Lets Talk About Difference

Addressing racial and ethnic

diversity & inclusion in Europe
By Minjon Tholen, Cook Ross Inc.

Addressing Racial and Ethnic

Diversity & Inclusion in Europe
Introduction
In Europe, we are still struggling
to talk about race and ethnicity.
The terms race especially are
often omitted for fear of
controversy. Within the diversity
and inclusion space, gender,
(dis)ability, sexual orientation,
etc. have become relatively
acceptable topics to address,
while race/ethnicity is still a
taboo. I was recently in Paris to
serve as an international witness
to the first European Diversity
Conference specifically dedicated
to the issues of Cultures and
Origins, titled: Ethnicity, Culture
(and Social Class): Origins and
Business, Time to come out of the
closet!. The European Network
Against Racism organized the
conference in partnership with
LOral, the French Association of
Diversity

Managers (AFMD) and the ENAR

Foundation.
I was both interested in learning
from and contributing to the
diversity and inclusion
conversation in Europe, not only
because of my work with Cook
Ross Inc., a Washington D.C.
area-based organizational
development and management
consulting firm specializing in
diversity and inclusion, but also
because of my own identity and
personal experiences. I was
adopted from Sri Lanka by Dutch
parents, and grew up as an ethnic
minority in a white middle-class
family in The Netherlands. I was
both different and the same,
Dutch and not Dutch, insider and
outsider, an ethnic minority living
a white middle-class life.

Now living in the United States, I

am interested in exploring diversity
and inclusion from a transnational
perspective.
So why is it still so difficult to talk
about race and ethnicity in Europe?
While I recognize that each
European country has their own
unique situation and challenges, I
suggest that there are several
dynamics that might be at play to
varying degrees in most of them.
This article is intended to share my
view of the issues surrounding the
(racial) difference and diversity
discourse in Europe, and to suggest
exploring some shifts in how we
relate to difference.

Heterogeneity on
the European
continent: a
relatively modern
phenomenon
Compared to the United States,
European nations historically have
been largely homogenous and
immigration by people of a wide
variety of different races/ethnicities
is relatively recent. For example,
decolonization during the 20th
century created a migration flow by
members from the former colonies,
and labor migration for economic
reasons took off about 40 years ago,
when migrant workers from
countries like Turkey and Morocco
moved to European soil. They
settled down, started families, and
have lived in Europe for several
generations now. Initially, the
numbers were small enough to
consider them social groups without
much social-political power, and it
was relatively easy to be tolerant
towards them. As long as they
integrated (or rather, assimilated
to the dominant culture) they were
not much of a concern and could live
along-side the native population
relatively comfortably. But our
countries are becoming more and
more diverse, and immigrants and
ethnic minorities are becoming a
more significant group. They are a
force to be reckoned with, gaining
more cultural, social, economic, and
political power. These demographic
changes are undeniable and will
continue to develop.

Us versus them: living with the other

Given these demographic shifts,

tolerance often considered a
virtue in European countries like
The Netherlands not only lacks
ambition; it is simply not enough
anymore. Tolerance can simply
mean being fine with you living
over there, as long as you dont
bother me. It often means living
along-side each other, instead of
with each other. Tolerance is in line
with the traditional us versus
them framework. Within this
framework, there are two
polarities. One is white, or
otherwise considered indigenous or
members of the majority
population who represent the
national identity and culture of a
country, and who hold the socialpolitical power. The other are
immigrants, members of ethnic
minority groups, people of nonEuropean origins, people of color;
those who might not look, behave,
or believe like the majority. Even if
they might be equal in terms of
their legal, citizenship status, they
often do not necessarily receive
equal respect, opportunities,
resources, and voice in all areas of
life. These inequalities can be
intangible, subjective, and
immeasurable, but they are real
and can have a significant impact
on quality of life. I have noticed
that ethnic minorities are often
cast as guests; temporary and not
inherently belonging to the host
country. Belonging is a critical
need in the human experience, and
the us versus them shows up as
those who belong and those who
do not. Do we want those we
consider others to belong in
Europe?

If so, why do we sometimes

seem to cast them as guests
that dont really belong? If not,
why not? If we are worried
about a scarcity of resources,
we need to be reminded of the
strong business case for
diversity and inclusion. Or
maybe we are concerned that
it will impact our national
culture and identity? Fear of
change is a natural human
reaction, because, for most
people, the status quo is safe
and we are hard-wired to seek
out safety. There is nothing
wrong with this concern. It is
completely natural. However,
we need to remember that
culture is dynamic and always
in flux, changing under the
influence of internal and
external factors, of which
diversity is one. For instance,
can we recognize, whether we
know it or not and whether we
like it or not, how much

European countries have already

been influenced by cultures from
across the world? The key is to
acknowledge unstoppable
changes and find constructive
ways to deal with them. And to
allow our cultures to evolve over
time, expanding from a culture
based on historical homogeneity,
to a culture of diversity and
inclusion. Whatever it may be
that continues to feed into the
us versus them conversation,
lets talk about it and get to the
root of it so we understand what
is really going on. We have to get
real before we can make things
better. Only when we look
beyond tolerance and us versus
them, can we begin to talk about
inclusion. By inclusion I mean
living with each other, instead of
side by side, allowing each other
to contribute, create, and gain
together in a respectful, humane
environment.

Difference as taboo:
confronting the
uncomfortable
It might seem contradictory, but the us
versus them dynamic continues to exist
exactly because of the tendency to ignore
difference. Some countries do not include
race/ethnicity in their census data
collection or are focusing on social
cohesion, which might discourage us from
acknowledging and confronting
difference. It can also lead to color or
race blindness, in service of the need to
all be the same. We might say that we
are all French or we are all Swedish, or
talk about language or religion as code for
race/ethnicity. Often, when we ignore and
do not confront something, there is a
level of discomfort, fear, or taboo
associated with this phenomenon racial
difference in this case. We seem to have a
tendency towards associating difference
with bad, so some of us would rather
not talk about it. But not talking about
difference does not diminish the fact that
Pellentesque viverra. Ut sed odio. Class aptent taciti
it exists. Race, skin color, immigration
sociosqu ad
litora torquent
per origins
conubiaexist,
nostra,just
perlike
status,
and ethnic
inceptos hymenaeos.
Donec
porttitor
venenatisdisability,
felis.
gender, age,
sexual
orientation,
Vivamus orci.
ante. in our
etc.,Vestibulum
and they rutrum
matter.tincidunt
They matter
daily experiences, in the impact of policies
Integer non
sem.
Donec
enim diam,
at, mattis in
and
social
services
and sagittis
programming,
nec, ultricies
vitae, diam.
Donec euismod
turpis et diam.
politics,
interpersonal
dynamics,
opportunities,
and decision-making.
Only
Nunc non nulla.
Duis nec tortor.
Nulla facilisi. In ligula
if we acknowledge
thepulvinar
impactac,
ofnisl.
lectus, nonummy
nec, pulvinar id,
racial/ethnic
difference

without
Pellentesque purus. Proin tristique tempus turpis. Ut id
attaching a value judgment to difference
lectus. Nulla facilisi.
itself can we address the reality of
growing
numbers
our sit
minority
Mauris nonummy
turpis
id nisl.of
Fusce
amet purus.
populations.
Only
then
can
wenulla
break
Donec commodo, lorem id sodales congue,
lacus
through the us versus them and truly
commodo mi, vel volutpat tortor augue id quam. Donec
talk about all of us. Only if we
sit amet massa. Fusce at nulla. Aenean faucibus odio
acknowledge difference can we talk about
eget tortor.diversity.
Pellentesque
Cum
natoque how
Andtellus.
only if
wesociis
understand
penatibus we
et magnis
montes,
nascetur
relatedis
to parturient
difference,
can we
shift our
ridiculus mus
Etiam nislto
elitdiversity
venenatis
consequat
relationship
and
turn it into
inclusion.

Nam vestibulum dolor quis libero.

Recognizing discrimination as pain: a

need for healing

In addition to the association of

difference with bad, the negative
relationship we have to difference might
be the result of historical pain.
Difference, and discrimination based on
difference, can be difficult and
threatening to discuss. Most people like
to think of themselves as fair and
equitable, treating others the way they
would like to be treated. For someone to
say that they feel discriminated when the
other person is not aware of or
intentional about possible discriminatory
behavior, can feel threatening, offensive
or difficult to understand. The natural
emotional reaction to this is to become
defensive or withdrawn, in an effort to
protect ourselves. For those who feel
discriminated against, the emotional
reactions can stem from feeling inferior,
invisible, misunderstood, limited, a lack
of belonging, or not good enough. It can
also generate feelings of powerlessness.
Ive noticed that in debates about race,
the emotional reactions from both
parties are motivating the conversation,
rather than the human beings behind
them. For example, someone accuses
someone else of being racist, and the
other person responds that they are
exaggerating or that if they dont like
how they are treated, they should go
back to their own countries since they
are merely guests. In situations like
this, the former speaks from the need to
call a spade a spade finding some
solace or power in the ability to accuse
someone of something. The latter, on the
other hand, uses their majority status to
silence/minimize/ridicule the others
voice and experience, and remind the
other person of their temporary, inferior,
and even expendable status.

Both speak from a need for

defensiveness and self-preservation, and
both feed right into again that us
versus them conversation. This happens
both on interpersonal and societal levels.
Exploring how we relate to difference
requires confronting ourselves with our
own background, biases and pain
surrounding this issue. These are often
invisible to us, but they inform much of
what we feel, think and do, and are
therefore critical to become aware of.
How might our background impact the
way we see the world? What
unconscious biases do we bring to our
interactions with others? It is important
to remember in this inquiry that bias is a
natural function of the human mind,
critical for our survival, and at the same
time, can cause us to have unwarranted
judgments about others that might
translate into subtle and not so subtle
discrimination and exclusion.
This exploration can help us practice a
more conscious awareness, allow us to
start working through any pain that
might be associated with difference,
mitigate our biases, and start the healing
process on individual, organizational and
societal levels. I suggest that the reason
why policy and compliance efforts
around difference and diversity have not
moved the needle as much as we hoped
to in Europe, is partly due to our inability
to address our (unconscious) biases, and
the pain and subsequent healing process
necessary to create an ontological and
emotional shift in how we relate and deal
with difference.

Courageous conversations: the audacity

to speak and the strength to listen
Creating a breakthrough will require us
to have courageous conversations. It
seems that in Europe, we are still
struggling to find a terminology and to
integrate it into our mainstream
discourse. A lack of vocabulary prevents
us from speaking, from verbalizing our
experiences, from interpreting
information, and from processing
emotions. Courageous conversations
require vocabulary, space, voice,
listening, authenticity, and commitment
to collective, constructive action. They
can only occur if ethnic minorities/
immigrants and their allies are
empowered to find and claim their voice.
One of the necessary steps for this to
happen is to address our internalized
biases. Biases and stereotypes about
social minority groups that exist in our
societies are often not just internalized
by majority groups, but also by members
of the minority groups as well. The lens
through which they view themselves is
impacted by those biases, potentially
holding them back from speaking up,
challenging these biases, and claiming
opportunities for themselves. But thats
only part of the story, because even if
these groups have a voice, is there a
listening for their concerns? As a person
of color growing up in The Netherlands,
Ive regularly experienced my voice going
unheard or being minimized and
dismissed. The biases regarding the
validity of the voice of ethnic minorities
projected onto me prevented others to
truly hear what I wanted to share.
Audiences of our voices need to examine
their own biases and their own listening
of certain groups of people, in order to
really hear us, unfiltered by their own
lenses and assumptions.

Earlier I mentioned allies. Allyship

between dominant and non-dominant
groups is another factor we should
explore. First, because it helps us to
amplify our efforts, since were
broadening our base. And second,
because our biases can cause us to hear
members of the dominant group
differently than those of the nondominant group. In cases where voices
of non-dominant groups are invalidated,
the same words coming from dominant
groups might have a greater impact. This
relates to why it is also so important for
diversity and inclusion practitioners to
do our own work, as outlined in the
previous section: we can provide the
clearing for these conversations and
allyship to happen, but only if we
acknowledge and confront our own
internal processes.

Cultural competency: leveraging tools

to live and work across difference
Another factor that might contribute to
the challenges of talking about
racial/ethnic difference in Europe is that
people might feel like we dont have the
skills and tools to relate to those we
consider different from ourselves.
Acknowledging difference means living
and working across difference. How well
are we preparing ourselves for crosscultural communication? There is some
cultural competency work in Europe that
addresses cross-cultural communication
between people and organizations of
different European countries, but there
is very little attention for cross-cultural
communication among people from
different immigrant and ethnic minority
groups originating outside Europe.
Cultural competency tools could help
reduce fear, anxiety, or concern about
dealing with difference, so a critical part
of diversity and inclusion work is
comprehensive cultural competency
work.

First and foremost, we need to become

familiar with the concept of social
primacy, to help us understand what
motivates the need for and development
of collective cultures. It further requires
us to identify cultural patterns, uncover
cultural memes, and assess how our
systems and structures might hinder or
promote cultural competency in our
organizations and societies. And it
includes cultural competency training in
understanding and valuing our own and
each others cultural identity (awareness
of self and others) and cultural capital
(the business-case for cultural diversity),
developing cultural humility, cultivating
cross-cultural knowledge and skills, and
expanding our cultural bandwidth and
flexibility.

Shifting the discourse: embracing diversity as

opportunity and advancing a culture of
inclusion
The European discourse around racial/ethnic difference often appears to
be mainly focused on fixing the problems we have around these issues.
There is a sense of something is wrong, and the energy around these
topics might occur as sadness, frustration, anger, powerlessness, etc.
And of course, as discussed in this paper, we are facing some serious
challenges that have deep emotions and real impacts associated with
them. But a focus on fixing can have the opposite effect. No one likes to
feel like they or their society has to be fixed, because it implies that
something is wrong with them and that often leads to defensiveness or
disengagement. How might we be able to shift the tone of the narrative?
As I have attempted to do in this paper, can we understand and
appreciate the specific history of diversity in Europe at large, and
individual countries specifically, and where we are in our journey
towards a more heterogeneous Europe? Can we acknowledge the
emotions that are at the root of these issues for all of the parties
involved, meet people where they are, and work with them in respectful
partnership to get us where we want to be? In order for us to provide a
clearing for this kind of inquiry to occur, we have to do our own work as
practitioners; exploring any pain or wounding we might have and
healing ourselves, as well as practicing consciousness around our own
identity, lenses onto the world, and biases. Only then can we support
others in doing the same. Furthermore, I suggest that we start shifting
our relationship to difference and diversity from a problem were trying
to fix, to an opportunity to enhance our societies, communities,
economies, organizations, and interpersonal relationships. Inclusion is
about making difference/diversity work, which is important for societies
and organizations to function at their highest potential. It is an
opportunity for growth, community, social stability, and allows people to
feel like they belong so they become more engaged and invested in
contributing to their societies and organizations. When we start
approaching diversity and inclusion from a place of possibility, rather
than a problem, our solutions will be more creative, innovative, positive,
and inspiring. This requires a conscious shift in discourse and a focus on
comprehensive societal and organizational culture change that
promotes diversity and fosters inclusion.

Cook Ross Inc.

8630 Fenton Street, Suite 824
Silver Spring, MD 20910
United States
+1 (301) 565-4035
http://www.cookross.com
lookingforanswers@cookross.com