Viewing entries tagged
diversity equity inclusion

DEI:  How Leaders Drop the Ball

Comment

DEI: How Leaders Drop the Ball

By Susan Letterman White

Leaders expect results, organizations fall short, time and money are wasted, and frustration builds. 

How did that happen? How do you fix it? 

Expectations and effort are not enough. An equity audit is not enough.  Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training is not enough. 

Hastings Law Professor Joan Williams reports in Fortune magazine that organizations spend some $8 billion a year on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)­—and see remarkably few results. Leaders are trying sincerely to bring a more diverse workforce into their organizations, yet, despite expending large amounts of time and money to drive high expectations, their approaches are ineffective. They begin with an equity audit or hire outside experts from the best universities to explain concepts like implicit bias and systemic racism. Neither is sufficient alone or even together. 

As a current DEI practitioner and former managing partner of a law firm, I've provided assessment, training, coaching, and facilitation for high level executives at law firms, municipal government, and state and federal government agencies in transportation, healthcare, and finance.  I've worked with top leaders and executives who have a sincere desire to change their organization to a more diverse, equitable, and inclusive culture. When we work together, they experience positive change. However, most leaders, who are failing to achieve their organization’s expected results, drop the ball by not continuing the work. 

Too many leaders waste time and money trying to address DEI problems without sustainable results. The problems are systemic problems and the solutions should be systemic, too. DEI challenges are not solvable with a single intervention. Real, sustainable change requires ongoing efforts throughout every level of the organization.

Every organization has opportunities for systemic change. Yet, most organizations stop after making a single change at a single level of the organization, like training individuals to change how they think and behave. Every organization has opportunities for sustainability. Instead change efforts stall after an equity audit or a training series as if DEI is a “one and done” proposition.

An Equity Audit Is Not Enough

Leaders drop the ball when they don’t leverage the momentum built from an equity audit.

Leaders seek equity audits because they have recognized the symptoms of systemic issues of inequities, like disaggregated data showing implicit bias-based disparities in hiring, compensation, and/or promotions or listening sessions that generate qualitative data of implicit bias-based disparities in how people are treated in workplace meetings and team conversations.  Collecting and analyzing equity data and then creating the strategic blueprint is not enough.  Leaders must take the next step and call their team together to collaboratively design and implement a plan based on the blueprint, yet many organizations never go through the required steps and wonder why they are unable to execute the strategic blueprint provided by the racial equity audit.

This failure phenomenon is not limited to DEI projects. HBR reported that statistically, approximately 70% of change projects fail. There is debate on the accuracy of this statistic; however, there is no debate that according to 2008 research from IBM, the need to lead change is growing, but our ability to do it is shrinking. McKinsey reported that 70 percent of change programs fail to achieve their goals, largely due to employee resistance and lack of management support. Even when people are truly invested in change the success rate is only 30 percent more likely to stick.

DEI change recommendations have a better chance of being implemented when leaders quickly transition into implementation planning and execution of the strategic plan. If leaders hesitate pushing positive change forward, the organization loses momentum. To recover, takes additional time, money, and workforce effort. One of my first clients called me after this exact experience.

The law firm had hired a well-known consulting firm to develop a strategic plan. It sat on a shelf collecting dust because firm leaders had not been able to translate the strategic plan into an implementation plan, which often requires discussions about roles, responsibilities, and timing. Often, difficult discussions about trade-offs in resource allocation and sometimes difficult decisions about changes to a business model arise. The avoidance of difficult conversations combined with the absence of clear roles and responsibilities was enough of an obstacle to stall the entire process. By the time they called for help, any motivation and energy for the work, first had to be recovered.

DEI Training Is Not Enough

Leaders drop the ball when they make training their only DEI initiative.

Equity audits almost always include a recommendation for extensive DEI training. The strongest leaders may not be inclusive leaders and even the best effort at fairly evaluating individual performance is often not equitable. They will benefit from training. Training is also an easy initiative to launch. Leaders delegate the training design and delivery to external experts or their learning and development department. Leaders then “show up” and learn, like anyone else at the training. The time demand on leaders is minimal as compared to other DEI change initiatives and a leader can say they did something. Unfortunately, what often happens is that training is the first, and often, only DEI initiative. Similar to an equity audit, the bulk of the work and time is delegated, while giving leaders credit for DEI efforts. Also similar to the equity audit, the initiative has a high likelihood of not achieving the expected DEI results without the right follow-through from leaders. The follow-through with training is the immediate application of learned material to a DEI challenge and the intentional spreading of DEI competencies learned to others in the organization through behavior modeling and using feedback effectively. 

Systemic problems are never addressed with an initiative aimed to improve individual skills and performance. Systemic problems require systemic solutions. While DEI leadership training is a solution aimed at individuals in an organization, adjustments to policies, processes, and structures are systemic solutions aimed at the organization as a whole. Equity audits include recommendations for changes at the organization itself.

If roles, responsibilities, lines of authority, and collaboration requirements are unclear in job descriptions, then implementing change is difficult or impossible. If the culture does not favor a growth mindset - the openness to discuss and learn from mistakes - then people in the organization will behave in alignment with a culture that encourages excessive  defensiveness and inhibits learning and change. If communication is flawed, either the right messages are getting lost or the wrong impressions are left unexamined. If the hiring, evaluation, and promotion processes are inequitable; i.e.,they use decision criteria that are not objectively measuring the ability to do a job or apply objective criteria through an implicitly biased lens, then disparities will continue to define the status quo.

Equity audits always identify organization-level strategies, yet too often, they remain as ideals or long-term goals. They require more time and effort to put in place and, unlike training, there is no option to simply schedule an event and then “check-the-box” for completion. 

Fixing the Problem

Leaders meet expectations when they follow through

Take these steps to sustainable and systemic change that increases diversity at all levels and strengthens a culture of equity and inclusion.

An Equity Audit - A robust equity audit that identifies strategies for change at all levels of the organization is the first step. Without the result of an equity audit - the blueprint or overarching strategy for improving diversity at all levels of the organization and a culture of equity and inclusion - you won’t know where to focus your efforts. 

Designing Your Implementation Plan - Leverage the momentum of your equity audit and put the recommendations into action right away by bringing the right people together to collaborate on the development of the strategic implementation plan.  The “right” people are those who will be expected to implement any action step of the plan and those who will be affected by changes anticipated. These are changes at the organization level to structures, processes, resource allocation, and communications and selecting who is responsible for doing what by when to make those changes a reality. This is often the first time the points of disagreement surface and why including an outside facilitator to help transform conflict into a productive discussion that builds commitment, engagement, and motivation in addition to help with prioritizing initiatives is wise. 

Executing the Implementation Plan - Once you have a strategic implementation plan that dictates who is responsible for doing what by when, start the execution.  Execution is an iterative process where improvements are expected at every cycle.  When problems and obstacles arise, it’s time to develop strategies to eliminate or navigate around them.

Having Difficult Conversations -  The iterative process of executing a strategic implementation plan always surfaces points of resistance from anyone affected by the change work and disagreement among executives. Do not avoid these conversations.  

Making Difficult Decisions - Resistance can stop or stall progress. Do not avoid making these decisions. Get help from a facilitator who is experienced with conflict management.

What Next? 

Leaders are already demonstrating their commitment by allocating resources, like time and money. If your organization has done an equity audit it’s time to plan for its implementation.  If your organization has done training it’s time to aim more broadly and consider how to change processes and structures. Sustainable improvements will follow as long as actions continue.  As a leader you can change your organization and the time to do it is now. 

Comment

How to Respond to Microaggressions

Comment

How to Respond to Microaggressions

By Susan Letterman White

Microaggressions are commonplace daily verbal or behavioral slights that are often unintentional, yet communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative attitudes toward culturally marginalized groups. As leaders, it is important to act in ways that contribute to a culture of inclusion. That means considering what you will do when you are either the recipient of a microaggression or the observer of a microaggression directed at another person.

Whether to act or stay silent depends on many factors and the decision of whether to act, and if, what to say or do, is an example of a difficult leadership decision.  Factors to consider include what the actual recipient of a microaggression wants, the good of the entire group or organization in which the event happened, the timing and surrounding circumstances of the event, and if action is the conclusion should it be done publicly or privately.  

Additionally, you should consider whether acting will escalate a situation in an unhelpful or dangerous way.  Is there a risk of danger to physical safety? Will the utterer become excessively defensive in a manner that is better handled privately or not alone? If the relationship is important to you, how will what you say affect the relationship? 

Some scholars have criticized the microaggression concept thinking it promotes psychological fragility and possibly stalls the development of skills to stand up for oneself. Certainly, the developmental trajectory of the individual recipient is important, as is what the individual wants to happen. Regardless, there is no excuse for leaders who do not recognize the harm microaggressions can cause and consider what they will do when it happens.

It takes courageous leadership to manage one’s emotions and also the behaviors of others in conflict situations. When a person uses a microaggression, regardless of whether it is aimed at a particular person or just offered as a poor joke, that action sets up a conflict, because, at the very least, it should not be an acceptable behavior in an inclusive workplace. 

The conditions that contribute to or subtract from leadership courage are rarely discussed. There are four conditions that all leaders should cultivate.

First, they should have a mental health, self-care routine.  When we feel emotionally well, we are better able to think constructively, call on a reserve of energy, and have difficult conversations. 

Second, leaders should be able to reframe a difficult situation as a challenge and ask: How might I address this challenge? Related to this concept is the third condition. Leaders should conduct a cost-benefit analysis that highlights the benefit of being courageous, which often means not falling back on default ways of thinking, feeling, and acting and instead practicing new and different approaches. For example, if speaking up seems like the right decision, but also difficult, highlight the benefits of acting and the risks of doing nothing. For example, you might say, “Do I want to stay silent and feel bruised and belittled or do I want to speak up and feel my self-worth and power as a leader here?”

Finally, leaders should remind themselves of a commitment to developing a growth mindset and putting that to use.  If the behavior seems challenging and difficult, it ought to signal a growth opportunity for learning or honing a valuable skill. Lean in and grow as a leader. Growth is often better as a team sport. If you are able, form a leadership support group where you can share stories of trying, learning, and growing and introduce a cultural norm where leaders prize the attempts of their colleagues and direct reports who share such stories.

Courageous leaders may be ready to say or do something in response to a microaggression and still not know what to say or do.  If it happens to you, it’s your choice whether to act or not. If you observe an event, it may be your responsibility to act or act in a particular way to comply with organization rules.  

If you decide to act, use feedback approaches that have the highest likelihood of being beneficial.  A skillful feedback response is delivered as close as possible in time to the event, criticizes the behavior rather than the person, uses “I” statements, and is clear about the behavior that must change.  For example, you might say, “When you said X, I felt Y.  In the future, I would prefer if you did not say/do X.  I understand that you may not have intended me to feel this way. Perhaps you were making a joke or you think I’m overreacting. However, our working relationship is important enough for me to speak up. I hope you understand. 

Comment

Creating a Diverse Organization with a Culture of Equity and Inclusion

Comment

Creating a Diverse Organization with a Culture of Equity and Inclusion

By Susan Letterman White

Advice on creating diversity, equity and inclusion in any organization usually begins by directing an assessment and following with changes to meet minimum legal standards followed by training. Although arguably necessary, this formula falls short of being sufficient. After all, what is the formula for transforming ordinary leaders into leaders, who drive the creation of diversity at all organization levels and a culture of equity and inclusion?

Certainly this type of systemic change requires leaders capable of respectful interactions, curious about people’s capabilities that often go unnoticed or discounted, and a willingness to help people achieve. But, even this disambiguation begs the question of why organizations and society-as-a whole are not making enough progress. This article spots the common snags that hold back systemic change to create a more diverse organization with a sustainable culture of equity and inclusion and shares solutions.

The Equity Assessment Snag

Equity assessments often skip measuring cultural indicators of system motivation and readiness for change. Motivation and readiness measure state of mind and emotional power to drive or block change efforts. Equity assessments must assess these measures in three groups of people; those who have the power to make necessary changes, those who have the power to affect the thinking and emotions of others in the organization who can either block or drive necessary changes, and those who will be affected by and involved in change implementation.

Equity assessments are usually quite detailed in what needs to be different and better, but unaware of informal networks where people share and reinforce their values. These networks entrench current attitudes and behaviors and are obstacles to motivation and change readiness. Knowing the opinion leaders and their opinions and the people who have the power to connect people and integrate different values is a data point often overlooked, yet the one that will drive change forward or block it. [1]

Some assessments include a stakeholder analysis; however the definition of stakeholder does not include informal influencers. When defined as a person with vested interest in something and who is impacted by and cares about how it turns out, it excludes those who are not at all interested or are interested in maintaining the status quo. Often, change leaders are unaware of the identities of informal influencers.

Indicia of motivation and readiness to change include assessment of why this change is personally important and degree of willingness to try using new behaviors and the tenacity to continue practicing them when mistakes are inevitable. Equity assessments that investigate organizational culture regarding a growth mindset or individual values regarding equity are rare.

The Talent Cycle Snag

Although it is easy to get experts to agree that people influence organizational performance, those same experts often forget that employee performance is overwhelmingly driven and reinforced by each distinct process in the talent cycle. A detailed review of each process with analysis of its effect on how people think, feel, and act is barely given adequate attention. Similarly, little thought is given to the behaviors considered indicative of capability.

Talent cycle processes, including the identification of decision criteria, are:

Recruiting,

Hiring,

Onboarding,

Performance evaluation,

Development,

Advancement,

Reward and recognition,

Engagement and wellbeing, and

Termination.

Capable performance is often detailed as skill only, yet motivation is equally important. “Expertise, knowledge, and skills will not produce great results if employees are unmotivated.” [2] Instead, people need to understand how their behavior influences a performance measure that personally affects them and they need to care about the personal effect.

If your organization’s talent cycle integrates values that are unimportant to the people you need to drive a change effort or fails to integrate values that are important, motivation wanes where it cannot. When an organization espouses values that are not integrated into the talent cycle, skepticism and distrust enter the culture and undermine change efforts.

Solutions

Find the disconnects between assumptions by top leaders and the beliefs of key groups of employees. To do this, first accurately identify through effective interviews or network analysis three groups of people; those who have the power to make necessary changes, those who have the power to affect the thinking and emotions of others in the organization who can either block or drive necessary changes, and those who will be affected by and involved in change implementation. Then ask the questions that matter. For example, if you were to ask top leaders whether and why creating diversity at all leadership levels of the organization is important and then asked employees the same question, what would you discover? If you discover a lack of alignment, the first step is a strategy to increase motivation for the changes contemplated.

Do a detailed analysis of the effect on employees of each process in each point of the talent cycle. Are any processes causing employees to think, feel, and act in ways that will undermine or fail to catalyze efforts to create diversity at all leadership levels of the organization and a culture of equity and inclusion? If you discover aspects of the talent cycle that are creating skepticism or failing to motivate employees effectively, then overhaul the talent cycle to create the motivation necessary.

Eagerness to engage in training before sufficient system motivation and readiness is a waste of time and money. Even worse, it can worsen the culture by increasing skepticism. All too often, employees consider training to be a “check-the-box” activity for meeting the minimum standards set by law. Instead, avoid this ending by first building sufficient motivation and readiness for change.

[1] P. Gray, R. Cross, M. Arena, “Use Networks to Drive Culture Change,” MIT Sloan Management Review, November 30, 2021 https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/use-networks-to-drive-culture-change

[2] E.E.Lawyer, “What Makes People Effective?” in Organization Development (Joan V. Gallos, ed.) 2006

Comment

Diversity | Equity | Inclusion:  Conversation to Action

Comment

Diversity | Equity | Inclusion: Conversation to Action

By Susan Letterman White

I design and facilitate group conversations on systemic racism and bringing more racial and ethnic diversity into leadership and power in organizations. My groups and many of the individuals in those groups express a craving for change and a culture where honesty and differences are sought out, supported, and even celebrated. The deeper the conversation goes, the deeper the realization of how difficult it is for people without formal power and authority to change processes and structures to turn words and ideas into actions to change systemic racism. This is especially true today, where people can’t agree on what a fact is.

It’s a given that if companies want to cultivate a culture of diversity, equity, and inclusion, they must recruit, hire, and put into leadership positions, people of all races who do whatever it takes to help employees feel like they belong and have the resources they need to be successful. When leaders fall short, they must be held accountable. A commitment without accountability is insufficient for a culture change.

It’s a given that leaders must create the context where everyone feels comfortable speaking up. As my group commented yesterday, it’s easy to speak up when everyone shares similar opinions and feelings. Silencing voices, like systemic injustice, happens without you knowing. When we work in a culture that demands perfection and is intolerant of mistakes, articulating an unpopular opinion, or inadvertently misspeaking, the fear of consequences – embarrassment to being fired – overwhelms and silences people. The role and responsibilities of a leader include enabling the conversations to happen, helping people find the courage to speak up, encouraging other to speak up, supporting vulnerability, and cultivating forgiveness when mistakes inevitably happen in conversation and action. Leaders must act on their moral obligation to speak up when they see something wrong and be held accountable for the culture they create by what they do and say, staying silent, or silencing people who challenge the status quo.

Comment