Are Our Digital Lives Hindering Engagement of Diversity?

• Half of all American children under the age of five are non-white.  
• Twenty five percent of children in the U.S. have at least one immigrant parent.
• Forty five percent of college aged American students are political independents.

 Success is being redefined

How to get there is being redefined 

The end-game is being redefined

Tomorrow's donors, voters, members, clients and employees are diverse in thought, behavior and demographics. Engaging this inevitable growing diversity requires a shift in leadership mindset and management technique and a fresh review of mission and vision. More and more, there is a need for learning about unfamiliar perspectives and considering ideas that may be be uncomfortable.

Abundant Access. Twitter, Facebook, Blogs, online journals, Wikipedia, chat rooms and on and on.  Ten years ago Facebook didn't exist.  Eight years ago Facebook had six million users.  Today, Facebook has one billion users.  That means Facebook has access to the population of the third largest country on the planet. The opportunity to network with people of diverse backgrounds, interests and thoughts is more available than ever.

Social Unnetworking? Lately I have been thinking about the drawbacks of the digital age when it comes to engaging diversity.  Here's what I mean:

Twitter for example...
A benefit of Twitter is that it provides access to the needle in the haystack.  We can find that small group of people in the entire country that shares our very unique interest. Truly fantastic. But it also means that when it comes to ideas, we can find that small group that thinks like us and use it to reinforce our very narrow view, to the exclusion of considering other perspectives.  Google (and others) helps us with this.  Google keeps track of our searches so that ads are customized just for us.  The more we access the web, the more the virtual powers-that-be customize what we see to align with our current perspectives. And because what we see influences what we think, it becomes a wonderful cycle of affirmation!

"Control your digital identity"...
I attended a wonderful continuing legal education seminar last week where we were advised that, like it or not, we all have digital identities.  Rather than ignoring those identities, the experts encouraged us to control them.  Manage what pops up when someone searches your name.  "Push down" any online images that you may not like.  All good advice, but does this knowledge make us less willing to meaningfully explore oppositional ideas?  What if you're conservative and you regularly read a blog that discusses liberal ideas?  Or you're an environmentalist and you engage in online conversation with a leader in the energy industry? Could that impact your digital identity? Are you willing to take that chance?

Be Intentional.  Although we have what seems like endless access to information, ideas and people, unless we are intentional about seeking out oppositional views, and fearless about communicating with those who are different from us, we are in danger of lulling ourselves into believing we are examining the spectrum of information while really we are just deepening the roots of our pre-set ideas.  In real life, diversity is increasing. Let's make sure virtual life simulates that.

Imprinted Moments

Each of us has moments in our life history that imprint themselves on us, set the foundation for what we “know” life holds, and become the backdrop against which we see everything. For someone living through the Depression, for example, what they know life holds might be scarcity, and against that backdrop all actions might be infused with frugality. The thing is, in the scheme of things these moments — even if decades long — are fleeting. And with the dawn of the Knowledge Age these moments pass even more quickly.  

Recently I read a blogpost about vision-based versus mission-based culture.  At its essence the post recognizes that organizational risk-taking and innovation are indicia of good stewardship. Leadership requires stepping away from imprinted moments not because those moments are outdated or inherently good or bad, but because they are not the only backdrops against which all else should be measured. When we allow ourselves to see multiple backgrounds against which things can be viewed, it changes how the things in the foreground appear. This is particularly important for non-profits, the purpose of which is to bring about change, rather than maintain the status quo (or sometimes, to maintain the status quo in opposition to change on the horizon; in any event, it's not riding the wave). This is particularly true in the 21st century, a time when transparency is demanded and information is abundant.

I am exercising my ability to exorcise my set backdrops. For example:

• Kids get up in the morning and go to school:  moment not fact.  
• College education and professional training lead to prosperity: moment not a fact.

I don't expect that I will move past my imprinted moments and I'm not sure I want to.  Deep down I may always feel that leg warmers and shoulder pads are a reasonable style choice. But that doesn't mean I have to wear them. 

We Have Been Changed For Good

After about the fourth preview at the movies today, I whispered to my son, "I want to see every one of these movies!" After the fifth preview my daughter whispered to me, "Each of these movies is awesome! They've done a good job figuring out what I will want to see, based on what we came to see today." I have such an insightful twelve year old! I also realize that the world has changed and she has never known it to be any other way. Audience profiling and segmentation is no longer under the surface.  

The information age has also improved the way organizations can make choices. Using Big Data we can determine need and improve how we select which ideas to turn into projects. Social media and mobile devices allow us to crowd source information to determine approach to implementation; and we can harness voluminous data using sophisticated data-tracking software in order to measure results.  

Despite being a champion of research-based approaches, data-driven programs and quantifiable outcomes, one of my favorite quotes is, "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." (Albert Einstein or William Bruce Cameron or someone) Furthermore, I recognize potential dangers attached to the information revolution.  Among them, privacy concerns, moral issues, and the risk of confirming unfounded biases rather than reducing their impact.

For now, my solution is to remain alert and keep learning about these serious issues. I have also selected two cautions to put on my bulletin board for the next few months:

1. More and better is best, but better is better than more alone. Sometimes the most important question does not present itself at the outset of a project.  So the more types of data collected, the better the chances that you'll have the data you need once you figure out the right question. But that's quite different than focusing on volume to the detriment of creating thoughtful measures and metrics, ensuring that the data gathered is valid, interpreting data correctly, and taking the time to consider it in context.    
2. Don't let inadequate information lead to inaction. How much data is enough? At some point, you must decide to move forward. In fact, within a portfolio of projects some portion of them should not be supported by directly relevant research, or spot on data. That's a sign of innovation. 

Note:  I will also remind myself that when it comes to coffee and other matters of equal importance I will only query the data if I am prepared to face and act on whatever the answer might be!

3 Reasons to Avoid Best Practices

1. Freedom from the market
In the for-profit arena there is a point of view that industries, not individual companies, succeed.  If that point of view has merit, "industry practice" is reasonable on some level. But a non-profit organization fills a need that is not otherwise met by the market. Almost by definition there is no adequate local industry for the service -- fulfillment of the mission -- that the organization provides.  

2. Avoiding disaster is not good enough
There's a fun theoretical discussion about the differences among "best" "smart" and "good" practices. In the end though, whatever you call them, the practices usually are not emprically proven.  Instead they are: one, common and, two, have not led to obvious failure. If the best that can be said about an employee is that her work is common, or that her work has not led to disaster, any manager will run for cover at the suggestion of working with her.  Likewise, organizations should steer clear of practices that have nothing more to recommend them. 

3. The expert is in the mirror
Sometimes a best practice results from the collective input of experts in a field -- guidelines from an association for example. Here's the thing though, no one is as expert about the unique context of an organization as its board and its leadership staff. Even if the practice is based on empirical evidence, the practice must be contextualized for your organization. So while guidelines from experts are a fair place to begin sifting for excellent ideas, they are not a place to end. 

Before cutting and pasting a seemingly successful neighbor's practices into your organization's arsenal of practices, here are some things to consider:

• Does the other organization have the same goals? The same values?  
• Is the other organization guided by a mission that overlaps with your organization's?  If so, by adopting the practice might your organization compromise the very thing that sets it apart?
• Is there a causal link between the practice and extraordinary measurable results?  
• Is the practice best or safe? In this instance is risk reduction justification enough to adopt the practice?   
• What is the source of the best practices and whose interests does that source promote or protect?
• Are the practices adjusted in some way to be forward looking?
• Do the practices impact the heart and soul of the organization (e.g., governance structure, bylaws, strategic plan, distinguishing characteristics, the story)? 

There is no shortcut to setting goals, assessing risk, allocating resources and thinking through what is right and best for your unique and special organization. And why would we ever want there to be?  That's the fun part!