Abstract
Perceiving others as members of one’s group (the ingroup) or of another group (an outgroup) has a profound impact on how people respond. People react spontaneous more positively toward others viewed as ingroup than outgroup members in their perceptions, thoughts, feelings, and behavior. Thus recognized differences between groups can create unfair barriers for some individuals and advantages for others. In this chapter, we discuss the two most dominant approaches to managing diversity in societies and organizations: colorblindness (an assimilationist strategy) and multiculturalism. We highlight how understanding the psychological challenges and benefits of diversity is critical for managing the landscape in which diversity operates within organizations and for building more inclusive and effective organizations. Consideration of the psychological dynamics of group identity can help leaders respond nimbly and effectively to the social circumstances of their organizations. Encouraging dialogue between members of different groups and instituting policies that acknowledge both difference and interconnections can cultivate the significant benefits of diversity as a valuable resource that can enrich the experiences of both majority- and minority-group members within the organization and thus benefit both the organization and its members.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Antonio, A. L., Chang, M. J., Hakuta, K., Kenny, D. A., Levin, S., & Milem, J. F. (2004). Effects of racial diversity on complex thinking in college students. Psychological Science, 15, 507–510.
Apfelbaum, E. P., Sommers, S. R., & Norton, M. I. (2008). Seeing race and seeming racist? Evaluating strategic colorblindness in social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 918–932.
Bear, A., & Rand, D. G. (2016). Intuition, deliberation, and the evolution of cooperation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113, 936–941.
Bergsieker, H. B., Shelton, J. N., & Richeson, J. A. (2010). To be liked versus respected: Divergent goals in interracial interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 248–264.
Cheryan, S. (2012). Understanding the paradox in math-related fields: Why do some gender gaps remain while others do not? Sex Roles, 66, 184–190.
Craig, M. A., & Richeson, J. A. (2014). More diverse yet less tolerant? How the increasingly diverse racial landscape affects white Americans’ racial attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(6), 750–761.
Crisp, R. J., & Turner, R. N. (2011). Cognitive adaptation to the experience of social and cultural diversity. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 242–266.
Crisp, R. J., Walsh, J., & Hewstone, M. (2006). Crossed categorization in common ingroup contexts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1204–1218.
Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2010). Intergroup bias. In S. T. Fiske, D. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 1084–1121). New York: Wiley.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Ufkes, E. G., Saguy, T., & Pearson, A. R. (2016). Included but invisible? Subtle bias, common identity, and the darker side of “we”. Social Issues and Policy Review, 10, 4–44.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The Common Ingroup Identity Model. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Guerra, R., Hehman, E., & Saguy, T. (2016). A common ingroup identity: A categorization-based approach for reducing intergroup bias. In T. Nelson (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice, discrimination, and stereotyping (2nd ed., pp. 433–454). New York: Psychology Press.
Greenaway, K. H., Wright, R. G., Willingham, J., Reynolds, K. J., & Haslam, S. A. (2015). Shared identity is key to effective communication. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 171–182.
Gurin, P., Nagda, B. R. A., & Zúñiga, X. (2013). Dialogue across difference: Practice, theory, and research on intergroup dialogue. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Hahn, A., Nunes, A., Park, B., & Judd, C. M. (2014). Social-psychological recommendations for a diverse work environment. In K. M. Thomas, V. C. Plaut, & M. Tran (Eds.), Diversity ideologies in organizations (pp. 236–252). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Insko, C. A., Schopler, J., Gaertner, L., Wildschut, T., Kozar, R., Pinter, B., et al. (2001). Interindividual-intergroup discontinuity reduction through the anticipation of future interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 95–111.
Jost, J. T., Gaucher, D., & Stern, C. (2015). “The world isn’t fair”: A system justification perspective on social stratification and inequality. In M. Mikulincer, P. R. Shaver, J. F. Dovidio, & J. A. Simpson (Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychology: Volume 2, Group processes (pp. 317–340). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Kelman, H. C. (2005). Building trust among enemies: The central challenge for international conflict resolution. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29, 639–650.
Leung, A. K. Y., Maddux, W. W., Galinsky, A. D., & Chiu, C. Y. (2008). Multicultural experience enhances creativity: The when and how. American Psychologist, 63(3), 169–181.
Migacheva, K., Tropp, L. R., & Crocker, J. (2011). Focusing beyond the self: Goal orientations in intergroup relations. In L. R. Tropp & R. K. Mallett (Eds.), Moving beyond prejudice reduction: Pathways to positive intergroup relations (pp. 99–115). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Miller, N. (2002). Personalization and the promise of contact theory. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 387–410.
Mummendey, A., & Wenzel, M. (1999). Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 158–174.
Munduate, L., Di Marco, D., Martínez-Corts, I., Arenas, A., & Gamero, N. (2014). Rebuilding the social dialogue and promoting inclusive organizations. A tool for social innovation in times of crisis. Papeles del Psicólogo, 35, 122–129.
Otten, S., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2000). Evidence for implicit evaluative in-group bias: Affect-based spontaneous trait inference in a minimal group paradigm. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 77–89.
Plaut, V. C., Garnett, F. G., Buffardi, L. E., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2011). “What about me?” Perceptions of exclusion and whites reactions to multiculturalism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 337–353.
Purdie-Vaughns, V., Steele, C. M., Davies, P. G., Ditlmann, R., & Crosby, J. R. (2008). Social identity contingencies: How diversity cues signal threat or safety for African Americans in mainstream institutions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 615–630.
Shelton, J. N., & Richeson, J. A. (2005). Intergroup contact and pluralistic ignorance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 91–107.
Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., Hood, W. R., & Sherif, C. W. (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation: The Robbers Cave experiment. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Book Exchange.
Shnabel, N., & Nadler, A. (2005). The role of agency and morality in reconciliation processes: The perspective of the needs-based model. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24, 477–483.
Ukes, E. G., Otten, S., van der Zee, K., Giebels, E., & Dovidio, J. F. (2012). Urban district identity as common ingroup identity: The different role of ingroup prototypicality for minority and majority groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 707–716.
Van Bavel, J. J., Packer, D. J., & Cunningham, W. A. (2008). The neural substrates of in-group bias. Psychological Science, 19, 1131–1139.
Van Vugt, M., & Hart, C. M. (2004). Social identity as social glue: The origins of group loyalty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 585–598.
Verkuyten, M., & Martinovic, B. (2012). Immigrants’ national identification: Meanings, determinants, consequences. Social Issues and Policy Review, 6, 82–122.
Vorauer, J. D., Gagnon, A., & Sasaki, S. J. (2009). Salient intergroup ideology and intergroup interaction. Psychological Science, 20, 838–845.
Waldzus, S., Mummendey, A., Wenzel, M., & Boettcher, F. (2004). Of bikers, teachers, and Germans: Groups’ diverging views about their prototypicality. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 385–400.
Wolsko, C., Park, B., Judd, C. M., & Wittenbrink, B. (2000). Framing interethnic ideology: Effects of multicultural and color-blind perspectives on judgments of groups and individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 635–654.
Workman-Stark, A. L. (2017). Inclusive leadership. In inclusive policing from the inside out (pp. 167–188). New York: Springer International Publishing.
Yogeeswaran, K., & Dasgupta, N. (2014). Conceptions of national identity in a globalized world: Antecedents and consequences. European Review of Social Psychology, 25, 189–227.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dovidio, J.F., Abad-Merino, S., Tabernero, C. (2017). General Concepts About Inclusion in Organizations: A Psychological Approach to Understanding Diversity and Inclusion in Organizations. In: Arenas, A., Di Marco, D., Munduate, L., Euwema, M. (eds) Shaping Inclusive Workplaces Through Social Dialogue. Industrial Relations & Conflict Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66393-7_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66393-7_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-66392-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-66393-7
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)