Episode 20
· 31:16
In framing what individuals from diverse backgrounds might have to contribute as business assets, it sends to these groups the signal that, in fact, the organization, when when they show up at the interview, what the organization may do is try to evaluate what they could contribute in terms of their social identity. And so this actually makes for a very stereotyping and and depersonalizing experience for underrepresented group members.
Dr. Sonia Kang:When we talk about an organization's case for diversity, we're talking about the set of justifications or reasons it gives for why DEI is an important organizational value. A super common case that organizations make for promoting DEI is the business case for diversity. It's everywhere. It's the idea that diversity is important because it boosts an organization's bottom line. For example, in 2020, McKinsey released a report stating that companies with more gender diverse executive teams make more money.
Dr. Sonia Kang:The business case for diversity seems harmless or maybe even helpful on the surface, but research has found that using the business case for advocating for equality could, in some cases, be doing more harm than good. Today, we're going to debunk the myth that the business case for diversity is effective for creating equality for marginalized groups. I'm Dr. Sonia Kang, academic director at GATE.
Carmina Ravanera:And I'm Carmina Ravanera senior research associate at GATE.
Dr. Sonia Kang:This is an interesting myth to tackle because it really is everywhere. We hear about the business case for diversity all the time. It's almost like it's just taken for granted.
Carmina Ravanera:Yeah. So we're going to be unpacking the business case from a lot of different angles today. We'll talk about how it impacts employees from both underrepresented and dominant groups, and then we'll talk about whether the business case is actually effective in convincing people to make changes that advance equality. And finally, we'll go into what might be a better way to approach this idea of making a case for diversity.
Dr. Sonia Kang:Great. So let's start with the basics. What exactly is the business case for diversity?
Carmina Ravanera:Right. To learn a little bit more about this, I talked to Doctor Oriane Georgeac, Assistant Professor of Management and Organizations at Boston University's Questrom School of Business. She explained that there are typically two common ways that organizations justify their DEI efforts the business case and the fairness case.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:So a case for diversity is basically a public message that an organization actually broadcasts in which it really tries to make people understand why diversity matters to them. So it's public. It's typically on their website or their career pages, their diversity reports, blogs, social media, wherever. Recruitment materials is a big one as well. So it's public, and it's not capturing the views of any particular individual like the CEO.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:It's really representing the views of the organization as a whole. And and it focuses on the why question, so why are we doing diversity? Not what we're doing when we pursue diversity, how we're approaching it, or what are diversity stats. It's really not that. It's really the why.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:It's a rationale. It's a narrative about why we're doing what we're doing with regards to diversity. So the broad there are two broad categories of reasons why organizations may pursue diversity, and the first one is what we call the business case for diversity. The way we describe it is basically any type of diversity case that argues that the value of diversity comes from its benefits for the organizational performance. So that may be direct, like the usual McKinsey claims of diverse companies perform better.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:That may be indirect, like diversity is better for creativity. It's better for accessing some customer segments that we previously didn't have access to, or it helps us attract even better talent pools, all of which, in the end, would logically help the organization's performance. So any narrative or any rhetoric that frames diversity as a means to an end, which is improving performance, would fall into that broad category of a business case. And as you hinted, there are actually other types of cases that exist. And the big second category is what I call the fairness case for diversity.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:This one actually justifies diversity as valuable in and of itself on the grounds of moral principles, such as equal opportunity, fairness for all, etcetera. So it's really not making any claim about whether there will be benefits or not. It's really agnostic. It's not the point. It's just saying it's an important moral thing to ensure, irrespective of any benefits that may ensue.
Dr. Sonia Kang:So a big difference between these two rationales is that the business case frames diversity as a means to an end, whereas the fairness case frames diversity as important in and of itself, irrespective of any business benefits.
Carmina Ravanera:And of the two, organizations use the business case a lot more often. Orianne's research team investigated Fortune 500 company websites to understand their public rationale for diversity and found that about 80% make the business case and less than 5% make the fairness case, while the rest either didn't make a case or just didn't discuss diversity at all.
Dr. Sonia Kang:So the business case is super common for organizations. But what does the research say about how effective it is?
Carmina Ravanera:Here's what Oriane told me about her research on how members of underrepresented groups, LGBTQ plus professionals, women in STEM, and African American students respond to the business case for diversity?
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:What we did is that we randomly assigned them to read a message that a prospective organization had written on their website. And unbeknownst to them, they were randomly assigned to read either a business case, a fairness case, or no case. So just a claim that diversity mattered but without any explanation. And then what we did is that we asked them how they to what extent they felt like they would belong to the organization in question and how interested they would be in joining the organization if there was an interesting opportunity for them there. And what we found was that across all these three stigmatized identities, the same pattern replicated again and again, whereby those who had been randomly assigned to read a business case rather than a fairness case or no case reported significantly lower levels of anticipated sense of belonging to the organization, and in turn, led them to report lower interest in joining the organization.
Dr. Sonia Kang:It seems like the business case kind of backfires when you compare it to making the fairness case or even to making no case at all. It made people from underrepresented groups less interested in joining an organization. But why does this happen?
Carmina Ravanera:If you think about it, the business case reduces people's identities to tools for profit. People don't respond well to it because it makes them feel commodified or tokenized. Plus, they think that organizations will be evaluating them through the lens of stereotypes about their identities.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:What we saw was that it was mostly driven by a sense that they were more concerned about being seen stereotypically by the organization. There was also a sense that they would be depersonalized, meaning that they would be seen as identical to any other member within their social identity group, and also a perception that, that the organization was less intrinsically motivated about diversity, that it was more about what they could get out of it than a genuine commitment to diversity. We wanted to understand a little bit why and to understand why it's important to go back to what the business case actually says. And so what it says really is that different groups have different skills, different perspective, different experiences, interaction styles, you name it. But crucially, it doesn't stop there.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:Instead, it frames these, purportedly, quote, unquote, unique contributions as business assets that are the very ingredients that are gonna boost the organization's performance. And so in doing so, in framing what individuals from diverse backgrounds might have to contribute as business assets, it sends to these groups the signal that, in fact, the organization, when they show up at the interview, what the organization may do is try to evaluate what they could contribute in terms of their social identity. Really, like, for instance, if I'm a woman in STEM, maybe I'm going to be seen as a female engineer rather than just an engineer. And so maybe what they'll look for in my application is hints that I could bring this unique quote unquote female touch or this extra ingredient that purportedly will boost performance. And so this actually makes for a very stereotyping depersonalizing experience for underrepresented group members.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:And that's, in turn what drives down their sense of belonging and their interest in joining relative to those who read the fairness case or no case, where those assumptions are not present.
Dr. Sonia Kang:That makes sense. If you're told that your value lies in some quote unquote diverse trait or identity, you're not exactly going to feel like the organization values you for who you are.
Carmina Ravanera:Yeah. And she mentioned that the business case makes it seem like the organization doesn't see advancing DEI as intrinsically motivating. It's like the organization only cares about equality because there's profit involved. It's not an ideal way to talk about opportunities, fairness, and well-being for people who are experiencing marginalization and discrimination.
Dr. Sonia Kang:But it's not just bad for members of underrepresented groups, right? How do members of dominant groups react?
Carmina Ravanera:Well, it's interesting you ask that. It turns out that they don't respond well to it either. Here's what Oriane had to say about that.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:But we found some less consistent but still interesting patterns with well represented job seekers as well, such that in the context of white American college students, there was a sign post George Floyd's murder, and I think this is important as well, that they too, when they were exposed to a business case rather than a fairness case or a no case, could get a sense that they might be seen more stereotypically, and that undermined as well their sense of belonging and their willingness to join. It's possible that this happened because at the time of George Floyd's murder, race was so salient in the public debate, and you had all these companies making statements about the unique contributions and value that members of underrepresented groups had. It's possible that white students at that point thought, well, if that's what you're looking for and I'm white, then I I can't contribute any of those extra ingredients that you stereotypically may be, but you're assuming other, group members have. And so you're not gonna value me, hence the sense of of being stereotypes and and and the drop in in belonging.
Dr. Sonia Kang:This is backed up by research by Dr. Jamillah Bowman Williams, a professor of law at Georgetown University, who has examined how white people respond to the business case for diversity. In one study, white participants were randomly assigned to watch a video about an organization making a business case for diversity, or a video about general organizational performance. Those who watched the business case video showed greater bias against black teammates. They were less likely to nominate a Black teammate for a leadership role, even though all their teammates performed equally well.
Dr. Sonia Kang:The business case video seemed to trigger a sense of threat rather than persuading them about the value of diversity.
Carmina Ravanera:We can see that the business case can have detrimental effects on employees and potential hires. It can make members of underrepresented groups hesitant about working somewhere and it can increase bias among members of dominant groups. So now I want to turn to how this plays out in specific industries. I talked to Dr. Anamik Saha, professor of race and media at the University of Leeds. He's explored how people talk about diversity in the publishing sector.
Dr. Anamik Saha:So the business case for diversity refers to the kind of increasing awareness or understanding or attitude towards diversity that by increasing it within an organization that could lead to economic growth. So in the context of publishing where I've done a lot of research, but this I find extends throughout the cultural industries or media in general, This manifests in terms of how media companies, organizations are putting, placing an impetus or onus on hiring more people from racial or ethnic backgrounds in order to then engage more racial racially and ethnically diverse communities and audiences. So there's an assumption by having that by having more, let's say, black, brown, and Asian people in our organization, they're gonna help us reach black, brown, and Asian audiences. More specifically about the publishing industry, publishers, you know, seem to be working with an assumption that by having more black, brown, Asian authors, we can read we can reach more black, brown, and Asian readers, which is a lovely idea in principle, but doesn't really bear out. Undoubtedly, there have been there are a lot more opportunities for racialized groups.
Dr. Anamik Saha:We are seeing more diversity inside the publishing industry, which research shows, if I could put it kinda crudely, is the whitest of all of the cultural industries, including, you know, music, television, film, and so on. So we're seeing definitely seeing more people from racially minoritized backgrounds working inside the publishing industry. For a moment, it looked like there was an increase in the commissioning of racialized authors. This all really came to a head with the Black Lives Matter protest in 2020. This is where I think you see a spike of interest in black, brown, and Asian authors.
Dr. Anamik Saha:And I was conducting interestingly, in 2020, I was conducting research in the publishing industry, and then the Black Lives Matter moment happens. And you can see there's a scramble for racialized authors, essentially, in order to demonstrate their anti racist credentials. And, you know, in according to the business case with diversity, engage a black audience who historically have been left out in book culture in the UK, at least. So that's how it manifests inside the organization in terms of the books being commissioned, in terms of the content being commissioned more broadly.
Carmina Ravanera:In his research, he's observed that publishers use the business case as a surface level way of addressing diversity without actually tackling inequality. He says that this applies to both their employees and the markets they serve.
Dr. Anamik Saha:What I found in my research and publishing is that as much as publishers want to kind of present themselves as open, meritocratic, not racist, this they still, I feel, devalue racially minoritized audiences. So there's still a lot of assumptions that these people, these groups don't buy books. They're not avid readers. And these are really problematic assumptions for all kinds of reasons. If you look at, for instance, the people who who use libraries the most in The UK, it's those groups.
Dr. Anamik Saha:And so when it came to, for instance, the commissioning of black and Asian authors, which, as I said, I think there was an increase in the number of authors from those backgrounds being published, but only because historically, the number's been so low in the, you know, in the first instance. While we did see an increase, they were still essentially being packaged and promoted for the one audience that the publishing industry knows and recognizes, I e, those people who belong to the same social class, the same social media as the publishers themselves. So you find that a lot of these books are presented and aestheticized in a way that appeals to the white middle class reader. So, you know, that's why you see a prevalence of orientalist tropes or ways in which with those authors often when I spoke to those authors, they would complain that their books were kind of for instance, the book jackets would present ethnicity or racial identity in a way that was seen to appeal to, you know, to a a particular white middle class kind of outlook or perspective. I think this is a really big issue, and this is this relates specifically to people who are employed in these industries.
Dr. Anamik Saha:So people who work as editors, who work in sales, in marketing, and so on. There's, yeah, there's been a push for more diversity in that regard. But what often what happened when I spoke to these people is that they would describe how even though, you know, they have been, you know, let in, if you like, there's still an expectation that they're gonna conform to the boardroom, the executive suite, the the meeting, you know, the the the the the department that they work within. There was an expectation that they conform. So as much as there's been this business case for diversity, that having more racial ethnic minoritized groups in our organization will, you know, kind of allow us to reach wider audiences, actually, what happens is that a lot of the people who end up getting these opportunities end up feeling like window dressing, that they're there to kind of help the publisher the publishing house feel better about itself, you know, that it that we are open and meritocratic.
Dr. Anamik Saha:When in actual fact, when it actually comes, the business case with diversity only really works when you're allowing these people to bring in their different perspectives and worldviews and ideas where they're not just churning out kind of tired, old, you know, kind of assumptions about audiences.
Dr. Sonia Kang:I think this really resonates with Oriane's research. The business case for diversity puts the focus on getting underrepresented groups in the door, which is important, but it doesn't say anything meaningful about equality or inclusion for underrepresented groups. In fact, it might make people from these groups feel like they're, as Animek says, window dressing.
Carmina Ravanera:It also puts the onus on underrepresented groups to improve the organization's performance by nature of their identity. In an industry like publishing, it burdens them with the responsibility of reaching their identity group as an audience, even if they don't necessarily have the tools to do that.
Dr. Sonia Kang:So it seems that with the business case, there's a focus on numbers rather than on eliminating inequality, which is the real issue.
Carmina Ravanera:Yeah, we've seen the business case in action for many years now, but there's been very little change, not only in terms of representation of marginalized groups in organizations, but also how they're treated. Systemic racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination are still very prevalent in workplaces including bias in hiring and promotions. Pay gaps and exclusionary work cultures are all over the place And now many organizations are scaling back or cutting DEI initiatives entirely as part of a political shift. But if organizations really believe that DEI was helpful for business, they wouldn't be rushing to cut it.
Dr. Sonia Kang:Yeah. And this makes sense because research has shown that, contrary to many people's beliefs, making an economic case for something, not just diversity but even initiatives for sustainability or corporate social responsibility, doesn't actually convince people that it's important. It doesn't inspire people to act.
Carmina Ravanera:True. The business case might help to get conversations about equality started in the workplace because it can at least open the door for people who might not engage with the topic at all, or even those who think that DEI has nothing to do with how an organization functions. But the scholars I spoke with made some suggestions for better ways to address this discourse around diversity.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:So that leaves us with a question of what can organizations say instead? And here, I want to suggest two options. The first option, if organizations still feel the need that they need to provide a reason why they care about diversity, why diversity matters to them, would be to use a fairness case. It's not a perfect case. It has some detrimental effects, but what we find in our research is that it consistently cuts in half or even three times the detrimental effects of the business case.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:So if you're going to justify diversity, it better be in moral terms. Now, another option is just not to justify diversity at all. So I'm not saying not talk about diversity. By all means, talk about diversity, but just state your commitment as something that makes sense and doesn't require extra justification. In the same way that organizations do not justify the importance of innovation, it goes without saying, my recommendation is that they could actually just stay their commitment to diversity without justifying it.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:And what we find also consistently in our studies is that even better than the fairness case, are the outcomes of this kind of no case at all, that makes people the most happy.
Dr. Sonia Kang:So there's the option of not trying to justify DEI at all, just doing the work. Doctor Jamillah Bowman Williams, who I mentioned before, advocates for moving away from the business case to what she calls the transformational case. Inspiring people to internalize the value of equity so that it becomes a shared value and doesn't need to be justified at all. This approach focuses on social and moral reasons for stopping discrimination and bias, and it can lead to more positive outcomes because it spurs people to take action in a way that you just don't see with the business case.
Carmina Ravanera:These are all great ideas for how diversity, equity, and inclusion can become more of a core part of an organization rather than an add on that is easy to cut when it isn't immediately leading to profit.
Dr. Sonia Kang:So if our listeners were to hear someone making the business case for diversity or implying that it's a necessary justification to make, what could they say to push back on the idea that it leads to real equality?
Carmina Ravanera:Well, Anamik commented on how you could challenge them by asking what the business case is really doing for your workplace and the people in it.
Dr. Anamik Saha:I guess I would encourage them if they have the if they have wits about them and the courage to challenge you know, are you sure you really believe in this business case for diversity? Or is it simply the case that you want more people of color in your organization, company, and so on in order to, as I say, make yourself feel better about yourself, to make your company, organization, institution, you know, kind of present itself as equitable, open, meritocratic. So I'd kind of immediately challenge that I'd wanna challenge that idea. You know, what are your real motivations here? Are we just window dressing?
Dr. Anamik Saha:You theoretically believe that having more people of color in an organization will enable you to reach those audiences. But, you know, again, to what what what conditions are you creating for people of color to really have the freedom and and feel safe to bring their perspectives. Anyone who makes a business case with diversity, I wanna get a real sense of how much do you actually care about reaching historically marginalized audiences, and how are you gonna enable me, for instance, as someone with from a marginalized background to, yeah, to be able to speak to those people's needs and desires and to be able to kind of encourage, for instance, a publishing house to publish the kind of books that those audiences want. There's one more thing to say, though, and this complicates it, is that I'd also wanna challenge their assumption they might have about me as being representative of a particular community. So I'm kind of contradicting myself here, but this is kind of a real issue, and it's a really tricky one.
Dr. Anamik Saha:So it's the idea that, oh, you're black. What do black people wanna read? And, you know, that's kind of a ridiculous you know, you can't burden anyone with, you know, representing an entire community, especially, you know, community as diverse as, you know, black culture, South Asian culture, so on and so forth. So there's also that as well. I'd wanna get a sense of, well, okay.
Dr. Anamik Saha:You wanna engage black audiences, but, you know, according to this business case of diversity, But do you understand it's gonna take more than, you know, dare I say, a tokenistic hire in order to solve that problem? So how much are you really investing in order to understand the needs and desires of the black community? Yes. Hiring someone who belongs to that community is an important step, but that by itself is not enough. And so I'd wanna get a sense of all of those kind of issues that will help kind of persuade me that hiring me, for instance, for a marginalized background isn't simply to enhance the profile and reputation of the publishing house.
Dr. Anamik Saha:You know, where I can get wheeled out in a kind of internal communications memo as, you know, look at our diverse workforce. Look at all of us working together, you know, in this you know, I don't wanna be I don't wanna be used in that way.
Carmina Ravanera:Similarly, Oriane said that you can point to research showing that the business case doesn't help underrepresented or dominant groups feel valued in organizations. And here's what else she told me you could say.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:If they hear somebody make the business case, then they might gently just question a little bit where that is all coming from and maybe hint that things are a little bit more complicated. There's actually now decades of research that has studied the effects of diversity on performance, and the results are really mixed. Clearly, diversity has some positive effects for things like creativity or the soundness of decision making processes in groups, but unfortunately, research has also shown that diversity has some downsides in groups, such as higher levels of conflict or lower retention. So all in all, because it has both positive effects, negative effects, the relationship overall between diversity and performance is kind of a null effect. One question that people don't often ask themselves is, irrespective of the actual effects of diversity on performance, is it actually helpful to talk about diversity in this way, as a tool to improving performance, which I call an instrumental kind of rhetoric?
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:Is it helpful? And if so, for whom? Typically, business case fails to convince those who ask others to make the business case. It it fails to convince them of the importance of these social issues, and it fails to move the needle in terms of action towards supporting those social causes. That's especially the case in the context of corporate social responsibility.
Dr. Oriane Georgeac:And it's in part because not only does it fail to convince, but it tends to also dampen the moral emotions that people typically need to feel, such as moral outrage, in order to take action to redress a situation. So the idea that you can convince people with the business case is is is really is is really uncertain at best. So all in all, I'm not sure there's much evidence out there that the business case is really helpful to anyone. And that's so that's that's that's really something that you wanna bring up in a very curious way. Who do you think it's actually helpful to?
Dr. Sonia Kang:And with that, this myth is busted. Make sure you subscribe. We'll be back with a new episode soon.
Carmina Ravanera:In the meantime, happy myth busting. GATE's busted podcast is made possible by generous support from BMO. If you liked this episode, please rate and subscribe to busted. You can also find more interesting podcast series from the Institute for Gender and the Economy by searching GATE Audio wherever you find your podcasts. Thanks for tuning in.
Listen to Busted using one of many popular podcasting apps or directories.
