This document discusses diversity in corporate boardrooms and leadership. It argues that while increasing gender diversity is important, simply adding more women is not enough. True diversity requires addressing potential pitfalls like stereotypes and lack of trust that can inhibit creative thinking. It recommends five conditions to maximize the benefits of diversity: 1) organizational encouragement of equal status, 2) leadership support, 3) emphasis on common goals, 4) intergroup cooperation, and 5) developing personal relationships to overcome initial distrust.
The American culture of individualism, self-reliance, and independence celebrates the legend of the lone entrepreneur. However, for many years, research has shown that team-founded ventures achieve better performance than those founded by individuals. This paper reviews why entrepreneurs form teams, and the process of securing the various types of capital required, to increase the probability of success. A particular focus is placed on social capital and how when complimented with social competence, it can be leveraged to secure financing and build a highly effective, high-performance team.
A call to arms for leaders - 5 rules to reduce biasBinna Kandola
Leaders must realise the unique and powerful part they have to play in reducing bias. Here is a call to arms for leaders - a guide to facilitate change and progress in your organisations:
The Measureable Value of Diversity and InclusionLaunchpad
Diversity and inclusivity (D&I) in the workplace is one of the most pressing and controversial topics in the business world today. This subject receives extensive coverage nationally and internationally – but are we simply paying it lip service? It could be that we have our sights set much farther than where our feet lie. At the very least, conversations surrounding D&I have blossomed encouraging coherent strategies for a more inclusive future.
5 rules for how learning & development can reduce biasBinna Kandola
Reducing bias is a question of motivation, and Learning & Development teams have a critical role to play. If we’re truly willing to recognise the fact we are all biased, there are some straightforward actions that can be implemented in any organisation.
The American culture of individualism, self-reliance, and independence celebrates the legend of the lone entrepreneur. However, for many years, research has shown that team-founded ventures achieve better performance than those founded by individuals. This paper reviews why entrepreneurs form teams, and the process of securing the various types of capital required, to increase the probability of success. A particular focus is placed on social capital and how when complimented with social competence, it can be leveraged to secure financing and build a highly effective, high-performance team.
A call to arms for leaders - 5 rules to reduce biasBinna Kandola
Leaders must realise the unique and powerful part they have to play in reducing bias. Here is a call to arms for leaders - a guide to facilitate change and progress in your organisations:
The Measureable Value of Diversity and InclusionLaunchpad
Diversity and inclusivity (D&I) in the workplace is one of the most pressing and controversial topics in the business world today. This subject receives extensive coverage nationally and internationally – but are we simply paying it lip service? It could be that we have our sights set much farther than where our feet lie. At the very least, conversations surrounding D&I have blossomed encouraging coherent strategies for a more inclusive future.
5 rules for how learning & development can reduce biasBinna Kandola
Reducing bias is a question of motivation, and Learning & Development teams have a critical role to play. If we’re truly willing to recognise the fact we are all biased, there are some straightforward actions that can be implemented in any organisation.
Uncovering talent. A new model of inclusion.Sage HR
It has now been many years since the diversity and inclusion revolution swept the corporate world. Today, most Fortune 500 companies have a diversity and inclusion officer who superintends an impressive array of programs focused on the needs of a diverse workforce. Yet reports suggest that full inclusion remains elusive:
• “Only a little more than 1 percent of the nation’s Fortune 500 companies have Black chief executives... At the nation’s biggest companies, about 3.2 percent of the senior executive positions are held by African Americans.”
• “A meager 21 of the Fortune 500 CEOs are women. Women hold about 14 percent of executive officer positions, 17 percent of board seats, and constitute 18 percent of our elected congressional officials.”
• “There isn’t a single openly gay chief executive officer in the Fortune 1000.” As the Human Rights
Campaign’s director of corporate programs noted, “Being gay in the corporate world is still far from being a ‘nonissue,’” given that “many subtle biases remain in the workplace.”
Why have inclusion programs stalled on these fronts? One intuitive answer is that these initiatives have not lived up to the core ideal of inclusion. The ideal of inclusion has long been to allow individuals to bring their authentic selves to work. However, most inclusion efforts have not explicitly
and rigorously addressed the pressure to conform that prevents individuals from realizing that ideal. This study hypothesizes that a model of inclusion analyzing that pressure might be beneficial to historically underrepresented groups. Indeed, given that everyone has an authentic self, a culture of greater authenticity might benefit all individuals, including the straight White men who have traditionally been left out of the inclusion paradigm. To test this theory, this research draws on the concept of “covering.”
The CS Gender 3000: Women in Senior ManagementCredit Suisse
Greater gender diversity in companies' management improves their financial performance. A new Credit Suisse Research Institute study presents the financial evidence, looks at which regions and sectors show higher diversity levels and analyzes the obstacles to female participation in the workplace.
To download a copy of 'CS Gender 3000: Women in Senior Management', click here: http://bit.ly/1cWMUIM
Women & corporate governance - interviews - relationship to power Viviane de Beaufort
An analysis from interviews of women 50 executive women who hold mandates on Boards around the globe, on the increasing importance of greater gender diversity on Boards. A discussion about the fact that women could be a real engine for a more effective Corporate Governance of Boards. The study provides empirical support that women must be encouraged to bring, in terms of skills and behaviours, a difference to the table in effective Corporate Governance practice. The study highlights that current and potential female candidates share a rigorous vision of the functioning of Boards and therefore demand a new model of governance based on sustainability, which integrates both masculine and feminine “polarities” within companies and organizations.
Administrated by Lee Ellis' consulting company, Leadership Freedom LLC, the purpose of this survey was to identify and compile consumer input and opinion on the general state of leadership from their personal perspective. It contained nine objective questions about the state of leadership in the following major industry sectors: Business/Corporate, Government/Politics, Military, Healthcare, and Education.
While the actual societal reality may differ slightly from the results of this survey, it does confirm consumer sentiment based on their exposure of leaders and leadership issues within their personal reality. See the results, and compare them against your leadership perspective.
How to engage men in inclusionary leadership programs within your Diversity and Inclusion initiatives. by Dale Thomas Vaughn, presented at the Women In Tech International Summit 2017, previous versions presented at SHMR Diversity and Inclusion 2016, and various corporations.
Original article from the Flevy business blog can be found here:
http://flevy.com/blog/are-women-good-for-business/
Do women or men make better leaders?
Recently, McKinsey republished an article from 1976 entitled ‘ Sex bias – still in business ’ with the following 2014 introduction:
Despite much talk of equal opportunity for women, discrimination persists in business. This 1976 McKinsey Quarterly article, part of a series celebrating our 50th anniversary, shows how companies should correct disparities that are illegal, immoral, and bad for business.
Curious as to how a 38 year old article could offer fresh and relevant insights into a subject close to my heart, I sat down with keen anticipation to read it. My enthusiasm was quickly dispelled by tedium and increasing frustration. The article was too predictable. It gave a prescription of organisational measures to create greater opportunities for women, but the only reason it gave for doing so was ‘unfairness’ and the need to conform with legislation. I struggled to understand why McKinsey were bothering to republish it in 2014 – it certainly did not provide thought leadership..
Whilst the right of women to equal opportunities is undeniable there are even more positive and compelling reasons to advance their role in business. Ask yourself whether ‘the fairer sex’ or ‘the testosterone-fuelled sex’ are likely to fare better on the following, research-validated characteristics of Top 1% companies:
• Decisions, which can occasionally be bold and radical, are made on the basis of quiet, calm insight and understanding, not bravado.
• There is an holistic culture with a long-term, nurturing perspective and a recognition of the constant need to improve and to learn, personally and collectively.
• Staff regard the company as if it was their family and describe it with affection as an open, honest and supportive environment in which standards are high, but everyone’s contribution is valued.
Uncovering talent. A new model of inclusion.Sage HR
It has now been many years since the diversity and inclusion revolution swept the corporate world. Today, most Fortune 500 companies have a diversity and inclusion officer who superintends an impressive array of programs focused on the needs of a diverse workforce. Yet reports suggest that full inclusion remains elusive:
• “Only a little more than 1 percent of the nation’s Fortune 500 companies have Black chief executives... At the nation’s biggest companies, about 3.2 percent of the senior executive positions are held by African Americans.”
• “A meager 21 of the Fortune 500 CEOs are women. Women hold about 14 percent of executive officer positions, 17 percent of board seats, and constitute 18 percent of our elected congressional officials.”
• “There isn’t a single openly gay chief executive officer in the Fortune 1000.” As the Human Rights
Campaign’s director of corporate programs noted, “Being gay in the corporate world is still far from being a ‘nonissue,’” given that “many subtle biases remain in the workplace.”
Why have inclusion programs stalled on these fronts? One intuitive answer is that these initiatives have not lived up to the core ideal of inclusion. The ideal of inclusion has long been to allow individuals to bring their authentic selves to work. However, most inclusion efforts have not explicitly
and rigorously addressed the pressure to conform that prevents individuals from realizing that ideal. This study hypothesizes that a model of inclusion analyzing that pressure might be beneficial to historically underrepresented groups. Indeed, given that everyone has an authentic self, a culture of greater authenticity might benefit all individuals, including the straight White men who have traditionally been left out of the inclusion paradigm. To test this theory, this research draws on the concept of “covering.”
The CS Gender 3000: Women in Senior ManagementCredit Suisse
Greater gender diversity in companies' management improves their financial performance. A new Credit Suisse Research Institute study presents the financial evidence, looks at which regions and sectors show higher diversity levels and analyzes the obstacles to female participation in the workplace.
To download a copy of 'CS Gender 3000: Women in Senior Management', click here: http://bit.ly/1cWMUIM
Women & corporate governance - interviews - relationship to power Viviane de Beaufort
An analysis from interviews of women 50 executive women who hold mandates on Boards around the globe, on the increasing importance of greater gender diversity on Boards. A discussion about the fact that women could be a real engine for a more effective Corporate Governance of Boards. The study provides empirical support that women must be encouraged to bring, in terms of skills and behaviours, a difference to the table in effective Corporate Governance practice. The study highlights that current and potential female candidates share a rigorous vision of the functioning of Boards and therefore demand a new model of governance based on sustainability, which integrates both masculine and feminine “polarities” within companies and organizations.
Administrated by Lee Ellis' consulting company, Leadership Freedom LLC, the purpose of this survey was to identify and compile consumer input and opinion on the general state of leadership from their personal perspective. It contained nine objective questions about the state of leadership in the following major industry sectors: Business/Corporate, Government/Politics, Military, Healthcare, and Education.
While the actual societal reality may differ slightly from the results of this survey, it does confirm consumer sentiment based on their exposure of leaders and leadership issues within their personal reality. See the results, and compare them against your leadership perspective.
How to engage men in inclusionary leadership programs within your Diversity and Inclusion initiatives. by Dale Thomas Vaughn, presented at the Women In Tech International Summit 2017, previous versions presented at SHMR Diversity and Inclusion 2016, and various corporations.
Original article from the Flevy business blog can be found here:
http://flevy.com/blog/are-women-good-for-business/
Do women or men make better leaders?
Recently, McKinsey republished an article from 1976 entitled ‘ Sex bias – still in business ’ with the following 2014 introduction:
Despite much talk of equal opportunity for women, discrimination persists in business. This 1976 McKinsey Quarterly article, part of a series celebrating our 50th anniversary, shows how companies should correct disparities that are illegal, immoral, and bad for business.
Curious as to how a 38 year old article could offer fresh and relevant insights into a subject close to my heart, I sat down with keen anticipation to read it. My enthusiasm was quickly dispelled by tedium and increasing frustration. The article was too predictable. It gave a prescription of organisational measures to create greater opportunities for women, but the only reason it gave for doing so was ‘unfairness’ and the need to conform with legislation. I struggled to understand why McKinsey were bothering to republish it in 2014 – it certainly did not provide thought leadership..
Whilst the right of women to equal opportunities is undeniable there are even more positive and compelling reasons to advance their role in business. Ask yourself whether ‘the fairer sex’ or ‘the testosterone-fuelled sex’ are likely to fare better on the following, research-validated characteristics of Top 1% companies:
• Decisions, which can occasionally be bold and radical, are made on the basis of quiet, calm insight and understanding, not bravado.
• There is an holistic culture with a long-term, nurturing perspective and a recognition of the constant need to improve and to learn, personally and collectively.
• Staff regard the company as if it was their family and describe it with affection as an open, honest and supportive environment in which standards are high, but everyone’s contribution is valued.
Join us as we share best practices and recipes for success from our reviews of 50 largest associations in America. Discover what other associations are doing—innovative sites and those innovation hasn't reached—along with breakthrough sites that are shining examples of better communications. We look forward to discussing all that we have learned during our site visitsSM review.
You will learn:
- compelling trends in site navigation and structure to guide your redesign
- recognize innovation (or the lack of it) in homepage design
- best practices in the presentation of thought leadership
- why some membership centers sing and others sag
- statistics about responsive design, taglines and other marketing features
- how to balance visual and verbal communications for optimal reader attention
ITS 833 – INFORMATION GOVERNANCEChapter 7Copyright @ Oma.docxdonnajames55
ITS 833 – INFORMATION GOVERNANCE
Chapter 7
Copyright @ Omar Mohamed 2019
1
1
Chapter Goals and Objectives
What is the difference between structured
What is the difference between unstructured and semi-structured information?
Why is unstructured data so challenging?
Copyright @ Omar Mohamed 2019
2
Generally, what is full cost accounting (FCA)?
What are the 10 key factors that drive the total cost of ownership of unstructured data
How can we better manage information?
How would an IG enabled organization look different from one that is not IG enabled?
2
The Business Case for
Information Governance
Difficult to Justify
Short term return on investment is nonexistent
Long term view is essential
Reduce exposure to risk over time
Improve quality and security of information
Streamlining information retention
Looking at Information Costs differently
Copyright @ Omar Mohamed 2019
3
3
The information environment
Challenges of Unstructured Information
Data volumes are growing
“Unstructured Information” is growing at a dramatic rate
Challenges unique to unstructured information
Horizontal nature
Lack of formality
Management location
Identification of ownership
Classification
Copyright @ Omar Mohamed 2019
4
Calculating Information Costs
Rising Storage Costs (Short sighted thinking)
Labor (particularly knowledge workers)
Overhead costs
Costs of e-discovery and litigation
Opportunity Costs
4
Full Cost Accounting for
Information Models
Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) Model
Return on Investment Model (ROI)
Full Cost Accounting Model (FCA)
Past, Present, Future Costs
Direct Costs
Indirect Costs
Flexible Application
Triple Bottom Line Accounting – Monetary, Environment, Societal Costs
Copyright @ Omar Mohamed 2019
5
Full Cost Accounting
General and Administrative Costs
Productivity Gains and Losses
Legal and E-discovery costs
Indirect Costs
Up-Front Costs
Future Costs
5
The politics involved
Tools needed to establish facts about the information environment
SOURCES OF Costs of owning unstructured information, cost reducers, and cost enhancers
Giving unstructured information value
The IG enabled organization
The End
Copyright @ Omar Mohamed 2019
11
11
Radical Change, the Quiet Way
by Debra E. Meyerson
AT ONE POINT OR ANOTHER, many managers experience a spang of conscience—a yearning to confront the basic or hidden assumptions, interests, practices, or values within an organization that they feel are stodgy, unfair, even downright wrong. A vice president wishes that more people of color would be promoted. A partner at a consulting firm thinks new MBAs are being so overworked that their families are hurting. A senior manager suspects his company, with some extra cost, could be kinder to the environment. Yet many people who want to drive changes like these face an uncomfortable dilemma. If they speak out too loudly, resentment builds toward them; if they play by the rules and remain silent, resentment builds insi.
Work 1.jpegWork 2.jpegWork 3.jpegWork 4.jpegWork.docxambersalomon88660
Work 1.jpeg
Work 2.jpeg
Work 3.jpeg
Work 4.jpeg
Work 5.jpeg
work 6.jpeg
work 7.jpeg
Work Grading.jpeg
Managing Conflict: Audio Interviews
Healthy Conflict in Public Administration
Interviewer: Workplace conflict is a natural and healthy aspect of organizational success, but in some
instances, it can also be detrimental. From your perspective, should the public administrator promote a
culture where health conflict is expressed and utilized toward achieving organizational goals, and if so,
how should he or she do achieve this organizational culture?
Representative Keith Ellison
United States Congressman, 5th District of Minnesota
Washington, D.C.
Well, the public administrator has to understand that conflict is like gravity, it is there, it will be there,
there is no such thing as conflict-free environment, nor should there be.
The sales force wants to sell as many products as they can. The accounting group wants to make sure
that the organization is safe and sound and solvent. Sometimes these two goals are at cross purposes,
and they should be—what the administrator and the leader needs to do is to create an environment
where mistakes are OK, where conflict is OK, where people can disagree, where somebody can say that I
think that so-and-so is wrong and that so-and-so will have enough trust to know that it is, one, not
personal. Two, not designed to thwart their progress in the organization. Three, that it is sincerely
meant.
I mean, the leader needs to set that tone, and sometimes that means the leader needs to let people
critique them, and that sends a message that, critique and difference of opinion is OK here.
Now, of course at some point we need to get it together and make a decision, but you have got to make
a deliberate and conscious effort to make sure that you have an environment in which people can give
criticism and people can take it.
This is learned behavior. This does not just spring up overnight, this is learned behavior, and you have to
practice it and you have to deliberately implement a process for conflict resolution, honesty, and trust. In
that way you are always going to be able to anticipate problems as they arise. Conflict should be looked
at as early warning system.
State Senator Katie Sieben
Minnesota State Senator, District 57
St. Paul, MN
There is certainly no lack of conflict in the Minnesota Senate and it is not, as most people would think, it
is not along partisan lines always or has been usually. So I do not have any real good advice to how to
promote it because it just comes so naturally to us in the legislative setting.
Ms. Deborah Chase
City Council Member 1998 - 2003, Mayor 2002 - 2003
City of Kennmore
Conflict ignored always grows, so you absolutely have to address that. And providing a healthy
environment where it is okay to disagree or at least discuss the disagreement, so that everyone
understands where each other is coming from is critically important in order .
Enough Already with the Business CaseGetting SeriTanaMaeskm
Enough Already with
the Business Case
Getting
Serious
About
Diversity
Robin J. Ely
Professor, Harvard
Business School
David A. Thomas
President, Morehouse CollegeA U T H O R S
I L L U S T R ATO R
OJIMA ABAL AKA
DIVERSITY
Harvard Business Review
November–December 2020 115
“ The business case has been
made to demonstrate the value
a diverse board brings to the
company and its constituents.”
“ The case for establishing a
truly diverse workforce, at all
organizational levels, grows
more compelling each year.…
The financial impact—as
proven by multiple studies—
makes this a no-brainer.”
“ The business case is clear:
When women are at the table,
the discussion is richer, the
decision-making process is
better, and the organization
is stronger.”
DIVERSITY
H E S E R A L LY I N G C R I E S for
more diversity in companies,
from recent statements by
CEOs, are representative of
what we hear from business leaders around the world. They
have three things in common: All articulate a business case
for hiring more women or people of color; all demonstrate
good intentions; and none of the claims is actually supported
by robust research findings.
We say this as scholars who were among the first to
demonstrate the potential benefits of more race and gender
heterogeneity in organizations. In 1996 we published an
HBR article, “Making Differences Matter: A New Paradigm
for Managing Diversity,” in which we argued that compa-
nies adopting a radically new way of understanding and
leveraging diversity could reap the real and full benefits of a
diverse workforce. This new way entailed not only recruit-
ing and retaining more people from underrepresented
“identity groups” but also tapping their identity-related
knowledge and experiences as resources for learning how
the organization could perform its core work better. Our
research showed that when companies take this approach,
their teams are more effective than either homogeneous
teams or diverse teams that don’t learn from their members’
differences. Such companies send a message that varied
points of view are valued and don’t need to be suppressed
for the sake of group cohesion. This attitude encourages
employees to rethink how work gets done and how best to
achieve their goals.
We called this approach the learning-and-effectiveness
paradigm. We argued that cultivating a learning orienta-
tion toward diversity—one in which people draw on their
116 Harvard Business ReviewNovember–December 2020
T
dignity. Finally, leaders must acknowledge that increasing
demographic diversity does not, by itself, increase effective-
ness; what matters is how an organization harnesses diversity,
and whether it’s willing to reshape its power structure.
In this article we expose the flaws in the current diversity
rhetoric and then outline what a 21st-century learning-and-
effectiveness paradigm could look like—and how leaders can
foster it.
A CRITIQUE OF THE B ...
Hays Journal 20 - How can organisations improve on intersectionality?Hays
Hays Journal 20 - How can organisations improve on intersectionality?
Many organisations have made good progress in improving the diversity of their businesses in recent years.
But could understanding and embracing intersectionality help them improve the experience of all employees?
Read the Hays Journal to find out more: www.hays-journal.com
Title:
HOW DIVERSITY WORKS.
Authors:
Phillips, Katherine W.1
Source:
Scientific American. Oct2014, Vol. 311 Issue 4, p43-47. 5p.
Document Type:
Article
Subject Terms:
*DIVERSITY in organizations
*DIVERSITY in the workplace
*INNOVATIONS in business
*CREATIVE ability in business
*TEAMS in the workplace
*GROUP decision making
*ORGANIZATIONAL sociology
*ETHNICITY -- Social aspects
Abstract:
The article discusses the benefits of diversity in organizations. The author notes that research has shown social diversity in a group can cause discomfort, a lack of trust, and lower communication, adding that research has also shown that socially diverse groups are more innovative than homogeneous groups. Topics include the concept of informational diversity, the impact of racial diversity on small decision-making groups, and how diversity promotes hard work, diligence, and creativity.
Author Affiliations:
1Paul Caleb Professor of Leadership and Ethics and senior vice dean, Columbia Business School
Full Text Word Count:
2152
ISSN:
0036-8733
Accession Number:
98530148
Persistent link to this record (Permalink):
https://ezproxy.faytechcc.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=98530148&site=eds-live
Cut and Paste:
<a href="https://ezproxy.faytechcc.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=98530148&site=eds-live">HOW DIVERSITY WORKS.</a>
Database:
Academic Search Complete
THE STATE OF THE WORLD'S SCIENCE 2014
THE FIRST THING to acknowledge about diversity is that it can be difficult. In the U.S., where the dialogue of inclusion is relatively advanced, even the mention of the word "diversity" can lead to anxiety and conflict. Supreme Court justices disagree on the virtues of diversity and the means for achieving it. Corporations spend billions of dollars to attract and manage diversity both internally and externally, yet they still face discrimination lawsuits, and the leadership ranks of the business world remain predominantly white and male. It is reasonable to ask what good diversity does us. Diversity of expertise confers benefits that are obvious -- you would not think of building a new car without engineers, designers and quality-control experts -- but what about social diversity? What good comes from diversity of race, ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation? Research has shown that social diversity in a group can cause discomfort, rougher interactions, a lack of trust, greater perceived interpersonal conflict, lower communication, less cohesion, more concern about disrespect, and other problems. So what is the upside?
The fact is that if you want to build teams or organizations capable of innovating, you need diversity. Diversity enhances creativity. It encourages the search for novel information and perspectives, leading to better decision making and problem solving. Diversity can improve the bottom line of companies and lead to unfettered discoveries and breakthrough innova ...
Similar to Diversity in the Board Room_ How to Unlock Its Full Potential - by Christiana Vonofakou, August 2013 (20)
Diversity in the Board Room_ How to Unlock Its Full Potential - by Christiana Vonofakou, August 2013
1. Diversity in the Board Room: How to Unlock Its Full Potential
By Christiana Vonofakou, DPhil (Oxon)
Diversity in the boardroom is a hot topic. As an executive recruiter assisting public and
private companies in making key hires, I increasingly come across requests from clients to
include female talent in short-lists. Today, the call for gender equality in the board room is
loud and clear.
Sheryl Sandberg, Chief Operating Officer of Facebook, recently argued that we need more
female leaders, drawing considerable media attention with her bestselling book “Lean In”.1
Several European Union member states have even enacted legislation for a minimum
percentage of female board directors. In the US, women hold about 17 percent of board seats
at Fortune 500 companies2, while one in seven board members (13.7 percent) at Europe’s top
companies is female.3 In the UK women hold only about 7 percent of executive directorships
and 15 percent of board seats among FTSE 100 companies. Among FTSE 250 these numbers
decrease slightly to 5 percent of executive directorships and 9 percent of board seats.4
The road to true gender equality is long and will have many winding turns. I have noticed a
lot of misconceptions in the market regarding the push for more female leaders. I recently
received a late-night call from a client with an urgent request for a female candidate to
interview, simply to satisfy HR requirements regarding fair and anti-discriminatory
employment practices. What I had long suspected finally became apparent: the value and
logic behind real diversity (gender or otherwise) is rarely ever communicated, let alone
understood. Even when organizations are serious about diversity across their boards and
leadership positions – as an ever growing number of companies clearly are – it is not enough
to merely push for more diversity in terms of numbers. Social psychology research shows us
that by merely bringing diverse teams together without appropriate organizational and
managerial intervention, we run the risk that negative reactions and gender stereotypes will
prevail and our organizations will take much longer to benefit from diversity – if at all.
Why Diversity Matters
Diversity means variety. Boards or management teams may differ in readily detectable
attributes, such as gender, nationality or ethnicity, but also in underlying - initially
undetectable - qualities such as personality or educational background. The conventional
logic is that diversity boosts the range of perspectives and skills brought to bear on a task,
while also increasing the probability that individuals will have unique information to share,
thereby stimulating creativity.
Harvard Business School Professor Boris Groysberg recently summarized the findings of a
survey of 294 female and 104 male board directors of private and public companies – 80
percent of whom were US board directors. He found that 34 percent of women and 57
percent of men said that women do bring fresh perspectives and diversity of thought.5 One
well-documented example is that women bring in-depth insight into female buyer’s
behavior.
2. Boards composed of men and women are more likely to have a greater range of perspectives
and skills to draw from, as opposed to homogenous, male dominated boards. However,
research has shown that diversity itself does not necessarily imply a difference in
perspective.6 Companies ought to ask: Do board members embody a diversity of
knowledge, skills and perspectives that, when combined, will stimulate creative thought
processes and innovative outcomes?
The Pitfalls
The very divergence of views that creates multiple perspectives will often lead to
disagreement and conflict at the workplace. Research has shown that groups with members
who differ from each other on easily detectable characteristics may experience higher levels
of conflict.7 Gender is a salient characteristic. While conflicts may become opportunities to
find creative solutions, they can provoke negative reactions at first. In fact, there is a range of
potential pitfalls.
Differences may fragment a team. Negative gender stereotypes and distrust of opposing
board members are likely to kick in. Gender stereotypes still prevail. A European-wide,
representative survey conducted on behalf of the European Commission in 2012 showed
that the majority of Europeans agree that the business community is indeed dominated by
men who do not have sufficient confidence in women in positions of responsibility.8 Such
initial distrust is likely to block both male and female board members from identifying with
the board as a whole.9
Perceived differences may cause board members not to identify as strongly with the board
as they might with a team of similar others10 – such as, a team composed of only men. Social
Identity Theory11 suggests that group members tend to favor ideas and opinions offered by
similar people, rejecting ideas and opinions of those who are different, hindering the growth
of any sort of creative thought processes.
In addition, a group’s capacity for idea generation depends on the degree to which members
are willing to share information. Research into minority dissent has been shown to predict
team innovation, but only in teams with high levels of participation and information
sharing.12 When low levels of initial trust and team identification exist, team members do
not feel safe discussing and sharing differences of opinion. Work groups tend to stress
uniformity in members’ thoughts and behaviour13, potentially blocking the very processes
that are essential for creativity.
Creative thought is more likely to occur when individuals are free from pressure and feel
safe.14 Raising questions about the status quo can be intimidating in its own right. Sheryl
Sandberg described this very same set of fears: “Fear of not being considered a team player.
Fear of seeming negative and nagging....Fear that by speaking up, we will call attention to
ourselves, which might open us up to attack.”15 Research has shown that threats to
reputation, dignity or identity are associated with more rigid thinking.16 It is clear that
diversity within climates that are initially characterized by distrust and lack of
3. communication will inhibit any beneficial effects of diversity on creativity and innovation
within organisations.17
How to Counteract The Pitfalls
Merely pushing for diversity in organizations without an awareness of some of the side-
effects that may occur when putting together diverse teams for the first time may backfire,
suppressing the desired result of creativity and innovation. If we are to unlock the benefits
of diversity within organizations, we need to take a look at the application and extension of
social psychological knowledge about mechanisms that reduce potential conflict. In the
1950s Gordon Allport put forward one of the most influential ideas in social psychology for
improving intergroup relations - the Contact Hypothesis.18 This suggests that contact
between members of different groups reduces prejudice and mitigates any pre-existing
stereotypes, leading to better intergroup relations - but only under appropriate conditions.
If organizations are mindful of gender equality or if they wish to hire executives from
diverse backgrounds onto their boards, they are in effect bringing individuals who belong to
different groups (such as across gender, but also ethnicity or socioeconomic background) in
direct contact with each other, asking them to effectively collaborate and work together. But
what are those necessary pre-conditions for harmonious intergroup contact that Allport
refers to? Are organizations providing the appropriate environment for the most effective
form of contact to occur? Below I outline five conditions that promise to ensure
organizations make the most of diversity.
1. Organizational Encouragement & Equal Status
Allport stressed the importance of authority sanctions for effective intergroup contact.19 The
organizational culture undoubtedly plays a powerful part in influencing how well men and
women work together. The degree to which an organization communicates the value of
diversity is of key importance. Allport also stressed the necessity for equal status between
groups for effective intergroup contact. Organizations should take care to ensure equal
status for male and female leaders. In practice this can take many forms, such as equal pay,
opportunities or recognition.
Moreover, heterogeneous boards or management teams need help in understanding how
their differences may be a source of competitive advantage. Organizations need to be
transparent and to explicitly point out the reasons behind particular board compositions.
Training on what is known about the advantages and disadvantages of composing diverse
boards to perform a task is therefore an essential by-product of HR initiatives to increase
diversity within organizations.
2. Leadership Support
The critical influence on how diversity affects group processes and contributes to creativity
and innovation is leadership. Chairmen and Chief Executive Officers exert powerful social
influence on an organization or team; managerial intervention is critical.
4. Norman Maier’s seminal research showed that leaders should use their power to protect
individuals with minority views, so that their opinions can be heard.20 Leaders can delay
criticism of an idea by asking for alternative contributions. A dominant, directive leader may
also prevent attempts by team members to bring about change. The leader must be
receptive to information but not impose solutions.
3. Emphasis on Common Goals
Leaders who integrate diverse perspectives and manage conflicts effectively are likely to
enhance the influence of diversity on creativity and innovation implementation. Key to this
is the need for common goals. Emphasizing shared objectives and painting a common vision
are important for any organization, but are particularly critical if a diverse board is to work
together harmoniously. Stressing common objectives cannot be underestimated as a key tool
for fostering group identification and hence bringing about effective collaboration.
4. Minority Perseverance
I have pointed to organizational and leadership factors that are essential to support the
voicing of ideas that challenge the status quo. Social psychologists have also extensively
studied minority group members in teams and examined the ways they can best get their
message across. Minority Influence Theory21 suggests that perseverance and consistency on
the part of minority group members, such as women on boards, act to bring about change in
the views of majorities and are a necessary behavioral style for creativity and ultimately
innovation to occur.22 Consistency of arguments over time is crucial for changing the
majority’s views.23
5. Previous Exposure
Over time, the experience of diversity at board level and the wider organization will soften
into familiarity24, which in turn fosters mutual trust and greater group identification. The
degree to which board members have prior experience in working alongside men and
women alike will predict how easily and well they will collaborate with one another from
the outset. This in itself should encourage organizations to invest in diversity now, so that
the very real benefits of diversity have time to kick in.
An understanding of the potential benefits and pitfalls of diversity, coupled with insight
into the mechanisms to counteract those very pitfalls, will hopefully allow organizations to
make the most of diversity in the board room (and beyond). Executive recruiters will
likewise feel assured that the search for more female talent is not only pressing, but indeed
worthwhile and more important than ever.
Notes
1 Sandberg, S. (2013). Lean in: Women, work and the will to lead. New York: Random
House, Inc.
5. 2 Catalyst, 2012 Catalyst Census: Fortune 500 Women Board Directors (December 2012),
http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/2012-catalyst-census-fortune-500-women-
board-directors
3 Women on Boards: Commission proposes 40% objective, European Commission Press
Release, Nov 2012. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-1205_en.htm
4 Ruth Sealy and Susan Vinnicombe, The Female FTSE Board Report 2012: Milestone or
Millstone?, Cranfield International Centre for Women Leaders (Cranfield, England:
Cranfield University School of Management, 2012).
5 Boris Groysberg and Deborah Bell, Dysfunction in the Boardroom, June 2013.
http://hbr.org/2013/06/dysfunction-in-the-boardroom/ar/1
6 Milliken, F.J., Bartel, C.A., & Kurtzberg, T.R. (2003). Diversity and creativity in work
groups: A dynamic perspective on the affective and cognitive processes that link
diversity and performance. In P.B. Paulus & B.A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity:
Innovation through collaboration (pp. 32-62). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
7 Jehn, K.A., Chadwick, C., & Thatcher, S.M. (1997). To agree or not to agree: The
effects of value congruence, individual demographic dissimilarity, and conflict on
workgroup outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 8, 287 – 305.
8 Women in decision-making positions, conducted by TNS Opinion & Social at the request
of Directorate-General Justice, survey co-ordinated by Directorate-General
Communication, 2012.
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_376_en.pdf
9 Brewer, M. B. (1979). In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-
motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307-324.
10 Milliken, F. J., & Martins, L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding
the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management
Review, 21, 402 – 433.
11 Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. In S.
Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago:
Nelson.
12 De Dreu, C. K. W., & West, M.A. (2001). Minority dissent and team innovation: The
importance of participation in decision-making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68,
1191-1201.
13 McGarth, J.E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
14 Claxton, G. L. (1997). Hare brain, tortoise mind: Why intelligence increases when you think
less. London: Fourth Estate.
15 Sandberg, S. (2013). Lean in: Women, work and the will to lead. New York: Random
House, Inc.
16 Cowen, E. L. (1952). The influence of varying degrees of psychological stress on
problem-solving rigidity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 420-424.
17 West, M.A. (2003). Innovation implementation in work teams. In P.B. Paulus & B.A.
Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 245-276). New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
18 Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Oxford, England: Addison-Wesley.
6. Pettigrew, T. F. (1971). Racially separate or together? New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Williams, R. M. (1947). The reduction of intergroup tensions. New York: Social Science
Research Council.
19 Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Oxford, England: Addison-Wesley.
20 Maier, N. R. (1970). Problem solving and creativity: In individuals and groups. Monterey,
CA: Brooks Cole.
21 Moscovici, S. (1976). Social influence and social change. London: Academic Press.
22 Nemeth, C., & Owens, P. (1996). Making work groups more effective: The value of
minority dissent. In M. A. West (Ed.), Handbook of work group psychology (pp. 125 –
142). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
23 Nemeth, C., & Nemeth-Brown, B. (2003). Better than individuals? The potential
benefits of dissent and diversity for group creativity. In P.B. Paulus & B.A. Nijstad
(Eds.), Group creativity: innovation through collaboration (pp. 63-84). New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
24 West, M.A. (2003). Innovation implementation in work teams. In P.B. Paulus & B.A.
Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 245-276). New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Note about the author
Christiana Vonofakou is a Director at an international executive search firm and lives in
London.
She holds a DPhil in Experimental Social Psychology from the University of Oxford. Her
DPhil thesis focused on examining ways of reducing prejudice and discrimination towards
minority groups. She is the author of various social psychology articles, published by the
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology amongst others, and a book chapter, published
by Blackwell, investigating the impact of contact on intergroup relations. She is bilingual in
German and Greek and fluent in English.