There are few events that are not, in some way, about power. If, socially, power is about being able to be seen and heard, to assert one’s presence and knowledge, then, in a way, every event, summit and conference empower us to do this in our own sphere… but few events attempt to look at power beyond social perceptions (which is also why we do not think about our events as empowering as a generality). The Forbes Power Women’s Summit is perhaps unique in the knowledge of power past the social perceptions, which, as mentioned during the summit in several ways, can be very narrowly defined and often seek to ascribe power in only very specific terms, which end up disempowering whatever does not fit (chiefly women, people of colour, LGBT+ and other minorities), and in its sincere attempt to disseminate this awareness to the broader public.
Power, then, is not how much money one has, and where in the corporate world – or our societies in general – one sits… it is about the clear awareness of one’s own capabilities as a change-maker, and one’s own voice that can be used to achieve so much… all addressed, in many ways, during the summit.
Awareness in society of this kind of power is complicated, to say the least. On one hand, more and more people are using their voice – especially because more and more simple platforms exist for them to do so through technology, particularly social media -, for varied causes, good and bad alike, and with varied success rates. At the same time, the awareness of power in general still tends to be stereotyped; there is, I might add, also a certain amount of power in presenting a faction or oneself as powerless, disenfranchised by an Other, in order to garner attention, because nothing brings people together more than a common grievance or enemy… sadly often far more than a good cause or deed, which may be viewed with suspicion or dismissed altogether. This behaviour is as old as the world, and isn’t attached to any one ideology or political side; but it has a tendency to mangle further our perspectives not only on what power is, but who has the power to have power. And yet, it is crucial for us as a global society to reconsider the meaning of power in this sense, and its weight for ourselves and our society, and the responsibility that is attached to both, always; to create change, we must consider ourselves capable of it and trust others who openly wield that power.
Technology, as well as how we behave about it, and social perspectives on health and work shape much of the current hottest topics and they definitely shaped the summit itself. Technology itself was an underlying tool; especially in 2020, when its role in society became very clear, what with immense options in uses in health tracking, but also in remote work and conferencing, it was less of a topic of interest per se as the enabling tool that made life and work during the pandemic easier, achievable. Health, and especially mental health, division of domestic tasks (which can influence both, plus efficacy at work) and adapting strategies were the key topics of the rest of the agenda.
By now, we’re realising that surviving is not enough; thriving is necessary for humanity, as well as the economy (which still brings us back to thriving for humanity, because that is what economy ultimately provides under the right circumstances).
The key takes were as follows.
We must remain aware of health, and especially mental health and work related health issues. Under those terms, better policies for leave should be considered, both on corporate and state/federal/country level. Paying special attention to parental leave, childcare, care of the disabled or elderly and typically women’s issues (childbirth) should not only be addressed and improved, but also considered from many angles.
Paying attention to all those is beneficial on all levels (including societal/state-federal/country/corporate). Nor is this about women alone; paying attention to our needs as humans and acknowledging the universality of those needs is a big part of bringing about positive change.
Flexibility is the name of the game for every work move. Adapting quickly while keeping in mind the long term goals (including the changes that may come about), and embracing failure as a learning curve is how businesses are expected to thrive and stay ahead. Data – so correct interpretation of factual information – remains the most important aspect of success.
Corporate activism and positive social involvement are what is being striven towards, with expectation of more companies being involved and active this way in the near future. Among the steps is one very notable one – helping develop awareness of power as described above in conjunction with practical action and steps towards inclusion and equity, such as outreach programmes. This makes sense, because, to profit from any of these, people must first be aware of the fact that they, too, can and do count, they have a choice and a voice to use, and they, too, can take steps towards thriving, including when offered.
The way is long – but if someone metaphorically stops their car and offers to give it a lift, take it. There is no honour in struggling for the struggle itself.
If these are the key takes – all of which are heavily involved with the topics of diversity and inclusion -, what are the likely issues that stand in the way of change-making?
Here’s what I think.
Polarisation is and remains, especially the the US but also elsewhere, the kryptonite of literally everything we attempt to do. Polarisation is a part of Othering and Othering exists to clearly delineate who is “Us” and who is “Them”, and the “Them” side must by default be problematic, criminal, devious and untrustworthy… and, socially, possesses other negative traits (disease, dirtiness, pollution, etc.). This is one gulf that remains incredibly difficult to cross and, if anything, it has been getting deeper over the last, I would suggest at least decade, with the climax in the past few years. There is no one nation and one ideology that is solely at fault (that, ironically, would be Othering too); rather, behaviours, beliefs, perceptions and resulting policies that seek to divide, isolate, elevate one group above others or disenfranchise, banish or even destroy another on basis of a trait, whatever this trait is, co-create this situation and mire us in it until there is literally no debate left, just pointless arguments. Older biases and prejudices, anchored in history – some newer and some very old – are equally responsible for this stance, as is revisionism. It matters very little if we know we have to work together internationally and nationally to battle crises (whatever they may be), if we are aware of talent being found everywhere but are not looking because of prejudices; without shifting perceptions, there will be no progress and no positive changes, or rather, they will happen at a lot slower rate and with a lot more trouble’ and this process will, by virtue of being one of kicking and screaming, be locally and universally expensive. Observations on behaviour, economy and thriving certainly suggest this, but if you want more proof, consider life conditions for vulnerable minorities, such as buying power and conditions that may lead to personal debt. Thriving is economy boosting; Othering tends to cause economy to stagnate, and, in a social re-enactment of Mandelbrot’s work, the little world mirrors the big world… including in terms of social unrest, poverty, spread of disease, mortality (particularly mother and infant mortality, which influence population growth and therefore not only successful amount of possible tax paying, which is supposed to supply a certain amount of functional income for countries, but also elderly care and retirement providers – the younger generation and, again, buying power… which in turn supports existing businesses, development and growth of new ones, state income through business and goods taxation and pretty much everything else you can think of ).
Perception is the key to this particular problem and the underlying part of every bias and prejudice. Behaviour is a matter of chicken and egg problem – we learn to be human from other humans, who learned it from other humans, who… and we develop our perceptions on the basis of this cycle, pro or against, plus personal experience or lack thereof. The social behaviour is a structure comprised of simple biological/psychological issues – fears, needs, etc. – that are further shaped by what our teaching level humans (so our immediate social environment, primary care-givers, etc.) have already decided… whether or not there is a factual basis for their decision. In short, we do things because we have “always” done them, always being any given amount of time, and because we seek to belong. The stronger the opinions (including biases) of our surrounding environs, the more likely we are to risk social expulsion in some way (which can even threaten our actual lives, not merely our social involvement with others), and the more likely we are to either desperately seek to show that we are not Other, or go out the other way completely, and adopt policies that would normally go against good judgement just because… in other words, polarise against the Othering faction by creating our own, and declare all other, well, Other. This aggressive approach to alterity can become never ending, and the worst part about it is that it is also singularly unproductive of positive change. It influences how capable we are of any and every type of flexibility – including how willing we are to pursue new corporate strategies and adapt in crucial moments.
But what of the solutions to these issues?
Establishing dialogue (or perhaps re-establishing it) should be the primary goal in both these snags. However, any form of dialogue is often tough to establish where people simply do not and will not see eye to eye, because the extant biases compel them not to consider any other viewpoint. This is an issue that is a part of both polarisation and perception, and the key problem on the way to reaching diversity, equity and inclusion… as well as simple improvement and empowerment of everyone in general.
A further problem is the hierarchy of a polarised society or group. In cases where Othering is actively happening or is passively present, there are always tiers, and they come with entitlement to or removal of rights and commodities according to which group and/or which tier of the group one belongs to. This is clearly visible in all divided societies, particularly those that have taken authoritarian stances on social and/or religious behaviour, but is is visible even in the relatively democratic societies. One of the biggest issues to overcome, therefore, is not solely the need for the hostile group(s) to recognise the humanity of the Other and universality of entitlement to human rights and thriving, but the deep-seated fear of one’s own reduction or loss of rights as the result of dealing with Other in a positive way/abandoning one’s own group stances which ensure one’s hierarchical standing and therefore rights. This can be a problem that is so deeply seated it is barely present in a state of awareness other than Geertz’s notion of aura of factuality, and the world outside of it seems impossible, unlikely, unsafe. Enjoyment of one’s of hierarchical power (including as a bully vs the possibility of being a victim) must also be considered in any attempt to bridge this gulf of polarisation and perception.
It is therefore logical to conclude that the change of perception of self and Other should be the primary goal for us in wishing to establish lasting, positive change, and one that anthropology can be of great help in achieving.
And what of my own thoughts on power? Every participant, and many others, were asked this question, and all our voices count. So what do I see as power? How do I define it?
Power, for me, is determination, knowledge; being able to break the mould, the perceptions, and influence positively. Power is to act regardless of perception, through curiosity and willingness and passion, unrestrained and undetermined by bias. It is remembering the responsibility of helping with one’s knowledge and to keep enriching one’s knowledge. Above all, it is to remember that we have a voice, always.