Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
How Should We Act to Influence Positive Change? - Coggle Diagram
How Should We Act to Influence Positive Change?
how do we manage diversity?
by recognizing our differences - learning to be okay with them & be uncomfortable
Phillips urges us to look for differences, not similarities, in others - that's more productive
but for this to be true, we need psychological safety. we need to feel safe enough to be uncomfortable
otherwise you have diversity/representation without actual meaning - like Zheng & women ERGs
Heterogeneous groups outperform homogeneous groups in Philips' research, partly bc they're more likely to share unique information and engage with different perspectives
diversity → more differences → more potential conflict → better decisions?
how do we manage conflict?
task conflict vs relationship conflict (Hidden Brain Podcast). High-performing teams experience task conflict early; low-performing teams allow relationship conflict to dominate
productive disagreement (Hidden Brain Podcast)
connects to
psychological safety
- allows team members to speak up, raise concerns, and take interpersonal risks
get past psychological biases
solution aversion
public discourse geared towards negativity
illusion of explanatory depth -> basically I see this as a proxy for our own pride/tendency to overestimate our abilities
mb this is what companies are doing w overemphasis on DEI trainings - Zheng
be open minded - transcend differences
totalitarian ego - admitting uncertainty threatens our self-image. Edmondson - employees may avoid admitting mistakes because of interpersonal consequences --> be willing to be wrong
opening of the Tao Te Ching - can language and fixed descriptions fully capture reality? not really
similar to Philips's definition of diversity: we use visible differences to make predictions about how other people think, feel, and behave
where does the action have to come from?
internal, genuine, intrinsic moral principles - Cicero & Tao. we have to
change people
both Cicero & Tao agree it has to be from within/intrinsic, not performative
"leader after leader continues to throw DEI training at the problem" & example of the women's ERG helping them feel better but not actually solving the underlying issues in Zheng --> proof that Cicero/Tao principles still hold up
Tao, Chapter 38: “A man of superior virtue is not conscious of being virtuous.”
from effectively designed systems - we have to
change systems
Zheng - "we know that approaching this work as change management to shift the workplace
environment
...rather than trying to change people's deeply held internal beliefs, works...at scale"
example of addressing "overwork" through systems, policies, incentives, etc. in Zheng -> maybe beliefs follow institutions/policies/environments, and not the other way around
but Cicero may actually disagree? doing what is morally right shouldn't depend on whether it is profitable or convenient
who has the responsibility to do it?
Zheng started her "overwork" example "at the top"
Cicero/Tao would say it has to be an individual - regardless of the external environment you act the same way, selfless & going with the flow like water. not reacting to others
is silence a form of unethical behavior? to what extent ?
Cicero would say yes - grain merchant should have spoken up, etc.
Grant & Edmonton might say yes also - avoiding disagreement can prevent teams from discovering problems
connects to Grant's discussion on being too agreeable too - where does that factor in?