Episode 43: Navigating the Unspoken: Decoding Organizational Rules

Join us as Daisy Auger-Dominguez discusses the "decoder ring" for navigating the unspoken rules of organizations. Learn how to push boundaries and foster a culture of inclusivity.

Chris Riback: Daisy, thank you so much for joining us. We're looking forward to the conversation.

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: So am I. Thank you for having me, Chris.

Chris Riback: So we should start, of course, with a little bit about you and your intersection of professional experience, but also in the inclusion, how to get the most out of our employees in a constructive way that is meaningful to both companies and individuals. Your life story. Daisy, tell me about you.

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: I won't give you my full life, Chris, because we don't have enough time for that. But I was born in New York City and raised in the Dominican Republic and returned back to the US when I was a junior in high school. That opposite migratory pattern, if you will, and experience in the Dominican Republic where I studied an international school with kids from all over the world. My best friends growing up were Danish, Dutch, Israeli, Chinese. I was not only living in diversity before we even talked about diversity, but I was also part of the majority living as a Dominican in the Dominican Republic in a school of mostly expats and children of industry, if you will. My grandparents who raised me were working class. And then when I moved to the US at the age of 16, all of a sudden I became Hispanic. I had grown up being Dominican and Puerto Rican, and my identity formation shifted significantly. And from there on, I went to a school in Pennsylvania, Bucknell University for undergrad, NYU for my master's in public policy, did a fellowship in public affairs, the Corps of Fellows program here in New York, and just kept on studying and experiencing what difference looked like within the American context. And then I entered the workforce and I entered the workforce as a credit risk analyst at Moody's Investor Service. I had a master's. Of course

Chris Riback: You did.

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: Yes, exactly. I had a master's in public policy, undergraduate degree in International Relations and women's Studies. And I landed at Moody's as a credit risk analyst in the public finance department. And I ended up working at Moody's for 12 years. I was a credit risk analyst for six. I then managed our global foundation for three years, and I was then asked to transition into the HR department to run the company's first diversity and inclusion function. So that is how I eventually made my way into the human capital function and the diversity and inclusion space. But I made my way through it at a time when no one really was talking about diversity. This was in the early two thousands, most of the work around diversity was around diversity, recruiting, if you will, and credit rating agencies certainly were not focusing on work, but as with many companies, there had been a series of legal actions taken against the company.

And one of the remediations was to create a diversity and inclusion function. So this is how I landed in this world, and I always share that because when folks talk about their career trajectories, it always sounds like this lovely linear path and something that you've always wanted to do. And I really landed in this role because I was that at that point, that manager of Global Foundation programs who would go to the black MBA conferences, the Asian MBA conferences, the Latino MBA conferences, I would go to our HR team, our recruiting team in particular, and let them know I'm helping fund programs to build, as I joked, the future geeks of America. I want these folks to be hired at Moody's, helped me figure out how to get them hired in this place. And so I was learning the fundamentals of diversity and inclusion, but also as a woman of color, I had experienced what it felt like to be ignored, to be sidelined, to be marginalized.

I had seen that experience in many of my incredibly talented colleagues of color and women as well. And I knew that there was a better way that work didn't have to be as painful as it was. It didn't have to be as onerous as it felt. And so I landed in this role. And from there I've worked at some of the world's most admired companies from Moody's. I went to Time Warner, which has now been bought and sold in several versions. Then I went to Disney, then I went to Google, then I went to Viacom. And then most recently I was chief people officer at Vice Media. And in every one of those roles, with the exception of Vice Media, I was leading diversity and inclusion and talent acquisition and some version of a talent role because I started taking on these more hybrid roles throughout my career really as a plea to expand the scope of DNI. Because for a long time I would see the opportunities for making this, not this sidelined effort, but really an integrated effort throughout. And so that's what lands me here today.

Chris Riback: Outstanding. And I've made a note. We're also going to ask you to join us on our new podcast, credit Risk Geeks of the World Unite. Yes. Yes, we'll get you on that one too. So a quick follow up on your upbringing. So really interesting for me to hear that you went to a school, you grew up in an environment where you were surrounded by diversity, but it sounds like you'll correct me if I'm wrong, didn't consider it as a thing, like something that needed focus and programs and follow up and guidelines, et cetera, guidance. yet now you have spent years in roles where it was all about why is it just that it was different circumstances and you happened to be in a high school where part of the infrastructure was to meaningfully create a diverse environment.

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: It was in the air that we breathed. We were this small little island in the Caribbean with folks from all over the world who intentionally wanted to be there. And we were navigating difference in a way that was very much about national identity, not in the terms that we speak about it today, not in the terms of valuing. And there were certainly, there were communities that were valued more than others, and there were countries and nationalities that folks as young people will do, made jokes of and whatnot. But because we were all growing up together in this fabric on any given day, I was at my friend's house who was Japanese, eating Japanese food and speaking in Spanish. And my best friend to this day, Rio, who's Danish, she lives in Copenhagen now. I grew up helping her parents make the ice cream cones that they made.

That was their industry in the island. And listening to Danish, which I still don't understand that well, and speaking in Danish and Spanish and Spanglish, and that was just in the air that we breathe. We didn't really question it as much, what it did was give us a scope of understanding that was beyond our immediate identity. I remember vividly, I think it was in 10th grade, we wrote a letter to, I think it was McGraw Hill, but it folks, it was our geography class, the publishers of our book, because the map that they had created had the Dominican Republic off skewed somewhere else the wrong size. And we were just frustrated. And I remember telling our teacher who was, she happened to be an American teacher telling her, I was like, we study this and it is our job to know geography exhaustively and this, it was a very tough academic program, strong academic rigor, and yet what are people learning about us?

So it was that while it wasn't very much about like, oh, it has to be a program about it, it helped build in me a sense of the world and my place in it that was a lot more expansive than what may have happened. And then for me, it really was coming to the us. And after growing up with that and expansive view, making it so small, I was placed in this box. I was Hispanic, and the way that people saw me was so limiting. I was placed in this homogeneous box of folks who could not speak English well. And I happened to speak English fluently because I had learned it in my entire life who were poor socioeconomically, and my family was working class, but people had gone to college, people had done things that folks would not expect my family to have done.

We were supposed to be the drug dealers, the maids, my freshman year roommate, I remember telling me the only Latinas that she had known she had grown in California were maids. So this was an interesting experience for her. So it was being placed in all these moments where all of a sudden it was like, well, wait a second. Your experience is vastly different from mine. And yet I'm really looking at it from a humanity perspective here. I know the good, the bad, and the ugly of so many communities across the world. And when we limit it this way, that means that you only see me as being capable of doing X, Y, Z. And I am not given entrance into spaces where I want to enter, but simply because of the color of my skin or who I am. And so that just inspired me always to push against the grain and to kind of expand people's lenses of what humans look like.

And then that became far more practical. Being in the workforce and realizing, oh, wait a second. Not everybody has the same access to these roles that I've had or opportunity. Not everyone is given the same coaching and mentoring to be able to advance in their careers. Not everyone is given what I call the decoder ring of how to navigate the unspoken rules of an organization. My mentor, Dr. Ella, be always says, I was like, many of us did not grow up having dinner table conversations about how to navigate the workplace. That does not make us unable to learn that, but it just means that we have to catch up. And what if there are programs and opportunities to help reduce those gaps for folks? So that's inspired me to help reduce those gaps so that I can create level playing fields so everybody can achieve to their fullest capacity. And sometimes that means programs, sometimes that means initiatives, sometimes it just means pushing folks to think more expansively about the talent that they have in their organizations and how to ensure that you're creating conditions for everyone to thrive.

Diane Flynn: So I'd like to follow up on that, and your narrative is so fascinating and so rich. So thank you for sharing that. Daisy, we do similar things. We do programs often to support those from underrepresented groups to create opportunity for all. And I'd like to hear from your decades of work in this space, what do you think has improved and where are we still falling way short. And we all know about recent Supreme Court rulings, and I've seen personally the impact of that on some DEI departments on budgets. I'm just kind of curious how you see the winds blowing and where are the silver linings?

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: I think there are a lot of silver linings. My latest response to folks who are concerned about what's happening about DEI in the workplace is don't believe the hype. And what I mean by that is it's not dead, right? Contrary to comments everywhere about DEI is dead and DEI is on fire, I'm actually speaking on a panel that's entitled, DEI is on fire. But what I mean by don't believe the hype is that there are countless of examples of this work continuing because this is reflective of the world that we live in, right? It's a hot button issue right now because the perception is that diversity programs are about giving preference in hiring and promotions to people other than white men. And the widespread belief is that DEI is another word for hiring preferences. And that's unfortunate because that's not what this work is.

But language is important. Understanding the context of this work is very important when you talk about affirmative action. When it comes to academic institutions, it's also assumed to be a synonym for preferential hiring. But again, except in very unusual circumstances, it's limited to reducing bias and shaping the applicant pool. And I have to tell you, having worked in the tech industry where the language of the hiring bar was one that was often used to fight against DEI programs, and having been in the human capital space for a long time, my cheeky response to that was often I have seen the hiring bar be raced and lowered significantly for many different groups of people, not just people of color. I have seen it be lowered for white people entering the workforce because of relationships that they have, but we don't talk about that. And people wrongly assume that increasing workforce diversity means sacrificing principles of fairness and merit because it requires giving special accommodations to black indigenous people of color, name marginalized identities to those candidates rather than treating everyone the same. And I argue that a racially sensitive management team recognizes that fairness requires treating people equitably, which may entail treating people differently, but in a way that reduces systemic disparities. And no one wants to talk about that.

You're just like, oh, that's just too big. It's too much, too software. But that's what this work is about. So to recruit a more diverse workforce, everyone involved in the hiring process needs to understand the hiring goals. They need to recognize why they matter, and they need to be held accountable for hiring with diversity, equity, and inclusion in mind. And those are the kinds of programs that work when there's that level of accountability where that level of transparency, where there is a tie to the business and the objectives of the organization, that's when I see this work well, where every recruiter knows how painful it is. When someone in the chain, whether it's the hiring manager, the interviewers, or even your leadership breaks that system of accountability, that's when it doesn't work. And so I share that because I know that that's a lot of the subject matter.

It is a lot of what doesn't get said about what's being said right now. We're talking about how unfair this is, but we don't talk about the rationale and the reason for this work to have existed in the first place. And I've been doing this work for about two decades now, and I've seen the ebbs and flows I've seen the minute the economy constraints, everything gets cut. And yet what I have seen in most organizations is that reduction in budgets doesn't mean complete eradication of departments and functions except for some reason DEI always gets sort of just completely taken out. But you don't get rid of your marketing team when the economy is tanking, right? You reduce it and you get ready for when the economy is back on the upside so that you can be ready to take advantage of what those market trends will bring.

The DEI space is one that has been so misunderstood for so long and frankly has not been credentialized the way that it should be because it's still a relatively newish function in organizations for the most part. And so it's an easy piece to say, this doesn't work, so we're going to get rid of it, versus doing what we do in sound business practices, which is what are we good at? What is working and what are we continue to invest in and what needs to be improved? Because there's always areas that need to be improved. I'm not saying that DEI programs are always perfect and efficient. We all know that diversity training programs have not been highly efficient in organizations. They've been helpful at helping us understand biases, but most of us end up leaving those sessions going like, okay, I'm biased.

So what next? What do I do, it's not just a one session or one day lesson. This is applying what you're learning. It's figuring out what role do you want to play in this work. I fundamentally believe everyone has a role to play in this work. We don't all have to be in the front champions of this work. We don't all have to be the in the front, but we all have to be allies in one way or another. We all have opportunities every day to drive this work in a meaningful way. And I think that what we're seeing right now is this pushback. And I'll tell you, and I'm sure this is what you're seeing in organizations every CEO, every DEI leader that I've talked to over the last couple of months, and they've been several, they're all continuing to do this work. They're just doing it slightly differently. Their corporate legal teams are reviewing all the legal concerns and risks and addressing where and if areas need to be fine-tuned, but everyone's continuing this work because the workforce of the future demands it. The markets that we live in are operating in spaces where stakeholders are either demanding it, asking for it, or pushing against it. And it's a tough job for a leader to have to find that right balance, but folks are really trying hard to make sure they do that right now.

Diane Flynn: So two follow on questions. One is to clarify. You said it's on fire that could either be perceived as it's imploding or on fire strong as ever. So if you could clarify that and then it's both. It's both. Okay.

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: I would say it's the imploding. I think imploding is not the right image that I want to convey here. I think it's on fire right now because it's being attacked from almost every side that you can think of. And the attacks are coming from attacks on its impact and from a legal perspective, from a political perspective. But the attacks are also coming from practitioners within the field saying, oh, well you know what? This is an opportunity to reshape what DEI looks like. Let's not throw everything away, but let's try and inspire new levels of skill in this work. Let's try and inspire new levels of achievement because at the end of the day, no one wants to do work that does not achieve the desirable outcomes. And so there is a lot of energy. And there's also, I think we keep on forgetting that this is a relatively new field that many, if not most of us who have come into this work.

There's very few of us that are the two decade leaders. Most of the leaders and drivers of this work have really been around for the past five plus years, especially since the summer of 2020 post George Floyd's death. And so a lot of folks barely had a chance to really, I mean, it took me years to build the right influencing skills, the right strategic skills, the right business skills to lead this work effectively. And so we're attacking a field that is still evolving and managing. And so that's that fire. But there is, I think the other side of that, which is I think what you were alluding to is the good fire of, it's like when you get lit up and you're like, you know what? This work is important and I'm not going to stop doing this work because I have seen firsthand how it works and the impact that it has, not just on individuals, but on organizations. I have seen the impact that it has on productivity. I have seen the impact that has on creativity, on innovation. This is real. This is not made up stuff. So I do think that there's both of those sides, the energy is coming from both sides.

Diane Flynn: Yes. Thank you for clarifying that. In my opinion, I think the practitioners that have given this a bit of a bad name, and I'm curious if you would agree, are the ones that approach it with the shame and blame mentality because I just don't think that is how you open people's minds if you get them not on your side to begin with. But that's my opinion. I'd love to hear what you have to say. A related question to that though is as we continue to do this work, do you think the name itself, DEI, is triggering polarizing? I mean, we know it's polarizing, but do you think there is a better way to speak about it?

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: I'll answer your first question about giving DEIA bad name, if you will. I think that it's not just DEI professionals, but we do live in a society that has become much more prone to calling people out than calling them in canceling versus calling them in. And I'm a big proponent of calling people in mostly because it's a human reaction. Nobody wants to have their hand slapped and nobody wants to be shamed into action. Some people deserve to be canceled. Some people who do horrible things deserve that. But the vast majority of us are just trying to live our lives. And most of us, it's like we just walk around our days completely unaware of things that are outside of our scope of reference. That doesn't mean that we do not care or that we will not show care when presented with that information, but it just so means that if I don't know what I don't know, I am going to continue to live my life this way.

One of the lessons of the last couple of years has been the need to expand our scope of understanding. And if we are going to operate in organizations as we do with such diverse backgrounds and experiences and knowledge bases, we need to build shared understanding. And I don't think enough is said about shared understanding. I really do think that that's the crux of this work is being able to understand each other so that Diane, you and I did not grow up in similar environments, but there are a lot of things that we share as women, as colleagues, as folks in the space. You name it. And we may not agree on everything, but there are certain elements that we can agree to in terms of respect and connectivity and engagement and compassion and kindness, the things that really make us human. And I think that there's just so much emphasis on what divides us versus what really brings us together.

And I think that that sense in many ways, I think it is with the intent of the term belonging, that's what the original intent of this word, but it has become politicized as well. And also frankly I think watered down as a way of making feel people comfortable. If I don't say the word diversity, I'm going to say the word belonging, but I really “wink wink” mean diversity. It's like, no. I'm like, if you mean diversity, say it. Because diversity to me is a fact. It is our lived experience. Inclusion is what we do with that diversity. How do we make it work? How do we create conditions for everybody to thrive? How do we create conditions for everybody to create?

Because we come to workplaces to do the things that we can't do on our own. We come to organizations, we work in teams so that we can lean and leverage the intellect and the talent of a wider group of people because I can create better that way than when I'm just in my head thinking things on my own. We do that, but that means that we have to navigate difference and that we have to learn how to do that in a way that is additive and valuable versus sort of squishing people down or making folks feel unheard, unseen and unvalued. And that's what diversity, equity and inclusion, I'm not a proponent of changing the words. I'm a proponent of understanding the words. When you say diversity, and I say diversity, what do we mean when I say equity? What do we mean? And I think for many of us, we just use these words so loosely that they've even lost meaning.

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: And so the time, a lot of the attention that I place is understanding what do these words mean to us? And going deeper, asking questions about what scares you about it? What excites you about it? What promise do you think it helps build for our organization? And where do you think some obstacles may exist in actually achieving that? Because when we have those conversations, when we get to that deeper place, that's when we build shared understanding, and that's when we can enhance the practices and the skill in this work that is necessary, as with any function in any department, in any organization. Is that helpful?

Diane Flynn: Absolutely. Another word I think is widely misunderstood is this word woke. It's thrown around, and I think a lot of people have no idea what it means or it's subject to interpretation. And so I absolutely agree that there has to be more understanding. It's just it's really hard when you have leaders saying, we want to be the state where DEI comes to DIE. There's just a lot of propaganda. So it's a challenging space to be in for sure. And I applaud what you do.

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: Thank you, thank you. It's meant to be provocative, but I think you can be provocative in a way that can also be helpful and constructive versus just squashing people down. But I think to your point, when you hear those kinds of statements, people react and it's instinctually, you defend what you believe to be defended. And I think if we were to be able to get to spaces where we're willing to really listen to each other, and I think that this is where employers can do a better job of looking at their practices and skilling up their teams, not just their diversity teams, but their entire teams. I'm a big proponent of diversity not being a siloed, right? The DEI team, not being siloed, but being fully integrated because we've learned that, like I said earlier, the least helpful efforts in this work have been diversity training designed to get employees to see their own biases, right?

Okay, but it only gets us somewhere. But the way of improving diversity outcomes, if you will, and I use diversity representation because that's really what we're trying to aim for. It's not just diversity for the sake of diversity, but we're trying to, in most organizations, address representation gaps. What do we have? Or in the simplest terms, what do we have too much of? What do we have too little of? And how do we get a balance to ensure that you have a talent base that's ready to meet the 21st century needs of an organization? So how do you get results oriented approaches like recruiting diverse slate of candidates that are helping address that representation gap, mentorship programs that are helping address skills gaps and access gaps and goal setting that holds leaders accountable. These are some of the most successful parts or programs that you can see, and I call them the beautiful basics.

Everyone's trying to think of these big grand initiatives. I'm like, let's start with the basics. How are you holding your leaders accountable to be good leaders, to engaging, connecting with their teams, getting the most out of them? How are you ensuring that at the end of the day you're recruiting in and bringing in talent and looking at the entire employee life cycle holistically so that you have a workforce that's representative of the markets that you're trying to reach and create for? How do you ensure through development programs and mentorship programs an opportunity for those who are incredibly talented, incredibly eager and driven to do work, but may have just because of the lived experiences, not had the same leg up in some experiences and with just some training, some access to information, some decoding can get there really quickly. That's how you transform organizations into what I believe to be vibrant, joyful, inclusive versions of their best versions of themselves.

Chris Riback: Daisy, to close out, and thank you, so many ideas here. And I'm hoping to go from where you said you were going a moment ago, which was provocative and go to where you kind of did end up a bit in that last response as well, which is practical. And here's the tension that I'm feeling or hearing in this wonderful conversation.

Maybe some of this even goes to your book, which we can now shamelessly plug the inclusion revolution, your upcoming book, The Essential Guide to Dismantling Racial Inequality in the Workplace. So on the one hand, no one wants to do work that doesn't achieve the desired outcomes. Very practical type question. You talked about wanting to create advance efforts, create efforts that advance a representative, workplace balance, results oriented programs. How do we know what we have too much of, what we have too little of pretty, in my estimation, specific pretty definable things that to phrase it, and I'm hesitant to even use this word, things you could measure.

On the other hand, I am hearing from you, and I'm equally, I persuaded by, I might even be more persuaded by your comments around, these are really big ideas. This is nuanced. It's really nuanced. We are trying to advance shared understanding the type of understanding that you got in your high school education that was shared, that we want to create the goal, compassion and kindness and understanding and environment to call in, which thank you for your shameless plug of the name of our podcast, not call out ideas that I agree are central to what it means to have inclusion, to have equity. It is about understanding, it's about to put it, in my opinion, to put it most simply in the way that probably our parents and grandparents and ancestors going way, the ability to walk in someone else's shoes to have that understanding. Well, those aren't, in my estimation, strictly measurable goals. How do you measure the understanding? And so there's tension I think between those two avenues. I find them both compelling. And now you've got a CEO who's asking you, okay, daisy, smarty pants, what are we supposed to do? Now?

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: I get asked that question all the time because everyone just wants solutions. And I appreciate that because I have a great deal of empathy for leaders that are trying to manage the unending stream of demand. But

Chris Riback: I want to understand how you reconcile the tension between the desire for quote solutions, measurements, results. What can I tell a board? What can I tell journalists? What can I tell employee resource groups who are on me to do X, Y, Z versus ideas like nuance, shared, understanding, compassion, kindness. How do you help reconcile those tensions?

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: They are reconciliable because they are about the employee experience. They're the human experience. You run an organization with KPIs, with data. It's about using the language that moves things and people and processes. So you can do both. You can measure this work and gain the insights and the data and the progress that allows people to understand, what am I getting towards? What does that look like? And then you can also ensure that this work is not void of the human component of it, which is fundamentally about how do you get swaths of people to achieve and thrive to their fullest capacity? You can do both. And I think I often get asked, what does that look like? And my response is always, it's in the simple actions. It's in the day-to-day, right? We create all of these leadership and development programs that are really fancy and nice, but how about an endorsement and support system for underrepresented talent that is not just about the high profile assignments, the mentoring, the sponsorship, the development plans that everyone's constantly thinking about, but what about the way that work and life truly happen, right?

It's making introductions, is celebrating the achievements of your teams, is lending an ear, is asking tough questions. It's calling out deliberate acts of bias and pushing through what that means for your organization. My favorite example, Chris, and this is something that I tell every CEO, it's like, when was the last time you endorsed someone that didn't look like you and what did that look like? And I give them a script that I've used and I use that in inclusion revolution, and it goes like this. Look, I want you to meet Maria. Maria is amazing. I want you to give her insight into the culture, help her navigate through the unspoken rules because we have lived in these unspoken rules for so long that I don't even know how to help decode them for her, and I'm about to give her a stretch rule, but she could benefit from your help and support along the way, and I know that if she has that, that will help her achieve the goals that I'm setting up for her so that we can measure her KPIs in the next quarter and the quarter after that.

Right? It is tying it to the business and the fundamentals, but also recognizing that the gap that Maria has from an experience perspective and the fact that there are unspoken rules that we ignore all the time that help people achieve differently in organizations. I've seen that happen. I have witnessed firsthand how male leaders can make things happen for women in unique and powerful ways. And it's not because today I'm going to help this woman alone, right? It's simply because they know how to accelerate the careers of folks around them, and they can see, I know I've been the beneficiary of male leaders who have seen in me either their sister, their wives, their daughters, whatever, and they've helped me navigate challenging waters that I would've been on my own because no one would've given me their hand and said, Daisy, let me help you navigate that. When you do that, that helps you achieve the tangible results that you're trying to achieve. But we tend to think that we're only going to live in the numbers or that we can only live in the soft spaces, and we need to figure out what the middle spaces are, because that's how you make all that come alive.

Diane Flynn: For listeners who may wonder, what are these unspoken rules to which you speak? What is an example of one or two that you have come across?

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: Oh, goodness. I mean, we know these from, how does an idea become an initiative in an organization? It's different in every organization. Who needs to be socialized? Who do you need to socialize your idea with? Who do you need to get to approve the idea before you get it to the meeting that you have to get to? What are the groups that need to be part of this conversation, and what are the groups that only simply need to be listening to? We talk about RACI models all the time. I love them. I'm a geek for all kinds of things that help us process things in an efficient way, but we don't think about the RACI model from a, how do you navigate a workplace initiative that is not just about who gets informed, but who's got the juice, right? Who's got the power and the it's

Diane Flynn: Got the power and influence. Great. Well, thank you so much, Daisy. It's been a real pleasure to hear from you. Thank you for all the good work you're doing.

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: Thank you. Thank you so much, and I hope this was helpful and I appreciate you. I know we didn't talk about inclusion revolution, but literally everything I talked about is an inclusion revolution. It's the book that I wish I had when I started doing diversity and inclusion work, and it's my love note to any manager and aspiring manager, sorry, any manager or aspiring manager who believes in this work, who wants to get it right or who is simply just sort of figuring this out and thinking, why on earth did anybody think I should be leading diversity and inclusion programs? Well, let me get some skills and some tips on how to do it.

Chris Riback: Daisy, we are all about love notes. Thank you for taking the time with us.

Daisy Auger-Dominguez: Thank you.