At the Crossroads: Why Resisting Change Appears to Work

An entrepreneur once said, "If I can resist change a little longer, it will all go away." So as time went on, the man refused to sell his land to the developers, he refused to update his products/services, and he refused to modernize his building. After 35 years in operation, the man has few customers and the new buildings that were built around him makes his business look like a shack. Today he believes it's too late to change since he is totally unprepared for this new reality, but this lifelong entrepreneur is not alone. Business Insider reports that "7,500 stores are closing in 2019 alone" and that does not include the household brands that have already closed such as K-Mart, Sears, and Toys"R"Us.

Change is inevitable. The longer you resist it, the harder it is to do. Some organizations inadvertently position themselves for disruption because they never prepare for the competitor who doesn't have a hard time adjusting to change. Think about it from a little kid's perspective: you grow up seeing the excitement around the nation's first mixed race President and his family. Then you see the chaos that exists now. Growing older, as a member of Generation Z, what will you think about leadership? In schools where small teams are preferred, or when playing video games with highly-skilled players from around the world, what will you think about working with people who are different? As a well-educated and technologically-savvy consumer, what will you think about purchasing products and services from companies that refuse to customize or even digitize your experiences? This is the future...the next Generation, and anyone who thinks that resisting change will work-- over the long-term-- is totally delusional.

Yet, CNBC reports that "support for U.S. President Donald Trump increased slightly among Republicans after he lashed out on Twitter over the weekend in a racially charged attack on four minority Democratic congresswomen. A Reuters/Ipsos public opinion poll showed his net approval among members of his Republican Party rose by 5 percentage points to 72%, compared with a similar poll that ran last week. The poll was taken after Trump told the lawmakers they should 'go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came'."

Indeed, the global spectacle of the U.S. political system draws attention to the fact that the current social construct in America is outdated. This social construct called race has outlived its usefulness and relevance. Created centuries ago for the purposes of establishing a hierarchy for who can access power and resources, today's system operates in pure dysfunction and disconnectedness. Nevertheless, that doesn't mean that everyone wants to let it go-- even if it means that the current system hurts them in the end. Here's why:

1. The benefits, or advantages, of privilege are misunderstood. When the concept of privilege was first introduced in the diversity and inclusion space, some Caucasians became keenly aware of the social benefits associated with the color of their skin. For example, they realized that some people of color were treated differently-- worse-- in certain circumstances. Others disputed the veracity of privilege because they didn't experience ALL of the benefits that they believed should arise from privilege. Actually, both groups are correct. Here's the problem with the current discussion about White privilege: (a) racial privilege is not at the pinnacle of the social hierarchy. It represents one positive dimension in the group ranking system but it is not the only one. For example, race must be combined with gender, age, education, family status, sexual orientation/gender identity, geography, and more to provide greater advantages. (b) The concept of privilege requires its beneficiaries to make good choices in order to receive more benefits. For example, moving to an area where there are more job opportunities, pursuing advanced education, getting married, or changing some other aspect in order to improve the quality of one's life. Racial privilege alone does not guarantee one's success anymore. (c) People from different ethnic groups can experience the advantages of privilege, albeit there are more obstacles for them to overcome. Keep in mind, while obstacles and stereotypes persist, the determination to succeed and the openness to taking non-traditional paths, may override any man-made barriers.
2. Cultural humility is lacking. Why should one learn about other cultures, or acknowledge the contributions of different groups? Because this learning process helps one to diminish damaging power dynamics and challenge personal assumptions about the "best culture". Cultural humility is a newer term that replaces, or co-exists with, the concept of cultural competence. Coined by Melanie Tervalon and Jann Murray-Garcia in 1998, cultural humility is based on the ideas of self-reflection and lifelong learning. Cultural humility allows for better service, revolutionary ideas, greater agility, and true inclusion because it assumes that there is more than one way to do things effectively. It is a process that can benefit ALL groups, as the quantitative limitations of a social hierarchy have caused individuals of color to systematically engage in bias against each other. Inter-group conflict among people of color is real, but cultural humility helps to assuage tensions that may arise based on the lightness or darkness of one's skin, education, income level, immigration status, age, religion, and traditions, to name a few.
3. It's easier to become indignant when someone does not know "their place" on the social hierarchy. Think about it, why are some folks so angry? After witnessing the election and re-election of America's first multi-racial President and seeing people of color generally making more advancements, it is becoming clear that these groups are not content with staying on the bottom of the hierarchy. As a result, it provokes resentment in those who subconsciously believe that the hierarchy must be preserved. It implicitly states: "How dare you cross that line"? From birtherism and Trumpism to 911 calls and police shootings, a person justifies their indignation to varying degrees upon acknowledgement (i.e., You know the real reason why I am doing this). The justification is preserved in statements such as: "I was afraid" or "I didn't know if that person should be there". In other words, the person of color is out of place-- not just physically but socially. How many White guys would have experienced a choke-hold resulting in death for selling cigarettes outside a store like Eric Garner? Watch the initial interaction in the video closely. If the argument can be made that Eric Garner was acting illegally, the argument can also be made that the choke hold was "illegal". Which is worse-- selling cigarettes or killing someone?

The U.S. is at a crossroads, which is "a point where two roads meet; the juncture at which an important decision must be made". Do we really need to change, or can we continue to give lip service to this diversity thing? Meanwhile, the rest of the world is moving on. For example, Boeing has prided itself on its super-smart rocket scientists from the top schools for years. Today, Airbus is selling more planes because Boeing did not want different people (or outliers) asking questions about pesky things like airplane safety. The same thing happened to NASA when they were forced to retire their space shuttle fleet in 2011 after leading the aerospace industry for decades. The agency admits that a lack of thought diversity changed NASA's trajectory. NASA's recent attempt to get back into the space industry through "diversity" backfired when they realized that their space suits were not properly equipped.

In the case of the United States, a governmental censure is done when a body's members wish to publicly reprimand the President, a member of Congress, a judge or a cabinet member. Congressman Steve King was censured and stripped of committee seats after controversial comments on White supremacy. Yet, Congressman King is still a policy maker. Sure, the censure is on his formal record but it amounts to lip service if he is still in power. As a duly elected member of Congress, it is not up to Congress to get rid of King-- that power resides with the people who select King to represent them. Likewise, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to censure President Trump, but the question is, does the censure serve to "fire-up" his base? After all, diversity is for losers, right?

My point is that racism presents a false sense of security, where some believe that the current power construct can be preserved forever.

If we just install new judges, re-district, outlaw abortion, miscount the Census, and change asylum and immigration rules, we can maintain the status quo a little longer. In the workplace, the same thing happens: if we can keep certain people out of leadership positions, make sure different people can not influence decisions, and guarantee that the system only rewards certain individuals, we can win. But it's only a matter of time before the organization loses because the talent quits and no new ideas get to the table. The result is a downward spiral from prominence to inconsequence because the "decision makers" do not understand that racism eventually hurts everyone.

The idiocy behind the social construct called race is that we choose to give race power over our emotions, decisions and actions, when we have the ability to change it.

What purpose does racism play? It is designed to preserve a hierarchical system based on the belief that one day, I may receive all of the benefits/advantages associated with my group. But it ignores the fact that privilege is NOT guaranteed. We live in an era where people of color are not ignorant about how high they can go. In other words, the system of racism can only be preserved if it is based on ignorance. In this digital era, people are only ignorant because they want to be. Nevertheless, it doesn't change: (1) time or (2) reality.

So, keep resisting. After time, total frustration, and/or a new reality for which you are completely unprepared, will be your ONLY path forward.

Alternatively, you can rise to the occasion by choosing the path less traveled...How will your journey end?

~~~~~~~~~

Leah Smiley, CDE, is the President of the Society for Diversity, the #1 professional association for diversity and inclusion. To learn more about how the Society equips organizations to be more effective in D&I, visit: www.societyfordiversity.org.