Inclusion

HBR EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE SERIES

OceanofPDF.com
 HBR Emotional Intelligence Series
How to be human at work

The HBR Emotional Intelligence Series features smart, essential reading on

the human side of professional life from the pages of Harvard Business
Review.
Authentic Leadership
Confidence
Dealing with Difficult People
Empathy
Energy and Motivation
Focus
Good Habits
Happiness
Inclusion
Influence and Persuasion
Leadership Presence
Mindful Listening
Mindfulness
Power and Impact
Purpose, Meaning, and Passion
Resilience
Self-Awareness
Virtual EI
Other books on emotional intelligence from Harvard Business Review:
HBR Everyday Emotional Intelligence
HBR Guide to Emotional Intelligence
HBR’s 10 Must Reads on Emotional Intelligence

OceanofPDF.com
 Inclusion
HBR EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE SERIES

Harvard Business Review Press

Boston, Massachusetts

OceanofPDF.com
 HBR Press Quantity Sales Discounts
Harvard Business Review Press titles are available at significant quantity discounts when
purchased in bulk for client gifts, sales promotions, and premiums. Special editions, including
books with corporate logos, customized covers, and letters from the company or CEO printed in
the front matter, as well as excerpts of existing books, can also be created in large quantities for
special needs.
For details and discount information for both print and ebook formats, contact
[email protected], tel. 800-988-0886, or www.hbr.org/bulksales.

Copyright 2023 Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation

All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise), without the prior permission of the publisher. Requests for permission should be directed
to [email protected], or mailed to Permissions, Harvard Business School Publishing,
60 Harvard Way, Boston, Massachusetts 02163.

The web addresses referenced in this book were live and correct at the time of the book’s publication
but may be subject to change.

Cataloging-in-Publication data is forthcoming.

ISBN: 978-1-64782-482-2
eISBN: 978-1-64782-483-9

The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of the American National Standard for
Permanence of Paper for Publications and Documents in Libraries and Archives Z39.48-1992.

OceanofPDF.com
 Contents

1. Why Inclusive Leaders Are Good for Organizations

Six behaviors to model when practicing inclusive leadership.
By Juliet Bourke and Andrea Titus

2. The Value of Belonging at Work

It’s beneficial for people—and for the bottom line.
By Evan W. Carr, Andrew Reece, Gabriella Rosen Kellerman, and Alexi Robichaux

3. Make Psychological Safety a Strategic Priority

How leaders can enhance integrity, innovation, and inclusion.
By Maren Gube and Debra Sabatini Hennelly

4. The Importance of Being an Inclusive Colleague

Small gestures can make a big difference.
By Juliet Bourke

5. Recognizing and Responding to Microaggressions

What to do if you witness one—or commit one yourself.
By Ella F. Washington

6. Tap into Empathy

Treat others how they want to be treated.
By Irina Cozma

7. Inclusion Starts with Belonging

Unlearn your own biases, especially the ones you have against
yourself.
By DDS Dobson-Smith

8. Stop Using These Words and Phrases

 The language we use can make others feel hurt, disrespected, and
isolated.
By Rakshitha Arni Ravishankar

9. The Power of Sharing Our Stories

It’s a rare chance to take on a new perspective.
By Selena Rezvani and Stacey A. Gordon

Index

OceanofPDF.com
 Inclusion
HBR EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE SERIES

OceanofPDF.com
 1
Why Inclusive Leaders Are Good for
Organizations
By Juliet Bourke and Andrea Titus

Companies increasingly rely on diverse, multidisciplinary teams that

combine the collective capabilities of women and men, people of different
cultural heritage, and younger and older workers. But simply throwing a
mix of people together doesn’t guarantee high performance; it requires
inclusive leadership—leadership that ensures that all team members feel
they are treated respectfully and fairly, are valued and sense that they
belong, and are confident and inspired.
Inclusiveness isn’t just nice to have on teams. Our research shows that it
directly enhances performance. Teams with inclusive leaders are 17% more
likely to report that they are high performing, 20% more likely to say they
make high-quality decisions, and 29% more likely to report behaving
collaboratively. What’s more, we found that a 10% improvement in
perceptions of inclusion increases work attendance by almost one day a
year per employee, reducing the cost of absenteeism.
What specific actions can leaders take to be more inclusive? To answer
this question, we surveyed more than 4,100 employees about inclusion,
interviewed those identified by followers as highly inclusive, and reviewed
the academic literature on leadership. From this research, we identified 17
discrete sets of behaviors, which we grouped into six categories (or
“traits”), all of which are equally important and mutually reinforcing.3 We
then built a 360-degree assessment tool for use by followers to rate the
presence of these traits among leaders. The tool has now been used by over
3,500 raters to evaluate over 450 leaders. The results are illuminating.
 These are the six traits or behaviors that we found distinguish inclusive
leaders from others:4
Visible commitment: They articulate authentic commitment to diversity,
challenge the status quo, hold others accountable and make diversity and
inclusion a personal priority.
Humility: They are modest about capabilities, admit mistakes, and create
the space for others to contribute.
Awareness of bias: They show awareness of personal blind spots as well as
flaws in the system and work hard to ensure meritocracy.
Curiosity about others: They demonstrate an open mindset and deep
curiosity about others, listen without judgment, and seek with empathy to
understand those around them.
Cultural intelligence: They are attentive to others’ cultures and adapt as
required.
Effective collaboration: They empower others, pay attention to diversity of
thinking and psychological safety, and focus on team cohesion.
These traits may seem like the obvious ones, similar to those that are
broadly important for good leadership. But the difference between assessing
and developing good leadership generally versus inclusive leadership in
particular lies in three specific insights.
First, most leaders in the study were unsure about whether others
experienced them as inclusive or not. More particularly, only a third (36%)
saw their inclusive-leadership capabilities as others did, another third (32%)
overrated their capabilities, and the final third (33%) underrated their
capabilities. Even more importantly, rarely were leaders certain about the
specific behaviors that actually have an impact on being rated as more or
less inclusive.
Second, being rated as an inclusive leader is not determined by averaging
all members’ scores but rather by the distribution of raters’ scores. For
example, it’s not enough that, on average, raters agree that a leader
“approaches diversity and inclusiveness wholeheartedly.” Using a five-
point scale (ranging from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”), an
average rating could mean that some team members disagree while others
agree. To be an inclusive leader, one must ensure that everyone agrees or
strongly agrees that they are being treated fairly and respectfully, are
valued, and have a sense of belonging and are psychologically safe.
Third, inclusive leadership is not about occasional grand gestures, but
regular, smaller-scale comments and actions. By comparing the qualitative
feedback regarding the most inclusive (top 25%) and the least inclusive
(bottom 25%) of leaders in our sample, we discovered that inclusive
leadership is tangible and practiced every day.
These verbatim responses from our assessments illustrate some of the
tangible behaviors of the most inclusive leaders in the study:

Shares personal weaknesses: “[This leader] will openly ask about

information that she is not aware of. She demonstrates a humble
unpretentious work manner. This puts others at ease, enabling them to
speak out and voice their opinions, which she values.”
Learns about cultural differences: “[This leader] has taken the time to
learn the ropes (common words, idioms, customs, likes/dislikes) and
the cultural pillars.”
Acknowledges team members as individuals: “[This leader] leads a
team of over 100 people and yet addresses every team member by
name and knows the work stream that they support and the work that
they do.”

The following verbatims illustrate some of the behaviors of the least

inclusive leaders:

Overpowers others: “He can be very direct and overpowering which

limits the ability of those around him to contribute to meetings or
participate in conversations.”
Displays favoritism: “Work is assigned to the same top performers,
creating unsustainable workloads. [There is a] need to give newer team
members opportunities to prove themselves.”
Discounts alternative views: “[This leader] can have very set ideas on
specific topics. Sometimes it is difficult to get an alternative view
 across. There is a risk that his team may hold back from bringing
forward challenging and alternative points of view.”

What leaders say and do has an outsized impact on others, but our
research indicates that this effect is even more pronounced when they are
leading diverse teams. Subtle words and acts of exclusion by leaders, or
overlooking the exclusive behaviors of others, easily reinforces the status
quo. It takes energy and deliberate effort to create an inclusive culture, and
that starts with leaders paying much more attention to what they say and do
on a daily basis and making adjustments as necessary.
Here are four ways for leaders to get started:

Know your inclusive-leadership shadow: Seek feedback on whether

you are perceived as inclusive, especially from people who are
different from you. This will help you to see your blind spots,
strengths, and development areas. It will also signal that diversity and
inclusion are important to you. Scheduling regular check-ins with
members of your team to ask how you can make them feel more
included also sends the message.
Be visible and vocal: Tell a compelling and explicit narrative about
why being inclusive is important to you personally and the business
more broadly. For example, share your personal stories at public
forums and conferences.
Deliberately seek out difference: Give people on the periphery of your
network the chance to speak up, invite different people to the table,
and catch up with a broader network. For example, seek out
opportunities to work with cross-functional or multidisciplinary teams
to leverage diverse strengths.
Check your impact: Look for signals that you are having a positive
impact. Are people copying your role modeling? Is a more diverse
group of people sharing ideas with you? Are people working together
more collaboratively? Ask a trusted adviser to give you candid
feedback on the areas you have been working on.
 There’s more to be learned about how to become an inclusive leader and
harness the power of diverse teams, but one thing is clear: Leaders who
consciously practice inclusive leadership and actively develop their
capability will see the results in the superior performance of their diverse
teams.

JULIET BOURKE is a professor of practice in the School of Management and

Governance, UNSW Business School, University of New South Wales, and
a workplace consultant. She is the author of Which Two Heads Are Better
Than One: The Extraordinary Power of Diversity of Thinking and Inclusive
Leadership. ANDREA TITUS is an organizational psychologist, executive
manager at Westpac Banking Corporation, and vice president of SIOPA.

Notes
1. Juliet Bourke, “The Diversity and Inclusion Revolution: Eight Powerful Truths,” Deloitte
Review 22 (2018), https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/deloitte-review/issue-22/diversity-and-
inclusion-at-work-eight-powerful-truths.xhtml.
2. Deloitte Australia and the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission,
“Waiter, Is That Inclusion in My Soup? A New Recipe to Improve Business Performance,” May
2013, https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/au/Documents/human-capital/deloitte-au-hc-
diversity-inclusion-soup-0513.pdf.
3. Bernadette Dillon and Juliet Bourke, “The Six Signature Traits of Inclusive Leadership,”
Deloitte University Press, 2016,
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/au/Documents/human-capital/deloitte-au-hc-six-
signature-traits-inclusive-leadership-020516.pdf.
4. Juliet Bourke and Andrea Titus, “The Key to Inclusive Leadership,” hbr.org, March 6, 2020,
https://hbr.org/2020/03/the-key-to-inclusive-leadership.

Adapted from “Why Inclusive Leaders Are Good for Organizations, and How to Become One” on
hbr.org, March 29, 2019 (product #H04V8Y).

OceanofPDF.com
 2
The Value of Belonging at Work
By Evan W. Carr, Andrew Reece, Gabriella Rosen Kellerman, and
Alexi Robichaux

Social belonging is a fundamental human need, hardwired into our DNA.

And yet, 40% of people say that they feel isolated at work, and the result
has been lower organizational commitment and engagement. In a nutshell,
companies are blowing it. U.S. businesses spend nearly $8 billion each year
on diversity and inclusion (D&I) trainings that miss the mark because they
neglect our need to feel included.
From this 10,000-foot perspective, the costs associated with this drought
of workplace belonging are eye-catching. Zooming in a bit helps focus on
the reality of the problem. Exclusion is damaging because it actually hurts:
The sensation is akin to physical pain. And it’s a sting we’ve all
experienced at one time or another. To feel left out is a deeply human
problem, which is why its consequences carry such heft and why its causes
are so hard to root out of even the healthiest workplaces.
Humans are so fundamentally social that we can even bond with strangers
over the very experience of not having anyone with whom to bond.
Consider this story in the Guardian, which prompted people to share their
own experiences of feeling left out at work. More than 800 wrote in.1 One
anonymous worker in the United Kingdom lamented, “I get paid well to do
something I enjoy, and . . . [I’m] surrounded by clever, funny, like-minded
people. And for 45 or 50 hours every week, I feel isolated.”
To better understand this basic need to belong—a key missing ingredient
in the D&I conversation—BetterUp conducted research to investigate the
role of belonging at work and the outsized consequences of its absence.2
For this project, defining belonging became our first and, in some ways,
trickiest task. Our data showed that belonging is a close cousin to many
related experiences: mattering, identification, and social connection. The
unifying thread across these themes is that they all revolve around the sense
of being accepted and included by those around you. We set out to study
how that develops—or doesn’t—in the workplace, what it means for
employees and organizations, and whether it’s possible to turn a bad
situation around.
The research is novel in two ways: First, it quantifies the value of
workplace belonging, both with correlational and experimental findings.
Second, it offers new, evidence-based interventions to boost inclusion.
Following earlier BetterUp studies on loneliness and purpose, we first
surveyed 1,789 full-time U.S. employees across many industries and then
conducted a series of experiments with more than 2,000 live participants to
observe and measure the costs of exclusion. Here’s what we found.

Belonging is good for business

If workers feel like they belong, companies reap substantial bottom-line
benefits. High belonging was linked to a whopping 56% increase in job
performance, a 50% drop in turnover risk, and a 75% reduction in sick
days. For a 10,000-person company, this would result in annual savings of
more than $52 million.
Employees with higher workplace belonging also showed a 167%
increase in their employer promoter score (their willingness to recommend
their company to others). They also received double the raises and 18 times
more promotions.

Exclusion leads to team (and self-) sabotage

Our survey findings reveal workplace exclusion as a systemic issue that
generates hefty financial losses. But does exclusion actually cause
measurable hits to team performance?
To address this question, we conducted a series of experiments. Initially,
workers were assigned to a team with two other “participants” (bots
programmed to act like teammates), using a collaborative virtual ball-toss
game.3 Included workers had teammates that consistently threw them the
ball, whereas excluded workers only got the ball a couple of times. After
this, participants completed a simple task where they could earn money
either for themselves or for their entire team. The longer participants
persisted in the task, the more money they earned.
What differences did we see between the excluded and included
teammates? When participants were told the payouts would be shared with
the team, the excluded people worked less hard than the included ones,
even though it meant sacrificing earnings. When participants were told the
payouts would benefit them and them alone, excluded team members
worked just as much as included ones. We replicated this effect again and
again, across four separate studies. We can now say that feeling excluded
causes us to give less effort to the team.

The harmful effects of exclusion can be reversed

These findings invite the question: Can exclusion be fixed? Many solutions
have been proposed, but few are based in experimental evidence.
As such, a new round of our experiments tested three interventions, each
designed to mitigate the costs of exclusion:

1. Gaining perspective: Previous participants shared reflections with

current participants on their exclusion experience and how they coped.
2. Encouraging mentorship: Participants imagined how they would coach
someone else through exclusion.
3. Finding empowerment: Participants planned out how they would
restructure this team experience to make it more inclusive and
enjoyable.

All three interventions succeeded in causing excluded team members to

behave more like included ones. Notably, the mentorship and empowerment
tools were so powerful that those excluded participants worked even harder
for their team than their included peers.
 Having an ally protects workers from exclusion
It might be difficult to identify exclusion on the spot as it’s happening, so
another valuable intervention strategy would be to buffer workers against
the negative effects of exclusion in the first place. One possibility is that
having an ally might take the sting out of being excluded by other team
members.
We tested this in another experiment, wherein an ally bot was
programmed to signal inclusion by throwing the ball to the participant,
while the other bots ignored them. Importantly, the ally only threw the ball
to the participant as much as anyone else did; that is, the ally offered equal
(not special) treatment. We found that having one fair-acting ally made
people more willing to work for their entire team, protecting group
performance from the negative effects of exclusion.

How do we create a workplace of belonging?

Our research demonstrates clear, actionable paths forward to help resolve
the epidemic of workplace exclusion. Even the most effective recruiting
strategy for diversity won’t lead to long-term change if new talent isn’t
supported to succeed. Fortunately, our findings show that we are not
powerless in the face of exclusion.
Individuals coping with left-out feelings can adapt these new evidence-
based tools of gaining perspective from others, mentoring those in a similar
condition, and thinking of strategies for improving the situation. For team
leaders and colleagues who want to help others feel included, our research
suggests that serving as a fair-minded ally—someone who treats everyone
equally—can offer protection to buffer the exclusionary behavior of others.
They can also share stories about how they have coped with similar
challenges and see what suggestions teammates have for improving the
situation. These strategies would help workers not only navigate tricky
workplace dynamics, but also drive their own version of change, especially
when the system isn’t working for everyone. Leaders and organizations
should invite employee feedback and take it seriously; this behavior is a
cornerstone of inclusive companies. Workers need to feel like they belong
to something they value—and that they have the power to bring about
change when it’s needed.

EVAN W. CARR is a senior research scientist at Amazon Web Services and

was previously a quantitative behavioral scientist at BetterUp. ANDREW
REECE is a behavioral data scientist at BetterUp. GABRIELLA ROSEN
KELLERMAN is the chief innovation officer at BetterUp and head of BetterUp
Labs. ALEXI ROBICHAUX is cofounder and CEO of BetterUp.

Notes
1. Sarah Marsh, “‘You Are Not the Only Lonely Worker’: Our Readers on Making Friends at
Work,” Guardian, February 2, 2016, https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/feb/02/you-are-
not-the-only-lonely-worker-our-readers-on-making-friends-at-work.
2. Gabriella Rosen Kellerman and Andrew Reece, “The Value of Belonging at Work: Investing in
Workplace Inclusion,” BetterUp.com, https://grow.betterup.com/resources/the-value-of-belonging-at-
work-the-business-case-for-investing-in-workplace-inclusion-event.
3. Kipling D. Williams and Blair Jarvis, “Cyberball: A Program for Use in Research on
Interpersonal Ostracism and Acceptance,” Behavior Research Methods 38, no. 1 (2006): 174–180.

Adapted from content posted on hbr.org, December 16, 2019 (product #H05BT9).

OceanofPDF.com
 3
Make Psychological Safety a
Strategic Priority
By Maren Gube and Debra Sabatini Hennelly

The Covid-19 pandemic, geopolitical instability, and unpredictable markets

have made organizational resilience like food in the desert: critical for
survival but challenging to grow. By making resilience a strategic priority,
leaders ensure that their organizations can stretch and adapt.
Much has been written about psychological safety’s role in improving
workplace wellness. But to weather uncertainty, organizations also need to
make psychological safety a strategic priority, creating a culture where
employees can comfortably raise concerns, contribute ideas, and share
unique perspectives.
Three cultural dimensions are critical for resilience:

Integrity: Ethical leadership and courageous candor

Innovation: Fearless collaborative creativity
Inclusion: Authentic respect and belonging

These sustain business continuity, competitiveness, and growth—the

intersection of these three dimensions forms the core of a psychologically
safe culture. To strengthen resilience, leaders must understand how to
connect these three siloed dimensions of culture and develop leadership
attributes that encourage candor.
In what follows, we explain why psychological safety is necessary for the
highest expression of integrity, innovation, and inclusion; explore the
obstacles to investing in psychological safety; and illustrate how senior
leaders can overcome these obstacles to boost resilience.

Psychological safety as the foundation of resilience

The simple business case for each dimension of resilience is well known.
Ethical business behavior (integrity) enhances financial performance,
employees who generate and share more ideas improve profitability through
innovation, and organizational diversity predicts higher financial returns
(inclusion). Both integrity and inclusion are key elements of assessing an
organization’s environment, sustainability, and governance (ESG)
commitments and performance.
Beyond their direct impacts on the bottom line, the three dimensions share
an intrinsic connection: Psychological safety is at their core, and any breach
erodes their foundation. The fear of retaliation for speaking up
compromises integrity, curbing creative ideation leads to stagnation, and
disrespectful interactions have a disproportionately toxic impact on
engagement and belonging.
Psychological safety does not happen automatically. Because our brains
are hardwired to keep us safe, our default mode is to presume some level of
threat in most environments. Like animals that sense a predator in the
forest, humans tend to stay quiet in a workplace form of “freeze” (from the
“fight, flight, freeze” reaction) unless we know we can safely speak up with
concerns, fresh ideas, or unique perspectives.
When leaders recognize the connections between psychological safety and
resilience, they can model the behaviors that welcome candor—and set
expectations throughout the organization to enhance integrity, innovation,
and inclusion.

Dimension #1: Integrity

Organizations with a culture of integrity don’t sacrifice doing the right thing
for short-term profit. Leaders trust employees to challenge myopic
directives, and they empower team members to own decisions that
safeguard long-term resilience. Candor is expected, as well as protected, to
prevent (or detect and address) legal or ethical issues that could derail or
shut down the business.
Two key reasons employees refrain from speaking up are fear of
retaliation and a perception that even well-founded concerns will not be
addressed. When leaders are committed to encouraging candor, they can be
intentional about changing these perceptions.
Early warning signals prevent problems from spiraling out of control. In
the last two years, 55% of all tips about workplace fraud came from
employees.1 The sooner tips are investigated, the sooner an organization
can mitigate related losses. When employees at all levels feel safe to raise
concerns, problem behaviors like bullying and harassment can also be
confronted in a timely manner.
Retaliation for speaking up about wrongdoing is at an all-time high. The
contradiction is not lost on employees, whose companies’ codes of conduct
oblige them to speak up. Yet, these “upstanders” often face overt or subtle
retribution if they do.
Employees who don’t have safe internal channels for reporting issues
sometimes choose to blow the whistle with the government or the media.
Despite the risk of stigma, some find that they have no other alternative.
However, external reporting threatens the resilience of organizations in
multiple ways. Perhaps the greatest risk comes from the missed opportunity
to address the problem in house, early, before the damage escalates.

Dimension #2: Innovation

In a rapidly changing world, continual product and process innovation are
necessary elements of sustainable organizational performance. However,
the stress of uncertainty reduces individual creativity and diminishes the
drive to explore and challenge existing paradigms.
Innovation tends to decline when external risk increases. Focusing on
psychological safety internally helps counter that tendency. Embracing
“what if . . .” questions fosters a culture of curiosity for generating possible
solutions.
The innovation imperative sometimes gets misconstrued as a drive to
innovate at any cost. Dissenters can be marginalized and overruled in a new
product push, to the detriment of the organization. Putting the brakes on a
train that is just about to leave the station requires psychological safety—
and is unlikely to happen unless leaders are on board with encouraging
passionate dialogue.

Dimension #3: Inclusion

Engagement and belonging are grounded in inclusion. They are
foundational to the resilience of not only the organization, but also
individual employees. In 2021, two-thirds of people who left their jobs said
they did so because they did not feel included, valued, respected, trusted, or
cared for.2 Almost half of U.S. employees were looking for other
opportunities, and the number of women intending to leave was startling.
Underrepresented (and sought-after) groups were particularly likely to be
on the move.3
Diversity among employees helps companies anticipate, cope with, and
adapt to risk and turbulent conditions. For example, the International
Monetary Fund has cited “a high degree of groupthink” (that is, a lack of
diverse viewpoints) as a contributing factor for failing to sound alarms
about the impending financial crisis in 2007.4
Diverse teams have a broader knowledge base, which allows for better
environmental scanning and risk analysis, especially in complex
environments. Experiential diversity among team members increases the
range of potential coping strategies and leads to better decision making
under threat. The question “What am I not seeing?” is more likely to
surface rich perspectives, latent concerns, and novel suggestions when the
team is diverse—and when all voices are heard thanks to psychological
safety.

Obstacles to psychological safety

Given the multidimensional benefits of psychological safety, why is it so
challenging to make it a strategic priority? Be aware of these two primary
obstacles.

Obstacle #1: Blind spots

Senior leaders may not be connecting the dots across functional silos in the
organization, overlooking the opportunities to work together. For example,
functional professionals (for example, legal, risk management, R&D, HR)
tend to focus their requests for limited internal resources vertically in the
hierarchy. By competing for support for one-off initiatives—rather than
collaborating—they miss the opportunity to help senior leaders realize the
cross-functional alchemy of investing in psychological safety.
The onus is on senior leaders to see beyond functions as individual cost
centers. By identifying opportunities to champion psychological safety
across previously disparate initiatives, they optimize resources for a
multidimensional return on investment that enables all voices to be heard.

Obstacle #2: Vulnerability

Psychological safety demands modes of decision making that are different
from what many leaders are used to. It requires leadership attributes like
accessibility, humility, and empathy.
One of the most valuable actions leaders in resilient organizations take is
to set their personal agendas aside. Many leaders are fearful of feedback
that may leave them vulnerable to criticism, but transparent decision
making gets beyond seeing only what we want to see. Input that contradicts
our subjective perceptions can be hard to hear, but often provides valuable
signals for course correcting.
Gustavo Razzetti, culture designer and author of the book Remote, Not
Distant, points out that all too often, leaders claim to have an open agenda
and welcome dissent—and yet, out-of-the-box ideas and candid feedback
are quickly shut down when leaders become defensive. “Even brilliant
leaders can have a hard time accepting change, like Steve Jobs when the
idea of the iPhone was first floated,” Razzetti says.5 “[W]e need to stop
thinking of them as superheroes with all the answers.”

Taking the lead on psychological safety

Like trust, psychological safety takes a long time to build—and even longer
to rebuild once breached. Here are five focus areas for leaders who want to
make psychological safety a strategic priority in the service of
organizational resilience.

1. Ask questions about the culture. Periodically conduct assessments of

engagement, integrity, and other aspects of culture. Pay attention to the
results and how they change over time. Take the time to map out
existing and desired cultures and design a road map for necessary
transformations.
2. Be clear about your expectations for ethical decision making and
integrity. Silence and ambiguity have consequences. Be intentional
about seeking out early warning signals—and clear about responding.
Prohibit retaliation against “upstanders” and ensure that employees
always have a safe channel for raising concerns and that they know
how to access it. Build trust by extending trust. Align your actions
with your words and show your own vulnerabilities first.
3. Encourage outside-the-box thinking. Perceived leader support
influences creative performance and innovation. Reframe and
celebrate mistakes as organizational learning opportunities. Encourage
employees to generate and share ideas, which need not always be
polished. Welcome dissent without judgment. Assign and rotate the
role of “challenger” at meetings.
4. Invest in and personally support your diversity, equity, and inclusion
(DEI) initiatives. Having even one ally in the workplace fosters a sense
of belonging and can encourage people to speak up—be that ally. Use
your relative privilege to share, rather than hoard, power. Foster
diversity and inclusion as explicit business strategies, include them in
your ESG-related commitments, and tie them to executive
compensation. Know how to avoid the pitfalls of disrespectful,
noninclusive cultures that make for toxic workplaces with high
turnover. Prioritize clear communications, assign projects and roles
based on strengths, foster relationships, and invite people to be part of
the decision making.
5. Build accountability for psychological safety into performance
metrics. Set relevant objectives and provide the necessary training for
your managers so that psychological safety rises to the level of a
 strategic objective rather than a “nice-to-have.” Emphasize leadership
skills around emotional and social intelligence in career development
and promotions. Take the metrics seriously and hold people
accountable.

Also, hold yourself accountable by asking yourself: How am I modeling

these behaviors? How can I set up my direct reports to be successful?
___________
Learning to be nimble and resilient in the new world of work requires an
uncommon level of human connection. Understanding how integrity,
innovation, and inclusion are connected—and sparking that alchemy—
helps organizational leaders move beyond their blind spots and own
psychological safety as a strategic imperative. These three cultural
dimensions can map the route to resilience and sustain an abundant harvest,
no matter how unpredictable the terrain ahead.

MAREN GUBE guides organizations pursuing cultures of fearless

collaborative creativity through her research and professional practice. She
helps leaders develop the necessary emotional literacy for adapting to
change and disruption. Maren empowers teams to unravel invisible
systemic threats, decoding the contextual social emotions that
subconsciously drive organizational culture. Her blend of executive
experience and PhD inquiry brings new perspectives to leaders. Her award-
winning work on creativity and why women leave STEM fields has earned
citations on both sides of the Atlantic. She is the coauthor of the article “4
Ways to Spark Creativity When You’re Feeling Stressed” on hbr.org and
executive director of Resiliti. Read more about her at marengube.com.
DEBRA SABATINI HENNELLY advises executives and boards on enhancing
organizational resilience by creating cultures of candor, inclusion, integrity,
and innovation. She engages teams and leaders directly to identify and
address obstacles to psychological safety and ethical decision-making,
increasing collaboration, well being, and productivity. Debbie also coaches
ethics and compliance professionals in effective leadership and personal
resilience. Her pragmatic approach is informed by her engineering and legal
background and decades of corporate leadership, C-suite, and advisory roles
in compliance and ethics, legal, environment and safety, and strategic
management. Debbie is an adjunct professor in Fordham University Law
School’s Program on Corporate Ethics & Compliance, a frequent speaker at
professional conferences, and the founder and president of Resiliti
(resiliti.com).

Notes
1. Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, “Occupational Fraud 2022: A Report to the Nations,”
https://acfepublic.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/2022+Report+to+the+Nations.pdf.
2. Mark C. Crowley, “It’s Not Just Money. This Is What’s Still Driving the Great Resignation,”
FastCompany.com, March 5, 2022, https://www.fastcompany.com/90727646/its-not-just-money-this-
is-whats-still-driving-the-great-resignation.
3. David Rice, “Stemming the Tide: How to Retain Diverse Employees in the Great Resignation,”
DiversityIncBestPractices.com, https://www.diversityincbestpractices.com/stemming-the-tide-how-
to-retain-diverse-employees-in-the-great-resignation/.
4. International Monetary Fund Independent Evaluation Office, “Why Did the IMF Fail to Give
Clear Warning?,” in IMF Performance in the Run-Up to the Financial and Economic Crisis
(Washington, DC: IMF, 2011).
5. Zameena Mejia, “Steve Jobs Almost Prevented the Apple iPhone from Being Invented,” CNBC
Make It, September 12, 2017, https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/12/why-steve-jobs-almost-prevented-
the-apple-iphone-from-being-invented.html.

Adapted from “Resilient Organizations Make Psychological Safety a Strategic Priority” on hbr.org,
August 25, 2022 (product #H0771Y).

OceanofPDF.com
 4
The Importance of Being an
Inclusive Colleague
By Juliet Bourke

Already a hot topic, creating an inclusive workplace has become even more
critical for organizations seeking to attract and retain talent, and enhance
productivity. Historically, companies have focused on putting in place
organizational diversity policies. More recently the focus has shifted to
inclusive leadership and the powerful role played by leaders in setting the
tone, modeling inclusive behaviors, and calling people to account. Both of
these strategies are critical, but they overlook the significance of peer
relationships.
There’s a good reason for that. In academic literature as well as industry
practice, inclusion has been conceptualized as a psychosocial experience
between an individual and a group.1 In other words, only a group (or a
leader as representative of a group) has the power to make an individual
feel fairly treated, valued, respected, and connected. But is that really right?
Over the last few years I’ve been investigating the impact of peer
relationships on an individual’s experience of inclusion. My first study
involved deep-dive interviews with 21 diverse employees working in
different project teams in a global firm. In a second ethnographic study, I
observed the regular meetings of a project team (comprising people of
different nationalities, technical capabilities, and gender) over a period of
two months to see if (and how) inclusive behaviors between peers
manifested themselves in practice. In other words, I took out a microscope
to explore people’s granular experiences, and then zoomed back out to
make sense of the relationship between small acts of inclusion or exclusion,
an individual’s job performance, and team effectiveness more broadly.
Here’s what I learned.

Interpersonal inclusion is manifested by and developed through

three sets of behaviors
The interviewees from my first study told me in no uncertain terms that
peers absolutely have the power to include or exclude, and the exercise of
that power makes a meaningful difference to work performance. Further,
both studies identified that peer inclusion is demonstrated through three
different types of behaviors.

1. Helping each other out. These behaviors, which I call “instrumental

assistance,” are those that help a peer to perform their work tasks, such as
by providing information, making introductions to contacts, giving
endorsements in meetings, and offering advice.
What’s significant about these actions is that they are discretionary and
fall outside the strict ambit of one’s job description. For example, one
senior manager told me of a peer who came out of a meeting and quickly
gave him a heads-up on what was covered rather than waiting until the end
of the week and the formal project status report.
During my observations, I often saw peers subtly endorse and amplify
each other (for example, “As Pedro said . . .”), thus helping to underscore a
peer’s point and increasing their potential influence over proceedings. This
particular behavior is reminiscent of a technique reportedly used by
President Obama’s female staffers to reinforce and amplify points made by
their female peers.

2. Taking emotional care of others.

This refers to the care, support, and personal
interest people demonstrate toward their peers, which helps to develop
emotional bonds. Interviewees spoke about socializing with their peers,
joking, and banter, as well as providing space for venting and showing an
authentic interest in a peer’s personal life (for example, children, pets, or
sport). One junior employee told me about how he and his peer started each
day with “some kind of little joke,” while many others talked about taking a
quick break from the office environment to have a coffee together. Of
course, with the rise of hybrid work, in-person socializing occurs less
frequently, but that was countered by an observable increase in the practice
of checking in with peers at a more personal level at the beginning or end of
online meetings.

3. Making physical connections.

The third behavior, which I call “embodied
connection,” refers to the ways in which team members use their physical
beings to create and communicate a closer connection through body
language and the sharing of space. For example, interviewees talked about
walking together to meetings, deliberately sitting next to each other, or if a
meeting was virtual, sharing their personal backgrounds rather than using
an impersonal corporate photo, and exaggerating positive nonverbal cues
such as smiling and nodding.
What’s clear about these examples is that each involved a pint-sized
effort. Nevertheless, the impact was profound psychosocially in terms of
feeling included, especially when these micro acts of interpersonal
inclusion accumulated over time.

Interpersonal inclusion is a reciprocal process and is highly

beneficial to individual job performance and team effectiveness
The benefit of interpersonal inclusion between peers is not just
psychological; it also has very practical consequences in terms of boosting
individual job performance and improving team effectiveness, according to
all of the interviewees. Why? Because each act of interpersonal inclusion is
essentially a trade of valuable resources. It might be a direct trade (that is, I
give you an act of instrumental assistance and you give me one back) or a
diffuse trade (that is, if I give you the space to vent, I’m building a more
supportive culture that will be there for me should I need it). This makes
interpersonal inclusion sound a bit calculating, and interviewees were at
pains to play down that connotation. They preferred to think of
interpersonal inclusion in terms of helping a peer rather than “cashing in
favors.” Nevertheless, the reality was that each trade strengthened a peer’s
sense of inclusivity (that is, my peer cares about me) and provided the
practical instrumental and emotional resources needed to do a job.
 Importantly, given that interpersonal inclusion is a reciprocal process,
anyone can kick-start it. This challenges the traditional conceptualization of
inclusion as, by nature, a passive experience, with a person waiting for an
act of inclusion to be extended toward them by the dominant group or the
leader. It turns out that inclusion can be either a passive or an active
experience, with half of the interviewees saying that they actively included
others as a strategy to make themselves feel more included. Further, they
did this by using one or more of the three behaviors of interpersonal
inclusion to trigger a reciprocal response. Of course, it didn’t always work,
but it did tip the odds in their favor. This is a very empowering message.
So what does this all add up to? Interviewees told me that these small
behaviors have an outsized impact on motivation and energy (“If you feel
included, you want to come to work every day; you feel more motivated,”
as one told me) as well as psychological safety and thus the flow of
information and speed of problem-solving (thereby reducing the duplication
of effort). Such acts also facilitate deeper insight into a peer’s skills and
thus better job-matching, as well as helping employees to grow and develop
on the job. In sum, interpersonal inclusion between peers helps with
retention and growing the quality of employees’ human capital, thus
contributing to team effectiveness more broadly.

On the flip side: Interpersonal exclusion is damaging and usually

subtle
But it’s not all roses. Interviewees described interpersonal exclusion to me
as the antithesis of interpersonal inclusion, albeit that it was more likely to
be manifested as an omission than commission. In other words,
interpersonal exclusion was often experienced through a failure to provide
instrumental assistance, emotional bond, or embodied connection rather
than via an overt act, such as a snide comment.
For example, I observed people consistently give endorsements to some
peers but not others (and this was not driven by the peer’s deservedness). I
heard about overtures to lunch that were ignored, and I saw people respond
impassively to ideas presented by some but animatedly to those presented
by others (once again, irrespective of the quality of the idea).
 Given that these acts were omissions and small in scale, they were
difficult for the excluded peer to put their finger on and name for what they
were. Nevertheless, the effects were profound in terms of diminishing
motivation and energy, constricting channels of communication, and
causing people to hold back their discretionary effort.
Disappointingly, in both phases of my research I saw that those who
identified themselves as more different to the group than similar were three
times as likely to report, and experience, acts of interpersonal exclusion
than those who were similar. Some of these acts seemed deliberate, but
many more of them appeared to be unconscious. People seemed unaware of
the differences in their behavior toward different peers, and they also
underestimated the impact of their small acts of interpersonal exclusion on
their peer, in terms of both job performance and their own team’s
effectiveness. In essence, they failed to recognize or give weight to the fact
that interpersonal exclusion is a self-defeating behavior, because it restricts
access to a larger pool of resources and creates a more transactional
workplace culture.
If an organization’s objective is to create an inclusive culture, and thus
attract and retain talent, this research reveals the significance of focusing on
(horizontal) peer relationships. As such, it complements organizational
diversity policies and (vertical) inclusive leadership practices. Moreover, it
offers practical insights about how to do this by identifying the nature of
interpersonal inclusion, thus making it easier for people to consciously and
equitably demonstrate these behaviors with their peers.
In sum, paying much more attention to these small acts of instrumental
assistance, emotional bond, and embodied connection can make a world of
difference, especially given that in increasingly flat hierarchies “co-workers
are not only a vital part of the social environment at work; they can literally
define it,” as Dan Chiaburu and David Harrison have written.2 In other
words, it is peers who help define what is means to work in an inclusive
workplace, and thus, in concert with organizational policies and inclusive
leaders, encouraging more inclusive relationships between peers can help
teams to be more effective and organizations to achieve their aspirations.
JULIET BOURKE is a professor of practice in the School of Management and
Governance, UNSW Business School, University of New South Wales, and
a workplace consultant. She is the author of Which Two Heads Are Better
Than One: The Extraordinary Power of Diversity of Thinking and Inclusive
Leadership.

Notes
1. Wiebren S. Jansen et al., “Inclusion: Conceptualization and Measurement,” European Journal of
Social Psychology 44, no. 4 (2014): 370–385.
2. Dan S. Chiaburu and David A. Harrison, “Do Peers Make the Place? Conceptual Synthesis and
Meta-analysis of Coworker Effects on Perceptions, Attitudes, OCBs, and Performance,” Journal of
Applied Psychology 93, no. 5 (2008): 1082–1103.

Adapted from “3 Small Ways to Be a More Inclusive Colleague” on hbr.org, December 13, 2021
(product #H06Q9C).

OceanofPDF.com
 5
Recognizing and Responding to
Microaggressions
By Ella F. Washington

We’ve all been in situations at work when someone says or does something
that feels hostile or offensive to some aspect of our identity—and the person
doesn’t even realize it. These kinds of actions—insensitive statements,
questions, or assumptions—are called “microaggressions,” and they can
target many aspects of who we are. For example, they could be related to
someone’s race, gender, sexuality, parental status, socioeconomic
background, mental health, or any other aspect of our identity.
Most often, microaggressions are aimed at traditionally marginalized
identity groups. Yet these hurtful actions can happen to anyone, of any
background, at any professional level. A microaggression against a Black
woman, for example, could be “You aren’t like the other Black people I
know” (indicating the person is different from the stereotypes of Black
people), whereas one for a white male might be, “Oh, you don’t ever have
to worry about fitting in” (indicating that all white men are always
comfortable and accepted). Essentially, microaggressions are based on a
simple, damaging idea: “Because you are X, you probably are/are not or
like/don’t like Y.”
One criticism of discourse about microaggressions is that our society has
become “hypersensitive” and that casual remarks are now blown out of
proportion. However, research is clear about the impact seemingly
innocuous statements can have on one’s physical and mental health,
especially over the course of an entire career: increased rates of depression,
prolonged stress and trauma, physical concerns like headaches, high blood
pressure, and difficulties with sleep.1 Microaggressions can negatively
impact careers as they are related to increased burnout and less job
satisfaction and require significant cognitive and emotional resources to
recover from them. Employers are now paying closer attention to how
organizational culture can influence whether or not employees want to
leave. One study found that 7 in 10 workers said they would be upset by a
micro aggression, and half said the action would make them consider
leaving their job.
So the reality is that microaggressions are not so micro in terms of their
impact. They should be taken seriously, because at their core they signal
disrespect and reflect inequality.
To create inclusive, welcoming, and healthy workplaces, we must actively
combat microaggressions. Doing so requires understanding how they show
up and how to respond productively to them, whether they happen to us or
to colleagues. Inclusive work environments are not just nice to have—they
positively contribute to employee well-being and mental and physical
health.
Building inclusive workplaces requires candid, authentic conversations on
tough subjects, like sexism, homophobia, and racism—and it’s natural to
worry that we may commit microaggressions in these kinds of
conversations by saying the wrong thing. The more awareness we have
about how microaggressions show up, the more we can work toward
decreasing them in the workplace. Yet the reality is that we all make
mistakes, so you should know what to do if you witness a microaggression
or commit one.
As I share in my book, The Necessary Journey, awareness is always the
first step. Here are some ways to become more aware of microaggressions,
interrupt them when we see them, and promote workplace cultures with
fewer microaggressions.

Being more aware of microaggressions

There are many words and phrases in the English language that are rooted
in systemically favoring dominant groups in society. Thus many parts of
our everyday speech have historical roots in racism, sexism, and other
forms of discrimination. For example, the following terms you may
casually hear in the workplace have hurtful connotations:

“Blacklist” refers to a list of things that are seen negatively, juxtaposed

against “whitelist,” a list of things that are seen positively.
“Man up” equates gender with strength or competence.
“Peanut gallery” originated in the 1800s and referred to the sections of
segregated theaters usually occupied by Black people.

These words and phrases can trigger thoughts of current and past
discrimination for people. Taking time to be intentional with the language
you use is a significant part of treating each other with respect. While it’s
unrealistic to know every cultural minefield that may exist in language, the
goal is to be thoughtful about the origins of common phrases and, more
importantly, to change your use of these terms if you become aware that
they are problematic. For example, if you are looking to encourage
someone, telling them to “rise to the moment” or “be brave” is a better way
to communicate the sentiment than “man up.” It takes work to unlearn the
many fraught words and phrases in our cultural lexicon, but most people
find it’s not that difficult to do once they set their minds to actively being
more inclusive.
Here are examples of a few types of microaggressions that you may hear
within and outside the workplace:

Race/ethnicity

– “I didn’t realize you were Jewish—you don’t look Jewish,”

signaling that a person of the Jewish heritage has a stereotypical
look. (Of course, similar statements happen to people from many
backgrounds.)
– “I believe the most qualified person should get the job,” signaling
that someone is being given an unfair advantage because of their
race.

Citizenship
– “Your English is so good—where are your parents from?” signaling
that people with English as a second language are generally less
capable of speaking English.
– “But where are you really from?” signaling that where someone
grew up isn’t their “true” origin. This microaggression often
happens to people who are in ethnic and racial minorities, whom
others assume are immigrants.

Class

– “How did you get into that school?” signaling that someone’s
background makes them an anomaly at a prestigious school.
– “You don’t seem like you grew up poor,” signaling that someone
from a particular socioeconomic background should look or behave
a certain way.

Mental health

– “That’s insane” or “That’s crazy,” using terminology related to a

mental health condition to describe surprise or astonishment.
– “You don’t seem like you are depressed. Sometimes I get sad too,”
minimizing the experiences of people with mental illness.
– “Don’t mind my OCD!” using the acronym for obsessive
compulsive disorder, a mental health condition where an individual
is plagued by obsessive thoughts and fears that can lead to
compulsions, to describe attention to detail, fastidiousness, or being
organized.

Gender

– “Don’t be so sensitive,” signaling that someone, likely a woman, is

being “too emotional” in a situation where a man would be more
objective.
 – “Thanks, sweetheart” and similar comments often directed at
women, which are often not appreciated or even offensive.

Sexuality

– “That’s so gay” to mean something is bad or undesirable, signaling

that being gay is associated with negative and undesirable
characteristics.
– “Do you have a wife/husband?” which assumes heteronormative
culture and behaviors, versus more inclusive phrasing such as “Do
you have a partner?”

Parental status

– “You don’t have kids to pick up, so you can work later, right?”
signaling that someone without children does not have a life outside
of work.
In the workplace, microaggressions can happen in all types of
conversations. For example, they may occur during hiring when someone is
evaluating a candidate with a different demographic background than their
own, during the performance evaluation process when someone is
highlighting the positive or negative aspects of an employee, or in customer
service when someone is interacting with customers who have a different
first language than their own. We should all become more aware of
microaggressions in general, but in professional environments, there should
be a special level of attention to and care taken in the language we use.

Responding to microaggressions
The more you increase your awareness of microaggressions, the more you
will inevitably notice they are happening—and wonder how or if you
should intercede. As with the advice given to victims of a microaggression,
you have the option to respond in the moment or later on, or let it go.
There is no one right approach to dealing with micro aggressions, but here
are a few considerations for when you witness one:
 1. What’s the right moment to say something?
Consider the environment and be thoughtful about how to create a safe
space for the conversation. Think about whether the conversation is best
had in the moment (possibly in front of other people) or one-on-one.
In some situations, an in-the-moment approach may be sufficient. For
example, if someone accidentally misgenders a colleague in a meeting, a
leader could say, “Let’s make sure we are using everyone’s correct
pronouns,” and keep the meeting going. Doing this can make it less taboo to
point out microaggressions and help to create a culture of positive in-the-
moment correction when they happen.
But no one likes to be put on the spot, and conversations are much more
likely to turn tense if your colleague feels like you are calling them out. So
if you need to confront someone, try to “call them in” by creating a safe
environment where you can engage the person in honest, authentic dialogue
—without a client or other colleagues present—to say, “Hey, I know you
didn’t mean it this way, but let’s not use language like . . .”

2. What’s your relationship to the person who made the comment?

Do you have a personal relationship with the person who committed the
microaggression? If so, you might be able to simply say, “Hey, you made a
comment earlier that did not sit well with me.”
However, if you do not have a personal relationship with the colleague,
you may want to consider what you know about their personality (do they
tend to be combative?) and history with uncomfortable conversations (are
they generally approachable?). You may also need to bring in other
colleagues they are closer with.

3. What’s your personal awareness of the microaggression’s subject?

Be honest about your level of familiarity with the subject at hand. For
example, maybe you recognize that a comment is a racial microaggression,
but you do not know the history or full implications of it. In that case, it’s
OK to talk to the person, but recognize you are not an authority on the
topic, and consider learning more first or talking to someone who has more
familiarity with the topic.
 Once you realize a microaggression has been committed and you decide
to act, it’s important to remind your friends or colleagues of the difference
between intent and impact. While the speaker may not have intended the
comment to be offensive, we must acknowledge the impact of our
statements. Intent does not supersede or excuse actual impact. For example,
you could say to the person, “I know you may have intended your statement
to come off as ______, but the way I received it was ________.”
Sometimes simply highlighting the gap between intent and impact can be
enlightening for the other person.

If you realize you have committed a

microaggression
If someone tells you that you have said something offensive, this is an
obvious moment to pause and consider the best way to handle the situation.
Using your emotional intelligence, here are some steps to take.

Take a moment to pause

Being called out can put us on the defensive, so breathe deeply and
remember that everyone makes mistakes. In most cases committing a
microaggression does not mean you are bad person; it signals that you have
a chance to treat a colleague with greater respect and to grow on your
diversity, equity, and inclusion journey.
Taking a moment to pause, breathe, and reflect can help you avoid
reacting with emotion and potentially saying something rash that could
make the situation worse.

Ask for clarification

If you are unsure what you did to offend your colleague, invite dialogue by
asking for clarification. Say, “Could you say more about what you mean by
that?”

Listen for understanding

Listen to your colleague’s perspective, even when you disagree. Far too
often in uncomfortable conversations, we listen for the opportunity to speak
and insert our own opinions instead of truly listening for understanding. To
make sure you have understood your colleague’s point of view, you could
restate or paraphrase what you heard: “I think I heard you saying
____________ [paraphrase their comments]. Is that correct?”

Acknowledge and apologize

Once you process that harm has been done, you must acknowledge the
offense and sincerely apologize for your statement. This is a moment to be
honest, whether you lacked the knowledge of a certain word’s history or
made a comment that was insensitive. You could say something like, “I can
now better understand how I was wrong in this situation. I will work to
become more aware of _____________ [the topic that you need to increase
your cultural awareness of].”

Create space for follow-up

The majority of these tough conversations take more than one conversation
to work through. Allow yourself and your colleagues the opportunity to
follow up in the future to continue the conversation, especially when cooler
heads can prevail. You may say something like, “I would be happy to talk
about this more in the future if you have any follow-up thoughts. I
appreciate you taking the time to share your perspective with me.”

What leaders should know

While microaggressions often happen at the individual level, companies
that say they are committed to inclusion should have zero tolerance for
exclusionary or discriminatory language toward any employee. Leaders
should set the standard by providing training on topics such as
microaggressions. Yet, because of the insidious nature of microaggressions,
leaders and HR professionals have the responsibility to correct individuals
when they become aware that these offenses have happened.
 Many microaggressions can become part of an organization’s culture if
not corrected. For example, I have worked with some organizations where
confusing people of the same race happened often and was casually
overlooked as an honest mistake. While we all do make mistakes, when
these same types of incidents happen consistently to the same groups of
people, leaders need to correct the behavior. One client came to me with the
issue that two Asian women on the same team were often called each
other’s name, giving them a feeling of interchangeability. I helped the client
share with the firm some tools on how to politely correct someone in the
moment, as well as provided some general reminders to the firm about why
it’s offensive to confuse two people of the same race. One thing that firm
did was to push employees to learn each other’s names and make sure to
have individual interactions with new colleagues to get to know them. They
even had a name challenge, with a prize, when they returned to the office
after working remotely during the pandemic. In this way, the firm acted to
not only call out inappropriate behavior but also shift the culture by making
it clear that knowing colleagues’ names was an important expectation for all
team members.
Ultimately, getting better at noticing and responding to microaggressions
—and at being more aware of our everyday speech—is a journey, one with
a real effect on our mental health and well-being at work. Microaggressions
affect everyone, so creating more inclusive and culturally competent
workplace cultures means each of us must explore our own biases in order
to become aware of them. The goal is not to be fearful of communicating
with each other, but instead to embrace the opportunity to be intentional
about it. Creating inclusive cultures where people can thrive does not
happen overnight. It takes a continuous process of learning, evolving, and
growing.

ELLA F. WASHINGTON is an organizational psychologist; the founder and CEO

of Ellavate Solutions, a DEI strategy firm; a professor of practice at
Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business; and a cohost of
Gallup’s Center of Black Voices Cultural Competence podcast. She is the
author of The Necessary Journey: Making Real Progress on Equity and
Inclusion (Harvard Business Review Press, 2022).
Note
1. “Understanding Racial Microaggression and Its Effect on Mental Health,” Pfizer.com, August
26, 2020,
https://www.pfizer.com/news/articles/understanding_racial_microaggression_and_its_effect_on_men
tal_health.

Adapted from “Recognizing and Responding to Microaggressions at Work” on hbr.org, May 10,
2022 (product #H07195).

OceanofPDF.com
 6
Tap into Empathy
By Irina Cozma

Treat others as you would like to be treated.”

How often did you hear this phrase while growing up? After stealing
another kid’s toy or hurting someone’s feelings, your parents were likely
quick to remind you of the “Golden Rule.” For many of us, this was our
first introduction to the concept of empathy. And there’s a good chance
you’re still (consciously or unconsciously) using this phrase as a guidepost
for how you show up.
But in our modern workplace, with all our different preferences, cultural
backgrounds, professional disciplines, ages, genders, sexual orientations,
and so on, treating others as you would like to be treated isn’t always the
best option. Although it can be helpful to put yourself in someone else’s
shoes, doing so can actually lead to making assumptions based on your own
perspective—not theirs.
It’s time to adopt the “New Golden Rule”: Treat others as they would like
to be treated. It’s a small change, but one that can make a huge difference.
All it takes to put this new mindset into practice is under standing, curiosity,
and compromise.

Challenge your assumptions

I’m an introvert, I enjoy working from my home office, and I find Zoom
easier than face-to-face meetings. This setting suits me well and makes me
feel comfortable. All other introverts must feel the same way, right?
Of course not! The fact that I and other introverts share this one
personality trait does not mean we all want or like the same things. This is
important to keep in mind when implementing the New Golden Rule.
Remember: We are all a unique mix of genetics, experiences, and desires.
Even if you share the same personality traits, hobbies, interests,
background, or generation as someone, it doesn’t mean they think exactly
the same way as you. This is even more true when considering the
preferences of those you differ from.
When you find yourself making assumptions about another person, ask:
Where are these beliefs coming from? What information am I missing?
Why do I think my assumptions are true? Are there any alternative
explanations or possibilities? Are my assumptions based on my own
experiences and understanding of the world, and if so, am I being biased?
Generalizing other people and their characters can be very dangerous—
and more often than not, our generalizations are inaccurate.

Ask questions and listen

Imagine this scenario: You’re hosting a Zoom meeting and one of your
colleagues joins with their camera off. What assumptions run through your
mind? Is something wrong? Maybe they don’t feel well today. Are they
going to multitask during your conversation?
You personally like having your camera on—doing so helps you pay
closer attention, holds you accountable, and makes you feel more connected
with your colleagues. Why wouldn’t they want the same?
You can see just how quickly your assumptions can take over. That’s why
the best way to really find out how someone else would like to be treated is
to simply ask. For example, in this case, you could ask the members of your
team if they prefer cameras on or off during meetings and use that
information to create a policy that keeps everyone comfortable and on the
same page.
Some other sample questions that might be helpful to ask those around
you include:

“How do you prefer to communicate—email or Slack?”

“Is now still a good time for us to connect?”
 “I’m not sure what you meant when you said [statement]. Can you tell
me a little more about it?”
“In what format do you need the information about this project?”

Not everyone will take the initiative to ask these questions, so when in
doubt, don’t be afraid to let others know directly about your own
preferences. Assumptions can be misleading. Disclosing our preferences
and asking more questions can help eliminate misunderstandings.

Replace “or” with “and”

Moving beyond assumptions and taking into consideration what others
prefer isn’t about putting aside your own needs. When our preferences
differ from others, it’s essential to look for a solution that works for
everyone involved.
Take the virtual meeting scenario. Your colleague prefers to have their
camera off. You prefer to have yours on. That arrangement works well for
both of you—it doesn’t have to be their way versus your way. The more
you can accommodate the preferences of the most people involved, the
better. So whenever you find yourself in a seemingly “or” situation, take a
step back and look for an “and.”
Of course, you will at some point find yourself in a situation where
compromise isn’t possible. If that’s the case, it’s best to look for any
common denominator. You might not be able to agree on everything but try
agreeing on just one thing. Look for that small win-win.
We all need to be more cognizant when making generalizations and
assumptions. When we rely too heavily on our own perspectives, we miss
out on the diverse and important viewpoints around us. Adopting the New
Golden Rule will help us all feel more seen and heard.

IRINA COZMA is a career and executive coach who supports professionals to

have better career adventures. She has coached hundreds of Fortune 500
executives from global organizations like Salesforce, Hitachi, and Abbott.
Irina also coaches startups and the Physicians MBA at the University of
Tennessee. Download her free career guide at irinacozma.com/career-guide
to help you prepare for your next career adventure.
Adapted from “It’s Time to Stop Following ‘The Golden Rule,’” on Ascend, on hbr.org, August 2,
2022.

OceanofPDF.com
 7
Inclusion Starts with Belonging
By DDS Dobson-Smith

Humans are social creatures. We have a deep-seated need to be liked,

respected, and accepted by our peers. Sometimes that need is so strong, it
drives us to alter our behaviors in exchange for approval. At work, school,
and other social institutions, this happens every day. People whose
identities don’t conform with the dominant group are often pressured to
present disingenuously to “fit in.” Under these circumstances, a sense of
belonging is hard to come by.
As an example, let’s say that you work at an organization that hires and
creates products representative of predominantly white, straight, cisgender,
male, able-bodied, middle-class, and thin men. Let’s say that you have few
of these qualities. Do you feel comfortable walking into the room? Probably
not. In fact, you probably feel that you should hide certain parts of yourself
to appear less “different.” A mother walks into this office and doesn’t talk
about her children because she thinks it will limit her growth opportunities.
A queer person walks into this office and hesitates to mention their same-
sex relationship to avoid judgment. A Black man walks into this office and
hides how scared they are by another racially driven murder in the news
because who will be able to relate to and understand that feeling?
If you look, sound, love, or think differently than the majority in the
spaces you occupy, then you already know this. You also know that it
comes at a cost—emotionally, physically, and mentally.
While the issue here is systemic and ultimately needs to be solved at the
leadership level, you don’t have to sit by until change knocks. The
experience of belonging is unique in that it doesn’t only come down to your
organization, your manager, or your teammates. You have a role to play,
too, and that role starts with self-acceptance.
 Discover your power
Every one of us has the power to accept and honor who we are at our core.
This looks like owning our qualities, values, and choices regardless of how
we think others will perceive us, and showing up for and believing in
ourselves first.
Self-acceptance happens through the process of self-discovery and self-
awareness. It’s a state we experience when we welcome, include, and take
pride in all that we are and all that we’re not yet. When we welcome every
part of ourselves, the pressure to perform or suppress our true characters
lifts. We create more space to exist comfortably within and can give more—
to our work, to our customers, and to our relationships—in that space.
It’s only when we like ourselves, and care for ourselves like we would a
loved one, that we begin to feel that we deserve to be visible and feel we
belong.

What gets in the way of self-acceptance?

While society is one factor that gets in the way, we do, too. Self-acceptance
may be essential to our wellbeing, our happiness, and our work, but it’s not
something we can conquer overnight. It requires regular practice to
overcome the biases many of us have been taught to hold against ourselves
since childhood. To understand why this is, we have to go back to the
beginning.
Most infants and young children are developing at lightning speed—faster
than our adult brain can imagine. As babies, basic connections are made in
our brains, synapses are created, and we absorb information
indiscriminately and without discernment. The majority of this knowledge
arrives through interactions with our immediate caretakers, family, and
friends. As we grow older, that circle expands to our schools, religious
institutions, workplaces, communities, and the media—pop culture and the
practices, beliefs, and objects trending at any given time.
By adolescence, most of us have learned (subconsciously or consciously)
what our society promotes and favors. In most cultures, this manifests as a
set of inborn characteristics or identity markers. For example, right now,
and for centuries in the United States, the dominant group identity markers
include white, male, cisgender, heterosexual, and able-bodied.
When you consider that, from the start, we’re trained to believe certain
characteristics are “in” or “out,” good or less good, favorable or
unfavorable, the battle with self-acceptance becomes easier to understand.
This training is further compounded by the way historically marginalized
identities have been portrayed in mainstream media: the Asian person as the
underdog, the Black person as the criminal, the trans person as the lovesick
loner, the gay person as the drug-fueled partygoer, or the disabled person as
the butt of the joke.
For anyone who is not a member of the dominant groups—and sometimes
even for those who are—we internalize these messages when we are young
and create beliefs about what is and what isn’t good, right, and likable.
Inevitably, we end up projecting those biases onto ourselves, creating
negative self-images, and low expectations of our capabilities. These
projections, or internalized prejudices, become calcified as our personal
truths. They are weapons we unknowingly use against ourselves, causing us
emotional pain, holding us back from achieving our full potential, and
suppressing our experience of pride.
This is the source of the oft-talked about, and universally experienced,
phenomenon known as impostor syndrome, the cause of many derailed
lives and careers. This is also why, as adults, we need to do the work to
unlearn our own biases, especially the ones we have against ourselves. That
work isn’t going to be easy. It’s going to be very hard.
While I agree that this is a societal problem at large, know that we have
the tools to thrive under the circumstances we find ourselves in. Here is
some advice on how to take back power by rewriting your individual
narratives and beliefs, and developing the kind of thoughts and habits that
will create change for the future.

Start by learning to love yourself

If you have at least one identity marker that comes from a marginalized or
underrepresented group, it isn’t so much a case of if you have internalized
sexism, racism, ableism, transphobia, or homophobia, but more a case of
how it shows up and impacts your inner and outer worlds. The good news is
that it’s possible to unlearn your biases and relearn to love all the parts of
who you are, despite what the dominant discourse would have you believe.
Based on my experience as a licensed therapist and executive coach, here
are a few tips to help you get started.

Breathe
The idea that you might be holding yourself back due to internalized
prejudice is a challenging concept to get your head around. Sit quietly and
breathe deeply and consciously as you let your thoughts surface into
awareness.
Focused breathing will keep you grounded instead of getting lost in your
thoughts or becoming dysregulated emotionally. Your deep breaths slow
your active mind and allow you to look more deeply into what you’re
feeling. Connecting with your breath and your body is important when
confronting internalized prejudice and beginning a process of self-
discovery.

Do a life audit
Internalized prejudice is caused by the environment that you’re in—the
books you read, the TV shows you watch, who you follow in your social
feeds, and the people you hang out with. So, do an audit of your
environment. Are you surrounding yourself with people and things that
validate your identity? Does your environment make you feel inferior or
powerful?
Make it a priority to fill your life (at work and at home) with influences
that are supportive of you. At work, get in touch with your organization’s
employee resource groups (ERGs) to connect with people who represent
your intersectional identity. If your employer doesn’t provide ERGs, then
undertake a search in your local area for peer support groups, clubs, or
associations that are devoted to people like you.
At home, look at your friend groups, the content you’re consuming, and
the experiences you’re seeking on social media. Make sure these areas of
your life are abundant, energizing, and affirming—not draining.
 Educate yourself about yourself
When you internalize myths and misinformation about your identity, you
may (often unconsciously) feel that you aren’t as worthy as people in the
dominant group.1 You may act in ways that reinforce this belief and hold
you back from being yourself in uncomfortable spaces, like work. Hence,
awareness is essential.
To unlearn the biased lessons imposed during your upbringing, you need
to reteach yourself the truth about our (and your) history. Learning more
about the societal structures that uphold oppression and exclusion will help
you reframe your internalized prejudice through uncovering their origins.
Further, learning the history of your communities, and how the people who
came before you fought the odds, is the first step to gaining self-awareness,
which leads to empowerment and acceptance.
For example, everything we have learned has been subject to the bias and
perspectives of the lesson-giver, whether that be a family member, a teacher
at middle school, a book we borrowed from the library, or a YouTube video
we watched. In the process of educating yourself about yourself, you must
be willing to unlearn, and you must be willing to be uncomfortable;
allowing truths to become untruths in the process of expanding your map of
the world isn’t always easy. My advice here is simple: Don’t believe
everything you think. Learn to question your own opinions by challenging
where and who they come from, and asking yourself what evidence you
have to prove or disprove them.
Some people choose to do this work with a therapist who can provide a
loving, supportive, and objective space. Other people choose self-reflective
journaling as a way to track their thoughts and emotions over time, and
many people choose to do both. To open the door to unlearning (and
relearning), I recommend three great podcasts from the Scene on Radio
series—Seeing White, Men, and The Land That Has Never Been Yet—as
informative, factual, and powerful sources of insight and learning. Another
great podcast from NPR, Hidden Brain: “Man Up,” is also worth checking
out.

Be kind to yourself
Unpacking and exploring your internalized prejudice may surface
unpleasant memories or associations; it can be hard and lead to feelings of
shame, guilt, and embarrassment. To that end, please do this work with self-
compassion and empathy. Know that your difficult feelings are valid and
are a part of your healing and self-acceptance process. Don’t run away from
them. Instead, get curious about how and why they’ve developed. This is
the only way to grow and be kinder to yourself in the future.
___________
Belonging is an archetypal experience that all humans seek, whoever they
are. It transcends geographies, generations, and genotypes. When we
recognize that we’re not alone in our desire to belong, then we can live with
greater empathy—empathy not only for others, but also for ourselves. And
it is with that spirit of empathy for ourselves that we can gently and kindly
dismantle any internalized prejudice and open up into greater levels of self-
acceptance.

DDS DOBSON-SMITH is a licensed therapist, author, executive coach, expert

on leadership development, and Reiki master—all in service of helping
others grow and become who they are. They are the founder of
SoulTrained, an executive coaching and leadership growth consultancy, and
the author of two books: You Can Be Yourself Here: Your Pocket Guide to
Creating Inclusive Workplaces by Using the Psychology of Belonging and
Leadership Is a Behavior Not a Title: Your Pocket Guide to Being a Leader
Worth Following. Learn more at www.soultrained.com.

Note
1. “Section 3. Healing from the Effects of Internalized Oppression, Chapter 27. Working Together
for Racial Justice and Inclusion,” Cultural Competence and Spirituality in Community Building,
Community Toolbox, Center for Community Health and Development at the University of Kansas,
https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/culture/cultural-competence/healing-from-interalized-
oppression/main.

Adapted from “A Sense of Belonging Starts with Self-Acceptance,” on Ascend, on hbr.org, August 8,
2022.

OceanofPDF.com
 8
Stop Using These Words and Phrases
By Rakshitha Arni Ravishankar

Try this thought experiment: You’re sitting at your desk when your friend
texts you an article about a topic you’re passionate about. You read it and
ask her what she thinks. To your surprise, her opinion is the complete
opposite of yours. This obviously upsets you. Later that evening, as you
explain what happened to your partner, how do you describe your friend’s
point of view?
If you said it was “stupid,” “insane,” “crazy,” “lame,” or “dumb,” you
have (unknowingly or not) participated in spreading ableist language.
You may be surprised to learn that your response was a form of
discrimination. People use ableist words and phrases every day without
realizing the harm they do.
Ableism is defined as discrimination or social prejudice against people
with disabilities based on the belief that typical abilities are superior. It can
manifest as an attitude, stereotype, or an outright offensive comment or
behavior. When it comes to language, ableism often shows up as metaphors
(“My boyfriend is emotionally crippled”), jokes (“That comedian was
hysterical”), and euphemisms (“He is differently abled”) in conversation.
As a journalist with a background in media studies, I spend a lot of time
thinking about language and the words we choose to express ourselves. Our
words, and the reasons why we choose them, reflect the times we live in.
Just as some historically racist, sexist, and derogatory terms have been
retired, so have a handful of ableist slurs that were used to dehumanize,
stigmatize, and institutionalize people in the past. At the same time, too
many people continue to casually spew ableist language to ridicule,
criticize, or dismiss others.
 My intent is not to shame anyone; it is to help more people understand
how to identify and stop using words and phrases that reinforce ableism. I
reached out to several disability rights advocates for their insights.
Here’s what I learned.

Ableism is bigger than language

Language is a tool we use to make sense of our feelings and environment.
When we verbally describe the things, experiences, and people around us,
we are also assigning value to them and that value impacts how we interact
with each other.
Ableist language largely influences us in three ways.

1. It reveals our unconscious biases

Lydia X. Z. Brown, a disability justice advocate, told me that our attitudes
toward disability show up in the language we use. “If we believe people
with mental illness should not be in our workplace, life, family, or
neighborhood, then, it’s easier to rationalize using ableist words,” Brown
said. “You might think: ‘Only crazy people do that. I don’t do that, so it’s
okay for me to say.’ But when people say these things, they send a signal to
people with psychosocial disabilities that we are not welcome.”
Of course, Brown noted, that language is just one way ableism shows up.
“By removing ableism from your vocabulary, you don’t remove ableism
from your surroundings.”
Ableism can be blatant, especially in work or school environments. It
could be the lack of accessible infrastructures, or something more insidious,
like performance evaluations based on what are traditionally considered
“productive” or “appropriate” behaviors.
Shain Neumeier, a lawyer and activist, added, “Unfortunately, people may
not realize that doodling during a meeting [or class] may be your way of
paying attention, especially if you’re someone with an invisible disability.
They might just think it’s an abnormal behavior for that space.”

2. It makes us internalize harmful biases about disability

When you treat a disability as a joke, metaphor, or euphemism, you are
causing harm in a couple of ways. First, you are spreading the idea that it’s
acceptable to dehumanize and stigmatize someone with a disability.
Depending on your circle or friend group, you could even be enabling
others to do the same.
Second, a disabled person may end up internalizing those tropes
themselves. “The first time someone makes fun of you or people like you
(even if it’s not directed at you), it’s a little drop in the bucket. It’s like a
poke,” Neumeier said. “But, when you are put down 100 times, over and
over again, you start feeling disrespected, and it becomes hard to be around
the perpetrators. Specifically in the work environment, if there is an
imbalanced power dynamic, and the perpetrator is your boss, it can be very
difficult.”
Neumeier also pointed out that writing off a slur or universally
unacceptable expression—like the r-word or the m-word—may be easier
for a disabled person than constantly confronting microaggressions. If the
person facing discrimination doesn’t have a support system, they may start
to believe something is wrong with them, and that’s dangerous.

3. It stigmatizes already marginalized people

Allilsa Fernandez, a mental health and disability activist, told me that using
words that are ableist can distract attention from the point you’re trying to
make and normalize the idea that disabilities equate to insults. Fernandez
explained, “When you say Trump is such a ‘psycho’ or ‘weirdo’ for his
stance on immigration, you end up focusing on those specific words,
without addressing the real issue: what it is that you don’t like about the
immigration policy.”
If you want to critique a politician’s viewpoint or an administration’s
policy (or anything for that matter), Fernandez advises that you talk about
the reasons you agree or disagree with it. “When you attack a person’s
physical and mental abilities in place of actually expressing an opinion or
idea, you further stigmatize people with disabilities,” said Fernandez.

A conscious effort to improve your vocabulary

Using ableist language doesn’t make you a bad person. It makes you a
person. But, if you have the privilege to change your vocabulary for the
better, then why not try?
I asked my interviewees for a few beginner tips. This was their advice.

1. Acknowledge the disability around you

More than 1 billion people worldwide, around 15% of the population, have
some type of disability.1 People with disabilities make up a quarter of the
U.S. population.2
Professor Beth Haller teaches disability and media studies at Towson
University. She told me the more conscious we become of the disability
around us, the less we are likely to stigmatize it as something to be fixed
and look at it as something that is.
“Usually, people exist on two ends: People either feel bad for you if you
are disabled or self-aggrandize by feeling ‘lucky’ for the life they live
(without the disability),” she explained. “Both of those things are
unhelpful.”
Haller said that, as a world, we need to get out of the mindset that a
disabled person has “less than the rest of us.” That’s where the
discrimination begins.
Pro tip: Don’t try to fix disability; instead fix the oppression.

2. Learn, learn, learn

“Education, that’s where you start,” Fernandez says. “It’s not that people
don’t stop and think about the impact their words have on others, it’s just
that language is very deeply ingrained. It reflects our families, friends,
cultures, and identity.” According to Fernandez, becoming aware of our
own biases—many of which we’ve picked up from the people we’ve met,
the experiences we’ve had, and the media we’ve consumed throughout our
lives—is the first step to educating ourselves.
Another way to become more aware of our own biases is to listen more
than we talk. Neumeier told me to think of listening as a means of building
stronger relationships—at work or beyond. “Look at every interaction you
have as a way to bond with others, rather than just a clash of ideas.
Otherwise, we are all going to feel isolated.”
Finally, Brown added that it’s important for everyone to use the resources
put out by disabled people. “Look for articles, books, videos, podcasts, and
other work by disabled writers and activists. Use these tools to learn about
the way discrimination or ableism works.” Doing so will help you
recognize when it’s happening in real life—whether it’s coming from you,
or someone else.
Pro tip: Educate yourself, and don’t rely on others to teach you.

3. Don’t make assumptions about someone’s identity

Linguistic rules are evolving. In the late 1980s and early ’90s, during the
AIDS epidemic, organizations began to move away from words like
“handicapped” and embrace what is referred to as people-first language,
according to Haller. Instead of defining people by their disability, the
movement sought to focus on the fact that people with disabilities are, first
and foremost, just people. An example of this would be saying “a person
with a disability” instead of “a disabled person.”
This was the linguistic rule for some time. Then, in the early ’90s, other
disability communities, like the National Federation of the Blind and the
d/Deaf community, mobilized for an identity-first rule so disability could be
recognized as an identity and not just a medical category. For instance,
some individuals may prefer “Deaf” (capitalized) instead of “people who
are deaf” or “people with loss of hearing.”
The history behind our identities and how we name them is complex.
“Today, the best strategy is just to ask people how they want to be
addressed,” Haller said.
Everyone I interviewed echoed this sentiment: clarifying questions about
identity shows respect.
Pro tip: The best rule is: When you’re unsure of someone’s identity, just
ask.

4. When you make a mistake, genuinely apologize

“When someone tells you that something is disrespectful, you don’t have to
understand why they are hurt. Just that they are,” said Brown. “I love
cooking for my friends. But, if someone says they didn’t like a dish I made
for them, then I’m not going to force them to eat it. I don’t have to
understand or argue or even agree with them. But if I have a choice, why
would I make my friend a dish they don’t like?”
Brown cautions to be aware of your reaction if someone calls you out.
Getting defensive may be a natural response, but the last thing you want to
do is make someone else’s pain about you, even if you had good intentions.
Instead, genuinely check yourself, say you’re sorry, and do better in the
future.
Pro tip: This isn’t about your opinions; it’s about how the other person feels.
___________
My big takeaway from these conversations is that the pain and isolation that
accompany discrimination and prejudice run much deeper than the ableist
words many of us were taught as kids. Those words hurt people, and that
hurt is valid.
The upside is that history shows us that language and communications
evolve. This means we have a lot of room to create vocabularies that are
more empowering and inclusive—ones that address historical injustices and
make everybody feel welcome.
Language isn’t meant to alienate us; it’s meant to help us understand one
another.

RAKSHITHA ARNI RAVISHANKAR is an associate editor at HBR Ascend.

Notes
1. “Disability Inclusion,” World Bank, April 14, 2022,
https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/disability.
2. “Disability Impacts All of Us,” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/infographic-disability-impacts-all.html.

Adapted from “Why You Need to Stop Using These Words and Phrases” on Ascend, on hbr.org,
December 15, 2020.
OceanofPDF.com
 9
The Power of Sharing Our Stories
By Selena Rezvani and Stacey A. Gordon

As inclusion consultants, we see more and more companies doubling down

on diversity metrics like business cases, scorecards, and targets. After all,
what matters gets measured, right?
These programs track things like workforce demographics, diversity
hiring, retention, promotion rates, and utilization of DEI resources. While
those measures have their place, we’ve found that they’re insufficient to
create inclusion on their own. In fact, an overly mathematical approach
actually deemphasizes the very thing we hope to build in inclusive
workplaces: awareness, connection, empathy, and mutual respect.
In our attempts to create more awake and aware environments, we’re
forgetting that numbers typically don’t inspire us to change our behavior—
people and stories do. With our corporate clients, it’s the exchange of
human experiences via stories, focus groups, and listening sessions that
tend to inspire lasting change for people on a personal level.
We can make actual progress on inclusion by implementing a story-based
approach where employees are encouraged to tell their stories, own them,
and consider how they impact their day-to-day experiences at work.

Whose stories get told?

So now you might be thinking: If we’re going to tell more stories, it makes
sense to start with leaders, right?
Not necessarily.
One study published in the Academy of Management Journal revealed
that newcomers prefer to hear stories from their peers rather than leaders.1
If that’s true, why do most inclusion programs leave so little space for peers
to share their lived experiences?
It’s up to leaders to facilitate that sharing. Failure to do so leaves
employees, especially women and people of color, feeling unrepresented.
One of our clients at a consumer goods company called us because women
weren’t “raising their hands” for opportunities at the same rate as men.
After dozens of one-on-one interviews, we found that women had been
raising their hands—and were continually being passed over and dismissed.
We then facilitated a session with leaders and employees, presenting themes
from their interviews. A principal at the company called it the most raw,
honest dialogue they’d experienced in years, thanks to the unfiltered stories
and voices of employees.
When people hear stories that feel representative, it creates a vehicle for
nuanced conversations, which are what truly drive change. Stories invite
perspective-taking: the concept of standing in someone else’s shoes and
imagining what it’s like to be them. It’s a drastically underutilized inclusion
tool. One study found that taking the perspective of others “may have a
lasting positive effect on diversity-related outcomes by increasing
individuals’ internal motivation to respond without prejudice.”2
One CEO we worked with in the entertainment industry didn’t really
understand what ERGs are or why the company needed them. Still, he
signed off on starting them and even allocated some budget for them. He
was skeptical and didn’t see the point until he attended one of the events
held by the LGBTQ ERG and heard, through stories, how bias affected
those employees. Later, he heard how much happier they were at work once
they began feeling as though they belonged, and they began working on
ways to improve the company—not just for LGBTQ employees, but for
everyone.

Look in the mirror

Because traditional DEI programs can make things too abstract and
overlook the fact that DEI is about the people, we tell all leaders—even
cisgender, white, heterosexual men—to first look in the mirror and examine
their own diversity stories. Doing this work helps leaders understand and
empathize with the narratives shared by others. Once they uncover their
own stories, they may be invited (and expected) to share their own—in
addition to, not over and above, the stories of individual contributors.
People crave authenticity, texture, and transparency in leaders. They don’t
want the diluted, professional version of who you are. There’s a false
narrative that our unique and personal backgrounds are somehow
unprofessional and should never be addressed at work. But, regardless of
whether we ignore them or bring them to the fore, they shape the way we
interact with others in every situation—nobody is ever fully objective.
Bringing our own stories to the table helps us create contrast with others
and better see the nuance in ours and their perspectives.
If you feel stuck or unsure of how to dig into your own diversity story,
here are few prompts to get you started:

When did your privilege afford you different treatment than someone
else?
When did someone advocate for you? (Did someone with privilege
help you?)
Did you ever need to search to find your own sense of belonging?
When did you discover a bias or privilege you had and how did you
overcome it?
Have you ever felt pressure to conform or fit in?
Did you ever witness an unconscious bias play out in the workplace?

Here’s what we learned from this exercise ourselves:

Selena: “As a biracial person, I dismissed and minimized my personal
diversity stories for so long. I’m half-Pakistani and brown-presenting—
and also half-Caucasian and at times white-passing. Being mixed can
make you feel like you don’t belong anywhere. Once I finally told my
story about the contrasts that I experience being multiethnic, I felt a sense
of freedom that allowed me to connect with others—even clients—more
deeply and authentically.”
Stacey: “As a Black person in a white world, growing up as one of very
few Black children in my school, I never felt that I fit in. I thought that
 would change when I moved to Brooklyn, New York, but surprisingly, it
didn’t. Because once I arrived, I realized everyone saw me as ‘the British
girl.’ It took years to embrace my nontraditional culture, but owning my
background helped me gain that sense of belonging, and now I use that
journey to help our clients do the same.”
More than 500 professionals responded to our organization’s DEI
Blueprint survey, and only 4% of respondents were able to answer in the
affirmative that “[o]ur leadership is aligned on the commitment to diversity
and inclusion in the organization.”3 How can leaders show up and tell their
stories if there’s no alignment on the importance of DEI? That’s a gaping
disconnect, and a big problem. It means the stories we hear from them are
often watered down and unrelatable. They don’t serve a purpose, they’re
just lip service, and they don’t help people see the leader’s humanity.
So, what’s a leader to do?
Share! Share your story as authentically as possible. Share how it made
you feel. Share the mistakes you’ve made. Be honest.

Create space for storytelling

The best way to create a cascading inclusion effect in an organization is to
offer safe spaces where stories can be heard without judgment. This works
best when psychological safety is being actively cultivated. There is a
natural give-and-take to storytelling—a vulnerability that comes with
sharing—and an instinct to reciprocate. That means that in the most
psychologically safe workplaces, people aren’t required to share, but
they’re safe to share. The vulnerability employees are placing in leaders’
hands has to be cared for by the organization. To encourage team members
to talk regularly about their diversity stories, consider the following actions:

Do a round-robin question in a meeting.

Hold listening sessions.
Host discussion-heavy book clubs.
Schedule storytelling town halls.
 Include stories in blogs, videos, celebrations, promotions, and
onboarding.
Be transparent about surveys and focus groups that show negative
perceptions and harmful treatment.
Have social forums and meetups.
Develop dynamic social media campaigns that share stories.

Many people may be walking around with powerful experiences but don’t
see them as “good stories.” Reassure them that their stories don’t need to be
perfect, they just need to be real.
As you open up forums for your team, encourage people to tell their
stories in their own words by:

Bringing a beginner’s mindset. Let go of what you think you know so

you can actively listen to what is being said.
Receiving diversity stories with empathy and warmth. Affirm the
stories you hear, even if you don’t relate or completely understand how
a person feels. If someone is emotional or uncomfortable, affirm that
you’re there to support them.
Not asking storytellers to “oververify.” After someone is done sharing,
even if you have questions, don’t challenge or ask people to give
evidence for their stories. If you do have questions, ask them directly if
you can pose a follow-up question about their experience when they’re
done.
Thanking people for sharing. It’s important to let people know that you
hear them and appreciate them sharing.
Checking in about continually improving safe spaces. As more
storytelling forums take place, check in with people. Ask if they feel
you’ve created a space where people can tell their stories and be heard.

___________
It’s time for the conversation around inclusion and diversity to take a
human-centric approach. It’s not just about the numbers—it’s about the
people. Storytelling, one of the most universal human experiences, gives us
a rare chance to look through new lenses. And perspective-taking is a life
skill, not just a workplace one. Companies that prioritize inclusion will
emerge from crisis stronger, and stories are one major vehicle to help them
get there.

SELENA REZVANI consults with employers on how to make work truly

“work” for women—through cultural diagnostics, focus groups, and by
implementing cutting-edge inclusion programs. Selena is the author of two
leadership books, Pushback and The Next Generation of Women Leaders,
and the forthcoming Quick Confidence. In 2019, Selena’s TEDx talk,
“Interrupting Gender Bias Through Meeting Culture,” was recognized with
the Croly Journalism award. To learn more, visit www.selenarezvani.com.
STACEY A. GORDON is a workplace culture consultant, keynote speaker,
author, facilitator of learning, and executive adviser on diversity strategies.
As the founder of Rework Work, she coaches leaders to lead workplaces
where all stakeholders #WorkTogether to create belonging. Stacey’s
unconscious bias course is number one on the LinkedIn Learning platform
and has been translated into several languages. She is also the author of
UNBIAS: Addressing Unconscious Bias at Work. To learn more, visit
learn.reworkwork.com.

Notes
1. Sean R. Martin, “Stories About Values and Valuable Stories: A Field Experiment of the Power
of Narratives to Shape Newcomers’ Actions,” Academy of Management Journal 59, no. 5 (2015),
https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amj.2014.0061.
2. Alex Lindsey et al., “The Impact of Method, Motivation, and Empathy on Diversity Training
Effectiveness,” Journal of Business and Psychology 30 (2015): 605–617.
3. “Diversity Equity & Inclusion Workplace Assessment,” https://www.reworkwork.com/about-
us/workplace-assessment/.

Adapted from “How Sharing Our Stories Builds Inclusion” on hbr.org, November 1, 2021 (product
#H06NYO).

OceanofPDF.com
 Index

ableism/ableist language, 117–130

improving vocabulary, 123–129
internalizing harmful biases, 121–122
and language use, 119
lessons learned from, 129–130
revealing unconscious biases, 120–121
stigmatizing marginalized people, 122–123
Academy of Management Journal, 135
accountability, for psychological safety, 44–45
allyship, 24–25, 26, 43
alternative views, 9
apologizing, 83, 128–129
awareness of bias, 5, 86, 125–126. See also self-awareness

beginner’s mindset, 143

being kind, to yourself, 112–113
belonging, 38, 101–113
difficulties in experiencing, 101–103
learning to love yourself, 107–113
self-acceptance, 103–107
social, 17–18
at work. See workplace belonging
BetterUp studies, 18, 19
bias(es), 101–103
awareness of, 5, 86, 125–126
internalization of, about disability, 121–122
self-acceptance to overcome, 104
unconscious, 120–121
unlearning, 107, 110–112
“blacklist,” 71
blind spots, of psychological safety, 39–40
Bourke, Juliet, 3–12, 51–62
breathing, 81–82, 108–109
Brown, Lydia X. Z., 120, 126, 128–129

candor, 32, 34, 35

Carr, Evan W., 17–26
Chiaburu, Dan, 61–62
citizenship discrimination, 73–74
class discrimination, 74
collaboration, 4, 6, 40
Cozma, Irina, 91–97
cultural differences, 8
cultural dimensions for resilience
inclusion, 32, 38–39, 45
innovation, 32, 36–37, 45
integrity, 32, 34–36, 45
cultural intelligence, 6
culture, of workplace. See organizational culture
curiosity about others, 5–6

D&I trainings. See diversity and inclusion trainings

DEI initiatives. See diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives
disability, 120, 127
ableism and. See ableism/ableist language
acknowledging, 124–125
internalization of biases about, 121–122
discrimination/discriminatory language, 71–72, 84
ableism as, 117–118, 122, 125, 126
citizenship, 73–74
class, 74
gender, 75
mental health, 74–75
of parental status, 76
racial/ethnic, 73
sexual, 75–76
diversity
among employees, 38–39
as business strategy, 44
conversation around, 144–145
experiential, 39
metrics, 133
organizational, 33
policies, 51, 61
recruiting and hiring for, 25
stories, 137, 138–139, 142, 143
diversity and inclusion trainings (D&I trainings), 10, 17, 44
diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives (DEI initiatives), 43–44, 82, 137–141
Dobson-Smith, DDS, 101–113

embodied connection, 55–56, 61

emotional care of others, 54–55, 61
empathy, 91–97, 112, 113
employee resource groups (ERGs), 109, 136
employees
diversity among, 38–39
excluded, 21–22
fear of retaliation, 35
 psychological safety of, 58
employer promoter score, 20
empowerment, 23–24
engagement, 17, 38
environment, sustainability, and governance commitments (ESG), 33, 44
ERGs. See employee resource groups
ESG. See environment, sustainability, and governance commitments
ethical business behavior, 33
ethical decision making, clarity in expectations for, 42–43
exclusion, 17–26, 100. See also workplace exclusion
acts of, by leaders, 10
allies to prevent, 24–25
costs of, 20–22
exclusionary language, 84
interpersonal, 59–61
interventions for, 23
reversing effects of, 22–24
external reporting, 36

favoritism, 9
Fernandez, Allilsa, 122–123, 125
focused breathing, 108–109

gaining perspective, 23, 25–26

gender discrimination, 75
“Golden Rule,” 91. See also “New Golden Rule”
Gordon, Stacey A., 133–145
groupthink, 38
Gube, Maren, 31–45

Haller, Beth, 124–125, 127

Harrison, David, 61–62
Hennelly, Debra Sabatini, 31–45
humility, 5

impostor syndrome, 106–107

included workers, 21–22
inclusive leadership, 3–12
definition, 3
good leadership vs., 6
getting started in, 10–12
insights on, 6–8
traits/behaviors of, 5–6, 8–10
inclusiveness, 3–4, 7
inclusive workplaces, 51, 52, 69–70, 133
innovation, for psychological safety, 32, 36–37
instrumental assistance, 53–54, 57, 61
integrity, for psychological safety, 32, 33, 34–36
intent, vs. impact, 80–81
internalized prejudice, 106, 108–109, 110, 112
interpersonal inclusion, 51–62
disadvantages of, 59–61
embodied connection, 55–56, 61
emotional care of others, 54–55, 61
instrumental assistance, 53–54, 57, 61
as reciprocal process, 56–59

journaling, 112

Kellerman, Gabriella Rosen, 17–26

language. See ableism/ableist language

leadership, good vs. inclusive, 6. See also inclusive leadership
learning
cultural differences, 8
importance of, 125–126
learning to love yourself, 107–108
being kind to yourself, 112–113
doing life audit, 109–110
internalized prejudice, 106, 108–109, 110, 112
unlearning bias from upbringing, 110–112
left-out feelings, 25. See also exclusion
life audit, 109–110
linguistic rules, 127

“man up,” 71, 72

marginalized people, stigmatizing, 122–123
mental health discrimination, 74–75
mentorship, 23–24, 25
microaggressions, 67–86
acknowledging and apologizing, 83
approaches to dealing with, 77–81
asking for clarification, 82
against Black people, 68
awareness of, 70–72, 77, 80–81, 84
creating space for follow-up, 83–84
creating inclusive workplaces to combat, 69–70
intent vs. impact of, 80–81
hurtful words and phrases, 71–77
leaders’ responsibility to manage, 84–86
listening for understanding, 82–83
negative impact in career, 68–69
speaking up about, 78–79
taking time to pause, 81–82

National Federation of the Blind and the d/Deaf community, 127–128

The Necessary Journey (Washington), 70
Neumeier, Shain, 121–122, 126
“New Golden Rule,” 92–93

organizational culture
assessing, 42
correcting microaggressions in, 70, 78, 85–86
of curiosity, 37
inclusive, 10, 61, 86
of integrity, 34–36
psychologically safe, 31, 32
organizational diversity, 33
outside-the-box thinking, encouraging, 43
overpowering others, 9

parental status, discrimination of, 76

“peanut gallery,” 71
peer relationships, 51
impact on individual’s experience of inclusion, 52–53
interpersonal exclusion and, 59–61
significance of focusing on, 61
people-first language, 127
performance metrics, 44–45
personal weaknesses, sharing, 8. See also storytelling
perspective, gaining, 23, 25–26
perspective-taking, 136, 145
physical connection. See embodied connection
preferred pronouns, 78
psychological safety, 31–45
accountability for, 44–45
blind spots of, 39–40
cultural dimensions for resilience, 32, 34–39
focus areas for leaders, 42–45
as foundation of resilience, 33–34
vulnerability as obstacle of, 40–41

racial/ethnic discrimination, 73
Ravishankar, Rakshitha Arni, 117–130
Razzetti, Gustavo, 41
Reece, Andrew, 17–26
Remote, Not Distant (Razzetti), 41
resilience
cultural dimensions for, 32, 34–39, 45
organizational, 31
psychological safety as foundation of, 33–34
retaliation, fear of, 35–36
Rezvani, Selena, 133–145
Robichaux, Alexi, 17–26

self-acceptance, 103–107, 112

self-awareness, 103, 111
self-compassion, 112
self-sabotage, 21–22
sexual discrimination, 75–76
social belonging, 17–18. See also belonging; workplace belonging
storytelling, 133–145
creating space for, 141–144
leaders’ role in, 137, 140–141
listening to, 143
questions to ask yourself, 138–139
real vs. good, 143
receiving with empathy, 143

team sabotage, 21–22

Titus, Andrea, 3–12
traits/behaviors, of inclusive leaders, 5–6, 8–10

“upstanders,” 36, 43

visible commitment, 5
vocabulary, improving, 123–129
vulnerability, 40–41, 141–142

Washington, Ella F., 67–86

“whitelist,” 71
workers. See employees
workplace belonging, 17–26
creating, 25–26
research, 18–20
value for business, 20
workplace culture. See organizational culture
workplace exclusion, 17–18. See also exclusion
allies as protection from, 24–25
reversing effects of, 22–24
sabotage and, 21–22

OceanofPDF.com
OceanofPDF.com