US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4693

"Diversity is a key driver of innovation and is a critical component of being successful on a global scale. Senior executives are recognizing that a diverse set of experiences, perspectives, and backgrounds is crucial to innovation and the development of new ideas. ...
A diverse and inclusive workforce is crucial for companies that want to attract and retain top talent. ...
The business case for diversity and inclusion is intrinsically linked to a company’s innovation strategy. Multiple and varied voices have a wide range of experiences, and this can help generate new ideas about products and practices. ...
This is particularly true for the largest companies. Among companies with more than $10 billion in annual revenues, 56% strongly agreed that diversity helps drive innovation. “Because of our diverse workforce, we’ve experienced a boost in productivity. When you can move people to contribute to their fullest, it has a tremendous impact,” noted Rosalind Hudnell, director of global diversity and inclusion at chip maker Intel. ...
Respondents in Asia also were more likely to see a link between diversity and innovation. In the APAC region, 56% “strongly agreed” with this notion, compared to 48% in the Americas and 41% in EMEA. “In Asia Pacific, we’re focused on leveraging diverse skills in growth markets and getting better gender representation in senior management,” explained Niki Kesglou, head of diversity and inclusion, Asia Pacific, for financial services firm Credit Suisse. ...
In the fight for global talent, diversity and inclusion policies are being designed specifically as recruiting and retention tools, helping to broaden the pool of talent a company can recruit from, while also helping to build an employment brand that is seen as fully inclusive. “If you want to attract the best talent, you need to be reflective of the talent in that market,” said Eileen Taylor, Deutsche Bank’s global head of diversity. ...
“The recruitment of diverse talent for our organization is critical to our ability to build our business and drive future growth,” said Sumita Banerjee, vice president, talent recruitment at L’Oréal USA.
https://images.forbes.com/forbesinsights/StudyPDFs/Innovation_Through_Diversity.pdf

"Companies in the top quartile for racial and ethnic diversity are 35 percent more likely to have financial returns above their respective national industry medians. Companies in the top quartile for gender diversity are 15 percent more likely to have financial returns above their respective national industry medians. ...
Companies in the bottom quartile both for gender and for ethnicity and race are statistically less likely to achieve above-average financial returns than the average companies in the data set (that is, bottom-quartile companies are lagging rather than merely not leading).
In the United States, there is a linear relationship between racial and ethnic diversity and better financial performance: for every 10 percent increase in racial and ethnic diversity on the senior-executive team, earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) rise 0.8 percent.
In the United Kingdom, greater gender diversity on the senior-executive team corresponded to the highest performance uplift in our data set: for every 10 percent increase in gender diversity, EBIT rose by 3.5 percent."
https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/why-diversity-matters

"In numerous studies, diversity — both inherent (e.g., race, gender) and acquired (experience, cultural background) — is associated with business success. For example, a 2009 analysis of 506 companies found that firms with more racial or gender diversity had more sales revenue, more customers, and greater profits. A 2016 analysis of more than 20,000 firms in 91 countries found that companies with more female executives were more profitable. In a 2011 study management teams exhibiting a wider range of educational and work backgrounds produced more-innovative products. These are mere correlations, but laboratory experiments have also shown the direct effect of diversity on team performance. In a 2006 study of mock juries, for example, when black people were added to the jury, white jurors processed the case facts more carefully and deliberated more effectively."
https://hbr.org/2016/09/diverse-teams-feel-less-comfortable-and-thats-why-they-perform-better

"Homogenous Teams Feel Easier — but Easy Is Bad for Performance

A revealing 2009 study of fraternity and sorority members published in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin offers a remarkable window into the workings of diverse and homogenous teams. Fraternity and sorority membership conveys a powerful group identity, much like political or religious affiliation, and consequently can create a strong sense of similarity (or dissimilarity) with others. In the experiment, teams were asked to solve a murder mystery. First, students were individually given 20 minutes to study the clues and pinpoint the likely suspect. Next, they were placed into teams of three with fellow members from the same Greek house and given 20 minutes to discuss the case together and provide a joint answer. Five minutes into the discussion, however, they were joined by a fourth team member, someone from either their own house or another one.

After collectively naming their suspect, members individually rated aspects of the discussion. More diverse groups — those joined by someone from outside their own fraternity or sorority — judged the team interactions to be less effective than did groups joined by insiders. They were also less confident in their final decisions.

Intuitively, this makes sense: On a homogenous team, people readily understand each other and collaboration flows smoothly, giving the sensation of progress. Dealing with outsiders causes friction, which feels counterproductive.

But in this case their judgments were starkly wrong. Among groups where all three original members didn’t already know the correct answer, adding an outsider versus an insider actually doubled their chance of arriving at the correct solution, from 29% to 60%. The work felt harder, but the outcomes were better.

In fact, working on diverse teams produces better outcomes precisely because it’s harder.

This idea goes against many people’s intuitions. There’s a common bias that psychologists call the fluency heuristic: We prefer information that is processed more easily, or fluently, judging it to be truer or more beautiful. The effect partially explains that we gain greater appreciation of songs or paintings when they become familiar because they’re more easily processed. The fluency heuristic leads many people to study incorrectly; they often simply reread the material. The information becomes more familiar without much effort, and so they feel that they’re learning. But in a 2011 study students performed better on a test after studying the text once and then trying to recall as much as they could, a strenuous task, than they did by repeatedly going over the text, even though they predicted that rereading was the key to learning. Similarly, confronting opinions you disagree with might not seem like the quickest path to getting things done, but working in groups can be like studying (or exercising): no pain, no gain."

https://hbr.org/2016/09/diverse-teams-feel-less-comfortable-and-thats-why-they-perform-better