Is it an illusion or can it exist - Diversity & Inclusion!

Ubiquitous - Organizational and Incumbents Dilemma

Simplified researched view with the help of dynamic #DnIQ Assessment model.

The question of Diversity & Inclusion (D&I) in India Inc isn’t new, and it always keeps on getting enhanced or reinvented every fiscal year.

To catch up with any trending practice, every established corporate player act with the mere speed. The aim remains at the getting employer brand at the helm of all levels. The same thing happens with Diversity & Inclusion (D&I) practice in most of the corporates. It starts with gender & ends at LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, transgender, bisexual, queer) whereas later happens only in very big organizations where it can afford and sustain for well-prescribed non-monitory ROI. The essence of having this program as a strategic level intervention is to create a diverse workforce & cumulatively bring in strength (core competence) of such workforce at performing level and gain the right momentum for vision & the mission of the organization. In the book - Strength Finder 2.0, author Don Clifton states that - "There is no more effective way to empower people than to see each person in terms of his or her strengths." With this visionary thought in the backdrop, plenty of management & leaderships is empowering the teams to create successful organizations. It has helped the organization in the past & will continue to give that push to be successful. The idea is not na?ve but very proven one and certainly needs to be taken to the next level each year.

High on Success

I am not ready to comment on the intentions of the leadership teams of any organization who must be incorporating D&I as one of the goals for them. Expected inclusion of women (referring to at-par with men,) in the workforce has always turned out as a beneficial and leveraging strategy for any corporate in short to long run. In my initial days of career, have done exhaustive research with WIL – Women in Leadership forum which was sponsored by the CEO of Dale Carnegie India. This survey-based research (which I have designed & executed and thus, helped a research scholar to complete her PhD thesis) was targeted @ C-suite population women from all family-owned businesses and working together with their male counterparts. Data shows that all these businesses were and are running very well by these female leaders. Due to confidentiality reasons can’t quote all names but prominent ones were – Thermax, Renuka Sugars, Forbes Marshall and VLCC. Women in a leadership position have created a large impact and no one can deny that. Their highness of success is beyond the imagination of many patriarchal leaders. Not being preachy here but accept it or deny – this is the truth across the places. There are primarily 2 aspects to overall diversity & Inclusion in the organizational and even @ individual level –

·      The Illusion of D&I

·      Cognitive Existence of D&I

The key part of Inclusion & Diversity is "No Exclusion" - both, cognitively or obliviously. Many people-leaders to any business leaders - just get away with it, under the name of un/conscious bias and still keep encashing on benefits and keep talking about the inclusive & diversity - wherever and whenever possible. Let’s decode both aspects.

The Illusion of D&I

It’s not the literal meaning here i.e. inclusion is an illusion but the hidden one & I am intending to share or expose – very subtly. It is not the argument whether the D&I (better is I&D) as a choice is strategic or non-strategic. It is about the genuineness of the person/s at the helm who is/are going to design, popularize and govern it in the organization and individual level.

The primary question is – are they genuine & unbiased in their approach while doing it? The usual appointment or positioning of such individuals should be very open, transparent and must be done with the help of some role-driven assessment. Ones D&I maturity should be checked in multiple ways, instead “only” – individuals’ aspiration-driven, cyclic job rotation for a specific gender’s appointment. Most of the organization must be following all of it while doing these hiring or appointments while they assume, the perfection of the role whosoever is holding it. The incumbent has to be: -

·      100% unbiased

·      Zero tolerance on integrity violation

·      An absolute inclination for all types of inclusion

·      With no-baggage of social dislike for anyone across human-beings (by her/him-self)

Almost every trait is essential to be D&I leader or a team member. The missing link is Real Check or existence of these traits in the role holder, though the role demands it or functions in itself demands it. The organizations tend to miss on the role requirement or compromise on it and end up hiring/positioning anyone as available. 

It is only about individual roles but also about the D&I as a function in itself. If the function at large doesn’t have people who are possessing all these behaviours, it exists for namesake & so is the strategy, program plans, execution frameworks & activities by this function/unit within the organization. The core philosophy of diversity fails and inclusion never happens. In my limited experience & reading, the social construct of geography plays a vital role in keeping this illusion very high though hidden, not-explicitly mentioned self-serving biases and mind-sets. It is the mentality of the function heads or even a team member, holds back every plausible inclusion & diversity policies/strategy at the organization level. The social construct baggage remains so strong, that even if the written statement says “no discrimination”, but still the exhibition of “Exclusion” happens via un/intended action, visuals, selections, team formations, structures – organization structures as well the real estate-structures at times and whatnot. Mostly this topic pops-out via – informal mediums of communication or group-talks and it becomes the norm. People tend to normalize the social baggage of exclusion in the formally organized set-up too. At times it gets referred directly just to make fun and goes up to the level for ensuring stereotyping and zero D&I for a certain section of the people. It is a major part of the inevitable office politics and its genesis lies in these soft aspects of organizations design. The baggage of society is so well institutionalized in all the corporate set-ups too, that it doesn’t become inclusive easily and both conscious & unconscious bias constantly protrudes anytime & anywhere. The help of the affairs officer & team can remain helpless.

Absence of right D&I mindset can only create a culture of partial inclusion or deprived diversity or almost zero possibility of the existence of D&I strategy & anything around it – within the given organizational boundaries. Isn’t it an Illusion – under the name of this noble and scientifically proven need of the organization? It needs a tremendous level of introspection to individuals & to the organization for relative retrospection for future actions. The question is – does that happen?

Cognitive Existence of D&I

The other aspect covers the school of thought which takes up I&D seriously and deal with its every part under extreme care & caution. Every aspect of inclusion is at par with the ideal, most desired stage of its existence which matters to any excluded person, groups, communities and society @ large. The count of such practices & such organization & individuals is very rare but it could be portrayed on the paper very well. 

The rarity of this aspect is the cause of concern for 2 reasons – 1. Anybody & everybody tries to rip the benefit of ever-popular Real D&I by just putting it on paper and 2. Due to the high illusion D&I players, real one's influence goes down and that hampers this ideal organization state.

They start ideally – i.e. Inclusion first and diversity must follow in a phased manner. The discreet existence of the inclusion enhances the plausibility to nurture diversity better. The usual ‘limited’ approach of “only gender” or explicitly known factors of I&D but these players goes well beyond that. To simplify it, all such players (though very less in numbers) do attempt & turn successful with:

• 0 unfair exclusion & constant check on that
• 100% trained – staff (CEO to Crew of housekeeping) on I&D sensitization pieces of training
• Use of technology like AI to – fool-proofing of unconscious bias 
• Set-up of I&D office within the organization with the members from all background
• 100% & equal access to opportunities

So, if the organization is falling into this category – typically above listed facts are as-is applicable to those organizations. But these will not be only the factors which one can think of and there could be more than these. Something totally innovative or creatively created by these limited organizations for their I&D needs. These practices – in cumulative fashion can become Best Practices on I&D for all the organizations in similar industries or even in different industries too. So, if both the aspects around I&D gets compared – it will essentially conclude the Mindset which drives the success or failure of its existence, its flourishing look and propelling to the level of best practice for the organization & industry. The engrossed I&D strategy can lead the organizations to excellence & makes that as the secret ingredient and it’s been scientifically proven by any researchers. 

#DnIQ and Maturity Model*

Diversity refers to the traits and characteristics that make people unique while inclusion refers to the behaviours and social norms that ensure people feel welcome, as per the definition given in builtin.com. As an outcome of my observatory research following section of this paper, carved out the #DnIQ and its maturity model. Proposing the newly coined terminology #DnIQ i.e. D and I Quotient, which is an analogy to IQ or EQ concept in respective context and brings in sense of objectivity towards D&I without losing the subjectivity. This model will strengthen & refine the perspective to look at an organization or a person or both for their I&D understanding. It will help any assessor to measure the maturity level objectively as well as subjectively to different #DnIQ. The proposed matured stage for an individual or organization can be calculated with the addendum of #DnIQ calculator (sharing the screen-picture with demonstrative numbers). It can further simplify the core of this paper i.e. – are you or your organization creating the illusion of D&I or are they serious on anything & everything about D&I. As asserted in a section of this paper, it has to I&D in a very logical sequence than D&I. This maturity model bolsters this thought further but doesn’t dilute the very concepts of diversity. It significantly supports both the concepts equally, compliments each other and depicts the interdependency for really matured person or organization on #DnIQ.

The model shows, 4 different quadrants which may be applicable to a person/organization depending on the I&D Assessor with the help of #DnIQ calculator:

A] Discrimination Drivers

B] Diversity Deficient

C] Inclusion Illusionary

D] Cognitive Creators of I&D

A] Discrimination Drivers: This is the quadrant where the scoring (objective & subjective) for the person puts them in lower sides of the axis value i.e. these people score low on the depth of Diversity and intensity of Inclusion parameters. The entity falling into this might have never experienced I&D as a concept in their so far journey. Even if they have heard it, never tried challenging the status -quo of I&D in their respective spaces. Arguably, such entities must have not seen the benefits of having diverse organizations even in the simplest manner and have been averse to huge research work which has proved the unimaginable gains out of the diverse but inclusive set of minds working together. It will be very hard to judge but in my limited readings & observations, many small-scale manufacturing organizations (due to age-old culture), almost all family-owned business houses and there could be an addition to this list even from tech space – am no perfect data-house on this. The apparent characteristics of these entities could be:

?    Least possible know-how on D&I fundamentals

?    It’s a no-clue cohort, ready to encash on everything just as freebies 

?    Nothing formally created under Diversity strategy & inclusion is far-fetched

?    It has to start somewhere but D&I remains as the last priority for leaders

These aren’t exhaustive but limited ways to depict features of the entities falling here. It is crystal-clear that there is a need for full-time orientation on I&D and gets the priority in business strategy, subject to top managements will!

B] Diversity Deficient: This is a set of entities who are the recipient of a low score on the depth of Diversity but high on the intensity of Inclusion parameters. It is a clear case of assessment where the assessed entity does almost every possible step to include people from a single demographic but least focus on other demographic or elements of diversity. People feel included i.e. they get cultural & environmental feeling of belonging but they aren’t from diverse for the full spectrum of human demographics or diversity parameters. Notably, we can find below features here,

·      Diversity as a factor is avoided to meet self-serving biases and/or to “bring another him”

·      Have a great scope to make diversity as a focus and move up in the ladder

The discreet difference between entrant of this group vs other 3 is that the existence of diversity becomes is cursory @ all the levels. Efforts are not visible to build diverse culture however it remains a talking concept. Though the Inclusion is very high which is typically meant for like-minded & people from the same background/region/religion/socio-economic background. SHRM defines inclusion separately from diversity as “the achievement of a work environment in which all individuals are treated fairly and respectfully, have equal access to opportunities and resources, and can contribute fully to the organization’s success.” Though the organization live up to the definition of Inclusion but goes south while doing anything on diversity & its best practices on the ground. This is equally true with the individuals who are falling into this category & the same person might end up being the D&I leader/ professional with no or least diversity focus. The #DnIQ calculator should be in a position to help them!

C] Inclusion Illusionary: In-line with a set of diversity-deficient group, the entities falling into this category have a linear focus on one & miss-out other i.e. none or least inclusion focus and everything around diversity. In this case, the quadrant for inclusion illusionary represents all the efforts @ epitomized level to cover diversity parameters. The group post-assessment even via assessment suggested by this paper, will show you the score maximum for Diversity practices. Almost everything under best practices of diversity embracing policies, initiatives, and tools designed to increase levels of diversity among given entities can be experienced and seen via score too. 

·      Culture of “#” around D&I - more of branding & have minimum to a mediocre level of policies

·      Definition of diversity limited to Gender & goes up to LGBT @ times

·      Un/Conscious Biases exist even after sensitization pieces of training/culture

While these entities (individuals or organizations) will show promising positioning for Diversity in the workforce or everything they do but while remaining highly reserved cum reluctant to do anything about Inclusion. Inclusivity which is the logical thing to bring in while developing diversity as a central theme and both complement each other while existing in any individual or organization. However, there is zero level or least thought around bringing any inclusivity and such entities stay under the illusion – most of the time intentionally and quite an accidentally. I have personally experienced the exclusion at multiple instances while doing my simple job of hiring, onboarding or developing an individual or set of individuals. The desperation of exclusion was so high in certain cases, the manager-leader called it out explicitly about the body-type (physical), just the background of fumbling while speaking or even the avoiding the company of the person vis-à-vis his inner circle. The reason for sharing this simple experience, since the inclusivity always assumed by most players as synonymous to Diversity and just do a bit or most about diversity and limit themselves. Not surprising but even senior leader from HR/Business and at times D&I leader too. Diversity in the workplace does not necessarily mean inclusivity in the workplace but creating a culture where people from all sorts of existing (or newly developing) demographics should feel included, then only the assessment will help in getting existence of Inclusivity OR it will be an illusion in reality.

D] Cognitive Creators (of I&D):  The learning so far can be summarized in a few lines and that is - the very existence of Diversity is well complimented by the reality of inclusion. Inclusivity is the key to maintain (not just creating) diversity in the workplace. As defined earlier, having diversity ensure or enables getting the workforce of varied but unique traits & characteristics while inclusion refers to the behaviours and social norms that ensure people feel welcome with NO exclusion. It is the absence of Exclusion by any nature can ensure inclusion & that is for any diverse set of individuals with respect. But the basic Qs is – do we get such combination @ one place or in one person? Often the answer is Yes to fill the columns or rows of the corporate policy pages or win glory with it for the firm. In principle both the strategies can be seen on ground subject to fulfilment of essential criteria to carry it – whether by organization or individual/s. To be in this quadrant is nothing but acceptance as well demonstration of depth in Diversity @ highest & possibly defined level and fathoming the Inclusion @ its extreme intensity. The real meaning of I&D has been actualized by entities who are positioned here. It means, the entity has understood the I&D, strategized every aspect of I&D strategies and ultimately implemented it – by ensuring every nuance of Diversity without compromising (un/consciously) iota of Inclusivity. As per the defined assessment (subjective & objective) where optimal and sincere inputs had been recorded with the brave assumption that all the respondents haven’t manipulated the data. To revalidate it, as an assessor, it is recommended to have – role holder assessment independently who holds the top role in an organization and also by significantly high sample size from employee base which is picked-up via stratified cluster sampling from the participating organization. With my empirical observatory data, the Social Construct of a country like India or any geography, where cultural hegemony (the regressive one) is usually very high on person’s mind and “Unconscious Bias” plays a strong role in data manipulation, assessment response and thus – final results. Most of the respondents (in an actual day in the organization) bring the difference of “Us” vs “Others” and organizations environment is sharply exclusive for a typical & dominant social group. As a result of that organization's key roles, position and full organization (except the bottom of the pyramid) is always full of such people, their style, aura, culture and values of that historically dominant group. That is where the whole idea of Cognitive Creators might help. However, the real players (organizations or individuals – minimal) falling into this category overcome all the challenges and at-least be torch-bearers to reach the actual meaning of Truly Inclusive and Diversity lead organization. The way reaching the level of “The Buddha” or solving quantum physics code of Black Hole - is extremely rare or impossible, similarly ensuring the “0th” level of bias while operating in any kind of entities is herculean and purely person/s mindset dependent. At-least it can be said that Cognizance of Entities can drive them to create such entity i.e. Cognitive Creators of Inclusive Diversity.

#DnIQ Assessment: Objective and Subjective

With very succinct observation but empirical one, I have also designed the #DnIQ Assessment for an individual or organization, subject to 0% - subjugation by any respondent/s towards their superiority on I&D practice. It should be responded with the current state of affairs or real-time existence of listed parameters in them or with their organization. The current list of parameters is comprehensive but not exhaustive to avoid any delusion drive data I&D practice. It can be sufficiently validated by any truly driven & authentic leader/s with the help of column on “Objectivity Check” for the respective parameter’s existence and thus, scoring by any independent assessor (like me) Or anyone who wants to assess themselves. It can be further rationalized by adding more role to role/region to region – nuances to the parameters which otherwise simply ignored or missed by organizations while designing the I&D policies. It is something which always remains unconscious, everyone understands it, discreetly accept its existence and its historical hegemony but never leverages organization I&D ecosystem to challenge or emancipate it. This is the core reason for the dire failures of I&D practices in organizational as well as to individual levels and they can find its genesis with this parameter. The assessment designed here is cumulative & dynamic and depends on the authenticity of data presented, provided, proved and repeatedly demonstrated from the “Objectivity” section of the assessment. 

So here are the sample data-tables shown for an easy depiction of this assessment – to keep every possible data confidentiality but with the pure trust in each reader.

The samples are meant for illustration purpose only and detailed assessment can be done with the real participants.*

Recapitulate

Mere conceptualization or ideation of I&D philosophy doesn’t help to unleash its benefits at an organization or individual level. The entire talk has to be converted into the doable plan on the ground, should reach So, to prove or truly establish very existence of inclusive diversity for any entity (person or organizations) and avoid any illusions around it – it has to be assessed with the help of multiple parameters. The list of parameters can differ in each context of entities, regions, kind of leader who is going to lead or be Chief Diversity officer or one who will responsible & accountable for such role. As per the renowned HR Guru, in his article, he states the toughest job in business is of Chief Diversity Officer or the position holder only. As we all know Diversity is an important business strategy and rives superior business results and Inclusive Diversity can do wonders. Here I have referred both the aspects equally and tried showing the delusions organizations/ individual can create under the name of such a noble business practice. There are limited Cognitive Best Practice Creators but the count of discrimination drivers is high. The article, the #DnIQ Model, assessment and its parameters are chosen in a way to address this illusion and also suggests few practical ways forwards too, subject to BoD’s/ Org Exec Committees wish & will towards it. Can they create an Inclusive Workplace? Can they make any exclusion zero? Can they put every bit of unconscious bias & elements which supports its flourishment, people, practices, etc. outside the organizational boundary? - Well, these are tough but important questions to be answered by anyone who wants to make this happen in reality for business & I&D as a business strategy. I will be observing this space for more subtle/unsubtle changes in near time.

This piece of writing is primarily based on - multiple levels of exhaustive observations and also - in-person sessions/ workshops delivered and interviews conducted by the author. Also, the Various infographics & pictures used in the article are downloaded from open source and a presentation has been developed. To avail the detailed* - #DnIQ Assessment Model for any personal or groups use – please reach out @ [email protected] / 9096000654.