Enhancing the Effects of Sexual Orientation Diversity Training: The Effects of Setting Goals and Training Mentors on Attitudes and Behaviors
The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of goal-setting theory (Locke, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157–189, 1968; Locke and Latham, 1990, A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; Locke and Latham, American Psychologist, 57, 705–717, 2002) within a diversity training context to enhance training outcomes. In particular, the training focused on an understudied group—gay men and lesbians—and examined both the short- and long-term outcomes associated with diversity training.
Using experimental methods in a field setting, participants (college students) were randomly assigned to a 2(goal-setting condition: self-set goals and no goals) × 2(mentor goal condition: mentor goals and no mentor goals) factorial design, where behavioral and attitudinal data were collected at two points in time: 3 months and 8 months subsequent to training.
Participants who developed sexual orientation supportive goals reported more supportive behaviors and attitudes toward gay and lesbian individuals than those who did not. Sexual orientation supportive behaviors mediated the relationship between goal-setting and sexual orientation attitudes.
The pattern of results suggests that time was the key for participants to meet the goals that were set during the diversity training. Both behaviors and attitudes were influenced by the goal setting at 8 months, but not after 3 months. This study demonstrates the importance of measuring both behaviors and attitudes in assessing diversity training.
This is one of the first studies to integrate goal-setting theory (Locke and Latham, 1990, A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; Locke and Latham, American Psychologist, 57, 705–717, 2002) into the area of diversity training in an experimental field setting. We used a longitudinal design, addressing limitations of past research that usually examine short-term reactions to diversity training.
KeywordsDiversity training Goal-setting Mentoring Discrimination Prejudice Sexual orientation
- Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- Bell, M. P. (2007). Diversity in organizations. Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western.Google Scholar
- Chrobot-Mason, D., & Quiñones, M. A. (2002). Training for a diverse workplace. In K. Kraiger (Ed.), Creating, implementing and managing effective training and development (pp. 117–159). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Clark, M. M. (2003). Three non-employment law cases in high court have business ramifications. HR Magazine, 48, 31–47.Google Scholar
- Crocker, J., Major, B., & Steele, C. (1998). Social stigma. In D. T. Gilbert & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 504–553). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Dutton, J. E., & Ashford, S. J. (1993). Selling issues to top management. Academy of Management Review, 18, 397–428.Google Scholar
- Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
- Fletcher, J. K., & Ragins, B. R. (2007). Stone centre relational cultural theory: A window on relational mentoring. In B. R. Ragins & K. E. Kram (Eds.), The handbook of mentoring at work: Research, theory and practice (pp. 373–399). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
- Ford, J. K., & Weissbein, D. A. (1997). Transfer of training: an updated review and analysis’. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 10, 22–41.Google Scholar
- Friskopp, A., & Silverstein, S. (1996). Straight jobs, gay lives: Gay and lesbian professionals, the Harvard Business School, and the American workplace. New York: Touchstone/Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
- Galvin, T. (2003, October). The twenty-second annual industry report. Training, 19–45.Google Scholar
- Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Goldstein, I., & Ford, J. K. (2002). Training in organizations (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
- Gonsiorek, J. C., & Weinrich, J. D. (1991). Homosexuality: Research implications for public policy. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
- Herek, G. M. (1994). Assessing heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians and ay men: A review of the empirical research with the ATLG scale. In B. Greene & G. M. Herek (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives in lesbian and gay issues in psychology (pp. 206–228). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
- Jacobi, M. (1991). Mentoring and undergraduate academic success: A literature review. Review of Educational Research, 61, 505–532.Google Scholar
- Latham, G. P. (1997). Overcoming mental models that limit research on transfer of training in organizational settings. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46, 371–375.Google Scholar
- Lazin, M. (2007). Record 94% of Fortune 500 companies provide sexual orientation discrimination protection. Retrieved June 1, 2011, from http://Equalityforum.com.
- Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Noe, R. A. (1999). Employee training and development. Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.Google Scholar
- Reber, R. A., & Wallin, J. A. (1984). The Effects of Training, Goal Setting, and Knowledge of Results on Safe Behavior: A Component Analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 544–560.Google Scholar
- Roberson, L., Kulik, C. T., & Pepper, M. B. (2001). Designing effective diversity training: Influence of group composition and trainee experience. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(8), 871–885.Google Scholar
- Rynes, S., & Rosen, B. (1994). What makes diversity programs work? HR Magazine, 39, 67–73.Google Scholar
- Segal, J. A. (2003). Diversity: Direct or disguised? HR Magazine, 48, 10–20.Google Scholar
- Weaver, V. J., & Dixon-Kheir, C. (2002). Making the business case for diversity. SHRM.Google Scholar
- Wilder, D. H., Hoyt, A. E., Surbeck, B. S., Wilder, J. C., & Carney, P. A. (1986). Greek affiliation and attitude change in college students. Journal of College Student Personnel, 27, 510–519.Google Scholar
- Wood, R. A., & Locke, E. A. (1990). Goal setting and strategy effects on complex tasks. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 73–109.Google Scholar