According to the diversity wheel, which of the following is an organizational dimension?

Do you know the source of your definition of diversity? Chances are it draws on a model called the Diversity Wheel, a definition that gained popularity in the early 1990s as the fledgling diversity industry took off.  

Marilyn Loden, the creator of the model, saw the need for a tool that would help people better understand how group-based differences contribute to people's social identities.

"I wanted to identify the differences that make a major difference," she explains, " ... to show which dimensions of diversity are important in people's lives, acknowledge their power so that people who wanted to talk about them would be supported by the model."

No definition of this kind had emerged in earlier attempts to address America's workforce diversity, including race relations, multiculturalism, affirmative action, and equal opportunity.

Now, almost 20 years later, Loden's work has turned her into a leading authority on managing change and implementing diversity in the workplace. Her model, the Diversity Wheel, has become the lingua franca for defining what is meant by the word "diversity." Her model has been used as a principle text for diversity management training nationwide in the United States, and probably in some other countries as well. 

WHY A NEW PLAN? WHY NOW?

In the last 20 years, the global context for business and the workplace has become much more clear, and diversity right along with it.  To help make the diversity discussion more relevant in this global context, Marilyn Loden decided the model needed an update.

"I would like [the model] to be part of diversity discussions in which people outside the United States also participate. This last round of changes was my attempt to provide a more inclusive starting point for the conversation," she explains.

The newest version of the model addresses identity issues that were implicit in earlier versions, which Loden believed needed to be brought to the forefront. She has added the dimensions of class and spiritual beliefs to the core circle as well as political beliefs to the secondary circle; she hopes that the new model will open up the diversity discussion worldwide and eventually serve to leverage diversity internationally.

HISTORY OF THE MODEL

The original version of the Diversity Wheel appeared in Marilyn Loden and Judy Rosener's book, Workforce America! Managing Employee Diversity as a Vital Resource (Irwin Publishing, 1991).  A second version was published in Loden's 1996 book, Implementing Diversity (Irwin Publishing). In this version, Loden added four identifiers to the secondary circle: first language, family status, work style, and communication style. Many of these additions were already implicit in the original model, but Loden chose to make them more explicit in the second version. First language was the only modification that was not included in the original model.

In the 1990s, according to Loden, many people wanted to minimize the impact of race and gender and focus more on diversity of thought. But Loden remained convinced that these two dimensions of diversity were still very important and should not be glossed over or minimized in diversity discussions

In developing the model, Loden has always believed it was more important to emphasize key group-based differences that are present and powerful throughout people's lives.

"I wanted to limit the number of differences we talked about [to] the ones that are particularly important in shaping our identities, and also the ones that are prone to stereotypes," she states. She chose to emphasize the differences that often lead to frustration, suspicion and conflict when they are not understood or acknowledged.

Loden wanted the model to be empowering, so that someone could say, "I want to talk about race and the impact it has on my opportunities in this organization." Or women could point to their gender and the impact it may have on their voice and how they are heard in the organization. Loden's depiction of important group-based differences was the Diversity Wheel, a model that pointed to what is core to our social identities, the ways in which people derive a sense of self when identifying with certain groups.

"I think diversity discussions are really about understanding our social identities, acknowledging what is important and learning to integrate into society so that no sub-group feels excluded or one down," Loden asserts. The wheel consists of what she called primary, or core, and secondary dimensions of diversity. The categories suggest how much influence these differences exert on a person's beliefs, expectations and life experience.

She described the primary, core dimensions as the most powerful and sustaining differences, ones that usually have an important impact on us throughout our lives. In the original model, Loden presented six primary dimensions that help shape our basic self-image and our worldviews: age, ethnicity, gender, physical abilities/qualities, race, and sexual orientation.

She defined the secondary dimensions as other important differences that are acquired later in life and presumably have less influence in defining who we are. "They are more mutable differences that we acquire, discard, and/or modify throughout our lives," Loden states. In the original model, the secondary dimensions included: educational background, income, marital status, work experience, military experience, religion and geographic location.

ITERATIONS OF THE MODEL

Several years after the first publication of the Diversity Wheel, two other diversity consultants, Lee Gardenswartz and Anita Rowe, published an adaptation of the Loden/Rosener model in their book, Managing Diversity: A Complete Desk Reference and Planning Guide (McGraw-Hill, 1998). Gardenswartz and Rowe changed the original language of core and secondary diversity dimensions to "internal and external dimensions" of diversity that shape a person's sense of self. They also added two additional concentric circles, personality and organizational dimensions.

Gardenswartz and Rowe describe the internal dimensions as those that have a powerful impact on the way we treat others and the opportunities presented to us in organizations. Additionally, they maintain that these six internal dimensions are relatively out of our control. They describe the external dimensions as more controllable, but still important factors for the way people are treated at work.

Although they cited Loden and Rosener in their use of primary and secondary dimensions in their model, Gardenswartz and Rowe also made modifications to these circles, adding factors like "personal habits" as an external dimension of a person's social identity.

Loden doesn't necessarily agree with the adaptation of her model, which Gardenswartz and Rowe call, "the Four Layers of Diversity." Loden says the Gardenswartz and Rowe version mixes individual and group-based differences. She thinks this confuses a key point she was making: that group-based differences have a major impact on individual perceptions, experiences and opportunities. As such she prefers to omit the focus on individualism and personality.

"I don't think [these concepts] belong in this discussion. That's not to say they aren't important, they are. But I think they muddy the water in diversity work," Loden explains. Her main goal in creating the wheel was to identify important group-based differences that not only shape our expectations, but also are also prone to stereotyping and can create conflict if they are devalued or misunderstood.

Loden believes describing the primary and secondary dimensions as internal and external differences in the Gardenswartz and Rowe model is misleading. "I don't see the distinction between internal and external as helping to illuminate the model. In fact, I'm not sure what it means."

She also thinks the addition of personal and recreational habits to the diversity wheel can water down the important key differences. "These categories are just not in the same league as dimensions like family status, military experience and communication style. They don't really belong in the discussion."

Lastly, Loden wishes that the derived model did not separate organization role and affiliation from other secondary dimensions. "Again, it over-complicates what the diversity discussion is about," she says, "giving too much prominence to organizational dimensions of diversity." 

EVOLUTION OF THE MODEL

Loden has made several changes to her Diversity Wheel model since the original publication in 1991. While most of the latest additions were implicit in the earlier versions, Loden decided that several needed further emphasis in order to validate the experiences of people who felt that these issues were more central to their core identities.

                                  DIMENSIONS of DIVERSITY

Adapted from: Implementing Diversity by Marilyn Loden. 1996. McGrawHill Publishing

One significant change to the model is the replacement of religion as a secondary dimension with spiritual beliefs as a primary one. While Loden believes that the United States is still a secular society, she recognizes that a global discussion of diversity has to focus on the importance of spiritual beliefs in shaping societal norms. "This doesn't change the fact that spiritual beliefs may be irrelevant to some individuals. But by adding it to the core, we are also acknowledging how central this dimension is to some groups." 

Loden recognizes the role that spiritual beliefs play in many people's lives, which is why she moved spiritual beliefs to the core circle. "We are seeing shifts in our society and other societies today, the emergence of fundamentalist beliefs, and more emphasis on religious dogma. I do think this dimension is becoming more of a cultural conversation," Loden said, as she briefly referenced the recent Islamic Center controversy in New York City.

In another change, Loden added class to the core circle. After discussing the issue with several scholars, she decided it was time to make class a stand-alone dimension so there could be no mistaking its profound impact on social identity formation.

"As much as people may assert that the United States is a classless society, this simply isn't true. While income, education, family status and other dimensions contribute to our understanding of class, I thought it was time to make this an explicit dimension," Loden states. And she adds, " As economic disparities continue to grow in the U.S. and throughout the world, how we deal with differences in class is an increasingly important global issue. It is part of the primary, core circle, because it shapes life experience and opportunities from the day that we are born."

Other adjustments to the model include the addition of political beliefs to the secondary dimensions. Over the last decade, Loden has noticed how much energy many people put into arguing their political beliefs, so she added it to the model. Her rationale is that political beliefs can be a major source of conflict and stereotyping among people, and therefore, this dimension of difference should also be included in the general conversation.

LODEN'S ADVICE FOR USING THE MODEL

Loden's first piece of advice to people using the model is to open up the diversity conversation so that everyone at the table can identify with some dimensions. "The goal for an organization is to create an environment where, regardless of one's diversity profile, everyone feels welcomed and where everyone's skills are leveraged,” Loden explains. "The Diversity Wheel is useful in explaining how group-based differences contribute to individual identities."

However, as the diversity conversation shifts from a U.S. context to a more global one, it is important to remember that other cultures place different emphasis on certain dimensions.

"While it would be great to understand all the nuances of every culture and the correct etiquette for negotiating the global terrain, it would take several lifetimes to learn all of this. What we can do is keep in mind four principles for managing our own behavior in a global context and dealing effectively with people globally. These four principles are respect, inclusion, cooperation, and responsibility - or RICR."  

Loden defines RICR as:

•RESPECT: treating others as they wish to be treated;

•INCLUSION: making certain everyone on the team is truly a part of the team decision-making process;

•COOPERATION: actively helping others succeed rather than competing or attempting to one-up someone;

•RESPONSIBILITY: managing personal behavior to maintain a diversity-positive environment and questioning inappropriate behavior when it occurs.

Anticipating an upcoming trip to the Middle East, Loden explains how she will use RICR to help navigate interactions: "What do I need to know? I am not entirely sure. But by using the wheel, I can consider how cultural differences may be shaping other's identities and experiences in the world. I can also demonstrate through my behavior that I am interested in showing respect, including others in activities, cooperating rather than competing to accomplish goals and taking responsibility for building a comfortable, diversity-positive environment."

WILL THE NEW SPIN ON THE DIVERSITY WHEEL HAVE A POSITIVE EFFECT GLOBALLY?

Currently, Loden believes we are a ways away from having a truly global conversation about diversity and inclusion. The reason? Many countries believe that "diversity" is an American concept focused primarily on race and gender. More importantly, other societies have different, deeply-held cultural assumptions. Thus when working in international settings, it's important to remember that others’ cultural assumptions and expectations will probably not be the same as ours.

"Frankly, I think it's a mistake for America to assume that a US-centric model of diversity fits in a global context. It doesn't. For example, if you are a global business operating in the Middle East, you have to recognize the cultural tolerances - particularly as they apply to women's roles. In some societies, women aren't expected or encouraged to function as equals in a professional context. By assuming that gender equity is a given, employers can place female workers in a real bind - where they must manage opposing expectations at work versus in their communities.  Changing cultural expectations takes time. It requires societal endorsement and, to be sustainable, should bubble up from within rather than be imposed from outside," Loden explains.

Although Loden in no way advocates the oppression of women, her point is that it is not our place as Americans to assume we know what's best or what will work elsewhere. Instead, we need the humility to recognize that every society's culture is different, and that what works for America today may not work elsewhere.

At the same time, Loden believes the Diversity Wheel can be used to help facilitate deeper discussions throughout the world. "At the very least, the model can be used to initiate conversations about similarities and differences that cross societal and cultural boundaries.  As Americans, we have to understand that we are not in the same place as other societies, and that has to be ok.  It's what global diversity is truly about."

There is no doubt that globalization has put a new spin on the Diversity Wheel. How these changes will be viewed by those outside of the United States, or those working here from other countries, remains to be seen.  As a change management expert, Loden is hopeful that the re-focus will make cross-cultural conversations about diversity dimensions more fruitful and more likely to occur - even as the topic of diversity itself continues to become more complex. 

SOURCES:

Gardenswartz, Lee and Anita Rowe. Managing Diversity: A Complete Desk Reference and Planning Guide. Ed. Jeffrey Krames. United States: McGraw Hill, 1998. Print.

Loden, Marilyn. Implementing Diversity. Ed. Jeffrey Krames. United States: Irwin Publishing, 1996. Print. 

Loden, Marilyn and Judy Rosener. Workforce America! Managing Employee Diversity as a Vital Resource. Ed. Jeffrey A. Krames. United States: Irwin Publishing, 1991. Print.

Barbara Deane is the editor-in-chief at DiversityCentral.com. Kimberley Lou was an intern in residence at the time of publication.

What is the diversity wheel in sociology?

How can I use the diversity wheel with staff?

What is Marilyn Loden’s diversity wheel?

Should the descriptions line up with the categories on the wheel?

What are the dimensions of the diversity wheel?

What is the personality dimension of diversity?

How do you use the diversity wheel?

Which categories are represented by the external dimension of diversity?