Counting heads vs making heads count

Abstract

Purpose Research on organizational diversity initiatives generally focus on either numerical diversity or racial climate. Both facets of diversity are critical, however, research has rarely examined their impact simultaneously. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach In the current study, the authors use the context of higher education, to examine how variations in the composite of numerical diversity and racial climate predict psychological disparities between faculty of color (FOC) and White faculty. The authors test how institutions that engage in authentic diversity (i.e. institutions that are both numerically diverse and have a positive racial climate) compare to other diversity composites. Findings Using a data set of n=37,406 faculty members in US colleges/universities, this study found that racial disparities between FOC and White faculty for various psychological outcomes are smaller in authentic diversity institutions compared to institutions with low numeric diversity/ poor racial climate. Further, the data demonstrate that authentic diversity institutions have reduced psychological disparities compared to institutions with high numeric diversity/poor racial climate, but have similar disparities to institutions with low numeric/positive racial climate. Originality/value These results suggest that diversity climate may be the primary driver of mitigating psychological disparities between FOC and White faculty. However, it is necessary for institutions to authentically engage in diversity – by promoting both entities – to become more effective in reducing disparities.

Leading with DEI on my Mind: Examining the Interactive Effects of Supervisor Perceptions of Psychological Diversity Climate and Supervisor Characteristics on Leadership Style

“…Echoing this notion, Rice, Taylor, et al (2020) suggested that abusive supervision is status degrading for employees. The severe mistreatment is detrimental to employees’ beliefs that they are valuable organizational members (Rafferty & Restubog, 2011; Vogel & Mitchell, 2017) and generally has a silencing impact on employees (Kiewitz et al, 2016; Wang et al, 2020; Xu et al, 2015). This is because management research suggests abusive supervision conveys to employees that they are unimportant to the organization (Lin et al, 2013; Rafferty & Restubog, 2011; Rice, Taylor, et al, 2020; Vogel & Mitchell, 2017).…”

“…With respect to individual employees, "diversity climate has been called psychological diversity climate (PDC) and is the extent to which individual employees perceive that their organization and representatives of the organization value diversity and strive to create a work environment that is fair and inclusive to all employees, irrespective of their gender, ethnicity, culture or religious background" (Newman et al, 2018, p. 149). This research has revealed the significant impact of PDC on a variety of workplace outcomes (Brimhall et al, 2014;Buttner et al, 2010;Chrobot-Mason & Aramovich, 2013;Gonzalez & DeNisi, 2009;Hopkins et al, 2001;Kaplan et al, 2011;Madera et al, 2016;Newman et al, 2018;Randel et al, 2016;Vargas et al, 2018).…”

Disrupting the Status Quo: Forging a Path to Promotion that Explicitly Recognizes and Values Faculty Work Focused on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

“…There is no value in representational diversity if those representing are either disregarded and otherwise silenced or ostracized and excluded for initiating the change they were hired to enact (Kolowich, 2017). Authentic DEI work attends to representation, climate, and value of contribution (Vargas et al, 2018). As universities have taken steps to not only embrace but enact the values of DEI, the underbelly of unrecognized and invisible labor that has long overtaxed the too-often small number of faculty, especially women of color at historically white institutions, has been revealed (Matthew, 2016).…”