Why Care? #11: Bendita Cynthia Malakia - LGBTQ+ Liberation Reimagined
“There is broadening acceptance in society, which means some of these identities that have been more at the margins have had the opportunity to appear and flourish. It doesn’t mean they haven’t been there- they’ve always been there. It’s just becoming more visible to those outside of the community”.
In this episode I talk with Bendita Cynthia Malakia, Global Head of Diversity and Inclusion at Hogan Lovells, an international law firm, as she reflects on her accomplished career as a female, black lawyer who identifies as queer.
Bendita discusses her view that the commonly used abbreviation of EDI (Equality, Diversity and Inclusion) should further become JEDI, to incorporate Justice, which is especially pertinent to legal professions. She goes on to discuss how some professionals can view justice, equity and equality to be at odds each other, but this shouldn’t be the case.
We have an in-depth discussion on the LGBTQ+ acronym, it’s expansions (such as LGBTQQIAAP2S), and how it has evolved so quickly in the last decade. Bendita explains what each letter refers to, what these identities are and mean, how many people may use umbrella terms such as “gay” or “queer” instead, and the unique experiences and treatment that bisexual individuals face.
Bendita offers her advice on the best ways to respectfully approach minority groups without being offensive or burdensome, and how stating your pronouns has become a popular way to visibly show allyship, but may not be suitable for all scenarios or industries.
Finally, Bendita illuminates me on Hogan Lovells Bias Interruption pilot, in which she works with hiring teams to:
“provide a little bit of education….remind [them] of what our firm goals are and where they stand in respect to those firm goals…..give information about what they can’t do [in regards to bias]”
We then close the conversation by talking about how individuals or organisations can start their JEDI journey and become change leaders. She encourages JEDI advocates to “stay in the game, stay in the deep end”.
Links
For more from Bendita Cynthia Malakia go to her website at www.benditamalakia.com
Or Hogan Lovells’ website at https://www.hoganlovells.com/en/malakia-bendita-cynthia
Connect with Bendita: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bendita/
You can find Bendita’s article I mentioned on Biphobia in the workplace here
Links to some of Bendita’s other articles:
https://soundcloud.com/elevatetogetherpodcast/bendita-cynthia-malakia-adjust-for-unconscious-bias
Transcript
Bendita Malakia 00:00
If you're in a space with underrepresented people, it's not really for you to impose your views. And depending on the dialogue, you may be able to contribute actively. And if you're doing so in a respectful and inquisitive way, it's more for you to respect the space and to engage in learning and if there's an opportunity to provide your view, but really, you shouldn't be going there with the intent of trying to put your view on others. That's a privilege that many people who are in the majority tend to take for themselves, the ability to dictate what happens in the space, the primacy of their own views, and prevailing those views over others at any costs.
Nadia Nagamootoo 00:36
Hi, my name is Nadia Nagamootoo. Business psychologist, coach, speaker and founder of Avenir consulting, which creates organizational growth and success by inclusion and diversity. We've been discussing the benefits that diversity brings to a company's bottom line performance for decades with more and more evidence, but there are so many questions organizations still have about how to achieve it. How do you create a culture where people feel valued for their uniqueness and the qualities they bring? I believe it's crucial to the future success and sustainability every organization that they find the answer to this question to make sure that each employee is not only supported but also appreciated. With this podcast, I aim to get some of the key challenges to creating inclusive workplaces out in the open and start uncovering the solutions to embracing a culture that cares for everyone. I'm going to be having conversations with some of the most inspiring people in different countries and across industries who are pushing the boundaries on inclusion and diversity in the workplace, from topics such as parenting in the workplace, ethnicity, age, gender, mental health, and all things inclusion. I want to create a movement to change society through sharing life experiences, and creating more empathy and connection.
Why care? I believe that once we have organizations and societies that accept and value everyone for who they are, we become healthier, happier and better in our roles both inside and outside work.
Hello, and a huge welcome to Season Two of my Why Care Podcast and what a season of discussions have I got in store, I feel incredibly honored to have a list of some of the most brilliant and talented Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion internal specialists offering their insights and views. And to kick it off, I couldn't feel more excited to have the incredible Bendita Cynthia Malakia join me. Bendita leads Hogan Lovell’s global justice, equity, diversity, inclusion and belonging work with a primary goal of building their strategy. A graduate of Harvard Law School, she's been the in-house counsel for two global financial institutions. She's a well-known thought leader in the area of intersectionality on LGBTQ plus issues, as well as having her own consultancy the Malakia group. She's also the treasurer of the national LGBT bar. We talk about gender identity and the discrimination faced by people from different LGBTQ plus community groups. We also discuss ways to demonstrate allyship with an in-depth conversation about stating pronouns. Bendita also shares her insights on the specific JEDI challenges faced in the legal industry and some of the best practice work she's doing in Hogan Lovells, I hope you enjoy our conversation.
Bendita, it is an absolute pleasure to have you on the Why care podcast show. Thank you so much for joining me.
Bendita Malakia 03:11
I'm so delighted to be with you.
Nadia Nagamootoo 03:12
Well, I'm really excited because I see all of your posts on social media, on LinkedIn and you've done a lot of keynote speaking and panel discussions. What's your story? How did you end up on the path of diversity and inclusion?
Bendita Malakia 03:25
I think that I've been on this path for probably my entire life. I was with my parents this past weekend. And they were showing me some old articles, op eds that I'd written to newspapers and other things that indicated that I've always been a JEDI advocate, but I decided to go to law school. I think initially when I can see that I might go to law school. I was a teenager and I thought I would do civil rights. Having kind of graduated through college and being in a fair amount of poverty, at least briefly. When I joined Harvard Law School I definitely wanted to be in real estate, practising law after that in project finance because the real estate markets crashed, right after I graduated and so I spent about a decade practising law, both at a large law firm and housed it to international finance development organizations. I was at Goldman Sachs, and they were a private lending function, and around the time that Trump was around, it started to become a viable thing. I decided to start a DEI consultancy, so I left my role at Goldman and started DEI consultancy, which I've named after myself, which is aimed at supporting the inclusive leadership capacity of executives through coaching, providing legal organizations and national non-profits consulting services and helping underrepresented leaders navigate their careers. So I've had the opportunity to do JEDI in lots of different areas and from lots of different seeds, whether it was as a counsellor, hiring lawyers and setting my own outside counsel guidelines with respect to diversity and inclusion, whether it was as an independent consultant helping with projects, big and small, both structural and individual, and I had the opportunity to join Hogan Lovells in 2017. And I love the role that I've been in and I work in partnership with ten other diversity and inclusion professionals and seven diversity inclusion partners around the globe to co-create and execute our global D&I strategy. So I love what we're doing. I love what we get to do. I love that we are inspiring and investing, every single day, I feel like I've been made for this, and I'm really glad to be here.
Nadia Nagamootoo 05:18
What a journey. And just to be clear, JEDI, you're saying…
Bendita Malakia 05:23
Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion, it's an acronym that helps me remember, among all the other millions of acronyms, more importantly, I do think prioritising justice, I think is the ultimate goal. And I don't think in many workplaces, including many large law firms, that's where we are yet, that's where you're at the level of trying to dismantle and recreate whole systems in order to account or kind of create a new world that centers identity and has all sorts of different people in mind. But I think right now, you know, we've been doing a good job with diversity, maybe not a good job with results, but at least with our focus on it. Inclusion, I think has become increasingly top of mind for people, they kind of figure out their strategy. Equity is a little bit at the cutting edge, and that's kind of where I push us to go as an organization and I push my clients to go ‘what are the strategic investments that we are making to make sure that we are having the outcomes that we seek?’. But justice is a step beyond that, that sort of liberation comes in. That's where we're really reimagining the whole way that we're doing everything. So in the context of a law firm, it might be, ‘should we be taking a look at this partnership structure entirely’?, ‘is this partnership structure serving the needs of our population’, and we're nowhere close to being there yet, being an aspirational, hopeful, and ambitious person, I put it right there at the beginning, in the hope that we'll get there soon.
Nadia Nagamootoo 06:40
And I love that, it really resonates with me, because that’s something that's quite daunting and almost feels like the impossible task of breaking the system. And what you're talking about with the J with the justice is breaking the system. Actually just starting from really looking at every piece of the process of the system, how it’s structured, and bringing it back to its foundations, and maybe even digging a bit deeper than that. And for sure, certain organizations I'm working with even talking about inclusion and what that means and how to be an inclusive leader and what that means for themselves, their self-awareness, breaking down their own view of the world, and being able and open to see things in a different way. That already is a challenge.
Bendita Malakia 07:21
Absolutely a challenge. And I do think that what I see and it's an interesting kind of tension between Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity, and I'm starting to find that inclusion is actually the area where most people are starting to be able to get along once they understand it. And some of it is a little bit perverse, right? I mean, it's the idea that every single person ought to feel like they belong, they are able to contribute, and that they've got an opportunity to succeed. And sometimes I find that inclusion is used as a means of trying to prioritize individuals rather than historically marginalized folks and a way to undercut diversity. So we can do inclusion without making sure that we've got representation in the context of our organizations. And I've also seen it pitched against equity, right. And equity can be challenging for people conceptually, because there is a little bit of tension between equity and equality such that if we treat every single person equally, if we overlay an equal process over an inequitable system, we will continue to produce inequitable results. And that's a realization that we all have to recognize if we truly care about equity, if we truly care about JEDI. Overall, we may need to make specific investments in certain individuals, or build certain structures that are targeted towards specific individuals to ensure that our outcomes at the end are equitable. So it's not just inputs that matter, but also outputs, we need to analyze it from both perspectives and figure out what's the strategy that's going to best serve what our JEDI ambitions are as an organization.
Nadia Nagamootoo 08:52
Yeah, to know that you've got few more years left in your career to sort that out.
Bendita Malakia 08:56
[laughs] I’ll do that next week, and see what the next action is…
Nadia Nagamootoo 09:01
Well, I know that you've got a particular lens on LGBTQ plus, I know that's an area that you support with the National bar as well. I guess I'm curious, because this is an area that you know, I hold my hand, I know less about with regards to diversity characteristics, and the community. And I have many conversations when I'm facilitating sessions and workshops, where people start getting frustrated, almost it's like, I don't know, what's the right thing to say, even the label seems to change how do people identify, I don't even know what these things mean anymore. How can sexuality be so many different things, but it's particularly if they come from a certain generation or belief system where it is very much binary, it’s just heterosexual or homosexual. And actually, it's evolved over the years. Firstly, I'm interested in you providing a little bit of a helping hand for people who are listening around what the different labels for lack of a better word of the different sexuality what do they mean?
Bendita Malakia 10:00
Yeah, you know, I've got some empathy for folks. It used to be kind of when I was a baby queer, that we wouldn't call ourselves queer. That's kind of first and foremost, we also wouldn't use you’re lesbian and gay and maybe bisexual, and we weren't really talking about anything else. And so, there is broadening acceptance in society, which means that some of these identities that have been more at the margins have the opportunity to appear on the floor, it doesn't mean that they haven't been there. They've always been there. It's just that it's becoming more visible to individuals outside of the community. And as we understand identity better in the same way that we're having a debate in the UK about BAME, and whether or not that's an appropriate way to encapsulate individuals of those identities, do we aggregate it? How are we serving certain identities over others, and a very lively and present debate is the same way that we have to have a proper discussion related to the LGBTQ plus community. The longest acronym that I've heard for the community is LGBTQQIAAP2S and that stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, allies, pansexual, and two-spirited.
This is more of an indigenous conception in the US. And so, it's about the indigenous kind of the idea that individuals have multiple spirits in their body. And they're lots of indigenous communities around the globe. But I've only really heard that the Polynesian culture and US culture have direct references to two spirited, but I'm sure I'm probably missing some or an alternative reference for those folks. I find that it's a good default to kind of stick with LGBTQ or LGBTQ plus, but I'm not the person that designates necessarily you’re right or wrong, the most important thing is to kind of try to understand the community that you're with and understand how they identify, we need to be centering people, that's what identity is all about. It's not about our own individual comfort. So for instance, when I was in the second grade, I had a teacher that called me Brenda, and my name is Bendita. And they got lazy because they've never heard of a Bendita before. And it doesn't make it right just because it's easier for you, right. And so we all need to kind of try to make sure that we're respecting people's individual identities. And so in turn, you know, a lesbian is a self-identified woman that has a romantic and or sexual orientation to other women. And that's where that interest lies and gay historically kind of referred to the community overall, which from a language perspective centered men's identity, but now it tends to refer to a self-identified man that has a romantic and or sexual orientation to other men.
I do recognize it in some jurisdictions, like the UK, some people prefer to use the term gay woman. And so, if that's how people want to refer, the same way that I get to choose what my name is, and what my nickname is, is the same way that they get to choose how they identify, I would never call myself a gay woman. In part because I don't identify that way. I identify as a Black queer woman or a Black bisexual woman, one or the other. Bisexual refers to an individual of any gender that has a romantic and or sexual orientation to men and women. There are some people that believe in particular in the community, that bisexuality reinforces the gender binary, and is not trans inclusive, but I don't receive it that way. And I find that there's kind of fluidity among people that are called kind of Bi plus individuals and pansexual communities, but some others disagree. And so just like any community, just as in with respect to race and ethnicity, people who kind of are multiracial, sometimes pick a particular race, and they don't necessarily identify with all their underlying races or vice versa, right. People get to decide who they are.
Nadia Nagamootoo 13:32
Just pause there for a second there on bisexual because I just remembered the article that you wrote for inclusion at work last year, which was talking specifically about Bi phobia. With regards to that, what do you see is the distinction in how people who are bisexual get treated compared to those who are gay or lesbian.
Bendita Malakia 13:52
And I've read a little bit about this but there isn't a ton of scholarship on it. And that's part of the problem. People don't necessarily believe that bisexuality exists, and so bisexual people experience a variety of myths and misperceptions. For instance, it's been found that people think that bisexual individuals are flaky and indecisive. They find their relationships to be a joke. They often characterize it as a passing phase between identities such as heterosexuality and homosexuality, rather as an identity in and of itself. It's often construed as something that happens to you in particular when you're a woman in college and that men can never be bisexual, which is also incorrect and is also kind of a reassertion of misogyny. This idea that if you're tainted with some form of kind of women-ness in this way that we kind of stereotype people that somehow you opt out of manhood, and that's another level of misogyny. And on a societal level bisexual people come out at work less than lesbians and gays do, they experience more housing instability, they have more instances of domestic violence, they tend to have less health insurance in countries where health insurance is something that you have to pay for, and they have less employment stability than lesbians and gays do. So even though it's a community, it tends to be overlooked in particular when they are in opposite sex relationships, because people just decide you're no longer bisexual or sexual orientation minority. And in those particular cases, oftentimes, the oppression against them is insidious, and it's hidden. And people tend to think it's a joke more than others.
Nadia Nagamootoo 15:19
I feel quite angry, I suppose when I'm listening to you and I hear that minimization of people's reality and just kind of going well, you’re something or you’re something else, but you clearly can't decide. So therefore, you've just labelled yourself as bisexual.
Bendita Malakia 15:33
I think others like what's easiest for them, right? And so it's like, Oh, it's too hard. Like, how do I put you in the world? How do I decide who you are, right? Because our entire world is gendered. I mean, if you tend to sit down to dinner at most restaurants with a person of the opposite gender, the individual that appears to have a gender expression that aligns with a masculine gender identity, will likely be seeing the cheque before the other person.
Nadia Nagamootoo 15:57
It happens to me all the time with me and my husband.
Bendita Malakia 15:59
And I'm perfectly fine with that, if you're with me, take the cheque. But that may not absolutely be the way that somebody's relationship is constructed. Or maybe they're splitting it, it undermines the role of women, but also put men in an uncomfortable position where they're forced or required to live up to certain stereotypes or objectives that they may not have anticipated. And so these biases aren't necessarily great for anyone.
Nadia Nagamootoo 16:24
No, absolutely, there's fear isn't there, a lot of it is I feel if any sort of hate crimes or bias is fueled by the fear of the unknown is that I don't understand you, I don't understand. And I don't believe that what you're saying you are exists, it's not part of my world, it is challenging to overcome. I feel sad that there are so many people, gay, lesbian, bisexual, any who don't conform to being heterosexual, the majority characteristic, in this particular instance, have to cover, and have to hide who they are. And there's so many stories in the media, in the UK, not that long ago, that we have a TV presenter here called Philip Schofield, and that was massive. He was a public figure, children's TV presenter, married, all of this sort of wrapped around this ideal kind of scenario of who this person is, and then all of a sudden comes out late, much later in his life around his sexuality and that he's gay. And that saddens me that the world is such that people feel oppressed, and that they would be so judged for who they are that they can't be their true selves.
Bendita Malakia 17:30
Yeah, it's interesting, because in a lot of large organizations, we try to push people to come out. And we try to push people to identify who they are, right, because we want to support them. We've got a global pride plus network that has 1300 folks, and we want to celebrate our LGBTQ+ colleagues. However, in some jurisdictions, it's not safe. In some communities where the legal community and other business communities may be tighter knit, you may be comfortable being out in the workplace, but you may not necessarily be comfortable with everyone in the business community knowing because maybe you're not out in your family, because maybe that might have some particular trigger or risk. It's all very, extremely complicated and it's personal. And I think that what we can do best is demonstrate that we've got an inclusive open environment, it is the hope that people are willing to do what they need to do. And we have world-class benefits and other supports, including an onsite counsellor at our firm. And so it was our goal to try to help people as much as we can through these types of issues to the extent that they feel comfortable.
Nadia Nagamootoo 18:28
Okay, so I know I paused you partway through your definition. So I'm curious still around the term queer, then which you say that you can align yourself to the most. So can you just describe a little bit more about that?
Bendita Malakia 18:41
Sure. Queer is probably of all the terms, the one that I think has the most fluid definition, it can mean genderqueer. Or sometimes people say queer, and it's often about a gender identity, but can also be kind of an omnibus term for participating in the entire community. And so while it used to be a term that people didn't find to be acceptable.
Nadia Nagamootoo 19:02
A derogatory term, right.
Bendita Malakia 19:03
Yeah, exactly. I think over the last several years, five or six years, especially within the community, it's gained resurgence and acceptability in some places. And so there are other identities like non-binary, and some other gender identity minorities may also identify as queer or gender-queer as well.
Nadia Nagamootoo 19:20
And so then I have to ask the Q, the I, the A, the A and the P, and then the two S.
Bendita Malakia 19:27
Questioning is an identity, kind of for those exploring their gender identity, or sexual orientation or both. And I think it's awesome that one of the things that I think the queer community has done a really great job of is bringing folks in who may be curious about where they are, and bringing them into the fold of the community, and also bringing in allies. I mean, with the percentage of individuals that are out in societies, we definitely need allies, and we need to kind of bring them into the fold. And I think there's a lot that other communities can learn about engaging allyship. I think in the gender space and with respect to kind of men, women and other genders, I think there’s starting to be the sense of increasing allyship there as well. But I think there are other communities that could benefit from learning there.
Nadia Nagamootoo 20:08
One of the conversations I had just earlier today, in fact, the session I was running was on inclusive leadership. So I was very much encouraging them to reach out to people of different diversity characteristic backgrounds that they may not necessarily always feel connected to, or lean towards. So obviously, to understand what that feels like to step out of your own shoes and see, think the world through another lens. And their main concern was around, firstly, not being genuine in that, so just kind of, I'd really like to know about you, because I don't know anyone who's gay, that sort of thing. And it being a bit false, but also around feeling like they wouldn't be able to offer their own beliefs or views, that it would be very much wanting to go into a community to learn about that community's views and perceptions, and feeling like what if it jars with their own beliefs, what do they then do with that? Is it that they then just need to accept everything of this community, and let go of their own beliefs. So there were all of those sorts of conversations? I'm just interested in your views on that.
Bendita Malakia 21:05
Sure. I mean, I think allyship is incredibly important. And I think learning about other communities is also important. But there's a way to do it that's not exploitative, and it's not about kind of showing up and looking at people as if they're in a zoo. Between the US and the UK, I think there's some tension about the validity of reverse mentoring and that sort of thing. But in particular, it's much more popular in the UK where we have individuals of various identities and diversities and especially marginalized ones, who are partnered with more senior individuals that may not be underrepresented for mutual engagement and learning. But the question is, sometimes from the US perspective, why are we leveraging the negative experiences that people of this particular identity have, especially those who are more junior, just for the edification of these more senior people? There are lots of ways to learn about things. There's Google, which we do for everything we don't know, right? I mean, I see something on television. I'm like, oh, there's instant lipo in 10 minutes, let me Google that. Right. I mean, I don't necessarily go and find people that were fat yesterday and are skinny today, it'd be like did you do this 10-minute lipo, right. And so, I think there are ways to kind of engage in learning and education, or books and podcasts. And I think there's a little bit of a kind of colonialist bent sometimes or tinged, when we start talking about, Okay, you go over there and talk to those people and let them educate you.
So, I think that there is something about us increasing our knowledge about other people, especially with respect to sexual orientation and gender identity, increasing acceptance come from people understanding that their family members or friends and colleagues identify as members of these sexual orientation, gender identity, minority communities. But I do think that there's a really fine line. Now a way to do it that's not necessarily exploitative is to join events. I mean, I think it's a little bit awkward to go to somebody and be like, unless you're a diversity professional, and anybody can come to me and be like, you're a queer person, was that mean for you? I'm happy to share at any point in time, but I've also signed up for this to be my job, right? I get paid to kind of wear my identity and to advocate for people of historically marginalized identities. And so I take that on, but lots of individuals that are underrepresented haven't signed on to do that. And it can be an awkward thing for that to occur. So join affinity group meetings, join public spaces, reach out to people who've decided that they want to be an ambassador in this space, because they run a brilliant podcast, like yourself, or because they've written a book, or because they've decided to be a public figure with respect to these identity issues.
But it's a little bit awkward, because it's awkward. And it doesn't mean that people have to even when you get in those spaces, that you don't have to kind of let go of your views. I mean, your views wouldn't be values if they were so easily released, or kind of swayed or moved. But what it does mean is having a willingness and openness and suspending beliefs, and that's not a space, that's yours. So I do think the way that you behave in a space is really important. And if you're in a space with underrepresented people, it's not really for you to impose your views. And depending on the dialogue, you may be able to contribute actively. And if you're doing so in a respectful and inquisitive way, it's more for you to respect the space and to engage in learning and if there's an opportunity to provide your view, but really, you shouldn't be going there with the intent of trying to put your view on others. That's a privilege that many people who are in the majority tend to take for themselves, the ability to dictate what happens in the space, the primacy of their own views and prevailing those views over others at any cost.
Nadia Nagamootoo 24:28
That I'm totally with you. I think the conversation I had earlier was very much like, Oh, does that mean that my views aren't important anymore? So as a leader, if I'm going to lead in this space, does that mean that I'd have to let go of my own belief system in order to lead inclusively?
Bendita Malakia 24:40
Yeah, and that's not the case at all right? But we know that for those that are used to privilege, equality feels like oppression. And so even just the idea that we're decentering their particular perspective value idea, all of a sudden they feel like they're losing everything. When I sit in conversations in lots of spaces with lots of organizations who are at different stages of the journey, and I hear all sorts of things at the center of identity and nobody would ever expect, except for by virtue of my role that I would have anything to say about that, right. And so, there's just a sense about kind of checking our privilege where we can, and understanding privilege is hard, right? It's like bias, you don't really know you have it until somebody points it out. And so it's being open to that input and that feedback.
Nadia Nagamootoo 25:26
Yes, absolutely. So the A, the P and the two s.
Bendita Malakia 25:30
I think trans people tend to know what that is. It's changing. It's identifying with the gender that you identify with, rather than your sex assigned at birth, gender is in alignment of the sex assigned at birth and the gender identity. Intersex is kind of a gender identity, encapsulating those that have any number of variants of physiological or physical markers that blend sexes and genders. And so the outdated term that we shouldn't use anymore for this is hermaphrodite, and other people use other derogatory terms here, but to be intersex is to be as common as having red hair biologically. And that's an interesting thing for people to realise and understand. Asexual means that an individual does not identify as having a particular sexual orientation or desire towards other individuals. And an agender person is a person that doesn't identify as having a particular gender. And while agender folks can often identify as non-binary, often those that are non-binary are relatively fluid along the spectrum rather than gender folks who do not identify with agender at all. Pansexual is an individual that has a sexual or romantic orientation towards all genders, sexual orientations and sexualities. So, it's specifically and decidedly trans-inclusive, it was a term that was kind of created to fight what some people thought was wrong with, kind of inherently, bisexuality. And as I mentioned, it's a little bit of a contention within the community. But often individuals that are pansexual will be aggregated into a broader bi-plus community of people. And two s's two spirited and often is attributed to indigenous folks who identify as having multiple energies and spirits within them. Even though it's called two-spirited, it tends to be described as being on a spectrum.
Nadia Nagamootoo 27:11
As you're talking about pansexual I was very much thinking, well, if people who are bisexual are having so many issues being take your pick, why you sort of floating in between the two, then surely pansexual even more so. One of the things that came out in a workshop recently for me was the pronouns. Should individuals feel like they have to now put their pronouns after their name and their email signature or what have you. And in order to make people feel like it's okay, no matter what gender identity or sexuality you have, it's fine by me, there's almost like waving the flag and saying, I'm cool with it, because this is who I am. But there was a whole conversation around why should I feel like I have to do that. There's a minority of people who don't necessarily align to some of the broader terms like heterosexual or lesbian or gay, why should I have to say where I stand just to make other people feel comfortable. So this was an interesting conversation, I just bring to you to hear your wisdom.
Bendita Malakia 28:09
No one has to do anything. I know people who are amazing allies, who demonstrate to me their allyship every single day. And I've never seen them identify their pronouns after their name but identification is really important to members of the queer community, because in a way without knowing somebody individually, to know that that individual tends to be supportive of the LGBTQ plus community. So to the extent that you've got teammates, colleagues or direct reports that you want to send a signal to, it's an easy way without having that conversation to do it, especially in a zoom-related era. I do think, though, that it's a really complicated question about whether or not you choose to add them or not. For instance, if you work in a global jurisdiction, and you work with others in certain jurisdictions that do not necessarily recognize homosexuality, or members of the queer community, and maybe even potentially criminalize it, you can sometimes end up into challenges with clients and others. What happens if you're in a particular jurisdiction, let's say I have my pronouns, and then I go to a jurisdiction that criminalizes queer status, queer identity, and I'm in that jurisdiction now, people in that jurisdiction that I work with know something about me, right? Oftentimes, people assume or presume that, especially in more conservative jurisdictions, that you are queer, some form of queer by virtue, if you are including your pronouns, even though in certain jurisdictions like the US, UK, continental Europe, other places, it's really just a mark of ally ship in the community, that you are an ally.
But if people take it the wrong way, or people kind of infer the wrong thing, you can end up in particular work circumstances I’ve ended up in and some really kind of interesting situations because people I worked with knew that identified as being bisexual or queer, and we were in countries that require you to report other people that you know who are queer, and there's criminalization for people that don't report. And so what do you do in these stances? And so I happen to have a conversation with the team before we left and travelled to that particular country and said, Look, I know what the law is. And I've always been very open about who I am. If any single individual who's travelling on the team does not feel comfortable with me going like, for me, my personal view was I'm not going to put you in that particular position. For other queer people, they may not have chosen to do that, they may have said, well, if other people have an issue with it, they can choose to not to go right, I chose a different direction. And so that teams credit, every last person said, No, we know who you are, and we're perfectly comfortable with travelling with you, we'll take what comes. So that put an additional level of worry on my shoulders with respect to that, particularly because I'm so used to being open. I have an incredibly supportive family with respect to my identity and in every workplace that I've been in. And so, it puts a burden, but I was really honored that everyone showed up for me. And if any one of those people didn't have their pronouns behind their name, I wouldn't be fussed about it, because I know that they've demonstrated their allyship.
Nadia Nagamootoo 31:06
Oh, that's beautifully put. And I hear that there is a signal for maybe people you don't know, if you see their email or on LinkedIn, that you can kind of initially just gauge that allyship. But actually, what really matters are the people around you and their actions and their behavior and how they demonstrate it on a day to day basis.
Bendita Malakia 31:24
Absolutely. After we had a talk, and he said, what are some easy allyship tips, and one of them was you feel comfortable, include your pronouns in various spaces on LinkedIn, your email signature, and they actually ended up reconnecting with an individual they have lost touch with on LinkedIn, because they added their pronouns. And that individual said, look, I've been struggling with a couple of things I didn't know who I could talk to, but you're in the same area of law that I'm in, and I saw that you included your gender pronouns. So I knew that you were open and accepting, right? And so it does make a difference. What I'm saying is, no one should feel like they have to do one particular thing. But what I do personally feel like each of us have the responsibility to do is be an effective ally to individuals who have less privilege than we do. I do think that that's an affirmative responsibility. And it doesn't necessarily have to look or appear in a particular form. I think it's always good to challenge ourselves individually about why does this particular form make me uncomfortable? I think that individual interrogation is really important.
Nadia Nagamootoo 32:22
In fact, all of the work that we do at Avenir very much starts at self-interrogation, self-awareness, and under the new self, what emotionally evokes you, and where does that belief system come from? And that's the only place that you can start when you're working in this space. So, is there anything particular t that's very distinct around the work that needs to be done in the JEDI Space?
Bendita Malakia 32:47
Sure. Underrepresented lawyers exist in a conservative industry, but it's driven in some jurisdictions, at least by precedent, right. And so that means that in the law, we tend to follow what happened before, there's something about the law where we like stability, right? The rule of law, at its core ought to be in some sense stable, which does kind of counter a civil rights mindset. So the essence of JEDI is that we're looking to make a change. And many lawyers are not trained with the mindset for that. And so additionally, legal professionals are selling their command over their mental acuity. And so until you believe that you have implicit bias, and that it may be inadvertently governing your decision-making and driving outcomes, you won't be able to take the necessary steps to mitigate bias. And so some lawyers believe that this admission with respect to implicit bias, which is scientifically proven undercuts kind of the core of being able to do their job. And so, I think the last thing that I'll mention is that many lawyers believe in their own success and that believing that they have privilege means that their own success might be called into question or validated. And so that's a really hard pill to swallow for so many people who have worked really hard to get where they are, regardless of their backgrounds, regardless of whether or not they identify with one of these socially or historically marginalized groups.
Nadia Nagamootoo 34:05
You said a lot there in terms of the industry, what's typical, the type of people that tend to work in that industry, but also from a legal perspective, how intangible implicit bias is, and therefore how do you argue against it or for it. I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know all these legal terms, but essentially, because it's so intangible, it makes it really challenging to navigate in your industry. Okay. So, I'm intrigued then, how does Hogan Lovells approach JEDI?
Bendita Malakia 34:31
Sure, we extricated our JEDI function to be separate from our people team reporting directly to the CEO. And so that was a structural change, isn't it, to accelerate our pace of change. And so we've got five pillars that drive our global plan. Accountability is the first, then processes, recruitment or retention, clients and culture and so we've done a few things that are kind of established best practice. We've published goals for women partners and women in leadership. We published goals for ethnic racial minority and LGBTQ plus partners so that's been really exciting over the last year, we've also established a little diversity and inclusion credit to ensure that we're resolving the diversity tax that disproportionately burdens underrepresented lawyers and with the desire to incentivize all others to undertake effective ally ship investments that are critical to the firm's diversity, equity, inclusion success. And a special little project to my heart is our piloting a bias interruption programme, it is our advancement process for one of our practices, so it's really exciting for us to embark on that journey as a firm.
Nadia Nagamootoo 35:36
I'm really intrigued by that, because the email you sent me, just on my way, I'm just a bias interrupter for a talent conversation. So what is a bias interrupter? What do you do? How do you do it? Why is it important?
Bendita Malakia 35:45
Sure. So a bias interrupter is an individual that tends to understand how biases play out and the context of talent conversations. So there tends to be seven key processes where usually in the context of conversation or meetings where a bias may play a role. And we know that there are about 188 cognitive biases that are at play, we look at 8 to 10 that tend to prevail most often in the context of advancement or promotion conversations, and we're doing a little bit of a hybrid model. So I've been involved with several organizations that have implemented a bias interruption process, what we're doing with this particular practice is to provide a little bit of education. So, remind our peers in this practice of what our firm goals are, and where they stand with respect to those firm goals, both published and internal promotion goals. And then I give them some information about what they can't do. And then one of the things they definitively can't do is align promotion decisions to identity. So they cannot say, I'm promoting Bendita because she's Black, or I'm not promoting Matthew, because he's a man, right? So we can't do that. And I also then give them an overview of these eight or nine kind of key cognitive biases. And what's interesting is none of them are rooted in identity except for parental bias. All the rest are related to just specific cognitive biases that aren't rooted in any particular social demographic diversity. And that's an intentional one, I don't want to give them that we're talking to people around the globe, and certain jurisdictions are more strict than others, I don't want to prime my leaders to be aligning diversity with the promotion. And we also find that these cognitive biases that we've identified are those that tend to impact or have a really disproportionate impact on underrepresented people.
And so we can achieve the end by using a neutral means without kind of inserting identity, by raising awareness around it. And so I provide a little bit of education about those biases. And then I, in partnership, sometimes with our global managing partner for diversity and inclusion, responsible for business at the firm, we observe the conversation, we mark down trends, and we only interrupt in the event that we think that the conversation is happening in such a way that bias may impact the outcome. Otherwise, we just observe, and then we will circle up myself and our other bias interrupter, we will make sure that our notes align, and we'll prepare kind of a report with some best practice for setting up the conversation, having the conversation and we'll identify some trends and provide some education on the back end for ways that they can have better conversations. And so the goal, of course, is twofold is to increase the inclusivity capacity of our leadership. But the other goal is to just to make sure that our underrepresented lawyers aren't disproportionately impacted by bias and talent conversation. So it's really exciting when we're going to have this pilot run goals and then we'll evaluate our progress, we will get the input of our leaders, and we will make some tweaks as we always do. And then we will assess the suitability for other practices. And it's a really exciting development for us. Because we know that bias exists in all practices, you need somebody who's been trained and who thinks about these issues, and understands microaggressions, specifically to be able to identify them.
Nadia Nagamootoo 38:49
Wow, me, it's really exciting. I have so many questions I'm appreciating, we're coming to the end of our conversation, just very quickly, senior people partners and the business people who you're sitting around the table with and challenging how they feel about having a bias interrupter around the table?
Bendita Malakia 39:04
We try to make it as non-intrusive as possible. So for instance, in a zoom environment, we cut our cameras off. So the idea is, is that I only interrupt if I think that the conversation is going to impact the outcome for underrepresented people. And so that doesn't mean that bias doesn’t sometimes pop up. But if the conversation is so heavily weighted toward an outcome, that it wasn't going to make a difference anyway, those are the sorts of items that we include in our report for conversation afterwards. But we really want people especially in the context of our pilot to have natural conversations. And if I'm jumping in every time somebody uses female and male instead of man and woman, because female and male is not trans-inclusive, or if I'm jumping at every time people kind of triple wire, then it's not really going to allow them to do their job and people aren't gonna want to invite me to their conversations. I mean, I wouldn't invite me back either. I think it's important to have a great balance and so the times that we did have the opportunity to kind of jump into the conversation were extremely well received and we were actually invited at the beginning to be an active part of the conversation. But that wasn't really part of the learning. And we want to make sure that whatever we build a scale, that it'll be something that across the business, even those who are reticent, who might not want additional people in the context of their conversations, something that they could buy into, a slightly less intrusive process, it is likely able to get us more mileage and kind of achieve the same objectives.
Nadia Nagamootoo 40:24
Well, I'd love to hear how the pilot goes.
Bendita Malakia 40:26
I'm excited about it.
Nadia Nagamootoo 40:27
Yeah, it sounds fantastic. So just one final question around reflecting on the last year, it's been a tough year for lots of reasons. Obviously, COVID included, a light being shone on JEDI, for sure. Not that it wasn't before, but it just seems to have been raised in prominence in conversation and organizations really doing something more actively around this space. So, for leaders who are listening, potentially feeling overwhelmed with the challenge that they're facing in managing an organization, managing their business in this incredibly tough marketplace that we're in at the moment, whilst also needing to focus and wanting to focus on JEDI. Where should they begin? Where should they focus in order to gain the most?
Bendita Malakia 41:09
If you feel the challenges, it’s because it's challenging, right. Inequity has been kind of a part of our societies from the beginning of time. And so the idea that just because an individual is murdered for everyone to see in the context of a pandemic, it doesn't mean that all of a sudden, we're all going to have the tools and the capability to be able to address these long standing issues that are so interwoven into our systems and processes to almost feel inextricable, right. And for any leader, I think it's critical to have the right mindset. I mean, leadership is all about mindset and attitude. Of course, there's some basic skills involved, but it's mostly mindset. And so I encourage leaders to lead with empathy, humility, and vulnerability. And I think it's critical, including for yourself as a leader, so you’ve got to be kind to yourself, you have to be your own advocate, you got to understand what you need, you got to be able to understand that if this is truly a strategic priority, you wouldn't deem anything else a true strategic priority without putting money behind it. Specific measurable goals and staff and resource, right, you'd be willing to make structural fundamental change. And so you have to have the same mindset here too. You've got to know where you need to grow and be honest about it. I mean, what so many people I think would probably want to hear in the context of this conversation is, the first thing you need to do is an audit on your numbers. And the second thing you need to do is to have, you know, is a focus group in there. And I have empathy for that, because we're all looking for kind of the fix. But I really think that right before you get there, right before you get involved in any tactical pieces of work or even the strategic thinking, you need to get your own mindset together, you need to know your own biases.
You’re going to take a few implicit bias tests, disagree with the results, take it two or three more times, it'll validate it, and then read some things, start having conversations, joining spaces that make you uncomfortable to strategically and thoughtfully share who you are and what you believe, to bring others along and to align your vision. This is the vulnerability piece. This is the, “look, I've never believed in queer issues my whole life but I understand this is important for lots of our people so I'm willing to learn”. I’ve had leaders say this to me recently, and I can deal with this person. This is the person that I can work with. Why? because they know where they are, and they're willing to be honest, they're willing to be open, they're willing to be vulnerable, they understand the importance. And while both of us know it's going to take them some time to get where they need to go. This is something we can work with. What I can't work with is constant deniability, there are no issues, we just happen to have no LGBTQ+ people in our organization. That's the kind of stuff that's harder to deal with. Do this and understand that inclusion means everyone, including you, and people need to stay in the game, we need to stay in the deep end. That's where the growth happens. And that's where we really make change.
Nadia Nagamootoo 43:42
Love that, stay in the deep end. Brilliant. Bendita if people are interested in hearing more about yourself and the work that you're doing, how can they get ahold of you?
Bendita Malakia 43:53
So many think I live on LinkedIn, you can find me there, www.linkedin.com/bendita. I've got a website www.benditamalakia.com. You can find me on the Hogan Lovells website and my office email addresses there. And so I tend to be pretty responsive. If I haven't responded to you in a couple of days that means I will never respond to you. So feel free to email back, like email again. Like I'm not shy, ask lots of others. And I expect others to ask lots of me. That's really why we're here.
Nadia Nagamootoo 44:25
Indeed, indeed. So amazing, it’s just brilliant to speak to you. If you’re interested in anything about what we've spoken about today. There's gonna be more links on the show notes page on the Avenir consulting services.com website under podcasts. Bendita it's been an absolute pleasure. I wish we had longer to speak. Thank you so much for your time, for your energy for your passion in this area, for all the work that you're doing and for sharing your insights. So, I really appreciate it.
Bendita Malakia 44:49
Thank you so much for having me. It was delightful, and I look forward to following you and your great work in the JEDI space.
Nadia Nagamootoo 44:56
Oh, thank you. That concludes episode 11 of the Why Care Podcast. I've got so much out of that discussion in particular the value of understanding the different gender identities. Do let Bendita and I know what you thought of today's show. You can find me on LinkedIn and Twitter with handle @Nadia Nagamootoo. As always I really appreciate your support of this podcast or leaving a review on whatever platform you're listening and spreading the word by sharing with friends and family. Huge thanks, as always, to Mauro Kenji or editing this podcast and to Jon Rice for supporting the show notes and getting it out there on social media.