How Modern Workplaces Quietly Maintain the Diversity Status Quo
There are many ways our current market is disadvantaging marginalized communities. I wanted to discuss a few less popular ones that seem more relevant. I don't think there are legal ways to stop these from happening, making it all the more important to discuss.
Intentional Stonewalling
Managers and senior staff give you projects and assignments that are more proof-of-concept because there isn't "anything more important to do." This seemingly innocuous practice can have serious consequences. Once it is time to see who to lay off for various business reasons, it would be you because you didn't make a difference to the bottom line. This gives enough excuse and reason to lay you off, even though your manager decides your projects and your value-add. By limiting the employees' opportunities to contribute meaningfully, managers establish a paper trail of underperformance that can later justify layoffs or denied promotions.
Another manifestation is when employees, particularly those from diverse backgrounds, are given a challenging scenario to fix. When they inevitably fall short, it simply reinforces the belief that these people are just bad at their jobs, perpetuating harmful stereotypes. Glass cliff scenarios where marginalized communities are picked when there is a lose-lose situation further exemplify this problem.1 Companies may hire them for "optics" reasons, but the underlying dynamics set them up for failure.
The general pattern I have seen is to create scenarios or put diverse communities in situations where they are more likely to fail or have minimal business impact, even if there is real success. I don't know if there is a legal workaround for this, but since projects are assigned and informal meetings are held at everyone's discretion, it makes it that much harder to fix.
Intentional blocking of important context
As you grow higher and go up the ladder, you are generally given more responsibilities and the work of finding/identifying opportunities for the business. Much work is needed to identify said opportunities, which lies in understanding the "business context." Knowing precisely what the business wants and needs, you can better solve/chart a plan. Leaders intentionally make the business context opaque by claiming various reasons like confidentiality and a "need-to-know" basis if pressed. Then, the same leaders give out the actual context to others that they favor in private parties and meetings. They exchange ideas and expectations at these private meetings, allowing those favored in power to be better positioned to solve problems. This causes a huge disadvantage for marginalized communities who don't have access to such context and information, ultimately causing them to fail or shine less than their counterparts who use the context to create a more "fit" solution. This gives reason for not getting promoted to crucial senior management roles. Exclusion from informal networks and mentoring opportunities hinders career advancement, perpetuating the lack of diversity at higher levels.2
Maintaining relationships with people in power
We exist in a marketplace of favors. If your parents/grandparents or someone you closely know is in a position of power (this can be non-political, like a higher position in a big company), they wouldn't want to burn that bridge. People talk, and when they tell others that their child/nephew/niece got laid off and they see them visibly sad, they want to retaliate. They won't do anything directly, but it will come across as stonewalling in deals and being unapproachable when back-door deals have to happen. So, it isn't worth burning that bridge and getting into problems in the future, so if they know an employee knows someone important, they would be shielded compared to someone who isn't. Non-marginalized people hold most seats of power, so even if you are a better employee, when layoffs come, you will be the person leaving. This invisible shield of protection further entrenches existing power structures and inequalities in the workplace.3
The subtle nature of these practices makes them difficult to prove or address. Somehow, when layoffs happen, an overwhelming number would be from diverse groups, even though there were only a few at these companies. This reduces diversity significantly as a massive chunk of people from the already small population are systematically removed from the workplace, creating a vicious cycle of underrepresentation. By shining a light on these hidden mechanisms, we take the first step toward creating truly equitable workplaces where talent and dedication—not connections or privileged access—determine success.
Ryan, M. K., & Haslam, S. A. (2005). The Glass Cliff: Evidence that Women are Over-Represented in Precarious Leadership Positions. British Journal of Management, 16(2), 81-90.
Ibarra, H. (1995). Race, Opportunity, and Diversity of Social Circles in Managerial Networks. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 673-703
McDonald, M. L., & Westphal, J. D. (2013). Access Denied: Low Mentoring of Women and Minority First-Time Directors and Its Negative Effects on Appointments to Additional Boards. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 1169-1198.