It is natural, perhaps, that legislation should provide the platform for diversity policies, but there is an argument that HR departments need to extend their understanding of diversity far beyond basic compliance with laws on sex, race, age and disabilities.
Diversity is fundamental to the structure of our natural world, ensuring that individuals in every species are characterised as much by their differences as they are by their similarities. It is the paradox of life that ensures evolution.
That said, the tenets of Darwinian theory may not be the best foundation for a boardroom conversation on how to establish a truly diverse organisation. Darwin doesn't sell soap powder, cough medicine or banking services. But people do and people simply hate to be pigeonholed.
And here is another paradox. To help understand human differences, sociologists like nothing more than to create artificial groupings. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the study of generations. Demographers cannot even agree on the birthdate parameters of various identified generational groups. Baby-boomers, for example, are variously described as people born between 1946 and 1965, or between 1945 and 1961, depending on the researcher.
Generational groupings, nevertheless, have established a meaning for themselves in our daily conversations. If someone is described as a member of Generation X, we have a general understanding that they are aged between about 30 and 45.
That understanding is important in management if employers are to ensure their organisations are relatively free from the kind of generational tension that can undermine working relationships. It is not simply about older people taking orders from younger people.
In What's Next: Gen X, Keeping Up, Moving Ahead and Getting the Career You Want, Tamara Erickson argues that people born into different generations think and behave differently because of their shared experiences.
Today's teenagers are growing up with the twin threats of climate change and environmental depletion. They are also the first generation born into the world of the internet. You, like me, might recall that peculiar screeching noise when using a modem. Our children will never hear it.
These same children will be entering the workplace in a few years' time just as a few of those in the generation preceding mine - often described as 'traditionalists' - are deciding to work beyond the normal retirement age. We are going to have a workplace packed with five distinctive generations. What will that mean for HR? A whole lot of headaches.
Whether they liked it or not, HR professionals have had to broaden their understanding of cultural diversity in recent years. It is all well and good trying to enforce uniformity in support of a brand image, but that didn't wash at British Airways in 2006 when Nadia Eweida, a check-in clerk, was told to remove a crucifix pendant which contravened the dress code. The company mounted an embarrassing policy review following protests from MPs and church leaders. All of that could have been avoided with a bit of cultural sensitivity.
HR's approach to diversity must become similarly acquainted with generational sensitivities. Companies need to maintain a healthy mix of generations in future. It is no longer acceptable or sensible to cut off an experienced cohort of employees as they reach their 50s. Nor is it possible to ignore the influence of a younger generation who may pick an employer for its environmental or equality policies.
The world of work must be big enough for everyone. It's up to HR to ensure that.
Richard Donkin is author of The Evolution of Work and The Future of Work, richard.donkin@haymarket.com
