Increasing political tension in many world regions – and within Europe – seems to strengthen and to bring the EU closer together. At the same time, limitations of a compliance-driven D&I approach and a widening gap between Europe and the U.S. also encourages a stronger European profile in D&I. But how much can be achieved when global standardisation calls for a one size fits all approach?

Revisiting D&I on both sides of the Atlantic

Europe, and more specifically the European Union, is undergoing a period of intense reflection and discussion – to say the least. European identity and the purpose of a political union, as cornerstones for the EU, are revisited in the light of Nationalistic or protectionist tendencies in some countries, in Europe and beyond. The U.S., which used to be a role model for the free world, is sending mixed messages and there are strong doubts whether it can be considered a leader in D&I. This question was already hidden behind the vast global initiatives emerging from the U.S., some of which implied the notion that other world regions were lagging behind. However, even US experts admit that their approach hits certain boundaries that don’t exist, e.g., in Europe. The International D&I pioneers of European Diversity Research & Consulting have been specialised – since 1997 – in the relations of as well as the collaboration and differences between EMEA and the Northern America. They have recently produced an in-depth analysis of D&I dynamics in Europe and the US (against the backdrop of legislation that was introduced in European countries over the past five years) and published a summary of selected aspects in the Global Diversity Primer, a publication of Diversity Best Practices, a business unit of US-based Working Mothers.

Baseline analysis including legal cornerstones

The essay discusses the implications of the European integration process – which is based on the idea of harmonisation rather than standardisation – and how it encourages both, a consistent EU-level framework as well as necessary localisation. Overall, the experts state that the need for tailoring is larger than the outside view (e.g. from the U.S.) suggests but also less than what local experts will often demand.

The description of the EU legal framework reveals that some standards are actually stricter than the much-praised US legislation – although the details and dynamics differ. The fact that some legal threats do not exist in Europe in the same way they exist in the U.S. has one implication that is widely overlooked: In Europe, systemic bias that is embedded in processes or in organisational cultures, can be discussed and addressed more openly than in the U.S. Also, the widely-held notion that diverse slates are illegal in Europe and the European ‘quota’ would be illegal in the U.S. does not hold fully true, a deeper analysis shows. Many of the perceived gap or disconnect appears to be rooted in language – and perceptional – issues.

Many Languages – Strong Messages

In fact, language continues to be a key aspect in working on D&I across Europe, let alone EMEA. While local languages are critical to involve the workforce in a genuine D&I dialogue, English is wider-spread than many think. It serves as a working language for 38% of Europeans outside the UK and Ireland and for the vast majority of senior management. However, when spoken as a foreign language and more specifically in a D&I context, this holds pitfalls, even more so, when some native speakers are part of the conversation. Language and conceptual questions overlap: Why do most (continental) Europeans never address ‘race’? What exactly do they mean by ‘women quota’? Why ‘equal treatment’ appears to be desirable concept in some places? These are but few examples where communication in Europe can get difficult or even lead to disruption.

Rigorous analysis of the context and a deep dive into the respective D&I framework, its goals and objectives, positioning, stakeholders and other relevant elements will provide you with the necessary understanding of where everyone is coming from and striving for. Experience shows that re-arranging a storyline can turn resistance into buy-in and adaptations of your ‘global’ tools will change your tick-the-box-exercise into a fully engaged journey of change efforts.

How successful can globally standardised programmes be?

As a consequence of globalisation and technological progress, the business world has been going through several waves of standardisation. In the D&I arena, eLearning, mentoring/sponsoring, ERGs/employee networks, and Unconscious Bias training are common areas where the belief in standardisation is as strong as the absence of robust success stories. This comes as no surprise if one takes into account the assessment of political, societal and cultural differences as a starting point. However, when you add the vastly different points where your audiences might be in their journeys, it would be a miracle if one concept would work equally well in different places around the world. Nevertheless, a large body of learning content will actually resonate in many different contexts – especially when it’s evidence-based (such as comprehensive Unconscious Bias models). However, many related dynamics are influenced by cultural norms and societal context. ERGs, for example, are a concept that is rooted in U.S. cultural values (‘stand up and speak for your case’). If and how this tool will fly in a given local context strongly depends on the individuals involved and in the organisational micro-culture – which may or may not support (or even allow) networks. Wanting to push this initiative from the U.S. to other geographies can create huge disruptions and the same is true for Unconscious Bias training exported from the U.S. What has proven successful, though, is to examine the objectives, content and mechanisms of global frameworks and reconfigure them first for Europe and then to local contexts as needed.

The journey continues

Some routine and even fatigue has emerged in many places in the D&I arena over recent years. Some large blue chip players even feel the time had come to mainstream all D&I responsibilities in HR and other functions and discontinue dedicated D&I change programmes. Others thought that Unconscious Bias provided the sought-after silver bullet to overcome existing barriers for D&I and concentrated all their efforts on one global programme. Another common approach is to leverage the many D&I events each year offers as a recurring agenda. For all of them, the current analysis shows: The political trends – especially in and between the U.S. and Europe – provide ample energy and need to reconsider D&I work on both sides and across the Atlantic.

 

Further Reading 

The Global Diversity Primer is available for members of Diversity Best Practices: http://www.diversitybestpractices.com/books

Article on D&I as an answer to Nationalism, based on an opening key-note at the Global D&I Congress, Mumbai:

http://en.diversitymine.eu/di-could-be-a-powerful-alternative-to-nationalism-if-pitched-effectively/

Spanish Diversity Charter article about overcoming fatigue in D&I:

http://fundaciondiversidad.org/too-much-of-the-same-thing/


About Michael Stuber

As a European D&I pioneer, his journey started 20+ years ago. His D&I models and practical work are based on evidence, generated by proprietary or secondary studies. Michael is one of the most published practitioners in D&I including books, research reports, more than 150 publications and features in the media and a D&I blog with 1,800 + articles: http://en.diversitymine.eu