Chapter 11 Fairness and Diversity in the Workplace
- Slides: 24
Chapter 11 Fairness and Diversity in the Workplace 1
Module 11. 1: Fairness • Justice & fairness used to characterize an event or an exchange relationship • Trust is a belief in how a person or organization will act on some future occasion 2
Trust • Can be undermined by 1) Unmet expectations; 2) Leader behavior; 3) Technology • Extremely hard to rebuild trust – Negative events are more visible & memorable – Greater weight is given to negative events 3
Organizational Justice • Includes considerations of organizational procedures, outcomes, & interpersonal interactions 4
Types of Justice Figure 11. 1 Types of Justice 5
Distributive Justice • Perceived fairness of allocation of outcomes or rewards to organizational members • Definitions of what is “fair” – Merit or equity norm – Need norm – Equality norm 6
Procedural Justice • Perceived fairness of process by which rewards are distributed • Voice: Having possibility of influencing or expressing an objection to a process or outcome • Impact on layoffs & self-esteem 7
Interactional Justice • Sensitivity with which employees are treated; linked to extent to which employee feels respected by employer • Consists of a) informational & b) interpersonal justice 8
Justice vs. Injustice • Injustice, once experienced, leads to: • • Retaliation Reduced effort Reduced motivation A lasting impact on attitudes, emotions, & behavior • Perceptions of justice lead to: • Extra effort • Feelings of inclusion • Feelings of contribution 9
Module 11. 2: Practical Implications of Justice Perceptions • Performance evaluation – Feelings of fairness more a matter of procedural justice – Feedback process most important determinant of feelings of fairness – Shift from performance measurement to performance management 10
Applicant Perceptions of Selection Fairness • Research important on applicant reactions to selection procedures – Acceptance/rejection of employment offer – Reputation of organization – Litigation • Conclusions based on review of research 11
Model of Applicant Decision Making Rational economic model Rational psychological model Person-as-machine Person-as-scientist Individual differences model Organizational fit model Negotiation process model Person-as-judge 12
The Role of Applicant Reactions in Selection Figure 11. 2 (Anderson et al. , 2001) 13
The Rejected Applicant • Rejection letter should supply plausible reason • Wording of rejection letter can enhance feelings of justice • Positive characteristics of rejection letters – Indicate respect for applicant – Indicate more than one principle of justice 14
Special Case of Affirmative Action • EEO Philosophy – All individuals have same opportunity, allowing success to be dictated by merit • Affirmative Action – Provides specific mechanisms for reducing under-representation of particular demographic groups 15
Affirmative Action (cont’d) • Affirmative action programs (AAPs) can take many forms • Much emotion surrounds AAPs – Favored vs. unfavored employees • Reactions to AAPs Duncan Smith/Getty Images 16
Conceptual Model of Determinants of Attitudes Toward an AAP Program Figure 11. 3 (Kravitz & Klineberg, 2000) 17
Module 11. 3: Diversity • What does diversity mean? – Differences in demographic characteristics, values, abilities, interests, & experiences – Diverse workforce = Fact – Multicultural workforce = Goal 18
Dynamics of Diversity • Relational demography – Relative makeup of various demographic characteristics in particular work groups • Tendency for work groups to seek homogeneity rather than diversity – Creates trust – Enhances communication – Increases satisfaction, commitment, & effectiveness 19
Dynamics of Diversity (cont’d) • Group members appear to value homogeneity because in diverse groups: 1. Others don’t agree with your vision 2. Differences in vision are result of value differences 3. Differences in vision lead to disagreements 4. Differences in expertise lead to disagreement about methods 20
Diversity From Work Group Perspective • Group heterogeneity often enhances creative efforts by widening approaches to problemsolving • Although culturally homogeneous work groups initially perform at higher levels, heterogeneous work groups become more effective over time 21
Managing Diversity From the Organizational Perspective • Ineffective models for diversity – Assimilation model – Protection model • Ideal diversity model – Value model Ryan Mc. Vay/Getty Images 22
HR initiatives that support Value Model 1. Recruit specifically with diversity in mind 2. Ensure career development is available for every member of organization 3. Provide diversity training 4. Seek input from diverse group members 5. Provide support & networks for diverse group members 6. Develop connections to cultural groups in community 23
Leadership & Diversity • Tendency for group homogeneity places greater burden for managing diversity on shoulders of group/team leader – Leaders must remember that each group member is an individual 24
- Fairness and diversity in the workplace
- Workplace diversity report example
- Dividends of workplace diversity
- Diversity and conclusion
- What is ecosystem biodiversity
- Genetic diversity vs species diversity
- Global context
- Veil of ignorance example
- Fairness and flawless ceo
- Justice as fairness
- Avoiding discrimination through causal reasoning
- Dominant resource fairness
- Line-drawing fallacy
- Max-min fairness example
- Fairness scenarios
- The fairness doctrine
- The fairness doctrine
- Procedural justice
- Fairness
- Fairness
- Keva cream
- Max-min fairness
- Substantive fairness
- Fairness adjective
- Chapter 5 diversity and human needs and development