Do You Embrace Diversity?
How many times have you been in a conversation with someone that despite all good intention goes off the rails simply because you see the issue or maybe the solution differently? Perhaps you value things like data, evidence while they value intuition. Or maybe you prefer structure over flexibility. Maybe you prefer a more direct approach whereas they prefer a more sensitive approach. In most cases neither party is right or wrong, they simply bring a different set of values, predispositions and/or perspectives to the conversation.
I consider myself a tolerant person. I have spent time working in different cultures, I have worked in and managed teams that cross all generational divides, and I like to think I understand the inherent value of diversity and the benefits of the team mosaic. If I embrace the concept of difference, I should thrive in moments like those described above. Unfortunately, that this is not always the case.
I have reflected on this a lot and arrived at the conclusion that most of us embrace the concept of diversity until confronted by the reality of it. I have worked with thousands of leaders over the years, and I believe most think that diversity is a good thing. However, when confronted by moments of difference, big or small, they react in ways that don’t always match their intent.
Most of us don’t like difference, (or perhaps we don’t respond well to loss), even though we know and accept it is a good thing. It stems from our tendency to view the world and others through the lens of ourselves. This can be in terms of cognitive difference and/or identify difference.
I recall a conversation with an HR director in a large organization. When he asked his executive team to identify their successors, it became apparent that most had simply identified individuals with similar characteristics, views, and qualities to themselves. Not surprisingly, the predominantly white, Anglo, male executive team identified white, Anglo, male successors. In essence, they had identified and selected individuals in their own likeness.
Valuing differences is the right thing to do from a human perspective and a business perspective. When we value each person’s contributions, we multiply the number and variety of ideas, talents, and perspectives that can be applied to any task. This helps ensure more effective results, whether we’re solving a problem, making a decision, or completing an important task.
Furthermore, in an increasingly global marketplace our ability to understand and leverage difference is fundamental to our success. Whether we’re talking about hiring and promotion practices, or simply how we treat people, discriminatory practices and exclusiveness prevent us from leveraging the true potential of our people.
So, if we accept that most people understand the case for diversity in the workplace, what can we do to ensure people follow through on it in those key moments of difference? Here are a few ideas:
Understand differences by first understanding ourselves. If we understand our own preferences and tendencies then we are better prepared to confront the tendencies and, ultimately, the biases that will underpin our own behaviours and actions.
Seek to understand differences as they relate to our own preferences and tendencies. As an example, if I am aware of my own tendency for structure and detail then I can prepare for my reaction to those who bring lower levels of prudence. I won’t always have access to someone’s personality profile but knowing myself allows me to recognize those moments when someone else’s actions and responses may be different from mine.
Understand your values and motivations. We are all motivated by different things and understanding what is and isn’t important to us can alert us to the things that we might be drawn to and the things that we might unintentionally ignore. For example, some people are not motivated by public recognition or visibility. For others this is important and so a leader needs to create sufficient opportunities for those who respond to public recognition.
Experience diversity in settings that allow people to confront their own reactions and responses to difference. A couple of years ago I ran a session with a large group of leaders. We broke the group into teams based on a couple of common personality traits and assigned them the task of building a predetermined object. Working in their own teams they displayed all the characteristics of their personality patterns and generally worked well together.
Then we combined teams with quite different personality traits. The result was explosive. Confronted by the task and time pressure the combined teams did not work well together. In fact, a number of participants felt quite angry and alienated. Despite spending a couple of hours prior to this activity talking through typical personality traits and the value and importance of difference, when confronted by the reality of different styles and approaches most teams and individuals resorted to default behaviours.
In the end, the opportunity to experience and ultimately debrief on the impact of these differences was profound.
Be particularly mindful of derailing tendencies that block openness and receptivity to difference. At one time these characteristics might have been our strengths; however, as we advance to more senior or substantially different positions, they can become our weaknesses. Some examples might include:
Individuals who are shrewd, wary, politically astute, have strong backbones, and are strong negotiators might be described, at higher levels, as argumentative or skeptical, tense, perhaps paranoid or suspicious, focused on protecting their own interests, and likely to resist coaching and feedback (perhaps because they are easily hurt by criticism).
Individuals who are self-assured or confident might be seen, at higher levels, to be overly self-assured or confident and self-promoting. They might overestimate their own abilities, seem self-absorbed or inconsiderate, or be perceived as too independent (not needing or valuing others).
Individuals who are often described as creative might be perceived, at higher levels, as being too focused on ideas. They might embrace new ideas quickly but forget to gain the buy-in of others who may not immediately embrace the change.
Individuals who are detail-oriented, hardworking, well-organized, quality-oriented, and reliable can be perceived, at higher levels, as being micromanagers or perfectionists. They are seen as controlling and demanding of others. Their results orientation and cautiousness might render them controlling and overly involved in subordinates’ activities.
Manage individually. In recent times there has been a lot of focus on trying to understand the factors driving the ‘great resignation’. However, too often the response has fallen into the trap of ‘great generalizations’, e.g., everybody wants to work from home, or everybody wants a four-day week.
The key is to focus on individuals. Leaders can’t take a one-size-fits all approach to managing people. A leadership style that motivates and inspires one individual may plunge another into poor performance. Leaders must learn to adapt their style and approach to suit individual needs.
Diversity without Inclusion Is An Echo Chamber
Understanding difference is important, but the real value lies in our ability to leverage differences. This is the ultimate value of differences—utilising people’s diverse styles, abilities, and motivations to maximize individual contributions and achieve superior results.
We can tap the unique differences that each person brings to the workplace by:
Involving people with diverse perspectives, backgrounds, and expertise in solving problems and making decisions.
Supporting approaches to situations, tasks, and assignments that are different from our own.
Matching tasks to people’s unique styles, abilities, and motivations so they can contribute their strengths.
Don’t assume this will be easy or that the decision to be more inclusive will immediately lead to changes in behaviour. People need to play out in their minds the first time they are having a conversation with someone who presents a different view, or the first time they are under pressure and someone hands them a piece of work that is different from what they expected.
by Mark Busine