Why “brewing,” and not the implied “spontaneity” of a blog post?  Because the description above uses perfectly refined, planned, and politically neutral language that doesn’t really convey two episodes of what I believe to be unconscious bias on the part of two of the three lone white people in the room of otherwise 30+ African-Americans during the session. 

The first one was me (ouch!), one of three Caucasians and the “subject matter expert” leading the presentation.  Not sure who/how many caught what I would call my “gaffe” but here’s what happened.  I dove into the strategies and activities, without giving an overview of what we mean by Diversity and Inclusion in the Workplace.  As more general questions started right away, I realized immediately my unconscious assumption:  That because the audience was African American, OF COURSE everyone would know about Diversity and Inclusion in the workplace.  But, indeed, that field is just like any other area of expertise, you study it, there are best practices, there are academic studies….

Luckily, I had learned my lesson from the last time I had made fun of someone from another culture (now I’m being playful, even flirtatious, because I’m talking about my Brazilian-born husband in contrast to my Missouri-Jewishness) and had a batch of “Extra Slides” at the back of the file that had the “Business Case for Diversity and Inclusion” in place and ready to go.  There’s buried in here somewhere a 15 year overdue apology for making fun of my husband because when he was working on his MBA he occasionally would ask me to proof his presentations.  “But they’re 100 slides!” I’d protest. “No, it’s just the first 10,” he would say, “the rest are back-up.”  To which I would think, “Whatever.  No one in the United States does it that way.”

At any rate, thanks to following my lovely husband who didn’t know what he was doing, I was able to seamlessly (I’m pretty sure it was seamless to most) pull up the overview slides from another presentation I’ve given in the past,( presumably to white people—my commentary here) and give the overview with authority.

So then we went into my favorite part, Intercultural Communications.  It’s my favorite because I live and breathe it. I’m a marketer by profession, and specialize in communicating to people of different backgrounds.  Understanding the various communications styles, recognizing my own, and how all of these might be influenced by cultural and gender differences, is fascinating.

So here comes unconscious bias number two, from Philip* who was from one of the area’s larger Public Relations firms.  Philip was #2 Caucasian at the event, and his colleague Martha made the third and final (I think it’s important, just because I think my reactions to things were possibly influenced by being in the minority—which makes me hyper-conscious, curious if it’s typical when being in the minority to temper behavior, and of course curious about grave implications for that in the workplace, etc…)

Oh, we were talking about Philip.  So the conversation was about Communications Styles. “Direct,” which puts facts over people to divine truth and understanding, and “Indirect” which looks at feelings and relationships first. 

When I asked the group if Direct or Indirect was more prevalent in the workplace, all said “Indirect.” Which, as a Direct communicator I thought “are you kidding?  US Business norms are all about results and action, normed around a male, Western European communication style.  But, again, this is not about me….

So what I said was that it’s interesting to see how communications styles do seem to trend around culture and gender, so for example studies show that 50% to 80% of Hispanics tend to favor an Indirect communication style, or 50% to 80% of white men tend to favor Direct.

And that’s when Philip, in HR asked his question.   “But if it’s only 50% to 80% then really it’s not a statistic at all.  I tend to evaluate each person individually and build relationships with people one at a time.”

My gut thought was “like being colorblind.”  And the immediate reactive thought to that was (okay, that’s the problem, I knew something was wrong at the time, but it took me a good week to really think it through) the problem with the colorblind approach is that it is often the privilege of the majority culture to be color blind.  Because the structures of society, and certainly the USAmerican workplace, are normed around the majority culture.  So what I could have said was “That’s actually belies your white privilege, Philip, because as part of the majority culture you are not constantly reminded of your race or culture.”

But what I said was that while the trends shouldn’t supplant what’s in front of you, nor should groups be stereotyped by their dominant communication style, that it’s helpful as a framework to better understand one’s own style and to make sure that the reward bands—which people in the organization’s ideas and contributions are valued, are not being influenced by communication styles. 

Or, as Marti Barletta, accomplished expert in marketing to women, told me when I asked her the same question a few years ago, “you have to start somewhere, and because the commonalities to play out over a certain portion of the population, it gives you a starting place from which to operate.”

Luckily, Steve,* an HR Director at a major Chicago corporation (and African-American) then chimed in to say how effective it had been at his company when they did take into consideration the cultural implications of communication, and we moved on.

So, my 10 minutes is up (it morphed into 25…yikes!) and really this could have been summarized in three sentences:

1.  People of color are not inherently magnanimous experts on diversity, inclusion and pure, unbiased opinion.  In fact, thinking such continues to be an unconscious bias by either a.) Looking for approval from the other, or still operating from a framework of “white/majority” and everything else.
2. Claiming to be “colorblind” is a tenet of white/majority privilege, and is really only possible for someone from a majority culture.  And, seeing color or difference is natural, and does not equate to prejudice or racism.
3. If you are the invited speaker at a Professional Learning event, it’s okay to “stay on topic.” In other words, my handling of both situations, without publicly announcing the underlying bias, was okay, because the topic was diversity and inclusion in the workplace, not the underpinnings of racial inequity in society.

On that last one, though, while it may make me a great, consummate professional, it might not catapult me to ideological fame.  I’m reminded of seeing Gloria Steinem speak at an event in Chicago a number of years ago.  She espoused these amazing, controversial opinions, and had no qualms about calling it out like it was.  “She’s fabulous,” I remember thinking.  “I wish I could be in a position to say whatever I thought and have people listen.”

But that goes one further, to the idea that “when your mouth is open, your ears are closed.”  So maybe I’m not too far off.

What are the interactions that make you uncomfortable, that have you still thinking about them three weeks later?  Those are the ones to follow…

* Names changed

The short version of the review of Hop is that People Magazine gave Hop 3 (out of 4) stars and my son liked it.  It features a cute bunny and a cute leading man…something for the kids and for the moms…plus 100’s of adorable baby chicks.  How could you go wrong, right? 

But early on themes of engagement and inclusion, disparity, and feudalism started to bubble through. 

The first “cringe” moment was Carlos’ sad “Go on, enjoy your life of privilege” that he calls after EB (the Easter Bunny’s son, pre-ordained to fill the position when dad retires) as he hops off to go play, shouting “later” over his shoulder, in response to his father’s suggestion that it’s time to learn the family business.

Carlos, who speaks with an unmistakable Hispanic accent, is a giant yellow chic who runs the Easter Bunny factory, managing the day to day work of 100’s of yellow baby chicks, impeccably churning out millions of perfect chocolate bunnies, jelly beans, Easter baskets and more.  “Will we be ready for Easter?” asks the patriarchal Easter Bunny?  “Yes, boss,” answers Carlos, showing off the efficiencies and improvements he has implemented around the factory.  He clearly knows the business better than anyone, including the boss himself.

Yet when EB runs away to pursue his dream of becoming a professional drummer and Carlos suggests that perhaps he can fill in, he is brushed off without a moment’s consideration. 

“You need someone who knows the business to take his place,” hints Carlos. 

“But who could that be?” asks the Easter Bunny. 

“Me, boss,” says Carlos.

“You!?” the Easter Bunny responds, laughing uncontrollably at Carlos’ fantastic joke.  “Can you imagine the Easter Chick? A chick could NEVER be the Easter Bunny!”  Ouch.

At this point I thought there was a distinct Pro Engagement and Inclusion message.  Carlos clearly was a leader, hard worker, and with his strong accent in contrast to the patriarchal whiteness of the Boss, I felt the injustice of his situation.

But suddenly the propaganda machine swings into full gear, warning of the dangers of what would happen if minorities were allowed into leadership positions. 

The Easter Bunny leaves to search for his son.  Carlos stages a coup, taking over the factory. 

After years of careful attention to every detail of the factory, Carlos declares that now that he is in charge all of the kiddies will get baskets of dirt and worms.  Yellow furry bunny ears sprout from his head, two prominent front teeth pop out from his mouth, and his feet quadruple in size, as he becomes a gigantic fuzzy yellow evil monster rabbit-chick (you could argue this one for either side:  ANTI-if a minority gets in power they will destroy everything, or PRO-see what happens if someone is forced to emulate the majority population, just to be accepted?)

In the end, white privilege reigns.  EB and Fred, the human who befriends EB when he runs away—a white, male, 26ish out of work slacker, return to over throw Carlos, “save” the factory, and, after having demonstrated no effort or actual competency, take over as “co-Easter Bunnies,” one because he was born into the family, the other because he just “felt he’d be good at it.”

So in the end, when my son says, “did you like the movie?”   Where do I begin?

Did you see Hop?  What do you think?  More importantly, what did your kids think?

Just ask Ryan, who’s overweight, or Samantha who doesn’t quite know how to socialize—because of a developmental disability, or maybe not.  Kids know when they are different, but do they know how to make others feel included?

In honor of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day my mom, a 40 year veteran of teaching Religious Education at two reform Jewish congregations, asked me to be the “guest speaker” last weekend for her kindergarten class about the legacy of Dr. King.

I had 20 minutes, and they were 5.  In the world of “coulda, shoulda, woulda” could I have prepared more?  Should I have included more biographical information on Dr. King?  Would it have been better for her to have selected someone else?

Sure, but here’s what I say.  1.) Put your money where your mouth is.  If someone asks you to volunteer to speak about something about which you feel passionate (equitable society, combating prejudice, etc.) you say yes, and 2.) If adults will only remember three things that you tell them, kids will remember one.

The Government was denying people rights because of their skin color.  That was wrong.  Dr. King acted and fought for what was right.

Alright kids, what does Judaism say we are obligated to do when we see something wrong in the world?  “Fix it!” they shouted.  Lesson learned?  Hope so.  Lesson lasting?  Hope so too.

Here’s what we did in 20 minutes or less:

ACTIVITY 1:  “Same and Different”

EQUIPMENT NEEDED:  None

ROOM SET-UP:  Helpful to have two to three distinct corners, tables, or ‘bases’ within room where kids can go.

LEARNING OBJECTIVE:  We really don’t know anything about a person or what we might share in common with them, just by physical appearance.  Getting to know someone is what shows his or her character.  Judging before knowing is called prejudice, and might prevent a child from making a good friend.

HOW TO:  Select 4 to 6 questions that will allow the kids to self-select based on things called out by the leader.  Examples might be “boy or girl;” “oldest, middle, youngest, or only child;” “food preferences, such as liking fish or chocolate.”

“If you are the oldest child, go to table 1. If you are the youngest child, go to table 2. If you’re the middle child, table 3”

“If you are a boy, got to table 1; if you are a girl, go to table 2”

“If you are Jewish, go to table 1.”  (Also good to show that just because we are all the same, Jewish, doesn’t mean we all like the same things.)

“If you like to eat fish, go to table 1.  If you don’t like fish or you’re a vegetarian, go to table 2.”

Each time the kids were told to look at who was in their group.   Sometimes kids were similar or different based on physical characteristics. Sometimes all the kids were the same.  And sometimes kids found things in common with each other that they didn’t know just by looking.

“So what can you tell just by looking at someone?”  “Nothing!” answered one child.”

“How can you tell if you might be friends with someone?  “By what’s inside,” said another.

ACTIVITY 2:  Blue Eyes/Brown Eyes (VERY truncated version derived from hearing about the original experment)

EQUIPMENT NEEDED:  None

ROOM SET-UP:  Helpful to have two to three distinct corners, tables, or ‘bases’ within room where kids can be in the same room, but separated.

LEARNING OBJECTIVE:  Recognizing Institutional Bias and standing up against it, just like Dr. King.

“Everyone with blue eyes go to table one.  Everyone with Brown eyes go to table 2.”

“Now, what if the teacher said I’ve got lots of juice, but today only the kids with blue eyes can have more juice.  There’s no juice for the brown-eyed kids, even though I have plenty.  Is that fair?”

“NO!” shouted the kids.

“Well that’s exactly what happened with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  In his case it was actually the United States Government, not just the teacher, who was being unfair and not sharing everything that was available with all of the people.”

“And what does Judaism teach us that we have to do if we see something wrong in the world?”

“We have to fix it” said Emily, “just like Martin Luther King.”

 I realized as I mixed together onion, fresh cranberries, sour cream, sugar and horseradish tonight that is is not the actual cranberry relish I love, but the tradition of Susan Stamberg slipping her recipe for Mama Stamberg’s Cranberry Relish into on-air conversation, every year since 1972. I’ve heard her suggest it to foreign heads of state, Hilary Clinton…she even got Martha Stewart to make it one year.

In fact, I’ve served it at least five year’s now, and I don’t even think anyone else has noticed it’s a regular yet.

But this year is extra fun…Stamberg connected with rapper Coolio, host of an on-line cooking show and author of a book with the same name, “Cookin with Coolio.”

If I honestly assessed my unconscious biases as relates to rappers, I would have to say it would be that they don’t spend the day in the kitchen or even know how to cook, although perhaps I should have known better after Snoop Dog did his laundry on a T-Mobile sidekick ad a few years ago.   I stand corrected, and the show below is worth the watch.

Coolio ads his own multicultural touch, making “blasian” eggrolls (his term for food that is Black mixed with anythin Asian): traditional eggroll wrappers and asian spices with ground beef and cheese, among other things. For Mama Stamberg’s Cranberry Relish, he added Thai Hot Sauce.

I found this fun parody of the new and wildly successful Old Spice spokesman, a promotional piece for the Harold B. Lee Library at Brigham Young Univisity on adfreak.com last week.  While it should have been a simple, pithy post, I’ve obsessed for seven days about whether or not to post it.

Why?  Because my immediate reaction, related to combating stereotypes in advertising was:  Oooh.  Look.  A Smart Black Man.  Then the unconscious bias kicked in…Seriously, is it such an anomaly to find a Smart Black Man that you have to make a big deal out of it.  What does that say about YOU and YOUR biases?

On the one hand, there is often disparity in positive representations of African Americans in Media, so the opening image of the lead, Stephen Jones (who also c0-wrote the piece), holding his A+ paper saying “Look at my grades, now look at yours, now back at mine,” is powerful.  The final shot shows a traditional painting of a BYU founding father and the tagline “Study like a scholar, scholar,” as though welcoming our friend into the BYU family.

However,  on a closer view, it looks like Mr. Jones is the ONLY African-American student in the library that day.  And, according to a report on collegeprowler.com, that may actually be everyday.  The college review website gives BYU a C- for diversity, citing 0% African American students, and 0% African American Faculty.

So maybe I’m just pointing out that it’s a great piece, clever, funny and with a few great messages–students should go to the library, Universities should make sure their policies and practices do not discriminate, and it’s okay to acknowledge your unconscious bias, because may that’s how you learn something new.

What ad images have you seen that provoked an uncomfortable reaction for you?

The spot was written and produced by the Harold B. Lee Library Multimedia Production Crew, which consists of two full time employees and ten student employees.  You can get all of the details at the official blog for the project.

This was supposed to be a cute post about how the Youth Ambassadors from Ecuador (8 high school students and one adult mentor) ended up having to stay two extra days in Chicago because on the day of their departure (9/30) the military closed the airports in Ecuador after a rebellion by the police, in response to rumors that year-end bonuses were to be cut.

The idea was that as “typical” Americans we tend to gloss over world events unless something connects us personally…or really unless we are inconvenienced.  In the case of recent terror threats in Europe, the news angle was to interview USAmerican tourists in London and France to see if they still planned to visit the London Eye and the Eiffel Tower, respectively.  “Yes, they answered, otherwise the terrorists win” was the trite answer.

In this case, after two weeks of scheduling, homestays, parties, school shadowing, presentations, meetings, museum visits and other assorted planning, the Youth Ambassadors showed up at the airport only to find that they couldn’t travel.

The urgent call came to me as a planner for this program locally in Chicago (via the Illinois-Sao Paulo Chapter of Partners of the Americas–the program was implemented nationally by Partners of the Americas, funded by the US State Department).  “The kids are still here.  We have to find places for them to stay at least until Saturday…possibly indefinitely.”

For me it became a funny anecdote as relates to my realm of responsibility…not a “real event” affecting “real people.”

For 15-year-old Dayana, it was deep concern for  her family’s safety in Ecuador; or for 17-year-old Andres it was wondering when he would see his family, as he already was expecting a two day delay to get to his home on the Galapagos Islands after the group returned to Ecuador.  And for the President of Ecuador it was a threat to his life, and for Ecuadorians a fear for national stability.

Even with a program designed to foster intercultural understanding, appreciation and global leadership (and it does, I don’t want to discount that), it’s still hard to step outside of one’s frame of reference to empathize with the position of others.

Perhaps the person who got it the most right was the Consul General of Ecuador, who was at the airport to say goodbye to the youth when the announcement came through.  He and his wife invited two of the students to stay in their home until they were able to travel (two other volunteers with the program also immediately stepped-up to host the other students for the additional days).

If the role of the Consulate is to protect and serve nationals from their country when on US soil, he certainly aligned his ideas with his actions.

How do your ideas and actions align?

Lessons in intercultural communications abound every day, everywhere.  Over the past few days, “my friend” learned how orientation to different jobs/careers fields can yield the same intercultural snafus found in cross cultural communications.

Whether it’s Jargon (think SEO, CEO, B-Hag, NGO, HACE), written communication styles (think Engineer vs. School Teacher) or simply the anticipated protocol for completing a project—never underestimate the cultural patterns that are unique to specific careers or job titles.

Here are a couple of real-life case studies that happened to my friends recently:

Case Study 1:

Two partners agree to co-present a concert.  At the last minute, it turns out no one has committed to renting instruments.

The event planner:  How can a professional band show up to play without instruments?

The music promoter:  Bands from out of town never travel with instruments.  How could you expect to present an out of town band without providing their ‘backline?’

Case Study 2:

One partner offers to sponsor an exhibit to feature projects of four international architects, if the other partner, a not-for-profit board, will coordinate and present the exhibit.

Five weeks before the opening it turns out the exhibit doesn’t actually exist, and production of the exhibit wasn’t included in the sponsorship.  In a closer review of the budget, indeed it only included flight and lodging for the architects, shipping, the opening event and related symposia…not exhibit production.

The lay person on the Board:  If you are sponsoring a program to bring in an architecture exhibit, I’d think it’s implied that the exhibit actually exists!

The architect on the Board:  It’s common practice in the US that architects will produce their own exhibition materials, to maintain control. (This one is a double whammy—expectations of architect vs. non-architect, plus differing practices between architects from two different countries.)

So what do you do?

As is the same with instances of intercultural conflict, yelling at the other person may feel good initially, but it won’t necessarily yield a positive outcome.

Repeating your position over and over while making the “duh” eyes also doesn’t really help.

Recognizing that you entered the conversation with a series of implicit assumptions (no matter how logical they are to you) based on your “title” in relation to the project, does help.

Here’s how:

1.) You’ll learn better questions to ask next time;

2.) You may listen more deeply to understand the others’ assumptions;

3.) You may learn something about another field that will help expand your value in future partnerships and interactions.

What are the underlying assumptions you carry with you?  How have they come up lately?

You’re at a black tie event.  You’re looking for the restroom.  Who do you ask?

“Me,” joked our new friend who spontaneously joined us at our table at a recent black-tie-event, jovially laughing at the third time in the last 10 minutes he’d been asked for directions.  “It’s hard to be a black man in a tuxedo at a formal event—everyone assumes I work here!”

Which is absolutely ridiculous, when you look around and realize that ALL THE MEN at the event are wearing tuxedos.

Our friend made light of the situation, playfully making fun, but it does belie unconscious bias/prejudice that may accompany first, immediate reactions to others.

So how do you combat your own biases?  How do you ‘humanize’ others around you?  Just for fun, listen to your gut, and then do or say the exact opposite.  Such as…

1.  At a very fine event, ask the older woman who’s dressed the best where to find the bathroom (or step out of your comfort zone…ask the person who’s least like you.)

2.  At restaurants, events, etc., ask your server’s name—he/she too is a person, and actually has a big influence on your enjoyment of your evening.

3. If you meet someone from Brazil (or fill in country name or neighborhood in City, etc.) don’t say “I would never go Rio, I’ve heard the crime is terrible.” (Yes, it has happened enough that it warrants mentioning.)

4.  When speaking with someone with an accent, listen for content.  “And treat them like a person, not an accent,” adds my husband, a native Portuguese speaker.  And never say “don’t you speak American?” (Yes, I’ve overheard that, too)

What other things have you seen others do (or fess up, what have you done?) that reveal an underlying bias?  What was the reaction?