One of the big stories in the onslaught of bad news coming out of the US lately has been the systematic dismantling of DEIA.

So we're no longer allowed to openly talk about equity and inclusion.

OK.

I've been in this long enough to remember when we discussed many of the targeted policy measures under the label of "affirmative action."

The words we use change and our understanding of the scope of the work has expanded. But the fundamental work to move toward treating everyone more fairly continues.

We don't have to change our values or stop trying to create environments where everyone feels safe being themself. We just have to shift our language and tactics yet again.

Of course I'm writing about this now because I see using a coaching approach as one of the strategies that can help you accomplish that!

Individualized support

To build a truly inclusive culture, you need to provide individualized support that takes each employee's strengths and needs into account.

The challenge is to make sure that you’re providing the support that each person actually needs, instead of what you think they need.

Coaching provides a framework to help you get to know each member of your team through asking open-ended, non-leading questions and actively listening to their responses.

The example that comes to mind for me here is supporting neurospicy team members.

You can find a ton of examples online and in trainings of common accommodations. But if you just put those in place as if it were a cookie-cutter checklist, then you might actually do more harm than good.

Each neurodivergent person has a unique constellation of needs and strengths.

Just to give one example of how this can show up:

One of the common sensory issues for autistic folks is a sensitivity to lights. Many hate bright overhead lights, because they're overstimulating. For me, though? Maybe it's because I'm also really nearsighted, but I HATE a dimly lit room! I prefer LED over flourescent and "daylight" ofer "soft white", but I have to have bright light to get work done!

Lighting issues may seem insignificant, but there's that sort of range of response to just about every way that autism shows up. And neurospicy includes plenty of other diagnoses that show up in other ways.

When you embrace your curiosity instead of rushing to solutions, you'll learn how to provide the support each team member needs.

The flip side of this is:

Making sure that EVERYONE gets the support they need

Even with the best of intentions, many leaders fall into a pattern of assuming that those who are doing fine need less support.

It makes rational sense. You focus on those who clearly need your attention to make sure they consistently meet expectations. And of course you support those who actively ask for your support. And you have eleventy billion other things on your plate.

So you trust those who are doing fine to keep doing fine.

Even with regular 1:1 meetings, the quality of those meetings can vary depending on the leader’s sense of what support each team member needs.

Intentionally using a coaching approach can provide a structure to make sure that you're supporting everyone's development. That means setting aside time to discuss a goal or project that they're working on, and using a coaching framework to talk through how that's going. That means asking open-ended questions with a focus on helping each team member continually grow and develop in ways that matter to them.

This matters, because if you wait to be asked, then you're going to let some people fall through the cracks and not get the development that would help them thrive.

​Research has shown that children from working class backgrounds are socialized to ask fewer questions and seek less help from those in positions of authority. That leads to uneven outcomes as early as elementary school.

Without some intervention, these patterns often extend into adulthood.

At least, that was the case for me. As a new librarian, even when I was struggling, I was afraid to ask for help, because that would mean that I failed to figure things out on my own. So, instead, I struggled in silence.

One way that this showed up in my performance was when I was planning my first big event in the library. It was a new event that my supervisor had recommended - so not something I was personally excited about and not something that there was a template already in place for. I got stuck in decision paralysis until the last minute on a few different pieces of the planning.

I remember that she did drop by my office once to ask how things were going, and asked if I needed help. But that's a yes/no question, and when I said "no, I'm ok," she moved on to some other topic.

The event turned out fine, but I look back now and wish that supervisor had been more of a coach.

If she had used a coaching approach to ask more curious, open-ended questions about where things were at in my planning, we might have been able to talk through the best way to approach whatever I was agonizing over, without me feeling like I was admitting to having a hard time figuring it out on my own.

This focus on questions instead of advice also helps you do a better job of supporting team members who are from different backgrounds.

Race-neutral mentoring programs can be counterproductive in supporting BIPOC librarians, because the advice often assumes white cultural norms and encourages assimilation.

Simply sharing what worked for me in some sticky situation may not actually do a thing to help a colleague of color navigate a similar situation, because of the ways racism can shift people’s reactions to the exact same words or behaviors.

The research linked above focuses on race, but this effect extends to all forms of oppression/privilege. What has worked for me as an able-bodied person isn’t always possible for a colleague with a chronic illness.

A coaching conversation - using open-ended, non-judgmental questions following the coaching framework - enables you to support your team member in working toward their goals in a way that is going to work for them.

YMMV

One important caveat here is that coaching skills are a tool, not a magic wand. Your actual outcomes will depend on your knowledge about the systems in play. Of course, nobody's perfect. You may be able to recover from an occasional microaggression if you've built a strong foundation of trust and immediately offer a genuine apology with changed behavior. But doing that too many times, or before you've built that solid foundation of trust, can sabotage all of this work.

So, to get the best results in using coaching to build an inclusive culture, you must also be engaged in ongoing learning about these issues from a structural perspective, not just individual actions.

But, if you're still reading these newsletters, then I’m assuming that you’re already doing that work on your own!

If you're looking for more opportunities to learn about this part, then I recommend checking out these courses at Library Juice Academy:

​Cultural Competence for Librarians​

​Examining Institutional Racism in Libraries​

Starting to plan the next cohort of Leading With Curiosity

If you're considering signing up for a future cohort of Leading With Curiosity: Coaching Skills for Library Leaders​, I'd love your input on a scheduling idea...

The program normally meets every other week for roughly 5 months. It includes ten 90-minute live Zoom meetings. Right now, I'm looking at fall (Aug-Dec) for the next regular cohort.

Would you be interested in a more intensive summer (June-July) version, meeting once every week for eight 2-hour live Zoom meetings (with a break in the middle)?

Would an even more intensive version be better for you, meeting twice a week for only 4 weeks?

The content and price would remain the same. The condensed schedule includes the same amount of meeting time and content, just with longer meetings and less time in between.

Please fill out this poll with your preference, and feel welcome to send me an email with your thoughts/opinions/suggestions on this idea!