What happens when diversity is a source of disruption? At the individual level, diversity can be a source of discomfort in one form or another. Take the example of an international team made up of mostly French and German engineers. Initially, cultural differences may be a source of curiosity, creating a motivation to try to get to know the ‘other’. But they can also be a source of difficulty in trying to find ways to connect to the ‘other’. As the team begins to work together on a common task, both sides may find that the other structures the task differently, has a different way of making decisions, and thus ends up taking different decisions. These experiences may eventually lead to negative evaluations and the undermining of the other and the other's actions. In a survey I carried out with international teams composed mostly of French and German managers, I found that German and French managers observed similar characteristics for themselves and for the other group. However, the judgment of themselves and the other group differed in a way predicted by social categorization theory. In this particular survey the German managers perceived themselves to be organized, structured, and correct, and the French managers as unorganized, over-analysing everything and thus unreliable. The French managers on the other hand perceived themselves also to be unorganized, analytical, but saw themselves as cultured. They described the Germans as pragmatic, disciplined, and not interesting. In this type of situation, diversity is a source of disruption. The other is at the origin of should-not-be actions and events, that are unexpected and unwelcome because they present different possibilities and put into question taken-for-granted beliefs. These beliefs, for example, may be about how to go about working on a team project or how decisions should be made and implemented. In other situations, these beliefs may also be about what type of activities ethnic minorities are suited for, or how women should behave. Disruptive moments are useful because they momentarily clarify otherwise hidden, taken-for-granted beliefs. Because these moments are uncomfortable, they solicit cognitive effort, thereby focusing our attention on the unexpected, that which doesn't make sense. They are also moments in which we can see things differently and hear opinions that we have not paid attention to before. For example, if we have an underlying stereotype that Asian women tend to be housewives, seeing an Asian woman who is a senior manager in a firm is unexpected, and initially may not make sense. We are momentarily lost for words and actions, and need to think about how to make sense of the situation, and how to react. This cognitive effort focuses our attention on the unexpected, and in so doing creates a window of opportunity to address our taken-for-granted beliefs and to work on our cognitions and to see the world differently. So, how can we do this in a systematic way? First, become aware of the situations and experiences that don't make sense automatically, and that activate cognitive processing. Use the moment as an opportunity to reflect on your taken-for-granted values and beliefs as you become aware of these often hidden elements. What do you observe? Why is the observation surprising? What does that say about your expectations? Then, secondly, become aware of your own thoughts and emotions in that moment, and how you are using them to make sense of the situation. Are your thoughts and emotions founded on evidence? For example, in your encounter with the female Asian senior manager, because it is unexpected for you, you may think that she must be a member of the owning family and consequently undermine her contributions. Is this assumption well founded and based on evidence? For example, think about why you expect Asian women to be housewives. Are the reasons based on evidence, or on an underlying bias? Third, think of other potential ways of understanding the situation, gather more information and other perspectives. Take this opportunity to question the underlying basis of your thoughts and reactions. And finally, fourth, based on alternative interpretations, identify new and different possibilities for interpretation, reaction and action. This method is based on a cognitive approach to personality. It helps to highlight potentially non-rational beliefs and judgements which influence our actions, and it encourages the generation of alternative, more balanced and factual interpretations, which in turn can change our behavior. When firms increase the number of women or people with disabilities, due to push factors and equal opportunities, this impacts the overall organization equilibrium, and creates opportunities for should not be situations and events. By training both majority and under-represented collaborators with this methodology, organizations can harness the power of diversity through its disruptive force. In doing so they create what Ibarra, Ely, and Kolb call safe identity spaces, where under-represented populations are able to fully contribute in ways that are potentially different from existing, mainstream contributions. Because it encourages the questioning of our automatic reflexes, this process can be put at the heart of innovation and change for individuals and organizations. It can facilitate new perspectives, new initiatives, and overall innovation.
