Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
Underrepresented vs. underrecognized: What’s in a name?
52 Plays3 months ago
In this episode, we debate the use of the terms "underrepresented" and "underrecognized." What's the upside of using one term over the other? Is this just wordsmithing or is there more to shifting the way we talk about marginalized minorities? And what does it mean for us Asians?
https://hbr.org/2023/04/why-we-should-stop-saying-underrepresented
Recommended
Transcript
Introduction: Terminology Shift in Diversity
00:00:08
Speaker
Hi, everyone. Welcome to another episode of him is in plain sight or things Asian in the workplace. In this episode, we're actually going to be talking about a very interesting article. The article is on the HBR article called why we should stop saying under represented. And it's an article that basically describing that we have been referring to a lot of the diversity groups as under-represented groups.
Implications of 'Unrecognized' vs. 'Under-Represented'
00:00:37
Speaker
But now there is a new phrase um that they have been promoted in this article.
00:00:45
Speaker
And they were actually what they were referring them to? Unrecognized. Unrecognized. Unrecognized. So the article is taking a side and saying, hey, let's stop using the word underrepresented. Instead, let's use the word unrecognized. Under-recognized. Correct. So, just opened up in what you two think about it, and I definitely have my strong opinions on this, but love to hear what you two are thinking about it. Well, can I ask you something? What about this article, Peter Interest, Echo?
00:01:20
Speaker
um So, actually, I also share a bit of background how this article came into my um mind or came into my eyes.
Relevance in Workplace Settings
00:01:27
Speaker
Beiwen, who some of you have probably already tuned into the episode that we had with her last season, she asked me, like, Echo, have you heard of this word under-recognized group seen in your work settings? I was like, oh, I actually have not heard of them yet. And then she formed me this article from HBR, But essentially, the the the message there is she starts hearing more and more ah people using that word under recognized groups in her work settings, programs or initiatives. I wondered, like,
00:02:04
Speaker
what's behind of that change like what become behind that shift from the under-represented to the under-recognized groups.
Systemic Reasons vs. Outcomes
00:02:12
Speaker
And I think in the article, there are a big something that she mentioned a couple of like reasons why she would advocate for this change. you know One is being under-represented as the outcome that we are actually seeing in the workplace versus under-recognized is kind of calling onto the reasons or the the rationale, like why this came into the place and or will we'll have the type of but outcome that we've seen in the workplace. And I thought that was a good call out. You know that the usual way Asians in the workplace are when it comes to representation, it's usually the the leadership presence, the leadership representation has been a big bottleneck for this population. when You were thinking about Asians as you were reading this article, and then that's that's one of the reasons why this piqued your interest. I think this is an interesting shift in terms of how we are calling those groups, how we are actually addressing this. um But to a point like Jenny, I do think about Asians in this case. What does this mean when it comes to like all the different work changes?
00:03:24
Speaker
Took, I see your your your brain is working. What's going through your head? so The hamster's running. I don't know if the wheel's turning. But I remember Echo sending this over, and I read it through real quick. I thought it was actually pretty interesting.
Will Terminology Change Drive Real Change?
00:03:41
Speaker
I'm like, oh, what an interesting perspective or change of lexicon. And I i thought i thought to myself, like well, would any change come from this ah change in lexicon? Or is this ah the next generation changing up the words or its new vocabulary that it uses to address things that have ah existed and continues to persist for um not only Asian people, but like people of color and women in the workplace?
00:04:17
Speaker
And when I read it, I think i i think i I was very cynical in my response to this. And I think I said, it's it's nice that they're changing the lexicon. But you know of those who are in power really want to make these changes, want to recognize these folks, they would have made a concerted effort to do so and not just change the lexicon. So maybe that's from the from the other end, that's the, maybe the more pessimistic view of this is that it's nice that we're changing the lexicon.
Inclusivity vs. Marginalization Concerns
00:04:54
Speaker
Will it actually yield anything? There's a part of me, there's a teeny tiny part of me, there's a little light in there that says, hopefully there is, it could, but there's a darker, no the other side of me that says, well,
00:05:07
Speaker
you know If you change a word, it's you know we still have systemic racism, sexism, homophobia within the system that we live in. So how much does the the changing of under-recognize from unrepresented, how much does that change? yeah I don't know. And I can join you on the skepticism part because I felt very skeptical and cynical about this article. And I think part of the reason is, you know, it's what you said, like it's window dressing. And my fear is that a lot of leaders are gonna say, okay, we're gonna start using under-recognized instead of underrepresented. We're gonna check that box, and then they're gonna pat themselves on the back.
00:06:02
Speaker
By saying under-recognized, it can extend that concept to anyone, which I understand that concept. Everyone, Asian, Black, American, Hispanic, um or veterans, or women, or anyone who who were both historically like at a disadvantage groups or anyone who were at the majority group. Like a white person now can say like, I'm under-recognized and might actually dilute the entire purpose of coining out like underrepresented groups or historically marginalized groups. Those groups have a baggage they need to be served for and by changing this next song, lexicon, that it actually removes that baggage, that historical baggage from them. Could you say what's the baggage?
Potential Misuse by Majority Groups
00:07:01
Speaker
I feel like it's kind of a negative. What I'm trying to say there is
00:07:08
Speaker
There's a reason those groups are called historically marginalized groups. yes And there's a reason why- It's not because they have baggage. It's because they've been marginalized up because they have baggage. That's very far from- I've got to check the echo on this. That might be a bad news of the world's itself. But I think what I'm trying to convey there is the the issue we're trying to address is to fix some of the the mistakes that we have made in the past, and by changing this naming from under-written to under-recognized, and regardless of whatever that has been called, that it might shift to the focus, or it might actually dilute the the issues that we're trying to address.
00:08:00
Speaker
So I'm hearing one point you're saying, like it's the under-recognized, maybe a more inclusive way to include other people who may have been disadvantaged as well? Yeah. So in the way that it's been very inclusive in the world you use, um it's actually been exclusive to some of the groups who needs to be front and center of that. Exactly. Oh, I could totally see like white men being like, well, I'm under recognized because I should have gotten that promotion, but I'm under recognized. I'm curious about what you think about this, but I also think that creating more lexicon at this point, it's
00:08:47
Speaker
It's adding to like the mind field of things that you can say versus right terminology.
Complexity and Backlash of DEI Terminology
00:08:52
Speaker
And I feel like more people, like I am all for changing the way we speak and changing, you know, like like pronouns, for example, for different groups. But I think we're getting to a point where a lot of people and a lot of people who are not supportive of DEI efforts are saying, like, oh, it's a minefield. Like, I don't know what to say. So I'm just not going to say anything at all. I don't want to engage in this conversation at all, because is it DEI? Is it DEIJ? Is it underrepresented? Is just underrecognized it We're just adding more and more to that list of things. And I don't know if this is productive.
00:09:26
Speaker
you know It's really interesting, like um what in 2020 DEI became popular? And I would say like maybe within the last six months or a year or so, DEI has become like a landmine, especially in certain states that are targeting like have led targeted legislation against it to defund it. um So I wonder if this is like in another like another way, maybe the next generation's way of talking about it without talking about it. if that makes any sense. Oh my goodness. Yeah, yeah. coding by the The timing of all this, it does, and this is my suspicion, it has a lot to do with the Supreme Court ruling last year. When you started to remove moving those diversity goals, then
00:10:13
Speaker
what's left to be addressed. Then it seems like representation is the place you wanted to go, then what's left? So I'm kind of like suspicious of the reasons of this change. So to your point, like, Doug, like that shift in mindset, in society from 2020 to now, it's only four years. I feel like it was just a lot of virtue signaling. So their mind didn't really shift. It was just because suddenly There were people marching on the streets and people demanding justice. A lot of leaders were like, okay, we we we have to do something. But it's not that their minds actually shifted, because if their minds shifted, we wouldn't see this pendulum swinging the other way in the opposite direction.
Superficial Changes vs. Systemic Issues
00:10:57
Speaker
It was just very superficial. Changing words and lexicon and terminology and wordsmithing, that's just another way of... It gives gives organizations a way out.
00:11:08
Speaker
an easy way out. Sorry, I'm turning my head left and right in disgust of like, like Jenny, I'm totally with you. Like, like is it the organization's the place to really like do all this work? You know, like I know some are trying to do it too. Yes, is their responsibility to do this work. It's up to leadership at every level to just build this in. Yeah, because ah if it's not them, who else will do it?
00:11:39
Speaker
I mean, it's a great question. um I don't have an answer myself. it's just um I mean, it's systemic. i so If it's up to the workplace or organizations to do it, no, it's like everybody has to do it. like This has to change systematically. But in the workplace, what can leaders do? What can you know senior leaders do to codify? So they have a role. codify DEI into the practice so that it doesn't change with the changing of the guard. You know you might have a really awesome chief diversity officer, but what if he or she leaves or they leave and someone else comes in and who's just like, you know what, I want to ask everything. Or maybe they get rid of the chief diversity officer role. If these things are not codified into other parts of the organization, that's just going to go back to the way things were.
Can Organizations Self-Regulate DEI Practices?
00:12:24
Speaker
and And you know, there's a article who just came out yesterday, Microsoft just let go their entire DEI team. That is something like we need to be really careful about. Like I'm trying to refer back to those cases, like the words itself seems like a minor change. But any of those gestures can signal something like very differently, and then people start to interpret that differently. Do you think Microsoft or any of the large tech companies or any of the big corporations are at a point where they can disband their DEI practice and say, okay, you know what, just like do it on your own? so like I'm seeing your reaction.
00:13:03
Speaker
um All right, so I work in assessments, and of course, there's certain things that all assessments that have high-sake assessments have to follow, which is the EEOC guidelines. And of course, within the EEOC guidelines, there's the four-fifths rule. And that was implemented in the 1960s, right after the Civil Rights Act of 1965. We're still using this.
00:13:29
Speaker
In the fourth, fifths rule for people who might not be sure. Sure. In high-stakes testing, and when people are selected to be hired or not, ah the dominant group that is hired, ah that should be the main group that every other group gets compared to. ah Other groups, ah so let's say, ah And we're going to use a typical example here. Let's say in um ah the selection tests,
00:14:00
Speaker
um mostly um whites got hired at 50% rate, the highest rate. right And it's 50%. All the other groups, Asians, African-Americans, Hispanics, have to have at least four-fifths of that. So they have to be hired at like four-fifths the 50% rate, which is about 40%. Anything below that may ah signify that there are adverse impacts. And of course in cases of large numbers that you'll see, yeah that gets picked up pretty quickly. But you also want to keep in mind that in cases of small numbers that it also needs to be significantly different from one another as well too. So the four fifths rule with adverse impact is just a rule of thumb. ah So you do need to dive in go a little bit deeper with that.
Centralized DEI Teams for Accountability
00:14:50
Speaker
But it is something that you know that was put in in the 1960s that we still use today as a measure to make sure that we're doing certain things in a fair way. So left unchecked, I don't know if organizations would do that all by themselves. i don't and I don't think, and and I think some would even argue that they don't want to unless they even know about this, unless they know they have somebody who actually understands those guidelines throughout there. I think for folks within our field, IO psychology, so that's psych folks, business folks, psychometricians, lawyers, they know about this, but maybe other folks who are trying to move fast and break things, they're just trying to hire, hire, hire.
00:15:35
Speaker
and one hire there, two hires there, 10, 20. They get a pretty homogenous organization. and They don't know why. and If they actually did practice what was out there since the 1960s, maybe they'd be hiring a little bit more fairly. yeah yeah I think it's premature to disband your DEI group. It's kind of like, it's what Bey once said, right? When she was here last season, there's a difference between companies where you have a chief diversity officer who reports directly to the CEO and who has her own, or his or her own function. So I said her because I was actually doing some like, or just kind of like an analysis of chief diversity officers and pharma companies, and they're all predominantly women. So that's why I was like, that's cheap.
00:16:21
Speaker
But, I mean, you you look at companies that have chief diversity officers versus ones that don't. And, you know, the ones that started post-2020, like, you know, post the BLM um movement um versus the ones that were doing it long before. And i there is a big difference in, I think, the way they practice CEI. and the way they codified into the organization. So, all this to say, I don't think companies should be disbanding their DEI practice just yet. But they do though, right? It's like, when it affects the bottom line, like, how how do, I guess, if the business as well, you know, this this unit doesn't bring in any money, what do we need to say back as ICs or managers within an organization?
00:17:26
Speaker
part of my sense is like not every tech companies are doing that well. But there are companies that kind of like ahead of a game that and I can see there's a reason why they do that. To really be able to like adjust to the new model and they be able to really put those practices being very inclusive of everyone in the in in the company, the challenge that usually comes with it is the action coming out from it. like We do that every year, and in the first couple of years, there's nothing coming out from it. like We will see it uncovered at every impact, and there there will always be attorney at present, and they will always discuss those things.
00:18:11
Speaker
But nothing will change because there's no actions coming out from it. And one of the things I think the benefits of having a designated DEI team is to really hold people accountable and drive some of those initiatives or actions. Is the leaders responsibility to pick it back this on? Is HR's responsibility to pick this back on? And that to me is always the biggest challenge. We can do whatever the analytics side, but if you don't take any actions, those data or those insights cannot translate to trans makingking into any of the impact.
00:18:53
Speaker
And that's the the the part where I really appreciate having a centralized DEI team. And of course, like not every DEI teams have the enough of a power or authority to play that role, but it's better than nothing. Yeah, so I think we're on the same page. A DEI should still be centralized. You can't disband them. There should be a central office. There should be a chief diversity officer. There should be someone holding the different functions accountable. I mean, it's good for us if you know there are more DEI jobs or DEI work to be done. We have a haiku.
Reflecting on Terminology Shifts with a Haiku
00:19:31
Speaker
What's a haiku, Echo? And by the way, I don't know if you two can hear. There's a thunderstorm outside my building. It's really nice. I was going to make a comment. Are you filming? Yeah, it's storming over New Jersey. and Yeah, New Jersey. Really? Yeah, I can't. i Yeah, I don't think it picks up on the the microphone, but like as we were talking about DEI.
00:19:54
Speaker
It was like storming heavily and thundering. Maybe we should add that. I mean, it's a Halloween, but you know. um So shall we go back to the haiku? So I did a bit of like a longer prompting this time. I asked Chad GPT to write us a haiku. The focus is we need to be careful about shifting the word underrepresented it to underrecognized because I thought that was the the a lot of what we have been discussing. And what chat GPT has returned is um shifting terms with care, underrepresented cries, nuance must be clear. What were your thoughts, Jenny? You had a interesting look on your face. Underrepresented cries, nuance must be clear. I don't know, maybe it's the the late evening. um my My brain is, it took me a while to understand that.
00:20:51
Speaker
Shifting terms with care. So shifting term with care or shifting terms with care underrepresented cries, nuance must be clear. I mean, in a way that that's kind of kind of summarizes what we were talking about. i So yeah, I think so. OK. Well, thank you listeners for joining us on another episode of Hidden in Plain Sight. We'll see you all next week.