Managing Diversity in R&D Groups

Abstract

The shrinking number of scientists and engineers coming out of graduate schools in the United States and the growing proportion of foreign-born, women and minorities among those graduates represent a challenge for high technology firms. As the work force becomes more diverse, companies must learn to manage that diversity. Each group represents a different culture or subculture with different expectations, norms and values. Can we expect that people from diverse cultures will work together in the same way that people from a single culture do? Do the behavioral norms for each of these groups coincide with the behavioral norms of American industry? On the positive side, are there potential opportunities in having a more diverse work force? Does diversity in work teams produce greater creativity? Are the norms for particular cultures especially appropriate for handling certain kinds of problems? A recent study addressed the problems and opportunities created by the increasingly diverse work force in R&D. Interviews were conducted with 100 scientists and engineers from five Industrial Research Institute member companies (see editorial box, next page). The major themes and their implications for management are discussed below. For the purpose of clarity, we shall refer to native-born white males as employees and foreign-born, women and minorities as new groups. Orientation/Integration An issue heard frequently in our study was that the groups were not as attuned to the rules of corporate behavior as traditional employees. In particular, it appeared that for this highly educated labor force, people were expected to use their initiative in such matters as seeking out help when they needed it, defending their ideas to peers and management, writing up and publicizing their work, and going after the type of experiences that would help them grow as professionals. It appears that within each of the groups there are specific behavior patterns -- which may be cultural in origin -- which make these groups less effective in accomplishing these ends. For example, women and minorities expressed a hesitancy to ask questions because they felt others would question their competence for not knowing the answers. Some respondents reported that Asians (especially Chinese and others from the Far East) were, in general, less prone to criticize others in public. It was often stated that females were less likely to claim credit for a piece of joint work than were males, and Far East Asians reported that they were trained in humility and found self-promotion to be foreign to them. In fact, some of them reported being accustomed to censure, but not praise, in their upbringing, and they felt these early experiences carried over to the work setting. For example, some said they were sometimes embarrassed when praised by a supervisor. Perhaps more problematic for clear communication with U.S.-born white male employees, Asians were also often reluctant to say what they think is obvious or should be taken for granted so as not to showcase themselves as individuals. They considered such behavior as impolite. Such presentation of self contrasted sharply with the native-born white males with whom we talked. For example, the white male group reported that individuals must be proactive in seeking out desired assignments and role models, whereas the other groups were more likely to look to the company to provide equity in those areas. Overwhelmingly, managers expressed the opinion that the groups must adapt to the dominant culture if they are to thrive. This view was particularly strong among managers who were themselves not native-born white males. Negative Expectations A complaint heard from blacks particularly was that even though they have gone through a comprehensive selection procedure and have the credentials required for the job, their competence is still questioned frequently. …