In a recent event hosted by the women’s network Chief, the inimitable Mindy Kaling shared the following anecdote:
“I hated being the diversity hire on “The Office,” which is what I was when I was hired. That was literally my title, and the other writers knew it. I was a Staff Writer, but I was also the Diversity Hire for NBC Universal. They had a program — which is a great program, I wouldn’t have this job if it wasn’t for it — but I was also embarrassed because everybody on the staff knew that my salary was covered by NBC Universal because I was diverse.
It’s a weird thing — to feel so lucky to have gotten the job, and also weirdly like, “Great, I beat out every other minority for this one spot.” I was the only woman, and the only minority in the writing staff for the first two years of the show. And it was because I was “free.” I hated it, but I had to dig myself out of that hole, because I owe my entire career to that experience, too. I’ve realized that it was a gift, and I should have just felt so proud to have been the one person who was chosen.”
This is a conundrum for a lot of “firsts” or “onlys” – the mix of pride, frustration, and hyper-awareness of your singularity whether it’s in a meeting or a team or a workplace. It can be both a blessing and/or a curse and it’s easier for some to manage than others. Kaling’s ultimate conclusion that it was a gift and that she should be proud of that achievement is laudable if potentially hard to emanate. But without the first, there can’t be a second and a third and a fourth.
That said, there’s ample evidence to show this kind of tokenism rarely leads to true shifts in a group (I use “group” here as an encompassing term) dynamic, thus keeping that group stuck in its insular structure and therefore limiting the kind of creativity and innovation that occurs when a group is in fact widely representative. In research by Frances Frei and Anne Morriss, they found that companies that hire and retain diverse talent will be more competitive in their markets in the next 5 years. The framework is strikingly simple. In the authors’ words:
“Diversity doesn’t automatically confer advantages in decision-making. In fact, if diverse teams aren’t managed actively for inclusion, they can underperform homogenous ones. That’s because shared knowledge is key in decision-making, and diverse teams, by definition, start out with less of it. But if you create conditions of trust that allow diverse team members to bring their unique perspectives and experiences to the table, you can expand the amount of knowledge your team can access—and create an unbeatable advantage.”
Organizations of all shapes and sizes need to invest in people of diverse backgrounds, profiles, demographics, and experiences, not because it’s the “right” thing to do (it is) but because it’s the right thing for the organization. We need to move past feeling good about ourselves for selecting one Mindy Kaling and instead create space and belonging for a room full of them – of us all.