Benefits of Workforce Diversity
The main culprit in the case under study is the non-compromising presence of employee regulation. This disabled the ability to develop a pool of workers with varying experiences, skills and personalities (Harvey & Allard, 2005). Thus, the protection of status quo is embedded in the formal rules creating a shield towards diversity. Most of the employees of the firm have at least three year of experience. This showed that protection of status quo is also offered by current employees themselves. On the contrary, a diversified workforce can provide the strength and commitment similar to a highly-regulated status as diversity can give flexibility.
It just a matter of prioritizing the most important rules (e. g. safety, money transactions, and machine repair) and classifying groups of workers that are directly affect by them. As diversity results to flexibility, the organization can offer different operational policies across different departments and jobs description according to their needs. It is unlikely that the client-based tactics of marketing and sales team will be undermined by rules. Corporate benefits are higher in this situation than costs. Also, it is unlikely and against growth objective to limit the creativity of design team as there is a pending cost-reduction scheme.
Again, corporate benefits exceed cost. These examples are evidence that status quo through formal rules is not a decision framework for today’s businesses. When rules become lenient and allow diversified workforce, worker exploitation of opportunities from the changes in the external environment will not necessarily result to corporate admission of excessive threats and risks because employees will feel responsible for their actions. Also, they will tend to adapt to difficult and costly situations resourcefully as their own identity and self-being is seen through their output.
Giving a chance for the workforce to have varying identities is an assurance that the firm has established an informal yet effective and efficient corporate regulation. Effective because the objective for profit and growth is still in place while efficient as minimal monitoring systems to every action and interaction are in existence. Some would say that corporate culture will be at stake when individual expertise, religions, attitudes, norms, physical attributes and other heterogeneous characteristics will be recruited (Thomas, 2002).
The solution to this difficulty is already available in workforce diversity. Since the goal of corporate culture is to bind relationships between managers and employees, diversity offers the required creativity, social cohesion and ethics that are taken from individual employee. Although in minority, workers would feel that they have a unique and important role in the company that a corporate culture that emanate from a diversified workforce is largely a culture with extended proportions.
Brunning, H. , Cole, C. & Huffington, C. (1997).Manual of Organizational Development: The Psychology of Change. London: Karnac Books. Dooley, K. & Johnson, L. (1995). “TQM, Chaos and Complexity”. Human Systems Management. 14( 4), 1-16. Harvey, E. & Allard, M. (eds. ) (2005). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Educ. / Prentice Hall. Hitt, M. , Hoskisson, R. & Ireland, D. (2003). Strategic Management: Competitiveness and Globalization, 5th Edition, Singapore: Thomson Learning. Thomas, W. (2002), ‘The rise and fall of Enron; when a company looks too good to be true, it usually is’, Journal of Accountancy, 1 April.