Managing Diversity at Spencer Owens & Co. In 2000, following a careful national search, Spencer Owens & Co., a forty-five year old international consulting firm focusing on foreign and domestic economic development, recruited its first female executive director. Agnes Richards, a white woman in her mid-50s, welcomed the opportunity to lead this successful firm widely recognized for its achievements, including those in the area of diversity. She believed Spencer Owens offered a unique working environment uncommon to the industry. Hiring Richards was the culmination of an effort, initiated in the mid-1980s by Spencer Owens' then all-white-male executive team, to increase racial, ethnic, and gender diversity throughout the company, from entry-level positions to executive ranks. The new affirmative action plan read "Spencer Owens will consider people on their merits and for their capacities to do what is expected or required of them." To implement the plan, they set hiring goals, communicating them to all employees and creating accountability. Over the next decade, numerous women and people of color were hired and placed on career paths toward becoming project managers and leaders in the firm. The company's two-hundred-member staff was divided between operations and program services. Operations included general management, community relations and special programs. The company's areas of expertise, or programs, spanned criminal justice, economic justice, youth support, humanitarian assistance, immigration and conflict prevention. Initial Success By 1995 Spencer Owens boasted the most diverse staff in the industry at all levels of the company and was considered a model of successful diversity efforts. About 50% of the firm's 150 managers and professionals were women, and 30% were people of color. Many qualified entry-level employees of color had been promoted into managerial positions over time. A third of the company's 12-person executive team was women and a quarter was people of color; the associate director was an African- American man. Exceedingly competent, the firm's staff was built through aggressive hiring and advancement practices that set high qualification and performance hurdles in addition to affirmative action goals. Spencer Owens' leadership and much of the staff were proud of the company's achievements. As one Latina project manager stated, "A significant number of people of color is a sign of somethinggood about the organization." The firm's commitment to fairness and equality encouraged people to ignore gender or ethnic differences. Typical comments from employees across the board included "I don't see people in color," "Everyone is the same and is treated the same," and "We are all human beings here." A white manager described the firm as having "made tremendous progress in its commitment to build both a just society inside, as well as a just society outside the organization." He continued: I think the organization has committed itself to restructuring its personnel makeup in order to right some of the wrongs caused by racism and sexism in our society. People of color have enriched the organization; they have helped us live up to our ideals of equality and justice. To complement its affirmative action program, Spencer Owens undertook several other initiatives. The firm required that every staff member attend "sensitivity training" sessions. Coupled with follow up discussions, the training was intended to raise people's awareness of individual prejudices and institutional racism, sexism, and homophobia. In addition, top management embraced employees efforts to form networking groups for women employees and for employees of color. The two groups aimed to ensure the development and advancement of women and of non-white staff at Spencer Owens as well as to leverage their perspectives on work produced by the firm. Tensions on the Rise Since assuming her directorial duties, Richards had noted growing friction around race relations. It seemed that employees of color were quick to bring charges of racism against whites in the organization. Also Richards was disturbed by the frequency of complaints brought by the two networking groups. Three years into her tenure at the firm, amid concerns that the firm had not done enough to deal with prejudice in the organization, Richards and her leadership team reinstituted sensitivity training for all staff, but the attendance was poor, especially among racial and ethnic minorities. Recently, a few high-potential employees of color had resigned. Racial tensions escalated when Richards fired Sahara Johnson, an African-American manager in Human Resources who had a history of lateness and what her superiors called "an attitude problem." The incident was like the breaking of a dam, and everyone's anger and frustration came pouring forth. During 10 years at the firm, Johnson had worked her way up to a managerial position, and many people, particularly women of color, had looked up to her as a role model. Her firing divided the firm into those who considered her dismissal abrupt and unjust and those who felt it was long overdue. In the aftermath of Johnson's removal, Richards turned to her executive team to discuss the undercurrents at the firm. Together, they decided to hire consultants to undertake a systematic study of the firm's race and gender relations and to help formulate a corrective strategy. The race- and gender-diverse consulting team engaged for the task, led by an African American man, interviewed a cross-section of employees, including executives and managers, program staff, and support staff from the operational and program areas in the firm. Despite success with the number of hires, the interviews revealed numerous concerns about the affirmative action initiative. White staff acknowledged that the firm was successful in reaching its affirmative action goals, but some maintained that the diversity program was adversely affecting the quality of work put out by the firm. White male managers complained that the newer employees were undermining Spencer Owens' traditional strength in hard-core quantitative analysis by advocating for incorporation of interviewing and observation into data-gathering methods. Minorityproject leaders had also challenged standard practice by suggesting that Spencer Owens program staff seek input from middle managers and the rank and file at client organizations, instead of focusing exclusively on senior managers. Long-term employees, especially white program staff, feared these ideas were pulling the organization away from its original mission and values, whid'l were grounded in rigorous analysis of economic development strategies. By contrast, people of color were critical of due affinnative action program for having achieved merely superficial results. For example, one AfricanAmerican project leader felt that die firm tolerated minorities without fully accepting them. Another minority staffer confirmed \"they say we are just one big happy family, but there are some stepchildren in this organization.\" Many nonwhite professionals reported having their ideas routinely disregarded. A Latino program staffer explained, \"Until white people discover an idea, until they express it with their own words in their own style, it's as if it doesn't exist.'r An AfricanAmerican project leader in charge of Eastern Europe shared the following experience: We were mapping out our strategy, and I tried to get people on the team to consider the idea that actually these countries had more in common with certain parts of Africa and Latin America dian with Western Europe. lpointed out that the firm's white, Eurocentric orientation might lead us to assumeerroneouslyd'lat white countries have more in common with one another than with nonwhite countries and that, as an AfricanAmerican, l was probably less committed to that view. But when I raised the idea that our race might influence how we saw things, they all thought! was being racist. These complaints were routinely brought to the attention of the networking groups, which interjected themselves in defense of women and people of color whenever they deemed necessary. Some whites complained that diese groups had taken on a policing and advocacy function, and several white project leaders believed the groups had "more leverage and more power than perhaps they ought to have in decision making.\" Cine manager complained, "They are sometimes allowed to make interventions and judgments of certain programs based on their political clout rather than on actual facts."r When a person of color was fired, whites observed that \"people [of color] are up in arms and saying it's racism."r A white manager complained that it had become \"increasingly difcult for supervisors to provide firm, fair, consthctive supervision to people of color, who are prone to charge racism if they are criticized." In turn, many employees of color lamented the missed opportunities for valuable feedback, and some resented what iey perceived as white supervisorsr fear of confrontation. \"There's a real sense on the part of some white people that whatever they're going to do iey're going to get in trouble,'r a black woman had told one of the consultants. "Their biggest fear is being called a racist.'r To gain a better understanding of how widespread these attitudes and perceptions were, the consulting team administered a companywide survey with questions based on the varied points of view expressed in the interviews. Ninety-hvo percent of the employees responded to the survey [see Exhibit 1}. The executive team was taken aback by the gravity of the problem exposed by the survey. Faced with the results parsed by race and hierarchical level, Richards realized that she had to find a solution and set a new course for the company. Sitting at a round table, she turned to her team and to the consultants for ideas on how to steer the company out of this difficult situation. Exhibit 1 Responses on Sample of Survey Items Note: This exhibit demonstrates the percentage of affirmative ("agree" and "strongly agree") responses. Item Senior Management Program Staff Support Staff Commitment to the Mission 1 I continue to work at this firm because I am committed to its mission. Minority 88 87 50 White 94 89 77 2 I love this organization for what it stands for. Minority 88 75 54 White 88 85 38 Quality of Race Relations 3 Whites have no problem dealing with competent minorities. Minority 57 White 35 62 50 There is a lot of racial polarization in my department/division. Minority 13 62 21 White 12 54 17 5 Many whites in this organization are intimidated by Black staff. Minority 50 47 41 White 76 67 45 6 I feel comfortable confronting my white colleagues with negative feedback. Minority 75 72 59 White 63 45 7 Minorities' are often overly confrontational when questioning the actions of whites. Minority 63 11 30 White 35 58 31 8 I am hesitant to criticize minority coworkers because I don't want to be called a racist. Minority 16 White 64 61 46 9 White males are often under attack in this organization. Minority 25 5 19 White 38 52 33 10 For minority staff to get into management and stay there they cannot appear to challenge racism in the organization. Minority 14 55 52 White 19 17 11 It seems no matter what management does, it cannot please some black staff. Minority 71 11 44 White 64 54 50 12 Latinos are not sought out for their expertise on the broader social issues of Latin America and U.S. foreign policy. Minority 29 65 26 White 20 18 18Item Senior Management Program Staff Support Staff Discrimination and Prejudice I am constantly confronted with racism against me in this organization. Minority 13 30 25 White 20 14 Because of my race and/or gender people often ignore my suggestions about work-related matters. 14 45 44 Minority 36 White 14 11 15 Black employees are allowed to get away with things that white employees can't get away with. Minority 25 11 15 White 35 48 16 Blacks in management are taken as seriously as their white counterparts. Minority 57 16 28 58 White 63 65 17 "I have to suppress much of who I am to be accepted and to do my work. Minority 25 62 15 25 54 White 11 Attitudes Toward Diversity Policies 18 Hiring decisions should be made without regard to race. Minority 43 32 88 59 46 64 White 19 This company has been very successful in reaching its affirmative action goals. Minority 63 33 33 71 74 42 White 20 Our success at bringing in minorities has meant that we've lost some good white men. Minority White 6 32