In these studies of topic to observe diversity of race and ethnicity that are described by the authors as well as it will try examining each of these dimensions of them to describe common them across dimensions and to develop an integrative model of race and ethnic diversity.
Within the article, journal, newspapers and other resources that are based on race and ethnic diversity of race theory issues focus on positive predictions or possible positive outcomes of racial and ethnic diversity. Besides, it demonstrates that although authors tended to see race or ethnicity as important and significant in their research, they rarely defined or operational the concepts adequately.
Besides, it briefly explores how race became a part of our Sociological and Philosophical and argues that in this article we analyze the impact of multicultural ideology on struggles for equality in the spheres of gender, race/ethnicity and sexuality. It argues that multiculturalism has permeated theory, policy and action in these areas and that this has resulted in divisions and conflicts between movements for human rights.
It briefly explores how race became a part of our culture and consciousness and argues that it disconnects cultural features and problems and issues of identity from biological traits and study how “race” eroded and superseded older forms of human identity. It suggests that “race” ideology is already beginning to disintegrate review of empirical research and theory on the relationship between workforce diversity and organizational performance and outlines practical steps HR practitioners can take to manage diversity initiatives successfully and enhance the positive outcomes
The last, Reviews based on differences between whites and blacks have examined differences in values, motivation, socioeconomic background, and intelligence. Research in this area has focused on issues of biculturalism as a management skill and how it affects access to informal networks to superiors, and to receiving respect, appreciation, and encouragement from them.
Grouping reviewed studies according to the effects of race-ethnicity on perceptions of leadership, the effects of race-ethnicity on leadership enactments, and actors’ move toward to the social actuality of race-ethnicity. The analysis reveals a gradual resemblance of ideas of leadership and ideas of race-ethnicity as their comparison dimensions are progressively more emphasized. A shift in the conceptualization of race-ethnicity in relation to leadership is reported, from a constraint to a personal resource to a synchronized thought of its constraining and releasing capacity.
Organizational behavior to ensure that leadership, staff, and the culture of the health services organization represents and values the communities they serve. Based on our evaluation of health services and common management organizational behavior and racial/ethnic diversity literature, we offer an agenda for future investigates in this area. Factors that will make easy or reduce the detection of the future research agenda are also recognized and discussed.
Introduction
The effectiveness of a fire department is influenced by many factors including its culture and Leadership. Individually, the associated characteristic of each may generally maybe identifiable and understood. However, not understanding how one influences the other can lead to a disconnect leaving the organization unable to meet its mission or honor its value. It is true that we live in an era of significant and constant change. From the technology we rely upon daily to the attitudes we currently embrace regarding social, environmental, and a host of numerous other issues, what exists now may not have been the order of the day a half century ago. Diversity is such an issue. Most of the legislation regarding diversity has surfaced within the last few decades, as have many diversity-oriented rules, policies, and practices in companies and several current positive attitudes regarding diversity. There are six dimensions of diversity (race, gender, age, disability, sexual orientation, and national origin) to determine how these literatures have evolved.
We then analyze some of the theoretical, practical and philosophical reasons why a movement engaged in the struggle for racial/social justice can operate in oppressive ways. These include approaches to the analysis of power, the adoption of unitary definitions of oppression, the material context of capitalism and the logical, sociological and philosophical problems that are inherent in the concept of multiculturalism itself.
Problem Statement
Research has found that racially diverse environments are associated with positive intellectual and social outcomes. Racial diversity in the in different situations is linked to the possibility that a people will interact with other of a different race or ethnicity and engage in discussions of racial or ethnic issues. Frequent interaction across racial lines and discussion of racial and ethnic issues positively predicts society retention, intellectual and social self-concept, and overall satisfaction. My problem statement will help me to face with solutions that address the root of the cause not just the symptoms. The situation is observed in different type of society which they are organization, specific type of people which Black and white races in the society as they are facing this problem.
It is experienced situations when populations are very diverse in ethnic, cultural and religious terms there are no doubt that reaching a balance or consensus is very difficult, as is established by the different approaches to multicultural populations taken by Western European states. Besides contrasting examines on Black and white versus diversity , when the result have been rather consistent, there is still much to be learned in studies of race and ethnic differences in leadership style and effectiveness.
White and Black versus situations happened where it acted from in relation to it in Civil Rights Acts in the US. It was paying attention on whether there was discrimination and bias present in collection, preparation, performance evaluations, promotions, and other important human source functions.
The positive point of view is that there are benefits to the team by having increased
Diversity, and ethnically diverse work group makes better decisions than homogeneous teams.
That it found a fairly equal number of studies reporting positive or negative effects for race and
Ethnicity diversity across three outcomes types performance, process and affect, attitude.
Besides we can analyze diversity problems and issues which it is two broad categories of problems can be acknowledged as follow: the first having to do with how people of diverse teams get along with one another and it is the problem of how individuals and groups perceive who they are the problem of “identity.”
Race and ethnicity effect that those persons who are different from the majority in a society tend to be more likely to leave, to be less satisfied and less psychologically dedicated. This connection that diversity of racial and ethnic as well as group and organizational perspective outcomes is complex, with suitable variables of exhibiting a strong principal influence on diversity’s impact.
3.0 Definition of race and ethnic diversity
“Race” is described as the differences based on skin color or biological characteristics. Besides there has not been any believable realistic evidence that indicates that common psychological, moral or academic features are described to people on the basis of their skin color or looks of face (Donald and Rattans, 1993)
“Race” identity took significance over religion, ethnic origin, education and training, socioeconomic class, career, verbal statement, principles, beliefs, morals, lifestyles, geographical location, and all other human attribute that up to this time provided all groups and individuals with a sense of who they were (Conrad 1969).
A number of theories have been used for studying race/ethnicity as a central changeable of attention. Most of these theories come from a micro-theoretical view and attempt to explain conduct from an individual, or within work group insight (Tajfel, 1981). Most of these theories come from the fields of social psychology or cognitive psychology and stem from our cognitive and social need to classify ourselves and others based on surface-level or readily perceivable personality such as race(Phinney,1992). These theories often have been used to establish or defend hypotheses that have focused on pessimistic outcomes or guesses as a consequence of race/ethnicity differences. Some of the basic assumptions made about community and individual nature contained in many of these theories are that:
Humans critic each other on surface-level individuality, such as race or gender, in the absence of further information (Davis & Watson, 1982; Schein, 1973).
Group connection based on these features implies true similarities or differences between groups which then constructs the formation of in-group and out-group differences (Alderfer 1986;Tajfel & Turner,1986)
These judgments lastly result in outcomes that may have unhelpful effects for alternative or out-group members or group efficiency (Kanter, 1977).
Surrounded by the text on race and ethnic diversity, there also are some theories that center on affirmative forecasts or likely positive outcomes of racial/ethnic diversity. This comes from a “value in diversity” viewpoint (Cox, 1993; Cox, Lobel & McLeod, 1991) which argues that diversity creates value and help for group outcomes. The common theory that causes these theories is that a raise in racial/ethnic diversity means that a work group will practice achievable positive outcomes such as: improved information, better problem solving facility, practical argument and dispute, increased creativity, higher feature decisions, and increased understanding of diverse ethnicities/cultures. Any more essential theory is that surface-level diversity such as race is indicative of deeper-level differences, such as thinking processes/schemas, difference knowledge base, different sets of experiences, and diverse views of the world.
3.1Antecedents and outcomes of racial/ethnical diversity
In earlier research from 1960 to 1980, it was mentioned in relation to it in Civil Rights Act in the U.S. it was paying attention on whether there was discrimination and bias present in collection, preparation, performance evaluations, promotions, and other important human source functions (c.f., Cox &Nkomo, 1990). There also has been some explore conducted on differences among subdivisions in terms of job agreement and other attitudes, incentive, and leadership.
According to Kraiger and Ford’s (1985) meta-analysis, race/ethnicity clarified 3.7% of the difference in job performance ratings. Rates tended to accept higher ratings from raters of the same race. Other results (Moch 1980; Williams& O’Reilly, 1998) for race/ethnicity effects recommend that those persons who are different from the majority in a society tend to be more likely to leave, to be less satisfied and less psychologically dedicated.
By the 1990s, Johnson and Packer made examine on diversity begun to focus on work teams, or the business case for managing and utilizing a gradually more diverse workers. Two conflicting views appeared that about it Milliken & Martins, 1996 explained as follow .The positive point of view is that there are benefits to the team by having increased diversity. Group performance is thought to be enhanced by having broader resources and multiple views (Hoffman, 1959).
Particular to race, some studies (McLeod, Lobel& Cox, 1996; Watson, Kumar & Michaelsen, 1993) have found that ethnically diverse work group makes better decisions than homogeneous teams. Joshi and Roh (2007) found a fairly equal number of studies reporting positive or negative effects for race/ethnicity diversity across three outcomes types (performance, process and affect/attitude). The most stimulating finding, however, was that there were more null findings than positive and pessimistic effects put together. For example, race/ethnicity diversity effects in relation to show were seven positive, eight negative and 20 null findings.
3.2 Diversity of Race Sociological and Philosophical Content
The implementation of totally developed multiculturalism raises basic questions about the nature of social relations and culture itself. About it, Mitchell and Russell said: “. . . the. Right to be diverse can never be unrestricted. . . No society can reserve a position in which ‘anything goes’ at the cultural level within its different communities” (Mitchell &Russell, 1994, p. 153).To agree with this report is not to slip into ethnocentrism or racism. It is, however, to state the sociologically clear: that there are limits to the amount of diversity that any society can accept without destruction, if not total disintegration. In Britain, for example, calls for the application of Islamic law to Muslim British citizens have thus far been rejected, as have demands for female genital harm on the NHS. On the other hand, as noted above, a high court judge has justified by reference to cultural custom his lenient sentencing of men who murdered a female relative, and state funding for Islamic denominational schools has been approved. Human social being implies at least a minimum level of compromise, or commitment to shared norms (Macey, 1995b) and in democracies there is a need to balance the rights discussed by citizenship of a society with the responsibilities that this demands (Marshall & Bottomore, 1992). When populations are very diverse in ethnic, cultural and religious terms there are no doubt that reaching a balance or consensus is very difficult, as is established by the different approaches to multiethnic populations taken by Western European states. France has adopted a stance of “ethno centric assimilations,” Germany has” institutionalized precariousness” and Britain has taken the path of “uneven pluralism”(Melotti, 1997). All these approaches are difficult, mainly in relation to achieving equal opportunity of conduct and opportunity for members of minority groups who wish to preserve a typical culture. All raise basic, and potentially conflictual, questions about minority in contrast to majority, individual versus group rights and, finally, the very nature of the liberal democratic project.
On many issues there may be little or non-conflict between majority and minority cultures and values, as appears to be implied in Ben-Tovim’s suggestion that multiculturalism be seen: “. . . not as an end in itself, but as a component of the resist for social equality, justice and freedom within the non-relativistic framework of secular liberal and social democracy” (1997, p. 220).
Poulter’s study, like that of Mitchell and Russell (above) places of interest the potential conflict essential in widely opposed philosophical views on human social existence, mainly the question of universal versus particularistic rights. We need to acknowledge the reality of such differences, the fact that some may not be reconcilable and thus that decisions have to be taken on the basis of value decisions.
3.3 Problems and Issues of Identity: Ethnicity and Race
All of this demonstrates to the fact that inter-ethnic inter face has a long history. We humans are not new to the dispute of trying to get along with “unfamiliar” others. What strategies were used in early times to accommodate or transcend differences? How did inherited societies recognize and deal with humans who differed from themselves, both culturally and physically? In existing times many areas of the world are supporting a way with “ethnic” conflicts, and “ethnicity” seems to be a fairly new notion about human identities stopped with elements of exclusivity, opposition, competition, and antagonism. Some groups define themselves in conditions that appear rigid and unyielding and in disagreement always to “the others.” In many belongings we have seen populations state an almost lasting addition an ethnic or religious identity, as if such features of our social selves are determined by our DNA and cannot be transformed or diminished by any social mechanisms. In some cases, populations that were once deemed generally ethnically homogeneous are now unambiguously and irrevocably multination.
The media represents a popular idea of these phenomena as if they were something new in the human practice, and many scholars in the social sciences care for multi ethnicity as not only a modern phenomenon or a novel condition, but one that inevitably creates problems and potential, if not real, conflicts. Two broad categories of problems can be accepted:
The first having to do with how people of diverse teams get along with one another;
The second is the problem of how individuals and groups perceive who they are the problem of “identity.”
The sets of troubles are clearly interrelated but not the same. In the first class, there seems to be a fundamental principle or guess that people of diverse ethnic groups are in opposition with one another so that difference and opposition are inevitable. Another related and often unstated statement is that different ethnic groups can have no common benefit which makes any form of unity or even good relations not possible.
It is the second difficulties that this paper addresses, the one concerning individuality, an arena of troubles that may be more strange to Americans, in terms of their individual conceptions of who they are, than to peoples of other nations. There seems to be a psychologically based theory in our society that people must know who they are, that a concrete and positive sense of one’s individual selfness (or “identity”)i n a wider world of other” selves” is a necessary condition for good psychological health. We humans are actually the only animal that sufferings over the question, “Who am I?” Perhaps the question get up because in manufacturing societies we lack a sense of bonding to a relationship group, a village, or other more limited territorial entity and because our heavy focus on eccentricity disconnects us from others and fosters an abiding sense of separation and in safety. Whatever the reason, some les-sons from history might provide a broader context in which to understand the dilemmas of human identity that we experience in the modern world.
Mullin and Cooper in 2002 presented a six-factor model to assist the delivery of culturally competent discussion.
It involves an in-depth awareness of self, the consultee, and the consultee system as cultural beings.
That relates to possessing the mechanical and professional skills required to work in a manner congruent with the consultee or consultee systems’ cultures.
It focuses on understanding the factors beyond culture- together with economics, racism, intercontinental relations, organizational health, sexism, and agism- that affect the consultee and the consultee system.
It identifies the need both to understand one’s own culture and its impact on one’s personal and professional beliefs,
Involving to the extent that one’s own culture and the culture of the consultee or the consultee system is multicultural or monoculture and the difficult effects this has on interactions between persons, groups, and organizations.
The development of knowledge, attitudes, and skills that assist in focusing non-judgmentally and helpfully on the culture of the consultee and consultee system. In the end, this entails advancing from awareness to acceptance to valuation of macro- and micro cultural, racial, and ethnicity differences.
Whaley and Davis (2007) defined cultural capability as “a set of problem solving skills that includes
The ability to identify and understand the dynamic inter play between heritage and adaptation dimensions in culture in shaping human behavior;
The ability to use the knowledge acquired about an individual’s heritage and adaptation challenges to maximize the effectiveness assessment, diagnosis, treatment; and
Internalization of this process of recognition, acquisition, and use of cultural dynamics so that it can be normally applied to diverse groups”
The main conclusion of their analysis is that “a compelling case can be made on socio-demographic, clinical, ethical, and scientific grounds for cultural competence in the delivery of services”
The goal of this particular issue is to offer more theoretical and useful resources that will add to greater efficiency of consultations when consultants, consultees, and client systems occupy diverse culture, race, and ethnicity. Specifically, this particularissue consists of five articles by P. Romney, D. Sue, F. Leong and J. Huang, S. E. Cooper(with contributions from K. Wilson-Starks, A. M. O’Roark, G. Pennington, and D.Peterson), and R. Thomas.
3.4 Whites versus Non-whites diversity race
Study on the leadership styles of black and white supervisors has created that black
Supervisors tend to use more consideration with both black and white subordinates than do White supervisors (e.g., Adams, 1978). White supervisors were found to use a more instruction leadership style, especially with black subordinates. Kipnis, Silverman, and Copeland (1973), for example, found that white supervisors in mixed situations reported using coercion (such as suspensions) more frequently with black subordinates than with white subordinates.
Some research on outranked satisfaction has found no differences among black- and white-led groups (e.g., Adams, 1978), but other study has found that black supervisors are rated more positively than white supervisors, by both white and black subordinates, on administrative support, emphasis on goals, and facilitation of work (Parker, 1976). In general, investigate on differences in notes of subordinate satisfaction and insights of efficiency are scarce and in conclusive. Contrasting examines on women and men, where the result have been rather consistent, there is still much to be learned in studies of race and ethnic differences in leadership style and effectiveness.
A learn by Cox, Lobel, and McLeod (199 l), the behavior of Anglo-Americans compared to diverse groups (defined as one Anglo-American and three minority members) in solving the Prisoner’s Dilemma. The minorities included African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asian-Americans. Cox et al. (199 1, p. 840) established that the all-Anglo groups selected “the cooperative choice only 25 percent of the time compared to over 70 percent for the ethnically diverse groups.” These outcomes propose that leading ethnically diverse groups may place different demands on leaders than leading homogeneous, Anglo-American groups.
3.5 Effects of race and ethnicity on perceptions of leadership
The first set of study focuses generally on the questions of how the race-ethnicity of the leaders and/or of the groups influence absolutely or negatively perceptions of leadership. Most of these studies try to identify how the race-ethnicity of either the perceiver or the objective affects who is authorized to be a leader, as well as how leaders are evaluated or treated. In general, in this group, scholars view race-ethnicity as an independent changeable that helps explain how leaders are viewed or experienced. Some studies investigate how the race-ethnicity of the leader impacts the way he or she is viewed by followers, while others investigate how the race-ethnicity of followers (or of a general audience that represents potential followers) impacts their view of the leader, given his or her race-ethnicity.
Studies in this class then respond to this context by focusing on how those discriminations translate into constraints placed on individual leaders of color. (The majority of research has compared whites and African-Americans; however more recent study has investigated Latino/a, Asian and Native American leaders as well.) Some studies have been paying attention solely in establishing that these obstacles exist, while others have also investigated diverse explanations for the drawback, as well as the influence of particular contextual factors that may moderate the effect of race.
In addition to, Bartol, Evans and Stith in 1978 noted that the dominance of evidence from field studies showed black managers was rated more disapprovingly than white managers. However, other studies showed no difference or even, in one study, that African Americans were rated more completely than whites. The authors also point out that there seemed to be a diversity in what leadership features were given more weight: “across the studies, there does appear to be a tendency to estimate blacks in leadership positions more heavily on interpersonal factors than on content or task-related factors” though little research at that time investigated why this might be the case.
In 2003, Knight, Hebl, Foster, and Mannix compared white and black managers in an experimental study and found that participants tended to give lower ratings to black leaders and white subordinates, and higher ratings to white leaders and black subordinates, “thus affirming these workers in their conventional public positions”
Furthermore, Rosette, Leonardelli, and Phillips 2008 also compared white and black “business leaders” in an experimental study, finding that whites were seen as more effective leaders and as having more leadership prospective. In an extensive study of white and black women managers (Bell &Nkomo,2001), a number of the African American participants described incidents of outright racism as well as more subtle challenges to their authority as well as being held to a higher standard.
A lot of these studies also examine or think about why these obstacles exist. Bass (1990) cites early studies to propose that “stress created by marginality” is likely to be a constraining effect for black leaders, even as he allows that marginality in some situation can be quite useful. He specifies that African American managers may lack contact to important networks and “appreciation and encouragement” from their superiors. Bass (1990), on the other hand, speculates that racial prejudice, a “cultural background that stresses modesty” and the stereotype of Asians as “passive and retiring” may all contribute to the reasons they are not found in management in higher numbers, despite their relatively larger presentation in technical and professional fields. Knight et al. (2003), state aversive racism, a modern form of racism that avoids complete white supremacy while more insidiously rationalizing white dominance. They argue that it is “perhaps the most difficult barrier for black managers to conquer “While Rosette and her colleagues (2008) recognize the presence of negative racial bias and stereotypes, they believe another mechanism may also be at play: that “being white” (that is, race itself rather than stereotypes about race) is part of the business leader sample and then whites are more likely to be seen as leaders.
Others have identified extra factors that could influence how race influences subordinates’ assessments of superiors. In one early study, more liberal white subordinates rated their black managers more favorably than less liberal subordinates. Ellis, Ilgen, and Hollenbeck (2006) investigated another possible contingent influence on ratings of black vs. white leaders:
They found no direct outcome of race on performance ratings. Instead, team performance and whether assistants attribute performance to internal or external factors, influenced the performance ratings of black and white leaders. Rather, influenced by social identity and social categorization theory (e.g.,Brewer& Gardner, 1996), they dispute that most work on leadership overlook the fact that “leaders not only lead groups of people, but are also themselves members of these groups” (Van Knippenberg and Hogg, 2003). They suggest that groups authorize those most ideal of the group to be their leaders, particularly when group members have strong group identification.
3.6 Racial and Ethnic Diversity management and organizational-level outcomes
The correlation between racial and ethnic diversity and group and organization-level outcomes is complex, with appropriate variables exhibiting a strong prevailing influence on diversity’s impact.
In 2000 year, Hartenian and Gudmundson studied of small business presented conclusions that linked helpful change in financial performance from the prior fiscal year with workforce diversity, defined in terms of the percentage of people of color employed by the firm.
In addition, Richard (2000) in a firm-level study of the banking industry using a sample drawn from California, Kentucky, and North Carolina found no generally support for the theories that racial diversity will be positively associated with firm financial performance.
A lately published survey explore study (Hopkins, Hopkins, &Mallette, 2001) shows that organizational diversity initiatives may well recover the commitment and agreement of all employees, irrespective of race and ethnicity. They found that, for both white male managers and managers of color, organizational commitment to diversity is absolutely associated with the managers’ perception that their organization has satisfied its commitment to them and with the managers’ self-reported commitment to the job. Organizational obligation to diversity was considered by a scale that consisted of seven diversity practices, which were rated by the respondents on a seven-point scale for the extent to which the item describes their organization.
Diversity management and its relationship to racial and ethnic disparities in access, treatment, and outcomes remains an unused area of study. This gap in the literature, united with the lack of engagement in diversity management practices by HCOs, irrespective of service area demographics (Muller &Haase, 1994; Maldonado et al., 2002), makes the link between diversity management practices and racial and ethnic differences largely hypothetical.
4.0 Conclusion
In conclusions, compare to a popular belief on ethnic diversity, the positive effect of ethnic diversity on work group performance has not been supported conclusively. Instead, null and negative results have been more common. Therefore, more study is certainly needed to specify different possibilities such as length of time together as a group, task personality, and a variety of mixtures of ethnicity in which ethnic diversity may have differential effects on performance. In other words, other than research result that report lower work attitudes for Whites in diverse settings (e.g., Riordan, 2000), There is little research that provides experiential evidence explaining the reasons for these findings or that sheds light on the characteristics associated with being White or the White experience of diversity.
By repeating the sociologically clear that human social being implies at least a minimum level of compromise or commitment to shared norms. What establishes this “minimum level” and the extent of possible difference from it is a matter for discuss (Macey, 1995b). However, if we continue to allow the politicization of the dissertation to stop the asking of fundamental, complex questions we put at risk the uncertain gains inequality and human rights that have been won at huge cost to women, black, white and working-class people. If we choose not to question our own assumptions and practices and fail to challenge oppression from whatever source, we must accept that we, like the men referred to above, are
