The DEI Hire: A Changemaker’s Saga of Tokenism & Burnout
The DEI Hire: A Changemaker’s Saga of Tokenism and Burnout
In today’s workplace, there’s a growing recognition of the importance of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). More organizations are creating DEI roles, hiring changemakers who are passionate about fostering inclusivity, equity, and social justice. But what happens when these well-intentioned hires are, in reality, brought on only as token representatives of diversity?
The illustration, “The DEI Hire: A Changemaker’s Saga,” created by Rev. Dr. Shelley Best, tells a familiar and frustrating story that plays out in workplaces everywhere. Let’s follow this journey to understand the pitfalls and challenges that await a DEI hire who is celebrated in the beginning but ultimately cast aside.
Step 1: Changemaker Enters the Organization
Our changemaker enters with optimism and passion, eager to drive meaningful change. They’re a skilled professional with a deep commitment to DEI values, excited to contribute to the organization’s vision of becoming more inclusive and equitable. The organization has expressed a need for their expertise and welcomes them as the “right fit” to spearhead change.
Step 2: Honeymoon Phase – Tokenized but Welcomed
Initially, everything seems perfect. The changemaker feels validated and needed. The organization’s leadership often celebrates this hire publicly, pointing to them as a sign of their commitment to DEI. During this “honeymoon” phase, they’re invited to meetings, included in decision-making, and generally feel appreciated. However, this support is often superficial; the changemaker’s role is more symbolic than impactful.
Step 3: Reality Sets In – Microaggressions and Resistance
Soon enough, cracks begin to show. The changemaker, eager to make a difference, starts pointing out issues within the organization. They may highlight structural inequities, policies that inadvertently harm marginalized groups, or the lack of diversity in leadership roles. However, these observations are met with subtle (and sometimes not-so-subtle) resistance. They experience repetitive inquiries that question their suggestions, and microaggressions start to become part of their daily reality.
Leadership may brush off the changemaker’s concerns as “overly sensitive” or dismiss the issues as misunderstandings. Despite their efforts to work within established structures and advocate for accountability, the changemaker begins to see that their influence is limited, and their voice is not truly valued.
Step 4: Denial of Racism – The Blame Game
As the changemaker pushes for deeper, structural changes, the organization often turns defensive. Rather than acknowledging the validity of the changemaker’s insights, the organization denies the presence of systemic issues or racism. Leadership may shift responsibility for fixing these problems onto the changemaker, suggesting that they should “educate” others or “build bridges” without the full support of the organization.
In this phase, marginalized employees may be pitted against each other, creating a toxic environment where the changemaker feels isolated and unsupported. The message is clear: while the organization is open to performative DEI, it resists the deeper, structural shifts needed for genuine inclusivity.
Step 5: Retaliation – The Changemaker Becomes “The Problem”
When the changemaker refuses to back down, the organization begins to label them as “the problem.” Leadership reframes the changemaker’s advocacy as a “communication issue” or implies that they’re not “qualified” or “a good fit.” The very attributes that made the changemaker an asset—courage, tenacity, and a commitment to equity—are now framed as liabilities.
The changemaker may face formal or informal retaliation. Their ideas are ignored, their performance is questioned, or they may be excluded from important conversations. The organization’s hostility becomes clear, and the changemaker is left with a difficult choice: remain in a toxic environment or leave to protect their well-being.
Step 6: Exit – The Changemaker Leaves the Organization
After exhausting all avenues to create genuine change, the changemaker decides to exit the organization. They leave with a sense of disappointment and disillusionment, often experiencing burnout from the emotional toll of their journey. The organization, meanwhile, may continue to tout its commitment to DEI, using the departure as a chance to start the cycle over with a new hire.
Reflection: The Consequences of Tokenism
The cycle illustrated here is a cautionary tale. When DEI hires are brought in merely for show, without genuine support or commitment to their mission, everyone suffers. The organization loses a passionate, skilled advocate for change, and its workforce remains mired in the same inequities that the DEI hire was meant to address. Worse, the experience can leave a lasting impact on the changemaker, leading to disillusionment, burnout, and even harm to their mental and emotional health.
True commitment to DEI requires organizations to do more than hire diverse talent. It requires a willingness to listen, to be uncomfortable, and to make substantive changes. For changemakers, it’s essential to recognize the signs of tokenism and to advocate for environments that support—not just tolerate—them.
Organizations must remember: DEI is not a checkbox, a marketing ploy, or a quick fix. It’s a journey that requires dedication, humility, and the courage to dismantle long-standing structures of inequity. Only then can changemakers truly thrive and help create workplaces where everyone feels valued and included.
