Diversity Management Instruments in German Organizations: Effectiveness and Preferences from Corporate and Employee Perspectives

Jens Landwehr

doi:doi:10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13

| Peer-Reviewed

Diversity Management Instruments in German Organizations: Effectiveness and Preferences from Corporate and Employee Perspectives

Jens Landwehr

Published in Journal of Human Resource Management (Volume 4, Issue 6)

Received: 25 November 2016 Accepted: 6 December 2016 Published: 24 January 2017

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

While diversity management appears to rank high on the HR agenda of many organizations in Germany, both status and quality of diversity management in Germany remain lower than in most European countries, and by far lower than in the US. This paper discusses the relevance organizations in Germany attach to the topic of diversity, identifies the measures actually employed, and shows how effective these measures are in practice. Based on the responses of 73 organizations and 285 employees, the study empirically measures the use and effectiveness of diversity measures and identifies differences from the perspective of the organization versus the employee. In the area of Gender diversity companies employ the largest breadth of measures that also appear very effective. In the areas of Age and Ethnic diversity, companies tend to employ much fewer measures which also don’t appear to be the most effective, showing less relevance and experience with relevant instruments. We also found that measures considered by employees to be most effective often differ from the measures used in practice and prioritized by HR professionals. In general, from an employee perspective, diversity measures appear to be connected to better career and development opportunities. Companies in Germany largely follow the diversity measures prescribed by the state without using their diversity profile for differentiation in employer branding. The results of the study give an overview of the diversity measures in use today in German organizations and of their effectiveness to achieve diversity objectives.

Published in	Journal of Human Resource Management (Volume 4, Issue 6)
DOI	10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13
Page(s)	100-123
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Personality Assessment, Performance Management, Talent Management, Personality, Potential, Personality Talent Management, Potential, Social Responsibility

References

[1]	Anfuso, D., (1997), Diversity keeps up with the times, in: Personnel Journal 74 (7), p. 30-38.
[2]	Arrendoro, P., Successful Diversity Management Initiatives (1996).
[3]	Briscoe, J. P., & Hall, D. T. (2005). Protean and boundaryless career assessment collection. Boston, MA: Unpublished, copyrighted scale collection.
[4]	Capowski, G (1996), Managing diversity, in: Management Review 86 (6), pp.12-20.
[5]	Carnevale, A. and S. Stone (1994), Diversity beyond the goler rule, in: training & Development 48 (10), pp. 20-40.
[6]	Chen, Z. X. and Aryee, S. (2007) ‘Delegation and Employee Work Outcomes: An Examination of the Cultural Context of Mediating Processes in China’, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.50, No.1 pp.226-238.
[7]	Choudhury, E. H. (1996), The nature and significance of workforce diversity: Orientations of Sate and Urban Administrators, in: International Journal of Public Administration 19 (3), pp. 399-423.
[8]	Colarelli, S., Bishop, R., Career Commitment, in: Group & Organization Studies; Jun. 90, Vol. 15 Issue 2, p 158-176, 19p.
[9]	Collings, D. G. and Mellahi, K. (2009), ‘Strategic Talent Management: A review and research agenda,’ in: Human Resource Management Review, 19: 4, 304-313.
[10]	Costea, B., Introna, L. (2008), On the mystery of the other and diversity management, in: Phenomenology, Organization and Technology, Lisbon, Universitade Catolica Editora and POT Books.
[11]	Cox, T. (1994), A comment on the language of diversity, in: Organizations 1 (1), pp. 51-57
[12]	De Dreu, C. K. W and Boles, T. (1998). Share and share alike or winner takes all? Impact of social value orientation on the choice and recall of decision heuristics in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76.
[13]	D’Souza, D. (1997), The diversity trap: usefulness of cultural diversity training by corporations, in: Forbes 159 / 2), pp.83-84.
[14]	Elias, C. and Sonnenfeld, J. L. (1994), Divere approaches to managing diversity, in: Human Resource Management 33(1), pp.79-109.
[15]	Fetchenhauer, D., & Huang, X. (2004). Justice sensitivity and behavior in experimental games. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1015–1031.
[16]	Garnsey, E. and Rees, B. (1996). Discourse and enactment: Gender inequality in text and context. Human Relations, 49 (8): 1041–1064.
[17]	Humphries, M., Grice., S., (1995), Equal employment opportunity and the management of diversity: A global discourse of assimilation?, in: Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 8 Iss: 5, pp.17–32.
[18]	Iedema, J. and Poppe, M. (1996), 'The Effect of Self—presentation on Social Value Orientation', Journal of Psychology, vol. 134.
[19]	Johnson, W. B., Workforce 2000: Work and Workers for the 21^st Century, Hudson Institute (1987).
[20]	Jonsen, K., et al., (2013), The tragedy of the uncommons: Reframing workplace diversity, in: human relations, 66 (2), pp. 271-294.
[21]	Kersten, A. (2000) "Diversity management: Dialogue, dialectics and diversion", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 13 Iss: 3.
[22]	Kandola, R. S., Fullerton, J., Diversity in Action: managing the mosaic, CIPD Publishing (1998).
[23]	Kollock, P., (1998b): Social Dilemmas. The Anatomy of Cooperation; in: Annual Review of Sociology.
[24]	Konovsky, M. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1991). Perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor of employee attitudes and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 698–707.
[25]	Köppel, P., Yan, J., Lüdicke, J., (2007), Cultural Diversity Management in Deutschland hinkt hinter her, Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gütersloh.
[26]	Krell, G., (2008), Diversity Management: Chancengleichheit für alle und auch als Wettbewerbsfaktor, in: Chancengleichheit durch Personalpolitik, Gabler, 5. Aufl. Wiesbaden, S. 63-80.
[27]	Kuhlmann, D. M. & Marshello, A. (1975). Individual differences in game motivation as moderators of preprogrammed strategic effects in prisoner's dilemma. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 922–931.
[28]	Landwehr, J. (2016), The Principle of ‘Self-Control’ in the Design of Instruments, Processes and Procedures: True Success Factors of Talent Management in Journal of Human Resource Management.
[29]	Lewis, R. E., & R. J. Heckman (2006), ‘Talent management: A critical review,’ in Human Resource Management Review, 16: 139-154.
[30]	Lobiecki, A., Jack, G., Critical Turn in the Evolution of Diversity Management, British Journal of Management, Vol. 11, Special Issue, S17–S31 (2000).
[31]	McDonald, D. M. (2010). The evolution of ‘diversity management’ in the USA: Social contexts, managerial motives and theoretical approaches. Institute of Business Research, Daito Bunka University.
[32]	Mobley, M. and Payne, T. (1992), Backlash: the challenge to diversity training, in: Training and Development 46(12), pp. 45-52.
[33]	Nemetz, P. L. and Christensen, S. L., The challenge of cultural diversity: Harnessing a diversity of views to understand multiculturism, in: Academy ogf Management Review 21 (2), pp. 434-462.
[34]	Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2009). Age, work experience, and the psychological contract. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 1053-1075.
[35]	Nkomo, S., Cox, T. (1996). Diverse identities in organizations. In Handbook of organization studies, ed. S. Clegg, C. Hardy and W. Nord, 338-356. London and Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
[36]	Lewis, R. E., & R. J. Heckman (2006), ‘Talent management: A critical review,’ in Human Resource Management Review, 16: 139-154.
[37]	Noe, R. A. (1996), "Is career management related to employee development and performance?", Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 17, pp. 119-23.
[38]	Noe, R. A., Noe, A. W., & Bachhuber, J. A. (1990). Correlates of career motivation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 37, 340–356.
[39]	Ozbilgin, M. F., Tatli, A (2008), Global Diversity Management: An Evidence based approach, 2008.
[40]	Peng, J.-C., Chui, S., F., An Integrative Model Linking Feedback Environment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior, in: The Journal of Social Psychology, 2010, 150 (6), 582–607.
[41]	Robinson, C., Fetters, R., Riester, D., Bracco, A., The Paradox of Potential: A Suggestion for Guiding Talent Management Discussions in Organizations, in: Industrial & Organizational Psychology; Dec2009, Vol. 2 Issue 4, p413-415.
[42]	Robinson, Carl; Fetters, Rachel; Riester, Devon; Bracco, Anna (2009), ‘The Paradox of Potential: A Suggestion for Guiding Talent Management Discussions in Organizations’, Industrial & Organizational Psychology, Dec2009, Vol. 2 Issue 4, p413-415.
[43]	Roznowski, Mary (1989). Examination of the measurement properties of the Job descriptive index with experimental items, in: Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 805-814.
[44]	Sattler, D. N. and N. L. Kerr (1991) 'Migh versus morality explored: motivational and cognitive bases for social motives', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60 (5), 756-65.
[45]	Schmitt, M., Neumann, R. & Montada, L. (1995). Dispositional sensitivity to befallen injustice. Social Justice Research, 8, 385-407.
[46]	Schmitt, M., & Mohiyeddini, C. (1996). Sensitivity to befallen injustice and reactions to a real-life-disadvantage. Social Justice Research, 9, 223-238.
[47]	Seligman, D. (1994), Thinking about the gauntlet: diversity training programmes for federal agency employees are coercive, in: Fortune 130 (8), pp. 214-215.
[48]	Smith, B. (1991), Diversity with a difference, in: HR Focus 68 (12), pp. 5-6.
[49]	Subeliani, D., Tsogas, G., Managing diversity in the Netherlands: A case study at Rabobank, in: International Journal of Human Resource Management 16: 5 May 2005, pp 831-851.
[50]	Suess, S., Kleiner, M., (2005; Diversity management in Deutschland, Ergebnisse einer Unternehmensbefragung.
[51]	Tatli, A., at al., (2012), The role of regulatory and temporal context in the construction of diversity discourses: the case of the UK, France and Germany, in: European Journal of Industrial Relations 18 (4), pp. 293-308.
[52]	Thomas, R., (1995), ‘A Diversity Framework’, in: Chemers, M. M., Oskamp, S., Costanzo, M. A. (eds.), Diversity in organizations: new Perspectives for a Changing Workplace, Thousand Oaks (Sage), pp. 306-317.
[53]	Thomas, D. A., and Ely, R. J., (1996), Making differences matter: a new paradigm for diversity management, in: Harvard Business Review, Sept-Oct, pp. 79-90.
[54]	Van Lange, P. A. M. (1999). The pursuit ofjoint outcomes and equality in outcomes: An integrative model of social value orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 337–349.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Jens Landwehr. (2017). Diversity Management Instruments in German Organizations: Effectiveness and Preferences from Corporate and Employee Perspectives. Journal of Human Resource Management, 4(6), 100-123. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Jens Landwehr. Diversity Management Instruments in German Organizations: Effectiveness and Preferences from Corporate and Employee Perspectives. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2017, 4(6), 100-123. doi: 10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Jens Landwehr. Diversity Management Instruments in German Organizations: Effectiveness and Preferences from Corporate and Employee Perspectives. J Hum Resour Manag. 2017;4(6):100-123. doi: 10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13,
  author = {Jens Landwehr},
  title = {Diversity Management Instruments in German Organizations: Effectiveness and Preferences from Corporate and Employee Perspectives},
  journal = {Journal of Human Resource Management},
  volume = {4},
  number = {6},
  pages = {100-123},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jhrm.20160406.13},
  abstract = {While diversity management appears to rank high on the HR agenda of many organizations in Germany, both status and quality of diversity management in Germany remain lower than in most European countries, and by far lower than in the US. This paper discusses the relevance organizations in Germany attach to the topic of diversity, identifies the measures actually employed, and shows how effective these measures are in practice. Based on the responses of 73 organizations and 285 employees, the study empirically measures the use and effectiveness of diversity measures and identifies differences from the perspective of the organization versus the employee. In the area of Gender diversity companies employ the largest breadth of measures that also appear very effective. In the areas of Age and Ethnic diversity, companies tend to employ much fewer measures which also don’t appear to be the most effective, showing less relevance and experience with relevant instruments. We also found that measures considered by employees to be most effective often differ from the measures used in practice and prioritized by HR professionals. In general, from an employee perspective, diversity measures appear to be connected to better career and development opportunities. Companies in Germany largely follow the diversity measures prescribed by the state without using their diversity profile for differentiation in employer branding. The results of the study give an overview of the diversity measures in use today in German organizations and of their effectiveness to achieve diversity objectives.},
 year = {2017}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Diversity Management Instruments in German Organizations: Effectiveness and Preferences from Corporate and Employee Perspectives
AU  - Jens Landwehr
Y1  - 2017/01/24
PY  - 2017
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13
T2  - Journal of Human Resource Management
JF  - Journal of Human Resource Management
JO  - Journal of Human Resource Management
SP  - 100
EP  - 123
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0715
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13
AB  - While diversity management appears to rank high on the HR agenda of many organizations in Germany, both status and quality of diversity management in Germany remain lower than in most European countries, and by far lower than in the US. This paper discusses the relevance organizations in Germany attach to the topic of diversity, identifies the measures actually employed, and shows how effective these measures are in practice. Based on the responses of 73 organizations and 285 employees, the study empirically measures the use and effectiveness of diversity measures and identifies differences from the perspective of the organization versus the employee. In the area of Gender diversity companies employ the largest breadth of measures that also appear very effective. In the areas of Age and Ethnic diversity, companies tend to employ much fewer measures which also don’t appear to be the most effective, showing less relevance and experience with relevant instruments. We also found that measures considered by employees to be most effective often differ from the measures used in practice and prioritized by HR professionals. In general, from an employee perspective, diversity measures appear to be connected to better career and development opportunities. Companies in Germany largely follow the diversity measures prescribed by the state without using their diversity profile for differentiation in employer branding. The results of the study give an overview of the diversity measures in use today in German organizations and of their effectiveness to achieve diversity objectives.
VL  - 4
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Jens Landwehr

Faculty of Management, Economics and Social Sciences, Seminar of Personnel Economics and HRM, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Jens Landwehr. (2017). Diversity Management Instruments in German Organizations: Effectiveness and Preferences from Corporate and Employee Perspectives. Journal of Human Resource Management, 4(6), 100-123. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Jens Landwehr. Diversity Management Instruments in German Organizations: Effectiveness and Preferences from Corporate and Employee Perspectives. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2017, 4(6), 100-123. doi: 10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Jens Landwehr. Diversity Management Instruments in German Organizations: Effectiveness and Preferences from Corporate and Employee Perspectives. J Hum Resour Manag. 2017;4(6):100-123. doi: 10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13,
  author = {Jens Landwehr},
  title = {Diversity Management Instruments in German Organizations: Effectiveness and Preferences from Corporate and Employee Perspectives},
  journal = {Journal of Human Resource Management},
  volume = {4},
  number = {6},
  pages = {100-123},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jhrm.20160406.13},
  abstract = {While diversity management appears to rank high on the HR agenda of many organizations in Germany, both status and quality of diversity management in Germany remain lower than in most European countries, and by far lower than in the US. This paper discusses the relevance organizations in Germany attach to the topic of diversity, identifies the measures actually employed, and shows how effective these measures are in practice. Based on the responses of 73 organizations and 285 employees, the study empirically measures the use and effectiveness of diversity measures and identifies differences from the perspective of the organization versus the employee. In the area of Gender diversity companies employ the largest breadth of measures that also appear very effective. In the areas of Age and Ethnic diversity, companies tend to employ much fewer measures which also don’t appear to be the most effective, showing less relevance and experience with relevant instruments. We also found that measures considered by employees to be most effective often differ from the measures used in practice and prioritized by HR professionals. In general, from an employee perspective, diversity measures appear to be connected to better career and development opportunities. Companies in Germany largely follow the diversity measures prescribed by the state without using their diversity profile for differentiation in employer branding. The results of the study give an overview of the diversity measures in use today in German organizations and of their effectiveness to achieve diversity objectives.},
 year = {2017}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Diversity Management Instruments in German Organizations: Effectiveness and Preferences from Corporate and Employee Perspectives
AU  - Jens Landwehr
Y1  - 2017/01/24
PY  - 2017
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13
T2  - Journal of Human Resource Management
JF  - Journal of Human Resource Management
JO  - Journal of Human Resource Management
SP  - 100
EP  - 123
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0715
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20160406.13
AB  - While diversity management appears to rank high on the HR agenda of many organizations in Germany, both status and quality of diversity management in Germany remain lower than in most European countries, and by far lower than in the US. This paper discusses the relevance organizations in Germany attach to the topic of diversity, identifies the measures actually employed, and shows how effective these measures are in practice. Based on the responses of 73 organizations and 285 employees, the study empirically measures the use and effectiveness of diversity measures and identifies differences from the perspective of the organization versus the employee. In the area of Gender diversity companies employ the largest breadth of measures that also appear very effective. In the areas of Age and Ethnic diversity, companies tend to employ much fewer measures which also don’t appear to be the most effective, showing less relevance and experience with relevant instruments. We also found that measures considered by employees to be most effective often differ from the measures used in practice and prioritized by HR professionals. In general, from an employee perspective, diversity measures appear to be connected to better career and development opportunities. Companies in Germany largely follow the diversity measures prescribed by the state without using their diversity profile for differentiation in employer branding. The results of the study give an overview of the diversity measures in use today in German organizations and of their effectiveness to achieve diversity objectives.
VL  - 4
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download