CONVERSATIONS EPISODE 2: PART 3 (Conclusion)

With Irving Torres, Assistant Director of Member Engagement at Vibrant Pittsburgh

In this episode, I virtually sat down with Irving Torres, the Assistant Director of Member Engagement at Vibrant Pittsburgh. Posing to him questions about community development and engagement, Irving shared his candid perspective and experiences on them, drawing from his many years of experience within the DEI space. From the importance of investing in DEI to the importance of inclusion and education within the space and how hierarchy plays a role when it comes to funding minority-led organizations or funding solutions that pertain to challenges that particularly affect minority groups, this insightful, nuanced, and riveting conversation provided powerful insights that are beneficial for both the nonprofit and philanthropic space at large. You can find more details about his work in the bio at the end of this part of the conversation. Per usual and much like the aim of this series, we hope this meaningful conversation adds to the existing catalog of what it means to do community work that truly makes a difference. We also hope that it’ll drive change within donor communities and enable them to understand the importance of funding and extending resources to those who often don’t get access to the needed resources to fulfill the mission and vision of their work.

To learn more about Vibrant Pittsburgh, visit them here: https://vibrantpittsburgh.org/.

Thanks for staying tuned.

Ophelia Akanjo (OA): Do you find that there are hierarchies within the nonprofit space? Do you find that there are hierarchies within your space? And if so, in what ways? And another layer of the question is, do you think you participate in this hierarchy?

Irving Torres (IT): Great question because I talk about this a lot. I understand the hierarchy and the need for it.  My values don't necessarily align with hierarchical behavior If you will. There's been pros and cons depending on the organization that I've been in. But for me, the reason why I've had those values is because I feel like it's understood that if you have a specific title, and you're a supervisor, it's understood that you are in charge of that set of individuals. But oftentimes from my experience of of being managed and and variety of capacities especially in the beginning of my career, I've seen how folks intentionally or not may have relied on that hierarchy so much that it definitely created  more of a distance that I think that person or persons had wanted between the employee and their supervisor. And so for me, I've always led the teams that I was a part of by saying, like yes, I think you know already that I'm your supervisor but for me we're on an equal playing field. So I think this is leading towards the psychological safety aspect where you can come to me if you have an issue with what I'm saying. If you think that I made a mistake, or if you have something that you wanna address or speak up about, or if you just wanna share something in your personal life with me. That is so important for me in terms of creating a team dynamic. Don't get me wrong. I totally understand the place of creating a hierarchical structure in terms of having organization in terms of the processes and what you do. Having a space in terms of getting certain tasks done, and resolving conflict or various issues. I understand that okay, you have a designated person that you have to go to when you have these various challenges or issues. So, although I understand its place, I think for me, I've seen a lot of success in adopting more of a model of having people understand that we are aligned in this work together and that I can also learn from you and appreciate everything that you're providing me in this particular task. And I'm willing to hear you and what you have going on. And granted also, I know the hierarchy also sets up boundaries. There's many different elements to having hierarchy within an organization and why that's needed and important. I think all I'm saying is, find the balance, have the structure that is needed, but also understand when you're working within a team and and put yourself and in the shoes of when you were also an employee and how important it was to feel appreciated. How important it was to feel heard, and not feel as though you were beneath someone or less than. When you take it to the next step, the next level, that's where I can see the deconstructions of things, and so yes, find a balance in it, and that’s my perspective. Other people may not agree with me, which I totally respect and understand and honor. But from my experience with leading teams, I felt like that has worked best for me– finding the balance.

OA: Oh, there's nothing like a leader who does not feel like they have anything to learn. My goodness. Or a leader who is a micromanager. For me, if you're going to be a micromanager about things, then you might as well do the work by yourself, because you don't know everything. But yes, I do totally agree that it's really the human connection. I think once you establish a human connection with people, no matter what your titles, It really does create that safety that people can sort of be themselves around you, and can thrive at work. So for sure thank you for that. But I was also curious about the hierarchies among various organizations. Can you remember, with the various organizations that you've worked in/with, how it felt like when you all competed for resources against peer organizations? Do you feel like those kinds of hierarchical structures exist among various organizations? In other words, do you feel like, because of a status that an organization may have in terms of whether or not they have generated a lot of buzz because of who's associated with the organization, etc?. If so, do you think that creates a hierarchy when it comes to them going up against other organizations that may not be particularly known, but are also doing good work?

IT: That's a really great question. I'm trying to think of anything that has come up throughout my experience, because branding and brand recognition and visibility is huge and I know more and more folks are trying to get that visibility so that people can be seen more. And it's hard, it really is challenging when you, as a leader, may not be getting as many opportunities to showcase your visibility and depending on your funding and the resources, you may not be able to join an external group. And so I know that's why PR and marketing is so important. It's just getting that visibility. And then also, who's a part of your circle? Who can also do that as well for you? Your board? Your other entities that are involved? Who can do the outreach and increase your visibility? I do think that this is something I haven't thought about but I do see how that can be such a challenge for organizations that may not have as much of that visibility, but are doing important work. Like I would say, even my last job with the National Health Corps. We were doing great work addressing so many different kinds of disparities. We would focus on chronic disease. We were focused on age and the barriers to that health and well being that older adults were facing. We were focused on COVID-19 and the disparities there. We were focused on maternal health. There's so many different parameters we were focused on and our members were doing great solid work, helping to mitigate the gaps in the healthcare system and in the public health sector. And there were so many folks who did not know about us; so many folks who could have leveraged us and the opportunities that we offer to organizations because essentially our Americorp members are full time employees. And they're helping in a capacity building sense with being able to do more work for that company. And so yes, we had social media. Yes, we had all these other things, but we weren't getting that much traction, and so I could see if we did have a bigger name that was attached to us, how that would aid in our visibility. But yes, there were so many organizations who did not know who we were, and what we provided, and when they would hear about us, they were like, Oh, my gosh! I wish we would have done this sooner, because there were so many nonprofits that were at capacity and needed an Americorps member, you know, who had that specific skill set to come in and provide services for their patients and clients. And so, yeah, I think that is a great point.

OA: Yeah, thank you for that. And I think that it also speaks to the conversation around resources. For example, with what I'm doing with Accra Literacy, I'm looking for various resources that are available to startups like mine. However, it feels like you have to really dig deep to find these resources. It almost feels like they're hidden, but they're not. Maybe they just don't have the budget to advertise as much as other organizations may. And so that's definitely a good discussion for folks to have. My next question is, what are some of the complexities that you encounter within the space that you're in doing the work that you do?

IT: I would say the complexities that I have is meeting people where they're at at times, and it's not because I'm not patient. I would say that sometimes it can be a struggle, because you know where the root source of some of these issues or challenges are but you have to take a step back, and this is good homework for me, you know taking this step back and looking at the individual and their particular experiences, or an organization that I've worked with in the past. Not just like what I'm doing, but my previous jobs, too and assessing why they may think a certain way. Because I feel like a lot of the people that I interact with in my current job, they're aware that these changes need to be addressed but sometimes it is the process of getting those things done which can be difficult. I think there's also a challenge where people have certain expectations of us, where they think, if they join our membership, that that would be the end and will be all and that their organization will be diverse overnight and that all these changes would occur. Not everyone thinks that way but you know, I may encounter some connotations or feelings towards that where it takes a long time to kind of see the changes that you want to see, especially because our social, political, and historical context has shown that this has been going on for hundreds of years. And so for you to think that this will change immediately overnight, that is not what is going to happen, you know. It's going to take a lot of time to do that organizational shift and change the culture. It does. It takes a lot of persistence, commitment and buy-in from senior leadership to really enact these changes. And so I would say, understanding what it takes to see the shifts the way that they want to see these shifts is the major challenge. Especially in this particular climate because, even though a lot of our organizations are still committed towards DEI, It's hard especially when you're hearing the sentiments consistently in the news and the media surrounding DEI. So I would say to answer the question, more succinctly, it would be illustrating to folks what it takes time to see the organizational shift when it comes to DEI. That will probably be the toughest element.

OA: Thank you for that. And along with that, do you feel like there are any practices within your field, DEI, that are outdated and need to be removed. And similarly, do you feel like there are practices that you have encountered, or have observed, that are helpful that need to be more widespread?

IT: For organizations who want to begin this work and foster the dialogue, I think long are the days of just doing one training. So doing one unconscious and implicit bias training for the year. I've seen that happen before, and to the defense of the organization, a lot of times it is about having enough resources and a strategic plan surrounding DEI. But you know, I think that is a practice that a lot of people are aware of, like, hey, that doesn't do much. I think it's more understood that you have to have trainings or spaces for conversation sprinkled throughout the course of the year. And it has to be easily digestible. You do have to meet people where they're at within the organization. And I think it's been showcased through research that it is most effective. It's like doing it in microdoses. And so having perhaps one to two minute videos or things of that sort, where folks can consume that information steadily throughout the year and then giving priority for leadership to further conversations with their employees surrounding these particular topics. So I would say that is a big big one. I think another shift that I've seen too looking at diversity, equity and inclusion that is very important, and I think I started to mention in the beginning is sometimes, there needs to be a conversation surrounding the fact that we do have to start first with inclusion. To have that be the imperative, and have that drive home diversity and equity. And so I think that's another shift that we're seeing as opposed to having folks do all the outreach that we can in alignment with all these other ethnic based organizations across various industries and see if that works because again, you could bring all the diverse people to your organization. But if they aren't feeling included, they're gonna leave. And so it is very important to educate your people and have them have these conversations as well. So I would say, those are the two biggest things that jump out for me. Another thing is you can't just hire a Chief Diversity Officer or someone equivalent in that position, and not give them the resources to really fully explore and implement these initiatives. I think there are some misconceptions as to the amount of effort it takes to really see the impact. And you have to give those individuals who are placed in that position the resources to fully flesh out the strategic plan or other DEI initiatives or that individual will get burned out extremely quickly. There will be a conflict of feeling, perhaps tokenized when they're approached with various issues, or perhaps celebrating various days of observation and things of that sort. That's I think another practice of people understanding like, hey, we gotta put more resources into this thing which I feel like people have caught a hold of but still needs to be said and have conversations surrounding. 

OA: I totally agree with you. And the reason why I chuckled was because for me and perhaps maybe it's because of my not doing too much digging around it, or just not knowing much about it, but and correct me if I'm wrong because you're in the space, but it feels to me like some of these roles around diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging, they kind of sprung out of nowhere especially considering for me, I hadn't heard about, let's say, Chief Diversity Officer being like a fully fleshed role until just recently, like a couple years ago. I think that before this, the best we had was, go to your HR for them to do this or that. But now you know, these things are like fully blown out roles that are taking charge of the workplace, which is a good thing. But I do agree that in order for them to be effective, you do need to put in the resources and training behind them, in order for them to tackle these issues. And also you can't just hire one minority person and think that they're gonna solve the issues that the organization has been dealing with for years. So I'm right there with you. 

IT: I don't know the complete history surrounding the Chief Diversity Officer role or the equivalent. But I know after the murder of George Floyd that organizations made a huge commitment towards advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion. And that's where you see so many of the diversity departments and Chief Diversity Officers. But a lot of other organizations have had that role or they were deciding after the murder of George Floyd, whether to house diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives under HR or create their own department. So there are what we call people officers, chief people officers, or chief personnel officers as an equivalent kind of role. But with DEI there's more of that focus with the, you know murder of George Floyd. That definitely was one of the inciting incidents of all this creation of these jobs and departments. But then over time, especially more recently after the affirmative action ruling, we've seen the kind of elimination of different departments and or roles and that has also challenged the landscape, if you will. But I would say, It is so important to give these individuals the resources that they need to do the work because it's a lot. It's a lot of work. There's a lot of burden on those folks. Unilaterally, there needs to be buy-in from the top, and there needs to be a challenge of the status quo. I think that is what usually leads towards those changes. 

OA: And for me I hate to prolong this part of the conversation because it’s truly tragic, but oftentimes, when I think about George Floyd, I just think I'm so sorry for George Floyd that America decided to use him, considering all of the history that America has had of oppression, that George Floyd's very visceral murder was the thing that brought people's attention to the fact that many things needed to be addressed. It’s some people having to see physical proof of somebody else being killed for them to say, Oh, my gosh! I now believe that there is oppression in this country. That is wild.

IT: Yeah, that was definitely something that I had thought about as well. So it's great that you're bringing that up in terms of this has been going on for hundreds of years. But because it was explicit and the person who died as a result of that racist behavior, then that was the impetus for people to make those big shifts and to make these big changes. I was thinking, looking at that specific scenario and saying, like, hey, this is still going. And this is why there still needs to be commitment towards this work. But yeah, I agree with you in terms of why did it need to have this visceral display of racism in order to make these changes? 

OA: You didn't have to take a man's life. But wrapping up with my last 2 questions, do you find your work, this work that you're doing fulfilling?

IT: I do find it fulfilling. I think it's hard work. I think that being able to connect  because there's so many people who are like-minded, I think that is probably one of the more fulfilling aspects. It is seeing how many people want to see these changes be made within our society and then connect with them and talk through various ways to go about doing that within their organization, through Vibrant Pittsburgh, or just having conversations back and forth is very fulfilling. I think it does tie into a personal fulfillment as well as a professional fulfillment with wanting to continue to advance equality and equity within the Pittsburgh region. So I feel as though personally speaking, and going through my own trials and tribulations within a variety of workplaces, this definitely fulfills me in that regard of addressing some of the things that I wish had been addressed when I was working in various institutions. But also knowing that we're working towards a better future and there are a lot of other people who are invested as much as I am in this work has been great for me.

OA: That's awesome! And my last question which you kind of answered when you talked about the quiz that you took, but I was wondering if you had any more to say around it. What would you say are some of your strengths and qualities that have helped you in being successful within the space of DEI?

IT: Great question. The strengths that I possess are definitely the empathy portion and the compassion portion. I think those are the qualities that help with the trauma informed care principles that I've been speaking about. It's because when we're connecting with people on a human level, and understanding the trials and tribulations that everyone has gone through, being patient and taking a step back and listening actively, listening and treating that person as an individual who's going through life which can be hard, but also very happy and enjoyable, all these complex emotions, I think that provides such a great scaffolding for connecting, and having relationships. Because this work that we're doing is solely about relationships and meeting people within their journey. And so the empathy, compassion, active listening, and the ability to harmonize, to want others to feel validated, and heard is what I think leads towards the connections that I'm able to build with people. I'm very vulnerable when having conversations with people, and I think sometimes that rubs off on people and allows them to be vulnerable with me. Or if I'm showcasing empathy or actively listening, they may feel more able to be vulnerable and share. Vulnerability exists on a spectrum, and so it just depends on what you would like to be vulnerable with. Oftentimes I'm having conversations with people and we're healing with one another. Sometimes it's not even about the work that we're doing. We'll get to the work eventually. But it's connecting as individuals and building that relationship, that rapport which is what this whole work is about. 

OA: I couldn't agree more. And I think probably not just this space or this industry. I think it cuts across industries. Across the human condition, people really do want to be seen, heard, and to know that somebody understands what they're going through. And I think that we really do underestimate the power of community, especially in this day and age, where technology seems like it's our best friend and we can isolate. And we're in on the individualization rhetoric. So oh, my gosh! I couldn't agree more. I could talk to you for hours. Thank you for doing this with me, Irving. 

Thank you for reading the concluding part of episode 2. We truly appreciate you!

Please engage with us by sharing your perspective here in the comments section and on all our social media accounts @accralit.

About Irving Torres:

Irving Torres is responsible for overseeing Vibrant Pittsburgh’s member retention strategy, data and processes related to member recruitment and retention, and managing the logistics of all member engagement events. 

For the past 7 years, Irving has been involved with spearheading a myriad of community-based programming initiatives throughout Southwestern Pennsylvania. These initiatives include coordinating gender-based violence prevention programming through the University of Pittsburgh and directing Pittsburgh’s National Health Corps, an AmeriCorps program, dedicated towards mitigating health disparities in underserved communities via the promotion of health access and health education.

A New York City native by way of Queens and Harlem, Irving considers Pittsburgh his second home. Irving is interested in creative writing, mental health advocacy, mindfulness, and finding a variety of ways to share a laugh with loved ones.