TRUE AUTHENTICITY AND DIVERSITY. CAN THEY CO-EXIST IN BUSINESS? Part 1

Rawpixel.com

In today’s world, it has become increasingly easy for some, and difficult for others, to live out their values in the workplace. As a result, many individuals find themselves unable to fully exhibit their personal and professional values at work. This tension strikes at the heart of the “authentic workplaces” we often speak about and has become a growing concern. It directly undercuts the foundation of Diversity, the letter “D.” (It’s intentional that I’m leaving out the remaining letters. The foundation of this work was born in Diversity, or rather, in the absence thereof.)

I’m writing this article with both bold resolve and a humble heart because I know how sensitive this topic can be. Still, I’ve chosen courage over silence. Let me share one personal experience that captures the complexity of this issue in corporate spaces.

I recall being told by a leader, someone I had a great relationship with, to “be cautious” about putting my beliefs on display around a client I was scheduled to train. The advice? “Be careful with that Jesus stuff.” This leader knew my personal beliefs and was not being malicious. The concern was whether the client would be receptive to open expressions of faith. I was encouraged to avoid discussions centered around my personal beliefs.

I took time to self-reflect on the intent of the feedback, on my personal and professional values, and on what it means to navigate business spaces with both. To be direct, I am not afraid to speak about my faith, Jesus, or Christianity with others, but I’m also aware and respect that others hold different beliefs or none at all. So, what did I do in that situation? I’ll tell you more about that in Part 2.

Now, some of you might resonate deeply with my opening thoughts. You may be wondering: “Why can’t I live out my values at work while others get to express theirs freely?” I agree with that sentiment, so long as those expressions do not cause harm to others. Now, let’s define harm clearly. Disagreement does not automatically equal harm. We can’t use “emotional harm” as a catch-all to silence people simply because they see the world differently. Here are examples for consideration:

• If your religious belief means bringing a doll to work modeled after a colleague and sticking pins in it, yes, that constitutes harm. I think we can all agree that behavior does not belong at work.

  
  

• If a Christian is posting up pictures of crosses all over the office, including in other’s personal workspaces or drops a giant cross on their boss’s desk because they believe he needs a big dose of Jesus, that’s not okay. My friends, that’s not inclusion or ministry. Rather, it’s an imposition and inappropriate workplace behavior that causes harm.

  
  

• If an organization creates rules that force people to “comply”, even when compliance means denying one's faith or personal values, that is problematic. When we require people to think and act the same way or else...this is not creating an inclusive workplace, is the antithesis of diversity, and this too constitutes harm. 

And please don’t claim I’ve harmed you because I mention Jesus in adoration. I’ve worked with plenty of people who invoke His name using expletives and we don’t call that harm. Let’s be fair and balanced about what it means to harm others. Real harm is different from discomfort. In the Spirit of Diversity, I think we can agree to that. 

Now, others of you may be thinking: “Work is work. Personal expressions of faith don’t belong here. In fact, they infringe on others’ rights.” Did I get that right? For many, yes. And I also acknowledge that some who feel this way have nuanced reasons for holding that view.

Everyone is entitled to their perspective, and we won’t always agree. Guess what, that’s okay! Isn’t diversity itself the realization that we’re all different? Isn’t it our responsibility to learn from our differences and utilize those variances to be better together? If we can’t do this, we're no different than a program - we're no different from AI. And, if we're just like AI, it's less expensive to write a program. I think you can figure out the implications of this. 

I invite you to reflect on what I’ve shared in Part 1. I welcome your comments and thoughts. Part 2 will be posted in two days.