Why tick-box approach keeps missing the mark
Within an organisation, dominant cultures tend to subsume all others.
Diversity was in the spotlight last week. Te Wiki o te Reo Ma¯ori and Te Wa¯ Tuku Reo Ma¯ori were embraced throughout organisations and homes. We also had the annual Diversity
Awards NZ, celebrating organisations championing diversity and inclusion in workplaces. Tellingly, most award recipients talked about ensuring our workplaces are representative of our society.
Having diversity at the table is an excellent and important start, but just as with Te Wiki o te Reo Ma¯ori, if our engagement ends there, we lose the full potential diversity and inclusion offer.
Research shows that diverse teams are more creative, innovative, resilient and empathetic. They are more productive and profitable. Shareholders and customers are starting to vote with their wallets too – requiring organisations to embrace diversity and inclusion.
Across New Zealand, organisations are becoming more diverse due to changing demographics. The latest census shows almost 40 per cent of Kiwis identify as Ma¯ori, Pacific or Asian; and more than 55 per cent in Auckland. More than half of us identify as female, a quarter of us weren’t born here, and a quarter have disabilities. We also have an ageing population.
But diversitywithout inclusion is meaningless.
The typical approach to diversity is to record the number of people in each diversity box, including: gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, physical ability, age, beliefs, socioeconomic background, and education. And more and more organisations are reporting in this way.
In many of my roles throughout my career, I have been the youngest, the only ethnic Indian, and migrant from the Pacific, a religious minority, and one of few women. That’s a few boxes I tick.
And yet I have been told that had I identified with the rainbow community and had a disability, I would be a better poster child for diversity.
We are in such a hurry to put people in boxes, we miss the intersectionality that arises as a result of the multiple forms of diversity they represent. We also fail to see that people have the potential to bring a lot more to the table than ticks in boxes.
A few years ago, a highachieving Ma¯ori recalled to me her early experiences on boards. One of her board chairs would seek input from the men at the table and ignore her. The reportingmetrics would have shown aMa¯ori woman on that board, but her knowledge, skills and experience were underutilised.
Sadly, such tick-box exercises are still prevalent today. If anything, perhaps even more so as appointment panels are under more pressure now to ensure teams are diverse.
A tick-box approach to diversity and inclusion also perpetuates stereotypes. By having a token Ma¯ori, or Pacific or Asian person at the table, we expect them to represent the views of entire communities. This ignores the huge diversitywithin Pacific and Asian communities.
We also forget that while we may identify with an ethnicity and its cultural values, our education, socio-economic background, life and work experiences all mean that our views will not be representative of everyone in our community. The same applies for peoplewho identify with disabilities or gender minorities. Just as we need all of us for diversity to exist, the responsibility for harnessing the value of diversity and inclusion lies with all of us too – not only thosewho are considered diverse, which is oftenminorities. While it is important that leaders set the tone, the onus is on each of us to learn about those different from ourselves – whatever dimension that difference may take.
Step in someone else’s shoes for a day. Covid-19 and the lockdowns magnified some of these differences. Consider that 90 per cent of the newly unemployed as a result of Covid-19 have been women. Consider that Ma¯ori and Pacific people are more likely to end up in unemployment statistics than other communities. Consider older colleagues unable to work because they were vulnerable or immuno-compromised. Contrast those worried about how to put food on the tablewith those who complained about missing their regular coffee fix. Many businesses claim they seek to maximise diversity, but their systems promote similarity. Recruiting practices emphasise hiring from historically reliable sources. Job ads give cues which help attract or turn off certain candidates. Selection practices often tend to choose candidates based on what’s worked in the past.
Within an organisation, dominant cultures tend to subsume all others. This is also reflected in approaches to performance and pay reviews, and promotions, which mean minorities and women continue to stagnate and plateau.
Diversity and inclusion cannot be a one-off exercise. Organisations need strong, sustained and inclusive leadership and culture. A culture where all people feel respected and valued, and not viewed as ticks in a box.