Diversity is essential in social change organizations because it makes the group appealing to various identity groups and is a better reflection of society. For example, in a feminist organization, the more diverse the population is in its race, age, and gender, the more appealing it is for various identity groups within the larger society with similar interests because they see themselves reflected within the cause. However, how you go about diversifying membership may also have a lot to do with your context (e.g. demographics of your community) as well as the values and objectives of your organization such as fostering inclusivity and/or creating a safe space for marginalized individuals and communities.
One example of ensuring diversity can be seen in Sadaka Reut’s commitment to diversity in the form of co-leadership of Jewish and Palestinian staff. Co-leadership happens both at an organizational level and at the level of each program the organization implements, based on a belief that partnerships are better forged with leaders with diverse background and identity. Sadaka Reut staff and board members also emphasize the importance of bringing leadership into the organization that reflects diversity not only in terms of ethno-national identity, but along multiple identity categories (gender, ethnic heritage, sexual orientation, etc.).
Similarly, Fathi Masoud, a civil society practitioner in Israel, notes the significance of having diverse membership in order to protect marginalized activists (Palestinians). In his words, when engaged in concrete action against oppression of Palestinians, Jewish participation “will give [activists] more legitimacy. It’s sort of protection because if [Palestinians] do it alone, they might be arrested, they may be attacked by others, etcetera.”
Another way of approaching organizational diversity is by focusing on the experiences and participation of multiple individuals and communities experiencing discrimination and marginalization while remaining attentive to the umbrella issue of systemic oppression of specific communities. For instance, one local US-based Black Lives Matter group has decided to remain independent, rather than an official chapter of the Black Lives Matter Global Network, because of its desire to “make space for mixed race and non-black people of color.” In contrast, leaders of this community-based group note that this is not always possible in spaces characterized by a desire for separate black spaces. Highlighting the benefits of diversifying membership in this way, a leader of this group states: “We are big fans of coalition building. […] Coalition building used to mean we will help you if you help us—that has changed thanks to social media, the new concept is built on the idea of ‘the rising tide lifts all boats.’ If we all help marginalized people, everyone wins.”
Finally, another Black Lives Matter group in the Southwestern United States notes that community demographics can shape the parameters of member diversification. While this group “centers the impacted” and focuses on systemic oppression aimed at black communities, the individuals most involved in their events are not black: “As far as people that are engaged, when we are marching and look back, you’ll be at the front of the march and look back and see white, black, Hispanic, Middle Eastern, all kinds of people...” The experience of this group suggests that in communities with a smaller population of individuals who experience oppression, an inclusive approach can be necessary in order to ensure that there are significant numbers of people involved and that organizations can grow. The importance of inclusive approaches was echoed by Saviona Rotley, a practitioner in Israel formerly involved with Women Waging Peace, who noted that the group used a “more vague message” in order to bring in women from across the political spectrum.
The more diverse the pool of members, the more difficult it can become to make decisions or retain a focus on the core aims of an organization.
In contexts that are deeply divided or polarized, it can be hard to diversify across lines of division due to lack of exposure or political will to engage across those lines.
In cross-conflict work, it can be challenging for individuals to engage when they don’t belong to either of the predominant conflict groups. If the work is premised on building relationships across conflict lines, these individuals face unique challenges to their own identity that can make the work - and thus scaling the work - more challenging.
Categories: Building the Movement from the Inside Out, Networks, Coalitions, and Allies
Subcategories: Strengthening organizational structure, Building strong networks
Diversify the talent pool - Diversity isn’t just about demographics, it’s also about pulling on a wide variety of strengths and talents to build a team
Define roles to deepen impact - As organizations take on new and more structured forms, defined roles must also balance and blur hierarchies within their diverse memberships
Create safe spaces - With diversity comes the need to create safe spaces to protect and empower movement actors
Create networks around shared beliefs/values - Inequity between groups is often the cause of conflict, but networks created around shared beliefs and values of multiple communities experiencing discrimination can build more durable movements
Build on opportunities to engage - Use the inertia from a moment of opportunity to engage a more diverse membership
Engage in storytelling - Develop and frame narratives that mobilize the movement’s cause and are palatable to prospective new membership
Mobilize key actors - Consider how diversity should also influence partnerships with key community actors