I think you are missing the question being asked which is asking for cites of studies showing diversity in the workplace improves business performance.
Algernon, my intention is to try to use this excuse/opportunity to get away from the board and more into real life. I have to admit that I feel like a guy smoking his last few cigarettes before he quits.
I understand. Thanks for taking the time to respond. I wish you the best. And I for one will miss you. I hope you return someday.
Moving forward, most companies will be more diverse than they were in the past. Doesn’t really matter much if there are studies showing a correlation between bottom line improvement and diverse corporate cultures. Let’s say there was a high correlation of success. That doesn’t necessarily mean YOUR company will be more successful. And if the alternate were the case, it would not necessarily mean your company would be less successful. What does matter however, is how fast companies and employees “advantange” this change and make it work FOR them and not AGAINST them. Embrace the differences, folks, and let’s get on with the business of business.
Also from Philster’s link.
I don’t know about the other poster’s classes, but I got the distinct impression in my class that what we were striving for was more along the lines of demographic diversity.
I know that anecdotes aren’t evidence, but here is one data point, at least.
When I was working in personnel for a large bank/financial company, I participated in a marketing review session with the company gay/lesbian employee group. The marketing dept. was trying to capture some of a ‘gay/lesbian’ market they had suddenly realized was out there.
The g/l employees reviewed the sales materials, marketing plan, etc. and really tore them to shreds. They pointed out many subtle things that would have been offensive to g/l customers, or at least irrelevant & off-putting. (“Heterosexist” was the term used often.) They objected to many of the photos that were used, to the wording of many phrases, and even to the colors on the sales pieces (“you don’t have to use only lavender & pink colors on g/l materials!”).
They also criticized much of the marketing plan. For example: “That magazine’s a bar rag – read by young gays who run around and get themselves whacked out on liquor or other drugs. They won’t be interested in ads for home mortgages. Try ads for car loans or credit cards, if anything. Put the mortgage ads in the gay parenting magazines.”
None of this info from the g/l employees was expected, and the campaign was extensively revised – actually had to be delayed a bit to do the revisions. But it was quite successful, and brought a lot of business to the bank.
Later they did a similar review with black employees, and were planning them with hispanic & SE asian (Hmong, mostly, in this area).
One of the common comments from these was that potential customers wanted to see ‘members of their community’ shown in the materials, and expected to see some of them employed at teh bank when they went there.
So here’s one example where diversity in the workforce provided specific, financial gains to this company.
Employees in this bank wear little labels indicating their sexual orientation? (like name-tags?)
Suppose there is a group of engineers trying to make a new car engine. The group is highly diversified. Some engineers are trained by Honda (which specializes in high revving, N/A engines), some are from GM (high capacity, slow revving engines) and some from say Nissan (some good Turbo engines)
Which of the two statements is true?
This group will produce a high revving, big capacity, turbocharged mother of an engine.
They are going to have endless arguments on which technology is best and make no progress at all.
Stanford article did not seem to make any conclusions pro or con about diversity. It cited no studies. In fact it was mostly the kind of wishy washy conclusions that this thread was started to get past.