Black Engagement and Advancement Team Design Jam Sessions, February 2021: Qualitative Analysis

By Lori-Anne Bradley

Acknowledgement

The Black Engagement and Advancement Team would like to thank all those involved with the Design Jam report for their thorough analysis, thoughtful and insightful comments on this collection. We would also like to acknowledge and thank the Design Jam Working Group participants and event enablers from the Human Resources Services Branch as well as the Public Affairs and Stakeholder Relations Branch for their efforts in delivering the February 2021 Design Jams.

Background

On February 23 and February 24, 2021, the Black Engagement and Advancement Team of the Human Resources Services Branch (HRSB) of Employment and Social Development (ESDC) organized two sessions (French and English) for ESDC employees. The format of the sessions was a “Design Jam” focussed on audience participation to co-develop or brainstorm solutions to an identified problem. The intent of the sessions was to explore two key areas: specific terms and their unintended consequences or implications for the Black community, and opportunities to develop solutions for the Black community for an improved work experience.

Broader Context and Conceptual Framework

December 2020, Nan DasGupta et al. reused an argument that many Canadian social scientists and social activists have repeated in the past few years, which is the idea that racial discrimination and violence against Blacks and other racialized groups in the United States does not happen in Canada. DasGupta et al. argue:

  • While Canadians often believe that our country is a model when it comes to inclusion, the hard truth is we have a long way to go toward achieving equity for the Black population in Canada. A new review and compilation of the available data by BCG and CivicAction demonstrate the depth and pervasiveness of anti-Black racism in Canada, and how systemic racism against Black individuals appears across their full lifecycle in areas like education, employment, healthcare, and policingFootnote 1.

The authors cite a 2019 survey that indicates that while about 50% of Canadians believed discrimination against Black people was ‘a thing of the past’, 83% of Black people in Canada said they were treated unfairly at least some of the time. In fact, a 2019 report by the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, based on a survey by The Environics Institute for Survey ResearchFootnote 2, showed that (2019: 9)

  • Canadians are more likely to see racial discrimination to be a function of the prejudiced attitudes and actions of individuals rather than the systemic foundation of the country’s laws and institutions; and this is regardless of whether the target is Indigenous, Black, South Asian or Chinese. Moreover, this perspective is largely the same across the population and racial groups, although younger Canadians are more apt to see both causes as equally problematic, and First Nations respondents are more likely than others to believe that Black people in Canada experience systemic racism.

The impact of systemic racial discrimination in Canada is also reflected in a variety of socioeconomic outcomes. For example, in the research compiled by DasGupta et a. (2020) about the Black experience in the Greater Toronto Area:

  • Black students are four times more likely to be expelled from a Toronto high school than White students;
  • Black workers are twice as likely as Asian workers and four times as likely as White workers to report experiencing racial discrimination in major decisions at workplaces in Canada;
  • Black university graduates earn only 80 cents for every dollar earned by White university graduates – despite having the same credentials;
  • Black women are three times less likely to have a family doctor than non-racialized women in Ontario;
  • Black residents are 20 times more likely than a White resident to be shot dead by police in Toronto.

Race relations studies in Canada and the United States have, for years, shown that ‘race’ does not exist in nature, and therefore, biology, whether phenotypic or genetic, was merely the marker of race and could not and did not do the work of differentiation and distinction. ‘… yet, it is an integral part of the classificatory system through which a racialized social order is produced and maintained’ (Torres, Miron and Inda, 199:5)Footnote 3.

Within the federal public service, systemic discrimination has been recognized for decades. It started with the adoption of the Employment Equity Act (EEA) in 1986, just four years after the adoption of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The public consultations and the debates in the Houses of Commons leading to the EEA adoption are full of references to a major contradiction within Canadian liberal and democratic system. This contradiction concerns the persistence of a system of privileges and discriminatory practices, often operating outside the control of individuals, and the adherence to a system of merit and equal opportunities. These contradictions have been well articulated by Saskatchewan sociologist Peter Li (2007:37):

  • As ideologies, liberal democracy and racism are contradictory because the former rejects the relevance of ‘race’ in determining the worth of human beings and the latter thrives on the signification of individuals and groups based on ‘racial’ and other superficial features. Liberal democracy is premised upon the principal of equality, under which all human beings are equal. Racism, on the other hand, posits essential differences between peoples, produced either by heredity or by adaptation, which in turn produce further differences in human capacity and achievement

As a result, racialized groups continue to face major barriers in recruitment, advancement and retention in the federal public service and in the private sector. Using employment statistics from October 2020, DasGupta et al. (2020) show that ‘the unemployment rate for Black Canadians was 5 points higher than the rate for Canadians who are not a visible minority (11.7% vs. 6.7%).’ Furthermore, when they succeed in getting work, Black people tend to hit a glass ceiling:

  • In addition to facing microaggressions and having to “code switch” (defined as a person changing the way they express themselves when they are around non-racialized people in the workplace), Black employees have low rates of sponsorship and find hidden biases in promotion processes. This is reflected in the data that shows Black leaders hold less than 1% of executive roles and board seats at major Canadian companies.

This low representation is also reflected the federal public service. While the representation of ‘visible minorities’ is equal or superior to their availability rate at the entryFootnote 4 and non-managerial levels, it is persistently low at the executive level. For example, according to employment statistics from the Treasury Board of CanadaFootnote 5, out of 5,887 employees at the executive level, only 1.6% were Black. All racialized groups were under-represented at this level.

This is the overall context against which the Design Jam was held. While the data analysed in this report is not representative and cannot be used to generalize, it is consistent with systematic observations and scientifically sound studies of similar issues.

Data

The first Design Jam session took place on February 23 in English and involved 175 participants from across Canada. The second session took place on February 24 and involved 88 participants from across Canada. SlidoFootnote 6, an online polling application, was used to create the questionnaires that contained 42 questions, such as:

  • Do you believe that micro-aggressions exist? (Yes/No). Why?
  • What does the term Anti-Black Racism make you want to say or do?
  • What positive/negative word do you associate with the word “Black”?

Data from the Slido questionnaire was downloaded and presented in Microsoft Excel as a series of rows, organized horizontally as: question, then response. The rows did not contain participant identifiers. The response data consisted of a single word, short lists, short phrases and sometimes a few sentences depending on the question. The number of responses to each question varied. In some cases, the number of responses exceeded the number of those expected. For example, when a quantifiable question-response format indicated a number of “no” responses, there would be a greater number of textual ‘if not why’ answers. The reason for this issue was that participants used Slido to enter the answers to the questionnaire, which is a data collection tool designed to encourage group participation and the generation of ideas. Thus, there were no built-in skip patterns, which allowed participants to answer all of the questions, if desired. Reflective of the group facilitation format, the group leaders may have chosen to skip certain questions, as there was no response to some questions in the data from one group, but responses in the other group data.

Method

The data was provided in and analyzed using Microsoft ExcelFootnote 7. The first three questions regarding where participants worked, where they would like to holiday and what they like about working from home are not included in this report. The researcher used an iterative approach to examine and code the contents of each question; conducting a “close read” creating and attaching codes to categorize the responses accordingly.

The researcher chose to scan the data quickly, then, conduct the close read question by question, writing the analysis results one question at a time as shown in the paragraphs below. The format of the data did not allow the researcher to know which participants had answered the previous question nor, how they answered. There were no unique identifiers allocated to each row, making it impossible to attach more than one response to any one participant. Therefore, individual thoughts, feelings and experiences could not be linked to the types of ideas and opinions expressed to other questions. In short, cross tabulation was not possible. Of particular relevance, those who chose to self-identify personal characteristics in some questions, such as race or gender, is not reflected throughout the analysis, unless identified within the response.

Given the variation in the number of participants answering each question and between groups (there were a few questions not answered or not answered by one group) the researcher analyzed the data by question. The responses from the two groups were combined for analysis. The researcher clearly understood most responses however, there were a few outliers or unclear responses that could not be understand without more context.

The data is presented in order of mention, generally, with the most dominant theme in the beginning of the section, followed by less common sentiments, unless otherwise specified. This is in no way the order of importance of any one comment, but rather, reflective of how often participants shared those types of thoughts, feelings or ideasFootnote 8. It is important to note that, due to time constraints; the researcher did not include the nuance of every idea, but rather tried to categorize the types of ideas. Further, while the summary and conclusion identify both dominant and non-dominant themes, given that not every participant answered every question, it is suggested to be cautious in attributing thoughts, feelings and opinions more broadly.

Analysis: Review of Individual Items

“How does the term Anti-Black Racism make you feel?”

Question 4: When asked “How does the term Anti-Black Racism make you feel?”, 172 participants answered. Most provided one-word responses that were personal or feelings-based, while about a third indicated broader more socially, or systemically focussed ideas.

Most commonly, participants indicated feeling upset in some way, with sadness and despair commonly reported. Many felt anger, a few indicated frustration. Others used words to describe a sense of victimization, such as “targeted” and “fearful.” Several participants indicated feeling uncomfortable with the term, a couple noted confusion. A few indicated that they felt unknowledgeable about the topic.

Those who responded with more systemically, based comments most often, acknowledged its existence as a current and ongoing issue with many of those participants questioning why it persists. Comments around social injustice were common within this broader sense of the question. Conversely, some took a positive stance on the question, indicating, “it’s about time” that it was addressed, some feeling “acknowledged” by the discussion of the topic. A few provided solution focussed or action oriented comments, “engage for change” and “fight the good fight.”

“What does the term Anti-Black Racism make you want to say or do?”

Question 5 : When asked “What does the term Anti-Black Racism make you want to say or do?”, 168 participants provided a response. The responses were brief ranging from one-word answers to short four or five word phrases. Overwhelmingly, the most common theme was to take some form of action to bring about change. While, many simply stated they wanted to “take action” or “fix it” others were more concrete suggesting the need for listening, understanding, personal learning, as well as, societal education. Many wanted to speak out or “call out” Anti-Black Racism and share their knowledge and experience to teach others. Several wanted to be allies. There was a sense of urgency and passion for change in many responses: “Act immediately.”

Others focussed on what they might say, with a few questioning “why” racism persists. Only a couple participants indicated that the statement had no impact on a desire to say or do anything, with no further explanation.

While the focus was on challenging racism, a few responses showed frustration, even a sense of fear, when asked what they wanted to say or do, as they wrote that the term “Anti-Black Racism” made them feel the need to “protect” themselves or their families. A few wrote about the need to stand up for themselves. One participant simply wrote “powerless.”

“What do you think when you hear the word Ally?”

Question 6 : When asked “What do you think when you hear the word Ally?” 181 participants answered. Most responses were one word, none more than six. Of the responses provided, close to three quarters were positive in nature. More than half of the positive comments centred around collaboration or support with people using words like “teamwork” “solidarity” and “partnership” as well as the word “support” itself.

After collaboration and support themed responses, the next most commonly expressed sentiments around the word “ally” were not as positive. A few responses reflected an element of distrust and a perceived lack of authenticity. Some felt that the word itself was a “buzzword” or “trendy” while others dismissed the concept using terms like as “fake” or “fake friend.” A few used strong words, such as “performative” “white privilege” and “saviour-ism.” A couple found the word divisive and one participant expressed frustration at being asked about allies repeatedlyFootnote 9.

Still, many attributed positive connotations such as “friend” and a few wanted to know how to become an ally and to learn more. Raising awareness and learning were important themes with statements such as “make the connection.” Others indicated that it made them feel “hopeful” and indicated that allies are “needed.”

Thus, there were strong thoughts and feelings expressed about the word and concept “ally” and while most were positive, the more negative opinions seem to speak to a broader issue of authenticity.

“What does the term “Ally” make you want to say or do?”

Question 7 : There were 156 responses to the question, “What does the term “Ally” make you want to say or do?”. Almost all of the responses centred on positive action. About a quarter of responses used terms such as “act” “forge ahead” and “participate.” Other action-oriented responses were more prescriptive, suggesting collaboration, raising awareness and initiating dialogue. The theme of being supportive “how can I help?” or seeking support from allies “have my back” was again, highlighted.

Authenticity and accountability to the term “ally” came through strongly, among several participants. Calls to “walk the talk” and “ensure accountability” were among such responses. One participant wished to act authentically, similar to a few others who identified the need for self-reflection and learning about their own privilege. Only a few participants indicated that they did not want to say or do anything.

“If you were in a situation where you were the minority in the room, how does that make you feel and why?”

Question 8 : Participants were asked: “If you were in a situation where you were the minority in the room, how does that make you feel and why?” There were 175 responses. Most responses consisted of one or two short sentences. Almost all participants reported having been in this scenario. Many reported that it was commonplace for them or “the norm.” Where people expanded on feelings, they most commonly reported feeling discomfort. This was closely followed by feelings of isolation, exclusion and loneliness: “it’s normal, but isolating.” While a few felt invisible, some reported feeling very noticeable, self-conscious and a few described a sense of pressure to represent their race. “The onus is on me to represent ALL Black people,” indicated one participant, a sentiment similarly indicated by others. This concept of voice came up a few times, particularly, in terms of feeling nervous to speak, inhibited, even fearful. A few talked about not being able to be themselves: “The story of my life! Inhibited!” wrote one participant, while another answered: “I have to watch everything I say.”

Conversely, several participants talked about pride. One participant stated: “I hold my head high and I am proud to represent others.” A few who described being “used to” being the minority and went on to say that they had no issues with it. Similarly, a few said it depended who was in the room and that it was not always a difficult experience.

Overall, however, the experience of having been the minority in the room, while commonplace, was typically a challenging one. Most responses described isolation, discomfort or a sense of inhibition. The pressure to work harder, speak better, and act as a racial representative was common. Less commonly, several indicated that they felt proud to be in the room, while others had experienced no problems.

“What positive emotions do you associate with the term Black?”

Question 9 : Participants were asked: “What positive emotions do you associate with the term Black?”. There were 169 responses, most containing one word, although there were some with several words or a phrase. Responses were more often descriptors or concepts, than emotions. There was a wide range of responses. Strength was the most common response, closely followed by pride, then beauty. These words were often used together in one response: “strong, resilient, proud, beautiful.” Resilience, followed by powerful, were the next most mentioned responses. Some participants provided other similar sentiments, such as “perseverance.” Emotions, particularly, “joy” and “love” were noted by a few, while others used descriptors like “warm” or “welcoming”.

Some participants associated culture and diversity with the term, while a few others referenced “heritage,” “the history of humanity” and the “Root of humanity.” “Unique” was used by several participants and several others stood out with answers that seemed to deconstruct the term “Black” with responses such as “I am brown. Black has a more deeper meaning” and “Black = presence of all colors.” These types of responses were not as common.

“What negative emotions do you associate with the term Black?”

Question 10 : When asked “What negative emotions do you associate with the term Black?” participants provided a wide range of responses including descriptors, feelings and concepts. There were 165 answers of varying lengths, many containing one word. Most described stereotypical attributes and some expressed frustration, as this participant noted “Anger due to false and negative associations.” Another shared they were “Always having to live up to being ‘cool’ and a sense of (a) certain level of masculinity to uphold.” Others focussed on social situations of disadvantage, injustice, discrimination, and again, a sense of pressure to address stereotypes and feelings of judgement, by working “twice as hard.” This theme was similarly, indicated in the question about being the minority in the room. Participants reported the word “misunderstood” several times, as well as, words or phrases that would indicate a sense of inadequacy, such as “less than.” There were other associations shared, such as anger, fear or being feared, and a sense of exclusion with words such as “unwanted” “other” and “unworthy.” Several participants indicated that they had no negative emotions associated with the term “Black.”Footnote 10

Micro-aggressions

Questions 11, 12, 13 : Participants were asked about the concept of micro-aggression. 176 participants answered the ‘yes/no’ question “Do you believe that micro-aggressions exist?” Yet 66 answers were provided to the follow-up question: “For those of you who said you don’t believe that micro-aggressions exist, why not?”. The responses to this question varied and contained short phrases, but the most common theme was of misunderstanding. More than a quarter of the participants explained that micro-aggressions are generally unintentional, although the negative impact was highlighted nonetheless. Participants noted unconscious bias, such as “unintentional discrimination” and inadvertently, inappropriate questions. For example, there were comments made about being asked to touch hair or about country of origin (even though they were born in Canada), noting that these were not usual questions for Caucasian or non-Black Canadians. Many noted micro-aggressions as commonplace, with several emphasizing the impact: “They may be asking with positive impressions but don’t understand the impact on the other person.” Another explained that while people may not be aware that they are doing it, “it ends up being the straw that breaks the camel's back.”

A few noted that they learned from the session and now understood the term, while a few still wanted more information. Several felt that people were “too sensitive.” “It’s just curiosity. We mean well.” explained one participant. The term did not resonate with a few participants who provided unique responses like this: “It does not exist because harassment does not exist” and “where is your sense of humour?”. This type of response was not common, but noteworthy.

Overall, it seemed like a common experience, yet there seemed to be less comfort with the term when compared to the responses about “Anti-Black Racism.” There were fewer responses for comparison and again, some confusion around being required to answer: both of which may have an impact on the quality and nature of responses.

Of the 147 participants who answered the question “For those of you who said you do believe micro-aggressions exist, why?” most, favoured short phrases, over shorter one-word responses. HalfFootnote 11 explained clearly that they know micro-aggressions exist because they had experienced them, while several indicated that they had witnessed it “I see it every day.” Many provided responses that included examples or descriptions of the negative impact: “I have experienced it. Made me feel small. Affect on my self-esteem.” Another shared “Death by a thousand cuts— each comment may seem insignificant, but accumulated becomes very heavy.” Some gave specific examples of common experiences. Presence or absence of an accent was mentioned: “you don't sound Black, you speak perfect English.” This participant answered with a common theme: “ Because I get asked where I come from.” A few noted that people were “surprised” that they were educated. There were also negative experiences outside of work, such as “being followed around and watched in stores by employees.”

Participants who had experienced, witnessed or committed micro-aggressions, sometimes discussed the notion of misunderstanding, innocence, or unintentional offence in various ways. Several discussed the concept of “unconscious bias.” A few indicated that they had committed micro-aggressions themselves and were pleased to be learning about the concept, while a few others indicated that there is a need for more education or improved understanding. Participants used the word “ignorance” several times, some simply stating the word, while others mentioned the need for learning. Others provided more context: “ignorance, the way we are raised.”

Some comments focussed on systemic or broader societal issues. A few noted how privilege is interwoven into social interactions creating not only unconscious bias as mentioned above, but also a sense of superiority for the aggressor. This participant explained that: “the people inflicting it think they are superior and entitled. Even if it they don't actively think this...it's unconsciously ingrained.” Another explained: “It exists because it’s rooted in ideology that is taught from (the) dominant race and culture. It becomes second nature and subconsciously exhibited.” A couple of participants mentioned intersectionality and how a variety of micro-aggressions can compound the issue, such as being a Black woman.

Overall, it seems that the level of understanding particularly, among those who experience it is high, while others had gained some understanding and insight. Some indicated that they had innocently, been guilty of committing micro-aggressions, even attributing it to curiosity or human nature. Still the prevalence and frequency stood out clearly, as well as the negative impact.

Self-identification

Questions 14, 15, 16 : Participants were asked if they self-identify, presumably in employment processes. Out of 160 responses, 78% said that they did self-identify. When asked “For those of you who said you don’t self-identify, why not?”, 58 provided a short response. Almost half indicated that they did not self-identify for fear they would not be treated positively. Typical comments included: “So as not to bias the judgment” and “afraid it will be used against me.”Footnote 12 There was a lot of variation in the remainder of the responses, but wanting hiring to be merit-based was the next commonly shared theme. Participants shared not wanting to be hired based on “colour of skin” for Employment Equity (EE) purposes feeling like a “token” or worried others will think they are not qualified: “I want to be recognized for my achievements, not perceived as an EE hire.”

Several participants indicated that they did not have anything to self-identify. The remaining responses varied. A few were not sure there was any benefit to the data collection. Others did not feel it should be necessary. A few did not understand it: “The self-identification process is unclear” and a few indicated that the practice was racist in itself: “Official racialization.”

When asked “For those of you who said you do self-identify, why?” 112 participants responded. Most responses were short phrases. More than half indicated that they did so for statistical purposes or to ensure representation: “I want to contribute to the data and hoping the data helps.” “Equity” was similarly, highlighted as this participant shared: “To break the glass ceilings.” While some indicated that they self-identified to increase the chances of being hired, a few expressed doubt that it did in fact help. A few talked about how it could contribute to accountability as is noted in this response, “not to say that minorities do not participate” and several discussed the important influence of statistics on the development of policy. Overall, these types of responses, which were the majority, centred on the importance of data collection to encourage fairness, create a more representative workforce and inform human resource management and policy development.

The next most commonly noted reason was a sense of pride. This concept stood out from other responses. These participants sometimes simply stated the word “pride” while others were more explanatory with comments like “I’m proud of my ethnicity” and “I am a proud Black public servant, and want to make sure I'm counted.”

Lastly, there were a few, who indicated that they self-identified because they were encouraged to do so and a few who thought it was mandatory.

Authenticity of Sense of Self at Work

Question 17, 18, 19 : Participants were asked about a sense of personal authenticity in the workplace. They were first asked a “yes” or “no” question and received 163 responses: “At work, do you feel like your authentic self at work?”. There were 80 responses to the next question “For those of you who said you don’t feel like your authentic selves at work, why not?”. Most responses contained one or two short phrases and were about the need to blend or fit into the dominant workplace culture. Many expressed feelings, such as fear, particularly the fear of judgement. Nearly a quarter of the responses included the concept of judgement with statements such as this: “fear of judgment, laugh at me.” Others felt that there was no support for their differences: “diversity and inclusion is not entirely supported.” Lack of support for diversity was reported to be rooted in management or the culture of the public service itself by several participants. For example, participants made comments such as, “management won't support me being real” and “I was told by a co-worker that my hair was unprofessional… My hair was out in a curly fro.” Fitting or blending in was a common concept. Participants shared feelings such as being “belittled”, “ridiculed” and “not to be accepted.” A few mentioned that they felt that they would not be “taken seriously” or that their work might be undervalued if they were to be authentic in the workplace.

Interestingly, a few noted that given the current virtual work context, they were better able to be their authentic selves. This theme came through in the responses to the next question “For those of you who said you do feel like your authentic selves at work, why?” with answers such as this very telling response: “Telework has benefited my mental health because I don't have to 'act' or code switch ALL the time, which is incredibly draining.”

Most commonly, however, answers reflected sentiments about being true to oneself: “I live truthfully and honestly.” Similarly, participants indicated feeling proud and confident to be authentic: “ Yes because I am proud to be Black and I am who I am.” Another participant shared they felt confident to take action should they face discrimination. About a fifth of the responses described positive workplace experiences that allowed them to be themselves. This included acceptance by co-workers, team diversity and supportive managers.

Perceptions of Privilege

Questions 20, 21, 22 : Next, participants were asked about the concept of privilege. Sixty-six percent (66%) answered “no” when asked: “Do you feel you benefit from privilege?” They were then, asked “For those of you who said you don’t benefit from privilege, why not?”. There were 90 answers consisting of short phrases.

Different from the answers to previous questions, more than a third of the responses contained comments that self-identified the participant as Black or a minority. These responses, intended to answer why they did not benefit from privilege, most often simply stating sentiments such as, “Because I’m Black” or “I’m a double minority.” Several identified as being a woman as well: “I am female and Black.” Similar to the answers to other questions, some participants indicated a feeling of pressure to work harder than their non-Black peers and that there was a clear sense of being overlooked or not as far ahead in their careers. This participant described their frustration: “ Despite my darkness I'm transparent.” Another stated that, “ The level of barrier for a racialized person or woman is far too high compared to the white man and our myogenic-white society.”

“Layers” of privilege were identified. A few participants discussed their struggles with needing to learn French, while others discussed poor recognition of foreign qualifications. Several indicated that they did not recognize how privilege had helped them: “I have never been the subject of an undue advantage more than my colleagues, quite the contrary.” It was unclear what was meant by a few responses since they did not self-identify race: “I do my job I'm appreciated and that's it.” However, overall, there was recognition of privilege, with most indicating they did not benefit.

When asked “For those of you who said you do benefit from privilege, why?” there were 80 responses. Most responses contained short phrases listing various points of privilege. The most commonly listed recognition of privilege was education with well over a third of participants including it. The next most commonly identified point of privilege was currently having employment. This was often listed with having education. Some self-identified as being “White” as a point of privilege, while several identified that they had experienced privilege because they were “lighter skinned.” One participant reported being told they had “Caucasian like features.” Similarly, several indicated that their “name” had allowed them some privilege: “lighter skinned, non-ethnic sounding name,” replied one participant. Another answered listing three points: “university educated, Anglophone, name.” Language came up for some participants as they discussed being an English speaker, bilingual or speaking multiple languages as a clear privilege.

Participants commonly highlighted the concept of place. Whether it be growing up in a good neighbourhood, community or where people live now, some participants recognized privilege in where they live. For example, this participant explained that being “born and raised in Canada” gave them the ability to “‘code switch’ when needed,” while this participant noted the privilege of living in “a democratic and peaceful country.” Some participants noted their parents, such as a “strong mother” or a “supportive” family as a privilege. This participant shared: “as a child of immigrant parents, there is a sense of privilege … knowing the struggles my family went through to make a life for me here.” Having a partner and family was noted as privilege and generally included in a list of examples: “I am healthy and I have a great job and family.”

Some participants noted financial security or being middle class, and a few highlighted networks and opportunities for employment. Several participants mentioned privilege points such as health or ability and a few mentioned the privilege of being male. This participant wrote: “ White. But no privilege regarding the fact that I am a woman.” A few included being heterosexual or cisgender in their examples.

Unconscious Bias

Questions 23, 24, 25 : Ninety-eight percent (98%) responded “yes” to the question “Do you believe that unconscious bias exists?”. However, when asked “For those of you who said you don’t believe that unconscious bias exists, why not?” 37 participants chose to provide a response, perhaps misunderstanding the question or influenced by session activities (there would only be 4 responses expected). The answers were short sentences, with about a quarter explaining that unconscious bias is caused by lack of awareness and one-fifth explaining, similarly, that it is “normalized” in society.

When asked “For those of you who said you do believe that unconscious bias exists, why?”, 119 participants weighed in with an answer. The answers were short and varied, but the most common sentiment was that participants believe it exists because they either experience it or witness it. “It’s my common experience,” wrote one participant. Some felt that unconscious bias is embedded in our society or culture, while others explained it as learned, particularly while young. A participant explained that “influences such as our upbringing, background and experiences can play a big part in shaping our choices and perspective, whether we realize it or not.”

Several mentioned history and the perpetuation of biases: “Because they have passed from generation to generation.” Others pointed to “stereotypes in the media.” Some participants explained that it is simply “human nature” to develop biases and there was a sense of innocence or lack of intention as this participant explained plainly, that it was “because we're operating from unique perspectives and there is no possible way for us to be conscious of everything we do, or why we do it.”

Reducing Barriers to Career Advancement

Question 26: Participants were asked to provide ideas to address barriers to promotion (How might we reduce barriers to promotion?). 129) participants provided a response. There were a variety of responses, but transparency in the hiring process, as well as, the need for development opportunities were the most common.

Participants suggested reviewing staffing processes. There was a call for more communication and open advertising: “no more hidden job opportunities”. Several called for more accountability in the hiring process. Merit-based hiring practices were highlighted, such as “blind hiring” and the development of a “data bank” of skills and talents. Ensuring a more diverse assessment board was suggested by a few as this participant stated: “Fair representation of Black people on hiring boards”. Several mentioned training on bias for managers, leaders and staff, while a few felt there needed to be more diverse representation among leaders or managersFootnote 13.

Many participants felt there was a need for better access to development opportunities including:

  • Mentorship
  • Job shadowing
  • Coaching
  • Sponsorship
  • Increased acting/assignment opportunities
  • French language training
  • Job competition skills training

Overall, there were many ideas to address barriers with the overall common theme of ensuring equity and merit-based hiring.

Workplace Engagement and Sense of Belonging

Question 27 : When asked the question “How might we foster a sense of belonging in the workplace/community?”, 118 participants provided a response. The answers were similar in length, mostly consisting of a couple of short sentences or ideas. They were most often focussed on opportunities for learning, whether it was through training, informal activities or more formal cultural events. Opportunities for openness, safe dialogue and authenticity were favoured concepts. For example, comments such as “implement inclusion because we believe, not because we have to” were common as participants sought authentic messaging, training, and event planning. “Making Black history education less passive and more active/mandatory” was shared by another participant, while this participant explained the need to “allow people to speak openly and honestly (on both sides)” to better facilitate understanding. The importance of having “uncomfortable conversations” was emphasized. Many spoke of the need for these opportunities for shared learning to be ongoing.

Other responses focussed on management and leadership action and accountability: “Make it a requirement in leaders’ PMAs.” Attaching these types of requirements to the performance evaluations of those in leadership roles came up in response to other questions. The need for those in leadership roles (from team leaders to senior management) to attend training on topics including, racism, unconscious bias and micro-aggression was mentioned by several participants; while others wanted more diversity or representativeness reflected among those in management roles. A few identified a need for corporate messaging to be more authentic and meaningful: “The Corporate messages have to be more real. They tend to be very neutral.”

Education and Awareness

Question 31 :Footnote 14 There were 22 responses to the question “How might we further education and awareness?” The responses were short, one sentence, and very similar to the responses to the question regarding fostering a sense of belonging in the workplace. Almost half were about increasing and supporting opportunities for dialogue: “Talk about it in the workplace. Organization of awareness sessions where everyone must attend and not those who want or a given group.” The need for sessions to be mandatory was highlighted, as well as the theme of training for management. Mentorship ideas, such as a “diversity buddy” were mentioned.

Empowerment

Question 34 : When asked “How might we exercise leadership and foster empowerment?”, 91 participants provided an answer. Most answers consisted of one or two short phrases, often more than one idea. The answers were varied in specificity, but the most common theme was of ensuring more opportunities for representation through supportive mechanisms such as mentorship, assignments, targeted hiring, hiring equity, and special projects. “Taking advantage of our employees’ talents at all levels which in turn will yield leaders and empowered employees” was a clear suggestion made by one participant. As in other responses, accountability at the management level, including training and policy changes came through strongly as this participant suggested trying “training and simulation exercises where leaders are challenged on realities of Black people.”

Several highlighted dialogue or opportunities to speak, collaborate or share as important ways to create an empowered workplace. This participant sums up the importance of dialogue: “Listen to mid-career employees who have experienced Anti-Black Racism. They may have something relevant to say.” A few mentioned the design of space: “space for folks to say what they like.” A few mentioned gaining access to senior management to share experiences, as well as creating opportunities for safe reporting of problems. Several mentioned ideas around having better representation at the “table” and opportunities to provide input into decision-making.

Several identified being an ally, being supportive, advocating and empowering others as important ways to foster empowerment. For example, “for non-Black allies: look for a concrete situation to openly support a Black colleague who's being sidelined… challenge an unfair action by management.”

Recommendations for Action

Question 38 : 119 participants responded to the question “What is one action we can take in our organization that will get us closer to the future we would like to see?” The responses were short and most often included one idea, although several provided more than one action. Many participants prioritized dialogue, particularly inviting people to “listen.” “Honest discussions for honest change” characterized the nature of the dialogue for this participant, while “engage and support” was more reflective a few others. Inclusive “talking circles” was provided as a clear action. Conversely, this participant stated: “Concrete actions, enough small talk.” Several participants indicated the need to “act,” while others specified that action be given a timeframe, be goal oriented or measurable.

Accountability was a clear theme: “Honesty, accountability, no brushing anything aside.” Actions involving management were common as well: “ That senior management be more involved.” One participant suggested, “Put a performance indicator of managers.” Acknowledgement was another theme shared by a few participants. For example, this participant suggested “Admitting the wrongs and working towards better.” Workshops, training sessions and mandatory training, were all mentioned.

Lastly, human resources processes or practices were highlighted as another action to take. Participants suggested more diversity in management positions, targeted hiring processes, more opportunities, mentorship, more recognition, transparency, and more diversity in human resources itself.

Leadership

Question 39 : Participants were asked to provide an answer to the question “What is one action that ESDC Leadership can take to address the issue of Anti-Black Racism in our organization?” 124 participants answered, mainly, with short one or two word responses. The answers varied with a few overall themes.

  • Accountability: There was a clear response that leadership needed to be accountable for action on Anti-Black racism, improving inclusion and to “acknowledge and address” these issues: “stop failing Black employees.” A few suggested “discipline” or performance indicators as measures. Participants encouraged leadership “Leading by example”, to “be brave” and to employ a “zero tolerance” policy on racism. The word “communication” was listed by several participants: “communication, education of senior leaders.”
  • Education: Participants felt that leadership should either take or provide training, education, workshops, and learning as well as, develop self-awareness. This participant stated that there was a need to “believe that their white privilege is wrong.” Another suggested “role playing workshops.” The word “listen” came up in a few responses and several wanted to improve “awareness” of Anti-Black Racism.
  • Staffing/Hiring: There was an overall theme around inclusion through targeted hiring, policy development and improvements to diverse representation. A few participants called for “transparency,” while others wanted leadership to facilitate concrete action through targeted hiring such as setting “promotion targets for Black employees.”
  • Inclusion: While this theme may be implied in some of the responses, several participants were clear: “Include Black people in the convo.” These participants wanted leaders to create an environment characterized by “support” and “respect” “encouraging Blacks to speak up.”

Good Practices

Question 40 : When asked “Regarding dismantling Anti-Black Racism, what do you think is working so far?” 121 participants answered with short phrases. About a third of responses highlighted dialogue as working. Participants felt ideas such as, “authentic conversations” and “talk about racism” had worked so far. A few gave more specific examples such as this response: “town halls with Senior ADM on subject of anti-racism and ally ship.” “Speaking up and out” or “people in positions of power and privilege calling it out and supporting” were also noted as effective. Similarly, this participant stated: “ When those with privilege speak out.”

Nearly a quarter of those who responded to this question felt workshops were helpful and cited the Black Engagement and Advancement Team in particular, with one participant calling it a “good tangible start.” Participants commonly noted education and awareness as helpful to dismantling Anti-Black Racism: “Lots of awareness; defining what it looks like.”

Conversely, the next most common theme was that “nothing” was working. This participant stated that to date nothing was working and noted: “gas lighting, increased backlash, defensiveness, (and) denial” as examples. Another also answered “nothing” and added that “a change is coming, but not there yet.” Another worried that once the sessions ended, nothing would be implemented.

A few highlighted societal change and that “communities are standing.” Participants mentioned media coverage as forcing people to “face it” and a couple of people talked about positive change in younger generations: “my kids and their generation… more inclusive than mine.”

Overall, almost all participants who answered, indicated that something was working, mostly centred on dialogue, increased awareness and ongoing education.

Poor Practices

Question 41 : Participants were asked to comment on “What is not working when it comes to dismantling Anti-Black Racism at ESDC?” There were 110 responses, mostly consisting of short phrases. The answers varied, with the most common response identifying a lack of action on the issue. Some responded “no action” while others were more descriptive as this participant explained that there was “no follow through on identified goals.” There was a sense that while issues were identified, there was less commitment to action and a couple of participants mentioned “weak messaging” from senior officials. A few participants highlighted the need for ongoing commitment, suggesting that dismantling racism is not working “when it remains a topic just for the month of February.”

The lack of diverse representation came out clearly, as a few discussed the lack of Black employees in senior roles, at “decision-making tables,” and among employees more generally. When asked what was not working to dismantle Anti-Black Racism, this participant stated: “no change in the recruitment and promotion of minorities.”

Several participants identified “denial” as a problem at ESDC, such as in this statement: “no acknowledgment and pretending it doesn't even exist.” Another explained: “Denial is huge! Even when it has been communicated as an issue.” A few discussed a lack of acknowledgment of Anti-Black Racism, while others described a lack of authenticity calling out “performative gestures.” Similarly, participants mentioned “ignorance” and an unwillingness to change one’s “mindset.” A few felt that the lack of mandatory training meant that not enough people were gaining awareness.

Suggested Improvements

Question 42 : Participants were asked “What could be improved to effectively combat Anti-Black Racism at ESDC?”. There were 119 responses, most of which contained one or two short phrases. The responses were often detailed and reflected the ideas shared in response to other questions. Overall, participants most often suggested “concrete and intentional actions.” A few added the need for action to be ongoing and to measure or monitor progress. A couple of participants discussed making data open and accessible (presumably staffing and EE data). The theme of accountability came through in these and other comments, such as: “tangible performance metrics that the ADM is accountable for.”

A workplace culture shift was mentioned a few times in different ways. This participant suggested that ESDC “ Implement an organizational culture focused on diversity.” Facilitating awareness by creating opportunities for open dialogue, as well as a safe space for sharing experiences were among ideas: “Transparency, honesty, open communication about black employees and how we are treated/perceived.” Several participants mentioned mandatory training and participants mentioned “educating all employees, at all levels,” as well as, targeting managers and senior officials to learn, understand and lead change. Suggestions such as “Put all leaders in a room to discuss the issues and get them to all commit in writing to actions” reflected the theme of management action and accountability. Another commented that “any significant change becomes effective when it comes from up there.”

A few suggested policy development, a couple suggesting research or evidence-based policy and a few discussing a “zero tolerance policy.” Some felt that disciplinary action must be taken when racism occurs: “Zero tolerance towards racism with immediate repercussions.” Human resources policy was highlighted by several participants. This participant suggested reform: “dismantle and rebuild existing hiring and promotions process.” Improved equity, transparency, targeted hiring, more promotions and were among the comments made.

Summary of Findings

The researcher was charged with analyzing data collected during participant sessions intended to explore Anti-Black Racism at ESDC. A rapid textual analysis of more than 4000 fields of information found clear, dominant themes reflective of the content of the sessions. Slido, the tool used for questionnaire input, while user friendly, and engaging for participants, is not a rigorous research tool. As such, in-depth analyses were not possible. Still, the data was reasonable and telling and given tight deadlines, more than adequate for analysis.

There were several dominant themes ranging from more personal or experiential viewpoints to those more systemically-focussed. When asked to comment on aspects of Anti-Black Racism at ESDC, discomfort was a dominant overarching personal or experiential theme for participants. Some participants indicated feeling unsupported, invisible, criticized, dismissed, and undervalued as employees. Some felt that they were “code switching” to adapt to workplace cultural expectations, unable to be authentic at work. For example, several feared being perceived as “loud.” Conversely, many expressed positive feelings about being Black or their Black colleagues. Participants used words like “pride” and “beauty.” Several participants indicated that Anti-Black Racism did not effect their overall sense of self or their confidence at work.

Others indicated their discomfort in dealing with Anti-Black Racism as allies. This sense of discomfort came through in feelings-based questions, as well as questions concerning terms like “privilege” “micro-aggression” and “unconscious bias.” A sense of misunderstanding came through strongly as many attributed day-to-day transgressions to ignorance or innocence. Some had never heard of micro-aggressions and expressed surprise or were apologetic for having committed them. Some responded that they were “used to” these experiences.

Participants hoped to address interpersonal issues through ongoing learning, which was another clear theme. The need for improved and increased learning opportunities, even mandatory training linked to performance indicators, was shared in response to many questions. Learning was highlighted with words like “listen” “education” and “dialogue.” Most participants wanted to improve working conditions for Black employees by helping staff at all levels understand racism and its impact. Participants wanted to have more “uncomfortable conversations.” Generally, there was a desire for self-reflection for those who wanted to be allies and a welcoming of support by those who self-identified as Black.

The sense of discomfort in the workplace was noted as feelings of frustration for some, but for others the gravity of their experience was more pronounced, with participants using words like “powerless” and describing a perceived lack of safety. Participants expressed the need to have a voice, a safe opportunity for reporting wrongdoing, and an equal opportunity to participate “at the table.” Others added layers of discrimination, such as being women, noting intersectionality.

Participants discussed discrimination in human resources processes or staffing actions and many called for reform. Many participants wanted more transparency in hiring and felt that they were often overlooked due to racism. Participants proposed changes to how people are interviewed, selected and promoted at ESDC. Ideas included blind hiring processes whereby, names were removed and telephone interviews are used; and better advertising of positions. Many wanted more opportunities for acting assignments to both gain and demonstrate skills. Some favoured Employment Equity (EE) approaches, while others questioned its utility, suggesting that it may create discrimination. Some called for open data, wanting to see the EE data and to know what happens with it or how it is used.

This need for transparency and accountability was a clear theme that came through as questions moved away from personal experiences toward action. Many participants called for increased accountability from colleagues, but especially from management. From team leaders to senior officials, participants wanted clear, measurable, well-communicated goals that were subject to ongoing monitoring and evaluation. Participants noted the need for authentic, meaningful corporate messaging demonstrating support and “walking the talk.” A few participants highlighted safe reporting and disciplinary actions for those who engage in racist behaviour.

Lastly, in terms of themes, there seemed to be more comfort with understanding broader systemic racism. There was a common sense of recognition around addressing Anti-Black Racism in society at large. Participants highlighted history, media influence and the need for immediate action to bring about change. Many were able to list various points of privilege with education being a common answer. Those who self-identified as White mainly recognized this as privilege. There was a shared sense that racism is wrong and a commitment to act. Thus, as the questions moved away from a more micro, experiential perspective, the responses became slightly more homogenous.

Beyond themes, there were those sentiments that stood out. While most indicated that they had experienced it or witnessed it, a few participants did not believe that Anti-Black Racism was a significant issue at ESDC or that it did not impact them. A few spoke highly of their teams, managers, and senior officials indicating a supportive environment or commitment to anti-racism. A few indicated that hiring processes were clear and merit-based.

In regards to some of the terms used during the session, unconscious bias and micro-aggression did not resonate with several participants as they indicated that unintentional harms ought not be considered racist behaviour. Such responses used words like “hypersensitive.” When asked about privilege, there were a small number who clearly, identified that they did not benefit from white privilege; a few citing other barriers such as homophobia, language or gender. The term ally was also met with mixed reactions, as participants considered it a “buzz word” with insincere or unauthentic connotations, while other participants embraced it, wanting to learn more. An important note, is the sense that some expressed fatigue at needing to continually, educate others on being Black and one participant talked about how these types of sessions run the risk of “re-traumatizing” people as they are called upon to revisit and relive painful experiences. A valuable piece of feedback to be considered by those planning, facilitating or presenting.

Overall, responses concerning personal day-to-day interactions clearly, identified learning among participants. Many spoke highly of the sessions and several hoped for more, with improved attendance. Moving forward, the data shows that such engagement was generally, valued by participants and generated suggestions for action. Exploring uncomfortable feelings and new ways of framing ideas proved to be useful, even if some did not fully embrace the terminology or concepts. Mutually respectful dialogue was clearly seen as a starting point for action.

Conclusion

This senior management-sponsored event brought to the open a number of issues that were privately discussed and created a safe space for Black and other racialized employees and their allies to name those issues and propose potential mitigating solutions.

While data is not statistically representative, it is consistent with past and current research on discrimination, exclusion and stigma faced by racialized groups in the Canadian workplace in general and the federal public service in particular.

Recommendations proposed by participants are also consistent with findings of numerous lessons learned in diversity management. They also point to potential areas where senior management could build on small success that are already happening across the department.

Author/Lead Researcher: Lori-Anne Bradley

Lead Data Analysts: Lori-Anne Bradley and Oumou Khairy (Cathy) Beye

Reviewers: Abdou Saouab, Paul Pilon and Sagal Abdullahi

Design Jam Data Team: Abdou Saouab, Oumou Khairy (Cathy) Beye, Niasha Blake, Harry Antoine, Adwoa Gyasi Nimako and Sagal Abdullahi