Round Pegg


Rethinking Diversity

photo by laffy4k

photo by laffy4k

After reading another comment by a seasoned HR professional on a LinkedIn group that blindly valued ‘diversity,’ I felt the need to explore the topic.

Too often our discussions on diversity in the workplace are rooted in the obvious.  Our analysis is literally skin deep and from there we draw conclusions that because one is [select a color] and/or [select a gender] they must have different life experiences and think about things differently.  Our teams would, therefore, be better if they were a part of them.

Stereotyping isn’t the best way to improve team performance.

While I’m a big believer in bringing together people with different expertise, I also believe you need to have a foundation upon which everyone implicitly agrees to build.  People must have enough in common so that they’re willing to explore their differences.

Being able to productively dissent requires one to a) listen, b) be able to communicate in a way that gets considered and c) have the trust of the majority that you’re still working toward the greater goal.

It’s imperative then that we assemble people who have similar values and who communicate in a similar fashion.

What to accomplish and how to accomplish it are grounded in values.  If we don’t share similar values then we’ll fail to agree on these fundamental starting point for any team.  Likewise, you and I aren’t suddenly going to have a “you got chocolate in my peanut butter” moment if what you’re saying has no chance of getting heard because of the way it’s being said.

Evolving an idea requires both sides to be willing to move off their original position (this is different than compromising).  You have to be willing to consider that you’re not 100% right.  But if you don’t trust the person with the alternative approach then you’re likelihood to move from your position is slim.  Sharing some common values makes it easier for us to trust one another because we can relate to what motivates the thinking.  We disassociate ourselves from the conversation and begin implicitly agreeing that the ‘best answer’ revolves around satisfying the values we share.

America’s current health care debate is an unfortunate illustration of this.  For the most part, both sides are a bunch of entitled white guys.  About as homogeneous a group as you’ll ever find.  Surely, they’d be highly susceptible to group think, right?  Instead they’re guilty of not thinking.  There is no willingness to move the ball down the field because their value systems are so incredibly divergent and the way they talk past each other fails to find the ears of those on the ‘opposing’ side.

I’m not advocating that we hire and assemble homogeneous teams by any means.  But I am pushing for us to consider each person individually in terms of how they think and how they communicate to establish whether they have enough in common with our existing team to make a difference.

We have a long way to go to establish equality in the workplace, but valuing diversity simply by trying to assemble the 64-pack of Crayolas isn’t going to do anyone any favors.

This is a can of worms.  Please feel free to disagree in the comments, but do so respectfully (that’s one of my values).

No related posts.

Leave a Reply