Here's the story:

I recently joined the board of a large nonprofit that is committed to improving equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI). While the organization is making strides at the program level, the board is just beginning its EDI journey - for example, as a mid-40s, white, cisgender woman, I’m considered a 'diversity' candidate among older, white, wealthy directors. We have scheduled some EDI training in the coming months, but I'm hearing comments from other board directors like "EDI has swung too far" or "people are afraid to even say things". I’m not sure if I should challenge these perspectives, or just wait for some resistant directors to step away when their terms expire at the end of the board year.

And here's my take:

Ah, the irony of sitting around an all-white board table and saying that ‘EDI has gone too far.’ This isn’t just a cringeworthy take; it’s the sad reality of many nonprofit boards. Should you challenge pushback on EDI at the board table? Probably. Should you spend your time and energy trying to gently coax a group of established white leaders into greater awareness of structural inequities? Probably not - your organization will be better served by investing in systemic change rather than focusing on the perspectives of individual directors.

To Confront or Not to Confront? Addressing Problematic Comments at the Board Table

So, should you respond to problematic comments, or let them slide? Here's what I think: whenever we take on a formal leadership role, even if we’re up against big power dynamics, we have a responsibility to act like leaders. And when we’re sitting in a place of privilege, especially as white people, we must be active in advancing equity.

Addressing problematic comments can feel risky, especially as the ‘young’ person on the board. But it’s generally the right thing to do. That said, not every offhand comment deserves a response. The remarks you mentioned aren’t directly harmful like a racist or ableist microaggression might be. However, since the organization is committed to EDI principles, it's worth considering when and how to address such comments constructively.

Think of it this way: if two board members had a side conversation about how “budgeting is a waste of time,” you’d be reasonably concerned and feel compelled to address it. Why should EDI be any different?

Navigating Interpersonal Dynamics in the EDI Space

One of the most helpful resources I’ve found for navigating these kinds of dynamics is Shakil Choudhury’s Deep Diversity. He emphasizes the importance of developing the ‘inner skills’ of discernment and conflict competence to advance racial justice. If you haven't already, I recommend grabbing a copy of his book or checking out his online training.

From my own experience, thinking about ‘interrupting’ a problematic conversation rather than confronting or correcting an individual can make it easier to act. Simple interjections like “What do you mean by that?” shift the focus to the person making the comment and can even invite a moment of self-reflection. In some cases, a direct response like “That’s an offensive comment” is necessary, particularly when someone is at risk of harm; naming the issue and holding the perpetrator accountable is essential in such situations.

While interrupting problematic comments is worthwhile, it shouldn’t consume too much of your time and energy. Advancing EDI at the board level is ultimately better achieved by building equitable governance infrastructure.

Why Board Training Is Not Enough to Advance EDI Goals

EDI training is valuable, and I’m glad your board is engaging in it. But if you really want to advance EDI on your board, it’s important to focus on building equitable organizational infrastructure that outlasts individual personalities (including yours - too often, boards drop their EDI commitments when their primary champion leaves).

The nonprofit sector has spent years trying to shift individual directors’ perspectives on EDI, often at the expense of systemic change. Even organizations making significant progress on EDI often have boards misaligned with their values. We keep providing training in the hopes that boards will lead—or at least support—organizational change. Yet, boards remain predominantly white and older. So EDI training on its own is not enough. 

Going Beyond EDI Training to Build Equitable Governance Infrastructure

I don't know what your board's specific EDI goals are (if your board hasn’t articulated any, start there!), but here are some areas to consider in advancing EDI principles at the board level:

1. Articulate Organizational Values Related to EDI: Many organizations have generic values like ‘honesty’ or ‘transparency’ that fail to guide action. Take time to define what diversity, equity, and inclusion mean for your organization. What kinds of diversity do you value? Why does it matter? What does it look like in practice? Thoughtfully articulated values are powerful governance tools.
2. Redesign Board Recruitment and Orientation: If you can only do one thing, start here. Many boards lack thoughtful recruitment processes. By adopting equitable practices, you’ll attract a more diverse candidate pool. Similarly, your annual orientation is an excellent opportunity to set the tone for respectful collaboration and help address power dynamics.
3. Audit Governance Policies Through an EDI Lens: Use your organizational values as a framework to review policies and processes. In addition to being good clean fun (who doesn't love a good policy audit!?), this collaborative effort can shift the focus from individual fears of saying or doing the 'wrong thing' to a constructive approach of activating shared principles.
4. Update the Board’s Code of Conduct: Many boards have a code of conduct that says something like ‘engage respectfully’, without specifying what ‘respectfully’ means, whose ideas of respect take precedence, and what happens if someone engages ‘disrespectfully’. This is not a problem until it’s a problem, and at that point, you’ll wish you had a clearer policy and process. Think about what kind of conduct is and is not welcome at the board, and make sure to use an EDI lens when building this list. Have a conversation about what happens if a board director violates the code (scenario planning can be very helpful here), and what kinds of remedies would be appropriate. You’d be surprised at how rich this conversation can get.
5. Adjust Meeting Norms and Board Culture: Many boards unconsciously operate within white, hierarchical, Eurocentric paradigms. Your board can decide how to run meetings in a way that aligns with your values - Robert's Rules be damned! Check your bylaws for mandatory processes and then design inclusive meeting norms that work for your group.
6. Reduce Barriers to Participation: Structural issues often limit board diversity. Address barriers like caregiving responsibilities, transportation, and accessibility with thoughtful policies and financial resources. Solutions like online meetings, childcare subsidies, and sensory accommodations can make participation more equitable.

Ultimately, advancing EDI at the board level requires both the personal courage to lead, and an investment in lasting, systemic changes. By addressing problematic comments thoughtfully and investing in equitable governance structures, you can help your board better align with the organization’s values of equity, diversity and inclusion.

Big Takeaways:

• Being a leader means speaking up about problematic comments at the board table, even when it's awkward or risky.
• Board training alone isn't enough to advance EDI goals at the board-level.
• The board recruitment process is a high-leverage place to make headway on EDI goals.