Diversity and inclusion practitioners have concluded that one of the reasons workplaces do not transform to be inclusive, or transform at a slower pace, is unconscious biases that make it impossible for those hiring and promoting to see talent among certain individuals or groups because of ingrained biases that they themselves may not be conscious of.
These biases may be beliefs about people belonging to certain categories, such as race, age, gender, sexuality, personality, education level and so on. As a result of these beliefs, they cannot see the individual and situation for what it is but their judgement is informed by these beliefs, whether applicable or not to the individual being judged.
This is when an organisation may have the right policies to drive change, but those hiring keep saying they can’t find talent despite their best efforts, or blame those individuals they have biases against for all manner of things that make it impossible to promote them.
If one is lucky to pass through the scrutiny to be hired or promoted to satisfy the policy expectations, one is often expected to fall within biased behaviours and not be truly yourself. Otherwise the system will reject you.
To cope and avoid trouble, many would choose to just fall in line and play the script. We all know this can never be an acceptable way to go through life, trying to fit into someone’s ideas of who you are and how you should behave to avoid rocking the boat, but what do you do when you have bills to pay?
These matters are discussed as academic concepts to make sense of observable behavioural trends, but they are often cruel and painful when they play out in real situations. By its very nature, transformation triggers resistance from those who believe certain spaces belong to them. Whether consciously or unconsciously they will put up a fight to ensure they protect those spaces.
This means that those brought into those spaces because of transformation efforts have to bear the brunt of being victims of these cruel expectations and actions directed at breaking them psychologically to put them in “their place“ so as to protect the space.
The challenge about discussing these matters as academic concepts is that the language used softens the cruelty and their unacceptable nature. Suddenly, when we give these well orchestrated behaviours terms such as “unconscious biases“ we normalise them, and even go as far as creating programmes to assist these individuals suffering from unconscious biases to hopefully get past them so as to end up with a diverse and inclusive work environment. We do all of this while the real victims are suffering, often in silence, as they are being bullied and made to feel they do not belong.
One of our Black Management Forum members reported a matter where she was invited by one of the big corporate companies to be part of their enterprise and supplier development programme as a black female.
The opportunity seemed empowering for her and her business until she got to experience abuse from one of the company’s white male general managers. She and her employees were called derogatory names and the abuse was so severe that she reported it, but all her efforts at reporting simply caused the organisation to label her as a trouble maker, which resulted in her contract being terminated and her ending up in court battles that she can’t afford as a small business.
As a big corporate, they’ve used their muscle to silence her and she’s now out of business, with no one to come to her rescue. Another case I observed at Labour Court in a matter involving a black female employee and a university, where a white male judge argued on behalf of the university, instead of the university attorney arguing the case. The judge didn’t allow the hearing of the side of the black female and then simply dismissed the case.
The judge admitted that he hadn’t read all the crucial documents in the file, but was convinced by the university case and dismissed the case. This was blatant abuse of power that could academically be explained by terms such as “unconscious bias“.
To make sense of these behaviours we could classify them under affinity or confirmation bias, where one favours people like them, or forms an opinion and then looks for evidence to support one’s opinion.
By explaining these behaviours we sanitise the cruelty perpetrated by adults who are consciously simply ensuring that the spaces they believe are reserved for them remain theirs. We must act swiftly against this cruelty if we are serious about opening opportunities for all and transforming this country.
Dr Sibongile Vilakazi is president of the Black Management Forum.
BUSINESS REPORT