People working in corporations will learn much by considering the lessons from the last 30 years of the disability movement. The main lesson is: diversity is not just a legal or affirmative action issue, it is a systems survival issue. If we make diversity only a legal issue we degrade its contributions to building sustainable organizations.

In the disability movement we are focusing on self-determination and whole systems management. For persons with disabilities, it is a natural next step after the empowerment and coaching “waves” of employment services. The similarities to the corporate environment are obvious. Whole systems planning is an approach that draws upon the science of our times. It moves us from viewing our organizations as well-oiled machines to viewing them as living and dynamic systems with innate abilities and capabilities (see Figure 1). Today, whole systems planning and employee authority are all the rage.

It is my prediction and my fear that whole systems management and employee control will be very popular with corporate management and consultants. Corporate authorities will abandon old planning systems, herald the need to unify and begin to use the capacities of the whole community, and give cause to reduce financial and moral support to diversity-related initiatives targeting people with special needs (see Figure 2).

Back to Top

As we speak of having employees that are self-determining and using methods of whole system management, we must be careful to understand where we are going. The clear intent of making employees self-determining and adopting whole systems management philosophies, is to unify – to make organizations whole by bringing all the parts (individuals in the organizations, as well as customers) together. The goal then is to cause enculturation (the process of learning cultures through relationships), which, in turn, changes both groups (society, communities, and work places) and individuals.

This simple distinction gets to the heart of many of the diversity problems encountered in the corporate environment. Organizations demand that work groups uniter. Individuals must change and enculturate or processes must be created to transform the groups so that they become united.

The difference between the disability movement and corporate America is in how we view diversity. We view diversity as the only way to survive. Corporations view diversity more as a good social action. Each person who enters a group should be understood for his or her talents, and the group--whether it's society, a community, or a workplace--needs to change and make room for the contribution of these talents.

A manufacturer of sausages in the Midwest made the shift from being a supplier of quality sausages to being a community of sausage producers. The focus shifts then from a hierarchical corporate model to the person, the community, and the lifestyles chosen by the employees.

Back to Top

Building on David Schwartz’s Crossing The River; Creating a Conceptual Revolution in Community & Disability, there are three visions of corporate structure that underlie various options for strategic action on behalf of employees with disabilities or from diverse cultures. The first is the therapeutic vision. The therapeutic vision says that the well being of individual employees grows from being in an environment composed of professionals and their services. Corporate services resulting from this vision may be in-house counseling, expanded Employee Assistance Programs, special classes, etc. The second is the advocacy vision. This vision conceives of the individual in a world guarded by legal advocates, support people, self-help groups, job coaches, and career planners. The advocacy vision sees the need for a defensive wall of helpers to protect an individual against an “alien” work community. The third approach is the community vision. Unlike the others, it aims for the “recommunalization" of "exiled and labeled individuals." It "understands the community as the basic context for enabling people to contribute their gifts."

As I examine my own life for what works, it is clear that being physically present "in the work community" gives me opportunities and teaches me the options of career life, (as the therapeutic vision tells us) but that alone is a hollow promise.Having lived most of my adult life in the advocacy vision, it is distressing to discover that the good I envisioned for people did not come through specialized support, regulations, or just being in the corporate mainstream.

Back to Top

When I was underemployed and struggling with self-esteem and basic survival needs, presence in the work community and living with protective regulations was not what kept me going. It was Betsy, Rick, Patricia, Kevin, Sue, Jon, Nancy, R.B., Dianne, Don, and it was my dentist, mechanic and the post Women. I could go all day with no food but not without connecting to some of those people.

There were people I relied on at work who caused me harm; there were people who I chose to avoid who also caused me harm. But I was united through strong relationship, I lived in the "community vision" for myself and, all together, my experience is on the plus side.

Being self-determining and part of the whole does not come out of being in a physical place but being in the embrace of relationships. It does not come from regulations, but from life sharing. It does not come from specialized employee programs and models, but from individual considerations of global connectedness. It does not come from evaluating deficiencies, but from focusing on contributions. It does not come from viewing a person as having problems to be dealt with, but from understanding that all people have something to offer you and from feeling deprived if you do not discover what that is and take advantage of the offering.

When I ask people who work as managers and executives to tell me of a time they made a corporate difference, the stories I get always involve a special relationship they had with a person in the corporate community. They tell me of how they shared their life, and how the person became part of the family.

When I ask them to tell me about their job, they speak of regulations, lack of control, and how they are so busy doing paper work for the corporate bureaucracies that they cannot possibly carry out the strategic purpose of their jobs.

Back to Top

I do not advocate for a solution to the very real problems of working within the system. I only point out that if a whole system unity is what the goal is, systems, regulations, and bureaucratic control appear to have acted against that goal. Forming relationships, making commitments, and viewing the total corporate society - as opposed to segments - seems to move people toward more desirable futures and communities toward more self-determined and healthy futures.

As we focus on the individual employee as they relate to the total corporate community, family, friends, associational connections, and suppliers, we make progress toward whole systems sustainability. As we focus employee deficiencies and low-level legal requirements, we build our own business security by making the proclaimed needs of employees our commodities. The commodification of need has served us well. Let us now balance the power and work for people not with needs.

Corporations are systems, and like all systems, we sometimes lose focus. A person who has relied on the human service system has much to teach us as we design sustainable corporate systems. As an individual who relies on these services, Raymond Kilroy says much about the Human Service industry. We would do well to embrace his vision as we direct our organizations.

"We are moving away from emphasizing my needs [and] toward building upon my capacities. We are moving away from providing services to me in some facility [and] toward building bridges with me to communities and neighborhood associations. We are moving away from programming me and other people with disabilities toward empowering us and our families to acquire the support we want. We are moving away from focusing on my deficits to focusing on my competence. We are moving away from specialized disability organizations so that we can develop and sustain relationships with people who will depend upon people like me and upon who people like me can depend” (Kilroy 1987).

Back to Top

I believe, and it has been shown in the science of Chaos, that little changes create big events. We will move toward self-determining work environments by changing relational circumstances one person at a time. If we focus on systems change we are destined to spend our lives in frustration. “One at a time” will multiply to affect millions of people. Focusing on people, their relationships, and mutual understanding will cause systems to change. Another way to view this is to understand that throughout democratic history, systems have not changed people so much as people have changed systems.

Along with the understanding that little changes create big events, is that we live in a world where all fields, sciences, technologies, and thought are interdependent and interrelated. If we embrace one method or one people for achieving whole systems unity as "the answer," we can guarantee that there will be events that work against the goal of creating corporations with sustainable processes and profitable bottom lines.

Figure 1:

Contrasting Approaches To Planning

Adapted from a letter by Kellner, Rogers and Wheatley Inc., 1994

Back to Top

Figure 2

Objectives of Whole System Planning:

To create common ground understanding of the organization's changing environment.

To create common ground understanding of the organization's capabilities, strengths, and weaknesses.

To develop a common and realistic perspective of critical relationships with key stakeholders, and to create an environment in which these relationships are continually reassessed.

To enhance organizational adaptability such that the organization increases its ability to respond to the environment in real time.

References

Schwartz, David B. 1992. Crossing The River; Creating a Conceptual Revolution in Community & Disability. Brookline Books (ISBN 0-914797-82-4)

Wheatley, Margaret J. & Kellner-Rogers, Myron, 1996. A Simpler Way. Berrett- Koehler Publishers, San Francisco.

Back to Top