But sometimes good people who are trying to do the right thing can get a little too zealous. That’s a phenomenon that we always need to remain vigilant for because when it happens, it’s the innocent who tend to get hurt. And recent FCC rulings concerning conference calls have me wondering if that’s exactly what is about to happen.

The conference call probably ranks right up there with the word processor when it comes to workplace tools that are essential for career and professional success. The word on the street is that many VRS calls that go into teleconference bridge numbers are being red-flagged now as potential fraud, with payment being delayed or withheld indefinitely – often because these conference calls tend to be longer in duration than the “average” call.

When VRS providers know that they will have a difficult time getting paid when calls are made into teleconference bridges, it would be naive to think that their interest in placing those calls and the quality of service won’t be affected in some way. At NexTalk, we have an executive team conference call every Monday morning with our Vice President of Business Development joining the conference call by VRS. The last thing she needs is a VRS provider that would rather have its VI doing just about anything else other than servicing our call. To the contrary, we all need the very best interpreters the provider has and we need them for as long as they can hang in there. Yes, these calls are lengthy, and by their nature they also usually involve relatively complex language and multiple voices. Rather than being penalized for serving these kinds of calls, there is argument that says VRS providers should receive even higher compensation than for other types of calls because business conference calls are so demanding. The level of skill required is something that not every VI possesses…

I particularly worry that recent FCC rulings make it difficult or impossible for VRS providers to interpret conference calls where all of the participants are deaf and are on the call via VRS. Problem number 1 is how a VI provider is supposed to know whether participants are deaf or hearing. Deputizing interpreters and asking them to start policing conference calls is bad policy. In many cases, it would require VI’s actually interrupting telephonic business meetings to question participants about whether they’re deaf or hearing. That doesn’t sound much like functional equivalence.

As vexing as that is, problem number 2 is even worse. At this time, if a group of deaf colleagues in remote locations need to conduct a business meeting remotely, there simply is no other effective way to do it than by conference calls where all participants are there via VRS. At NexTalk, we have a business division run entirely by deaf employees, and they rely significantly on feedback from teams of deaf “beta” users of our software. The inability for them to conduct these kinds of calls will have a significant negative impact on our business. Do we now have to plant a hearing user on every beta team call for the sole purpose getting VI’s to do the calls? The FCC’s current position banning these types of calls effectively ensures that teams of deaf co-workers in different locations cannot be as effective as hearing teams can be because they cannot conduct conference calls. In an environment where too many organizations already worry about whether and how deaf employees can be effective, now we have a federal agency essentially decreeing that they cannot be. Something is very wrong with this picture.

My company, NexTalk, is not a relay company, so these policies have little direct effect on our revenues. But they do affect our business, and they significantly impact our deaf employees. While I understand why FCC and NECA are tightening up their policies, I can’t help but wonder if they’re throwing the baby out with the VRS bath-water.

Todd D. Wakefield is CEO of NexTalk, Inc. ( http://www.nextalk.com ). He lives in Park City, Utah with his wife of 20 years and four kids.

It was, of course, great to see the numerous federal and state government agencies represented at the fair. But what was particularly impressive to me was the number of private sector employers who participated. It was fun to see big names like Bank of New York Mellon, Eli Lilly & Co., IBM, ITT, Microsoft and Raytheon competing for talent even in a tough economy.

But it quickly became clear to me why they were there when I interviewed two outstanding candidates for potential positions at NexTalk. I was impressed with background and credentials of both of these students, as well as their people skills. It was treat getting acquainted with. Clearly NTID has an eye for talent. In fact, it may be too good at that for its own good, as shown by its loss of AlanaHurwitz to Gallaudet, which just hired him as its 10th president. But fear not. There are plenty of other equally impressive people at NTID, so look forward to more good things to come!

And for the rest of us, I’d suggest looking at the list of companies supporting great employment opportunities for these students and supporting them with our business. You can find the list by pasting this address into your browser – http://www.ntid.rit.edu/NCE/jobfair_students.php.

Todd D. Wakefield is CEO of NexTalk, Inc. ( http://www.nextalk.com ). He lives in Park City, Utah with his wife of 20 years and four kids.

OK, maybe not an outright fight, but at least get your colleagues to disagree with you. Get them to do it vocally, with feeling. And get them to do it on matters that are important, that you feel strongly about. Get them to argue with you. Really. And it’s not about raised voices, but strong opinions. Get them to debate even though many of them will at first be terribly hesitant and uncomfortable trying to do. Help them grow into it.

Debate is a remarkable tool in a work environment. Done respectfully, it fosters respect among co-workers. Done regularly with wide participation, it cultivates engagement. Done with broad participation, around the truly important issues, it encourages ownership, commitment and loyalty. And when you have a team where the members are engaged, loyal, committed, and feel a sense of ownership, you have the key ingredients of passion. Unless the group simply has terrible chemistry or there is severe dysfunction elsewhere, passion should be ready to emerge and grow.

But debate is hard enough without a language barrier. How do you ensure that it extends to and includes deaf and hard-of-hearing colleagues? It’s not easy. But there are things you can do.

Be vocal and up-front about wanting that debate to occur. There may be situations where there’s an advantage to quietly, invisibly and slowly cultivating a culture of healthy debate. This is not one of them. Come right out and say it – clearly, broadly and repeatedly. A workplace with language and communication gaps is no place to be subtle. Tell all of your colleagues you want them to argue with you, but tell deaf workers they can and should be more firm about it than anyone else. Tell everyone (who has a sense of humor) that if worse comes to worse and something gets a little too firm or harsh sounding, they should blame it on the interpreter! Anything to get deaf colleagues to insert and assert themselves in the debate.

Also, don’t just tell your team what you’re trying to encourage, but ask them to hold each other and you accountable. And, by all means, reward them for doing it – in front of everyone. If every team member feels like he/she is expected, and empowered, to hunt down and eliminate debate-squelching behaviors, you’re halfway home.

If, as a leader, you need to cut off a debate for some reason, or you need to make a decision that goes against the direction the debate pointed, tell everyone that’s what you’re doing. And as best you can, tell them why. And when you do so, make absolutely certain you have a direct conversation with your deaf and hard-of-hearing colleagues about the fact you’ve done it and why.

This may be obvious, but sometimes the obvious is worth restating: if someone on your team is struggling with getting into a debating mindset (deaf or hearing), talk with them about offline and get their permission to actively draw them in when a debate is or should be happening. Then go ahead and start interrupting your debates to seek their thoughts, questions, concerns, etc. Ask them open ended questions. Don’t wait for what feels a natural place in the discussion to do it. As soon as it occurs to you that someone may be having a hard time, you’re probably right. So stop and ask for their input.

There is, of course, more you can do, but this is starting to become too long of a post. So I’ll come back to the topic again in the future to flesh it out more. For now, just remember that workplace passion is the best insurance policy you can have against a tough and unpredictable environment. And that passion is something you can cultivate in your organization. One of the best ways to start is get your co-workers in on the dialog of your organization. Get them into the conversation – into the debate – not as “yes-men,” but rather as “don’t-you-think-we-should-consider-this-too-men.” Make your workplace a place for healthy debate, and you’ll have a healthy – and more passionate – workplace.

Todd D. Wakefield is CEO of NexTalk, Inc. ( http://www.nextalk.com ). He lives in Park City, Utah with his wife of 20 years and four kids.