The Politics of Hiring and the Price of Courage – Cloaking Inequity

There’s a familiar and unsettling pattern that Uppity Minorities and equity-driven leaders know all too well. When you take a courageous stand for justice—when you lead with clarity, integrity, and an unwavering commitment to equity—they come for you. Even if you followed the very same processes your predecessors used without scrutiny. But what we don’t talk about nearly enough is what comes next: they come not just for the leader, but for the legacy you dared to build.

This scrutiny is rarely coincidental. It often reflects a strategic response to meaningful change. When you begin to build a team grounded in values, vision, and excellence, it becomes evident that transformation is not only possible, it is already underway. The individuals you bring into an organization, especially those from historically marginalized communities and/or are equity-focused, often become focal points. Not because they lack preparation or qualifications, but because their presence represents a shift. They challenge longstanding norms, question outdated hierarchies, and introduce new energy into spaces accustomed to decline. They elevate expectations. They bring clarity where there was once ambiguity. And they contribute in ways that call others to rise. Their impact is undeniable. And for some, the disruption towards success is difficult to embrace.

Hiring Is Always Political

One of the greatest myths in higher education, nonprofits, philanthropy, and business is that hiring is a neutral activity. It is not. Hiring is deeply political. It is a statement about values, priorities, and power. It is not simply about filling a vacancy. It is about shaping the future. And when leaders choose to do that with intention and equity, it is perceived as a threat by those who have benefited from a culture of familiarity and favoritism.

In many organizations, there is an expectation that roles are earned by longevity, visibility, or relationships, not by capability or alignment with the mission. When a new colleague arrives and insists on transparency, accountability, and demonstrated excellence, it disrupts unspoken assumptions. Hiring decisions suddenly become a referendum on who deserves to be in a role, who deserves to be visible, and who deserves to be empowered. That disruption makes many people uncomfortable.

There is a fundamental difference between A-talent and B-talent leadership. A-talent hires A-talent. These leaders are secure enough to surround themselves with people who are strong, principled, and often smarter in key areas. They believe in collaboration and shared success. They welcome challenge because it sharpens the mission. B-talent, by contrast, hires C-talent. These leaders prefer loyalty to competence. They hire to protect their ego, not to build capacity. They avoid excellence if it comes with critique. And when B-talent sees A-talent being hired by someone else, especially someone leading with courage and justice, they react with resentment and retaliation.

Centering the Community from the Start

One of the most powerful ways to protect the integrity of a hire is to build legitimacy through community participation. Too often, organizations pretend to engage stakeholders only after key decisions have already been made. Community forums become window dressing. Students, staff, faculty, and external partners are invited to listen rather than shape. This approach breeds cynicism and weakens the organization’s ability to support bold hires when resistance arises.

Genuine community engagement must begin early. It must be embedded in the formation of the job description, the composition of the search committee, the design of the interview process, and the evaluation of candidates. Those who will live with the consequences of the hire must be given a meaningful voice in the decision. This is not gatekeeping. It is participatory leadership. It affirms that leadership does not reside solely in executive offices, but is distributed across the organization. It ensures that when critics emerge, there is already a base of support that can stand behind the process and the outcome.

When you build that community-based foundation, you are not just protecting hires. You are modeling the kind of organization you want to work in. You are telling the truth about who belongs and why. And you are cultivating a culture that resists top-down control and instead embraces collective wisdom.

Build Your Shield: Process as Protection

If you are going to hire with courage, you must also hire with discipline. The process must be transparent, inclusive, and meticulously documented. Every step matters. Publicly post the position. Avoid informal hires or closed searches as much as possible. Make criteria clear and tie them to the mission. Construct rubrics before applications are reviewed and apply them consistently. If you are a leader, select a diverse and empowered search committee that includes people you trust with real insight and authority, not just those who are convenient or compliant.

Every interview should be followed by debriefs. Every decision should be documented. Every stage should be archived. Save emails. Take notes. Maintain a record that can stand up to legal scrutiny and internal review. Do this not out of paranoia, but out of preparation. Because the moment an organization makes a hire that reflects transformation rather than tradition, you will be questioned.

During my time in academic leadership, I asked constant questions about process and precedent. I wanted to ensure that every step we took could be defended, not just because I expected resistance, but because I understood the stakes. When you are building something new, you cannot rely on informal practices. You must rely on integrity, evidence, and policy. That is what builds trust with community and protects the future you are trying to create.

General Counsel Is Not Neutral

Let’s talk about General Counsel. Too often, they are not neutral. They are strategic actors. They advise presidents, boards, and executive teams, but they also shape the organizational playbook for containment and retaliation. I have seen it. A bold leader makes a hire with a community-engage process. The hire starts making change. And General Counsel intervenes, not to guide, but to gum up the works. They initiate investigations. They retain outside firms. They plant doubt under the banner of “risk.” But let’s be clear. The real risk is not the hire. It is that someone challenged the system. The real liability is truth-telling in a space that was built on silence. Until we demand that General Counsel offices centers justice, not just risk avoidance, these patterns will continue. Legal strategy must not be a shield for mediocrity or discrimination. It must be a tool for protecting integrity.

Consider Hiring the Courageous—Even When They Carry Battle Scars

Some of the most powerful and principled leaders you will ever meet are the ones who have already been targeted. They are the so-called damaged goods, the ones with Google search results that raise eyebrows, the ones whose résumés include “controversial” departures. But if you look closer, you will often find something more than a red flag, you’ll find courage. These individuals spoke the truth. They protected students. They advocated for equity. They pushed for transparency. And they paid the price for it.

These are not flawed professionals. They are tested professionals. They have already demonstrated their willingness to stand firm in the face of pressure. They have already shown they will not back down when the stakes are high. What they need is not fixing. What they need is freedom. If you hire them, support them, and let them lead, they will bring strength, clarity, and impact to your team.

When I was Dean at the University of Kentucky, we hired Dr. Cheryl Matias, one of the most unapologetic and visionary scholars in the field of education. She had been targeted before. Her bold writing on whiteness, her outspoken critiques of institutional racism, and her deep love for the students she served made her a lightning rod in spaces that were more comfortable with performative diversity than actual transformation. But I knew we needed her voice. We needed her brilliance. We needed her fearlessness. The students deserved someone who would speak hard truths with heart. So we brought her in—not as a risk, but as an asset.

And she delivered. Dr. Matias challenged us all to dig deeper. She brought national recognition to our College. She taught students to connect critical theory to their lived experience and to think about education not just as content delivery, but as liberation work. She held space for those who had long felt unseen. She inspired those who thought academia required them to shrink. She became, for many, the embodiment of what justice-rooted education could look like.

That’s what happens when you hire the brave. They do not just do the job. They elevate it. They shift culture. And yes, they sometimes leave, not because they failed, but because their excellence takes them to the next level. They move on to national posts, foundations, presidencies and other amazing opportunities. Their departure is not a loss if you recognize it as part of a legacy of lifting excellence. If we want to build organizations that matters, one that can actually serve the future, you must be ready and willing to hire the courageous and talented. Vincent. Rodriguez. Dixson. Glass. Adamson. Even when they carry battle scars. Especially when they do.

Prepare for the Blowback

If hires reflect an equity-driven vision, if they are bold, principled, and excellent, you must be prepared for the backlash. Organizations often attempt to discipline leaders indirectly. Rather than coming for you directly first, they’ll come for the team. They challenge hires not because of performance, but because of what they represent. Their excellence becomes “suspicious”. Their confidence becomes “arrogance”. Their clarity becomes “aggression”.

I have had people send threats at me through proxies. I have seen what happens when someone does not get the job they wanted, or the job they convinced themselves they were owed. They play dirty. They do not always come directly. They whisper. They undermine. They call in favors. They weaponize gossip. They use the language of fairness, but their actions are about power and resentment. This is the kind of manufactured chaos that Uppity Minorities and equity-driven leaders are expected to endure quietly. But silence protects no one. We need to be honest about how personal and vicious the backlash can get. We need to say out loud what others try to keep off the record and hidden in the shadows.

That is why process must be airtight. Values must be visible. And support must be tangible. Never leave a team to stand alone. Build systems that protect them. Show up when the pressure comes. Defend them with your words, documentation, and supportive presence. Even if some may later choose not to stand by you when the heat is turned up, you will know that you stood by them when it mattered.

Track the Patterns, Tell the Truth

We must build a record of what is happening. These attacks are not isolated incidents. They are patterned, coordinated, and consistently directed at the very people most committed to innovation and transformation. Often, the same roles see the same outcomes. Much like in dating relationships, organizations tend to part ways with people for the same reasons they did the last time, it is a cycle rooted in unresolved issues, not individual shortcomings. We need a public ledger that tracks who gets pushed out, who does the pushing, which law firms are engaged, and what justifications are repeatedly used. We must also document which General Counsel offices are routinely involved in these tactics and which board members choose to enable them—or have the courage to resist.

This work is not about revenge. It is about accountability. Future employees deserve to know what kind of organization they are stepping into. Bold professionals deserve to know who will stand beside them. And communities deserve to know whether the organization that claim to care about them are actually prepared to protect those who fight for justice.

Risk, Innovation, and the Future

The places that make the so-called safe hires are often the places that are in decline. They cling to familiarity, prioritize politics over performance, and avoid disruption even when disruption is exactly what is needed. These organizations stall because they invest more in preserving the past than building the future. They reward caution over vision. They protect reputations rather than elevating ideas. And in doing so, they slowly fade into irrelevance.

In contrast, the organizations that are growing, innovating, and ascending are the ones willing to take strategic risks. They hire for talent, not comfort. They invite people in who will challenge them, sharpen them, and push them forward. They understand that the world is changing and that their team must reflect not only excellence, but imagination and creativity. These organizations are not afraid of hard conversations. They are afraid of becoming obsolete.

Courageous, community-driven hiring is the fuel of meaningful progress. It is how you build organizations that do not just survive, but lead. It is how you ensure that mission is more than words on a website. It is how you honor the future you claim to believe in.

Conclusion: The Legacy You Leave

The people you hire are the clearest reflection of an organization. Do not hire to play it safe. Hire to move the mission. Do not avoid conflict. Embrace the work that transformation requires. And when you find someone who can help you build something better, stand beside them when the attacks come. Use your process. Use community voice.

They do not storm the gates for the ordinary. They come for the bold. Those who shine too brightly, speak too clearly, lead too unapologetically. And when they do, how you rise to meet that moment will shape not only leadership, but the story they tell when you are gone. Because B-talent trembles in the presence of brilliance. And A-talent does what the timid will not, it hires light and lets it lead.

Please share and read the past articles from the Uppity Minority series by Julian Vasquez Heilig: