Strategic Leveraging of Diversity, Agility & Emotional Intelligence

AGILITY, EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE, AND DIVERSITY

Strategic Leveraging of Diversity, Agility and Emotional Intelligence

Christopher Lee Wright

1

Agility, Diversity, and Emotional Intelligence

Abstract

This paper discusses the business case for diversity, how emotional intelligence operates within

individuals and groups and the business case for EQ. The paper discusses how diversity, agility

and innovation result within organizations and can be predicted and established. It then

summarized the principles of diversity, EQ and agility inter-relate and reinforce each other to

produce innovation.

2



“The concept of diversity encompasses acceptance and respect. It means

understanding that each individual is unique, and recognizing our individual differences.

These can be along the dimensions of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socio-

economic status, age, physical abilities, religious beliefs, political beliefs, or other

ideologies. It is the exploration of these differences in a safe, positive, and nurturing

environment. It is about understanding each other and moving beyond simple tolerance

to embracing and celebrating the rich dimensions of diversity contained within each

individual” (University of Oregon, Definition of Diversity, 2014).

The University of Oregon’s definition incorporates the moral, legal, business, and

theoretical aspects most businesses are trying to implement. Diversity provides the foundation

for creativity and innovation, but it also is a source of conflict and misunderstandings (Bassett-

Jones, 2005). One major challenge is helping white men understand the value of diversity and

helping white men not feeling like they are the enemy (Pine, 2002). Most white males can see

the disadvantages of minority groups, but they are far less likely to see the advantages they

posses in a hierarchy of society that has been based on one dominant groups unearned assets

(McInthos, 1988). Diversity is a societal value and when leveraged as a collection of complex

backgrounds, values, perspectives, experiences, etc. it can be a competitive advantage (Canas,

2011).

There are many aspects and perspectives to the business advantage of diversity. Some

aspects are cost savings associated with turnover, attraction of talent, marketing advantages,

creativity, and global relations. Workforce productivity increases from effectively dealing with

racial and gender negativity (Canas, 2011). Although the expectations for greater influence

3


among diverse ethic groups are anticipated, realization of efforts to take advantage of diverse

experiences, cultural awareness, and business alignments has yet to be shown by individual

businesses. Diversity has yet to be accurately defined outside of the typical recruitment,

promotional, and turnover rates (Hansen, 2003). It is possible that solid performing companies

with stronger recruiting capabilities may simply attract and retain a more diverse workforce

without the need to focus on specific diversity goals (Canas, 2000). Because developing line of

sight from diversity statistics to bottom line profits is difficult and expensive many companies do

not spend the resources to identify the relationship. “There is a connection between diversity and

financial success, but typical profit-and-loss systems don’t capture the benefits that diversity

creates (Canas, 2008, pg. 19). Just like the ambiguity surrounding the concept of sales, diversity

may never fully be understood as a direct line of sight to profit, but a conglomeration of facts,

figures, theory’s and approaches that appear to lift the entire organization. A basic argument is

that when associates feel recognized and valued because of their unique backgrounds and

perspectives they are more likely to engage is trusting activities like expressing their views and

assisting in creation of unique innovations through their multiple cultural identities with

religious, ethnic, sexual, etc. groups (Canas, 2008). Yet, defining exactly what race is has

proven to be very challenging.

How does one define race within the human categorical of DNA. Genetically, when

every race of people is evaluated on terms of DNA, the greatest variance between any two

people is 10 gene pairs in a pool of 30,000. That’s a genetic difference of .01%; not even close

to the most liberal significance established by any statistical analysis (Hubbard, 1994). The

reality from a statistical analysis is that the planet has one race, human. “It is the culturally

invented ideas and beliefs about differences that constitute the meaning of race” in the general

4


public (Smedley & Smedley, 2005, p. 20). One of the great irony’s pertaining to racism is that

blacks, having the greatest variance in genetic disposition, are considered by most groups to be

genetically homogenous; equally ironic is that the genetic differences between blacks and all

other groups is less than the differences between blacks and blacks (Ossorio & Duster, 2005).

What really separates each individual is the ethnic group they derive from.

The ethnic group individuals associate themselves with represents many different

traditions, customs and practices. All of these are experienced through music, history, food,

literature and languages (Lott, 2010). These differences bring unique perspectives and

backgrounds that can be harnessed to create unique lenses and biases toward problem solving

and identify unique associations within and between information. Perhaps, these differences in

ethnicity are what the concept of diversity should spring from, and carried within that definition

appears to be the hope of creativity and innovation. Business is seeking to capitalize on those

differences to create greater stakeholder value, but the moral and ethical implications of diversity

carry much greater value to society than bottom line profits of corporations. “Moral leadership is

about leading an organization or people to accomplish an explicitly moral purpose” (Hanson,

2006, p. 292). If learning theory is correct when it states that all behavior is learned, it is

reasonable to believe that differentiation on the basis of race, religion, gender, and sexual

orientation can be viewed from an alternative lens and relearned on the basis of equality.

Designations from powerful political and ideological branches of society are typically

constituted in order to maintain an unequal distribution or access to resources (Lott, 2010).

“Racism is about the unequal distribution of economic wealth and political power . . . supported

by numerous institutional practices and . . . traditions (Lott, 2010, p. 24). The human mind can

adapt to almost any environment and circumstance (Zimbardo, 2005). Therefore, all that is

5


needed to institute an awareness and solution for institutional and social prejudice is learning and

institutional awareness of how biases are created, employed, rationalized, and institutionalized.

Individuals in power will justify their own self-interests, so it’s become important that power is

both diversified and enveloped within a scope of collaborative decision-making (Keltner, 2006).

New values must be both legitimized in the eyes of people, and congruent with the individual

moral values each carries within their own mind-set (Keltner, 2006). With the vast number of

cultures in the world, and the complexity of having each individual defined by multiple cultural

identifications, the perspectives, backgrounds, and mind-sets available to perceive problems is

unlimited. Diversity’s business case rests on the premise that unique and different perspectives

will result in creativity when harnessed correctly by leaders (Robinson, 1997).

What is Emotional Intelligence

Almost all successful executives have one character trait that’s common among them,

they have high emotional intelligence (Goleman, 1998). Leading change requires personal

commitment, resilience, constant motivation, effective management of personal emotions, the

ability to manager others emotions, and self-discipline (Wicks, 2014). Notice that two aspects of

effective change management leaders derive from the same skill set, emotional intelligence.

There are two specific skills required of managers for effective emotional intelligence

management. The first is personal management. It is made up of three competencies, the ability

to be self-aware of ones emotions, the ability to self-regulate ones emotions, and the ability to

self-motivate. The second is social management, or the ability to manage social relationships,

and it is composed of two competencies. First, is empathy; the ability empathize is being able to

consider the thoughts and feelings of others within the context and complexity of making

decisions (Goleman, 1998). Lastly, is the competency of social skills. Social skills are not just

6


about being nice or admirable. Social skills are about being cordial and friendly with the

purpose of moving people into a certain direction (Goleman, 1998). Emotional awareness,

regulation, and motivation are needed tools in change management (Kogan, 2014). However,

change management has many aspects to it, and no one has discovered a change management

theory or practice that will work in every situation (Schaffer, 1998).

Change requires people to identify with competing commitments, competing values,

and emotional paradoxes that can be simply embarrassing or overwhelming to deal with (Kegan

and Lahey, 2001). Emotional intelligence is necessary in the complex emotional arena of change

and innovation. When one thinks of the value added to either sustained or disruptive innovation

for company profit and loss statements and the connection between group adhesion and

individual commitment for developing creativity, engagement and inclusion, emotional

intelligence is seen as a significant contribution (Druskat and Wolff, 2001). One standard

deviation from the norm of performance is 19 to 48% of total output on a standard bell curve.

Moving one standard deviation is worth 48 to 120% increase in productivity, and emotional and

cognitive performance is the greatest predictor of superior performance in productivity (Spencer,

2001). Amazingly though, increasing an employee’s level of skill competency through training

actually decreased business activity and results. Further, cognitive training does not explain the

variance between average to superior performance even though 20% of variables, in most

studies, are associated with cognitive skills. In two sample studies with branch managers, 80%

of revenue generation was associated with Emotional Intelligence Competencies (EIC) (Spencer,

2001). Emotional intelligence in employees carries the bulk of productivity improvement

possibilities, and leaders who are high in emotional intelligence can maximize the productivity of

skill competencies of workers for high returns on labor costs. The value-added of individual and

7


leader emotional intelligence can be magnified when groups function with high levels of

emotional intelligence as well.

Diverse perspectives and knowledge integrated into a solid decision-making matrix

produce innovation and improved decisions (Lawler, 1998). Effective teams can increase the

speed of integration and effective decision-making when they are cooperative and collaborative

(Druskat and Wolff, 2001). When teams are able to take functional expertise and integrate that

knowledge and experience through idea sharing and collaborative efforts the results can be

dynamic, but how does a group achieve the advantages of cooperation and collaboration

associated with high emotional intelligence? Achieving high levels of group emotional

intelligence can be very difficult, but it is based on the same simple pattern of how individual

emotional intelligence is achieved.

Group emotional intelligence is defined as “the ability of a group to generate a shared

set of norms that manage the emotional process in a way that builds trust, group identity, and

group efficacy” (Druskat and Wolff, 2001). Two aspects are important in group emotional

intelligence, culture and emotional awareness. Groups must establish norms for emotional

awareness and regulation. Leaders and group members must have a clear baseline of what

emotional behavior is acceptable for emotional intelligence to flourish. Emotional intelligent

behavior builds trust, efficacy and identity within groups (Druskat and Wolff, 2001). Creating

those collective beliefs is a process, and that process requires active participation from every

group member. One member who may be overzealous or domineering can significantly affect

the group’s behaviors and effectiveness. There are two norms that must be established in order

for the group to function properly emotionally, perspective taking and interpersonal

understanding. Perspective taking is understanding another member’s point of view. The four

8


aspects to fully realize perspective taking are understanding of the speaker’s identity or position,

confidence in the speakers’ ability to conceptualize problems, the perceived speaker’s agenda,

and the speakers knowledge base. When members perceive these four aspects as altruistic, each

member will feel comfortable with predicting each other’s behavior in a positive light and will

understand how to cope with tense discussions or disagreements during communication sessions

(Druskat and Wolff, 2001). Once the norming takes place, or standards are established for

displays of emotion in communication, members will feel comfortable with expressing

themselves. They will feel a sense of control and have the opportunity of expressing themselves

through the uniqueness of their individualities (Druskat and Wolff, 2001). The establishment of

norms and awareness allows for a caring orientation to be established. The caring orientation

doesn’t necessarily mean personal caring, but established processes and expectations for

validating, affirming, and respecting one another. When these aspects of group emotional

intelligence are in place, individual members are able to align their thoughts and feelings within

the needs, wants, and expectations of the group. Individual members’ cognitive awareness of

expectations and norms, along with group emotional balance and trust, decrease dissonance

while accurately defining the context for disagreements and lively discussions. Let it be

understood that highly emotionally intelligent groups are creating norms and standards not to

stave off conflict or disagreements with an eventual outcome of group think. They are

establishing a firm awareness within each member of how to regulate emotions within the

dynamic of group tolerances. Disagreements and significant ideological differences are possible

within groups that prize acceptance of expressions without the fear of strong emotions that can

appear as personally injurious. The pressure within the group is not to conform to group

thinking, but to address differences within a standard of emotional awareness and regulation.

9


Emotionally intelligent groups are not trying to “bolster morale at the expense of critical

thinking” (Janis, 1971, pg. 220). When critical thinking can occur because of safe environments

being attained, innovation and creativity can take root (Lencioni, 1998).

Principles of Agility & Innovation

Agility and innovation are complex behaviors displayed by both organizations and

individuals. Innovation is usually studied and researched as an organizational competency, but

organizations are made up of individuals, and individuals perform the work of the organization.

There are several factors that contribute to innovative, creative, and agile organizations.

Innovation can be considered in at least three aspects. The first aspect is as job performance

metrics. The second is how employee attributes contribute to innovation. The third is how

organizations contribute to innovation (Jex and Britt, 2014). Let’s first discuss how job

performance leads to innovation.

Most innovation derives from new products and services, but innovation can also spring

from creative idea’s for new processes and organizational structures (Jex, 2014). These are

seldom reflected rigorously in most literature. There are four specific groups of research relating

to job performance. The first is identifying how employees develop creative ideas and

innovations. The second is how innovations infiltrate an organization and comes to be part of its

normal operations. The third is focused on understanding how organizations decide upon what

innovations will be followed up on and implemented. The fourth is how organizations and

individuals facilitate with one another to make internal habits, alignments, networks, etc. to

sustain and encourage innovation (Damanpour, 1991). Employee creativity is a large part of

innovation within organizations and individual creativity should be both developed through

training and recruited into the organization (Jex, 2014). Companies that prize creativity and

10


innovation hire associates with varied skills, experiences, backgrounds, and interests (Harggon

and Sutton, 2000).

When looking for talent, one question that always comes up is whether there are

identifiable predictors for creative and innovative recruits. Creativity is associated with task-

relevant and creative-relevant skills, and individual task motivation (Amabile, 1983). Creativity,

it is thought, stems from general mental ability, formal education, tutoring, and self-teaching

(Jex, 2014). Creativity is, therefore, made of up many different skills that combine in multiple

ways and display a diorama of convergent approaches to problem solving. Creative individuals

step out of their mind-sets and consider opposing and multiple perspectives. They allow

themselves to spend large amounts of concentrated time on problems, and are willing to put

down those problems when they reach roadblocks. Further, they have an ability to abandon

unproductive approaches and continue on with applying new ideas in attempting to solve

problems (Jex, 2014). First impressions and interpretations of problems are filled with biased

perspectives and those biased views can changed through concentrated efforts to discover new

data (Knoblich, 2000). Creative individuals also have great ability to concentrate on problems

for long periods (Jex, 2014). They also have goals that are oriented toward learning rather than

toward performance (Lu, Lin, and Leung, 2012). Even though scientists have struggled to find a

clear personality specific to creativity, they have found many personality traits that are

consistently identified within creative people. They all have self-discipline, can delay

gratification, have high levels of perseverance, think independently, resist conformity in

thoughts, and do not depend on social approval for recognition (Jex, 2014). They feel high needs

for autonomy and variety. They also have high needs to see themselves as innovators who create

value for their jobs and organizations. When these individuals feel a connection with their job so

11


deeply that it is an extension of themselves, and offers connections with people they work with,

they begin to develop high levels of innovation (Jex, 2014). Organizations can both encourage

these employee’s and set up their organization as primers for innovation and creativity to

maximize the strengths of these employees.

The best way to sustain and create innovation is to hire creative people, but an

organization needs to be able to sustain that creative and innovate environment. Organizations

can provide training which encourages people to think in unique and unfamiliar ways, they can

inspire creativity through pushing individuals to complete tasks because of personal desires to

achieve and understand, they can encourage employees by identifying and removing both

internal and external constraints, and lastly, they can ensure employees are in jobs they genuinely

enjoy (Peters and O’Connor, 1988). Other research identifies five factors in the environment that

encourage creativity in employees. Those factors are, encouraging creativity, autonomy and

freedom, resource availability through removal of barriers, pressure associated with high

challenging standards and lower workloads, and lastly, lessening of obstacles like conflict

(Amabile and Conti, 1999). These are all predictors of organizational climate characteristics that

influence innovative and creative thinking, but they are not the definitive theory on innovation

and agility. A meta-analysis conducted by Dr. Damanpour in 1999 is the most comprehensive

study every conducted on creativity and innovation and the factors that predict them.

Damanpour concluded that there are two types of innovation, administrative and technical.

Technical innovator is the greatest predictor of organizational innovative environments. Four

factors predict technically innovative organizations according to Dr. Damanpour, technical

expertise of employees, high levels of specialization within the organization, high levels of

external communications, and functional differentiation. High levels of technical expertise allow

12


for understanding of problems and facilitate the organizations ability to implement solutions.

High levels of specialization allow for more employees to approach problems from a wider array

of expertise, and encourage cross-pollination of ideas and views. High levels of external

communication allows for employees to fertilize ideas with industry experts in an unbiased and

objective environment and to bring the best critical evaluations back to the organization for

further contemplation and scrutiny. Finally, functional differentiation allows for groups of

experts, in specific area’s of expertise, to bounce idea’s off of each other and find the best idea’s

possible through the lens of group involvement (Damanpour, 1999). All of these predictors are

only effective when leaders create the environment where employee activities and motivations

are encouraged (Jex, 2014).

How do organizations use Diversity, EQ, Agility and Innovation

Diversity, emotional intelligence, agility and innovation leading to effective change

management is extremely complex. Leaders mistakenly believe that rational plans will meet

every contingency, funnel all energies into execution, and are stumped when plans and theory

do not meet the practical needs of situations (Smith, 2014). However, when one views the

benefits of a diversity business model that encourages open dialogue, collaboration of

experience, and contemplation of the uniqueness of culture as an enhancers for innovation, the

idea feels meritorious; even if, it can’t be proven. Diversity enhances multiple perspectives and

pushes back against personal, corporate, social, political, and cultural biases. Emotionally

intelligent leaders can enhance communication, encourage effective collaboration, set norms for

productive interchanges, and build trust within the expectations of meaningful outcomes. Those

same leaders’ capabilities and skills can be enhanced when they are combined within an

organization that is primed for creativity. Predictors of organizational creativity enhance

13


innovation and can help leaders identify climates capable of encouraging and sustaining

innovative and creative products and services. Truly, there are many variables to agility,

diversity, and emotional intelligence, but they are all within the scope of positive outcomes.

When used together they can reinforce and multiply each unique advantage each competency

brings to innovation and creativity.

14


Reference

Basset-Jones, Migel (2005). The Paradox of Diversity Management, Creativity, and Innovation.

Creativity and Innovation Management 14, No. 2. Pg. 169-175.

Canas, Kathryn A. and Sondak, Harris (2011). Opportunities and Challenges of Workplace

Diversity – Theory, Cases and Exercises. Upper Saddle River, NJ. Prentice Hall.

Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational Innovation: A Meta-analysis of Effects of Determinants

and Moderators. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 34, 555-590.

Druskat, V.U. (1996). Team-level Competencies in Superior Self-Managing Teams. Paper

presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Cincinnati, OH.

Hansen, F. (2003). Diversity’s business case doesn’t add up. Workforce, 82(4), 28-32.

Hubbard, R (1994). Race and Sex as Biological Categories. In Challenging Racism and Sexism.

New York, NY. Feminist Press.

Jex, Steven M. and Britt, Thomas W. (2014). Organizational Psychology – A Scientist-

Practitioner Approach. Hoboken, NJ. Wiley and Sons Publishing.

Knoblich, Gunther; Ohlsson, Stellan; and Raney, Gary E. (2001). An Eye Movement Study of

Insight Problem Solving. Memory and Cognition (2001), 29 (7), pg.’s 1000-1009.

Kuczynski, S. (1999). If diversity, then higher profits? Companies that have successful diversity

programs seem to have higher returns. But which came first?. HR Magazine, 44(13).

Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. San Francisco: Jossey-

Bass.

Lott, Bernice (2010). Multiculturalism and Diversity – A Social Psychological Perspective.

Oxford, UK. Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.

McIntosh, P. (1992). White privilege. Creation Spirituality, 33-35.

15


Pine, Jordan (2002). White Men Can Be Diversity Leaders, Too.

http://www.DiversityInc.com/members/3657.cfm.

Robinson, G., & Dechant, K. (1997). Building a business case for diversity. The Academy of

Management Executive, 11(3), 21-31.

Smedley, A., and Smedly, B.D. (2005). Race as Biology is Fiction, Racism as a Social Problem

is Real. American Psychology, 60, pg. 16-26.

Smith, Richard; King, David; Sidhu, Ranjit; and Skelsey, Dan (2014). The Effective Change

Manager’s Handbook – Essential Guidance to the Change Management Body of

Knowledge. Philadelpha, PA. Kogan Page LLC.

University of Oregon. Diversity Quote:

http://www.uni.edu/accreditation/sites/default/files/Definitions%20of%20Diversity

%20(various% 20institutions)_0.doc

16

http://www.uni.edu/accreditation/sites/default/files/Definitions%20of%20Diversity%20(various%25%2020institutions)_0.doc

http://www.uni.edu/accreditation/sites/default/files/Definitions%20of%20Diversity%20(various%25%2020institutions)_0.doc

http://www.DiversityInc.com/members/3657.cfm

Strategic Leveraging of Diversity, Agility & Emotional Intelligence

Documents

Transcript of Strategic Leveraging of Diversity, Agility & Emotional Intelligence