Like a fighter hidden in the foliage, "guerrilla bias" is concealed by good intentions. The behavior is manifested in ways such as reluctance to coach a female employee for fear of hurting her feelings, or excessive accommodation for cultural differences such as varying standards of punctuality. There are many examples of the bias interfering with effectiveness in the workplace.
retchen,
marketing director at a large U.S.-based pharmaceutical company, listened as the
new Cambodian supervisor explained his design idea. She then nodded respectfully
and said she’d think about it. But she returned to her desk with little
understanding of what the man had said. "Saru’s accent was so heavy I just gave
up," Gretchen recalls. "I’m sure that his ideas were fine. I didn’t want to
discourage him, so I gave him permission to go ahead with the project."
Poor Gretchen. She thinks of herself as a "nice" person
who would never harbor a bias against anyone. Trouble is, she and other
well-intentioned managers are, in fact, carriers of a particularly dangerous
strain of prejudice I call "guerrilla bias."
The guerrilla bias is a dangerous prejudice for two
reasons. First, like the warrior who hides behind lush foliage, guerrilla bias
is concealed behind good intentions, kind words and even thoughtful acts.
Second, it is based on the perverse premise that all women, emerging groups
(previously called "minorities"), people with disabilities and those who are
outside the so-called "majority" population are to some degree fragile, quick to
explode or in need of special treatment.
The behavior is manifested in ways such as reluctance to
coach a female employee for fear of hurting her feelings, or excessive
accommodation for cultural differences such as varying standards of punctuality.
There are many examples of the bias interfering with effectiveness in the
workplace. Gretchen’s decision not to confront Saru about his communication
skills is one. At issue is her inability or unwillingness to honestly discuss
the problem or to provide effective coaching.
How often do managers fail to tell the truth to members of
emerging groups for fear of hurting their feelings, getting slapped with a
lawsuit or being labeled prejudiced? All of these feelings are based on the
underlying premise of guerrilla bias: that members of emerging groups just don’t
have what it takes to hear the truth. The result is an employee who is never
taught how to excel at the job and, therefore, isn’t able to move up in the
organization.
A woman once approached me after a diversity workshop. She
was utterly confused about how to handle what seemed to be a straightforward
management issue. Her confusion surprised me because she had appeared so bright
and experienced during the workshop. The conversation went something like this:
"I just don’t know what to do. I have several Native
American employees who are late to work every day. I know they all have reliable
transportation, so there’s really no reason for them to be so lax. All I can
figure out is that it must have to do with their culture, so I decided to give
them some leeway and let them come in anytime up to half an hour after everybody
else. Now my problem is that the other employees are complaining and want the
same flexibility. In my industry, that just isn’t going to work. What do I do
now?"
My response to this woman was simple. "Why? Why would you
allow the Native Americans to come in late when everybody else isn’t granted the
same privilege?" She repeated her thought that maybe there was a cultural reason
that members of this particular ethnic group couldn’t grasp the notion of
punctuality. After I had talked with her for a while, it became clear that
cultural differences were not the problem, her bias was. She was another "nice"
person guilty of guerrilla bias. She made an assumption that members of emerging
groups have needs so special that they have to be given certain privileges. In
this case, her attitude harmed her ability to build harmonious teams. It
demeaned the Native Americans by implying that they were not able to measure up
to the same standard as other employees. It diminished productivity by throwing
off the early-morning work schedule. And it created tension among team members
and, she says, caused the non-Native Americans to look down on their colleagues.
If the manager had kept her bias in check and held all her
employees to the same high standard of punctuality, the pernicious problem might
never have occurred. Reasonable and respectful accommodation of cultural
differences is a hallmark of a high-functioning, diverse workplace. Bending over
backwards, however, is not only personally insulting, it’s also a real
team-building killer. All biases are nothing more than what I call habits of
thought. Like any habit, when it is identified, it can be broken. Fortunately,
identifying our biases is fairly easy. Asking yourself the following questions
may help:
Do certain assumptions pop into your mind when you
encounter someone from an emerging group? What are those assumptions? Some of
those just might be your biases.
When you think about certain cultural or racial groups
that are different from your own, do you think more about how these groups are
different from yours or about what you have in common? What kinds of differences
do you focus on?
Do you feel uncomfortable when coaching an employee who is
of a different culture? What is the source of that discomfort? Can you think of
any specific groups that make you particularly uncomfortable?
Give the answers to these questions some thought. Once you
identify and face your bias, you will be better able to recognize it and to
develop the habit of shoving it aside when it comes to mind. The result of the
effort is that you will be better able to get on with the business of valuing
all employees and hold them all to the same high standard of excellence.
= Member Only
