Workplace Diversity: What Happens When White Men Don't Want It

Thomas Friedman probably did not intend to offer any insights about white-male bias in yesterday's New York Times Op-ed "59 is the new 30," but the diversity consultant in me could not ignore how his underlying theme explained why diversity is a dilemma in Corporate America and law firms: diversity efforts fail when white men don't give a damn about their employees of color.

Yesterday, Friedman gushed about how he identified with a 59 year-old golfer and how this affinity engendered a personal stake in the golfer's tournament, writing, "...if you are a baby boomer you could not help but look at him and say something you would never say about Tiger or Kobe: 'He's my age; he's my build; he's my height and he even had his hip replaced like me. If he can do that, maybe I can do something like that, too."

To a certain extent, we are all guilty of identity-bias. Friedman and I share a healthy bias in wanting to see those who we identify with succeed. (I'll admit that every time I see President Obama's popularity poll numbers slip, I wince.) However, white men, who are still the majority of executives and partners in corporations and law firms, can kill a diversity initiative if their identity bias is only based on physical affinity.

Almost every professional of color I featured in my book, Recruiting & Retaining a Diverse Workforce: New Rules for a New Generation, watched their senior-level white supervisor champion the success of a lucky-to-be-white guy. Whether senior white male executives identify with junior-level white men because they are reminders of their more youthful days or reminders of their children, the result is the same. Junior-level white men are getting better access to informal and formal mentoring.

A few years ago when I was giving a diversity presentation to a group lawyers, an earnest white male partner asked why associates of color tend to leave law firms after a few years. A recent study by Catalyst, the non-profit that conducts research about race and gender issues in the workplace, released a study last week that put statistics to the partner's retention quandary. According to the study, 86% of women attorneys of color leave their law firms by their seventh year. Even more startling, all of the firms that participated in the study have diversity and inclusion programs. Why aren't these programs working? It's simple. Until senior-level white men take a stake in the success of their employees of color, their organizations' retention and promotion efforts will fail.

When white male executives sincerely ask how they can keep more of their Black, Asian and Latino talent, I ask, how much do they really want them? If senior-level white men siphoned some of their identity bias toward the Asian man or Black woman in the office, racial diversity wouldn't be an issue. More white male executives have to want their employees of color to succeed. More white male executives need to stop by the offices of their employees of color to check in and see how they are doing; give unsolicited and invaluable advice about career tracks; or make it their business to assign the next high-profile matter to a person of color. White men are capable of this type of obsession with another's success. If you don't believe me, just ask Thomas Friedman.

Follow Natalie Holder-Winfield on Twitter: www.twitter.com/nholderwinfield

Comments

[LaurenJill]

As an intercultu­ral/divers­ity coach, I can tell you that although we like to imagine "we are all one" culturally diverse employees bring to the workplace, differences in:
• Values
• Preferred work environment
• Communication style
• Concept of rewards; motivation
• How to engage and develop
•
Benefits of a diverse leadership include
• More innovation, because of multiple perspectives, less group-think
• Wide pool of talents and skills
• Reflects a multicultural market

http://www.callearning.com/cultural-competency-training.php

[greyhound2]

For the past 40 years, it has been the same old tirade of the "imaginary white boggyman" is the reason for everybody's problems. Don't you get tired of the same old hash?

[mixedup]

Lack of "oneness and respect" for all of nature including humanity,
Total Control and Domination of nature(profitable goods) and humanity(profitable slaves).

That could be the cause of all the slaves problems.

But "awareness, knowledge, information about TRUTH" being revealed to the slaves might be the biggest problem of the powers that be.

[mixedup]

There is a Canadian family who is Black but have fully adopted100% Canadian Culture and speak with a Canadian accent. They are from Ethiopia. They fly to Greece for a 3 week vacation, and their child is born on the last day of the trip. When they leave Greece, (where the child was just born) they fly to Hong Kong and take up permanent residence. The child is raised in both Canadian Culture and Chinese Culture, but is sent off to boarding school in France where he/she becomes an adult. This adult Marries a French Person from Australia and moves to the U.S.

A Black, Ethiopian, Canadian, Chinese, but born in Greece, French person (who sounds Australian now) but calls them self an American.

It's better to just accept the truth that we are just one human race. Humans. Not blacks, Asians, and Latinos, humans. The more you want to see "diversity" the more you don't see them as the "same humans". That might be what some refer to as racist. Trying to divide and conquer.

We're all the same humans, stop seeing color and you will only be proud of your fellow humans getting promoted because of their hard work.

[mixedup]

If a white person gets promoted, the white person who didn't feels their work was lacking.
If a white person gets promoted, the "diverse" person must have deserved it more, therefore the boss is racist.

"Before we can influence change, we must be able to communicate in the language used by the decision makers."

Well, if "Influencing change" is the worst enemy of the "decision makers" then you are in the wrong place at the wrong time barking up the wrong tree for the wrong change.

This seems to be ALL about being entitled to something somebody else is offering to people that you feel are different than you. Your state of mind stems from the feeling that YOU are different.

I'm sure the non diverse white people may feel it's already diverse, because everybody is different.
But "diverse" people won't feel diversity unless everybody looks like them.

If a black employee want's a diverse partner, why can't we pair him up with a white person?

Would that white employee represent diversity?

[NHolderWinfield]

I think the bigger issue is what is it going to take to get top executives to start promoting and advancing professionals of all different backgrounds. While I agree with your sentiments regarding racial classifications, the terms "Asians, Blacks, and Latinos" are the parlance used in the U.S. diversity spheres. Before we can influence change, we must be able to communicate in the language used by the decision makers.

[mixedup]

"advancing professionals of all different backgrounds"

I thought employees advance NOT based on "backgrounds", but based on work ethic, work accomplishments, etc.

If I was just promoting employees for diversity, I could just advance one who's Irish, one who's Armenian, and one who's Portugese. Except, if those three had pure white skin tone, somebody wouldn't see it as diverse.

I think the bigger issue here is how can we make sure we are ONLY promoting the "most worthy employees" and not just "advancing professionals of all different backgrounds".

It should be based on only skills, not advancing certain races just because of skin color.

"what is it going to take to get top executives to start promoting and advancing professionals of all different backgrounds"

It's going to require that the "professionals of all different backgrounds" to see themselves as one and the same family as those who are "NOT professionals of all different backgrounds".

I'm just curious. What if 100 employees were all mixed races and nationalities. And no two people were the same. What if all of them didn't promote the darkest one. Then you'd see that this problem would still exist in even the MOST diverse situation. In order for it to be equal, there must be no diversity. We must see ourselves as one united human race. If not, you will only be divided, and thus conquered.

[Haditup2here]

It is this type of thinking (as you are presenting in your p0st) as to why the U.S. is falling behind when it comes to global competition. When it comes to solving problems or finding solution there is no "one" solution or "one way" to solving that particular problem - - - only the better solution. Mind you, I am not speaking as someone in the field of management, but someone in the field of engineering. For instance, in engineering, there are a great deal of people who are visually inclined (like me), while others are more mathematically inclined. Then there are others who are good at working with their hands but may not be as well verse when it comes to grasping physics. Therefore, no "one" person may have all of the skills to solve a particular problem. That is why people work in teams. However, if you hire people who not only have your skill sets, strengths, and some of the same weaknesses as well, what sense does that make? However, that is the point of this article. Because workplace is as much a social as it is a business atmosphere, employers oftentimes (through bias) select those who they readily relate to.

[mixedup]

"we must be able to communicate in the language used by the decision makers."

I feel the exact opposite. One should never "dumb-down" their language so people can understand it.
I would rather speak correctly, retain intellectual honesty, and set the example for them. They have to see your example. Then they will follow, sink or swim. It's up to them. You can't EVER use their incorrect terms "so it's easy for them to digest", that brings you down to their level. They have synesthesia, and you have been programmed to it.

Blacks Latinos and Asians, just listen to that again. There are black Latinos and black Asians! And white black people! This is crazy-speak. Set the example in order to change, you'll never change anything copying their mistakes.

[mixedup]

"Black, Asian and Latino talent" ?

This seems to be clear evidence of Synesthesia. Black, White, Tan, Brown, etc. are colors. If you are going to call out the "types" you've got to pick either between using colors, nationalities, races, or continents. You couldn't possibly not have noticed the mistake of confusing this stuff.

Do you know there are Black-Asians? Do you know there are White-Latinos? Do those "count" as diverse too? Do you know Obama is considered FULLY White (by black people) in lots of countries?

I hope you are not suggesting that all one needs is a "Black, Asian, and Latino" kid in the cartoon for it to become magically diverse. Unfortunately, that's exactly how you came across. And besides, you left out the REAL minorities, "indigenous native peoples", so you must not want it "too diverse" .

It just comes off as you saying you really "just want more like you, and less like them", and that is the opposite of diversity.

[Nommo]

I think that you should go back and read it again. The blog was not nearly long enough to do the minutiae you introduce.