Women in Leadership, Inclusion, and Race — A Personal Story.
I have a working-mother story. No better time to share than today after Mother’s day and also after seeing a DEI colleague’s enlightening post on taking a critical look at people we expect should carry the DEI mantle but may not be trained in it and as such may not have much to offer asides from over-worn ideas.
Begin story:
A few years ago I was refused an accommodation that would have very minimal disruption to my schedule (a fact laid out in the request). The reason for the refusal was based on not wanting to give the perception of making arbitrary accommodations.
I went ahead and worked through the consequences of this disruption for about 4 months since it was a temporary situation.
If this was the end of the story, it would be a very boring one indeed. But, come to find out a few months later that a peer was given the same type of accommodation I asked for (with more latitude to the time request). I found this out through a random conversation with the individual involved since they had no way of knowing that I had also requested a similar accommodation.
You can imagine how much of a betrayal this felt like. And of course the theories about my getting ‘No’ and another ‘Yes’ kept coming up and disrupting my thinking. But since the temporary period had lapsed and I no longer needed the accommodations, I went ahead and filed it under the file of unfairness. To date though, I only wished or hoped the persons affording the accommodations had learned about Adam’s equity theory of motivation and how the feeling of unfairness can sometimes be a significant de-motivator to employees even if they don’t indicate this verbally.
The story doesn’t end there, and this is where it gets even more interesting: That summer I attended a women’s mentoring meeting and, as a mentee, I brought up the scenario, asking what I should have done under the circumstances. Two senior women leaders volunteered to answer. The first one tells me to suck it up and realize that the person who refused to give the accommodation had other people to think about and how they were right in not wanting the perception of arbitrariness (Ok. Point taken).
The next leader came up and told about how she had a similar issue when she was raising her own kids. She went on to tell how she had readjusted schedules during those few months, putting in a lot of work upfront. She then said I could have done the same thing, especially when it was so temporary, and also having to do with childcare. Because in her words “your kiddos are not going to be little forever.” I tell you even though the period for the requested accommodations had elapsed, I felt so seen and validated by this particular senior leader’s response.
Now what’s interesting is that the first respondent was of the same race as me while the second was from the ethnic majority.
End story.
Why am I bringing race (or ethnicity) into this?
Because, people are people; the mindset of “shut up and suck it up” is not one limited to any race or ethnicity. This was after all a women’s’ group, and you would think that the gender discrimination women have faced and that we continue to talk about would make some women leaders more empathetic about some of the challenges faced by working women of all races. But, there’s obviously more work to be done because I have heard the argument that working mothers ought not be given accommodations as it’s unfair to women who do not or choose not have children.
While I recognize the merit of this argument, I choose to come at it from a framework of “Is the work being done?,” “Is it being done at excellent levels?,” “Have you given accommodations and then seen declining levels of work?,” If you have, and you answered ‘No’ to 1 and 2 and ‘Yes’ to 3, then I can get on the bus. But if your answer is the reverse, then I would say examine your prejudice.
Having a premeditated answer to situations that you have not explored within a transparent framework is a type of prejudice.
It’s also quite a traditional and rigid style of leadership (especially for small teams) when you say “this is what I know would happen if I did this,” without recognizing that members of your team may have different needs. Simply recognizing that fact could make a difference in morale and motivation. This may be the lens such leaders use to maintain emotional distance from team members. Because, being warm and open, may be perceived as being a weak or ineffectual leader.
Heart-centered leadership means you see each individual as a person with unique needs. It also means you see them as valued members of your team and reflect this in your relationship with them.
Today I can actually sit back and thank those two senior leaders because they helped me view the issue from different reference points. This was one of many experiences that sent me into the world of leadership theory and practice, something I do now with a DEI frame of reference.
Fostering belonging through inclusion is not something that happens on auto-pilot. Inclusion has to be both intentional and deliberate and its outcome (belonging) is not determined by you but by those you lead. You can say “I am inclusive” but if the people you lead do not perceive it to be so either through your actions or your failure to act, then there is a disconnect.
As women leaders either of self or people, there is so much room for us to enhance DEI within the spaces we occupy.
Dr Iwuchukwu is a Pharmacist-Scientist trained in the objective methods of pharmaceutical sciences and psychology. She contributes to the mentoring, career development and leadership training of female pharmacists. She is on the Advisory Board of the Intentional Leader Project at www.intentionalleader.me with a mission is to advance the leadership cause for under-mentored females.
