Diversity

Before I close up shop for the week, I had mentioned to someone that I was going to write about diversity this week. This is a hard topic. But, something in King Kaufman's column today [clicky] compelled me to write.

OK, it's not as generalized as such, but the two points King raised got me to typing:

1) "So now that we've ridiculed and vilified and slapped down Gary Sheffield for his supposedly racially insensitive comments in GQ magazine, is it safe yet to wonder if he had a point?" - KK

I'm going with: Sheffeld is right. Not just about baseball but for the American workforce. If you have leverage over an employee or an alternative (outsourcing) that is cheap and willing to do grunt work, you can make money with few problems. This we know.

2) "...don't forget, racism has been conquered and people should stop bringing up race all the time...." - KK

King has occasionally noted that too many of us exist in in a bubble where we pretend that "racism has been conquered." Sports, specifically, and the general American workplace is content that race is no longer a huge problem. Remember, we have the EEOC, right? And, a justice department to strictly enforce infractions.

What is workplace diversity?

From the Wiki:

“In a business context, appearance diversity, (ethnicity, gender, color, sexual orientation, body size) is approached as a strategy for improving employee retention and increasing consumer confidence. The "business case for diversity", as it is often phrased, is that in a global and diverse marketplace, a company whose staff embrace ethnic representation and gender composition which mirrors the demographics of the marketplace it serves is better equipped to thrive in that marketplace than a company whose appearance is out of step with its market's appearance.”

Wow. I couldn’t have summed it up any better. Get it? It has become best to look what you believe your audience thinks is diverse without ever clearly making a business or mission case why it's necessary, why you have it, or what it can do for anyone. But we hear/see the words "equal employment opportunity" everywhere we look (and, "equal housing opportunity"). Saying it means nothing. It's a check-off on your worksheet from the lawyers. Behavior and attitude are often mutually exclusive.

Believe me, I’ve struggled with this forever. I’ve always heard in organizations, “We need more diversity,” or “Let’s take care to choose a diverse team for this project,” or "Let's start a diversity program!" Why? More women? More blacks? More Hispanics? More poor people? More handicap? More appearance that we are the good guys – I mean just take a look at the photo on our annual report and you’ll see just how diverse we show the world we are.” I refuse to be the dark skin in the group promotional shot. I figured that scam out in college.

Speaking to point #2, Racism is Cured, I hear it all the time, people emphatically noting that "race has nothing to do with it!" Or, "We only want the very best candidates for the position." Since racism is so cured, then why do I keep getting asked to be in the promo shots? If it's not a problem why bother showing the black, the white, the woman and the Hispanic/south Asian/Asian at all? If it's not a problem, then why the desperation? Instead of printing the entire EEO statement, print the following:

At Hardaway Industries, we have conquered race, gender, and SES issues. We only pick the best candidates. Executive Order 11246 was created to prohibit federal contractors from discriminating against employees on the basis of race, sex, creed, religion, color, or national origin. We don't have that problem here.

Let me tell you, racism isn't cured and me typing these words makes me a less-than-ideal candidate in many organizations (the lazy, the inept, and the backwards looking).

In the supposed diverse workplace, I have seen many of the hires that don't fit the clubby atmosphere suffer. They don't find their way, they are passed over for promotion, and they are segregated (self and inadvertently imposed). I've been asked by senior managers to check in with people to see how they are really feeling, like I speak black or something.


Sometimes, Kaufman point #1, the best candidate is the one that is not only equally talented, but easier to manage (in the traditional fashion). If we can give less than average raises or pay at a lower scale, work the candidate for long hours, and never hear a peep (including their "ideas" or "opinions," then the workplace is very easily managed. You can just sit back and watch Widgets (tm) get churned out without effort, thought, or worry.

But, if another equally talented employee feels that a 60 hour, salary-based workweek is too much, or if reporting the egregious behavior of a supervisor becomes your thing, or you want a raise, then you force the organization to actually act in a fashion that becomes annoying, labor intensive, and tiresome.

If you can have workers in India do the work and you can neither see them nor hear their complaint and pay them a fraction of what you'd pay a wannabe actor with an attitude, then you - sorry, the Company - wins again. Sheffeld is so spot on and everybody who has given two seconds to ponder it knows is.

I have seen people who have their visas sponsored by organizations worked relentlessly; Sheffeld's point.


What's my point though? My point is that race (and other factors like gender, sexual orientation, physical ability, origin, etc.) may or may not matter to a particular industry or a particular audience. So, why pretend when you don't have to? Conversely, if you don't know how individuality factors play into your organization's mission, business goals, etc., maybe you should figure that out.

If it matters, do something about it. If you really believe it doesn't, then don't fake the funk.

How is this managed? How is this mitigated? I have opinions and ideas, but they're not free.