IDEA - ARE YOU GUILTY OF UNCONSCIOUS BIAS AND BELIEFS?
IDEA - ARE YOU GUILTY OF UNCONSCIOUS BIAS AND BELIEFS?
This week’s The Provocateur welcomes guest blogger and colleague, Krishan Mehta, PhD. Krishan completed his PhD from the University of Toronto where he studied the philanthropy of immigrants in Canada.
SEEKING CLARITY ON INCLUSION IN 2020: AN OPENING FOR CONVERSATION
Krishan Mehta, PhD
January 14th 2020
Photo Credit: Unsplash
Starting with a Defining Moment
It was a brief encounter, but one that I often think about. I was in a coffee shop talking on the phone in Gujarati when a man came up to me and exclaimed, “You should learn English if you want to live in this country!” He then ran out in a huff, leaving me hurt and speechless.
How does one react to such a situation? What’s wrong with speaking another language? Why did he presume that I didn’t know English or that I wasn’t from here? As I stewed over this incident, I started to ask harder questions: How are beliefs and assumptions made? And, what is the ripple effect of these biases? As someone who works in philanthropy, I often think about this in terms of how I see donors and volunteers – and how I believe they see me.
Defining moments, like the one I experienced in the coffee shop, can be big or small, and often rollup into an inaccurate or disturbing profile about a person or an entire group: “He doesn’t even speak English so he has no commitment to Canadian culture!” Needless to say, assumptions can be made by a quick glance or soundbite based on biases that are created over time. And more often than not, they have a devastating effect. Just think about how often you hear comments like, “She’s talented, but not a good fit for our organization” or “That community is not generous so don’t bother asking them to support your cause”?
Ultimately, this is where the real challenge about diversity and inclusion work rests. How do we resist and dismantle our sometimes unwavering commitment to our biases and beliefs?
Inclusion as Unlearning
We can learn a lot by putting Canada and the United States under the microscope because of the various ways in which we account for diversity along with an emerging body of knowledge that has taken a close look at the social, political, and economic dimensions of inclusion in the charitable sector.
If you look up “diversity” and “inclusion”, you will certainly find variations on the terminology. Some focus on the kinds of diversity we often hear about (race, gender, ability, sexual orientation, and so on) while others look at factors such as class, faith and education. Some folks think about “intersectionality” whereby two or more dimensions of diversity converge. Others look at the impact of diversity on workplace culture, governance, personal safety and so forth. The possibilities for defining and understanding are infinite, making it difficult to crisply answer the question, what exactly makes someone (or a community) “diverse”?
“DIVERSITY
Diversity includes all the ways in which people differ, encompassing the different characteristics that make one individual or group different from another. While diversity is often used in reference to race, ethnicity, and gender, we embrace a broader definition of diversity that also includes age, national origin, religion, disability, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, education, marital status, language, and physical appearance.
EQUITY
Equity is the fair treatment, access, opportunity, and advancement for all people, while at the same time striving to identify and eliminate barriers that have prevented the full participation of some groups. Improving equity involves increasing justice and fairness within the procedures and processes of institutions or systems, as well as in their distribution of resources.
INCLUSION
Inclusion is the act of creating environments in which any individual or group can be and feel welcomed, respected, supported, and valued to fully participate.
A SUCCINCT WAY OF DESCRIBING THESE DIFFERENT CONCEPTS IS THAT “DIVERSITY IS A NUMBER, EQUITY IS AN OUTCOME, AND INCLUSION IS A BEHAVIOUR.”
Most people agree that while related, diversity and inclusion are distinct in so much that one is a fact of life or desire (“Yes, we would like to have more diversity”) while the other focuses on how to create a climate and culture that respects, values, and leverages diversity to do what is good and right. (“We have a safe and respectful office culture because everyone feels – and is – included”.)
Inclusion work tends to have a degree of unlearning associated with it, meaning that in respecting other cultures, traditions, and beliefs, we are meant to challenge our own assumptions and biases. In this regard, inclusion sometimes gives way to the concept of “taking a walk in the other person’s shoes”. We must proceed with caution here because learning about or respecting one’s differences does not give us permission to call them our own. Inclusion isn’t just about the light stuff – appreciating food, culture, language, clothes, etc. Years (or generations) of exclusion and discrimination (sometimes referred to as oppression) tend to be very painful. You can’t just take that on and off like you would an ethnic costume.
Furthermore, as my take on inclusion evolves, I am increasingly interested in the role of power and privilege in our sector. In my opinion, we can only get to the heart of the matter when people see how their power and privilege (or lack of power and privilege) propels an uneven “us over them” system.
Shifting Sands on Power
Fasten your seatbelts because we’re about to speed through some complex concepts. While everyone has some power and privilege, some have more than others. For example, white men disproportionately occupy charity leadership positions, holding greater power and decision-making capacity than white women. In this vein, women of colour are further underrepresented in charity leadership positions. Naturally, the question then becomes: How much power will one share in order to support a level playing field? The hard reality is that only an exceptional few would happily give up their power or seat to someone with less privilege. This is where the argument for access and equity come into play. Inclusion, therefore, isn’t enough since it doesn’t really challenge the “us over them” dynamic. In other words, just because you are included doesn’t mean that you have the power to change or direct your organization’s culture or work.
Clarity for 2020
I am delighted that ViTreo is kicking off the year with a focus on these topics because, as many of you will agree, change begins when we open ourselves up to the realities and complexities about diversity, inclusion and inequality. While A LOT more could be said and debated today, the next two posts by Melody Song, MA, CFRE and Birgit Burton provide further context to these uneasy but lofty concepts. For me, 2020 is about seeking greater clarity on how our sector must evolve in light of diversity and inclusion.
With all else that’s raging in the world, we need change now more than ever before.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Krishan Mehta, Assistant Vice President, Engagement
Ryerson University
Krishan Mehta is the Assistant Vice President, Engagement at Ryerson University, where he leads alumni relations, special fundraising campaigns, and other strategies to engage different communities in support of the university. Previously, he held a variety of senior fundraising, alumni relations and marketing roles at Seneca College and the University of Toronto. Krishan leads the Fundraising Management Certificate Program at Ryerson and is a professor in Carleton University's Philanthropy and Non-Profit Leadership Graduate Program. Krishan completed his PhD from the University of Toronto where he studied the philanthropy of immigrants in Canada. He serves as a board member of CanadaHelps.org and the TELUS community grants board. He is also the Immediate Past-President of the Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP) Greater Toronto Chapter, the largest AFP chapter in the world.