2009 Conference a Success Story!

The Institute's 2009 conference at the Radisson Hotel

was a very positive, expansive, and fascinating one!


To all who attended: it was great seeing you

and sharing ideas with you! And to those who missed it,

we hope that you'll mark your calendars next year and join us,

because talking about and practicing Inclusion is a powerful

way to expand your consciousness, and is a great tool

for increasing your organization's effectiveness as well !


This year we modified our format to feature multiple short

concurrent sessions. Judith Katz and Fred Miller have been to

a couple of TED conferences (see Fred's new blog entry about

this year's TED conference ) and they were very excited about

the energy that that much sharing can create. So we split our

focus this year: we maintained our custom of co-creating

intellectual capital (this year we looked at the areas of Inclusive

Behaviors and at the Values and Language of Inclusion) and we

made sure that we had good chunks of valuable conference time

for presentations and for full group dialog/sharing time, following

the sessions.


I think the format worked well, although our attendance

was lower this year than last year, and I thought that some

of the presentations didn't get the attendance they deserved,

especially because of the lower turnout.


There was a lot of enthusiasm as Institute "regulars" like

Edie Seashore, Fred Miller, Russ Gaskin and Bernardo Ferdman

presented on topics ranging from "triple impact change" to

Energy to Polarity Managment and Measuring Inclusion.


There were lots of presentations from newer attendees too!

For example: Yvette Jarreau and Amy Hall presented on

initiatives underway at Eileen Fisher; and Ruthie Landis

illuminated "points of view" via the Enneagram, as a way to

increase inclusion; Michael Donovan, who is a city councilman

as well as a professor, talked about "bonding and bridging"

types of social groups and public policy in "Opportunity Valley".

Steve Hanamura, at this point still our only regular conference

attendee who is blind, inspired us with the trailer for his new film

(funding needed for the full production, please sponsor!) and

illuminated us with his gentle and loving (yet firm) reminder that

by not transferring our material into Braille text we are leaving

him, a visual learner with a disability, more "out" than "in".

We need to do better, and we need to include more people

in our work!


One of many talented and thoughtful people who joined us this

year for the first time was Margherita Coppolino. Marg is a

leading diversity and inclusion consultant from Australia, and

she presented on her journey in leading the creation of a

social inclusion framework for the government of the state of

Victoria, Australia, through their department of Planning and

Community Development. There are 5 million people in Victoria!

Margherita's thoughtful work and insightful comments were

deeply appreciated, and she also took over 100 photos,

which form a new slideshow on our website.

A pdf file of her presentation will be in our Archives.


A recurring theme for us was how to practice inclusion when it

seems like the "other" is hostile. The KKK was used as an

example, as was radical Islamic fundamentalists, but the

challenge is there for us all - and not just with such dramatic

examples. It's a daily challenge for everyone, but the big

issues still need to be wrestled with. As Ruthie said,

maybe we have to come to terms with the shadow inside of

each of us before we can hope to engage someone who

represents that shadow we "love to hate."

How would YOU make the case for Inclusion?

Today two young men met with me in my office. They had made an appointment to explain how their bank could help the Institute. They represented a local bank which wanted to contribute a small amount of money for each Institute for Inclusion member who opened an account with them, and also a percentage of interest earned on linked accounts, thinking that some of our multi-million dollar net worth Board Members (we wish!) would be depositing substantial amounts. The young man taking the lead wanted to know more about the IFI, and that’s where the conversation became special, for both me and for the young men.

It’s interesting to try to explain the Institute for Inclusion, or just Inclusion, to a fresh face, and if you haven’t done so recently, I encourage you to bring the topic up with someone.

I first mentioned the Inclusive behaviors of including those impacted by decisions in the dialogue, and of increasing the transparency of decisions. I took a tough example, storing nuclear waste materials. Would you want that in your backyard? But if you had waste to store, you’d feel strongly that it had to go somewhere, right? Or you’d feel that way as long as it didn’t have to go into your own community, probably! Assuming that nobody will be eager to welcome the waste, what do you do if you have committed your organization to Inclusion? You create a dialogue and you commit to making the solution a Win/Win solution, somehow. And you make your reasons for wanting the waste to go into a given community more transparent than opaque.

The two young men were nodding in agreement, but I could see that the idea was still not really hitting home with them. So I pointed out that another principle of Inclusion is to encourage full participation from everybody in an organization, to bring together individuals’ talents, skills, and perspectives to compliment and enrich each other. I said, “Look, what if your bank came to you and told you that you had a lot of talents that weren’t being used in your current (sales) role, and asked you to use more of them?”
The young man said, “I have a degree in Organizational Psychology, I could use that!” “Exactly,” I agreed, “What if the bank asked you to create a project, maybe do some research or writing about the organization from that perspective, in addition to your work in sales, would you be interested?” “I sure would be,” he said, “and I’d be excited about it, and if I didn’t have to go to them to propose the idea, if they came to me about it, it would be such an honor that I’d work really hard. But how would you get the bank to adopt the Principles? Are there case studies that show that Inclusion gives a good R.O.I.?” Smart young man.

I had to admit that there aren’t, not yet, anyway. And I told them that the real catch is getting the Chairman of the bank’s board to want to adopt Inclusion. I said that it was easy to show these two young men how inclusion could benefit them; they could see that it was in their self-interest to work for an inclusive organization, it was all upside potential, but the first thing a CEO was likely to think about was whether their power to make decisions and control the organization would be affected. And I had to admit that while hierarchical organizational structures were probably going to still be possible, the typical pattern of making decisions in an organization that has adopted inclusion principles was going to look different than before. That’s where the sale gets tough, and I could see that if I was pitching Inclusion to a CEO instead of to two young sales reps, there could be some hesitation instead of the energy and excitement I was seeing in the young man across from me.

I invited him to our next conference, and took his card to add his name to our mailing list.


But if you were talking to the CEO instead, how would YOU make the case?

Your comments would be most interesting!

IFI HAS A LOGO CONTEST WINNER !!

Congratulations to Russ Gaskin, who submitted the winning entry in our Logo Contest!!

We announced the Contest at our March Conference, and a winner has finally been announced.
It took several committee meetings and lots of debate, but the winning entry is a rather abstract design that might evoke an image of flames, or even 'equal signs' (turned sideways!).

What do you think of it??

You'll notice our new logo on our website and also in our Constant Contact generated group emails.

A big "Thank You" to all who submitted ideas for the Logo Contest--- well done!!

The World Bank is searching for a Senior Diversity & Inclusion Officer

In this globalizing world, more organizations and companies are expanding to global scale. Of course, they need to know how to manage and mobilize the potential of its diverse workforce in inclusive way!

The World Bank, the World largest development organization, has its diversity and INCLUSION program. The Bank is seeking for a Senior Diversity & Inclusion Officer.

If somebody in the Institute can work in the World Bank, and create an Inclusion BREAK THROUGH in this huge organization, it will really benefit the world!

That sounds BIG IDEA to me!

This Bank is really driving a lot of economic and development in the third world. It has been having significant impacts on many people lives, in many aspects, and has offices all over the World. Inclusion is definitely a must for the Bank at both levels:
1) at internal multi-cultural workforce management and
2) at its policies to ensure the inclusion principles in its global development program, most of which claim to cover and support the poor and disadvantaged (i.e. most neglected) population.

The following is some information in case somebody interested in, for more information please go to the World Bank Job!

Job #	081515
Job Title	Sr Program Officer (Diversity & Inclusion)
Job Family	Human Resources
Location	Washington, DC
Appointment	International Hire
Job Posted	15-Jul-2008
Closing Date	31-Aug-2008
Language Requirements	English [Essential]
Appointment Type	Term (Duration: 3 yrs)

Good Mind! Good Luck!

Thanh Vo

Is Inclusion Valid Globally?

I’m curious regarding the validity and application of the concept of inclusion in a country with an overwhelmingly homogeneous majority population coming from a single ethnic group.

The concept of inclusion seemed to evolve from the context of ethnic diversity in the US where there is not just only a United States government, but many different races with different cultural, social, and economic backgrounds who are not really united! They needed a law to ensure the diversity, if not, then…!

Since we’re talk about global inclusion, and not just inclusion in the US, let’s look out to the world, at the globalization trend. Let’s try to be more inclusive! Right! More US companies have branched out to other countries which have traditionally one majority ethnic such as Vietnam, Japan, Korea, and Russia...Then a simple question emerges: is the inclusion concept is still valid in those countries?

Let’s take Vietnam, my homeland, as an example. It is a country with roughly 80 million people with 54 different ethnicities. That makes it sound like a very diverse country. However, out of that population, 70 million are Kinh people and they dominate urban centers, the coastlines and deltas. The ethnic minorities live mostly on mountainous areas. Most of the labor force in the country’s economic engines such as Hanoi (8 million people)and Ho Chi Minh city (8 million people) are Kinh, a single ethnic group! It sounds like they are all included in a social setting which they have formed for themselves and enjoy their culture norms which have evolved for about four thousand years.

If we look around in Asia, several countries have similar conditions, such as Korea, Japan, and Taiwan. They have a kind of homogenous society! Nobody seems to be excluded! Or at least most people are included. Evidence, they don’t need a law to ensure diversity to eliminate discrimination!

So when it come to these situations, the question is, is the concept of inclusion still valid? I think it is!

Firstly, though living in a homogenous culture, people come to factories and companies with many different mind sets, different concerns, and different social and economic conditions and statuses, and with different talents.

I don't need to cite too much here! As we may agree that, personal and institutional performance are affected by:

1) personal capacity, skills, and talents;

2) the energy and materials invested in the job (from individual and organization)

3) the institutional setting allowing people to perform;

4) the emotional environment, which could help them to expand beyond the average standard with proper encouragement; and

5) personal values which may lead to self-sacrifice! For example, due to the value of family, religious or country, some people could sacrifice themselves, even their lives, for that value!

Once they come to the workplace, most people behave in an institutionalized environment with institutionalized behaviors! The institutionalization of behaviors is framed by task guides, accountability and liability. Also, don't forget that in a culture which has been strongly influenced by Confucian philosophy, people tend to obey the layers of the power structure above them, and tend to wait for direction in a very passive way. Furthermore, for quite a long time, in a society in which formal social spaces have been strongly formalized and have strong value, people try to separate work relationships from their personal traits and background. These factors may hinder the ability of people to participate and initiate new ideas to improve performance in the companies.

Here you go! The inclusion concept and principles seem to have some value!

We need to encourage people to participate with their whole-self! Anyway, 8 hours at work are part of their life too! They are actually living during that 8 hours of working, right? And the workplace is also part of their living space. Relationships with co-workers are also part of their social lives. If people try to stop what they are, and who they are, then companies really lose a lot of potential.

In recent research and efforts to adapt to changes, such as conflicts, globalization, or climate change, researchers have pointed out that we really need a lot of different types of capitals or assets and should try to nurture as much as potentiality as possible. Why? The more diverse the system, the better chance the organization may survive!

Diversity is necessary and important, but it is not enough! I am sure all member of IFI agree with this, and if you happen not to agree, then let’s look around and think about that. We need to have the system and environment which enable us to convert these assets into capital! from there, capital could create value added outputs! sound like a capitalist isn't it?

In countries like Vietnam, Korea or Japan, the most important form of capital in the whole economy is HUMAN! Yes, human! The diversity of workforce in a country like Vietnam includes the differences in generations, experiences, creativity and motivations. Do they need a way to mobilize their assets and turn it into capital?

Yes! Organization is a human device! It is the way human make up our reality to achieve the thing one single individual could not make create. So if the organization needs to become bigger than what it used to be is, let it make everybody who is part of the organization bring more to their work and be eager to do so! Humans can make it happen and design in the way they want! They can either try to divide people’s life into separate realities or make them bring their whole-self to their workplace to share, learn, contribute their talents and abilities to the common goal of their organization.

That environment may be called an inclusive organization!

Some of you may ask, yeah, it is important, so what? How can we make that happen?

Easy! (Maybe) just join the Institute for Inclusion! Or ask member of the institution! Still couldn’t do it? Then let’s think about it, and keep thinking about that idea, the other may come!

Try it yourself! Isn’t it an interesting point, an organization starts from an individual!

Trust you! Trust me! And smile!

Thanh Vo

Thoughts from Fred Miller, Institute for Inclusion Vice President

Thoughts from my travels to India and Dubai
Life is FULL, and continues to be a Blessed and Exciting Adventure

In early March, I was in Dubai, watching Al Jazeera Television, waiting for them to portray the United States as the evil empire.

I watched story after story about world events, and the stories seemed fair--in fact, just factual. Then came a story about President Bush and his trip to somewhere in the Middle East. I expected them to show him with horns coming out of his head. It did not happen. I expected them to talk about him as one of the most evil people on earth. It did not happen. Nothing negative was said. They just reported the story and moved on.
I was shocked. When will I learn??

I remember my first trip to the former Soviet Union, before the Berlin Wall came down, and how I expected hostility from the Russian people. I expected them to be cold and hard. But to my surprise, I fell in love with them--their gentleness and their friendship.

But I obviously did not learn the lesson. When will I stop believing the negative "press clippings" and "sound bites" of the United States mainstream press? When will I realize they are playing the same power game and the slanted game they accuse others of doing.

It makes me sad--sad in realizing how often I have been fooled and sad for all the people who do not have exposure to a view of the United States from outside the country and who have no opportunity to discover how badly and how often they have been fooled. They have no way to see the United States from a world perspective.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE being a United States citizen. I LOVE living in this country, and I am proud of our espoused values that we occasionally live by. And, although it may not be politically correct to say, I want the United States to stay one of the leading powers in the world because of those espoused values.

But on that night, thousands of miles from the United States, I was reminded of our shadow side that shows itself, especially in our dealings with the rest of the world. There is a lot of work we need to do to again be a real and respected member/partner of the global community.

Two more Al Jazeera stories were disturbing for different reasons. The first was about a Greek town named Sugartown, where all the women had left for the bigger city and the men were left without an opportunity to have marriage partners and raise families. Their mayor decided to recruit Russian women to come to the town to meet the men and hopefully marry and raise families there. About 10 Russian women were recruited in a sort of matchmaking process and came twice to the town to meet the men. In the end, however, none of the women found any of the men desirable enough to want to marry them, and the big reason was because the men were "different." Perhaps understandable given the circumstances, but another example of people who focus on differences rather than common ground even when both are desperate for friendship and a new life.

The next story was about Kosovo and Serbia, a country torn apart because people who are different can't find a way to work it out, live together and share a national identity. Under the prevailing circumstances, it seems dividing the country is the only way for ethnic Albanians to not be oppressed and to maintain their identities. [A little background: although ethnic Albanians are a majority within Kosovo (92% of the population, compared with 5.3% Serbs), they are a minority within the Republic of Serbia. Hence, in the Republic of Serbia the ethnic Albanians are politically dominated by a Serbian government, under the authoritarian control of President Milosevic.] Prolonged Serbian oppression of ethnic Albanians in the Republic of Serbia and an unwillingness to sign a peace plan led to NATO air strikes in the late 1990s. Since then, Kosovo has been torn by violence and mass refugee movements. As a consequence, Kosovo is extremely poor and unemployment is at 40% (60% for those under 25). In February of this year, Kosovo declared its independence from the Republic of Serbia. Kosovo is now recognized by about 40 countries, including the United States, but Serbian leaders continue to claim sovereignty over it.

Well, that was some thought-provoking TV-watching at 2:00 am in Dubai when I could not get to sleep.

Let me tell you about Dubai--what a Place!

What a wonderful, beautiful city!! It is a merging of innovation, technology, architecture and a world view.

I know there are many stories about forced labor and low wages for people working to build this 21st century city. Even with that, it is a statement city. It is the first place I have been in my life that is not "centric" to its history, ethnicity, location, or a specific identity. It is the first global city I have been to and it may be the first in the world. It FEELS global. It presents itself as a world city, and it treats people, residents and visitors as citizens of the world. It looked like every major ethnic group in the world was walking down the street and shopping in the malls.

Visiting Dubai (and other experiences I will mention in a moment) made it clear to me that there is a major power shift happening in the world. It is moving away from the west and away from the dominance of the United States (and Europe), and it is heading eastward. It is real and easy to feel and see. The World seems to be moving to the post-United States dominance period. Even though many in the United States don't realize the world has changed, many in the world are counting down to the end of our days of singular dominance.

Prior to visiting Dubai, Judith Katz, Ilene Kane, Kamen Miller and I attended a conference in India. It was wonderful to be in India. You can see and feel change, growth and the future in the air. I had not been in India in several years and the changes that had taken place since my last visit were dramatic. Yes, there is still a lot of edge-of-starvation, hard-to-witness poverty. There are places where you see miles and miles of people living in tin huts or tents.

Mumbai has the largest slum in the world, Dharavi--550 acres and one million people. But even there, commerce exists: there are 15,000 single-room factories specializing in recycling with revenue estimated at $14 million. They are recycling all the waste (tin, aluminum, auto parts, cardboard) of the city.

You see change happening and hear people talking about the fact that the conditions are not as bad as they used to be (also my observation). More Indians have moved out of poverty in the last decade than in the preceding fifty years and that in the next 5 to 10 years there will be another dramatic impact/reduction in poverty and improvement in living conditions. I say "dramatic reduction;" they say, "We will eliminate it." I believe they believe what they are saying. India is in such a growth mode and the people we talked with have such an optimistic view. It is wonderful to see and hear a country that is committed to its people moving beyond the pain, suffering and financial hardship of their parents.

There is also controversy. There is a plan to tear down Dharavi and let developers build housing for the people, shops for the businesses and malls to make the area slum-free.

But some have the very justified fear based on what has happened in many places in the world, including in the United States: the warehousing of the poor and the land going to the middle and upper class. It is a struggle!! The BIG Question is always, whose values and whose vision will win out in the end? The Plan is to eliminate the Dharavi slum by 2013.

India seems to be a nation trying to make and live up to a promise that it will improve life for all including the least fortunate among us.

Two statements I heard on a BBC broadcast about this situation stand out for me:
1. Regarding commerce in Dharavi, "Who does NOT want to make money?"
2. "The government will never take the risk of harming the residents of Dharavi."
Both are great statements!!!! They are perspectives that are vital to creating a win-win solution and progress for all.

I love India, and I expect to return yearly because of the people and how they treated us. There are so many shades of people and there is so much human diversity on all levels.

Wherever we went, from Mumbai to the Taj Mahal, I felt welcomed and "a part of" vs. "apart from." I still feel "apart from" at times in the United States.

Shortly after this perspective-changing and life-renewing trip, I attended the TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) Conference with my colleague and friend Tara Whittle. Let's be clear--this is a conference of elites--cool people, but elites. They are change-the-world people, the "Creative Class" elites.

The TED Conference works at being elitist. It costs $6,000 to attend--they limit attendance so you must submit an application and be selected in order to attend the conference and become a member. All of that is the downside. The upside is that TED, held in Monterey, is THE place where all those "creatives" introduce/launch their new products and announce their latest change-human-life-on-this-planet breakthroughs.

TED is where many of the Internet innovations that moved the Internet to Web 2.0 were first announced and shown, where innovations ranging from the first Apple Macintosh computer to the One Laptop per Child initiative were unveiled. In 2005, Craig Venter broke the news at TED that he and his collaborators had successfully sequenced the human genome (his own), and this year he came back to tell TED that they are NOW creating new species in their lab. NEW SPECIES!!! He and this group are working on designing these new species to perform specific functions--in one example, to create gasoline as a byproduct of their waste flow.

Microsoft unveiled a breakthrough for viewing the universe: the Worldwide Telescope. Rather than represent the universe through the myriad images collected by countless astronomers, satellites and spacecraft over the years, WWT creates a mashup of these images. The result is a view of the universe as one continuous place. Users can zoom in or out on any spot in the universe and it will give you information about that spot. Users can also follow "expeditions" or create their own.

There were 30 other incredible, and sometimes scary, discoveries or breakthroughs that were presented.

One of the many items that struck me as another sign of the global shift was that the Guggenheim is building one of its most ambitious projects ever in the Middle East. They had wanted to build a new, massive museum in the United States and it did not work out. So, they are building in the Middle East. It sounded fantastic; the CEO said it will be the first global museum, not centric to one country or one culture. It is another sign that the movement from West to East is real. Signs are popping up all over.

Tara is a blogger. At TED, she and other bloggers were, in real-time, telling the world what was being discussed, and their reactions to it, as fast as words were being spoken.

Speed of knowledge transfer is one of the realities and will be a major competitive advantage in the next few decades. As I was sitting next to Tara, watching her blog real-time, I was struck by the fact that she and the other 20 or so bloggers were not just reporting, but also shaping the world through their eyes. Tara had 800 people following her blog during TED.

If it is not already, the blogosphere will soon be faster and more powerful than network television, and it has no source controlling it except individual bloggers. In almost all cases, no producers, sponsors, censors, review boards or other gatekeepers.

Clearly, if Tara and the other bloggers liked or did not like something at TED, their words would have tremendous power (the power of one independent person talking to many) and the organizers of TED the next day or hour would have to respond because they want a good impression of TED in the world and want to play a part in forming and/or influencing that impression. But this is not just a Tara phenomenon or a TED phenomenon; this is the world we live in.

Some see it as democracy in action: the voice of the individual and people having choice about what they read/learn, what is true and how to respond. Others see it as out of control. Many others are somewhere in the middle. But the reality is, this is our world, and there is no going back. In fact, when it comes to the revolution and explosion in knowledge transfer, this is just the beginning.

Whether it is a scientist creating a new species, making viewing the universe user-friendly, or blogging to the world in real-time, we are in an era of openness and exposure like never before.

What struck me most was that technology is going to allow more and more of this, and people will act as they choose. This raises an important question--maybe THE important question: What values will guide the work, practice, communications and quest for moving forward? Will those values move human beings to a new level of interaction and quality of life, or will they feed the worst parts of our behavior and our treatment of people and the planet?

The jury is out. But WE CANNOT be out. We need to, have to, take a stand and be active in trying to move the whole--our communities, our neighbors, our families, our organizations, ourselves--to be our BEST human selves. We need to live and be our best selves as many times a day as we can be, modeling what humans can be and aspire to, and teaching and coaching others to be their best.
The clock is ticking on our opportunity to move the human race to higher ground.

We do not have a lot of time before a fear of change/lack of movement to higher ground will allow enough self-destructive things to bring to an end our time on this earth.

My trip to India and Dubai; attending the TED Conference; my presence at the Institute for Inclusion Conferences, a group that is working at making Inclusion the BIG Idea that will change human interaction; and my work with Judith and with our clients--these all give me hope and give me worry.

The worry is easy to describe: Will we move fast enough and in ways that make us better? The hope is also easy, because it is one of the reasons I get out of bed in the morning.

Human beings are magnificent!!!

We do great things!! And every human being has something to offer. In fact, each person has a part of the puzzle that we each need for our collective greatness.

Thanks for being in my life. Thanks for what you are doing to move humankind to a higher level of functioning. Thanks for being you.

Frederick A. Miller
June 2008

P.S. There are three books that I highly recommend--Thought Changers, at least they were for me.

The first is a MUST read:

Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything
by Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams
http://www.amazon.com/Wikinomics-Mass-Collaboration-Changes-Everything/dp/1591841933


The Age of Speed: Learning to Thrive in a More-Faster-Now World
by Vince Poscente
http://www.amazon.com/Age-Speed-Learning-Thrive-More-Faster-Now/dp/1885167679

The Post-American World
by Fareed Zakaria
http://www.amazon.com/Post-American-World-Fareed-Zakaria/dp/039306235X

Thoughts on Membership, Language, Inclusion

excerpts from an email exchange. Participants: Ed Letchinger, Melissa Severson, Michele Hunt

Please send us your thoughts!!!

In a message dated 3/21/2008 11:00:56 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ed@boulwareinc.com writes:

Melissa, You've once again done a very fine job on the two mailings. Really wonderful work, great layout, great content. Thank you!!

One little note: I think we should be careful to the point of avoidance when referring to "members", as in : "As we work to spread out information among our members, we encourage you to send us your thoughts and ideas in response to our output. Your unique perspective will bring added value to our collective progression. We hope to hear from everyone!"

The reason I say this is that we are not at this point actually a membership organization. We have no official system for people to become members, no dues, no membership fee, no special benefits for members. In fact, having members might be exclusionary, because you automatically have "non-members" once you have "members".!! Perhaps we should be exploring this possibility for 2008, however.

warmly,

ed

From: Michele Hunt
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 11:28 AM
Subject: Re: Membership in the IFI

Thanks Melissa,

I think it is a wonderful idea! I strongly agree with one note;language is powerful and carries with it inherent assumptions. Membership, for me, carries with it "insiders and outsiders". Our current model unintentionally has some of the inner circle - outer circle feel (Co-founders and staff verses other attendees) I realize this was necessary in the beginning.

Maybe we could come up with another model or language that gets to the heart of Melissa's idea. Where we make a contribution to grow and development of the Big idea and by doing so we create a sense of identity and ownership for the Big Idea. I believe people need to have an identity with this movement, and be able to proudly declare I am a part of the Institute For Inclusion.

I hope we continue the dialogue, this is important. Can we float this as a Blog dialogue to everyone who attended the conference? I bet innovative solutions will develop. Great subject to use this medium.

Michele Hunt

In a message dated 3/21/2008 1:41:35 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, seversonm@instituteforinclusion.org writes:

These are very good points, thanks to both of you for your input!

It’s true that membership creates boundaries – the idea is that everyone is a member of the Inclusion Effort one way or another, however; some are active participants and some are not. I’ll avoid the word member from now on (I was getting into that habit – I only thought of it as a means of making people feel welcome, I didn’t think of the converse implications).

We can take the safe route and refer to everyone as people (this is the standard now anyway, right?) I just tend to think that language sounds cold. That’s probably just me though.

There’s one other thing I wanted to mention (now that we’re on the topic)…

Communities tend to create their own labels based on what’s practical for them, and then the labels have a way of growing beyond their practicality into more restricting realms. We are already doing this in one respect relating to IFI – we sometimes separate attendees from invitees.

We mean nothing by it at this time, however as we grow into online networking, we’ll be able to move away from the “invitee” and “attendee” separation, because it implies that attendees of the conference have a higher participatory status than non-attendees. Right now, that’s almost entirely accurate, but only because we have not set up the tools to make the Big Idea a year-round conversation yet. We now have the resources and energy to do so, so now is the perfect time to discuss the implications of how we refer to participatory status. (Again, I am so glad Ed pointed this out, thanks for catching my language!)

People need to know that the ideas and progress made using web tools is equally important and has equal status to the ideas discussed at the conference. Many people regret being unable to attend, and I’m sure they have a lot to provide to our thinking. We just need to give them the tools to communicate remotely, and encourage them to do so in their free time.

Therefore, I do feel there should be some form of recognition/label that gets more to the heart of what we all really mean when we say “attendee” and “invitee”. I think we really mean “active participant” vs. “reader”. (Readers may not respond to our mailings, but they also do not ask to be removed from the list – therefore it’s safe to assume they are following our progress and will become active when they have the time/resources/online networking tools to do so.) I’ve heard active participant in use as well in internal conversations – so it’s already there, really.

Again, it would probably be better to avoid labels completely and just call everyone “people” like I said at the top of this email. J But, if the label-situation ever came up again and/or we find it necessary to assign labels, then “active participant” “sponsor” “reader” etc would probably be an acceptable form of recognition without offending anyone. What do you think?

The blog would be a great place to continue this conversation! Or Russ’ new forum once it goes public (I am not sure if you have seen it yet, but I like it and I hope it will go public sooner than later!)

Melissa Severson, Coordinator

The Institute for Inclusion

---

From: Michele Hunt
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: Membership in the IFI

maybe we create a new word or phrase as we continue our journey to learn and grow the power of inclusion. We are all unlearning things, as the "Kings" language is rooted in the culture from which it came.

Michele