Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Are Not Dirty Words

Adrian McIntyre: 00:00:04

Diversity, equity, inclusion, belonging. We all know that these are. Oh, wait, are we, Are we allowed to say those words anymore? I'm not sure we're allowed to use these words.

Are these dirty words? Abbie, what's on your mind?

Abbie Fink: 00:00:17

Well, in my mind, they are not dirty words. The concept of diversity, equity, inclusion, belonging, finding value in our differences is, in my view, an extremely important part of building a culture within your organization that is supportive of everyone. And it is, you know, DEI -- diversity, equity, inclusion -- has certainly been top of mind recently and the impact of the changing policies around it.

I'm bothered by it. I'm challenged by it because I think this concept has been around for a long time. It has evolved over time as we've gotten smarter, maybe more accepting of differences or what the differences mean and really should be recognizing the benefits to our organization when we, you know, when we embrace the concept of what I believe DEI really means in the larger context.

Adrian McIntyre: 00:01:27

So to back up here, we're all clear that in the present moment, programs to support diversity, equity, inclusion, belonging, whatever they've been called, are being pulled back voluntarily. That's been going on for a few months.

The federal government has issued new guidance essentially eliminating positions and even the use of these words. The National Science Foundation is now prevented from reviewing grants that contain a list of banned words, including words like "cultural" and "women."

It's something that a few years ago we might have said, "oh, it's a slippery slope..." Last year, the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) officially stated -- the CEO, anyway, stated -- that they were going to remove the E from DEI. It was no longer going to be about equity. There's some deep, deep problems with that.

But we have ended up in a really strange place. We're communicators. Words have meanings, ideas have price tags. And eliminating words from our vocabulary is not something that should be taken lightly. Abbie, you advise clients all the time. They must have a range of opinions about what's happening right now.

Abbie Fink: 00:02:43

Yeah.

Adrian McIntyre: 00:02:44

What are you hearing in general, whether from your clients or the broader landscape about these changes?

Abbie Fink: 00:02:49

Well, you know, in one of our first episodes back on Copper State of Mind, I talked about the communication I had internally with our team about, you know, what we needed to be prepared for.

There were going to be things that were going to be coming down the pike, which we didn't know at the time what those might be, but the impact that they might have on our business, certainly on, you know, in our own personal beliefs, the beliefs of our clients, and how we would come to a place where we would figure out how to evolve from this.

Well, this is certainly one of those topics that a couple months ago I didn't know what the answer was, now here it is. So what we're, you know, we regularly bring up the conversations around what is happening on a larger scale and the impact that might have here in our local communities, regardless of what the topic is. We talk about, you know, how do you make your voice heard in a topic that's larger than yourself? And so this is, "Okay, what are we doing about the idea of DEI?"

And again, our agency in our history has long supported the concepts of diversity, equity, inclusion. In our work in the disability community and our work with tribal affairs, we and others, we have talked about equal access and inclusion and such as just a common practice and the importance of, you know, being open and available to all. And I, you know, our clients who are across a variety of different industries. Some are based here in the local market, some are national, some have parent companies.

This is a topic now, and a lot is going into, you know, where do we stand on our internal beliefs about inclusive workplaces? How does that impact the mission of our organizations and ultimately the, you know, the customers or the, you know, the clients that take advantage of the work that we're providing. And to be honest with you, we don't have straightforward answers right now. Like, we're not, you know, there's no crystal ball that we can look into and say, here's the magic that we need in order to answer this question.

But what we know intuitively and what we've been able to, you know, look back historically is this concept of, you know, an inclusive workplace and a place where your team members, your staff, your colleagues feel heard and seen, have a place to be productive.

And that their contributions are valued extends to the, you know, the trust in the organization that they work with that they are genuine in their relationships. And this is the kind of place where I want to give my 110% every day.

And whether or not we change the names that we're calling these things or policies are being, you know, handed down. It's hard to argue that the importance of having an inclusive workplace isn't worth fighting for that option.

And I think that, you know, this is maybe Abbie more personally than Abbie as an advisor and a counselor on the communications issues. But I think there is a middle ground that we need to find, and we need to find it quickly, that says this ability to have an inclusive and equitable workplace that has diverse voices and diverse opinions is a good thing and ultimately leads us to the kind of organization that we want to be and the kind of organizations that we want to work alongside. That's not to say that we don't respect the differences of opinion, but isn't that difference of an opinion exactly what DEI means? We don't have to agree on everything, but we agree that it's important to have the discussion.

Adrian McIntyre: 00:07:06

I think we -- I, anyway need to address the fundamental hypocrisy of the way this issue is being debated. And let me just say I believe all issues are debatable, that there are multiple points of view on pretty much anything, and that in a healthy, functioning society you can have those tough conversations where people can express their points of view and be heard. So as much as I don't personally agree with the decision, I think we have to start at least ... I mean, look, I'm trained as a cultural anthropologist. The core premise of that is this idea that you try to understand things not on your terms, but on the terms of the people you're engaging with.

This is being presented as somehow being about merit. The idea in the anti-DEI statements is that people are being hired not because they're best for the job, but because they fit some checklist category of people who are getting preferential treatment over other qualified candidates.

The subtext here, let's be clear, is that the qualified candidates who are not getting a chance are white and that the people who are being appointed "preferentially" based solely on some other form of identity are non-white. That's what this is all about.

If we're not talking about that, we're playing into one side of a polemical argument, okay? And the polemical argument is, "well, look, these policies are unfair because they pass over qualified people in favor of unqualified people."

Let's set aside for a second the fact that the inherent belief that someone is unqualified because they are a person of color, a woman, or whatever, is the very racism we are trying to overturn with these policies and procedures. But I digress.

If this were really a conversation about merit, first thing is private companies would be able to resolve this on their own because the federal government should not be telling a private entity how they should or should not hire people. Right?

The government has established policies through the Equal Opportunity Act and et cetera, to try to protect people from a history of systemic racism that has prevented people from getting equal opportunities.

So the perverse nature of the way this conversation is playing out now flips the whole thing on its head and says, "oh, no, no, the people who are getting overlooked, who really need to have a chance are these marginalized white people."

All right, look, we could debate any of this on its terms. We should bring evidence to those debates. Show me your sociology. Show me your economics. Let's have this conversation. I think it's just important to point out that what's happening now pretends to be about one thing, and I suspect it's actually about something else.

Abbie Fink: 00:09:56

Well, as, as most things that come, you know, that are politically directed, they have a lot of nuance around them. And, you know, that's conversation for a different time. But, you know, your point is well made in that that the ... We all want the opportunity to have our voice heard, be respected, you know, understood that we are bringing value to the workplace. That my experiences, my knowledge, my expertise is valued because I have it, not because I represent a particular box on a list that you want to check off.

And I think regardless of where we're coming in that discussion, anyone representing, to just be generalized and say "a marginalized group," anyone that would identify within a marginalized group, I believe, would say, "don't hire me because I happen to be this. Hire me because this is what I bring to the table. The knowledge, the expertise, the experiences that I bring to the table. I have additional points of view and a nuance to what I bring to the table because I also happen to be this, this, and this. But my qualifications are my education, my work experience, whatever that might be."

I was following a conversation on social media not too long ago, and it started with a colleague who has about 15, 18, maybe 20 years of experience looking for a new opportunity and was questioning whether or not she wanted to include a photo, her photo, her corporate headshot on her resume. And it was, you know, she is in a group of ... she would identify in a certain way. She thought it was important that that be visible. And people were saying, oh, no, don't do that. You won't get a job if you do that. And then other people were being, be proud of who you are. Do that. You know, of course do that.

And then the whole idea was, well, a good employer is going to find her on LinkedIn or, you know, anything and recognize some of those kinds of things. And I stepped back from that for a moment. I'm like, why are we even talking about that at all? Because she is extremely qualified to do whatever position it is she chooses to apply for. And those other elements are what she brings from an experience perspective and again, the nuance of her own lived experiences, which should be valued. But you know, it, it, there's just over the years there's been, you know, we look about it all the time.

I mean, I'll look at a resume and see someone who's got 30 or 35 years experience. And although I like to think I'm open minded, I'm like, you know, do I want an older person in my workplace? Well, they bring maturity, they bring experience. But they also can expect other things.

So there's so much about this idea that we've put issues on top of things that may not needed to have issues put upon them. And as you said, there are federal mandates and guidance about equal opportunity and the things that we need to do. And it shouldn't be a question of making this concept be bad or a negative. And it should be more about the value that an individual's experiences, their personal background and their work and their work ethic can impact my organization. And if they meet all of the qualifications and experiences, then they should have ... anyone should have an equal opportunity to be a candidate for a particular position. And we should seek out, you know, even within our own organizations, whether we're talking about bringing in new people or not, the diversity of opinion and the different way of approaching things based on your lived experiences needs to be valued.

Adrian McIntyre: 00:14:34

I really appreciate what you said there a minute ago, acknowledging that your own bias creeps into moments like this. This is the conversation I think we're not having.

This is a country, probably a world, probably a species -- let's just include all humans, why not? We're not very good at telling the truth to ourselves about ourselves. And certainly, let's bring it back to the United States. This is a country that has shown itself to be unwilling to have hard conversations at a national scale about the very history of this country, of this imperfect union. People have been resisting for decades ... by the way, this is not something that started, in the last 10 years. The so called culture wars, even earlier, there have been fierce debates about the degree to which we were willing to be honest about the historical events, processes that led us to the point we are today.

This is a country that was founded on racism and white supremacy. It was literally built through chattel slavery. Pretending something otherwise because it benefits you is the ultimate "snowflake" point of view, if you ask me. Like, let's be honest about where we're at.

And let's not deny 50 years of social science research on these topics either. I mean, this is unassailable fact at this point. Harvard researcher sends out a thousand resumes. I'm paraphrasing the study. Half of them, the person's name is Doug. The other half is named DeShawn. How many times does the phone ring? 65, 70% for the Doug, 0% for DeShawn, right? And those aren't the names, and that wasn't the actual statistics. But that's the idea.

This has been studied inside and out. Our prejudices are real. We all have them. We're human, okay? So nobody's pointing a finger and saying, "oh, you're a bad, icky racist." Unless you are, in which case we should be doing that.

But all of us have these inherent biases, so why would we have policies in place to try to reverse that? Because we want a better world, that's why. Because diversity -- let me just add to my little rant here. Diversity is a fact, okay? Diversity is a fact in nature. Diversity is a fact in humanity.

So let's just start there, right? There is already diversity. It exists. It is the nature of our being human. We come from different places, we think different ways, we have different genetic expressions, you know, all the things. Okay, fine.

So now what do we do in the workplace? Well, if diversity is a fact outside the building, maybe we should create an environment where the inside of the building reflects the outside of the building. In other words, it's ...

And this is the same thing with universities. I have spent years in academia, and the issue was elite universities were struggling with the fact that the student body did not represent the broader community in which the university was located. It was largely white, largely middle or upper middle class. So there was a real effort to try to provide access to universities.

And not just access, but success. Right? Let's not just get, quote unquote non-traditional students, meaning normal folks, everyone, let's not just get them into a university degree program. Let's provide them resources they need to succeed and actually graduate.

So access and retention and completion were words that universities were talking about. Is that racist? Is that somehow biased against the historically dominant classes? Well, some people wanted to make the argument that it was. And again, as I say, we should have all those debates, but we need to have them with facts and with evidence, not just with feelings.

So anyway, that's diversity. It's a fact. Inclusion, what's that? Well, that's are you being welcoming? Do you include people who aren't like you? Belonging, what's that? Well, that's do you as a person feel like you're at home somewhere? Do you feel safe? Do you feel like you belong? Why would we not want to have a world in which people feel safe and belong?

Equity is the hard one. And I think equity is where the whole thing breaks down. Because equity says we need to actually restore economic benefits, in other words, pay compensation, et cetera. We need to create equal pay. We need to create not just equal access and equal opportunity, but we need to set things right that have been wrong.

This really triggers a lot of people. This really bothers a lot of people. But this is the conversation that I'm worried we're going to not have because we already were not having it.

It was in the acronym, right? The E was in the D, E and I -- but the E, the equity part, was the part we weren't talking about that needed to be talked about. And now that's off the table.

Abbie Fink: 00:19:25

And in that discussion, we have to allow ourselves to understand that our views and opinions evolve over time. And what we knew and what we thought and what we believed at one point in our lives has evolved.

And maybe it's evolved in a more forward thinking way. And it may be that it's evolved and it's gone in a, in a less forward thinking way. But baked into this idea is also that fact, right?

That what we know now, what we believe to be right now, and how we approach things is very different than what we might have done five years ago, 10 years ago, 100 years ago.

And the fact that we have been open to the idea that change is okay, that we can acknowledge that we might not have been, this perfect process is partly what makes what we do that much more important.

The, the, you know, we've been, we've been having conversations on, you know, on this podcast and we, you know, we had it during COVID and we talked about a lot of these things then, right? About access to information and what was coming out and how we were doing it and the workplace changes and all the, all sorts of things that were happening.

And my viewpoints, you know, from then to now, have even changed about what inclusivity means and how do we do that and how do we manage, you know, an equitable workplace, all of it. And that is just, to me, the nature of these Discussions.

And this topic is the idea that we have to be open and flexible and understanding and acknowledge where we are doing well and where we need to improve and quite honestly, where we really might have screwed it up. And in that discussion, we learn and we get better and we move forward. And you know, it's.

The difficult thing for me in all of this is that the, you know, the, the, the responsibility needs to be on all of us and whatever definition we put on our own individual backgrounds and the, the bias, conscious or unconscious that we bring into the discussion, we are responsible for, for the things that we do and the things that we say and the way that we respond and the way that we act on particular conversations. And they're not easy and we're not always going to have an agreement.

And that in itself is also the importance of diversity, is that we don't have to agree, but we can agree that the conversation is important to have. And where we go with this, I'm not sure. I don't know what's going to be the fallout from it. I don't know how we implement and make changes.

I don't know what ultimately it means for an individual that is identified in one of these marginalized groups for what, their future employment opportunities.

But I gotta tell you that my personal belief and what I hope is something that we can stand firmly in front of and alongside of with our team and with those that we work with and the colleagues that we support, is that we have to keep having the conversation.

We have to keep recognizing that whatever words we use to describe it, it needs to be an authentic approach to creating a equal and diverse workplace. And that the, you know, the clients and our audiences and our target markets and. Pick a word.

But the people that we want to know about us, the people that we are, you know, putting our goods and services in front of, are a diverse population and, and demand that the people they do business with, you know, support that concept and the concepts that are important to them. And as a, as a business owner, as a business leader, it will be up to you to determine, you know, how that's going to play out.

And, you know, as we discussed in our topic a couple weeks ago on the, the concept of trust and what that means and, and, you know, grievances with our institutions, you're going to have to be bold in your attempts to decide if this is something that is worth it for your organization and whatever that looks like on the other side.

Be confident in your decisions and communicate that appropriately and, you know, internally and externally and that authentic voice, both what you as an organization stand for and your acceptance of those voices within your organization, to me, regardless of what we call it, is what creates an inclusive and equitable diverse workplace.

Adrian McIntyre: 00:24:27

Thanks for listening to this episode of Copper State of Mind. If you enjoyed the conversation, please share it with a colleague who might also find this podcast valuable. It's easy to do, just click the "Share" button in the app you're listening to now to pass it along. You can also follow Copper State of Mind in Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any other podcast app. We publish new episodes every other Friday.

Copper State of Mind is brought to you by HMA Public Relations, the the oldest continuously operating PR firm in Arizona. The show is recorded and produced by the team at Speed of Story, a B2B communications firm in Phoenix, and distributed by PHX.fm, the leading independent B2B podcast network in Arizona. For all of us here at Speed of Story and PHX.fm, I'm Adrian McIntyre. Thanks for listening and for sharing the show with others if you choose to do so. We hope you'll join us again for another episode of Copper State of Mind.