Samenvatting
Summary Diversity 2
- Instelling
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (VU)
Summary of the course Diversity 2 with all the articles and chapters.
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 55 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 55 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
2 beoordelingen
Door: charlottekerst11 • 2 jaar geleden
Door: romyvannierop • 2 jaar geleden
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Summary Diversity 2HC 1 Diversity policies & the tyranny of good intentions
- VAN EWIJK 2010
- Turning ‘diversity’ into policy-> a framework of the what, the why and the how
- Diversity not one definition, because context dependent-> plurality and heterogeneity
- Diversity policy about focus effort to reach policy objective or cause-> notion of diversity needs to be
moulded to be fit into a policy
- The What
Modes of differentiation: the principles by which people from context to context, situation to situation,
mark themselves and each other as different -> to what extent do the differences matter
Social categories approach: gender, skin colour or race, class, income,
educational background, (dis)ability, age, religion, sexual orientation,
marital status, parental status, and so forth
Management approach: life style, perspectives, political opinion,
union affiliation, thinking types, professional experience, personality
types, functional background
- Diversity always about a form of selection
- The Why: about the set of reasoning and set of motivations for a policy
Individual: equal opportunity approach-> justice and equality
Moral arguments: group-focus denies agency of individuals and strengthens stereotypes and
detrimental to individual freedom
Practical arguments: group-boundaries do not exist, individuals have multiple identities, focus on
groups blocks the creation of mutual understanding, advantages of a collective focus have not been
tested properly in empirical research and diversificiation may in fact create institutional tensions
rather than increase productivity -> against celebration of differences
Collective: differences as a set of assets that are valuable for an organisation and can be used
Moral arguments: recognising groups is essential for individual freedom and ignoring groups means
ignoring discrimination; an individual approach may not actually deliver change
Practical arguments: groups are an inevitable aspect of modern social processes, group-focus is the
only way for marginalized individuals to gain visibility and power and arguments from management
theory; optimal use of skills, making products or services more attractive to diverse customers,
accessing international markets, avoiding the costs of racial discrimination, and improving the image
of the company in the eye of potential investors
- The How:
Equal opportunities approach (social case): aims for social equality and justice (motivation) by equal
treatment in general and treatment adapted to differences to compensate for unequal outcomes of general
policies (means)
Managing diversity approach (business case): aims for organisational benefits, such as creative and
productive work environment (motivation) by valuing difference (means)
These are ideal types
- Not just a definitional matter: important consequences (claims, rights, budget, means, policies, outcomes) with
real-life dimensions (who is treated how? Who gets what?-> discrimination etc.)
- Route from diversity to diversity policy-> ways to achieve outcomes and goals
- Analytical framework to understand choices for the study and practice of diversity policy
- ESSED 2002
- Cultural cloning: criticizes view of diversity and focus on inclusion-> which is a preferable condition->
cultural cloning shifts from diversity and exclusion to problematizing sameness and homogeneity in
organisations: same kind of preferences develop over time
- Being include to what price?
- Critical of cultural cloning: structural inequalities not tackled
- Focus on axis of race, ethnicity and gender but can be expanded on broader axis’s
- What are the expectations that organisations and institutions have of newcomers and existing?
- Cultural cloning: is predicated on taken-for-granted desirability of certain types, the often-unconscious
tendency to comply with normative standards, and the subsequent rejection of those who are perceived as
deviant
- The 4D-model:
Deficit: the deficit paradigm focuses on what are considered development gaps between the dominant
group- the norm group- on the one hand and on the other hand, norms and values among minority groups:
levels of education, labour market skills, cultural capital-> taking norm for granted, and leaving unjust
balances in balance
, Difference: the paradigm is deterministic in identifying cultural difference as a main factor to position
newcomers. Cultural difference is seen as a potential source of conflict as well as a source of enrichment
-> tendencies to overlook majority groups, difference seen as an add on
Discrimination: paradigm of discrimination identifies as a central problem the structural exclusion of
those perceived as different. The exposure of systemic forms of exclusion defies the myths of merit and
tolerance
Diversity: paradigm of diversity represents a paradigm shift: from a focus on difference and patterns of
exclusion to a focus on the complete and inclusive organization-> different we and they-> holistic notion
of diversity
- Critical of inclusion and managing diversity approach (now rather dominant)-> unsure about business
purposes of diversity-> justice, fairness and humanness
- Tokenism: the policy or practice of making a perfunctory gesture toward the inclusion of members and
minority groups to create a false appearance of inclusiveness-> Ewijk and Essed both recognize this
Essed: organisations looking for reproduction of homogeneity through inclusion-> if not combined with
tackling structural inequalities than not good
Reproduced in film: e.g. south park black character named token and in not another teen movie-> trying to
break this stereotype
- Applying the concepts:
Statement
Open end questions
Article of the Oudenhoven of the VU being too white and masculine-> ‘verkleuren’-> What, Why and
How
- When designing a policy, fundamental choices have to be made concerning the what, the why and the how of
diversity
- These choices have their own set of unwanted outcomes, such as tokenism, stigmatization or cultural
determinism
- In our analysis of diversity matters we can use the 4D model: deficit, difference, discrimination and diversity
- Cultural cloning can lead to inclusion without dismantling unequal and unjust structures within organizations,
institutions or society
Article: Diversity and diversity policy: diving into fundamental differences, A.R. van Ewijk
- There is much ambiguity surrounding diversity
- Diversity is a social construction: it is dynamic and plural in nature and influenced by context -> it is defined
in different contexts
- Misunderstanding occurs when the conceptual difference between diversity and diversity policy is blurred
Diversity is the condition of heterogeneity within a certain whole
Diversity policy is the approach towards that condition that can generate specific goals or objectives
- Defining diversity unintended practical implications (e.g. one form of diversity above the other)-> need for
justification and choice should be explicit
- Also added value for empirical research (reflecting on the different definitions of diversity): comparison be
used as a check for validity and also which measure their research results in different contexts are comparable
- Gaps in research to different definitions of diversity: only quantitative methods (terms such as ‘black’ had
different meanings in contexts), mostly done in USA (gap in research in Europe), most done on analyses of
private organisations (not generalizable), lack of research on definition of diversity (none identify what
variance in this variable is important, relevant to explain)-> analytical framework
- The equal opportunities approach is generally said to aim for social equality (motivation) by equal treatment
in general and treatment adapted to differences to compensate for unequal outcomes of general policies
(means)
- The managing diversity approach typically aims for organisational benefits (motivation) by treatment adapted
to differences (means)
- Analytical framework
What: definitions of diversity-> which modes of differentiation are selected, how are they interpreted in
practice, and how are they categorized?
Diversity is based on the modes of differentiation: principles by which people, from context to
context, situation to situation, mark themselves and each other as different-> context bound (also in
history)
Need for three choices: (1) selection certain modes of differentiation (2) interpretation those modes of
differentiation (connecting with individuals) (3) categorizing those modes of differentiation by
referring to the most basic difference in their nature
(1) Mostly focussed on culture and/or ethnicity-> cultures pretend to be all-embracing so that cultural
diversity encompasses every kind of diversity that people can exhibit in their lives unlike religion
, or taste-> is discarded because it carries connotations that may not be relevant or might not be
specific enough to describe dynamics of diversity and markers-> ethnicity questionable because
of limited role in political reality-> so other modes are gender, skin colour or race, class, income,
education, (dis)ability, age, religion, sexual orientation, marital status, parental status etc. ->
choices are made
(2) How to identify the chosen mode of differentiation should be interpreted-> what is understood
under for instance ‘old’-> may be employed in different ways
(3) Categories to indicate fundamental differences in modes of differentiation-> those are choices and
not one is better than the other and some are now more hard than before -> primary (inborn,
important impact early socialisation, ongoing impact in life) versus the secondary (that can be
changed)-> Litvin: six fixed primary dimensions (inborn) and eight fluid secondary dimensions
(distinguish self from other and less permanent and adaptable)-> three choices have to be made
o Old versus the new: e.g. Muslims coming to ‘homogenously’ Christian Europe-> religion is
thus new
o Hard versus soft: choose to change them other no so easily changed
o Collective versus individual: individual can experience a difference uniquely versus a group
can experience being different because they share the difference-> who should we listen to
(group versus individual) and is it important for individuals to define themselves as a group or
not
Why: motivations for diversity within organisations-> is the goal to promote individuals or to promote
collectives, and are the motivations moral or practical?
Whether the goals is to support individual or
collective-> diversity is something collective
(women differ from men) but diversity policies
might aim to neutralize those differences
(women equal pay to men)
What type of argumentation do you base your
policies on moral or practical
o Moral: equal opportunity ->
(III) Individual: focusing on groups
is not humane, because it denies the agency of individuals and stereotypes, identities
that constituted by several forms of diversity
(IV) Collective: groups have a moral value that goes beyond the sum of individuals,
recognising groups is essential for individual freedom, ignoring a group means
ignoring discrimination
o Practical: managing diversity->
(I) Individual: policies should not be based on groups, because group-boundaries do not
exist
(II) Collective: groups exist and therefore should be taken into account groups are the
inevitable aspect of modern social processes, focusing on groups is the only way for
marginalized individuals to gain visibility and power that otherwise would never be
recognized because of their marginalization within the dominant society->
organisational arguments (skills,
avoiding discrimination etc.)
How: diversity policy approaches-> two fundamental
(instrumental) choices are related to the policy approach
with respect to diversity within organisations: are processes
designed so that everyone is treated the same or are they
adapted to collective differences, and do these policies
affect the entire organisations or is their scope limited?
Choice between policies where individuals are treated
the same or adapt to collective differences
Group-based approach: promote equal opportunity->
e.g. different career tracks
Individual based approach: to promote collectives where people can compensate-> e.g. all jobs party-
time
Another choice: scope
High intensity: entire organisation
Low intensity: limited role
- The framework will allow
, Researchers to compare the definition of diversity, the motivation for diversity, and the diversity policy
approach in a clear and structured way and determine the variation between contexts-> evaluative or
explanatory research
It gives practitioners, professional, or policy advisors an instrument to reflect upon the fundamental
choices that are made in current-day policies, on what consequences these choices have in practice, and
possibly on how to improve policies by adapting them or making them more internally coherent
- The first step to achieve these contributions consists of applying the analytical framework in specific
empirical contexts, to test whether it is sufficiently discriminative (proving that all categories in the typologies
are mutually exclusive) and inclusive (showing that all policies related to diversity can be analysed clearly
according to this framework), and to enhance researchers’ understanding of diversity policy dynamics by
exploring how the three parts of the analytical framework (definition of diversity, motivations for diversity,
and diversity policy approach) are related to each other
Article: Cloning cultural homogeneity while talking diversity: Old wine in new bottles in Dutch organizations,
P. Essed
- 4-D model: (cultural) deficit, (cultural) differentiation, (anti) discrimination and (managing) diversity
- Managing diversity very popular in the Netherlands-> it’s about including differences without problematizing
process of cultural cloning
- In policy discourse a distinction between ‘fit and competent’ and those who need ‘extra help’ or ‘special
facilities’-> norm not describes a such but the second categories come with ‘problems’
- Cultural cloning: same-kind reference over time, reproducing a certain profile or image of a profession
- Exclusion cultivate the preservation of racial clones (racial purity) and concomitant social cultural cloning
((normative systems of aesthetics and cultural behaviour favouring—idealized images of—whiteness and
masculinities)-> problematizing sameness and homogeneities
- Cultural cloning is a predicated on taken-for-granted desirability of certain types, unconscious tendency to
comply with normative standards and subsequent rejection of those who are perceived as deviant
- Preferences for sameness, whether gendered or racialized, are historically part and parcel of the social fabric
of our societies-> race as an ordering principle has been interwoven in the very nature of and in the making of
modernity -> gender, where modern manhood required the construction of dominant rational, emotionally
suppressed identities and the imitation of these images of manhood over generations
- Netherlands: minority policy-> integration and assimilation, favouring dominant group-> immigrant into
gender-system-> motherhood and fulltime job or ‘girls from ‘Muslim families’ are too repressed to enter
science’-> would have benefitted more from interventions about racial discrimination-> problem of
‘tolerance’-> domination of ethnic minority men over women
- Much more unemployment and economic setbacks for minorities than the dominant group-> minorities less
likely to be hired-> within the organisation discriminated when higher positions open or other issues
- Study: the point of view that ethnic minorities have "disadvantages" in the labour market as a result of an
"unfavourable" starting position and of "indirect" discrimination-> positive action programmes 1980s->
backlash and moves to undermine gender and ethnic inclusion
- Study Kempadoo: argument against hiring women from ethic minority their degree of adaptation to Dutch
culture, behaviour and mentality -> minority has to deal with being the cultural clone whilst the organisational
culture is biased in favour of the majority
- Example: job advertisement for a ‘One black women’ social worker with requirements that mostly fit the
majority and not the minority only the title implies a minority-> barrier between lower levels and management
(mostly white male)-> no change and even prejudice against women and minorities in the workforce
- Problems positive action:
Antibiotic (kills positive and negative), reverse discrimination and political instrument for control where
group is expected to fully adapt to dominant culture -> the state also did not manage positive example of
equal gender and ethnic representation
Gets narrowed down to certain recruitment procedures with stated preference for white women or ethnic
minority background when she/ he is equally qualified as real/ imaginary white (male) candidate-> actual
preference for white male norm -> candidate who does not fit gets problematized
Unnecessary burdens on those who should benefit-> hypervisibility to those who are different from the
norm because of institutional invisibility-> results in expectances of super competent or super
malfunctioning -> no room for balance for similarities between minority and majority group
Seldom sanctions-> preference for women and ethnic minorities problematic because (1) myth of never
been a preference but choice based on merit (so preference for white males) (2) little voices challenged
employers to prove their interpretation of competence and quality invites diversity rather than
homogeneity and thus the ‘other’ than white male are problematized and stigmatized as lacking
qualifications
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper svandoorm. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €7,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 79079 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen