ABSTRACT
R. Roosevelt Thomas (1996) tells us that, nearly every decade or so, people who concern themselves with the racial and/or ethnic demography of the United States and its impact on business functions fasten onto a particular word or phrase that surfaces from a general, wide-ranging issue. For a time, this “buzz word” is extremely popular. Before long, the word begins to take on a more symbolic meaning, serving as a simple verbal code for the complex problem from which it originated. This is true of the word “diversity.” It appears that individuals use the word to designate a complex situation; however, there is often no consensus on what the word “diversity” actually represents. For the public, diversity is verbal shorthand for a workforce that is multi-racial, multicultural, and multi-ethnic, which means that it comes preloaded with people’s own individual perceptions and biases. For those organizations concerned for the wellbeing of their employees, diversity has become a kind of semantic umbrella that encompasses an assortment of programs emanating from within the organization. Therefore, it is evident that there is a need for a new understanding and discourse on diversity.
