unconscious bias
The Richards Group Steps into a Multicultural Minefield

The recent headlines about Stan Richards’ controversial comments regarding their Motel 6 client sounded an alarm bell throughout the advertising and marketing industry, especially as it relates to multicultural marketing.  As the recent Dallas Morning News story reports, Mr. Richards stated in a meeting at the ad agency’s office that a particular ad pitch for Motel 6 was “too Black”  for its “white supremacist constituents.”  The statements were reportedly made during an internal meeting to discuss an idea for celebrating Black artists in a Motel 6 campaign.

The ensuing reaction by the firm’s clients was a bloodbath:  In addition to losing the Motel 6 account, The Richard Group also lost accounts for Home Depot, Keurig/Dr. Pepper/Keurig, H-E-B, Orkin and Advanced Auto Parts.  Last year, The Richards Group reported revenues of $200 million, but the loss of these large accounts will lead to the loss of many jobs at the firm.

Mr. Richards has apologized for his misstatements and assured us that he has never uttered racists comments in the past. He “fired” himself from the firm while operations will be assumed by his hand-picked successor, Glen Dady, who has worked with Richards for 40 years. In addition, Richards is planning to create a new position on diversity, equity and inclusion; begin bias training for staff; and commit to becoming more “culturally relevant.”

 In the past, such apologies may have been forgiven in due time but the current volatile climate for race relations in the U.S. suggests that The Richards Group will feel the pain for a longer period of time. With such a close relationship to his successor, one wonders if changes will indeed occur or whether traditional practices will continue.

As a research professional who has evaluated multicultural campaigns for the past 45 years, it is indeed difficult to understand why Mr. Richards felt the need to make the controversial statements about the multicultural campaign.  In the normal course of campaigns, it is customary to conduct focus group research with members of the target audiences and let them judge the appropriateness of the advertising concept for themselves or members of their communities.  Why would Mr. Richards feel like his views should override the views of the Black or white customers for Motel 6?  And why telegraph the message that Blacks are not welcomed at Motel 6 or that its preferred customers are “white supremacists?”  While Mr. Richards is described as being “fiercely independent,” it appears consultation with a multicultural expert may have been the best approach.

This unfortunate incident underscores a general problem that permeates academic institutions today, that is, the relative absence of courses in multicultural marketing, public relations and research. The multicultural segment in the U.S. numbering 120 million in 2019, has brought considerable cultural and linguistic diversity to this nation, and continues to challenge the work of advertising agencies and research practitioners.  Unfortunately, these industries have not kept pace with the changing composition of the U.S. population, and college graduates are not receiving sufficient training regarding the best communicative strategies for this growing segment.  Instead, academics have chosen to focus their curricula on international markets rather than the more relevant issues related to U.S. multicultural consumers – a pattern that needs to change.

Certainly, it is never too late to make a company more culturally relevant, especially if your client base serves a large segment of multicultural consumers.  Like the recent experience of racially profiling Black customers by Starbucks, The Richards Group reputation may benefit from staff bias training to staff and hiring someone to lead a newly created diversity, equity and inclusion department. In my opinion, however, this transformation will require more substantive changes in order to be successful. My suggested changes include the following:

·       Hiring multicultural staff – Blacks, Hispanics and Asians – to become key members of the advertising staff.  Aside from ethnicity, these individuals should be experienced professionals that understand these communities.

·       Ensure that the Board of Directors includes multicultural members who are seasoned professionals with intimate knowledge of multicultural communities.

·       Persuade academic institutions to include courses on multicultural marketing, public relations, and research in marketing and advertising departments – thus ensuring that future generations of college graduates will have the foundation to make better judgments regarding multicultural consumers.

 

It will take time for The Richards Group to recover from this unfortunate incident, and the firm is paying dearly for its misstep.  On the bright side, however,  this experience provides a strong message to the broader advertising and marketing communities that their activities as well as their clientele will be closely watched in the current climate of fragile race relations.

Does Unconscious Bias Explain Police Brutality?

National and global attention has shown a spotlight on the brutal killing of George Floyd – an unarmed black man who died when Officer Derek Chauvin pressed his knee against Floyd’s neck for an estimated eight minutes and 45 seconds while other officers looked on without intervening.  Although Officer Chauvin has been charged with second degree murder, protests continue to advocate for police reforms to stop these needless killings.  Indeed, the historical record reveals that law enforcement throughout the U.S. has all but declared open season on Black males. For example, a Tulsa Police Department Division Commander, Major Travis Yates, recently explained that African Americans probably ought to be shot more often based on the amount of contact that they have with the police.[i]
In the ensuing debates about police reforms, unconscious bias training has emerged as one potential strategy. But what is “unconscious bias”?   Following is one simple definition:

“Unconscious biases, also known as implicit biases, are the underlying attitudes and stereotypes that people unconsciously attribute to another person or group of people that affect how they understand and engage with a person or group.”  [ii]

The key term here is “underlying” which suggests that the individual may not be aware of these attitudes and stereotypes.  For example, gender bias is the tendency to prefer one gender over another gender.  Confirmation bias is the inclination to draw conclusions about a situation or person based on your personal desires, beliefs and prejudices rather than on unbiased merit.  Although there are different types of unconscious bias, they share one thing in common:  a lack of awareness or consciousness by the individual who may later choose to act on these beliefs.
Regardless of the type of unconscious bias under consideration, I do not buy the argument that people are not conscious of their “underlying” attitudes and stereotypes – as if their behavior deserves to be forgiven or not disciplined due to an alleged lapse in memory or consciousness.  The following three examples will hopefully make my point.
  
Training Police on Using Pepper Spray
A news article in The Dallas Morning News described an unusual training program at the Cambridge police academy on the appropriate use of pepper spray when apprehending Mexican American suspects. [iii]  Police academy trainers were instructing new cadets to use stronger doses of pepper spray on Mexican American suspects. Officer Gutoski, the department training officer, explained their rationale in rather un-scientific terms: “Mexicans grow up eating too much spicy food, and because they spend so much time picking hot peppers in the fields….so with Cajuns, Mexican-Americans, Pakistani, Indian…what happens is that pepper spray is effective for a much shorter time.”  Even more unnerving is the explanation by departmental spokesman, Frank Pasquarello, that “Officer Gutoski was repeating information that’s shared all the time among officers in informal training sessions on the use of pepper spray.”   The training program might have been considered an act of “unconscious bias” if not for the fact that it was part of the approved training program.
Is Racial Profiling on the Decline?
A recent analysis of traffic stops made by the Texas Highway Patrol revealed that racial profiling of Hispanics was on the decline, although critics suspected that the Department of Public Safety was deliberately misclassifying Texas drivers that they stopped in order to lower the state’s racial profiling statistics. [iv] Further analysis, however, revealed that the DPS troopers were assigning the race category based on the physical characteristics of the drivers, rather than simply asking each driver to identify themselves by race or ethnicity. To achieve the lower racial profiling statistics, troopers apparently found it convenient to classify Hispanic drivers as white. Was this unconscious bias?  Perhaps not since the misclassifications by race-ethnicity were not random and designed to achieve one objective:  to lower the racial profiling statistics in Texas.
Just a Cup of Coffee

A Starbucks shop in Pennsylvania received national attention regarding the mistreatment of two Black men who were asked to leave the premises even though they were just waiting for a meeting to take place.  The Starbucks manger called police to remove the two men from the premises.  The CEO of Starbucks wasted little time in personally apologizing to the two black men for their discriminatory treatment and announced that all Starbucks employees would be required to attend a workshop to identify and remediate unconscious bias.
In my view, the Starbucks manager in Philadelphia that requested police action to remove the two black customers was not motivated by “unconscious bias,” but rather by conscious beliefs and prejudices against blacks that were not detected in the screening process by Starbucks staff.  While it is common practice for organizations to screen applicants for job skills, personality, career and criminal background, it seems that screening for beliefs and attitudes about blacks and Latinos should also be part of the hiring process.  
Does cultural knowledge or awareness influence medical treatment?

One recent study explored the trend in pain management wherein whites were more likely than Blacks to be prescribed strong pain medications for equivalent treatments.[v]  Researchers at the University of Virginia quizzed white medical students and residents to learn how many believed inaccurate statements about biological differences between the two races – such as “black people’s blood coagulates more quickly,” “Blacks’ skin is thicker than whites’,” and “Blacks’ nerve endings are less sensitive than whites.’ ” Although they expected some endorsement of these statements, the investigators were surprised that so many in the group with medical training endorsed such beliefs. It was discovered that those who held false beliefs often rated Black patients’ pain lower than that of white patients and made less appropriate recommendations for the treatment of their pain. 
Does Unconscious Bias Help Us Understand Police Brutality?
It is not likely that Officer Chauvin experienced unconscious bias while he forced his knee on Floyd’s neck for eight minutes and 45 seconds.  It is more likely, based on his past behavior, that he intentionally and consciously killed Floyd.  Officer Chauvin should have been removed from policing a long time ago, and it is not likely that any amount of unconscious bias training could have changed his animosity towards blacks. Such individuals pose a danger to the safety of all residents, especially people of color.
Beliefs, prejudices or stereotypes about people of color are a consequence of many factors – family values, a past negative experience, media stereotypes, and growing racial segregation in residences, churches, schools, and social networks – factors that are very resistant to change. In addition, the current political climate in the U.S. has “normalized” racist commentary and behaviors towards blacks and Latinos, making it much easier to mistreat these groups.  In 2018, there were 7,120 hate crime incidents in the U.S. with a majority of the reported hate crimes motivated by race, ethnicity or ancestry bias (59.6 percent). [vi]  (See Figure 1 below)

Figure 1

Conclusion
  The prevalence of hate crimes based on race, ethnicity or ancestry should serve as a loud warning bell to employers that current employees and new hires, especially armed police officers, should be vigorously investigated for past experiences and current attitudes related to people of color. Once the presence of these negative attitudes or stereotypes is confirmed, these individuals should not be hired. Current employees should be removed from the organization or re-assigned to a position that does not require interaction with the public. Indeed, it is insufficient to simply conclude that a person shows evidence of unconscious bias that is potentially harmful and expect that a workshop will magically remediate their hostility towards Blacks, Latinos or Asians.  
End Notes

[i] Li, D.K.   (2020, June 11).  African Americans ‘probably ought to be’ shot more by police, a top Tulsa officer said. NBC News. Accessed at https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/african-americans-probably-ought-be-shot-more-police-top-tulsa-n1229981
[iii] Dallas Morning News (1999, August 14).  Pepper spray remarks backfire on department. Cited from  Los Angeles Times.
[iv] Rincón, E. T. (2016). How DPS can improve its system of recording race/ethnicity during traffic stops.  Dallas News, Jan. 2016. Available at https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2016/01/27/edward-t.-rincon-how-dps-can-improve-its-system-of-recording-raceethnicity-during-traffic-stops
[v] Hoffman, K.M., Trawalter, S., Axt, J.R., and Oliver, M.N.(2016, April 19).  Racial bias in pain assessment and treatment recommendations, and false beliefs about biological differences between blacks and whites.  PNAS Vol. 113 No. 16.

[vi]  McCarthy, N. (2019, November 13).  U.S. Hate Crimes Remain At Heightened Levels. Statistica. Accessed at https://www.statista.com/chart/16100/total-number-of-hate-crime-incidents-recorded-by-the-fbi/

Unconscious Bias at Starbucks? I don’t think so.

So sitting in a Starbucks and waiting for a meeting with someone is now considered a disturbance that warrants calling the police.  Apparently, a Starbucks store manager in Philadelphia recently decided to call the police on two African American males who were simply waiting for a third person to arrive before making a purchase and starting a meeting. A video captured by a store customer illustrated the embarrassing moment of being handcuffed while observers stared in disbelief.  I have been a loyal Starbucks customer for many years, have held many meetings there that required some waiting time, but have never, ever been required to buy something or leave the premises. Curiously, news reports have described the incident as an example of “unconscious bias”  — presumably an action by the manager that was done unconsciously or without intent. I don’t buy that.

Why?  Because recent history tells us that such behaviors are not so “unconscious,” but rather deliberate efforts to act out strong beliefs that are held about selected groups of persons.  For example, a news story in the Dallas Morning News described how a police academy in Cambridge, Massachusetts was training new recruits to administer extra doses of pepper spray to disable Latino suspects.  Why?  Because it was believed by the training staff that Latinos and other dark-skinned persons eat and pick hot peppers – thus developing a higher tolerance for pepper spray.  The training program might have been considered an act of “unconscious bias” if not for the fact that it was part of the approved training program.

A second example in the medical area relates to a study about pain management. The researchers administered a test to medical residents and practitioners regarding biological facts and myths about African Americans, such as, “Black skin is thicker than whites,” “Blacks’ nerve endings are less sensitive than whites,” and “whites have larger brains than blacks.”  In a simulated experiment of treating black and white patients, it was found that the medical staff who believed such false statements made more errors in the medical treatment that they recommended to black patients.  Unconscious bias?  Perhaps, but the medical staff were aware of their beliefs, recorded them on the test, and consciously decided to act on these beliefs.

Like many other companies, Starbucks also makes deliberate, conscious decisions regarding the location of their stores which impact the quality of life in many communities.  The following three maps vividly illustrate that Starbucks locations in Dallas County have generally avoided communities of color as well as lower income areas. 

Figure 1 below, for example, displays the location of Starbucks stores by the household median income of Dallas County households in 2016. Even communities with median incomes of $100, o00 or higher in the south, west, and southeast part of Dallas County reveal few Starbucks stores, suggesting that lower income alone does not explain these location decisions.

Figure 2 below shows that few Starbucks stores have been established in predominantly black communities.
Similarly, Figure 3 below shows the same pattern for Latino communities.  That is, Latinos have little access to Starbucks stores in the communities where they are concentrated.

To long-time residents of Dallas County, it is perhaps not surprising that the vast majority of Starbucks stores are principally located in the northern parts of Dallas County where higher income, white families are concentrated. After all, the price for a cup of coffee from Starbucks may be out of reach for lower-income persons. But the maps show that middle to higher-income areas in communities of color are also being avoided by Starbucks.

Another interesting theory that is frequently discussed in online forums is that “blacks do not drink coffee” – a belief that was reinforced by basketball legend Shaquille O’Neal who decided not to invest in Starbucks when presented the opportunity by its CEO. Most blacks, however, do drink coffee as revealed by research cited in the Journal of Nutrition: 61 percent of U.S. black adults drink coffee, compared to 76 percent of whites and 80 percent of Latinos.   What else should one consider to understand the picture presented by these maps?  Is “unconscious bias” influencing the site location decisions by Starbucks’ executives? If so, will a workshop for these executives also change their behavior?    

To their credit, the Starbucks organization recently announced that they are establishing a new store in the re-developed Southwest Center Mall in southern Dallas, which will also serve as a workforce training site for its predominantly black community.  It’s a good start but leaves considerable room for improvement.  It would indeed be interesting to determine if similar location patterns exist in other U.S. communities with a high presence of blacks and Latinos.

In my view, the Starbucks manager in Philadelphia that requested police action to remove the two black customers was not motivated by “unconscious bias,” but rather by conscious beliefs and prejudices against blacks that were not detected in the screening process by Starbucks staff.  These beliefs are a consequence of many factors – family values, a past negative experience, media stereotypes, and growing racial segregation in residences, churches, schools, and social networks – factors that are very resistant to change. In addition, the current political climate in the U.S. has “normalized” racist commentary and behaviors towards blacks and Latinos, making it much easier to mistreat these groups.  While it is common practice for organizations to screen applicants for job skills, personality, career and criminal background,   it seems that screening for knowledge and beliefs about blacks and Latinos should also be part of the hiring process.  Why wait for an incident like the one in Philadelphia to occur that can rapidly blemish the reputation of an entire organization?

The CEO of Starbucks should be commended for wasting little time in personally apologizing to the two black men for their discriminatory treatment, and announcing that all Starbucks employees will be required to attend a workshop to identify and remediate unconscious bias. New employees will also be required to participate in this training program. This training, however, will likely have minimal impact on employees that hold negative beliefs or inaccurate information about groups that they dislike. These bad apples – whether current employees or new hires — need to be fired or rejected from the organization, not just simply diagnosed as having unconscious bias and hope that a one-day workshop will somehow remediate this hostility towards black or Latinos.  I remain hopeful, nonetheless, that Starbucks’ renewed energy will include better screening practices of employees as well as clear policies with consequences when culturally diverse customers are mistreated by its employees. And it would not hurt for the company to re-examine its site location strategies in Dallas-area communities of color and perhaps similar communities throughout the U.S.