Introduction
The cultural phenomenon known as “Michigan Nice” is often described as a regional expression of politeness characterized by surface-level affirmations, conflict avoidance, and the prioritization of civility over candor. While this behavior may appear benign, it has significant implications when operating within community planning, governance, and policymaking contexts. In particular, it undermines trust between Black communities and predominantly white-led institutions that hold decision-making power and control community resources.
This article explores how “Michigan Nice” reflects a tension between two competing cultural values—conflict avoidance (“If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all”) and candor (“Honesty is the best policy”)—and how the elevation of the former perpetuates inequities in resource allocation and decision-making.
Characteristics of “Michigan Nice” in Decision-Making
The practice of “Michigan Nice” manifests as:
- Affirmation without commitment: Community stakeholders, especially from marginalized groups, may receive verbal validation during public forums or meetings, only to find their input disregarded in final decisions (Miller & Sardelis, 2021).
- Conflict avoidance: Decision-makers often suppress dissenting perspectives to maintain a perception of harmony, which results in unaddressed tensions and suppressed dialogue (Warren, 2020).
- Performative inclusion: Engagement with Black communities can become tokenistic, prioritizing optics of inclusion rather than substantive collaboration or shared power (Fraser et al., 2018).
Tension Between Cultural Values
“Michigan Nice” illustrates a cultural conflict between two competing maxims in West Michigan, particularly in Grand Rapids:
- If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all.
- Promotes civility, but often silences necessary critique.
- Encourages superficial consensus at the expense of authentic dialogue.
- Honesty is the best policy.
- Demands transparency and accountability.
- Serves as the foundation of trust in democratic processes and equitable policymaking.
When conflict avoidance supersedes honesty, the integrity of decision-making is compromised (Tyler & Huo, 2002).
Impacts on Black Communities
For Black communities in Michigan, the costs of “Michigan Nice” are disproportionately high. Specific consequences include:
- Erosion of trust: Repeated experiences of verbal affirmation without material follow-through create skepticism about the authenticity of institutional commitments (Troutt, 2019).
- Policy inequities: Decisions about funding, programming, and access to services often fail to reflect the needs and priorities articulated by Black communities (Bailey et al., 2017).
- Disempowerment: Community participation processes risk devolving into performative exercises, undermining the democratic ideal of shared governance (Arnstein, 1969).
Research on racial equity in governance underscores that trust and collaboration are contingent upon consistency between institutional words and actions. When affirmations are not matched by policy outcomes, systemic inequities are perpetuated (Bailey et al., 2017; Warren, 2020).
Policy Implications and Recommendations
To mitigate the harms of “Michigan Nice” and advance equity, institutions must adopt practices that prioritize honesty, accountability, and transparency:
- Institutionalize Accountability Mechanisms
- Require public reporting on how community input is incorporated into final decisions (Fraser et al., 2018).
- Establish independent equity review boards to monitor alignment between commitments and outcomes.
- Promote Culturally Responsive Engagement
- Leadership must demonstrate anti-racism and cultural humility to reduce reliance on performative affirmation (Sue et al., 2019).
- Move beyond token consultation to genuine power-sharing with Black community stakeholders.
- Normalize Constructive Conflict
- Create structured processes for dissenting perspectives to be voiced and considered (Tyler & Huo, 2002).
- Reframe conflict as a necessary component of equitable decision-making rather than a threat to civility.
Conclusion
While “Michigan Nice” may serve the interests of maintaining surface-level harmony, it undermines the values of honesty, accountability, and equity that are essential to effective governance. For Black communities, the practice reinforces historical patterns of exclusion, erodes trust in institutions, and perpetuates systemic inequities.
To advance racial equity in Michigan, policymakers and institutional leaders must reject the comfort of conflict avoidance and embrace practices of courageous honesty. Politeness without candor is not harmless; it is a structural barrier to justice. Sustainable, equitable policymaking depends not on being “nice,” but on being honest.
References
- Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224.
- Bailey, Z. D., Krieger, N., Agénor, M., Graves, J., Linos, N., & Bassett, M. T. (2017). Structural racism and health inequities in the USA: Evidence and interventions. The Lancet, 389(10077), 1453–1463.
- Fraser, H., Taylor, N., Jackson, A., & O’Toole, L. (2018). Engaging communities in decision-making: Strategies for equitable governance. Policy Press.
- Miller, D., & Sardelis, S. (2021). The problem with politeness: Conflict avoidance in academic and community partnerships. Equity & Excellence in Education, 54(4), 425–440.
- Sue, D. W., Alsaidi, S., Awad, M. N., Glaeser, E., Calle, C. Z., & Mendez, N. (2019). Disarming racial microaggressions: Microintervention strategies for targets, White allies, and bystanders. American Psychologist, 74(1), 128–142.
- Troutt, D. D. (2019). Race, community, and trust in public institutions. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 46(2), 243–270.
- Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. Russell Sage Foundation.
- Warren, M. R. (2020). Community organizing for racial equity: Voices from the field. Oxford University Press.
The Social Work Concierge, LLC 
Leave a comment