Author: Julia Fein-Ashley

Discussion Questions Week of 7/19

Response to #1

In the section Equity vs. Equality (page 2) of the article “Changing Organizational Culture: From Embedded Bias to Equity and Inclusion”, Wong presents a fascinating metaphor. This metaphor illustrates the point that one size does not fit all. It gives a hypothetical scenario where each runner is given the same size shoe. If the shoe is too big or too small, that runner will be disadvantaged and unable to compete at their peak performance level. The most important part about the metaphor, in my opinion, is where Wong introduces the idea that the judges of the race may not experience the discomfort that some runners endure because they are wearing a shoe size that fits them.

This metaphor, therefore, is significant in a variety of ways. Often people view equality as a positive thing, where change is occurring. However, by treating everyone the same, we are not acknowledging everyone’s differences. By not embracing people’s differences, many people will not feel included in the organization, which would harm the organizational culture. The article further goes on to point out the fact that having neutral policies assumes people have the same needs.

The other significant idea that this metaphor brings up is that judges may have a shoe size that fits them well. They have not had to experience the discomfort that others have had to go through, which brings up the idea that people like bosses or superiors are privileged. The idea is brought up later in the article where Wong speaks about understanding differences between people creates different experiences and gives us an idea of how to interact with other individuals.

This metaphor, to me, was important as it illustrated the idea that equality and equity are not the same things. We need to promote equity and embrace different viewpoints. By encouraging this, we can have a workforce that is a safe, inclusive, and inviting environment.

Response to #2

Wong does a great job at connecting her sentences. It seems as though she first presents an idea or a thought that she has and then backs it up with evidence. As an illustration, in the starting from the margins section, Wong points out that people need different forms of support that weaken their disadvantages. In the following sentence, she uses the transition phrase for example, and then presents some of the ways in which people can be accommodated for their needs. After explaining why the example is meaningful, Wong uses a conclusion transition not included in the TSIS book. I thought it was a great way to conclude the point she was making. She used “Put another way,” which is a way to say in summary, or in conclusion. I liked how she put her own spin on it to where it did not sound as mechanical like: in conclusion, or in summary.

Wong seems to like the ‘for example’ transition, as opposed to other example transitions mentioned in ch8 of TSIS. She uses it four times throughout the article, whereas other example transitions are not utilized at the beginning of any sentence. Instead of introducing the idea with a transition that is overused and easily visible in the article, such as on the other hand, regardless, or by contrast, Wong comes up with her own transition phrases, which I admire.  To introduce the idea about how we should embrace differences and cater to each individual’s needs, she uses rather than. I thought that this transition to a new idea or subject was strong, as it pointed out what society and different organizations are currently doing and then later points out how we can change that. Her for example transition was significant as it pointed out in plain English how accommodations to people have already benefitted those groups. The two examples of groups who have already benefitted from changes catered to their specific needs are disabled people, and nursing parents. By giving each group space or special accommodations to their needs, they have accepted in the workplace.

The TSIS ch8 states that transitions should be invisible. I do not believe that you always have to use the words or structured transitions that they give in the book, rather you can come up with your own ways to transition ideas. Wong does this in this section but still manages to use a TSIS example transition phrase. This section flows seamlessly, and I think it is great at illustrating the idea that writing is like a conversation and transitions should be effortless. This is what Wong manages to do in her writing.

This week I went up to the mountains. I went on a few hikes with my brother and we saw a mountain goat. No one else was on the path the whole hike, which was awesome. Hopefully I’ll be able to go one more time before I head back to Syracuse.

Discussion Questions Week of 7/12

Response to #1

There are so many different search tools that I use when trying to create reliable sources that help convey the point I am trying to make in a paper. There are two main ways that I search for articles. Through Google, or the SU library. I find the SU library search engine to be more useful when writing academic papers, as I can filter to the specific area of study that I want to focus on. With so many different sources available within the search engine, I find it beneficial to utilize the filter button.              

Some of the filters I use include the publication date (to make sure it is still applicable to the real world), subject terms, and area of study. I believe that the subject terms filter is beneficial as I can focus on keywords that I would like to see explored further within the article. I have also found that area of study is helpful, as it can help create focus in a specific class. For example, an economics paper may focus more on the supply and demand of a subject, while a geography class may concentrate more on the distribution of people or the topic in question.

             Along with using the filters, I always type keywords into the search engine. It is a decent place to start because I usually do not know the title that I am searching for. In my previous writing class, I did a paper on NCAA compensating athletes and used search words like athlete, compensation, college, pros, cons. This way I also had the opportunity to review different perspectives concerning the subject.

             I am looking forward to using some new advanced filters for researching my topic, as it will be interesting to hear about different people’s experiences surrounding the subject.

Response to #2

              I am looking forward to obtaining primary sources for the topic that I will be exploring. This could include blog posts or interviews from individuals who have been impacted by the topic that I will be exploring firsthand. For my research topic, I will be focusing on underrepresentation of women in finance. Along with focusing on this topic, I believe it to be critical to answer the question of “Why does this matter, and who is impacted by the lack of women in the industry?”. I am looking forward to reading about women who have been negatively impacted by the industry. It may also be interesting to see if there are any client perspectives surrounding the lack of representation and how they plan to advocate for change within the industry.

              Although I believe that primary sources will be essential in helping answer my questions about underrepresentation in finance, I believe that the secondary sources that I utilize will be just as important. Hearing different people discuss their own ideas, as well as dissecting primary sources will be interesting, as the different sources may interpret different situations differently. So, my goal for secondary sources will to be to gather as many views as possible and analyze their significance to the question I posted above.

              One of the main goals that I have surrounding this research project is just to be open to all views surrounding my topic. Very often, I develop an opinion about the subject before I even research it. Although I believe that women need to have more of a platform within the industry, I believe that it will be beneficial to read some other perspectives about the current and past state of the industry.

Hopefully, I can find some sources within the SU library database, and maybe talk to some professors or people currently in the industry, students who already have internships and have experienced this firsthand. Along with this, I will try to find some TED talks that speak about the subject, as I feel as though those help us reflect on certain topics well (Media sources will also be beneficial).

Being able to listen, read, or see different perspectives and viewpoints about underrepresentation in finance will be critical, not only for this study, but going into the future as well. I am not focused about the end-product of my research as much as I am about what I get out of it. I think that having the opportunity to just understand what people have had to go through within the industry is fantastic. I am looking forward to doing this study and hope I can learn a lot about not only the topic, but also how to properly conduct research.

Bogost’s Rhetorical Moves

In “The Problem with Diversity in Computing”, by Ian Bogost, a writer at The Atlantic, there were a variety of rhetorical moves used to emphasize the writer’s main purpose for the article. This was that the culture in the tech industry will most likely not change in the mere future, even with the increasing number of opportunities for women and underrepresented groups. The first time I read through the article, I did not notice the rhetorical moves in the writing. After going through a second time and paying close attention to the wording, I found that Bogost had crafted his arguments and reasoning extremely well, as all of the rhetorical devices he included supported his argument.

To begin the article, Bogost uses an anecdote about Amy Webb, a professor at NYU going through airport security. Due to the fact that she had a boot on her foot, she had to go through a different machine than the metal detector, a backscatter. While getting patted down, she noticed that most women had the same problem areas as her in the machine. According to Webb, this was due to the fact that “someone like me wasn’t in the room when the system was designed”. After Bogost gives this story to the reader, he speaks about how it is due to the ignorance of the computer most likely due to the fact that only men were in the room when designing the backscatter recognition programming. As a reader, I found this example to be very helpful in realizing that many people in the tech industry are unaware of how useful another person’s perspective is, such as a woman because they have never had to experience pat downs at the airport just because of what they may be wearing or their hair.

The second rhetorical device Bogost uses in the article is an idiom. The purpose of the idiom is to engage the reader and help emphasize the fact that their impact may be small, but the reader may not understand how small the impact that the Constellations Center for Equity in Computing may really be. The center gives the opportunity for women and underrepresented groups, particularly in neighborhoods where there was minimal access before to have access to computer science classes. It is a fantastic start towards giving people in the community a chance to learn something new, but as Bogost puts it, “their impact might be a drop in the bucket, given the size and composition of the tech industry.” After stating that the impact of the center may be a drop in the bucket, the author goes on to give the example at Google, and how it will only increase the percentage of underrepresented minorities in the industry up by a miniscule amount.

Another rhetorical move he uses in his article is a metaphor. Bogost first presents a question, which is whether we want integration or diversity. This is an interesting question, because on surface level in my opinion, it would just mean inclusion within the workforce for everyone.  Isbell, an incoming dean of computing at Georgia Tech, presents the idea that “Diversity is just membership, Integration is Influence… power, and partnership”. Along with this, Bogost splits up this quote into two sections, even though it seems as though he said the two together. I believe that what Bogost was trying to do was emphasize the point that Isbel was making about the difference between the two. As I put above (the quote), it does not feel as powerful as the way that Bogost stated in his article, “Diversity is just membership, Isbell said. Integration is influence, power, and partnership.”. By allowing the two to be separate, it also allows the reader to help process the two words separately. I thought this really helped the idea stick. Along with this, the metaphor he uses comparing diversity to only membership, but integration to partnership helped me comprehend the difference between the two.

Bogost goes on to use an analogy to demonstrate to the reader just how different computing professionals are to everyone else. He presents the idea that underrepresentation in the tech industry is not a fundamental problem. They are separated because of their way of approaching problems is most likely different than an average person’s solution to a problem as “computing professionals constitute a tribe, separated from the general public not primarily by virtue of their race, gender, or nationality, but by the exclusive culture of computing education and industry.” The tech industry is a relatively new industry compared to many others, such as business, education, and even science. Both of my brothers are majoring in computer science, and I have seen some of the course work. It is so different from the ways that a person approaches problems in business, as well as the education in general. By giving the analogy of computer professionals being a tribe, I think this really illustrates the point about how their education is different from others and helps emphasize the exclusivity of working in the tech industry in general.

The final rhetorical device that Bogost uses in his article is another analogy. In using the analogy, it also strengthens the metaphor he included earlier in the article, about how diversity is just membership, while integration is partnership. In today’s culture, diversity is just a checkpoint on a company’s box, they do not really see the value of having different perspectives be involved and have power in the workplace. Also, as the article earlier noted, the older people in the industry must be willing to integrate. Currently, many companies are not willing, as “their goal is to get more people in the game, not necessarily change the rules of that game.”. This quote helps illustrate that many people within the tech industry are not changing for the right reasons. The author compares it to a game, instead of real life. The right reasons would be because it is the morally correct thing to do, not only because it has a positive economic impact on the company. By comparing the diversity efforts to a game, Bogost helps demonstrate that the tech industry is not really ready for integration, rather they are only ready for the membership of others.

These rhetorical devices really stood out to me as they helped me understand the point that Bogost was trying to convey. I found these to be the most useful in understanding his ideas and the point that he was making surrounding diversity in the tech industry.

Discussion Questions Week of 7/5

Response to 1

I truly enjoyed reading all of the Expanding the Canon posts, having so many people contributing their ideas was fantastic. With that said, I enjoyed reading the post that Sherri made on Algorithm-Driven Hiring Tools: Innovative Recruitment or Expedited Disability Discrimination?. Also, reading Bogost’s article this week makes me want to relate this to that because if you think about it, many of the people who create algorithms are white men who may have biases. They are often the only ones in the room creating the algorithms and are unaware of other people’s perspectives. Sherri did a fantastic job of making me want to dive deeper into the topic, as well as explain why machines should not be analyzing people’s every move, whether it is on their resume or in an interview, as “machines ignore nuances and context and lack of empathy”, according to Sherri. Machines do not have emotions, cannot sense if someone has autism just through the way they move, so it would be unfair to judge their personalities only using algorithms. Humans have emotions and tend not to assess every movement that another person makes, which is much more beneficial. The video that Sherri included a trailer for Persona, a series on HBO max, was also interesting. I think the trailer did a great job of illustrating that AI labels someone immediately off the bat, whether it is using a personality test, or recording movements and voice and then analyzing it. I doubt anyone could ever comprehend how much data machines collect on each one of us.

Another post I found interesting was Edwards, on the lack of diversity with CEOs and HR management. He read more into whether or not the CEOs’ public versus private beliefs were the same, and if there was a difference in the two whether or not that impacted the organization.  I found that reiterating the percentage of male and Caucasian respondents, whether it was about CEO or HR management positions, illustrated that there is no diversity in the workplace, for these two positions at least. I also feel as though Edward’s use of pictures was also helpful. His last picture, a bunch of white men sitting at the table saying “congratulations on the 20th meeting of our diversity committee” really spoke volumes to me on the fact that there needs to be a larger presence of diverse individuals, whether it be in HR management positions or elsewhere. The picture illustrates a bunch of white men talking about diversity efforts, but they are not acting on hiring diverse individuals, if they were acting, there would not be so many white men sitting at the table.

For the Expanding the Canon post, people posted in different areas that are considered diverse. This included diversity in business, LGBTQIA+ experiences, gender gaps, along with others. If there is one thing that this unit has taught me is that to progress in society, I have to have an open mind about everything. So many people go through different journeys and have their own experiences, previously I did not realize how broad the term diverse was, or its applications. One thing that all of these posts shared was the fact that the world is changing, and people are becoming more accepting and welcoming of others. Diversity has a direct impact on the organizational culture, along with the success of the organization in general. Before these posts, I did not realize how much more progress needs to be made regarding the promotion and inclusion of diverse individuals within organizations.

Response to 2

For this, I walked through what the TSIS book recommended. I tried to first introduce the point that he tried to make in the article, and then where he moved his viewpoint from diversity in the workforce currently being a huge benefit to the idea that it could risk tokenization. I then gave the quote and put in a summary of how I saw the quote. After that, I gave my own viewpoint on his view, and then related it back to the tech industry as a whole. I think I did it right, but I would appreciate any feedback that anyone has.

Bogost, a writer at The Atlantic, presents the article “The Problem with Diversity in Computing” where he writes about how the tech industry needs to be more inclusive in hiring and listening to the ideas of diverse individuals, as they are not being heard. He wants change to happen now through new programs and centers to open, promoting a new generation of diverse individuals going into the tech industry. However, Bogost himself writes “But there’s a risk of tokenization; inviting a black man or curly-haired woman into the room could make a difference in the design of the systems produced… But it probably will not substantially change the thrust of the tech industry as it currently operates.” The essence of Bogost’s argument is that although bringing in diverse individuals to work on computing technology now might have an impact on a few pieces of programming, the industry would not have diverse individuals in positions that make a meaningful impact on the industry as a whole, such as management positions. I agree that changing the industry to reflect the experiences of everyone more accurately will take time and will not happen immediately. In my experience, even at Syracuse, change happens slowly, as people need time to adjust to new ideas and situations. Hopefully, people will realize the benefits of having people with different viewpoints than their own office space and management positions, as it would benefit the collective industry.

Expanding the Canon

In “Reproducing inequity: the role of race in the business school faculty search”, after discovering that an astonishing 67% of full-time faculty at business schools are white, Professors Grier (a professor of marketing at American University) and Poole (a professor at the University of San Francisco) decided to dive deeper into why diverse groups are underrepresented. To do this, they conducted a qualitative study through interviewing professors in business schools.

Through interviews, Grier and Poole were able to study five components of the Critical Race Theory which offered some explanation into why there is not a proportionate number of diverse faculty members to students. The elements include: unchanged race and lasting racism, the interconnected nature of race with forms of subordination, the idea of one dominant ideology, experiential knowledge, and commitment to social justice. The interviews also revealed in detail how many schools care about the ‘best athlete’ construct, where only outputs matter. Schools do not take into account inputs, or extra duties performed by many underrepresented staff, including mentoring diverse students and serving as members in hiring committees.

Grier and Poole’s research found that to be successful in creating an inclusive environment, everyone must be enthusiastic and open to change. By documenting the issues surrounding diverse faculty in business schools, the professors hope other professors will reflect on their environments, and advocate for change.

The research done by Grier and Poole is essential in understanding the reasons why there are not more diverse faculty members in college business departments. It also helps illustrate that by understanding the reasons behind not having a more diverse faculty, people will understand which components need to shift within their business department. In particular, the article helps identify that the Critical Race Theory applies to higher education organizations. By establishing that the CRT applies to higher education, a relationship is established between diversity and education. Many colleges do not take advantage of this relationship. Universities do not reward professors when they take on different tasks to promote diversity. This includes acknowledging differences and mentoring students who may come from similar backgrounds or share similar experiences.

One of the critical points in the article states that inputs are just as necessary as outputs and that underrepresented minority faculty perspectives must be valued throughout business departments. Different perspectives’ value can only be appreciated when the relationship between international and domestic diversity is studied further. 

Due to the dominant ideology component of the CRT, many may find it difficult to change, or understand others, as they are a part of the dominant group. It is difficult for a person to comprehend another person’s experiences if they have not experienced it themselves. 

The picture below illustrates that white faculty members consider their department to be more committed to inclusion. This will make them feel more accepted in their respective departments.  Black faculty, in contrast, may believe that department efforts to promote inclusion are unsatisfactory. As a result, many feel as though the department does not take inclusion seriously. 

www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/01/06/faculty-members-color-see-illusion-inclusion

This supports the idea that white faculty may not understand some of the difficulties other members go through to feel included. To make diverse faculty feel included within the business school, it is imperative that actions, not just words, are taken to promote diversity. This consists of holding conversations or meetings to discuss staff backgrounds and their experiences, encouraging questions, and acknowledging each faculty member’s unique upbringing or culture. Funding diversity studies may also be beneficial in helping promote inclusion.

We already know why having diverse faculty is crucial, as illustrated by Austin and Pisano, and Gundemir. The following video provides student testimonials about how faculty diversity has had a positive impact on their education. 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=owogyWB_lqE

The video illustrates that acknowledging differences between individuals is beneficial, as it encourages students from diverse backgrounds to feel comfortable in their environment. 

Grier and Poole’s article is crucial in helping reflect on our surroundings and understanding that we all need to be supportive of change. One of the main objectives was to understand that knowing what to change is essential in feeling the positive effects of a more diverse faculty. By understanding the different aspects that explain why many organizations are not more diverse, institutions will reflect and alter these components, eventually leading to a more diversified group that accurately represents everyone’s backgrounds and experiences. 

https://www-tandfonline-com.libezproxy2.syr.edu/doi/full/10.1080/0267257X.2020.1800796

Works Cited:

Flaherty, Colleen. Faculty Members of Color See ‘Illusion of Inclusion’, 6 Jan. 2021, www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/01/06/faculty-members-color-see-illusion-inclusion.

Sonya A. Grier & Sonja Martin Poole (2020) Reproducing inequity: the role of race in the business school faculty search, Journal of Marketing Management, 36:13-14, 1190-1222, DOI: 10.1080/0267257X.2020.1800796

UniversityRochester, AS&E Faculty Diversity Office, director. The Importance of Faculty Diversity. YouTube, YouTube, 1 Dec. 2015, www.youtube.com/watch?v=owogyWB_lqE.

Expanding the Canon Draft

After discovering that an astonishing 67% of full-time faculty at business schools are white, Professors Grier (a professor of marketing at American University) and Poole (a professor at the University of San Francisco) decided to dive deeper into why diverse groups are underrepresented. To do this, they conducted a qualitative study through interviewing professors in business schools. Through interviews, Grier and Poole were able to study five components of the Critical Race Theory which offered some explanation into why there is not a proportionate number of diverse faculty members to students. The elements include: unchanged race and lasting racism, the interconnected nature of race with forms of subordination, the idea of one dominant ideology, experiential knowledge and commitment to social justice. The interviews also revealed in detail about how many schools care about the ‘best athlete’ construct, where only outputs matter. Schools do not take into account inputs, or extra duties performed by many underrepresented staff, including mentoring diverse students and serving as members in hiring committees. Grier and Poole’s research found that in order to be successful in creating an inclusive environment, everyone must be enthusiastic and open to change. By documenting the issues surrounding diverse faculty in business schools, the professors hope other professors will reflect on their own environments, and advocate for change.

The research done by Grier and Poole is essential in understanding the reasons why there are not more faculty who are considered diverse. In my opinion, by understanding the reasons behind not having a more diverse faculty, people will be able to change components of their organization. For example, we need to start understanding and celebrating how many professors take on different tasks to promote diversity. The dominant ideology has never represented the underrepresented minority experience, yet has always served towards the best interests of dominant groups. Many may find it difficult to embrace change, as they are a part of the dominant group. By promoting change, they are not serving in their own best interests. Along with this, it is difficult for another person to truly comprehend another person’s experiences if they have never experienced them themselves. Being in a dominant group and promoting change through words is different than taking actions to promote change. As a result, many underrepresented groups may not feel as though others are advocating for change.

Source: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/01/06/faculty-members-color-see-illusion-inclusion

We already know why having faculty that is diverse in their views is important, as illustrated by Austin and Pisano, Gundemir, along with this clip:

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owogyWB_lqE

However, understanding what to change is essential in feeling the effects of a more diverse faculty. By understanding different aspects that explain why many organizations do not have a more diversified staff core, we will be able to reflect and change these components, eventually leading to a diverse staff that represents everyone’s backgrounds and experiences. In my opinion, Grier and Poole’s article is critical in helping us reflect on our surroundings and understanding that we all need to be supportive of change.

Discussion Questions Week 4

Response 1

Heffernan, a former CEO, attempts to explain the need for human qualities, as forecasting with technology cannot be solely relied on in the future. In the TED talk, Heffernan first attempts to connect with her audience by using a joke,  in which coconuts are used in the reference as an example. I thought it was well done by Heffernan, as it got her audience interested in hearing more about what she had to say. After using examples of things that AI cannot forecast, such as when a group of high schoolers will need to buy coconuts, Heffernan uses “we” a significant amount. Heffernan is most likely referring to the human population due to how much she references human nature and the qualities that humans have, unlike technology. Along with using “we”, Heffernan does a fantastic job at blending in everyday real-world examples of why human qualities are essential. Heffernan does this by speaking about a hospital that had a strict schedule for each patient, which was changed to a more relaxed schedule based on what the nurse believed was necessary. A nurse who is sitting in the audience might be interested in hearing more about this topic. She uses other topics of individuals in the business world, thereby making other people within that field interested. By referencing a wide range of different industries, Heffernan can appeal to a variety of people in different areas, yet all have one thing in common. Efficiency does not always mean effectiveness, as numbers are not 100%, and cannot predict the future. She also used a personal anecdote where she said she spoke to some rising CEOs, asking who their friends were at work. The CEOs stated that they had no time for that,  in turn not being able to create lasting connections with other meaningful people in the business world.

The most critical part about her speech though is that she spoke more in a conversational tone. She did not bring up any relevant statistical evidence in her examples, rather she spoke through the reasoning. Technology, on the other hand, would solely rely on numbers, not human intuition. For this speech, Heffernan only relies on human interaction and appeals to the audience as “we” to illustrate the need for human interaction and emotions to be involved in organizations.

Response 2

Heffernan chooses to work with evidence in the exact opposite way that AI would work to form an opinion. Instead of using numerical data to back up her findings, Heffernan relies almost only on anecdotes in different organizations to prove her point. To make her points more effective, Heffernan develops her ideas by initially stating what she believes to be true, which is that we must not rely on technology completely, as humans are useful due to their ability to form connections and have emotions. After doing so, Heffernan chooses to use a real-world example to illustrate this point. For example, Heffernan states that having an efficient well-laid schedule may not be effective. Nurses discovered this after following a strict schedule only allocating a small amount of time for each patient and then turning to a schedule where they were able to spend as much time as they would like to with any given patient. After switching schedules, the cost went down while patient recovery times also improved.

Heffernan throughout the speech keeps us on our toes, as she speaks on the fact that no one knows when the economy is going to tank, or when the next epidemic is going to happen. Although this talk happened in 2019, I think it is really interesting. No one ever could have imagined that the COVID pandemic would happen in 2020, as we really could not predict it. Being able to look back on this video two years later is fascinating to me because it solidifies her point that forecasting and technology cannot predict everything in life, especially because ”Efficiency works well when you can predict exactly what you are going to need. But when the anomalous comes along… efficiency is no longer your friend.”  She speaks about how there are organizations that help research vaccines and variations of sicknesses or diseases. If we did not already have research on other diseases such as SARS, then we would not have been able to develop a vaccine as quickly. However, due to some amazing researchers who continued to research SARS a vaccine was developed fast. Some may not have thought that it was efficient to be studying something that was not impacting our society at that present moment. However, it became effective in the long run and helped develop a vaccine.

Another reason why Heffernan is so successful at conveying her thoughts is because of the way that she addresses her audience. She addresses the audience as “we” because both she and the audience have emotions and are people. One of the main points that she tries to illustrate is that the thing that makes an organization successful is the people within it. I believe that her speech was less of an argument and more so went through a step-by-step process of her ideas, which were laid out through logical reasoning and stories.

By using both imaginary and real-world anecdotes to convey her point, Heffernan does a fantastic job at conveying her point about why technology cannot be fully relied on. I enjoyed listening to this TED talk especially because it aligned with many topics covered in my management classes last semester.

Reproducing inequity: the role of race in the business school faculty search

In Reproducing inequity: the role of race in the business school faculty search, Grier, a professor of marketing at American University, and Poole, a professor at the University of San Francisco examines diversity in business schools, why groups are underrepresented, and presents a qualitative study using the Critical Race Theory to examine components of race. The scholarly article dives deeper into five components of CRT analyzing why there is not a proportionate number of diverse faculty members to students. This includes: unchanged race and lasting racism, the interconnected nature of race with forms of subordination, the idea of one dominant ideology, experiential knowledge, and commitment to social justice. Grier also speaks about how many business schools only care about the ‘best athlete’ construct, where only outputs matter. Schools often do not take into account extra duties (inputs) of underrepresented minorities including mentoring diverse students and serving as token members in hiring committees. The article also illustrates that in order to be successful in promoting diversity, enthusiasm and promotion of diversity needs to come from everyone. Grier and Poole hope that the conversation on diversity in business schools continues through other scholars evaluating and promoting diversity within their own business schools.

Sonya A. Grier & Sonja Martin Poole (2020) Reproducing inequity: the role of race in the business school faculty search, Journal of Marketing Management, 36:13-14, 1190-1222, DOI: 10.1080/0267257X.2020.1800796

Link to article: https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2020.1800796

Alternate link to article (PDF): https://www-tandfonline-com.libezproxy2.syr.edu/doi/pdf/10.1080/0267257X.2020.1800796?needAccess=true

Discussion Questions Week 3

Response to #1

The reading in this unit that stood out to me the most was the Austin and Pisano article about neurodiversity. As a result, I would like to focus on neurodiversity in the workplace. The Austin and Pisano article focused a lot on the benefits of neurodiverse individuals, along with how to get them into specific industries which could use their skillsets. However, I would like to focus on areas or industries where there is already an underrepresentation in the industry, the struggles that they have with adding neurodiverse individuals, and see if there is any room for change. In order to have the most success in finding an article which interests me, I plan on using google, as well as the SU library database using key words to narrow down my search. I plan on using the filter features on the SU database, as I believe that this will help me narrow down the results and find something that is relevant towards our class. Some of the filters I plan on using to have an article that is credible and relevant in today is to have the filter set for articles published in the past five years, as well as journal articles. After I have found an article that meets these criteria, I plan on googling the author to make sure that they are respected individuals within that field. The experts I believe that would be relevant would be people in academia, or people in the corporate world who have experience dealing with neurodiverse individuals. So far, I have had success using these techniques to find articles which would be relevant and interesting to research more on.

Response to #2

In their article, Austin and Pisano highlight the fact that people with neurodiverse conditions are not taken full advantage of due to conventional recruitment tactics. In addition, they state some of the benefits associated with neurodiverse individuals, along with ways to get them involved in the workplace. Although Austin and Pisano do not say so directly, they acknowledge that accommodations for neurodiverse individuals often involve extreme amounts of effort and change within the organization.  In their recent work, Kaplan and Donovan have found that having good intentions does not always mean that there will be a positive impact. Kaplan and Donovan argue that to have a positive impact on diverse individuals there must be constant changes taking place in the organization in order to accommodate and help diverse individuals grow.  This is similar to Austin and Pisano as they both illustrate that in order to accommodate diverse individuals,  many things have to change in the workplace. Along with this, both articles stated the fact that it is often difficult for people who do not have the same background as diverse individuals to help them grow, as they do not understand where they are coming from, or their personal needs.

Kaplan & Donovan Summary

In the article, Kaplan and Donovan claim that it is difficult for managers to embrace differences in the workplace due to unconscious bias’, insider-outsider group dynamics, and the idea of different levels in systems. They also suggest that good intentions are often not matched with a positive impact. For example, the article speaks about, Kim, a manager, going into a separate cafeteria only available to a small population. Although the intent is to create a quite space for upper management, it comes off as elitist because of separation from the rest of the employee population.

The authors also illustrate that by giving uniform performance reports, Kim is damaging the opportunity for organizational growth. The article speaks that it is difficult to review others who are different from us, as people are often unaware of the other person’s needs. As a result, the author states that daily actions as well as reflecting on our own biases are essential to foster diversity and inclusion.

After reading the article, I support the idea that changing daily processes are essential in promoting diversity and inclusion. Continuous development and growth are required and can only be done by matching intent with impact within the organization.