This is
a brief essay on race, gender, and spirituality and the role each plays in
today’s workforce. Race and gender
comprise the physical makeup of a person.
It is these two aspects of one’s personal being that people are often
judged by or perceived. A person’s
spirituality speaks to the core of one self.
It speaks to who that person is on the inside. What are their core beliefs? What is their personal value system? What are their non-negotiables? The personality of a person is often a
reflection of their spirituality. Race,
gender, and spirituality are key aspects of one’s life. These three aspects make for very “touchy”
and often combative discourse when dealing with socio-economic status,
perception, stereotypes, biases, and most importantly job status and career
growth opportunities.
First, I will discuss how race plays
a major role in the workplace today. I
will pontificate on how racial discrimination is prevalent not only in today’s
society, but in corporate America as well.
Secondly, I will also show how gender and culture play a key role in the
selection and appraisement process of business leaders today. Thirdly, I will delve into the controversial
topic of spirituality. I will offer
literature that debates the role that spirituality should or should not play in
today’s workplace. Lastly, I will
attempt to share with the reader strategies on how to use race, gender, and
spirituality to one’s advantage and how diversity among race, gender, and
spiritual beliefs can lead to productivity for any business or company.
It is my opinion that one’s race,
gender, and spiritual beliefs should play a role in the hiring process in order
to create a diverse and culturally aware staff.
However, this is often not the case. Employers often use race, gender
and spirituality to shape the company in their own image, enhance and tighten
their own power structure, and discriminate against those who don’t “fit the
mold” of their desired company model.
The perception that racial
discrimination exists in the workplace is prevalent. It is a controversial subject that warrants
investigation, and discussion. However,
it is very difficult to prove that one has been discriminated against at their
job simply because of their race. “One
of the most difficult aspects of racial discrimination at work is that it can
often take place entirely undetected.
After all, unless an employer specifically admits otherwise, who can say
for sure why they made a particular decision to hire a certain individual or
gave another a promotion?” (Findlaw.com, p. 1, 2013)
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964 defines racial discrimination in the workplace as:
·
Failing
or refusing to hire an employee based on their race
·
Firing
or disciplining an employee because of their race
·
Paying
an employee less or providing them fewer benefits on account of their race
·
Failing
to provide benefits, promotions, or opportunities, to an employee because of
their race
·
Improperly
classifying or segregating employees or applicants by race.
These laws are well written and clearly
stated. Once again, how does one go
about proving that these laws were broken when it comes to being reprimanded at
the job, getting passed over for a promotion, not being hired for a certain
position, or being fired from the one an employee currently holds? The only way one can completely guard against
these unfair practices is to create a cultural awareness among employers. This type of staff development has already
begun to take root in many businesses.
“Many project managers have begun implementing a variety of initiatives
that foster increased diversity awareness among team members in hopes of
improving team effectiveness and overall success.” (Plowman, 2013, p. 1)
The subject of gender discrimination
in comparison to racial discrimination in the workplace is
just as convoluted
and hard to prove, yet just as real. In
discussing gender discrimination, I want to talk about leadership, and the
influence that gender identification has on leadership in the workplace. Leadership has often been presented as a
phenomenon that is primarily gender and culture neutral. (Ayman & Korabik,
2010) The United States has become a very diverse nation. Today’s workforce is reflective of that. It is imperative to have a staff that is
diverse and representative of its consumers and the culture in which it
exists. “Kluckhon’s (1951) definition
that culture is an acquired and transmitted pattern of shared meaning, feeling,
and behavior that constitutes a distinctive human group.” (Ayman & Korabik,
2010, p. 158)
In addition, culture has been
defined as: “visible and invisible
characteristics that may influence leadership.
Their categories of culture include demographic characteristics (e.g.,
place of residence and physical gender), status characteristics (e.g., economic
and educational variables), ethnographic characteristics (e.g., nationality,
ethnicity, and language), and affiliations.” (Ayman & Korabik, 2010, p.
158) As you can see, according to these
definitions, gender plays a major role in one’s culture.
The belief that leadership is culture and
gender neutral has caused these two demographic characteristics to be omitted
in several studies conducted on the development of leaders and leadership in
the workplace. Ayman and Korabik argue
that any study conducted on leadership should include culture and gender as key
variables. In studying the “Implicit
leadership theory,” it is easy to establish that women are facing
discrimination when it comes to obtaining leadership positions, especially when
in those leadership positions exist in stereotypically male dominated fields.
“The image of a leader is strongly associated
with men and masculinity. Research shows
that this stereotyped image develops as early as kindergarten. Girls and women are not as likely to hold
this masculine image of a leader as are boys and men. By and large, the fact that these stereotypes
exist is detrimental to women’s ascent into leadership positions. (Ayman &
Korabik, 2010, p. 161) This is why theory building in leadership is key, and
gender and culture are two variables that should become staples of any future
leadership theory practice.
Discussing the role that race and
gender play in today’s workforce can be uncomfortable for many. The role spirituality should or should not
have in businesses and corporations today often stoke even more discourse than
that of the aforementioned variables. Spirituality
at work (SAW) is often described as a good thing, something that fosters
individual freedom, and connectivity on oneself. However, the subjectivity of this concept
makes it susceptible to leader interpretations and abuse. “SAW can become yet another attempt to
establish monocultural workplace environments, in which employee dissent is
demonized as the sinful antithesis of pure spiritual values, to which only
morally deficient individuals could object, and which organizational leaders
are uniquely qualified to articulate.” (Tourish & Tourish, 2010, p. 209)
This in turn would effectively create more
managerial power rather than establish employee freedom and individual expression. The pressure to conform to the culture that
has been set in place by one’s leader or manager is immense. With the market being the way it is today,
job security is at a premium. Employers
know this and prey on that harsh reality.
This is just one example of many as to why the argument exist that work
and spirituality should be separate. In
this instance I tend to agree. However,
I do feel there is a place for individual spirituality at work. There should not be some overriding set of
spiritual ideals that one must conform to in order to avoid being ostracized by
the masses. One should be permitted to
express their beliefs individually, so long as it does not inhibit productivity
and do irrevocable harm to the overall brand of the company.
Once
again, I am of the opinion that one’s race, gender, and spiritual beliefs
should play a role in the hiring process in order to create staff that is
diverse, culturally, and able to meet the needs of its consumers. Discrimination on any level is deplorable and
has proven to be counterproductive. In
conclusion, utilizing leadership-training methods that promote cultural
awareness could help to eradicate employer’s use of race, gender and
spirituality to shape companies to their individual liking and help loosen the
discriminatory power structure that is so prevalent today. Included is a short video that will help
illustrate the points that were made in this essay.
Ayman,
R., & Korabik, K. (2010). Why gender and culture matter.
American
Psychologist, 65(3), 157-170
doi:
10.1073/a0018806
Plowman,
N. (2013). Cultivating diversity awareness in successful project teams.
Retrieved from
http://brighthubpm.com/resource-management/60216-the-importance-of-diversity-awareness-in-successful-project-teams/
Racial
discrimination in the workplace. (2013).
Retrieved from
http://employment.findlaw.com/employment-discrimination/racial-discrimination-in-the-workplace.html
Tourish,
D., & Tourish, N. (2010). Spirituality at work, and its implications for
leadership
and followership: a post-structural perspective.
Leadership, 207(6), 207-224
doi:
10.1177/1742715010363210
No comments:
Post a Comment