Two examples from the speaking book 365 days Dutch by Neaada Aurangzeb from 2021:
Example 1: Birthday party
Tineke: “Racism is such a difficult topic to discuss. It quickly makes me emotional.” Me: “What makes it difficult for you?” Tineke: “It feels like I am being accused of something and that is a very unpleasant feeling.” Me: “Very good books have been written about this process. Perhaps it will be enlightening if you read them.” Tineke: “I think this is very bad if you act so pedantic. As if you know it all so well.”
Example 2: Drugstore Amsterdam-South
Seller to Bart: “I’ll help you in a minute, just keep an eye on that dark lady with the make-up.” Bart: “Keep an eye on her?” Salesperson: “Yes, they steal.” Bart: “That’s my wife.”
The pleasant positive self-image of the Netherlands is wrong. The Dutch rate equality in the Netherlands as particularly high. The self-image that the Dutch have and propagate about themselves and the Netherlands to the outside world does not correspond to the actual attitude and behavior of the Dutch. There is a discrepancy between the image of tolerance, equality, diversity and reality is one of the conclusions of the research by Miller et al (2014). Compared to 65 countries surveyed, the Netherlands scores implicitly and explicitly very high on stereotype preferences, in this case for men in certain social roles. This difference is also clearly visible when the participants of Esther Mollema’s workshops are tested on their assumptions and unconscious prejudices about diversity. 18,000 managers tested in those workshops in the Netherlands show that there is a large gap between what managers think and do when it comes to the progression of employees to leadership positions. Managers think they give dark-skinned women and employees the same chance, but in reality we do not in more than 75% of the cases. The Dutch tend to consider themselves very egalitarian and tolerant when it comes to diversity, while the reality is different. Why is this happening in the Netherlands in particular?
Empty Tolerance
According to Wijnand Mijnhardt, professor of cultural history at the University of Utrecht, the current form of tolerance in the Netherlands is related to a number of historical factors. In the 17th century, many immigrants came to the Dutch trading towns to find work. At the time, they were accepted into Dutch society without many problems for two reasons. Firstly, there was simply a lot of demand for cheap labor and, especially in Holland, many immigrants were needed to keep the economy going. Secondly, in the 17th century, the Netherlands was a densely populated country, where population layers lived closely together, with the result that the poorer immigrants in cities such as Amsterdam and Leiden came to live right next to the wealthy patricians in the alleys between the canal houses and mansions. This to the great surprise and dismay of foreign scholars and merchants who visited the Netherlands at the time. Numerous writings have been preserved in which it was mentioned that a stately merchant, even then, was simply booed in Amsterdam when he ran into a poor day laborer. In other major European cities, the street scene at the time was much more homogeneous – each group lived in its own part of the city. Mijnhardt calls it a “special kind of tolerance” built on social pressure, a high population density, combined with freedom of religion and freedom of the press. “However, it was not a principled tolerance, but rather a kind of necessary form of self-preservation,” said Mijnhardt. This self-preservation, or sobriety as a traditional Dutch form of tolerance, can be seen later during the Pillarization, when each societal pillar lives completely separate from each other; the Catholics had their own butcher, the Protestants their own milkman and the Socialists their own football club. But they did need each other and they tolerated each other in the least extreme sense of the word. Just like in the Golden Age, people tolerated each other’s way of life, origin and culture for practical reasons, but in reality they didn’t have to know anything about each other. Marli Huijer, former thinker of the nation and professor of philosophy at Erasmus University, calls this attitude ’empty tolerance’; people tolerate each other, but there is no form of respect for each other. Citizens who are part of the same society but who in fact live completely apart from each other. According to Huijer, this can still be seen in metropolises in particular. “There is a diversity of lifestyles, but people are in their own bubble, they have little to do with each other. This too is a form of empty tolerance because you are completely indifferent to others.”
One of us
How cooperation takes shape in the Netherlands and who exactly gets a place at the table is more complicated. According to Ruben Gowricharn, professor of diaspora studies at the Free University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands, like other societies, still has many tribal features. ,,We are a ‘large tribe of the Dutch’ and someone of color has to ‘marry’ before he becomes one of us. In the Netherlands, everyone has to integrate.” As group animals, according to Gowricharn, the Dutch have a kind of natural dislike for others with whom they cannot identify. Language appears to be essential for ‘belonging’ in the Netherlands, according to research by PewResearchCentre in fourteen countries into the factors that matter for national identity (What it truly takes to be ‘one of us’). not particularly important where a person was born or what religion a person adheres to. But compared to other countries, the Dutch attach the most importance to the importance of the language as part of the Dutch identity. Of all respondents in the Netherlands, 84 percent indicate that a good command of Dutch is very important for Dutch citizenship. That strong preference is nowhere so strong. In Hungary and the United Kingdom, 81 percent of those surveyed say that language is very important for citizenship, but in Canada or Italy, for example, it is ‘only’ 59 percent of those surveyed. This means that it is a lot more difficult for people with a language deficiency to climb the social ladder in the Netherlands. In combination with the tribality of ‘integration’ in the Netherlands, this leads, among other things, to the fact that the Netherlands is so incredibly homogeneous, say Gowricharn and Mijnhardt. Only 20 percent have a foreign cultural background or describe themselves as cosmopolitan. “The Limburger is of course different from the Groninger, but they all have the idea that they are Dutch and that they have a common culture to which newcomers have to adapt,” says Mijnhardt.
In other words, everyone should be approximately the same and not deviate too much from the prevailing standard. And that means that many people never get a fair chance to prove themselves in a top position, but also that many organizations will simply not fill their leadership positions with the most talented and suitable people. It is therefore not surprising that the Dutch administrative layers are also very homogeneous. Data on diversity show that this – certainly in the long term – can become a major problem for the business community. For some time now, women have formed the majority of the group of graduates in the Netherlands. And projections show that in 2060 more than a third of the Dutch (34 percent) will have a migration background, compared to 23 percent in 2019 (CBS).
Breaking through
But how can the discrepancy between the positive self-image of the Dutch about tolerance, equality and diversity, the implicit and explicit preference for uniformity and the reality, especially in the workplace, be overcome? By pointing out to managers that they have “a moral duty” that companies are a reflection of society, Gowricharn believes. “Society is diverse, so companies should be too.” Many companies use “quality” as a legitimacy to keep people out, Gowricharn notes. But “quality is colorless. To suggest that quality is a uniform thing, the same for all groups of people, for age categories, for cultures, is completely wrong.” And so managers must be made aware of those “holy houses and knock them over”. Understanding how unconscious biases affect perception and decisions is also an important step. “Realize how great the temptation is to choose someone who looks like you,” says Huijer. This willingness for self-reflection, dialogue and understanding are the key words to move forward. Esther Mollema can only endorse this. “Work on more dialogue and improve together. In particular, invite the group you are talking about to the table. In the Netherlands, the diversity debate often takes place without the group in question.” Moreover, making mistakes is human. “Forgive yourself and others if you sometimes make mistakes in trying to be more inclusive. Think of it as a process in which you learn a little bit every day how inclusiveness works and how you can contribute to it. An open attitude is important to break through the difference between self-image and empty tolerance,” says Mollema. “You also have to organize honesty better. Guarantee equality by organizing unconscious biases from your processes. Tighter management of recruitment & selection, assessments, promotions and decision-making. Give less chance to unconscious biases here. And yes, that is difficult to accept for the Netherlands, who often think that they will do well without strict rules. But it is precisely the Dutch who need strict agreements to achieve results in the field of diversity and inclusion.”
Nearly all organisations are facing big challenges that present themselves one after the other increasingly quickly. In helping employees to move with the times, the role of managers is more crucial than ever. Many managers are looking for tools so they can do their work as leaders even better, to continue to book results and stay connected to their people.
As one of the founders of the HPO Center, I have spent over twenty years helping leaders to do their work better, with the help of insights and tools. At HPO Center, we study the characteristics of high-performing teams and organisations, and based on these findings and decades of experience, I can help managers to optimise their approach. The ‘good leadership model’ that I work with has over time become increasingly simpler and more practical, and is based on the following principles:
Good leadership is essentially about balancing power and connection.
A leader’s behaviour is ‘contagious’; the behaviour modelled by leaders is unconsciously reproduced by their employees.
There is no such thing as a bad team with a good leader: a team’s performance is largely determined by the focus and actions of their leader.
The difference between more and less effective leaders lies not so much in big things, but in what the leader does in the micro-moments of the day. It is not big words, but small actions that make the real difference.
Image: When leaders change their behaviour, employees follow suit
It is only in teams where the work is always the same, and there are no organisational or external challenges, that self-managing teams may occasionally be successful. In the vast majority of teams, it is the qualities of the manager that determine the team’s performance. What are these qualities?
Much has been said and written about what effective leadership is. When you peel off all these layers and look at the essence of all leading studies, it becomes apparent that the leaders of successful teams stand firmly on two legs: daring & caring. Both are essential for a good team result and there needs to be balance and interplay between the two.
Image: The two legs of good leadership: using power and creating connection
The first leg stands for what I call the daring side of leadership: organising the work and working together towards a common goal. This asks of a leader that they bring focus and monitor the team’s objectives. Here, the power that comes with the position is optimally deployed to create clarity and generate momentum. The manager has control over the focus of the team and the tempo in which things are picked up and implemented. The manager can also resolve the dilemmas that arise in the course of the work by taking decisions, stimulating and supporting collaboration, and providing clarity. Clearly, leaders can talk to and consult with their teams on many matters, but ultimately, it is the leader who is responsible for taking decisions, and transparently setting the direction and tempo.
The other leg represents the caring side of leadership: the human side of responsibility. From this place, the leader wants to help their team, their people, to grow and develop, to make them better, and to inspire and coach them. Creating an environment in which people can grow, and acting as a binding factor in the team. Teaching people to work together, learn together, and inspire each other – to create a good team feeling, respect and appreciation for each other, and an inclusive environment. From the power in this leg, people are taught to listen to each other’s perspective, so that the team’s decisions get better and better.
The two legs in practice
The daring leg is the side of leadership that has traditionally been considered most important. In the past, many leaders were therefore also chosen and appointed on the basis of these qualities. My impression is that until a few years ago, there was this idea that the caring part could also be delegated to an active department secretary who devoted attention to birthdays and team outings. That is a fallacy. Caring leadership goes much further and deeper: it is about really making time for your people, really listening to them, and actively helping them in their development by coaching them, inspiring them, and thinking and acting along with them. A growing number of studies shows that people who feel inspired, appreciated, and coached within their teams are substantially more flexible and resilient, engage with challenges with more energy, and generally get more energy from their work.
The daring side of leadership is an active task in which the work is continuously framed, focus is established and maintained, and decisions and actions are quickly taken It is not something a leader does from time to time, but something they are continuously aware of: who needs my help to lift a collaboration to a higher level, who is facing a choice that I can help with, who has a tendency to take on too many tasks that are not in line with our focus and core tasks, and how can I guide them better? An experienced leader learns to recognise such moments with speed and accuracy, and does so actively.
My guess is that a good daring leader devotes approximately 30% of their time to organising the work. The majority of managers’ time is devoted to the caring aspect of leadership. It is about giving the team attention by bringing inspiration, stimulating collaboration, and improving and growing as a team. And this also requires individual attention for all team members. It helps tremendously if a manager can create rhythm with fixed individual appointments, such as ‘30 minutes every Friday.’ It is essential that these appointments should not focus on the work’s content, but on the well-being and development of the person. And this takes time. Good managers devote approximately 70% of their working hours to the caring tasks.
Ask yourself whether, in your position as leader, you stand firmly on both of these legs and are successful at both tasks. Are you as caring as you are daring? What is by nature your strongest leg? How would your employees assess you in this respect? Which leg do you need to train more, and what would that look like for you? Are you actually prepared to train your leadership legs to help your team and organisations move forward?
What do you need?
To learn to effectively use both leadership legs requires training – practice and reflection. We often see that at times when leadership challenges intensify, people tend to fall back on their naturally stronger leg. And that is not always the best choice. What I see a lot in practice is stress in teams, caused by uncertainty and lack of clarity. This stress expresses itself in practice in various ways. Some people become hyperactive or angry, others tend to crawl back into their shell. The tendency of a caring leader is to listen, to sympathise, and to try and help, while the task of a leader at such times is on the contrary to be daring and to reduce stress by taking decisions and creating clarity. For example by telling an insecure team: “I know that a potential reorganisation would lead to changes in our team. I don’t yet know everything about it, but I can assure you that until 1 March of next year, nothing will change. If something does change, I will tell you about it at the latest at the start of next year.”
Leaders in organisations benefit from working with these simple principles, speaking the same language, and learning and balancing together. When leaders discuss with each other the daring and caring challenges in their teams and reflect on their approach, they can help each other make great progress. This allows managers to solve challenges that have remained unsolved for far too long and have as a result become a source of frustration for manager and team.
Taking the time to be a good leader
For some managers, this approach to good leadership may come as a shock. They see their roles as manager as one of their roles, one that they sometimes can pay less attention to, especially when heavy content-related tasks also demand much from them. Occasionally, you meet people who are good at both, but far more often, what you see is that teams with such leaders function less well, that their best employees tend to leave, and especially that these teams are unable to respond quickly to changes. The question to ask such leaders is whether they can either adjust their behaviour, or make their leadership position available to someone else. Often, both the team and the leader regain a lot of energy once the leader decides to focus on the content, and relinquish their leadership position. This is no loss, but a gain for all involved, as well as for the organisation.
Waarom willen de meeste mensen wel meer diversiteit maar lukt het niet hun teams echt diverser te maken? Hoe hebben onbewuste vooroordelen invloed op de beslissingen die we nemen? Hoe groot is de invloed van bias in jouw leven en werk?
Voor optimale dialoog, zelfreflectie en resultaat biedt Esther deze online training voor het Erasmus MC. Deze trainingen zijn eerder ook dit voorjaar gegeven.
Why do most people want more diversity but find it difficult to really make their teams more diverse? How do unconscious biases influence the decisions we make? How big is the influence of bias in your life and work?
For optimal dialogue, self-reflection and results, Esther offers this online training for Erasmus MC. Webinar 7, on November 28th, is offered in English.
Classroom Training & Webinars
Per datum is er een maximaal aantal deelnemers. Inschrijven kan voor de volgende data:
As an individual, you have no influence on where you are born. Yet, your place of birth and the circumstances of your rise into adulthood carry a great impact on the rest of your life. You might be born with a substantial advantage over people who share your date of birth on numerous socioeconomic, cultural and institutional variables. This contrast holds throughout different countries and continents.
If you are born with considerable privilege, it can be a complicated task to identify instances in which you, as an individual, experience the benefits of these privileges at the expense of those less-privileged. The crux in this difficulty lies in the fact that those privileged may not recognize the advantages they enjoy as such, but rather take them for granted.
Are you aware of your own privileges? Researcher Peggy McIntosh published a list with a stunning 50 examples of white and male privileges as far back as 1988 (https://nationalseedproject.org/Key-SEED-Texts/white-privilege-and-male-privilege). I selected the 15 most relevant topics on both spectrums. I invite you to reflect on both lists and to think about what these privileges mean in your life, career and success.
The consequences of privilege
Over 30 years passed since Peggy McIntosh published her lists. However, the implications of privilege still do not enjoy the exposure and attention that they deserve. Moreover, the disadvantages that go along with not having certain privileges are still likely to be underestimated. Individuals who are born with less privilege experience these effects in all stages of life. A highly talented but underprivileged individual will have more trouble being seen, heard and valued by society. This starts at school, where certain privileges increase your chances of higher education and extrapolate on the labour market.
Examples of privilege are widespread and hard to pick. In the US, the average net worth of a white family is still over 10 times higher than the average net worth of a black family. The number of women in positions of power in public and private institutions is still lacking in many countries. During the Covid-pandemic In the UK, 15% of teachers from deprived schools reported that over a third of pupils would not have electronic access to school work compared to 2% at more affluent state schools. This last statistic does not include the UK’s private schools. It seems evident that privilege is a controversial topic for those who enjoy it. Western countries like to see themselves as level playing fields. However, the opposite seems to be true when accounting for the privilege. A fitting metaphor for being born with or without privilege is starting a football match with a 0-1 disadvantage. The results of this inequality are that people are calling for action and justice and that they are becoming louder in doing so.
The myth of meritocracy
The debate on privilege and equality is not an easy pill to swallow for a lot of people. Especially those that never thought about their privilege and have been very successful according to societal standards are often triggered by the narrative surrounding privilege. These people find themselves in positions of power and believe that they deserved to be there because of their talent and hard work. They attribute patterns of inequality to the mechanics of the meritocracy, which they think rewards those who work hard and are willing to go the extra mile. This storyline gives rise to the notion that the people who are at the top layers of organizations are the most competent, most ambitious and have worked the hardest to get there. In most Western countries, this group was long synonymous with white males.
This assumption is proven false now research is exposing the effects on unconscious privilege in modern societies. The concept of meritocracy is a myth. Those in positions of power are not always the best according to objective standards, they are extremely likely to possess a high degree of personal privileges. Their success can partly be attributed to factors such as their place of birth and their upbringing. It goes without saying that skills, ambition, talent and perseverance are all essential ingredients for success and this article does not argue that privileged persons lack these qualities. However, an underprivileged person with the same qualities is a lot less likely to attain similar levels of success compared to a similar person born with a lot of privilege. The widespread inequality of opportunity in Western societies proves the falsehood of the notion of meritocracy and is a powerful argument for those demanding equality.
The seven key privileges
Journalist and anthropologist Joris Luyendijk analyzed the system of privilege in The Netherlands. He concluded on seven key privileges that give an individual a large advantage in life, namely: being white, being male, being heterosexual, having highly-educated parents, being highly-educated yourself, speaking with a standardized dialect and being secular to a degree where religion does not play a large role in your life. Luyendijk asserts that a mere 3% of all Dutch people have all seven privileges. However, this statistic increased astronomically when zooming into layers of power in politics and the economy. This group of people is very homogenous in the sense that the majority of people have all seven privileges. According to Luyendijk, it takes the average person 2 years of hard work and perseverance in order to level the disadvantage associated with missing one of the seven key privileges. It follows that an individual that ticks two of the seven boxes is 10 years behind a similar person that ticks all seven.
‘It’s always those white men’
A fitting universal example of two of the key privileges is found in a July 2021 statement by gender studies professor Rosemare Buikema: ‘’We have a white male prime minister and a white male public health minister. In hindsight, experts agree that they together made a colossal error in opening up too quickly during the Covid-19 pandemic. However, there is nobody who says ‘It’s always those white men’.’’ The takeaway here is that the mistakes made by these two white men does not reflect on white men in general. They do not experience sexism, racism or any other form of negative backlash for lacking certain privileges. However, if both officials had been women, twitter would have been full of statements such as: ‘’Women can’t lead in times of crisis. They simply can’t handle the responsibility.’’ I would like to add here that the word ‘women’ would have probably been replaced by less flattering phrasing.
Stereotypical preferences
Around the globe, born privilege and unconscious bias are in the way of much-needed diversity. A study by Miller et al. (2014) analyzed the objective and subjective reality surrounding both phenomena on a global scale. This study showcased the severity of the problem. The most striking example concerns the Netherlands. Dutch people are generally convinced that their country is among the best when it comes to gender equality. In reality, the Dutch ranked among the highest out of a pool of 65(!) states in implicit and explicit preferences for male leadership in positions of power. The research conducted by Direction among 13.000 Dutch managers confirms that these conclusions still hold for 2021. This bias towards male leadership is one of the key reasons why women experience difficulty reaching positions at the top of organizations. The Netherlands counts four times as many male scientists compared to women scientists and only one in six top executives of the largest 5.000 companies is a woman. Similar statistics are available for nearly all Western countries.
Research indicates that individuals born with privilege are likely to have an unconscious bias towards persons without these privileges. In the UK, people with a migration background have great trouble finding employment that matches their level of skill. A third of ‘highly skilled’ migrants living in the UK are working in ‘unskilled’ jobs such as supermarket staff or as cleaners. Often heard explanations by privileged non-migrants revolve around work ethic, ambition cultural barriers. The former two are proven false by statistics. Migrant men are more likely to be employed compared to UK-born men (84% vs 79% in 2019) and unemployed migrant men are less likely to claim unemployment benefits compared to their UK-born counterparts (17% vs 29% in 2019). Maybe these ‘cultural barriers’ do not revolve around the willingness to work hard, but in fact, constitute systems of privilege and unconscious bias towards underprivileged groups.
An abundance of talent
People are inclined to assess their societies as more egalitarian than is objectively the case. Data on diversity and gender indicates that this divergence and its repercussions are likely to grow in severity, especially in the long run. In most Western nations, women are currently more likely to complete higher education. Also, migrant populations are growing along with their level of education. As the talent pool that feeds societies is changing, they ought to adopt in order to reap its full benefits. Less-privileged individuals will grow in numbers and so will the talents they have to offer. Yet, their potential is not valued as such.
Quality above all else
Ensuring a more levelled playing field for all individuals may feel like an injustice to some as it will come at the expense of those highly privileged. This is especially true if people are not aware of their own privilege and believe that they deserve their current position because of their own qualities and hard work. Highly privileged individuals are fearful of rapid downward mobility of themselves and especially of their children. Defence mechanisms are triggered resulting in passionate arguments about meritocracy, hard work and if you are lucky, a reference to ‘the American dream. It is exactly this argument –people should be treated in accordance with their personal qualities– that underlines the urgency of the issue at hand. If people are truly selected based on quality, we have to work to reduce the role privilege plays in our societies and allow diversity to manifest in our companies and governments.
Inclusion for now and for later
We live in a time of complex, urgent and global issues. Daily headlines revolve around climate change, the energy transition, the decay of democracies and institutional racism. In order to meet these challenges, time and creativity are essential. Research indicates that teams with high levels of diversity are exceptionally well-equipped for such tasks as they offer a range of perspectives. Leaders that ensure enough seats at the table for more diversity are the leaders of the future. They invite a range of talents, give those talents enough space, are able to listen and are able to connect. These leaders do not defend their position of power, but take action to move forward. If they were lucky and have a lot of individual privileges, they apply these privileges to help those less-privileged. Leaders who apply this notion in their personal lives become role models for their children. Their children are taught not to defend, but to move forward and help others do so as well. Research shows that this behaviour of helping others results in strong gains in personal status for those lending a helping hand*. This is the type of leader that advances organizations and societies. Therefore, the enormous differences in privilege that currently exist can also be interpreted as a chance for those in leadership positions to make a meaningful difference. This comes down to the opportunity to apply one’s privilege in order to benefit future generations and the common good. A modern-day version of noblesse oblige.
A classroom example
Examples of male privilege
As a child, I could choose from an abundance of role models in the media with positive, active, non-stereotypical traits. I have never had to look for any.
Nobody ever taught me not to walk in certain places by myself or to be afraid in public places after dark.
Every sizeable religion in the world is predominantly led by people of my gender. Even God is conceptualized as a man in most religions.
If I chose not to have children, nobody questions my manhood.
If I live together with a female partner, chances are that we split our duties in the household in such a way that she will do most chores, especially the repetitive and boring ones.
When applying for a job, nobody is interested in whether or not I have a family or if I will start a family anytime soon.
When I am a clumsy driver, nobody blames my gender for it.
If I pursue my career whilst having children, nobody will say I am a bad parent because I do not stay at home.
When I get a new job, none of my colleagues will think that I landed the job because of my gender.
When I make a mistake at work, it does not reflect badly on people of my gender.
I can be loud and aggressive without fear of being called a ‘bitch’.
The odds of me becoming the victim of sexual intimidation at work are close to zero.
I can speak in front of a large audience without my gender being a topic of conversation.
On average, I do not get interrupted during meetings very often.
I have the privilege not to be aware of my male privilege.
Examples of white privilege
I do not need to teach my children from a young age about racism and how to behave in such a way as not to become a victim of it.
I can rest assured that my children’s teachers will treat them in the same way as they treat children with other skin colours.
If I would want to, I could surround myself at work solely with people with white skin colour.
There is an abundance of children’s books, toys and films that have people in leading roles with my skin colour.
I can rest assured that when I move to a new home, my neighbours will welcome me either neutrally or openly.
When I am in need of medical attention, I can be sure that my skin colour does not influence medical professionals whatsoever.
In the event that I do not pay great attention to my appearance and dress rather informally, people do not draw conclusions on my intelligence or perceive me as a threat.
I am never asked to speak on behalf of people with the same skin colour as me.
I can excel in a challenging situation without being called a role model for ‘people like you’.
I can express criticism on the government or institutions without being called ungrateful or being met with hostility and scepticism.
I can afford not to follow the developments around the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, slavery and institutional racism.
I am able to talk about racism without people thinking that I do so in my own interest.
When I am late to a meeting, people do not connect this to the colour of my skin.
I feel welcome and ‘normal’ at all places in everyday life.
I have the privilege not to be aware of my white privilege.
If you could answer a lot of the points raised in the two lists above with a yes, you have been lucky to have been born as a privileged individual. I would like to invite you to a simple exercise. In the coming days, reflect on what your privilege has meant for you in your life so far and what a person without your privileges would have experienced differently. Please dwell on this reflection the next time you take the word during a meeting, when you assess a coworker and when you express your opinions.
This is what inclusive leaders do
Actively help less-privileged people grow within their organization.
Ensure that all people that take part in a meeting are able to express their views and are able to contribute equally.
Directly react to double standards and stereotypes when confronted.
Actively assist those who are (subtly) being excluded.
Maintain clear rules during meetings and act on micro-aggressions such as repeated interruptions.
Correct people that try to take credit for work done by someone else.
Take immediate corrective action against those that exclude team members or give team members a feeling of inferiority.
Stimulate humour that does not offend anyone.
Ensure that you are equally accessible to any person in your organization.
You are in a standard classroom with rows of desks that seem to exist in all corners of the world. The teacher hands out sheets of paper to all students and asks the class to cram it together into a ball of paper. Subsequently, the teacher places the bin right under the blackboard and proclaims the following: ‘’You children represent the people in our society. Everyone has a chance to become rich and successful. To become so, you need to throw your paper ball into the bin while remaining on your seats.’’ The children sitting in the back rows immediately respond by saying that this is completely unfair to them as the children in the front row are much more likely to succeed. The teacher does not respond. All children throw their paper and, as expected, children sitting in the front rows are hitting the bull’s eye in higher numbers than their classmates in the back of the class. Nevertheless, some children that sat in the back also complete the task. The teacher now confirms that the proximity to the bin is the key driver of success in this game. The teacher states: ‘’Sitting close to the bin is a privilege. Did you notice that none of the kids in the front rows were complaining about the unfairness of the game? Those people hardly realized their privilege as they were occupied with the objective of the game. They could not see beyond the two meters between them and the bin. Your task as a young person is to be aware of your privileges and the advantages that come your way. The privilege you may have come with the privilege of helping those behind you. Not just in this classroom but in the rest of your life.’’
As a manager you recognize that there are team members you can lead more easily. Often these are the team members in which you recognize yourself and who you can easily “read” to estimate what they need to perform in your team. It is probably also more challenging for you to lead team members in whom you are less likely to recognize yourself. Being a good leader by these team members also requires empathy and a number of good guidelines as the basis for an inclusive and effective team. Here are 7 checks that can help you with that:
Don’t use yourself as the norm
A team has all kinds of tasks. Some tasks need explanation and guidance if a team member has not done them before. Other tasks are self-evident and team members should be able to do themselves. But is that really so? If something is clear or easy to you, it doesn’t mean it is the same for all your team members. People with different backgrounds or experiences can sometimes use your explanation or help for something that does not need an explanation for you. Check for tasks that you take for granted whether this is also the case with all your team members. Don’t see yourself as the norm and actively monitor this. By checking and responding to this, you give all your team members the same knowledge and principles to be able to do their work well.
2. Make sure that you are equally easy to approach for all your employees.
Managers who indicate that their doors are always open to all of their employees may not be doing enough for all of their team members. Pay attention to who all uses the invitation to just walk into your office, call you or schedule a Team appointment with you. Does everyone do that equally or are there people you talk to a lot and others don’t? Check every week how much and for how long you have spoken to your team members and actively contact the people you speak less often each week. Moderate your contacts with employees you talk to a lot to make time for the other employees. Let people see and feel that you want to be in contact with everyone equally.
3. Actively invite colleagues to give their opinion.
Organize your meetings in a way that ensures that all team members can contribute as much as possible. Ask your team how you will handle this together and how you will use differences in team discussion to make better decisions together. For example, make sure that introverted colleagues can also contribute. Record how you are going to do this in each discussion and monitor the agreements made.
4. Correct immediately if someone on your team asks for credit for ideas originally conceived or suggested by someone else.
Consciously or unconsciously, team members sometimes claim ideas previously suggested by other team members. Because of this, some team members don’t get the credit they deserve. Pay attention yourself and correct and ask your team members to do this for each other as well. These 7 basic rules help your team to build inclusion and trust with each other and with you. Perhaps an idea to discuss in your team which of these 7 basic rules can still be improved and whether your team has additions to these basic rules for your team?
5. Assign your employees highly valued and visible tasks equally.
Give your employees equal opportunity to perform highly valued and visible tasks in your team and for the organization. Give everyone the opportunity to present occasionally, represent the department or lead a project. By giving everyone the same opportunities, everyone can learn and grow.
6. Also divide the non-visible tasks equally among all your employees.
In addition to distributing the visible tasks fairly, you can also share the invisible tasks that your team has to perform fairly across the group. Show in a diagram how you distribute the more invisible tasks over the entire team and evaluate every 6 months whether the distribution of the visible and invisible tasks are still well organized with your entire team.
7. Respond immediately and in the team to those who exclude team members and / or make them feel uncomfortable, inferior. Promote humor that doesn’t hurt.
As a manager you want a pleasant atmosphere in your team in which everyone feels seen and heard so that all team members can contribute optimally. You naturally stimulate jokes and humor in a team, but you immediately intervene if jokes hurt or make some team members feel uncomfortable. As a manager, also pay close attention to whether all team members inform each other correctly and on time. You also want to avoid sub-groups in your teams because these people mainly interact with each other and (un) consciously exclude other people. Ask your team members to pay attention to this themselves and to correct each other quickly if things go wrong.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
