Working with difference

I’ve written before that the focus on inclusion being about belonging sells the concept short. To me, including and valuing different viewpoints, ideas and approaches is just as important as including people who are different to the norm. But mastering this form of inclusion is arguably much trickier. It involves leaning into difficult conversations, encouraging healthy non-conformity, navigating conflict constructively and confronting and letting go of the baggage that has us hold onto the status quo.

While much of the change needs to happen at an individual level, ultimately creating a culture of inclusion comes down to how people behave at a team level, whether that be an executive or leadership team, or a functional or project team. It could be a team of 2 or 20, or more. 

Regardless of the size or nature of your team, there are a number of behaviours that research says matter most to including and valuing difference. I reckon it can be summarised into these four practices.

1.    Form teams for diversity of thought; connect on common humanity

You can’t access the benefits of including and valuing different perspectives unless you’ve got diversity of thought around the table. This is about much more than counting the ratio of men to women, or white people to people of colour. While these visible dimensions certainly impact the perspective you bring, you need to explore the different thinking preferences, personality types, experience and background of your team. 

There are a number of simple frameworks that can help teams make this assessment. The simplest is Deloitte’s six problem solving preferences which asserts we all have our preference for how we solve problems (ie we either focus on outcomes, options, evidence, risk, process or people) and we will lean towards those preferences at the expense of others. 

For me, I’m all about outcomes and options. And frankly process people just get in my way. Well that was until I understood my subtle (and at times not so subtle) tendency to override the process thinkers undermined my ability to effectively execute big ideas. Once I could see the cost, I started actively seeking out and consciously including those different problem solving preferences.

For a more nuanced view of cognitive diversity, try the Hermann Brain Dominance Instrument or Clarity 4D. These tools both use colour to articulate preferences and help people understand their own and other’s styles, and adapt to more effectively work with difference. 

By putting our personality into words that can be shared and explored, Clarity 4D in particular allows your team to connect authentically and in turn build the psychological safety that’s essential for mastering the remaining practices. It’s this human connection that allows us to move past the focus on visible diversity like gender or cultural background, to explore our common humanity through what makes us unique.

Side note: For those still wondering if diversity is worth the fuss, check out this fascinating 2017 research, Diversity Investing. The researchers found that buying S&P1500 firms with diverse executive teams and selling firms with homogenous teams delivered a 53 basis points average monthly return. Diversity was measured by trawling the SEC disclosures and assessing factors such as international and industry experience and educational background as well as gender and cultural background.

2.    Call out and remediate biases

Simply put, cognitive biases are the shortcuts our brain makes in the pursuit of rapid information processing. It’s a part of evolution; everyone has them. In fact, it’s among the differentiators that puts humans at the top of the food chain. The trick is knowing the one’s most deceive you before putting in place tactics to minimise their impact.

I’ve already mentioned my bias for outcomes people. Along a similar vein, I also have a bias towards extroverts. Introverts appear aloof or lacking in confidence, so first impressions land a bit limply. That’s my affinity bias at play. Once I know it’s a habit that doesn’t serve me, I can watch it occur, get curious about my reaction and then let it go. 

I also suffer from optimism bias. I tend to focus on the upside of situations and can overlook important information. To overcome that, I seek out feedback from different sources and ask people to challenge my enthusiasm. 

There are literally scores of ways our brains deceive us.  Check out Daniel Kahneman’s game-changing work on judgement and decision making to learn more, or listen to this podcast for the short cut version.

The best way to offset your brain tricks is to get curious and observe the mind. For that, you can’t beat mindfulness; the brilliantly simple but wonderfully hard practice of observing your thoughts, feelings, external environment and bodily sensations moment to moment. Doing so literally builds grey matter in the part of your brain responsible for your best thinking – the frontal lobe – and decreases grey matter in the part of your brain responsible for stress and anxiety (your amygdala). 

Most people will tell you they can’t meditate because their brain is too noisy. But that’s the point! Everyone’s brain is noisy – that’s the wonder of our aforementioned, brilliantly deceptive unconscious. Mindfulness is simply the practice of observing the noisy mind in all its glory. There are lots of great apps to help you meditate. My favourite is Waking Up by Sam Harris. I love the short lessons in consciousness, as well as the guided meditations.

My mindfulness partner Charlotte Thaarup from The Mindfulness Clinic has a fantastic Mindfulness @ Work program for those who want to really make an impact on their people. We have great plans in 2019 to integrate mindfulness into the world of humanity, inclusion and diversity at work so watch this space.

3.    Invite constructive dissent 

The best way to include and value difference is to invite it to come to the table and demonstrate a commitment to taking it on board. Harvard Business School academic Francesca Gino has done some amazing research on rebel talent and finds leaders who actively encourage and reward people who disagree are able to foster innovation and lift employee engagement. Yet her research reveals around half of employees and managers across a representative sample feel they need to conform and those around them don’t challenge the status quo.

Gino highlights the importance of voicing and encouraging dissenting views by looking for contrary evidence, appointing someone as the devil’s advocate and then celebrating their role. 

I recently had an excellent example of a client doing this brilliantly. This person is a passionate man who’s conscious his passion can come across as conviction, and in the process inadvertently shut down other perspectives. So he makes a point of letting people know he wants to be challenged, despite sounding convinced.

There’s an element of good faith needed on everyone’s part to manage the inevitable conflict that comes from different opinions. I like the concept of ‘plussing’ first coined by Pixar as a way to discuss different opinions from a basis of good faith. Also known as ‘yes, and’, the idea is you build on ideas without tearing them down or judging them first, and instead find something you agree with and work from there. Sam Harris calls this ‘steelman-ing’, which he describes in this great TED interview.  

The opportunity here is to explore how much your team feels divergent views are welcome. Most teams I speak to feel conformity prevails for two main reasons: (1) there’s not enough time to hear divergent views, and (2) A history of nothing changes quickly shuts down those willing to speak up. The engagement and motivation of your people is the price paid.

4.      Enable yourself and others;step in if someone’s excluded 

Personal responsibility is at the heart of enabling your own potential. You are the writer, director and producer of your life, you have to drive the outcome. While that is undeniably true, some people have a more straightforward script than others. 

In nearly every organisation or team there are in groups and out groups. Members of the in group are invited to take on the hot projects, go to the key client events and take home the most reward. Often it’s based on merit, sometimes it’s based on looking like the critical mass who has the most influence and power, which in many organisations is white, extroverted men. 

How do I know this? I analyse large set of pay data and often see top performing women getting paid less than top performing men, when all other factors are equal. It’s just one data point, there are many others.

To enable others in your team takes an understanding of what opportunities exist in your organisation for professional, personal or career advancement and how this stack up against your team member’s career and life ambitions. Finding ways to connect the two then comes easily.

On the flip side, enabling team potential must also involve an awareness of how exclusion occurs and then developing a language that helps others step in when someone’s excluded.

I think this is probably the hardest and most important behaviour to model. Most people find it hard to challenge their peers’ behaviour but when there’s a clear framework for what exclusion can look like, you create a guidebook that helps people navigate the awkwardness. 

Asking your colleagues how exclusion happens across the business is the best way to bring this to life. Male-only events, default minute takers, taking credit for other’s ideas, skewed views of merit and promotion readiness, and uneven talk time in meetings are just a few of the ways people can feel excluded at work.

When leaders take the initiative to understand who feels excluded and why, it’s likely to be the smallest changes (like sharing the role of taking minutes) that will make the biggest difference.

Your thoughts

I would love to know what you think matters most to including and valuing difference ideas, viewpoints, people and process. If you’re interested in cultivating these practices in your team, give me a shout.