Exploring the paper ‘Diversity initiative effectiveness: a typological theory of unintended consequences‘ – Leslie, Lisa M. 2019
Blog five of five, in a series.
Hello! Natalie here – COBE’s Relationship and Engagement Manager, back once again translating Chrissi’s expert insights and terminology into practical actions that you can adopt in your workplace.
***
What really resonated with me from Chrissy’s first blog is that notion of only measuring success and not failures. I think this resonates because I see it in so many scenarios I’ve been involved in the commercial world, I see it in the research that we explore at COBE, and I see it from a lot of clients that come to us at COBE. I thought it stemmed from a need to demonstrate ROI – particularly in the commercial space – or lack of resource, which many of our clients report, and I even considered that there might not be a full enough understanding of what success versus failure looks like in EDI. So you can imagine my ears pricking up with interest in a moment of ‘Ooh, that could never be me… could it?’ when I read Chrissi’s take – based on the patterns found by Leslie (2019) – that actually, we tend to justify successes rather than unintended outcomes because they had good intent. And good intent makes you a good person right? And that means you’ve done your job well? And that means your organisation will be a better place?
But the problem is; focusing on whether we’re good or bad person for what we’ve achieved removes that sense of objectivity, which is imperative when where trying to help others.
Finishing up my review on blog two; I liked how Chrissi pulled upon her own recent experience of having great intent, which resulted in unintended ‘negative’ consequence. I think it serves to show that even the most practiced and aware of us is, after-all, still human, and that negative, unintended consequences do tend to be forgivable when there is good intention – but does that mean we’re more inclined to brush them under the carpet or even repeat them? Which I’m sure we all agree is fine when the stakes are low (such as a duplication of work for two hours) but not when stakes are a minority group being further disadvantaged or resented.
*Yes, I say this as the Natalie that was victim to the great intent < unintended consequence!
**In case you were wondering, this unintended consequence wasn’t too impactful, and all was rectified!
The bits that made me understand that this tricky business, is ok to be tricky:
In blog three of our series Chrissi moves on to talk about the methodology employed by Leslie during their study. Now for any fellow non researchers and non science folks out there – I want to reiterate some terminology which really helped me to grasp where this research sits, which and in turn, helped me to understand the complex nature of not just EDI, but EDI research.
–> First up was soft science vs hard science – I had always appreciated that hard sciences was more your physics, maths… you know… easily quantifiable things – with soft sciences juxtaposed on the social, psychological end of the spectrum (disclaimer: I say this in very loose terms! Our hard science friends need not call me out). But I hadn’t considered the added variables of power in the workplace environment – which reaallllly cranks up the complexity (though isn’t it fascinating!?)
–> Second was conceptual research paper vs empirical research paper. Having broken up with academic education at degree level (I’m blaming you, Harvard referencing), I hadn’t considered that conceptual papers – those exploring ideas and frameworks – can be as significant as data-driven studies.
So I’ll tell you why these felt quite critical to me. It felt both assuring yet overwhelming to be reminded that when it comes to EDI (and specifically the negative unintended consequences of well-intended practices, as per the topic of this month’s research paper) – it’s not always going to be 100% perfect because: a) We don’t always know what ‘perfect’ EDI work looks like… people are complex, and when working in large groups, especially within power structures like workplaces, outcomes vary widely. b) With so many variables at play – from where people start to what resources are available – effective EDI means doing the best you can, with what you have, for the most people.
And just a quickie before I move on… did you note how blog XX highlights that Leslie (2019) avoided including performative work in their research? Her reasoning is one of the key messages we promote at COBE. Performative work is surface level. It’s trend based and thus easily accepted. Less easily adopted, but still easier than core, holistic, considered transformation. The critical problem with it is the proven lack of impact; both depth and breadth, and longevity speaking.
Are we all pulling the blinkers over our own eyes?
Before we close up with the core findings of the paper, echoed through our blog series, I want to revisit Chrissi’s candid account on her susceptibility to confirmation bias. The honest irony of how, because much of Leslie’s (2019) paper resonates with her experiences. She likes it, and thus believes it.
That got me thinking… deep down, most of us are just looking for something or someone to align with – a framework, a value, a community that makes us feel less alone in this work. And as a consequence, if you’re the person driving diversity in your organisation, you’re often trying to lead with empathy, to bring others in, and to create something fairer and more inclusive for everyone.
Three check points to avoid unintended negative consequences:
So to round up my… round up, I’ve pulled together some brief guidelines that help you achieve balance – and mitigate those unintended consequences…
DON’T view or portray marginalised groups as objects of pity (which can lead to resentment etc).
DON’T push productivity goals in a way that ends up harming the very people we’re trying to support.
DO employ the ‘wrapped gift’ approach, EDI work should be clearly and morally grounded, not because certain people are the problem, but because the organisation isn’t working for everyone, and that’s what’s holding it back. In my time working with COBE, I’ve realised just how widespread the myth is that EDI and business goals are somehow at odds. In reality, supporting people to reach their full potential is one of the most powerful ways to unlock performance and impact. But we totally get that the unintended consequences are scary.
#Fairness #OrganisationalJustice #EDI #Leadership #WorkplaceCulture #Engagement #Trust #Diver
As ever, we welcome discussion, curiosity and challengers of the research we’ve presented. Feel free to comment, or contact us via info@thecobe.co.uk
