Few of us would eagerly trade places with a leader trying to navigate an organization through a racist incident. Finding oneself at the top of a ladder at its breaking point is an uncomfortable place to be. But should any leader really be surprised to find him or herself there, given the social and political climate in which we live, and the surplus of headlines detailing such incidents?
This kind of crisis doesn't need to mark the end of a leader's career, but instead can serve as an enormous opportunity to rise to the occasion and model what is so desperately needed in American culture right now: Transformational Antiracist Leadership.
Most of us remember what happened at the University of Missouri in 2015 when students protested an unsatisfactory administrative response to racist incidents on campus, as detailed in Spike Lee's documentary Two Fists Up. This situation prompted the American Council on Education to take a close look at what works and what doesn't when leaders are trying to save an institution from implosion. The result was their comprehensive report, Speaking with Truth and Acting with Integrity: Confronting Challenges of Campus Racial Climate. The findings are conclusive:
Being an effective leader requires that you not only engage in a lifetime of transformative learning to become more educated about racism, but that you constantly work to instill a solid antiracist infrastructure in your institution before an incident occurs.
Being an effective leader requires that you not only engage in a lifetime of transformative learning to become more educated about racism, but that you constantly work to instill a solid antiracist infrastructure in your institution before an incident occurs.
Here are other key takeaways copied directly from the report on how to forge a path forward when addressing an institutional crisis triggered by a racist incident:
CAMPUS CONTEXT MATTERS. A campus racial crisis does not emerge from thin air. Such crises are deeply embedded within layers of social, cultural, and political contexts on a given campus. The interviews we conducted at the UM System and MU reveal the perceptions that many campus stakeholders have of the historical legacy of race and racism on campus, as well as the climate at the local and state levels, which further contributed to the crisis. In addition, racial crises occur within the broader national and political context of race and racism. We document how leaders can assess and analyze these contexts, and the role they play in how the racial crisis unfolds, in the recovery from a crisis, and in ultimately building a more inclusive environment.
ACKNOWLEDGING AND RESPONDING TO COLLECTIVE TRAUMA. Once a racial crisis occurs on a campus, the impact can vary, depending on the campus’s efforts to build capacity prior to the incident. Low- and even moderate-capacity campuses will not have invested deeply in educating leaders, building trust and respect across groups, or dismantling oppressive environments—actions that build the capacity of a campus to withstand times of crisis. This was the case for the University of Missouri. Trauma leaves a great deal of collective emotional pain with members of a campus community. And because emotions are often ignored, campuses have difficulty emerging from racial crises. Acknowledging and responding to this collective trauma is a critical step in recovering from a racial crisis.
TRAUMA RECOVERY—DOS AND DON’TS. The general features of collective trauma recovery frameworks include active listening, speaking from the heart, and “acting with” (as described below). What leaders absolutely should not do in the immediate aftermath of a crisis is set up a task force, collect data, and develop a report with recommendations. This routinized approach to responding to racial issues on campus rarely creates meaningful changes and will be particularly weak in addressing the trauma that ensues from a racial crisis. This routinized response is common but destructive to campus communities that need authentic engagement from their leaders.
ACTIVE LISTENING. The first element of overcoming collective trauma is active listening, a structured form of listening and responding that focuses the attention on the speaker and improves mutual understanding without debate or judgment. Most people engage in conversations but are focused on their own mental responses and perspectives, and tend to not focus intently on the other speaker. Active listening—especially when utilized by leadership—is a powerful method of responding to stressful and traumatic situations and events. This tactic allows individuals to share problems and struggles, engage with difficult feelings, gain perspective on the experiences, take ownership of the situation, rebuild relationships, find their own solutions, and build self-esteem and resilience.
SPEAKING FROM THE HEART. The second element of overcoming collective trauma is speaking from the heart. This involves honest communication from leaders, free from political spin. Speaking from the heart, as is suggested by the phrase, means invoking and responding to emotions. Too often it is the impulse of leaders to get prepared comments after a tragedy so that they do not say anything “wrong” that might further offend people. When leaders speak from the heart, they can build the trust needed to overcome fear and fatigue.
“ACTING WITH.” The third element of overcoming collective trauma, “acting with,” allows leaders to move forward by directly engaging with community, particularly the community members most affected by the traumatic events. Too often, leaders rush ahead with actions to “solve” the problem and do not engage and act with the community, which can negatively impact the collective recovery from trauma. “Acting with” requires leaders to move in a measured way that deeply connects to community members as the campus actively listens to inform their strategy forward.
BUILDING CAPACITY PRIOR TO A RACIAL INCIDENT. Racial incidents are complex and emotionally charged. Even under the best of circumstances, there will be significant challenges in leading through a crisis. High levels of capacity building provide a strong foundation and frame of reference for shared expectations, values, and commitments to diversity and inclusion. Leaders on high capacity building campuses have a shared context from which to communicate and engage in sense making during and after a crisis. The University of Missouri case highlights how low capacity around diversity and inclusion led to a prolonged and traumatizing experience. Being proactive on issues of diversity and inclusion is critical to avoid this type of trauma. Campuses that build capacity ahead of time can accelerate their ability to respond effectively during and after a crisis. High-level capacity building requires that campuses demonstrate a sustained commitment to issues of diversity and inclusion even when things appear to be improving.
....
Many of us raised with traditional models of leadership struggle to shake the outdated image of a charismatic commander who appears to know how to steer the ship. Effective and accountable leadership requires that we replace these notions with a new image of leadership characterized by listening and humility. Transformational Antiracist Leadership is the wave of the future, and the only way out of the mess in which we currently find ourselves.
