Translocations: Migration and Social Change
An Inter-Disciplinary Open Access E-Journal
ISSN Number: 2009-0420
________________________________________________________________________
Training Interventions as a Site for Integration
Marian Tannam,
Harnett Tannam Consultancy, Email: mariantannam@htconsultancy.com;
www.htconsultancy.com
_____________________________________________________________________
Introduction
Integration is an on-going, relational process in which the complexities of culture,
communication, identity, globalization, racism and power are played out at individual,
organizational and societal levels. The workplace is a key location for the promotion of
integration in society, moving beyond discourse into the reality of the lived modalities
and experiences of members of minority and majority ethnic groups. Hofstede (1994:239)
points to the work situation as being a suitable laboratory for intercultural cooperation,
‘as the problems are practical and results are visible to everybody’. Pendry et al
(2007:27) see diversity management as being ‘grounded in “real world” practices in
organizational environment’. Training interventions are one strand of a Whole
Organization Approach1 to diversity management which aims to create an egalitarian and
inclusive workplace that values everyone. Through the lens of the training room, I will
explore concepts and models of intercultural and anti-racism training and possible
learning outcomes for participants, organizations and trainers. Observations are based on
extensive professional experience of design and delivery of intercultural and anti-racism
training in the workplace in many sectors,2 as a partner in Harnett Tannam Consultancy
(HTC 2001 to present). The discussion is also informed by insights from over twenty-five
years of involvement as an activist in anti-racism and intercultural work, including being
a founder member of Harmony (1986-1999), Ireland’s first intercultural and anti-racist
family organization.
Different Names
There are a myriad of intersecting labels, methodologies and theoretical approaches
which can be applied to training for ‘integration’. Such training mainly falls into the
categories of diversity, intercultural, equality and ‘anti-racism’. Terms such as ‘diversity’
and ‘intercultural’ are often used interchangeably. While it is important to identify the
specificities of differing types of training, I would argue that a combination of
intercultural and anti-racism training with reference to the overarching equality, diversity,
1
For example in Fás, the Irish National Training and Employment Authority where HTC delivered
intercultural and anti-racism training over a number of years, in addition to training other strands of their
Whole Organisation Approach included: Guidelines on Interculturalism; translation of documents into
various languages; the Know Before You Go Campaign; a language line; Equality Proofing and a
designated Social Inclusion Unit.
2
Examples are drawn from many sectors including corporate, community and health and public service.
management and organizational development contexts is needed to address integration
issues that arise in the workplace. For the purpose of this article the main focus will be on
the issues relating to the ‘cultural diversity’ aspect of diversity and the anti-racism aspect
of equality. The constraints of time allocated to training dictates that trainers must find
models and design programmes which allow for exploration of many issues in a limited
timeframe. It is important that training for the promotion of integration in the workplace
encompasses the lived experiences of participants in which diversity, culture and
discrimination interact and that it is grounded in the needs of the organization.
Outline
As racism is one of the main barriers to integration, initial discussion will focus on the
intersection of globalization and racism in the Irish context and the need for the
incorporation of an anti-racism perspective into intercultural training. An outline of the
layers of difference that occur in the workplace is followed by identification of strategies
for creating trust and safety in the training room. A section on ‘Bridging Differences’
covers aspects of intercultural, anti-racism and diversity training. Practical examples of
training activities are incorporated. Intercultural and anti-racism training in Ireland are
relatively new and a brief overview of their development is provided. The conclusion
points to the role of training in integration and reiterates the need for anti-racism to be
included in intercultural training. It also touches on considerations for intercultural
training and trainers.
Intersection of Globalization and Racism in Ireland
The ‘Celtic Tiger’ economy attracted a variety of workers from many cultures. Migrants
from at least 190 countries now reside in Ireland and at one stage accounted for 16% of
the labour force. Our historical experience of net emigration turned to one of net
immigration. Even with the reversal of this trend due to the recession, multi-ethnic
Ireland and the intercultural workplace are firmly established. The global is now local,
‘strangers’ are now found at every crossroads. These same ‘strangers’ are found in
workplaces. Lentin & McVeigh (2006a:98) suggest that media and political discourses
blame the stranger for the problems of the system thus creating what Etienne Balibar calls
‘crisis racism’. Migrants in Ireland tend to be scapegoated for such problems as the overburdened health system. Yet the international nurses who make up 21% of those
employed by the Health Services Executive (HSE) are rendered ‘invisible’ and
‘voiceless’ in the discourse. They become visible when targeted for verbal or physical
racial abuse.3 A sign of integration is when long-term migrants are no longer considered
‘strangers’.
Sivanandan (2004) argues that racism today is ‘embedded and shaped by globalization’.
Lentin and McVeigh (2006a:18) point to Ireland as being an ideal case study for ‘the
intersection of globalization and racism’. They further say that multi-ethnicity and racism
are not new to Ireland and that socio-economic and other factors have given rise to ‘new
articulations of Irishness, and new experiences of racism by ‘old’ racialized minorities
and ‘new’ migrant populations’ (ibid:5). Whilst acknowledging that ‘accommodating
cultural diversity’ might be a positive move, Lentin & McVeigh (ibid:176) stress that it is
3
Experiences shared by nurses from a minority ethnic group during a training session.
not a methodology for opposing racism and that racism itself is a part of ‘cultural
diversity’.
Locating Anti-Racism in Intercultural Training
Whilst acknowledging the many positive experiences of migrant women in relation to
integration the Immigrant Council of Ireland (ICI) Report (Pillinger, J. 2007:101)
identifies racism as a major barrier to integration which needs to be addressed. Work on
intercultural training, especially in the US, has not fully addressed racism in the training
room. Given the historical denial of racism in Ireland, initially in relation to Travellers,
the intersection of globalization and racism and the reality of racism in Ireland for old
and new minority ethnic groups, it is important that anti-racism training is firmly located
in training to promote integration. Sorrells (2008) points to the opportunities and
challenges of studying intercultural communication as being addressed by introducing
concepts of positionality, standpoint theory and ethnocentrism. By doing this she
acknowledges issues of power, privilege and oppression that exist in society. Debriefing
of anti-racism training activities needs to ensure participants understand that as with other
discriminations, racism can be a reality in the workplace and must be addressed at both
personal and organizational levels. It also needs to allow for discussion that deals with
how to handle perceptions of racism which may occur when individuals experience
ongoing racism in their lives outside the workplace and misunderstandings which occur
when intercultural communication in the organizations is not as effective as it should be.
A competent trainer will also acknowledge and help managers not to become paralyzed
in their management function when false allegations of racism are made.
As trainers when we do not facilitate the acknowledgment, naming, understanding and
addressing of experiences of discrimination, such as racism, we are effectively silencing
members of minority groups and ensuring that underlying motivations and structures
which allow for discrimination in the workplace are not addressed. Intercultural training
needs to incorporate an anti-racism perspective which deals in a sensitive way with
power relationships within the organization and training setting.
Naming Difference
We can draw on Gardenswartz et al (2003:26) for an in-depth explanation of differences
that may be present in the workplace. They identify ‘Four Layers of Diversity’ 4:




4
Personality
Internal Dimensions: Gender, Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Physical
Ability and Age
External Dimensions including: Educational Background, Income, Geographic
Location and Religion
Organizational Dimensions including: Management status, Seniority, Work
content/field and union affiliation
Anita Rowe & Lee Gardenswartz stress that the differences listed in their model are not exhaustive and it
is open to being extended.
Differences contribute to misunderstandings in the workplace and erect barriers to
effective communication but it is the more ‘fixed’ internal aspects and their intersection
that may dictate whether one is disadvantaged in life and impact on equality of
opportunity and outcome. Implicit in this model is ‘cultural’ difference which relates to
all four layers, from organizational culture to the dimensions of ‘race’, ethnicity and
religion which impact directly on social identity and personality.
Trust and Safety
It is our experience in HTC that the facilitation of a safe environment in which all
participants feel respected is vital in creating a space for effective real communication in
which fears can be expressed and misperceptions, myths and prejudicial attitudes
explored and challenged. Generally, if facilitators can hold off an immediate response to
a blatant statement of prejudice or misinformation, one of the participants will challenge
their co-participant and the learning may be more effective and provide role modeling for
the workplace. However, if this does not happen the responsibility for a challenge to be
made rests with the facilitator. As people can be sensitive, fearful and occasionally
aggressive regarding issues of interculturalism and racism it is useful to agree a way of
working together or ‘group contract’ in advance which can be referred back to if
necessary. This will help facilitate the most effective learning in a respectful
environment. It is very important that facilitators have accurate and up to date
information and data to counteract the many myths and misinformation that circulate in
Irish society about issues relating to Black and minority ethnic groups. When dealing
with participants who have negative beliefs about other ethnic groups, it is vital for
facilitators to recognize that each participant is coming from the perspective of their own
life experience. Trainers who respond judgmentally may jeopardize the climate of
honesty and may miss an opportunity to contribute to positive attitudinal shifts. In
addition they risk alienating other group participants as well as the person who has taken
the risk of being honest. The majority of participants are usually well disposed to
exploring ways of improving teamwork and the professional delivery of services. This
was very evident during our work with Fás frontline staff where overall the level of
commitment to effective delivery of services to clients, especially members of minority
ethnic groups, went beyond job description requirements. Trainers need to acknowledge
and build on such goodwill.
Real dialogue happens when everybody feels safe in being open about their experiences
and perspectives. An anxiety often raised by participants is fear of not using the correct
terminology. Rather than bringing the focus on individual participants who use wrong or
inappropriate terms, a section should be incorporated into the programme on terminology
which includes examples of inappropriate and exclusionary terms such as ‘non’ national,
‘non’ Irish, ‘coloured’ and ‘normal’. Participants should also be encouraged to ask for
clarification and discuss appropriate terms. Trainers who are activists must take off their
activist hat and not judge people. If we are asking participants to act in a respectful
manner in the training room, they also are entitled to our respect.
Bridging Differences
Each individual can do his or her part to be a bridge-building engineer (see Gardenswartz
et al 2008:38) in one-on-one relationships, work groups and organizations. When training
focuses on racism (as it should), participants who don’t have personal experience of this
particular discrimination may find it difficult to understand its interacting factors and
have feelings of guilt or fear of being held responsible which hinder learning. People who
themselves experience other forms of discrimination such as sexism or homophobia may
feel their experiences excluded. Many trainers use the activity of getting participants to
name ‘groups who experience discrimination in Irish society’ as a way of acknowledging
the many discriminations that exist. The resulting list can help create an ‘empathy
bridge’5, discussed further below, as participants’ experiences of discrimination are
named, they may relate to others by drawing on these experiences. The resulting list,
which usually includes Black people, Travellers and Jewish people, can be used to clarify
the type of discrimination that comes under the heading of ‘racism’ i.e. based on ‘race’,
colour or ethnicity; the intersection of discriminations; and which discriminations are
more ‘fixed’ and pervasive in people’s lives. Lentin & McVeigh (2002:5) say that
‘Despite the well-meaning resistance to “hierarchies of oppression”, racism still appears
high up in the matrix of subordination as one of the “big three”, along with classism and
sexism.’ The list can also demonstrate that racism is not new in Ireland when the
experiences of indigenous and other long-term minority ethnic groups such as Traveller
and Jewish communities are explored. The ‘labels’ people use for naming groups can also
be the basis for a discussion on appropriate terminology. Hickman (2007:14-16) points to
the existence of a hierarchy of Irishness in contemporary Ireland and says ‘the “Ireland of
the Welcomes” is not always apparent if you visit from Northern Ireland or England, are
of Irish descent and have an English accent…that in these instances an, at best,
ambivalent and often adverse response, can greet claims…about “being Irish”’. We have
found that participants recounting their negative experiences in relation to the above or of
being Irish in Britain can contribute to creating empathy. The question of who is
‘allowed’ to be Irish is a key one for integration and a challenging discussion for trainers
to facilitate. This issue is not helped by Ireland’s lack of a comprehensive, fair and
transparent immigration framework which promotes integration.
The fact that people are experiencing, or are passionate about challenging, a particular
form of discrimination does not necessarily mean that they understand or even want to
challenge other forms of discrimination. Experience in many training rooms has shown
that participants, who are strong on challenging, say, racism against Black people, may
show apathy or even hostile attitudes to Travellers or Gay people, for example. Unless
they have mobility difficulties how many people think about access to buildings? Or how
many are aware of structural barriers to transport and accommodation which render
people invisible in the workplace? The majority of people tend to be more aware of
discriminations that personally affect them or people close to them. The sharing of
personal experiences of discrimination is very powerful but one that must take place
naturally and trainers need to provide affirmation and support when such sharing
5
Referred to in lecture by Donna Stringer at a course in 2007 at the Institute of Intercultural
Communication, Portland, Oregon, USA.
happens. It is absolutely essentially that participants emerge from diversity training with
an understanding of how discrimination works.
Intercultural Competence
According to Bennet & Bennett (2004:149), ‘intercultural competence is the ability to
communicate effectively in cross-cultural situations and to relate appropriately in a
variety of cultural contexts’. They see developing this kind of competence as a primary
goal of diversity initiatives in organizations which contributes to ‘effective recruitment
and retention of members of underrepresented groups’. This also contributes to effective
management of interethnic teams, increased productivity and, most importantly, to the
‘development of a climate of respect for diversity in the organization’. A culturally
competent manager will support his/her staff and ensure the most effective delivery of
services by, for example, having information translated for service users whose first
language is not English. Such a strategy is in contrast to the ethnocentric stance taken by
a manager of a service provider who I heard saying (not in a training context) that he
would not consider providing information in languages other than English as people who
come here should speak English. Becoming proficient in English is key to integration in
Irish society but this takes time and needs interim support and strategies.
Perspective Taking
While the provision of information in training programmes, covering for example
legislative requirements, may result in behavioural change motivated by compliance
requirements, information provision has limited results in contributing to positive
attitudinal change. Pendry et al (2007:30-35) say that ‘merely providing factual
information has been shown to be often ineffectual as a means of evoking attitude
change’ and that ‘there are clear benefits that accrue from approaches that increase
empathy or encourage participants to engage in perspective taking.’ Pendry et al
(2007:32) discuss, from a dissonance and guilt inducing approach, the Walking through
White Privilege (WTWP) exercise which was developed by Peggy McIntosh in 1988.
This exercise has been used widely by intercultural trainers in Ireland and aspects of how
it has been adapted to a more ‘perspective taking’ approach will be discussed below. In
the original version as described by Pendry et al, participants are asked to respond to a
series of statements, such as ‘I can easily find a doll for my child that represents his or
her race’, by taking a step forward if they can answer yes. Statements cover the many
aspects of identity where members of minority ethnic groups are disadvantaged and may
not be able to step forward, ‘thereby providing a spatial demonstration of what happens
in society’.6
This exercise has been adapted to the Irish context and the version developed by HTC
involves giving participants cards with a particular named identity, e.g. Zambian woman
married to an Irish man; a Filipino nurse; a settled Traveller; a Polish radiographer
working as a cleaner; a person using a wheelchair, and asking participants to take on the
Pendry et al (2007:32-34) caution that ‘highlighting inter-group differences can backfire in terms of
reducing positive inter-group feelings and behaviour’… and that ‘diversity trainers should evaluate the
benefits or costs of the exercise for people of colour as they are not likely to benefit greatly from … having
their non-privileged status highlighted so publicly’.
6
perspective of their given role when answering the statements. The identities on the cards
cover a wide range of differences. This method avoids the focus being on the participants
in the room and puts it on the given role, it widens out the number of identities
represented in the room and it also means that all participants may be challenged to take
on the perspective of the(ir) ‘other’. It is important that the ensuing discussion is
facilitated by a skilled trainer.
Intercultural Mindset and Skillset
According to Bennet & Bennett (2004:149), ‘Although the primary emphasis of
intercultural communication is on behaviour, no behaviour exists separately from thought
and emotion. This necessary unity can be called the intercultural mindset and skillset’.
The messages we receive about ‘others’ contribute to how we view ‘out groups’ and what
our intercultural mindset is. These messages are received from early childhood and come
initially from significant adults in a child’s life and later from institutions in society such
as education, media, political, etc. For many people these messages are negative and
contain misinformation. Often even well-intentioned messages reveal a mindset of the
perception of members of minority ethnic groups as needing help. An example we use is
of a poster promoting interculturalism which shows a multiethnic team in a hospital
setting and with the caption ‘Supporting Diversity in the Health Service’. The majority of
participants and even trainers do not question the message this is giving. As trainers it
was a learning opportunity when one participant did question whether the caption should
actually read ‘Diversity Supporting the Health Service’. Given the reliance in our health
service on migrant workers, (e.g. 21% of nurses in the HSE were born and trained outside
of Ireland), a caption that showed ‘them helping us’ would be more appropriate.
Although, development aid organizations today are more cognizant of the messages they
are giving out and the need to inform people of how structural frameworks such as trade
agreements privilege Western countries, they have in the past contributed to an Irish
mindset of ‘us helping them and they being dependent and inferior’.
Miscommunications and Misunderstandings
The ‘Cross Cultural Hooks that Block Communication’ activity adapted by HTC from
Gardenswartz & Rowe (1998:72), is a non-threatening way to introduce participants to
differing cultural ways of communicating, the feelings these behaviours may elicit and
the judgements we may make when people behave in a way we are not used to.
Participants are asked to tick behaviours on a list which irritate them and then indicate if
they feel there is a cultural explanation for ticked behaviours. Discussion in small groups
follows where experiences of intercultural communication and related feelings and
judgements are shared. The list of feelings, which are typed up and projected for people
to see, invariably includes feeling threatened, dismissed, annoyed, angry, not respected
and upset; the judgements made include rudeness, ignorance, aggressiveness and
irritation. This demonstrates how behaviour, especially non-verbal, may be
misunderstood and block effective communication in the workplace. The facilitator then
goes through the list and gives the associated cultural explanation e.g. that our cultural
programming dictates how the majority of people in a particular culture will set the
‘norm’ for say, an acceptable distance between people, whether and for how long eye
contact should be maintained or how loud people speak. A good facilitator will also
acknowledge that rudeness may underpin some behaviour and that rudeness exists in all
cultures.
The behaviour of ‘saying yes without understanding’ is one that managers often express
concern about and has huge implications for safety, particularly in the health context.
Understanding that people from certain cultures do not easily question managers or may
engage in such behaviour to keep the harmony of the relationship and do not wish to
embarrass managers by indicating they have not explained something properly can help
managers take a different approach and see the irrelevance in intercultural
communication of the commonly used question ‘do you understand?’. The issue of
showing respect is one that surfaces routinely and exploring how cultural ways of
showing respect vary across cultures can help avoid misunderstandings e.g. that who and
when and for how long one can make eye contact with is culturally determined. A
Nigerian colleague often shares with participants how his children who have lived in
Ireland for many years have adopted the Irish way of making direct eye contact with their
parents and how uncomfortable this makes him feel as in his culture this would be
considered disrespectful.
Feeling disrespected when people do not use ‘please’ and ‘thank you’ as frequently as
Irish people do is another irritant that people experience. Discussion here can focus on
how politeness may be shown through language, e.g. the use of formal and informal
address and that ‘rules’ about the use of ‘thank you’ differ culturally. A Sudanese
participant has pointed out that it would be unusual to thank family members on a regular
basis as such thanks is implicit in family interactions, and a Finnish participant shared
how she felt work colleagues were making fun of her by what she thought was their
overuse of ‘please’ and ‘thank you’ in the workplace. These experiences were reiterated
in findings in the European Intercultural Workplace Report on Ireland (Dublin City
University, 2007:177) which quoted a Latvian interviewee as saying she had to learn to
frequently say please and thank you, as this is not normal practice in Latvian
language/culture. The report also says that ‘Indian and Polish workers similarly spoke in
amusement about having to learn to say ‘Sorry, sorry!’ on every occasion. Key learning
here is not to make judgements but to examine behaviour for multiple explanations and
not just from one’s own cultural stance.
Anti-Racism and Intercultural Training in Ireland
The establishment of the National Consultative Committee on Racism and
Interculturalism (NCCRI) in 1998, whose core funding came through the Department of
Justice, Equality and Law Reform, was an official recognition of a culturally diverse
Ireland and that racism existed. The setting up of the NCCRI Training and Resource Unit
in 2000, which provided anti-racism and intercultural awareness training to government
and non-government organisations, put such training firmly on the agenda. Excellent
training resources and policy documents were produced, in particular Guidelines on AntiRacism and Intercultural Training (Monshengwo, 2001), and a Train the Trainer
Programme7. NCCRI also encouraged sectors such as health to identify training needs
and develop intercultural health strategies.
7
www.nccri.ie
OSCD (Organisation and Social Development Consultants Ltd.), one of Britain’s longest
established specialist equality and community development consultancies, was one of the
first organizations to carry out anti-racism training in Ireland and continues to do so
today. Ashok Ohri and Wendy Davis’s (OSDC) Model of the Cycle of Oppression has
been used widely by Irish trainers. This model explores how the interacting factors of
prejudice, discrimination, ideology and power at various levels can result in a cycle of
oppression or the many ism’s that occur.
Prior to this it appears that anti-racism training was non-existent and intercultural training
confined to executives in multinationals with a focus on adaptation or given to
development aid workers going abroad. Around 2000 anti-racism training emerged in the
NGO sector with groups such as Comhlamh, the Galway One World Centre and LIR
Anti-Racism & Education, becoming active. Comhlamh’s Le Cheile Project: Artists
Against Racism was set up in 2000 at the instigation of the artist Robert Ballagh and
Moya Doherty of Riverdance. This partnership moved anti-racism into a wider context
and focused on three strategies: Policy/Advocacy, Awareness Raising and Anti-Racism
Training.
As early as 2001 consultancies such as Harnett Tannam Consultancy (HTC) and Open
Minds were delivering diversity, anti-racism and intercultural training to organisations
across the sectors. The number of specialised providers expanded from the mid-2000s on.
In more recent years management and organisational trainers have included anti-racism
and intercultural training as an ‘add-on’ to their services. It is unfortunate that just as
intercultural and anti-racism training were becoming mainstreamed in many sectors,
training budgets have been some of the first cuts in organizations responding to monetary
constraints of the recession.
Conclusion
Training can contribute significantly to integration in the workplace. It provides an
opportunity to explore ways of working together that promote effective strategies for
inclusivity and equality for both employees and clients. For maximum effectiveness and
transfer of learning to the workplace, training should be supported by a Whole
Organisation Approach. Individuals within an organisation, who are personally
committed and motivated by social justice, often play a vital role in highlighting the need
for equality and diversity initiatives. However commitment from senior management is
essential to the success of such initiatives, both in terms of resourcing and leadership.
Intercultural training, without an anti-racism element and underpinning perspective, fails
to address one of the main barriers to integration in the workplace and society. Stand
alone anti-racism training ignores the differing cultural ways of communicating which
contribute to misunderstandings that undermine effective teamwork and delivery of
services. It also fails to acknowledge the importance of culture to people’s identities.
Ideally a combination of both should be promoted.
There are many considerations for intercultural training8but committed, professional and
experienced trainers are vital to successful training interventions. Intercultural and antiracism training are very specific in nature and, in addition to a high level of training and
facilitation skills, need personal commitment to the issues. A one day course or indeed a
one week course does not make one an anti-racism or intercultural trainer. Of particular
significance is a trainer’s own intercultural competence and commitment to anti-racism.
Paige (1996:158) says that ‘the consequences of inadequate trainer knowledge and skills
can be extremely serious’ and that ‘intercultural training is difficult enough for highly
skilled trainers, it is absolutely no place for the amateur’.
Clearly to be a competent practitioner in this profession requires considerable knowledge,
experience and skill. As Paige and Martin point out, intercultural training is inherently
transformative (change oriented) and thus is exceptionally demanding of both trainers
and learners. It is education in the most profound sense of the term (the facilitation of
learning in the cognitive, affective, and behavioural domains). It can be very stressful.
(Paige 1996: 149)
It is important to find ways of combating the negativity and stress often experienced in
the training room through, for example, co-facilitation and/or drawing on the support of
other trainers. However, for many trainers working at something one is passionate about,
having an opportunity to harness goodwill and feeling that this work can make a
difference are on-going motivations.
References
Adams, M. (2007) ‘Pedagogical frameworks for social justice education’, in Adams, M.
et al (Eds) Teaching for diversity and social justice: A sourcebook, 2nd edition, New
York: Routledge.
Bennett, J. M. & Bennett, M. J. (2004) ‘Developing Intercultural Sensitivity: An
Integrative Approach to Global and Domestic Diversity’ in Landis, D. et al (eds)
Handbook of Intercultural Training, 3nd Edition, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Dublin City University (2007) European Intercultural Workplace: Republic of Ireland.
Dublin: European Intercultural Workplace (EIW) Project Partnership available at
www.eiworkplace.net
Gardenswartz, L. et al (2008) Emotional Intelligence for Managing Results in a Diverse
World: The Hard Truth About Soft Skills in the Workplace, Mountain View, CA: DaviesBlack Publishing.
Gardenswartz, L. et al (2003) The Global Diversity Desk Reference: Managing an
International Workforce, San Francisco: Pfeffer
8
See www.htconsultancy.com ‘Considerations for Intercultural Training’.
Gardenswartz, L. & Rowe, A. (1998) Managing Diversity: A Complete Desk Reference
and Planning Guide. Rev. ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hickman, M.J. (2007) ‘Immigration and Monocultural (Re)Imaginings in Ireland and
Britain’. Translocations: Migration and Social Change, Vol 2, Issue 1
Hofstede, G. (1994) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind – Intercultural
Cooperation and its Importance for Survival, London: Harper Collins Business.
Lentin, R. & McVeigh, R. (2006a) After Optimism? Ireland, Racism and Globalisation,
Dublin: Metro Eireann Publications.
Lentin, R. & McVeigh, R. (2006b) ‘Irishness and Racism: Towards an E Reader’,
Translocations: Migration and Social Change, Vol 1, Issue 1.
Lentin, R. & McVeigh, R. eds. (2002) Racism and Anti-racism in Ireland, Belfast:
Beyond the Pale BTP Publications Ltd.
Monshengwo, Kensika (2001) Guidelines on Anti-Racism and Intercultural Training
Dublin: National Consultative Committee on Racism and Interculturalism.
Paige, R. Michael (1996) ‘Intercultural Trainer Competencies’ in Landis, D. & Bhagat,
R. S. (eds) Handbook of Intercultural Training 2nd edition Pp. 148-164. Thousand
Oaks/California: Sage Publications.
Paige, R. Michael & Martin, Judith N. (1996) ‘Ethics in Intercultural Training’ in Landis,
D. & Bhagat, R. S. (eds) Handbook of Intercultural Training 2nd edition Pp 35-60.
(Thousand Oaks/California: Sage Publications)
Pendry, L. F et al (2007) ‘Diversity training: Putting theory into practice’ Journal of
Occupational and Organisational Psychology vol. 80, No 1, pp. 27-50. UK: The British
Psychological Society.
Pillinger, J. (2007) The Feminisation of Migration: Experiences and Opportunities in
Ireland. Dublin: Immigrant Council of Ireland.
Renwick, G. (2004) ‘Afterward: Reflections on the Future of Training’ in Landis, D. et al
Handbook of Intercultural Training. Thousand Oaks/California: Sage.
Sivanandan, A. (2004) Racism in the Age of Globalisation. Speaking at the Third Claudia
Jones memorial Lecture on 28 October 2004 organised by the National Union of
Journalist’s Members Council. Available at www.irr.org.uk/2004/october/ha000024.html
(accessed 13.06.10)
Sorrells, K. (forthcoming 2011) ‘Globalizing Intercultural Communication’ in Linking
Social Justice and Intercultural Communication in the Global Context (2008).
(Portland/Oregon: Summer Institute for Intercultural Communication)