A Systemic Failure of Society
It has been over 10 days since the tragic death of George Floyd happened in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Since then, protests have spilled over into the streets of major cities in the USA as well as some other cities around the world showing support for the “Black Lives Matter” movement. Some protests have been peaceful and others not so peaceful. While it seems that everyone has an opinion about what’s happening, I have also noticed other people staying quiet. Some are afraid that they will say something that would be misconstrued or taken out of context, resulting in a backslash to their words that would hurt their professional or personal carriers. Others admit that they do not understand why there is so much anger in this country. Others just blame the “hype” into the current US political situation. And the best thing is that it seems that maybe some change may come out from the painful situation, if only because we are so close to the National US elections that no one wants to come out as not supporting the people in the streets.
After receiving a couple of messages from current and former students and friends wanting to know what I think about the matter, I decided to compose my thoughts into my not-so-regular blog on inclusive leadership. Let me start by saying that I have been interested in the topic of inclusivity and diversity for many decades from a leadership and psychological point of view. I have researched the matter in depth over the last decade, developing and delivering a more effective, research-based trainings on diversity and inclusion for law enforcement here in Colorado with a colleague. We basically approach the issue as a cultural issue. We both have extensive international business experience and it is not unusual to run into misunderstandings when we change the context in which the business is conducted. Each culture introduces new game rules, changing the playing field. Understanding how we react to those changes is of paramount importance to react the appropriate way.
Last summer, I completed my book on inclusive leadership, “The Shadow of Bias on Leadership”. I investigated bias and racism from a cultural and psychological point of view. I also read many systemic failures in organizations to curve bias and discrimination. Researching that book opened to my eyes to the main obstacle to enacting any change in our society — us, humans.
Sociologist W.E.B. Du Bois conducted a study for fifteen months in the Seventh Ward in Philadelphia, a predominantly black neighborhood. Du Bois saw to understand the life conditions of African American from a historical and social point of view. In order to get a better understanding, the University of Pennsylvania researcher, professor and African American activist moved into the neighborhood himself where he conducted over 2,500 interviews with the residents.
His study was published in 1898 in the Annals of Political and Social Science under the title of “The Study of the Negro Problems”. Du Bois wrote that “[I]t is not one problem, but rather a plexus of social problems, some new, some old, some simple, some complex; and these problems have their one bond of unity in the act that they group themselves about those Africans whom two centuries of slave-trading brought into the land.[1]” His social study on the conditions of America’s Black citizens was important from an academic point of view for many reasons. From a sociologist point of view, he identified two categories that determined the fate and future of the African Americans — first, African Americans as a social group and, second, the particular social environment and context in which they exist. In other words, individuals exist within a system and that system will affect those individuals as much as the individual actions will.
One of my favorite books is The Nature of Prejudice written by Gordon Allport in 1954. In that book, Allport described what contemporaneous prejudices that one would encounter in the US society at that time. Allport wrote his research-based book a decade after the end of World War II. During this time of economic prosperity and against the backdrop of the stalemate of the Korean War, the United States was still feeling the effect of absorbing the newly arrived immigrant masses of WWII and was struggling to understand the global repercussions of the newly established nation of Israel and the infant stages of the globalized economy borne out of the Marshall Plan. The country, led by president Eisenhower and a Republican-controlled congress, struggled with societal biases and integration of the newly settled European immigrants (mostly Irish and Catholic), the growing Jewish population and the existing African American population. Allport´s book presented a provocative and research-supported interpretation of prejudice, the bases for prejudices and an array of potential solutions.
According to his research, most people then were suspicious of Italian and Irish immigrants, as well as Chinese immigrants, for example. It is a must-read book for anyone interested in this topic and I will not try to summarize it here since it would not do it justice. Still, one thing that surprised me the first time (I have read it many times) I read the book, was that, if one would apply a “Replace All” to the Italian, Irish, Chinese, Blacks and change those cultural identities for some of today’s main immigrants — Vietnamese, Chinese, Mexican, Muslim — take your pick- the book will be as true now as it was then, over the six decades ago that it was first published. And Blacks will still be in the mix of minority groups that are discriminated against in our current society. Allport wrote in his book that, “while some of this endless antagonism seems based upon a realistic conflict of interest, most of it, we suspect, is a product of the fears of the imagination”. It is kind of sad but very telling — our human nature is difficult to change and is very slow to evolve.
We are dealing with three main issues here — human nature (liking the people from our ingroup or tribes more than people from other groups or other tribes); the system or context within which we exist; and finally, the social group itself. Let’s first agree that it is not easy to change human nature. Can it be done? Yes, anything can be done but it will not happen in this century unless a major catastrophe (i.e. a major world war or climate change) imposes that change. Exposure to other groups is one of the more successful techniques — it is easier to discriminate against a group we have not contact with. Develop friendships, associations and links to those groups and suddenly, it is not as easy to justify actions that hurt those groups.
We do operate within a society though. In that society, we operate under societal rules within a social context. That is something that we can change. Many studies have shown racial disparity in the treatment of citizens by police, some arguing that it could be borne from the explicit or implicit racial profiling harmful to minorities. The systemic failure is reflected in many governmental processes and structures. For example, the simple matter of keeping a toll on the number of individuals killed by law enforcement. In regard to the number of civilians killed by law enforcement, from 2010 to 2014, the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) reported 428 cases as “justifiable homicides by law enforcement”. Justifiable homicides by law enforcement include those cases where the subject was killed while committing a felony. The data collected by the FBI was voluntarily submitted by local agencies and might not fully reflect the reality of the situation. The Washington Post created a database on suspects killed by law enforcement officers based on reports from the news outlets, public records and other sources of original reporting[2]. The newspaper reported that 991 people died while in police custody in 2015 compared to 963 during 2016, a significant difference from the FBI data. For both years, 96% of the individuals killed were male, with about half of them being identified as White. In 2016, 24% of those killed were Black, down from 26% in 2015. The Washington Post reported that in 2015, 9% of those victims were unarmed versus 5% in 2016. For both years, the data discerned another big societal failure that we are facing — about 25% of those killed displayed signs of mental illness.
In many instances, the use of excessive lethal force by law enforcement agencies (LEA) can be traced to their trainings. The Police Executive Research Forum (2016[3]) argued that the law enforcement officer (LEO) should not be faulted for his or her actions when involved in a use-of-force incident. Those actions were a direct result from the training received by the officer. Education further explains the nature of an LEA’s organizational culture. In 2015, a study by the US Department of justice found that 84% of LEO had a High School diploma, with 4% having some college experience, 10% having completed a 2-year college degree and only 1% having a 4-year college degree[4]. In regard to formal training, education and preparation of candidates for law enforcement careers, the average LEO in the USA received 19 weeks of classroom training in 2006, mostly focused around the legal system and the techniques and adequate use of force[5]. Candidates to law enforcement in the Netherlands, Norway and Finland received 3 years of education prior to becoming a LEO, through a sophisticated and nationally defined examination and evaluation process. In Germany, the average training of a law enforcement candidate ran 130 weeks, with greater focus on conflict de-escalation. The basic police training among European Union members lasted anywhere from four months to four years, depending on the level of education of the incoming candidate and the position for which he or she was applying for (local, state or national)[6].
Another example, we can affect the equity rules (different from equality) that govern who receives health care, education, employment training, housing, and many other societal staples that would allow a discriminated social group to reach a level ground with the other social groups within a society. Universal healthcare could be one huge step to start leveling the field. Improved education regarding of zip code could be another huge step. Revision of the outdated penal code that distributes harsher penalties for certain crimes to certain groups over others. Housing allows individuals to feel safe to live, study and enjoy family time, meeting the lower levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs pyramid. Equity brings fairness and justice into the system and equalizes everyone chances to succeed.
Other ways to improve those societal changes is by getting corporate America onboard. Organizations need to implement changes within their organizations’ practices to ensure that equity is reached. Hiring and development practices are a good start but also, ensuring minority representation in their management, as well as diversity within their ranks. Mentoring and coaching programs could further help those minority groups that are falling behind. The success, motivation and engagement of all employees has been strongly tied to stronger financial performance, greater creativity and higher levels of customer and employee loyalty.
Before we move to the last point, the social group itself, let me point out that law enforcement is the result of our system. It operates within a certain set of societal rules. I have worked with many law enforcement agencies. My American family is in law enforcement. My best friend in Spain is in law enforcement. Through my work, I have met many good law enforcement officers that are truly concerned about the wellbeing of the communities that they served and serving justice. These are good people following the rules of the system. They are a product of their training and societal expectations. You could look at them as a separate social group operating under a set of rules that was imposed by the system within which they operate. We, the people, chose the governments that created those rules that we are asking the law enforcement agencies to enforce. If we want and expect a different response, we need to change that system to which they respond. And yes, you will find bad apples as we find them in any other social groups. We also need to figure out how to get those “bad apples” the proper training and, if that does not work, take corrective actions.
Finally, the social group. The changes in a social group needs to happen from within, under strong leadership. During one of the diversity trainings we conducted with a law enforcement agency in Colorado, my colleague and I were asked to provide guidance on how to manage the relationship with a large group of predominantly Russian immigrants. This particular Russian social group did not trust law enforcement. Crimes that occurred in that neighborhood was difficult to investigate because of the distrust of law enforcement in general. Researching the topic, we found that this particular group was in general suspicious of any law enforcement agency. As a very hierarchical group, it trusted the Orthodox church, first; their Russian neighbors, second, and the military. In order to improve the level of trust on the local law enforcement, the change needed to happen from within the social group and it would not happen quick. The local Orthodox Church agreed to kick off the efforts to improve the trust of this specific community towards local law enforcement.
We are facing a systemic problem with a complex solution. And actions can be taken to ensure that we finally break with this vicious circle of mistrust and racism that protesters are denouncing in the streets. We need to enact changes that will go to the root of the problem, which is not law enforcement but the overall system by which rules we all play. We need to create the processes and system that would eventually affect changes at the human level, or at least, neutralize the biases of human nature.
[1] Du Bois, W. B. (1898). The study of the Negro problems. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1–23.
[2] Police shooting 2015 database. (2015). The Washington Post [data file]. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings/
Police shooting 2016 database. (2016). The Washington Post [data file]. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2016/
[3] Police Executive Research Forum (2016). Critical issues in policing series: Guiding principles on use of force (March 2016). Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum. Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of personality and social psychology, 90(5), 751.
[4] U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (2015). Local police departments, 2013: Personnel, policies, and practices. (May 2015 — NCJ248677). Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/lpd13ppp.pdf.
[5] Hirschfield, P. (2015, November 25). Why do American cops kill so many compared to European cops? The Conversation. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/why-do-american-cops-kill-so-many-compared-to-european-cops-49696
[6] Extract from unpublished article titled “A Literature Review of Prejudice and Bias in Law Enforcement: Where to Go from Here”, by Juan M Gallego
