Popular in Professional

Culture and Society

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

New York University Harvey Moltoch

Education

The Role of Education in Reducing Racial Inequality

University of Southern California Pedro A. Noguera

Law

Diversity and Social Mobility in the UK legal profession

Law Society I. Stephanie Boyce

Internet Law

The Law of AI for Good

University of San Diego Orly Lobel

Pharmacy

Cytotoxic Activity and Anti-Migratory Effect of Berberine-Phytantriol Liquid Crystalline on Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

University of Technology Sydney Kamal Dua

Human Rights Law

Transforming Restorative Justice for Transitional Settings

University of Nottingham Kerry Clamp

Education

Implementing the equality, diversity, and inclusion agenda in multinational companies

View more insights in Professional - Business - Management

View more figures from Oxford Brookes University

View the page of Sylwia Ciuk

Read the Study

Sylwia Ciuk discusses the implications of the proposed framework for EDI theory as well as human resource management policies and practices.

Image courtesy of interviewee. April 25, 2024

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

This video video is a transcript of a presentation discussing a paper that highlights the challenges and strategies for implementing Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) frameworks in organizations, particularly multinational corporations. The speaker acknowledges the contributions of co-authors and underscores the importance of EDI for organizational performance.

Key points from the presentation include:

1. **Recognition of Challenges:** Organizations, especially multinationals, commit to EDI but face difficulties in its implementation. Relying solely on prescriptive policies often fails to yield significant progress.

2. **Proposed Framework:** The authors propose a two-step framework aimed at improving EDI implementation. This video video involves:
- **Cognitive Shift:** Changing how organizations think about diversity, moving from viewing it as a problem to seeing it as a resource.
- **Practical Action:** Promoting reciprocity and collaboration among all group members, both majority and minority, to leverage the benefits of diversity.

3. **Linguistic Diversity:** The presentation emphasizes linguistic diversity as a critical, yet often overlooked, aspect of EDI. It discusses the challenges faced by individuals based on language and accent and how organizations can promote linguistic inclusion.

4. **Fluidity and Reciprocity:** The framework encourages viewing diversity as fluid and not static, pushing for a more integrated understanding that incorporates diverse perspectives and experiences.

5. **Challenges of Resistance:** The speaker acknowledges potential resistance to EDI initiatives and notes that the framework’s effectiveness may vary across different contexts and organizational sizes.

6. **Future Directions for Research:** The presentation calls for further research to test the proposed framework, examine other forms of diversity, such as neurodiversity, and understand the dynamics within various organizational contexts.

Overall, the speaker advocates for a more inclusive and positive view of diversity within organizations, stressing the need for organizational change in both thought and action to enhance EDI outcomes.

Language:

Export as PDF

Export as PDF
Here are five key points from the video:

1. **Acknowledgment of Contributions**: The speaker emphasizes the importance of recognizing the contributions of co-authors in their paper, highlighting the collaborative nature of their research.

2. **Challenges in Implementing EDI**: Organizations, especially multinational ones, face difficulties in effectively implementing Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) agendas despite their recognition of its significance for organizational performance. A more holistic approach, rather than just focusing on policies, is necessary for meaningful progress.

3. **Proposed Framework for EDI**: The paper proposes a new two-step framework aimed at improving EDI implementation. This framework encourages a shift in thinking about diversity—from viewing it as a problem to recognizing it as a valuable resource. It emphasizes the need for holistic, embedded actions rather than merely prescriptive policies.

4. **Importance of Linguistic Diversity**: Linguistic diversity is highlighted as a critical but often overlooked aspect of EDI, particularly in multinational settings. The potential for language-based discrimination in organizations is discussed, alongside the need to foster an inclusive environment that values linguistic competencies and fluidity in language use.

5. **Encouraging Positive Attitudes and Reciprocity**: The framework advocates for fostering positive attitudes towards language differences among all organizational members and emphasizes the importance of mutual efforts from both majority and minority group members to advance inclusion and diversity effectively. The concept of reciprocity is crucial for leveraging the benefits of diversity in organizational settings.

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.015 --> 00:01.605
Thank you so much for, for having me.

00:01.745 --> 00:04.845
Uh, first I'd love to, start by saying that,

00:05.535 --> 00:09.405
today I'll been discussing a paper that is, core written

00:09.555 --> 00:10.885
with two other authors,

00:10.885 --> 00:13.525
and is very important to acknowledge their,

00:13.525 --> 00:14.685
immense contribution.

00:14.705 --> 00:16.085
So does professor annual housing

00:17.065 --> 00:18.805
and a professor Martin Shiva.

00:19.825 --> 00:23.125
So, coming back to your question, so we know

00:23.125 --> 00:25.725
that organizations in particular multinationals

00:26.625 --> 00:30.005
are very committed to implementing the equality,

00:30.005 --> 00:31.125
and diversity agenda.

00:31.545 --> 00:35.985
We know that, this is important for,

00:36.075 --> 00:37.465
their organizational performance

00:38.045 --> 00:40.905
and organizations do not generally dispute the need

00:40.965 --> 00:43.025
to implement, EDI.

00:43.025 --> 00:45.785
However, what we also know is that they do struggle.

00:46.725 --> 00:49.665
So it is tricky to implement the diversity

00:49.805 --> 00:52.665
and quality agenda because we know that,

00:53.245 --> 00:57.925
if we focus on the young policies, if we only focus on,

00:58.245 --> 01:00.405
prescription, we really do not get the,

01:00.405 --> 01:01.525
the progress that we need.

01:01.785 --> 01:04.285
So in order to implement EDI agenda,

01:04.425 --> 01:07.165
we need a more holistic, we need more,

01:07.485 --> 01:08.765
embedded, action.

01:09.225 --> 01:12.405
So we've decided in the paper, to,

01:12.405 --> 01:16.645
help organizations, with, EDI implementation

01:17.385 --> 01:19.805
and also, we want to,

01:20.035 --> 01:22.165
advance conceptually, the field.

01:23.185 --> 01:27.085
So we are proposing, a new framework, which we,

01:27.085 --> 01:28.765
which is simple two-step framework.

01:28.765 --> 01:31.725
However, the purpose is to,

01:31.795 --> 01:33.365
both advance conceptually

01:33.385 --> 01:37.365
and empirically, the research on, EDI agenda.

01:37.825 --> 01:40.565
Yes. Uh, thank you for asking me about linguistic diversity.

01:40.985 --> 01:43.205
So I'll be proposing a framework,

01:43.985 --> 01:45.405
for the management of EDI.

01:45.545 --> 01:47.085
Uh, but we know that,

01:47.085 --> 01:49.365
talking about a framework can be quite abstract.

01:49.865 --> 01:54.365
Uh, so we using an example of, linguistic diversity,

01:54.505 --> 01:58.325
by linguistic diversity, we understand the,

01:58.435 --> 02:01.725
diversity within a particular language and across languages.

02:01.745 --> 02:04.965
So when we talk about, multinational enterprises,

02:04.965 --> 02:06.835
for example, we know

02:06.835 --> 02:09.395
that they operate across different languages.

02:09.455 --> 02:12.355
So we have, diversity across languages,

02:12.735 --> 02:14.595
but also there is a huge,

02:15.025 --> 02:19.155
diversity within a particular language that applies to,

02:19.415 --> 02:20.795
to people how they,

02:21.085 --> 02:24.075
speak a particular language in different contexts.

02:24.335 --> 02:29.035
Um, that applies to huge variety of the way we speak.

02:29.295 --> 02:31.435
So people will speak, we know that,

02:31.445 --> 02:34.955
every single person speaks differently in different context.

02:35.375 --> 02:37.275
So we all speak very different languages.

02:37.535 --> 02:38.755
We have different accents,

02:38.755 --> 02:40.675
we have different language norms to this.

02:40.735 --> 02:42.755
And also we have very different language profiles.

02:42.775 --> 02:47.175
We can be highly competent in one situation,

02:47.175 --> 02:50.175
linguistically competent in one situation, but not really.

02:50.235 --> 02:51.855
So, in another situation.

02:51.875 --> 02:54.575
So we might be very fluent in formal settings,

02:54.635 --> 02:56.415
but struggle in informal settings.

02:56.755 --> 02:58.735
Or we might be very good at, speaking,

02:58.985 --> 03:01.005
but we might struggle with writing, for example,

03:01.425 --> 03:04.245
as our purpose is not to provide, an overview

03:04.245 --> 03:05.805
of the literature, because that will be a,

03:05.885 --> 03:07.245
a massive task in itself.

03:07.585 --> 03:08.845
But what we're trying to, we're trying

03:08.845 --> 03:11.685
to integrate the literature rather than to review it,

03:11.755 --> 03:13.485
that some, papers do.

03:13.485 --> 03:15.245
We are trying to integrate the literature.

03:15.245 --> 03:17.325
In particular, we are drawing on, three aspects.

03:17.905 --> 03:19.485
We drawing on Harrison,

03:19.505 --> 03:24.255
and clients 2007 framework, on, diversity.

03:25.005 --> 03:27.095
That particular framework suggests that,

03:27.095 --> 03:28.135
when we talk about diversity,

03:28.355 --> 03:29.975
we often talk about very different things.

03:30.075 --> 03:33.095
So we can look at diversity as, as a problem.

03:33.715 --> 03:36.935
Uh, we can look at it, from the,

03:37.665 --> 03:38.855
separation perspective.

03:39.195 --> 03:43.615
Uh, we can also look at, diversity as variety.

03:43.875 --> 03:46.935
So we highlight the, the nuances, the differences.

03:47.595 --> 03:50.895
But also when you look at variety, diversity becomes,

03:51.195 --> 03:52.975
is seen through a positive lens.

03:54.405 --> 03:57.985
We can also look at diversity through their disparity lens,

03:58.605 --> 04:00.385
which we highlight the negative

04:00.385 --> 04:02.225
consequences, of diversity.

04:03.375 --> 04:05.915
So that's one of our, elements of our framework.

04:06.335 --> 04:09.475
Uh, the other ones are drawn from advancements in,

04:09.675 --> 04:12.475
EDR research in particular, we are looking at,

04:12.495 --> 04:14.435
the concept of, fluidity.

04:15.175 --> 04:17.155
And we encourage, we encourage scholars

04:17.155 --> 04:20.675
and practitioners to look at, deference not

04:20.675 --> 04:22.755
as something, static,

04:23.215 --> 04:26.195
and not as, binary category,

04:26.535 --> 04:30.565
but as something that is more fluid and content dependent.

04:31.025 --> 04:33.245
We also, in the first, the third element

04:33.305 --> 04:35.485
of the framework is the reciprocity.

04:36.145 --> 04:38.165
Uh, we want to highlight that in order

04:38.185 --> 04:39.925
to advance the agenda.

04:40.025 --> 04:44.335
In order to implement change, we need to, look at

04:44.925 --> 04:47.335
concerted efforts of both, majority

04:47.355 --> 04:48.535
and minority group members.

04:49.235 --> 04:52.175
Uh, it cannot be a task of one single group.

04:52.565 --> 04:55.375
Okay, thank you very much. So, what we are proposing,

04:55.395 --> 04:57.895
the framework is, are two steps.

04:59.115 --> 05:02.695
Uh, our framework is based on, the well-established,

05:02.925 --> 05:05.895
cognitive, theory, which suggest that,

05:05.995 --> 05:08.335
our actions depend on how we think.

05:08.755 --> 05:13.135
Um, so the framework we're proposing that in order to,

05:13.475 --> 05:17.575
in, achieve, inclusion, we need to, think about,

05:17.955 --> 05:20.815
we need to start, we need to change

05:20.835 --> 05:22.215
how we think about diversity.

05:22.435 --> 05:25.325
So we need to move from a situation,

05:25.905 --> 05:29.405
and we have, when we see, diversity as a problem.

05:29.985 --> 05:32.285
So where there is low variety we need,

05:32.305 --> 05:35.205
but instead where we highlight, high separation

05:35.505 --> 05:37.165
and, high disparity.

05:37.165 --> 05:39.485
When we look at diversity as a problem,

05:39.875 --> 05:43.805
when we highlight the, opposing standpoints of staff,

05:43.895 --> 05:47.645
where we also focus on the, on the problems with diversity

05:48.945 --> 05:51.285
and the negative consequences,

05:51.285 --> 05:54.285
and we need to instead shift towards, thinking

05:54.285 --> 05:56.845
of diversity, in a positive light. So

05:56.845 --> 06:01.285
We highlight the, diversity as, as a resource,

06:01.345 --> 06:04.045
and, and a focus on variety instead.

06:04.625 --> 06:07.485
And we suggest that, this shift will also,

06:07.795 --> 06:09.845
will also need to be accomplished by,

06:09.845 --> 06:10.845
acting differently.

06:11.025 --> 06:14.365
So with a practical shift,

06:14.385 --> 06:17.445
in which we promote reciprocity, in order

06:17.465 --> 06:19.925
to leverage diversity, would it be possible

06:19.925 --> 06:21.685
to also look at the implementation

06:21.685 --> 06:23.845
of the framework in relation to linguistic diversity?

06:24.425 --> 06:27.845
We believe that it is, helpful to, highlight,

06:27.845 --> 06:31.245
provide an example of how the framework can be implemented.

06:31.505 --> 06:35.485
Uh, and for this, we have chosen, linguistic,

06:35.485 --> 06:37.925
inclusion, and we've done so

06:38.315 --> 06:41.885
because, of the prevalence of,

06:42.285 --> 06:43.885
language-based discrimination organizations.

06:44.625 --> 06:48.245
Um, it happens in organizations, but also in society

06:48.385 --> 06:50.885
and linguistic, based discrimination.

06:51.185 --> 06:52.965
So this is the un unfair treatment of people

06:53.315 --> 06:55.525
because, of the language they speak,

06:55.525 --> 06:58.325
because how they speak, it might be

06:58.325 --> 07:01.165
because of their accent, which is seen as,

07:01.305 --> 07:04.525
not non-standard because of the, people's class,

07:04.525 --> 07:06.165
because of their, their background,

07:06.165 --> 07:10.645
because of the, the, the region of the country,

07:10.915 --> 07:14.005
they come from because of their, the country of birth.

07:14.145 --> 07:17.195
So they might be speaking with a foreign language or

07:17.195 --> 07:21.035
because they might be, speaking, using a norm that is,

07:21.175 --> 07:24.755
seen as, non-standard in a part particular setting.

07:25.985 --> 07:27.805
Um, and, but we know

07:27.805 --> 07:29.645
that linguistic diversity is very important,

07:29.755 --> 07:32.405
however, it has not received sufficient attention.

07:32.665 --> 07:35.085
Uh, when we talk about, a DI

07:35.145 --> 07:38.165
and diversity inclusion efforts, we often talk about,

07:38.495 --> 07:40.845
categories of deference which are protected.

07:41.065 --> 07:45.285
Uh, so we talk about, race, gender, for example.

07:46.025 --> 07:49.565
Um, but we don't know, we do not talk about language,

07:49.565 --> 07:51.565
and language is not,

07:51.595 --> 07:53.205
protected, characteristic.

07:54.195 --> 07:55.375
So we're using this example

07:55.375 --> 07:57.775
because we think that it has great potential,

07:58.155 --> 08:00.695
and it's also very important in multinational settings

08:00.695 --> 08:03.975
because those multinationals operate across,

08:03.975 --> 08:07.135
linguistic end, cultural, boundaries.

08:07.155 --> 08:11.815
So coming back to the framework, so we suggest that,

08:11.835 --> 08:16.445
in order to achieve, linguistic inclusion,

08:16.585 --> 08:19.925
we need to, we need those two steps.

08:19.985 --> 08:22.365
We need to, think differently and,

08:22.365 --> 08:24.645
and add differently what, what we mean by that.

08:24.905 --> 08:28.725
So our starting point often is that, we approach,

08:28.755 --> 08:31.845
when we talk about language diversity in multi enterprises,

08:31.865 --> 08:33.285
we talk, about,

08:33.285 --> 08:35.885
we talk from the deficiency perspective,

08:36.075 --> 08:38.725
that it is the non-language use the not language

08:38.725 --> 08:39.805
users of causing a problem.

08:40.425 --> 08:42.765
Uh, so we need to focus on their training.

08:42.825 --> 08:45.565
We need to address, the, the problem.

08:46.675 --> 08:49.775
We also talk about language differences very often from this

08:50.375 --> 08:53.615
binary perspective when we talk about, when we think of,

08:53.615 --> 08:55.680
native speakers and not native speakers,

08:55.705 --> 08:58.645
and those differences seen, in binary terms.

08:59.425 --> 09:04.165
Um, also, what, the starting point is that,

09:05.505 --> 09:07.685
for often native language speakers are the first,

09:07.685 --> 09:09.525
first language users are seen

09:09.525 --> 09:11.045
as the benchmark for competence.

09:11.065 --> 09:12.405
So in a way, we are seeing

09:12.435 --> 09:14.405
that if somebody speaks their first language,

09:14.915 --> 09:18.725
they will be good in all, communicative, situations,

09:18.825 --> 09:21.245
and others need to mimic or adjust

09:21.245 --> 09:23.445
or try to achieve that, standard.

09:24.345 --> 09:28.165
Uh, and also we assume, we often assume, wrongly,

09:28.315 --> 09:33.005
that the, the norms, of the first language users,

09:33.705 --> 09:37.245
are then once, and should be followed by others.

09:37.785 --> 09:42.445
And what that creates, and that creates, focus on,

09:43.265 --> 09:46.405
on, on the problem, on the, that is linked to,

09:46.905 --> 09:48.085
second language users.

09:48.865 --> 09:53.245
Um, and we don't focus enough on, conservative efforts.

09:53.305 --> 09:56.365
So what we are suggesting is that we need to,

09:57.065 --> 09:58.245
change our thinking.

09:58.945 --> 10:02.285
So the conceptual shift of that we were posing is that,

10:02.305 --> 10:04.445
we want to see language differences as a resource.

10:04.985 --> 10:08.045
Um, so we need to look at what

10:08.045 --> 10:12.385
that means is multinationals need to recognize that,

10:13.285 --> 10:14.545
the variety of languages

10:14.545 --> 10:16.945
that people use can be very helpful for them.

10:17.445 --> 10:20.225
And also the fact that people might be,

10:20.355 --> 10:23.785
might have a plural competence might be able to,

10:24.005 --> 10:26.585
to refer to linguistic resources from different contexts,

10:26.845 --> 10:29.265
is seen as a difference is seen, can be seen,

10:29.325 --> 10:30.425
as a resource.

10:30.965 --> 10:33.585
Um, and the fact that, people,

10:34.215 --> 10:36.665
also speak differently in different contextual situations

10:36.925 --> 10:40.865
can also, potentially, changed, into a resource.

10:41.285 --> 10:44.385
So we suggest that, we need to,

10:44.965 --> 10:47.745
depart from focusing on this binary distinction

10:47.745 --> 10:49.705
between not native and non native speakers.

10:49.705 --> 10:52.185
That is not helpful, that reinforces differences.

10:53.005 --> 10:55.385
Um, and instead, we need to focus on,

10:55.825 --> 10:58.625
language proficiency in context in particular situations.

11:00.275 --> 11:03.655
Um, also we need to, challenge the ple

11:03.675 --> 11:06.215
of an implicit assumptions that,

11:06.875 --> 11:09.695
the first language users are the superior language users.

11:10.135 --> 11:13.535
Research shows that in fact, at times the first,

11:13.535 --> 11:16.055
first language users can cause communicative problems

11:16.055 --> 11:19.095
because they might use, high context language,

11:19.095 --> 11:23.135
they might speak at pace, they might use highly,

11:23.265 --> 11:25.095
contextual references, et cetera.

11:25.115 --> 11:27.575
So they might be causing a problem themselves.

11:27.575 --> 11:29.215
They might not also have the ability

11:29.355 --> 11:31.095
to adjust to other speakers.

11:31.675 --> 11:33.535
So this will be the conceptual,

11:33.545 --> 11:34.855
shift that we are proposing.

11:35.895 --> 11:38.355
Um, so thinking of diversity in a positive light,

11:38.355 --> 11:42.315
and also pushing fluidity, the fact that our,

11:42.435 --> 11:45.595
linguistic competencies are very different context,

11:45.955 --> 11:48.915
dependent, and we also need to act differently.

11:49.335 --> 11:53.325
Um, so in order to act differently, we need to focus on,

11:54.085 --> 11:57.045
positive attitudes, of different language users.

11:57.405 --> 12:01.445
Research has shown that, the way we, our attitude,

12:01.465 --> 12:03.365
the way we think about language differences,

12:03.495 --> 12:05.685
influences our ability to understand.

12:06.905 --> 12:10.005
And so it is important to think about, to focus on

12:10.065 --> 12:12.765
and to foster those positive attitudes in organizations.

12:13.545 --> 12:17.925
Um, we also need to focus on, adjustment

12:17.945 --> 12:20.765
of communicative efforts of all organizational members.

12:20.985 --> 12:22.885
So we cannot focus only on those,

12:23.185 --> 12:25.765
on providing language training, for example, for those,

12:26.185 --> 12:27.405
for second language users.

12:27.905 --> 12:30.485
But we need to highlight all, all staff

12:30.635 --> 12:33.845
that it is their responsibility to,

12:33.935 --> 12:35.125
focus on accommodation

12:35.145 --> 12:38.125
and adjustment, in communicative situations.

12:38.865 --> 12:40.805
Um, so we need to, so

12:40.805 --> 12:42.605
therefore, the implications, we need to consider

12:43.205 --> 12:46.205
communicative competence of all language users, right?

12:46.205 --> 12:47.885
So we do not assume that,

12:47.885 --> 12:49.365
if somebody speaks in their first language,

12:49.395 --> 12:52.525
like they are immediately, communicatively competent,

12:53.025 --> 12:55.285
and we believe that there's two, two shifts.

12:55.285 --> 12:57.885
So the cognitive shift, how we think about diversity

12:59.015 --> 13:00.955
and how we conceptualize difference,

13:00.955 --> 13:03.795
as something positive, and also also as something,

13:03.805 --> 13:05.275
fluid conflict dependent.

13:05.975 --> 13:07.555
Um, and if we take,

13:07.655 --> 13:10.235
and we highlight reciprocity, this will allow us

13:10.235 --> 13:11.275
to leverage diversity.

13:11.765 --> 13:13.835
Thank you very much. Um, so

13:13.835 --> 13:18.435
what we highlight in the paper is that, we need to,

13:18.455 --> 13:21.075
in order to progress research, we need to,

13:21.625 --> 13:25.155
stop thinking, too much about, so much, about,

13:25.815 --> 13:27.755
diversity in the,

13:28.195 --> 13:29.675
negative light highlighting differences

13:29.695 --> 13:31.795
and highlighting what separates us.

13:32.175 --> 13:36.115
And instead, we might need to focus on, on the nuances,

13:36.415 --> 13:40.395
and, view diversity, in a positive light.

13:41.725 --> 13:45.825
We believe that, it is important to,

13:47.535 --> 13:51.425
also, focus on efforts, of all organization members,

13:52.285 --> 13:56.625
and, that will help us, in the implementation.

13:57.205 --> 14:00.945
We also recognize that, our research has,

14:01.405 --> 14:02.745
some limitations.

14:03.485 --> 14:05.945
Um, for example, we focused,

14:06.275 --> 14:08.945
quite a lot on the positive aspects of diversity,

14:08.945 --> 14:12.145
which is natural because we, we know that,

14:12.645 --> 14:14.625
the majority of research focuses on the

14:15.185 --> 14:17.705
negative consequences on the various and what separates,

14:17.705 --> 14:19.105
and we want to find like the positive.

14:19.125 --> 14:22.905
But that with itself has, brings negative,

14:23.165 --> 14:26.605
it has limitations also in our framework.

14:26.605 --> 14:30.125
We haven't, discussed the, the possibility

14:30.145 --> 14:32.125
of resistance because we know,

14:32.125 --> 14:34.045
and we also can observe nowadays

14:34.045 --> 14:35.325
that there is some resistance

14:35.325 --> 14:36.845
to diversity inclusion efforts.

14:37.025 --> 14:39.445
Uh, there is more resistance in some context than in others.

14:40.425 --> 14:43.965
Uh, but this is not something that is, now equally,

14:45.045 --> 14:46.045
accepted everywhere.

14:46.935 --> 14:48.235
So we need to bear this in mind.

14:48.295 --> 14:51.035
We also, we recognize that the framework,

14:51.175 --> 14:53.005
originates in the global, north north

14:53.625 --> 14:55.525
and the implementation,

14:55.825 --> 14:59.405
of diversity inclusion efforts will vary,

14:59.405 --> 15:01.685
greatly in regards to con complex.

15:01.785 --> 15:05.045
So, even if we take multinational companies, depending

15:05.045 --> 15:06.645
where the head waters allocated,

15:06.825 --> 15:08.445
the implementation is likely to be different.

15:08.625 --> 15:12.005
The implementation also likely to be different across,

15:12.195 --> 15:15.645
different, subsidiaries depending on the, the problems

15:15.645 --> 15:18.365
that, the company is currently facing,

15:18.365 --> 15:20.765
depending on the prevalent language attitudes

15:21.265 --> 15:23.645
and the, linguistic diversity that,

15:23.655 --> 15:24.805
particular context.

15:25.625 --> 15:28.645
Um, we've also talked, a lot about,

15:28.645 --> 15:30.845
we are focusing on multinational enterprises,

15:30.865 --> 15:35.525
but equally small enterprises,

15:35.595 --> 15:38.965
will struggle with, EDI, issues as well.

15:39.065 --> 15:42.285
So we need to, future research can explore, how,

15:42.675 --> 15:46.215
what this looks like, and also putting the framework

15:46.215 --> 15:48.615
to test, will be very helpful.

15:49.355 --> 15:52.855
And also perhaps not only looking at linguistic diversity,

15:53.035 --> 15:56.865
but other aspects of diversity such as neurodiversity,

15:56.965 --> 16:00.465
for example, and to see to what extent this is helpful,

16:00.465 --> 16:05.265
looking at, conceptualizing, neurodiversity, to

16:05.265 --> 16:06.945
what extent the concept of,

16:08.005 --> 16:11.425
how fluidity can be helpful in this context, reciprocity

16:11.925 --> 16:15.105
and also the three categories, of difference.

00:00 - Thank you so much for, for having me. first I'd love to, start by saying that, today I'll been discussing a paper that is, core written with two other authors, and is very important to acknowledge their, immense contribution.

00:14 - So does professor annual housing and a professor Martin Shiva. So, coming back to your question, so we know that organizations in particular multinationals are very committed to implementing the equality, and diversity agenda. We know that, this is important for, their organizational performance and organizations do not generally dispute the need to implement, EDI.

00:43 - However, what we also know is that they do struggle. So it is tricky to implement the diversity and quality agenda because we know that, if we focus on the young policies, if we only focus on, prescription, we really do not get the, the progress that we need. So in order to implement EDI agenda, we need a more holistic, we need more, embedded, action. So we've decided in the paper, to,

01:12 - help organizations, with, EDI implementation and also, we want to, advance conceptually, the field. So we are proposing, a new framework, which we, which is simple two-step framework. However, the purpose is to, both advance conceptually and empirically, the research on, EDI agenda. Yes. thank you for asking me about linguistic diversity. So I'll be proposing a framework,

01:43 - for the management of EDI. but we know that, talking about a framework can be quite abstract. so we using an example of, linguistic diversity, by linguistic diversity, we understand the, diversity within a particular language and across languages. So when we talk about, multinational enterprises, for example, we know that they operate across different languages. So we have, diversity across languages,

02:12 - but also there is a huge, diversity within a particular language that applies to, to people how they, speak a particular language in different contexts. that applies to huge variety of the way we speak. So people will speak, we know that, every single person speaks differently in different context. So we all speak very different languages. We have different accents, we have different language norms to this.

02:40 - And also we have very different language profiles. We can be highly competent in one situation, linguistically competent in one situation, but not really. So, in another situation. So we might be very fluent in formal settings, but struggle in informal settings. Or we might be very good at, speaking, but we might struggle with writing, for example, as our purpose is not to provide, an overview of the literature, because that will be a,

03:05 - a massive task in itself. But what we're trying to, we're trying to integrate the literature rather than to review it, that some, papers do. We are trying to integrate the literature. In particular, we are drawing on, three aspects. We drawing on Harrison, and clients 2007 framework, on, diversity. That particular framework suggests that, when we talk about diversity,

03:28 - we often talk about very different things. So we can look at diversity as, as a problem. we can look at it, from the, separation perspective. we can also look at, diversity as variety. So we highlight the, the nuances, the differences. But also when you look at variety, diversity becomes, is seen through a positive lens. We can also look at diversity through their disparity lens, which we highlight the negative

04:00 - consequences, of diversity. So that's one of our, elements of our framework. the other ones are drawn from advancements in, EDR research in particular, we are looking at, the concept of, fluidity. And we encourage, we encourage scholars and practitioners to look at, deference not as something, static, and not as, binary category, but as something that is more fluid and content dependent.

04:31 - We also, in the first, the third element of the framework is the reciprocity. we want to highlight that in order to advance the agenda. In order to implement change, we need to, look at concerted efforts of both, majority and minority group members. it cannot be a task of one single group. Okay, thank you very much. So, what we are proposing, the framework is, are two steps.

04:59 - our framework is based on, the well-established, cognitive, theory, which suggest that, our actions depend on how we think. so the framework we're proposing that in order to, in, achieve, inclusion, we need to, think about, we need to start, we need to change how we think about diversity. So we need to move from a situation, and we have, when we see, diversity as a problem. So where there is low variety we need,

05:32 - but instead where we highlight, high separation and, high disparity. When we look at diversity as a problem, when we highlight the, opposing standpoints of staff, where we also focus on the, on the problems with diversity and the negative consequences, and we need to instead shift towards, thinking of diversity, in a positive light. So We highlight the, diversity as, as a resource, and, and a focus on variety instead.

06:04 - And we suggest that, this shift will also, will also need to be accomplished by, acting differently. So with a practical shift, in which we promote reciprocity, in order to leverage diversity, would it be possible to also look at the implementation of the framework in relation to linguistic diversity? We believe that it is, helpful to, highlight, provide an example of how the framework can be implemented.

06:31 - and for this, we have chosen, linguistic, inclusion, and we've done so because, of the prevalence of, language-based discrimination organizations. it happens in organizations, but also in society and linguistic, based discrimination. So this is the un unfair treatment of people because, of the language they speak, because how they speak, it might be because of their accent, which is seen as,

07:01 - not non-standard because of the, people's class, because of their, their background, because of the, the, the region of the country, they come from because of their, the country of birth. So they might be speaking with a foreign language or because they might be, speaking, using a norm that is, seen as, non-standard in a part particular setting. and, but we know that linguistic diversity is very important, however, it has not received sufficient attention.

07:32 - when we talk about, a DI and diversity inclusion efforts, we often talk about, categories of deference which are protected. so we talk about, race, gender, for example. but we don't know, we do not talk about language, and language is not, protected, characteristic. So we're using this example because we think that it has great potential, and it's also very important in multinational settings

08:00 - because those multinationals operate across, linguistic end, cultural, boundaries. So coming back to the framework, so we suggest that, in order to achieve, linguistic inclusion, we need to, we need those two steps. We need to, think differently and, and add differently what, what we mean by that. So our starting point often is that, we approach, when we talk about language diversity in multi enterprises, we talk, about,

08:33 - we talk from the deficiency perspective, that it is the non-language use the not language users of causing a problem. so we need to focus on their training. We need to address, the, the problem. We also talk about language differences very often from this binary perspective when we talk about, when we think of, native speakers and not native speakers, and those differences seen, in binary terms. also, what, the starting point is that,

09:05 - for often native language speakers are the first, first language users are seen as the benchmark for competence. So in a way, we are seeing that if somebody speaks their first language, they will be good in all, communicative, situations, and others need to mimic or adjust or try to achieve that, standard. and also we assume, we often assume, wrongly, that the, the norms, of the first language users,

09:33 - are then once, and should be followed by others. And what that creates, and that creates, focus on, on, on the problem, on the, that is linked to, second language users. and we don't focus enough on, conservative efforts. So what we are suggesting is that we need to, change our thinking. So the conceptual shift of that we were posing is that, we want to see language differences as a resource. so we need to look at what

10:08 - that means is multinationals need to recognize that, the variety of languages that people use can be very helpful for them. And also the fact that people might be, might have a plural competence might be able to, to refer to linguistic resources from different contexts, is seen as a difference is seen, can be seen, as a resource. and the fact that, people, also speak differently in different contextual situations

10:36 - can also, potentially, changed, into a resource. So we suggest that, we need to, depart from focusing on this binary distinction between not native and non native speakers. That is not helpful, that reinforces differences. and instead, we need to focus on, language proficiency in context in particular situations. also we need to, challenge the ple of an implicit assumptions that, the first language users are the superior language users.

11:10 - Research shows that in fact, at times the first, first language users can cause communicative problems because they might use, high context language, they might speak at pace, they might use highly, contextual references, et cetera. So they might be causing a problem themselves. They might not also have the ability to adjust to other speakers. So this will be the conceptual, shift that we are proposing.

11:35 - so thinking of diversity in a positive light, and also pushing fluidity, the fact that our, linguistic competencies are very different context, dependent, and we also need to act differently. so in order to act differently, we need to focus on, positive attitudes, of different language users. Research has shown that, the way we, our attitude, the way we think about language differences, influences our ability to understand. And so it is important to think about, to focus on

12:10 - and to foster those positive attitudes in organizations. we also need to focus on, adjustment of communicative efforts of all organizational members. So we cannot focus only on those, on providing language training, for example, for those, for second language users. But we need to highlight all, all staff that it is their responsibility to, focus on accommodation and adjustment, in communicative situations.

12:38 - so we need to, so therefore, the implications, we need to consider communicative competence of all language users, right? So we do not assume that, if somebody speaks in their first language, like they are immediately, communicatively competent, and we believe that there's two, two shifts. So the cognitive shift, how we think about diversity and how we conceptualize difference, as something positive, and also also as something,

13:03 - fluid conflict dependent. and if we take, and we highlight reciprocity, this will allow us to leverage diversity. Thank you very much. so what we highlight in the paper is that, we need to, in order to progress research, we need to, stop thinking, too much about, so much, about, diversity in the, negative light highlighting differences

13:29 - and highlighting what separates us. And instead, we might need to focus on, on the nuances, and, view diversity, in a positive light. We believe that, it is important to, also, focus on efforts, of all organization members, and, that will help us, in the implementation. We also recognize that, our research has, some limitations. for example, we focused, quite a lot on the positive aspects of diversity,

14:08 - which is natural because we, we know that, the majority of research focuses on the negative consequences on the various and what separates, and we want to find like the positive. But that with itself has, brings negative, it has limitations also in our framework. We haven't, discussed the, the possibility of resistance because we know, and we also can observe nowadays that there is some resistance

14:35 - to diversity inclusion efforts. there is more resistance in some context than in others. but this is not something that is, now equally, accepted everywhere. So we need to bear this in mind. We also, we recognize that the framework, originates in the global, north north and the implementation, of diversity inclusion efforts will vary, greatly in regards to con complex.

15:01 - So, even if we take multinational companies, depending where the head waters allocated, the implementation is likely to be different. The implementation also likely to be different across, different, subsidiaries depending on the, the problems that, the company is currently facing, depending on the prevalent language attitudes and the, linguistic diversity that, particular context. we've also talked, a lot about,

15:28 - we are focusing on multinational enterprises, but equally small enterprises, will struggle with, EDI, issues as well. So we need to, future research can explore, how, what this looks like, and also putting the framework to test, will be very helpful. And also perhaps not only looking at linguistic diversity, but other aspects of diversity such as neurodiversity, for example, and to see to what extent this is helpful, looking at, conceptualizing, neurodiversity, to

16:05 - what extent the concept of, how fluidity can be helpful in this context, reciprocity and also the three categories, of difference.

Faculti AI can make mistakes