How to Turn Your ERGs into Business Insight Engines with Mantej Singh

Speaker A: This is ERG Power Talk and I'm your host, Joe Santana. This program is for ERG and BRG leaders, executive sponsors and business unit leaders who want to unlock powerful, measurable business impact through their ergs while championing the goals and needs of the communities these ergs represent. Our vision is a future where ergs aren't just appreciated, they're seen as essential to business success, driving revenue, cutting costs, powering marketplace growth, and creating workplaces where everyone can thrive. Our goal is simple but powerful to help you deliver so much value that your organization sees your ERG as a must have investment worthy of more resources, greater influence and stronger support. We know you'll get top value from every episode. So now let's get to the show. Hello and welcome to another episode of ERG Power Talk. I'm, um, your host, Joe Santana. Today we're going to explore how ERG leaders, or staff networks, as they are called in some places operating out of nonprofit government agencies and for profit organizations, can move beyond controlled activity based groups and become drivers of real results by identifying systems gaps, using internal data and presenting their work in terms that leaders can understand and act on. And this is really critical right now because ERG leaders are facing increased scrutiny, tighter budgets and growing pressure from executives and legal environments to prove real impact in many places around the world. At the same time, many organizations are pulling back from some of the efforts that cannot show measurable results that positively impact their missions and their organizations. So to help us with this, we have the perfect guest. I'm joined today by a belonging and inclusion strategist and the founder of belonging to co. He brings over 20 years of experience working with government agencies, corporate leaders and community organizations in Australia to turn inclusion into real outcomes, not just ideas. He has led diversity, inclusion and belonging strategy at the New South Wales Department of Planning, advised executive teams and work directly with staff and community networks to drive measurable impact.

Speaker B: My first name is Mantej and Mantej is an Indian name. So Mantej stands for man is heart. That's what it means. And tej means glow around it. So I would say I'm a person who in its name has a glow around believe deeply in thinking through the heart, but also connecting to organizational outcomes. So my first name is Mantej, last name is Singh and I am based in Sydney, Australia. I'm the founder and principal consultant for a belonging inclusion consultancy called Belonging Co. It's a social and cultural inclusion consultancy. It works with organizations to drive meaningful outcomes both at a community level or At a staff level, especially around social and cultural inclusion. And um, as you said, I work for about 20 years across German organizations in functions such as community engagement, social outcomes, place activation, arts and culture, diversity and inclusion. But I've always had uh, an approach of that we need to empower communities, whether they be people living in a neighborhood or a suburb function supported by an organization or staff in an organization. Uh, so the key to success that I've always followed, and sometimes it's worked, sometimes it hasn't, is you've got to let go of control and empower the community, whatever that community is. It might take time, but it always leads to better outcomes.

Speaker A: Mantish, I'm really happy to have you here and I was just reading a ah, briefing about you. In addition to the questions that I was planning on asking you, there are some other things that have popped up. So let's just dive in. So when I was on your show, I was recently on your podcast, you said that ergs in various environments often operate under a constrain, control and comply model. Tell me a little bit about that. Share that with the rest of the people that are listening. Also let me know if I've got those three things correctly because I'm just going off memory based on uh, I

Speaker B: think you got the idea right. So it's control, contain and comply. And what I mean by that is, look, I think any organization, no organization would go out there and say we want ergs and we want to control them and we want to contain them. Nobody would say it out loud. So it happens in the background, it happens subconsciously, it happens through layered bureaucracy. So not one person is saying I'm going to do that, but that is what is occurring. So it's embedded in the system sometimes and it's embedded in how things happen. So it's not necessarily by design, that's the first thing. But what it means is, and I think at ah, the root cause of it, Joseph, is fear, isn't it? It's the fear uh, of losing control over the narrative, over what might come out through a listening session, over what might an erg want to do. So we try to manage that because. And the opposite of that is letting go. Right, okay. Genuinely following the process and saying and going to first principles. And the first principles are organizations, uh, need ergs, which are employee reference groups. So they need employee reference groups because leadership or executive in an organization want insights. What is happening on the ground, what is the employee experience, what are they feeling, what's working, what's not Working, what's contributing to a sense of safety, to a sense of belonging, which is what my organization works on. So in order to understand, genuinely understand what is driving safety, trust, participation, sense of belonging, sense of being able to contribute, which are things that drive innovation in an organization, productivity, performance in an organization. And you. And when you and I talked, we talked about business impact, right? So, uh, any organization anywhere in the world would benefit from those genuine insights to ensure better customer service, employee retention, innovation, productivity, performance. So you need. So all organizations need insights because leadership is not on the ground, uh, all the time. People are, they are the front face when talking to customers. They're the front face when work is happening or getting blocked. So an organization would want lived, experience, insights, period. All organizations would value that. But what organizations can tend to do is fear what might come across. And that happens progressively. That gets embedded in the system. So as I said, uh, earlier, not one person is saying, let me control and contain, but what is happening is that we get fear of what might come out, what might people say. And then as a result of that, if we genuinely let that come through, uh, let that sort of be socialized and known across the organization, then that might reflect poorly on certain people, certain functions. That's not being done. And that is such a sort of limiting thought process and a limiting process because we want the insights, but we also want to say that we want to manage them, that they're not too much or too real. So therefore it impacts or reflects poorly on people or, uh, functions. And that's the dance and the dynamic that's always going on. And that's what drives this. And that's why, uh, as we talked about, we try to control it, we try to contain it, the messaging and what's being heard. And we put deadlines on it. And we say this, that we can only submit this form in these many letters. And you can. So things like that take away from the real purpose.

Speaker A: That makes a lot of sense. Organizations are very complex and especially large organizations where you have multiple layers and sometimes the reality of what's going on and what's really being experienced by employees or by customers that employees pretty much might be closer to, might reflect badly on, um, one of the groups right between those employees and the leader at the top. And so consciously or not, there is that effect of trying to sometimes control the narrative of what's going up. So mentage, what are some of the clearest signs, if you're an ERG leader or a BRG leader or staff, uh, network leader, what are some of the signs that you should look for that tell you, hey, you know what? I'm being managed that way right now. I am being somewhat controlled and I am being somewhat, how shall I say, filtered before my actual experience gets to the top.

Speaker B: Huh.

Speaker A: What are some ways that they would know that's happening to them?

Speaker B: I think that's a good question, Joseph. And before even I get to the collective, which is the eig, I'd like to bring it back to what would any person know that they have been controlled, contained, and forced to be filtered? Is that when it's the feeling in our gut, right? If you and I were being spoken to somebody and we felt the feeling that, look, I'm not being allowed to speak my true feelings or have enough time to gather my true feelings, and I'm being rushed and I'm being pushed into quickly saying what my feeling is. My experience is I would know. And I think the same principles apply to an ERG as well. If there is rush being applied, if there's pressure being applied, if you're being asked to quickly respond in certain deadlines, fill a certain form, which are all governance things, which is also needed. So we can't have complete the opposite of that, which is no control at all. And, uh, we go on forever to discuss. I'm not suggesting that.

Speaker A: You're not suggesting Wild West?

Speaker B: No, I'm not suggesting that. But I am suggesting that there has to be a balance. It has to work for the organization. So it has to have some timeline and some timeframe to capture the lived experience so that we can move into action, plan, strategy, delivery. That is absolutely important. But sometimes that difference is one extra day not having a form which says submit your response in 50 words versus saying come and talk to us. And in terms of effort, it doesn't make a lot of difference. So it's not a big difference. But it's the intention behind it, it's the fear behind it that actually makes a difference. So I would say to your question, what would tell ERG leaders? I think it's. It's the feeling in your gut, it's your own sense of what you're experiencing in the process. And if that experience is not once, but if that experience is continued over a period, then you know that you are being controlled and asked to be contained in a certain way. The other thing is to watch out is what kind of messages are you getting from your executive sponsor to rest of the organizational bureaucracy? And if those messages are different and vague, then because for anybody to feel empowered, they need a clear sense of direction and purpose, that we're behind you, we support you. But if the messaging is quite vague, a lot of confusion can hide in the chaos of it.

Speaker A: Give me an example of that. A message that's not exactly letting the true voice of what the person is saying filter up. Double click on that for me.

Speaker B: So I think many organizations would want employees to give feedback on a particular inclusion strategy or the employee retention strategy. So employee reference groups are employees that have other jobs. In most cases they're not, uh, hired for diversity and inclusion. They have other functional jobs which are full time jobs. So in order to contribute to employee experience outcomes and inclusion outcomes and diversity outcomes, Joseph, they have to find the time to contribute to that. So that time is really precious because the more time you contribute to this, the more your actual job manager could say, look, you're spending too much time there. So that time is really precious. And that friction does exist in organizations. So one of the challenges that we have to be really precious about the time people in employee reference groups are contributing to diversity and inclusion or employee experiences outcomes. And so, uh, an example of that would be that we want that feedback on employee experience or inclusion strategy which is happening somewhere else in the organization. And there's other consultations. Organizations may have engaged consultants and then that process runs. And somewhere at the end of it we say, let's have an employee, let's consult the erg. So that ERG consultation is almost occurring at the end because we want to say we've consulted the ergs, whether it's a co design workshop or a consultation workshop that's happening at the end of a piece that is led by the organization. And in the end we are also taking input. What should happen is the flip of it, which is we should be consulting the employee reference groups in setting the scope of that project, not consulting them at the very end to say, what's your views? When the whole scope is defined, the project is on its way, uh, the strategy is happening in place. And then we say, yep, we consulted the employee reference groups and that's five bullet points of what they said. And here's our strategy. It should be the flip of it. The employee reference group, the diversity inclusion team, or any leadership team should be working on a continuum on a regular basis to define what should be the scope of these projects. Because you got to capture the employee experience in defining the problems, not in symbolically putting that messaging into the final stage of a solution being grafted.

Speaker A: Okay, so let's Say someone looks at this and goes, hey, I'm only coming in on the tail end of this all the time. Or the message that I'm sending out and that I know the rest of the group is sending out is being interpreted in a totally different way before it actually gets to the end of this communication line. So once an ERG leader recognizes that, what are some specific actions that they can take to move beyond that and to gain a little more real business influence by getting their voice out there in a more pure fashion, uh, around these various experience and prospective topics?

Speaker B: I think there's, I would say there are, uh, two contexts for this. If you are operating in a, uh, control, compliance and contain context, you have to approach it differently. If you're working in a more of a inclusive, empowering context, the approach is different. So let me talk about the first one. If you're, uh, working in a, um, limiting context, you have to take a pause, reflect what's going on, and actually work out a plan to address it. And that might require having conversations with certain people, with executive sponsors, with the staff, employee reference group, its members itself, to not be on a, um, sort of hamster wheel of responding or reacting to what's being thrown at you, but actually creating some space to say, what do we want, how do we want to contribute our experience and actually put some uh, value on that lived experience and not convert it into a tokenistic product that can be purchased at any given time, if that's the analogy I'm taking. Because that's what happens sometimes and in many cases unconsciously, where organizations want that experience to be put into a, uh, strategy development process. To say, we've consulted the employees, and that certainly happens in community engagement as well, which is not an employee experience situation. It's a community experience situation where we get that experience at the end, but the discussion and decisions and the planning is already happening. So the first step, I would say, Joseph, is to create some gap, create some pause and understand the context that we are operating in and then devise a strategy of how to tackle or challenge or disrupt that dynamic. Because if you keep operating in the dynamic, you'll always be back and forth in that dynamic. So I think recognizing the situation, recognizing your own experience and putting some value on m that lived experience. Because lived experience is expertise, right? It's not a product to shop. It's not something to. It's not a branding exercise that we said we consulted employees. Lived experience is deep expertise on marginalization, disadvantage, discrimination. And what organizations need to be doing is Seeing that as expertise that people. Yes, uh, there is trauma, yes, there is really sometimes, uh, experiences that are negative. But what we're not tapping into that, we're tapping into expertise or where problems exist, how they manifest and what should be done to address them based on real insight. So we have to place value on that experience as anybody would do. If you and I were asked as consultants to provide expertise, we'll place a value on our expertise. And so do ergs have to place a value on their lived expertise and create pause and create their own sort of momentum and value to say this is how we will want to provide that expertise, not only, not always be in a reactionary mode. I think that's the key to regaining control and regaining some power for your own expertise and relevant experience.

Speaker A: And uh, you said that was in one type of organization where there is a lot of that control and so forth. What's the other organizational context and how would you approach that differently?

Speaker B: The other organizational context is I would say if I use the uh, Alphabet, abcd, uh, my organization stands for belonging. So that's the B. When you're working in a belonging mindset where we want employees to belong or communities to belong, then you completely skip the C. So we don't go to control, compliance and contain at all and we go to the D. And I would now uh, that I have created that acronym. I would find the three letters for the D and I would say there would be dialogue, design and deliver. So an organization that is not the three Cs is the 3Ds, which is you are genuinely wanting to listen to employees. You are wanting to design systems change, design, uh, experience, change using that deep listening. And then you want to deliver strategies and outcomes as a result of that too. So an organization that is in a dialogue design and deliver context would genuinely value staff expertise. So there you have to almost do the opposite, which is say we can't do all of it. We are limited in time. These are the one or two things we want to focus on in these first six months or these first three months and genuinely partner with that organization, its leaders, its diversity and inclusion team to actually do that very process, which is generally contribute to your lived experience in that dialogue and then say what are uh, collaborate and co design in the design of what the change would look like. And then you partner with them to drive that outcome, um, to communicate that to your network, to the rest of the organization. So that's the other, that's a partnering mindset. So you are a genuine Partner in that context. Whereas in other contexts you have to create space to create value for your expertise. To first get to that partnership mode.

Speaker A: I think you just answered in the last couple of questions, the next question I was going to ask you. You tend to describe BRGs, based on our last discussion, ergs, uh, or staff networks, as either being directional or decorative. I think the definitions you gave before define those that have been forced into a decorative model versus those that are in a directional model. Can you say a little more about that just to wrap that topic up? Because I think that you answered it already, but I'd love to put a fine point on it.

Speaker B: What's the purpose of ergs before I answer that? As I said earlier, uh, any organization would want employee reference groups, in theory, to give insights from the ground, which gives insights from lived experience, customer experience, what's happening, why, um, people leaving or staying, a sense of psychological safety, all of those things. Leaders and managers would want to hear that because they're not directly observing it. That's the principle of an erg, isn't it? That we can't see it on a daily basis. At an operational level, you tell us what you are seeing, and based on that information, we will do things differently. It's m very simple. It's not a complicated concept. But what tends to happen is it's that fear of what might come out or how might that reflect on the organization the way we've done things. It might say that we haven't done it well. And so what that does is we tend to focus on things we can control. And that's the decorative mindset. So we have ergs, and we are going to do, uh, an annual day of significance, an event, uh, a campaign, a morning tea and cupcakes. And somebody from the top will come and they will be at a panel discussion talking about how we all support ergs. And there'll be lots of comms and messagings and going on around that. And everybody on that day will feel very special and great because the ergs will get some visibility. They'll be on a panel, leaders will be on the panel, and everybody will have a great conversation. It'll be fantastic. It'll be a really big high. And then the next day we go back to normal because it's been ticked. I think that tends to happen quite a lot in organizations. Because we tick that box, we say, okay, obviously we had that event and everybody got there. So that, I would say, is decoration. It's not to say that it's not important. But that's almost like the icing on the cake. That's not the cake. The cake is that dialogue, design and deliver partnership that should occur between the organization and the employee reference group with respect for lived expertise, with respect for time. People are pouring into that so that they don't get burned out and disengaged and fatigued by repeatedly saying the same thing. So that's the kick. And you are in a true partnership and collaboration and co design mode where you're working with people on the ground, with organizational teams in leadership or development or human resources, to actually give shape in a way that justifies and recognizes and acknowledges the lived expertise and says so when whatever the change is being driven, when it's done, the employee reference group or the staff networking is say, we supported that, we were part of that. And they can be proud to say that they are done. They did that in partnership and so can be the organizational teams. And when that doesn't happen, people disengage. People get fatigued, burnt out, uh, and disconnect from that process because it's almost. They've been. Information has been gotten out, but nothing comparative has occurred in terms of change.

Speaker A: I've been talking to a lot of military people recently for another program that I'm doing and one of the things that this makes me think of every time I have a conversation with you is that when these groups are not utilized directionally or when they're not utilized in a way that allows their voice to get to the top and to truly really make it through the organization, it's essentially if you think of the organization as a military unit, it would be like military intelligence that's planning a strategy, having no communication with the troops that are on the ground. The troops that are on the ground, they're not looking at a map, they're not looking at little placeholders representing the other side and their side, they're looking at the actual situation of what's going on and what they're experiencing and how this is actually going. And that communication is really important because these people may have great strategy, but without connecting that to what's actually going on in the ground, that strategy may not be as, uh, effective. Okay, so what did we learn from the first half of our discussion with Mantage? First, learn to recognize when your erg is being managed in ways that quietly limit your impact. If you are consistently rush, you given incomplete information or uh, no information, or asked to weigh in at the last minute on decisions that have already been made somewhere else by someone else, That's a big signal your role is being minimized. When you notice that pattern, step back and ask yourself honestly, is our input shaping decisions or is it just being used to check a box? And if the answer is the latter, you need to form a new independent group and move away from checking boxes. Second, treat your members lived experiences as the expertise it actually is. The people in your group have firsthand direct knowledge of how your organization really works. Not how leadership thinks it works, but how it actually works day to day. That is no different from the inside a paid consultant would bring. So speak with clarity and confidence and boldness, and present what you share as informed input that leaders can use to make better decisions. Third, push to be part of the decisions at the beginning, not just the end. If you're consistently being asked to react to a finished plan and the underlying problem is presented in a way it doesn't resonate, is correct with you, say so. It is far more valuable to correct the flawed assumption early than to spend your time trying to adjust or justify solutions built on the wrong foundation. Fourth, focus your time and energy on work that connects to how the business actually performs and what they care about. Events, panels and celebrations may create visibility, but they rarely change outcomes or position you or your members as valuable business contributors with potential for growth and development. Look for opportunities where your insights can influence decisions around performance, customer experience, or cost. That is where your contribution starts to matter in ways that the people who matter the most to your career can value and measure. And finally, fifth, get yourself and your members clear on what your role actually is. Your value is not in the number of celebration activities and speaker events that you run. Um, it is in the insight that you bring to the business. Think of yourself as an advisor to the business. Your job is, is to help leaders see what they cannot see and understand what they do not yet understand. That shift in how you see yourself will change how you spend your time and how others see and value you and your contribution. In the first half of our discussion, we learned that ergs create real value when they provide insights and shape positive business decisions. In the second half, we're going to go into the systems, the power and the dynamics you need to understand and and watch in order to produce those insights that drive measurable results. All this and more when we come back. But first, this. I'll see you on the other side. Are you an ERG group or committee chair struggling to balance your ERG activities with your day job responsibilities? Well, you're not alone. There are hundreds of thousands of passionate ERG leads all around the world that find themselves in the same boat. The only solution found by many is to give up lunch hours and personal time with family and friends. But there is a better way. And that better way is to master the powerful skills that enable you to 1 set realistic and achievable compelling goals and priorities 2 distribute the workload by effectively delegating tasks and responsibilities to others 3 communicate in a way that increases your impact with less time and effort on your Part 4 Secure the full and active support of executive sponsors and other senior business leaders and five Fit your ERG leadership work into a reasonable set of time boundaries. And that and more is exactly what tens of thousands of your colleagues and have learned to do effortlessly by participating in Supercharged Workshops. Supercharged Workshops was developed by us along the same easy and powerful how to framework found in our popular Supercharger ERGS book. The modular customizable programs are loaded with fun exercises and tools that will immediately give you back hours of time each day while increasing your ability to achieve high impact and measurable results in both your ERG work and your job. For more details on how you can schedule a Supercharged Workshop session in your organization, go to supercharge workshops.com that's HTTPs://forward/supercharged workshops One word with no spaces so don't suffer silently. Take that first step towards stopping your struggle today. Check out Supercharged Workshops. You said that exclusion and non belonging are not just individual things. So a lot of times in a lot of organizations a lot of money is spent in trying to fix people, make managers better at being more inclusive, make other team members be more effective in working with different people that are from different backgrounds. But one of the conversations you and I had, and we both agree on this, is that in many cases non belonging and the disconnect it's built right into the system. It's not just the individual. The system is supporting those conditions. There was an experiment that was done many years ago by a professor at Stanford University where they took a bunch of students, randomly assigned some of them as prison guards, and assigned the others to be prisoners. They put them in this school basement where the ones that were designated prisoners were locked up inside makeshift jails. And the other people who were supposed to be the prison guards were supposed to make sure that they kept order. And they had to actually terminate the experiment after a short period of time because the people that were supposed to be the guards began to act aggressively and even cruel towards some of the people that were designated as the prisoners and some of the people that were designated as prisoners began to behave in either rebelliously or submissively toward the ones that were the guards and they were picked randomly. So what came out of that experiment is that your environment and the conditions that are set up around you can have a tremendous influence on your behavior and the behavior of other people you interact with. So I just wanted to put that out there because that's something that's always fascinated me. And when you and I were talking about that, I thought back to that particular experiment. Pick up from there and tell us a little bit about how these systems might create non belonging, non inclusion, and what are some of the things that we should look for to make sure that we're addressing systems that do that.

Speaker B: Yeah, Joseph, that's an interesting example. And I think system is a big issue because in many of the organizations that I worked in or that I've partnered with, you can remove the specific people and the same situation potentially would occur again. And that, that is because it's at the back of end of it is or underneath it is something about this control, contain and compliance mindset, which is about we've got to manage this and we can't let it go too wild. As you were saying earlier, we can't make it the white way. So we are going to go the opposite extreme. And that. And sometimes that messaging gets percolated down a bureaucracy. So in handovers in how we describe problems or situations. So from an ERG perspective, what it means is that how do ergs, uh, the governance of ergs occurs? It occurs through, uh, will have a charter, it will have a terms of reference, it'll have information on an organizational website, it'll have executive sponsors and it'll have some projects. That's how most ergs work. And so we get too caught up in forms and surveys and what's in a document. And we never get into the starting mode, which is these people are busy, the leaders are busy. But also the ERG people on ergs that used to be there, they're also busy, they have other jobs. So their time is really important. They are coming with lived experience. So it's not that organization leaders are uh, here and ERG people are here. Sometimes people in ERG is also quite in high positions. But sometimes we have to create that balance which is their power and their position is their lived expertise, lived experience, their uh, living experience. So that's not down here that's has the same power and creating that power, equality or equity between erg members, chairs and organizational teams. And leadership is really important and fundamental because otherwise we treat ergs as down here that we have to manage and control. Once we shift that power dynamic, that there are people at our own very level, then we don't control and they are partners. We are uh, co designing with them, we are developing strategies with them because that's what we do when we are doing organizational strategies. So uh, a director of one team engages with the director of other team with a sense of equality and equity. But when we deal with DRGs, we see they are down below. So we've got to create that power equity so that we, there's respect, there is a sense of that we, I need your expertise. And until that is there, that systems change would always, systems thinking would always be an issue because that power inequality is embedded in the system. That's how we see ergs. Uh, and that's got to change fundamentally to get from control compliance and contain, because that's looking down at people as people on the ground and poor people. Let them just tell what they want to see and then we'll see what we do with that. Whereas the dialogue, design and drive mindset, a collaboration mindset, sees them equal, probably puts them at a stronger pedestal that we don't have that expertise, we're trying to get that expertise and that system change has to occur. I'm talking at a conceptual level, but that flows in how we talk to ergs, uh, or how much time we give, how much we let them speak in a meeting rather than telling them at a meeting. Whether we force them to say, respond in this survey form with 50 characters and 200 characters, or we say, look, come for a two hour meeting and if, if it takes longer, we'll schedule another one. And that's how that mindset drives into the functionality of how we support ergs. Uh, whether we say to them how much budget you need, or uh, we tell them you need to fill a form and a business case to justify $200. And I think it's the mindset driving that, as we said earlier, decoration versus direction. Because if you truly value somebody as a partner, value their expertise, respect their experience, you would say, what do we collectively need, you and me to drive this change? If you're working on a decorative sort of mindset, we will say, you've got five minutes in this meeting, this form to fill and we'll see you in three months when we'll do the same thing again. And we can say that we are consulting ergs. Uh, so when Somebody reads a report or something. Both are consulting ergs, but the approach is very different. And a lot of time that mindset is embedded in the system. So it's not just one person. That's how it's been always done. Until somebody says that, stop, this is not working, we need to do it differently.

Speaker A: So what you're saying is, and uh, I think you've made that point fairly well, is that you want these groups to be able to, on an even footing, share what they're actually experiencing so that we can design the systems around them so that everybody gets more done and works more effectively together. Which as, uh, we're just going in the direction of what companies want. CFOs always want proof tied to revenue, cost, productivity, mission outcomes, et cetera. But the only way to generate that in many cases, when you have some people in the organization who maybe are not as equally supported as others, is to change that support system so that they can be more effective. And when you do that, then that shows up in some of the numbers going into that business piece a little bit. In terms of what CFOs look for or organizational leaders look for, uh, what are some of the ways that you've seen ERG leaders or others generate that kind of internal evidence instead of relying on general research? What are some of those simple ways that you don't have to be a mathematical wizard or a finance person?

Speaker B: I think inclusion has to connect with business impact because otherwise it's on, uh, a sort of. For people who are not in that inclusion space, it has no footing. And what I mean by that is that ergs who are supporting and giving lived expertise are like communities and community engagement, which are telling what's happening at a community level. So it's almost like as salespeople telling a sales manager to say, look, you want to increase sales, these are the things that need to happen. The sales team has to be supported in this way. So it's the same model as to. To answer your question, what we have to do is that we. Because the EIG is regularly meet, so any staff network will have regular meetings that will discuss in a sort of confidential safe space without any leaders or managers being present, what's impacting people from a certain diversity group, whether it's cultural diversity or disability or anything else. So that experience is telling where the problems are, which they are discussing amongst themselves. And from there an erg has to pick up one or two or three specific things that they're going to tackle in this year. And then from there on they've got to partner with the organization, identify the right leaders, their executive sponsors. And I said the 3D, which is dialogue, design and drive. So the ERGA also has to demonstrate what it is expecting the organization to do. So the also has to say, okay, these are the three things we want to handle or uh, address how we're going to design the solutions, how are we going to design the change that needs to happen and how are we going to drive it? And sometimes what I have seen Joseph, is that driving from an EIG perspective is different from driving from the organization. So ERGs have to be very careful about their time because they are not the organization, they are not the business. They don't have to necessarily drive the actual change. They have to drive how their expertise is used, how they are. They have to be almost like the sensors on the ground that regularly say this is not working or that's in the right direction. But their job is not necessarily to drive it. And that's where sometimes ergs get in the trap that they want to actually do the execution and then people burn up because the ERG doesn't have the tools and resources and positionality. And it's not their job to actually drive the change, it's their job to drive the insights and it's to drive that the work is not heading in the right direction or it needs to be balanced or adjusted. I would say, uh, an example of that would be I worked with an ERG in an organization to create training on cultural diversity, including an anti racism. So that ERG was absolutely fantastic in generating the insight of what the lived experience around racism was. Lived experience around cultural inclusion diversity was where it was working, where it wasn't working. And they provided case studies, they provided video content and they were a uh, constant source of checking for me that the training or the interventions that I was designing were on the right track. So I regularly went back to them and, and it took about an year to where we designed actual training and started delivering training on cultural diversity, inclusion and anti racism. But I constantly used the ERG to tell me that I was on the right track or not. And to my team when the work got delivered. I did a lot of the work in designing and delivering the training on my team did that. But ERG is critical part at key stages to give us the insights to help us design the training and to tell us whether we are on the right track or not. And then they promoted that training. So it was a great partnership and that is the key to success of erg, it's partnership, but saying. But what needs to be driven is different for ERGs than for the organizational team. The organizational team is driving the actual change. The ERG is driving the insights and keeping that change in the right direction.

Speaker A: I love that. I think that is the mantra there that I would put up there is they're not supposed to be driving the change, they're supposed to be providing that insight that drives the change or uh, driving the insight. And I think that's a key distinction because you're talking about people that have full time jobs. So they're not going to park their full time job and go work with someone else in another department in order to affect the change, let's say in uh, marketing to help capture a bigger client base or a change in HR that's going to help the organization to lower its turnover costs and be more effective in engaging people. They don't have the time, the expertise or the power to pull those levers, but other people do. And that insight that they provide should give them what they need, the map that they need or the perspectives that they need to do that. So I love that.

Speaker B: I think where challenges and tension or things don't go in the right direction is that an organization in that process, which is taking a longer time and jump in to say we want to manage the insights. So they're trying to control, contain the insights and the, and that frustration of that causes the staff network or the ERG to overstep and they start to manage the change. And we've done what shouldn't happen, so we should, and that's where friction and burnout occurs is uh, and I've certainly been through that myself, is so we've got to understand and keep the model correct, which is the organization drives the change, the ERG drives the insight and keeps the organizational change in the right direction. And if you keep that sort of balance correct, both from the organization side and the ERG side, but that requires trust and honesty and transparency and then that will. Any ERG across the world can be very successful with that approach.

Speaker A: Absolutely. So montage, if an erg leader has 90 days to prove their value and they're listening to this, what is the one action they should take right away, uh, in order to do that? That's the first half of my question and the second half is where could our listeners reach you?

Speaker B: I think if an erg leader has 90 days, I would say firstly they've got to assess the situation before actually going into action mode. You've got to say, are we working in a control, contain and compliance mindset which is heading towards decoration as we talked earlier, are we working in a uh, dialogue, design and deliver context, which is about strategy and direction and change. The latter would recognize the systemic changes that need to occur. The first one would go towards events and activity. So you've got to assess the situation is the first thing. I think we all like events, we all like activity and events and campaigns and promotion, which is fantastic. And they do play a role in highlighting a uh, staff network, a particular diversity area. But it's the power is in taking a pause and understanding the context, talking to people. So the ERG needs to demonstrate what it be the chain that you want to be. Ah, as we say. So the change we want is we want dialogue, design and ability to drive results. So an ERG has to have the dialogue in the first 90 days. An ERG leader has to go and talk to the diversity team, the business teams, the executive sponsors, the organizational CEO and understand what context they're operating in and what systemic barriers exist in that context. And then from that design their strategy of okay, and also speak to their network and say what are the problems that the network members experience? And from those two pieces of data and information, one is from lived experience and lived expertise and one is through organizational discussions work out where they are placed and what are the two or three top priorities they're going to address. Because the challenges that you can find 10 areas of disadvantage and marginalization and try to drive change in them while you're doing another job. And if you're in the wrong context, that's a key strategy for burnout. So I think identify two or three things that they can drive with full understanding of the context. Because the starting point may be different depending on the context. Uh, in a certain context you probably will have to do just six, seven months of dialogue and discussion and awareness. In some other context you can go directly to delivery in two months on a particular change and partnering with the key organizational teams. It all depends on the context. There's no, unfortunately there is no magic formula for driving results in a time bound way. That magic formula is only in your approach and I would say start with a belonging approach. And for me belonging is what drives safety, what drives trust, what builds participation and ultimately what drives people in that network to contribute and thrive. That's the sort of continuum that you've got to say what will allow that to occur and then build a strategy of two or three very targeted, specific, measurable actions that you will partner with the organization to drive change. Well said.

Speaker A: Uh, and before we leave that, uh, one last question, which is how can people reach you?

Speaker B: So my name is Mintet Singh. I run a consultancy called BelongingCo which is based in Sydney, Australia. Website is www.belongingco.com and we partner with organizations to deliver strategic outcomes in the social and cultural inclusion space, multicultural outcomes, staff networks, anti racism, and anything to do with employee and community experience that can benefit from lived expertise and lived experience and listening and engagement.

Speaker A: Montej Singh is a belonging and inclusion strategist and the founder and principal consultant of Belonging company Montage. Thank you for joining us today on ERG Power Talk.

Speaker B: Thanks Joseph. It's a pleasure to be here and always good to talk to you.

Speaker A: Okay, so what did we learn from the second half of our conversation with with Mantage? First, look beyond individual behavior and pay attention to how the systems in your company are designed. Many of the issues your members and clients experience are not caused by one individual or person acting badly. They're caused by how the work is structured, how decisions get made, and how information moves through your organization. When you see the same problem repeating across different people in different situations, focus on the system behind it. Uh, that's where the real change can happen. Not in training people in checking off a box and leaving poorly constructed systems in place. Second, do not think of your perspectives as less important than leadership's perspectives. Don't walk into a discussion with a leader bearing the attitude and posture of someone who's bringing trivial data. The reason your ERG and you exist is to provide insight that leaders do not have access to on their own. Your lived experience gives you a view of the business and that is otherwise invisible at many senior levels. So bring your insights forward boldly with that understanding and resist the urge to soften or defer unnecessarily. As Thomas Fuller, the English clergyman, once put it, better a bitter truth than a sweet lie. Third, stay disciplined about where you focus. It is easy to identify a long list of problems, but trying to solve all of them at once will just spread your energy too thin and and lead to frustration. Choose two or three issues that clearly affect how work gets done by members of your group or how customers who share your demographic are served, and then stay focused on those until you see real movement. Fourth, understand the difference between insight and execution, and stay in your lane in the best possible way. Your responsibility is to share your insights on what is happening, explain why it matters, and help point the organization in a better direction. It is the job of the formal department owners and leaders in the organization to take action, allocate resources and implement change. When you try to carry both roles, you risk burnout and you actually reduce your own effectiveness. And finally, fifth, honestly assess the environment you're operating in right now and uh, adjust accordingly. If your ERG is only being used for visibility activities and not for meaningful input, recognize that early rather than staying stuck in low impact work. Get out of that rut. Form a non supported caucus group that meets in a restaurant like the old Xerox Black Caucus group of the 1960s. If it's a topic that you're passionate about, there you can discuss real issues and your perspectives without being constrained. Next, find senior leaders through your network of relationships who are genuinely open to hearing your insights and invest their time and energy with you where it can really make a difference. Here's what I want you to hold on to as you leave this episode. You and your members are the closest people in the organization to what is actually happening. Where work slows down. Where people who share your demographics struggle to do their best. Where customers who share your demographics get frustrated or aren't adequately served. That perspective has real value, but only when it is clearly understood and deliberately shared. Take this example. UPS did not improve performance by running more programs or calling in more consultants. They improved it by listening carefully to what their delivery drivers were experiencing every day and then using that input to redesign how routes are structured, eliminate wasted time, and improve services to their entire market across all demographics. The insights they needed already existed in their employees, and those employees found executives were smart enough to capture and use those insights. You have the same opportunity right now. You know why people leave. You know why productivity quietly drops. And you know where the company is missing something it cannot see from the top. The question is whether you're translating those observations reservations into something a leader can act on, and then finding the right channel to share your message with the right people. So here's what I invite you to do at your next ERG meeting. Bring one question to the table. What is one recurring issue that affects how, uh, our people do their work or how our customers experience us? Write, uh down what comes up. Give it some context. Connect it to something the business cares about, retention, performance, cost, customer satisfaction, etc. Then find that one business leader who you believe is genuinely open and then share it with them directly. That one conversation and transaction done well is worth more than 10 years of events and scores of speaker series and it will only take a fraction of the time. Then stand back and watch what happens because that is the power move. So I urge you to start there. Thank you for tuning in to ERG Power Talk. If you enjoyed and got value out of this program, please like us and leave a favorable review at your podcast provider site. Also invite others to listen to the show. By the way, contact me if you're looking for an ERG Symposium keynote or or a leader for your strategy workshop, New Chair Onboarding and or ERG Bootcamp. I can run these for you either in person or in a virtual setting. Also, for more great ideas and Tips for your Ergs, Get My Books Supercharge youe Ergs 18 Tips to Power up your ERG Slash BRG Strategy and the New DEI and ERG Frontier, how you and your efforts can rise and thrive in the new world of constant disruption. Both available on Amazon.com I'm Joe Santana. Thanks again for tuning in.