Notes on a conference: bringing your ‘whole self’ to work?
If you are sitting comfortably, then I’ll begin…Hello, I’m your storyteller today.
Some of you will be aware of The Parable Of The Blobs And Squares… I do like it, but sadly I think it gives a false impression that some of us are blobs, and others are squares. It’s an assumption that leads us to believe that there are only two types of individuals in the world. This means that many of us can feel caught having to choose between two ways of being ourself.
I feel it’s the idea that blobs and squares are different people that is a danger. Wherever we divide people into groups there’s a tendency that one group will be perceived as better than the other. Stereotypes then emerge: the great pride in being a blob, a member of an activist community for example, not the shame of being robotic, a worker in a bureaucratic workplace. Given a choice I’d like to think I’m not a square. But, I sometimes speak in a paid role, so being in square mode I tend to hide a lot of my feelings, and I push my credentials forward in an oppressive way. Obviously, this doesn’t mean I don’t have feelings, it just means that in more formal settings I’m discerning about who has earned the trust to hear my personal story - the more private aspects of my life. A polarising continuum is dangerous, as pushing people into 1 of only 2 boxes, neither helps those in positions of power or those rejected.
As for stories told, the overwhelming worky nature of conversations outside a business space, with their focus on money and growth, further silences those of us who talk about things that lie beyond financial considerations. Human rights, for example, is often felt to be a priceless vision, but one often obscured by issues of viability or systems change. The way work terminology creeps into conversations where it isn’t needed also makes us forget that there are great many places where people come together to tell a different shared story. The language of this storytelling defines the subtleties alternative cultures where money does not define what’s valuable. Stories can be experienced as a welcoming – but also as a reminder of what fits - so rejection for some is never too far away.
As you’ll guess, that’s not where the complexity stops, there are also levels of conversation, between individuals and groups within institutions and beyond them. It is easy to forget there are many different types of squares… as there are different types of blobs. Each will have a way of using language, using a different vocabulary and speech pattern. Because the activity shared will be specific, language is incredibly local, with each place and groups having a way of telling their culture.
Research into language and culture, speaks of dialogue and narratives, and suggests that there are at least 5 types of dialogue. I’ll spare you the extensive lecture, but a quick overview differentiates between personal, social, learning, professional, and community. While culture is hard to shift from a top down position, when people choose to tell a different story the shift can be speedy. However, the memo "we will be more inclusive as of Monday 7th!!", will most probably never change culture. Being told what to say tends to be felt as an abuse of power, and sadly turns most conversations into a rant against any new ideas coming from above. Understanding inequality and wanting to change the way our shared story is told is a sign of power more equitably shared.
In the context of Equality & Diversity and privilege, not to be confused with its common meaning of luxury, needs to be clearly defined as an unearned advantage. Yet within storytelling, there is no single continuum for advantage, privilege may be best represented as a star, with the points multiple facets of identity stretching out further in areas where we face less resistance to our story. We may belong to many groups, and our story will change depending on who we have a conversation with.
Fake it, until you bake it! Like many I can’t exactly leave any part of myself at home (to my chagrin), and I feel unwanted, not overtly but when my words are rejected and my way of telling things is at odds with the stories around me. Exemplified by a certain difficulty in equal opps monitoring forms, the questions are often personal about identity, rather than affiliation to a group or network that has a more public quality. It’s not like saying “I’m French!”. I’m proud about that. My impairments are an entirely private matter, even though disablism need to be spoken about more publicly. When I read ‘do you have a disability?’ or better ‘are you disabled?, I know that disabled peoples story in the UK hasn’t been heard. I want people to use impairment and disability with clarity and intent – not confusion.
It is why I am becoming less and less in favour of letting it all hang out. Not only because at my age it tends to fall apart once it’s out. But more importantly my story is private in a conversation that’s professional, and often political. Conflating impairment and disability confuses body shape and identity. Furthermore, the answers may be unconsciously construed as a fit test, or my pro-justice and anti-ism values misread as a criticism of team spirit.
Fremont troll story
Jim Diers speaks with heart of Seattle’s city desire to provide service in a community way. That is with help and signposting at local level. He states “Community empowerment, on the other hand, means giving citizens the tools and resources they need to address their own priorities through their own organizations” (Diers, 2004, p. 21). His story of the Freemont Troll always serves me as a reminder that alternative tales materialise when those constrained by bureaucracy devide to loosen its power. When the Seattle council let go, giving citizens a few options, new choices arose that could not have been dreamt of. The words “Troll Patrol” never fails to light my world with joy. Intentionally changing the way ‘things are done around here’ stands in opposition to the expectation of people having to learn to navigate the system. An expectation that unfailingly excludes many, while favouring those already on the inside – advantaged by unearned privilege. And those arguing for a deeper understanding Equality and Diversity perceived as pests, when they fail to act in ways that suit government working practice?
Using a different way of telling the story makes people act differently! It shakes things up revealing where the cracks are, and giving people voices they were previously not using. Change is supposed to be uncomfortable, because alternative tales unsettle, but the gain is worthwhile if we are offering more people a chance to be themselves.
Probably the most shocking statement that morning was that ‘disability you have to apply for’. It speaks volumes to the stories we tell about disabled people being untrustworthy. Incapable of declaring their own identity in the face of an oppression- ablism - few can speak of.
Guiding literature:
Brown, B. (2012). Dearing greatly: How the courage to be vulnerable transforms the way we live, love, parent, and lead.London: Pengiun Books Ltd.
Chapman, L. (2013). Respectful Language: How Dialogue Supports Moral Development of Leaders and Respectful Culture. Journal of Psychology Issues in Organizational Culture, 3, 78.
Diers, J. (2004). Neighbor Power - building community the Seattle way.Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Fullan, M. (2011). The Moral Imperative Realized.Thousand Oakes: Corwin sage.
Paterson, R., & O'Connor, K. (2019, 4 29). Viewpoint: Bringing Your ‘Whole Self’ to Work Can Feel Risky. Here’s Why’. HR News.
West-Burnham, J. (2009). Rethinking Educational Leadership.London: Continuum.
Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2009). The Spirit Level, Why more equal societies almost always do better.London: Allen Lane.
