How do you define a list of inclusive terminology?

[Carlos Garcia Navarro]

In the last years  inclusive terminology has become a main topic and many companies and teams are making sure that non-inclusive terms are removed from our vocabulary. But how do you define what terms are non-inclusive? Some are very clear, but others seem less. I've seen some groups replacing the terms 'stand-up' or 'all-hands' while other groups still use them. There doesn't seem to be a standard. What are your thoughts? How do your teams make sure we tackle all the non-inclusive terminology that must go? Thanks!

[Mykenna Cepek]

Great topic, @Carlos Garcia Navarro! I'm looking forward to reading about how folks are helping their teams level-up their wording and express acceptance in their everyday language.

[Sedera Randria]

Hi @Carlos Garcia Navarro 

I would like to share some thoughts : 

• It seems that translators of the Scrum Guide are not allowed to translate some specific terms such as Scrum, Daily Scrum, Sprint Review, Scrum Master, etc.
• If we replace "Daily Scrum" with something else, "Sprint Planning" with something else, "Scrum Master" with something else and so on, - even if it's to be more inclusive or to be aligned with a local context - until what point do we still consider the Scrum Guide as a reference?
• SAFe uses "Daily Stand-up" and "Iteration Planning". IMHO, precisely to mark a difference with Scrum

Curious to read next comments :-)

[Mykenna Cepek]

The good news is that the Scrum Guide doesn't actually contain the term "stand-up". So no concerns there.

Some clarification on the context of this discussion might help. The term "stand-up" can be considered non-inclusive because a team member who uses a wheelchair might literally not be able to stand up.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that terms like Scrum, Sprint Review, Scrum Master, and Iteration Planning be replaced. The focus of this discussion is on terms known to be exclusionary for certain groups of people.

The original post used "stand-up" and "all-hands" as examples, with the latter being problematic for those who may have lost an arm.

One of the most common examples I've seen is the use of "guy" or "guys" to refer to people in general, which disregards female and non-binary folks. As a female, I notice the use of this term each and every time. I liked this article of a company that approached this head-on.

As an LGBTQ woman in IT, I promise you that we have quite some ground to cover - as an industry - to help ensure that everyone around us feels included in the workplace through our use of everyday language.

I hope that helps clarify the intention of this thread. We're looking at the broad set of words, terms and phrases that we currently use that would (often unintentionally) feel exclusionary to some of our coworkers.

[Samie Kaufman - Your Gal at Gliffy]

One thing I would flag is that inclusive terminology and peoples' preferences can change over time — and we need to be flexible for our communities and workplaces accordingly.

My youngest sister is severely disabled and so I have always advocated for person-first language ("people with disabilities" instead of "disabled people"). However, I have learned in the past few years that many people diagnosed with Autism prefer to be referred to simply as Autistic and think of this as a core part of their identity. I will always defer to these types of preferences, even if it's not how reflective of how my own family speaks about my little sister and her needs.

For teams and workplaces, I think this example means that we need to consistently work to create psychological safety. That safety allows people to share and express their personal preferences or kindly educate others. It also allows people to learn and grow without shame.

Our priority can't just be to "check the box" and remove all the language we see as exclusionary today. Reviewing your policies and documentation is a good place to start, but the more important work is really cultural! If you have a team where inclusiveness is valued and your teammates feel safe, you'll figure out what terminology and phrases do and don't work simply by continuing to collaborate and support one another.

[Britta Neugebauer _yasoon_]

I strongly agree with you, @Samie Kaufman - Your Gal at Gliffy: 

Inclusive terminology and peoples' preferences can change over time — and we need to be flexible for our communities and workplaces accordingly.

As a mainly German speaking company, we are faced with exclusionary aspects of the German language. That's why we have a Confluence page for our brand book, on which we collect links and resources on how to find a smooth way to speak and write inclusively. This page is updated regularly.

[Samie Kaufman - Your Gal at Gliffy]

I do like the idea of having a dedicated (and updated!) page for these things. I feel like that creates a clear way to share resources with teammates. :) 

[Malka Jackson _Isos Technology_]

Wow, I need to do some personal work. As a wheelchair user, I didn't even catch "Daily Standup" as an issue. SMH 

[Ankush Bora]

Thanks @Carlos Garcia Navarro on this one. Eye-opening for me.

TIL that 'all hands' & 'stand ups' are non-inclusive. Rather had an uncanny realization that unintended bias is always lurking in the shadows.