Diversity - Another Perspective :)

Diversity was a topic of at the annual directors briefing for the Australian Institute of Company Directors. The subject had received some press of late, as some companies have announced policies of positive discrimination with the objective of getting a more balanced gender representation on boards and in senior executive ranks.

There is no doubt that more diversity in business is greatly needed, and the dominance of white male lawyers and accountants on boards is shameful. However I fail to see what it has to do with gender. If you come from the same private schools, attend the same universities and work in the same roles in the same organisations I hardly think that is a model for diversity no matter whether you are male or female.  The fact that gender equality is synonymous with diversity in the business lexicon is really just a symptom of how utterly appalling the current situation is.

Not that I am against positive discrimination. On the contrary I am a big supporter. Although it is not an adequate response it is at least a start. Hopefully it is the thin edge of the wedge rather than a solution in and of itself. First we need to break current practices and then we will worry about how it should be put back together.

Some may argue that positive discrimination is not fair, and that the best person for the job should be appointed irrespective of gender. Well the first problem with that argument is whoever said that this was supposed to be fair? Companies are not democracies, and board positions cost a lot of money and political capital, so board appointments are always about powerful investor interests. The same argument applies to people who believe that gender equality on boards should be encouraged because of fairness. What rubbish. Both side should give up any idea of fairness as a valid argument.

The second point about being the best person for the job is also nonsense. There is no doubt in my mind that there are many eminently qualified people who are capable of performing well in these roles. It is impossible to predict who could be more successful. Once you pass the bar of capability all the rest is simply about competing preferences. I would go so far as to say that on boards that are currently dominated by men that overall board performance is almost certianly improved by appointing a woman. Unless a company is going through a specific issue where specialised expertise is required then I would expect that true diversity of opinion should be the primary goal of all board and senior executive appointments.

Some may argue that positive discrimination is tokenistic, and that it is all about public image. I would agree with this. But then again all appointments are tokenistic and about public image. When a company appoints a director or executive from outside of Australia it is sending a message saying that it has searched the world for the best person. When it appoints a local it is saying that it is a great Australian company. When a company appoints an internal person they are saying they value consistency and trust their own people, when an outsider is appointed they are saying they are looking for new ideas and fresh approaches. Every appointment sends a message, nothing new here.

Finally it is only tokenistic the first time it is done. Once it becomes commonplace it is hardly tokenistic. When we stop talking about tokenism then we might have just started to focus on the real problem, which is promoting diversity of views and opinions, not just having the same opinions and views of the previous regime being expressed by a carefully selected handful of appointed women.