The emperor is naked.  We see its nakedness as we participate in session after session about “valuing differences” and “appreciating diversity.” We see its nakedness as we realize that at the end of a particularly intensive diversity session the “excited” participants are those who were excited about the topic before we even started.  Maybe… just maybe… we managed to sway the middle of the road opinions of the middle-of-the-roaders a wee bit closer to the “appreciating diversity” direction.  In all likelihood, though, they will forget all about it once they get back to the “real life.” 

We define Conversity as a series of intentional conversations to find connections. When Susan Gray and I worked together during the first year of our business, we thought that the word “Conversity” better described how we wanted to go about improving diverse team relationships.  In a nutshell, we wanted team members to talk to one another and find common ground.  We wanted teams to focus on what really mattered - their mission, vision, and common goals.  

The Conversity idea came from at least two sources: experience and research.  First, experience.  Intuitively we know that we seek people with whom we have something in common.  Be honest… when was the last time that you said… gee, this person is totally different from me in every single aspect I can think of… how about I become her friend? 

Secondly, social psychology research tells us that diversity relations are a paradox… we tend to understand and value the diversity of those whom we perceive as similar.  Does that sound odd? It is odd… but it is also the way we operate.  If I perceive you to be like me, then I can accept that you are not totally like me.  I can focus on the things we have in common and find the differences interesting.  But if I perceive you to be totally different from me, then the bridge is broken - my tendency is to leave, not to get close enough to find connections.

What does that mean for diversity development? Basically, that our traditional diversity efforts, while laudable, are unlikely to work.  The more we tell our employees how different they are, the less they build bridges. The less they connect. We’re not saying, mind you, that we ought not to discuss differences - differences are important, they are productive, they help us manifest a variety of strengths and talents in the workplace.  Differences are essential if we are to build an organization that works (can you imagine a company where everyone is a clone of your star sales person? Or your star accountant? Or your star researcher? That would be one strange company… and one doomed for disaster…).  

What we are saying is that every time we encourage our employees to discover the strength of their differences we should also help them build a common ground.  A bridge.  A flag to waive together as they move in the same direction using different tools.

What do you think? Do you agree or disagree? Tell us about it!