by guest blogger M. Wittmer (or... Mr. Cosmopolite?)Although I am not sure what the cosmopolite individual would say, an argument to not downplay the necessity and role of judgment within our views of the world merits more attention than sturdy advocates of diversity will readily admit.
Judgment often gets a bad rap when it comes to the expansion of diversity. Pressures to expand individuals’ views to be more inclusive, more accepting, more tolerant, and more thirsty for the unknown frequently seem to paint judgment with a bad name. "Don't be so judgmental" is often the resulting subtext of these messages. Or, at least the push for diversity seems to presuppose some universal assumption that we all may not agree on in the first place – like the simple fact that we all must be more accepting. That is not important to some people. And it is very hard for many people to understand.
I've heard more than a few times, strongly-held sarcastic perspectives about the results diversity initiatives play within a corporation when the company tries to bring these issues to the table for their stakeholders.
Recently, I heard a few jokes amongst some level-headed professionals who seemed to acknowledge a recognition that there is an overall awareness regarding the barriers of so called 'mandatory diversity policies' within the workplace. One's first inclination at such talk, on the surface, is to think that to mock or abandon diversity efforts within institutional policy is worse than never having made these efforts. But then again, if diversity efforts are being met with resistance or interpreted in a negative light, are our institutional efforts to incorporate diversity not then contributing to the divisions between us as a people rather than creating more welcoming and cosmopolitan perspectives?
I'm not sure. It seems resistance to diversity often gains strength from claims that efforts to diversify are not effective, not practical, and not relatable enough. I find myself wondering why more people aren't thinking about the efforts behind diversity initiatives instead of evaluating or interpreting the functionality, practicality, potential, end result, or effects that they see within their own worlds. Initiative efforts don't have to be a qualitative, measurable objective in order to impact our perspectives.
Debating the practicality of diversity, and specifically opposing diversity efforts on the grounds of inefficiency is itself a huge issue and a strong judgment upon the world within which we all live. This kind of critiquing builds a foundation for many to promote the worth and impression that their individual routines are too complex, too static, and will most assuredly be more unreceptive to becoming more cosmopolitan and tolerant.
Perhaps looking at the issues of judgment is diversity's true cash cow. While organizations often use the cookie cutter issues of expanding individual perspectives to be more inclusive of various socioeconomic, ethnic, or cultural groups, this kind of effort posits more emphasis on accepting others for the sake of doing so and skims over the lynchpin issues of examining our individual judgment processes. Why do we think the way we do? Why are we resistant? Why does it matter so much that diversity initiatives truly meet our needs to be worthy enough for us to consider them valuable?
Judgment is an essential skill that we all rely on 24 hours a day to survive and grow. Like any tool at our disposal, we also use judgment to bolster our own resistance to many things and justify our perspectives. Diversity initiatives should begin to address this universal issue within each of us, as it is the core process that is universal to all groups.
Diversity initiatives may claim that judgment is what they are there to address. Personally, I think corporations and the diversity programs they utilize could do better by focusing not on one person’s experience to draw us into learning about the differences of one type of group, but by focusing more exclusively on the process and stories behind OUR judgments. It is within the context of our judgments that the differences in our stories can support the central issues universal to each of us. Using this approach can help unite the process of diversifying citizens of the world more effectively and in my estimate, will be met with less resistance than initiatives that focus on a particular cultural group or experience. Would Ms. Cosmopolite agree?
Press Room