Credit:
One of the reasons why so little progress has been made on racial equity and inclusion is that too many professionals assume that everyone else is the problem. When a great article is posted on LinkedIn or they hear an inspiring quote, most leaders are too eager to forward it to someone who “needs” it—not recognizing that they need it. They confuse basic decency with real equity and think that simply because they voted for Obama, belong to the DEI Council or wore a Black Lives Matter t-shirt to a company event, they must be creating an oasis of inclusion.
Not true.
That’s not an indictment of well-intentioned, nice, progressive “allies;” instead, it’s an acknowledgement of the basic anti-racism physics that outcomes will not change until and unless specific actions are taken to make them change. That requires leaders, in particular, working to identify the root causes creating racial disparities, exclusion and toxicity and taking corrective action to fix them. Yes, book clubs are great and words and symbols certainly matter, but that has to be a beginning, not an end if we want to see real anti-racism progress. It’s a lot like losing weight. Reading articles and diet books can be a great first step, but you won’t lose a pound until you actually change your behavior.
While many well-intentioned allies are indeed dropping the ball by not taking specific action to advance anti-racism, even worse, they sometimes unwittingly cultivate the precise types of exclusive, othering environments that repel so many Black and Brown professionals. My own personal corporate experience (along with that of many friends and family) is filled with “nice” team leaders or managers who were perfectly pleasant, even gave me rave reviews, but still unwittingly and likely unintentionally created and supported environments ranging from culturally insensitive to downright cold. Since it can be hard for managers (particularly the “nice” ones) to grasp just how they’re fostering these environments of exclusion, I offer three specific, concrete examples from my own personal corporate experience.
Indeed, these are just three classic mistakes that perfectly competent, “nice” team leaders can make.
Allowing One or Two Personalities to Consistently Dominate Casual Discussions
Anyone who has worked in professional spaces knows that casual spaces/times (e.g. banter at the beginning of a call, break room talk, training class/conference downtime, etc.) are anything but inconsequential. Those are times when connections are established or reinforced, information is shared and oftentimes cliques can develop. As “high school” as it may sound, these spaces are oftentimes characterized by an in-group/out-group dynamic. Indeed, some team members are laughing, joking and making references to previous events and activities while others sit on the periphery conspicuously reminded of their outsider status.
A vivid example of this I easily recall from my early years as a telecommunications supervisor. On Monday mornings the team would regularly reflect on their weekend before the start of our weekly team meetings. Frequently, they discussed trips to “Helen” which threw me initially since I’d never visited the small, rural north Georgia town famous for its German heritage. Since it was a popular vacation spot among the mostly older white team members with kids, most of the conversation centered around those types of outdoor, rural weekend family activities. Unfortunately, as a 20-something, single, childless Black female, I had zero experience and even less interest in said leisure activities. As a result, those of us who couldn’t relate typically observed on the periphery while they chatted it up. Indeed, for those of us “on the outside” of these types of regular exchanges during team events, they served as tangible reminder of our outsider status.
While casual interaction is generally healthy for workplaces—offering levity and social connection that increase morale and build relationships—it’s critically important to avoid the in-group/out-group dynamic that can develop too often. Do this by engaging others in the conversation, posing questions that allow groups to shift topics or using ice breakers that encourage broader connections.
Defaulting To Culturally Specific or Unrelatable References
We’re all a function of our cultural background and experiences, and when leaders or cliques within a team constantly make references that some don’t relate to, it can have a distinct othering effect. Once when tasked to work with two older white guys during setup for a training event, I was trying to log into a conference room computer using the credentials and password provided to me by one of them. When one read off the password starting with “Lima,” I dutifully typed “L-i-m-a” prompting them to explode into an abrupt, hearty laughter. Of course, he was using the phonetic alphabet commonly used in the military (their common background) so Lima just meant “l,” but they didn’t have to clarify that though. The raucous laughter clued me in.
It's expected and quite normal for team members to make culturally specific references without realizing it, but it’s important for leaders to try to maintain and cultivate an environment where other team members don’t feel alienated or belittled. Everyone won’t necessarily understand all cultural references or vernacular—and that’s fine as that’s what diversity is about—but leaders should guard against persistent language, vernacular or topics that simply leave some out of the discussion or even worse, feeling minimized.
Supporting Opaque, Informal Promotion Processes
Anyone who has worked in a corporate setting knows quite well that job performance, while important, is only one determining factor for promotability and overall career progression. Relationships and social connections arguably matter just as much if not more. I remember in my 20s talking to a trusted colleague about wanting to be promoted, and they asked if I was on the “promotable list” to which I responded, “What is the promotable list?” They simply smiled and said, “If you don’t know what it is, you’re definitely not on it.” And they were right! Too often workplaces are full of secret lists, events and opportunities that many don’t even know about, and that reality oftentimes leaves Black and Brown professionals at a significant disadvantage. Promotability criteria and career progression processes shouldn’t be a secret, but unfortunately information inequality is rampant in organizations and those with broader, deeper, more powerful networks are the ones who tend to get the best information and access to the best opportunities.
To avoid creating environments of exclusion, leaders should make a conscious effort to equalize information sharing and increase transparency around promotions and other career progression mechanisms. Certainly, this doesn’t require 100% transparency. There will be times when certain information can’t be shared, but working on a team shouldn’t feel like pledging a sorority or fraternity either.
Part of the difficulty of teasing out inequity in 2022 is that it’s much more subtle. The great resignation among other things has laid bare what many companies have been in denial about for some time—many professionals simply don’t enjoy their work environment. Now as companies are increasingly returning to the traditional workplace setting, many Black and Brown professionals in particular are opting not to return to workplaces where they don’t feel included and are instead lobbying to continue to work from home. While this renewed focus on inclusion spurred by the summer 2020 racial reckoning may seem overwhelming to some, enhancing inclusion doesn’t have to be hard. It just requires a bit of consistent, persistent intention—just like good leadership.
