Inclusion Isn't Culture-less: Why It Needs Context

Boracay, Philippines

DEI Content Isn’t Universal

Most of the DEI frameworks and educational resources that are widely shared are written in English by North American and Western-European researchers for domestic workplaces. These materials often assume cultural norms and workplace behaviours familiar to those contexts, making them less effective — or even misleading — in other environments.

Content, terminology, and pedagogical approaches that feel natural in one context can unintentionally create barriers in another. I learned this firsthand in my previous role leading a global Anti-Racism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion team. One of many lessons came during a visit to our Kenya office, when a local colleague shared that “race” wasn’t the primary social identity in their context — tribal identity was. Our team’s name unintentionally signalled we weren’t there to serve their reality, highlighting how English-centric, Western DEI language can miss the mark in global contexts.

Dr. Ernest Gundling and Dr. Cheryl Williams, in their book Inclusive Leadership, Global Impact, underline this point: inclusion efforts sometimes fail not because they lack good ideas, but because their language, methods, and assumptions are ethnocentric.

Leading Inclusively Across Cultures

Cultural intelligence, intercultural effectiveness, cultural competence, cultural agility — the labels vary, and authors will emphasize the particular merits of each one, but ultimately, they point to the same capacity: the ability to adapt, engage, and thrive in culturally diverse settings.

Applied to inclusion, culturally intelligent practices aren’t just about applying DEI principles; they’re about adapting them to the cultural tendencies of the team or organization.

Leaders who are culturally intelligent adjust their communication, leadership, and problem-solving to fit diverse contexts instead of defaulting to models learned elsewhere (often at a distant headquarters). In the same way, they tailor their approaches to building inclusive workplaces.

Global DEI from Theory to Practice

Early in my work on global DEI learning, I assumed inclusion practices could be broadly applied. Indeed, the research shows that across geographies and industries, feeling included is a critical driver of engagement and matters everywhere.

However, as I moved from theory to practice and started working in a global organization, I began to notice patterns: leaders who tried to be inclusive but failed to adapt their approaches to local contexts, DEI training programs developed in one context without accounting for the realities of other contexts, and global team members who disengaged because the content had clearly not been developed with them in mind — all of this ultimately led to programs being labeled as ineffective.

This wasn’t abstract theory; it was seeing employees feel frustrated, unseen, or disconnected when DEI initiatives were implemented as if everyone’s experience was the same, rather than grounded in their cultural context.

DEI Trends in Asia: What I’ve Seen and What Research Shows

Living in Asia has reinforced this insight. Inclusion models originating in Western contexts rarely translate seamlessly here. DEI leaders in the region are adapting frameworks to local realities rather than importing global templates wholesale.

The 2024 Navigating Tomorrow: Workplace Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Trends in Asia report by INCLUDE Consulting highlights how organizations across Asia are reshaping DEI in response to labour market challenges, changing employee expectations, and the urgency of attracting and retaining diverse talent. Inclusion is increasingly recognized as essential — however, as the authors of the report recommend, businesses in Asia must adopt a regional approach to DEI if they hope to see meaningful progress in diversity and inclusion.

Not a “Soft Skill” — A Strategic Capability

Cultural intelligence isn’t a “soft skill.” (Fun aside: In his book Hidden Potential, Adam Grant notes that the term “soft skill” was coined by military psychologists to describe skills not related to weapons training — essentially, skills that weren’t “hard.” Psychologists later suggested the term be changed, because leadership, communication, and judgment were anything but soft.)

It’s both a strategic imperative and essential to getting inclusion right, which as research shows, further magnifies the gains that culturally intelligent leadership creates. Leaders and organizations with strong intercultural competence achieve smoother cross-regional collaboration, build more effective global leadership pipelines, reduce costly breakdowns during change, and strengthen engagement across borders.

What This Means for Inclusion Work

Here’s what I’ve learned: inclusion doesn’t fail because the principles themselves are wrong. Sometimes it flops because it’s preached but not practiced (employees notice), or because leaders don’t fully put their weight behind it (employees notice this too). And too often — especially in global contexts — it fails because it's applied generically. Inclusion only works when it’s thoughtfully adapted to the people, the culture, and the context it’s meant to serve.

Key Takeaway

Culturally intelligent inclusion isn’t an add-on — it’s critical to making inclusion work, especially in global, multicultural environments. Leaders who flex across cultures don’t just execute strategy effectively; they ensure inclusion efforts actually resonate with the people on their teams.

Next week, in the final article of this series, I’ll turn to the question I get asked most often:

What does this actually look like in practice?

(This article originally appeared on my LinkedIn on December 23, 2025.)