Skip to main content

How to Talk to Your Team About Diversity

In the modern 2020 world, terms such as microaggression, implicit bias, and intent vs. impact have becoming increasingly common. But how can we get our teams to see these terms as more than buzz words? This task can be even more daunting outside of business settings where the lines of professionalism are more blurred.

This semester I am serving as the President of Purdue’s chapter of Alpha Phi Omega, a national co-ed service fraternity. As a service fraternity our culture differs greatly from other Greek organizations, in fact, we operate more as a club than a PanHellenic house. Our fraternity is governed by an elected executive board, who I’ll refer to as my team for the purposes of this blog. As president, I work with 10 other active members to curate events, curate educational pledge programs, and oversee our organization’s day to day operations.

This past week we received some unfortunate feedback about our pledge program and what they described as a general air of disrespect and cultural insensitivity that they felt was being portrayed during pledge meetings. This is the exact news you never want to get about an organization you are currently running. However, it is something that you need to immediately address and nip in the bud.

The following are the steps I took to addressing the feedback we received:

1. Address it to the entire board, but don’t attack those involved.

At the first executive meeting following the feedback submission, I took time to address my team on how we behave in front of the chapter. It is often easy to forget that we are in positions of authority directly representative of a larger organization rather than just hanging out with friends. We must remember that part of our responsibility is to act more professionally and to be more conscious of the things we say and the impact they may have. I avoided giving specifics on the feedback we received to prevent those involved from feeling targeted. This allowed us to have a more open discussion on what it means to behave in an environment of diversity.

2. Speak to the individuals the feedback pertained to.

The next step was to speak to the individuals involved in a one-on-one setting to again create a safe space for discussion. I started this meeting by ensuring they understood they were not in trouble, but rather we wanted to help them grow from their mistakes. I then read them the full feedback form that cited specific instances where they felt the executive members had behaved insensitively. Going into this meeting I was afraid they would be defensive and say that what they had said had been taken out of context. I was pleasantly surprised when they admitted fault, explained what had happened, and apologized.

3. Create a plan to address the problem in its direct setting.

Since this feedback was specific to our pledge program, we took time to come up with ideas to create a better sense of identity and belonging within this program. One of the first things we decided needed to happen was that we needed to redefine how we respond when criticized or corrected. Particularly when holding a position of authority, we need to be in the habit of apologizing and moving forward when miscommunications happen. It is easy to get caught up in anxiety and embarrassment when you make a mistake in front of an audience and immediately go to defend yourself, but it is important to acknowledge the feedback you are given. This ties directly into the idea that what we say and what we mean are not always perceived the same way by everyone in our audience. Secondly, we came up with a few team building activities that the pledge class could participate in to address the topics of inclusivity and diversity.

4. Provide non-abrasive training to the entire organization.

Although we planned activities specific to the pledge class, I also found it important to provide activities to our entire active body. At the next chapter meeting we took time to discuss what intent vs. impact and microaggressions mean and how they can change perceptions. We then conducted an activity where our members were given several biased questions and asked to rephrase them in a more open ended and accepting manner. For example, when given the question “Where are you really from?” our members rephrased it as “Where is home for you?” to remove negative stigmas. As part of this activity we discussed that it is our responsibility to work to acknowledge our implicit biases, the biases and stereotypes that we subconsciously act on. Understanding our implicit bias and actively working to combat them can help us communicate.

The bottom line is that a good team is built on respect. To build a good team of good people you have to create an open and respectful environment where people can address miscommunications and other problems without attacking each other. The easier you make it to have hard conversations, the more affective this type of training will be.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Proposed Plan for Socially Distanced User Study of Wix.com

Plan for User Study: www.Wix.com I. Introduction Although a usability test is unlikely in this socially-distanced and pandemic-filled world, if I were to do one, this post describes how I would see myself doing it as well as a basic overview of my plan of study, had this been an option. II. Identifying Users 1. The users of this site align most with the age group of 20-35. This demographic uses Wix primarily for educational purpose and small business website platforms. 2. Users in this case will work through website creation, as that is the main function of the site. III. Target Identification of Problems Below are the main heuristics and an associated question to further explore the content of the site as I plan a User Study. A. Engagement Are the screen and workplace too crowded, and are they layered to maximize engagement? Is the site   nested too deeply with helpful tools to be useful? B. Error Tolerance Does the Help Desk analysis show enough specific problem de...

Design Surrounds Us

Despite surrounding us in every object that we own, encounter, and interact with, design is oftentimes an invisible sort of force. Good design generally directs the user without being overtly noticeable, which means that it is often easier for us to pick out elements of bad design—that is, we most often notice design when we’re frustrated or confused by it. However, when we feel these emotions, it is important to understand which aspect of a design has caused them. Sometimes the failure in design is not caused by the most obvious component; indeed, the design of a specific frustrating component may have been the best design available if there are external and unmalleable constraints that it had to work within. Noting which level a design fails at, then, will make addressing design concerns much more exact and relevant, as critiquing a specific frustration without addressing the wider problematic system brings about no progress. While perhaps not the most exciting topic, a strong exampl...

Think “Experience Architecture”

At the beginning of this class, we were assigned readings and videos about airports in order to conceptualize the main theme of the course, experience architecture. Experience architecture is the design of spaces (architecture) for users (experience), such as an airport. In de Botton's work, "A Week at the Airport," de Botton addresses a doubt about experience architecture that sheds light on the scope in which the concept applies. "Standing before costly objects of technological beauty, we may be tempted to reject the possibility of awe, for fear that we could grow stupid through admiration...[and] yet to refuse to be awed at all might in the end be merely another kind of foolishness. In a world full of a chaos and irregularity, the terminal seemed a worthy and intriguing refuge of elegance and logic." (de Botton, 2009, p. 3-4). Simply put, experience architecture is design that is meant for the experience of the user. De Botton communicates this through an exp...