Tea and Sweets in Ginza

In John Maeda’s book, “Redesigning Leadership,” he challenges the reader with his opinion that “difference drives deliciousness.” Although theoretically we may agree that “variety is the spice of life,” when it comes to the workplace, I often hear my clients wishing for more similarity with colleagues than difference. In fact, whether a potential job candidate is “likely to fit in” is a key driver in the decision to hire.  Too many of us have worked on teams where someone’s differentness drove a wedge into team function, isolating him or her from the team.  Naturally, we wish to avoid this, if possible.

Choosing team members based on their likely ability to mesh with others comes from the acknowledgement that teams need to be able to coalesce in order to be effective.  No one wants to be on a team where everybody is fighting all the time, or where conflict routinely grinds things to a halt.  It makes sense that managers would hire people who have similar (or at least complementary) styles, skills, and perspectives–it’s smoother that way.

But here comes the rub:  When styles, skills and perspectives are too much alike, the potential for low creativity, missed opportunities, and bad decisions increases.  Here’s why:

People who are alike tend to generate similar ideas and approve of similar approaches.  People who are alike tend also to overlook the same opportunities and to perceive the same threats in any given situation, therefore putting the team at risk for bad decisions, missed chances, and errors.  Lack of diversity creates team “blind spots”–and these can be devastating.

A wise and successful leader once told me, “Our company’s best protection is having good arguments behind closed doors.  Challenging each other the way our competitors will–and finding a way to rebut and outwit our own misgivings and obstacles–is what will make us successful.  That means we have to have different skills and different points of view.  We can’t preempt failures unless we are willing to have lively discussions and conflicts that cover all the scenarios.  I tell my people, ‘Bring me your best thinking, not your agreement!'”

As you can well imagine, this leader’s team discussions were contentious, and often heated.  And, he got brilliant results from a very enthusiastic, very eclectic team.

Obviously, it takes a strong leader to invite and encourage diverse perspectives as part of creative problem solving and teamwork.  But it also takes strength as a team member to show up ready for conflict, in the interest of making the organization the best it can be.  Yes, it helps if there are communication norms that insure respectful discussion.  And yes, it helps if participants have basic, if not advanced, conflict mediation skills.

But an often-overlooked and relatively simple ingredient to managing team diversity is curiosity.  As our skills improve, our experiences accrue and tenures lengthen, we can become closed to the new.  We think we already know what others are thinking, what the best answer is, what the likely outcome will be if we choose “A” rather than “B.”  We start winnowing out new ideas and gravitating toward the time-honored approaches.  Mastery is undoubtedly satisfying, but it sometimes arrives at the expense of creativity and innovation.

When teams and organizations are ready to shake up their own thinking, they do not necessarily have to hire new blood (although that can really help.)  A first step that anyone can practice is to consciously bring beginner’s mind to team interactions, even if you have been on that team for years.  For example, maybe you’ve worked with Waldo since the turn of the century, and you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is a big weirdo who has never had a good idea and never will.   This means that the “Waldo avenue” for good ideas is entirely closed to you–you have rerouted all of your efforts around him and he cannot possibly make a valuable contribution.

You may well be right.  But what if Waldo actually does have a good idea?  Or a perspective that no one else has?  Or has read something interesting?  Or just met someone your team could really benefit from knowing?  You will not find these things out unless you get slightly curious about Waldo.

When it comes to diversity, suspending your own judgments and experience, and looking anew can bring some surprising experiences and ideas to your workplace and to the work itself.  When we are actually interested in understanding a thought, approach or idea quite different from what we would generate ourselves, we start to learn.  And as we learn, our horizons tend to extend outward, and a more expansive world becomes possible.

This is part of the deliciousness of life.

Can difference drive conflict?  Without a doubt.  But can it also drive deliciousness?  I believe it can, and does.  What diversity-driven deliciousness have YOU experienced?