Privilege is a useful concept. It forces us to examine ourselves and our actions. If humility leads to better leadership, as Jim Collins’ research in Good to Great suggests, acknowledging our privilege can help us be better leaders.
But privilege has unfortunately become inflammatory in workplace discussions on diversity. That’s why I was intrigued by an attempt to shift the discussion to earned and unearned advantage by consultants Chris Altizer and Gloria Johnson-Cusack.
People tend to believe they have earned whatever position or benefits they have gained in their career. Talking about earned advantage is welcoming to such beliefs. But it also asks everyone to acknowledge there can be unearned advantage: Benefits or positions gained or granted by virtue of who you are or where you’re from.
Unearned advantage, of course, sounds like privilege. It’s a bit of a euphemism. But the consultants say the word privilege in diversity discussions calls to mind distinctions of class and diminishes perceptions of effort. That can be emotionally triggering, negative interpretations erupting before inquiry and diversity discussion even begin. People with privilege might react, whether they realize it or not, with denial and withdrawal.
“In our experience, however, ‘advantage’ initiates a more productive response. Advantage seems well understood without as many emotional or social additives as privilege,” they write in Growing the Elephant. Breaking advantage down into earned and unearned allows people to argue “I worked for what I have” and “no one gave me anything.” More importantly, they might reflect on the unearned advantage that also runs through their career, and be open to seeing the earned and unearned advantages colleagues have.
Ginni Rometty, Ursula Burns, and Indra Nooyi are all women who made it to the CEO’s office in major American corporations and in recent years published introspective and inspiring memoirs. Being a woman was a disadvantage. Ms. Burns and Ms. Nooyi are of colour, Ms. Rometty Italian-American. Ms. Burns grew up impoverished and Ms. Rometty in difficult circumstances after her father ditched the family. Ms. Nooyi was raised in a Hindu Brahmin family in India, living comfortably and with “invaluable stability,” as she puts it, before immigrating as a stranger with different customs to the United States for graduate business studies at Yale University. As CEOs, all had privilege. But they didn’t start in privilege. It’s a tangle. But individuals and careers are a tangle, full of contradictions, complexities and nuance.
Euphemisms shield and deflect but the concept of advantage, earned and unearned, potentially provides a better platform for discussion. Aiding such exploration, Mr. Altizer and Ms. Johnson-Cusack suggest, can be considering the headwinds and tailwinds that helped or hindered careers.
In her book Rising Together, women’s leadership consultant Sally Helgesen tries to bridge workplace divides by looking at other emotional triggers. When they arise, she says “we feel a rush of adrenalin, a sinking in the pit of our stomach, a recoil, a blinding rage …. Our immediate impulse might be to lash out. But if we are in a work situation, we fear what this could cost us, so we try to suppress our feelings and move on.”
Ms. Helgesen urges us to consider alternative, positive scripts when triggered. She cites the all-too-common meeting situation where a woman raises an idea that goes unrecognized until a man, Mark, makes the same point later and is treated as if a genius. The woman might rightfully feel furious at being slighted, her idea stolen by a colleague. But the woman could decide the man intervened because he agreed with her idea and wanted to support her. Or she could decide he was summarizing what she said to amplify it.
She could give him the benefit of the doubt and after he finishes respond: “I am so glad Mark agrees with what I said. Thanks, Mark!” When the meeting ends, she could tell him, “It’s great to know you and I think alike on this issue. I’d love to discuss how we can move ahead.”
Ms. Helgesen stresses that it doesn’t matter whether the woman believes that alternative story is true or not. In fact, she might be sure he was trying to take credit for her idea. But creating a positive story allows her to take power over the situation: “Revising her script enables her to reinterpret a painful situation and gives her a number of ways to claim what she wants – in this case recognition – without going to the mattress by calling Mark out.”
Unfair actions are a common workplace trigger. We expect a level playing field, a notion drawn from sports that Ms. Helgesen argues doesn’t translate into how organizations operate. Organizations are always in flux and ground rules can vary situationally. Unlike sports, rules don’t necessarily triumph over positions. Again, she urges restraint: “The fairness trigger can undermine our capacity to make the best of our talents, collaborate broadly, focus on the big picture and enjoy our work. The negative energy that drives many ‘it’s not fair’ narratives can also diminish our ability to effectively advocate for larger changes we seek to put in place.”
Both approaches – replacing discussions on privilege with ones on earned and unearned advantage, and writing positive scripts when triggered – can reduce the negative energy surrounding the positive effort for a more inclusive workplace.
Cannonballs
- To boost creativity on your team, stop playing “schedule Tetris,” trying to cram as many meetings into the week as possible. Stanford University professors Jeremy Utley and Perry Klebahn say the most visionary leaders block time for priorities and unscheduled activities.
- Executive coach Dan Rockwell suggests asking job candidates, “Imagine your boss just said no to your request. How would you try to convince your boss to say yes?” Another questions he likes: “When did you say no to a previous boss, and why?”
- Offer managers and supervisors simple support to help them oversee others in tumultuous times. “The simpler the support, the better it is, because it’s more likely to be consumed,” notes David Landman, global head of talent development at Goldman Sachs. He was pointing to how-to guides that firm produced helping managers through performance conversations, from goal-setting at the start of the year to a coaching conversation in the middle of the year to a look-back conversation at the end.
Harvey Schachter is a Kingston-based writer specializing in management issues. He, along with Sheelagh Whittaker, former CEO of both EDS Canada and Cancom, are the authors of When Harvey Didn’t Meet Sheelagh: Emails on Leadership.