自20世纪80年代以来，专家建议雇主指定由来自不同部门、专业背景和管理水平的人员组成的多元化委员会和工作组(Kalev, Dobbin， & Kelly, 2006)。为了没有独裁的公司，多元化委员会允许不同人群的需求得到倾听和尊重。Robinson和Dechant(1997)列出了管理多样性的许多商业原因，如节约成本、赢得人才竞争、推动业务增长、提高创造力、产生更高质量的问题解决方案、增强有效领导、提高市场理解等等。很明显，管理多样性是员工和雇主的一个关键组成部分。多元化举措的一个重要组成部分是让每一位员工都感到自己处在一个包容的环境中。先前的研究表明，社会排斥与攻击性行为和智力思维的衰退有关(Baumeister, Twenge， & Nuss, 2002)。因此，为了让企业尽可能保持员工的工作效率，确保没有社会排斥感是很重要的。然而，这项任务并不像看上去那么简单。尤其是对于少数群体来说，看到他们在中层和高层管理职位上的代表不足，他们更有可能对多样性倡议的原则打折扣，从而得出结论，该组织不重视像他们这样的人(Avery, 2003)。这一数据表明，并非所有的多样性倡议都将有效。多样性倡议必须经过测试，以确保它们真正传达了预期的信息。尽管如此，多样性可以有广泛的含义。一些公司使用传统的平等就业机会委员会(EEOC)对多样性的定义，该定义处理性别、种族和年龄方面的差异(Robinson & Dechant, 1997)。其他公司倾向于对多样性进行最宽泛的定义，包括性别、种族、年龄、体能、素质和性取向的差异，以及态度、观点和背景的差异。(Robinson & Dechant, 1997)。许多人依赖于对多样性更详细的定义，认为多样化的人处于非主导的社会系统中，传统上一直处于研究和服务之下(Henderson, 1998)。虽然对多样性没有正确的定义，但本文讨论的三项多样性倡议的目标似乎是创造一个包容所有人的多样化工作环境，特别侧重于包括少数群体和非少数群体。
Since the 1980’s specialist have suggested that employers designate diversity committees and task forces composed of people from different departments, professional backgrounds, and managerial levels (Kalev, Dobbin, & Kelly, 2006). In order to not have dictatorial companies, diversity committees allow for the needs of diverse populations to be heard and respected. Robinson and Dechant (1997) listed many business reasons for managing diversity such as cost saving, winning the competition for talent, driving business growth, increasing creativity, producing higher quality problem solving, enhancing effective leadership, improving marketplace understanding, and more. It is clear that managing diversity is a key component for employees and employers. One important component of diversity initiatives is to make every employee feels that they are in an inclusive environment. Previous research shows that social exclusion is linked to aggressive behavior and decrements in intelligent thought (Baumeister, Twenge, & Nuss, 2002). Therefore, in order for businesses to keep their employees as productive as possible, it is important to make sure there are no feelings of social exclusion. Though, this task is not as easy as it may seem. For minorities in particular, seeing that they are underrepresented in middle- and upper-management positions makes it more likely for them to discount the principles of the diversity initiative and conclude that the organization does not value people like themselves (Avery, 2003). This data shows that not all diversity initiatives will be effective. Diversity initiatives have to be tested out to make sure that they are truly getting through with their intended message. Though, diversity can have a wide range of meanings. Some companies use the traditional Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) definition of diversity, which deals with differences in gender, racioethnicity, and age (Robinson & Dechant, 1997). Other companies tend to favor the broadest definitions of diversity, ones that encompass differences in gender, racioethnicity, age, physical abilities, qualities, and sexual orientation, as well as differences in attitudes, perspectives and background. (Robinson & Dechant, 1997). Many individuals rely on a more detailed definition of diversity considering diverse people as being in the non-dominant social system who have been traditionally under research and under served (Henderson, 1998). While there is no correct definition of diversity, the three diversity initiatives discussed in this paper seem to target a definition that encompasses creating a diverse work environment that is inclusive to everyone, specifically focusing on the inclusion of minorities and non minorities.