In class a few days ago we explored the implications of using a corporate/business metaphor to describe the university. The “Helping the Other Become More Like Us” section of chapter one in today’s reading reminded me of that conversation. In particular it reminded me of our exploration of the business tradition of prioritizing existing partnerships. I think we touched on a few of the reasons a business leader might choose to return to a trusted relationship rather than seek out a new relationship, and I think efficiency and predictability were prominent among them. There are, of course, a number of reasons to seek out new relationships in business. The risk might be rewarded by greater efficiency or productivity, for instance. Grimm points out an ethical concern, however, when she asserts that “[t]hose of us who are mainstream prefer communication with those who share our mental models” (12). This observation uncovers the way particularization can obscure significant patterns. That is, the trusted relationships that are preserved in a business culture can be justified on an individual basis, but taken as a group it might become apparent that these relationships are motivated by a preference for maleness and whiteness as much as they are based upon prior relationships with individuals. The inevitable consequence, of course, is that women and minorities are underrepresented, undercompensated, or excluded altogether. The academy has abetted this system, and Grimm is right to invite the writing center community to consider the role it has played and continues to play.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
The inevitability of bias can lead to many kinds of limitations. For example, my feminist concerns sometimes lead me to make choices -- in the absence of other differentiating criteria -- based on traditionally under-represented populations. For example, all things being equal, I am more likely to vote for a female candidate than a male, or a candidate of color rather than a white candidate. This is true in many contexts, including business. In no way does this guarantee that I've chosen the best person (in my estimation) for the job, only that I've tried to add some diversity to the context. It wouldn't take much to convince me of the fallibility of this strategy, but I've not come up with a better way. Many times I find that, in making the considerations that Grimm asserts, I get so caught up in wondering what is "real" and what is a social and cultural construction acting upon me, that I continually second-guess myself. At some point, however, I have to make the best decision I can with the information and awareness I have at the time.
Post a Comment