Since the 1980s, companies have increasingly adopted diversity policies to improve the representation of women and racial minorities in the workplace.
Today over 95% of companies with at least 1,000 employees have instituted programs to increase diversity and inclusion within their ranks.
Despite this, we know remarkably little about how people feel about these programs, and even less about why they feel the way they do. This is a major knowledge gap. Research shows that diversity programs are more effective when workers support them — and when done correctly, they offer great opportunities to improve workplace equity and, ultimately, firm performance. At their worst, however, they can stimulate resistance and actually create an even more challenging environment for underrepresented workers.
To help companies take full advantage of these programs and close this knowledge gap, we conducted a study guided by the following three research questions:
> Read the full article on the HBR website
By Danny Lambouths III, William Scarborough and Allyson Holbrook
Source: HBR
It’s a persistent myth: if a company recruits enough employees from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, a sufficient number will, over time, rise through the organization to create a diverse culture at all levels. But that is not happening.
The script at BIO this year could not have been more clear: Progress on diversity is being made, but more work needs to be done. Yet still, an undercurrent of biotech’s all-boys brand-of-old tugged at the heels of efforts to bolster those long-excluded from positions of authority.
Another vital antidote to the labor shortage is fixing the care economy, made up of people who provide paid and unpaid care. (See “Overview of the Care Economy.”) Within the care economy, two related and somewhat hidden issues are crucial to the long-term health of the US labor market.