Pendulum Swings From DEI to 'Belonging'

By Denise Williams | Channel Connection

There’s a common misperception that DEI (diversity, equity & inclusion) is a new paradigm, birthed in recent years alongside “cancel culture” and the “me too” and Black Lives Matter movements. More accurately, DEI has been around for the better part of 25 years, couched in an understanding that embracing different perspectives benefits businesses — a position reported in a Channel Connection article just a year ago. But for all its good intentions, as much as it pains HR expert Claudia St. John to suggest, DEI isn’t working.

What Went Wrong?

Although many — usually larger — companies quietly embraced the concept early on, the founder and CEO of The Workplace Advisors explains that widespread change failed to sweep through the upper tiers of leadership. In response, she continues, some businesses in recent years began to formalize DEI practices in an effort to grow opportunities for women, people of color, and anyone else not matching the white male archetype that overwhelmingly populates America’s upper management and C-suite positions.

Powered by this push, DEI saw a revival around 2020 — a time when the country was crackling with socially conscious energy: a new chapter of activism leveled at racial injustice (sparked by the police-involved death of George Floyd) and a modern-day missive against sexual abuse and harassment (sparked by a string of accusations against Hollywood hitmaker Harvey Weinstein). Against this politicized and highly charged backdrop of “woke-ness,” Corporate America pushed back on DEI.

Power Trippin’

St. John suspects there is a perception at the top of being stripped of opportunity and forfeiting it in the name of progress. When a limited number of positions of power are at stake (so the rationale might go), when somebody claims a seat, the individual who previously occupied it feels something is being taken away from them. “It really is an anti-woke messaging that people are losing to somebody else in that transaction,” says St. John. “And the sentiment becomes, ‘we need to take it back.’ DEI — mistakenly, I think — is a target of those initiatives.”

While the undercurrent of discontent was always palpable, the recent Administration change in Washington has raised the issue of DEI back to the surface level — and pinned a new bullseye on it. Included in the immediate flurry of Executive orders were the cancellation of federal DEI programs; calls for similar action within the private sector and among nonprofits; and official recognition of only male and female as genders, among other anti-DEI policy changes. Reception to these actions has been mixed at best, ranging from celebration or indifference to anger and litigation.

Not a ‘Black or White Thing’

Another roadblock that has tripped up DEI, St. John believes, is the lack of clarity on what diversity really means. It’s not a quota system, like some wrongly assume. “Very few companies put in place policies specifically designed to seek out people of diverse backgrounds,” she observes, citing a fear of backlash — such as lawsuits claiming reverse discrimination. Moreover, she admits, the strategy isn’t always an effective one. Consider this hypothetical: a distributor desires more managers of color but asks that applicants have a college degree and 5-10 years of supervisory experience in the channel. “Look around,” St. John challenges. “Where are you going to find somebody like that in Dubuque, for example? You’re not…unless you lower the requirements in order to open the door and let people in that might be able to grow into those roles.” That presents a quandary, too, she says. “You end up with a problem because people say you hired somebody who didn’t have the experience and therefore was not qualified,” she points out.

But if diversity is not all about race, what else is it about? While that’s the first association many people make, St. John emphasizes that the definition stretches to include everything from ethnicity to gender identity … even diversity of thought. Diversity of what? Yes, neurodiversity is real, she assures, and it’s keeping companies from hiring some truly exceptional employees. Those candidates may not interact well socially because they have ADD or are on the autism spectrum, for example, but they possess characteristics that would allow them to excel in certain roles.

Meanwhile, St. John has observed more companies struggling to come to grips with employees or prospects who they can’t pigeonhole into the traditional buckets of race or gender. She recalls one scenario where a valued senior-level sales manager with many years of service on the books refused to work with a new hire who happened to be a transgender woman. The manager’s “one-of-us-has-to-go” stance put the company in the unenviable position of either losing a star producer or separating from the new employee, who provided reliable labor the business desperately needed.

Change is uncomfortable, St. John admits. What used to be cut-and-dried — man/woman, black/white — isn’t anymore. Sexuality is fluid, and the rising number of mixed-race families is changing the complexion of the nation. “People are unsettled,” she says resignedly. “They don’t understand; they can’t put people in the box that makes sense to them.”

What Now?: Belonging

It doesn’t have to make sense, St. John argues, because it honestly doesn’t matter. Companies need labor, and the bottom line is there isn’t enough to go around. If you’ve got employees who show up and are getting the job done, that’s what you should care about, she suggests. And if you want to keep them, she cautions, it’s in your best interest to cultivate a workplace culture that makes them feel welcomed and supported.

“That’s where ‘belonging’ comes in” as an alternative to DEI, St. John says. “You may not be able to understand or relate to [the ways that people are different],” she concedes, “but you can create an environment where they can feel safe, where they can be productive, where they can be happy, and where they can contribute and foster a sense of community.”

Belonging is a core value, and it’s reflected in how businesses structure interviews, configure paid time off and flex schedules, treat religious holidays, communicate performance feedback, and so on. “Are we doing that in a way that everybody feels that they can be heard and seen and that they can grow and thrive in their jobs?” St. John asks. It also means handing down repercussions to individuals whose attitudes undermine others’ sense of belonging.

Looking back to the earlier example of the “old-school” manager and the new transgender hire, St. John believes a behavior change is required of the manager and, in the event of noncompliance, they should be relieved of their duties — even if it causes temporary pain for the company. Is that the right answer? “YES,” she states with conviction. “If you’re truly committed to having an environment of belonging, the answer is yes, every time.” Change starts at the top, according to St. John, by holding bad behavior accountable.

Darth Vader vs. Yoda

So, then, is ‘Belonging’ better than DEI? Well, yes…and no, St. John muses.

“DEI can show up like Darth Vader,” she notes wryly, mimicking the Star Wars character’s iconic baritone. It knocks down the door, demanding in the voice of authority that policy must be carried out and that is the end of the discussion. Hence the backlash.

Belonging is more like a gentle nudge from Yoda. “When you say, ‘let’s create an environment where everybody feels safe and belongs,’ I don’t know anybody who says they don’t want that,” St. John says. “I don’t know anybody who wants an environment where they make people miserable — even if that’s what they’re doing, albeit unintentionally.”

In that sense, she believes belonging is a zig-zagging path of progression. “Belonging gets us a lot of the way there,” she imagines. It doesn’t accomplish what DEI does, she also acknowledges, in that it isn’t a highly intentional move to target employees or candidates for opportunity because they’re different. “We lose that with belonging,” St. John concedes, while reiterating that the approach of purposefully re-allocating power wasn’t working, anyway. “But we’re creating environments where people can thrive. And by thriving, the hope is that they will then be elevated organizationally, anyway, because of that.”

And unlike DEI, which has become a flashpoint for some companies, she sees belonging taking “the wind out of the anger and hostility” provoked by DEI. It’s simply asking that people treat one another the way they themselves would like to be treated: in the community, within their own family, in school…and at work.

“It’s not the Bogeyman,” she insists. “This is not ‘woke.’ This is just being kind.”