The New Principle-practice Gap: The Disconnect between Diversity Beliefs and Actions in the Workplace

Author:

Bowman Williams Jamillah1ORCID,Cox Jonathan M.2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA

2. University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

Abstract

Following increased calls for racial justice, many organizations have pledged to play their part in dismantling systemic racism. One common step leaders take is to invest in diversity and inclusion programs. Yet, despite organizations’ bold claims to value diversity and the investment of billions of dollars on related efforts, workplace discrimination continues to be a major factor in the lives of people of color. In addition, existing research highlights a principle-policy gap, wherein people—particularly White Americans—espouse support for the principles of diversity, yet their support wanes for policies that address inequalities. In this survey study, we explore attitudes about organizational diversity efforts and further examine how these beliefs shape workplace decision making. Our analysis of open-ended responses reveals a major disconnect, where individuals say diversity is important in principle, yet in practice do not take actions to further the goals of diversity and inclusion programs, a phenomenon we label the “principle-practice gap.” We use diversity ideology as the theoretical link to help explain why this subtle resistance to action might occur. We find that the principle-practice gap is more pronounced for those who view diversity as important because it improves outcomes. Conversely, those who think diversity is an important goal because of workplace inequality are more likely to take action, such as promoting a Black man. These findings help reveal which people endorsing diversity in principle are more likely to take action and which tend to be more performative and less connected to practices that counter structural inequality.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3