Attitude, Schmattitude 1

The Diversity Monster surfaced at the University of Delaware.

When University of Delaware freshmen showed up at their dorms this semester, their orientation included an exercise aimed at bridging cultural divides.

But the program backfired after they were told to write down stereotypes of different ethnic and religious groups and publicly give their views on issues such as gay marriage and affirmative action.

(snip)

Delaware’s diversity training program is under scrutiny after students complained that they were pressed to adopt university-approved views on race and other sensitive topics, participate in squirm-inducing exercises, and rated on their responses to questions about their sexual and cultural beliefs.

Parents and professors also complained that the program is politically slanted, citing training material that claims all white people living in the United States are racist.

What is the Diversity Monster?

Well, it has nothing to do with the social, religious, ethnic, cultural, and racial make-up of the population of the United States of America.

Yes, America has a population of truly diverse backgrounds, perhaps the most diverse in the world. And, for a number of valid reasons (I won’t go into the history here–it’s readily available), one of the side effects of this diversity is the creation of the Diversity Monster.

So what exactly is this monster?

It’s the thriving little industry of consultants (many of them well-intentioned) and charlatans (many of them trying to become well-heeled, others just jumping on the bandwagon of the day) who think that by, structuring experiences designed to expose persons’ opinions and prejudices in small (and sometimes large) groups and then humiliating persons for those opinions, they can somehow change “attitudes” and eliminate bigotry.

It is a fitting offspring of EST.

Just for grins and giggles, take a break and google “diversity consultants.” I just did, and I got “approximately 1,870,000” hits, to cite the results page.

These projects are doomed to failure.

Why? Because there is no such thing as an “attitude.” There is therefore nothing to change.

If I say, for example, that “Opie has such-and-such an attitude,” I’m not talking about Opie.

His “attitude” doesn’t exist in his head.

It exists in mine. It is a judgement that I make of Opie based on the behaviors I have observed. I can’t change it in him because it doesn’t exist in him.

There is no such thing as “attitude.”

There is only behavior.

Now, I’m not arguing that racist, sexist, cultural, and other types of bigotry don’t exist.

Just go here to see numerous examples of them. (And leave a donation when you do. Morris Dees is the Real Deal.)

And what are those examples? Examples of . . .

(Wait for it.)

. . . Behavior.

The way to grapple with misconduct, whether it’s based on race, color, religion, creed, sex, national origin, disability, age, veteran status, and (in some jurisdictions) sexual orientation, is to grapple with . . .

(Wait for it.)

. . . Behavior.

In one of my previous incarnations, I taught a class that was colloquially referred to as “EEO training.” It really wasn’t “equal employment opportunity” training. It was training in how not to get the company in trouble with the EEOC (not something to worry about these days).

We would open the class by telling the attendees (who usually weren’t to happy to be there, but it was mandatory for all supervisors at all levels) that we were not there to change–or even to talk about–what they believed or felt, that the company did not have the right to dictate beliefs to them.

But, we would go on, the company sure as shootin’ had the right to tell them what they could and could not do on company property or on duty and how they must respond if a problem was brought to their attention.

By the end of the day, the attendees were generally glad they had been there, because they had not realized how behaviors they exhibited or witnessed might come across to others.

And, you know what, that class changed behaviors.

After a decade of this training, my employer, who had had a pretty bad record in this area (including signing a consent decree, which, as I’ve pointed out before, companies don’t do without reason), not through malice, but through inadvertence and ignorance, ended up being ranked as one of the best places for members of societal minorities to work.

And if someone’s behavior is acceptable, frankly, what the hell does it matter in day-to-day conduct what feelings or opinions may lurk inside the dark recesses of someone’s soul?

As one of my ex-colleagues used to say, “If you get ’em by the behaviors, the hearts and minds will follow.”

And if you try to change attitudes, you are doomed to failure and, and, as in the case of U.Del., richly deserved derision.

Hat tip to Linda for the first hint of this story.