Here’s Exactly Why Diversity Initiatives Are Failing in Business
And why they’ll continue to fail if leaders don’t switch strategies.
The topics of diversity and inclusion are enjoying an unprecedented spotlight around office water coolers and in corporate boardrooms, not only in the United States but around the world.
Employees and social justice activists, however, are largely not impressed by the results, even at companies like Google and Facebook, which have been engaged in diversity initiatives for years. In fact, the opposite is happening in some cases, with diversity-related policies creating tension and controversy.
Is that because advocates of those policies are asking for too much — or asking for the wrong thing? Or is it because companies aren’t actually taking social justice seriously? The answer to these questions is a definitive “no.” Instead, it’s a much subtler problem that’s getting in the way of real progress.
Complex vs. complicated
Most of us tend to use “complex” and “complicated” interchangeably. Many reference books and sites do list them as synonyms, after all. But in terms of science, they mean two very different things. Although there is any number of lines in the sand that you could draw between them, here is perhaps one of the clearer ones:
Complicated systems are deterministic, meaning that when you know the set of starting conditions, you can reliably predict the results. The rules of baseball, for instance, constitute a complicated system. Executing a game by the proper rules is far from simple, but once you understand them, you can easily predict what will happen: each team will go up to bat at least 27 times, at least 51 outs will be recorded, and the team which scores the most runs will win the game.
Complex systems, on the other hand, are the opposite of deterministic. In other words, the same set of starting conditions can lead to a wide range of results. For example, while the rules of baseball are complicated, an actual game of baseball is complex when played out. Even if you know all of the starting conditions, including specifics like batting lineups and player statistics, you could never reliably predict the outcome.
At the risk of vast oversimplification, you could describe this difference by saying that complicated systems are “static” in regard to how their components interact, while the components of complex systems interact in a highly “dynamic” way, where the actions of one component frequently influence the actions of others.
What does this have to do with diversity and inclusion?
A lot. But first, the main takeaway from the above should be that if you attempt to manage complex problems with complicated solutions, then you’re guaranteed to frustrate yourself in the long run. This is because they require totally different types of solutions.
Hard vs. soft methods
Complicated problems aren’t always easy to solve, but ultimately, they can be effectively dealt with using “hard methods” like algorithms and processes. Hard methods are capable of providing finality and repeatability. Making a chocolate chip cookie from scratch that you truly love is a complicated problem. Once you nail down that recipe, though, you’ve solved the problem for good, and you can repeat that solution as many times as you want.
What won’t get you reliable results is attempting to use that recipe (the hard method) to win baking competitions. Sure, you may win some, but taking home the blue ribbon is a complex feat that depends on a whole slew of inter-influencing factors, of which your perfect recipe is only one. Instead, you’re going to need some “soft methods” at your disposal.
Now, here’s where it all comes together.
Diversity is not a complicated problem — it’s a complex one
First of all, diversity can be tough to measure. But even if we agreed to talk about diversity strictly in terms of ethnicity, gender, age, and sexual orientation, finding a way to embrace and foster that diversity would still be a highly complex problem.
In other words, there is no hard method by which you can make an organization sufficiently diverse. Not only because “sufficient diversity” eludes definition, but because diversity itself is not something that can be solved.
One of the best ways to illustrate this is with the fact that in order to create diversity, one is actually forced to condense, or de-diversify.
Consider the following: there are ten applicants for a job opening — five male and five female — but inclusion quotas demand the hiring of a female for the position, then the diversity of the applicant pool has literally been cut in half.
Similarly, in order to enforce a particular way of thinking about diversity and inclusion, you must inherently limit — or de-diversify — other types of thinking. Thus, the factors involved in handling issues of diversity mutually influence, or “turn in on,” one another, making it a complex problem.
As we’ve already seen, hard methods will be ineffective here. Put another way, attempting to use policies, seminars, memos, or any other kind of top-down initiative to address issues in the workplace that relate to diversity is like trying to force a square peg into a round hole.
So, what can managers do?
If policies or better training can’t be long-term solutions for making workplaces more diverse and inclusive, then what can? Luckily, there are plenty of “soft methods” for handling complexity that managers and business leaders can learn and adopt.
In fact, finance professor Rick Nason wrote a book to help with just that, entitled “It’s Not Complicated: The Art and Science of Complexity in Business.” Nason provides three explicit steps for creating an environment in which complex problems can be effectively dealt with.
1. Define the type of problem you’re facing
Is it really complex, or is it just complicated? If the latter, then a hard method is exactly what you need, whether it’s designed in-house, outsourced, or copied from someone else who’s already found the solution. If it’s complex, on the other hand, then buckle down, because this problem will require a different mindset.
2. Replace ‘solve’ with ‘manage’
Complex problems often lack solutions. Going back to the baking competition, you may have won the last one, but that doesn’t offer much hope that you’ll win the next one. What Nason suggests is that rather than worrying about how something complex can be solved, managers can benefit from asking how a complex problem can be managed.
3. Use a ‘try, learn, and adapt’ strategy
Remember: complex problems are dynamic, so they will eventually evolve in response to whatever methods you use to address them. In short, forget a quick fix, because anywhere complexity exists within an organization, it’s unlikely to ever vacate.
In summary, diversity and inclusion are important and beneficial topics to address in the contexts of business and the workplace, and the fact that they are not problems to be “solved” does not imply that they should be ignored. Instead, they can and should be consciously managed through an adaptive system, and with the expectation that ongoing course corrections will be needed.
