WEBVTT - Illuminating an Inclusive Path Through Recognition 0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:03.680 You're listening to Bloomberg BusinessWeek with Carol Messer and Tim 0:00:03.680 --> 0:00:05.840 Stenebek on Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:06.160 --> 0:00:08.880 Well, let's turn to a challenge that's facing every C 0:00:09.000 --> 0:00:13.000 suite executive, not to mention every policymaker, university, dean, teacher, 0:00:13.800 --> 0:00:16.799 you name it, who's trying to work at improving diversity 0:00:16.960 --> 0:00:20.599 and inclusion in their business school, etc. How do you 0:00:20.640 --> 0:00:23.040 try and bring people up who faced an equality and 0:00:23.040 --> 0:00:27.159 discrimination without simply focusing on the numbers, simply filling in 0:00:27.200 --> 0:00:32.320 the checkboxes. Michelle Lamont, a professor at sociology, a professor 0:00:32.360 --> 0:00:35.199 of sociology at Harvard, tried to answer this question, and 0:00:35.240 --> 0:00:37.920 she went out and interviewed over one hundred and eighty 0:00:38.000 --> 0:00:42.440 cultural leaders around the country. She wrote about her findings 0:00:42.640 --> 0:00:46.159 in the books Seeing Others, how recognition works and how 0:00:46.159 --> 0:00:49.000 it can heal a divided world. So, Michelle, you know, 0:00:49.040 --> 0:00:50.840 academic inequality. 0:00:50.280 --> 0:00:53.880 Is a key piece of the polarization, the cultural polarization 0:00:54.040 --> 0:00:56.880 that you describe in your book, But you think it's 0:00:56.920 --> 0:01:01.880 a pretty limited way of understanding why some people succeed 0:01:01.920 --> 0:01:03.920 why other people lag explain. 0:01:06.000 --> 0:01:09.839 Well, there's several aspects of this question. One of them 0:01:10.160 --> 0:01:15.240 is that when large organizations are putting in place a 0:01:15.240 --> 0:01:19.320 diversity program, they're not necessarily spending enough time thinking about 0:01:19.319 --> 0:01:22.160 the cultural change that are needed to make people feel 0:01:22.160 --> 0:01:27.240 that they belong and members of dominant groups white people 0:01:27.520 --> 0:01:30.560 meant tend to be very much at the center of 0:01:30.640 --> 0:01:35.160 the conversation and are often located more centrally in the space, 0:01:35.280 --> 0:01:38.399 for instance. So my book is very much about how 0:01:38.480 --> 0:01:42.240 to make more people feel worthy. And if we think 0:01:42.280 --> 0:01:45.600 of the role of organization well, for instance, putting together 0:01:45.720 --> 0:01:49.800 programs that reward people for being parents and make it 0:01:49.920 --> 0:01:54.440 possible for people to bring their older parents to the doctor. 0:01:54.560 --> 0:01:57.880 Giving some flexibility in work hours, for instance, are the 0:01:57.960 --> 0:02:00.000 kind of policies that can really make it. 0:02:00.760 --> 0:02:03.720 I love more well. I just want to jump in, Michelle, 0:02:03.960 --> 0:02:05.840 because we only we only have a few minutes with you, 0:02:05.880 --> 0:02:07.120 and I want to make sure we get to everything 0:02:07.120 --> 0:02:09.760 on our long list of questions here. But you bring 0:02:09.880 --> 0:02:11.440 up something that's so interesting in the wake of the 0:02:11.480 --> 0:02:15.040 way that the workplace has changed post pandemic, if we 0:02:15.080 --> 0:02:19.520 can call this post pandemic, I certainly feel like we 0:02:19.560 --> 0:02:22.240 are in a different world when it comes to flexibility. 0:02:22.360 --> 0:02:25.840 I feel totally comfortable going to doctor's appointments, bringing my 0:02:25.919 --> 0:02:30.120 kid to doctor's appointments, Approaching my managers about these things 0:02:30.120 --> 0:02:32.280 in a way that I didn't before the pandemic, because 0:02:32.720 --> 0:02:36.480 you know, not everybody comes into work five days a 0:02:36.480 --> 0:02:38.000 week these days. I mean, how do you do this 0:02:38.080 --> 0:02:40.160 in a way that in a way where we have 0:02:40.200 --> 0:02:41.240 a distributed workforce? 0:02:42.280 --> 0:02:45.440 Yeah, well, those are positive changes. But what has come 0:02:45.480 --> 0:02:49.680 also with the pandemic is that some of the aspects 0:02:49.720 --> 0:02:52.840 of life that are released sustained by regular work is 0:02:52.880 --> 0:02:56.400 that we build relationship with our coworkers. We feel seen 0:02:56.480 --> 0:02:59.320 by them. And as more of us are spending more 0:02:59.360 --> 0:03:03.679 time stated on our computers and being evaluated by algorithms, 0:03:04.040 --> 0:03:07.560 interacting with data more than we are people, the sense 0:03:07.600 --> 0:03:11.320 of how we gain recognition from the workplace is really diminishing. 0:03:11.680 --> 0:03:14.120 And that's a real problem for gen zs who have 0:03:14.320 --> 0:03:17.960 such a desire to feel more social inclusion and to 0:03:18.080 --> 0:03:21.600 really value quality of life, not only working to make money, 0:03:21.919 --> 0:03:25.639 but working to have rich relationships that allows them to 0:03:26.120 --> 0:03:28.080 really be all they want to be in life. 0:03:28.520 --> 0:03:32.200 So those is this the argument for a return to 0:03:32.240 --> 0:03:34.320 office from a diversity and inclusion perspective. 0:03:37.280 --> 0:03:43.680 Not really. I think my focus is not necessarily no, sorry, 0:03:43.720 --> 0:03:47.560 The argument is really about how sorry. The argument is 0:03:47.600 --> 0:03:50.720 really about how to create a workplace that is more 0:03:51.160 --> 0:03:55.080 fulfilling for people because they feel more worthy, they feel 0:03:55.080 --> 0:03:58.680 more valued in the eyes of their co workers. So 0:03:59.160 --> 0:04:02.680 how to create structures that allow them to develop relationships 0:04:02.680 --> 0:04:03.400 that are deeper. 0:04:03.920 --> 0:04:06.480 So how do you do that in a world where 0:04:07.400 --> 0:04:10.520 remote workers are not the exception anymore? 0:04:12.120 --> 0:04:17.280 Well by creating opportunities for people to really you know, 0:04:17.320 --> 0:04:21.039 if you create an environment where there's more emphasis on 0:04:21.400 --> 0:04:26.880 allowing people to live authentically and to bring their best self. 0:04:27.000 --> 0:04:30.760 I taught during the pandemic, and I remember my undergraduates saying, 0:04:31.080 --> 0:04:33.679 you really need to in the classroom create a culture 0:04:33.720 --> 0:04:36.200 that allows us to bring our best self. And I 0:04:36.320 --> 0:04:38.440 was very puzzled. I asked them, what do you mean? 0:04:39.040 --> 0:04:41.080 They say, I don't want to feel like I have 0:04:41.200 --> 0:04:44.240 to be in this environment where I'm supposed to present 0:04:44.360 --> 0:04:46.599 a picture of who I am that is untrue, or 0:04:46.640 --> 0:04:48.800 I have to be exposed to ideas that are really 0:04:48.839 --> 0:04:52.080 contrary to what I value. So of course that's part 0:04:52.120 --> 0:04:56.120 of the educational system to learn about ideas that are 0:04:56.120 --> 0:04:59.080 not familiar or agreeable to you. But there's a focus 0:04:59.080 --> 0:05:03.720 put on attentics by young people that future employers really 0:05:03.760 --> 0:05:06.000 need to think about if they want to retain them. 0:05:06.360 --> 0:05:09.159 But to some degree, everyone puts on some sort of 0:05:09.200 --> 0:05:11.840 persona when they go to the office, right, whether it's 0:05:12.240 --> 0:05:14.440 you know, doing your hair more nicely than you would 0:05:14.520 --> 0:05:18.120 on the weekend or putting on nicer clothes. 0:05:18.200 --> 0:05:22.760 I mean, yes, is it too much you variation in 0:05:22.839 --> 0:05:28.440 the extent to which this is people can disclose their 0:05:28.520 --> 0:05:31.800 real selves thing. For instance, of people who've had miscarriages 0:05:31.960 --> 0:05:34.719 at work, I mean, how much do they talk about this? 0:05:34.880 --> 0:05:37.000 How much? How free do they feel that they can 0:05:38.000 --> 0:05:42.359 reveal this drama to their supervisor. There's some environment in 0:05:42.400 --> 0:05:46.440 which we're all expected to present, you know, who we 0:05:46.480 --> 0:05:48.839 are in a very formal way, and there's others that 0:05:48.920 --> 0:05:52.679 are much more open to experiencing people, you know, through 0:05:52.720 --> 0:05:56.160 their authentic selfs. So these are some of the consideration 0:05:56.279 --> 0:05:58.839 that the book is talking about in terms of inclusion 0:05:58.880 --> 0:06:03.320 and also promoting diversity is not only about numbers. It's also, 0:06:03.400 --> 0:06:07.120 as you said earlier, it's very much about signaling that 0:06:07.160 --> 0:06:11.279 everyone belongs by for instance, the way that the offices 0:06:11.320 --> 0:06:14.440 are distributed. Who are going to be receiving the offices 0:06:14.480 --> 0:06:16.960 that are in the corner, far away from everyone, and 0:06:17.000 --> 0:06:19.200 who's going to be more at the center of the networks. 0:06:19.200 --> 0:06:22.960 Those are among the questions that employers may want to consider. 0:06:23.240 --> 0:06:25.440 Michelle, I think one challenge that I think about when 0:06:25.440 --> 0:06:28.720 you talk about authenticity is what we see in Washington 0:06:28.839 --> 0:06:31.240 today and what we see from our politicians here in 0:06:31.240 --> 0:06:33.599 the United States. Authenticity is not a word I would 0:06:33.680 --> 0:06:37.760 use to describe the interactions the relationships that take place there. 0:06:37.760 --> 0:06:40.240 And I'm wondering how we do this in a world 0:06:40.320 --> 0:06:44.400 where the behavior for you know, what's modeled for us 0:06:44.480 --> 0:06:46.280 is sort of the polar opposite. 0:06:47.680 --> 0:06:50.599 No, absolutely, And when we think about the very large 0:06:50.640 --> 0:06:54.840 percentage of the American population that doesn't vote, it's in 0:06:54.839 --> 0:06:58.360 particular because they perceive people in d C as extremely fake. 0:06:58.960 --> 0:07:02.719 And I think as the working class is really being 0:07:03.160 --> 0:07:07.000 courted by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party as well, 0:07:07.040 --> 0:07:13.000 there's a real need to have discussion within each party 0:07:13.120 --> 0:07:16.120 about how are they able to better appeal to the 0:07:16.160 --> 0:07:19.520 working class, in part by signaling that the value authenticity 0:07:19.560 --> 0:07:22.480 and people being people and people being more real if 0:07:22.520 --> 0:07:25.440 you want so. There's such a class divide in the 0:07:25.760 --> 0:07:32.000 political culture and in between the elite, college educated professionals 0:07:32.040 --> 0:07:36.160 who dominate the workplace and who dominate d C that 0:07:36.760 --> 0:07:39.760 I think if we want more people to take democracy 0:07:39.840 --> 0:07:43.000 seriously and to be invested in our society, there's really 0:07:43.080 --> 0:07:45.560 a need to think and to discuss the place of 0:07:45.600 --> 0:07:49.240 sincerity and authenticity as we interact with each other at 0:07:49.320 --> 0:07:51.040 work and also in the political world. 0:07:52.160 --> 0:07:55.480 Weigh in a little bit on the impact of the 0:07:55.520 --> 0:08:00.600 Supreme Court's decision to really narrow affirmative action, to essentially 0:08:01.360 --> 0:08:04.880 remove this from being a strong criteria that you know, 0:08:05.000 --> 0:08:08.360 universities can use. And there is some speculation that this 0:08:09.400 --> 0:08:12.160 or some form of this rule may get applied to 0:08:12.200 --> 0:08:14.880 the workplace as well. I mean, talk to me about 0:08:14.880 --> 0:08:17.800 how business leaders can get past us. 0:08:19.680 --> 0:08:22.600 I don't think it will be very easy. If you 0:08:22.680 --> 0:08:26.239 think of the rulings as it applies to higher education, 0:08:26.440 --> 0:08:29.760 there's this class that says students can write as says. 0:08:29.880 --> 0:08:33.120 So it's true that there's certainly a possibility for universities 0:08:33.120 --> 0:08:36.760 to slightly get around this, But in a Supreme Court 0:08:36.840 --> 0:08:41.600 that is dominated by six Supreme Court judges who are 0:08:41.640 --> 0:08:46.000 fundamentally conservative, it's absolutely predictable that they will go after 0:08:46.040 --> 0:08:49.960 affirmative action at many different level, and yet I think 0:08:50.000 --> 0:08:53.800 our workplaces are already extremely diverse. So we can think 0:08:53.840 --> 0:08:57.880 of many context in which those who do the evaluation will, 0:08:58.960 --> 0:09:01.480 you know, find ways create the kind of workplace that 0:09:01.640 --> 0:09:05.520 is reflexive of what the future of American society is 0:09:05.559 --> 0:09:08.360 in terms of diversity, but also in terms of the 0:09:08.400 --> 0:09:12.160 population that they are serving. As the number of non 0:09:12.200 --> 0:09:17.000 whites is increasing rapidly in the US, all organizations that 0:09:17.080 --> 0:09:22.960 provide services will want also to have a staff that 0:09:24.520 --> 0:09:28.959 with whom the clients can relate. So I think that 0:09:29.160 --> 0:09:33.160 bureaucratic processes are not functioning in isolation from real life. 0:09:33.880 --> 0:09:38.320 And at that level, I'm somewhat optimistic about the opportunity 0:09:38.400 --> 0:09:39.400 to go around the rules. 0:09:39.440 --> 0:09:42.679 If you will, Michelle, we really appreciate you joining us 0:09:43.240 --> 0:09:45.960 this afternoon on Bloomberg Business Week. Michell Laman as professor 0:09:46.000 --> 0:09:49.439 of sociology at Harvard her new book, Seeing Others, How 0:09:49.480 --> 0:09:52.000 Recognition Works and How it can heal a divided world. 0:09:52.040 --> 0:09:52.600 It's out now.