Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Practicing Dialogue: How an Organization can Facilitate Diverse Collaborative Action

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In addressing social issues, organizations have a responsibility to promote diverse participation, yet often struggle to harness the benefits of racial and gender diversity. Using a community-based participatory research design, with data collected over an 18 month field study, we examined how a social change organization, FoodLab, facilitated diverse collaboration. FoodLab aimed to grow a good food economy in Detroit, Michigan, through working with their members, local food entrepreneurs. We found that recurrent episodes of practicing dialogue catalyzed collaborative action around multiple issues, including shared kitchens, licensing, and membership. Practicing dialogue included intentional convening, participatory devices, and collective language. While leaders set up the initial procedures and rules, leaders and members, together, enacted these structures. Through high quality interactions, participants developed additional resources, knowledge, motivation, and relationships. Across episodes of practicing dialogue, traces of high quality interactions supported sustained effort around social issues. Our findings demonstrate the dynamic aspects of organizational structure and individual action in working towards diverse collaborative action.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The participants of this study did not give written consent for their data to be shared publicly, so supporting data beyond the anonymized data within the manuscript is not available.

Notes

  1. This concept is (a) similar to collective action (Garrison 1992), but helps clarify that the action is not motivated by opposition to or protest of a dominant social order or perceived injustice, and (b) aligned with growing social movements research on collaborative strategies for systems change (Briscoe and Gupta 2016; McDonnell et al., 2021; Schifeling & Soderstrom 2022).

  2. This concept is (a) similar to collective action (Garrison 1992), but helps clarify that the action is not motivated by opposition to or protest of a dominant social order or perceived injustice, and (b) aligned with growing social movements research on collaborative strategies for systems change (Briscoe and Gupta 2016; McDonnell et al., 2021; Schifeling & Soderstrom 2022).

References

  • Alesina, A., & Ferrara, E. L. (2005). Ethnic diversity and economic performance. Journal of Economic Literature, 43(3), 762–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allport, G. W. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice. Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R., Baxter, L. A., & Cissna, K. N. (2003). Dialogue: Theorizing difference in communication studies. SAGE publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, R. S., Bulger, M., Salipante, P., & Weisinger, J. Y. (2020). From diversity to inclusion to equity: A theory of generative interactions. Journal of Business Ethics, 167(3), 395–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berrey, E. C. (2005). Divided over diversity: Political discourse in a Chicago neighborhood. City and Community, 4(2), 143–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berrey, E. C. (2015). The Enigma of Diversity: The Language of Race and the Limits of Racial Justice. University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Binder, J., Zagefka, H., Brown, R., Funke, F., Kessler, T., Mummendey, A., Maquil, A., Demoulin, S., & Leyens, J. P. (2009). Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? a longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(4), 843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohm, D. (2004). On dialogue. Routledge.

  • Bradbury, M., & Kellough, J. E. (2011). Representative bureaucracy: Assessing the evidence on active representation. The American Review of Public Administration, 41(2), 157–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bright, E. M. (2002). Reviving America’s Forgotten Neighborhoods: An Investigation of Inner City Revitalization Efforts. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Briscoe, F., & Gupta, A. (2016). Social activism in and around organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 671–727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, S. E., Dovidio, J. F., Perry, S. P., Burgess, D. J., Hardeman, R. R., Phelan, S. M., Cunningham, B. A., Yeazel, M. W., Przedworski, J. M., & van Ryn, M. (2017). Informal training experiences and explicit bias against African Americans among medical students. Social Psychology Quarterly, 80(1), 65–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buttner, E. H., Lowe, K. B., & Billings-Harris, L. (2012). An empirical test of diversity climate dimensionality and relative effects on employee of color outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(3), 247–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, J. (1998). Theorising the ethical organization. Business Ethics Quarterly, 8(4), 621–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, T. (1994). Cultural Diversity in Organizations: Theory. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creary, S. (2020). How to talk about race in the workplace, according to this management professor. World Economic Forum. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/talking-race-workplace-environment-manager

  • Danbold, F., & Unzueta, M. M. (2020). Drawing the diversity line: Numerical thresholds of diversity vary by group status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118(2), 283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Della Porta, D. (2009). Democracy in Social Movements. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dobbin, F., Kim, S., & Kalev, A. (2011). You can’t always get what you need: Organizational determinants of diversity programs. American Sociological Review, 76(3), 386–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobbin, F., Schrage, D., & Kalev, A. (2015). Rage against the iron cage: The varied effects of bureaucratic personnel reforms on diversity. American Sociological Review, 80(5), 1014–1044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunphy, S. M. (2004). Demonstrating the value of diversity for improved decision making: The “Wuzzle-Puzzle” exercise. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(4), 325–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Earley, C. P., & Mosakowski, E. (2000). Creating hybrid team cultures: An empirical test of transnational team functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 43(1), 26–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. (2001). Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(2), 229–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago guides to writing, editing. and publishing. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press

  • Feldman, M. S., & Orlikowski, W. J. (2011). Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1240–1253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galinsky, A. D., Todd, A. R., Homan, A. C., Phillips, K. W., Apfelbaum, E. P., Sasaki, S. J., Richeson, J. A., Olayon, J. B., & Maddux, W. W. (2015). Maximizing the gains and minimizing the pains of diversity: A policy perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6), 742–748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, W. A. (1992). The social psychology of collective action. Frontiers in Social Movement Theory, 1, 53–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M., & Freeman, R. E. (2018). Deepening ethical analysis in business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 147(1), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T. (2002). Time, teams, and task performance: Changing effects of surface-and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 1029–1045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heintz, E. (2018). Detroit Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Report. (Entrypoint). Retrieved from https://entrypointmi.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/2018-detroit-entrepreneurial-ecosystem-report-high-res.pdf

  • Heinze, K. L., & Weber, K. (2016). Toward organizational pluralism: Institutional intrapreneurship in integrative medicine. Organization Science, 27(1), 157–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, A. B. (2014). Race and revitalization in Detroit. Detroit Data. http://detroitdata.org/dataset/race-and-revitalization-in-detroit. Retrieved from https://www.deadlinedetroit.com/articles/10677/not_a_myth_data_confirms_notable_race_gap_in_detroit_s_rebooting

  • Ho, A. K., Kteily, N. S., & Chen, J. M. (2017). “You’re one of us”: Black Americans’ use of hypodescent and its association with egalitarianism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(5), 753–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huising, R. (2014). The erosion of expert control through censure episodes. Organization Science, 25(6), 1633–1661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssens, M., & Steyaert, C. (2019). A practice-based theory of diversity: Respecifying (in) equality in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 44(3), 518–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), 741–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalev, A., Kelly, E., & Dobbin, F. (2006). Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies. American Sociological Review, 71(4), 589–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. (2001). Analytic induction. International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences, 1, 480–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellogg, K. C. (2009). Operating room: Relational spaces and microinstitutional change in surgery. American Journal of Sociology, 115(3), 657–711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leslie, L. M. (2019). Diversity initiative effectiveness: A typological theory of unintended consequences. Academy of Management Review, 44(3), 538–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loyd, D. L., Wang, C. S., Phillips, K. W., & Lount, R. B., Jr. (2013). Social category diversity promotes pre-meeting elaboration: The role of relationship focus. Organization Science, 24(3), 757–772.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, J., Wolf, M., & Seelos, C. (2016). Scaffolding: A process of transforming patterns of inequality in small-scale societies. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6), 2021–2044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mannix, E., & Neale, M. A. (2005). What differences make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse teams in organizations. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 6(2), 31–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell, M. H., Odziemkowska, K., & Pontikes, E. (2021). Bad company: Shifts in social activists’ tactics and resources after industry crises. Organization Science, 32(4), 1033–1055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishii, L. H., Khattab, J., Shemla, M., & Paluch, R. M. (2018). A multi-level process model for understanding diversity practice effectiveness. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 37–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, B. J., & Weathington, B. L. (2006). Beyond the business case for diversity in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 18(4), 283–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onyeador, I. N., Wittlin, N. M., Burke, S. E., Dovidio, J. F., Perry, S. P., Hardeman, R. R., Dyrbye, L. N., Herrin, J., Phelan, S. M., & van Ryn, M. (2020). The Value of Interracial contact for reducing anti-black bias among non-black physicians: A cognitive habits and growth evaluation (CHANGE) study report. Psychological Science, 31(1), 18–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oosting, J. (2015). Michigan elite to gather on Mackinac Island to talk business, politics and racial diversity. http://www.mlive.com/lansing-news/index.ssf/2015/05/michigan_elite_to_gather_on_ma.html.

  • Orlikowski, W. J. (2015). Practice in research: Phenomenon, perspective and philosophy. In D. Golsorkhi, L. Rouleau, D. Seidl, & E. Vaara (Eds.), Strategy as Practice (pp. 33–43). Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ospina, S., & Foldy, E. (2010). Building bridges from the margins: The work of leadership in social change organizations. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(2), 292–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page, S. E. (2007). Making the difference: Applying a logic of diversity. Academy of Management Perspectives, 21(4), 6–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative analysis and interpretation. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 3, 431–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pew Research Center. (2019). “Pew Research Center analysis of 2014–2016 Bureau of Labor Statistics American Time Use Survey data.” Pew Research Center, Washington, D.C. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/09/24/among-u-s-couples-women-do-more-cooking-and-grocery-shopping-than-men/ft_19-08-28_genderchores_1/

  • Phillips, K. W. (2014). How diversity makes us smarter. Scientific American, 311(4), 43–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, K. W., & Loyd, D. L. (2006). When surface and deep-level diversity collide: The effects on dissenting group members. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99(2), 143–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pirog, R., Miller, C., Way, L., Hazekamp, C., & Kim, E. (2014). The local food movement: Setting the stage for good food. MSU Center for Regional Food Systems.

  • Pless, N., & Maak, T. (2004). Building an inclusive diversity culture: Principles, processes and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 54(2), 129–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post, C., Muzio, D., Sarala, R., Wei, L., & Faems, D. (2021). Theorizing diversity in management studies: New perspectives and future directions. Journal of Management Studies, 58(8), 2003–2023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, M. G., Kaplan, S., & Whittington, R. (2020). Editorial essay: The tumult over transparency: Decoupling transparency from replication in establishing trustworthy qualitative research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 65(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabl, T., del Carmen Triana, M., Byun, S. Y., & Bosch, L. (2020). Diversity management efforts as an ethical responsibility: How employees’ perceptions of an organizational integration and learning approach to diversity affect employee behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 161(3), 531–550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3849-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richard, O. C. (2000). Racial diversity, business strategy, and firm performance: A resource-based view. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 164–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera, M. T., Soderstrom, S. B., & Uzzi, B. (2010). Dynamics of dyads in social networks: Assortative, relational, and proximity mechanisms. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 91–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schifeling, T., & Soderstrom, S. (2022). Advancing Reform: Embedded Activism to Develop Climate Solutions. Academy of Management Journal, 65(6), 1775–1803.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoem, D. L., & Hurtado, S. (2001). Intergroup dialogue: Deliberative democracy in school, college, community, and workplace. University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Seelye, K. Q. (2011). Detroit census confirms a desertion like no other. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/23/us/23detroit.html.

  • Sewell, W. H., Jr. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1), 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, G., & Bansal, P. (2020). Cocreating rigorous and relevant knowledge. Academy of Management Journal, 63(2), 386–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Holcombe Ehrhart, K., & Singh, G. (2011). Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A review and model for future research. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1262–1289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soderstrom, S. B., & Weber, K. (2020). Organizational structure from interaction: Evidence from corporate sustainability efforts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 65(1), 226–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sommers, S. R. (2006). On racial diversity and group decision making: Identifying multiple effects of racial composition on jury deliberations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spreitzer, G. M., & Sonenshein, S. (2004). Toward the construct definition of positive deviance. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(6), 828–847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(6), 1467–1478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugrue, T. J. (2014). The origins of the urban crisis: Race and inequality in postwar Detroit. Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tatum, B. D. (2017). Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?: And other conversations about race. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J. M. (2013). Redevelopment and race: Planning a finer city in postwar Detroit. Wayne State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tracy, S. J. (2019). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treuhaft, S., Hamm, M. J., & Litjens, C. (2009). Healthy food for all: Building equitable and sustainable food systems in Detroit and Oakland. PolicyLink.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & O’Reilly, C. A., III. (1992). Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(4), 549–579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, H., van Engen, M., & Paauwe, J. (2012). Reframing the business case for diversity: A values and virtues perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(1), 73–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verbos, A. K., Gerard, J. A., Forshey, P. R., Harding, C. S., & Miller, J. S. (2007). The positive ethical organization: Enacting a living code of ethics and ethical organizational identity. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(1), 17–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallerstein, N., & Duran, B. (2008). Community-based participatory research for health, Edition: 2ndChapter: The theoretical, historical, and practice roots of CBPRPublisher: Jossey Bass. (pp.25–46)

  • Williams, K. Y., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 77–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, L. (2017). A fair game? Racial bias and repeated interaction between NBA coaches and players. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62(4), 603–625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are indebted to FoodLab Detroit, especially Jess Daniel and Devita Davison, and to our research fellows Paola Mendez, Tara Tarazi, Isabella Morrison, Kaitlin Keane, and Jennifer Zdroik for making this research possible.  We are grateful to Associate Editor Tina Dacin and the reviewers for their constructive suggestions and insights.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Both authors contributed equally and are listed in alphabetical order.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sport Management, University of Michigan, 830 North University, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Kathryn L. Heinze

  2. Organizational Studies and Program in the Environment, University of Michigan, 825 Weiser, 500 Church St, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Sara B. Soderstrom

Authors
  1. Kathryn L. Heinze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sara B. Soderstrom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sara B. Soderstrom.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Heinze, K.L., Soderstrom, S.B. Practicing Dialogue: How an Organization can Facilitate Diverse Collaborative Action. J Bus Ethics 189, 453–478 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05348-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05348-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation