Abstract
We present a review of the diversity ideologies literature from the target’s perspective. In particular, we focus on how diversity ideologies–beliefs or organizational practices with regards to how to approach diversity–affect racial minorities’ and women’s self-perceptions and experiences at work. This review suggests that a diversity aware ideology (i.e., multiculturalism) is more beneficial than a diversity blind ideology (i.e., colorblindness) for racial-ethnic minorities (e.g., better performance outcomes; more psychological engagement, inclusion, and workplace satisfaction; more positive leadership self-perceptions; and reduced perceptions of bias and turnover intentions). In contrast, for women, gender-blindness is associated with more positive outcomes than gender awareness (e.g., enhanced self-confidence, pro-active behaviors and leadership emergence). Importantly, multiculturalism and gender-blindness can both produce negative side effects for racial minorities and women, respectively, which highlights the importance of developing approaches to address the shortcomings of these conventional ideologies. We discuss the implications and offer recommendations for future research.
Highlights
Specialty section: This article was submitted to Organizational Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology
This review suggests that a diversity aware ideology is more beneficial than a diversity blind ideology for racial-ethnic minorities
While many agree that the dichotomy between de-emphasizing vs. acknowledging and celebrating social group differences is common across studies on diversity ideologies (Hahn et al, 2015), it is noteworthy that both ideologies are complex and can take different forms
Summary
While many agree that the dichotomy between de-emphasizing vs. acknowledging and celebrating social group differences is common across studies on diversity ideologies (Hahn et al, 2015), it is noteworthy that both ideologies are complex and can take different forms. Colorblindness has been depicted as a valuein-individual differences approach, focusing on ignoring any type of group membership (e.g., a subgroup or an overarching one) in favor of individual qualities that make people unique (Wilder, 1984; Ryan et al, 2007; Verkuyten, 2010; Peery, 2011) Regarding these different conceptualizations of colorblindness, scholars have debated whether these different conceptualizations represent subtypes of the colorblind ideology or separate ideological approaches (Rosenthal and Levy, 2010). Unlike the clearer conceptual distinctions made in research on race ideologies, empirical research in this domain has rarely distinguished between these components While these conceptualizations represent hierarchy attenuating ideologies, some conceptualizations are hierarchy enhancing, such as a gender-blind approach which focuses on women adapting to men, which is consistent with assimilation (Hahn et al, 2015). When the reviewed work specifies the exact conceptualization of color/gender-blindness, we make note of which conceptualization was used; otherwise, when left unspecified or if multiple elements occur simultaneously, we use the overarching term “colorblindness” or “gender-blindness” for race and gender ideologies, respectively
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
