Equity and Inclusion as Workplace Practices: A Four-Step Process for Moving to Action

IF 1.5 4区 文学 Q2 COMMUNICATION Technical Communication Pub Date : 2023-08-01 DOI:10.55177/tc710097
K. Moore, Timothy R. Amidon, Michele Simmons
{"title":"Equity and Inclusion as Workplace Practices: A Four-Step Process for Moving to Action","authors":"K. Moore, Timothy R. Amidon, Michele Simmons","doi":"10.55177/tc710097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: In this article, we offer a praxis-driven framework that practitioners, scholars, and administrators can use to differentiate between equity and inclusion challenges and move toward catalyzing individual and/or coalitional action. We argue that distinguishing\n between equity and inclusion as two different potential problem types provides an opportunity for imagining a range of more just and equitable solutions. Acknowledging our margins of maneuverability and tacking in and out of potential realms for action allow practitioners to enact those solutions\n in practical and context-driven ways. Method: Following the definitional work of Iris Marion Young (1990) and Rebecca Walton, Kristen Moore, and Natasha Jones (2019) surrounding justice, we delineate relationships between justice, equity, and inclusion before offering a four-step process\n that practitioners, scholars, and administrators can deploy in order to envision and enact contextually specific tactical actions to redress inequity and exclusion in TPC workplaces and programs. Results: Through the application of the four-step process to contextualized examples of\n equity and inclusion challenges, we illustrate the utility of this approach as an actionable strategy for revealing and addressing inequity and exclusion within TPC workplaces and programs. Conclusion: The work of doing equity and inclusion is an ongoing endeavor that requires vigilance\n and imagination. Identifying whether we frame a problem as inclusion or equity makes visible the arguments available within specific contexts, acknowledges our margin of maneuverability, and enables us to consider the realm where initial change is possible. Our proposed process provides but\n one point of entry into the field's long-standing pursuit of justice.","PeriodicalId":46338,"journal":{"name":"Technical Communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technical Communication","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55177/tc710097","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: In this article, we offer a praxis-driven framework that practitioners, scholars, and administrators can use to differentiate between equity and inclusion challenges and move toward catalyzing individual and/or coalitional action. We argue that distinguishing between equity and inclusion as two different potential problem types provides an opportunity for imagining a range of more just and equitable solutions. Acknowledging our margins of maneuverability and tacking in and out of potential realms for action allow practitioners to enact those solutions in practical and context-driven ways. Method: Following the definitional work of Iris Marion Young (1990) and Rebecca Walton, Kristen Moore, and Natasha Jones (2019) surrounding justice, we delineate relationships between justice, equity, and inclusion before offering a four-step process that practitioners, scholars, and administrators can deploy in order to envision and enact contextually specific tactical actions to redress inequity and exclusion in TPC workplaces and programs. Results: Through the application of the four-step process to contextualized examples of equity and inclusion challenges, we illustrate the utility of this approach as an actionable strategy for revealing and addressing inequity and exclusion within TPC workplaces and programs. Conclusion: The work of doing equity and inclusion is an ongoing endeavor that requires vigilance and imagination. Identifying whether we frame a problem as inclusion or equity makes visible the arguments available within specific contexts, acknowledges our margin of maneuverability, and enables us to consider the realm where initial change is possible. Our proposed process provides but one point of entry into the field's long-standing pursuit of justice.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
作为工作场所实践的公平和包容:行动的四步过程
目的:在本文中,我们提供了一个实践驱动的框架,从业者、学者和管理者可以使用该框架来区分公平和包容性挑战,并朝着促进个人和/或联盟行动的方向发展。我们认为,区分公平和包容这两种不同的潜在问题类型,为想象一系列更公正、更公平的解决方案提供了机会。承认我们的可操作性,并在潜在的行动领域中进进出出,使从业者能够以实际和情境驱动的方式制定这些解决方案。方法:根据Iris Marion Young(1990)和Rebecca Walton、Kristen Moore和Natasha Jones(2019)围绕正义的定义工作,我们描绘了正义、公平和包容之间的关系,然后提供了一个四步过程,管理人员可以部署,以设想和制定具体的战术行动,纠正TPC工作场所和项目中的不公平和排斥现象。结果:通过将四步流程应用于公平和包容性挑战的情境化例子,我们说明了这种方法作为一种可操作的战略的效用,可以揭示和解决TPC工作场所和项目中的不公平和排斥问题。结论:公平和包容的工作是一项持续的努力,需要警惕和想象力。确定我们是将一个问题定义为包容还是公平,可以在特定的背景下看到可用的论点,承认我们的可操作性,并使我们能够考虑可能发生初始变化的领域。我们提出的程序只是该领域长期追求正义的一个切入点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Technical Communication
Technical Communication COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
20.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
From the Poor to the Rich: Predatory Inclusion and the Robinhood App Review of Research: Critical Interface Analysis as a Heuristic for Justice-Focused, Community-Engaged Design Research Making Solutions Visible: Facilitating Housing Equality through Interface Design Driving Innovation: Analyzing Mobile Ridesharing App Interfaces and Moving Toward Community-Based User Experience (CBX) Reporting Online Aggression: A Transnational Comparative Interface Analysis of Sina Weibo and Twitter
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1