SHRM26 Debrief · Modern Employee Experience · #1575

Beyond Inclusion Training: Building Cultures that Get Real

with Alan Mueller

▶ Watch on the SHRM portal ~83 min, distilled

inclusion trainingshared expectations vs. valuesclimate surveys

"No one ever gets canceled for messing up. They get canceled for doubling down on their mess-up and refusing to learn."

What it was about

Standard climate surveys and value statements only tell organizations what they already know about inclusion. Real, sustainable cultural change comes from moving groups from broad shared values to specific, negotiated shared expectations, paired with qualitative tools like focus groups and ongoing cultural humility and curiosity.

By the numbers

roughly 80% vs. 20%

Result of a 2016-2017 large-scale survey of autistic people in the US on preferred terminology: ~80% preferred 'autistic people' over 'people with autism' (person-first), with 20% preferring the person-first form.

95% correct, 5% not

Rate at which doctors correctly guess a newborn's gender at birth (aligning with later gender identity), used to explain cisgender vs. transgender/non-binary.

~800+ hours

Speaker's calculation of cumulative time never spent scanning a room to check for people who look like him, as a second privilege-quantification exercise (10 seconds x every room he's entered).

Key notes

Run a shared-expectations exercise with teams (not just abstract value statements) and interrogate each word offered — ask what people can actually commit to, and modify or remove words the group can't honestly own.
Replace one-size-fits-all quantitative climate surveys with qualitative methods like facilitator-led focus groups, and train internal staff (train-the-trainer) so the organization can run them without permanent reliance on outside consultants.
Distinguish types of 'safety' (personal/physical vs. psychological) explicitly in team agreements rather than using the word as a vague, feel-good label.

The contrarian takeThe speaker argues that treating quantitative data, like standard climate surveys, as the objective gold standard for understanding inclusion is itself a 'white colonial frame.' Qualitative, lived-experience data, such as focus groups and direct conversation, is more valid for measuring inclusion than Likert-scale survey metrics.

Take this back Monday

Do this for your team

Run a shared-expectations exercise with your team: list values, then cross out any word people can't actually commit to living.

Say this in your next leadership meeting

Climate surveys just confirm what the majority already believes — real inclusion data comes from focus groups, not Likert scales.

Watch out for

Relying solely on quantitative climate surveys, which mainly confirm what majority groups already believe and fail to surface minority experience.
Adopting person-first or other identity language wholesale without checking what the community itself actually prefers (e.g., autistic people vs. people with autism).
Treating diversity/inclusion work as a one-time training or a static value statement instead of a living, recurring practice.

Fun fact · Alan Mueller

Before leadership consulting, Dr. Mueller spent nearly a decade performing professional improv comedy with an award-winning troupe.

If this landed, see these

↳ Go deeperInclusivity as a Virtue: Virtue-Based HR Habits for Building Ethical CulturesTurns shared-expectations work into five daily virtues leaders can actually rehearse.⇄ The counterpointChange-Ready or Change-Resistant? How to Assess and Elevate the Mindsets That Drive AgilityReframes the fix: readiness is about mindset capacity, not just a better group exercise.✦ The unexpected oneThe Future of Work is Still HumanSame candor principle, aimed at AI-era work redesign instead of inclusion work.