Some have said that instituting the principles of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the workplace, out of compulsion, results in mediocrity, not meritocracy. However, in the absence of diversity and inclusion, it is exceedingly difficult in most human endeavors to proclaim that someone or something merits designation as “the best.” In other words, without diversity and inclusion, meritocracy itself is a meritless myth, and any merit bestowed cannot be deemed equitable.
Science, resplendent in objectivity, is not immune to these pernicious failings when it comes to a lack of DEI principles in our workplaces. Years ago, I was told by my university advisor that my pursuit of a degree in science “was (for an African-American man) socially deviant behavior.” My inclusion in the program challenged the contemporary orthodoxy and the closely guarded cultural hegemony within the sciences. The diversity that I brought to the program was received with a resounding chill.
I know others with similar stories.
I would argue that the presence of differences within a given community (diversity) and the practice of ensuring that people feel a sense of belonging (inclusion), coupled with ensuring that processes and programs are impartial, fair, and provide equal possible outcomes for every individual (equity), is foundational to creating an environment in which meritocracy, not mediocrity, thrives.
Examples abound. For instance, I think most will agree that pugilism is the ultimate measure of meritocracy. Mano y mano, as it were. I don’t think, however, that there are many who subscribe to the notion that Jack Johnson’s inclusion in boxing ushered in an era of mediocrity. Rather, I think, most would agree that his inclusion added diversity to the sport, which may have exposed mediocrity masquerading as the champion.
There are countless stories about American icons that illustrate this point. Despite segregated working conditions at NASA, Katherine Johnson and her team were instrumental in the monumental success of America’s manned space flight program. John Glenn, the celebrated astronaut, did not see their work as mediocre. Rosalind Franklin played a pivotal role in elucidating the structural geometry of DNA. Yet, because of her gender, her brilliant contributions to the field are underreported. In the world of tennis, thanks to Althea Gibson’s courage and masterful game, we now celebrate Venus and Serena—the antithesis of mediocrity. And, during World War II, the U.S. government made Herculean efforts to desegregate and make the armed services more inclusive. Gradually, honors and promotion to positions of leadership were opened to all service members. These actions resulted in exceptional leaders, including General Colin Powell, General Lloyd Austin, and Admiral Linda Fagan. No mediocrity in these ranks.
In a pluralist society, the dominant group frequently seeks to invalidate the contributions of its minorities. In the United States, this is often the case for women, people of color, and other marginalized groups. Advancing the idea that compulsory DEI results in mediocrity is a form of societal invalidation, and its aim is to maintain a sort of cultural hegemony while simultaneously preserving the preferred socioeconomic order among its various subgroups. The easiest means for maintaining and sustaining cultural hegemony is through segregation and exclusion. When the field of participants for any organized activity is the exclusive domain of the dominant group, that group can feign an appearance of superiority.
Historically, efforts to preserve cultural hegemony within the sciences have been highly effective. For decades, women and people of color were summarily excluded from its ranks. The face of science in the United States is still predominantly that of a male person of European descent. Not an Asian, not an African, and certainly not a woman.
Achieving diversity often is a challenge due to trepidation and fear of fraternity with the unknown. Achieving an inclusive organization requires deliberate actions in bringing it to fruition. Diversity and inclusion enable an institution or a society to overcome mediocrity. The true measure of a society’s greatness cannot be ascertained when multitudes of citizens are excluded. Judging meritocracy under conditions of exclusion is the highest form of folly.
The opinions expressed in Dialogue are those of the author.
Job Ubbink and Allen Levine posit that the NOVA food classification system is flawed, but it draws attention to the fact that many processed foods are not healthfully formulated.
Speaking as a part of a Tuesday Scientific & Technical Forum on consumer mistrust, Center for Food Integrity’s Roxi Beck highlighted some recent research on Gen Z’s purchase behavior.
Three passionate advocates for regenerative agriculture laid out the challenges and opportunities it presents in a Monday Business FIRST session.
Byproducts of agriculture and food processing written off as “waste” can be profitably and sustainably reused as other food products, according to panelists at a featured session on Monday at IFT FIRST.
News and new product information from food industry suppliers, including a Q&A with Richard Waycott of the Almond Board Of California.
In this column, the author describes the regulatory and food safety considerations of utilizing principles of sanitary equipment design.
A team of Food Technology editors visited the IFT FIRST Food Expo floor in search of the latest ingredient innovations—and found four top trends that are exciting both industry innovators and consumer palates.
Connecting the dots between behavioral research insights and product innovation is a labor of love for Dave Lundahl.
Finding the right co-manufacturing partner can be challenging, but it can also be a smart business strategy. Here’s a look at some of the ins, the outs, and the how-tos.
IFT weighs in on the agency’s future in the wake of the Reagan-Udall Report and FDA Commissioner Califf’s response.
Learn how IFT boosts connections, efficiencies, and inspiration for its members.
In a new white paper, our experts examine the FDA’s Food Traceability Final Rule implications—and its novel concepts first proposed by IFT.
IFT’s 2022 Compensation and Career Path Report breaks it down.