The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0964-9425.

htm

WIMR 22,4

Managing diversity in academic organizations: a challenge to organizational culture

Iris Barbosa and Carlos Cabral-Cardoso
School of Economics and Management, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to look at the way higher-education institutions are responding to the challenges of an increasingly diverse academic force and the extent to which organizational culture welcomes and values diversity, thus allowing the university to benet from talented people with diverse backgrounds. Design/methodology/approach The study was conducted in a Portuguese university. Data were collected from 45 interviews with faculty members from different backgrounds and afliations. Findings The organization studied is failing to promote equal opportunities policies and to manage the increasingly diverse academic workforce. Behavioural pressures to conform and parochial and inward looking attitudes appear to prevail. Values-in-use and artefacts seem to reect the assimilation ideals. National origin came out as the key diversity issue. The integration of foreign academics is left to the individuals concerned and little effort is made to accommodate and to take advantage of their unique contribution. Originality/value The paper provides an in-depth account of subtle discriminatory mechanisms faced by non-native academics in a university that does not value diversity. Keywords Equal opportunities, Organizational culture, Universities, Portugal Paper type Research paper

274

Women in Management Review Vol. 22 No. 4, 2007 pp. 274-288 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0964-9425 DOI 10.1108/09649420710754237

Introduction Signicant changes in society and in the markets are responsible for the growing workforce diversity. The globalization process compels organizations all over the world to deal with more international customers and suppliers (Cox and Blake, 1991; Milliken and Martins, 1996). Improvements in transportation and communication, and the change in lifestyles contribute to the growing mobility of people (Kossek and Lobel, 1996). The participation of social groups traditionally seen as minorities or disadvantaged groups in the workplace has increased in numbers, qualications, and inuence (Carr-Rufno, 1996). Women, older people, individuals with disabilities, and people with different ethnic backgrounds, lifestyles, religious faiths, and sexual orientations, are becoming regular players in the labour market (Dass and Parker, 1996). In this context, managing the increasing workforce diversity has become a strategic issue that organizations aiming to achieve and/or maintain an international competitive advantage can no longer neglect. However, the view of diversity as an asset worth valuing (Cornelius et al., 2000) seems to contradict the traditional preference for strong organizational cultures that encourage uniformity in thinking patterns and behaviours (Granrose, 1997). Thus, considerable changes are required in the organizational culture if organizations are to attract and benet from a diverse workforce. There is consistent evidence that demographic diversity is also raising in higher education. Student and staff exchange and cross border recruitment is increasing

(Marginson, 2000; Schapper and Mayson, 2004). The Erasmus, Socrates and other European funded exchange programs support learning, researching, and teaching opportunities for academics and students in different European cultural contexts (Corbett, 2003). The Bologna Declaration is another important step towards the creation of the Europe of knowledge and higher education promoting the employability and the mobility of everyone involved in education and research. Under the Bologna framework students will get the chance to pursue their studies or get their degrees at a different university or country from the one where they originally enrolled. For academics and administrative staff, the Bologna Declaration admitted the recognition and valorisation of periods spent in European context researching, teaching, and training, without prejudicing their statutory rights (European Ministers of Education, 1999). By 2010, when this process is expected to be fully implemented academic institutions will face new challenges derived from the increasingly diverse work environment. In order to attract, integrate, motivate, and develop the full potential of academic diversity, European universities must become more internationally oriented and have organizational cultures that truly values and creatively manages such human diversity. Diversity remains considerably under-researched in European higher education. To examine these issues, a study was conducted looking at the way a particular higher-education institution is responding to the challenges of diversity, and assessing the extent to which organizational culture is supporting diversity and allowing the organization to benet from talented people with several cultural backgrounds. Conceptual framework The concepts of diversity, minorities, prejudice, and discrimination In the organizational context, diversity usually refers to the variety of human resources, customers and suppliers. Minorities refer to groups of people that in some features like national origin, race, gender, physical condition, age, sexual orientation, religion, nancial or social condition, lifestyle, education, or values differ from the pattern (Kossek and Lobel, 1996; Milliken and Martins, 1996). Two types of groups coexist in the workplace: the organizational groups and the identity groups. Organizational groups result from aspects that are strictly related to the work (like the job or function, the hierarchical level, the department or section, the skills and abilities). On the other hand, the individuals cultural backgrounds dene their identity groups. As pointed out by Brickson (2000), minorities belong to identity groups traditionally seen as disadvantaged groups in terms of power and opportunities. They become recurrent targets of organizational prejudice and discrimination in recruitment, selection, career opportunities, wages, and training (Kossek and Lobel, 1996). Prejudice is the tendency to view different people as inferior, less hard-working, less intelligent, and less skilful (Carr-Rufno, 1996). It results from the ancestral belief that differences mean some human deciency (Wentling and Palma-Rivas, 1998). The cognitive nature of prejudice makes it harder to deal with in organizations than discrimination (Cox, 1991). Discrimination occurs when decisions are made based on some of the employees features, like gender or ethnicity, in spite of their irrelevance to the accomplishment of the task. Broadly speaking, it refers to policies and practices that result in members of a subordinate group being treated differently in ways that disadvantage them (Carr-Rufno, 1996). Prejudice and discrimination can result from

Managing diversity

275

WIMR 22,4

individuals thoughts and attitudes or be part of an institutions policies and practices (Carr-Rufno, 1996, p. 92). They constitute strong barriers to the minorities access to work and career advancement, self-esteem, motivation, and productivity. Dealing with the difference at the workplace Different approaches to dealing with workforce diversity, prejudice, and discrimination have been suggested, ranging from the legalistic ones to the more pragmatic and managerial vision of valuing diversity. Originally brought up in the USA, equal opportunities policies were intended to guarantee equal opportunities for all in the workplace and to give to the victims of discrimination the legitimacy and the means to complain (Carrington et al., 2000). The emphasis was on legal requirements and penalties for non-compliance (Prasad and Mills, 1997). In the Portuguese context, the constitution states that nobody can be privileged, favoured, harmed, deprived of any right or discriminated against on the grounds of sex, race, language, national origin, religion, political or ideological convictions, education, nancial situation, or social condition. These principles have been translated into ordinary law enforcing equal opportunities in the work context. Within this framework it is up to the workers to prove they have been discriminated against. According to Liff and Wajcman (1996), this approach underlines the sameness among the individuals from several identity groups. Liff (1999, p. 66) summarizes this perspective:
The thinking is that discrimination occurs because social group characteristics, such as gender and ethnicity, are taken into account when they are irrelevant to the requirements of the job, and that equality consists of rejecting such criteria and ensuring instead that individuals are judged against each other only on job-relevant bases.

276

This approach has been criticized on the grounds that it does not take into account the initial disadvantages women and minorities have to deal with. In the case of women, they result from the traditional family roles and/or the different patterns of qualications and work experiences (Liff and Wajcman, 1996). Under this perspective the organization is supposed to act as if all individuals were from the same race, gender and ethnical background, thus assuming that the diverse workforce does not inuence the organizational culture and work practices (Thomas and Ely, 1996). This approach was strongly criticized for failing to preserve the different groups identities and to benet from their unique contributions (Carr-Rufno, 1996). Despite these weaknesses, Dickens (1999, p. 13) argues that anti-discriminatory legislation must be in place because the market tends to produce discrimination, not equality. Afrmative action is also an originally US legalistic approach based on the premise that organizations must reect the social diversity of the community at large. Within this framework, the several social groups in society are supposed to be conveniently represented in the workplace, so that it begins to look like a patchwork quilt (Gilbert et al., 1999). In Europe in general, afrmative action has remained limited to a few specic cases and never made it to mainstream legislation. This approach has been criticized on several grounds, not least because it goes against the basic principles of meritocracy (Thomas, 1990). Its emphasis on quota hiring seems to imply the rejection of the more skilled candidates (Groschl and Doherty, 1999), and minorities tend to be stigmatized on the grounds that they did not get their job and promotions by their own merit (Gilbert et al., 1999). In sum, afrmative action fails to eradicate the deep roots of

prejudice and inequality and does little to enhance the full potential of minorities and to promote a multicultural environment (Groschl and Doherty, 1999). The management of diversity To overcome the drawbacks pointed out above, a new approach emerged during 1980s that became known as diversity management. According to Ivancevich and Gilbert (2000, p. 75), it refers to the systematic and planned commitment by organizations to recruit, retain, reward, and promote a heterogeneous mix of employees. This voluntary and strategic-oriented approach recognizes the workers individuality and believes in the benets of diversity to the organization (Cornelius et al., 2000). It is not intended to guarantee the assimilation of minorities into a dominant culture, but to challenge the organization policies and practices so that everyone can succeed by being him or herself (Thomas, 1990). Under the diversity framework, the equality based on sameness is replaced by the equality based on difference (Liff and Wajcman, 1996). Diversity management also questions the traditional way to face equal opportunities at work: more than a legal or moral issue, diversity is now regarded as a business case (Thomas and Ely, 1996). Several contributions are expected from a diverse workforce (Cox and Blake, 1991; Thomas and Ely, 1996): . improvements in decision-making processes; . increased exibility; . innovation and learning; and . market competitiveness. Organizations that follow this orientation will probably also reduce costs associated with turnover, absenteeism, stress, lawsuits related to discrimination, and low productivity of minority workers (Cox and Blake, 1991). The interaction of culturally diverse workers is not without problems, such as the increased turnover among individuals from the dominant group, decreased group integration, and communication barriers (Cox, 1991; Brickson, 2000; Milliken and Martins, 1996). In order to overcome these obstacles and to benet from a diverse workforce, several authors argue that organizations must develop cultures that welcome, support and value diversity (Carr-Rufno, 1996; Cox, 1991; Cox and Blake, 1991; Miller, 1998). Organizational culture and the management of diversity Since, it became prominent in the management eld in 1980s, organizational culture is regarded as a powerful and original tool to understand and analyze the human behaviour in the workplace (Meek, 1992). Organizational culture can be dened as the set of taken-for-granted values, beliefs, practices, and norms that indicate to its members the appropriate behaviours in each specic circumstance (Louis, 1985; Schein, 1985). To be accepted in the workplace, newcomers are encouraged to adopt the current organizational values and artefacts (Louis, 1985; OReilly et al., 1991), whereas existing members tend to distrust, fear, and dislike people with other ideas (Trice and Beyer, 1993, p. 11). Organizations tend to attract and retain individuals from similar social and demographic backgrounds and to discriminate dissimilar ones in recruitment, selection, career development, and informal integration (Kossek and Lobel, 1996; OReilly et al., 1991).

Managing diversity

277

WIMR 22,4

278

Organizational culture works as a mechanism of social control that promotes behavioural uniformity and the assimilation of the dominant values. Such demand originates high levels of stress in people from minority cultural backgrounds that want to preserve their identity (OReilly et al., 1991). Therefore, cultural barriers may prevent members from minority identity groups from developing their full potential (Miller, 1998). These barriers can be tangible like the stairs that limit the mobility of people in wheelchairs, or more subtle like the refusal to pay attention to someones suggestions and opinions because he or she is a member of a minority group (Miller, 1998). Strong cultures in particular demand workers to develop unilateral efforts to t into the existing norms and values (Granrose, 1997). In academic settings, members of strong academic cultures share ideologies, values, and quality judgments, and those who seem to contradict these common cultural elements risk to be penalized (Becher, 1989). In contrast with strong cultures, in which individuals are expected to t into the existing cultural practices and norms, a more inclusive organizational culture has been suggested in which values, practices, and policies are developed that welcome the characteristics and needs of employees from minority identity groups (Clair et al., 2005; Liff, 1999). For that purpose, Cox (1991) recommends a socialization process in which members of the dominant culture and members of the alternative cultures are invited to share some important values and norms while keeping their own cultural identity, hoping to facilitate both the full structural integration of minorities (the presence of minorities at all organization levels) and their integration in the informal networks. In the particular case of academic institutions, a culture that appreciates innovation, cooperation, teamwork, and mutual trust must be encouraged in order to promote and respect diversity (Creamer, 2004; Gersick et al., 2000; Hinings and Greenwood, 1996). In sum, an organizational culture that is sympathetic to diversity and promotes diversity is a key factor for the success of any diversity management strategy. Methodology Aims, research setting and procedure This study was conducted looking at the way a particular Portuguese academic institution is responding to the challenges of the growing diversity in higher education. The study examines whether organizational culture in this particular institution is supporting diversity and allowing the organization to benet from talented people with several cultural backgrounds. The university was founded in the early 1970s and like most institutions in this part of the world is historically lled with a homogenous academic workforce. It currently employs over 1,000 faculty members from nearly all subject areas. Despite some increase in recent years in the number of foreign academics roughly 95 per cent of the faculty is still of native origin. Apart from sex, age, and nationality, no records are kept in the university les concerning other diversity dimensions. The qualitative methodology is normally considered the most appropriate to explore the dynamics of organizational culture (Hatch, 1993; Thomas, 1990; Wentling and Palma-Rivas, 1998). Overall, 45 in-depth interviews were conducted with faculty members from different backgrounds and afliations. The number of interviews was not predetermined. The data collection ended when the saturation of information became visible. When selecting the interviewees, an attempt was made to have as much variety as possible in terms of their background. A total of 38 individuals were of native origin.

The remaining seven interviewees were foreigners from different nationalities: French (two individuals), and Chinese, German, the US, Russian, and Spanish (one each). Five individuals were junior members at the assistant level (three of them of foreign origin) and 40 had positions at the professorial level. Nearly all of them worked at this university for at least ve years. During the interviews, it was found that only 2 out of 45 interviewees were non-white: one black and one Asian. In terms of religious background, 28 individuals claimed to be Catholic, and two others belonged to the Evangelical Church and to the Orthodox Church. Of them, 15 individuals present themselves as not interested in religious matters. All participants assumed to be heterosexuals. Among the interviewees no one lived with disability. The initial contact was made by e-mail and by conventional mail. Individuals chose the time and the location for the interviews (almost all interviews were conducted in their own ofces). The interviews took from 30 to 75 minutes. All interviews were tape-recorded with the permission of the interviewees, transcribed verbatim, and content analyzed. Participants were asked to share their views on the cultural values, artefacts, and management practices of their departments, particularly with regard to diversity issues. Foreign nationals were also invited to describe their experience and process of joining and integrating in this institution. An open-ended format was adopted so that the individuals could express themselves freely, using their own words. The individuals line of thought was respected and specic questions were only raised when interviewees did not voluntarily address specic topics considered relevant. Examples of the topics raised during the interviews include: . Exposed values and values-in-use. . Decision-making procedures and major criteria in recruitment, selection and promotions processes. . Policies and practices in the socialization of newcomers. . Description of what is considered proper behaviour. . Reactions to whoever challenges the dominant values and practices. . Specic policies and measures addressing minorities and disadvantaged groups. . Benets and problems associated with demographic diversity. Anecdotal evidence was often volunteered by the interviewees to illustrate a particular point they were making. The interviews were conducted in Portuguese but further explanations were sometimes given in English when the interviewees seemed less familiar with the Portuguese language. The content analysis of the interviews was conducted considering the following analytical categories: . organizational culture (reference to general values and values concerning issues of diversity, artefacts, formal and informal relationships, and HRM practices); . managing diversity (reference to policies and practices of recruitment, integration and career development of individuals from minority identity groups, organizational discriminatory policies and practices, costs and benets associated with workers from minority identity groups); and

Managing diversity

279

WIMR 22,4

foreign academics (reference to the barriers experienced by foreign individuals in their recruitment process, integration and career development, perceptions and feelings in terms of expressing their views and assuming their identity in the work setting).

280

Findings In the analysis, an attempt was made to assess the extent to which the culture of this particular organization has incorporated the values of diversity and adopted the practices of diversity management. Bearing in mind, the limited representation of other minorities, national origin emerged as the key diversity issue in this organization. Values Individualism, selshness, and competition were pointed out by the interviewees as values-in-use in the organization. Few individuals referred to collectivism, cooperation, and solidarity that the literature denes as values more suitable to an increasingly diverse workforce (Creamer, 2004; Chatman and Flynn, 2001; Hinings and Greenwood, 1996). It is not unusual in academic settings that individual academics decide to work alone rather than in teams, presuming that it is a safer way to develop a professional identity (Quinn et al., 1996). There seems to be little openness to what is new and different and a strong resistance to change appears to prevail unless change brings direct advantages to the individuals involved:
People come here with several ideas. Newcomers tend to be very dynamic and willing to improve things in many areas, such as research, management, or teaching. But the machine is too heavy; there is no openness to change, to new approaches to do things (Spanish professor). There are always some negative points of view concerning innovation and change because these individuals fear the consequences in their security and welfare (Native professor).

An environment that resists the newness and the difference is unlikely to be receptive to individuals from minority cultural backgrounds with distinct ways of looking at life in general and the academic career in particular, thus failing to take advantage of the more signicant benets of a diverse workforce new ideas and work practices, and innovative problem solving approaches (Cox and Blake, 1991). Structural conditions also seem unfavourable to diversity. Decentralization has been found more suitable to a heterogeneous workforce (Thomas and Ely, 1996), but decision-making procedures and communication processes seem to remain in this particular university, strongly controlled by organizational hierarchies. The free ve and inappropriate behaviour. expression of ideas is sometimes referred to as na Interviewees often describe an authoritarian climate and an environment where retaliation and the abuse of power are not uncommon:
In terms of expressing individual opinions at the school level or in the department meetings, there is no actual freedom. (. . .) I know cases of individuals that threatened others telling them to be careful because one of these days they could be sitting in their promotion committees. (. . .) Thats why in faculty meetings some individuals prefer to keep their opinions to themselves (. . .) Expressing a certain point of view can put individuals in serious trouble (Native professor).

Both native and foreign academics admit they suffered pressures to conform and to adopt values and behaviours more in line with the dominant cultural pattern. On the other hand, academics from distinct cultural backgrounds may have more difculties understanding what is acceptable behaviour and whether and when to express their opinions. The following quote highlights this aspect:
If someone behaves differently, people criticize it. (. . .) There was a [foreign] professor whose behaviour was somehow eccentric. At the city festivities she used to go to the street, jump into the stage and dance with her students. Those kinds of jokes arent very common here. And people used to comment: Thats not a proper behaviour for a respectable professor (Native professor).

Managing diversity

281

Artefacts Although there is no formal dress code and informal dressing rules are not particularly strict, a conservative attitude and pressures for behavioural conformity prevail. Piercings, visible tattoos, strange haircuts or other peculiar looks would not be socially accepted. In other words, there is some exibility in the way faculty members present themselves, but only up to a (relatively limited) point. The use of language reects the strong hierarchical relationships pointed out above. Some level of informality is apparent in daily interactions but the language normally reects hierarchical differences. Academics from less formalized cultures or cultures with lower levels of power distance (Hofstede, 1991) seem to face some difculties adjusting to this use of language:
In Germany you dont call a peer a doctor even when this person is a PhD. Thats considered ridiculous. But here, in Portugal, you call everybody doctor even if thats not the case. Thats a practice that is very difcult to get used to (German assistant).

Despite legal provisions for access to public buildings for individuals with physical disabilities, some architectural barriers also remain that prevent the full access of staff and students with disabilities:
This Institute isnt adapted to people with wheelchairs. We dont have an elevator. Ive already seen students with disability that had to be carried upstairs [3rd oor] by their fellows.

Here again, there is little concern for the difference and for the benets that a diverse workforce would bring to the organization. Formal and informal relationships Informal networks seem to be relatively stable and mainly developed around professional and, above all, personal afnities. It takes some time for a stranger to be accepted, which makes it harder for non-natives to develop informal relationships and to get access to mentors:
Ive already told my colleagues that I feel too lonely and that I would like to go out with them, to get closer to them. I used to ask if they would like to go to the cinema, to a pub, or elsewhere, but they didnt answer me or they simply said they couldnt. (. . .) They dont understand the loneliness of someone who is far from their country and family (French assistant).

Some informal networks seem to develop around internal politics. Foreign academics normally show little formal power and tend to stay out of these networks. As a result,

WIMR 22,4

their structural and informal integration, and career opportunities are limited from the start (Gersick et al., 2000; Quinlan, 1999). Milliken and Martins (1996, p. 419) explained that:
. . . people who feel less psychologically linked with other members of their group (. . .) may engage in a kind of self-censorship, whereby they hold themselves back from contributing their thoughts to the group.

282

The following quote from a foreign professor illustrates this point:

Im a member of the Board but I feel a bit lost there. I dont really know anyone there and I really dont catch what they discuss. If someone asks me to do a specic thing, its okay. Otherwise, I dont want to get involved. I dont understand how things work here (Chinese professor).

Several members of faculty reported difculties in their integration processes. In most departments integration is dealt with informally. The success of such processes depends almost entirely on the newcomers own efforts, which represents an additional burden for individuals with no previous connections in the organization. As reported by non-native academics, little efforts are made to promote the integration of foreign individuals:
The efforts they make to integrate foreign faculty are exactly the same they make with the native ones. (. . .) Its quite hard to face a class with hundreds of students when you have just arrived and you arent familiar with the language, the values, or the rules of the Portuguese academic institutions (Spanish professor). There wasnt anyone formally in charge of my socialization. (. . .) Ive been working here for about three years and still there are a number of issues I dont understand. The truth is there isnt anyone that really explains things or, at least, some kind of guidebook with relevant information for foreign academics (French assistant).

The comment made by the Spanish professor is consistent with Liff and Wajcmans (1996) argument that sometimes minorities are disadvantaged not because they are treated differently but because they are treated equally . . . If their particular needs are to be taken into account, different procedures rather than the same procedures should apply. Human resource management practices Selection decisions tend to favour familiar applicants in order to avoid the uncertainty associated with unknown or different candidates, thus leading to homosocial reproduction (Gilbert et al., 1999; Kossek and Lobel, 1996). Individuals with no former connections with the organization such as foreign applicants are likely to be discriminated against. On the other hand, there seems to be little concern for the consequences of inbreeding:
Theres a great concern that the newcomer perfectly ts into the department environment. (. . .) We can determine if a person ts into our lines of research through the curriculum. But in terms of individual t, its safer to recruit applicants that are already known. People who have studied or made research here have an advantage over the other candidates (Native professor).

Some interviewees admitted that their faculties prefer academics that appear to be easy to deal with and have a normal looking and share the organizational values.

In brief, the interviewees show that the difference is not valued and sometimes it is even avoided. These ndings are consistent with cultures that show high levels of uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede, 1991, p. 109). In this case, what is different is dangerous and organizations prefer to stick to the candidates they already know. A native professor acknowledged this reluctance to accept diverse staff: I must admit that conformity with the prevailing values and attitudes is a criterion when it comes to recruit academics. Objective criteria such as research output are certainly taken into account in career advancement decisions. But quite often inuence made through networks plays an important part and seems to prevail over individual merit when it comes to promotions. In this context, attering the higher ranks, particularly those who determine career advancement decisions, becomes a common political tactic among academics:
You must behave politically. Thats the fundamental factor, I guess. Youd better not annoy powerful people and atter them once in a while. You have to be extremely prudent with your relationships. It is important to show work, of course. But the main criterion is the other, I guess (Native professor). Theres a lot of favouritism around here. There isnt a culture that guarantees that professional merit is always rewarded. (. . .) People get promoted if they accept the way things are and if they blindly follow the ones who decide ones career advancement. Its the culture of obedience and subservience (Native professor).

Managing diversity

283

Career advancement not based on merit certainly penalizes the politically less skilled academics. Here again, individuals from minority identity groups who tend to be less familiar with the local mechanisms of political manoeuvring are disadvantaged (Thomas, 1990). As argued by Bajdo and Dickinson (2001), an inclusive workplace would require career advancement to be determined by performance rather than political connections. Equal opportunities and diversity management practices and policies Some members of minority identity groups were interviewed, including foreign individuals, Black and Asian individuals, and individuals from religious minorities. None of the interviewees assumed to be homosexual or bisexual, though some respondents suggested that it would be more appropriate to hide sexual orientation in this organization. No policy statement was issued with regard to the recruitment and promotion processes of individuals from social minorities. Most interviewees claimed to be aware of the advantages of working with people from different cultural backgrounds. Native individuals believed that their faculties welcome and value foreign academics in their ranks. Non-natives who felt that the university was not making use of their talents did not share such a view. They think that, in practice, native peers tend to show little interest in beneting from their particular experiences and knowledge. A good example was provided by the way foreigners were disregarded and ignored in department meetings. A French academic working in the French department illustrates this attitude:
Well, in the council meetings people speak Portuguese and in my rst year here I didnt know this language. (. . .) I didnt understand anything they said. In this aspect, I was discriminated against because all of them teach French and work in a School of French. Then, why didnt they speak French? (French assistant).

WIMR 22,4

Other foreign individuals related their perception of discriminatory mechanisms in career advancement with the lack of access to management positions. A German lecturer puts it very clearly:
I think its very difcult to nd foreign academics performing management tasks in this institution. Native peers dont trust them enough [and] nd it hard to identify with them.

284

Some native interviewees also pointed out disadvantages associated with a diverse workforce. Communication and cultural barriers may arise when working with foreign colleagues; they argued admitting that these barriers lead to misunderstandings and improper behaviours that ultimately threaten organization stability. Prejudice towards non-whites and foreigners from particular nationalities were also pointed out, though individuals from religious minorities denied having experienced discrimination or prejudice in this organization:
I think that some people consider that individuals from specic geographic origins dont t into the institution. There seems to be an ethnocentric belief that academics from Brazil, Africa or Asia arent as effective and talented as individuals from either Northern Europe or the US (Native assistant).

In sum, the organizational culture of this particular university does not seem to welcome and value a diversied workforce. Parochial and inward looking attitudes appear to prevail. Values and artefacts seem to reect assimilation ideals while preserving explicit and implicit discriminatory mechanisms that prevent real equal opportunities. In an environment somewhat hostile to individuals from minority identity groups, it will not be easy to implement the proclaimed internationalization goals recommended by the Bologna Declaration, let alone to develop a culture of inclusion that values diversity. Discussion and conclusions The international and multicultural environment in which universities have to operate these days requires the management of an increasingly diverse workforce. In order to benet from the potential of such diverse workforce, it is important to ensure that all individuals are making full use of their skills, knowledge, and work experiences. In that sense, an inclusive culture that values diversity and encourages the free debate of ideas would be a major asset (Thomas and Ely, 1996). The ndings show that this particular university does not seem to promote real equal opportunities and does not benet from the potential of an increasingly diverse workforce. The study was conducted in a Portuguese university that at least in numerical terms is increasingly plural given the growing number of faculty members from minority identity groups, most of them of foreign origin. However, their participation is clearly limited due to structural, political and cultural barriers that came out in the interviews. Some organizational values may reect dimensions of Portuguese culture such as uncertainty avoidance and power distance (Hofstede, 1991). The prevalence of parochial attitudes and the importance of personal connections over individual merit criteria in recruitment and promotion decisions contribute to restrict the access, integration and career advancement of whoever might be regarded as different or outsider. In a time when the Bologna Declaration is promoting the mobility of faculty members and students in Europe, the development of a welcome environment for individuals from other nationalities is a critical element for the success of the

internationalization of higher-education institutions. In this particular case, failure to create a level playing eld providing equal opportunities for all faculty members regardless of their racial or ethnic origin may jeopardize talented academics that do not t into the dominant group. Minority groups remain easy targets for prejudice and for institutional discrimination argued Liff (1999), and sameness tends to prevail over difference (Liff and Wajcman, 1996). In other words, individuals from minority groups have to develop unilateral efforts to t into the organization, while the organization does not seem to make any special effort to accommodate or to take advantage of those individuals. Additionally, institutional pressures to conform inhibit the free ow and debate of ideas that is expected in an academic institution, thus precluding the development of a creative and innovative environment. Organizations devoted to research were expected to be more receptive to newness and difference, though apparently that is not the case everywhere. Unless important changes take place, this organization will not be able to attract talented people from distinct cultural backgrounds who want to preserve their identity and keep their distinct perspectives, knowledge, and work experiences. While at the rhetorical level the benets of a diversied workforce were acknowledged, little respect for diversity was detected in practice. No evidence was found of polices and practices designed to promote diversity and to benet from the unique contribution of a heterogeneous workforce. A native professor summarizes the prevalent orientation towards minorities:
There is no evidence that someone was excluded or avoided because that person belonged to one or another minority group. But the institution doesnt develop efforts to value and to benet from talented minorities. Well, I think that people tolerate minorities. I guess thats the better description of what happens here. Minorities arent especially welcome, but their presence isnt faced as a disaster. Its like a rainy day: Its boring but you must live with it (Native professor).

Managing diversity

285

Recommendations, limitations and suggestions for future research The successful implementation of the Bologna Declaration does require considerable changes in organizational culture and a different attitude towards the difference. Some suggestions were made regarding the development of formal mentoring programs targeting social groups that are likely to be disadvantaged in informal mentoring activities and networks (Kram and Hall, 1996; Quinlan, 1999). Practical measures such as information about local idiosyncrasies, leisure events and language courses for non-native speakers could also help in the socialization process of newcomers. The need was also felt for some diversity training, raising awareness of stereotypes and prejudices in order to prevent subtle discriminatory mechanisms. More transparent and more professional styles of management would also contribute to limit the inuence of political networks and parochial rainmakers. Raising accountability to the whole community is perhaps the decisive factor for changing the current state-of-affairs. The ndings and conclusions drawn from this study cannot be generalized to other higher-education institutions, though similar ndings would possibly be found in many other places. National origin emerged in this study as the critical diversity dimension, but it is believed that other methodologies rather than face-to-face

WIMR 22,4

interviews would more easily allow other visible and non-visible minority identity groups to voice their concerns in these matters. Replicate the study in other institutions and in other points in time would also allow to monitor and shed some more light on the transformations taking place in European higher-education as a result of the Bologna Declaration.

286
References Bajdo, L.M. and Dickson, M.W. (2001), Perceptions of organizational culture and womens advancement in organizations: a cross-cultural examination, Sex Roles, Vol. 45 Nos 5/6, pp. 399-414. Becher, T. (1989), Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultural Disciplines, The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press, Milton Keynes. Brickson, S. (2000), The impact of identity orientation on individual and organizational outcomes in demographically diverse settings, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 82-101. Carr-Rufno, N. (1996), Managing Diversity: People Skills for a Multicultural Workplace, International Thomson Executive Press, London. Carrington, W.J., McCue, K. and Pierce, B. (2000), Using establishment size to measure the impact of title VII and afrmative action, Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 503-23. Chatman, J.A. and Flynn, F.J. (2001), The inuence of demographic heterogeneity on the emergence and consequences of cooperative norms in work teams, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 956-74. Clair, J.A., Beatty, J.E. and MacLean, T.L. (2005), Out of sign but not out of mind, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 78-95. Corbett, A. (2003), Europe: a threat or an opportunity for national systems of higher education?, Society for Research into Higher Education, No. 53, pp. 1-5. Cornelius, N., Gooch, L. and Todd, S. (2000), Managers leading diversity for business excellence, Journal of General Management, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 67-78. Cox, T. (1991), The multicultural organization, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 34-47. Cox, T.H. and Blake, S. (1991), Managing cultural diversity: implications for organizational competitiveness, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 45-56. Creamer, E.G. (2004), Collaborators attitudes about differences of opinion, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 75 No. 5, pp. 556-71. Dass, P. and Parker, B. (1996), Diversity: a strategic issue, in Kossek, E.E. and Lobel, S.A. (Eds), Managing Diversity: Human Resource Strategies for Transforming the Workplace, Blackwell, Cambridge, MA, pp. 365-91. Dickens, L. (1999), Beyond the business case: a three-pronged approach to equality action, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 9-19. European Ministers of Education (1999), The European Higher Education Area: Joint Declaration of the European Ministers of Education Convened in Bologna on the 19th of June 1999, available at: www.bologna-berlin2003.de/pdf/bologna_declaration.pdf (accessed 15 December 2005).

Gersick, C.J.G., Bartunek, J.M. and Dutton, J. (2000), Learning from academia: the importance of relationships in professional life, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43 No. 6, pp. 1026-44. Gilbert, J.A., Stead, B.A. and Ivancevich, J.M. (1999), Diversity management: a new organizational paradigm, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 61-76. Granrose, C.S. (1997), Cross-cultural socialization of Asian employees in US organizations, in Granrose, C.S. and Oskamp, S. (Eds), Cross-cultural Work Groups, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 186-211. Groschl, S. and Doherty, L. (1999), Diversity management in practice, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 262-8. Hatch, M.J. (1993), The dynamics of organizational culture, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 657-93. Hinings, C.R. and Greenwood, R. (1996), Working together, in Frost, P.J. and Taylor, M.S. (Eds), Rhythms of Academic Life: Personal Accounts of Careers in Academia, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 225-37. Hofstede, G. (1991), Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Ivancevich, J.M. and Gilbert, J.A. (2000), Diversity management: time for a new approach, Public Personnel Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 75-92. Kossek, E.E. and Lobel, S.A. (1996), Introduction: transforming human resource systems to manage diversity an introduction and orienting framework, in Kossek, E.E. and Lobel, S.A. (Eds), Managing Diversity: Human Resource Strategies for Transforming the Workplace, Blackwell, Cambridge, MA, pp. 1-19. Kram, K.E. and Hall, D. (1996), Mentoring in a context of diversity and turbulence, Managing Diversity: Human Resource Strategies for Transforming the Workplace, Blackwell, Cambridge, MA, pp. 108-36. Liff, S. (1999), Diversity and equal opportunities: room for a constructive compromise?, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 65-75. Liff, S. and Wajcman, J. (1996), Sameness and difference revisited: which way forward for equal opportunity initiatives?, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 79-94. Louis, M.R. (1985), An investigators guide to workplace culture, in Frost, P.J., Moore, L.F., Louis, M.R., Lundberg, G.C. and Martin, J. (Eds), Organizational Culture, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, pp. 73-93. Marginson, S. (2000), Rethinking academic work in the global era, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 23-35. Meek, V.L. (1992), Organizational culture: origins and weaknesses, in Salaman, G. (Ed.), Human Resource Strategies, Sage, London, pp. 192-212. Miller, F.A. (1998), Strategic culture change: the door to achieving high performance and inclusion, Public Personnel Management, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 151-60. Milliken, F.J. and Martins, L.L. (1996), Searching for common threads: understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 402-33. OReilly, C.A., Chatman, J. and Caldwell, D.F. (1991), People and organizational culture: a prole comparison approach to assessing person-organization t, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 487-516. Prasad, P. and Mills, A.J. (1997), From showcase to shadow: understanding the dilemmas of managing workplace diversity, in Prasad, P., Mills, A.J., Elmes, M. and Prasad, A. (Eds),

Managing diversity

287

WIMR 22,4

288

Managing the Organizational Melting Pot: Dilemmas of Workplace Diversity, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 3-27. Quinlan, K.M. (1999), Enhancing mentoring and networking of junior academic women: what, why, and how?, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 31-42. Quinn, R.E., ONeill, R.M. and Debebe, G. (1996), Confronting the tensions in an academic career, Rhythms of Academic Life: Personal Accounts of Careers in Academia, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 421-7. Schapper, J.M. and Mayson, S.E. (2004), Internationalisation of curricula: an alternative to the taylorisation of academic work, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 189-205. Schein, E.H. (1985), Organizational Culture and Leadership: A Dynamic View, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Thomas, R.R. (1990), From afrmative action to afrming diversity, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 68 No. 2, pp. 107-17. Thomas, D.A. and Ely, R.J. (1996), Making differences matter: a new paradigm for managing diversity, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 74 No. 5, pp. 79-90. Trice, H.M. and Beyer, J.M. (1993), The Cultures of Work Organizations, Prentice-Hall, London. Wentling, R.M. and Palma-Rivas, N. (1998), Current status and future trends of diversity initiatives in the workplace: diversity experts perspective, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 235-53. About the authors Iris Barbosa is a Teaching Assistant at the School of Economics and Management at the University of Minho, in Braga, Portugal. In 2003 she completed her Masters degree in Human Resource Management with a dissertation entitled Organizational subcultures in the academic context in the perspective of the management of diversity: a case study. She is currently attending a PhD program in the same institution. Her PhD thesis focuses on the rhetoric and practices of equal opportunities and diversity management in the Portuguese organizational context. She aims to confront the perspectives of different organizational actors with regard to these issues. E-mail: iris@eeg.uminho.pt Carlos Cabral-Cardoso is an Associate Professor of Management at the University of Minho, Portugal, where he is currently Director of the Management Research Unit and responsible for post-graduate studies in organizational behaviour and human resource management. He received his PhD from the University of Manchester. His current research interests include the role of the HR function, issues of equal opportunities and diversity, and ethical issues in management education. He has published in the Journal of Management Education, Journal of Business Ethics, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, International Public Management Journal, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, International Journal of Innovation Management, Career Development International, Women in Management Review, EBS Review, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Several other contributions were made to edited books and Portuguese journals. Carlos Cabral-Cardoso is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: ccabral@eeg.uminho.pt

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints