To Adapt Our Language or Not to Adapt?

One question that has come up frequently in my conversations with educators over the past few months is about whether to change our language around diversity, equity, inclusion, or intercultural competence work. The point of this post is not to provide an answer, but to invite a possible reframing. I find it’s helpful to consider this question through the lens of intercultural development, and specifically the Intercultural Development Continuum (IDC).

First, it’s important to recognize there’s a difference between being an advocate and a developer. Dr. Mitch Hammer—the creator of the Intercultural Development Inventory (IDI), an assessment based on the IDC model—talked about this years ago at an IDI conference, and it has stuck with me ever since (for more information about the distinction, read this post). According to Hammer, an advocate’s role is to disrupt the status quo, bring people’s attention to a problem, expose inequities, and raise awareness. A developer’s role, however, is to meet people where they are—in a non-judgmental way—and support them in overcoming their developmental challenges and being open to new possibilities.

There’s a need for both advocacy and intercultural development work in our world, and they can be highly complementary. However, it’s important in any situation to get clear on which role you’re taking.

If your role in a given situation is one of advocate, you’re unlikely to change language because others want you to do so. But when you’re taking a developer role, changing your language may be necessary and useful.

Let’s break down the developer role further. If you’re an educator or trainer in a situation where you’re meant to be facilitating others’ intercultural learning, you’ll likely want to take a developer role.

But there’s another type of situation where taking a developmental approach can be useful. I’m talking about a situation where you are navigating cultural complexity and need to practice intercultural competence yourself. I define intercultural competence as the capacity to communicate and act effectively, appropriately, and authentically across cultural differences, locally and globally (to learn more, check out the three-part blog series where I discuss what I mean by effectively, appropriately, and authentically). 

If you’re in a situation where you are weighing whether to change your language, there may be an opportunity—indeed a need—to practice intercultural competence. That is, you might choose to strategically meet others where they are in their own development in order to effectively achieve your broader goal.

First, it’s important to clearly define the context. What’s the exact situation that involves you grappling with changing language? Are you being advised to scrub certain words from your website to maintain funding? Deciding whether to rename a department, course, or program to avoid it being cut? Figuring out how to teach a certain topic given its polarizing nature?

Next, get clear on your goal. What are you ultimately trying to accomplish in this particular context? (See this blog post for more information on defining your goals when navigating cultural differences.)

Then, clarify your role. Are you taking an advocate or developer role in this situation?

If you’re proceeding as a developer, the next step is to get curious about the other individuals, parties, or communities involved in this situation. What matters to them? How might they interpret words and ideas differently than you? How might they experience cultural similarities and differences according to the IDC? You can’t bridge differences in complex intercultural situations without first deeply understanding and empathizing with the others involved.

Once you know your goal and have a deeper understanding of those you’re engaging with, what adaptations might be appropriate and help you achieve what you’re trying to achieve?

Imagine, for example, we’re at a school town hall where some parents are expressing concern about the school creating transgender bathrooms because they’re worried or scared about how that might impact their own kids. Rather than emphasizing the importance of equity and inclusion, we might instead use language that meets those parents where they are in their development, addressing their fear or uncertainty. We could underscore their concern, highlighting the fact that most parents and caregivers want their kids to feel safe at school. We might then point to the fact that many kids—transgender kids especially—do not currently feel safe at school with the current bathroom situation. Their parents and the school want to ensure their safety.

We adapt our approach—and our language—not to trick people or hide our own intentions, but to meet them where they are developmentally. Choosing language appropriate to the situation helps us achieve our goal.

Adapting strategically to meet people where they are on the IDC can be an effective form of cultural bridging when taking a developer role. Shifting our language might be a means of navigating complex intercultural situations effectively, appropriately, and authentically. However, this is an advanced bridging technique that typically requires significant intercultural competence.

This is why I always return to the foundational principle: If we want to help others develop intercultural competence, it’s critical to engage our own intercultural development practice.

Photo credit: Brett Jordan, Unsplash