How might certification schemes unintentionally prioritize performative over substantive inclusion for LGBTQ+ communities?
Certification is often seen as an essential way to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion within organizations and companies.
When it comes to LGBTQ+ communities, these certifications can sometimes have negative consequences. One such consequence is that they may prioritize performative actions over meaningful changes. Performative inclusion refers to when an organization takes superficial actions to appear inclusive without actually making significant changes to improve conditions for marginalized groups. In this case, organizations may obtain certifications without truly changing their policies or practices to be more inclusive. This can lead to false promises of progress and a lack of real action towards creating a safe and welcoming environment for all individuals, including those who identify as LGBTQ+.
Performative inclusion can manifest itself in various ways within certification schemes.
Companies may simply hire a few people from the LGBTQ+ community without addressing the underlying issues that prevent them from fully integrating into the workplace. They may also create policies that seem inclusive but are not backed up by concrete measures to ensure that everyone feels welcome.
Some businesses may use certification as a marketing tool to attract customers without implementing any tangible changes within their organization.
The impacts of performative inclusion on LGBTQ+ communities can be severe. It reinforces the idea that simply having a diverse workforce is enough to promote equality and ignores the systemic barriers that exist within society. Moreover, it creates a false sense of security for employees who believe that their employer has made sufficient efforts towards true diversity, equity, and inclusion. Without substantive change, members of the LGBTQ+ community may continue to experience discrimination, harassment, and exclusion at work.
To avoid prioritizing performative over substantive inclusion, certification schemes should focus on measurable outcomes rather than superficial actions. Organizations should be held accountable for ensuring that they have created a safe and supportive environment for all employees, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. Certifications should require companies to provide evidence of meaningful progress in areas such as training, policy creation, and employee engagement. This would help ensure that these programs do more than just check boxes; instead, they would encourage real change within organizations.
While certification schemes can play an important role in promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion, they must not prioritize performative over substantive inclusion for LGBTQ+ communities. By requiring measurable outcomes and holding organizations accountable, we can create a safer and more welcoming environment for everyone.
How might certification schemes unintentionally prioritize performative over substantive inclusion for LGBTQ+ communities?
Certification schemes can potentially create an environment where the most visible or outgoing members of marginalized groups receive recognition while others may feel excluded. This is because these individuals are more likely to participate in community events and advocacy efforts. Furthermore, there may be a bias towards those who have access to resources like money, education, or time that makes it easier to attend training sessions or pay fees associated with certifications.