1. Case Study 1
Several large organizations announced recently they would
increase efforts to recruit persons of color, in part a response to
the Black Lives Matter movement. Some of the same
organizations made similar announcements in the past—yet the
numbers of persons with minority backgrounds in those
organizations have remained about the same.
This is in the face of research findings that organizations with
significant minority representation are stronger than their peers.
A McKinsey & Company study in May of top executive teams in
more than a thousand organizations in 15 countries concluded
that the most diverse organizations have an edge in their
markets. These firms are “more innovative—stronger at
anticipating shifts in consumer needs and consumption patterns
that make new products and services possible, potentially
generating a competitive edge.”
Of equal significance is a finding that the top third of the
organizations in the study are pulling away from the other two-
thirds in diversity and inclusion, registering increasingly higher
probabilities of being the most profitable. They are exhibiting
progress in achieving greater gender and ethnic diversity, and
increasingly positive impacts on bottom-line performance,
according to the researchers.
Differentiating between diversity and inclusion
I differentiate between diversity and inclusion by thinking of
progress in diversity as depending primarily on successful
recruiting of diverse talent. It can be measured. It’s what we see
on the corporate dashboard of performance measures. It is quite
likely that the rich get richer in this effort; organizations
exhibiting greater diversity are more attractive to talented

2. people with diverse backgrounds.
Talent retention depends to a large degree on inclusion. At least
that’s what people of diverse backgrounds tell us. Inclusion is
related to such things as “voice”—the belief by workers that
they are heard—as well as recognition and equal opportunity in
rewards and promotions. Harder to quantify than diversi ty,
inclusion is more nuanced and measured in comments in
interviews and surveys. It doesn’t provide the numbers and
simple headlines often associated with diversity.
Some organizations are good at both diversity and inclusion;
others can’t seem to get either right. Some companies, for
example, are strong recruiters but lack the ability to be
inclusive of talent with diverse backgrounds. Try as they might,
they are not making progress on diversity. Instead, they have
low retention rates for their diverse talent. In many cases, the
“last in, first out” phenomenon may apply in times of crisis.
The key to achieving both diversity and inclusion is committed
leadership at all levels, not just a few at the top who have
already made it. Transformation has to take place on the front
lines and the middle levels as well. This takes effort and time,
perhaps more than many organizations are willing to invest.
Inclusion may present too many challenges; it requires leaders
with the hearts and minds to understand personal challenges and
provide mentorship for all of their direct reports, listening to
them, and being willing to accept new ideas from them. They
must recognize those with diverse backgrounds as resources
rather than consumers of their effort.
Achieving these objectives requires more than training. It
involves constant measurement, counseling, and follow -up with
managers at all levels in the organization to produce results.

3. Answer each question in a paragraph
1. Describe the nature and role of Managing People:
2. Discuss why this is important as a result
3. Identify the concepts
4. Discuss the three components of the subject and how it can
assist positively
5. What kind of leadership philosophy applies?
6. What kind of leadership solution has to be applied?
7. What is your overall analysis on the matter? Are your
solution based on a long term or a short-term plan?