Perfection, positivity and the elimination of difference: consulting, leading and diversity in the global development sector

This paper explores the intersection of consulting, leadership, and coloniality within the global development sector. Using an auto-ethnographic approach, I reflect on my experience as a British-born male of South Asian heritage leading a diverse consulting team on behalf of a UK-based firm. The team was tasked with evaluating an advocacy portfolio for a major US foundation committed to addressing global poverty and inequality. While such foundations and consultancies espouse inclusivity both externally and internally—often engaging in diagnostics on race, unconscious bias training, and efforts to diversify their workforce—I argue that coloniality continues to manifest in subtle and overt ways.

Leadership and consulting opportunities, particularly for freelance workers, often arise through informal networks rather than transparent, formal processes. Those who deviate from the majority in terms of social status are less likely to access these powerful networks. The generosity of a few well-connected individuals is frequently pivotal.

Under pressure to secure revenue, consultancies may hastily assemble teams of individuals with no prior working relationship or experience with the subject matter at hand. In such cases, consultancies may present opportunities for women and people of colour (PoC) to occupy more prominent roles. However, amongst PoC, those with South (and East) Asian heritage often benefit disproportionately due to stereotypes that position them more favourably than other racial or ethnic groups. Yet, they are frequently promoted into senior roles during precarious, high-risk situations, a phenomenon known as the Glass Cliff and mobilised to lead in often quite punitive ways. This mirrors historical patterns, where the British colonial administration mobilised South Asians for tasks undesirable to the British, such as managing the East African protectorate.

Teams assembled under these conditions often struggle with a weak group identity. When compounded by remote working modalities, this makes having difficult, yet necessary, conversations more challenging. Without honest dialogue, unproductive team dynamics can persist. Weak group identity also makes the projection of harmful stereotypes onto team members more likely, especially when differences emerge.

Client organisations can also exacerbate these dynamics. Some exhibit an obsession with perfectionism, demanding excessively high standards that place immense pressure on consulting staff, particularly those in less powerful positions, such as junior PoC team members. This pressure contributes to mental health challenges and a sense of overwhelm.

Furthermore, older white men in formal leadership roles may struggle to use their power effectively. Fearful of being perceived as cruel or incompetent, particularly when engaging with women or PoC, they may refrain from addressing difficult issues. Paradoxically, this reluctance reinforces the very perceptions they are keen to avoid.

Lastly, while organisations in the Global North have increased efforts to employ staff from the Global South, business processes are often rigidly designed around Global North norms. As a result, employees from the Global South may not receive the appropriate support or role adjustments needed for success, setting them up for failure. Consultancies and think tanks in North America and Europe, despite their stated commitment to reducing inequalities abroad, often reproduce the same inequities within their own ranks.

Session schedule

5 MINS

Introduction

30 MINS

Paper presentation

20 MINS

Small group discussion; impressions of the paper and developing questions for the presenter

20 MINS

Discussion forum with the presenter; moderated for the speaker to elaborate their ideas

10 MINS

Discussion forum with the presenter; themes from the discussions

5 MINS

Break

Share this presentation!

Parallel Paper Presentations

The following are presenting at this time

At War against Nature – The Iceman Legacy

The legacy of colonialism is written in Stone on the monuments and buildings that house its institutions. This paper seeks to explore the nature of the colonial project as a manifestation of a mind ill-at-ease in the world. This mind can be categorised as “The Iceman Legacy” and is situated in the hypothesis that northern Europeans suffered extreme hardship at the hands of nature’s winters and lack of sun which altered their DNA to such extent that they regressed to a brutal, warlike being with diminished capacity for love, sharing and growth.

Considering the foundational work Authority conducted at the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations and its global partners, this paper suggests that Weberian, Kantian and Hegelian thought was used to further the ends of the ill-at-ease mind as it sought a paradigm shift to complete domination on one hand and annihilation of the “other” on the other. Freud had opened the doors to a new layer of perception when he identified the unconscious and its capacity to identify and explain the discontents in that project of colonialism, “civilisation”.

The paper lays out the epistemicide that is inherent in the colonial project – meaning that the true goal of colonialism was not simply the harvesting of resources, human and otherwise, it was infact a systematic, parasitic attempt to secure a dominating position with regard to all of life on earth in order to wipe out knowledge systems that gave the “other” power. The tools of colonialism are shaped by the systematic framework of concepts in the form of Politics Philosophy and Economics. Armed with these conceptual frameworks, the agents of the colonial project created disciplines of education, health, housing, employment, cultural pursuits and its crowning glory, the systems of laws and rules to enshrine the ownership of commodities.

It is not by chance that even in 2024 the British Royal Family followed by the Catholic Church and Gina Rinehart, Australian mining magnate are the largest land owners on earth. The paper makes no claim that any one individual or organisation is culpable for the domination and epistemicide necessary for the colonial project to survive, but in order to understand the scale of thought that decolonisation requires one has to understand the depth of the infection that we all carry due to contamination from the ill-at-ease mind.

Psychoanalysis and the systems psychodynamic perspective is an antidote to the species-wide infection, and offers a glimmer of reality via its Bionian intense beam of darkness.

It leaves the reader with some questions about the nature and form that the dominator mind has and how to access the assumptions that hold up that world view.

Session schedule

5 MINS

Introduction

30 MINS

Paper presentation

20 MINS

Small group discussion; impressions of the paper and developing questions for the presenter

20 MINS

Discussion forum with the presenter; moderated for the speaker to elaborate their ideas

10 MINS

Discussion forum with the presenter; themes from the discussions

5 MINS

Break

30 MINS

Whole symposium open reflection discussion

Share this presentation!

Parallel Paper Presentations

The following are presenting at this time

Our Bodies Are in the Room: Lessons from A Decolonial Embodied Approach to Leadership Pedagogy for Social Justice Leaders

Pedagogical processes tend to reproduce hierarchical colonial practices of mind over body; rationality over unconscious processes and hierarchical models of “experts” who teach and learners who ‘learn’ (Joseph & Kerr, 2021). Access to knowledge derived from the body, from unconscious processes and with more shared efforts in the learning experience are devalued and often lost in the learning adventure within traditional colonial frameworks. Coloniality, a concept coined by Anibal Quijano (2000), is a form of domination, involving mechanisms, conditions, and modes of control and exploitation that remain in place, even after colonizers leave (Quijano, 2007, p. 170), or if they never do – as is the case on Turtle Island, colonially known as North America. Coloniality refers to the processes, beyond land dispossession, through which the cultural, social, and knowledge systems of the dominant group take hold. Decoloniality is a praxis of disruption that allows for exposing, making sense of, and countering the sociocultural, historical, and political influences of coloniality, the legacies of these systems in shaping societies in the West and the Global South, and the many modes of renewal, resistance, and resurgence within settler colonial contexts (Mignolo, 2009; 2011; Mignolo and Walsh 2018). When applied to leadership learning, decoloniality means challenging understandings of learners as passive recipients required to reproduce or take in what is known rather than as agents for creating what is known and mobilizing how it comes to be known.

For several years Insight for Community Impact https://www.ici-ici.ca
has been integrating decolonial praxis into group relations methods (Joseph et al, 2021) to explore questions of difference, leadership, self authorization among social justice leaders and ourselves. Using the 2024 Exploring Difference three-day residential conference in Toronto as an example, this presentation will outline the work we undertook to deepen decolonial praxis and what was learned in our efforts to transform our pedagogies. We engaged in conference discussion, movement, games, planning and reflective activity sessions that prioritized (1) attending and tending to the body, that is, attuning to information shared by and through the body and learning through movement, (2) bringing awareness to individual and collective unconscious processes, and (3) utilizing transparent lateral leadership structures in conference planning and delivery. This learning by social justice leaders created openings for different ways of knowing, being, and working.

We learned that when leaders pay attention to body-knowledge, unconscious processes, and shared leadership, we can begin to counter colonial hegemonies and the intractable systems in which we live and work. We can grapple with what we think we know about difference, social justice leading and following, power and self-authorization, about ourselves and others, and about the construction of social power within which we live and work. Through our experimental decolonizing practices, we began to understand more about how our idealisms fuel our efforts, obstruct our best intentions, and in some cases repeat the very forms of coloniality with which we grappled. Decolonial praxis is never a linear process.

References

Ashcroft, G., Griffiths, & H. Tiffin (1995). (Eds.), The Post-colonial Studies Reader. Routledge.

Joseph, J. & Kerr, E.* (2021). Assemblages and Co-emergent Corpomaterialities in Postsecondary Education: Pedagogical Lessons from Somatic Psychology and Physical Cultures, Somatechnics, 11(3), 413–431. https://doi.org/10.3366/soma.2021.0368

Joseph, J., Williams, B., & Lewis, T. (2021). The Exploring Difference Workshop: Adapting group relations to explore questions of difference and antiracism in Toronto, Canada. Organizational and Social Dynamics 21(1), 40–55. https://doi.org/10.33212/osd.v21n1.2021.40

Mignolo, W. D. (2009). Epistemic Disobedience, Independent Thought and Decolonial Freedom. Theory, Culture & Society, 26(7–8), 159–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276409349275 

Mignolo, W. D. (2011). Epistemic Disobedience and the Decolonial Option: A Manifesto. TRANSMODERNITY: Journal of Peripheral Cultural Production of the Luso-Hispanic World, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.5070/T412011807 

Mignolo & C. E. Walsh, (2018). On Decoloniality: Concepts, Analytics, Praxis. Duke University Press.

Quijano, A. (2000). Coloniality of Power and Eurocentrism in Latin America. International Sociology, 15(2), 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580900015002005 

Quijano, A. (2007). Coloniality and Modernity/Rationality. Cultural Studies, 21(2–3), 168–178.

Session schedule

5 MINS

Introduction

30 MINS

Paper presentation

20 MINS

Small group discussion; impressions of the paper and developing questions for the presenter

20 MINS

Discussion forum with the presenter; moderated for the speaker to elaborate their ideas

10 MINS

Discussion forum with the presenter; themes from the discussions

5 MINS

Break

30 MINS

Whole symposium open reflection discussion

Share this presentation!

Parallel Paper Presentations

The following are presenting at this time

Jumping into the Messiness: Decolonising Allyship through Intersectional Reflexivity

We critically examine the intricate interplay of intersectionality and decolonizing allyship within settler colonial contexts, focusing on our experiences as first-generation migrants to Australia and our relationships with Indigenous peoples. By employing an intersectional framework, we illuminate how interlocking social categories—such as gender, ethnicity, and socio-economic status—shape both individual identities and broader societal structures, as articulated by scholars like Dhamoon (2011) and McIntosh (2012).

Central to our discussion is the concept of ‘Othering’ and its implications for cultural relations. We argue that prevailing models of assimilation inadvertently perpetuate colonial paradigms, reinforcing power dynamics that marginalise both non-Anglo migrants and Indigenous communities. Drawing on Racial Triangulation Theory (Kim, 1999), we explore how assimilation policies position non-Anglo migrants within the dominant settler group, complicating their relationships with Indigenous peoples and contributing to ongoing systems of domination.

We highlight the unique positionality of non-Anglo migrants, who navigate the dual pressures of rejecting the coloniser within alongside a desire to avoid being ‘Othered’ by the dominant group. This creates a push-pull dynamic: the push to reject internalised colonial mindsets contrasts with the pull to conform to the model migrant archetype, where owning one’s lands symbolises acceptance and belonging. We advocate for a both/and logic (Warner, Settles, & Shields, 2016) that recognises the complexity of identities and experiences in these intersecting discourses while holding the tensions inherent in this struggle.

To deepen our analysis, we apply intersectional reflexivity through contrasting personal vignettes that reflect our own journeys of enacted and inacted cultural identities (Armstrong, 1998). This approach, as advocated by Atewologun and Mahalingam (2018), enables a reflexive exploration of the internal transformations necessary for effective allyship, including confronting biases, privileges, and areas of marginalisation. Our exploration of cultural reflexivity emerges as a vital tool for decolonising allyship.

By examining our experiences, we aim to identify pathways toward new forms of orthogonal allyship that extend beyond linear white settler-Indigenous binaries. We also address the concept of ‘psychic retreat’ (Steiner, 1993), investigating how individuals and groups may withdraw from uncomfortable truths about their complicity in oppressive systems to ultimately negate our roles in perpetuating or challenging systemic injustices.

Through our voices as outsiders-within, we aspire to open up a way of thinking about the complexities involved in decolonising allyship with Indigenous Australians as non-Anglo migrants and, in doing so, emerge from our own spaces of psychic (dis)comfort.

References:

Armstrong, D (2009). Psychic retreats’: The organisational relevance of a psychoanalytic formulation. In Burkard Sievers (Ed), Psychoanalytic Studies of Organizations – Contributions from the International Society for the Psychoanalytic Study of Organizations (ISPSO). Taylor & Francis, Canada. 175-196.

Atewologun, D., & Mahalingam, R. (2018). Intersectional reflexivity: Methodological challenges and possibilities for qualitative equality, diversity, and inclusion research. In R. Bendl, L. Booysen, & Judith Pringle (Eds.), Handbook of Research Methods on Diversity Management, Equality, and Inclusion at Work. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Dhamoon, R. K. (2011). Considerations on mainstreaming intersectionality. Political Research Quarterly, 64(1), 230–243.

Kim, C. J. (1999). The racial triangulation of Asian Americans. Politics & Society, 27(1), 105–138.

McIntosh, P. (2012). Reflections and future directions for privilege studies. Journal of Social Issues, 68(1), 194–206.

Steiner, J. (1993). Psychic Retreats: Pathological Organizations in Psychotic, Neurotic and Borderline Patients. London: Routledge.

Warner, L. R., Settles, I. H., & Shields, S. A. (2016). Invited reflection intersectionality as an epistemological challenge to psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(2), 171–176.

Session schedule

5 MINS

Introduction

30 MINS

Paper presentation

20 MINS

Small group discussion; impressions of the paper and developing questions for the presenter

20 MINS

Discussion forum with the presenter; moderated for the speaker to elaborate their ideas

10 MINS

Discussion forum with the presenter; themes from the discussions

5 MINS

Break

30 MINS

Whole symposium open reflection discussion

Share this presentation!

Parallel Paper Presentations

The following are presenting at this time

He Awa Whiria – weaving socioanalytic and Māori knowledge systems in PhD research

I have begun to engage with the ‘decolonisation challenge’ (Tuhiwai Smith 2022) during the early stages of PhD research into the psychodynamics of leadership and governance work focussed on the experiences of Māori (indigenous) board directors in Aotearoa, New Zealand (Joseph and Benton 2021).

My research is informed by the hopeful idea that different knowledge systems, primarily mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) and socioanalytic, may be woven in a useful and reparative hybrid, strong enough to honor and contain each stream of thought and its ontologies without permanent splitting and regression (Petriglieri and Petriglieri 2022).

I use the metaphor and methodology of he awa whiria – a braided river – to explore the possibilities and tensions in acknowledging and working within these different knowledge streams (MacFarlane, Derby and Macfarlane 2024). I will outline the principles, ontologies, epistemologies and ethics suggested for research with Māori (Tuhiwai Smith 2022) and the identity work (Caza, Vough and Puranik) and supervision system that this requires (Macfarlane, Derby and Macfarlane 2024).

I then discuss the ‘hoped for’ contribution of socioanalytic concepts and methods to my research and how these might braid with kaupapa Māori methods. The psychodynamics of decolonization requires consideration of how historical trauma, resistance and struggle is likely to manifest in unconscious as well as conscious dynamics in the object of study as well as in the research system. I will share my thoughts about the difficulties in working at the boundary of what can and cannot be thought or said in this research (Petriglieri & Petriglieri 2020).

The paper concludes with the a working hypothesis about the contributions of each knowledge stream and encourages the reader to think deeply and widely about their cultural position and the societal dynamics which may be impacting their relationship to knowledge and research.

References

Caza BB, Vough H, Puranik H. Identity work in organizations and occupations: Definitions, theories, and pathways forward. J Organ Behav. 2018; 39:889–910. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2318

Joseph, R. and Benton, R. eds. Waking the Taniwha: Māori Governance in the 21st Century. Thomson Reuters.

McFarlane, A., Derby, M. and Macfarlane, S. eds. (2024) He Awa Whiria: Braiding the knowledge streams in research, policy and practice. Canterbury University Press.

Petriglieri G. & Petriglieri J. (2020). The return of the oppressed: a systems psychodynamic approach to organization studies. Academy of Management Annals 2020, 14(1): 411– 449.

Petriglieri G. & Petriglieri J. (2022). The work is alive! Systems psychodynamics and the pursuit of pluralism without polarization in human relations. Human Relations, First Published April 21, 2022, Research Article https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267221089208 

Tuhiwai Smith, L. (2022) Decolonising Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. 3rd edition Bloomsbury Academic

Session schedule

5 MINS

Introduction

30 MINS

Paper presentation

20 MINS

Small group discussion; impressions of the paper and developing questions for the presenter

20 MINS

Discussion forum with the presenter; moderated for the speaker to elaborate their ideas

10 MINS

Discussion forum with the presenter; themes from the discussions

5 MINS

Break

30 MINS

Whole symposium open reflection discussion

Share this presentation!

Parallel Paper Presentations

The following are presenting at this time