Why Diversity Cannot be the Sole Goal
Diversity and Unity: Lessons from Life
A hot word today is diversity. It appears that diversity is the answer to every problem; according to some. It seems as if almost every major business nowadays has a dedicated goal to diversity. Apple’s website has a page dedicated to showing how diverse it is. Northrop Grumman’s webpage likewise has a page dedicated to showing off its diversity. Straight from Grumman’s page titled Diversity and Inclusion Programs it says that they “established a number of programs and initiatives to help further diversity and inclusion throughout the company.” This phrase, “diversity and inclusion,” are found everywhere nowadays. Universities almost universally provide resources to an administrator or department specifically dedicated to diversity. For instance, Harvard Medical School has an “Office for diversity, inclusion and community partnership,” the University of Arizona also has a diversity and inclusion office. Additionally, the University of Arizona provides an article to its students titled Student Benefits of Diversity and Inclusion where the first sentence says “Diversity has a positive impact on all students.” To provide more examples would be redundant. From reading these pages and articles posted online by businesses and universities, which is a fair representation of both business and the academic world, we find that diversity appears to be a desired end goal. As I read each of these articles and webpages lifting diversity up on a pedestal, I couldn’t help but feel that their message was lacking.
I have grappled for a while about how to approach this topic. Clearly there are strengths in diversity; however when left to itself, diversity can also create more problems than it solves and weakens what it touches. Alternatively, unity consistently creates strength. However, it too can become problematic if it turns into blind conformity. I found that these two seemingly opposing principles are mutually strengthened when there is a proper balance. There exists a myriad of examples to illustrate this balance between being diverse as well as unified. Either extreme is dangerous and problematic. Our examples will show that diversity by itself is insufficient to create strength, diversity is still important even though it is not the goal, and that sticking to one’s roles and assignments is necessary for unified strength. I will use the examples of football, music, art, the Allied leaders of WWII, and the founding of the United States to illustrate these points.
First, diversity, left to itself, is neither a sufficient nor good answer when problem solving. In fact, my experience has proven to me that diversity for the sake of diversity is actually wrong. Consider the topics we will cover with sports, music, art, the allies in WWII, and the U.S. founding. I have never heard a team be praised for its diversity. I’ve never heard, “they played well today, they were very diverse.” Or “they simply beat their opponent because they were more diverse.” I have never heard someone praise a choir or orchestra like this. “All the different sounds were so diverse.” In art I have never heard “wow Michelangelo’s use of color is so diverse.” We do not attribute the victory of WWII to diverse set of leaders we had at the time. Likewise, the American experiment did not succeed because the founding fathers chose to focus on their differences, nor did the 13 original colonies.
I hear the opposite. Teams are always praised for their unity. I hear things like this, “they were a close knit group,” or “they worked together as a team.” In music people will talk about the wonderful harmonies (where different notes work together, in other words — unity). They praise the different sounds that blended together. Likewise in art we celebrate the creative and pleasing blending of colors in a single picture. The differences between each of the Allied leaders during WWII were very diverse, yet it was their unification towards a single goal (i.e. defeating totalitarianism) that ultimately gave them the victory. The founding fathers and 13 colonies unified under the same cause to defeat British tyranny. Their unification made them strong. In each of these examples they had to overcome their differences and diversity to rally around a single cause. They unified their efforts and that is what made them strong. If they focused on their differences and possessed no unifying factor, teams would lose, music would annoy our ears, art would anger our eyes, WWII would have been handed to fascists, and the War of Independence would be known as the failed American rebellion.
Each of the above exemplifies strength through unity, not diversity. From my experiences on teams, a team that focuses on its differences doesn’t perform well. Those teams usually fall apart and become selfish as players begin infighting and create rivalries. The unified team is selfless and focuses on its common goals. The unified teams tend to do better while teams who lack unity crumble. Therefore, on principle, working to increase unity instead of increasing diversity is the more optimal goal.
Second, just because diversity isn’t the goal, does not mean that it is not important. Our examples again illustrate this point, although I will focus mainly on football. A football team is made up of the most diverse group of players in any sport (in my opinion). On the same team you have various positions: lineman who are big, wide, strong, tall or short, and who lack quickness and speed (relative to their counterparts); running backs who are short and quick or large and powerful; receivers who are tall and lanky or short speed demons; and a quarterback who can be immobile and calculated or an athletic improviser. Each position is completely different than the other positions, and that is just the offense, which we will stick with for simplicity sake. Their body types are dramatically different and are usually best suited for their own job and not that of their teammate. Within each position there are a variety of body types which seem opposite. Each of the positions provides vital services to the team who must function as a single unit or they will not succeed. A team of football players are as diverse as it gets; each man provides a skill set that the others do not likely have.
Unity does not mean sameness. The other examples strengthen this point. In music (either orchestra or choir) there are multiple notes being played at once. It is rare that every musical sound is on the exact same note. The blend of their different sounds make it beautiful. Art would be dull if artists were limited to one color. It is the vast number of colors that can be used that make art so interesting. The leadership among the allies differed greatly in life experience and plans for how to win the war. Each brought compelling ideas and strengths to the high command that enabled for them to do what one man could not do on his own. The founding fathers also differed on many political ideas as the constitutional conventions relate. Their compromises and acceptance to good ideas that weren’t their own is what we find in our magnificent constitution. Diversity unified is where each of these examples succeeds.
Third, unified strength is achieved when diverse subjects decide to stick to their roles and assignments. Again, we turn to football first. Each member of the team must accept their role their position performs. Each position faces its own unique challenges that shouldn’t be compared. The linemen create the most important foundation for the offense, yet they will receive almost no public recognition for their contributions. A receiver sprints almost every play on their routes to create strain on the defense but have a low percentage of getting the ball thrown to him since there can be up to four or five other receivers in a single play. Receivers make some of the flashiest plays but also take some of the most dangerous hits. Running backs take some of the hardest and most consistent physical punishment as their hits are often at high speeds against larger opponents. They also receive much of the glory. Quarterbacks receive more praise and more criticism than is actually theirs to claim. They get to touch the ball every play, but also take some of the biggest hits by being blind-sided while trying to pass the ball.
To compare who has the harder position is frivolous. It creates rivalry and selfishness. The unity of the team breaks down and success becomes rare. The player who tries to do the role of another position, regardless of the reason, detracts from the unity of the team. Each position is entrusted with specific assignments to help move the football across the goal line. Each player is expected to perform his assigned task, trusting that his teammate will do the same. That dedication to a unified cause is what creates good and successful teams. It is the focus on unity, not diversity that strengthens teams.
In our other examples we again find that doing one’s duty creates strength. Music is beautiful because it follows rules. Each sound is in the same key and singers and musicians are assigned specific notes at specific times with specific volume. What would be the outcome if each singer decided to sing the note they felt was best or if each instrument jealously tried to play louder than all the rest? Art would lose its prestige if the colors refused to obey the artist. If the artist placed blue on a certain part, but then the color decided to expand beyond its assigned territory it would be detrimental to the overall picture. The Allies won WWII because they did their assignment given to them by General Eisenhower. How different would the outcome have been if the Allied infighting between leaders bested them and the Axis powers won? If each of the 13 colonies decided to remain fragmented and let the other 12 fend for themselves, we could still be living under a monarch.
Diversity can be found almost everywhere. Among that diversity brings a variety of skills, experiences, knowledge, solutions, information and options for success. However, success will never be achieved until those diverse skills are properly used to help achieve the unified goal. Unity does not detract from diversity. Sameness does not create strength. A monolithic team, choir, orchestra, painting, political movement, or government, will not succeed. The diversity enables success. However, a group that remains fragmented instead of unifying remains weak and will never achieve its success until it unifies.
Diversity, in and of itself is insufficient to achieve success. Only when diversity unifies under a common goal is success achievable. The answer for today’s problems should not stop with “more diversity.” Diversity, left alone, will keep communities and groups fragmented and weak. These diverse communities and groups need to use their uniqueness toward a common shared goal. Strength comes from the unification of diversity. If each of us would learn the principles that unify this republic and then commit to our assignments, we would create a more perfection Union. We ought to reflect on our country’s name, the United States of America. Only a united nation or group can be strong and successful. Instead of focusing on our differences, I believe it is time to remember what ties us together in unity.
