Introduction

Ten years ago, I wrote The Loudest Duck: Moving Beyond Diversity While Embracing Differences to Achieve Success at Work (Wiley & Sons). My work with organizations prompted me to write that initial book on diversity because I observed those same organizations struggling with how to both make a case for diversity and implement efforts to achieve what they said their goals were.

Ten years on, I do observe progress, particularly in the recognition that it isn't just about diversity, but must also encompass equity and inclusion. I called the initial focus on diversity the "Noah's Ark" phase. That's when you just get two of each in the ark and say you have accomplished the mission. Many groups are still in that stage, with representation of differing people the be-all and end-all of the efforts, mainly concentrating on recruitment of diverse individuals.

While recruiting was and is important, it is a partial view. It is the "intake" view, but it does not recognize the "upgrade" view or the inclusion and equity view. That is, people are coming in the door but have not been as successful at thriving and rising in organizations. It also did not take into account what is now clearly seen: that a new type of leadership is required, one that prizes inclusivity as an essential element of what leaders must do.

In The Loudest Duck, my purpose was to create clear and practical ways to ensure that people were treated equitably and that the value of diversity would be attained. The book started with a look at the case for diversity, particularly cognitive diversity and getting the differing perspectives that each of us brings to the workplace to enhance creativity and innovation. There are many other reasons for why diversity should be pursued, but at many points in the book I refer back to this fundamental reason. I ask the reader if they are getting the cognitive diversity they purport to want.

The next step was to explore what we unconsciously bring to the workplace, beyond unconscious bias that makes us respond to people who are like us differently than people who are not like us. I wanted to move beyond thinking only of unconscious bias to thinking of all the other types of unconscious ways of existing. We have unconscious beliefs, attitudes, perspectives, preferences, roles, associations, and archetypes.

I then focused on the Elephant and the Mouse, which is the concept that dominant groups know little about nondominant groups, but the latter knows a great deal about the former. This causes continual issues and problems within organizations because it means that some people have almost no awareness of how actions, processes, decisions, and comments can disproportionately impact diverse individuals.

Dominant groups still don't know the fully lived lives of nondominant groups. I have come to see that this dynamic is perhaps one of the most powerful ones that haunt societies, particularly as more and more diverse groups correctly express their desire to be fully accepted and treated equitably. The Elephant and Mouse metaphor has resonated well with those who read my book and those to whom I've spoken. In fact, it was so popular that one group decided to name its company The Mouse and the Elephant and base its framework on my work!

As the world continues to become increasingly interconnected, it is crucial to know about others, particularly how others experience life and are impacted by conscious and unconscious beliefs about who they are. That is why this book is titled The Elephant and the Mouse. To me, this is a core tenet of the effort to reach full diversity, equity, inclusion, and social justice. It now must be a core tenet of how leaders behave and how they are measured. Diversity, equity, and inclusion can no longer be seen as "nice to have" but are essential to high-functioning, successful organizations. A parallel example, given to me by Mason Donovan and Mark Kaplan of the Dagoba Group, might be when a company realizes that "safety first" requires a full reorientation of how it operates and how everyone is responsible for that safety goal.

The Elephant and the Mouse is a callout to all of us to acknowledge that the concepts and realities of diversity, inclusion, and equity are becoming fully embedded in our lives and structures. This requires far more from each of us with concomitant effort and reward.

THE DIVERSITY OF DIVERSITY

The Loudest Duck also outlined the many diversities we find in the workplace, not simply the legally covered or generally assumed ones such as gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, disability, religion, or age. Diversity is about like to like and like to not like. We discover that there are many ways we separate ourselves from others. In that separation comes a propensity to bond and take seriously those who are like us and to distance ourselves or find reasons to dismiss others who are unlike us, as well as their ideas and even their essential personhood.

There are the smokers and the nonsmokers, introverts and extroverts, tall and short people, folks who are standard weight and those who are nonstandard weight. Introverts think that extroverts talk too much and extroverts think that introverts have nothing to say. There are the Manchester United football fans and the Arsenal fans, both equally passionate and, in their own minds, quite discerning. Parents and non-parents often live in different worlds from each other, and so too do those who have varying speaking styles.

Different nationalities can create troublesome beliefs and give permission to one group to dismiss the thinking and creativity of the other, thereby defeating what was the original stated rationale for diversity. In his book Blink, Malcolm Gladwell explains that 16% of men in the United States are 6 feet or taller, but 57% of Fortune 500 male CEOs are 6 feet or taller, which is four times the cohort!1 I have yet to see research that correlates leadership ability and skeletal structure.

The military has a convenient phrase: "Large and in charge." We have an image of what a leader looks like. If you fit that image, you have a lot of tailwinds going for you. People will assume you are competent until you prove you are not. If you are shorter than 6 feet tall, you are not going to get that easy advantage. You might be assumed to be incompetent until you prove you are competent. Tall people are more likely to be pushing an open door. Short people find themselves having to demonstrate their abilities more often and more consistently with a different measuring stick.

Without more tools to use to ensure inclusion and equity, the very diversity we say we want can actually cause more problems than homogeneity, which is less compelling but easier to maneuver. For example, many held beliefs-and continue to hold them-about what roles are acceptable and proper for women to play and what roles men should play. The bulk of caregiving and housework globally falls to women and, while that is changing somewhat, men play a much less equal role in care and housework. Some countries have strict laws and cultural norms about these gendered roles. Equality Now, an organization that tracks laws that discriminate against women, found in 2020, for example, that "in 59 countries there are no laws on sexual harassment in the workplace, and in 18 countries husbands are legally allowed to prevent their wives from working. Meanwhile, 104 countries have laws that prevent women from working in specific jobs, according to U.N. Women."2

How and where we form beliefs about other people was also explored in The Loudest Duck. All of the ways we learn about people, I called Grandma (society). Thus, we are all diverse and we all unconsciously bring our Grandmas to work with us.

We learn in myriad ways. Our parents teach us, peers put pressure on us, our everyday experiences in life shape us, religion sends messages to us, and the media, TV, film, and social media are playing a bigger and bigger role in how we learn about others. And all those fairy tales, fables, and myths? Those are strong molders of the archetypes we have of others.

I reflected on the great myth of the hero's journey. It is about the young man who has to overcome great odds, slay the dragon, and defeat the evil empire. It looks like he is going to lose to the enemy, but he comes back stronger and overcomes the struggles. He returns to his kingdom, village, or tribe and gets his rewards, which are generally the keys to the kingdom, the pot of gold, and the hand of the fair maiden.

These myths find their way into movies and television. I once read a review of a forgotten, money-losing 2005 movie called Sahara, directed by Breck Eisner and starring Matthew McConaughey as "an aquatic treasure hunter who halts a worldwide plague, defeats the evil dictator of Mali, locates a fortune in gold and rolls around a pristine beach in the arms of a scientist played by Penelope Cruz." (At least the woman has a career!)

An equally strong mirror myth is the rescue or rescue me myth. The classic is Cinderella, who is rescued from the evil stepmother by the prince, or Sleeping Beauty who, after lying on a table for 100 years, is awakened by the prince with a (nonconsensual) kiss.

We learn about people unconsciously in so many ways. Movies, fairy tales, and myths depict various archetypes, including the mentor (think Yoda), the orphan (Harry Potter), and...