Dr. Dawn Nicholson and Jeffrey Siminoff – EDI’s Evolution and Persisting Hurdles Over the Decades

Connect with Dr. Dawn:

• 

Connect with Jeffrey:

• 

Connect with Dwight:

• 
• dwight.brown@salary.com

Connect with David:

• 
• 
• david.turetsky@salary.com

Podcast Manager, Karissa Harris:

• HRDataLabs@salary.com

 

Production by Affogato Media

Resources:

• RFK Human Rights Resources
• Medium Magazine's interview with Jeffrey
• Compensation Consulting Services
• HR Data Labs Season 6 Episode 10
• HR Data Labs Season 6 Episode 8

• “What we are seeing is that people who have been cynical or not in favor of DEI leverage the poorest reasoning to [act against it].”
• “An analogy [for DEI] that I’ve heard is: diversity is being invited to the party; inclusion is being asked to dance; and belonging is knowing all the songs.”

Announcer: 0:02

Here's an experiment for you. Take passionate experts in human resource technology, invite cross industry experts from inside and outside HR. Mix in what's happening in people analytics today. Give them the technology to connect, hit record for their discussions into a beaker. Mix thoroughly. And voila, you get the HR Data Labs podcast, where we explore the impact of data and analytics to your business. We may get passionate, and even irreverent, that count on each episode challenging and enhancing your understanding of the way people data can be used to solve real world problems. Now, here's your host, David Turetsky.

 

David Turetsky: 0:46

Hello, and welcome to the HR Data Labs podcast. I'm your host, David Turetsky. And like always, we try and find you the most fun people to talk to inside and outside the world of HR about what's going on in HR today. As always, I have with us our friend and colleague, Dwight Brown from Salary.com. Hello, Dwight how are you?

 

Dwight Brown: 1:04

Hey, David, I'm good. How you doing?

 

David Turetsky: 1:05

I'm very good. But I'm even better today because I have with me one of my besties, Dr. Dawn Nicholson, who I'll let her credential herself in a minute, but she is one of the brightest people you'll ever meet in the world of HR and beyond. And we also have another guest, Jeffrey Siminoff. And I'll ask him to give his credentials as well. But But Dr. Dawn, why don't we start with you?

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 1:29

Hello, everyone. Thank you very much for that introduction, David. I really appreciate it. I have, as you know, undertaken a variety of jobs in my life. And I've most latterly have been in working in higher education. And I am a lecturer in business and organizational psychology now at the University of Kent in the United Kingdom. And you and I met all those years ago at Morgan Stanley back in 1994.

 

David Turetsky: 1:54

Wow. 1994. And, Jeffrey, how about you?

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 1:59

Well, thank you for having me. And it's great to see you again, Dawn. And to be in the company of two former Morgan Stanley colleagues, which is amazing. So it's sort of spilling the beans. I spent 13 years at Morgan Stanley, sort of in the first part of what I consider a three part career, practicing as an employment lawyer, then leading inclusion and diversity initiatives, both at Morgan Stanley and companies like Apple and Twitter. And now I lead a workplace dignity program at Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights where we focus on the intersection of human rights at the workplace through a focus on dignity of work.

 

David Turetsky: 2:37

So as you can tell, we're going to have a fascinating discussion today about the positioning of diversity in the world of business with to almost world renowned experts, I could say. Well they certainly will be after this podcast. But first, as we always do, what's one fun thing that no one knows about, Jeffrey?

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 3:00

Oh, gosh, well, some people know it so I can't. I can't commit to a complete secret. But a surprising fact is my sort of side hobby is being a wannabe concierge. Really interested in focusing on experiences from places, food, beverage, especially beverage, and interesting travel and finding great ideas from friends and family.

 

David Turetsky: 3:27

So we're going to create an app after this called Ask Jeffrey.

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 3:31

I'm into it.

 

David Turetsky: 3:32

Cool. Dr. Nicholson, since you are a guest as well, on this program, you must also answer if you would like to.

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 3:40

Okay, well, I guess it's fun. For many, many, many, many years, I was absolutely terrified of water. And then finally, when I got to 40, I thought I need to overcome this. And so I learned to swim at the age of 40.

 

David Turetsky: 3:54

It was only a couple of years ago. So you're still new at it. How are you doing?

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 3:57

Pretty good. Swam so much I got bored. You know how it goes?

 

David Turetsky: 4:01

Oh, wow. You now have to take on another challenge like Dwight does and jump out of airplanes.

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 4:06

No.

 

Dwight Brown: 4:08

Come on! Where's your sense of adventure?

 

David Turetsky: 4:12

Yeah, I feel the exact same way, Doc, it's not something I'll ever do. And I actually ask him every time he does it, please never do it again. So it's never gonna happen.

 

Dwight Brown: 4:21

I just keep doing it.

 

David Turetsky: 4:21

He's just gonna keep doing it. So as I mentioned before, one of the really wonderful things is when you can get experts on a topic and have a really interesting conversation about it. You will hopefully have fun doing it. And we certainly should, try at least, have that today. Today we're going to talk about EDI and looking at what it is and how it has changed over the last few decades, because there has been major change in it. So the first question is what is EDI?

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 4:57

Well, I guess the way that I think about EDI is is it stands for equality, diversity and inclusion. And I think that's the way most businesses think about it. And sometimes the ordering of the words is slightly different. But fundamentally, equality in this context is about, you know, creating a level playing field, I would see it that way. Diversity is about really welcoming and embracing difference. And difference in culture, difference in age difference in sexual orientation, gender, whatever that may be. And inclusion is about really creating an environment where all of that difference can be brought together, can be embraced, and can be valued in such a way that in the context of a business, all employees feel welcome, and that they're a part of an organization and can give their best to it. I think that's, that's hopefully that's consistent with the way you think about it, Jeffrey.

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 5:53

Yeah, I think a lot of times, we get hung up on some of the phrases or the wording or the ordering. But fundamentally, where we'll be talking about, really leveraging the differences that exist among us. So that, you know, everyone is considered for opportunities, whether it's in recruiting, and has an equal and fair and equitable opportunity to thrive, once they're employed in a work environment, where differences are truly engaged and celebrated, rather than tolerated, which not to jump out to future questions. But I think earlier iterations, focused a little bit too much on tolerance, versus really creating environments for where people can thrive, do their best work. And there was recognition, I think, in these terms that the playing field to your point, Dawn, isn't level, we have some times interventions are necessary to equalize the environment in which we're spending so much time which is the workplace.

 

David Turetsky: 6:55

Well, let me ask what might seem like a very stupid question. But is there a difference in the perception of what whether it's EDI, or DEI has become inside of companies? Just recently, we've seen a lot of issues, especially since the Supreme Court has basically overturned affirmative action programs. Is there really something that we have to worry about now about this? Is it? Am I getting too afraid of it?

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 7:24

I mean, I think that this is something that for me always has to be kept at the forefront of people's minds, you know, it is too easy to lose the gains which have been made in the past 30 40, sometimes even longer years, it's easy for complacency to arise. And for people to think, well, we fixed that issue, we can move on to the next issue. But these are these are issues and challenges that I think never go away and require a constant lens and a constant eye to be kept on them.

 

David Turetsky: 7:55

Jeffrey?

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 7:56

Yeah. And I think it's it's concerning time, you know, when when folks are listening to this, the Supreme Court decisions will be several months in the past. And I think what we're what we will see and what we are seeing is sort of an opportunistic approach to those decisions in the US at least, where people who have been cynical or not in favor of diversity, equity, inclusion work to leverage the court's reasoning to buy, apply it to the workplace. And they think to Dawn's point, vigilance is important and smart organizations are ever going to lean into what they say are their stated values, and their missions around inclusion. Or they'll step away from them because they never really were well anchored in the first place. And so I think at any time when there's a little bit of confusion or uncertainty about what we're in, it's incumbent on good leaders to reaffirm what is important, and to put a real spine behind what they say they stand for because it's in these moments, people who are most vulnerable, are at risk of fighting back into more precarious terrain.

 

David Turetsky: 9:10

And we've seen check the box activities, where companies sign up to do what they call DEI, but they really are just for lack of a better way of saying it lip service. And you know, the oh, we did it and now it's done. Those are the ones I'm more most concerned about, Jeffrey, falling off, as you're saying. And the complacency comes in where the people that work in that company in that they're seeing these changes happen to me, especially if they're in a leadership position, need to step up and stand for there being there being something there to say, no, we're not going to let this happen. And we want to make sure that these changes become permanent. They are not changes anymore. They are the way we operate.

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 9:54

You know in the in the US the aftermath of George Floyd's murder, you know, there was the large stake in statements, pledges and commitments. And anyone, by frankly, could write a pledge or write a check. But the work of real substantial change is more complicated, and it's more long term and requires sustained effort. And I do think that's why we've seen some rollback because some organizations that really weren't authentically behind the words that they were putting out, or the dollars that they were committing to, found it easy to sort of step back when the going got tough. And I think the hope now is that as people attack the work of inclusion or EDI more broadly, it's on leaders to be able to articulate why what they're doing makes a difference for their organizations, it doesn't amount to taking things away from other people. Just because you're an inclusive culture doesn't mean that one group or another is somehow detrimentally affected. And I think that's going to be the ongoing trick.

 

Dwight Brown: 11:08

It really is an interesting tipping point, because you know, you've got the legislative and then you've got the moral and ethical. And I think the hope is, and this is what we're talking about here is, we've got enough tailwind behind us that we can get past the legislative mandates that go with this. And we can use the tail winds of the groundswell that's really started to get us here. And even though it's not regulated, or whatever you want to call it, there still is that understanding and that recognition of, of the equality and the need for inclusion and, and those sorts of things. So hopefully, we can maintain forward momentum, even in the absence of a lot of the legislative protections.

 

David Turetsky: 11:55

Yeah, Dwight, the only thing I'll say about that, about the things that have been happening recently is I'll take the inclusion, you know, the I, and that transgender people have had a really bad go of it over the last, I mean, obviously, history, but six months of the focus on transgender athletes and the rallying cry that the that the Conservatives are putting against that, making it almost, you know, a referendum on the elections, the upcoming elections, that, you know, if you don't elect a Republican, you know, people who are born boys are going to be competing against girls, and that can't happen. And this fear mongering crap that happens to me the I needs to make sure that people can be their authentic selves at work and not worry about that political garbage happening, and not worrying about it seep into, well, I'm transgender female. Now I want to be looked at as a female. Let me work like that inside my organization and be treated fairly.

 

Dwight Brown: 12:58

Yeah. And my thought on that is that we still have a long ways to go. We just don't necessarily have that legislative push protection there to get us where we need to go. But hopefully, there's enough momentum that we can continue forward with it. But I hear exactly what you're saying there. And I think it's a very real reality and issue.

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 13:20

I mean, I think that there have been some positive changes insofar as at the beginning of this journey, I suppose. There were a lot there was a lot of pushback in those days, which was, you know, what's the financial benefit of this? What's the economic benefit of this? I mean, I remember being asked repeatedly, show me the business case, show me the business case, and inevitably, that business case was about, you know, where are the dollars? Where are the pounds, going to be made better by doing what you're asking me to do, basically. And I feel good in the sense that I really feel we've moved beyond that point, and that there is more of a sort of clear focus now on the the moral, the moral rights of this of this approach. But I agree with you that some groups in particular, seem to get constantly a hard time almost all the time, right?

 

David Turetsky: 14:14

Because their, lack of a better way of saying it, it's easy to pick on certain types of people, right? Sometimes it's not, but once they're, quote, unquote, outed, and then the focus becomes on the what, instead of the who, then it becomes a really slippery slope and really awful, you know, situation for them.

 

Announcer: 14:37

Like what you hear so far? Make sure you never miss a show by clicking subscribe. This podcast is made possible by Salary.com. Now, back to the show.

 

David Turetsky: 14:48

Let's pull on the thread you just mentioned though, Dawn, let's go back in time. Let's get in our way back machine and talk on the second question of what was EDI way back when and you started mentioning that it was, it was an equation.

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 15:01

Yeah, I mean, I think I think even before that, EDI barely existed. I mean, I began working for a major consulting firm, or then it was an accounting firm actually, in the UK back in the 80s. Arthur Andersen. I mean, EDI was hardly spoken about, you know, let me give you some examples. If you were a female, you did not wear a pantsuit. That was unacceptable.

 

David Turetsky: 15:23

Oh my gosh, yeah.

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 15:24

I think my particular firm had a focus in the UK because at that point in time, there were no, underlined no, female partners. And that became something that they felt they wanted to change. Ironically, the first female partner in the United Kingdom was actually an American. But but certainly it was very, very, very challenging environment. I mean, I did not come out at all. In that time, inevitably, people find out and it emerges, then you think, gosh, you know, who have I told? And have I done the right thing? And, and, you know, there, there are all those thoughts that go through your mind about, I legitimately had these concerns, that if people found out about my sexual orientation, and the fact that I was living with a woman, my career would be compromised.

 

David Turetsky: 16:13

I think the environment that you worked in, at Morgan Stanley, we were a family. Right?

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 16:19

It was very much more open. I mean, I went to Morgan Stanley in 1994, which is still, you know, certainly, in a UK context fairly early in the diversity journey. But I don't know whether it was a factor of being in the specific department, David, that we worked in, in HR, but there was certainly a sense that it was a much safer environment. People knew, and I felt more comfortable telling people very early on in my career. I don't think that it was widely known outside of the department at that point, and I certainly didn't make a point of making it known. Even you know, even though I felt very safe in the department. So yeah, it was definitely that feeling of, you know, being part of a family, as you say, I think that's right, that that made it that made me feel certainly within the confines of our family, it felt much, much easier and much more comfortable to, you know, to come out. And let me tell you, you know, being able to be myself was and talk about my, my partner was a huge, huge, huge change, positive change for me, really.

 

David Turetsky: 17:24

There were a lot of things we shared in that group at Morgan Stanley, a lot of stories. And so it was really cool to be to be somebody as part of that, who felt and I literally did feel like they were part of my family. In fact, you know, I miss them more than I miss, you know, some actually immediate members of my family these days. But, but so, Jeffrey, let's talk about your experience and what you've experienced from the EDI journey over the last few decades.

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 17:52

Yeah, I think, a lot of similarities to what Dawn shared. And I will say that one thing that sort of remains consistent as the kind of a, you know, never ending need to sort of explain, I agree with Dawn. I have sort of PTSD on the business case conversation, I also find it very diminishing to underrepresented groups. Like why should we help you identify a business case for equal treatment for a black woman or a gay man or a transgender person, and it puts almost like the burden of a case, proving a case on those least equipped to prove the case eventually. So I think the business case has always been somewhat problematic, although I understand why conversations occur, but this need to sort of explain what this, meaning DEI, is and what it's not, I think recessed. Also, I think, at earlier points in time, in addition to having to prove a so called business case, there was a compliance imperative, which is that you need like this work to sort of, from a legal perspective, to protect yourself from potential lawsuits. If you're going to get sued into class action by, you know, female investment bankers, it's a good thing to point to a gender related diversity initiative, etc. And so I think we've moved beyond the sort of compliance basis, you know, the basis fully rooted in a so called business case to something that's more expansive. But again, I think we're in danger of sort of slipping backwards, because these challenges are coming up that are rooted in a formulation that says, a focus on diversity, equity and inclusion is discriminatory towards certain groups. And therein I think lies the rub right now. But I'm encouraged. Like Dawn, I've benefited from this work as a worker, professional, and would personally feel very, very sad if some of the experiences that I had even years ago, such as at Morgan Stanley, such as being part of the pride group, were suddenly rendered too complicated to persist, because they offered such great benefits to me as a human being, and as a professional.

 

David Turetsky: 20:26

I think one of the things that that's scary that we're talking about is that there has to be some kind of business case, or there has to be some kind of proof that the white male isn't, isn't the basis for work getting done. Right? We have to prove that people of color, people of other other backgrounds can actually do the work and do it in an appropriate way. That doesn't make any sense to me. I, I've never actually worked in an environment where I looked around and and I said, Gosh, there aren't enough white guys here, it just, it doesn't make any sense. So and that's probably because I grew up in an environment where, in right outside of New York City where we were a melting pot for all different types of people. So I grew up loving the fact that I lived in a diverse world, where in the world of business, you know, why do we have to make business cases for or why do we have to even feel that? You know, we making a case on diversity is just something that we have to do? It's mind boggling.

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 21:28

Yeah. I mean, it's, it's crazy. And also, I mean, you know, you're a data guy, David. So let's, let's put our data hats on for a moment. I mean, right, this whole question of what's the business case, you know, and people, fancy firms and fancy consultants saying, Hey, if you change the diversity of your board by X percent, then your profitability will go up by y percent. We've all seen those statements. We've all read those statements. And as you know, David, one of my favorite statements is correlation is not causation.

 

David Turetsky: 21:59

Sure.

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 21:59

And you know, there is no way to measure this, right? Because there are too many extenuating factors. And so that whole business case argument is automatically rendered null. In my view, even if you actually, you know, accept that there's a there's a point to the discussion, there's no real effective way to conduct that measurement.

 

David Turetsky: 22:19

But you know, what, what I will say, though, about what you just said, which I think is funny is if I look at a board of directors for a company, and the board of directors is diverse, I at least have some hope, that the people who are candidates for jobs of that company, look at the board and go, the leadership is diverse. I'm a diverse candidate. I feel like I belong there. Right? Whereas if you normally and Jeffrey, I'm sure you've seen this, when you've looked at websites for companies that has the about us section. You look at it, and you go, why is it just a bunch of white guys, white old guys? Everybody's got white hair, everybody's white? They're all in their 60s? That doesn't represent me.

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 23:00

Yeah. And I think candidates look for, what do they see in terms of their future potential, what they see in the leadership of a company that they're considering, and we know that younger employees, 20 somethings or, you know, people who are early in their career, these issues matter disproportionately to them. And so in the fight for talent, employers are going to be finding they'd be behind the curve, if they can't demonstrate engagement and authentic engagement on some of these issues. And I think it's the board. But I also think it's the senior leadership team. Let's face it, boards of directors are a little bit removed from the actual day to day experiences of most workers, their line up, somebody is much more connected to senior leadership teams, people who are running team meetings, town halls, and diversity on boards of directors is important. But I also think that what people are seeing on their leadership teams matters extraordinarily much. And as to the board diversity point, I would also say that, my hope is that more companies find ways to engage their boards on matters of workforce engagement, diversity, etc. Because if you have people who are, you know, represent diverse demographics or experiences on the board and the board isn't really tasked with people issues, aside from compensation, which most typical way that boards are connected to the workforce, their ability to influence sort of cultural change in the company is a little bit muted.

 

David Turetsky: 24:36

But don't you think, though, Jeffrey, with some of the governance issues that the SEC and others are bringing up about creating diversity metrics that are, at least whether it's part of the proxy or not, but at least more public? Don't you think that definitely puts more emphasis or more pressure on boards to ensure that there are programs behind those metrics that are actually trying to go in the direction that the company stating?

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 24:59

I think that's true. I think that there are increasing movements for data disclosure, we're seeing more and more data disclosure, whether it's held or whether it's the result of peer pressure. You know, when I went in the tech industry from finance, there was unyielding pressure publicly for the companies to disclose diversity related data. And that sort of set a marker that many other companies have since followed. The board diversity in terms of how diversity boards are legislation around that a little bit complicated at the moment, because some states that pass rules around mandatory board diversity, both in the US and elsewhere, and in the US, for example, California courts have turned even in a liberal state like California overthrown both the gender related and race related board diversity requirements. So in the US this situation is a little bit unclear at the moment,

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 26:02

I mean I think there's a very important point and it kind of goes to your comment, David, about box ticking, you can present a picture, right? Whether it's your board, whether it's your exec, whatever it is, basically, the first question that comes into my mind is, do you actually listen to the diverse voice? Or voices? Do you actually even then integrate and assimilate what the diverse voice or voices are actually saying? So you know, I think it's, it's, it's always that thing about, you know, scratching away at the surface. Okay, you look like you're diverse. Maybe you even sound like you're diverse. But unless you're actually able, I think, to, you know, at least give some indication or assurances that you are integrating that diversity fully into your decision making and to your whole ethos, that it's still just a picture.

 

David Turetsky: 26:57

But But that's where I like how DEI programs have now kind of evolved to the B, the belonging, as well, so that, yeah, you're here, yeah, you're included, we're gonna listen to you. But yeah, until we actually make you feel like you belong, and you are actually a part of everything. And you feel like, and Jeffrey, you mentioned this before, like ESGs, where, you know, you not only belong, but you identify, and then you hang out with and partner with people across your organization, in similar situations to yourself, who, then we all feel more like we belong there, right? So doesn't that take it to the next step, Dawn, of we're not just going to listen to you, we're going to make you feel like you belong here.

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 27:44

I mean, I think that really is important, to make people feel like they belong, then that makes them, I think, feel that exactly to your point, they have a voice and their voice will be heard.

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 27:55

One analogy I heard that's kind of fun is diversity is being invited to a party. Inclusion is being asked to dance, and belonging is knowing all the songs. And you know, you can rely on that for what you will. But I do think there's something to be said about that. And, you know, take to your point earlier, David about transgender people, it's one thing to hire a transgender person. But it's something like different to make them feel the equivalent of being asked to dance. You may think about as being invited to the decision making table, it's another to help them feel part of the decision making narratives that are, you know, the key dialogues that are going on at the company, knowing all the small things. So I do think this idea about reaching a point where people feel that they truly belong, because they've been heard to Dawn's point because the environment is psychologically safe enough for them to speak up and have ideas even if it goes against the grain a little bit, or appears to contradict the decision making process that's already in flow. So those are great opportunities, I think to help environments better thrive.

 

David Turetsky: 29:15

Hey, are you listening to this and thinking to yourself, Man, I wish I could talk to David about this? Well, you're in luck. We have a special offer for listeners of the HR Data Labs podcast, a free half hour call with me about any of the topics we cover on the podcast or whatever is on your mind. Go to Salary.com/HRDLconsulting to schedule your FREE 30 minute call today. So let's get to the last question, which is when did we start actually seeing real change happen in EDI in organizations?

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 29:50

I mean, I would probably date my my experience to round about 2000. I mean, I was I was working in London still then and I think that's really when in London, certainly banking began to really get smart about diversity and really embrace diversity. And you know, I saw real change beginning to happen. I think, you know, it happened in some of the safer if you like, areas of diversity for first there was a focus on gender, for example. And then ethnicity. I mean, I think LGBTQ, or LGBT, as it was then was a little bit behind that. I mean, I can remember when we received a request to set up an LGBT network at Morgan Stanley in in London, I mean, there was a little bit of a Whoa, that was certainly a a free sign of excitement. We had lots of debates about, you know, did they want that meeting to be on site? Did they want that meeting to be off site? Would that be more encouraging? So we were still going through some very complicated conversations. And I remember going and I actually went, in my HR capacity with a with a colleague of mine, we were both gay. And two or three of the attendees turned around and said, oh you're here, you're in HR, are you here to put down our names on some naughty list?

 

David Turetsky: 31:11

Which, by the way, since we're all Morgan Stanley, except for Dwight, sorry. That stuff kind of happened!

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 31:18

Well, on this occasion, I can assure you it did not happen.

 

David Turetsky: 31:21

No, I know! I wasn't saying you'd do that, Dawn, I'm just saying.

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 31:25

You know, it was certainly still quite a lot of trepidation in that particular group about coming forward and asking for for a network.

 

David Turetsky: 31:33

Jeffrey, how about you? When do you think that EDI finally started turning the corner?

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 31:39

Yeah, I tend to agree with Dawn, I think that it's interesting for me, because during my time, for example, at Morgan Stanley, I was both an employment lawyer. So I was very focused on the sort of legal side, like I was sort of the legal person, for my HR colleagues, for my inclusion and diversity colleagues. And there was definitely a industry wide focus on advancing diversity work, I think largely for compliance reasons, you know, going through through the early 2000s, there was a spike in class action type lawsuits, etc. But I do think during the, during the 2000s, there was an evolution where employee voices were better harnessed and needed to be responded to in ways that weren't just the result of a compliance related focus. If you're going to bring together employees in groups and allow them to come together, certain things are going to flow from that. And so I do think that this employee collected for really helpful and sort of gently in some cases, less gently holding leaders feet to the fire, and creating space for our community and change that brought some of this work forward that extended it beyond, you know, gender, which was a global issue for all these companies, cause if you were a global company, you had women in all environments. And this was before, we started talking about non binary people, of course, but things started to expand and communities became more known and the fact that people had gay or lesbian or other siblings or relatives or friends became more commonplace and openly discussed. And it set the stage for more openness and greater change. And younger people who really wanted to see their workplaces, give them something different and better.

 

David Turetsky: 33:38

Well, Jeffrey, was there a particular societal or global event that occurred that may have triggered that, that you know, that feeling?

 

Unknown: 33:47

I think that there was a lot of hope and inspiration that came with President Obama's election in the US. And I think we saw sort of a groundswell of energy around that. And I guess, you know, that's going into the 2008 election, and certainly things were happening before then. But it would still take some time. I mean, it wasn't until years later that the Supreme Court in the US recognized marriage equality in the US. And that really puts things into a, you know, within about further wave activity. So those are some of the things that, you know, we would see but I remember, during the financial crisis, concerns about whether progress as it related to diversity might slept because layoffs, economic impacts, and things like that. And fortunately, we didn't see too much in that moment. There was some for a period.

 

David Turetsky: 34:40

We definitely saw some just recently, where there was some backsliding a little bit with whether it was true or not. Some of the stated reasons for the collapse of a couple banks, said, you know, one of the stupidities, I think that came out of that was somebody said that it was due to DEI programs when the banks collapsed, which is obviously horseshit. But the other thing, I think if you look at Twitter, they, you know, one of the things Elon did, was he completely destroyed the ESGs. Which I mean, you know, you could say there was somewhat of a dumpster fire there anyways. But, you know, that collapsed, probably, maybe it may have been the last straw for many employees at Twitter, but I'm sure it made people feel less comfortable as well.

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 35:27

Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, this, you're, I think, partially eluding to Silicon Valley Bank. And we have people at the same time saying both that because Silicon Valley Bank had a commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion. And also, quite frankly, whatever the railroad was, that was involved in a train derailment in Ohio, US also had one before, you know, bad business people and train conductors working on the trains who are unqualified because they were, supposedly

 

David Turetsky: 35:58

They were diversity hires.

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 35:59

I mean, these are all very unfortunately, they gained some traction, and they gained they enter the conversation. And so they need to be debunked. But I think the opportunity for leaders is to feel better equipped with what they're actually doing on inclusion and diversity. So they can easily respond to those things without having to, like frantically call up their HR team, or their diversity leader or their employment lawyer to say, oh, my God, you know, what do we do about this? Like, just as comfortable as they would be in responding to a business challenge on a certain, you know, product initiative or whatever? There needs to be greater confidence and understanding about what this work is and what this isn't, you know, Silicon Valley Bank's collapse wasn't because they cared about their people. It was because of other practices that weren't effective for their customers and for their operations.

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 36:57

I mean, I think there's also, it's important to recognize the fragility of some of these things, right? I mean, think back to COVID. Not that long ago, right? Look how quickly the gender roles became reinstated. Right? Oh, Mom, you had a job once upon a time? Well you got that job. But now, you're the principal home, homemaker, cook, cleaner, whatever it is, right? So, so it's important that we all keep a real focus on this.

 

David Turetsky: 37:28

Well, The one thing I was gonna say back to, Jeffrey, on the fragility to your point, Dawn, was the Bud Light issue where they had hired a transgender spokesperson. And nothing there was nothing happened in the commercial, that was necessarily controversial at all. It was a great commercial. But there was such a backlash that many, well, few stores stopped selling Bud Light. And then there were a few people who did the right thing and said, I'm gonna support Bud Light, I'm gonna stand behind Bud Light, because the reaction is just bullcrap. Sorry, bullshit, actually what it was. And so, you know, there is fragility to this. And that's why one of the things I wanted to ask before we end today was, we've made a lot of progress. God help us the political change, the political winds seem like they're putting headwinds against this, you know, could we see retraction on these things now?

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 38:24

Well, I mean, I'll just start on that. I mean, I think the answer is yes, we can see a retraction on these things. And I think, you know, it's only going to get more intensified during the US presidential election season. And, of course, we're seeing the equivalent movements in other parts of the world on some of these divisive issues, it's not US specific thing. And, you know, there are organizations that aren't fully behind, thinking equitably about their people those organizations exist for one degree or another and in different ways. You know, I can't say where they're gonna lead. But I think that organizations that say that they have inclusion and diversity, equity and equality built into their DNA, you know, it's, it's going to really be on them to like, proactively sit down and say, what are we really here for on this? What are we talking to people about? How are we equipping our leaders to respond to sort of, you know, hyperbolic narratives that really aren't well rooted in facts, and to be proactively prepared to stick their guns on what they say is important to them, because their people deserve it. Their customers deserve it. And you know, their role as good societal contributors depends on it.

 

David Turetsky: 39:42

Dawn, any parting thoughts on that?

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 39:44

Yeah. I mean, I think the I mean, the voice is really important. You know, the voices. It's on us, basically, those of us who you know, are living it, breathing it back at whatever to keep saying, and keep speaking with our voices, basically. You know, I mean, I don't want to look over my shoulder and say, hey, the boogey man was behind us 30 40 years ago, but it's important that we remember where we come, where we've come from, taken a long, long time and a lot of effort to get to where we are now. And it's easy to go back. So I think it's, as I say, it's on all of us to keep pushing.

 

David Turetsky: 40:22

It's a cautionary tale. Dr. Nicholson, thank you.

 

Dr. Dawn Nicholson: 40:35

Thank you!

 

David Turetsky: 40:35

Jeffrey. Thank you.

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 40:36

Thank you.

 

David Turetsky: 40:37

Mr. Brown, thank you.

 

Dwight Brown: 40:39

Thank you. Appreciate you both being here with us.

 

Jeffrey Siminoff: 40:42

Pleasure.

 

David Turetsky: 40:43

And we'll have to get you back on because that was the quickest 40 minutes I've ever spent on a podcast.

 

Announcer: 40:50

That was the HR Data Labs podcast. If you liked the episode, please subscribe. And if you know anyone that might like to hear it, please send it their way. Thank you for joining us this week, and stay tuned for our next episode. Stay safe.