ABSTRACT
This
research examined Managing Diversity in Multinational Organization with special
reference to Unilever Nigeria Plc. The research adopted survey research design. Data were gathered
through primary source with the aid of a well-structured questionnaire. Simple
random sampling technique was adopted in the selection of sample, this was used
to eliminate biasness in the selection process of the respondents.
Data garnered were presented on table using
percentage and the formulated hypotheses were analysed with the used of
Chi-square statistical method. The result of the analysis shows that there is no significant relationship
between recruitment and diversity management. Also, Communication play
effective role in managing diversity and there is a correlation between
diversity management and organizational productivity
Based
on the conclusion of the analysis recommendations were proffered to the staff
and management of Unilever Nigeria Plc.
TABLE OF CONTENT
Cover Page 1
Abstract 2
Table of Content 3
CHAPTER ONE:
INTRODUCTION
1.0 Background of
the study 5
1.1 Statement of the
Research Problem 9
1.2 Objectives of
the Study 10
1.3 Statement of
Research Questions 11
1.4 Statement of
Research Hypothesis 11
1.5 Relevance of the
Study 12
1.6 Scope and
Limitation of the Study 13
1.7 Operational
Definition of Terms 13
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF
THE RELEVANT LITERATURE
2.0 Introduction 15
2.1 Literature
Review 15
2.2 Managing
Diversity – A Competitive Advantage 19
2.3 Increasing
Diversity in the Workforce 24
2.4 Affirmative
Action and Valuing Diversity 31
2.5 The Importance
of Top-Management Commitment to Diversity 37
2.6 Barriers
and Challenges to Managing Diversity 39
2.7 Company
Culture and Diversity Management 41
2.8 Organizational
Practices used to Effectively Manage Diversity 44
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction 48
3.2 Research Design 48
3.3 The Study Area 48
3.4 The Study
Population 48
3.5 Sample Size and
Sampling Technique 49
3.6 Description of
Research Instrument 49
3.7 Research
Procedure 49
3.8 Method of Data
Collection 50
3.9 Method of Data
Analysis 50
3.10 Problems
Encountered on the Field 51
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA
ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF RESULTS
4.1 Background
Information 52
4.2 Analysis of
Demographic Variables 52
4.3 Research
Questions 57
4.4 Test of
Hypotheses 64
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY
OF MAJOR FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Summary of Major
Finding 69
5.2 Conclusions 70
5.3 Recommendation 72
References 74
Questionnaire 76
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.0 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Managers are increasingly being asked
to boost productivity, quality and customer satisfaction while also reducing
costs. These goals can only be met, however, through the cooperation and effort
of all employees. By creating positive work environments, where people feels
valued and appreciated, organizations are more likely to foster the employee
commitment and performance necessary for organizational success.
Considering the following examples by
Kreitner, Kinicki and Buelens (2002), which are in contrast
with the above statement, taken from three different work environments. “Ade Arogundade, a finance manager with
Springboard Southward Trust has received racist literature telling him he is
not wanted at the organization and has been the subject of anonymous petitions
sent to mangers demanding that all black employees be removed from the work
force”.
Also, a report revealed appalling
behaviour in the Dutch police force: “79 percent of female employees had been
confronted with pin-ups, 55 percent with “dirty gestures”, 38 percent with blue
films and 44percent had the feeling of male colleagues “undressing them with
their eyes (Hooghiemstra 1998).
Finally another example cited by Kreitner et al (2002) described Sarah Locker, “a woman police officer,
received pornographic magazines on her desk and literature making derogatory
reference to her Turkish background: she decided to take her complaints to
court. She won her case, but met even more hostility on her return to work. The
episode finally ended in a serious suicide attempt.
Sandra Valentine, a woman pilot
claimed that she was told by a male colleague, “Women should not be let loose
with anything more technical than a knife and fork. Once a senior pilot had
announced to passengers. “The first officer is Ms. Valentine and yes, ladies and gentlemen, she is
a woman we have then in the front as well as the back these day as, do not
blame me”.
Managing diversity however is a
sensitive potentially volatile and sometimes uncomfortable issue. In Europe, as
well as in the USA,
creating a diverse workforce is increasingly considered a necessity. Jitan Patel, race equality manager
with HSBC, a major UK bank, declares “for us the idea is true diversity, which
means that we value every individual for who and what they are and we provide
them with the opportunities to meet them full potential within the
organization.
However, diversity represents the multitude
of individual difference and similarities that exist between people (Kretiner
et al, 2002). This definition underscores three important
issues about managing diversity. First, there are many different dimensions or
components of diversity. This implies that diversity pertains to everybody. It
is not an issue of age, race or gender. It is not an issue of whether one is
heterosexual, gay or lesbian; or indeed Catholic, Jewish, Protestant, Celestian
or Muslim etc. Diversity also does not pit’ White males” against all other
groups. Diversity pertains to the host of individual differences that makes all
of us unique and different from other. Secondly, diversity is not synonymous
with “differences”. Rather, it encompasses both differences and similarities.
This means that managing diversity entails dealing with both simultaneously.
As Price, (2004) puts it, people are different.
They vary in gender, culture race, social and psychological characteristics. He
affirmed that our attitudes towards their differences could be negative or
positive depending upon individual perspectives and prejudices.
As members of organizations, it is
difficult to challenge the often sub-conscious actions and elaborately
entrenched justifications for unfairness. Not least, because discrimination and
prejudice are expressions of power entailing the ability to prevent, inhibit or
punish critical comment. Yet, if people are the key assets of a business, it is
important to realize the maximum benefit from their human capital. True competitive
advantage, requires the best from everyone, without restrictions, it demands a
prejudice-free inclusive attitude towards actual and potential employee. It
requires diversity.
Nevertheless, fairness, justice, or
whatever we call it, it is essential and most companies in general and most
multinational firms in particular do not have it. Everybody must be judged on
his performance, not on his looks or his manners or his manners or his manners
or his personality or whom he knows or is related to (Townsend, 1970). Why should multinational organizations and
their managers offer equal opportunities to a diverse range of employees? The judgmental
perspectives are indefinable which can be related to different models of Human
Resources Management (Goss, 1994).
These are Human Capital and Social Justice.
Human capital, which artificially
blocking the progress of any group results in less than optimal use of an
organization’s human capital. Discrimination is irrational since it limits the
resource value of employees. On the issue of social justice, a moral or ethical
interest in social equality, compatible with soft or social market Human
Resources Management (HRM). Economic benefits are secondary to this social
dirty.