This is a great question I receive often, and most recently received this week.
In the earlier versions of the Table of Diversity, there was a column for National Origin. Not too long after the Table of Diversity launched, an immigration lawyer asked me the purpose of the Table of Diversity.
In short, I said that I wanted organizations to be able to use this tool to drive meaningful change that recognized everyone and helped them thrive.
The immigration lawyer told me that having National Origin on the Table of Diversity can, inadvertently, put people at risk, which could lead to deportation. This was in 2018/2019 when national conversations on immigration were not so welcoming.
In my mind, I was creating space for people to show up fully at work. And that was true, but the legal risks outweighed that. It was an easy decision to remove National Origin as a column on the Table of Diversity.
That moment helped draw a line in the sand for what should and should not be represented on the Table of Diversity. The first requirement is that it is an actionable data point. Every column on the Table of Diversity can be asked in a workplace culture survey and a strategy of inclusion and equity can be developed from it. The second requirement is that there has to be science behind it.
I'm often asked why 'body size' isn't on the Table of Diversity. First, body size isn't an actionable data point. While we know that biases, privilege, and marginalization exist related to body size, we probably aren't going to ask about someone's body size in a culture survey. Second, there's not a lot of workplace data on the impact of body size...yet. As GPL-1 medications become more popular and in demand, body size is becoming more of a focal point in health and wellness conversations. If there's ever a scale for body size that outlined privilege and marginalization, I could see incorporating body size on the Table of Diversity.
The same goes for colorism, hair texturism, if you're left- or right-handed, and the list goes on and on! These aspects of difference are no less important in the DEI conversation, but how we approach them in the workplace is different.
How does the Table of Diversity make space for these nuances? Within each Diversity Element, there are a range of diverse experiences. We often say that people are not a monolith and that is true for every aspect of diversity. Body size for women is different than body size for men. And, it's different in the Black community than in the White community. Body size for babies (with their chunky cheeks!) is different than body size for 40 year olds. Body size for football players is different than body size for jockeys. 'Dad Bods' are much more acceptable than 'Mom Bods'.
In this case, the discussion of what body size means becomes so important. That's where the Table of Diversity supporting tools can help!
Comments