Diversity Training: Worthwhile or Woo?

[b33fj3rky]

From

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/mgmtprog/...Consultant.pdf

"In the last ten years, there has been an explosion in the “Diversity Industry.” Like the Internet, diversity consulting is both vast and unregulated. There are no standards, there is no recognized accrediting body; the practice of diversity goes on without significant, credible, published research into what works and what does not work. In order to become a diversity consultant or trainer, one only has to call oneself such and hang out a shingle. "



So what do you all think? Is "diversity training" worthwhile for a corporation, or is it just a new woo-woo, feel-good, multicultural fad with little chance of helping a corporation's bottom line?

[balrog666]

Originally Posted by b33fj3rky

From

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/mgmtprog/...Consultant.pdf

"In the last ten years, there has been an explosion in the “Diversity Industry.” Like the Internet, diversity consulting is both vast and unregulated. There are no standards, there is no recognized accrediting body; the practice of diversity goes on without significant, credible, published research into what works and what does not work. In order to become a diversity consultant or trainer, one only has to call oneself such and hang out a shingle. "



So what do you all think? Is "diversity training" worthwhile for a corporation, or is it just a new woo-woo, feel-good, multicultural fad with little chance of helping a corporation's bottom line?

Hey, it's great for avoiding lawsuits from stupid people, minimizing damage awards for employee behavior (policy violation, don't ya know!), riling up your employees into a frenzy (wasting their time and insulting them too, two for the act of one!), and informing the employees of the potential bounty out there by acting offended by normal human behavior of stupid people.

Other than that, it's complete doog-poop.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by b33fj3rky

From

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/mgmtprog/...Consultant.pdf

"In the last ten years, there has been an explosion in the “Diversity Industry.” Like the Internet, diversity consulting is both vast and unregulated. There are no standards, there is no recognized accrediting body; the practice of diversity goes on without significant, credible, published research into what works and what does not work. In order to become a diversity consultant or trainer, one only has to call oneself such and hang out a shingle. "



So what do you all think? Is "diversity training" worthwhile for a corporation, or is it just a new woo-woo, feel-good, multicultural fad with little chance of helping a corporation's bottom line?

Spot on! But balrog's point about lawsuits is a good one and unfortunately every large company needs to take the issue seriously.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Originally Posted by lionking

Spot on! But balrog's point about lawsuits is a good one and unfortunately every large company needs to take the issue seriously.

Well. They don't really have to take it "seriously". All they have to do is to have some Diversity Sessions and force staff to attend (a free lunch helps). Then when challenged they can say the addressed the issue.

My brother, who worked at a large Canadian financial institution, used to have a lot of fun at these sort of sessions. Once, when the example was given about not exposing the bottom of the feet (shows) to staff from the Middle-East, he suggested that maybe, just maybe, people from the Middle-East might be diversified into understanding that their folkways were not the same as in the West and they should, err, lump it.

[Wolfman]

The problem with the whole "Diversity Training" thing is that it is entirely unregulated, with no standards whatsoever. What started out as a good idea quickly got hijacked by the woo.

Diversity training, at its core, seeks to help people understand and deal with differences that may normally cause problems. This may be based on gender, on sexual orientation, on skin color, on culture, or whatever.

In China, I've run diversity training programs for companies like P&G and Motorola, with great results. The focus in this training was on teams that had people of many nationalities working together -- Chinese staff, as well as management from all over the world (US, Canada, India, Philippines, UK, Australia, Germany, Italy, etc.).

Before we started the training, we did extensive interviews that revealed significant communication and relationship difficulties between people of different cultural backgrounds; this was having a serious impact on the company's bottom line, as it led to inefficiency, miscommunication, low motivation, etc.

One of the main reasons for this was that each culture had its own idea of "how things should be done". This included issues such as "How should a leader act", "How should disagreement be expressed", "How should personal and professional relationships be balanced", etc. Each group felt that its way was the "right" way, and if in a leadership position, sought to make everyone else on the team act in the way they expected.

In my diversity training program, I first spent two days where we examined the cultural differences of those involved, and how it affected issues such as leadership, communications, relationships, etc. In each case, besides looking at how people from that culture tended to behave, we also discussed in which corporate situations such behavior might be most desirable, and most undesirable. The last day and a half was spent on group activities where mixed cultural teams discussed ways in which their different perspectives and orientations might be used to the greatest effect.

The result was very significant, and quantifiable. 6 months after the training, productivity had increased by more than 25%, and workplace satisfaction was far higher. Instead of teaching everyone how to think/act the same way (the normal focus of things such as "corporate culture training), we taught everyone how to understand and value the different perspectives available to them, and to use those to their greatest effect.

Sadly, most of the diversity training programs I've seen out there are complete crap. They incorporate all your favorite woo methods, and usually focus on politically-correct issues such as homosexuality. They are feel-good sessions run by people who don't have a clue what they are doing, but are very sincere in their desire to do it.

I think that it is obvious to anyone with half a brain that if you can understand the different perspectives and orientations of people in your company, and then use those differences to enable each person to make their greatest contribution, that this is a "good thing". And that is what diversity training is supposed to be about.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

There are good ones that focus on sociology and psychology behind culture, race, ethnicity, oppression, etc. They also focus on group discussion.

But like most things, 95% is bullcrap fluff and no one really learns anything. It is more to appease contrarians and avoid further punishment.

[Wolfman]

The problem here is on declaring something "worthwhile" or "woo" based on "the majority", rather than based on "does it work".

Diversity training, if done properly, can be tremendously useful and valuable to a business. Its not just an issue of feel-good seminars; it translates to higher efficiency, better communication, and increased profits.

The fact that there are tons of people out there offering programs that are garbage doesn't mean that diversity training doesn't work; it means that you need to do real research to determine which programs are worthwhile.

Also, diversity training is not a foundation for change, and should not be used in that way. If you have a company that has other more fundamental problems -- vaguely defined corporate culture, incompetent leaders, scattershot chain of command, etc. -- then diversity training isn't going to do squat for your company. I've actually only conducted diversity training three times (in eight years of working as a corporate trainer/consultant); in the other instances, when we did assessments, we found that the companies involved had other more fundamental problems that had to be dealt with first.

If you have a company that is already working fairly well, diversity training can be a useful tool to tweak it even more. If you have a company that is suffering from numerous problems that are unrelated to diversity issues, then diversity training isn't going to accomplish much at all, regardless of the quality of the program.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto

Well. They don't really have to take it "seriously". All they have to do is to have some Diversity Sessions and force staff to attend (a free lunch helps). Then when challenged they can say the addressed the issue.

My brother, who worked at a large Canadian financial institution, used to have a lot of fun at these sort of sessions. Once, when the example was given about not exposing the bottom of the feet (shows) to staff from the Middle-East, he suggested that maybe, just maybe, people from the Middle-East might be diversified into understanding that their folkways were not the same as in the West and they should, err, lump it.

One of my favorites - from the equivalent - and as I pointed out similarly: When I go to Saudi Arabia, I will observe the Saudi social procedures, when I am in Florida, Florida's. The phrase is "When in Rome....." - and it means behave properly according to where you are - not according to where someone is from.

Diversity is fun. Diversity meetings are PC (pure crap).

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

The problem with the whole "Diversity Training" thing is that it is entirely unregulated, with no standards whatsoever. What started out as a good idea quickly got hijacked by the woo.

Diversity training, at its core, seeks to help people understand and deal with differences that may normally cause problems. This may be based on gender, on sexual orientation, on skin color, on culture, or whatever.


I think that it is obvious to anyone with half a brain that if you can understand the different perspectives and orientations of people in your company, and then use those differences to enable each person to make their greatest contribution, that this is a "good thing". And that is what diversity training is supposed to be about.

And, if that was how diversity and related programs worked, I am sure a lot of people (me for one) would not be mocking them as the waste of time most are. I want information dense, hard data supported programs if I am forced to sit through them. I don't want to play cute little games, put on funny hats, or (usually) draw/write on big pieces of paper in groups.

Sounds like you know how to do it right (which doesn't surprise me given your other posts)!

[TX50]

[anecdote]
I remember serving with Gurkhas in Hong Kong. We had a "diversity training"
of sorts to acquaint us with their customs and expectations (I recall that
pointing with a finger, for example, was regarded as the epitome of rudeness
by Gurkhas, and we had to practise all sorts of weird antics like pointing with
our fists, chins and shoulders). The fact that a British officer of a previous
battalion had [allegedly] been sliced up with a kukri in retaliation for a slight
was excellent at focussing our minds on "appreciating diversity".
[/anecdote]

[TX50]

Originally Posted by fuelair

I don't want to ...draw/write on big pieces of paper in groups.

Aaargh! Not the "writing on big pieces of paper in groups"! When I go to hell,
Satan will be waiting for me with a clawful of marker pens and a big sheet of
paper!

[Fnord]

GOOD: Getting paid to attend and eat a free lunch while watching someone foul up a Powerpoint presentation and then have to "wing it" from the handout.

BAD: Being a member of the only group (straight, male, native-born, white, Christian) held up as an example of the need for diversity training, while also being required to express an appreciation for the diversity of other people (gays, females, immigrants, non-whites, and/or non-Christians).

You know, the old "Only straights, whites, non-immigrants, males, and Christians are bigots, while everyone else is cool" line of male bovine manure.

[dudalb]

I can't speak for all diversity programs,but the one where I work is a joke,a total waste of time.
It's a video followed by a ineptly presented powerpoint program, in which eight hours is wasted covering material that could be presented in about an hour.
I guess the motives are good,but the program itself is horrible.
It might have some value a PR and providing some legal cover for a goverment agency or business come lawsuit time,but I doubt anybody who is bigoted or sexist is gonna have their minds changed by the cornball crap that most diversity programs are.

[fuelair]

11 - 13 have this fully covered for the typical program!!!

[Björn Toulouse]

I can only speak for one instance as well. Our entire facility had to experience "diversity training" about 15 years ago. It was given by a black man named Dr. Nuckles and dealt only with black and white issues. So much for being diverse and it was particularly one-sided in its presentation. Dr. Nuckles seemed to focus upon things like hidden black heritage in the lives of prominent white persons, singling out President Eisenhower's "black" grandparent, the evidence being that there was a picture of one of them displaying "kinky" hair, and the differences being blacks and whites as they attended church services. For the life of me, I could not figure out how that knowledge was supposed to help me as a white person better understand my black co-workers. I could have profitted by having training in dealing with workplace A-holes instead. All I got out of it was a paid day away from the job and a free meal at a very nice hotel.

[shuize]

I'm sad to report the crappy version of diversity training is making its way to Japan. At least in the university environment. I doubt the corporate culture here is willing to tolerate it ... yet.

My department was recently required to sit through a presentation full of poorly drawn and copied handouts in order to learn what was and was not "appropriate" to say, look at, talk about at work. The whole retarded event consisted of being talked down to, as if most people in the room were not tenured university faculty but rather bad elementry school children just caught misbehaving. "OK, I thought. You're going to treat me like a child, then I'll act like a one." Toward the end of the lesson, when the presenter asked yet another rhetorical question about what we thought when we looked one of the photo copied prints of a woman with exaggerated breasts, I turned to the professor sitting next to me and said in a bored voice loud enough for those nearby to hear, "The answer ... it's 'nice tits,' right?"

[Fnord]

Why does "Diversity" usually mean "Look at me! I'm different! Different is better!"?

[Wolfman]

I appreciate the various criticisms of many of the diversity programs out there. Here is my own explanation/definition of diversity issues.

At the core, I believe, is the issue of "equality". And it is this issue which, more than anything else, causes so much confusion in diversity training programs.

The "normal" practice in most companies is to establish a set corporate culture, and clearly defined rules about chain of command, leadership styles, communication styles, etc. The principle is that if everyone knows and follows the same rules, then everyone is treated the same, regardless of race, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, etc.

This is not necessarily a bad thing; and, in fact, it is a very significant improvement over previous systems that openly discriminated against certain groups. And it can even be very effective if one has a work force that is mostly homogenous.

The thing is, these days, our workforce is rarely homogenous. These days, most companies have quite a mixture of different people -- different genders, different cultures, etc.

The core to effective diversity training is A) to recognize that different people respond to certain 'motivators' differently, and B) that the company's focus should be on finding a way to let every person reach their greatest efficiency/productivity.

Some concrete examples will help here. Consider that you want to motivate your staff to work their hardest. For most people born and raised in the North American culture, the best way to motivate them is by offering them financial or career incentives (ie. bonuses, salary increases, promotions, etc.). However, for many people from Asian backgrounds, these things are not terribly great motivators. They tend to focus more on interpersonal relationships, on how much the workplace feels like a "family". If they do not have that feeling, then financial and career incentives will not be nearly so effective.

In this case, diversity training would focus on looking at all the different "groups" involved ("groups" can be defined by culture, gender, sexual orientation, etc), determine what is the "goal", and then what is the best way of facilitating each group in reaching that goal.

Let us say that the "goal" is to give people in our company the strongest motivation to do their best, and to feel that the company values them. We get the following results:

Group A is motivated most strongly by individual recognition and awards. Offering pay bonuses and promotion opportunities will work the best.

Group B is motivated most strongly by a sense of "family" in the company; a sense that everyone is not just a colleague, but that they are friends. Increasing/improving social opportunities in the company will work the best.

Group C is motivated by a sense of reciprocal responsibility; they will demonstrate as much loyalty to the company as the company demonstrates towards them. Having excellent medical insurance packages, offering personal development training programs, etc., will work the best.

By understanding and recognizing the diversity of motivations and desires within your company, you are able to increase both workplace satisfaction, and overall efficiency and productivity.

This is just one example of a much, much broader range of possibilities.

As stated above, however, many/most diversity programs do not do this. They tend to be more agenda-driven. A homosexual individual feels ostracized in the workplace; so they become a "diversity consultant" and do programs that focus on increasing awareness of homosexual issues in the workplace. This might qualify as sensitivity training; it definitely should not be called diversity training. Why? Because it really only focuses on one group. Its not teaching people how to understand and evaluate people from many different backgrounds; it is preaching about how to treat people from one specific background. In my opinion, this is actually anti-diversity training.

Also, most diversity training programs are based on broad generalizations about the groups involved. In my training, there are no generalizations at all. Every participant does an extensive evaluation in advance, that clearly identifies what their personal orientations/motivators are. Thus, I don't divide the groups according to "all the Asians here", "all the women here", "all the gays here", etc.

For example, if we go back to the issue of motivations, we'll likely find that most of the people from an Asian background are motivated by a sense of "family" in the company; but we'll find a few who are not. And likewise, we'll find a few people from North America who are motivated more by a sense of family, than by individual rewards. So we won't have a group of "Asians", a group of "whites", etc. Instead, we'll see that these groups are actually mixed, and that you can't stereotype entirely based just on what racial/cultural/gender group they belong to.

This, again, facilitates the goal of real diversity training -- to see the incredible diversity that exists within your company, and not to automatically stereotype according to superficial labels.

To close -- "diversity" already exists in our education programs, where teachers are taught that children will have different learning styles -- some learn best by reading, some learn best hands-on, some are more mathematically inclined, some are more artistically inclined, etc. A teacher who is trained to understand those differences, and to teach each child in the way that is best suited to that child's particular learning style, will be the most effective teacher.

The same principle applies within the corporate environment.

[Roboramma]

Wolfman, thanks for some really informative posts.

[Complexity]

I despise political correctness.

Diversity training is evil.

Chocolate is good.

[Wolfman]

Originally Posted by Complexity

I despise political correctness.

Diversity training is evil.

Chocolate is good.

But in order to truly appreciate chocolate, one must appreciate the tremendous diversity that exists between different chocolates

[fuelair]

For teaching, actually, the ultimate arrangement is that teachers and students are matched for teaching-learning style. Most teachers can operate in all styles - but they are best in that they are most comfortable with - their own learning style usually.

[JoeEllison]

The problem with "corporate diversity training" isn't "diversity." Diversity is good, a useful thing that can create positive outcomes. The problem is "corporate"... there's nothing good that some corporate nimrod can't break down into into useless and inefficient parts, and then reassemble incorrectly.

[Fnord]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

But in order to truly appreciate chocolate, one must appreciate the tremendous diversity that exists between different chocolates

But which is better; white chocolate or non-white?

And I'm not asking, so please don't tell me about "Carob," which is not even straight chocolate...

[Zbu]

I think this exposes another source of woo: completely useless presentations that essentially waste time at the expense of nothing else.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by Fnord

But which is better; white chocolate or non-white?

And I'm not asking, so please don't tell me about "Carob," which is not even straight chocolate...

Yuch on white chocolate - just chocolate fats none of the rich, good feeling producing stuff!!!

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by JoeEllison

The problem with "corporate diversity training" isn't "diversity." Diversity is good, a useful thing that can create positive outcomes. The problem is "corporate"... there's nothing good that some corporate nimrod can't break down into into useless and inefficient parts, and then reassemble incorrectly.

I work for the Feds,and beleive be Bureaucrats can do just as good a job of incompetence as the worst corporate dweeb.

[shuize]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I work for the Feds,and beleive be Bureaucrats can do just as good a job of incompetence as the worst corporate dweeb.

Having worked for county government, I second this wholeheartedly.

In fact, I cannot imagine that a profit-driven business, even on its very worst day, could possibly come close to the level of incompetence regularly displayed by local government.

[BPSCG]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I work for the Feds,and beleive be Bureaucrats can do just as good a better job of incompetence as than the worst corporate dweeb.

Fixed.

Last diversity training I went to was about ten years ago. If they ever make me go to another one, I'm gonna bring a picket sign that says, "What part of E pluribus unum don't you understand?"

[Father Dagon]

Originally Posted by JoeEllison

The problem with "corporate diversity training" isn't "diversity." Diversity is good, a useful thing that can create positive outcomes. The problem is "corporate"... there's nothing good that some corporate nimrod can't break down into into useless and inefficient parts, and then reassemble incorrectly.

Depends on what kind of diversity. "Diversity" only describes a specific state, not if it's bad or good. And beacuse it's more PC to divide people after the colour of their skin, not after their competence, skin-based groups is what we get.

[Babylon Sister]

In the US Department of Agriculture, diversity training is done on-line and has to be taken every year. Just pass the test with 70% right and you're good for another year. No flip charts, no markers that smell like fruit, and no free lunch.

[Tokenconservative]

Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto

Well. They don't really have to take it "seriously". All they have to do is to have some Diversity Sessions and force staff to attend (a free lunch helps). Then when challenged they can say the addressed the issue.

My brother, who worked at a large Canadian financial institution, used to have a lot of fun at these sort of sessions. Once, when the example was given about not exposing the bottom of the feet (shows) to staff from the Middle-East, he suggested that maybe, just maybe, people from the Middle-East might be diversified into understanding that their folkways were not the same as in the West and they should, err, lump it.

I love it!

I never understood why it was that Americans (looks like Canadians, too) had to change to suit people coming here...I remember in the 80s when Japan was "taking over" the US, all these firms out there were hiring people to teach we loutish Americans how to keep from gravely insulting our Japanese vistors by using the wrong hand to pick up papers, or scratching our noses with the wrong finger, or my favorite, knowing who should remain bowing longer....

What nonsense.

Here's an idea for foreigners coming here: learn OUR ways and pull your heads out of your parochial, bigoted behinds long enough to understand that they may be different from yours but that just because we show you the bottom of our shoe or are left-handed does not mean you should start a war with us.

Just a thought.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Originally Posted by Babylon Sister

In the US Department of Agriculture, diversity training is done on-line and has to be taken every year. Just pass the test with 70% right and you're good for another year. No flip charts, no markers that smell like fruit, and no free lunch.

Do you have to learn things like the current, PC terms for illegals and that it's no longer considered funny to visit a canning plant and shout "imagracion!!!" That you now shout "la migra! La migra!!" to get the best reaction?

Things do change....

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I work for the Feds,and beleive be Bureaucrats can do just as good a job of incompetence as the worst corporate dweeb.

You are giving gov't dweebs waaaayyy too much credit. When you can't be fired for virtually any reason, and when your next raise only depends on whether or not you (or you heirs and assigns) are still breathing, you cna be an upper-level manager in a gov't agency and you don't even have to be as competent as the worst, pimply-faced slacker with an ipod bolted to his head in the mailroom of XYZmegacorp.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Originally Posted by Zbu

I think this exposes another source of woo: completely useless presentations that essentially waste time at the expense of nothing else.

Well, there are also those "Team Building" seminars they send you to where you are wowed by some presenter in a $2000 suit with about $5000-worth of dentition organizing games many of us played as children during sleepovers.

And remember: it's a part of your year-end bonus or next year's raise that went to pay the $20, 30, 50, $250k they spent to bring in these n00bs.

Gawd...I get up every morning and thank the Almighty that I no longer work for anyone who is stupider than me....

Tokie

[bigred]

Originally Posted by b33fj3rky

So what do you all think? Is "diversity training" worthwhile for a corporation, or is it just a new woo-woo, feel-good, multicultural fad with little chance of helping a corporation's bottom line?

In America at least, it's a massive pile of hypocritical PC crap; just another sugar-coated BS term (like "affirmative action" and "tolerance" before it) that hides behind touchy-feely double-speak while really meaning "ensure you keep the decades-old tradition of reverse discimination going."

(PS the general comments on the gov't are true, plus change. And it doesn't matter at what level either. I will never wonder why we're trillions in debt.)

Originally Posted by Wolfman

I think that it is obvious to anyone with half a brain that if you can understand the different perspectives and orientations of people in your company, and then use those differences to enable each person to make their greatest contribution, that this is a "good thing". And that is what diversity training is supposed to be about.

Of course. Sadly, "anyone with half a brain" hardly descibes the PC nazis who run the whole "diversity" show here.

Originally Posted by Wolfman

Its not just an issue of feel-good seminars;

It is in America. Well that and a CYA for lawsuits. Ditto the "sexual harassement training," "don't hate on cross-dressing eskimos" training, and who-knows-what-else training.

PS great overall posts btw. You can run our "diversity" thingy anytime.

Originally Posted by TX50

Aaargh! Not the "writing on big pieces of paper in groups"! When I go to hell, Satan will be waiting for me with a clawful of marker pens and a big sheet of
paper!

lol - have a lot of gov't experience eh

Originally Posted by Fnord

BAD: Being a member of the only group (straight, male, native-born, white, Christian) held up as an example of the need for diversity training, while also being required to express an appreciation for the diversity of other people (gays, females, immigrants, non-whites, and/or non-Christians).

You know, the old "Only straights, whites, non-immigrants, males, and Christians are bigots, while everyone else is cool" line of male bovine manure.

You just summed up not only diversity training but IMO the heart of the problem with race relations in America. White/male/Christian? My God, the unholy trinity if ever there was one; you are evil incarnate. And we all know minorities, non-Christians etc are incapable of bigotry and never practice it. Too busy being oppressed I guess.

But thx for reminding me that there are at least a few others who see this whole thing for the absurdity it is. Sadly, we're out-numbered on an order of magnitude.

Originally Posted by Wolfman

But in order to truly appreciate chocolate, one must appreciate the tremendous diversity that exists between different chocolates

phooey. I hate dark chocolate.

gasp - I'm a chocolatist

[Father Dagon]

Originally Posted by TX50

[anecdote]
I remember serving with Gurkhas in Hong Kong. We had a "diversity training"
of sorts to acquaint us with their customs and expectations (I recall that
pointing with a finger, for example, was regarded as the epitome of rudeness
by Gurkhas, and we had to practise all sorts of weird antics like pointing with
our fists, chins and shoulders). The fact that a British officer of a previous
battalion had [allegedly] been sliced up with a kukri in retaliation for a slight
was excellent at focussing our minds on "appreciating diversity".
[/anecdote]

No wonder why they are so feared. I think that Sweden should fall back on her time-honored tradition of mercenaries and hire gurkhas. In case of WW3 the swedish navy can drop them off in S:t Petersburg and wish them good luck.

And how does Gurkhas cope with the latin tradition of constantly grabbing the crotch? (A man gotta keep himself updated about the invertory, you know.)

Originally Posted by Fnord

GOOD: Getting paid to attend and eat a free lunch while watching someone foul up a Powerpoint presentation and then have to "wing it" from the handout.

Powerpoint fouls up by definition. David Byrnes take on PP is hilarious!

Originally Posted by Fnord

BAD: Being a member of the only group (straight, male, native-born, white, Christian) held up as an example of the need for diversity training, while also being required to express an appreciation for the diversity of other people (gays, females, immigrants, non-whites, and/or non-Christians).

You know, the old "Only straights, whites, non-immigrants, males, and Christians are bigots, while everyone else is cool" line of male bovine manure.

Seems like a classic scenairo of "You want bigotism? I'll show you how much of a bigot I can be." Even though I'm a libertarian I would love to tell the rainbow coalition of PC-ness that they can have their fun little games, beacuse I represent the apex of civilization.

Originally Posted by Tokenconservative

Well, there are also those "Team Building" seminars they send you to where you are wowed by some presenter in a $2000 suit with about $5000-worth of dentition organizing games many of us played as children during sleepovers.

And remember: it's a part of your year-end bonus or next year's raise that went to pay the $20, 30, 50, $250k they spent to bring in these n00bs.

Gawd...I get up every morning and thank the Almighty that I no longer work for anyone who is stupider than me....

Tokie

The silly games and conferences are worthy a thread of their own.

I recommend Gaimans and Pratchetts Good Omens for a hilarious take on silly games and conferences.

[Tokenconservative]

Originally Posted by bigred

In America at least, it's



phooey. I hate dark chocolate.

gasp - I'm a chocolatist

Clearly there is something drastically wrong with you.

Dark chocolate is to die for.

It's white chocolate that is nasty, disgusting stuff.

Why do they call that crap "chocolate" anyway?

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Originally Posted by TX50

[anecdote]
I remember serving with Gurkhas in Hong Kong. We had a "diversity training"
of sorts to acquaint us with their customs and expectations (I recall that
pointing with a finger, for example, was regarded as the epitome of rudeness
by Gurkhas, and we had to practise all sorts of weird antics like pointing with
our fists, chins and shoulders). The fact that a British officer of a previous
battalion had [allegedly] been sliced up with a kukri in retaliation for a slight
was excellent at focussing our minds on "appreciating diversity".
[/anecdote]

Hmm...why din't the officer do an Indiana Jones on them? Remember the scene where the erstwhile hero had just dispatched a dozen bad guys in the market, only to be met with a big bad one waving a huge sword around?

Indy pulled his revolver and shot the guy in the head.

That's why we in the West invented guns. And the Brits have always had some nice ones.

Tokie