an assessment of organizational multicultural competences

An Assessment of Organizational Abeya G. and Frew A. 39

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

An Assessment of Organizational Multicultural Competencesof Ethiopian Public Universities

Abeya Geleta1 and Frew Amsale1

Abstract Higher education institutions (HEIs) as multicultural organizations refer directly to thedegree to which everyday institutional policies and practices support cultural plurality,which is the focus of the present study. In line with this, the multicultural competencelevels of Ethiopian public universities were investigated. The convergent parallel mixed-methods design, including document analysis, semi-structured interviews andquestionnaires, was used in the study. Multi-stage, simple random and purposivesampling techniques were employed to select 316 participants for the study. Inferentialstatistics including mean, standard division, t-tests and one-way ANOVA wereused to analyse the quantitative data. The findings revealed that the universitieslacked policy frameworks, units, practices and programmes that adequately focus onmulticulturalism. Progress in addressing gender issues was still limited, including interms of women's empowerment, and the rate at which opportunities are utilised by menand women is still skewed in favour of men, as with the low numbers of femalelecturers. The staff associations were weak and poorly equipped to provide or promoteopportunities for skills development in the management of diversity. There is a need foruniversities to establish internal rules and policies and to provide conduciveenvironment for managing diversity amongst students and staff. There is also a need forthe creation of open and trusted mechanisms for staff and administration to freelyinteract with each other. It is imperative that university leadership adopt multiculturalcompetence as an essential competency within their profession, continue to seek outopportunities to further enhance personal multicultural competence, and infuse it intotheir daily practices.

Key words: Multicultural competence; leadership; cultural competency; organizational policy and procedures; personnel practices; attitudes, knowledge and skills

INTRODUCTION Today, more than ever before, the need torecognize cultural pluralism is inexorable

1Jimma University, College of Education and Behavioural Sciences, Department of Educational Planning and Management

Ethiop. J. Educ. & Sc. Vol. 12 No 1, September 2016 40for the “rapidly increasinginterconnections among all nations inthe world, particularly, as we face globalissues related to the ecosystem, nuclearweapons, terrorism, human rights, andscarce national resources” (Connerley andPedersen, 2005) and thereby to therealization of an ideal and healthy situationin any productive society.

Similarly, as the sustainability oforganizations by large depends upon theknowledge, skills, abilities, and attitudes ofall workers, the recognition of the culturalpluralism within organizations is ofparamount importance for the sustenanceof organizations (Connerley and Pedersen:2005). Hence management practices thatencourage innovation, high performance,and a learning culture that embraces allemployees (Macdonald, 1995), regardlessof the cultural similarity with their leadersare needed. In other words, the age ofcultural pluralism in which we are livingcalls for multiculturalism, that is the art ofmanaging diversity in a total qualitymanner is highly needed to managediversity effectively both at societal andorganizational levels.

Multiculturalism can be broadly defined asa system of beliefs and behaviours thatrecognizes and respects the presence of alldiverse groups in an organization orsociety, acknowledges and values theirsocio-cultural differences, and encouragesand enables their continued contributionwithin an inclusive cultural context whichempowers all within the organization orsociety. Multicultural competences, be it atthe societal or organizational level, is thecapability of managing diversity. It is anon-going process that unleashes the varioustalents and capabilities which diversepopulations bring to an organization,community or society, so as to create awholesome, inclusive environment, that is

safe for differences, enables people toreject rejection, celebrates diversity, andmaximizes the full potential of all, in acultural context where everyone benefits.Organizational multicultural competences(OMC) particularly refer to the capabilityof an organization managing diversity in atotal quality manner. Organizations arerequired to be multiculturally competent as“… the adjustments that employees willmake within an organization depend on theorganization’s tolerance for ambiguity, thedemand for conformity, and the valueplaced on diversity, cultural fit, andacculturation” (Carr-Ruffino, 1996).

OMC is related to the extent of theinclusiveness of organizational programs,policies, procedures, physical environment,health and social services and the like tothe existing diversity in an organization.Determining whether organizations aremulticulturally competent or not needs usto assess the efforts exerted byorganizations to create a wholesome,inclusive environment – where differencesare safely treated, where people areempowered to avoid cynicism, wherediversity is celebrated, where the fullpotential of all are being excelled andwhere everyone is a winner in a culturalcontext. Multicultural organizations valuediversity and attempt to accommodatecontinuing cultural change. Theseorganizations (a) work with a vision thatreflects multiculturalism; (b) reflect thecontributions of diverse cultural groups intheir mission, operations, products, andservices; (c) value multiculturalism andview it as an asset; (d) engage in visioning,planning, and problem-solving activitiesthat provide for equal access andopportunities; (e) understand that equalaccess and opportunities are not the sameas equal treatment; and (f) work ondiversifying the environment (Sue, 2001).

An Assessment of Organizational Abeya G. and Frew A. 41The key elements of OMC includes thingssuch as a mission statement, program goals,organizational norms, principles, policies,hiring practices; the culturalappropriateness of the physicalenvironment of the university, the culturalcompetence of the university’s governingstructures and the like. While anorganization may have many componentsof cultural competence, if they are notsupported and upheld by policy, they maybe put aside as a result of issues such aslack of funding. OMC includes bothpolicies and practices related to employees;the level of satisfaction and retention ofstaff. It also refers to the inclusion ofcultural competencies in the missionstatement of the organization, leadershipcommitment to a culturally competentorganization, the presence of an advisorycommittee for cultural competence, and aculturally sensitive and welcoming physicalenvironment. The OMC further includesthe development of systems and methodsfor determining what is culturallyappropriate for the organisation communityand for providing cross-cultural trainingand supervision for all concerned. It alsorefers to the degree to which multiculturalinterventions are institutionalized.

Developing OMC can also be considered asa strategy for securing competitiveadvantage for organizations. In lines withthis, Webb, Darling, and Alvey (2014)stated that “Multicultural capabilities areincreasingly becoming a significant sourceof competitive advantage and businessstrategy.”

Statement of the problem In society where there is ethnic andreligious diversity, the issue ofmulticulturalism is inevitable responsibilityof higher education institutions (Hurtado,2007). The cultural pluralism within theinstitutions makes them such models of the

pluralistic democracy (Ameny-Dixon,2004). Moreover, the issue of diversity inEthiopian universities makes the agenda ofmulticulturalism of their priority. Highereducation in Ethiopia has a relatively shorthistory of some 60 years only, and until2000, Ethiopia’s higher education systemwas comprised of just two universities,seventeen colleges, a total of 31,000students, and a small supervisorydepartment in the Ministry of Education.However, during the past ten years it hasundergone both major quantitative andqualitative change. This can be attributed tothe fact that the succession of new policies,development programs and legislationswere designed and implemented.Consequently, today it comprises about 36(33 take students directly from Grade 12)public universities, and several privatecolleges. The enrolment in the publicinstitutions also rose from 447,693 in2010/11, to 593,571 in 2013/14 (MoE,2015/16). To 388,529 in all programs by the year2011/12 (MOE: 2011).

According to ESDP V (MOE) in thecoming years of the implementation ofESDP V, the total enrolment in highereducation both undergraduate and postgraduate will continue to rise up. Theproportion of females and disadvantagedgroups in the enrolment will be given aparticular emphasis by strengtheningaffirmative action’s through preferentialaccess, academic support programs, and theestablishment of a gender friendlyenvironment and climate at HEIs (MoE,2015/16)). To this end OMC becomes ofparamount importance for Institutions ofhigher education today as they are madeof culturally diverse student and facultypopulations(Ameny-Dixon, 2004). In acondition highly marked by cultural,linguistic and religious diversity, makingconstructive use of this diversity in the

Ethiop. J. Educ. & Sc. Vol. 12 No 1, September 2016 42development of new ideas and solutionscan increase the opportunities forrecognition, equal opportunity,achievement and development for all. OurHEIs are required to promote democraticculture and uphold multiculturalcommunity life.

Though, numerous studies have beencarried out to study multiculturalism inboth Western and non-Western countries,their implications on educational leadershiphave not been studied and analysedsufficiently (Andersen, 2012). In additionto these, there are evidences thatuniversities in Ethiopia have not properlyaddressed the challenges of diversity intheir own context, let alone playing a vitalrole in addressing the diversity-relatedproblems of the larger society (Levine,1991). That is why in the last decade ourHEIs have been experiencing severalconflicts of the group of students due tomisconceptions that resulted from thedifferences in religion, ethnicity andlinguistics. Universities usually spendmuch of their resources in resolving suchconflicts of students rather than placingproactive measures. Therefore, the contextin which the HEIs are practicallyfunctioning calls for the development ofmulticulturalism in their leadership as wellas organizational contexts.

Prior to the development of multiculturalcompetences of HEIs, it seems wise toassess the existing multiculturalcompetences. The assessment believed toavail necessary data that help to understandthe multicultural competences of HEIs andthereby help to determine the possible waysto develop multiculturalism accordingly.Therefore, the main purpose of this studywas to provide a better insight of themulticultural competences of Ethiopianpublic universities by examining themulticultural competences Ethiopian publicuniversities at the institutional level.

To achieve this purpose the study has raisedthe following basic questions:

1. To what extent organizationalarrangements (such as policies,programmes, rules, regulations,decision making procedures,communication tools) in Ethiopianpublic universities are multicultural-oriented?

2. To what extent organizationalcultures of Ethiopian publicuniversities are multiculturalfriendly?

The purpose of the study The overall purpose of this study was toassess the organizational multiculturalcompetences of Ethiopian HEIs.

Significances of the study The study is significant in that it tried tostudy the multicultural competences ofEthiopian HEIs and factors that hamper it.The study helps to understand the extent towhich HEI’s in Ethiopia are multiculturallycompetent and to design systematic waysof developing their multiculturalcompetences so as to enable themdischarge their educational and socialresponsibilities for now and for the future.

An Assessment of Organizational Abeya G. and Frew A. 43The study might enable to have a betterinsight for policy makers on what essentialareas are to critically focus on in order todevelop the multicultural competences ofHEI’s. The study might also provide betterinsights for researchers who are interestedin the area of multiculturalism in furtherresearch undertakings.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

The Research Design The study applied convergent mixedmethods research approach by parallellycollecting and analyzing both qualitativeand quantitative data in order to bringabout more reliable result. The qualitativedata were collected from educationalleaders through interview and by analyzingnecessary documents whereas thequantitative data were collected fromteachers, administrative staff and leaders ofthe public universities throughquestionnaires.

Sources of the data University presidents, administrators,college deans, department heads, teachersand administrative staff working in thethree public universities were included inthe study as primary sources of data.Besides, essential documents such as policydocuments, senate legislations, strategicplans and programs and were also used assecondary data sources for the study.

Sample Size and Techniques The public universities in Ethiopia can becategorized in to three based on theirgenerations (MoE, 2011). From each ofthe three generations one sample universitywas selected using simple randomsampling method. Accordingly, JimmaUniversity (JU), Mizan-Tepi University(MTU) and Wollega University (WU) wereincluded in the study. Multistage randomsampling technique was employed to selectfive colleges from each of the sampleuniversities and then three sampledepartments from each of the samplecolleges were included in the study.

Summary of the study participants

Respondent Type * University Type Cross-TabulationUniversity Type Total

Jimma

Mizan-Tepi

Wollega

Respondent Type

Academic staff 104 68 46 218Academic Manager ( vice presidents, college deans, department heads)

24 16 6 46

Administrative staff 8 8 6 22Administrative Officers (administration team leaders)

14 9 7 30

Total 150 101 65 316

Instruments of Data CollectionIn this study, data were collected throughthree major instruments. These arequestionnaire, interview and document

analysis. Each of instruments is discussedas follows:

Ethiop. J. Educ. & Sc. Vol. 12 No 1, September 2016 44Questionnaires Two sets of questionnaires were used toassess the multicultural competences ofHEIs. The two sets of questionnaires weredesigned in line with the nature of datarequired from the participants. The first setof questionnaire was administered toacademic and administrative staff and thesecond questionnaire for the educationalmanagers (academic and administrativeofficers). The questionnaires were designedby consulting relevant literatures in the areaof multiculturalism. Accordingly, structure,roles and commitment of administrators,organizational policy and procedures,culturally biased incidents managementpractices, staff retention and personnelpractices, cultural competency in theservice delivery and communication toolswere identified and included as majorteams in the questionnaire.

Interview In this study, face-to-face semi-structuredinterviews were used to elicit relevantinformation on the attitudes andperceptions of the participants regardingmulticultural competences in the publicuniversities. The interviews were carriedout on face to face basis. The purposivesampling technique was employed to selectthe key participants for the interviews ofthe study who were perceived as possessingthe information needed to make acontribution to the phenomenon understudy. Consequently, 18 participants wereselected for participation in the semi-structured one-to-one interviews. Thesample included three vice presidents,three administrative team leaders, sixdeans and six senior teachers. Theintention for interviewing the managersand senior teachers was to get moreinsight into multicultural practices of theuniversities.

Document Analysis For the purpose this study all essentialdocuments such as senate legislations,strategic plans, visions and missions, valuestatements, programs and etc. of the publicuniversities under consideration wereanalysed and used to complement thequantitative data.

Validity and Reliability Checks The study, as indicated earlier, involved thecollection of both quantitative andqualitative data. Regarding the qualitativedata, the items of the interviews weredeveloped by consulting substantial worksand literature regarding the multiculturalcompetences. They were then modified,omitted as well as added as per thequalitative data. Regarding the validity ofthe questionnaires, prior to the main datacollection phase a pilot study was carriedout to maintain the reliability of thequestionnaire items. Besides, thequestionnaires were presented to the groupsof experts at Jimma University, college ofeducation and behavioural sciences forprofessional comments. A pilot study of thequestionnaire was conducted usingpurposive sampling of 17 respondents in asingle university which is similar to theones included in the study. Theparticipants in the pilot study were chosenbecause they had a similar background andknowledge to the target population aboutthe issues being investigated. They did notform part of the group to be surveyed. Theanalysis of the pilot study data indicatedthat the sub-scales of the questionnairehave good item characteristics in terms ofinternal consistency and homogeneity ofthe items contained in each sub-scale. Theresults showed that the reliabilitycoefficient (Cronbach Alpha) for theeducational leaders’ questionnaire rangesfrom 0.840-0.963 and it ranges from 0.856-0.932 for the administrative staffquestionnaire, which are considered very

An Assessment of Organizational Abeya G. and Frew A. 45good for the purpose of this study. Theresults of the pilot study have not beenincluded in the final results.

Procedures of Data CollectionTo answer the basic research questions, thisstudy involved series of data gatheringprocedures. The questionnaires wereadministered to respondents after a brieforientation about the purposes of the studyand how to answer the questions. Tomaximize the quality of the responses andthe rate of return, convenient time for therespondents was arranged. The completedquestionnaires were collected from therespondents with the help of assistant datacollectors. To elicit the desired information,the researcher discussed and arrangedappropriate time and place so that theinterviewees might be at ease during theinterview period. Besides, the purpose ofthe interview was explained and allpossible effort was made to establishproper rapport with the interviewees beforeand during the interview secludes. In orderto reduce the possibility of losingconfidentiality through the involvement ofmany interviewers (Patton, 2002:354), thedata in this study were collected only bythe researcher.

Data analysis MethodsIn this study, the data collected throughthe questionnaires were coded, entered,cleaned and analysed using theStatistical Package for Social Sciences(SPSS 20) computer software. Thequantitative data were analysed usinginferential statistics such as mean,standard division, t-tests and one-wayANOVA. The qualitative data were alsotranscribed, coded and interpretedthematically.

The one-way ANOVA was conducted,based on results of inter-item correlationand factor analysis of data, to examinedifferences in perceptions among the

different groups of respondents in theuniversity as well as among theuniversities. Besides, a post hoc test wasmade to see the directions of thedifferences among the universities. Anindependent sample t-test was computedto examine the significant perceptiondifferences that might exist betweenuniversity leaders and workers groups.Prior to the independent sample t-test,Levene's Test for Equality of Variances wascarried out to check the equality of thevariances between the two groups. Equalityof variances were taken in to considerationin computing the independent t-test whenthere are no statistically significantvariances between the mean values of thetwo groups. On the other hand, whenstatistically significant variances betweenthe mean values of the two groups arefound, equality of variances were not takenin to consideration in computing theindependent t-test. The interviewtranscripts and data from the documentswere analysed for descriptions and patternsrelated to OMC. Analysis of quantitativedata is displayed first and thencorroborated by qualitative data analysisin the form of texts and quotes.

Ethical Considerations

Even though the data collected for thisstudy are not politically, socially orphysically sensitive in nature, ethical issuesare considered important. For the surveyquestionnaire, respondents were remindednot to write their name on thequestionnaire. The process of gettingaccess to the universities began byrequesting permission formally, in writing,through the official channels. The first stepthe researcher took regarding this matterwas to write and explain in detail thepurpose of the study and the data-collectionmethods to be used to the target universitiesto get permission to conduct the research.

Ethiop. J. Educ. & Sc. Vol. 12 No 1, September 2016 46The research offices at the sampleduniversities were requested to issue anethical clearance certificate for this project.Interviews participants’ right to privacywas also maintained through the promise ofconfidentiality. A number of techniqueswere included to ensure anonymity andconfidentiality in terms of the findings. Theparticipants were informed of the purpose,methods and time frame of the study as it isunethical in terms of human relationshipsto conduct an investigation when thesubjects are unaware of the real purpose.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Structure, Roles and Commitment of

Administrators A culturally competent public organizationis one that acknowledges and incorporates– at all its structure levels – the importanceof culture, vigilant towards the dynamicsthat result from cultural diversity,expansion of cultural knowledge andprompting cultural competence to meetculturally unique needs ( Betancourt et al,

2003). Accordingly, the study seeks toexamine the appropriateness of thestructure as well as the roles andcommitment of administrators in promotingcultural competency in the threeuniversities.

Table 1 shows the perceptions of workersand managers regarding the structure, rolesand commitment of administrators inpromoting cultural competency in theuniversity. Hence, both the workers(M=2.68, SD= .792) and managers(M=2.92, SD= .668) perceived that thestructure, roles and commitment ofadministrators in promoting culturalcompetency in the university weregenerally low. However, statisticallysignificant differences exist between theperceptions of teachers and managers t(298) = -2.377, p < 0.05, suggesting thatthe structure, roles and commitment ofadministrators in promoting culturalcompetency in the university wereperceived lower by the workers (M=2.68,SD= .792) than the managers (M=2.92:SD= .668).

Table 1: Independent sample t-test of the perceptions of teachers and managers regarding structure, roles and commitment of administrators

Independent sample t-testStructure, rolesand commitment ofadministrators

Position Mean SD t df sig Meandifference.

Workers 2.6830 .79245-2.377 298 .018 -.24326

Managers 2.9263 .66883

A one-way ANOVA was conducted in orderto examine the differences in perceptions ofthe staff on the appropriateness of thestructure and roles and commitment ofadministrators in promoting cultural

competency in their respective universities.To this end, 11 items were aggregated (asmeasuring the same thing) based on theresults of inter-item correlation and factoranalysis of data.


Table 2: ANOVA on differences of perceptions of staff regarding structure, roles and commitment of administrators in promoting cultural competency across the Universities

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.Between Groups 5.860 2 2.930 5.077** .007Within Groups 171.388 297 .577Total 177.248 299

As indicated in Table 2 above, there weresignificant differences in the responses ofstaff in the three universities regarding theappropriateness of the structure as well asthe roles and commitment of the managersin promoting cultural diversify across theuniversities, (F (2, 297) = 5.077, p = .007).In order to determine which universitystaffs’ perceptions differs significantly fromwhich, the Tukey post hoc multiplecomparisons methods were employed. Theresults indicated that a significantdifference exist between the MTU and theother two universities, suggesting that theappropriateness of the structure andcommitment of the managers in supportingcultural diversity were relatively in place inthe JU (M = 2.86, SD = .757) and WU (M= 2.78, SD = .608) than in MTU (M = 2.55,SD = .829). However, in general theappropriateness of the structure and theroles and commitment of the universityleadership in promoting cultural diversifyacross the universities were found tominimal.

Furthermore, the results of the qualitativedata revealed that the mission statementsdid not explicitly recognizes culturaldiversity in the universities and newmembers of the universities received noorientation with respect to the universitiespolicy statements, goals and functions and

responsibilities vis a vis multiculturalcompetencies. There were no practices ofevaluating leaders on, among other skills,their knowledge and skills pertaining tocultural competency and staff and studentshad no access to training activities thatfocus on issues relating to culturalcompetency. Majority of respondents didnot believe that the university leaders wereselected from a field of candidates with therequisite knowledge and experience inmanaging culturally diverse workforce. Theuniversities under study did not have aspecial office or function to addressethnic/cultural diversity issues andconsequently students and workers werenot involved in identifying key diversityissues and the universities had no culture ofcollecting, analyzing and incorporatingdemographic and statistical informationpertaining to cultural diversity in itsplanning process.

Organizational policy and procedures Multicultural competence from theorganizations perspectives is related to theextent of the inclusiveness oforganizational programs, policies,procedures, physical environment, healthand social services and etc. to the existingdiversity in an organization. It is, amongother things, through supporting suchmulticultural competencies in their stated

Ethiop. J. Educ. & Sc. Vol. 12 No 1, September 2016 48strategies, policies, procedures, andimplementations that organizational leadersbe able to develop multi-culturallycompetent employees (Sue, Parham, &Bonilla-Santiago, 1998).

It is in line with this notion that this studyattempts to examine the organizationalpolicies and procedures of the three publicuniversities. Table 3, shows theperceptions of the participants regardingthe extent to which the organizationalpolicies and procedures ensure culturaldiversity in their universities. Accordingly,the mean values of both the workers

(M=2.68, SD= .792) and managers(M=2.92: SD= .668) of the publicuniversities were found to be low. Thisindicates that both groups of participants ingeneral perceived that the organizationalpolicies and procedures of their universitieswere not adequate to ensure culturaldiversity. Besides, no statisticallysignificant differences were found betweenthe perceptions of the workers and themanagers pertaining to organizationalpolicies and procedures in ensuring culturaldiversity in the universities, t (298) =-1.387, p > 0.05 (see Table 3 below).

Table 3: Independent sample t-test of the perceptions of teachers and managers about organizational policies and procedures

Independent sample t-testOrganizationalpolicy & procedures


Workers 2.8219 .73139 -1.387

298 .166 -.13640Managers 2.9583 .71459

Further analysis was carried out to examineif there were differences in the staff’sresponses among the three Universities. Tothis end, ten items were aggregated (as

measuring the same thing) based on theresults of inter-item correlation and factoranalysis of data. Then, a one-way ANOVAwas conducted in order to examine thedifferences in perceptions of the staffacross the three universities (see Table 4below).

Table 4: ANOVA on differences of staff perceptions concerning the availability of organizational policy and procedures to ensure cultural diversity in the University

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.Between Groups 1.974 2 .987 1.870 .156Within Groups 156.730 297 .528Total 158.703 299

The ANOVA result in the Table 4 indicatesno statistically significant difference in thestaff perception across the threeUniversities concerning the availability of

organizational policy and procedures toensure cultural diversity, F (2,297) = 1.870,P > 0.05). The Tukey Post hoc analysisrevealed no significant difference among

An Assessment of Organizational Abeya G. and Frew A. 49the mean ratings of the three Universities,JU (M=2.93, SD =.751), WU (M =2.80, SD=.644) and MTU (M =2.76, SD =.733).Thus, participants in general perceived thatthere were no organizational policies andprocedures in place to ensure culturaldiversity in the universities.

Moreover, the qualitative data confirmedthat the universities had no missionstatements, policies, programs andpractices that explicitly acknowledge andaddress cultural diversity and reflectscompliance with the country’s statestatutes. The participants reported that there

were no personnel or organs appointed totake responsibility for and have authorityover the development, implementation, andmonitoring of the cultural competenceactivities and/or to advice the managementon matters pertaining to multiculturalservices.

Dealing with culturally biased incidents Participants of the study were asked aboutthe capabilities of their universities indealing with culturally biased incidents.Their responses were computed throughindependent sample t-test and results werepresented in Table 5 below.

Table 5: Independent sample t-test for the mean scores of workers and managers about the capabilities of their universities in dealing with culturally biased incidents

Independent sample t-test Culturally biased incidents

Position Mean SD t df sig Mean difference.

Workers 2.57 .923 -2.196 166.312 .030 -.222Managers 2.80 .706

Table 5 shows that both groups of theparticipants, workers (M=2.57; SD=.923)and managers (M=2.80; SD=.706)perceived the capabilities of theiruniversities in dealing with culturallybiased incidents as low. However, there arestatistically significant differences betweenthe perceptions of the workers and the

managers, t (166.31) = -2.196, p < 05, inthat the capabilities of sample publicuniversities in dealing with culturallybiased incidents were perceived to be lowerby the workers (M=2.57, SD=.923) than itas perceived by the managers (M=2.80,SD=.706).

Table 6: ANOVA on differences of staff perceptions regarding the management of culturally biased incidents across the universities


The ANOVA result in Table 6 showed thatsignificant difference existed among thethree Universities regarding themanagement of culturally biased incidents

across the universities, F (2, 303) =4.252, p< .0.05. The Tukey post hoc comparisons ofthe three Universities showed that theattempts university leaders made to

Ethiop. J. Educ. & Sc. Vol. 12 No 1, September 2016 50effectively managed culturally biasedincidents was relatively better in theJU(M=2.78, SD =.924), than in theMTU(M =2.47, SD =.809), p = .018. There

was no statistically significant differentbetween the mean ratings of WU (M =2.52,

SD = .827) an the two other groups,p>0.05. The qualitative data also supportthe above findings. The FGD dataconfirmed that the three universities had noclear and written procedures to deal withculturally biased incidents. The universitieshave clear limitations in providing staffwith training in conflict resolution and torecognize and deal with culturally biasedand discriminatory practices or behaviours.The leadership did not arrange multilingualservices when appropriate. Human resourcepolicies and procedures were not in placeto address concerns or complaintsregarding unfair treatment in the area ofethnic/cultural issues.

Overall understanding and commitment to cultural competency

The university’s overall understanding andcommitment to cultural competency refers

to the extent to which the it acknowledgesand respects the right of an individual to hisor her cultural customs, beliefs andpractices and responsive to issues ofcultural diversity, and designs programsand services that reflect its populations.The university’s overall understanding andcommitment to cultural competency has todo with the extent to which the principlesof equality, freedom from discrimination,and access to participation outlined in theEthiopian constitution are incorporated intoits management and service deliverystrategies. In general, a University thatpossesses adequate understanding of andcommitment to cultural diversity respectsthe diversity and rights of the individuals itserves. It is in line with this notion that thestudy seeks to investigate the overallunderstanding and commitment of the threepublic universities to cultural competency.

Table 7: Independent t-test of the perceptions of teachers and managers about Universities overall understanding and commitment to cultural competency

Independent sample t-test understanding& commitment to cultural diversity


Workers 3.3276 1.14700 -2.097

172.8 .037 -.25019Managers

3.5778 .78547

The mean values of the perceptions ofworkers and managers regarding theiruniversities overall understanding of andcommitment to cultural competency foundto be (M=3.32, SD=1.147) and (M=3.57,SD=.785) respectively showing that thesample universities have more than average

understanding and commitment to culturalcompetency (Table 7). However, there is a

statistically significant difference betweenthe perceptions of workers and managers inthis aspect, t (172.805) = -2.097, p < 05.The managers in the sample public

An Assessment of Organizational Abeya G. and Frew A. 51universities perceived that their respectiveuniversities have higher level of overall

understanding and commitment to culturalcompetency as compared to the workers.

Table 8: ANOVA on differences of staff perceptions with respect to the university’s overall understanding and commitment to cultural competency

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.Between Groups 10.248 2 5.124 4.524** .012Within Groups 340.899 301 1.133Total 351.147 303

One way ANOVA was computed toexamine the differences in staff perceptionswith respect to the university’s overallunderstanding and commitment to culturalcompetency across the three universities. Itwas identified that significant differenceexists among the three Universities asperceived by the staff respondents, F(2,301) =4.524, p = .012). The post hoc testshowed significant difference in the meanscores of the staff respondents between JU(M=3.51, SD =1.03) and WU (M =3.01,SD =1.10) showing that the overallunderstanding and commitment of theuniversity community to cultural diversitywas high in JU than the WU, p =.008.There was no statistically significantdifferent between the mean ratings of MTUand the JU, p = .705. The result of studyshows that the sample universities haveaverage understanding and commitment tocultural competency (as in Table 8).

The respondents believed that theuniversities were incorporated the

principles of equality, freedom fromdiscrimination, and access to participationoutlined in the Ethiopian constitution intoits management and service deliverystrategies. However, they were remainingambivalent whether the universitiesconsider cultural factors such as language,and ethnicity in developing theirmanagement and service delivery strategiesand whether universities respect thediversity and rights of the individuals theyserve.

The personnel practices

Table 9 portrays the multiculturalcompetencies of the personnel practices ofthe sample universities. The data on theTable 10 show that workers in the sampleuniversities in general have perceived thepersonnel practices of their universities tobe lower in terms of their multiculturalcompetencies (M=2.71; SD=.848) thanthey have been perceived by the managers(M=3.14; SD=.528).

Table 9: An independent sample t-test of the perceptions of teachers and managers about universities personnel practices

Independent sample t-test Personnelpractices


Workers 2.71 .848 -4.850

169.323 .000 -.42825Managers 3.14 .528

Ethiop. J. Educ. & Sc. Vol. 12 No 1, September 2016 52

There are statistically significantdifferences between the perceptions ofworkers and managers regarding thepersonnel practices of the sample

universities, t (169.323) = -4.850, p < 0.05,showing that managers have relativelyevaluated as high as compared to theworkers’ mean ratings.

Table 10: ANOVA on differences of staff perceptions concerning the personnel practices


The ANOVA result showed statisticallysignificant difference among the threeUniversities relating to personnel practices,(F (2,271) =8.83, P < 0.001). The post hoctest results showed that the attempts madein the JU (M =3.01, SD .791) toincorporate multicultural competences tothe personnel practices was significantlyhigher than in WU (M =2.51, SD =.717)and MTU (M =2.69, SD = .803) (as inTable 10).

From the above result it was learned thatthe personnel practices of these twouniversities were not effective as evaluatedagainst personnel recruitment, hiring, andretention practices. There were nostrategies to recruit and retain a culturallydiverse staff. Academic and administrativestaff members from culturally diversebackgrounds were rarely employed at alllevels of the universities. However,participants from the JU argued that theuniversity had an equal opportunityemployment policy and it regularlyexamines and eliminates selectionprocedures that inadvertently excludeculturally diverse candidates. Yet, theresources were not committed to supportinitial and ongoing training for personnel to

develop cultural competence and systemwas not designed to continually monitor,evaluate, and reward the culturalcompetence of the staff. The participants inthe Jmma University did not believe thatforms of communication were culturallyand linguistically appropriate for thepopulations served.

Staff retention Staff retention refers to the university’seffort in retaining its diverse staff throughsuch mechanisms as developing a databaseon the cultural composition of staff forevaluating its progress towards a culturallydiverse workforce; regularly reviewing itscultural competency performance; andpaying attention to cultural identity,customs, communication, and norms.Besides having a clearly written non-discriminatory policy, the university canretain its staff through recognizing,supporting and acknowledging staffmembers who are actively demonstratingcultural competency in their practices.Thus, the sample public universities wereevaluated against the extent to which theyhave devised such staff retentionmechanisms.


Table 11: An Independent sample t-test for the mean ratings of respondents regarding Staff Retention

Independent sample t-test Staff retention


Workers 2.74 .886 -1.08

296 .281 -.124Managers 2.87 .796

The study found that both workers (M=2.74, SD =.886) and managers (M =2.87,SD =.796) reported that the threeuniversities in general were performing lowin relation to implementing staff retention

mechanisms. The perceptions of both theworkers and the managers have shown nostatistically significant difference in thisregard, t (296) =-1.08, p = .281 (Table 11).

Table 12: ANOVA on differences of staff perceptions with respect to the staff retention Practices

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.Between Groups 2.672 2 1.336 1.794 .168Within Groups 219.623 295 .744Total 222.295 297

As indicated in the Table 12, there were nosignificant differences in the response ofstaff in the three Universities concerningthe staff retention practices, F (2,295)=1.794, P > 0.05). The Tukey post-hocmean comparison also depicted nosignificant differences in the mean ratingsof the respondents across the Universities.However, in general, the mean ratings ofthe three universities revealed that they hadlow staff retention mechanisms andstrategies.

It was learned from the qualitative data thatall the three universities have had criticalproblems regarding staff retentionpractices. There were no databases on thecultural composition of staff that might

help the universities to evaluate and designstrategies regarding the development of aculturally diverse workforce and therespondents did not believe that staffmembers pay attention to cultural identity,customs, communication, and norms in thesample universities.

Cultural competency in the service delivery

Cultural competency in the service deliveryprocess is one of the areas of themulticultural competencies of theuniversities. The University’s culturalcompetency in the service delivery processcould be extrapolated from its effortexerted to design its mission, goals andobjectives and creating an atmosphere of

Ethiop. J. Educ. & Sc. Vol. 12 No 1, September 2016 54support which states that all persons shallreceive appropriate services. TheUniversity also ensures that methods ofservice delivery are culturally appropriateand in doing so it recognizes and uses theknowledge and expertise of culturallydiverse staff. Besides, the Universityidentifies cultural, linguistic etc. barriersthat may limit or prevent culturally diverse

individuals from having access to itsservices and it collects feedback to learnmore about the effectiveness andresponsiveness of its programs andservices.

In line with this, the cultural competency ofthe three public universities in terms of theservice delivery process was computed.

Table 13: An independent sample t-test scores of the staff regarding the University’s service delivery system

Independent sample t-test


Workers 2.94 .825 2.365 270 .019 -.28442Managers 3.22 .855

The study found that the perceptions ofworkers and managers pertaining to thecultural competency of the universitiesdiffer significantly, t (270) =-2.365, p = .019. Workers in the three sampleuniversities perceived the culturalcompetence of their university in theservice delivery process below the average(M=2.94 SD=.825) whereas the managershad a relatively positive perception of thecultural competence of their university inthe service delivery process (M= 3.22,SD=.855) (as in Table 13).

Nine items were classified into similarcategories through inter-item correlationand factor analysis of the data and thenone-way ANOVA was calculated to identifyany differences in terms of the staffperceptions across the universitiesregarding the extent to what theyincorporate cultural competency in theirservice delivery processes. There wasstatistically significant differences amongthe three Universities in the servicedelivery system, F (2,269) =4.874, p <0.05).

Table 14: ANOVA on differences of staff perceptions regarding the extent to what the university incorporates cultural competency in its service delivery process


In order to determine which Universitystaff perceptions differs significantly fromwhich, Tukey post hoc multiplecomparisons methods were employed. The

results in Table 14 indicated that asignificant difference exist between JU andthe other two universities suggesting thatthe practice of service delivery is relatively

An Assessment of Organizational Abeya G. and Frew A. 55efficient and effective in addressingmulticulturalism in JU (M =3.17, SD=.809) than MTU(M =2.89, SD =.850) andWU (M =2.81, SD =.831). There was nostatistically significant difference betweenMTU and WU, p > 0.05.

The staff respondents in MTU and WUuniversities argued that their respectiveuniversities were not committed to createan atmosphere of support that might bettermeet diverse, unique needs of students andstaff of various cultural, ethnic andlinguistic backgrounds.

Communication The University regularly identifies andseeks to overcome barriers in itscommunication with culturally diversepopulations. The University identifiescommunication networks that will reachculturally diverse populations. TheUniversity assesses all existing materialsfor cultural bias and makes appropriatechanges. The University clearly outlinesprogrammes or activities that will ensurecultural competency.

Table 15: Independent sample t-test for the mean ratings of respondents regarding communication and materials

Independent sample t-test

Communication & materials


Workers 2.7522 1.00 -1.360

252 .175 -.22701Managers 2.9459 .943

As discussed in the Table 15 above, thecompetence of the three public universitiesin creating muticulturally competentcommunication system was found to bebelow the average. There seems aconsensus between the two groups ofparticipants pertaining to the

communication process in that as therewere no statistically significant differencesbetween both of the workers (M=2.75,SD=1.00) and managers (M=2.94, SD= .943) groups in this regard, t (252) =-1.360, p = .175.

Table 16: ANOVA on differences of staff perceptions concerning the communication and materials in your universities employed to ensure cultural diversity


In addition, one-way ANOVA wascalculated to identify any differences interms of the staff perceptions in respect tothe appropriateness of the communicationand materials to the culturally diverse

groups across the three Universities (seeTable 16). The one-way ANOVA testconfirmed that there were statisticallysignificant difference in the perception ofstaff across the three Universities regarding

Ethiop. J. Educ. & Sc. Vol. 12 No 1, September 2016 56the practices of communication andmaterials, F (2, 301) = 6.048, p < 0.05. TheTukey post-hoc mean comparison depictedsignificant differences between JU (M=2.99, SD =.1.01) and MTU (M =2.57, SD=.998), p = .002. In general, the low meanratings of the staff confirmed that the threepublic universities were not competentenough in establishing and implementingmuticulturally efficient and effectivecommunication system in their respectiveuniversities.

Summary of the major findingsJackson (2002) argued that, if leaders aresuccessful in negotiating the cross-culturalbarrier, they can reduce other barriers andfacilitate trust. In line with this, themulticultural competence levels ofEthiopian public universities wereinvestigated. The mixed methods researchapproach was used. The following are themain gaps identified; they also provideindicators of the issues that could beaddressed.

The study showed that the appropriatenessof the structure and the roles andcommitment of the university leadership inpromoting cultural diversify across theuniversities were generally low. Theuniversities visited did not directly addressthe management of multiculturalismthrough a policy framework. In theuniversities, there were no extensivemechanisms to promote and monitorpluralism and the enjoyment of equal rightsand treatment by the student and staff body.University administrations lacked actionsand programmes that adequately focus onmulticulturalism. There were no personnelor organs appointed to take responsibilityfor and have authority over thedevelopment, implementation, andmonitoring of the cultural competenceactivities and/or to advice the managementon matters pertaining to multiculturalservices. The universities had not made use

of academic associations, which by theirnature encompass diverse groups of staffand provide natural spaces for engagement.The universities had no identifiableprogrammes or units to manage the issue ofdiversity across the system.

Human resource policies and procedureswere not in place to address concerns orcomplaints regarding unfair treatment inthe area of ethnic/cultural issues. The lowmean ratings of the universities revealedthat they had low staff retentionmechanisms and strategies. There were nostrategies to recruit and retain a culturallydiverse staff. Academic and administrativestaff members from culturally diversebackgrounds were rarely employed at alllevels of the universities.

Efforts to engage with diversity or topromote a multicultural environment wereoften ad-hoc, resulting in efforts reaching afew individuals, without affecting theoutlook and practice of the universities asinstitutional entities. Efforts were alsoinsufficient to comprehensively address thedifferent challenges faced by members ofthe university staff in engaging withdiversity. Progress in addressing genderissues was still limited, including in termsof women's empowerment, and the rate atwhich opportunities are utilised by men andwomen is still skewed in favour of men, aswith the low numbers of female lecturers.

There was a limited use of availableopportunities to promote the understandingand appreciation of multiculturalism, suchas using cultural groups as a conduit tobring staff and students together throughjoint or complementary programmes. Thesegroups need to come together to learnabout and appreciate difference. There wasno uniformly applied discussion andtraining on diversity and pluralism,pertinent to all aspects of the universitylearning and social environment.

An Assessment of Organizational Abeya G. and Frew A. 57CONCLUSION In the literature on organizational culturalcompetence, policies, programs, andpractices are frequently described as theareas in which an organization’s underlyingcultural values and beliefs are mosttangible (Cross et al., 1989; Sue, 2001).Practices, however, did not emerge fromthe quantitative data analysis, although theyhave been considered one of the mostessential aspects of cultural competencebecause they most focus on ways of beingand behaving in organizations (Sue, 2001).

This study highlighted a number ofobstacles for the universities to achieveorganizational level multiculturalcompetences. The mere presence ofcultural plurality is not enough to make anorganization a multicultural one. Althoughdiversity among the workers is animportant factor, multiculturalism is morethan that: it refers to what makes anorganization into a place where all workersfeel valued, whatever their culture. D’Nettoand Sohal (1999, p. 531) argued thatmanaging diversity means building skillsand creating policies and practices that getthe best from every employee within anenvironment that encourages all employeesto reach their full potential within thecontext of organizational goals. In order toachieve that, diversity practices inrecruitment, training, development,appraisals, and pay are important.

RECOMMENDATIONSThe study highlighted the need foruniversities to establish internal rules andpolicies and to provide conduciveenvironment for managing diversityamongst students and staff. They shoulddevelop policy and strategies that addresselements of difference, such as gender,disability, and ethnicity. Pluralism has to beplaced on the university agenda, across all

faculties, as one way to ensure the futurestability of the country. Diversity and itsmanagement can also provide a regulartopic for papers to be presented at annualuniversity conferences, public lectures andstudent debates. Debates can also beorganised on difference and life on campus.Cultural associations provide importantavenues for the management of diversity.Cox (2001, p. 119) discussed the factorsrelated to leaders that supportmulticulturalism, such as openly expressingsupport for diversity-related goals; invitingfeedback from colleagues on behaviourrelated to diversity; seeking persons whoare culturally different for informal contact;bringing diversity-related problems oropportunities to the attention of higherlevels of management; mentoring peoplefrom diverse backgrounds; andparticipating in diversity-related educationactivities.

The managers’ and workers’ awareness ofthe varied cultures, behaviour, andexpectations of the different groups andsub-cultures on campus and how theyinteract with each other needs to beimproved. Academic and non-academicstaff should be better equipped than theypresently are to manage such diversity.Universities should include opportunitiesfor discussions on diversity and itschallenges, to benefit both new and seniorstaff.

These findings confirm the position that theneed to prepare university leaders withmulticultural knowledge, skills, anddispositions. The university leaders werenot adequately familiar with orknowledgeable about cultural competences.In the academic literature on individualcultural competence, researchers typicallyfocus on the development of awareness,knowledge, and skills (Betancourt, Green,Carrillo, Ananeh-Firempong, 2003;

Ethiop. J. Educ. & Sc. Vol. 12 No 1, September 2016 58Connerley & Pederson, 2005; Sue, 2001).Awareness relates to one’s perceptions andrecognition of his or her own biases andworldview, as well as recognition of therealities of privilege and inequities in thesurrounding environment. Raisingeducational leaders’ awareness of theirbiases and privilege is an important startingpoint in developing individual culturalcompetence. Knowledge has to do withfamiliarity with concepts and theoriesabout injustice as well as specificknowledge about other cultures or theability to learn about them. For educationalleaders, knowledge of instructionalleadership strategies also is essential topromote organisational-wide culturalcompetence (Ruff & Shoho, 2005). Skillsrefer to a leader’s ability to behave in waysthat effectively and appropriatelycommunicate with those who are different.Certain skills have also been associatedwith socially just organisational leadershipthat complement the notion of culturalcompetence such as: the ability to leadchange effectively (Fullan, 1991), apurposive moral imperative (Dantley,2003), distributive leadership (Brooks etal., 2007), and the ability to handleresistance (Theoharis, 2007), among others.

The staff suggested that organisational-wide cultural competence could beaccomplished through the implementationof a series of programs designed to enhanceand promote intercultural integration. Thereis a need for the creation of open andtrusted mechanisms for staff andadministration to freely interact with eachother. Deliberate efforts could be made toregularly collect staff ideas and provide anopportunity for discussions on these issues,to ensure that staff and administration arewell informed. It is imperative thatuniversity leadership adopt multiculturalcompetence as an essential competencywithin their profession, continue to seek

out opportunities to further enhancepersonal multicultural competence, andinfuse it into their daily practices.

REFERENCESAmeny-Dixon, G. (2004). Why

multicultural education is more important in higher education nowthan ever: A global perspective. International Journal of ScholarlyAcademic Intellectual Diversity, 6(1), 1-12.

Andersen, F. (2012). The concept of multiculturalism and implications for school leadership. Retrieved September 21, 2014 from , from http://www.emasa.co.za

Banks, J. A. ( 1989). Multicultural education: Characteristics and goals. In J. A. Banks, & C. A. Banks, Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Banks, J. A., & et.al. (2005). Democracy and Diversity: Principles and Concepts for Educating Citizens in a Global Age . Seattle: Center for Multicultural Education, University Of Washington.

Carr-Ruffino, N. (1995). Managing Diversity: People Skills for a Multicultural Workplace. Paperback.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education (6 ed.). Abingdon: Taylor & Francis e-Library.

Connerley, L. M. (2004). LEADERSHIP IN A DIVERSE AND MULTICULTURAL: The Development Of Multicultural Competencies. In P. Pedersen, 110

An Assessment of Organizational Abeya G. and Frew A. 59Experiences For Multicultural Learning (pp. 69-88).

Connerley, M. L. (2005). Leadership in a Diverse and Multicultural Environment: Developing Awareness, Knowledge, and Skills, . Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.

Connerley, M. L., & Pedersen, P. B. (2005).Leadership in a diverse and multicultural environment: Developing awareness, Knowledge, and skills . Sage Publications, Inc.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3 ed.).New Delhi: SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.

Jupp, V. (2006). The Sage Dictionary of Social Research Methods. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Komives, S. R., Lucas, N., & McMahon, T.R. (2007). Exploring Leadership: For College Students Who Want to Make difference (2nd ed.). San Fransisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2003). Exemplary Leadership. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2007). The Leadership Challenge (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Louis Cohen, L. M. (2007). Research Methods in Education (6 ed.). Abingdon: Taylor & Francis e-Library.

MOE. (1994). EDUCATION AND TRAINING POLICY. Addis Ababa.

MOE. (2010). Education Sector Development Program IV (ESDP IV) 2010/2011 – 2014/2015 2003 EC – 2007 EC. Addis Ababa.

MoE. (2012). Education Statistics Annual Abstract 2004 E.C (2011/2012) . Addis Ababa. doi: www.moe.gov.et

Northouse, P. G. (2013). leadership: Theory and Practice (6 ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Sue, D. W. (2001, November). Multidimensional Facets of Cultural Competence. The Counseling Psychologist , 29(6), 790-821.

Webb, L., Darling, J., & Alvey, N. (2014). Multicultural Leadership Development in the 21st Century .White Paper.

an assessment of organizational multicultural competences

Documents