A Collaborative Inquiry: Raising Cross-Cultural Consciousness

A Collaborative Inquiry: Raising Cross-Cultural Consciousness

Diversity Divas
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-1812-1.ch006
(Individual Chapters)
No Current Special Offers


This chapter describes a Collaborative Inquiry (CI) process as experienced by six diverse female participants in a doctoral program. The focus of the inquiry was to deepen individual and group cross-cultural understanding, and to show how holistic learning can be promoted through integrating multiple ways of knowing and spirituality within a multicultural context. The purpose of this chapter is to provide the readers with sufficient information to apply CI in their practice and build on the research presented here. To meet this goal, the authors describe how CI has the potential to foster transformational learning and discuss the relationship between transformational learning, informational learning, global competencies, developmental capacity, and the paradoxical nature of diversity work. Lastly, the chapter ends with recommendations for creating a CI process that supports deep learning and change, and potential topics for future research.
Chapter Preview


Rapid changes in the global labor force call for the need to leverage workplace diversity (Ernst & Yip, 2008; Maltbia, 2001; McCuiston, Wooldridge, & Pierce, 2004). Organizations today have started to acknowledge the importance of increasing diversity within their structures, and recognize that cultural diversity can enhance their competitive advantage (Cox & Blake, 1991; Herriot & Pemberton, 1995). For instance, key research that emerged out of the University of Michigan during the 1960’s examined the quality of solutions to assigned problems (Cox & Blake, 1991). In this study, when the production of high quality solutions was compared between homogeneous and heterogeneous groups, researchers found that only twenty-one percent of the former produced high quality solutions, as compared to sixty-five percent of the latter (1991). Later findings also confirm the benefits of prioritizing diversity in the workplace (Amla, 2008).

As the workplace becomes more diversified, however, the construct of “diversity” has become even more challenging to define (Wentling & Palma-Rivas, 1998). While early attempts to create a succinct definition often resulted in only race and gender being identified, it was soon recognized that a more inclusive definition was needed (Ashkanasy, Hartel, & Daus, 2002; Oyler & Pryor, 2009). Maltbia and Power (2009) acknowledge the multiple layers and interpretations that exist when examining diversity, and identified some key components of diversity found in the literature. They include inborn human characteristics, personal experiences, organizational dimensions, personal style or tendencies, and external factors (2009).

R. Roosevelt Thomas, Jr. (1991) provides a comprehensive definition: “Diversity includes everyone. It is not something that is defined by race or gender. It extends to age, personal and corporate background, education, function, and personality. It includes lifestyle, sexual preference, geographic origin, and management or non-management” (p. 10). Scott (2010) concurs that organizations are now “more diverse culturally, ethnically, linguistically, intellectually, creatively, physically, and spiritually than ever before” (p. x). These views are all encompassing and take into account a more inclusive definition of “diversity” that allows for the support of all employees. Likewise, this handbook calls for an expanded view of “diversity” as well as “transformational strategies” that can be utilized to enhance the workplace. We define “transformational strategies” as those that support transformational learning that “…relates to the development of the cognitive, emotional, interpersonal, and intrapersonal capacities that enable a person to manage the complexities of work (e.g., leadership, teaching, learning, adaptive challenges) and life” (Drago-Severson, 2009, p. 11).

Key Terms in this Chapter

Transformational Learning: Developing cognitive, emotional, interpersonal, and intrapersonal capacities that allow a person to manage the complexities of life. It has the potential to “shift” how a person actively interprets and understands his/her experiences and the world around him/her (Drago-Severson, 2009).

Collaborative Inquiry: A systematic process of action and reflection adopted by co-learners to investigate an agreed upon and meaningful topic or question (Ospina, El Hadidy, & Hofmann-Pinilla, 2008).

Paradox of Diversity: The competing processes of diversity work including high potential for conflict and high potential for innovation, understanding, and creativity (Fisher-Yoshida & Geller, 2009; Yorks & Kasl, 2002a).

Habit of Being: A holistic process for making meaning about and relating to the world (Yorks & Kasl, 2002a).

Adaptive Challenges: Complex and ambiguous problems or opportunities that are often systemic with no readily understood answers (Heifetz & Laurie, 1996).

Global Competencies: Having knowledge and perceptual understanding as well as intercultural communications skills that assist one in interacting with the global and interdependent world (Olson & Kroeger, 2011).

Developmental Capacity: The ability to use our internal resources (affective and cognitive) in complex ways so we can better manage the demands of life (Drago-Severson, 2009; Kegan, 1982).

Diversity: Includes inborn characteristics, personal experiences, education, organizational dimensions, and personal style. It is inclusive and incorporates lifestyle, sexual preference, geographic origin, and work experience (Maltbia & Powers, 2009; Scott, 2010; Thomas, 1991).

Spirituality: Personal beliefs, values, and experiences about a higher power or higher purpose. Connecting to something greater than ones self. Feeling interconnected to all things and fostering a more holistic identity (Chin, 2010; Tisdell & Tolliver, 2003).

Ways of Knowing: One’s individual perspective of a topic and/or the world including one’s cognitive, affective, and relational capacity to make sense of phenomenon. It is about how a person makes meaning of his/her inner life and external experiences. It includes propositional, presentational, experiential, and practical Ways of Knowing (Drago-Severson, 2009; Heron, 1992; Kegan, 1982; Mezirow, 2000; Yorks & Kasl, 2002a).

Informational Learning: Gaining knowledge and abilities (Drago-Severson, 2009).

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book: