By Marcus Coetzee, 22 September 2025.
The principle of diversity has been on my mind recently – of beliefs, views and skills that emerge from different demographics, political allegiances, neurological types and behavioural traits. This builds upon my article, ‘Getting Governance Right’, which drew upon multiple theories to explain why the right types of diversity in boards are a strategic asset.
As one might expect, the subject of diversity lends itself to various interpretations, often with opposing views like those I encounter online and in discussions. Some argue it has virtue for its own sake, while others are more critical about the strengths that people with different experiences bring to the table. It is notable how hard it is to reach any consensus on why diversity actually matters, as debates tend to break down into polarised positions.
I prefer a more nuanced and contextual approach to thinking about diversity at the levels of countries, organisations, teams, families and relationships.
Diversity in such systems is an asset when the following conditions are met:
- People subscribe to the overall purpose of the system – its vision and primary goals. For example, a family might want to create a nurturing environment for children, and a local charity might want to reduce poverty in a village.
- People agree to support and contribute to the system. There’s a meeting point where self-interest and system objectives align. For example, working hard might get me promoted and paying taxes would enable me to access decent government services.
- People accept the governance mechanism of the system. This includes respecting structures and working within the rules, even those for managing disagreements. Imagine an organisation where the staff didn’t respect the mandate of the board or hierarchy; it wouldn’t work.
- People proactively integrate into the system. I focused strongly on this while integrating into Scottish society after moving here in 2021.
- There is a set of compatible values. It is difficult to cultivate trust, understand and develop a constructive culture without this. This is why organisations should be explicit about their values. All my relationships are grounded in compatible values.
When these conditions break down, or when they are perceived as flawed or unjust by a group, then such diversity doesn’t strengthen the system – it fragments it. This creates separate identities and factions that work at cross-purposes. This can lead to conflict when resources (e.g. money, jobs) are scarce or agendas are incompatible. At a national level, extreme cases can escalate into instability and low-grade civil conflict – the kind that some security scholars like David Betz have warned may become more likely in Western societies. Stability often requires one faction to dominate, or a new unifying movement to emerge.
But if these five conditions are met, then diversity becomes a great asset to a system. It sharpens the system’s mental models and ability to identify and respond to both threats and opportunities. Diversity becomes very desirable. The real task, then, is to recognise and value the types of diversity that one’s system needs, and find ways for it to flourish.