778016

research-article2018
ADHXXX10.1177/1523422318778016Advances in Developing Human ResourcesHughes

Preface
Advances in Developing Human
Resources
The Role of HRD in Using 2018, Vol. 20(3) 259­–262
© The Author(s) 2018
Diversity Intelligence to Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Enhance Leadership Skill DOI: 10.1177/1523422318778016
https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422318778016
journals.sagepub.com/home/adhr
Development and Talent
Management Strategy

Claretha Hughes1

There is only one, small, group of workers who are not protected in the workplace and
they are White males who are nonreligious, nonveterans, nondisabled, non-LGBTQ
(lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning), and non-Title IX pro-
tected. Many diversity initiatives championed by human resource development (HRD)
professionals have not been successful as is evidenced by the many Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission complaints, Department of Labor settlements, and other
legal settlements related to violation of federal diversity statutes that protect employ-
ees. The workplace climate and American society have experienced notable issues
related to diversity that have been termed political correctness by those who say they
are tired of being politically correct. Similarly, protected class employees are tired of
being discriminated against within and outside of the workplace.
In some organizations, diversity efforts face consistent resistance and are often mea-
sured by simply counting the number of employees in each protected class group (Dass
& Parker, 1999). This simplification of diversity, essentially based on headcount, allows
it to remain a surface level issue that is relegated to minimal attention. The value of
diversity, then, can be inferred to be represented by having enough of a particular group
such as enough Black males, Black females, White females, and/or substituting for
them by having enough international employees who can be counted in the protected
class group categories (Copeland, 1988; Dobbin, Kim, & Kalev, 2011).
Unless diversity is understood and taken seriously by all organization leaders, it is
futile to expect change to occur. Often leaders think that they know what diversity is
and how to implement diversity initiatives. There is a gap in what leaders perceive that

1University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA

Corresponding Author:
Claretha Hughes, Professor, Human Resource and Workforce Development, University of Arkansas, 255
Graduate Education Building, College of Education and Health Professions, Department of Rehabilitation,
Human Resources, and Communication Disorders, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA.
Email: chbanks@uark.edu
260 Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(3)

they know and what is actually communicated to diverse employees. Hughes (2015)
suggests that diversity intelligence (DQ) can bridge this gap by clearly assessing what
leaders truly know and what they are consistently doing that is working to enhance
diversity efforts.
Acknowledging that there is diversity in the workplace and ensuring awareness
through diversity and sensitivity training initiatives is not enough (Dobbin et al., 2011).
Being aware seldom translates into application and prevention of diversity concerns of
protected class employees within many workplaces. Diversity and inclusion efforts
have also had limited effect on the treatment of protected class employees (Dobbin &
Kalev, 2007). Traditional diversity training efforts including equal opportunity adver-
tisement, diversity training for managers, general diversity training, diversity task-
forces, affinity networks, and diversity mentoring programs have focused on awareness,
have evolved to inclusion and equity, and have not led to impactful change (Bregman,
2012; Dobbin & Kalev, 2007; Edelman & Petterson, 1999; Hayles, Hayles, & Russell,
1997; Hemphill & Haines, 1997). Only taskforces and mentoring have led to increases
in gender, racial, and ethnic diversity in management (Dobbin et al., 2011). Training
does not necessarily change behavior and cognition and is often viewed as “window-
dressing, adopted largely to win legitimacy” (Dobbin et al., 2011, p. 387).
Also, not all protected class employees need or want to be included in every diver-
sity effort to the detriment of their job performance. For example, in academia, faculty
of color do not want to be included in every diversity effort nor does every woman
want to be included in every gender initiative. Inclusion alone is not the answer. A
combination of equity, inclusion, and fairness is needed as applicable to each employ-
ee’s circumstance.

Diversity intelligence (DQ) provides an opportunity for leaders to reflect on their actions
and behaviors toward all employees and to effectively implement new strategies. DQ
values the differences in employees without attempting to make everyone alike. It is
needed so that organizational leaders can better interact with the changing demographics
in America and the global economy by embracing differences as strengths rather than
weaknesses. (Hughes, 2016, p. 76)

DQ is the capability of individuals to recognize the value of workplace diversity and

to use this information to guide thinking and behavior. Thus, because there is diversity
in many workplaces, DQ needs to be integrated alongside intellectual, emotional, and
cultural intelligences to be more effective.

Purpose
The purpose of this issue is to assist HRD professionals in their endeavors to provide
inclusion and equity in the workplace and to deepen the understanding of diversity
through DQ (Hughes, 2016). DQ builds on the need for diversity in the workplace, and
diversity training is the method through which this occurs (Holladay, Knight, Paige, &
Quiñones, 2003). This issue’s premise is that diversity exists in the workplace, yet the
Hughes 261

intelligence to achieve inclusion and equity for all employees is lacking. The potential
for advancing theory of HRD is vast because DQ is a concept that can be evaluated,
measured, and assessed alongside current HRD theories related to intellectual, emo-
tional, and cultural intelligences. The practice of HRD can be advanced by exploring,
examining, developing, and implementing inclusion and equity initiatives without the
stigmas associated with diversity such as quotas and marginalization of others because
there will be a recognition that there is diversity already inside the organization.
Irrational, unsubstantiated fear can be alleviated through initiatives that show that the
organization is already diverse. This does not imply that some workplaces are not
diverse and need to increase diversity hiring. Showing each individual that they are
valued through inclusion and equity in practice will benefit the HRD profession.
Missing from the empirical literature on diversity are intelligent actions that are
successful in reducing protected class employee discrimination in the workplace.
This is a critical problem as societal discrimination is spilling over into many work-
places. DQ is a concept that many scholars believe is already covered within cultural
intelligence, but there is diversity within cultures and other scholars, as noted in the
submissions included here, believe that there is extensive work left to be done.
Cultural intelligence alone has not solved the problems and neither has emotional
and intellectual intelligence. “Industry norms, corporate culture, and identity group
power are the leading predictors of diversity program adoption since 1980” (Dobbin
et al., 2011, p. 405). Adding DQ as an industry norm and to corporate cultures will
strengthen the HRD industry and the opportunity for leadership success within
organizations.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.

References
Bregman, P. (2012, March). Diversity training doesn’t work. Harvard Business Review Blog.
Retrieved from http://blogs.hbr.org/bregman/2012/03/diversity-training-doesnt-work.html
Copeland, L. (1988). Valuing diversity: Making the most of cultural differences in the work-
place. Personnel, 65, 52-60.
Dass, P., & Parker, B. (1999). Strategies for managing human resource diversity: From resis-
tance to learning. The Academy of Management Executive, 13(2), 68-80.
Dobbin, F., & Kalev, A. (2007). The architecture of inclusion: Evidence from corporate diver-
sity programs. Harvard Journal of Law & Gender, 30, 279-301.
Dobbin, F., Kim, S., & Kalev, A. (2011). You can’t always get what you need: Organizational
determinants of diversity programs. American Sociological Review, 76, 386-411.
262 Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(3)

Edelman, L. B., & Petterson, S. M. (1999). Symbols and substance in organizational response to
civil rights law. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 17(1), 107-135.
Hayles, V. R., Hayles, R., & Russell, A. M. (1997). The diversity directive: Why some ini-
tiatives fail & what to do about it. New York, NY: American Society for Training and
Development.
Hemphill, H., & Haines, R. (1997). Discrimination, harassment, and the failure of diversity
training: What to do now. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Holladay, C. L., Knight, J. L., Paige, D. L., & Quiñones, M. A. (2003). The influence of fram-
ing on attitudes toward diversity training. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14,
245-263.
Hughes, C. (Ed.). (2015). The impact of diversity on organization and career development.
Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Hughes, C. (2016). Diversity intelligence: Integrating diversity intelligence alongside intellec-
tual, emotional, and cultural intelligence for leadership and career development. London,
England: Palgrave MacMillan.

Author Biography
Claretha Hughes is professor of human resource and workforce development at the University
of Arkansas. She has more than 27 years of diverse management, supervisory, and administra-
tive experience and has published numerous articles in both scholarly and professional jour-
nals. She has published 7 books including Diversity Intelligence: Integrating Diversity
Intelligence alongside Intellectual, Emotional, and Cultural Intelligence for Leadership and
Career Development and Valuing People and Technology in the Workplace: A Competitive
Advantage Framework which won the Academy of Human Resource Development’s R. Wayne
Pace Book of the Year award in 2012. She has a PhD from Virginia Tech and an MBA from
the Sam M. Walton College of Business at the University of Arkansas.