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.
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
Post a Comment