It is SO comfortable to categorize things.
Shopping for groceries, am I looking for fresh, canned, or frozen vegetables? Good news, they are in 3 distinct areas.
Checking email, is it from my boss, colleague, or client? Nice way to quickly guess on the urgency.
And it is also too easy to over simplify categories in the name of comfort. Vehicle licensing could be for cars, large pick-ups, semi trucks, boats, bicycles, motorcycles, etc. Just saying that you need to license your vehicle doesn't paint a very clear image.
For those of us who regularly deal with 'things' that can't be put on shelves, parked in garages, or anchored in marinas, it gets really goopy, quite quickly.
Is your boss...
effective
a parent
a partner
a jerk to you
nice to you, but a jerk to Kevin
even tempered
well-dressed
down-to-earth
earthy
aloof
... and so on.
It is very easy to imagine your boss being all kinds of things. It is rare that at any given point, they are acting as, or being evaluated by, simply one 'thing.' It's complex, but common.
"We need to conclude discussion, make a final decision, then get moving on it."
This could be heard as definitive, effective, bossy, overreaching, or abrasive based on WHO said it with very little to do with the words used.
This complexity is significant in the space of team development and training. There's a frozen wind that has blown across the DEI landscape. This is based on assumptions and misunderstandings (or wonton disregard for actual information).
After spending a decent amount of time presenting on the topic of intercultural competence, I asked for questions. There was some discussion and one participant asked, "So is this just basically empathy?" At some level. yes. Being able to appreciate someone for who they are without comparing them to one's self or judging them is a form of empathy.
Many of the tenets of diversity, equity, and inclusion have very little to do with exclusion. An example of exclusion is when someone says "Diversity is everything." Yes, but...
Imagine people sharing their disposition on 50 different categories. Among the 50, some people have 49 in common while others have 5 in common. Are those with 49 factors in common diverse? Yes, but not to the same degree or in the same capacity as those with 5 in common. Just because two 49's are 'diverse' and get along, doesn't mean a 49 is going to get on well with a 5 because they're 'diverse.' It's much more complex.
As organizations are planning their professional development for the coming months or years, they might be nervous to label any of it as DEI training. Without focusing on the diversity, equity, or inclusion, here is a small sample of characteristics demonstrated by effective leaders that can be trained and developed by people at every level of the organization:
empathy
curiosity
openness
appreciation
humility
Training effective leaders and productive colleagues has everything to do with interacting with all types of people in all types of roles from all types of backgrounds. Turning DEI into an imaginary Boogey Man changes nothing about what is required of an effective leader in terms of professional skills, human interaction, and team engagement.
If your company decides DEI is just too much of a hot button, they can train on any of the topics above and their closely-related topical cousins. If the company decides they can't train on those topics either, then it might be that they hold little to no value in the development of their humans in the name of reducing turnover, increasing productivity, and fostering an environment with higher creativity.
They can make a homogeneous work culture... and over time, it will dwindle in nearly every productivity metric available.
Comments