Enough being tough

Enough of the advice on how to be tough and cope with the heat in the kitchen.

We should seek not only who are strong and can take the abuse. People who are sensitive, caring, quiet, delicate, they all have something to contribute to the diversity.

We should celebrate not only those who have triumphed over adversity. Some people are weaker and less abled as a result of what the world did to them, perhaps as children. They’re still valuable people with a contribution to make.

Others had to drop out, to take time to heal, and are coming back. We need to welcome them, not ask where they’ve been.

My hangup is with the inference or expectation that resilience is a personal responsibility. It’s not. It’s up to all of us as a community to help and support each other. I know that’s not very American but for many other cultures it’s normal.
The problem is that the US “rugged individualism” and Friedmanist extractive exploitation have infected management thinking, especially the MBA sect. Employees are gaslighted into thinking it’s all on them to survive when it’s not. It’s up to the organisation as a whole and everyone in it to create an environment where the strong and the weak can all flourish and grow, where we can all be our best and make our contribution. We can love and care for each other. Just like civilised societies.

The culture comes from the top. The executive set the tone, and they in turn are driven by the values demanded by the owners and governors.
It’s up to everyone, all colleagues, to create the environment collectively.
It’s even possible for the group as a whole to demand better values, though it’s usually crushed by the power centre if it’s not sympathetic. If those in power are open, change can be very fast even when driven from “below”. It never ceases to astonish me how quickly our clients change when coached that brutality isn’t the only management model.