When historians look back at how companies and society tackled diversity and inclusion in the first half of this century, they will most likely comment that good intentions led to far slower progress than intended. They will point out that well-meant initiatives, such as implicit bias training, not only failed to have any lasting impact,…
Membership Required
You must be a member to access this content.
Why not sign up to a month’s free trial?
Related Content
-
Positioning difference
Many mentoring programmes are designed specifically to support diversity objectives....
-
How to take collective responsibility for individual development
Personal development plans are a great idea in theory,...
-
Positioning difference in coaching and mentoring
Positioning difference Many mentoring programmes are designed specifically to support...
-
Coaching and Mentoring: A Journey Through the Models, Theories, Frameworks and Narratives of David Clutterbuck
David’s retrospective examination of 45 years of evolution in coaching,...
-
Enter the Otrovert
I once went through a battery of psychometric tests with one of the leading psychology consultancies. I wanted to understand them from the perspective of the client experience. For a lot of the questions, I found myself saying “From this perspective, I’d answer X; but from another perspective, I’d answer Y”. Clearly frustrated, the psychologist told me that my personality was too complicated for diagnosis!
-
Challenging times for Human Resources
I was pointed to a fascinating book at an EMCC webinar on supervision and neurodivergence. We’re all neurodiverse by Sonny Jane Wise explores the modern history of neurological difference in society. Its starting point is that neurodiversity is the norm. Neurodivergence describes behaviours or traits that do not conform to a cultural norm – yet cultural norms are social conveniences that have no scientific basis.