Affiliation:
1. School of Business, Marymount University, Arlington, VA 22207, USA
2. The PATIENTS Program, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA
Abstract
The concept of “diversity dishonesty” has emerged as a pressing concern within highly selective and highly ranked schools of medicine, pharmacy, and public health at elite and highly ranked U.S. universities, particularly in the context of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts. This phenomenon, defined as a lack of sincerity and genuineness in an organization’s commitment to genuine and measurable change regarding diversity, raises significant questions about the authenticity of their endeavors. Organizations often engage in surface-level or performative actions related to diversity, creating the illusion of progress and dedication while failing to enact substantive and meaningful advancements in promoting diversity and inclusivity. This applied research inquiry uses a review of literature, research theories, and research frameworks to delve into the nuanced dynamics of diversity dishonesty, exploring how organizations demonstrate a commitment in form but not in substance. The practice of tokenism, where diverse individuals are hired and prominently featured in organizational materials but are not genuinely valued, emerges as a defining characteristic of diversity dishonesty. Moreover, when questions regarding the authenticity of their commitment arise, organizations may resort to gaslighting minorities, further exacerbating the issue. Recognizing the critical need to address diversity dishonesty, this article comprehensively explores frameworks to understand and combat this phenomenon. It seeks to engage with viable theories, problem-solving approaches, and contextual models that can illuminate the complex interplay of factors contributing to diversity dishonesty. By shedding light on the mechanisms through which elite and highly ranked predominantly White schools of medicine, pharmacy, and public health engage in performative acts without enacting transformative cultural change, this research aims to pave the way for more genuine and impactful DEI efforts and future research in this area.
Reference59 articles.
1. Wehmeyer, Michael L., Shogren, Karrie A., Little, Todd D., and Lopez, Shane J. (2017). Self-Determination Theory. Development of Self-Determination Through the Life-Course, Springer.
2. Anderson, Nick (2024, January 05). Black Professors Push a Major University to Diversify and Confront Racism, The Washington Post, Available online: https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2021/06/16/penn-state-black-faculty-racism.
3. From Diversity and Inclusion to Antiracism in Medical Training Institutions;Argueza;Academic Medicine,2021
4. Gender Diversity, Diversity Fatigue, and Shifting the Focus;Branson;The George Washington Law Review,2019
5. Creating Diverse and Religiously Inclusive Workplace Cultures in Hyper-Connected, Technical, and Cyber-Driven Organizations;Burrell;International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development,2021