written by Jon Sheaff
Am I alone in finding the corporate flight from EDI both wearisome and bemusing? Wearisome because there is a sordid inevitability about the way in which programmes have been scaled back across the Bro-sphere. It sems that rather taking the knee to kick out inequality and discrimination, this season’s posture of choice is to genuflect at the feet of a convicted felon with a penchant for fake news/tan (delete according to preference).
Bemusing because research into the economics of EDI conforms that where policies are in place, enhanced organisational productivity follows. Diverse teams usually outperform more homogeneous ones in problem-solving and decision-making because of the varied experiences and skill sets that diverse teams bring to the table. This diversity of experience and outlook drives the development of innovative products and services and the identification of new market opportunities Research by McKinsey suggests that companies with strong gender diversity are 25% more likely to have above-average profitability and culturally diverse companies are 36% more likely to out-perform less diverse counterparts.
But binary revisionism is impacting on the extent to which employees feel comfortable in their working environments. Research carried out by Henley Business School into the attitude sets of 2,000 employees has revealed a significant drop in the extent to which people feel they can bring their ‘whole self’ to work – from 66% in 2020 to 41% in 2024. A third of employees found that this was impacting on their productivity, engagement with work and mental health, highlighting the knock-effect on wellbeing, belonging and performance. Does this not mean that corporates turning their back on EDI will be at a competitive disadvantage when compared with companies flying a more progressive flag? At the macro-economic level, all the evidence suggests that messy and imperfect pluralistic democracies consistently outperform narcissistic and sycophantic authoritarian autocracies. So where are you going with the bros?
But isn’t this discussion a simple evolutionary no-brainer? The natural world is fundamentally non – binary. The vast majority of living organisms depend on symbiotic relationships with other organisms to a greater or lesser degree (for those with a less squeamish disposition, check out the life cycle of nematomorphae to see how wonderfully strange this can become). Symbiotic relationships develop where species live in close proximity and many of these interactions are mutualistic, benefitting both species. At a zoological level, we are also at the party and have been for ever. It’s how we got here and how we’ll continue to be here (fingers crossed). Is the productiveness of diversity at a social level (aka reciprocity) not simply a reflection writ large of indispensable symbiosis at every level of the natural world, including our reckless selves?