To Highlight or Downplay Differences? A Threat-Matching Model for Crafting Diversity Approaches
We integrate organizational and psychological scholarship to devise the threat matching model, a contingency theory that illustrates when, how, and which diversity approaches—frameworks leaders provide employees to understand and respond to diversity—promote inclusiveness. Rather than presume the existence of a “best” approach, we theorize that two types of diversity approaches, the value in difference approach (which focuses on the importance of social group differences) and the value in equality approach (which focuses on the importance of equality irrespective of differences), can each be effective, but only when they match the magnitude of threat employees experience and corresponding psychological needs that underlie feelings of inclusion. We propose that the value in equality approach is most effective when threat is high because it satisfies employees’ salient desire to belong and be accepted as an insider, whereas that the value in difference approach is most effective when threat is low because it satisfies employees’ salient desire to be respected for the unique characteristics they contribute. Further, we develop a two-step recursive process for promoting inclusion as threat evolves over time. This model reconciles mixed results in past research, substantively extends existing theory, and informs leaders’ efforts to promote inclusion across contexts.
Keywords: diversity; gender; race and ethnicity; leadership; inclusion; Diversity; Gender; Race; Ethnicity; Equality and Inequality; Leadership;
Citation:
Lees, J., and Evan Apfelbaum. "To Highlight or Downplay Differences? A Threat-Matching Model for Crafting Diversity Approaches." In Making a Case for Diversity: Pros, Cons, and Complexities. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA, August 8, 2017. View Details