The Elephant and the Mouse. Laura A. Liswood
I'd read that every day and think, “Such good questions to ask men.” But of course, they were good questions to ask women too. That was the start of an eye‐opening look at how men live in the world and how women go through life. It expanded into thinking about dominant groups and nondominant groups and how dynamics in organizations can cause real problems for those who are not in that dominant group.
The title of the book The Loudest Duck refers to how easy it is for some to be under‐heard and some to be over‐heard and how that can defeat the true essence of a diverse population. In some cultures, people are taught that “the squeaky wheel gets the grease.” Speak up and you get what you want. American men often exhibit this culturally learned behavior and it is acceptable for them to do this because Grandma has taught them it is okay. I call this the Wheel.
While doing sessions in Japan, I asked who knew what that squeaky wheel phrase meant. No one knew. They had been taught by Grandma that “the nail that sticks out gets hit on the head.” That's 180 degrees away from the squeaky wheel! I call this the Nail.
Another example: women in many cultures have heard the phrase “If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all,” mimicking the notion that women must above all else be nonconfrontational, nurturing, and unable or unwilling to exhibit anger. Again, 180 degrees opposite of the squeaky wheel. I call this Nice.
Finally, in China the societal norm is “the loudest duck gets shot.” Yet another 180 degrees opposite of the squeaky wheel. For example, in some societies' culture it is dangerous to share your political views if they are in opposition to those in power, so not speaking up can seem the smarter approach. In other places, it is considered bad form to ask questions in the classroom because that implies you are questioning the teacher's abilities rather than a simple request for information. I call this the Duck.
So, let's hypothesize that you are in a meeting and the team is diverse because you hired for diversity. It has a Wheel, Nail, Duck, and Nice. Who's likely doing most of the talking? The Wheel, because that is what they have been taught. But looking at it through the lens of cognitive ideas, the group is over‐hearing the Wheel and under‐hearing the Nail, Duck, and Nice. And the Wheel maybe gets more promotions or assignments or is seen as more valuable because they are the most often heard.
To put this in research terms, multinational professional services firm PWC has found that in a typical eight‐person team meeting, on average only three people do 70% of the talking. Organizations need to level the playing field so everyone is heard. I liken it to being a traffic cop (which I was once). The manager of the meeting says, “Let's hear from Jennifer first. Hold on, Bob. Now Andre, what do you have to say? Hold on, Bob.” The thing about having a diverse work group means that we need additional tools to make sure the heterogeneous Grandmas are not causing the advantaging of one group over another, of some groups being over‐heard and others under‐heard, which is the exact opposite of why we wanted diversity in the first place. If we wanted cognitive differing perspectives, we didn't get it.
In this book you will read about the division of responsibility required for ensuring the equitable and inclusive organization that many say they strive for. This is referred to as the Seed and the Soil. The Seed is the individual who has a 50% responsibility for ensuring their career goes well. The Soil is the institution and the management and leadership that comprise the institution, which has a 50% responsibility to bring the necessary tools to bear to create a fair organization. Each manager and leader must act so that their collective action provides the impetus of the organization to overcome systemic problems.
In The Loudest Duck, there are two dynamics I see over and over again. One is the lack of real, critical, and actionable feedback for women and other underrepresented groups by those in charge of giving feedback. It may well be a concern for how they will take the critical feedback or a worry that it will be perceived as biased. Sometimes the feedback comes in an unhelpful form. I've seen feedback that tells women to have more gravitas, for a Black person to stop appearing so angry, for an Asian man to be more athletic. None of this is helpful to the person receiving the feedback. I consider the absence of clear, detailed, nonbiased feedback to be one of the major roadblocks to the development of diverse groups. The Soil (organizations and managers) needs to be far more diligent in the processes of giving (and getting) this important development information.
The second dynamic is that some people are good at stating accomplishments, much like they are comfortable speaking up. Others have been taught by Grandma to be humble, not to brag, or to think that their work speaks for itself (hint: your work does not speak; only you do). Worse, some are delusional, thinking a manager will know what they are doing. The disadvantage can be huge, particularly if managers rely on their gut feeling or intuition based on the bragger's statements. The non‐bragger is seriously disadvantaged. The Seed (the individual) needs to learn more ways to ensure their work is recognized. They may need to tell Grandma to go home, to get out of their comfort zone, and to speak up more. The Soil needs to solicit the information about what the quiet ones are doing.
One of the tools I recommend is what I call “three up and three down,” the purpose of which is to eliminate the effect of the differing Grandmas. The employee expresses to the manager the three things they are doing well, and the manager shares the three things the employee needs to work on. Everyone thereby states accomplishments, and everyone gets feedback. This should happen at least every three months or sooner and can be informal in nature and quick to do. If a manager wants to reaffirm three ways the employee is doing well, that's fine, but they must give three actionable observations of feedback to help develop the individual. It is a simple yet effective tool and it can help de‐bias the system instead of defaulting to the unconscious ways people behave.
We have unconscious biases against some and unconscious biases toward others. (The latter looks like “He reminds me of me when I was young.”) But I never liked the term “bias.” Many people hear both accusation and wrongdoing in that word and it shuts us down to learning more. I have done diversity sessions for thousands of people globally, and I am confident that unconscious bias is an approach that is quite limiting.
My idea is that we have unconscious beliefs, perspectives, perceptions, associations, actions, roles, and archetypes. We need to go beyond unconscious bias, which feels like a limited way of thinking about our own thinking. The unconscious bias training may be necessary, but it is not sufficient. Some critics have assailed the framework because it can be seen as our having thoughts that are beyond our control. If all of this is unconscious, how am I supposed to know that I am thinking this way? How do I know that I am reacting in a hyper‐fast way and subtly or not subtly putting people in categories if it is all unconscious?
Others may embrace the beliefs but then cry out, “What do I do once I know what I didn't know before? Give me the tools to help me overcome these harmful beliefs.” I did receive feedback that The Loudest Duck book helped change attitudes and provided a useful framework and vocabulary to move beyond what diversity had been seen as.
Over the course of August and September 2021, I interviewed scholars, diversity consultants and practitioners, and executive leaders, by phone or, as appropriate for the times, by Zoom. The individuals I cite in this book are world‐class thinkers on issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion for whom I have great respect. Either through their leadership of organizations or through their consulting and research, they have advanced the understanding of how we can value and advance these goals.
My hope is that this book will build on The Loudest Duck and fill the gap between awareness and action. I hope it will provide a way to move beyond simply a desired outcome to make the goals of a diverse workplace a reality and a win‐win for all. Wherever you are on the journey of diversity, equity, and inclusion, the Elephant and Mouse will help you move even further along.
NOTES
1 1 Malcom Gladwell, Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking (Little, Brown & Co. 2005).