10819, 1(35 PMCHAPTER SEVEN From Diversity to Inclusion An.docx

10/8/19, 1(35 PMCHAPTER SEVEN: From Diversity to
Inclusion: An Inclusion Equation - Diversity at Work: The
Practice of Inclusion
Page 1 of 12https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/diversity-
at-work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml
CHAPTER SEVEN
From Diversity to Inclusion: An Inclusion Equation
Mary-Frances Winters
For inclusion, you have to start with the heart and then move to
the head.
For authentic, sustainable, inclusive organizations, leaders have
to “get it
in their guts” and then commit to becoming competent so their
behavior
matches their intent.
—FORTUNE 100 FINANCIAL SERVICES CEO
In the past twenty-five years, the field of diversity and
inclusion has become
more sophisticated, both in its definitions and in articulating
what the terms
really mean. But multiple definitions of this burgeoning and
complex disci-
pline still abound, often leading to confusion and even
controversy. As I
pointed out in a prior review, “[d]iversity has evolved into a

rather amor-
phous field, where the very word itself invokes a variety of
different mean-
ings and emotional responses” (Anand & Winters, 2008, p.
356).
Thought leader Dr. Roosevelt Thomas is credited with shifting
the paradigm
from complying with legal mandates to the business case for
diversity. Ac-
cording to Thomas, the challenge of diversity was more than
ensuring repre-
sentation of historically underrepresented groups. Data showed
overwhelm-
ingly that the careers of minorities and women plateaued, and
few were
breaking into higher-level positions (Thomas, 1990). He said
the goal should
be to “create … an environment where ‘we’ is everyone”
(Thomas, 1990, p.
109). Thomas argued that we needed something else besides
affirmative ac-
tion: “That something else consists of enabling people, in this
case minorities
and women, to perform to their potential” (Thomas, 1990, p.
109).While he
did not use the term inclusion, the definition commonly put
forth is as
Thomas articulated it: creating an environment in which
everyone has the
opportunity to reach his or her full potential.
It took almost a decade for Thomas's concept to become
commonly referred
to as inclusion and for it to become paired, routinely, as part of
diversity and

inclusion.
Distinguishing Inclusion from Diversity
Andrés Tapia, president of Diversity Best Practices and author
of The Inclu-
sion Paradox, offers a simple way of distinguishing between the
definitions
of diversity and inclusion: “Diversity is the mix. Inclusion is
making the mix
work” (Tapia, 2009, p. 12). Or, as others have defined the
distinction: diver-
sity is about counting heads; inclusion is about making heads
count. Another
way to distinguish between diversity and inclusion is to define
diversity as a
noun describing a state and inclusion as a verb or action noun,
in that to in-
clude requires action. Expanding on these ideas, I define
inclusion as creat-
ing an environment that acknowledges, welcomes, and accepts
different ap-
proaches, styles, perspectives, and experiences, so as to allow
all to reach
their potential and result in enhanced organizational success.
Perhaps the most salient distinction between diversity and
inclusion is that
diversity can be mandated and legislated, while inclusion stems
from volun-
tary actions. In an interview I conducted with a Fortune 100
CEO, he cap-
tured the distinction highlighted in this chapter's epigraph: that
leaders
must “get it in their guts” and then match their intent with their
behavior.

Inclusion Is Harder to Achieve Than
Diversity
Lack of advancement of historically underrepresented groups is
the prover-
bial inclusion quandary. Twenty-five years ago, the common
explanation was
that these groups had less time in the workforce than White
men. As more
White women and people of color gained experience, the theory
went, the
inequities would self-correct. Lack of workforce experience is
no longer a
valid justification. Current evidence points to organizational
cultural norms
P R E V
Part Three: Organizational and Societal Perspectives and
Practices
⏮
N E X T
CHAPTER EIGHT: Inclusive Human Resource Management:
Best Practices and the Changi…
⏮
#$!
% Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion
https://learning.oreilly.com/home/
https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/diversity-at-
work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml#
work/9781118415153/p03.xhtml

work/9781118415153/c08.xhtml
work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml#
work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml#
work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml#
work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml#
at-work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml
that unwittingly perpetuate exclusive behaviors as a key barrier
to advance-
ment. Achieving an inclusive culture is a complex endeavor,
requiring delib-
erate examination of all aspects of the organization and a
willingness to
make changes to reduce the potential for bias that favors the
dominant
group.
As an example of the continued difficulty to achieve inclusion
in organiza-
tions, a 2012 study conducted by the Center for Talent
Innovation on the im-
pact of sponsorship in advancing multicultural employees found
that over
one-third of African Americans and Hispanics and 45 percent of
Asians re-

ported a “need to compromise their authenticity” to conform to
their compa-
ny's standards of “demeanor or style.” In addition, about one-
fifth of His-
panics, one-third of African Americans, and 29 percent of
Asians in the
study reported that a “person of color would never get a top
position at my
company” (Hewlett, Jackson, Cose, & Emerson, 2012, p. 2).
Achieving an inclusive workplace for women is also
challenging. Women
make up half of the U.S. workforce yet as of this writing hold
only 3.8 per-
cent of Fortune 500 CEO positions and 4.0 percent of Fortune
1000 CEO po-
sitions (Catalyst, 2012). In 2009, Catalyst reported that almost
30 percent of
Fortune 500 companies had no women executive officers at all,
and less than
18 percent of companies had three or more women executive
officers
(Soares, Carter, & Combopiano, 2009).
Another compelling example is that, according to the 2010
Survey of Em-
ployment of Americans with Disabilities (“Survey: Employers
Not Doing
Enough,” n.d.), disability is included as part of their initiative
by only two-
thirds of companies surveyed that had diversity programs (70
percent of the
total); only 18 percent of responding companies reported having
education
programs aimed at ensuring inclusive practices for people with
disabilities.

Yet another example suggesting we have much work to do to
achieve inclu-
sion is the Out and Equal Workplace Culture Report (Harris
Interactive,
2008), which tracked attitudes about LGBT workers in the U.S.
from 2002
to 2008. This survey found that, in 2008, 42 percent of
heterosexual respon-
dents believed that LGBT people are treated fairly and equally,
a proportion
unchanged from 2002; 22 percent indicated that it would be
very difficult to
be openly gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender at their
workplace. Fifty per-
cent of LGBT adults reported hearing someone at their current
or most re-
cent job tell jokes about people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual,
or transgen-
der, and only 30 percent reported never having faced any
workplace discrim-
ination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation.
An innovative study conducted by Bendick and Egan (Bendick,
2008) point-
ed to a lack of inclusion as the cause of an organization's lack
of diversity,
and concluded that a lack of diversity is merely a symptom of
the lack of in-
clusion. Based on a multiple-regression analysis of HR records
for a large fi-
nancial services company, key indicators for positive career
advancement fell
into two categories—demographic and professional (as shown in
Exhibit 7.1).
There was a higher likelihood of success at this company for

people who
were White and male, but also for those who had attended the
“right” school,
had military service, or had other characteristics or experiences
that were
more valued. While it has long been acknowledged that
organizational
norms often set up unwritten rules that favor the ingroup,
Bendick (2008)
and Egan successfully isolated and quantified those factors for
their client.
Exhibit 7.1. Bendick and Egan Study Findings of Key Success
Factors
Demographic
Characteristics
Professional Characteristics
White
Male
Age 36–55
Grew up in US
or EU
Native English
speaker
Married with
kids
Degree from 20 “core”

universities
Served in Marines
No degrees outside
business
No experience in any
other industry
With firm >10 years
No career shifts within
the firm
Developing Sustainable, Inclusive
Organizational Cultures: The Inclusion
Equation
While, as previously discussed, there is some consensus on the
definition of
inclusion (see also Ferdman, Chapter 1, this volume), the
concept is open to
widely varying behavioral interpretations. The specific
behaviors and actions
that exemplify inclusion are not consistent or well understood.
Too often it is
easier to perpetuate habitual exclusive practices rather than
adopt new in-
clusive ones. To make the shift to an inclusive cul ture that will
be sustainable
over time requires a much broader and deeper approach than
what has tra-
ditionally occurred in the name of diversity. Inclusion requires
addressing
both macro, systemic issues and ongoing micro behaviors that
impact the

experiences of individuals on a day-to-day basis. Inclusion also
has to be dri-
work/9781118415153/c01.xhtml
at-work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml
ven both by top-down leadership and bottom-up engagement.
I created the inclusion equation to help depict the interrelated
variables nec-
essary to create and sustain inclusive cultures (see Figure 7.1).
There are two
broad components of the inclusion model it depicts: macro and
micro inclu-
sion practices. The two macro aspects focus on organizational
culture and
organizational systems. At the micro level, the model identifies
individual
cultural competence and emotional intelligence as the two core
requirements
to create and sustain inclusion. The components of the model
are interde-
pendent and work synergistically. When any one aspect is weak
or absent, it
severely inhibits the ability of an organization to effectively
practice
inclusion.

Figure 7.1. The Inclusion Equation
Source: Copyright © 2012, The Winters Group, Inc. Used by
permission.
At the micro or individual level, inclusion or exclusion involves
the day-to-
day experiences that individuals have with managers and peers
as well as
outside vendors and suppliers. This is where microinequities as
well as un-
conscious bias occur most often. The concept of microinequities
was first in-
troduced in 1973 by Mary Rowe (2008; see also Haslett &
Lipman, 1997),
who defined them as “small events which are often … hard-to-
prove … often
unintentional, frequently unrecognized by the perpetrator,
which occur
wherever people are perceived to be ‘different’ ” (Rowe, 2008,
p. 45). Exam-
ples include names mistakenly left off a list, people
inadvertently not being
introduced at meetings (or erroneously introduced as someone
else of the
same race), and/or sending out invitations that may be
insensitive to gays or
women (for example, “Bring your wife”). Rowe (2008) contrasts
these with
microaffirmations, the small and sometimes hard-to-see
behaviors that pro-
mote inclusion, such as “tiny acts of opening doors to
opportunity, gestures
of … caring, and graceful acts of listening” (p. 46).
Unconscious bias is also a
primary factor in the perpetuation of exclusive cultures.
Unconscious bias

can be defined as preferences based on perceptions, thoughts,
feelings, and
beliefs that are deeply hidden in our subconscious. Theorists
believe that dis-
crimination persists in society because we routinely act on our
unconscious
biases (see Ross, 2008).
Inclusion requires individuals to become culturally competent.
As the first
step, individuals must work on becoming aware of
microinequities and their
conscious as well as unconscious biases. The journey to
becoming more cul-
turally competent involves ongoing learning to develop the
skills and abili-
ties to recognize, accept, and adapt to cultural differences and
similarities. I
provide more detail on the role of cultural competence later in
the chapter.
In the next section, I provide detailed examples of how the
elements of the
model work to either enhance or inhibit an inclusive culture.
Inclusion Equation Macro Element #1: Values-
Driven Culture
Organizations today are beginning to link diversity and
inclusion to the com-
pany's values. Here I cite two representative examples, as
indicated on the
companies' websites.
Microsoft's vision and strategy for the future:
Diversity and inclusion are integral to Microsoft's vision,

strategy and busi-
ness success. We recognize that leadership in today's global
marketplace re-
quires that we create a corporate culture and an inclusive
business environ-
ment where the best and brightest diverse minds—employees
with varied
perspectives, skills, and experiences—work together to meet
global con-
sumer demands. The collaboration of cultures, ideas, and
different perspec-
tives is an organizational asset and brings forth greater
creativity and
innovation
[Microsoft, 2012, para. 1].
Dell's commitment to diversity and inclusion:
Dell is committed to inclusion and diversity. Our mission is to
succeed in the
marketplace by fostering a winning culture of Dell employees
who are highly
talented, committed, reflective of our global customers and
recognized as
our greatest strength. Diversity is at the core of Dell's values
and winning
culture. It helps define the kind of company we are and aspire to
be. Diversi-
ty initiatives tap additional talent, retain employees, strengthen
relation-
ships, improve our operating results and further our global
citizenship ef-
forts in the many communities we call home

at-work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml
[Dell, 2012, para. 1–2].
Inclusion is a value, and as such must be inherent in and
integrated into all
aspects of an organization's culture. Values are the moral
compasses that
guide organizational behavior. Like other values that employees
are expected
to “live,” inclusion must comprise a set of behaviors that are
meaningful
across a variety of backgrounds and cultures. In Exhibit 7.2, I
list a useful set
of such behaviors, adapted from Hubbard (2004).
Exhibit 7.2. Developing Inclusive Behaviors
Modify your listening skills
Recognize and adapt to the variety of listening
behaviors you will encounter among diverse employees.
Recognize and adapt your own listening skills as
necessary to understand diverse perspectives.
Listen for value-based cultural assumptions,
perceptions, and expectations.
Observe behavior and monitor your interpretations and
meanings.

Ask necessary and appropriate questions
Learn about other views, work styles and assumptions,
and needs. Encourage others to do the same.
Be comfortable in asking questions about the preferred
terminology, pronunciations, and so on.
Be comfortable in asking if you have caused offense,
and be open to understanding how to correct it or avoid
it in the future.
Ask for clarification of goals, directions, and
instructions to ensure common understanding.
Shift the frame of reference when necessary
Demonstrate an understanding that perceptions are
relative.
Demonstrate empathy and understanding for other
values, attitudes, and beliefs; distinguish empathy from
agreement.
Be flexible in your approach to situations. There are
many ways of doing things.
Manage conflict constructively
Define the issues in the conflict and focus on interests,
not positions.
Make an effort to understand others' perspectives.
Demonstrate an understanding of different cultural

assumptions about what conflict is and alternative ways
of dealing with it.
Develop a collaborative (“win-win”) problem-solving
approach.
Recognize unconscious bias and stereotypes
Know your own culture, why you believe what you
believe, your history and early experiences that have
shaped your value system.
Be aware of and monitor your own unconscious biases
and stereotypes.
Ask people you trust to give you feedback on potential
biases that you may not be aware of.
Hold others accountable for their stereotypes.
Learn to distinguish between individual difference and
cultural difference.
Show respect for and interest in the other person
Learn about the cultures of those around you
(geography, customs, history, and so on).
Be aware that humor is handled differently in different
cultures. Something that you think is funny and
harmless can be insulting to others.
When talking with those who are more fluent in
another language than yours, speak clearly (but not
louder or slower) and ensure that there is shared
understanding.

Strive to interact meaningfully with those you perceive
as “different”
Learn to feel and exhibit comfort with groups and
individuals from other cultures (for example, spend
time with people from diverse groups both at work and
outside of work).
Give cultural information about yourself freely when it
is requested.
Be open and accommodating to others' needs to gain
information. Do not assume that they know what you
know.
at-work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml
Strive to be nonjudgmental
Continually ask yourself if you are making a value
judgment about others, rather than recognizing that
others might just do things differently that you.
Remember that we are programmed to make snap
judgments. Continuously work on this tendency in
order to reduce such behavior.
When judging others' cultural values and norms,

refrain from using only your “yardstick.”
Continually check and recheck your perceptions about
others.
Make decisions using a “cultural” lens
When making decisions, ask yourself: does this work
for most, or am I making assumptions based only on
my own world view and cultural frame?
Seek out the opinions of diverse people and test your
assumptions.
Integrate different world views into final decisions.
Source: Adapted from Hubbard (2004). Copyright 2004 by
Edward E. Hubbard. Used with permission.
Living from the value of inclusion happens one action at a time,
and often
the little things, such as saying “Good morning,” send a
message of inclusion
—or exclusion. Just like most values, inclusion is conceptually
simple, but
complex to implement consistently!
Inclusion Equation Macro Element #2: Inclusive
Systems and Programs
At a systems level, human resource policies such as recruiting,
onboarding,
succession planning, high potential identification, leadership
development,
work-life balance, accommodations for differently abled
employees, benefits,
rewards and recognition, and performance systems all need to

support the
goal of inclusion, and many organizations' written policies do
so today.
However, many large companies have launched robust diversity
and inclu-
sion initiatives, only to find their struggles continuing as a
result of inconsis-
tent implementation. Strong implementation depends on the
intercultural
capabilities of leadership (see Bennett, Chapter 5, and Gallegos,
Chapter 6,
this volume), which is responsible for interpreting and
executing the poli-
cies, as well as on the extent to which those leaders are held
accountable. I
offer several examples of situations in which the policies are
inconsistent
with the practices.
R E C R U I T I N G
From the HR policy perspective, a diversity strategy for
recruiting may be in
place, but individual recruiters sometimes systematically screen
out candi-
dates based on their own unconscious bias. Here is an example:
University
of Chicago professor Marianne Bertrand and MIT professor
Sendhil Mul-
lainathan sent 5,000 resumes to 1,250 potential employers and
discovered
that White-sounding names—such as Brendan, Gregg, Emily,
and Anne—
received 50 percent more responses than Black-sounding names
like Tami-

ka, Aisha, Rasheed, and Tyronne (Bertrand & Mullainathan,
2004). To ame-
liorate this problem, inclusive organizations ensure that their
recruiters are
some of the first to receive cultural competence training and
education.
W O R K- L I F E S T R AT E G I E S
Work-life strategies offer another example. Many organizations
claim to of-
fer flexibility to support work-life balance. However, in
conducting focus
groups over the last few years for several clients, I discovered a
consistent
theme. Participants agreed the policies were in place, but they
also said it
would damage their careers to take advantage of them.
Managers often sub-
tly discouraged employees from taking time off or working from
home. Once
again, a policy may be in place, but without consistent
implementation it
cannot be considered inclusive. To shed light on the disconnect
between the
written work flexibility policy and its implementation, leaders
of one client
were shown the focus group results during a training session.
Many of them
were shocked at some of the sentiments expressed by
employees. Another
client chose to reinforce work-life policies by holding leaders
accountable in
their performance evaluations for the extent to which work-life
balance was
positively perceived by employees.

The rapid globalization of many companies also necessitates an
inclusive ap-
proach to ensure that policies are adapted to different cultural
norms. Many
companies try to overlay U.S. policies around the world.
However, as an ex-
ample, Sodexo, a leading global quality-of-life services
company headquar-
tered in France, develops inclusion strategies country by
country. The com-
pany's various diversity leaders do not “customize” French or
U.S. policies,
but rather start from scratch in each country, understanding the
unique is-
sues and then determining whether solutions that have been
developed for
one region can be tailored to another specific geographic
region. If not, new
diversity and inclusion initiatives are developed under the
leadership of the
country HR manager.
Programs such as mentoring, employee resource groups, and
diversity coun-
cils that are integrated into an overall strategy can also be very
effective in
work/9781118415153/c05.xhtml
work/9781118415153/c06.xhtml

at-work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml
fostering and sustaining inclusion.
M E N TO R I N G
An examination of decades of employment statistics provided
by companies
to the federal government found that mentorships, particularly
for Black
women, were very effective in increasing diversity. Notably,
they were much
more effective in this regard than diversity training. In one
example, men-
toring increased Black women's numbers in management by
23.5 percent
(Dobbin, Kalev, & Kelly, 2007).
What distinguishes inclusive mentoring programs from diversity
mentoring
programs is that inclusive programs are reciprocal, designed to
acknowledge
that the mentor learns as much from the mentee as the mentee
from the
mentor (see Gallegos, Chapter 6, this volume).
For one client, The Winters Group set up such a cross-cultural
reciprocal
mentoring program pairing senior leaders with someone
different from
themselves in some significant way. Each month the pair
received a lesson
on a different topic related to diversity and inclusion and met

for a few hours
to discuss the lesson. To her surprise, an African American
female partici-
pant, who thought that as a Black woman she could not learn
much more
about diversity and inclusion, learned she had misconceptions
about White
men because she was seeing things only from her own world
view. This
shared learning experience at the micro level fostered greater
intergroup in-
clusion in the organization.
“Reverse” mentoring programs are gaining in popularity. In this
model the
younger or underrepresented employee is set up to mentor a
more seasoned
leader. However, from my perspective this is still a one-sided
concept and
not as inclusive as one that acknowledges reciprocity.
S P O N S O R S H I P
Studies have shown that sponsorship is an even more powerful
concept than
mentoring to create a climate in which more people can reach
their full po-
tential. Mentors provide advice; sponsors do so as well but also,
more criti-
cally, serve as advocates: “They elevate a protégé's visibility
within the corri-
dors of power, win them key assignments and promotions, and
place their
own reputations on the line for a protégé's continued
advancement”
(Hewlett et al., 2012, p. 7). According to the study conducted

by the Center
for Talent Innovation (Hewlett et al., 2012), people of color
continue to be
undersponsored; only 8 percent of people of color (9 percent of
African
Americans, 8 percent of Asians, and 5 percent of Hispanics)
have a sponsor,
compared to 13 percent of Whites. A similar study conducted by
the Center
for Talent innovation in 2009 found that women are also under-
sponsored
in corporations. Sponsorship requires a higher level of
commitment than
does mentoring. Sponsors have to be truly invested in their
protégé's career
and understand the organizational cultural barriers that they are
helping
their charge overcome.
To date, sponsorship has not been institutionalized in the same
way that
mentoring has been in many organizations. Sponsorship is often
more infor-
mal and even secretive. Formalizing sponsorship as an inclusive
practice can
boost engagement and retention. According to the Center for
Talent Innova-
tion study (Hewlett et al., 2012), 53 percent of African
Americans with a
sponsor are satisfied with their rate of advancement, compared
with 35 per-
cent of those without sponsors. Similarly, 55 percent of Asians
with a spon-
sor are content with their rate of advancement, compared with
30 percent of
Asians without such support. In addition, people of color with

sponsors are
less likely than those without sponsors to leave the
organization.
D I V E R S I T Y CO U N C I L S
Diversity councils offer an effective means to drive inclusion.
This was sup-
ported by results of DiversityInc's 2011 Top 50 Companies for
Diversity sur-
vey, based on data from 535 organizations, which showed that
“[c]ompanies
with executive diversity councils have almost twice the number
of Blacks,
Latinos, and Asians, and 47 percent more women in senior
management,
than companies without executive diversity councils” (“How
Effective Diver-
sity Councils Get Results,” 2011, para. 2).
Note that the DiversityInc survey focused on executive diversity
councils.
Well-meaning organizations often set up councils with a cross-
section of em-
ployees at different levels in the organization in the name of
inclusion. Often,
visibly “diverse” employees are selected for the role. Such a
method may pro-
mote diversity but may not be inclusive because councils
comprising em-
ployees with no decision-making power cannot influence change
in the orga-
nization. Participants become frustrated and often feel more
excluded than
included. The most effective approach to establishing inclusion
councils is to

set up an executive council and also divisional councils with
employees at
other levels to serve in advisory capacities.
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) devised an
effective strategy to
integrate inclusion at all levels, one “tier” at a time. In the first
year of the di-
versity and inclusion initiative, Chief Diversity Officer Equilla
Wainwright
established a Diversity Leadership Council (DLC) comprising
senior vice
presidents from each business unit. They were charged with
developing a
three-year strategic plan for the enterprise. The group met
monthly, was ex-
posed to experiential education to enhance all members' cultural
compe-
tence, and spent time developing the strategic plan.
The next stage involved identifying Champions, primarily
middle managers,
who would tailor and implement the enterprise-wide strategy
divisionally.
work/9781118415153/c06.xhtml
at-work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml

This new council of Champions had the Diversity Leadership
Council mem-
bers as advocates and resources to support them in the
implementation of
their plans.
Divisional plans focused on the more micro elements of
inclusion, to ensure
that the initiatives were cascading throughout the organization
and executed
by those closest to the issues. Measurable actions include
incorporating di-
versity and inclusion into the agenda of every team meeting,
requiring a di-
verse slate of candidates for every opening, encouraging
participation in em-
ployee resource groups, devising strategies to ensure that more
voices are
heard, and increasing team involvement in the community.
BCBSM conducted enterprise-wide surveys (macro-level work)
and focus
groups to ensure inclusion in the process and also widely
communicated
progress to all employees, soliciting their input at every major
juncture.
BCBSM's top-down and bottom-up approach has ensured that a
critical
mass of competent diversity advocates is seeding inclusion
principles
throughout the organization.
E M P LO Y E E N E T W O R K G R O U P S
Employee network, resource, or affinity groups can be

instrumental in real-
izing inclusion. Sodexo's Employee Network Groups partner
closely with
Human Resources and the Office of Diversity to drive
recruiting, profession-
al development, and community outreach. They also partner
with the market
segments to support business growth. Sodexo not only
encourages leader
participation in network functions but also holds leaders
accountable for
supporting and participating in network events. Sodexo
surveyed employee
network group members and found that as a result of their
participation,
members were more engaged and more likely to say they will
stay with the
company.
In addition to conducting diversity and inclusion efforts within
a company,
employee resource groups (ERGs) can play a business role in
providing in-
formation about the interests and needs of diverse market
segments. For ex-
ample, Macy's Hispanic ERG developed an electronic gift card
specifically
for the Hispanic market to recognize the quinceañera, a coming
of age party
for Latina girls (Jennifer Brown Consulting, 2010). And
Prudential's GLBT
ERG was instrumental in urging the company's multicultural
marketing
team to market to diverse segments, including the untapped
LGBT market
(Jennifer Brown Consulting, 2010). Employees feel valued and

included
when their opinions are sought and the company gains valuable
insights to
enhance marketing efforts: truly a win-win.
Programmatic inclusion efforts are most effective when they are
simultane-
ously executed at the macro and micro levels. The Office of
Diversity, HR,
and senior leaders can ensure that policies are consistently
followed, and
employees should be engaged in providing feedback as to how
well the poli-
cies are working for them day to day.
E M P LO Y E E E N G A G E M E N T S U R V E Y S
Employee engagement surveys can be an effective way to
measure inclusion.
Although inclusion is inherently more difficult to measure than
diversity, it
is not impossible to do so. Employee engagement surveys are
very popular
today and are used by most large organizations to understand
the percep-
tions and attitudes of workers (see Church, Rotolo, Tull, &
Shuller, Chapter
9, this volume). Employee engagement and inclusion are
synergistic con-
cepts. A 2005 Gallup Study (Wilson, n.d.) found that employee
engagement
was much more likely among respondents who perceived their
companies as
having a stronger diversity focus, compared to those who saw
their compa-
nies as being in the lowest quartile for diversity focus (60

percent versus 11
percent); in the latter group, 38 percent were actively
disengaged, whereas in
the first group that was true of only 1 percent.
To measure inclusion, employee engagement surveys should be
segmented
by demographic and other characteristics to explore differences
in attitudes
and opinions. Many organizations today do analyze their data by
different
employee segments, but a large number have not yet made the
connection
between inclusion and engagement. To do this, employee
engagement sur-
veys should ask specific questions about inclusion, such as
those in Exhibit
7.3, which are examples of those employed by The Winters
Group as part of
the surveys it conducts for clients. On one such survey
conducted for a client,
The Winters Group found a correlation of .78 between mean
engagement
scores and mean inclusion scores.
work/9781118415153/c09.xhtml
at-work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml

Exhibit 7.3. Sample Items to Assess Inclusion
I think our CEO is committed to inclusion.
I think that my immediate manager is committed to inclusion.
I think leadership exhibits inclusive behaviors.
I have the same opportunities for advancement as anyone else
at XXX.
I think that employees feel valued and respected for their
unique contributions to XXX.
I feel valued and respected for the unique contribution that I
make to XXX.
XXX's culture respects and values cultural differences.
Work-life balance policies and practices allow me to balance
my
personal and work life effectively.
Source: The Winters Group. Used by permission.
Segmenting the data by different demographic groups allows
leaders to un-
derstand how perceptions of inclusion differ so that policies and
practices
can be adjusted to be more inclusive. Based on surveys
conducted by The
Winters Group over the years, in general, employees of color
and White
women, younger employees, and older employees have less
favorable views
of organizational inclusion practices. Perceptions of unfairness

can lead to
undesirable outcomes such as lower productivity, and higher
turnover,
which is costly to an organization. To effectively analyze
results of an em-
ployee engagement survey, reviewers should be culturally
competent enough
to understand the reasons for some of the different opinions and
recognize
how deep-seated, long-standing perceptions about fairness may
drive
results.
Employee engagement data should be analyzed at the work unit
level, hold-
ing unit managers accountable for survey results and for
developing im-
provement strategies. Some organizations today have developed
an inclusion
index, and this measure becomes a part of the overall scorecard,
which may
also include other metrics such as hiring, promotions, manager
involvement
in diversity and inclusion initiatives, and termination metrics.
Inclusion Equation Micro Element #1: Cultural
Competence
In my book Inclusion Starts with I (Winters, 2003), I assert that
inclusion
begins with the individual. An inclusion mindset often requires
transforming
the way individuals in the workforce think and behave. Eleanor
Roosevelt
sums up this sentiment for me in her book You Learn by Living
(2011): “You
must try to understand truthfully what makes you do things or

feel things.
Until you have been able to face the truth about yourself you
cannot be really
sympathetic or understanding in regard to what happens to other
people” (p.
63).
Over the past twenty-five years, organizations have put
substantial effort
into training, especially for leaders, with the goal of shifting
thinking and be-
havior to be more inclusive. However, in my observation, short-
term train-
ing is inadequate to build skills and shift mindsets. Those with
the power to
drive inclusion must want to do it. No amount of coaching,
coaxing, or coer-
cion can convince the die-hard recalcitrant. Leaders have to
believe in diver-
sity and inclusion, either as part of an altruistic goal and/or
because they
truly believe that inclusion will enhance business success and in
turn make
them better off in some way.
S E L F - R E F L E C T I O N
Ultimately, inclusion will not be sustained by leaders who
respond to diversi-
ty and inclusion initiatives as “check the box” exercises.
Leaders need to
think about and reflect on their day-to-day behaviors and how
they might be
perpetuating microinequities and unconscious bias. The Winters
Group de-
veloped the following set of questions for leader reflection

relative to inclu-
sive behaviors:
Do I understand my power as a leader, that those I lead are
constantly looking for signals from me, both explicit and
implicit,
verbal and non-verbal?
When it is time to form a team, do I tend to select the same
people
all the time?
When I am in a meeting, does my body language send positive
vibes
to certain people and neutral or negative vibes to others?
In one-on-one sessions, does my body language send micro-
messages that are inconsistent with my words?
Am I equally comfortable communicating with everyone on my
team or do I find myself behaving differently with different
members of the team? Do I know my source of discomfort?
Do I have different relationships with people on my team? Is it
obvious that I am closer and have more positive relationships
with
some rather than others?
As I think about those on my team who are not performing as
well
as I think they could, are there messages that they may be
getting
from me which may be impacting their results?

at-work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml
Does my tendency to minimize differences send a micro-
message
that I find others' uniqueness or individuality to be
unimportant?
Does this lead to my devaluing of the individual and ultimately
to
lower engagement by that individual?
Do I understand cultural differences related to communication
styles and how certain gestures, words, body language may have
different meanings to different groups? Do I respect these other
styles as they may be exhibited by members on my team or do I
send micro-messages that I expect conformity?
When I interact with people who are different, do I find myself
not
exactly knowing what to say … not wanting to say the wrong
thing
and ending up feeling in the end that I had said the wrong
thing?
Am I aware of group dynamics among team members? What are
the power dynamics? Where is the focus of leadership, both
formal
and informal? Who seems to be included/excluded? Why?
Do I look for the signs that may say there is a disconnect
between
words, intent, and execution?

How can I learn to be ever in tune with the micro-inequities that
are occurring in my organization?
These questions can help leaders assess their willingness and
capability to
drive inclusion.
M E A S U R I N G C U LT U R A L CO M P E T E N C E
I believe that cultural competence is the linchpin to ensure
inclusion. A focus
solely on awareness and sensitivity training will not change
behaviors and
ways of thinking. To become culturally competent takes study,
time, and
practice. The first step is assessing one's current level of
cultural
competence.
The Winters Group uses the Intercultural Development
Inventory (IDI;
Hammer, 2010; Hammer & Bennett, 2003) to measure cultural
competence
(we typically use this term rather than intercultural competence,
though we
mean the same thing). The IDI, owned by Dr. Mitchell Hammer
and IDI,
LLC, and based on Milton Bennett's Developmental Model of
Intercultural
Sensitivity (DMIS; M. J. Bennett, 1986; J. M. Bennett & M. J.
Bennett, 2004;
see also Bennett, Chapter 5, this volume), is useful in providing
a framework
for understanding the developmental stages of cultural
competence.

Hammer (2009) describes intercultural competence as reflecting
“the degree
to which cultural differences and commonalities in values,
expectations, be-
liefs, and practices are effectively [understood,] bridged,” (p. 3)
managed,
and leveraged in pursuit of an inclusive environment. The IDI
provides a
baseline for individuals and organizations to understand how
they experi-
ence difference along a continuum from denial to adaptation.
This self-
awareness is the first step to learning how to be more culturally
competent.
Once individuals and organi zations know where they fall along
the continu-
um, it is then possible to shape learning and experiential
interventions that
help a person move along the continuum and develop greater
competency.
Inclusion Equation Micro Element #2: Emotional
Intelligence (EQ)
Modern management theory now widely accepts that effective
leaders must
possess more than technical expertise to engage employees and
achieve busi-
ness goals. Daniel Goleman, one of several emotional
intelligence (EQ) theo-
rists, asserted that one's EQ is a greater determinant of success
than one's IQ
(Goleman, 1995). Goleman identified the five domains of
emotional intelli-
gence or EQ as knowing your emotions, managing your own
emotions, moti-

vating yourself, recognizing and understanding other people's
emotions, and
managing relationships (that is, managing the emotions of
others).
Lee Gardenswartz, Anita Rowe, and Jorge Cherbosque took
emotional intel-
ligence to another level by forming the Emotional Intelligence
and Diversity
Institute in 2004 to promulgate the connection between
emotional intelli-
gence and inclusion. They developed a model focused on
introspection and
self-governance, intercultural literacy, and social “architecting”
(Gar-
denswartz, Cherbosque, & Rowe, 2010).
The Winters Group offers an eight-step personal journey model
for individ-
ual introspection. It is a baseball card-sized reminder of the
emotional com-
mitment it takes to sustain inclusive behavior. It lists eight
steps to inclusion
constituting an individual's Personal Diversity Journey, as
shown in Exhibit
7.4.
work/9781118415153/c05.xhtml

at-work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml
Exhibit 7.4. Steps in the Personal Diversity Journey
1. Know self first: Who am I? What do I stand for? What
makes “me” me?
2. Value self: What are my unique gifts? What is my best self?
3. Acknowledge your prejudices: In what ways do I
exclude? How do I contribute to intolerance? What are my blind
spots?
4. Open yourself to change: What are my opportunities to
grow? To be my best self?
5. Learn about others: How are other individuals/groups
different from me? How are they the same?
6. Value differences: How do differences enhance who I am
and can become? What can I learn from differences?
7. Include others: Expand your circle to optimize diversity.
8. Embrace personal growth: Constantly ask yourself,
Where am I now? Am I growing in my journey to be more
inclusive? What do I need to change?
Source: Copyright 2012 by The Winters Group, Inc. Used
with permission.
As is inherent in these concepts and the required self-
examination, the quest
for inclusion is not possible without the willingness to be
vulnerable and
honest about oneself. Self-awareness and ongoing self-
reflection are the

foundation for enhancing cultural competence and one's ability
to think and
behave inclusively.
Summary
Diversity and inclusion are interconnected concepts. Many
organizations,
however, put most of their efforts into diversity, working to
increase repre-
sentation of historically underrepresented groups, and invest too
little effort
in creating a culture where all employees can thrive to enhance
the achieve-
ment of organizational goals.
Fostering and nurturing inclusion must be embedded into an
organization's
normal business practices from top down and bottom up.
Employees have to
see, hear about, and, most important, experience inclusion
regularly for it to
be effective. Inclusion is accomplished when a critical mass of
people inside
an organization develops and implements policies and practices
and rewards
behaviors that lead to a sense of belonging, respect, and value.
As described
in the inclusion equation, inclusion will be sustained only when
all of the ele-
ments are working synergistically, both at the micro
(intercultural compe-
tence and emotional intelligence) and macro (systems and
values) levels.
References

Anand, R., & Winters, M. F. (2008). A retrospective view of
corporate diver-
sity training: From 1964 to the present. Academy of
Management Learning
& Education, 7, 356–372.
Bendick, M. (2008, October 27). Measure inclusion, not
diversity! Presenta-
tion at the Society for Human Resource Management Diversity
Conference
and Exposition, Atlanta, GA. Retrieved from
http://bendickegan.-
com/pdf/BendickDiversityConf08.pdf
(http://bendickegan.com/pdf/BendickDiversityConf08.pdf)
Bennett, J. M., & Bennett, M. J. (2004). Developing
intercultural sensitivity:
An integrative approach to global and domestic diversity. In D.
Landis, J. M.
Bennett, & M. J. Bennett (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural
training (3rd
ed., pp. 147–165). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bennett, M. J. (1986). A developmental approach to training for
intercultural
sensitivity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,
10(2), 179–196.
Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). Are Emily and Greg
more employ-
able than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor
market discrimi-
nation. American Economic Review, 94, 991–1013.
Catalyst. (2012, November 18). Women CEOs of the Fortune
1000. Retrieved

from http://www.catalyst.org/publication/271/women-ceos-of-
the-fortune-
1000 (http://www.catalyst.org/publication/271/women-ceos-of-
the-fortune-1000)
Dell (2012). Workforce commitment: Advancing diversity and
inclusion at
Dell. Retrieved from http://content.dell.com/us/en/gen/d/corp-
comm/commitment (http://content.dell.com/us/en/gen/d/corp-
comm/commitment)
Dobbin, F., Kalev, A., & Kelly, B. (2007). Diversity
management in corporate
America. Contexts, 6(4), 21–28.
Gardenswartz, L. R., Cherbosque, J., & Rowe, A. (2010).
Emotional intelli-
gence and diversity: A model for differences in the workplace.
Journal of
Psychological Issues in Organizational Culture, 1(1), 74–84.
doi:10.1002/jpoc.20002
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter
more than
IQ. New York: Bantam.
Hammer, M. R. (2009). Intercultural Development Inventory v.3
individual
profile report. Retrieved from Intercultural Development
Inventory website:
http://bendickegan.com/pdf/BendickDiversityConf08.pdf
http://www.catalyst.org/publication/271/women-ceos-of-the-
fortune-1000
http://content.dell.com/us/en/gen/d/corp-comm/commitment

at-work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml
Browse / Resource Centers / Playlists / History / Topics /
Learning Paths / Highlights / Settings / Support / Sign Out
© 2019 O'Reilly Media, Inc. Terms of Service / Privacy Policy
http://www.idiinventory.com/pdf/idi_sample.pdf
(http://www.idiinventory.com/pdf/idi_sample.pdf)
Hammer, M. R. (2010). IDI validity. Retrieved from
Intercultural Develop-
ment Inventory website:
http://www.idiinventory.com/pdf/idi_validity.pdf
(http://www.idiinventory.com/pdf/idi_validity.pdf)
Hammer, M. R., & Bennett, M. J. (2003, July). Measuring
intercultural sen-
sitivity: The Intercultural Development Inventory. International
Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 27(4), 421–443. doi:10.1016/S0147–
1767(03)00032–4
Harris Interactive. (2008). Out and equal workplace culture
report: Survey
of workplace attitudes, 2002–2008. Retrieved from Out & Equal
Workplace
Advocates website,
http://outandequal.org/documents/OE_workplace_cul-
ture_report.pdf
(http://outandequal.org/documents/OE_workplace_culture_repor

t.pdf)
Haslett, B. B., & Lipman, S. (1997). Micro inequities: Up close
and personal.
In N. V. Benokraitis (Ed.), Subtle sexism: Current practices and
prospects
for change (pp. 34–53). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hewlett, S. A., Jackson, M., Cose, E., & Emerson, C. (2012).
Vaulting the col-
or bar: How sponsorship levers multicultural professionals into
leadership.
New York: Center for Talent Innovation. Available at
http://www.worklife-
policy.org (http://www.worklifepolicy.org)
How effective diversity councils get results. (2011, July 15).
Retrieved from
http://www.diversityinc.com/diversity-management/how-
effective-diversi-
ty-councils-get-results (http://www.diversityinc.com/diversity-
management/how-effective-
diversity-councils-get-results)
Hubbard, E. E. (2004). The manager's pocket guide to diversity
manage-
ment. Amherst, MA: HRD Press.
Jennifer Brown Consulting. (2010). Employee resource groups
that drive
business. Retrieved from http://www.cisco.-
com/web/about/ac49/ac55/docs/ERGreportEXTERNAL.pdf
(http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac49/ac55/docs/ERGreportEX
TERNAL.pdf)

Microsoft. (2012). A vision and strategy for the future.
Retrieved from
http://www.microsoft.com/about/diversity/en/us/vision.aspx
(http://www.microsoft.com/about/diversity/en/us/vision.aspx)
Roosevelt, E. (2011). You learn by living: Eleven keys for a
more fulfilling
life (50th Anniversary Edition). New York: Harper Perennial.
Ross, H. (2008). Proven strategies for addressing unconscious
bias in the
workplace. CDO Insights, 2(5), 1–18. Retrieved from
www.cookross.-
com/docs/UnconsciousBias.pdf
(http://www.cookross.com/docs/UnconsciousBias.pdf)
Rowe, M. (2008). Micro-affirmations & micro-inequities.
Journal of the In-
ternational Ombudsman Association, 1(1), 45–48. Retrieved
from
https://www.fctl.ucf.edu/Events/WinterConference/2008/content
/Mon-
day/microaffirmations.pdf
Soares, R., Carter, N. M., & Combopiano, J. (2009). 2009
catalyst census:
Fortune 500 women executive officers and top earners.
Retrieved from
http://www.catalyst.org/file/321/2009_fortune_500_census_wo
men_ex-
ecutive_officers_and_top_earners.pdf
(http://www.catalyst.org/file/321/2009_fortune_500_census_wo
men_executive_officers_and_-
top_earners.pdf)

Survey: Employers not doing enough to hire people with
disabilities [Blog
post]. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.diversityinc.com/diversity-and-in-
clusion/survey-employers-not-doing-enough-to-hire-people-
with-disabili-
ties (http://www.diversityinc.com/diversity-and-
inclusion/survey-employers-not-doing-enough-
to-hire-people-with-disabilities)
Tapia, A. T. (2009). The inclusion paradox: The Obama era and
the trans-
formation of global diversity. Lincolnshire, IL: Hewitt
Associates.
Thomas, R. R. Jr. (1990). From affirmative action to affirming
diversity.
Harvard Business Review, 68(2), 107–111.
Wilson, D. C. (n.d.). When equal opportunity knocks: A Gallup
survey re-
veals what workplace diversity really means to employees,
managers, and
the balance sheet. Gallup Business Journal [online]. Retrieved
from
http://businessjournal.gallup.com/content/22378/When-Equal-
Opportuni-
ty-Knocks.aspx
(http://businessjournal.gallup.com/content/22378/When-Equal-
Opportuni-
ty-Knocks.aspx)
Winters, M.-F. (2003). Inclusion starts with I. Washington, DC:
Renais-

sance Books.
P R E V
Practices
⏮
N E X T
CHAPTER EIGHT: Inclusive Human Resource Management:
⏮
https://learning.oreilly.com/home/
https://learning.oreilly.com/resource-centers/
https://learning.oreilly.com/playlists/
https://learning.oreilly.com/history/
https://learning.oreilly.com/topics/
https://learning.oreilly.com/learning-paths/
https://learning.oreilly.com/u/af225693-a066-44d3-aba3-
3f528eec9eed/
https://learning.oreilly.com/u/preferences/
https://learning.oreilly.com/public/support/
https://learning.oreilly.com/accounts/logout/
https://learning.oreilly.com/
https://www.oreilly.com/terms/
https://learning.oreilly.com/privacy
http://www.idiinventory.com/pdf/idi_sample.pdf
http://www.idiinventory.com/pdf/idi_validity.pdf
http://outandequal.org/documents/OE_workplace_culture_report
.pdf
http://www.worklifepolicy.org/
http://www.diversityinc.com/diversity-management/how-
effective-diversity-councils-get-results
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac49/ac55/docs/ERGreportEX
TERNAL.pdf

http://www.microsoft.com/about/diversity/en/us/vision.aspx
http://www.cookross.com/docs/UnconsciousBias.pdf
https://www.fctl.ucf.edu/Events/WinterConference/2008/content
/Monday/microaffirmations.pdf
http://www.catalyst.org/file/321/2009_fortune_500_census_wo
men_executive_officers_and_top_earners.pdf
http://www.diversityinc.com/diversity-and-inclusion/survey-
employers-not-doing-enough-to-hire-people-with-disabilities
http://businessjournal.gallup.com/content/22378/When-Equal-
Opportunity-Knocks.aspx
work/9781118415153/p03.xhtml
work/9781118415153/c08.xhtml
at-work/9781118415153/c07.xhtml
Practices
⏮ CHAPTER EIGHT: Inclusive Human Resource Management:
⏮
work/9781118415153/p03.xhtml
work/9781118415153/c08.xhtml

10819, 1(35 PMCHAPTER SEVEN From Diversity to Inclusion An.docx

10819, 1(35 PMCHAPTER SEVEN From Diversity to Inclusion An.docx

More Related Content

Similar to 10819, 1(35 PMCHAPTER SEVEN From Diversity to Inclusion An.docx

More from aulasnilda

Recently uploaded

10819, 1(35 PMCHAPTER SEVEN From Diversity to Inclusion An.docx