The Origins of Affirmative Action

all in all persons born or naturalized in the joined reconciles, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce every law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law nor refuse to any person at heart its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. (1) favourable post through can suck up its roots back to the 14th amendment, although it did not really get started until Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights bring was passed, giving minorities equal recitation rights. The overall strategy and outline for this plan were contained in Executive locate 11246, which was issued by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1972 (Gilbert et al. 2). This led to a wave of programs that were intended to further the equal employment opportunities for minority individuals. Affirmative carry out programs were intended to legally require organizations to be diverse.During the 1990s these programs have hang at a lower place a lot of scrutiny and are being replaced with a concept known as miscellany commission. . Managing and valuing mixed bag are key aspects of organizational behavior, but the question lies in how to create the diversity within the organization. In this paper, I will examine some(prenominal) articles that will give us reasons that assentient litigate should be replaced by diversity management, as well as one that imagines that positive action is take over needed in todays society. Mary Guy believes that affirmative action programs are still needed today.She celebrated that if we lived in a perfect world we would not have a need for organizations to have affirmative action programs (240). However, since pile have a tendency to work around people that are nearly like us, programs are needed to ensure that past discriminator y actions are corrected. Opposition to these programs generally has come from advantaged groups who feel that quotas will keep them from their jobs. Since the laws creating affirmative action never required quotas, then when quotas have been put in place, they are merely exceptions to the rule (Guy 242). transmutation in the workplace has been slowly increasing on a lower floor affirmative action, however, Guy feels that this is no time to abandon it, but to keep it moving forward (242). stigmatization revisited Does diversity management make a difference in applicant success? , written by Jacqueline Gilbert and Bette Ann Stead, includes the results of experiments conducted at two universities. These experiments examined whether there was a great recognition of increased qualifications and competence when employees were hire down the stairs a system of diversity management versus an affirmative action plan.The second article sort management A New organizational paradigm, writ ten by Jacqueline Gilbert, Bette Ann Stead, and John Ivancevich, defines diversity management and compares it to affirmative action. Furthermore they discuss strategies that will help to insure that a diversity management program is successful. (Gilbert et al. 1) In Stigmatization revisited the authors performed experiments to determine the effects of affirmative action versus diversity management.Individuals, both women and those of color, that were hired under the make-believe of an affirmative action plan were generally viewed as less able than there peers. It was noted that the perception was that if they were qualified for the position, then they would have been no need for an affirmative action plan. Those individuals that were hired in an aureole of diversity management were not perceived as being more or less qualified than their peers. These results were especially evident when the job was a conventional male type, for example, an electrician (Gilbert & Stead 11).They cerebrate that an organization that valued and promoted cultural diversity would enable women and minorities to be perceived as competent for the positions that they held. in addition those companies would have an inherent advantage when it came many other areas including resource acquisition, marketing, creativity flexibility, and corporate attractiveness. These advantages would lead to greater profits and therefore a more positive outcome (Gilbert & Stead 11).Thc theories of affirmative action are changing in todays world, according to the authors of Diversity management Many states, as well as the federal government, are debating the future of programs that are viewed as giving any type of advantage to a particular group of people (i. e. execute or gender) (Gilbert et al. 1). In order to alleviate concerns of discrimination, companies are evolution corporate cultures that embrace cultural diversity. This is known as diversity management. Affirmative action has come under a lo t of scrutiny, both by majority and minority groups, due to misperceptions and problematic implementations of the programs.Many people view affirmative action as a quota system that leads to unqualified individuals being hired in front of those that are qualified, and are therefore viewed as less competent than their peers. By treating all people equally, with regards to race and gender, these perceptions disappear (Gilbert et al. 8). These programs, however, will not work if they only exist in one part of an organization. Diversity management programs must start with the CEO and work its way down to the bottom.By being preponderating throughout an organization, the positive ethics of a strong diversity program will not be detrimentally affected with the decisions of one individual who chooses not to be ethical (Gilbert et al. 8). Through their research, the authors feel that the traditional misperceptions that are prevalent in an affirmative action program should not surface in a diverse multicultural organization (Gilbert et al. 8). As we can see, the problems that have been associated with affirmative action can be dissolved and the goals still met with a strong diversity management program within and throughout an organization.Affirmative action is under fire all around the country. Here in Georgia we have had several cases that have been brought to the publics attention. The University of Georgia is being sued because of racial preferences in its admission process (Rankin & Suggs 1). The City of Atlantas affirmative action set-aside plan is being challenged in a lawsuit as well (Campos & Rankin 1). The overall drift in these suits, as well as others throughout the country is that any system that gives preference to authentic groups is actually discriminatory in and of itself.In my view the original concept of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was that any type of discrimination is in violation of the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution. Affirmative ac tion programs that use quotas, no consequence how they are implemented, result in individuals being classified and treated according to their race and gender. Diversity management programs within an organization will promote the multiculturalism that is required, as our business world becomes more and more global. though traditional discrimination is still around in some cases, I do not believe that we need to keep affirmative action in the form that it is in today.A strong diversity management program will actually do more for the affected individuals by treating them as individuals quite of as part of a group. By looking at the individual and their individual contribution, stereotypes can be avoided. This is not an easy task, as old habits die hard, and people are slow to change. By embracing cultural differences that exist within our organization, misconceptions and prejudices can be left behind as we rise preceding(prenominal) discrimination and into diversity management.