Zach welcomes Dr. Stephanie Creary, an organizational scholar at Wharton with expertise in identity, diversity, inclusion, and workplace relationships, to the show this week to discuss Wharton’s equity research. She is also a founding faculty member of the Wharton IDEAS lab (Identity, Diversity, Engagement, Affect, and Social Relationships) and more – check the links in the show notes to find out more about her.
Want to check out Wharton’s equity research? You can find it on their website.
You can connect with Dr. Creary on LinkedIn and Twitter.
Zach (02:21): What’s up y’all? It’s Zach from Living Corporate and, it’s Tuesday. If you’re listening in on Tuesday, but maybe listen to on another day. But we’re recording this and we drop this every Tuesday. These are Real Talk Tuesdays. Real Talk Tuesdays are where we sit down with some executive entrepreneur, elected official, activist, professor, thought leader, author, or celebrity influencer. And we’re talking about something regarding diversity, equity and inclusion. We’re talking about the experiences of those in the margins, in very tangible, tactile, like real ways. That’s the purpose of Real Talk Tuesdays. We’re having real talk, with folks that often are not provided the platform either to give that real talk. Or, because of just like the politics of where they work, maybe they don’t really talk a lot on public platforms.
(03:07): So, today is really cool because we’re actually talking to Stephanie Creary, excuse me, let me put some respect on that, Dr. Stephanie Creary. Dr. Stephanie Creary is an Assistant Professor of Management at Wharton. And the Wharton School of University of Pennsylvania, with support from Moody’s Corporation and Diversity Inc., published a new study called, Improving Workplace Culture Through Evidence-based Diversity, Equity, Inclusion Practices. And so, we sit down and we talk about the findings of her research, because she was the lead researcher for this entire project.
(03:42): Not only that, but we talk about how, her near over 20 years of experience helps to inform the work itself, as well as the future of the workplace, as it pertains to workplace equity. So, really excited to sit down and talk to Dr. Creary. I’m excited that she was able to be a guest on the show, make sure that you check out the research itself. We put the link in the show notes, learn more about the work that she’s doing.
(04:09): Shout out to Black Academics. Shout out to the work that y’all do, like the thing about it, is that so many of us, like if you were to like put the thesis of a lot of these papers, and a lot of these findings it’s a black folks been told y’all. So, it’s interesting because too many of us who, as you hear this conversation, if you’re a part of a marginalized community, you’re going to hear this and you’re going to be like, yeah, we know this. But the way that white supremacy works is so many things have to be validated in these structures and frameworks that, Eurocentric frames and educational frames have demanded that they be put in. So, I’m thankful for Dr. Creary for doing this work and taking the incredible amount of emotional labor to put this together. And hopefully, helps shift and push systems to better create equity for those on the margins. But before we get there, we’re going to tap in with Tristan. See you in a minute.
(08:51): Stephanie, welcome to the show. How you doing?
Dr. Creary (08:53): I’m doing so well, thank you so much for having me.
Zach (08:55): So let’s start with your story, how you ended up like in higher academia, like just in how you ended up doing the work that you’re doing.
Dr. Creary (09:03): Yeah, well, it’s an interesting story. I didn’t start off thinking that I would be a business school professor. I actually used to work in healthcare, and it was actually my experiences working in healthcare with patients that had me thinking about issues of diversity in the workplace. Now, prior to that, like I think many people who I’ve met, who are scholars on the topics of identity and diversity, I was very involved in issues of diversity on my college campus. But I hadn’t been thinking about tackling these topics on a professional level, but once I started working in the workplace issues of gender and race became very salient to me, not only in my interactions with the patients, but also with my collaborators.
(09:45): And so, a few years after I had started working in healthcare, I decided to get an MBA. And in my MBA program, it became apparent to me that this study of the workplace called, organizational behavior, really was where my sweet spot is. And from there, I just began to work on faculty research, got to a research position at Harvard Business School. And really, it was that position that introduced me to this topic of corporate diversity, equity, inclusion practices. And so that was in 2007. So, I’ve just been steadily working my way through both applied and academic research on this topic.
Zach (10:24): And so, I guess my question is, as someone who exists in the ivory, like what points of connection do you see between the work that you’re doing and your research and your findings for the corporate American context to hiring?
Dr. Creary (10:39): Yeah, so I assume my research is very grounded. As I mentioned, I was a working professional outside of academia prior to embarking on this research. So the questions that I ask are really much grounded in people’s everyday lived experiences. So what is it like to work in an organization that touts a diversity agenda? But, my day-to-day experience may not be feeling the effects of all this investment and all these resources that my company is committed to this process. So for me, my latest report, that’s looking at evidence-based diversity, equity, inclusion practices really is I would say a culmination of 15 years of mulling over this idea of, if we’re going to put all these practices into place, employee resource groups, mentoring, and sponsorship programs, what do they actually do? Do they help to boost our engagement, our belonging? Do they create equity? Does it change my job satisfaction? So, for me, having research that’s grounded in the things that I think everyday people care about is really important.
Zach (11:46): I agree. And especially, in this era where folks are kind of like just talking around concepts, or just speaking about about diversity, equity, inclusion in very theoretical frames. I think the more grounded and practical we can get the better, otherwise you run the risk of it just being more noise. You know what I mean?
Dr. Creary (12:04): Absolutely. I think now that diversity, equity, inclusion, I would say has gone mainstream, it’s [inaudible 00:12:11] as an academic topic has been around for 50 years, at least. And probably even if you go back further to social psychologist studying issues of inner group relations. The practice of something that was an earlier version of what we’re calling diversity, equity, inclusion, it started in the United States in the 1960s with the historic Civil Rights legislation. So I say that because what we’re seeing now, the iteration of lots of new concepts, including belonging and whatever the new term dou jour becomes, is really a manifestation of a broader group of people feeling like something like diversity, equity, inclusion might be of importance, but not really understanding what that might look like in practice, or how to achieve those outcomes beyond the talk. And so, I would say, as an academic, we’re very good at concepts and creating concepts, but more importantly, we’re very good at understanding relationships between what different groups say they want to achieve and whether they’re actually achieving those outcomes that they set out to achieve.
Zach (13:24): So, let’s talk a bit, as we talk about like, just your work in general and really this research thing getting into, let’s talk a bit about your findings. And so, I’d like to understand, I’m looking at like these three major takeaways, but I really want to just hear, you wax poetic a bit about, what it is you’re hoping that leaders are going to do with this information.
Dr. Craery (13:48): Yeah. I think it’s a great question. And I think part of that is understanding what the motivation for the study was. And so as I mentioned, I’ve been involved in either applied or academic research on the topic of diversity, equity, inclusion for more than a decade. And one of the things that has been true for this amount of time is that both scholars and practitioners have asked the question, ‘what do these initiatives that we put in place, what do they actually accomplish?’ And so the study is essentially trying to understand if all of the more quintessential practices, like I’ve mentioned earlier, mentoring and sponsorship, employee resource groups, which we talk about as internal diversity partners, education and training, which is what everyone wants to talk about. Does it work? What do these things actually accomplish? And can they help us to build this thing called a more inclusive culture?
(14:42): So for us, part of the study the initial impetus was understanding what our diversity equity, inclusion, experts, analytics practitioners, what are they trying to do? First of all, what practices are they putting in place? Second, how are they measuring the effectiveness of these practices? And third, do any of these practices actually shift the needle on inclusion in the way that these companies would like? And so, the long story short here is we found that while companies were engaging in a lot of different practices, a lot of different initiatives, a lot of different activities. They weren’t necessarily measuring the outcomes or the effectiveness of these practices. And so, we like to use a medical analogy here. We talk about practices, things like mentoring and sponsorship, things like diversity training, things like employee resource groups, as medicine that is sitting on the shelf in your medicine cabinet.
(15:40): And we like to think of things like inclusion, belonging, respect, turnover, intent, job satisfaction, you name it as a potential ailments that you have. The question that we wanted to know was, do companies know which medicines they need to take when they experience a certain ailment? And by and large, at the start of our study, we realized that that was not a common way of thinking about diversity, equity, inclusion. So it wasn’t, evidence-based, it wasn’t that I will go choose these medicines or these practices when I’m feeling this type of belonging pain, or inclusion pain, or, equity pain? And so for us, that was a huge finding.
(16:16): And then there’s obviously the results around what works. So what do these different practices do? And some of my favorite findings are related to this set of outcomes that we just colloquially referred to as, ‘speaking up’. And so we talk about these as prohibitive voice, promotive voice, or supportive voice. Those are the academic terms, but for all intensive purposes, ‘speaking up’. And so, what we found in one part of our study of the data that you all have access to as part of the report that we released, we found that women and people of color were more likely to engage in speaking up behavior.
(16:52): They’re more likely to speak out against bias. They’re more likely to advocate for someone of color or a woman to be considered for a position at the company. They’re more likely to be champions and advocates for their company’s diversity initiatives. And so I think for many of us, as we’ve looked over the last year at all of the DEI work that has been done, particularly with regards to race, as racial equity has become of interest in a more widespread fashion. We’re not surprised. We’re not surprised that women and people of color or women of color are doing all this work.
(17:25): But, what we ended up finding out through our study was, if we want to be able to encourage more people to engage in speaking up behavior, not just women of color, what are the sets of practices that a company would put in place in order to drive that behavior? So things like having a manager who’s actively involved, and who takes the initiative to talk about diversity, equity, inclusion becomes important. Having access to other people in the company who, it’s not their day job, their title doesn’t include diversity in it. Seeing people who are VPs or people who work like marketing or finance take on the task of supporting the company’s diversity initiatives. That becomes really important.
(18:11): So I’d say by and large, there’s lots of really interesting, cool findings. I hope everyone reads the reports, but I would encourage people to look at the ‘speaking up’ findings, because I do think as we’re beginning to talk about behavior change, what is it that we want to see done differently in corporate organizations? So much of what I learned from my research, does relate to this notion of getting people more actively involved and engaged in the company’s diversity work. And not just leaning on women, people of color and women of color to do the lion’s share of the work.
Zach (18:41): And Dr. Creary, I think my challenge and my frustration in this moment, speaking as someone who has not been studying DEI academically for over a decade. Who is not as credentialed as yourself, why is it that organizations aren’t being outcomes-based or data-driven in their efforts? I mean, at Living Corporate we talk a lot about like, just the function of white supremacy, patriarchy and capitalism, in these corporate context. Why is it in 2021, we’re still having to do this level of research? And why is it that, once again, that there’s a black woman yourself leading the charge in this way? In any of your research, or even in your findings, your perspective, what is like the root cause you talk? You talk about these illnesses and I agree with you. I would challenge and maybe say that they are symptoms. Like, at what point would you say or what would you say is the root cause of like all of this extra labor? That again, black and brown folks having to do yourself and doing the research, me interviewing you, like us having these conversations. What’s the root of all of this?
Dr. Creary (19:46): Yeah. It’s a big question. So let me break it down into pieces. When you think about the fact that companies are investing all of this money in these initiatives, so like, what’s the point here? What are they trying to achieve? And I would say that has actually been the problem. Is I would say that this amorphous idea of creating a culture where everybody can thrive and survive and feel like they can contribute to being successful. These are the words, this is the rhetoric that is often used. And I would say that attracts people like you and me, black people, to the company to come and work there, because it’s somehow it seems that maybe our experiences working in this organization might be perhaps a little bit more positive, than they are on a daily basis. I think there’s been a lot of hope, and a lot of optimism in the field, but hope and optimism isn’t what drives the action. Isn’t what creates change.
(20:35): And so, if I think about the field of diversity, equity, inclusion, the field of diversity, equity, inclusion practice, I would submit to you that, for so long, the people who previously have done the work, I’m talking about the veterans, the people who leave every two years.
Zach (20:48): [inaudible 00:20:49].
Dr. Creary (20:50): But the veterans were people who really felt that by creating mentoring programs, by creating employee resource groups, by creating communities, by giving people voice, by creating training, they really did believe that that would help to create an environment where black and brown people and anyone in the minority could survive and thrive. But, they weren’t necessarily as attuned to the measurement aspect of it. And that’s just because training is different. I’m a social scientist. My job is to measure whether things actually work. And that’s not necessarily, I would say what the strengths of people who have historically entered into this field.
(21:31): And we admit in the research how much it was important for us to not only draw on the skills and expertise of people who are, I call them, ‘the people people’. They specialize in putting practices and programs and initiatives into place that are designed to create positive workplace experiences, so that’s your DEI leaders, that’s your HR leaders. They’re those people and that’s a talent and that’s a skillset. And that requires expertise in order to know what types of initiatives might you put into place. But for all intents and purposes, I would say that a large part of what they’ve been doing has been hypothesis driven. It’s been, we think that if we put a mentoring program in place, it will help to advance somebody’s career, but you have to test that. You have to measure that.
Zach (22:17): And so I guess what I’m coming to here is that it requires a different skillset in order to begin to assess outcomes. Now, to your other part of your question around, I would say what comes up a lot when I’m talking to people is let’s just take a corporate organization. Corporate organizations don’t survive and thrive if no one measures the outcomes. So why is diversity being treated any differently? Well, that’s the question of the day. Why is it that people are treating diversity, equity, inclusion differently than they’re treating like any other business process? And so I would say, as a root cause for understanding why we have to do this research as academics to help the field, it’s because diversity, equity, inclusion has not unmasked across organizations, been treated just like everything else that is needed in order for a company to do well.
Dr. Creary (23:04): It’s been treated as a nice to have. It’s been often marginalized as something that perhaps is not as important as things that bring in a direct manner, dollars and cents. And so it becoming deprioritized would also be a reason for why we’re still doing this work. But, I would say, what’s different now, than what has been the case in previous years, is that more people with different skill sets. So the people people, the analytics people, the finance people are all now, looking at the challenge and the opportunities around DEI and trying to figure out how to move the needle. And that’s very different from where we used to be.
Zach (23:49): So, I appreciate that Dr. Creary, and again, I come to this as like a regular dude, family from the south, first generation college graduate, et cetera, et cetera. I think the reason we don’t take it serious is because of white supremacy. I think people just don’t care. Because like, you wouldn’t have, and I want to talk about this research a bit more, but you don’t, we don’t treat other parts of the business like this, where we just kind of like throw things at the wall. Like we actually go in with research and we use data and then we have like actual milestones and marks. And then when those milestones and marks aren’t met, there’s points of accountability held. And for whatever reason, we just don’t do that. And when I say for whatever reason, I mean, I the reason behind that lack of care. I don’t think it’s mysterious. I think that there’s an underlying, just deep bias against centering those on the margins.
Dr. Creary (24:40): Yeah. So you were not wrong, but let me talk to you in more lay terms, and I’m going to talk to you in terms of reds, yellows, and greens. Let’s start with greens. With respect to diversity, equity, inclusion practices, and organization. The green group are people who are always going to hold up the mantle. They’re going to be doing all the work, creating all of the energy and continuing to try to get other people involved and engaged in this work, no matter what. And so, what does that look like in a company who are the greens? Well, the greens are the people who sign up for the diversity role. The greens are people who create employee resource groups. The greens are the people who are pushing the company to release statements against racism. The greens are people who are trying to do everything that they can, as a, I call it a ‘side hustle’, to hold their companies accountable to this work.
(25:34): Then we have the yellows. The yellows are the people who are like, eh, I’m not really sure how I feel about diversity, equity, inclusion. On the one hand, I can see that it’s really important, but on the other hand, is this the business of our company? Should this be something that we’re dealing with in the workplace? Not entirely convinced that this is something that businesses should care about. Isn’t this just a social issue, so on and so forth? Those are the yellows. Now what’s great about the yellows is they’re ambivalent, which means they could go either way. So, it’s the jobs of the greens. It’s the job of the greens to help try to pull the yellows toward their positive nature, and not swing toward that side of their ambivalence. That is negative or thinking that it’s not important.
(26:18): Then there’s the reds. We always have to have red. And red, is a group of people that is like, I’m absolutely not thinking that we should be spending any time investing any resources in this topic. It feels like a distraction. It feels like we’re prioritizing people of color and women. Isn’t this reverse racism? That’s that group. Now, to your question here around white supremacy, where do they sit? Well, they could sit in any one of those groups. I’m not going to pretend that people who hold white supremacist beliefs, or the nature of white supremacy is baked in the system, that only sits in the red, because many people don’t know. They don’t even know that they are prioritizing or privileging Eurocentric norms in their day-to-day. And they may think they are green. So, I would say, I view white supremacy being perpetuated could exist in any of those groups.
(27:07): But I think to your point, if we’re not moving the needle, it must mean, and this, I would say as a hypothesis, it must mean that there are reds in positions of power than there are greens and yellow. And that to me, is actually the truth. There are more people in positions of power who have the capacity to help things change in their organization, but they are red. They haven’t been fully convinced that this is important. What I think we saw over the last year was more leaders moving from red to yellow. And perhaps more leaders moving from yellow to green. But the greens have always been there pushing on the yellows, and the yellows push on the reds. And that’s essentially why we’re still talking about this,. Is there is a power dynamic here. There is this idea of when I’m in charge of a company as a CEO, I do have considerable leeway in terms of where I direct our resources and our attention. And if those resources and an intention is not going to DEI, it’s a concentrated choice.
Zach (28:14): Let’s talk a bit, about one of the major findings or just the call-outs is around just turnover. We continue to talk about, and especially in tech. We know. We know that turnover is sometimes three, four x higher for our black and brown employees compared to their white counterparts. I guess what I’m curious about is what, if at all, in your research indicates the leading factors of that turnover?
Dr. Creary (28:42): Yeah. So what we didn’t measure in our study was we focused on understanding the relationships between, again, those medicines, the practices, and the outcomes. So our goal wasn’t to understand every factor in the company that, or individual, or group level, or organizational, or societal level factors, if you will, that drive [inaudible 00:29:04] turnover.
Zach (29:04): Sure.
Dr. Creary (29:04): We were just trying to see of these groups of practices, what do they actually do? But I can talk to you a little bit about what research on this topic talks about, with respect to turnover. Is what we know is, intent to turn or intent to leave one’s company is often driven by lack of feeling that I can be successful here. I don’t have the capacity to grow. I’m not getting signals that I have a future here, beyond my current role. So that’s a primary factor.
(29:33): I would say, then there’s issues of, racism and sexism, and whether you want to call them micro–aggressions or macro-aggressions. There’s this idea that the interactions, my daily lived experiences of working in this company and the interactions that I have with other people are not healthy. They are toxic. And so I can’t be here. So we have a whole set of cultural factors that also drive one’s intent to actually leave the company. And so, if we look at tech and especially tech over the last 10 years, and what issues have they been trying to deal with? One of them has been cultural issues. Has been, to some extent, people are attracted to tech because there’s potentially less bureaucracy than there is in other industries. This idea of a flatter hierarchy, meaning that I, even if I don’t have a fancy title I’m able to contribute and be heard, but that’s not what we’ve learned. That’s not the reality for everyone, meaning that’s not the reality for people, many people of color, particularly black and brown people. I want to suggest, in tech. And so what we see is that black and brown people are not feeling as connected to the tech space, as perhaps their white and Asian peers are, because the culture in and of itself in tech, isn’t a culture that suggesting that they are welcomed and appreciated for what they have to contribute.
Zach (31:04): So first of all, thank you for the answer. It’s interesting, when we talk about, there are certain assumptions made when you like read, I don’t wanna say popular articles, when you read like major publications about the workplace and expectations. And sometimes people even make sweeping generalizations about millennials or Gen Z. And like, oh, well, millennials don’t really care about title. They just want to make sure they have balance. And I would challenge that for those on the margins, many of us do care about title because we recognize that with that title comes a demanded level of respect or an understanding that we have a mutual expectation that you’re going to talk to me a certain way. I’m going to have access to certain things. And so, like, I hear you as it pertains to turnover, this idea that like folks are just leaving because they don’t see a path for them. They don’t see a path forward for them. I’m curious as we talk about the future of work, and we look at like the next nine years or so. Like let’s, look at the end of 2030. Based on your research and then just based on the several years of experience that you have in this space, what do you see being like the major events? Or like where do you see DEI as a space going?
Dr. Creary (32:18): Yeah, it’s such a great question. Before I answer that, I do want to call out something that you raised because I think it’s really important for people to recognize. And we talk a lot about the importance that representation matters in organizations. And it matters in so many ways, but it also matters when it comes to data. So if you do a study and the study does not have sufficient representation of black and brown people in it, and you make conclusions about generations. are you actually capturing generational experiences that include black and brown people, or are you capturing generational experiences that include people who are not black and brown. And so think about this as if you’re in the minority. If people are in the minority, in your industry, such as tech, it is more than likely that a lot of the conclusions that are being drawn, unless they have a critical mass of black and brown people, which is often not the case. That’s the problem that tech has. Is, it is often the case that they are not capturing and to your point, the experience of black and brown people.
(33:19): So it’s this weird conundrum that we have. Unless we’re represented, our experiences don’t often get picked up in data. So we have to be represented in order for people to account for the specific issues and challenges, and desires that we have. And so, I just wanted to call that out, because you talked about the fact that from your own personal experience, that you believe that position, and authority, and rank matter. But tech keeps saying, or industries keep saying that generations don’t value that. And I think you’re raising a very important issue is, did they interview people of color based on generations? Because I would surmise something different. And I would say that that’s something that we all have to think about as consumers and as workers is, read who was in the sample. Look and see was the sample diverse. Because if the sample wasn’t diverse, then they might not be talking about you.
(34:14): Now to your next point, about the future of DEI. For me, the future has to entail accountability. And from a perspective of a researcher, what that means is if you’re going to put in intervention, as we would call it, into place. So if you’re going to implement a mentoring program, an employee resource group, a diversity training, the future state of DEI should be measuring the extent to which that intervention is actually driving some meaningful outcomes. And so, that would be a fantastic future state. I would say that, anecdotally based on my conversations with organizations, every day I get a different email from some company who wants to implement some sort of training or some sort of educational events for their employees.
(35:05): And they call them like, ‘request for proposals’. And so, I’ve read a couple of these. And I’ve been pleasantly surprised to see that they’re asking the people who want to bid for this work. They’re asking people to actually say what outcomes that they think that their [inaudible 00:35:24] will address. And they also want to say, how are you going to measure its effectiveness? So for me, as a social scientist, I would say that that would be a great feature state, is that we’re actually holding ourselves as scholars and practitioners accountable to seeing what our investment is actually achieving.
Zach (35:44): I love that Dr. Creary, this has been an incredible conversation. Let me just ask you one last thing, I’ll let you go. Okay. So let’s talk a bit about, three points of advice for executives, really looking to create an impact and organizational transformation as it pertains to diversity, equity, and inclusion in their organizations. What would those three points of advice be?
Dr. Creary (36:10): Yeah, that’s a great question. So I would say the first would be, have a robust set of practices in your company so that you’re not relying on any single factor to drive results. And so in our study, we look at seven categories of diversity, equity, inclusion practices, and we found that companies that had more of those practices in place, as opposed to just one. So if you’re only doing diversity training, versus if you’re doing diversity training and mentoring and a whole bunch of other things that we capture in employee resource groups in our study. So coming to have a more robust set that are doing more of, or are covering more of the seven categories, are able to drive outcomes in a way that is much stronger, and much more sustainable than companies that are only, I would say, embarking on a one hit wonder. So for executives, make sure that you’re investing across the spectrum of diversity, equity, inclusion initiatives.
(37:12): I would say the second is the who. Who should be doing this work? And executives should be engaging in diversity work. So what does that look like? Companies that create diversity councils, what they are focused on is creating opportunities for people across the organization, no matter the day-to-day responsibilities, but adhering to making sure that no matter your rank. So if you’re a high level senior executive, you too should have some responsibility for diversity as it relates to your direct reports, your business units, et cetera. So for executives, the recommendation is, making sure that those responsibility for diversity is spread across people, across levels. That it’s not just what seemingly seems a burden to the person who has the quote unquote chief diversity officer role.
(38:08): And then the third set of recommendations for executives is realize that this is a long-term business process, just like everything else companies do. What we know to be true is short-term investment is never the right answer when it comes to looking at whether or not something is important in a company. So, investing in short-term gains or investing in short-term initiatives is not good business practice. So we can’t treat diversity, equity, inclusion practices as a short-term initiative, or short term investment. So how do we begin to think about our diversity work? Just like every other business process we are here for the long haul. And what resources do we need to commit to it in terms of financial resources, and human resources, and energy resources in order to allow it to sustain in help carry our company? So I would say those are my recommendations.
Zach (39:02): Dr. Stephanie J. Creary, Professor of Management at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, I thank you so much for being a guest, consider you a friend of the show. And you know what, shout out to all the black academics out there. You know what I mean? Like y’all do not get enough shine at all. It’s crazy. What’s up with that, Dr. Creary? What’s going on?
Dr. Creary (39:23): I would say that maybe academia isn’t as sexy as some of the other things that people go into, but I would tell people here’s the deal. We’ve had this thing called Corona virus over the last year, and a lot of academics are allowing us to start walking around without our masks on. So shout out to all of the academics, in all fields of science and social science who are without being, I would say, given their due props, are carrying the load. So go science.
Zach (39:53): For sure. Go sciences, go academics. Now, I’m honored and I’m always excited when we’re able to get y’all here because y’all’s work is so critical. So we consider you a friend of the show, and we look forward to having you back.
Dr. Creary (40:09): Thank you so much for having me. It was my pleasure.
Zach (40:47): And we’re back. Yo, thank you so much. Again, shout out to Dr. Creary, shout out to the entire team, incredible work, shout out to black academics around the world. I can name a bunch of folks, but also, all the black academics that have been guests on Living Corporate, who have been fans of Living Corporate, thank you for all your effort, all of your labor, all of your work. Y’all listen, if you didn’t check it out last week, this is me reminding y’all. We do have the Pfizer campaign going. We’re actually spotlighting black and brown executives. We’re actually spotlighting black executives at Pfizer, and talking about their respective journeys, the work on the Covid-19 vaccine, and the work that Pfizer is doing internally to create a choice place for black employees. So I hope take the time, go back and listen. We’re dropping the next instalment to that series next week. And look, we’ll talk to you soon. All right. Until next time, this has been Zach. Make sure you give us five stars on Apple podcasts, share this with a friend or two, a colleague, a boss, somebody that you don’t like. I don’t care. Share it with somebody y’all. All right, peace.