Inclusive Language: What Is It and How Does It Impact My Workplace?

25
Jan 2022
341
A group of people are standing around a sign that says `` she , it , we , he , they ''.

Author : The Medicine Hat Champter Committee

It’s 2022, the world around us is constantly changing, and not all changes are caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic. Inclusive language is a prominent example. While some organizations have taken steps to release guidelines or expectations to employees or students, others appear indifferent. Is there a right and a wrong to this discussion? Is it better to assume employees will apply the principles of respect, or does the topic require a more directive approach? Unfortunately, there is no perfect answer, and our society will likely misfire more than once trying to get to the right approach.

The term “preferred pronouns” has become part of our everyday language. For example, there has been a marked increase in people including their pronouns in email signatures and when introducing themselves in meetings. Of course, some feel these efforts are unnecessary. Still, when receiving an email from someone with an androgynous name like “Ashley,” it helps to read that Ashley prefers he/his/him before assuming the sender is female.

Gender-neutral language is becoming the standard for policies and other workplace documents. The Department of Justice 1 explains that “[g]ender neutrality is important when writing about people because it is more accurate – not to mention respectful.” “It is also professionally responsible and is mandated by the Federal Plan for Gender Equality , which was approved by the Cabinet…in 1995.” Therefore, gender-neutral language is not new; it has just taken over 25 years for workplaces to comply.

For example, how often have you heard these phrases in your everyday work interactions? “Good job, guys,” “ladies and gentlemen,” “Grandfathered,” and “what’s your maiden name?” These terms are used regularly and often without thinking. They are patterns of language that we may not even be aware we are using. 

It’s a good idea to take a moment and think about all the times in our day where we might be using terms that perhaps are exclusive, micro-aggressive, or even downright offensive. 

Using acronyms can also be a way of excluding others. Some individuals may not understand the context, and acronyms may be used to create an “in-crowd.” Consider how you felt when you were new to your role. Acronyms were likely being used, and you had no idea what others were saying. Until you did. When using acronyms, think about others that may not understand the term and explain it long-hand. There may even be some longer-term employees who are afraid to ask and don’t understand the acronyms.

Inclusive language goes beyond emails and face-to-face interactions. How long has it been since you reviewed your organization’s documentation for inclusive language compliance? You might be surprised by how much still contains gender-based language or phrases that indicate gender bias. Are you using terms and references that not everyone understands? For example, do your documents refer to older adults as “the elderly”? What about “man-hours”? Are your dress codes outdated? Is your organization’s documentation gender-neutral and fair, does it account for religious and cultural dress, and is it compliant and inclusive of protected grounds? The language we use is not intended to exclude a person or a group, but it may have that effect. Inclusive language avoids offensive and negative expressions and shapes a supportive culture and healthy communications.

Beyond organizational mandates, inclusive language is about caring enough for others to avoid marginalization. In the worst form, we marginalize when we demean others or use inflammatory language that offends someone at their core. For example, a Medicine Hat Chapter Committee member states, “in 2020, I began wearing a mask prior to the mask mandate because a friend was concerned for her health. Listening to and respecting what she and others were experiencing provided the motivation to help lessen their risk.” Similarly, avoiding demeaning language, whether intentional or not, shows respect. We won’t be perfect in our efforts but starting with ourselves is the critically important first step.


1 “Legistics – Gender-neutral Language.” Department of Justice , 1 Jun. 2020. www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/legis-redact/legistics/p1p15.html . Accessed 7 Dec. 2021.



The views and opinions expressed in this blog post belong solely to the original author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of CPHR Alberta.


The views and opinions expressed in this blog post belong solely to the original author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of CPHR Alberta.



By Jessica Jaithoo August 21, 2026
Each year on August 26th, Women’s Equality Day offers an opportunity to reflect on progress toward gender equity while recognizing the work that remains. While legislative milestones have helped create a more equitable foundation, the lived experiences of women in today’s workplaces tell a more nuanced story. To explore this further, we invited a group of women leaders to share their perspectives on equality in practice, the barriers that persist, and the actions needed to drive meaningful change. Their responses highlight both the progress made and the opportunities ahead. Contributors: Chelsea Harper, Director of Human Resources, Stoppler Hughes Christine Dagenais, Founder and CEO, Bright Wire Leadership Development Connie De Ciancio, Chief Commercial Officer, Strathcona Resources Michelle Dulmadge, Executive Vice President Human Resources, Surerus Murphy Rosy Makkar-Sethi, Portfolio Head of HR, Volaris Group Sabrina Brock, Vice President Human Resources, TriSummit Utilities Inc. To guide the discussion, we asked each contributor to reflect on three questions: What does women’s equality truly mean to you in today’s professional or leadership context, beyond formal policies or stated commitments? From your experience, what structural or cultural barrier continues to limit women’s advancement, and where do you see the greatest opportunity for progress? What is one action by leaders or organizations that can meaningfully advance women’s equality, and why does it matter now? Across responses, women’s equality was described not just as a policy outcome, but as a lived experience of fairness, recognition, and opportunity. As Chelsea shared: “It requires acknowledging that women have historically been conditioned differently in the workplace and society. The goal is to build workplaces where women are valued, compensated, and developed equitably enough that gender eventually becomes irrelevant to the conversation.” Connie emphasized fairness in assessment: “It is when people are genuinely assessed on their capability, judgment, performance, and leadership potential, not on assumptions or labels. It is not about lowering the bar or advancing someone because of gender; it is about making sure the best person has a fair opportunity to step forward and be recognized.” Sabrina reflected: “It is the experience of truly feeling valued for who you are as a professional and as a leader, where gender is not a topic of conversation. It also means being surrounded by more women in senior leadership roles due to equal access to stretch roles, equivalent tolerance for risk-taking, and performance judged by the same standards.” Despite progress for women in the workplace, certain barriers remain and are often invisible to those who have not experienced it. Chelsea reinforces the deeper context behind these challenges: “A true commitment to women’s equality requires acknowledging that history and understanding how deeply it still impacts confidence, negotiation, leadership presence, and career progression today.” Rosy names it directly: “A persistent barrier I continue to see is the reliance on subjective notions of leadership potential, often shaped by familiarity and unconscious bias. In my experience, this disproportionately impacts women, and even more so women of colour, whose strengths and leadership styles may not align with the traditional model. I have seen how this can limit access to opportunity despite clear capability and performance.” Subjectivity, when left unchecked, defaults to familiarity. Familiarity tends to favour the dominant group even when it is not intentional. This habit will continue to be consequential in the workplace. Sabrina offers a common example of how this bias shows up in practice: “If the behaviour is assertiveness, men may be seen as strong, confident, decisive leaders; however, when a woman behaves that way, they may be seen as aggressive, difficult, or abrasive.” The good news: Michelle calls for organizational accountability. “When equity is treated as a business discipline, not just a values statement, it becomes measurable and sustainable.” Christine adds the human dimension: “Real progress happens when women stop waiting for permission and start taking their seat at the table and when men in leadership actively sponsor and advocate for women, not simply as a diversity initiative, but because it strengthens teams and organizations.” Together, they point to the same truth: meaningful advancement requires both systemic intention and individual confidence. These examples are not seeking for exception, but consistency. Women want to be seen clearly, assessed fairly, and given the same opportunities to rise, or stumble, that their peers receive without having to ask. Building on this, one theme emerged clearly in how contributors see progress taking shape: the importance of sponsorship. Respondents highlighted the impact of leaders actively advocating for capable colleagues - particularly those who may not yet recognize their own potential or have had opportunities to demonstrate it. Rosy emphasizes the role of leadership influence, noting that “When leaders use their influence to advocate for women in succession discussions, critical assignments, and promotion decisions, opportunities for women increase significantly”. Similarly, Michelle reflects on the tangible impact of sponsorship in practice: “In my career, the moments that accelerated growth were when a leader put my name forward for something I had not yet been given the chance to prove at scale. Those decisions build confidence, capability, and visibility in ways that formal development programs cannot”. The urgency of this approach is reinforced by Connie, who notes, “This matters now because organizations need the strongest possible leaders, and they cannot afford to overlook capable people who may simply need a push to step up.” Christine expands on this broader organizational impact, stating “The leaders who understand this do not see equality as a favour or a quota. They recognize, as research continues to show, that advancing women’s equality is a strategic advantage. And importantly, they understand that creating greater equality is not a zero-sum game. When women rise, organizations, teams, and communities benefit alongside them.” Collectively, these perspectives highlight key actions: sponsorship, creating meaningful opportunities for growth, and encouraging individuals to recognize and step into their potential. Advancing women’s equality requires intention, advocacy, and action - turning insight into impact by championing talent and ensuring no potential goes overlooked.
By Jessica Jaithoo August 19, 2026
Author: Kanwaljit Chaudhry We often begin developing leaders after we have given them something to lead. Someone is promoted into their first supervisory role. They join a leadership development program, receive coaching, attend workshops, or are paired with a mentor. All of these can be valuable. But by then, leadership development has already been happening. Long before the title arrives, people are learning how to exercise judgment, influence others, navigate disagreement, take responsibility and make decisions when the answer is not obvious. The question for HR is: Do we have to wait for the title to help those capabilities grow? Create opportunities, not just programs Some of the most valuable leadership development happens through work itself. A stretch assignment. Leading a small project. Presenting an idea to senior colleagues. Coordinating people who do not report to you. Navigating competing priorities. Being trusted to make a decision rather than simply carrying one out. None requires a management title. HR can help organizations look at development as not only as courses people attend, but as experiences people need. That may mean encouraging managers to distribute meaningful opportunities rather than repeatedly turning to the person who is already proven. It may mean designing project work so different employees have opportunities to lead. It may mean making mentoring, coaching or job-shadowing available before someone enters a formal leadership pipeline. The objective is not to make everyone a manager. It is to give more people opportunities to build capabilities that will serve them whether or not formal leadership is their eventual destination. Make room to learn from experience Experience alone does not necessarily create development. Two people can go through similar experiences and take very different things from them. What often makes the difference is the opportunity to reflect: What worked? What didn't? What did I notice about myself? What would I do differently next time? HR can help make those conversations part of development rather than leaving them to chance. A manager checking in after a difficult project can ask more than, “Did we deliver?” A mentor can help someone examine why a conversation went differently than expected. A performance discussion can explore not only what someone accomplished, but how they influenced others, exercised judgment or responded when things became uncertain. These are relatively small interventions. But they help turn experience into learning. Notice leadership before it becomes obvious There is another role for HR: helping organizations broaden what they notice. Potential does not always announce itself loudly. The person who volunteers to coordinate a complicated piece of work may be demonstrating leadership capacity. So might the employee who brings people together when a team is stuck, asks the question no one else is asking, helps a colleague succeed without needing credit, or remains thoughtful when everyone else is rushing toward an answer. If we look for leadership potential only among those who already resemble our current leaders, we may keep finding the same kinds of people.  Creating broader opportunities allows capability to become visible before we decide who has it. Pay attention to what the organization teaches Organizations are also developing future leaders when they are not deliberately trying to. Employees notice who gets promoted. They notice what behaviour gets rewarded, whose ideas receive attention and what happens when someone makes a mistake. They notice whether managers share information or protect it, whether difficult conversations are avoided or handled respectfully, and whether asking for help is treated as good judgment or weakness. These observations become lessons about what leadership looks like here. HR influences many of the systems through which those lessons are reinforced e.g., performance management, recognition, development, succession planning and promotion among them. That makes an important question worth asking: What are our people learning about leadership from the way our organization actually works? The answer may tell us as much about our leadership pipeline as any competency framework. Before the title Leadership development does not have to begin with a leadership program. It can begin when someone is trusted with something slightly beyond what they have done before and supported while they figure it out. It can happen when a manager shares the reasoning behind a difficult decision rather than only communicating the outcome. It can happen when someone gets to lead a project before they have people reporting to them. And it can happen when an employee has someone who helps them make sense of an experience rather than simply move on to the next task. HR cannot manufacture leaders. But HR can help create workplaces where people have opportunities to practise judgment, responsibility, influence and reflection long before a title makes those things part of their job description. Perhaps the question is not only “Who are our future leaders?” It is also: “What are we doing today that gives future leadership capacity a chance to emerge?”
By Marina Perkovic July 22, 2026
At the CPHR Alberta Conference, we asked HR leaders one question: What leadership capability matters most for the future of your organization? Leaders picked up a star and placed it beside their answer. By the end of the conference, HR leaders cast 131 votes across 16 capabilities. Three stood out, with two tied for first place. Here is what they told us. What the Data Showed The capabilities on the board came from Bright Wire's PLUS Leadership Framework, a proprietary model built to define what effective leadership looks like across every level of an organization and is organized across four dimensions: Courageous Coach-Like Disciplined for Results and Relational The results below reflect the capabilities HR professionals believe matter most. 
MORE NEWS