Skip to content

Workforce

Tag: inclusion

Posted on December 22, 2019June 29, 2023

The Decade in Diversity and Inclusion: How Much Progress Did We Make?

diversity

From a diversity and inclusion perspective, this has been a tumultuous decade. There has clearly been an increase in conversation about moving the dial on D&I, but how much has really changed?

It’s easy to feel discouraged when women make up only 17 percent of executives in consulting, 15 percent in financial services, and 11 percent in tech. However, increased advocacy, laws and pressure addressing this problem has begun to make changes. The proportion of women on boards of the FTSE 100 has increased from 12.5 percent in 2010 to 32.4 percent in 2019.

But the numbers don’t tell the whole story. The biggest areas where things have changed are our understanding of bias and discrimination and the way people are thinking about D&I.

Ten years ago, the words “unconscious bias” were only heard in academic circles. Now, they are common parlance. The term “psychological safety” was only used in academic journals in 2010, but now C-suite executives discuss its importance. These examples show an incredible increase in our understanding of why inclusion problems persist in the workplace.

Perhaps the biggest change comes from the very reasons organizations are doing D&I work in the first place. A decade ago, most organizations were approaching D&I from a compliance-driven approach that focused on ensuring the company was meeting all requirements it was legally obligated to. This “Diversity 101” approach was about attaining a minimum, not adding value.

As social consciousness around D&I increased, many organizations moved to a “Diversity 2.0” approach. They recognized that consumer markets look very different than they might have even 10 years ago and that consumers want to respect the values of the organizations they buy from. Putting diversity at the center of a major ad campaign is a good signal to these diverse populations that businesses understand these needs.

But as we close out the decade, some organizations have realized when these ad campaigns are not backed up by concrete action, it can create a feeling of inauthenticity. This can make the dominant group feel good about themselves but make the minority group they are trying to attract even more cynical. That gap in marketing versus reality is stark, and people notice. It causes a credibility gap that can make things worse in the eyes of the public.

As a result, businesses have found real success by using the “Inclusion 3.0” approach. This is where diversity and inclusion initiatives are not something done on the side, but rather are a key aspect of the way they do business.

Inclusive thinking is embedded in all the decisions they make, creating the conditions for a more organic increase in diversity in the company and a more inclusive environment that makes everyone thrive and work together more productively.

This change in perspective is also affecting new technologies. In the last decade, advances in machine learning and AI have caused some problems in the D&I space. Algorithms are created by human programmers, so everything the machine learns is imbued with their biases. One famous example is how object-detection systems in self-driving cars are better at detecting light skin than dark skin, a phenomenon discovered by Georgia Tech researchers in early 2019.

However, this technology has also become much cheaper. Thus, as we become more aware of how bias affects AI, we are more easily able to rectify its problems. In the case of self-driving cars, companies like Tesla and Uber have been able to adapt their platforms to completely change the way their cars detect objects in a short time for a relatively low cost.

Moreover, we are seeing the advent of tech products that actually help mitigate our biases. Textio is one example. It uses machine learning to help us understand what words and phrases in job descriptions are more or less biased toward applicants of different genders.

As tech becomes cheaper and easier to use, and as our awareness of our own biases and how they affect our work and technology increases, we can become increasingly innovative in how to mitigate our biases in day-to-day life. While at times it may seem that little progress has been made when we look at the numbers, in reality the change in consciousness around D&I is a much more substantive change.

We may have backlash to this progress, coming in the forms of political crises around the globe, but the conversation has clearly changed. As such, we can look to the next decade with optimism.

Posted on October 25, 2019June 29, 2023

New Study Points to Diversity and Inclusion as Key Driver to Company Success

A recent study focusing on diversity in the workplace found a strong correlation between diversity and inclusion functions and corporate business strategies that if well-aligned will reap a distinct positive impact on the organization’s reputation, employee retention and financial success.diversity

Global communications firm Weber Shandwick and management consultancy United Minds joined forces with KRC Research to conduct a new diversity study that focuses on the best practices of D&I functions that are well-aligned with the overall business strategy of the company, as well as the roles and responsibilities of chief diversity officers and the challenges facing them today.

“Diversity Officers Today: Paving the Way for Diversity & Inclusion Success,” which was released in September, surveyed 500 senior-level corporate D&I professionals employed at high-revenue companies in the United States. Elizabeth Rizzo, Weber Shandwick’s senior vice president of reputation research, said that the survey was about “their role, their attitude about the D&I function that they work for, and how it is integrated with the rest of the company.” The research categorized D&I professionals into three sections — Well-Aligned, Aligned and Misaligned — along a “D&I alignment continuum.”

Tai Wingfield, senior VP of diversity, equity and inclusion, Weber Shandwick.

After reading extensively about increased visibility on the work and investment that companies were making in D&I, researchers noticed a significant gap in the field. “We were surprised to find that there was very little research available that looked at the role of chief diversity officer as a whole,” said Tai Wingfield, Weber Shandwick’s senior vice president of diversity, equity and inclusion practice. “We thought there was a need to have some sort of research in place to arm chief diversity officers with best practices on what they could do more effectively, and to raise visibility around what this role entails and where it’s headed in the next couple of years.”

Full alignment is achieved when the actions of the D&I function and D&I staff members are integrated with the organization’s planned objectives in order to meet its overall business goals. This alignment has a substantial effect on new hires and resignations. The study shows that D&I activities impact 30 percent of new hires and 13 percent of resignations. Well-aligned companies have a 33 percent rate of position acceptances due to employee satisfaction of D&I at the company, as compared to aligned functions with 28 percent and misaligned functions with 24 percent.

D&I alignment was found to be a key driver of company reputation, as 79 percent of executives in well-aligned functions strongly agreed. This is substantially higher than in aligned D&I functions with 44 percent and misaligned D&I functions with 30 percent.

Financial performance was also positively transformed through D&I. An estimated 66 percent of executives in well-aligned D&I functions strongly agreed with this statement, which was also substantially higher than the 27 percent of executives in aligned D&I functions and the 30 percent in misaligned D&I functions.

“Having an aligned function means that you have a line of sight into the C-suite, that you’re getting the right investment in the space and that you have some sort of partnership with communications and marketing, which is critical in terms of achieving D&I goals and objectives,” Wingfield said. “All of that ladders up to increased reputation benefits, financial performance and better retention and recruitment of diverse talent.”

The biggest challenge that diversity executives face is making the business case for diversity and inclusion, followed by making diversity and inclusion values or outcomes externally visible. “I think that’s why we see the CDOs who are in well-aligned functions with the business note that partnerships between communications and marketing as a best practice, because it’s so important in terms of that external visibility piece,” Wingfield said.

Elizabeth Rizzo

Rizzo said that the most surprising finding within this study was that there are three things standing in the way of achieving full integration and alignment with the business strategy: Not all D&I functions had a dedicated leader (34 percent), many of these positions are only part-time (40 percent), and alignment was not always a top priority for some companies (18 percent).

“That seems to suggest that not every company really realizes the importance of having their D&I function being aligned, or having a seat at the table with the other business strategy goals,” Rizzo said.

As for the future of D&I, the study also found that CDOs are optimistic in their visions for D&I and the expansion of the position in corporate America. Approximately 81 percent have a positive outlook on the future of D&I, and 50 percent predict that most U.S. companies will have chief diversity officer positions in the next five years.

Posted on October 25, 2019June 29, 2023

Interpreting and Improving Performance Reviews of Multicultural Employees

Have you ever encountered a performance review in which a manager criticizes a behavior that’s tied to an employee’s cultural norms rather than to performance issues?

As more multicultural employees join the workforce, organizations are challenged to identify, interpret and assess potentially biased evaluation input on these workers. According to a recent Harvard Business Review article, “while biases can affect any of an organization’s talent decisions, they can be especially harmful when it comes to diversity and inclusion efforts.” And there is perhaps no setting that shapes careers, salaries and lives like annual performance evaluations.

When it comes to developing and advancing multicultural employees, performance reviews can be a double-edged sword. Too often, reviews are either underutilized, resulting in missed opportunities to intervene, or administered with a lack of cultural awareness. This can leave multicultural employees feeling isolated and unable to make reasonable advancements, ultimately deeming them a retention risk.

After seeing more than one multicultural employee depart after a disappointing performance review, I’ve wondered if a different review experience could have prevented that outcome.

Common Review Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

From coaching many multicultural clients over the years, I’ve compiled some best practices that may be useful for HR and learning and development practitioners, as well as managers faced with these performance review challenges.

  1. No Surprises! Give Feedback Early and Often

When concerns over his clarity of speech were expressed for the first time, one multicultural coaching client said, “I had no idea they felt that way. It’s good to know now, but I had never heard that from them before.”

Negative or constructive feedback coming late in the cycle can unintentionally put multicultural employees at a disadvantage. Addressing language and communications development needs (presentations and writing skills, interpersonal communications or dimensions of emotional intelligence) requires extra time. These “higher order” skills are progressively learned and attained, so infrequent feedback, or feedback that relies too much on human memory, can limit multicultural employees’ progress.

  1. Don’t Let Comments Get ‘Lost in Translation’

Performance review comments are not always written in a way that is clear or actionable. Or they are overly nuanced, reflecting the commenter’s lack of comfort with direct, straightforward language.

For example, a consulting firm employee of Asian background was given the vague advice to “get verbal presence training,” instead of being told that he might explore speech coaching to help improve his speech clarity and articulation. Another multicultural coaching client noted, “It is always disappointing to get my work back with so many corrections — and no explanation of why it is wrong.”

A better way: Focus on clear, actionable steps, as in these recommendations excerpted from a multicultural employee’s review:

  • Speak louder — both in person and on calls.
  • Inject energy — vary tone and place emphasis on key words.
  • Be direct — clearly tell listeners what you have to say and recap if necessary.
  • Provide coherent structure — organize your points clearly so your key messages are not disjointed or confusing.
  1. Read between the Lines

Some managers are (understandably) reluctant to be too direct in their critiques for fear of giving offense or being politically incorrect. Others may display unintended bias or lack understanding of how cultural differences play into behaviors.

During a manager review feedback conversation, one Springboards coach was told: “My employee is an incredibly strong technical contributor, but accent gets in the way — wait, are we allowed to say that?”

When a senior level employee is either receiving or providing performance feedback, the process is especially delicate. It could benefit from having a neutral third party like a specialized coach who can assess communication, language and culture needs and present recommendations. A well-designed peer review tool really helps managers to articulate potentially sensitive development needs in a way that’s impartial and actionable. This tool also provides a clear roadmap for coaching follow-up.

Managers can zero in on specific employee competencies, for example:

Based on an effectiveness rating scale from 1 to 5, to what extent does the employee:

  • Speak English with clear pronunciation, appropriate word choice and proficient grammar?
  • Deliver the appropriate, essential message to the audience: high level or in-depth summary to colleagues/team as necessary?
  • Guide her audience through complex material with appropriate storytelling, leading them to a strong conclusion and clear takeaways?
  • Present analysis effectively to a range of audiences?
  • Speak clearly and at the right pace, pausing appropriately, allowing audience to absorb, interject, and engage naturally and comfortably; display a confident cadence and vocal style?
  1. Mind the Gap

In coaching engagements, we’ve often seen three to five month gaps between the review and the onset of follow-up training. By that point, the next talent review cycle is already well underway. Ideally, employees should immediately have a clear set of recommendations and goals and the appropriate resources to get there, like internal mentoring, coaching or skills training.

Given the extra time multicultural employees often need to address feedback recommendations and make training progress, for some, the writing may already be on the wall.

  1. Unintended Consequences: ‘There’s nowhere to go here’

Consider how frustrating it must be for an individual who has been given constructive feedback but has not been pointed in the right direction for immediate upskilling. “I feel embarrassed that people don’t understand me,” a multicultural coaching client recently shared. “Sometimes I think they are pretending to understand me so as not to hurt my feelings, but it is awkward either way.”

Thoughtful messaging can eliminate any stigma or suggestion that the employee needs to be “fixed.” If coaching is perceived by multicultural employees as remedial or as a last-ditch effort, their next step may well be to contemplate opportunities elsewhere. But when managers frame their feedback and subsequent recommendations to be both constructive and inclusive, performance reviews can be a positive force in advancing career development and opportunity for all employees.

 

Posted on August 19, 2019June 29, 2023

Diversity Consultants Are Healers, Not Magicians

I was on the phone with one of my favorite colleagues debriefing a recent client engagement.

We’d done a series of focus groups for an organizational assessment and we’d gotten some fantastic data and comments.

“They’re such a great client!” my colleague exclaimed. I enthusiastically agreed.

That exchange got me thinking about great clients. What makes them “great” to work with? And what are the consequences when a client isn’t “great”?

Consultants are here to serve clients, yet we are most effective when clients help us help them. Being a “great client” doesn’t just matter when working with diversity consultants — it matters in engaging any external partner for leadership development, organizational strategy or change management. However, sometimes those leaders engaging diversity and inclusion consultants are less experienced in how to work with external professionals.

What makes clients great to work with — and more successful afterwards as a result — are the following three behaviors:

Trust the consultant. Clients who are unable or unwilling to be fully transparent inhibit the consultant’s ability to serve them and do an excellent job. Even pre-contract intake conversations are confidential, and an ethical consultant will ensure their client’s data, documents and personal disclosures are kept private. If you’re wary, have the consultant sign a non-disclosure agreement, but just as full honesty with your physician is critical to receiving the best health care, full transparency with your D&I consultant is critical to properly diagnosing your problem and getting meaningful results. Avoid keeping secrets from your diversity consultant even if they portray your organization in a less-than-flattering light.

Work at least as hard as the consultant. The consultant will eventually leave, and you will stay behind. Ultimately, you are the owner of the problem you have hired the consultant to help solve. Just as it’s up to you to follow your physician’s advice and change your behaviors to improve your health, you are responsible for implementing solutions and creating results that matter for your organization. Involve the right people in meetings with the consulting team, and enlist the right internal people to take on tasks. Follow up on action items by the agreed-upon deadlines. Communicate changes in priorities or key personnel to the consultant, as well as crises that arise during the project. Make it easy for the consultant to do their job well by executing critical functions they can’t, such as internal communications, scheduling and on-site logistics. It’s a waste of time, talent and budget to not ensure proper building access, fill focus groups, or brief stakeholders on the project goals.

Follow the consultant’s advice. Great clients hire excellent consultants because they need expertise they don’t have in-house. The fields of diversity and inclusion, organizational development, coaching and others require years of study and practice. When a consultant uses their expertise to provide recommendations, great clients often ask for clarification or provide necessary pushback. But just as a patient may not get good outcomes if they ignore a health practitioner’s advice, a client who does not heed their consultant’s expertise will not get the best results. Just as in health care, second opinions and questions are welcome, but great clients don’t waste their budget on consultants they plan to ignore or use as a scapegoat.

In short, great clients treat D&I consultants like healers, not magicians. Just like other types of healers, we partner with clients to understand their situation and context, diagnose the problem, co-create a treatment plan and provide support. We can’t do the work for the client just as the physician can’t heal the patient. The patient’s body does that with the right intervention and support. We can’t wave a wand and make the problem vanish, and we cannot fix it for you. Great clients get it, which is one of the reasons they can be so successful after working with great consultants.

Posted on July 24, 2019August 3, 2023

Employers Find Strength in Diversity

diversity
Amy Cappellanti-Wolf, chief human resource officer for global cybersecurity and defense company Symantec
Amy Cappellanti-Wolf

Amy Cappellanti-Wolf is the chief human resource officer for global cybersecurity and defense company Symantec. Cappellanti-Wolf has extensive experience in the consumer and tech sectors, having worked companies such as Pepsi, Disney and Cisco Systems. Cappellanti-Wolf spoke with Workforce Editorial Associate Bethany Tomasian on diversity as a driving force for a successful business operations model.

Workforce: How does diversity fit into Symantec’s business strategy?

Amy Cappellanti-Wolf: I believe that diversity is an important business driver. Symantec is located in more than 42 countries around the world, and if you’re going to be a global company you need to have an employee population that reflects the different geographies of your customers. You need different ways to operate and go to market and you aren’t going to be able to do that with a homogeneous employee base. You need people that bring different perspectives and experiences into the business. Diversity is a critical enabler for the business to be successful.

Workforce: Can you describe Symantec’s initiatives to overcome diversity barriers regarding women and minorities?

Cappellanti-Wolf: Our first part of our three-pillar approach is centered around amplifying the work that we do and creating a platform for it. That affects our employees and potential employees in the marketplace, as well as our customers and partners. Our CEO Greg Clark signed the diversity pledge for CEOs to show that we are committed to creating a diverse work environment. The second pillar is about taking bias out of the system. We did this when we introduced Textio to our system. Textio allows you to look at job descriptions and ensure that the language is gender-neutralized. We don’t want words of phrases that might not be attractive to a diverse set of candidates. That change allows everyone a level playing field when they look at these jobs. The third pillar surrounds inclusive leadership and that starts at the top. You need a company where people have a voice and they know that what they say counts because different voices bring different solutions. Diversity is an outcome of good inclusion practices.

Also watch Cappellanti-Wolf talk about enterprise transformation at the 2019 Unleash conference in Las Vegas 

Workforce: What advice would you offer other companies and startups regarding HR?

Cappellanti-Wolf: I would tell them to start with diversity now. Be clear about the three to four things that you want to do and focus on those, rather than launching 1,000 different ships. Leadership teams have a responsibility as officers of the company to drive this type of strategy so that it becomes a way by which you do business. I would tell startups to plant the mindset early by not to hiring the likely suspects: friends from college or previous colleagues. Bring different perspectives into the room. If you start at the beginning, it will become the operating model of business as it grows.

Other Workforce Q&As: 

Gary Pisano on How Managerial Leadership Drives Innovation

Author Jeffrey Pfeffer Addresses Dying for a Paycheck — Literally

 

Posted on July 16, 2019June 29, 2023

Playing the Game of Baby Boomer Bingo

baby boomers

It’s no secret that the retirement of baby boomers is contributing to a shortage of workers. baby boomers

Recent reports show that the United States is predicted to see a 38 percent increase in the over-65 population between 2015 and 2025, while the U.S. population of those between ages 18 and 64 is only expected to rise by 3 percent. Baby boomers are estimated to comprise 15 percent of the total global population, according to a resource on website employmentcounselor.net.

Around the world, employers are trying to retain these tenured resources with creative incentives. Some countries are increasing wages, and others are increasing retirement ages.

At the same time, companies are finding that the work styles of baby boomers are changing. After long careers spent largely working as traditional, full-time employees, many in this generation are shying away from retirement and are instead looking for smaller, more flexible work as contractors or consultants. In a tight labor market, this shift can be a significant opportunity for employers desiring the deep level of subject matter expertise, hard and soft skills, and management experience that boomers carry.

Boomers’ preference to continue working can be a big win for any company. To keep this generation in the workforce, however, companies will have to embrace several basic approaches to improve worker engagement. These approaches include creating flexible schedules and engagement models, partnering with senior workers in their career progression, and empowering senior workers with technology.

Embrace Flexibility

As baby boomers find their own balance between easing into retirement and staying productive, employers can aid the transition by providing flexible work options and alternative engagement models. For example, consider the sales executive who looks forward to cutting the hourlong commute from her morning or evening schedule.

For the employee, retirement may be a big, drastic step, but the personal and lifestyle benefits of removing the commute, even if just a few days per week, outweigh the anxieties of not working. By engaging that worker in meaningful dialogue around her real needs and proactively offering remote work as an option, the employer can dramatically alter the equation, often resulting in the employee staying on board for several valuable years. Similarly, flexibility in scheduling may include four-day weeks or alternative hours.

Along with schedule adjustments, an open mind about engagement models is also an advantage. Talent may come in the form of consultants or contractors, allowing a more flexible engagement model.

Hiring managers need to become comfortable in looking at both traditional employees and flexible workers when considering talent needs. That level of comfort requires an environment that enables the employer to quickly and easily identify and access all available talent, including permanent employment candidates and contractors alike.

Become a Career Partner

When employing baby boomers, it is critical to partner with them in their career progression and understand what they want from the position, as well as their overall career goals. For example, they may be interested in expanding their skills.

From technology to processes and new fields of expertise, workers of all generations value learning, and employers would do well to meet their needs with appropriate resources and learning programs. Likewise, visibility into job openings across the company is also valuable to pre-retirement workers. What the boomers desire in development (or increased flexibility) may come simply in the form of a role in a different department or functional group.

Along with traditional training opportunities and job visibility, boomers can benefit greatly from the give and take of knowledge transfer among workers in the organization. Mentorships are an obvious option for knowledge sharing from pre-retirement workers to those of other generations. Less obvious, but just as important, are reverse mentorship arrangements that give pre-retirement workers a chance to learn from younger generations.

Provide Up-to-Date Technology

Employers wishing to continue working with highly skilled baby boomers should not only provide them with workplace flexibility but also enable them to do that work with easy and transparent digital interactions. While baby boomers may have lived a substantial portion of their lives before the rise of digital communication, they also have grown accustomed to the consumer experience of using applications for everything from shopping on their phone to using Facetime to connect with distant family members.

In the workplace, baby boomers can benefit from the same level of technology enablement. For example, the use of cloud-based technologies for collaboration should make workflow, documentation, feedback, and approvals on projects transparent and accessible any time, any place.

Likewise, telecommuting tools like videoconferencing are no longer new, but many organizations have not fully adopted the concept in their core business. As more boomers opt to avoid or reduce the number of days spent commuting to onsite locations, use of these tools will become more widely accepted as part of corporate cultures and more widely sought after by generations approaching retirement. 

Make Workplace Accessibility a Priority

Regardless of age, employees need to believe that their employer is committed to their well-being, and removing barriers to access is an important part of that commitment.

For workers with disabilities, an employer’s commitment to improving employees’ ability to utilize physical and virtual resources can be instrumental to a positive work experience. Considering that the percentage of the U.S. population with a disability jumps from 10.6 percent for those between 18 and 64 to more than 35 percent for those over 65, according to research by the University of New Hampshire, the importance of access and accommodation for baby boomers is clear.

The most obvious example of accessibility is the corporate website. Captions with audio and video, along with visual options such as larger formats and contrasting color schemes, can help to ensure that the employer does not place unnecessary barriers to work and interaction for employees.

Many organizations can help companies assess their accessibility and provide paths for improvement. At the same time, employers should consider that accessibility often leads to a better experience for everyone and not just workers with disabilities.

Engaging Talent of All Ages

Organizations will continue to compete for valuable baby boomer talent. The competition may come from different employers, or it may come in the form of competing life choices, from full retirement to relocation. In all cases, core principles that drive great talent engagement will make the difference between employers that successfully engage baby boomers and those that miss out on the opportunity these workers present.

These commitments — being flexible, empowering their careers, and providing the right tools and technology to get work done — are more than strategies for recruiting senior workers. They are basic paths for any company to become a better employer to the people it hires and aims to retain, whatever their age and experience group. When it comes to attracting and retaining talent of any age, what’s good for people is good for business.

Keep Looking Ahead

Companies face persistent challenges in attracting, finding and retaining critical talent. They are struggling to get work done in a market where demographics are shifting, and the technology is constantly evolving.

When positioning a talent acquisition strategy to better engage the workforce, regardless of generation, an open mind for change is essential. A new solution may supplant the technology that works today for virtual work.

The model that engages pre-retirement professionals as consultants may evolve as part of a total talent approach. Amid such conditions, the leaders, today and in the future, will be the employers that continually question how work gets done, who needs to do it, and how they will go about securing that talent.

Posted on February 28, 2019June 29, 2023

Ensuring #MeToo Movement Advances Diversity in Leadership

Progress has been made in terms of women’s equality and protection over the past 10 years.metoo anniversary

In fact, it was recently the 10th anniversary of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the first bill signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2009.

While there have been significant strides in reducing gender bias, harassment and sexual misconduct, clearly there is still work to be done. The #MeToo movement has been an important driver in bringing to light numerous cases of sexual abuse and misconduct.

However, it has also had the unintended consequence of causing men to refrain from interacting with women for fear of retaliation. Considering that male executives play a key role in advancing women into higher levels of leadership, this fear must be taken seriously because if unaddressed it leads to workplaces where there are fewer opportunities for women’s career advancement and informal coaching. Bloomberg recently conducted interviews with more than 30 senior executives that suggest many are startled by the #MeToo movement — some for good cause while others succumb to fear and retreat from supporting leadership diversity.

This is a huge problem for women, men, the companies they work for and society as a whole. When men shy away from mentoring women and helping them advance in their careers, it hurts everyone. Likewise, it is shameful and unacceptable when women are objectified, threatened or harmed.

In both cases no one wins. The outcome of the #MeToo movement should not be that we reverse progress on increasing diversity in leadership but that we are creating opportunities for women and men to thrive.

This shift needs to happen at the organizational level with changes implemented by leaders so that men can invest in the career advancement of women without fearing they will be classified as #MeToo participants and so that women will have confidence that they are working in a safe environment. These changes should include:

  • Providing sexual harassment and communications training for men and women. Employees and managers need to understand what is acceptable and what is not. Men and women respond to nuance differently, and everyone needs to understand what behavior crosses the line. Insight on how to be friendly, kind and foster appropriate relationships will benefit both men and women at all levels within the organization.
  • Ensuring there are confidential reporting protocols in place. All employees need to have a clear and confidential venue to report misconduct so they will not be retaliated against by their colleagues. Similarly, they need to know that because they are empowered to report any misconduct (perceived or overt), their concerns will be taken seriously and senior leadership will take appropriate and supportive action. By formalizing the process, men will feel confident that if a woman retaliates and misuses her power in a destructive way there is a recourse. Both men and women should not be driven by fear but rather they should understand that if they adhere to clearly specified boundaries and are treated unfairly, they will be supported.
  • Making evaluations less ambiguous. We know that when there is ambiguity in assessments it can lead to bias. An article in the Harvard Business Review sums it up as, “Without structure, people are more likely to rely on gender, race and other stereotypes when making decisions — instead of thoughtfully constructing assessments using agreed-upon processes and criteria that are consistently applied across all employees.” When managers use comparable data to evaluate employees and include insight from subordinates, peers and other leaders as well as self-evaluations it will help ensure that constructive criticism relayed to a subordinate is not viewed as subjective, but in fact is based on data and information gathered from multiple sources.
  • Rewarding positive behavior and swiftly addressing inappropriate or illegal actions. By recognizing men and women who serve as successful models of mentoring colleagues, leaders will gain confidence and others will better understand the best way to help both men and women advance in their careers. Likewise, punishing the bad actors will improve working conditions for everyone.

Men and women are asking some important and tough questions about the workplace. Women have earned a seat at the management table and are rightfully demanding it. The #MeToo movement has been a powerful force for change in bringing to light sexual harassment and misconduct and removing perpetrators from positions of power. It’s time to capitalize on that momentum and change our workplace policies — starting from the top down — so that we can turn the #MeToo era into a movement that is constructive, encourages human interaction and supports appropriate career advancement.

Posted on February 26, 2019June 29, 2023

Coaching Is Not Mentoring: Underrepresented Employees Need Both

In a recent meeting with a major client my consultant team and I were faced with an unusual request.

A transgender executive working for the organization had been facing a series of small but cumulatively damaging setbacks in her career after many years of success. Her slow-motion derailment was harming the performance of her team, which was tasked with a high-stakes, high-visibility project. She had transitioned (from male- to female-presenting) two years earlier and she believed the perceived lag in her performance was not about her actual results, but about her now more-visible gender identity. The organization wanted to invest in the executive’s development and needed help finding her a coach.

It turned out I was the only one in the room who had experience working with transgender clients, but before I could gather more information, one of the leaders jumped in eagerly with a suggestion: “Well, why don’t we call up the local chapter of the Human Rights Campaign and see if anyone there can coach her?” Several heads nodded.

My heart sank. These educated, well-intended professionals had just made the same error too many of our clients make — confusing coaching with mentoring.

As a professional coach and former fitness instructor, there are parallels between the two disciplines that can be helpful in making a distinction between coaching and mentoring.

Before the modern fitness movement first began in the U.S., gyms, sports and various forms of dance and exercise already existed. In the late 1970s and early ’80s, programs such as Jazzercise emerged, and Richard Simmons and Jane Fonda helped popularize a whole new form of intense, rhythmic exercise done to upbeat music.

In those early years, almost anyone who was charismatic and a good dancer could lead an “aerobics” class. However, driven by increasing popularity, the exuberance of innovation soon gave way to widely varying levels of quality among aerobics classes and instructors, some of which seriously injured participants. Over time, the industry developed standards, ethics and certification guidelines so that today, fitness instructors are mostly well trained and accountable, and class participants enjoy both safety and effective guidance in meeting their wellness goals.

Coaching is similar in that the term “coaching” existed long before the coaching field, and some aspects of what we today refer to as “coaching” have always been performed by skilled therapists, bosses, clergy, healers, elders and even close friends. However, these similarities, as well as the recent explosion of the coaching field, have contributed to both confusion about what coaching is and widely varying degrees of quality among coaches even as the field has adopted certification procedures, a code of ethics and credentialing requirements.

The Elements of Professional Coaching

“Professional coaching” is not coaching like we see happening in sports. It’s not directing. Simply put, coaching is the facilitation of self-discovery in another person. This self-discovery is achieved through powerful and provocative questions, insightful feedback on what the coach is noticing, and a clear plan for action and accountability. Effective coaches are extraordinary listeners, highly creative, extremely agile and masterful at self-management — skills developed over months of training and years of practice.

Coaching is not giving advice, telling someone what to do, or showing someone how to perform a task. These functions are more accurately described as advising, mentoring or even consulting. Mentoring is a form of advising, in which the mentor’s role is to impart what the learner doesn’t have — knowledge, wisdom, skills and connections. Coaches can be effective even with minimal experience in their client’s field or industry, because the client possesses the “self” the coach helps them unlock and act from. In mentoring, the mentor has the answers; in coaching, the client has the answers.

Effective advising, mentoring and consulting often have coaching elements to them, but they are not technically coaching. It’s also true that some coaches incorporate advising or consulting in their work — for example, debriefing the results of an assessment or 360 — but when they do, they aren’t necessarily coaching. When I incorporate advising into my coaching, I always ask permission to do so, and verbally indicate when I am stepping in and out of coaching mode.

Being clear about what coaching really is, it is not about nitpicking semantics. When advising is called coaching, or mentoring is conflated with coaching, everyone involved misses out on the unique transformative power of a professional coaching relationship. People think they have experienced coaching, when they have not.

Professional coaches are to coaching what certified fitness instructors are to the fitness world. Here are some of the requirements:

  • Many professional coaches have completed a certification program, often accredited by the International Coach Federation, which requires up to 125 hours of training taking place over several months or longer. Some certification programs also require an exam, completion of hours observed by a mentor coach, and receiving coaching from a senior level coach. Coaches who complete certification become certified professional coaches or another designation bestowed by their certification program.
  • Some coaches, certified or not, choose to complete a credential, usually with the International Coach Federation. This requires at least 100 documented hours of coaching experience, passing an exam, and in some cases (depending on the type of credential and selected path), mentor coaching and/or the submission of recorded sessions for evaluation. Credentialed coaches (ACC, PCC or MCC) must complete continuing education to maintain their credential, which must be renewed every three years.
  • In sum, all credentialed coaches are trained, many credentialed coaches are certified, but not all certified coaches are credentialed. The latter case is similar to that of a social worker that has completed their MSW degree but is not yet licensed as a counselor.

Being clear about the qualifications that professional coaches possess is not about denigrating those who aren’t certified or credentialed. Many coaches who are not certified or credentialed are very skilled. But many of them are not. Some of them are not even doing coaching, and they are neither held to a professional code of ethics nor required to meet continuing education requirements.

Our clients trying to support their struggling transgender leader had good intentions, but have a common misunderstanding of what coaching entails. Suggesting that a person from the Human Rights Campaign would be qualified to coach a transgender executive just because they’re LGBTQ is like saying a person who’s good at arithmetic is qualified to do your tax returns, or a person with nice hair is qualified to cut yours. Professional coaches have a specialized, often highly developed skill set that should not be devalued or dismissed.

Both coaching and mentoring are critical to developing employees from underrepresented and marginalized identity groups. While we do need insightful, validating facilitators of our self-discovery, we also need competent role models to show us the way.

Posted on January 7, 2014June 29, 2023

Four Steps to Achieve Inclusiveness

WF_WebSite_BlogHeaders-12The new year is an ideal time to reflect on past triumphs and tribulations, and set the course for the days and months to come. Thoughtful attention to language is a critical way we create reality and set the stage for D&I success (see this post on the term “cultural competence.”)  One way to do this is to turn the “I” of “inclusion” into “inclusiveness.” To some, inclusiveness may sound the same as inclusion, but inclusiveness offers a subtle one-degree shift from old ways of thinking and better orients your compass toward the wildly successful results that D&I offers.

Inclusion, while a necessary counterpart to diversity, is a noun. It implies a static state, a reachable endpoint. It suggests something that can be easily measured and recognized. It’s a diversity 1.0 concept that might be achieved through what I call the Skittles approach: ensuring we have a colorful mix — gathering some of those (color, race, gender, age, type, etc.), and a couple of those, and a few of those. Colorful mix equals done! However, diverse mixes don’t achieve superior results by themselves — in fact, the mix without effective communication and positive relationships gets us more of what we don’t want in organizations, and less of what we do (see Scott E. Page’s work).

Inclusiveness is also a noun, but its root — inclusive — is an adjective that describes a state of being. Inclusiveness implies a dynamic, changing state that’s a moving target. It’s a diversity 2.0 (or 3.0) concept in that achieving inclusiveness requires ongoing attention, monitoring and dialogue. It’s never completely done. Its measurement requires creativity and flexibility.

How would you measure and achieve inclusiveness? First, get super clear on your D&I goals. This helps prepare your organization for the journey. D&I is not just about the mix but about leveraging the mix and making it work effectively to generate more brilliance and excellence. That brilliance and excellence should yield measurable results the organization cares about. Quantifying the impact of D&I on those measurable results should be the goal.

Second, determine what’s getting in the way of employees and leaders doing their best work, bringing their full selves to work, and enthusiastically contributing their brilliance and excellence. Is it substandard onboarding and training? Is it a lack of accountability and integrity? Oppressive or unfair policies or practices? Ineffective leadership behaviors? Poorly managed stress or ineffective communication? A little of each? What is at the heart of these gaps?

Third, identify what’s already working. Organizations can unintentionally damage or destroy what’s working well while attempting to solve problems. Identify what’s working and keep doing those things!

Fourth, act, with measurable milestones and a system of accountability to ensure goals are reached on time. Also, remain flexible and creative. Since inclusiveness is a shifting state of being, the challenges, opportunities, strengths, demographics and market are moving targets that require constant monitoring and nimble responses.

Arguably, one could follow the same four steps and obtain similar results while calling it inclusion, but if your goal is inclusiveness — a shifting state of being where diverse people bring their brilliance and excellence to work and generate results beyond your wildest dreams — why not call it that?

Posted on May 15, 2012June 29, 2023

The Women’s Movement in the ’70s, Today: ‘You’ve Come a Long Way,’ But …

women's movement

A new social movement took center stage in the 1970s. It followed the lead of the civil rights movement, as well as the mounting protests against the Vietnam War. In this volatile era, the women of the nation were determined that their voices be heard above the din of discontent.women's movement 1970s

“I am woman; hear me roar,” went the lyrics of a popular Helen Reddy song from 1972.

“A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle” went another popular slogan frequently used by activist Gloria Steinem. The phrase suggests an independence and stature for women that still, four decades later, is not fully realized. Even with a string of laws and legal wins that have advanced women’s positions in the workplace, advocates say there is still a long way to go.

“We take five steps forward and 10 steps back, but we try to keep moving forward and not get too discouraged,” says Nancy Kaufman, CEO of the National Council of Jewish Women, which supports social and economic justice for all women. “We really try to be advocates, and that’s what the women’s movement has been all about. I feel we really need to stand up for the gains that we’ve made over the last century or so and not let them slip.”

Outspoken leaders of the women’s liberation movement, like Steinem and Betty Friedan, aimed to raise women up from home and work situations that they considered subjugation. And both forward-thinking college students and working women organized marches and protests for equal rights in the workforce. One of the more noteworthy rallies was the Women’s Strike for Equality where an estimated 50,000 women marched in New York and another 100,000 women across the country in August 1970 to mark the 50th anniversary of the 19th Amendment, which gave U.S. women the right to vote.

“You’ve come a long way, baby,” was another popular saying of that era, which originated on cigarette advertisements meant to acknowledge the giant strides of the women’s movement.

But judging from a January 1975 article in Personnel Journal, the forebear of Workforce Management, some of the concepts embraced by the women’s movement, including equality in the workplace and the C-suite, were not going over well in tradition-bound workplaces.

In “What Does It Take for a Woman to Make It in Management?” by Marion M. Wood, an assistant professor at the University of Southern California, a list of 10 attributes was offered as requisites for women’s success: 1) competence; 2) education; 3) realism; 4) aggressiveness; 5) self-confidence; 6) career-mindedness; 7) femininity; 8) strategy; 9) support of an influential male; and 10) uniqueness.

Additionally, Wood quoted an unnamed male Equal Employment Opportunity director as saying, “For a woman to succeed, there must be a man in her life who believed it’s the right thing to do.”

The women’s movement of the ’70s was in part a reaction against the type of happy homemaker that was often portrayed in television sitcoms of previous decades. Like it or not, girls growing up in the ’50s would have been exposed to role models such as the housewives in Leave It to Beaver, The Donna Reed Show and Father Knows Best, women whose career goals were getting the kids off to school and serving dinner on time. A working woman as role model didn’t come along until the late 1960s and early 1970s when shows such as Julia—where Diahann Carroll starred in the first nonstereotypical network TV role for an African-American woman as Julia Baker, a single mom who worked full time as a nurse—and The Mary Tyler Moore Show in which Moore portrayed Mary Richards, a career-oriented single woman who is a news producer for a TV station in Minneapolis.

Today, women comprise nearly half of the U.S. labor force. While 70 percent of families in 1960 had a stay-at-home parent, now 70 percent of families have either both parents working or a single parent who works. In two-thirds of all households, women are either the main breadwinner or the co-breadwinners, according to the Center for American Progress. In 40 percent of all households, women are the only wage earners. Yet on average, women in the workplace earn 20 percent less than men doing comparable jobs.

Please also read: Workforce Management Looks Back at Workplace History (1920s-1970s)

Over the past several decades, a variety of laws and rulings have paved the way for more Mary Richards to succeed at work. Among the first was the Equal Pay Act of 1963.

And, truth be told, the wage gap was even wider in the early ’60s. When President John F. Kennedy signed the bill banning wage discrimination, women were making only 58 cents for every dollar earned by a man.

Other landmark legislation followed that was intended to improve worklife for women, while making it easier to meet the dual demands of work and family. In 1978 the Pregnancy Discrimination Act was passed as an amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (Title VII prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.) In 1993 the Family and Medical Leave Act, or FMLA, was passed. It entitles eligible employees to take unpaid, job-protected leave for specified family and medical reasons. In 2009, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was signed into law, giving workers more leeway to sue for paycheck discrimination.

Conservative commentators take issue with this act, as well as the validity of the gender wage gap. In a recent article in the online libertarian magazine Doublethink, the Ledbetter Act is said to force businesses “to constantly look over their shoulders” for claims rising up from the past. “This is a trial lawyer/class action lawsuit boondoggle,” writes columnist Nicole Kurokawa Neily, “and that’s bad for the American economy.”

But other observers defend the Ledbetter act as vital to fairer pay for women. And advocates say there is more to do to make the workplace a level playing field for both sexes.

“I think the current laws are important and a great start,” says Emily Martin, vice president and general counsel for the National Women’s Law Center in Washington, D.C., “but I don’t think they’re the end of the conversation by any means. They’re a good baseline structure that establishes the crucial principle that women are entitled to equal treatment on the job.”

For example, Martin recently testified at an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission hearing on pregnancy discrimination, which was ostensibly outlawed in 1978. Yet the EEOC reports that complaints from pregnant workers are on the rise, with 5,797 complaints in fiscal year 2011 alone. Most complaints stem from wrongful firing, while about 10 percent are from unlawful failure to hire.

At the Feb. 15 hearing, EEOC general counsel P. David Lopez stated, “At the core, all of these cases involve employers who held stereotypical assumptions about pregnant women.”

Adriana Kugler, chief economist at the U.S. Labor Department, tells Workforce Management that lingering stereotypes and biases play a large role in keeping women from achieving equality in the workplace. “There are expectations from employers that women want to have a family and won’t be as committed, and so they’re not even offered an opportunity,” she says.

Women tend to outperform men academically, while they are held behind in the workplace. According to the 2010 census, 36 percent of women age 25 to 29 had college degrees compared with 28 percent of men in that age group. A December 2011 report by the Harvard Independent states that since 1980 not only are more women than men enrolled in higher education, but also more women graduate with honors.

Yet, in Fortune 500 companies women account for just 7.5 percent of top earners, and only 3.6 percent of those companies’ CEOs are women.

Kugler says that, among employers, there’s a widespread but unexpressed belief that women cannot fully commit to job responsibilities, work-related travel and time away from home. She points to a 1997 study by two women economists from Harvard and Princeton universities of major orchestra auditions that showed that when the auditions were blind, women were as likely as men to be hired as musicians who would be expected to go on the road and to make considerable time commitments to the job. But when interviewed in person, men were hired more often than women.

“You know,” Kugler says, “the sound of a beautiful instrument should be the same whether it’s played by a man or a woman. But the employer has stereotypes about what kind of a commitment a woman is willing to make.”

To make it easier for a woman to commit to her job, especially when trying to juggle work and family, existing laws need to be updated, some observers say. Dina Bakst, co-president of A Better Balance, a legal team in New York City specializing in work-family issues, says, “Our laws and policies are really out of date. The FMLA was a monumental piece of legislation, but it doesn’t go far enough. We need paid leave and workplace flexibility.”

Bakst says 178 countries have paid family leave for new mothers, and 50 countries give paid leave to new fathers. Meanwhile, some states have passed their own legislation. Laws requiring paid family leave are on the books in California, New Jersey and Washington. A similar law has been introduced in New York’s Legislature.

“Paid family leave is a seriously important policy that many companies recognize as being good for the bottom line and have for their own employees,” Bakst says. “You’ll see many fantastic companies that do provide some form of paid leave because they know it’s good for business.”

As for the disparity between wages earned by men and women, there was slow but steady improvement in closing that gap after the 1963 Equal Pay Act became law. But once the female equivalent of a man-earned dollar passed 70 cents in 1990, progress began to sputter. “The pay gap really narrowed for about 30 years, and it has stalled for the past decade or so,” Kugler says.

The issue has not lacked attention. Indeed, it has its own unofficial holiday, April 17, which is meant to show how long a woman must keep working into the next year to earn the equivalent salary earned by a man in the previous year. And this year on Equal Pay Day, the U.S. Labor Department announced seven winners of its Equal Pay App Challenge. Teams of software developers devised their own free mobile phone applications to apprise job hunters of pay disparities and to offer tools, such as negotiation skills, for improving one’s chances for landing a better-paid job. (Links to the Equal Pay Apps can be found at tinyurl.com/78ycsgu.)

Incidentally, encouraging female workers to learn salary negotiation skills is not a new idea. In Wood’s Personnel Journal article from 37 years ago, lack of such skills was cited as a reason women were often held back from management positions. “Traditionally, women have not been trained to bargain,” she wrote. “Most have not learned that a salary offered is not a constant, but a starting point for discussion. Men … will continue considering women ‘cheap help’ as long as women continue to accept lower offers than they are worth.”

Disparities in men’s and women’s paychecks still exist in most professions. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey of 2009, the gap was greatest in the financial services industry, with women making about 70 cents to a man’s dollar. Even in teaching, which has traditionally been a woman’s profession and today is 80 percent female, women’s wages are lower. “In 2010, women in teaching professions were earning only 80.9 percent of their male counterparts’ wages,” says Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, which represents 1.5 million people.

Making its way through Congress now is the Paycheck Fairness Act. It would require disclosure of compensation while outlawing retaliation against employees who seek information about other workers’ salaries. According to Martin of the National Women’s Law Center, it would “tighten some of the loopholes” in the Equal Pay Act, namely loose interpretations that have allowed some employers to justify wage discrimination.

The case of Sheila Davidson of Philadelphia illustrates what the Paycheck Fairness Act is all about. Last November Davidson won her wage discrimination claim against her employer, Amtrak. Davidson had just been promoted when she learned that a man, doing the same job she had previously performed, was being paid a higher salary, higher even than what Davidson was earning after her promotion.

What gave Davidson an advantage is that she works in human resources for Amtrak and thus has access to compensation information. If the Paycheck Fairness Act gets passed, average employees would have access to similar data.

Philip Kovnat, the EEOC lawyer who represented Davidson in her lawsuit against Amtrak, remarked that it was not uncommon for HR people to file their own EEOC complaints. In fact, Davidson had been filing EEOC complaints on behalf of other employees for the previous eight years and had worked as an HR professional for 25 years. In the end, a federal court in Philadelphia directed Amtrak to pay her $171,483 in back pay, along with damages and attorney fees, and raised her pay by $16,505.

Susan G. Hauser is a writer based in Portland, Oregon. Comment below or email editors@workforce.com.

Posts navigation

Page 1 Page 2 Next page

 

Webinars

 

White Papers

 

 
  • Topics

    • Benefits
    • Compensation
    • HR Administration
    • Legal
    • Recruitment
    • Staffing Management
    • Training
    • Technology
    • Workplace Culture
  • Resources

    • Subscribe
    • Current Issue
    • Email Sign Up
    • Contribute
    • Research
    • Awards
    • White Papers
  • Events

    • Upcoming Events
    • Webinars
    • Spotlight Webinars
    • Speakers Bureau
    • Custom Events
  • Follow Us

    • LinkedIn
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
    • RSS
  • Advertise

    • Editorial Calendar
    • Media Kit
    • Contact a Strategy Consultant
    • Vendor Directory
  • About Us

    • Our Company
    • Our Team
    • Press
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms Of Use
Proudly powered by WordPress