Feature --Diversity – is it a Good?

By Dr.F.E. Dias

ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) is a buzzword today.  Institutions - whether governments, companies or schools, are clamouring to identify with it and perhaps signal their virtuousness or at least their up-to-datedness.  Organisations are proceeding, often in good faith, to incorporate, implement, comply, laud and promote the philosophy – as they understand it, and the metrics, underlying this superficially innocuous acronym. For the present purpose let us note that the UN’s sustainable development goals and targets - which all superficially find praiseworthy, are embedded in the ESGs which in turn are driven via the UN’s Global Compact that corporations find themselves signing up to and celebrating.  The UN’s interpretation of “sustainable development”, and the nitty-gritty of the SDGs deserve separate treatment.   On this occasion, let us focus on an apparently innocent idea, “diversity”, prevalent in the conventions, prior to considering its related ideological KPI’s that are driving forth the new world order – into which we are falling.

Definition

Diversity is deemed to be an overarching good and a fundamental value such as love or justice, in the sense that such values are always good irrespective of the context. Diversity is construed to be indispensable and its lack at best a weakness and at worst a crime. What then is “diversity” in the context of the equity-pushers and social constructionists and their followers, whose minds have been enlightened by a shadow whose rays are falling on you? What is this concept which has emerged as a hallowed imperative to be worshipped in your school, your society and every region or facet of modern life? How does it play out among executives who seek to appease the demands of WEF-sponsored so-called “social sustainability” coming to your company in the guise of ESG? 

What does or did “diversity” mean before man awoke? It means variety, assortment or heterogeneity, or several different aspects or manifestations of the property or parameter whose diversity is under consideration. It is a phenomenon or condition, and an expression of a reality or status. In itself, diversity is neither a good nor a lack of good. It is the condition or instance of having or being composed of differing or manifold elements or qualities.  The state of diversity in a given scenario or reality may be one of natural occurrence or it could be compelled into existence. Intervention could be just, or partial. Furthermore, the factors that are diverse may be relevant or irrelevant to the business at hand.

This understanding and definitions of the term “diversity” hold as yet in most dictionaries, but dictionaries being fluid and woke-whimsical today as has never been before, the word is rapidly taking on transformational or at least supplementary meaning. Soon, or perhaps already in many minds, the meaning of this word may be as related to mere variety, as joyful, light-hearted, carefree and lively relates today to “gay”. 

Revelation

Let us attempt to see through the façade or perhaps unveil the cloak. In entrepreneurial contexts, diversification in various streams of commerce or industry is considered prudent when the holding company seeks to minimise corporate risk should one sector of business fail. At other times, however, divestment is the more prudent option. There are instances when diversity may be profitable, for example when toilet soap has a variety of colours and fragrances to attract consumers having a range of tastes, whereby it increases overall sales. A diversity of opinions relevant to the solving of a problem, may lead to the formulation of an optimal solution and produce the right decisions as outcomes. Diversity may however be a disadvantage in the Society for the Protection of Chickens if the membership is made inclusive of broiler farmers and Coq au Vin enthusiasts. Likewise, diversity of sexes would defeat the purpose of the Pi Beta Phi sorority or of the Little Sisters of the Poor – or even of a Ladies’ Golf Club situated adjacent to a cemetery, royal or otherwise. 

It is perhaps evident then that diversity has no value of itself, that is, it is not an absolute value - but can be useful or detrimental depending on the context, purpose, vision and mission, and on the category of factors whose variety is under scrutiny. Indeed, an association, society, company or any type of group converges with a united aim, such a united aim being the very purpose for convergence and association. Enforcement of irrelevant, jaundiced factors of diversity upon such associations which disrupts or at best fails to enhance that unity, makes the association prove futile. For example, while the women’s cricket team would benefit from a diversity of skills relevant to the game such as batsmanship, bowling, wicket-keeping and catching abilities, it would be destroyed in its essence if the opening bowler was a man, and their opponents in the sport would be justified in disqualifying such a team in a competition. 

The question that arises is whether in your organisation relevant and productive diversity is sought or whether you have succumbed into counter-productive irrelevant identity politics. (The writer is a Board Leadership qualified Chartered Scientist and Chartered Engineer, who received his doctorate from the University of Cambridge.  His experience in business spans inter alia the food, chemicals and cosmetics industries and agriculture).