Management of cultural diversity in companies: the challenge of higher education

Teresa Escrich - Dr. J. Félix Lozano (INGENIO. CSIC-UPV)

Index

1. Introduction
2. The need for training for diversity: a global overview.
3. The management of cultural diversity in organizations
4. Management Models of Cultural Diversity
5. Measures for the training of professionals capable of working in
diverse environments.
Bibliography

Abstract

Cultural diversity is a fact that must be reflected upon; and reflection must be done
rigorously and integrated into educational and professional fields.

Many European initiatives in the field of higher education have already gone down this
path, however, not enough emphasis has yet been placed on the need to incorporate
intercultural competences into generic competences that serve to create a homogeneous
European area of education.

For this reason, and because of the relevance of the issue in the current context, a
reflection on the need to prepare future professionals to work in diverse environments is
proposed. Companies are aware of this need and have been working on diversity
management strategies for a long time, bearing in mind that this is the basis for growth,
improved profits and improved innovation, as it contributes to retaining and attract
talent.

1
 1. Introduction

The question of cultural diversity is of first relevance in education for two fundamental
reasons: the first is that it is in education where in fact many cultural conflicts are
experienced and, the second, is because it is in education where it can be influenced
more direct way to lay the foundations of an intercultural coexistence. We will begin our
article with a first approach to the reality of cultural diversity in higher education in
Europe. Secondly, we will focus on analyzing the question of cultural diversity in
companies and, thirdly, on presenting the differences between the two great models of
diversity management: multiculturalism and interculturalism. There we will stop to
discuss in detail the advantages and weaknesses of each of the approaches and, above
all, to present the strengths of the intercultural approach to higher education. We will
analyze the difference between two concepts that may make a difference in how
diversity is managed in the future: the concept of tolerance and the concept of respect.
Finally, some first proposals for action1 in higher education will be outlined with a view
to preparing future graduates for their insertion in diverse work environments.

2. The need for training for diversity: a global overview.

The UNESCO Universal Declaration for Cultural Diversity, 2001, considered that the
wide dissemination of culture and the education of humanity for justice, freedom and
peace are indispensable to the dignity of man and constitute a sacred duty that all
nations must comply with a spirit of responsibility and mutual aid. Likewise, it
considers that pluralism should be the political response to cultural diversity, and
Human Rights its guarantor. The general reflection on the social and civic dimension of
higher education has been studied in several works in recent years (Boni and Lozano
2007; Lozano et. Al. 2012) and has been the subject of

1 This work is in its first phase, so the proposals that can be presented here are still in the draft phase.
reflection by prestigious authors (Nussbaum, 1997; Walker, 2006; Collini, 2012). What
interests us here now is to reflect on how university education is training the
professionals of the future and training them for their insertion in diverse work
environments.

In recent years there has been an important transformation in higher education in Europe
both in its academic organization and in its pedagogical models (DeSeCo, 1998-2000;
Tuning Project, 2000; Cheers, 1998-2000; Declaration of
Bologna, 1999; REFLEX, 1999-2000; Horizon 2020, 2010; Erasmus +, 2014). These
transformations have aspired to the creation of a single European area of higher
education of excellence, motivated mainly by the need to adapt to the European labor
space and encourage mobility between countries, which leads to an increase in cultural
diversity in Europe. A crucial concept to assess the university's strategy in this regard is
the concept of competence, which here will be understood as “something more than
knowledge and skill. It involves the ability to face complex demands ”(DeSeCo,
executive summary, 3: 2005). What the University is doing in this regard and what the
company demands is crucial to promote the employability of Spanish university students
in the current context, seeking convergence between institutions. This work will try to
analyze how universities are promoting the skills to work in multicultural environments
and manage cultural diversity. An attempt will be made to identify the key generic
competencies that students must acquire in their university training process so that they
are able to work effectively in diverse environments (DeSeCo, 1998-2000; Tuning
Project, 2000).

The DeSeCo project and the Tuning project recognize the “cultural diversity”
competence as a key competence for a successful life and a well-ordered society. As the
DeSeCo project states: “Societies are becoming more diverse and compartmentalized,
with interpersonal relationship therefore requiring more contact with those who are
different from oneself” (OECD, 7: 2005). This fact makes inevitable the development of
a broader capacity called “interact in heterogeneous groups”, which includes the ability
to relate well with others, the ability to cooperate and the ability to manage and resolve
conflicts. The question of how to deal with diversity is also considered in the Tuning
project through generic competition: “appreciation of and respect for diversity and
multiculturalist ”and
in the specific competence, aimed at students of degrees related to the company:
“Identify related issues such as culture and ethics and understand their impact on
business organizations ”, these are two clear examples of the relevance of the issue.

Currently, the Horizon 20202 strategy is underway, which has among its main
objectives the development of an economy based on growth and innovation and that this
growth is inclusive, promoting an economy that has a high level of employment, based
on social cohesion and integration: "Understanding social, cultural and political
transformations in Europe requires the analysis of changing democratic practices and
expectations as well as of the historical evolution of identities, diversity, territories,
religions, cultures, languages and values" (Horizon 2020, 60: 2010).

This year (2014) the Erasmus + program was launched, in which two key lines are
established: cooperation between institutions and cooperation with companies, which is
a good opportunity to give coherence to the demands of the current labor market and to
the offer in competitions that the university is doing. Among the challenges to be
addressed is reflected: "the development of social capital among Young people, the
empowerment of young people and their ability to participate actively in society, in line
with the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty to" encourage the participation of young people
in democratic life in Europe "(Erasmus + Guide, 9: 2014). The development of the skills
that are proposed from the European space requires addressing higher education based
on intercultural competences,

3. The management of cultural diversity in organizations.

It is a reiterated statement that: “Among the factors that may influence the greater or
lesser predisposition to innovate is the culture of the people involved in

2 Framework Program for Research and Innovation of the European Union planned for 2014-2020 that will contribute directly to addressing the main social challenges set out in Europe 2020 and its
flagship initiatives. It will also help create industrial leadership in Europe. It will also reinforce the excellence of the scientific basis, essential for the long-term sustainability, prosperity and well-being of
Europe. (Cit. Mineco,
http://www.idi.mineco.gob.es/)
these processes, people who can simultaneously belong to different social groups
”(Castro and Aracil, 1: 2014; Fundación Bertelsmann, 2012). Many companies are clear
that diversity can be a source of talent, that heterogeneous teams are usually more
efficient than homogeneous ones, due to the contribution of different perspectives.
However, the key is to know how to manage and be part of these teams in which
conflicts can arise. Diversity is a clear “contribution to attracting and retaining talent;
increased motivation, commitment and, therefore, the efficiency of the workforce;
increased innovation and creativity throughout the organization ”(Fundación
Bertelsmann, 67: 2012).

As a result of the appearance in the United States of Diversity Management strategies in

companies in the 90s, several lines of action have been adopted. These have depended
and have been subject to the real interest that the company itself had in the matter.
According to Thomas (1990), there are three ways of managing cultural diversity, from
the establishment of quotas (in order to comply with current legislation on positive
discrimination), to seeing cultural difference as a prestigious value for the firm, to the
vision of cultural diversity as a valuable learning resource for the organization.
However, the general trend has been to link diversity management with issues of
efficiency and competitive advantage.

Much of the literature on the matter, as well as various studies agree that Diversity
Management in the field of organizations entails important direct benefits. These
benefits are usually grouped into: Strengthening the culture of the organization;
improvement of the company's global reputation; Increased creativity and innovation;
strengthening of a high performance culture, as a consequence of innovation by
differentiation; customer loyalty of different origins and; in short, an increase in
production (EOI, 2009; GESDI, 2011; Fundación Berstelsmann, 2012).

However, many companies have forgotten to recognize the importance of good diversity
management for people's coexistence. Here coexistence goes beyond coexistence and is
that coexistence, involves both individual and collective aspects. At the individual level,
the recognition of a person's culture, values, customs and habits are essential for them to
feel that they belong to the place where they are: in this case, the company. On the
collective level,
Therefore, we find that differences have to coexist, not coexist, which makes the
demand for tolerance obsolete in favor of an intercultural management of difference.
According to the EOI, in the management of diversity in Spanish companies, “The
experts agree that only those that affect the functioning of a working group are attended
to. From this perspective, the characteristics of the people that affect their relationships
with the group and that affect the results of their activity are understood as significant
”(EOI, 2009: 21).

It is about incorporating aspects of coexistence into the organizational culture that do

not pass through the status quo. It is about giving value to the difference in contrast to
the general trend of "non-discrimination", under which it was intended to take for
granted that equality in the workplace was being committed. Following Kochan “Today
diversity is a reality in the labor and consumer market. Successfully managing diversity
and generating value from it requires a sustained, systemic approach and long-term
commitment. Success is achieved through a strategy that views diversity as an
opportunity for all individuals in an organization to learn from each other how to
achieve better results at work. An organizational culture of cooperation is required to
support it, as well as leadership and skills that facilitate the effective functioning of the
group. Organizations that invest resources to take advantage of the opportunities that
diversity offers will have better results than those that do not invest in its management. "
(2002).

4. Management Models of Cultural Diversity

- Multiculturalism and interculturalism

It was in the 1950s, as a result of the proliferation of social studies and cultural
implications, that proponents of the earlier models began to realize that they had
undemocratic tendencies. In the following two decades, attention began to be paid to
equal opportunities for minorities, thus emerging cultural pluralism.
Cultural pluralism, within which multicultural and intercultural models are developed, is
based on the claim of peaceful coexistence, under the belief in the benefits of diversity
and social heterogeneity. Like the melting pot, and unlike assimilationism, pluralism
accepts the immigrant, or the minority group, as an “active participant in the
construction of society,
thereby recognizing their full membership in it, as well as the indigenous population
”(Blanco, 2006). Unlike the other two models, where the loss of identity is presented as
a prerequisite, “in the pluralist model of society, the existing diversity does not
disappear but is maintained, it is recreated. It does not disappear either by acquisition of
the dominant culture (assimilationist) or by the emergence of a new integrating culture
of pre-existing contributions (melting pot) ”(Giménez, 1996). But in addition, this model
'celebrates the difference', based on two principles, as pointed out by Giménez and
Malgesini (2000). Firstly, it is based on the principle of equality or non-discrimination,
depending on culture, ethnicity, religion, etc. And in second place, it is complemented
by the principle of difference or respect and acceptance of the other. In this way,
pluralism is considered as a proposal against exclusion, presenting itself as an
alternative proposal to the socio-political management of cultural diversity.
During the first period in which the pluralist model was gaining strength, from the mid-
1960s to the mid-1980s, the concept of multiculturalism was used as a synonym for
cultural pluralism (Giménez, 2000); advocating a special value to the understanding of
all cultures. This model is both a matter of fact and a proposal for social organization, or
as Lamo (1995, cited in Giménez and Malgesini, 2000: 292) suggests “multiculturalism
(in fact) is coexistence in the same social space of people identified with varied cultures
and, as a political project, in a normative sense, respect for cultural identities ”. It is
appreciated in these contributions that multiculturalism, as part of cultural pluralism, is
based on respect and tolerance of the other in society. However,
The characteristics of the multicultural model would soon become its greatest criticisms,
considering that multiculturalism advocates mere coexistence, without promoting
coexistence. An example of this will be its foundation "in the spatial location of
differences, in the legal recognition of minorities that implies a specific and complex
jurisdiction that guarantees the rights of each group, in the recognition of cultural
relativism" (Rodríguez, 2012: 6 ).
Thus, authors such as Rex (1986) have established their criticisms that this diversity
management model assumes that there are two different levels, the public in which all
individuals are equal, and the private, to which the public would be relegated. culture,
beliefs, etcetera. The concept of interculturality has its origin within the educational
sphere, but it expands to other spheres, such as the social, cultural and political spheres
in an attempt to respond to the incessant needs for managing diversity within plural
societies. It should be remembered here that the concept of 'plural society' does not have
to entail a pluralistic model on the social and political level, it is necessary to refer,
again, to the level of facts (factual) and to the normative level (Table 1).

Table 1. Cultural pluralism: models and plans of action.

Source: Carlos Giménez (2000). Own elaboration.

Interculturality develops within the philosophy of cultural pluralism. It is an overcoming

of the multicultural approach, in the sense that it pays more attention to “the intense
interaction in fact that exists between cultures” (IIDDHH, 2009: 18).

The concept, or basic element, around which the intercultural model revolves is that of
'interaction', between different subjects or ethnicities. As Giménez (2003) points out, the
nucleus of this approach, its novelty, is a normative proposal on inter-ethnic relations,
beyond the relations based on respect and tolerance that it proposes
multiculturalism because, according to the author, these are basic principles of cultural
pluralism. This contribution qualified by Giménez and Malgesini [interculturality]
introduces a dynamic perspective of culture and cultures. Without this dynamic
perspective of the creation of culture and reconfiguration of identities, the risks of
essentialisms, ethnicities and culturalisms are great. Second, the intercultural proposal
focuses on contact and interaction, mutual influence, syncretism, cultural miscegenation,
that is, in the increasingly intense and varied sociocultural interaction processes in the
context of globalization ”( 2000: 258).

As can be seen in Table 1, and in relation to Lamo (1995), a distinction is made between
the level of facts and the regulatory level, in order to attend to the differences between
expressions or cultural forms that occur in a society and its implementation in the
legislation or regulations thereof. Likewise, the table shows the contributions of the
intercultural model to the multicultural one.

One of the fundamental contributions, following Giménez (2003), is that the

intercultural perspective is concerned with addressing the relationships between each
culture. The intercultural perspective will look for convergences on which to establish
links and common ground. It is here where we suggest moving from the concept of
tolerance, a pillar of multiculturalism, to that of respect, which seems more appropriate
for the intercultural model. The basic differences between the two concepts, their ways
of facing, in this case, the difference will be briefly exposed.

The difference between the two concepts is of great importance, since each of them will
be based on different conceptions of society, culture and human nature. In addition to
the fact that each of them has different normative consequences for the management of
diversity.

In philosophy, the concept of tolerance has been used to refer to an ideal situation of
peaceful coexistence in societies with different religious orientations. Since Locke, with
"Letter on Tolerance", written in 1667, to the present, this concept continues to be used
in order to propose a minimum of social peace.

Tolerance has been an excellent claim, a good mechanism, in the context of

multiculturalism. The multicultural model, which at its normative level advocates the
principles of equality and the (legal) recognition of difference, has made use of the
The concept of tolerance to contain real differences and achieve a more or less
satisfactory peaceful coexistence within society. But it does not serve us to defend the
proposed intercultural model, since it cannot be based on values, which in our opinion,
demands the ideal of tolerance.
A relationship of tolerance cannot be equated to respect because tolerance implies an
unequal power relationship between the one who tolerates and the one who is tolerated.

Here respect is defended as a fundamental value of the intercultural model, the

definition of which must necessarily include the component of “recognition”.
Recognizing difference implies taking a step beyond tolerance, it implies knowing and
recognizing differences on a basis of respect. The tolerant does not recognize the
tolerated, he supports him, “which implies an asymmetric character between those who
tolerate and are tolerated” (Bartolomé and Cabrera, 2003: 38).

In Cortina's words, regarding active respect, “it consists not only in stoically supporting
that others think differently, having different ideals of a happy life from mine, but also
in the positive interest in understanding their projects, in helping them carry them
forward, provided they represent an acceptable moral point of view ”(1997: 240).

Influencing from the educational sphere in the selection of key competencies that
highlight these values is essential, as was pointed out at the beginning, to train not only
brilliant technicians, but also citizens. As Martha Nussbaum puts it in her book
Cultivating Humanity (1997): “it is very urgent right now to support curricular efforts
aimed at producing citizens who can take charge of their own reasoning, who can see
the different and foreign not as a threat to be resisted, but as an invitation to explore and
understand, expanding their own minds and their capacity for citizenship ”(Nussbaum
1997: 301).
 5. Measures for the training of professionals capable of working in diverse
environments.

The development of civic citizenship and intercultural respect implies taking measures
at various levels and of varying complexity. Here we briefly present six that would be
basic to this process:

1. Prepare plans for academic exchange and educational experiences with more
countries. Civic citizenship and intercultural respect are based on experience and
require the epistemological and affective involvement of people (Nussbaum
1997). For this, having direct experience of cultural otherness is a basic
requirement; and this could be achieved by intensifying the academic exchange
of students and teachers from other countries and cultures.
2. Facilitate the development of inclusive curricula where subjects related to civic
education and intercultural respect can be incorporated. Cultural diversity is a
fact that must be reflected upon; and reflection must be done rigorously and
integrated into educational and professional fields. It would be very convenient
for studies oriented towards management or professional training to incorporate
themes, concepts and analysis of cultural reality and its challenges. In this way
we would avoid having professionals with great technical capacity but without
the skills to work in multicultural environments.
3. Develop training programs in intercultural skills for teachers and University
workers. The phenomenon of cultural diversity is not limited only to the
classroom space, but also occurs in all areas of university life. That is why it is
important to train in intercultural skills for all university workers and teachers.
Basic questions such as knowing the basic precepts and sacred dates of the
majority religions, or the basic rules of behavior of different cultures would help
to avoid many conflicts.
4. Creation of intercultural and interreligious meeting spaces. Faced with the
proposal to eliminate all cultural or religious symbols from public institutions,
some universities (U. Pompeu Fabra) have chosen to create spaces for meeting
and expressing cultural and religious diversity.
 This proposal is based on two basic assumptions: it is impossible to eliminate
people's cultural or religious traits; and second, it is unfair. That is why the
institutions that choose this path (not exempt from conflicts) show a clear
commitment to civic education and intercultural coexistence.
5. Development of regulations and protocols to fight discrimination and racism.
Among them rules on symbols in public spaces. Linked to the previous point, but
going a step further in the concretion, higher education institutions should
develop regulations, recommendations and protocols to fight against
discrimination. From giving guidelines on how to respond to the demands for
change in some teaching activity for religious reasons to the creation of a
communication channel for complaints about intercultural lack of respect, there
is a wide variety of concrete measures that could be developed. Among them,
one of special relevance and that continues to cause problems in countries like
Germany, is the one related to the presence of religious symbols in public
spaces. It is important that people from different cultures participate in the
elaboration of these recommendations, protocols and regulations,
6. Organization of extracurricular activities aimed at promoting the recognition
and appreciation of cultural diversity. A final recommendation that is easy to
carry out and has great impact would be the organization of intercultural meeting
activities outside the classroom space. The possibility for people of different
cultures, traditions and religions to meet and interact in an open and flexible
academic space would be one of the actions that would probably have the
greatest impact on mutual knowledge and recognition and on the promotion of
intercultural respect.
Bibliography.

Bartolomé, M. and Cabrera, F. (2003) "Multicultural society and citizenship:

Towards an intercultural society and citizenship" in Revista de Educación,
extraordinary number of 2003, pp. 33-56, 2003. [Retrieved 6th November
2013]
Boni, A. and Lozano, JF (2007), “The generic competences: an opportunity for
ethical learning in the European convergence in higher education”, Journal of
Higher Education, 54: 819-831.
Cantle, Ted (2013), Interculturalism. The new era of cohesion and diversity, London,
Palgrave-Macmillan.
Cortina, A. (1997) Citizens of the world. Towards a theory of citizenship.
Alliance, Madrid.
Cortina, A. (1993), Applied Ethics and Radical Democracy, (Madrid, Tecnos).
Cortina, A .: 2007, Ethics of cordial reason, (Ediciones Nobel, Oviedo)
De Santos, FJ (2004) "Development of intercultural competence in university
students: a training proposal for management in multicultural companies",
Barcelona. Doctoral thesis
UNESCO, (2001), UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity.
[http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-
URL_ID = 13179 & URL_DO = DO_TOPIC & URL_SECTION = 201.html
(retrieved 10th April 2014)]
Delors, J. (1996) UNESCO Report of the International Commission on Education for
the 21st Century. The education holds a treasure. Santillana, Madrid.
DESECO .: (2005), The definition and selections of key competencies. Executive
Summary, OECD,Paris.Available at
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/47/61/35070367.pdf [retrieved 22th February
2011].
European Commission .: (2003), The role of universities in the Europe of knowledge,
in COM. 58 final (Brussels)
European Commission .: (2006), Recommendation of the European parliament and of
the council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning, OJ
L 394 30.12.2006, p. 10 (Brussels)
Fraser, N. (1996), "Redistribution and recognition: towards an integrated vision of
gender justice" in Revista de Filosofía Política, nº8, pp. 18-40, 1996 [retrieved
8th January 2013]
Giménez, C. (1996) "The integration of immigrants and interculturality", in Arbor.
CLIV, 607, July, pp. 119-149 [Consulted on 04/05/2013]
Giménez, C. (2003), “Pluralism, Multiculturalism and Interculturality. Proposal for
clarification and educational notes ”In Revista de Educación y Futuro, nº8,
2003 [Retrieved 27th March 2013]
González, J. and Wagenaar, R. (eds.): (2003), Tuning Educational Structures in
Europe.
Final Report. Phase One.Deusto, University of Deusto.
Gualda, E. (2001) “Social integration of immigrants and theoretical models that
explain it”. In the book: The social integration processes of the first generation
of “Gastarbeiter”. Spaniards in Germany. University of Huelva.
Habermas, J .: (1981), Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns, Frankfurt am Main,
Suhrkamp.
Habermas, J .: (1983), Moralbewusstsein und kommunikatives Handeln, Frankfurt
am Main, Shurkamp.
Habermas, J. (2005), Zwischen Naturalismus und Religion, Frankfurt am Main,
Suhrkamp Verlag.
Harkavy, I .: 2006, “The role of universities in advancing citizenship and social
st
justice in the 21 century ”, Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 1, 5-37.
Hernández, DM (2010) "Marcuse and Rawls on tolerance" in Political Science, nº10,
pp. 120-135, 2010. [retreived 11th November 2013]
Honneth, A. "Recognition and moral obligations" in Journal of Political Philosophy,
nº8, pp. 5-17, 1996 [Retreived 8th January 2013]
Kozlarek, O. (1999) "Michael Walzer: Tolerance as criticism?" in Philosophical Signs,
nºI.1, pp.226-234, 1999. [Retreived 8th January 2014]
Kymlicka, W. (1995), Multicultural citizenship. A liberal theory of minority rights,
Oxford, Clarendon Press.
Leiva, JJ (2007) "Education and conflict in intercultural schools", Malaga, Doctoral
Thesis.
Levey, GB (2012), “Interculturalism vs. Multiculturalism: A Distinction without
Difference ?, Journal of Intercultural Studies, 33: 2, 217-224.
Locke, J. (1689), A Letter Concerning Toleration,
Lozano, JF et. Al (2012), “Competencies in Higher Education: A critical analysis
from the capability approach”, Journal of Philosophy of Education, vol. 46, # 1:
132-147.
Lozano, JF, Pérez, PJ and Gonzalez, E .: (2008), “The limits of tolerance in public
universities”, Politics in central Europe, 4, pp. 9-25
Miller, A .: (2007), "Rethoric, Paideia and the Old Idea of a Liberal Education",
Journal of Philosophy of Education, vol. 41, (2), Pp. 183-2006.
Meer and Modood, (2011), “How Interculturalism contrast with Multiculturalism?”,
Journal of Intercultural Studies, 33: 2, 175-196.
Nussbaum, M. (1997), Cultivating Humanity. In defense of reform in liberal
education, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press.
Nussbaum, M. :( 2002), “Educationforcitizenshipinanera
global connection ”, Studies in
Philosophy and Education, 21, pp. 289-303
Nussbaum, M. (2008), Freedom of conscience. Tusquets, Barcelona.
Spanish Observatory of Racism and Xenophobia (2011) "Guide for the
Management of Diversity in Professional Environments", 2011, Madrid.
OECD, (2005), Thedefinitionandselectionofkeycompetencies
, http://www.oecd.org/pisa/35070367.pdf
(Accessed April 2014).
OECD, (2010). Educatingteachersfordiversity ,
[http: //www.oecd- ilibrary.org/education/educating-teachers-for-
diversity/intercultural- competence-teacher-training-models_9789264079731-
11- en; jsessionid = 10kbb1nqfr6co.delta (accessed April 2014)]
UNDP (2004), Culturallibertyintoday'sdiverse
world,
[http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/265/hdr_2004_complete.pdf
(Retrieved, 15th April 2014)]
Rawls, J. (1978) Theory of Justice, Fondo de Cultura Económica, Madrid.
Rawls, J. (1993), Political liberalism, New York, Columbia University Press.
Rex, J. (2002), “Multiculturalism and political integration in the modern national
state”. Isegoría, nº26, pp. 29-43, [Retreived 1st April 2104]
Rychen, DS And Salganik, LH: (2003), Key competencies for a successful Life and a
Well-Functioning Society, Gottingen, Hogrefe and Huber.
Salazar, (200), Multiculturalism and interculturality in education. Experiences in
Latin American countries, San José, Inter-American Institute of Human Rights.
Sen, A. (2006), Identity and violence. The illusion of destiny, New York, Norton and
Company.
Sennett, R. (2003) Respect. On the dignity of man in a world of inequality. Anagram,
Barcelona.
Taylor, Ch. (1992), "The politics of recognition" in: Gutmann, A. (edit), Multiculturalism
and the politics of recognition. New Jersey, Princenton University Press.
Thomas, DCandInkson, K. :( 2003),
Cultural Intelligence. Abilities interpersonal skills to
succeed in the global company, Barcelona, Paidós.
Ulrich, P. (1997), Integrative Wirtschaftsethik, Stuttgart, Haupt Verlag.
UNESCO: 1998, World Declaration on Higher Education for The Twenty-First
Century: Vision and Action, available at
http://www.unesco.org/education/educprog/wche/declaration_eng.htm
[retrieved 25th July (2009)]
United Nations (2009), Principles for Responsible Management Education,
[http://www.unprme.org/index.php (retreived 5th April 2014)]
Voltaire (2010) Treatise on tolerance. Sol 90, Barcelona. Walzer,
M (1998), Treatise on tolerance. Paidós, Barcelona.
Zaccaria, G. (2003), “Tolerance and the politics of recognition” in Person and Law,
nº 49, pp.107-124.