Do We Really Need Workplace Diversity ?

“Youth ages, immaturity is outgrown, ignorance can be educated, and drunkenness sobered, but stupid lasts forever.” – Aristophanes

A lot has been written about diversity of late: diversity in the workforce; diversity on management teams; diversity on boards of directors.

Merriam-Webster dictionary defines diversity as it is applied in this case, as the inclusion of different types of people (as people of different races or cultures) in a group or organization. I also took a look at the list of traditional antonyms for diversity. They really don’t capture what diversity programs are working to solve, which is racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination the workplace. Diversity programs are also trying to promote the benefits of having people from different races, sexes, and religious backgrounds involved with making decisions and providing leadership.

The United States Federal government first mandated “diversity” with the 1964 Civil Rights Act. This act made it “illegal for organizations to engage in employment practices that discriminate against employees on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age and disability.” In 1965, president Lyndon Johnson signed Executive Order 11246 requiring all government contractors to take affirmative actions to overcome past patterns of exclusion and discrimination.

Does that mean discrimination no longer exists? Certainly not. Discrimination based on race and gender is still rampant in the workplace. For instance, shockingly, estimates suggest that almost a quarter of women will experience sexual harassment in the workplace in their lifetime, which is a form of gender discrimination. The only stand to achieve justice seems to be to go through legal proceedings by contacting someone like this sexual harassment lawyer here. This is unjustifiable, but at least the law is there to help a multitude of women suffering from this trauma.

It is now 50 years later. So what’s the problem? Don’t we have an African-American president of the United States now? Isn’t discrimination, racism, sexism, and prejudice a thing of the past, especially in the workforce? Not by a long shot! Why is this? Prejudice and discrimination have been with us for thousands of years. Prejudice has been around as long as societies have been in existence, and government mandates won’t really change that. I have traveled all over the United States and all over the world, and found that racism is rampant, and, in many cases, it is even more prevalent, and even accepted, outside the United States. So, can we really eliminate prejudice and discrimination? Not unless we can curing ignorance and stupidity. Does that mean we shouldn’t try to implement diversity in the workforce? Absolutely not!

With that being said, is diversity the most important factor for hiring an employee, a senior executive, or a member of a board of directors? I don’t think so. Is diversity helpful and critically important in all levels of a healthy organization? I’d say absolutely yes! So we have a bit of a conundrum.

It reminds me of the famous article published in The Wall Street Journal on July 15, 1996, Cypress CEO Blasts Sister Who Asked for Diverse Board. This article is popularly known in Silicon Valley as the ‘Fight between T.J. and the Nun”. The history is that Sister Doris Gormley from the Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia, Our Lady of Angels Convent – Glen Riddle, sent a letter to the board of directors of Cypress Semiconductor requesting more diversity on the Cypress board. T.J. Rogers, the Cypress CEO sent a detailed response letter to her. T.J. is a brilliant technologist, operations expert, and was on the board of directors of one of my former companies. Like many executives in the semiconductor industry, T.J. is very blunt and direct with his opinions. In T.J.’s response letter, he states, “Thank you for your letter criticizing the lack of racial and gender diversity of Cypress’s Board of Directors. I received the same letter from you last year. I will reiterate the management arguments opposing your position. Then I will provide the philosophical basis behind our rejection of the operating principles espoused in your letter, which we believe to be not only unsound, but even immoral, by a definition of that term I will present.” Although I don’t agree with the “immoral” term, I think T.J. has a point that there are other far more important factors for selecting a member of a board of directors besides a person’s race or sex.

What is really important in hiring an employee, a member of a management team, or a member of a board of directors? Forbes magazine published an article on April 2, 2013 about the 15 Traits of the Ideal Employee. Interestingly, diversity is not on the list. I haven’t asked the author of that article if he thinks diversity is important, but I suspect he does.

Some of the most important things I seek in hiring employees, senor executives, and members of a board of directors include:

Intelligence
Honesty and integrity
Good work ethic
Focus on results
Passion a desire to win, and a hate to lose
Good listening skills
Confidence, but not cockiness
Willingness to do the work for fact-based decision making
Ability to rely on “gut” for decisions
Ability to articulate, sell, and defend decisions
Ability to operate in a decision-making environment with the presence of uncertainty and ambiguity
Ability to both lead and follow
Knowledge of how to play on a team
Politically savvy, but not political by nature
Specific domain knowledge and competency

So, diversity isn’t on my list either. I think diversity is important to organizations, but not because of affirmative action, or diversity for the sake of diversity. That being said, if we have two equally qualified candidates, and one creates diversity while still persevering a strong team dynamic, I believe that we should hire that candidate.

Why do I think diversity is valuable and complementary to the list above? Well, if everyone thinks the same, then you only need one person. Diversity creates an environment where differences of opinion and perspectives exist more frequently than on a homogeneous team. If you can create a diverse workforce, then you can improve chances of winning. That is the case with teams at all levels in the organization, including management teams and boards of directors. Why is that? Winning teams are good at anticipating what changes will happen in the environment and with the competition, and they have the ability to adjust quickly to these changes. If a team is diverse, it will see things from more angles, and this improves a team’s ability to recognize a broader set of obstacles and challenges. In many cases, a diverse team anticipates potential changes beforehand, allowing the organization to avoid pitfalls, and more easily navigate around obstacles. This only works with strong leadership, but diversity helps a lot.

The primary challenge of having diverse teams is staying receptive to others’ ideas while continuing to operate as a high performing team. Another important challenge is speed of decision-making. Therefore, strong leadership is even more important on diverse teams.

In summary, I’d say diversity for diversity sake is stupid. Racism and sexism are even more stupid. It is a result of ignorance, but sad to say, it is an inherent part of society. The best way to approach any hiring situation is to find the most qualified candidates and make diversity a key part of the selection process. If I find two equally qualified candidates, and one adds more diversity to the team, I will hire that person. It is much easier said than done, since candidates are typically not “equally qualified”, but it is a worthwhile quest.

What do you think? Please share your successes, challenges, thoughts, and experience about hiring the right people and implementing diversity programs!