-Text Interview-

Why did you write this book (or how did the idea for the book come about)?

  The more I learned about economic, political, and social systems, the more I became convinced of the importance of diversity writ large, not just diversity of preference, beliefs, and information, but diversity in perspectives and interpretations (how we see the world) and diversity in heuristics and predictive models (the thinking tools we use to solve problems and make predictions).   I didnÕt think diversity was universally good.  I figured that like anything else, sometimes diversity would be good. Sometimes it wouldnÕt.   Regardless of what I found, I felt it needed to be unpacked and then aggregated -- from a social science perspective. I set out to write something akin to Social Choice and Individual Values (one can try right?) but rather than focus on diverse preferences, I considered the aggregation of diverse ways of seeing the world and diverse ways of thinking.

 

What do you feel are the wider implications for the book?

  This book speaks logic to metaphor.   Almost any corporate or university brochure you pick up says something like we seek out people with diverse perspectives.   Yet no one seems to know what perspectives are or how they produce benefits.   In the book, I construct a conditional logic.  It lays out conditions under which diversity is beneficial. America is a place that prizes ability.  Diversity is seen as a second or even third order effect -- multi-colored sprinkles atop the cake if you will.   The book shows in stark, clear logic that diversity produces benefits far greater than mere symbolism.  In fact, collective diversity may contribute more to progress than individual ability.   And yet, I think a lot of people do not believe deep down that diversity is beneficial, but they feel that supporting diversity is the politically correct thing to say.  This book shows that favoring diversity has logical foundations.

 

What do you mean by diversity? 

I mean differences inside of our heads: cognitive differences: differences in how we see the world and think about it.  I formalize these as perspectives, interpretations, heuristics, and predictive models. 

 

How does that connect with racial or ethnic diversity? 

Differences on the outside partly contribute to cognitive differences.  People who belong to distinct identity groups have different experiences.  They hear different stories.  Their experiences overlap but are distinct.  Hence, they think differently.   But identity is not the only reason people cognitively differ.  Training and experience also matter.  Economists think differently from moral philosophers.  People who have traveled often think differently than people who have never left Kalamazoo.

 

Why should anyone care? 

If you understand how diversity aggregates, you can leverage differences productively.   Firms can do better.  Universities can do better.  Society can do better.  Enough said.

   

Where can you apply these ideas?

The book has implications for how organizations and firms manage diverse work forces, be they identity diverse or vocationally diverse.   It should change how people think about hiring and admissions decisions.  The book has also implications for how we structure and create incentives for interdisciplinary research. 

   

What do you think about standardized tests like the SAT and IQ tests? 

Like any crude aggregate statistic, they have a place. For instance, in selling recruits on the wonders of the University of Michigan, I like to be able to say that the average temperature in Ann Arbor in February is closer to thirty than to zero.  However, if weÕre making important decisions about which person to hire or to admit, I think we do better to look at toolboxes – the collections of skills that people have.    Different people have different toolboxes.  The more tools a person has, all else equal, the better she does on an IQ test or an SAT test.   But, two people with the same high IQ could have the same tools.  If so, two heads would be no better than one.  I am not saying ability does not matter. Clearly, if we add someone to a team, we want someone with lots of tools, but we also want someone with different tools.  The benefits of diverse tools are not just a portfolio effect – the benefits of diversity are more than insurance, i.e. the need for someone who knows calculus in the event that you have to find the area under a curve.  Cognitive differences can often be superadditive: one plus one can equal three.