Tristan's Tip : Gain Clarity While Gaining New Skills

Zach and Ade spend some time catching up in this lighthearted special Monday episode. Ade shares a bit about what she's focusing on right now - check the link in the show notes to schedule a career pivot consult with her! - and they both stress the importance of ensuring learning content is free for the people who need it, but not for these organizations.Click here to schedule a career pivot consult with Ade! Do note that this is specifically for transitioning into tech.Donate to the Justice for Breonna Taylor GoFundMe by clicking here.Find out how the CDC suggests you wash your hands by clicking here.Help food banks respond to COVID-19. Learn more at FeedingAmerica.org.Visit our website.

On the twentieth installment of our See It to Be It podcast series, Amy C. Waninger speaks with Monica Morgan, an award-winning international photojournalist who has documented historical events around the globe. Morgan has served as an official photographer for iconic figures like Rosa Parks and has snapped imaged of dozens of politicians, entertainers, other public figures and ordinary Metro Detroiters during a decades-long career. She shares what led her down the path to photojournalism, some of the incredible experiences she's had in her career, and more.Connect with Monica on LinkedIn and Twitter.Check out her personal website.Donate to the Justice for Breonna Taylor GoFundMe by clicking here.Find out how the CDC suggests you wash your hands by clicking here.Help food banks respond to COVID-19. Learn more at FeedingAmerica.org.Check out our website.

On the eighty-third installment of Tristan's Tips, our amazing host Tristan Layfield talks about creating content for LinkedIn. Content for you to post on LinkedIn is all around you, so pay close attention to the examples Tristan provides that can help you get started posting on the platform. Having a great Linkedin profile is only half of the battle - the other half is posting and engaging on the platform to make sure you are being seen by the right people. Tristan also plugs our live interactive weekly webinar series The Access Point - check the link in the show notes for more information!Click here to sign up for The Access Point! Our second live interactive weekly webinar takes place September 22th at 7pm CST.https://bit.ly/3br7ab4Connect with Tristan on LinkedIn, IG, FB, and Twitter. Links in order.http://bit.ly/2G7d6HKhttp://bit.ly/2XDcp3zhttp://bit.ly/2JEbg1Rhttp://bit.ly/2JCmKTzFind out how the CDC suggests you wash your hands by clicking here or below.https://bit.ly/2Ug4l5KHelp food banks respond to COVID-19. Learn more at FeedingAmerica.org.https://bit.ly/2WD73UkCheck out our website.https://bit.ly/living-corporateTRANSCRIPTTristan: What's going on, Living Corporate? It's Tristan, back again to bring you another career tip. Before we get into the tip, I want to do another shameless plug for Living Corporate's new weekly live, interactive webinar called The Access Point, designed to prepare Black and brown college students for the workforce.⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀We're bringing on corporate professionals, industry leaders, and top voices to cover topics from self-advocacy and personal branding to respectability politics and building allies, all things that will help aspiring professionals successfully transition from college to corporate.⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀We kicked off the series this past Tuesday the 15th, so make so to join the hosts Tiffany Waddell Tate, Mike Yates, Brandon Gordon, and myself every Tuesday at 7 pm CST/8 pm EST from here on out. Make sure to sign up at the link in the description.Okay, so now that the promo is out of the way, let's talk about creating content on LinkedIn.Posting on LinkedIn has 2 main benefits: 1) it helps you be found on the platform and 2) it help you establish your thought leadership and professional brand. When I tell my clients that they have to start posting, the most common response I hear is, “I don’t know what to post.” If you feel this way, I’m here to tell you that content for you to post on LinkedIn is all around you. So I wanted to give you a few examples that can help you get started posting on the platform.When you think of posting on LinkedIn the most obvious places to start are your successes, things like new jobs, awards, certifications, licenses, etc. People love to see how your career is progressing and the honors that you may be receiving.Posting your successes is easy, but I’d also suggest focusing on the other end of the spectrum, your failures. Many of us have a complicated relationship with failure, and it does take quite a bit of vulnerability to share these but we have to understand that failure is not the opposite of success, it’s a defining factor in success. Each failure is designed to teach us something. Once you figure out what that something is, share it and watch the engagement flow.Often times we have to participate in training for work or even as part of organizations that we are involved in. Take the time to share what training you attended and your top 2 - 3 takeaways from it. LinkedIn loves to hear about people’s learning processes.If you stay on top of industry news, share your take on it. If you’re super dialed into what your company is doing in relation to this industry new and their plans have been made public, share them as part of your post. Maybe even tag some of your leadership team to show how engaged you are with the business.Another thing LinkedIn really likes is a good story. This could be about an interview experience, an interaction you’ve had at work, or even things like how you and your kids are dealing with virtual learning or transitioning back into the office once COVID restrictions were loosened. These stories can be powerful and provide people with an opportunity to relate to you and your experience.Lastly, sometimes the content is already available on LinkedIn via other people’s post. Take the time to reshare the post to add your insight, thoughts, and opinions.Before I go, here are some quick tips on posting. Start slow. If you don’t already post regularly, start by trying to set a consistent cadence like once a week until you start to feel more comfortable. Don’t be afraid to use hashtags but stick to no more than 3 -5 per post. Also, consider tagging people in your post, this can help create dialogue and boost engagement. Lastly, and I know this sounds corny, but like your own posts. It helps trick the algorithm and helps your post be seen. Having a great Linkedin Profile is only half of the battle, the other half is posting and engaging on the platform to make sure you are being seen by the right people.This tip was brought to you by Tristan of Layfield Resume Consulting. Check us out on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook @LayfieldResume or connect with me, Tristan Layfield, on LinkedIn.

Zach chats with Aubrey Blanche, the Director of Equitable Design & Impact at Culture Amp, about re-imagining tech and belonging. She discusses her complicated relationship with race and identity, talks about how to effectively combat diversity fatigue, and much more. Click the links in the show notes to connect with Aubrey and check out Culture Amp's anti-racism plan!Connect with Aubrey on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Instagram. Visit her personal website.Check out Culture Amp's anti-racism plan by clicking here.Donate to the Justice for Breonna Taylor GoFundMe by clicking here.Find out how the CDC suggests you wash your hands by clicking here.Help food banks respond to COVID-19. Learn more at FeedingAmerica.org.Check out our website.Struggling with your Diversity, Equity & Inclusion (DEI) work? Kanarys—a Black-founded company—has your back. Regardless of where you are on your DEI journey, we arm you with the insights you need now to take action now. From audits to assessments to data-informed strategy, we'd love to be the partner you have been looking for. Email stacey@kanarys.com or learn more at https://www.kanarys.com/employerTRANSCRIPTZach: What's up, y'all? It's Zach with Living Corporate, and look, you know what we're doing, right? Every single week we're having real talk in a corporate world. And what does that mean? That means we're having authentic conversations that what? Center and do what else? Amplify. Who? Black. And who else? Brown people. I keep on doing this weird call-and-response thing. I guess I'm just really excited. But the point is we're having these conversations, and we typically have them with movers and shakers, and that could be executives to entrepreneurs to social capital investors to activists to elected officials to public servants, authors, you know, whoever. We're talking to everybody. Typically these people are Black and brown, but every now and then we'll have some white or white-presenting folks on the podcast as well, and we're really passionate about that. Our goal is that if you're a Black or brown person or one of the onlys in your workplace that you listen to this and feel affirmed and heard, and if you're not one of those people that you take this opportunity, a rare opportunity, to really hear some frank conversations about, and from the persectives of, Black and brown people about being Black and brown at work, and you can use that information to be a better ally. See what I'm saying? So it helps everybody, and so like I said, every week we have an incredible guest, so let me just put our own collective back at Living Corporate. We've had some incredible guests though, and today's no different. We have Aubrey Blanche. Aubrey Blanche is The Mathpath - that's a math nerd and an empath, which is wild because that's, like, the Dark Side and the Light Side of The Force coming together. She's like a Gray Jedi. Anyway, director of equitable design and impact at Culture Amp and a start-up investor and adviser. Through all of her work, she seeks to question, re-imagine and re-design systems--now, y'all know we're gonna double-click on that in a minute--and practices that surround us to ensure that all people can access equitable opportunities and build a better world. Her work is undergirded--I like that word, "undergirded." Undergirded. Just say that to y'allselves, y'all. Undergirded. Undergirded by her training in social scientific methods and grounded in the fundamental dignity and value of every person. Aubrey, welcome to the show. How are you doing?Aubrey: Hey. Thank you so much for having me. I feel, like, genuinely blown away at the idea that I get to join you, and also your intro makes me want to cry. I just love what you're doing. I love the mission and the vision. And "undergirded" is such a fun word.Zach: It's so great, right? There's certain words that are just really nice to say. "Undergirded." "Plethora."Aubrey: Right? I mean, [I'm a?] deeply over-educated human being, so just occasionally getting to use those silly $17 words that you don't to, but [?].Zach: You don't have to. Erykah Badu once said, "What good do your words do if they don't understand you?" But that's for another conversation, another day. Look, I read your bio, or rather let me be honest--I took out, like, the first 20% of your bio for the sake of this conversation, but what does all of that really mean? Like, what do you actually do?Aubrey: Yeah, what do I do? I feel like what I try to do is crush white supremacy with capitalism, which is confusing conceptually, but really what I think I try to do is harness the privilege that I have and I guess the oppression I've experienced as this very liberal human, and we can talk about what that means, and try to use the privilege that I've had and try to figure out how to scale those out. Like, that's the [?] thing in my soul that I'm trying to do, and right now I happen to do that within the context of technology and investing and finance. What I'm really interested in is learning the rules of systems so that we can begin to evolve those systems so that they begin breaking themselves down where they are harming people.Zach: I like that. I like that a lot. There's a lot of nuance in what you just said, so that's why I'm really excited to get into this. In fact, let's talk a little bit about, like, this moment where we are, right? And before we do that, like, let's zoom in on our interaction about you being on this platform, right?Aubrey: Right. So for folks on the podcast, basically what happened is Zach was awesome and reached out to have me on, and my first sort of response was "Hey, want to be clear that I'm white-passing. I want to make sure that we have sort of BIPOC folks in front of my voice. I'm really happy to speak sort of to my people, but I also want to be respectful of not taking up more space than I need to," and that for me is because--it's really important to me just, like, on a basic, ethical level. Like, we have this moment. It's always been important to listen to those voices, and I've tried to create that space, but it's especially important now because so many people are listening. So I think I'm trying to figure out where my role is in this moment as a woman of color but someone who does have white privilege in so many settings, and then on top of that I'm trans-racially adopted, so there's even more nuance inside that sort of like--Zach: Wow.Aubrey: Yeah, it's a lot.Zach: That is a lot. Okay, so when you say trans-racially adopted, like, your parents are what ethnicity?Aubrey: Yeah. So I'm mixed, and I'm Mexican-American, and as of about a couple weeks ago I found that the other part is Irish. Fun fact - adoption is weird and keeps coming back to you. So my adoptive mother is second-gen American on both sides, Euro-American, and then my adopted father is actually Euro-American and Indigenous. So he's Choctaw and has been an Indigenous legal activist in addition to being sort of corporate counsel, but my dad, what's interesting is despite the fact that I grew up sort of in the Indigenous community and things like that is my dad is also white-passing. So my whole adoptive family looked hella white, but we actually had a really complex sort of racial identity within our family.Zach: I mean--so I think it's important, right? I mean, we're gonna get there in a minute, but... so you operate in this space, right? I know when I first saw your picture I was like--do you watch Steven Universe?Aubrey: I don't.Zach: Okay. So you should check out Steven Universe, 'cause, like, you give me strong Rose Quartz vibes. And it's a compliment. Like, you should look up Rose Quartz. She's great. But you kind of look like a star. Like, you do all these talks and all these things, and so outside looking in it's like--I think you sit in this space that's really interesting. So I'm not gonna profile you, 'cause I've listened to what you actually have to say, but you sit in this space that's, like, you speak about diversity, equity and inclusion, you are white-passing--like, your experience and your identity is much more complex than that, but you sit in this very influential space and it's, like, kind of--what I'm curious about is, considering the space that you've inhabited historically around this work, and when you think about this moment--like, it's kind of like a watershed moment, right? Like, people are really starting to call D&I institutions to account, particularly white women in these spaces and groups. I'm curious, like, is there anything right now that you're more sensitive to? You kind of talked a little bit about you've been thinking about it more. Like, where are you at just emotionally and mentally around this work right now?Aubrey: Yeah. So I think, like, the Overton window of what we can talk about to white people has shifted, and so what I mean by that is my personal philosophy is that I'm someone who was born in a situation that was let's just say much rougher than the one I got adopted into, and something I've always carried with me is--like, the phrase I use to describe it is "Little girls born like me do not sit in rooms and talk to billionaires." It's just a fact. Statistically speaking, there's no reason I should be in the place in the world that I am. And so what I think about is I've moved through these very white supremacist systems, right? Like, I got to survive 'cause I need more SPF than some people, and I've learned how those systems work, but the problem is I always felt really alienated by them because they didn't align with my sense of self, because for a lot of complicated reasons I really have been socialized and racialized as a Latina because of the social context I grew up in, and I didn't actually understand whiteness until I went to college and people stopped being racist to me, and I was like, "Wow, I didn't know that was optional." Truly, and it sounds really silly to someone I think, but just given the specific circumstances of my life that happened. So throughout my 20s as I sort of my grew in my consciousness on this I kind of said, "There are particular spaces I can speak to that people who are darker than me can't," and I own and acknowledge that that is a relic and a fact of a white supremacist system, but it's also still true. So what I try to do, and I will admit imperfectly, which is why I think we need people to keep us accountable to this integrity, is I try to talk to people who are going to listen to me more or I try to say things to shift the Overton window so that when darker people of color say them they receive less abuse. So I recognize when I say something first--and I say first meaning in ths space, not that it's my magical idea, that I'm less likely to just get shit on for it because I look like Karen. And so I think about it like, "Can I be the linebacker for Black women? Can I normalize that idea so that we can make that space less hostile so then I can go, "Now listen to who you should listen to, and let me bring that voice into the room"? So I think that's my dual responsibility, and now because suddenly we're seeing communities actually capable of listening to BIPOC folks without immediately abusing I'm much more careful about where I step back, because I think I have less internal intuition about where the correct action is, and so I'm trying to be more deferential. So that's where I am, but I wouldn't say that I know what I'm doing. I'm figuring it out. Zach: No, that's a really honest answer, and thank you for the context and background. I think your premise, what you started off with in terms of your purpose, is different than most folks. Like, if you ask most people their purpose, like, they're not going to say what their real purpose is, because most folks--painting with a wide brush, but I mean what I'm about to say--most folks' goal is to, by some degree, be white men, right? So, like, their goal is to get as much power as they can. So, like, your whole framing of, like, "I'm gonna block for this other person so that they can have a platform to actually speak, I'm gonna leverage my access and my power and my privilege to then create space for darker-skinned Latinx, for Black women, for other people who are societally, historically in different ways just on their face," no pun intended. Like, that's just not the typical goal, right? So we've talked a little bit about the nuances of your identity and your background, and that's incredible. I'd like to talk more about the concept of being white-presenting while also at the same time being a person of color, right? My challenge, Aubrey, right now is that, like, that "person of color" term is starting to become this, like, junk drawer thing where, like, everybody's a person of color, but we don't really specify or name identity in this work, even now. So, like, that's why with Living Corporate, we don't say "we center marginalized experiences of people of color at work," we say Black and brown because we really want to be explicit with who we're talking about. You know, you brought up being white-presenting. I'd like to hear more about the nuances of, from your perspective, Latinx identity and how you present versus culture and ethnicity, and let's also add, like, the dynamic of how people perceive you.Aubrey: So I think it's something I think about a lot, and I want to bring in another piece of my identity that's been really helpful for me in figuring this stuff out, which is I'm also a queer person. I'm, like, bisexual or pansexual or--I don't know, whatever's something that's definitely not definitely gay and not definitely straight, and I don't really think about it much harder than that, but I have a lot of things that are, like, queer signifiers in terms of my identity but, like, could also just be confused for [alt?] straight people. So again, most of my identities are invisible and liminal, and the way that I think about it is that we talk about that identity construction is a process, and so I can't change that, like, I didn't grow up in a Latin family, for example, and I would never lie about that. Something that was really interesting to me was--I have a friend who's Indigenous who gave me a framework for thinking about this because I've struggled with my legitimacy as, like, part of the Latinx community or how do I relate to this label, "people of color"? I have a complicated set of feelings with that language but think it can be useful in terms of identifying a collective. For me it was really about who I am, and my identity is actually not something that can be challenged. The fact is, right, my lineage comes from people in Mexico, but I also can acknowledge that I have both colonizer and colonized in my DNA, and that is something [I have to?] deal with, but the thing that a friend of mine said that gave me the legitimacy that my identity is real is he said, "I can't accept that the fact that we are pale means we are no longer from our ancestors, otherwise they would have been right that they could [BLEEP] the indigeniety out of us." And that, like, is probably pretty harsh, but for me I was like, "Yeah, you're right. There's an energy. There's a spirit. There's a culture." Now, I, for my own well-being did need to be put in a different family than the one I was originally born into. I've had to connect with and sort of become a part of my culture as an adult, so I've had a little bit of a different experience because of what was important for me. And so I think there's that, but I think to pretend, like, my experience in terms of economics, in terms of the way that I have experienced racism and racialization, are meaningfully different than most or a big portion of the Latinx community, and I think for me that tells me what my role should be. So I'm grateful for the folks who, like, welcome me into the community and don't do the, like, "You're not legitimate 'cause you have a different story," a story that also understands--here's a fun fact - my adoptive mother is the most incredible person I've ever met, absolutely saved my life, and also we know that women of the dominant race, you know, bringing children from the colonized race into their family is [?]. Like, both of those things are true, and so for me I say because I have this almost armor in the systems we live in, my role is to listen to my community and advocate to the majority for it because I can be a translator, because I can move between, and so rather than seeing my ability to play with those systems of oppressions as questions about my legitimacy, I relate to them as in they give me a special role for my activism in the same way I think each of us have a special role in the way that we bring our activism to life in line with our purpose and our unique privileges and oppressions. So yeah, that was really deep for you, but that's my honest answer, and I think I try to hold the humility that, like, I've definitely [BLEEP] up, right? I've definitely done things that were wrong, but I try to surround myself with people who tell me that when it's happening so I can at least try to minimize the way that, you know, my white fragility or my internalized racism or any other -isms aren't impacting the people around me.Zach: I mean, you out here just casually dropping wild bombs. You're doing a phenomenal job. You should continue on this path. Like, stay here. So let's talk a little bit about the culture summit in 2019 that you were at a guest speaker, a keynote speaker [at,] and you talked about diversity fatigue in tech, right? So it's interesting--we're going to continue to nail on this the next few questions, but I feel as if--so the majority has had to be aware or care about Black people for... let's see here, has it been, like, three months? Two-and-a-half months? Like, it's been a handful of months. Like, it hasn't been that long, and people are already talking about being tired. So, like, I'm curious about when you think about the concept of diversity fatigue with, like, white leaders, and especially as you think about it at an organizational level, like, what have you seen work well to manage diversity fatigue?Aubrey: Yeah. I think the thing about it--and this really relates to this idea that I say a lot, which is, like, [BLEEP] D&I, and what I don't actually mean is, like [BLEEP] the goal, and I think they're actually related things. People are tired. Like, I want to sit there and be like, "How dare you get tired?" But I understand how the human nervous system works, so I have to, like, deal with that as a real constraint. But I feel like diversity fatigue is partially happening because everybody's had the same ten diversity talks for five years. They, like, put some money into branding and putting a Black face on their website, and then threw their hands up and said, "Why isn't racism done?" And so when you describe it that way you're like, "Oh, yeah, that was never going to work in the first place." So I think the solution to diversity fatigue, rather than us, like, yelling at people who are tired, which is just going to make them turn off, and I, like, hold in my heart the frustration that we have to do this, right, because people are tired. They've done enough. But again, philosophical versus practical rationalism there. I think it's this move to equitable design that actually I think fights diversity fatigue, because what are people tired of? They're tired of being lectured at. They're tired of not doing. So instead of saying, "We care about D&I," my response is "If you don't have a budget and you don't have a time allocation, I don't care and you don't count," 'cause I'm sorry, your caring didn't help anyone. And that's what equitable design is, right? It's about what saying "What is my plan? What is my process? What is my data about what's broken and what is my idea and my action about how we'll try to fix it?" And when you go with that methodology, suddenly everybody gets a job. So maybe it's--I'm speaking about Culture Amp in this exact moment, our programs, right? Our Black employees' job right now is to attend the mental health program we're offering for them and to take care of themselves. That is their job.Zach: That is so healthy.Aubrey: Right? Like, that is your job right now. In our company anti-racism strategy, our Black [campers?], your job is to take care of yourself. We've made it clear. We've brought in experts. My job is to build the corporate strategy, you know? Our CEO's job is to fully fund the plan. This equitable design idea gives everyone a job, and it's hard to get fatigued with something when you've given people, like, little win breadcrumbs along the way. So I'm not [perfect?], and if folks want to they can check out Culture Amp's anti-racism plan online. We didn't just publish the commitment, we published the operating plan, and at the end of this sort of six-month cycle we'll provide an update for folks because accountability matters. It's real. Cultureamp.com/antiracism if you want to check it out. The pillars are easy, which is support and care, accountability, education, and then access. So for me that's what equitable design is. It's everyone taking a look at the actions that they're already taking in their day and going, "How can I design this to create a more equitable impact?" So maybe you're giving a career coaching to that friend of a friend's kid. Why don't you ask that student to find an underrepresented classmate who you're also gonna give a career coaching conversation to? I'm telling you. I did it last month. When you read a book written by a Black woman, why don't you make sure you go online and write a review for it, because then the algorithm knows that people engage with that book. Right? It's not about always--although certainly if you want to donate to the movement for Black lives and everything I vehemently support you. I think people mistake that, like, activism, that anti-racism, that D&I is something separate from what they're already doing as opposed to a slight edit of the things they're doing. So that's how you overcome fatigue, and I'm totally fine if you as an ally--like, you just did that coaching conversation with someone who would not have had access to an executive before? Like, I'm chill if you pat yourself on the back for that. Go ahead. Like, I know, "ally cookies" or whatever, but if you want to self-high five or you want to tell another one of your friends who isn't marginalized from that group, like, "I did a good thing," and you want a high five from another white person, fine. Cool. If it keeps you motivated and it gets you to do the next 10 things over the next 10 and 100 years, then I'm fully supportive of that. So I guess that's where it is. Like, we fight diversity fatigue by doing things consistently that actually work. Zach: I feel like a large part of this work is massaging white discomfort or trying to figure out ways to, like, Jedi mind trick white folks into caring about Black and brown people. And, like, I hear what you're doing at Culture Amp. The link will be in the show notes, 'cause I just looked at it and it's fire. So it's worth, and I also shared it with a couple of mentors, but I'd like to get your reaction to what I just said and, like, if you agree with that, then, like, is that tenable in today's climate?Aubrey: That's such a good question. I was a little quiet because I was like, "Is it, like, 60% or 80% of the work?" Right? No, I think it absolutely is, and it's the reason that I choose to do this work, because I think something that people don't talk about enough--and I talk about in some communities that I'm building--us white-passing folks are the tactical weapons to solve this particular problem, right? Like, I don't just, like, code switch, although I do that too. I literally identity switch at work minute by minute because I have the unique ability to, like, feel both sides of the coin 'cause I've lived both sides of them, so that's actually a lot of the reason I do the work I do, because I know how much of this is, like, managing white discomfort, and frankly, my face partially manages white discomfort to have discussions about racism and white supremacy. So I think that's true. Now, your next question is really important. Is it tenable or sustainable? I have a complex answer to that. So philosophically my answer to you is no. My deeply practical, science lady answer is it's not an avoidable problem in the short term. So this is a weird theory I'm gonna give you, and it has to do with drug addiction, but I think it's relevant for anti-racism work. So here's a theory I've never spoken online before. So there's something really fascinating about drugs and how they work on the brain, which is that the dosage and the frequency that they hit the brain completely changes the brain's response to it. So, like, small amounts over time create resistance. Large amounts at once tend to cause addiction. I'm vastly oversimplifying, but just work with me. So I'll say people who experience racism--not people of color, but people who experience racism, we basically have been given doses of racial stress throughout our lives, so we now have resilience to it. I'm nto saying it's good. I'm not saying it's ideal. I'm just saying it's sort of a descriptive fact of the world. So white people, we basically have to dose them with enough racial stress in the right ratios at the right time to get them to be able to have these conversations, because what the research is telling us is white fragility is actually, like, people's brains perceiving they're in danger when they're in absolutely no danger whatsoever. Like, that's neuroscience. So philosophically I'm like, "Yeah, it's not sustainable," but we have to think about ways to give people experience through racial stress, white people specifically, so that they're resilient and can have the conversations, and I think that's the process that's happening right now in a broader cultural sense is that white people--I mean, have you seen the New York Times Bestseller list? It looks like my bookshelf. [?] on one of my shelves called "What White America's Reading." So what I'm saying is I think we're in a moment where white people are being dosed with racial stress in a way that they never have been, and so I am saying that, like, we're still probably going to have another--I don't know, I don't want to put a timeline on it. That's a terrible statistician thing to do, but I do think it will change because more white people are educating themselves, and even, like, white people that are in my family that I've never seen talk about racial justice before are, like, texting me and asking me questions. So, like, I'm really hopeful. I know how the 17 million different ways this could go sideways, but I have to hold onto that hope because that's what motivates me to push so hard right now. So I think that there's a real chance that there's enough white people who are like, "Oh, I get some rules now, and I at least know to shut up and listen," that we could build a coalition that's big enough to actually create fundamental structural change. Like, I have to believe that's true because that's what I spend all of my time pushing for.Zach: Right. I mean, I struggle with the ways that this space plays with language. I don't know, like, to a certain extent, Aubrey, like, the language itself becomes like, this test and, like, just becomes very classist, and it becomes really exclusionary, because we're talking in these very, like, esoteric terms that kind of mean whatever, right, and we write long Medium posts about this versus that, but at that same time a lot of folks are still using equity and equality interchangeably. So we really don't understand--when I say we I mean, like, just the common person, not even a D&I expert but just, like, the common person. I do think a word though, when we talk about this space and we talk about achieving belonging at work is, like, redistributing organizational power. I don't often hear the word "power," like, really employed in conversations, particularly around Black engagement, brown people. I don't hear that word. Have you thought about that? Is that significant to you at all?Aubrey: I think I want to add another word in, 'cause I agree with you, right? Getting really esoteric about language, it excludes people who haven't had those discussions about those specific subtle differences. I talk about equity. I actually don't really use the word equality. I don't think about equality that much.Zach: I don't either, but people be throwing--I've seen it. I've seen it, like, some big brands have used the word equality. I'm like, "Why are we--"Aubrey: I'll just give my particular view, and I want to do this without, like, throwing shade, but for me I tend to see people use equality when they're familiar with a lot of the, like, deep social justice theories, because they're articulating the outcome, and equality is the outcome of the process of equity, and the process of equity, by literal definition, is about redistributing power and opportunity, at least in the way that I perceive it. I think the other term that we have to talk about or that I think about a lot, and I can't believe I work at a place where I have, like, advanced, deep conversations with executives about this, is [?] collective organizational justice. I think justice is helpful because there's--I just learned a new type of justice, which is, like, my favorite fact ever, but thinking about, like, what does procedural justice look like, right? Equitable design creates processes that create procedural justice. I think about testimonial justice. So how do I make sure that people's stories have the space to be told in the ways that they need to to respect human dignity and opportunity? And so I think redistributing organizational power is at the core of what I do, so really what I'm doing all day, whether I'm writing a corporate strategy or thinking about what hat I need to wear in a particular conversation, is I'm doing a power analysis of the situation. Like, a good example of this, and I'm gonna put this out there, when I think about power and systemic power, right, one of the most abusive things that exists that most D&I leaders aren't even talking about are forced arbitration agreements. You have just [?] or also class action rights. So by including that in your employment contract to all of the CEOs and leaders listening, what you are saying is "[BLEEP] you and your power. You have absolutely no recourse that is fair if we mess up and harm you," and I truly believe that that's true, because what you're doing is stripping that individual of the way that they might balance their power against the power of a corporation with backers, and that's even ignoring the racial power dynamics or the ableist power dynamics there. So I think we would be so much better served if we talked about power, but then the other important thing I want to bring in--and I realize it's your thing, but I'm gonna ask you a question, which is I don't think that people understand the difference between power with and power over, and it relates to [?] earlier where I almost laughed--not at you, but you said, like, "You're giving up power," and I almost laughed because I don't think by creating space for people I'm giving up power, because my definition of power is "power with," so I believe that when I move out of a particular space, I am gaining power because the collective is gaining power and I'm a part of that collective.Zach: But, see, in that though there's, like, this--I don't know. You have to have a different mindset and premise that you're operating from to even see that as power though, right? Because most people don't--it's a zero-sum game. There's also, like, a very capitalistic mindset to it too. So if you heavily prescribe to historically oppressive systems and you're not necessarily, like--you don't think in communal terms or frames, then you're not going to see it that way. I agree with you though that, like, the idea of power with and power over is--and it's funny, because I didn't know that's what you were going to say. I didn't know that that's what that meant in that context. I thought you meant, like, power with being like--I don't know, I interpreted it differently. I think about the fact that a lot of people don't consider the fact that, like, even if they aren't high in an organization, they still have power by way of their whiteness, and that's not a theoretical power. Like, it's a real power. As an example, let's pretend you and I work at Culture Amp and we are a part of the same team. We have the same job. In fact, I may be senior to you in the organization. The reality is, like, if you wanted to, you could just share a couple of points of feedback to other people around me and I could be fired. Not at Culture Amp, but you know what I mean. You have the societal--you have advantages to where if you say, "You know what? I just don't think Zach is really cutting it," or "I don't really think Zach is that bright," or "I don't think" whatever or "Zach makes me feel uncomfortable" or whatever the case is, right, and so what was a struggle for me is when we talk about power, yes, we're talking about, like, the white executives, or just executives period, like, people who are in positions of organizational authority, but also the people who are not in organizational authority who still can harm Black and brown people who should, on paper, be protected, even by the very pessimistic and harmful rules that that organization has created for its own leadership. Like, they still don't really even participate or benefit from those protections because of the color of their skin or because of a disability or whatever the case may be, you know what I mean?Aubrey: Oh, yeah. Absolutely, and I think that's actually something we don't teach people. I think it's, like, American culture in general is very aggressive. Like, a lot of our cultural values are about control, but we don't actually have a dialogue about it. So those of us on the bottom end of the distribution in any context tend to talk about it, but the people at the top don't, and so yeah, I think people--also because we're in this sort of capitalistic society. I say that as if I'm, like--capitalism is like traffic. I don't like it, but I have to be in it. I got that from Nicole Sanchez. I want to give her a shout-out. She's brilliant. I can only say that she's someone who has guided me and taught me, and I appreciate her wisdom, and I don't even have time to describe how much I think she's great, but I think that's it, that people don't understand power. And also I think there's this weird game in--I think it's everywhere, but, like, American culture lies about it, where the thing is people actually, like, crave power and status, but they have to lie about wanting it, and it comes from our whole lie about, like, "Classes don't exist in America," even though they obviously do. "We're not a classist system." Yeah, we are. I've been on every rung of it. Trust me, I know. At different points in my life.Zach: Right. Let's talk a little bit about--part of your bio I read included the concept of re-imagining systems, right? So I've had on a few guests, and many of them believe that this is a watershed moment for, quote-unquote, D&I, HR culture, like, that whole space. Do you think there's any radical re-imagining that needs to happen today or that really should have happened a while ago but is certainly, like, further mobilized by this moment?Aubrey: Absolutely. I mean, like, the thing is the phrase--it's been repeated to me, like, every week, like, "Never waste a good crisis." Well, what I mean is don't waste the attention on these problems, because attention is what can get you the solutions. So yeah, do I think it's a watershed? Gosh, I hope so. I hope that companies stop doing unconscious training and we have honest conversations about the fact that it was conscious design decisions in organizations that create intentional discrimination and exclusion. I've been saying that to everyone with a C-level title I can talk to. If you're like, "Unconscious bias," I'm like, "It was never unconscious bias. You were just too fragile to hear it. It was conscious failures of leadership."Zach: Listen... I'll never forget--this was some years ago--I was talking to a leader about... and it was literally on my way out, 'cause I left, and I made a risk log as I was leaving. I said, "These are just things you need to know about the project we was on and the people on your team. Here are things that would help you if you just considered the risks." Got on the phone. I had already resigned, so, like, it was, like, my last week, right? So then we're talking and she's like... one of the risk ops on there was--I literally made it so soft. I said "potential unconscious bias," and her response was "I've never had a situation where I've been unconsciously bias." And I said, "Well, by the very nature of the concept you wouldn't know if you had been unconsciously bias, 'cause it's unconscious." So it's wild when you think about, like, the multiple levels of grace and outs that white people provide themselves through diversity and inclusion work. It's just not to me about justice, not about equity, really it's not about Black and brown people at all, it's just about shoring up power and control while kind of, like, protecting yourselves from litigious risk, right? But it's not real.Aubrey: You know what, Zach? You just said the word "risk," and I want to one, yes, +1,000 you, and I want to talk about the way that risk can be re-imagined, and it's a thing I've been saying to lawyers and executives, not just at Culture Amp. Like I said, literally to anyone who will listen, because I figure I have my, like, Hamilton, my [?] energy about this, like, how much [?] can we get in this moment? Which is that we can decide that risk means the company losing business because we have to fire an executive who's an abusive [BLEEP]. Like, violations of human dignity are a risk we cannot bear, and we simply choose, when we identify abusers, to remove them out of our organizations. Like, that's a choice that people can make about the definition of risk. And frankly, even if you're talking in capitalistic terms, if you think about how much companies spend on, like, external legal firms when they get sued for discrimation, it is so much cheaper to fire an executive and hire a new one. Or anyone in the organization, right? If they're not an executive they're even less financially, you know, sort of creating return for the business. So again I go back to this idea of re-imagining. Let's take the words and the concepts and just ask the basic question - "Do we have to do it this way? Is there a better way?" A company could say, "We value people being treated well because we know that treating you well equals better cognition, which equals more innovation, which in this economy, in our business, equals more dollars and revenue." We can choose to act as if that is true, and that choice and that action is what builds the world in which it is true. So I'm saying this, like, I live in an industry where everyone's like, "We're changing the world." I'm like, "You're shooting a rocket into space. Someone did that already." Not to diminish that it's an incredible feat of engineering to get a rocket into space. It's incredible, but it's actually less incredible than being like, "Maybe we should treat our employees like full humans who are deserving of dignity." Like, that doesn't seem that bananas to me.Zach: Well, it doesn't though because you're rejecting white supremacy and patriarchy, like, full-stop.Aubrey: Because it's lame and it diminishes--[?] I could drive, like, what, a Lamborghini because I look white? Like, my soul is not better off. Other beings aren't better off. Sorry, I'm going off on a tangent, but white supremacy diminishes everyone, even those of us who benefit from it. Obviously those of us who benefit should do more work full-stop.Zach: Right. I feel you. I also think it's wack, but that's the reason. So what about this time right now scares you, Aubrey, mathpath, white-presenting woman, complex background. Like, is there anything right now that you feel more in the spotlight or more pressured?Aubrey: The thing that I'm, like, deeply afraid of in this moment, to be specific, is I know what the United States does to people who don't identify as white in history, and I'm afraid that white America won't take the signals that we're deep down the road to genocide seriously enough until we all start dying in higher numbers. That is actually what I'm afraid of, that white people don't think it's urgent enough to burn [BLEEP] down over, because the fact is, like, there are children in cages. This has been happening forever. We have police forces gunning down innocent civilians of all colors, although we know some communities experience that disproportionately. So what scares me? People wanting to lull themselves into a sense of security because they want the world to be better than it is.Zach: Yeah, it's scary. I think about where we are right now and just the death count because of COVID-19, and I think the fact that "defund the police" is still becoming such a--people are still pushing back so hard. I say, "Y'all, the data's right here. They're not solving crime. They're bleeding communities dry because the budgets are way too hard. We are underserved in these other service areas." And yet that's still, like, a radical, crazy idea. We're still pushing back against, like, the idea of reparations. Folks are still sending kids to school, right now, in the middle of a pandemic. Like you said, kids in cages. You're right. It's scary because--I don't know. There's a certain level of awareness that's been really cool to see. Kind of weird, to be frank. As a Black person it's kind of strange. But at the same time I'm looking everything and I'm just like, "Yo, this is--" Just talking about the pandemic alone, like, we haven't even hit the second wave, and so it's just like, "What are we doing?" So I hear you, that's a fear of mine too.Aubrey: That was the honest answer. It wasn't an upper, but [?] all of these things are under people's control, to pay attention, to advocate [?], and that's what I was going to link it to. Like, if that's not the world you want to see, refuse to live in it.Zach: Right, no, 100%. Okay, so let's wrap it up on this one. If you had to give three things executive leaders should be keeping in mind when it comes to engaging and retaining Black talent specifically, and in general a more socially conscious workforce--you think about Gen Z--like, what would those three things be?Aubrey: #1: You need to go to therapy to deal with your own self-esteem, control and power issues. They will absolutely come out in the workplace. #2: You must educate youreslf, and the Google machine is an incredible resource.Zach: And it's free.Aubrey: Free! There are so many people from Gen Z and the Black community that have put their thoughts and life experiences online you do not have to go bother someone who works with you. #3: What you value is not what they value, and they are coming to power. You need to learn how to gracefully evolve with the world. Those would be my most heartfelt pieces of advice to make what is an inevitable transition something that you can participate in and bring into the world as opposed to something you can fight and that will be painful.Zach: That's something that just kind of happens to you, 'cause it's going to happen, right?Aubrey: I mean, like, [?] is destiny. We know where this is going, so you can either be a part of that change and come into that new world or you can kick and scream, but it's coming, and it can either be fun or not fun, and that's really up to you.Zach: I mean, first of all, this has been fire. We haven't done sound effects in a while, but I still have them. Sound Man gonna put 'em in right here. And a Flex bomb too. There you go. Okay. So this has been incredible. You know what? I'm calling it right here. Aubrey Blanche, you are a friend of the show. Culture Amp, y'all are welcome here any time. This is not an ad. Culture Amp, what's up?Aubrey: Thank you for creating this space. I'm really grateful for this space to get to unpack these things. I guess my hope is other folks who have some life stories similar to mine get some wisdom and inspiration out of it so that they can do something that makes the world more incredible. So thank you so much for creating this space. I'm really grateful.Zach: Look, I appreciate you. This is great. Y'all, this has been Zach with the Living Corporate podcast. You know what we do. We have these conversations every single Tuesday, and then on Thursdays we have Tristan's Tips, and on Saturdays we have See It to Be It with Amy C. Waninger. So we have, like, a whole network really on one platform. You just have to check in when you check in, okay? But look, that's been us. Check us out. We're all over Beyonce's internet. Just type in Living Corporate. We'll pop up. I'm not gonna go through all the domains. We got all of 'em except for livingcorporate.com. We have all the other ones, so just type us in and you'll see us over there. Until next time, this has been Zach. You've been listening to Aubrey Blanche, leader, mover, shaker. 'Til next time, y'all. Peace.

On the nineteenth entry of our See It to Be It podcast series, Amy C. Waninger speaks with Sha'Ron James, an insurance professional with nearly two decades of experience providing forward thinking, strategic and regulatory advice to clients on a number of business and economic development matters. Sha'Ron talks a bit about her unique role as an insurance regulator, her career journey up to this point, and offers some advice for people who are interested in making the jump into the insurance industry.Click here to sign up for The Access Point! Our first live interactive weekly webinar takes place September 15th at 7pm CST.Connect with Sha'Ron on LinkedIn and Twitter.Donate to the Justice for Breonna Taylor GoFundMe by clicking here.Find out how the CDC suggests you wash your hands by clicking here.Help food banks respond to COVID-19. Learn more at FeedingAmerica.org.Check out our website.TRANSCRIPTAmy: Sha'Ron, thank you so much for joining me today. How are you?Sha'Ron: I'm great. Thank you for having me.Amy: I am so excited to talk to you today because you have a job that most people don't even know exists. So just, yeah, tell us about what it is, your role in the insurance industry.Sha'Ron: Well, Amy, my role in the insurance industry I think is somewhat unique in that I spent the past decade or so as an insurance regulator. And so as an insurance regulator, I was responsible for ensuring that insurance companies maintain the promise that they make to policy holders. And I did that in two different roles that I can share a little bit more about. But just again, in its most basic form as a regulator, I was responsible for ensuring that insurance companies maintain their promise to policy holders.Amy: And that means a couple of different things, right? Because it means on the one hand that they're not denying claims that they should be paying. Absolutely. But on the other hand, it also means that you have a hand in making thing, making sure that these companies are holding enough money back in reserve so that they're going to be around long enough to pay the claims. So can you talk a little bit about what that means?Sha'Ron: Yes. So during my time in state government in the state of Florida was with the Department of Financial Services. In other parts of the country it's different offices of insurance regulation. So I held two roles. Both of them were somewhat unique, but played a really important role in ensuring, again, that that promise was kept. So I spent about six years as the director of the division of rehabilitation and liquidation, which is the division within state government that takes over insurance companies that become financially insolvent. So when our insurance commissioner determines that an insurance company doesn't have the financial wherewithal to pay the claims as they become due, that referral was then made to my division, and I led a team of about 120 people that would oversee the takeover of an insurance carrier. We would run off the claims and transition policy holders to more vibrant financially solvent insurance companies. And then we would also sue to recover assets so that those claims could be paid. That was a pretty fascinating role. Really exciting at times, but also somewhat disheartening because there are times when insurance companies aren't able to make good on their promise, and so policy holders are sometimes left holding the bag with unpaid claims and unfulfilled promises. And so it was a very delicate balance to be able to take care of the policy holder while at the same time essentially shut down an active insurance company.Amy: And so for people not in the industry, not in the insurance industry, I think it's important to understand, you know, the, the, the insurance companies make a promise to pay at some point in the future, but they take your premiums up front, right? So you are paying for that promise and it's up to regulators like yourself to make sure that, you know, if you have a long-tail policy, like I think, you know, probably the most common example is, you know, asbestos claims, right? This right, we have people going into buildings, you know, tearing down buildings. We have policies around, you know, their health and safety working for us. And 20 years from now those employees develop lung cancer because they were working with asbestos. Those employees then go to the insurer to collect for medical bills, for pain and suffering. And it's not just that the employer needs to be there to help handle that, but their insurance company is really the backstop for those lawsuits. So if they've invested with an insurance company that's not around 20 years down the road, these folks, these workers then have, are going to struggle to pay their hospital bills. They're going to struggle to be compensated for the damage that their employers caused them. Is that a good summary?Sha'Ron: That's a great summary. And another example that we have run into is in long-term care insurance where again as you mentioned, policyholders are paying premiums for years. And even in the basic, you know, life context, you're paying policy premiums for years in the hope that when there's a trigger, when something happens in life, the life context, if you pass away or are in a long-term care situation, if you have you know, something, a health episode that triggered you using your long-term care insurance, the hope is that that carrier is going to be there and will make good on that. There's also a hope that over time your premiums will not significantly swing, meaning that you may be paying $20 a month and you're told you'll be paying $20 a month for, you know, the next 20 years. But then 10 years in you find out, "Oh, the insurance company needs more money." Now you have to pay $120. And so in other role as a regulator I served as the state insurance consumer advocate. And Florida has a pretty unique position in that--and other states don't have this, but the state insurance consumer advocate represents the insurance buying public in rate cases and in rate hearings. So if a company is looking to increase their rates or introduce new products into the marketplace, I was responsible for weighing in on whether or not that was a good product or a good rate for consumers. And so again, that also was a really interesting perspective given the landscape of the industry, which you and I know, Amy, is really vast and really complex, and so I was grateful to be able to see the industry from both contexts.Amy: And I think that's an interesting perspective too because there's a balancing act there for people who are unfamiliar with this is you want the insurers to get enough of a rate, right? Enough premium to remain solvent, to pay all of their claims to do all of the work that they need to do. Right? So they have to have enough money coming in, but on the flip of that coin, you don't want them to have rates that are so high that they're gouging their policyholders.Sha'Ron: Absolutely. Rates cannot be excessive. And they have to be justified and they can't be discriminatory. And so those terms to a lay person seem pretty simple, excessive, you know, fair. Non-discriminatory, but all of those terms that make up how a regulator evaluates a rate- in reality, it's really complicated. And again, there are a lot of people, in terms of the team, that really participate in that analysis. So you have an actuary, you have lawyers, you have analysts. And there are so many factors that go into whether or not the rate can be justified. And so again, like you said, you want to make sure that the rate is adequate so that insurance companies have enough money to pay the claims, but you want to make sure that policy holders aren't being treated unfairly, being charged too much, or, in the context of issues about discriminatory rates, you want to make sure that insurance companies aren't taking certain risk factors and kind of extrapolating that risk factor across a broad swath of people. So when you look at zip coding, you look at, you know, race, ethnicity, geography, age, you want to make sure again, that large groups of policy holders aren't being treated unfairly based upon certain certain rating factors, Amy: Right. Because insurance is all about discrimination, right? In the purest sense of the word, right? Higher risk individuals, companies should pay higher premiums because they're more likely to have a claim or to cause a claim. But then, you know, again, there's this balancing act, because in the United States we know that, you know, you can pretty much use zip code as a proxy for race. So, you know, when an insurer says, "Where's the zip code where your car is parked at night," right? You have to make sure that that's really relevant to the property risk of the car and not "We're charging black customers more."Sha'Ron: Absolutely. Absolutely, and similar conversations take place around data and insurance companies' use of, you know, what we call big data and how they capture data and use data for policy holders. So again, all of this is just really to me, very fascinating and very impactful. So again, as you look at the broadness of the industry, the role of a regulator is very important, and it's sometimes often missed when we talk about insurance professionals. Amy: Absolutely. And so that leads me to my next question, which is how did you get into this role? Because I'm guessing this wasn't something that you thought about, you know, when you were in high school or college and said, "Oh, someday I'm going to regulate insurance in Florida," which might be the most complicated job in the world by the way, because Florida has the most regulations of any state.Sha'Ron: Absolutely, and the most risk.Amy: How did you find yourself in that role?Sha'Ron: It was an interesting path, and I think, like most of my fellow insurance professionals that I have relationships with and I've talked with, it wasn't a direct path. It wasn't something that I dreamed about. So I am a lawyer by trade and training, and so I was practicing law with a firm and my practice was primarily--it started as primarily a real estate transactional practice during the height of the real estate market. So I was doing real estate closings and litigation, and my practice shifted away from real estate transactional practice to more of a bankruptcy practice. Because a lot of developers, contractors, banks were--people, you know, just in general were being hit hard when the bubble burst. So my practice in law shifted to bankruptcy, and an opportunity became available in state government to become a part of the division I mentioned, the division of rehab and liquidation, which really is akin to bankruptcy. Essentially it is placing an insurance company into quote-unquote bankruptcy, and because of how companies are regulated--they're regulated at the state level versus the federal level, and so the state oversees that, the takedown, and the unwinding of an insurance company. So my bankruptcy background and my legal background I think was very important in me landing this new role. And also, you know, frankly it was good for me in terms of work-life balance because at that time I had a new child. My daughter's 12 now. It was a good fit to move from the pressure cooker environment of being in litigation to what I consider a more balanced environment for my family.Amy: I think that's such a great story. And you know, like you said, so many people end up in the insurance industry just by happenstance. What surprised you about the industry or about the role that you were in that you did not expect coming into it? Sha'Ron: I really didn't expect to fall in love with insurance like I have. Amy: I understand. [laughs]Sha'Ron: You know, it's kinda like, I just didn't know enough about it and what I knew about it just didn't seem or sound as we say it, you know, it didn't sound sexy. It didn't sound like something that I would want to be involved in for ever. So I was really surprised by that, and once I got involved--and one of the reasons why I didn't think I would enjoy it as much is I really didn't understand the fact that insurance as an industry is a people-oriented industry. It touches people. And so one of the things outside of, you know, my practice of law is that I'm really passionate about being impactful, really passionate about people, and so I always thought that I can only impact people in the social kind of policy context. So education, criminal justice, you know, I had no idea that this industry was out here that is regulated business, but also impactful towards people. So that's surprised me. And once I really realized and found my niche it's been, you know, me in the industry ever since and I'm really committed to making it the best possible industry it can be, not just for policyholders but for insurance professionals as well.Amy: And you raise such an awesome point, because so many people have this call, right? They want to follow their heart and do something good for their communities, good for the world, and they think in their minds--and I know I felt like this too--that to do something good for the world you have to live on, you know, a very paltry salary. You have to have very little means, right? You know, I know so many people that go into social work because that's where their heart is, and there's nothing at all wrong with that, but by the time you've got a master's degree and now you're making just above minimum wage, right, and you're paying off student loan debt, like, that's a big financial hit. I think it's so important for people to realize you can do a lot of good in the insurance industry but also have a middle class income that's sustainable for your entire career.Sha'Ron: Absolutely. And I'll give you an example, and it really kind of I think illustrates--as you mentioned earlier, the role that Florida plays in insurance, Florida is a high-risk state because of our prevalence for catastrophic hurricanes. And so a couple of years ago in my role as insurance consumer advocate, I had the opportunity unfortunately to be involved in the post-hurricane climate that we were in as a state. And so one day I got a call from a woman who said that her parents who were in their 90s were in their home when one of the hurricanes came through and a tree fell on their house. The great thing was they were not harmed, but the insurance company did not want to total loss the home, although the house had actually moved. And you know, this can get real technical and geeky, but the point is that, you know, I was able to weigh in in my role as insurance consumer advocate and assist them and kind of mediate between them and then the insurance company, educate the policy holder on, you know, things in their policy, but at the same time weigh in with the carrier that, you know, these folks are in their 90s. These are factors that aren't in the policy. They're in their 90s, and, you know, they're good people and it will be a great thing to do. And so I was able to help. And so that's an example of, because of my knowledge of insurance, my knowledge of insurance policies, my relationships in the industry, how something--what I thought was technical and boring term turned into an opportunity to help and to serve. And I think that's really important.Amy: Absolutely. So I'm guessing--correct me if I'm wrong--that there's not a critical mass of Black insurance regulators in the state of Florida.Sha'Ron: No, there's not a critical mass of Black insurance regulators in Florida or in the country. [laughs]Amy: Okay, so my assumption is correct. [laughs] So with that being said, where do you go for community? How do you handle or balance or counteract the feeling of being the only in your work?Sha'Ron: That's a great question, and so for me I found that community within NAAIA, the National African-American Insurance Association, and my entry point into the organization started when I became an insurance consumer advocate for the state of Florida. I knew that a part of my role was to outreach, so I immediately wanted to connect with folks that looked like me that had an understanding of insurance to kind of help me get my message out to the rest of the state, and so I did a Google search and I looked for African-American insurance professionals Florida, and it took me to the NAAIA website. Went there, scrolled through, and found that NAAIA did not have a chapter in Florida, which was somewhat surprising because of the role that Florida plays in the insurance landscape across the country. To make a long story short, I started emailing people, anyone who had, like, an email address on the website to find out if this was some oversight or if there was anything I could do, and about 2 years later we chartered a chapter in Florida, a state-wide chapter, and so we created the community. So the greater community was there. I went to the national conference, got connected with some great people across the country that are equally committed to the industry and diversity and inclusion, and we started kind of our road show in the state of Florida, and we now have a chapter with over 50 members. So that's where I go, and sometimes you have to create a community where one doesn't exist.Amy: Excellent point. I think that once you've created that space, right, once you've blazed that trail, it becomes so much easier for other people to walk that path and find you. So what are the membership requirements for joining NAAIA at a chapter and national level so that people understand?Sha'Ron: The requirements are pretty broad. One, the hope is that you would be involved in the insurance industry, you would be an insurance professional, but that's not a hard and fast requirement. We have student members who aspire to be in the insurance industry. You could also be just an associate of the industry. So if you have an interest in insurance, the national organization chapters are really open. It's also a misnomer by the name that you have to be African-American. We have members that are all races and support the mission of the organization, which is to diversify the insurance industry. So if you have an interest in insurance and you have a commitment to diversity and inclusion, then NAAIA membership is open, and we welcome you with open arms.Amy: You know what's so funny? I interviewed yesterday, Omari Aarons, who is the inaugural president of the Boston chapter, and he and I worked together at Liberty Mutual for a while, and as I'm talking to him I'm wondering to myself, "Why am I not a member of NAAIA?" That makes so much sense. So for 24 hours I've been marinating on this, like, "Why am I not?" And so that's why my next step after this call is to go apply to be a member of NAAIA because of course I am an insurance professional who is committed to this work, and I'm embarrassed that it's taken me this long to figure out, you know, after interviewing six people who are on national leadership roles with NAAIA, that it didn't occur to me to go and sign up. Sha'Ron: Well, we would love to have you.Amy: Now you're stuck with me, Sha'Ron. [laughs] So what would you tell somebody--like, if somebody's thinking about "Ooh, this sounds interesting. I like super complicated work, and I want to help people, and I've got a huge brain, and I can process all of this information," what would you tell them about how to get started?Sha'Ron: It depends on where they are in the process. I would definitely say if you're an existing college student and you're not in a major that you think will guide you into insurance that you're probably wrong, in that you can enter into the insurance industry from any major, really any major. So if you're on the business side or communications with marketing and PR, if you're in math and you want to be an actuary, or if you're just liberal arts and you're not sure, the skills that are needed in insurance are wide. So your ability to communicate, written and verbally, is important. Your ability to build relationships. So it just really doesn't matter, and so I think that just start seeking out mentors and opportunities to engage with insurance professionals. You would be surprised at the doors that will open for you.Amy: I have found the industry to be so welcoming of people at the personal level, right? If you reach out to somebody and say, "Hey, I want to learn about your job," people are more than happy to share, but also the industry as a whole--there is such a need for talent, because the stereotypical insurance persona of "old white dude" is not too far off in terms of where the concentration of people is, and so we're looking at an industry that half of the workforce is poised to retire and, you know, there's just a loto f shoes to fill, and without broadening that search into different communities, different schools, different talent profiles, you know, different demographics, different educational backgrounds, you name it, it's an industry that, I fear, will struggle to remain relevant and solvent, and we know from talking to you and talking to others that if the insurance industry isn't there, you know, it's gonna be harder to buy homes, to buy cars, to start businesses. I mean, we really need to keep this industry going for the good of our economy and for the good of society, so thank you so much for the outreach that you're doing. I know that NAAIA is doing a lot of work to reach out to HBCUs and students there. I know you're doing a lot of work in your community to engage and retain the talent that we've already got in the industry, and so Sha'Ron James, thank you so much for your time today, for enlightening our listeners and for sharing your journey. I really appreciate it.Sha'Ron: Well, thank you for the invitation. I appreciate you.Amy: Absolutely.

On the seventy-ninth installment of Tristan's Tips, our amazing host Tristan Layfield brings us another career tip, this time talking about when to take jobs off your resume. Remember, there's no one right way to write a resume, but the purpose of one is to show the employer how you can help them solve their problem. Drop your attachment to certain parts of experience if they don't fit with where you're trying to go and keep them if they do and simply focus on how you can make yourself relevant!Connect with Tristan on LinkedIn, IG, FB, and Twitter. Links in order.http://bit.ly/2G7d6HKhttp://bit.ly/2XDcp3zhttp://bit.ly/2JEbg1Rhttp://bit.ly/2JCmKTzFind out how the CDC suggests you wash your hands by clicking here or below.https://bit.ly/2Ug4l5KHelp food banks respond to COVID-19. Learn more at FeedingAmerica.org.https://bit.ly/2WD73UkCheck out our website.https://bit.ly/living-corporateTRANSCRIPTTristan: What's going on, Living Corporate? It's Tristan back again to bring you another career tip. This week let's talk about when to take jobs off your resume.Many of us have heard the rule that after 10 - 15 years, you should take experiences off of your resume. I used to give this advice too, but now I don't think the experience you should include on your resume is as cut and dry as that rule tries to make it out to be. In conversations with my clients, I focus less on the time limit and more on relevancy. When we are writing our resumes, we want to focus on providing the most relevant experience and skills in the shortest amount of time.So during my intake calls when we get to those experiences that are 10 - 15 years back, I always ask, "Does this role contain a relevant skillset not already represented by a more recent job?" If the answer is no, then we discuss either completely removing it from the resume or putting it an additional experience section with only the job title, company name, and dates if we still want to showcase the background or career trajectory. But if the answer is yes, then we have a conversation on what skill sets that role showcases that differ from recent experiences, and we keep ONLY that portion and ditch the rest.Now, some people, resume writers and career coaches included, don't necessarily like this advice. They may believe this begins to create gaps in the resume, and to that, I would say that completely removing anything 10 -15 years back already creates a large gap between college and the first employment experience listed. They'll also say if the skillset is 10 -15 years back that it is probably outdated to which I would say if that's the only place that represents the skillset, then why risk the chance of not getting the job because you omitted it?Remember, there's no one right way to write a resume, but the purpose of your resume is to show the employer how you can help them solve their problem. So drop your attachment to certain parts of experience if they don't fit with where you're trying to go and keep them if they do. Simply focus on how you can make yourself relevant.This tip was brought to you by Tristan of Layfield Resume Consulting. Check us out on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook @LayfieldResume or connect with me, Tristan Layfield, on LinkedIn.

Zach chats with Dr. Lily Jampol on this special Saturday episode themed around allyship and privilege. She and Zach discuss the diversity, equity and inclusion space at length, and Dr. Jampol shares her perspective on both where the industry is going and what the next step is to really take it to the next level. Check the links in the show notes to check out the work of several prominent Black authors and thought leaders!Connect with Dr. Jampol on LinkedIn and Twitter.Dive into the work of Stephanie Jones-Rogers, Ibram Kendi, Rachel Cargle, and Ijeoma Oluo.Find out how the CDC suggests you wash your hands by clicking here.Help food banks respond to COVID-19. Learn more at FeedingAmerica.org.Check out our website.TRANSCRIPTZach: What's up, y'all? It's Zach with Living Corporate, and we're back. Yes, we're back from outer space, having another great conversation with someone who is passionate about amplifying Black and brown voices at work, 'cause that's what we do, right? Like, we exist to highlight and center underrepresented perspectives and experiences and identities at work, and we've been around, shoot, now going on a couple--like, it's almost up to year 2 now, and I'm just really thankful for all the support. So shout-out to all of our listeners. Shout-out to the folks working 9-to-5. Shout-out to the people working 10-to-9s. You know, whatever y'all working, man, shout-out to y'all. And then of course shout-out to our allies, you know? Our Buckys, our White Wolves. So, you know, for those who are not Marvel fans, Bucky was Captain America's sidekick, and then when he had to be rehabilitated because he was brainwashed by Dr. Zemo, Baron Zemo, he then went to Wakanda, and when he went to Wakanda he became "the White Wolf." And, you know, Wakanda's all Africa. You know, it's all a bunch of African people, 'cause it's in Africa so it's all Black people. But he was the White Wolf. Like, he was trusted. You know, he was a true ally of the people. So all of that to say we also engage allies on Living Corporate, right? So this is not, like, exclusive, right? Like, if you are less melanated, then as long as you're down for the Wakandans, hey, we're down for y'all, right? So with that being said, we have a really dope guest - Dr. Lily Jampol. Dr. Lily Jampol helps organizations solve difficult challenges and ensure that their workplaces are happy, productive, and equitable. She primarily works with the diversity, equity and inclusion firm ReadySet based in Oakland, California, and a people scientist and strategist. Dr. Jampol is also a frequent speaker and writes on diversity and inclusion from a behavioral science data perspective. She believes that one of the keys to moving forward is understanding how people think, behave, and relate. Lily, Dr. Jampol, Dr. L, Dr. J, what's up? How are you doing?Dr. Jampol: I'm doing pretty great. I'm almost always doing great. I'm feeling super fulfilled by my work right now, and I'm generally speaking a pretty positive person, so it's all good. I feel like it's a rare thing when the anger and disappointment that you feel about the world and society can be channeled into your actual day job, so I'm constantly grateful for that and all of the other wonderful things in my life.Zach: Man, you know, and you've been a few different places, right? So I know that you're at ReadySet today, but you've had a journey, right? Like, can we talk about your background and how you got into this world of diversity and inclusion?Dr. Jampol: Yeah, definitely. Well, so I've always been a pretty curious person about other people and society in general. I've also taken some non-traditional routes in my career trying to follow that curiosity, and in terms of background I actually grew up in an eco hotel in Costa Rica, and that was a really interesting experience for me. It was the first time that I really saw inequality, and yet also I had to confront how my white privilege played out there even while I felt like an outsider myself. So growing up in a different country and also a hotel made me super curious about just how people relate to each other, how differences play out in society. I also came from a pretty social justice family since they're all eco warriors, so I knew I wanted to do something social justice related. I started off in political science, but I ended up getting my Ph.D in social psychology where I was examining human behavior, specifically gender bias in organizations. So for a while I thought I was gonna be in academia, and I spent 3 years as a professor in London at a business school, but while I really enjoyed my research, I really was also feeling like I could make a bigger impact working to implement that research in organizations, and this all came to a head when I was going through the middle of a pretty nasty divorce and I was like, "Screw everything," so I quit my 10-year [track?] career and joined a tech startup here in Silicon Valley, and after a few months there I realized I wasn't really working as much on issues that felt really socially important, so I transitioned to working with ReadySet, my amazing team, doing diversity, equity and inclusion work, and I've done serious amounts of learning since then. So I came into this work thinking that I was an expert in my field, and I didn't realize how much of a novice I was when it came to actual equity issues. First of all, I barely knew or used the term "intersectional feminism" before starting this work in the field. So part of what I love about my job now is how much I've been able to grow as a person and also help others who are just beginning their journey to be able to do so too, and I really do have my colleagues and my network to thank for that.Zach: That's incredible. And, you know, you talk about your privilege and you talk about, like, you coming to learn things and experience things on your own and develop certain levels of fluency and awareness. I couldn't help but notice myself that you're white, you know what I'm saying? Like, it leapt out to me. [laughs] I'm curious to know about how your whiteness intersects with the work that you do within behavioral and data science and, like, you know, when I say how it intersects with the work you do, like, how does it impact how you show up, and what observations do you have in, like, being in this space?Dr. Jampol: Yes. Right, I am very white, or unmelanated as you put before. I'm literally half-Viking, half-Ashkenazi Jew. Zach: That's incredible actually. Shout-out to both the Ashkenazi Jews and the Vikings. That's--wow.Dr. Jampol: My mom is basically, like, 100% Swedish, Norwegian, so yeah, definitely have some Viking blood in the background. My whiteness really does impact my work in a pretty big way. So when I started my Ph.D I was actually focusing on behavioral economics, and the reason that I'm telling you this background is because I want to explain how my behavior and my work has changed since then. So when I was doing behavioral economics, in that field it's mostly dominated by white men, still is, and when I was doing that work I always felt like I had to prove myself to be taken seriously, and when I started transitioning into looking at gender biases, I was told to stop doing that work by many of my advisers and colleagues because I was told no one was gonna take me seriously as a scientist. Now, of course that made me want to do the work more, but now that I'm a white person and I have a data and quantitative background, I realize how privileged that identity is. So I can come into a room with a bunch of tech executives and lay my Ph.D out on the table, proverbially speaking, talk data with them, and they give me the validation and respect that many of my colleagues who have been doing this work much longer than me and who are not white just don't get, and it actually impacts the way that I play a role on my team, and for good reason. So for example, we had a company who we were working with who were just not taking the CEO of my company seriously, who is a Black woman, and she has a JD from Harvard. She worked as an international human rights lawyer. She's the CEO of her own successful company, has been doing this work for, you know, 5 times as long as I have. You put me in the room, and I had only been working in this space for a few months, and their attitudes just totally changed. They went from, you know, defensive and aggressive to, "Oh, yeah. Of course. You know, this sounds great. What do we need to do to get there?" Zach: Can I pause right there though? 'Cause, like, I'm so--I'm so triggered. [laughs]Dr. Jampol: Okay. I'm sorry about triggering you. [laughs]Zach: No, no, it's not your fault. [laughs] So the reason why I'm pausing is because I think--and we haven't done these studies because of white fragility and the fact that I think academia is still, like, very much so, like, a white space, but I wish--and maybe we have and I just haven't seen it, but I'd love to see a behavioral study done on how the majority tends to treat Black and brown professionals with a certain level of hostility and defensiveness that they don't treat white counterparts, right? Like, your earlier point about the CEOs, like, why--and I've been in situations where I've been on the receiving end or I've observed. Like, "Why are you talking to me like I'm your enemy or like I'm trying to get you?" Like, "Why are we not able to have, like, an actual dialogue?" Like, "Why does everything feel really transactional and, like, a zero-sum game in this conversation," you know what I mean?Dr. Jampol: Mm-hmm. Yeah, no, I totally do, and I think, you know, you're totally reading my mind about wanting to do some behavioral studies on this stuff. I think about this all the time too, and I think you're absolutely right. There is quite a bit of evidence showing that people from underrepresented backgrounds in different domains, including women, have to prove it again and again and again and give more and more legitimacy in order to be taken seriously, but I do think that the aggression and hostility is an interesting component of this, and I have a lot of theories about why, and I think--and I don't want to go too down the rabbit hole, but you got me excited about this topic, so just for a second... so [a study] I've been really playing around with in my head is the entitlement to the good will and patience of people of color towards white people to learn and to get to where they need to be, and I'm talking about not just, you know, average people, but well-meaning, progressive, liberal people who still believe that it is your work, people of color's work, to be able to get them to where they need to be. And it is my job, and it is our jobs as, you know, a company, but I would love to see research showing that there's an entitled expectation to how we're supposed to be doing this work for people and also putting up with them when they don't want to do it and don't want to, you know, put their 50% of the work in. So there's lots of other studies I want to go over, but that's just one I've been playing around with as well, that entitlement aspect.Zach: Yes. So I'm not trying to cut you off, 'cause you're telling a story, so I'm not trying to--ironically--mansplain and jump all over your stuff, so please continue with the story. It's just that you said that and I was like, "Oh," and I wanted to just ask the question. So please continue. So you come into this space. You're relatively new. The CEO, the person who actually built the company and has the education from a fairly elite, recognized institution is not as well-received, but you come in and the whole vibe changes.Dr. Jampol: Yes. The whole vibe changes. Not only that, but we just have more--you know, an easier time getting [?] and actually comvincing people, but I think I also want to talk about one interesting other thing that I observed, and this is something that I've observed in a couple of different companies and situations in that a lot of the people who do this, I think that we have this idea of what that person looks like, the CEO of a company or who sits on the board of a company. White women are very much involved in the same process, and in fact I see this pattern from white women almost more than I see it from white men, and I think there's something interesting in that.Zach: Wait a minute. [record scratch sfx] Say that again.Dr. Jampol: I think that often we see white women putting up the most resistance to doing diversity, equity and inclusion work within companies, especially if they've already achieved a position of power. And, you know, there's a litany of reasons why that happens. A lot of them are psychological. A lot of them are just where women sit in the power hierarchy of society. So they sit in the middle, not at the highest point--which is where white men sit--and not at the lowest point, which is where a lot of people of color sit in terms of how much power and influence you have. So they have a lot to lose, and a lot of the ways that women have managed to achieve a semblance of power is by either mimicking white men or upholding the very systems of oppression that have, well, essentially benefitted them for a long time, but also benefitted white men. So there's a lot to lose by getting rid of that power, but there's also a kind of "pull yourselves up by your bootstraps" attitude of "Well, I got here, so why does anyone else need help to do so?" But I do think that there's something greater in terms of how white women have benefitted from systems of oppression compared to women of color and men of color.Zach: And I wonder, like--and so, you know, I am not a Ph.D, so when I say things like, "You know, I haven't seen this," I'm not trying to say that it doesn't exist. What research or what, like, written work would you recommend, if any, that explores, like, the historicity of white women and their relation to systems of power in America?Dr. Jampol: Yeah. That's a great question, and I also want to, before I continue, just say that I don't have, you know, quantitative research to back that observation up. It's an observation I made. However, this idea that white women uphold systems of oppression can be seen in lots of other data that we have. For example, who is the group that voted Donald Trump into power? We have lots of other data to show that white women are upholding systems of oppression, but I think, you know, we can go back and look at historical data about how this happened. Stephanie Jones Rogers is an amazing academic who wrote about how white women were complicit in slavery, essentially, in the American South, and it really starts there. You know, it starts in other areas of colonialism, but there's quite a few academics who are writing about this, and there's also thought leaders who are writing about this as well. Rachel Cargle. Robin DiAngelo. I mean, she's a white author, but she's written extensively on white fragility. Ibram Kendi, Ijeoma Oluo. Those are all folks that I think are really interesting to read and have [?] a lot more on this than I have.Zach: And again, like, just shout-out to you for, like, highlighting Black authors and other thought leaders in your quick list that you just, like, sprouted off like it was nothing. That's super dope. So let's talk about that then, right? We've talked a little bit about how we've seen, like, power abused or taken advantage of, but I'd like to talk a little bit more about what, like, effective allyship looks like, right? And we've had a few of these types of calls, like, these conversations on Living Corporate. I don't think that, like, they ever get old. I think it's really important that we have advocates and aspirational allies on this platform, because there are a variety of people that listen to Living Corporate. A lot of diversity and inclusion professionals listen to Living Corporate, and I can say that I just--I don't know if I've even seen a lot of programming that is really explicit on what it means to build inclusive behaviors as a leader. I don't know if I've seen training that's really, really intentional in building that fluency or building that capability or that muscle, whatever word you want to use, and so I'm really curious from your perspective, what do you think it looks like, specific to white women, what does effective allyship look like in the workplace? Dr. Jampol: Yeah, that's such a great question, and I think we're talking about allyship more and more, and it's something that we talk a lot about with the organizations we work with. I think that first of all--let's talk about intentions for a minute. I think I feel sometimes when I talk about white women that there is this assumption that there is an intention to be racist, for example. I don't think that that's necessarily true. I think there's a strong desire to be good people, and I think that, you know, women, having been marginalized themselves, feel like they have been victims of that marginalization as well. The problem is that strong desire to be a good person, when they are told that their actions are contributing to racism or they are complicit in a system of white supremacy, it makes us feel threatened that our own progressiveness, our own willingness to help others, our idealism of ourselves as good people is super threatened, and that makes us shut down, and I think that's because we've been--and I'm not the first person to say this obviously as lots of people have written on it, it's what we teach--we have not had to grow up and experience the discomfort of having to talk about race and racism and systems of oppression. And so for a lot of people this is the first time they're even hearing about it. So the first thing is just being comfortable with that discomfort of understanding that it's not about you, it's about systems of oppression that you still might have behaviors and even attitudes that are formed through your experience with the world, with culture, with television, with radio. The way that we learn how to stereotype is just ingrained in our society, and so we have to start slowing down and be able to recognize how we actually are contributing to that. We have to also be careful in terms of allyship with how we show up. So I'm always trying to be conscientious about not taking up too much space and making sure that I'm amplifying non-white voices and work and also listening more than I talk. I think this has been a big change for me over the last couple years. This is also part of the framework that we teach in our Ally Skills workshop, which I co-facilitate with my colleagues Willie Jackson and Kim Tran at ReadySet, and it's really about moving from passive allyship to active allyship, what we call being an accomplice. So it means centering impacted communities rather than yourself, owning your impact when you hurt somebody's feelings over your intentions to not have hurt their feelings, listening and learning and expressing humility and amplifying other people's voices, and it's also about how we demonstrate growth and are humble when we mess up, and we will mess up. So I myself am trying to be a better accomplice in this work. I think in terms of D&I practitioners there's a huge place for white women who are working in this space, and I know a lot of white women are trying to figure out what exactly their role is. I think one of our roles is to be able to do some of the emotional work and the burden of carrying some of these conversations and some of this work forward so that it's not only people of color who are doing it. So there's also--you know, my white privilege as a white person, I can get angry and I can push back in a way that doesn't have the same repercussions for my Black colleagues. I can lend my voice or carry conversations that are triggering or exhausting for people of color to do, for example, convincing white women that they play a part in white supremacy or that feminism has to be intersectional for it to work. So I think there's very specific roles that we can play that can help us be better allies, both personally and to other folks in the DEI space. Zach: And, you know, it's just such an interesting dynamic too when you talk about, like--so, like, the things you're talking about around feeling threatened or feeling attacked or feeling just various levels of insecurity, like, it's really interesting as it intersects with having white women managers, right? [both laugh] Or then, like, being even more complex is having a white woman manager who is, like, supposed to be the czar of diversity and inclusion, and you're working for this person and it's like, "Okay. I recognize that you've been invited to these very, like, exclusive white spaces to sit on a panel and, you know, to word diarrhea on diversity and inclusion and, like, the latest thing that you read in Cosmopolitan, but I also have insights and life experience, and those life experiences mean things, and I know things by merit of my life that you may not understand or you just frankly don't even think about." And it's just interesting to me when I think about, like, this dynamic of, like, the corporatized diversity and inclusion space and how you have often times white women in these positions of leadership in these groups, and they themselves are either--I mean, everybody has blind spots, so it's not, like, even this huge knock. It's not, like, this huge indictment. It's just the reality of you're trying to lead a space that it's critical for you to be empathetic, coachable and humble in, and if you think that you have nothing to learn or you think that everyone around you, especially people of color, Black and brown folks, are just there to do your bidding, like, that is just cruelly ironic, you know what I mean? But I see that though. I see that often, like, in these corporate spaces, where, you know, Whoever is, like, the leader of D&I, and it's like, "Why are you here?" And I know there's tension, right? Like, I've had conversations with Jennifer Brown, and she's talked about, like--I'm not gonna say she's on one side and I'm on the other, but my impression of our conversation was, like, "I feel like we're--" We being white D&I professionals--"are constantly questioned and have to really show and prove that we should be here," and I'm kind of like, "Well, yeah. You should though." I mean, I'm not trying to be, like, a jerk. It's just like, "You should. You should show and prove that you should be here, because we don't have a historical track record of--" Like, I don't know of a model, like, a person, a white diversity and inclusion, one diversity and inclusion that is like, "Wow, this is the model." And I've asked other--you know what I mean? I know I'm kind of ranting, but I'm asking--Dr. Jampol: No, no. I hear you, I do, and I actually really agree with you. It's something that I've thought a lot about, even as I'm thinking about my own career trajectory, right? Because I want to help do this work, but I don't want to occupy a position of power first of all on my own as a white person, like, I don't think I should be the head of diversity and inclusion at a company, at least not right now in this societal context, because I think context really matters too, and I think we often don't think about that. We think in terms of meritocracy, you know, about, like, "Who has worked hard and who deserves to be here and who doesn't?" But we're talking about representation. We're talking about justice. We're talking about repairing harms that have been done over hundreds of years in our society, and right now diversity and inclusion is often one of the places where people of color can have influence and power within a company. And it's important too because--well, I'm not explaining it to you, because I'm hearing all of your points and I'm just saying that I agree with you, because I think you have to be in a position of taking a step back and learning, and I think you can find your niche as a white person in this area--I mean, mine is behavioral science data right now. I'm also still trying to figure that out, but I'm also really focused on learning, 'cause if we're not doing that personal learning, we're just repeating those same things that have happened throughout history, and we're repeating those hierarchies and we're maintaining that status quo. So yes, short, TL;DR, you're right. [both laugh]Zach: It's interesting too. I want to talk about your work, right? I think something we first talked about, like, when we first did an introductory call is I'm curious about what does it look like because--so, like, I've met people who are in D&I and, like, they purport themselves to be, like, data strategists, right? But they don't actually have any actual context--and I'm kind of jumping ahead, because this is a part of a question I'm gonna ask you in a little bit, but they don't really have, like, the empathy or the, like, fluency and, like, understanding of American history that would then inform how they do their work. So in my mind, and this is based off just my very limited experience, right, is it feels to melike you're almost sitting in two camps. Like, you're sitting in, like, this hard, quantitative, scientific, measured space, but then you're also--because of your own background you still do have a passion around, like, connecting inclusion and diversity and equity with justice and the historical foundations of the work itself, as well as the work and writings of Black and brown women and activists and people who came before you, right? So, like, do you feel a duality there? Do you feel as if, like, you're uniquely placed, or do you feel as if your profile is common within, like, this data science and behavioral space that you work in?Dr. Jampol: Yeah, that's a great question. I think about this a lot. I don't think that it's common. I think if it was common we'd see a lot more data scientists doing diversity, equity and inclusion work, and I mean--there's other reasons for that. I mean, I could be making a $300,000 salary if I wanted to do data science in a tech company. We don't do this work for the money. But I do think that I've had different relationships with data and how I approach this work, and I think I do want to start this by saying that it's really because of my team at ReadySet that I have become this hybrid that I feel comfortable [?] and that I am able to do both the quantitative aspects of my job and also the very human aspects of my job. I think when I came into this field I had been taught my entire career that quantitative evidence-based scientifically published data is the only type of data of value. So evidence-based work, evidence-based in general is such a buzzword now. I think everybody hears it, and I think people believe "evidence-based" means that it has to be couched in [?] methods and scientific papers and outcomes calculated in ROI, and I definitely did when I started with this work. So I'll just tell you a quick story. I think in my first week of working with ReadySet I was analyzing data for a company, and I was doing it the way that I had always been taught to, which is trying to find significant statistical difference between groups in a sample, and in order to do that, when you have fewer than 5 people in a sample you usually just take [?] out because it's not gonna be statistically valid, and I remember having this conversation. I think in the room was [?], one of my colleagues, and Kim Tran, and we started this conversation, which was started by them, which was, "Why are we leaving out a small sample?" Now, this sample had been a sample of transgender people within a company, and in my mind I was just like, "Well, we'll just leave them out 'cause they're not a big enough group," and they were--you know, that was how I had been taught, and they were like, "Wait, but the whole point of doing this work is to represent the voices and the opinions and the feelings of underrepresented, small numbers of people within a company," and I was like, "God, that makes total sense," and it's ridiculous that I had even thought in my mind that that was an appropriate thing to do, you know, in terms of getting these major insights. So that's just a story about, you know, how I first started thinking about this, so I really want to give credit to my teammates for helping me get there. I still think that evidence-based research is important, but so much of that research is based on white, Euro-centric idea samples and methods. Quant data can be super useful, let's say if you want to track representation in your company or show that a bias exists, but it should not be necessary for doing this work. It's just that our concept of data, what data is and what kind of data is valid and important is biased, and I've been writing about this a lot recently. I'm trying to publish it soon, but I've just been getting--I feel like this idea is so complex and interesting, but I have noticed that there has been a trend with the people that we work with, and that is people's responses to DEI work in particular, they use data--and data with a big D, I call it--to stall and delegitimize or otherwise reject diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. Zach: Yo! Yo, wait a second! Golly, Dr. Jampol on here dropping crazy, crazy, crazy Flex bombs. [Flex bomb sfx] Oh, my gosh. And then also--Dr. Jampol: Yeah, and please feel free to, like, stop me whenever. I tend to just go on [?].Zach: Yo! Yeah, I'm trying not to cut you off. I'm trying not to be rude. And also air horns for your team, 'cause I know you shouted them out. [air horns sfx] Okay, so first of all, yo, man, tell me why you're talking about--you said people use big Data, big capital D data, to discount D&I initiatives and--like, say that again.Dr. Jampol: Yeah. So I think that people are using data to basically put off doing the hard work, to delegitimize the work itself or just reject, like, having to do any of that work itself, and I'll explain a little bit why I think this is happening. So I think it's happening in part because the way that people in power use data in relation to diversity, equity and inclusion work is similar to other ways that we inadvertently uphold systems of oppression. It's essentially gatekeeping, and it benefits white people, and I think one of the ways that I've seen this is overly demanding evidence from DEI best practices. So wanting to know, like, what exactly is going to work here in my specific context, but then also refusing to contribute to those best practices by actually being innovative and taking risks in that space so that we can add to the knowledge base. And then another way is through dehumanizing human data by not looking beyond the quote-unquote "hard data," so not wanting to listen to people's stories, not wanting to hear the voices of employees that already exist within their organizations, by not wanting to listen to experts, people like my teammates who have been spending years doing this work, and then finally using data or the need for more evidence to block the efforts to actually go forward on that data. And so often, you know, we'll have a conversation with people that often sounds like, "Okay, here's why we should go forward with this program," and they'll come back and say, "Okay, okay, but do you have any data on whether this is gonna work?" And I'll come back and say, "Look, we don't have a ton of data yet. This is still a pretty new field, and there's lots of different people doing it. It really depends on what your context is. But, like, here's what we know." "Okay, but that's not enough data. Like, we really can't go forward with this until there's something that's not gonna be as risky." So then we'll come back and say, "[We] collected all this data from inside of your organization. Here's this group, this group and this group that are saying, "I'm not happy." Please do these things," and they'll say, "Okay, but how many people actually said it, and can you actually go get us some [?] studies of other companies like mine that have done this so we don't take a risk and don't make people upset?" And then we say, "Which people are you making upset?" And then they look blankly and say, "Wait a second." And we're like, "Yeah, [white?] people." Anyway, I think the reason I put it this way is that I think that data is important, yes, [but?] data is used as a tool to block this work because it is inherently uncomfortable and it involves having to do [?] and it involves having to do some money and some priorities into it, and I think people ultimately just don't think it's that important, and so they're able to use data as this kind of delegitimizing or scapegoating force that they can say, "Well, we don't have enough to do it." That's my thoughts on that in a nutshell.Zach: First of all, again, shout-out to you 'cause, man, that's incredible. You know, I might have to go ahead and drop another Flex bomb... [Flex bomb sfx] 'cause that's incredible. So it's interesting though, because you're talking about how organizations can use quote-unquote "data" to slow down or block efforts to make organizations more inclusive, but I also think, like, there's something to be said about how data itself is reported, aggregated or analyzed, right? So how do we account for, and how in your experience as a data scientist do you account for, the biases that exist within, like, data analytics itself, right? So let's just say you get the data. How do you account for biases on the day that you receive it, and how do you account for any biases that you have, conscious or otherwise, in how you analyze and report that out?Dr. Jampol: Yeah, that's a really great question, and--I mean, there's a lot to be said here, and I think this conversation is happening in other places like AI as well. I think first of all, like, the way that we use--so let's go back to the evidence-based question for a minute. So when people talk about evidence, they're often talking about academic research that has been done. As an academic researcher myself, I know that a lot of this research is really not legitimate for talking about any bit of this work with any kind of intersectional lens, because most of this work has been done using a super white sample at an Ivy League institution in a lab where all of the variables have been held constant except for the one that you're researching, and that unfortunately has translated in a lot of cases to best practices where people say, "Oh, well, we have to change this one thing in our organization because research has shown when you change this one thing, this happens." Of course that doesn't really incorporate a lot of people's experiences, and I want to say also that I am fully guilty of doing this in my past research. So as a gender bias researcher, I often talked about women and men as this very, like, homogeneous group, and really when I'm talking about women and men I'm talking about white women and men, because that's my sample and that's the lens through which I was doing the work. And, like, Black women's experiences are gonna be super different and my affects might totally change. You know, one of my affects that I found is that women--and I should say white women because that was the majority of my sample--are given less accurate performance feedback than man. So even though they're judged to be doing poorly, their managers will tell them that they're doing okay. By the way, this work was done in a lab with a primarily sample of white people who were Ivy League educated and through samples in, you know, Mechanical Turk online. So just thinking about that through an intersectional lens, do I know that that is going to happen in the same way for women of color when we're thinking about different types of women in the workplace? No, and yet we still use these words, you know, "This is a gender bias effect," you know, without really knowing what some of the different groups might experience. So I do think there's that bias. I also think in terms of the data that we're analyzing. This is another really important thing. When we get survey data, often companies just want to rely on that survey data to make decisions, but the problem is there are certain groups--especially the ones that feel less safe in organizations--that do not answer the survey, and so you're leaving out groups of people who are the most important to hear from if you're just looking at one type of information. Instead it's better to go and do a qualitative assessment on top of the data and make sure you're getting down to the bottom of some of the trends that you see, but also you're including voices that wouldn't necessarily participate in a written way. So there's lots of different ways that bias can creep in, and the way that we analyze it and the way that we do that research is really important.Zach: I'm really curious about your opinions on this, and I've shared this on another interview but I want to bring it up here. So your work heavily focuses on partnering with organizations to help them set up their D&I strategies, and when I talked to other diversity, equity and inclusion professionals, a lot of time this work is delivered in the context of office hours or workshops or, you know, trainings. I'm curious though, like, have you helped groups transition from seeing diversity, equity and inclusion as, like, these isolated, singular events to being more of, like, an iterative journey that they're on to develop and grow and, like, partner with them? Like, have you seen that or have you helped any organizations kind of pivot in that way?Dr. Jampol: Yeah. So I think it's hard. I think it's really hard. Most of the work we get is for "check the box" type work. Initially a lot of organizations want to come in and hire us to do a workshop or an assessment and then go from there, which is totally fine. Often the people who are initiating those programs are internal HR and DEI practitioners who have a very limited budget that they're working with and need something to be able to convince stakeholders that this is worthwhile and that there's a desire for it or they just want to get it flowing. So we love doing that kind of work because it allows us to be able to impart important knowledge. For example, we focus a lot on systems bias, not just interpersonal or unconscious bias. We focus on biases that are structural and how those relate to historical systems of oppression. So we do get our education in there, but in order to do this work successfully it has to be integrated with other business objectives and as an outcome itself. So we know, you know, you can make the business case for it. It's tied to ROI. It's tied to innovation. I mean, it's a really important part of culture. I've found that in order to convince stakeholders I often offer the risk side of this as well. It's really risky to not do this work for many reasons. I mean, talent attraction for one, but there's also your culture can fall apart, and that can actually lose tons of money. But ultimately our aim is to get people to see why it's more than a business case, and I think we've had this success with a couple of companies. I'm thinking of one in particular where--and actually this is one that I've mentioned before in some of my stories, where we came in and did a series of conversations with the executive team trying to convince them that, you know, diversity, equity and inclusion is a good way to go, and it took a long time. It took 6 months of really educating people, bringing them in terms of conversation, letting them contribute their thoughts and fears, and really we use, you know, empathy, but also just vulnerability there to understand, like, where the pain point is, and now we've got, you know, a multi-year scope with them, and they have fully understood, and we're working with every single organization and team within their company, and its become a priority, but it did take some time. So I think there's hope to be had, but I think you have to do it really intentionally and really methodically in order to get people there unless you have someone who's on board already.Zach: That really leads me to my next question. What do you think the next step is for diversity, equity and inclusion, like, as an industry, as a corporate for-profit space? And I ask because I see--it's weird, and again, like, I'm not a sociologist, I'm not a psychiatrist, I'm not a behavioral scientist. I'm just a change manager who is also passionate about diversity and inclusion who's doing his own thing and kind of creating his own path. It's almost like you have this growing activist wing and, like, community organizing wing within this diversity, equity and inclusion space. There's also, like, this growing academic wing that is almost, like, a white moderate, but then I see this other group that's almost pushing against the community organizing activist attitudes and sentiments, almost to the point where--'cause I've seen things like this on LinkedIn, no doubt, where I've seen things that people say, "Just because you're a person of color doesn't mean that you should be in diversity and inclusion," right? There's these narratives of, "You're passionate, but your passion doesn't equal education or credentialing." And so I'm really curious about, like, where do you see this space going next, and what do you think is, like, the next step to really take this work to the next level?Dr. Jampol: Yeah. That's a big question, and I'm just gonna kind of share some thoughts. I don't know that I have a perfect answer for you on this, but I think to your comment around--you know, you see these kind of different camps on social media and practitioners and different approaches and ways of doing this work, and I think actually that that's a really important dynamic to have to move the work forward. I think it's the same thing we see, say, like, in the Democratic Party, where there's a more radical left side and then there's the centrist side and then there's this push and pull constantly of, like, "What do we do and where do we go?" And through doing that we're creating new definitions and understandings. And, you know, I get a ton of education from just reading through Twitter on a daily basis of, like, "Oh, I didn't know that word. I hadn't thought about it in that way before," and trying to see, like, where my values align, but I think that in order to progress we need pressure from the outside. We need radical pressure, and we also need the more compromising inside pressure of "Okay, we're gonna take this slow and do this methodically and bring people along," and I think you need both those forces. I think the outside pressure is the social pressure that really validates some of the inside pressure that we're putting on people. So let's say I'm taking a company along, trying to get them to understand using empathy, and they're doing okay, but then they have a PR crisis because something they posted on their social media site gets called out, and those two forces operating together create a really successful way forward, and I think that's also why there's different roles for different people within this space. I do think we should be pushing boundaries, and I do think we should be pushing people to get there, and I think some of the comments that are happening around this stuff is really just evidence that that's happening, and I think the third part of this is just that we need companies to lend more support to actual innovation within this space. Going back to that data conversation, you know, by demanding best practices and more evidence to prove the things that we already know work and to prove that we're actually legitimate in doing this work, it's stifling innovation. We need organizations and leaders who have the privilege of being in these spaces already to put money and time and effort and spaces towards creating innovation in the DEI space. We need more collaboration between academics, leaders, corporate employees, and we all need to work together to be able to create new pathways forward, but I think we have to get out of that head space of thinking about, "Best practices, best practices, best practices," and start taking a little bit more risk, because I think we're seeing risk the wrong way. We're seeing risk as like, "What if I do this work and it goes wrong?" when we should be seeing risk the way that any other company sees innovation and risk, which is sometimes you have to play around with the parameters in order to do the work the most effective way. But I as a data person would love to see data on this, just so we can keep track of what we're doing and what works and what doesn't. I think I would love to see more data like that, but it means that companies have to release their data on what works and what doesn't, and when diversity and inclusion stops being a shameful thing, you know, when companies stop thinking, "Oh, gosh. It's so horrible that I only have 20% women or 5% Black people in our company. Nobody knows, so I don't want to talk about it." Like, everybody knows. Everybody knows. You're a tech company. Like, it's bad. Talk about it and, like, actually publish it and support new ways of thinking about this stuff. I think we need all three prongs of pressure there to move forward.Zach: Man, Dr. Jampol, I have to just thank you again. Like, this has been a super dope conversation. I want to give you the last word. Is there anything else? Like, any shout-outs? Any parting words before we let you up out of here?Dr. Jampol: Thank you. I feel the same way. This has been such a fun conversation. Thank you for letting me nerd out and be on your podcast. I think your podcast is wonderful. Thank you for doing the work that you do. I also just want to give a shout-out to my team again because they're so amazing and I feel grateful for them every single day and for all the authors who have helped educate me to get here. And Twitter. Honestly, like--not Twitter the company but, like, the people who are actually being brave and voicing their thoughts on Twitter and helping educate us, even if it means that they are taking flack for it. I think it's been such an important part of my own growth. So thanks to everybody.Zach: Oh, man. That's beautiful, and yes, we'll make sure that we list all the authors and we'll have all of that content in the show notes, y'all, so make sure you check it out because, again, believe women, listen to women, believe Black women, believe all women. There's a lot of great work that's being done, you know? For those of y'all who are--you know, it's funny. There's an understated, like, expectation or kind of, like, tension around who really deserves to talk about these things, and those conversations don't really happen until Black and brown people start trying to talk about diversity and inclusion, but that's a whole other conversation. But the point is a lot of the work that comes into really educating yourself, what I've been learning is, is about reading the work that Black and brown women have written about this space, right? And so I just want to encourage, like, if you're listening to this and you're passionate about diversity, equity and inclusion, check out the show notes, use that as a starting point, and just start reading. Like, educate yourself something. Like, don't depend on these super Ivy League white institutions to tell you what diversity is. It is one of multiple data points. I would say start with the Black women and then work your way outward from there. All right. Well, cool, cool, cool. Thank y'all for listening to the Living Corporate podcast. You know we do this. You know we're posting content three times a week. We're all over the place, so if you just Google Living Corporate we're gonna pop up, 'cause we got it like that. Ow. We're also on Instagram @LivingCorporate, on Twitter @LivingCorp_Pod, and again, if you want to check us out, if you just gotta--let's say you old school and you wanna type it in the browser, then it's www.living-corporate.com--please say the dash. We're also livingcorporate.co, livingcorporate.tv, livingcorporate.us, livingcorporate.net, livingcorporate.org--Lily, we have all the livingcorporates except for livingcorporate.com, but we have all the other ones. We're trying to--what's that thing when you... SEO. We're trying to take it over, okay? One domain at a time. So we're out here. Let's see here. Until next time, this again has been Zach, and you've been listening to Dr. Lily Jampol, data scientist, behavioral organizational just beast, general researcher, all over super dope White Wolf ally... what else we got? I don't want to say edge-snatcher because, I mean, you're still white. I'm not trying to get you in trouble, but just super cool Viking Ashkenazi Jew hero. How about that? Is that cool?Dr. Jampol: That's awesome, and I'm someday hopefully gonna fit that all in my LinkedIn profile. [both laugh]Zach: 'Til next time, y'all. We'll catch y'all. Peace. [both still laughing]Dr. Jampol: Bye.