Critical race theory (CRT) is seen by some as necessary for racial conciliation, while others fear it indoctrinates and divides society. Akwasi Opoku-Dakwa discusses how the core concepts of CRT – systemic racism, racial realism, intersectionality and interest convergence – can illuminate the minority experience for organisations that seek to be inclusive.

Critical race theory (CRT) is having a moment. Some fear it is indoctrinating children and dividing society into racists and victims. Others insist it is timely and necessary for racial conciliation. In the US, CRT has come to the forefront because inclusion of the 40 per cent of the population that are ethnic minorities has become socially and economically urgent. With only 14 per cent of its population being non-White, Europe remains upstream of this challenge. But its aging population and shortage of skilled labour makes increased immigration likely, creating a future in which organisations that can attract and retain diverse workers will fare better.

Like your preferred well-loved “scary” character – perhaps the eponymous Shrek or Chewbacca from Star Wars, CRT has a big heart that belies its grizzly portrayal. I discuss here how its core concepts – systemic racism, racial realism, intersectionality and interest convergence – can illuminate the minority experience for organisations that seek to be inclusive.

First the bad news

CRT argues that racism – an individual’s belief that one race is superior to another – is mainly sustained by systems not individuals. This contribution has led to the ubiquity of the new terms “systemic” or “institutional” racism, referring to the oppression of a racial group to the advantage of another. For those concerned about social inequality, ferreting out racism in institutions can seem a more daunting task than just addressing it in individuals. For those for whom social inequality is not a priority, elevating racism to a systemic level may seem to distract from urgent priorities such as the economy and national security. Either way, it seems like bad news. But the real whopper is CRT’s claim that racism is a normal and permanent aspect of society – an idea referred to as racial realism.

Whether these are useful ideas depends on whether they are true. If they are true but denied because they are unattractive, people are doomed to sustain them. We are better off being aware of our predicament. In this regard, I like to draw an analogy to cognitive biases which have been found by leading scholars like Nobel winner Daniel Kahneman to be pervasive. Recognising the ubiquity of bias helps people to better make sense of their world and make better decisions. Once you give up resistance to the idea that we are all biased, it is not so unpleasant. You simply don’t treat your own thoughts or those of others as 100 per cent accurate.

For those who have not experienced them, systemic oppression and realism might be better understood in the application of CRT to broader group dynamics. Think of persistent group dynamics such as tribalism, which is endemic in many parts of the world among people with the same skin colour. Or historical US immigration, where successive waves of Irish, Italian and Jewish immigrants were physically attacked and denied jobs, housing and educational opportunities by their fellow European immigrants who preceded them. Experiments also show that simply being arbitrarily assigned to a group leads to oppressive behaviours to favour one’s own group at the expense of others, even at the price of sacrificing your own group’s advantages. These examples demonstrate the ease with which oppressive group dynamics insert themselves.

In CRT, the foil of systemic oppression is privilege, which refers to the good fortune of not having to deal with (or even be aware of) the challenges of being a minority. To gain a sense of how oppression and privilege work, conduct a low-risk experiment: Ask people you know to tell you stories about being either right- or left-handed. Most likely, your right-handed acquaintances will be stumped (by their invisible privilege) for response, whereas your left-handed colleagues will regale you with stories about having to learn to write on right-handed school desks, eat with their right hand (because it is considered morally unacceptable to eat with one’s left), etc. Perform the same exercise asking your straight, queer and gay friends to tell you their “coming out” story. These examples illustrate the unique societal constraints that minorities face that the majority do not encounter or have to think about.

The idea of intersectionality in CRT recognises that multiple aspects of diversity can combine, such that members of the same minority group have very different experiences. To illustrate this, I’d like to introduce you to Huxley, a former ward of the state transitioning to independent adulthood. Huxley is smart, motivated, and currently a social worker planning to complete nursing school. He constantly encounters obstacles that I would not dream of. Recently he received an eviction notice because a neighbour reported him to the building manager for entertaining guests afterhours. The neighbour assumed that, because the afterhours guest she saw was Black (like Huxley), the guest must have been visiting Huxley. The management company sent Huxley the eviction notice without investigating the accusation.

Contrast Huxley’s with my experience as a middle-income Black male who owns his own home in a leafy US suburb. I am much less likely to experience my neighbours reporting me for an offence without first speaking to me, or have an agency attempt to remove me from my home for an unverified accusation. It is similarly unlikely that a low-income White person living in Huxley’s apartment would be accused of bad behaviour simply because he has the same skin colour as a perpetrator. Huxley experiences these types of setbacks on a regular basis because he suffers the combined intersectional effects of being young, Black, low income and a former ward of the state. As CRT predicts, the constraints Huxley and I experience as Black men in America are not comparable.

The good news

There is a ray of light in CRT. The principle of interest convergence states that minorities achieve civil rights victories only when their interests converge with those of the majority. The “cup half full” interpretation of interest convergence has, for me, been the most important insight from CRT: Minorities depend on the cooperation of the majority for their wellbeing. People with disabilities need the support of the non-disabled majority to make buildings, software, etc. more accessible. The Muslim Rohingya minority depends on the goodwill of the Buddhist majority in Myanmar. Minorities by definition cannot achieve legislative progress without majority support. The implication of interest convergence is that, if we value diversity, the privileged majority needs to step up and support it.

The call to action

By explaining the societal barriers minorities face and how they can be mitigated through the allyship of the majority, CRT advances our understanding of inclusion in an increasingly diverse world. This is the same allyship that has moved society from allowing infants with “imperfections” to be left to die, to modern public school systems that aspire to leave no child behind. And to companies hiring people with autism for their distinctive abilities in quality management.

While there is a purely moral argument to be made for greater inclusivity, there are also competitive benefits. For organisations, a climate of inclusion leads to better hiring, retention, motivation, and performance. Organisations can leverage CRT’s insights to achieve those benefits by doing the following:

1. Lead. Any company that employs underprivileged minorities can benefit from CRT’s insights. Because like any useful tool (knife, artificial intelligence) CRT can be wielded to cause harm, organisations should frame how they will leverage its insights to be more inclusive. They should not relinquish that responsibility to the media or misinformed organisational members.
2. Be curious about your people and address their needs. Create opportunities to hear from employees and use their stories (not their race or other ambiguous labels) to learn about underprivileged forms of diversity in your organisation – things taken for granted that do not reflect their realities. Remove systemic barriers where possible, thus extending privilege to more people. For example, retention of highly-skilled new moms at Google increased when the company granted 18 weeks of paid maternity leave to address the needs of mothers. Acknowledge and look for opportunities to alleviate the precarious living conditions that cause high absenteeism and turnover among low-income employees like Huxley. Use data (e.g., from surveys) to assess if efforts are working and to learn about further opportunities to be inclusive.
3. Make bias okay to talk about and remedy. Bias training that is educational rather than threatening or accusatory can make both minority and dominant group members feel valued and heard.

• This blog post is based on A Place for Critical Race Theory and Wokeness in Diversity Strategies, Academy of Management Perspectives (2023).
• The post represents the views of its author(s), not the position of LSE Business Review or the London School of Economics.
• Featured image provided by Shutterstock
• When you leave a comment, you’re agreeing to our Comment Policy.

Print Friendly