A global business calls for an inclusive approach to the art of people management. This involves an extremely discerning approach on one’s part, in terms of not allowing any prejudices influence the decisions one takes and the attitudes one displays towards others. In the era of a more than ever and much sharper divide between the conservative and the liberal elements; the art of leadership in the business environment needs a completely different overhaul from within. It may seem like walking a tight rope in the hope of retaining the balance throughout, since it involves a delicate adjustment of behaviour towards others on an ongoing basis. In reality it is more about making the choice in the favour of the actual belief that one holds in the individual as well as the organisational context or re-engineering the values and the belief systems entirely, for good. And it is definitely not easy. It involves a whole process of complex design thinking, keeping the macro and micro environments in view. But it is imperative and imminent.
Therefore, basically there can be two approaches to the concept of inclusive management- firstly, one can do as suggested in the previous paragraph; keep making minor adjustments to your behaviour and walk the tight rope. This is risky though. Secondly, a complete overhaul of the mindset that encompasses one’s belief system.
Both these approaches are completely dependent on the individual’s preferences and inclination towards addressing this issue.
The fact is, a few leaders have already gone through the ritual of affirmation in the present scenario due to certain situational compulsions. These rituals of affirmation have involved drawing the line that puts their organization within a defined ideological spectrum. To send the message clearly to the world, the words have to be matched carefully with the attitude that is on display or that needs to evolve (in case if something is lacking). The resulting actions have to be measured in order to reflect the words that deliver that message. This is a whole lot of work on oneself and the organisation’s ethos. For example, Airbnb leadership acted decisively by canceling the membership of the people who were involved in something that was not aligned to the organisational culture. It came up with a statement in the aftermath of the white supremacists’ rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, USA; and through that it established itself as both, an inclusive as well as a strong organisation. The statement that they came up with, was as follows,
“In 2016 we established the Airbnb Community Commitment reflecting our belief that to make good on our mission of belonging, those who are members of the Airbnb community accept people regardless of their race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or age. We asked all members of the Airbnb to affirmatively sign on to this commitment. When through our background check processes or from input of our community we identify and determine that there are those who would be pursuing behavior on the platform that would be antithetical to the Airbnb Community Commitment, we seek to take appropriate action including, as in this case, removing them from the platform“. (Source: TechCrunch)
There is a similar example from Google where James Damore was fired for circulating a memo that was not aligned to the basic tenets of Google’s culture. The fact that he went running to hire a Republican lawyer, in the aftermath of his firing proves the existence of the sharp ideological differences that are dividing the people like never before and are present within the organisations as well as outside in the public arena. Google’s CEO simply showed to the world as to where the organisation stands with its diversified work force. In his statements he did not mince the words despite the constant and sharp media attention and the pressure.
Earlier a veil of ambiguity and nicety existed that somehow ensured that the top leaderships did not have to take a stand regarding the issue of diversity and inclusion in media glare and public eye. The issues were dealt with, in their individuality without any political implications in the wider context of ideological adherence. But times have changed indeed, with the rapid crystallisation of ideological leanings, which were definitely there earlier as well but were a little amorphous within the organisations, in contrast to the present day sharp discourse on social media and main media that is so deeply entrenched into the communication patterns of today. Being liberal was just the ideal way to be in the organisational context, in terms of the highest benchmark of thoughts and behaviours. The hypocrisy lurking behind was often ignored or swept below the carpet. The hierarchies within the organisations were always projected to be indifferent to the concepts of race, caste, region, religion, gender etc; therefore the concept of the ‘equal opportunity employer’! Time and again issues erupted and disturbed the peace, yet the official line was expected and remained to be the same. The executive leadership of today’s organisation has to be extremely cautious, and self introspection is the need of the hour, given the emotional flare ups and the hypersensitivity on the part of the different parties. A complete re-evaluation and delineation of the values and belief system have to be done.
This is much more important or rather compulsory for the technology giants since they are more in public eyes inadvertently. One can only imagine what must be going on in the organisations wherein media or social media does not have much of a reach.
To be continued…
-Deepshikha Singh
Deepsh27 