Pierre-Etienne Bardin: “Diversity doesn’t cause problems—it solves them.”

When you hear the word “parity,” what comes to mind?

The first instinct is to think about quotas to balance the representation of women and men. This is a necessity, and it requires tracking the numbers.

When it comes to the term “parity,” however, I prefer “diversity,” which encompasses gender equality but also offers other perspectives… Diversity allows us to consider the effects of different viewpoints coming together. We need ecosystems where a multitude of cultures, ways of seeing, and ways of being interact… In fact, above all, we need dialogue. That is what allows us to enrich one another and to build a collective capable of generating deeper insights.

Would you say that diversity is a source of performance?

It all depends on what kind of performance we’re talking about. I think we need to go back to a fundamental definition of performance, namely the ability to create value. Today, in an era where everything is moving at an incredible pace, creating value requires questioning the status quo, adapting, and innovating… In this context, diversity can only be an asset. It’s even a necessity—to make sense of complexity and come up with new solutions…

Isn’t diversity sometimes a source of tension as well?

Personally, I’ve never seen diversity as a source of tension or difficulty. In fact, I’ve tended to observe problems in highly polarized teams within closed ecosystems. Diversity isn’t what causes problems; rather, it’s what solves them.

The truth is that difference can be unsettling at first. When we’re confronted with the unfamiliar, we instinctively become wary… But those instincts fade as soon as we get to know the other person. The challenge of diversity is to create an environment that fosters encounters and a deeper understanding of who the other person is… Not to mention that every time we identify “the other” in relation to ourselves, we are also “the other” to them. Tensions related to diversity can arise from the fact that certain groups are accustomed to others making more effort to get to know them than they themselves have to make to get to know others. It is by addressing these kinds of discrepancies that we can work to smooth out relationships in diverse settings. We see this clearly in the issue of intergenerational relations: for a long time, older generations expected younger people to conform to their norms; today, we have a much less hierarchical approach in which different generations better recognize the value of open dialogue and of learning from one another.

Which argument do you find most convincing for committing to the goal of gender diversity?

For millennia, we have lived in a patriarchal and hierarchical society. The framework within which our societies operate is defined by a certain number of leaders who share more or less the same profile—starting with the fact that they are men. We cannot say that this has collectively led us to a perfect situation. In any case, today we are facing economic problems, environmental issues, and health challenges for which we cannot find satisfactory answers. Perhaps it is time to do things differently!

Let’s dare to entrust power to those who have had little or no power. Let’s give power to the majority. The majority is diversity.

What would be the first step?

Setting quotas on Executive Committees is a good thing. But what matters most, in my view, is having diversity in positions that impact the vast majority of the company. Cultural transformation means reaching as many people as possible at the heart of the business.

And then there are the wrong questions we need to stop asking ourselves. On paper, you’ll always find good reasons not to appoint someone to a particular position. Let’s embrace the “Merkel effect”: when Angela Merkel became chancellor, many were skeptical—a woman in a patriarchal environment, from East Germany in a Western-centric political landscape…. Yet it is precisely these kinds of role models we need to break free from traditional patterns. The greatest risk we face today isn’t making mistakes—it’s remaining inactive. We learn from our mistakes. Making bad choices isn’t that serious. Certainly not as serious, in any case, as doing nothing at all.

Some people worry that the failure of a person “from a diverse background” will harm the cause of diversity as a whole. How would you respond to them?

We must not link all these issues together. When a person fails, it is not their gender, age, skin color, or background that is to blame! It may be a matter of the person’s skills, but we must also examine the conditions under which they were selected and placed in that role. Appointing someone to a position of responsibility isn’t just about signing their letter of appointment. It’s also—and above all—about ensuring that the conditions are in place for them to succeed. You’ll always be setting them up for failure if you don’t take responsibility for your own actions when entrusting responsibilities to others.