Does workplace Diversity Result in a More Productive Firm? Yes OR NO

It depends.

 

Employee's with less in commen tend to socialize less and work more.

 

Some work is collaborative, so that's not necessarily true.

 

Diverse recruiting across gender, race and nationality probably has merit because you're giving yourself a larger talent pool; but I think its effect is probably neutral when compared to other more tangible factors.

 

Walmart is successful because it has great understanding of business concepts and is ruthless. I am sorry to say but Walmart's life is limited due to the fact that it overpowers many smaller businesses both Retail and Wholesale, history shows that every so often the people uprise agains such a dominent and oppresive force, causing major social changes.

 

-Walmart is not a monopoly. Will the people be rising up against Target, Costco, Kroger, Petsmart, Macy's and Best Buy as well?

-Walmart's a retailer, which means they're at the ass end of the supply chain. Will the people be rising up against their wholesalers, vendors and manufacturers; many of whom are run by governments and entities more powerful and suppressive than them?

-All of Walmart's activities are subsidized and largely dictated by the budgets and tastes of their 100 million weekly customers. Will the people be rising up against ourselves?

 

divide and conquer



Divide the similarity... conquer productivity...


Similarity breeds similar slackness, down time, talking instead of working, etc.





Who knows?

 

But sometimes it also heightens morale, allows for greater cooperation, and more of a willingness to sacrifice and compromise for the sake of company objectives. Furthermore, some jobs are critically dependent upon successful networking and socializing. It really varies from firm to firm, or even between different departments in the same company.

 

After establishing a baseline competency to perform a job, after that what's important is diversity of thought, perspectives and skills.

 

It does matter in that in the ever globalizing and changing world, different "perspectives" become very important. For example, I remember hearing from one campus recruiter from GM a few years ago commenting on why it was so important for GM to start hiring engineers outside of the Michigan area.

Because so many of it's engineers had dads that work in GM, gets a new GM car every 3 years that they eventually stifled innovation of the ever changing auto marketplace.

Then you take a look at the recent earnings from the markets today. The companies that are doing better are the ones with global presence that offsets the U.S. problems. As globalization becomes more of a reality, people from different perspectives become even more vital to a company.

 

if everyone hired is the best avaliable and thus more than qualified for the jobs, than yes it results in a more productive firm regardless of the ethnicity/gender/religous and whatever else background they are from. but if you are just hiring people to fill a quota (which i believe is illegal), and if you slip in un-qualified personel, than it obviously decreases productivity.

 

there is a good site for discussing these sorts of issues. it's called flexpaths.com. just launched and it's about driving efficiency for companies by enabling people to work differently.

diversity is a big part of who they are (i know this because i consult with the founders).

 

Or, you can be in a workplace where different races constantly poke fun at each other over racial nuances, causing some of them to dread even being there, just waiting for quitting time.

Example, auto repair shop.

 

Anybody that uses diversity in and of itself as a way to predict productivity really shouldn't be running a business.

 

Diversity is over rated. We should all follow the GOP's example and ditch it when it's politically expedient!

We followed the slavery thingie for 4 centuries or so and that didn't work out. No need to give diversity that kinda time. We can be more effective eliminating the time line on integration!

Who really cares about alienating minorities if short term productivity is enhanced? Handicapped parking, access, hell they have a dedicated booth in the dang john! How can that be "More Productive"???

Since I'm already on the soap box, McClain's already looking great. He hates diversity! Gays, lesbians, blacks (can't appreciate MLk its unlikely any other melanin blessed folk will appeal to you). Hates solders too (go figure).

Would be so much nicer if we were all the same and production had no challenges!

[/crap]

 

I'm pretty sure the opposite is true. At the last place I worked (government contractor), it was actually required that a certain percentage of subcontracts were awarded to "small disadvantaged businesses" (SDB's). To be considered an SDB the business has to be at least 51% owned by member(s) of a historically disadvantaged group (minorities, women, etc.). Granted it's not exactly what you're talking about since it's more about ownership as opposed to employment, but it's in the same ballpark.

As to the OP's question, I have no idea.

 

Does workplace Diversity Result in a More Productive Firm? Yes OR NO

Correlation does not imply causation. Of course in this case, I'd argue it coincidence, if anything.

 

^^ Or a spurious correlation. It's probably more that flexible firms run by more open-minded individuals are more likely to have a diverse workforce, and also more likely to utilize diverse talent effectively.

 

Depends on the business.

An auto repair shop in downhome backwoods {fill in the blank} probably wouldn't do well with a diverse workforce.

On the other hand, a multi-national company would probably be MUCH better served.

So it depends.