COMING TOGETHER

Don Liu, Chief Legal and Risk Officer at Target, shares his thoughts on why collaboration and honest dialogue is needed now more than ever across diverse communities. He also deconstructs attitudes that have traditionally hampered connectivity between the Black and the Asian Pacific American communities. By Don Liu

IGREW UP IN A PREDOMINANTLY BLACK NEIGHBORHOOD, and was the only Asian student in my elementary school. My environment rarely reflected the perspectives of the majority white U.S. population at that time but also lacked a diversity of perspectives. In my teens, my family moved to a suburban town that was majority white. Once again, I was an outlier; one of only a few non-white teens. This situation lasted until I went to college – where, for the first time, I experienced true diversity in action. Those experiences taught me the difference between diversity of thought and diverse representation – and how both of these concepts work together to form better communities and create real impact.

The common aspect of the environments I grew up in was a lack of diversity. I learned similar lessons as someone ‘different’ in both communities. To uncover true diversity, you need a critical mass of people with dimensions of difference that span race, gender, sexual identity, cultural background and more. Being ‘the only one’ in a community is difficult – but, more importantly, it’s unproductive to organizational, community or societal progress.

Later in life, I gained the authority to shape the diversity of my work and community organizations. When I found myself in positions of influence, I aimed for a critical mass of diversity, so that nobody in any room would be ‘the only one.’

One element often overlooked in discussions around diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) is that, before achieving a critical mass of diversity, there will be periods of discomfort. Many individuals in majority and minority groups will go through various levels of uncomfortable discussion, emotion and change. This is part and parcel of significant and necessary societal shifts.

For example, consider the majority white neighborhood of my teenage years. Over time, the neighborhood became more diverse. As more non-white families moved into town, some of the white students at my school expressed discomfort. Sometimes that discomfort was based on initial reactions to change and would subside. Other times, it was simply racism. As an adult, I now recognize the generational indoctrination of racism that we’ve continued to see within our American institutions and globally. So, those deeper sets of beliefs and opinions from some students would take a much more critical (and uncomfortable) effort to unlearn.

Overcoming stigmas is a journey for all. Sometimes, as leaders, we are too quick to conflate inclusivity with everyone being comfortable. But the journey to inclusivity nearly always involves some level of discomfort.

I talk about these topics with my own team at Target. It’s what I call ‘getting comfortable with being uncomfortable.’ If you can’t get comfortable with being uncomfortable, then change isn’t going to happen. Leaders must be able to guide their teams through this process and should proactively embrace conversations and changes that are perceived as ‘difficult.’

Another critical element of enacting meaningful social change is starting with data and insights. Understanding and deconstructing the relationships between different communities in the U.S. is crucial to breaking down barriers and bringing people together.

One area that I am passionate about is shifting common misunderstandings around relationships between Asian Americans and the Black community, both historically and over the last 18 months. For example, there’s an impression, emphasized in media coverage, that most hate attacks against Asian Americans are carried out by Black perpetrators. This is not true.

A study from 2020 by the University of Michigan found consistent over-reporting of incidents featuring Black-on-Asian hate crimes in the media. This assumption that Black hostility is driving the current epidemic of anti-Asian racism and violence pushes these communities further apart. However, data shows that in the majority of instances the perpetrators of abuse were white males. Once you realize this is not a Black-on-Asian problem, it is important to take stock and avoid incorrect assumptions that could lead to flawed policies.

It is also crucial to understand where stereotypes historically stem from. Whether it’s the LA riots in the early 1990s or generally perceived tensions that exist in Black

neighborhoods where a high percentage of business owners are Asian, it’s helpful to know what has shaped these issues over time.

To begin to see beyond deeply rooted stereotypes, we must acknowledge the pervasiveness of everyday prejudice and discrimination. To some degree, both conscious and unconscious biases are innate human qualities. Active listening and letting go of our assumptions are great first steps toward improvement. One example I recently saw was a debate between two pastors – one Black, one Asian – discussing harmful and incorrect impressions between different racial groups. The pastors uncovered the origins from which some of these misunderstandings emerged. The Asian pastor had relatives that owned a business in a Black neighborhood. When the store faced theft issues, the majority of perpetrators were Black. The pastor then acknowledged statistical insights that point to geography – rather than a false Black-on-Asian crime narrative – and pointed out that the majority of the business’ paying customers were also Black.

Conversely, the Black pastor, who grew up in a predominantly Black neighborhood, commonly heard the opinion that the Asian business owners should have done more to integrate themselves into that neighborhood. The Black population felt that these businesses made money from their patronage, but were not making an effort to support neighborhood activities or make friends outside of Asian bubbles.

Ultimately, the pastors concluded that the more you confront stereotypes, misunderstandings and incorrect assumptions, the easier it is to come together with common purpose. Normalizing these discussions and getting comfortable with being uncomfortable leads us to better outcomes and solutions.

These ideas – hitting a critical mass of diversity and making human connections to debunk myths – are relevant in the legal profession. But what steps do we need to take to ensure meaningful change? Are there practical ways that Black lawyers, Asian American lawyers – and, frankly, all lawyers – can collaborate for the good of all?

The short answer is yes. By following several fundamentals, as a collective set of professionals, we will gain knowledge, uncover and admit what we don’t know and become increasingly comfortable with the discomfort of change.

Data can help determine if progress is being made. With baseline data in hand, you can make annual and monthly comparisons to determine if you’re headed in the right direction. With no measurement over time, strategies are baseless and lead to unsubstantiated results.

But data can be manipulated or misrepresented. Data sources should be verified, and metrics should be double checked. We need to be able to trust data and understand it in context. For example, consider regional demographics. A law firm in Minnesota with 10% Latinx representation would likely get more credit for diversity compared to a law firm in Miami with the same statistic, given the demographic makeups of those states.

At large corporations, such as Target, we often gather background data on our law firms, including their employee demographics (e.g., gender, race, etc.). We aim to work with firms that represent the same diverse values we hold.

Companies like Target regularly disclose DEI data. This approach to information-sharing sets expectations with business stakeholders and the public, since they can now measure against your progress over time. It’s a starting point, and if you work at a company that is at least willing to make commitments to DEI – regardless of where you begin and the journey ahead – you’ll likely see progress.

Like trying to lose weight, there is no magic pill. We can hire a personal trainer but if we don’t do the work, we won’t see the results. The same concepts apply to appointing DEI professionals and champions. It’s about behavioral change. Consistency leads to meaningful progress. This may take the form of several smaller actions, but as long as you measure and track the data, every step forward counts.

We must prioritize our efforts to ensure we are moving in the right direction. For example, there are not enough Black lawyers, due to a number of systemic barriers. So, prioritizing how to increase the number of Black legal professionals is necessary to create meaningful representation in our field. In 2020, Target announced a goal of increasing the number of Black team members across the company by 20%. Some in other communities of color said, “well, what about us?” Responding to Asian and Latinx individuals who asked why Target was prioritizing Black team members at this juncture did create discomfort. But we were comfortable with the uncomfortable conversation because, while all disenfranchised and communities of color deserve significant commitments, the data showed that the Black community had the largest gap for us (and many other companies), which led to prioritizing that now.

As legal professionals, we have to stand together. For example, I want to see more non-Black lawyers engaged in promoting Black lawyers. It will take all of us to tackle the issues that negatively impact Black individuals in the legal industry.

History shows that it takes a collective effort to raise up marginalized communities. During the 1960s Civil Rights movement, change had to be mostly enacted by white lawmakers. More recently, same-sex marriage was legalized in the U.S. mostly by heterosexual-identifying lawmakers. To enact momentous change, it takes a critical mass of diverse individuals coming together to get uncomfortable for the welfare of us all.

Discussions around DEI are uncomfortable because they force us to deal with the unknown. For lawyers, this can be especially hard because we’re trained to find the ‘right’ answer. Systemic issues are not solved overnight, especially when it comes to social justice. However, we can continue making real change by implementing equitable policies and procedures.

We only learn by first acknowledging that we don’t know everything. If you cannot acknowledge a lack of understanding about topics, you will never successfully learn about them. Collectively and individually, growth and change are essential pieces of humanity. When we check our egos and biases at the door, we are able to build an inclusivity that benefits everyone and makes the world a better place to live in – now, and hopefully for generations to come.