Performative Allyship vs Structural Inclusivity in Workplaces
In today's world, discussions about diversity and inclusion have become increasingly popular. Many companies are recognizing the importance of creating a safe space for employees who come from different backgrounds to thrive.
There is still confusion surrounding how this can be achieved effectively, specifically when it comes to workplace culture. One question that often arises is whether performative allyship differs from structural inclusivity. This article will explore these concepts and provide insights into their differences and similarities.
What is Performative Allyship?
Performative allyship refers to the act of showing support for marginalized groups without taking meaningful action. It involves posting and sharing articles, participating in marches, signing petitions, and making social media posts promoting equality. While these actions may seem like solidarity, they do little to create real change. Instead, they reinforce existing power structures, perpetuate stereotypes, and maintain the status quo.
A white person who attends a Black Lives Matter rally but fails to acknowledge their privilege or engage with black colleagues at work remains a passive observer. They are performing an act of allyship but not making any effort to implement real change.
Structural inclusivity involves systemic changes that make diverse perspectives visible and valued in an organization. This includes hiring practices, training programs, policies, and procedures that promote equity and justice. Structural inclusivity recognizes that true progress requires more than simply being 'not racist.' It means actively working towards dismantling systems that have historically oppressed minorities and creating new ones that empower them.
A company that offers employee resource groups (ERGs) for people of color and supports their initiatives demonstrates structural inclusivity.
Similarities Between Performative Allyship and Structural Inclusivity
Despite their differences, performative allyship and structural inclusivity share some similarities. Both require intentional efforts to promote diversity and inclusion in the workplace.
It's important to note that performative allyship can be easily performative while structural inclusivity is sustainable over time. Performative allyship may result from external pressures such as social media backlash or public outcry, whereas structural inclusivity stems from internal commitment to create meaningful change.
Both approaches require continuous evaluation and improvement to ensure they remain effective and impactful.
Understanding the difference between performative allyship and structural inclusivity is crucial for building an inclusive workplace culture. While performative allyship might seem like an easy way to show support for marginalized communities, it does little to address underlying issues. On the other hand, structural inclusivity involves systemic changes that benefit all employees by promoting equality and equity. By implementing these strategies, companies can create an environment where everyone feels welcome, heard, and valued.
How does performative allyship differ from structural inclusivity in workplaces?
Performative allyship refers to actions that individuals take in order to demonstrate their support for marginalized groups without actively engaging with them or challenging systems of oppression. This may include attending protests, posting on social media, or wearing a rainbow pin during Pride month. Structural inclusivity, on the other hand, involves creating an environment in which people from all backgrounds are valued and have equal access to opportunities.