Olivia: A study by Citigroup calculated that racial inequality cost the US economy $16 trillion over the last two decades. Jackson: Whoa, hold on. Sixteen trillion? With a T? That’s not a rounding error. That’s like the entire GDP of China. Olivia: Exactly. It’s not a social justice talking point; it’s an economic invoice for exclusion. Which makes you wonder, what if fixing it wasn't just about being 'nice,' but about being incredibly smart? Jackson: That number just reframes the entire conversation. It moves it from the 'feel-good' category to the 'mission-critical' one. Olivia: And that's the perfect entry point for the book we're diving into today: Inclusion on Purpose: An Intersectional Approach to Creating a Culture of Belonging at Work by Ruchika Tulshyan. What's fascinating about Tulshyan is that she started as an international business journalist. She wasn't a traditional HR or DEI person; she came at this from a place of observing systems, power, and money, which is why her arguments are so grounded in both data and powerful human stories. Jackson: I like that. It’s not coming from a purely academic space. It’s coming from someone who’s been in the trenches of global business and seen how these things actually play out. The book has been widely acclaimed, praised by people like Brené Brown, but it also challenges some really core ideas about how we think we’re being good people at work. Olivia: It absolutely does. Tulshyan argues that inclusion isn't a passive state of being. It's an active, intentional, and sometimes deeply uncomfortable practice. Jackson: That’s the disconnect, right? Most of us think we're good, fair-minded people, but the system is clearly broken. Where does Tulshyan say the breakdown happens?

Olivia: Well, she argues the breakdown starts with us. With our own defensiveness and our lack of what she calls an "inclusion mindset." The foreword, written by Ijeoma Oluo, sets a chilling stage for this. Oluo shares the advice her mother gave her before her first corporate job. Jackson: What was it? Olivia: "Never go to HR. HR doesn’t work for you, they work for the company. They aren’t paid to make sure that there aren’t any problems for you; they are paid to make sure there aren’t any problems for the CEO. When you complain, you become a problem." Jackson: Wow. That is bleak. And also, feels painfully true for so many people. It’s the silent fear in every office. Olivia: It gets worse. Oluo then tells a story about a Black woman on a neighboring team who did go to HR to report issues. The woman’s manager later revealed that because she complained, the division manager had put her on a literal, physical "shit list." Jackson: A 'shit list'?! You're kidding. That's terrifying. That’s not just a career-limiting move; that’s a career-ending one. It’s a targeted campaign. Olivia: Exactly. Her career in that company was effectively over. And that story perfectly illustrates the book's first major point: our systems are often designed, consciously or not, to protect the powerful and silence the marginalized. Good intentions are completely irrelevant in the face of a system like that. Jackson: Okay, so if the system is rigged like that, and even the designated 'safe' channels like HR are a trap, how can an individual even begin to make a difference? It feels hopeless. Olivia: This is where Tulshyan’s argument gets really interesting. She says before you can even think about fixing the system, you have to fix your own lens. You have to see past your own privilege. She tells these small but powerful stories, like Ijeoma Oluo’s experience early in her career where her white boss constantly compared her to another Black woman named Ebony. At first, she thought it was a compliment, but she soon realized she was just being seen as a racial stereotype, not an individual. Jackson: That’s so insidious. It’s like a compliment that’s actually a cage. You’re being praised, but only within the very narrow box they’ve put you in. Olivia: Precisely. And when confronted with these ideas, especially the word 'privilege,' most people’s immediate reaction is defensiveness. We think it’s an attack on our own hard work or our own struggles. Jackson: Yeah, that word is a conversation-stopper for a lot of people. They hear 'privilege' and they immediately think, 'My life hasn't been easy!' How does the book get past that defensiveness? Olivia: It reframes the problem. Tulshyan uses a powerful quote: "The problem isn’t men, it’s patriarchy. The problem isn’t white people, it’s white supremacy." By focusing on the system of oppression rather than blaming the individual, it allows people to lower their defenses and see how they might be benefiting from or upholding a system, even unintentionally. Jackson: That’s a much more productive way to look at it. It’s not about personal guilt; it’s about systemic awareness. Olivia: Exactly. And to help cultivate that awareness, she introduces a framework called BRIDGE. It’s an acronym: Be uncomfortable, Reflect on what you don’t know, Invite feedback, Defensiveness doesn’t help, Grow from your mistakes, and Expect that change takes time. Jackson: I like the sound of that. It’s practical. It’s not just saying 'be better,' it’s giving you the steps. 'Be uncomfortable' feels like the most important and the hardest one. Olivia: It is. Because it means you have to be willing to listen to experiences that challenge your view of the world, and of yourself, without immediately trying to explain them away. It’s about developing what she calls "inclusion empathy." Jackson: Empathy for people who have had a completely different journey through the world than you have. Olivia: Yes. And that requires moving beyond your own social circle. The book cites this staggering statistic that the average white person's core social network is 91% white. If you’re not interacting with people from different backgrounds, you’re operating on stereotypes and assumptions. You can’t develop empathy in a vacuum. Jackson: It’s like you’re living in a curated reality, and then you’re surprised when the rest of the world doesn’t match it. So the first step is really about a personal reckoning. It’s about looking in the mirror before you try to change the office. Olivia: That’s the foundation of the entire book. Without that internal shift, all the organizational initiatives in the world are just performative. They’re just window dressing on a broken system.

Jackson: Okay, so once you’ve done that hard internal work—or at least started it—what’s next? How do you start to fix the actual systems in an organization? Olivia: And once you start using that framework to look inward, the next logical step Tulshyan points to is looking outward—at the systems we build. And the most fundamental system is how we let people in the door: hiring. Jackson: Ah, the classic "culture fit." The most beloved and possibly most destructive concept in modern HR. Olivia: Tulshyan absolutely dismantles it. She argues that "culture fit" is often just a code word for "people who are like us." It’s a bias-riddled metric that leads to homogenous teams. She tells the story of Tiffany Tate, a highly qualified Black woman with two degrees and extensive experience, who was interviewing for a director role at a college. Jackson: Let me guess, she was perfect for the job on paper. Olivia: More than perfect. She aced multiple interviews, had dinner with the team, felt a great connection. But the hiring manager, a white man, called her to say they’d chosen someone else because they were a "better fit." When she asked for feedback, he had none. He just said, "keep being who you are." Jackson: Oh, that’s brutal. It’s a rejection without a reason, which leaves you to fill in the blanks, and the blank is almost always, 'It's because of who I am.' It’s a rejection of your identity. Olivia: Exactly. It left her feeling completely defeated. And Tulshyan argues this happens constantly. "Culture fit" becomes a shield for unconscious bias. Jackson: So "culture fit" is basically a company hiring its own echo. It feels safe and comfortable, but it's ultimately a dead end for innovation and, well, inclusion. What's the alternative? Olivia: The alternative is hiring for "culture add." Instead of asking, "Will this person fit into our existing culture?", you ask, "What unique perspective, skills, or experiences does this person bring that will enrich and expand our culture?" Jackson: I love that. It’s a shift from a mindset of conformity to a mindset of growth. It’s about adding new ingredients to the soup, not just more of the same broth. Olivia: That’s a perfect analogy. And to illustrate the power of this, not just in hiring but in creating opportunities, she tells one of my favorite stories in the book. It’s about Marilyn Monroe and the jazz singer Ella Fitzgerald in the 1950s. Jackson: I think I’ve heard this one, but I want to hear your telling of it. Olivia: Ella Fitzgerald was one of the greatest singers of her time, but she couldn't get booked at the Mocambo, a famous Hollywood nightclub. The owner thought she wasn't "glamorous" enough—which was likely coded language for her being a Black woman. Marilyn Monroe, who was a huge star and a huge fan of Ella's, heard about this. She personally called the owner. Jackson: What did she say? Olivia: She told him, "If you book Ella, I will sit at the front table every single night of her engagement." The owner, knowing the press would go crazy for Marilyn Monroe showing up every night, agreed immediately. Jackson: And did she? Olivia: Every single night. The press went wild. Ella Fitzgerald said after that week, she never had to play a small jazz club again. Her career exploded. Jackson: Wow. That gives me chills. Monroe wasn't just being nice; she was being a sponsor. She saw a systemic barrier—a biased gatekeeper—and used her immense privilege and power to smash it for someone else. That's a world away from just hiring your buddy. Olivia: That’s what Tulshyan calls "shining the light, then getting out of the way." Monroe created the opportunity, but then she let Ella’s talent do the work. This principle extends to everything: sponsoring women of color for high-visibility projects, passing the mic in meetings, redistributing "office housework." It’s about actively rewiring the system of who gets seen and who gets heard. Jackson: That story is incredible, but it also feels like it's from another era. In today's world, especially in tech, the barriers feel more invisible. They’re coded into the systems themselves. How does the book address that?

Olivia: That’s the final, and I think most urgent, part of the book. She argues that if we don't get this right, the consequences will be amplified on a massive scale by technology. And she uses the story of Ifeoma Ozoma's time at Pinterest to show just how high the stakes are. Jackson: I’ve heard her name. She’s become a major advocate for tech workers' rights. What happened at Pinterest? Olivia: Ozoma was a public policy manager there. She discovered that the platform's algorithms were promoting wedding venues that were former slave plantations. As a Black woman, she was horrified and flagged it to her manager, expecting immediate action. Jackson: Of course. That’s a PR and moral catastrophe waiting to happen. You can’t promote concentration camps as wedding venues, and you can’t do it for slave plantations. Olivia: You would think. But her manager chastised her in her performance review for having a "bias" and promoting her own "agenda." He told her she needed to provide the "pros and cons" of ceasing to promote former slave plantations. Jackson: The pros of promoting slave plantations? Are you serious? That is an insane, morally bankrupt response. Olivia: It’s staggering. But it gets worse. Later, after she worked on policies to safeguard against health misinformation and white supremacist content, a white male engineer at the company doxxed her—he leaked her personal information online. She was flooded with violent threats. It took Pinterest a week to fire him. Jackson: A week? That’s an eternity when your life is being threatened. That is a complete and utter failure to protect your employee. Olivia: It’s a catastrophic failure of what the book identifies as the most critical element for future innovation: psychological safety. Dr. Amy Edmondson defines it as a work environment where people feel safe to speak up with ideas, questions, and concerns without fear of retribution. Jackson: And Ozoma’s experience is the polar opposite of that. She spoke up with a valid concern and was punished, and then she was actively endangered and the company dragged its feet. What does 'psychological safety' even mean if that can happen? Olivia: It means the concept is absent. Tulshyan argues that for women of color, the workplace is often a psychologically unsafe minefield. They’re penalized for speaking up, their concerns are dismissed as "emotional," and white comfort is prioritized over their safety and well-being. This is why so many brilliant women of color leave industries like tech. Jackson: They’re driven out. The system is actively hostile to their presence. So what’s the solution? How do you build psychological safety? Olivia: Tulshyan offers another practical framework: ADAPT. Analyze employee data to see where the pain points are. Develop a clear code of conduct that goes beyond obvious discrimination to include microaggressions. Accept and even celebrate failure as a part of innovation. Propel and fund Employee Resource Groups (ERGs) so they have real power. And create Team tenets on DEI, so it's a shared responsibility. Jackson: So it’s about creating explicit rules of engagement and support systems, so that it’s not just left to individual managers’ discretion—which, as we’ve seen, can be disastrous. Olivia: Exactly. It’s about building a safety net into the very fabric of the organization. Because without it, you not only lose talented people like Ifeoma Ozoma, you also end up building biased, harmful technology. The book talks about AI that can't recognize Black faces or that tags Black people as gorillas. That’s not a technical glitch; it’s a human failure. It's the direct result of a lack of diversity and psychological safety on the teams that built it. Jackson: So the future of technology, and maybe our society, literally depends on creating these safe, inclusive spaces. Olivia: That’s her argument. The future is ours to create, but we have to be intentional about who gets to be in the room where it’s being designed.

Jackson: This has been a journey. We’ve gone from our own internal defensiveness and the biases we don't even see, to the broken systems of hiring and promotion, all the way to the very real dangers of getting this wrong in the future of technology. Olivia: It’s a powerful arc, and it all comes back to that central idea: inclusion is not a passive virtue. It’s an active, purposeful, and continuous practice. It’s a verb, not a noun. Jackson: I think the biggest shift for me, listening to these stories, is moving away from the idea of a checklist. It’s not about having a diversity training or a multicultural potluck. It’s a fundamental shift in perspective. It’s moving from asking, "Does this person fit in with us?" to asking, "What can this person add that we are desperately missing?" Olivia: And recognizing that the people who have been most excluded, the women of color who have had to navigate these broken systems their entire lives, often hold the key to the most valuable and transformative insights. Their experience isn't a liability; it’s an expertise. Jackson: That’s a fantastic way to put it. Their experience is an expertise. So, for someone listening who feels both inspired and maybe a little overwhelmed by all this, what’s one concrete thing they can do tomorrow? Olivia: Tulshyan argues one of the most powerful things someone with privilege can do is simply "pass the mic." The next time you're in a meeting, take a moment to notice who isn't speaking, or who was interrupted. And then, create an opening for them. You could say, "Actually, Sarah, you had a thought on this earlier, I’d love to hear more," or "I’d like to circle back to what David was saying." It’s a small act of using your platform to amplify another’s. Jackson: I love that. It’s simple, it’s immediate, and it costs nothing. And maybe the question for all of us to take away from this is: where in our own lives, at work or at home, are we prioritizing our own comfort over someone else's inclusion? Olivia: A question worth sitting with. This is Aibrary, signing off.