Five Myths that Explain Why We Don’t Pay Attention to Cultural Competence
April 7, 2013
Sara Taylor

In our work to build cultural competence for individuals and organizations, we see recurring myths pop up about this skill.

Myth #1: Exposure = Competence. With this myth we hear statements such as, “I’m around Diversity all the time. I have a gay couple for neighbors, my mom has lived with a disability and my best friend is black.” The inherent belief in this statement is that ‘I am exposed to difference; therefore I am competent to interact across difference,’ as if a new skillset is in the air when Diversity is present and all we need to do is breathe in. Cultural competence, like any other complex skill, needs to be developed. Think of it in comparison to developing math skills. You would never assume a child could learn math if you just sat them in a room all day where mathematicians are present. As with math, we build cultural competence through intentional, developmental learning, practice and work.

Myth #2: I get this stuff; it’s my co-workers that don’t! Most people, if asked, would say that they are already culturally competent. Yet, the shocking reality is that only 5-10% of us actually are (as measured across the world by the foremost cultural competence assessment, the IDI). This perception/reality gap that most of us are walking around with leads to much of the confusion and conflict that happens as we interact across difference. If I believe I “get it” and am still in situations where I’m not that effective interacting with my co-workers that are different, then it must be their issue. That’s also why I don’t need any more of this “Diversity stuff.”

Myth #3: Identity = Competence. Here’s a myth that, while widely believed, goes unspoken more often than not. It’s the notion that people from marginalized groups—especially people of color and women—are somehow more culturally competent; that somehow the experiences tied to our identity inherently increase our “get it” factor. In actuality, that’s not the case. In fact, many times that experience of marginalization holds back our development and keeps us in just the second of five stages of development (using the Milton Bennett model of the DMIS). That is particularly true when we feel as though we need to defend our group, as is often the case for many that are marginalized.

Myth #4: Comfort = Competence. We’ve all felt discomfort at one point or another in our lives as we have encountered difference. It might have been the first time we ate dinner at a friend’s house or the first time we walked into a new workplace, new neighborhood or new country. The fallacy here comes when we believe that as the discomfort dissipates, competence somehow materializes. I can tell you I’m completely comfortable holding my High School clarinet, but you would not want to hear me play it! Likewise, just because we are comfortable does not mean we have learned how to be effective with the complexity that comes as we interact across differences.

Myth #5: Youth today are more competent. This myth is basically an extension of myths #1 and #4. Kids today are exposed to much more Diversity than we adults were at that age; they also very comfortable with the differences around them. Cultural competence is a learned and developed skill and who are children learning from? They learn from the example set by the adults in their lives. Remember, only 5-10% of us are actually culturally competent, so unfortunately we’re not the best role models.

The realities behind these myths: Every interaction is a cultural interaction; and we know that cultural competence is a significant contributor to effectiveness and success for both individuals and organizations. Yet, because we believe that we already “get it,” few take the time to build this mindset and skillset. You can’t just breathe it in, so if you want to be more competent, you have to work at it.

 

 

Leave a Comment »
5 Diversity eLearning Best Practices
December 14, 2012
Sara Taylor

Numerous organizations today are moving their Diversity and Inclusion training programs online in order to more efficiently reach all of their staff.  I’ll admit it; I was slow to get on the eLearning bandwagon. Having grown up in this field as a classroom trainer, I used to say that good Diversity training could only be done face-to-face. Like many of our clients, I was reluctant to move to the online platform, but believed I had no other choice in order to offer more efficient training options.

Now, after delivering programs in the online space for a number of years, I can say I’m a convert. Don’t get me wrong, I’m still a believer in the power of the face-to-face interaction, but I also understand the many things we can do in the online format that aren’t possible in the classroom. As we make that shift to the online format for Diversity, there are several factors to keep in mind to ensure the training is effective.

1.       Start with the end in mind: Diversity eLearning needs to be designed around the purpose. Think of the purpose positioned on a continuum somewhere between just relaying information on the one end, to building skills and creating behavior change on the other. The closer your purpose is to just relaying information—say, communicating your D&I strategy or informing about respectful workplace policy—the less interactive the design needs to be. Conversely, if the purpose of your course is skills building and behavior change—such as building cultural competence—the more interactive your course needs to be with branching options, scenarios requiring decision-making and feedback on those decisions.

2.       Tie to business objectives: Learners tend to approach Diversity eLearning more dismissively than other eLearning topics—at best, disregarding the value and at worst, resistant to take in any information. The least effective approach for this resistance is the cookie-cutter messages or canned videos about how wonderful Diversity is. They’ve already seen and heard those messages and don’t buy it.  What resistant learners need is to hear how Diversity specifically impacts them and their organization. They need to hear how D&I work is going to help their organization reach their strategic goals, and they need to hear that from their own CEO, not an actor.

3.       Develop both mindset and skillset: To actually make a difference, Diversity eLearning needs to go beyond the business case and focus on building awareness and competency. Learners need to first see their own differences, perspectives and filters in order to better understand and fully see the differences of others. At that point, they need new skills to more effectively respond to the differences that they are now more aware of. Building these competencies is essential for individual behavioral change and organizational culture change.

4.       Allow for real-experience interaction—both personal and work: If competency building is our goal with eLearning, then our courses need to incorporate exercises that allow the learner to interact with their real-life experiences. It’s also important to use examples and scenarios from their actual industry, work and workplace. Here are a few eLearning tools that solicit real experiences and facilitate interaction appropriate for Diversity eLearning:

·         Drag and drop responses to complete a scenario or approach

·         Fill-in text boxes where learners can free-script their experience or perspective

·         Scenarios encouraging learner’s to interact from someone else’s perspective

·         Sorting or prioritizing activities to identify their preferences and cultural “default mode”

·         Read, watch, reflect process with reflection questions guiding their awareness building

·         Branching scenarios that allow the learner to follow a scenario with their specific response or perspective

5.       Provide opportunities to connect: Competency-based Diversity eLearning is more transformative than transactional. As such, learners benefit from opportunities to reflect, connect with others and hear other perspectives. Monitored, online discussion groups are a great way to make those connections outside of the course and leverage the content. Discussion topics can start with the content of the course and continue with real-time situations in the workplace, reactions to current events, even book clubs.

Leave a Comment »
Why Cultural Competence is Foundational to the Work of D&I
October 16, 2012
Sara Taylor

Tomorrow marks the start of the 12th annual SIETAR conference (Society for Intercultural Training Education and Research). This conference is all about Cultural Competence and I am dismayed by the minimal level of corporate participation and the few D&I professionals attending. 

What is Cultural Competence? It’s the ability to interact effectively across difference.

Why should the D&I field care about Cultural Competence? We now know that only 10% of our population is actually effective when interacting across difference—or culturally competent (as measured by the Intercultural Development Inventory).  That means, on average, 90% of a typical workforce is not able to effectively communicate, interpret, adapt or make decisions when difference is a part of the mix; which, in reality, is in every interaction. 

I see an abundance of hard-working, committed and well-intentioned professionals in the D&I field. They create recruitment and retention programs, lead Diversity training, devote themselves to achieving leadership buy-in, and the list goes on.  What good is all of this hard work if the workforce isn’t competent enough to do something with it or if leadership doesn’t have the necessary mindset and skillset to be more effective and lead this work?   Even the best of individual intentions and strongest organizational strategy are useless if they fall into an organization that lacks cultural competence.

Leave a Comment »
Reorienting: Any Port in a Storm of Ideology
September 22, 2012

Unless you’ve been on an extended spelunking expedition, you’ve probably heard that President Obama has openly stated his support for gay marriage. This is already causing all sorts of interesting ripples, not least amongst some of the President’s most ardent supporters.

And it really IS a problem caused by ideology, by the basic human impulse to grab onto an idea, and claim its universal validity. We want our ideas (and beliefs, which are just another kind of idea) to be true because, on a deep biological level, it makes us feel safer. Now, that’s not inherently bad; in fact it’s been quite useful ensuring the survival of the species. The tricky part is that most of our existence on this planet has been spent living in small, intensely socially homogenous groups. This is a problem because, especially in the context of the workplace, how many of us can still make that claim?

In order to deal effectively with the fact of diversity, the fact that we are in fact all different from one another, we have to increase our capacity to SEE the differences of others on their own merit, as opposed to claiming we’re “blind” to difference, which is a simple fallacy. It’s impossible for us to be blind to difference (whether of skin color, or accent, or religious belief, or sexual identity); your brain is built to make judgments, and so judge you will.

However, the more aware we are of the judgments we make and, more importantly, WHY we make them, the more effectively we can understand why we believe what we believe, which is the first step to really understanding that, while beliefs and values are necessary for each of us, none are universal. If we’re all individuals, they simply can’t be.

So, back to the President. You’ll notice that though he’s stated his support for gay marriage, he’s not asking anyone else to do the same. At least in this instance, he’s avoiding the storm of ideology. And if that leads to reflection, to a richer dialogue around this and other issues, politics aside, it’s a human victory.

Leave a Comment »
Defining Diversity
May 9, 2012
Sara Taylor

Defining Diversity How we’ve defined Diversity in the industry has certainly evolved over the years. Decades ago it began very broad because we wanted to be careful not to exclude anyone. We said Diversity was about any and all differences. In fact, the definition I used most was “The aspect of human difference.” Well, if that isn’t difficult to manage in a workplace, I don’t know what is! Where do you even begin and, for that matter, where do you stop?

After years of using that broad definition, many companies and Diversity practitioners realized the definition needed to be narrowed. The new definitions actually listed specific groups. They said things like, “Diversity at XYZ Company is about valuing and respecting the many differences in our workplace including race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc.”

The problem with this approach is that it goes a little too far in the direction of specificity. Usually about seven different groups are listed. Yes, this makes our work in D&I much easier to manage, but what if those areas of Diversity aren’t the ones that most impact our workplace?

Today the definition we use comes from my colleague Nehrwr Abdul-Wahid: “Differences that may make a difference” particularly in relationship to productivity, safety, costs and legality. The beauty of this definition is that it allows for a full range of Diversity to be included, as the definition of decades past, but also allows for true specificity at the organization, group and individual level.

Leave a Comment »
Syndicate content