Associated Colleges of the South

Home/GDI :: Home :: Growing Departmental Inclusiveness/GDI :: Interpersonal Environment Toolkit 1

GDI :: Interpersonal Environment Toolkit 1

INTERPERSONAL ENVIRONMENT

An inclusive department has an interpersonal environment that is accepting, supportive and encouraging.

What does a relative weakness in the Interpersonal Environment domain of the GDIS (or stated concern in this area) mean?  Each department may have many meanings, but here are some potential indicators of concern to consider.

  • Not all members feel that people in the department get along well.
  • Not all people feel that they or others have an equal voice.
  • Treating others with respect may be an issue that needs group attention.
  • Group norms may not be adequate, or the group does not deal effectively with those who are violating acceptable norms.
  • Untenured and non-tenure-track faculty may be fearful of senior faculty’s abuse of power.
  • Traditional tasks and functions may not consider diversity and the service loads of underrepresented faculty. Thus, there may be unacknowledged “hidden work” that excessively burdens faculty from underrepresented groups.

RELATIONAL VERSUS TRANSACTIONAL ATTITUDES

Our research showed that when faculty members held relational attitudes toward their department, they were less likely to be thinking of leaving their department than someone with a transactional attitude. Simply put, if you view your job as contributing to a team and/or community you care about, you work to help nurture your relationships. In a transactional relationship, you see work as something you do to get a reward for yourself, whether that means economic or professional advancement. When faculty members thought their department acted in inclusive ways, they were more likely to hold a relational attitude to their work. A department with a strong interpersonal environment will create a supportive team by advocating for each member to have an equitable career and satisfying professional life. When faculty members flourish, the institution can succeed.

Make the Interpersonal Climate Better

  • Work with colleagues in other departments that have excellent interpersonal environments.
    • Consider observing a meeting and working directly with departments with better climates. Don’t know who has a great environment?  Go one up a level of administration (e.g., Dean’s office) and find out which teams at your level are working well and inclusively.
    • If resources allow, an external reviewer or outside consultant can gather and provide anonymous or anonymized feedback about the department.
  • Promote mutually respectful interactions by identifying and examining respectful and disrespectful actions in the following ways:
    • Recognize common forms of disrespect, like interrupting, talking over people, or ignoring comments, and agree to work to reduce these behaviors
    • Establish ground rules to eliminate uncommon but destructive behaviors, such as yelling, gossiping, or name-calling.
    • Include experiences, such as role-plays or case study discussions, to eliminate interactions that stem from unconscious bias. Unconscious bias can be overtly negative. For instance, when women’s ideas are credited to a male colleague, or more subtly when women are complimented for keeping a space attractive and clean. Another example of a disrespectful interaction owing to unconscious bias includes complimenting a person of color for being “articulate.” It is best for such group experiences to be done live (whether virtually or in-person) to allow for questions and discussion.
    • Take note of the faculty’s willingness to contribute to discussions. The faculty’s hesitation to get involved may signal that they do not feel comfortable asserting their ideas. Attention to structural power dynamics is crucial. Untenured faculty may always feel at risk when voicing an opinion. Consider ways to make them feel safe sharing their ideas as valued and connected department and university community members.
    • Consider including agreements about respectful interaction in a department’s statement on diversity and inclusion.
    • When offered committee assignments or other additional service obligations, encourage faculty members to consult with actors such as the chair or even a “no” committee who can take the heat by providing a formal recommendation for prioritizing other work if the faculty member wishes to decline the task.

Ensure Equity within the Interpersonal Environment

  • Map out departmental expectations and clarify the process of task distribution, even if informal.
    • Include non-departmental/service expectations and demands, especially those that put burdens on faculty of color, and make sure that expectations are clear and readily available.
      • Sensitivity, patience, and above all, the inclusion of those most affected are all key factors in determining these often-hidden contributions.
    • Be sure to incorporate diverse needs (deriving from caregiving, religious affiliation, health concerns, and other personal matters) in the scheduling and timely notice of meetings.
    • Assigned class times should take work-life balance into account. For example, faculty members with children or elder care obligations may benefit from class schedules that allow them to be away during the usual workday. Ask how schedules can best accommodate each faculty member and be prepared and willing to alter historical practices to support diverse needs best.
    • Rotate tasks/expectations fairly, being sure to solicit what fairness means for each faculty member regarding their needs. For example, consider who is the sponsor for the department’s club, if applicable. Consider how many evening events a faculty member is expected to attend. Underrepresented faculty are disproportionately asked to work as mentors to student groups, which often schedule evening meetings and events. Those evening events can add up when they are asked to serve on campus search and other committees.
  • Have individuals complete a Hidden Work Self-Study [hyperlink to Hidden Work Inventory] of their mentorship, advising, and other aspects of their load.
    • Distinguish this self-study from any existing annual report. Complete form [hyperlink to Hidden Work Inventory] that includes many examples of hidden work: letters of recommendation, informal mentoring, and recruitment meetings with prospective students and parents.
      • Add items to the form to suit your needs and include open-ended questions for which faculty can mention additional types of hidden work.Monitor responses over the years, and consider adding new questions based on the similarity of open-ended responses.
      Recognize the emotional toll of some responsibilities. Meeting with students about racist incidents or sexual assaults on campus can have an additional draining impact that would not be encountered in meeting students applying to graduate school. 
      • Check in with faculty engaged in emotionally taxing student activities, express appreciation for their efforts, and acknowledge these contributions regarding load.Ensure faculty are aware of mental health resources for these emotional burdens.
    • For faculty whose burden of hidden activity is a consequence of their identity and the high value the institution places on diversity, consider adjusting “traditional” departmental obligations (e.g., advising load) to offset the burden.  Also, consider negotiating additional compensation for them.  Both approaches can be used in an inclusive environment where equity, rather than equality, is valued.
      • Depending on your department, offsets may be achieved formally through a point system or informally through discussion and understanding of the burden of various service categories.
      • Contributing invisible labor related to diversity, equity, and inclusion should be considered for merit-based salary increases on an equitable footing with other considerations.
  • Pay close attention to non-tenure-track faculty, who are likelier to be members of underrepresented groups.
    • Ensure that equity efforts include all departmental faculty.
  • Consider using anonymous online polling for medium to large departmental decisions.
    • Departments often use a consensus decision-making model, yet consensus or unanimity is often assumed in departmental decisions when it does not truly exist.  Junior faculty or faculty from underrepresented groups may not want to endure the potential political costs of expressing objection or criticism, despite well-meaning reassurances. Thus, some members may not share their perspective or their true vote, leading to a false consensus. 
    • Smartphone polling applications are useful because they avoid the problem of recognizable handwriting in secret ballots.  Votes with these tools can yield outcomes that are surprisingly more representative of departmental voices.  Decisions based on truly secret ballots are a healthy counter to untested notions that everyone is on the same page.  Poll Everywhere is a good example app, but many apps and online services can provide this functionality.

Explore more