I was recently leading a workshop for a group of HR professionals from several different countries. At one point we were discussing their organisation's ambition to increase diversity at leadership levels and what could be done to help achieve that.
We talked about some of the messages being communicated from the corporate centre. More importantly, we discussed how these messages had been interpreted differently by different people in the room. It illustrated in a very practical way the challenges faced when implementing a diversity strategy globally.
Key messages were being written in English by people with English as their first language. There were good intentions – the messages would help everyone understand the direction being taken and guide their actions. On the ground, the impact was rather different - reflecting in part the impact of differing knowledge of English vocabulary and national cultural norms.
Take the word Goal. In the absence of a common definition, the spectrum of interpretations in the group ranged from a mandatory quota to an optional aspiration. The attitudes and potential actions being driven by these alternatives are dramatically different. At one end – an individual leader could pursue a policy of positive discrimination - potentially illegal as well as risking a destructive level of backlash. At the other – a leader might opt to do nothing risking the loss of diverse staff, personal credibility and corporate reputation.
My experience tells me that different organisations also tend to have rather different interpretations of words like Goal or Talent. For anyone leading an agenda across boundaries of language or culture (national or organisational), inclusion requires dialogue and the creation of common language. For me, that is inclusion in action.
Are you certain that everyone knows what you mean and want to achieve? Do you “take the time to define”?
No comments:
Post a Comment