The Role of Authentic Leadership in Fostering Workplace Inclusion: A Social Information Processing Perspective

• Date: 01 March 2015
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21669
• Published date: 01 March 2015
• Author: Janet A. Boekhorst

Human Resource Management, March–April 2015, Vol. 54, No. 2. Pp. 241–264

© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com).

DOI:10.1002/hrm.21669

Correspondence to: Janet A. Boekhorst, School of Human Resource Management, York University, 4700 Keele

Street, Toronto, Canada M3J 1P3, Phone: 416-736-2100 ext. 33672, Fax: 416-736-5188, E-mail: janetb@yorku.ca.

THE ROLE OF AUTHENTIC

LEADERSHIP IN FOSTERING

WORKPLACE INCLUSION:

A SOCIAL INFORMATION

PROCESSING PERSPECTIVE

JANET A. BOEKHORST

The extant literature has largely overlooked the importance of a climate for

inclusion as a response to the growing trend of workplace diversity. This

conceptual article contends that an organization-wide change effort compris-

ing several reinforcing processes aimed at creating a climate for inclusion is

needed to institutionalize workplace inclusion. Drawing on social information

processing theory, authentic leaders are posited to transmit social informa-

tion about the importance of inclusion into the work environment through

inclusive leader role modeling. Reward systems that remunerate inclusive

conduct can foster the vicarious learning of inclusive conduct by followers.

Large and diverse workgroups offer a plethora of opportunities for followers

to learn how to behave in an inclusive manner. Authentic leaders and follow-

ers who share cooperative goals related to developing a climate for inclu-

sion can prompt the vicarious learning of inclusive behaviors by followers,

thereby facilitating goal attainment for both parties. Theoretical and practical

implications are discussed. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Keywords: social information processing theory, climate for inclusion, in-

tegration-and-learning, authentic leadership, reward systems, group com-

position, group size, goal interdependence

Introduction

Organizations are experiencing a

prominent trend of an increas-

ingly diverse workforce, thereby

underscoring the earnest need for

leaders to effectively attend to the

changing nature of the workplace (Chavez &

Weisinger, 2008; Lirio, Lee, Williams, Haugen,

& Kossek, 2008; McKay, Avery, & Morris,

2009; Pless & Maak, 2004; Sanchez-Burks,

Bartel, & Blount, 2009; Scott, Heathcote, &

Gruman, 2011). Through a review of the di-

versity literature, Shore etal. (2009) conclude

that, until recently, researchers have largely

examined diversity from the perspective

242 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, MARCH–APRIL 2015

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

This article presents

a conceptual model

that explains why

authentic leaders

are a key source of

social information

that can significantly

influence the

formation of a

climate for inclusion.

Building upon these dominant themes of

inclusion and in line with the general con-

ceptualization of work climate (e.g., Reichers

& Schneider, 1990; Schneider, 1990), the

term climate for inclusion is defined as the

shared perception of the work environment

including the practices, policies, and proce-

dures that guide a shared understanding that

inclusive behaviors, which foster belong-

ingness and uniqueness, are expected, sup-

ported, and rewarded. This article seeks to

understand how inclusion can be institu-

tionalized in the work environment by draw-

ing on social information processing theory

as an overarching theoretical framework

(Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). More specifically,

the integration-and-learning paradigm (Ely &

Thomas, 2001; Thomas & Ely, 1996) is offered

as a prelude to the following discussion. This

paradigm posits that when organizations sin-

cerely value and embrace diversity by linking

it to work processes, tasks, and strategies, the

result is a significant improvement in terms

of group functioning (Ely & Thomas, 2001;

Thomas & Ely, 1996). However, employees

will only apply their individual differences

if they feel comfortable in the workplace. In

support, Tulenko and Kryder (1990) found

that employees must feel comfortable in order

to be creative, which undoubtedly involves

the application of individual differences.

Moreover, employees from underrepresented

groups often experience discrimination,

exclusion, and marginalization (Goldman,

Gutek, Stein, & Lewis, 2006). These feelings

tend to have a direct negative influence on

their desire and capacity to contribute to the

organization (L. Roberson & Block, 2001).

Henceforth, a climate for inclusion, which

engenders a sense of belongingness and

uniqueness, provides the comfort needed for

employees to apply their individual differ-

ences to work processes, strategies, and tasks.

It is therefore imperative to understand how a

climate for inclusion can be institutionalized.

This article presents a conceptual model

that explains why authentic leaders are a key

source of social information that can signifi-

cantly influence the formation of a climate

for inclusion. Authentic leaders can help their

followers understand the value of individual

of a single facet, including race, ethnicity,

and gender. Often this research has been

grounded in its originating paradigms that

center mostly on the problems, such as biases

and discrimination, associated with diversity

(Shore et al., 2009). However, recently this

area of research has focused on examining

the value inherent in diversity and workplace

inclusion (Bilimoria, Joy, & Liang, 2008;

Nishii, 2013; Q. M. Roberson, 2006).

More specifically, there has been a grow-

ing interest toward examining how nontradi-

tional internal processes can foster workplace

inclusion (Shore et al., 2011). For instance,

Wasserman, Gallegos, and Ferdman (2008)

assert that leaders are instrumental in cham-

pioning inclusion initiatives.

Instead of silencing resistance

to inclusion initiatives, lead-

ers must engage with such resis-

tance to support the vision of an

inclusive workplace (Wasserman

et al., 2008). Indeed, inclusion is

a nascent construct that is con-

ceptually and empirically distinct

from diversity (Shore etal., 2011).

Broadly speaking, inclusion refers

to employee involvement and

the integration of diversity into

organizational systems and pro-

cesses, whereas diversity refers to

the variability in the composition

of a work group (Q. M. Roberson,

2006). Although several concep-

tualizations of inclusion have

been proposed in the literature (e.g., Lirio

etal., 2008; Q. M. Roberson, 2006), two gen-

eral themes of belongingness and unique-

ness emerge from these definitions (Shore

etal., 2011). The belongingness theme reflects

a sense of acceptance for all organizational

members, whereas the uniqueness theme

implies that the contributions of all employ-

ees are valued whereby each member experi-

ences respect and the opportunity for voice

in the workplace. The commonalties across

these definitions suggest that we need to

begin understanding how this type of work

climate can be fostered to provide all employ-

ees the opportunity to experience a sense of

belongingness and uniqueness.