Anti-racist systems leadership

[Introduction]  

This is a Research in Practice podcast, supporting evidence-informed practice with children and families, young people and adults.

Welcome to the Research in Practice Podcast. In this two-part podcast Dez Holmes talks to Meera Spillet about anti-racist systems leadership, reflecting on the excellent briefing authored by Meera and recently published by Research in Practice, along the way, exploring wider, systemic issues about racism. This podcast contains some difficult conversations about racism. It is really important that we take care of ourselves. If today is a bad time for you to listen to the podcast, please be kind to yourself and listen to it when you're ready. It can be both important and difficult to take a break with the nature of our work, but it is particularly key in terms of retaining the capacity to properly hear and listen to people's experiences. For people who experience racism directly, this could be a difficult listen at times and it might be worth thinking about someone you can speak to after the podcast if it has stirred up strong feelings. Someone that you work with or another person that you can off-load to.  

Dez: Today I'm delighted to say that we're joined by Meera Spillett who's briefing on anti-racist systems leadership to address systemic racism is an absolute must read. Meera is a former director of children's services and a social worker with, this year, 40 years experience in social care, education and public sector partnerships. She started her life in care and became disabled in later life. She manages several chronic health conditions. Meera was one of the founders at BALI, the Black and Asian Leadership Initiative, a programme designed for aspiring Global Majority leaders to give them strategies to overcome and identify some of the barriers they face. It's part of a programme of work offered by the Staff College, supporting people in their leadership approaches and renewing their confidence, which is particularly important for those whose confidence can be depleted by everyday racism. Meera is the author of Black Leaders Missing in Action, Cultural Competence Promoting Leadership and Organisational Change, and is also the co-author of the very popular resource, Leading in Colour, the Fierce Urgency of Now. In 2023, Meera was awarded a lifetime achievement award by the Social Worker of the Year awards. A very warm welcome Meera, lovely to have you with us.

Meera: Oh, hello Dez, I'm delighted to be talking with you. We have known each other many, many years. I would like to thank Research in Practice and the Staff College for commissioning this piece. Both gave me the space to be able to write the briefing. And a big thank you to Emily from Research in Practice, we had some great conversations. The quote on the front of the briefing is one that has real meaning for me. When I became a team manager in Devon, their first Global Majority team manager, I got myself an Athena print of Martin Luther King Jr's I have a dream that one day, from that speech. And it has been on the walls of the places I've worked in, all of them. It's still on the wall in my home office 32 years on. I used Martin Luther King's words at the start and the end of the briefing and I finished by saying, 'Without anti-racist systems leadership, our Global Majority leaders and aspiring leaders cannot be what they ought to be, until all our leaders, including white leaders, are who they ought to be.' And then added Martin Luther King Jr's quotation, 'For some strange reason, I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. And you can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be.' We are in this together, and let's bring our humanity into eradicating racism.

[Terminology] 

Dez: Thank you. Just a quick point on language, in Research in Practice, we tend to use the term Global Majority when we're talking about people who identify as Black, Asian, Arab communities, indigenous populations, often those who can be referred to as mixed heritage, those who are indigenous to global south. Broadly, those who've often been racialised as quote, unquote, ethnic minorities. And the reason we no longer use the term ethnic minority is because globally, these groups represent approximately 85% of the world's population and it felt more than a little bit white centric of us to use language like ethnic minority. Nor do we use language like BAME [Black Asian and Minority Ethnic], which has rightly fallen out of widespread use in recent years because of course, it eclipses so much diversity within diverse groups. I just wanted to check in with you Meera around if there's any preferred terminology that you like to use, having heard what RiP generally does.

Meera: Thanks Dez. I use the term Global Majority, which was brought to prominence by my dear friend Rosemary Campbell Stephens, MBE, co-founder of BALI. I also use Black in the political sense to include all of those who face racism. And then I'll use cultural terms as it brings greater accuracy. So, for me, I'd say I'm Indian and my family have got Jewish roots, Cockney roots and so on. So, hopefully that helps in terms of the language I use.

Dez: Of course, thank you. And it's interesting you note the political use of the term Black. One of the things we'll do is we'll add to the show notes a link to where people can learn more about why we capitalise the word Black when referring to groups of people, why it comes to mean a political term for groups rather than simply the colour. So, in this podcast together, we're going to cover some issues around the roots of racism, how we can work effectively with Black and Global Majority authors and facilitators like yourself. You're going to touch on some tools from the briefing, and thinking as well, towards the end, about how Black and Global Majority people, friends, loved ones and colleagues, can be supported so that they don't take on the burden of tackling racism alone. Thinking about how people who experience racism can have their wellbeing promoted and protected in the course of pushing for change.

[Exploring the roots of racism] 

So, turning, Meera, to this issue of the roots of racism, one of the points you make in the briefing is that the groundwork of racism, if you like, is often unseen, it's like a tree. We can't always see the roots of the tree, but of course, it is from those roots that racism springs. So, can you talk us through a little bit, you know, what kinds of historical events and constructs, to your mind, underpin racism? How can we help people to see those things that they often don't or can't see?

Meera: Yes. How do we see what we can't see? And for me, that is about having critical consciousness. So, actually, I'm interrogating what their environment is for looking at the past and how we have racism today. So, it does mean that we have to, kind of, look back at history. We can't have a historic neutrality of this. So, when that tree analogy, where it comes from, the tree analogy comes from eugenics. And it was, it's literally a certificate that was issued to people who went to the National Eugenics Conferences around the world in the 1920s, and it has a tree as we would know it, and then underneath you see the roots of the tree and on every one there's something different. All the -ologies. So, there's anthropology, genetics, biology, physiology, history, statistics, politics, sociology, I could go on. There are so many of those within what the eugenics movement tried to do and in a sense, what they did it for was in fact on the certificate that's part of that, says, 'The International Congress of Eugenics is devoted to researching in all fields of science and practice which bear upon the improvement of racial qualities in man.' So, for me, going back to eugenics and how we can't then see some of the things that are on the roots of those tree, so how do we look underneath the soil, if you like? So, for example, just talking about eugenics, it's really important, because it's still, if you've ever heard of anything like statistical significance, nature versus nurture, IQ, SATs, correlation coefficients, all these things are rooted in eugenics. And the way in which they operate today, they still have those underpinning parts of that racism built in. So, Frances Galton in 1883, he was the person who coined eugenics and that means in Greek, 'well born.'

He happened to be the cousin of one Charles Darwin and he and Carl Pearson brought together a massive laboratory in University College of London to look at research into human genetics. And what they did was they set out to show that there were two races. White and then inferior Black. And unfortunately, they put that into the way in which their methodologies worked for understanding some of the things that they wanted to prove. So, for example, Carl Pearson measured skulls and then concluded that yes, there was a presence of two different races and that the skull measurement itself could indicate differences between races. And by extension, differences in intelligence or character. So, that's when Galton continued to have this, you know, idea that society as a whole needed to have the good qualities of superior men as opposed to the socially problematic or unproductive identified people who were given that label of feeble minded.

Dez: It's so fascinating and challenging to, kind of, hear this. What you're arguing for is that until we truly look back and understand the roots of some of the things that still influence us today, you know, some of these methods and ways of working, and I am of course not suggesting that anybody who things about the importance of statistical significance is feeding racism. But it's about, I think you're arguing for us to be literate about where some of these understandings come from, where they had their roots, rather than only looking at one part of the tree that we can see now, today, in contemporary society. You're also making me think about the misuse of science, where discrimination or oppression is dressed up in pseudo-science, and that certainly still happens today.

Meera: Yes. I totally agree, Dez, and I think what people, I'm not… It's difficult to explain but when you look at how they conducted their so-called science, then that's been put into action without challenging how some of that was developed. So, yes. So, if you look at IQ, for example, they tested out IQ by giving a small group of questions to white children in a school. They then tested that out on Spanish speaking children, who didn't speak English, they did it in English. And then they asked the same for Black children who had never been to school. And yet, that underpins today's IQ.

Dez: And that's such a perfect example, isn't it, of how prejudiced and discriminatory views can become baked into the way we think about or articulate or measure contemporary issues.

Meera: And I think that does make us need to look back at our history and to see that some of those concepts we still have, the racism, as you say, built in, because of some of the eugenics constructing it. This wasn't a scientific experiment, this was just trying to show that there were people who were in different categories and white people were the highest. And actually, what I'm clear about is that you might call it a different lane, but the eugenics movement, the whole, kind of, science, racism, is still here and if you want any contemporary examples, just look at, there's a British film-maker, Havana Marking, who, it's airing on channel four, Hope Not Hate, a documentary on undercover, exposing the far right wing and this is about so-called race science. And then you look at just, again, very recently, as part of the Post Office inquiry, until 2016, the Post Office and Horizon were using the categories of the people that worked for them and they used Negroid types, Chinese, Japanese types and dark-skinned European types. So, this hasn't gone away. There are multiple disciplines where we need to look again, and I would definitely recommend reading UCL's materials on eugenics, and also Professor Joe Cain's web page is great to visit for some of the more information about eugenics and what it has done.

[Double consciousness and the white gaze]  

Dez: Thank you, we will certainly add those things to the show notes. When you were working on this briefing, one of the things that you introduced to us was this notion of double consciousness and the white gaze, and I wondered whether you could share a little bit, very briefly, on those concepts and really about the concept of whiteness, what the white gaze is, how double consciousness can occur. What you see as that when you were writing the briefing, what you found in the literature.

Meera: Yes, double consciousness was coined again a phrase by W. E. Du Bois, a sociologist in around 1897. So, he was absolutely leading in some of this, as a Black sociologist. And it's a sense of Black people looking at themselves through the eyes of others. So, it's both experiencing themselves through their own consciousness and through their awareness of how they are perceived by white people. And that's from his 1903 work. And it's interesting, because I got thinking about what other examples there could be around double consciousness and the white gaze. Because they come a little bit hand in hand. And so, Toni Morrison, the late great Toni Morrison, coined the term white gaze and that is conceptualised as the assumed white reader. So when writers craft stories, the assumed white and often cisgender, heterosexual male audience that they are writing for and to is the white gaze in action. So, the white gaze can be expanded to mean the ways in which whiteness dominates how we think and operate in society. Being encouraged to adhere to white-centred norms and standards is one of the ways in which that is that white gaze and double consciousness operates. And Morrison highlighted, and I'll quote her, 'I have had reviews in the past that have accused me of not writing about white people, as though our lives have no meaning and no depth without the white gaze, and I have spent my entire writing life trying to make sure that the white gaze was not the dominant one in any of my books.'

Dez: Would it be a bit like, to, sort of, ground it in something that I probably bring more lived experience of, but is it a bit like the male gaze? You know, where women might internalise sexism and misogyny as part of understanding themselves, for example, let's say their beauty standards or their behavioural norms through the lens of what they are told men want and value. Is it a similar sort of dynamic you're describing?

Meera: Yes, I think there are three strands to that though. So, the double consciousness of not knowing under whose gaze you're supposed to be. The white gaze, which particularly has a normalisation for whiteness and it's not challenged and it's often challenged by us as Global Majority leaders. And then there's something about how that works to internalise racism within Global Majority people. It can do that.

[What we mean by whiteness] 

Dez: That's a really helpful way of separating but showing the connection between those three strands. We will, again in the show notes, share a link to something that sets out a bit more of W. E. Du Bois' work and the language is very jarring and quite difficult to listen to. But what I found hardest when you showed us that clip was that so many of the messages endure even though we are over 100 years further on. Now, a moment ago Meera, you used the word whiteness, and I wondered if you could set out a little bit for listeners what that word can mean and how can we start to see it as a construct? How could it be useful to white people who are striving to be allies? So, what do we mean by whiteness? What do you mean when you say the term whiteness?

Meera: So, whiteness is a socially constructed category, just like races, and we have to remember that didn't exist for us, really, until slavery came out and constructed the myth around two races, one being superior to the other. And laws were made to keep those categories and de-humanise other human beings for profit. So, let's be clear about the UK, when slavery was abolished in 1834, the government compensated slave owners for their loss of human profits and the Bank of England, in 2015, finally paid the loan off. So, it was constructed and it has come to be something that still defines power. So, it's socially constructed, it's a category where white only exist in relation to other racial categories, where it was creation of white power holders who then were able to, kind of, be superior as far as they were concerned, over others. And this definition of whiteness has changed a lot and that's the thing about language, it does change. But over time, there are still issues where the power is held in particular places for white people. So, we need to stop centring things around whiteness. And just to give you an example of how whiteness is the norm, I often asked people if you didn't know me, and I didn't know you, and we were going to meet up at a train station, how would you describe yourself for meeting that person? And if you think about it, and I've tried this with people, I would say who I was, so I'll say I'm an Indian woman with grey hair, I'm in a wheelchair, those would be the things that I would say. And actually, if you ask that question to quite a few white people, they wouldn't even say anything about, 'Oh, I'm white and I…'

Dez: Yes, they might not feel any need to say, 'Oh, I'm 5'9", 6' in heels, white woman, long, dark hair.' For example. Because it's the implied assumed quote, unquote, norm. So, that sense of white dominance in how we see and understand the world, I guess that's part of what I'm hearing, this notion of whiteness. This white-centric understanding.

Meera: Absolutely, and there is this, kind of, I know that white leaders get quite unsure of what they should say for these things. I mean, we need to look at the systems and as leaders, we should look at systems that are unhelpful for racial equality and racial equity. We know that they're built into systems and actually, they don't need people that are racist to, kind of, replicate them. But we do need to think about the power imbalances that are there and we can't not look at them. So, it's very much trying to get people to think about whiteness, the power, the privilege that brings. And some white people will not think about any particular privilege that they might get through being whiteness. So, I think, Peggy McIntosh, who did ‘the knapsack’, the Invisible Knapsack, or we would say rucksack, she wrote that many years ago, but it's still relevant. You can't necessarily see, as a white person, what your privilege is in because it's on your back. But maybe it comes out as you recognise the things that you have but other people don't have.

[Whether the steps of progress have the unintended impact of making people think the problem is solved] 

Dez: Absolutely. We will, I'm sure, return to that later in our conversation. I was really interested that you were talking about slavery and the compensation arrangements for slave owners there, it's at the time of recording, it is yet again a really live issue with current or recent political figures feeling they ought to be expressing views on this on social media. How was your weekend? Anyway, it made me, sort of, think about how these issues endure and hundreds of years later, we can still see the repercussions, we can still see the racism at play, which speaks to your point about stuff getting baked in. So, I guess, I want to ask you a question, now I think most of us would say there have been clear examples of demonstrable progress since, for example, Du Bois' time. But we can't be complacent. And this is a really tough one because I do believe in staying hopeful, but do you think sometimes the steps of progress that have been made have this, sort of, unintended impact of making people think the problem is solved?

Meera: That's a really interesting question, Dez. I think looking back at the struggles to tackle racism, I feel there is an ebb and flow around racism. So, I think, there are things that have changed. And then sometimes, I think, we've gone back again. So, when I was a social worker, and I qualified in 1989, our practice was anti-racist and anti-oppressive. And then, the kind of, terminology moved on to equality. Then equality moved to diversity. Then diversity went into unconscious bias. And then more recently, we had equality back, diversity and inclusion, or equity, equality, diversity and inclusion. So, for me, there's something about why it's almost like, why do we keep changing the deck chairs on the Titanic around what we're talking about? We need to be very clear that we have to tackle racism and we need to continue to do that conscientiously and make sure that we don't just go off into some discussion about language, because it's really easy to have, what I call displacement activity. Where you're supposed to be looking at something that's possibly quite difficult, trying to look back at history, about racism, and maybe you, kind of, go where you feel safe in terms of the terminology bits. But that's not the place you need to be.

Dez: That really resonates with me, and I would recognise that, sort of, shift in language over time and in different forums as well, different spaces use different language. I've noticed, and let me be clear, I'm certainly not arguing against promoting diversity, championing inclusion, pushing for equity, but I also observe that sometimes by using slightly veiled language, we allow ourselves to not say the really sharp bit. You know, if we want to talk about things like inclusive organisations, that's great. But if what we mean is our organisation needs to be anti-racist, there's something about saying the words out loud. Holding ourselves to that. Calling a spade a spade sometimes. Calling issues out for what they are and not giving ourselves, particularly those of us who benefit from racist structures and systems, white people, not giving ourselves permission to hide behind more opaque language.

Meera: Yes. I agree and again, I'm like you, I mean, every strand of those words is important to the groups that are affected by all of those issues. However, there's something about race that seems to, kind of, disappear and I've recently had a conversation around how people are putting things in that same bag and then just, 'Oh, then that means the racism one won't actually be talked about.' So, is inclusivity, kind of, stopping some of that? And I've recently been in some work supporting some very specific professionals and they wanted to just wrap it all up in inclusion. But then, that means the strands of racism literally don't get spoken about. Because those are the things that are hard.

Dez: Yes, I recognise that challenge. I guess, there's a real both and we have to hold here. We both absolutely need to take an intersectional perspective, think about the compounding, multi-faceted ways in which a person experiences discrimination and oppression. But we also mustn't dilute or lose really, really key areas, racism being the one that we're focused on here.

Meera: Yes, and I absolutely agree and I think that when I said ebb and flow around racism, I really, you know, in the 40 years that I've worked, you look at it and you can see opportunities come and there might be some action and then it gets lost again. So, that ebb and flow is something that I have seen throughout my career. So, we've had times like the opportunity to tackle racism have come and gone. So, for example, Stephen Lawrence, the Macpherson inquiry, the report was published in 1999. He identified the concept of institutional racism and yet, to date, we still seem to, kind of, not, we're almost saying, 'Well, it isn't really institutional racism.' When actually, we need to own up and say it is. And then we get taken in terms of, you know, fast forward to 2020, with the murder of George Floyd, horrendous. And I sat there and thought, 'This has gone around the world and part of me things that it went round the world, essentially because everyone was locked down due to COVID.' And I'm not sure if it had gone round the world if we hadn't had COVID.

Dez: That's a really sobering thought isn't it? That there was a moment in time where people who perhaps previously hadn't considered the extent to which racism was present in their lives, their systems, their organisations, their social circles, but was that partly circumstance? Was it that we were able, you know, that was able to cut through, to use the media jargon? It's a pretty salutary thought isn't it?

Meera: Yes. I mean, I do think, you know, I don't think it would've come to prominence necessarily without lockdown. You know, people can disagree with that, I absolutely am happy with that. But in terms of, you know, what we didn't hear. So, in the UK, what we didn't hear about over that period, in May, June, July in 2020 there were three deaths in custody in Devon and I don't think we necessarily heard about those.

Dez: Well this speaks to… just to say yes, I laughed there because you're absolutely right, listeners are at liberty to disagree with anything discussed in this podcast, all we ask is that they are listening. Now that's a really sobering point. So, it's not exactly hard science which tales of pain and tragedy and injustice cut through. There's something about circumstance and happenstance here and sometimes, injustices very, very close to home are not reaching us or not being, kind of, finding their way into public consciousness in the way that, for example, the murder of George Floyd did. But I guess that speaks to part of the fact that that ebb and flow that you describe is, in part, influenced by press and media attention. And I would say also in relation to, you know, the government of the day, for example. We've recently experienced a change in the UK in terms of the administration in power, and I think it's worth noting that there are influences, approaches, rhetoric used or indeed found in favour or out of favour, depending on those power structures, press and political power structures.

Meera: I agree with that, Dez, and I think if you think about, again, the Windrush scandal, and there were very clear recommendations that were made and the previous government did not accept all of those recommendations and was taken to the ombudsman and taken elsewhere and I think the judiciary said you should. And then a couple of weeks ago, we had a research report that was done on the history around racism and around Windrush. And it didn't hit any of the, I didn't see it on television at all in any of the news. And I thought, 'I wonder why that is?' And so there is an issue about what is news-worthy when actually, that's a huge report that actually lays out why racism, the history of racism and brings it up to date.

[Working effectively with Black and Global Majority authors and facilitators] 

Dez: Again, we'll be sure to share the links in the show notes. So, with taking into account that ebb and flow you described, there are points in time, we've I think seen one recently in our sector in the, sort of, social care and wider public sector in our country in recent years, where organisations are trying to do much more work around anti-racism. Certainly within Research in Practice, we've been looking to try and push ourselves, make sure that our delivery programme and our outputs speak to some of these issues louder, more consistently and to different audiences. I think it's fair to say that commissioning work from Black and Global Majority trainers or authors is not simple. You know, if you've been doing it for 30-odd years like some of us have. There are a few reasons for this, you know, the content about racism from people who have direct experience of racism, similar when you're commissioning work around care experienced people providing training about being in care, or products about neurodiversity or mental health or poverty from those who have direct experience of it. You're not just commissioning academic knowledge or professional knowledge, it's a person's lived experience not just their learnt experience. And of course, the personal, professional, the political, they all overlap. There are lots of reasons why this work can be complicated and I certainly wouldn't want to say that RiP gets this right every time. You know, the feedback processes are not neutral when the person you've commissioned is bringing so much of their personal experience to bear. The power dynamics are really live.

One person is paying the bill, one person is being paid to do the work. Biases are at play, I think, you know, for white led or majority white organisations, you can find a sense of guilt or fragility at play in that commissioning process. Or indeed, you might have a lack of sensitivity or you might expose your resistance to some of the messages. All sorts of complications and we're continuing ourselves to learn about this as we develop. So, from your experience, as someone who is frequently commissioned by a variety of organisations to help them progress their efforts around anti-racism, how do you think majority white organisations can set clear expectations or support content creation in a way that's really power conscious? Does that make sense?

Meera: Yes, it makes sense, absolutely, and I think, you know, there are a few things I would say. I mean, we need more Global Majority leaders who are commissioning content creation. There are not enough people doing that. We do, as you said, need to reflect on power. Who has it? Who doesn't have it? And how can that process be more equitable? I think it's really a key issue for people to discuss. Some of the reasons, I think, Global Majority groups often have a lack of social capital. So, they're overlooked, often seen just as a, kind of, racism specialist, rather than an inclusive systems leader or practitioner. So, you can be pigeon-holed. You might not have that network, where I am very, very purposeful about ensuring the Global Majority fantastic people that I know and have worked with I absolutely get them, try to get them into rooms that they wouldn't normally be in. And that, I think, is really important and will probably touch on allies and accomplices later. But we need people who are putting Global Majority people in the right place and supporting them, so that they're not overlooked. One of the things I think is important is around being able to see that white resistance, as you said white resistance, and that white gaze that we've already identified. And if I were to write a book, you know, the content I would face is illustrated, for me, in Publishers Weekly. They looked at how many people, of authors, what was the breakdown of the ethnicity? So, 94% of authors in the UK are white. 2% are Asian. 2% are mixed heritage, and 1% Black with 4% identified as other. So, there's a huge disparity amongst that just that's from 2019. I'm sure that it's a similar figure today. So, I would recommend a few things in terms of resisting whiteness, because that's what happens.

Do you know, I've often had discussions with people who want to set up a session and I go through the things about well what would they like me to cover? And I've often had people come back on the, kind of, third conversation where they're worried about putting the strong things forward. And that's an interesting one for me, and I never know what's behind that. So, whether it's the person who is talking to me and saying what they want, do they then go to another person who says, 'Oh, no, no, we can't do that.' I never know. Because I don't get that conversation. I think we do need to look at resisting whiteness.

Dez: There's a really helpful, sort of, set of practical tips there. You rightly acknowledge the role of, sort of, Black led organisations and there is phenomenally important work, Black content creators, Global Majority content producers. In the context of, let's say, local authorities commissioning support around anti-racism, invariably-, that's not true. In the majority of instances, there will be white majority organisations commission the work often from a Black or Global Majority provider, freelancer, trainer, author. And so, your first call to action there is about making sure the talent pool you draw on is suitably diverse, so you have that rich range of people to draw upon. There's something there in, sort of, the design of a staff training or conference or development programme or in a briefing, about being really clear on the purpose of it, agreeing that together and then being courageous in how you achieve that purpose. Not having a wobble half way through when you're confronted with, 'Oh my goodness, that exercise is going to be hard for people.' It may well be hard for people, but if it speaks to your agreed purpose, it's probably worth doing, albeit with appropriate safeguards and ethical considerations. And then that point about considering whiteness, considering biases, considering resistance up front in the commissioning process so they don't surprise you when they're happening down the line. But actually naming right from the start of this commissioning arrangement, 'Here's what we will do if, for example, the team who review all of our training content express resistance to messages. Here's how we'll unpick that together in partnership.' Are they the kinds of steers you'd want to give organisations commissioning this work?

Meera: Yes. I think, local authorities do need to think as well as all the other partners across the public sector actually, across the public sector, I think there is something about understanding why there's resistance and getting leaders, particularly white leaders, to understand what that's about and not try and seek to tone it down. Yes, we can have all the safeguards about the warnings around it being perhaps bringing people's emotions and everything but we've got to look at it. And I think there's a good example in the briefing around resisting whiteness, anti-racist leadership and professional learning in majority white senior leadership teams in England, and it's headed up by Claire Stewart-Hall and colleagues. And it identifies how white individuals, as part of their critical whiteness studies, acknowledges majoritised white racial identities as part of the racism equation, putting whiteness under scrutiny. It's a really good piece and I would, you know, it's about helping people to recognise actually how their own white identity has been created, and how there are places where people can stop thinking about racism by not seeing it. So, actually looking at people who are more or less trained not to notice and mitigate wider external systems that are operationalising whiteness. So, I think, I would definitely recommend, again, it's in the back there of the references and believe it or not, I read every single one of those and I can't believe how many there were. But yes, there are places to look to, kind of, just hold yourself accountable.

Dez: I guess, you're really pushing people to notice those things that very often we don't notice. As white people, we may not instinctively notice the white lens through which everything is being designed or considered. So, if I, again, try and think of a very real example for the listeners here. A local authority commissioning some training around anti-racism, as the materials are submitted and someone in the training team reviews them, they might get very nervous because, 'Oh, people will feel blamed her.' Now, that's a really good question to ask yourself, because no one can learn when they're feeling blamed. I've seen, and in fact you referenced it today Meera, a really excellent thing you do where you often say up front, 'Racism happens without a racist being in the room.' So, everyone can just relax that they're being individually singled out as a racist, we're going to get on with the real work of talking about tackling racism. A skilled trainer can ensure people aren't feeling blamed and therefore able to learn, but it's useful to ask yourself, 'Why am I nervous about this exercise? Why am I nervous about that slide? Why am I a bit nervous about how staff will feel if they read this?' And when we really interrogate that, sometimes the honest answer is, 'Because we haven't done enough groundwork ourselves to address issues of white resistance, white fragility.' And then you've got to ask yourself whether it's ethical to bring in an external trainer into that system. Have I, as an employer, done the groundwork necessary to make this fruitful, to make this a partnership with the expert I'm hoping to commission? Really interrogating what might be underpinning that sense of resistance.

Meera: It's really interesting to hear you say that, Dez, because for me, having, kind of, gone to quite a few different places and spaces across the public sector, there are real issues with people not being authentic in what they are asking for. So, I don't know why some people are worried about not feeling that they're being-, absolutely they shouldn't feel that they're in any way, shape or form, just because they're white, they don't have to see it as that. It is about looking at the systems, not the people. Sometimes we do need to look at the people, but this can be without hurting people as part of the process. But I do think there is something about authenticity when you are asking for something to be done. Because I can see when people are wanting to just tick the box and when they're truly wanting to make a difference.

[Outro] 

Thanks for listening to this Research in Practice podcast, we hope you've enjoyed it. Why not share with your colleagues and let us know your thoughts on Twitter? Tweet us @ResearchIP. 

[Introduction]   

This is a Research in Practice podcast, supporting evidence-informed practice with children and families, young people and adults.      

Welcome to the Research in Practice podcast. This episode is part two of two and concludes Dez and Meera's discussion on anti-racist systems leadership. This episode encompasses why leaders must consider authenticity in their practices, the need to recognise white privilege and the importance of understanding historical contexts.  

This podcast contains some difficult conversations about racism. It is really important that we take care of ourselves. If today is a bad time for you to listen to the podcast, please be kind to yourself and listen to it when you're ready. It can be both important and difficult to take a break with the nature of our work, but it is particularly key in terms of retaining the capacity to properly hear and listen to people's experiences. For people who experience racism directly, this could be a difficult listen at times and it might be worth thinking about someone you can speak to after the podcast if it has stirred up strong feelings, someone that you work with or another person that you can offload to.  

[Key tools described within the briefing] 

Dez: I think that probably it's a really useful point to start to explore some of the tools and models that you describe within the briefing where you're really explicit, you're trying to help the reader think about some of this authenticity at play. So, one of the frameworks that I thought was particularly interesting was the me, we, us framework, and I wonder if you could tell us a little bit more about how you see it being applied by leaders, how it relates to organisational culture? Give us a bit of a sense of that please, Meera?

Meera: Yes, the me, the we and the us framework is something that I think could be really supportive for individuals and for leaders, practitioners, for everyone across the public sector. So, if I take you through it, part of it starts with your values and our values motivate our actions. So, if you go back to your own core values and understand what they are, think about whether they've ever changed. So, personal values can change because maybe some people have decided, 'Well, I do get the difference between equality and equity, and therefore I've changed one of my personal core values to be equity now. It was equality, there is a difference.' So, we all have our own core values and that drives us, motivates us. Then we have the we - so, that's your organisation that you work in, and they will have organisational values that they essentially send you because they want you to be part of the work force and part of those organisational values. And that's where something can start to happen because it may be that your own core values don't chime with the organisational values that are being sent to you, and that can be in a number of ways. So, someone might keep quiet because they're not feeling able to challenge the values that people are giving them. Or, it might lead to a motivation. So, you think that, 'Well, you know, I think people if they work hard can do exactly what they need to do.' So, someone might be feeling that meritocracy, if you work hard then you're going to get promoted, and therefore they don't see or believe in racism.

So, you could have people not… but they're in this organisation that's saying, 'No, we want to be anti-racist.' So, you will get people who will cover what they feel around racism, but will nod their head and say they want to tackle it.

Dez: Right. So, it can work in both directions then? You could have an individual whose personal values and life experiences are such that they are more ambitious and perhaps more authentic around tackling oppression than their organisation is, or conversely, an individual might hold beliefs that mean they are not really matching up to the organisational ambitions, they're going through the motions. I guess both can happen, right?

Meera: Absolutely, and they do happen and it goes back to this, you know, authenticity of leadership. You can tell if someone is believing what they're saying and it shows, and it shows sometimes in the delay that there is for people doing something. So, it gets put off, put off, put off again. So, I think those who work in those organisations, particularly Global Majority people, can see whether it is authentic or if it's just being pushed by-, and they'll do the minimal that they have to do. Now, hopefully that doesn't happen, but then we have the us, which, kind of, finishes that piece off. Which is, ok, so, you've got your personal values, core values, you've then got your organisational values, and then you find yourself in a partnership like an integrated care board, for example, and everybody brings to that all of those things. So, your values, your organisation's values. But what we don't tend to do is actually then is talk about them in that three dimensions about what it's going to mean for the partnership that they're working in. And if you look at things like integrated care boards or some of the top boards in youth justice or anywhere, you will often see right at the top there are quite a few white people at that top, and if they are not having those conversations then they will never see what they can't see.

Dez: Right, so, the us bit, I'm thinking about me and we and us, really lends itself to some of the critical thinking required, let's pick an example, children's safeguarding partnerships. Colleagues who are in leadership roles around children's safeguarding, they have to not only think about their own personal values and the individual values and attitudes and belief systems that their core staff bring, they also are thinking about that organisational level input. And then there's this third entity. What are we when we are together as a whole partnership? How are we interrogating and trying to align and even working out whether there is congruence between, I don't know, pick an issue? We know that within children's safeguarding there is real disproportionality affecting some groups, types of harm, for example, in key groups being over-represented. Pick an issue. Criminal exploitation, some forms of it, and young Black boys and men. In a partnership, which gets very white the more powerful the positions are, it becomes even more essential to think collectively about what each partner is bringing. I could see there being limited use in, let's say the local authority, working very, very hard to establish a strong understanding of adultification, of anti-racist practice, if one or two of the other partners aren't bought into that and signed up to it. Is that the kind of thing that your framework is prompting us to think about?

Meera: Yes, I mean, I think if we're going to have successful partnerships we need all the leaders in that partnership to have conversations about values and then hopefully some of the values around racial equity, anti racism will come through. At times, having been in some of those spaces myself, if you're the only Global Majority person in that room it's really difficult for you to say something, because on a lot of occasions they will then just stereotype you as, 'Oh, here comes Meera with the… oh, she's talking about racism again.' So, that's really hard to navigate when you're just maybe one in a Global Majority, kind of, set where there are lots of white leaders. So, I do think, yes, it is about making sure that your values align and that you don't drop some of the values around anti-racism and some of the equity issues and disparity issues. And I'm not sure that lots of places are having those conversations in those partnership groups, and it's really important for that to happen.

Dez: It is. We often talk about partnerships as if they're just a noun, you know, the meeting, the place, the group, but of course it's a doing word, it's a verb as well isn't it, to work in partnership, to partner with others. So, another good call to action there that when trying to construct, design and indeed lead partnerships and collaborations, if you're serious and committed to addressing racism, you have to think about the me, the we and the us, and a partnership can't truly achieve its goals without being honest about what each agency is bringing, and indeed what each individual is bringing. You introduce another really helpful framework within the briefing. You talk about the three Ps - platitudes, proximity and progress. Which I guess might speak in part to some of the ebb and flow that you described earlier. Can you tell us a bit more about what you mean when you're talking about platitudes, proximity and progress? And how does thinking about these three Ps, how can it support more critical conversations?

Meera: Yes, thank you. Yes, I developed this tool as a way for organisations and the work force to ensure that they weren't just saying the right words around racism, but actually doing something. So, I looked, as always, at the Cambridge and Oxford dictionaries and I came up with platitudes, which they identify as, have little meaning as it's said many, many times over. So, that's words not actions. That displacement activity I've been talking to you about, just saying you're inclusive does not make it happen, and a bit of, kind of, Groundhog Day. So, when there was the George Floyd murder, and there were a whole lot of platitudes going on. And I don't think everyone recognised that as we've gone on and we're now in 2024, they are platitudes, because some of them have been dropped as it's gone along. And people notice. Your Global Majority staff will notice and it really does mean that we're, kind of, going through a bit of that ebb and flow and Groundhog Day again around those platitudes that have been given. And then actually what we're still seeing is, you know, Black social workers are still disproportionately appearing in disciplinaries and grievances and with Social Work England in terms of issues around disparities for them. So, for me, platitudes is definitely part of a P and how people can think about are they just doing the talking the talk and not actually doing it. Then we've got proximity, which is defined as nearness in space, time and relationships. And I do like that, that it's got space, time and relationships, because so much about challenging racism is about having that space to talk about relationships and what we need to be doing, and the whole point of that one is to situate yourself into looking at those people who are experiencing racism 365 days of the year.

It's not a 9-5 thing, so, white leaders need to recognise systemic racism goes on outside of 9-5. They need to look at having that critical conscious mindset. So, pricking themselves about… ok, I may not be Global Majority but I can see there are issues here that we need to address. And, so, making sure that you look at data for example. The one for me that is in the briefing, and do look at it because just situate yourself in that graph - it's basically one that's showing the cumulative mortality rate per 100,000 population for deaths including COVID in England, and it's by ethnic group. So, from March 2020 to January 2023, 313.7 white people per 10,000 population dying. Black people, 597.4. Asian people, 620.7. That is a vast difference and we haven't really spoken about it. So, do look at that in the publication.

Dez: It's a really good example of the stark, stark statistics that demonstrate that people are not experiencing life outcomes or life generally in the same way. There are similarly stark statistics, I know Meera, in relation to things like death in custody, as you mentioned, arrest rates, custodial sentences, maternal mortality rates and on and on and on. And it's astonishing really that those people who are not compelled by human stories of racism, how can they not be compelled by these hard facts and statistics?

Meera: Yes, it's interesting, and actually that proximity needs data. So, if you're in that partnership then you need that data and you have to prick your own conscience about, 'Well, I know this isn't my experience, but clearly this is the experience of quite a few people that we need to serve as our communities.’ And then the third P is progress, which is a forward and onward movement to a destination goal or aspiration. There are leaders and practitioners who are really making progress. So, we talked about it at the beginning that progress - it is there. Some of them are in the briefing, which are good examples to look at. There is also a strong business case around the difference that you get positively if you have Global Majority leaders, Global Majority staff, what they bring. However, there are some organisations who don't have that psychological safety where staff, particularly Global Majority staff, they can feel unseen, unheard, and they cannot speak up without consequences. So, looking as part of that progress, you've got to look at all those issues, because actually, and I will say it, there are still some people who have wilful blindness to racism. So, this approach in terms of all those three Ps, and linking into our conversations so far, you can establish a critical consciousness, you can get the data, look at the multi- dimensional racism.

You can establish critical consciousness. You can use the multi-dimensional racism framework. You can convey your intentionality, your values, behaviours and actions, and you can enable change, change at a cultural level within your organisational arrangement, change as a person and change as a professional. So, from my point of view the three Ps are really about holding yourself and others and partners to account.

[How colleagues can use the briefing to actively engage in anti-racism instead of being passive, ‘unwilling witnesses’] 

Dez: Thank you, and it really speaks to some of your earlier points about the timidity of language. I think we could all recognise examples of platitudes. Maybe we even, if we were to reflect hard, could recognise using them ourselves. I certainly saw too many examples of platitudes. We recently… at the time of recording, saw racist riots in many, many parts of the country and I was quite struck by some businesses, organisations or, sort of, powerful actors referring to them as examples of unrest. Which, it struck me that they'd spelt racist riot wrong. But you see that, sort of, nervousness, that dilution of language. So, there's a call to action here to be really honest and tough on ourselves. Are we talking in platitudes? Because as you say, those colleagues, those friends, those loved ones who experience racism, they certainly notice when they're being spoken to in platitudes, when there isn't that meaningful progress. How else do you think colleagues could use the briefing to actively engage in anti racism and avoiding that, sort of, passive unwilling witness position that sometimes people can find themselves in? Because I guess it's not enough to not be a racist. That's the very least we expect of ourselves isn't it? But to be actively anti racist, how can the briefing help people with that?

Meera: Definitely the briefing can help with that, and I want to see more progress on eradicating racism. And we started, kind of, talking about… initially we talked about allies and I like to push that further because I think some allies can be quiet passive. They might be listening, but not tackling the environment that they're in. So, these days I prefer accomplice, others may not, but it's about putting that… actively seeking to tackle racism and the systems that it's built on. So, in the briefing I touched this area with Dr Ishiyama, who has a great model - the active witnessing model stages. And it's so helpful and I would recommend it. And it's got four levels of witnessing. It's got this witnessing. So, people are not hearing, not seeing, not feeling, not doing anything about tackling discrimination. They fail to recognise or acknowledge racism even exists. So, we've talked about the meritocracy mindset. They minimise things, so, they say, 'Oh, I'm sure they didn't mean to say that.' Or, 'I'm sure it was a joke.' Or, 'I think you're a little oversensitive.' And then don't have any empathy. So, that's where you don't want to be, and if you're there, you need to do something. Then you have passive witnessing. So, you're hearing, seeing and feeling, but you're not doing. So, you might think silently to yourself, 'Okay, I can see something is going on but I really don't know what I'm going to do.' So, they're consciously thinking about the, kind of, ethical issues, the morale issues. Again, perhaps looking at their own values again.

But it hasn't yet come to the point where they're overtly responding to the issues of racism that they might be seeing and hearing. So, they might engage intellectually, but emotionally, no. Then you have the third, active witnessing. So, you are hearing it, seeing it, feeling it and doing more. So, you've got that awareness interaction overtly responding to situations of discrimination, harassment and stereotyping, and offering that empathy and support to be moving into more direct action. And then the fourth place, which is where we all should be trying to be, is ethical witnessing. Taking socially just action to change social or institutional systems. So, we have to look at those systems as we've been talking about, you know, and make sure we are very clear about what the disparities are and what action we're going to actually take to do something about it, and how we work with others collaborate as a collective to do this, because if there are more of you, you can do more. So, raising that social awareness, education, empowering, taking leadership into those anti racism movements. Research, absolutely essential. Preventing conflict. Acting to counter and eradicate racism, and also recognising that actually there is trauma for people who are experiencing racism. So, that for me, that four model stage is really helpful again for people to think about where they are. You know, are they someone that will hear something racist but won't say anything at the time, but might say something when that person is in a different room?

But that's actually not where they need to be. They need to be challenging it more. It's great that they recognise it, but definitely they need to challenge. And don't always look at the Global Majority person in the room to come back on some of the things that people have said…

Dez: Yes.

Meera: Yes, I mean, the way I do it, I have to say, is if someone says something to me which is potentially racist, I will probably just bat it back to them. Say, 'Oh, yes, what makes you think that?' Because then they tend to struggle.

Dez: I think what's really helpful in that framework is this briefing is explicitly for leaders, particularly across children's sector systems, but absolutely applies well beyond that - adult social care, health and so forth. But that point about it being pitched at leaders is important, because I could completely understand why junior colleagues or people in roles where they're not afforded significant structural power, you know, the thought of being, for example, a practitioner for a Global Majority background in a majority white organisation, having to take on that responsibility of overt challenging - that's not what we're advocating for here. We're talking about a framework leaders can use to exercise the power they have, the formal authority that they hold by virtue of being in a leadership role.

Meera: Absolutely, and if you had that and you had it every time you spoke about racism, you really could do… you could move mountains basically.

[How we can do the work necessary to combat racism without placing the burden on those who experience racism] 

Dez: You started to touch on this when you referenced just there the importance of not looking to the person in the room who experiences racism most directly, you know, to call someone out for saying something racist. I want to touch on that now, if I may, about how we can do the work necessary to address racism without placing the greatest burden on those who experience racism. Now, I'm not the first to say this by any stretch, but too often it can be clear that we're asking those who suffer the greatest harm of racism to do the majority of the work. Examples that strike me are, you know, repeatedly sharing their personal painful stories of racism, which as an aside I'm not convinced is a particularly effective mechanism for change, because if it was we'd have it sorted by now wouldn't we? But anyway. And I think, not for me to speak on behalf of all white people, clearly, but I wonder whether sometimes that happens because those of us who benefit from racist structures, those of us who identify as white, we don't want to take up space that's not ours, or, we don't want to say the wrong thing. But that means that we're being silenced, and there's no such thing as a silent ally. So, how do you think we could address it? How do we re-frame racism as a white people's problem and one that is ours to shoulder the burden of?

Meera: Well, thank you, Dez, that's a really hard one. But I've got a few thoughts on that. So, we do need white people to see racism, actively see it, witness it and do something to eradicate it within the systems that they work in, and these are leaders we're talking about. This involves that look back into history and how race was constructed and how it continues to perpetuate racism with the whiteness taken as the norm, white privileges that people don't think about, and we have to understand the past in order for us to move forward into a different future. So, for me, people, kind of, tend to say, 'Well, you know, slavery is over and done with, it's a long time ago. We should stop talking about that and just get on-,' Just need to get on attitude. And I'm going to talk about now the Akan tribe in Alkebulan, which is colonially referred to as Ghana. And they have a global leadership approach that speaks of Sankofa, which is drawn as a bird, and the feet of the bird is going forward, and the head is looking backwards, and it encourages people to look and learn from our history as well as moving forward on our life journeys. So, the translation of it is, go back and get. So, to retrieve. So, for me if we've thought about Sankofa as a way in which, yes, the past is important to the future, then I think we would see and tackle those unseen routes of racism.

Dez: I think that's a really important point, and being unapologetic and unafraid to look back, look back at where we've been, look back at where we've come from, look back the roots of racism is a really important part of how we move forward. And I want to push you again on this notion of white people, or, you know, to avoid using race constructs, those of us who benefit from racist structures and systems, what are the appropriate ways in which we can promote anti-racist leadership in practice - do the work but not take up undue space? Any thoughts or pointers there?

Meera: I think for me I go back to the definition of institutional racism. It's held its absolute impact for me since 1999 when it was published. I happened to be in the social services inspectorate opposite where the enquiry was taking part, and I think-, and I'm going to read it out, because it's something that I have on my wall. Sir William Macpherson's definition of institutional racism was ‘the collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racial stereotyping.' Now, for me, if I were a white leader I would be looking at that and unpicking all of the amazing things that are said in that one definition. We've got to look at our processes, we've got to think about our attitudes and our behaviours. We've got to think about unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racial stereotyping, and if white leaders can do that then they will make progress.

Dez: And I'm also really struck by… you're right, it's a superbly helpful quote. I'm struck by Macpherson's use of the term collective. Systemic racism is a collective endeavour. It doesn't happen by one rogue agent, it seems into the brickwork and the bloodstream of an organisation. But I guess so too does conscious allyship. That too is collective. We do it together or we're not really doing it.

Meera: Absolutely. I absolutely agree. And I think, you know, if you get yourselves around that, if that was something you spoke about in the we, me and us, you know, and actually pulled some of that out, you would start to see actually we need to bring our data in a different place. We need to look at things collectively and collaboratively, rather than just sitting in our own little agencies and all, kind of, shuffling around to get what they particularly want out of it. So, I think it is a positive way that could have a big change.

[How those pushing for change can stay safe in work, and how those of us who do not experience direct racism can play our part to support Black and Global Majority colleagues] 

Dez: I'm really, really conscious, and you will be too given the work that you do. There are so many organisations and partnerships in parts of the country where people are really trying. And I've been really, sort of, impressed and heartened by some examples. I want to just briefly, as we start to draw to a close, I want to hear from you your ideas about how those people who are pushing for change can stay safe in work, and how those of us who don't experience direct racism can play our part in protecting and supporting Black and Global Majority colleagues who take on so much of this pain and labour?

Meera: For me there are a number of things and I absolutely agree with you, there are lots of people making lots of change, we just need that momentum to build slightly more because we're still having some of the same issues reported around racial disparities across the public sector. I think for people tackling this, you need self-care and wellbeing as a crucial part of what you do, because certainly I know that you do need a good network around you. In BALI we call that the council of elders, where you know you can go and speak to someone without them judging you. You know, just to listen to you, and sometimes even to just check that you're not being gaslighted. 'Am I right to think this?' Yes, you are right to think that, because sometimes under that white gaze we often, kind of, doubt ourselves. So, I think definitely self-care, and as you said in the introduction, if there is stuff coming up that you don't think you should be looking at at this particular time, then look at them another time. You have to have the energy to do the work, so, you have to know when you need to stop and when you need to recharge.

Dez: It's a really important point, when you talk about that council of elders model you used in BALI, that's the Black and Asian Leadership Initiative that Staff College lead, that sense of being able to sense check I guess. Check in with others who might share some of your experiences and might be able to empathise and find resonance with you in ways that can be quite profound. Being able to check in with others seems key. What about those of us who often hold greater structural power? I am particularly wanting to not let this bit of the podcast, sort of, slide past white listeners. So, let's make it personal. How can I as a white leader who benefits from the racist and discriminatory structures in our country, in our society How can I proactively ensure that the people I care about who directly experience racism and who are often doing the work to tackle racism feel supported by me? How do I share that load? How do I help them to be as safe as they can be?

Meera: I think it's about co-creating the space and having that ethical witnessing accomplice mentality, and helping people to see what they can't see. You have to see what you can't see, and that's really difficult to do, but that's the mindset you need. In order to tackle racism you need to be an accomplice, you need to promote people into places that they would not normally get into. I think the… kind of, network that go on around applications for senior level people to join leadership roles, there is often a lot of… they're in my network and therefore I'm white, my network is white, and then I'll just when the recruitment consultant says, 'Do you know anybody?' - then it's bound to be someone who is white. So, you need to find the different people that you can support, sponsor, get behind, mentor, sponsor, all those kinds of things that can be active for you to help people to get further places, but also looking at that proximity of the data around racist issues and disparities. I mean, in lockdown I was dealing with breast cancer and looking at what was going on in the world, and looking at those mortality rates that were skewed in terms of the amount of racism that must have been in there for it to be very differently given by the government figures. And I collapsed one day, before we had the vaccines, and I was unconscious, and my husband, my white husband, rang an ambulance and they came, and they tried the oximeter on my finger and they apparently couldn't get anything on the oximeter so they thought, 'That's it. We're going to cart her off to hospital.'

And my husband just said 'Look' to the white crew that were standing there. 'Actually, oximeters don't work on her colour of skin.' On my colour of skin they didn't work. And they didn't know that, and then it makes you think, 'How many of those people were on oxygen, oximeters, and did that have an affect?' So, it's about recognising the disparities, the difficulties that we have. You know, skin cancer isn't identified appropriately for some skin types depending on the colour of your skin. I mean, these are basic things…

Dez: Yes, they are.

Meera: That we need to challenge.

Dez: So, what I'm hearing you describe in that term whiteness, is this underlying and overwhelming assumption of the predominance of whiteness, white expectations, white standards, white norms being the overall norm. Oh, I know what was a good example. I saw someone not too long ago posting that… I don't know if it's still true now, but the NHS website, the page you go to check, oh, I think it might be hand, foot and mouth or scabies, or some sort of skin condition, only has white children. And this mother, I think she was posting on… social media is where I saw it, explaining how unhelpful that was for her and her children because she couldn't… from a national provider of healthcare - she couldn't use the resources because there was just this assumption that the images of white children's skin would work for everyone. That seems to me like a really clear example of whiteness in action.

So, Meera, we noted at the start that you have forty years, this year, experience across social care and education, you know, I know it's hard to ask you to summarise, but at a really high level, just headlines here. What do you think you've learnt? How would you summarise your learning over the years in relation to anti racism?

Meera: Another difficult question. I hold my values tight. I remember that we're all human beings, we're all fallible, but we can equally be quite horrible to each other. I try to be my authentic self even when that's not something that people want to hear. I had a quote of my own - 'Integrity is the backbone of power.' And it is. I call out and continue to call out all forms of discrimination inequities and racism. I've learnt to find a way of how you use strategy, build relationships and move the immovable. It takes a while, but you can do it. And know when you're in a toxic environment, and if they can't change then you know it's time to go. And I've also learnt that you need to recharge yourself, celebrate the wins, but don't internalise the losses or the discrimination that you're getting because that will just lead to a very difficult road for you. Don't get angry with people, and if you do get angry with people, then just let it go, because if you hold onto it like a coal ready to throw it at somebody, the only person that's getting burnt is you. I also think I have this, kind of, mind the gap philosophy. So, I support my wellbeing through gratitude. I am so grateful to have what I have and I'm always… I keep a gratitude diary every day. It helps you, really helps you to see the good things and be grateful for them. I also have appreciation for others, for people who are struggling with trying to get to grips with racism because they might be white or they might be finding difficult things that they didn't know before. And then positivity, we have to be positive because if we're not, that way we'll never do anything.

Dez: I didn't know what you meant at first by mind the gap. So, gratitude and appreciation and positivity. Now, I'm conscious I have some colleagues internal and external, some friends and some very close loved ones who absolutely are angry, and I guess what you're inviting us to do is to only hold that anger for as long as it's useful to you?

Meera: Yes.

Dez: And to get rid of that anger and let it go, not because it's easier for the other person or the party who has angered you, but because it is better for you and yourself, and that's an important nuance. We're not saying let it go because it's difficult of you to keep raising it. You're saying, let it go for your own wellbeing.

Meera: Absolutely, and one of the things that happens when we do the BALI programme is you often see people who have held onto these horrendously racially, oh, just horrific things that have happened to them, and part of it is they haven't been able to process that in a way that has come out to be positive for them and where they're not having scars internally about some of the things that have happened to them. So, we have got to find a way of making sure that we are not harmed, we are not traumatised when someone is racist against us.

Dez: Thank you. So, in your final words, Meera, because there is a lot to be angry about, there is a lot to feel frustrated by, there is a lot to carry in terms of the injustice. For those of us who benefit from racist structures, many of us will be carrying a sense of guilt. We might still be carrying a sense of denial. We'll certainly, those of us who care about the issues, be carrying a sense of helplessness at times. For those who experience racism directly the burden and the pain and the rage of confronting… you know, of facing racism is a lot to bear. Help us end on a hopeful note. I mean, should I feel hopeful? Am I being over optimistic. I mean, I find you quite a positive person, but tell me if you think that we shouldn't be hopeful?

Meera: Oh, I think we should be hopeful. I'm hopeful. If we continue to make that difference in the ways that we've talked about today then we have absolute hope. We've seen different people across the country, across the UK in fact, who have done some great projects and are doing great work, and I stand on the shoulders of giants. So, you know, I think we absolutely need to feel hopeful and we need to recognise that we're all human beings, because so much of it at the moment is being dehumanised. I try to be a glass half full person in terms of this and not a glass half empty, but sometimes it does mean that the glass is smashed and on the floor. But then the next day you pick it up, because I will never stop tackling racism until it's been absolutely eradicated, and that is my continuing hope.

Dez: Thank you for helping us end on a hopeful note. This is not science and I can't give you a reference for this because it's just my personal recipe that works for me. I find one part rage to two part hope is just the right combination to keep me going when I'm starting to lose morale. You are clearly in a much healthier ratio of about five parts to just a tiny, tiny little morsel of rage there. You're a better person than I am I think Meera, in so many, many ways.

Meera: Oh, no, Dez, I think, you know, it's really nice to hear how you hold different parts and I just think for someone who has experienced racism from very early on, you cannot take that as anger, it doesn't get you anywhere. Doesn't get you anywhere. You cannot let it hurt your soul.

Dez: We so appreciate your time, your wisdom and just the energy at which you've come to this. The briefing is a fantastic read. Your hard work on it absolutely shines through, and thank you so much for this podcast. You've really brought it to life for us and, yes, the quality of the conversation as ever, Meera, has just been a joy. We would include in the show notes a range of links to things that Meera talks about, and of course, Meera, if you've anything to plug at all, if you want us to share your social media handle, any other resource you've been involved in, we'll be very, very happy to. But, for now, I'll just remind listeners to visit www.researchinpractice.org.uk for a range of resources including this stellar briefing on anti-racist systems leadership. And then just to end with my heartfelt thanks, Meera. As ever, a real joy to talk to you. Thank you so much.

Meera: Thank you, Dez.

[Outro] 

Thanks for listening to this Research in Practice podcast. We hope you've enjoyed it. Why not share with your colleagues and let us know your thoughts on Twitter. Tweet us @researchIP.