The Traps of DEI: Moving Beyond Grievance to Inclusion
Over the past few years or so, I've referenced or explicitly articulated various traps we face in diversity, equity, and inclusion work.
For those who have been following my writing, you'll know that I frequently draw inspiration from everyday moments—like my son Kai (who just turned 6 years old on 28 March, by the way!) warning me about imaginary "traps" on the sidewalk as we walked home from the park.
That simple interaction made me think: Who wants to be trapped? None of us do, but that doesn't prevent it from happening. In the inclusion and diversity space (or so-called ‘DEI’ if you may and not fall into Trap #1 below), practitioners and allies often fall into traps without even realizing it. The deeper we go, the bigger our blind spots become.
As I check myself constantly and remain curious about perspectives different from mine, I've identified several key traps we must vigilantly avoid:
The Traps That Hinder True Inclusion
Trap #1: Reductionism
Too many so-called DEI experts reduce complex human issues to single dimensions. We reduce everything to genderization or racialization as the causal rationale for all ailments in organizational life. This stance reduces inclusion and its transformational potential, putting a box around the myriad subtleties of our identities, similar to the box that racialization places around the racialized.
Trap #2: Failure to Seek out Disconfirmation (Confirmation Bias)
When doing this work and seeing a problem in organizational life, we often look for what we want to find. And when we look for what we want to find, we unironically find it. If we don't seek out contrary evidence, we fall into the trap of thinking our understanding is complete. Intellectual honesty about our confirmation bias becomes our biggest asset.
Trap #3: Creating "Us vs. Them" Dynamics
In a field where our primary work is to mitigate separateness, we have, in too many instances, doubled down on behaviors that reinforce segregation. I don't fundamentally believe there is an "other." The interdependent nature of humanity says you can't have an "other" (even when we want to move far away from “them”) and think that the so-called other is your enemy when, in fact, they are by nature connected to you. The good, bad, and ugly of that.
Defining Diversity and Inclusion
Trap #4: Being Uncurious
Curiosity is one of our biggest superpowers, but practitioners in the inclusion and diversity space can be much more curious about possibilities for practice beyond their anchored beliefs. When one is not broadly curious in a space as complicated as humans and human communities, it does the practice, the practitioner, and particularly those you are working on behalf of a disservice.
Trap #5: Separateness
In Reconstructing Inclusion, I say there's no go-it-alone strategy. "In the quest for inclusive and equitable organizations and communities where their stakeholders exist, we all win, or we all lose, as we are all part of the superset that is humanity." If anyone (even with noble intentions) suggests a form of separation to create more diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplaces or societies, consider them underinformed or confused. Don’t hire them or give them any sway in a role related to culture development.
Trap #6: The Identity Trap
As Yascha Mounk describes in his book, The Identity Synthesis, there's an alluring but ultimately counterproductive approach that puts race, gender, and sexual orientation above other considerations. This view analyzes even ordinary situations through the lens of relative social power and group identity, which can undermine progress toward genuine equality.
Trap #7: The Grievance Trap
As Frank Bruni notes in The Age of Grievance, identity-based rage and grievance-laden media discourse have become ubiquitous. Grievance sells, but it turns everything into a cultural battlefield. Humility is the antidote to grievance because it recognizes that the world doesn't conform perfectly to any one person's desires.
Moving Forward
Mounk and Bruni suggest solutions aligning with my thinking: contact over caucus, humility, nuance, discernment, and connection across differences to create perspective-getting conditions.
I avoid these traps by constantly checking myself, mostly via checking in with others. Including my wife who is Chief Check Yourself Champion! She sounds like a woman with a French accent channeling Ice Cube's “Check Yo Self!”).
I read and listen to people I theoretically disagree with. I'm curious about people who have a different perspective than mine. I don't see anyone, regardless of their actions or words, as being outside of the human condition.
I stay mindful not to fall into the trap of thinking that I am beyond any mindset that finds its way to my eyes, ears, or other sensibilities. I avoid getting into a stance of possessing some special moral authority due to my work in inclusion.
To center our common humanity and reinforce why connection is critical to democracy and civility, we need a pragmatic path that makes inclusion and diversity accessible to all, actionable, and aligned with organizational purpose.
Watch out for these traps. If you need assistance avoiding them, call me... I'll ask Kai if he can help point them out to you. 😉
Join us on April 8th for our Elevating Your Inclusion Edge free interactive virtual event.
We will discuss concepts adjacent to the above and how inclusion is needed more than ever in today’s ever-shifting climate. In the session, I will discuss the necessity of transcending dated paradigms attached to DEI that have reached an impasse and the direction to move in now–how to skate to where the inclusion and culture puck will be.
In our hour together, I expound on our approach–a pathway leading individuals and organizations to create the conditions for people and organizations to thrive consistently.
I hope to see you there! Tell a friend 😊.
I hope this was helpful. . . Make it a great day! ✌🏿
If you were actually interested in evidence that falsifies your ideas, you’d read Shelby Steele and Thomas Sowell, and you’d support color blind individualism and decisions based entirely on merit.