5th November 2024, Available to the Public from December 2025
The Third Culture
The Third Culture is a company that creates spaces for fearless and human inclusion conversations. It does this through three practice areas of Auditing, Learning and Intentions.
Under the Intentions strand, the Inclusion Conversations Series for practitioners who work or are connected to the inclusion field was launched in April 2024. The series seeks to address the gap in the market for safe, thought-provoking and honest spaces for practitioners to discuss more complex and problematic challenges related to ‘EDI’ (Equity, Diversity and Inclusion) as a practice. The goal of each session is to enable further conversation in a positive way across all potential social or political positions. Using the Chatham House Rule allows all participants to share realistic experiences that can lead to more meaningful and impactful solutions, which will be drafted into a report.
This is the second report. Initially open to attendees of the workshop.
Open access. Some rights reserved
This report is available to workshop attendees within the first month of its publication. After this, The Third Culture will publish the report on its website and encourage the circulation of this work as widely as possible while retaining the copyright.
Anyone can copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form and for non-commercial purposes only.
For anyone who receives, downloads, saves, performs or distributes the work, note that this is subject to the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Licence
- You are free to copy, distribute, and display the work;
- You must give the original author (The Third Culture) credit;
- You may not use this work for commercial purposes (non-commercial means not primarily intended for or directed towards commercial advantage or monetary compensation);
- You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work
This work is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
You are welcome to ask The Third Culture for permission to use this work for purposes other than those covered by the licence.
The Third Culture is grateful to the attendees of the Inclusion Conversation Series whose output contributes to the reports.
2024 The Election Year
As 2024 draws to a close, it’s worth reflecting on how significant the year is for 2 billion people worldwide who have been casting their ‘votes’ at the polls. The Third Culture’s last report, ‘Dismantling EDI’, suggested that practitioners of EDI would benefit from an open admission that EDI is ultimately political work about ‘people’. If this is the case, it stands to reason that 2024 is a critical year for understanding how EDI work will survive or thrive in future years because critical decisions will be made that could potentially affect people’s freedoms and because the work of social justice is continuing to be weaponised under the guise of ‘culture-wars’ by politicians and others (as highlighted in ‘Dismantling EDI’).
Analysing how the election year will impact EDI’s work requires a deep look at topics such as political discussion in the workplace, the role of government in setting policies and regulations, and what people or colleagues are genuinely concerned about. As events in themselves, elections can also create tension, fear, and anxiety in people, but do politicians really care? Are their strategies a reflection of the reality of people’s day-to-day lives?
Nearly three years ago, Russia invaded Ukraine, prompting the ongoing war. Generally, international Western-based companies and other organisations were seen to support Ukraine in their business practices and publicly in communication strategies. When the most recent conflict in Israel and Gaza began on October 7th, 2023, a more cautious and less consistent approach was witnessed, and many prominent firms chose (and continue to choose) to say nothing, claiming that politics is not something for the workplace.
Amidst all of this, EDI practitioners are tasked with navigating a labyrinth of varying leadership opinions, fear about entering into such a complex topic, armchair activism and virtue signalling, as well as intimidation of colleagues and EDI leaders themselves, ultimately affecting careers and livelihoods.
Some see the complex and challenging situation as an opportunity for organisations to take the ‘easy route’ of not getting involved. There are some organisations for which politics is inherent to the work, and there is a clear established line due to the mission and business (think defence). For others, it is sometimes considered irrelevant (think advertising). Some have set clear guidelines for political conversation, which is a somewhat contractual obligation for staff, but they are the exception and not the rule. Interestingly, non-profit organisations encourage people to be political, especially when working with vulnerable groups. In these environments, an opposing political perspective can be treated with disdain. Ultimately, there is a question about whether muting conversations is a form of power to silence people from having more healthy conversations or, to use a term from The Rest is Politics podcast, ‘disagreeing agreeably’.
Whilst external comms has been more limited on that conflict now spanning a wider area of the Middle East, some companies, particularly those with a foothold in the US, created safe spaces and discussed the issues in townhalls or through their employee resource groups. When the summer riots took place in the UK, many organisations supported staff internally by creating safe spaces and sending messages of support, and providing flexibility given the potential physical threat to staff on their journey’s home, foe example. But there is also a sense that increasing education, particularly in the area of bias, has backfired – people are more aware and willing to ‘hide’ their perspectives, which dangerously leads to pluralistic ignorance. The opportunity to learn about tolerating ‘difference’, especially concerning political opinion difference, is lost.
For those who decide to apply the guidelines, should the same rules apply to all political discussions, whether related to conflict or not?
At the base level, political discussions aside, there is no doubt that who is in power can impact the workplace. Ideologically, one would expect a more left-leaning government to institute higher regulatory requirements, including reporting obligations. This is already being seen in the UK with a new Labour government broadly supportive of the concept that identity plays into inequality. For a more right-leaning government, there is an opportunity to play into the idea of ‘culture wars’ or ‘identity politics’ as more of a weapon against inclusive practices.
The US election taking place on November 5 could purport to be the most meaningful as it relates to EDI work: Kamala Harris as president could improve the situation for a woman’s right to choose and a more balanced conversation on gender roles (i.e. what type of masculinity will Walz represent as VP?). Another Trump presidency could mean more anti-EDI policies and a continuing rollback of ‘affirmative action’. Across the world, several countries have now chosen their governments – and for the most part, across demographics, people have simply chosen something different to what they’ve had before- fed up with struggling inflation, cost of living and lack of economic growth or feeling that their local needs simply haven’t been met. This happened in India and South Africa, where previously strongly held majorities have been lost.
The conversation around immigration, which is a crucial pillar for many elections in Western democracies, has now moved well beyond the realms of a practical discussion that neither political side is tackling, which ultimately feeds into dangerous far-left and racist rhetoric.
Knowing all of the above, what role can EDI play in this environment as a force for good?
- Be guardians of safe spaces.
The concept of safe spaces is not new. With politics standing at the door of workplaces, safe spaces can serve many functions, from helping a workforce navigate difficult conversations to simply providing a secure environment for people to share difficult lived experiences.
Being guardians would require setting the guidelines relevant to the organisation’s culture, shifting mindsets, and educating leaders and other professionals- particularly in the area of trauma-informed workplaces.
Safe space strategies in the context of politics ultimately guard against silencing perspectives and promote psychological safety.
Taking on the responsibility can solidify EDI as a caring profession in a climate where EDI is often under attack.
2. Be a force for unity.
The principles of EDI can be a force for unity even against a complex political backdrop. As discussed in The Third Culture’s ‘Dismantling EDI’ report, a ‘rebrand’ is needed. The principles of social justice are relatable for many people if there is an honest acknowledgement of the day-to-day challenges that people face in life—be it economic hardship or access to healthcare.
The practice often discusses celebrating or tolerating ‘difference’, but this concept is difficult to grasp. More work is needed to explain what this means, the balance between fostering belonging and respecting uniqueness, and what they mean for unity.
Organisations also have the power to create a culture of unity despite external factors. When faced with complicated political environments, an organisation might be wise to examine its values and consider whether they are genuinely being leveraged.
3. Deliver a far-reaching EDI influencer strategy.
EDI practitioners do not yet have the profile to tell a positive story and educate other influencers in this space. For example, who is educating key politicians on an ever-evolving area?
There are many high-profile figures across business and entertainment wading into the political conversations, from Elon Musk to Oprah Winfrey. Those from a range of professions may talk about equality challenges specific to their experience. But EDI lacks a high profile practitioner voice.
Could EDI harness the power of a range of thought leaders who are practitioners in this space to educate and influence interested parties but may know very little – think guesting The Rest is Politics or Americast podcasts for example?
This improves understanding across other thought-leaders, journalists and politicians about the work and begins to create a more helpful dialogue ensuring that EDI doesn’t sit in a silo. It also helps a much wider group of people understand the facts of the work so it is not lost in culture wars and weaponisation.
4. Focus on policy and principles- but in the context of culture.
Political discussion might not be possible, feasible or even legal. However, organisations are responsible for setting the tone and clarifying their principles or values concerning politics. A clear and consistently applied policy or set of policies is also essential for colleagues and provides information on where colleagues are supported.
However, Edgar Schein’s organisational culture model helps us understand that policies are an artefact of culture. They look the way they do because of the values the organisation espouses, not to mention the underlying assumptions and unconscious ways of being and acting.
Therefore, EDI professionals should be indispensable counsel to the leadership on organisational culture in general and in navigating the role that all the critical aspects play in building it.
In conclusion:
The EDI field has an opportunity to be a force that unites despite the sensitivity and complexity of the current political climate. Anchoring its work as a caring profession may soften people’s perspectives on how EDI can support people and organisations. Still, it is critical that EDI professionals keep abreast of society’s concerns and do not shy away from delving into complicated topics and their history. Only in this way can empathy be achieved. EDI must go beyond the scope of influencing organisations and their leaders with counsel and advice on policies by targeting politicians and other thought-leaders to improve understanding and legitimise the work further.
All of the above is likely to apply to whoever wins the US election, and either way, it’ll be under more demanding conditions.
Leave a Reply