Why ‘Diversity of Thought’, is not the answer to the problem
In the current climate, where issues concerning Race, Diversity, and Equality are at the forefront of many conversations, many companies are beginning to look at their Diversity & Inclusion (D&I) policies to see how they reflect the culture and values they want to promote. Companies such as EY have been vocal with their pledge to increase the number of BAME (Black and Minority Ethnic) and female employees within it’s UK & Ireland partnership, by 20% and 40% respectively.
The company I work for are having similar conversations concerning how to address D&I, and recently launched a survey to collect employee feedback. Questions focused on obtaining people’s thoughts concerning the topic and if people were comfortable bringing their authentic self to work.
Within the survey was a sentence outlining the company’s commitment to promoting ‘Diversity of Thought’, which immediately stood out to me and led me to comment on how much I disagreed with this concept and my reasons why.
My comments subsequently led to a very positive meeting with the company’s Head of People, who was keen to hear my thoughts and criticism. It was the type of constructive conversation I had never previously had in a work environment, with an issue concerning race (usually because in the UK, people are so uncomfortable talking about race, so it’s often easier to ignore the subject).
Following the conversation, I decided to set out why ‘Diversity of Thought’ is not the answer to issues regarding D&I and is laughable when compared with what the likes of EY have set out to achieve.
Now for those who may never have come across the concept before, Diversity of thought is the idea that people in a group don’t need to look different or identify with an underrepresented group to bring varying, diverse viewpoints to the table.
In layman terms, a group should aim to have people who think differently, and it does not matter if this group all fall within a specific gender, race, or sexuality as long as they think differently.
In my opinion, people are more likely to agree with the notion of ‘Diversity of Thought’ when positioned in specific way, however, if you were to explain it to people in layman terms, people are far more likely to challenge its effectiveness and view it as no more than a token gesture.
I’ll be honest with you, the first time I became aware of “Diversity of Thought” as a concept, the exact phrase that came to mind was “Oh The Caucasity” (Urban Dictionary if you are unsure what this means).
Now for anyone in their feelings about the above, firstly, “Why So Serious?”, Secondly, the idea that ‘Diversity of Thought’ should be the pillar of any D&I strategy is weak and fails to take on board many of the arguments being made by marginalized groups, requesting more diverse representation.
The crazy thing is ‘Diversity of Thought’ is one of the successful outcomes that comes from having an effective diversity and inclusion policy that seeks to level the playing fields for under representative groups.
In the current climate of Black Lives Matter, it is extremely important to challenge thinking that may be considered inclusive or progressive as companies and individuals seek to implement change. Companies that seek to create a culture and set of values, need to be held accountable for implementing policies that have a direct impact on their employees and customers.
‘Diversity of Thought’ does nothing but maintain the status quo and puts no pressure on companies to increase the race, gender, and sexuality of their staff and senior leadership teams.
We are in an era where companies can measure every perceivable metric when it comes down to employee performance and company growth. Therefore, companies need to avoid adopting passive and reductive ideas such as ‘Diversity of Thought’ which only seeks to maintain the status quo and avoid addressing the fundamental concerns of marginalized groups, which is to have a seat at the table (shout out Solange).
I work within the Tech industry, which is far quicker to adopt innovative ideas and methods than other industries. Perks such as unlimited annual leave, the ability to work remotely, and free breakfast and lunch are accepted as the norm.
When I told my mum, that at my current company, unlimited annual leave was a perk for all employees, she could not get her head around how this was feasible and how we could survive and scale as a business.
Now, this is perfectly reasonable considering she has spent her entire career working for local government and the bureaucracy this entails. However, the thing about working in the tech industry is every perceivable metric is measured, so you can best believe that unlimited annual leave has been measured across the business and works out to a sustainable amount from each employee.
When trying to recruit the very best talent, a perk like ‘unlimited holiday’ is massive but the reality is, in an era when your performance is always being measured, companies that provide this incentive, do not tend to attract the types of people who would abuse it and even if they did, it would be noted very quickly and that individual would not be there long.
Lastly, a recent study by the Boston Consulting Group found that diverse companies produce 19% more revenue.
“The study found that “increasing the diversity of leadership teams leads to more and better innovation and improved financial performance.” It looked at 1700 different companies across 8 different countries, with varying industries and company sizes. They have found that increasing diversity has a direct effect on the bottom line”. Boston Consulting Group
Now, in a world where people are more and more obsessed with looking at data to gain a competitive edge, answer me this question, “How do you measure Diversity of Thought?”
Let me know your thoughts in the comment section below.
