SIX

Let the Conversations Continue: Interpret and Bridge Differences

There is no greater agony than bearing an untold story inside you.

MAYA ANGELOU, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings¹

Jake and Rodney are now ready to delve into their different perspectives. This is their third conversation. Readiness to delve into differences may happen by the third conversation or it may not. It could happen before then, depending on the readiness and preparation of each party, as shown in our model for Bold, Inclusive Conversations. (See the figure on page 88.)

It is hard to say how you will know when you are ready. It will be a feeling of greater mutual understanding. You will feel that you have amassed sufficient information about the other person or cultural group. You will sense that you are at a different place—a shift has occurred—and your worldview is different from when you started the first conversation. The table on the next page is a guide for determining when you might be ready for deeper conversations around polarizing topics.

ACKNOWLEDGE THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM

Delving into the differences is the most difficult part of the conversation process. Acknowledging that polarized opinions exist is the first step.

AM I READY? A GUIDE

FIGURE 6. DIFFERENCES IN PERCEPTIONS OF HOW B LACK PEOPLE ARE TREATED IN THE UNITED STATES
Adapted from Pew, 2016

Continuing with our example of Rodney and Jake, let’s look at the polarization that they might acknowledge at this juncture.

In Chapter 1, I highlighted the study that only 44 percent of white people were very concerned about the killing of Philando Castile and Alton Sterling (two black men), compared to 77 percent of black people. However, this is not the only topic for which black and white people are polarized.

A 2016 Pew study highlighted in Figure 6 shows the division in perceptions on a number of different issues, including on how black people are treated by the criminal justice system, in housing, in the workplace, in stores, in restaurants, and when voting.² These conflicting views obviously make it more difficult to have bold, courageous conversations. Before progress can be made, that polarization must be revealed. Acknowledge the elephant in the room, and admit that polarization exists.

The reflection and learning that Jake and Rodney have engaged in up to this point should have already surfaced some of the reasons for polarization on these issues. So both Jake and Rodney should be armed with more knowledge. That does not necessarily mean that there has been a total shift so that they each completely agree with the other’s perspective.

Remember in the last chapter, they were able to come to some shared meaning, mostly on the less controversial facts. Jake may still have a hard time believing that the police actually profile a certain race for no legitimate reason, and Rodney may still believe that Jake’s white privilege keeps him from seeing the full picture.

Continuing with Jake and Rodney’s conversations from Chapter 5, the third conversation might start with something like this.

JAKE: I have been reading a lot of the issue of how black people are treated in the criminal justice system. I really had no idea of the disparities. It looks like the reasons are fairly complex.

RODNEY: They are. Do you agree that it is largely due to discrimination?

JAKE: I am not sure. I always thought that our justice system was pretty color blind. If you do the crime, you pay your time, so to speak.

RODNEY: (Rephrasing rather than defending at this point) So what I hear you saying is that you think the system is fair.

JAKE: Yes, for the most part, I think so, or at least I thought so. The stats do show that blacks commit more crimes than whites.

DISTINGUISH DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS AND CLARIFY DEFINITIONS

Let’s consider the interpretation of fairness. Fairness to Jake might look like the rules are applied the same to everybody regardless of race (the minimization worldview described in Chapter 2). He may envision a meritocracy.

For Rodney, fairness may be less fixed and depend on circumstances. Rodney might think that it is fairer to consider context and history in making the decision and not necessarily treat everyone the same.

For example, if someone steals food because they have no money, because they cannot find employment, because they have been discriminated against, should their punishment be the same as someone who has money and a good job but steals food? Jake and Rodney will need to explore ethical considerations such as this and use the reflect-and-learn cycle for further exploration.

To have meaningful conversations about difference, we should define and clarify terms. If there are different interpretations, keep them all visible (perhaps on a flip chart or captured on projection device). At this juncture, do not debate the validity of the different definitions; simply acknowledge and make note of them.

UNCOVER YOUR DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES

When we start a conversation from a polarization mindset, we typically have a very simplistic understanding of the topic or situation. However, if we have gone through the steps of learning more about all aspects—broadening our knowledge and reflecting—we are better prepared to have an informed opinion, to be curious about the other’s opinion, and to listen with an open mind. We are at that point operating at acceptance on the Intercultural Development Continuum discussed in Chapter 2.

At this juncture, the conversation may go something like this.

JAKE: While I am disturbed by the disproportionality in the statistics showing the number of incarcerated blacks, the facts also show that blacks perpetuate more violent crimes, overall, and much of it is black-on-black crime, is it not?

RODNEY: Black-on-black crime is concerning, but you have to consider that even though the ratio of black homicides against black victims is greater, the number of white murderers far exceeds the number of black murderers.

JAKE: Well yes, I would expect the numbers to be bigger because there are more whites in the population than blacks. Isn’t the ratio the problem?

RODNEY: Yes, it is certainly a problem, but why do you think black men are incarcerated at six times their numbers in the population? That is a ratio too. Do you think that black men are more prone to be criminals?

JAKE: I don’t know about “prone to be criminals,” but the facts would suggest that they are. However, what I have learned through this process is that the reasons for these statistics are extremely complex and I need to keep learning more. I just think it is sad when anybody is murdered senselessly, and I don’t understand why black people would want to kill other black people. I also realize now though, why, as an African American male, you might be more fearful about your safety. I did not understand that before.

RODNEY: Part of the reason for black-on-black crime is the feeling of worthlessness and helplessness on the part of many young black men. The statistics clearly show different outcomes for black males as early as pre-school. They are stereotyped as less intelligent and more aggressive, and, in some cases, this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

JAKE: It did not happen to you. Look at how great you turned out. I really think life is what we make it in the end. People can make lemonade out of lemons, you know. There are a lot of stories about you people who have overcome the odds. I don’t understand why more of you people don’t.

At this juncture, Rodney became frustrated and somewhat angry. He nearly lost it when Jake said “you people.” Jake probably did not know why those two words were such a hot button for Rodney. (See Chapter 7.) Remembering his emotional intelligence skills, Rodney knew he needed to manage his emotions at that point. He did not want to show Jake how frustrated he had become. He and Jake seem to be at an impasse. Rather than continue the conversation, it is time to pause.

RODNEY: (In a neutral tone) No it did not happen to me. Every person’s circumstance is different. I think we have gone far enough for this conversation. I would like to refer you to some additional information on this topic that might help. I would also like to suggest that during our next conversation we talk about our respective life experiences. I do want you to know more about who I am, my experiences, and I would like to know the same about you.

JAKE: Yes, I would like that, too. Let’s plan on it.

KNOW WHEN TO PUT THE CONVERSATION ON PAUSE

Rodney and Jake have come to an impasse. They should stop, agree to do some more reflection and learning, and come back at another time to continue. When there is a deadlock around ideologies, emotions may run high and both parties might sink back into polarization. Continue to frame these conversations as skill development. Remember that when learning a skill, there may be times you just can’t grasp a particular point, so you leave it for some period and come back to it with fresh eyes and ears.

Tell Your Story

Storytellers, by the very act of telling, communicate a radical learning that changes lives and the world: telling stories is a universally accessible means through which people make meaning.
Chris Cavanaugh, Olympic swimmer³

When Jake and Rodney come back together for their fourth conversation, they have agreed to tell their stories. Storytelling is a very powerful learning tool. Everybody has a diversity story, regardless of their race, gender, and sexual orientation. However, we have to be ready to hear someone else’s story in a way that will have a compelling impact and foster greater understanding.

Telling one’s story when the parties are still polarized can move them deeper into polarization, because at this stage, they are still wedded totally to their own opinions and may consider the story an excuse, an exaggeration, not relevant to the facts, not the norm; or they may use any other similar rationale that would deny the validity of the story.

Conversely, it could have a positive outcome—an epiphany that moves individuals out of polarization to a place of greater understanding. I have seen it work both ways. In one situation, after a compelling story from an African American woman about being labeled as an angry black woman, one of her white female colleagues, said, “I don’t think that has anything to do with race at all. I could say the same label happens for white women.” It effectively invalidated the African American woman’s story.

On the other hand, the story of the gay, Muslim male who was afraid to stand close to the edge of the Metro platform, referenced earlier in the book, provided an aha experience for one of the white senior leaders, who was shocked that anyone would be carrying such a fear with them every day. He had told his story during the third conversation with the employee affinity groups.

Rodney and Jake have not yet shared their deep personal stories. They have pretty much stayed in the head (facts and logic). Assuming that Jake is more discussion style, it was appropriate to provide a more logical, fact-based argument, as opposed to a more emotional delivery that personal stories may generate. It may now be the right time for them to have a conversation about their life experiences and how these experiences have shaped who they are.

There are pros and cons to placing this type of sharing at this point in the process, rather than during the first two conversations structured around listening. The advantage of telling one’s story early on is that it fosters openness and transparency, which can build trust and empathy, and, as mentioned above, it may lead to a transformative aha moment early on that can get one to delve into differences sooner. The drawback is there may not be enough mutual trust that early in the process so that the parties feel comfortable sharing at this deep level. One of the primary purposes of the first three conversations is to build trust. However, as stated above, it could deepen the polarization because of the lack of foundational knowledge at that early juncture.

If there is adequate readiness early in the process based on the self-assessment in Chapter 3, sharing one’s story can be quite impactful during the listening phase.

Where Do Jake and Rodney Go from Here?

So what’s next for Jake and Rodney after they share their respective stories in the fourth conversation? They need to keep chipping away at more mutual understanding, which does not necessarily mean agreement or consensus. Perhaps they incorporate further conversations into their regular one-one meetings as recommended in Chapter 5. There may come a point where they agree to disagree while still respecting each other’s right to have a different point of view.

Rodney and Jake now both have a greater capacity to have bold, inclusive conversations. They have done the hard readiness work recommended in Chapters 2 and 3 and have had some breakthrough conversations that shifted perspectives. The level of trust is enhanced so that if there is another polarizing topic that they want to discuss, they are not starting from scratch. They may need to repeat some of the readiness steps to learn about a new topic but will be able to get to delving into their differences much faster.

Rodney had initially requested that there be a team meeting to discuss his concerns about the killing of unarmed black men. Jake is in a much better position now to make a decision about the advisability of such a session. He knows the process that he needed to go through to get to this point. Rodney, too, has a better vantage point. They decided that Jake would share what he had learned at a team meeting, stressing the importance of supporting each other during times of stress and trauma. This would be an opportunity for the team to listen to Jake as the leader and for Jake to answer questions other employees might have. Depending on the interest and readiness of the team, Jake would decide if additional conversations were warranted. In addition, Rodney would seek support from the black employee network group as an opportunity to commiserate with others who may share his fears and anxieties.

The End Point: Reciprocal Empathy

If there is an end-point to bold, inclusive conversations—and I contend that there really isn’t because it is a journey not a destination—it is reciprocal empathy. If we can get to the point of reciprocal empathy (i.e., the ability to know what it is like to be the “other”), we increase the likelihood of generating new ways to engage with each other.

When we engage with each other, we have the opportunity to learn more about each other’s similarities and differences, build better relationships, and improve trust. In the workplace, employees will feel more valued, respected, and more motivated to give their all. This, in turn, leads to greater productivity, engagement, and innovation. One of the participants from a dialogue session noted in Chapter 1 summed it up this way: “I will go back to work now knowing that others are feeling like I do. Just being able to openly talk about it makes me feel better, and I can go back to giving my all. Somebody understands.”

Celebrate Little Breakthroughs and Keep Practicing

I keep reiterating that this is a process, one that has no specific ending. Learning how to have bold, inclusive conversations is a journey, not a destination. You have to keep chipping away at it a little bit at a time, just like any other competency. If you are learning to play the piano, you keep practicing until you are able to play more difficult pieces. There may come a time when you don’t have to practice as much because you have mastered the skill. However, to keep your skills fresh, you will always need to practice some. Hopefully there will not be a need to have regular conversations about polarizing topics, but you want to be ready when the need arises.

There will be little gains and some big gains along the way. Celebrate them all.

CHAPTER 6 TIPS FOR TALKING ABOUT IT!

   Recognize that it is hard to predict when you will be ready to delve into deep, polarizing differences. First, you will feel some type of shift in your worldview perspective.

   Acknowledge the points of polarization at the beginning of the conversation in order to delve deeply into the topic.

   Clarify meanings and interpretations. Allow for multiple interpretations as you sort out your different perspectives.

   When you reach an impasse, put the conversation on pause.

   Learn to manage your emotions when there is disagreement.

   Build trust before sharing your story, so that it will be understood and validated.

   Recognize that there is no real end point to bold, inclusive conversations. It is a journey, not a destination. You keep developing and learning.

   Seek reciprocal empathy.

   Celebrate the little breakthroughs as much as the big wins.