Erica Gabrielle Foldy

Helping without harming: the instructor's feedback dilemma in debriefing--a case study.

Introduction Simulation instructors often feel caught in a task-versus-relationship dilemma. They must offer clear feedback on learners’ task performance without damaging their relationship with those learners, especially in formative simulation settings. Mastering the skills to resolve this dilemma is crucial for simulation faculty development. Methods We conducted a case study of a debriefer stuck in this task-versus-relationship dilemma. Data: The “2-column case” captures debriefing dialogue and instructor’s thoughts and feelings or the “subjective experience.” Analysis: The “learning pathways grid” guides a peer group of faculty in a step-by-step, retrospective analysis of the debriefing. The method uses vivid language to highlight the debriefer’s dilemmas and how to surmount them. Results The instructor’s initial approach to managing the task-versus-relationship dilemma included (1) assuming that honest critiques will damage learners, (2) using vague descriptions of learner actions paired with guess-what-I-am-thinking questions, and (3) creating a context she worried would leave learners feeling neither safe nor clear how they could improve. This case study analysis identified things the instructor could do to be more effective including (1) making generous inferences about the learners’ qualities, (2) normalizing the challenges posed by the simulation, (3) assuming there are different understandings of what it means to be a team. Conclusions There are key assumptions and ways of interacting that help instructors resolve the task-versus-relationship dilemma. The instructor can then provide honest feedback in a rigorous yet empathic way to help sustain good or improve suboptimal performance in the future.

Action learning, fragmentation, and the interaction of single-, double-, and triple-loop change: A case of gay and lesbian workplace advocacy

The action-learning framework is traditionally used to summarize complex change efforts as one of three methods: single-, double-, or triple-loop. Although this summary is quite useful for some kinds of organizational analysis, it can oversimplify and thus ignore the fragmented, contradictory nature of change. This summary also implies that actionlearning methods are autonomous or even mutually exclusive: The characterization of a change effort as double-loop suggests that single- and triple-loop change did not happen. We propose an elaborated action-learning framework that decomposes action-learning method into three components: argument, practice, and outcome. This approach enables action-learning theory to illuminate the multiple facets of change and to analyze the interaction of the three methods in significant change processes. We apply this new framework to a case of gay and lesbian workplace advocacy and illustrate how different action-learning methods are woven together to create change.

A Pedagogical Model for Increasing Race-Related Multicultural Counseling Competency 1ψ7

With the increasing need for multicultural competence, questions have emerged about the appropriate classroom strategies to cultivate growth in this area. These questions have been further complicated by a growing focus on self-awareness, which has increased the affective demands of and student resistance to the material. This article proposes a pedagogical model to enhance what the authors call race-related multicultural counseling competency, which focuses on race, racism, and racial identity development. The fundamental premise is that two types of safety, psychological safety and identity safety, must be present. The authors further argue that safety requires attention to both course content and teaching processes as well as an incremental learning approach that emphasizes race-related competence as a lifelong developmental process.

Dueling Schemata Dialectical Sensemaking About Gender

Recent scholarship has shown that, despite the broad representation of women in the workplace, gender inequities in organizations remain widespread. Because gender schemas—embedded ways of thinking about men and women—contribute to this phenomenon, addressing such mental models should be a part of gender equity initiatives. This article provides data that suggest that some individuals hold within themselves quite contradictory schemas of men and of women. It then illustrates how individuals can use these internal inconsistencies to push through superficial understandings of gender to more complex ones. By facilitating this learning process in training and other kinds of organizational events, change agents can strengthen organizational efforts to achieve gender equity.

Claiming a voice on race

In this article, I reflect on how my white racial identity shaped and, in turn, was shaped by my dissertation data collection. I identify specific choices and experiences in the research interviews that were influenced by my race, using data both from my own journal as well as feedback about my interviews from two informants of color. I also trace how conducting the interviews and writing about them in my journal affected how I make meaning of my racial identity. I offer these reflections as a contribution to two conversations, both related to exploring and learning about race. First, my discussion of how being white influenced my study contributes to important dialogues about how researcher identities reverberate through the research process. Second, my consideration of the change in my racial identity suggests implications for those interested in learning from and about race. Specifically, it suggests that whites must claim a voice on race in order to contribute meaningfully to cross-racial learning.

The Space Before Action: The Role of Peer Discussion Groups in Frontline Service Provision

Studies of street-level discretion tend to focus on what influences workers’ behaviors and the consequences of their choices for advancing or compromising policy goals, but studies rarely focus on the space before action, that is, the processes through which workers make decisions and, in particular, how they deliberate with one another about practice problems within groups dedicated to improving social service delivery. Drawing from two qualitative studies of peer discussion groups, a study of teams of child welfare workers and a study of interorganizational groups composed of employment service workers, we find that workers in each setting grappled with similar types of problems but differed in their focus on specific clients or routine tasks, how they sought to legitimate their responses, and the extent to which their proposed solutions modified established approaches to practice. Our analysis suggests that features of the accountability contexts associated with the two policy fields help explain observed differences.

Something of Collaborative Manufacture: The Construction of Race and Gender Identities in Organizations

Using qualitative data, this article documents how organizations contribute to the construction of their members’ race and gender identities. Data collection took place in four organizations, from a small nonprofit to a large financial services firm. Using interactions as the unit of analysis, the author compiled and investigated a database of 114 interactions, creating a process model of how working in an organization can spotlight and change the expression of racial, ethnic, and gender identities. The article makes four contributions: It suggests a broader reach for organizational influence on individual identity, since earlier research has explored work-related identities; it distinguishes among levels of influence by isolating the discrete role of interpersonal encounters, organizational practices, and the combination of the two; it casts light on how identity construction happens even without intentional effort by individuals or organizations; and it illustrates the importance of modest changes in the construction of identity.

Reimagining Cultural Competence: Bringing Buried Dynamics Into the Light

Many organizations attempt to increase cultural competence as one way to foster organizational change to enhance equity and inclusion. But the literature on cultural competence is largely silent on the role of emotion, despite the strong feelings that inevitably accompany work in cross-racial dyads, groups, and institutions. We offer group relations theory as an approach rooted in the importance of emotions, especially anxiety, and offering a rich awareness of how unconscious processes, including defense mechanisms like splitting and projection, drive that anxiety. We show how this approach helps us both diagnose and address difficult dynamics, including by recognizing entrenched power inequities. We draw on examples from others’ research as well as our own research, teaching, and consulting to illustrate key concepts. Ultimately, we argue that buried emotions can create distance and inhibit change. Surfacing and addressing them can foster connection and provide a way for organizations to move forward.

From first-person inquiry to second-person dialogue: A response to the European-American Collaborative Challenging Whiteness

I want to begin by saying how much I appreciate the time and attention given to my article by the European-American Collaborative Challenging Whiteness (hereafter referred to as the Collaborative). This kind of mindful reflection on one’s work is invaluable. I have learned both from the Collaborative’s recognition, in my article, of their own experiences, as well as their forthrightness in naming what they see as missing. And I welcome the opportunity to continue a dialogue with other whites who are thoughtfully and reflexively considering the impact and role of whiteness – their whiteness – in the world. From my reading, the Collaborative raises three areas in which more dialogue would be useful. First, they express a desire for more data about how I was seen by my informants of color. They use that point to raise broader questions about validity: How can I, as a white person, know what is not being said by my informants of color? How can I be sure that my informants were candid with me, given the ‘strong taboos that prohibit revealing oneself . . . to the white world’? Second, they point out that my dissertation research was not emancipatory or mutual: it was a relatively traditional qualitative design, with a clear demarcation between researcher and researched. Finally, they raise the concept of ‘critical humility’ and the spirit of inquiry in doing this work. I will address each of these areas in turn. Action Research

Permeable borders: How understanding conflict in research teams can enhance understanding conflict in work teams

Most often, as researchers, we study conflict “out there”—we study research subjects or participants (whether in dyads, teams, organizations, communities, or societies) and assess the level and kind of conflict, its precursors and consequences, and the like. We usually avoid examining conflict “in here,” among ourselves the researchers, though of course we experience it regularly (see Bartunek & Rynes, 2016, this volume). Rarely do we explore how our own conflict can potentially enhance the validity of our findings, helping us dig down to the deeper dynamics lying below the surface.