Background Information
Abdel-Monem, Bingham, Marincic, and Tomkins’s (2010) paper is an article on diversity and inclusion by Tarik Abdel-Monem, Shereen Bingham, Jamie Marincic, and Allan Tomkins. The purpose of this research was to determine the perceptions of individuals from different cultural backgrounds who attended a policy deliberation held in Omaha, Nebraska. It was a policy deliberation that aimed at collecting views of ethnically integrated individuals on migration policies. It was attended by members from different ethnic backgrounds and gender.
Among the participants included men and women from the following ethnic backgrounds: Hispanic groups, African Americans, Native Americans, Asian Americans, and Native Americans. The objective of Abdel-Monem et al. (2010) was to evaluate how the members who participated in the Omaha deliberation felt about diversity and inclusion among the small discussion groups. The study was also comparative since it aimed at determining the difference in perception of different participants.
The research question directing the research by Abdel-Monem et al. (2010) explored whether the Omaha deliberation was a free and fair process promoting equity. The significant difference of this study cannot be underrated since it is helpful to scholars and learners exploring the importance of diversity and inclusion. It has supported that inclusion and diversity are critical factors in healthy human interactions and contribute to social, economic, and political prosperity.
Methodology and Design
Abdel-Monem et al. (2010) was quantitative research with the analysis of numerical data collected from a survey. Telephone interviews were conducted where the participants included adult citizens from Omaha. For this research, to ensure it included participants from diverse backgrounds, it interviewed members from different races. Five hundred forty-two participants were interviewed, and they were invited to attend the deliberative process in Omaha.
Each group in the deliberation consisted of members. The interviewer in the study had to ask the participants random questions and observe their reactions. The survey questions included the participants’ perceptions of the quality of communication in their small deliberation groups, their satisfaction within the group, and their effectiveness. The survey variables were represented in scales, and the respondents were classified into White people and people of color. ANOVA scale to compare the groups.
Implications and Meaning of the Results
After data analysis, the data has a Crombach alpha of 0.93, 0.88, and 0.86 for communication quality, group effectiveness, and group satisfaction, respectively, and therefore the information was reliable. The results showed that people of color had a higher perception of the quality of communication and group effectiveness and showed greater satisfaction than their white counterparts. The study also found that most participants were happy about the diversity of the participants. Many participants in the deliberation process felt that the interaction between ethnically diverse groups was outstanding. The group members appreciated that most participants in the deliberation maintained a respectful tone despite the difference in their views. A high number of interviewees accepted that giving every member a chance to contribute was an adorable experience.
The participants also praised the facilitation of the migration deliberation. No member was allowed to dominate the discussion, and the facilitators maintained the focus of each group discussion. The facilitators also ensured that everybody participated through effective turn-taking, promoting inclusion. However, some interviewees complained about their facilitators, who failed to control some speakers who dominated the group discussion. Many interviewees also stated that the deliberation process was a learning experience. Being in an environment with diverse views and ideas led to the transfer of knowledge between different individuals.
The results section of Abdel-Monem et al. (2010) also found that most interviewees loved the deliberation since it promotes equal opportunity for all involved to speak. The other members were also tolerant of divergent views from different speakers. On being listened to, many participants in the deliberation appreciated that they were heard. They were also given a chance to express their views. Many people of color and white people interviewed hinted that they enjoyed it when they were allowed to offer their opinions. The deliberation was hence inclusive and diverse, and thus, the participants showed high levels of satisfaction, and the group’s effectiveness increased. The communication quality was also high due to the promotion of inclusion and diversity in the setup.
Evaluation of the Study
The findings of Abdel-Monem et al. (2010) express the importance of inclusion and diversity in human setup. As Dovidio et al. (2017) argue, humans are social beings, and the behavior of another person cannot significantly affect another individual either positively or negatively. The happiness or sadness of people is dependent on their perception of their relationship with their immediate neighbors (Kirton, 2020). The participants of the deliberation were satisfied and hence were more willing to participate in the process (Abdel-Monem et al., 2010). Hunt et al. (2018) support the findings of Abdel-Monem et al. (2010) that diversity and inclusion lead to higher employee performance.
Required Improvements
Although this study is applicable while studying diversity and inclusion, the researchers have failed to explain the ethical consideration of their research. Kaewkungwal and Adams (2019) state that people doing research must consider the importance of ethical conduct. Many researchers who fail to evaluate their research ethics usually conflict with institutions that evaluate research ethics. Abdel-Monem et al. (2010) have not included ethical considerations in the article, and therefore it’s hard to determine whether the research had ethical consent or not. As a researcher, I would have stated which body authorized the data collection method and whether the participants voluntarily consented to this process.
How the Research Expands Knowledge base on Diversity and Groups
Abdel-Monem et al.’s (2010) article is thorough research on diversity and inclusion, and scholars and students can use it to learn their applications. In this study, the importance of diversity and inclusion is emphasized. Scholars, students, and other individuals in leadership positions can use this article to learn more about the strength of inclusion and diversity in the performance of organizations and other sectors, including the education and health sectors.
How Abdel-Monem et al. (2010) article relates to Classwork
In the class, the definition of diversity, examples, and surface and deep-level diversity were discussed. The importance of diversity to a group was also included in the class teachings. Abdel-Monem et al.’s (2010) article is an application of the theory taught in class. It’s an example of practical inclusion and diversity in a deliberation setup. The article highlights different types of diversity, including racial, gender, and religious diversity. It has highlighted how diversity and inclusion can lead to a successful output from the members involved, which is also one advantage of diversity and inclusion stated in the class.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this paper has reviewed an article on diversity and inclusion. The research was conducted through the survey method and quantitative data analysis. The article found that participants were satisfied with the deliberation process in Omaha since the facilitators controlled well and ensured everyone participated. The findings from the survey conducted in the article have portrayed that in an environment where diversity and inclusion is a primary factors, the performance of the members is high. The members’ participation and output are also increased.
References
Abdel-Monem, T., Bingham, S., Marincic, J., & Tomkins, A. (2010). Deliberation and diversity: Perceptions of small group discussions by race and ethnicity. Small-Group Research, 41(6), 746-776. Web.
Dobusch, L. (2021). The inclusivity of inclusion approaches: A relational perspective on inclusion and exclusion in organizations. Gender, Work & Organization, 28(1), 379-396. Web.
Dovidio, J. F., Abad-Merino, S., & Tabernero, C. (2017). General concepts about inclusion in organizations: A psychological approach to understanding diversity and inclusion in organizations. Springer International Publishing (pp. 23-31). Springer, Cham. Web.
Hunt, V., Prince, S., Dixon-Fyle, S., & Yee, L. (2018). Delivering through diversity. McKinsey & Company, 231. Web.
Kirton, G. (2020). Diversity and inclusion in a changing world of work. In the future of work and employment. Edward Elgar Publishing. Web.
Jayakrishnan, S. (2021). Diversity and Inclusion. National Journal, Bengaluru, India, 22(8), 4. Web.
Kaewkungwal, J., & Adams, P. (2019). Ethical consideration of the research proposal and the informed- consent process: An online survey of researchers and ethics committee members in Thailand. Accountability in Research, 26(3), 176-197. Web.