The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-6119.htm
IJCHM
23,2
Diversity management strategies
of global hotel groups
A corporate web site based exploration
224
Stefan Gröschl
Received 23 September 2009
Revised 13 November 2009
10 March 2010
Accepted 13 March 2010
Abstract
ESSEC Business School, Cergy-Pontoise, France
Purpose – The study aims to explore major internationally operating hotel groups and their
corporate diversity statements. An understanding of these statements is critical for the analysis of
workforce diversity actions, as they shape the policy framework and basis for any diversity
management (DM) program or initiative.
Design/methodology/approach – The study applied a qualitative content analysis of corporate
web sites. The analysis and evaluation of the data was not treated in statistical terms or in any
quantifiable measures due to the study’s rather exploratory and inductive nature. Moving away from
traditional forms of validity and reliability, this study applied Denzin and Lincoln’s authenticity
criteria.
Findings – Most of the selected hotel companies with diversity management strategies and policies
need to communicate their diversity management activities and actions more extensively and clearly
via their corporate web sites to help support employee recruitment efforts, attraction of talents with
different educational and cultural backgrounds, development of multiple (minority) supplier relations
and corporate social responsibility (CSR) image, and accessibility into new markets.
Research limitations/implications – This study should be seen as a starting point with some of
the arguments and conclusions to be reconfirmed with more case-study based explorations of
corporate DM policies and their translation into operational actions and programs.
Practical implications – Communicating in a more effective and structured way, corporate or
operational diversity strategies and activities via corporate web sites will provide hotel organizations
with a key sustainable competitive advantage in talent recruitment, CSR and market accessibility.
Originality/value – This study provides a starting point for better understanding corporate
diversity management in the global hotel industry.
Keywords Equal opportunities, Corporate image, Web sites, Hotels
Paper type Research paper
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
Vol. 23 No. 2, 2011
pp. 224-240
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0959-6119
DOI 10.1108/09596111111119347
1. Introduction
Based on world-wide demographic, economic, political, technological development and
changes many organizations have expanded beyond their national borders (Gröschl
et al., 2008; Brodbeck et al., 2000). One of the key players in this movement towards
globalization is the hotel industry (Littlejohn, 2003; Olsen and Zhao, 2008). Due to
internationalization, hotel organizations are confronted with the issues of managing
increasingly culturally diverse workforces.
Aside from the cultural diversity challenges that accompany the globalization
process of many multi-national hotel companies, some of the dramatic demographic
The author thanks Sebastien Point for his collaboration and support throughout this project.
developments (e.g. aging populations in Europe and Asia) combined with being a labor
intensive industry (Barrows and Powers, 2008) enforce the issues of managing
increasingly diverse human resources in hotel organizations around the globe.
According to Gröschl and Takagi (2008, p. 16) the basic notion of managing diversity is
“an evolving dialectic from inequality, fair representation and assimilation to respect,
co-existence and performance”.
Outlined in the subsequent section, the concept of diversity management has been
hailed as an effective managerial response to the challenges of managing increasingly
diverse workforces. Responding to challenges with sound diversity management
strategies and concrete practices requires commitment by top management and is often
reflected in clear and transparent corporate diversity policies. The policies are
necessary to provide direction and guidance for management and employees crucial in
an area as complex, multifaceted and comprehensive as workforce diversity.
To date, however, little research has been conducted in the area of corporate
diversity management in the global hotel industry. Several studies have focused on
either specific geographic regions (see, for example, Gröschl, 2004), specific types or
dimensions such as persons with disability (see for example, Gröschl, 2007) the
processes of training and development of diversity (see, for example, Weaver et al.,
2003), and other hotel related sectors such as the restaurant or casino industry (see, for
example, Schaap et al., 2008; Woods, 1995). In order to develop this under-researched
area, this study explores major internationally operating hotel groups and their
corporate diversity statements, communicated via their firms’ corporate web sites. An
understanding of these statements is critical for the analysis of workforce diversity
actions, as the former shape the policy framework and basis for any diversity
management (DM) program or initiative.
The first part of this paper provides a brief introduction to the concept of diversity
and diversity management, and a more detailed overview of the past and current
diversity management related research within the hotel or hotel related sectors. This is
followed by an outline of the methodological approach to this study, and the
presentation and discussion of the findings. The final part of this paper puts forward
conclusions and recommendations, and the limitations of this study.
2. Literature review
Diversity and diversity management
The literature that explores the meaning(s) of diversity and/or its evolution has tended
to focus on the North American context. Much of the discussion about diversity within
a workplace or managerial context ranges from “numerical compositions [. . .] to
inclusive behavior” (Point and Singh, 2003, p. 751), or from “a legal necessity [. . .]
versus a moral responsibility [. . .] versus a competitive advantage” (Kirby and Harter,
2003, p. 44) – reflecting the multiple facets of, and expectations attached to diversity.
Regardless of this multiplicity of meanings of diversity, in the late 1980s and early
1990s, a range of writers predicted an increase of diversity in the US labour markets
due to demographic changes in the population (see, for example Jamieson and O’Mara,
1991; Johnston and Packer, 1987). At this time, in the USA, the concept of DM was
regarded as an effective tool to manage such increasingly diverse workforces.
Since then, many authors have taken a very enthusiastic stance towards DM.
Kossek et al. (2006) and Mor-Barak (2005) have highlighted the benefits of DM ranging
Diversity
management
strategies
225
IJCHM
23,2
226
from improved decision-making, reductions in costs associated with turnover and
lawsuits, increased productivity, quality improvements, enhanced creativity and
innovation, and being better able to meet the needs of diverse customers. According to
Klein and Harrison (2007, p. 27) “groups rich in diversity of knowledge, heuristics, and
perspectives have more tools, more insights, and more estimates with which to tackle
the problems assigned to them than do homogeneous groups”. Seymen’s (2006)
literature review of studies explored approaches to effectively manage cultural
diversity within organizations and identified benefits such as better communication
and greater group harmony. According to Fleury (1999) DM is a necessary managerial
tool or process that helps create a work environment in which all employees can
achieve their personal goals in line with the overall business objectives and a number
of studies by the European Commission have described a number of business case
related arguments for DM (see, for example, European Commission, 2005, 2008). As a
result, many firms (in particular in the Anglo Saxon world) including IBM, JP Morgan,
American Express, and Bank of America have developed DM policies, initiatives and
programs. These are implemented and monitored by newly created functions such as
DM committees or positions such as VPs or Directors of Diversity, and communicated
internally and externally through a wide range of channels such as intranets, corporate
web sites, and the media. A good example of utilizing the media is the special
supplement by the The New York Times (2006, p. 73) about leadership in diversity
highlighting “America’s top companies and government agencies” growing and
“expansive” investment in diversity related workplace initiatives.
Considering these expansive investments a wide range of studies has tried to
measure quantitatively the added value of greater workforce diversity for team and
organizational performances. Desvaux et al. (2007) studied gender diversity in top
management teams and concluded that higher female representation in decision
making bodies leads to better economic performances of their organizations. Slater et al.
(2008, p. 208) compared financial performance indicators of Diversity Inc Top 50
Companies for Diversity and a set of matching companies and concluded that
“developing a diverse workforce and cultivating relationships with a diverse set of
stakeholders provides firms with a competitive advantage”. Horwitz and Horwitz
(2007) conducted a meta-analytical review of team demographics and found some
positive relationships between, for example, task-related diversity and the quality of
team performances.
While many other studies come to similar positive outcomes and conclusions most
researchers are cautious of the limitations of their studies as often far too many
variables have to be controlled. So far, the author is not aware of any study that has
clearly and explicitly made causal links between different forms of diversity and
company performance.
Diversity management in the hotel industry
Based on McKercher et al.’s (2006) rating of hospitality and tourism journals, the
author focused on the leading academic hospitality journals including the Cornell
Hospitality Quarterly, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, and Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism Research. A search was conducted for articles containing the term “diversity”
and published between 1990 and 2009. Articles were identified that included the term
either in the title or the text. By initially not specifying or narrowing the term diversity
the author wanted to be as inclusive as possible in terms of finding studies about
different forms and types of diversity within the hotel industry. After an initial
research of all articles generated by the author’s search, all those that were not linked
to workforce diversity were eliminated including, for example, industry, markets,
stocks, bonds, portfolios, investments or financing.
In the final selection of articles very few studies were identified that focused on
aspects of workforce diversity and the hotel industry. Iverson (2000) conducted
interviews with 74 culturally diverse managers of hotels with 400 rooms or more about
their perceptions of their firms’ diversity related practices. Iverson focused on
US-based companies and cultural diversity. By identifying and analyzing DM issues
that are of concern to minority managers, Iverson explored the potential or perceived
implications and consequences of corporate diversity management policies of hotel
organizations rather than the policies themselves.
Holcomb et al.’s (2007, p. 471) study that identified and described corporate social
responsibility patterns among the top ten hotel companies, reported that 60 percent of
these hotel organizations had diversity policies and that the “underlying premise is
that diversity within the employee ranks and among suppliers and business partners is
a good virtue to practice”.
Another study identified as looking at diversity policies was Gröschl and Doherty’s
(1999) exploration of diversity management approaches of international hotel chains
operating in San Francisco. In contrast to this study of corporate policies, Gröschl and
Doherty focus on a hotel unit level and limit their search to hotels within a small region
(city) in the USA providing a situational snapshot within a particular geographical
context. While their initial research objectives might have been very different, the last
two studies above have in common that the diversity policies within their hotel
samples were rarely justified by the business case but by following principles of social
responsibility and equal opportunity, and meeting legal obligations set through
affirmative action targets: “Most of the sample hotels implemented a ‘reactive
diversification strategy’ which tolerates, but does not expressly value, the diversity of a
workforce. Therefore, many of the sample hotels could be categorised as pluralistic
organisations which focus on affirmative action programmes required by law and
equal opportunity training” (Gröschl and Doherty, 1999, p. 262).
This reactive approach might come as a surprise considering the business case
arguments for DM repeatedly being put forward and promoted by DM and human
resource management (HRM) experts quoted earlier. Thus, for this study the author
was curious to explore the diversity statements and arguments that shape the
corporate diversity management policies of international hotel groups.
As seen above and in subsequent sections, most of the research on diversity within
the hotel or hotel related sectors focused on the US context and of the very few studies
(see, for example, Devine et al., 2007; Gröschl, 2007) that exist in this area and that were
conducted outside the US, none discussed general corporate diversity statements and
policies or DM at corporate or strategic levels. Instead these studies explored particular
dimensions of diversity such as age and cultural differences and focused
predominantly on practical aspects at a more operational level (Furunes and
Mykletun, 2007; Gröschl and Doherty, 2006) While such research is useful to get a
better understanding of the contextual and situational workforce diversity challenges,
Diversity
management
strategies
227
IJCHM
23,2
228
and their operational responses in the form of management actions and initiatives, the
latter might not necessarily reflect the global and strategic DM approaches and
corporate policies of hotel companies.
Regardless of where the studies were conducted, (national) cultural diversity was
the dominant dimension on which many DM studies within the hotel or hotel related
sectors focused. With (national) cultural diversity being the key variable most studies
explored different leadership styles (see, for example, Tesa, 2007, 2009), learning styles
(see, for example, Lashley and Barron, 2006), and management styles and decision
making (see, for example, Ayoun and Moreo, 2008). Few studies explored other
dimensions of diversity such as persons with disabilities (see, for example, Gröschl,
2007) and generational differences (Gursoy et al., 2008). Yet, irrespective of the
dimensions on which these studies focused, most authors recognize the importance of
strong, coherent and proactive corporate diversity statements and policies. Despite
this, researchers examining hotel companies often do not find such policies to be a
reality in the firms they study. For example, Woods’ (1995, p. 18) report on diversity
programs in chain restaurants concluded that “diversity management may not be a
high priority”. One of the reasons might be the challenges of transmitting and
implementing corporate diversity statements and policies at a unit level. Another
explanation may be the limited existence of such corporate diversity statements and
policies and the subsequent lack of managers prioritizing DM initiatives at an
operational level.
3. Methodology
In line with a range of other studies within the DM area, the author believes that when
exploring DM in general and DM at a strategic or corporate level an indicative starting
point is a content analysis of corporate web sites. According to Winter et al. (2003)
corporate web sites constitute an increasingly important data source as well as a tool
for public relations. Using corporate web sites, Point and Singh (2003) explored 241
companies, across eight European countries, and their definitions of diversity and its
different dimensions. The two authors revealed that the term diversity and its
dimensions are defined differently across the eight European countries.
Based on Hotels’ (2008), Corporate 300 rankings, 25 hotel organizations from among
the 60 largest companies (by room numbers) were selected. Large, internationally
operating hotel organizations are more likely to have in place sophisticated HR related
policies and practices (see, for example, D’Annunzio-Green et al., 2002), and to operate
corporate web sites (in English). The author’s selection criteria included a certain level
of internationalization as hotel groups operating in a wide range of geographically,
demographically, and legally different contexts are more likely to be confronted with,
and thus have to respond to, workforce diversity related challenges (Gröschl et al.,
2008). Thus, companies such as Red Roof Inns, Drury Inns Inc. and Prince Hotels were
excluded as their locations are solely in one country. Other companies such as TUI,
Club Méditerranée, and the MGM Mirage were excluded as their core businesses have
not traditionally been the hotel sector but the tour operator business and the casino
industry. Finally, to create a balanced set of US and non US-based hotel groups (in
2007, eight out of the top ten companies were US-based), and to get a global view
across continents, companies from other parts of the world were selected including
Mövenpick Hotel and Resorts (Switzerland), Rezidor SAS (Belgium), Four Seasons
Hotels and Resorts (Canada), and Shangri-La Hotels and Resorts (China). In total, out of
the 25 sample hotel firms 14 companies were from North America – including 11 hotel
groups from the USA, two from Canada and one from Mexico. Eight sample hotel
groups had their headquarters in Europe, while three organizations operated out of
Asia.
Table I gives a full list of the selected companies detailing their corporate country of
origin and size in terms of number of rooms.
Starting in 2008 the author accessed the selected companies’ corporate web sites to
retrieve all diversity and diversity management related statements, aspects and
information. The web content search included keywords such as diversity and
diversity management, different forms or dimensions of diversity including disability,
gender, age, etc, and diversity related concepts and terms including equal
opportunities, equality, culture, etc. The author and a colleague accessed and
searched, separately and as a pair, each company web site repeatedly throughout 2008
– ensuring the accuracy and reliability of the data collection process. All relevant web
sites and information were stored as text files and at the same time transferred into
Nudist 6.0 software. In the first stage of the data analysis, the author focused on the
text files and evaluated the data manually, supporting the study’s interpretative and
qualitative approach to the analysis of the data. Based on Krippendorff’s (2004) coding
guidelines and the author’s strong closeness to the data, a coding scheme was
developed and implemented in the second stage. Throughout the latter each category
Hotel name
Company headquarters
IHG InterContinental Hotels Group
Windsor, England
Wyndham Hotel Group
Parsippany, NJ, USA
Marriott International
Washington, DC, USA
Hilton Hotels Corp
Beverly Hills, CA, USA
Accor
Paris, France
Choice Hotels International
Silver Spring, MD, USA
Best Western International
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide
White Plains, NY, USA
Carlson Hotels Worlwide
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Global Hyatt Corp.
Chicago, IL, USA
Golden Tulip Hospitality Group
Amersfoort, The Netherlands
Sol Melia SA
Palma de Mallorca, Spain
LQ Management LLC (formerly La Quinta Corp.) Irving, TX, USA
Jin Jiang International Hotels
Shanghai, China
The Rezidor Hotel Group
Brussels, Belgium
Groupe du Louvre
Torcy, France
Vantage Hospitality Group
Westlake Village, CA, USA
Interstate Hotels & Resorts
Arlington, VA, USA
Fairmont Raffles Holdings International
Toronto, Canada
Shangri-la Hotels & Resorts
Hong Kong, China
Scandic Hotels
Stockholm, Sweden
JAL Hotels Co. Ltd.
Tokyo, Japan
Grupo Posadas
Mexico City, Mexico
Four Seasons Hotels & Resorts
Toronto, Canada
Mövenpick Hotels & Resorts
Glattbrugg, Switzerland
Diversity
management
strategies
229
Number of rooms
585,094
550,576
537,249
502,116
461,698
452,027
308,636
274,535
146,600
135,001
86,585
75,022
69,089
68,797
67,000
60,807
55,167
42,620
33,017
26,434
24,005
20,715
18,100
17,741
13,923
Table I.
Selected hotels
IJCHM
23,2
230
was discussed to limit the subjective nature of the coding process. After several rounds
of fine coding, cross-checking and changes in the coding structure, 100 different codes
were identified and imported into matrix structures. Some of the key categories that
were identified were definitions and dimensions of diversity, DM or DM related policies
and practices, and the drivers behind DM initiatives.
Throughout the data analysis and evaluation the data was not treated in statistical
terms or in any quantifiable measures due to the study’s rather exploratory and
inductive nature. The author moved away from traditional forms of validity and
reliability and, instead, applied Denzin and Lincoln’s (2000) authenticity criteria
including fairness, ontological and educative authenticity, and catalytic and tactical
authenticities, as they seemed the most valid judgment tool for this study’s findings
(see Table II).
In line with these “alternative” judgement criteria the author does not aim to
develop scientific theories and laws or to statistically generalise the empirical findings.
Denzin and Lincoln (2000)
Table II.
Applications of Denzin
and Lincoln’s
authenticity criteria
This study
Fairness
Quality of balance, that is, all stakeholder views, While still being work in progress I have started
perspectives, claims, concerns, and voices should to develop a methodological and sample
be apparent in the text
triangulation including semi-structured
interviews with individuals in a number of the
sample hotel organizations addressing the balance
of stakeholder views and perspectives
Ontological and educative authenticity
Criteria for determining a raised level of
A research report is in preparation and will be
awareness, in the first instance, by individual
sent to a number of regional / national hotel
research participants and, in the second, by
human resources professional associations. Some
individuals about those who surround them or
of the findings have and continue to be presented
with whom they come into contact for some social and discussed at HR round table discussions that I
or organizational purpose
have been organizing with local and regional hotel
HR directors. As the Co-chair of diversity and
performance I have used the findings for a range
of educational and training purposes ranging
from the development of DM related educational
frameworks with the European Commission,
panel discussions at a national and regional level,
to executive education and training.
Catalytic and tactical authenticities
Ability of a given inquiry to prompt, first, action Through existing partnerships with some of the
on the part of research participants, and second, sample hotel organizations I have explored some
the involvement of the researcher/evaluator in
of the DM-related aspects and challenges in
greater depth (e.g. recruitment based on physical
training participants in specific forms of social
attractiveness, age and gender diversity) aiming
and political action if participants desire such
at the development of new or different DM
training
frameworks for, for example, recruitment and
selection, and talent management
A number of DM related educational training
programs have been developed
Instead, the author wants to provide a starting point in the exploration of strategic and
corporate approaches to managing successfully the increasingly diverse workforces
within the international hotel industry. As mentioned in the introduction an
understanding of these approaches seems crucial and an important first step as they
form the framework and basis for any subsequent workforce diversity management
related actions and initiatives.
Diversity
management
strategies
231
4. Findings and discussion
The lack of communicating diversity
Many non-hospitality international companies such as IBM, Daimler and L’Oréal
consider their workforce diversity to play a strategic role, and this is communicated
extensively via their corporate web sites (see, for example, Daimler, 2009; IBM, 2009;
L’Oréal, 2009). Thus, it came as a surprise to find more than half of the selected
companies not to have any mention of diversity or diversity related statements on their
corporate web sites. Of course, the lack of communication of any diversity related
statements, policies or initiatives does not mean that those companies are not actively
responding to workforce diversity challenges on an operational or strategic level. Yet,
considering the importance of corporate web sites as an employee recruitment, supplier
relations, and branding and public relations tool (see, for example, Point and Singh,
2003), this lack of communication came as a surprise to the author.
Another reason for the 13 selected companies not to communicate any diversity
related statements and actions could, also be the non-existence of companywide
strategic or operational diversity or diversity related management approaches or
concepts. This would be an even greater surprise considering the increasingly diverse
contexts in which international hotel organizations operate, the challenges such
diverse environments pose at an operational and strategic level, the potential benefits
of proactive DM policies and initiatives outlined earlier, and “the significant and
emerging service quality” opportunities for the hotels (see Maxwell et al., 2000, p. 372).
Dimensionalizing diversity
The 12 companies that communicated diversity-related statements on their corporate
sites differed widely in terms of how they defined diversity, and where they publicized
their diversity related policies and actions. Most of the definitions responded to the
complexity of defining diversity by using elements of generalization and broader
criteria such as Accor’s “When it comes to the broad horizon of human experience, our
diversity encompasses all facets of imagination and innovation” (Accor, 2009) and
Carlson’s “Diversity and inclusion refers not only to ethnic background and gender,
but to much broader dimensions that make us unique individuals” (Carlson Hospitality
Worldwide, 2009), as well as sets of specific dimensions of diversity. Intercontinental,
for example, listed 12 categories to define their notion of diversity. In total, selected
companies described 27 different dimensions of diversity as outlined in Figure 1.
Three key dimensions were identified that are most often associated with diversity by
the selected companies including gender, disability, and ethnicity. Combining ethnicity
with related terms such as culture, colour, language and nationality creates a very
dominant dimension reflecting the hotel industry’s strong internationalization and its
requirement for hotel employees to be geographically flexible and mobile. While gender
diversity has rarely been disputed at an operational level, female managers in the
IJCHM
23,2
232
Figure 1.
Dimensions of diversity
boardrooms are still a rarity – highlighting the importance of continuing to push for
greater gender diversity at the decision making level. Persons with disabilities have also
been disadvantaged in their employment opportunities in the hotel industry (Gröschl,
2007). The need for some hotel organizations to elevate “pregnancy” (see, for example,
Intercontinental Hotels, 2009) as a key category could add to the discussion about
physical attractiveness and some of the discriminatory concerns associated with physical
attributes being an unofficial selection and promotion criteria in the hotel industry.
Most corporate statements about defining diversity follow a rather equal
opportunity oriented stance instead of the often promoted business case. Rarely did
the author find definitions that promoted the added value of DM to the company.
Instead, most corporate statements were based on anti-discriminatory ideas and
concepts such as equal accessibility, equal opportunities, and fairness. This might be
an indication of the complexity and challenge of measuring increases in, for example,
workforce diversity and its impact on organizational performance – as can be seen
later in this paper.
Drivers behind diversity policies and actions
While most of the definitions seem to emphasize the anti-discrimination argument, the
placements of the companies’ diversity related statements and communications within
their corporate web sites provided further insights into the rationales behind and
arguments for companies’ engagement in diversity. Most of the companies’ diversity
related data and information were found in their corporate profile and careers and human
resources pages. Based on similar research in other sectors (see, for example, Point and
Singh, 2003) the authors concluded that integrating diversity related messages and
information in corporate profile pages could indicate a strong external branding purpose
(e.g. good corporate citizenship, corporate social responsibility (CSR), etc.) addressed to
all stakeholders of the company. In contrast, companies that communicated their
engagement in DM related activities on their careers and human resources pages seem to
target potential new recruits, and/or indicate a strong internal branding purpose
addressing current employees – as the message by Hyatt Hotels illustrates:
With your upbeat attitude and desire to exceed our guests’ expectations, you’re an ideal
candidate for a career with Hyatt. In our culture of inclusion, you’ll feel accepted for the
individual you are, regardless of your background, style, ideas, or beliefs. We continue to
receive recognition as one of America’s best companies for our diverse population.
Surrounded by this kind of encouragement, you’re sure to grow and enjoy plenty of
satisfaction as you move your way to the top (Hyatt Hotels, 2009).
Companies seem to respond to what have been the author’s experiences and which has
been in line with his anecdotal evidence: Attracting new talent and high potential is no
longer solely a question of money or career opportunities – new recruits have started
to attach much greater importance to CSR activities and company values such as
inclusiveness that derive from promoting greater workforce diversity. The strong
focus on employees when communicating about diversity shows the salience of DM to
attract and recruit new employees and retain current company talents. As mentioned
earlier, considering that one of the key current and future hotel HR challenges is the
attraction and retention of talents, it comes as a surprise that more than half of the
selected international hotel groups had no communication at all in their corporate sites
about their views and approaches to managing workforce diversity.
While the author was able to develop a set of assumptions and draw conclusions
from the placement of diversity related information in the corporate web sites, the
latter themselves were often blurred and ambiguous when it came to the drivers behind
the companies’ diversity related efforts. Key drivers such as “competitive advantages”,
“better serving stakeholders” and “key to success” (see, for example, Intercontinental
Hotels, 2009) (see Figure 2) provided limited detailed information and concrete
justifications as to why companies engaged in DM related activities.
Statements such as “competitive advantages” did not clarify what advantages,
“better serving stakeholders” left the reader to guess which stakeholders are addressed
by the companies (e.g. shareholders, employees, clients, suppliers, etc), and “key to
success” did not always clarify whose success and the type of success (e.g. financial,
non-financial, etc.). Many other arguments and drivers remain equally abstract as the
following quote from Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide’s corporate site
illustrates:
Diversity
management
strategies
233
We recognize and appreciate the diversity of people, ideas and cultures, and believe that
diverse experiences and people are required for our business to succeed. We strive to create
an environment that embraces the diversity of all of our constituencies: associates, customers,
guests, owners, suppliers and shareholders. We support a culture of inclusion where
associates at every level, including the full range of backgrounds, cultures and orientations
can reach their maximum potential. We are passionate about attracting and retaining the best
and the brightest talent, unleashing their potential and stretching them beyond their comfort
zone. Through this diversity of viewpoints, we deliver unprecedented business results by
satisfying all of our guests and customers with superior innovation and service (Starwood
Hotels and Resorts Worldwide, 2009).
Figure 2.
Key drivers behind
diversity initiatives
IJCHM
23,2
234
While it can be assumed that Starwood values the creativity aspect of diversity this
argument is nowhere clearly highlighted or stated.
Very few of the corporate sites that communicated on their DM initiatives provided
more concrete and detailed information about the reasoning and aims behind their
diversity policies and activities. Wyndham Wordwide corporate web site, for example,
is one of the few sample company sites which views explicitly DM as a strategic asset
or as “a key factor toward achieving [its] global business strategy” (Wyndham
Worldwide, 2009). On its site Wyndham Worldwide separates its DM activities into
four key areas including “supplier diversity, workforce diversity, multicultural
marketing and minority franchising” (Wyndham Worldwide, 2009) and provides more
detailed rationales for the different initiatives. For example, the driver behind
multicultural marketing is “to forge a long-term relationship with targeted consumers
that ultimately drives new business revenue and grows market share” (Wyndham
Worldwide, 2009). Hilton Hotels Corp.’s web site is equally concrete when it comes to
the reasons for the firm’s diversity policies and strategies. According to Hilton
reflecting its market diversity through its employee mix provides “enhanced
competitiveness”; supplier diversity provides “competitive minority and
women-owned companies with increased access to [Hilton’s] purchasing and supply
activities [. . .] and helps ensure continuation of the most competitive marketplace for
[Hilton’s] purchases” and “promoting brand relevancy within minority markets”
supports [Hilton’s] objective of “continuing to increase market share for all [its] brands”
(Hilton Hotels Corporation, 2009). In contrast to the anti-discrimination and equal
opportunities related arguments found in most company web sites, Wyndham and
Hilton’s drive behind their DM approaches illustrate a proactive stance based on sound
business case principles promoted by the literature.
Diversity support structures
Three out of the 12 corporate sites that communicate about diversity specifically
mention formal company structures aimed at promoting and supporting their diversity
approach. For companies to develop a corporate DM strategy accompanied by a
framework of DM policies, and implement the latter into actions, requires commitment
by top management and strong diversity support structures at a decision making,
managerial and operational level in form of DM VPs or directors, diversity managers
and councils, and diversity champions and interest groups or associations (see, for
example, Thomas, 2004). Top management’s involvement is illustrated by, for
example, the Hilton Hotels Corp. where diversity policies:
[. . .] are established by the Corporation’s Board of Directors with the direction of its Diversity
Committee. HHC President and CEO Stephen Bollenbach is accountable for implementing the
Board’s Diversity Policies. CEO Bollenbach and SVP McKenzie-Swarts preside over the
Diversity Council, consisting primarily of [the] direct reports, who provide input and
consultation on implementation of diversity initiatives (Hilton Hotels Corporation, 2009).
A number of other hotel companies introduce their key diversity managers including
Hyatt’s VP of Diversity, Intercontinental’s Regional SVP Diversity and its Diversity
and Inclusion Supply Chain Manager, and Wyndham’s VP Talent Acquisition and
Diversity Inclusion on their sites. And a range of company sites such as those of Accor,
Carlson and Hilton provided information about their diversity councils and
committees. The existence of individual diversity positions separated from the HR
function seems to show that diversity is not “just another HR responsibility” but has
emerged as a separate organizational and managerial priority. The human resources
and structural investments in, and support of their DM strategies and actions show the
importance of the concept of diversity to those companies at a strategic and operational
level. Yet, considering these financial and non-financial investments in DM staff and
structures, how are their benefits and return on investment measured by companies
such as Hyatt and Wyndham that have invested in DM?
Methods of measuring the benefits of DM
As mentioned in the literature review, no study in the hotel sector or in any other
industry known to the author has been able to clearly and explicitly make causal
links between different forms of diversity and companies’ performances. Thus, the
author was curious about some companies’ statements such as Starwood’s “linking
compensation to achieving diversity goals” (Starwood Hotels and Resorts
Worldwide, 2009), and Hilton’s announcement that “Diversity initiatives at Hilton
Hotels Corporation are designed to produce quantifiable and qualitative results
which go beyond just establishing and maintaining a diverse workforce” (Hilton
Hotels Corporation, 2009), and interested as to how those hotels would measure –
in particular quantitatively – their DM efforts, and what the results might be. The
two companies which discussed their measurements structures on their corporate
sites did not provide detailed information about their measurement methods. Both,
Hilton and Starwood describe how they set up performance goals for their
managers and teams “established to measure their diversity performance” (Hilton
Hotels Corporation, 2009). Yet, how these performance goals or the different
diversity performance criteria are defined is not addressed. In terms of quantifiable
results this study did not find any numbers and figures illustrating a return on
investment or any other quantifiable form of performance measurement. Most
corporate web sites focused on quotas and employment targets as the following
examples show:
61 disabled persons were integrated into local Accor teams during the year (Accor).
IHG is inherently diverse: no fewer than 47 languages are spoken by people working for the
Group (Intercontinental).
Our commitment to diversity is illustrated by our workforce. Marriott’s associates hail from
dozens of nations, speak more than 50 languages and work under the Marriott banner in 67
countries and territories around the world (Marriott).
53 percent of our current associate population who are people of color (Starwood Hotels and
Resorts Worldwide, 2009).
In line with a range of other writers such as Kandola and Fullerton (1994), this paper
argues that such criteria are unreliable and misleading indicators for measuring the
success of DM strategies and/or corporate policy frameworks. For example, these
quotas do not specify where the members of the different minority groups work and
whether they are represented equally at all operational, departmental, managerial and
decision making levels.
The strong focus on employee quotas as opposed to the business case so strongly
promoted by proponents of DM leads to the assumption that, for example, the cultural
Diversity
management
strategies
235
IJCHM
23,2
236
diversity symbolized by the number of languages spoken by employees, might
predominantly be a by-product of the labor market rather than the result of proactive
recruitment and integration policies and actions. In other words, some of the hotel
groups might be more likely to follow a diversity enlargement approach that are
coerced by labor market demands and popular, politically correct state of the art
management sentiments, instead of being initiated voluntarily. Other sample
organizations seem to have applied reactive diversification strategies which
discourage “discrimination and bias against diverse labor pools and individuals but
do not affirmatively attempt to utilize the talents of these pools and/or individuals”
(Arvey et al., 1996, p. 53). This is supported by the anti-discrimination argument many
hotels have communicated as their key rationale behind their corporate DM strategy
(as was discussed earlier).
Considering the lack of communication of business case related individual or
organizational performance measurements such as productivity, quality
improvements, or enhanced creativity and innovation could also lead to question
whether some of those earlier mentioned specialists exaggerate when promoting
benefits of DM and/or whether some of those benefits are simply very difficult to
quantify and to measure in a causal and direct manner (e.g. creativity and innovation).
Whatever the reasons might have been for hotel organizations not to communicate the
performance outcomes or benefits of their DM strategies and policies, the discussion
confirms again the author’s comments about the complexity and intricacy of the
concept of diversity.
Conclusions, limitations and recommendations
This paper examined a group of major international hotel organizations and analyzed
their corporate diversity management statements and policies. An understanding of
these policies seemed crucial and an important first step in the exploration of any
subsequent workforce diversity management related actions as they form the
framework in which operational initiatives are embedded. The qualitative content
analysis of the selected companies’ corporate web sites confirmed the complexity of the
concept of diversity – the difficulties to define, grasp, understand and measure it; and,
at the same time, revealed several surprises.
As highlighted in the introductory part of this paper, corporate web sites are
important data sources as well as valuable tools for public relations. In many
non-hospitality multinational companies diversity management plays a key strategic
role and is communicated extensively via corporate web sites. Yet, more than half of
the selected hotel companies in this study did not have any mention of diversity or
diversity related terms and concepts in their corporate web sites.
A second surprise was that hardly any company that communicated about their DM
strategies and policies justified their DM approaches with business case arguments
(e.g. increased productivity, quality improvements, and enhanced creativity and
innovation). For most companies the key rationale behind their DM strategies and
initiatives was based on anti-discrimination related claims. Focusing on
anti-discrimination arguments and employee targets as a key performance indicator
has led the author to believe that many of the sample companies follow a diversity
enlargement and/or a reactive diversification strategy.
At the same time, it came as a surprise to observe the strong investment in the
resources and support of some of the companies’ DM structures, and how DM
seems not to be merely another HR function but a central strategic aspect in those
companies. Of course, any of the sample companies that have not communicated
about diversity or diversity related terms and concepts in their corporate web sites
could have equally sophisticated DM support structures, proactive DM strategies
and policies, and well organized and implemented DM actions and initiatives. The
author is aware that as a result some of his work and conclusions presented in this
paper seem hypothetical and need to be reconfirmed with, for example, more
case-study based explorations of corporate DM policies and their translation into
operational actions and programs.
What is certain, however, is the need for hotel companies which have DM strategies
and policies to communicate more extensively and clearly their DM activities and
actions via their corporate web sites. Such communication will help support hotel
organizations’ employee recruitment efforts, attraction of talents with different
educational and cultural backgrounds, development of multiple (minority) supplier
relations and CSR image, and accessibility into new markets – as many companies in
other industries have already recognized and proven.
For hotel companies which have not communicated because they have no corporate
or operational DM strategies or activities the author strongly recommends to make this
aspect a key priority at all organizational levels – in particular when considering the
global demographic changes and the labour intensive nature and global presence of the
hotel industry.
Companies deciding to develop a strategic approach towards better managing their
increasingly diverse workforce need to invest human and financial resources in the
creation of their DM framework and support structure. It is important to separate DM
positions from the HR function, to create its own identity that thrives from a decision
making level down to all managerial and operational levels – showing that diversity is
not “just another HR responsibility” but has emerged as a key organizational and
managerial priority that is supporting the overall business strategy and goals.
Despite the pressure of the current financial crisis, companies need to think
long-term – changes to individual and organizational thinking and behaviours cannot
be expected over night. Moving to an inclusive organizational culture with a strong
focus on the individual, and to a more business case oriented approach will take time
and requires the freedom to pilot and experiment.
A corporate DM framework with actions and initiatives requires a monitoring and
evaluation element. The author recommends moving away from solely focusing on
quotas and targets. As the current economic crisis has shown – a shift towards more
qualitative (e.g. organizational climate, interpersonal skill set development,
communication) rather than quantitative indicators (e.g. productivity, product
quality improvements) is appropriate and necessary.
Companies deciding to respond in a more effective and structured way to the
challenges deriving from their increasingly diverse workforces will also more likely to
be able to see the current economic crisis as an opportunity rather than as a challenge
– starting with re-evaluating and readjusting organizational values to redefining and
assessing managerial processes and practices.
Diversity
management
strategies
237
IJCHM
23,2
238
References
Accor (2009), Workforce diversity, available at: www.accor-na.com/diversity/index.asp (accessed
January 2009).
Arvey, R.D., Ross, A., Ostgaard, D. and Raghuram, S. (1996), “The implications of a diverse labor
market on human resource planning”, in Kossek, E. and Lobel, S. (Eds), Managing
Diversity, Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge, MA, pp. 51-73.
Ayoun, B. and Moreo, P. (2008), “The influence of the cultural dimension of uncertainty
avoidance on business strategy development: a cross-national study of hotel managers”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 65-75.
Barrows, C. and Powers, T. (2008), Introduction to Management in the Hospitality Industry,
John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
Brodbeck, F. et al., (2000), “Cultural variation of leadership prototypes across 22 European
countries”, Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, Vol. 73 No. 1, pp. 1-30.
Carlson Hospitality Worldwide (2009), available at: www.carlson.com/careers/diversity.cfm
(accessed January 2009).
Daimler (2009), available at: www.daimler.com/dccom/0-5-659599-1-661957-1-0-0-0-0-0-8-7145-00-0-0-0-0-0.html (accessed 23 February 2009).
D’Annunzio-Green, N., Maxwell, G. and Watson, S. (2002), Human Resource Management:
International Perspectives in Hospitality and Tourism, Thomson Learning, London.
Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (2000), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, London.
Desvaux, G., Devillard-Hoellinger, S. and Baumgarten, P. (2007), Women Matter, McKinsey,
Paris.
Devine, F., Baum, T., Hearns, N. and Devine, A. (2007), “Managing cultural diversity:
opportunities and challenges for Northern Ireland hoteliers”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 129-32.
European Commission (2005), The Business Case for Diversity, Directorate-General for
Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunties D-3, Belgium.
European Commission (2008), Continuing the Diversity Journey, Directorate-General for
Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunties, G-4, Belgium.
Fleury, M.T.L. (1999), “The management of culture diversity: lessons from Brazilian companies”,
Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 99 No. 3, pp. 109-14.
Furunes, T. and Mykletun, R. (2007), “Why diversity management fails: metaphor analyses
unveil manager attitudes”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 26 No. 4,
pp. 974-90.
Gröschl, S. (2004), “Current human resources practices affecting the employment of persons with
disabilities in selected Toronto hotels: a case study”, International Journal of Hospitality
and Tourism Administration, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 15-31.
Gröschl, S. (2007), “An exploration of HR policies and practices affecting the integration of
persons with disabilities in the hotel industry in major Canadian tourism destinations”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 666-86.
Gröschl, S. and Doherty, L. (1999), “Diversity management in practices”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 262-9.
Gröschl, S. and Doherty, L. (2006), “The complexity of culture: using the appraisal process to
compare French and British managers in a UK-based international hotel organization”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 313-34.
Gröschl, S. and Takagi, J. (2008), Diversité, Deloitte, Paris.
Gröschl, S., Dowling, P., Festing, M. and Engle, A. (2008), International Human Resource
Management: A Canadian Perspective, Nelson Education, Toronto.
Gursoy, D., Maier, T. and Chi, C. (2008), “Generational differences: an examination of work values
and generational gaps in the hospitality workforce”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 448-58.
Hilton Hotels Corporation (2009), available at: https://cvmas02.cvmsolutions.com/hilton/
(accessed March 2009)
Holcomb, J., Upchurch, R. and Okumus, F. (2007), “Corporate social responsibility: what are top
hotel companies reporting?”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 461-75.
Horwitz, S. and Horwitz, I. (2007), “The effects of team diversity on team outcomes”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 987-1015.
Hotels (2008), Corporate 300 rankings, available at: www.hotelsmag.com/article/CA6575623.html
(accessed February 2009).
Hyatt Hotels (2009), available at: www.explorehyatt.jobs/index_flash.php?docid¼54 (accessed
March 2009).
IBM (2009), available at: www.ibm.com/ibm/responsibility/policy4.shtml (accessed February 24,
2009).
Intercontinental Hotels (2009), available at: www.ihgplc.com/index.asp?pageid¼319 (accessed
February 2009).
Iverson, K. (2000), “Managing for effective workforce diversity”, Cornell Hospitality Quarterly,
April, pp. 31-8.
Jamieson, D. and O’Mara, J. (1991), Managing Workforce 2000: Gaining the Diversity Advantage,
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Johnston, W.B. and Packer, A.H. (1987), Workforce 2000, Hudson Institute, Washington, DC.
Kandola, R. and Fullerton, J. (1994), Managing the Mosaic, The Cromwell Press, Wiltshire.
Kirby, E. and Harter, L. (2003), “Speaking the language of the bottom-line: the metaphor of
‘managing diversity’”, The Journal of Business Communication, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 28-49.
Klein, E. and Harrison, D. (2007), “On the diversity of diversity: tidy logic, messier realities”,
Academy of Management Perspectives, November, pp. 26-33.
Kossek, E., Lobel, S. and Brown, J. (2006), “Human resource strategies to manage work force
diversity: examining the business case”, in Konrad, A.M., Prasad, P. and Pringle, J.K.
(Eds), Handbook of Workplace Diversity, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 53-74.
Krippendorff, K. (2004), Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology, Sage Publications,
Thousands Oaks, CA.
Lashley, C. and Barron, P. (2006), “The learning style preferences of hospitality and tourism
students: observations from an international and cross-cultural study”, International
Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 552-69.
Littlejohn, D. (2003), “Hotels”, in Brotherton, B. (Ed.), The International Hospitality Industry,
Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, pp. 5-30.
L’Oréal (2009), available at www.loreal.com/_en/_ww/html/our-company/diversity-is-a-priority.
aspx (accessed 25 January 2009).
McKercher, B., Law, R. and Lam, T. (2006), “Rating tourism and hospitality journals”, Tourism
Management, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 1235-52.
Diversity
management
strategies
239
IJCHM
23,2
240
Maxwell, G., McDougall, M. and Blair, S. (2000), “Managing diversity in the hotel sector:
the emergence of a service quality opportunity”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 10 No. 6,
pp. 367-73.
Mor-Barak, M. (2005), Managing Diversity: Toward a Globally Inclusive Workplace, Sage
Publications, London.
(The) New York Times (2006), “Leadership in diversity”, The New York Times, 24 September,
p. 73.
Olsen, M. and Zhao, J. (2008), Handbook of Hospitality Strategic Management,
Butterworth-Heinemann, New York, NY.
Point, S. and Singh, V. (2003), “Defining and dimensionalising diversity”, European Management
Journal, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 750-61.
Schaap, J., Stedham, Y. and Yamamura, J. (2008), “Casino management: exploring gender-based
differences in perceptions of managerial work”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 87-97.
Seymen, O. (2006), “The cultural diversity phenomenon in organizations and different
approaches for effective cultural diversity management: a literature review”, Cross
Cultural Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 296-315.
Slater, S., Weigand, R. and Zwirlein, T. (2008), “The business case for commitment to diversity”,
Business Horizons, No. 51, pp. 201-9.
Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide (2009), available at: www.starwoodhotels.com/
corporate/careers/believe/diversity.html (accessed March 2009).
Tesa, M. (2007), “A deeper look at national culture and leadership in the hospitality industry”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 468-84.
Tesa, M. (2009), “National culture, leadership and citizenship: implications for cross-cultural
management”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 75-85.
Thomas, D.A. (2004), “Diversity as strategy”, Harvard Business Review, September, pp. 98-108.
Weaver, P., Wilborn, L., McClearly, K. and Lekagul, A. (2003), “Diversity training management
initiatives in the lodging industry: an exploratory analysis of underlying dimensions”,
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, Vol. 27, pp. 237-53.
Winter, S., Saunders, C. and Hart, P. (2003), “Electronic window-dressing: impression
management on websites”, European Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 12 No. 4,
pp. 309-25.
Woods, R. (1995), “Diversity programs in chain restaurants”, Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, June,
pp. 18-23.
Wyndham Worldwide (2009), available at: www.wyndhamworldwide.com/about/global_
diversity_and_inclusion/multicultural_marketing.cfm (accessed March 2009).
Corresponding author
Stefan Gröschl can be contacted at: groschl@essec.fr
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints