by Maggie Garden

Bendett & McHugh, P.C.

USFN Member (CT, MA, ME, NH, RI, VT)

by Sally Garrison, Esq.

The Mortgage Law Firm

USFN Member (AZ, CA, HI, OK, OR, WA)

Language is a powerful thing. It describes the world around us; defines expectations; and becomes the narrative in our minds. Yet, it has limits and unanticipated consequences. As Alan Watts said, “The menu is not the meal.” So, if the purpose of language is communicating accurately – maybe even beautifully – then as awareness and understanding evolve, so too must language.

First, the problem: The words we choose create expectations, boundaries, and implications. The problem arrives when those expectations, boundaries, and implications result in excluding groups from fully engaging. The exclusionary results act as gatekeepers for opportunities and growth, maintaining the accustomed status quo. Those results may be intentional, but often they are not. Intentional gatekeeping can only be addressed with education, argument, and policy. Unintentional gatekeeping can be harder to address because it is undetected and unconsidered.

So, what is the impact of unintentional exclusionary language?  Global management consulting firm McKinsey & Co. has published compelling findings from the McKinsey Global Survey on inclusion in the workplace (https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/understanding-organizational-barriers-to-a-more-inclusive-workplace). The study evaluated the respondents’ feelings of authenticity, belonging, and comfort. The data was collected before the COVID-19 pandemic, but was published in June 2020. The findings suggest that many of the respondents consider inclusiveness in career decisions. However, approximately half of the respondents do not feel included.

Some notable statistics include that while 70% of the senior leadership respondents feel included, no other group scores as high: vice presidents and more junior roles scored 44%; women and ethnic/racial minorities were at 50%; and non-minority respondents scored 55%. Thirty-nine percent of the respondents turned down jobs or decided not to pursue an opportunity due to a perceived lack of inclusion associated with that opportunity. However, when grouped by demographic the numbers shift: 50% of LGBTQ+ respondents have decided not to pursue an opportunity due to the perceived lack of inclusion; 44% of women; and 45% of ethnic/racial minorities.

Business language has taken a beating with phrases like “synergy,” “thinking outside the box,” “leverage,” “taking it offline,” and the like. Even so, business language has met inclusionary challenges before: changing “chairman” to “chair” or “chairperson;” forms were edited to change the salutation from “Mr.” to Mr./Mrs./Ms.; and “John Doe” was changed to “John or Jane Doe.” Those changes were an indication of progress, but we have passed those landmarks and language has fallen behind again.

For example, Mr./Mrs./Ms. may not be accurate. Mx. is now available as a gender-neutral honorific. Further, John and Jane Doe are not the only options; perhaps, Occupant(s) is more inclusive and apt. The point is not to make the changes and be done with the effort. The point is to continually evaluate how you are addressing people and ideas to ensure you are being intentionally inclusive and eliminating false barriers.

How can we adapt? First, perfection is not the goal, progress is and it is ongoing. Don’t let fear or discomfort with new language be an impediment. Change is hard for many. It can foster resentment and discomfort. So, as with all things, with practice comes confidence and comfort. Next, evaluate your “go to” phrases and look for the casually exclusionary. It can be as small as referring to your team as “guys,” or assuming the CEO you are referencing is a man. Start to work towards eliminating those sneaky gatekeepers. Enlist a trusted colleague or friend to help you; it is amazing what others identify that you miss. Educate yourself. You can be more intentional when you know what the issues and hurdles are.

Copyright © 2021 USFN. All rights reserved.

Fall 2021 USFN Report