In praise of dissenters: It pays to encourage a variety of opinions
THE STORY of the emperor’s new clothes is one of Hans Christian Andersen’s best-known fables. Conmen fool the monarch into believing they have made him a fabulous suit that the unworthy will be unable to see. Courtiers dare not say that the emperor is naked; it takes a child to point out the obvious.
The moral is that people are often too hidebound by social convention to state their views. How many companies have ploughed ahead with expensive projects that were favoured by the chief executive, even when other managers have had doubts? In his new book “Rebel Ideas: The Power of Diverse Thinking”, Matthew Syed, a sportsman-turned-journalist, argues that the key to dealing with this problem is “cognitive diversity”. In other words, assembling a team of people with different perspectives and intellectual backgrounds.
Upgrade your inbox and get our Daily Dispatch and Editor's Picks.
He begins with the striking example of the failure of the American authorities to prevent the terrorist attacks of September 11th 2001. An important reason, he argues, was that the CIA was dominated by white Christian males, who failed to grasp how Osama bin Laden was exploiting Islamic symbols to build support. Or take the British government team that introduced the poll tax in 1989-90, a disastrous policy that led to riots in Trafalgar Square. The policy’s masterminds were all drawn from wealthy stock and did not appreciate quite how hard it would hit low-earners.
People from different backgrounds approach problems from different angles—that much should be blindingly obvious. It is not just about selecting people for teams from both sexes and various ethnicities (though that, too). Hire only Cambridge politics graduates (or Harvard MBAs or Stanford software engineers) and they will have studied under the same professors and absorbed similar world views, regardless of their gender or skin colour.
In the modern world, with all its complexity, co-operation is essential if breakthroughs are to be made. In science and engineering, 90% of papers are now written by teams rather than individuals. Analysis of American patent filings since 1975 showed teams dominate in every one of the 36 defined categories.
There are two elements to selecting a good team. First, assemble people with diverse viewpoints. Second, ensure that those viewpoints are heard and respected. That may not happen if those in charge are overbearing. A study of over 300 projects by the Rotterdam School of Management found that those led by junior managers were more likely to succeed than those led by senior managers—maybe because other team members were less intimidated about pointing out potential pitfalls to someone lower down the pecking order.
The ability to speak up within an organisation, without fear of sanction, is known as “psychological safety” and was described by Amy Edmondson of the Harvard Business School in a book on the issue. Mr Syed cites a study of teams at Google, which found that self-reported psychological safety was by far the most important factor behind successful teamwork at the technology giant.
One way to overcome diffidence while brainstorming, for instance, is for everyone to write down their ideas but ensure they are anonymous. That way, opinions about thoughts are less closely tied to the seniority of the thinker and can be tested against each other with less fear or favour (though some degree of second-guessing is probably unavoidable). Increasing the number and range of ideas on offer (within reason) may be the secret of success. As Mr Syed writes, the willingness to share knowledge pays off in a world of complexity.
Another advantage of diversity is that outsiders can spot profitable opportunities that insiders may miss. Immigrants account for 13% of the American population but 27.5% of those who start a new business. By their nature, migrants have more get-up-and-go than the average person—otherwise they wouldn’t move. Some may start businesses because existing ones won’t hire foreigners. But Mr Syed is probably right that experiencing more than one culture is a competitive advantage.
A fresh perspective may help existing firms, too. Studies show that firms with more diverse boards enjoy higher returns than ones with identikit directors. Correlation is not causation, of course; successful businesses may feel freer to appoint atypical board members. But a bit of variety can’t hurt.
from Hacker News https://ift.tt/2AVXu6W