DEI done right makes a world of difference—for those who need it most. We sit down with author, activist, educator and catalyst Jarvis Sam to discuss what ‘done right’ looks like and why the majority of DEI efforts, while well intentioned, fall short of expectations for employers and underrepresented talent groups alike. As founder and CEO of The Rainbow Disruption, his insights and experience continue to carry the true potential and profit of DEI forward.

Key Takeaways:

• For DEI to be effective, it needs to be integrated and embedded at a foundational level to attract, inspire and retain underrepresented talent;
• While multiple organizational champions of DEI exist to inspire other efforts, there is no one DEI formula, but several common roadblocks;
• For the full innovative potential of DEI to be realized, underrepresented talent needs the opportunity to thrive at the leadership level.
  

He helped bring Snapchat into the bigger picture. Seeing the need for increased pipelines of women in engineering and design, specifically sparking interest in coding and STEM opportunities, as their Head of Global Diversity & Inclusion, Jarvis helped Snapchat work with another past employer, Google. Together they created a competition encouraging young girls to code new lenses and filters—and received thousands of freshly inspired and inspiring entrants.

His book, DEI C.R.E.D.E.N.T.I.A.L. speaks directly to what today’s leaders need know and reaches into the minds of tomorrow as an adjunct professor at both Berkeley and Brown.

Few know and impact that world of difference like Jarvis Sam.

The trouble is, as Jarvis points out, no one has it entirely right yet.

He helps companies get that bit closer to DEI done right with a single question.

Three Ways to the ‘Why’ of DEI

“My very first question is a simple one—Why?” said Jarvis. “That question, as simple as it is, it helps me to understand: what is their intent, what is their desire out of the engagement and how do they actually want to position the impact of DEI on their organization.”

That said, Jarvis finds the answers to the quintessential question of the why of DEI vary widely, but render down to three motivations—good intent, good business and a good understanding of where the future of work is headed.

“The answers as you can imagine are quite multiplicitious. For some companies, their why IS related to social justice movements. In the last six years alone, we’ve seen the impact of multiple movements, as well as a number of acts of violence, policies and legislation that are anti LGBTQ+ in nature—particularly those targeting LGBTQ+ youth. We are also seeing the impact of geopolitical crises beyond the borders of those regions directly impacted by those events,” said Jarvis. “So a lot of organizations have felt the need to be relatively responsive to all of this because whereas in the past topics like politics, race, region and human sexuality were seen as taboo in the workplace, now we exist in a space where authenticity and the ability to bring one’s genuine identity to the workplace necessitates that those are topics that are actually front and centre. We no longer take off one hat of our identity when we enter our workspaces.”

Others take a more fiscal approach in their answer—it’s just good business, a fact backed by a growing wealth of research.

“Many organizations and institutions have been heavily influenced by some of the great work and research done by organizations like Deloitte, McKinsey, BCG and Harvard Business Review on topics around the business impact of diversity, equity and inclusion,” said Jarvis. “So they’ve looked at companies like Nike, Google, Target Corp. and Costco who have seen and reported on the great impact of diversity, equity and inclusion strategies and programs for their organizations. Whether it’s through the lens of global accessibility, disability inclusion, hiring, promotion and development of more women or communities of colour in the workplace, developing products to support and serve LGBTQ+ communities—the business case is there.”

“When you can create segmentation and evangelize your support of particular underrepresented communities, it goes a long way towards having a clear impact on the bottom line of the organization,” Jarvis added. “So that becomes a big mover and driver for others.”

The third core motivation for companies more genuinely engaging their DEI initiatives boils down to a factor affecting every workplace—tomorrow’s talent today and the future of work.

“If you look at the talent who is entering the workforce, we have to account for creating approaches that promote engagement across generations. The reality is this—GenZ and Gen Alpha overall identify far more as LGBTQ+ than previous generations and they’re very open and out about it. Their expectations about how community is treated through the lens of social activism is much higher and they’re more vocal about it than previous generations,” said Jarvis. “Their point of view about the role of the workplace and how they show up is different too, so future work cannot in any way be separated or divided from the lens of the talent landscape.”

“When that begins to happen, that’s when organizations have a very quick realization that DEI must be embedded and integrated into everything that they do because it’s not just value-additive or a nice-to-have,” said Jarvis. "For GenZ and Gen Alpha, the current and future makeup for career talent in our workforce, it is an expectation. It is an obligation they hold for how the company must show up.”

No Paragon of DEI or Finish Line in Sight

As for who is doing DEI perfectly ‘right’, right now, it’s a question he gets from students and leaders alike too often, but his answer is both unwavering and hopeful—no one is outperforming on all levels.

“I often get that question about what organizations are doing DEI the best and I struggle with it because I can’t identify a single organization that is doing this work exceptionally well. I think different organizations are doing aspects or components of the work incredibly well,” said Jarvis.

Jarvis points out that while some companies such as McDonald’s, Google and certain educational institutions like the University of Chicago excel at supplier diversity—leveraging procurement dollars to invest in underrepresented owned and operated businesses—others have yet to address it at all.

That said, commitment to supplier diversity doesn’t necessarily translate into internal representation, Jarvis notes, whereas other companies like Nike and Target Corp have historically held a higher representation of underrepresented leaders and the vice-president level and above, as well as on their boards.

“Then though, some of those organizations don’t necessarily thrive with the culture bit—in the ways of inclusion and the ability to retain great talent. But then you look at a company like Costco that has done really well in that regard and who does see the mobility opportunities for their talent from retail teammate all the way up to senior executive in their organization,” said Jarvis.

“So to find a good example, we need to look to a number of different companies, but I think there is an opportunity for them to all dig in and learn from each other how to build this future work in a much more sustainable fashion.”

That build is a task of which Jarvis never tires, likening DEI to a work in perpetual progress with no finish line in sight.

“When we talk about there not being a finish line to DEI, what that means is that there is not a destination for this work. It means this is a work of continued progress and advancement.” said Jarvis. “And as the social, political, economic and environmental components of how we live life and the realities of being’ continue to shift and change, it is going to result in shifts and changes of how we have to lead this work within our organizations.”

Where Tech Can Take DEI Further

As for the tech industry itself, Jarvis has no trouble laying out where some of the roadblocks and barriers.

“I think a lot of gaps remain for a couple of reasons. I think many tech companies still have failed to consider the deeply congruent nature that has to be created between employee experience and consumer experience. The reality is this—for a lot of major tech companies their employees are their consumers,” said Jarvis. “Unless it’s a SAAS company or a big B2B—they use the product. As a result, DEI strategies cannot just be built to serve the consumer side and not be reflected in how their supporting the employee side.”

“On the flip side,” he added, “You cannot have a strong accessibility strategy internally that supports your workforce, but then your product, which members of your workforce want or need to use to do their jobs, is not accessible.”

Unfortunately, this is something Jarvis sees a lot of—companies with .com platforms selling in a digital space that promote DEI within, but are still fronted by sites those same employees can’t buy product from because are not up to core standards around accessibility.

Another major area of impediment for tech and DEI boils down to a focus on recruitment over retention regarding underrepresented talent.

“The second piece of DEI that the tech industry struggles with is that while there has been a significant push over the last decade towards ensuring diversity recruitment efforts—deep investment has been made in conferences that support the hiring of underrepresented talent—not enough work or practice has been done to supportive retention off those talents,” said Jarvis, pointing to a steep attrition rate for underrepresented groups. “Tech companies are not doing enough work on their internal culture to ask and understand, Why does this talent tend to leave at rates much faster than their non-underrepresented counterparts and what is it that they can do to invest to make meaningful change that ensures that these folks desire and want to actually stay at these companies?”

Moreover, Jarvis notes that the revolving door of talent in those spaces is actually much more harmful to a company’s ability to attract talent for the future despite even some of their deep investments in diversity recruitment.

The third dilemma facing tech in the realm of DEI brings the first two into further perspective and speaks to the work yet to be done—representative leadership.

"I think one of the other gaps that exists for the technology industry to navigate is their ability to build leaders that are reflective of the experiences of their consumer. I don’t think that they necessarily prioritize inclusive succession planning. Put simply, when the tech industry showcase their numbers every year in various diversity or impact reports, you will see marginal progress being made—one or two percent growth, sometimes a little less—in regards to representation for underrepresented communities,” said Jarvis. “But if you then take a look at leadership representation, often times you will see no growth or even negative growth. That is very telling because what it is saying is that the biggest area where decisions are being made in an organization is actually not being made by a group that is reflective of the rich diversity of the consumer set of that organization or the employee base.”

This is a concern that speaks to Jarvis and talent alike.

“What they’re not taking into account is that within each organization there a number of constraints and a number of areas where bias can and is influencing people processes on the promotion and succession side,” said Jarvis. “We create these archetypes around who we think should exist in certain roles. So, in a world where that happens—even if it’s unstated, understated or just not discussed at all, the element of bias that plays out there is still existent even if it’s not talked about.”

As for what is needed most to counter bias and build?

“Intentionality, transparency and accountability—those are the big three missing pieces or roadblocks,” said Jarvis. “If we are not  intentional about this, so many of the biases that are intrinsic to human nature and the human experience just become rife within our people and talent processes.”

Progress a Metric of Mobility

As for measuring progress in your DEI efforts, Jarvis points towards big pictures and distinct actions.

“In terms of progress. I struggle with the word success because levelling the playing field should not be evaluated as a term of success. We’re merely trying to reach where we should have been all along,” said Jarvis. “Progress looks like seeing higher retention rates for underrepresented talent in organizations, seeing boardroom, leadership and C-suite representation more reflective of the consumer and employee bases that are featured within these companies.”

It is seeing these companies proactively discussing openly and externally, here is what we have done really well, here’s where we still have opportunities are holding ourselves accountable, here are the expectations from our consumers and our employee base to be part of that accountability journey—and that focus is more transparently sharing what their experience has looked like,” Jarvis added. “Progress in this way looks like seeing actual economic empowerment and economic mobility of underrepresented folks both within organizations and in society. When you are able to put more money into the pockets and hands of people who need and deserve it the most, you are able to build really great opportunities for these folks to feel more complete and empowered to grow and thrive within organizations.”

And though no one is throwing three pointers on every shot, Jarvis celebrates the milestone moments made, in the making and coming next.

“I think we’re really on the precipice of something great, frankly, in what we’re working on and there is just a really big opportunity for us to build together."