Why a history of “D&I work” may have done nothing for your company
“We’ve had D&I as an initiative for years.” Thank you, but I call your bluff.
I’ve been doing this whole “women in tech” thing for over a decade now. I’ve been the recipient of “D&I Initiatives” many times over by tech companies large and small. Women 2.0, in large part, can thank these well-intentioned dollars for at least part of its success.
First, thank you. These dollars, for years, are what helped many organizations and companies like Women 2.0 grow. They helped communities of women around the world flourish.
They helped “us” (meaning everyone working towards a more diverse tech industry) build awareness, drive conversation forward, and raise crucial issues. This matters, and we all wouldn’t be here if it weren’t for that process.
But they didn’t do a whole lot for workplaces.
Bear with me.
CSR is different than HR.
The name says it all: Corporate Social Responsibility.
The process of CSR — which is where, for the bulk of the last 10–15 years, most D&I budgets came from — suggests that there is a social, societal focus. On the corporation as a whole being better stewards within that society.
Tech Company F should be supporting the local communities of women and girls (or whichever breakdown you happen to focus on), and making sure they have public access to resources and empowerment.
This is inherently separate from the company itself.
External vs Internal.
It follows closely, then, that the D&I of Old — the D&I prior to about 5 years ago (this is an industry generalization, I know for some of you this timeframe isn’t right!) — didn’t really have much to do with the actual workforce or workplace.
The D&I of New — how we’ve been considering the importance of diversity and inclusion in the last 5-ish years — is about how companies are creating internal principles, policies and processes, and how they can support employees — all of them — and make sure work environments are open, etc.
By and large, the most I saw during the D&I of Old Era that was internally focused were implicit or explicit hiring initiatives. But that’s muddy because the effects of those initiatives often stopped once the role was filled. Sort of internal, sort of external? (Or, more cynically, sort of self-serving?).
[NOTE: If your diversity recruitment budget is still in CSR or a separate D&I budget, MOVE IT NOW. Yes, I’m yelling at you. A topic for another day, but hiring is hiring, people are people. Get it in your general recruitment budget.]
Different dollars, impact and ROI.
The D&I of Old is simply not the same as the D&I of New, past the words “Diversity” and “Inclusion”.
Yes, there’s a focus on humans in both — diverse humans. Yes, there’s a focus on making the world a better place (great!). But that’s about where the similarity ends.
The impact of work in the Old Era was external.
In some cases, it was considered a selfless duty. There was little acknowledgement of internal impact past the spirit of volunteerism.
No companies ever asked what the ROI was on their CSR efforts. None.
In many cases, it was considered a branding effort. If a brand showed that it was aligned with D&I efforts, it’s a win.
This is when the only rumblings of ROI came into play, around marketing dollars and the impact on branding. Is the brand getting the exposure it’s looking for? Are people understanding that we, Brand F, care about diversity? Are we spending on the right community events?
But that’s different than what we’re trying to solve for now.
What’s the matter with companies caring about the communities they live in, which is amazing of them? About brands caring about their brand alignment, which is what brands are supposed to do?
Because many of them thought they were fixing “their” problems of diversity and inclusion with these dollars.
But they weren’t and they didn’t. In my opinion, this falsehood became an impediment to progress in the space.
Companies poured CSR and marketing dollars externally during the D&I of Old Era.
But the curtain comes up in the D&I Era of New, and internal cultures are unchanged, or worse, toxic.
Diversity numbers only move by 1% point or less per year.
HR departments still think using “too passionate” or “too eager” on reviews for women employees is gender-neutral (yes, that was 2017 and yes, that was coming from a tech giant who’s been one of the most “generous” with their CSR dollars in the past many years).
2% of VC funds are going to women.
We all find out sexual harassment was the norm.
And so on….
Again, I do thank all of the companies who genuinely put forth their CSR dollars to change communities. We were able to do a lot with them, and set us up to do better work now.
And I do kind of thank the companies who kind of genuinely put forth their marketing dollars (and glad that most of us put it to good, positive use).
But, for the most part, I think it’s safe to say that a lot of companies out there are “starting from scratch” in this D&I of New Era. Old, external efforts just don’t count, and they don’t make you an expert.
[Parting words, I would love to hear from the companies who’ve been doing D&I of New for longer than most. Kudos to you, you may very well actually be experts.]
