DEI Principles Part I of X
DEI Principles Part I of X
Building approaches that don’t hold promise for the betterment of everyone in our organizations create missed opportunities.
In over twenty-five years of work related to or adjacent to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the modern sense, I’ve stood firm on a handful (or two) of principles.
Here, I will share three: mirror–holding, willingness to be influenced, and Counter-Othering.
Principles are best served through action. And while this article is aimed at those who believe in DEI or may be on the fence based on how it is often portrayed, the principles are not DEI principles per se. They are principles for living that can help anyone manage the tensions and complexities of any mixture of differences and similarities (i.e., diversity) in organizational or daily life.1
Mirror-holding comes before window-peering. In any industry, profession, or passion project where those in practice emphasize human flourishing, people and their humanity are at the center. Care, openness, safety, and trust are critical factors in creating the conditions for the desired outcomes.
For those invested in DEI as a profession or passion, it is critical that we consistently hold up the mirror as to how we are doing “the work.” As practitioners, we need to be clear about the values that guide our work day in and day out. We have to have the capacity to go deep.
We do not need to go deep into the psyche of the “so-called other” but rather into how we perceive and sense the world with its myriad subtleties and complexity.
This means that recognizing interdependence in organizational life is critical when you are working to co-create the conditions for people to thrive and for your organization to create value for society, including and beyond its balance sheet.
When focused on self-management in service of others, you practice mirror-holding. Conversely, a focus on being right, righteous, and morally superior, lacking the capacity or desire to see beyond a fixed DEI narrative or lived experience connotes window-peering (starting with a focus on what you see others doing). Such a way of being is not in alignment with your desired impact; that is (again), all colleagues thriving.
👐🏾 Are you willing to be influenced by the so-called "other"?
Willingness to be influenced by the “so-called other.” I often talk about the distinction between the “other(s)” in the relative sense and the “so-called other” in the sense of any entity, group, or individual that one opposes. I use the phrase “so-called” because in organizational life, like it or not, we are interdependent.
We could go further and say that life is generally an interdependent endeavor. But, for the sake of space and time, we will stay focused on organizational life.
In my book, Reconstructing Inclusion, I have a chapter entitled “Rooting (for) Them (out).” In that chapter, I said:
“The world is much more complex than the essentialist-like assignment of inhumane behaviors to a particular group. To state that a monolithic notion of “they” (in many cases white men) is perpetuating inhumanity and then commence to an ideological takedown, based on particular facets of identity with expectations and intentions to inspire change, is absurd. This combativeness is not what organizations, nor the myriad humankinds that operate within them, seek to create.
If the objective is to create an organization whose people thrive through inclusive actions, there needs to be a movement away from any form of “us vs. them” binaries. They are contrary to all the foundational elements of an Inclusion System, starting with the first one that talks about inclusion being accessible to everyone in an organization. It is critical that we are intentional and unambiguously prioritize creating solidarity across humankinds, investing in organizational efforts toward care/community, openness, safety, and trust, or your organizational efforts will never be sustainable.
In fact, any subtle, conscious, or unconscious actions toward creating a lane for blame and/or othering will exhaust DEI efforts. Such fatigue is created when we develop frameworks for DEI that are incomplete. Building approaches that don’t hold promise for the betterment of everyone in our organizations create missed opportunities. If the DEI journey isn’t constantly adjusting in order to evolve beyond our relatively modest expectations (e.g., increased representation, ignorance not being surfaced), what purpose do our efforts serve?"
Inclusion is largely about a willingness to be influenced by those different from you. I would go as far as to say that deep practitioners dance in the space of ideological distinction. That is, they engage with people who are likely to disagree with them to learn something that might allow them to create something extraordinary via their philosophical or ideological contrasts.
The more heterodox you can become, the greater your capacity to manage complexity. Whether on one pole or its opposite perspective, echo chambers amongst a pod of those you agree with are inherently self-limiting. As a DEI practitioner, they diminish your capacity to elevate your work and make a sustainable impact.
Related post: Centering Nuance in DEI
Counter-Othering. Being willing to be influenced by people who think and see the world differently than you is a surefire way to counter-othering vigilantly.
Institutionalizing disconfirmation and constructive disagreement, robust dialogue, better listening, and consistently creating mechanisms to do the above are other ways to counter othering.
Principles are the best route to take if you are committed to creating a culture where DEI is normative and sustainable.
I hope this was helpful. . . Make it a great day! ✌🏿
In this episode of the ‘Reconstructing Inclusion’ podcast, we talk about the importance of listening for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and how it can be practiced and improved upon both personally and professionally. Raquel Ark, the Founder of listening ALCHEMY, shares insights into her background, growing up between cultures, and how it shaped her understanding of different perspectives and listening. Raquel emphasizes the role of listening in high-stakes situations, the need for humility, and the impact of listening on building trust and effective communication.
From Dr. Roosevelt Thomas