Diversity & Equity — But What About Inclusion?
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DE&I), these three words have become a vital part of every company’s vocabulary around the world. Businesses are learning the benefits of adopting and nurturing this untapped potential. According to a recent Gartner research, the number of C-Suite leaders identifying DE&I efforts as a top priority is on an upward trajectory.
For any company, DE&I initiatives should be a no brainer. It does not cost much; employees nowadays are receptive to the idea and most importantly it increases motivation and positive energy overall. Diversity makes a company more competitive in terms of selling services and products to a diverse clientele. Organizations typically make use of a business case to promote DE&I initiatives, but most do not make it a value to be incorporated into its culture — that is a mistake. For any DE&I drive to succeed, organizations should always compare between a ‘business case’ versus a ‘fairness case’ which advocates diversity on moral grounds of fairness (an idea promoted by Oriane Georgeac and Aneeta Rattan — Harvard Business Review June 2022).
Studies have shown that current and prospective employees prefer the fairness case to the business case by a wide margin. Employees sense of belonging is bolstered when a company promotes value-based DE&I initiatives signaling a deep-seated commitment for diversity as an end in itself. Conversely a business case for diversity may send a subtle signal that organizations only view employees from minority groups as a means to an end. Companies should not consider diversity implementation as just something that needs to be done — they should believe in its value. Pressure builds up when there is a stark difference between what companies say publicly and do privately. Double speak by an organization is inherently harmful to the concepts of diversity and inclusion, whereas DE&I is showcased as high priority externally but is never really thought of as a high priority with resource allocation and goal setting internally.
Diverse groups make more innovative and accurate decisions than homogeneous groups.
Persistence is needed for correct application of an otherwise well-meaning diversity policy. Employees need to know why we are promoting DE&I and should be educated in the benefits of diversity initiatives. Research has repeatedly shown that diverse groups make more innovative and accurate decisions than homogeneous groups (“DE&I Initiatives Are Futile Without Accountability — Harvard Business Review”). There will always be challenges in implementing DE&I related changes, but people will be more likely to remain engaged with the process if they know the why. Leaders should explain how these changes affect employees at a personal level, data should be shared, and feedback invited. Recognition and encouragement are key for all this to work. Praise for those who use it, encouragement (and a gentle nudge) for those who are hesitant to venture in this direction.
Major companies have robust diversity programs but are these helping? Boston Consulting Group’s comprehensive survey in 14 countries (including USA) shows that 96% to 98% of large companies (above 1000 employees) have similar DE&I programs. This research further found that “three quarters of employees in underrepresented groups — women, racial and ethnic minorities, and LGBTQ employees do not feel that they have personally benefited from their companies’ diversity and inclusion programs” (Matt Krentz — HBR Feb 2019). Major and honest commitment by corporate leadership can be a first step in changing that perception amongst employees. Hollow words and unfulfilled promises are insufficient — unconscious bias that may be present in senior leadership leading to wrong initiatives must be purged. An example of a diversity initiative falling short is the practice of formal sponsorship (which has been shown to increase representation for minority groups). I have recently suggested such a program for the company I work for. Groom A Protégé (GAP) can bring about meaningful change in the sponsorship efforts of a company by pairing of senior leadership with an aspiring individual contributor. An executive sponsor can be a senior level leader who elevates their protégés visibility within the corridors of power, advocates key assignments and promotions for them, and risks his or her reputation for the protégés advancement. This is just one example and there is still a lot of room for progress in achieving corporate DE&I initiatives.
Diversity attempts to address discrimination should be more about real change than mere optics. DE&I efforts when applied judiciously will cause inevitable friction and discomfort. In “Inclusion on Purpose,” the diversity consultant Ruchika Tulshyan opines that meaningful progress requires constant initiative-taking efforts. She talks about six strategies to push real change in a company’s culture — be uncomfortable, reflect on what you do not know, invite feedback, limit deficiencies, grow from your mistakes, and expect change to take time (HBR Feb 2022). Even when policies or initiatives seem normal, they might not be. Consider a company where social gatherings always include serving of alcohol thus excluding employees whose religion or health forbids it or an office which does not have a designated prayer area. These might not seem such a big deal for majority of the employees, but it will certainly impact diverse minority groups negatively.
To bring about meaningful DE&I improvements — change the system not the people.
There is always some kind of backlash expressed by advantaged groups no matter how noble the underlying good faith assumptions are behind any DE&I efforts. Why the backlash when DE&I is considered such a good thing? Lily Zheng, a diversity coach answers this question in a very honest way, she says, “Because people are strongly motivated to protect their own sense of self-esteem, competence and inherent goodness.” When any of these things are challenged, their gut reaction is to resist and reject. To avoid such an outcome, it is imperative that the DE&I message be framed in a way as to avoid resistance, rejection, and backlash. Diversity messaging can function as a two-edged sword, inviting recriminations from both sides — advantaged and disadvantaged. If diverse employees perceive that their hiring or promotion was a result of ‘diversity and not skill,’ that constitutes a challenge to their self-esteem. To bring about meaningful DE&I improvements — change the system not the people.
Diversity training is another sticking point with employees of both groups (for and against). Truth be told these trainings do not always make the impact that companies are hoping for. These have become a sort of go-to solution for curing inequities caused by lack of diversity in a company. Trainings by itself will not affect meaningful change, it is the attitudes that must evolve. Few hours or even a day long training session will not change ingrained stereotypes that we harbor, distilled from a lifetime of listening to radio, tv, other people and being bombarded by social media posts every second of the day. Research has shown that a diversity training program alone does not lead to increases in work force diversity, it must be supplemented with practical systemic changes (like creating formal programs for mentoring, including all employees for skill and management training, solving diversity problems inhouse instead of leaving these to outside consultants).
“Diversity is being invited to the party. Inclusion is being asked to dance.”
Human nature craves inclusion. American philosopher William James observed in 1890 that human beings possess a fundamental need for inclusion and belonging. When employees really feel that they are included and have a sense of belonging, they are more likely to share knowledge and participate in decision making. Organizations nowadays are coming to the realization that diversity and inclusion are different and should not be lumped together. Noted diversity advocate Verna Myers provides a succinct differentiation between the two, “Diversity is being invited to the party. Inclusion is being asked to dance.” Diversity and Equity alone will not work if no attempts are made to promote inclusivity. In absence of inclusion, attracting diverse talent, employee participation in DE&I activities, fostering innovation, and resulting business growth will not happen.
Inclusivity cannot be quantified
Laura Sherbin and Ripa Rashid (both noted talent innovators and diversity advocates) share the results of the study they did on sponsorship regarding multicultural professionals. Their research showed that although 41% of senior level African Americans, 20% of senior level Asians, and 18% of senior level Hispanics feel obligated to sponsor employees of the same gender or ethnicity as themselves (for Caucasians the number is 7%), they hesitate to act. Sponsor of color, especially at the top, are hobbled by the perception of giving special treatment to protégés of color and the concern that protégés might not make the grade. (“Diversity Doesn’t Stick Without Inclusion — Harvard Business Review”) The result: Just 18% of Asians, 21% of African Americans, and 25% of Hispanics step up to sponsorship (and 27% of Caucasians).
We can measure diversity, but it is difficult to measure inclusion. Diversity can be easily quantified, a matter of head count but measuring inclusion is a difficult proposition — how can you measure feelings? Employees may feel valued but not fully inclusive. Material benefits and office perks do not help if an employee feels uncomfortable in an office setting. Consider a Muslim employee who does not want to pray in the office for fear of negative consequences or a LGBTQ executive who is unsure whether he can bring his partner to the company events.
Surveys are a good measure for gauging inclusivity, but their results should be segmented by minority groups (gender, minorities, ethnicities, tenure etc.) to be meaningful. Conducting focus groups is another effective way to get insights into employee frustration and inclusivity issues. Organizations should invest in creating an inclusive leadership which ensures that team members take part in discussions, empower them to make decisions, allowing constructive criticism and providing actionable feedback. Inclusion efforts will work best when applied at a grassroots level. Leadership should also know the difference between ‘real inclusion’ and ‘surface inclusion’ as introduced by Michael Slepian, Professor at Columbia Business School. He explains that when employees feel included, involved, and accepted, they feel like they belong in the workplace. When employees sense that they were asked for their input because they were supposed to, or their opinion was sought as someone who can represent their social group (surface inclusion) — they feel like they belong less. This is an immensely powerful observation that is overlooked in many companies.
The correct way for any company is to adopt a middle ground that allows minority group employees to feel included while not feeling singled out. All employees’ concerns should be heard not just minority employees when asking for feedback. Majority of companies while pursuing DE&I initiatives invest heavily in ERGs (Employee Resource Groups) with mixed results. Care should be taken with ERGs lest they create a false narrative that only individuals from underrepresented backgrounds needed help developing these skills and their performance is lacking in some way. An organization cannot just broadcast a message that change is only needed for a certain group and only that minority group needs help in moving upwards. Then there is the case of reverse favoritism — when companies do not engage majority members in the conversation on diversity and inclusion, they experience a push back. Companies should adopt a path that does not exclude majority employees from diversity initiatives.
Inclusion also differs from assimilation efforts by an organization. Employees should never be forced to assimilate into the company culture as that will diminish their individualism and inclusivity. Let me stress that not all assimilation effort is bad, like a company’s expectation for employees to be on time or adopt the values of the company are examples of good assimilation while expecting employees to talk or look a certain way that is different from an individual’s culture or background is problematic. DE&I efforts will bear fruit when they are focused on identifying a realistic and healthy expectation of assimilation that still allows employees to thrive and be a useful contributor (HBR Feb 2022).
Companies with a mature DE&I framework foster an innovative and a learning mindset. A case can be made for every Fortune 500 company to have a Chief Diversity Officer (CDO) who oversees and guides the employee base towards true diversity and inclusiveness. Among Fortune 500 companies, 53% now have a CDO or equivalent role (McKinsey & Company). Silicon Valley companies like Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Facebook have had CDOs since 2016. The reason these industry-leading companies hired Chief Diversity Officers is because they have found that their previous lack of diversity led to a stall in creative innovations and a static trend in revenue (“3 Reasons Tech Companies Need to Hire a Chief Diversity Officer”). In one recent survey, 93% of leaders agreed that the DE&I initiatives were a top priority but only 34% believe that it is a strength in their workplace (David Lancefield, Leadership Coach) — this needs to change.
Organizations should investigate instituting or defining KPIs for DE&I and mid-level management should be made accountable for achieving these goals. Many large employers including Starbucks and McDonald’s are already working on defining key performance indicators for diversity. (“5 Strategies to Infuse D&I into Your Organization — Harvard Business Review”) While some other big companies like Nike and Uber have gone further, tying executive compensation to diversity goals. Financial incentives are a powerful tool for affecting a meaningful change in behavior.
Diversity without inclusion will not work — but diversity with inclusion will provide an atmosphere where all people feel respected, accepted, supported, and valued, allowing everyone to participate in decision making processes and charting their own career development inside an organization.
I end with a beautiful truth from Jesse Jackson.
“When everyone is included, everyone wins.”
