True- vs. Paper-Diversity is Wildly Uncomfortable

Truly embracing diversity means opening yourself up to different opinions, viewpoints, and decisions that may fly directly at your own. This is uncomfortable. It takes courage and a willingness to be wrong - or at the very least accept that another’s suggested path may bring about a stronger end game.

True diversity means giving alternative viewpoints a firm seat at the table. Being truly diverse means you are courageous enough to reach and ask for alternative paths, opinions, decisions that you wouldn't get if you stayed surrounded by those who think like you, eat like you, talk like you, dress like you, and are just as emotionally expressive as you, while keeping you content in their agreement with … you.

Appointing in name only, but not fully inviting diverse opinion or advice into meetings or important decisions is not actual true diversity. Don’t look at a team and say you’ve created a diverse team because you've tossed in the ‘requisite’ number of non-Caucasian or non-males into the mix to look diverse –no, that’s just paper lip-service if you've given them no power or voice. This seemingly easy path of diverse paper lip-service leads to very little challenge or actual permanent change. But it can falsely make you feel you're being "diverse" without actually experiencing the benefits of being truly diverse.

Most of my career choices put me firmly amongst teams that have not had stellar diverse-embracing reputations. As a woman who has worked in Construction, in Utilities, in Engineering and in Technology, I’ve had my share of scenarios that were designed to prevent alternative thoughts and viewpoints to enter the inner circle of close-knit male-dominated teams.

Or you can witness my attempt to navigate dinner conversation with two teenage boys 30 years my junior – a true smorgasbord of differing opinions and viewpoints that can clash with my own.

We, humans, like to be agreed with, and we surround ourselves with people we like while avoiding those we don’t like. We dislike disagreement. It's messy. It's emotional. Thus, we tend to simply "not invite" opposing thought to our table or in our meetings. This behavior is understandable al-be-it misguided.

As humans, we seek the path of least resistance and surround ourselves with people who generally have the same beliefs. It is hard for any of us to allow opposing thoughts or suggestions into our inner circle. Yet, we don’t know what we don’t know. Thus - seeking the path of least friction in decision making is perhaps a tendency that stifles our growth, our true change, and prevents us walking down paths that may be far more productive, beneficial, and economically sound in the end just because they are uncomfortable and messy in the now.

I encourage some soul-searching: Do you have the commonly thin social veneer of paper-diversity in place, or have you opened up your inner-circle table to alternative thoughts, advice, and paths that may be contrary to your own original ideas and decisions? Do you ask a variety of people into your major decision making process, or restrict input only to the close circle of people you feel you can trust? Are the people you have in your weekly guiding leadership meetings all one gender or race and view?

This is not a male vs. female issue. This is not a race issue or any other identifying label. This is about moving away from our mental comfort bubble and opening our decisions, our thoughts to challenge and change. It is highly uncomfortable, but necessary for permanent change.

WITFY? Why should you break open your protected inner circle? You’ve been successful for the most part up to now - right? Worlds don’t stay the same and this world is changing at such speed that to stay relevant, afloat and competitive requires doing some things very different than has been thought or embraced. AI, Robotic Process Automation and many other here-and-now-technologies demand we as humans loosen our thoughts and ramp up our willingness to hear alternative approaches to the strategies and processes of the past. The past now being measured in 2-3 years – not 5 or 10 years.

Well facilitated, Group Decision Making processes help divergent views merge to one agreed-upon path and open up unforeseen fixed thought processes.

Article by Dana Houston Jackson, Senior (People) Change Management Professional for Burns and McDonnell

#Diversity #Change #Utilities #RPA #AI #CultureChange #Construction #DiversityInCSuites #PaperDiversity #GroupDecisonMaking #Gamification #Burns&McDonnell #UtilityConnections