Designing for Cultural Sensitivity

When we say “apply a gender lens to everything,” this is exactly what we mean. For over a century, many everyday inventions were designed by men, for men, and women simply adapted, often at a cost to their comfort, safety, and health. The redesigned speculum is a perfect example. After more than 150 years, women engineers finally asked a simple but radical question: What if women’s bodies and experiences actually mattered in medical design? And the speculum is not alone. Inventions originally not designed with women in mind: • Car seat belts – modeled on the “average male body,” increasing injury risk for women and pregnant people • Car crash test dummies – long based almost entirely on male bodies • Smartphones – larger sizes that strain smaller hands • Voice recognition systems – struggle more with women’s voices • Office temperatures – calibrated to male metabolic rates • Personal protective equipment (PPE) – often ill-fitting for women • Medications & drug dosages – tested primarily on men • Tools and machinery – designed for male grip strength and height And here is a critical fact many people still don’t know: 👉 Women were largely excluded from clinical research until 1993. Yet women metabolize drugs differently, experience different side effects, and respond differently to treatments. Still, medicine was labeled “neutral.” It wasn’t. And yes, this goes beyond medicine. Even road and transport design carries gender bias. Without applying a gender lens: • Roads prioritize private cars over public transport • Routes ignore caregiving travel patterns (school, market, home, hospital) • Pedestrian safety, lighting, and crossings, used more by women are undervalued In Ghana, this means some road designs systematically disadvantage women, especially those who walk, carry loads, use public transport, or move with children. I’ll write more about this when I get the time, but this is the heart of the matter: Design is never neutral. Policy is never neutral. Research is never neutral. If gender is ignored, inequality is designed in. #academia #phdjourney #genderlens #womeninacademia #scicom

Did you know that in the UK, women are 50% more likely to be misdiagnosed after a heart attack? This is not because women’s symptoms are “atypical”, they are typical for women, but because medical research and training have historically centred on male bodies. The “Reference Man” has been the standard for everything from drug dosages to car crash test dummies, with devastating results: women are 17% more likely to die in a car crash, and 47% more likely to be seriously injured, simply because safety systems were not designed with them in mind. Caroline Criado Perez outlines this concept of 'male as default' in her book, Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Designed for Men. Even today, the vast majority of pain studies are conducted on male mice, and drugs are often not tested on women at different stages of their menstrual cycle. The result? Women experience more adverse drug reactions, and sometimes, the drugs simply don’t work for them. This isn’t just a healthcare issue, it’s a design issue. When we build systems, products, or workplaces around a single “default” user, we inevitably exclude others. The cost is not just inconvenience, but real harm. In the case of organisations outside of healthcare, these same default user error easily occurs. And this is causing real harm to individuals, teams, companies and has real knock-on effects in society. So what can we do? We must design workplace systems, policies, and cultures that recognise and accommodate difference. We must examine inherent bias that exists in our people processes - right from designing a role, through to the language used in job descriptions and the expectations around what a job 'should' look like. There are so many aspects to eliminating bias in the workplace and this is just one of the starting points for organisations. At Shape Talent Ltd, we've developed a Debias Audit, designed to identify barriers and gender biases in organisations, many of which can be subtle and unintentional. People processes, policies and systems may have been passed down for years without anyone looking critically at them and asking whether they are gender inclusive in their ability to attract, retain, promote and reward talent. Organisations may not be aware of the simple, subtle and often quick changes they can make to their HR policies and practices that positively influence gender equality in the workforce. If this might be a helpful tool, get in touch to discuss how we can customise it for your organisation. #GenderEquity #EDI #DebiasAudit #DEI #PeopleAndCulture #HRLeadership #HRToolkit

We all know that many fashion brands in the global north have a nasty habit of "taking inspiration from" (read: exploiting) cultures that aren't their own—without consent or credit—to line their own pockets. The impacts are manifold, from compounding colonial narratives and diluting cultural context to funnelling money away from rightful recipients. Done right, however, incorporating traditional and Indigenous textiles and crafts into contemporary fashion design can be a force for good. It can provide new markets for artisans and preserve techniques that are threatened with extinction – but only by completely turning fashion’s extractive tendencies on their head. My latest piece for 1 GRANARY explores how fashion brands can act as stewards for traditional crafts, techniques, and materials. It features insights and examples from Mozhdeh Matin, Ana Tafur of SAKE, Bubu Ogisi of IAMISIGO, and Róisín Pierce, all of whom incorporate traditional methods into their work with sensitivity, reciprocity, and respect. The process, says Ogisi, is a dialogue. "We share our design vision, and they share their knowledge of the materials and techniques. It’s a true co-creation where the final piece is a beautiful fusion of tradition and contemporary design. A tradition is not something static that must be kept in a museum; it can grow and evolve while still honouring its past." It's also a practice in humility. “You cannot arrive with a colonial attitude and think ‘I’m going to be the saviour’,” says Tafur. “I’m not the saviour of anything.” I adored writing this article. To me, craft and connection are what should lie at the heart of fashion. The brands and the skilled communities they work with keep me hopeful that a better fashion system can exist. In fact, it already does. https://lnkd.in/eVdY7g54 If this is a topic of interest, I'd highly recommend learning more about the work of Cultural Intellectual Property Rights Initiative® (CIPRI)

As AI weaves itself into the fabric of our lives, we have a tendency to assume that all of us want the same things from AI. A recent study from Stanford HAI reveals that our cultural background significantly influences our desires and expectations from AI technologies. European Americans, deeply rooted in an independent cultural model, tend to seek control over AI. They want systems that empower individual autonomy and decision-making. In contrast, Chinese participants, influenced by an interdependent cultural model, favour a connection with AI, valuing harmony and collective well-being over individual control. Interestingly, African Americans navigate both these cultural models, reflecting a nuanced balance between control and connection in their AI preferences. The importance of embracing cultural diversity in AI development cannot be understated. As we build technologies that are increasingly global, understanding and integrating these diverse cultural perspectives is essential. The AI we create today will shape the world of tomorrow, and ensuring that it resonates with the values and needs of a global population is the key to its success. When designing technology solutions, we must think beyond our immediate cultural contexts and strive to create systems that are inclusive, adaptable, and culturally aware. If OpenAI wants to benefit humanity, then that needs to be humanity with all our different world views. The key takeaways from the study can apply to all kinds of product development: 1. Cultural Awareness: recognise that preferences vary across cultures, and these differences should inform design and implementation strategies. 2. Inclusive Design: incorporate diverse perspectives from the outset to create products that resonate globally. 3. Global Leadership: lead with an understanding that what works in one cultural context might not in another—adaptability is key. By embedding these principles into our product development efforts, we can ensure that the technology and products we develop are culturally attuned to the needs of a diverse world. I would love to see deeper analysis of this cultural lens as it should inform the way we work with technology for good. There is always a danger that as we seek to break one set of biases, we introduce our own. How do you think leaders should adapt their AI approaches or precut development on the basis of this research? #AI #product #research #techforgood #responsibleAI Enjoy this? ♻️ Repost it to your network and follow me Holly Joint 🙌🏻 I write about navigating a tech-driven future: how it impacts strategy, leadership, culture and women 🙌🏻 All views are my own.

People criticized Nike for this campaign, and it served as a marketing lesson that every global company needs to understand. The London Marathon is one of the world's major marathons. This year, it attracted over 55,645 participants. Hence, making it a natural fit for Nike's marketing efforts. Their campaign copy was - "Never Again. Until Next Year." Quite interesting to capture that familiar feeling runners have after completing the 26.2-mile race. Anyone who has run a marathon knows this sentiment - you're exhausted, you swear you'll never do it again, but somehow you're back the following year. ➡️However, the phrase "Never Again" holds deep historical significance. It originated as a solemn vow after the Holocaust, when 2 out of every 3 European Jews were killed. This phrase became a commitment to ensure such atrocities would never happen again. ➡️The campaign's timing was particularly sensitive, launching close to Yom HaShoah, which is Holocaust Remembrance Day observed annually to honor the memory of those lost. What this situation teaches us about marketing is the importance of cultural context in global campaigns. For marketers working on global campaigns, this highlights three important considerations: 1. Diverse perspectives in creative review processes help identify potential cultural sensitivities. 2. Understanding historical context becomes crucial when your audience spans different cultures and communities. 3. Thorough research into local customs and significant dates can prevent unintended conflicts. It doesn’t mean that you should avoid bold, creative ideas. They do work, but ensure those ideas work across all the communities you're trying to reach. What do you think about this campaign? #nike #marketing

Vulva cupcakes are cute and all, but International Women’s Day is about more than sugar coating things. If we want a world where women are not just included, but valued and protected, we need to redesign the system—from the lab, to the clinic, to the boardrooms where decisions are made. When we talk about the gender health gap, what does it actually mean? Let me explain.... Imagine you’re in a car. The seatbelt, the airbags, the crash tests—they’ve all been designed for a 70kg man. But you’re not a 70kg man. So when you crash, you are 47% more likely to be seriously injured than a man. That’s not a hypothetical. That’s real. That’s how safety standards are built. Now take that same design flaw and apply it to medicine. Imagine your parents. Your father has chest pain and walks into an emergency room. The doctors immediately check for a heart attack, because that’s the "classic" symptom. Your mother walks in with the same heart problem, but her symptoms look different—nausea, fatigue, shortness of breath. She’s told it’s anxiety or indigestion and sent home. She is twice as likely to die after a heart attack than your father. Across 700+ diseases, women are diagnosed later than men—meaning by the time they finally get the right treatment, the disease has had more time to progress. This isn’t a coincidence. It’s the result of a system that was designed without women in mind. This is not just about fairness. This is about survival. But here’s the good news: we are finally changing the system. At Hertility, we refuse to accept a world where women are an afterthought in healthcare. Through personalised and preventative diagnostic care, we are closing the gender health gap by providing answers in days, not decades. 💡 We can diagnose over 18 conditions with 99% accuracy in just 8 days—conditions that, in the traditional system, might take years of misdiagnosis and medical gaslighting to uncover. 📊 We empower women with data-driven insights about their reproductive and hormonal health, so they can take control of their bodies before symptoms spiral into serious diseases. 🏥 We provide life-stage health care from testing to telemedicine to treatments- from menstruation through to menopause. Women’s health is not a side issue. It’s our mothers, our sisters, our daughters. And if we continue using a seatbelt that wasn’t designed for them, we’ll keep watching them crash. This International Women’s Day, let’s not just celebrate women—let’s fight for them. #ReproductiveRevolution #ScienceMeetLife #AccelerateAction #InternationalWomensDay #GenderHealthGap #Hertility

¡Hola! It’s been a while since I’ve been active on LinkedIn, a lot has happened, and I’m looking forward to sharing and reconnecting with this fab network. But something recently caught my attention and yesterday, I shared a quick post in Spanish on my Instagram about it, and the unexpected engagement made me think it was worth bringing the conversation here too, especially for those outside of Mexico who may not be aware of the situation. There’s been a heated debate recently around designer Willy Chavarría’s collaboration with Adidas and a new sandal model called "The Oaxaca Slip Ons". The issue? Many people, including the Ministry of Culture, are calling it out as a clear case of cultural appropriation, since the design is basically identical to mexican indigenous sandals, specifically "huaraches", long made and worn by communities in southern Mexico. What’s caught my attention isn’t just the controversy, but how little of the conversation is addressing the bigger picture: collective rights. So that’s where I’d like to jump in. Collective rights are rights held by groups or communities, not just individuals. These can include land rights, language rights, and, as in this case, cultural rights: the right of communities to preserve and practice their traditions, languages, ancestral knowledge, and ways of life together. They’re not just theoretical. UNESCO defines cultural rights as both individual and collective. This includes the right to access, create, participate in, and enjoy culture. It also requires public policies that protect cultural identities. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP, 2007) goes further. Article 31 clearly states that Indigenous peoples have the right to: “maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and cultural expressions… as well as the intellectual property over them.” Here’s why that matters: If a well-known designer copied a piece by, say, Jeff Koons, and sold it as their own, that would be a violation of individual copyright. But when the design in question, like these sandals, comes from a community tradition with no single author, we’re talking about collective rights. The community has the right to protect its cultural heritage and demand recognition. They should not be treated as a source of "inspiration" to be instrumentalised for "fashion" (coff coff market) purposes. That’s why cultural appropriation goes far beyond plagiarism. The Adidas Oaxaca Slip Ons should be a wake-up call to think not only about individual authorship but about how entire communities are treated when their heritage is commercialized without consent or credit. So, what can we do? We may not be in a position to challenge a global brand legally. But we can shift the conversation. Let’s name what’s happening. Let’s talk about collective cultural rights, about living heritage, and about the cultural justice that Indigenous communities are owed.

₹44,800 for a “design” or a culture with no credit? Ralph Lauren is facing backlash for a skirt inspired by India’s traditional Bandhani technique, sold at a luxury price point, but with no visible acknowledgement of its origins. But this isn’t just about one product. It highlights a recurring pattern globally: 1. Cultural extraction Traditional crafts are treated as “aesthetic inspiration,” stripped of their context and meaning. 2. Premium repositioning The same design is reframed as luxury, often at prices inaccessible to the communities that created it. 3. Missing attribution No credit, no storytelling, no visibility for the artisans behind the craft. Bandhani is not just a print trend. It’s a centuries-old technique rooted in regions like Gujarat and Rajasthan, sustained by generations of skilled artisans. So the real question is: If brands can profit from culture, shouldn’t they also participate in preserving it? Because today’s consumer is evolving. They don’t just buy products; they buy context, ethics, and transparency. The brands that will lead going forward aren’t the ones that “borrow culture,” but the ones that collaborate, credit, and compensate. In a global market, cultural intelligence is no longer optional; it’s brand equity. What’s your take? Where should brands draw the line between inspiration and appropriation?

Rethinking Mobility: Why Gender-Inclusive Planning Matters. How often do we stop to consider whether our cities are designed for everyone? A recent toolkit on Gender-Inclusive Mobility Planning highlights a critical gap in urban design: most transportation systems are still unconsciously built for a “default male user” someone commuting during peak hours, without stops or detours. But women and gender minorities make up more than 50% of the population, and their travel patterns are often more complex, more frequent, and more dependent on off-peak and multi-modal trips. Key insights from the report: 🔹 Women use public transit more, yet feel less safe especially at night. 🔹 Trip-chaining is common balancing work, caregiving, and household errands in one journey. 🔹 Safety and accessibility are top concerns, influencing route choices and travel times. Cities like Vienna, Austria are leading the way with intentional gender mainstreaming widening sidewalks, improving lighting, adding seating, and prioritizing pedestrian safety. Their approach shows that when we design with people, not just for them, we create cities that are more equitable, safe, and livable for everyone. #GenderInclusiveDesign #UrbanPlanning #Mobility #TransportationEquity #InclusiveCities #PublicTransit #UrbanDesign #LinkedInLearning