Comparative equality and diversity: main findings and research gaps

Klarsfeld, Alain; Ng, Eddy S.; Booysen, Lize; Christiansen, Liza Castro; Kuvaas, Bård

doi:10.1108/ccsm-03-2016-0083

Cited by 31 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore diversity management, at least conceptually, does not restrict itself to the dimensions of sex (or gender) and race, but is open to any category or trait that people share with certain other individuals, which makes them, as a group, differ from other individuals (Gardenswartz & Rowe, 1998;Klarsfeld, Ng, Booysen, Christiansen, & Kuvaas, 2016).…”

Section: Introduction: How Did Diversity Management Emerge?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity Management: A Critical Review and Agenda for the Future

Köllen

2019

Journal of Management Inquiry

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although a widespread management approach, diversity management is far from being a well-defined and unambiguous one. This article outlines how this management practice emerged, and how it is enacted, and it identifies and critically discusses the two crucial areas of dissent or ambivalence within the diversity management discourse: first, the dimensionality of diversity management, and second, its legitimacy. The first issue addresses the prioritization of certain dimensions, the difficulty of clearly demarcating one dimension from another, and the unequal consideration of specific manifestations of each dimension. Taking into account the fact that everyone embodies at least one manifestation of every dimension of diversity, the aspect of intersectionality also belongs to the dimensionality of diversity. The legitimacy issue includes legitimate starting points, operating ranges, and desired outcomes of diversity management practices. The article concludes by looking toward possible future directions in diversity management research and diversity management practice.

show abstract

Section: Introduction: How Did Diversity Management Emerge?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity Management: A Critical Review and Agenda for the Future

Köllen

2019

Journal of Management Inquiry

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Equality is mostly discussed in the form of equality of opportunity (Fleurbaey et al, 2017), equality of outcome, or, less frequently, equality of treatment (Dahlerup, 2007;Klarsfeld et al, 2016) for all employees, regardless of their diverse demographics or backgrounds.…”

Section: The Moral Legitimization Of the Different Approaches Towardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An indisputable “holy trinity”? On the moral value of equality, diversity, and inclusion

Köllen

Kakkuri-Knuuttila

Bendl

2018

EDI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose There seems to exist a widespread, unquestioned and unquestionable consent, both in research and practice, that there is a moral value inherent in equality and related initiatives toward diversity and inclusion. However, this consent is primarily based on political convictions and emotional reasons, and is without any strong ethical grounding. Whilst a considerable volume of research has been carried out into different facets of the economic value of initiatives toward equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI), comparatively little research has been undertaken into its moral value. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to structure the moral perspectives on EDI more precisely and more critically. Design/methodology/approach After discussing the interrelation of the three concepts equality, diversity and inclusion, the authors discuss the way in which initiatives toward diversity and inclusion are justified morally in literature. The authors point out the crucial position of equality, and then, subsequently, outline how different approaches to equality try to achieve moral legitimacy. Being an important group of initiatives in this debate, the authors subsequently reflect upon the moral (il)legitimacy of affirmative action (AA). The concluding section of this paper provides a brief summary of the findings. Findings The moral evaluation of equality, diversity and inclusion remains an under-theorized field. Within the discourse on equality, diversity and inclusion, the term “justice” is largely used in an intuitive way, rather than being rooted in a specific moral philosophy. As there are several conceivable, differing moral perspectives on EDI, one cannot expect an indisputable answer to the question as to whether a given approach toward equality, diversity and inclusion is morally praiseworthy or just. However, the widespread assumption that equality is morally praiseworthy per se, and that striving for equality morally justifies any initiative toward diversity and inclusion, is untenable. Originality/value This paper addresses the lack of theorizing on the moral value of initiatives toward equality, diversity, and inclusion, such as diversity management, AA or various equal opportunity approaches. Future research could enrich the discourse on the moral evaluation of diversity management, inclusion programs and organizational equality approaches with new philosophical facets and perspectives, perspectives that might differ from those taken in the predominantly American discourse.

show abstract

“…As a matter of fact, research informs that legislations in some countries may impose more constraints on employer's willingness to promote diversity (Klarsfeld, et al, 2016). Since this research uses data gathered from Kuwaiti organizations, the power of DM influence on HRM can be underestimated given the role of local regulatory system that imposes varying quota-based policies depending on the sector of activity.…”

Section: Theoretical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is also important to note that early research in DM usually reflected national perspectives mainly originated from a limited number of countries (Klarsfeld, et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%