The Olympic Games – An Example of a Failed Parallel

As China enters the final week of its ‘coming-out party’, it prepares for another few weeks of competition in the Paralympic Games. This event is meant to be a celebration and competition of the best sporting talent amongst those who have disabilities. These athletes are the best in their sport, incredibly talented and every bit as inspiring as Mikey Phelps or Eddie ‘the Eagle’ Edwards. So why, prey-tell, aren’t these sports combined into the Olympic Games?

Statements and messages aren’t always overt. In fact, most of the time they are spoken without saying a word. Men and women rarely compete together in sport, because they are physically different. Sport and bathrooms have a lot in common here, same function yet different paths. As our nation’s men and women compete on the track, in the pool, and on board vessels why do our athletes with disabilities have to wait until the closing ceremonies are done to begin? It makes no sense to this author, but then again, few international bodies do when disability is involved.

This year’s Olympics in Beijing are bringing 60 million sets of eyeballs to NBC and its website per day. Gross that up globally, and we’re looking at more than 500 million daily viewers of the Olympic Games. NBC paid $894mm for the US rights to broadcast the Games. It speaks volumes about the perceived value of the parallel and segregated system that is the Paralympics that this author could not find a US TV schedule for this event. It is safe to say that the public is not captured by the Paralympic story.

Looking at this parallel system in the ‘Paralympics’ is important for the global corporate community. Often in corporations, disability is funneled through a parallel system. Employees with some sort of strong attachment to disability (typically family members), carve out a niche for a handful of candidates who are brought into an environment that has different standards than the rest of the firm. These employees do not have the same unofficial supports as their ‘regular’ peers do, and are seen by the firm as charity cases. It is not surprising that these programs have an abysmal record on retention, as most employees with disabilities feel that they are not part of the team. These employees, their assessments correct, either leave or are terminated because they cannot compete (through no fault of their own).

In order to be taken seriously, one must compete on the same stage as one’s peers, whether one is a world-class athlete or a world-class employee. Parallel systems don’t work simply because those in the mainstream system question why the parallel is needed and quickly deduce that a lower bar is required, thus that system is shunned. The curious aspect of this is that often the lower bar is not needed. It is truly amazing what happens when talented people are left to compete.

There are 20 sport competitions in the Paralympic Games. Of these 20, 11 sports can be merged as an ‘adapted’ class into sports already in the Olympics. These 11 sports would have Men’s, Woman’s, Men’s adapted, and Woman’s adapted. Sound familiar, it’s called accommodations. The remaining 9 are added to the competition and must be opened to all. Can Kobe make a 3-point shot from a wheelchair? Let’s find out. There are more important things than ensuring an athlete with a disability gets to participate. This is not Little League, it is the Olympics.

The same must occur in global corporate entities in order to get a meaningful number of employees with disabilities into their workforces. Talent acquisition must be aligned with the ‘regular’ effort to bring new blood on board. Competition must be judged on the same scorecard, both to entice those with disabilities to come forward, and perhaps more importantly, to ensure their success and retention. When the organization sees all employees on an equal footing, the perceived value of those employees is also equal. Organizations are human organisms, and humans take signals as policy. If your organization signals that some individuals need a different set of rules, your employees simply won’t take those individuals seriously.

Integrating disability into all systems is the way to go. Your firm already does a good job reaching women and other minorities, expand that to disability. The first step is to take an inventory of where you are, what works and what does not. The next step builds on that, and involves research. Your firm needs to understand this market and actually needs to have a conversation with your Customer, a novel concept indeed. By following proven practice, and building an arsenal of knowledge, all you then need to do is deliver on those Customer desires.

This is where most Western firms fail. They assume that they understand their Customer, lock themselves in a room, and come up with a strategy that reflects executive knowledge. Western automotive firms and their share prices show how well this works. When developing a strategy, Customer is King, Queen, Jack and Ace. If someone argues against that, find them a different job. A strategy in disability that is based on the Customer is the difference between success and failure. By integrating disability into talent acquisition/retention, marketing, product development, R&D and IT your firm is unlocking the world’s largest market.

Parallel systems do one thing well, they highlight opportunity. They allow the masses to see the potential in something that might be a little bit different. If these systems continue for too long without integration into the whole, their legitimacy is questioned and they risk irrelevance. This is true of the Paralympics. The masses see talented athletes competing outside the norm and the results as shown in TV ratings speak for themselves. The Paralympics must be integrated into the Olympics, just as disability must be integrated into the mainstream of our global corporate entities. Anything less not only sends a questionable inclusion message, but leaves material opportunity on the table.