White Men and Diversity

What Works and What Doesn’t: Ensuring that Organizational Diversity and Inclusion Efforts Engage White Men

 

The conversations are often similar: A diversity manager who is almost always a person of color or a white woman telephones to discuss ways to engage white men in their organization's Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) efforts. During these calls, they share stories of backlash, indifference, or disinterest on the part of white men. It has been our experience that diversity managers often express fatigue and weariness in having to shoulder diversity change efforts themselves. They long to have some of their white male colleagues step up and speak out about the value of diversity. They also convey their wish to have white men be more assertive in forging diversity partnerships with other individuals. Unfortunately, these leaders are at times discouraged because they don't know what else to do to engage white men.

Over the years of assisting courageous leaders in organizations, we've witnessed strategies to better engage white men in effective D&I efforts that have both worked and not worked. In the pages that follow, we've outlined the lessons that we, and those leaders, have learned. If your organization faces challenges in attracting support for diversity efforts, perhaps these observations can help you work through the roadblocks.

There is no quick fix; it's a long-term effort.
The message upfront should be that D&I efforts are about everyone in the workplace. There is no silver bullet or quick fix because it takes persistence, tenacity, and an alignment of actions and strategies over time to cultivate inclusive work cultures.

Many firms want to simply define the problem and then fix it. This problem-solving approach is a hallmark of white male culture and certainly is valid in many situations. However, when this strategy is applied to D&I efforts, it can further alienate white men, who sometimes see their company adding new "diversity hires" and assume those additions are due to people's skin color or gender rather than their skills sets and competences. Furthermore, the quick-fix approach can fuel feelings of tokenism from those new arrivals.

Leaders who are committed to diversity need to view any engagement of white men as a long-term effort. While skills training and awareness sessions are important tools, D&I efforts to engage white men cannot be seen as a one-time program to implement or as a problem to solve. What doesn't work is a mandatory program mentality to engagement efforts. Mandatory diversity training can often deepen resistance, cynicism, and apathy, and further divide and alienate potential partnerships across differences at work. Another approach is to plan, organize, and execute efforts over the long term. It is important to avoid the temptation to adopt short-term solutions.

"Cultivate white male leaders who are grounded in their diversity journeys, willing to visibly practice their diversity learnings, and understand their role in partnering with other white men, white women, and people of color."

Presently, there are very few white men in senior leadership roles engaged in D&I efforts. Yet they, along with leaders who are white women and people of color, have a visible role in guiding efforts that promote and support engagement from all parts of the organization.

White male senior leaders who are able to acknowledge what they know and what they don't know about diversity transmit authenticity to their role as leaders. They demonstrate that the practice of vital partnership is more about being truthful and vulnerable, and less about being politically correct.

Russ Danielson, vice president and chief executive of Providence Health System in Oregon, is one of those visible leaders who admits that he doesn't know everything about inclusiveness. Danielson demonstrates his continued curiosity and hunger to deepen his learning journey, and has publicly admitted his shortcomings numerous times. His authenticity—warts and all—combined with his passion to create an inclusive work place, demonstrates to his employees that he does get it. Frame D&I efforts to include the interests of white men.

When D&I efforts are solely about the recruitment and retention of women and people of color, it is often only a matter of time before resentment from white men and charges of tokenism ensue. D&I efforts have for so long primarily addressed the recruitment and retention of non-white males. Many people have never considered that white men have a self-interest and an ongoing commitment to D&I.

Some of those self-interests include:

• Enjoying enhanced quality of relationships, both at work and at home.
• Heightening the quality and content of communication, especially with other white men.
• Seeing greater value in such leadership skills as empathy, compassion, vulnerability, and deep listening.
• Developing and then using a support system rather than thinking that competence is having to go at it alone most of the time.
• Strengthening the sense of community so it's possible to talk over professional or personal dilemmas.
• Having greater self-confidence, knowing they have real contributions to make in diversity—and inclusion—related issues.
• Expanding the sense of true partnership as it pertains to D&I learning by seeing other white men as potential partners and teachers.
• Wasting less energy on negatively impacted work relationships that result when matters of difference are off the table.
• Using greater skill in being able to bring up difficult conversations.
• Spending less time being unconsciously incompetent, and having more time to practice being a more vital work partner who is willing to make mistakes during the learning process.

It is important to shatter the myth that diversity efforts do not include white men. What doesn't work is offering D&I efforts that do not include the interests of white men. A limited approach will only create more divisiveness and apathy.

Challenge conventional wisdom.
In 2000, following a highly publicized racial discrimination lawsuit, David Ratcliffe, then president and CEO of Georgia Power in Atlanta, made an unconventional decision to appoint a heterosexual white male as the company's first vice president of diversity. In addition to diversity, Ratcliffe also gave responsibility for corporate relations, supplier diversity, and workforce planning to the new functional organization.

Frank McCloskey, who had 28 years of business-line experience at Georgia Power, was tapped for his business acumen, understanding of the organization's culture, and passion for fairness. Ratcliffe's rationale was that any sustained diversity at Georgia Power could be counterproductive without white male involvement.

Georgia Power's broad diversity initiatives connected leadership effectiveness to increased understanding around issues of race, gender, and sexual orientation. The company created new leadership accountabilities that reflected its belief that managing across all human and organizational differences improves daily business decisions and personal interactions. The company's culture-change initiatives continue today and engaging white men remains a critical piece of the strategy.

Most firms define diversity in a very broad sense, yet the overwhelming majority of chief diversity officers, diversity council members, and action team leaders are generally men and women of color, and white women. Why does a largely white male leadership look only to white women and people of color to fill these roles? Does this avoidance of white males in key diversity leadership positions propagate the myth that white men don't know about diversity, aren't diverse, and hence could not possibly lead a diversity effort? If companies continue this approach to enhancing D&I efforts, does leadership unknowingly send the message that diversity does not include everyone?

Women and people of color should not be blamed for this predicament because they did not create this unbalanced leadership dynamic. Sure, some make it more difficult for white men to expose their questions and ignorance about diversity. Others may worry that if white men become more engaged in diversity efforts and take on their share of leadership, white women and people of color might lose the little senior management ground they have forged through positions tied to diversity. The role white male leaders play in shaping this effort is huge, yet oftentimes unacknowledged.

The notion of asking white women and people of color to educate and lead others on D&I has largely been created by caring, patient, dedicated, mostly white male leadership searching for a more diverse workforce.

"When white male leaders uncover their own personal motivations for greater diversity, including why this effort is personally important to them, it will give them the staying power necessary to help shift long held, and often unconscious, institutional practices."

More direct white male involvement in D&I change efforts will further help organizations practice diversity so that it is truly about everyone.

Embrace and invite resistance.
Creating sound D&I work will also foster resistance, which in and of itself is not bad—opposition is often a reasonable response to change. A way to combat it is to work with it, invite it, validate it, and use that energy to reshape and embolden your efforts.

Make sure that you are relentless and compassionate simultaneously as you move forward. Expect people to question your intentions and motives. It makes sense that if white men and diversity have been practiced as an oxymoron, people will initially question why any inclusiveness effort needs to also focus on a group often viewed as entitled or privileged.

Additionally, challenge others to question their reasoning for such assertions. Ask the following question: Can your firm really be successful in D&I efforts without white males as fully engaged and active participants in any change effort? If you think your firm can, look deeper and ask again.

Constantly over-communicate your intent for your D&I efforts.
In 1999, Mike Kennedy, then the manager of the Northwest Region for CH2M Hill, an engineering consulting firm, committed the time and resources for his region's management team to look at issues of diversity over an extended period. At the time, the team was almost exclusively white male. Part of the team's work was to create a business case and road map for diversity for the region.

When the report was completed, Kennedy scheduled a series of 25 half-day meetings at every regional office to communicate the plan and business case. The meetings included ample opportunities for feedback, which was documented and used later by the management team to fine-tune the region's ongoing diversity efforts. The process lasted over a year and created a broad and inclusive dialogue amongst the predominantly white male engineering culture.

Work to find senior-level white men who have the self-awareness, tenacity, and compassion to lead publicly with their hearts—like Kennedy, and the other white men on his regional management team, who took the time to personally deliver the business case. Instead of looking to women and people of color, this team comprised largely of white men started the change effort themselves. Remember, change begins with a small, dedicated group of engaged individuals.

When a critical mass of white men is willing to start an affinity group to address diversity issues, make sure that you endorse it. Support white men working with other white men to both examine and challenge their assumptions and beliefs about D&I efforts.

In 1999, Shell Oil Company in Houston, Texas realized that many of the company's white males increasingly viewed diversity as "not about them." After conducting white-male focus groups, Shell's Global Diversity Practice confirmed that there was a high level of white male confusion and frustration toward the company's diversity efforts. Shell turned to White Men as Full Diversity Partners (WMFDP) to offer a series of learning labs to help white men gain a more thorough understanding of diversity and their role and self-interest in inclusion efforts.

From this work, a group of white men in Shell's IT division created a white men's group. Though small and tenuous at times, the men continue to develop their partnership skills with other white men as well as with white women and people of color. A core group of men have clearly embraced diversity as "about them" and other white men.

White men who assume leadership in groups such as Shell's can experience negativism. When white men are not involved in diversity efforts at work, no one considers it odd. When they seek to gather with other white men around diversity, however, they often receive raised eyebrows. White women and people of color may question their intentions and simply think the affinity group is a veiled effort to maintain power. Some white men may assume that a white male who is visibly immersed in D&I efforts is attempting to become "politically correct" or the "diversity police" to other white men in the organization. Breaking rank with other white men can be a frightening proposition.

Bobbi Mooney, global manager for Shell's Group IT Infrastructure Base Services, located in Houston, Texas, has been a longtime outspoken partner for white men to be a part of the diversity dialogue in her organization. Mooney has consistently demonstrated her ability to help white men understand what it has been like for her and other women working inside a predominantly male environment. She has been relentless in engaging many white male colleagues in constructive dialogue that both supported and challenged their notion of diversity within Shell and their role in furthering the company's diversity efforts.

Bill Schwartz is a Houston-based manager in the Shell Group IT Infrastructure, and one of the advisors of the IT white male group. He has teamed with Mooney and Paul Krig, global manager for Diversity & Inclusion and Business IT, in sponsoring a WMFDP partnership learning workshop that brings white men together with white women and people of color to deepen their understanding of effective diversity partnerships at work.

As the group of white males in Shell's Houston IT organization began to coalesce, Mooney remained an outspoken and visible supporter of their efforts to form and talk about challenges white men faced at the company as they sought to contribute to corporate-wide diversity efforts. When others questioned the necessity of a white male affinity group, she was an outstanding ally, explaining to others why this group was necessary and supporting its continuation.

For some, affinity groups are unnecessary, divisive, and, hence, antithetical to inclusion; a white men's network runs counter to conventional wisdom. They would argue, "Every day at work is a white men's group; why do they need a group?" We believe, however, that white men's affinity networks can serve the following important roles:

• To focus white men, white women, and people of color on the role white men must play alongside others in D&I initiatives.
• To debunk the long held myth that white men don't know about diversity, aren't diverse, and can't learn from other white men.
• To help white men better discover their self-interest that will result as the organization better embraces differences and inclusion.

Our experience has shown that networks for white men are often difficult to form and maintain. Many white men resist being labeled as part of a white male group. They prefer instead to be seen as individuals. Additionally, when a white male group forms, it may be perceived by women and people of color as a continuation of the "old boys' club." Non-white men and women may also fear that any effort to focus on white men may detract from the firm's efforts at recruitment and retention of white women and people of color. Don't view it as an either/or proposition because they are both connected.

What Doesn't Work—Intolerance

"A willingness by people to engage in often messy or difficult conversations about diversity helps propagate a culture of inclusion. What doesn't work is not having a tolerance for mistakes."

Clearly communicate to employees the line that separates missteps from inexcusable behavior. That said, innocent mistakes from white men and others should be acceptable. Thus, it is important to use them as teaching moments rather than public forms of humiliation.

Most missteps come from a place of ignorance, not malicious intent. Clearly, ignorance cannot be raised as an ongoing excuse for failing to learn how to be more respectful, sensitive, or supportive. However, sometimes leaders harshly admonish employees for actions that they truly did not know were insensitive, disrespectful, and/or hurtful to others, and for which they lacked the opportunity to increase their level of understanding, whether through formalized training, life experience, or exposure. This type of reprisal contributes to a fear-based, low-trust work culture where little-to-no curiosity about differences is openly expressed. Political correctness rules the day and everyone suffers in their partnerships as a result. Don't let it happen.

What else doesn't work:

• Engaging only white men in a way that implies that they are broken and need to be fixed. Focusing solely on white men is not the answer. The engagement of white men demands that everyone examine their working assumptions in order to forge a broader coalition to support and deepen D&I efforts.
• Labeling someone's behavior as resistant or obstructionist and then discounting them outright. Organizations have to create opportunities that allow and invite a thoughtful dialogue where employees can truly express their views about diversity from where they currently are, not where others think they should be, on the spectrum. This aspect is key because when individuals cannot express their confusion, questions, or opposition, it impacts and limits their willingness to re-examine their behavior.
• Executing D&I work with the primary (especially when unacknowledged or expressed) motivation being avoidance or elimination of legal exposure.
• Executing D&I work with the primary motivation of meeting another's expectations (for example, corporate clients), without doing the work needed to obtain full personal buy-in about how the work will actually strengthen your own workplace.
• Practicing D&I as a zero-sum game where someone benefits at another's expense. It has to work for everyone for it to work for the organization.
• Derailing D&I work by allowing others to attach potentially negative labels to the efforts—such as, "affirmative action," "quotas," "preferences," and the like.

If you don't know why the re-engagement of white men is a critical step in your D&I efforts, start asking yourself why, and in your self-examination be curious. After a while, if you still don't have an answer, perhaps the premise of your D&I efforts needs be re-examined and then reconstructed.

If your firm simply wants to recruit more non-white males to your ranks, just call it that. To disguise a recruitment effort as your diversity effort is demeaning to new hires (shades of tokenism) and simply invites white men to question the firm's commitment to hiring the best and brightest.

Juggling these dynamics is tricky. It takes commitment and patience. However, D&I change efforts will not succeed without the engagement of white men alongside white women and people of color. If white men are not included, it leads to a dynamic that pits people and groups against each other. Everyone has to feel valued and acknowledged in an organization's day-to-day efforts. Getting everyone aligned and pulling in a similar direction takes courageous leadership, sound vision, and the tendency to view every member of your organization as a unique and vital asset.

---

From the November/December 2005 issue of Diversity & The Bar^®