Optimal Distinctiveness is Fitting In and Standing Out
There's something funny about us humans, our identities, and why certain things catch on. We want to buy the same brand of t-shirt as our peers but choose our own color. We like the same genre of music as our friends, but did you know it's the songs with the most lyrical differentiation that become the chart toppers?
What's going on?
A behavioral scientist and a sociologist are two leading experts who study this phenomena. One comes from a marketing and consumer behavior lens and the other from psychology. I'm fascinated by their research, and I think you're going to like it too.
The theory I'm about to share is powerful in terms of my research on hybrid professional identity and why hybrids struggle to find where they belong in the workforce.
I'll start by asking you a few questions:
Are you part of the in-group or the out-group?
Are you a conformist or a nonconformist?
Are you identifiable but not identical?
Do you assimilate or differentiate?
In simple terms, do you like to fit in or stand out?
Now, I suspect you read these questions and thought to yourself, "Geez, I'm a bit of both. I'm somewhere in between" This is exactly the point.
As humans, we're programmed to want to fit in while standing out. But what happens when similarity and difference combine, and why do we yearn for this?
Hybrid professionals face this dilemma constantly because as a hybrid, we call ourselves by titles (like leadership coach) that sound familiar to fit in, but at the same time, we're more than just one job title. Trying to fit the mold while explaining how we're not the mold is the plight of a hybrid worker. So what's the solution?
What To Do About Standing Out While Fitting In...Try Optimal Distinctiveness
Let me introduce scholar #1...Dr. Jonah Berger is known for his work on social identity and uniqueness. He's a marketing professor at Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. He's known for his research on what makes brands contagious and also on social influence. Importantly, he wrote a paper on being identifiable but not identical.
Berger studies consumer behavior to understand our choices and found that a desire for uniqueness is the underlying motivator of our decisions. Based on our consumer choices, it's apparent people are trying to satisfy two competing needs simultaneously. Through a single choice, we hope to demonstrate we belong to a certain identity group and that we're unique relative to the others in that in-group.
In his paper, Berger notes that situational cues and meanings attached to our choices influence and alter whether we assimilate or differentiate.
Essentially, this leads to the bigger theory I want to share with you.
And now for scholar #2...Dr. Marilynn Brewer is a sociologist who teaches in the psychology department at Northwestern (although she lives in Australia), and she developed the theory of optimal distinctiveness.
Brewer argues:
"Humans have two needs. We want to feel validated by others and belong to groups for safety, and we want to feel unique and not be easily replaced. Optimal distinctiveness is the perfect balance between these two needs."
This is Brewer's visual depiction of what optimal distinctiveness means.
The theory of optimal distinctiveness is a big deal because it names what we humans are seeking in our lives, in our social circles, in our partners, and in our professions.
Especially for hybrid professionals, who are carving new career paths and shifting between professional identities, hybrids are striving to find that sweet spot where they assimilate and are accepted by the in-group but are also differentiated enough to appear unique but not to the point where they're excluded.
Brewer proposed this theory in 1991, and there are a number of tenets that go along with it. This one spoke to me the most:
Distinctiveness of a given social identity is context-specific. It depends on the frame of reference within which possible social identities are defined at a particular time, which can range from participants in a specific social gathering to the entire human race.
I believe this tenet is significant because many hybrid professionals ask me about how to articulate themselves when they're in front of different audiences. In the case of optimal distinctiveness, context matters. That's why I advocate for knowing and owning your hybrid identity and also translating it back to each audience by breaking down what your hybridity means, that way it makes sense to whoever you're speaking to.
Lastly, one word of caution from Brewer. She warns of the risk of "excessive" distinctiveness and to avoid this because it has a negative effect on you and your self-concept.
Final thoughts
I hope this was fascinating.
My parting words are for you to think about how optimal distinctiveness is another way of conveying your hybrid professional identity.
When you create your Venn diagram of your professional identities and examine your intersectionality, how are you simultaneously blending in while standing out? A hybrid does both, that's what makes you unique.