CNN
Arick Wierson
Although she's not a household name in the United States, billionaire Luiza Trajano, the richest woman in Brazil, might very well become one soon if her radical new model to confront structural racism takes hold.
Trajano
made her fortune with her eponymous Magazine Luiza (or Magalu as it is
known) -- Brazil's sprawling 1,000-store department store chain with
over 40,000 employees. She recently announced, together with her son,
Frederico Trajano, the company's CEO, a bold and highly controversial
move: Its coveted trainee program, long considered a major stepping
stone into Brazil's corporate world, will now only admit
Black Brazilians into its ranks in an effort to upend a system that
oftentimes sidelines Brazilians of African heritage from rising up the
corporate ladder.
The
Magalu announcement quickly reverberated across the Brazilian media
landscape. It was a bold move, no doubt, but not one without blowback;
there have been calls across social media for a boycott of the company's stores.
To
put this move in perspective, the impact of Magalu's new hiring edict
in Brazil would be like Goldman Sachs announcing that its prestigious new associate program would only be hiring MBAs of color, or Google retooling its coveted associate product marketing manager program so that it would only accept Black and Brown college graduates.
Of
course, such a move in the United States would immediately run afoul of
long-established laws stemming from Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights
Act, which set up the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) to
adjudicate race-based hiring, firing and promotional grievances. Seminal
cases such as Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971), McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (1973) and Hazelwood School District v. United States (1977),
among many others, served to advance the legal structure through which
American companies now deal with matters of race and equity in the
workplace. Over time, these lawsuits gave EEO policies more teeth by
defining a legal framework for ensuring workplace protections. They also
forced companies to rewrite or get rid of unfair employment policies
and practices.
However,
the cruel irony of America's efforts to curb workplace discrimination
is that once Title VII forcibly removed race from the hiring equation,
it immediately became that much harder to enact programs to address
systemic racism in ways that might be beneficial, which is why our
country's long attempts at promoting affirmative action programs
ultimately failed. Although originally passed to hinder workplace discrimination, race-based recruiting and hiring laws were eventually co-opted by conservatives
and used to thwart race from being a factor for creating more diverse
and inclusive workplaces, while giving birth to an array of White
grievances under the general rubric of 'reverse racism.'
No
matter how we got here, the current system is clearly not working;
White males still account for the majority of executive positions. Among
the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, only 1% are Black.
Even a level down, a recent Stanford Graduate School of Business study
examining the makeup of Fortune 100 companies found that just 3%
of African Americans held senior-level roles with profit and loss
responsibilities -- often seen as stepping stones to the top job.
America has a diversity problem, and our largest corporations need to
embrace bold new models about how to accelerate social and racial
justice within their ranks.
CEOs
should start by stripping down America's foundational myth of
meritocracy -- the notion that one's ability to get ahead in life is
solely a function of the combined strength of their efforts and
abilities -- and approach corporate recruiting from a new angle. Instead
of relying on a hiring process defined by attending the right schools
and interning at prominent companies, CEOs could begin identifying and
cultivating talent much earlier in life and according to a new metric:
grit.
Several corporate programs, such as Starbucks' College Achievement Plan,
have taken steps to make higher education more accessible for
employees, but fall short of addressing the social, environmental and
economic vectors that impinge upon disadvantaged youths. What if growing
up in a low-income, single-parent household, instead of being seen as
an impediment to climbing the social ladder, positioned high-potential
young teens for corporate-sponsored talent development programs that
would support them from junior high, through high school and college and
into the sponsor's corporate ranks? Such a program executed at scale
would invariably lift up disadvantaged White youths as well, but that
would be a feature, not a bug, making the entire initiative less
controversial.
Which
CEOs will have the requisite combination of vision to truly stand up
for racial ju
stice and stick their neck out for meaningful workforce
diversity? Perhaps, like Trajano in Brazil, it will be a corporate
leader who is unencumbered by risk-averse boards and myopic shareholders
who can't be tasked with thinking about anything beyond the quarter
ahead. Maybe it needs to be someone like my former boss, Mike Bloomberg,
who still owns most of his behemoth media and data company and is beholden to virtually no one.
Or perhaps it will be someone like Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella,
who is widely seen as one of the most progressive CEOs on the topic of
diversity and inclusion. Or perhaps it could be Amazon's Jeff Bezos, JP
Morgan's Jamie Dimon or Zoom's Eric Yuan -- there is no shortage of
candidates with the political muscle and dogged perseverance necessary
to pull off what Trajano is doing down in Brazil.
Despite
the controversy around the decision, the Trajanos are not wavering.
"We want to see more Black Brazilians in positions of leadership in
Magalu; this diversity will make us a better company, capable of
delivering a better return to our shareholders," Frederico Trajano wrote in a recent article.
Forcing diversity, argues Trajano, is in the long-term strategic interests of shareholders.
Trajano's
plan is not only to create a powerful stream of more diverse leadership
throughout his company's ranks, but to inspire other corporate leaders
to follow suit, and in doing so, fast-track the demarginalization of the
country's majority Black demographic. Ultimately what happens as a
result of the mounting political and public pressure against Magalu
remains to be seen. If Magalu stays the course, it could signal a
watershed moment in Brazil and could encourage other Brazilian companies
to consider similar policies.
"Today the racial make-up of Brazil is over 50% Black and Brown -- it basically looks like what the United States is projected to look like
by 2050," observed Frederico Trajano in a recent Zoom interview with
me. "American CEOs of large companies would be well-served by looking at
what we are doing down here in Brazil on many fronts, including how to
ensure that a company's leadership team better reflects the public it
serves."
Here in the United States, Americans just elected
the first woman of color, Kamala Harris, herself the daughter of
Jamaican and Indian immigrants, as vice president, and so the timing of
such a bold move by a leader in Corporate America would certainly be
fitting. Maybe for once, instead of looking east, west, or at one
another for inspiration, American CEOs should look south, and take their
cues on racial justice from a bold businesswoman and her son from
Brazil.
Acesse a notícia original AQUI
Acesse: www.jacksoncampos.com.br
Acesse: www.jacksoncampos.com.br
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário