Managing workforce diversity: a critique and example from

South Africa

Linda Human
The Authors
Linda Human, University of Stellenbosch, Bellville, South Africa
Abstract
Managing diversity, multiculturalism, affirmative action and equal employment opportunity are
words in common currency in a newly democratic South Africa as they are in most democratic
countries of the world. However, in South Africa, as elsewhere in the world, these concepts
are frequently confused, often misunderstood and, in some instances, form the theoretical
backdrop to practical programmes of dubious efficacy at best and which may be
counterproductive at worst. Distinguishes between these concepts. Concentrates on
managing diversity and how this process is often hampered by an over-emphasis on "national
culture" at the expense of broader individual identity and power relations. Analyses how
power relations impact on perceptions of "culture", and ultimately on the motivation,
performance and development of "historically disadvantaged" employees. Describes how this
framework of understanding has informed the development of a managing diversity skills
training workshop which has been run successfully in corporate and not-for-profit
organizations alike.
Article type: Theoretical with Application in Practice.
Keywords: Affirmative Action, Employees, Empowerment, Equal Opportunities, National
Cultures.
Content Indicators: Practice Implications** Originality* Readability**
International Journal of Manpower
Volume 17 Number 4/5 1996 pp. 46-64
Copyright © MCB University Press ISSN 0143-7720

Introduction

Managing diversity, multiculturalism, affirmative action and equal employment opportunity are
words in common currency in a newly democratic South Africa as they are in most democratic
countries of the world. However, although these concepts are now being articulated by
government, business and trade unions alike, for many years they were the sole preserve of
those organizations subscribing to the various codes of conduct (such as the Sullivan
Principles)[1] as well as enlightened employers resisting apartheid oppression. Thus,
although the debate about these concepts is just beginning in earnest, academic research
and practical experience was gained during the time of the apartheid regime which, in turn, is
informing the implementation of affirmative action and managing diversity programmes in a
new era.
This experience is made all the more important by the fact that affirmative action and the
management of diversity in South Africa do not constitute tools to facilitate the entry of
minorities into the mainstream of organizational life. In South Africa, for many years, the
majority of the population has been denied access to education, jobs and opportunities
through a process of rigorous discrimination[2]. Some observers argue that black and female
advancement and empowerment will now take place naturally and that an inexorable drift
towards equality of opportunity is inevitable (e.g. see Bruce (1994, p. 35)). Given both the
experience of other African countries, such as Zimbabwe and Namibia, as well as statistics
relating to social mobility from other countries of the world (e.g. see Bennell and Strachan
(1992); Heath (1981)), this scenario is highly unlikely. It is, nevertheless, crucial to the stability
of the country that a committed effort towards non-racialism, non-sexism and increased
democracy and participation is made and is seen, by the majority population, to be made. The
expectations the majority of South Africa's population have of the government of national
unity are such that the effective management of diversity and the redistribution of power,
wealth and opportunity have to take place. South Africa, unlike some other countries of the
world, has no choice but to manage workforce diversity and to manage it effectively; the
future prosperity and stability of the country, and possibly the region, depend on it.
Given this urgency, it is surprising how few committed efforts to managing diversity and
affirmative action have been made (Human, 1993). Many organizations pay lip-service to the
need for affirmative action and managing diversity, yet few appear to have incorporated these
kinds of objectives into either their strategic planning process or reward systems (Human,
1993). Although the government has committed itself to legislation in its Reconstruction and
Development Programme (African National Congress, 1994), it would appear that a confusion
about terminology as well as the scope of such programmes hinders current discussions
between government, business and trade unionists (see Shilowa (1994) and African National
Congress (1994) for broader definitions of affirmative action in particular). Such discussions
are also hindered by the vested interests of non-unionized and, particularly, managerial
employees as well as the lack of a consultative culture, particularly with respect to the
management/trade union relationship.
Many organizations, to this day, look for quick fix solutions to their management of diversity
challenge; such solutions frequently take the form of workshops or interventions which are not
incorporated into overall strategic and human resource management processes (Human,
1993). Other organizations are playing the numbers game and are underestimating the extent
to which effective affirmative action requires fundamental changes to organizational culture
and the way in which people are managed (Human, 1991). Still others, like some authors and
practitioners in other countries (for example, Thomas (1990)), confuse concepts such as
affirmative action and managing diversity and appear to believe that the latter can be
undertaken to the exclusion of the former.
Having distinguished between these concepts, this contribution goes on to concentrate on
managing diversity and how this process may be hampered by an over-emphasis on cultural
differences at the expense of both broader individual identity and power relations. Having
dissected how power relations impact on perceptions of culture and ultimately on the
motivation, performance and development of historically disadvantaged employees, a
description is provided of how this understanding has informed the development of a
managing diversity skills training workshop which has been run successfully in corporate and
not-for-profit organizations alike.
This contribution is based on academic research and practical experience in managing
diversity, not only in South Africa but also in the USA, Europe, Zimbabwe, Namibia and, more
recently, West Africa.

Some definitions

Affirmative action and its relationship to concepts such as equality and equal opportunity are
matters of serious intellectual and practical concern to legal specialists, economists,
philosophers, sociologists and employers in many countries of the world. The debate
concerning the definition, justification, impact and consequences of affirmative action is
ongoing, complex and beyond the scope of this paper (Faundez, 1994). Suffice it to say that,
for the purposes of this discussion, affirmative action is defined as the process of creating
greater equality of opportunity; it is temporary and flexible and not in accordance with rigid
quotas; it is compatible with the concept of qualification and it does not unnecessarily trample
on the reasonable expectations of competent white men (see also Blumrosen (1985); Human
(1993)). According to this definition, affirmative action is the process of creating equal
employment opportunity (employment equity), which is the desired outcome. Affirmative
action, moreover, is not merely a process of recruiting greater numbers of historically
disadvantaged employees: it is part and parcel of a holistic system of human resource
management and development and impacts on all of the processes, policies and procedures
relating to the selection, recruitment, induction, development, promotion and severance of
people. Research and practical implementation of affirmative action programmes (as defined
above) in South Africa, suggest that, for affirmative action to be effective, the following critical
success factors need to be in place.

Employee development as a strategic issue

Employee development as a strategic issue means the extent to which people development in
general and black (African, coloured/Asian), female and disabled advancement in particular,
are seen as key strategic issues for the organization. Further, it means the extent to which
managers are measured and rewarded in terms of their performance in this area. Top
management commitment to employee development should be evidenced in the actions and
comments of top management, as well as in their regular review of departments; and their
alignment of this area with other key strategic objectives.
The management of people as a strategic issue also includes the extent to which workforce
plans, succession plans and career plans exist.

Staffing

This refers to the way in which people are matched to jobs; whether they are recruited from
the outside or whether they are developed, transferred or promoted from within.
It involves a critical analysis of current selection and recruitment procedures, criteria for entry
into jobs, selection tools and organizational culture. Such an analysis should lead to attempts
to overcome unfairness and blockages, to remove glass ceilings and to eradicate both
tokenism and resistance.
Strategic and workforce analysis may also lead an organization to the conclusion that it is
necessary to ameliorate the under-utilization of qualified members of excluded groups at entry
level or in promotions.

Organizational culture and the role of line management in the development of people

This refers to the extent to which the development of employees in general occurs in the
organization. The importance of this issue rests on the assumption that the creation and
maintenance of standards (whether in terms of quality or output, etc.) relies in large measure
on well-trained staff who are responsible for the development of those who report to them.
Development should not be perceived, however, in racial or gender terms. Development is
rather characterized by:
the determination of individual development needs;
the drawing up of individual development plans based on the competences required
for effective job performance and on the overall workforce plan;
the attendance of relevant off-the-job training and development courses which meet
individual training needs;
line managers playing a key role in on-the-job coaching and the development of staff.
This process applies equally to all staff, irrespective of race, gender or level.
"Organizational culture" refers to the importance that is attached to the development of people
and the norms, values and beliefs that reinforce or discourage people development in general
and the advancement of the historically disadvantaged in particular. An organizational culture
that supports people development is characterized by the following:
1 positive expectations of individuals and their competence;
2 open, honest and constructive feedback on performance;
3 evaluation of performance based on results achieved in terms of short and long
term objectives;
no discrimination based on race, gender or disability;
the development of people is a key result area for managers and performance in this
area is measured and rewarded/sanctioned in a meaningful way;
managers understand the process of development and their roles in this process;
managers have the necessary skills to perform the role effectively;
on-the-job coaching is an effective and primary means of people development.

The role of the human resources function

The role of the human resources function is to support line management ownership of the
people development process by providing, inter alia, appropriate systems and advice to line
management. This does not mean that the role of human resources is a passive one; the
function should be proactive in identifying and diagnosing problems, proposing solutions and
influencing line managers in the strategic direction that the organization has chosen. This
implies that the human resources function needs to be staffed with people who:
are positively and actively committed to the development and advancement of all
people, particularly disadvantaged groups;
 have a high degree of credibility among the managers and staff, for whom they
provide a service;
can provide practical and realistic solutions to problems and issues raised by their
clients, without sacrificing professional excellence;
operate from an integrated perspective of all aspects of the human resources
function, although they may be expert in one particular area (Human, 1993).
Affirmative action strategies, moreover, vary from organization to organization and are based
on an audit of the organization in terms of workforce composition, policies and procedures
(see for example, Ontario Women's Directorate (1991)) and the perceptions of all levels of
employees of the organization's performance in relation to the critical success factors
(Human, 1993).
Experience suggests that affirmative action strategies should be developed in consultation
with trade unions and non-unionized employees and should be regularly monitored and
evaluated. In a country such as South Africa, affirmative action involves not only the
recruitment, development, promotion and retention of qualified individuals from historically
disadvantaged groups; it also involves the development of those with the potential to become
qualified either within the organizational setting or through educational and community
projects (Human, 1993).
In the discussion thus far, a distinction has been drawn between affirmative action (the
process) and employment equity (the result). It is accepted that this distinction may not be so
clearly drawn in other countries (such as Canada) where the terms affirmative action (so
defined) and employment equity would appear to be synonymous (Ontario Women's
Directorate, 1991).
A major distinction which this paper wishes to draw is not between affirmative action and
employment equity; it is between affirmative action/employment equity and managing
diversity. It would appear that the terms affirmative action/employment equity both
encompass, and are encompassed by, the concept of managing diversity.
To take an example: affirmative action in South Africa is part of the process of managing the
country's diversity. However, at the same time, and as part of an organization's affirmative
action strategy, employees in general, and line managers in particular, are required to be
competent in managing diversity. This paradox is probably a fact of life in most countries of
the world; managing diversity at one level incorporates affirmative action and yet, at the
particular level, is one of the competences required for the effective implementation of
affirmative action programmes.
Understood as a competence required by employees in general, and line managers in
particular, managing diversity is crucial for the effective management and development of
people. A line manager who is prejudiced against people from a specific racial group, for
example, is unlikely to manage those people effectively and to recognize and encourage their
particular strengths and talents. Managing diversity, at this level, thus concerns the
management of people irrespective of race, gender, ethnic background, religion, disability,
sexual orientation and so on. Many so-called managing diversity programmes not only
confuse the relationship between managing diversity and affirmative action and employment
equity, but also confuse managing diversity with managing culture. The argument presented
below suggests that it is counterproductive to equate managing diversity with managing
culture for a number of reasons. First, the conceptualizations of culture provided in such
programmes tend to be unduly fixed and inflexible. Second, national or ethnic culture tends to
be stressed at the expense of other social variables. Third, such programmes often
understate the importance of the relationship between perceptions of culture and power and
how this relationship impacts performance through the transmission of expectancy
communications. Finally, an understanding of this relationship is rarely translated into a need
for individuals to look at their own articulation with these concepts and at the need for change
from within (Human, 1994). These points are discussed in greater detail below.
The argument begins with a critical discussion of some of the work on culture and goes on to
discuss how some such work may have a negative impact on the management of diversity on
a practical level and in some organizational settings.

Multiculturalism and managing diversity

The maximalist versus the minimalist approach

One of the current debates on culture surrounds its definition, measurement and the utility of
such measurement with respect to managing diversity. Protagonists in this debate appear to
fall on to a continuum ranging from what can be called a maximalist (universalist) camp at the
one extreme to the minimalist (particularist) position at the other (Blommaert, 1988). Put
simply, the maximalist approach to culture argues, with varying degrees of certitude, that a
person's culture will tend to determine how that person interacts with others. At the other
extreme, the minimalist approach takes an interactional approach to culture and argues that
culture constitutes a subconscious part of the person's identity as a communicator and is
therefore constructed to a large extent by the perception of the other party in the interaction.
On a general level, maximalists tend to work with ideal-typical cultural differences which tend
to be both monolithic and deterministic. Moreover, contrary to the exhortations (and perhaps
the wish) of their authors, such ideal-types, to the average reader, tend to be value-laden
which has serious implications for both how individuals and groups perceive themselves and
how they are perceived by others. Such perceptions, in turn, in their ability to create either
positive or negative self-fulfilling prophecies, impact on both performance and development.
Although almost all of the authors of a more maximalist bent refer to the dynamic and
changing nature of culture as well as to individual variation, the fact is that many authors do
not place their ideal-types within a dynamic and changing framework which admits to
individual variation. Neither do they inform us about how this dynamism, change and
individual variation should be managed. Given this lack of clarification of provisos, the
average reader will tend to interpret the ideal-types as static, general (uniform), unchanging
fact and resort to the maximalist perspective in both their understanding and management of
other cultures.
Arguably the classic maximalist definition of culture is that of Hofstede (1994). Hofstede
(1994, p. 4) defines culture as the "collective programming of the mind which distinguishes
one group of people from another". His research has looked at the differences in work
behaviour and attitudes of people from a variety of countries. Hofstede (1994) concludes from
this research that "national culture" explains more of the differences in work-related values
than a person's organizational position, profession, age or gender.
Cultures, according to Hofstede (1980, 1994) vary across four main dimensions, namely,
individualism versus collectivism; power distance, uncertainty avoidance and masculinity
versus femininity.
Hofstede (1994) does not maintain that all members of a particular cultural group will hold
precisely the same values. Rather, he argues that the values are typical of that culture.
Moreover, although he acknowledges that cultures do change from time to time and are
dynamic in nature, he nevertheless believes that most value changes are peripheral and
would not really affect the four major dimensions.
Hofstede (1986) furthered his work on cultural differences by reference to the
learning/teaching environment in which he alerts teachers and students to the differences
they may encounter in teacher/student interaction between collectivist and individualist
societies; small versus large power distance societies; weak versus strong uncertainty
avoidance societies and masculine versus feminine societies. Although Hofstede (1980)
admits to the statistical rather than absolute nature of these four dimensions and although he
(1986) constantly qualifies his own use of these dimensions as well as stresses that not all
differences in teacher/student interaction can be associated with one of the four dimensions,
his work generally may not have been applied with the same level of qualification he employs.
Moreover, the value judgements attached to the various dimensions have also rarely been
explored as well as the self-fulfilling nature of the imposition of such classification on people.
Like many other authors who pursue a maximalist approach, Hofstede (1980, 1986) does not
go far enough; having qualified his own position, he does not go on to tell us how to deal with
all the qualifications he raises.
The maximalist approach has existed and continues to exist in the South African context, but
with an interesting twist. Academic papers in the early 1980s stressed the cultural argument
in relation to the under-performance of black managers. One of these papers (Coldwell and
Moerdyk, 1981) stressed the differences between European and African culture, the
descriptions of these cultures containing the tacit assumption that the former was inherently
superior to the latter. Thus, according to this article, whereas Europeans or whites are reared
in a culture geared to the profit-motive, to ambition, to individualism and to success, the black
environment stresses sharing, "ubuntu" (humaneness) and a sense of community. African
time was described as cyclical and as leading to a lack of responsibility with respect to time-
keeping. Subsequent qualitative research by a different author (Godsell, 1981, 1982)
highlighted the role of ubuntu in the lives of black managers, a value which is perceived as
more important in the lives of Africans than whites.
A great deal could be said about this trend in South African thinking. Suffice it to say that the
research does not clarify the role of apartheid and its impact on the lives and psyche of
African people, nor does it compare and contrast so-called African cultural traits with those of
either oppressed or rural people elsewhere in the world. The assumption is also made that
some of these cultural traits (for example, individualism versus communalism) constitute a
continuum rather than non-mutually exclusive categories.
Thus, many of the aspects of culture which are put forward as generating psychological
consequences which impede the ability of Africans to function in the western business
environment could also be construed as aspects of either rural community life or oppression.
However, urbanization has led to many millions of Africans moving to towns and to a radical
change in certain aspects of their traditional cultures. Furthermore, many African people (as
well as whites) behave situationally. In other words, they behave differently on a visit to
elderly parents in a rural area, or among friends in the township, from the way they behave in
the white-dominated work environment. For many people, the holding of two sets of nominally
contradictory values which are used according to the situation at hand is perfectly possible.
Moreover, the cultural argument appears to assume that cultures do not change over time
whereas it could be argued that, like all cultures, African cultures are evolving in order to meet
the needs and demands of the total society in which they operate.
Thus, one of the major problems with the maximalist perspective is that it tends to ignore the
cross-cutting complexity of other social variables such as level of modernization, social class,
level of education, language group and regional and political differences. De Haas (1990, p.
18), for example, argues that:
Linguistic groupings are cross-cut by factors such as differential education, wealth,
occupational status, religious world view and values which are of far more significance in daily
life than are differences based on "traditional culture", these significant differences not only
cause deep divisions within black society, but also create important cross-cutting ties between
black and white.
Although she does not explicitly mention the concepts of class and power relations, what De
Haas (1990, p. 18) argues is that the naturalness of ethnic groups is taken for granted by
whites, in particular. "A brief overview of the historical development of these `groups' will
serve to remind us [however] that, real as they are now in some respects, there is nothing
immutable about ethnic identities". While differences in traditional culture do exist between
different African linguistic groups (as they also do between, inter alia, Afrikaans, English,
Jewish and Portuguese white South Africans) such differences also occur within linguistic
groups, with class being an important variable in terms of both within-group differences and
between-group similarities. Thus, according to Adam and Moodley (1993, pp. 140-1):
Urban-rural tensions in the townships are marked by generational, cultural and political
differences. The predominant urban black identity emerged from a mixture of traditional
elements and rural customs, the street wisdom of survival in the townships and in the modern
workplace, and the consumerist aspirations of secular Western society. This politicized,
individualistic urban culture defines itself in sharp contrast to the ethos of rural inhabitants and
migrants, who are considered illiterate, unsophisticated country bumpkins. In the status
hierarchy of the townships, the people with rural ties are often scorned.
The influence of literature which expounds cultural differences and maximalist perspectives
has been enormous, both in South Africa and elsewhere in the world. On one level, such
literature, as well as the historically derived and transmitted stereotypes it both maintains and
creates, may serve a very important function: it helps us make sense of the world.
On other levels, however, such cultural stereotyping can be highly detrimental. First, such
stereotyping denies the reality of within-group differences as well as between-group
similarities and the cross-cutting complexity of other social variables. Second, such
stereotyping often signifies perceived power and status differentials as well as value-
judgements concerning inherent superiority or inferiority.
To further this point, research in South Africa, for example, suggests that many whites believe
that blacks are inherently less capable than whites. Centuries of oppression have led to the
"inferiorization of blacks" whereby blacks were seen as innately inferior and intellectually
limited (Adam and Moodley, 1993, p. 105). Such stereotypes remain. For example, a 1987
study (Human and Hofmeyr, 1987) of 306 business people, 98 per cent of whom were white
and 95 per cent male, found that while the majority felt that business and society should
accept black people, value their work, provide equal opportunities and open up facilities to all
race groups, the majority also felt that blacks do not have the objectivity to evaluate business
situations properly and just less than half felt that blacks are too emotional and that
challenging work is not as important to blacks as it is to whites. The respondents also had
problems with the self-confidence of blacks as well as their ability to contribute as much as
whites to the overall goals of the organization. Although three-quarters felt that blacks have
the capability to acquire the skills necessary for management positions, only half felt that
blacks are as capable as whites of learning mathematical and mechanical skills. This study
concluded that, although respondents generally felt most positive about the principles of equal
opportunity, fairness and non-discrimination, many still express the belief that blacks are
inherently inferior to whites.
These findings were confirmed in a subsequent study of 217 managers, 91 per cent of whom
were white males (Human, 1988). Again, five factors or clusters of answers were found; these
relate to "projection", the way in which people project themselves publicly; "inherent
capabilities"; "equitable climate" - equal opportunity within an organization; "leadership roles";
and "white attitudes" - the attitudes of other whites to blacks. What was found was that if a
person felt positively about the inherent capabilities of blacks, then he tended to also be
positive about projection, leadership and equitable climate. A positive attitude to equitable
climate, however, does not imply a positive attitude towards the other factors.
But how can people express racist attitudes about the inherent capabilities of blacks and at
the same time say they believe in equal opportunity? One obvious explanation for this finding
could be that these managers only pay lip-service to equal opportunities. While feeling that
they should be liberal because it is no longer acceptable in many companies to be racially
conservative, they still harbour doubts about the capabilities of blacks, as well as the desire to
hold on to power differentials.
Further research on the attitudes of white English-speaking male managers to the
advancement of white women in business suggests that male managers also doubt the
current abilities of women. It is interesting to note, however, that white women were not
perceived as inherently less capable than men; it was felt, rather, that women still have some
catching up to do (Human and Allie, 1988). These prejudices and attitudes which, in turn, can
lead to indirect discrimination - practices which inherently put women at a disadvantage -
appear to be relatively entrenched in the majority of countries of the world and serve to
highlight the difficult task faced by South African companies committed to the eradication of
both racism and sexism. Subsequent studies (Brook, 1991; Day, 1991; Human, 1991) reveal
similar findings to the ones mentioned above.
Such signification of power and status differentials through the more subtle yet perhaps more
powerful route of seemingly harmless maximalist perspectives relating to culture are
supported by the natural tendency among human beings to assign value judgements to the
cultural stereotypes they generate.
With respect to the question of cultural stereotypes, ideological contortionism in South Africa
is now taking on almost bizarre proportions. As stated earlier, a decade ago, African culture
was seen as a major blockage to success in the business world. Today, various new
maximalist perspectives argue that certain African values are crucial to the long-term success
of the capitalist enterprise (see, for example, Beck and Linscott (1993); Koopman (1993);
Lessem (1993)). Such shifts in liberal thinking reflect the trends mentioned by Rorty (1994, p.
13). However, the same dangers as in the US situation remain, particularly the failure of such
approaches to tackle power relations. Indeed, Rorty, reviewing Bernstein's Dictatorship of
Virtue: Multiculturalism and the Battle for America's Future, offers a scathing attack on cultural
sensitivity trainers for precisely this tendency; namely, an about-turn from the maximalist view
of certain underdeveloped cultures as problematic, to the somewhat trendy belief that such
cultures are, in fact, nice.
Although traditional maximalist stereotyping appears to perceive historically disadvantaged
communities as problematic while the cultural sensitivity trainers perceive them as nice,
neither approach involves an analysis of other social variables which impact on power relat
ions. In fact, both approaches would appear to do more harm than good, the traditional
approach by reinforcing negative stereotypes and the multicultural approach by alienating
those members of what Rorty refers to as the "nasty" culture. The end result in both instances
may well be the reconfirmation of negative stereotypes either through the (negative)
maximalism of traditional approaches or through the creation of defence mechanisms in the
more modern approach.
In this way, both the traditional maximalist perspective and the more modern multicultural
perspective can create the conditions under which power relations and how these impact on
performance expectations and conversational patterns remain unexplored, thereby retaining
the status quo.

Maximalism: stereotyping and performance expectations

Although inaccurate stereotypes can not only lead to inefficient decisions but also severely
retard the advancement of minority status individuals, organizations confront two intractable
problems. First, humans are dependent on stereotypes in order to make sense of the world
and stereotypes therefore cannot be eliminated (Falkenberg, 1990). Second, stereotypes are
resistant to change or modification because they help avoid inner conflict and insecurity; they
maintain basic values about the individual's societal role and power relations and provide an
interpretive framework for judging behaviour.
The initial classification of people or objects into groups often leads to an assignment of
status based on power relations. The assignment of positive or negative, in-group or outgroup
status, in turn, creates divergent performance expectations for individuals of different status:
"high status members are expected to organize and direct tasks, but low status individuals
are expected to complete assigned tasks and support group activities" (Falkenberg, 1990, p.
108). Stereotypes of high and low status groups tend to be maintained by the individual's
capacity to ignore information that does not fit current perceptions.
One problem with the maximalist perspective of culture as one aspect of power relationships
is that categorization tends to lead to the assignment of status. This differential status, in turn,
will affect the performance expectations in-groups (or in-cultures) have of out-groups (or out-
cultures) as well as the opportunities made available to out-groups.
Performance expectations, in turn, have a powerful impact on out-group members. According
to Howard and Hammond (1985), inferior performance and inferior ability are not the same
thing. According to these authors, poor performance is a behavioural problem, with negative
stereotypes engendering fear and self-doubt which, in turn, may lead to an avoidance of
competition. Out-group members (in this case, black Americans) may internalize feelings of
inferiority which can lead to a tendency to avoid effort and to a poor self-image. These
behavioural (and management) problems may develop among individuals who have the
ability to perform, in terms of their skills, knowledge and qualifications.
Expectancy communications which, it is argued here, can be related to power relations in
general and to the cultural stereotyping created by the maximalist perspective in particular,
are often extremely subtle, and according to Howard and Hammond (1985), affect behaviour
in two ways:
1 Behaviour. They affect intensity of effort, level of concentration and willingness to
take reasonable risks - a key factor in the development of self-confidence and new
skills.
2 Cognition. They influence the way people think about or explain their performance.
The causes to which people attribute their successes and failures have an important
impact on subsequent performance. People who are confident of doing well at a task,
when confronted with unexpected failure, will tend to attribute failure to inadequate
effort. A likely response to a similar task in the future is to work harder. People who
go into a task expecting to fail will tend to attribute their failure to a lack of ability.
They feel as though they do not have what it takes and will tend to give up (Howard
and Hammond, 1985, p. 20):
This combined effect on behaviour and cognition is what makes expectancy so powerful. The
negative expectancy first tends to generate failure through its impact on behaviour, and then
induces the individual to blame the failure on a lack of ability, rather than the actual (and
correctable) problem of inadequate effort. This misattribution in turn becomes the basis for a
new negative expectancy.
The individual, in effect, internalizes the low estimation originally held by others:
This internalized negative expectancy powerfully affects future competitive behaviour and
future results (Howard and Hammond, 1985, p. 20).
Traditional explanations of the small number and under-performance of Black managers in
South African organizations suggest that under-performance is a result of culture (Coldwell
and Moerdyk, 1981). More recent explanations have included a poor and racially divided
educational system and discrimination, which, too, have their roots in maximalist stereotyping
(Human and Hofmeyr, 1985) and ultimately in power relations. It has been suggested that,
with the demise of apartheid, racism, sexism and cultural stereotyping will disappear. This
would appear to be wishful thinking. All over the world, and particularly in a racist, patriarchal
country like South Africa, power differentials and maximalist stereotypes of culture (and of
gender) remain. These are no longer generally translated into overtly racist or sexist remarks
and/or behaviour. They remain, nevertheless, on the level of negative expectancy
communications and continue to cement power relations. Power relations continue to be
reinforced by the fact that such negative expectancy communications, even if extremely
subtle, have a powerful dampening effect on both the motivation and the performance of
many blacks (and, indeed, women) (Human, 1994).
Negative expectancy communications can also negatively impact relationships across
cultures. For those with self-confidence, negative expectancy communications can create an
irritable or angry response which may, in turn, be reciprocated or misunderstood by the
person commencing the conversion. For those lacking self-confidence, negative expectancy
communications can become a self-fulfilling prophecy as both the speaker and receiver
respond in a way which assumes that the receiver is in some way inadequate or inferior.
It is not enough for the maximalists merely to argue that their classifications are value-free.
Most people will attach value-judgements to them which, in turn, will form the basis of
negative or positive expectancies in social interactions. The extent to which people evaluate
information has been severely underestimated by maximalists. This, in turn, has led to a
failure to recognize the impact of their classifications on the average reader and of the status
differentials and expectancy communications such classifications generate.
For example, a recent report (Goleman, 1995), argues that, contrary to popular opinion, sights
and sounds that reach our conscious minds are not evaluated after they have been received
as neutral stimuli. Rather, a value has already been attached to them by the brain's
mechanisms of processing them. A test developed by psychologists for measuring the likes
and dislikes created at the moment of perception of a sound, a word or an image shows that
our evaluations are immediate and unconscious and are even applied to words or sounds that
people have never heard before. For example, to English-speakers, a nonsense word, such
as "chakaka" is disliked, whereas "bargulum" is moderately acceptable and "juvalamu" is
liked! (Goleman, 1995, p. 10).
The implications of such instantaneous evaluations are enormous in the sense that they
create the initial predisposition for things to get off on a positive or negative footing,
particularly in situations where people come from different regions or use different languages.
However, Bargh (Goleman, 1995) believes that it is possible to override these evaluations
with conscious thought. If an individual is aware of his/her initial biases and preferences,
thinking over one's initial judgements adds information and may overrule the unconscious
judgement. Failure to think further about initial judgements has the power to influence greatly
the course of social interaction inasmuch as they define the psychological reality of the
situation from the start. The problem is, of course, that because we are unaware of our initial
judgements, we tend to trust them in the same way as we trust our senses, without realizing
that what we assume are neutral perceptions are already biased. Bargh argues that when
someone immediately strikes us in either a positive or negative way, we frequently do not
question our perception or prejudgment because we fail to realize that an evaluation or
judgement has already taken place (Goleman, 1995).
It is these prejudgements that we have to learn to understand and control. We can do this by
placing culture within a broader perspective of diversity, flexibly applying our stereotypes to
people and situations and by managing the communication we have with others and
ourselves.
The basis of the managing diversity skills training programme described in this paper is a
recognition of the effect of such expectancy communications and the provision of skills to
communicate in more productive ways. This workshop is run for line managers (who are
generally white and male). A converse empowerment workshop is run in the main for blacks
and women. This workshop assists these out-group members with an understanding of how
expectancy communications can impact on levels of self-confidence and motivation and with
skills to counter such communications in the work situation; in other words, how they can
better manage power relations away from what may result in a negative self-fulfilling
prophecy.
The managing diversity skills workshop is contextualized and discussed in the section that
follows.

The managing diversity skills training programme

Managing diversity training concerns the ability to manage individuals who are impacted by
many social variables of which national culture is but one (Coetzee, 1990; Degenaar, 1993). It
is also concerned with making managers aware of how power relations impact on stereotypes
of groups and on perceptions of individuals and the expectations we have of them.
From the discussion thus far, it is also evident that an important aspect of managing diversity
is the provision of practical skills in order that individuals might better manage cultural
stereotypes, power relations and their attendant expectancy communications.
Falkenberg (1990) argues that, within a social cognition framework, three processes tend to
stimulate stereotype revision, namely:
1 unexpected behaviours become common and are associated with the out-group
individual;
2 expectations are based on knowledge of the individual rather than a broad
category;
3 out-group individuals are classified into an occupational sub-category (i.e.
according to other social variables such as occupation or social class).
The managing diversity skills programme which has resulted from the reasoning described in
this paper attempts to institute these three processes. First, delegates are made aware of the
negative impact of the maintenance of inaccurate stereotypes and expectancies based on
power relations and transmitted through ideas relating to culture. Second, they are provided
with an understanding of themselves and, finally, they are provided with the communication
skills not only to minimize the impact of negative stereotypes and expectations, but also to
reinforce the processes by which the development of more accurate stereotypes occurs.
Reinforcement is also provided by professional, holistic and fair human resource development
systems which are in turn supported by an actionable and negotiated code of conduct which
attempts to inculcate a respect for the dignity and the integrity of the individual. The objectives
of the managing diversity and concomitant empowerment workshops are relatively simple but
effective. They assist individuals with an understanding of how cultural stereotypes impact on
power relations and hence the performance of some historically disadvantaged employees.
They also assist participants to manage in a non-racist and non-sexist way; in other words, in
a way in which stereotypes are managed and positive expectancies transmitted. This involves
the creation of an understanding in delegates of the way in which they are currently
communicating and behaving (and the attitudes which may accompany this), and the
provision of skills to change from what is often a counterproductive behavioural form. The
understanding and skills provided, in turn, reinforce the move away from maximalist
stereotyping towards the development of respect for individuals - not as members of a
specific cultural group but rather as individuals who have unique relationships with the many
and complex social variables which have impacted on their development. The programme
thus looks inward rather than outward; in other words, it does not begin by providing
maximalist descriptions of the out-group, but rather by assisting delegates with an
understanding of how their own prejudices and stereotypes impact on power relationships
and hence on the attitudes and behaviours of those around them. "Situational adaptability"
(Marsh, 1993) involves adaptability, flexibility and empathy as well as the skills to convey
positive expectancies and to treat others as equal adults and with dignity and respect.
The personal empowerment workshop aims to assist delegates with the process of personal
empowerment by helping them to understand the process of development and personal
empowerment and the blockages to it and by providing simple practical skills to enhance
personal empowerment and more effectively to manage relationships in a diverse workplace.
This workshop constitutes the mirror image of the managing diversity workshop in the sense
that it assists those affected by discrimination with the ability to understand the blockages to
their own development and facilitates an ability to manage upwards. In other words, it
provides delegates (generally lower-level or non-managerial employees) with an
understanding of how the negative expectancies, racism or sexism of their managers may
impact levels of self-confidence and motivation and hence performance, and provides the
skills to manage these perceptions in a way which enhances self-image and self-esteem.
Many workshops attempt to deal with issues such as managing diversity, racism and sexism
as subjects in their own right; in other words, without exploring the consequences of these
issues with respect to performance, productivity, international relations and the like. The
workshops described here contextualize issues such as power relations, stereotyping and
negative expectancies as factors impacting on development and performance within the
worksetting. This contextualization helps delegates to understand both the consequences of
their behaviours and also the relevance of behavioural change. The use of actual work
problems in role-plays also highlights the relevance of the programme to practical reality.

Conclusion

It would appear that, in many intercultural situations, differential status is assigned according
to stereotypical ideas about the attitudes and behaviours of particular groups. Members of
some groups tend to project themselves as superior; members of others may feel inferior or
inadequate in intercultural encounters. Such issues can arise where race, power or status
constitute a dividing factor or when a language policy puts the group for whom the official
language is not a home language at a disadvantage. Such issues are often rife in gender
relations and/or also relate to mental/physical disability, as well as in circumstances of racial
and/or ethnic difference.
Meaningful and effective intercultural, inter-ethnic, inter-gender and inter-class situations
require an ability to manage diversity in its broadest sense. Managing diversity, in turn,
requires situational adaptability and communication skills which affirm the value of diverse
people and which communicate positive expectancies. Such affirmation, in turn, can create
the optimal conditions for effective co-operation and performance.
The relevance of these workshops to first world managers lies in the applicability of the skills
to managing diversity in its broadest sense. At a time when intercultural contact is increasing
and thrusts for employment equity prevail, managing diversity skills training requires
individuals to look internally at their own attitudes and behaviours rather than at the
reinforcement of often counterproductive stereotypes based on either tacitly negative or
romantically positive views of particular national cultures.

Notes

1.During the mid-1970s, pressure on foreign companies operating in South Africa to

practice equal opportunity increased as a result of the introduction of various codes of
employment practice. These included the Sullivan Principles and the code of the
European Economic Community. The Sullivan Code, which impacted US controlled
companies operating in South Africa, focused not only on non-discriminatory social
responsibility issues but also advancement in the form of skills development.
2.In this article, the terms blacks and black are used for (Black) Africans, coloureds
and Asians collectively.
In 1993, the South African population numbered 40.7 million, having grown at an
average rate of 2.44 per cent since 1985. Black Africans comprised 76 per cent of the
population; whites 13 per cent; coloureds 8.5 per cent and Asians 2.5 per cent. The
male/female ratio was 0.95:1 and less than half of the population was officially
urbanized (48 per cent). However, the functional urbanization level, which includes
informal urbanization, was estimated at 65 per cent (DBSA, 1994, p. 17).
The extent to which apartheid policies have limited the integration of blacks into the
formal economy is evidenced by the large numbers of black people found in the
informal sector: in subsistence agriculture or with no work at all. Over 40 per cent of
the population cannot find a formal job (Barker, 1993, p. 63). At the same time, White
men constitute 64 per cent of high-level manpower (Barker, 1993, p. 63) and, in 1990,
business enterprises owned by blacks were estimated to constitute less than 4 per
cent of total businesses (Maas, 1993, p. 74). Income is also unequally distributed with
South Africa's Gini coefficient, for the economy as a whole, standing at 0.60 per cent
(Barker, 1993, p. 63).
The composition of South Africa's labour force is basically a reflection of decades of
oppression which denied black people the opportunity to obtain all but basic
education as well as the right to professional and skilled positions in all but a limited
 number of enterprizes (Human and Hofmeyr, 1985). Since the unbanning of the ANC
and other political parties, and particularly since South Africa's first democratic
elections in 1994, the need to end decades of inequality has become a priority.
Both the ANC and Democratic Party have suggested that legislation to regulate
employment practice may be desirable, particularly if private sector organizations do
not begin to get their "houses in order" in the interim. Although organizations such as
SACOB (1993) have suggested that affirmative action should be voluntary and
without a statutory foundation, this approach was tried in the USA for nearly a quarter
of a century and was found not to work (Blumrosen, 1985). During the period 1945 to
1965 when efforts took the form of voluntary programmes with almost no law
enforcement, the occupational status of so-called "minorities" failed to improve.
Significant law enforcement efforts since 1965 have increased the "voluntary"
introduction of such programmes and have led to a dramatic improvement in the
position of "minorities" (Blumrosen, 1985).
The track record of most South African companies in relation to employment equity
suggests that a voluntary approach may not produce the kinds of changes required in
the short to the medium term. For example, a 1992 research project involving 41
companies employing 571, 511 people suggests that blacks remain marginal in
managerial and professional categories. For example, in Paterson Bands D to F,
Africans constituted 2.1 per cent of the sample, coloureds 1.7 per cent, Asians 1.7
per cent and Whites 94.5 per cent. Only 5.1 per cent of employees in Paterson Bands
D to F were women (Bowmaker-Falconer, 1993). Another study, undertaken a little
later, of 600 managers in 200 companies, puts the percentage of African males in top
and senior management at 2.5 per cent and African females at 0.3 per cent. The
comparable percentages for white males and females are 88.2 per cent and 6.0 per
cent respectively. Surprisingly, African males occupied no more than 7 per cent of
middle and junior management positions, and African females 1.4 per cent, compared
with 72 per cent for white males and 12.6 per cent for white females. Another
alarming statistic was that African males occupied less than 17 per cent and African
women less than 3 per cent of supervisory and skilled positions compared with 31 per
cent white men and 35 per cent white women (BMI/BMF, 1993).
It would appear that over 15 per cent of the population of South Africa is disabled,
with over three-quarters of these not being economically active and only 0.26 per cent
being productively employed in the open labour market (da Avila-Coelho, 1994).

References
Adam, H., Moodley, K., 1993, The Negotiated Revolution, Jonathan Ball Publishers,
Johannesburg.
African National Congress", 1994, Reconstruction and Development Programme: A Policy
Framework, Umanyano Publications, Johannesburg.
Barker, F., 1993, "The labour market", Nomvete, B., The Economic Democratization of South
Africa, AIPA, Johannesburg, pp. 63-6.
Beck, D., Linscott, G., 1993, "The African crucible: unity in diversity", Christie, P., Lessem, R.,
Mbigi, L., African Management: Philosophies, Concepts and Applications, Knowledge
Resources, Johannesburg, pp. 93-109.
Bennell, P., Strachan, B., 1992, "The Zimbabwean experience: black occupational
advancement", Hugo, P., Redistribution and Affirmative Action: Working on South Africa's
Political Economy, Southern Books, Johannesburg, pp. 23-41.
Blommaert, J., 1988, "Intercultural communication and objects of adaptation", Working
Document 3, International Pragmatics Association, Antwerp, 61-70.
Blumrosen, A., 1985, "Improving equal employment opportunities: lessons from the United
States experience", paper prepared for the Royal Commission on Employment Opportunity of
the Government of Canada, Canada, 423-40.
BMI/BMF", 1993, Succeeding in Affirmative Action in South Africa in the 1990s, BMI, Rivonia,
March.
Bowmaker-Falconer, A., 1993, "Bumpy journey to employment equity", Die Suid-Afrikaan, No.
44, May/June, pp. 12-14.
Brook, J., 1991, "The attitudes of white civil servants to the upward occupational mobility of
Africans and so called `coloureds': findings from four municipalities in the Western Cape",
Human, L., Educating and Developing Managers for a Changing South Africa: Selected
Essays, Juta, Cape Town, pp. 66-95.
Bruce, F., 1994, "A qualitative diversity perception audit", research report submitted in partial
fulfilment of requirements of MBA, Graduate School of Business, University of Stellenbosch,
Bellville.
Coetzee, E., 1990, "Stereotypes in contemporary South African cultural discourses", MA
thesis, University of Stellenbosch, Bellville.
Coldwell, D., Moerdyk, A., 1981, "Paradigms apart: black managers in a white man's world",
South African Journal of Business Management, 12, 3, 70-6.
Da Avila-Coelho, M., 1994, "Equity for people with disabilities", People Dynamics, January,
17-22.
Day, R., 1991, "The attitudes of white male MBA students to the advancement of blacks and
white women in business", Human, L., Educating and Developing Managers for a Changing
South Africa: Selected Essays, Juta, Cape Town.
DBSA", 1994, South Africa's Nine Provinces: A Human Development Profile, Development
Bank of Southern Africa, Johannesburg.
Degenaar, J., 1993, Nations and Nationalism: The Myth of a South African Nation.
De Haas, M., 1990, "Ethnicity in perspective", Democracy in Action, February.
Falkenberg, L., 1990, "Improving the accuracy of stereotypes within the workplace", Journal
of Management, 16, 1, 107-18.
Faundez, J., 1994, Affirmative Action: International Perspectives, International Labour Office,
Geneva.
Godsell, G., 1981, Work Value Differences in South Africa: An Introduction, CSIR Special
Report Pers 320, CSIR, NIPR.
Godsell, G., 1982, Work Values and Work Value Conflict in South African Organisations,
IACCP Congress, Aberdeen, July.
Goleman, D., 1995, "What we like and dislike: how the brain processes sight and sound",
International Herald Tribune, 10.
Heath, A., 1981, Social Mobility, Fontana, Glasgow.
Hofstede, G., 1980, Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-related
Values, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
Hofstede, G., 1986, "Cultural differences in teaching and learning", International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 10, 301-20.
Hofstede, G., 1994, "Defining culture and its four dimensions", European Forum for
Management Development: Focus: Cross-cultural Management, 94, 1.
Howard, J., Hammond, R., 1985, "Rumors of inferiority. The hidden obstacles to black
success", The New Republic, 9, 17-21.
Human, L., 1991, "Why affirmative action programmes fail: the South African experience",
Human, L., Educating and Developing Managers for a Changing South Africa: Selected
Essays, Juta, Cape Town, pp. 217-26.
Human, L., 1993, Affirmative Action and the Development of People: A Practical Guide, Juta,
Cape Town.
Human, L., 1994, "The South African experience as a mirror for understanding
interculturalism in Europe", paper delivered at 1994 SIETAR Europa Symposium, Jyväskylä,
Finland, 11-12.
Human, L., Allie, F., 1988, "The attitudes of white English-speaking male managers to the
advancement of women in business", South African Journal of Labour Relations, 12, 2, 38-50.
Human, L., Hofmeyr, K., 1985, Black Managers in South African Organisations, Juta, Cape
Town.
Human, P., 1988, Do Multi-nationals Make a Difference? A Comparison of the Value
Orientations of Multinationals with Local Companies Operating in South Africa, Multinational
Culture Conference, Hofstra University, New York.
Human, P., 1991, "Managerial beliefs and attitudes and change in South Africa", Human, L.,
Educating and Developing Managers for a Changing South Africa: Selected Essays, Juta,
Cape Town, pp. 96-116.
Human, P., Hofmeyr, K., 1987, "Attitudes of South African managers to the advancement of
bslacks in business", South African Journal of Labor Relations, 11, 3, 5-19.
Koopman, A., 1993, "Transcultural management: in search of pragmatic humanism", Christie,
P., Lessem, R., Mbigi, L., African Management: Philosophies, Concepts and Applications,
Knowledge Resources, Johannesburg, pp. 41-76.
Lessem, R., 1993, "Four worlds: the Southern African business sphere", Christie, P., Lessem,
R., Mbigi, L., African Management: Philosophies, Concepts and Applications, Knowledge
Resources, Johannesburg, pp. 17-40.
Maas, G., 1993, "Black entrepreneurs", Nomvete, B., The Economic Democratization of
South Africa, AIPA, Johannesburg, pp. 74-7.
Marsh, D., 1993, "The Worlds in Collision Conspiracy; Intercultural Situational Adaptability as
a Success Factor", Fifth International Seminar of ENCODE: Languages and Culture: Bridges
to International Trade, Lancashire Business School, Preston.
Ontario Women's Directorate", 1991, Organisational Analysis, Managing Employment Equity,
Ontario Women's Directorate, Ontario.
Rorty, R., 1994, "A leg-up for Oliver North", The London Review of Books, 20.
SACOB", 1993, A SACOB Policy on Affirmative Action, South African Chamber of Business,
Johannesburg, 13.
Shilowa, S., 1994, "Black economic empowerment and the RDP", The Innes Labour Brief, 5,
4, 7-17.
Thomas, R., 1990, "From affirmative action to affirming diversity", Harvard Business Review,
March-April, 107-17.