•Is there any consideration to testing selection personnel and/or recruiters on stereotype & prejudice views and use only the ones with least or none, based on the subtle tests/measures discussed in the King & Ahmad article (2010)? Although, the Goldman article did explain that people can have stereotypes beliefs but not act on them so this may not be probable or legal.
In response to Katie's comment it would be very difficult to test individuals predjudiced attitudes. First of all, self report questionnaire are extremely susceptible to self presentation biases. Even measures like the IAT may not only measure someone's prejudiced attitudes (they likely at least partially tap into individuals knowledge about stereotypes). Also seeing as there are many different type of groups out there, would we give them a test for each group? As Katie says, it does not seem very practical.
I appreciated the perspective of Goldman et al. (2006) on the advantages of HR professionals following legal developments in regard to disparate treatment and disparate impact and proactively making adjustments in policies to anticipate changes in the law and how this could be a competitive advantage for the organization. How might this approach be "sold" to the various constituencies within an organization in order to get people on board for changes that seem less exciting that product development and marketing strategies? This seems to be an issue that if framed correctly could help bring HR issues into the overall strategic planning of the organization in a proactive rather than reactive way.
It would seem easy enough to show an organization being discriminatory in larger, more official acts like hiring decisions, promotions, salaries, etc. However, smaller "micro" discrimination that persists over time in a workplace can have just as detrimental effects but might be much more difficult to demonstrate or even articulate. What sorts of things can the organization do (apart from diversity training) to curb tense race relations within the organization or to decrease this micro-discrimination? What can the person who is on the receiving end of the discrimination do (excluding legal repercussions)?
Do you think training hiring managers to avoid these discrimination issues (i.e., the susceptibility of treating classes of people differently) will help to reduce negative? Could such training actually make matters worse such that hiring managers would end up being too lenient of minority and protected classes a means to avoid discriminatory behavior?
These were important readings to understand how employment discrimination is defined, how it is being researched, what federal regulatory agencies have been established and what they do, what court decisions have impacted law and practice. It gave me a good sense of how societal needs impact the creation and modification of laws. Some current questions I have: Do employers who list non-discrimination on the basis sexual orientation do this voluntarily or has there been legislation impacting this that I missed? What is the impact of Nebraska’s anti-affirmative action vote that past last year?
The articles we read suggest that things like prejudice, discrimination, and stereotype threat are alive and thriving in organizations. How can organizations proactively deal with problems of discrimination in the workplace? Would diversity or sensitivity training be effective in addressing these issues, or just make them even more salient and solidify some individual’s prejudices about stereotyped groups?
•Is there any consideration to testing selection personnel and/or recruiters on stereotype & prejudice views and use only the ones with least or none, based on the subtle tests/measures discussed in the King & Ahmad article (2010)? Although, the Goldman article did explain that people can have stereotypes beliefs but not act on them so this may not be probable or legal.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Katie's comment it would be very difficult to test individuals predjudiced attitudes. First of all, self report questionnaire are extremely susceptible to self presentation biases. Even measures like the IAT may not only measure someone's prejudiced attitudes (they likely at least partially tap into individuals knowledge about stereotypes). Also seeing as there are many different type of groups out there, would we give them a test for each group? As Katie says, it does not seem very practical.
ReplyDeleteI appreciated the perspective of Goldman et al. (2006) on the advantages of HR professionals following legal developments in regard to disparate treatment and disparate impact and proactively making adjustments in policies to anticipate changes in the law and how this could be a competitive advantage for the organization. How might this approach be "sold" to the various constituencies within an organization in order to get people on board for changes that seem less exciting that product development and marketing strategies? This seems to be an issue that if framed correctly could help bring HR issues into the overall strategic planning of the organization in a proactive rather than reactive way.
ReplyDeleteIt would seem easy enough to show an organization being discriminatory in larger, more official acts like hiring decisions, promotions, salaries, etc. However, smaller "micro" discrimination that persists over time in a workplace can have just as detrimental effects but might be much more difficult to demonstrate or even articulate. What sorts of things can the organization do (apart from diversity training) to curb tense race relations within the organization or to decrease this micro-discrimination? What can the person who is on the receiving end of the discrimination do (excluding legal repercussions)?
ReplyDeleteDo you think training hiring managers to avoid these discrimination issues (i.e., the susceptibility of treating classes of people differently) will help to reduce negative? Could such training actually make matters worse such that hiring managers would end up being too lenient of minority and protected classes a means to avoid discriminatory behavior?
ReplyDeleteThese were important readings to understand how employment discrimination is defined, how it is being researched, what federal regulatory agencies have been established and what they do, what court decisions have impacted law and practice. It gave me a good sense of how societal needs impact the creation and modification of laws. Some current questions I have: Do employers who list non-discrimination on the basis sexual orientation do this voluntarily or has there been legislation impacting this that I missed?
ReplyDeleteWhat is the impact of Nebraska’s anti-affirmative action vote that past last year?
The articles we read suggest that things like prejudice, discrimination, and stereotype threat are alive and thriving in organizations. How can organizations proactively deal with problems of discrimination in the workplace? Would diversity or sensitivity training be effective in addressing these issues, or just make them even more salient and solidify some individual’s prejudices about stereotyped groups?
ReplyDelete