Summary literature making diversity work: Building inclusive
organizations
Index
#1 Şahin (2019). Looking beyond our similarities: How perceived (in)visible dissimilarity
relates to feelings of inclusion at work.....................................................................................2
#2 Vink (2022). From best practices to best methods: An integral, systematic, and evidence-
based approach to D&I management......................................................................................3
#3 Cheryan (2020). Masculine defaults: Identifying and mitigating hidden cultural biases......4
#4 Van Laar (2019). Coping with stigma in the workplace: Understanding the role of threat
regulation, supportive factors, and potential hidden costs.......................................................7
#5 Coffeng (2021). Quality of group decisions by board members: a hidden-profile
experiment.............................................................................................................................. 9
#6 Purdie-Vaughns (2008). Social identity contingencies: How diversity cues signal threat
or safety for African Americans in mainstream institutions....................................................10
#7 Plaut (2018). Do color blindness and multiculturalism remedy or foster discrimination and
racism?................................................................................................................................. 12
#8 Aarntzen (2021). How individual gender role beliefs, organizational gender norms, and
national gender norms predict parents’ work-Family guilt in Europe......................................14
#9 Meeussen (2020). How to foster male engagement in traditionally female communal roles
and occupations: Insights from research on gender norms and precarious manhood...........15
#10 Kaiser (2013). Presumed fair: Ironic effects of organizational diversity structures..........18
#11 Pietri (2019). Addressing unintended consequences of gender diversity interventions on
women’s sense of belonging in STEM...................................................................................19
#12 Morgenroth (2018). Quotas and affirmative action: Understanding group-based
outcomes and attitudes.........................................................................................................20
#13 Iyer A (2022) Understanding advantaged groups’ opposition to diversity, equity, and
inclusion (DEI) policies: The role of perceived threat.............................................................21
,#1 Şahin (2019). Looking beyond our similarities: How perceived (in)visible
dissimilarity relates to feelings of inclusion at work.
Introduction
Dissimilarity at work
Dissimilarity negatively affect a variety of work outcomes. There are several mechanisms
affecting employees.
1. The ingroup bias on the numerical majority, which causes them to discriminate who
are different from them.
2. The minority employees tend to be more engaged with social acceptance leads them
cognitively away from task performance.
3. Similarity attraction. Minority members may form minority subgroups.
Dissimilarity (subjective) = whether participants feel dissimilar to other team members
Social inclusion = persons' sense of belonging and ability to be their selves in a specific
situation
Hypothesis
Hypothesis 1a Both types of perceived dissimilarity (surface-level and deep-level) will be
negatively associated to emotions of inclusion.
Hypothesis 1b Perceived surface-level and deep-level dissimilarity negatively relate to key
work-related outcomes, namely job satisfaction, work-related stress, turnover intentions,
career commitment, and career advancement motivation.
- Inclusion is shown to be a key predictor of work satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2 Felt inclusion mediates the relationships between perceived dissimilarity and
work-related outcomes.
Climate for inclusion
Hypothesis 3a Perceived climate for inclusion moderates the relationship between
perceived dissimilarity and felt inclusion, such that the negative relationship between
perceived dissimilarity and felt inclusion is weaker the more inclusive the climate is perceived
to be.
Hypothesis 3b Perceived climate for inclusion positively relates to felt inclusion.
Discussion
- Perceived deep-level (but not surface-level) dissimilarity is negatively related to felt
inclusion
o Can be improved in programs, because most are focusing on the surface-level
- Felt inclusion acts as a mediator between deep-level dissimilarity and participants’ job
satisfaction, work related stress, and turnover intentions.
- the negative relationship between perceived deep-level dissimilarity and felt inclusion
was buffered by a perceived positive climate for inclusion.
- both minority and majority group members are better off in an organizational climate
where people who are dissimilar are being valued and accepted as they are.
, Conclusion
In conclusion, this article shows that subjective perceptions of difference and the current
inclusive society have significant effects on employees' sense of inclusion. Furthermore, the
findings imply that deep-level dissimilarity, more so than surface-level dissimilarity, plays a
significant role in the mechanisms operating in heterogeneous groups.
#2 Vink (2022). From best practices to best methods: An integral, systematic, and
evidence-based approach to D&I management.
The problems with a best practice approach to D&I management
1. Overlooks evidence suggesting that D&I programs are more effective when
implemented as part of a lager bundle of activities than in isolation
a. When picking one activity, which was ‘effective’, can work out very different.
2. It lacks a systematic approach to implementing programs
a. Also need to align with the companies’ goals
3. Purely based on anecdotal data, which, at best, serves as a poor substitute for their
actual efficacy
4. Not monitoring whether there is support for such practices within their own
organization
Solution: move from a best practice approach best methods approach
Entails that D&I programs cover all relevant HR domains, are developed in a systematic
manner, and are evidence-based
1. Cover the entire human resources chain integrally implementing
a. A bundle of programs better communicates an organization’s diversity
b. An organization’s diversity program should cover the entire employee journey
and include measures aimed at the influx, inclusion, promotion and retention.
2. Developed, implemented and evaluated in a systematic manner
a. Apply strategic alignment. Strategic alignment means that employees,
managers, and directors know what their organization stands for and
understand how its strategies, policies, and activities contribute to achieving its
purpose. Practitioners should follow 5 steps to develop and implement
diversity programs
i. Specify the organization’s D&I vision and ensure that it is aligned with
its overall strategy
ii. The goals of different diversity programs should be aligned with the
organization’s D&I vision and SMART
iii. Monitor support for and resistance to D&I programs by identifying
whether there is support for programs and practices, areas in which
issues may arise, and actions that can be taken to increase support
iv. Concrete D&I programs should be implemented to reach the specified
goals
v. D&I programs should be measured and evaluated to determine whether
the organization successfully reached it goals
organizations
Index
#1 Şahin (2019). Looking beyond our similarities: How perceived (in)visible dissimilarity
relates to feelings of inclusion at work.....................................................................................2
#2 Vink (2022). From best practices to best methods: An integral, systematic, and evidence-
based approach to D&I management......................................................................................3
#3 Cheryan (2020). Masculine defaults: Identifying and mitigating hidden cultural biases......4
#4 Van Laar (2019). Coping with stigma in the workplace: Understanding the role of threat
regulation, supportive factors, and potential hidden costs.......................................................7
#5 Coffeng (2021). Quality of group decisions by board members: a hidden-profile
experiment.............................................................................................................................. 9
#6 Purdie-Vaughns (2008). Social identity contingencies: How diversity cues signal threat
or safety for African Americans in mainstream institutions....................................................10
#7 Plaut (2018). Do color blindness and multiculturalism remedy or foster discrimination and
racism?................................................................................................................................. 12
#8 Aarntzen (2021). How individual gender role beliefs, organizational gender norms, and
national gender norms predict parents’ work-Family guilt in Europe......................................14
#9 Meeussen (2020). How to foster male engagement in traditionally female communal roles
and occupations: Insights from research on gender norms and precarious manhood...........15
#10 Kaiser (2013). Presumed fair: Ironic effects of organizational diversity structures..........18
#11 Pietri (2019). Addressing unintended consequences of gender diversity interventions on
women’s sense of belonging in STEM...................................................................................19
#12 Morgenroth (2018). Quotas and affirmative action: Understanding group-based
outcomes and attitudes.........................................................................................................20
#13 Iyer A (2022) Understanding advantaged groups’ opposition to diversity, equity, and
inclusion (DEI) policies: The role of perceived threat.............................................................21
,#1 Şahin (2019). Looking beyond our similarities: How perceived (in)visible
dissimilarity relates to feelings of inclusion at work.
Introduction
Dissimilarity at work
Dissimilarity negatively affect a variety of work outcomes. There are several mechanisms
affecting employees.
1. The ingroup bias on the numerical majority, which causes them to discriminate who
are different from them.
2. The minority employees tend to be more engaged with social acceptance leads them
cognitively away from task performance.
3. Similarity attraction. Minority members may form minority subgroups.
Dissimilarity (subjective) = whether participants feel dissimilar to other team members
Social inclusion = persons' sense of belonging and ability to be their selves in a specific
situation
Hypothesis
Hypothesis 1a Both types of perceived dissimilarity (surface-level and deep-level) will be
negatively associated to emotions of inclusion.
Hypothesis 1b Perceived surface-level and deep-level dissimilarity negatively relate to key
work-related outcomes, namely job satisfaction, work-related stress, turnover intentions,
career commitment, and career advancement motivation.
- Inclusion is shown to be a key predictor of work satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2 Felt inclusion mediates the relationships between perceived dissimilarity and
work-related outcomes.
Climate for inclusion
Hypothesis 3a Perceived climate for inclusion moderates the relationship between
perceived dissimilarity and felt inclusion, such that the negative relationship between
perceived dissimilarity and felt inclusion is weaker the more inclusive the climate is perceived
to be.
Hypothesis 3b Perceived climate for inclusion positively relates to felt inclusion.
Discussion
- Perceived deep-level (but not surface-level) dissimilarity is negatively related to felt
inclusion
o Can be improved in programs, because most are focusing on the surface-level
- Felt inclusion acts as a mediator between deep-level dissimilarity and participants’ job
satisfaction, work related stress, and turnover intentions.
- the negative relationship between perceived deep-level dissimilarity and felt inclusion
was buffered by a perceived positive climate for inclusion.
- both minority and majority group members are better off in an organizational climate
where people who are dissimilar are being valued and accepted as they are.
, Conclusion
In conclusion, this article shows that subjective perceptions of difference and the current
inclusive society have significant effects on employees' sense of inclusion. Furthermore, the
findings imply that deep-level dissimilarity, more so than surface-level dissimilarity, plays a
significant role in the mechanisms operating in heterogeneous groups.
#2 Vink (2022). From best practices to best methods: An integral, systematic, and
evidence-based approach to D&I management.
The problems with a best practice approach to D&I management
1. Overlooks evidence suggesting that D&I programs are more effective when
implemented as part of a lager bundle of activities than in isolation
a. When picking one activity, which was ‘effective’, can work out very different.
2. It lacks a systematic approach to implementing programs
a. Also need to align with the companies’ goals
3. Purely based on anecdotal data, which, at best, serves as a poor substitute for their
actual efficacy
4. Not monitoring whether there is support for such practices within their own
organization
Solution: move from a best practice approach best methods approach
Entails that D&I programs cover all relevant HR domains, are developed in a systematic
manner, and are evidence-based
1. Cover the entire human resources chain integrally implementing
a. A bundle of programs better communicates an organization’s diversity
b. An organization’s diversity program should cover the entire employee journey
and include measures aimed at the influx, inclusion, promotion and retention.
2. Developed, implemented and evaluated in a systematic manner
a. Apply strategic alignment. Strategic alignment means that employees,
managers, and directors know what their organization stands for and
understand how its strategies, policies, and activities contribute to achieving its
purpose. Practitioners should follow 5 steps to develop and implement
diversity programs
i. Specify the organization’s D&I vision and ensure that it is aligned with
its overall strategy
ii. The goals of different diversity programs should be aligned with the
organization’s D&I vision and SMART
iii. Monitor support for and resistance to D&I programs by identifying
whether there is support for programs and practices, areas in which
issues may arise, and actions that can be taken to increase support
iv. Concrete D&I programs should be implemented to reach the specified
goals
v. D&I programs should be measured and evaluated to determine whether
the organization successfully reached it goals
