Part A
Companies that fail to embrace Diversity including Disability, as a core business issue,are simply missing the point.
Sir Peter Bonnfield, CEO. British Telecom Plc
Disability confidence is about balance, perspective and organisational commitment in relation to the practical and attitudinal inclusion of Disability as a bona fide aspect of Diversity and its intrinsic role within the entire organisation.
It can very quickly be seen how compatible Disability is with traditional perceptions of Diversity. Typical Diversity in this context is almost always associated with race and gender (alone) however.
The point though is less about the similarity between Disability and traditional Diversity, but rather that for either to succeed, a perspective of how it impacts on all aspects and components of an organisation, is essential. In addition, it’s about who gets involved and how much do they know.
Background
In South Africa (SA), particularly since the Employment Equity Act (1998) highlighted by the reflected glow of the Constitution Disability inequality was largely perceived and dealt with as a labour and employment issue. The bulk of activity, since then has been directed at reducing unemployment of persons with Disabilities (PWDs).
As a result, notwithstanding the considerable effort that has been invested in the preparation of numerous Codes, guidelines and White papers, the fact remains that very limited legislative muscle exists that can be directly deployed to facilitate the holistic progress of Disability inclusion, and none that is explicitly geared for this goal.
That which does exist includes but is not limited to:
- The Constitution and the Bill of Rights 1996
- The Employment Equity Act 1998
- The Promotion of Equality and prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 2000
- The National Building Regulations 1986 (currently being revised).
- The Code of Good Practice and Technical Assistance Guide; on the employment of Persons with Disabilities. (these two guides are not legislation however but simply serve to aid and clarify)
- Lastly, the two principle White Papers that exist, and which are explicitly dedicated to Disability are;
- White Paper 6 covering Inclusive Education, with limited reference to Higher Education,
- Integrated National Disability Strategy, (intended as both a guide and tool to support increased employment of, and to some degree, service to, PWDs, within Government structures.
As tempting as it is to perceive this battery of anti-discrimination “legislation” as being the whole answer to holistic Disability integration, it sadly is not, as it lacks, for the time being the consistency, compatibility and breadth of scope required to genuinely ensure successful and equitable Disability integration in SA.
However, as sobering as the above points are, they do provide a valuable insight into one of the principle components required in establishing Disability Confidence; an understanding of the Legislative case.
The Need for Disability Confidence
It is precisely because of the limitations and unbalanced perspective shown above, that most convincingly illustrate the need for Disability Confidence. Even had the countries legislative portfolio been more holistic and better equipped, it would not have provided the whole solution.
The tendency that exists in most organisations, not just in South Africa but globally, when faced with the challenge of addressing Disability integration is to gravitate towards the Human resources solution and focus or fixate on that sector to achieve what is too commonly understood to be an employment issue.
However Disability confidence is the appreciation and balance of three primary perspectives and which need to be viewed in concert, viz;
- The Human Rights perspective, knowing the facts and realities of Disability,
- The Legislative perspective, compliance and understanding the law pertaining Disability,
- The Business Case perspective, motivation and consequence.
These perspectives when viewed in turn, ought to impact and influence every activity that make up any functioning organisation.
An Institution of Higher Learning is naturally made up of essentially the same anatomy with certain variations for faculty.
These components could be categorised and condensed to include:
- Human Resource management
- Employment and Placement
- Skills Development
- Retention
- Operations Management
- Policies and procedures
- Facilities
- Procurement
- Marketing and sales
- Image and PR
- Social investment
- Community projects
- Grants and Funding
- Bursaries
- Scholarships
- Service delivery
- Teaching
- Lecture and Lab facilities
- Libraries
- Residences
- Sports and recreation
- Student services, support, wellness
Disability Confident Higher Education
If one overlays the above organisational categories and functions with the three perspectives of ‘Disability Diversity’ as one would examine something through a lens, one can clearly and strategically identify, evaluate and execute performance criteria across the organisational spectrum thus achieving balance and ensuring an holistic outcome..
The Table below serves to illustrate the kind of analysis and scope one can expect from taking a strategic approach to ensuring that an institution of Higher Learning becomes Disability Confident…
The examples provided are not intended to be exhaustive or definitive and are posed as questions to encourage reflection.
| Organisational Function | Facts, Reality Human Rights Case | Compliance and Application of the Legislative Case | Motivation and Consequences of The Business Case |
| Human Resources – Employment – Retention – Skills Development | How many PWDs employed? What levels/functions? Are PWDs open to apply for any positions? Is training accessible to all? Are our executives, management and staff equipped to serve staff, visitors and students who are PWDs? | How well are we performing on Employment Equity? Do our existing positions filled demonstrate equitable placement? Do our learnerships and training conform to EEA and Skills Act requirements? | Are PWDs attracted to WANT to work there? Is the skills development programme recognised as being Disability friendly? Is long service and retention rewarded with development? Can we recognise that the accommodations made will benefit others? |
| Operations – Administration – Policies and Procedures – Facilities – Procurement – Sales and Marketing – Image and PR | Are we sure that our policies and procedures are not discriminatory? How accessible are our facilities for staff, visitors and students? | Are our policies etc, compliant with EEA expectations? Do our facilities comply with National Building Regulations? Are we vulnerable to prosecution via the “Equality” Act | Are our procedures, e.g.; enrolment, accounts, loan application, website etc, transparently Accessible? Does the access of our faculty and operational facilities, attract or deter potential staff, funders, visitors or students? |
| Social Investment – Community Projects – Funding – Bursaries – Scholarships | Does our Community activity include relevant and meaningful focus on Disability issues? Are our funding and bursary opportunities reflective of the reality of Disability in Society? | Are our bursaries and scholarships equitable and free of discrimination? Are application and registration procedures accessible? | Does our existing social investment aimed at Disability show a return on investment? Do we use our bursaries and scholarships to actively increase our numbers of students and future staff who are PWDs |
| Service Delivery – Teaching – Lecture/lab facilities – Libraries – Sport & Recreation – Residential life – Career Planning – Support and Wellness | Do we teach enough PWDs? Are enough of our faculty staff PWDs? Are we mindful of needs and challenges when providing facilities and services to students? | Are our facilities for teaching, research, studying, etc, and compliant with National Building Regs or OHS? Are we vulnerable to threat from the “Equality” Act or EEA? | Do we project a world class accessible image that will attract PWDs who may be students, visitors, teachers or potential staff? Can we recognise that a Disability Confident Campus attracts ‘business’ through fees, funding and presents an attractive image. |
Part B
Achieving Disability Confidence, collaboration and Best Practice
Access is a relative term
Compared with a campus whose authorities have neither the willingness, know how or inclination to embrace the fact that PWDs have the need, the right and the ability to be educated beyond secondary school; even a marginally accessible institution is attractive.
It is in this context that one must consider the status quo of South African higher education facilities and appreciate the differences and reasons for the range.
Background
It is useful to touch on some of the fundamentals of Disabilities existence, and the way it was perceived in society until, to some degree, fairly recently, it began to change.
Initially, Disability was viewed from the stance of the “Medical Model” which basically saw Disability as a biological aboration, and which was the primary “cause” of the difficulties the PWD had in accessing most of societies amenities.
Civil rights pressure and changing international stances toward Disability over the last 30 years led to an ambitious shift in concept. The Social Model moves away from the view that Disability was the individuals ‘problem’; towards the notion that it is societies inaccessibility both attitudinally and physically that renders a persons impairment disabling.
It is this concept that is both exciting and a challenge to every organisation imaginable as it forces role-players to move (often unwillingly) from “unconscious ignorance”; to “conscious ignorance”, which is an essential migration if change is to occur.
Shifting Trends
It is immediately apparent when researching institutions of higher learning that there is an increase in activity toward accommodating PWDs at campuses internationally. The scope of this brief does not warrant an exhaustive list, but suffice to say, Disability is on the map. One is hard pressed to find examples where it is not.
As tempting as it is to critically compare international advances in this area to South Africa’s own attempts of more inclusive Higher education, cognisance must be paid to our unique Post Apartheid socio economic reality.
Having said that, there is little doubt that Disability, certainly from a student perspective, has begun to raise its head increasingly, to be counted in more and more campuses around the country.
Beginnings of cooperation
In conversations with individuals involved in several existing and fledgling “Disability units at Universities around the country, stories of cooperation were emerging. A recent national symposium of “Disability Units from many Universities was held for the first time in Gauteng in August 2007. Higher Education Disability Associations of Southern Africa (HEDASA) promises an exciting and energetic new resource in the Higher Education community. It is simply too early to predict or evaluate activity as their inaugural meeting is being held in late October 2007.
By all accounts, it appears that service to both students and staff with Disabilities is high on the agenda.
Limited collaboration
Little evidence could be found of collaboration between campuses, regarding the integration of PWDs within those institutions, outside of the aforementioned Disability unit activity, and some initiatives of the CHEC. However, at a strategic level, it appeared that most institutions operate in relative independence in terms of holistic Disability inclusion.
Although no in-depth investigation was undertaken amongst overseas Universities, some observations were made.
In on going email conversations with a variety of American academics involved in Diversity, transformation and Disability studies, mostly in California, it appeared that little actual “collaboration” existed outside of normal cross campus academic intercourse. The bulk of the insight gained, had to do with “Disability Studies”; as a discipline, as opposed to a resource to facilitate actual Disability inclusion.
Another observation made was that, with the existence of “strong anti discrimination law, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act ADA 1991), preventing discrimination, it was believed that much of the problem was solved. Certainly the impression gained was that those Campuses were particularly Disability friendly from both a student and teaching point of view.
This was vividly demonstrated, when I was attending a lecture by a visiting University of California academic last year. On seeing my white cane while I was waiting for the talk to begin, he approached and asked, how, seeing that he was going to be using slides that were; “germain to the presentation”, he could best ensure that I missed as little as possible. This simple act, for me, personified “Disability Confidence.
Some Collaboration and Best Practice
In 1995 the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) was promulgated in the UK. This law proved to be a far reaching and impact agent for significant progress in Disability integration in every sector of society.
Like every other industry, Higher education facilities had no choice but to comply with this unambiguous Law. Its clarity and balance, covering PWD inclusion as staff and customer (student) alike, made it hard to lose perspective in priority.
At the same time the emergence and rapid growth of an independent organisation, known as the Employers Forum on Disability, became, arguably, one of the world’s largest examples of collaboration amongst employers with the express purpose of building “Disability Confidence”.
Of its more than 400 member organisations, amounting to over 25% of the UK workforce, 15 members are made up of Universities and higher education institutions.
Briefly, this collaborative organisation after 17 years and R200 million of member investment has made demonstrable progress in the advancement of Disability confident organisations throughout the UK. What is significant is that all initiatives are conceived, funded and launched through collaborative effort. These include a plethora of resources to facilitate the creation of Disability confidence within organisations, from tools promoting accessible corporate websites, to users guides of how to serve customers with Disabilities and employ and accommodate disabled staff. It is the world’s largest publisher of Disability integration material. Most significant is the level of executive participation and commitment, which is almost certainly the key to its success.
Best Practice of Disability Confidence
It must be pointed out that at face value most Universities in the UK, to some degree demonstrate some overt interest in Disability as a viable aspect of their market share. This is certainly to some extent, due to the encouragement of the DDA. Also, as has been shown, a number of institutions of Higher Learning were influenced by their association with the Employers Forum on Disability.
One such University that emerged as being particularly Disability confident, certainly on “paper”, was University of Bradford, in Yorkshire, UK.
Situated within a particularly diverse community with a strong Sub Continent influence, Bradford University boasts a higher than average racial diversity among its 10 000 Students and nearly 2000 staff.
But what strikes one straight away is the attention to detail to include and accommodate Disability in every facet of its operation and image.
An extract from their “Disability Equality Scheme” provides insight into this.
“Welcome to our Disability Equality Scheme, which in part upholds our core value of ‘Confronting inequality, celebrating diversity’.
This document sets out how the University will make sure that it promotes equality for disabled staff and students, and addresses discrimination. We are committed to ensuring that people are treated equitably regardless of their disability. This Scheme articulates how we plan to achieve this whilst establishing an environment free of unfair discrimination.
It is at the heart of the University of Bradford’s Widening Participation, Achievement and Social Inclusion policy that we make reasonable adjustments to facilitate learning, employment and encourage participation in University life for all who come to work or study with us. This includes people who might not necessarily identify themselves as disabled, but who nevertheless face discrimination in their everyday life because of their impairment. “
Far from being an example of typical lip service “spin” that one so often encounters in matters of Diversity, this statement demonstrates a subtle appreciation of the challenge and complexity of the situation.
The “scheme”, then goes on to identify and unpack in great detail, all components of their promise and commitment.
This included highlighting the evolution of the process which, essentially began with consultative forums, ranging from Disability stakeholders to disabled Alumni and current students and of course staff with Disabilities. These were held in addition to ongoing Diversity and Equality committees chaired by senior University role-players.
It then deals with access and the steps taken to address the barriers beginning with a state of the art access audit of all facilities.
Collaboration was begun with other Universities. The West Yorkshire Higher Education Equality and Diversity Working Group were established. “The group had a primary aim of collaborating on the development of individual Disability Equality Schemes. The group has subsequently developed into a forum for exploring wider diversity issues, sharing good practice and for ensuring that disability issues are included and integral to the Equality and Diversity agenda.”
The scope of this project does not permit a too detailed description of all the intensions and activities that encompass Disability at this University, but suffice to say, that it continues in similar vein. Highlights include:
- A comparative analysis of the numbers of Disabled students over a three year timeframe
- A similar analysis of staff with Disabilities.
- A breakdown of the most common Disabilities prevalent amongst Students.
- An extremely detailed performance management breakdown highlighting deliverables, and achievable expectations in an all inclusive Disability strategy.
- A clear balance score card mechanism for ensuring delivery, commitment and outcome.
Conclusion
There is little doubt that Bradford must be counted as an outstanding example of what we call a “disability Confident” institution of higher learning.
Much of the data above was corroborated in an interview with the CEO of the Employers Forum on Disability, Susan Scott Parker.
In conclusion, one or two key points must be reiterated.
- Without the “political will”, overtly and faithfully demonstrated by Executives of institutions of Higher Learning, little progress can be expected.
- Unless Diversity including Disability, is intrinsically woven into the entire organisational fabric, spanning both faculty and operations, Diversity or Disability confidence cannot be achieved
Sources.
It was never intended to treat this paper as a high-level research project or to present it as such. Research and enquiry was predominantly carried out by telephone, Skype call and email. Internet research and numerous books articles and sundry material gleaned over the last seven years added to the mix, but cannot be easily attributed. Lastly our own research and activity, including 300 interviews, 500 access audits and 350 Disability Awareness training programmes provided a solid ideological and practical foundation.
Some willing participants included:
- Prof David Theo Goldberg, University of California
- Prof Melissa Stein, Diversity Studies UCT
- Reinette Popplestone, Director Disability Unit UCT
- Emma Coop, Disability unit UCT
- Susan Scott Parker, CEO Employers Forum on Disability.
- University of Bradford. www.bradford.ac.uk
- Employers Forum on Disability. http://www.employers-forum.co.uk