Who's Afraid of 'Diversity of Thought'?

In a recent interview on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show the corporation’s outgoing director general was quizzed about diversity. While mentioning regional diversity his major focus was on the idea of “diversity of thought” and how the BBC needs to prioritize this. To be honest this was such a small part of the overall interview I hardly noticed it and I am sure most people watching it on a Sunday morning glossed over it as just more “management-W1A-speak” than anything else.

However following the interview I immediately received a number of concerned emails and private DMs concerned about the use of the term “diversity of thought”. But why?

The reason was that intentionally or otherwise the DG was running with a phrase and idea that has gained popularity in right wing circles and has been used to criticise the intellectual underpinning for the need to increase the number of people of colour, women or disabled people in positions of editorial responsibility in the UK media.

The “diversity of thought” argument is a simple one:

Physical differences in gender, disability are superficial  and when it comes to race it is quite literally just skin deep.

We should not focus on such superficial diversity. In many ways focusing on these types of differences is racist /sexist / ableist / etc

What we need to do is focus on “diversity of thought” as the different ways people view and think about the world is what really matters and is true diversity.

This argument also has some supporters among people from underrepresented groups themselves. They have been frustrated in recent years that the people from underrepresented groups who seem to succeed invariably share the same views and have the same values as those already in positions of power.

The problem with the “diversity of thought” argument is that it fails to understand what diversity policies should be trying to achieve.

 

DIVERSITY DOESN’T WORK WITHOUT INCLUSION

For true diversity to work it needs to be combined with another concept - “inclusion”. Inclusion is the idea that people from diverse backgrounds can flourish in an organisation and the rich diversity of their life experiences, which informs their opinions and perspective, are valued.

To use an overused metaphor, first coined by diversity and inclusion consultant Verna Myers: “Diversity” is inviting people from diverse backgrounds to the dance. Inclusion is those same people being able to DJ - i.e. pick the music they want to listen to and decide the music everyone else is dancing to at different points.

Inclusion is difficult, and is possibly the most challenging part of any diversity policy, because it involves people in positions of power recognising that their way is not the only way to run an organisation and might not be the best way to run it. To return to the DJ metaphor it is a lot easier to invite different people to your party as long as it remains your party and no one messes with the music you love.

If the inclusion part of your diversity policy isn’t working you end up with problems of people from diverse backgrounds failing to rise up in the organisation and retaining diverse talent - as they get bored of being at a disco whose music they don’t like.

If the inclusion part of your diversity policy is working then you end up with a working culture where diverse views and opinions are valued and allowed to flourish. A really fun disco!

 

LACK OF “DIVERSITY OF THOUGHT” IS A SYMPTOM OF FAILED INCLUSION

And this is at the heart of the problem. Organisations should not aim for diversity of thought.

They should aim for better diversity and inclusion. If the policies are implemented properly you will achieve diversity of thought as a result because you have created an environment where it can flourish irrespective of where you are from.

The problem of prioritising “diversity of thought” is that it fails to recognise other key fundamental aspects of diversity policy and that is the idea of getting a range of experiences.

Here are some more examples.

 

EXPERIENCE MATTERS

Diversity policies are not simply aiming to “mix things up a little”, companies are aiming for diversity because they recognise that people from different backgrounds will have had different life experiences and those life experiences are enriching.

For example Michelle Kim the Co-Founder & CEO Awaken a management consultancy wrote on the issue and gave the example that if you had a room full of white middle-aged privately educated white male doctors they might all have different opinions on an issue - demonstrate “diversity of thought” - but their lack of diversity of experience would be a real drawback if you wanted to know more about the overall job market which includes  teachers, firefighters, custodial workers, sociologists, entertainers, etc.

We saw this beautifully illustrated when BBC Breakfast presenter Naga Munchetty famously talked about her experience of being told to “go back to where she was from” when discussing Donald Trump. The BBC initially disciplined her - a failure of their inclusion policy - before reversing their decision, a recognition of how important inclusion is not just the diversity of having a “brown person sitting on the sofa”.

 

REPRESENTATION MATTERS

The other aspect of diversity that “diversity of thought” fails to recognise is the importance of representation. Numerous newsrooms in the US think a large part of their failure to spot that Donald Trump would win the presidential election in 2016 was down to the fact that they did not have enough journalists from the types of backgrounds and regions that voted for Trump. They simply failed to understand the mood of the country because it was not represented in their staff.

They’re likely right. A similar argument holds true with regards to British newsrooms and the Brexit referendum. When I was based in BBC Scotland I would constantly hear the refrain from Scottish journalists that London just didn’t understand Scotland because they were based in London and only spoke to other Londoners.

 

EQUALITY MATTERS

And finally diversity policies are also about equality.

At their best they recognise that historically large sections of society have been excluded from positions of power. These include women, disabled people, LGBTQ and people of colour.

Diversity policies are also about trying to create a better society - one in which everyone can flourish irrespective of where they come from.

 

THE DANGER OF ADVOCATING “DIVERSITY OF THOUGHT” 

Prioritising “diversity of thought” puts all of the above at risk.

It enables a room full of straight, able-bodied white men to say that they are the true representation of diversity.

It sidelines the representation of women, disabled people, people of colour as being as  “superficial” as just skin deep.

I have watched the Tony Hall interview with Anderw Marr a few times now and the DG is right, the BBC needs to be a place where different values and thinking flourishes.

However, whether he meant it or not, for a lot of women, people of colour, and people from other underrepresented backgrounds, when they hear that phrase “diversity of thought” they worry that their representation is being pushed to the back.

The positive thing I take away from this is that the BBC and other UK media organisations have so far prioritised diversity targets. It is time we all start to recognise the importance of inclusion.

SUMMARY

After publishing this piece I received a personal message via Twitter from Dr David Dunkley Gyimah from Cardiff University that I think perfectly sums up the argument:

Even if you believe in arguments around diversity of thought, "Having diversity of thought from a cultural homogenous set of people is not the same as diversity of thought from a cultural heterogenous group." I think most people would recognise that and we should definitely strive for the latter.