Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Google
YahooAccording to the Wall Street Journal white men who are at the helm of diversity programs are essential to legitimizing a company’s diversity initiatives. In order to quell the divisiveness a diversity program might have in a company, the presence of a white man will help bring in other white men. By encouraging men who work outside of the human resources realm to participate, brings an authenticity to a common presumption that only women, the disabled and visible minorities are affected by these programs:
Too many diversity initiatives make white men feel defensive, says Frank McCloskey, a white male operations veteran named Georgia Power's first head of diversity in 2000 after the company was sued for allegedly discriminating against blacks in hiring and promotion. He believes firms must engage white men to change the company culture.
But Diversity Inc's Luke Visconti doesn't see it that way. It is the support of the CEO in making sure that their diversity programs are legitimized and that people must be held accountable and "and having formalized communication channels, metrics and personal involvement":
Our DiversityInc Top 50 Stock Indexâ„¢ documents that diversity management has business legitimacy that transcends human resources as well as the race/culture/gender/orientation/disability or age of the executive leading the program. Over the past three years, we've seen an increasing trend toward diversity management being considered a line-management position. However, an organizational-development background is logical for any diversity executive, and we see many very effective diversity executives who report to the senior HR executive.
In my opinon, the WSJ is basically saying what a lot of people believe: a white man legitimizes not only diversity programs because people are more willing to believe them over the opinions of the people who are affected by diversity programs - white women, the disabled and disenfrnachised minority groups.
Wocsuite also agrees that it is the responsibility and actions of a CEO that spearhead and direct the effectiveness of diversity programs:
Frankly, a company that has to put a white male in charge of a division to legitimize it is showing why it needs diversity initiatives to begin with.
Let's take this a step further. In discussing race relations, do we value the opinions of POC bloggers less than we do whites, such as Tim Wise? Do people feel more comfortable and feel that their sentiments are more astute? While bloggers who choose to write about race and have formed opinions from their lived experiences, is it more palatable coming from a percived "more objective" viewpoint?
What is the biggest blessing motherhood brings you?
Where does power lie?
nelle2nelle May 20, 2007 - 9:16amGiven white guys still have predominant control and influence, without their buying into things it will take more effort.
It's not just this, not just senior management support, it takes a concerted effort across the board. Management can certainly send a message, but the undercurrents that tend to be more hidden can still leave people feeling uneasy.
When I first started with this agency, one that has a very clear and unambiguous anti-discrimination policy, inside of two weeks there were rumours about me, even though I was in training and not even interacting with people in the main location. Quick action was taken to put an end to it, and I only became aware when they asked me if the action they intended to take was ok with me.
Fast forward half a year, I am in training for a new position, and one of the people I was training with was asked by one of the workers in that same locale "how does it feel to be working with 'it?'
She told me about it, and I just laughed, believing interacting with me would change minds, and in fact it has... but having the policy, having upper management support just is not enough. People have to get why and believe it is the right way to go.
nelle