It is not a great leap to imagine future historians re-defining our time as Before COVID-19 [BC-19] and After COVID-19 [AC-19]. BC-19 was an unsettling and destructive time. The gnarly old man of capitalism was in the throes of a final hedonistic, nihilistic binge: his vomit poisoning the roots of humanity and the planet. The toxic effects of his binge was seen in the growing gulf between a tiny proportion of people acquiring an ever increasing share of wealth, with a growing number in poverty and feeling disenfranchised, and frankly, ever more pissed off. People needing food banks and payday loans despite working more than one job. People turning to populism and hatred towards those seen as Other, when their real anger was directed at those who seemed to be comfortably riding a wave of liberalism. People on the liberal end of the spectrum looking on in horror at the popularity of Trump and other populist right wing politicians who berated the 'liberal elites' whilst sitting on a mountain of wealth themselves. Late BC-19 saw discussions about a second age of enlightenment bubbling up to the surface. I'm privileged to be part of this dialogue. It's held my interest even in the times when the idea was just hanging on by the fine threads of a few people keeping the pot bubbling. But all it ever takes is a few people who quietly tend to an idea, until it comes into an age and stage that it's ready to gather momentum. That feels like where we are now, like a snowball finding the right conditions to grow and go where it needs to. Yesterday saw our first public event discussing the principles of a Second Enlightenment Movement and mapping projects, policies and resources that chime with these principles. What makes this movement so appealing to me is that it is not driven by a need for funding, it is self organised and is not looking to fix stuff in itself. Its purpose is to notice, connect and amplify those projects, policies and resources that chime with its principles. It is powered by love and a wider perspective. That makes it resistant to future factionalism as one branch of a movement seeks to prove it is more 'right' than another. This is a phenomenon that has plagued many progressive movements, and has repelled me from becoming involved in any form of politics. And so, here we are, exploring the frontiers of a new age of enlightenment. When has there been a better time to lay that gnarly old man of capitalism to rest? To lovingly remember he was an idealist once, borne of the 1st Scottish and European enlightenment, driven by virtue and the need to improve himself and society. We can thank him for his service, forgive him his transgressions against people and the planet, and move towards an age where we care for each other and the planet, and thrive together. That is possible, that is achievable, but it's not going to happen because someone else holds the answer. We all hold a piece of the magic wand of change, but it only works when we deploy it together in service of each other and the planet. This is what the folk who attended our event yesterday thought it might look and feel like, and it felt good to me!
Putting a tick in a box seems like such a simple thing. Yet when we ask someone to fill out an equality monitoring form, we are asking them to confine the complexity and multiplicity of their identity into a set of labeled boxes. For me, when I tick the ‘White British’ box, I think, “Yes, but I have multiple heritages”. When I tick the ‘Disabled’ box, I feel a twinge of disconnection, when I tick the ‘Straight’ box, I think, “Yes, but it’s more nuanced than that.” When I tick the ‘No religion’ box my soul has a little chuckle. If there is a box to tick about gender identity, I think about my transgender friends, and the complexity of emotions associated with this box. These thoughts skim briefly through my mind every time I'm asked to tick those boxes. Some days how I feel about my various identities is more tricky than others, complicating my relationship with those boxes yet further. I believe this is true for most of us. And yet I, like many reading this blog, will have more insight than most into why we tick those boxes. I have even have designed some of the forms and debated about the wording of the labels. I ask myself to imagine how it feels to tick those boxes, or ask others to tick those boxes, when you don’t really know why you are being asked or what will happen to the information. As an equality and inclusion practitioner, I often advocate for collecting this data so that we have a quantifiable source to help measure and improve equality impact. We ask frontline service providers to collect this data. More and more we ask people using online services tick these boxes. But where does it all go? How much of it is analysed and used to make improvements? Data can give some powerful insights, but usually only as a starting point. It needs to be followed with understanding more about people's lived experiences. Numbers can start to tell you which groups are accessing services or opportunities, they can indicate who’s complaining and who’s missing from the picture altogether . However, to understand why, and more importantly, what can be done to make things better, the picture needs to be layered with an insight into people’s experiences and perspectives. In my experience, if collecting data is seen as ticking a compliance box, it is likely to have limited impact in terms of how it affects decision-making, leading to improvements. What determines effectiveness lays in how insight about equality is valued by organisations, and whether the people we are asking to tick those boxes see the benefit in doing so. We live in an age of ‘ big data’ , where very large sets of data are used to map trends, and these trends determine where money is spent, or predict how we will make decisions. I was recently struck by the quote "Data is the new oil”, with some claiming it is the world's most valuable resource . Viewing data from this lens, as fuel to commercial interests, reinforces the need for privacy and consent. The GDPR and updated Data Protection Bill define tighter principles to regulate the flow and use of this ‘new oil’, so that our human right to privacy isn't washed away by the the force of its flow. GDPR provides an opportunity to sharpen our focus on how we collect and use equality data, as organisations review their approach to processing personal data. However, it should also prompt us to be more critical about why we collect equality information and what we do with it. Do we see it as a way of ticking one of our own 'to-do' boxes, or do we see it as a starting point of discovery leading to better access and experience for all? Understanding the Why? and the So What? usually only comes about through a strategic investment in curiosity and exploring solutions. We should never forget the complexity behind that tick in the box, or the value of people’s identities. We should either honour this by making it really count, or not ask at all. This is the start of a conversation I’d love you to join me in, if you have a examples of good practice or a view to share please click here . It would be great to share resources and insight as the conversation develops. Links to guides and resources: Here’s a brilliant example from Ideas for Ears about using data to raise awareness about how people with hearing loss miss out in meetings and events Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) GDPR briefing This FAQ resource gives some guidance for processing equality information relating to staff Preparing for the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) - 12 steps to take now European handbook on equality data This blog was inspired by a blog written by Sam Tadcastle, a master of peacemaking and empathy, who wrote: It’s an emotive thing, drawing lines on maps .
Here at Arc of Inclusion we focus on the environment. Not the global ecosystem (although we like that too), but the environment created by organisations, and the vital contribution people make to that environment. In this article, the first in a series, I'll be outlining why we think the development of an inclusive, safe and accessible environment is so very, very important. We know that identifying the tangible ingredients for getting that environmental mix just right can be pretty tricky, but that’s exactly what we aim to explore here on these pages. We know that people flourish in environments where they feel safe and included. The business case is strong - to paraphrase Richard Branson: when you prioritise your employees, your employees will take care of your clients. Whatever your view of Richard Branson, it’s fair to say that he has a healthy interest in the bottom line. Even in those organisations where the primary driver is profit, creating a safe, inclusive and accessible environment for their employees and clients makes sound business sense. When we go to work, we expect to be safe. We also hope to be supported to do our jobs to the best of our abilities, and maybe even to flourish and grow. Many organisations (profit motivated or otherwise) are driven by a strong vision and a set of core values, but too often these don’t resonate with staff, as they don’t see that vision and those values reflected in their working environment. We all know workplaces which are rammed with filing cabinets and intranets overflowing with policies and completed CPD training courses. Yes, the compliance boxes are ticked, but how far can box ticking go when it comes to creating an optimal environment where staff can thrive and give of their best? I’ve seen the power of inclusive environments where some people, people who have encountered challenges and barriers to inclusion, overcome those barriers to thrive and blossom. I’ve also witnessed environments where talented and highly motivated staff become ever more disillusioned and disengaged, and eventually either vote with their feet, or develop strategies to minimise their exposure to their work environment. Sound familiar? In recent times, we’ve witnessed a depressingly large swathe of people courageously publicly speaking up about unacceptable behaviour in the work environment, That kind of behaviour has always been unacceptable, but alarmingly, we’re now seeing how readily it was accepted. It seems most prevalent where there is often an imbalance of power and people who often feel their careers are on the line if they speak up. How honest are organisations about the unspoken rules of their working environments? I’ve spent the last couple of years preoccupied by what makes an inclusive environment, one where people are actively encouraged to thrive. I’ve been very conscious about what it feels like, from a range of different personal and professional perspectives, to be in environments which feel properly inclusive, environments which might, for example, have been thoughtful about access. I’ve contrasted that positive approach with what failure feels like when inclusion isn’t really considered., I’ve seen for myself how lack of thoughtful inclusion puts a real dampener on efforts to make good things happen. In the rest of this series, I’ll outline how finding and using the right ingredients can combine to make for a much more healthy and nurturing environment. I’ll share some of my experience, and some of the stuff I’ve learned from a diverse range of sectors and settings. Most of all, I’ll encourage you to forget box ticking, and take the time to create the right mix for a healthy and happy working environment.
