From DEIBJ to Culture: Is This Selling Out?
by Stacey D. Mitchell
I have recently been in conversation with organizations that are peeling back explicit references to work related to diversity, equity, inclusiveness, belonging and justice. In response to a broader social and political climate that is unwelcoming, even hostile to DEIBJ work, they, instead, are calling this work “culture.” And I wondered to myself, Is this selling out?
In one of my mid-career jobs, I was responsible for ensuring that staff members were treated fairly, felt fully engaged in staff culture and that our practices and systems supported equity. At that time in the organization, we were learning in many ways–some more painful than others–that staff members from underrepresented groups were having a less positive experience than white staff members. And this was particularly challenging given that this organization’s mission centered on partnering with and serving in underrepresented communities. So, if this group–BIPOC staff, those who most closely shared the backgrounds of the communities where we worked–were disenchanted, it was a major concern. Not to mention, I was one of those staff members.
So I took on this task with voracity. I spent time looking into differences in recruitment and hiring rates, and promotion rates, and retention rates, and pay rates, and rates and types of performance improvement plans, and satisfaction/engagement survey rates. And it was clear to me that we needed to place an intentional focus on diversity…and equity…and inclusiveness. In service of that, my organization threw resources behind DEI staff and initiatives. And over the course of the years, we saw meaningful improvements in DEI outcomes for our staff members.
But the end game was always to make DEI so embedded in the way we functioned that, like the salt covenant my husband and I made at our wedding, you couldn’t tell a DEI grain of salt from a hiring grain of salt, or from a learning and development grain of salt, or from a promotion grain of salt, and so on. In other words, DEI would be inextricably integrated into every aspect of culture.
So, why did it feel offensive, deflating or even hurtful each time I heard others in the space sharing that they were moving away from DEIBJ language and more toward “culture” language or “inclusion” alone?
I will continue to grapple with the answer to that question long after today. But for now, I believe it is because the DEIBJ practitioners in those organizations didn’t seem to have a choice. The concern that they held about sustaining their important work far outweighed whatever personal or moral conviction they had to hang on to specific vocabulary, especially when that vocabulary wasn’t altogether inaccurate. Their agency to authentically speak about their work was limited. And here, in these United States of America, is where the injury seemed so profound.
But make no mistake about it: the work of building diverse, equitable and inclusive teams was continuing in the organizations that I have engaged with.
So when asked if changing terms related to DEIBJ to “culture” is selling out, my answer is, No. We will learn if referring to this work as something other than DEIBJ will have a meaningful impact on the work itself. When I think about movements that in every way were about DEI, I don’t recall the use of those words. Instead, words like civil rights and freedom and equality ring in my ears as the foundational lexicon of the work.
And I scarcely think neither term matters much if the Black woman assistant doing the same job as the white male assistant is getting paid less. I think those in this work strive for an integrated world where concepts such as diversity, equity and inclusiveness are part and parcel of any work culture, alongside joy, and effectiveness, and respect for everyone’s humanity…as long as the work continues.
Need help creating a thriving and equitable culture? Contact us at www.sageliconsulting.com/connect
Stacey D. Mitchell is the Founder & Principal Consultant of SAGEli Consulting.
