Cited by 2,433Gender Diversity and InequalityTeam Dynamics and PerformanceSocial and Intergroup Psychology

Cultural Diversity at Work: The Effects of Diversity Perspectives on Work Group Processes and Outcomes

Ely, Robin J., Thomas, David A.·2001·Administrative Science Quarterly

Abstract

This paper develops theory about the conditions under which cultural diversity enhances or detracts from work group functioning. From qualitative research in three culturally diverse organizations, we identified three different perspectives on workforce diversity: the integration-and-learning perspective, the access-and-legitimacy perspective, and the discrimination-and-fairness perspective. The perspective on diversity a work group held influenced how people expressed and managed tensions related to diversity, whether those who had been traditionally underrepresented in the organization felt respected and valued by their colleagues, and how people interpreted the meaning of their racial identity at work. These, in turn, had implications for how well the work group and its members functioned. All three perspectives on diversity had been successful in motivating managers to diversify their staffs, but only the integration-and-learning perspective provided the rationale and guidance needed to achieve sustained benefits from diversity. By identifying the conditions that intervene between the demographic composition of a work group and its functioning, our research helps to explain mixed results on the relationship between cultural diversity and work group outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2667087

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Organizational diversity climates that ignore or deemphasize diversity are more likely to set up for subgroup categorization than climates that acknowledge and celebrate diversity.

    “Likewise, organizational diversity climates that ignore or deemphasize diversity (e.g., colorblindness; discrimination-and-fairness perspectives) are more likely to set up for subgroup categorization than climates that acknowledge and celebrate diversity (e.g., allinclusive multiculturalism, learning-and-effectiveness perspectives; Ely & Thomas, 2001;Nishii, 2013;Nishii et al., 2018;Plaut, Garnett”

    From Leading diversity: Towards a theory of functional leadership in diverse teams. (2020) · cites this paper as Ely & Thomas, 2001

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 105 · Cited by 2,433

Authors
Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
2001-06
Volume
46
Issue
2
Pages
229-273
ISSN
  • 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-3815
OpenAlex
W2109507579
Cited by
2,433
References
105
Citations by year
2026: 135 · 2025: 139 · 2024: 153 · 2023: 121 · 2022: 139 · 2021: 118 · 2020: 118 · 2019: 142 · 2018: 125 · 2017: 121 · 2016: 116 · 2015: 143 · 2014: 127 · 2013: 121 · 2012: 109
FWCI
53.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Administrative Science Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Diversity and Inequality
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
cultural diversity, workplace diversity, diversity perspectives, underrepresented employees, diversity management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review