Diversity and decision quality
The formal argument that groups with diverse perspectives outperform groups of uniformly able people on complex problems, together with the widely cited consultancy studies that link workforce diversity to financial performance. The formal argument depends on its assumptions, and the consultancy findings have not survived independent re-analysis.
Evidence grade: contested Useful but disputed; the limits below say what is contested.
Use it when
The make-up of the rooms where decisions are taken, treated as a matter of decision quality. Homogeneous groups demonstrably converge fast, and can converge on the wrong answer.
Where it stops working
The strong quantitative claims are not established. The equity case does not rest on them, and a case that overclaims is easier to dismiss.
Where the standard uses it
- CC-3Inclusive practices and equitable opportunity distributionWho gets the stretch work, the visibility, and the benefit of the doubt.
Sources
- Jeremiah Green and John R. M. Hand. McKinsey's Diversity Matters/Delivers/Wins Results Revisited. Econ Journal Watch, 21(1), 2024. In the bibliography
- Scott E. Page. The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies. Princeton University Press, 2007. In the bibliography
Used alongside it
- Glue work practice
- Merger integration with cultural intent practice
- Opportunity and attention as scarce resources practice
- Proximity and promotion research
Cite this model
Chicago, BibTeX and licence →Engineering Management Academy. (2026). Diversity and decision quality. In Engineering Management Academy Body of Knowledge (Version 3.1, TEC.diversity-and-decision-quality). https://www.engineeringmanagement.academy/body-of-knowledge/techniques/diversity-and-decision-quality