This article is a good example of why the business world will help lead the charge for what the author calls wokeism. Business psychology would rather look at k

This article is a good example of why the business world will help lead the charge for what the author calls wokeism. Business psychology would rather look at knock-on effects on growth and leverage, even in the big picture, than position itself as an arbiter in a polarized and highly subjective values dichotomy. For one, this is the same as playing to business strengths. But also, it's avoiding weak areas. The "look at both sides and be calm" perspective is one of the only major tools businesses are comfortable deploying in _any_ deep relationship-equity issue. If businesses get into complex and polarizing relating issues and look as if they are coming out on a given side, they risk immediately having their own values questioned, which immediately calls their longer term stability into question. We know that people and cultures change and adapt over time--so what about this business? In terms of equivalent dichotomy and polarity, business mentality is much closer to the right/wrong world of measured data and businesses need to find ways to stay in that circle in order to grow in a sustainable way. You can say that businesses are able to metabolize data easily, and individuals rely on businesses to lend out this leverage. IMO this is also why generalized ethics systems and ethics training are good for business, even though people who prefer more authentic depth will blast such things for being too shallow. These systems work from the objective side, rather than forcing an entire organization into a fractally-deep conversation that distracts from core business gifts. So yes, they are shallow, but the point is to provide a compatibility layer for the business operations so to speak, not to reformat every layer from the bottom up.