As we enter the third millennium, America's workforce looks markedly different than it ever has before. In a way, it can be described as polytypic. Compared with the workforce of even twenty years ago, more white women, people of color, disabled persons, new and recent immigrants, gays and lesbians, and intergenerational mixes (i.e., baby boomers, Generation Xers, and Generation Nexters) now work in America. To say that this has created challenges for managing the workplace is an understatement.
The way in which government employers embrace this opportunity of diversity will clearly distinguish effective and efficient organizations from those that are unproductive and unable to meet the demands and necessities of the American people in the twenty first century.
Today, public and private sector employers are poised to create productive workforces that are truly representative of not simply the national but the global population.
Diversity qua Diversity
When we speak of managing diversity in the context of the workplace, we often think of concepts such as equal employment opportunity (EEO) and affirmative action. Although diversity has evolved from these concepts, it is significantly different. The easiest way to understand the differences in these concepts is to compare and contrast them.
EEO is largely viewed as a means to prevent discrimination in the workplace on the basis of such factors or characteristics as race, color, religion, gender, national origin, ability, and age. Affirmative action, on the other hand, which emerged in response to pervasive employment discrimination, embodies proactive efforts to redress past discriminations as well as to diversify the workplace in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, physical abilities, and so forth. Affirmative action has been viewed as a legal tool to ensure equal employment opportunity or diversity. Its emphasis on proaction has been the cause of endless controversy and public debate over its use as an employment tool or social policy.............
