IMQ Spr 2013

IMQ Intercultural Management Quarterly

Integrating Culture and Management in Global Organizations Volume XIV, Number 1 \ Spring 2013

2013 Conference Edition of IMQ:

Culturally Appropriate Alternative Dispute Resolution by Marc Brenman n An Innovative Approach to Cultural Competence Organizational Leadership: The Intercultural Personal Development Council by Sherwood Thompson n Peacebuilding through Inter-Group Contact: Challenges for Practitioners

by Horia M. Dijmarescu n Structural Inequality: Applications of an Old Theory to New Organizational Challenges by Benjamin Alexander, Jr.

RED CARPET POLITICS: THE GEOPOLITICS OF POP IN EAST ASIA

by Grace Haenim Yoo

EXTROVERSION VERSUS INTROVERSION IN CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

by Sarah C. Santoro

www.imi.american.edu

STAFF

Foreword

Publisher Gary R. Weaver

Dear readers,

Managing Editor Ryan A. Dalton

Happy end of the hiatus! Welcome to the Spring 2013 issue of Intercultural Management Quarterly. After much soul-searching and deliberation, IMQ has effectively reinvented itself through a facelift and a redefinition of purpose.

We thank your for your patience and hope you enjoy the results.

Editorial Review Board Dan Deming, Adam Mendelson, Robinder Sachdev, John Robert Kelley, and Gary R. Weaver

As always, IMQ awaits your contribution.

Please continue to adhere to our guidelines for submissions. We are not an academic journal, so be sure that your submissions contribute to the study and practice of intercultural management.

Intercultural Management Quarterly is published by the Intercultural Management Institute at American University. IMQ combines original research conducted in the field of intercultural management with the applied perspectives of industry experts, professors, and students.

Many thanks, and feel free to contact me if you have any comments or questions!

Ryan A. Dalton Managing Editor, IMQ

Table of Contents Intercultural Management Quarterly Volume XIV, No. 1 \ Spring 2013 Red Carpet Politics: The Geopolitics of Pop in East Asia

by Grace Haenim Yoo.....................................................3 Extroversion Versus Introversion in Conflict Management

by Sarah C. Santoro.......................................................6 Culturally Appropriate Alternative Dispute Resolution

by Marc Brenman..........................................................9 An Innovative Approach to Cultural Competence Organizational Leadership: The Intercultural Personal Development Council

by Sherwood Thompson................................................12 Peacebuilding through Inter-Group Contact: Challenges for Practitioners

by Horia M. Dijmarescu..............................................14

MISSION

SUBMISSIONS

Professionals, scholars, and students are invited to submit articles of 1,000–2,000 words on issues related to the study and practice of intercultural management.

Articles must be innovative and contribute to knowledge in the field but should avoid overly academic jargon. Endnotes are discouraged except in the case of direct quotations or citations and they must follow Turabian citation style. Each submission is refereed by the members of the Editorial Review Board. Accepted pieces are subject to editing.

REPRODUCTION

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the express written permission of the publication manager. Please contact the managing editor for reprint availability.

CONTACT

Intercultural Management Quarterly Intercultural Management Institute 4400 Massachusetts Avenue Northwest Washington, District of Columbia 20016 Phone: 202.885.6434 Fax: 202.885.1331 imqeditor@american.edu www.imi.american.edu

Structural Inequality: Applications of an Old Theory to New Organizational Challenges

by Benjamin Alexander, Jr............................................17

Red Carpet Politics: The Geopolitics of Pop in East Asia

by Grace Haenim Yoo

N

ew York City, Miami, Beverly Hills.

It’s had a good run, but it may be time for Bravo’s hit “Real Housewives” series to expand its horizons. There is a bug going around among the housewives of Tokyo, and it’s threatening marriages, stirring hopes of elopement, and causing plenty of drama. The name of what some right-wing Japanese politicians have actually referred to as a “disease” is none other than the Korean Wave. Even Japan’s First Ladies have not been immune to its charm, and the popularity of Korean television series, films, songs, and celebrities is now making its way to influencing foreign policy. Former Prime Minister Hatoyama Yukio’s wife Miyuki was all smiles when she met one of her favorite Korean actors during his visit to the Prime Minister’s office—there are even rumors that she’s producing a film in Korea.

Even the wife of Abe Shinzo, who recently became Prime Minister for the second time, is known to be an avid fan of Korean entertainment. Abe Akie even began learning Korean after becoming a fan, and was spotted attending a musical re-make of a hit Korean television series in Tokyo.

In what is known as the Korean Wave, celebrities and entertainment content from the small nation of 49 million have been immensely popular throughout Asia in the last decade.

Korean boy bands have broken records on music charts everywhere from Thailand to Taiwan, and the faces of Seoul’s most beautiful grace cosmetics advertisements in Ho Chi Minh City and Hong Kong. One Korean band even topped a weekly Taiwanese music chart for more than 100 consecutive weeks. Channel surfing in Tokyo will yield at least one or two stations airing a Korean soap opera, while the city’s newsstands nearly always include tabloid magazines dedicated solely to the latest Korean celebrity gossip. But as the famous Chinese idiom goes, too much may be just as bad as too little. As what many predicted to be a temporary fad continues to yield both economic

profits and soft power to Korea for over a decade, the Korean Wave is quickly becoming involved in the tricky geopolitics of East Asia.

Last year, hundreds of critics of the Korean Wave protested outside a television studio in Tokyo against the airing of a Japanese television series featuring Korean actress Kim Tae-hee. After news circulated that Kim had worn a T-shirt promoting Dokdo (the Korean name for the disputed islands, called Takeshima in Japanese) in Switzerland six years ago, Japanese protestors took to the streets demanding that the broadcast company ban the series from airing. Protestors shouted, “Kim Taehee who does not like Japan, do not try to make money here,” and threatened the broadcasting company by announcing, “We will remember the Japanese company that supports anti-Japan actress Kim Taehee.”1 A Japanese cosmetics company also revised its advertising campaign to significantly reduce Kim’s footage in a television commercial after facing similar protests. It later became known that the actress even received death threats from perpetrators who were eventually arrested by police in Osaka last year.

Considering the extent of protests against a Korean actress starring in a Japanese television series filmed completely in Japan and featuring a nearly entirely Japanese cast, similar outrage over completely Korean productions have unsurprisingly been worse. Although the Japanese television series featuring Kim eventually aired amidst continued controversy, a Korean TV drama slated to air in Japan was completely banned from being broadcast after it became known that the lead actor (Song Ilgook) visited the disputed islands. In a rare official statement addressing a specific individual, Japanese Vice Foreign Minister Yamaguchi Tsuyoshi remarked, “it will not be easy for him [Song Ilgook] to come to Japan from now on.”2 In the aftermath of worsened territorial disputes between Japan and Korea and in the months leading up to the Japanese general election, even Abe

Grace Haenim Yoo is a master’s candidate in the School of International Service at American University. A Thomas R. Pickering Foreign Affairs Fellow, Ms. Yoo will join the Foreign Service in May upon receiving her degree in International Communication. © 2013 Intercultural Management Quarterly

Vol. XIV, No. 1 \ Spring 2013

3

Akie—the wife of current Prime Minister Abe despite their inability to speak Mandarin or CanShinzo and the aforementioned fan of Korean en- tonese. Obvious dubbing apparently can’t get in the tertainment—changed her mind. Long known for way of Chinese viewers’ hunger for Korean celebriher friendly stance on Korea and love of Korean ties and shows, and Seoul is starting to show signs of entertainment media, Abe recently told report- reciprocation. Taiwanese television shows are gaining ers that she no longer watches Korean television popularity in Korea, and a collaboration film featurshows and coming a Korean actor ...perhaps the time has come for the U.S. pletely stopped and Chinese actress learning Korean.3 pivot to also take heed of the social capital recently achieved Although tento be reaped from effectively utilizing both critical acclaim sions between Japan and mass popularand Korea regarding existing envoys embedded within the Asian ity. After starring entertainment industry. historical and terin the collaboration ritorial issues have film Late Autumn, continued for years, the spillover to entertainment Tang Wei of Lust, Caution fame recently bought a media is a relatively recent phenomenon. In one house near Seoul and is becoming a household name of its most dramatic manifestations to date, one of in Korea. Often referred to as the “pro-Korean” acJapan’s beloved holiday traditions is coming under tress, her Korea-friendly image only solidified when scrutiny of K-pop fans around the world. The Kou- rumors circulated of her romantic involvement with haku Uta Gassen is Japan’s favorite New Years Eve a Korean film director. television program that airs annually and features This is not to say that all is gung ho between appearances by the year’s most popular artists in the China and Korea when it comes to rock stars Japanese music scene. This year’s lineup of partici- and red carpets. In a policy largely regarded to be pating artists made headlines for its shocking lack of targeting Korean entertainment products, China’s singers and bands of Korean descent. Considering State Administration of Radio Film and Television the high number of Korean artists whose albums and (SARFT) announced new regulations on imported songs have topped Japan’s Oricon charts and enjoyed television dramas. According to the regulations, successful concert ticket sales in Japan, appearances no more than 25 percent of programming should

by K-pop artists on Kouhaku have been common in be devoted to foreign shows, imported TV dramas the last few years. NHK denied accusations that this should be no longer than 50 episodes and nonyear’s surprisingly K-pop-devoid selection is related Chinese programming could not be aired during to issues of race and nationality, instead stating that prime time (7pm to 10pm).5 Considering the Korean artists were simply not popular enough to be fact that Korean TV series are yet unrivaled in invited to the annual program.4 popularity among foreign programming favored by In another interesting observation of Asian year- Chinese viewers and TV stations alike, observers end programming, the Korean-produced MAMA interpret the move to be an attempt by China to (Mnet Asian Music Awards) seems to only target both limit the influence of Korean media products Chinese-speaking audiences in its outreach efforts. on domestic audiences and safeguard the market Despite Japan accounting for 70 percent of the Ko- for Chinese productions. Despite its relatively rean music industry’s overseas proceeds, the Korean more positive reaction to the Korean Wave, China cable channel Mnet interestingly chose Macau, Sin- is also actively taking measures to limit the spread gapore, and Hong Kong as the venue for the three and success of foreign shows. On the other hand, MAMA awards ceremonies that have taken place although protestors take to the streets against Korean thus far. Is the Korean Wave leaning toward China celebrities, Japan remains one of Korea’s most major in Asia’s pop warfare, having encountered Japanese partners on numerous film projects and high-profile criticism? Perhaps. After all, Korean actors are regu- media collaborations. Clearly, the dynamics at play larly hired to play lead roles in Chinese productions are neither consistent nor simple.

Perhaps less apparent are the ways in which the United States fits into this obviously complicated equation. U.S. involvement in a region that is home to its greatest economic competitor and two of its longest-standing security alliances is nothing new.

However, one of the more interesting manifestations of America’s presence in the Asian entertainment industry is indeed a newer phenomenon—and it’s not easily detectable at first glance. From Korean girl group members to the prince of Mandarin pop music, younger generations of Americans raised under Asian immigrant parents are deeply embedded within the Asian entertainment scene. From New York native Wang Leehom to California girls Tiffany and Jessica of the popular Korean girl band Girl’s Generation, Asian-Americans are being thrown into the pop warfare taking place in television sets and record stores throughout Asia. Born and raised in the United States, singer-songwriter Wang Leehom is immensely popular among Chinese-speaking audiences. Although the Chinese-American only spoke English before his debut in Taiwan and struggled to pick up the language and culture he was little familiar with throughout his childhood in New York, Wang Leehom is far from exempt from the geopolitics plaguing the Asian entertainment industry. He recently came under heated criticism from fans in China and Taiwan for endorsing the Japanese camera brand Nikon. Fans and critics “were in disbelief and greatly disappointed on how the Taiwan[ese] singer/actor could do such a thing” amidst high tensions between China and Japan surrounding territorial claims about the Diaoyu/ Senkaku islands.6 The past several years of the Obama administration witnessed much talk of the U.S. “pivot to Asia” and “America’s pacific century.”

Many have offered perspectives and prescriptions, but perhaps the time has come for the U.S. pivot to also take heed of the social capital to be reaped from effectively utilizing existing envoys embedded within the Asian entertainment industry. As things stand now, New Yorker Wang Leehom is quite literally singing, “Beijing, Beijing, I Love Beijing” as he did at the Beijing Olympics in 2008 and visiting rural Chinese villages in hopes of preserving endangered Chinese traditional musical heritage. U.S. citizens

4

Vol. XIV, No. 1 \ Spring 2013

Intercultural Management Quarterly

Tiffany and Jessica promote travel and tourism not to their native California, but to Seoul in ‘Visit Korea 2010-2012’ campaign videos as official Public Relations Ambassadors.

The 14th century Chinese envoy Zheng He is widely respected in China for his diplomatic travels to the Middle East and South Asia on behalf of the emperor. Perhaps the fact that Zheng He was also Muslim-Chinese is more than mere coincidence. The cultural understanding and affinity he shared with the leaders he visited likely aided Zheng He’s outreach efforts in one of the world’s earliest public diplomacy successes. The time may be ripe for America to tap into a few Zheng Hes of its own, beyond official government representatives like Asian-American ambassadors Gary Locke and Sung Kim. Without a doubt, East Asia’s red carpet politics pose substantial complications and worrisome spillover potential.

But they also present an interesting opportunity for the United States to contribute its unique strength as a diverse nation of immigrants to achieving greater peace and stability in a region characterized by both high security concerns and opportunities for mutual prosperity. Moving the hearts of Prime Ministers’ wives and schoolgirls alike, Asian-American celebrities may have a starring role in not only U.S. public diplomacy, but also in easing tensions in East Asian geopolitics. Who knows? Boy bands and pop princesses just may hold the key to the soft power arsenal of America’s pacific century. n Notes 1. “Kim Tae Hee Go Away!” Japanese Anti-Kim Tae Hee Protest,” Soompi, October 17, 2011.

2. “Korean Stars in Japan in Bind Over Dokdo,” The Chosun Ilbo, August 27, 2012.

3. “Korean Wave Fan Ex-Prime Minister Abe’s Wife No Longer Watches Korean Dramas after Dokdo Problem,” MyDaily, October 4, 2012.

4. “NHK Denies Lack of K-Pop at Kohaku Uta Gassen Due to Racial Tensions,” JpopAsia.com, November 28, 2012.

5. “Foreign TV dramas restricted in China,” Global Times, February 18, 2012.

6. “Leehom Wang Criticized for Endorsing Nikon,” Hollywood Invasian, October 17, 2012.

5

Extroversion Versus Introversion in Conflict Management

Major Sarah C. Santoro is currently a student at the USAF’s Air Command and Staff College furthering her professional education in the military operational arts. She is a combat veteran of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq where she provided combat resupply and tactical airlift as a C-130 pilot. Additionally while stationed in Germany, she led multiple theater security cooperation events across Africa and Europe with key leadership roles in Bulgaria, Romania, South Africa, Botswana, and culminated her overseas tour with Mission Command of the first C-130J military-to-military partnership exercise to Israel.

ference between the major personality trait variables ous to the outside world. The Extroverted Ideal is so (i.e. extrovert/introvert, sensing/intuition, thinking/ strong that many introverts may not even realize or feeling, judging/perceiving). According to the USAF appreciate their own introverted tendencies yet have Negotiation Center of Excellence’s Practical Guide, developed highly adaptive extroverted coping skills. negotiations attempt to resolve conflict over five cat- These chameleon introverts find ways to build in quiegories including conflict of structure, data, relation- et, restorative time into their daily schedules and over ships, worldview, and/or priorities. As extroverts and time develop an auxiliary extroverted ability to engage introverts naturally have an opposite-facing inner eye, in the United States’ extroverted society. Realizing that the way an extrovert or introvert perceives the five cat- introverts are not always obvious among us, negotiaegories of conflict may be from very differing angles. tors should strive to meet the mental processing needs Prior to entering into a negotiation, a TIPO of both extroverts and introverts in the problem-solvanalysis should be conducted to evaluate the level and ing process. This can be done by realizing the strengths type of Trust between parties, the amount and qual- and benefits of each. ity of Information available, and the amount and type Extroverts and introverts together can brainstorm of Power between parties before moving into the Op- afullspectrumofoptionstocreatevalueinthenegotiation tion forming stage of negotiations. Understanding a process. The difficult aspect is maintaining awareness few basic differences between extroverts and intro- of self and building space for others to contribute. verts, a culturally atExtroverts naturally ...the CNS model reminds negotiators tuned negotiator will encourage dialogue, realize that differing to focus on the problem (I) and not the but to keep the personality types will people (E) at the table to actively work to discussion focused synthesize informa- discover interests (I) instead of spinning one must ask critical tion and wield power thinking questions wheels over positions (E). differently. Partnerto discover shared ing this awareness with the Cooperative Negotiation interests and engage the introverts’ inner world Strategy (CNS) will enhance information sharing, of concepts. Once an introvert gets talking about expand power with relationships, and ultimately in- thoughts, ideas, and concepts an extrovert might crease the probability of creating value through the be surprised at how talkative an introvert can be! negotiation process.

Introverts need awareness to speak-up and extroverts The CNS model nicely balances the needs of ex- require awareness to actively listen. If time allows, troverts (E) and introverts (I) without specifically ad- after a good dialogue between parties, call a recess to dressing the nuance of the differing E/I mental frames. allow for a period of reflection for those introverted This is done through a strategy of cooperation (I) vs. types who likely need a touch of quiet time before competition (E), a focus to speak (E) and actively lis- finalizing an agreement. Whenever new information ten (I), encouragement to share information, a focus is introduced, an introvert will require time to process to share power with each other to find overlapping the new data on their own. If time is not allowed, the interests, and ultimately create value in the develop- introvert will likely be uncomfortable, feeling pressed ment of options. Furthermore, the CNS model re- into a decision before having adequate time to fully minds negotiators to focus on the problem (I) and not think through the details. the people (E) at the table to actively work to discover Extroverts and introverts can make a great interests (I) instead of spinning wheels over positions team in navigating the negotiation process, (E). The aim of CNS is to preserve relationships while especially considering that the inner world of the expanding value solutions.5 The CNS strategy exhibits introverts lends them to more readily discover many strengths, but can easily be enhanced by under- interests and needs. Yet, at the same time, they standing and applying knowledge of E/I awareness. have difficulty articulating the “so what” of their Generally speaking, extroverts are easy to iden- argument. Externally-oriented extroverts, on the tify, however, introverts are not always quite so obvi- other hand, naturally hold an advantage to realize

6

Vol. XIV, No. 1 \ Spring 2013

by Sarah C. Santoro

C

ultural differences and bias abound to both positive and negative affect. An important element of a sound negotiation method is to understand the influences that shape human thought and decision making. Cultural differences and biases certainly shape man’s worldview, and the clash of those differences present a dynamic problem solving environment. Often individuals accept their own cultural norms without question as to their value and come to regard cultural truths as fact, thus forming the basic underlying assumptions and structure of one’s culture. Culture as a set of basic assumptions tells us what to pay attention to, what things mean, how to react, and what to value in human nature.1 When possible it is important to identify one’s cultural assumptions to know what is hiding in the shadows of those assumptions. This paper will peel back the basic underlying assumption of the American Extroverted Ideal and apply its effect to the negotiation process.

Basic underlying assumptions are difficult to see or even question, but with careful consideration and introspection the basic underlying assumptions of culture may be teased out from the social fray. Over the past 100 years, the United States has adopted a powerful belief in the concept of the Extroverted Ideal as eloquently identified by Susan Cain in her book Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking. At the turn of the last century the United States was greatly influenced by the confluence of industrialization, urbanization, mass immigration, and the rising attention paid to entertainer celebrities.

As the structure of society changed, so did its associated values. Americans placed ever-growing importance on extroverted values such as being assertive, gregarious, expressive, and externally focused. This belief in the Extroverted Ideal leads Americans to accept that being extroverted not only makes us more successful, but also makes us better people. As human behaviors researcher William Whyte observed, “Society is itself

an education in the extroverted values, and rarely has there been a society that has preached them so hard.”

This pervasive influence is witnessed from the modern American classroom that champions cooperative learning to the U.S. business model that assumes open collaborative floor plans are best suited for over 70% of the U.S. workforce.2 Extroverted strengths hold merit, however, not to the exclusion of introvert qualities. Unfortunately, the Extrovert Ideal oft casts a negative light on introverted traits such as being reserved, quiet, introspective, and internally focused. In reality, introverts bring much to the table in the form of their rich inner world of deep thoughts, ideas, and concepts. Extroverts are known to be much more social and talkative than introverts, but that does not mean that introverts are anti-social or poor communicators. A driving difference between extroverts and introverts is in the way each recharges self—extroverts gain energy and do their best work while socializing whereas introverts do their best work alone and require periods of solitude to reenergize the spirit.3 Neither approach is right or wrong, but merely represent different forms of processing one’s life and environment. In Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type, this opposite approach to life can be reflected such that an extrovert must first live and experience life before he can truly understand it, whereas an introvert must first think about and understand life before he can truly live it.4 Extroverts and introverts perceive and experience the world differently and naturally will communicate unique perspectives between and among each other. Considering the fact that the art of negotiation is simply a communication process between two or more parties, it is advantageous to understand the two fundamental mental frames through which individuals see the world through. In fact the famed Swiss psychoanalyst, Carl Jung, believed that the extrovert/ introvert (E/I) tendency was the most important dif-

Intercultural Management Quarterly

7

their position and wants, but may have difficulty articulating the deeper “why” of their arguments.

Thus, it is mutually beneficial for extroverts and introverts to develop into cooperative teams. All that is required is an appreciation for the differing mental frames each brings to the table.

The application of E/I awareness is critical to understanding the dynamics of human thought and interaction. The true U.S. population breakdown of extroverts and introverts is difficult to pin down. Depending on the testing measurements and estimates utilized one finds that anywhere from 25-50% of Americans are introverted. For the U.S. Armed Forces, the E/I population holds steady at a roughly 50/50 split for the entire Department of Defense from the general officer corps to the line enlisted troop.

Furthermore, the U.S. Business Manager Corps reflects a roughly 50/50 split among extroverts and introverts.The interaction of extroverts and introverts is a natural consequence of life, and in the art of negotiations, it is advantageous to understand the way one thinks if one wants to change another’s mind.

Although introverts make up a significant percentage of the U.S. population as well as half of the U.S. Armed Forces, the Extroverted Ideal lives on as reflected in what is valued in perceived desirable leadership qualities. In 1994, the Industrial College of the Armed Forces conducted a Strategic Leadership survey among 100 students and 20 faculty. The results of this study demonstrated the perseverance of the Extrovert Ideal in that 5 of the top 7 personality types (out of a possible 16 MBTI types) selected as desireable leaders were extroverted personality types. Furthermore, the survey found that extroverted leadership characteristic qualifiers were preferred 15-20% more than classically introverted leadership attributes. Ironicially, the best leaders—or even the highest percentage of leaders—are not overwhelmingly extroverted by nature. Instead surveys of U.S. Military General Officers, students of Air War College and Air Command and Staff College all reflect a 50/50 8

split among extrovert and introvert leaders and the leadership research book, Good to Great, conducted by Jim Collins finds that the highest performing U.S. companies are led by introvert CEOs. 6 Yet, the Extroverted Ideal lives on.

Even so, a basic defense against bias and the unintended consequences of cultural basic underlying assumptions is awareness of the bias or assumption.

Understanding the organic strengths and weaknesses of self as well as one’s adversary draws upon the Sun Tzu axiom to “know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be in peril.”7 Cultural differences and biases will continue to impact human interaction to both positive and negative effect. If one desires achievement of maximum value creation in negotiations, then one must understand and appreciate the differing approaches to interpretting one’s environment. Extroverts and introverts have a naturally opposed inner eye, however, understanding and appreciating the alternative viewpoints and mental frames offers an advantage to the negotiation process. n Notes 1. E. Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership, (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000).

2. Susan Cain, Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking, (New York: Crown Publishers, 2012).

3. H. Rutledge and O. Kroeger, Strategic Leadership and Personality: Making the MBTI Relevant, (Washington, DC: NDU ICAF, 1994)..

4. Isabel Briggs-Myers and Peter Myers, Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type, (Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc., 1980).

5. B. Knowlton and M. McGee, MBTI Introduction Workbook, (Fairfax, VA: 2005).

6. H. Hemeon, H. Lyon, et al, An Investigation of Relationships Between U.S. Air Force Leadership and Organizational Psychology Types as a Means for Addressing Change, (Maxwell AFB, ALB: ACSC Research Paper, 1995).

7. Sun Tzu, The Art of War, trans. Samuel B. Griffith (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1971.)

Intercultural Management Quarterly

Culturally Appropriate Alternative Dispute Resolution

by Marc Brenman “The world in which you were born is just democracy. There is a “liturgy” of Global North style one model of reality. Other cultures are not ADR: failed attempts at being you; they are unique Mediators are neutral. manifestations of the human spirit.”

Mediators are without decision-making authority.

- Wade Davis, anthropologist Mediators are non-directive.

Mediators facilitate. he purpose of this paper is to provide Mediators should not offer solutions to the parties. information on how conflicts Mediators do not negotiate with the parties. are resolved in indigenous and Mediators are impartial with respect to the traditional justice systems and tribal societies and outcome of mediation. make recommendations for a new approach by No conflict of interest.1 Global North practitioners of Alternative Dispute To this, I would add working by ethical codes, Resolution (ADR). It discusses the cultural being trained and certificated, having character, and relevance of developing appropriate ADR training maintaining confidentiality. for Native Americans, First Nations, and other But some of ADR is done between groups with indigenous, tribal, and traditional peoples. There is different cultural, racial, and ethnic backgrounds. competition among systems and interpenetration. The practitioner must often struggle to keep the table Cross-fertilization can be good so long as the level between and among the parties. One way to sharing is mutual and respectful. The lessons can be sensitive to their needs is to use ADR methods flow both ways. Especially in regard to traditional that are based in traditional ones. The systems have and indigenous groups, it is important for the ADR pros and cons. They can be used to empower a practitioner (and the entity hiring or providing her party who normally has little power and to bring or him) to recognize that the group exists and has greater understanding to the dominant culture party. value. For some time, I have not been comfortable Some of these traditional systems have meaningful with the phrases “dispute resolution” and “conflict enforcement and monitoring methods built in. They resolution” because the assumption is that disputes are also respectful of the belief systems of the people and conflicts already exist. I am interested in pushing involved. incidents back to what explosive ordinance specialists All societies need governance and dispute call “left of boom,” or before the dispute occurs. resolution forums. The traditional process is often There are many different forms of alternative generalized as one of a respected leader or elder dispute resolution (ADR). Examples include facilitating, mediating, arbitrating, or, via consensus negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and adjudication. building, resolving a dispute between parties with People use other mechanisms for handling disputes the goal being to “right their relationships” rather at the local level, including peer pressure, gossip, than to “truth-find or to determine guilt or liability”. ostracism, violence, public humiliation, witchcraft, A reason to consider changes is the desire spiritual healing, and the fissioning of kin or residential among some groups who call for the rejuvenation groups. The dominant one originated in the US, and and reclamation of ways in which disputes may incorporates Euro-American values. Global North be resolved according to the culture and custom style ADR practitioners may make assumptions of of the indigenous party or local group involved.

T

Marc Brenman was Executive Director of the Washington State Human Rights Commission from 2004 to 2009, which enforces the broadest nondiscrimination statute in the US; and Senior Policy Advisor for Civil Rights in the U.S. Dept. of Transportation from 1995 to 2004. He is the co-author of “The Right to Transportation,” on social equity in that infrastructure, and “Planning as if People Matter: Governing for Social Equity,” from Island Press, with Prof. Tom Sanchez. He teaches graduate courses on civil rights history, human rights, public policy development, advocacy, and governing for social justice.

Vol. XIV, No. 1 \ Spring 2013

9

Indigenous and traditional systems can be more effective. Issues may not come to the US-style ADR practitioner because of withdrawal of some religious persons from state institutions. A pluralistic legal system applies different religious or customary laws to different segments of the population. Plural legal systems are particularly prevalent in former colonies, where the law of a former colonial authority may exist alongside more traditional legal systems. The specific knowledge needed to adjudicate postcolonial and diaspora disputes would militate against using the person who is an expert in ADR but not in a particular religious or cultural domain.

There are a number of benefits of traditional systems of ADR. These include the following: Culturally familiar; Relatively corruption-free; Quick resolution; Inexpensive; Locally accessible and resourced; Enforceable (in intact communities); Trusted; Focuses on restorative justice rather than retribution, preserving harmony within the community; They are conducted by community leaders, who speak the local language and understand local problems, and their rulings are likely to be accepted by the community at large.

ADR, and particularly traditional methods, help reduce the state of uncertainty people find themselves in. They are rankled, threatened, or aggrieved by something and want to be restored to a previous better state. As long as they are uncertain, they are unable to take some action.

Local methods can include peacemaking circles, talking circles, family or community group conferencing, ritual healings, appointment of an elder or wise person to adjudicate a dispute, a council of elders, grassroots community courts, and others.

Failing to adapt to the challenges of the local context is a common cause of failure. The values of decision makers, practitioners, and assessors undertaking a project will affect the decisions made and the perspective taken. For instance, the decisions made about the type of evidence to be collected and how it is weighted or judged are important. The tensions between the art and science of both evidence and policymaking are challenging.

Similarly, judgments about trade–offs between the differing needs of groups of the population are linked to values. Practitioners must be aware of these 10

tensions throughout and articulate them—if only to the self—at each step in the process. These tensions will not always be resolved but can be reduced by acknowledging the role of values and working from the principles underpinning fairness in the given context. Culture expresses values.

Culturally appropriate ADR goes beyond the usual advice about eye contact, bowing, and not showing the soles of one’s shoes. You can get plenty of discussion on that from others. However, for example: An Indian commentator noted that a devout Hindu may see a cow as a revered incarnation of the goddess Laxmi, a Masai tribesman may see the cow as a measure of wealth and status, and an American may see it as a McDonald’s “Happy Meal.” Or, furthermore, could be seen as a symbol of freedom, the open range, and cowboys. And in American English, we mix cultures, as in a “sacred cow,” and “I won’t be cowed,” and “riding herd.”

Even after modern law has displaced traditional norms within a formal legal system, the traditional norms persist in the larger society and stand poised to “interpret, adjust, take over, manipulate, change, and/ or possess the new modern system.”2 Culture can be a code of behavior, as in the Afghanistani and Pakistani pashtunwali—a code of behavior that has a profound existence in the collective mind of the tribe; it is seen as an unwritten ‘constitution’ of the tribe. Cultural competence is a set of congruent behaviors, attitudes, and policies that come together in a system, agency, or among professionals that enables effective work in cross-cultural situations. It reflects the ability to acquire and use knowledge of the beliefs, attitudes, practices and communication patterns of residents, clients and their families to improve services, strengthen programs, increase community participation, and close the gaps in status among diverse population groups.

ADR activities should be culturally based and influenced, with values, traditions, and beliefs determining a person’s and group’s journey and unique pathway to peace and conflict resolution. Services should be culturally grounded and personalized. Ethnocentrism should be avoided. Culture should be added to ADR, as well as historical context. The idea of relationships needs to be expanded, to include tribes and clans. When culture and history are left out or handled inexpertly, opportunities for ADR can be derailed and more problems created. For example, in the case of a graving Intercultural Management Quarterly

yard being built in Port Angeles, Washington, starting in 2004, for construction of the new Hood Canal Floating Bridge by the State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). The site turned out to be built on a not-soancient Indian village and graveyard belonging to the Lower Elwha S’Kallam Tribe. Very soon after construction began, workers encountered Indian burials and artifacts.

Eventually, over 300 burials were uncovered, making this the second largest Native American archeological site in the United States. An Environmental Impact Statement had been written and was supposed to cover socio-economic, cultural, historical, and archeological elements, but did not discover the village and burials.

An archeologist employed by WSDOT to conduct a “cultural resources survey” reported that “no evidence of significant prehistoric or historic archeological resources was found.” Contract archaeologists often undertake their projects on or near Indian reservations without taking into account the oral history and contemporary testimony of the native peoples living in the immediate area. Worse yet, tribal recommendations not to excavate or disturb the earth are often ignored, despite compelling data otherwise. The Anglo and Native American communities do not know each other’s history.

The new role of the ADR practitioner may be more of a facilitator, finding the right mechanism and people. This new, expanded role would require an almost intimate knowledge of the group’s interactions, disputes, and other dynamics, as well as the ability and desire to intervene. There should be culturally appropriate dispute resolution training and programming for members of ADR, civil rights, human rights groups, and governmental entities that come in contact with and/or consult with First Peoples and other native, traditional, and indigenous groups. This training can be used as a catalyst to develop a dispute resolution program that is culturally relevant to our respective communities.

State human rights commissions, the federal government, the military and other governmental groups, humanitarian groups, non-governmental organizations, and others may, if the project is successful, be able to adapt the principles and techniques for non-adversarial human rights problem solving with other issues and among other cultural communities.

Vol. XIV, No. 1 \ Spring 2013

I do not mean to portray that culturally appropriate methods of ADR are universally good.

For example, they may pose ethical problems, contain lack of rights for women, condone brutality, may surrender to class or caste interest, and otherwise not meet international human rights standards. There may be more than one traditional system in effect. The effectiveness of such mechanisms in affording access to rights is determined not only by cases won or lost, but also by the quality of the rulings handed down, the satisfaction these afford the applicant, and the restoration of harmony. It can be said that satisfying the needs of the Global North practitioner is not a goal of the process.

The ADR practitioner may not be comfortable with expressing spirituality. In the United States, we are usually trained to keep religion out of public, especially “neutral” discourse. There is a strain of ADR that is informed by religiosity. An example is that of John Lederach, growing out of the Eastern Mennonite Church. The spiritual dimension of groups one works with sometimes needs to be ascertained.

This is especially true for Native American and First Peoples groups like tribes. The ADR practitioner may have to learn to “sit” with her lack of knowledge of the specifics of the facts or culture. “The appropriate role may require the mediator to become comfortable with his or her relative ignorance of the underlying subject matter…”3 In Zen Buddhism, this is known as “Don’t Know” mind. Zen Roshi Dae Soen Sa Nim said often, “Throw away all opinions, all likes and dislikes, and only keep the mind that doesn’t know.

This is very important.”4 n Notes 1. Ben Hoffman, “Win That Agreement: Confessions of a Real World Mediator,” CIIAN News: Winter 2009.

2. Marc Galanter, Law and Society in Modern India, (Dehli: Oxford University Press, 1989), xli.

3. Eric D. Green, “Re-Examining Mediator and Judicial Roles in Large, Complex Litigation: Lessons from Microsoft and Other Megacases,” Boston University Law Review 86 (2006): 1171.

4. “Seung Sahn: Don’t Know,” Ox Herding, http:// www.oxherding.com/my_weblog/2010/09/seungsahn-only-dont-know.html.

11

An Innovative Approach to Cultural Competence Organizational Leadership: The Intercultural Personal Development Council

Dr. Sherwood Thompson is an associate professor in the College of Education at Eastern Kentucky University.

cultural standards.

Members of the IPDC serve as a personal advisory board to leaders, sharing their tremendous knowledge about how to be effective in diverse environments. Of course, this information helps the leader to be armed with the proper knowledge to address the diverse workforce in a respectful manner. The IPDC members offer the right blend of advice about religious practices among group members; share the appropriate way to handle family matters that may challenge group members; and give the leader information about cultural holidays, ceremonies, and rituals in an attempt to keep the leader informed of the appropriateness of handling multiple situations among diverse populations.

It is beneficial to establish an IPDC, especially when the leader has little experience working in a diverse setting. The simple matter of choosing the right words to address people from different cultural backgrounds is critical to maintaining a harmonious existence between and among diverse members of the workforce. The leader must avoid jargon and slang because words can carry negative connotations. Imagine that your workforce is made up of members of a particular Native American population, and in talking, you explain to your managers the need to “circle the wagons” and find a solution to a certain problem. In this case, what the leader understands as the meaning of the phrase could be completely different than that of his or her Native American co-workers. This could inadvertently cause conflict and tremendous misunderstandings. This interpretation of words and their meanings is ancillary to how individuals act. Their behavior is impacted by their beliefs and how they translate the words that they and others around them speak. And those seemingly simple words can cause resistance and tension which could have been avoided if the person using them had been properly educated about the meaning and how a particular group might perceive the meaning.

Another benefit of having an IPDC is to have trusted people working with a leader that are committed to the goals of the organization and are willing to put in the necessary time and effort to be available to the leader to give valuable guiding information on matters that address proper understanding and dispositions about culture and cultural populations. This guidance is important in assisting the leader in overcoming misunderstandings and cultural confusion. The IPDC

12

Vol. XIV, No. 1 \ Spring 2013

by Sherwood Thompson

L

eaders are called upon in today’s society to be sensitive to and aware of the needs of their workforce. In many instances, these needs transcend the professional requirement of getting the job done. Oftentimes, the employees are dealing with needs that involve personal relationships between and among co-workers based on cultural differences.

A large portion of the United States is composed of people from different ethnicities, religions, ages, sexual orientations, and physical abilities. A person in a leadership position with cultural relevant knowledge cannot overlook these differences and progress as an effective leader—especially in an organization that is composed of diverse intercultural characteristics.

In the United States, with a workforce of approximately 155 million people, about one third are people of color according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. As we reach the year 2020, even more people of color will constitute the labor force. This dynamic demographic indicates that organizational leaders are going to need a culturally relevant understanding of diverse populations in order to work more effectively with individuals and teams with diverse backgrounds.

Building an IPDC The concept of intercultural personal development councils (IPDC) is not new. Business leaders have been utilizing some form of a personal development council for decades, though they are called by many different names. In essence, a personal development council is a collection of experts that lend their knowledge and leadership in advising individuals on matters pertaining to their area of expertise. The personal development council members bring unique knowledge and skills to assist individuals in their professional goals and objectives related to their organization. Council members serve to make recommendations and/or provide key information, materials, and resources to help individuals reach their goals. The reason for having a personal development council is to have trusted individuals that will give correct information about

issues that will assist the leader in making decisions that will steer him or her away from wrong actions and thinking.

In establishing an intercultural personal development council, one must be aware of the need to select persons that are credible within their cultural community and among the majority population. In a workforce that is two-thirds European American, careful attention must be paid to selecting a representative from the African American community, Asian community, Latino/Hispanic community, and so on. If the leader is a person of color, it is highly recommended that they select a European American as a member of the IPDC. This mixture of diverse individuals will assist the leader in understanding the nature and cultural nuances that each cultural group brings to the workplace environment.

Benefits of Establishing an IPDC An IPDC is formed to address the need of an organizational leader who requires assistance with understanding how to appropriately relate to diverse populations without stereotyping those who are different from his or her own background. This is an important leadership attribute when working in a diverse environment. The leader must speak with authority, using appropriate language that does not offend members of the organization. Words are precise messages and sometimes, even with the best of intentions, they get in the way of what we are trying to say. A lack of cultural knowledge has a lot to do with the misunderstanding of word usage when a leader has not been made aware of the right language to use among different cultural groups. An individual can be swayed to think a certain way based solely on the choice of words that are spoken. This influence has a monumental impact on the choices an individual makes, the way the individual thinks, and the political persuasion the individual embraces. These choices can have a positive or negative impact on the overall organization depending on the leader’s knowledge of

Intercultural Management Quarterly

members can inform the leader about the appropriate behavior norms, and help the leader become comfortable with working in a diverse environment.

Some questions leaders should ask when selecting IPDC members include: Is this person a wellrespected individual that can assist the leader in feeling comfortable about understanding different cultures? In what ways can this person assist the leader? What are his or her strengths (e.g., language, cultural customs, helping ease integration of racial populations, etc)? Is this person resourceful (i.e., can he or she suggest any good contacts and ways to enrich the organization)?

Will this person help the leader to develop a workplace environment that values all individuals? Does this person have meaningful ways to help the leader in making diverse populations feel welcome and included in the organization? Will this person be honest with the leader and point out any biases and stereotypes that might negatively impact the organization’s workforce? Is this person diplomatic and trustworthy, demonstrating allegiance to and not sharing sensitive information with others about his or her conversations with the leader?

IPDC Members are the Champions of an Organization’s Intercultural Initiatives The IPDC can be a tremendous complement to the effectiveness of leaders’ interactions with their workforce and with external stakeholders. The IPDC’s foremost responsibility is to lend its leadership to helping leaders solve potential problems and making recommendations on improving workplace situations involving diverse populations. They are campaigners and they help leaders to exploit opportunities for cross-cultural training and emersion experiences for all employed workers.

Striving toward a harmonious existence between people of different cultural backgrounds is basic to the ideals of a truly democratic society. In the process of recognizing that the United States is a multicultural nation, resistance and tension will naturally occur. The IPDC is one approach to helping organizational leaders attain culturally relevant knowledge from a diverse group of individuals who are willing to counsel and give direction on important steps. This, in turn, assists leaders working in diverse settings to reach their full potential and avoid many pitfalls that involve cultural misunderstandings along the way. n 13

Peacebuilding through Inter-Group Contact: Challenges for Practitioners

by Horia M. Dijmarescu

C

oming out can be among the most frightening experiences for LGBTQ people. It is, unlike the underlying context, a choice, and an extremely difficult and personal one at that. For many LGBTQ people, particularly those who perceive their environments as hostile, the decision to come out marks the conquest of fear by courage and the refusal to continue living in an unjustly untruthful reality.

Complementing the deeply personal nature of coming out is a more organized narrative that by coming out en masse, LGBTQ people are enhancing their own rights by increasing their visibility and convincing those around them who would be otherwise hostile that being LGBTQ is not a deviation from “normal.” In the United States, some argue that the recent explosion of LGBTQ people coming out has contributed to a dramatic shift of public opinion in direction of LGBTQ acceptance.

The fundamental assumption behind this idea is intuitive. In theory (first articulated by Gordon Allport in his famous study The Nature of Prejudice1), increasing positive contact between individual members of traditionally mutually antagonistic groups can help break down long-standing inter-group stereotypes. Simply put, by seeing that the “other” is not that dissimilar from the “self” individuals begin to identify with their newly realized common attributes rather than their previously perceived group differences. The goal is to change perceptions. Many LGBTQ people who come out help change the views of their families, friends and coworkers. The LGBTQ community is, of course, not the only group to which this contact hypothesis has been prescribed as a way to mitigate discrimination, stereotypes, prejudice, and hatred.

Indeed, peace practitioners seem to have taken a strong liking to contact-intensive, dialogue-based peacebuilding. Professional contact-based projects aim to catalyze inter-group (and often cross-cultural) interaction where it would otherwise not occur with the same intended result, to reduce intergroup stereotypes and hatreds. Contact-based projects have been used to try

to improve relations between immigrants and natives in Western countries, between ethnic majority and minority groups in Kenya, Nigeria, Sudan, and the United States, and between politicians whose willingness to compromise on ideologically relevant issues has been reduced by ingroup mentalities.

These projects (which frequently cite Gordon Allport’s work) are the subject of countless funding requests, but they present a challenge to donors who struggle to assess the projects’ impact after implementation. The challenge to donors comes from the fact that reality is not as simple or intuitive as the theory. Under certain conditions contact projects do indeed achieve their intended goals (albeit to a more modest degree than the theory posits). Under other conditions, however, contact projects might fail and, in fact, harden existing stereotypes and prejudices.

Contact-based projects are therefore not a panacea to intergroup prejudices and stereotypes. At the same time, contact-based projects are not inherently “bad” and should not be reflexively dismissed. They are, after all, intuitive.

Despite this, and although much has been written on this topic, the evidence regarding the conditions in which contact-based projects work to achieve their stated objectives is inconclusive. Contact projects should be the subject of more thorough empirical evaluation so that funding applicants may better understand the conditions in which these projects succeed or fail. This idea has an important corollary. Onus probandi—the burden of proof—to convince donors that their particular execution of the contact hypothesis will work falls upon the funding applicant who seeks to conduct the project.

The Ideal and the Divergent The ideal contact initiative satisfies four criteria. First, and most importantly, intergroup stereotypes held by participants are dismantled because of inter-group contact.

Second, newly learned thinking regarding an individual “other” ought to eventually expand (or be scaled up) to the entire group with which that individual identifies and

Horia M. Dijmarescu is an International Peace and Conflict Resolution master’s candidate in the School of International Service at American University. Mr. Dijmarescu serves as a research assistant to AU faculty and as an editor for the Journal of International Service.

14

Intercultural Management Quarterly

is identified. Third, dialogue and contact continue after the project formally concludes. Fourth, individuals whose perceptions of the “other” have changed will return to their communities and bring with them positive stories about the interactions they had, gradually reducing total in-group hostility towards the out-group. In an organic, non-project setting, we can see cases where, for instance, LGBTQ coming out has had these affects. With respect to peacebuilding projects, the picture is a little more opaque.

Rothbart and John2 find that contact dependent interventions are successful when (1) the minority group members’ behavior does not reinforce stereotypical beliefs, (2) contact between group members occurs in diverse contexts and on a frequent basis, and (3) the minority members are perceived as typical of their cultural group.

Intuition also suggests that power differences among participants are an important factor. If, for instance, you put together two individuals whose power difference mirrors that of their respective groups’ social standing, it may be more likely that stereotypes are reinforced.

Among LGBTQ people coming out to family this is not a deep problem because the familial relationship is often close enough that perceived power asymmetry can be overcome. Among ethnic groups, particularly minority ethnic groups, power asymmetry is likely to exist at the group level and thus might get reproduced in a project setting.

Many project proposals do actually cite these conditions, implying that staff is at least aware of the challenges contact projects produce. (Although, given that this field of study has evolved from the 1950s and 1960s, it might good for funding applicants to move to more contemporary applications and interpretations of Allport’s theory.)

What is important here, however, is not to determine a universally applicable set of conditions necessary for any and all contact projects. Really, each project depends on its implementation, on the individuals involved, and on the context-specific narratives each group builds about the “other.” What project directors ought to specify are the conditions their project requires to be successful in the particular context where it will be conducted. More importantly, ex post facto analysis and empirical evidence must be strengthened so that the results of individual projects can be better measured and applied to future projects.

It should be noted that many of the efforts to study contact theory come from academia. The fact that most of the conditions provided herein come from academic sources should be deeply unsettling to peacebuilding Vol. XIV, No. 1 \ Spring 2013

practitioners. This is not to disparage the articulated visions provided by academia but rather the alarm ought to derive from the fact that practitioners have not adequately shown that the projects are substantiated by little more than anecdote as evidence of their success.

Monitoring and Evaluating Contact Projects The previous sections suggested what we know as fact.

First, the theory behind contact projects is strong and has been expanded on by successive generations of scholars. Project directors often include these detailed theoretical frameworks to underpin their projects. Second, what is lacking is a programmatic and empirical understanding of whether particular contact projects work. Potential peacebuilding project directors and staff, who seek to use contact and dialogue as the primary means by which to achieve inter-group reconciliation, must therefore be cognizant of the significant empirical evaluation challenges such projects present.

Given that the projects implementing the contact hypothesis require sustained, long-term intergroup contact, the temporal perspective for evaluating these projects is longitudinal. The length of time after the conclusion of the project is an extremely important factor that provide clues as to whether the project will be correctly evaluated. It is extremely difficult for a project evaluator to measure whether contact between participants and their respective groups will continue (and be measurable for that matter) after the end of the project without a longitudinal assessment. When talking about analyzing changing perceptions, longitudinal studies would be much stronger if they have both pre- and post-intervention components.

To overcome this difficulty, a recent trend in peacebuilding monitoring and evaluation strategies has been to conduct randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Under ideal conditions, RCTs are considered effective at assessing project success because it compares samples from groups that have been exposed to interventions to those who have not been. RCTs tend to be, however, time consuming and expensive. Thus, it falls on donors to expand their financial assistance to allow projects to have rigorous monitoring and evaluation plans in place as part of the project.

Evaluators may have a similarly difficult time connecting changes in behavior and attitudes to the project itself. Suppose project staff conduct a longitudinal study to observe the effects of their project. How do they know whether the relationships they are seeing (whether stagnant, increasingly positive, or increasingly negative) are 15

related to the project? After all, an almost immeasurably large number of factors could effect inter-group relations, including such minute details as individual personalities among the participants and their respective groups. Ceteris paribus simply does not exist in the real world, especially not in areas where inter-group conflict poses a danger. A well designed pre- and post-intervention evaluation, as recommended earlier, might help overcome this challenge, but evaluators should still retain humility and refrain from making excessively strong attribution claims.

There are also questions about the relationship between inter-group contact and prejudice itself that project directors must answer. First, Allport states that prejudice occurs when individuals hold stereotypical beliefs about groups even when confronted with evidence that contradicts those beliefs. There is a difference between open-minded and closed-minded people and those who belong to the latter category might be less affected by contact with the “other.”

Second, individuals might find that their particular counterpart during a contact project is a “good person” but that the group that the individual is from is still inherently bad. Project directors ought not to take it for granted that the participants in contact and dialogue projects would somehow magically be more likely to identify with the entire “other” group.

Matejskova and Leitner3 analyzed local immigration projects in Germany and found they often reinforce pre-existing stereotypes, and fail to provide opportunities for deeper contact. Even sustained encounters, which engender more empathy and positive attitudes toward individual immigrants, are generally not scaled up to the group. We see that empirically the German immigrant contact projects being evaluated do not hold up to their espoused goals, and even under ripe conditions the results of contact projects are not as strong as theory suggests. These results accurately represent the sort of challenges contact projects face. But the Matejskova and Leitner research is helpful in that it serves as a model for NGOs that seek to empirically evaluate their own contact projects.

discussion would make funders realize that they ought to demand more thorough post-project evaluations (that determine whether the intended outcome of the project was attained rather than whether the project was implemented as it was proposed) from applicants.

These changes would help improve intercultural peacebuilding projects.

Despite the difficulties and limitations of evaluations of contact-based projects, evaluators must do their due diligence to show that their projects work over the long-run. Although it is natural for project directors to complete a project and then to move on to the next one, funding organizations ought to demand more. After all, their money is being used and they might not even know for sure—apart from anecdote and theory—that it is having the desired effect. A more thorough examination of contact project successes and failures by NGOs that actually conduct these projects could bring to the field of practitioner peacebuilding a deeper understanding of intergroup conflicts.

Project directors who apply for funding for funding projects should have an empirically demonstrable track record of successful contact projects, whose effects I contend can only be analyzed longitudinally. If an applicant is conducting a contact project for the first time it would not hurt to have a local partner that has an empirically demonstrable record of contact projects. One-sizefits-all contact project designs should be avoided until more empirical evidence is available to determine whether conditions for success (indeed, if there is any measurable and attributable success at all) are the same in all contexts, and among all participants and groups. n

Structural Inequality: Applications of an Old Theory to New Organizational Challenges

by Benjamin Alexander, Jr.

S

1. Gordon W. Allport, The Nature of Prejudice, (New York: Basic Books, 1979)..

2. Myron Rothbart and Oliver P. John, “Social categorization and behavioral episodes: A cognitive analysis of the effects of intergroup contact,” Journal of A Way Forward Social Issues 41, no. 3 (1985): 81-104.

I hope this piece does two things. First I hope it 3. Tatiana Matejskova and Helga Leitner, “Urban stimulates discussion regarding appropriate methods encounters with difference: the contact hypothesis and used by NGOs for empirically evaluating contact- immigrant integration projects in eastern Berlin,” Social based projects. Second, I would like that such a & Cultural Geography 12, no. 7 (2011): 717-741.

tructural Inequality is an old theory with new with immigrants of Asian countries who were initially applications in organizations throughout the welcomed in as a source of cheap labor and were later world. In terms of specific linkages to the U.S. barred from immigration under the Chinese Exclusion however, it is as American as cherry pie.

Act. As the nation expanded its boundaries, groups from This nation was founded in response to structural Mexico, who were annexed into newly acquired western inequality (SI). If King George III had been able to apply and southwestern areas of the country, found themselves the theory of SI to the issues of unrest and inequality that entering structures of inequality around citizenship, were growing in the American colonies, perhaps the U.S. owning property, employment, education, justice, and would never have existed. participation in the political process. Over the years, Although news of dissatisfaction among British these various groups found it necessary to unite in order subjects in America had been traveling to London for to overcome the inequalities, which were imposed upon a number of years, the King had not responded in a them. timely and effective manner to the unrest that presaged SI exists in organizations as well as in society. the American Revolution. The reasons that the King had It is generally understood to be bias that is built into not anticipated this strong reaction, according to some organizational structures to the extent that certain groups historical accounts was because he was more concerned will not have equal access or status with respect to rights, with the West Indian colonies which brought more opportunities, and attributes associated with equality and income to the Crown through the production of sugar success within that structure. and rum. And perhaps he did not believe that a rag-tag In terms of its origins, SI is a systems theory that assortment of poorly armed and untrained rebels could emerged during the 1940s and 1950s as an alternative create a major challenge to one of the world’s greatest to the theories of inequality that prevailed at that time military powers. and continue to influence our thinking in the areas of He responded to the protests with draconian diversity and inclusion. measures designed to shut the dissent down. As a result, The deficiency theory holds that certain groups loyal British subjects became traitors and revolutionaries, experience continuing inequality because of their as they formed a new group known as Americans. deficiencies which keep them from being able to These new Americans immediately set up structures assimilate into the mainstream. Examples of deficiencies and systems of inequality that continue to influence could range from biological inferiority to cultural societal practices and norms. The nation was created underdevelopment. based on a political system and structures that created The bias theory holds that the inequality groups equality and advantage for some groups and inequality experience is based upon prejudiced beliefs and mindsets and disadvantage for others. Free, white adult men had that are applied to members of disadvantaged groups. rights and privileges that were not given to white adult Together, both theories represent a circular kind of men under indentured contracts, non-property holders, thinking that fails to examine the impact of social and women, or the small number of freed persons of African organizational structures upon the individuals in these ancestry. groups. A major weakness in the deficiency theory is The institution of legalized slavery continued that the deficiencies identified were often caused by for the majority of those of African ancestry. Native bias against the group thought to be deficient. Similarly American indigenous groups had no rights along with the bias theory, the mindsets and stereotypes, Ben Alexander is a senior partner with Alexander Consulting & Training, Inc. (ACT). Since its founding in 1982, ACT has carried out HR, EEO, workforce diversity, and organizational leadership training and consulting projects in private and public sector organizations in the U.S. and in Canada and Mexico.

16

Vol. XIV, No. 1 \ Spring 2013

Notes

Intercultural Management Quarterly

17

which support the existence of bias are grounded in and reinforced by perceptions of deficiency.

For example, there is the landmark sex discrimination case involving a woman who worked in a high-pressure brokerage environment (Price Waterhouse v Hopkins 490.US 228) who was not promoted to partner because she was not “feminine” enough. She was told that she needed to talk, walk, dress, and groom herself more like a woman. It was even suggested that she “take a charm school course.” Yet she had risen to the highest levels of the organization based on behaviors shared with her male co-workers (e.g. aggressive, outspoken) that were now being viewed negatively based on stereotypes of what women should and should not do.

The SI theory offers an alternative to general assumptions about discrimination, bias, and prejudice. It recognizes that individuals often act out the cultural beliefs that institutionalize feelings of privilege and practices of entitlement. By shifting the focus from individual actions and responses to examining how groups are impacted by structures which advantage some while disadvantaging others, the SI theory offers an objective and pragmatic approach to solving complex and emotionally-charged organizational problems.

The SI theory has direct application to organizational development and change initiatives. In most organizations there are numerous macro and micro inequities that are not covered by law or policy and yet have a significant impact on organizational functioning and success. Diversity and inclusion (or D&I) initiatives (along with Human Resources (HR), equal employment opportunity (EEO), and affirmative action) attempt to eliminate or lessen the impact of these inequities which cause people to feel ignored, disrespected, undermined, or otherwise negatively impacted as a result of an intrinsic characteristic or group identity.

Diversity consists of the similarities and differences that make up the organization’s workforce, customers, executive leadership and various publics (e.g. stakeholders).

Diversity refers to the unique combination of groups with their inherent similarities and differences, which comprise an organization or a system. These groups can be those frequently referenced by the larger society (e.g. race, gender, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, geographical region, religion, economic status, etc.) as well as those created by organizational culture and distinctions (e.g. occupations/ titles, credentials, corporate/plant, salaried/hourly, etc.).

18

Inclusion is a term that is occasionally coupled or even used interchangeably with diversity; however, they are different. Inclusion refers to a sense of belonging, or making people feel valued, acknowledged, and essential to the success of the organization. Diversity and inclusion initiatives recognize and respond to the unique combination of cultural and workforce diversity dynamics unique to each organization in order to ensure that the workforce, customers, and other stakeholders feel valued, respected, and included. This translates into productivity and profitability through attracting and retaining a talented workforce, anticipating and satisfying customer needs, and fostering creativity and innovation.

There are some important links between SI and D&I. While both are concerned with how individuals and groups interact with others within a system, SI focuses upon the way in which the structures within a system have created advantage and equality for some groups and disadvantage and inequality for others. This distinction helps illuminate the organizational cultural dynamics that impact the relationships that are critical to success. It also eliminates the analysis from emphasizing who is right and who is wrong or identifying victims (deficiency theory) and perpetrators (bias theory). SI examines the structures operating within the organization and determines the extent to which they may be associated with actual or potential disadvantage for any specific group. SI is not limited to groups by the organization for purposes of compliance (e.g., women, members of minority groups, individuals with disabilities, etc.).

For example, a scientific organization was having difficulty in resolving recurring discrimination complaints filed by African-American and Hispanic women, many who were members of the organization’s support staff.

The organization believed that there was no clear and convincing evidence of race and sex discrimination that would support the allegations of race and gender bias and was concerned that employees continued to insist upon filing these complaints.

The results of the inquiry revealed that the same patterns of dissatisfaction existed among other nonscientist employees who were not African-American or Hispanic women. The only difference was that the women who were minority group members had chosen to express their dissatisfaction through the discrimination complaints process. The situation was not based on race, Intercultural Management Quarterly

as it had initially seemed, rather it revolved around the experiences of non-scientist employees (reflecting all races and genders) who felt that they were not given the levels of respect and inclusion that were appropriate for the contributions that they made to the success of the organization. In many cases, they felt that they were disrespected by not having their work acknowledged, not being included in meetings where their presence and expertise may have been useful, and generally not treated as if they were “members of the team.”

By identifying and addressing the structural inequality that existed in the treatment and experiences of employees who felt disadvantaged and disrespected in a structure that seemed to only value scientists, the organization was able to recognize and take action to lessen the disadvantage through higher levels of inclusion and respect for all employees. The concept of structural inequality became a tool for helping the organization improve its effectiveness while meeting its legal requirements around dealing with discrimination complaints and taking appropriate corrective action to correct practices and conditions which may lead to the reality or perception of unlawful discrimination.

As a result of this new awareness, organizational managers ensured that support staff members were included in meetings and had an opportunity to influence decisions that impacted their jobs. Open door policies were instituted for the purpose exchanging information and resolving problems. Leaders modeled and held staff accountable for exhibiting the kinds of respect for everyone’s contribution that they agreed should be part of the new culture that was being established.

The contributions of non-scientists were described in the organization’s newsletter and acknowledged in its awards ceremonies for the first time. In taking these actions, the organization shifted the focus from antidiscrimination to diversity and inclusion, by improving relationships through higher levels of inclusion, respectful communication and recognition.

SI theory is highly useful in examining policies, practices, and working conditions from the perspective of what groups may be experiencing advantage, disadvantage, or unequal treatment. Organizational examples include: Recognizing the need to change cultural and historical practice of having early morning Vol. XIV, No. 1 \ Spring 2013

breakfast meetings given that more women entered the executive levels and more men had parenting responsibilities, both which conflicted with this practice; Understanding that a global, multi-national organization has to recognize and respect holidays different from those typically celebrated in U.S. culture and shifting expectations accordingly; Providing vegetarian and other religiously-mandated meal options in the organization’s cafeteria or dining room in order to recognize and meet the needs of a significant population; And establishing private, sanitary areas for nursing mothers to pump and store milk.

The following steps are offered as a way of applying this theory in the current environment, which emphasizes making D&I initiatives an integral part of HR and EEO program efforts. It offers a new way of addressing organizational structures and systemic practices, which contribute to inequity and exclusion in the workplace.

In the first step, identify the problem. Are there recurring expressions of dissatisfaction or inequity? Can they be attributed to unequal status in relationship to other categories of people? In the next step, determine the cause, practice, or driving force behind the problem. It may be caused through a confluence of unequal relations in roles, functions, decisions, rights, or opportunities.

Thirdly, determine what is the impact of the practice or structure on the group(s) and on the organization.

How does it affect productivity, teamwork or customer satisfaction? Next, ask what steps can be taken to lessen the inequality. What is the consequence of taking no action? And lastly, how can proposed actions be leveraged in terms of overall HR, EEO, and strategic management goals? To what extent will proposed solutions create the appearance or reality of inequality to others?

SI is an old theory that has new applications in the current environment, which emphasizes making D&I initiatives an integral part of HR and EEO program efforts. It offers a new way of looking at organizational structures and systemic practices, which contribute to inequity and exclusion. SI can be a powerful intervention as diversity and inclusion becomes the driving force behind HR and EEO initiatives to create inclusive workplaces that are free from discrimination and other unlawful practices and responsive to all groups within the organization. n 19