>>> intro
Welcome to this episode of our podcast Let's talk about Work. Today we have someone very special as our guest. Bart Wuyts will be talking to our podcast Founding Mother Artemis Kubala. She has recently taken on a new challenge and we are very happy to see her back here. It is a unique opportunity to zoom in with her on the origins of this podcast series, but especially to take a deep dive into terms such as diversity, inclusion and divergence. Be sure to have a pen and paper at hand, because Artemis has special book tips for you.
Dear listener, today we are very excited with our new guest in the podcast series. And actually it is not a new guest, because Artemis Kubala has been involved from the very beginning and has actually put together, directed and produced this entire podcast series. And we thought it was worthwhile, now at the end of the second season of our podcast series, to have Artemis herself speak. So welcome Artemis Kubala.
Thank you.
Artemis, you have worked here as a colleague within WEB-Blenders in recent years. We're not going to dwell on that for too long, but maybe just for a moment. What are you doing now? Because you recently left us?
Yes, I am now a learning and development expert within Natuurinvest and Natuurinvest is the equity part of the Nature and Forest Agency. This means that all the money that comes in from timber sales comes from managed forests by nature and forest. That money must be invested in more and better nature. And this is done through Natuurinvest and we focus on nature education and nature experience, among other things.
Yet another world that you seek out.
Another and the same. Because everything I have been able to do so far around inclusion and innovation often came down to looking for: what is trainable, what are skills in which we can practice, in which we can improve. So now we can fully dive into learning and development. I still see the common thread there somewhere.
Yes, I actually saw another common thread that it is ultimately important to cherish diversity everywhere. Whether it concerns people in an organization or nature, our biodiversity. Anyway, we're not going to talk about that for too long, biodiversity.
Yes, but wait, maybe just a little while longer because there is also a junction between the two. It has been scientifically proven that in places on earth where cultural diversity is high, biodiversity is also better.
Look at that. Look at that. So another reason to strengthen cultural diversity in our society. I would actually like to address that right away. Diversity is a word that we have been using for many years and we, perhaps each of us, has our own interpretation of it. And for a number of years now, diversity and inclusion have often been mentioned in the same breath. You also see a lot of companies that have officials there. People responsible for diversity and inclusion in the organization. But they are not the same concepts for you and I think for many, Artemis. What is the difference for you?
Yes, diversity and inclusion are often mentioned in the same breath. DEI, equity, is also often added. Equivalence. And I like to explain it as follows. Diversity is what there is. That is like the air that surrounds us. And inclusion is the action you take with it. You could then call inclusion breathing. So when I hear people say yes, we want a more diverse workplace, I always frown a little.
Because diverse just means different. Various. If it is about a diverse workplace, yes, does that mean that you produce lamps and wash cars and grow plants? That would be a diverse workplace. But mostly I think people are trying to work towards an inclusive workplace where people who are different can all contribute. And it is important to know that visible diversity is smaller than invisible diversity.
Wait, visible diversity, yes. Please explain again what you mean.
Yes, that actually comes from the Human Genome Project that was completed back in 2003. So it's certainly nothing new that I'm saying. This also shows, among other things, that race is not a scientific concept.
But I immediately started to deviate. What also emerges is that at DNA level, if you have two different groups of people, the diversity between them at DNA level is genetically smaller than that genetic diversity within one group of so-called same people. So if you then translate that into inclusion efforts in the workplace, you could actually say, look, if you see a group of people in a meeting and they all kind of look the same, and your first reaction is, yeah that's a very homogeneous group.
It can really be diverse. Just think of Helma Lutz's fourteen axes of identity formation. Your origin, your health, your residence status, your level of education. These may be people who appear homogeneous on the outside, but who really have a different frame of reference. Maybe someone has autism, maybe someone grew up in poverty, there are different political preferences. There you have much more polyphony than in a group that may look very different on the outside, but who have all studied about the same, who all have the same opinion, but you actually don't have that polyphony. And it's always a bit of a slippery slope to say that because I think we should continue to commit to visible diversity because of the importance of role models and because visible change can have an impact that makes things better for invisible differences. But we shouldn't focus blindly on that either. It's not a checkbox. You can't say oh, at my company we all look very different, so we are very inclusive.
Yes, I wanted to address that, but hey, you already addressed it yourself. So it is a dangerous consideration, but you say we must dare to focus on more visible diversity. You say very quickly, partly because of role models. Why do you say that?
Yes, role models are important for those people who are not yet treated equally in various areas and who cannot yet seize an equal opportunity themselves. At the same time, role modeling is just a tool. The ultimate goal of focusing on inclusion is to create more belonging. Something that is very elusive. Because when do you feel at home somewhere? When do you feel that you can contribute to the mission and vision of your company? It is elusive. But why is that? To bridge the gap to your initial question as to why we should focus on visible diversity or visible inclusion. Because if we still experience discomfort in dealing with people who look different. That's a bit of the canary in the coal mine of how we deal with invisible diversity. If we have strategies at the company level of view, even for visible diversity, we ensure that people feel at ease. Then that will open doors to people who may look a bit the same or resemble each other, but who are actually divergent.
But we don't pay attention to that, because you don't see that at the first level. Then you will develop strategies so that those people can also increase their level of belonging.
Yes, and in passing you drop another word that I think I coincidentally read something about in a LinkedIn post of yours yesterday. Dear listener, by the way, if you are interested in this topic you should definitely follow Artemis Kubala on LinkedIn. Where you talked about the concepts of diversity and divergence. And you also just mentioned someone who is divergent. But explain what you mean by that?
Yes, diversity is actually just diversity and it is there and it is even more invisible than visible. But if you look at group dynamics or what is going on, for example during a meeting, it is important to keep an eye on divergence. And someone who is divergent from the mainstream presence, that is someone who deviates from the majority. And it is always more difficult for someone who differs in personal characteristics to be heard, seen and have an impact.
It has been scientifically proven that once you have three people in a divergent position, this becomes less of an issue. But as a coordinator or leader or team leader or chairman of a meeting, it is important to keep this in mind. Also to know how you relate to yourself. If you are more in that divergent position, you can strengthen equality by taking more space yourself and then you actually almost become more of a role model position. If you are not in that divergent position and you lean more towards the mainstream position, then your strategy is to give room.
And you mean your strategy as leader of the conversation or of the team.
Indeed
Divergence, so how do you relate to some kind of unspoken standard that applies at that moment in those circumstances.
That's right. How do you relate or do you have insight into the divergence that is present in the team.
Yes. Funny. This morning in another meeting here at home we did an exercise where positions were taken and people actually moved around the room. Depending on how you relate to that statement. And then it was also fascinating to see that for each statement there were a few people, most of them always agreed with the statement, but there were always a number of people who deviated and so that was very visible in the room. And the facilitator of the process actually preferred to give the floor to those divergent voices because they would certainly be heard. So that was also an interesting insight, which you also confirmed in another way.
Artemis, we have done a lot of podcast conversations together over the past two years. We started this as a result of a concrete innovation project on the theme of inclusion that you carried out with great passion. Perhaps we should think about that for a moment. Because what actually prompted you to start this? And how do you look back on that yourself?
Yes, the reason and at the very beginning it was called project MADAM, when we were still in the exploration phase. MADAM was an acronym I believe. More attention to ladies with a migration background. And then we actually wanted to explore why there is a 10% gap in labor market participation between higher educated women with a migration background and higher educated women without a migration background. And that was our initial terminology. Gradually throughout the project we actually moved away from higher and lower, because there is also a bit of a value judgment behind this and we speak of people with a longer education and people with a shorter education. But the exploratory phase was actually like yes, how come that gap is there. Because when we talk about long-educated people with and without a migration background, if with a migration background, these are also people from the second generation or third generation where there is no longer a language barrier, who have the same diplomas. How come there is still a 10% difference? And then we had conversations and workshops with both employers and job seekers as mediators. And I still remember a nice session, including in the workout room at the VDAB, and many obstacles emerged. But of course we were in a project context. So you have to select, you have to make choices.
And then we ultimately chose three thresholds: skills, network and knowledge. Knowledge about what is available and what support is available. And within that knowledge, we really wanted to unlock the knowledge that is available from the academic world or from the expert world. Because there is quite a lot of knowledge, but it is also a bit fragmented and is sometimes wrapped in jargon or in academic articles that not everyone has access to. Same with network. There is also a network, but if, for example, you cannot build on your parents' network because they also have a network but not in Belgium, then you are already at a disadvantage.At the same time, the network also contains an interesting bias or unconscious judgment or prejudice that no one can do anything about. To be clear, there is no value judgment behind this. But you usually just have people in your network who look like you and that's true, that's human nature. But there is a lot of potential in cross-pollinating these different networks with each other. And so we actually started organizing walks between employers and job seekers. Not primarily to result in a job interview. But that those who actually walked together for an hour would cross-pollinate each other's network and each would pass on at least three contacts after the walk, saying, ah, I've been talking to you for an hour now, I think you should definitely talk to so-and-so and so and vice versa.
And we were inspired by the Canadian program, the Connectors Program, because it works really well there. Ultimately, it did not survive the project phase. But one of the things we also organized there, so it called walks, talks and labs. The labs were for strengthening skills. But the talks there were conversations that we organized between different experts with a live audience, with a digital audience. Because we have organized them both in real life and digitally. And that was actually the reason for these podcast conversations. We thought that format would catch on.
That was quite a long detour to get back there. Yes. So we did indeed organize those talks during the project where we brought people together and where we shared insights, shared knowledge. That usually involved a speaker who shared his or her knowledge. And we said about that, actually this is an easy medium to continue doing that. That we don't put those experts on a stage but get them in front of the microphone and in that way actually give the floor to interesting people around this theme. And so we have in the meantime, I actually lost count, but I estimate we have had about twenty conversations together. Dear listener, you can listen to them all again. It would take us too far to review them all now. But I am interested in asking you whether there have been conversations that have particularly stuck with you or insights that may have been new. What has that done to you?
To start with, I was very pleasantly surprised by the enthusiasm of the speakers. Because I thought, yes, we are going to contact them with the request to free up an hour of time around this theme. And actually everyone accepted that. And yes, here and there one exception I think.
Because you invited a lot of people that you didn't actually know yourself.
Yes, absolutely. Purely with the explanation of look, it comes from this project, that is our goal. We want to keep the theme alive. We want to illuminate it from different angles. Yes, and that is alive, so that is already something nice to establish. And yes, every conversation has actually stuck with me. Maybe one in particular with which I do not want to detract from …
No, that's the risk if I ask you that question now.
Yes, indeed, but I remember, and it was actually one where you yourself could not be there at the last minute, right Bart. But the conversation with Mounir Samuel in Amsterdam had a huge impact. He wrote a book ‘A new language for a new era’. And the title is actually ‘You can’t say it that way’. Do I have it here that I have the title right.
There are a lot of books on the table for us, dear listener. You can't see that. And Artemis is now taking one, you may hear that.
Correction. Mounir Samuel's book 'You can no longer say a new language for a new time' in which he actually thinks about what we actually want as a society. Which language do we provide relevant. Do we sufficiently recognize the power of language created? Are we on the right track with this? While we are sufficiently urgent in this society, we dare to make enough of a topic for discussion. And he suddenly links something very nice to that, because he goes further than inspiration. He talks about diversity skills and that is something that has been a common thread in what I do or did for some time. Always looking for ways in which this can be practiced. Do you want to be really inspired by something, but it is always important to translate it into behavior, into changing behavior. And if you go for change, how are you going to be prepared to change what you have been doing so far? And that is something he emphasizes very strongly in his book. He also made it into a podcast, so you can listen to it too.
Yes, give his name again.
Mounir Samuel. And yes, I should mention other speakers as well. Maurice Crul with his research, that booklet is here. Maurice Crul, professor, also in the Netherlands, 'The new minority - About people without a migration background in a super diverse city' in which he actually popularizes his research in a very accessible book. It is available in both English and Dutch and you can also download it for free. What emerges, among other things, is that education is so extremely important and that as an adult you take with you things from your upbringing, unconsciously, that are very difficult to unlearn. And that it is very important to grow up as a child in an environment in which you come into contact with a lot of diversity in different areas. Because you cultivate a kind of skill that is very difficult to cultivate as an adult. And that is also a bit of a link to the conversation we had with William Boeva in which he talked about 'we live in a subsidized segregation'.
Yes, especially in his case, he focuses on people with disabilities. The books that Artemis just mentioned are on the table here, listener, and they are full of yellow reference papers, so she has read them thoroughly, but also found reason to highlight all kinds of things in them. So there is a lot of knowledge hidden in those books, I am convinced. Artemis, you mentioned it earlier in the conversation or you mentioned it briefly. That was also one of the reasons for our project that you referred to, the labor participation of non-EU citizens in Flanders is woefully low. I saw statistics recently. We also use this internally to raise awareness among our employees. From a European perspective, no country scores worse than what we do in Flanders.
Belgium also does a little better than Flanders. And that is still the case today. And that was one of the reasons to start that project and also start other activities and initiatives at WEB-Blenders. But it is apparently a persistent problem. What do you think needs to happen now to really make major progress in this region?
What a comprehensive question.
What can companies do differently? Employers who are working on this theme and who are working today. A paradox, we are faced with a larger labor market, scarcity and tightness than ever before. And yet we see that systematically people with a non-EU background are given few opportunities in our labor market compared to everyone else.
Of course, there is also the problem of recognition of diplomas, which will undoubtedly be a delaying factor. That just needs to be rethought. Because I certainly understand that you also need to be clear about whether someone with a medical diploma can also work here in the same way. So I understand that this certainly needs to be looked at, but there must be ways to better utilize the human potential that is available. And I'm having a bit of a hard time if I say so myself, because human potential goes beyond just how people can be activated. Or how can people be put to work more. Because life consists of more than just work. At the same time, it is important that people can commit themselves through work to something that they consider very important. So those ambitions, those personal ambitions, can be given a place in the workplace. Also because it comes from employers. There is a need to have good people in the workplace. And perhaps there is an opportunity in letting go of diplomacy, daring to separate education from the labor market a little more. In my opinion, school and education are not intended to produce employees. Because when you are in secondary school, when you complete secondary school or at the beginning of secondary school, you choose a certain direction. Who's to say that six years later the labor market will still look the way it does now? Or what needs there are now. That is of course not a ready-made answer. But I think it is important that we dare to look in that direction. But that will play a role in the long term.
Yes, it triggers all sorts of things for me when you say that. But I spontaneously think of us, I think our very first podcast conversation, where we talked to a guest who, I think, had obtained her engineering degree in Poland at a very renowned university in Poland and who actually struggled with it for years in Belgium to get that here. was not recognised. And then in the meantime he has ended up in a management position at another job. Anna Gaik from Accent. Correct. What would you say to employers who are working or want to work on this theme today? Are there a number of things you could give them that you say yes, these are very important preconditions or ways to deal with this in a good way? And I know this is also a broad question, but maybe there are some things that spontaneously come to mind for you.
Yes, I think when it comes to shaping your organization, your company, more inclusively, you have to dare to change. Because ultimately you want a result that is different from what you have now. And that can be about very small practical things. For example, Yes, where do you distribute your vacancies? Is that only via the VDAB? And the VDAB platform is good. Please distribute your vacancies further via the VDAB. But know that there is also, for example, LEVL, the recognized participation organization for Flanders and Brussels. They have a job platform. Hijabis at work is also a rewarding platform where you as an employer immediately make it clear that you are welcome here. We are not going to ask you to take off your headscarf and we are not going to treat you like a pioneer employee. Maybe I should explain pioneer employee. A pioneer employee is actually an employee who is the first in the company, for example, to have a different skin color or a Muslim background or a different belief or to be the first to use a wheelchair. And very often it is treated as, oh, tell me something about Islam. I am now referring to my own views, although I am of course not a spokesperson for everyone who is Islamic. And very often that is curiosity in itself, but it is something that the other employees should not wear or not wear. So something like that for example. There is also a scientific insight around this. From the moment you recruit three people who are in that divergent position, because that's actually what it's about, that doesn't matter.
Yes, you said that earlier, that number three.
For many organizations this is not a reality. We recruit in groups of three. Because the resources often do not allow that. And a very good objection that I have heard again: Yes, but we do not want to recruit based on identity characteristics. We want to recruit based on the fact that someone has the qualities. And that is a very valid objection. So you are now in a bit of a time where you are really in a staggered position. We want to accelerate inclusion. So that representativeness is very important, but we do not want to recruit people based on their identity characteristics.
Is positive discrimination necessary after all?
Positive action. Positive discrimination in itself does not actually exist, because if you look at, if you have a certain standard line, then you are only going to take positive action for those who currently do not meet that line, that standard line. So that is actually about getting people who are in a less equal position to reach that standard line. Discrimination, that would mean that you lift them above the others, while that is not the case, because they start at a level minus 10. So positive action in that sense, I think it will make a difference, but it will get you still not out of that spread, because you are working on representativeness and you do not want to recruit based on personal characteristics. And yet the situation demands it.
Yes, so we actually have to do it. Yes. And you started to say: look broader than just the VDAB vacancy database. Also post your vacancies elsewhere. For example at LEVL and so on. Because that alone actually gives you a signal. You may also attract other people with it. But even if you don't do that, you are still sending a signal. You are welcome here, even if you come from a different background, culture, you name it.
Yes, absolutely. And, in addition to daring to take different paths in terms of spreading your vacancies, because that is also about addressing people personally, there is also something else. And this came to the fore in the conversation with Sharon Augustus from the municipality of Eindhoven. To be sure to focus on selection committees that are designed to be inclusive. Because somewhere we always unconsciously select people based on some kind of click, some kind of recognisability. Ah yes, I feel good about that person. Yes, it will definitely fit here. But yes, if you recruit on the basis that it fits in well with the rest, then yes, you will of course continue your company as it is now, which is sometimes not a problem.
But if you want to go for change, it is a good thing that your selection committee also includes people whose mikado sticks, I call them, those fourteen axes of identity formation, that they are crossed differently than your own because then you actually have that confirmation bias, that prevents blind spot. And you can only do that together. You cannot counteract that in yourself on your own.
Yes. You brought a lot of books here and we have seen that again and again during the previous podcast episodes. Anyway, I've seen that, the listener a little less so. Coincidentally, we just removed two of them. I was thinking about the beginning of the conversation. Which three recommendations, strongest recommendations, do you have on the table for the listener?
Then I will first mention two at the same time, which will then count as one book, then I can mention two more.
And you hear some movement on the table here. Those are the books that are picked up.
Yes, I have one. Cultural intelligence by Julia Middleton, ‘the competitive edge for leaders crossing borders'. She is talking about the concept of cultural intelligence or cultural quotient, which saw the light of day in America about twenty years ago, in the expat world actually.
Cultural intelligence, so that actually stands next to emotional intelligence or the classical intelligence that we call the IQ and the EQ, this is the CQ.
That's right, that's right, and it is also time-wise that you could put it in that dynamic. Because at first there was a lot of attention for IQ. After that, EQ actually came with empathy as a kind of addition to it, where you try to put yourself in someone else's shoes as much as possible and then make decisions based on those insights. And then, yes CQ. CQ actually saw the light as a training course that you give to people who are going to work abroad for a certain period so that they have tools and practical guidelines on how I can live and work well together with people who really have a completely different frame of reference have than myself. But we don't have to go abroad for that, to want to live together and work well with people who have a completely different frame of reference than our own. And the baseline. Because there is a lot to be said about CQ or cultural quotient, but the baseline is somewhat that the most important culture to fathom and understand is your own and not the others. Because very often we project our curiosity onto others and forget to do some kind of self-examination or self-reflection of yes, but why is it that a certain behavior or a certain statement, or a certain belief of someone else, that conflicts so much with how I approach life. But that has a lot of impact on how you view life, how you grew up, what you stand for. That's half the reason for that resentment or that friction. We have to deal with this consciously, because to frame it almost negatively. It's not always the other person's fault. It is also up to you. But then positively, in a constructive way.
It challenges you to look in the mirror.
Absolute. And it also challenges you not to exclude yourself from the conversation around inclusion. Because I often hear people say to me. Yes, you are a good one, aren't you, Artemis, to talk about inclusion with your non-Flemish name and your headscarf, and your language skills and I don't know what else. And then I say yes, of course I like to talk about that, but everyone likes to talk about that. Because you can't talk about inclusion if you exclude yourself, even though that often happens. We talk about inclusion, because that is important to those people. That is important for those people who do not yet have an equal position. But everyone has someone close to them on one of those different axes. Suppose, for example, that your mother or father has been diagnosed with Alzheimer's and is now only addressed in terms of that neurological condition. Yeah, that's not fair either. That is not equivalent either. That person is also more than. Or suppose we find ourselves in a wheelchair due to illness or age and we want to take public transport. Yes, that has an immediate impact on our own lives. All those different axes, they all have a hook on ourselves, on everyone. So inclusion is important to everyone. Yes, I got so caught up in my own argument that I had already forgotten.
We talked about three books and you named one. We're going to do the other two a little faster. So the book you were talking about was Cultural Intelligence.
That’s right. And one that actually belongs in the wake of that is 'Digital, Diverse & Divided' by David Livermore 'How to Talk to Racists, Compete with Robots and Overcome Polarization’.
Okay, what about a third book? You only get one chance anyway.
A third book would be 'No Rules Rules' 'Why Netflix is so successful' by Reed Hastings, Netflix co-founder and CEO and Erin Meyer. Because actually, there is a lot in it, but what it has really become a kind of pocketbook for me is around giving and receiving feedback. And I will keep it short, I will not explain it, but I certainly recommend that you take a look at that, because giving and receiving feedback, being aware of why you do it in a certain way and in accept or reject a certain way. Finding the way in which you can have a mirror of what everyone needs and why it is or is not good for one person or another. Yes, that is a really big part of company culture and inclusivity too.
No Rules Rules. Look, dear listener, you received three tips and we had already mentioned two books for that. So you know what to read in the coming weeks. Artemis, I have the feeling, just like in many conversations, that we could continue talking for a long time, I see the clock ticking and we are still moving towards a conclusion. I usually ask Artemis if she has any compelling questions. This time I'm just asking if there's anything you want to say that you haven't said yet.
What else can I give? Yes, you know, practicing inclusion very often comes down to how can we be more comfortable with discomfort and how can we do that too, welcoming may be too celebratory, but how can we deal with discomfort in a way that doesn't hinder connection. So I think that might be a call from me, both personally and professionally. What makes you uncomfortable and how can you practice not letting that discomfort get in the way of connection? And I think that if we can all practice that more together, we will take a step forward.
A fantastic way to end this podcast. Thank you Artemis for being here for this conversation.
Thank you.
[outro]
You listened to an episode of Let's talk about Work, the podcast of the group WEB-Blenders. All our conversations are about work, the road to work, well-being in the workplace and everything that comes with it. You can find us on your favorite podcast platform and at www.blenders.be/podcast. On social media you can follow us on LinkedIn under podcast Let's talk about Work and on Instagram as Blenders podcast Let's talk! You can also stay up-to-date via the Blenders newsletter. Were you handcuffed? Does this conversation make you think? Would you like to be one of our next guests? Let us know via info@blenders.be and who knows, you might join us at the table soon!
