Dick (2010)
1.The psychological mechanisms
• empathy (individual level)
• self-disclosure (individual level)
• quality of the communication (group level)
• group involvement (group level)
• trust (group level) mediate the relationship between diversity and group performance.
2.The effects of diversity on psychological mechanisms (at individual and group levels) are
Kanter (1976)
There are no sex differences in work behavior, only in work attitudes that stem from
organizational structures.
Effects of structure:
• Opportunity Structure
• Power structure
• Segregation
Impact of opportunity structure on aspirations
people in low mobility or blocked mobility situations limit their aspirations and
seek satisfaction outside of work, this often applies to women which is why they are
less involved
Impact of opportunity structure on value for social relations
Women hold interpersonal relationships at work at higher value than men
People in low-mobility positions tend to seek social interactions due to need to
form groups and receive immediate rewards from it in the present situation
People in high-mobility positions are interested in instrumental relationships
which leads to closes cliques.
Impact of power on attention to social-emotional side of leadership Concept of re ected
power
• Good human relations + power = high morale
• Organizational power: close contact and good relations with power holders, high
opportunities
• Even if women manages to be high in these structures, she still has less in uence
through her isolation and minority
, Conclusion
By looking at the larger organizational context in which relationships and interactions occur,
we can account for the behavior of both men and women who nd themselves in similar
positions in an opportunity or power structure or in a similar sex ratio. Complex
organizations whose opportunity and power structures routinely disadvantage some kinds of
people are likely to generate the behavioral consequences of such disadvantaging. It is the
nature, form, and degree of hierarchy that should bear the burden of change.
Week 2
Fiske & Lee (2008) I
• Intergroup stereotypes and prejudice hinder workplace diversity.
• Categorization processes and social identity theory help explain how stereotypes are
formed.
o Stereotypes help distinguish between ingroup and outgroup.
• Stereotypes are sometimes functional, but also have problems: main one is
discrimination.
• Discusses various forms of discrimination and prejudice:
o blatant, ambivalent, aversive, contemporary (symbolic, modern, and racial
resentment).
Blatant: highly prejudiced employers who are unwilling to hire immigrants and minorities
even if it compromises their business pro ts
Ambivalent: On the one hand, a white person might think of black people as inherently
deviant because they are stereotypically lazy or incompetent, but simultaneously perceive
them to be disadvantaged in society and therefore feel sympathy. Ambivalent attitudes re ect
a distinction people make between responsibility for a problem and responsibility for nding
a solution for that problem
Aversive: . While they might consciously consider themselves to be fair and non-prejudiced
people – and even sympathize with and support minorities’ equal rights movements – they
harbor negative attitudes toward minority groups, producing layered attitudes and
consequently avoidant behaviors,
Symbolic: ‘‘blend’’ of anti-black sentiments and conservative values. These attitudes are
abstract and moralistic because they did not form from direct contact with the target but
instead, constitute part of the perceiver’s value system
Modern: acknowledged contemporary racism’s connection to old-fashioned racism by
recognizing that it also was rooted in socialization and in moralistic belief
Racial resentment: emphasizes the role of values in contemporary racism.
• Gender stereotypes create shifting standards.
knowledge of egalitarian norms discourages expressed hostility toward the target group, but
the norms are not internalized enough that the neosexist or the subtle racist can successfully
guard against leaking animosity
Modern sexism, similar to modern racism, expresses doubts about the current prevalence of
sexism (e.g., ‘‘Discrimination against women is no longer a problem in the United States’’)
and disapproves of those who disagree.
Fiske & Lee (2008) II
• Focuses on gender stereotypes and discrimination
