Sheryl Miller explains why microaggression remains a problem in the virtual and hybrid workplace; shares examples of this; and offers advice as to how to check yourself against it
The workplace – both physical and virtual – is a microcosm of the world at large and, despite all social progress in promoting inclusivity, can be beset by ‘isms’. Whilst overtly offensive discrimination has been taken to task across many areas to varying degrees, microaggressions – a less severe but nonetheless harmful form of discrimination – is far less easy to detect and tends to fly under the radar, disguised as banter, locker room chat or innocent ‘curiosity’.
On ‘race’ and colour
Part of the issue with overturning microaggressions is that it’s omnipresent in everyday parlance and media reporting. Think of the countless times black celebrities have been ‘mistaken’ for someone else. The fact that Samuel L Jackson has often been mistaken for fellow thespian Laurence Fishburn that it became parodied in Ricky Gervais’ Extras sketch highlights just how ingrained racist tropes and unconscious biases really are. In it, the show’s ditsy protagonist, Maggie, gushed at the former (who was playing himself): ‘The Matrix, I loved it, it was amazing … and you were brilliant at it’.
Outside of the celebrity sphere, we see countless stories of black children being sent home from school for wearing ‘inappropriate’ natural hairstyles such as braids or an afro. In fact, hair has become such an issue in the workplace with certain professions so encumbered by corporate dress codes that, aside from homogenizing looks and stifling any expression of individuality, natural black hair is posited as ‘unprofessional’. After all, how many captains of industry or barristers do you see wearing braids or an afro? There is a constant under-current of discrimination in all of these subtle and not so subtle forms of ‘othering’. In the workplace, it is symptomatic of diversity without ‘real’ inclusion.
Then there’s the wrestling with non-Western sounding names. In the new working world of virtual meetings, where you have to bring people into conversations by reading their name, the pressure is on to get the pronunciations right. Anecdotally, I have found that people with African names will inevitably abbreviate and shorten these to circumvent awkwardness and mispronunciation. With Chinese and South East Asian professionals, I have found many will Anglicise their name, opting for something typically Western. But it is an issue.
Our names are indelibly tied into to our sense of identity and ancestral roots; the ability to say and pronounce someone’s name correctly is fundamental to getting off on the right foot, showing respect and striking rapport.
In his book How To Win Friends And Influence People, Dale Carnegie underscores how vitally important it is to know, remember and say people’s names in discussions in order to be engaging. Those who succumb to renounce elements of their names to make it more digestible to unaccustomed tongues tend to be worn down by the constant sloppiness with which their name is articulated.
This laziness also stems from the same kind of silent discrimination that defines people of colour’s lives. It’s also a form of ‘covering’ – the act of hiding one’s identity in order to fit better into corporate spaces. It can be disheartening. It does not take much effort on people’s part to ask: ’Can I check how I should pronounce your name?’
Or ’How do you like to be addressed?’ It’s a great way of being able to tackle awkwardness around mispronunciation right from the onset with honesty and genuine interest, and also understand difference and diversity better.
In the age of Google, where definitions and names are sounded out for proper pronunciation, there is simply no excuse for getting this wrong.
On sexuality and gender
Microaggressions go beyond race, beyond kinky hair and beyond mispronounced names. I’ve spent countless years as the only female in boardrooms where men would apologise to me either before or after swearing. Obviously they assumed my delicate female sensitivities needed appeasing before the F-bombs were dropped. It’s time that straight talking business discussions remain consistent and indiscriminate in terms of direction and tone irrespective of who is on the receiving end.
In terms of gender, the ways in which we identify ourselves is becoming increasingly fragmented. We should no longer assume that a person either identifies as male or female. This calls for an exercise in tact. People have started using their preferred pronouns (e.g. she/her) on Linkedin and other social media profiles like Twitter, which can be enormously helpful. But, if in doubt, wait for a cue from the individual, or from colleagues or friends that know them well.
It goes without saying, but asking about gender reassignment surgery or making comments on how good they are with their makeup and personal styling is both intrusive and inappropriate.
An equally important point is ‘trying too hard’ that you appear awkward, inauthentic and ill-informed about the modern world. When conversing with a colleague who identifies as LGBTQ+, you need to refrain from referencing your only other gay friend or relative each time you have a conversation. The very fact that you do makes it all too clear how you are unable to move beyond the label you’ve assigned them.
Mental and physical ability
Several years ago, a member of my team had organised a team-building event at a local venue which had stairs and no elevator. On the day of the event, we found out that the event was on the first floor and, due to its historical significance, had no provision for people unable to navigate stairs. An attendee on the client-side was a wheelchair user. To our horror, a member of staff offered up two solutions: ‘I’ll just tell him he can’t come, I’m sure it will be fine,’ or as an alternative: ‘I will offer to carry him up the stairs’.
In truth, mental and physical disabilities can be both visible and invisible; those with flagrant disabilities (such as wheelchair users) will have a rather different experience of discrimination than those who have disabilities that are naked to the human eye. The former might have people make assumptions about their cognitive capabilities (being spoken to as if deaf or treated like an inanimate object are common examples), while the latter might be derided by those who believe they’re exaggerating their disabilities. It might appear difficult to navigate this minefield without causing offence.
But ultimately, what this calls for is treating colleagues and clients with disabilities the same as you would your able-bodied associates. Take stock that they’re in the professional position they’re in because of what they can do – not because of what they can’t.
Arranging events with absent-minded regard for wheelchair accessibility shows just how far we need to go in order to ensure disabled clients and colleagues are adequately catered for in the corporate world. While there is an increasingly trend for acquiring a ‘neurodiverse’ workforce, recognising the unique skills that say high-functioning autistic or dyslexic employees bring to operations, there is plenty of room for improvement – not least when it comes to accommodating those with physical impairments.
As with dealing with any other ‘ism’, you might want to assemble an external advisory board that will help you shape more inclusive policies for your organisation, based on true insights, expertise and lived experiences. From this position, you’ll will be able to become a more attuned and empathetic leader – awakened to the needs of a truly diverse workforce.
Why it’s hard to completely eliminate microaggressions
Microaggressions are difficult to eliminate because these are largely fuelled unconsciously by our own individual biases. To circumnavigate this automatic process involves deeper cognitive thinking – overriding the emotional and instinctual (the evolutionary drivers of snap judgment that were essential to our survival when we were cavemen) with analysis and rationale.
We need to practice slower thinking, as advocated by the behavioural economist Daniel Kahneman. It entails checking ourselves and questioning our belief systems; engaging our tools for analysis and rationale prior to talking.
Ask yourself these important questions: ‘Is what I’m saying a result of some internal prejudice I have towards this individual? Would I ask the same question if the person looked like me, was the same gender as me, was able-bodied like me, shared the same sexuality as me?’
Dismantling discriminatory thinking which fuels microaggressions means unpicking the parts that make up our belief systems and examining them in order to learn more about them. In turn, we learn much more about ourselves and how we can change to become better colleagues, clients, associates and leaders.
Sheryl Miller is an award winning serial entrepreneur, business coach and author of Smashing Stereotypes: How To Get Ahead When You’re The Only _____ In The Room.
