DEI's Failure: The 'Power' Problem

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion work is intended to provide the skills, knowledge, and support to leaders to prevent and remove the marginalization experienced by the marginalized.

How can this be achieved when those dedicated to this work are being marginalized across the country by their leadership, clients, or employers? How can this be attained when DEI is being marginalized?

DEI stems from one problem at its source and seed: Power.

Power being used and exercised at will without consequence, except to the powerless.

The only way DEI has a chance at realizing its promise and potential is through our industry unifying around this singular focus that forces an unrelenting message to be heard and collective action to be supported at critical mass; that is not predicated through another murder.

In my last article, I introduced the DEI Death Zone? as the phenomenon that emerged to describe the failure of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives as a result of five new biases being hidden through the work itself.

My ask was:

Let's retire?'everyone has biases'?and replace with?'every leader has the capacity to advocate and oppress'.

This is not to shame nor blame. This is to encourage a new language and new learning that enlightens and brightens a redirected path for progress.

On the surface, DEI appears to be pursuing commitment worthy goals such as diversity hiring metrics and pay equity standards. Certainly critical and necessary. However, underneath that surface, decision-makers are simultaneously preventing efforts that would disrupt inequity in practices and processes.?

Power and their Decisions. This is the place we must solely focus on for change.

Had our research continued into 2022, this 20% would have declined.

The importance of ADVOCACY Masking OPPRESSION

Think NFL, Google, State Farm, and any notable name. Think the big D&I investments, the D&I Commitment Statements, and their corresponding lawsuits.

State Farm's site: 2019 Best Companies for Diversity, recognized by the editors of Black Enterprise Magazine since 2007; 2021 100 Best Companies, 2021 NAMWOLF Diversity Initiative Achievement Award, 2021 Leading Inclusion Index Company, 2022 LATINO Equity 100, and so on.

Dr. Carla Campbell-Jackson was a State Farm employee for 28 years until she was terminated in 2016 after raising concerns to leadership. She observed a trend that customers from certain demographic groups were systematically being denied their insurance claims considered as higher likelihood to engage in fraud. Dr. Campbell-Jackson and additional plaintiffs filed claims they were fired and retaliated against for blowing the whistle on race discrimination in the workplace. The company's response is:

“State Farm has long been committed to a diverse and inclusive environment, where all of our associates and customers are treated with respect and dignity, and where differences are valued,” said State Farm public affairs specialist Gina Morss-Fischer. “These allegations do not reflect the State Farm culture.”

This is the response every time by every organization. The statement conveys a convenient denial and significant disconnection resulting in losing all credibility to your D&I Commitment. Corporations have diversity initiatives, win awards, and employees are still experiencing discrimination and retaliation. THAT is Advocacy Masking Oppression.

There are thousands of similar stories that don't make the criteria for a lawsuit or concealed through arbitration agreements inside companies who make it to the Top 10, 50, 100 lists of noteworthy diversity awards. There is a major flaw in the award system but that is to unpack at a different time.

For purposes of our power dilemma, there is a major flaw in the decision-making for DEI.

Exhibit A for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

This is how DEI is sold and sells. This is what gets purchased and prioritized.

‘Advocacy’ are macro-level activities that are visible- shining light on ACTION.

Examples include inspirational speakers, D&I Committees, and college recruiting increasing diversity at mid-level ranks. The popularization of 'belonging' and 'changing hearts and minds' as powerful predictors for DEI success is an example of positive psychology being used to inspire hope and happiness.

Advocacy is playing offense as its primary game plan. 'Feel good’ activities pedaling idyllic images representing all aspects of diversity high fiving, laughing, and collaborating.

Advocacy activities are the path of least resistance with our employment, contracts, and financial livelihood prospering in the safety zone.

Exhibit B for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

This is how the real and right DEI work feels. This is what gets defunded and dismissed.

‘Oppression’ are micro-level repeated occurrences that remain hidden -casting shadow on INACTION.

Examples include diverse voices being silenced, team members stealing credit from peers, managers retaliation, relationship based cultures, and eliciting consequence when truth is spoken. These practices thrive in the darkness where positive psychology 'belonging, hearts, minds, authenticity, and allyship' in their highest forms will not dissolve.

Dismantling Oppression is the defensive playbook that addresses the hazards, traps, and inclement conditions diverse individuals are forced to endure and navigate in the workplace. It holds the analysis and strategy from diversity practitioners' expertise whose capability to magnify the 'micro' exposes systemic, cultural, and institutional inequity. However, because this game plan doesn’t elicit inspiration and doesn’t place any leader or corporation on a Top 50 award list, it gets abandoned and discarded.

Removing Oppression is the path of great resistance that immediately propels employment, contracts, and financial livelihood out from its safety zone.

Power - makes or breaks the DEI game plan and why examining the source of decision-making was critical.

5 Biases Leading DEI into the Death Zone

Let's go back to the research.

From the 20% exclusively advancing DEI - male leaders were the strongest advocates at 73% and racially diverse leaders at 60%.

In contrast, from the 80% advancing and oppressing DEI, white leaders were preventing change at 62% and female leaders at 59%.

These findings are compelling and best delineated through five newfound biases causing the DEI Death Zone?.

Each of these biases are carefully outlined with tremendous sensitivity. My aim is to be straightforward but with respect, care and delicacy.

1.???Protector. Being stewards of the law equates to expertise and qualified to supervise DEI decisions.?

This functions under the belief that because HR protects against employment discrimination, they appropriately should oversee and supervise DEI. HR is trained in employment discrimination which is entirely different than bias, behavior, and equity. Protector Bias fails to advance DEI because HR's fiduciary function is protecting the corporation (refer back to State Farm's stance) therefore decisions are being made to conceal, cover, or censor that prevents change.

Example: A Chief Human Resources Officer (CHRO) supervises the DEI function and receives an analysis that bias is found in multiple steps across recruitment, onboarding, performance, and succession planning; communication between HR and Managers conveys an implicit message that diversity requires special treatment; and HRBPs advisement approach is ‘protect the company’ versus ‘educate the manager’ preventing development, knowledge, and contribution to advancing DEI.

The CHRO views the report as exposing admission. Therefore, disputes presence of bias, defends team's capabilities, declines recommendations, and elects to implement unconscious bias training to mid-level managers.

This existing reporting structure would be similar to an SEC Auditor reporting to a Chief Financial Officer of its publicly held company.?DEI cannot be housed in HR - not for the reasons historically given - rather, the conflict from who their function ultimately serves.

2.???Advocacy. Being an advocate qualifies to facilitate efforts and assures supportive DEI decisions.

This functions under the belief that strong advocates for DEI are skilled in leading activities with trust that decisions are competent and supportive. Advocacy bias fails to advance DEI because they lack qualifications to recognize the macro and micro forms of oppression, consequently further marginalizing the marginalized.

Example: A VP of Marketing is the Executive Sponsor, chairs the D&I Committee and drives the inclusive marketing strategy. Digital media used diverse employees portraying a false image of its culture and business, therefore, were tokenized without capability to deselect their involvement. Concurrently, the D&I Committee hosted an event where the speaker shared personal anecdotes conveying not to take comments personally, everyone has good intentions, and how ‘speaking truth to power’ courageously enabled their success.

The Executive Advocate's marketing decisions were offensive although the issue was that employees were offended, a subtle but critical detail. The unvetted speaker's message implicitly communicated the onus and responsibility being entirely on the 'diverse individual' overcoming which lack efficacy in educating others. All forms of advocacy were exhibiting microaggressions towards diversity and diverse individuals.

Enabling this is similar to trusting a non-attorney to lead and litigate elder abuse cases because they are strong advocates against the abuse of older people. Advocates are important collaborators and contributors, however, reckless and irresponsible if given sole or final decision authority in any DEI activity or initiative.

3.???Intention. Being well-intended and committed is sufficient to manage a diverse team and lead DEI decisions.

This functions under the premise that people can manage others without passing 'bias training' and without prior proven performance for capability of D - E - I. Each letter represents separate skills for a people manager. Intention Bias enables leaders to manage teams without consideration for employees careers or experience in the workplace.

Example: ?In every organization, people are promoted without the development, skills or qualifications in managing diverse teams. The criterion is only 'commitment' to being inclusive. When evaluating any leadership competency such as emotional intelligence (EQ) or building trust - diversity is not factored. Meaning, a director may exhibit strong competency in EQ until factoring EQ with racially diverse consumers, clients, or team members. The director is still considered as highly emotionally intelligent irrespective of racial diversity. This is the danger of intent bias.

In our research, racially diverse employees experienced[10] different practices preventing their advancement by the 80% of Executive Advocates advancing and oppressing DEI.

The 20% of Executive Advocates advancing DEI without oppressing DEI, happened to be devoid of any stated oppression by them. On the other hand, the 80% of Executive Advocates oppressing DEI happened to exhibit oppressive practices towards racially diverse employees. This data was strikingly unexpected and triangulated for validity and reliability.

The highest oppressive act towards racially diverse leaders whereby 85% of the Executive Advocates (from the 80% oppressing DEI) exhibited 'dismissiveness' defined as 'workplace experiences, opinions, knowledge, contributions, emotions, or expertise' were invalidated, placed inferior, rejected, or ignored. I will author a separate article to dive into these ten.

Continuing Intention Bias equates to permitting drivers on the road without passing their drivers license test enabling their commitment to pass suffice, thus compromising safety of others. The well-being and careers of racially diverse and marginalized groups are compromised until all leaders are required to demonstrate skills in D-E-I.

?4.???Experience. Being and living the marginalized experience qualifies to position and exempt from oppressive DEI decisions.

This functions under the belief that living the experience of oppression equates to ‘capability for', ‘prevention of’ or ‘exempt from’. Experience bias leads to authority given without the requisite support or expertise to drive organizational changes.

Example: A person of color possessing extensive knowledge with the 'isms' serving in commendable leadership roles at corporations that places them directly to the short list, becomes a CDO. They are excellent at positioning companies as diversity champions amidst high profile political and social issues, leading inspirational events and earmarking funds for racial equity.

Upon gathering quantitative and qualitative feedback, findings reveal diverse turnover is disproportionate to its workforce representation, personality-centric promotions persist, the D&I Committee is active without influence, and challenging the executive team is unsafe. In addition, the CDO is systematically and repeatedly oppressing their staff.

Promoting this bias equates to the ability to diagnosis a health condition, recommend a treatment and perform surgery because one experienced the similar condition and underwent surgery. While there is close proximity to the experience, this does not set the individual nor the function up for success. It further invalidates the expertise to create change this work necessitates.

5.???Power. Being in a position of power authorizes and qualifies to make credible DEI decisions.

This operates from a CEOs position granting final decisions over all functions. The appropriateness isn't being disputed. The inherent flaw is that DEI is the only function whose responsibility is to remove bias through confronting power. This challenges ego provoking self protection in their decisions. Or the position enables avoidance through keeping one's distance. Power bias is negligent where decisions made are incongruent to any DEI commitment that employees always eventually notice.

Example: An organization’s C Suite executive team is highly committed to the extent DEI has been a norm for over two decades, led by a global CDO, dedicated team, integrated across its business functions, and diverse hires increase year over year.

Meanwhile, oppression persists for Black employees. Executives deflect, discount, and dismiss with subtlety and skill ultimately removing themselves from participating due to business demands.

Prolonging power bias promotes privilege and superiority - the very structure DEI must dismantle to bring inclusion, equity, and diversity to its highest peak. Power can be held by one position but authority must be co-shared with those with the expertise. That is true efficacy for DEI.

Solutions

There are a few solutions above that require greater detail. I don't wish to overwhelm with more information to process so forthcoming articles will deconstruct each bias and reconstruct with tangible, actionable cause and effect solutions.

In Disrupt Magazine, my advisement for those ready to start pivoting:

Maintain your power but relinquish the 100% authority you are exercising with DEI and simply?co-share?the responsibility of DEI decision-making with a credentialed professional equipped to help navigate this complex journey in partnership.

The plateau and glass ceiling our industry reached is ready to be broken through. Power Bias is the bias that intersected with Compliance, Advocacy, Intention, and Experience. This is the new form of intersectionality for us to tackle and dismantle.

There is no one safeguarding DEI from the powerful making decisions for its fate.

With insistence and inclusivity, let's together shift all focus to form a collective voice discussing the problem and solution [Power, Bias, and Decision] so the ascension to our Mt. Everest summit may begin.

More to come...

#diversity #diversity #diversityequityinclusion #csuite #executiveleadership #cdo #bias #power #powerbias #powerindei