Tag: week of 5/25

Posted on

Responses- Week of 5/25

When it comes to the topic of diversity, most of us will readily agree that it is an important and healthy part society and culture. Where this argument usually ends, however, is on the question of organizational culture. Whereas some are convinced that a Value-in-Homogeneity policy is best for an organization and its culture, others maintain that a Multiculturalism or Value-in-Individual Differences policy is better for minority employees, the organization and its culture.

I used a sentence outline designed to open a debate to describe Gundemir et al’s research. It worked for my sentence because, as a minority, I am biased towards multiculturalism-focused organizations, which the sentence demonstrates. It also worked because the results of Gundemir et al’s research did support the hypothesis that “minorities [would] report more positive leadership self-perceptions and leadership-related goals” in a company focused on multiculturalism rather than homogeneity, so it’s likely that many believe Multiculturalism or Value-in-Individual Differences is better for an organization’s minority employees.

I found that the messages behind the Gundemir et al article and the article from last week about organizational diversity were similar in that both articles were ultimately promoting the acceptance of diversity in the workplace. As a minority, reading both of these articles was refreshing since I had never really thought about diversity in a business setting and it felt like the authors of both articles had a mindset similar to mine. In my limited experience working at FedEx and Costco, I hadn’t heard anything about company diversity policies, but there were policies about harassment and respecting other people and their cultures. I hadn’t noticed in the moment, but since reading these articles and thinking about my coworkers, almost everyone I worked with at FedEx was different from me, whether they were a different race, religion, or sexual orientation versus Costco where everyone was relatively similar.

Posted on

Question Responses Justin

  1. The template that I’d like to use showcasing starting from what others are saying is from the templates on page 23. It has become common today to dismiss ____________.  It has become common to today to dismiss the lack of racial, ethnic, and gender diversity in organizations all over the U.S. With statistics showing that it is rather beinficial to be more diverse within these companies. This template offers a statement from someone saying how it is common so dismiss an issue that is currently going on. This is a good template because it also has many facets to it. You can substitute any word for dismiss and completely change the template. in the introduction, the authors were addressing how some people think the templates can be repetitive and boring especially if everyone is using them. But with subsidizing words and phrases, there are manY ways of saying what you want to say while still using the “they say technique and still being effective.

3. When it comes to diversity in the workplace, there are many different factors that are taken into account and play a role. The organization and leadership of that organization plays a huge role because they are hiring individuals based off what they think can help their company in the long run and what they see best fit. From the point of view of Austin and Pisano in their article, they state that the behaviors of many neurodiverse people run counter to what most companies are looking for in an employee. For example, good communication skills, team work, persuasiveness,  networking, and a ton of other qualities the article states. this kind of criteria automatically screen out people who are unable to do these types of things without certain help. Companies tend to go along with what society is fixated on and what they are personally comfortable with. On the other hand, Gundemir et al, looks at it from the point of view of the workers. They conducted a study that shows certain policies create a more diverse culture. They look at the goals of the individuals and what it takes for them to be successful within different working conditions. Both of these ideas are important because hiring happens all the time and it is making it harder for neurodiverse people to obtain jobs.

Posted on

Week of 5/25 – Discussion

1. When it comes to the topic of organizational diversity policies in the workplace, most of us will readily agree that said policies bring beneficiary values.  Where the agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of “whether and how these can play a pivotal causal role in shaping minority group member’s leadership-related perception” (p 173). Whereas some are convinced that we should explicitly value the characteristics of diverse minority members, others maintain that suppressing the categorization of people into distinct groups will eliminate negative consequences such as prejudice or conflict. My own view is that ideologies of colorblindness will always influence a time and place for assessing the best possible workplace type and climate based environment.

For this exercise I worked off a template that introduced an ongoing debate. Where I decided to expand off this template was in the last sentence of the paragraph. Here I’m basically trying to say that the nature of colorblind theory (whether positive or negative) carries a be-all and end-all placement for determining the direction of diversity policies in the workplace. I think because my knowledge on the subject is fairly new and limited, the point I wanted to make may read a bit difficult, however, it is an area of research I’d be interested in exploring further. Overall I found this approach pretty useful for getting my thoughts to follow a logical process onto the page.

2. Something these weekly readings have began to do is expand my horizon for how I think about diversity in organizations. In my earlier views I always thought about diversity kind of as a black and white slate. The readings particularly on neurodiversity illuminated groups I had not fully considered. Even more so as I kept reading on the topic, it unveiled how widespread these organizations can be. Often times they’ll break up into further subgroups and subcultures within an already distinct body. Being a minority myself found me agreeing with a lot of the claims made especially in Gundemir’s reading. It made me reflect on conversations I’ve had in the past with family or friends alike whom identify as such. From our discussions we would talk about how being a minority places one on a constant pedestal (showcase) to society. As individuals we have a role and responsibility to live up our name or fall in either stereotypical category. Its sad to think like that though most would agree that if there were greater personal and leadership examples in the workplace, we would feel more motivated to excel. The reality is though with our current policy standards and systems in place, it isn’t as easy to progress. To say “yes we support diversity, here it is” is not enough. Theres a teetering and sensitive balance for how companies and individuals can work. As I’ve come to learn, instilling a new message requires discussing all grounds no matter how uncomfortable or confrontational they may be.

Posted on

Discussion Responses week of 5/25 – Dominique

 

  1. Many People assume that __________ 

Many people assume that in order to allow for a safe and respectful work environment, Value-in-Homogenity Policy should be used. .However, Value-in-Individual Differences and Multicultural Policy makes it so that minorities feel respected. It also allows minorities to feel capable of achieving their goals and work in leadership positions.

This template is very simple, yet effective. In order to complete the template, I first talked about what others believe by saying “Many people assume…”. Next, I stated my argument. This allows for two sides of the argument instead of just one. Writers could use this template in any order. For example, the writer could state their argument, they say: However, many people assume… I think that the simplicity of this template makes it better because it is easy for readers to understand. The framing of the template is very  useful because the two arguments are clearly outlined in only a sentence or two.

  1. This week’s reading adds to my understanding of diversity in organizations because all of the readings have shown that there are positive outcomes to having different people work for companies/businesses. The Gundemir article talks about minorities, and how to diversify a work community in that way. This article focused on ways to appreciate different cultures so that they are respected and talked about. The Austin and Pisano article talks about neurodiversity in the workplace, and explains the benefits. Unfortunately, the workforce is not nearly as neurodiverse as it should be. This article highlights the fact that everyone has different abilities, and that people who have disabilities do not need to be cured. Both articles show the importance of diversifying work communities. Diversity allows for different life experiences that can be utilized in the workplace to enhance work performance. While there may be challenges in diversifying companies or businesses, these articles show that in the end, it makes a huge difference. 

 

Posted on

Unit 1, They Say, Aaron

  1.  In the first chapter of They Say/I Say, using the templates that are given, I would like to try this exercise: At the same time that I believe that people are more comfortable around their own peers, neighborhood, or ethnicity, I also believe that diversity is a truly healthy thing. Not just for the social aspect of expanding your horizons and ideas and sharing experiences with different people, but there is also evidence that it really does contribute to higher production in the workforce.
    This template did help me to construct an argument sentence a lot easier than if I was just using stream of conscious writing, and it also made it easy for me to express that things can be nuanced. It’s not always all this way or all that way and if given the opportunity to argue that more than one thing can be true at the same time, I tend to take that challenge at every opportunity.
  2. The two readings this week obviously have some differences since they are about two different kinds of diversity: The Gündemir study relying heavily on gender and ethnic diversity and the Austin&Pisano piece about neurodiversity. Both writings gave me much more information than I previously had about the subject- for instance, the studies done by Gündemir were very detailed and the correlation between more people of diverse backgrounds leading to diverse candidates being willing to take positions of leadership in a company was honestly a little bit higher than I would have assumed, which is a really good thing! The article about neurodiversity was really eye opening to me to see that some very reputable technology companies were doing quite a bit to implement employing people who were neurologically different, and seeing some complaints about concessions being made to these employees (such as having their own office while other employees had to share an office with multiple other employees). That sort of led me to remember some of my experiences when I worked at UPS (I worked inside their hub loading trucks for a large number of years). One peak season (holiday season), there was an influx of workers that were hired on a temporary basis- some were Sudanese refugees, some were Arabic refugees and some were from South and Central America. This naturally peaked my interest because I must be weird but I naturally enjoy being around other cultures, I find it interesting. Well, as soon as they were done being trained and left to load on their own, they had nobody to help them- nobody could speak their language, and (this really bothered me) nobody wanted to work with them, for some blatantly racist, nationalistic reasons. I requested my boss that I move from my area to work with them and help them out, and although I couldn’t speak in depth sentences with them, we got along fine when it came to work, and we even would chat about non work things like which soccer club we supported. Some of my other coworkers who I have known for many years sort of gave me condescending looks and that gave me a bad taste in my mouth, but it instantly made me think of these articles because if you treat someone unfairly and like they don’t matter, than of course the chances are high that you aren’t going to have a super excited employee who strives to go above and beyond for a company while the people there look down on them.
Posted on

Overview of Week of 5/25

Now that we’ve gotten to know each other a bit and have gotten our feet wet, so to speak, in what organizational culture and diversity are, we’re going to spend this week deepening our knowledge of those topics AND beginning to think about some writerly concerns.

In this post, I’ll lay out a little more info about the week’s assignments and point you toward some additional resources that will help you to complete those tasks.  Please read on for more.

Reading assignments:

  • “The impact of organizational diversity policies on minority employees’ leadership self-perceptions and goals” by Gundemir et al (you will use SUMMON on the library website to locate and download this article)
  • “Neurodiversity as a competitive advantage” by Austin & Pisano (on Blackboard)
  • chapter 1 “They Say” of They Say/I Say

Writing/discussion assignments:

  • 100-200 word summary of Gundemir et al (working with the guidance from the handout on summary, on Bb and in the blog post linked below) [due Weds., 5/27 through Bb]
  • 200-300 word comparison of Gundemir and Austin & Pisano article, focusing on how the pieces differ in author, audience, purpose, and approach [due Sunday, 5/31 through Bb]
  • discussion posts in response to this week’s prompts [due Saturday, 5/30]

    Discussion prompts for Week of 5/25

Check out these additional resources:

  • read over the Close Reading handout on Blackboard (click on the Handouts tab there)
  • read through this blog post (and check out the embedded links) for some more background on genre and summary

    Thinking about summary and genre

 

Posted on

Discussion prompts for Week of 5/25

Everyone should respond to the 1st question and then select 1 of the other 2 to answer. Responses should be >150 words each. Please tag your responses with “unit1,” “week of 5/25,” and [your name]. Categorize as “Discussions/Homework.”

Please post your responses by 5/27, and then read through your classmates’ posts and my comments and respond where you wish.

  1. Graff and Birkenstein (in the opening chapter of They Say/I Say) remind us that in researched writing we are always starting from what others are saying. That means we must first be able to fairly and accurately represent the ideas of others. They suggest a number of different shapes this might take. Try out one of their approaches from chapter 1 to craft a statement about some piece of Gundemir et al’s argument. Write a sentence or two using this approach, and then explain what you’ve done and how it went. Did you find this approach to framing useful? How/why/why not?
  2. How do this week’s readings from Gundemir et al and Austin and Pisano add to your understanding of diversity in organizations? Draw some connections between these readings and the texts we examined last week–-how is this broad topic starting to take shape for you? Are there ways that you find yourself able to connect to your own experience to these Big Picture concepts (i.e. as a member of the SU community and/or as an employee/intern in another work setting)?
  3. These articles we’re reading this week have rather different purposes. Gundemir et al raise important questions about the impacts of how diversity is framed (as either valuing individual differences or as de-emphasizing individual differences). Austin and Pisano examine the opportunities and challenges that a specific type of diversity (neurodiversity) brings to workplaces. While heading in different directions, both articles ask readers to consider the social implications of workplace decisions. Explain and respond to their conclusions about the ripple effects of diverse workplaces. In other words, help us to understand how and why their ideas matter.
Posted on

Thinking about summary and genre

Why summary is important

Summary is a task that you’ll encounter often in research-based writing–as an author, you’ll need to explain the essence of a text that you have worked with in developing your own ideas. Writing an effective summary means offering your reader a genuine understanding of the text, not just a list of its greatest hits. Your reader needs a little context–

  • what is this text?
  • what is the author doing in it?
  • what are the key ideas we should take from it?
  • and then what are you going to do with it?

Because you’ll need this skill regularly, we’re going to practice and use it regularly–we develop writing skills just like any other kind of competency, through examining models, trying it out, and repeating the drill.

You’ll find a handout on Blackboard that offers some more explanation of writing effective summaries. It’s also linked here: Handout on summary

Let’s think about this in terms of the Herring article you just read for last week. If you were going to explain this article to someone else, it wouldn’t be enough to say that Gundemir and her colleagues talk about some of the pros and cons of workplace diversity. We wouldn’t know anything about who Gundemir is and why we should take her word for it. We wouldn’t know whether this article was grounded in good research. We wouldn’t know whether the idea that there are more fruitful and less fruitful ways to frame diversity is central to her argument, or a kind of tertiary point that she mentions. We wouldn’t understand what the article is.

A summary like this, however, would offer us a lot more value: In his article…. from the Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Seval Gundemir, an organizational psychologist at the University of Amsterdam, examines how companies’ diversity policies affect the way that minority employees view their own leadership potential within their companies. She reports data from 2 different studies that she and her colleagues conducted.  She finds that…..

Notice what that summary does–it offers a quick biographical blurb about the author (which tells us that she’s an academic), lets us know that this is a scholarly article (written by a scholar for other scholars in the field), gives us a window into her data set and methods, and then lets us know what she’s arguing. If we know all that, then anything else that you share with us from the article will be a lot more meaningful. We’ll get why it matters and what evidence there is to back it up.

Because effective summary is so essential to writing about research, we’ll be practicing this skill quite a bit in the weeks to come.

Why it’s important to think about genre

This is a term we’ll use quite a bit throughout the course, so it’s worth taking some time to discuss what it means. We often think about genre in relation to music or movies, where we’re accustomed to using it to refer to different ‘types’ of media. These genre labels communicate something to consumers, shape expectations for what that media will be like, and serve as handing sorting mechanisms for us (what we like, what we don’t, what we’re in the mood for, how we would describe something to another person, etc.)

When it comes to genres of writing, that same sort of understanding applies, but it’s worth pushing beyond this simplistic idea of ‘categories’ (as though they’re just sorting buckets) to understand how and why genres take shape.

image of small buckets for sorting crayons by color

For starters, genres tend to responses to recurring writing situations–in other words, the same kind of need keeps popping up and we can use the same sort of text to meet that need. Let’s think about applying for a job. That’s a recurring situation, right? Lots of people find themselves having to do that. And there are ways that writing can help to make that situation work. Now, job application materials–resumes and cover letters–didn’t just emerge spontaneously. They took shape because readers and writers found them to be useful ways of meeting that situational need–front-loaded documents that quickly communicate a job seeker’s qualifications, skills, and experiences. AND they’ve taken the fairly standard form that they do (consistent across many decades) because that pretty standard approach to organizing and formatting makes it possible for the reader to plow through a whole bunch of these documents pretty quickly, while still finding what they need.

Thus, we can think about genres as responsive and organic–developed to meet the needs of writers and readers and changeable depending upon circumstances. They’re not fixed, not static, and not simply interchangeable. We need to match genre to situation–thinking about our readers, about our purposes, about our publication/delivery venues.

Everything you do as a writer is a choice. And our choices are shaped by the situations in/for which we write. This rhetorical situation consists of a few key components, illustrated in the diagram below:

illustration of the components of rhetorical situation--author, audience, purpose, and context

Understanding the rhetorical situation of texts helps us as readers understand what to expect from them and how to read them. And for us as writers, understanding our audience and purpose will help us to craft texts that work for our readers, meeting their needs and expectations and providing them a clear path to understanding.

The texts that you’re reading this week come from 2 rather different genres–Gundemir’s article is a fairly typical scholarly text, written by academics for an audience of other academics in their field and providing the sort of intensive research and analysis those readers demand. The other text by Austin & Pisano is from the Harvard Business Review, a publication with a much broader audience of professionals. They turn to HBR for quick insights into topics they might be interested in and are generally not looking for the same kind of deep-dive. When you know what you’re looking at, it’s much easier to navigate through it.

Now, because most of us are not organizational psychologists (I presume), Gundemir’s text isn’t really designed for us. We have to make our own path through it. There’s a handout on Blackboard (also linked here: Handout on Reading Scholarly Articles ) on how to wade through sometimes dense scholarly articles like this one.