University of Georgia

Terry College of Business

* - Associate Professor of Business and Employment Law, TerryCollege of Business, University of Georgia

©1994, Dawn D. Bennett-Alexander, all rights reserved.
 
 

I am a citizen of the United States, as are my parents and as were their parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents. I do not, however, fit those mental sets that define America and Americans. My physical appearance, my speech patterns, my name, my profession (a professor of Spanish) create a text that confuses the reader. My normal experience is to be asked, "And where are you from?"

I've always known that I was the other, even before I knew the vocabulary or understood the significance of being the other.

[W]e would always have an accent, however perfect our pronunciation, however excellent our enunciation, however divine our diction. That accent would be heard in our pigmentation, our physiognomy, our names. We were, in short, the other.

Being the other means feeling different; is awareness of being distinct; is consciousness of being dissimilar. It means being outside the game, outside the circle, outside the set. It means being on the edges, closed out, precluded, even disdained and scorned. It produces a sense of isolation, of apartness, of disconnectedness, of alienation.

Being the other involves a contradictory phenomenon. On the other hand being the other frequently means being invisible. Ralph Ellison wrote eloquently about that experience in his magisterial novel The Invisible Man. On the other hand, being the other sometimes involves sticking out like a sore thumb. What is she/he doing here?

If one is the other, one will inevitably be perceived unidimensionally; will be seen stereotypically; will be defined and delimited by mental sets that may not bear much relation to existing realities. There is a darker side to otherness as well. The other disturbs, disquiets, discomforts. It provokes distrust and suspicion. The other makes people feel anxious, nervous, apprehensive, even fearful. The other frightens, scares.
 

For some of us being the other is only annoying; for other it is debilitating; for still others it is damning. Many try to flee otherness by taking on protective colorations that provide invisibility, whether of dress or speech or manner or name. Only a fortunate few succeed. For the majority, otherness is permanently sealed by physical appearance. For the rest, otherness is betrayed by ways of being, speaking or of doing.
 

I spent the first half of my life downplaying the significance and consequences of otherness. The second half has seen me wrestling to understand its complex and deeply ingrained realities; striving to fathom why otherness denies us a voice or visibility or validity in American society and its institutions; struggling to make otherness familiar, reasonable, even normal to my fellow Americans.⁽⁴⁾
 
 

As we discover the taxing toll that "otherness" takes on the workplace, it is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore the issue of diversity and its role in the world of work. As recently as five or six years ago the issue was barely mentioned in any widespread context. Today, colleges of business are beginning to respond. Harris and Moran's book, Managing Cultural Differences, has been adopted by over 100 colleges and universities.⁽⁵⁾

The Wharton School at Penn the Harvard Business School, the Yale School of Management, Rutgers Business School, Penn State's Smeal College of Business, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, and the Weatherhead School of Management at Case Western Reserve University have all made moves to include some sort of diversity training in their curriculum.

However, this response is not entirely of its own accord. As stated in a recent AACSB⁽⁶⁾

magazine article, "industry is making it increasingly clear that diversity bottom-line issue."⁽⁷⁾

With the feelings expressed by Arturo Madrid above, it is not difficult to see why. Being thought of as "other," with the concomitant implication that this somehow means "less than," causes an incessant leaching of resources the employer has paid for and now refuses to accept. To the extent that the employee must spend energy denying who he or she is in order to be acceptable in the workplace, less energy is able to be expended on the job the employee is being paid for.

In recognizing this, industry has made moves to become more culturally diverse and to take it on as a business issue. Many corporations have created high level positions to deal solely with diversity. DuPont's diversity budget for 1993 was $96 million.

Is this issue, as some have argued, divisive, unstable, and a temporal "politically correct" flash in the pan? I would argue no. Not only is it the wave of the future, but a wave which is long overdue. I believe that employers have found that the law has gone as far as it can go to regulate behavior among people. The law can prohibit an employer from discriminating in employment based upon race, gender, religion, etc., but it can do little about the attitudes of people in carrying out the law. Yet it is these attitudes which shape the experience which makes some groups feel as if they are "the other."

It is particularly true that the law can do little about the attitudes of people in carrying out the law, when much of the attitude has been as ingrained in the very fabric of a society as it has in ours. Attitudes about race, gender, religion, age, ethnicity and other categories have long, deep, often acrimonious histories not so easily forgotten.

The more recent history we are making with renewed waves of immigration are also affected by this. The past fifteen years have seen economic slumps, recessions, losses of jobs to other countries, inflation, cutbacks, layoffs, downsizing, re-engineering and realignments in industry. Whenever people feel their jobs are threatened, they begin to close ranks and strike out at the easiest target. With increasing numbers of immigrants, minorities and women entering the workforce, they found themselves in this uncomfortable position.

This paper will discuss the concept of valuing diversity and why it should be an integral part of every workplace if the employer wishes to maximize the production, creativity and efficiency of its workforce and gain a competitive edge. Because it should be an integral part of the workplace, it should also be an important part of the business curriculum. In so including it, employers and business academics will see that this issue of valuing diversity is not just hype, and is more than just a wave which will at some point recede. It is, in fact, evolution in the making.

When Norman Lafond finally got to the bottom of Kyowa Electrical and Chemical Co.'s chronic production glitches, he found the root problem went deeper than poor quality or bad communication. It came down to culture.

The Irvine firm's top management and technicians, mainly Japanese, were the object of suspicion on the shop floor: they went around making notes and conversing in a language nobody else understood. The largely Hispanic work force had plenty of ideas for improvement, but nobody asked in a way that encouraged suggestion. The mostly white middle management was caught in between, distrustful of both groups and frustrated that problems weren't being solved.

The result was an alarmingly high defect rate in the company's products. Kyowa had tried three times to implement a total quality management program, to no avail. The high return rate kept hammering the company's bottom line; even worse, it was damaging Kyowa's reputation and relationships with its quality-conscious customers.

What became clear to a consultant brought in, was that there were cultural problems. With the best of intentions, they weren't communicating. You had a management that was very supportive and wanted workers to get involved, but it wasn't working.

Today, Kyowa's defect rate in transfers between its production and finishing plants has dropped from 37 to virtually zero; its reject rate in production has fallen from 16% to 4%.

And for business people who think trendy concepts like "managing diversity' are better suited to college sociology classes and TV talk shows than company boardrooms, Kyowa has bottom-line production savings of up to $400,000--savings management attributes largely to better meshing of cultures.⁽⁸⁾

In addition to Kyowa, add to the list of diversity converts, Corning, DuPont, Procter and Gamble, Avon, Xerox, and many federal and state government agencies, and others. The above passage is only one of many such articles which have appeared in the mass media lately.⁽⁹⁾

With each article, it becomes clearer that valuing diversity is here to stay. It is not a revolution, but rather, an evolution. As such, its effects will be felt for a long time to come.

The U.S. Department of Labor's Workforce 2000 study conducted by the Hudson Institute and released in 1987⁽¹⁰⁾

held a few surprises that galvanized America into addressing the issue of diversity. According to the widely cited study, by the year 2000-only 6 years away--we will experience the greatest influx of immigrants since World War II. At the same time, the percentage of women entering the workforce is increasing and is now nearly 50%. While the last big wave of immigrants at the early part of the century was 90% European, this wave is to be about 90% Asian and Latin American.

There is every reason to believe that those who come to America will not completely leave behind their culture and totally assimilate. In fact, history shows us, as does Arturo Madrid's piece above, that even if they wanted to, it would not be totally "successful".

According to the study, the net result is that 85% of the net growth in the workforce will be comprised of women and nonEuropeans. For the first time, white males, who have by and large shaped the contours of our workforce until now, will be a minority in the incoming workforce. Add to this the globalization of business and the concept of the world as a "global village," and valuing diversity takes on even greater importance.

While definitions may vary, valuing diversity is learning to understand, appreciate, and value (not just "tolerate") the unique aspects of cultures different from our own. The end product is learning to value others who may be different from us for what they contribute. "Culture" encompasses not only ethnicity, but also gender, age, disability, affinity orientation (I refuse to use the term "homosexuality" and thus define an entire person by the singular, irrelevant, and very private matter of what they do sexually) and other factors which may significantly affect and in many ways, define, our lives. Valuing diversity is learning that "different from" does not mean "less than".

Valuing diversity is getting in touch with our cultural conditioning and recognizing it for what it is: our culture's way of doing things rather than the "right" way of doing things. It is taking in this information about culture and using it to evaluate and interpret other's behavior. It is using this information to help us communicate a more accurate message to others about matters we may be unaware are dividing us. It is working toward inclusion rather than conformity.

Those who understand the value of the concept of valuing diversity and the relevance it has for business will be better situated to address the workplace with which they will be faced. Not only are employees changing, but so are markets, clients, customers, suppliers and others we do business with. What may have been true in the past, may not be true, as we know it, any longer. Those who fail to deal with the reality of the changing workplace and how to address it, will be left behind as surely as a business which has not moved to computers or photocopiers from typewriters or ditto machines.⁽¹¹⁾
 
 

* In Saudi Arabia, the protocol is to use the first meeting for social acquaintance, warm-up, or trust building, and not as a time to conduct serious business.⁽¹⁴⁾

* In matters of recruitment and selection, Asian managers often rely on family and friends whom they can trust or have obligations to, while Western managers use more objective measures of competency.⁽¹⁵⁾

* When doing business in Indonesia, handshaking with either sex is perfectly acceptable, but using the left hand for this purpose is strictly "taboo"; in other cultures, handshakes are avoided, and some form of bow is preferred.⁽¹⁶⁾

* Leaving the office in America requires one to say "Good night" or "See you tomorrow." Leaving the office in Japan is a procedure requiring exquisite timing and style. Generally speaking, no one should leave before his or her boss. But since everyone in a corporation has a boss, except the chairman, no one moves until something happens way up the line. Because chairmen could die in their chairs (thereby trapping everybody for an eternity of twenty-four hour paper shuffling), elaborate rituals have been developed to break up the work force at the end of the day. A supervisor will remember an urgent appointment for drinks with a supplier, a department head will discover tickets to the ballet in his wallet, a ection chief will receive a call from a dying mother. Pretty soon, it's "okay" to split. Most Japanese offices are empty by 10:00 P.M.⁽¹⁷⁾

* In working with Hispanic Americans, [there are often] problems dealing with conflicts over sex roles. In their traditional culture, men are expected to be strong, dominant, and the provider for the family whereas women are expected to be nurturant, submissive to the male, and self-sacrificing.⁽¹⁸⁾

The list of cultural differences could go on ad infinitum. It is provided to demonstrate that there are many ways the same thing can be approached. The way in which we approach virtually all matters is based upon our cultural conditioning. Our diversity as humans is based primarily upon cultural differences. While members of the human race have basic similarities, we have many different ways of addressing them. For instance, we all have a need for food, but a Mexican burrito is not the same thing as a Chinese egg roll, or an Italian calzone. They are all some type of food wrapped in an edible, flour-based covering, but they are as different in taste and appearance as night and day.

Now, for each of those questions which you have answered, ask yourself "why?." But don't stop at the first why. Like a two-year old, keep asking the question until you get to the heart of your reasons. No matter what the question, no matter what your answers, eventually you will come upon the kernel of truth in the middle: culture.

There are very few absolutes in life. Yes, if we are here we were born. And yes, if we are born, we must die. But everything in between is up for grabs. We learn to make sense of it through our culture. There is nothing inherently valuable or invaluable or disgusting or wonderful, for any single thing on earth.⁽¹⁹⁾

We learn to attach these value judgments to everything in our lives from the minute we are born.

In order to learn to value diversity, we must first determine why and how we do not. Doing so means getting at the root of our resistance to things different from us. To do this, we must take apart, or deconstruct, how it is we make those determinations, see what it is that we base them on and look at whether there is anything there of real import. Generally, once we realize that our resistance is not built on anything substantial, but rather is the result of habit, conformity, or a particular acculturation, we are less resistant to those things which are not the same as what we may be used to.

There is nothing inherently special about gold. Or diamonds. Just as there is nothing inherently awful about feces or mucous. Our cultures have taught us to value the former, and be offended by the latter. But all you have to do is visit cultures with differing values to see that these things are not cast in stone.

We think of mucous as offensive and unpleasant, yet the Chinese delicacy of birds' nest soup is based on the mucous a bird (animal mucous, no less!) uses to build its nest. But is there really that much difference between that and the silk that we adore? A fabric that is made from the strands of the cocoon which the silk worm spins around itself out of its mouth or anus after it has gorged on mulberry leaves and is ready to transform itself? We say, well, we're not eating it as the Chinese do birds' nest soup, instead we're wearing it. Yet would it sound any more pleasant to say you are wearing on your body, often next to your bare skin, strands of something a bug spun out of its anus, than to say you are eating bird mucous? The difference, of course, is acculturation and what we have learned to value, rather than the intrinsic value of the thing itself.

Of course, some things are so virtually universally accepted, until we take for granted that everyone feels the same way about them that we do. For instance, most of us would abhor wanton violence against others' person or property. But these are still value judgment rather than inherent givens. Kantian categorical imperatives of culture are difficult to come by.

One need only look to the heart-wrenching (for most) photos on the front pages of virtually every newspaper in recent weeks depicting weak, emaciated, dying Tutsi children in Rwanda, and think of the 500,000+ killed by the rival Hutus, to realize this. Reports have been that despite the hundreds of thousands of Tutsis slaughtered in ethnic fighting, the Hutus are apparently hungry for more. It was reported that the Hutu soldiers "not only show no remorse but can't wait to repeat their cowardly acts."⁽²⁰⁾

It is important to understand the value we place on culture because it is then that we can see how important they are to shaping our values and how cultural values color virtually everything we do. It becomes important to understand this table as we imagined, but, rather, a slab of rough-hewn tree, low to the floor? What if the walls didn't have cement, wallboard, paint or wallpaper, but instead, was ice or palm leaves or straw? What if they had their shoes off? Tooth picks in their mouths? A plate of food in front of them? Reading the newspaper? Working on a home workshop type protect?

You get the picture. Little is inherent about any of the usual things we take for granted when we come into a business meeting. It is our accepted way of doing things, which may or may not have legitimate reasons, but all of it is based on cultural values we hold. This is not to say that any of the original picture we had in our minds is right or wrong, merely that it is based upon our cultural values.

For the most part, our culture does not value people who conduct business in certain types of clothing, colors of clothing, or certain clothing fabric, or with certain hair colors or styles. We have learned that serious business considerations are conducted with us concentrating on the business at hand, not, in a business setting while picking our teeth or eating.

The point to all this is that before we learn to value cultural diversity, we must be able to recognize it. We must first learn to see what the differences are, why they are, what they impact, and what they do not. The latter is extremely important. If we go back to the business meeting, let's look at how much of what we pointed out in our changed picture, really impacted the ability to carry on business at the meeting. Much of it did not.

What the men wore, how they styled their hair, even whether they picked their teeth, would not interfere with their ability to absorb information and provide input. For some, perhaps even eating, reading the newspaper or working on another project may not interfere. I crocheted all the way through law school (including classes), yet was known as "Ditto" because my class notes were so comprehensive and detailed. Crocheting actually helped my concentration. Yet all of those factors are things which we would consider unthinkable at business meetings as we know them.

These are but some of the more obvious manifestations of culture. Use them as an example for you to think about other ways in which you may see culture manifested in the workplace. We have a tendency to think of things not as a reflection of different cultural values, but rather in qualitative terms also. We attach value judgments to things different from our way of doing things. We often think less of something which is different. As we go through, think about how much is really necessary for us to function as we need to and how much is merely a cultural difference which need not be the same as ours any more than someone's choice of their favorite ice cream need be the same as ours.

Most of the resistance in dealing with things differently than we have done them is based on cultural egoism. That is, we think of it as better because it is ours. Yet someone else's way of doing things may suit them just fine and get the job done.

The actions we engage in merely reflect the qualitative significance we attach to them based upon our cultural values. The actions are like the outside layer of an onion. Beneath our behavior is our attitude. Beneath our attitude is our assumptions. At the core is the value which determines the assumptions we make. Virtually every action which we engage in is only the end result of a complex set of thought processes which occur before the behavior is engaged in, and our behavior will reflect that thought process.

For instance, if, at the core, we value our elders, our assumptions moving from that will include that our elders are good and worthy of our admiration. Based on those assumptions, we have a positive attitude toward our elders. Based on the positive attitude, we will have kind, good, positive actions toward them.

It is then not difficult to understand why some groups in our society do not feel valued. our behaviors toward them are reflective of how we really feel, and that is sometimes obviously negative.

For example, a woman feels uncomfortable and alienated in the workplace. When asked why, one of the reasons she gives is that her input, and other females is rarely acknowledged at meetings. If told this, the person who generally runs the meetings may be incensed and say he did not intentionally leave her out of discussions.

But let's analyze it from her point of view. She feels uncomfortable and alienated because she does not feel as if she is valued as a contributing member of the staff. She feels he does not value the input of women in general, or her input in particular. The assumption which leads from that is that women have little of value to provide in the workplace. The attitude is that since there is not much women can contribute in the business setting, why bother to include them. The manifested behavior emanating from this attitude is not acknowledging the female employee at meetings. Her discomfort would seem to be supported.

If women who wish to be are consistently not recognized in meetings, it is not a stretch in logic to think they have little to contribute. By the same token, if men are consistently called upon and their ideas accepted, it implies that their input is more highly valued.

Most of us do not value diversity, yet we are not even aware of this. In order to find out how we don't, and concomitantly, how we can, let me share with you an interesting experience I had.

One Sunday I attended at my university a three-hour session on prejudice reduction put on by the local affiliate of a national organization. The session was a series of exercises which were meant to sensitize people to the issue of discrimination and help them to begin working on changing their behavior.

One of the exercises we engaged in called for participants to call out the one discriminatory thing that people do that bothers them greatly and that they would eradicate if they could. People called out all sorts of things and a list was made. From the list, we were to take the top four items, break into groups addressing one item each, and discuss the item and report back to the entire group.

I was not at all surprised when the items mentioned included things like discrimination against young black males, discrimination based on age, affinity orientation, gender, etc. What did surprise me, however, was that when we split into the groups with which we wanted to deal, the largest group was the group on discrimination on the basis of marital status--singles. I had no idea people considered it as much of a problem as they did.

I was even more surprised when the group reported back its findings. When asked what made them feel uncomfortable about their status, they reported that they, themselves, felt fine about it, but it was the actions of others that presented the problem. They listed a number of things that were done that made them feel bad and which they would eradicate from the face of the earth if they could. Among them were people saying at weddings, "Next time it will be your turn," or "Are you sure you aren't being too picky?", or "All my friends have grandchildren, but not me. When are you going to get married and give me grandchildren?", or "Maybe you're gay/lesbian." They also hated it that their friends were constantly trying to fix them up with dates or assuming that they wanted to be with someone.

The thing I found most fascinating about all of this is that every single thing that the singles listed as presenting a problem for them, and which they wanted to eradicate was something that in and of itself was of little consequence. Not one thing they pointed to was something that was regulated or even regulatable by law. Each and every thing that irked them no end was something that an individual had chosen to say or do--probably with no intention of having it cause the impact it did.

Here was the largest group in the room complaining about discrimination of a type which few of us think of a serious problem in the context of discrimination, yet all of the anger, sadness, frustration, etc., that these group members felt about this issue all stemmed from some statement made, or act done by someone. Usually someone whom they knew and cared about. Virtually their entire idea about this issue came from actions and words of those around them.

No laws needed to be passed to stop these actions. It was entirely within the control of each and every person who ever made such a statement or did such an act, to not do it. The feelings the group felt all came from an environment created by others. An environment whose creators, I am certain, did not intend to create, and did not maliciously create.

Rather, the environment came from ignorance and insensitivity to the impact of the actions the creators engaged in. Presumably, if they had realized that what they were saying was as harmful as it was, they would not have done it. Certainly none of the statements were anything that needed to be said. The statements stemmed from valuing couple-dom and not valuing single-ness. The activity engaged in reflected what the members of the group had picked up on--they felt they were not valued as singles, but instead were required to take on a partner in order to be of value.

Do this exercise. Think about a time when you felt valued. It could be when you had done a particularly good job at work, when you sang a nice song at church, when you baked a great batch of cookies or made a good meal at home, when you closed a big deal at the office, or any time when you felt good about yourself.

Now think about why. Let's take the meal you cooked. How did you come to feel valued for it? Did people say nice things about it? How did you know they were nice things? Did it come from the words they used? The tone of voice? The setting? Their facial expression? The fact that they ate it all? What if you felt you cooked a good meal and no one mentioned it? Would you still feel valued? What if those who ate the meal said it was good but had a scowl on their faces? What if they had screamed at you that it was good? What if they said it, but only after you asked? Would any of that make any difference as to how you felt about feeling valued for cooking the meal?

Work is no different. We feel most comfortable when we feel we receive positive feedback about who we are, what we contribute, and what the expectations are of what we can accomplish. We get these messages (pro or con) in any number of ways. It can be through the regular work process of evaluations, feedback, acting as if one's ideas are worthy. But it also happens in ways which most probably are not aware of--including those who are not being valued. That is, through personal interaction with people.

Personal Interaction

There are any number of ways in which we show people that we value or do not value them by our personal interaction with them. Valuing diversity involves not only learning to view people in ways which may be different from what we habitually do, analyze the differences to determine what is and is not significant for us, but also making sure that once we make that determination, we adequately convey it to the "others." What we have to be sure to do is to take our cues from those with whom we deal. We also have to make sure that we are conscious of the way in which we deal with different kinds of people. Without realizing it we may have incorporated certain ways of treating different groups differently, without even realizing it. It can be a real eye opener.

This was dramatically shown in the recent ABC Prime Time Live television piece, "True Colors". In the piece, two men, one black and one white, who are virtually the same on paper, are sent to St. Louis to see what their experiences will be when they try to start life there. They look for a place to live, look for jobs, shop at a car dealer, shoe store, jewelry store and music store. Each has a hidden camera that records their experiences.

In each instance, there is little overt discrimination, but rather, things such as the white man being warmly greeted as he walks into the shoe store, while the black man is left to fend for himself as the salesman simply ignores him. A stopwatch records the time it takes for each to be waited on. It is always much longer for the black man. The black man is followed around in the music store, without the clerk even asking to help him, while the white male is not. The black male is made to wait when shopping for a car, while sales personnel are gathered in front of him talking, while they immediately come out to help the white customer. The black customer is quoted a larger down payment and higher interest costs than the white customer.

When looking for a job, the black man is lectured on blacks being lazy and giving away job leads to others who did not pay for the service, while the white man is pleasantly told of the job. At the job site the black man is told the job is no longer open, while the white man is told that it is. In searching for an apartment, the white man is given a key to the apartment and told about the neighborhood, as if welcoming him. The black man is lectured about how strict the place is, is not given a key, is escorted around, and at one place is told an apartment is taken, while it is offered to the white man. If your school does not have a copy, the video can be ordered from:

MTI Business & Industry Group

5130 Industrial Street

Maple Plain, MN 55359

Phone 1-800-777-2400 or 1-800-545-2726

Production number 6745MVHA FRT "True Colors"
 

The piece is an excellent demonstration for students to see how often subtle, unconscious actions towards members of various groups may form a pervasive pattern of discrimination. It makes them aware of the fact that we may not always be looking for workplace discrimination which is obvious or people who "look" like they would discriminate. We do not want workplace liability for discrimination to attach due to our being unaware of the possibilities.

In its most essential sense, the above quote captures well the dilemma of the concept of valuing diversity. Those not in power who wish to have the concept of valuing diversity accepted and incorporated into how we do business and conduct our lives simply wish to have others remember who they are, not forget. One of the most benignly offensive statements which can be made to an "other" is to say, "You're just a person to me. I don't think of you as black/white/Asian/gay/Hispanic, etc." This implies that somehow if the person is thought of as whatever "other" category they fall into, then somehow that will not be as acceptable to the speaker.⁽²²⁾

It also makes invisible the differences among them, as if they do not exist.

In order to make the most of our human resources, what we must learn to do is to get to the point where we do think of the person as whoever it is they are, and that is not automatically taken as "less than." Making the differences invisible does not take the differences away. In order to best use our human resources, we must learn to accept them fully and see how they can add to what it is we need to accomplish, not only accept the parts that are like us and ignore the rest.

The work world is beginning to take significant steps toward recognizing this. Given the data, it only makes good business sense to do so. They have come to see that valuing diversity is not "politically correct" hype, but rather, an well deserving idea whose time has come.
 
 

1.

¹

Newsline, "Teaching Diversity: Business Schools Search for Model Approaches," American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business, Vol. 23, Number 1, Fall 1992 at p. 2.

2.

² Id. at 3, quoted from Rita J. Shellenberger, manager of diversity for Dow, USA.

3.

³ Diversity in Teacher Education: New Expectations, Mary E. Dilworth, Ed., Dossey-Bass Pubs., 1992, p. 134, quoting from Burstein, N.D., and Cabello, B., "Preparing Teachers to Work With Culturally Diverse Students: A Teacher Education Model", Journal of Teacher Education, 1989, 40(5), at 9.

4.

⁴ "Missing People and Others: Joining Together to Expand the Circle", by Arturo Madrid, from Race, Class and Gender: AnAntholoqy, Andersen and Hill Collins, Wadsworth Publishing, 1992, pp. 6-8.

5.

⁵ Managing Cultural Differences, 3d Ed., by Philip R. Harris and Robert T. Moran, 1991, Gulf Publishing, at xii.

6.

⁶ AACSB, the American Association of Collegiate Schools of Business, is the accrediting body for schools and colleges of business administration.

7.

⁷ Id. at 3.

8.

⁸ From: "Getting Bosses, Workers to Speak the Same Language", by Jim Gardner, Orange County Business Journal, 11/2/92.

9.

⁹ See., e.g., "Cultural Training Improves Relations With Asian Clients," by Marcia Forsberg, Personnel Journal, May 1993, at p. 79; "Managing Today's Immigrants," by Charlene Marmer Solomon, Personnel Journal, February 1993, at p. 57; "Many Workers Abroad Hurt by Culture Shock," by Emily Wagster, USA Today, 12/17/93, at B1; "Diversity Educator Joins [Girl]Scout Council," Athens Daily News, 11/14/93 at 8A; "2.9 Million Households Learn to Live in Linguistic Isolation," by Margaret L. Usdansky, USA Today, 12/15/93 at 9A; "Our Diverse Workforce Provides Clues to Competing in a Global Marketplace," by Mary Coeli Meyer, Atlanta Journal & Constitution, 8/29/94 at p. C-3; "New Plan Provides Diversity, Quality in Judge Selection," Athens Daily News, 9/3/93, at p. 4A; A Fervent 'No' To Assimilatiom In New America" The New York Times, 6/29/93 at p. A6.

10.

¹⁰ Johnston, William B., Workforce 2000, Hudson Institute, 1987.

11.

¹¹ For instance, the 1990 census showed that Georgia experienced a 113 percent increase in non-English speakers from 1980 to 1990. Thousands of Hispanics have found jobs in the poultry industry around Gainesville and in Atlanta's landscaping and Construction industry. Other major languages spoken in Georgia are French, German, Korean, Chinese, Vietnamese and Japanese, and American Indian dialects such as Blackfoot, Cherokee, Choctaw, Apache and Navaho, according to the census figures. Athens Daily News, April 28, 1993, at 12A.

12.

¹² From a list of tips to travelers abroad, issued by the Chinese government. Newsweek, September 13, 1994.

13.

¹³ Managing Cultural Differences, 3d Ed., Harris and Moran, at 3.

14.

¹⁴ Id.

15.

¹⁵ Id.

16.

¹⁶ Id.

17.

¹⁷ Japan-Think/Ameri-Think: An Irreverent Guide to Understanding the Cultural Differences Between Us, Robert J. Collins, Penguin Books, 1992, p.59.

18.

¹⁸ Counseling the Culturally Different: Theory and Practice, 2d Ed., Derald Wing Sue and David Sue, John Wiley & Sons, 1990, p.

19.

¹⁹ For instance, the August 4, 1994 USA Today newspaper carried a front page story about the recent "toad licking" fad in Arizona. As strange as it may seem, the Colorado River toad (Bufo alvaris) secretes a milky white substance that includes a powerful combination of bufotenine (classified as a psycho-active drug under Arizona law) and a drug called dimenthyltryptamine. Despite the fact that the practice is dangerous and the secretion poisonous, those looking for a "cheap high" have given the Arizona Department of Fish and Game cause for concern by engaging in the practice.

20.

²⁰ USA Today, August 4, 1994 at 6A.

21.

²¹ The Book of Laughter and Forgetting, Milan Kundera.

22.

²² See, e.g., "Growing Up With Privilege and Prejudice," by Karen K. Russell (daughter of Boston Celtics center Bill Russell), New York Times Magazine 136, June 14, 1987), 69-74.