Police Forces and Diversity

Diversity in a Small Police Department

The Importance of Diversity in a Small Police Department

Diversity is a significant issue in life, and in the workplace. Unfortunately, there are a number of workplaces where diversity is not seen. This could be deliberate, but it could also come from simply not hiring specific people who did not meet the job requirements. Overall, people like to be with others who are similar to them, and like gravitates to like (Allen, 1995). When getting involved in any type of business, especially one that works with the public, it is important to consider how best to add diversity to the workforce (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). That can make the job better for everyone, and can also help the public when it comes to interactions with the people who do that job (Harvey, 2012; Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). The more people are open to diversity, the better they will generally do at understanding and empathizing with others. For a police force, this kind of connection with the public is a critical part of the job. It can deeply affect how the officers do their jobs, and how the people they interact with feel about those officers.

Beginning in the 1960s, there have been models and cases that have addressed the value of diversity in the business environment (Brownell, 2003; Cockburn, 1989; Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010). Affirmative action was part of a program of forced diversity, and many of the early models that dealt with how a company could be more diverse were centered around that plan (Harvey, 2012). However, there were also other ways of providing diversity to companies and their workers, which allowed for more people to work with others who were not like them. That provided them with insight into how they wanted to look at the world, and helped them focus on the kinds of things that truly mattered to them. Understanding and accepting diversity is not always easy, hence the reason that it really had to be forced in many ways before people would agree to it (Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). Much has changed since that time, though, and there is a greater acceptance of diversity than what was seen in the past. This has brought many people closer together, and helped them focus on the important things in life -- some of which involves caring for and appreciating others.

One of the biggest problems with the affirmative action way of bringing in new and different people to businesses, was that it led to the feeling of tokenism (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). This is when a person who is different from others is the "token woman" or "token black" in the group. It implies that the only reason the person is there is to ensure that a quota is met or a law is not violated (Fine, 1996). That does not allow the person hired much chance to really become part of the group and/or have his or her ideas heard and appreciated. Since the person was not hired for his or her skills but only for an appearance of diversity, the job is not one that is really appropriate for the person and very little respect or assimilation will be seen from the other people who work there (Mumby, 1988; Page, 2007). Diversity is not something that happens easily in many of today's companies, even when those companies are not violating the law or do not feel they need a "token" person or a particular gender, color, or ethnicity (Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003).

Laws to encourage diversity have really not helped, in that they have forced companies to hire more diverse workforces in some cases, but those companies do not value the diverse workers that they have (Harvey, 2012). Because the laws have not provided the desire for diversity that was hoped for, it is important to look at other reasons diversity should be seen and other ways in which it can be encouraged. One of the models that evolved after affirmative action was the social justice model. It advocated for diversity, and did so by expounding the idea that hiring people who were different was the right way to handle things when it came to good business (and moral) decisions (Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). The idea was to take people who did not fit with the dominant culture or group at the workplace, and either hire or promote them, so that diversity would spread. It was still "tokenism" in many ways, but it also helped to encourage a better fit between companies and their employees.

Because the country and the global market are both changing, it is important for businesses to do the same. Too many businesses remain stuck in the past, where they only hire certain kinds of people as much as possible. What they fail to understand when doing that, is that there are a number of people they will have to work with who will not be like them (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010). If they do not have employees who have similarities to their customers, they can experience breakdowns in communication and other problems that come with not having a diverse workforce (Allen, 1995). That is true for something as simple as a coffee shop, and even more important for businesses that work closely with others in sometimes tense situations. Police officers fall into that category, whether they are on a standard force or they work for a private company. Diversity encourages productivity and a culture where people want to learn from one another (Cockburn, 1989). The more diversity is seen in a particular company, the more likely that company will be to have employees who can interact well with customers and clients.

Being able to work with the public is a gift that not everyone possesses, but the people who do this best are often those who are open to new thoughts, ideas, and ways of doing things (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010; Page, 2007). They are also generally happier in their jobs, because they get to work with a mix of people who challenge them and keep them thinking about the world and all it can offer (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). There are still a number of organizations and companies that are not serious about diversity, though, and that do not make an effort to include all types of people in their employee roster. They may feel more comfortable with what they already have, but overall they are keeping their company from getting needed help and information from people who have other ideas and belief systems based on their diverse backgrounds. Because studies have shown that more diverse workforces mean happier employees who are more productive, miss fewer days, and stay with their employers longer, one would think that diversity would be very important to companies (Brownell, 2003; Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010; Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). However, there is still discomfort about it that can be difficult to overlook, and that businesses have not yet been able to completely get past.

Issues with diversity are really not as easy to address as it would seem when it comes to companies and businesses (Harvey, 2012). Recent research into the concern has shown that there are three different types of organizations, and they all work with, address, and consider cultural diversity somewhat differently. These organizations are monolithic, plural, and multicultural (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010). In the monolithic organization, there is minimal cultural diversity. In the workforce it is possible to find people who are diverse in that they do not "match" what is commonly seen throughout the organization (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010). However, none of these people are going to be found in real leadership or power positions. They may be employees, but they will be kept there. It is not possible to see them as managers, or as anything more than the people who take orders from the people who make the rules. While that is unfortunate, it does not take long to spot these kinds of organizations. Then they can be avoided by people who are looking for diversity in the company they work with, or who need that diversity to get hired (Brownell, 2003; Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010).

By contrast, the plural organization is much more open to hiring people from diverse backgrounds (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). While many of them will remain at the employee level, there are opportunities for them to receive promotions to management. There is still a dominant group, but that group is willing to be more inclusive, and takes steps to encourage people who come from different cultures and races (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). These kinds of organizations generally consider the people who are different from them to be marginalized to some degree by society, so they want to give chances to these people and allow them to grow and develop from a business standpoint (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). That is very important for the people who are trying to get these kinds of jobs, because they have the chance to find a company that believes in them and that is actually looking for people who are not the same as everyone else. That can make a huge difference not only in whether the person gets hired, but also whether he or she is successful in the position and whether there are realistic opportunities for promotion (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009).

The third company type, the multicultural organization, has a number of different kinds of people and groups within it (Harvey, 2012). These companies want people who are diverse, and will deliberately seek them out, hire them, and encourage them. One of the reasons behind this is because people who own and manage these types of companies know that a more culturally diverse workforce can mean a number of new ideas that would not otherwise be seen (Harvey, 2012). Thinking outside of the box can be a highly significant way for individuals to operate companies and bring success to them. That is true whether the person is the manager, or only an employee. If everyone is the same, groupthink is often the outcome (Harvey, 2012). Naturally, that is not good for any organization, because it does not allow the company to grow. There are no new ideas, and every person in the company thinks the same way and says the same things. In multicultural companies this does not happen. People from different cultures and races look at problems differently, and come up with unique solutions (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010; Harvey, 2012).

That can create rivalry and arguments, but a certain level of that is a good thing. People are more likely to keep the company moving forward with their interesting ideas (Allen, 1995). When companies are able to move forward because of unique and different ideas, they are also able to stay ahead of competitors that are not as multicultural in their approach to things. This can and should be pointed out, because it means that a company that is focused on multiculturalism has a benefit that other companies like it do not have if those other companies are hiring people who are just like everyone else in the company (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010). While the temptation to do that can be understood because like attracts like, it is vital that any company that wants to grow and develop focuses on more multicultural and diverse options when hiring employees (Brownell, 2003). This can also have a direct affect on how the company relates to its clients and customers, as those people will likely be very diverse in nature (Allen, 1995).

Among the reasons why more diverse businesses are so successful, is the way leadership is addressed. There are a number of different leadership theories, all of which have changed throughout time. As these theories have evolved, the people who use them have also evolved. They have seen the value of diversity in the workplace, and how that also helps when dealing with the public (Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). As they see that, they begin to adjust the way they lead. When leading people who are all very similar, there is one way in which it should be done. However, when a person has the opportunity to lead a group that is very multicultural and diverse, the ways in which that leadership is handled need to be very different -- just like the people (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). It can be challenging to find a leadership style that everyone can relate to, but doing so is certainly possible. One of the most common ways of doing that is to offer transformational leadership. This is also sometimes called servant leadership, and is designed to bring everyone in the group together for the common good, instead of simply giving orders (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009).

When people feel as though they are part of a team, they are more likely to work harder for the company (Fine, 1996; Page, 2007). That translates to nearly every culture and ethnicity, and is something that the vast majority of people can get behind. When leaders make everyone feel valued for their contributions and for their differences, those leaders are on the right track toward making sure each person in the organization is going to work hard and be appreciative of what he or she has (Mumby, 1988). This can make those who work in a multicultural organization very committed to what they are doing, and also to what they are getting in return. While there are challenges to this type of organization and the type of leadership, there are also a high number of benefits offered that can and should be carefully considered. Not every company may work better as a diverse company, but most of them will -- and that is especially important for companies that deal with a diverse public.

The benefits of a culturally diverse organization include higher levels of problem solving and better decision making (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). These claims have been disregarded by some, who have attempted to discredit them. However, companies that employ diverse groups of people do state that having different opinions helps the company when it comes to determining what the right course of action is (Brownell, 2003; Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). Because groupthink is not as much of a problem for companies that are interested in diversity, it is more likely that these companies will consider a number of different options for finding the right solution (Allen, 1995). They will hear from people with different thoughts and ideas, and that can lead them to consider solutions that they never would have thought of otherwise. Another thing this can do is keep these companies ahead of their competition, because they will find that competitors who do not have diverse workforces are not as strong when it comes to creative and unique solutions to issues (Harvey, 2012). In short, companies that have diverse workforces are able to change and adapt more quickly.

Both marketing the product or service offered by the company and developing that product or service can be improved when there is more diversity throughout a company (Mumby, 1988). The ideas and suggestions that come in regarding these two areas are unique and different, and they can often cause conflict. That conflict is actually a good thing, because it forces people to think outside of the box and look at the situation in a way that they would not normally consider (Fine, 1996). By doing that, they are better able to find new and different ways that the company can market its product or offer its service. Since the market for a number of products and services is becoming much more global and dynamic, it is vital that any company wishing to remain competitive have people who show that global diversity (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010). That can make customers and clients much more comfortable, and help the business land important accounts with people in other cultures and areas of the world. Making customers and clients comfortable goes a very long way toward earning their business (Page, 2007).

Diversity in these types of companies is recognized and appreciated. It is not something that is downplayed or that is ignored. When an employee sees that his or her diversity is important to the company, and that it is valued along with other traits, that employee is much more likely to feel good about his or her job. That, in turn, can cause that employee to want to work harder and do more for the company (Harvey, 2012; Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). The loyalty is important, since it provides both the employee and the company with a lot of value that might not otherwise be seen. When employees are loyal to the companies for which they work, it is easier for those employees to offer value to the company (Allen, 1995). It is also easier for the company to ask for more from the employee, and to get more work out of the people who see their importance with the organization (Fine, 1996). Because this is so significant, the benefits of having a diverse group of individuals in any organization is not something that can be realistically and logically overlooked. Unfortunately, many companies still avoid diversity, even though it has already been shown numerous times that they can benefit from it.

There are, of course, challenges that have to be considered when working with a very diverse group of individuals. Not everything will be perfect, and there are some risks to hiring a group of people who really have very little in common. There will generally still be a dominant group. In the United States, that is most often white males. However, it is also possible that it is a different group. Regardless, one group will have more members than the others, and that can make assimilation of the people who are not part of that group a little bit difficult (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010). That does not mean the person will not be welcomed, but only that even the nicest welcome does not make people the same as one another. When people are different from the main group, they may be shy about presenting their ideas, or they may feel as though what they have to offer is not something others would be interested in (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). When that happens, those who feel they are very different may not offer their time and talents in a way that they would normally provide, because they are not comfortable doing so (Allen, 1995).

Promoting people who are different from the dominant group into management positions also comes with risk. Not everyone in the dominant group will like being led by someone who is different from them (Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). Tensions are likely to develop. This can often be mitigated by transformational leadership, as opposed to transactional leadership, but even that is not a guarantee that there will not be any problems in having a leader who is really not like the dominant group of people he or she is leading (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). This can be a racial or cultural issue, or can also be drawn along gender lines. Too often, the unique person who is going to be placed into a leadership role is no longer appreciated for his or her differences (Page, 2007). Instead, he or she is taught different techniques to be more accepted by the dominant group. This defeats the purpose of having a diverse group of people, or of promoting people who are diverse and allowing them to lead groups of individuals within the company (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). When that occurs, the diversity that was supposed to make the company great suddenly has very little value, and is not nearly as beneficial (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2010).

It is not easy to manage diversity. While it is very important to acknowledge the differences that diverse groups have, there is more to the successful management of these groups than simply saying that one understands that they are different (Harvey, 2012; Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). Miscommunication is among the biggest indicators of diversity problems in any organization (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). It is not about accents or native languages, but about the complete way in which a person communicates. This is often very different on a cultural level (Miliken, Morrison, & Hewlin, 2003). Expressions, slang, and even the way in which a person gestures or emotes can be significantly different from one culture to another (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). That can lead to misunderstandings, and also to people who just do not "get" what another person is trying to say. Some cultures also feel that certain ways of expressing oneself may be embarrassing or shameful, while another culture may not see things that way, at all. During everyday work this may not be too difficult to address, but when groups are working together things can quickly become confusing and frustrating (Allen, 1995; Brownell, 2003).

Part II: Implications and Applications

There are many serious implications when it comes to considering diversity in any company. However, there are some companies and organizations where diversity is much more significant and important than others. For this discussion, the organizational setting is a hospital security department. This is like a self-contained police force, designed only to address issues that occur at the hospital itself. This can be something that occurs with a patient, a patient's family, or between medical personnel. The security department also responds to hazmat and related risks in the building and on the hospital grounds. Because they act as a police force, they need to be able to interact with one another and with the public easily. There are currently 20 officers in the hospital security department. Two of these officers are white females, and the other 18 are white males. Throughout the rest of the hospital, there is a vast array of diversity. It is only within the security department where there is a serious lack of diversity seen at this particular hospital. Most people probably do not realize this, though, because they do not interact with the security personnel that much. This is especially true for patients, who are not at the hospital all the time.

The Hospital and Security Department

The hospital is a microcosm of the society around it, where there are a number of different races and cultures. Those who work at the hospital and those who come to the hospital for help are a diverse group, and they generally get along well overall. Having an entirely white and nearly all male security force, however, goes against the diversity of the hospital and the diversity of the community. That sends a message to the rest of the people at the hospital, and really does not look like the security force understands of accepts diversity in any way, whether that be racial, cultural, or along gender lines. The two female officers appear to be there based on the practice of tokenism, so it is not possible for complaints to be lodged that there are "no women" hired by the security department. While they may be good officers, they are likely not treated equally and are probably not assimilated into the department nearly as much as the male officers are.

There is also no racial mix of any kind in the security department. No black or Hispanic officers have been hired by that department, and there are no other ethnicities, either. While the department has not had legal problems because of their lack of diversity, it is still clear that it is an all-white department. As was seen in the information presented in the literature review, not having a diverse organization or department can mean a lack of problem solving skills and ability (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2009). For a police force or a security department that may have to deal with a number of issues on a daily basis, diversity would seem to be one of the most important things to consider (Brownell, 2003). Being able to handle issues quickly and efficiently, and being able to determine the best ways in which those issues can be addressed, can be much more easily considered when there is diversity in the department. That promotes new ways of looking at things, and can allow for unique and more interesting ideas to be formulated so that problems can be fixed before they become worse.

A Plan for the Security Department

To address the needs of the organization, diversity will be required. This is easier said than done, however, because the department has been a particular way for a long time. Making changes to it is more than just hiring people who are more diverse. Those changes require a different mindset and a way to look at things differently. Additionally, one also has to consider that the people in the department right now may enjoy and appreciate the status quo, and may not want it to change. Another problem they face is that there are only so many openings for security officers, based on the size of the hospital. Because of that, hiring more people may not be possible until someone else leaves. However, that does not mean that a plan cannot be put into place now that will be used later, when people move on, quit, or retire and it becomes necessary to hire more personnel to replace them. This plan has to start with a vision for the security department, and that vision will be to make the department just as diverse as the rest of the hospital.