Research in the field is still limited but it is becoming apparent that early interventions to improve the speed and effectiveness of inclusion are important to counter the potential for negative impacts.

Frederick Herbert and Paris Will explore this in The effects of diversity on teams change over time, published by the London School of Economics.

They criticise what they say is the most prominent hypothesis for explaining the uncertainty of achieving desirable workplace diversity outcomes—a model of diversity that is a matter of constant and ongoing trade-offs. Herbert and Will prefer a more dynamic temporal view that explains that diversity outcomes differ, based on how long a team has been functioning. They argue this more nuanced view is in line with research that shows how organisational teams develop over time, progressing through distinct phases. The best-known of this kind of phased team development process is Tuckerman’s ‘forming, storming, norming, performing’ model.

Our observation of clients who have attempted to add diversity to their boardrooms aligns with Herbert and Will’s view that success relies significantly on the effectiveness of inclusion. When designing inclusion initiatives, effects will differ depending on how long the board has worked together.

A significant factor is the extent to which stereotypes are present and persist. On one hand the authors say that “stereotypes can help us capture information efficiently by reducing effort for processing”. On the other, they accept that stereotypes can also be problematic, especially when groups with long histories of inequality and prejudice are involved. To illustrate, they refer to research that shows women are subject to gender stereotypes and perform worse when in a male-dominated working environment.

It is reasonable to expect that, as existing board members become more familiar with their diverse new colleagues, any unhelpful stereotypes they applied to them initially would be progressively undermined. In other words, greater familiarity and appreciation of new colleagues as individuals, show up their initial labelling as inappropriate and incorrect. This process is referred to as individuation.

However, there is no guarantee that ‘successful’ individuation will occur. In some cases, one stereotype will simply be replaced by another. A backlash towards a new board member for violating the expectations accompanying the original stereotype is also not uncommon. The authors illustrate this by referring to the common case of professional women showing leadership who end up being viewed as cold and unlikable, unlike their male counterparts.

Taking this into account, the authors suggest that it is important to consider the ‘micro dynamics’ of these situations and seek practical interventions to help teams manage these transitions successfully.

Behavioural change frameworks indicate that the timeliness of interventions—particularly early intervention—is the key to success, according to the authors. The opportunity to change undesirable behaviours is most likely to occur during periods of transition. There are clear benefits to interventions that take place in the forming and storming phase of board development, particularly when the whole board is new. Directors on new boards come together more or less on an equal footing; they have no status quo to defend. An early teambuilding exercise that proactively supports board formation and the development of deeper relationships between diverse team members is likely to speed up the individuation process.

Herbert and Will’s analysis suggests, however, that individuation will be more challenging when the core membership of a board is well established. It has essentially been ‘formed’ and may even be ‘performing’. They suggest that, in this case, getting one-on-one time between new and existing members may help new members settle in better and avoid being pigeonholed.

We agree that may be helpful. However, we also suggest an inclusion intervention for a new board member should be viewed as a signal to start a new whole-of-board development sequence. Too often ‘onboarding’ a new director is a superficial process accompanied by little more than the offer of access to a plethora of background papers and a superficial introduction to other directors and senior staff. Typically, too little attention is paid to the consequences for the board dynamic of adding even one new director. It is easy to see how a sporting team, for example, is completely changed by the addition of a new ‘playmaker’. The addition of a new board member, particularly one selected for their diversity attributes, seems no less likely to be a disruption requiring adjustments across the whole group.

Taking this second route is not inconsistent with the authors’ suggestion that inclusion initiatives will only truly work if the underlying culture is changed. When culture forms in a new group it is through the process of adopting a shared view of how norms of behaviour should guide the way the board operates.

In long-standing teams and boards with very stable memberships, group culture is likely to be ingrained, relatively invisible and thus more difficult to change. We have found, however, that adding new board members is a perfect opportunity for a board to step back and take the time to review and reset some basic expectations. These include, for example, organisational purpose, setting priorities between related outcomes, and the values that, when operationalised, will give the board its best chance of being successful.

It is unlikely that existing board members will have considered such matters as a group for a long time, if ever. Refreshing these with the active contribution of new board members can create a sense of common purpose, make explicit shared expectations, and generate fresh energy. It won’t make the ‘storming’ phase any less challenging when the board is searching for greater diversity, but it offers the chance for successful inclusion to be a by-product of other worthwhile outcomes and not just an end in itself.

Note: The original article contains numerous links to relevant research for readers who may be interested in delving more deeply into some of the issues raised above.