[ANNOUNCER]: Breaking down everyday workplace issues and diagnosing the hidden sickness not just the obvious symptom, our hosts James and Coby.

[COBY]: Did we lose a patient?

[JAMES]: No that’s just my lunch.

[COBY]: Hey thanks for joining us. I’m Coby, he’s James. Let’s get started with a question. What is missing from Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion?

[JAMES]: This is a question that seems to… it seems like it’s being asked a lot more frequently in over the last few years. A lot of people are trying to answer it by including DEIB for adding Belonging, or adding J for Justice or A for Accessibility. And while I really I like where the conversations are often going with a lot of these. And trying to answer this question, the issue that I have with these additions, especially Belonging and Accessibility, is that if Belonging doesn’t already exist in your DEI efforts then you can’t have Inclusion anyways. And if Accessibility doesn’t exist, then you can’t have Equity. So there needs to be something else right, it can’t just be DEIB doesn’t work because Belonging without Inclusion is integration. And DEIA doesn’t work for Accessibility because you can’t separate Accessibility from Equity.

[COBY]: Yeah, and I mean especially when it comes to Accessibility and Equity, because I mean, really when you remove the accessibility from it what you’re kind of creating is you’re creating equality, right? And though equality sounds really good, it’s actually something that is a really challenging, or really poor standard to try and create. Because equality is everything is the same. You get the same, I get the same regardless of our needs, we get the same. And that’s something that is very… again it doesn’t sound like it’s a bad thing, but it’s actually a very dangerous thing. Because the reality is people are complex, and different people need different things in order to be successful. So when we provide people equality… and one thing that I read about this is that in some places, I think the UK is one of them, the E in DEI actually is for equality, which is a whole other concern. Hopefully that’s not something that is carrying its own momentum on its own, because that’s a dangerous path to follow. But this is… but you’re right. There is something that, it’s important to have this discussion. It’s important to have this conversation, but it’s also something to keep in mind that we don’t want to be, you know, hurting our initiatives by forcing a separation, or forcing a focus that actually weakens the whole point, right?

[JAMES]: And the conversation about what’s missing, or if anything is missing from DEI, it is a conversation that we should be having because we should be challenging our assumptions about whether or not we have the complete picture. We’re not going to get everything right, right away or the first time that we try something. And by not shutting the door on examining our current understanding of DEI, we allow for the opportunity to improve and grow and provide a more diverse, equitable and inclusive workplace.

[COBY]: Right and it is really important to be critically reflective of all the initiatives that we take, because one thing that can be dangerous is when we could barrel head first towards a path that we set out, and not allowing for the learning that happens along the way. It’s almost like, you know, we don’t just make mistakes, you make mistakes really fast. So it is important to take a step back, because again, it is impressive that, you know, we are finally… well it’s not impressive… the fact that we’re finally looking at DEI, taking it seriously, and trying to leverage all the value that comes from it, more recently. Something that, you know, we all should be, we should be talking about a long time ago, but at least we’re talking about it now. But while we’re doing this stuff, and while companies are investing in these actions, and strategies, and implementations of these new efforts. You’re right, it’s important for us to be looking at this with some… to reflect on it critically to make sure that we’re absolutely trying to get the best out of our investment. The best out of our efforts. Because all this stuff is really important, so we should be really trying to make sure that whatever we do, we’re doing it right.

[JAMES]: Yeah and on that piece, that’s one of the problems that I have with where the the state of the current conversation is. I want to harp on two pieces, two items I’ve mentioned already. One… it’s the B and the A. DEIB, the reason why I really I don’t like that, where that conversation is leading, because it feels like people are trying to separate… that Belonging is somehow separate from all of the rest of your efforts. That to me dangerously undervalues what Inclusion is, right? If you… we’ve talked and we have different resources available on, you know, our different platforms about the difference between things like Inclusion and integration. And really I… the crux of it is that when you remove Belonging from being a central part of Inclusion, you no longer have Inclusion. You no longer have an inclusive workplace if people don’t feel that they belong. You have an integrated workplace where people co-exist, where they… they can co-exist in harmony without large amounts of conflict, and that’s not a bad thing. But that’s not Inclusion. And so the adding of Belonging tagged on to the end of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, I think does a huge disservice to, not only how important and central Belonging is to the whole conversation, but it waters down and it weakens Inclusion as well.

[COBY]: Yeah you’re right. And I think that it is really important for us to be clear, if we’re removing Belonging from Inclusion, then is it still Inclusion? Or our argument is that, no. You’re creating integration. You’re creating this visible coexistence, because when you’re trying to create the look of Inclusion, you’ve created integration. If you want to create the culture of Inclusion, then Belonging is a fundamental component that you can’t separate it. Because to me having Inclusion and Belonging, DEIB; is like saying we have soup, and we have soup with broth. So well then, what was the first soup? Was it just wet vegetables? So again the whole point of soup, is the broth. It’s just like the whole point of Inclusion, it’s Belonging. It’s a very odd thing to separate and still call Inclusion.

[JAMES]: A pizza with no dough, right? Now it’s just vegetables and cheese on my plate, right? It’s no longer Pizza.

[COBY]: Exactly. So it’s one of those things where I do get the point of trying to prioritize Belonging. But again, what that more speaks to when you put the B after DEI, is you’re actually saying we don’t really understand Inclusion. So we’re making sure that our Inclusion has Belonging. Just like we don’t really understand soups, so our soup has broth. It’s one of those things where they’re often not looking at the full picture, or again they’re really not really getting what it all entails and I think part of that is, again, that rushing in head to first, without really, reflectively, asking the questions; are our actions sustainable and impactful? And I mean it’s good that they’re trying to readjust their approaches, and part of the adding the letters on is that readjusting of approaches. But I think it does hurt the conversation, or the conversation maybe does kind of damage the impact that Inclusion should be, if we’re separating Belonging from it.

[JAMES]: So I think the conversation, and the intent behind having the conversation, comes from an absolute good place. And I this is my own conspiracy theory. ‘We’re going deep down the rabbit hole with this one’.

[COBY]: Oh it’s one of those podcasts.

[JAMES]: No, I think this comes from the fact that a lot of organizations have not been successful with their Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives. They have not seen… they have not been successful in creating inclusion. They have not been successful with DEI, or they see DEI as lacking because they’re not getting the outcomes that they should. So if DEI is lacking, then it means that we need to add something, right? So we need to, if we haven’t done a really good job with our DEI efforts, and people don’t feel that they belong, then we need to add Belonging. If people don’t… if we’ve done a really poor job of Equity and nothing is actually accessible to anybody, then we need to add Accessibility. So I think it stems from that, you know, just doing it really, really badly for a long time, and not understanding how DEI is not a thing, it’s three things. It’s Diversity, it’s Equity, and it’s Inclusion. And each one of those requires a substantial amount of forethought of effort and understanding on what they mean and what they entail.

[COBY]: Yeah and the idea too of, I think maybe a part of it as well, is they also require time and follow-through. Because like again, a lot of… and we see this with a lot of the organizations that we work with, that we speak with, and that we connect with or partner with. There is often this sense of, you know, “gotta go check the DEI boxes. We got to move on to the next one. So we did D, and then we did E, now we’re doing I. You know, boom, boom, boom. Oh my gosh! We didn’t get the outcomes we were looking for”. When that’s not how this whole conversation should be approached. And one thing that we’ve always said in our training is, we like the acronym DEI, but we also recognize that it may unintentionally lead people to think that is the process. Diversity plus Equity, you know, either plus Inclusion or Diversity plus Equity equals Inclusion. And both of those are fundamentally wrong. And again I don’t want to get too much… because again we talked a lot about this kind of stuff in the conversation that we had about, in the podcast episode we did about Are Organizations Successfully Creating Inclusion? We talked a lot about this, especially around Belonging. So I don’t think we need to spend too much time you know recovering this. So again, that’s a great episode to catch up on if this is a part of the conversation that you’re enjoying. But it is important for us to really acknowledge that Inclusion really kind of has to be that thing that exists first. And it’s something that is probably the biggest component. Because it’s about what the experience… Employee Experience is largely about Inclusion. So something that we do have to make sure that we’re not… if we’re going to do something, if you’re not gonna… if we have to do something fully right, it really has to be Inclusion, and that is considering Belonging as the in crucial element to it.

[JAMES]: Yeah so the other point I talked about, or went off on belonging a little more than I meant to. But, that’s part of the dangers of just putting me in front of a microphone unscripted, you have to just deal with what you get. But I want to talk about Accessibility as well. Because I’m seeing Accessibility coming up as the answer to what’s lacking with DEI and I don’t agree with that. And I think that again, it’s similar to how, to the conversation around Belonging, I think that it sets a dangerous… dangerous might be a little too alarmist, but it sets a problematic example or a situation. Where somehow Accessibility needs to be this other piece that’s added on, when Accessibility has to, in my less than humble opinion, has to be included in Equity. You can’t have Equity in the workplace, if it’s inaccessible to people. How can like… really though if there’s no Accessibility, if your initiatives are inaccessible… it doesn’t matter if it’s inaccessible, it’s not Equitable.

[COBY]: Yeah and I think that a lot of, again the reason for this is it I think that it comes from a very similar place to why we try and separate Belonging from Inclusion. Is again, we’re often not maybe fully giving the whole picture. Because like, so one thing though that I just want to… that I do find funny, going back to both Belonging and Inclusion and Accessibility and Equity, it’s like removing those is kind of like trying to remove Representation from Diversity. Like what is the point, If not these things? Like you know, these are two sides of the same coin. So it’s an odd thing to for us to try and separate them. But I think a lot of it does come from, we don’t fully get the whole picture. Like I think that we often think of Equity more in the lines of like pay equity. And Accessibility is more seen as like wheelchair access. But the things that… but the truth is both of them are so much more. Like, the work, being successful, the ability to provide your best most productive work, needs to be accessible to everybody. By creating Equitable practices and this can be as big as letting all employees, you know regardless of their mobility, have access to all the rooms in the building that you work. For the more the more traditional side of Accessibility. But it could also be about letting everyone have access to the same opportunities for advancement. Like I mean Equity and Accessibility is not just about things like pay equity, and wheelchair access, or mobility access. It’s about giving everybody like a fair, equal or not equal, a fair practical chance to be on a level playing field.

[JAMES]: It’s giving people what they need, individually, to be successful. And making sure that it is accessible to everybody. And it’s equitably applied, equitable practices. And so if we set the standard of, you know, in terms of productivity, you need to achieve the, whatever your KPIs are, whatever your outcomes are. What I need to be successful is going to be different than what you are going to need. And part of that is our approaches, our backgrounds, the way that we think about things. Part of it has to do with ability, and, you know, different aspects. If I need a little… if I need to ask for something more, in order to accomplish the goals, it shouldn’t be dependent on just one aspect of who I am. It should not… my ability to access the resources that are necessary shouldn’t be contingent on getting a doctor’s note. If we want to create a truly equitable and accessible workplace, then we need to look beyond how we often think about Accessibility and the accessibility of supports and resources.

[COBY]: Yeah I think one of the… I think like the slogan of poor Equity and poor Accessibility is the phrase “Well, if I do that for you, I’ll have to do it for everybody else”, right? Because the whole idea is, like you know, because again, Accessibility and Equity doesn’t have to be the big, construction projects of widening the doors for walkers and wheelchairs. It can be as small as allowing production workers to have  an AirPod in their ear to let them kind of listen to music and stay focused while they’re working on the machinery, right? It’s about what does this person need…

[JAMES]: As long as it doesn’t interfere with like safety protocols.

[COBY]: Exactly,

[JAMES]: Those hard and fast operational requirements.

[COBY]: Absolutely, yes. But what does this person need, that doesn’t break operation requirements, thank you for that qualifier, that will allow them to give me their best work? And how can we make that available to everybody? That’s kind of the heart of Equity. Like we really go into Equity to almost like the granular level in our Workplace Culture Hierarchy work especially. We did an episode about Job Dissatisfaction. Is Jobs Dissatisfaction Really That Dangerous? Because Equity is one of the fundamental parts of what… of the employee expectations. Employees around the world expect that their employers, what they provide them, will be Competitive, Sufficient, and Equitable. So these are things that are fundamental foundational into how we provide opportunities for our employees, to provide us their best work. So it’s something that we have to be taking seriously. But it is important for us to realize that the Accessibility part is inherent in Equity. And again, separating them kind of weakens them both. I think one thing that might actually kind of help as we try and really kind of smooth out the edges around the connection of Equity and Accessibility is kind of talk about an example of a client that we worked with. So we were working with an organization who is really big on professional development. They had spent, you know, a lot of money, seven or eight years ago, to create a manager, you know, leadership career path. And what they created when they spent all this time and this investment, was they created this professional development process that was really a series of like binders and paper tests that allowed people to kind of do some self-study and then write the tests. And if they pass enough tests, they were able to kind of move into the career path. Now as this organization grew, there was a bad habit of really only overly extroverted people being encouraged to take the leadership track. And for the most part those that had like a written word learning style, or really good with being able to like process the written word from the binders, were the ones that were really the most successful in the program. Not to say that other people weren’t able to, with other learning styles, weren’t able to get through it. But there are a lot of stories of you know it consuming their entire life because it was really counterintuitive to how they learned.

[JAMES]: An entire leadership program of binders would absolutely kill me. Like that that is the bane of my existence.

[COBY]: Absolutely. People were like waking up with like binder nightmares. But what this does is, this may not seem like an Equity and Accessibility issue, but it really was. Because this was what inequity and poor accessibility can look like. So yes everybody was given equal access to the training, it was available to everybody. But it wasn’t equitable in who was encouraged to participate. And the material was really only accessible to specific learning styles, unless they wanted to  give up their whole personal life to try and get through this year of training, with with these binders, that like you said James, probably would have killed you. So again, we often don’t think of things like these as examples of Equity and Accessibility, but it really can be. But it really can look like this. And something that’s really important for us to not forget about when we’re trying to almost like unpack what Accessibility and Equity means, and why we should be trying to keep them together.

[JAMES]: So we’ve talked about Belonging, and we’ve talked about Accessibility, and we’ve talked about how it’s important to have the conversation, and it’s important to ask and answer the question. We’ve asked the question several times, but we haven’t really answered it. So what is, is there something missing from DEI?

[COBY]: And again, and I think the answer is yes. I think that there is something more that we need to add to it, and I think that what is missing is largely about Agency. Now Agency is not necessarily a word that everybody’s familiar with, but let’s kind of give a brief summary of kind of what Agency is. Agency is the ability to have a voice, and have a say about your future. It’s about the ability to have some autonomy in your career, and from a psychological perspective, it refers to the ability for people to be able to act independently and effectively be in control of their own lives. So when we talk about this from a standpoint of the workplace, and from a DEI realm. It’s really about giving the opportunity for people to have a voice and to find their own path. So this is… so what Agency is kind of a fundamental component of, is removing barriers like the glass ceiling. Or removing the kind of invisible walls that some people find themselves in. Because I often think of this in terms, again, I have an education background, in terms of streaming. So streaming is a term that was kind of a fundamental part of a lot of school systems kind of again like a 90s approach. Where you put students kind of into a stream, and they were kind of forced down this path of either towards College, towards University, towards the Workforce. And the problem with the streams is that it was almost impossible to jump streams. So once you’re in a stream, you got to stick it out, and you have no Agency…

[JAMES]: And somebody else decided what stream you were in.

[COBY]: And you decided those really early on.

[JAMES]: Really early on.

[COBY]: Yeah, like I don’t want to go on my own soapbox about education practices. But, staying focused, but it is a great kind of example of the kind of invisible barriers that we place around people, and force them into a direction where to go, regardless of their own voice or their own opinions about their future. We have placed them in this path, or in this box, and they don’t really have the ability to break out of it unless we give them Agency.

[JAMES]: Yeah and what I like about this… what comes to mind for me is… well I mean the question that has to be asked is, ‘how does this play out in the workplace?’, right? How does Agency, how do you create Agency in at work? Or what does this actually look like? And thinking about that, it reminded me of a story that a friend of mine shared with me about his experience. Because this person works for an organization that very publicly supported LGBTQ+ rights and as a trans male, the values of the organization was one of the big things that really attracted him to the company. But the problems that came up in the workplace was that he was constantly being tasked with, like anything and everything, that had to do with the LGBTQ+ community. And anytime the organization wanted to raise their profile, or any time that they there was an event that involved the community, he was kind of put forward as the face of the company. He was volunteered to head up diversity groups and tasked with, you know, coming up with what the company should be doing for Pride, and all of these extra responsibilities ended up snowballing him into a position that was nothing at all like the job that he actually applied for. To use your terminology, somebody else decided and ended up streaming him into a completely different career path than what he had set his sights on, right? This is somebody who had the education and training to perform, to pursue a certain career, and he was hired for those skills, or after a while he it felt like he was not hired for his skills, but hired for…

[COBY]: His representation.

[JAMES]: The community that he represented, right? And this happens far more often than we would want to think. And it’s not that you shouldn’t have diversity committees, it’s when you remove somebody’s ability to make the decisions for themselves, or they feel coerced or forced into that. The sad reality is he ended up quitting that job and taking a lower paying job so that he could actually get back into the field that he was trained for, that he pursued, that he wanted to grow his career in.

[COBY]: Yeah and it’s one of those things where it kind of feeds into a lot of these problems that have kind of be kind of come up with this, almost like this poorly understood, unintentional consequences that kind of have evolved from this prioritizing DEI without really knowing how to do it properly. Or going in head first, you know, as fast as we can to make very, very quick mistakes. Because the idea is that end up creating new problems, like when we ask people from underrepresented groups, or Equity deserving groups to take on extra work. You know, sit on extra committees or just outside the regular duties, we call that The Minority Tax, right? We’ve asked people to put… to do a lot of work as a representative of their community, on top of the job that we hire them for, and we expect them to do more, because we want their voice. That’s a good thing, but then we don’t allow them to do the job that they wanted to do. And there’s a lot of people that fall into this, because again, it’s not a trap of.. a malicious trap, right? It’s actually… the sad part is its actually because of good intentions that these mistakes end up happening. Because we have the best of intentions, so we want to provide this voice, we want to provide these opportunities. But we end up, again, removing the Agency that the people have to say ‘No’. To be able to advocate for their own career. And its funny, it reminds me of back when I was doing a lot of workforce stuff, I did a lot of work with New Residents. One of the kind of funny expectations that came from government, was when we would work with New Residents is to help them land employment, ideally in a lot of their fields. A lot of people would come into the… that came into the our region with a skill set that was very specialized. Like I had one lady who was a brilliant professor of Egyptology from Cairo, kind of came into, you know, our rural community, where there’s no opportunities for kind of stuff like that. And kind of government’s opinion at the time was, ‘well if somebody has a skill set outside of our current workforce then they should be working with New Residents’. Like that was the idea. Like a New Resident, you know should be streamed into supporting our New Resident program, so that, because if you can’t work in our factories, then you should be doing this. And again, that removes the Agency when we try to put people in that box, but I do think though too with that because one of the things that kind of has come up in a lot of conversations around how do we actually, like you know, create this balance in our workplace and achieve the positive outcomes that we want from the from Diversity Equity and Inclusion. We still have these barriers like the glass ceiling, and like these invisible barriers, and that’s why I really do think that while we’re trying to be reflective of our current practices, that there is this need for Agency to become one of these important elements. Because we need to give the voice back to the people. We need to give people the opportunity to do this. Because one thing that we talk about a lot in our training and in our programs is the idea of of what we call Inclusive Engagement, so moving from inclusion to improving employee motivation and productivity. And you really can’t do that without Agency. Because if you want people to to be able to improve their professional development, for people to get better at what they’re already good at. You want to connect to people’s purpose, which we talked about in our previous episode, you want to access purpose. If you want to improve autonomy and professional Independence, those are things that are dependent on our organizations providing employees Agency. So it’s something that if you really want to leverage the power of an inclusive workplace, to improve employee performance and towards business outcomes, we really can’t do that with if Agency is the missing piece.

[JAMES]: There’s something that you said a minute ago that has got me thinking. So I want to ask the question to you because I need to work this out. You talked about the ability to say ‘No’. And I think that’s really interesting. Where my mind went is that I think that’s an interesting way of looking at whether or not we provide Agency in our organization. What is the consequence of somebody saying ‘No’, right? What would have been the consequence for my friend if they had said “Well, no. I don’t want to. I want to do my what I was hired to do, rather than all of these other things”. Part of agency is not only the ability to say ‘Yes’ to what you want to do, but to say ‘No’ to what you don’t want to do. Then does how a company responds to a ‘No’, does that kind of indicate whether or not there’s agency in the workplace?

[COBY]: Well I think that there certainly is a element to it. But the thing to keep in mind with Agency is that Agency is really about expectations. And so the Agency is really more, it really is part of that cultural aspect of the workplaces. Like where expectations kind of exist, again like the idea of the glass ceiling is a great example of that. Because again, the ability to say ‘No’ is one of those elements we talked about kind of below Inclusion on our Workplace Culture Hierarchy, is the ability to have Psychological Safety, right? So the ability to kind of say… to advocate for yourself is really, really important. Especially talking about Accessibility going back to that. But the the ability for someone to be able to have almost like the infrastructure in place behind them, that is provided by Agency, that allows them to say “No. I am here for this purpose. I’m not here as a representative, I’m here as an engineer. I’m here as an accountant. That’s why I’m here”. And so it is also about that voice. But it’s also about the protections and the infrastructure behind the voice. Because the voice can be something that comes from psychological safety, you really can’t have Agency if you’re not psychological safety. That’s just a fundamental, like it’s dependent on it, clearly right? But there really is that aspect of we have to be able to provide that internal infrastructure that allows people to have that say over their own career. Because one of the problems, going back to the streaming example, is we’ve seen a large increase in high level positions that have a DEI mandate. Like there’s Chief Diversity Officers and stuff like that. Again, very good indicators of the right mentality. However when those positions are put into a glass ceiling, then it does remove the Agency. If you come into a position, because of a need to put more support behind everything Inclusion, that’s fantastic. That’s great, those roles need to exist. They should be empowered different ways we’ve been over in other conversations. But also, if they are limited to “Well, you can only progress through this DEI stream. The Chief Diversity Officer is never going to sit in the CEO chair, because there’s a ceiling on that role”. That removes the Agency, right? So the idea of like, could your Chief Diversity Officer become your Chief Operations Officer? If this if they have the skill sets, the aptitude for it? Or is it, “Well, no….” Because sometimes when DEI efforts are initiated without the proper intention, they become like an appendix. They’re part of the body, but they’re not necessarily, you know, a fundamental component to its operations. Then that really does limit the Agency of it. But if they’re integrated effectively, we kind of talk about this in a previous episode about who HR reports to in that, in the internal structure that does kind of play in it too. If that respect behind the people side , the human capital side, is kind of interwoven into the workplace, then it makes that Agency so much more impactful. Because people’s skills, people’s voice, people’s abilities, allows for them to have more control over their professional development, and ideally their career trajectory.

[JAMES]: It’s a really good point. I like agency as a way of continuing the conversation and I’d be I’m really interested to get feedback from you who are listening. On what in your opinion is missing from DEI, if anything? And does Agency answer a need in the workplace?

[COBY]: Because again, this is the whole point of this episode, specifically, but with the podcast in general, is ideally to start a conversation. And we’ve been fortunate we do get a fair and people connecting with us through LinkedIn, and through email, kind of giving us their thoughts and asking questions. And we love that! So please continue doing that. Because again, this is something that is important for us all to be considering, because I think that the entire, everyone benefits from having success with DEI efforts. And I think that is a fundamental truth that, you know, there’s really not much of an argument to counter…

[JAMES]: The key is, DEI is not a zero-sum game. It’s not about one person or group winning, and others losing. It’s about creating an environment where everybody feels like they belong, where they can be their true authentic self, where they can give their best work, and where we can gain the benefits of actually being in an environment where people… where we don’t hate going to work.

[COBY]: You’re right, so I think that it is important for us to always remember that everyone benefits when there’s Diversity and all groups are represented. Everyone benefits when people are treated equitably and all opportunities are accessible. Everyone benefits when we are inclusive and we allow people to belong. And everyone benefits when we give people a voice and a sense of Agency in their career. And I think that this is something that… this is why the conversation is worth having. And this is why it needs to be continued.

[JAMES]: That’s well said.

[COBY]: Thank you. So I think I’ll wrap this up. So again, the question is what’s missing from Diversity, Equity and Inclusion? Well ideally we need to be looking at Diversity, Equity and Inclusion with a better understanding. To avoid weakening our strategies by separating areas and making them… putting the focus on the wrong area. So the problems with Belonging being pulled out of Inclusion is what that does is inherently creates integration, a coexistence, rather than a sense of included togetherness that we look for with Belonging. Separating Equity from… Accessibility from Equity puts us into a situation where we’re trying to create equality. Which can actually be a damaging idea of treating everybody equal, regardless of what they need, and making our opportunities less accessible to people that may need something different. We may want to consider looking at Agency as an addition to our strategies around improving DEI. Giving people a voice, giving people ability to have some say on their careers, and on their own lives. And if we incorporate a sense of Agency into how people grow their careers, their skills, their contacts, and improve their own performance; we’re empowering them. We’re letting them help give us their best work. Which is really what we’re trying to do by improving organizational culture, which ultimately improves organizational performance. So that about does it for us. So for a full archive of our podcasts and access to the video version hosted on our YouTube channel visit our website at roman3.ca/podcast. Thanks for joining us.

[ANNOUNCER]: For more information on topics like these don’t forget to visit us at roman3.ca. Side effects of this podcast may include improved retention, high productivity, increased market share, employees breaking out in spontaneous dance, dry mouth, aversion to the sound of James’s voice, desire to find a better podcast…