The Diversity Executive recently posted an article by trainer Susana Rinderle called Cultural Competence: What’s in a Name?. Rinderle suggests that the term “cultural competence” is new to the diversity world (the term has actually been used since at least the 60’s!) and is inadequate for two reasons: (1) It implies an end point or a check box. Neither exists when it comes to effective communication across differences. Providing the best, most appropriate services to a variety of people and populations is a moving target — fluid, contextual and evolving. (2) Second, “cultural” is vague. For many, culture is proxy for race just like diverse often means people of color.
I could not disagree more! Competence does not represent an end point at all. I do agree with the author’s contention that competence is a moving target, ever evolving. Therefore competence is an “ongoing learning process”. Just like most other fields require practitioners to update their skills, so it should be with the diversity, inclusion and cultural competence field. The author’s second point that the term “cultural” is vague is simply a cop out. Any term can be vague if it is not clearly defined. One of the objections we often hear about the term “diversity” is that it is vague, not clearly defined and a “proxy for race”. We cannot continue to use the excuse that because these terms do not have a consistent definition, we should stop using them. The term “culture” has widely accepted definitions that are not limited to race.
Rinderle goes on to recommend alternative terms such as crosscultural dexterity, intercultural effectiveness (preferred by the author), and cultural responsiveness. In my way of thinking in order to be dexterous, effective or responsive to other cultures, one must be competent. The author admits that effectiveness requires three things— awareness, knowledge and skills. Isn’t that the definition of competence?
Another term that I hear more today is cultural intelligence, which I also do not like because it suggests a fixed state.
Noted interculturalist Janet Bennett offers that “cultural competence” refers to competence about a single culture. Intercultural competence often refers to the ability to communicate appropriately/effectively in a variety of cultural contexts. Some use transcultural, which has that transcendent quality to it.
Please, let’s stop debating the terms and start doing the work of promoting deep cultural self and other awareness that will enable us to effectively bridge across differences in ways that enhance interpersonal relationships and desired organizational outcomes.
