Post on 01-Feb-2022
transcript
Gender and Racial Diversity in South Africa’s Companies:
An Exploration of Barriers and Solutions in the Literature
Modi Hlobo
University of Johannesburg
ABSTRACT
South Africa’s Apartheid regime deeply entrenched racial and gender inequalities amongst
South Africans, which negatively affected all spheres of the economy, the working
environment as well as society.
However, since the dawn of democracy more than two decades ago, South Africans have
experienced changes in the landscape of employment. This has been mainly due to numerous
legislation that were implemented to redress previous unfair discrimination in the workplace.
Recently, researcher have identified slow progress in transformation of the working
environment. This article is based on a literature analysis on the state of gender and racial
diversity in the workplace, the barriers that are hindering the progression of women and blacks
in the working place as well as the strategic methods adopted to retain women and blacks in
the working environment.
The results from the analysis indicate that legislation on its own is not sufficient to efficiently
achieve diversity in the working environment. Organisation and countries need to also
implement other strategic programs in order to achieve this goal.
The outcomes from this study are significant for South African regulators, as they provide
justification for increased efforts to transform or diversify the South African working
environment, particularly since some studies have recognised that diversity can have a
positive impact in an organisation.
Key words
Discrimination, Diversity, Apartheid, Gender, Race,
INTRODUCTION
Over the years companies have embraced diversity and as a result they have realised
significant increases in workforce productivity and job performance. It has been said that a
diverse workforce drives economic growth, as more women and racial minorities enter the
workforce (Burns, Barton & Kerby, 2012)
According to Maznevski (1994), Milliken and Martins (1996), Pelled (1996), Boeker (1997) and
Timmerman (2000), demographic diversity includes gender, age, race and cognitive diversity,
which encompasses knowledge, education, values, perception and personality
characteristics.
Diversity can broadly be defined as variety amongst the employees with regard to
characteristics such as different kinds of expertise, managerial background, personality,
learning style, age, gender, education and values (Swartz & Firer, 2005). Diversity advocates
suggest that to make managers and board members act ethically; there should be support for
diversity on the boards of directors (Fields & Keys, 2003). In addition, there have been
numerous contemporary studies on demographic diversity and its effect on performance
(Randy & Carson, 2005).
In South Africa, gender and racial inequalities in the workplace are still a major concern. The
2014-2015 Commission for Employment Equity (Department of Labour, 2015) reported on the
employment distribution of the various population groups in terms of their representation at
the top management levels of organisations. The representation of white people decreased
marginally by 2.6%, dropping from 72.6% in 2012 to 70% in 2014. Black representation
increased slightly by 1.3%, rising from 12.3% in 2012 to 13.6% in 2014. The representation of
coloureds remained the same at 4.7% whilst the representation of Indians increased by 1.3%,
rising from 7.3% in 2012 to 8.6% in 2014. The representation of foreign nationals increased
by 0.3%, rising from 3.1% in 2012 to 3.4% in 2014. Notwithstanding the fact that there is a
steady but slow decline in the representation of whites, their domination remains as they
maintain more than a two-thirds majority in terms of representation at this level in
organisations. It is worth mentioning that there has been a slight drop (0.9%) in male
representation at top management level. This is an indication that significant interventions are
required to help women and non-whites break through the ‘glass ceiling’ in the work place.
Based on the above it is clear that in order to diversify, organisations need to address the
different barriers that are obstructing the advancement of minorities in the workplace.
A study by Orlando, Kirby and Chadwick (2013) reveals that most companies have now
implemented diversity policies in order to counter discrimination. Such companies have come
to realise that having a diversified working environment provides a competitive advantage. A
2008 study by the European Business Test Panel (EBTP) indicates that 63% of their
companies recognise the link between diversity and innovation, as compared to 26% in 2005.
A study by Dickens (2012) illustrates that voluntary agreements are more effective in ensuring
fair employment outcomes as compared to legal agreements and programmes such as
affirmative action.
In 2015, the South African Commission for Employment Equity reveals that in spite of
affirmative action programmes, progress with transformation has been very slow Department
of Labour (2015). This slow progress was also registered by the 2009 (EEOC) report in the
United States, which states that although some progress has been made in the composition
of the workforce over the last ten years, the progress however has been slow in transforming
the workplace (United States Equal Employment Opportunities Commission, 2009).
This slow progress in transformation is an indication that legislation on its own is not adequate
to encourage racial diversity in the work place; there is a need for a more integrated approach.
GENDER DIVERSITY
Although women have been active in the workforce for several decades, their representation
at senior management level is still alarmingly low. In the UK in 2002, there were only 5% of
women at senior level management while in Malaysia only 5.4% of women held management
positions (Burke & Nelson, 2002).
The 2013 Grant Thornton International Business Report (IBR) on women in business revealed
that women filled just over 25% of top decision-making roles in South Africa’s businesses.
Since 2009, only 28% of South African senior management positions were filled by women
and this figure had remained static, even in 2013. Of even greater concern is the fact that 21%
of South African businesses surveyed in 2013 had no women at all in senior management
positions (Grant Thornton, 2013).
The 2013 IBR survey further revealed that only 15% of board members in South Africa were
women, compared to 19% globally and 26% in the BRICS economies. It is encouraging to
note that the statistics showed a significant improvement in terms of women in Chief Financial
Officer (CFO) positions in South Africa. According to the survey, the number of women CFOs
in South Africa has more than doubled in 2013 when compared to 2012, up 128% from 14%
to 32%. The number of Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) continues to be low, although slightly
up from 2012, rising from 8% to 10% in 2013 (Grant Thornton, 2013).
These statistics raise questions as to why there is such a low representation of women in
senior-level management, particularly as there is no supporting evidence that women are less
efficient managers compared to their male counterparts (Carli & Eagly, 2001).
It is therefore evident that there is an intangible “glass ceiling” preventing women from
advancing in the workplace. In order to shatter this glass ceiling and permanently remove the
barriers that prevent women from progressing in the corporate world, it is important to identify
and understand these barriers and formulate strategies that could be used by corporate
organisations to assist women in moving up the corporate ladder (Powell & Graves, 2003).
In 2012, Ernst & Young conducted a survey of 1 000 UK working women between the ages of
18 and 60. The report resulting from this study was entitled “The glass ceiling is dead as a
concept for today’s modern career”. In the Ernst & Young study, women confirmed that they
had faced multiple barriers throughout their career. The following section discusses some of
these barriers to the progression of women in the corporate world (Ernst & Young, 2012).
Barriers to the Progression of Women
Research reveals that there are tangible and non-tangible barriers that could be deterring the
advancement of women in the business world. These barriers make it difficult for women to
progress and they prevent both women and minorities from moving up the management
hierarchy (Powell & Graves, 2003). The following section explains some of these barriers:
A. Family barrier (family duties and motherhood)
The 2012 Ernst & Young survey revealed that the impact of becoming a mother was identified
as one of the key barriers to women’s progression in the workplace. Traditionally, a woman’s
primary role was her domestic responsibilities and anything else distracting her from this role
would cause conflict. This traditional role therefore meant that men were freed from any
domestic or childcare responsibilities (Charles & Davies, 2000).
A study of the comparative roles of men and women in America and Europe conducted by
Williams and Cooper in 2004 indicates that women are responsible for between 65% and 85%
of childcare work. This practice has resulted in women spending less time in the workplace,
receiving a lower salary and lower benefits, as well as not progressing in the corporate world.
Similar studies conducted in the science and engineering field by Rosser (2004), Maskell-
Pretz and Hopkins (1997) and Miller (2004) confirm that one of the significant barriers for
women attempting to advance in the business world is the pressure that they face in balancing
career and family life. This study indicates that women failed to reach senior positions as they
were not willing to spend long hours at the workplace at the expense of spending time with
their families.
Most organisations are still male-dominated. These organisations view ideal employees as
those working long hours and spending limited time with their families (Lewis & Cooper, 1999).
The majority of women in the 2012 Ernst & Young survey rated family commitment very high
and found it hard to strike a balance between career and family life. Organisations wishing to
benefit from gender equality need to move away from their “masculine” style of running the
business and start embracing females and their requirements (Burke & Nelson, 2002; Konek
& Kitch, 1994; Schuck & Liddle, 2004).
Experience or qualifications barrier
In the 2012 Ernst & Young survey, the lack of experience or qualifications was rated as the
second highest factor that constrained women from progressing in their careers. According to
Simpson, Sturges, Woods and Altman (2004), improving one’s qualifications and experience
is an individual responsibility if one wishes to progress in one’s career. Education and skill,
when supported with equal opportunities in the workplace, lead to an individual’s career
progression (Simpson et al., 2004). This is a global principle, whether in South Africa or
internationally.
B. Persistence in gender salary or wage gaps
Another barrier identified was the persistent gender pay gap. A report submitted to the
International Labour Organisation (ILO) in 2009 noted that in most countries, women’s wages
for work of equal value represent an average of between 70% and 90% that of men’s’.
A 2014 study by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) points to an international
overall average gender pay gap of 26% in favour of men. According to this report, the gap is
even higher at 32% for women with children.
An article in The Guardian newspaper dated 27 January 2014 reveals that South Africa has
an overall gender pay gap of 33%. ‘This means women effectively earn in a full year what men
earn in eight months,’ writes Sandra Burmeister, CEO of executive search firm Amrop
Landelahni. Even with such a high gender pay gap from a global perspective, South Africa
was doing well. It remains among the top 20 in the World Economic Forum overall gender gap
rankings.
C. Society perception barrier
According to a 2013 study by Adkins, Samaras, Gilfillan and McWee, societies’ perception of
women is another barrier that deters the advancement of women in the corporate environment.
There exists a societal perception that women are not modelled for executive positions.
Ridgeway (2001) describes a “good mother” as one who spends more time at home and less
time in the workplace. In contrast, an employed father is considered to be a “good father” and
more professionally competent (Fuegen, Biernat, Haines & Deaux, 2004). These belief
systems create barriers preventing women from advancing in the workplace since women
employed full-time are seen as violating the perceived norms while employed fathers are seen
as the providers. This type of societal pressure of work-life balance is also visible in South
Africa despite affirmative action principles, which stipulate that women should be given more
employment opportunities compared to their male counterparts (Booysen, 2007).
D. Barriers stemming from a lack of female role models
The 2012 Ernst & Young survey also disclosed that 75% of the women that were questioned
indicated that they had few or no female role models within their organisations, which hindered
their career development. Okurame (2007) and Burke, Vinnicombe, Singh and James (2006)
believe that women in senior positions should take on the personal responsibility of mentoring
younger women and acting as their role models. Women in senior-level positions should drive
the implementation of policies empowering women in their organisations (Burke & McKeen,
1994). Other studies point to women in senior positions who were reluctant to promote other
women because of fear of competition for positions or “the queen bee syndrome” (Staines,
Tavris & Hayagrante, 1973). This was particularly evident in situations where opportunities
were limited (Davidson & Cooper 1992).
E. Organisational culture barrier
Another factor identified as a barrier to women’s advancement in the work place is
organisational culture. Lord, Brown, Harvey and Hall (2001) define organisational culture as a
‘system of shared meanings, values, beliefs, practices, group norms of the members to
produce behavioural norms with regard to the working conditions of the organization’. A 2000
study by Charles and Davies points out that these cultural norms are so well adhered to by
employees, that they often supersede formal organisational policies. Even though
organisations promote a neutral gender environment in the workplace, the male dominance in
the workplace is validated daily as a cultural norm. Therefore, these cultural associations of
power and masculinity make it difficult for women to progress because their gender challenges
masculine power.
In South Africa, despite changes in legislature, white male dominance (“the old boys club”)
which is prevalent in corporate culture is still largely visible in organisations. This leads to
significant barriers to those outside this group, as business deals are concluded in gentlemen’s
clubs or sports clubs and the boardroom is a mere formality. This practice still poses a
challenge for both women and black employees who are not part of these inner circles
(Rosener, 2003).
It is therefore evident that there are barriers that hinder the progression of women in the
workplace. If organisations wish to benefit from a diversified working environment, they need
to embrace women and implement policies and strategies that promote transformation.
Strategic Methods Adopted to Achieve Gender Diversity
Even to this day discrimination against women persists in many aspects of employment and
includes the type of jobs that women can obtain, their remuneration, their benefits and working
conditions as well as their access to decision-making positions. This discrimination continues
despite legislative and policy initiatives (Powell & Graves, 2003).
The 100th International Labour Conference Report of 2011 notes that discrimination against
women has deep social roots, which cannot be removed simply by legislation or any one
specific measure (International Labour Organisation, 2011).
According to Moser and Moser (2005), the Association for Women’s Rights Development
identifies “gender mainstreaming” as a globally accepted strategy for promoting gender
equality. The Organisation defines gender mainstreaming as ‘a strategy which aims to bring
about gender equality and advance women’s rights by infusing gender analysis, gender-
sensitive research, women’s perspectives and gender equality goals into mainstream policies,
projects and institutions’.
Moser and Moser (2005) indicate that mainstreaming is not the only approach that is required
to achieve gender equality. The strategies discussed below by other researchers have been
identified as other effective methods of reducing gender discrimination and improving
women’s progression in the work place.
A. Balancing work and family responsibilities
The International Labour Organisation (ILO) Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention
No. 156 of 1981 and its accompanying Recommendation (No. 165) provide guidance on
drafting policies that enable male and female workers with family responsibilities to advance
in their employment without discrimination. One such policy is flexible working conditions,
which is aimed at reducing absenteeism, attracting and retaining skilled staff as well as
improving productivity and time management.
According to a report on incidence of flexible work schedules increases from US Bureau of
Labour Statistics, flexible work arrangements have increased over the years. In the United
States between 1991 and 1997, the percent of full-time wage and salary workers with flexible
work schedules increased from 15.1% to 27.6%. Nearly 29% of married workers were working
flexible working hours and approximately 30% of workers with children under six years were
working according to a flexible schedule.
The 2011 International Labour Conference Report discusses other family-friendly policies that
are gradually being introduced in some organisations, notably, job sharing and teleworking.
These are all presented with the intention of reducing discrimination in the labour market faced
by workers with family responsibilities.
According to this conference report, some countries have introduced a free public nursery to
assist employed parents with young children. In Chile, the number of free public nurseries for
children aged three months to two years increased from 14 400 in 2005 to 64 000 in 2008.
The introduction of affordable, high-quality childcare can reduce structural barriers for many,
particularly those who are low-paid and unable to afford alternative childcare options
(International Labour Organisation, 2011).
In Hungary, the “Start Plusz” Programme, was introduced in 2007. The programme provides
employers who employ women a subsidy for social security contributions. A lack of sufficient
support for employees with family responsibilities can make organisations unattractive for
some parents, as they are forced to choose between employment and caring for their children
(International Labour Organisation, 2011).
B. Maternity and paternity status
Even though developed economies such as that of the European Union comply with the ILO
maternity standards, the 2011 International Labour Conference Report notes that most
countries do not provide pregnant women with sufficient benefits. In Africa, only 39% of
countries reviewed provided benefits in accordance with ILO standards. Some countries,
including Lesotho, New Guinea and Swaziland provided no cash benefit for pregnant women.
According to the 2011 International Labour Conference Report, there was still discrimination
against women on the grounds of maternity in spite of established legislation and standards.
In 2009, the United States received 6 196 cases, compared to 3 977 cases in 1997. The
majority of these cases related to dismissals for pregnancy, dismissal while nursing, failure to
grant time for nursing and the non-payment of pre- and postnatal benefits.
The Maternity Protection Convention 2000 (No. 183) stipulates that it is vital to provide women
with benefits whilst they are pregnant so that they can maintain their children and are not
disadvantaged in the labour market as a result of pregnancy. (International Labour
Organisation 2000).
The 2011 International Labour Conference Report also revealed several new pieces of
legislation that have been introduced to improve the situation of women in the workplace. For
example, the government of Costa Rica has issued a teleworking pronouncement on certain
job profiles. In Europe, some companies are implementing policies which grant women
additional weeks of maternity leave with wages fully paid by the company. There have also
been improvements in paternal leave legislation. Since 2010, fathers in Finland have been
entitled to an additional 24 days of paternity leave. In Slovenia fathers are granted up to 90
days of paternity leave, while in Kenya fathers get two weeks’ paid paternity leave.
Organisations in these countries and other organisations that offer maternity benefits to
women are therefore able to attract women who seek a balance between work and family life.
In South Africa, women are given up to four months’ paid or unpaid maternity leave, however,
fathers are only allocated three days’ paid paternity leave.
C. Girls’ access to education
As indicated earlier, the second highest barrier that affects women’s progression in the
workplace is a lack of education. In most developing countries, girls are at a disadvantage
regarding access to education when compared to boys. According to the 2010 World
Development Indicators published by the World Bank, 64 developing countries have achieved
gender parity in enrolments at primary school level and another 20 are on track to do so by
2015. However, 22 countries are lagging far behind, the majority of these being in sub-
Saharan Africa.
In secondary level education, 73 countries, mainly in Latin America, the Caribbean, Europe
and Central Asia, have succeeded in achieving gender parity whilst another 14 are well on
track. The majority of countries in sub-Saharan Africa, however, are lagging far behind and
are unlikely to achieve parity if current trends continue (World Bank, 2010).
In 2003, the South African Minister of Education launched the Girls’ Education Movement
(GEM) in Parliament. UNICEF supported the National Department of Education to roll out
GEM in all of the country’s nine provinces. GEM is an African childdriven grassroots movement
where children and young people in schools and communities work to bring positive changes
in the lives of African girls and boys. GEM aims to:
Give girls equal access to education
Improve the quality of education, especially in disadvantaged rural schools
Make the school curriculum and school books gender responsive
Create schools that are safe and secure for children, especially girls
Work with boys as strategic partners
Reduce gender-based violence
Abolish harmful cultural practices such as early marriage for girls
Affirmative action
The 2011 International Labour Conference Report states that since 2007, numerous
affirmative action programmes have been implemented to foster transformation in the
workplace. In Spain, companies were required to meet gender quotas of between 40% to 60%
for boards and executive positions by 2015. In 2008, the Norwegian government required that
boards should have 40% of people from each gender. In pursuing its quota system, Norway
saw growth in female company board members, increasing from 7% in 2003 to 39% in 2008.
In South Africa, the constitution’s objective is to ensure that its citizens enjoy equal rights, and
that the social imbalances that were created by the Apartheid Laws are re-dressed. The
Economic Empowerment Act (EEA Act) was a necessary step towards the transformation of
the South African working environment. This Act is seen as a tool to ensure the progression
of women and black people in the labour market and to break the glass ceiling that had
prevented these groups from advancing and enjoying the same access to job opportunities as
their male counterparts (Mdladlana, 1999).
Narrowing the salary or wage gap
The salary gap between men and women is another cause for concern. In the United Kingdom,
for example, data contained in the 2008 Labour Force Survey (LFS) revealed that the majority
of women were paid lower salaries compared to their male counterparts. The survey shows
women occupying two-thirds of jobs in lower-paid categories and two-fifths in other categories.
Over the years, there have been various strategies and policies adopted by different countries
to narrow this discrepancy in remuneration. For example, Rubery, Grimshaw and Figueiredo
(2005) indicate that in 2003, the European Council of Ministers agreed to new guidelines for
European member states to pursue the European Employment Strategy (EES). These
included adopting policies that aimed to achieve a substantial reduction in the gender pay gap
in each member state by 2010.
In 2008, the Low Pay Commission study revealed that in the United Kingdom, the minimum
wage increase affected jobs held mostly by women. According to the study, it affected a total
of 5.6% of women compared to 3% of men. Since the introduction of the National Minimum
Wage in 1999 in the United Kingdom, salaries at lower pay rates have become more equal
between men and women, however, the gender pay gap for high earners has remained
unaffected by the national minimum wage policy.
The 2016 European Commission report on gender equality indicates that Cyprus adopted a
regulation in 2009 that promoted equal pay for work of equal value as a way forward. As at
2016, there was equal pay between men and women in the public sector and semi-
governmental organisations. In the private sector, however, the wage gap between men and
women remained high (15.6%).
In South Africa, Employment Equity was introduced in 1998 to address the pay gap between
men and women as well as between whites and blacks.
RACIAL DIVERSITY
Globally, gender and racial discrimination continue to exist in the workplace and these
practices are negatively affecting the progression of racial minorities and women and fair
remuneration (Bartlett, 2009; Hirsh & Lyons, 2010)
According to Ibarra (1995) and Westphal and Stern (2007) in the United States, racial minority
groups receive fewer opportunities and career benefits when compared to their white
counterparts. Katz and Stern (2008) concur with this view that African Americans receive far
lower incomes when compared to their white counterparts. In 2004, the average income of an
African American family between the ages of 30 and 39 was 48% less than the average
income of a white family within the same age group. The situation for African American women
is even worse, as they experience both racial and gender discrimination in the workplace
(Browne, 1999).
In the United Kingdom in 2002, Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) maintains that where
ethnic minorities made up 8% of the total UK workforce, there was a 6% representation of
ethnic minorities in management positions.
In the United States, in the science and engineering field, DiTomaso, Post and Parks-Yancy
(2007) reveal that United-States-born white males are viewed as more competent than their
black counterparts and, as a result, are more favoured and receive greater benefits and
promotions.
Rosette, Leonardelli and Phillips (2008) add that white leaders are considered to have a more
"prototypical leadership" style compared to African-American leaders, who are viewed in a
less favourable light.
In South Africa the situation is even worse. According to statistics South Africa in 2014, the
unemployment rate amongst black Africans stood at 39% compared to 8.3% for whites.
Barriers to progression of other racial groups
Over and above the research discussions around racial discrimination in the working
environment, there are also discussion made on the different barriers that hinder the
progression of other racial in the working environment. Kandola (2004) reveals stereotyping,
a lack of role models, networks and social ties are some of the factors deterring career
progression of racial minorities in senior management positions in the United Kingdom. These
factors are explored in the sections that follow.
A. Stereotyping
Davidson (2002) and Stewart and Bapat (1996) view racial discrimination as a “glass ceiling”
which prevents minority ethnic workers’ progression to higher levels in their working
environment.
Roberson and Block (2001) maintain that racism breaks down communication between racial
minority employees and their white supervisors, which in turn reduces the support received by
minorities. These practices of racial discrimination have a negative stereotypical effect on
minorities, who are perceived as underperformers. Such practices produce anxiety, distraction
and inefficiency, which lead to reduced performance levels (Steele & Aronson, 1995).
Fearfull and Kamenou (2006) and Stewart and Bapat (1996) note that the negative
stereotypes that come with racial discrimination make minorities feel undermined and doubt
their own credibility. This statement is supported by Kandola (2004), who states that minority
employees feel that the lack of understanding of their culture is a hindrance to their being
promoted in the workplace.
Ibarra (1995) confirm that race and ethnicity play an important role in employees' hiring,
promotion and performance appraisals in most organisations. A similar view is held by Pager,
Western and Bonikowski (2009) who claim that in spite of African Americans having
comparable qualifications to their white counterparts, they are half as likely as whites to
receive a job offer.
The 2005 studies, by Eddie Webster, Karl von Holdt, confirms that, in South Africa the formal
colour bar was arranged by apartheid laws, to date this situation remains mostly unchanged.
Even when black people occupy senior positions, they usually earn less, and have fewer
benefits and less responsibility as compared to their white counterparts. Increasingly, black
applicants are required to have higher qualifications for jobs once done by less-qualified white
people.
B. Lack of role models: Not seeing others like themselves in management or executive
positions
According to Kenny and Briner (2007), most employees find it difficult to see how they can
progress to higher levels in an organisation where there are few people of their own ethnic
group represented at management level.
In South Africa, black employees feel excluded from the informal work networks; as a result
they have limited access to mentors and role models. The white male exclusionary
organisational culture makes it challenging to retain black employees and women at
management level (Booysen & Nkomo 2006; Selby & Sutherland 2006; Thomas 2004)
C. Social capital resources or “networking”
Parks-Yancy (2006) suggests that a lack of social capital resources (also known as
“networking”) forms another barrier to the progression of racial minorities in the workplace.
White males are said to have good networks, which help them in gaining employment and
promotions in the workplace.
Petersen, Trond, Saporta, Seidel ML (2000) investigated the impact of gender, race and social
networks on the hiring process in the hi-tech industry. They discovered that networking was
critical for receiving job offers and that most white Americans had access to both personal and
professional networks, unlike black African Americans.
In South Africa Ngambi (2002) and Thomas (2004), identified organisation culture issues, like
the exclusionary old boys network, as historical organisational cultures, that create barriers to
retention and advancement of blacks in organisation
Social ties or similarities: The “in group”
Waldinger (1997) and Moss and Tilly (2001) claim that in the United States, African Americans
are not only competing with white majorities but they are also competing with other racial
groups for work opportunities. The research of Waldinger (1997) and Moss and Tilly (2001)
suggests that managers and owners of various businesses in Los Angeles are likely to employ
people from their own ethnic group. As a result, certain ethnic groups dominate certain
industries. For example, in 2001 Latinos (i.e. Latin Americans) dominated the housekeeping
jobs in hotels, restaurants and furniture manufacturing. This marginalised blacks within these
industries, which created conflict, tension and rivalry between the two groups. Tajfel and
Turner (1979) refer to these behaviours as “in-group bias” where there is favouritism towards
the in-group and discrimination against the out-group. Selby and Sutherland (2006) also
confirm this result, they advocate that black employees are marginalised from the existing
white corporate cultures as these monoculture values fail to consider workforce diversity, and
continue to drive black people out of the organisations.
Strategic Methods Adopted to Achieve Racial Diversity
A study by Carr-Ruffino (1996) describes an ideal workplace as one that includes all
employees and excludes none. It is therefore important to make sure that there is fair
distribution of career opportunities and equal treatment of employees if organisations wish to
increase employee job satisfaction for higher productivity levels and maximum profits.
The 2009 HALDE Report of the French Equal Opportunities and Anti-Discrimination
Commission states that the main complaints it received related to racial discrimination.
Examples included direct discrimination in job advertisements or indirect discrimination which
involved the refusal to recognise foreign diplomats.
Due to the racial discrimination in the work place, there have been numerous initiatives
including legislation that have been introduced by many organisation to promote racial
diversity in the workplace. Some of these initiatives are discussed below.
In South Africa, researcher’s Selby & Sutherland 2006; Thomas 2002 reveal that even though
legislation is fundamental to addressing unfair workplace discrimination, legislation on its own
is not enough. It is also important to change organisational culture. These researchers are of
the view that the implementation of Economic Empowerment Act needs to be supported by
comprehensible employment practices that focus on human capital development and are
inclusive of practices and organisational culture change.
CONCLUSION
Globally over the past few decades, the number of women and ethnic minorities has slowly
increased in American companies (Hillman, Cannella & Harris, 2002). The rationale behind
such increases at both has been to address gender and racial imbalances in the corporate
environment.
Companies that have embraced diversity have realised significant increases in workforce
productivity and job performance. It has been said that a diverse workforce that includes
women and racial minorities drives economic growth (Burns, Barton & Kirby, 2012). Employee
diversity management is key to good corporate governance (Smith, Smith & Verner, 2006).
Since the implementation of the Employment Equity Act, post the Apartheid era there has
been slow progress in the transformation of South African corporates. In order to improve on
its transformation, it is essential for the South African government to strengthen its regulations
around transformation and diversity.
The results suggest that a legislative quota should be adopted, similar to that of Sweden,
where companies are obliged to have a certain percentage of women in their top corporate
positions (Adams & Ferreira, 2009). It is therefore recommended that in South Africa, this
quota should be extended to both women and those who were previously marginalised from
working enviroment by the apartheid regime.
In addition South African organisations should introduce compulsory awareness programmes
on prejudice and diversity and should do regular race climate surveys to test institutional
racism. Diverse workforces are needed to end institutional racism.
Reference List
Adkins, C.L., Samaras, S.A., Gilfillan, S.W. & McWee, W.E. (2013). The relationship between
owner characteristics, company size and the work-family culture and policies of women‐owned
businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(2), pp. 196-214.
Bartlett, K.T. (2009). Making good on good intentions: The critical role of motivation in reducing
implicit workplace discrimination. Virginia Law Review, 95(8), pp. 893-1972.
Boeker, W. (1997). Strategic change: The influence of managerial characteristics and
organizational growth. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), pp. 152-170.
Booysen, L & Nkomo, SM. 2006 Think manager- think (fe)male: a South African perspective.
International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences:1833 – 1882.
Booysen, L. (2007). Barriers to employment equity implementation and retention of blacks in
management in South Africa. South African Journal of Labour Relations, 31(1), pp. 47-71.
Browne, I. (1999). Latinas and African American women at work. New York: Russell Sage.
Burke, R.J. & McKeen, C.A. (1994).Women in Management: Current research issues. London:
Chapman.
Burke, R.J. & Nelson, D.L. (2002). Advancing Women's Careers. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Burke, R.J., Vinnicombe, S., Singh, V. & James, K. (2006). Constructing a professional
identity: How young female managers use role models. Women in Management Review,
21(1), pp. 67-81.
Burns, C., Barton, K. & Kirby, S. (2012). The state of diversity in today’s workforce.
Washington DC: Center for American Progress.
Carli, L.L. & Eagly, A.H. (2001). Gender, hierarchy and leadership: An introduction. Journal of
Social Issues, 57(4), pp. 629-636.
Carlsson, G. & Karlsson, K. (1970). Age, cohorts and the generation of generations. American
Sociological Review, 35(1), pp. 710-718.
Carr-Ruffino, N. (1996). Managing diversity: People skills for a multicultural workplace. San
Francisco: Thomson Executive Press.
Charles, N. & Davies, C. (2000). Cultural stereotypes and the gendering of senior
management. The Sociological Review, 48(4), pp. 544-567.
Department of Labour (2015). Commission for Employment Equity Annual Report. Pretoria:
Department of Labour.
Davidson, M. (2002). The black and ethnic minority woman manager: Advancing women’s
careers. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers
Dickens, L. (2012). Making employment rights effective: Issues of enforcement and
compliance. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
DiTomaso, N. Post, C. & Parks-Yancy, R. (2007). Workforce diversity and inequality: Power,
status and numbers. Annual Review of Sociology, 33, pp. 473- 501.
Ernst & Young. (2012). The glass ceiling a dead concept for today’s modern career.
Available: http://www.ey.com/uk/en/newsroom/news-releases/12-08-23---the-glass-ceiling-is-
dead-as-a-concept-for-todays-modern-career. (Accessed 9 April 2015).
European Business Test Panel (2008). Diversity management in 2008: Research with the
European Business Test Panel. Available: http://www.iegd.org/pdf/Task%201-%20EBTP.pdf.
(Accessed 9 April 2015).
Eurostats (2008). Available: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-
explained/index.php/Youth_unemployment. (Accessed 26 March 2015).
European Commission (2016). Country report, gender equality. Available:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/ge_country_reports_d1/2016-cy_en.pdf.
(Accessed 26 March 2015).
Equal Opportunity Commission (2002). Equal Opportunity Commission Report. London: Equal
Opportunity Commission.
Fearfull, A. & Kamenou, N. (2006). How do you account for it? A critical exploration of career
opportunities for and experiences of ethnic minority women. Critical Perspectives on
Accounting, 17(7), pp. 883-901.
Fields, M.A. & Keys, P.Y. (2003). The emergence of corporate governance from Wall St. to
Main St.: Outside directors, board diversity, earnings management and managerial incentives
to bear risk. Financial Review, 38(1), pp.1-24.
Fuegen, K., Biernat, M., Haines, E. & Deaux, K. (2004). Mothers and fathers in the workplace:
How gender and parental status influence judgments of job‐related competence. Journal of
Social Issues, 60(4), pp. 737-754.
Girls Education Movement (2006). Available:
https://www.unicef.org/southafrica/SAF_resources_gembrief. (Accessed: 5 August 2018)
(HALDE) Haute autorité de lutte contre les discriminations et pour l'égalité (2009). HALDE:
The French Equal Opportunities and Anti-Discrimination Commission Report. Available:
http://www.ces.uc.pt/projectos/tolerace/media/WP2/WorkingPapers%202_France.pdf.
(Accessed 8 April 2015).
Hillman, A.J., Cannella, A.A. & Harris, I.C. (2002). Women and racial minorities in the
boardroom: How do directors differ? Journal of Management, 28(6), pp. 747-763.
Hitt, M.A. & Tyler, B.B. (1991). Strategic decision models: Integrating different perspectives.
Strategic Management Journal, 12(5), pp. 327-351.
Hirsh, E. & Lyons, C.J. (2010). Perceiving discrimination on the job: Legal consciousness,
workplace context and the construction of race discrimination. Law & Society Review, 44(2),
pp. 269-298.
Grant Thornton (2013). Grant Thornton International Business Report: Focus on South Africa.
Johannesburg: Grant Thornton.
Ibarra, H. (1995). Race, opportunity and diversity of social circles in managerial networks.
Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), pp. 673-703.
International Labour Organisation (2000). Maternity Protection Conversion No: 183.
Switzerland: ILO Library
International Labour Organisation. (2009). Available:
http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@dgreports/@stat/documents/meetingdocument/w
cms_101467.pdf. (Accessed: 5 February 2015).
International Labour Organisation (2011). Available:
http://ilo.org/ilc/ILCSessions/100thSession. (Accessed 5 February 2015).
International Trade Union Confederation (2014). Available: http://www.ituc-csi.org/2008-2014.
(Accessed 8 April 2015).
Kenny, E.J. & Briner, R.B. (2007). Ethnicity and behaviour in organizations: A review of British
research. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80(3), pp. 437-457.
Katz, M.B. & Stern, M.J. (2008). Beyond discrimination: Understanding African American
inequality in the twenty-first century. Dissent, 55(1), pp. 61-65.
Kandola, B. (2004). Skills development: The missing link in increasing diversity in leadership.
Industrial and Commercial Training, 36(4), pp.143-147
Konek, C.W. & Kitch, S.L. (1994). Women and careers: Issues and challenges. Thousand
Oaks California: Sage Publications.
Labour Force Survey (LFS) (2008). United Kingdom - Labour Force Survey 2008. London:
The Stationery Office.
Lord, R.G., Brown, D.J., Harvey, J.L. & Hall, R.J. (2001). Contextual constraints on prototype
generation and their multilevel consequences for leadership perceptions. The Leadership
Quarterly, 12(3), pp. 311-338.
Low Pay Commission (2008). National Minimum Wage Low Pay Commission Report 2008.
London: The Stationery Office.
Lewis, S. & Cooper, C.L. (1999). The work-family research agenda in changing contexts.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4(4), p. 382.
Maskell-Pretz, M. & Hopkins, W.E. (1997). Women in engineering: Toward a barrier-free work
environment. Journal of Management in Engineering, 13(1), pp. 32-37.
Maznevski, M.L. (1994). Understanding our differences: Performance in decision-making
groups with diverse members. Human Relations, 47(5), pp. 531-552.
Mdladlana, M. (1999). Statement by the Minister of Labour, Membathisi Mdladlana at
Median African National Conference meeting. Available:
http://www.anc.org.za/docs/anctoday/2003/at16.htm. (Accessed 12 February 2015).
Milliken, F.J. & Martins, L.L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding the
multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 21(2),
pp. 402-433.
Miller, G.E. (2004). Frontier masculinity in the oil industry: The experience of women
engineers. Gender, Work & Organization, 11(1), pp. 47-73.
Moser, C. & Moser, A. (2005). Gender mainstreaming since Beijing: A review of success and
limitations in international institutions. Gender & Development, 13(2), pp. 11-22.
Moss, P. & Tilly, C. (2001). Stories employers tell: Race, skill and hiring in America. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation.
Ngambi, H. 2002. The role of emotional intelligence in transforming South African
organisations. Proceedings of the International and Management Sciences
Conference, Vanderbijlpark:221-231.
Ngambi, HC. 2002. Exploring diversity perspective in South Africa & United States:
different emphasis, different contexts. Paper presented at a conference held at
Göteborg, Sweden, August 29-31.
Okurame, D.E. (2007). Perceived mentoring functions: Does mentor's gender matter? Women
in Management Review, 22(5), pp. 418-427
Orlando C., Richard, S.L. Kirby, B. & Chadwick, K. (2013). The impact of racial and gender
diversity in management on financial performance: How participative strategy making features
can unleash a diversity advantage. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 24(13), pp. 2571-2582.
Pager, D., Western, B. & Bonikowski, B. (2009). Discrimination in a low-wage labor market: A
field experiment. American Sociological Review, 74(5), pp. 777-799.
Parks-Yancy, R. (2006). The effects of social group membership and social capital resources
on careers. Journal of Black Studies, 36(4), pp. 515-545.
Petersen, T., Saporta, I. & Seidel, M.L. (2000). Offering a job: Meritocracy and social networks.
American Journal of Sociology, 106(3), pp. 763-816.
Pelled, L.H. (1996). Demographic diversity, conflict and work group outcomes: An intervening
process theory. Organization Science, 7(6), pp. 615-631.
Powell, G.N. & Graves, L.M. (2003). Women and men in management. Thousand Oaks,
California: Sage Publications.
Randy, W. & Carson, C.M. (2005). A social capital explanation of the relationship between
functional diversity and group performance. Team Performance Management: An
International Journal, 11(7/8), pp. 302-315.
Ridgeway, C.L. (2001). Gender, status and leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), pp. 6
Roberson, L. & Block, C.J. (2001). Racioethnicity and job performance: A review and critique
of theoretical perspectives on the causes of group differences. Research in Organizational
Behaviour, 23, pp. 247–32537-655.
Rosette, A.S., Leonardelli, G.J. & Phillips, K.W. (2008). The white standard: Racial bias in
leader categorization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(4), p. 758.
Rosener, J. B. (2003). Women on corporate boards make good business sense. NACD
Directorship, 29(5), 7.
Rosser, S.V. (2004). Using POWER to ADVANCE: Institutional barriers identified by women
scientists and engineers. NWSA Journal, 1, pp. 50-78.
Rubery, J. Grimshaw, D. & Figueredo, H. (2005). How to close the gender pay gap in Europe:
Towards the gender mainstreaming of pay policy. Industrial Relations Journal, 36(3), pp. 184-
213.
Selby. K & Sutherland, M. 2006. “Space creation”: a strategy for achieving employment equity
at senior management level. South African Journal of Labour Relations 30(2):36-64.
Simpson, R., Sturges, J., Woods, A. & Altman, Y. (2004). Career progress and career barriers:
Women MBA graduates in Canada and the UK. Career Development International, 9(5), pp.
459-477.
Steele, C.M. & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of
African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), p. 797.
Stewart, M. & Bapat, G. (1996). The cement roof: Afro‐Caribbean people in management.
London: Routledge.
Schuck, K. & Liddle, B.J. (2004). The female manager's experience: A concept map and
assessment tool. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 56(2), p. 75.
Statistics South Africa (2014). An exploration of household survey evidence on skills
development and unemployment between 1994 and 2014. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa.
South African National Treasury (2011). Confronting youth unemployment: Policy options for
South Africa. Pretoria: South African National Treasury.
South African National Treasury (n.d.). Available: http://www.nyda.gov.za/About-
Us/nyda/Pages/default.aspx. (Accessed 2 April 2015).
Staines, G., Tavris, C. & Hayagrante, T. (eds.) (1973). The queen bee syndrome in the female
experience. New York: Psychology Today
Swartz, N. & Firer, S. (2005). Board structure and intellectual capital performance in South
Africa. Meditari Accountancy Research, 13(2), pp. 145-166.
Tajfel, H. & Turner, J.C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The Social
Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 33(47), p. 74.
Thomas, A 2004 Black economic empowerment: a study of South African companies.
Management Today, May:35–38.
The Guardian Newspaper. (2014). Available: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014.
(Accessed 2 April 2015).
Timmerman, T.A. (2000). Racial diversity, age diversity, interdependence and team
performance. Small Group Research, 31(5), pp. 592-606.
United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2009). Available:
https://www.eeoc.gov. (Accessed 8 April 2015).
Von Holdt, K., & Webster, E. (2005). Beyond the apartheid workplace: Studies in transition.
Scottsville, South Africa: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press
Waldinger, R. (1997). Black/immigrant competition re-assessed: New evidence from Los
Angeles. Sociological Perspectives, 40(3), pp. 365-386.
Westphal, J.D. & Stern, I. (2007). Flattery will get you everywhere (especially if you are a male
Caucasian): How ingratiation, boardroom behavior and demographic minority status affect
additional board appointments at US companies. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2),
pp. 267-288.
Williams, J.C. & Cooper, H.C. (2004). The public policy of motherhood. Journal of Social
Issues, 60(4), pp. 849-865.