'Manage Resistance to Change Proactively Essay\r'

'Register for this journal is acquir fit at http://www. emeraldinsight. com/researchregister The current issue and sound text archive of this journal is accessible at http://www. emeraldinsight. com/0262-1711. htm Managing mixture using a strategicalal plan metamorphose set about Earnest Friday Management in the College of byplay Administration, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA, and Managing form 863 Received October 2002 rewrite February 2003 Accepted February 2003 Shawnta S. Friday\r\nSchool of Business and patience at Florida A&M University, T from each oneahassee, Florida, USA Keywords revolution trouble, Strategic caution, h octeten counselling Abstract Many arrangements break implemented discordant types of initiatives at bottom the ratiocination few decades in an effort to recognize with motley. A possible missing vinculum (link) mingled with how an scheme preserves with innovation and its impact on the bottomline is a in mergedd variation schema that is execute using a mean seevert court to systemic in altogethery be boast re innateal.\r\n piece legion(predicate) organisations nonplus implemented a incarnate revolution scheme, most dedicate non utilise a â€Å"plotted switch over- corporate variety repoint system”. The lack of a â€Å" be after flip-corporate assortment dodge” is kind of a app atomic number 18nt to inhibit managing regeneration from suit equal systemic to an giving medication’s ending and its carriage of doing vexation, thus tending to interdict the emf bene? ts of form to be maximised.\r\nHence, this rude(a)sprint offers a mannikin for using a â€Å" aforethought(ip) dislodge-corporate renewal schema” to: uphold on the â€Å" mutation toytinuum” starting with acknowledging to valuing, and eventually to managing salmagundi; and systemically managing regeneration using a eight- spirit â€Å"managi ng smorgasbord dish”. Introduction all over the past few decades, academicians, practiti whiz and totally(a)rs and giving medicational researchers beat recognized that smorgasbord is a phenomenon that has a wide array of affects at heart the workplace, and hostel in general (Ko at once, 2001; Stark, 2001; Williams and O’Reilly, 1997).\r\nIn this report, miscellany refers to any attri fur in that location that happens to be salient to an item-by-item that get ats him/her perceive that he/she is contrastive from an new(prenominal) separate (Williams and O’Reilly, 1997). almost widely hireed distinguish openiating at subsidys overwhelm racioethnicity (which encompasses race and ethnicity), sex activity, nationality, religion, service open expertise, and age. Even though racioethnic and gender variety show tend to bugger off the majority of the oversight in the system of rulesal variety literature (Stark, 2001; Williams and O’Reil ly, 1997), this de? ition allows for the exemplars offered to be applied to any type of governing bodyal mixture salient to members. Diversity programs look been implemented in many international giving medications, primarily, in an effort to improve works relationships Journal of Management Development Vol. 22 No. 10, 2003 pp. 863-880 q MCB UP Limited 0262-1711 inside 10. 1108/02621710310505467 JMD 22,10 864 surrounded by white males, whose sex act numbers racket insure to decrease, and demographically dis akin soulfulnesss, whose numbers continue to increase in the workplace (Friedman and DiTomaso, 1996).\r\n turn many multinational establishments save a corporate variation dodge, most take non implemented it using the suggested be after changed court posited in this paper. disposed(p) the increase â€Å"war for talent” in directly’s competitive, global telephone line environment, it is dictatorial that the motion and evaluation of a corpora te conversion dodging use a be after changed woo to non neertheless ac association and regain transition, but to to a fault systemically eliminate and inculcate miscellany into an governing’s corporate furyivation.\r\nThis type of arise jackpot contribute immensely to an institution’s energy to use all of its gentle capital as a strategic means to brighten and hold on a competitive wages in today’s high-powered, global market (Richard, 2000). It has been purported that if variety show go off be in effect managed in an placement, approximately electromotive force bene? ts to the validation include great creativity and innovation, and improve decision-making (Cox, 1991).\r\nConversely, if variety show is non managed efficaciously, some potential major costs to the establishment include, at a minimum, breakdowns in communication, interpersonal con? ict, and higher turnover (Cox, 1991). darn in that view may not be more(prenom inal) than empirical narrate to substantiate claims that in effect managed renewal directly leads to bottomline increases (Chatman et al. , 1998; Richard, 2000; Stark, 2001), in that location is real-world evidence (e. g.\r\nCoca-Cola, Denny’s, Publix, and Texaco settlements) to suggest that not efficaciously managing gender and racioethnic variation has been, and can be, detrimental to government activitys and their bottomlines. Thus, it is a logical extrapolation that an institution’s world power or inability to create a goal in which motley is systemically acknowledged, valued, and stiffly managed is more likely to determine the affects renewal forget name on it’s bottomline.\r\nMany compositions puddle implemented various variety initiatives as a divorce of their corporate motley scheme (Koonce, 2001), but most have not apply a think change approach to strategically align their initiatives with their long-term objectives and strategic p ositioning. It is exceedingly probable that this lack of plan strategic alignment contributes immensely to the purported ineffectualness of many mixture initiatives (Stark, 2001). Consequently, an makeup that seeks to maximize the potential bene? s of change should prink a â€Å" intend change-corporate renewal strategy” prior to implementing variety show initiatives. The purpose of the planned change-corporate innovation strategy is to align the transcription’s variation initiatives (designed to manage novelty) with the brass section’s strategic goals, and ultimately shop managing renewing an integral part of the make-up’s refinement. An aligned planned change-corporate form strategy give contribute immensely to the long-term effectiveness of variation initiatives aimed at better managing all of he system’s human resources. This is especially signi? bank building for constitutions with a highly diversi? ed workforce. With a planned change-corporate assortment strategy, sort initiatives atomic number 18 aligned with organisational policies, procedures, and systems. Such alignment is want to systemically reinforce an organisational furorure that encourages the effective caution of all employees in severalise to garner diversity’s purported bene? ts, including the end goal of increasing the bottomline.\r\nThus, frameworks argon presented for using a planned change-corporate diversity strategy to: advance from the initial peaceable tells of acknowledging and valuing diversity to the ? nal wide awake accede of managing diversity on the â€Å"diversity continuum”; and systemically manage diversity using the speci? c eight- pure tone â€Å"managing diversity change”. The diversity continuum and the planned change approach Valuing diversity and managing diversity as trenchant phenomena Over the dying few decades, a myriad of articles have been written on the subjects of va luing diversity and managing diversity (Wanguri, 1996).\r\nIn some cases, valuing diversity and managing diversity have been considered, and sometimes used, interchangeable when, in fact, they be twain distinguishable phenomena (Jenner, 1994). By the very record of their de? nitions, valuing and managing diversity argon distinctly different. Valuing refers to the relation back worth, immenseness, or signi? cance of something, w presentas managing refers to taking charge or coordinating and supervising situations. effrontery these de? nitions, valuing diversity should be considered a more motionless phenomenon, where importance or signi? ance is granted to man-to-mans’ differences, which does not automatically lead to visible actions or reactions on the part of the individuals valuing the diversity or differences. Managing diversity, on the new(prenominal) hand, should be considered an active agent phenomenon, which involves supervising or coordinating and perple xityal the diversity or differences individuals bring to the governance to go with the cheek’s strategic goals argon macrocosm experty and effectively met. In other words, it refers to roaringly organizing the organisational inputs of individuals with divers(a) backgrounds.\r\nThis de? nition is consistent with the managing diversity de? nition given by Thomas’ (1991): â€Å"a ‘ federal agency of thinking’ toward the objective of creating an environment that provide enable all employees to take their full potential in pursuit of organisational objectives”. The diversity continuum As a payoff of the confusion in the literature between the two phenomena, valuing diversity and managing diversity, it is not dif? cult to understand why consensus does not d easy on the claims of bottomline bene? s as a result of the attempts agreements have made to value and/or manage diversity. In assenting to the confusion, lack of consensus could alike b e a juncture of the Managing diversity 865 JMD 22,10 866 complexity of the diversity concept in the organisational context. devoted the complexity of diversity inside an organisational ambit, it is possible that perceiving it in terms of a set of three elements that follows what to do with diversity may serve to simplify or clarify the confusion in the diversity literature.\r\nTherefore, a diversity continuum is offered to guide researchers and practiti acers in moving from the more passive distinguishs of acknowledging diversity and valuing diversity, on done to the more active state of managing diversity. As individuals ? nd themselves in situations with several(prenominal)(a) individuals, they atomic number 18 likely to direct nonp aril of two courses of action: evacuate dealing with the diversity, or recognize that the diversity represents. In the case where individuals avoid diversity, they do not face the fact that diversity is an issue.\r\nIt is likely that thes e individuals do not accept the idea that they are likely to be biased in their interactions with others that they perceive to be different from themselves. Although avoiding diversity is viewed as a possible response to diversity, it is not include in the diversity continuum. The diversity continuum is ground on the assumption that individuals take the split second course of action and recognize diversity. formerly diversity is recognized, as previously verbalize, the diversity continuum serves as a framework to delineate the three potential states of dealing with diversity: acknowledging, valuing, and managing diversity.\r\nThe three nonparallel circumstancess of the diversity continuum are: acknowledging diversity; valuing diversity; and managing diversity (see meet 1). Acknowledging diversity, the ? rst component, refers to recognizing the existence of diversity or the individual differences individuals bring with them to a particular fit. In order for individuals to tr uly acknowledge diversity, they moldiness(prenominal) be exposed to it, determine it, larn knowledge about it, and they must(prenominal) create an intellect of diversity. The second component of the diversity continuum is valuing diversity. Valuing diversity, as de? ed above, refers to the signi? cance or importance existence given to the diversity or differences individuals bring with them to a particular setting. Having an cargo deck for, as sound as value for, the differences that diverse individuals bring with them to the work setting can lead to the last component. The last component of the diversity continuum is managing diversity. As stated above, managing diversity refers to the planning, organizing, leading of individuals with differences or diversity in a particular setting, much(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) that their inputs are used to fulfil the institution’s strategic goals.\r\nEven in racioethnically homogeneous organizationa l settings, organizations make oversized investments to retard an captivate organizational culture is fostered. An appropriate organizational culture is desirous, such that individuals are systemically managed to perform and chance on its goals, not proficient hoping that their performance forget someways lead to the deed of the organizations’ desire goals. Thus, convertible systemic efforts are incumbent in order to manage Managing diversity 867 go in 1. The strategic management process emographically diverse individuals such that the organization can gain the maximum synergistic bene? ts from their contributions as well. The planned change approach Rather than universe reactive and waiting for a â€Å"diversity crisis” to take place in the beginning a change is made (i. e. Coca-Cola, Denny’s, Publix, and Texaco settlements), an organization should be proactive in systemically Managing Diversity. Hence, an organization and its members should make t he inevitable changes to proactively cause from moreover cave in for the ? rst act of acknowledging diversity to the ? al stage of managing diversity. The Lewin-Schein change exemplar is offered as the abstractive framework to proactively and systemically facilitate the management of diversity in organizations. This planned change fabric is found on the premise that the organizational forces propelling change must subordinate the forces resisting change for highly effective change to occur. Therefore, it is posited in this paper that the Lewin-Schein change model is a framework that can tending organizations and individuals in moving through the sequential elements of the diversity continuum.\r\nIt is also posited that this model can be applicable at JMD 22,10 868 both(prenominal) the organizational and individual train for managing diversity. While all(prenominal)en and Montgomery (2001) offered the Lewin-Schein change model as a framework for creating diversity, the model is offered in this paper as a framework for Managing Diversity. The Lewin-Schein change model involves three stages: unfreezing, change (moving), and refreezing (Lewin, 1951; Schein, 1992). For the organization or individual to finger successful change, the three stages need to be addressed in succession.\r\nUnfreezing using a planned change-corporate diversity strategy In the unfreezing stage, the organization’s or individual’s present culture (which includes perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors) toward diversity, unavoidably to be unfrozen. This means at that place necessarily to be enough motivation within the organization or individual to compulsion to change from its present state to the new want state. Thus, in moving from one end of the diversity continuum to the other end, with managing diversity being the coveted outcome, management must desire that its members move from beneficial acknowledging and valuing diversity to managing diversity.\r\nAs presented previously, managing diversity refers to systemically organizing and directing the inputs of all organizational members (including diverse individuals) to watch the organization’s strategic goals are met. Likewise, the individual must want to move from just acknowledging and/or valuing diversity to the ? nal phase of managing diversity. At the individual direct, this movement involves governing one’s actions toward diverse individuals in a way that allows for goodly, productive interaction with those diverse others.\r\nTherefore, to unfreeze the organization’s culture and its members’ current state of mind toward diversity, a planned change-corporate diversity strategy should be devised and aligned with the organization’s strategic positioning to reduce the forces that are s develop to maintain the status quo (Dobbs, 1998). A ? rm’s strategic positioning The strategic management process is employed by many organizations in or der to distinguish themselves from their competitors in the marketplace (David, 2001; Porter, 1985; Steiner, 1997). Although there are several schools of thought in the strategic management ? ld, the generally accepted components of the strategic management process are: strategy formulation, strategy implementation, and strategy evaluation as explained in grade 2 (David, 2001; hummock and Jones, 1998). dodge formulation is comprised of under break-danceed or reviewing the organization’s mission, vision, and long-term goals; conducting internal and outside(a) judgings to identify the organization’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT); setting tell apartion criteria and selecting the strategies that pass on afford the organization the best strategic positioning relative to its competitors (David, 2001; Steiner, 1997).\r\nStrategy implementation entails allocating the appropriate resources to ensure the Managing diversity 869 Figure 2. The thre e levels of organizational strategy selected strategies are the right way executed (David, 2001; Steiner, 1997). Strategy evaluation involves setting direct processes to straightly review, evaluate, and provide feedback concerning the implemented strategies to determine if the desired results are being accomplished, such that corrective measures may be interpreted if warranted ( pile and Jones, 1998; Steiner, 1997). As illustrated in Figure 3, there are usually three levels of strategy associated with large-scale organizations.\r\nThe corporate level strategy de? nes the organization’s purpose and the lines of businesses in which it plans to operate, thereby providing the overarching direction for the organization. If an organization only operates in one line of business, its corporate level strategy and business level strategy are effectively one in the same (David, 2001; Hill and Jones, 1998). A business level strategy is the draft that should enable an organization to leverage its resources in order to differentiate itself from the competition within a particular line of business (David, 2001; Hill and Jones, 1998).\r\nThe functional-level strategies serve to reassert the organization’s business-level strategy by providing direction for the appropriate short-term activities required by each functional area to meet the goals established in the business-level strategy (David, 2001; Hill and Jones, 1998). Consequently, having properly aligned corporate, business, and functional level strategies countenance an organization in its efforts to accomplish its goals, thereby strategically positioning itself to successfully struggle within the marketplace (David, 2001; Hill and Jones, 1998; Porter, 1985).\r\nCombining highly differentiated and ef? cient human capital with clearly delineated corporate, business, and functional level strategies can prove to be a competitive advantage for an organization (Barney, 1991, 1997; Wright et al. , 1995). A n organization must view strategies for developing and managing its employees JMD 22,10 870 Figure 3. Alignment between corporate strategy and planned change-corporate diversity strategy as a part of its overarching corporate level strategy if it desires to have highly differentiated and ef? ient human capital in today’s competitive, global environment. Therefore, one argument of this paper is that any organization seeking to realize the maximum bene? t from having a diversi? ed workforce should have a planned change-corporate diversity strategy that is aligned with the organization’s general strategic positioning. Developing a planned change-corporate diversity strategy The organization â€Å" wish to create an environment that enables all employees to reach their full potential go forth have to . . . change organizational practices as necessity” (Thomas, 1991).\r\nHowever, prior to changing any organizational practice, a blanket(prenominal) strategy for ho w to accomplish that change should be devised based on an in-depth understanding of relevant organizational dynamics (i. e. culture, structure, ? nancial position, strategic initiatives, etc). Theoretically, a strategy should bring in the structure of an organization. Consequently, a planned change-corporate diversity strategy should be devised to align with the organization’s corporate strategy before structuring diversity initiatives (as illustrated in Figure 4), and strengthen using a planned change approach.\r\nOrganizations that have elevated their diversity strategian to executive-level management are likely to have an overarching corporate diversity strategy in place. But, it is not as likely that the diversity strategist is using a corporate-wide planned change approach to systemically reinforce the proposed changes in the corporate diversity strategy end-to-end all of the Managing diversity 871 Figure 4. The diversity continuum organization’s policies, pro cedures, and systems.\r\nRegardless of whether an organization has a corporate diversity strategy or not, it may be inevitable to superimpose a planned change-corporate diversity strategy over alive fragmented diversity strategies and initiatives. At the onset of such an endeavor or superimposition, corporate diversity mission statement, vision, and goals must be formulate to phrase the purpose diversity initiatives will serve within the organization and the desired outcomes to be achieved from such initiatives. The delineated desired outcome should be designed to systemically manage diversity.\r\nConducting internal and out-of-door assessments are requirement stairs in devising a planned change-corporate diversity strategy. An internal assessment will allow the diversity strategist to decide how to position diversity strategies and initiatives within the organization’s structure, and to align them with all of the organization’s policies, procedures, and systems . To assess the external environment, the diversity strategist should use environmental scanning tools to extract best practices based on benchmarked diversity strategies and initiatives at other leading organizations.\r\nThrough the internal assessment, the diversity strategist should require intimately beaten(prenominal) with the organization’s values, vision, mission, strategies, goals, and initiatives, all of which effect a sound basis for understanding the organization’s culture, policies, procedures, systems, and boilers suit strategic positioning. The diversity strategist must suffer equally well-known(prenominal) with the bene? ts and shortfalls of various diversity initiatives.\r\nThe strategist must conduct an compend to determine the most appropriate linkages between the organization’s overall strategic positioning, policies, procedures, systems, and its diversity initiatives. Before proceeding, the diversity strategist must recognize and effec tively articulate a clear strategic ? t and alignment amongst the organization’s overall strategic positioning, policies, procedures, systems, JMD 22,10 872 and diversity. Both strategic ? t and strategic alignment are necessary to strengthen the business case for allocating resources to support the planned change-corporate diversity strategy.\r\nIn order to realize the maximum bene? ts from diversity, the planned change-corporate diversity strategy postulate to be properly executed, evaluated and refrozen to ensure that the stated goals are being met, and that the organization’s culture and members are moving toward and sustaining the desired state of systemically managing diversity. wretched to systemically managing diversity Once the present state is unfrozen, the move that will allow the organization’s culture and members to advance to the desired state should be put in place.\r\nIn this case, the move is to culturally reengineer the organization and its members to the trustworthy state of managing diversity by implementing the managing diversity process. The hearty acquire possibleness (Bandura, 1977) is offered as the theoretical framework for the managing diversity process. It has also been offered as the theoretical framework for developing training programs in the cross-cultural and expatriate literature (Black and Mendenhall, 1989; Harrison, 1994). There are four major tenets of social reading theory: motivation, attention, retention, and reproduction (Bandura, 1977).\r\nThese tenets are re? ected in the eight go of the managing diversity process. In an effort to truly manage diversity, a change in the attitudes and behaviors of individuals, and in organizations’ systemic and institutional ways of doing business is required. Therefore, it is posited that utilizing the tenets of social discipline theory can assistant in the acquisition of the learning that is necessary for organizations to maximize the inputs of all of its diverse members. The planned change-corporate diversity strategy serves as the motivation for the learning of new behaviors and attitudes.\r\nHence, once the planned change-corporate diversity strategy is articulated, the move through the eight steps of the managing diversity process should be instituted to assist individuals and organizations in culturally reengineering and moving to the desired state of managing diversity. The eight sequential steps of the managing diversity process include: (1) exposure; (2) experience; (3) knowledge; (4) understanding; (5) appreciate; (6) respect; (7) modify attitudes and behavior; and (8) healthy interaction.\r\nAll of these are undergirded by tolerance (see Figure 5). The acknowledging diversity component of the diversity continuum is imperturbable of steps (1)-(4), and they re? ect the â€Å"attention tenet” of social learning theory. The valuing diversity component of the diversity continuum is comprised of steps (5) and (6), and is re? ective of the â€Å"retention tenet” of social learning theory. Steps (7) and (8) constitute the managing diversity component of the diversity continuum and the â€Å"reproduction tenet” of social learning theory.\r\nThe movement through each of the eight steps requires individuals to progressively develop appropriate skills to enable them to manage how they deal with individuals whom they consider different from themselves. Therefore, executing the eight steps in the managing diversity process serve as the necessary movement required to progress from acknowledging and valuing diversity to managing diversity. The true movement through the eight steps from acknowledging diversity to managing diversity is a prototype diversify, in that it entails a change in the treatment of diverse individuals (Fitzpatrick, 1997).\r\nManaging diversity 873 Diversity training In order for an organization to realize the potential bene? ts that can be afforded by employi ng diverse individuals, there demand to be a paradigm shift in which the inputs of diverse individuals are systemically managed within an organization to enable the successful accomplishment of its strategic goals. Training of individuals is viewed as a necessary tool to facilitate the organization in achieving its goals. Diversity training should be viewed no differently than any other type of training in which an organization invests.\r\nTherefore, it should also be viewed as a necessary tool to manage members’ behaviors and their ability to work productively with diverse individuals. aft(prenominal) canvassing the literature, it has been noted that most diversity training programs merely raise individuals’ sentiency of or sensitivity to diversity (Grubb, 1995; Jenner, 1994). Some few diversity training programs go as far as attempting to change individuals’ perceptions of diversity and how they communicate with people different from themselves (Grubb, 199 5).\r\nHowever, these programs tend to be offered to only select employees, and they tend to be short in duration, ranging from a one-hour session to a serial publication of one-day sessions several times a form (Koonce, 2001). The major drawbacks to most existing diversity training programs are that: . they do not build skills to facilitate individuals’ ability to very manage their interactions with individuals different from themselves; . they are not rigorous nor time-intensive enough to create a paradigm shift in individuals’ treatment toward individuals different from themselves; and\r\nJMD 22,10 874 Figure 5. The continuous managing diversity process . there are no enduring livelihood mechanisms embedded in the organization’s culture to ensure all individuals’ inputs are successfully managed to met the organization’s strategic goals. Managing diversity As a result, most (if not all) existing diversity programs have not been successful in c reating enduring change in the way individuals interact with individuals different from themselves, nor have they been successful in changing their organization’s culture to one that systemically manages diversity.\r\nIn order to create enduring change in individuals and the organization’s culture, members of the organization at all levels need to get in in diversity training that encapsulates the comprehensive managing diversity process. The outcomes that should be expected from participation include, but are not limit to, skill building in the future tense(a) areas: the ability to clearly articulate their ideas and feelings; con? ict management skills; effective giving and receiving of feedback; effective listening; sort out observation skills; and group decision-making skills, all of which will facilitate modi? d attitudes and behaviors, and healthy interaction with diverse individuals. Individuals have to come to grips with their feelings, thoughts, attitudes , and behaviors toward diversity and others with whom they are different. In the ? rst step of Exposure, individuals provide public receipt of where they are at that point. They do this by: laying open who they are; divulging where they are; unmasking themselves; and receiving others’ culture. Step (2), experience, involves gathering information through personal involvement, encountering, seeing ? rst-hand, and life through events.\r\nIn the third step of cognition, individuals become well informed, thus able to be conversant because they become familiar or acquainted with the culture of others. Knowledge serves as the basis for step (4), understanding. Because of their scope of cultural realities, individuals are able to encompass (understanding) relevant cultural dynamics, which leads them to be sensitive, and enables them to parcel unique insights and perceptions. In step (5), appreciate, individuals’ bankers acceptance of the worth of a person’s cultur e and values makes it easier for them to welcome and â€Å" right” estimate diverse individuals.\r\nResultantly, individuals are able to respect (step (6)) diverse individuals; thus, they are able to pay attention, pay deference, and pay tribute to the values, worth, and culture of diverse others, as well as give personal reflexion to the diverse individuals. Successful movement through the ? rst six steps, along with tolerance underpinning each step, should lead to modi? cations in individuals’ attitudes and behaviors toward diverse individuals, which is step (7), modify attitudes and behaviors.\r\nThis change in attitudes and behaviors, again, along with tolerance should lead to healthy interaction (step (8)) with and amongst diverse individuals. Step (8) is a function of continuous acceptance and execution of steps (1)-(7). Therefore, this is a ? uid (not static) process that must be recognized for its ever-changing and 875 JMD 22,10 876 evolving character. The req uirements for successful execution of the managing diversity process are laborious and time intensive because it requires individuals to modify their attitudes and behaviors.\r\nThus, they must modify the way they interact with individuals different from themselves, and not just expect that they either avoid, acknowledge, or value those individuals that are different. Given that all individuals in today’s global business environment are likely to encounter others that are different from themselves on a frequent basis, the managing diversity process should be viewed as alike to the open systems approach †it is a continuous process that maintains a constant interactional relationship with the environment.\r\nRefreezing the systemic management of diversity Successful movement through the managing diversity process requires individuals to change. Resistance to change is intrinsical in any change process, and it will be no different in this process (Harrison, 1994). Ther efore, the managing diversity process is a ? uid, continuous process that needs to be systematically reinforced and embedded in the organization’s culture and individuals’ interactions, such that the organization’s culture and its members do not deliver back to just acknowledging or valuing diversity.\r\nHence, refreezing the desired state of managing diversity requires reinforcing the new perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors with emphasis on the modi? ed behaviors and healthy interactions individuals have adopted as a result of going through the managing diversity process. In order for individuals and organizations not to revert back to their previous states, the new desired state must go through the refreezing stage to be institutionalized. This should be accomplished through systemic, on-going training and workaday interactions at the individual level, and through edict policies, procedures, and systems at the organizational level.\r\nAt the individual le vel, the systemic, on-going training should not be just periodic training that merely exposes individuals to diversity. A great deal of time is necessary to cement these fresh adopted attitudes, behaviors, and skills for healthy interaction. This kind of cementation is required for these newly acquired attitudes, behaviors, and skills to become totally embedded in the individuals’ natural way of interacting with diverse individuals. The systemic, on-going training needs to be skill-based and experiential in nature to promote long-term changes in the way individuals work with individuals different from themselves.\r\nThis type of reinforcement at the individual level will contribute to the cultural reengineering that also must take place at the organizational level. To reinforce the desired state of managing diversity at the organizational level, revise recruiting, appraisal, development, and refund systems, as well as an enforceable diversity policy need to be implemented ( Allen and Montgomery, 2001; Hemphill and Haines, 1998; Miller, 1998). The revised policies, procedures, and recruiting, appraisal, development, and bribe systems need to re? ct the organization’s position on how the inputs of diverse individuals will be managed, such that their contributions fully aid the organization in meeting its strategic goals. A written, enforceable diversity policy, stating the systemic action steps and behaviors expected by all employees is a must as it relates to effectively managing the organizational inputs of all individuals. Everyone’s inputs should be effectively managed to contribute to the act of the organization’s strategic goals. The revised policies, procedures, and systems should also align with the planned change-corporate diversity strategy.\r\nGiven the resources and time required to revise and initiate implementation of the revised organizational policies, procedures, and systems, individuals are likely to resist these changes initially. Therefore, it is quite likely to be a dif? cult and time-consuming process to make the appropriate and necessary revisions to the organization’s policies, procedures, and systems. This is an essential and critical step necessary to ensure the organization and its members do not revert back to their previous attitudinal and behavioral states.\r\nIt is predominate that revised policies, procedures, systems, and planned change-corporate diversity strategy are clearly communicated to all members of the organization to ensure that it can be suitably recognized, executed, evaluated, and reinforced. To reinforce this cultural reengineering effort, management needs to initiate and actively participate in the refreezing stage, the same as they must unfeignedly participate at the unfreezing and moving stages. authorisation limitations As with any theoretical model, there are limitations.\r\nOne potential limitation of this notional model is that no affaire how well it is implemented, there are likely to be some individuals whose attitudes may never change or they may continue to consciously or unconsciously show favoritism toward those whom they consider to be similar to themselves (Gilbert and Ivancevich, 2000; Miller, 1998). Another potential limitation is that pernicious forms of biases against diverse individuals may still exist informally within the organization and/or outside of the work environment; thus, highly impacting individuals within the organization.\r\nBacklash is also a potential limitation; members of the majority are likely to perceived that they are being excluded at the expense of including diverse individuals (Hemphill and Haines, 1998). Additionally, if the training initiated to implement the managing diversity process is perceived as a bad experience, the organization’s leadership may fling the initial implementation, hence dooming all future diversity efforts.\r\nHowever, by using the suggested planned cha nge approach along with well enforced diversity policies and disciplinary procedures for violations of the diversity policy, it is more likely that individuals’ behaviors can be altered to be more big of others whom they consider to be Managing diversity 877 JMD 22,10 different (Gilbert and Ivancevich, 2000). This will allow the talents, skills, and abilities of all individuals in the work setting to be used to meet organizational objectives.\r\nConclusion Given that individuals are less willing to quit their differences outside the doors of the workplace (Thomas, 1991), an organization’s ability to systemically manage diversity will become more important, in historic period yet to come, if it wants to ensure its ability to compete successfully in the global marketplace. This paper suggests that, ? rst, a planned change approach should be used to systemically manage diversity, by developing and implementing a planned change-corporate diversity strategy.\r\nSecond, o rganizations should execute their cultural reengineering efforts to move individuals and the organizational culture along the diversity continuum from the states of acknowledging and valuing diversity to the desired state of managing diversity. Movement to the desired state of managing diversity can be achieved by using the managing diversity process. It is also suggested that the organization needs to provide on-going training, and needs to institute new policies and procedures.\r\nAdditionally, it must suck up in appropriately different recruiting, appraisal, development, and reward systems that systemically reinforce the cultural reengineering of moving to the state of managing diversity. These new undertakings will ensure that the newly reengineered culture of managing diversity is inculcated into the organization’s culture, and its way of conducting business domestically and abroad. By adopting and executing the frameworks offered in this paper for ystemically managing diversity through a strategic planned change approach, managers will have created an organizational environment where they will be able to enjoy healthy, innovative, and productive interactions amongst diverse members of the organization.\r\nThe pastime is a list of other potential bene? ts that may be derived from using the offered frameworks: . in general, individuals will develop an increase knowledge of and appreciation for other cultures; . individuals will learn to value and respect the cultural norms, behaviors, and attitudes of others; . here is likely to be a greater receptivity to necessary organizational changes; . there is likely to be a decrease of workplace anxieties; . a reduction in organizational con? ict; . a more pleasant work environment; and . increased performance and productivity. 878 In conclusion, the proactive management of diverse human resources will aid organizations in gaining and sustaining a competitive advantage in today’s dynamic global mark etplace.\r\n'