Embed DEI in your processes
Changing behaviour is hard. To make it stick, you need structures to make it easy. The key to embedding DEI is in behavioural design. With simple tools such as checklists and templates to structure your processes, you’ll make it easier for everyone to embed inclusive behaviours in their day-to-day.
How do processes support DEI?
DEI isn’t about tick-box exercises. One-off training sessions or events are unlikely to make a sustained impact on people’s behaviour. In the worst cases, they can even be harmful. If you want to transform your organisation, you need to make changes that last. But how do you get to a place where DEI is an automatic part of everything you do?
You need to bake DEI into your processes. These should encompass all of your people activities (such as hiring, promotion, pay etc.) to limit bias in decision-making. It’s about setting defaults for objective and fair behaviour so that we don’t fall back on our mental shortcuts. Instead of relying on individuals to change their behaviour, make DEI a structural focus for how you do things as an organisation.
Processes to limit bias
When people are under a lot of pressure or faced with a complex tax, they’re more likely to rely on mental shortcuts to make things easier. But that’s how bias comes into play. We might hire the candidate who made the strongest impression (i.e. shared your hobbies or “looked the part”) rather than the objective best performer, just because they’re easier to remember.
By tweaking the decision-making process, we can make fairer decisions. It all comes down to behavioural design — changing structures to influence people’s behaviour.
Let’s take hiring as an example. The best way to cut bias out of the picture is to remove ambiguity. If evaluation criteria are vague, then manager intuition can fill the gaps, which is riddled with unconscious bias and assumptions.
Plenty of research has shown that stereotypes significantly influence our judgment of candidates. In one study, participants were asked to rate a man and woman for a police chief position. Some participants were shown that the man had more experience and less education than the woman, and for other participants, the situation was reversed. In both instances, the participants rated the male candidate more favourably, redefining the success criteria depending on his strengths.
But rigid, well-defined assessment criteria completely eliminate gender gaps in ratings. When assessors have clear guidance on what “good” looks like, they rely less on assumptions and make more accurate judgements. By setting up a process where hiring managers define criteria for success, and rigidly stick to these when judging candidates, you can minimise bias in hiring.
Examples of processes that support DEI
It’s not rocket science. Simple, cost-free tools can hugely impact workplace equity. Things like templates, checklists and timely nudges shape people’s behaviour. For example:
Put a word count on your performance review forms
Vague performance feedback holds back careers. Researchers found that men are 20% more likely to receive constructive, developmental feedback than women. Level the playing field with a simple nudge at the top of your feedback forms:
“Write 100 – 150 words for this question. Be specific and aim to write similar-length reviews for each of your direct reports.”
Create a template for 1-on-1s with questions about wellbeing
Make sure all employees are receiving valuable support from their direct managers by standardising 1-on-1 questions. Templates like this minimise preparation time for managers and ensure consistency across the board. Here are some example questions to add:
- What work are you most proud of over the last 2 weeks?
- Is there anything you need to help you work better?
- How are your stress levels?
Run default opt-in promotions
Women are less inclined than men to boast or self-aggrandise, even when performing equally. Studies have also confirmed that women tend to put themselves forward for promotion at a lower rate. Check this bias by switching the default.
Instead of relying on employees to put themselves forward for promotion, automatically consider every eligible employee, unless they explicitly tell you not to.
To maximise fairness, your processes need to be transparent. Outline who’s involved in the decision-making process, when these decisions happen, and how decisions are made. Publish this information in accessible documents that employees can review.
Using a tool to embed DEI
DEI isn’t usually thought of as an issue that tech can solve. But just like marketing and sales, there are tools on the market to help you run your processes more effectively and efficiently.
With a tech tool, it’s much easier to systemise your DEI. You’ll get a holistic picture of what your company does well and where improvements need to happen. It’s also easier to delegate responsibility when everyone has access to this information. Instead of relying on a few dedicated individuals to stay on top of things, your DEI tool will do it for you.
Fair HQ streamlines your DEI process. Fair HQ uses data-driven insights and behavioural science research to give you an accurate picture of your diversity, equity and inclusion. With Fair HQ, you can gather diversity data, audit your processes for equality and learn about employees’ experiences of inclusion. Our library of science-backed recommendations enables you to bake DEI into all of your processes.
If you’d like to learn more about embedding DEI with the Fair HQ platform, get in touch today.
Backing it up
Anand, R., & Winters, M. F. (2008). A retrospective view of corporate diversity training from 1964 to the present. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7(3), 356-372.
Correll, S. (2017). Reducing Gender Biases In Modern Workplaces: A Small Wins Approach to Organizational Change. Gender & Society, 31(6), 725-750.
Correl, S. & Simard, C. (2016). Research: Vague Feedback Is Holding Women Back. Harvard Business Review
Exley, C. L., & Kessler, J. B. (2022). The gender gap in self-promotion. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 137(3), 1345-1381.
Uhlmann, E. L., & Cohen, G. L. (2005). Constructed criteria: Redefining merit to justify discrimination. Psychological science, 16(6), 474-480.