Do Diversity Programs Reduce Race Discrimination?

Not only is race discrimination still widely seen as a major problem in the U.S., a number of experts are criticizing some of the very programs developed to combat it.
In 1999, racial bias was again the most commonly alleged form of discrimination in the U.S., according to the number of charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. About 37% of all the EEOC charges asserted race discrimination, significantly higher than the next most common charge (31%) of sex discrimination. Since 1993, race discrimination charges as a percentage of all discrimination charges have remained fairly stable both as a percentage (between 34% and 37%) and as an overall number (between 91,000 and 77,000 charges per year).
Other data also reveal a continuing perception of discrimination in the U.S. A Fortune magazine nationwide survey of African Americans found that 81% said discrimination was common in their workplace, while just 13% viewed it as rare. And a recent Gallup survey found that 19% of black respondents said that they had been victims of workplace discrimination within the past month.
According to some observers, discrimination plays a role in keeping more minorities out of top corporate jobs. A recent article in HR Magazine notes that racial/ethnic minorities make up only about 3% of senior management in the U.S. To further break it down, Blacks and Hispanics make up under 2% of executive positions. "A few minority CEOs -- like at Maytag and American Express -- get exposure, and people think things are better. But in the trenches, it's a different ballgame," states George Gamble, director of the International Institute for Diversity and Cross-Cultural Management at the University of Houston.
Others, however, believe that there's been substantial progress in the decades since the U.S. enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Ted Childs, IBM's vice-president for global workforce diversity, is reported as saying, "When I joined IBM in 1967, we didn't have a lot of African- American managers or executives. If someone became a second-level manager out there, I'd hear about it. Now we've reached the point where I don't know all the African-American executives. That's an extraordinary example of progress."
Signs of progress -- or the lack thereof -- are often attributed to corporate diversity programs. Some skeptics believe that diversity programs, which tend to cover a broad range of employee differences, have lost the rigorous focus on race and ethnicity that was once the hallmark of affirmative-action initiatives. In wide-ranging diversity programs, race is "discounted," suggests Lisa Willis-Johnson, chair of the Society for Human Resource Management's Workplace Diversity Committee. She is quoted in HR Magazine: "Race was a sacrificial lamb to launch diversity and make it palliative to corporate America. Who is corporate America? White males. And they don't want to hear about race."
Nor do firms necessarily want to measure the results of these programs, suggest other critics. Although HR uses tools for measuring the effectiveness of various types of training, such tools are not consistently used in diversity programs. One reason for this may be that not all firms want to know whether such programs actually work. "Ignorance is often bliss when it comes to shielding yourself from potential lawsuits," says Prof. Elissa Perry at Teachers College, Columbia University. "You want to be able to show you're addressing the problem, and don't really care if you're solving it."
On the other hand, not all diversity initiatives are created equal, and some programs seem to make a measurable impact. For instance, in 1995 IBM formed eight task forces on women, men, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, gays and lesbians, and employees with disabilities. The task forces asked members of these various groups questions such as what would make them feel valued and how the firm could effectively partner with them to enhance productivity. IBM's Childs states, "The intent was for us to identify anything where change would make things better. We looked at recruiting, mentoring, stereotyping and external agencies we should work with." At IBM, the number of African-American executives rose from 62 in 1996 to 115 in 1999. Progress has included a significant increase in the number of executive women of color, predominantly African-American and Hispanic women. African Americans now hold 5% of IBM's executive positions.
Allstate Insurance Co. is another company with initiatives that are highly regarded. Since 1993, Allstate has been managing diversity as a central business issue closely connected to its overall corporate objectives. Its efforts seem to have had an impact. For example, at Allstate the percentage of managers and executives who are members of an ethnic minority is substantially higher than the national average.
One way Allstate shows that it takes diversity seriously is by making it part of the criteria used to gauge leadership and tying those criteria to compensation, according to Management Review magazine. Via an online feedback system, Allstate determines employees' perception of how well the company is achieving goals for its customers, shareholders and employees. Allstate has found a correlation between customers' intention to renew and how employees respond to leadership and diversity questions. Having established the value of diversity, Allstate links 25% of managers' merit pay to diversity measures.
====================================================

For government data about discrimination charges, see
http://www.eeoc.gov/stats/charges.html.
To see two of HR Magazine's recent articles on race discrimination and diversity, see
http://www.shrm.org/hrmagazine/articles/0300cov.htm and
http://www.shrm.org/hrmagazine/articles/0300grossman.htm.
More information about Allstate's diversity strategies can be found in Louisa Wah's "Diversity at Allstate: A Competitive Weapon," an article published in the July/August 1999 issue of Management Review.