# Inclusive Hiring Gone Wrong > SOURCE: Excerpt from Jimmy, Elwood, and Vanessa Andreotti. *Towards Braiding*. Vancouver, BC: Gesturing Towards Decolonial Futures Collective, 2019. [https://decolonialfutures.net/towardsbraiding/](https://decolonialfutures.net/towardsbraiding/). RELATED FUNCTIONS: [[People Operations]], [[Governance]], [[Hosting & Guesting]] This is a very common story: an organization decides it wants to “Indigenize” and/or “decolonize” and hires an Indigenous person to do this work for them, but usually this position is not one of decision-making authority or autonomy. The Indigenous person accepts the job, hoping that the organization understands Indigeneity and decolonization the same way they do and that they will be able to influence change. However, in time it becomes clear that, apart from this new position, most activities of the organization go unchanged: the mere presence of an Indigenous person is meant to Indigenize and decolonize the public image of the organization. Despite a genuine yearning for deeper connections and relationships, the organization performs a socially sanctioned desire for a specific formula: > business as usual > +non-threatening Indigenous content > -guilt and risk of bad press The Indigenous employee is expected to facilitate convenient Indigenous involvement, to exercise conditional Indigenous leadership, to curate Indigenous content that is palatable to the taste of non-Indigenous consumers, to perform gratitude for “being included,” to embrace the opportunity for reconciliation, to offer redemption to the organization, to appear in equity photos, and to allow the use of their presence as an alibi for the continuity of colonial desires and relations. Unrealistic expectations are put on the Indigenous employee to tackle issues in every aspect of the organization, which often amounts to the expectation that one employee will take on multiple full-time jobs. At some point, the two sides and their differing expectations clash. The Indigenous person feels instrumentalized for an agenda that is still fundamentally colonial in an organization that fails to imagine that other ways of working, collaborating and relating are possible. The Indigenous person calls out this tokenism and the frustration it brings. Next, the Indigenous person who identified the problem starts to be perceived as a problem and as someone who is taking advantage of the organization’s gesture of inclusion. The organization either ignores or denies what was communicated (placing blame on the Indigenous person) or makes superficial changes without realizing the depth and difficulty of the learning that is necessary to interrupt systemic colonial patterns that are perceived as normal, natural and, in many cases, benevolent. When the Indigenous employee loses faith in the commitments of the organization, they also start to actively or passively resist the organization’s demands. In turn, the organization starts doubting the Indigenous person’s ability to do the job they were hired to do. The inability to communicate across this divide builds mistrust and anger on both sides. At one point the Indigenous person burns out, threatens to quit, and accuses the organization or individuals in the organization of racism and (neo)colonialism. The organization then feels justified in their judgment that this Indigenous person is unstable and incompetent. The Indigenous person quits or is fired. The organization hires another Indigenous person, who seems to be more amenable to performing the required set of tasks. In time, the different expectations clash, and the damaging and re-traumatizing cycle unfolds. --- ## Source - Jimmy, Elwood, and Vanessa Andreotti. [*Towards Braiding*](https://decolonialfutures.net/towardsbraiding/). Gesturing Towards Decolonial Futures Collective, 2019. ## Tags (click to view related pages) #stories #functions/people_operations #functions/governance #tree