GaudiLab/Shutterstock
In this month’s Higher Ed Careers Interview, Andrew Hibel spoke with Dr. Kim D. Kirkland, Executive Director for Equal Opportunity and Access at Oregon State University. Dr. Kirkland spoke about her career path, provided tips for communication in the workplace, and advised educational leaders and employees on how to address difficult situations that may arise from miscommunication. To learn about Dr. Kirkland’s background and areas of professional interest, please visit her full bio to the right.
Andrew Hibel, HigherEdJobs: At the recent CUPA-HR conference you presented on the topic of managing “STUFF.” Can you explain what you mean by this acronym and why it is important to have conversations surrounding these types of things?
Kirkland: While most allegations raised in the workplace are framed as discrimination or harassment, we have to acknowledge that many of those allegations are grounded in misunderstandings, miscommunications, mistakes, or cultural missteps. Even messages initiated on social media or through private emails are often packed with Stuff that tends to find its way back to the workplace. In this context, the “Stuff” is “Something That U Find Frustrating” — it is the stuff that gets on people’s nerves, it’s the stuff that makes people angry, it’s the stuff people don’t like — it’s distracting and disruptive to people’s daily psyche, and some say “it’s the stuff that makes them sick.” It’s the stuff that people will stew on. This is the stuff that creates organizational noise.
Somehow, we have lost the ability to talk to one another and instead, we reach for third-party intervention for resolution. We want someone else to go straighten out the offending party. Somehow, our diversity has become the divide. We have to begin to talk to one another if we’re going to take this journey of cultural understanding together. In order to bridge communication gaps and begin to build community with all the diversity amongst us, we have to start allowing people to make mistakes with us. We forgive people in our personal lives that misstep and talk through it or work it out; but in the workplace, we cannot seem to do the same. We need to be able to talk through issues and risk that our professional relationships can sustain the same rigor as our personal ones. People must give others permission to make mistakes with them in order to gain a better understanding of our differences from a lived and shared perspective.
Hibel: Cultural missteps, mistakes in words spoken or assumptions in values, religious beliefs or feelings can be difficult to navigate and may lead to organizational “noise.” You said, “People must give others permission to make mistakes with them in order to gain a better understanding of differences and begin to talk to one another if we are going to take this journey of cultural understanding and bridge the diversity divide.” How do you recommend that people embrace the acceptance of mistakes and move forward to understanding?
Kirkland: If you work around a group of people on a daily basis or long enough, you are going to step on something — someone’s culture, beliefs, values, or little toe. You are going to make a mistake with someone, have some level of miscommunication via email, and have to navigate a misunderstanding over something very simple which all has a tendency to be magnified today more than ever. While most of these issues get framed as harassment or discrimination, it is most likely “Stuff” grounded in culture or conflict which creates organizational noise. Coworkers and colleagues’ professional relationships suffer when they are unable to talk to one another, which creates a myriad of organizational challenges. Misunderstandings, miscommunications or missteps can be easily resolved or cleared up when we put the issues front and center with the offending party. Most often, people are not even aware that their behavior or comment was offensive to someone until it gets raised. We assume everyone knows everything about each other’s culture — this is absolutely not true. I have even misstepped within my own affinity group as there are sub-cultures within the primary culture, particularly across generations.
When most people are confronted with an issue, they respond with surprise that their behavior or the interaction was even perceived as an offense. For example, most people will respond with something like “OMG, I am so sorry, that is absolutely not what I intended. I am so sorry that you took it or perceived it in that manner. Thank you for coming to me as I had no idea that you felt that way about what happened” — OR — “OMG, that is exactly what I said, but by no means what I intended. I am so sorry you interpreted my interaction in that manner. Please accept my apology as I would never intentionally or unintentionally be disrespectful toward you about something like that as I value our friendship and our professional relationship too much for that. Thank you for bringing this to my attention because sometimes we just don’t know when what we say or do is at odds with other people’s feelings, values or beliefs. I appreciate that you felt comfortable enough to come talk to me about this.”
Hibel: Often times it may not be the actual words, but it can be the tone or body language that one exhibits that people find frustrating and sometimes offensive. Do you have any recommendations for people to be more aware of their tones and body language when interacting with co-workers or in some cases, students?
Kirkland: I often suggest that people set aside the technology and engage in what may be an uncomfortable face-to-face conversation. The process of communicating between two people consists of transmitting and receiving information. This sounds relatively simple, but in reality, it is difficult for most people. While people may be attempting to listen to what’s being said, body language, emotions that show up via tone and volume of the conversation (particularly if someone is yelling), attitude as well as noise has a tendency to get in the way of effective communication. The most serious communication challenges in personal interactions are due to feelings, but it is those feelings that are also the most important aspect of communication.
A receiver will disconnect, check out, or shut down when the static in a conversation reaches a level that makes them uncomfortable. With most verbal conversations the parties receive 7% words, 38% tone, and 55% body language. Hence, I normally provide people with five critical points to engage in a difficult or unpleasant conversation.
- First, they need to know how to show up in order to have that conversation — check your feelings and emotions at the door (tone, attitude, body language, volume, etc.).
- Introduce the concern or issue — own it; talk about how it impacted you or made you feel; and thank them for agreeing to meet with you and hearing you out.
- Try not to get caught up on the words people use, but instead try to listen to the meaning of what’s being said and the story that’s being told.
- Stick to the script — don’t start talking about historical incidents that have nothing to do with the issue or concern at hand.
- Definitely do not allow yourself to get drawn into a debate or argument. Terminate the conversation if it goes south or sideways.
Hibel: A recent report by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NAESM) published a report on racial and sexual harassment. However, it received criticism because “the report and its reception also demonstrate some fundamental flaws with the academic system: naming a problem does not mean you’ve solved it.” What are your thoughts on this statement? Given that there has been much societal, cultural, and legal discussion surrounding harassment today, is there enough being done in academia to prevent it?
Kirkland: There are probably thousands of people, mostly women, nationally as well as internationally who has a #MeToo story — I know I have several that I could speak about, but never have publicly. And almost every woman I know personally and professionally has a #MeToo or three story to tell, nor have they ever spoke of it publicly. However, I have privately had a myriad of conversations with close friends about our tolerance of institutional behaviors adverse to policies, laws, and regulations that would never have been enforced in the workplace during the era we grew up in. Today, we’re left with naming it because most of us are at a place personally or professionally where we see no means for any real recourse; or we do not have the will to relive something that will ultimately culminate in a mockery of the process likened to what occurred during the recent Supreme Court confirmation, so why bother.
I was at the Title IX Consortium last week on Wichita State University’s campus and the capstone speaker Scot Beckenbaugh was presenting on “The Importance and Value of Mediated Solutions in Title IX and Equity Based Disputes.” Scot stated that until his group (the men) take ownership and responsibility for their past misdeeds and behaviors toward women, not only in the workplace, but in general, and help with awareness and prevention as a path forward, we’ll just have to keep naming it. So, thank you, Scot, for having the courage to call your group out publicly and in such a profound manner. While academia has some work to do, so do most organizations; hence, this work will be work in progress for some time to come.
Hibel: As an institution, failing to prevent or ignoring harassment, bullying, discrimination, or other claims can be detrimental. What advice would you give to leaders of institutions to deal and be prepared to deal with the “STUFF” and other detrimental behaviors?
Kirkland: While there are many strategies for diffusing organizational noise, when Stuff has been up way past its bedtime, supervisors, directors, managers, and senior leaders will need to “exercise tough love.” Meaning, it’s time to hold people accountable for disruptive and other detrimental behaviors that create organizational noise. Exercising tough love sends a message to other members on the team; it addresses performance challenges; it addresses disruptive behaviors; and it can be an opportunity to clean house by addressing productivity issues through a reorganization, restructuring, etc. Unresolved noise and/or conflict can be costly in that it interferes with the team’s ability to perform and/or deliver, time and other valuable resources are wasted housekeeping, other people get frustrated and either quit trying or quit the team altogether, and ignoring the noise or conflict can result in poor decisions, missed opportunities, stress, personal illness (high levels of FMLA and other personal leave), etc.
Leaders should create environments and situations for people to talk to one another; allow people to make mistakes with you and with each other and forgive those transgressions; and know that ignoring the Stuff and the noise is not a strategy.
Hibel: Speaking to employees, what advice would you give them on the flip side to deal with conflict and some of the “noise” that they feel may not be handled or diffused?
Kirkland: Employees need to find their voice and speak up for themselves as there may not always be someone else available or willing to advocate on their behalf. Employees need to speak their own truth to power no matter how awkward or clumsy is comes out and own it.
Not all words and comments should distract in the workplace as colleagues attempt to build relationships and community across the organization. We hold a grudge over unintentional slights such as leaving a team member off an email or misspoken or insensitive words. Sometimes we make this stuff bigger than it needs to be. Sometimes people are going to fumble the ball, trip on their words, or slur their phrase because they don’t know everything they need to know about every subculture to keep them out of trouble. When everything in your cultural bag reflects your own life, cultural clashes are hard to avoid.
Here’s what I will say to employees — not everything that happens to you is based on your race, age, gender, religion, orientation, disability, etc. Sometimes people will misstep or make a mistake with you. I ask that you forgive those small missteps if it is not outrageous or egregious (and we all know what that looks like), and talk it through as you would with your personal relationships. To quote an old phrase “don’t sweat the small stuff.” Move past it or talk about it with the offending party. When your personal attempts to address concerns have been exhausted and/or unsuccessful, then use the internal resources within the organization as the next step for redress — EEO office, ombudsperson, diversity office, human resources, immediate supervisor, etc. While investigatory enforcement agencies and lawyers are always a resource, they shouldn’t always be your “go-to” or “Plan A” but your last alternative. Once an employee seeks resolution from an external resource outside the organization because they believe the organization has either let them down or will be ineffective in addressing what they assert are their issues in the workplace based on some protected status, they are way beyond salvaging the relationship. We need to be able to talk to one another and take some risks, knowing that our professional relationships can sustain the same type of rigor as our personal ones without fear of retribution, complaints, litigation, etc. At the end of the day, it’s time to talk through this stuff.
- Give people permission to make mistakes with you, whether they misstep, misspeak, or even misunderstand. Reflect on the last time you misstepped and recall how you felt when the person forgave your transgression.
- Take some risks and get to know one person that you don’t know and embrace the journey knowing it’s not life ending. We are all going to make mistakes with one another, so learn the lesson and turn the page on it.
- Ask people for permission to make mistakes with them, especially people from other ethnic, cultural, and international backgrounds that you are most likely to be unfamiliar with.
- Identify and strip away stereotypes and myths about groups that may generally be regarded as different from groups with which you have an affinity.
- Build authentic and significant relationships with people who may be regarded as different in order to acquire an understanding of the issues created by group differences.
- Examine and learn how to listen for the assumptions that may drive the differences in the perceptions and perspectives of others because rubs have their roots in cultural norms.