Mix it up – Hang out with people who aren’t like you? Eek! This can be scary in today’s polarized world if you are talking to people with different political views. And for me, I’m an INTJ on the Meyers Briggs scale and have no extroverted qualities. My happy place is home alone.
But here’s the thing: I’m of that certain age where Facebook is still where I make most of my online social connections with distant friends. And some of my friends are on the other side of the political spectrum. And I learn a lot about how they feel and why. I’ve learned that we are all pretty much the same: we care about others, are curious about the world, and have hopes, dreams, and disappointments. We just have different ideas about the best way to address problems. And that is the value of hanging people who aren’t like you.
Complexity Scientist Scott Page found that in many problem-solving contexts, “diversity trumps ability.” “There’s a lot of empirical data to show that diverse cities are more productive, diverse boards of directors make better decisions, and the most innovative companies are diverse.” “The logic behind these results is that when dealing with a complicated problem, even the smartest person can get stuck. Adding a new perspective or new set of skills can unstick us, even if the perspective is off the wall or the skills are mediocre.”1
“People can think harder when they fear their views may be challenged by others. They write better, more logical prose when told their work will be read by someone with different political beliefs rather than someone like-minded.”2
Years ago, I worked on a comprehensive plan for a world-class Colorado ski resort, and an interesting dynamic arose. The elected officials and staff disdained developers and saw them as having only money-grubbing interests. The developers in question saw the Town officials as arbitrary, obstructionist, and as willfully trying to sabotage any of their efforts to do a good project. My partner and I talked with both sides about the values and objectives they had for their work. Surprise, surprise. Both sides had nearly identical values. The hatred went both ways and came from projections that the other side was absolutely opposed to efforts to do good. Once they could focus on mutual values, a discussion of how to achieve their objectives in ways that worked for both ensued.
When people who are not “great friends” and have different perspectives get together, they do better work than those who know each other well and feel comfortable. From the research: “Members of diverse teams didn’t feel sure they’d gotten the right answer and felt socially uncomfortable. The teams made up of four friends had a more pleasant time, and they also tended to be confident – wrongly – that they had found the right answer. …friendly [groups} would make decisions aimed at preserving those friendships [rather than making the best decisions] “Why run roughshod over the feelings of members?” said one member of the club, “If there’s strong opposition, we can’t push.”3
Discomfort goes against our human nature. I am uncomfortable around people who think differently than I do and who I don’t know. As humans, we don’t enjoy disruption; “we don’t believe the disruption is useful; it may be months or years before we finally realize how much we gained from what seemed to be at the time an awful mess.”4
Research points to the idea that team harmony – a value and objective in many business and other group endeavors – doesn’t result in the best work. Tour De France team manager Dave Brailsford suggests “goal harmony” is a better objective, “a team focused on achieving a common goal rather than having members get along with one another. Be less interested in making friends and more interested in achieving goals.”5
Photo by Tim Mossholder on Unsplash
1 Tim Harford. Messy: The Power of Disorder to Transform Our Lives. Riverhead Books, 2016. Pg 48
2 Ibid. pg 49
3 Ibid. pg 50-51
4 Ibid. pg 52
5 Ibid. pg 58
