According to my new research in applied psychology in peer-reviewed journals, diversity training is more effective when personalized.

As a management professor, I worked with Andrew Bryant, who studies social marketing, to develop an algorithm that can identify people’s “role” or psychological profiles when participating in diversity training in real time. We embed the algorithm into a training system that dynamically assigns participants to a training version based on their roles.

We found that this personalized approach works particularly well in a particular group: "skeptics." When skeptics received training tailored for them, they responded more positively and expressed a desire to support their organizational diversity efforts rather than those who received the same training as everyone else.

In the age of social media, almost everything is custom and personalized, which sounds easy. However, through diversity training, a certain degree of suitable approach is still stipulated, which is radical. In most diversity training, all participants heard the same message regardless of their beliefs and attitudes about diversity. Why do we think this will work?

Thankfully, the field is realizing the importance of a learner-centric approach. Researchers believe there are several diverse trainee roles. These include the resistance trainer who feels defensive. Overly involved, overly enthusiastic interns; and anxious trainees, who are uncomfortable with the diversity topics. Our algorithm is based on real-world data and determines two roles with empirical support: skeptics and believers. This is a proof of concept, and learner roles are not only theoretical - they are real and we can detect them in real time.

But identifying a role is just the beginning. Next is custom message. To learn more about tailoring, we looked at the theory of Jiu-Jitsu persuasion. In Jujitsu, the warriors don't strike. They use their opponent's energy to win. Again, in the persuasion of Jiu Jitsu, you succumb to the audience, not the challenge. You use the audience's beliefs, knowledge and values ​​as leverage to make changes.

When it comes to diversity training, this does not mean changing what the information is. This means changing the way the message is constructed. For example, the skepticism in our study still understands the devastating harms of workplace bias. But when information is framed as a diversified “business case”, they are more persuasive than “moral justice” messages. "Business Case" news is tailored to the actual orientation of skeptics. If diversity training researchers and practitioners train different trainees in tailoring, there will definitely be more creative tailoring methods designed.

Why it matters

The Trump administration is leading a strong opposition to the diversity initiative, and a strong opposition to this opposition is emerging. This is not entirely new: diversity has long been a controversial issue.

Organizations such as the Pew Research Center, the United Nations and others have always reported conservative liberal divisions and men and women around diversity. Diversity training has little impact on bridging these gaps.

First, diversity training often ineffectively reduces bias and improves diversity indicators in organizations. Many organizations view diversity training efforts as box inspection exercises. Worse, this backfire effort is not uncommon.

Our research provides a solution: identify the role of trainees represented in the audience and customize the training accordingly. This is social media platforms like Facebook: They understand people in real time and then tailor what they see.

To illustrate the importance of specifically adjusting diversity training, consider the differences in ideas for skeptics and believers. One skeptic in our study (focusing on gender diversity training) said: "This question is not as big as feminists try to force us to believe. Women are just focused on other things in life; men focus on careers first." In contrast, one believer said: "In my own organization, all CEOs and managers are men. Women are not often respected or promoted, if anything."

Obviously, the students are different. Customized training for different characters, Jiu Jitsu style may be the way we change our minds.

Don't know yet

Algorithms are only as good as the data they rely on. Our algorithm determines the role based on the trainee’s report of their own information. More objective data, such as data deducted from the human resources system, can more reliably identify roles.

The algorithm has also improved over time. As artificial intelligence tools become widely used in human resources, role recognition algorithms will become smarter and faster. Training itself needs to be smarter. Compared to periodic nudges, a one-time training course, even tailored training courses, have fewer opportunities for long-term change. Nervous is a bite-sized intervention that is delivered unceremoniously over time. Now, consider a tailor-made little animal. They may be a game changer.

A brief introduction to the research is a brief view of interesting academic work.