|
|
In an article in the September 2004 issue of Harvard Business Review, Professor David Thomas describes how IBM made diversity a cornerstone strategy. In this interview with Professor Thomas, he discusses his findings, how IBM's strategy compares to others in the marketplace and the future of diversity in the workplace and marketplace.
|
Why did you decide to look at IBM's diversity strategy?
My interest began when I started seeing IBM people of color and women in the press who were listed as highly-influential executives or people in the technology community. Then, I had a conversation with Al Zollar, who was in the Boston area when he was president of Lotus, and he invited me down to present to the Black Executive Forum. It became clear to me that something was happening inside of IBM that seemed to be much more sustained and profound than at many other companies — that IBM's diversity initiatives had this orientation toward the marketplace and toward inclusiveness of all groups of people within IBM.
You always hear the comment that diversity is paid attention to seriously only during the best of times. And here was IBM, an organization that paid attention to diversity as a business driver at the same time they were moving themselves into the future. Those were the pieces that got me knocking on IBM's door.
What was significant about your findings?
First, the extent in which the senior executive group, the WMC, starting with Sam Palmisano and many of his directs, were connected to this diversity initiative as task force leaders or executive sponsors. I interviewed 50 people, and half of that group were people on the WMC who had been involved from the beginning. I was struck by how they all could talk about being personally connected to this effort, what it meant, and how it changed the corporation. I've been interviewing people for 28 years, so I know how to set up questions and, if you only have a briefing book, being shallow on the subject would reveal itself.
"By deliberately seeing ways to more effectively reach a broader range of customers, IBM has seen significant bottom-line results."
— David Thomas, Harvard Business Review
My other key findings include the extent to which "diversity as the bridge between the workplace and the marketplace," is taken seriously by IBM in ways where you could actually see the synergies being created. By addressing internal diversity at IBM, you increased your capacity to respond to the diversity in your customer base and your labor pool. So even if you look at the initiatives as philanthropic, the senior executives I interviewed were able to talk about things like EXITE camps, education recruiting and the work to close the digital divide for people and communities of color, and could link that to where IBM's employees and customers are going to come from.
The total design of IBM's approach to diversity challenged a basic company cultural premise that differences were supposed to be suppressed as opposed to magnified. Many people talked about the creation of the task forces and how they seemed to counter IBM's culture. But people saw this as a signal that there was a real culture change occurring within the corporation.
How does IBM's strategy compare to other diversity strategies in the marketplace?
The main comparison is that IBM's diversity strategy is much more comprehensive and much more congruent with its business strategy. By that I mean what Lou Gerstner stressed when he came to IBM — that IBM's culture should become more market and customer-focused. And if you think about the way even the task forces were put together, the questions are about the workplace and the marketplace. So there's a consistency and alignment between the diversity strategy and business imperatives that makes IBM stand out. Unlike other companies, IBM's diversity strategy is really one that is owned by the line organization, not simply workforce diversity or human resources. So I think this is a strategy that can serve as a model for other companies.
What does the future hold for diversity and the global workforce of the 21st century?
More and more I'm seeing just two types of companies. Companies that really want to try the path IBM has charted, where they want to go beyond complying with the law, to really thinking about how diversity can be a resource for both individual learning and development, and for business performance and effectiveness. Then there are those companies that believe equal opportunity compliance and the legal model is sufficient, and basically they will sort themselves out in the marketplace — and not make diversity a competitive advantage. It's also very clear too, that with globalization, with the movement of people across international and cultural boundaries, that no company is going to escape being diverse, or having to deal with a diverse marketplace. The real question is: how are they going to respond?
If you can make a compelling case that doing certain things in the diversity space directly impacts the return on investment, I think you will get some CEOs who say we've got to do that because it's hurting our bottom line. But some CEOs, such as Sam Palmisano, see diversity as part of a vision for a company they want to build. Other CEOs see diversity in the narrowest of ways.
If you prove to a company that they can do better when the people selling the products speak the language of their customers, then they will hire that type of person. But they don't think, however, about how those people can contribute more broadly in their organization. By interacting with global markets and cultures that are different, companies will learn things that will make their entire organization better. I personally think that return on investment is compelling, but if that's all that motivates a leader, it's not enough. IBM's diversity strategy is about vision and investment. I think that combination is what will take IBM from good to great.
|
