Formal organizational diversity policies and how they affect minorities’ self-perceptions and goals in leadership, seem to be based on statistics of findings through the lens of subcategories of multiculturalism, valuing interindividual differences and valuing homogeneity. These three subcategories seem to increase perceptions of an open diversity climate, which in turn enhances leadership self-efficacy. I feel ill-equipped to analyze or even summarize these findings I attempted to follow throughout this article. It’s incredibly well researched and documented. It’s made clear that many sources are out there to say that, “minority leadership is crucial to optimally utilize the talent of all employees for competitive advantage,” but it’s also stated that such initiatives, such as affirmative action, are often accompanied by unintended negative consequences. Further attempting to study if cultural intervention in the form of diversity policies can be instrumental in stimulating minority leadership and impacting leadership self-perceptions, they manipulate the environment to see the extent that such policies succeed in creating a climate for diversity, and if they will positively influence minority employees. However, without the manipulations in place, one might wonder what the real life impacts these cultural interventions actually have? And is the real goal diversity? Or apparent diversity so long as it benefits the company at large?
Writing and organizational cultures