Content uploaded by Kevin Dunn
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kevin Dunn on Jul 28, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
https://doi.org/10.1177/03128962231175182
Australian Journal of Management
1 –28
© The Author(s) 2023
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/03128962231175182
journals.sagepub.com/home/aum
Productive disruptions: Supporting
diversity and anti-racism in the
workplace through multi-level
organisational strategies
Brigid Trenerry
Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities, Singapore University of Technology and Design, Singapore
Kevin Dunn
School of Social Sciences, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Yin Paradies
Faculty of Arts and Education, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia
Abstract
Racism in the workplace occurs at both the interpersonal and institutional level in terms of
prejudiced attitudes and behaviours and avoidable and unfair differences in hiring, retention
and opportunities for training and promotion. Many organisations have stated commitments to
workforce diversity; however, work-related racism remains the most common forms of reported
discrimination. Rather, efforts to increase workforce diversity will fail in the absence of measures
to address discriminatory attitudes, behaviours, practices and cultures. Current approaches also
lack strategic development, including knowledge of how to implement workforce diversity and
anti-racism strategies at multiple organisational levels. Specifically, there is less understanding
of measures to support structural level change. This article aims to advance both theoretical
and empirical understanding of racism and anti-discrimination in the workplace. We do this by
presenting a multi-level framework for understanding and addressing workplace racism. We also
study the implementation of a meso-level workplace diversity and anti-discrimination assessment
within two local government organisations in Australia. Findings revealed the importance of
implementing strategies across multiple organisational levels and establishing accountability for
commitments to diversity and anti-racism practice. Despite its structural and universal drives,
Corresponding author:
Brigid Trenerry, Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities, Singapore University of Technology and Design, 8
Somapah Road, Singapore 487372.
Email: brigid_trenerry@sutd.edu.sg
Final transcript accepted 18 April 2023 by Mariano Heyden (AE Special Issue).
1175182AUM0010.1177/03128962231175182Australian Journal of ManagementTrenerry et al.
research-article2023
Article
2 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
we argue that racism can be disrupted through the presence of diversity in the workplace and
anti-racism intervention.
Keywords
Anti-racism, discrimination, diversity, local government, workplace racism
1. Introduction
Recent global developments, such as the Black Lives Matter movement and protests in the United
States, have heightened attention to issues of racism, including structural forms of discrimination
in the workplace. In response, there has been increasing momentum for organisations to increase
workforce diversity and address racism through hiring practices and other measures such as dedi-
cated diversity roles and training. At the same time, progress remains slow or non-existent in many
settings, with work-related racism continuing to be one of the most consistent forms of reported
discrimination (Lee et al., 2019; Pew Research Center, 2016).
Racial discrimination or racism is defined as a system of practices, attitudes and beliefs based
on assumptions of superiority/inferiority, which sustain an unequal and avoidable distribution of
resources based on racial/ethnic group membership (Paradies, 2006). Alongside racism, individu-
als may experience multiple discriminations, including on the basis of gender, age, class and sexual
orientation (Crenshaw, 1989; Nash, 2008). Workplace racism can be linked to several negative
outcomes, including poorer mental health and well-being, lower job quality and higher occupa-
tional stress (De Castro et al., 2010; Hughes and Dodge, 1997; Rospenda et al., 2009; Shannon
et al., 2009) and can also result in substantial economic costs, where companies may suffer litiga-
tion costs due to substantiated cases of racial discrimination (Blank et al., 2004; Buttner et al.,
2010; Elias and Paradies, 2016).
Despite its prevalence and harmful effects, issues of workplace racism have been neglected
within management studies. Rather, research has focused mainly on managing diversity, which
involves the process of recruiting, retaining, rewarding and promoting individuals from diverse
backgrounds (Cox, 1991; Ivancevich and Gilbert, 2000). While such a focus is important, efforts
to increase workforce diversity can backfire in the absence of clear strategies to address prejudiced
attitudes and behaviours and exclusive workplace practices and cultures (Ely et al., 2012). For
example, organisations may fail to attract diverse candidates who anticipate a lower sense of
belonging and/or organisational commitment to diversity and non-discriminatory cultural norms
(Avery and McKay, 2006; Chatman and O’Reilly, 2016).
There are also important conceptual differences between diversity management and ensuring
workforce equity and anti-discrimination. The former is a voluntarist agenda, which is controlled
and managed internally, while the latter is usually addressed by external regulatory controls, such
as equal opportunity and anti-discrimination legislation (Noon, 2007). While it is claimed that the
voluntarist nature of diversity management allows managers to assume greater responsibility for
diversity issues, this can conceal underlying issues of bias and discrimination, where managers
might, for instance, deny that racism exists (Nelson, 2013) and face less scrutiny when implement-
ing diversity plans.
Diversity management has also been positioned as a more ‘inclusive’ language and philosophy
which can be applied to the ‘whole’ organisation (Thomas, 1990), thus avoiding some of the back-
lash effects of affirmative action and anti-racism agendas (Lorbiecki and Jack, 2000; Wrench,
2005). However, as Noon (2007) argues, it is ‘misguided to believe that diversity will deliver in
Trenerry et al. 3
ways that equal opportunities could not’ (p. 775), where the seemingly neutral language and ideol-
ogy of diversity management can conceal racism and unequal power relationships (Lorbiecki and
Jack, 2000). Nonetheless, finding the right language is a key dilemma in diversity work, where, for
instance, Ahmed (2006) proposes that the term can be used strategically:
Diversity work is strategic, even if it has certain political principles behind it. So diversity is used by some
precisely because it is a comfortable term that allows people to engage more easily with this kind of work.
As a result, practitioners are positive about the term ‘diversity’ for the very reasons some are critical of
them. (p. 122)
In this sense, diversity practitioners articulate the usefulness of diversity terminology in estab-
lishing buy-in, while being critical of the term at the same time. Similarly, we use both diversity
and anti-racism terminology in this article, including the terms ‘diversity practitioner’ and ‘diver-
sity work’ to refer to individuals and work practices that support both workforce diversity and
anti-racism goals. Like Ahmed (2006), we recognise that diversity terminology has practical value
while also being critical of managerial focus on workforce diversity alone. Diversity work must
include an explicit focus on anti-racism – as an active process of identifying and eliminating racism
through addressing attitudes, behaviours, structures and systems (Jones et al., 2015; Paradies,
2005). However, these two goals are not mutually exclusive, where anti-racism can be re-oriented
within diversity practice (Berman and Paradies, 2010).
While there is extensive research and theory on the causes of workplace inequalities, studies of
effective ‘remedies’ are rare (Dobbin et al., 2015: 1014). Rather, despite growing interest in the
efficacy of diversity and anti-racism best practices, understanding remains relatively limited, par-
ticularly outside of well-studied areas like training (Nishii et al., 2018; Paluck and Green, 2009).
In addition, few studies have tested the effects of interventions with adults outside of laboratory
settings (Paluck et al., 2021; Pedersen et al., 2005). This gap may be due to difficulties in gaining
access to institutions to study implementation processes and sensitive issues, such as racism,
despite a critical need for such work (Cox and Nkomo, 1990; Fine, 1996).
Current approaches also lack strategic development, including knowledge of how to implement
workforce diversity and anti-racism practices at multiple organisational levels (Ben et al., 2020;
Bourke et al., 2019; Bowser, 2017; Ferdinand et al., 2017; Griffith et al., 2007b). The resultant lack
of clarity can obstruct analysis and confuse managers. Overall, there is evidence that individual-
level strategies, such as training to reduce managerial bias, are largely ineffective if not accompa-
nied by other structural measures such as increased organisational accountability, affirmative
action plans, committees and dedicated diversity staff and resources to support implementation
processes (Kalev et al., 2006; Nishii et al., 2018).
Alongside the implementation of multi-level strategies, there is a need to establish accountabil-
ity for workforce diversity and anti-racism initiatives. This is because organisational commitments
to workforce diversity and anti-racism, even when inscribed into institutional mission statements,
documents and speech acts, are often ‘non-performative’ in that they ‘do not do what they say: they
do not, as it were, commit a person, organization, or state to an action’ (Ahmed, 2012: 104). Rather,
there is consistent evidence of gaps between statements of commitment and practice. For example,
the Stephen Lawrence enquiry into institutional racism in the United Kingdom (Macpherson,
1999) led to mandatory requirements for public bodies to develop race equality plans. However,
while public authorities readily shifted language, this ‘quickly got translated into being good at
race equality’ (Ahmed, 2006; Gillborn, 2006: 16). Rather, while many local councils established
training programmes, some evaluations showed that workforce compositions remained largely the
4 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
same, with no clear policies and processes for dealing with racism at work (Creegan et al., 2003;
Hussain and Ishaq, 2008).
2. Research aims
Given the persistence of workplace racism, a key task for scholars is to advance understanding of
how racism manifests in diverse organisational contexts and to provide further evidence to guide
practitioners in conducting more effective diversity and anti-racism practice. Therefore, the aims
of this article were twofold: to provide a fresh theoretical framework for understanding and
addressing racism in the workplace and to further empirical understanding of anti-racism interven-
tion. Integrating academic literature and theoretical insights from multiple disciplines, we seek to
shed light on the interplay of factors that contribute to racism at multiple organisational levels. We
then review key strategies to support diversity and address racism and tie together these themes in
an overarching framework. The empirical focus of this article involves the implementation of a
meso-level workforce diversity and anti-racism strategy within two local government workforces
in Australia. By observing the implementation process, we demonstrate supporting factors and bar-
riers when implementing workforce diversity and anti-racism strategies in practice.
3. Theoretical framework
3.1. Understanding and addressing racism in the workplace
Racism occurs at multiple levels, including individual and/or interpersonal racism (i.e. interactions
between individuals) and institutional or systemic racism (i.e. production, control and access to
labour, materials and resources within society) (Jones, 1997; Paradies, 2005; Watego et al., 2021).
Psychological theory focuses on individual- and group-level prejudice, which includes attitudes or
beliefs based on a sense of racial/ethnic superiority or distinctiveness (e.g. negative, and inaccurate
stereotypes) and/or negative emotions (e.g. anxiety, fear, or hatred), alongside biased behaviours
that result in unfair treatment (Allport, 1954; Blumer, 1958).
Institutional or systemic racism is defined as a set of established laws, patterns, procedures and
practices that consistently penalise and reproduce systems of inequality (Carmichael and Hamilton,
1968; Griffith et al., 2010; Jones, 1997), although there are important overlaps between individual/
interpersonal and systemic/institutional racism. Watego et al. (2021: 6) note the existence of ‘con-
ceptual slippage’ between different terms such as systemic, institutional and systemic racism.
Systemic racism can be understood as a set of institutions and practises (e.g. the education or health
system) and deeper political, economic and sociological systems. Due to its breadth of use, referring
to a ‘system’ may not invoke the accountability mechanisms of institutional governance and other
hierarchies (Watego et al., 2021). In this article, which examines workplace racism, we use the term
institutional racism due to its focus on accountability, norms and practices within institutions, while
recognising that these practices are intertwined with broader structural and systemic factors.
According to sociological theory, racism is a combination of structure and agency, where its
structural forms are actively produced and reproduced by human actors or agents (Essed, 1991;
Giddens, 1984). Essed (1991) defines racism as a combination of ideology, structure and process
in which dominance is produced and perpetuated by systems that establish norms, laws, regula-
tions and the allocation of resources and control. Therefore, while racism is often viewed as an
individual-level problem, its everyday nature in the attitudes, behaviours and practices that make
up social systems highlights its systemic nature (Essed, 1991). Similarly, other scholars have criti-
cised conceptions of institutional racism that downplay the role of human agency, where it is the
Trenerry et al. 5
‘attitudes, beliefs, objectives, and concerns’ of people who make up institutions, especially deci-
sion makers, who make it feasible for institutions to be seen as racist (Berard, 2008: 740).
Racism is also underpinned by power relations, whereby dominant group members have rela-
tively more power and privilege (e.g. access and allocation of resources) and can dominate without
necessarily being aware of how systems are structured according to their interests (Arendt, 1953;
Essed, 1991). However, the privileging effects of racism are also commonly neglected, where
existing power imbalances have a relative, privileging/anti-privileging effect for members of dom-
inant/subordinate groups (Collins, 1991; hooks, 1990; Paradies, 2006). Racism’s privileging
effects are tied to responsibility, where not acting, or passive tolerance of racism, also involves an
exercise of power (Essed, 1991).
In the workplace, racism can be both overt and/or subtle, interpersonal and/or systemic (Deitch
et al., 2003; Jones et al., 2016). Overt forms of interpersonal racism include bullying, harassment,
rudeness, name-calling, exclusion, excessive surveillance, verbal/physical abuse and unfair perfor-
mance appraisal and firing, while subtle racism can include avoidance, unfriendliness and a failure
to help with work responsibilities, as well as seemingly positive and well-intentioned behaviour,
such as unrealistically favourable feedback or tokenistic inclusion (Deitch et al., 2003; Dovidio
et al., 2010). While such acts may arise out of unconscious psychological processes and not come
from a desire to hurt, subtle forms of prejudice and racism can be just as harmful as overt racism
(Dovidio and Hebl, 2005; Jones et al., 2016; King et al., 2023). As a result, interpersonal racism
can lead to unrealistic expectations, scrutiny and criticism, which in turn causes experiences of
isolation and exclusion (Smith and Calasanti, 2005) alongside reduced access to training, mentor-
ing opportunities and promotion (Fiske, 1998). Conversely, due to privileging effects, dominant
groups may gain more opportunities to perform and demonstrate their competence, and ‘believed
to be more competent, are preferred for job assignments, may garner more rewards, and often are
better liked’ as well as having better access to developmental opportunities at work (DiTomaso
et al., 2007: 490).
At both the institutional and systemic level, racism commonly manifests in disparities in labour
market search and labour supply (Biddle et al., 2013; Habtegiorgis and Paradies, 2013), alongside
job application and selection processes (Berman et al., 2008; Dovidio and Hebl, 2005; Gelfand
et al., 2005) and interviews themselves (Hughes and Davidson, 2011). For example, recruitment
practices can exclude applicants who lack experience in navigating complex application processes,
including an understanding of ‘bureaucratic lingo’ and relevant ‘cultural know-how’ (Bertone
et al., 2005). Racism can also manifest in recruitment practices as a form of cultural ‘cloning’
(Colic-Peisker and Tilbury, 2007; Essed, 2005) and ‘the reproduction of likeness’ (Ahmed, 2012:
38), such as a tendency for managers to consciously or unconsciously recruit and mould people
like themselves (Essed, 2005). A preference for sameness can also mean a reliance on applicants
by word-of-mouth referrals and networks (Brief et al., 2005; Rangarajan and Black, 2007). While
some of these practices and processes are structural in nature (e.g. job application and selection
processes), human agency (e.g. managerial bias, networks) also plays an important role.
More subtly, institutional racism can be embedded in organisational processes, practices, cul-
tures and norms (Agocs and Graham, 2015; Ahmed, 2012; Bourke et al., 2019). For example,
diversity comes to represent the inclusion of those who ‘look different’ and is ‘added on’ to existing
organisational norms and practices, thereby confirming ‘the whiteness of what is already in place’
(Ahmed, 2012: 33; Rabelo et al., 2021). Also termed ‘institutional whiteness’, this can manifest in
the physical environment, in the form of symbols and surroundings (e.g. statutes and buildings
representing dominant groups) that are often taken for granted and unnoticed but influence organi-
sational culture at visible and subtle layers (Ahmed, 2012; Schein, 2004).
6 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
Institutional racism is also contextual and is likely to manifest differently according to various
institutional and organisational settings, such as education (Ahmed, 2012; Gillborn, 2006; Moreton-
Robinson et al., 2011), health (Bourke et al., 2019; Came, 2014; Flemington et al., 2022; Watego
et al., 2021), the criminal justice system and policing (Bennetto, 2009; Cunneen, 2001; Holdaway
and O’Neill, 2007), among others. In addition, the nature of racism and racist attitudes vary in rela-
tion to place (Kobayashi and Peake, 2000), thereby necessitating the importance of targeting of
anti-racism strategies to local contexts (Dunn et al., 2004).
3.2. A need for remedies: supporting workforce diversity and addressing racism at
multiple organisational levels
Strategies to support diversity and address workplace racism can also be conceptualised and imple-
mented at different organisational levels (Cox, 1993; Trenerry et al., 2012). Drawing on Syed and
Ozbilgin’s (2009) relational framework, we propose three levels of analysis for supporting work-
place diversity and anti-racism intervention. Micro-level strategies are targeted at the interper-
sonal/group level and aim to address individual attitudes and behaviours (e.g. training), while
meso-level factors assess organisational structures, cultures, policies and practices (e.g. human
resource (HR) policies and practices such as recruitment/hiring, anti-discrimination complaints
and grievance policies) and organisational development strategies (e.g. organisational assessments,
diversity plans). Interpersonal and meso-level strategies overlap and are situated within macro-
structural contexts, such as equal opportunity and anti-discrimination laws and regulations (Syed
and Pio, 2009).
At the micro/interpersonal level, training is one of the most commonly practised and studied
interventions and ranges from cultural awareness or cultural competency training to implicit/
unconscious bias or anti-racism training (Ben et al., 2020; Paluck and Green, 2009). In general,
training has a positive impact on participants (Beach et al., 2006; Paluck, 2006), although evidence
is more mixed on other outcomes such as behaviour change, team and organisational effects
(Bezrukova et al., 2016; Kalinoski et al., 2013; Maloney et al., 2016). Diversity training has also
been critiqued as focusing overly on cultural awareness and difference over more complex and
confronting issues of race, racism and privilege (Fredericks and Bargallie, 2016; Truong et al.,
2014). Anti-racism training can cause negative emotions such as discomfort, guilt, anxiety, sadness
and shame (Kowal et al., 2013). A failure to address these reactions can, in turn, lead to resistance
and create ‘backlash’ effects, including increased prejudice and racism and disengagement from
anti-racism practice (Bhui et al., 2012; Dovidio et al., 2010; Utsey et al., 2008). However, such
discomfort and resistance can be worked through in a process of individual and organisational
transformation (Fredericks and Bargallie, 2016).
Alongside general training for employees, studies support the effectiveness of targeted train-
ing, such as for leaders, managers and service delivery staff (Greene, 2007; Johnstone and
Kanitsaki, 2008; Mack Burch et al., 2005). For example, a recent evaluation of an Aboriginal
Cultural Awareness training programme found higher participant awareness in understanding
race and racism alongside greater support for organisational policies to improve Aboriginal
recruitment and retention (Kelaher et al., 2018). Targeted training is therefore likely to have a
flow-on effect by highlighting structural barriers and supporting policy and practice improve-
ments (Kelaher et al., 2018).
Meso-level strategies target organisational structures, policies, practices and cultures.
Organisational assessments, also called diversity audits, provide a framework for examining
structures, policies and practises (Cox, 1993; Dreachslin et al., 2004). Organisational assessment
Trenerry et al. 7
guides strategic change across different domains by involving representatives across different
roles and seniority levels (Mathews, 1998; Trenerry and Paradies, 2012). This includes assess-
ment of workplace environments and cultures, strategic plans, human resource policies and prac-
tices such as recruitment, anti-discrimination complaints and grievance policies and other
organisational development and culture change initiatives. For example, visible support for
diversity and anti-racism can be demonstrated in the physical environment, such as through
signs and symbols that provide a sense of welcome for employees from diverse cultural back-
grounds, alongside organisational values, plans and policies (Ahmed, 2006; Schein, 2004;
Truong et al., 2014). By reviewing organisational structures, policies and practices, organisa-
tional assessments help to establish accountability and allocate resources to diversity and anti-
racism efforts by leveraging real organisational data to convince leaders and managers that
problems exist (Mathews, 1998; Paradies et al., 2009).
Hiring practices can range from interpersonal strategies, such as training to reduce managerial
bias in recruitment and ensuring diverse representation on interview panels, to structural level
interventions such as de-identifying job applications, also known as blind recruitment (Åslund
and Skans, 2012; Banerjee et al., 2018; Krause et al., 2012). Other organisational development
practices include affirmative action, also termed positive discrimination, which aims to redress
inequalities in the workforce by increasing the representation of under-represented groups
(Amano-Patino et al., 2021). Affirmative action or positive discrimination is often commonly
misunderstood in relation to quotas and undermining principles of merit-based recruitment,
including beliefs that ‘an unqualified (or less qualified) person from an under-represented social
group will be given preferential treatment over a more qualified person from a dominant social
group’ (Noon, 2010: 370). However, such misconceptions neglect new and more moderate forms
of positive discrimination, such as the tie-break and threshold systems, which seek to maintain
principles of ‘merit-based’ recruitment. Other human resource initiatives include establishing
clear policies and procedures for addressing racial discrimination (Griffith et al., 2010; Hussain
and Ishaq, 2008; Kelaher et al., 2018).
Alongside the importance of implementing strategies at multiple organisational levels, there is
a need to establish accountability across different institutional levels to enable system-level change
(Griffith et al., 2007a; Paradies et al., 2009). Establishing accountability is critical in racial equality
work in holding organisations to account for statements of commitment to workforce diversity and
anti-racism. Accountability can be established through external measures, such as equal opportu-
nity and anti-discrimination legislation and policies, as well as increased public transparency
around workforce data. Internally, the importance of establishing leadership and management sup-
port for workforce diversity and anti-discrimination has been well established (Dreachslin et al.,
2004; Fernandez and Rainey, 2006; Metz and Kulik, 2008). In traditional change models, leaders
play a key role in leading strategic change and allocating resources, while managers are commonly
responsible for implementing change and countering resistance (Kotter, 1996; Narine and Persaud,
2003). The role of bottom-up actors is also critical in initiating change and maintaining momen-
tum. Diversity champions and change agents help to keep initiatives alive and establish coalitions
for change, often through informal channels and networks (Greenhalgh et al., 2004; Rogers, 1995).
Overall, changing institutional structures, policies, practices and cultures, require ongoing commit-
ment from multiple organisational actors.
Based on literature summarised above, we present a multi-level framework for understanding
and addressing racism in the workplace (see Figure 1), including the interplay between interper-
sonal (i.e. human agency) and institutional (i.e. structural) barriers and enablers across multiple
organisational levels.
8 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
4. Methods
4.1. Study background: supporting workforce diversity and anti-racism in Australia
This study is set in the macro-context of Australia, which has a settler-colonial history, including
the dispossession of Indigenous/First Nations’ land and peoples and successive discriminatory
policies of forced assimilation, alongside restrictions placed on immigrants from predominately
non-White and/or non-English-speaking backgrounds (Ferdinand et al., 2012; Langton, 2000).
These origins can be linked to present-day inequalities and discrimination across a range of set-
tings, including education, employment, the criminal justice system and healthcare, among others
(Biddle et al., 2013; Cunneen, 2001; Paradies, 2006). Moreover, despite nearly half (48%) of
Australia’s population being born overseas or having at least one overseas-born parent (Australian
Bureau of Statistics, 2021a), this diversity is not adequately represented in the workforce, espe-
cially in more senior roles (Soutphommasane, 2017).
Australia has several measures to challenge racial discrimination at the national, state and local
levels. This includes ratifying the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination and enacting the Racial Discrimination Act 1995. Each Australian state and terri-
tory also have anti-discrimination laws allowing individuals to report discrimination, harassment
and bullying. Under the Equal Opportunity Act 2010, companies, schools and goods and service
providers in Victoria have a positive duty to eliminate discrimination, sexual harassment and vic-
timisation, including local government organisations (local councils). The Local Government Act
2020 also requires local councils to develop merit-based, transparent recruitment and advertising
practices.
In addition to legislative measures, the Australian Government recently established a National
Anti-Racism Strategy to promote public awareness of racism and develop educational resources to
identify and prevent racism in key settings where it occurs. Other initiatives include structured
partnerships and plans to address long-standing structural inequalities and racism, including in the
workplace (e.g. Lowitja Institute, 2022; Polity Research, 2020). Despite these initiatives, however,
there is widespread evidence that current measures are inadequate in dealing with issues of
Figure 1. A multi-level framework for supporting diversity and anti-racism in the workplace.
Trenerry et al. 9
workplace racism, including complaints of workplace discrimination (Behrendt and Coombes,
2021; Gaze, 2005; Paradies, 2005).
4.2. Local governments as implementation partners in a wider public health
programme
This study was situated within a wider 4-year public health programme and evaluation aimed at
supporting diversity and reducing racial discrimination across different settings (e.g. workplaces,
retail, education and the broader community) within two local government municipalities in
Victoria, Australia. The two local councils were selected as implementation partners in the broader
programme due to having an existing track record in supporting community-level diversity (e.g.
local implementation of multicultural and settlement policies) (Mansouri et al., 2007). The pro-
gramme trailed multiple strategies (e.g. anti-racism training, workplace assessments, social media
campaigns) and was rigorously evaluated to build evidence of effectiveness in supporting diversity
and countering racism at different levels of society, including the workplace. This study is focused
on a workplace assessment implemented with the council organisations, to examine policies, prac-
tices and procedures to support workplace diversity and anti-racism.
4.3. The local council workplace sites
Participating organisations included City Council (a pseudonym) which is located in the northern
outskirts of metropolitan Melbourne, with a population of 231,799 residents, of which 1% identify
as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander, while around 37.6% of residents are born overseas
(Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2021b). Regional Council (a pseudonym) resides in a regional area
of Victoria, with a population of 68,522 residents. Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people
make up around 3.9% of the total population. The large majority (82.6%) of residents are born in
Australia, while 17.4% of residents are born overseas (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2021b).
4.4. Development and implementation of a workplace diversity and anti-racism
assessment tool
This study focused on the implementation of a Workplace Diversity and Anti-Discrimination Tool
(the Workplace Assessment Tool hereon in), developed after a global literature review (see Trenerry
and Paradies, 2012). The review found few publicly available tools within the diversity manage-
ment literature, particularly those with an explicit focus on addressing racism, although some have
since become available (e.g. Bourke et al., 2019; Marrie and Marrie, 2014). Cultural competency
literature provided greater insights for assessing processes and practices across multiple organisa-
tional domains (Cross et al., 1989; Siegel et al., 2004), although many tools reviewed still focused
on the individual-level, rather than organisational-level, processes and practices (Gozu et al., 2007;
Olavarria et al., 2009).
Based on these gaps, the authors developed a tool integrating management and cultural compe-
tency and focused on the organisational level (Bowen, 2008; Cox, 1993; Olavarria et al., 2009).
The tool was piloted with council employees and contextualised to the Australian context (see
Merri Community Health Services et al., 2014; Mungabareena Aboriginal Corporation and
Women’s Health Goulburn North East, 2008).
As shown in Table 1, the tool was structured to assess five domains of organisational planning,
policy and practice (see VicHealth (2015) for a final version of the tool). During implementation, an
assessment committee was formed with representatives from human resources, communications,
10 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
Table 1. Workplace diversity and anti-discrimination assessment tool.a
Domain/Description Best-practice examples Supporting documents
1. Organisational
profile
• A commitment to diversity and anti-
discrimination is an explicit in the
organisation’s mission, values, goals
and other strategic documents and is
regularly communicated and promoted
to employees.
• The physical environment reflects the
diversity of the workforce and local
community and service population
(e.g. Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander flags, plaques, signage, reading
materials, posters, noticeboard items,
staff amenities, prayer rooms etc.)
• Physical environment.
• Mission, vision, values
statement.
• Organisational website.
• Annual reports/public
documents.
2. Diversity
strategic planning
and resource
allocation
• The organisation plans for diversity
and specifies goals for the composition
of the workforce in consultation with
staff from diverse backgrounds.
• The organisation provides dedicated
resources, including leadership and
managerial support to implement
workforce diversity and anti-racism
initiatives.
• Clear policies and procedures
on lodging and responding to
complaints of racial discrimination
and consequences for engaging in
discriminatory practice and behaviour.
• Organisational strategic
plans, including
multicultural, diversity and
reconciliation plans, human
resource plans (etc.)
• Employee codes of
practice, anti-discrimination
complaints policies,
procedures and protocols.
3. Communications • A diverse range of images are
used in publications, including the
organisational website and other
promotional material.
• Organisational website, policies and
publications are monitored to eliminate
bias and ensure inclusive language.
• Organisational website,
social media.
• External and internal
publications and
documents.
4. Human resources • Jobs are advertised through diverse
media outlets, including formal and
informal community organisations and
networks.
• Position descriptions and selection
criteria are written in plain English and
include only the skills, qualifications and
experience required for the role.
• Short-listing processes include
measures to monitor bias (e.g. removal
of identifying information)
• Interview panels include employees
from diverse racial, ethnic and cultural
backgrounds.
• Human resources strategic
and recruitment plans.
• Employment policies,
processes and practices.
• Job advertisements,
position descriptions.
• Hiring procedures,
protocols and guidelines.
• Existing procedures,
protocols and documents.
(Continued)
Trenerry et al. 11
policy and planning, administration and finance, as well as individuals whose job roles supported
diverse communities or roles directly related to workforce diversity and inclusion (i.e. diversity
practitioners).
4.5. Participant observation and key informant interviews
This study examined the implementation of the Workplace Assessment Tool within the two local
council workplaces above. Key methods included participant observation of meetings and work-
place dynamics with 25 council employees across the two council sites and 16 follow-up inter-
views. During fieldwork, the first author spent 1 day each week in each council for 12–18 months
and conducted more than 500 hours of observation, with 100,000 fieldnotes written. During meet-
ings, the researcher observed discussion and exchanges throughout the implementation process,
including group dynamics, body language and subtle exchanges (e.g. speaking under one’s breath,
the use of humour). Key informant interviews provided an opportunity to follow up on issues
observed during the implementation process (Patton, 2002).
Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and shared with participants in a process of mem-
ber checking (Lincoln and Guba, 1986). Data were analysed in two stages. First, field notes were
analysed to inform interview questions. In the second stage, all data were analysed together using
the NVivo qualitative data-coding tool, employing ‘inductive’ or open coding followed by ‘closed’
coding (Emerson et al., 1995). Observational and interview data were triangulated with organisa-
tional documents (see Table 1 above for examples).
5. Findings
This section presents selected findings of observations of the workplace diversity and anti-discrim-
ination assessment and follow-up interviews with council employees at the two local council work-
places. Findings are structured according to three domains of practice in the assessment tool. First,
we examine Councils’ organisational profile, with a focus on commitments to diversity and anti-
racism in mission statements, values and goals. Specifically, we consider how organisational com-
mitments translated into practice, including the role of leaders and diversity practitioners in the
implementation process. We also examine the importance of the physical environment and the role
of managers in countering resistance. Second, we explore strategic plans and policies to increase
Domain/Description Best-practice examples Supporting documents
5. Data collection
and monitoring
• Workforce data are collected and
monitored for retention, promotion,
seniority and turnover rates across
diverse employees’ groups.
• Compliance with anti-discrimination
and equal opportunity regulations and
laws are regularly reviewed.
• Complaints of racial discrimination
are monitored to identify recurring
problem areas.
• Workforce data and human
resource management
systems.
• Updated anti-discrimination
and equal opportunity.
• Documents of complaints
processes and outcomes.
aSee VicHealth (2015) for a full version of the assessment tool and best-practice examples.
Table 1. (Continued)
12 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
workforce diversity. Finally, we analyse human resource policies and practices, with a focus on
selection and hiring. Across all domains, we examine the role of structure (i.e. organisational docu-
ments, policies and practices) versus agency (i.e. managerial attitudes and behaviours) when
implementing workforce diversity and anti-racism organisational assessment and strategic change.
5.1. Organisational profile
5.1.1. Commitments to diversity in mission statements, values and goals. At both councils, the assess-
ment committee discussed how commitments to diversity and anti-racism were reflected in organi-
sational documents, such as Council’s mission and value statements as well as publicly available
documents and plans, including the website. At City Council, valuing diversity was strongly
reflected in council values, where ‘valuing diversity’ was one of six key values expected of staff.
As Sonia and Kon said during a meeting,
Valuing cultural diversity is strongly reflected in our values . . . The statement also mentions workforce
diversity ‘in strengthening and enriching the organisation’. (Sonia, Diversity Practitioner, City Council)
The values do help to promote discussion about diversity. For my department, we use a simplified version
of the performance review process. Managers break it down and provide some concrete examples of what
kinds of behaviour are acceptable and not acceptable in the workplace. (Kon, Senior Manager, City
Council)
As Sonia explained, valuing cultural diversity also included a reference to workforce diversity,
where diversity was positioned as a resource that strengthened and enriched the organisation (Ely
and Thomas, 2001). The inclusion of council values also helped to promote discussion about
diversity, such as in the performance review process. For Kon’s team, this included concrete
examples of what kinds of behaviour were acceptable and not acceptable in the workplace.
Importantly, embedding council diversity values into the performance review process helped to
translate commitments into action (Ahmed, 2006). Nonetheless, it was less clear whether all man-
agers took an active role in discussing diversity and reinforcing council values as part of the
performance review process.
At Regional Council, references to diversity were included in the organisation’s vision state-
ment and other publicly available documents such as council plans and annual reports. As Andrea
said,
[Council publications] are quite good. It has some really good images on the front of people from
multicultural backgrounds as well as a statement about recognising diversity. Although this relates more to
the community than the workplace. (Andrea, Senior Manager, Regional Council).
In contrast to City Council, there was less reference to valuing workforce diversity in strategic
documents at Regional Council. Assessment committee members also mentioned constraints on
integrating commitments to workforce diversity and anti-racism into council values where
changing council values was seen as a long-term process, which raised ‘bigger questions’ for the
organisation.
In translating statements of commitment to diversity and anti-racism into practice, assessment
committee members acknowledged the importance of top-level support from the chief executive
officer (CEO) and other senior leaders. As Liz and Andrea, both senior managers at City Council,
said,
Trenerry et al. 13
I think one of the things from [the program] is that we’ve had [the CEO’s] support right from the beginning;
he’s been our biggest champion. That means a lot. So in some ways, the organisation can’t question our
commitment to it . . . It’s on the agenda and that makes it easier for us. . .it’s already now accepted that
this is a setting that we’re working in. (Liz, Senior Manager, City Council)
I think they’ve [senior management] been really good with it. Because we’ve had a CEO change it could
really railroad it. Like if you’ve got the wrong CEO coming in afterwards, after a CEO who had been so
embracing of this, that if you got someone in after that just went, ‘oh no, we don’t need to do that’?
(Andrea, Senior Manager, 3 years at council)
According to Liz, the CEO’s personal commitment translated into organisational commitment
(‘the organisation cannot question our engagement’). This commitment also led to the allocation of
resources for ongoing diversity work and therefore helped to embed commitments into practice.
Like Liz, Andrea found senior management to be supportive (‘they’ve been really good with it’).
However, she suggested that a change in leadership could potentially ‘railroad’ these efforts, where
a new CEO might not value or prioritise diversity goals. This speaks to the tenuous nature of diver-
sity commitments, even when ‘institutionalised’ into organisational mission and value statements
and documents.
In fact, despite council having plans and policies in place, the implementation of diversity initia-
tives often fell to diversity practitioners. As Brian explained,
But the thing is it’s assumed that we know everything about all Aboriginal issues regardless if they’re
health, social justice or whatever it’s like yeah, you can come to an Aboriginal officer and they’ll know . . .
Because you can’t claim ignorance anymore . . . we’ve got reconciliation on the agenda and it’s about
everyone being a part of that journey . . . (Brian, Diversity Practitioner, City Council)
Due to his role in working with the Aboriginal community, Brian said that staff commonly assumed
that he could advise on ‘all Aboriginal issues’. This was even though City Council had stated com-
mitments to supporting reconciliation (‘we’ve got reconciliation on the agenda’) alongside sub-
stantial expertise and resources (‘we’re a very clever organisation’). This meant that the organisation
could no longer ‘claim ignorance’. Brian’s comments also reflect the educative burden that com-
monly falls on under-represented groups (Land, 2015).
Similarly, Sonia described the process of trying to engage with another department to support
multicultural communities.
[Another external organisation] came to me to have a conversation around engaging the multicultural
communities in playing tennis, but [another department] are the ones that run the tennis club . . . All they
had to do was write a letter to say ‘yes we can participate, no we can’t’, and we left it with [the other
department] to do that body of work, but in the end I don’t think anything happened. (Sonia, Diversity
Practitioner, City Council)
Even though another department was responsible for managing the tennis clubs, it was assumed
that it was Sonia’s role. Despite being a relatively simple task (‘all they had to do was write a let-
ter’), the department failed to follow up. This reflects a common phenomenon in diversity work,
where institutional responsibilities are often shifted onto employees with an obvious diversity role
in the organisation (Ahmed, 2012). As a result, it is left to diversity practitioners to maintain
momentum for diversity initiatives.
As champions and change agents, diversity practitioners also played a key role in advocating for
diverse communities and challenging dominant cultural norms in the workplace. As Brian and
Sonia both explained,
14 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
Brian: I suppose for me I’ve done front line work and worked at the coal face for a long time so I think I’ve
served my community so I want to serve them in a different way . . . But yeah it’s a culture shock of
moving away from that kind of work into working in a big organisation like this . . . Because I tell you,
look I have to change the way I speak sometimes . . . (Diversity Practitioner, 3 years at council)
Sonia: Local government is still an organisation, it’s still a bureaucracy in itself, it’s still very much based
on the system . . . But that’s part of what it means to work in an organisation, is that you are part of
something . . . At the same time, my role is one that is a change agent . . . and so of course we’re going to
have conflicts with the system, but I actually see that as my role, that’s what I’m here to do, to rock the
boat. (Diversity Practitioner, 7 years at council)
Brian spoke about working in ‘front line’ community roles before joining local government,
which he described as serving his community in ‘a different way’. Sonia also described tensions
between working within a government bureaucracy while trying to create change. She recognised
that part of working in an organisation included learning to fit into that structure, while also
describing herself as a ‘change agent’, whose role is to ‘rock the boat’. She acknowledged that
this might cause conflict, but believed it was necessary to disrupt the status quo and challenge
‘what’s seen as normal’. Together, due to their proximity to diverse communities and commit-
ments to create institutional change, Brian and Sonia ‘held’ organisational commitments to diver-
sity and anti-racism in place.
5.1.2. Supporting diversity and anti-racism in the physical environment. In Australian local govern-
ment, support for diversity is commonly made visible through signage, flags and ceremonies that
acknowledge Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as First Peoples and traditional landown-
ers. At City Council, the assessment committee discussed the importance of flying the Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander flags at the council buildings. As Brian and Kon said,
Flying both flags is seen as a positive step from council to the community. (Brian, Diversity Practitioner,
City Council)
Only the Australian flag is flown at the council depot as there are no other flag poles, although it would be
easy enough to get another pole. (Kon, Senior Manager, City Council)
As Brian pointed out, flying the flags was seen as a positive step from City Council in providing a
sense of welcome to both the local community and council employees, a point he reiterated in a
later interview:
It is wonderful to see that we have both flags out the front, you know. Well, what I explain to the community
is [that] council supports and works with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. So that’s their way
of showing that. So, the environment, the workplace environment’s right. (Brian, Diversity Practitioner,
City Council)
During the meeting, Kon acknowledged that at the council depot, where outdoor operations are
managed, including storage of City Council’s garbage trucks and other vehicles, only the Australian
flag was flown. At a follow-up interview, Kon indicated that he had already set aside funding to
instal another flagpole at the depot site:
I mean, just because I was on [the assessment committee] when we put our budgets together, I got the
money for an extra flagpole . . . So doing that sort of stuff you know, flying the Koori flag, it will be a
change, people will come in here and say ‘this is political correctness gone mad’ . . . But I mean as a
Trenerry et al. 15
manager staying true to the cause, you know being firm in and resolute in a view when these actions occur,
helps bed that down through the masses so they’ll say, ‘ok no this is serious stuff, he hasn’t blinked an eye
lid’. (Kon, Senior Manager, City Council)
Following his involvement in the workplace assessment, Kon recognised the importance of the
physical environment in supporting workforce diversity. However, Kon also anticipated that
installing an Aboriginal flag would be met with resistance (‘this is political correctness gone mad’).
However, he conceded that managers could address such tensions through clear leadership and
communication and linked this to action, through embodiment such as mannerisms and body lan-
guage (‘they’ll say: ok no this is serious stuff, he hasn’t blinked an eyelid’). As discussed further
below, Kon’s leadership style worked to counter resistance and bridge gaps between articulated
commitments to diversity and practice.
5.2. Strategic plans and policies to increase workforce diversity
The assessment committees at both councils discussed specific plans for workforce diversity,
including goals to increase diversity in the workplace and dedicated roles and resources to support
workforce diversity. As Victoria said during a meeting at City Council,
Council has a multicultural plan . . . but no, we don’t have a specific diversity plan for the internal
workforce. (Victoria, Diversity Practitioner, City Council)
This role would be very much about the workforce, more core and integrated into HR . . . is this something
we would recommend for future action? (Josh, Diversity Practitioner, City Council)
[Motioning to HR], I’m sensing your silence means that you approve! (David, Senior Manager, City Council)
Victoria explained that City Council had a multicultural plan and several community-facing job
roles, but no internal diversity plan or position. Josh said the role must be a core HR function. David,
a senior manager, interjected, using humour to encourage consensus. Following the assessment
process, City Council committed to hiring an HR practitioner focusing on internal workforce diver-
sity recruitment, acknowledging the importance of allocating resources to support diversity work.
Highlighting important contextual differences between the council sites, at Regional Council,
the assessment committee acknowledged that the largely Anglo-Australian demographic of council
was not currently representative of the diversity in the community. However, this was something
that Regional Council desired to change. As Craig said,
I’ve been in the ear of [the CEO] . . . to get the diversity of the workforce at a level of one per cent
[compared to community demographics] . . . (Craig, Senior Manager, Regional Council)
In a later interview, Craig restated his desire to develop a workforce diversity plan:
[Policies would] definitely need the structural support all the way from the top, from the councillors.
That’s the only way the union will agree with me. The union said, if you put in a council policy that says
you can [positively] discriminate against one per cent, he said then I’ll back off . . . And I just haven’t got
time, it’s not my area to be out there fighting policies like that. That’s where it’s up to [the program
coordinator]. (Craig, Senior Manager, Regional Council)
Craig demonstrated his commitment to establishing a policy which would allow Regional Council
to positively discriminate in favour of diverse candidates and had taken initial steps in engaging
16 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
with the CEO and union representatives. He claimed the union representative would be more sup-
portive if policy was supported ‘from the top’. Despite his enthusiasm and seniority, Craig implied
that developing the policy was not part of his role and that the programme coordinator was better
placed to progress the work.
Similarly, other senior leaders at Regional Shire admitted that the predominately Anglo-
Australian council workforce was not representative of community demographics. For example,
Paul said,
I think it’s a realisation that local government, for its survival, needs to become more reflective of its
community . . . I’m not advocating quotas, but what I do think is that we need to be far more inclusive of
that, because that will then enable us to then hopefully provide services in a much more reflective way . . .
(Paul, Senior HR Manager, Regional Council)
Paul suggested that local councils should reflect the community’s diversity, even linking this
to their ‘survival’. However, Paul indicated that he was not ‘advocating quotas’, followed by
an aspiration that ‘being inclusive’ would ‘hopefully’ lead to enhanced service delivery.
Ahmed (2012) has critiqued the role of ‘hope’ in diversity practice, where commitments to
diversity ‘as a speech act might be understood as generating its own promise’ (p. 67). Paul’s
statement was ‘non-performative’, where statements of his support did not lead to action
(Ahmed, 2012).
5.3. Human resources
5.3.1. Selection and hiring processes and practices. Recruitment involves the process of attracting,
selecting and hiring and is a key point of entry into the labour market. In this study, applicants from
under-represented racial/ethnic groups faced barriers in the hiring processes at both interpersonal
and structural levels. For example, at City Council, committee members discussed the job applica-
tion process:
We have already started the process of moving job applications online . . . This is the preferred way,
although there is an alternative application process for some council roles. (Andrew, Senior HR Manager,
City Council)
The online application system is not working well for diverse communities. (Victoria, Diversity
Practitioner, City Council).
I understand the barriers, but we have already invested in streamlining the application process. We have
limited resources to deal with the overwhelming number of applications. (Frank, Manager, City Council).
Due to resource constraints and a higher volume of applications, City Council had already switched
to an online application system. Victoria said that the online application systems created barriers
for job seekers from under-represented groups, who lacked experience navigating complex appli-
cation processes. However, alternative recruitment processes were also used for selected council
roles, like school crossing supervisors, such as information nights and on-the-spot application
processes. Due to the community-facing nature of such roles, applications from people who spoke
a language other than English were often well regarded.
At a subsequent meeting at City Council, Frank elaborated on how the online application might
inadvertently impact under-represented groups:
Trenerry et al. 17
The process for shortlisting applications . . . it could be improved. Recently we advertised for a permanent
part-time customer service role, which is particularly popular for women. But due to the high volume of
applications, those that were not well presented, such as not adequately addressing the selection criteria
would have been eliminated during the short-listing process. (Frank, HR Manager, City Council)
Frank recognised the role of bias in the selection process, where due to ‘the high volume of applica-
tions’ for a permanent part-time role that was particularly popular among female candidates with
caregiving responsibilities, poorly presented applications, including those that did not sufficiently
address selection criteria, were excluded. This seemed to confirm fears that even small errors or
inconsistencies in applications would be rejected in the short-listing process. During follow-up
interviews, council employees said that bias also occurred in interviews. For example, Victoria said,
I think it happens, it definitely happens, yeah, it happened. I was part of a process where it did happen,
whether it was because of racism I don’t know, I can’t actually say that, but there was a situation whereby
. . . we didn’t have that many [applicants] shortlisted but I was on the interview panel . . . in the end there
were three of us saying ‘this person’ and one of us, who was the boss, saying ‘no I don’t want that person,
I want this person, and in the end [the other applicant] was employed. (Victoria, Diversity Practitioner,
City Council)
Victoria explained that despite having a diverse interview panel, with a majority favouring a par-
ticular candidate, decisions could be overridden by a senior manager. Sonia also spoke about her
own experience as a woman, and felt that she had been treated unfairly when applying for a more
senior role after returning to work after having a baby:
Like I really have this thing about gender, in that I think [this council] has an issue with gender more than
they have an issue with cultural diversity and racism, although they could probably both exist on the same
plane. It’s kind of old-fashioned or something. (Sonia, Diversity Practitioner, City Council)
Sonia felt that gender discrimination was more of an issue in council, saying that many of the
organisational structures were ‘run by males’, thus highlighting the intersection of multiple forms
of discrimination (Crenshaw, 1991), which included a tendency for ‘old-fashioned’ values and
hierarchical power structures (Kalev, 2009; Metz and Kulik, 2008).
At Regional Council, the assessment committee also discussed barriers to recruitment. Despite
legislative requirements in relation to equal opportunity in employment, managers discussed that
recruitment practices had become ingrained within bureaucratic processes. As Paul and Simone said,
Recruitment has to be on the basis of transparency, merit . . . We are still very much mono-culture, mono-
stuck, it’s ingrained, recruitment for example in responding to [key selection criteria] . . . now that’s a
gatekeeping thing really, that’s not about securing and recruiting the very best person for the role. That’s
about can you comply, and you know, conform to our requirements . . . (Paul, Senior HR Manager,
Regional Council)
If someone leaves [a team leader or manager] will say we need another person just like that. Well, do we?
Do we really need the exact same demographic, age, gender, nationality? . . . There might be a way to look
at the key selection criteria, that there might be some minimum requirements . . . we need to think outside
of the box. (Simone, HR Manager, City Council).
Paul began by stating legislative requirements for merit and transparency in hiring but sug-
gested that such practices had become ingrained and relatively unquestioned. It was clear from
18 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
Paul’s choice of words (i.e. ‘mono-culture’ and ‘mono-stuck’) that there was a tendency towards
homogeneity in hiring practices. In addition, Paul said that hiring practices had taken on a
‘gatekeeping’ role, where passing the initial ‘first test’ (i.e. the interview stage) was critical to
long-term success within the public sector. Similarly, Simone discussed the tendency for man-
agers to hire people from similar backgrounds to those already employed within Council. As
Craig, a senior manager at Regional Council, said,
I’ve been pushing very, very hard to be able to be allowed to use Congolese, Afghans, whoever that come
here to put them on as full-time employees. Our systems don’t allow that to be done very easily . . . I’ve
got a guy who’ll be sitting at this table next Monday for an interview . . . Like he should get the job, but
he won’t . . . Because his interview technique will be terrible, because of his English and so forth . . . But
he’s a magnificent worker. (Craig, Senior Manager, Reginal Council)
Craig spoke about difficulties in moving casual employees from non-English-speaking back-
grounds to secure permanent and/or full-time employment within the council. This included
evidence that some hardworking employees (e.g. outdoor workers) were unlikely to gain perma-
nent employment due to a lack of English proficiency, despite such proficiency not being a
requirement for the role. As Craig pointed out, high levels of English proficiency were often
expected even when such skills were not required for the role. Similarly, Manika, a highly skilled
diversity practitioner at Regional Council, who had recently immigrated to Australia, explained
in an interview,
[The application process] puts off people applying because it’s so cumbersome looking . . . The terminology
used [in responding to key selection criteria] is so, I think they must keep it by the job. But I don’t think
there has ever been a review of these things, it’s just dished out from the past centuries I think and it’s still
going on . . . I’m not doing one per cent of what [the job description] wanted me to [do] . . . (Manika,
Diversity Practitioner, Regional Council)
Manika described the job application process, including responding to lengthy selection criteria, as
unnecessarily complex and a key barrier for applicants from racially/ethnically diverse back-
grounds, who were less familiar with navigating such processes. Rather, job selection processes
were outdated and often did not match the requirements for the role.
Similarly, at City Council, the assessment committee discussed other practices such as remov-
ing demographic information (such as names, age and gender) from job applications prior to the
short-listing process (i.e. blind recruitment). However, despite a push to trial blind recruitment, this
was met with resistance, as demonstrated by the following conversation at City Council:
But surely ‘discrimination based on surnames’ does not happens at [this council]. (David, Senior Manager,
City Council)
Could we at least trial it, give the goal of this process is to trial innovate approaches? (Josh, Diversity
Practitioner, City Council)
Despite evidence that racism exists in recruitment practices (Booth et al., 2009), some assessment
committee members questioned the need to remove identifying material from job applications.
Rather, there was a perception that discrimination on the basis of race/ethnicity did not happen
within the council. More subtly, following the meeting, HR had written emphatically ‘no, not pos-
sible’ against the proposed action item of trailing blind recruitment on the draft action plan. Rather,
the assessment committed opted to focus on addressing implicit bias within hiring processes.
Trenerry et al. 19
6. Discussion
This article was structured in two parts. First, we established a multi-level framework for under-
standing and addressing racism in the workplace, tying together theoretical insights from multiple
disciplines, including sociology, psychology and organisation/management studies. This includes
analysis of how workplace racism manifests at both the interpersonal and institutional level, where
attitudes, beliefs and behaviours at the interpersonal level influence organisational structures, poli-
cies, practices and cultures (Brief et al., 2005; Essed, 1991). Key strategies to support diversity and
address racism were also reviewed. Drawing on Syed and Ozbilgin’s (2009) relational framework,
three levels of practice were proposed: micro-level strategies targeted at the interpersonal/group
level; meso-level strategies aiming to assess and alter organisational structures, policies, practises
and cultures; and overarching macro-structural factors that influence micro/macro practices and
processes. Key principles for enabling system-level change and establishing accountability were
also emphasised (Griffith et al., 2007a; Paradies et al., 2009).
6.1. Summary of empirical findings and implications
The empirical focus of this article presented selected findings based on observations of a meso-
level workplace diversity and anti-racism assessment implemented within two local government
organisations in Australia. Findings were presented thematically with a focus on three domains of
policy and practice as summarised below.
First, this included assessment of commitments to diversity in organisational documents, such
as mission statements, values and plans and in the physical environment. Findings revealed con-
textual differences between the two council workplaces. City Council’s mission and values explic-
itly valued workforce diversity, while Regional Council only focused on community diversity. City
Council had made some steps towards embedding diversity values into the performance review
process, which helped to establish accountability. Organisational leaders who championed diver-
sity and anti-discrimination also helped to establish accountability by allocating resources and
leading change. However, there was recognition that such support was contingent on the appoint-
ment of leaders who were personally committed to diversity issues.
As Ahmed et al. (2006) propose, this is one of the ‘loops’ and difficulties in diversity work
where ‘achieving commitment depends on commitment’. Even when ‘institutionalised’ into organ-
isational documents, it usually takes more ‘commitment’ by individuals to turn commitments into
action (Ahmed et al., 2006). Such circularity highlights the tenuous nature of diversity commit-
ments and the interplay between structure and agency. Indeed, despite having institutional state-
ments and plans in place, the ‘doing’ of diversity work was often left to employees with an obvious
diversity role, where diversity practitioners spoke about challenges in gaining broader organisa-
tional support for diversity work.
Support for diversity was also made visible in the physical environment (e.g. flags acknowledg-
ing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples), where involvement in the assessment process
led managers to allocate additional resources for installing flagpoles at other council sites. While
managers acknowledged that such measures could be met with resistance, the presence of strong
leadership helped to counter resistance and bridge gaps between articulated commitments and
practice.
Strategic plans and policies, including goals to increase workforce diversity and allocating dedi-
cated roles and resources to support diversity work, were assessed in the second domain. This
process, combined with other workforce planning initiatives, led to City Council committing to
hire a HR practitioner with an explicit focusing on diversity recruitment. Commitment from other
20 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
senior leaders, such as the CEO, translated into the allocation of resources for ongoing diversity
work, thereby helping to embed commitments into institutional practice. At Regional Council, it
was openly acknowledged that the workforce was not representative of the diversity in the com-
munity. Although some managers expressed sincere commitments to establish plans to increase the
diversity of the workforce, including positive discrimination, there was a lack of ownership over
who would drive and implement these initiatives. In this way, commitments to workforce diversity
were ‘non-performative’ in that they did not lead to action (Ahmed, 2012).
Finally, the assessment involved a review of human resource policies and practices, with a key
focus on recruitment. Several barriers to hiring were identified. In particular, standardised recruit-
ment practices, such as shifting to online application systems and requiring applicants to respond
to lengthy selection criteria, disadvantaged applicants from under-represented groups, who lacked
experience navigating complex application processes. Despite requirements for merit-based
recruitment, selection procedures appeared to function as a form of organisational gatekeeping,
with applicants expected to fit into predefined cultural norms. Other forms of bias in recruitment
practices included a preference for homogeneity, such as hiring individuals with a similar profile
and background. Even when interview panels were diverse, senior managers could override con-
sensus decisions.
While alternative recruitment processes were adopted for selected council roles (e.g. school
crossing supervisors), these were focused narrowly on community-facing roles, limiting opportu-
nities for upwards mobility (Avery and McKay, 2006; Kalev, 2009). Women also faced barriers in
promotion, due to outdated values and hierarchical power structures, indicating the intersection of
multiple forms of discrimination in the workplace (Crenshaw, 1991; Metz and Kulik, 2008).
Furthermore, even though some roles (such as those for outdoor workers) did not require a high
level of English proficiency, such workers were unlikely to obtain permanent positions despite
holding casual jobs at Council. In addition, despite other studies indicating bias and discrimination
in recruitment (e.g. Booth et al., 2009), there was denial that such practices occurred within the
council organisations. Rather, suggestions to trial blind recruitment were met with resistance.
There was a preference for ‘softer’ strategies targeted at removing individual biases (e.g. manage-
rial training) over testing ‘harder’ interventions focused at the institutional level.
Based on these findings, there are several implications for policy and practice. While manage-
rial bias plays a role in hiring practices and is often remedied by training, other strategies targeted
at the structural level are needed. Strategies can include changes to hiring practices, such as alter-
native recruitment methods and greater flexibility in hiring to meet diversity targets. Organisations
could also do away with the need for candidates to respond to lengthy selection criteria, given that
such practices commonly disadvantage under-represented groups. Given the persistence of work-
force inequities, there is a strong case for establishing special measures such as positive discrimi-
nation. In contrast to popular assumptions, such measures do not undermine principles of
merit-based recruitment, but if part of strategic planning processes demonstrate that organisations
are serious about their commitments.
Organisational commitments, as expressed in mission statements, values, plans and the physical
environment at the most visible level of organisational culture (Schein, 2004) provide an important
starting point for diversity and anti-racism work. However, even when ‘institutionalised’ into
organisational documents and even physical structures, such commitments will fail in the absence
of sustained action by institutional agents. This highlights the importance of establishing account-
ability in racial equality work. We need to ‘follow’ organisational commitments to diversity and
anti-racism ‘around’ to ensure that such commitments ‘do’ what they say (Ahmed, 2006: 105).
Due to power and status differentials that exist within organisations, leaders and managers play
a crucial role in establishing buy-in for diversity and anti-racism work and countering resistance
Trenerry et al. 21
(DiTomaso et al., 2007). This is particularly important in addressing racism where power imbal-
ances have a privileging/anti-privileging effect for members of dominant/subordinate groups and
passive tolerance of racism is also an exercise of power (Essed, 1991; Paradies, 2006). Targeted
training can be developed for leaders and managers to highlight structural barriers and the neces-
sity of changing policies and practices (Kelaher et al., 2018). Moreover, as shown in this article,
it is commonly bottom-up actors, such as diversity practitioners and other change agents, who
maintain momentum for diversity work and hold organisations to account for stated commit-
ments. Such actors can also be in leadership and management roles and are bottom-up in the sense
that they are proximate to diverse communities and willing to disrupt dominant cultural norms
(Ahmed et al., 2006). Hiring leaders and managers who are similarly committed to diversity and
anti-racism goals is therefore essential in establishing multiple levels of accountability and build-
ing coalitions for change.
6.2. Study contributions, limitations and priorities for further research
This study makes several contributions to existing theory, research, policy and practice. We have
sought to integrate and consolidate key literature across multiple disciplines and provide a fresh
theoretical framework for understanding the nature of racism in the workplace. This includes the
importance of implementing strategies across multiple organisational levels and the role of struc-
ture versus agency in workforce diversity and anti-racism intervention. We have also studied the
implementation of a meso-level workplace diversity and anti-discrimination assessment as a tool
through which to scrutinise organisational structures, policies and practices and processes. The
intersecting role of structure (e.g. organisational values and mission statements, the physical envi-
ronment, strategic plans, human resource policies and practices, etc.) versus human agency (i.e.
establishing accountability and addressing attitudes, behaviours and norms) in supporting work-
force diversity/anti-racism is less well studied and is thus a key theoretical contribution of this
research (Ahmed, 2012; Berard, 2008; Essed, 1991).
This study also contributes to both empirical understanding of workforce diversity and anti-
racism intervention. We have addressed a gap in studying implementation processes in real-life
workplace settings (Cox and Nkomo, 1990). In addition, the use of multiple methods – including
participant observations, interviews and assessment of organisational documents – helped to
uncover deeper understanding of workplace dynamics and interactions. While organisations might
be reluctant to allow researchers access to study these processes, doing so is crucial for understand-
ing systemic issues like racism and where workforce diversity initiatives get stuck.
This study is limited to the Australian context, which has a specific macro-historical context for
understanding and supporting workforce diversity/anti-racism, including in work-related settings.
The findings of this research, including differences between the case study sites, underscore the
importance of context and adopting workplace diversity and anti-racism strategies that are respon-
sive to local and contextual factors. Nonetheless, the study has global relevance due to the paucity
of empirical research on workplace racism and anti-racism, where relevant findings can be studied
and generalised across countries and contexts.
Finally, this study examined the process of change rather than long-term outcomes. Longitudinal
studies can measure changes in attitudes, behaviours, policies, practices and cultures over time and
contribute to theory building. Other priorities for future research include understanding how rac-
ism manifests in different institutional settings and which strategies are more effective, given these
varied contexts. This includes developing further knowledge of the intersection between structure
and agency workforce diversity/anti-racism interventions, including the conditions and organisa-
tional contexts in which anti-racism interventions are more likely to succeed or fail.
22 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
7. Conclusion
Many countries and organisations around the world are dealing with a variety of workforce chal-
lenges, such as rapidly ageing populations and workforce shortages across a range of industries.
More than ever, countries are reliant on migration to boost labour supply and increase productivity.
Similarly, if companies are to remain competitive, attracting and retaining workers from a diversity
of backgrounds and skill sets is essential. Despite increasing acknowledgement of the business
case for diversity, many corporate diversity efforts have not led to significant changes in represen-
tation (Dobbin and Kalev, 2016).
Challenges in implementation can be due to multiple factors, including reliance on less effective
strategies such as anti-bias training, and a lack of courage to acknowledge and challenge more
confronting and deep-seated issues such as racism (Livingston, 2020). In particular, there is a need
to hold institutions and decision makers to account for stated commitments to workforce diversity
and anti-racism through implementing strategies at multiple organisational levels and establishing
buy-in from a range of organisational actors. Nonetheless, despite its structural and universal
drives, racism can be disrupted through the presence of diversity in the workplace and anti-racism
intervention to challenge unacceptable attitudes and behaviours and exclusive institutional struc-
tures, cultures and norms.
Acknowledgements
The data collection and initial write-up for this article were completed while the first author was a PhD can-
didate at Western Sydney University, Australia. The authors would also like to thank the reviewers for their
helpful comments in improving this article.
Author contributions
B.T. conceptualised this article and undertook data collection, analysis and presentation of findings. K.D. and
Y.P. helped to develop the results and edit the article. All authors contributed to and approved the final
article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship and/or publica-
tion of this article: B.T. was supported by an Australian Postgraduate Award in developing this study.
ORCID iDs
Brigid Trenerry https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6496-7382
Kevin Dunn https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9974-1217
References
Agocs C and Graham K (2015) Systemic racism in employment in Canada: Diagnosing systemic racism in
organizational culture. In: Sancton A and Zhenming C (eds) Citizen Participation at the Local Level in
China and Canada. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, pp. 139–170.
Ahmed S (2006) The nonperformativity of antiracism. Meridians: Feminism, Race, Transnationalism 7:
104–126.
Ahmed S (2012) On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life. Durham, NC; London: Duke
University Press.
Ahmed S, Hunter S, Kilic S, et al. (2006) Race, Diversity and Leadership in the Learning and Skills Sector.
London: Goldsmiths, University of London.
Allport GW (1954) The Nature of Prejudice. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Trenerry et al. 23
Amano-Patino N, Aramburu J and Contractor Z (2021) The effect of affirmative action on workers’ out-
comes. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics, No. 2104. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/
abstract=3762025 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3762025
Arendt H (1953) Ideology and terror: A novel form of government. The Review of Politics 15: 303–327.
Åslund O and Skans ON (2012) Do anonymous job application procedures level the playing field? ILR
Review 65: 82–107.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2021a) Census of population and housing 2021. Cultural diversity of
Australia. https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/cultural-diversity-australia
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2021b) Census of population and housing 2021. Community profiles. Available
at: https://www.abs.gov.au/census/find-census-data/community-profiles/2021 (accessed 1 August 2022).
Australian Human Rights Commission (2018) Leading for Change: A Blueprint for Cultural Diversity and
Inclusive Leadership Revisited. Sydney, NSW, Australia: Australian Human Rights Commission.
Avery DR and McKay PF (2006) Target practice: An organizational impression management approach to
attracting minority and female job applicants. Personnel Psychology 59: 157–187.
Banerjee R, Reitz JG and Oreopoulos P (2018) Do large employers treat racial minorities more fairly? An
analysis of Canadian field experiment data. Canadian Public Policy 44: 1–12.
Beach M, Price E, Gary T, et al. (2006) Improving health care quality for racial/ethnic minorities: A system-
atic review of the best evidence regarding provider and organization interventions. BMC Public Health
6: 104–111.
Behrendt L and Coombes L (2021) Do Better – Independent Review into Collingwood Football Club’s
Responses to Incidents of Racism and Cultural Safety in the Workplace. Melbourne, VIC, Australia:
Australian Football League.
Ben J, Kelly D and Paradies Y (2020) Contemporary anti-racism. In: Solomos J (ed.) Routledge International
Handbook of Contemporary Racism. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 205–215.
Bennetto J (2009) Police and Racism: What Has Been Achieved 10 Years after the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry
Report? Manchester: Equality and Human Rights Commission.
Berard TJ (2008) The neglected social psychology of institutional racism. Sociology Compass 2: 734–764.
Berman G and Paradies Y (2010) Racism, disadvantage and multiculturalism: Towards effective anti-racist
praxis. Ethnic and Racial Studies 33: 214–232.
Berman G, Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission and Victorian Multicultural
Commission (2008) Harnessing Diversity: Addressing Racial and Religious Discrimination in
Employment. Melbourne, VIC, Australia: Victorian Multicultural Commission and the Victorian Equal
Opportunity & Human Rights Commission.
Bertone S, Leahy M and Doughney J (2005) Equal Opportunity in the Victorian Public Sector: Working
Towards Equity in Cultural Diversity. Footscray, VIC, Australia: Work and Policy Research Unit,
School of Applied Economics, Victoria University.
Bezrukova K, Spell CS, Perry JL, et al. (2016) A meta-analytical integration of over 40 years of research on
diversity training evaluation. Psychological Bulletin 142: 1227–1274.
Bhui K, Ascoli M and Nuamh O (2012) The place of race and racism in cultural competence: What can
we learn from the English experience about the narratives of evidence and argument? Transcultural
Psychiatry 49: 185–205.
Biddle N, Howlett M, Hunter B, et al. (2013) Labour market and other discrimination facing Indigenous
Australians. Australian Journal of Labour Economics 16: 91–113.
Blank R, Dabady M and Citro C (2004) Measuring Racial Discrimination. Washington, DC: The National
Academies Press.
Blumer H (1958) Race prejudice as a sense of group position. The Pacific Sociological Review 1: 3–7.
Booth A, Leigh A and Varganova E (2009) Does Racial and Ethnic Discrimination Vary across Minority
Groups? Evidence from Three Experiments. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Australian National University.
Bourke CJ, Marrie H and Marrie A (2019) Transforming institutional racism at an Australian hospital.
Australian Health Review 43: 611–618.
Bowen S (2008) Beyond self-assessment: Assessing organisational cultural responsiveness. Journal of
Cultural Diversity 15: 7–15.
24 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
Bowser BP (2017) Racism: Origin and theory. Journal of Black Studies 48: 572–590.
Brief AP, Butz RM and Deitch EA (2005) Organizations as reflections of their environments: The case of
race composition. In: Dipboye RL and Colella AM (eds) Discrimination at Work: The Psychological and
Organizational Bases. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 119–148.
Buttner E, Lowe K and Billings-Harris L (2010) The impact of diversity promise fulfillment on professionals
of color outcomes in the USA. Journal of Business Ethics 91: 501–518.
Came H (2014) Sites of institutional racism in public health policy making in New Zealand. Social Science
& Medicine 106: 214–220.
Carmichael S and Hamilton CV (1968) Black Power: The Politics of Liberation in America. London: Cape.
Chatman JA and O’Reilly CA (2016) Paradigm lost: Reinvigorating the study of organizational culture.
Research in Organizational Behavior 36: 199–224.
Colic-Peisker V and Tilbury F (2007) Integration into the Australian labour market: The experience of three
‘visibly different’ groups of recently arrived refugees. International Migration 45: 59–85.
Collins PH (1991) Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Enpowerment.
New York: Routledge.
Cox T (1991) The multicultural organization. Academy of Management Perspectives 5(2): 34–47.
Cox T (1993) Cultural Diversity in Organisations: Theory, Research and Practice. San Francisco, CA:
Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Cox T and Nkomo S (1990) Invisble men and women: A status report on race as a variable in organization
behavior research. Journal of Organizational Behavior 11: 419–431.
Creegan C, Colgan F, Charlesworth R, et al. (2003) Race equality policies at work: Employee perceptions of
the ‘implementation gap’ in a UK Local Authority. Work Employment Society 17: 617–640.
Crenshaw K (1989) Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidis-
crimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum 1989:
139–167.
Crenshaw K (1991) Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of
color. Stanford Law Review 43: 1241–1129.
Cross T, Bazron B, Dennis K, et al. (1989) Towards a Culturally Competent System of Care. Washington,
DC: Georgetwon University Child Development Center, CASSP Technical Assistance Center.
Cunneen C (2001) Conflict, Politics and Crime: Aboriginal Communities and the Police. Crows Nest, NSW,
Australia: Allen & Unwin.
De Castro AB, Rue T and Takeuchi DT (2010) Associations of employment frustration with self-rated
physical and mental health among Asian American immigrants in the U.S. Labor Force. Public Health
Nursing 27: 492–503.
Deitch EA, Barsky A, Butz RM, et al. (2003) Subtle yet significant: The existence and impact of everyday
racial discrimination in the workplace. Human Relations 56: 1299–1324.
DiTomaso N, Post C and Parks-Yancy R (2007) Workforce diversity and inequality: Power, status and num-
bers. Annual Review of Psychology 33: 473–501.
Dobbin F and Kalev A (2016) Why diversity programs fail. Harvard Business Review, July–August. Available
at: https://hbr.org/2016/07/why-diversity-programs-fail
Dobbin F, Schrage D and Kalev A (2015) Rage against the iron cage: The varied effects of bureaucratic per-
sonnel reforms on diversity. American Sociological Review 80: 1014–1044.
Dovidio JF and Hebl MR (2005) Discrimination at the level of the individual: Cognitive and affective factors.
In: Dipboye RL and Colella A (eds) Discrimination at Work: The Psychological and Organizational
Bases. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 11–35.
Dovidio JF, Hewstone M, Glick P, et al. (2010) The Sage Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping and
Discrimination. London: SAGE.
Dreachslin JL, Weech-Maldonado R and Dansky KH (2004) Racial and ethnic diversity and organizational
behavior: A focused research agenda for health services management. Social Science & Medicine 59:
961–971.
Dunn KM, Forrest J, Burnley I, et al. (2004) Constructing racism in Australia. Australian Journal of Social
Issues 39: 409–430.
Trenerry et al. 25
Elias A and Paradies Y (2016) Estimating the mental health costs of racial discrimination. BMC Public Health
16: 1205.
Ely R and Thomas D (2001) Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group
processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly 46: 229–273.
Ely R, Padavic I and Thomas D (2012) Racial diversity, racial asymmetries, and team learning environment:
Effects on performance. Organization Studies 33: 341–362.
Emerson RM, Fretz RI and Shaw LL (1995) Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago, IL; London:
University of Chicago Press.
Essed P (1991) Understanding Everyday Racism: An Interdisciplinary Theory. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
Essed P (2005) Gendered normativities in racialized spaces: Cloning the physician. In: Solomos J and Murji
K (eds) Racialization: Studies in Theory and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 229–249.
Ferdinand A, Paradies Y and Kelaher M (2012) Mental Health Impacts of Racial Discrimination in Victorian
Aboriginal Communities: The Localities Embracing and Accepting Diversity (LEAD) Experiences of
Racism Survey. Melbourne, VIC, Australia: The Lowitja Institute.
Ferdinand AS, Paradies Y and Kelaher M (2017) Enhancing the use of research in health-promoting, anti-
racism policy. Health Research Policy and Systems 15: 61.
Fernandez S and Rainey HG (2006) Managing successful organizational change in the public sector. Public
Administration Review 66: 168–176.
Fine M (1996) Cultural diversity in the workplace: The state of the field. The Journal of Business
Communication 33: 485–503.
Fiske ST (1998) Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In: Gilbert DT, Fiske ST and Lindzey G (eds)
The Handbook of Social Psychology. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, pp. 357–411.
Flemington T, Fraser J, Gibbs C, et al. (2022) The Daalbirrwirr Gamambigu (safe children) model: Embedding
cultural safety in child protection responses for Australian aboriginal children in hospital settings.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19: 5381.
Fredericks B and Bargallie D (2016) ‘Which way? Talking culture, talking race’: Unpacking an Indigenous
cultural competency course. International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies 9: 3–16.
Gaze B (2005) Has the racial discrimination act contributed to eliminating racial discrimination? Analysing
the litigation track record 2000–2004. Australian Journal of Human Rights 11: 171–201.
Gelfand MJ, Nishii LH, Raver JL, et al. (2005) Discrimination in organizations: An organizational-level sys-
tems perspective. In: Dipboye RL and Colella A (eds) Discrimination at Work: The Psychological and
Organizational Bases. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 89–116.
Giddens A (1984) The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
Gillborn D (2006) Critical race theory and education: Racism and anti-racism in educational theory and
praxis. Discourse Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 27: 11–32.
Gozu A, Beach MC, Price EG, et al. (2007) Self-administered instruments to measure cultural competence
of health professionals: A systematic review. Teaching and Learning in Medicine: An International
Journal 19: 180–190.
Greene MP (2007) Beyond diversity and multiculturalism: Towards the development of anti-racist institu-
tions and leaders. Journal for Nonprofit Management 11: 9–17.
Greenhalgh T, Robert G, MacFarlane F, et al. (2004) Diffusion of innovations in service organizations:
Systematic review and recommendations. The Millbank Quarterly 82: 581–629.
Griffith DM, Childs EL, Eng E, et al. (2007a) Racism in organizations: The case of a public health depart-
ment. Journal of Community Psychology 35: 287–302.
Griffith DM, Mason M, Yonas M, et al. (2007b) Dismantling institutional racism: Theory and action.
American Journal of Community Psychology 39: 381–392.
Griffith DM, Yonas MA, Mason M, et al. (2010) Considering organizational factors in addressing health care
disparities: Two case examples. Health Promotion Practice 11: 367–376.
Habtegiorgis AE and Paradies Y (2013) Utilising self-report data to measure racial discrimination in the
labour market. Australian Journal of Labour Economics 16: 5–41.
26 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
Holdaway S and O’Neill M (2007) Where has all the racism gone? Views of racism within constabularies
after Macpherson. Ethnic & Racial Studies 30: 397–415.
hooks b (1990) Yearning: Race, Gender, and Cultural Politics. Boston, MA: South End Press.
Hughes D and Dodge MA (1997) African American women in the workplace: Relationships between job
conditions, racial bias at work, and perceived job quality. American Journal of Community Psychology
25: 581–599.
Hughes L and Davidson GR (2011) Effects of non-indigenous Australian human resource managers’ gen-
der and attitudes and applicants’ ethnicity and gender on resumé evaluations. Journal of Pacific Rim
Psychology 5: 1–10.
Hussain A and Ishaq M (2008) Managing race equality in Scottish local councils in the aftermath of the Race
Relations (Amendment) Act 2000. International Journal of Public Sector Management 21: 586–610.
Ivancevich JM and Gilbert JA (2000) Diversity management – Time for a new approach. Public Personnel
Management 29: 75–92.
Johnstone MJ and Kanitsaki O (2008) The politics of resistance to workplace cultural diversity education for
health service providers: An Australian study. Race, Ethnicity & Education 11: 133–154.
Jones B, Hwang E and Bustamante RM (2015) African American female professors’ strategies for success-
ful attainment of tenure and promotion at predominately White institutions: It can happen. Education,
Citizenship and Social Justice 10: 133–151.
Jones JM (1997) Prejudice and Racism. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Jones KP, Peddie CI, Gilrane VL, et al. (2016) Not so subtle: A meta-analytic investigation of the correlates
of subtle and overt discrimination. Journal of Management 42: 1588–1613.
Kalev A (2009) Cracking the glass cages? Restructuring and ascriptive inequality at work. American Journal
of Sociology 114: 1591–1643.
Kalev A, Dobbin F and Kelly E (2006) Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate
affirmative action and diversity policies. American Sociological Review 71: 589–617.
Kalinoski ZT, Steele-Johnson D, Peyton EJ, et al. (2013) A meta-analytic evaluation of diversity training
outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior 34: 1076–1104.
Kelaher M, Ferdinand AS, Paradies Y, et al. (2018) Exploring the mental health benefits of participation in an
Australian anti-racism intervention. Health Promotion International 33: 107–114.
King DD, Fattoracci ESM, Hollingsworth DW, et al. (2023) When thriving requires effortful surviving:
Delineating manifestations and resource expenditure outcomes of microaggressions for Black employ-
ees. Journal of Applied Psychology 108: 183–207.
Kobayashi A and Peake L (2000) Racism out of place: Thoughts on whiteness and an antiracist geography in
the new millennium. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 90: 392–403.
Kotter JP (1996) Leading Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Kowal E, Franklin H and Paradies Y (2013) Reflexive antiracism: A novel approach to diversity training.
Ethnicities 13: 316–337.
Krause A, Rinne U and Zimmermann KF (2012) Anonymous job applications in Europe. IZA Journal of
European Labor Studies 1: 5.
Land C (2015) Decolonizing Solidarity: Dilemmas and Directions for Supporters of Indigenous Struggles.
London: Zed Books.
Langton M (2000) A treaty between our nations. In: Inaugural Professorial Lecture By Professor Marcia
Langton Chair of Australian Indigenous Studies, University of Melbourne, VIC, Australia, October.
Lee RT, Perez AD, Boykin CM, et al. (2019) On the prevalence of racial discrimination in the United States.
PLoS ONE 14: e0210698.
Lincoln YS and Guba EG (1986) But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evalua-
tion. New Directions for Program Evaluation 1986(30): 73–84.
Livingston R (2020) How to promote racial equity in the workplace. Harvard Business Review, September–
October. Available at: https://hbr.org/2020/09/how-to-promote-racial-equity-in-the-workplace
Lorbiecki A and Jack G (2000) Critical turns in the evolution of diversity management. British Journal of
Management 11: 17–31.
Trenerry et al. 27
Lowitja Institute (2022) Close the Gap Campaign Report 2022 – Transforming Power: Voices for Generational
Change. Lowitja Institute. Available at: https://www.lowitja.org.au/page/services/resources/Cultural-
and-social-determinants/culture-for-health-and-wellbeing/close-the-gap-campaign-report-2022—trans-
forming-power-voices-for-generational-change (accessed 1 July 2022).
Mack Burch LD, Oliva G, Smyly V, et al. (2005) Assessing the immediate and longer term impact of an
Undoing Racism workshop on individuals and their organizations. In: American Public Health
Association 133rd annual meeting & exposition, Philadelphia, PA, 10–14 December.
Macpherson W (1999) The Stephen Lawrence inquiry. CM 4262-I. London: The Stationery Office.
Maloney MM, Bresman H, Zellmer-Bruhn ME, et al. (2016) Contextualization and context theorizing in
teams research: A look back and a path forward. Academy of Management Annals 10: 891–942.
Mansouri F, Kenny S and Strong C (2007) Promoting Intercultural Understanding in Australia: An Evaluation
of Local Government Initiatives in Victoria. Geelong, VIC, Australia: Deakin University.
Marrie A and Marrie H (2014) A Matrix for Identifying, Measuring and Monitoring Institutional Racism
within Public Hospitals and Health Services. Gordonvale, QLD, Australia: Bukal Consultancy Services.
Mathews A (1998) Diversity: A principle of human resource management. Public Personnel Management
27: 175–185.
Merri Community Health Services, the University of Melbourne and the Centre for Culture, Ethnicity and
Health (2014) Cultural Competency Organisational Review (CORe): Building and Strengthening
Organisational Cultural Competence. Melbourne, VIC, Australia: The Centre for Culture, Ethnicity
and Health.
Metz I and Kulik CT (2008) Making public organizations more inclusive: A case study of the Victoria Police
Force. Human Resource Management 47: 369–387.
Moreton-Robinson A, Walter M, Singh D, et al. (2011) On Stony Ground: Governance and Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Participation in Australian Universities. Report to the Review of Higher
Education Access and Outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People. Canberra, ACT,
Australia: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.
Mungabareena Aboriginal Corporation and Women’s Health Goulburn North East (2008) Making Two
Worlds Work: Building the Capacity of the Health and Community Sector to Work Effectively and
Respectfully with Our Aboriginal Community. Mungabareena Aboriginal Corporation, and Women’s
Health Goulburn North East, Wodonga, VIC, Australia.
Narine L and Persaud D (2003) Gaining and maintaining commitment to large-scale change in healthcare
organizations. Health Services Management Research 16: 179–187.
Nash JC (2008) Re-thinking intersectionality. Feminist Review 89: 1–15.
Nelson J (2013) Denial of racism and its implications for local action. Discourse Society 24: 89–109.
Nishii LH, Khattab J, Shemla M, et al. (2018) A multi-level process model for understanding diversity prac-
tice effectiveness. Academy of Management Annals 12: 37–82.
Noon M (2007) The fatal flaws of diversity and the business case for ethnic minorities. Work, Employment
and Society 21: 773–784.
Noon M (2010) The shackled runner: Time to rethink positive discrimination? Work, Employment and Society
24: 728–739.
Olavarria M, Beaulac J, Belanger A, et al. (2009) Organizational cultural competence in community health
and social service organizations: How to conduct a self-assessment. Journal of Cultural Diversity 16:
140–150.
Paluck EL (2006) Diversity training and intergroup contact: A call to action research. Journal of Social Issues
62: 577–595.
Paluck EL and Green DP (2009) Prejudice reduction: What works? A critical look at evidence from the field
and the laboratory. Annual Review of Psychology 60: 339–367.
Paluck EL, Porat R, Clark CS, et al. (2021) Prejudice reduction: Progress and challenges. Annual Review of
Psychology 72: 533–560.
Paradies Y (2005) Anti-racism and indigenous Australians. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 5:
1–28.
28 Australian Journal of Management 00(0)
Paradies Y (2006) Defining, conceptualizing and characterizing racism in health research. Critical Public
Health 16: 143–157.
Paradies Y, Chandrakumar L, Klocker N, et al. (2009) Building on Our Strengths: A Framework to Reduce
Race-Based Discrimination and Promote Diversity in Victoria. Melbourne, VIC, Australia: Victorian
Health Promotion Foundation.
Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
Pedersen A, Walker I and Wise M (2005) ‘Talk does not cook rice’: Beyond anti-racism rhetoric to strategies
for social action. Australian Psychologist 40: 20–30.
Pew Research Center (2016) On Views of Race and Inequality, Blacks and Whites Are Worlds Apart.
Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
Polity Research (2020) Reconciliation Barometer 2020. Sydney, NSW, Australia: Reconciliation Australia.
Rabelo VC, Robotham KJ and McCluney CL (2021) ‘Against a sharp white background’: How Black women
experience the white gaze at work. Gender, Work & Organization 28: 1840–1858.
Rangarajan N and Black T (2007) Exploring organizational barriers to diversity. Review of Public Personnel
Administration 27: 249–263.
Rogers EM (1995) Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press.
Rospenda KM, Richman JA and Shannon CA (2009) Prevalence and mental health correlates of harassment
and discrimination in the workplace. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 24: 819–843.
Schein EH (2004) Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco, CA: John WIley & Sons.
Shannon CA, Rospenda KM, Richman JA, et al. (2009) Race, racial discrimination, and the risk of work-related
illness, injury, or assault: Findings from a national study. Journal of Occupational and Environmental
Medicine 51: 441–448.
Siegel C, Haugland G and Chambers ED (2004) Cultural competency assessment scale with instructions:
Outpatient service delivery agency level. Unpublished manuscript. Orangeburg, NY: Nathan S. Kline
Institute for Psychiatric Research.
Smith JW and Calasanti T (2005) The influences of gender, race and ethnicity on workplace experiences of
institutional and social isolation: An exploratory study of university faculty. Sociological Spectrum 25:
307–334.
Soutphommasane T (2017) Cultural Diversity in Leadership: What Does It Say About Australian
Multiculturalism? Journal of Australian Studies 41(3): 287–295.
Syed J and Ozbilgin M (2009) A relational framework for international transfer of diversity management
practices. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 20: 2435–2453.
Syed J and Pio E (2009) Veiled diversity? Workplace experiences of Muslim women in Australia. Asia
Pacific Journal of Management 27: 115–137.
Thomas RR (1990) From affirmative action to affirming diversity. Harvard Business Review, March–April,
pp. 107–117.
Trenerry B and Paradies Y (2012) Organizational assessment: An overlooked approach to managing diversity
and addressing racism in the workplace. Journal of Diversity Management 7: 11–26.
Trenerry B, Franklin H and Paradies Y (2012) Preventing Race-Based Discrimination (An Evidence Review:
Full Report), Creating Healthy Workplaces Evidence Review Series. Melbourne, VIC, Australia:
Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.
Truong M, Paradies Y and Priest N (2014) Interventions to improve cultural competency in healthcare: A
systematic review of reviews. BMC Health Services Research 14: 99.
Utsey S, Ponterotto J and Porter J (2008) Prejudice and racism, Year 2008 – Still going strong: Research
on reducing prejudice with recommended methodological advances. Journal of Counseling and
Development 86: 339–347.
VicHealth (2015) Localities Embracing and Accepting Diversity (LEAD) Workplace Diversity and Anti
Discrimination Assessment Tool. Melbourne, VIC, Australia: Victorial Health Promotion Foundation.
Watego C, Singh D and Macoun A (2021) Partnership for justice in health: Scoping paper on race, racism
and the Australian health system, Discussion Paper, The Lowitja Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Wrench J (2005) Diversity management can be bad for you. Race and Class 46: 73–84.
