Wentling, R. M., & Palma-Rivas, N. (1997). Current status and future trends of diversity initiatives in the workplace: Diversity experts' perspective (Diversity in the Workforce Series, Report No. 2; MDS-1082). Berkeley: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, University of California.

DISCUSSION

In recent years, the world of work has become increasingly complex. New technologies, global markets, and especially workforce diversity have all added to this complexity. Organizations that do not manage diversity effectively will not be able to utilize the full potential of their diverse workforce. They will not be able to survive and grow under these increasingly complex conditions and will not become world-class, competitive organizations that produce high quality products and services (Fernandez, 1993).

Although the results of this study and the literature (Fernandez, 1993; Harris, 1994; Hayles, 1996; Morrison, 1992; Simons, 1992; Thiederman, 1991) indicate that there are enormous benefits to effectively managing diversity in organizations, there are still many barriers that first must be resolved before the advantages can be reached. One of the fundamental findings of this study is that there are still a significant number of barriers that continue to restrict the opportunities and advancement of diverse groups in the workplace. These barriers were categorized as organizational and individual barriers. The organizational barriers were those coming from the workplace environment and individual barriers were those coming from the employees themselves. The findings of this study seem to indicate that both organizational and individual barriers can be equally detrimental to the advancement of diverse groups. Minorities are more likely to be aware of organizational barriers than individual barriers (Jackson & Associates, 1992; Morrison, 1992; Thiederman, 1991). However, it is essential that minorities carefully assess and identify the barriers that they set for themselves and work on resolving them. It is also important to keep in mind that organizational and individual barriers are interrelated and that many individual barriers emerge as a result of organizational barriers. Since both types of barriers affect each other, it may be difficult to deal with them separately.

The barriers identified by the participants in this study are similar to those found in many other studies (Catalyst, 1993; Fernandez, 1993; Hanover, 1993; Henderson, 1994; Jamieson & O'Mara, 1991; Morrison, 1992). Determining what concerns and barriers are the most critical to the organization's employees is an important part of moving forward and one of the first steps in effective diversity efforts. Although the specific barriers to advancement vary from one organization to another, their effect is the same. Barriers that prevent minorities from advancing deprive any organization of utilizing the full potential of its workforce.

The diversity experts in this study defined diversity extremely broadly to include all types of differences. This is very suitable in that it includes and considers everybody as part of the diversity that should be valued. According to Johnson (1995), a broad definition of diversity goes beyond protected-class differences because all employees bring their differences, including a variety of group-identity differences, to the workplace. A broad definition moves workplace diversity issues beyond an "us versus them" struggle to focus on utilizing and maximizing diversity to accomplish both individual and organizational goals. It provides an overarching goal for a unifying focus. Carnevale and Stone (1995) also confirmed that organizations' diversity efforts are more effective when they are inclusive and when they focus primarily on interacting in the present rather than on accusations about injustices of the past. Even though defining diversity broadly seems to be the best way, it may also be appropriate for organizations to define diversity according to their specific problems and needs. Others argue that attempts to cover all differences may weaken current efforts to reduce racism and sexism in our society (Morrison, 1992; Thiederman, 1991). Based on her workforce diversity research, Tomervik (1995) concluded that there is no one definitive definition that fully describes the broad range of differences diversity includes, the evolutionary nature of the process it represents, and the far-reaching impact it has on individuals and organizations.

This study identified the major factors influencing diversity. As a result of these factors, many organizations are changing their cultures and beginning to apply more emphasis to valuing and managing diversity mainly because they are better understanding the significant role that diversity will play in their future competitive and organizational success (Finney, 1989; Griggs, 1995; Jackson, 1991; O'Hare, 1993).

When taking into consideration the changes in society and the workforce, it is easy to understand the significant role that diversity will play in the future competitive and organizational success. Regardless of whether one looks at diversity as a demographic, global, economic, societal, workforce, or consumer marketing issue, these changes can not be disregarded. According to the study participants, the character of American society and the workforce is changing and is expected to change significantly in the future. All these changes will direct many organizations to explore the business implications for managing diversity in the workplace.

This study also examined the reasons that organizations manage diversity. This study found that the major reason for managing diversity was to improve productivity and remain competitive. This finding is consistent with other studies in the literature. Finney (1989) examined the reasons several companies of various sizes implemented diversity programs. What she found was that these companies did not implement their diversity programs merely because it was the social, legal, or in thing to do. They did it because it was the right thing to do for their company's needs, circumstances, and philosophy. These companies developed diversity programs to address the needs of their workers, satisfy the demands of their competitiveness, or fulfill the requirements of their role in the community. Similarly, Work (1993) noted that while the needs for managing diversity may appear to grow mainly out of notions of social and economic "fairness" and "morality," the clear and central need for effectively managing diversity is maintaining and improving corporate productivity and profitability in national and global competition.

According to Thomas (1992), organizational participants are willing to accept change related to diversity only if the potential benefits are clear and worthwhile. Thomas (1992) further noted that diversity, being a business issue, does not mean that it no longer has legal, moral, or social implications; rather, awareness of the business implications is necessary for sufficient motivation to implement strategies for managing diversity.

Perhaps, the simplest and the strongest rationale for managing diversity stems from the potential to increase productivity among all workers, especially among those groups of workers that have historically been underrepresented and underutilized. Examples of these groups include women, people of color, people with physical disabilities, older workers, and gay or lesbian employees (Ehrlich & Garland, 1988; Morrison & Von Glinow, 1990; Stewart, 1991).

During the last decade, many organizations have responded to the increase in diversity with a variety of strategies designed to manage diversity in the workplace. This study has identified the six best strategies for managing diversity, and they can be used by human resource development professional for benchmarking. However, the literature seems to indicate that not all organizations should approach the issue of managing diversity in the same manner, especially since diversity needs are going to vary greatly among organizations. Although there are a wide range of approaches and strategies for managing diversity, there is no single approach or strategy that can be recommended for all organizational situations. However, even though there is no strategy that contains all the necessary ingredients for success in managing diversity, the following recommendations given by the study participants can be used with any strategy to more successfully managing diversity: obtain top management support; integrate diversity into all company functions; use a combination of strategies; and create a corporate culture that supports diversity.

Although organizations are using a broad range of initiatives in their efforts to manage diversity, training is one of the most widely used strategies in effectively managing diversity in the workplace. The definition for diversity training varies from organization to organization and many times the way the organization defines diversity training is heavily influenced by the way the concept of diversity is understood in the organization (Wheeler, 1994). According to the study participants, diversity training should include awareness, skills, application, and support. Numerous authors have acknowledged that potential benefits of training will not be likely to occur unless trainees return to a supportive environment for applying what they have learned (Goldstein, 1991; Hanover, 1993; Morrison, 1992).

This study identified the components of effective diversity training programs. These components can be used by HRD professionals as guidelines for comparison or in the development of diversity training programs in their organizations. The results of this study confirm previous research, namely, that success of diversity training depends on many organizational features, especially commitment and support from top management (Dutton & Ashford, 1993; Morrison, 1992; Noe & Ford, 1992; Scott & Meyer, 1991; Wheeler, 1994). This raises the important question of what HRD professionals might do to insure and maintain top management support in firms where training is already being conducted as well as how they might "sell" diversity training to top management when they feel it is needed (Dutton & Ashford, 1993).

Identifying the specific needs of the organization was also stated as a component of an effective diversity training program. Ideally, companies should conduct a needs assessment to identify the particular diversity needs within the content of their organizational goals. This is particularly important since diversity needs are going to vary greatly among companies. For example, a company in northern Illinois is going to have very different needs than a company in Miami, Tucson, or Los Angeles. This is a result of the workforce makeup. According to Simons (1992), every organization has a culture of its own, shaped by the people who founded it and staff it. Therefore, a critical challenge of diversity training is to understand the organization's needs and to develop objectives that meet those needs.

The results of this study indicate that, to be effective, diversity training should be integrated with the organization's education and training systems, combined with other diversity initiatives within the organization, and also delivered to all employees including top level managers.

Selecting a trainer is a very important decision that can have an impact on the effectiveness of the diversity training. Although there is not one model of what constitutes a good diversity trainer, this study has identified many professional/academic skills and personal/interpersonal skills necessary for an effective diversity trainer. These results of the study are consistent with the findings of other studies (Caudron, 1993; Thiederman, 1991; Wheeler, 1994).

This study found that a clearly focused evaluation plan that includes accountability is a necessity for an effective diversity training program. Other authors have also emphasized the importance of conducting diversity training evaluations. According to Morrison (1992), diversity training outcomes should be emphasized because, if they are not measured, it is possible that "well-intentioned diversity efforts can cost an organization a great deal of time and money and yet not create any significant, lasting change" (p. 230). Rynes and Rosen (1995), based on their research, found that more successful diversity training programs are associated with long-term follow-up evaluations of training. Evaluation brings the organization to a place where it can see its successes and then create a re-vision for the future, with new goals and implementation initiatives. Evaluation is an on-going process and is critical to the success of any diversity initiative. According to these authors, without concrete information about a program's strengths, weaknesses, and impacts, it is impossible to improve content and delivery. Evaluation is also a way to fight critics (Jackson & Associates, 1992), and its results may provide support for continuing with diversity programs (Lublin, 1995). According to Cox (1993), the principal aspect of follow-up diversity training is to establish accountability.

According to the experts in this study, diversity will become more and more important because society will become more diverse and, therefore, the workforce and the marketplace will become more diverse; there will be more globalization of corporations, which will lead to a more global workforce, marketplace, and economy; diverse work teams will be a reality in organizations; diversity will become more of a business concern than a social concern and be more closely linked to competitive strategies; diverse populations will make more money and spend more money and this increase in wealth will empower diversity; senior managers will become more involved in diversity issues because they will realize that the diverse workforce needs to be better utilized in order to remain competitive; more training professionals will face the challenge of dealing with backlash; and diversity training will be integrated more with other types of training.

The findings of this study seem to indicate that diversity training in the future will not be conducted in isolation but more as an essential component of other types of training. However, this does not necessary mean that it will lose its importance. It may lose some of its visibility, but it is likely that it will increase in importance because it will be part of many other types of training programs and strategies. Because of this, it is possible to infer that all organizational trainers will have to be prepared to deal with diversity issues. Consequently, trainers will have to develop not only the necessary content knowledge and skills but also acquire the necessary knowledge to deal with diversity issues.

The task of managing diversity in the future, as the diversity experts have indicated, may not be an easy one, especially with the potential for increase in backlash. History has shown that the struggle for greater inclusiveness of all people has not been easy. Civil right laws, political events, and wars all attest to this difficulty. Recent attacks on Affirmative Action provide new evidence that diversity remains a controversial topic (Nemetz & Christensen, 1996). What this means is that HRD professionals need to be prepared to deal with the inevitable possibility that not everyone will accept diversity as a worthwhile goal.

The movement of managing diversity in the workplace is at a critical stage. Organizations of the future will need to develop systematic efforts for managing diversity. These organizations will need to connect their diversity efforts to organizational needs and business objectives through needs assessments and developing measures for feedback and evaluation of their efforts. A long-term perspective and integration with other organizational change efforts will be needed in order to ensure that diversity becomes an effective corporate strategy.

Wentling, R. M., & Palma-Rivas, N. (1997). Current status and future trends of diversity initiatives in the workplace: Diversity experts' perspective (Diversity in the Workforce Series, Report No. 2; MDS-1082). Berkeley: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, University of California.