This article informs the intentions and functioning of the ARE Leadership Collective.
It provides additional insight to ARE organizational values and goals, particularly power sharing, individual and group accountability, embracing difference, and collective, consensus-oriented decision making.
This is a list of characteristics of white supremacy culture which show up in our organizations. Culture is powerful precisely because it is so present and at the same time so very difficult to name or identify. The characteristics listed below are damaging because they are used as norms and standards without being pro-actively named or chosen by the group. They are damaging because they promote white supremacy thinking. They are damaging to both people of color and to white people. Organizations that are people of color led or a majority people of color can also demonstrate many damaging characteristics of white supremacy culture.
NOTE: Clicking on linked text in the article below will skip you to other sections within this page. You can always scroll back to the top to come back and resume reading from top to bottom.
Perfectionism
little appreciation expressed among people for the work that others are doing; appreciation that is expressed usually directed to those who get most of the credit anyway
more common is to point out either how the person or work is inadequate
or even more common, to talk to others about the inadequacies of a person or their work without ever talking directly to them
mistakes are seen as personal, i.e. they reflect badly on the person making them as opposed to being seen for what they are: mistakes
making a mistake is confused with being a mistake, doing wrong with being wrong
little time, energy, or money put into reflection or identifying lessons learned that can improve practice, in other words little or no learning from mistakes
tendency to identify what’s wrong; little ability to identify, name, and appreciate what’s right
antidotes
develop a culture of appreciation, where the organization takes time to make sure that people’s work and efforts are appreciated
develop a learning organization, where it is expected that everyone will make mistakes and those mistakes offer opportunities for learning
create an environment where people can recognize that mistakes sometimes lead to positive results
separate the person from the mistake
when offering feedback, always speak to the things that went well before offering criticism
ask people to offer specific suggestions for how to do things differently when offering criticism
Sense of Urgency
continued sense of urgency that makes it difficult to take time to be inclusive, encourage democratic and/or thoughtful decision-making, to think long-term, to consider consequences
frequently results in sacrificing potential allies for quick or highly visible results, for example sacrificing interests of communities of color in order to win victories for white people (seen as default or norm community)
reinforced by funding proposals which promise too much work for too little money and by funders who expect too much for too little
antidotes
realistic work-plans
leadership which understands that things take longer than anyone expects
discuss and plan for what it means to set goals of inclusivity and diversity, particularly in terms of time
learn from past experience how long things take
write realistic funding proposals with realistic time frames
be clear about how you will make good decisions in an atmosphere of urgency
Defensiveness
the organizational structure is set up and much energy spent trying to prevent abuse and protect power as it exists rather than to facilitate the best out of each person or to clarify who has power and how they are expected to use it
because of either/or thinking, criticism of those with power is viewed as threatening and inappropriate (or rude)
people respond to new or challenging ideas with defensiveness, making it very difficult to raise these ideas
a lot of energy in the organization is spent trying to make sure that people’s feelings aren’t getting hurt or working around defensive people
the defensiveness of people in power creates an oppressive culture
antidotes
understand that structure cannot in and of itself facilitate or prevent abuse
understand the link between defensiveness and fear (of losing power, losing face, losing comfort, losing privilege); work on your own defensiveness
name defensiveness as a problem when it is one
give people credit for being able to handle more than you think
discuss the ways in which defensiveness or resistance to new ideas gets in the way of the mission
Quantity Over Quality
all resources of organization are directed toward producing measurable goals
things that can be measured are more highly valued than things that cannot, for example numbers of people attending a meeting, newsletter circulation, money spent are valued more than quality of relationships, democratic decision-making, ability to constructively deal with conflict
little or no value attached to process; if it can't be measured, it has no value
no understanding that when there is a conflict between content (the agenda of the meeting) and process (people’s need to be heard or engaged), process will prevail (for example, you may get through the agenda, but if you haven't paid attention to people’s need to be heard, the decisions made at the meeting are undermined and/or disregarded)
antidotes
include process or quality goals in your planning
make sure your organization has a values statement which expresses the ways in which you want to do your work
make sure this is a living document and that people are using it in their day to day work
look for ways to measure process goals (for example if you have a goal of inclusivity, think about ways you can measure whether or not you have achieved that goal)
learn to recognize those times when you need to get off the agenda in order to address people’s underlying concerns
Worship of the Written Word
if it’s not in a memo, it doesn't exist
the organization does not take into account or value other ways in which information gets shared
those with strong documentation and writing skills are more highly valued, even in organizations where ability to relate to others is key to the mission
antidotes
take the time to analyze how people inside and outside the organization get and share information
figure out which things need to be written down and come up with alternative ways to document what is happening
work to recognize the contributions and skills that every person brings to the organization (for example, the ability to build relationships with those who are important to the organization’s mission)
Only One Right Way
the belief there is one right way to do things and once people are introduced to the right way, they will see the light and adopt it
when they do not adapt or change, then something is wrong with them (the other, those not changing), not with us (those who know the right way)
similar to the missionary who does not see value in the culture of other communities, sees only value in their beliefs about what is good
antidotes
accept that there are many ways to get to the same goal
once the group has made a decision about which way will be taken, honor that decision and see what you and the organization will learn from taking that way, even and especially if it is not the way you would have chosen
work on developing the ability to notice when people do things differently and how those different ways might improve your approach
look for the tendency for a group or a person to keep pushing the same point over and over out of a belief that there is only one right way and then name it
when working with communities from a different culture than yours or your organization’s, be clear that you have some learning to do about the communities’ ways of doing
never assume that you or your organization know what’s best for the community in isolation from meaningful relationships with that community
Paternalism
decision-making is clear to those with power and unclear to those without it
those with power think they are capable of making decisions for and in the interests of those without power
those with power often don't think it is important or necessary to understand the viewpoint or experience of those for whom they are making decisions
those without power understand they do not have it and understand who does
those without power do not really know how decisions get made and who makes what decisions, and yet they are completely familiar with the impact of those decisions on them
antidotes
make sure that everyone knows and understands who makes what decisions in the organization
make sure everyone knows and understands their level of responsibility and authority in the organization
include people who are affected by decisions in the decision-making
Either/Or Thinking (The Binary)
things are either/or, good/bad, right/wrong, with us/against us
closely linked to perfectionism in making it difficult to learn from mistakes or accommodate conflict
results in trying to simplify complex things, for example believing that poverty is simply a result of lack of education
creates conflict and increases sense of urgency, as people are felt they have to make decisions to do either this or that, with no time or encouragement to consider alternatives, particularly those which may require more time or resources
antidotes
notice when people use “either/or” language and push to come up with more than two alternatives
notice when people are simplifying complex issues, particularly when the stakes seem high or an urgent decision needs to be made
slow it down and encourage people to do a deeper analysis
when people are faced with an urgent decision, take a break and give people some breathing room to think creatively
avoid making decisions under extreme pressure
Power Hoarding
little, if any, value around sharing power
power seen as limited, only so much to go around
those with power feel threatened when anyone suggests changes in how things should be done in the organization, feel suggestions for change are a reflection on their leadership
those with power don't see themselves as hoarding power or as feeling threatened
those with power assume they have the best interests of the organization at heart and assume those wanting change are ill-informed (stupid), emotional, inexperienced
antidotes
include power sharing in your organization’s values statement
discuss what good leadership looks like and make sure people understand that a good leader develops the power and skills of others
understand that change is inevitable and challenges to your leadership can be healthy and productive
make sure the organization is focused on the mission
Fear of Open Conflict
people in power are scared of conflict and try to ignore it or run from it
when someone raises an issue that causes discomfort, the response is to blame the person for raising the issue rather than to look at the issue which is actually causing the problem
emphasis on being polite
equating the raising of difficult issues with being impolite, rude, or out of line
antidotes
role play ways to handle conflict before conflict happens
distinguish between being polite and raising hard issues
don't require those who raise hard issues to raise them in “acceptable” ways, especially if you are using the ways in which issues are raised as an excuse not to address the issues being raised
once a conflict is resolved, take the opportunity to revisit it and see how it might have been handled differently
Individualism
little experience or comfort working as part of a team
accountability, if any, goes up and down, not sideways to peers or to those the organization is set up to serve
desire for individual recognition and credit
leads to isolation
competition more highly valued than cooperation and where cooperation is valued, little time or resources devoted to developing skills in how to cooperate
creates a lack of accountability, as the organization values those who can get things done on their own without needing supervision or guidance
antidotes
include teamwork as an important value in your values statement
make sure the organization is working towards shared goals and people understand how working together will improve performance
evaluate people’s ability to work in a team as well as their ability to get the job done
make sure that credit is given to all those who participate in an effort, not just the leaders or most public person
make people accountable as a group rather than as individuals
create a culture where people bring problems to the group; use staff meetings as a place to solve problems, not just a place to report activities
I’m the only one
connected to individualism, the belief that if something is going to get done right, I'll have to do it
little or no ability to delegate work to others
antidotes
evaluate people based on their ability to delegate to others
evaluate people based on their ability to work as part of a team to accomplish shared goals
Progress is Bigger, More
observed in systems of accountability and ways we determine success
progress is an organization which expands (adds staff, adds projects) or develops the ability to serve more people (regardless of how well they are serving them)
gives no value, not even negative value, to its cost, for example, increased accountability to funders as the budget grows, ways in which those we serve may be exploited, excluded, or underserved as we focus on how many we are serving instead of quality of service or values created by the ways in which we serve
antidotes
create Seventh Generation thinking by asking how the actions of the group now will affect people seven generations from now
make sure that any cost/benefit analysis includes all the costs, not just the financial ones, for example the cost in morale, the cost in credibility, the cost in the use of resources
include process goals in your planning, for example make sure that your goals speak to how you want to do your work, not just what you want to do
ask those you work with and for to evaluate your performance
Objectivity
the belief that there is such a thing as being objective
the belief that emotions are inherently destructive, irrational, and should not play a role in decision-making or group process
invalidating people who show emotion
requiring people to think in a linear fashion and ignoring or invalidating those who think in other ways
impatience with any thinking that does not appear “logical” to those with power
antidotes
realize that everybody has a worldview and that everybody’s worldview affects the way they understand things
push yourself to sit with discomfort when people are expressing themselves in ways which are not familiar to you
assume that everybody has a valid point and your job is to understand what that point is
Right to Comfort
the belief that those with power have a right to emotional and psychological comfort (another aspect of valuing ‘logic’ over emotion)
scapegoating those who cause discomfort
equating individual acts of unfairness against white people with systemic racism which daily targets people of color
antidotes
understand that discomfort is at the root of all growth and learning
welcome it as much as you can
deepen your political analysis of racism and oppression so you have a strong understanding of how your personal experience and feelings fit into a larger picture
don't take everything personally
One of the purposes of listing characteristics of white supremacy culture is to point out how organizations which unconsciously use these characteristics as their norms and standards make it difficult, if not impossible, to open the door to other cultural norms and standards. As a result, many of our organizations, while saying we want to be multicultural, really only allow other people and cultures to come in if they adapt or conform to already existing cultural norms. Being able to identify and name the cultural norms and standards you want is a first step to making room for a truly multi-cultural organization.
We are building an anti-racist movement of white Unitarian Universalists to dismantle white supremacy in ourselves, our congregations, and communities.