Conference tnpubs::tnpubs_vod

23.0. "Changing Face of the workforce" by TNPUBS::FORTEN (Love, Thy will be done...) Thu Sep 03 1992 14:50

From:	WECARE::FITZPATRICK "19-Aug-1992 1223" 19-AUG-1992 12:26:07.20
To:	@ZKOGPT,@COTTER_STAFF,STAR::RTAYLER,@LR_STAFF,FITZPATRICK
CC:	
Subj:	DIVERSITY IN THE HIGH TECH WORKPLACE (ARTICLE)

The June issue of the IEEE SPECTRUM had a powerful article on 
diversity in the high-tech workplace which is summarized in this 
message.  

CHANGING FACE OF THE WORKFORCE
 
In its classic 1987 study, WORKFORCE 2000, the Hudson Institute 
predicted that as we approach the year 2000, native-born white men 
will constitute only 15% of people entering the U.S. workforce.  
Women (white, non-white, and foreign born) will constitute 64% of the 
increase, and native-born non-white and immigrant men will make up 
the balance.  This changing face of the workforce presents a major 
challenge to high-technology industry, which leans so strongly on 
people and ideas.  

THE RESPONSE IS POSITIVE

Many U.S. corporations are responding to these demographic trends by 
positively embracing diversity.  Their premise is that encouraging 
the best and brightest, regardless of race, color, sex, religion, 
national origin, age, sexual orientation, or disability, gives them 
a competitive edge.  They believe that the more diverse their talent, 
the more access they will have to creativity, ingenuity, and 
innovative ideas in a world where corporate success often hinges on 
such intellectual commodities.  Diversity policies actively nurture 
non-traditional employees.

DIVERSITY AND PERFORMANCE IN R&D

New hires in U.S. R&D labs since the mid 1970's have changed from 
being almost exclusively U.S. born men to being largely, in some 
companies, U.S. born women or foreign born scientists and engineers.
At the same time, the proportion of native born minorities has 
increased to a small extent.  These new employees find themselves in 
work environments where most of the managers are U.S. born white men.
They are finding that their work styles, communication patterns, and
personal needs do not always match those of the people who evaluate 
their performance.

THE GAP BETWEEN NATIVE BORN WHITE MEN AND OTHERS

The authors of this article are surveying about 2000 scientists and 
engineers in the R&D units of 18 major companies to determine whether
a gap does exist between native born white men and others and, if so,
to guage its extent and possible implications.  Results do show 
diferences, both predictable and unpredictable, between the work 
experiences of native born white men and the rest.  These differences 
make it important to understand the issues facing R&D Managers.  Most 
of what is known about managing scientists and engineers comes from 
studies of U.S. born white men, yet the authors research shows that 
the path to success may not be the same for others.  For companies 
(like Digital Software Engineering) that depend on innovation to 
succeed, these issues are crucial.  Whether good ideas get supported 
or squashed, whether people can build on each other's contributions, 
and whether companies can retain good people depends on learning to 
manage diversity.  

KEY FINDINGS ON PERFORMANCE, TEAMWORK AND LEADERSHIP

The study is continuing, but the authors have reported some key 
findings on performance, teamwork and leadership.  Because the number 
of U.S. born blacks and Hispanics in their sample is small, the 
conclusions drawn are only about women (mostly U.S. born) and the 
foreign born (mostly male).

PERFORMANCE - MEASURED FOUR WAYS

The authors used four measures of performance ("how much of a 
contribution an employee is making"), including both self-assessmet 
and managers'ratings:

o  innovativeness (increasing knowledge through lines of R&D that are 
   useful and new);

o  usefulness (helping the organization carry out its 
   responsibilities);

o  promotability (readiness for advancement into management should an
   opening occur);

o  cooperativeness (effectiveness in working with others).

Respondents and their managers were asked to indicate, on a 100-point 
scale, what proportion of people the respondent "stands above".

The foreign born rate themselves higher than the U.S. born on 
innovativeness, usefulness, and cooperativeness, but no differently 
on promotability.  Their managers rate the foreign born as no better 
than the U.S. born on the first three dimensions and as lower on 
promotability.  Interestingly, it makes no difference how long a 
foreign born respondent has been in the United States; individual 
ratings and manager ratings followed the same trend.

Unlike the foreign born males, women respondents rate themselves lower 
on inovativeness, usefulness and promotability, but higher on 
cooperativeness.  Managers also rate women as lower on innovativeness 
but as no different from men on usefulness, promotability and, 
interestingly, cooperativeness.  Surprisingly, on the measures of 
innovativeness and usefulness, the individual ratings of U.S. born 
white males coincide almost identically with their managers, perhaps 
because they understand the culture around them and can easily 
interpret feedback on how they are doing.

While recognizing that factors like an uneven understanding of 
feedback, or living up to certain stereotypes might be at play here, 
its also clear that bias may be behind the managers' ratings.  
Clearly, managers need to examine their ratings for traces of bias 
attributable to cultural differences.

Biased or not, managers need to focus more on the kind of feedback 
they give, and on how they give it; they need to pay attention to how 
the "rules of the game" are communicated.

Women's underestimation of their contributions certainly portends 
concern for the organization.  If women are more tentative about 
their contributions and less confident about what they have to offer, 
then they surely are not as likely to offer their opinions, challenge 
those they think are on the wrong track, or make recommendations for 
change.

TEAMWORK

The authors contend that such speculation about women and foreign 
born male scientists/engineers is consistent with their findings on 
teamwork.  In their measure of how well people work together, they 
found that women and foreign born males differ in many respects 
from their U.S. born male colleagues.

One key indicator of teamwork is networking; generally, the larger 
one's network within engineering, the better one performs (the 
author's network size was the number of people a subject talked to 
about work in a given time period).  They found that foreign born 
talk to fewer people within their own laboratories, yet their 
networks are as extensive outside the lab, both inside and outside 
the company.

Women resemble men in their lab and intracompany networks, but talk 
to fewer people outside the company; managers tend to rate those with 
large lab networks most highly.

Teamwork was also evaluated by asking respondents about the level of 
cooperation they receive, both inside the lab and across the company. 
The foreign born responded like U.S. born men, although they are less 
likely to work with other functions.  Women report getting more 
cooperation than men from other functions like Marketing, better 
cooperation, in fact, than from colleagues in R&D.  In probing 
further into the characteristics of cooperation, both groups of men 
responded positively about group cooperation.

Women, though, have less favorable views.  They report less 
confidence and trust within their group, less mutual support, less 
enthusiasm, less similarity in work styles, less comfort with the 
decision making process, and less equality.  They are less likely 
than men to agree on the direction of the group, less likely to say 
they can influence the group, and less likely to feel part of the 
group.

So, the message is mixed.  The foreign born generally get cooperation 
and feel comfortable in their groups, but talk to fewer people in the 
lab about their work.  Women talk to people in the lab, but feel less 
fully accepted in their group.  If interactions with others are 
limited, neither women nor the foreign born men are as likely to 
contribute fully, or to have their contributions really recognized.

LEADERSHIP - THE SINE QUA NON

The authors were told time and again in their focus groups that the 
leadership of first-line managers is the sine qua non to success in 
R&D.  Women seem more likely than men to get coaching and to have 
access to mentors and social networks, the study found, contrary to 
findings in most mentoring studies.  The foreign born report having 
less access of this type of support, but do comment favorably on 
their leaders.

Women rate their managers lower on issues like getting people to work 
together, letting people know where they stand, being sensitive to 
differences among people, and minimizing hassles with the staff.  But 
women comment favorably, as do men, on the ability of their managers 
to communicate goals, define problems and get resouces.

One encouraging aspect of this study is that there does not seem to 
be evidence of overt discrimination or exclusion regarding these "new"
groups.  Differences seem to have more to do with culture, where 
change will not occur without concerted steps toward a better mutual 
understanding.  We need to better understand the differences among 
the foreign born and among women, the sources of misperception and 
misunderstanding of contributions, the work dynamics that make some 
feel part of the team and others excluded, and where the proactive 
leadership of first-line managers can make a difference.

**********************************************************************

As you work with your partners in the line on organizational 
effectiveness, communications and team excellence, I encourage you to 
share these thoughts with them.  In his first DVN broadcast to 
Digital employees, Bob Palmer specifically mentioned the need to 
value diversity as we strive to return Digital to profitability.  So 
the support from the top is clearly there!!

Thanks,

Tom



To Distribution List:

alvarado@baydec@vmsmail,
FRANCIS ARSENAULT @PKO,
BARBARA BURNS @PKO,
mike coco @awo,
CATHY DAVIDOFF @AWO,
JOHN DISCHINGER @PKO,
BRIGITTE ELLINGTON @PKO,
RUTH GALLAGHER @PKO,
EVELYN GARCIA @PKO,
FREDDY GONZALES @PKO,
DENNIS HERZIG @PKO,
DENNIS LERRA @PKO,
dennis masters @pko,
DICK ROBILLARD @PKO,
DAVE ROGERS @PKO,
BOB ROMANO @PKO,
swearingen@esmail@vmsmail,
dan walsh @pko,
NAME: \emote Addressee <ARCHDEACON@SUPER@VMSMAIL>,
PAT BAKER @MRO,
LESLIE BARRETT @MKO,
CHAPUT@CDROM@VMSMAIL,
CHARLES COSTIGAN @LKG,
CRAMER@DEMON @VMSMAIL,
PETE DELLAPELLE @LKG,
DONALD@WAGON@VMSMAIL,
ELDREDGE@DEMON@VMSMAIL,
Libby Finn @mro,
FINNERN@WAGON@VMSMAIL,
BARBARA FISHEL @PKO,
FRIEDMAN@DEMON@VMSMAIL,
suzanne grenache @aco,
HAMILTON@BOOKS@VMSMAIL,
HARRISON@DECWET@VMSMAIL,
HAUPT@WAGON@VMSMAIL,
HILLER@MRED@VMSMAIL,
hooper@demon@vmsmail,
HORAN@WAGON@VMSMAIL,
IANNUZZI@WAGON@VMSMAIL,
DAVE KILLELEA @MRO,
macarthur@timber@vmsmail,
MALAYERY@super@VMSMAIL,
FRED MARSH @ZKO,
VAL MATTHEWS @ZKO,
les may @pko,
MCCARTHY@WAGON@VMSMAIL,
ED MCFADEN@MRO,
NANCY NELSON @MKO,
TODD NELSON @GSF,
PARROTT@SUCCES@VMSMAIL,
GEREDA PRUITT @MRO,
ELLEN PZEGEO @GSF,
ROBINSON@MRED@VMSMAIL,
RONAI@WAGON@VMSMAIL,
KAREN ROSENBERG @ZKO,
NAME: emote Addressee <RYKEN@WREATH@VMSMAIL>,
betsey scharlack @pko,
SISAKHTI@WHEEL@VMSMAIL,
STITH@ljohub@VMSMAIL,
NANCY STRADER @MRO,
TARRY@WAGON@VMSMAIL,
WALKER@WAGON@VMSMAIL,
pat weger @mlo,
WTHOMPSON@WAGON@VMSMAIL,
NANCY BAUSCH @OFO,
CAROLYNN JONES @OGO,
ELS KNOPPERS @MRO,
lmartin@cslall@vmsmail,
linda maycock @ofo,
GLORIA ROE @PKO,
JOHN ROMEO @MRO,
BEVERLY TAYLOR @BXC,
macarthur@timber@vmsmail