Daphne emphasizes the mistakes we make in understanding what works to accomplish change in social systems. Her work on the Oscars So White movement and on other interventions highlights the importance of structural impediments to change. She gives an example of an assumption that women don’t want to compete. She cites a paper showing that there are no intrinsic differences between women and men in wanting to compete! The differences are in the context in which women and men are given opportunities in which competition is relevant. Daphne also explains the Oscars So White movement and the ways in which it led to mixed results on inclusion. She also describes her work on Ontario’s Comply or Explain regulation, and the unexpected outcomes that arose.

Our conversation ended on the question of why the achievement of change in the achievement of structural change to eliminate inequality is so tough. Daphne’s response pointed to the lack of understanding we have of how these inequalities actually arise. We don’t know how to fix them because we don’t really understand why they arise in the first place. Many of the problems that we seek to address are deeply embedded historically and involve subtle behaviors that are not well understood.

Anita came away from the interview full of admiration for Daphne for her commitment to clear thinking and deep engagement with complicated problems for which there is no easy answer. Daphne wants us to move away from blame and toward changing the context. She is, in the end, optimistic, and that makes Anita optimistic too.