An IDRC Project An Inclusive Design Research Centre Project

Quick Actions

  • Encourage all members to learn active listening, empathy, and respectful disagreement before starting every meeting.
  • Train chairs on how to handle conflicts, help the group agree, and run meetings in an accessible way.
  • Give chairs tools and resources to run discussions, especially when power differences exist.
  • Teach chairs when and how to step in if someone is dominating or others are being left out.
  • Take short breaks if discussions get heated.
  • Show chairs how to allow disagreement while still finding agreement where possible.
  • Pay attention to whether people feel included, excluded, or uncomfortable. This will avoid conflicts from happening.
  • Let people share concerns or complaints in writing or chat if they don’t want to speak out loud. Make sure these concerns are acknowledged.
  • Keep records of how conflicts were handled and lessons learned from past meetings.
  • Allow anonymous reporting when needed.
  • Offer follow-up one-on-one conversations for sensitive issues.

Long-term Actions

  • Develop clear conflict policies for meetings
    • Have written rules about professional conduct, respect, and how conflicts are handled.
    • Make these rules visible to all members and revisit them regularly.
  • Train facilitators and chairs on conflict resolution.
  • Update conflict resolution training as new techniques or challenges arise.
  • Create a permanent mediator position to help with disputes during meetings.

More Information

Examples

  • Canada – Accessibility Standards Canada (ASC) ASC includes formal feedback channels for accessibility concerns, allowing anonymous submissions via an online portal or surveys. An inclusion officer is assigned to each committee to handle conflict resolution and accommodation requests with trauma-informed, anti-oppressive training.
  • Germany – Deutsches Institut für Normung (DIN) DIN has a conflict mediation framework for resolving issues such as communication breakdowns or disagreements over accommodations. Trained mediators are available for both major and minor concerns, promoting early, open communication.
  • India – Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) Encouraging Quiet Voices - BIS uses facilitators to guide structured speaking rounds, helping quieter members feel comfortable. Active listening ensures all input is acknowledged and conflicts are minimized. Facilitators summarize quieter contributions to support inclusive, consensus-based decisions.
  • Brazil – Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas (ABNT) Inclusive and Flexible Input - ABNT supports written and paced contributions, avoiding dominance by confident speakers. Group discussions and smaller breakout sessions are common. Non-hierarchical formats and digital input tools allow equal participation across styles.

Barriers these actions address

Lack of training and support for chairs and facilitators

Why is this a problem?

Chairs and facilitators often need help to run inclusive and accessible meetings, but support is limited. Common problems include:

  • Few resources are available on how to lead inclusively and accessibly to ensure everyone, including D/deaf and D/disabled people, can participate.
  • Little guidance is provided on managing diverse or cross-cultural groups.
  • Time and resources to manage both technical and accessibility tasks are limited.
  • Handling conflict resolution without enough training and support.
  • Knowledge of accessible technology for virtual meetings and document sharing is not common.

Ways to address the barrier

  • Choose accessible meeting spaces
  • Empower chairs and facilitators to manage conflict
  • Host onboarding meetings before committee work begins
  • Make remote/virtual/online meetings accessible
  • Provide chairs with practical support and tools for accessibility
  • Provide ongoing accessibility and inclusion training
  • Provide translation and interpretation for everyone
  • Use inclusive approaches for decision-making

Communication styles default to Western norms

Why is this a problem?

Committees often use Western communication styles by default. As a result, some voices may be overlooked, and the group may miss valuable input. Common Western norms include:

  • Speaking often without being asked or invited to speak
  • Being assertive or dominant in discussions
  • Interrupting to join the conversation
  • Openly disagreeing with others

This can exclude or disadvantage members who:

  • Prefer listening before speaking
  • Prefer communication in chat
  • Prefer giving brief or thoughtful contributions
  • Value reflective or quiet communication

Ways to address the barrier

  • Empower chairs and facilitators to manage conflict
  • Make communications multi-modal and consistent

Default meeting language is English

Why is this a problem?

When meetings are held only in English, people who speak English fluently have an advantage. Others may find it harder to join discussions, which limits participation.

Common problems include:

  • Non-English speakers miss out on important points.
  • People feel less confident speaking or asking questions.
  • People stay quiet even when they have valuable ideas.

Ways to address the barrier

  • Empower chairs and facilitators to manage conflict

Dominant “expert” culture

Why is this a problem?

Some committees treat long-time members and technical experts as the most important voices.

This can lead to:

  • A few people dominating meetings while others stay quiet.
  • New members feeling unsure about speaking up or feeling they have to prove themselves before being taken seriously.
  • Jargon and insider language making it hard for new members to understand.
  • Questions from new members being dismissed instead of answered.
  • Non-technical people feeling less valued and pressured to speak like technical experts instead of sharing their real-world knowledge of marginalization or disability.
  • Long-time members having more influence, even without formal authority.
  • Decisions being made during side conversations instead of openly.

Ways to address the barrier

  • Empower chairs and facilitators to manage conflict
  • Host onboarding meetings before committee work begins
  • Use inclusive approaches for decision-making

No clear way to report problems or get help

Why is this a problem?

Some committees do not have a clear way for people to report accessibility problems or problems with how people treat each other. When there is no clear process:

  • People may feel scared to speak up because they worry about social consequences.
  • New or marginalized members may feel left out or stay silent.
  • People may not know who to contact when something goes wrong.
  • Complaints may fall through the cracks and the same problems may keep happening.
  • People may feel unsafe and decide to leave the committee.
  • People may be afraid to ask for accommodations in the future.
  • Trust in the system may go down.

Ways to address the barrier

  • Create a shared support system
  • Empower chairs and facilitators to manage conflict
  • Provide guidance and ongoing support to new members

People don’t start at the same place

Why is this a problem?

Standards work is often very technical and complex, and assumes people already know how things work. When information is too technical, it is hard for newcomers or people without a technical background to participate. Efforts to diversify participation need to recognize that people have different levels of experience and knowledge. Without proper support, many people will be left out.

Ways to address the barrier

  • Empower chairs and facilitators to manage conflict
  • Ensure all documents are accessible
  • Help with information management
  • Host onboarding meetings before committee work begins
  • Plan for regular check-ins with new members
  • Provide a welcome package for new members
  • Provide diverse, accessible knowledge-building opportunities
  • Provide guidance and ongoing support to new members