Stratification and Inclusion

As a society, we are wrestling with how to best increase diversity, equity, and inclusion. There are many solutions and numerous cases regarding good and bad policy implementation. Often there are simple ways to solve complex problems and some basic truths that apply. For example, you can have diversity without inclusion, but you cannot have inclusion without gaining diversity.  Focusing on inclusion can help you reach your goals.

Inclusion is not a form of consensus but does allow all stakeholders to be involved with processes. That is not to say that it never results in consensus.  Despite the standard efforts made by concerned organizations such as surveys, events, and employee councils, many people feel disconnected. Often trust is impacted as decisions seem imposed rather than thoughtfully inclusive of the team. One of the areas that lead to disconnection which is mentioned less frequently is stratification.

Stratification can be codified by policy or naturally occurring. In the country of Colombia, there is a system of socioeconomic stratification that charges a different cost for public services based on your assigned social level.  In addition, the six levels of stratification are not just socioeconomic but also can impact employment, education, and housing. One of the indirect effects has been a more significant cultural and social divide between the levels.  Divides usually create distrust as well.

We have many of the same impacts in large organizations. It is easier than one may think to adopt policies that on the surface seem to be inclusive, but in the end, cause stratification.  For example, remote work has caused a new line of conflict between those who can and can’t work remotely.  We know there are multiple reasons to offer remote work, but those that remain on-site often are viewed differently or of less value.  It creates a divergence of the cultures of the organization. While we are working to align operating units with organizational goals, we need to have a common culture.  Poor inclusion in many cases appears to be a significant contributing factor to stratification.

We are a technology-loving people. The same technologies that allow for a level of connection throughout the entire world have created the environment to forge new relationships. We have moved from an industrial economy to an information economy.  We can easily speak, text, or video conference with anyone anywhere. The big question is not who we are including in conversations but who we are not.  If we are going to mitigate the effects of stratification, we must spend time in the right places to build connections.

Time is a topic we rarely discuss in leadership circles regarding how it relates to inclusion. The reality is that our teams often measure the time we commit to them as the measure of their value to our organizations.  As a leader, we pass from meeting to meeting and often can’t find the time to spend with those outside our immediate sphere. Our sphere can create a bubble that limits external points of view.  

With projects, the amount of time invested at the start of the process generally ensures a better outcome.  The same is true for building connections with our teams.

Connections are extremely important if we want to unleash the full power of our teams. Tracking systems, rules, and restrictions can establish minimum levels of performance and often require little connection or inclusion.They generally are more punitive than empowering. When we include all stakeholders in processes, we build stronger and healthier connections.

I believe these connections are critical when we are asking teams to go through significant changes or support our institutional goals.  When each team member knows that we first support them in their individual goals, they are generally much more willing to be a productive team member that supports institutional goals.

Connections are also interesting. If you have traditional communication methods with your team, you likely have some form of connection. Just because you have a connection does not mean it is a good connection. Consider a telephone call where you are trying to talk to someone but have a lot of static.  You will work to communicate essential information but often cannot hold a productive conversation.  We have the same impact on our teams when we have poor or weak connections. We can communicate essential information but often fail to build relationships.

At this point, you may be asking yourself how you can afford the time. My answer would be how can you not afford the time? Weak connections have been a large factor in the decision to change positions.  A team that is connected understands its importance to the process. A team that includes all stakeholders will attain better results. A connected team will be a part of developing and better understanding of shared goals.  You as a leader will save time as you empower and unleash the team to accomplish the agreed-upon objectives. The old farm oil filter adage that “you can pay me now or you can pay me later” applies to time with our teams.  Taking the time now is extremely important.

In summary, stratification can be a major drain of energy for your organization. Time usually is the primary reason we do not get more out of levels involved in the decision-making process.  Not involving our teams fully has the same impact as launching a software project without a UX phase.  As you examine your team, be aware of stratification.  The good news is that the solution is simple…. time.