Inclusion - the conundrum of workplace diversity

It is fascinating that people in organisations are speaking ever so passionately about workplace diversity yet the vocabulary they are using reveals an act of real soft-pedaling on the issue, if not contradiction of efforts by the very people and practitioners.

If you have been reading the material on workplace diversity you may have come across some startling vocabulary being used. Words like INCLUSION are commonplace. This word, in the context of workplace diversity is, in my view, inappropriate. Some of the people who are diversity practitioners are using terms like I&D in reference to Diversity and Inclusion.

In one of the commissions I was participating in at a Diversity Conference in September there were colleagues who kept using the word “inclusion”. I posed a question: Isn't the concept of "inclusion" an indication of our poor grasp of what workplace diversity is about? Are we supposed to be “including” those whom have until now been excluded or are we supposed to consciously and boldly push down the walls of stereotyping, discrimination and exclusion, to create a new workplace? This left me and a certain lady debating head on. Let me qualify the question.

I was brainwashed inside a Human Resources Management class. It was impressed on us that to include is to “assimilate” marginalized persons; it is the opposite of “valuing” diversity. The rationale behind the existence of workplace diversity is that we are coming from a deeply prejudicial and discriminatory society at many levels. We are talking about workplace diversity today because we want to move away from this ugly past.

It is therefore no surprise that the text book and the case studies in the exam paper were used to drum into our minds an understanding that the moment we say we are valuing Diversity, we go for a clean slate. We tap into our spiritual faculties and become change agents (not passive employees) who open up to a new way of living, of thinking and of doing work. We open, not just the doors of work, but ourselves too, for all people of diverse profiles to work with us; to influence us and to contribute to the success of the organisation. Importantly, we do so to ensure that the socio-economic status of those against whom we used our prejudices, and of their families, improves in order to create thriving societies.

In that spirit, therefore, we do not stamp the authority of our “normal selves” as template against which the “other” persons must conform to and be “included” into. Doing so is tantamount to assimilating the marginalized persons into the mainstream group. It is the opposite of valuing Diversity. When we place the element of valuing and embracing diversity, we throw away the templates of our “normal selves;” we open ourselves to a new world where we experience life at work alongside all persons who make up our diverse society; the people who have something important to contribute. ‘I am not different from you; I am different like you,’ says Stanley Bongwe (founder of Diversity Institute.)

I was rattled by the conferrers who speak about workplace diversity as if organisations are including marginalized persons. To me it meant that those “inclusive” organisations are actually doing the marginalized persons a favour. We should not “include” marginalized persons into our sick, disparaging, intolerant, stereotypical, narrow ways we call workplaces. We should open ourselves to new workplaces.

What everybody is agreeing on - also backed by the research on the subject - is that embracing diversity contributes to better market insights, improved productivity, better innovation, improved decision-making and problem-solving. Therefore, we should “go after” the talent of diverse persons. We should not merely “include” them because Employment Equity legislation commands us to do so but because it makes moral and business sense to do so; because it helps us to grow as spiritual (not to be confused with religious) beings.

www.moroloconsultants.co.za

Different from Me v/s Different like You - a case for Workplace diversity

I had a sobering discussion with an HR Executive recently.

Workplace diversity was the issue on the table. ‘Senior managers need to be made aware that their approach to work, their hiring and management decisions and preferences are fraught with prejudices and bias,’ she said.

‘Transformation and Employment Equity legislation are impossible to implement without "conscious" executives and managers who value diversity of workers in the organisation.’ She added. It is even harder if you consider that executives and managers are where they are in their careers directly, and in-directly, because of the prejudicial and biased workplace practices.

The workplace practices mirror the socio-economic arrangement bordering on various ills such as racism, patriarchy, looking down upon, or feeling sorry for, people with disability. There are other issues which perpetuate discrimination and prejudices. The HR Executive concluded by saying that ‘It is crucial to work with the senior level of the workforce. They can inspire change if they are willing to re-learn.’

There is a misunderstanding about what workplace diversity entails. In his seminal book (100 Lessons in Diversity), Stanley Bongwe argues that ‘even though we had been taught throughout our upbringing that we should treat others as they would like to be treated, we must also learn, especially in a diverse environment, to treat others as they would like to be treated and not necessarily the way we would like to be treated or to treat them, for what works for us may not work for others.’

Below are some of the workplace diversity elements which top management need to be helped to deal with, and take the conscious lead on them around the workplace:

1. Race

Top management positions are predominantly white, and male. Management decisions on who to hire, promote, and how to evaluate performance, who to include in the succession planning, etc. must consciously open up the opportunities for the equally skilled and qualified individuals from other race groups to thrive;

2. Gender

There are few female managers and executives in South African workforce; even those who make it to the top are induced to perpetrate the prejudice... it is called "competence" and it is wrong. Deciding to hire people on the basis of their gender is discriminatory;

3. Age

The young and old workforce have different approaches to work. Conscious dialogue and deliberate collaboration is crucial;

4. Sexual orientation

Not all people in the workplace have similar sexual orientation. They deserve respect, they have the capability to work and we must suspend our judgement of them;

5. Religion

All the religions deserve recognition and respect; no prejudicial decisions based on religion must be welcomed;

6. Political views

The political views of workers should not influence management decisions and practices. The attitude towards people based on this borders on prejudice and discrimination.

7. Ethnicity

Decisions and practices based on whether a worker is Afrikaner, Zulu, English, or Venda-speaking means that those decisions and practices are prejudicial and biased;

8. Culture

How a people’s culture finds expression in the workplace is not something for anybody to dictate. Everyone can and should do things the way their social ways require, of course within the ambits of mutual respect, decency, timing and reasonable workplace standards.

9. Marital status

Whether a person is married or single or divorced has no bearing on hiring and people management decisions;

10. Family responsibility

It should not bother anyone that somebody has demanding or no family responsibility. All persons have a right to attend to family responsibility within reasonable parameters and clear policy guidelines.

11. Social status

That certain persons are of this social status, that they can or cannot afford to have this or that; that their hobbies are this and they have social relations with other certain important persons (or not) should not dictate the workplace attitude and decisions about them.

12. Nationality

Denying people of other nationalities employment, or standard privileges and basic rights accorded to the country’s citizens, is discriminatory. Xenophobia finds expression here.

13. People with Disability

Denying people with disability employment and training opportunities, ignoring to make the workplace environment conducive for them to work and socialise effectively, thinking that those persons need our mercy and help (they will not cope with work)... all these things are unacceptable.

14. Health status

When we make decisions which affect other workers based on their health status, and on whether we think their health or body weight (also confused with the physical looks) bars them from working effectively, we are discriminating. We must distinguish between poor health and incapacity.

15. Conscience

Whether people think that they want to save the planet, to hug the trees to prevent others from destroying forests or whether they want to emancipate women or men, it is not the basis to decide how to treat them. We must respect what they think is important and be open to learning from them and help them to learn from us – without coercion or force.

16. Language

The ability or inability, or refusal, to speak a certain language is not the basis to decide on the treatment of the worker in the workplace.

17. Distance to work

How we make the decisions about what time people must start and stop to work, and on whether they must be involved or excluded from work activities and events of fun and team building, should be mindful of distance to work. The implication of this is when certain persons have to participate in the extended work hours, evening company functions, family responsibility which, often, is unexpected, and so on.

Workplace diversity is about valuing and harnessing the differences amongst people - building on those differences. It is not about ‘You are different from me,’ but ‘You are different like me.’

The downside of valuing workplace diversity is that it can be isolated from ordinary social practices... as if the workplace practices do not mirror the broader societal practices. Secondly, those who deal with diversity may “include” or “assimilate” the outsiders into the dominant group. Doing so perpetuates the stereotypes, sanitises the prejudices and sustains the social inequity. We must have the courage to open ourselves to new lessons and experiences about other people. We must find out from those who are “different like us” how they want to be treated, and we must be willing to express our preferences to them openly.

www.moroloconsultants.co.za