evaluation of diversity initiatives in multinational corporations

This article was downloaded by: [The Aga Khan University]On: 06 November 2014, At: 22:35Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK

Human ResourceDevelopment InternationalPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rhrd20

Evaluation of diversityinitiatives in multinationalcorporationsRose Mary WentlingPublished online: 02 Dec 2010.

To cite this article: Rose Mary Wentling (2000) Evaluation of diversity initiativesin multinational corporations, Human Resource Development International, 3:4,435-450, DOI: 10.1080/713767865

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/713767865

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of allthe information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on ourplatform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views ofthe authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor andFrancis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings,demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, inrelation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rhrd20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/713767865

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/713767865

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Evaluation of diversity initiatives in multinationalcorporations

Rose Mary WentlingUniversity of Illinois

Abstract: This article reports the results of a study on the evaluation of diversityinitiatives in multinational corporations. Eight multinational corporationsheadquartered in the USA were selected for this study. Two methods of datacollection were used: semi-structured face-to-face interviews and documentanalysis. Diversity managers/directors were asked to provide information on theevaluation of diversity initiatives in their corporations. The study revealed that allthe corporations in the study were attempting to evaluate the effects of theirdiversity initiatives on employees and organizations. The study also revealed that,in an attempt to evaluate their diversity initiatives, each company uses a variety ofmethods. Despite the dif�culty in determining the impact of diversity initiatives,the corporations are making efforts to come up with measurements that can leadthem to confirm the value that diversity initiatives have for the organization’ spro�tability.

Keywords: diversity, evaluation, diversity initiatives, multinational corpora-tions

Introduction

The changing workforce is one of the most extraordinary and signi�cant chal-lenges facing many organizations today. Workforce diversity is a demographicphenomenon playing upon not only US organizations but also multinationalcorporations and institutions in other countries around the world (Little�eld1995; Morosini 1998). In addition, other business forces, such as globalcompetition and the need to remain competitive, are driving diversity intoorganizations regardless of their geographical location.

Theoretically, international business has been one of the pioneer �elds invaluing diversity (Simons 1992). Diversity, in this case, has emerged as a needfor survival and success. Multinational corporations are forced to develop andimplement initiatives that could lead them to capture and retain diverse customerbases not only nationally but also throughout the world (Albert 1994; Fernandez1993; Florkowski 1997; Norton and Fox 1997). They are also required to recruitand retain a diverse workforce that mirrors its diverse market.

During the last decade, many organizations have responded to the increase

Human Resource Development InternationalISSN 1367-8868 print/ISSN 1469–8374 online © 2000 Taylor & Francis Ltd

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals

HRDI 3:4 (2000), pp. 435–450

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

in diversity with a variety of initiatives designed to manage diversity in theworkplace (Arredondo 1996; Baytos 1995; Cross and White 1996; Hayles and Russell 1997; Loden 1996; Thomas 1996). For the purpose of this study,diversity initiatives are de�ned as speci�c activities, programmes, policies, and any other formal processes or efforts designed to promote organizational culturechange related to diversity (Arredondo 1996). Examples of such initiativesinclude non-traditional work arrangements, such as �extime and home workstations; education and training programmes intended to reduce stereotyping,increase cultural sensitivity, and develop skills for working in multiculturalenvironments; career management programmes designed to promote construc-tive feedback to employees, mentoring relationships, and access to informalnetworks; and new employee bene�ts, such as parental leave and dependent-careassistance (Arredondo 1996; Hayles and Russell, 1997; Jackson 1992).

Winterle (1992) conducted research for the Conference Board, studying 166 leading corporations and, based on the results, developed an inventory of diversity initiatives and grouped them into the following topical areas:communications activities; education and training classes; employee-involvementinitiatives; career development and career planning activities; performance andaccountability initiatives; and culture-change initiatives.

Morrison (1992) grouped the diversity initiatives found in sixteen exemplaryorganizations into four groups: (a) diversity; (b) accountability; (c) development;and (d) recruitment practices. Similarly, by using several case studies based onlarge US corporations, Gottfredson (1992) was able to group diversity initiativesinto five categories: (a) procedures to reduce ethnic and gender differences in career outcomes; (b) procedures to accommodate immigrants to the USA; (c) changes in organizational climate to value and utilize ethnic and genderdifferences; (d) changes in procedures or climate to accommodate individualdifferences among employees; and (e) decentralized problem solving toaccommodate local conditions. The �rst three categories listed above addressdiversity issues related to ethnicity and gender, and the last two categoriesencompass all individual differences and are directed to all employees.

Several of the major US employing companies have started implementing a great number and variety of diversity initiatives. There are many reasonscompanies are implementing these initiatives in the workplace. Some of thepurposes that drive diversity programmes are: compliance, harmony, inclusion,justice, and transformation (Rossett and Bickham 1994). Wentling and Palma-Rivas (1998) interviewed diversity experts from across the USA and discoveredthat companies are managing diversity because it helps organizations improveproductivity and remain competitive, form better work relationships amongemployees, enhance social responsibility, and address legal concerns. However,‘ it is unknown whether these programs are, in fact, producing expected gains,because so few organizations have evaluated their outcomes’ (Comer andSoliman 1996: 473).

436 Peer-Reviewed Articles

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

Even though there are many reasons to evaluate the impact of diversityinitiatives, the lack of attention to evaluation of diversity initiatives has beenreported by several authors (Comer and Soliman 1996; Johnson 1995; Wheeler1994; Triandis and Bhawuk 1994). ‘ To ascertain if their investments are costeffective, mechanisms should be in place to measure the success of diversityefforts’ (Comer and Soliman 1996: 473). Casse (1991) stated that diversityprogrammes should be evaluated to measure the nature of return on investmentto match the cost involved in them and to compare the situation before andafter the programme. It is also possible that ‘ well-intentioned diversity effortscan cost an organization a great deal of time and money and yet not create anysigni�cant, lasting change’ (Morrison 1992: 230). According to Comer andSoliman (1996), lack of appropriate measures does not exclude organizationsfrom assessing the impact of diversity initiatives. Conversely, it underscoresdramatically the need for practitioners and researchers to develop such measuresin order to determine whether organizational efforts to manage diversity arereally effective. Overman reported that companies concerned about the value ofdiversity are still struggling to �nd concrete ways to measure whether they aresucceeding’ (1992: 38).

Purpose and scope of the study

The purpose of this study was to identify practices, strategies, and processes that are used to evaluate diversity initiatives in multinational corporations.Multinational corporations, for the purpose of this study, are de�ned as businesscorporations with their origin in one country, but having operations in multiplecountries. They incorporate intent on success, focus on realities, and adaptationto conditions in several countries, in addition to their original countries(Reynolds and Nadler 1993). An in-depth understanding was provided throughthis study to contribute to reducing the lack of knowledge in the evaluation ofdiversity initiatives in multinational corporations.

Research questions

The study examined the following major research questions:

1 How are diversity initiatives being evaluated in corporations?2 How is the success of diversity initiatives measured in corporations?3 How effective are diversity initiatives in corporations?4 What components of diversity initiatives are dif�cult to evaluate in corpora-

tions?

Wentling: Evaluation of diversity initiatives 437

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

Methodology

This was a descriptive and exploratory study. Two major methods of datacollection were used: semi-structured face-to-face interviews and documentanalysis. Interviews were conducted with workforce diversity manager/directorswho are responsible for diversity initiatives in multinational corporationsheadquartered in the USA. The data obtained through the interviews consistedof words in the form of rich verbal descriptions (qualitative data), as well asquantitative data. Essentially, this study used a qualitative approach to answerthe research questions. A quantitative method in the form of frequencies andpercentages was also used to support the qualitative data. The second majormethod of data collection used was document analysis. Documents related tothe evaluation of diversity initiatives in the multinational corporations werecollected from primary and secondary sources. Documents were solicited fromthe corporations and from standard literature sources, such as annual reports,community relations reports, world-wide web, newspaper articles, and diversity-related books in which the corporations were featured. The data obtained fromthese documents provided insightful and enriched information that was used tocon�rm and verify the information provided by the study participants during theface-to-face interviews.

Population and sample

The population for this study was composed of the thirty multinationalcorporations in a Midwest state in the USA listed in the book entitled Directoryof Diversity in Corporate America (1994). From those thirty corporations, asample of eight was randomly selected to participate in the study. The populationand sample selected for this study were appropriate because, in order for acorporation to be included in the Directory of Diversity in Corporate America(1994), it must meet the following criteria: (a) have extensive experience withworkforce diversity, (b) be a multinational corporation, (c) be allocatingresources to diversity initiatives, and (d) have launched successful corporatediversity initiatives.

Eight diversity managers/directors at eight USA-based Fortune 500 multi-national corporations were interviewed. The diversity managers/directors workin corporations with sales varying from $10 billion to more than $50 billion, andassets from $12 billion to more that $60 billion. The number of employees inthese corporations ranged from 48,100 to 378,000. The average number ofemployees in these eight corporations was 125,250. The study participants areemployed in a variety of industries, which include the following: food (3),electronics (1), chemicals (1), petroleum (1), pharmaceuticals (1), and specialistretailer (1).

Five of the study participants were women and three were men. Oneparticipant was in the age range 21–29 years old. Five participants were 40 to


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

49 years old and two were in the age range 50 to 59 years old. Of the eightparticipants, seven individuals were African-American and one was Hispanic.Two participants had a bachelor’s degree. three had a master’s degree andanother three participants had a juris doctorate degree.

Data collection

The data were collected through interviews and document analysis. Theresearcher conducted face-to-face interviews with eight workforce diversitymanager/directors in charge of diversity initiatives in eight multinationalcorporations in a Midwest state in the USA. The researcher developed a semi-structured interview guide to assist in collecting the data from the interviews.The semi-structured interview guide addressed the following areas: (a) methodsfor evaluating diversity initiatives, (b) how the success of diversity initiatives aremeasured, (c) effectiveness of diversity initiatives, and (d) components of diversityinitiatives that are dif�cult to evaluate. Semi-structured interviews were chosenbecause they are ‘ reasonably objective while still permitting a thoroughunderstanding of the respondent’s opinions and the reasons behind them’ (Borgand Gall 1989: 452).

Names and phone numbers of the eight diversity managers/directors whoparticipated in the study were also obtained from the Directory of Diversity inCorporate America (1994). Initial contacts with the diversity managers/directorswere made over the telephone, at which time dates, interview appointments,and arrangements were made. All eight diversity managers/directors that werecontacted consented to participate in the study. Each interviewee received aletter con�rming the interview appointment and a copy of the interview guidetwo weeks before the scheduled interview. The participants had the opportunityto examine the interview questions prior to the interview. The interviews wereconducted on-site at each participant’s corporate of�ce. All interviews were tape-recorded and extensive notes were also taken during each interview. The inter-views lasted from one and a half to three hours, with an overall average of twohours.

In addition, the researcher conducted a document analysis of written andprinted materials related to the evaluation of diversity initiatives in the multi-national corporations. According to Gall et al. (1996), by studying pastdocuments researchers can achieve a better understanding of present practicesand issues. In addition, documents can be accessed at a time that is convenientto the researcher, which saves time and expense in transcribing (Creswell 1994).

A study advisory committee, made up of four human resource development(HRD) educators from a leading university in the USA, who have expertise indiversity, evaluation, and qualitative research methods, reviewed the interviewguide and study procedures. Also, to determine content validity and appropriate-ness of the interview guide, a pilot study was conducted with two diversitydirectors from the study’s target population. There was agreement by the study’s


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

advisory committee and the pilot test participants that the study procedures,interview guide, and the data being collected were appropriate for meeting theobjectives of the study.

Data analysis

The data from the interviews were content-analysed. Content analysis is aresearch technique for systematically examining the content of communications– in this instance, the interview data. The researcher and another researcherassociate independently analysed the participants’ responses and the related issuesthat arose during the interview process. No major discrepancies were foundwhen the analyses from the two researchers were compared. The researchersread the responses, put them together as complete quotations, and �led themaccording to the topic or issue addressed. Responses were analysed thematically.Emergent themes were ranked by their frequency of mention and �nally cate-gorized. Data obtained through the interviews were analysed qualitatively andquantitatively. Qualitative data in the form of descriptions and examples wereused to provide the basic research evidence, while quantitative data in the formof frequencies and percentages were used to support the qualitative data

Documents were collected and analysed prior to, during, and after theinterviews. All together a total of 47 related documents were analysed. Relateddocuments obtained from the world-wide web, corporate sources, books, news-paper articles, and so forth were all included in individual �les for each of thecorporations in the study. The researcher coded the related documents byrelevant topic as they related to the major research questions. To further assistin ensuring the reliability of the data analysis, the researcher invited a diversitymanager from a multinational corporation on the West Coast to review four ofthe interviews. The ratings (frequencies of emergent themes) of the diversitymanager matched the researchers’ ratings in all of the four interviews reviewed.The same procedure was followed for the related documents analysis, whichproduced similar results.

Results

The results of this study are summarized in four major sections which parallelthe research questions: (a) methods for evaluating diversity initiatives, (b) howthe success of diversity initiatives are measured, (c) effectiveness of diversityinitiatives, and (d) components of diversity initiatives that are dif�cult to evaluate.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

Methods for evaluating diversity initiatives

Six (75 per cent) of the organizations evaluate diversity initiatives. A basic themethat emerged from the study participants was that evaluating diversity initiativeseffectively was dif�cult and time consuming. Despite the dif�culty of evaluatingdiversity initiatives, all of the organizations in the study were attempting tomeasure their effects on employees and the organization. The study participantstogether cited twelve methods for evaluating diversity initiatives. The range ofevaluation methods cited by participants numbered from three to seven. Theaverage number of evaluation methods used was 4.8. Table 1 presents partici-pants in rank order by frequency of all the methods for evaluating diversityinitiatives that were cited by the study.

Six (75 per cent) of the study participants indicated they used employeesurveys, and another six (75 per cent) stated that they tracked employee data toevaluate the effectiveness of diversity initiatives. The employee surveys were usedto gather data from employees to determine their perceptions one to two yearsafter the original employee survey was conducted. The data collected from thesesurveys gave the organization a basis for comparison from the point at which it began the initial diversity initiative effort. The corporations that trackedemployee data reviewed the information to determine where improvements hadbeen made in such areas as turnover rates, retention, hiring, and promotion ofwomen and minorities. In addition, data were reviewed to determine if peoplefrom diverse groups were represented at all levels of the organization, especiallyat the top management ranks.

Half of the corporations in the study used management annual performancereviews and the other half used 360-degree feedback as methods for evaluatingdiversity initiatives. The management annual performance reviews were used todetermine if the manager’s business unit was reaching effective and pro�tableresults by fully utilizing a more diverse workforce. The 360-degree feedback


Table 1 Methods for evaluating diversity initiatives (n=8)

Method f %

1 Employee surveys 6 752 Track employment data 6 753 Management annual performance reviews 4 504 360-degree feedback 4 505 Focus groups 3 386 Benchmarking 3 387 Diversity-speci�c surveys 3 388 Customer feedback 3 389 Informal employee feedback 2 25

10 Informal employee group feedback 2 2511 Employee attitude surveys 1 1312 Peer reviews 1 13

Multiple responses were accepted.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

process was used to provide employee feedback to management related to hisor her skills and abilities in addressing diversity issues. This information was thenused to better develop managers in dealing with diversity issues.

Three (38 per cent) of the study participants reported using focus groups as a method for evaluating diversity initiatives, another three (38 per cent) used benchmarking, another three (38 per cent) used diversity-speci�c surveys,and another three (38 per cent) used customer feedback. The focus groups wereused to gather information from employees to determine their perception of the progress of diversity initiatives in the organization. Benchmarking was used to assess the company’s progress related to diversity in relation to othercompanies who are exemplary in addressing diversity. Diversity-speci�c surveyswere used to obtain information about the climate of the company from variousdiverse employee groups. Customer feedback was used to determine if theirdiverse customers’ needs were being met by the company’s products, services,and employees. In addition, informal employee feedback, informal employeegroup feedback, employee attitude surveys, and peer reviews were methods ofevaluation of diversity used by two (25 per cent) or one (12.5 per cent) of thecorporations.

How success is measured for diversity initiatives

The study participants were asked to specify how success is measured for diversityinitiatives in their corporations. The study participants cited �fteen methods formeasuring success of diversity initiatives. The range of methods cited byparticipants numbered from �ve to 12. The average number of methods used


Table 2 Methods for measuring success of diversity initiatives (n=8)

Method f %

1 Leadership commitment 8 1002 Representation of diversity at all levels of the organisation 8 1003 Measure progress against stated goals and objectives 6 754 Diversity initiatives are assisting to meet the company’s

strategic plans and goals 6 755 Promotion rates 5 636 Hiring rates 5 637 Turnover rates 5 638 Retention rates 5 639 Absenteeism rates 5 63

10 Performance ratings 3 3811 Attitude and behavioural change 3 3812 Employee satisfaction 3 3813 Complains about diversity issues 2 2514 Work group performance 2 2515 External recognition and awards 2 25


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

was 8.5. Table 2 presents in rank order by frequency all the methods formeasuring success of diversity initiatives that were cited by the study participants.

All of the study participants indicated that they looked at leadership commit-ment as a way of measuring success of diversity initiatives. According to thestudy participants, there is an indication of success if leaders in the organizationsare committed to and supportive of diversity initiatives and are willing to allocateresources to help ensure the success of diversity efforts. All the participants also reported using representation of diverse populations at all levels of theorganization as a method for measuring the success of diversity initiatives.

Six (75 per cent) of the corporations studied measured their success byobserving goals and objectives attained, and another six (75 per cent) noticed ifdiversity initiatives were assisting in meeting the goals of the company’s strategicplan. If they achieved their goals, then they could conclude that the diversityinitiatives were successful.

Five (63 per cent) of the study participants reported using promotion rates,hiring rates, turnover rates, retention, and absenteeism rates as methods formeasuring success of diversity initiatives. These measures were set to obtain theirobjective of creating and maintaining a diverse workforce and also of meetingAf�rmative Action requirements.

Three (38 per cent) of the study participants indicated they use performancerates, attitude and behavioural change, and employee satisfaction as methods for measuring success of diversity initiatives. These measurements were oftenachieved through performance appraisals, conducting informal employee feed-back, and general observations.

Complaints about diversity issues, work group performance, and externalrecognition and award were used by two (25 per cent) of the corporationsstudied as methods for measuring success of diversity initiatives. It is interestingto note that, although only two (25 per cent) of the study participants identi�edexternal recognition and award for measuring success, the review of the relateddocuments revealed that all of the corporations had received widespread publicrecognition for their exemplary human resource practices related to diversity. For example, half of the corporations in the study were included in the book The Best 100 Companies for Minorities, three (38 per cent) were included in thebook Best Companies for Working Mothers, two (25 per cent) had received theCatalyst Award for innovative efforts in providing equal opportunity for womenand minorities, and another two (25 per cent) had received the Manufacturerof the Year Award for community citizenship and commitment to women andminority employees.

How effective diversity initiatives have been

The study participants were asked to specify from their perspective how effective the corporation’s diversity initiatives had been on a scale from ‘ veryeffective’ to ‘ very ineffective’ (scale: very effective, effective, average, ineffective,


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

very ineffective). Six (75 per cent) of the study participants stated that thediversity initiatives have been very effective and have had a positive impact onemployees and the organization. Two (25 per cent) of the study participantsindicated that the effectiveness and impact have been average, meaning thatdiversity initiatives have had a relative success. These two research participantsbased their opinions on just perceptions because (a) it was too early to judge theeffectiveness or impact of the diversity initiatives and (b) there were no harddata available at the time the interviews took place.

The following statements were made by the study participants on the degreeof effectiveness or impact of diversity initiatives.

Some examples of our success are the positive feedback that we get from ouremployees regarding the bene�ts of our diversity efforts, such as training. Also, thepositive feedback we get when we do presentations about how and why we areaddressing diversity. From what I sense and hear, diversity is very well received inthis organization. The employees are beginning to feel much better and they sensethat managers are now walking the talk.

One of the study participants indicated that their diversity initiatives havebeen successful because (a) the minority representation has changed throughoutthe organization and (b) their diversity initiatives are being highly benchmarked.For them that meant that many other organizations have followed their exampleregarding diversity initiatives. This study participant stated:

We know that the number of women has increased tremendously. There was atime when very few women were working in this corporation. We know that thereis a major shift in the employee make-up. Women are now represented in all keydepartments and this is a major shift in terms of how we’ve grown and changed.Sometimes we get external recognition by impartial organizations for our effortsin providing opportunities for women.

Another study participant said, ‘ We have very good results based on ourdiversity initiatives and top management is very happy with our work andprogress and the impact we are having on the company.’ Still another studyparticipant stated:

We have been very effective in that we have raised diversity awareness throughoutthe entire organization from top to bottom. The organization as a wholeunderstands the value and business impact of diversity. This has resulted in manymore business units implementing diversity related initiatives.

The two study participants who indicated that it was too early to judge thesuccess and effectiveness of diversity initiatives had this to say: ‘ Effectiveness andimpact should be data driven. I can’ t give you any hard data because I needanother year. However, based on perceptions and generally speaking, diversityis well supported.’ The other study participant stated:


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

It is going to take a while before we really know how successful and effective weare going to be, because we are talking about a cultural change and this is goingto take time. We realized that it is going to be at least a three- to �ve-year effort.Therefore, it is too early for us to judge our successes and effectiveness.

Components of diversity initiatives that are dif�cult to evaluate

The study participants were asked to identify the components of diversity initia-tives that were dif�cult to evaluate. The study participants cited six componentsof diversity initiatives that were dif�cult to evaluate. The range of componentscited by participants numbered from two to four. The average number ofcomponents cited was three. Table 3 presents in rank order by frequency all thecomponents of diversity initiatives that are dif�cult to evaluate as cited by thestudy participants. Six (75 per cent) of the study participants indicated that theimpact of diversity on bottom-line (profitability) was difficult to evaluate.Another six (75 per cent) stated that impact of diversity on productivity wasdif�cult to evaluate. According to the study participants, bottom-line (pro�t-ability) impact and productivity are two of the greatest challenges in evaluatingthe effectiveness of diversity initiatives. The reasons for these challenges were thatbottom-line (pro�tability) and productivity are in�uenced by so many factorsthat it was difficult to isolate the specific diversity initiatives that caused theincreased productivity or pro�t levels.

Five (63 per cent) of the study participants found it extremely dif�cult andtime consuming to evaluate the return-on-investments of diversity initiatives.These participants indicated that they did not have an effective method formeasuring the profitability gain that resulted from the money invested ondiversity initiatives.

Behaviour changes and employee attitudes were mentioned as dif�cult toevaluate by three (38 per cent) of the study participants. Attitudes and behav-ioural changes were seen as dif�cult to evaluate because they may take a long timeto occur and many times may go unnoticed. One of the study participants statedthat internal readiness to launch diversity initiatives was dif�cult to evaluate.Internal readiness meant that employees and managers were ready to accept


Table 3 Components of diversity initiatives that are dif�cult to evaluate (n=8)

Method f %

1 Impact of diversity on bottom-line (pro�tability) 6 752 Impact of diversity on productivity 6 753 Return-on-investment 5 634 Behaviour changes 3 385 Employee attitudes 3 386 Internal readiness 1 38


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

diversity as part of the organizational culture. This was seen as dif�cult becausethere was no effective way to determine if organizational members were readyfor this change, which was seen as necessary and critical for effective imple-mentation of diversity initiatives.

Discussion

This study found that all corporations were attempting to evaluate the effects of their diversity initiatives on employees and organizations. The study alsorevealed that, in an attempt to evaluate their diversity initiatives, each companyuses a variety of methods. This �nding does not support the �ndings reportedby Morrison (1992). She found that very little is being done in evaluatingparticular diversity practices. What this study revealed is that evaluation ofparticular diversity initiatives seems to be rather new among the corporations thatparticipated in the study. This study also found that effectiveness of evaluationsis a major concern. The corporations in this study seem to recognize that diversityinitiatives need to be evaluated. Because of the emphasis on evaluation and well-elaborated tools some corporations have to evaluate diversity initiatives, it is possible to conclude that evaluation is becoming a more important part of the process of diversity initiatives. Other authors have also emphasized the importance of conducting evaluations for diversity initiatives (Arredondo1996; Jackson and Associates 1992; Morrison 1992; Rynes and Rosen 1995).Evaluation is an on-going process and is critical to the success of any diversityinitiative.

This study also examined how corporations measure the success of theirdiversity initiatives. Leadership commitment and representation of diversity atall levels of the organizations were the most common ways to measure success.These findings are consistent with results obtained in this area by Wheeler(1996). He examined the corporate practices in diversity measurement, andwhat he found was that leadership commitment is a critical measurementcomponent to ensuring that the organizational culture supports diversityinitiatives.

This study identi�ed impact on bottom-line, impact on productivity, andreturn-on-investment as the components most dif�cult to evaluate for diversityinitiatives. Similar areas dif�cult to evaluate were reported by a study conductedby Wheeler (1996). Wheeler’s study revealed that productivity, growth, andpro�tability of diversity strategies remain the most challenging and dif�cult areasto measure. There seem to be at least two reasons people in corporations haveidenti�ed bottom-line, productivity, and return-on-investments as dif�cult toevaluate. These areas are usually affected by many variables, and it is dif�cult to isolate cause–effect relationships (Wheeler 1994). Interestingly, even whenthere might be an increase in profitability and productivity due to diversityinitiatives, it is dif�cult to prove that diversity is the reason for such improvement


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

(Morrison 1992). Another reason might be that people do not have the necessaryknowledge, skills, and experience to determine the overall impact of diversityinitiatives. Despite the dif�culty in determining the impact of diversity initiatives,the participants in this study were making efforts to come up with measurementsthat can lead them to confirm the value that diversity initiatives have to theorganization’s pro�tability. When HRD professionals start to show managementexactly how much value diversity initiatives can contribute to the process ofbuilding an inclusive work environment, improving organizational performance,and achieving business goals and objectives, these initiatives will become astrategic business requirement (Hubbard 1997).

Educational importance of the study

The intent of the study was twofold. First, the study was designed to provide aninterpretation of the how diversity initiatives are evaluated within multinationalcorporations to help educators understand the status of diversity initiatives withinthese organizations. From this study, educators will learn about differences inorganizational responses to evaluating diversity initiatives. They will understandthe varying levels of concerns within corporations in evaluating the effectivenessof diversity initiatives in the workplace. The information on the evaluation ofdiversity initiatives from this study will enable educators to: (a) revise theircurricula appropriately to re�ect concerns and dif�culties of evaluating diversityinitiatives; (b) identify strategies for evaluating diversity initiatives moreeffectively; and (c) illustrate for their students the continuing impact of diversityon the organizational culture and climate of these multinational corporations.

The second intent of this study was to provide information on the status of the evaluation of diversity initiatives in corporations to decision-makers, suchas human resource managers, training and development specialists, and linemanagers. The information on evaluation of diversity initiatives from this studycan be used for benchmarking within their organizations. In addition, this studymay aid in the self-re�ective process organizations use to assess their currentstatus and assist them in developing more effective strategies to evaluate diversityinitiatives within their organizations. The information from the study mayin�uence the development of a deeper understanding of the diversity initiativeevaluation processes within organizations. This understanding, in turn, mayprovide insight and direction for improving evaluation practices not only in the�eld of human resource development, but also in other areas of management.The information may encourage or persuade human resource developmentpractitioners or any person in charge of programmes dealing with diversity inorganizations to: (a) better assess the needs of the employees, (b) improve thedesign, implementation, and evaluation of diversity efforts, and (c) identifyinitiatives to improve the management of a diverse workforce.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

Recommendations for further research

A limitation of this study was that information was provided by a selected groupof diversity managers/directors. This may be potentially problematic becausemembers of different groups have been found, on average, to perceive diversity-related issues in different ways (Fernandez 1993; Tsui et al. 1992). There is apossibility, for example, that diversity managers/directors are more optimisticabout diversity issues. Additional research from multiple perspectives is necessaryto address evaluation of diversity initiatives in multinational corporations. Furtherresearch could also target a larger sample of companies that are known to beconducting diversity initiatives and are also intensively evaluating their effects.

Further, longitudinal research is needed to examine the development,changes, accomplishments, barriers, and trends of diversity initiatives in corpo-rations. It is necessary to make comparisons with future diversity initiatives.Longitudinal research would provide information on the accomplishments andfailures of diversity initiatives. This type of study would be valuable and usefulin assessing if real progress has been made. Overall, more research on theevidence of the diversity initiatives effectiveness is needed.

Human resource development professionals are impeded by the almostcomplete absence of empirical research showing that diversity initiatives actuallyrepresent a definite or potential competitive advantage in organizations. In fact, little research has been conducted to date examining the factors relatingdiversity to job performance. The general point, here, is that human resourcedevelopment professionals would have a far easier time ‘ selling’ diversityinitiatives if they were supported by a stronger research base linking them tovarious successful job performance outcomes.

Therefore, further research should explore the impact of diversity initiativesof different durations, in different contexts, and with different designs. Furtherresearch could also identify which strategies are particularly effective in obtainingtop-level management support for diversity efforts and also determine how agood diversity manager differs from a typical good manager. Additional researchin the �eld of diversity will add to the understanding about the impact of diversityefforts and provide a feedback mechanism that will allow future efforts in thisarea to meet its intended goals and objectives more fully.

Address for correspondence

Professor Rose Mary WentlingDepartment of Human Resource EducationCollege of Education 345University of IllinoisChampaign, Illinois 61820, USA E-mail: [email protected]


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

References

Albert, R. D. (1994) ‘ Cultural diversity and intercultural training in multinationalorganizations’ , in R. L. Wiseman and R. Shuter (eds) Communicating inMultinational Organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Arredondo P. (1996) Successful Diversity Management Initiatives: A Blueprint forPlanning and Implementation, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Baytos, L. M. (1995) Designing & Implementing Successful Diversity Programs,Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Borg, W. R. and Gall, J. P. (1989) Educational Research, 5th edn, White Plains, NY:Longman.

Casse, P. (1991) Assessing Intercultural Training Effectiveness: In Training for theCross-Cultural Mind: A Handbook for Cross-cultural Trainers and Consultants, 2nd edn, Washington, DC: The Society for Intercultural Education, Training andResearch, pp. 217–27).

Comer, D. R. and Soliman, C. E. (1996) ‘ Organizational efforts to manage diversity:do they really work?’ , Journal of Management Issues 7(4): 470–83.

Creswell, J. W. (1994) Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches,Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cross, E. and White, M. (1996) The Diversity Factor: Capturing the CompetitiveAdvantage of a Changing Workforce, Chicago: Irwin Professional.

Directory of Diversity in Corporate America (1994) The comprehensive desk reference(1994–95 edn). Minneapolis, MN: Institute for Corporate Diversity.

Fernandez, J. P. (1993) The Diversity Advantage, New York: Lexington. Florkowski, G. W. (1997) ‘ Managing diversity within multinational �rms for compet-

itive advantage’ , in E. E. Kossek and S. A. Lobel (eds) Managing Diversity: HumanResource Strategies for Transforming the Workplace, Oxford: Blackwell.

Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R. and Gall, J. P. (1996) Educational Research, 6th edn, WhitePlains, NY: Longman.

Gottfredson, L. S. (1992) ‘ Dilemmas in developing diversity programs’ , in S. E.Jackson & Associates (eds) Diversity in the Workplace, New York: Guilford Press.

Hayles, V. R. and Russell, A. M. (1997) The Diversity Directive: Why Some InitiativesFail and What to Do About It, Chicago: Irwin Professional.

Hubbard, E. E. (1997) Measuring Diversity Results, Petaluma, CA: Global InsightsPublishing.

Jackson, S. E. (1992) ‘ Preview of the road to be traveled’ , in S. E. Jackson & Associates(eds) Diversity in the Workplace, New York: Guilford Press, pp. 3–12.

Jackson, S. E. & Associates (eds) (1992) Diversity in the Workplace, The ProfessionalPractice Series, Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Douglas W.Bray (ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

Johnson, S. J. (1995) The Status of Valuing and Managing Diversity in Fortune 500Service Organizations: Perceptions of Top Human Resource Professionals, Academy ofHuman Resource Development (AHRD) Conference Proceedings, St. Louis, MO.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

Little�eld, D. (1995) ‘ Managing diversity seen as core domestic value’ , PeopleManagement 1(6): 15.

Loden, M. (1996) Implementing Diversity, Chicago: Irwin Professional. Morosini, P. (1998) Managing Cultural Differences, Oxford: Pergamon.Morrison, A. M. (1992) The New Leaders: Guidelines on Leadership Diversity in

America, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Norton, J. R. and Fox, R. E. (1997) The Change Equation: Capitalizing on Diversity

for Effective Organizational Change, Washington, DC: American PsychologicalAssociation.

Overman, S. (1992) ‘ A measure of success’ , HR Magazine 37(12): 38–40.Reynolds, A. and Nadler, L. (1993) Globalization: The International HRD Consultant

and Practitioner, Amherst, MA: Human Resource Development Press. Rossett, A. and Bickham, T. (1994) ‘ Diversity training: hope, faith and cynicism’ ,

Training 31(1): 41–6.Rynes, S. and Rosen, B. (1995) ‘ A �eld survey of factors affecting the adoption and

perceived success of diversity training’ , Personnel Psychology 48(2): 247–70.Simons, G. F. (ed.) (1992) The Questions of Diversity: Assessment Tools for Organizations

and Individuals, 4th edn, Amherst, MA: ODT Incorporated.Thomas, R. R., Jr. (1996) Rede�ning Diversity, New York: American Management

Association.Triandis, H. C. and Bhawuk, D. P. (1994) Bridging the Gap between Theory and

Practice: A Comparative Study of Current Diversity Programs, Final Report,Working Paper #2, University of Illinois Center for Human Academe: Mentorshipand academic careers. Research in Higher Education 15: 315–27.

Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D. and O’Reilly, C. A. (1992) ‘ Being different: relationaldemography and organizational attachment’ , Administrative Science Quarterly37: 549–79.

Wentling, R. M. and Palma-Rivas, N. (1998) ‘ Current status and future trends ofdiversity in the workplace: diversity experts’ perspective’ , Human ResourceDevelopment Quarterly 9(3): 235–53

Wheeler, M. L. (1994) Diversity Training, Research Report Number 1083-94RR,New York: The Conference Board.

Wheeler, M. L. (1996) Corporate Practices in Diversity Measurement, Research ReportNumber 1164-96RR, New York: The Conference Board.

Winterle, M. (1992) Workforce Diversity: Corporate Challenges, Corporate Responses,Research Report Number 1013-92RR, New York: The Conference Board.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

22:

35 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014