Whose Comfort is Default? Understanding the Need for Inclusion

In recent weeks, debates over who deserves to be part of this country have dominated headlines. Discussions about limiting birthright citizenship and slashing safety nets like Medicaid reveal a dangerous truth: many leaders make decisions based on whose lives, bodies, and futures they deem valuable.

Countless people in the U.S. today live at the intersection of these debates. Policies that strip away healthcare, threaten immigration status, or redefine who is “deserving” do not exist in a vacuum. They ripple into workplaces, shaping who can participate fully and safely in the economy.

The Impact of Exclusionary Policies

These contradictions show up everywhere:

• A country built on immigrant labor now questions the legitimacy of immigrants’ children being citizens.

• Companies praised for their diversity often stay silent about policies that target the very communities they claim to support.

• Workers are expected to juggle caregiving, health crises, or legal vulnerability without systemic support from employers or policymakers.

  
  

This is the blueprint of our systems. When inclusion is treated as an afterthought, it reinforces the very exclusion it claims to address.

Exclusion as a design principle is the disease. Inclusion as an add-on is the symptom.

What If Inclusion Was the Starting Point?

We have to stop tinkering at the edges. We need to stop “accommodating” after the fact. We must stop asking marginalized people to navigate systems built without them. Inclusion isn’t a kindness, or a nice to have, and we also need to recognize that it’s a power shift.

If inclusion were the default, here’s what would happen:

🔸 Policy wouldn’t just prohibit discrimination; it would dismantle the assumptions enabling it. For example, parental leave policies designed with all family structures in mind, not just heteronormative, nuclear families.

🔸 Processes would interrogate power at every step. For instance, hiring committees would evaluate racial, gender, and disability representative support, not just creating, or alternatively assuming “diverse” panels where one person is tokenized.

🔸 Language wouldn’t be sanitized neutrality; it would be intentional solidarity. We would shift from “diversity candidates” to “equity-centered hiring” and from “non-white” to naming specific identities.

🔸 Access would be non-negotiable. Accessibility would be baked into design budgets, timelines, and accountability structures, not waiting for someone to request an automatic door, lactation room, or all-gender bathroom.

Inclusion at the design level changes who systems serve, who systems center, and who systems harm.

Operationalizing Equity: It’s Not Charity. It’s Strategy.

There are many leaders who say, “We’re committed to inclusion.” But when I ask, “Where is inclusion built into your operations?” they often point to trainings, affinity groups, and mentoring programs.

While these are good initiatives, they are not structural within business operations.

If your hiring pipeline still screens for degrees that systematically exclude first-generation students, or if your promotion criteria reward face time over results, or disadvantaging caregivers, then you’re not operationalizing equity. You’re hosting inclusion-themed events inside inequitable infrastructure.

Equity means making visible the invisible defaults. Whose bodies fit your furniture? Whose languages show up in your communications? Whose norms shape your “professionalism” standards?

Every policy, process, and practice was designed by someone, for someone. The question is: who? And are you willing to redesign for more?

Action Is the Only Accountability

This moment demands bold, structural shifts:

🔥 Audit one system in your organization this month. Not just for “diversity numbers,” but for exclusion by design. Ask: who is systemically disadvantaged by how this operates? Who benefits?

🔥 Move resources. Inclusion without redistribution is empty. Allocate budget, authority, and decision-making power to historically excluded groups.

🔥 Build in accountability mechanisms. If no one’s job performance is tied to equity outcomes, sustainable progress won’t happen. Period.

The Path Forward: Embracing Inclusion

The journey toward genuine inclusion is not easy. It requires commitment and a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths. We must embrace the idea that inclusion is not merely an add-on; it is essential for the health and success of our organizations.

Building a Culture of Inclusion

Creating a culture of inclusion involves ongoing education and awareness. It requires us to listen to the voices of those who have been marginalized. We must actively seek their input and involve them in decision-making processes.

The Role of Leadership

Leadership plays a crucial role in fostering an inclusive environment. Leaders must model inclusive behaviors and hold themselves accountable for creating equitable systems. This means making difficult choices and prioritizing inclusion in every aspect of the organization.

Measuring Success

To ensure progress, we need to establish clear metrics for success. This includes tracking diversity in hiring, retention rates, and employee satisfaction. By measuring these factors, we can identify areas for improvement and celebrate our successes.

About the Author

Tenea Watson Nelson, PhD, is an equity strategist and founder of Watson Nelson Consulting. She partners with organizations ready to move beyond surface-level actions toward systems-level redesign, embedding equity into the core of their operations.

Ready to Build Systems That Work for More People?

At Watson Nelson Consulting, we don’t retrofit inclusion. We redesign from the ground up. Partner with us to operationalize equity as a structural imperative.

Contact us to get started