Diversity Training Programme Outcomes: A Systematic Review

• Published date: 01 March 2016
• Author: Thomas Garavan,Fergal O'Brien,David McGuire,Ronan Carbery,Hussain Alhejji
• Date: 01 March 2016
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21221

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY, vol. 27, no. 1, Spring 2016 © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.21221 95

LITERATURE REVIEW

Diversity Training Programme

Outcomes: A Systematic Review

Hussain Alhejji, Thomas Garavan, Ronan Carbery,

FergalO’Brien, David McGuire

This article analyzes the scholarship on diversity-training outcomes

utilizing a systematic literature review (SLR) and provide insights for

future research. The article advances our understanding of diversity-

training outcomes through the integration of three perspectives: the

business case, learning, and social justice perspectives. The SLR revealed:

(a) a literature that is fragmented and diverse in terms of publication

outlets; (b) researchers conduct diversity-training outcomes research in a

diverse range or organizations, sectors, cultural and training contexts; (c)

studies primarily refl ect the business case or learning perspectives; and

(d) existing studies have signifi cant methodological limitations. We argue

the need for future research to adopt multiple perspectives ensure better

cross-fertilization of perspectives and make use of more sophisticated

methodologies.

Key Words: diversity training in organizations, theory, methodology,

business, social justice, learning perspectives

Introduction

More diverse workforces underscoring the need for organizations to invest

in diversity training (Boekhorst, 2015; Brooks & Clunis, 2007; Curtis &

Dreachslin, 2008). Diversity training has gained signifi cant international cur-

rency among HRD researchers and learning and development practitioners

(Qin, Muenjohn, & Chhetri, 2013; Schmidt, Githens, Rocco, & Kormanik,

2012). Conceptually diversity training is defi ned as “a distinct set of programs

aimed at facilitating positive inter-group interactions, reducing prejudice and

discrimination and enhancing the skills, knowledge and motivation of people

96 Alhejji, Garavan, Carbery, O’Brien, McGuire

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq

to interact with diverse others” (Bezrukova, Jehn, & Spell, 2012, p. 208).

Esen (2005) estimated that 67% of U.S. organizations and 74% of Fortune

500 companies invest in diversity-training programs. The Chartered Institute

of Personnel and Development (CIPD, 2010) found that four-fi fths of U.K.

organizations integrated diversity training into talent management processes.

Diversity training in these situations is a strategic issue underpinned by the

“business case” (Noon, 2007). There are many advocates and evangelists of

diversity training; however, notwithstanding the growth in research on how to

design and implement diversity training in organizations, the evidence of its

positive impact on organizational performance is far from conclusive (Anand

& Winters, 2008).

There are additional problematic issues with the existing research base.

First, existing studies often focus research diversity training within individual

organizations and single countries and derive their theoretical justifi cation

from an Anglo-Saxon perspective. There are diffi culties of translating these

models and concepts to non-Western contexts (Peretz, Levi, & Fried, 2015).

Second, it is diffi cult to draw conclusions about the outcomes of diversity

training given the variety of training designs utilized. Organizations utilize

multiple approaches, including classroom-based delivery, online, and blended

approaches (Kulik & Roberson, 2008) Differences in training design will inev-

itably lead to different impacts and potentially explain the inconsistency of

outcomes across studies and the lack of evidence at the organizational level.

Third, those who emphasize the need for performance outcomes draw

heavily on a business case (Noon, 2007). The business case may have rele-

vance to commercial organizations, where there is a focus on short-term prof-

its; however, in public-sector and not-for-profi t organizations, the rationale

for investment in diversity training will be signifi cantly different. In public-

sector and voluntary organizations, the focus may be on a social justice and/

or learning issues (Bond & Haynes, 2014). They emphasize outcomes such

as procedural fairness, equity, equal opportunity, compliance with legal regu-

lations, and enhanced individual and organizational learning. However, few

studies have investigated diversity-training outcomes using these perspectives.

Fourth, the measurement of the diversity-training outcomes is methodologi-

cally defi cient. Studies to date utilize different types of outcomes (Wang &

Wilcox, 2006), and they measure them in different ways. These differences

make the comparison of results diffi cult. Few studies utilize objective mea-

sures of outcomes.

Based on these problems, the aim of this article is to offer a broader set

of perspectives through which to more rigorously explore diversity-training

outcomes in a multiplicity of contexts, including different organizational

types, sectors, countries, and categories of employees. We seek to facilitate

dialogue across the theoretical perspectives (business, social justice, and

learning) and promote methodological approaches that link different levels

of outcome.

Diversity Training Programme Outcomes: A Systematic Review 97

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq

Overall, the article provides a more holistic set of perspectives to

facilitate understanding and interpretation of diversity-training outcomes.

We achieve this objective through conducting a systematic literature

review (SLR) of the literature on diversity-training outcomes. We included

only empirical studies that studied diversity training in organizational set-

tings that studied a diversity-training intervention rather than a bundle of

diversity practices and published during the period 1994–2014. Research

on diversity training outcomes is fragmented, disjointed, and of mixed

quality. Researchers have published in many different outlets, resulting

in a body of literature published in HRD, HRM, education, counseling,

psychology, nursing and health care, and organizational behavior jour-

nals. An SLR is suitable in the context of our overall objective due to its

replicable, transparent, and scientifi c methodology (Tranfi eld, Denyer, &

Smart, 2003).

The following research objectives guided this SLR:

1. In what contexts (country, organization, and type of training) are

diversity-training outcomes empirically investigated?

2. What theoretical perspectives and specifi c theories are used to investigate

diversity-training outcomes?

3. How are diversity-training outcomes investigated (i.e., methodology)?

4. What are the results of these investigations in terms of outcomes?

We conceptualized outcomes into three categories: learning outcomes,

which included individual-, team-, and organizational-level outcomes;

social justice outcome, which included equal opportunity, procedural fair-

ness, and attitudes toward diversity; and business impacts, which included

individual, team, and organizational performance outcomes. We begin this

article by summarizing the most important theoretical perspectives that help

us to understand the outcomes of organizational diversity training. Next,

we explain the method used for selecting and reviewing the literature, with

details of our search strategy, analysis, and assessment of the quality of the

studies selected for inclusion in the SLR. Then we present our fi ndings of the

SLR on empirical papers that have investigated diversity-training outcomes.

We conclude by offering suggestions for theory, methodology, and content

areas.

Understanding the Outcomes of Diversity Training:

Multiple Perspectives

Three theoretical perspectives have achieved prominence on the literature:

the business case (Noon, 2007), social justice (Tomlinson & Schwabenland,

2010), and learning (D. A. Thomas & Ely, 1996).