Valuing and value in diversity: the policy‐implementation gap in an IT firm

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12110
• Published date: 01 July 2016
• Date: 01 July 2016

Valuing and value in diversity: the policy-

implementation gap in an IT firm

Gill Kirton, MaxineRobertson and Nicole Avdelidou-Fischer,Centre for Research in

Equalityand Diversity, Schoolof Business and Management,Queen Mary Universityof

London

Human Resource Management Journal, Vol 26,no 3, 2016, pages 321–336

The focusof UK-based researchon diversity theory anddiversity managers hasled to a relative dearth ofstudies

focusingon the critical issue of line managers’agency in policyimplementation.This article providesa context-

sensitive organisational case study of the policy-implementation gap in the UK base of one multinational IT

company.The article exploresmale and female managers’perspectives on valuingdiversity at a level ofgeneral

abstraction,and the extent to which they seevalue in diversity for the effectiveness of their projectteams. In the

context of a White, male-dominated industry, the case study shows how the gap is sustained rather than

bridged despitethe implementation of numerousdiversity initiatives.

Contact: Gill Kirton, Centre for Research in Equality and Diversity, School of Business and

Management, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. Email: g.kirton@qmul.ac.uk

Keywords: diversity; line managers; gender; teamworking; IT sector

INTRODUCTION

The overarching focusof UK-based researchon diversitytheory and diversity managers

(e.g. Kirton et al.,2007; Noon, 2007; Ozbilgin and Tatli,2011; Tatli, 2011) leaves a gap in

our understanding about diversity policy implementation, and specifically about

managerial agency (exceptions include Cornelius et al., 2001; Foster and Harris, 2005; and

Greene and Kirton, 2009). The considerable challenges of getting employers (especially in the

private sector)and line managers on board with diversityresearch, especially of the casestudy

type, are acknowledged (CIPD, 2005; Greene and Kirton, 2009). This in part explains the

relative dearth of empirical case studies compared with the exponential growth of the overall

body of diversityliterature since the mid-1980s (Oswickand Noon, 2014). Authors also caution

that only studyingorganisational policiesoveremphasises structuralchanges, whereas without

line-management ‘buy-in’, the business case for diversity cannot be operationalised or its

potential realised (Cornelius et al., 2001; Kossek et al., 2003; Foster and Harris, 2005; Noon,

2007; Greene and Kirton, 2009). Thus, exploringpractical aspects of management engagement

with corporate diversity agendas –the claimto value workforcediversity and to see (business)

value in workforce diversity –is critical to understanding this policy-implementation gap.

Our contribution is to provide a context-sensitive organisational case study of the UK

operation of one multinational IT company. Diversity in the IT sector is worthy of close

examination not least because of the size of the industry, its importance to the economy and

ongoing significant under-representation of diverse groups in middle/senior roles. Our case

study situates managerial diversity engagement in context of managers’everyday work and

challenges.We identify managerial agency as a key explanationfor the policy-implementation

gap. However, wealso recognise thatimplementing the corporate diversityagenda is a complex

project involving multiple stakeholders and their buy-in (Greene and Kirton, 2009). Echoing

Kulik (2014: 138), we agree that both academics and practitioners in the diversity community

need to know what organisations aredoing in terms of policy formulation/structural initiatives,

HUMAN RESOURCEMANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL26, NO 3, 2016 321

©2016 John Wiley& Sons Ltd

Pleasecite this articlein press as: Kirton,G., Robertson, M.and Avdelidou-Fischer,N. (2016)‘Valuing and value in diversity:the policy-implementation

gapinanITfirm’.HumanResource ManagementJournal 26: 3, 321–336

doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12110

bs_bs_banner

which we address here. In addition, we argue that we also need to know what managers are

thinkingabout these policiesand doing in terms of implementation, whichwas the focus of this

research.

Argument andevidence of the business case fordiversity is summarised next,concentrating

on the purported team diversity–performance link and managers’role in policy

implementation.There follows a brief outline of diversity in the IT sector, followed by research

methods. In the findings, we describe the company’s diversity management system (diversity

paradigm, policies, initiatives, practices and climate) (c.f. Kulik, 2014), against which we

explore male and female managers’perspectives on valuing diversity at a level of general

abstraction, and the extent to which they see value in diversity for the effectiveness of their

own teams (Cox and Blake, 1991).

THE BUSINESS CASEFOR DIVERSITY: ARGUMENT AND EVIDENCE

The business case fordiversity has been widely critiqued(e.g. Lorbiecki and Jack, 2000; Noon,

2007). However, scholarsargue that the business case appearsto be more appealing than social

justice arguments, not just to CEOs and main board directors but also to line managers

(Cornelius et al., 2001; Noon, 2007; Kirton, 2008). Theoretically, organisations can leverage the

purported value in diversity via (i) taking advantage of diversity in the labour market; (ii)

maximising employee potential; (iii) managing across borders and cultures; and (iv) creating

business opportunities and enhancing innovation and creativity (Cornelius et al., 2001). Much

recent literatureempirically examines the value-in-diversity thesis at the level of organisational

performance, frequently positing, but not conclusively proving, the diversity–creativity and

innovation link (Armstrong et al., 2010; Bridgstock et al., 2010; Lee and Nathan, 2010).

North American management scholars in particular have investigated the performance

effects of diversity specifically at the workgroup/team level. This discussion is particularly

apposite for the IT sector because work is organised in teams. Team members will possess a

variety of skills, and there are high interdependencies, so successful outcomes depend upon

team cohesiveness.Cox and Blake (1991) proposed three general benefits of diverse teams: (i)

improved decision-making; (ii) enhanced creativity and innovation; and (iii) more effective

problem-solving. Nevertheless, two of the most widely cited articles on this differ in their

conclusions. Some studies show that heterogeneous teams outperform homogeneous ones,

while others indicate that diversity may not have any beneficial or meaningful effects. Some

studies find a positive race and/orgender diversity effect on working relationships, and others

find more supportive peer relations in homogeneous teams (higher trust, empathy and

reciprocity) (Milliken and Martins, 1998; Kochan et al., 2003). Few studies are located in the

IT sector, but it is argued that teamwork focused on knowledge-intensive activity (such as in

the IT sector) is most likely to benefit from diversity (Lee and Nathan, 2010).

Because managers select and manage team members, the realisation of any potential

diversity benefits at team level is arguably dependent on managerial participation in the

corporate valuing diversity agenda. Indeed, managers are encouraged in diversity discourse

to take ‘ownership’ofdiversity,and it is clear that managersshould expect to play a crucial role

in policy implementation (Noon,2007; Kirton, 2008). Yet, experientially the benefitsof diversity

are difficult to observe and measure; thus, the business case is a ‘hard sell’(Kulik, 2014). It is

only in specific circumstances where diversity (e.g. cultural and linguistic) is necessary for

effective service delivery that managers seemingly seek and value diversity (Janssens and

Zanoni, 2005). Line managers’failure to engage is invoked to explain why the laudable

aspiration of diversity policies (to value diversity) is frequently not realised in practice

Valuing andvalue in diversity

322 HUMANRESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL,VOL 26, NO 3, 2016

©2016 John Wiley& Sons Ltd.