Leading with Cultural Intelligence: Building Inclusive Teams Where Voice is Accessible to All with Paulinah Matlaela

HR leader Paulinah Matlaela shares pragmatic insights on building inclusive cultures beyond policy, from South Africa’s context to global DEI challenges

What if the most effective inclusion work isn’t about grand policies, but the subtle, daily acts of respect that make everyone feel heard? In a world where DEI discussions are often fraught and polarized, Paulinah Matlaela offers a compelling, grounded perspective forged in South Africa’s complex landscape.

Working for Jhpiego, with a career dedicated to human resources and organizational development, she moves beyond theory to the practical adjustments, like mindful meeting facilitation and feedback styles, that build genuine belonging.

In this interview, she shares how to turn intention into consistent action, the challenge of global polarization, and why closing the feedback loop is the ultimate test of an inclusive culture. Join us as we delve into a pragmatic blueprint for inclusion that works from the ground up.

Interview with Paulinah Matlaela

South Africa is a deeply diverse country in terms of ethnicity, languages, cultures, and historical backgrounds. Could you share an example of how your team or organization has actively worked to promote inclusion among people from different cultural, linguistic, or social backgrounds? In which areas do you think there is still room for improvement?

In my experience, inclusion has been most effective where it is built into everyday ways of working rather than treated as a standalone initiative. For example, in teams made up of people from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds, we’ve been intentional about how meetings are facilitated, including slowing the pace, avoiding unnecessary jargon, summarising key points, and actively inviting input from those who may be quieter or less confident speaking in dominant languages.

We’ve also supported leaders to adapt how they give feedback. In some cases, this meant moving away from very direct, public feedback to more contextual, one-on-one conversations that respected cultural norms around hierarchy and dignity. These adjustments led to noticeably more participation, better collaboration, and more trust within teams.

There is still room for improvement in consistency. Inclusion should not depend on individual leaders’ awareness or personal style. It needs to be reinforced through leadership expectations, capability-building, and accountability so that people experience inclusion regardless of who they report to.

In a market as diverse as South Africa’s, what practices, policies, or initiatives have you seen that truly contribute to building more diverse, equitable, and representative teams?

I have noted that the most effective practices address both how people enter the organisation and how they progress within it.

On the recruitment side, structured interviews, diverse shortlisting, and clearly defined selection criteria help reduce bias and ensure that decisions are based on capability rather than familiarity. The training provided to recruitment panels or selection committees have also played a key role.

Beyond hiring, I’ve seen strong results where some of the organisations I have worked for intentionally broaden access to opportunity. Examples include offering acting roles or stretch assignments to test readiness for promotion, creating targeted development programmes, and pairing high-potential employees with mentors who actively advocate for them.

These practices help move diversity beyond representation and into meaningful, sustainable inclusion.

From your role in Human Resources, what have been the main challenges related to diversity and inclusion in a multicultural context like South Africa’s, shaped by historical inequalities? How have you addressed them?

One of the main challenges is navigating South Africa’s historical inequalities while responding to present-day organisational pressures.

Diversity conversations can be emotionally charged, and many leaders fear saying the wrong thing, which can result in silence, defensiveness, or avoidance.

From an HR perspective, the work has involved creating structured spaces for honest dialogue, for example, leadership discussions using real workplace scenarios rather than abstract concepts. We’ve also focused on helping leaders separate intent from impact and address issues early, before they escalate.

Addressing these challenges requires courage, support, and consistency. Progress happens when leaders feel equipped and accountable, rather than blamed.

In your experience, how accessible is it for employees, considering cultural, linguistic, educational, or seniority differences, to share their ideas, concerns, and perspectives within the organization? What actions could further strengthen these spaces for participation?

Employee voice is not equally accessible by default. In practice, factors such as hierarchy, language confidence, cultural norms, and educational background often influence who feels comfortable speaking up, particularly in large or formal meetings.

I’ve seen participation improve where we have created multiple channels for voice. For example, combining open forums with anonymous surveys, structured one-on-one check-ins, and smaller team discussions allows different personalities and comfort levels to be heard. In some cases, managers followed up with individuals after meetings to invite input that wasn’t shared publicly.

One of the most important actions leaders can take is closing the feedback loop. When employees see that their input leads to visible action or clear explanation, trust and engagement increase significantly. And, this is an area we are doing well in. We value feedback as a tool for improvement, not a tick box exercise. It helps us understand employee experiences, amplify diverse voices, and take meaningful action where barriers to inclusion or engagement exist.

From an international perspective, and in comparison with the South African context, what do you consider to be the most critical challenges the United States is currently facing in terms of inclusion, diversity, and equity?

My view is that the most critical challenge faced by the United States is the increasing polarisation of diversity and inclusion discussions. Unlike South Africa, where these conversations are often grounded in a shared understanding of historical inequality, DEI in the U.S. has become highly politicised. This has led some organisations to retreat from inclusion efforts or frame them defensively.

The challenge and opportunity globally and not just for the U.S. is to re-anchor inclusion in:

• Fairness and access

• Human dignity

• Evidence-based organisational practice

• Long-term sustainability

That shift in framing helps move the conversation away from conflict and back toward meaningful progress.

In a globalized environment, what opportunities do you see to reduce the gap between national diversity and inclusion policies and the real needs of the various cultural groups and communities living in diverse countries and cities such as those in South Africa?

In a globalised environment, people, skills, and ways of working move across borders far faster than policy. Many organisations now employ globally mobile talent or operate across multiple cultural contexts, while policies remain nationally framed and slow to adapt.

One opportunity is to involve employers, communities, and local leaders more actively in how policies are interpreted and implemented, particularly in diverse urban centers. Another is learning across borders: for example, multinational organisations adapting global inclusion frameworks to local labour laws, cultural norms, and socio-economic realities rather than applying one-size-fits-all models.

In practice, inclusion works best when policy sets the direction, but leaders and organisations translate it into everyday, human-centred actions that reflect how people actually live and work.