An Interview with Michàlle E. Mor Barak
By Judi Casey and Karen Corday
Casey: What do you mean by the term “inclusive workplace?”
Mor Barak: The concept is based on the idea that work organizations must create and sustain a culture that is accepting of individual differences. It refers to a work organization that respects and utilizes the diversity of its own workforce while also being active in the community, in state and federal programs that support disadvantaged populations, and collaborating fairly across cultural and national boundaries.
Casey: So you’re looking inside as well as outside of the organization.
Mor Barak: Exactly. The major contribution that I’m hoping to make with the Inclusive Workplace Model is for organizations realize that their constituents are not only their employees and their customers, but also the communities in which they live.
Casey: But it’s not only the communities in which they live, but also the communities with which they interact throughout the world?
Mor Barak: Yes. That interaction could be either through the business operations, which means the subsidiaries or subcontractors of the work organization in other countries, or through potential customers who reside overseas. It stems from the understanding that we all operate globally now. Locally means globally.
Casey: Can you talk about the four levels of the inclusive workplace?
Mor Barak: At the first level, the organization has to value and utilize individual and inter-group differences within its workforce. In order to accommodate these differences, the organization needs to conduct assessment, training, and interventions that will change the organizational culture. For example, the restaurant chain Denny’s was the target of several lawsuits regarding discriminatory treatment of their customers. Since then, the company has done a tremendous job in changing its organizational culture to enhance and accommodate the diversity of its own workforce. In addition, they’ve worked with their employees to change their attitudes toward customers from diverse backgrounds. It’s all linked; that’s the core idea of the inclusive workplace.
Casey: Would you say that at the core, there’s a respect for diversity that builds and moves from the employees to the customers to the local community to the global community?
Mor Barak: You just said it perfectly. At the second level, the organization contributes to the surrounding community in which the organization resides. For example, Shell, the oil company, created a youth academy with several locations around the country where they prepare young people between the ages of 14 and 18 for the world of work. They teach work-related behaviors such as being on time and understanding the work environment and how to operate within it. Level two of my Inclusive Workplace Model includes any type of activity or project that benefits the local community. Another example for a level two activity is the University of Southern California’s Neighborhood Fund that provides support to projects in the local community such as a family counseling clinic and both financial and volunteer students’ support to local elementary schools.
Casey: So it’s really about community building?
Mor Barak: Yes, that’s right. At the third level of the Inclusive Workplace Model, the organization works to improve the lives of disadvantaged groups in the wider environment. The people they help may not necessarily reside in the geographic vicinity of the organization. For example, the Marriott hotel chain’s Welfare-to-Work program helps people who’ve been on welfare find jobs; Marriott trains them to work in their hotels and then hires graduates of the program.
At the fourth and final level of the Inclusive Workplace Model, the organization collaborates fairly with individuals, groups, and organizations across national and cultural boundaries. Here we examine the unfortunate behaviors that some companies exhibit overseas in which they exploit the local workforce and deplete community resources. Organizations that are inclusive will avoid these practices, contribute to the community and help communities grow while fostering true partnerships with the local residents. The Body Shop, for example, makes efforts not to exploit the natural resources and labor of the communities from which they get their products; instead, they give back to these communities by contributing to the development of beneficial community services.
All of this may sound too idealistic and costly, but in my book I provide research demonstrating that when corporations adopt these practices, they actually benefit greatly in many areas. For example, they increase their ability to attract a socially conscious workforce; typically, the highly sought-after employees are those who want a work environment that is supportive of diversity and respectful of other cultures and the environment. Another benefit of inclusive practices is the improvement of corporate image; again, there’s research that shows that improved corporate image can affect several financial dimensions, including stock prices. When investors realize that the company is socially conscious, the company becomes more attractive and they are more likely to support it. This support comes not only from idealistic reasons but from realistic ones too: a company that implements inclusive practices is more likely to avoid costly lawsuits. There’s a whole array of benefits that come from doing the right thing, and these benefits positively affect the company’s bottom line.
Casey: Why is your focus on a “globally” inclusive workplace?
Mor Barak: In the book, I examine how demographic, legislative, and public policy trends all over the world converge to make global diversity a local issue. I think this is well-demonstrated by population projections that impact this trend. On the one hand, developed regions of the world, such as North America and Western Europe, are experiencing low birth rates, decreasing cohorts of young people, and declining ratios of workers to retirees (fewer workers supporting increasing numbers of retirees). In order to sustain their current levels of economic activities, these countries need to import immigrants to work. On the other hand, developing regions of the world are experiencing a completely opposite trend, with unprecedented growth in the number of young people due to high birth rates, improved medical conditions, and decreased infant mortality. This creates very large cohorts of young people who are looking for jobs. These countries cannot support such large numbers of young job seekers, so they need to emigrate in order to find jobs for themselves and to support their families.
Case in point for the developed countries: Italy’s population is currently around 57 million. It is projected to decrease to about 41 million by the year 2050 because of low birth rates. In order to sustain its current economic activities, Italy will need to bring in about 350,000 immigrants yearly. We see similar trends in Germany, Belgium, and France—they are all likely to experience population declines if they don’t continue to accept immigrants. An example of the situation in developing countries is Mexico: every year, the same number of people reaches adulthood in Mexico as in the United States, but the Mexican economy is one-tenth the size of the United States’ economy. Obviously, these young people must look for jobs outside of their country.
So, if you put together these two trends—the push from the developing countries and the pull from the developed countries—you can see that the workforce is becoming increasingly diverse all over the world. In addition, advances in equal rights legislation around the world now force work organizations to be more accommodating of workers who have traditionally been excluded from the workforce, such as older adults, people with disabilities, and women, thus forcing companies to be more diverse.
Casey: How can the word “diversity” be defined in a way that’s meaningful to people?
Mor Barak: I struggled with this very question when I started my international research into diversity. I realized that the ways in which we define diversity in the United States, which is where most of this research comes from, do not travel well across national boundaries. The problem is that the research lags behind the new realities that make diversity global. To address this question, I contacted several colleagues in other countries and created a think tank or research collaboration. We talked about diversity, and all came to the same conclusion: the term “diversity” does not translate well across cultural and linguistic boundaries. For example, the people from Mexico and China both said that if you translate the word to their languages, the concept would be meaningless. My realization was that I had to define the word operationally, by examining how diversity categories are created in different countries and then analyzing the outcomes of belonging to such groups.
The definition that I came up with for workforce diversity in a global context has two parts. The first part refers to the division of the workforce into distinct categories that have a perceived commonality within a given culture or national context. This means that I may define diversity differently in different cultures. For example, in the United States “diversity” might refer to the racial/ethnic categories that have been used by the Census Bureau for many years such as Asian, African-American, Latino and so forth. In Ireland, on the other hand, the significant diversity categories are religious—whether one is Catholic or Protestant. In India, any discussion of diversity would have to include the societal division into castes. Whatever distinct categories you use to define diversity, they must have meaning within the specific national and cultural context.
The second part of my global diversity definition comes after you have established the specific categories that are meaningful within a specific context. You now examine the consequences of belonging to these groups. Belonging to one of these groups would have a potentially harmful impact on employment outcomes such as limiting job opportunities, discriminatory treatment in the workplace, and limited promotion prospects. For example, the fact that a person is defined as African-American could mean that they might be discriminated against; this makes “African-American” a diversity grouping. It is important to note that benign differences such as hair color, hobbies or food preferences do not form diversity categories. If, for example, I have blue eyes and you have brown eyes and these facts have no meaning or impact on employment, I did not consider them diversity categories. Once you define diversity in this way, it can be applied to different cultures and national contexts, using the same definition that is applicable to many situations.
Casey: What are the drivers and challenges of diversity management? How do organizations benefit by being more inclusive?
Mor Barak: There are three drivers for implementing diversity management. The first one is about doing the right and moral thing; this is an especially important value in democratic countries where we believe in equality and in treating people fairly. The second is the need to adapt to the new reality of the workforce; it’s becoming increasingly diverse, and this reality cannot be overlooked. It is here to stay. The third is gaining a competitive advantage; in order to do so, you must effectively manage the diversity of the workforce.
The emphasis on the business advantages of diversity management is a good motivator for companies to enact diversity programs, but this does not mean that the moral and ethical considerations can be overlooked. Diversity management must keep a dual focus on both enhancing profitability and fostering social justice. If you focus on just one of these, you’ll not be able to sustain the efforts needed for diversity management over time.
Casey: What’s the link between a globally inclusive workplace and work/life or work-family studies?
Mor Barak: The increasingly diverse workforce brings to the workplace a wide variety of family arrangements and family needs. If you take it to the next level and add the global aspect, the implications for work organizations are profound. When companies send employees on overseas assignments, they don’t prepare the family for the culture shock. Most overseas assignments are cut short because of family reasons – primarily difficulties in adjustment.
Consider the migrant workers who leave their families behind to take on, in most cases, low-paying jobs in our country and in other developed countries. How do they cope with the separation from their loved ones? How does it affect their emotional health and productivity? How does it affect the families that are left behind? These are important questions that effect work/life and work-family studies.
The balance between work and family responsibilities can be very distinctive in different societies. For example, during the literature review for my book, I found information that in Scandinavian countries, fathers often take time off from work to care for young or sick children. In contrast, in the U.S., fathers often do not take leave, even when they are offered the opportunity to do so. Typically, they are concerned that they would not be considered loyal employees or that the job will not be waiting for them upon their return. In many countries, child care is the sole responsibility of mothers. If you look at Japan or South Korea, the traditional cultural expectations still anticipate that women leave the workforce once they have children and devote themselves full time to taking care of their children. I did some interviews in South Korea and discovered that managers there are less likely to devote time and resources to training young women for supervision or management positions. They assume that as soon as these women get married and have children, they will leave the workforce altogether.
Casey: Is there any particular research that you think would help move us forward?
Mor Barak: If you think about human resource management in this country, we need to develop an understanding and sensitivity to the impact of globalization on work-life balance. Accommodating the work-life needs of the global workforce is the most important challenge we face as researchers and as managers in the 21st century. That’s what I’m focusing on in my research now. I think that it would be particularly interesting to examine the rapidly changing family structures and arrangements in different countries and the reciprocity between these changes. What are the different ways that people cope with the challenges of the global economy? If you look at call centers in India, these call centers may relieve U.S. workers from night shifts, but they also take away jobs from U.S. workers. Then, in terms of the families in India, the people who staff those centers are typically young, highly educated people. As a result, they earn more money than their parents. This threatens the traditional cultural structure where the parents have the authority within the family. Because call center employees work in American companies, adopt American accents, and are more exposed to American cultures, they are now different from their families and communities. The question is: what is the impact on the family structure and the community? Another example comes from China. People employed in the economic development zone have to travel into these zones and relocate, but often they can’t bring their families, so they are separated from them. Can we learn from the ways that they cope with this separation and apply it to Mexican immigrants, who are often young people who travel to the U.S. alone, and the ways in which they cope and create alternative family structures? I think it could enrich our understanding of work/life balance.
Casey: It certainly broadens us to think beyond professional, high-earning employees.
Mor Barak: Exactly. I think it will help us think of work-family balance among people who don’t earn those big salaries, in this country as well as abroad.
Casey: What’s the takeaway for state public policy makers?
Mor Barak: One of the things I allude to in the book is the fact that although diversity management has become a popular concept in recent years, without the foundation of legislation and sound, pro-active public policy, this trend may be transient. Many businesses today have come to realize that managing diversity effectively is good business, but sustaining these efforts over time may become costly. Without the support and encouragement of public policy makers, corporations may be disinclined to extend those efforts for the duration. Left to their own devices, some companies may opt out, and it’s up to public policy makers to keep the emphasis of diversity management on the values of fairness, ethics, and morals, not only on the bottom line. Employers need to develop a broader vision of inclusion that goes beyond diversity management, and policy makers play a key role in supporting business in these endeavors as well as advocating for individuals and communities that could benefit from these policies.
Casey: What can workplace practitioners do to help make their organizations more inclusive?
Mor Barak: They can start with an assessment of their employees and the company’s culture. In the book, I discuss two measures that I’ve developed: the scale of inclusion and exclusion, and the scale of diversity perception. These tools can be used to form an organizational diagnosis and to determine what areas are lacking and what should be done to make the workplace more inclusive. You must tailor changes and initiatives to the culture and needs of the organization. In terms of work-family initiatives, you must target not only group that belong to the mainstream in the organization, but also the employees who come from different cultures and bring with them different family care and child-rearing practices. One example is a woman I interviewed of Chinese origin, who asked for a special leave from her job to take care of her mother in Hong Kong. When she talked to her supervisor, the well-meaning supervisor asked her, “Don’t you have siblings living in Hong Kong?” When she answered that she did, the supervisor replied, “Why do you have to go? Can’t your siblings take care of your mother?” The woman tried to explain that she felt that her familial obligation was to be with her mother, regardless of whether her practical needs were taken care of by someone else. Such gaps in cultural understanding are important to address.
To contact Michàlle, please e-mail morbarak@usc.edu.
See also Graphic: Foreign Born as a Percentage of the Total Population of Selected Countries and Additional Resources Related to Managing Diversity
|
{literal}
{/literal}
New from the