Beyond the Rhetoric—Centering Justice and Anti-Racism in our DEI Strategy: Amplify your Anti-Racist Practices with Qualitative Data

We say it all the time: “Diversity is more than a numbers game.” Yet, in almost every industry I have worked with, diversity work is met with skepticism, followed with some combination of the following: “show me the numbers,” or “the data doesn’t back it up,” or “people say this is happening, but the data doesn’t show it,” or even more common, “we don’t have a big enough sample size.”  

This is not a new phenomenon, nor is this specific to DEI—just think of all the inaction and uncertainty behind COVID-19, as key stakeholders hid behind the notion that there was “no data” yet to show the impact of this new disease. Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches (better known as Mixed Methods) isn’t new. At The Winters Group, we have always used a mixed methods approach. But often we see pushback—a desire to see more graphs and numbers that are “actionable” instead of acting upon patterns and results shared in focus groups and interviews.  

As Mary-Frances explained last week, if we are going to hold our organizations to data-driven standards, we need to address the root injustices and interrogate beyond traditional quantitative analysis. When she mentioned how it is an injustice in and of itself that some organizations she works with don’t have complete data, or even collect any to begin with, this got me thinking about what we as change agents choose to prioritize or value as “data.” It is no secret that data and algorithms are created by people, for people; but we also know that data has limits, especially in the context of DEI work.  

Why is a “statistically significant p–value“ valued higher than people’s narratives and lived experiences? Moreover, how are we perpetuating injustices and inequities if we only value and/or choose to act upon the numbers that we choose to collect, and want to act upon?  

To truly interrogate and maintain integrity in our commitment for justice, we need to be intentional and invest equal time, energy, and financial resources in qualitative data analysis. From data collection to dissemination, how are we limiting ourselves in how we define “data-driven?” Whose voices are being silenced because they don’t have a “category?” What critically important stories do the graphs and regressions not tell? Organizations say that they listen to employees, but when acting upon findings, why aren’t people’s stories, experiences, and environments considered just as valid, or even more valid than, a spreadsheet of employment statistics?  

If we are truly going to make change and progress toward a just and anti-racist workplace, community, society, and nation, we must highlight and enlighten the nuances and intricacies of the -isms and injustices that have been embedded in our behaviors, actions, and systems. Prioritizing quantitative data can not only dilute these intricacies, but also perpetuate the minimizing of oppressive experiences your employees or community may be facing. A number or “datapoint” may show or prove a disparity, but it does not show nor prove the oppressive behaviors and systems that perpetuate the disparity.  

We cannot be truly anti-racist if we limit ourselves, knowingly forgo important knowledge and insight, and ultimately hide behind numbers that may not fully support the experiences and realities of our communities.  

Highlighted below are ways to rejuvenate traditional qualitative data analysis practices and redefine what data-driven means for your organization, your community, and yourself. 

 Decolonize Your Thematic Analysis: 

Finding themes and “coding” interviews or focus groups to summarize employee thoughts is a central component to thematic analysis. This information can be highly beneficial, especially if used to track thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. But just as with most data collection processes, the control and ownership of the data is often in the hands of the leaders and executives. Decolonizing our thematic analysis means following equity-centered design principles, putting more ownership of the result, the questions being asked, and the actions, in the hands of those being interviewed. This looks like: 

• Reflecting on how our cultural identities in the workplace or environment impacts and needs to be considered as we choose our approach. How is your identity and power as a leader, or as a data collector influencing the responses? How might the company culture as a whole, or your individual relationships with interviewees, impact their forthrightness? Who is creating the interview questions and whose voices are not represented in what is considered important to ask?  
• Taking an inductive approach by allowing your data to create themes, instead of coming in with pre-determined ones. This may take more time, but it is more conducive to reducing pre-existing biases as those in the focus group or interview are the ones guiding the conversation. 
• Involving participants in the decision–making process post-interview. This means giving the participants ownership and power in creating recommendations for institutional change, and not just letting executives or leaders make the decisions on which themes will be used for strategy development. 

Track Equity in Your Ethnography:

Ethnographies involve immersing yourself in an environment or situation to get an in-depth picture. Typically, an anthropological practice, ethnographies can be extremely beneficial in the context of DEI by providing a clearer understanding about how systemic inequities play out in the workplace. This may require more people power, but it can be much more insightful than a typical feedback card or survey in providing the whole picture of the factors at play. This looks like: 

• Assigning a few team members (to gain more interpretations) to take descriptive notes of the environment and interactions at company events, recruiting events, and even team meetings and performance evaluations. One example we often share is to have someone create a map of who is speaking at a meeting. This may seem silly at first, but these descriptions and recordings are rich data that can reveal everything from micro-aggressions and misinterpretations of cultural differences to racial injustice. These ethnographies can help inform patterns in leadership, career growth, company culture, and much more. 
• Tracking body language, conversational pauses, and tone in the room. Is there a particular question that makes participants pause more than others? Does someone’s presence or absence change the conversation or atmosphere? Note: Be cognizant of cultural patterns that may be misinterpreted.  
• Noting and creating images of the workplace structure. Are white employees clustered around white employees? Are all areas of your workplace accessible for those with disabilities? Are women seated farther from the head of the conference table or classroom than men?  

Radicalize Your Narrative Inquiry: 

The narrative inquiry process is fairly new from a research method standpoint, but it is one of the oldest and most revered ways of collecting data—the history of sharing stories, relics, photos, etc., is as long as human history itself. However, not all narratives have been given power, as only dominant narratives have informed world changes. So instead, decenter the dominant narrative that quantitative data must inform institutional change. Instead of letting a percentage point or a trend forecast lead the way, give more weight to your employees lived experiences by: 

• Being cognizant of whose narratives you are highlighting or valuing in your analysis. The stories of People of Color have been erased and marginalized in everything from history books to mission statements. Take a look at the history of your organization and note who is in charge of documentation and communications. What books and resources are being recommended and why? What are the limitations or areas of opportunity to better center experiences of those historically marginalized?  
• Interrogating language use in your internal and external communication. How are pronouns being used to perpetuate gender norms? How is your company language perhaps not inclusive or welcoming of different dialects? How are certain designs and branding influencing how people perceive your organization?  
• Implementing anonymous employee “diaries.” Diaries can be used to get real-time “day-to–day” anonymous feedback directly from employees that can be utilized in broader strategic conversations. This can even be done virtually using resources like Focus Vision and Qualboard.

Data should tell a story, but not just any story. Take a justice-centered approach to revolutionizing your data-driven strategies by centering the rich and robust qualitative data that is often hidden, but exists readily, in our workplaces and communities.