A couple excerpts:

In business design research circles at the moment, the question of how to engineer serendipity has gained currency: whether to apply algorithmic or programming thinking toward the environments in which human beings are asked to collaborate and innovate. Whether we are successful at innovation in those fields comes down to the degree of pluralism within the environment—pluralism among actors, agents, intellectual diversity or diversity of their capabilities.

[...]

...you can design an algorithm (if we can use an indirect operational definition of an algorithm in architecture and research, for a moment) with all the rigor and intention in the world, but when you put it out into the world and into a complex environment like a financial market, we cannot always foresee what will emerge as a final product or output. I think this accounts for the sameness or the not-so-innovative results you are seeing. It's not exactly what you would expect, given all the design and research energy happening within the universities, but what is produced in practice.

The second point addresses the necessity of diversity to produce emergent, innovative outcomes. You have to reach a critical threshold of pluralistic inputs-ones that don't just look different but actually function differently.