As someone who has worked in the Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) space, I was initially wholeheartedly committed to driving the systemic change that this work so often promises. However, it didn’t take long before I began to experience what is commonly referred to as "Diversity Fatigue." This term captures the exhaustion and disillusionment that comes from working within systems that promote diversity rhetorically, but ultimately fail to deliver meaningful change. What makes this more frustrating is that, at least in Canada, the government is fully committed to this work. Under the Employment Equity Act, the Canadian government provides companies with labor market availability data on various identity groups, including women, Indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities, and visible minorities. This data is meant to help organizations align their workforce representation with societal demographics, making the process of refining systemic change straightforward, at least in theory (Government of Canada, 2022).
Moreover, there are global frameworks like the Global Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Benchmarks (GDEIB), which offer best practices for every level of systemic change. These benchmarks provide actionable strategies to foster inclusion, improve hiring processes, and ensure that equity and diversity are integrated into an organization’s core functions. The GDEIB emphasizes areas such as Recruitment, Advancement and Retention, Job Design and Compensation, and Work-Life Integration, etc., providing a holistic approach for companies looking to genuinely increase diversity (Global Diversity, Equity, Inclusion Benchmarks, 2021).
Despite these resources, in my experience, the real issue lies with tokenism. While organizations might boast about their diverse hires, many of the individuals being selected are those from the most privileged segments of marginalized groups. As Ahmed (2009) points out, diversity can often function as a "shiny apple with a rotten core" (p. 45), where organizations appear progressive without actually challenging systemic inequalities. I have frequently witnessed this pattern, where those selected for roles are often immigrants who speak flawless English with no accent, individuals with the least noticeable or limiting disabilities, or people who have a distant trace of Indigenous ancestry but lack any direct lived experience of marginalization for at least a couple of generations.
This tokenism often prevents truly marginalized candidates from getting a seat at the table. It’s not that these candidates aren’t applying—although even if they weren’t, it should be the company’s responsibility to proactively seek them out and address the barriers that keep them from applying—but rather that the system fills diversity quotas with the most privileged individuals before more vulnerable candidates even have a chance.
To me, the issue is not just the language we use—though I recognize that glossy terms often create temporary optimism. The problem is that many of these terms give people false hope that change is on the way. A clear example of this in today’s political landscape is Kamala Harris, who is frequently tokenized as a person of color to portray the Democratic Party as inclusive, even though the systemic issues remain unaddressed. This is neoliberalism at its height, where diversity is commodified and used for branding purposes rather than real change.
Ultimately, while I appreciated examining EDI efforts through the lens of language, I believe the real issue lies in tokenism, which stems from identity politics and how intersectionality is being interpreted within our capitalist society. Tokenism, in this context, reduces complex identities to simplified categories, allowing organizations to appear diverse without addressing the deeper structural inequities that persist.
References:
Ahmed, S. (2009). Embodying Diversity: Problems and Paradoxes for Black Feminists. Race Ethnicity and Education, 12(1), 41–52.
Government of Canada. (2022). Employment Equity Act Annual Report. Retrieved from https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/employment-equity.html
Global Diversity, Equity, Inclusion Benchmarks (GDEIB). (2021). Best Practices for DEI Systems. Retrieved from https://centreforglobalinclusion.org/gdeib/
Comentários