Police Department as a reserve sergeant. I was proud to serve with my fellow officers, who strive to act to the highest standards that everyone deserves. I am disheartened by policing actions experienced by some communities and appreciative of those who see the need for systemic reform and who give voice to that need.
The cliché that no man (woman) is an island is true, at least in my lived experience. I have had unconditional support from many. It is unconditional in that my friends and family want to be present for me and also keep me from going too far down any rabbit holes I am inclined to fall into. This extended family that I was both born into and choose include my “sister” cousin Judy Liswood Stokes and her husband, a noted leader in health care, Chuck Stokes. They and Josh, Joel, Neil and Sherry, David, Lidia, Ellen, Ken, Debby, and Dori are dear family to me. Adrienne, one of the most powerful and impactful women leaders I know has supported me in so many ways. Melody and Candace have been part of my chosen family for decades, along with Linda, Caitlin, Lew, Luke and Robert, Jim and Kathy, Natalie and Jim, Amy, Lily, Nik and Melissa, Mel S., the Hill family, and so many more family and friends.
Professionally, I am surrounded by an extraordinary team who always goes above and beyond in their efforts. The Council of Women World Leaders is a vibrant organization because of a dedicated group, including Patricia Deyton, Sarah Wildi, Caroline Wachtell, Claudia Boscan Medina, and Rachel Berman. Sarah gave a keen eye to the writing and Rachel was my research associate for this book.
John Wiley & Sons provided me a platform and a welcome that any author would want. Thank you to Deborah Schindler, Sally Baker, Shannon Vargo, John Skinner, and the design team, who were enthusiastic and embraced the value of diversity, inclusion, and equity.
Adobe continues to sit on my keyboard and Mao prefers his own company.
All errors, omissions, and mistakes are mine alone.
Introduction
Ten years ago, I wrote The Loudest Duck: Moving Beyond Diversity While Embracing Differences to Achieve Success at Work (Wiley & Sons). My work with organizations prompted me to write that initial book on diversity because I observed those same organizations struggling with how to both make a case for diversity and implement efforts to achieve what they said their goals were.
Ten years on, I do observe progress, particularly in the recognition that it isn't just about diversity, but must also encompass equity and inclusion. I called the initial focus on diversity the “Noah's Ark” phase. That's when you just get two of each in the ark and say you have accomplished the mission. Many groups are still in that stage, with representation of differing people the be‐all and end‐all of the efforts, mainly concentrating on recruitment of diverse individuals.
While recruiting was and is important, it is a partial view. It is the “intake” view, but it does not recognize the “upgrade” view or the inclusion and equity view. That is, people are coming in the door but have not been as successful at thriving and rising in organizations. It also did not take into account what is now clearly seen: that a new type of leadership is required, one that prizes inclusivity as an essential element of what leaders must do.
In The Loudest Duck, my purpose was to create clear and practical ways to ensure that people were treated equitably and that the value of diversity would be attained. The book started with a look at the case for diversity, particularly cognitive diversity and getting the differing perspectives that each of us brings to the workplace to enhance creativity and innovation. There are many other reasons for why diversity should be pursued, but at many points in the book I refer back to this fundamental reason. I ask the reader if they are getting the cognitive diversity they purport to want.
The next step was to explore what we unconsciously bring to the workplace, beyond unconscious bias that makes us respond to people who are like us differently than people who are not like us. I wanted to move beyond thinking only of unconscious bias to thinking of all the other types of unconscious ways of existing. We have unconscious beliefs, attitudes, perspectives, preferences, roles, associations, and archetypes.
I then focused on the Elephant and the Mouse, which is the concept that dominant groups know little about nondominant groups, but the latter knows a great deal about the former. This causes continual issues and problems within organizations because it means that some people have almost no awareness of how actions, processes, decisions, and comments can disproportionately impact diverse individuals.
Dominant groups still don't know the fully lived lives of nondominant groups. I have come to see that this dynamic is perhaps one of the most powerful ones that haunt societies, particularly as more and more diverse groups correctly express their desire to be fully accepted and treated equitably. The Elephant and Mouse metaphor has resonated well with those who read my book and those to whom I've spoken. In fact, it was so popular that one group decided to name its company The Mouse and the Elephant and base its framework on my work!
As the world continues to become increasingly interconnected, it is crucial to know about others, particularly how others experience life and are impacted by conscious and unconscious beliefs about who they are. That is why this book is titled The Elephant and the Mouse. To me, this is a core tenet of the effort to reach full diversity, equity, inclusion, and social justice. It now must be a core tenet of how leaders behave and how they are measured. Diversity, equity, and inclusion can no longer be seen as “nice to have” but are essential to high‐functioning, successful organizations. A parallel example, given to me by Mason Donovan and Mark Kaplan of the Dagoba Group, might be when a company realizes that “safety first” requires a full reorientation of how it operates and how everyone is responsible for that safety goal.
The Elephant and the Mouse is a callout to all of us to acknowledge that the concepts and realities of diversity, inclusion, and equity are becoming fully embedded in our lives and structures. This requires far more from each of us with concomitant effort and reward.
THE DIVERSITY OF DIVERSITY
The Loudest Duck also outlined the many diversities we find in the workplace, not simply the legally covered or generally assumed ones such as gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, disability, religion, or age. Diversity is about like to like and like to not like. We discover that there are many ways we separate ourselves from others. In that separation comes a propensity to bond and take seriously those who are like us and to distance ourselves or find reasons to dismiss others who are unlike us, as well as their ideas and even their essential personhood.
There are the smokers and the nonsmokers, introverts and extroverts, tall and short people, folks who are standard weight and those who are nonstandard weight. Introverts think that extroverts talk too much and extroverts think that introverts have nothing to say. There are the Manchester United football fans and the Arsenal fans, both equally passionate and, in their own minds, quite discerning. Parents and non‐parents often live in different worlds from each other, and so too do those who have varying speaking styles.
Different nationalities can create troublesome beliefs and give permission to one group to dismiss the thinking and creativity of the other, thereby defeating what was the original stated rationale for diversity. In his book Blink, Malcolm Gladwell explains that 16% of men in the United States are 6 feet or taller, but 57% of Fortune 500 male CEOs are 6 feet or taller, which is four times the cohort!1 I have yet to see research that correlates leadership ability and skeletal structure.
The military has a convenient phrase: “Large and in charge.” We have an image of what a leader looks like. If you fit that image, you have a lot of tailwinds going for you. People will assume you are competent until you prove you are not. If
