Three's Not a Crowd, It's Representation: The Power Play of Critical Mass

When DEI Becomes the Target, It's Evidence of Its Impact and Its Uncomfortable Truths

Sometimes the most important ideas don't originate where we think they do. Take the concept of the "tipping point", that moment when a critical mass changes everything. While Malcolm Gladwell (and yes, the irony isn't lost on me that it took a man to popularise this) might have brought it into everyday conversation, the foundations of this thinking about critical mass and organisational change came from sociologist Rosabeth Moss Kanter's groundbreaking work in the 1970s on tokenism and gender dynamics.

As we mark International Women's Day this week, I find myself reflecting on how established knowledge about the importance of diversity in organisations is constantly being rediscovered, renamed, and sometimes actively resisted even as the evidence for its necessity continues to mount.

The "Magic Third" Effect: Not Just a Number

In 2006, researchers Vicki Kramer, Alison Konrad, and Sumru Erkut published "Critical Mass on Corporate Boards," revealing something fascinating about boardroom dynamics. They found that having just one woman or person who identifies as a woman on a board often led to tokenism, her contributions might be dismissed or attributed to her gender rather than her expertise. Two women improved the situation somewhat, but the real transformation occurred with three or more women, creating what they called a "critical mass."

With this "magic third," women stopped being seen as the "female perspective" and started being recognised as individuals with unique viewpoints. Board discussions expanded to include more stakeholders, difficult issues were less likely to be brushed aside, and the overall dynamic became more collaborative and open.

Fast forward to today, and Gladwell is again highlighting these concepts in his 2024 "Revenge of the Tipping Point," while organisations worldwide still grapple with the fundamental truth: authentic representation isn't just about fairness, it transforms how decisions are made and how organisations function.

Design Thinking Meets Diversity: Not a Checkbox Exercise

From my perspective as someone who's spent years focusing on human-centric design in healthcare, I see a natural connection between design thinking principles and the case for diversity. Both recognise that our blind spots limit our ability to solve complex problems.

Authentic diversity and inclusion at all levels from board to frontline, from policy to procedure, from strategy to output doesn't just create "better products." It fundamentally transforms the solutions we develop because it ensures we're accounting for the full spectrum of human experiences and needs.

This isn't about tokenism or checking boxes. It's about acknowledging that when we build organisations, policies, or products without diverse representation, we're designing for an incomplete version of humanity. The results are predictably flawed: health services that don't account for different cultural perspectives, technologies that work for some bodies but not others, and policies that inadvertently disadvantage entire communities.

A design team that represents the demographics of its users will inherently ask different questions and challenge different assumptions. This isn't theoretical, it's practical reality that shapes everyday experiences. A team with genuine diversity doesn't need to imagine what others might need; they already know because those perspectives are in the room where decisions happen.

Leadership Styles: What We Gain from Difference

The criticisms levelled at women in leadership often reveal more about our biases than about their effectiveness. Consider former New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, whose empathetic leadership style was initially dismissed as "soft" but proved remarkably effective not just through her entire tenure as Prime Minister but particularly in her response to the Christchurch shootings.

Or recall former Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard, whose historic misogyny speech became a watershed moment in calling out the double standards women in politics face. "I will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny by this man," she declared in Parliament, giving voice to frustrations women leaders have faced for generations. The very qualities that drew criticism, Ardern's empathy, Gillard's directness, was precisely what made their leadership distinctive and, in many cases, more effective.

These examples highlight what the research on critical mass demonstrates: when we include different perspectives, especially those historically excluded from power, we gain approaches to leadership that might otherwise remain undiscovered.

Australian Voices Making Change

Australia has powerful women and people who identify as women working to transform our society, often facing resistance simply because they challenge the status quo. Indigenous scholar Aileen Moreton-Robinson has spent decades articulating how white possession shapes Australian institutions and thinking, bringing crucial First Nations perspectives to academic and public discourse. Family violence activist Rosie Batty turned personal tragedy into a national reckoning about domestic violence. Trans rights advocate Georgie Stone has changed policies and perceptions through her advocacy, highlighting the importance of not just including LGBTQI+ voices in conversations about inclusion but ensuring these diverse voices are at the front of these conversations, leading them.

These leaders remind us that the work of inclusion isn't theoretical, it's about making sure every voice can contribute to shaping our shared future. Their intersecting identities and experiences also demonstrate why a singular approach to "women's issues" will always fall short; true inclusion requires recognising the diverse and overlapping experiences of women across different communities, abilities, backgrounds, and identities. Their work often happens without fanfare, creating change through persistent effort rather than dramatic gestures.

I acknowledge that I, too, am constantly learning from these diverse voices. My own journey of understanding has been shaped by listening to experiences different from my own, and I continue to discover blind spots in my thinking. This is the power of diverse representation; it challenges us all to expand our perspectives and reconsider what we think we know.

And like Kanter's research suggested decades ago, their most meaningful contributions often happen when they're not isolated tokens but part of a broader shift toward authentic representation.

When DEI Becomes a Target

The current pushback against diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives isn't happening in a vacuum. It's a predictable response to changing power dynamics. We see organisations dismantling DEI programs, claiming they're divisive or unnecessary, even as research consistently demonstrates their business and social value.

This resistance tells us something important: representation matters precisely because it changes how power operates. The "magic third" effect shows that token inclusion doesn't threaten established dynamics, but meaningful representation does transform how decisions get made.

That's why, especially when DEI programs face resistance, we need to reaffirm the evidence: organisations with authentic diversity perform better financially, produce more innovation, better serve diverse customers, and make more robust decisions.

The Path Forward

As we mark another International Women's Day, I'm reminded that the case for diversity and inclusion isn't new. The evidence has been mounting for decades. What's changing is our willingness to act on that knowledge.

The question isn't whether diversity improves outcomes, the research is clear that it does. The real question is whether we're committed to creating the conditions where everyone can contribute their full talents and perspectives.

For organisations and leaders, this means moving beyond tokenism toward authentic representation at all levels. It means recognising that the "magic third" effect applies not just to boards but to teams throughout an organisation. It also means acknowledging that resistance to inclusion often reveals exactly why inclusion matters.

This work belongs to all of us. Allyship isn't the domain of any single group, it's a responsibility we all share, regardless of our own identities or backgrounds. International Women's Day isn't just for women to champion; meaningful change requires everyone to recognise why representation matters and actively work toward it in their spheres of influence.

After all, if representation didn't change anything meaningful, it wouldn't face such persistent resistance.

As we design services, products, policies, and organisations, let's remember that inclusion isn't just about who's in the room, it's about whose experiences and perspectives shape the decisions that affect all of us. And in that space, we all have a role to play in creating workplaces and communities where the full spectrum of human experience is represented.

Because ultimately, that's how we create outcomes that truly work for everyone.

Maya Zerman is the founder of Dialectical Consulting, specialising in human-centred design approaches to healthcare transformation. Connect via LinkedIn or at info@dialecticalconsulting.com.au.