Wade Alliance Blog

Rule Follower

Mon, 26 Aug 2024 16:30:15 GMT

“All rules are equal but some are more equal than others” to paraphrase George Orwell’s pigs in Animal Farm.

Who gets to decide which rules to follow and which rules are more like suggestions?

The year I was born, interracial marriage was illegal. Same sex marriage was illegal until 2015.

Not every rule is fair or just and not every rue should be followed. As a former Army officer for more than 25 years you would think I would be the last person to advocate against following rules unconditionally. As the famous quote in “A Few Good Men” goes “We follow orders, son. We follow orders or people die. It’s that simple.” I’m sure you were expecting that other quote but this is the quote that I heard long before the movie and it highlights the importance of following orders while in uniform. So, when I say that using discretion and judgement with following rules is important, I understand the seriousness of not following rules. Following the rules can mean the difference between life and death. Today there are some laws and rules that favor one group over another and there will be more in the future. That is the nature of rules. They are not designed to please everyone but should be designed for the common good or a common objective. The obvious problem is that the people with the power have the privilege to decide what the common good means and whose interests are important. It ignores the reality that everyone does not have the same objective in mind.

Some rules are more equal than others.

There are rules like stopping for a red light or paying your taxes that have a clear foundation in maintaining society or creating safety. Other rules like restricting academic subjects or mandatory sentencing minimums reflect the values of the rule-makers with control. We will not address the unequal application of rules, that is a much larger problem. The following is a simple heuristic for helping to decide if the rule in question deserves the categorization of being beyond criticism or should be fought to be eliminated.

Even the best rules like, “Drive the speed limit” are often broken for the slightest reason like, “I’m late”. This problem-solving method is not to decide when to follow a rule but rather if the rule itself should exist as it is.

1. Does the rule harm or help people?

This is not controversial. Take the “jaywalking” rule. Pedestrians should cross at a corner and preferably with a signal. This rule favors cars but also keeps people safe. It is a good rule. There is no reason to advocate eliminating that rule. Compare that to the rule that allows election official to purge voter registration. In a system where fraud has not been proven, it puts a burden on the group being purged.

2. Does the rule apply to everyone?

Again, ignoring enforcement, it is important to see if the rule targets one group only. Not breaking and entering or committing armed robbery are examples of rules that everyone is expected to follow. Rules that protect everyone from harm create the opportunity for everyone to thrive. On the contrary, the laws that prohibit sleeping in public spaces is directed at the poor and unhoused. It is a rule that prioritizes the comfort of those with resources over the need of those without.

3. Would you enforce the rule on your own family?

If you would not want the rule applied to someone that you care about, the rule is likely unjust. The family separation policy at the border is an example of a policy that no one would approve if it happened to their family. As a counter, if my relative was caught embezzling I would expect them to pay the price and do their time.

4. Lastly, does the desire to fight the rule come from an emotional response to the messenger?

We are convinced by facts, authority and emotion. Being mindful of why we agree or disagree with a rule is challenging. We are all complex individuals with a lifetime of history and learned behavior. If a rule strikes an emotional chord, it deserves a closer look but our actions need the maturity to look for more than an emotional reason to disagree.

I was accused of not being a rule follower and had to pause before I accepted that the person is right. It seems a lifetime of following rules can have a reverse impact on a person especially when it is clear that some rules are more valued by some people than others. My hope as always is that there are rules that make things better not worse and the people making the rules have the empathy and compassion to see that they could be wrong and willing to change the rules, themselves or their views.

Mission Driven Individuals

Mon, 26 Feb 2024 19:03:16 GMT

Most of us believe that we have a purpose or mission in life.In optimal conditions our mission will to do more good than harm. If we are privileged enough to create and pursue a personal mission statement, we should routinely reflect on how well we are working towards that goal of being mission-driven. A personal mission statement is often aspirational with images of how we want the world to be, but it should also be an achievable guidepost along our journey. The Wade Alliance partners with individuals that prioritize their stated mission or want help in changing towards a positive direction. Here are six attributes that characterize a mission-driven individual.

1. Can state your mission

When someone asks, “What do you do?” can you pivot and tell them your mission?

My mission statement is simple and covers what I value: “I help people who want to change”. Finding your purpose or mission requires reflection and insight. The author Stephen Covey writes prolifically about purpose and influence. Other writers like Andy Andrews https://andyandrews.com/personal-mission-statement/ offer tools easily found to create a personal mission statement. Create one and try it out the next time someone asks you what you do to see if it feels right. If your statement doesn’t sound authentic to you, it won’t sound believable to other people. Your mission statements should be active and forward thinking. An authentic mission statement is the best place to begin the journey to being mission-driven.

2. Networks for good

Networking is building relationships. When our purpose is top of mind, we organically form relationships that advance our mission-driven purpose. When we network to build social capital and hope for reciprocity our mission is secondary to capitalism. If your authentic mission is to gain as much capital as possible you can stop reading here. This is not applicable. Money is a tool, so a mission to gain as much money as possible is equivalent to having the goal of collecting as many hammers as possible. The mission should be what you want to accomplish with the tool, not accumulating the tool. Networking for good is building alliances and collaborating with others instead of forming transactional relationships. Mission-driven individuals seek networks and people with similar missions.

3. Avoids toxic work

The ability to avoid work or change the work environment is a privilege. Only a small minority of people can reject work because bills and responsibilities don’t care about your mission. Being mission-driven starts with recognizing when work and environments drain you of your energy to pursue your mission and poison your purpose. Change is inevitable and controlling change requires awareness. For example, once we recognize that smoking is harmful then we have the motivation to stop the habit. Once we see that our work is harming the people that we want to help then we have the motivation to do something. Restrictions may prevent us from leaving or changing immediately but we can all take steps in the direction we want to travel.

4. Is a Lifetime learner

At every stage of our life, our priorities and therefor our purpose changes. In any profession we are at a beginner stage at some point and strive to learn more and be more proficient. Being able to claim years of experience is a worthy goal, claiming that your methods and information has not changed since the beginning is obtuse. [Shawshank Redemption reference] A mission-driven individual seeks knowledge, is curious and acknowledges gaps. Being a lifetime learner is also a sign of humility which softens the blow when obstacles appear to hinder your mission.

5. Seeks feedback

The best way to know when you are on the right path is through feedback. Our GPS shows a map of our location and the streets that we should see. A hot handle causes pain the moment we touch it. A smile or laugh tells us that we said something right. Very near to being a lifetime learner is seeking feedback. If my mission is to help people change, they have to let me know if I’ve helped them to change. If your mission is to support family members education, you need to see if they are succeeding in their education. Our personal mission may not have an end goal but feedback tells us if we are moving in the right direction.

6. Financially supports other missions

“Put your money where your mouth is.” If something is important, it shows. Maya Angelou’s quote of believing people when they show you who they are applies to being mission-driven. Mission-driven individuals give money and time to other mission-driven organizations. While this is oversimplification, Booker T. Washington said it first, "If you want to lift yourself up, lift up someone else." How we spend what we treasure reflects what we value therefore if we value being mission-driven our actions will reflect that.

Most people do not have the privilege to pursue their mission full-time and use their free time and weekends to do the work that gives them purpose and meaning. The upcoming generations are better at embracing the separation of our identity from our job but we all feel the pressure of being identified by our title. We can still earn a paycheck and have a mission. We can still have a title and work towards a greater good. The best scenario is when our mission aligns with what we do to earn a paycheck and we can devote the majority of our time to advancing our mission. To evaluate our path to becoming more mission-driven these characteristics can be one way to start.

Mission Driven Organizations

Tue, 21 Nov 2023 18:20:00 GMT

Evaluating a mission-driven organization

Many organizations claim to be "Mission Driven" because they have dedicated time and energy to crafting a mission statement that is often aspirational. "Mission First" is a catchy phrase but often does not reflect the actual culture and operations of the company or the “profit above people” decisions they make. The Wade Alliance partners with organizations that prioritize their stated mission and demonstrate the following six characteristics.

1. Have clearly stated missions

Take for example The American Red Cross: The American Red Cross prevents and alleviates human suffering in the face of emergencies by mobilizing the power of volunteers and the generosity of donors. Compared to failed crypto exchange FTX: Our mission is twofold - to build the best derivatives exchange and to help move this space toward becoming institutional! All mission statements sound active and forward thinking and the mission statement is where we begin to evaluate if the organization is led by its mission.

2. Are known by their mission

When you think of an organization and then learn their mission statement you should not be surprised. The Red Cross is known for helping during a disaster. We know what The Coca Cola company does but its mission “To refresh the world and make a difference” is rarely considered outside of the company. When others describe your mission driven company their description should be similar to your mission.

3. Publicly display outcomes

The most challenging task of a mission driven organization is to showing vulnerability in their performance. Sharing success is easy, sharing deficits is not. It is a rare organization willing to publicly show where they miss the mark with their mission. An example of showing how the mission aligns with the people in the organization is done exceptionally well by Goodwill https://www.comparably.com/companies/goodwill/mission They publicly display that 41% are not proud to be a part of the company and that only 8% feel the company mission is the most important part of their job. Mission driven companies who share publicly their progress know that you can’t fix a problem until you know the problem exists.

4. Members can state the mission

It is expected that members of the C-Suite can state the mission, vision and key points of the strategic plan. A mission-driven organization has the majority of its members able to state the mission. I’ve recently joined Team Rubicon and from the beginning it became clear that it is a veteran-led disaster relief organization. I don’t have the full statement memorized: “Team Rubicon is a veteran-led humanitarian organization, built to serve global communities before, during, and after disasters and crises. For us, no operation is too large or small. We go where disaster strikes, helping the people that need us most in the moments they need us most.” But I can easily tell anyone their mission.

5. Spend directly on the mission

“Put your money where your mouth is.” We judge charitable organizations by what percentage of their income goes to administrative costs. The percentage of a budget that does not directly support the mission is equally informative. McDonald’s mission “Our mission is to make delicious feel-good moments easy for everyone.” A Chief Financial Officer would argue that every penny contributes to making delicious food and goes into operating expenses. In 2022 about 20% or $2.7B of the $13.5B in expenses went to food and paper. A company where 80% of the budget goes to maintaining the company is hard to argue as being mission driven.

6. Metrics measure mission success

Lastly, the metrics identified as important tell the story of what is a priority. The mission-driven organization where I’ve spent most of my career is the military. The management allocation of the $800B 2023 budget is $1.7B and the rest goes to personnel, training, equipment and research. The mission is always first. Another example of metrics reflecting the mission can be seen looking at the five common church metrics: 1. Offerings 2. Membership 3. Event participation 4. Conversions and 5. Volunteers. The emphasis on each of these metrics can paint a picture of what the church and its leadership values.

Most organizations have a mission and most organizations prioritize their financial health in order to achieve their mission. Being purpose-driven or mission-driven entity shares the unifying characteristic of working with the question “Why are we doing this?” Use these markers to evaluate your organization and the organizations you would like to work with to achieve your mission.

Racial Healing

Wed, 05 Apr 2023 20:16:20 GMT

Malcolm X said, “If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there is no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that’s not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made…And they won’t even admit the knife is there”

This quote by Malcolm X was a direct response to a reporter asking about progress for the Black community. But it also applies to other wounds. There are injuries caused by sexual assault, antisemitism, transphobia, islamophobia, anti-Asian hate, and all other -isms. While it is tempting for some people to hold trauma competitions, we need to always start with Black trauma because it is the most enduring, copied and visible method of discrimination in the United States. Choosing to fix the wounds from anti-Black behavior first is like treating the stroke before the strain.

The idea of wound healing resonates with me because I am a medical doctor who also helps people incorporate leadership into their Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) efforts. I admire the people who work so tirelessly to heal social wounds knowing that racial healing and reconciliation is absolutely necessary for justice. Unfortunately, focusing on racial healing is out of my reach because I cannot unsee the seemingly endless amount of trauma that led to the Black Lives Matter hashtag and the continued aggression against those without power. It is impossible for me to pretend to put Band-Aids on gushing wounds. The healing can’t start until the injury stops. Since becoming a doctor, I have always believed that it is necessary to remove the offending object, but I realize that there are exceptions. We often leave fragments of bullets in place so instead Malcolm X's analogy of a knife causing harm, let’s use a bullet.

If I think of the wounds from racial trauma as from a bullet instead of a knife, I can appreciate how trauma doesn't have to be removed before healing begins. Progress can be made even when the offensive item has not been removed. Unlike a knife, a fragment of a bullet is left inside the wound because it may cause more damage to remove it. Some racial healing experiences reflect this and do more damage for the people who were harmed.

I saw a patient in clinic who was shot and the bullet passed through both thighs. I was there to follow-up on the wounds, check how she was healing and to remove the staples used to close the holes left behind. She was healing physically but we didn’t delve into how she was healing emotionally or mentally beyond the superficial. She was lucky in that there were no fractures and no fragments left behind. My other patient who was shot more than a dozen times is not as fortunate and still has fragments in his body as he makes his long journey to recovery. Both patients were wounded, one has a constant reminder, and the healing process will not be the same.

This bullet analogy is more visceral and better represents racial healing for me. Using bullets also conjures the reality of our national crisis of mass shootings and gun violence. We can compare how bullets will wound and kill until we do something about it. We are reminded regularly that people and children undeserving of trauma will be wounded. Our national response to mass shootings mirrors exactly our response to racial injury. There are people who insist that there is nothing that can be done. There are companies who profit off of the fear by selling bullet proof glass or Kevlar backpacks just as some individuals profit from racial harm by gathering people to talk about grit, resilience and their racial trauma without addressing the source of the trauma. With all things that cause harm, prevention is always better than repairing and we have to do both.

Prevention:

1. Know before you go. In the Army we would call this Recon, short for reconnoiter. The more you know about the people, environment and culture the better prepared you are for the possible injuries to come. If your goal is to do more than survive but to be a force against -isms knowing the situation is vital.

2. Gather your tools. When harm seems inevitable having phrases like, “What did you mean by that?” and “Help me to understand why you would hurt them like that?” can work for anyone dealing with harm. Your tools can also be the people who are fighting the same fight.

3. Create obstacles for harm . Making cultural changes in the workplace that reward inclusion and penalize harm is the most effective form of prevention.

Repairing the wound:

1. Remove what you can. Some harm in our history is obvious like slavery, segregation and housing discrimination. Removing them required bloodshed. Other harm like voting rights, environmental discrimination, war on drugs and health disparities are causing harm and can be removed with a national will to do so. Everything can’t be fixed at once so the advice of James Baldwin on facing change and Frederick Douglass saying “Power concedes nothing without a demand ” means that the wounds need to be addressed.

2. Close the gaps. To stop bleeding we close the wound and apply pressure. Racial healing feels futile as long as the open wound continues bleeding. Healing comes by closing pay and position gaps. Apply pressure to your organization to do the sometimes painful work that actually heals.

3. Clean the wound. Every injury brings debris with it. Comments left unaddressed and policies that are not inclusive prevent healing. From a medical point of view, dirty wound can also leave greater scars.

Seeing racial trauma as a bullet wound can further discussion and progress. At the very least, use the image as a conversation starter when the topic of racial healing and being anti-racist is raised. Remind people that we want to first prevent the injuries and treat the ones we couldn't prevent. We can all strive for a world where there is less violence and all injuries are addressed. Until then the existing resources and knowledge can be used to help with healing even if the bullet is never removed.

Why Nigerian Americans Aren't Seen a "Model Minority"

Sat, 03 Dec 2022 16:38:56 GMT

The problem with the model minority myth

Race is a construct created to divide, conquer and control; it is not a biological marker.

Races were birthed in 1613 to justify systems already in place that discriminated groups based on appearance and origin. There are valid reasons to identify different groups of people, for example: to track disparities; provide services to the underserved; or to measure the distance needed to reach justice and equity. The unlimited number of categories available to describe humans include gender identity, age, education, ability and religion. But race as a category is one of the most arbitrary and effervescent created by “educated” men who categorized what they observed and used pseudoscience to validate their decisions. Hispanic was a race only during the 1930’s census and until the 1950s, the census takers decided the race of the people they surveyed. The 2000 census was the first time people could choose more than one race, begging the question how to quantify race. Race is the lifeforce and foundation of white supremacy with the “model minority” idea used as a tool to help perpetuate racial hierarchies.

Ethnicity is a more precise and more meaningful way to let people self-identify.

It richly captures the culture, beliefs, experiences and joy of people with shared identities. Ethnicity invites all who share an identity to be seen together. Ethnicity counters the belief that a physical marker can be used to determine our identity. Ethnicity should be the default when discussing any group.

Nigerian American is one of many ethnicities in the Black diaspora but despite their achievements as a group, Nigerian immigrants are not seen as a model minority.

The term “model minority” is used in the US almost exclusively for Asian Americans. There are now eight billion people on earth and more than 4.5 billion people identify as Asian. Assigning any trait to a group that includes more than half the population on earth is laughable. The term “model minority” was popularized in the 1960s to convince white Americans that Japanese Americans were no longer a threat. It was used to pressure other minorities to stop protesting and model the narrative of Japanese Americans going back to “normal” life after internment. The idea of a model minority groups all Asian identities together and tries to imbue qualities such as industrious, quiet, smart and compliant to every person identified as Asian. By using narrowly defined metrics of success seen in typically Chinese and Indian immigrants, but ignoring the struggles of Vietnamese or Hmong immigrants, the stereotype is applied to the entire group of Asian Americans. Other racialized groups may argue that having a positive stereotype is better than a negative stereotype, but the model minority stereotype did nothing to quell the Asian American hate and violence that accompanied the COVID pandemic. From the perspective of Black and Latine Americans, having a positive stereotype would feel like a win. On the contrary, the stereotype fulfills its purpose of dividing, othering and centering whiteness as the aspiration.

To see how the current battlefield of racism versus anti-racism is set, let’s explore the question of why immigrants from Nigeria are not seen as a model minority. Why seeing Nigerian Americans as a model minority does not fit the narrative and purpose of racism.

If a model minority was simply a group that outperformed people who identify as white in areas of education or income, people who identify with Nigerian culture should also be seen as a model minority, but they are not. Not having a Black model can be blamed on both Black and White cultures in the US.

From a Black perspective, the family secret that needs to be shared is that there is some animosity between Black people who are American Descendants of Slavery (ADOS) and Black immigrants. There is a wedge between the groups perpetuated by both Black cultures where immigrants warn their children to avoid African Americans, and ADOS families openly disdain African immigrant achievement. The overrepresentation of Black-appearing people in prisons, illness, crime, and poverty feed the negative stereotypes all Americans have and the self-hatred too often seen in the Black diaspora. The achievements of groups like Nigerians or HBCU graduates are dismissed by many as exceptionalism that doesn’t refute the long-held beliefs of racial inferiority. An essential feature of white supremacy and racial hierarchy is the belief that negative examples represent the monolith of Black people.

The history of ethnicities such as Irish, Italian and Middle Eastern being absorbed into the white race category gives a clear picture of the incentive to maintain a racial ranking system. There is no benefit to white supremacy to have a positive model of Black culture. Perpetuating any Black identifying group as a positive and aspirational model harms the mechanics of systemic racism more than it benefits maintaining white supremacy. The Asian American model minority serves the purpose of keeping other groups afraid to be seen as rebellious or unappreciative. The Nigerian American culture is boldly proud of succeeding on their terms with characteristics described as confident, hardworking and competitive, which directly challenges the stereotypes of ADOS perpetuated since the inception of the US. The cognitive dissonance of treating any group of Black people as high achieving is unimaginable for white supremacy.

The use of a model minority trope is not the goal.

What can we do? We have to see the problem before we can fix the problem. Stereotyping creates a caricature instead of seeing the fine and true details of the people around us. On an individual level we can notice when we are generalizing. By habitually seeing the flaws in our rules and working to update them we build the mental energy and ability to counter harmful and often false stereotypes. By regularly using that energy to doubt the rules and stereotypes more often we can do the individual work necessary to bring more equity into our worlds.

From an institutional perspective, we need speed bumps and obstacles that disrupt our automatic thinking. A respectful work culture does not accept leaders giving nicknames to avoid “difficult” names or accepting mispronunciations in order to make the majority feel comfortable. Every interaction, especially with job interviews and performance appraisals, is an opportunity to challenge stereotypes. A growing and inclusive organization routinely values and encourages dissent of status quo, not maintenance of a biased system.

The model minority is easily refuted when information is disaggregated. Disaggregated information shows how different groups have different outcomes and can lead to more equitable policies instead of equal policies that advantage people who already have resources.

Just as the Asian American model minority myth does not protect anyone from harm, a Black model minority myth will not help people see the value of Black lives either. The idea of choosing between the lesser of two evils, a positive stereotype or a negative stereotype, is a false choice. The goal of being antiracist is to create a system where there is no racial hierarchy. Racial hierarchy drags everyone down and especially crushes everyone under the top. As Heather McGhee brilliantly describes in her book, "The Sum of Us: What Racism Costs Everyone and How We Can Prosper Together" the weight of a racist system harms us all and it will not be lifted until it is seen for what it is.

Cleaning a Junk Drawer

Tue, 19 Jul 2022 21:31:02 GMT

Cleaning a Junk Drawer
(Trigger Warning - Suicide)

Mental health is health. Mental health remains difficult to talk about in every culture. Since 2020 the stress on mental health has been undeniable for every person interacting in this world. Some people have chosen the coping mechanism of denial, some have chosen to fight or resist change, others have decided that there is nothing worth fighting for and look for a way to permanently end their suffering. If you are having any thoughts that you don’t belong or that the fight is no longer worth it, please talk with someone. Use 988, the new suicide prevention line, or the Crisis text line (Text HOME to 741741), or talk with your doctor, teacher, advisor, family or teammate. You don’t have to go through this alone.

Talking about mental health is disruptive. After the hotline number, 988, came online in July 2022 a telling question floated to the surface of the discussions: “Will the police show up at my house?”

The question is soaked in fears of autonomy, privacy and negative police interactions during a mental health crisis. People will address these concerns over time as the need for more and better mental health support remains clear.

The obstacles for everyone else struggling just below the crisis point are significant but not impassable. There are things to do that make a difference in improving our mental health. To those who feel the need for a business case argument, improving our mental health improves how we function and our productivity. The humanistic reason to care about mental health is translucent, we should seek to ease suffering. Here are a few things to try.

Clean out a junk drawer.

When the news of corrupt or self-serving people in power leave you feeling helpless, do something that you can control. Pick a junk drawer that you can tackle in one sitting and organize it. A professional organizer will tell you to make three categories: keep, give away and trash. At the end you will see what you have accomplished and feel a sense of control that we often lose learning about national events. Any project that has a set beginning and end can help. The feeling of control doesn’t last forever but it may be the nudge needed to pull you out of the spiral caused by doom-scrolling.

Move your body.

From doing chair-yoga to a session of CrossFit, each of us have the ability to exert ourselves beyond our normal pandemic routine of sitting in front of a screen. Acknowledging that resources and abilities are not equally distributed, incorporate going outside whenever possible. Increasing our heart-rate, using muscles infrequently used and deep breathing changes us physically and can also be the breeze that clears away the fog of melancholy.

Keep a gratitude list.

Go beyond saying that you are thankful for your health or family or job. Be specific . Say that you are grateful that your son is creative and curious. Write how the gift your friend gave you allowed you to spend time with your spouse. Share with someone that you can now walk 100 yards without taking a break. Unlike “toxic optimism” being grateful looks at the past with a positive lens instead of seeing a future that may be more fantasy than reality.

Let people help you.

A friend once told me that allowing him to help was a gift. If you know how it feels to help someone you care about then you understand why letting other people help is good for them also. If you do not have someone in your life to help then a professional, someone trained in counseling, is needed. White Saviorism is so prevalent because helping others makes us feel good. When we are the person who needs help, the best thing we can do is ask as clearly as possible what help we need. Sometimes it is as simple as needing someone to listen, other times it is help solving a problem that you have never had before. Give the people who care about you a chance to be there for you.

Every culture has spoken and unspoken thoughts and rules about when, how and who to ask for help. When your culture makes it more difficult to ask for help it requires a new level of courage to move forward. May you find the courage to clean out your current junk drawer and move onto the next one.

Who Do We Protect?

Tue, 05 Apr 2022 19:49:43 GMT

Spring 2022 has stirred up lots of emotions and most of them have been uncomfortable and unwanted. The common thread holding these insomnia-inducing events together is the concept of protection: who needs protection; who is the protector; and what does protection looks like. Here are a few examples of the statements people have made:

We need to protect the Ukrainian citizens who are being attacked.
Senator Booker’s impassioned speech was to protect Judge Brown Jackson.
We need to stop AAPI hate.
Title 42 (pandemic response) helps protect the border.
Will Smith’s slap was to protect Jada.
Governor DeSantis’ “Don’t say gay” law protects children.
Masks are no longer needed to protect people from COVID.

It is likely that you disagree with at least one of those statements and agree with at least one.
Protecting those we care about is human, tribalistic and necessary for our existence. How we protect the people we care about is where we disagree, and feelings are bruised. The unspoken reality is that not everyone gets the same protection.

Anything we deem important or meaningful to us triggers our protective response which is rewarded and nurtured differently based on our culture. Our instinct kicks in when we perceive danger, and we are no longer thinking but feeling; we are being human. Feelings take over, but we can still think through the process. We can recognize that our actions reflect how we are categorizing and defining groups as “us” and “them.” We protect the people we identify with and feel threatened when we are part of the group that is identified as the aggressor. Slowing down to think can help us realize that our protective reaction may not be necessary because our goals might be the same.

When the phrase “toxic masculinity” is used I know as a man which camp I am sorted into. When the terms scientific and evidence-based are used I know as a doctor which team I belong to. Race, gender identity, nationalism, and any other identity I may have, assigns me to a side until I profess any commitment to the contrary. Look at the statements again and see which identity is being protected.

We need to protect the Ukrainian citizens who are being attacked - Europeans
Sen Booker’s impassioned speech was to protect Judge Brown Jackson – Black women
We need to stop AAPI hate – Asian Americans
Title 42 (pandemic response) helps protect the border – Border protectors
Will Smith’s slap was to protect Jada – People with disabilities
Governor DeSantis’ “Don’t say gay” law protects children – non-LGBTQ+ children
Masks are no longer needed to protect people from COVID – Immunized and immunocompetent people

Changing identities or appreciating the perspective of a different identity is difficult, and there is enormous peer pressure to discourage us from leaving the group. Identity influence cannot be ignored, but we can recognize what is happening and try to compromise which is also a critical survival skill. Consider these questions the next time you hear a statement that sparks your emotion.

Which identity do I identify with? We can engage when we feel connected, and we can disengage by highlighting our differences. It is uncommon but possible to change your perspective when you strongly identify with a group. If you disagree with a statement like “We need to protect the unvaccinated” think of how you can identify with the people being protected: those unvaccinated because of health reasons or vaccine availability. The goal is to lower the emotional temperature and allow us to think and be less reactive.

What does being protective mean to me?
We can provide protection physically, mentally, or emotionally based on our abilities and experience. The pleasure of protecting those we care about is undeniable, and the pain of seeing someone who is part of our group hurt is also palpable. The best way to change the narrative is to change how we define our groups. When we bring more of “them” into the camp of “us” we are more likely to protect “them.”

Realize that our feelings are always changing. No one is always mad or happy or sad. Emotions change like the weather, and sometimes we must journey through the storm. Other times we use the sunshine or wind to grow and travel. Changing how we think is no different than recognizing that our feelings change. COVID proved that we can change when we need to change, but most of us agree that it’s easier on our brain to lump things together and simplify what we see. We are made to protect, and we can choose who we want to protect.

DEI Work is not HR It's C-Suite

Wed, 09 Feb 2022 21:47:40 GMT

In 2021 more than 1,200 books about leadership were published and there are more than 15,000 in print worldwide. The ever-growing information about leadership signifies that there is no single set of instructions on how to be an effective leader. Leadership comes in many different flavors. Great leaders however share characteristics such as courage, persistence, vision and the ability to communicate and adapt. These are the exact qualities of an effective Chief Diversity Officer (CDO).

Most people do not see being a diversity champion as a pathway to leadership but instead as a final resting place for those who desire to reimagine equity and inclusion. Diversity titles are typically seen in the same light as Human Resource professionals or more recently as the work of the Wellness Officer. Resource management is incorporated in the strategic plan while the challenging work of addressing diversity, equity and inclusion is seen as an indulgence not essential to business. Let’s change that.

An organization seeking to send the loudest message about how it values DEI will create a culture where the person leading DEI efforts is on track to be promoted to other leadership roles. Several recent examples of former DEI champions include Michael Hyter who became Korn Ferry’s CEO Feb 2021, Dr. Jamel Santa Cruze Wright who became President of Eureka College in 2016, and Kenneth Kelly Chairman and CEO of First Independence Bank. These three people are a small minority of the people taking their talent beyond the area of DEI.

Not every person who works to improve a business culture in the Diversity and Inclusion area wants to move up into other areas of leadership but the successful changemaker has the talent to lead within their organization and others. The unspoken part also needs to be said. There is a bias against seeing women and non-white people as leaders and many DEI champions are women or underrepresented. Yes there are women who lead, but there are also more men named Michael running Fortune 500 companies than there are women .

Wanting a change and making a change are both challenging. Here are three questions to start your organization on the path to elevating the people working tirelessly to improve your business culture.

Has anyone in your organization doing DEI work ever been promoted to a position with more pay and more responsibility?

Title changes without a pay increases are parlor tricks to encourage people to remain. Giving someone new responsibilities with the required support and compensation is a sign of respect and value. Promote your DEI people to other areas when possible.

Do any people in leadership have explicit and measured DEI responsibility?

If all of the responsibility for change in the area of DEI falls on the people with Diversity or Equity in their title it is highly likely that the work is not valued. If those in leadership are doing the work then the work is likely seen as valuable.

Are high level decisions postponed when the DEI champion is present or are they intentionally excluded from high impact meetings?

A common theme of leadership is to surround yourself with people who fill in your gaps. Few organizations exist today that would not benefit from the perspective of a successful champion of DEI.

Leadership doesn’t change quickly without the discomfort of internal or external pressure. Create the internal pressure to change and promote the people doing the work that many people fear. Promote the people who demonstrate the ability to manage change, inspire and see the larger picture as any effective leader does.

Racism: Acute Injury or Chronic Disease

Tue, 11 Jan 2022 23:29:12 GMT

Racism: Acute Injury or Chronic Disease
In medicine we classify a problem as acute meaning that it recently happened or chronic for ailments that are at least 6 months old. This classification helps when trying to make a diagnosis and more importantly when thinking about what steps to take next.

Bleeding from a cut has to be stopped quickly. It is an acute problem that requires immediate action. Iron deficiency anemia is not enough blood caused by inadequate iron and is a chronic problem that is slowly corrected over time.

I see racism as both an acute and chronic problem. Racism causes harm like infant mortality, police shootings and hate crimes and requires immediate prevention and treatment. Systemic racism as seen in job and housing segregation, and resource allocation causes harm slowly and continuously in a complex environment without one identifiable culprit.

It is time to address racism in all of its forms. It is time to stop ignoring and hoping that the problems will go away and see both the acute and chronic issues of racism that need healing

Here is a prescription for the acute injury of racism:

Accept that the experiences of other people are real even if you have never experienced the discrimination yourself. If as a doctor you don't believe the patient or what you see you cannot help. The first step is always to listen with the intent of understanding before attempting to intervene.

Stop the bleeding. Stop the harm. It is important to address the harm such as a toxic workplace and then search for the root cause of the harm. As the recently deceased Bishop Desmond Tutu said, “There comes a point where we need to stop just pulling people out of the river. We need to go upstream and find out why they’re falling in.” This step of action involves the greatest personal risks and therefore the greatest courage.

The third step to address the acute injury of racism is to provide the conditions for healing . Changing dressings, checking wounds, treating infections are the medical steps after an injury. In business, education and communities healing requires changing policies, checking in on the people harmed and providing support to help reestablish trust.

For chronic problems we must accept that the motivator of urgency and the pressure to drive change is much less intense. Just as chronic diseases like high blood pressure, obesity and depression can be ignored for a long time until they cause other problems, systemic racism has been ignored for too long.

The steps to treat the chronic problem of systemic racism:

Collect data and measurements over time . Because one person succeeds does not mean that there is not a problem just as one day of normal blood pressure does not mean that there is no hypertension. Collect demographic information and changes over time. Numbers alone are never enough to change behavior but behavior is rarely changed without some supporting data.

Focus on the reason for addressing the problem. Any change starts by answering the question, “Why should I change?” If the reason for change is not clear and internalized the energy to sustain the change will fade quickly.

Lastly, make the change in behavior automatic . The more obstacles, the more thought required to perform an action the harder it is to maintain the change. Just like water and electricity we follow the path of least resistance. Policies that incorporate inclusive and equitable practices that are easy to follow lead to progress that we need.

Treating racism like the public health crisis and pandemic it is finally being recognized as is a first step. The treatment is not limited to the professionals like CPR and "Stop the Bleed" is encouraged for everyone to learn. The next step is for everyone to accept our role in treating both the acute harm and supporting the systems that fight the chronic illness.

Balancing Mission and Margin

Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:14:32 GMT

During an interview I was once told “There is no mission without a margin” meaning that an organization must focus first on profit before it can fulfill its mission.
I respectfully cannot accept that. The choice is not a static picture of balance but a dynamic process of juggling.

More than 25 years of my career has been as an Army physician and putting profit over people is counter to the “mission first” world I grew up in. The minority of people who have served in the Armed Forces learn from the first day of Basic Training that we must do everything in our power to reach the objective. Mission failure is unacceptable.

Obviously, we are a part of an economy that depends on the exchange of goods and services while simultaneously expecting many things for free. My perspective despite this reality come from teaching Sunday School to second graders; the last time was in 2010. I was given course material and prepared each week for sixty to ninety minutes of crafts and conversations from young minds sometimes looking to learn. Each time I stepped into the room I was not being paid, I was not being recognized or compensated. Like the other volunteers, I saw the mission of teaching children as something I could and should do. Having taught hundreds of Sunday School lessons to children as part of a bigger mission reflected no regard for a margin.

A “margin first” view is easier to sell because of our inherent aversion to loss (Daniel Kahneman explains loss aversion ). It is also rooted in a scarcity mindset believing that all resources are limited while ignoring the spectacular accomplishments achieved by people with limited capital and extraordinary purpose like two impactful organizations MEASURE a data driven, community led non-profit and Black Speakers Collection a resource site to find Black speakers. Passion and purpose are obviously not enough knowing that the failure rate of small businesses according to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics is about 45% in five years but during the “Great Resignation” we are acknowledging that passion and purpose mean more.

The formula to success is not an equation. Instead of a static scale with weights placed reflecting priorities and resources, the better image to represent the interaction of mission and margin is of juggling. When finding new employees is now a challenge because of errors in leadership like firing people on a video call , money may not be enough to attract new talent. When employees are seen as resources and not essential components of success, retention and productivity is compromised.

Instead of “tips” to better juggle mission and margin consider these three questions:

1. Do you measure how productivity relates to engagement?

Every organization measures productivity through sales, contracts, or units produced. Organizations are also starting to routinely measure climate and engagement through surveys and focus groups. Gathering useful data is difficult knowing that employee engagement affects productivity but people can also be engaged and not productive . An example of a useful metric is to identify employee volunteerism on committees, social activities or company sponsored charity events measured against their productivity benchmarks. The correlation may be enlightening.

2. Can people outside of the C-Suite describe and discuss your mission?

Most people can easily describe their job and where the fit in the organization. The well worded mission and vision statement is often unknown to most employees in larger organizations. The sign in the break-room or the plaque over the door is not a substitute for regular conversations about everyone’s role in fulfilling the mission.

3. Could you randomly select an employee to be in a commercial for your organization?

Not everyone is comfortable on screen but that is not the intent of the question. A culture where employees are the best recruiters represents a growing organization.

Profit will always be necessary for a successful business and there will always be overhead in running any business. Ignoring the importance of the mission and engagement has been a negligible cost for most business before 2020 but today the costs of ignoring engagement and mission may be the difference between thriving, adapting and growing or falling on the wrong side of the failure statistic.

Pathways not Pipelines

Thu, 13 May 2021 15:27:52 GMT

To increase the number of under-represented people in programs let's talk pathways not pipelines.

In the field of leadership, diversity, inclusion and equity we use the term pipeline constantly. We discuss increasing the flow of under-represented people like we are looking for oil. We discuss how the resource is lost along the way and how to increase final output. The analogy is appealing to our belief that once discovered a resource can be directed to where it is needed. This analogy fails when you realize that once the "resource" is lost from the pipeline it cannot be recovered. The better metaphor is a pathway.

A pathway leads to a destination and is always accessible to join.

Imagine the difference between seeing a metal six foot high structure winding across the scene out of place with the surrounding environment forcing a fluid or gas to its destination. Now imagine wandering in a desert or forest without direction and coming across a well worn path. One gives a sense of relief the other feels foreboding. The path is made more welcoming by seeing someone else using it.

Making and marking paths to leadership, medicine or any profession allows inclusion of the people who cannot afford to replicate opportunities of the already privileged. A pipeline moves people through external and existing pressure with limited room for variability. A pathway moves through purpose and recognizes that there are many ways to reach a goal.

A pipeline program says, “Write this essay and take this test to get into my program” a pathway program says, “Taking care of your elderly relative demonstrates the abilities we’re looking for”.

A pipeline is anchored on achieving the accolades that have led to unequal representation. A pathway approach helps people at any stage in their life apply their skills and experience to reaching their goal. A pathway says that leaving the path is not the end because you can always come back.

Your path to your goal is not limited and not vulnerable to attack by one individual. Your path is uniquely your own.

"I don't need an Ally"

Wed, 28 Apr 2021 15:27:52 GMT

The fight for justice and inclusion is a fight no matter how you want to frame it.

People who work on diversity, justice, equity and inclusion can jump into the conversation on how to label those who fight for the issues but not everyone has the privilege to leave or ignore the fight.

The label “Ally” is not specific enough. An ally promises to support you when needed but there is a difference between words and actions. The people who are actively fighting need a better label.

Whether supporting Black Lives Matter (BLM), stopping AAPI hate, fighting for trans rights or improving access for the disabled there are fights that impact minority populations where we can simply be a bystander sharing encouraging words to other bystanders. The work for equity, inclusion and justice is an ongoing battle with victories, casualties and an incredibly large number of spectators content to wait and see the outcome. Anyone willing to join the struggle earns a title more meaningful than “Ally.”

Joan Trumpauer Mulholland who wrote “More Than an Ally” https://www.civilandhumanrights.org/joan-trumpauer-mulholland/ dislikes the term because of its association with the war, and others agree that it is too militaristic. In 2013 Mia McKenzie wrote “No More Allies” https://www.bgdblog.org/2013/09/no-more-allies/ and argued to drop the term allies not because of military association but because many self-described allies were all talk and no action. Alicia Garza, one of the BLM founders has emphasized the term “co-conspirator'' in order to push the narrative for people who are not in the marginalized demographic to be more active. The now ubiquitous term ally will not go quietly from the lexicon, and the term “co-conspirator” is accurate but too cumbersome to stick. Despite the reluctance to use military terms, we already have titles for people willing to fight by our side.

In the Army, it’s a “battle buddy;” in the Navy, a “shipmate;” and the Air Force has a “wing-man.” The point every writer makes who has addressed the term ally is that people who want to help need to go beyond performative lip service to taking actual risks. Those willing to fight need to be recognized for their work and not for their pledge. People with power and influence can safely signal support without taking action but doing the work takes courage: acting despite fear.

Bravery and safety do not coexist simultaneously.

Actions speak louder than words is an old but true trope that calls us to do something that shows support instead of just saying something. Here is a list of things characteristic of a battle buddy, shipmate or wing-man:

You share an objective or goal
You share risks
Either you communicate or you both fail
You respect each other
You are committed

The unifying characteristic is trust. We go into battle with the people we trust, and trust is built through experience and often necessity. Finding a battle buddy from a different demographic is not easy but the reward is, as we say in the military, a “force multiplier.” Having a battle buddy gives us the ability to do things we couldn’t do alone and this work we can’t do alone.

Culture Change

Fri, 05 Feb 2021 16:27:53 GMT

Dr. Camera Jones is a constant source of inspiration for me as she creates allegories, analogies and metaphors to address the systems that work against equity. See her TED talk Allegories on race and racism : https://youtu.be/GNhcY6fTyBM

The default belief for most individuals and organizations committed to the ongoing struggle of improving their culture is that information is the foundation of change. But to be clear:

Information is not the equivalent of knowledge and not all knowledge is useful.

Like Oprah and others who love repeating Maya Angelou’s quote "When you know better , you do better " it is easy to make generalizations about the value of knowledge. Our faith that knowledge changes behavior is often short sighted if you consider how knowing the calorie content of a donut doesn’t stop us from wanting one. The value of knowledge is varies by the situation and our experience.

We often use the image of an iceberg to represent things that are mostly hidden from view as an example of different types of knowledge. The iceberg is used to represent the different components that are visible like awards and accolades and the ones below the surface of our awareness like culture, experience, behavior and bias. The representation is helpful in describing complex topics but does not address the impact of the iceberg itself. When we learn the content of an iceberg that knowledge does nothing to help us navigate the waters around them. Knowing what made the iceberg would not have saved the Titanic.

When we understand the nature of something we can gain some insight but seeing the context is more valuable in leading to change.

If your organization wants to actually change the culture or just study the nature of what already exists there are proven steps available. Melting the iceberg may be an admirable goal but navigating through the waters is the more pertinent and urgent mission.

As your organization continues to understand your culture, bias and success these steps help navigate to your destination.

Slow down

The book by Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow is an essential read to understand how our thinking is impacted by the amount of time we take to respond. In essence, the faster we respond the more we rely on instinct, bias, feelings and habit. This is the same as going full speed through dangerous waters. The icebergs are more difficult to avoid and can cause more damage. The simple act of adding reflection time between decision and action to any systemic process will improve outcomes and decrease bias.

Listen to your navigator

Every organization has people with expertise and experience but their voice is often muted. The most knowledgeable person about a culture is from the culture. Culture change can no longer rely on the loudest or highest ranking person. To navigate past the bias and the hidden obstacles, the knowledge and understanding of people who have experience in the culture is essential. Inclusion is more than sitting at the table, it is actively contributing. It shouldn’t need saying but these navigators need to be compensated for their experience.

The Captain is responsible

Responsibility may be divided in many situations but the course is ultimately set by an individual. Only one person can have their hand on the wheel at a time. Leadership has the ultimate responsibility for the destination and speed.

Avoiding troubled waters will take more time

Setting a course away from discussions about race, bias, culture and climate is possible and has been the default for many organizations. To finish using this analogy, a course avoiding these icebergs is not possible if your destination is diversity, equity, inclusion or belonging. Organizations have been content reaching destinations that are not equitable. The path to equity requires navigating difficult waters.

You can learn a lot about the icebergs that create culture and accept that most of the culture below the surface you will never understand. The better goal is to understand that seeing and acknowledging the culture leads to the destination of equity, inclusiveness and belonging.

The Illusion of Meritocracy

Wed, 11 Nov 2020 18:10:51 GMT

If success was based on merit, the saying, “You have to work twice as hard to get half as much” would not exist.

One of our fundamental American beliefs is that every person has the opportunity to work and improve their situation. This equal opportunity for success is what inspires millions of people daily to work hard and sacrifice. The unfortunate reality of our society is that the formula to succeed is not as simple as hard work plus opportunity equals success. The equation is way more complex with many of the hardest working people in this country struggling and left poorly compensated or unable to reach their potential. The belief that good actions produce good results and bad actions create bad results is the "just-world hypothesis", a fallacy which fuels the illusion that we are in a merit-based system.

There are some things that are truly merit-based like getting a driver’s license or a car safety inspection. The criteria for success doesn’t change after the process begins and everyone who meets the requirement is awarded the prize. If you meet all of the requirements you get your license or safety sticker. A true merit-based system cannot exist if succeeding requires discriminating between qualified applicants for limited opportunities. A system where there can only be one or a few is not based on merit but judgement.

Here is an example.
A job opportunity is posted for a project manager. Two candidates have the same level of education and experience that qualifies them for the position. They have met all of the qualifications for the position; therefore a merit-based system would accept both. Because there can be only one person hired, additional criteria is necessary, and the reason for selection changes. The types of experiences are ranked, and the qualities of their references come into consideration. A selection has to be made and discriminating between the final candidates is required. The term merit is now used to justify the choice and hide the reality that a new standard for selection was created. Whatever label is given to the process, the term merit is inaccurate at best and deceitful at worse.

Those of us labeled as “successful” have little incentive to change the system. It works for us. The cost of this system is untapped potential and the loss of adaptability that comes from diversity and inclusion. If you want to challenge the illusion of meritocracy there are steps you can take to create a more transparent and inclusive environment.

Stop labeling success as based on merit unless everyone who meets a standard is selected.

My 25 year military career provided me with the privilege of serving an institution with pay transparency and a core value of meritocracy that I never questioned until I reached the higher levels of leadership. When I had the opportunity to sit on the deciding end of promotion boards the veil was lifted to the illusion of meritocracy. In a promotion board we are asked to force-rank everyone competing. It was clear that the criteria of success was based more on tradition and some hard work was seen as more valuable than others. A leader who created a new program which helped hundreds of troops was valued less than the person whose initiative elevated an executive with the rationale of an ultimately larger impact. Because merit is subjective the system is not merit-based.

Wanting the best person for a position remains the goal. Acknowledge that the criteria for “best” is burdened with bias and precedence.

We often identify the person who “succeeds,” and we look backwards to justify their success. The person with access to interview questions has an advantage over the person without access, but their success is attributed to talent not opportunity. We use attribution bias to explain why one person deserves the promotion over another when the choice is close. We ignore the compounding interest of prior selections which allows previously selected candidates to stand out. To overcome the practice of justifying our selection the criteria needs to be clear and consistent before the selection process begins.

Equity and meritocracy often conflict because the measurements for each are polar opposites. Equity seeks to elevate each person to their highest potential; meritocracy seeks to identify a winner for each competition.

Meritocracy maintains the status quo by continuing to reward the people most able to perform in the current system. In an equitable system leadership, pay and influence reflects the demographics of the organization. Leila Janah said, “Talent is equally distributed but opportunity is not.” As a leader, a conscious choice is required to seek equity which will necessitate sacrificing the verbiage of meritocracy.

People appreciate the effort to be more meritorious when the criteria are clear and stable.

Meritocracy at its core is a system where those who are most deserving are promoted. Meritocracy says that those at the top earned it, and those who fall short need to work harder. This system is motivating as long as the criteria is transparent. A system where the key to success appears more as favoritism than achievement poisons the environment. The antidote to this poison is clarity and consistency.

Any organization can transition to a more equitable climate and work towards a more meritocratic system by being transparent and routinely evaluating the process of who succeeds

Highly suggested reading: The Tyranny of the Meritocracy: Democratizing Higher Education in America by Lani Guinier was my inspirational step in re-evaluating my belief in meritocracy.

The Party Analogy

Sat, 25 Jul 2020 16:49:00 GMT

The Party: An Analogy of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Belonging

The problem with any allegory, metaphor or analogy is that it can not represent the issue completely. There will always be exceptions and deeper meanings surrounding the problem that is being represented. There will always be a valid argument that some aspect of the problem is ignored or poorly characterized.

Allegories and analogies are still very useful. Dr. Camera Jones is a master of using allegories to help people understand concepts of race and racism, and her work is inspirational. Many of the descriptions she uses like the 'Closed' sign in a restaurant to her gardener's tale with pink and red flowers and have helped people better understand the systemic nature of racism. Another brilliant speaker, Vernā Myers coined the saying, “Diversity is being invited to the party, inclusion is being asked to dance.” She has an inspiring TED talk from 2014 soon after the death of Michael Brown that challenges us to be uncomfortable with our biases: How to overcome our biases and walk boldly toward them

The sad reality is that her message, many years later, is just as powerful without changing a single word.

The goal of any analogy is to start a conversation and to reach a shared understanding. If you can understand the abstract concept represented by the imagry then we can take the next step and work towards making things better. Let’s expand the party analogy to see how we can move towards being anti-racist and include both equity and belonging which is gaining traction as another important goal of those who do Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Belonging work.

Diversity is being invited to the party. We only invite people to our home that we see as worthy and similar enough to enjoy the party. To be anti-racist in this scenario is to party with people who are different no matter how they arrive either through a friend or wander in off of the street. Having visibly different people in the room is the minimum.

Equity is having an accessibility ramp to the door. Not everyone can walk up the steps or through the door. Having the resources available to allow people with different abilities to get into the party is equity. Saying that anyone can come to your island but not providing a boat is disingenuous. Access requires a conscious effort to provide resources.

Inclusion is being asked to dance or being offered refreshments or being asked to help clean up. The fortunate few who have never stood awkwardly at a party waiting to fit in don’t understand how you can be surrounded by people and feel alone. The people with the power control inclusiveness. The social, financial, or organizational boss determines who is included.

Belonging is deciding the music, decorations or food. The best party is always the one you hate to leave because you feel like it is your party. It becomes your party when you are a part of it sharing responsibility according to your talents not sitting around hoping to fit in.

One day when COVID is manageable, we will be able to try this analogy in real life again.

The Need For Stress

Fri, 22 Nov 2019 20:38:38 GMT

Stress is a force not a feeling

Wa i ting in the “Green Room” area before I address almost 3,000 of my peers I feel my heart beating wondering if my lapel microphone is picking up the sound. I’m saying the mantra in my head “I’m not nervous, I’m excited” as the chit chat of the other presenters blend into the background. I take the stage and deliver a short talk about taking care of children in military families.
It went well.

My first understanding of stress came during physics class:a force acting on an object. Until I recognized it as a force, I believed that it was a feeling to avoid or reduce at all costs. Accepting that stress is more like gravity neither positive nor negative, it is easier to navigate. Like gravity, the situation makes the difference. Standing on a ladder requires a different respect for gravity than floating in a swimming pool. Stress can be ignored when the consequences are low like playing a video game or high like when performing CPR. Stress is absolutely necessary for change. Lifting weights at a gym is controlled stress. Standing in front of an audience to make a point or writing a public opinion piece is voluntary stress. Experiencing a natural disaster is involuntary stress.
Whether the stress is racism, illness or leadership the difference in the response to stress is directly dependent upon the degree of control.

A letter to the editor shared my thoughts on national stories of Black men dying from heart attacks and the conclusion that racial stress kills. Stress from being different is the stress least in our control except by avoidance. The critical question is, “Do we respond to inequity by blaming the stress on the victim or the system or both?” The system is difficult to change so it’s easier for most of us to focus on the individual. There are systems that need to change but until they do here are things we can do as individuals.

Voluntary stress is better than involuntary stress
The power of saying ‘no’ is underutilized. William Ury’s book “The Power of a Positive No: Save The Deal Save The Relationship and Still Say No” is required reading to appreciate the ability to say no. Choosing how much weight to lift, when to lift and how often to lift makes the stress of lifting manageable. Select the weight you lift with intention and use the privilege to walk away when you can.

Stress with a purpose is empowering

ay your registration is a different stress than waiting in line at an amusement park. Knowing the goal or intent of the stress transforms the stress. When the final outcome of standing in a registration line is the freedom to drive, the stress is worth it. When the final outcome is ambiguous or painful, the stress is more challenging to bear. Look for the reward to your efforts.

Stress is a spectrum not binary

If stress is seen as all or nothing then avoiding stress is a viable and reasonable option. Stress is graduated. Speaking to five people is a different level of stress than speaking to 500 people. Speaking to your boss is different from speaking to a room of potential customers. The ability to moderate the situation to adjust the level of force increases the tolerance for stress. Prepare as much as possible and change what you can before.

Endless stress is intolerable
Force over time is acceleration. Time is why objects break under continuous force. For organic organisms there must be a recovery period in order to adapt to the stress. Stress should not be unlimited. The popular emphasis on self care is the acknowledgement that stress needs a break. Unplugging from technology is a perfect way to practice turning off stress for at least a short period of time. Find a way to recover.

Stress is not the enemy any more than gravity is the enemy. It is a force that deserves respect and understanding so that it can be used in a positive way.

Know the Messenger

Wed, 18 Sep 2019 17:41:24 GMT

Know the source of the message
How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and [how] hard it is to undo that work again!
-Mark Twain

The organization, “Doctor Patient Unity” on the surface seems to cares about the rights of patients as they creatively tell the story of new rules hurting patients. They successfully use the same fear of excessive control and the threat of freedom being loss that has stopped universal healthcare from becoming a reality in the US since 1947. The stated goal of this lobbying group is to fight the legislation designed to reduce surprise billing but their motivation is pure profit.

Unrelenting ads depict closed hospitals and patients being kicked out of waiting rooms to induce fear. The New York Times investigate d and found that the money behind the messages were private-equity-backed doctor staffing companies. This is no real surprise. Corporate and private money supporting politics and woven into every aspect of our society is the price we accept for our representative, commerce-driven democracy. We accept that many messages are delivered by a false ally or disingenuous spokesperson but most of us rely on our bias and choose the easier route of accepting the messenger at their word. It would serve us better to pause, disengage our auto-pilot and remember the first basic step towards learning the truth: “Know your source”

Trust is the foundation of the relationships we need to make mutually beneficial transactions and it is easier to trust the people we share an identity. The characters who remind us of our family, ourselves and other “real people” who are not actors help us believe in the sincerity of the message. We also readily give our trust to celebrity endorsers who use their social capital, or the messages filled with expensive, high-production visual effects that trigger our belief that price reflects quality. These shortcuts to creating trust are well known and available to anyone learning marketing and seeking to build customers but they are easy for use as consumers to forget. There is no dilemma when the products are frivolous, useful or aimed only at disposable income. For products that impact basic needs such as health and well being, authenticity should be a factor.

There are three tools that can help us evaluate the authenticity and value of a product by evaluating the message and not simply calling everything fake and trying fool us. Taken from some of the same principles used to help kids recognize the power of advertisement, these three points can serve you in evaluating any message.

1. Discuss with someone: Who do you believe benefits from the call to action?

When you take a message at face value there is always a call to action: call your senator, buy this product, or change where you shop. The person or group who benefits should be clear. The most blatant example of an insincere messenger can be seen in any scam. Whether it is from the wealthy person who needs your help getting their money or the pop-up add that promises the best deal for that impossible to get new gadget, it's easy to evaluate offers that are too good to be true. We recognize any deceitful call to action by asking "Why would my actions help the messenger?"

2. Identify which emotions the message target

We are wired to avoid risks and danger. Because of this trait, fear is commonly used in the call to action. "Act now before it's too late!" Nostalgia is another emotion used to help us make an association with the product like the way car commercials focus on feeling good about buying their car. Different emotions create different responses and acknowledging the emotion dilutes some of the impact. Time is the other tool that helps counter the emotion of the message. Our emotions come and go sometimes during the same commercial. If you really want to break the spell of an emotion solve a few complex math problems: 23 x 42 = ?, 125 ÷ 11 = ?

3. Imagine a completely different messenger
Would the call to action work if it was given by: a local news personality? a trusted professional? a media superstar? or a favorite teacher? We are swayed by familiarity and our baseline knowledge changes our behavior. By recognizing the impact the messenger may have we are better equipped to see the message and not fall for the spectacle. "Why should I believe LeBron James for my beverage choice?"

The mental energy required to evaluate the hundreds of messages we receive every day would be enormous. These three tools are not for frivolous and disposable decisions we make hundreds of times each day. This scrutiny should be for actions that have a significant cost of time, money or energy. Finding truth behind a message is a challenge and every advertising professional is hired to get their message through to us at almost any cost. The same effort they make to influence our actions requires us to match their efforts with our own energy to protect what we value.

Skepticism is healthy and trust is best when it is earned.

Changing the White Savior Label

Fri, 23 Aug 2019 21:05:35 GMT

White Saviorism, or White Savior Complex, describes a Westerner who believes that he/she can help the helpless non-white people without their input.

If you are not overly offended by the title and can engage this topic, you may be ready to consider making a change in how you help people in need. The ultimate goal of charitable work is to act in a way guided by the perspective of the people from the culture in need and those offering assistance accept that outcomes outweigh the intents.

White Saviorism ignores the target group's needs, history or culture. “Voluntourism” is a unique version of this behavior where usually white-identifying Americans travel to Africa (or other nations) to provide aid, often for personal fulfillment. The help offered is believed to be better than anything that the local people can provide for themselves. This arrogance can go horribly wrong, as it did in Uganda when an untrained worker attempted medical care and 105 children died. ( NPR’s All Things Considered: American with No Medical Training Ran Center for Malnourished Ugandan Kids .)

White Saviorism also applies to every nonprofit and governmental agency whose leader or Board of Directors bears no resemblance to the community it serves. It manifests when well-intentioned members of the resource rich group lead without the talent or input of those in need. The findings of BoardSource, Leading with Intent: 2017 Index of Nonprofit Board Practices reports that nonprofit boards have not significantly changed despite explicit language of diversity and inclusion. They also predict that boards are not likely to change in the future.

Admittedly, the phrase “White Savior” can feel offensive on two fronts. The label "white" feels divisive and challenges the privilege of being seen as the default group. It impedes the desire to see charity as colorblind. The term "Savior" is difficult for people who identify as altruistic, socially aware or opposed to religious labels. It has a negative connotation, unlike the label “hero” or “collaborator” and categorizes our altruistic behavior as less noble, self-promoting and self-serving.

The individual responsibility of decision makers within an organization driven to assist is to examine the results of their work from the perspective of the group in need, while de-emphasizing the intent of the organization. Early efforts by TOMS shoes is an example of a good intention with an unexpected outcome. After Blake Mycoskie saw the impact of having shoes on children in Nicaragua his simple idea was to provide shoes. The problem surfaced when the local economy of shoemakers was disrupted, and the issues of clean water, immunizations, food and safety were ignored for a problem that was relatively insignificant. The problem with White Saviorism is the tendency of those with resources and a different culture to project what the intended group needs.

Changing the outcome of the work you and your organization is not easy, but it is far from impossible. Acknowledging the possibility of improving outcomes to focus on the needs of the population from their point of view is the first step.

Here are four additional steps that can help expunge the White Savior label and improve outcomes:

1. “Nothing for us, without involving us.”

Acknowledge that all planning should include the people who need help. All charitable work for humans should begin this way. Unlike saving animals or plants who cannot communicate their desires or needs, people can communicate. Eliminating the paternalistic view that the less fortunate cannot decide for themselves is essential to creating agency or the capacity for others to make their own free choices. When planning an intervention, event or service at least one person from the targeted group should have an active voice in the process. Obviously one or two people cannot represent every viewpoint and concern, but the right people may bring the focus to the areas most in need of help.

2. “You will never have the same experience as someone native to the culture.”

Be explicit in identifying the strengths of the target community. If the community has an efficient and reliable means of communicating, adding cell phones may be disruptive and create a new problem of needing power or cell service. Believe that a community can identify the problem and create a solution instead believing that your solution is the best. As a parent of teens I easily identify with the belief that my son’s life would be better if he simply did things my way. I may discount his creativity, experience with technology and alternate priority. The reality is that the best work and the best outcome is usually achieved when everyone fully participates in the process and contributes their perspective and talent. The most creative and sustainable solutions usually come from those with the most to lose.

3. “Play on the team.”

Be a player not an announcer. A player is in the game and has the same goals as everyone else. An announcer sees the players as interchangeable assets used for entertainment. To avoid the savior complex there has to be the sweat equity created on the field with teammates not the spectator sweat experienced while watching from a safe distance. “Voluntourists” may look like players but they are more like referees unaffected by the final outcome of the game. There needs to be as much connection as possible between the helpers, those being helped and the outcome where the victory belongs to everyone on the team.

4. “Be a part of the show.”

Using an arts metaphor: be an actor not a patron. Giving money is important in sustaining any performance, but the results come from the people on stage and behind the scenes doing the work. If you have ever been on stage you know that you rely on every person to hit her mark. The actor in a one-person performance doesn't control the lights, sound or scenery and has to rely on the assistance of others for a successful performance. A patron’s financial contribution does not guarantee a “hit” show and may have little emotional attachment. The emotional attachment comes from the work and shared risks.

The intent is not to bring shame or doubt if the current work you lead falls into the 'White Savior' category but most of us believe that knowedge leads to change. Consider these two additional opinions and their potential knowledge:
A 5 ½ minute vlog from Everyday Feminism about the problems of the trope and Kellye Whitney’s take that we should not have the term at all and just call them "Leaders". The ultimate goal is to make a positive impact with the humility that recognizes the humanity of the people being helped.

Charity is an important aspect of our connection to others but outcome is exponentially more important than intent. The best outcomes are from initiatives driven by those who are part of the culture and experience the need. Approaching charitable and social justice work from the perspective of the local people is both just and more productive. If you question whether your actions or the actions of your organization fits the definition of attempting to be a savior, the litmus test is the inclusiveness of the target population in planning, execution and evaluation. If they aren’t vital to all three areas, you may be acting like a White Savior and becoming inclusive is the first step that you can take to change.