Integration - Value the Difference/Devalue the Difference

I am going to present a method that will greatly help the problem of integration in any group whether it’s a social club or society in general. The main points are 1) that you need to focus on the differences and not ignore them, and 2) it’s a two-way street – it doesn’t work if only half of the job gets done.

We can start with an example of a company that only hires married white men. Their philosophy is that this represents the best talent pool. Now somebody suggests that unmarried men might make better traveling salesmen because they don’t have as many family obligations. This suggestion could occur internally or from a prospective candidate. The company agrees that there might be some truth to this. This is where the company starts to “Value the Difference.” Note that it doesn’t work to say that there is no difference between married and single men. That part is obvious – one group is married and the other is single. The first step is for all parties to acknowledge that the difference exists, even if the impact of the difference is imaginary!

But it doesn’t end there. The company already has a philosophy of why married men are better than single men. They may be more reliable, less likely to change jobs, more dedicated, etc. And some of these items may be statistically correct. With this being the case, it’s up to the first single candidates to “Devalue the Difference.” They can show their past reliable behavior would predict a similar future result. They need to show why they are not like the suppositions (or prejudices) of the group that they want to be a part of. They need to “Devalue the Difference.” This may seem unfair that a person would have to prove that another group’s ideas are flawed, or that those general ideas don’t apply to him, but how else does the change in thinking occur? How often do you change a strongly held belief without some type of evidence that you can evaluate for yourself? Also, many times the differences are real. In an English speaking country, a person who speaks another language could be a real asset (Value the Difference). But if they don’t speak English or refuse to speak it, then they have neglected to Devalue the Difference (that the language difference will impede normal business communication). The scenario that doesn’t work is where an individual wants to “join” an existing group of 100 people and as part of being accepted, the one person wants the other 100 to change, while he makes no effort to integrate himself into the group. This just doesn’t make sense.

There are many examples of people integrating without really changing who they are. People moving to a foreign country make an effort to learn the language. I know of Asian people who adopt a different name (e.g. Jane instead of Hsaio) to make is easier communicate with them. They haven’t legally changed their name; it’s like a nickname to help them fit in better. I know of a man who had tattoos all the way down both arms. When working in a professional office, he simply wore long sleeved shirts. When they were having these mini-riots, torchings, whatever you want to call it, in France a few months back, a heard a quote from a young Muslim who said he didn’t want to be forced to conform by wearing a shirt and tie to work and therefore many jobs weren’t available to him. What he failed to realize is that there are many French people who don’t like to wear a shirt and tie either, but they do it to fit into the expectations of their own society. So you don’t have to sell your soul to be part of another group, but you do have to make some kind of effort to be part of that group. It can’t be all take and no give.

The good part of the story is that when groups open themselves up, they usually see that their concerns were misplaced. This company didn’t really want married men - they wanted responsible men. And when they realized that single men can be responsible too, they expanded their universe, in this case to all white men, and filtered people to make sure they were responsible, dedicated, etc. No one has to break the “single man” barrier again. And as this company evolves, we would expect their universe to include women, minorities, foreigners, and on and on. But the Value the Difference/Devalue the Difference process will still need to occur before any structural change can take place.

Now I’m sure you can find examples where you say this won’t work. Take the Augusta National Golf Club (the organization that hosts the Masters Golf Tournament). They don’t have any women members. This is a situation where a bunch of rich, old men want to do what rich, old men do. Whether the rule against women is actually written or not doesn’t matter. No woman has made a strong enough case that having her in their midst would improve whatever it is that they do. You may not like it, but that’s what has happened. And there are many other situations where people want to join a group, just because they are excluded. A person who wants to ban all types of guns wouldn’t be welcome in the National Rifle Association. But then again, this person doesn’t want the NRA to “Value the Difference,” they just want to disrupt the organization. The principles of Valuing and Devaluing the Difference don't exist in either case.

If you think back in your own experience, you can see that this cycle of VTD/DTD is where the real changes in integrating people have occurred. Laws can change external behavior, but they don’t change how a person thinks or feels. Blacks were integrated into pro sports long before the civil rights laws were put into place and pro sports is one of the most fair, in terms of value based on talent, societies that we have. It takes one person admitting that someone who seems a little bit different might be a good thing. And it also means having the other person demonstrate that he’s less different than you thought he was. If you will Value the Difference/Devalue the Difference, you can make real progress on the process of integration.