A Moment for Memory
Before I get into today’s newsletter, I want to take a moment to reflect on the past year. It’s been 366 days since the most horrific day for Jews since the Holocaust: when Hamas terrorists raped and butchered Israelis, killing 1,195 and abducting 251, including a baby. Many of those remain hostages even today, some with little or no sign of life in the past year. Let us take a moment to reflect, to remember those who have passed, and hope and pray that the remaining hostages come home safely.
Leadership Moment: DEI-abolical Training
Freshman Shoshana Aufzein writes about Columbia/Barnard’s mandatory DEI training. It’s a frankly unsurprising record of what passes these days for HR training in many organizations, although the unique circumstances at Columbia, where Jews are regularly confronted by terrorist symbology and language, may make it a little more surprising to hear an official contractor of the university communicating antisemitic tropes.
But it shouldn’t be surprising. As Inclusion programs morphed from focusing on environments – how do we make everyone feel more welcome? – to an equity/outcome focus – how do we advance these specific groups – it was obvious that this was the outcome ahead of us. A identity-based focus on Under Represented Minorities (URMs) carries a clear connotation that a problem to be solved must be … over-represented minorities.
There are many societal and structural inputs that contribute to inequitable outcomes, but tackling those requires hard work. Easier for organizations to tackle – and for DEI “experts” to profit from – is an assumption that any group that does “better” than average is the beneficiary of oppression (and therefore fair game for all blame), and that any group that does “worse” is the victim of oppression (and to be a fair target for short-term positive discrimination). These assumptions underly much of modern DEI through, from the intersectionality of identity to the oppressor/oppressed language.
We will get to see how Columbia & Barnard address this problem … if they do at all.
Appearances
Recent
Sep 24: Video interview with David Spark about 1% Leadership
Sep 24: HOU.SEC.CON (Houston). Slides and recorded talk
Sep 26: Fundamental AppSec questions, with Daniel Shechter, Miggo.
Upcoming
Oct 9: ASPM Nation (virtual)
One Minute Pro Tip: Stop Using Exclusive Inclusive Language
A lot of language commonly in use in organizations has strong negative externalities. Take “diverse” as an example. I often see calls for “a diverse speaker” or calling for a “diverse candidate.” Diverse is an adjective that applies to groups: a diverse group has representation from a lot of distinct subgroups. An individual is not diverse. This is often code for “women, or specific minority groups.” Using diverse to mean this is problematic language for anyone not in those groups. If you have a panel with all white men, it’s fine to say “I need a speaker who isn’t another white man” without misusing the word diverse.
Similarly, be cautious about using the phrase under-represented minorities, which carries the implication that some minorities are over-represented (and should be reduced).