Know Your Role: Learned vs. Lived Experience in Diversity Discussions
Picture it. Your team is called to a DEI discussion on campus. There has been a rash of inciting incidents on the news regarding marginalized groups, and leadership has brought in a consultant to help facilitate this complex but necessary conversation. Enter Susan, a white female with a post-graduate certificate in DEI. She is here to discuss navigating the recent events of injustice and brainstorm ideas to move the institution forward. Jeremy is in the audience as required by his position. He is Black and grew up in the neighborhood where the most recent incident occurred. He still has family and friends in that specific community. The conversation lurches forward with Susan sharing all of her learned knowledge and suggestions. She reassures everyone that she is an ally and committed to advocating for justice. The whiteboard is filled with notes she made throughout the talk. Unfortunately, no room is made for Jeremy, or others like him, to contribute to the discussion. The session ends with leadership applauding Susan’s job well done at guiding the conversation. Her invoice is paid, and she moves on. Jeremy returns to his desk just as frustrated as he has been following the incident.
While this scenario may be a little uncomfortable to take in, it is common in higher education (and many other industries). We are more than willing to pay someone for their learned experience, yet hardly give any attention to those with actual lived experience. Are we welcoming the voices of lived experience as openly as those with learned experience?
Here is my perspective: we let our biases (conscious and unconscious) get in the way of some common sense matters. Jeremy should have been a part of the conversation. He has lived experience that would offer valuable insight and make him an ideal advocate for change on his campus. However, he was overlooked because he does not have the same textbook credentials. What would happen if we flipped our qualifying formula? What if we had given Jeremy the floor? His lived experience is integral to the conversation. Furthermore, he will offer some insight that helps someone else better understand the experience’s heightened emotions.
Until we invite the groups we are trying to include in our diversifying efforts to the conversation, we will continue to show up performatively. We must intentionally create space for others to feel a sense of belonging and comfort in participating in conversations. More than that, our invitations cannot just be reactive. Reactive invitations can feel disingenuous. In turn, individuals show up without genuine input. They come in wondering what the quickest way to get out of this uncomfortable room where I feel like a token participant. And they often leave the conversations with no resolve or elevated outlook. As leaders, it is up to us to proactively invite people to the tables rather than reactively allowing us to obtain valuable, genuine input. Otherwise, we will continue to get box-checking feedback.
You are probably wondering how to get started with this proactive approach. Figuring out the need for conversations on diversity is not difficult. We can tackle this at a high level by looking around our departments right now. If you have one racial identity, one gender identity, or one orientation represented, then it is time to discuss diversity. If you look across your workplace and classrooms and notice that only one population is thriving, it is time to talk about diversity. If you notice the absence of diversity altogether, then it is beyond time to talk about diversity. For example, when I prepare to speak somewhere, I always take a look at the About Us/Leadership pages of an organization. If all of the photographs represent only one demographic, that tells me a lot about what I am walking into. If all of the photographs except one represent the same demographic, that tells me even more. All of these are just starting points. Everyone must know their role no matter what your indicator is for initiating conversations on diversity. It is imperative that those with lived experiences not be excluded from the conversations.
Allyship is defined as the passive support of an effort. In comparison, advocacy goes a step further when people use their privilege and platform to affect change. I am convinced that learned experience vs. lived experience is part of the difference between the two. While individuals can make significant contributions and suggestions as an ally, those who are advocates can make a change. Knowing your role in the difficult conversations on diversity is essential to overall success. Including and valuing lived experiences in difficult conversations also helps to move the work forward.
