Measuring Progress in DEI

It is one thing for an organization to implement diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. It is another thing for an organization’s DEI initiatives to be successful. As such, companies should make the effort to analyze the metrics of their DEI initiatives in order to ensure these initiatives are working. In other words, they must assess that their workplace environments are indeed becoming more diverse and feel more inclusive to those employed. While this may seem like an overwhelming task, tracking these metrics can be broken down into manageable steps. Let’s take them one at a time:

1. Consistency with DEI Training

To begin, we must start with the obvious. A company can only be successful with DEI initiatives if they actually implement the training. This step is easy to track, as companies should record each time they do DEI training and ensure all employees at all levels participate, from upper management and leadership positions to workers at lower levels. Furthermore, DEI initiatives are not a “one and done” scenario. These issues require review and in-depth understanding, and as such demand revisiting.

2. Measuring Diversity: Analyzing the Demographics

In this step, quantitative data becomes prominent, as there are several subsets of information that companies should keep track of to ensure they are successfully creating diverse work environments. The overarching theme of this step is simple: measure employees of underrepresented groups—people of color, women, people with disability, the queer community, etc.—overall in comparison to majority groups. If there are disproportionately fewer Black, Hispanic, Asian, and indigenous employees compared to white employees, or disproportionately fewer women to men, that is a sign the DEI initiatives in place are lackluster in their effectiveness. Companies can and should break down this data further:

1. Diversity in new hires

2. Diversity in leadership positions (organizations cannot claim to value true diversity if they are only willing to implement it at lower levels)

3. Diversity in promotions (organizations must ensure they providing opportunities equally to all groups)

4. Diversity in retention

The last point is particularly crucial, as DEI initiatives are only effective if they are maintained. Who is leaving the company? Are people of color, women, and queer individuals choosing to seek work elsewhere at disproportionately higher rates than people from majority groups? If so, that is a sign a company’s DEI initiatives are falling flat and require rethinking.

Overall, keeping track of diversity is a matter of recording and analyzing the demographics of minority groups versus majority groups within employment records. If the numbers steadily improve, then it is fair to conclude the DEI initiatives are effective and the organization at hand is creating a diverse environment.

3. Effectiveness: Equitable Pay

As of 2021, Black women only make $0.63 to non-Hispanic white men’s $1, and this is only one example of many wage gaps that persist across the United States. Women, people of color, queer individuals, disabled individuals, and especially people who fall within multiple groups are typically paid less than an able-bodied, cisgender, heterosexual white man. While this gap is not always deliberate, organizations must pay attention to their wages and ensure they are fair. For example, a company might consider analyzing the average monthly paycheck for each minority group. After doing so, they can determine if any group is being paid substantially less or substantially more than others and make adjustments accordingly.

4. Measuring Inclusion: Data Behind a Feeling

Inclusion is the trickiest of DEI initiatives to evaluate, because how can a company really know if they are making their employees feel included in the workplace? Fortunately, there is a simple place to start: ask them, and ask them regularly.

Surveys are a fantastic tool for measuring the inclusivity of a workplace, but only when conducted repeatedly. By using the same questions, companies can compare the results of current surveys to previous ones and determine if their efforts at workplace inclusivity are improving. It is one thing to recognize the value of a survey measuring inclusion, however; it is another thing to make one.

Aleria offers 9 Categories of Inclusion that present an excellent basis for a survey on workplace inclusivity:

These same categories are explored further by Forbes. The Gartner Inclusion Index also has seven statements that form the basis of its assessment of inclusion, ranging from fair treatment to a sense of belonging. In other words, there are numerous tools available for companies to develop a survey that measures inclusivity. By doing so, companies can both assess on an individual basis and analyze as a whole who feels most included in their workplace and why. From there, specific areas can be pinpointed for improvement in future DEI initiatives. For example, an organization may be strong in ensuring trust between employees but struggle with making all employees feel equally heard by people in higher positions. By repeating these surveys on a regular basis, it is easy for a company to track if they are heading in the right direction.

While inclusion is largely based on qualitative information because it is about an individual’s feeling, there is also quantitative data involved. Looking back at step 3, an important subset was “diversity in retention.” Turnover rates are not only reflective of demographic diversity but also an environment’s inclusivity; if a workplace is not generating a sense of inclusion for minority groups, then people from those groups are more likely to leave and find different work. There are also new analytics tools and technologies that can help assess inclusion in a workplace; for example, organizational network analysis, or ONA. ONA uses company data to produce a visual map that demonstrates connections within an employee network, both the number of those connections and how strong they are. A workplace might use ONA and realize all the connections their Hispanic employees possess occur at lower levels, suggesting their company lacks Hispanic connections within higher positions. In other words, their company has not succeeded in creating an inclusive environment for people of color at all levels.

As with analyzing diversity demographics, the key to assessing inclusion is to do it over and over, continuously comparing current results with previous ones. Only then can true growth be recognized and specific areas targeted for improvement.

5. Transparency: Publishing Results

While this final step is arguably more optional, transparency in itself can go a long way in making a company more diverse, equitable, and inclusive. For one, publishing DEI results informs prospective applicants and current employees that efforts are being made towards improvement. It also demonstrates how effective those efforts are. Moreover, transparency suggests that an organization recognizes their own fallibility—humility is a virtue, after all. Most importantly, DEI initiatives are always evolving to meet new expectations. Because of this constant flux, a company being open about changes is an encouraging sign to individuals seeking to work in truly diverse, equitable, and inclusive environments.

As you can see, measuring DEI metrics is only overwhelming if we let it be. Breaking the process down allows for easier management of information as well as for more accurate collection and analysis of data. If organizations put in the work to ensure their DEI initiatives are successful, thus creating a work environment that is truly diverse, equitable, and inclusive, then it is only a matter of time before they—and their employees—reap the benefits of these efforts.

---

Dima Ghawi is the founder of a global talent development company with a primary mission for advancing individuals in leadership. Through keynote speeches, training programs and executive coaching, Dima has empowered thousands of professionals across the globe to expand their leadership potential. In addition, she provides guidance to business executives to develop diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies and to implement a multi-year plan for advancing quality leaders from within the organization.

Reach her at DimaGhawi.com and BreakingVases.com.

Biases: Nature or Nurture?

“Nature vs Nurture” is an age-old debate, especially when it comes to the subject of human bias. Are we born prejudiced, or do we develop prejudices over time based on the environments we are exposed to? Truth be told:

It’s complicated.

Psychology Professor Laura Lauksta phrases it well: “[The question is not] is it nature or is it nurture that contributes to development… the question is how do they contribute? How can we understand how nature and nurture work together to drive development forward?”

To recognize how nature and nurture can simultaneously influence human bias, it helps to first understand them separately.

Let’s start with “nature,” otherwise known as our genetics. Numerous studies have confirmed that humans are genetically predisposed to certain traits, and while most of us think of those traits to be mostly physical, that is not always the case. Yes, genetic factors can make us more likely to be tall or more likely to inherit certain illnesses, but they can also influence our political attitudes, how much TV we watch, and even likelihood of divorce. Everything is steeped in genetics. While political stances have been cited in the past as almost solely coming from a person’s parents, research suggests that “the shared family environment has little to no lasting effect on personality and intelligence.” Now, that statement is a hefty assertion, but nonetheless our genetics play a greater role in many of our decisions than most of us are aware of.

That said, genetic predisposition does not equate to inevitability. So let’s discuss “nurture,” otherwise known as our environment(s). While infants comprehend more than most of us think they can within a few months to a year, research suggests that different social biases emerge at different points in a child’s life. The linked study found that racial bias, for example, “emerge[s] between 2.5 and 5 years of age and do[es] not affect social preferences in infancy.” Language bias (preferring people who speak the same language/share the same accent) develops earliest within a year, followed by gender bias (preferring same-gender friends) around 3 years of age. In other words, these prejudices are, to some extent, learned. They are “nurtured” from specific social environments as well as social hierarchies and are not solely attributable to genetic predisposition.

So how are nature and nurture connected? One way to approach their duality is that “nurture” can serve to either enhance or suppress “nature.” For example, “Two recent studies have identified single genes that are respectively associated with violence and depression, but have also shown that their effects are manifested only with particular histories of stressful experience.” Although a person may have genetic predisposition to particular mental illnesses, their environment may make that mental illness easier or more difficult to deal with. A simpler example is that a person may be born tall. In theory, that gives them a “natural” advantage in basketball. But that person can only become a good basketball player if they “nurture” their abilities. As such, nature and nurture are deeply intertwined in cultivating human biases, talents, and much more to the point where it is near-impossible to examine one without analyzing the role of the other.

Of course, what do we do with this information? Humans are genetically and environmentally predisposed to certain traits, both good and bad, so how do we address the negatives? Ultimately, it comes down to choice.

It helps to think of nature and nurture as filters that influence our biases. A cisgender, asexual Black woman experiences different “filters” than a transgender, bisexual Asian man, and thus they cultivate different perspectives. Once we are more aware of our negative biases, we can choose to work against them and to do better.

One study about racial and gender preferences conducted on 3-month-old white infants revealed that exposure to different races can go a long way in shaping and changing bias, as demonstrated by this excerpt:

“[A]fter being shown videos of a white man and a Black man addressing them in a positive manner, babies still preferred the own-race face at test, but interestingly, attention to the Black face reliably increased in comparison to a no-exposure baseline group.”

In other words, active exposure to diverse environments can help combat biases. For infants and young kids, that means parents choosing to encourage their children to play with kids of different races and genders. As we get older, fighting bias becomes a task we take upon ourselves. We must choose to immerse ourselves in diversity, not for the sake of appearances, but to learn. “Nature” and “nurture” only control our biases when we ourselves choose not to address them. Psychologist Steven Pinker summarizes it well:

“Political equality, for example, does not hinge on a dogma that people are innately indistinguishable, but on a commitment to treat them as individuals in spheres such as education and the criminal justice system. Social progress does not require that the mind be free of ignoble motives, only that it have other motives (such as the emotion of empathy and cognitive faculties that can learn from history) that can counteract them.”

So let’s take some time today to examine our unconscious biases. From there, we can begin our journeys of rejecting the doctrine that nature and nurture alone control who we are. We can choose to be better.

---

Dima Ghawi is the founder of a global talent development company with a primary mission for advancing individuals in leadership. Through keynote speeches, training programs and executive coaching, Dima has empowered thousands of professionals across the globe to expand their leadership potential. In addition, she provides guidance to business executives to develop diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies and to implement a multi-year plan for advancing quality leaders from within the organization.

Reach her at DimaGhawi.com and BreakingVases.com.

5 Tips to Engage Gen Z

The newest members in today’s workplace are those of Generation Z. The general consensus places this generation as beginning in 1997 and ending around 2012, meaning as of 2022, the oldest of Gen Z are 25 (fairly fresh into the workforce, or perhaps still in college) and the youngest are only 10 (near the end of elementary school).

Despite their youth, Gen Z is a confident bunch, and it would be remiss of those of us commanding the workforce to dismiss their skill and grit. Gen Z knows what they want and, more importantly, they know what they deserve. This blog will thus review five straightforward ways to engage Gen Z in the workplace!

1. Create a Fitting Culture

In this period of economic flux, a global climate crisis, and institutional injustice, Gen Z values security and stability in the workplace above almost all else. Ensuring they feel aligned with the corporate culture is critical for hiring and retaining them. For example, Gen Z is the only generation currently in the workplace that has grown up surrounded by technology, hence why 91% say that a company’s technological sophistication will impact their decision to accept a job offer. In other words, it is imperative that a company’s culture demonstrates value and knowledge of modern technology to better connect with Gen Z.

2. Offer Opportunities for Growth

Gen Z may be willing to start at the bottom level of an organization, but like many of us, they aren’t willing to stay there! An employer must show interest in the career development of their Gen Z employees, including through opportunities like mentorship and sponsorship. Gen Z can be competitive, so there is a fine line we must walk of encouraging their intuition without feeding into unnecessary aggression, but when the end result is the chance to harness their inventive spirits, finding this balance is well worth it.

3. Contribute to the Community

The average employee of Gen Z does not want to work solely for an organization’s bottom line. One of the most notable characteristics of this generation is how much they care for others, including a willingness to accept diversity in ways we cannot deny us older generations have struggled with in the past. In fact, 30% of Gen Z would take a 10-20% pay cut to work for a company with a mission they care about. Do not mistake me as advising anyone to reduce Gen Z’s salaries! Rather, I seek to emphasize that many of Gen Z want to contribute to the greater good of their community and beyond, and it is of the utmost importance that employers support them in these desires.

4. Value Diversity and Inclusion

As established, Gen Z cares deeply for their communities, and they are incredibly accepting of others. This acceptance extends into DEI initiatives—they desire a workplace that embraces the value of diversity and inclusion, and it is in those environments where they flourish. In fact, Gen Z themselves “are more racially and ethnically diverse than any previous generation,” which only further illustrates just how important diversity and inclusion are to engaging Gen Z in the workplace.

5. Give Them a Voice

At the end of the day, Gen Z values a manager that not only encourages them to share their opinions but ensures they feel heard and recognized. After all, it is one thing to let a person talk—it is another matter to truly listen to them. Gen Z are realists as much as they are optimists, and giving them an opportunity to share their thoughts on an issue will help lead to practical solutions. “We’re going to change the world!” they boldly claim, and if we are willing to step back, let them have their voice, and listen closely to what they have to say, I think we’ll all come to see exactly how Gen Z intends to make our world a better place.

And there we have it! Five straightforward strategies to engage Generation Z. Of course, these tips are all easier said than done—what do you say we follow in the footsteps of Gen Z and walk the talk ourselves?

---

Dima Ghawi is the founder of a global talent development company with a primary mission for advancing individuals in leadership. Through keynote speeches, training programs and executive coaching, Dima has empowered thousands of professionals across the globe to expand their leadership potential. In addition, she provides guidance to business executives to develop diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies and to implement a multi-year plan for advancing quality leaders from within the organization.

Reach her at DimaGhawi.com and BreakingVases.com.

3 Tips For Managing Conformity Bias

There are over a hundred types of bias in our world, and today we’re going to examine a particularly pervasive one: conformity bias, also known as the bandwagon effect. As the name suggests, this bias involves “jumping on the bandwagon,” i.e. when we choose to do something not because we personally agree but rather because everyone else is doing it. Here’s a classic example: let’s say I’m at a restaurant, and I’d like to order dessert, but the three friends I’m eating with all refuse. As a result, I refuse, too, not because I decided I don’t actually want that delicious slice of chocolate cake, but because everyone else turned it down!

See what I mean? Conformity bias is one we have all experienced. Unfortunately, this bias can manifest in far more serious situations than deciding dessert at a restaurant—we need look no further than our own workplaces. As a result, in this blog I will break down three straightforward tips for helping us manage conformity bias during organizational meetings.

1. The boss should wait to share their opinion(s) until everyone else has spoken.

Now, this advice may seem a little counterproductive! After all, shouldn’t the leader lead by example and kick off a meeting with some straightforward discussion? In an ideal world, such a strategy makes perfect sense. But our world is not ideal, and it is up to us to counter bias whenever possible. When the boss speaks first, their position of authority often unwittingly conveys the notion that they must be correct, which creates conformity bias—everyone agrees with the boss not just because they’re the boss, but because everyone else is agreeing! (We can see here how the bandwagon effect is highly cyclical.) As a result, the boss should allow all other attendees of the meeting to share their opinions first, demonstrating that conflicting ideas are not only acceptable but necessary for a productive conversation.

2. Develop a simultaneous voting process.

Last but certainly not least, the matter of voting during a meeting is one that cannot be pushed under the rug! Because conformity bias often produces a false unanimity of opinions, eliminating this bias from matters of decision is of the utmost importance. Fortunately, there is a simple solution: develop a simultaneous voting process! My recommendation is the “thumbs up, thumbs down” system. When conducting a vote, don’t have one person speak their piece at a time, as this strategy is more likely to lead to individuals voicing a vote not because they agree, but because they don’t want to disagree. Instead, have all meeting attendees give either a thumbs up (yes) or a thumbs down (no) at the same time! This simple tactic helps ensure no one is unduly influenced by others’ opinions.

3. Appoint someone to be the “critic.”

We might also call this position the “devil’s advocate,” but such a moniker is not quite accurate, as it has a negative connotation most of us would prefer to avoid. As in the previous tip, we must recognize that discussion of different perspectives is necessary for a productive meeting, and appointing a critic allows for exactly that. The critic is someone who challenges ideas offered, though do note that “challenge” does not mean they denigrate, reject, or otherwise disparage said ideas. Rather, we might think of the critic as someone who asks why—why do we believe [x] is a better strategy than [y]? Why don’t we believe [q] will be as successful a partner as [p]? By having someone in the meeting who regularly challenges ideas, we can foster a more nuanced discussion of whatever subject is at hand, allowing us to move from our fast brains to our slow brains. In doing so, we will think more rationally instead of merely following the crowd—or should I say “jumping on the bandwagon”?

And there we have it! Three straightforward tips to help us combat the issue of conformity bias in any organizational meeting. I’d ask if you approve, but I don’t want you to feel pressured to jump on the bandwagon. ;) Instead, why don’t we give these tactics a try and evaluate their effectiveness for ourselves?

---

Dima Ghawi is the founder of a global talent development company with a primary mission for advancing individuals in leadership. Through keynote speeches, training programs and executive coaching, Dima has empowered thousands of professionals across the globe to expand their leadership potential. In addition, she provides guidance to business executives to develop diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies and to implement a multi-year plan for advancing quality leaders from within the organization.

Reach her at DimaGhawi.com and BreakingVases.com.