Happy Talk: Is Common Diversity Rhetoric Effective Diversity Rhetoric?

Despite their prevalence, diversity initiatives do not necessarily motivate employees to facilitate diversity goals. We advance understanding of diversity rhetoric—defined as how leaders talk about diversity and its effects—as a tool for motivating employees to foster diversity and inclusion. Prior work investigates rhetoric that emphasizes diversity in organizations is necessarily beneficial (value-in-diversity rhetoric), which is puzzling given the reality that diversity can have positive or negative consequences. We introduce the construct of contingent-diversity rhetoric, which emphasizes diversity is beneficial if its challenges are overcome, and thus captures the reality of diversity's effects. Drawing from the psychology of the self, we theorize leaders use contingent-diversity rhetoric less commonly than value-in-diversity rhetoric, due to fear of appearing prejudiced. Drawing from the psychology of employee motivation, we theorize contingent-diversity rhetoric results in more diversity effort among employees than value-in-diversity rhetoric does because it increases perceptions that diversity goals are difficult to achieve. Four multi-method studies support the proposed descriptive-prescriptive paradox: contingent-diversity rhetoric is descriptively less common, but prescriptively more effective, than value-in-diversity rhetoric is. Our research advances theory on fostering diversity and inclusion in organizations and suggests leaders can increase employees' diversity effort by changing the way they talk about diversity.