We Can't Talk about That at Work! Second Edition: How to Talk about Race, Religion, Politics, and Other Polarizing Topics

by Mary-Frances Winters, Mareisha Reese

In developing the skills necessary to engage in Bold, Inclusive Conversations around polarizing topics, we can acknowledge that these subjects are complex, that there are no simple answers, and that it takes time and practice to learn how to do it well.

Politics, religion, race—we can't talk about topics like these at work, right? But in fact, these conversations are happening all the time, either in real life or virtually. And if they aren't handled effectively, they can become more polarizing and divisive, impacting productivity, engagement, retention, teamwork, and even employees' sense of safety in the workplace.

In this second edition of We Can’t Talk about That at Work!, best-selling author Mary-Frances Winters and new coauthor Mareisha N. Reese of The Winters Group, Inc., provide fresh examples, updated research, and compelling insights. Featuring a new chapter on how two organizations have actualized the model for Bold, Inclusive Conversations as well as a discussion guide and updated glossary, this modern classic offers step-by-step guidance for conducting structured conversations around polarizing topics. Leaders and organizations can address sensitive subjects head on in a way that brings people together instead of driving them apart.

Genres: Nonfiction, Leadership, Business, Social Justice, Audiobook, Race, Politics

216 pages, Paperback

First published April 23, 2017

About the author

Mary-Frances Winters is the founder and president of The Winters Group, Inc., a 36-year old global diversity, equity and inclusion consulting firm. She is a passionate advocate for justice and equity; a provocateur not afraid to have the difficult conversations. Mary-Frances has over three decades of experience working with corporate leaders in support of enhancing their understanding of what it is like to be the “other.”

Ms. Winters is a master strategist with experience in strategic planning, change management, diversity, organization development, training and facilitation, systems thinking and qualitative and quantitative research methods. She has extensive experience in working with senior leadership teams to drive organizational change.

Mary-Frances Winters has served on national not-for profit, corporate and university boards. Among her many awards and distinctions, she was named a diversity pioneer by Profiles in Diversity Journal in August 2007 and received the Winds of Change award from the Forum on Workplace Inclusion in 2016. Ms. Winters was also featured in Forbes’ June 2016 publication, which honored some of the DC Metro area’s most powerful women. In November 2019, she was named by Forbes as one of 10 trailblazers in diversity and inclusion. She has served as a torch bearer for the Olympics and has previously been recognized as an Athena Award winner from the Chamber of Commerce for her contributions to women and the community.

Reviews

[Cecilia · Rating 2 out of 5]

Very basic. Easy to read. Includes definitions to words.

A lot of this book seems like coddling of individuals of the dominant culture (cis white western heterosexual able bodied men of means). Book puts a lot of the onus on individuals from marginalized groups to reach out/teach/give benefit of the doubt to individuals from the dominant group.

This is disappointing, and honestly exhausting.

[Jane · Rating 3 out of 5]

The audience for this book is clearly dominant-group (white, male, cis, etc.) senior leadership. Largely models one-on-one conversations and puts a lot of onus and emotional effort on individuals in discriminated-against groups. This book feels like a guide for problematic companies to put a band-aid on a problem instead of fixing it.

The inclusion of Sodexo as a good example is particularly tragic because of their scandals, ethical concerns and exploitation of its workers. It feels like the Winters Group would rather talk up its clients rather than take a step back and say that the result of these conversations should ultimately be action, rather than just increased empathy.

[Elese Roger · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really like the concept of the "platinum rule" vs the Golden rule. Treat someone as they want to be treated. The last chapter has great examples of classic examples of seemingly well meaning questions and why they are insensitive. I have to say I was afraid of this book - as my generation was brought up to avoid certain topics - this book provides a systematic formula for how to handle them and why they are important.

[Kate · Rating 2 out of 5]

If this is a new topic to you, then the book will provide a great starting point. If it’s not, you might prefer something with more heft.

[Pbarber19 · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was worried this book might be too simple, but I overestimate my ability to talk about topics like race, politics, and religion with people who don’t feel the same way I do. Especially in a work setting. This book is extremely practical and helpful. I highly recommend it for skill-building and learning to have productive conversations about very tough issues, whether at work or anywhere else.

[Leah · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think this book had a lot of helpful instruction and broke down steps involved in communicating about difficult topics quite well, especially for people who may be beginning the work of thinking about inclusivity.

There were some portions of the book I disagreed with or didn't sit well with me, namely the weak example of a conversation in chapter six and the way that everything was related to becoming a better or more effective worker. I know this was a book specifically addressing polarizing topics in the workplace, but having these conversations shouldn't happen just because they're impacting someone's ability to contribute to capitalism; I think this book suffered for that focus.

Overall, though, I think this book would be useful for someone beginning their inclusivity journey. Someone who has studied further may find it rudimentary or condescending.

[Mónica · Rating 2 out of 5]

Just when you think the book is going really well, the author forgets to speak truth to power.

For example, the last chapter was refreshing and very practical, with examples of offensive phrases one should avoid (like asking so-called minorities questions like "Where are you from?"), UNTIL I read that there is also a section of things to "avoid saying to white people" such as "you could never understand my issues". If you are white and bound to become an ally, you ought to develop thick skin and understand that if our communities have faced decades of oppression and systemic inequality, you can very well withstand someone from the office calling all white people racist.

[Madison Bemis · Rating 3 out of 5]

Decent read. Very digestible for a work place that is just starting to have inclusive conversations, but felt a tad bit too simple. Didn’t agree with everything she said either, but I suppose you have to start somewhere!

[Nick Carter · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book helped significantly re-shape my view of what progress means in a group, an organization, a society.

We Can’t Talk About That at Work! does a great job in laying out: why we should be talking about potentially divisive topics at work and HOW to go about that. I think it also does a great job in pointing out that great discussions will have a reciprocal commitment from both members of majoritized and minoritized groups. The example in the book of a black direct report bringing up his feelings around the police killings of 2020 to his white manager: this was incredibly realistic. The realism Winters treats the material with in this book gives the reader the assurance that the idea of bold, inclusive conversations is not some distant fairy tale or laughable wokism (as some see the field of DEI as, collectively).

10 outta 10, would recommend to anyone looking to spur a stronger community or communicate authentically.

[Nicole · Rating 4 out of 5]

A lot of this book overlapped with strategies from Crucial Conversations (5 stars) when it comes to difficult conversations but added the element of polarizing topics, which I learned a lot more about than I did in Crucial Conversations. I really like how actionable but also reflective the strategies were, it ramps you up by asking more questions than having more answers, which put me in an inquisitive open-minded mode throughout reading the book. I enjoyed Crucial Conversations more because those happen more frequently in the work I do, nonetheless this is an important book for everyone to read.

[Nick Quenga · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good content, emphasizes that both sides need to seek first to understand and assume positive intent. Did a good job to distinguish between being ready and preparation for though, open conversations.
Sets realistic expectations for both sides across many gaps: minority, power, gender, etc. Length was about right, with minimal preaching and repetition. Much prefer this over Subtle Acts of Aggression.

[Megan · Rating 2 out of 5]

Although you could make a case for "this is a great read for companies just starting to focus on DEI" because it's easy, I think it feeds into the harmful narrative that the onus of fixing the problems with diversity is on marginalized groups and not on the people perpetuating systemic racism. I wouldn't recommend it as a useful tool because of that alone. Should we be having inclusive conversations? Absolutely. But as a white woman the task is mine to take on to educate myself on harmful language, stereotypes, or why current events are so traumatizing. And I shouldn't be expecting my colleagues to do it for me.

[Ana Luiza · Rating 2 out of 5]

I liked message of the book, but it could’ve been 30 pages long. Like most business books nowadays, the author includes unnecessary and obvious content to make it long enough to be a book. For example, do we really need to include the importance of the temperature and the size of the room being right when we have inclusive conversations? Isn’t that preferred for any meeting or conversation?

The constant repetition of “bold, inclusive conversations” is quite annoying and I’m glad the author toned down on mentioning the Winters Group after the first 2 chapters.

Overall, I agree with the topics brought up, but the book was very basic and US-centric. It is written for Americans who live in a non-diverse bubble — but are they the people actually reading this book?

[Leonard Janke · Rating 2 out of 5]

Although this book does have a few good insights, for the most part it is unlikely that its goals are what they claim to be, and, even if they were, it is very unlikely that the approach suggested would achieve them.

The Good Insights

In terms of good points made, the author is right that when discussing controversial matters listening is more important than speaking especially in initial conversations. She is also right that most people only listen not to truly understand the other's point of view, but rather to prepare a rebuttal showing that the person speaking is wrong. Many of the points made in this book are also made in A Manual for Creating Atheists by Peter Boghossian. One thing that Boghossian's book mentions that this book does not, however, is that not only is it important in discussing controversial matters like religion and politics to listen thinking you might genuinely learn from the other person but to go in prepared to find out you might be wrong on some very important issues you were near certain of.

The Problems

The officially stated goal of the book is to allow for "bold, inclusive conservations" at work on matters such as race. The book was written in 2017 and the main rationale given is that there were things highlighted in the news that were troubling to minorities and distracted them from being fully productive at work. For example, police shootings of unarmed black men and BLM's claim that the disportionate rate was due to racial bias on the part of police. The author says that typically workplaces will suppress discussion of controversial matters but this does not prevent those discussions from occurring anyway. Thus it is thought that it is better to have such conversations to gain back productivity but in a systematic way following guidelines that will reduce rather than increase polarization. The ideal seems to be an end goal where "bold, inclusive conversations" will become routine after troubling events in the news.

Although the claimed goal of the book is "inclusiveness" the author's strong bias means that her suggestions run contrary to creating truly inclusive conversations. To have truly inclusive conversations you would have to create a playing field that is not tilted toward your personal views. Here the author fails in many ways:

First she gives a checklist to determine if a person and their organization are ready for bold, inclusive conversations. The checklist, however, already tilts the playing field in favor of one side. For instance by asking if those members in racially dominant groups have examined their racial privilege.

Many people while not doubting that "white privilege" was a problem in US history in the past doubt that it still exists. If you must agree with conclusions like this before you can even have conversations, how can the conversations truly be inclusive? Similarly the author shows her bias by recommending reading materials for points when conversations get stuck due to contentiousness. The problem is that the reading material is very biased: for example Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States. It is plausible that presenting such a biased book might work if a view from the other side was also presented. For example, Thomas Sowell has written many excellent books on his views on racial matters, but nowhere are these books mentioned. Nor, indeed, any from non liberal leaning sources.

By openly stating that "white privilege" is obvious and needs to be examined before there can be any discussions at all it all seems part of a plan to only have discussions once the deck is stacked in favor of one side. Thus the goal seems unlikely to be true inclusion, but, more likely, one side pushing their politics on the other and, even then, only in a situation where they think they already have such a critical mass of people leaning one way that some may be scared to speak against such near unanimity. If there is no such critical mass, the organization is deemed not ready to have these types of discussions.

There are other examples that make me question the author's true goal. For example, in the final chapter she says her goal is not to dictate "PC" speech and she then immediately presents a guide to what terms are not politically correct (even if she does not use that exact phrase) when discussing racial matters. Another strange thing she says is that an organization will probably still want to disallow political discussion even once it is experienced with having bold, inclusive conversations. I am not sure what to make of this. How can conversations about race not end up being political? Hence, it seems like a trump card to play to shut down conversations once they take a turn that the more liberal side does not like: "Now we are venturing off into politics so we should table this for now."

The book also pushes a notion of "truth" that is problematic. The author has a notion that truth can vary from individual to individual. For example, it might be "your truth" that an encounter with the police is nothing to be worried about if you are doing nothing wrong, but that might not be someone else's truth. Here what is primary is how someone perceives a situation. Thus you cannot deny someone's "truth" because it is that they perceive an encounter with the police as potentially life threatening. It is true that they feel this way. Using this notion the author adopts rules that you should not say something like "The statement you took offense to does not seem racist". That may be true for you, but it may not be for someone else. This, of course, is trying to pre-empt the discussion of whether or not a statement is actually racist which could be a contentious thing. It does not seem like a rule likely to work here, or in general, anywhere the author's notion of "personal truths" applies. People will just find ways to reword things such that they can state what they wanted to to begin with and which the rules will not allow you to deny: e.g. "It is my feeling that the statement is not racist and it is my feeling that you should not have reacted as if it were".

Another weakness of the book which highlights the author's bias is her taking for granted the early claims regarding "unconscious bias tests". Over the years the evidence has been mounting against these tests having much explanatory power to point where they are now merely called "implicit association tests" and where there is little evidence that the tests
correlate any more than very weakly with real world racial bias. Again, the author only presents one side of the story here, whereas if she wanted to emphasize her point about bold, inclusive conversations giving consideration to both sides she would set an example by pointing out the problems others were finding with these tests.

My general sense after having read her book was probably not what she was hoping it would instill in her readers. Ultimately I mostly thought it was a shame the media was promoting the BLM narrative that an unarmed black men who faces an encounter with the police is far more likely to be shot than an unarmed white man. Worried to the point of being distracted by these thoughts while at work. Similarly it must be a drain on productivity to buy into the exaggerated claims of "unconscious bias" supposedly revealed by implicit association tests.

Summary

If the program the author suggests could be implemented in a less biased fashion maybe it could have some value. I do think, however, that points of impasse will quickly be reached anyway. For example, it will be pointed out by one side that statistics show that an unarmed black man is no more likely to be shot in a police encounter than an unarmed white man. Perhaps that will alleviate fears for some, but then the question will arise as to whether the statistics can be believed so little progress will have been made. The same is probably true on any controversial issue: ultimately some minds may be changed, but ultimately it will hinge on peoples' subjective feeling about what is more likely to be true: for example, can statistics be believed or not on some particular matter.

[Shae · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was the first book chosen for our DEI book club at work. I enjoyed the discussions with coworkers, but I can't say the book itself is high on my list of favorites. The earlier chapters had some very interesting information about communication styles and gauging readiness, and the last chapter offered a list of offensive phrases to avoid. Both of these I found to be informative and helpful. The written example of a bold conversation toward the end of the book didn't have much to offer, in my opinion. It felt emotionless, tame, subdued, and fake. The manager was hurtful and didn't seem at all interested in learning more about the associate's perspective (even after having had multiple conversations).

I think the most frustrating part of the book for me was that individuals of the dominant group (white people) are constantly being given a pass for the way they (we) act. I probably don't have any right to feel frustrated about this. I can only imagine how others must feel on a daily basis living these examples in their day-to-day lives. Ultimately, I think this book was written for white people as a way to ease us into the conversation very slowly. If that's the case, maybe it's been eye-opening for some. It just seems to me that asking others to extend patience and understanding to the dominant group isn't really helping anyone on either side of the conversation anytime soon.

[Aaron · Rating 1 out of 5]

An oversimplified, low-resolution view of the world, comprised of two groups, the victim and victimizers, leads many naively compassionate people to be satisfied and in a state of moral certainty without any thinking or questions to ask.  After all, if the world is comprised neatly of two groups, it is easy to figure out who belongs in each group.  Once the dichotomy is established, it is not hard to identify or affiliate with the “victim” to claim unearned moral superiority.  After only a few jargon-soaked pages of this “handbook,” it is clear that co-authors Mary-Frances Winters and Mareisha N. Reese not only gleefully inhibit such a world but also have made lucrative careers out of promulgating and then capitalizing on a world with two categories of people.  Unfortunately, these books, and others like them, are far too often prescribed for professional development, “sensitivity” training, and other corporate initiatives to advance a particular agenda.  This book and its non-data-supported ideas were a complete waste of my time.

[Maryam James · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book was hard to read because of the author’s patronizing tone throughout. The author reinforces the narrative of marginalized groups as the only capable caretakers for their oppressors, with examples of having Black women use micro-aggressions aimed at themselves as “teaching opportunities,” infantilizing white peoples and further cementing the white privilege that the author had been indulgent towards earlier.

[Dina Zheng · Rating 3 out of 5]

While this book focuses on the corporate workplace setting, I think the takeaways can be applied to almost any setting, including healthcare. This book is helpful as an introductory guide, however, it often oversimplified the complexity and many layers associated with having polarizing conversations.

[Jen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Decent take-always. Most memorable: forget the golden rule; operate by the platinum rule - treat others how THEY want to be treated.

[Norjak · Rating 2 out of 5]

Nothing really beyond treat others as decent humans and listen well (which should be common sense).

[Sarah Jensen]

Book Review: We Can’t Talk About That at Work!: How to Talk About Race, Religion, Politics, and Other Polarizing Topics by Mary-Frances Winters

Mary-Frances Winters’ We Can’t Talk About That at Work! is a timely and essential guide that addresses the often fraught and taboo subjects of race, religion, politics, and other polarizing topics in workplace conversations. In this second edition, Winters provides readers with the tools and frameworks necessary to foster open dialogues and navigate difficult discussions that can otherwise fracture workplace relationships and hinder productivity.

Summary and Key Themes
Winters’ book is structured around practical advice and strategies that empower individuals to engage in meaningful conversations about sensitive subjects without fear of conflict or backlash. Key themes include:

The Importance of Dialogue: Winters emphasizes that avoiding difficult conversations does not resolve underlying tensions; instead, it can exacerbate them. The author argues that workplaces can and should be spaces for open dialogue, as confronting polarizing topics can lead to greater understanding and collaboration among diverse team members.

Frameworks for Engagement: The book presents various frameworks that guide readers in approaching tough conversations. Winters offers concrete examples and situational scenarios, helping individuals to find common ground and use active listening techniques. This approach is designed to create a respectful environment where everyone feels heard.

Addressing Power Dynamics: Recognizing the power dynamics that often accompany discussions of race and inequality is crucial. Winters provides insight into how these dynamics affect conversations and offers strategies to mitigate discomfort, particularly for those in positions of authority who may inadvertently create barriers to open communication.

Practical Tools and Techniques: The author equips readers with practical tools such as conversation starters, reflective questions, and conflict resolution strategies. These techniques are aimed at enabling employees to engage in discussions without escalating tensions, making the case that such conversations are essential for fostering an inclusive workplace culture.

Case Studies and Real-World Applications: Throughout the book, Winters includes case studies and examples from various organizations that have successfully navigated polarizing topics. These real-world applications serve to demonstrate the effectiveness of her strategies and provide inspiration for readers to implement similar approaches in their own workplaces.

Critical Analysis
We Can’t Talk About That at Work! is commendable for its accessible writing style and practical focus. Winters’ expertise and passion for fostering inclusive environments shine through, making the content relatable and applicable to a wide audience. By breaking down complex issues into manageable pieces, she empowers employees at all levels to contribute to healthier workplace discussions.

However, some critics might point out that while the book provides excellent foundational guidance, it may not fully address the deep-seated systemic issues that can complicate these conversations. Readers seeking more in-depth analyses of broader socio-political contexts may find themselves wanting additional resources or perspectives. Nonetheless, Winters successfully encourages readers to start somewhere, emphasizing action and openness over inaction and avoidance.

Conclusion
In conclusion, Mary-Frances Winters’ We Can’t Talk About That at Work! is an invaluable resource for anyone seeking to engage in important discussions about race, religion, politics, and other polarizing subjects in the workplace. The book serves not only as a guide to effective communication but also as a call to embrace the uncomfortable conversations necessary for fostering understanding and inclusivity. As workplaces continue to evolve in diversity and complexity, Winters’ insights will undoubtedly serve as a critical asset for leaders and employees committed to making meaningful progress in their organizations.

[Nathan Williams · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent read for anyone ready to engage but needs the slills

Overall, this is a splendid read. Winters has a wealth of experience and pours it all into this book in a very logical, digestible manner. As many books, guides, or experts will tell you, if you are to be effective in having these conversations, you have to do some self-work first. You have to at least begin the journey of understanding who you are, where you came from, what’s your worldview, etc. Winters includes helpful tools for starting this work.

There is perhaps one chief criticism I’d make of the book. While it’s a terrific guide for having thoughtful, scheduled,structured conversations, that’s not always how it works in the real world. Winters’s suggesting is that it’s best not to have impromptu conversations about these heavy matters and that if at all possible, you should postpone them until you and others can be better prepared. That is ideal, however, I would have liked to see same pages included to assist readers with getting through conversations when you can’t be fully prepared. The tools are here within the book, you’ll just have to be keen enough to adapt them to impromptu conversations if you find yourself stuck. Mostly, I point this out because we read this book in a book club for our work team, wherein I lead the conversations. The need for impromptu conversation guidelines came up a few times. In any case, the book was very well received, and served as a starting point to have some spirited conversations within the book club and larger team.

[Amanuel Wordofa · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was assigned to read this book as part of an elective course and I enjoyed it. In this powerful book, Mary-Frances Winters shows how to deal with race/ ethnicity, religion, politics, and other sensitive subjects in a way that brings people together for a positive outcome. This book will help you to be aware of the role culture plays in shaping people's perceptions, habits, and communication styles. She gives detailed guidance on how to have bold and meaningful dialogue about polarizing topics.
This book raises our awareness of our differences. It is intended to take a proactive approach to bold conversations that keep people divided. I definitely recommend this book to others. This book is like a manual to help and guide you to have those difficult conversations at the workplace. I have always been advised to stay away from sensitive topics like race and politics at work. But I see that I need to stand up for my beliefs and get involved in open dialogue. This book teaches you how to be culturally competent and emphasizes the importance of listening. For organizations, this book touches on the importance of creating a safe space to engage in these conversations. I will for sure look back to refer to some of the notes I took while reading it.

[Candy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Few months ago, I watched one of my fav guys get IN to IT with my arch-nemesis over hot/political topics and they went at it for hours at work until 3 AM. It ended with my fav becoming so enraged he was about to beat the absolute shit out of him (and low-key I was with it, because fck ole boy argument & logic) but he eventually saw the light & walked away because he realized he was arguing with an extremely privileged man with limited experience. Extremely entertaining for me, but I find staying neutral, silent or just walking away is best while at work. Saw this book on some entity's reading list - finally someone offering a practical solution on how to deal with these situations.

At one point I was all for this book until encountering some opinions I disagree with in the later chapters but overall worth a bit of my time and it was quick to get through. Still debating whether or not to throw this at my guy's face for him to read.

Fav Quote that got me screaming YESSSSSS: "Resist the tendency to minimize differences. We tend to minimize our differences and overstate our similarities leading us to practice the golden rule rather than the platinum rule."

[Seth · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is written in clear-concise language that helps to facilitate an obvious understanding of how best to confront polarizing topics within the workplace, or possibly social contexts as well. This book does this job well enough, but seems to be geared slightly more toward accommodating the ignorance of those within the majority groups than to have them conduct their own research. The ways that it describes surrounding one's self with those from other cultures can read a little like "tokenization" at times, which is uncomfortable for a book that is discussing the ramifications of issues such as this. I'm all for educating others on cultures, but my own personal experience has been much more rewarding in this regard to this when I have taken some initiative myself so as to minimize the burden placed on those frequently put into the "educator" role that can become exhausting.

Overall, a good starting place for learning about how to conduct these conversations in terms of structure and where issues may arise, but lacks the nuance that seems much more culturally relevant in the time since this book was written.

[Jason Watkins · Rating 2 out of 5]

trite…thesis is weak, and unsupported

There are few revelations in this book. Really a recipe for disaster for leaders to engage in charged dialogue without a clear understanding of purpose—which is not directly addressed herein.

As for the actual steps themselves, meh. Understanding one’s identity and cultural awareness discussion is useful. Her actual steps, seemed intuitive. Without a reason as to why, or an objective…the whole idea rings hollow. What about actual actions, and inclusive practices or leader behaviors etc?

Also, this dialogue example between jack and rodney was strange. There was no purpose to it, it was overtly one-sided and unrealistic. Last couple chapters on stereotype examples were wasted filler. Complete cut-n-paste job from other sources…and woefully incomplete and inconsistent.

What I liked…maybe if one hadn’t read a single thing on facilitating tough conversations, or watched the news, or surfed social media in the last decade then this book would be useful.

[Caleb Nelson-Lange · Rating 3 out of 5]

Overall, I think this book made a lot of good points when it comes to discussing topics in a workplace that is inexperienced with diversity and inclusion. t felt like some parts were put in to... soften the blow for heterosexual, cis-gendered white men that may be reading the book. (Like the section on things to avoid saying to different marginalized groups could have done without the blurb on things to not say to white people so they don't get offended during the conversations.) I also think that placing the burden of educating the dominant groups on the marginalized groups has also been problematic. The marginalized groups often have to have these conversations so many times, and the burnout with having to educate over and over again is exhausting. Overall, a good tool for anyone naive to having these conversations but for anyone that isn't, parts of the book seem troublesome in the books approach to pleasing everyone that reads it.

[Scott Vandrick · Rating 5 out of 5]

An important read. Smart, insightful and practical, Winters provides a well-articulated case for having bold, inclusive conversations at work as well as clear, step-by-step guidance on how complex dialogue can happen in a positive way for beneficial outcomes. This is BIG work. One of things I admired about Winters writing was her description of what could be perceived as impossible work, my “talking to her on the page” as I read, saying something like “…this is not realistic… how could I possibly do this and produce my event and do my grant proposals, and…” and I’d turn the page and Winters intuitively responds, writing (I’m paraphrasing): “I know what you’re thinking. Your time and workload don’t afford time to commit to this work…” Although I’m not sure how this guide fits into my personal journey or my organization’s, it is definitely a must read for its thoughtful, 360-degree view.

[Erin Irelan · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was the first book chosen for a small group of us at work. While I feel there are some good nuggets and reminders, particularly in communication styles, most of the nook felt fake to me. None of the scenarios written felt natural. Truthfully, if executives approached me to get to know me better as described in chapter 4 HUGE red flags would be raised.

Additionally, it felt like the author put a lot of the ownership on the marginalized groups and insinuating that they should be open to all questions and ready to teach and offer resources to the majority group.

Furthermore, most of the book is written in a way that excuses the ignorance of the majority group and discusses ways to protect their (majority group) feelings.

[Samantha · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was looking for a new audiobook to listen to, and this became available from my local library. As an audiobook, the reading was rather dull but the content was helpful and thoughtful. It helped me reflect and understand why some of my attempts to have conversations with people about these topics in the past didn’t go the way I expected (essentially, I was naive). I learned that there’s a progression to being able to have “bold, inclusive conversations.” I also learned some language to use that will hopefully be more helpful and empathetic and less triggering. I didn’t specifically read this book for work, but I think it could be a good starting point for someone who wants to move past polarization in their relationships at work and maybe even other contexts in their life.