Workplace Diversity and Managing Differences: Culture

Culture: Workplace Diversity and Managing Differences

An Experience of Sexual Harassment

Numerous definitions have been put forth to explain the term 'sexual harassment'. I, personally, think of sexual harassment as any form of degrading comments, gestures, or sounds directed at a person on the basis of their sex, even when there is no physical contact involved. A friend of mine had this male supervisor who just wouldn't stop making funny comments -- 'that skirt doesn't work for you', 'you need something shorter', 'why can't we just run off and get married?', and so on; and he would do so even when there were people around. Well, at first she considered this to be his 'unique' way of showing appreciation, but when push came to shove, she confronted him. The advances, however, still went on, and she was disturbed by the fact that he looked at her as an object and acted like he had power and control over her. She approached the departmental manager, explained that she was trying not to lose respect for her supervisor, and was transferred to another department, this time in a supervisory role. It was a promising opportunity, but she had to quit the job after some disgruntled employees began to spread rumors that she was sleeping her way to the top. To me, this amounted to sexual harassment because even though there was no physical contact, the comments and gossip directed at her portrayed her in a sexual way and tarnished her image in the eyes of her colleagues.

Section Two: Managing Differences

Conflict is almost inevitable when people work in a team or group (Lussier, 2008). This is because people hold different viewpoints and opinions, and when these fail to agree, differences are deemed to arise. It is how these differences are managed, however, that determines whether conflict will escalate to unhealthy levels. I, personally don't enjoy arguing with people, so whenever someone does or says something that I do not agree with, I just give my opinion, and if it appears like there is going to be an argument, I just let it go -- compromise just so there will not be a full-blown dispute. However, this strategy may change under various circumstances:

If winning is everything - in this case, I would be more interested in winning than in maintaining the relationship. I would first try to give my views and explain to my opponent why I do not agree with theirs. If they still do not agree, I would look for evidence presented in books or other relevant material to back up my arguments and get them to compromise; but if that still does not work, and there is so much at stake, I would put competitive advantage above ethics and bribe anyone there is to bribe - witnesses (if any) and even the opponent themselves - if that would help me win the ultimate prize. Well, if bribery does not work, I would do the only other reasonable thing -- use any means possible to make the opponent fail to show up.

If no one should lose face -- this would mean that I treasure the relationship I have with my opponent, and although I would love to win, I would not want them to appear as losers; and hence, I am out for a balanced (win-win) solution. In this case, I would use negotiation -- I would have both parties present their views and goals on the table, and carefully explore each other's positions until a mutually acceptable compromise that gives both sides as much of what they want as possible is reached (Lussier, 2008). In this case, the approach used promotes ethical decision-making, and ensures that both sides gain from the same.

If consensus is the only way to reach agreement - consensus-building would be the best approach in this case (Masters & Albright, 2002). Both sides would present their views before an audience and try to win their hearts as much as they possibly can. The audience will be acquainted with information on what the goals of both sides are, and encouraged to make their decision based on what they think is best for the group. Votes will then be cast and the winning side determined by a simple majority. In case of a tie, the leader will cast the determining vote.