Key Components for Strategic Diversity Initiatives
by Joan Cummings Clark

The need to develop, foster and maintain strategic diversity initiatives is the key goal for most "forward thinking" organizations. IBM, AT&T and Ford Motor Company are excellent examples of Fortune 50 companies that have developed and employed comprehensive strategic diversity plans–based on the goal of gaining and maintaining the competitive edge in today's global economy. The motivation for their diversity planning extends far beyond the "awareness" perspective–i.e., the "right thing to do," or litigation avoidance, or even the desire to ensure for workforce productivity. It is based on the fact that it "simply makes good business sense."

Why? It's a reality that the U.S. population has changed dramatically within the last ten years. The startling shifts in the population that were predicted in the Hudson Institute "Workforce 2000" study have already occurred. The combined influence of the numbers of women, immigrants and people of color has impacted the target markets, advertising strategies, communications, workforce values and norms–and almost any other realm pertinent to doing business as we rapidly approach the year 2000. Companies can no longer afford to perpetuate the "one size fits all" model in hiring/staffing or promotion decisions, in their marketing efforts, or even in their workplace policies. The organizations that will thrive and survive throughout the next millenium are those that are deploying a strategic "multicultural" approach to all of their existing systems.

As the principal of a management consulting firm which specializes in diversity and cross-cultural initiatives, I've been exposed to the entire spectrum of organizational efforts-- from the "band-aid" ("we've done our two hour diversity training ") approach to the comprehensive, "top-down" commitment of IBM's award-winning effort. It's always interesting to compare the companies which "create the need" to diversify after a major lawsuit has occurred, or after losing government contracts due to not meeting EEOC standards-- versus those which realize that a proactive, systems approach is the only way to effectively embrace diversity.

One large manufacturing firm called me in recently to assess their current efforts, which consisted of a half-day voluntary diversity awareness training program. Although the program has been in place for a year, only one-third of their managers have attended. The diversity training is conducted internally by a staff of HR individuals who read a few books, obtained a video, and felt competent to conduct the training. No needs assessment had been conducted, there is no evaluation, no benchmark data gathering process, and no follow-up to the program. As prompted by a pending lawsuit of several African-American and Hispanic employees, the HR Vice President stated that "diversity isn't working" in their organization. In addition, he indicated that the company has noted a 35 — 40% decrease in revenue over the past two years, and the loss of a major government contract due to the lack of diversity in their management ranks, board and supplier sources. When I asked about any other planning besides the marginal training program, the executive informed me that the firm felt "everything was okay;" until the lawsuit surfaced. This is a classic example of the need to strategically plan for diversity, to "talk it" and "walk it" —it's about business survival.

The goals for a strategic diversity initiative should be based on a "systems" approach, with the

premise that the planning and implementation is like any other major organizational change effort. The "piecemeal" approach referred to earlier will automatically doom the diversity effort for failure.

In working through the years with companies who have been either successful or unsuccessful in their efforts, I've found that there are four key components to implementation of an effective diversity plan. These components can be utilized as a "roadmap" to incorporate diversity strategically throughout the organization.

1. Establish Leadership/Management Commitment. Top management's support and genuine

commitment to diversity is crucial. Champions for diversity are needed–key, visible individuals who have the power, authority and support–and will take strong personal stands on the need for change. This includes modeling the behaviors required for change, and assisting with the work of moving the organization forward. This level of key executive involvement must go beyond "sloganism." For example, are human, financial and technical resources being provided? Is diversity consistently made part of the corporate strategy? Is there a willingness to change human resource management systems (such as performance appraisal and executive bonuses) to ensure for accountability? Is there a willingness to keep ongoing mental energy and financial support on the effort?

Top management commitment is crucial, but not sufficient. Champions are also needed at lower organizational levels–especially key line managers. The formation of diversity task forces or advisory committees are an excellent way to address the leadership requirement across the organization.

2. Conduct research (Needs Assessment, Culture and Management Systems Audits).

1. Training and Asssessment (Ongoing activity) . Mandatory training for all management and

staff should be the first step in program implementation after the needs assessment. However, it should not be the only step in the change process–and should never be used in isolation. We emphasize that it is absolutely crucial to facilitate training in concert with other diversity programs–and as an ongoing process rather than the "one-shot" approach discussed earlier. And, the most critical components are benchmark (pre-training) measurement, course evaluation, and post-training surveys (typically several months to one year after program initiation). The failure of many diversity efforts is directly linked to the lack of hard data to substantiate costs or value.

There are currently two types of training being implemented in organizations: awareness and

skill-building. Often companies incorporate a combination of both. The primary difference is that awareness training focuses on creating an understanding of the need for, and meaning of valuing diversity; while skill-building training provides specific techniques and tools (including communications) to use in daily interactions in the workplace.

2. Follow-Up. In addition to the various measurement systems, successful diversity initiatives