Diversity, Equity and Inclusion

I regret that we face significant backlash in promoting DEI. The backlash has even become legal, with several states (Texas, for example) enacting laws that prohibit DEI initiatives in public institutions.

Backlash arises from several sources. Opposition due to racism, homophobia, and political partisanship seems intractable; however, opposition based on misunderstanding can be remedied. IMO, the remedies include (1) thoughtfully defining Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion; and (2) avoiding implementation approaches that provide ammunition for opponents.

Even definitions prove tricky. A quick survey of government websites reveals a diverse set of definitions, including the add-ons of "justice" and "accessibility" in some. Definitions that I like include:

·         Diversity: The presence of a variety of talents, experiences, knowledge, and perspectives, often achieved through a mix of sexes, races, ethnicities, backgrounds, and cultures.

·         Equity: The consistent, systematic, fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals.

·         Inclusion: The recognition, appreciation, and use of the talents and skills of everyone so that all feel a sense of belonging.

Do you like different definitions?

Bill

Bill, thank you for the thoughtful post. I agree that definitions are essential to understanding. I also think definitions can guide or inform outcomes that the profession can strive to achieve. ASCE does provide definitions for justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion. ASCE Policy Statement 417 clearly defines those critically important terms in addition to stating the Society's commitment to advancing those principles. At the core, the work of DEI is organizational change. Appreciate your thoughtful post and hope to read more of your thoughts on this topic. 

I regret that we face significant backlash in promoting DEI. The backlash has even become legal, with several states (Texas, for example) enacting laws that prohibit DEI initiatives in public institutions.

Backlash arises from several sources. Opposition due to racism, homophobia, and political partisanship seems intractable; however, opposition based on misunderstanding can be remedied. IMO, the remedies include (1) thoughtfully defining Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion; and (2) avoiding implementation approaches that provide ammunition for opponents.

Even definitions prove tricky. A quick survey of government websites reveals a diverse set of definitions, including the add-ons of "justice" and "accessibility" in some. Definitions that I like include:

·         Diversity: The presence of a variety of talents, experiences, knowledge, and perspectives, often achieved through a mix of sexes, races, ethnicities, backgrounds, and cultures.

·         Equity: The consistent, systematic, fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals.

·         Inclusion: The recognition, appreciation, and use of the talents and skills of everyone so that all feel a sense of belonging.

Do you like different definitions?

Bill

I meant to add the link to PS 417 in the previous reply. Policy statement 417 - Justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion | ASCE 

Let us know your thoughts.

Bill, thank you for the thoughtful post. I agree that definitions are essential to understanding. I also think definitions can guide or inform outcomes that the profession can strive to achieve. ASCE does provide definitions for justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion. ASCE Policy Statement 417 clearly defines those critically important terms in addition to stating the Society's commitment to advancing those principles. At the core, the work of DEI is organizational change. Appreciate your thoughtful post and hope to read more of your thoughts on this topic. 

I regret that we face significant backlash in promoting DEI. The backlash has even become legal, with several states (Texas, for example) enacting laws that prohibit DEI initiatives in public institutions.

Backlash arises from several sources. Opposition due to racism, homophobia, and political partisanship seems intractable; however, opposition based on misunderstanding can be remedied. IMO, the remedies include (1) thoughtfully defining Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion; and (2) avoiding implementation approaches that provide ammunition for opponents.

Even definitions prove tricky. A quick survey of government websites reveals a diverse set of definitions, including the add-ons of "justice" and "accessibility" in some. Definitions that I like include:

·         Diversity: The presence of a variety of talents, experiences, knowledge, and perspectives, often achieved through a mix of sexes, races, ethnicities, backgrounds, and cultures.

·         Equity: The consistent, systematic, fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals.

·         Inclusion: The recognition, appreciation, and use of the talents and skills of everyone so that all feel a sense of belonging.

Do you like different definitions?

Bill

Thanks for your reply, Lisa. I should have included a link to the ASCE Policy in my original post and appreciate you adding it.

I agree completely with the intent of Policy 417. Some words and phrases trouble me. For example, adding "Justice" to the title and acronym seems unwise. Lumping too many desirable goals under one heading dilutes them all. For example, my grandchildren's school added religion and arts to STEM, creating a STREAM program that blurs the intent to an "everything" program. Further, justice, including environmental justice, is a goal worthy of its own initiative.

The phrase "equitable outcomes" in the Equity definition invites criticism from those who say we are imposing artificial, merit-blind quotas to hiring and promotion. We should never say or do anything that provides ammunition to some cretin who says a woman or person of color is a "DEI hire."

Bill Mc

------------------------------
William McAnally Ph.D., P.E., BC.CE, BC.NE, F.ASCE
ENGINEER
Columbus MS

Original Message:
Sent: 08-05-2024 08:33 AM
From: Lisa Black
Subject: Definitions

I meant to add the link to PS 417 in the previous reply. Policy statement 417 - Justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion | ASCE 

Let us know your thoughts.

Bill, thank you for the thoughtful post. I agree that definitions are essential to understanding. I also think definitions can guide or inform outcomes that the profession can strive to achieve. ASCE does provide definitions for justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion. ASCE Policy Statement 417 clearly defines those critically important terms in addition to stating the Society's commitment to advancing those principles. At the core, the work of DEI is organizational change. Appreciate your thoughtful post and hope to read more of your thoughts on this topic. 

I regret that we face significant backlash in promoting DEI. The backlash has even become legal, with several states (Texas, for example) enacting laws that prohibit DEI initiatives in public institutions.

Backlash arises from several sources. Opposition due to racism, homophobia, and political partisanship seems intractable; however, opposition based on misunderstanding can be remedied. IMO, the remedies include (1) thoughtfully defining Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion; and (2) avoiding implementation approaches that provide ammunition for opponents.

Even definitions prove tricky. A quick survey of government websites reveals a diverse set of definitions, including the add-ons of "justice" and "accessibility" in some. Definitions that I like include:

·         Diversity: The presence of a variety of talents, experiences, knowledge, and perspectives, often achieved through a mix of sexes, races, ethnicities, backgrounds, and cultures.

·         Equity: The consistent, systematic, fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals.

·         Inclusion: The recognition, appreciation, and use of the talents and skills of everyone so that all feel a sense of belonging.

Do you like different definitions?

Bill

I think it's important to be aware that the people who say things like that are not basing it on anything; they will say it regardless of whether they have "ammunition" and I think it's far more valuable to point that out and explore the reasons for that than it is to engage in optics games with people who are not engaging seriously to begin with. 

Thanks for your reply, Lisa. I should have included a link to the ASCE Policy in my original post and appreciate you adding it.

I agree completely with the intent of Policy 417. Some words and phrases trouble me. For example, adding "Justice" to the title and acronym seems unwise. Lumping too many desirable goals under one heading dilutes them all. For example, my grandchildren's school added religion and arts to STEM, creating a STREAM program that blurs the intent to an "everything" program. Further, justice, including environmental justice, is a goal worthy of its own initiative.

The phrase "equitable outcomes" in the Equity definition invites criticism from those who say we are imposing artificial, merit-blind quotas to hiring and promotion. We should never say or do anything that provides ammunition to some cretin who says a woman or person of color is a "DEI hire."

Bill Mc

------------------------------
William McAnally Ph.D., P.E., BC.CE, BC.NE, F.ASCE
ENGINEER
Columbus MS

Original Message:
Sent: 08-05-2024 08:33 AM
From: Lisa Black
Subject: Definitions

I meant to add the link to PS 417 in the previous reply. Policy statement 417 - Justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion | ASCE 

Let us know your thoughts.

Bill, thank you for the thoughtful post. I agree that definitions are essential to understanding. I also think definitions can guide or inform outcomes that the profession can strive to achieve. ASCE does provide definitions for justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion. ASCE Policy Statement 417 clearly defines those critically important terms in addition to stating the Society's commitment to advancing those principles. At the core, the work of DEI is organizational change. Appreciate your thoughtful post and hope to read more of your thoughts on this topic. 

I regret that we face significant backlash in promoting DEI. The backlash has even become legal, with several states (Texas, for example) enacting laws that prohibit DEI initiatives in public institutions.

Backlash arises from several sources. Opposition due to racism, homophobia, and political partisanship seems intractable; however, opposition based on misunderstanding can be remedied. IMO, the remedies include (1) thoughtfully defining Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion; and (2) avoiding implementation approaches that provide ammunition for opponents.

Even definitions prove tricky. A quick survey of government websites reveals a diverse set of definitions, including the add-ons of "justice" and "accessibility" in some. Definitions that I like include:

·         Diversity: The presence of a variety of talents, experiences, knowledge, and perspectives, often achieved through a mix of sexes, races, ethnicities, backgrounds, and cultures.

·         Equity: The consistent, systematic, fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals.

·         Inclusion: The recognition, appreciation, and use of the talents and skills of everyone so that all feel a sense of belonging.

Do you like different definitions?

Bill

I think it's important to be aware that the people who say things like that are not basing it on anything; they will say it regardless of whether they have "ammunition" and I think it's far more valuable to point that out and explore the reasons for that than it is to engage in optics games with people who are not engaging seriously to begin with. 

Thanks for your reply, Lisa. I should have included a link to the ASCE Policy in my original post and appreciate you adding it.

I agree completely with the intent of Policy 417. Some words and phrases trouble me. For example, adding "Justice" to the title and acronym seems unwise. Lumping too many desirable goals under one heading dilutes them all. For example, my grandchildren's school added religion and arts to STEM, creating a STREAM program that blurs the intent to an "everything" program. Further, justice, including environmental justice, is a goal worthy of its own initiative.

The phrase "equitable outcomes" in the Equity definition invites criticism from those who say we are imposing artificial, merit-blind quotas to hiring and promotion. We should never say or do anything that provides ammunition to some cretin who says a woman or person of color is a "DEI hire."

Bill Mc

------------------------------
William McAnally Ph.D., P.E., BC.CE, BC.NE, F.ASCE
ENGINEER
Columbus MS

Original Message:
Sent: 08-05-2024 08:33 AM
From: Lisa Black
Subject: Definitions

I meant to add the link to PS 417 in the previous reply. Policy statement 417 - Justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion | ASCE 

Let us know your thoughts.

Bill, thank you for the thoughtful post. I agree that definitions are essential to understanding. I also think definitions can guide or inform outcomes that the profession can strive to achieve. ASCE does provide definitions for justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion. ASCE Policy Statement 417 clearly defines those critically important terms in addition to stating the Society's commitment to advancing those principles. At the core, the work of DEI is organizational change. Appreciate your thoughtful post and hope to read more of your thoughts on this topic. 

I regret that we face significant backlash in promoting DEI. The backlash has even become legal, with several states (Texas, for example) enacting laws that prohibit DEI initiatives in public institutions.

Backlash arises from several sources. Opposition due to racism, homophobia, and political partisanship seems intractable; however, opposition based on misunderstanding can be remedied. IMO, the remedies include (1) thoughtfully defining Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion; and (2) avoiding implementation approaches that provide ammunition for opponents.

Even definitions prove tricky. A quick survey of government websites reveals a diverse set of definitions, including the add-ons of "justice" and "accessibility" in some. Definitions that I like include:

·         Diversity: The presence of a variety of talents, experiences, knowledge, and perspectives, often achieved through a mix of sexes, races, ethnicities, backgrounds, and cultures.

·         Equity: The consistent, systematic, fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals.

·         Inclusion: The recognition, appreciation, and use of the talents and skills of everyone so that all feel a sense of belonging.

Do you like different definitions?

Bill