{"title":"多元化、公平和包容计划强调象征意义:原因与后果","authors":"Ariel Levi, Yitzhak Fried","doi":"10.1002/job.2834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"SummaryIn this article, we attempt to explain why diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs have become so widespread and central to organizations today. We propose that organizations have responded to powerful societal forces that emphasize the importance of diversity. Because achieving diversity is often difficult, organizations often emphasize the symbolic aspects of diversity, including mission statements on diversity and the creation of units to promote the organization's DEI reputation. This emphasis on diversity symbolism has led to some unintended and negative consequences. A major consequence is that organizations become vulnerable to the charge that they are engaging in “window dressing.” This charge can lead organizations to respond by setting even more difficult‐to‐achieve goals. We cite illustrative examples in which stakeholders have called on organizations to actually achieve diversity, prompting a new round of diversity‐related goal‐setting sometimes accompanied by legally questionable human resource procedures (e.g., preferential hiring). Another negative consequence of diversity symbolism is that it incentivizes a focus on surface rather than deep dimensions of diversity. This displacement of deep by surface level diversity may cause organization to forgo the advantages potentially afforded by the former relative to the latter. We suggest that the tradeoffs inherent in DEI warrant caution and realism in program implementation.","PeriodicalId":48450,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Organizational Behavior","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diversity, equity, and inclusion programs' emphasis on symbolism: Causes and consequences\",\"authors\":\"Ariel Levi, Yitzhak Fried\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/job.2834\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"SummaryIn this article, we attempt to explain why diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs have become so widespread and central to organizations today. We propose that organizations have responded to powerful societal forces that emphasize the importance of diversity. Because achieving diversity is often difficult, organizations often emphasize the symbolic aspects of diversity, including mission statements on diversity and the creation of units to promote the organization's DEI reputation. This emphasis on diversity symbolism has led to some unintended and negative consequences. A major consequence is that organizations become vulnerable to the charge that they are engaging in “window dressing.” This charge can lead organizations to respond by setting even more difficult‐to‐achieve goals. We cite illustrative examples in which stakeholders have called on organizations to actually achieve diversity, prompting a new round of diversity‐related goal‐setting sometimes accompanied by legally questionable human resource procedures (e.g., preferential hiring). Another negative consequence of diversity symbolism is that it incentivizes a focus on surface rather than deep dimensions of diversity. This displacement of deep by surface level diversity may cause organization to forgo the advantages potentially afforded by the former relative to the latter. We suggest that the tradeoffs inherent in DEI warrant caution and realism in program implementation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48450,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Organizational Behavior\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Organizational Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2834\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Organizational Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2834","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
摘要 在本文中,我们试图解释为什么多样性、公平性和包容性(DEI)计划在当今组织中变得如此普遍和重要。我们认为,组织对强调多样性重要性的强大社会力量做出了回应。由于实现多样性通常很困难,因此组织往往强调多样性的象征意义,包括关于多样性的使命宣言,以及设立相关部门来提升组织的 DEI 声誉。这种对多样性象征意义的强调导致了一些意想不到的负面后果。一个主要后果是,组织容易受到 "装点门面 "的指控。这种指控会导致组织通过制定更难实现的目标来应对。我们举例说明,利益相关者呼吁组织切实实现多元化,从而引发新一轮与多元化相关的目标设定,有时还伴随着法律上有问题的人力资源程序(如优先录用)。多样性象征意义的另一个负面影响是,它促使人们关注多样性的表层而非深层。这种以表层多样性取代深层多样性的做法,可能会使组织放弃前者相对于后者可能带来的优势。我们认为,DEI 所固有的取舍需要在计划实施过程中保持谨慎和现实的态度。
Diversity, equity, and inclusion programs' emphasis on symbolism: Causes and consequences
SummaryIn this article, we attempt to explain why diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs have become so widespread and central to organizations today. We propose that organizations have responded to powerful societal forces that emphasize the importance of diversity. Because achieving diversity is often difficult, organizations often emphasize the symbolic aspects of diversity, including mission statements on diversity and the creation of units to promote the organization's DEI reputation. This emphasis on diversity symbolism has led to some unintended and negative consequences. A major consequence is that organizations become vulnerable to the charge that they are engaging in “window dressing.” This charge can lead organizations to respond by setting even more difficult‐to‐achieve goals. We cite illustrative examples in which stakeholders have called on organizations to actually achieve diversity, prompting a new round of diversity‐related goal‐setting sometimes accompanied by legally questionable human resource procedures (e.g., preferential hiring). Another negative consequence of diversity symbolism is that it incentivizes a focus on surface rather than deep dimensions of diversity. This displacement of deep by surface level diversity may cause organization to forgo the advantages potentially afforded by the former relative to the latter. We suggest that the tradeoffs inherent in DEI warrant caution and realism in program implementation.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Organizational Behavior aims to publish empirical reports and theoretical reviews of research in the field of organizational behavior, wherever in the world that work is conducted. The journal will focus on research and theory in all topics associated with organizational behavior within and across individual, group and organizational levels of analysis, including: -At the individual level: personality, perception, beliefs, attitudes, values, motivation, career behavior, stress, emotions, judgment, and commitment. -At the group level: size, composition, structure, leadership, power, group affect, and politics. -At the organizational level: structure, change, goal-setting, creativity, and human resource management policies and practices. -Across levels: decision-making, performance, job satisfaction, turnover and absenteeism, diversity, careers and career development, equal opportunities, work-life balance, identification, organizational culture and climate, inter-organizational processes, and multi-national and cross-national issues. -Research methodologies in studies of organizational behavior.