2022 Scranton Essay Contest

Full Name Pham Anh Duong

Title Diversity in communities: Concept, review and practice

[Format Details]
Times New Roman /12 point / Double Spaced / maximum 2,000 words

When Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his iconic speech I Have a Dream in 1963, he was fighting for

civil rights and equality for black people, who had been subjected to slavery and segregation in the United

States for decades. Sixty years later, the state of equality extends further than just black people or the

United States. Globalization is progressing rapidly, and various communities are making efforts to nurture

more diverse environments. However, what exactly needs to be done to maintain a truly diverse

community? This essay seeks to answer these questions, as well as provide concrete examples of cultural

diversity in certain communities.

Diversity is not simply a word defined within the scope of a dictionary. In fact, diversity has had

various formal and informal definitions. One eminent formal definition, given by the former National

Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (2008, p. 86) states that diversity is “ differences among

groups of people and individuals based on ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status, gender, exceptionalities,

language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area ”. Meanwhile, other interpretations of the

term diversity have been given by various authors. O’Reilly et al. (1998) describes a diverse group as

“composed of individuals who differ on a characteristic on which they base their own social identity ”,

while Cox (1994) defines diversity as “the representation, in one social system, of people with distinctly

different group affiliations of cultural significance ”. While indeed there are many written definitions, in

essence, they highlight the concept of “difference”. Generally, they approach diversity in terms of

categorizing attributes which are different between individuals. Considering that the number of attributes

is endless, researchers have made further typologies of differences. One example categorizes the different
attributes of diversity based on whether they are readily detected (Jackson et al., 1995). Generally,

observable characteristics such as sex, race, and other, usually natural characteristics are included within

one category, while underlying characteristics such as education and religion are part of another category.

Another bifurcation of attributes of diversity involves dividing between primary and secondary

dimensions (Loden & Rosener, 1991). Primary dimensions include gender, race, ethnicity, and other basic

attributes which define our fundamental image. In contrast, secondary dimensions are not as visible and

influence our identity in a more sophisticated manner. These may include experience, social status, and

more. There are even tertiary dimensions (Arredondo, 2004), which are essentially the core of personal

identity, and include beliefs and values. Whatever the method of categorization, the aspects of diversity

interact with one another and may be expressed differently depending on the environment. For example,

while race can be a more dominant attribute within an environment like school, or in a workplace, age has

a greater influence. This results in the difficulty of properly grasping the concept of diversity, which in

turn is the cause of the many aforementioned definitions. In light of this problem, within the scope of this

essay, it is proposed that diversity be defined simply as “the differences between humans within any

attribute(s)”. This definition comprises the most basic elements of diversity, which are “difference” and

“attributes”, and is therefore adequate for readers to understand the concept of diversity.

Cultural diversity has been studied extensively within theoretical and practical grounds.

Generally, a large proportion of diversity research has been based solely on theory or has been confined

to laboratory settings. In the past, studying diversity was grounded in intergroup relations, focusing on

larger-scale social stereotypes. Based on this, the social identity theory (Tajfel, 1978) seeks to explain the

processes through which individuals view themselves within groups and their respective environments. It

asserts that people tend to ensure that their group has a distinctive value, which makes the group differ

from and more positively valued than other groups. This so-called in-group bias is an inherent part of

intergroup interactions, so much so that the mere presence of group division is enough to trigger the bias

and consequently discriminatory behavior (Tajfel, 1970). Therefore, some research shows that

homogeneity in a group can improve cooperation (Williams & O’Reilly, 1998). Even more extreme is
that in a field study, there have been observable negative effects on group performance due to diversity

(Pelled et al., 1999). While this may serve as an argument against diversity, further research shows

different results. While diversity may bring about barriers to social interaction, a highly heterogeneous

group can be more effective in this aspect (Blau, 1977). Explaining this, it is observable that in a group

with a higher level of heterogeneity, members are spread out along a wider number of dimensions of

diversity which blurs the barrier separating in-groups and out-groups (Alexander et al., 1995). Another

experimental study has shown that advanced diversity in work groups tends to improve effectiveness

(Cox et al., 1991). All of the research points to the paradox that diversity can both act in favor and against

a community. The reasonable conclusion then would have been to maintain the status quo and work in

homogeneous groups and closed communities. But with international travel and the advent of the World

Wide Web, people around the world have the opportunity to interact with one another. No longer are we

in our closed-off spheres; rather we are part of a dynamic worldwide environment. This situation both

encourages and necessitates inclusivity within communities, and it is only becoming more inevitable.

Diversity makes way for creativity and collaboration. It is why we must be well-informed about the idea

of diversity so that we can effectively embrace and use it for our greatest interests.

How, then, will we be able to properly implement diversity within our communities? To create a

healthy diverse environment, measures should be taken in order to actuate the benefits of diversity while

at the same time restraining its negative effects. Thus, many practices have been developed for this

purpose, usually in the workplace where cooperation is a heavily weighted factor in the efficacy and

success of work. Related research indicates that the solutions are based on a combination of many factors.

Dobbin and Kalev (2013) did extensive research on the various diversity programs implemented by

corporations to see their effects and found that allowing the engagement of managers in promoting

diversity leads to good results. Organizations which make managers involved in the integration have seen

positive returns, with policies ranging from appointing a diversity manager to forming whole task forces.

Additionally, Avery and McKay’s (2006) study finds that recruitment strategies regarding diversity,

including sponsorships and messages promoting diversity, have a tendency to attract minority groups
more. These groups are then more likely to be influenced and apply for jobs in corporations employing

the strategies. Conversely, some approaches have not been as successful, which demands serious

consideration from institutions planning to implement them. Training programs to educate managers to

eliminate their biases have not seen success (Dobbin & Kalev, 2013), and recruitment practices may leave

out certain minority groups (Avery et al., 2013). Therefore, it is important to consider derived experiences

from previous attempts at promoting diversity to choose the best course of action, and even then it is

difficult to predict the outcome given the variability. This subsequent portion of the essay now explores a

general framework for integrating diversity into a community. First, a community should aim to be open

and should include people of all differences. Alluding to the previous research on homogeneity and

heterogeneity (Blau, 1977), it is apparent that while a closed community of similar people can be

adequate, by introducing more people with various backgrounds, we break the homogeneous state of the

community and bring about a more diverse environment which boosts interaction and creativity. It is also

an opportunity for participants of the community to acquire an open worldview, helping them in not only

the social life within their spheres but also outside of it, and this positive outlook may even carry into

other facets of their lives such as work. Second, it is important to acknowledge that in a community

everyone is unique. Obviously, in a diverse community, there are certain attributes that people are visibly

different in, including race and gender; however, it is essential to take the underlying variables into

consideration the underlying variables, which include education, personal values, financial backgrounds,

and more. This means that while it may be a good idea to maintain equality in a homogeneous group,

equity should be a higher priority when diversity is concerned. Instead of giving everyone the same

treatments and giving them the same choices, which some may be able to fully utilize while others may

find difficulty, each person should be catered to uniquely so that the community as a whole can thrive.

This is best seen in education, where teachers should adjust their teaching to ensure students of different

ethnicities and learning abilities all achieve academic success. The practice is referred to as culturally

responsive teaching (Gay, 2013) and has been explored and deployed successfully. Additionally,

community leaders, besides creating inclusive environments, should also allow those who are in a said
environment to learn and explore the diversity within it. More specifically, they should design programs

to give community members the chance to interact outside of their previously homogenized groups,

therefore defragmenting and slowly integrating diversity into the community. The University of Michigan

hosts the Intergroup Relations Program, which is a curricular program for first-year college students to

engage in democratic activities and dialogues, teaching them to be aware and accepting of differences and

to further understand the importance of collaboration and conflict (Gurin et al., 2004). These are but mere

general guidelines for creating and maintaining a diverse community; further examination and

experimentation are recommended for highly specialized sectors, such as science and media.

Conclusively, this paper has explored what diversity means and what constitutes it, namely the

ideas of difference along many dimensions. It has also explained the mechanisms and theory behind

diversity to highlight its cultural significance in the modern era, and subsequently given a guideline to

promote diversity. Consequently, this raises questions of how leaders will manage to implement these

approaches in their organizations to see the most significant benefits. This question becomes more urgent

as the development of the Internet further accelerates cultural divergence around the world. It is therefore

important for people to be equipped with knowledge about diversity, and to embrace differences in and

out of their lives. Perhaps to advance diversity, it is best to gradually make the building blocks towards a

completely heterogeneous society.