Diversity is a business function, and many organizations are taking actions towards integrating diversity initiatives to business operations. They have understood the importance of the diversity and inclusion role as a function that must operate as business if it wants to be respected and attended.

The Conference Board Diversity and Inclusion Councils state that “to be integrated into business functions, D&I executives must not only align themselves and their function with corporate strategy, they must also strive to influence that strategy. “

As companies are paying more attention to diversity initiatives as a business imperative, they are also creating specific executive roles to make sure business aligns with D&I objectives and vice versa. Roles such as Chief Diversity Officer have surfaced as crucial parts of the organization.

The question now is, what is required in a Chief Diversity Office? The Conference Board Diversity and Inclusion Councils highlights the following as characteristics desired in a D&I executive:

• Persistence and passion
• Ability to redirect change
• Persistence to move away from measuring their worth by “activity”
• A mind set on strategy and impact
• Look at diversity and inclusion in a vastly different way
• Stop focusing on “how busy you can be” and “making lists,” and instead place the focus on D&I’s impact on the business in short and long terms
• Champion the case for diversity starting with the needs of the company
• Ability to meet the company’s needs down to the business unit level
• Act as solutions providers
• Ability to help company think more broadly when entering new markets, building high-functioning global teams
• Clearly formulate and state publicly the value of D&I
• Clarify the definition of diversity and inclusion within the organization
• Learn about the business from the perspective of the managers they hope to convert
• Have an enhanced understanding of the entire organization
• Communicate their plans and define what winning means for the business in practical terms

Diversity and Inclusion executives must constantly challenge the perspectives of others inside and outside the organization. They are the champion drivers of diversity, leaders that must be willing to subject themselves and their initiatives to rigorous analysis.

A specific rigid profile must be hard to define, but certain elements must be present to succeed as a D&I executive.  And the most important of these elements is that as a D&I champion “you simply cannot simply stand by when you see things that are not inclusive or see people making decisions that are counter to the values of your corporation.”

Diversity and Inclusion executives are here to challenge everyone’s perspectives.

The conventional organizational models that still prevail were defined as “scientific management” in the 1900s. These models perceived the organization as “a collection of parts that need to be standardized and centrally controlled.”

Until recently, this thinking dominated management theories, with the following as its main characteristics:

• Specialization. The further down an organization one goes, the more jobs tend to be specialized, repetitive and routine. This makes it easier to train workers and handle contingencies.
• Standardization. Through scientific analysis, the one best way to do a job can be determined. Although this practice establishes predictability it also takes away individual motivation and creativity.
• Division of Labor. People are “grouped” according to similarity of function. This leads to people more committed to their own skill areas than the overall success of the enterprise.
• Centralization. This practice creates a hierarchy and places information and decision-making into the hands of an elite few. It insures unity of authority and command yet results in bureaucracy and inefficiency.
• Uniformity. Policies and procedures take ambiguity out of work by insuring that people “do things by the book.” All people and situations are treated in the same manner.
• Control. Management’s role is to control the means and speed of work. Employees are viewed as tools for management to accomplish their objectives.

As good as all this may sound, the model doesn’t quite work that well anymore. Dr. Roger K. Allen of The Center for Organizational Design highlights that “the principles of scientific management were very useful a century ago when this country was moving from a rural society in which people were self-employed, produced their own food, made their own clothes, and educated themselves, to an urban society based on mass production and interdependence.”

But society changed, and work had to be organized differently. So it’s been centuries since the introduction of bureaucratic organizations which were introduced to “control masses of untrained people.”

And again, a transition was needed, as we moved from an industrial society to a knowledge-based society where the economy is based on technologies and people. The bad news is, this much needed shift in paradigm hasn’t really happened. Some organizations have pioneered in the introduction of different organizational models attempting to flatten hierarchies and manage talent in innovative ways.

As much as these organizations prove to be thriving thanks to their structure and management, not every company has bought in the idea.

Dr. Allen describes the two main issues with the old bureaucratic model, which are restraining companies from achieving high productivity. First, the traditional organization fragments work in a way that doesn’t allow people to feel responsible for the whole process. A secretary feels she’s just a secretary, and doesn’t really know or care if the sales person isn’t performing. This, as Allen points out, “leads to poor communication, redundancies of effort, turf battles, delays in decision-making, and general inefficiency.”

A second issue with the traditional paradigm is that “managers are thinkers and planners and employees are the doers.” Under this structure, organizations are failing to identify and tap into the skills, knowledge, and experience of employees. If power only relies at the top, it’s only the ideas of those at the top which prevail.

It is widely known that this structure presents limitations. Research on the topic lead to new management theories such as management by objectives, participative management, team-building, quality circles and total quality management, as major approaches that aim to improve organizational functioning.

But Dr. Allen states that none of these approaches really addresses the problems of the traditional organization, and they are just adding options to what remains as the main approach: the traditional paradigm.

The High Performance Paradigm

In recent years, a new paradigm has surfaced known as high performance or high commitment work systems. This approach is shifting the way people think about work and how work must be organized in order to achieve productivity.

As Dr. Allen describes, a high performance organization is “an organization which achieves outstanding results by making each person a contributing partner to the business. In high performance organizations people understand the business.” A high performance organization is committed to results, and organized in a way that is self-regulating, with costumer oriented unites and teams.

This is the main difference from the traditional organization: the team and how team members feel about work. Work is no longer a one responsibility thing, but it’s rather about taking full responsibility for making decisions, solving problems and continuously improving the quality of their personal and group work.

Some other characteristics of a high performance organization are:

• High performance organizations tend to be grouped around core processes rather than functions. Everyone who is involved in a specific core process is a member of the same team.
• Roles and responsibilities are much broader and more meaningful in scope than in a traditional organization.
• The team is responsible for setting goals, coordinating and scheduling their work, interfacing with the customer, training, making decisions and problem solving, monitoring quality, and even measuring performance and making hiring and selection decisions.
• The role of management changes from that of controlling workers and solving day-to-day problems to being facilitators and coaches. They define outcomes, manage boundaries, interface with other departments and, in general, insure that the team has the resources, training, information and support they need to carry out the job.

The paradigm is shifting, and organizations are understanding the power of a proper structure that aligns with the company’s objectives. It has come to the attention of executives and managers that high performance is achievable if the right structure is in place and talent is managed in proper ways.

The number of companies expanding operations into other countries is increasing. More and more organizations seek to establish offices in other regions, to better control their international affairs.

One of the prospective regions is Europe, perceived as a whole in the form of the European Union. Europe presents a great opportunity for companies, as its legal framework enables business across all countries of the Union with little to no barriers.

But even as the region has tried to be homogenous, it still presents a set of diversity challenges given that the EU is integrated by different countries with differing cultures, languages, history, and business approach.

These different dynamics raise concerns in diversity and inclusion, pushing companies to seek for managers who can address the challenges with an ability to do business effectively.

Presenters at the joint council meeting from The Conference Board Diversity and Inclusion Councils highlighted the elements that can have an impact on diversity and inclusion in different regions.

For Europe, participants stated the following as the present diversity challenges:

• A shift away from the West: Western Europe markets are becoming more mature, and it’s becoming the time for Eastern Europe to grow. As the EU faces economic ups and downs, more people are considering moving somewhere else, and Eastern Europeans are searching for opportunities in Asia rather than Spain, Italy or France. This is causing the immigration patterns to shift, with a decreasing flow from east to west causing a labor shortage in some Western European countries. Organizations have to deal with these talent shortages now and begin extensive workforce planning for the near future.
• Birth rates: It has been a known fact for years that birth rates in Western Europe are plummeting. Several Western Europe nations have dipped below replacement level for births, with several small cities in the countryside being completely inhabited by older generations. This presents a struggle for companies searching for talent, and increasingly organizations have to rely on foreign talent to step up to the challenge in the region.
• Gender: Gender disparities in terms of the balance of men and women are not common in every country, but some internal regions face the issue. The gender pay gap in European countries is not as high as in other regions of the world, but it is still an issue, as well as the presence of women in boards and high executive positions.
• Race: Race as an issue varies from country to country, and usually depends on the immigration history of each nation. Some countries face challenges with languages or national origin, while others have problems with the integration of minorities. The young generations in Europe are more open to inclusive workplaces, but older generations are not so receptive of minorities since they grew up in a completely different scenario. Older generations are more protective of their language, culture, and history. Internal disputes between ethnic groups or different groups that defend languages and traditions are common in Europe, such as what happens in Spain with speakers of Catalan vs. Spanish speakers.
• Resistance to Diversity and Inclusion programs: Europeans often dismiss American-centric programs that tend to be centered in gender and race. But in Europe challenges are not usually about gender and race, so programs that don’t adjust to their needs will fail.
• Consumer diversity: In Europe, as participants of the joint council meeting described, “diversity and inclusion is more about internal talent and less about consumers,” even if the scenario os starting to shift.
• Market differences: Even as the European Union presents an opportunity to establish business with several countries with the least barriers possible, Europe still represents a whole set of differing national laws and cultures that make it a challenge if an organization doesn’t understand Europe as a whole made up of smaller independent pieces. As such, the region must be treated by what it is and how it is constituted.

With the European region being one of the leading economic and political powers in the world, multinational and international organizations must understand the challenges faced when establishing business in the area.

A present crisis in the EU also consists a tough challenge for companies, and the concerns raised by this crisis must also be addressed not only as bottom line issues but as human capital management issues.

“An organization’s ability to learn, and translate that learning into action rapidly, is the ultimate competitive advantage” Jack Welch, Former CEO of General Electric

It might take quite some time before organizations understand the importance of knowledge management. It is a topic more aligned with big corporations, while smaller businesses may not ever have heard about this concept.

But not having heard about it doesn’t mean they don’t unknowingly practice it. Knowledge management has been around for ages, existing whether we acknowledge it or not.

There is no universal definition of knowledge management and no real agreement as to what constitutes it. Some define knowledge management as the collection of processes that govern the creation, dissemination, and utilization of knowledge within an organization. What is clear is that it’s a value-creating process, “through which organizations generate value from their intellectual and knowledge-based assets.”

These processes have a strong effect on the decisions made and the actions taken, since both decisions and actions are enabled by some kind of knowledge. Organizations without a formal knowledge management program would be better off implementing steps to improve the quality of the processes that are taking place without supervision. In turn, they will improve the quality of those actions and decisions.

In The Knowledge Management Forum, Brian Newman highlighted that knowledge management is about the “entire process of discovery and creation of knowledge, dissemination of knowledge, and the utilization of knowledge,” which makes it much more than a “technology thing” as many managers label it.

Knowledge management requires the codification of what stakeholders know, and sharing the information back with stakeholders in an effort to drive best practices. Because it requires the gathering and codification of information, the process is commonly associated with IT, but it is not technology by itself.

Knowledge-based assets

CIO.com points out the relevance of understanding that knowledge-based assets are for each individual company. Every organization must determine what information qualifies as intellectual and knowledge-based assets in order to make the most out of their management.

Generally, intellectual and knowledge-based assets are categorized in two types: explicit or tacit. Explicit types of assets include patents, trademarks, business plans, marketing research and customer lists. This category  “consists of anything that can be documented, archived and conflicted, often with the help of IT.”

Tacit knowledge, on the other hand, is more complicated to understand and document. It is the know-how contained in people’s heads. It is a challenge to figure out how to recognize, generate, share and manage this know-how. IT is also used for these processes, in the form of e-mail, groupware, and instant messaging. These technologies “can help facilitate the dissemination of tacit knowledge.”

Benefits of KM

CIO.com highlights some of the benefits of implementing formal knowledge management processes. Benefits can be seen directly through savings in the bottom-line, or they can be implicit and hard to quantify.

But if an organization has an effective knowledge management program in place, it should see the following results:

• Higher innovation by encouraging the free flow of ideas
• Improved customer service by streamlining response time
• A boost in revenues by getting products and services to market faster
• Enhanced employee retention rates by recognizing the value of employees’ knowledge and rewarding them for it
• Streamlined operations and reduce costs by eliminating redundant or unnecessary processes

A creative approach to knowledge management can bring high efficiency and productivity levels, while boosting revenues for the organization.

No matter the size, any company must understand the importance of managing intellectual and knowledge-based assets as a crucial part of business.

The case of Cisco  is a good example of the benefits that proper knowledge management brings.

Cisco might be one of the best examples of a knowledge organization, not because the management is extremely creative, it probably is not. But Cisco management is a champion in identifying and implementing smart solutions. They let clients collect, through web-based chat boxes, the main ideas for innovation. They realized substantial cost cutting in a few years: 70% of support calls are resolved by a visit to the companys website, 80% of orders are placed on line, 70% cut in order cycle (from 6-8 weeks to 1-3 weeks), 40% inventory reduction, and 55% of the sold goods never touch a production place from the company, etc.

Ciscos acquisition and partner policy is a great success. More than 90% of the CEOs from the acquired companies are still in the company after a few years, benefiting from the great culture and option plan. Ciscos website states: “Our strategic alliances are designed to help deliver a customer-centric, total solutions approach to solving problems, exploiting business opportunity, and creating sustainable competitive advantage for our customers. This shared commitment to deliver solutions and services encompassing products, applications, systems integration, and best practices, will help make our customers successful as globally

A hostile work environment is damaging for the productivity of an organization. If employees don’t feel comfortable and accepted at work, they performance will suffer. A bad environment will also affect turnover rates, pushing employees to leave or consider leaving the job for a more accepting environment somewhere else.

WiseGeek.com defines a hostile work environment as a “a workplace situation where an employee cannot reasonably perform his work, due to certain behaviors by management or co-workers that are deemed hostile.”

This form of hostility, as WiseGeek.com describes, goes beyond a boss being tough or annoying. There is a legal framework to hostility in the workplace, and it is more in tune with an environment that causes severe stress to the employee.

Workplace harassment and hostility

Hostility in the workplace can come in the form of sexual or non-sexual actions, which usually include some form of harassment.

The FCC states workplace harassment as a form of discrimination which creates a hostile environment. Harassment violates the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as other federal authorities.

Hostile work environment harassment is present when “unwelcome comments or conduct based on sex, race or other legally protected characteristics unreasonably interferes with an employee’s work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment.”

The victim and the aggressor can be anyone; not only a boss and subordinate are exposed to these situations.

The FCC lists the following as examples of actions that might create a hostile work environment by harassment:

• Leering, i.e., staring in a sexually suggestive manner
• Making offensive remarks about looks, clothing, body parts
• Touching in a way that may make an employee feel uncomfortable, such as patting, pinching or intentional brushing against another’s body
• Telling sexual or lewd jokes, hanging sexual posters, making sexual gestures, etc.
• Sending, forwarding or soliciting sexually suggestive letters, notes, emails, or images
• Use of racially derogatory words, phrases, epithets
• Demonstrations of a racial or ethnic nature such as a use of gestures, pictures or drawings which would offend a particular racial or ethnic group
• Comments about an individual’s skin color or other racial/ethnic characteristics
• Making disparaging remarks about an individual’s gender that are not sexual in nature
• Negative comments about an employee’s religious beliefs (or lack of religious beliefs)
• Expressing negative stereotypes regarding an employee’s birthplace or ancestry
• Negative comments regarding an employee’s age when referring to employees 40 and over
• Derogatory or intimidating references to an employee’s mental or physical impairment

It might seem easy to press charges against an organization for hostile work environment. But in reality, the legal framework states that the hostility must produce severe stress to the employee and there are cases when the aggressor can get away with it, alleging that he or she didn’t intend, or didn’t know, they can get away with it.

This fine line puts victims hesitate on speaking out about the situation. The following story is just an example of what commonly occurs when employees take an employee to court over a hostile environment allegation. This was the case of Cowher v. Carson & Roberts from the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division.

The plaintiff, truck driver Myron Cowher, sued his former employer Carson & Roberts Site Construction & Engineering Inc. and his former supervisors under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. A state trial judge threw the case out, even though two of his supervisors at the company admitted to the slurs.

The trial court held that being a perceived membership in a protected group — other than disabled persons — wasn’t a basis to file a lawsuit under the state’s anti-discrimination law. The court also found that Cowher didn’t produce any evidence to show that his supervisors, Jay Unangst and Nick Gingerelli, actually believed he was a Jew.”

Mangers must identify hostility in the workplace in the appropriate moment, to avoid the escalation of issues related to this environment. It is a factor of employee wellness, productivity, and good talent management practices that tends to be forgotten or overlooked. It is not easy to paint the line between a joke and harassment, and it’s up to organizations to define what is appropriate and not in the workplace setting.

The global workplace will soon face, if not already facing, a big challenge: five generations at work. These five generations present differences in work behavior that will impact productivity, and will require management to adjust itself to the staff’s needs.

The generational differences in workplace behavior span across the globe, and as social business strategist Rawn Shah describes, the “multi-generational environment is a new diversity challenge for HR organizations everywhere.”

This scenario is also true for the Asian region, which has its own particularities that represent diversity and inclusion challenges.

Participants of the 2007 Diversity & Inclusion in Asia Conference, prioritize culture as the main challenge present to organizations that establish in Asia. But the generation gap is up there with the top priorities, and diversity and inclusion officials describe the following key challenges as the top concerns that must be accounted when doing business in Asia.

• Competition and war for talent: Diversity and inclusion executives that participated in the conference noted that the multinational companies they work for are rapidly expanding across the region. Luckily, organizations are able to tap into a large pool of young professionals, but on the other side, these professionals haven’t yet acquired the right skills, limiting the pipeline and making it a competitive market. It is a genuine war for talent. For the fortunate talented ones, they are able to market themselves better, and are increasingly mobile as companies request them to move around. Because they are in a position of power, they are able to place high demands on employers, putting a strain on organizations that know it is necessary to fulfill their requirements otherwise they will easily lose them.

• Lack of managers’ willingness to change: Diversity and inclusion executives identified the lack of managerial skills to deal with the working styles and attitudes of the younger generation. For instance, “they may not understand the modern communication methods and online pastimes (such as networking with thousands of people simultaneously online) favored by the young Generation Y.” Managers in the region are not prepared for the generational changes, and seem to be unwilling to embrace them or adapt their managerial styles. Another big concern derived from the generational differences is the lack of respect that generations have for each other. This presents a big challenge for managers, who have to solve the conflicts that arise from this situation.

• Managing expectations of the younger generation: Employees in Asia have expectations that don’t match with the organizational reality. For instance, “many young employees come into the workplace expecting certain development opportunities or overseas assignments within a short timeframe.” And this doesn’t occur, which may lead to dissatisfaction, low motivation and translate into low productivity and high turnover rates.

To address these challenges, participants of the conference identified some key actions that can impact change, in order to deal with the demands of the new generation in Asia and make the most out of the generational disparities.

These key recommendations are:

• Secure top down management commitment
• Provide long-term career development
• Rethink how work is done
• Differentiate your position as an employer

For diversity executives, it is key that management understands the issues and moves forward to adopt measures that are more receptive and open to the younger generation styles.

If organizations wish to gain benefits from the diverse workforce, they must understand the factors that are causing demotivation in young workers. If the root of the problem is not identified, it will be impossible to address high turnover rates or low productivity levels.

To gain loyal employees among the younger staff members, managers must encourage longer careers by building long-term development plans for each individual.

The new generations are used to different working styles, which require companies to have a fresh approach and think differently. Most young employees have entrepreneurial skills and interests, and companies must hone into these abilities and put them to work for the company’s benefit.

Lastly, it is crucial for organizations to understand that these days compensation is not everything. The interest in other benefits is increasing, and company aspects such as corporate responsibility and working hours flexibility are highly important for young workers. New generations value these other incentives and take these factors into account when deciding which company to join.

In a highly competitive market for young prepared talent, companies in Asia must adapt themselves to the new and future employees if they wish to succeed.

Event co-hosted with the New York City Latino Professionals. RSVP: www.nyclatinoprofessionals.org

Employee Volunteer Programs are a great opportunity for companies to engage in corporate social responsibility initiatives that benefit both their business and the communities in which they serve.

After designing an EVP, implementing it can be a hard step and crucial in the success of the activities.

The following ten tips from the USA Freedom Corps are practical steps to ensuring the program’s success.

1. Develop a value or mission statement. The mission statement will provide the outline for the reasons why the company is engaging in civic activities, and it will also define the degree to which the organization will be involved in the program.
2. Set goals and objectives. The objectives will provide direction by stating what the company aims to achieve, as well as how and by what means.
3. Generate management buy-in and support. Educate managers as to the benefits of supporting civic engagement, as well as actively involving them in the various programs and campaigns.
4. Establish formal policies and guidelines. These are necessary for establishing the scope and parameters within which employee volunteer, public service and charitable programs will operate.
5. Establish a formal program structure. Companies need to choose a structure which best fits the organization and business culture, and assign the duties and responsibilities of the employees, management and various departments.
6. Dedicate resources. Specify adequate personnel and allocate sufficient funds so that programs may successfully achieve stated goals and objectives.
7. Develop a communications plan. Know what to say, how to say it, and to whom. Communication helps generate and sustain a strong level of participation. Highly developed communications plans and marketing strategies help to continually recruit and retain participants.
8. Plan, organize and conduct activities. Choosing activities that simultaneously address community needs, employee interests and business goals and objectives, will generate the greatest benefits for all parties involved.
9. Reward and recognize participants. Acknowledging what employees do in their communities, whether through volunteerism, public service, and/or giving, will not only maintain current levels of civic engagement, but also help to increase those levels by inspiring others. A company can never say “thank you” enough – both informally and formally.
10. Measure and evaluate your success. Incorporate both informal and formal tools and techniques. Measurement and evaluation are the only way that the “true” success of any corporate-sponsored program can be determined. Then use this data to generate buy-in and support from senior management.

The case of small businesses

Jennifer Highsmith, senior director of corporate training & consulting at Points of Light Corporate Institute, describes some ways in which small business can establish and support EVPs without losing productive hours and wasting resources.

She outlines the following recommendations:
• Customize your volunteer policies – Encourage targeted volunteer activities that make use of the company’s or employees’ skills and competencies. “For example, if you run a design company, utilize your employee skills by designing the logo of a local charity.”

• Create a release time policy – “83% of EVPs offer employees paid time off to volunteer.” Small businesses can determine the max amount of time an employee can volunteer per year. If this is not an option, consider being flexible with time or allow employees to utilize their personal days for volunteer opportunities.

• Position volunteering as an HR tool – “Volunteering is a great tool for increasing employee engagement, morale, satisfaction, teamwork, retention, and skills.” It is also a great recruitment tool, especially for engaging with the younger generations.
• Fold volunteering into the workplace experience – “Integrating volunteer activities into the workplace lowers this barrier by reducing the time, distance and energy required to volunteer.” Consider onsite projects such as a toy drive or assemble backpacks for the youth during a lunch hour.

• Consider micro volunteering – Through micro volunteering tasks are completed by a volunteer or a team of volunteers in small increments of time. Micro volunteering tasks can be completed online or on a smart phone. “Tasks could include translating documents, providing advice to a college applicant, or taking part in a charity’s survey.”

For every company, implementing an EVP will be a different story but in the end it’s about adapting the program to the organization’s operations and business objectives in order to get the most out of the initiative.

Small businesses may struggle with the decision of whether or not an EVP makes sense, especially financial sense. But organizations today must understand that corporate social responsibility is a great way to give back and gain much more in return from the community. It is good business and the right thing to do.

In organizational design a common debate is centralization versus decentralization. Rarely are other options explored, and cooperation and teamwork are usually left out of the equation. And when they are included, they are regarded as subordinate to organizational design as something that can be helpful but is not essential.

Robert W. Keidel, Ph.D.,  describes that there are three ways in which people can constructively interact: In integration, in subordination, or in separation.

Kiedel proposes a triangular organizational design in which cooperation is a key criteria, along with control (which encompasses centralization) and autonomy (decentralization). He states that triangular design “provides a way to balance – and continuously rebalance – any organization across multiple dimensions, each of which incorporates the autonomy/control/cooperation triad.”

The challenge then becomes finding the balance among these three elements since balancing these elements implies the need for tradeoffs.

Kiedel highlights that when designing organizations, cooperation deserves as much attention as control and autonomy. He describe the importance of including teamwork as an explicit component of organizational design, rather than just assuming that teamwork will occur.

But in trying to achieve balance between these elements, every organization will take tradeoffs in order to make it work.

According to Kiedel no two organizations are identical, and each of them faces different dilemmas in the autonomy/control/cooperation triangle. Such dilemmas are:

• Autonomy/control: local responsiveness versus global perspective
• Control/cooperation: consistency versus flexibility
• Autonomy/cooperation: accountability versus synergy

Autonomy versus control is the classic field-versus-headquarters dilemma. Control versus cooperation is like consistency versus innovation, while autonomy versus cooperation is equivalent to accountability versus synergy – the individual versus the group.

Every organization must deal with these tradeoffs and act carefully considering that not all blends are viable. Kiedel states that organizations that try to maximize all three variables in equal measures or those who overemphasize a single variable while neglecting the rest, will fail.

To achieve a viable blend, organizations must put together a perfect balance dominated by a single lead variable or characterized by an almost symmetrical balance between two of the three.

Another aspect to consider is that organizations evolve, and will transition from one balanced structure to another, which means there is no fix structure that will work forever.

Much has and is being said about diversity in the workplace. We know that the world is changing, demographics are constantly shifting, and the workplace doesn’t look as it used to do ten years ago.

It’s up to each company to implement the necessary structural and cultural adjustments in order to make the most out of the diverse workforce.

Glenn Llopis highlights in Forbes.com, that the US lacks the necessary “infrastructure and resources to support and manage this demographic shift that is now being represented in the workplace, in colleges & universities, throughout the media and every other place you can think of.”

But to fully embrace Diversity and Inclusion, companies must face the bottom line and understand how diversity initiatives can benefit business.

First, as Llopis states, organizations “must transition from being managed as a traditional cost center to being lead as a profit center for enterprise to flourish.” When companies make this commitment, they will see the positive results.

Cisco represents the case of companies that cash in on the benefits of working in a global space and making the most out of it.

Cisco’s Sandy Hoffman, Sr. Director, Operations, Processes, and Systems Inclusion & Diversity,

Randall Lane, Manager, Global Inclusion & Diversity, and David Posner, Manager, Global

Inclusion & Diversity of Cisco Systems, Inc., and Marilyn Nagel, CEO of Watermark, highlight the diversity and inclusion value propositions that prove true by being easily supported by metrics:

• Strong collaboration solves complex problems.
• Diverse perspectives lead to innovation.
• Employees who are engaged are more productive.
• Companies that embrace diversity and are competent at inclusion enhance customer loyalty.
• Greater diversity leads to financial growth.

In order to prove them true, an assessment must take place. And the authors of the Cisco case study present the following three guidelines for shaping an organization’s global measurement strategy:

• Principle #1: Assessment shouldn’t be based on U.S. standards
• Principle #2: Not all numbers are created equal
• Principle #3: Make it personal

Principle #1: Assessment shouldn’t be based on U.S. standards

This consists one of the biggest challenges, as U.S. companies move abroad and try to implement strategies and metrics that are not relevant to local leaders and local challenges.

Even if a program was successful in the United State, it doesn’t mean the same program will be a success abroad as circumstances are substantially different.

There must be an opportunity for strategies to be localized and measure by country or region.

The key, as the authors state, “is to understand the specific challenges for each location so you can refine the metrics you measure.” And to do so, leaders must embrace dialogue and relationship-building to identify the needs and challenges of a specific community.

Principle #2: Not all numbers are created equal

“A number without reference or context is just a number.” The “real trick” is to identify and understand the metrics that will be provide meaningful insights after diversity and inclusion initiatives are implemented. The proper measurements will uncover issues and opportunities for leaders to embrace.

Managers will require the ability to cross-reference data, run different queries, figuring out answers from the numbers retrieved.

The decision of what gets measured and how is crucial, since there are infinite possibilities for statistics to be gathered and companies must understand which data is necessary for them.

Principle #3: Make it personal

Diversity and inclusion professionals must help leaders identify the challenges so they can understand the conditions the organization is dealing with and translate it into their personal leadership responsibilities.

A proper assessment doesn’t take place once; rather it occurs overtime, continuously, always searching to uncover the next challenge or opportunity for individual leaders and the organization as a whole.

Diversity and inclusion is an opportunity for companies to drive business through people, by engaging the community they serve in a win-win relationship that will establish a long-lasting relationship of success.