私が考えるダイバーシティ その① “大きな絵”

ビジネス組織においてダイバーシティを推進するって一体どういうことだろうか。　

ある日系大手メーカーの採用担当者は、「“ダイバーシティ”が進んだ究極的な状態というのは世界各地にいる全ての従業員がサラリーギャップや各種法規制のしばりを超えて、自分が望む国や地域で働くことが可能になることではないだろうか。」とおっしゃっていた。また、外資系日本法人のリクルーターの方は、「日本にある会社ではダイバーシティというのはまだまだ女性活用の問題であり、アメリカとは環境が大分異なるので人種・民族などといった範囲までには拡大されにくい側面がある。」と話してくれた。

両者とも正しい。しかし共通して何か大事なものが抜け落ちているような気がした。　それは戦略的な視点。なぜ日本の会社がこれからダイバーシティを本格的に推進していく必要があるのか（ないのか）といったこと。　世界レベルで見た日本の強みは何で、それをこれからさらに磨き上げ、十二分に発揮していくためにはどんな組織に変わっていく必要があるのかといった視点であった。　

例えば流行りのワークライフバランスプログラムや女性管理職の数値目標。　これらはなぜ必要で、どんな組織カルチャーを新たに取り込もうとしているが故の施策なのかといったより戦略的な視点。　また、そのカルチャーが顧客の立場からどんな新しい組織価値を生み出しうるのかといった視点である。　

以下（英文）は、今学期、Human Relations Workshop (Educational Psychology)の授業の中で書き上げたものの一部です。　"Cooperative Learning"の創始者の一人であるDavid Johnson教授の授業で、広くダイバーシティを専門にしたいと考える人にとって、しっかりとした“知の土台作り”ができるということでぜひおすすめしたいクラスになります。

参考までに、

Course addressing issues of prejudice and discrmination in terms of history, power, and social perception. Includes knowledge and skills acquisition in cooperative learning, multicultural education, group dynamics, social influence, effective leadership, judgement and decision-making, prejudice reduction, conflict resolution. Meets State of Minnesota's Human Relation teacher licensure requirement.

このpaperの中で私は、21世紀の日本企業がMulticultural Organizationへとトランスフォームするためにどんな方向を目指すべきなのかを、３つのコンセプト組織を使って説明しています（Individual-centered Cooperative Organization, Democratic Learning Organization, Justice-Sensitive Organization)。　私はこの３つのコンセプト組織を同時に目指すことこそが真のMuliticultural Organizationへと近づく道ではないかと考えています。　つまり、各種人事施策はこのコンセプト組織を具現化するための施策として捉え直されるべきだということです。

“Philosophical Statement on Multicultural Education”

• What does multicultural education in professional practice mean to you?
• Prepare a philosophical statement that expresses your stance on multicultural education in professional practice.

Multicultural Education and Human Resources Management:
Considering the Ideal Transformation for Japanese Companies
in the 21st Century

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

For many Japanese companies of 21st century, I believe the idea of multiculturalism will become an important part of management strategy, because global competitions are increasingly forcing them to make a strategic change from the conventional supply-side economies based on mass production to the quality economies based on enhanced cooperation between buyers and sellers. For the future, many Japanese companies would have to focus on creation of the products which enrich people’s minds and well-being, rather than produce standardized manufactures. In service area as well, they would need to shift to the pursuit of “customer delight” past the idea of simply meeting minimum customer satisfaction. In other words, so far, producer-driven monocultural mind-set and organizational structure valuing homogeneity have been effective mainstream values. However, for the future Japanese companies, it is crucially important to create multicultural organization which can better utilize accumulated technological asset for more diverse customer needs they have not ever met. It would not be enough just to realize superficial transformation, such as increasing diversity of human resources in terms of race, sex, or nationality. I think this requires deep philosophical thinking and insights on creating truly multicultural business organization. I’d like to try to show the direction of the ideal form of an organization internalizing philosophy of multiculturalism through the following three concept organizations: Individual-centered Cooperative Organization, Democratized Learning Organization, and Justice-Sensitive Organization. Concomitantly, in each section, I’d like to suggest basic HRM ideas appropriate for respective organizations. I believe that considering multicultural education in the Japanese business organizations ultimately means pursuing the above mentioned three concept organizations concurrently.

Individual-centered Cooperative Organization

Every person is multicultural (Johnson and Johnson, p.3). Thus, cultivating multiculturalism should primarily focus on unleashing power of multiculturalism from inside the individual. Valuing multiculturalism also should lead to recognizing, utilizing, developing and rewarding diverse human value of individuals. As I mentioned earlier, many Japanese companies have been focusing on how to effectively manage employee homogeneity. Conversely speaking, they have not been able to fully utilize heterogeneous value each individual potentially has. Thus, creation of multicultural organization should begin with the value transformation to individual-centered culture because I believe that truly creative cooperation among multicultural individuals could happen under healthy individual-centered culture.
Nonetheless, whether organizational diversity results in positive or negative outcomes largely depends on how to create social interdependence within organization. Johnson and Johnson (2002) noted that competition does not teach the value of excellence (p.272). When a situation is structured individualistically, individuals seek an outcome that is personally beneficial without concern for the outcomes of others (p.273). However, cooperation places value on a wide range of diverse qualities that facilitate joint success. Thus, everyone has value (p.275). Like a living organism which is supported by tons of nameless small functions, a business organization is also composed of many invisible small efforts and challenges of diverse people. I think pursuing individual-centered cooperative organization means trying to recognize and appreciate those “nameless” diverse performances. I thus believe that if a company tries hard to treat employees with individual-centered cooperative value, employees are also more likely to try hard to find and meet unmet needs of excluded potential customers. HR practices should help employees to rethink of applications of Japanese advanced technologies in more multicultural ways for a better global well-being.

Democratized Learning Organization

One of the key success factors for the Japanese business of the 21st century will depend largely on how to effectively include, nurture and utilize matured and sophisticated prosumers[1] to develop new products or services. Accordingly, conventional hierarchical and centralized decision makings in organization will no longer work well because those decision makings are conducted farthest away from the customer interface at which prosumerism flourishes. Furthermore, such a decision making system would be less effective from the standpoint of democratic values: “Our democracy was founded on the premise that an informed, educated populace makes better decisions than do kings or dictators (Johnson and Johnson, p. 264).” Also, James Surowiecki (The Wisdom of Crowds) argued that a crowd’s “collective intelligence” will produce better outcomes than a small group of experts, if four basic conditions are met: diversity of opinion, independence of members from one another, decentralization, and a good method for aggregating opinions. In addition to above conditions, I’d like to assert the importance of the primary role of education which Johnson and Johnson (p.264) noted － teach people how to engage in the democratic process in their community, prepare people for their role as responsible citizens (Albert, 1996; Miller, 1988), and develop civic competencies. That is, in order for a democracy to better flourish, the workplace should be a school or training ground for democracy, both practically and psychologically (Pateman, Participation and Democratic Theory). I think it is time for many Japanese companies to re-realize that the process of promoting democracy is another process of producing collective intelligence. For more and better applications of the existing Japanese technologies, HR practices should provide better supports so that employees can create more self-directed and democratized learning organization including many more outside multicultural people beyond a single organization.

Justice-Sensitive Organization

“The first duty of society is justice (Alexander Hamilton).” Johnson and Johnson (2002) noted that the purpose of multicultural education is to provide an equal opportunity to every individual so that they can foster the intellectual, social, and personal development of all individuals to their highest potential. I think a specific discrimination such as gender discrimination is a single manifestation of organizational injustice based on oppression. This will be reproduced in the form of an injustice or combination of injustices, such as “distributive injustice,” “procedural injustice,” “retributive injustice,” “moral exclusion” or “cultural imperialism.” In other words, as Young (1990) explained that oppression is structural, rather than the result of a few people’s choices or policies, organizations lacking in the sense of justice are more likely to find another scapegoat for oppression, even if one oppressed group is relieved. I think HR professionals should have this perspective and keep in mind that organizational injustice is a source of hostility, indifference, and uncaring among its members. In turn organizational injustice has a crucially negative effect on democracy, and is also, in addition to increasing employee cynicism within an organization, likely to be revealed by day-to-day interactions with external stakeholders such as customers or the community through decreased employee morale or less product and service quality. In other words, in spite of the fact that one of the business objectives of multicultural organization is to increase reachable potential markets, customer satisfaction, and retention, such organizations ironically would defeat their own end. Therefore, I think that for future HR professionals working with the companies pursuing truly multicultural organization, sensitivity to injustice will be increasingly important and I expect that the importance of role of a “justice advocate” will exceed the role of a “business partner.”

--------------------------------------------
All rights reserved by Yongmin Choi (ymchoi512@gmail.com)

References

David W. Johnson & Roger T. Johnson (2002). Multicultural Education and Human Relations: Valuing Diversity. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

John W. Budd (2007). Labor Relations: Striking a Balance 2nd Edition. McGraw-Hill College

James Surowiecki (2005). The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies and Nations. Knopf Publishing Group

Young, I. M. (2000). Five faces of oppression. In M. Adams, W. J. Blumenfeld, R. Castañeda, H. W. Hackman, M. L.

[1] In 1972, Marshall McLuhan and Barrington Nevitt suggested in their book Take Today, (p. 4) that with electric technology, the consumer would become a producer.