research on dei

Read our research on: TikTok | Podcasts | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Diversity, equity and inclusion in the workplace, a majority of u.s. workers say focusing on dei at work is a good thing, but relatively small shares place great importance on diversity in their own workplace.

Pew Research Center conducted this study to better understand how adults in the United States think about diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in the workplace. This analysis is based on survey responses from 4,744 U.S. adults who are working part time or full time, are not self-employed, have only one job or have multiple jobs but consider one their primary job, and whose company or organization has 10 or more people. The data was collected as part of a larger survey of workers conducted Feb. 6-12, 2023. Everyone who took part is a member of Pew Research Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the ATP’s methodology .

Read more about the questions used for this report and the report’s methodology .

References to workers or employed adults include those who are employed part time or full time, are not self-employed, have only one job or have multiple jobs but consider one their primary job, and whose company or organization has 10 or more people.

References to White, Black and Asian adults include those who are not Hispanic and identify as only one race. Hispanics are of any race.

References to college graduates or people with a college degree comprise those with a bachelor’s degree or more. “Some college” includes those with an associate degree and those who attended college but did not obtain a degree.

References to disabled workers include those who say a disability or handicap keeps them from fully participating in work, school, housework or other activities.

All references to party affiliation include those who lean toward that party. Republicans include those who identify as Republicans and those who say they lean toward the Republican Party. Democrats include those who identify as Democrats and those who say they lean toward the Democratic Party.

Workplace diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, or DEI, are increasingly becoming part of national political debates . For a majority of employed U.S. adults (56%), focusing on increasing DEI at work is a good thing, according to a new Pew Research Center survey. But opinions about DEI vary considerably along demographic and political lines.

Most workers have some experience with DEI measures at their workplace. About six-in-ten (61%) say their company or organization has policies that ensure fairness in hiring, pay or promotions, and 52% say they have trainings or meetings on DEI at work. Smaller shares say their workplace has a staff member who promotes DEI (33%), that their workplace offers salary transparency (30%), and that it has affinity groups or employee resource groups based on a shared identity (26%). Majorities of those who have access to these measures say each has had a positive impact where they work.

Related : How Americans View Their Jobs

The value of DEI efforts at work

The importance of a diverse workforce, dei measures and their impact, how gender, race and ethnicity impact success in the workplace.

This nationally representative survey of 5,902 U.S. workers, including 4,744 who are not self-employed, was conducted Feb. 6-12, 2023, using the Center’s American Trends Panel . 1 The survey comes at a time when DEI efforts are facing some backlash and many major companies are laying off their DEI professionals .

Some key findings from the survey:

• Relatively small shares of workers place a lot of importance on diversity at their workplace. About three-in-ten say it is extremely or very important to them to work somewhere with a mix of employees of different races and ethnicities (32%) or ages (28%). Roughly a quarter say the same about having a workplace with about an equal mix of men and women (26%) and 18% say this about a mix of employees of different sexual orientations.
• More than half of workers (54%) say their company or organization pays about the right amount of attention to increasing DEI. Smaller shares say their company or organization pays too much (14%) or too little attention (15%), and 17% say they’re not sure. Black workers are more likely than those in other racial and ethnic groups to say their employer pays too little attention to increasing DEI. They’re also among the most likely to say focusing on DEI at work is a good thing (78% of Black workers say this), while White workers are the least likely to express this view (47%).
• Women are more likely than men to value DEI at work. About six-in-ten women (61%) say focusing on increasing DEI at work is a good thing, compared with half of men. And larger shares of women than men say it’s extremely or very important to them to work at a place that is diverse when it comes to gender, race and ethnicity, age, and sexual orientation.
• There are wide partisan differences in views of workplace DEI. Most Democratic and Democratic-leaning workers (78%) say focusing on DEI at work is a good thing, compared with 30% of Republicans and Republican leaners. Democrats are also far more likely than Republicans to value different aspects of diversity. And by wide margins, higher shares of Democrats than Republicans say the policies and resources related to DEI available at their workplace have had a positive impact.
• Half of workers say it’s extremely or very important to them to work somewhere that is accessible for people with physical disabilities. About three-in-ten workers (29%) say this is somewhat important to them, and 21% say it’s not too or not at all important. A majority of workers (76% among those who do not work fully remotely) say their workplace is at least somewhat accessible for people with physical disabilities.
• Many say being a man or being White is an advantage where they work. The survey asked respondents whether a person’s gender, race or ethnicity makes it easier or harder to be successful where they work. Shares ranging from 45% to 57% say these traits make it neither easier nor harder. But far more say being a man and being White makes it easier than say it makes it harder for someone to be successful. Conversely, by double-digit margins, more say being a woman, being Black or being Hispanic makes it harder than say it makes it easier to be successful where they work.

A majority of workers (56%) say focusing on increasing diversity, equity and inclusion at work is mainly a good thing; 28% say it is neither good nor bad, and 16% say it is a bad thing. Views on this vary along key demographic and partisan lines.

Half or more of both men and women say focusing on increasing DEI at work is a good thing, but women are more likely than men to offer this view (61% vs. 50%). In turn, men are more than twice as likely as women to say it is a bad thing (23% vs. 9%).

About two-thirds or more of Black (78%), Asian (72%) and Hispanic (65%) workers say that focusing on DEI at work is a good thing. Among White workers, however, fewer than half (47%) say it’s a good thing; in fact, 21% say it’s a bad thing. But there are wide partisan, gender and age gaps among White workers, with majorities of White Democrats, women and those under age 30 saying focusing on DEI at work is a good thing.

Workers under 30 are the most likely age group to say focusing on DEI at work is a good thing. About two-thirds (68%) of workers ages 18 to 29 say this, compared with 56% of workers 30 to 49, 46% of those 50 to 64, and 52% of those 65 and older.

Views also differ by educational attainment, with 68% of workers with a postgraduate degree saying focusing on DEI at work is a good thing, compared with 59% of those with a bachelor’s degree only and 50% of those with some college or less education.

Democratic and Democratic-leaning workers are much more likely to say focusing on DEI at work is a good thing (78%) than to say it is a bad thing (4%) or that it is neither good nor bad (18%). Views among Republican and Republican-leaning workers are more mixed: Some 30% say focusing on DEI at work is a good thing, while the same share (30%) say it’s a bad thing, and 39% say it’s neither good nor bad.

A majority of workers say their employer pays the right amount of attention to DEI

When it comes to the focus of their own employer, 54% of workers say their company or organization pays about the right amount of attention to increasing diversity, equity and inclusion. The remainder are divided between saying their employer pays too much (14%) or too little attention (15%), or that they’re not sure (17%).

Women are more likely than men to say their employer pays too little attention to increasing DEI (17% vs. 12%). In turn, men are more likely than women to say too much attention is paid to this where they work (18% vs. 10%).

Black workers (28%) are the most likely to say their company or organization pays too little attention to increasing DEI, compared with smaller shares of White (11%), Hispanic (19%) and Asian (17%) workers who say the same.

Views on this question also differ by party. While half or more of both Republican and Democratic workers say their company or organization pays the right amount of attention to DEI, Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say their employer pays too little attention to it (21% vs. 7%). In turn, Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say their employer pays too much attention to DEI (24% vs. 6%).

While a majority of workers say focusing on increasing diversity, equity and inclusion at work is a good thing, relatively small shares place great importance on working at a place that is diverse when it comes to gender, race and ethnicity, age, and sexual orientation. About three-in-ten workers say it’s extremely or very important to them to work somewhere with a mix of employees of different races and ethnicities (32%) and ages (28%), while 26% say the same about having about an equal mix of men and women. And 18% say this about having a mix of employees of different sexual orientations at their workplace.

Women are more likely than men to say it’s extremely or very important to them to work at a place that is diverse across all measures asked about in the survey. For example, there are 11 percentage point differences in the shares of women compared with men saying it is extremely or very important to them to work somewhere that has a mix of employees of different races and ethnicities (37% vs. 26%) and about an equal mix of men and women (31% vs. 20%).

Black workers are among the most likely to value racial, ethnic and age diversity in the workplace. Some 53% of Black workers say it is extremely or very important to them to work somewhere with a mix of employees of different races and ethnicities, compared with 39% of Hispanic workers and 25% of White workers who say the same; 43% of Asian workers say this is important to them. (There is no statistically significant difference between the share of Asian workers and the shares of Black and Hispanic workers who hold this view.) And while 42% of Black workers highly value working somewhere with a mix of employees of different ages, smaller shares of Hispanic (33%), Asian (30%) and White (24%) workers say the same.

When it comes to diversity of sexual orientation, 28% of Black workers and 22% of Hispanic workers say it is extremely or very important to them to work somewhere that is diverse in this way; 15% each among White and Asian workers say the same.

Workers under age 50 are more likely than those 50 and older to say racial and ethnic diversity in their workplace is extremely or very important to them (35% vs. 26%). Workers younger than 50 are also more likely to say having about an equal mix of men and women is important to them, with workers ages 18 t0 29 the most likely to say this (34% vs. 26% of workers 30 to 49, and 20% each among those 50 to 64 and 65 and older).

There are also differences by educational attainment, with larger shares of workers with a postgraduate degree than those with less education saying it’s extremely or very important to them that their workplace is diverse across all measures asked about in the survey. For example, 44% of workers with a postgraduate degree say having a mix of employees of different races and ethnicities is extremely or very important to them, compared with 34% of those with a bachelor’s degree only and 27% of those with some college or less.

Democratic workers are much more likely than Republican workers to say working somewhere that is diverse when it comes to gender, race and ethnicity, age, and sexual orientation is extremely or very important to them. In fact, about half of Democrats (49%) place great importance on having a mix of employees of different races and ethnicities where they work, compared with 13% of Republicans. And there are differences of at least 20 points between the shares of Democrats and Republicans saying it’s extremely or very important to them to work somewhere that has about an equal mix of men and women (39% of Democrats say this vs. 12% of Republicans) and a mix of employees of different ages (39% vs. 17%) and sexual orientations (27% vs. 7%).

Overall, a majority of workers say their workplace has a mix of employees of different ages (58% say this describes their current workplace extremely or very well). Smaller shares say their workplace has about an equal mix of men and women (38%) and a mix of employees of different races and ethnicities (46%) and sexual orientations (28%). These assessments do not vary much across demographic groups.

Half of workers place great importance on working at a place that is accessible for people with physical disabilities

Half of workers say it is extremely or very important to them to work somewhere that is accessible for people with physical disabilities; 29% say it is somewhat important and 21% say it is not too or not at all important to them.

Highly valuing an accessible workplace varies by gender, race and ethnicity, and party, but there is no significant difference in responses between those who do and don’t report having a disability.

About six-in-ten women (58%) say it is extremely or very important to them that their workplace is accessible, compared with 41% of men.

Black workers are more likely than workers of other racial and ethnic groups to place great importance on their workplace being accessible: 62% of Black workers say this is extremely or very important, compared with 51% of Hispanic, 48% of White and 43% of Asian workers.

A majority of Democrats (59%) say it is extremely or very important to them to work somewhere that is accessible for people with physical disabilities; 40% of Republican say the same. Some 27% of Republicans say this is not too or not at all important to them, compared with 15% of Democrats.

There is no statistically significant difference in the shares of workers who have a disability and those who do not saying it is extremely or very important to them to work somewhere that is accessible for people with physical disabilities. But workers who do not have a disability are more likely than those who do to say this is not too or not at all important to them (21% vs. 15%).

Among those who don’t work fully remotely, about three-quarters of workers (76%) say their workplace is at least somewhat accessible for people with physical disabilities, with 51% saying it is extremely or very accessible. Some 17% say their workplace is not too or not at all accessible, and 8% are not sure.

When asked whether the company or organization they work for has a series of measures that are typically associated with diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, a majority of workers say their employer has policies that ensure everyone is treated fairly in hiring, pay or promotions (61%), and 52% say there are trainings or meetings on DEI where they work.

Smaller shares say their workplace has a staff member whose main job is to promote DEI at work (33%), a way for employees to see the salary range for all positions (30%), and groups created by employees sometimes known as affinity groups or employee resource groups (ERGs) based on shared identities such as gender, race or being a parent (26%).

Responses do not vary much by most demographic characteristics. However, workers with at least a bachelor’s degree are consistently more likely than those with less education to say each of these five measures is available where they work.

Workers tend to see positive impact from policies and resources associated with DEI where they work

Among those whose workplace offers each policy or resource, a majority of workers say each measure has had a somewhat or very positive impact where they work. About a third or fewer workers say each resource has had neither a positive nor negative impact, and about one-in-ten or fewer say each of these has had a somewhat or very negative impact.

Democrats and Republicans are about equally likely to say their workplace has these measures in place, but Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say the impact of each has been positive by margins ranging from 10 to 32 points (among those who say their workplace has these measures). For example, 66% of Democrats who say their workplace has a way for employees to see the salary range for all positions say this has had a somewhat or very positive impact, compared with 56% of Republicans who say this. And while about three-quarters of Democrats (74%) say having a staff member whose main job is to promote DEI at work has had a positive impact, fewer than half of Republicans (42%) say the same.

Women are more likely than men to say each of these policies and resources has had a very or somewhat positive impact where they work. This is mainly driven by gender differences among Republicans: There are double-digit differences in the shares of Republican women and Republican men who say many of these resources have had a positive impact. For example, 58% of Republican women say having a staff member whose main job is to promote DEI at work has had at least a somewhat positive impact where they work, compared with 31% of Republican men who hold this view. The same share of Republican women (58%) say having affinity groups or ERGs has had a positive impact, compared with 38% of Republican men who say the same.

Among Democrats, majorities of both men and women offer positive assessments of these resources in their workplace, but Democratic women are more likely than Democratic men to say having trainings or meetings on DEI at work have had a positive impact (72% vs. 65%).

While there are differences by race, ethnicity and age on overall attitudes about DEI in the workplace, there are no consistent differences along these dimensions in how workers with access to these policies and resources at their workplace assess their impact.

About half of workers who have participated in DEI trainings in the last year say they’ve been helpful

Out of all workers, about four-in-ten (38%) have participated in a DEI training in the last year. A similar share (40%) did not participate or say their workplace does not offer these trainings, and 21% are not sure if their employer offers these trainings.

Looking only at those whose company or organization has trainings or meetings on DEI, about three-quarters (73%) say they have participated in such trainings in the past year. And assessments of these trainings tend to be positive, with 53% of workers who’ve participated saying they were very or somewhat helpful. About a third (34%) give a more neutral assessment, saying the trainings were neither helpful nor unhelpful, and 13% say they were very or somewhat unhelpful.

While men and women are about equally likely to have participated in trainings on DEI in the past year, women are more likely than men to say the trainings have been at least somewhat helpful (60% vs. 46%).

Republicans and Democrats are also equally likely to say they’ve participated in these trainings in the past year, but Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to say the trainings have been helpful (66% vs. 36%). About one-in-five Republicans say they’ve been unhelpful (19%), compared with 9% of Democrats.

While both Democratic men and women offer similar assessments of the DEI trainings they’ve participated in, there are gender differences among Republican workers. Republican women are more likely than Republican men to say the trainings they’ve participated in have been helpful (47% vs. 28%). Conversely, 22% of Republican men, compared with 14% of Republican women, say the trainings have been unhelpful.

Few workers are members of affinity groups or ERGs at work

While 26% of workers say there are affinity groups or employee resource groups (ERGs) where they work, members of these groups account for a very small share of workers overall. Just 6% of workers say they are members of an affinity group or ERG, with 58% of workers saying these groups are either not available at their workplace or that they aren’t a member. Another 37% say they are not sure if their workplace offers these groups.

When asked about the impact a person’s gender, race or ethnicity has on their ability to succeed at work, workers tend to say these characteristics neither make it easier nor harder to be successful at their workplace.

Still, when it comes to gender, workers are more likely to say being a man makes it easier to be successful where they work than to say it makes it harder (36% vs. 6%). In contrast, a larger share says being a woman makes it harder to be successful than say it makes it easier (28% vs. 11%).

Men and women have different views on the impact gender has on a person’s ability to succeed where they work. Some 44% of women say being a man makes it at least a little easier to be successful, including 24% who say it makes it a lot easier. This compares with 29% of men who say being a man makes it at least a little easier to be successful.

Similarly, 34% of women say being a woman makes it harder to be successful where they work, compared with 21% of men.

Women under age 50 are especially likely – more so than women ages 50 and older or men in either age group – to say being a man makes it easier to be successful where they work and that being a woman makes it harder. For example, 38% of women ages 18 to 49 say being a woman makes it harder to be successful where they work. This compares with 29% of women 50 and older, 25% of men younger than 50, and an even smaller share of men 50 and older (13%).

When it comes to views about how race or ethnicity affects people’s ability to succeed at work, 51% of Black workers say being Black makes it harder to be successful where they work. This is significantly higher than the shares of Asian (41%), Hispanic (23%) and White (18%) workers who say the same about the impact of being Black.

Similarly, about four-in-ten Asian workers (39%) say being Asian makes it harder to be successful in their workplace, a higher share than workers of other racial and ethnic groups who say the same about being Asian.

Hispanic, Black and Asian workers are about equally likely to say being Hispanic makes it harder to be successful where they work. A smaller share of White workers say the same about being Hispanic.

When asked about the impact of being White in their workplace, workers across racial and ethnic groups are more likely to say it makes it easier than to say it makes it harder to be successful. This is especially the case among Black and Asian workers. About half of Black (52%) and Asian (51%) workers say being White makes it easier to be successful where they work, compared with 37% of Hispanic and 24% of White workers who say the same about being White.

Previously released findings from this survey found that Black workers are more likely than White, Hispanic and Asian workers to report that they have experienced discrimination or have been treated unfairly by an employer in hiring, pay or promotions because of their race or ethnicity at some point in their careers (though not necessarily where they currently work). Women are also more likely than men to say they’ve experienced such discrimination because of their gender.

There are large partisan gaps in views of whether gender, race or ethnicity make it easier or harder to be successful at work. Some 47% of Democratic workers say being a man makes it at least somewhat easier to be successful at their workplace, compared with 25% of Republican workers. Democrats are also more likely than Republicans to say being a woman makes it harder to succeed (37% vs. 17%).

Democratic and Republican women are more likely than their male counterparts to say being a woman makes it harder – and being a man makes it easier – to be successful where they work. The differences between Republican women and Republican men are particularly striking. About a quarter of Republican women (26%) say being a woman makes it harder to be successful, compared with 10% of Republican men. And while 36% of Republican women say being a man makes it easier to be successful where they work, just 16% of Republican men say the same.

Democratic workers are more than three times as likely as Republican workers to say being White makes it easier to succeed where they work (48% vs. 13%), and they are also more likely than Republicans to say being Black, Hispanic or Asian makes it harder. About four-in-ten Democrats (39%) say being Black makes it harder for someone to succeed at their workplace, compared with just 9% of Republicans. Similarly, 30% of Democrats say being Hispanic makes it harder to succeed, compared with 8% of Republicans. And while smaller shares in both parties say being Asian makes it harder to succeed, Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say this (16% vs. 6%). These partisan differences remain when looking only at Democrats and Republicans who are White.

• For details, see the  Methodology  section of the report. The analysis in this report is based on U.S. workers who are employed full time or part time, who are not self-employed, and who have only one job or have multiple jobs but consider one their primary job (99% of workers who are not self-employed have one job or a primary job). Additionally, the analysis is restricted to workers at companies or organizations with at least 10 employees as certain federal requirements such as non-discrimination mandates apply to larger workplaces. ↩
• Non-White adults include Black, Hispanic, Asian and other races besides White, as well as people who identify as more than one race. The sample sizes among Black, Hispanic and Asian workers who have affinity groups or ERGs at work are too small to analyze separately. ↩

Social Trends Monthly Newsletter

Sign up to to receive a monthly digest of the Center's latest research on the attitudes and behaviors of Americans in key realms of daily life

Report Materials

Table of contents, about a third of u.s. workers who can work from home now do so all the time, how americans view their jobs, the enduring grip of the gender pay gap, for today’s young workers in the u.s., job tenure is similar to that of young workers in the past, majority of u.s. workers changing jobs are seeing real wage gains, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

To Make Lasting Progress on DEI, Measure Outcomes

Tracking demographic representation is just the start.

Organizations that have committed to making progress on DEI goals know the importance of metrics and KPIs, but even the most committed to tracking metrics often struggle to identify the right ones. While tracking demographic data is important, there are a variety of other metrics organizations can focus on that shed light on DEI outcomes (disambiguated by demographic). To ensure that organizations make tangible and lasting progress on DEI goals, the author recommends three actions to take with regards to tracking metrics. First, recognize the importance of outcome metrics beyond demographics. Next, for each category that you choose to measure, develop a theory of change to identify tailored proxy metrics. Finally, to ensure that these findings result in lasting outcomes, create a plan in advance for using that data to follow up and take action.

Organizations that seek to achieve diversity, equity, and inclusion as measurable outcomes know the importance of metrics and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in their efforts. DEI metrics allow organizations to better understand and operationalize their challenges, hold their leaders and other stakeholders responsible for making progress, and experiment with targeted interventions to reduce inequity. However, even in organizations that already recognize the importance of DEI metrics, leaders can struggle to measure the right ones. It’s both hard to know where to start and challenging to draw out the most important metrics from the noise.

• Lily Zheng  is a diversity, equity, and inclusion strategist, consultant, and speaker   who works with organizations to achieve the DEI impact and outcomes they need.   They are the author of DEI Deconstructed: Your No-Nonsense Guide to Doing the Work and Doing it Right. 

Partner Center

• Search Menu
• Advance articles
• Author Interviews
• Research Curations
• Author Guidelines
• Open Access
• Submission Site
• Why Submit?
• About Journal of Consumer Research
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Gender, age, and body, race and ethnicity, social class and social status, religion and cultural identity, breaking new ground in diversity, equity, and inclusion in consumer research, gender, age, and the body: gaps and research questions, race and ethnicity: gaps and research questions, social class and social status: gaps and research questions, religion and cultural identity: gaps and research questions, asking pressing questions at intersections and beyond, articles in curation.

• < Previous

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) in the Journal of Consumer Research : A Curation and Research Agenda

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Zeynep Arsel, David Crockett, Maura L Scott, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) in the Journal of Consumer Research : A Curation and Research Agenda, Journal of Consumer Research , Volume 48, Issue 5, February 2022, Pages 920–933, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucab057

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) has become ubiquitous in public and academic discourse. This is despite ongoing contests over definitions and the lack of a clear consensus about the relative importance (and even the appropriate order) of each component. For our purposes, diversity refers broadly to real or perceived physical or socio-cultural differences attributed to people and the representation of these differences in research, market spaces, and organizations. Equity refers to fairness in the treatment of people in terms of both opportunity and outcome. Inclusion refers to creating a culture that fosters belonging and incorporation of diverse groups and is usually operationalized as opposition to exclusion or marginalization. Taken together, DEI is typically accompanied by an axiological orientation toward procedural and distributive justice in organizations and institutions.

In this curation, we highlight representative research published in the Journal of Consumer Research that directly and indirectly explores DEI issues primarily along the following axes of difference illustrated in figure 1 : gender, age, and body; race and ethnicity; social class and social status; and religion and cultural identity. These, in many respects, define the visible contours of everyday life. They are at least representative and may not be exhaustive. In the figure, we depict them as distinct but connected “stations” where subjectivities and structures collide and cluster intersectionally, rather than as flat positions of longitude and latitude situated in Euclidian space. We also illustrate two overlapping lenses that focus attention on specific features of DEI’s ontology. Each promotes a situated perspective on the axes, with the “Marketplace structure, stigma, and consumer vulnerability” lens calibrated to structural issues associated with disparity and fairness in the marketplace. The “Consumer identity and agency, mobilization, and autonomy” lens is calibrated to agentic issues associated with identity and practice in everyday life. Although each lens promotes a situated perspective, what they bring into view is neither predetermined nor fixed. Either can bring into view a marketplace premised on equality that promotes well-being or one premised on inequality that promotes oppression.

DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION IN CONSUMER RESEARCH

A research curation necessarily involves imposing order on a disciplinary literature. But we begin by underlining our intent not to single out the small handful of articles we include as exclusive markers of quality. Rather, among the many that have contributed to a rich conversation in the journal, we highlight a representative set that exemplifies and draws the reader’s attention to certain features of each axis in figure 1 . Given limited space, we provide a more comprehensive listing of representative work in the journal that touches on DEI issues in table 1 . In addition, the reader will note that many articles we highlight are situated along multiple axes simultaneously, even when our discussion focuses on only one. We trust that upon reading this curation, the potential and generativity of existing DEI-oriented consumer research in the journal will be evident, as will be the need for consumer researchers to continue breaking new ground. Given its importance and seemingly natural connection to consumption and market systems, more research that cuts across numerous intersecting axes of difference and intentionally brings DEI implications to the fore is welcome and needed.

EXAMPLES OF DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION (DEI) RESEARCH IN THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH

NOTE.— This table provides a representative listing of a selection of JCR articles since 1983, exhibiting some connections to the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Axes discussed in this article. This is not intended to be a complete or systematic review of JCR or the consumer behavior literature.

We begin by highlighting Scaraboto and Fischer's (2013) work on Fatshionistas, which takes an inclusive axiological position in understanding the relationship between gender, body size, and consumption. Instead of problematizing women with heavier bodies as lesser consumers whose bodies need to be remedied by weight loss or dietary changes to participate in the market, the authors start with the premise that the market provides inadequate offerings for underserved consumers. They demonstrate how the stigmatization of body weight—exacerbated by beauty norms, fashion systems, and medicalized discourses that exclusively pathologize high body mass—contributes to the underserving of larger-sized women in fashion markets.

The Fatshionistas’ market-changing project is notable because underserved consumers routinely choose not to pursue further market inclusion, due in part to internalized stigma and attenuated access to empowering cultural resources or strategies. But rather than accept inadequate market offerings and limit themselves to the “plus-size” niche, the participants in this study utilize their cultural and social capital to mobilize a collective identity and appropriate logics from adjacent fields such as the Fat Acceptance Movement to transform mainstream market offerings into something they could accept. Of course, such a remedy will not be available to every underserved consumer who is potentially stigmatized on any number of bases. The Fatshionistas seek to transform markets based on relative social advantages that exist in contradistinction to their stigmatized bodies.

Barnhart and Peñaloza (2013) explore age as a relatively neglected identity that is often invisible in research and practice, despite increasingly older populations around the world. They show that consumption is never a solitary pursuit for people with diminished physical capabilities (due to aging, disability, or both). They investigate the role of what is often an ensemble of family members, service providers, and friends in providing support to aging adults as they lose independence. The ensemble shapes and co-produces aged consumer identities and inscribes and affirms consumption meanings. The authors show how this co-production of aged identity is fraught with contest and negotiation, based on tensions between aging consumers and their care ensemble, as well as misalignments between old age as a subject position and aging as an identity project shaped by dominant cultural discourses and understandings about “getting old.” They show that despite a cultural shift toward seeing aging more positively, the marketplace still largely constructs it as a stigmatized identity. They also highlight the ways that care can appear to enable aged consumers while actually repressing or discouraging them and stripping them of agency. They discuss ways co-consumers (and co-producers) of care ensembles can generate supportive, dignified, and positive meanings while providing assistance. In understanding the practices of consumers who may frequently need interpersonal or market-based assistance, one should include and acknowledge joint consumption and intersubjective production of consumer identities.

In sum, this research finds that consumers’ gender, body type, or age may be treated as stigmatizing attributes that influence their marketplace experiences. Women in particular face unique and often magnified challenges based on body type norms. Furthermore, personal characteristics like disability or elderly status can diminish an individual’s transformative capacity by rendering them not merely less apt to be respected but also dependent on others’ resources to participate in the marketplace.

A prominent perspective on race and ethnicity in DEI-oriented consumer research examines it through the lens of disadvantage or vulnerability. In that vein, Bone, Christensen, and Williams (2014) identify marketplace restrictions experienced by Black and Hispanic consumers seeking financial services. The authors lay bare the “systemic, chronic, and uncontrollable” restrictions on options these consumers confront based on service providers’ race and ethnic bias and the corresponding downstream impact on well-being and judgments about the marketplace. They employ a multi-method approach to uncovering insights into the experiences of Black and Hispanic consumers, who are not widely represented in consumer behavior research. This includes an innovative “mystery shopper” field study approach, where a multi-racial and multi-ethnic group of study confederates visit banks as loan seekers. They find that non-White (vs. White) loan seekers are treated more poorly by loan officers in objective terms. They were asked to provide more documentation and offered less information in response to their queries, acts of discretion with direct implications for the potential outcomes of the loan application process. They reveal the psychological impact of such restrictions on consumers through a series of depth interviews, in which non-White (vs. White) consumers correctly perceive a subordinated position that limits their ability to pursue self-directed goals and whatever freedoms the market might provide. They conduct an experiment to identify the underlying psychological mechanisms of this perception, namely diminished self-esteem and autonomy. That is, when Black and Hispanic consumers experience racial and ethnic discrimination in financial services, they liken the loan seeking experience to a hopeless battle. As decades of research have demonstrated, this harms their financial prospects and well-being. We note that discrimination in financial services also has the potential to harm the bank’s brand.

Cultural identity is another perspective on DEI in consumer research. Using that lens, Rodas, John, and Torelli (2021) examine the perception of bicultural consumers, who internalize two cultural identities (e.g., Hispanic-American, Asian-American). The authors propose that bicultural (vs. monocultural) consumers will find “paradox brands,” which reflect contradictory meanings (e.g., a brand personality that is both rugged and sophisticated), relatively more appealing. In a series of experiments, including a field study of Latino and White participants in their respective community markets, they find that bicultural consumers tend to favor paradox brands. This preference for paradox brands is driven by cognitive flexibility. That is, bicultural consumers can be more or less cognitively flexible (with more or less integration among their multiple identities). As cognitive flexibility and cultural identity integration increase for bicultural consumers, so does their preference for paradox brands. For monocultural consumers (e.g., non-Hispanic White), priming cognitive flexibility also increases their favorability toward paradox brands. The underlying process provides important insights into how the lived experiences of bicultural consumers shape their perceptions of marketplace offerings. That is, bicultural consumers, based on internalizing multiple (sometimes contradictory) cultural identities, value and appreciate brands with multiple identities.

Social class position is in part created and maintained by consumption practices that vary across groups and cluster within groups based on similar assumptions about how consumption generates value. Consumer research on social class and status has largely operated as part of two distinct but overlapping traditions. One focuses on the generation, maintenance, and expression of social class boundaries in consumption, typically operationalized as status. The other focuses on the social psychological and behavioral implications of social class groupings, typically operationalized as clusters of similar perceptions and attitudes. Both traditions incorporate direct (e.g., income and wealth) and indirect (e.g., postal codes, education level, and occupational status) measures of social rank.

Saatcioglu and Ozanne (2013) explore the generation and maintenance of social class boundaries in everyday life through the habitus, a set of mostly embodied dispositions that functions similarly to a milieu. They uncover five status groups localized among residents of a mobile-home park organized around a distinct set of largely embodied moral dispositions (i.e., Nesters, Homesteaders, and Community Builders; Reluctant Emigrants and Outcasts). These dispositions adopted by park residents, taken together, constitute the habitus, which helps create and reinforce moral identity in the park and in the community immediately outside it. The mobile-home park, perhaps the quintessential residential marker of working-class poverty in the United States, is widely stigmatized as low status. Each moral disposition serves as field-dependent capital at the park, marking distinctions between those who are otherwise stigmatized. Unlike others, field-dependent capital is not convertible to economic, social, or other types of capital when transferred to other settings. Instead, its purpose is to help people navigate social life in a specific setting. Its value to the bearer is, in this instance, confined to the park. And it shapes and is shaped by residents’ mostly home-focused consumption practices. They construct and affirm moral identities by engaging in social comparisons of field-dependent capital with neighbors in the park and the surrounding community. The authors remind us that the relationship between consumption and social class (or status group) is not deterministic. Rather, consumption and social class are mutually constituting.

The literature does, of course, at times, demonstrate regularities in consumption behavior by social class group. For instance, Yan, Keh, and Chen (2021) demonstrate that demand for utilitarian “green” products (e.g., energy efficient light bulbs) is highest among the middle class. They reveal an underlying connection between social class and demand driven by a tension between need for differentiation and need for assimilation. Notably, that tension only emerges when neither need is dominant, and this occurs most prevalently among the middle class. By contrast, a single need tends to dominate among the so-called upper and lower classes. Consumers classified as upper class, whose need for differentiation is dominant, find green consumption too assimilating. Consumers classified as lower class, whose need for assimilation is dominant, find it too differentiating. A dominant need attenuates demand for green products. It is only among members of the middle class, where no single need is dominant, that a legitimate tension emerges that generates a dual motivation to satisfy both needs that green consumption satisfies.

Consumer researchers have long studied the nexus of consumption, markets, and religion. We highlight Appau, Ozanne, and Klein’s (2020) study of Ghanaian converts to Pentecostalism, as an exemplar of research situated at that nexus. The Ghanaian context is especially well-suited to generate insights into this phenomenon because it is both a highly marketized and an exceptionally competitive religious consumptionscape. It also operates with very different notions of personhood than the fully-agentic, utility-maximizing consumer who is largely taken for granted in marketing and consumer research set in North America and Western Europe. In many places outside those settings, personhood is conceptualized in dividual rather than individual terms. The dividual is a microcosm of social relationships, a site where they all meet. The authors use the dividual to explain the permanence among Ghanaian Pentecostal converts of what is generally thought to be a transitional phase—from secular to “born again” life. They conceptually unpack the paradoxical notion of “permanent liminality” among converts, which they experience as a state of being an unfinished dividual, caught between a desired and an undesired in/dividuality.

Although it is obvious to the point of trite to state that the Journal of Consumer Research needs additional research on DEI, it is not our intent in this curation to frame this entirely as a problem to be solved. Rather, it is to show, by dimensionalizing and highlighting well-regarded, recently published JCR , that DEI-oriented consumer research has taken institutional root at the journal and to point to opportunities to continue its cultivation. In table 2 , we present opportunities at each axis in the form of potential gaps in current knowledge, which shapes a collection of corresponding sample research questions that might guide future work. We note straightaway that some important consumption domains remain all but entirely absent in the journal. For example, more research is needed on human sexuality, and there is opportunity for more work on disability and diminished physical capacity. We need to know much more about a diverse range of consumption-oriented identity projects as people navigate the marketplace. In addition, consumer research needs deeper exploration of subject positions at various intersections, some of which exacerbate marketplace challenges and some of which consolidate privilege (see Güliz Ger’s curation on intersectionality published in 2018). Nevertheless, we remain excited about the potential for emergent DEI research to transform the field. To generate discussion, ideas, and future research streams, we propose a selection of key topics at each axis where additional research could address significant gaps in current knowledge about consumers and consumption and point readers to a more extensive treatment in table 2 .

EXAMPLES OF POTENTIAL FUTURE RESEARCH QUESTIONS RELATING TO CONSUMER RESEARCH AND DEI

In this historical moment, everyone is grappling with the profound challenges to the discourses on gender expression and the body that has emerged in socio-cultural life. Contested alterations to taken for granted aspects of gender and the body are intensely multi-polar, far too complex and liquid for traditional dyadic notions of the masculine and feminine. They are as subversive as non-gendered pronouns and as radical as gender reassignment. Consumers’ aging journey is fluid in other ways, and they navigate changes to health, financial and social status, and balancing their corresponding needs (e.g., reduced stigma, increased dignity, using technological resources to support these needs and continue to make meaningful contributions to society). The implications of these challenges for consumers and consumption, for marketers, for policy makers, and every other possible market systems stakeholder are widely acknowledged to be profound but are at present scarcely theorized. Research questions that would explore these implications should not be hard to craft, but we would point to classic research questions around role portrayal and representation in media and popular culture as being of immediate importance.

As many scholars have noted, products and brands commonly draw signifying power from the socio-cultural world that can help draw attention and gain mindshare. They embed themselves in various consumer collectives (e.g., brand communities, subcultures of consumption, tribes) in ways that can grant them an aura of authenticity. At moments, consumers and other actors oppose and resist their extraction of socio-cultural value through what they justly describe as cultural appropriation. It is not uncommon, however, for accusations of appropriation to operate as a derogatory term rather than a concept with analytical power. We believe that important theoretical and conceptual work remains to be done on cultural appropriation as a phenomenon. What does it mean? What are its boundaries? More importantly, through what processes and practices does it occur?

Marketplace inclusion has long stood as a taken for granted objective for vulnerable and so-called bottom-of-the-pyramid consumers. Since the consumer disadvantage studies of the 1970s and 1980s, increased marketplace literacy in various forms (economic, financial, technological, and literal) has been widely touted as the foundation upon which any other interventions intended to remediate vulnerability and disadvantage must build. Our intent is certainly not to disparage any such efforts. Rather, it is to add that prevailing levels of social class inequality in many parts of the world simply demand more focused attention on the inequality-generating actions of businesses and elites. Where that has traditionally been the province of scholars interested in what happens on the factory floor, the marketplace has long been an independent site of inequality production. In the neoliberal era, defined in no small part by financial sector dominance over the state, consumers are commonly made vulnerable or disadvantaged by structural features of their communities and the predatory actions of marketers rather than by their limited stores of knowledge. We believe research that explores the inequality-generating and reducing practices of marketers and public policy makers remains as relevant today as ever.

During the COVID-19 global pandemic, some evidence from the United States suggests that the lines separating religious theology and nationalism are blurred. Their intersection and interaction typically reduce the inclusion of the vulnerable and underrepresented. For instance, religious extremism is associated with negative attitudes toward equity in healthcare and education. Ideological resistance to equity and inclusion raises more general questions about the connection between ideology, religious identity, nationalism, and consumption. Namely, what is the relationship between contemporary nationalistic and religious extremist movements and self—or cultural—expression via consumption? That is, what role does consumption play for movement organizations and adherents, respectively, as a problem whose resolution mobilizes resources and action versus a means of submission or subversion?

Lastly, we ask scholars to tackle big picture questions that rest on the intersections of the four themes above and deal with macro issues and society as a whole. We note that the fluidity across all these axes must be addressed in future research. As more discussions about DEI takes place in academia, policy spaces, and boardrooms, how can scholarly work develop frameworks and tools to help society be more inclusive? How can media representations of diversity translate into inclusion and equity, and combat harmful stigmas around skin color, body size, and aging? How can we transform beauty and fashion industries? How can we provide dignified and accessible essential services to all members of society without predatory design?

We end the curation on an emancipatory note. We hope that researchers and practitioners will be mindful of our contributions to marketplace exclusion and stigma in practice. Too often we problematize identities that fall outside societal norms and offer consumption-oriented remedies that purport to “solve” already marginalized identities. These can push consumers toward risky (or harmful) products such as weight loss remedies, skin lightening and “age defying” creams, conversion therapy, plastic surgery. We can strive to conceptualize and construct a marketplace that is a celebratory and empowering space. This requires a more egalitarian and pluralist approach to understanding and serving consumers who are ascribed minority status, more participatory forms of research and data collection, and ensuring that amongst researchers and practitioners we also strive for representation, equity, and inclusion.

Zeynep Arsel ( [email protected] ) is a Concordia University Research Chair in Consumption, Markets, and Society at Concordia University, 1455 De Maisonneuve Blvd. West, Montreal, QC H3G 1M8, Canada.

David Crockett ( [email protected] ) is a Professor of Marketing and a Moore Research Fellow at the Moore School of Business, University of South Carolina, 1014 Greene St., Columbia, SC 29209, USA.

Maura L. Scott ( [email protected] ) is the Persis E. Rockwood Professor of Marketing at the Florida State University, 821 Academic Way, Tallahassee, FL 32305, USA. The authors greatly appreciate the help, guidance, and involvement of June Cotte and the support of the entire JCR Editorial Team. Author names are listed alphabetically, and all authors contributed to this curation equally. The authors thank the journal’s editors Bernd Schmitt, June Cotte, Markus Giesler, Andrew Stephen, and Stacy Wood for granting the opportunity to write this curation.

This curation was invited by editors Bernd Schmitt, June Cotte, Markus Giesler, Andrew Stephen, and Stacy Wood.

Amatulli Cesare , Peluso Alessandro M. , Guido Gianluigi , Yoon Carolyn ( 2018 ), “ When Feeling Younger Depends on Others: The Effects of Social Cues on Older Consumers ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 45 ( 4 ), 691 – 709 .

Google Scholar

Appau Samuelson , Ozanne Julie L. , Klein Jill G. ( 2020 ), “ Understanding Difficult Consumer Transitions: The In/Dividual Consumer in Permanent Liminality ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 47 ( 2 ), 167 – 91 .

Barnhart Michelle , Peñaloza Lisa ( 2013 ), “ Who Are You Calling Old? Negotiating Old Age Identity in the Elderly Consumption Ensemble ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 39 ( 6 ), 1133 – 53 .

Bone Sterling A. , Christensen Glenn L. , Williams Jerome D. ( 2014 ), “ Rejected, Shackled, and Alone: The Impact of Systemic Restricted Choice on Minority Consumers' Construction of Self ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 41 ( 2 ), 451 – 74 .

Briley Donnel A. , Rudd Melanie , Aaker Jennifer ( 2017 ), “ Cultivating Optimism: How to Frame Your Future during a Health Challenge ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 44 ( 4 ), 895 – 915 .

Brough Aaron R. , Wilkie James E. B. , Ma Jingjing , Isaac Mathew S. , Gal David ( 2016 ), “ Is Eco-Friendly Unmanly? The Green-Feminine Stereotype and Its Effect on Sustainable Consumption ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 43 ( 4 ), 567 – 82 .

Cole Catherine A. , Balasubramanian Siva K. ( 1993 ), “ Age Differences in Consumers' Search for Information: Public Policy Implications ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 20 ( 1 ), 157 – 69 .

Coskuner-Balli Gokcen , Thompson Craig J. ( 2013 ), “ The Status Costs of Subordinate Cultural Capital: At-Home Fathers’ Collective Pursuit of Cultural Legitimacy through Capitalizing Consumption Practices ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 40 ( 1 ), 19 – 41 .

Crockett David ( 2017 ), “ Paths to Respectability: Consumption and Stigma Management in the Contemporary Black Middle Class ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 44 ( 3 ), 554 – 81 .

Crockett, David (2021), “Racial Oppression and Racial Projects in Consumer Markets: A Racial Formation Theory Approach,” Journal of Consumer Research , https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucab050 .

Deshpande Rohit , Hoyer Wayne D. , Donthu Naveen ( 1986 ), “ The Intensity of Ethnic Affiliation: A Study of the Sociology of Hispanic Consumption ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 13 ( 2 ), 214 – 20 .

Durante Kristina M. , Griskevicius Vladas , Redden Joseph P. , Edward White Andrew ( 2015 ), “ Spending on Daughters versus Sons in Economic Recessions ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 42 ( 3 ), 435 – 57 .

Gaeth Gary J. , Heath Timothy B. ( 1987 ), “ The Cognitive Processing of Misleading Advertising in Young and Old Adults: Assessment and Training ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 14 ( 1 ), 43 – 54 . no.

Gilly Mary C. , Zeithaml Valarie A. ( 1985 ), “ The Elderly Consumer and Adoption of Technologies ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 12 ( 3 ), 353 – 7 .

Kates Steven M. ( 2002 ), “ The Protean Quality of Subcultural Consumption: An Ethnographic account of Gay Consumers ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 29 ( 3 ), 383 – 99 .

Kates Steven M. ( 2004 ), “ The Dynamics of Brand Legitimacy: An Interpretive Study in the Gay Men's Community ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 31 ( 2 ), 455 – 64 .

Izberk-Bilgin Elif ( 2012 ), “ Infidel Brands: unveiling Alternative Meanings of Global Brands at the Nexus of Globalization, Consumer Culture, and Islamism ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 39 ( 4 ), 663 – 87 .

John Deborah Roedder , Cole Catherine A. ( 1986 ), “ Age Differences in Information Processing: Understanding Deficits in Young and Elderly Consumers ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 13 ( 3 ), 297 – 315 .

Law Sharmistha , Hawkins Scott A. , Craik Fergus IM ( 1998 ), “ Repetition-Induced Belief in the Elderly: Rehabilitating Age-Related Memory Deficits ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 25 ( 2 ), 91 – 107 .

Li Yexin Jessica , Haws Kelly L. , Griskevicius Vladas ( 2019 ), “ Parenting Motivation and Consumer Decision-Making ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 45 ( 5 ), 1117 – 37 .

Luedicke Marius K. ( 2015 ), “ Indigenes’ Responses to Immigrants’ Consumer Acculturation: A Relational Configuration Analysis ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 42 ( 1 ), 109 – 29 .

Luna David , Lerman Dawn , Peracchio Laura A. ( 2005 ), “ Structural Constraints in Code-Switched Advertising ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 32 ( 3 ), 416 – 23 .

Luna David , Peracchio Laura A. ( 2005 ), “ Advertising to Bilingual Consumers: The Impact of Code-Switching on Persuasion ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 31 ( 4 ), 760 – 5 .

Maciel Andre F. , Wallendorf Melanie ( 2021 ), “ Space as a Resource in the Politics of Consumer Identity ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 48 ( 2 ), 309 – 32 .

Maciel Andre F. , Wallendorf Melanie ( 2016 ), “ Taste Engineering: An Extended Consumer Model of Cultural Competence Constitution ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 43 (5), 726 – 46 .

McAlexander James H. , Dufault Beth Leavenworth , Martin Diane M. , Schouten John W. ( 2014 ), “ The Marketization of Religion: Field, Capital, and Consumer Identity ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 41 ( 3 ), 858 – 75 .

Mittal Chiraag , Griskevicius Vladas ( 2016 ), “ Silver Spoons and Platinum Plans: How Childhood Environment Affects Adult Health Care Decisions ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 43 ( 4 ), 636 – 56 .

Mittal Chiraag , Griskevicius Vladas , Haws Kelly L. ( 2020 ), “ From Cradle to Grave: How Childhood and Current Environments Impact Consumers’ Subjective Life Expectancy and Decision-Making ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 47 ( 3 ), 350 – 72 .

Moisio Risto , Beruchashvili Mariam ( 2010 ), “ Questing for Well-Being at Weight Watchers: The Role of the Spiritual-Therapeutic Model in a Support Group ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 36 ( 5 ), 857 – 75 .

Nikolova Hristina , Lamberton Cait ( 2016 ), “ Men and the Middle: Gender Differences in Dyadic Compromise Effects ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 43 ( 3 ), 355 – 71 .

Oswald Laura R. ( 1999 ), “ Culture Swapping: Consumption and the Ethnogenesis of Middle-Class Haitian Immigrants ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 25 ( 4 ), 303 – 18 .

Peñaloza Lisa ( 1994 ), “ Atravesando Fronteras/Border Crossings: A Critical Ethnographic Exploration of the Consumer Acculturation of Mexican Immigrants ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 21 ( 1 ), 32 – 54 .

Price Linda L. , Arnould Eric J. , Curasi Carolyn Folkman ( 2000 ), “ Older Consumers' Disposition of Special Possessions ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 27 ( 2 ), 179 – 201 .

Rodas Maria A. , John Deborah Roedder , Torelli Carlos J. ( 2021 ), “ Building Brands for the Emerging Bicultural Market: The Appeal of Paradox Brands ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 48 ( 4 ),  ucab037, 10.1093/jcr/ucab037 .

Saatcioglu Bige , Ozanne Julie L. ( 2013 ), “ Moral Habitus and Status Negotiation in a Marginalized Working-Class Neighborhood ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 40 ( 4 ), 692 – 710 .

Sandikci Özlem , Ger Güliz ( 2010 ), “ Veiling in Style: How Does a Stigmatized Practice Become Fashionable? ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 37 ( 1 ), 15 – 36 .

Scaraboto Daiane , Fischer Eileen ( 2013 ), “ Frustrated Fatshionistas: An Institutional Theory Perspective on Consumer Quests for Greater Choice in Mainstream Markets ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 39 ( 6 ), 1234 – 57 .

Schau Hope Jensen , Gilly Mary C. , Wolfinbarger Mary ( 2009 ), “ Consumer Identity Renaissance: The Resurgence of Identity-Inspired Consumption in Retirement ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 36 ( 2 ), 255 – 76 .

Skurnik Ian , Yoon Carolyn , Park Denise C. , Schwarz Norbert ( 2005 ), “ How Warnings about False Claims Become Recommendations ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 31 ( 4 ), 713 – 24 .

Stayman Douglas M. , Deshpande Rohit ( 1989 ), “ Situational Ethnicity and Consumer Behavior ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 16 ( 3 ), 361 – 71 .

Tepper Kelly. ( 1994 ), “ The Role of Labeling Processes in Elderly Consumers' Responses to Age Segmentation Cues ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 20 ( 4 ), 503 – 19 .

Thompson Craig J. , Henry Paul C. , Bardhi Fleura ( 2018 ), “ Theorizing Reactive Reflexivity: Lifestyle Displacement and Discordant Performances of Taste ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 45 , 571 – 94 .

Tian Kelly , Sautter Pookie , Fisher Derek , Fischbach Sarah , Luna-Nevarez Cuauhtemoc , Boberg Kevin , Kroger Jim , Vann Richard ( 2014 ), “ Transforming Health Care: Empowering Therapeutic Communities through Technology-Enhanced Narratives ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 41 ( 2 ), 237 – 60 .

Üstüner Tuba , Holt Douglas B. ( 2007 ), “ Dominated Consumer Acculturation: The Social Construction of Poor Migrant Women's Consumer Identity Projects in a Turkish Squatter ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 34 ( 1 ), 41 – 56 .

Üstüner Tuba , Thompson Craig J. ( 2012 ), “ How Marketplace Performances Produce Interdependent Status Games and Contested Forms of Symbolic Capital ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 38 ( 5 ), 796 – 814 .

Varman Rohit , Belk Russell W. ( 2009 ), “ Nationalism and Ideology in an Anticonsumption Movement ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 36 ( 4 ), 686 – 700 .

Veresiu Ela , Giesler Markus ( 2018 ), “ Beyond Acculturation: Multiculturalism and the Institutional Shaping of an Ethnic Consumer Subject ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 45 ( 3 ), 553 – 70 .

Vikas Ram Manohar , Varman Rohit , Belk Russell W. ( 2015 ), “ Status, Caste, and Market in a Changing Indian Village ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 42 ( 3 ), 472 – 98 .

Wallendorf Melanie , Reilly Michael D. ( 1983 ), “ Ethnic Migration, Assimilation, and Consumption ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 10 ( 3 ), 292 – 302 .

Weinberger Michelle F. ( 2015 ), “ Dominant Consumption Rituals and Intragroup Boundary Work: How Non-Celebrants Manage Conflicting Relational and Identity Goals ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 42 ( 3 ), ucv020 .

Weinberger Michelle F. , Zavisca Jane R. , Silva Jennifer M. ( 2017 ), “ Consuming for an Imagined Future: Middle-Class Consumer Lifestyle and Exploratory Experiences in the Transition to Adulthood ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 44 ( 2 ), 332 – 60 .

Williams Patti , Drolet Aimee ( 2005 ), “ Age-Related Differences in Responses to Emotional Advertisements ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 32 ( 3 ), 343 – 54 .

Yan Li , Tat Keh Hean , Chen Jiemiao ( 2021 ), “ Assimilating and Differentiating: The Curvilinear Effect of Social Class on Green Consumption ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 47 ( 6 ), 914 – 36 .

Yoon Sunyee , Kim Hyeongmin Christian ( 2018 ), “ Feeling Economically Stuck: The Effect of Perceived Economic Mobility and Socioeconomic Status on Variety Seeking ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 44 ( 5 ), 1141 – 56 .

Frustrated Fatshionistas: An Institutional Theory Perspective on Consumer Quests for Greater Choice in Mainstream Markets

Daiane Scaraboto and Eileen Fischer

DOI: 10.1086/668298

Volume 39, Issue 6, April 2013

Why and how do marginalized consumers mobilize to seek greater inclusion in and more choice from mainstream markets? We develop answers to these questions drawing on institutional theory and a qualitative investigation of Fatshionistas, plus-sized consumers who want more options from mainstream fashion marketers. Three triggers for mobilization are posited: development of a collective identity, identification of inspiring institutional entrepreneurs, and access to mobilizing institutional logics from adjacent fields. Several change strategies that reinforce institutional logics while unsettling specific institutionalized practices are identified. Our discussion highlights diverse market change dynamics that are likely when consumers are more versus less legitimate in the eyes of mainstream marketers and in instances where the changes consumers seek are more versus less consistent with prevailing institutions and logics.

Who Are You Calling Old? Negotiating Old Age Identity in the Elderly Consumption Ensemble

Michelle Barnhart and Lisa Peñaloza

DOI: 10.1086/668536

As the elderly population increases, more family, friends, and paid service providers assist them with consumption activities in a group that the authors conceptualize as the elderly consumption ensemble (ECE). Interviews with members of eight ECEs demonstrate consumption in advanced age as a group phenomenon rather than an individual one, provide an account of how the practices and discourses of the ECE's division of consumption serve as a means of knowing someone is old and positioning him/her as an old subject, and detail strategies through which older consumers negotiate their age identity when it conflicts with this positioning. This research (1) illuminates ways in which consumer agency in identity construction is constrained in interpersonal interactions, (2) demonstrates old identity as implicated in consumption in relation to and distinction from physiological ability and old subject position, and (3) updates the final stages of the Family Life Cycle model.

Rejected, Shackled, and Alone: The Impact of Systemic Restricted Choice on Minority Consumers' Construction of Self

Sterling A. Bone, Glenn L. Christensen, and Jerome D. Williams

DOI: 10.1086/676689

Volume 41, Issue 2, August 2014

This research investigates the experience of systemic restricted choice and its impact on self-concept among racial and ethnic minority consumers seeking financing. Choosing loans is an involved consumer choice journey, and encountering systemic, chronic, and uncontrollable restrictions on choice at any level of the goal/choice hierarchy limits and even prohibits minorities' ability to make desired choices. Across a multimethod investigation, these three studies demonstrate that minorities experiencing systemic restricted choice endure deleterious impacts to self-concept, including framing the self as fettered, alone, discriminated, and subservient, as well as marked reductions in self-esteem, self-autonomy, and self-efficacy. Minority consumers also frame themselves as striving in a world of limited resources and fighting uphill, often losing battles. Juxtaposing the experiences of racial/ethnic minorities against the choice journeys of educationally and economically similar white consumers puts those minority experiences in sharp relief. The theoretical and transformative consumer research implications of these findings are discussed.

Building Brands for the Emerging Bicultural Market: The Appeal of Paradox Brands

Maria A Rodas, Deborah Roedder John, and Carlos J. Torelli

DOI: 10.1093/jcr/ucab037

Volume 48, Issue 4, December 2021

Bicultural consumers now represent a third of the US population and are the fastest growing demographic group in the United States. This shift in consumer markets presents a challenge for marketers as they try to design brand strategies to serve this important group. In this article, the authors show that certain types of brands, specifically paradox brands that incorporate contradictory brand meanings, are particularly appealing to bicultural consumers. Results from seven studies reveal that bicultural consumers evaluate paradox brands more favorably and choose paradox brands more than traditional brands without contradictions. Furthermore, bicultural consumers exhibit more favorable evaluations and greater choice of paradox brands than do monocultural consumers. These cultural differences are attributable to greater cognitive flexibility found among biculturals, particularly those who adopt an acculturation strategy of integrating their different cultural identities. Greater cognitive flexibility, in turn, prompts stronger engagement with a paradox brand, which contributes to more favorable brand evaluations and choice. Contributions of this research for understanding bicultural consumers, marketing to bicultural consumers, and directions for future research are discussed.

Moral Habitus and Status Negotiation in a Marginalized Working-Class Neighborhood

Bige Saatcioglu and Julie L. Ozanne

DOI: 10.1086/671794

Volume 40, Issue 4, December 2013

Examinations of the moral and ethical dimensions in identity construction are scant in consumer research. This ethnography of a trailer-park neighborhood investigates how different moral dispositions shape low-income, working-class residents' consumption practices and status negotiations. Drawing from Bourdieu's conceptualization of habitus and cultural capital, the authors extend this theory by foregrounding the moral aspects of habitus and demonstrate how morally oriented worldviews are enacted through consumption practices and social evaluations within everyday communities. The study reveals five moral identities that shape the residents' social construction of status within the microcultural context of a trailer park. These findings point to the multiplicity and richness of social-class-based dispositions as well as the importance of studying micro-level contexts to better understand macrodynamics.

Assimilating and Differentiating: The Curvilinear Effect of Social Class on Green Consumption

Li Yan, Hean Tat Keh, and Jiemiao Chen

DOI: 10.1093/jcr/ucaa041

Volume 47, Issue 6, April 2021

Building on optimal distinctiveness theory, this research examines the effects of social class on green consumption. Across six studies, we find a curvilinear effect of social class on green consumption, with the middle class having greater propensity for green consumption compared to the lower and upper classes. This effect can be explained by tension between need for assimilation (NFA) and need for differentiation (NFD) that varies among the three social classes in establishing their optimally distinctive identities. The lower class has a dominant NFA, the upper class has a dominant NFD, and the middle class has dual motivation for assimilation and differentiation. Concomitantly, green consumption has the dual function of assimilation and differentiation. The middle class perceives green consumption as simultaneously assimilating and differentiating, which satisfies their dual motivation and enhances their propensity for green consumption. By contrast, the lower class perceives the differentiation function of green consumption as contradicting their dominant NFA, and the upper class perceives the assimilation function as contradicting their dominant NFD, which lower both their propensities for green consumption. Furthermore, these effects are moderated by consumers’ power distance belief. These novel findings have significant theoretical and practical implications on building a more sustainable society.

Understanding Difficult Consumer Transitions: The In/Dividual Consumer in Permanent Liminality

Samuelson Appau, Julie L. Ozanne, and Jill G. Klein

DOI: 10.1093/jcr/ucaa010

Volume 47, Issue 2, August 2020

Some life transitions are difficult and prolonged, such as becoming an independent adult, forming a family, or adopting healthy consumption habits. Permanent liminality describes transitions that can span years and even a lifetime with no anticipated end. To understand how consumers are caught in permanent liminality, we examine how Pentecostal converts consume religious services in their difficult transition from the secular “world” to Pentecostalism. We draw on the concept of in/dividual personhood to explain how the Pentecostal dividual is coconstituted in an endless movement between the undesired “worldly” in/dividual and the contiguous incorporation into the desired Pentecostal in/dividual and structure. Pentecostals’ permanent liminality thus involves ongoing cycles of separation and incorporation within zones of indeterminacy, in which neither separation nor incorporation is ever completed. This theoretical framework explains the unfinished transition of Pentecostal converts as contested dividuals. We extend this theoretical explanation for future research on liquid modernity and consumers caught in permanent liminality.

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1537-5277
• Print ISSN 0093-5301
• Copyright © 2024 Journal of Consumer Research Inc.
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Medical School

• MD Students
• Residents & Fellows
• Faculty & Staff
• Duluth Campus Leadership
• Department Heads
• Dean's Distinguished Research Lectureship
• Dean's Tribute to Excellence in Research
• Dean’s Tribute to Excellence in Education
• Twin Cities Campus
• Office of the Regional Dean
• Office of Research Support, Duluth Campus
• CentraCare Regional Campus St. Cloud
• Office of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion
• Office of Faculty Affairs
• Grant Support
• Medical Student Research Opportunities
• The Whiteside Institute for Clinical Research
• Office of Research, Medical School
• Graduate Medical Education Office
• Office of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies
• Departments
• Centers & Institutes
• Dr. James E. Rubin Medical Memorial Award
• Fisch Art of Medicine Student Awards
• Graduating Medical Student Research Award
• Veneziale-Steer Award
• Dr. Marvin and Hadassah Bacaner Research Awards
• Excellence in Geriatric Scholarship
• Distinguished Mentoring Award
• Distinguished Teaching Awards
• Cecil J. Watson Award
• Exceptional Affiliate Faculty Teaching Award
• Exceptional Primary Care Community Faculty Teaching Award
• Herz Faculty Teaching Development Awards
• The Leonard Tow Humanism in Medicine Awards
• Year 1+2 Educational Innovative Award
• Alumni Philanthropy and Service Award
• Distinguished Alumni Award
• Early Distinguished Career Alumni Award
• Harold S. Diehl Award
• Nomination Requirements
• Duluth Scholarships & Awards
• Account Management
• Fundraising Assistance
• Research & Equipment Grants
• Medical School Scholarships
• Student Research Grants
• Board members
• Alumni Celebration
• Alumni Relations - Meet the Team
• Diversity & Inclusion
• The Bob Allison Ataxia Research Center
• Children's Health
• Orthopaedics
• Regenerative Medicine
• Scholarships
• Transplantation
• MD Student Virtual Tour
• Why Minnesota?
• Facts & Figures
• Annika Tureson
• Caryn Wolter
• Crystal Chang
• Emily Stock
• Himal Purani
• Jamie Stang
• Jordan Ammons
• Julia Klein
• Julia Meyer
• Kirsten Snook
• Madison Sundlof
• Rashika K Shetty
• Rishi Sharma
• Savannah Maynard
• Prerequisite Courses
• Student National Medical Association Mentor Program
• Minority Association of Pre-Med Students
• Twin Cities Entering Class
• Next Steps: Accepted Students
• Degrees Offered
• Preceptor Resources (MD)
• Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT)
• Message from the Director
• Clinical Training
• Curriculum & Timeline
• Integrated Physician Scientist Training
• MSTP Student Mentoring and Career Development
• External Fellowships
• Student Directory
• Student Advisory Committee
• Staff Directory
• Steering Committee
• Alumni Directory
• MSTP Student First Author Papers
• Thesis Defense
• MSTP Graduate Residency Match Information
• MSTP Code of Ethics
• Research Experience
• International Applicants
• Prerequisites
• Applicant Evaluation
• The Interview Process
• Application Process
• Financial Support
• Pre-MSTP Summer Research Program
• MSTP Virtual Tour
• Physician Scientist Training Programs
• Students with Disabilities
• Clinical Continuity & Mentoring Program
• Mental Health and Well-Being
• Leadership in Diversity Fellowship
• M1 and M2 Research Meeting
• Monthly Student Meetings
• MSTP Annual Retreat
• Preparation
• Women in Science & Medicine
• Graduate Programs/Institute Activities & Seminars
• CTSI Translational Research Development Program (TRDP)
• Grant Opportunities
• Graduate Programs
• Residencies & Fellowships
• Individualized Pathways
• Continuing Professional Development
• CQI Initiative
• Improvement Summary
• Quality Improvement Communication
• Student Involvement
• Student Voice
• Contact the Medical School Research Office
• Research Support
• Training Grants
• Veteran's Affairs (VA)
• ALPS COVID For Patients
• 3D/Virtual Reality Procedural Training
• Addressing Social Determinants of Health in the Age of COVID-19
• Augmented Reality Remote Procedural Training and Proctoring
• COVID19: Outbreaks and the Media
• Foundations in Health Equity
• Global Medicine in a Changing Educational World
• INMD 7013: COVID-19 Crisis Innovation Lab A course examining the COVID-19 crisis
• Intentional Observational Exercises - Virtual Critical Care Curriculum
• Live Suture Sessions for EMMD7500
• M Simulation to Provide PPE training for UMN students returning to clinical environments
• Medical Student Elective course: COVID-19 Contact Tracing with MDH
• Medical Students in the M Health Fairview System Operations Center
• Telehealth Management in Pandemics
• Telemedicine Acting Internship in Pediatrics
• The Wisdom of Literature in a Time of Plague
• Virtual Simulations for EMMD7500 Students
• COVID-19 Publications
• Blood & Marrow Transplant
• Genome Engineering
• Immunology & Infectious Disease
• Magnetic Resonance Imaging
• News & Events
• Support the Institute
• Lung Health
• Medical Discovery Team on Addiction Faculty
• Impact on Education
• Meet Our Staff
• Donation Criteria
• Health Care Directive Information
• Inquiry Form
• Other Donation Organizations
• Death Certificate Information
• Social Security Administration Notification and Death Benefit Information
• Grief Support
• Deceased Do Not Contact Registration and Preventing Identity Theft
• Service of Gratitude
• For Educators and Researchers
• Research Ethics
• Clinical Repository
• Patient Care
• Blue Ridge Research Rankings
• Where Discovery Creates Hope

What Does DEI in Research Look Like?

U of m medical school faculty share how and why they prioritize diversity, equity and inclusion in their studies.

Read time: 5 minutes

A lot has happened in the last 18 months that impacts what scientists research and how they do it. All of it, in some way, has brought new attention to three capital letters: D, E, I.

This attention included that of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which in March, launched the UNITE Initiative to “end structural racism and racial inequities in the health research enterprise.” Though no formal language or guidance — yet — has been provided about what this means for grant funding and research, program leaders do say more and more FOAs (Funding Opportunity Announcements) are including stipulations to demonstrate how that research will support or include aspects of DEI.

“Diversity, equity and inclusion are three linked concepts, and over the last year, I have been asked over and over what that looks like — what does DEI in research look like for someone who is a basic scientist versus a clinical scientist?” says Ana Núñez, MD, FACP , vice dean for diversity, equity and inclusion at the University of Minnesota Medical School. 

“No one has arrived,” she continued. “Our Medical School certainly has work to do, along with every other institution in the field, but there are exemplars in this space, including some at the U of M Medical School who have been working hard at this for years.”

Three faculty from the U of M Medical School share how their research prioritizes and integrates DEI and offer critical advice learned over the years while establising DEI concepts in the research they conduct:

Use an ‘Equity’ Lens First

Include the Individual Community’s Values, Strengths and Priorities

Build a Diverse Team

Number 1 — Use an ‘Equity’ Lens First

When establishing your research, Brooke Cunningham, MD, PhD , an assistant professor in the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, says researchers first need to understand that DEI is not one concept.

“D, E and I have both overlapping and distinct goals,” she says. "I focus on equity because I am most interested in closing racial gaps in health outcomes."

Dr. Cunningham explains that the 1993 NIH Revitalization Act mandated inclusion of women and racial minorities in NIH-funded research because they expected a different response to interventions by race and sex. 

"Unfortunately, they did not clarify why we might see a different response, leaving researchers to continue to analyze race incorrectly — as if it were biological,” Dr. Cunningham says. “When researchers think about diversity, equity and inclusion, mostly they think about who is participating in their study, the D and the I. Studies that more fully address DEI concepts focus on the E — equity. Those studies consider the different lived experiences and social positions of people in a racially stratified and inequitable society.”

Dr. Cunningham established her study with an equity lens. She hopes training white primary care providers how to talk about race with their Black patients will improve those relationships, and in turn, patients’ health outcomes.

“If we know that racism is a health risk — that racism is a public health crisis — then we need to talk about the different aspects of racism as it is a health risk for our patients,” she says.

Her hypothesis is that opening up communication will foster an authentic conversation about race that can tear down boundaries that may exist, which in turn, have the power to impact individual health and wellbeing.  It’s a multi-pronged project that includes interviews and focus groups, intervention development and pilot testing of that intervention. Thus far, Dr. Cunningham has learned there is discomfort talking about race on both sides — Black patients fear their experiences will be dismissed and white physicians fear saying the wrong thing or coming off as racist. She aims to use what she learns from the interviews and focus groups to develop a communication training for white physicians about how to talk about racism with their Black patients. She is working closely with a community advisory board and notes that, if you value community engagement, you have to be flexible with your research aims. 

“When you’re doing research like this, where you’re listening to others to inform your research, you have to be open to the direction that your project may take you — even if it’s different from where you started,” she says.

Number 2 — Include the Individual Community’s Values, Strengths and Priorities

Jordan Lewis, PhD, is the associate director of the Memory Keepers Medical Discovery Team – one of four teams funded by the Minnesota Legislature in 2014 to address some of the state’s most pressing health issues. Housed at the U of M Medical School, Duluth Campus, his research seeks to develop culturally appropriate dementia care resources for American Indian caregivers.

“Given the past history of research with Indigenous communities, it is imperative to honor and respect Tribal sovereignty, cultural values and strengths, protecting the rights of community members and ensuring research is a reflection of the community’s values, strengths, experiences and priorities,” Dr. Lewis says.

To do that, he has positioned his study as community-based participatory research, which seeks input directly from those he hopes to help.

“Many caregiver interventions are developed with Western, non-Native populations and then culturally adapted to match the community’s cultural practices and beliefs around caregiving,” Dr. Lewis says.  “My research is engaging American Indian communities to, first, better understand their needs in this area.”

So far, he has learned that the use of cultural activities, including serving traditional foods, hold important psychological, social and spiritual meaning that show great promise in reducing agitated behaviors of those with dementia. And, if those behaviors are reduced, caregivers are less likely to turn to pharmacological remedies or institutionalization, keeping Elders in their homes and communities.

During the course of his research, he has learned that not one approach fits all communities — what works for dementia care in one population may not translate to another.

“For example, American Indian caregivers of the same Tribal Nation, or community, are not homogenous. It is important to honor and respect the unique family, community, gender, economic, spiritual and generational differences that influence their caregiving duties, as well as how the research study is implemented and disseminated,” he says. 

Number 3 — Build a Diverse Team

Beyond diversifying who the research impacts, Anita Randolph, PhD , the director of Community Engagement and Education of the Masonic Institute for the Developing Brand (MIDB) , says it’s equally important to diversify the research team.

“MIDB is ​​dedicated to fostering healthy brain function of children across their lifespan through innovative neuroscience research, integrated therapeutic programs and accessible education and support for families,” Dr. Randolph says. “We will have the broadest impact if our researchers, our clinicians, our staff and our clinical trial participants better reflect the communities that we intend to serve.”

She leads the Community Engagement and Education (CEE) core, which has been established to foster community relationships and introduce neuroscience research to underrepresented students and community members. 

“A pressing problem that science is facing is the lack of diversity in our laboratories, our institutions and the Science-Technology-Engineering-Arts-Mathematics (STEAM) workforce in general,” Dr. Randolph says. “We believe MIDB CEE core will connect underrepresented students in K-12, undergraduate and graduate school, as well as their families, in order to increase STEAM participation and develop the next generation of scientists.”

The biggest challenge is that the results of this work won’t be known for years — and not without the help of leaders who have the tools to engage with young learners in this way. Dr. Randolph says, to surmount this, their team co-founded Neuroscience Opportunities for Discovery and Equity (NODE ), a centralized infrastructure for neuroscience-focused engagement programs across the University of Minnesota that will eliminate financial barriers, provide training and help leaders translate their engagement work into an academic product.

“This will help us overcome challenges associated with limited time, limited funding and limited staffing so that we can work to provide community-led, tangible solutions that improve people’s lives in that community, while inspiring the next generation of underrepresented learners to be scientists,” Dr. Randolph says.

‘Collaborator-in-Chief’ — Meet the Inaugural Vice Dean of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion

Ana Núñez, MD, FACP, vice dean for diversity, equity and inclusion for the Medical School and professor in the Department of Medicine, details her experience during her first few months in office. She describes how she’s become a “collaborator-in-chief.”

Memory Keepers Medical Discovery Team Receives $1M NSF Grant to Examine Successful Aging Among Alaska Native Elders

Jordan Lewis, PhD, MSW, professor and Memory Keepers Medical Discovery Team (MDT) faculty investigator, is embarking on a three-year research project to define what it means to “age in a good way” through the lessons and wisdom of Alaska Native Elders.

Neuroscience Opportunities for Discovery and Equity Builds Infrastructure for Community Engagement

Through a partnership with neuroscience-focused engagement programs across the University, Neuroscience Opportunities for Discovery and Equity (NODE) is working toward becoming a centralized infrastructure for community-based participatory research, training and resources.

• Data, AI, & Machine Learning
• Managing Technology
• Social Responsibility
• Workplace, Teams, & Culture
• AI & Machine Learning
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Big ideas Research Projects
• Artificial Intelligence and Business Strategy
• Responsible AI
• Future of the Workforce
• Future of Leadership
• All Research Projects
• AI in Action
• Most Popular
• The Truth Behind the Nursing Crisis
• Work/23: The Big Shift
• Coaching for the Future-Forward Leader
• Measuring Culture

The spring 2024 issue’s special report looks at how to take advantage of market opportunities in the digital space, and provides advice on building culture and friendships at work; maximizing the benefits of LLMs, corporate venture capital initiatives, and innovation contests; and scaling automation and digital health platform.

• Past Issues
• Upcoming Events
• Video Archive
• Me, Myself, and AI
• Three Big Points

DEI Practices That Have an Impact

As many organizations strengthen their commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace, leaders need clarity on specific positive actions they can take.

• Workplace, Teams, & Culture
• Leading Change

At Work/22, MIT Sloan Management Review ’s recent two-day virtual symposium, a range of guests shared their insights into the challenges leaders will face in the year ahead. Among the participants was Stephanie Creary, an assistant professor of management at the Wharton School, who coauthored a large-scale research study that shows what practices really underlie positive diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) outcomes.

Creary’s research is driven by an attempt to understand efforts around DEI through their potential for good. Positive outcomes from DEI, she says, include employees feeling that they are known and understood for who they are, and that they’re developing allied relationships in the workplace. “We have decades of research saying how fraught diversity, equity, and inclusion can be,” she noted. “How do we change that?”

Email Updates on the Future of Work

Monthly research-based updates on what the future of work means for your workplace, teams, and culture.

Please enter a valid email address

Thank you for signing up

Privacy Policy

A May 2021 research report she coauthored at Wharton, “ Improving Workplace Culture Through Evidence-Based Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Practices ,” describes evidence-based insights that identify which specific actions lead to which kinds of changes.

“When we talk about evidence-based diversity, equity, and inclusion practices, we’re using similar language that they use in the field of medicine,” Creary said. “If you have medicine sitting in a medicine cabinet, you don’t just take it randomly for any problem that you have. You pick medicine that’s designed to address the specific needs that you have.” In the same way, she set out to map DEI practices onto outcomes.

Creary said that she has heard “so many dehumanizing things” about middle management and DEI — specifically, that managers present roadblocks and obstacles to DEI efforts. Instead, she said, think of middle managers as people who have a lot of work to do, and consider that the company might have to do a better job of meeting them where they are. “How do we begin to translate all of the opportunities into middle manager language?” she asked. “What are specific tactics that they need to become familiar with?”

Part of her work has been to identify seven practices that lead to DEI outcomes — diversity recruiting initiatives, education and training, internal diversity partners, managerial involvement, mentoring and sponsorship, physical visibility, and workplace policies — and then map them onto 12 different outcomes.

She found that certain bundles of practices are more influential in driving certain outcomes. For instance, if the goal is to create a stronger sense of belonging, bundling three practices (managerial involvement, mentoring and sponsorship, and workplace policies) is most effective. On the other hand, if the goal is to get more people to speak out against bias, the practice of education and training is critical.

The point, she reiterated, is to see DEI strategy as a variety of medicines in the medicine cabinet that can best be used in certain combinations, depending on the outcomes you are most focused on.

Watch Creary’s Work/22 presentation below:

Related Articles

• Tools to build DEI are like medicines: They can be used in different ways to different effect.
• Seven workplace practices can be mixed and matched to reach 12 DEI outcomes.
• Specific bundles of practices have proved to be effective at driving each of the 12 outcomes.

More Like This

Add a comment cancel reply.

You must sign in to post a comment. First time here? Sign up for a free account : Comment on articles and get access to many more articles.

Resources on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Research in social science, medicine, and other fields can shed light on the factors that drive systemic racial inequities — not only in society at large, but also within the sciences, engineering, and medicine — with the goal of finding solutions based on evidence. A range of studies, webinars, and other activities at the National Academies have explored this research, some of which are highlighted here.

Feature Story

Journal Editors Issue Statement on Population Descriptors

A group of biomedical journal editors announced new standards for how authors and reviewers should use race, ethnicity, and ancestry labels in genomics research, following recommendations from a 2023 National Academies report.

Photo Credit: Dimitri Otis/Stone via Getty Images

Women in the transportation workforce

The transportation industry is expecting an all-encompassing need for an increased qualified workforce. Retirements are creating countless new open positions in the public transit, highways, airports, and marine industries. An outline released by TRB for how the public transit industry can – and already is –  attracting, retaining, and advancing women  is applicable to other modes of transportation as well.

FEATURE STORY

A Conversation with Janina Jeff

Janina Jeff is a population geneticist, bioinformatician, podcaster, and the first African American to graduate with a Ph.D. in human genetics from Vanderbilt University. She is also a 2023 top award winner of the National Academies’ Eric and Wendy Schmidt Awards for Excellence in Science Communications. Jeff discusses her experiences integrating Black history and heritage into her science communication.

• Load More...

Receive email updates from the Office of Diversity and Inclusion

By clicking subscribe I agree to the National Academies Privacy Policy

• Upcoming Events
• Past Events

12:00PM - 1:30PM (ET)

March 27, 2024

1:00PM - 5:00PM (ET)

March 28, 2024

11:00AM - 12:00PM (ET)

April 2, 2024

12:00PM - 5:00PM (ET)

April 3, 2024

Multiday Event | April 4-5, 2024

12:30PM - 1:45PM (ET)

March 22, 2024

Multiday Event | March 20-21, 2024

Multiday Event | March 19-20, 2024

Multiday Event | March 18-19, 2024

Highlighted Videos

Understanding Genetic Ancestry

The concept of ancestry is central to population descriptors that are thought to represent some degree of shared origin or heritage. This video, based on a graphic in the 2023 report, “Using Population Descriptors in Genetics and Genomics Research: A New Framework for an Evolving Field,” explains important differences between genealogical ancestry and genetic ancestry.

Making a Commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Diversity, equity, and inclusion are core components of what makes an innovative and effective committee and advances the impact a study or workshop may have on important stakeholders. This video provides the Academies’ definitions of diversity, equity, and inclusion and how these principles impact qualities ranging from creativity, quality, project relevance, a welcoming culture, and evidence-based outcomes.

Conversations on COVID-19: Impacts on Communities of Color

Minority-Serving Institutions

Office of Diversity and Inclusion

Fosters and embeds a culture that values diversity, equity, and inclusion within the National Academies and across the STEMM fields through the implementation of inclusive practices and evidence-based strategies.

Roundtable on Black Men and Black Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine

Through meetings, public workshops, and publications, stakeholders will focus on the barriers and opportunities encountered by Black men and Black women as they navigate pathways to careers in science, engineering and medicine.

Human Rights

CHR Statement on Structural Racism and Inequality in the United States

With a mandate to promote and protect international human rights, the Committee on Human Rights stands in opposition to racism and inequality and supports those who peacefully protest injustices.

Fellowships

The Ford Fellowship Family: Empowering Scholarship and Diversity

For decades, the Ford Foundation Fellowship programs have contributed to building a more equitable and diverse U.S. higher education system. One of America’s most prestigious and successful fellowship initiatives, the programs now have more than 3,500 alumni.

• Ongoing Activities
• Action Collaborative on Preventing Sexual Harassment in Higher Education
• Roundtable on the Promotion of Health Equity
• Committee on Law and Justice
• Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine
• Committee on Science, Technology, and Law
• Culture of Health program
• Special Collection: Publications by TRB Minority Student Fellows
• Neuroscience Training - Developing a Nimble and Versatile Workforce: A Virtual Workshop Series
• Conversations on COVID-19: Impacts on Communities Of Color
• TRB's Sharon D. Banks Award
• After Roe: A Webinar Series
• Diagnosis in the Era of Digital Health and Artificial Intelligence: A Workshop
• Opportunities and Challenges for the Development and Adoption of Multicancer Detection Tests: A Workshop
• Examining Prosecution: A Workshop
• Toward a Framework to Improve Diversity and Inclusion in Clinical Trials - A Workshop

Health Equity

Office of Diversity and Inclusion Annual Report 2021–2022: Building Capacity to Advance Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

The first annual report of the Office of Diversity and Inclusion highlights the milestones, projects, and activities achieved in 2021-2022. The report establishes a shared understanding of diversity, equity, and inclusion and the strategy for future goals.

Understanding the Well-Being of LGBTQI+ Populations

The increase in prevalence and visibility of sexually gender diverse (SGD) populations illuminates the need for greater understanding of the ways in which current laws, systems, and programs affect their well-being. 

The Impacts of Racism and Bias on Black People Pursuing Careers in Science, Engineering, and Medicine

Despite the changing demographics of the nation and a growing appreciation for diversity and inclusion as drivers of excellence in science, engineering, and medicine, Black Americans are severely underrepresented in these fields.

Minority Serving Institutions: America’s Underutilized Resource for Strengthening the STEM Workforce

The nation should turn to Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs) as high-priority resources for STEM talent, says this report, which recommends steps higher education leaders, policymakers, and the private sector should take a range of actions to strengthen STEM programs at MSIs.

Impact of COVID-19 on the Careers of Women in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

Preliminary evidence indicates that the COVID 19 pandemic has negatively affected the well-being of women in academic STEMM fields in a range of areas, including productivity, work-life boundary control, networking and community building, and mental well-being.

Also of Interest...

The COVID-19 pandemic left many persons with disabilities and older adults without reliable transportation to access essential goods, medical care, and social engagements. Issues of social isolation for older adults were exacerbated with the emergence of COVID-19 because transportation service was reduced.

TCRP Research Report 243: Transportation for People with Disabilities and Older Adults During COVID-19: Lessons for Emergency Response , from TRB's Transit Cooperative Research Program, aims to provide transportation organizations (including transit agencies, specialized transportation providers, and other local government agencies and stakeholders) with helpful information and strategies on providing service for persons with disabilities and older adults in emergency situations.

Supplemental to the report is a pocket guide .

Transportation for People with Disabilities and Older Adults During COVID-19: Lessons for Emergency Response

There has been a recently large increase in competitive federal grant programs for transportation, and the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) has considerable control over how the programs are structured and the funds awarded to states and other applicants. With this, USDOT has asked TRB and the National Academies to review the ways USDOT can emphasize and promote equity within the competitive grants process.

TRB Special Report 348: Elevating Equity in Transportation Decision Making: Recommendations for Federal Competitive Grant Programs from the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine is the product of an expert committee convened to fulfill this study charge.

The findings note that equity needs to be pursued across all facets of USDOT’s competitive grant programs, from goal setting and project evaluations to ensuring that all eligible participants have the capacity to apply for grants and to implement them successfully.

Elevating Equity in Transportation Decision Making: Recommendations for Federal Competitive Grant Programs

Many operators of passenger public transportation maintain an exclusion or trespass policy that effectively bans violators from using the system for a period of time in conjunction with, or in lieu of, other penalties related to the violation. Exclusion policies vary in scope, qualifiers, purpose, and approach.

TCRP Synthesis 173: Transit Exclusion Policies in Public Transportation Systems , from TRB's Transit Cooperative Research Program, documents the practice of the use of transportation exclusion policies in North American transit systems. It is designed to help transit agencies in understanding the usefulness of such policies, as well as understanding the methods for creating, amending, or supplementing exclusion policies to maximize their effectiveness in reducing crime and disorder within their respective transit systems.

Transit Exclusion Policies in Public Transportation Systems

For years, transportation systems, including aviation, have operated within a framework that has resulted in systemic inequality and even overt racism. To address this, airports have begun implementing new organizational dynamics and approaches.

TRB's Transportation Insights 1: Systemic Inequality in the Airport Industry: Exploring the Racial Divide provides a summary of an in-person TRB Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Insight Event. The event identified common manifestations of systemic inequality in an airport setting and the unique challenges airports face as they strive to be more diverse, equitable, and inclusive. Examples of practices undertaken by airports and similar industries are also included. The report will be helpful in fostering communication and collaboration on the topic and help identify areas of future interest and research.

Systemic Inequality in the Airport Industry: Exploring the Racial Divide

Involvement with the juvenile justice system can impact young people's physical and mental health and well-being throughout their lives, as well as the health and well-being of their families and communities. Youth of color are more likely to become involved with the juvenile justice system, and suffer worse outcomes in sentencing, during incarceration, and after release. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's Roundtable on the Promotion of Health Equity convened a workshop to discuss the impact that juvenile justice system involvement has on the health and well-being of adolescents, families, and communities of color; examine policies that are successful in improving outcomes; and explore what needs to be done to improve all aspects of encounters with the juvenile justice system.

The workshop suggested pursuing alternatives to traditional juvenile justice systems that would allow adolescents to stay in their communities rather than in detention, responding to behavioral problems in youth with interventions that promote health and positive development rather than punishment, and tailoring interventions and programming to participants' cultural background and gender identity. This report summarizes the proceedings of the workshop.

The Impact of Juvenile Justice System Involvement on the Health and Well-Being of Youth, Families, and Communities of Color: Proceedings of a Workshop

An overall objective of the transit community is to help develop an enhanced and more inclusive approach to public transportation planning and decision making. Public transportation planners have a critical role in addressing and correcting many of the problems caused by a 20th- and 21st-century transportation sector that severely impacted and, in some cases, destroyed Black communities in the building of today’s transportation systems and network.

The TRB Transit Cooperative Research Program's TCRP Research Report 236: Racial Equity, Black America, and Public Transportation, Volume 1: A Review of Economic, Health, and Social Impacts reviews the literature and summarizes common practices of the 20th and 21st centuries that had significant economic, health, and social impacts, and the racial gaps that emerged as a result of transportation inequities, deliberate actions, policies, and projects.

The objective of Volume 1 is to document the extent of the damage that has been done to Black communities as a result of transportation decisions and actions. Volume 2 will demonstrate a methodology to estimate how much it would cost to redress those damages. Volumes 3 and 4 will provide tools for elected and appointed officials and other stakeholder groups to engage effectively in the arena of transportation policy, planning, and funding at all levels of government.

Racial Equity, Black America, and Public Transportation, Volume 1: A Review of Economic, Health, and Social Impacts

An estimated 10 percent of children in the United States are living with disabilities, including a disproportionate number of children living in poverty and children of marginalized racial and ethnic groups. During the pandemic, children with disabilities suffered disproportionately compared to their peers without disabilities. To learn more about what policies and practices might be sustained or implemented beyond the pandemic to support children with disabilities and their families, the Board on Children, Youth, and Families hosted a workshop on June 13-15, 2022. Workshop presenters included service providers, researchers, government leaders, youth with disabilities, and caregivers of children and youth with disabilities. In this workshop, practices were identified that could improve the system of care for children with disabilities as well as improve access to services for underserved and marginalized populations.

Supporting Children with Disabilities: Lessons from the Pandemic: Proceedings of a Workshop

Suicide Prevention in Indigenous Communities: Proceedings of a Workshop

With an accessibility perspective, land use changes can bring transportation improvements by bringing activity locations closer together. If incorporated into transportation performance management, accessibility has the potential to highlight projects that would otherwise be overlooked because of their congestion-related impacts.

The TRB National Cooperative Highway Research Program's NCHRP Web-Only Document 330: Accessibility Measures in Practice documents research on accessibility measures that is the basis for NCHRP Research Report 1000: Accessibility Measures in Practice: A Guide for Transportation Agencies .

Accessibility Measures in Practice

Structural racism refers to the public and private policies, institutional practices, norms, and cultural representations that inherently create unequal freedom, opportunity, value, resources, advantage, restrictions, constraints, or disadvantage for individuals and populations according to their race and ethnicity both across the life course and between generations. Developing a research agenda on structural racism includes consideration of the historical and contemporary policies and other structural factors that explicitly or implicitly affect the health and well-being of individuals, families, and communities, as well as strategies to measure those factors.

The Committee on Population of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a 2-day public workshop on May 16-17, 2022, to identify and discuss the mechanisms through which structural racism operates, with a particular emphasis on health and well-being; to develop an agenda for future research and data collection on structural racism; and to strengthen the evidence base for policy making. Speaker presentations and workshop discussions provided insights into known sources of structural racism and rigorous models of health inequity, revealed novel sources and approaches informed by other disciplines and related fields, and highlighted key research and data priorities for future work on structural racism and health inequity.

Structural Racism and Rigorous Models of Social Inequity: Proceedings of a Workshop

There is increasing evidence that civic participation - from voting to volunteering - is a social driver of health. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's Roundtable on Population Health Improvement convened a workshop to explore the links between civics and health; between measures of civic engagement and quantitative and qualitative measures of health equity; and the roles that civic infrastructure, narrative, and media play in shaping civic engagement. Presenters discussed voting along with other important dimensions of civic engagement; others include the ability to set agendas, shape how policies are implemented, communicate information, model civic behavior, and support the involvement and inclusion of other individuals and groups.

Civic Engagement and Civic Infrastructure to Advance Health Equity: Proceedings of a Workshop

The United States has long made substantial investments in clinical research with the goal of improving the health and well-being of our nation. There is no doubt that these investments have contributed significantly to treating and preventing disease and extending human life. Nevertheless, clinical research faces a critical shortcoming. Currently, large swaths of the U.S. population, and those that often face the greatest health challenges, are less able to benefit from these discoveries because they are not adequately represented in clinical research studies. While progress has been made with representation of white women in clinical trials and clinical research, there has been little progress in the last three decades to increase participation of racial and ethnic minority population groups. This underrepresentation is compounding health disparities, with serious consequences for underrepresented groups and for the nation.

At the request of Congress, Improving Representation in Clinical Trials and Research: Building Research Equity for Women and Underrepresented Groups identifies policies, procedures, programs, or projects aimed at increasing the inclusion of these groups in clinical research and the specific strategies used by those conducting clinical trials and clinical and translational research to improve diversity and inclusion. This report models the potential economic benefits of full inclusion of men, women, and racial and ethnic groups in clinical research and highlights new programs and interventions in medical centers and other clinical settings designed to increase participation.

Improving Representation in Clinical Trials and Research: Building Research Equity for Women and Underrepresented Groups

Fostering diverse and inclusive teams that are highly skilled, innovative, and productive is critical for maintaining U.S. leadership in space exploration. In recent years, NASA has taken steps to advance diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) in their workforce by releasing its equity action plan, emphasizing how diverse and inclusive teams help maximize scientific returns, and requiring DEIA plans as part of announcements of opportunities. To further its efforts to advance DEIA, the Agency requested the National Academies undertake a study to evaluate ways NASA can address the lack of diversity in space mission leadership.

Advancing Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility in the Leadership of Competed Space Missions outlines near and long-term actions NASA can take to make opportunities for leadership and involvement in competed space missions more accessible, inclusive, and equitable. Report recommendations range from changes to the mission proposal process to investments in STEM education and career pathways. This report makes 15 recommendations for advancing DEIA within NASA's Science Mission Directorate divisions that support competed space mission programs. However, many of the report's recommendations could also be applied broadly to research at NASA and other federal agencies and institutions, leading to a more diverse research workforce.

Advancing Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility in the Leadership of Competed Space Missions

Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and other minority institutions (MIs) represent a valuable resource to expand the Department of Defense's (DoD) government and extramural workforce and science and technology enterprise. The more than 400 public and private HBCUs, Tribal Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, and other two- and four-year MIs are positioned to make strong and uniquely important contributions to the defense research enterprise, offering DoD an opportunity to widen its talent pool and diversify STEM research and ultimately strengthen its ability to support national security.

Defense Research Capacity at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Other Minority Institutions examines the status of DoD research at HBCUs and MIs, including the methods and means necessary to advance research capacity at these institutions in order to comprehensively address the national security and defense needs of the United States. This report offers recommendations to guide DoD, Congress, HBCU/MIs, and partnering entities in supporting and strengthening the role of these institutions in defense research. A strategic commitment will translate into increased opportunities for HBCU/MIs to diversify the future American academic, industrial, and government STEM workforce upon which DoD will depend.

Defense Research Capacity at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Other Minority Institutions: Transitioning from Good Intentions to Measurable Outcomes

On December 7 and 8, 2020, the Roundtable on Black Men and Black Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a virtual workshop that examined how to strengthen mentoring and advising of Black students and professionals in science, engineering, and medicine. Presenters included faculty deans, social scientists who are experts in organizational and professional development, and program implementers. Throughout the workshop, individual presenters highlighted evaluation criteria used by successful pipeline programs, including statistics on recruitment, retention, and advancement; career and leadership accomplishments; and awards and publications. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions of the workshop.

Mentoring of Black Graduate and Medical Students, Postdoctoral Scholars, and Early-Career Faculty in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Proceedings of a Workshop

Demand for tech professionals is expected to increase substantially over the next decade, and increasing the number of women of color in tech will be critical to building and maintaining a competitive workforce. Despite years of efforts to increase the diversity of the tech workforce, women of color have remained underrepresented, and the numbers of some groups of women of color have even declined. Even in cases where some groups of women of color may have higher levels of representation, data show that they still face significant systemic challenges in advancing to positions of leadership. Research evidence suggests that structural and social barriers in tech education, the tech workforce, and in venture capital investment disproportionately and negatively affect women of color.

Transforming Trajectories for Women of Color in Tech uses current research as well as information obtained through four public information-gathering workshops to provide recommendations to a broad set of stakeholders within the tech ecosystem for increasing recruitment, retention, and advancement of women of color. This report identifies gaps in existing research that obscure the nature of challenges faced by women of color in tech, addresses systemic issues that negatively affect outcomes for women of color in tech, and provides guidance for transforming existing systems and implementing evidence-based policies and practices to increase the success of women of color in tech.

Transforming Trajectories for Women of Color in Tech

Sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation are key indicators of the demographic diversity in the United States. Sex and gender are often conflated under the assumptions that they are mutually determined and do not differ from each other; however, the growing visibility of transgender and intersex populations, as well as efforts to improve the measurement of sex and gender across many scientific fields, has demonstrated the need to reconsider how sex, gender, and the relationship between them are conceptualized. This is turn affects sexual orientation, because it is defined on the basis of the relationship between a person's own sex or gender and that of their actual or preferred partners. Sex, gender, and sexual orientation are core aspects of identity that shape opportunities, experiences with discrimination, and outcomes through the life course; therefore, it is crucial that measures of these concepts accurately capture their complexity.

Recognition of the diversity within the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and other sexual and gender minorities - the LGBTQI+ population - has also led to a reexamination of how the concepts of sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation are measured. Better measurement will improve the ability to identify sexual and gender minority populations and understand the challenges they face. LGBTQI+ people continue to experience disparate and inequitable treatment, including harassment, discrimination, and violence, which in turn affects outcomes in many areas of everyday life, including health and access to health care services, economic and educational attainment, and family and social support. Though knowledge of these disparities has increased significantly over the past decade, glaring gaps remain, often driven by a lack of reliable data.

Measuring Sex, Gender Identity, and Sexual Orientation recommends that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) adopt new practices for collecting data on sex, gender, and sexual orientation - including collecting gender data by default, and not conflating gender with sex as a biological variable. The report recommends standardized language to be used in survey questions that ask about a respondent's sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation. Better measurements will improve data quality, as well as the NIH's ability to identify LGBTQI+ populations and understand the challenges they face.

Measuring Sex, Gender Identity, and Sexual Orientation

Fare evasion is generally defined as a passenger using public transit without paying the required fare or possessing the required fare media or valid proof of fare payment. Fare evasion has significant implications for the financial sustainability of transit systems and must be replaced by another stable source of funding.

The TRB Transit Cooperative Research Program TCRP Research Report 234: Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion explores in detail the recent past and emerging future of fare enforcement on transit systems.

Measuring and Managing Fare Evasion

ADA paratransit demand continues to grow while resources are dwindling. Because of this, transit agencies continue to explore models to more effectively meet the demand.

The TRB Transit Cooperative Research Program's TCRP Synthesis 161: ADA Paratransit and Other Demand-Responsive Transportation Services in Small to Midsized Transit Agencies explores paratransit delivery models for small and midsize systems and documents the way various service and contract models are structured, to enhance the knowledge base of small agencies.

ADA Paratransit and Other Demand-Responsive Transportation Services in Small to Midsized Transit Agencies

Numerous transit agencies, of all sizes, have undertaken bus network redesigns across the United States and Canada over the past decade. The importance of incorporating equity considerations in the planning process is an emerging topic that is rapidly evolving, especially since 2020.

The TRB Transit Cooperative Research Program's TCRP Synthesis 159: Assessing Equity and Identifying Impacts Associated with Bus Network Redesigns documents the current practice of how transit providers are defining, assessing, and addressing the equity impacts of bus network redesigns, including and beyond the Federal Transit Administration’s Title VI regulatory requirements.

Assessing Equity and Identifying Impacts Associated with Bus Network Redesigns

Academic preparation is critical to increase Black representation in Science, Engineering, and Medicine, but so, too, are such interrelated factors as providing mentoring and role models in sufficient numbers, adequately funding school and community support services, and analyzing the intentional and unintentional consequences of a range of policies and practices. To address these issues, the Roundtable on Black Men and Black Women of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a virtual workshop on September 2 and 3, 2020. Titled "Educational Pathways for Blacks in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Exploring Barriers and Possible Interventions," the workshop provided a platform to explore challenges and opportunities, beginning in the earliest years of life through K-12 schooling, undergraduate and postgraduate education, and into the workforce. Presenters throughout the workshop provided perspectives from research and from their own experiences to discuss the need for systemic solutions inside and outside of formal education institutions. This publication summarizes the presentation and discussion of the workshop.

Educational Pathways for Black Students in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Exploring Barriers and Possible Interventions: Proceedings of a Workshop

As the effects of climate change become more widespread and significant, communities least able to respond are bearing the largest burden. In the United States, communities disadvantaged by a legacy of racial segregation and environmental injustice struggle with disparate health outcomes, are vulnerable to the effects of climate change (e.g., severe flooding in low-lying areas and extreme heat in urban neighborhoods), and lack sufficient resources to recover from and rebuild for resilience against future events.

On October 12 and 14, 2021, the 2-day virtual workshop "Communities, Climate Change, and Health Equity - A New Vision" brought together environmental health experts, resilience practitioners, climate scientists, and people with lived experience to discuss the disproportionate impact of climate change on communities experiencing health disparities and environmental injustice. During the workshop, the first in a four-part series, 41 speakers shared their perspectives on the topic and suggested specific actions that decision-makers can take to address the intersecting crises of climate change and health inequity. This publication summarizes the presentation and discussion of the workshop.

Communities, Climate Change, and Health Equity: Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief

To better understand the inequalities facing lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) youth and the promising interventions being used to address these inequalities, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's Board on Children, Youth, and Families hosted a virtual public workshop titled Reducing Inequalities Between LGBTQ Adolescents and Cisgender, Heterosexual Adolescents, which convened on August 25–27, 2021. The workshop was developed by a planning committee composed of experts from the fields of sociology, medicine, public health, psychology, social work, policy, and direct-service provision. This Proceedings of a Workshop summarizes the presentations and discussions from that workshop.

Reducing Inequalities Between Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Adolescents and Cisgender, Heterosexual Adolescents: Proceedings of a Workshop

For public agencies, attracting qualified, technically competent, culturally sensitive, and motivated planning staff can be challenging in a competitive landscape.

The TRB National Cooperative Highway Research Program's NCHRP Research Report 980: Attracting, Retaining, and Developing the Transportation Workforce: Transportation Planners presents an assessment of current and emerging forces that are shaping transportation planning practice and the transportation planning workforce.

Supplemental to the report are downloadable tools (one for employees and one for employers ), an implementation memo , a Quick Reference Guide , and a Summary .

Attracting, Retaining, and Developing the Transportation Workforce: Transportation Planners

Many transit agencies are striving to improve diversity and inclusion. They continue to initiate and sustain programs and develop more innovative strategies.

The TRB Transit Cooperative Research Program's TCRP Research Report 228: Resource Guide for Improving Diversity and Inclusion Programs for the Public Transportation Industry builds on the snapshot of transit agency diversity initiatives provided nearly 20 years ago in TCRP Synthesis 46: Diversity Training Initiatives to understand how diversity programs at transit agencies have evolved, how inclusion has been incorporated, and what policies, plans, and practices have been successfully implemented within the industry.

Resource Guide for Improving Diversity and Inclusion Programs for the Public Transportation Industry

A diverse workforce and inclusive workspaces are important components of future chemical and chemical engineering research. The workshop Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, held virtually on May 25-26, 2021, by the Chemical Sciences Roundtable, provided a venue for the chemical sciences community to discuss ideas and best practices for creating more diverse, equitable, and inclusive environments. Specifically, the workshop (1) explored barriers to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) that are specific to chemistry and chemical engineering, (2) examined successful programs and best practices for increasing DEI in these fields, and (3) explored innovative approaches to create a culture in which all have equal opportunities to participate and advance. Ultimately, the workshop provided a forum for academic, government, and industrial participants to increase awareness of potential barriers to DEI and gain information needed to create more diverse, equitable, and inclusive environments in their workplaces. This document summarizes the presentations and discussions that took place during the workshop.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Chemistry and Chemical Engineering: Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief

The Action Collaborative's Year 2 Annual Report summarizes the Action Collaborative's collective progress in the 2020-2021 year, identifies areas for future focus, discusses trends in organizations' reported areas of work, and highlights work shared by member organizations and partner network organizations. A complete collection of "descriptions of work" authored by member and partner network organizations is available in the repository.

Action Collaborative on Preventing Sexual Harassment in Higher Education: Year Two Annual Report of Activities

There appear to be, in this preliminary assessment, no formidable issues that present design and engineering challenges for installing in-cabin wheelchair securement systems in airplanes. While equipping enough airplanes with securement systems to provide meaningful levels of airline service would require substantial effort, the types of cabin modifications required to provide the needed space and structural support would likely be of moderate technical complexity for many individual airplanes.

TRB’s Special Report 341: Technical Feasibility of a Wheelchair Securement Concept for Airline Travel: A Preliminary Assessment identifies and examines potential technical challenges to the development and implementation of an in-cabin wheelchair securement system.

Technical Feasibility of a Wheelchair Securement Concept for Airline Travel: A Preliminary Assessment

As one of the largest federal science and technology (S&T) funding agencies and employers, the Department of Defense (DoD) plays a critical role in the U.S. S&T ecosystem. While DoD draws on the expertise of both U.S. and international researchers to achieve its mission, national security requirements limit many other critical areas of the DoD S&T enterprise to U.S. citizens. This national security imperative calls for DoD to cultivate and support the diverse pool of U.S. talent who can meet DoD needs.

Previous studies by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine have documented how Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and other Minority Institutions (MIs) can help to access this expanded population of scientists and engineers. This publication presents interim findings related to the methods and means necessary to advance research capacity at these institutions to address the national security and defense needs of the United States. While critical data-gathering efforts are still in progress, these interim findings can be used to begin to inform decision making processes related to three key areas: current Department of Defense investments, opportunities and challenges at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and other Minority Institutions, and potential best practices for stakeholders.

Defense Research at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Other Minority Institutions: Interim Report

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's Committee on Addressing Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Anti-Racism in 21st Century STEMM Organizations convened a national summit in July 2021 that highlighted how racism operates at different levels in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) settings; reviewed policies and practices for confronting systemic racism; and explored ways to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEMM settings.

The 2-day, public webcast summit explored the empirical and experiential evidence related to the ways in which systemic racism and other barriers impede STEMM careers for historically marginalized racial/ethnic groups, and explored ways to address these barriers, including strategies undertaken by stakeholder communities. In this summit, speakers discussed how diversity, equity, inclusion, and anti-racism impact STEMM organizations. The workshop presentations focused on issues related to the history of racism in the United States, the lasting legacy of biased policies in the nation, and the research on practices to address systemic and structural racism in STEMM organizations. This publication summarizes the presentation and discussion of summit.

Addressing Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Anti-Racism in 21st Century STEMM Organizations: Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief

The Action Collaborative's Year 1 Annual Report summarizes the Action Collaborative's collective progress in the 2019-2020 year, identifies areas for future focus, discusses trends in members' reported areas of work, and highlights work shared by some member organizations.

Action Collaborative on Preventing Sexual Harassment in Higher Education: Year One Annual Report of Member Activities

Racism has been overt in transportation. For example, the segregation of races on intercity trains led to the infamous 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson “separate but equal” Supreme Court doctrine that stood for more than half a century. While many discriminatory policies have been reversed by the courts and in constitutional amendments, their impacts on society have not been fully remedied and persist.

TRB’s Racial Equity Addendum to Critical Issues in Transportation is intended to be a step in the process of identifying and building a research agenda for transportation that will help to more fully identify and address inequities and injustices caused and contributed to by transportation. While some equity-related issues were identified in Critical Issues in Transportation 2019 , the topic was not discussed in depth. In response to the candid and critical national dialogue on racial equity in 2020 and 2021, this addendum tackles racial equity exclusively and with additional consciousness about its transportation dimensions

The report covers research topics ranging from access to automobiles and public transit; institutional issues in decision making, planning, and public participation; land use and affordable housing; displacement and redlining; Native American transportation issues; and more.

Racial Equity Addendum to Critical Issues in Transportation

The year 2020 presented extraordinary challenges to organizations working to improve population health - from public health agencies at all levels of government to health systems to community-based non-profit organizations responding to health-related social needs. To improve understanding of how different domains in the population health field are responding to and being changed by two major crises (racial injustice and the COVID-19 pandemic), the Roundtable on Population Health Improvement of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a workshop from September 21-24, 2020, titled Population Health in Challenging Times: Insights from Key Domains. The workshop had sessions organized by themes: academic public health and population health; the social sector; health care, governmental public health; philanthropy; and cross-sector work. Each panel discussion highlighted difficulties and opportunities, both internal to the respective institutions and sectors, and at the interface with peers and partners, especially communities. This publication summarizes the presentations and panel discussions from the workshop.

Population Health in Challenging Times: Insights from Key Domains: Proceedings of a Workshop

The Committee on Reducing Racial Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a workshop in April 2021 as part of its exploration of ways to reduce racial inequalities in criminal justice outcomes in the United States. This workshop, the third in a series of three, enabled the committee to gather information from a diverse set of stakeholders and experts to inform the consensus study process. Speakers at the workshop presented on deeply rooted inequalities within the criminal justice system, which exist not only in readily measured areas such as incarceration, but also in a much larger footprint that includes contact with police, monetary sanctions, and surveillance and supervision. This publication highlights the presentations and discussion of the workshop.

Reducing Racial Inequalities in Criminal Justice: Data, Courts, and Systems of Supervision: Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief

While the COVID-19 pandemic has had devastating health and economic impacts in the United States, communities of color, especially Black communities, have been disproportionately affected. On June 23, 2020, the Roundtable on Black Men and Black Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a virtual workshop to discuss the landscape of COVID-19, including how systemic racism contributes to the disproportionate effects related to infection rates and mortality of this virus and other health conditions. Presenters highlighted relevant research and creative responses from many perspectives, including how Black scientists, engineers, and doctors are contributing to solutions and are ready to do more. National Academies leaders and members also discussed the role of the National Academies in addressing the pandemic and underlying issues of systemic racism that have led to health disparities in the United States. This publication summarizes the presentation and discussion of the workshop.

COVID-19 and the Present and Future of Black Communities: The Role of Black Physicians, Engineers, and Scientists: Proceedings of a Workshop

Women play important roles in science, engineering, technology, and mathematics (STEM) in the United States and in Arab countries, but they face challenges related to education and employment. Held October 5-7 2020, this was the second workshop in a series convened by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences. This workshop shared promising practices to increase the inclusion of women in STEM, focusing on gender stereotypes and family roles, retention and career development, and the role of mentorship. The workshop planning committee, comprised of women from the U.S. and Kuwait, identified themes relevant to American and Arab professionals from a wide range of disciplines and career stages, and they organized presentations and discussions around these themes. This publication summarizes the presentation and discussion of the workshop.

The Inclusion of Women in STEM: A Joint Workshop of the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, and the Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences: Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief

On March 22-23, 2021, an ad hoc planning committee under the auspices of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's Committee on Science, Technology, and Law hosted a virtual workshop titled The Science of Implicit Bias: Implications for Law and Policy. Implicit bias has been commonly defined as any unconscious or unacknowledged preferences that can affect a person's beliefs or behaviors, and in particular, an unconscious favoritism toward or prejudice against people of a certain race, gender, or group that influences one's own actions or perceptions. The methods for identifying the presence and degree of an individual's implicit bias, the presence of implicit bias throughout society, and the successes or failures of attempts to mitigate implicit bias are topics of much scientific inquiry, with ramifications for law and policy as well as a multitude of organizational settings. The ways in which implicit bias reflects or contributes to structural and systemic racism in the U.S. remains an open and urgent question. The workshop, organized by the Committee on the Science of Implicit Bias: Implications for Law and Policy, was convened to better understand the state of the science on this topic in the context of critical and ongoing discussions about racism in the United States.

The Science of Implicit Bias: Implications for Law and Policy: Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief

Recent events, including the COVID-19 pandemic and the collective awakening around issues related to racial justice, diversity, and inclusion, have underscored the challenges facing neuroscience and neuroscience training. To address these challenges, the Forum on Neuroscience and Nervous System Disorders of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a series of virtual workshops on neuroscience training with the goal of reconsidering how we think about neuroscience training in a rapidly changing world. On February 22, 2021, the fifth and final workshop in this series, titled Evolving the Culture of Science and Training in Neuroscience to Meet a Changing World, brought together stakeholders from across the neuroscience ecosystem to discuss how the culture of science and scientific training can become more inclusive, balanced, and adaptive to changing times. This final workshop expanded on many issues raised in previous workshops, including the importance of mental health and well-being in academic research; how to resist the legacy of white supremacy and support diversity in academia; and how to redefine what success means for neuroscientists in both academic and non-academic settings. This publication summarizes the discussions that occurred at the workshop.

Evolving the Culture of Science and Training in Neuroscience to Meet a Changing World: Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief

The global COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in laboratory closings, class disruptions, and hiring freezes. Combined with challenges experienced by the entire population, these situations have brought to light systemic institutional challenges faced by neuroscience trainees. At the same time, there has been a collective awakening around issues related to race, diversity, and inclusion. To explore these issues in more depth, consider changes needed across the ecosystem, and spark continuing discussion, a virtual workshop held on January 19, 2021. This workshop was the second in a series originating from the Action Collaborative on Neuroscience Training: Developing a Nimble and Versatile Workforce, an initiative of the Forum on Neuroscience and Nervous System Disorders of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The workshop series aims to illuminate critical issues and catalyze a reconsideration of how neuroscience training could be designed to meet current and future workforce needs across multiple sectors. This publication highlights the presentations of the workshop.

Neuroscience Training in Challenging Times: An Opportunity to Address Long-Standing Problems and Move Forward: Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief

Over the last few decades, research, activity, and funding has been devoted to improving the recruitment, retention, and advancement of women in the fields of science, engineering, and medicine. In recent years the diversity of those participating in these fields, particularly the participation of women, has improved and there are significantly more women entering careers and studying science, engineering, and medicine than ever before. However, as women increasingly enter these fields they face biases and barriers and it is not surprising that sexual harassment is one of these barriers.

Over thirty years the incidence of sexual harassment in different industries has held steady, yet now more women are in the workforce and in academia, and in the fields of science, engineering, and medicine (as students and faculty) and so more women are experiencing sexual harassment as they work and learn. Over the last several years, revelations of the sexual harassment experienced by women in the workplace and in academic settings have raised urgent questions about the specific impact of this discriminatory behavior on women and the extent to which it is limiting their careers.

Sexual Harassment of Women explores the influence of sexual harassment in academia on the career advancement of women in the scientific, technical, and medical workforce. This report reviews the research on the extent to which women in the fields of science, engineering, and medicine are victimized by sexual harassment and examines the existing information on the extent to which sexual harassment in academia negatively impacts the recruitment, retention, and advancement of women pursuing scientific, engineering, technical, and medical careers. It also identifies and analyzes the policies, strategies and practices that have been the most successful in preventing and addressing sexual harassment in these settings.

Harcèlement sexuel des femmes: Climat, culture et conséquences dans les filières universitaires de sciences, d'ingénierie et de médecine

For more than 150 years, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine have issued reports detailing leading research on public health and infectious disease. In response to the global outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020, the National Academies has continued this work by issuing publications related to disease transmission, preventative measures, vaccinations, and more that can inform the public response to the pandemic. Critical Findings on COVID-19 includes summaries and highlights of many of our key publications on COVID-19, including consensus study reports, workshop and webinar proceedings, and rapid expert consultations.

Critical Findings on COVID-19: Select Publications from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

The Committee on Reducing Racial Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a workshop in January 2021 as part of its exploration of ways to reduce racial inequalities in criminal justice outcomes in the United States. In this workshop, speakers described the historical underpinnings that have linked policing with systemic racism and explored how policing in specific communities has shaped disparities in rates of crime and victimization across racial and ethnic groups. Speakers from both the criminal justice system and several communities spoke about how they are working to address racial inequalities today and about the problems of over-policing and under-protection in certain communities. This workshop, the first in a series of three, enabled the committee to gather information from a diverse set of stakeholders and experts to inform the consensus study process. This publication highlights the presentations of the workshop.

Community Safety and Policing: Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief

Over the past several decades, fertility rates have fallen substantially in low- and middle-income countries, and efforts to limit fertility, primarily through the implementation of family planning programs, have become increasingly widespread. Although there is a substantial scholarly literature on the determinants of contraceptive use and other measures to limit fertility and on the resulting differentials in fertility, relatively little is known about the role played by women's empowerment as both a determinant and a consequence of fertility decline. In addition, there continues to be little consensus about the link between fertility decline and broader societal impacts, including economic development.

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a workshop, "Family Planning, Women's Empowerment, and Population and Societal Impacts," in September 2020. This event brought together experts and stakeholders to discuss conceptual, methodological, and policy issues regarding the relationships among family planning, women's empowerment, fertility decline, and population and societal impacts. The discussion was intended to inform research and policy focused on the issues of women's roles and empowerment and on longstanding questions surrounding the determinants and consequences of fertility reduction behavior. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussion of the workshop.

Family Planning, Women's Empowerment, and Population and Societal Impacts: Proceedings of a Workshop

Fostering a diverse neuroscience workforce, as well as an environment that is inclusive for all, is critical to the advancement of science and the future of the field. On January 25, 2021, the Forum on Neuroscience and Nervous System Disorders of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a virtual workshop, convening a diverse range of stakeholders from across the neuroscience community and at different career stages.

Participants tackled the broad topic of inclusion and diversity in neuroscience training to include discussions on racial equity (expanding on themes from the first workshop in the series), supporting a global workforce, institutional and geographic diversity, unique challenges for women in science, understanding how the goals of inclusion intersect with the goals around changing the culture of science. Discussions also considered the changes needed to move the field forward in this space. This workshop was the third in a series originating from the Action Collaborative on Neuroscience Training: Developing a Nimble and Versatile Workforce, an initiative of the Forum. The workshop series aims to illuminate critical issues and catalyze a reconsideration of how neuroscience training could be designed to meet current and future workforce needs across multiple sectors. This Proceedings of a Workshop-in Brief summarizes the discussions that occurred at the workshop.

Fostering Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Neuroscience Training: Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief

The Action Collaborative on Neuroscience Training: Developing a Nimble and Versatile Workforce (Action Collaborative) is an ad hoc activity convened under the auspices of the Forum on Neuroscience and Nervous System Disorders (Neuroscience Forum) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

Originated from and informed by the work of the Action Collaborative, the Neuroscience Forum launched a virtual workshop series in order to explore the rapidly evolving neuroscience career landscape and how neuroscience training programs can help trainees to develop the knowledge and skillset needed to advance their careers and biomedical science. The first of these workshops, held on August 20, 2020, tackled complex issues related to racial justice, diversity, equity, and inclusion. Panel presentations of the workshop were envisioned as a starting point for an ongoing discussion around the ways scientists can stand against racism and support diversity, equity, and inclusion in neuroscience and academia, both in their local communities and in the broader world. This publication highlights the presentations and discussion of the workshop.

Racial Justice, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Neuroscience Training: Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief

Despite the changing demographics of the nation and a growing appreciation for diversity and inclusion as drivers of excellence in science, engineering, and medicine, Black Americans are severely underrepresented in these fields. Racism and bias are significant reasons for this disparity, with detrimental implications on individuals, health care organizations, and the nation as a whole. The Roundtable on Black Men and Black Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine was launched at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in 2019 to identify key levers, drivers, and disruptors in government, industry, health care, and higher education where actions can have the most impact on increasing the participation of Black men and Black women in science, medicine, and engineering.

On April 16, 2020, the Roundtable convened a workshop to explore the context for their work; to surface key issues and questions that the Roundtable should address in its initial phase; and to reach key stakeholders and constituents. This proceedings provides a record of the workshop.

The Impacts of Racism and Bias on Black People Pursuing Careers in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Proceedings of a Workshop

There are over 20 million young people of color in the United States whose representation in STEM education pathways and in the STEM workforce is still far below their numbers in the general population. Their participation could help re-establish the United States' preeminence in STEM innovation and productivity, while also increasing the number of well-educated STEM workers.

There are nearly 700 minority-serving institutions (MSIs) that provide pathways to STEM educational success and workforce readiness for millions of students of color—and do so in a mission-driven and intentional manner. They vary substantially in their origins, missions, student demographics, and levels of institutional selectivity. But in general, their service to the nation provides a gateway to higher education and the workforce, particularly for underrepresented students of color and those from low-income and first-generation to college backgrounds. The challenge for the nation is how to capitalize on the unique strengths and attributes of these institutions and to equip them with the resources, exceptional faculty talent, and vital infrastructure needed to educate and train an increasingly critical portion of current and future generations of scientists, engineers, and health professionals.

Minority Serving Institutions examines the nation's MSIs and identifies promising programs and effective strategies that have the highest potential return on investment for the nation by increasing the quantity and quality MSI STEM graduates. This study also provides critical information and perspective about the importance of MSIs to other stakeholders in the nation's system of higher education and the organizations that support them.

Minority Serving Institutions: America's Underutilized Resource for Strengthening the STEM Workforce

The spring of 2020 marked a change in how almost everyone conducted their personal and professional lives, both within science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) and beyond. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted global scientific conferences and individual laboratories and required people to find space in their homes from which to work. It blurred the boundaries between work and non-work, infusing ambiguity into everyday activities. While adaptations that allowed people to connect became more common, the evidence available at the end of 2020 suggests that the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic endangered the engagement, experience, and retention of women in academic STEMM, and may roll back some of the achievement gains made by women in the academy to date.

The Impact of COVID-19 on the Careers of Women in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine identifies, names, and documents how the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the careers of women in academic STEMM during the initial 9-month period since March 2020 and considers how these disruptions - both positive and negative - might shape future progress for women. This publication builds on the 2020 report Promising Practices for Addressing the Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine to develop a comprehensive understanding of the nuanced ways these disruptions have manifested. The Impact of COVID-19 on the Careers of Women in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine will inform the academic community as it emerges from the pandemic to mitigate any long-term negative consequences for the continued advancement of women in the academic STEMM workforce and build on the adaptations and opportunities that have emerged.

The Impact of COVID-19 on the Careers of Women in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

Statements from the Presidents on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion June 22, 2020

Appalled by the killing of George Floyd at the hands of police and the stark reminder it provided of how far we as a nation still need to go to end systemic racism and lack of opportunity for communities of color, the presidents of the NAS, NAE, and NAM recently issued statements in which they committed to lead change — not just in how the National Academies approach diversity, equity, and inclusion within our own walls but also more broadly in science, engineering, and medicine.  

• Statement by NAS President Marcia McNutt
• Statement by NAE President John L. Anderson
• Statement by NAM President Victor J. Dzau

Browse National Academies' Topics >>

Discover what the National Academies are doing in various topic areas to strengthen the fields of science, engineering, and medicine and their capacity to contribute to the well-being of our nation and the world.

• Business Essentials
• Leadership & Management
• Credential of Leadership, Impact, and Management in Business (CLIMB)
• Entrepreneurship & Innovation
• *New* Digital Transformation
• Finance & Accounting
• Business in Society
• For Organizations
• Support Portal
• Media Coverage
• Founding Donors
• Leadership Team

• Harvard Business School →
• HBS Online →
• Business Insights →

Business Insights

Harvard Business School Online's Business Insights Blog provides the career insights you need to achieve your goals and gain confidence in your business skills.

• Career Development
• Communication
• Decision-Making
• Earning Your MBA
• Negotiation
• News & Events
• Productivity
• Staff Spotlight
• Student Profiles
• Work-Life Balance
• Alternative Investments
• Business Analytics
• Business Strategy
• Business and Climate Change
• Design Thinking and Innovation
• Digital Marketing Strategy
• Disruptive Strategy
• Economics for Managers
• Entrepreneurship Essentials
• Financial Accounting
• Global Business
• Launching Tech Ventures
• Leadership Principles
• Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability
• Leading with Finance
• Management Essentials
• Negotiation Mastery
• Organizational Leadership
• Power and Influence for Positive Impact
• Strategy Execution
• Sustainable Business Strategy
• Sustainable Investing
• Winning with Digital Platforms

DEI: What It Is & How to Champion It in the Workplace

• 03 Oct 2023

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives are essential to fostering a positive work culture. Through exposure to diverse perspectives, you can improve employee morale, promote business ethics , and drive creative problem-solving and innovation .

According to a LinkedIn survey , 69 percent of recruiters and human resources professionals believe their organizations commit to diverse hiring practices. Yet, only 47 percent think they hold hiring managers to those standards.

If you want to champion diversity, equity, and inclusion at your organization, here's an overview of DEI’s goals, why it’s important in business, and how you can implement it.

Access your free e-book today.

What Is Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion?

According to the online course Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability , DEI comprises:

• Diversity: The presence and participation of individuals with varying backgrounds and perspectives, including those who have been traditionally underrepresented
• Equity: Equal access to opportunities and fair, just, and impartial treatment
• Inclusion: A sense of belonging in an environment where all feel welcomed, accepted, and respected

To better understand DEI, here’s a breakdown of its components and benefits.

Your organization can achieve workplace diversity by employing people from various backgrounds based on:

• Sexual orientation

Doing so can produce several benefits for your company's bottom line. For example, research shows that businesses with diverse teams experience more than twice as much cash flow per employee .

Employees can also file charges against your organization if they've been discriminated against. According to a Good Jobs First report , 99 percent of Fortune 500 companies have been involved in at least one lawsuit related to discrimination or sexual harassment since 2000.

Such conflict resolution can be costly, but workplace diversity involves more than difficult conversations with employees .

“I don’t want diversity to be about policing people,” says Oona King, vice president of diversity, equity, and inclusion at Snap Inc., in Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability . “I want diversity to be about unleashing innovation and having more diverse perspectives in the room to come up with solutions to the most pressing problems of our day.”

Equity in the workplace requires treating all employees fairly and justly—regardless of their backgrounds—and ensuring equal opportunities for growth, development, and success.

While diversity provides financial benefits, equity ensures all employees feel valued. Yet, this isn’t always the case. According to a Gallup poll , 24 percent of Black and Hispanic employees experienced workplace discrimination between 2019 and 2020.

Since people often hire or promote individuals who share similar characteristics as themselves , proactively combatting influences—such as unconscious bias —can lead to workplace equity in the form of:

• Equal opportunities
• Fair compensation
• Balanced training and educational opportunities

“What you have to do around equity is tell people there are a lot of biases we’ve built up since we were kids that have been reinforced repeatedly,” King says in Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability . “And you need more awareness around them if you want to do well in a forward-thinking company.”

Inclusion extends beyond diversity and refers to employees’ workplace experiences.

It involves creating an environment where all employees feel valued, respected, and fully integrated into your organization's culture and operations.

According to Forrester , 60 percent of sales teams believe inclusion in the workplace has contributed to their success, while a Pew Research study indicates that over half of employees value DEI initiatives at work.

If you hope to make your organization more inclusive, consider your role as an ethical leader . According to Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability , thinking about the biases and concepts that influence your decision-making is essential to creating an inclusive workplace.

Related: The Importance of Reflective Leadership in Business

How to Implement DEI Within Your Organization

DEI is only effective when you implement it into your overall business strategy .

“You cannot have a diversity, equity, and inclusion strategy as a separate strategy,” King says in Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability . “It's not going to work. You have to tie it into the heart of your business strategy because separate is never equal.”

Here are four tips for implementing DEI effectively.

1. Invest in Diversity Initiatives

Investing in DEI initiatives can take several forms in business.

For example, Walmart invests in DEI by offering a Supplier Inclusion Program that supports businesses and suppliers from communities often underrepresented in large-scale retail.

Companies like Salesforce also emphasize DEI education . Through its partnership with professional skills-based platform Trailhead , employees can take courses and earn certifications in subjects such as inclusion guidelines for data visualization and inclusive content creation. According to the company’s Annual Equality Update , its commitment to DEI education and inclusive hiring tactics has resulted in nearly 51 percent of U.S. employees coming from underrepresented groups.

2. Offer Bias Training Sessions

Stereotypes—whether blatant or unconscious—can negatively impact your organization and result in decreased motivation and employee engagement.

One way to overcome workplace stereotypes is by offering unconscious bias training sessions to increase employees’ awareness of implicit biases. For example, the Implicit Association Test (IAT) —developed by professors from Harvard University, the University of Washington, and the University of Virginia—helps identify implicit associations or stereotypes you might be unaware of.

You can also provide employees the opportunity to earn a business ethics certificate to gain skills to identify and surmount biases.

Don’t be afraid to make training mandatory. According to Pew Research , approximately 53 percent of employees find DEI training helpful, with only 13 percent finding it unhelpful.

In addition, companies like Google provide this type of training through workshops that more than half of its employees participate in.

Related: Leadership in Big Tech: How to Make Ethical Decisions

3. Promote Pay Equity

Ensuring employees earn equitable salaries is crucial to championing DEI.

“When you measure objectives for metrics in corporate America, you’ll see very clear differences for different groups,” King says in Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability . “That's the data; we know it's a fact. So our job is to change those objectives in the workplace.”

One of those data points is pay equity. In the U.S., women earn approximately 82 percent of what men do—a figure that's only increased two percent since 2002. While various factors impact that statistic, it's critical for your organization to offer equitable compensation, regardless of gender.

“That's where today's diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts really come in,” King says. “What levers and tools do we have to change, so that whoever walks through the door has the same chance as anyone else of success?”

4. Prioritize Developing Talent from Underrepresented Groups

Developing talent from underrepresented groups is crucial to fostering diversity and inclusion. By providing opportunities for personal and professional growth, your organization can help address historical workplace disparities.

For example, Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability highlights Google’s push for DEI initiatives, including:

• Funding research on why fewer students who identify as female or are from underrepresented groups enroll in computer science programs
• Offering financial support to science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) programs in underrepresented communities
• Forming recruiting teams that establish a “pipeline program” with universities that have large populations of underrepresented students

These align with what Harvard Business School Professor Nien-hê Hsieh calls “the pipeline problem” in Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability .

“There simply aren’t enough qualified members of underrepresented groups available to hire for these jobs,” Hsieh says. “In the United States, this theory points to patterns like fewer women and Black people receiving degrees in science, technology, engineering, or math than their male, white, or Asian counterparts.”

Make Your Organization More Equitable

When implemented properly, DEI’s benefits can't be overstated.

“The underlying point of DEI is to understand the impact of culture and the way we do things in business strategy,” King says.

If you want to promote DEI, Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability can help you learn how to make ethical leadership decisions and create a fair workplace culture through interactive learning activities and real-world business examples.

Ready to champion DEI at your organization? Enroll in Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability —one of our online leadership and management courses —and download our free leadership e-book on how to become a more effective leader.

About the Author

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Clin Transl Sci
• v.5(1); 2021

Educating for diversity, equity, and inclusion: A review of commonly used educational approaches

Leonor corsino.

1 Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism, and Nutrition, Duke School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA

2 Duke Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Community-Engaged Research Initiative Core, Duke School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA

Anthony T. Fuller

3 Department of Neurosurgery, Division of Global Neurosurgery and Neurology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA

4 Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA

5 Duke Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Center for Pathway Programs, Duke School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are fundamentally important concepts for advancing clinical and translational science (CTS) education. CTS education spans a wide range of disciplines from cell biology to clinical and community/population research. This large scope both in terms of intellectual areas and target groups requires an understanding of existing educational approaches for DEI as we translate DEI from mere concepts into equitable actions within CTS education. In this  review, we provide the readers with the most common DEI educational approaches, including cultural humility, bias training, and improving mentoring to diversify the workforce. DEI educational materials can achieve maximal success and long-term impact when implemented as institutional-wide interventions, and the materials are not seen as an isolated or independent curriculum. Approaches, strategies, and programs to achieve this are many. However, many questions remain unanswered about what the best approach, strategies, and programs are to be implemented in institutional-wide education that will be embedded in CTS education.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are fundamentally important concepts for advancing clinical and translational science (CTS) education. In recent years, increased societal consciousness has led to the precipitous rise in the usage of DEI in everyday vernacular. Often, when concepts become ubiquitous, their meanings morph such that individuals may have completely different ideas of the concept’s definition, or they become “code” that can lead some audiences to opt-out.

For the purpose of this review, we use diversity and inclusion as concepts in alignment with the National Institute of Health (NIH) definitions, given the NIH’s position as a major funder of CTSs. Diversity is defined by the NIH as “the range of human differences, including but not limited to race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, age, social class, physical ability or attributes, religious or ethical value system, national origin, and political beliefs” [ 1 ]. While inclusion is defined as “involvement and empowerment, where the inherent worth and dignity of all people is recognized” [ 1 ]. For equity, we define this concept as “the state, quality, or ideal of being just, impartial, and fair” [ 2 ].

DEI work in CTS education requires an intentional focus on those already practicing in CTS as well as a focus on the training and education for the next generation of practitioners and investigators. CTS is uniquely positioned to reinforce inequities or entirely reshape and reduce inequities; therefore, the additional focus on trainees allows influence not only on the scientific questions that will be asked but also the scientific environment that they will inhabit. CTS education also spans a wide range of disciplines from cell biology to clinical and community/population research [ 3 ]. This large scope both in terms of intellectual areas and target groups requires an understanding of existing educational approaches for DEI as we translate DEI from mere concepts into equitable actions within CTS education.

CTS education is positioned within an academic environment that will either support or stifle DEI efforts. Environmental factors contributing to the support or stifling of DEI efforts include the makeup of the institution’s faculty, staff, leaders, and students alongside the institution’s evaluation procedures and policies. These environmental factors are distinct from educational materials created specifically to increase an institution’s members’ understanding of DEI. It is entirely plausible that an institution can have high-quality, innovative, and well-intended educational DEI materials within an environment that hinders its impact on its CTS educational community. The converse is also true. This reality is why we believe that within the CTS education community, despite our paper’s focus on DEI educational approaches, we must not only focus solely on the development and implementation of high-quality educational DEI materials, but also invest in cultivating just, equitable, and supportive learning environments.

While preparing for writing this review, we approached the intersection of DEI within CTS education with the broadest scope possible and then began narrowing. Our initial search terms brought up thousands of articles that spanned the spectrum from articles about educational environments to DEI materials. We choose to focus our paper on DEI educational materials and approaches, which narrowed the articles to a more manageable range. Each article in our search was examined to develop a list of the most common DEI educational approaches, and then we dove deeper into each approach to highlight the most salient features for the CTS educational community.

Educational Approaches and Programs

Several approaches have been pursued for educating DEI. In this section, we will provide a summary of some of the existing educational approaches and programs created and developed to enhance cultural humility, ameliorate bias, and improve mentoring to diversify the workforce in science. We recognize that due to the increasing body of literature in this significance and evolving area of research and education, it is impossible to be fully inclusive of all the work that has been done and is ongoing.

Cultural Humility

Cultural humility is defined as a lifelong process of self-reflection and self-critique whereby the individual not only learns about another’s culture, but one starts with an examination of her/his own beliefs and cultural identities [ 4 ]. Cultural humility training, usually referred to as cross-cultural training and education, is commonly offered to an array of professionals. The main goal of this training is to enhance cross-cultural interactions and increase personal awareness of one’s values and beliefs to increase the understanding and acceptance of others [ 5 , 6 ].

Although training in cultural humility is not new and has been implemented for decades, the approaches to implementation and its inclusion in research training are relatively new [ 4 ]. Traditionally, training to increase cultural humility utilizes workshops as its main pedagogical method [ 6 ]. These workshops are usually didactic, delivered for several hours or 1–2 days. This can lead many to perceive them as superficial. Further, those who are compelled to attend may find them divisive and uncomfortable [ 6 , 7 ].

Cultural immersion, based on the principle that immersion in another’s culture, practices, and language is an effective means of learning about oneself “in” another culture, has been utilized as another method to teach cultural humility [ 8 ]. Cultural immersion focuses on (1) increasing students’ capacity for empathy by exposing them to a different worldview, (2) developing critical self-reflection/self-awareness, (3) experiencing traditional cultural practices, and (4) exploring traditional and contemporary values and beliefs, focusing on the culture’s strengths [ 8 ]. Several studies have documented the impact and benefits of cultural immersion as a method to teach cultural humility [ 9 ]. Similarities among the studies include short-term immersion into a culture different than own, reflective journaling, daily writing, and debriefings [ 10 ].

A recently published systematic review looking into cultural immersion educational programs for healthcare professionals reports a total of 9 studies with a total of 94 participants with experiences in 14 culturally diverse environments. The interventions and assessments utilized by each program include didactic lecture, study abroad experience, semi-structured interviews, focus groups, journaling, and reflective papers. The authors concluded that participants in immersion programs demonstrated growth in the cognitive, affective, perpetual, cultural dissonance, and skills/engagement domains. The paper concluded that cultural immersion experiences can produce a positive multidomain effect in its participants.[ 10 ].

New approaches to delivering cultural humility training have been proposed. A group of investigators from the Rush Institute for Healthy Aging proposed the QIAN (Humbleness) curriculum: the importance of self-questioning and critique, bi-directional cultural immersion, mutually active listening, and the flexibility of negotiation curriculum. The QIAN curriculum is based on Chinese philosophy and is inspired by ancient Chinese thinkers. The investigators proposed a model that incorporates the following: (1) Question asking: questions regarding our own assumptions about the world, where the assumptions come from, constant self-questioning and self-critique; (2) Immersion: immersion that goes beyond exposure to other cultures; (3) Active listening: active listening with the body (gestures and body languages), mind (stories and narratives), and soul (feelings and emotions); and (4) Negotiation: willingness to negotiate mutually acceptable alternatives carries equal weight as learning each other’s preference. [ 7 ]

Another approach proposed to deploy cultural humility training includes an art-based curriculum. Art-based training for cultural humility has been proposed as an innovative and creative way of training health professionals. Art-based interventions that highlight self-reflecting artmaking facilitated insight, understanding, awareness, and competency [ 11 ].

Simulation is another method proposed for increasing cultural humility. Simulation for developing cultural humility has been utilized as a new pedagogical approach in nursing [ 12 – 14 ]. A review article published in 2017 looking at Cultural Competency and Cultural Humility in Simulation-Based Education identified a total of 16 studies. Within the 16 studies included in the review, a total of four themes emerged: (1) cultural sensitivity and cultural competence, (2) insight and understanding, (3) communication, and (4) confidence and comfort. However, the methods varied widely within these studies. At the end, the authors concluded that no one study existed at the time that describes the use of simulation to teach cultural humility [ 15 ]. Since the publication of this article, several others have shown the utility and the need of simulation as a new and innovative method to teach cultural humility [ 16 , 17 ].

Bias Training

Bias, conscious, or unconscious has been cited as a major contributing factor in health and health care disparities and underrepresentation of historically minority groups in science and academia [ 18 ]. The term “implicit bias” or “unconscious bias” gained significant attention and has been the subject of many publications. The “unconscious bias hypothesis” which is widely quoted in social psychology research, portends that bias can occur without recognition [ 19 ]. Bias is usually referred to as both stereotypes and prejudices and as “the negative evaluation of one group and its members relative to another” [ 20 ]. While studies have documented bias in health care delivery [ 21 ], additional research has shown the impact of unconscious bias in research, admissions, hiring policies, and underrepresented minorities (URMs) progression in academia [ 22 – 24 ].

To educate for DEI, it is necessary to address the significant impact that bias plays in our day-to-day lives as researchers, health care providers, educators, and leaders. The recognition of the impact of bias in all aspects of academic medicine is the main force behind the increasing number of materials and approaches developed and implemented to increase awareness of bias and its impact. Although it is not possible to eliminate our own unconscious bias, it is potentially possible to ameliorate its impact on our decisions while treating patients, conducting research, interviewing, and leading [ 25 ].

Numerous programs, educational materials, and approaches have been developed to address bias. It is challenging to provide a complete summary of the existing data and publications pertaining to unconscious bias due to the exponential increase in the number of publications within the last decade. However, for the purpose of this review, we will provide the readers with the most common approaches utilized and proposed to increase awareness, knowledge, and skills development to address the impact of bias in all aspects of academia including CTS education.

Awareness, Knowledge, and Skills

To address biases, we need to become aware that they exist and their impact on behavior. Approaches to increased awareness are currently being implemented. One highly utilized tool is the Implicit Association Test (IAT). The IAT is currently the only available objective measurement of unconscious bias. The IAT measures the differential association of two target concepts with attributes. IAT, developed in 1998 by Banjani and Greenland [ 26 ], has been extensively utilized by many studies addressing unconscious bias [ 27 ]. Although the IAT is widely utilized and there is research proving its validity [ 28 ], there is some controversy regarding it’s utility [ 29 ]. One of the main critiques of the test is to what extent awareness predicts behavior [ 30 ]. Despite the limitations of the test, its utility to increase awareness and its free availability makes it a valuable tool for bias awareness.

Research and publications reporting curriculum and programs developed to address the issue of racial bias in academic medicine are vast. The research ranges from programs targeting medical students [ 31 , 32 ], residents [ 33 ], faculty [ 34 ], and search committees [ 35 ]. Overall, commonalities within these programs and educational materials comprise the use of workshops, multimedia presentations, small group discussions, interactive audience polling, self-reflection, and clinical vignettes or case studies.

Educational materials focused on interventions to acquire skills to reduce the impact of bias are less commonly reported. However, some information exists regarding strategies to prevent implicit bias. Four strategies that show potential for reducing implicit bias include: (1) pursuing egalitarian goals by learning to associate minority groups with goals that promote fairness and equity, this potentially helps cutting the stereotype off even before they appeared; (2) identifying common identities by shifting the attention from differences and focus more on common interests and activities; (3) counter-stereotyping by focusing on the individual unique attributes and behaviors; and (4) perspective-taking by taking the perspective of the minority group [ 36 ].

Improving Mentoring to Impact Clinical Translational Science Education

CTS education will not be successfully achieved without deliberate attention to improve mentoring to diversify the workforce. Diversifying the workforce has been recognized as an important and necessary priority to further scientific discoveries, eliminate health disparities, improve minority health, and achieve patient-centered outcomes [ 37 ]. Robust mentorship has been cited as a way to enhance workforce diversity in health sciences and research [ 38 ]. Research has shown that trainees from URM groups receive less mentoring than their White peers [ 39 ]. Further, improving mentoring to increase DEI in research has been identified as a priority by the NIH [ 39 ]. The NIH directly addressed the science of diversity, citing the racial, ethnic, gender, and economic balance of the US biomedical research workforce as limiting the promise of building knowledge and improving the nation’s health [ 40 ]. To that end, the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) a nationwide consortium of biomedical professionals and collaborating institutions sponsored by the NIH works to provide all trainees across scientific disciplines with evidence-based mentorship and professional development programming that emphasizes the benefits and challenges of diversity, inclusivity, and culture within mentoring relationships and, more broadly, the research workforce. The goal of the NRMN is to increase the diversity of biomedical research by enhancing the mentorship and career development of individuals from diverse backgrounds, communities, and cultures [ 41 ].

The evidence-based curriculum, activities, and training resources available via the NRMN are grounded in a robust conceptual model, authentically address bias, stereotype threat, and cultural ignorance, focus on the formal preparation of both mentors and mentees, builds upon process-based, community-building approaches to mentor and mentee training, and include established multimodal training formats and proven train-the-trainer efforts that allow for rapid scale-up and sustainability.

Considering the extensive efforts by the NRMN in the development of a publicly available curriculum to train mentors and mentees to improve mentoring practice that will lead to DEI in research, we encourage others to explore and engage in activities to deploy this training widely. We recognized that there are potential limitations experienced by some academic institutions to fully deploy the curriculum, such as lack of time, financial support, and other resources including trained facilitators. However, it is challenging to educate for DEI when diversity in the scientific workforce is not achieved.

The NRMN curriculum has been adapted and implemented successfully by Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs) around the country. Through the Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (ICTR), the Entering Mentoring training materials were adapted for use with CTSA mentors. In a randomized controlled trial, the entering mentoring materials were implemented at 16 CTSA institutions across the country [ 42 ]. In this study, a total of 283 mentor–mentee pairs were recruited. Mentors were randomized to the 8-hour training group or to the control group. The curriculum is implemented in a small group of mentors that engage in discussions based on case studies and activities. The curriculum was deployed by two facilitators and in four 2 hours sessions. The curriculum focuses on six core competencies: (1) maintaining effective communication, (2) aligning expectations, (3) assessing understanding, (4) addressing diversity (5) fostering independence, and (6) promoting professional development. Evaluation of the curriculum demonstrated improvement in mentors’ skills important for successful mentoring such as communication and evaluation skills [ 43 ].

Implementation, Dissemination, and Evaluation

Increased attention and focus on DEI has led to the development of a wide array of educational materials with varying levels of quality and distinct pedagogical approaches. Sifting through the options to select the best and most impactful approaches requires the same attention to detail and scientific rigor as any other topic in CTS. Practically, this means that deliberate attention is given to the selection of educational materials, to the choice of the faculty, staff, and students who will administer and receive the educational materials, and to the environment in which the materials are being implemented.

DEI educational materials can achieve maximal success and long-term impact when implemented as institutional-wide interventions, and the materials are not seen as an isolated or independent curriculum. DEI education must be viewed as integral and intertwined with the successful mastery of every topic and aspect within CTS. Programs and institutions across the country are at different stages in the process of fully integrating DEI into their curriculum. Most have communicated acknowledgment of DEI’s importance by placing it within their mission statements. Undoubtedly, this is an important step towards full-scale systemic changes in the structures, environment, and educational materials.

As programs and institutions begin their journeys in DEI development and integration, dissemination becomes imperative. Dissemination serves a tripartite purpose by providing a channel for iteration, refinement, and sharing of best practices. The Association of American Medical Colleges’ (AMMC) MedEdPORTAL Diversity, Inclusion, and Health Equity Collection is a good example of a dissemination platform (Table  1 ). Through this and other mechanisms, work being done at a single program or institution can contribute to the growing body of work in this space. Collective knowledge development through dissemination is a key lever for success as programs and institutions grapple with the daunting task of dismantling racism, sexism, ageism, ableism, and a multitude of other isms.

Curriculum and educational approaches and materials resources

Rigorous evaluation of DEI educational interventions is an additional lever for success. There is a desperate need to try to get this “right,” which means there must be a way for CTS educators to know which DEI educational materials are better and what impact are to be expected. Checklists, audits, toolkits, and evaluation surveys have already been created [ 44 ].

Unmet Needs and Barriers

Institutional and program willingness, adequately trained and resourced staff, and receptive students are only part of the complex puzzle of educating for DEI in CTS. Unmet needs are embedded and widespread within each of these areas. Most institutions and programs have a general willingness to engage in DEI work and are faced with resistance [ 45 ].

Across the board exists the need to see the value and then to invest the time, funding, and development of qualified instructors. Until recently, DEI work has been an afterthought or has garnered increased attention due to tragedy and exposure of inequities.

Putting DEI into Practice

Academic institutions and CTSAs within these institutions recognize the value of DEI in the advancement of sciences. As such, implementing approaches to further educate stakeholders for DEI are important. Our simple conceptual framework focused on two distinct ideas: the creation of a conducive environment and the creation and implementation of educational materials and curriculum. The framework highlights the importance of the environment when it comes to fostering DEI. Without a supportive and conducive environment, advancement to ameliorate racism and bias in research and academic institutions is close to impossible.

Although, in this study, we focused mostly on describing some of the most used approaches to educate for DEI as we cannot overemphasize the impact of the environment. To implement training in cultural humility, bias training, and mentoring training, it is critical to have an environment that supports these initiatives. For example, the testing and implementation of mentoring training at several CTSAs around the country were possible with the support from NIH funding and buy-in by CTSAs leadership.

Similarly, training in bias and cultural humility requires dedicated effort to hire, train, develop, and implement new and existing materials. To that end, the creation of diversity and inclusion offices, centers for equity, and institutes dedicated to these efforts are important and, as such, should be fully supported and resourced. Also, the efforts to educate for DEI are no longer isolated and are becoming more and more critical components of research, training, and education. However, more is still needed. For example, validated measurements to assess the short and long-term impact of bias training. In the meantime, to what extent training that aims to change very rooted bias has an impact on research remains unknown. Finally, there is a need to continue the conversation, the creation, implementation, research, and innovation in DEI education.

Educating for DEI and dismantling racism in research and academic institutions is a national priority. Approaches, strategies, and programs to achieve this are many. However, many questions remain unanswered pertaining to what the best approach, strategies, and programs are to implement institutional-wide education that will be embedded in CTS education. Further, as we continue to explore, test, and implement these approaches, strategies, and programs, other questions remain regarding the best assessments to determine their impact.

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank Ms. Maureen Cullins for her editorial support.

Disclosures

Dr. Corsino receives funding for her role as co-director for the Duke CTSI Community Engagement Research Initiative Core by the CTSA grant UL1TR002553 and received funding for her former role as associate director for the Duke School of Medicine Office of Faculty Mentoring Training by the CTSA grant UL1TR002553. She also received NIH funding for her former role as co-director for the REACH Equity Center Training and Education Core 5U54MD012530-03. Dr. Corsino is a former Diversity Strategist in the Duke School of Medicine Office of Diversity and Inclusion. She is currently a co-investigator in the NIH-funded U01GM132374. Dr. Fuller has no conflicts of interest to declare. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NIH or the Duke School of Medicine.

• Search Close Search

escort pendik antalya escort perabet giriş

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (General) Research

De&i (general) research.

The mission of the IPR CDEI is to conduct, support, and promote research and insights relating to diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace focused on four core areas:  BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) , LGBTQ+, women, and intersectionality.

Research Topics:

Latest Research: 

The Future of DEI in Higher Education

• Posted October 5, 2023
• By Jill Anderson
• College Access and Success
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Higher Education Leadership
• Inequality and Education Gaps

The Supreme Court’s decision to end race conscious admissions and — actions taking place in many states to curb diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts on college campuses — has raised the question: What is next for DEI in higher education? Rich Reddick, a leading thinker on DEI in higher education, knows that the field needs to regroup and rethink the future of diversity — something on the minds of most college administrators.

“Many folks this summer, we all were sort of in a funk... . It's just disappointing to know that the work and the research that has gone on for the last 40 years [is] being dismissed,” says Reddick, Ed.M.'98, Ed.D.'08, the associate dean for equity, community engagement, and outreach for the College of Education at the University of Texas at Austin.

“I remind people in both Fisher [U.S. Supreme Court] cases, there are amicus briefs submitted by the Fortune 100 and the military saying [diversity] is something that's critical to our ability to be competitive. Having a diverse population and having students have an opportunity to learn from each other and expose to each other's identities is such an important part of what makes us competitive economically, socially, politically. So that can't go away,” he says, asserting that this is a time to lean into diversity in the college admissions and lean on partners in higher education to continue being committed to diversity.

In this episode of the EdCast, Reddick shares his reaction to the Supreme Court’s decision, how it has impacted and changed his work with college administrators, and ways for those doing the challenging work of diversity today to stay committed to the fight.

JILL ANDERSON: I'm Jill Anderson. This is the Harvard EdCast. 

Rich Reddick believes higher education needs to find new ways of doing diversity, equity, and inclusion work. He spent decades working and studying DEI in higher education. He's also the associate dean for equity, community engagement, and outreach for the College of Education at the University of Texas at Austin. It's been a tough year for those committed to diversity on college campuses, with the Supreme Court ruling against race conscious admissions and a growing number of bills being brought forth by states to curb DEI efforts at colleges and universities.

Rich admits it can be disheartening to do this work at times and is a big advocate for what he calls restorative resistance. I wanted to talk to Rich about what this all means, not just for college admissions, but also the future of DEI. First, I asked Rich his reaction to the Supreme Court ruling.

RICH REDDICK: I think it was expected from most of us. I think many of us were buoyed to see the responses from Judge Jackson and the things that she kind of put out there as far as really invigorating dissent that gives hope and also presents the idea that this is not a settled question. The decision went against precedent. And then secondly, it also sort of put together these competing views of what a colorblind society looks like.

JILL ANDERSON: Hm.

RICH REDDICK: I mean, it's so ironic that we are talking about this on the 60th anniversary of the Birmingham 16th Street bombing, right. There are people who lived through that bombing, still are living with the consequences of the trauma from that experience. And to posit that we're at this colorblind sort of apex of society, when in fact, the evidence is constantly around us that it's just not that way.  

So not a surprise. I think disappointment, but one that we were prepared for. And one that I think most institutions probably had already started thinking about, well, how do we respond to this?

JILL ANDERSON: You know, we've had a few months now to reconcile a little bit with the ruling. And as you noted, a lot of institutions were already thinking leading up to it, what way will this go? And how will I have to change? As someone who's worked in diversity, equity inclusion for many decades and you guide professionals in this area, has this changed the work? And if it has, tell me how.

RICH REDDICK: Many folks this summer, we all were sort of in a funk, you know. It's just disappointing to know that the work and the research that has gone for the last 40 years, sort of, being dismissed. And so, this summer at the Institute for Educational Management, we had Ruth Simmons visit with us.

JILL ANDERSON: Right.

RICH REDDICK: A giant, somebody I grew up reading about. And I'm sitting there interviewing with her with Jim Honan. And Juliet Garcia, who's another alumna and speaker, I have these two Texas giants of higher education. And one thing that Ruth said to us was, we do the work that we've always done. We just have to find new ways to do it. Kind of a very matter of fact framing of it.

So we have to adhere to the law. We'll do that. But we have to also find ways to meet our institutional goals. And I'm in a room of 70 higher education leaders, all of whom have something in their institutional mission about serving equitable populations and making sure that we are doing all the things to maximize human potential. We all have something like that in our mission statements. We had some very interesting discussions in the decision, one of which was Justice Roberts making the comment that, well, you should be able to talk about how race has impacted your personal development and your sort of opportunities.

And so, it's such a weird thing, Jill, because in a lot of ways I'm like, well, if you can do that, then why are we at this point with the ruling. But nevertheless, we heard them say that it's acceptable for applicants to talk about how race has influenced and shaped their lives.

RICH REDDICK: As institutions, we can't probe into that. We have reporting necessities we have to do for the federal government. And so, that's a change. But certainly, I think students and people who are applying for universities should be talking-- as they always should be talking about the way that their experiences have shaped their lives. And race is obviously-- race and gender and sexual orientation and socioeconomic status among other things are very salient parts of how we navigate the world.

So I expect that students and applicants will start talking about those things more explicitly. I think also, it sounds to me that the folks who are helping students think about accessing higher education, it would be important for them to recall and remember that something that was said in the decision, that is part of what you can talk about. And they should talk about it and in all its forms, right. I don't think it's necessarily a story where you say, well, because I have a underrepresented identity, my life has been terrible. But it should be, here are the things that I've encountered that have created perhaps more obstacles to me fulfilling my potential. And here are some things that I've done that have been inspiration.  

So think about myself as an African-American male. You know, I've had so many wonderful experiences that are inclusive of my identity. But I also went to an under-resourced school. I also had less resources in my k-12 experiences. So those have to be part of the narrative. So I think that was one thing I think that's a really important takeaway.

I think also just to remember that the efforts that are happening both inside institutions, but also outside institutions. So a lot of times think it's the importance of having our partners who support higher education, the world of philanthropy, nonprofits, community organizations have an important role to play. So I hope that is an opportunity for us to come together and think about, well, perhaps in the institutional context, this has been made more challenging or difficult or even not possible.  

How can our community partners, how can our partners in philanthropy, how can the corporate sector who is constantly said... and I remind people in both Fisher cases, there are amicus briefs submitted by the Fortune 100 and the military saying this is something that's critical to our ability to be competitive. Having a diverse population and having students have an opportunity to learn from each other and expose to each other's identities is such an important part of what makes us competitive economically, socially, politically. So that can't go away.

RICH REDDICK: And so, I think the opportunity and the importance of us calling on those partners to say, we need you to also articulate the importance of diversity, equity, and inclusion in your respective spheres, whether it's the corporate sector, whether it's the military. And in fact, there is a carve out in this decision supporting the military academies use of race in their admissions process. So these are critical aspects of what we need to do to make ourselves ready to be competitive and do our work. We just have to find new ways of accessing that information and building diverse, inclusive communities in higher education.

JILL ANDERSON: Because we know research shows that removing affirmative action leads to declines in students of color enrollment in so many colleges. I mean, you just were talking a little bit about that, about the essays and that portion of applying to college. Is this something that you heard a lot of worry about from college administrators? What are we going to do? Are we going to have big drops in enrollment?  

Prior to this decision, that was a lot of the goal was to bolster, to try to make the student body diverse and enrich the higher ed community, enrich the courses. And now it's kind of a little bit of a question mark of what will things look like going forward.

RICH REDDICK: Jill, we did. And in fact, we have evidence of that. When California had the proposition that rescinded affirmative action, they saw a precipitous drop in African-American enrollments at their flagship institutions. So yes, I mean, that's kind of the expected result.  

And so, for institutions we have to do is be steadfast in our commitment towards equity and inclusion, right. And we have to say, and you heard this from many institutions. The ruling came down. Most institutions aren't spoiling for a fight or looking to be sued. So certainly, the incentive to stay within the constraints of the law are there, but also the understanding that this is such an important part of our mission. We can't just not do it.

So we have to really strive to think about how we do this. And of course, people talk about these proxies, or how do we find other ways of looking. And of course, I'm reminded of Justice Roberts and Justice Sotomayor having this back and forth in another case where Justice Roberts says, well, the only way to get over the color issue is to get over it. And Justice Sotomayor is saying, well, the only way to really address it is to actually address it.

So every other proxy out there, whether socioeconomic status or first-gen status is addressing an issue specifically about that. But racial identity overlaps in so many different ways. To think that every single person who is African-American, Latino, Asian, Native American comes from a low income background or comes from a first generation background is problematic, right. That's not the case.

It really does present this dilemma because, again, it's these two competing ideologies from the court that say colorblindness. And it just sort assumes that we've had some kind of transformation. And nobody sees anything from the lenses of race and identity, to folks who have lived experiences where they're like, well, wait a minute. That is not how the world works.

I always remind people to look at any sort of indicator of life outcomes, whether it's maternal mortality or all those things. You see racial disparities. They're still there. So I think the realistic perspective is to say, we have worked very hard. And I think we can make different assessments of how hard we've worked. But we've made efforts to make those things improve.

It was powerful, I think, to hear Judge Jackson ask the question during the oral arguments about, how would you assess a person who had similar credentials but had different experiences because of their racial identity? And the lawyer couldn't really respond to it, right, because it is a salient part. And that's the thing that's, I think, really hard to square because I think it's understandable to say that, perhaps the goal is for some people to say we want a colorblind society. And people often abrogate Martin Luther King's words and saying colorblindness. And they don't think what that actually means.

What that meant was there was no negative consequences because of one's racial identity, not to let it go. And there seems to be this idea that we just need to ignore the role of race in our development. And what has-- or we've done something monumental to advance so those things don't happen. But again, I look at the things like mortality rates. I look at things like looking at the rates of certain diseases among the populations. Those are racially, you know, salient sort of spaces.

So it's hard to make a good faith argument to say that's not happening.

RICH REDDICK: It's fine to say, the goal is that. And we're working towards it. But we're not quite there.

JILL ANDERSON: Right, we've also just seen the work of DEI just coming under attack. We're seeing legal action being taken to bar colleges and universities spending money on DEI programs. We're seeing limits to how race can be discussed. And even though we can talk about the state where this gets the most media mentions, it's not just happening in Florida. It's happening in a lot of states, dozens of states.  

And there were many bills introduced in this past year putting forth efforts to curb DEI. For you guys who are doing this work is this just totally demoralizing?  

RICH REDDICK: Yeah. So I think that's a fair assessment. I think for many folks it is. This is not something that just came out of the blue. It's not, like, a trend. We called it different things, Multicultural Affairs, I think when we first started out.

But this is truly a body of research and a body of professional identity that many folks have. It shouldn't be surprising if we study history because we know typically when there are advances, there are backlashes. So in the summer of 2020 after the murder of George Floyd, there was this renewed focus and commitment from organizations. I remember when the New York Times best seller list, every book on the list was addressing issues of equity and inclusion and the invariable backlash.

And I think people need to understand this. So when you think about the Manhattan Institute putting out a paper saying, abolish DEI. That Christopher Rufo who's-- you mentioned Florida-- is the architect of what's happening there when they make very clear claims.

And again, they're not grounded in fact because as I've said already, I mean, these institutions and commitments to DEI have to work within the constraints of the law. So there are no quotas in spaces, right.

RICH REDDICK: Another thing I think, of course, is it's interesting that the response was, I see shortcomings in the DEI space. And I think all of us who work in the diversity, equity, inclusion space would say is, every DEI policy is every training at the very maximum? Of course not, that's true of anything.

But the response is to get rid of it, not to, let's revisit it. Let's analyze. Let's understand better. So I actually find, a lot of times when you talk to people about what the work actually is about and who's included in the work. The work is often organizations such as those that address veteran issues, that address issues for women, that address issues for rural students, a lot of populations that people do not think of as the DEI space.

People are often surprised to hear that. And of course, when I mentioned the Manhattan Institute, they were very explicit about pulling out, like, let's not have Title IX things in there or things that refer to veterans. But nevertheless, in most DEI organizations, those are part of the populations we serve.  

The other thing, of course, Jill, is that intersectionality is a real concept. It's not a boogie person that they talk about. Intersectionality would say that it's possible to be a white, rural, veteran and access services from a DEI office, right. You're not just one slice of identity.

And so, it's one of those things where I think people sort of see soundbites. And we're in a new media environment too, where I think the media, depending on what your media consumption diet is, you could start to walk away and think, well, it's this thing and take these sort of outlying kind of experiences and saying, well, that's what it's about. Instead of saying, there are very different ways of approaching this work.

And again, for somebody who's been doing this work as long as I have, I certainly think that I've grown a lot in the work I've done. I've taken different approaches. I think most of us who do the work seriously, I think my colleagues at Harvard like Robin Chapman at the Kennedy School, we do this work in a sense of trying to build communities and coalitions, right.

So everybody has to do the work. Everybody should be invested in maximizing the human potential in our organizations. And it isn't just for a certain population. It isn't just for certain people. And it's not as if people in the organization who have certain identities are either thriving or not thriving. It's kind of understanding that it's a much broader undertaking than that. And I've always been a person who's looked at this work as being work that is truly inclusive.

In fact, in my work I often challenge people who often feel, well, I don't hold a marginalized identity. So why am I in this? I'm like, you need to be in this because you're part of the organization. You're a leader in the organization. How you challenge and frame things matters.

So and, it's unfortunate because I do, again, think about what it means to be making people ready for world readiness. Like, how do we do that work when we in fact, have this incredible benefit of multilingual and multi identities that we can actually access and understand? We're actually harming ourselves if we walk into the world and say-- we come from a nation that has an incredibly diverse population, but because we've made certain policy choices.

And then, maybe I'm not able to access those experiences. And then walk into other spaces. And I'm ignorant. Or I don't have the tools to engage the way I should. And one thing I do, Jill, which I really have enjoyed as a professor is, I take my students abroad. And I can see the benefit of my students being in diverse spaces because they know how to engage with people from other countries because they've met people from those countries before.

They've had opportunities to understand how the world operates outside of their own context. Why would we want to take that away, I don't know. That's the thing that confounds me.

JILL ANDERSON: You referenced your own work on restorative resistance. If I'm understanding what that is, it seems like there has never been a time where that is needed more than right now. So tell me what restorative resistance is in the context of DEI work.

RICH REDDICK: First of all, I found that other people were using this term in other ways. But what I was trying to get at was this idea that, I think about the 30 years I've been doing this work. There's always been challenges, right. And then, how do you keep doing the work because one thing I think is very true of people who work in the DEI space is fatigue, right.

You're working to create a more inclusive climate. You've got sort of budgetary constraints. You've got policy constraints. You've got legal constraints. You have all these things kind of working against. It's Sisyphean. You're pushing a boulder up the hill. And there's stuff coming the other direction.

Well, how do you keep doing that work? And really it's trying to find the ways to build community and to prioritize selfcare, which I saw I think post George Floyd, the first time I saw people saying, you know, I've had enough. And in the book, I talk about the parallels in the sports world.

So Naomi Osaka and Simone Biles were both going through these moments in their careers where they were like, I cannot do any more right now. I can't perform at the peak performance. I need to take time away from this. And then I think, fairly mediocre people were critiquing them for this.

We're talking about the people who are the best at the world at what they're doing. And they had comments. And I realized this idea of preserving one's self is so important. And this concept of sustainability, which we apply in the environmental context applies to our lives as well.  

Like, to do this work in a sustainable manner, I think about my heroes in the work. The Beverly Daniel Tatums, the Charles Wylys, my mentor, Bridget Terry Long who's my advisor at Harvard. You have to know how to do the work and also live your life.

One of my favorite pictures of Martin Luther King Jr. Is when he's on vacation in Jamaica. And there's Dr. King in a pool with swim shorts on. And it just shows you, the work is unyielding. It's always there.  

But we have to make sure we prioritize our own well-being to do the work well and make sure we find the people in the world who are fellow travelers. And the fellow travelers are not simply in your institutional space. They're in other universities across the country, across the world, right.

And it means a lot when you can talk to somebody who is in a different context and say, I'm doing this work. Can you help me with some resources? Can you help me with just brainstorming? Or I tried something that didn't seem to be very successful. What's the feedback you had for me?

When I think about the joyfulness because people have often asked me those kinds of questions. And I'm like, I like what I do. Not like it's an onerous all the time. They're definitely challenging days. But you only have that when you have a chance to restore and prioritize your own well-being.

And my own transformation in the last several years was saying to people, if you feel the institution or the field is not giving what you need right now, it's acceptable to take time away from it. And hopefully we get to have that talent and those ideas and those skills back.

But there's so many spaces to execute the work of creating more inclusive climates, I think, moved in a lot of places. So a lot of my friends who worked in higher education have moved into nonprofits. They've moved in the medical sector. They've done all kinds of spaces to do this work.  

It's necessary. And it really is about this idea that we are doing our utmost to make sure that when we bring people in our organizations, we're getting the most we can out of their contributions. They're not holding back parts of their identity. They're not contributing because they don't feel it's safe to do so.  

And I always make that argument to people. I say, can you imagine what it must be like to be part of an organization, to be brought into an organization because you have an incredible skill set, but feel you can't truly be who you are because there's bias, there's prejudice, there's racism, there's homophobia? Wouldn't it be amazing if we could get those things out of there and allow those people to really bring all of the traits that they bring to the organizational stage? Of course, it is.

And so, we do that by helping people understand how to work in spaces that are inclusive and welcoming. And that sounds a little bit less scary, I think, to some people. But a lot of times it's just the matter of having it broken down. Haven't given up on the idea of making sure that people truly understand the work that we do and not falling into these tropes or these kind of media hyped false narratives about what the work actually is.

JILL ANDERSON: Rich Reddick is the inaugural associate dean for equity, community engagement, and outreach for the College of Education at the University of Texas at Austin. There he is also a professor in the program of and in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy. He is also the author of Restorative Resistance in Higher Education, Leading in an Era of Racial Awakening and Reckoning .  

I'm Jill Anderson. This is the Harvard EdCast, produced by the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Thanks for listening. 

An education podcast that keeps the focus simple: what makes a difference for learners, educators, parents, and communities

Related Articles

Making College Attainable

Higher Ed. at Harvard Event Addresses Looming End of Affirmative Action

Askwith Education Forum Details Impact of Wealth on College Admissions

An eye-opening presentation sheds new light on elite admissions practices in higher education

Center Report Uses Research To Fight Attacks On DEI

Today, the USC Race and Equity Center released a new report in response to politicized attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in higher education. Truths About DEI on College Campuses: Evidence-Based Expert Responses to Politicized Misinformation , the 62-page document, was produced by Shaun Harper, our center’s founder and executive director.

University Professor and Provost Professor in the Rossier School of Education, Price School of Public Policy, and Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California, Harper has been at the forefront of efforts to counter misinformation, disinformation, exaggerations, and lies about DEI in educational institutions and businesses. “This important new report is just one additional way our center is leveraging its research, resources, reputation, and networks to fight back against those who are aiming to further divide Americans and ultimately destroy our democracy,” he says.

Last summer, our center launched the National DEI Defense Fund , which helps students, families, and educators across the country who are negatively impacted by the elimination and defunding of DEI initiatives. The report highlights four universities that are in the crosshairs of such politicized attacks: University of Virginia, University of Florida, University of Louisville, and the University of Wisconsin System.

On March 7, the U.S. House of Representatives held a two-hour hearing titled, “Divisive, Excessive, Ineffective: The Real Impact of DEI on College Campuses,” which inspired Harper to unite 11 other highly-respected experts on DEI in higher education for rapid responses to the voluminous inaccuracies that Republican congresspersons and witnesses conveyed on Capitol Hill. Less than two weeks later, our center is releasing this helpful compendium of evidence-based essays.

In addition to Harper, these scholars contributed to the report:

Mitchell J. Chang, Ph.D. , professor of education and Asian American Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles. Chang also is UCLA’s interim Vice Provost for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion.

Eddie R. Cole, Ph.D. , associate professor of education and history at the University of California, Los Angeles. Cole also is the Joy Foundation Fellow at the Harvard Radcliffe Institute. He is author of the book, The Campus Color Line: College Presidents and the Struggle for Black Freedom (Princeton University Press, 2020).

Lori Patton Davis, Ph.D. , professor of education at The Ohio State University. Davis was the first Black woman president of the Association for the Study of Higher Education. She was inducted into the National Academy of Education in 2022.

Liliana M. Garces, Ed.D. , W.K. Kellogg Professor in the College of Education at the University of Texas at Austin. Garces also holds courtesy appointments at the UT School of Law and the Center for Mexican American Studies.

Joy Gaston Gayles, Ph.D. , Alumni Association Distinguished Graduate Professor and head of the Educational Leadership, Policy, and Human Development Department at North Carolina State University. Gayles also is a past president of the Association for the Study of Higher Education.

Toby S. Jenkins, Ph.D. , professor in the College of Education at the University of South Carolina. Jenkins also is Associate Provost for Faculty Development. Her seven books include, The Hip-Hop Mindset: Success Strategies for Educators and Other Professionals (Teachers College Press, 2023).

Walter M. Kimbrough, Ph.D. , executive in residence at the USC Race and Equity Center. Kimbrough served as the 7th president of Philander Smith College and the 12th president of Dillard University, two HBCUs.

Julie J. Park, Ph.D. , associate professor in the College of Education at the University of Maryland. Park’s books include, Race on Campus: Debunking Myths with Data (Harvard Education Press, 2018) and When Diversity Drops: Race, Religion, and Affirmative Action in Higher Education (Rutgers University Press, 2013).

Victor B. Sáenz, Ph.D. , L.D. Haskew Centennial Professor and Associate Dean for Student Success, Community Engagement, and Administration in the College of Education at the University of Texas at Austin. Sáenz also is co-founder and executive director of Project MALES (Mentoring to Achieve Latino Educational Success), a UT research and mentoring initiative.

Shawn M. Smith, M.D. , a physician at the Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago. Smith also is an Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at the Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.

Lisa Wolf-Wendel, Ph.D. , Roy A. Roberts Distinguished Professor of Higher Education at the University of Kansas. Wolf-Wendel also is Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Studies in KU’s School of Education and Human Sciences. She served as the 2012-13 president of the Association for the Study of Higher Education.

Beyond widely disseminating it through our center’s contact databases and social media platforms, we also submitted this collection of papers to the House Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development for inclusion in the hearing record. A grant from Spencer Foundation is generously supporting our center’s DEI defense activities, including the production and dissemination of this report.

“We invite Americans to use this document to dispel ridiculous, unsubstantiated claims about DEI,” Harper added. “We hope these truths are helpful, politicized lies are not.”

Verna and Peter Dauterive Hall 635 Downey Way, Suite 214 Los Angeles, CA 90089-3331

+1 (213) 740-0385

[email protected]

• K-12 Schools & Districts
• Colleges & Universities
• Businesses & Agencies
• Research & Assessment
• Resources & Tools
• News & Events

FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Join our mailing list.

Recommended

Dei math-ed prof who helped get algebra banned in ’frisco is accused of faulty research.

• View Author Archive
• Get author RSS feed

Thanks for contacting us. We've received your submission.

Stanford math-ed prof Jo Boaler’s DEI racket may finally be coming to an end: On Wednesday, a 100-page complaint was filed against her, citing 52 instances of misrepresentation in her research citations.

Boaler, who hauls in a stunning $5,000 an hour for Zoom consultations, was a key figure in getting eighth-grade algebra banned from San Francisco’s public schools in 2014.   

She’s an ideological propagandist rather than a research scholar, with her Stanford webpage declaring in its first sentence her focus on “how equity is promoted in mathematics classroom”; her “research” gave diversity, equity and inclusion hucksters on the city school board the “research-based,” “research-informed” cover they needed to push the ban through.

Indeed, she’s one of the biggest influencers of math education, widely followed and quoted by DEI warriors: When they say “research shows,” they refer to her and her ilk.

Yet the complaint slams her for “reckless disregard for accuracy.”

Charges of research fraud are lodged against other DEI hucksters — ousted Harvard President Claudine Gay, Harvard DEI Chief Officer Sherri Ann Carlson, University of Wisconsin-Madison DEI Chief Officer LaVar Charleston, Columbia University Medical Center DEI Chief Officer  Alade McKen — who’ve all been accused primarily of plagiarism.

But unlike them, Boaler did give credit to others’ research, but what she gave credit for was  not  what the credited research actually showed.

When Boaler cited author Randall Engel regarding “math anxiety” to attack algebra in middle school and calculus in high school, for example, Engel called it a “huge misrepresentation” of his work.

Boaler seems like a veritable Sam Bankman-Fried of math education with fraudulent research and idea-laundering.

Her “research” has helped her build a thriving math-ed-DEI business, called YouCubed , replete with materials, courses and consulting services (not that her six-figure salary as a tenured professor at Stanford is shabby to begin with).

The news of the complaint quickly drew tweets from prominent critics of DEI, including activist investor  Bill Ackman , internet pioneer Marc Andreessen , entrepreneur Elon Musk , filmmaker  Eli Steele and Peter Boghossian , who, along with James Lindsay, were early exposers of the DEI academic hoax.

(Boghossian was pushed out from his university academic position for his stand.)

And while we hold our breath waiting for a response from Stanford, it’s worth surveying the damage.

Remember, the harm is not just in the lying, the corruption, the unfair self-enrichment; Boaler’s schemes gravely hurt the kids of California and others around the country.

Again, she’s one of the biggest influencers of mathematics education, particularly when it comes to claims that race should somehow be a factor in it.

Families in San Francisco fought hard in what became known as the “math wars” against this obviously stupid ban — how does denying everyone a chance to learn algebra help anyone?

Keep up with today's most important news

Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update.

Thanks for signing up!

Please provide a valid email address.

By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy .

Never miss a story.

But Boaler, backed up by extensive “research” from the illustrious Stanford University, enabled the school board to beat the families.

It took 10 years to get the algebra ban lifted — including angry  school board elections   that threw out the wokest members, threats of litigation and legislation, alarming drops in standardized math-test scores and an admission by the University of California that such dumbing down of students left students, well, dumbed down.

Meanwhile, an entire generation of San Francisco’s students was sacrificed to DEI.

The harm is not limited to San Francisco.

Banning algebra from middle school based on Boaler’s research became a national crusade, with a similar effort  in New York City  nearly succeeding.

Campaigns to ban calculus (presumably another source of racism somehow) from high schools also gained momentum.

Such dumbing down of math is exactly as prescribed by the  California Mathematics Framework , a project mandated by California state law to regulate the teaching of math, of which Boaler is a key author.

Again, damage won’t be limited just to California, because what the largest state does in education, the nation follows.

Whatever Stanford does with Boaler, the DEI fraud appears set to expand exponentially.

Legislation in California’s Democratic-run legislature (ACA-7) contains the provision to “fund research-based, or research-informed, and culturally specific interventions or programs . . . [for] specific ethnic groups.”

In other words, California taxpayers will be required by law to fund DEI research — like that of Boaler.

Well, what could possibly go wrong there?

Wai Wah Chin is the founding president of the Chinese American Citizens Alliance Greater New York and an adjunct fellow of the Manhattan Institute.  

Share this article:

Critics are passing anti-DEI laws. We have to fight back. | Opinion

The University of Michigan is a leader in diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, with one of the largest DEI operations in the country.  

That makes it an easy target for DEI critics. 

The assault on DEI has been well-coordinated and well-funded. Opponents of DEI are more vocal than its supporters and frankly, I believe they are winning the public relations war. They have succeeded in making diversity into a bad word, and have used a Jedi mind trick to convince people that DEI initiatives are divisive, and lead to reverse discrimination, that DEI is ideological indoctrination and that the costs of supporting it at schools like U-M are dramatically increasing — and ultimately wasting — taxpayer dollars.  

These coordinated attacks are yielding results. The Chronicle of Higher Education's DEI Legislation Tracker has documented that since 2023, 52 anti-DEI bills have been introduced in 24 states. Seven have become law, and seven are awaiting a governor's signature. 

Diversity is not a bad word, yet you wouldn’t know it from the efforts to rename and rebrand it on college campuses. It is telling that in many instances the work of DEI is still being done, but under new names and administrative structures. 

Supporters of DEI have allowed DEI critics to control the narrative. To turn the tide of public sentiment in favor of DEI, supporters must sharpen their arguments, go on the offensive instead of always reacting, and acknowledge the limitations and well-intentioned but harmful missteps in some applications of DEI that provide ammunition for critics. 

Cherrypicking statistics 

Among the most vocal critics of DEI is retired University of Michigan-Flint economics professor Mark Perry. In a recent analysis for the conservative news website The College Fix , Perry calculated the amount of money U-M spends on DEI. Perry’s analysis — part of his crusade to combat so-called “ woke discrimination " — estimates that there are a minimum of 241 employees focused on DEI whose salaries and benefits total over $30 million, an additional 76 faculty or staff members working to implement DEI initiatives brings core DEI staff to 317, over 500 when considering part-time and other positions.

These figures have been disputed by the University of Michigan as “flawed and misleading.” In an email to The College Fix, university spokesperson Colleen Mastony indicated that there is no specific budget set aside for DEI and that the figures compiled by Perry include employees whose primary responsibilities extend beyond DEI-related activities. But critics like Perry use these inflated numbers to argue that universities are wasting valuable resources on DEI that could be used to support more worthwhile initiatives such as giving students a tuition break or funding need-based scholarships. 

Critics also cynically report cherry-picked diversity statistics as evidence of the supposed ineffectiveness of DEI initiatives. For example, a recent article in the conservative tabloid New York Post cited the Chronicle of Higher Education as reporting the percentage of U-M students’ satisfaction with campus climate decreasing from 72% in 2016 to 61% in 2021. 

The same article also reported that Black students’ enrollment at U-M dropped slightly from 4.3% in 2016 to 3.9% in 2021. The article cited U-M’s Black Student Union as saying that Black students’ experience on campus has hardly improved, even though $85 million dollars was spent on DEI efforts. (On a side note, if you believe that critics of DEI really care about declining Black student enrollment and Black students’ welfare, I have a bridge to sell you.) 

But it’s not even clear whether Black student enrollment has declined, given that the same source also reports a 1% increase in Black student enrollment during this time. Not surprisingly, the article does not report that Black graduate and professional students, Asian/Asian American undergraduate and graduate/professional students, Hispanic or Latinx undergraduate and graduate/professional students, Native American graduate students and multiracial undergraduate and graduate/professional students all experienced significant increases in enrollments, ranging from 31.4% to 57.7%. Overall, there was a 37.8% increase in BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) undergraduate student enrollment. 

Good for college, good for democracy 

The positive evidence of the effectiveness of U-M’s DEI initiatives (and there is much more, according to U-M’s DEI progress reports ) do not support the narrative of wasteful DEI spending, so critics must cherry-pick data to find any evidence of supposed ineffectiveness.  

However, we have long known about the positive impact of diversity. Twenty years ago, U-M psychology professor emerita Patricia Gurin and colleagues provided data on the importance of diversity in the college experience. In terms of learning outcomes, they found that students with the most diverse experiences during college showed the greatest engagement in active thinking processes and growth in intellectual and academic skills. In terms of democracy, they found that students’ experiences with diversity were consistently and positively related to engagement in citizenship activities and motivation to take the perspective of others, and other outcomes essential for democracy to thrive.   

A work in progress 

To be sure, DEI initiatives are not perfect. Former U-M Chief Diversity Officer and Vice Provost for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Robert Sellers recently acknowledged this during a Martin Luther King Jr. Symposium panel discussion. Black students at U-M report feeling significantly less positive about the effectiveness of the DEI climate than Asian, Latinx, and other students. Additionally, there are instances when well-intentioned proponents of DEI engage in behaviors and/or promote policies that are counterproductive at best and discriminatory at worst (e.g., draconian speech codes, discriminating against faculty for their political views, systematically downranking Asian applicants ). 

Proponents should not be afraid to be openly critical of problematic (and unconstitutional) policies and procedures conducted in the name of DEI, because they ultimately end up hurting all well-implemented DEI initiatives. Think of it as a type of tough love that is necessary for the survival of DEI. But most DEI initiatives that I am familiar with are both constitutional and well-implemented. 

As a premiere research university and a DEI leader in higher education, the University of Michigan has the opportunity to be an honest broker in the DEI culture wars. While imperfect, DEI is a noble goal that does not deserve to be slandered — and it is time for supporters to go on the offensive and defend diversity with the same passion as critics of DEI. 

Kevin Cokley is the university diversity and social transformation professor and associate chair for diversity initiatives at the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor . Submit a letter to the editor at freep.com/letters .

What is diversity, equity, and inclusion?

Variety, as they say, is the spice of life. If diversity is another word for variety, how can it enhance or flavor the world?

Get to know and directly engage with senior McKinsey experts on diversity, equity, and inclusion

Bob Sternfels is McKinsey’s global managing partner and is based in the Bay Area office. Tiffany Burns and Sara Prince are senior partners in McKinsey’s Atlanta office; Michael Chui is a partner in the Bay Area office, where Alexis Krivkovich and Lareina Yee are senior partners, and where James Manyika is a senior partner emeritus; Maurice Obeid , Shelley Stewart , and Jill Zucker are senior partners in the New York office; and Jonathan Woetzel is director of the McKinsey Global Institute and a senior partner in the Shanghai office.

Diversity—through the lenses of race, ethnicity, ability, gender, sexual orientation, neurodiversity, and beyond—can help to strengthen organizations, as studies have shown  time and again. Quite simply, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) is used to describe three values that many organizations today strive to embody to help meet the needs of people from all walks of life. While concepts such as biodiversity are important offshoots of the core idea of diversity, this article focuses on diversity, equity, and inclusion in business and society rather than in other contexts.

Companies that are diverse, equitable, and inclusive are better able to respond to challenges, win top talent, and meet the needs of different customer bases. With DEI in mind, companies are considering how to better support employees. Over the past few years, many organizations have taken strides to build diversity, equity, and inclusion  into their policies and hiring practices.

What are the differences between diversity, equity, and inclusion?

Diversity, equity, and inclusion are often grouped together because they are interconnected and it is only in combination that their true impact emerges. Some organizations include related concepts, such as belonging, in their DEI strategies. But all of these terms are also easily misunderstood. It’s important to grasp the individual meanings and implications of each of these terms:

Diversity refers to who is represented in the workforce. Some examples of diversity in workplaces include:

• Gender diversity: What makes up the composition of men, women, and nonbinary people in a given population?
• Age diversity: Are people in a group from mostly one generation, or is there a mix of ages?
• Ethnic diversity: Do people in a group share common national or cultural traditions, or do they represent different backgrounds?
• Physical ability and neurodiversity: Are the perspectives of people with disabilities, whether apparent or not, accounted for?

These are a few of the most common examples, but what is considered diverse can range widely. Nobel Prize winner Richard Thaler touches on this in an interview with McKinsey on debiasing the corporation. “There’s lots of talk about diversity these days,” says Thaler. “We tend to think about that in terms of things like racial diversity and gender diversity and ethnic diversity. Those things are all important. But it’s also important to have diversity in how people think.”

• Equity refers to fair treatment for all people, so that the norms, practices, and policies in place ensure identity is not predictive of opportunities or workplace outcomes. Equity differs from equality in a subtle but important way. While equality assumes that all people should be treated the same, equity takes into consideration a person’s unique circumstances, adjusting treatment accordingly so that the end result is equal. In an episode of the McKinsey Talks Talent podcast on the inclusive workplace, McKinsey senior partner and talent expert Bill Schaninger offers a view on the implications of equity when sourcing talent: “There’s a real difference between equal and equitable. Suppose we said, ‘All interns are created equal. We pay them nothing.’ The people who can afford an entire summer without getting paid are likely already coming from a position of privilege.”
• Inclusion refers to how the workforce experiences the workplace and the degree to which organizations embrace all employees and enable them to make meaningful contributions. Companies that are intent on recruiting a diverse workforce must also strive to develop a sufficiently inclusive culture, such that all employees feel their voices will be heard—critical if organizations want to retain their talent and unlock the power of their diverse workforce. In an episode of the McKinsey Talks Talent podcast on the inclusive workplace, McKinsey partner and DEI expert Diana Ellsworth  shared an example of how a lack of inclusion can manifest in workplace culture: “The LGBTQ+ community is underrepresented in the workplace, especially at more senior levels. As a result, many feel like an “only” at work and are more likely to experience microaggressions ; they might feel unable to talk openly and comfortably about themselves, for example, or need constantly to correct assumptions about their personal lives.”

Learn more about our People & Organizational Performance  and Strategy & Corporate Finance  practices.

Why is diversity in the workplace important?

A series of three McKinsey reports shows the impact of diverse workplaces: Why diversity matters (2015), Delivering through diversity (2018), and Diversity wins: How inclusion matters (2020). The latest findings draw from a data set that encompasses 15 countries and more than 1,000 large companies, as well as research on employee sentiment, and the results show a correlative relationship between business performance and diversity. It’s worth noting that greater access to talent and increased employee engagement contribute to this performance effect. The business case for diversity is robust, and the relationship between diversity on executive teams and the likelihood of financial outperformance has gotten stronger over time. And the results have been replicated in further research, for instance, in Latin America  and Central Europe .

Some of the key findings from the latest Diversity wins report  include the following:

• Most employees support diversity, with overall sentiment on diversity 52 percent positive and 31 percent negative.
• There are clear correlations between diversity and business performance. Analysis of 2019 data shows that companies in the top quartile for gender diversity within executive teams were 25 percent more likely than companies in the fourth quartile to have above-average profitability (up from 21 percent in 2017 and 15 percent in 2014).
• The greater the representation of gender diversity, the higher the likelihood of outperformance. For instance, companies where more than 30 percent of the executives are women were more likely to outperform companies where this percentage ranged from only 10 to 30. The most gender-diverse companies see a substantial differential likelihood of outperformance—48 percent—over the least gender-diverse companies.
• The business case for ethnic and cultural diversity is also strong: in 2019, companies in the top quartile bested those in the fourth quartile by 36 percent in profitability. Notably, the likelihood of outperformance continues to be higher for diversity in ethnicity than in gender.
• Progress in building diverse workforces remains stubbornly slow.
• Despite employees’ support of diversity, there are high levels of negative sentiment on inclusion—namely, equality, openness, and belonging—particularly around equality and fairness of opportunity.

Introducing McKinsey Explainers : Direct answers to complex questions

Even during a crisis, when leaders might be tempted to shelve DEI efforts to ensure the company’s financial survival, there is value to prioritizing diversity, equity, and inclusion. In the words of McKinsey’s Bryan Hancock  from McKinsey Talks Talent : “D&I is good business. It doesn’t have to be at the expense of financial outcomes. . . . This isn’t an issue where leaders can say, ‘We can’t do diversity right now, because we’re under a lot of pressure.’ Diversity is one of the things you’ve got to be mindful of in every context.”

What other benefits can organizations realize from inclusion and diversity?

In addition to profitability, there are five key domains  in which inclusion and diversity can significantly affect an organization’s overall performance:

• Winning talent: Organizations that monitor the demographic profile of their workforces are better able to retain top performers while making sure that diverse talent isn’t lost.
• Improving the quality of decision making: Diversity brings multiple perspectives to the table during times when enhanced problem-solving skills and vision are needed.
• Increasing customer insight and innovation: Diverse teams are typically more innovative and better at anticipating shifts.
• Driving employee motivation and satisfaction: Research in Latin America showed that companies that are committed to diversity are 75 percent more likely to report a pro-teamwork culture.
• Improving a company’s global image and license to operate: Companies that can maintain or increase their focus on inclusion and diversity during crises are poised to avoid consequences such as struggling to attract talent or losing customers and government support.

How can organizations foster an inclusive workplace?

For companies looking to bolster inclusion and step up their DEI efforts more broadly, five areas of action stand out :

• Ensure that diverse talent is well represented.
• Strengthen leadership accountability and capabilities.
• Be fair and transparent, enabling equality of opportunity.
• Promote openness and tackle microaggressions, bias, and discrimination.
• Foster belonging through unequivocal support for all the ways diversity manifests.

A McKinsey survey about inclusion at work and how to address organizational barriers to it offers unique insight at a more granular level. The research finds that respondents of all backgrounds encounter barriers to feeling included—and that women, respondents who are ethnic and racial minorities, and those who identify as LGBTQ+ encounter additional challenges.

A few key data points from the survey  add nuance about the lived experiences of employees in workplaces, inclusive and otherwise:

• Employee engagement is strongly linked with a sense of inclusion. Those who feel very included are more likely than others to say they feel excited by and committed to their organizations.
• Nearly 40 percent of respondents say they have turned down or chosen not to pursue a job because of a perceived lack of inclusion at the organization.
• Over a third of respondents say their organizations don’t put enough effort into creating a diverse, inclusive environment (while only 6 percent say too much is being done).
• A resounding 84 percent of respondents say they have experienced microaggressions at work. More than one in four say they have needed to correct others’ assumptions about their personal lives, for example. High levels of respondents have experienced everyday slights rooted in bias, such as not receiving credit for their ideas, being asked to speak as a representative for a group of people like themselves, or being coached to communicate in a way that feels inauthentic.
• Looking only at LGBTQ+ respondents, 37 percent say they have had an uncomfortable experience coming out to colleagues in the preceding month.
• Among respondents who identified as racial or ethnic minorities, 40 percent of those who indicated they have discussed identity-related issues at work in the preceding month say they have felt at least slightly uncomfortable in those situations.

To serve these workers better, organizations can pay attention to four main factors  associated with employees’ inclusion:

• Diverse, inclusive leadership: The presence of diverse leaders at an organization, as well as an organization’s focus on inclusive leadership, are correlated with individuals feeling more included.
• Meritocracy and initiatives to increase fairness in performance evaluations: A meritocratic company culture is strongly associated with a sense of inclusion.
• Sponsorship: Respondents who say colleagues at their organization have gone out of their way to create professional-advancement opportunities for them are also more likely than others to feel a strong sense of inclusion.
• Substantive access to senior leaders: More than half of all respondents say that meaningful interactions with senior leaders have aided their career advancement.

Learn more about our People & Organizational Performance  practice.

What is intersectionality?

Intersectionality, a term coined by Professor Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989 , refers to the ways different parts of one’s identity intersect or overlap with one another. For instance, gender is one aspect of a person’s identity, but so are sexual orientation and race. A Black woman who is queer, or a White woman who has a disability, may take a perspective that acknowledges how those different aspects of their identity overlap or intersect. McKinsey’s Women in the Workplace 2021 report , for instance, found that LGBTQ+ women, as well as women with disabilities, are much more likely than women overall to experience microaggressions on the job.

Acknowledging intersectional identities can strengthen companies and communities more broadly. “Everyone deserves to feel empowered across all aspects of who they are,” says McKinsey senior partner Guangyu Li . “It shouldn’t be left to any individual community to defend itself. It’s in our collective interest to show up for each other with concrete action and to come together in solidarity.”

Allyship is a concept that is closely related to intersectionality. An ally aligns with people in the minority to help foster equitable and inclusive opportunities for all. In corporate America, White women, for instance, may take allyship actions  such as mentoring women of color, advocating for new opportunities for them, and actively confronting any discrimination they might face. However, there is a notable disconnect between the allyship actions that women of color say are most meaningful and the actions that White employees prioritize—suggesting opportunities for recentering efforts around the experience of women of color  and other marginalized groups.

What issues are important to women in the workplace?

Women’s representation in the corporate world has largely increased in recent years, but the pandemic has affected their participation in the workforce. It is worth noting that dynamics of gender in the workplace may be regionally specific. While much of McKinsey’s work offers insight into women in corporate America, you can explore additional material on global gender equality , as well as gender diversity in Africa , Canada , Central Europe , France , Japan , the Middle East , and other regions.

The largest study of women in corporate America is Women in the Workplace , conducted by McKinsey in partnership with LeanIn.Org. The latest research, now in its seventh year, reflects information from 423 organizations that employ 12 million people, and includes responses from more than 65,000 people surveyed on their workplace experience, as well as in-depth interviews with women of diverse identities.

Findings from the Women in the Workplace 2021 report include the following:

• Women’s representation in the corporate pipeline (that is, the journey an employee might take from starting as an entry-level worker to advancing to a spot in the C-suite) has increased since 2016. But women—and women of color in particular—remain significantly underrepresented in leadership.
• At every step in the career ladder, women of color lose ground to White women and men of color.
• The “broken rung” problem remains a challenge for women, particularly those seeking their first step up from entry level to manager. For every 100 men promoted to manager, only 86 women are promoted.
• Burnout, stress, and exhaustion continue to affect women more than men. In the past year, one in three women considered leaving the workforce or downshifting their career, a notable increase from levels seen early in the COVID-19 pandemic.
• Women leaders are doing considerable work to support DEI efforts and employee well-being more broadly, but they’re not necessarily being recognized for it. For instance, employees with women managers are more likely than others to say that their manager has supported and helped them in the past year; women leaders also spend more time than men on DEI work that’s outside their formal job responsibilities. Less than a quarter of companies, though, recognize this work in performance reviews, for example.

To support women in the workplace, companies need to invest deeply in all aspects of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Although there are no quick fixes, there are some steps companies should take to empower women at work :

• Companies should put more practices in place to ensure that promotions are equitable. Beyond reducing potential bias in the hiring process, companies need to extend similar rigor to performance reviews.
• Organizations need to track representation and hiring and promotion outcomes more fully. A company may track representation for women overall, but does it break those numbers down to look at representation for women on color in particular?
• Companies need to double their efforts when it comes to accountability. Only two-thirds of companies hold senior leaders accountable for progress on diversity goals, and less than half consider progress on diversity metrics in performance reviews.
• To create a culture that embraces and leverages diversity, companies need to promote senior-level sponsorship, with top leaders fully and publicly supporting DEI efforts, modeling inclusive leadership, and actively participating in training and events.
• Spurring high employee engagement will also be crucial. Raising awareness of the barriers that many women face can help, and further training (on bias, antiracism, and allyship) can take employees from awareness to action.
• Burnout is on the rise, and investing in solutions to help address this problem will remain a crucial issue for many organizations. In addition to expanding on successful established policies and trying new approaches, companies can track symptoms and establish new norms to improve the everyday experience of employees.

What do we know about advancing racial equity for Black Americans in the US private sector and across society?

Black Americans in the workforce are at a disadvantage; the median annual wage for Black workers is approximately 30 percent, or $10,000, lower than that of White workers, with serious implications for economic security, consumption, and the ability to build generational wealth. They are underrepresented in higher-wage industries and executive roles, and they face lower odds for advancement. Clear racial patterns exist across the US labor force, with nearly half of Black workers concentrated in low-paying healthcare, retail, food services, and accommodations roles.

There are many benefits to righting historical wrongs and realizing the full potential of Black American talent: addressing wage disparities alone, for instance, could propel two million Black Americans into the middle class for the first time.

Doing so will take effort on many levels. Research from the McKinsey Institute for Black Economic Mobility  suggests some jumping-off points:

• Consumer-facing companies that pursue broader racial-equity goals can better serve Black consumers .
• Harnessing the power of retail can drive demand for Black-owned brands .
• Addressing racial disparities in farming could generate billions in value for the agriculture industry.
• Increasing financial inclusion to broaden services for Black Americans could yield $2 billion in potential revenue, and changes in three key areas can help companies make more progress toward racial equity in financial services .
• Supporting historically Black colleges and universities can accelerate Black economic mobility .
• Understanding Black representation in film and TV  could help drive greater diversity.
• Building supportive ecosystems for Black-owned business  could add $290 billion in business equity.
• Emphasizing health equity can activate meaningful change or even help retain talent .

The stories of Black leaders’ journeys  can offer inspiration and hope for personal and professional development. Get insight from Jason Wright  (president of the National Football League’s Washington Commanders), Stephanie Hill  (an executive vice president at Lockheed Martin), and Barry Lawson Williams  (the founder of Williams Pacific Ventures).

What issues are important to Latinos in the workplace?

In the United States, Latinos make up 18.4 percent of the population and 17.3 percent of the labor force, and that share is projected to rise to more than 30 percent by 2060. This community faces challenges, and US- and foreign-born Latinos alike remain far from equal with non-Latino White Americans, with Latino Americans earning just 73 cents for every dollar earned by White Americans. They face discrimination in securing financing to start and scale businesses, and they face challenges accessing food, housing, and other essentials.

McKinsey research on the economic state of Latinos in America  finds that they are underpaid, collectively, by $288 billion a year. At full parity, though, Latinos could spend an extra $660 billion annually, and Latino businesses could generate trillions in revenue and support millions of new jobs, while also creating new flows of generational wealth. Addressing barriers faced by Latinos in America could make the economy more robust for all.

How can we empower Asian Americans at work?

Asian Americans have contributed to the US economy since the 1800s, yet they have historically been overlooked. This group as a whole is often perceived as the “model minority,” a term that diminishes the unique issues faced by their diverse community. Recently, given the rise in racially motivated attacks on Asian Americans during the COVID-19 pandemic, historically unaddressed challenges faced by this group are coming to light , offering a fresh reminder of the need to support and include Asian Americans at work.

In corporate America, Asian Americans are underrepresented in senior leadership roles  (as are Black, Hispanic, and Latino Americans). What might help? Recognizing where in the corporate pipeline Asian Americans are underrepresented, mitigating implicit and unconscious bias during promotion and performance evaluations, fostering sponsorship for Asian American employees, and expanding workplace flexibility and support such as paid sick leave.

Learn more about our Public & Social Sector  practice.

What does research show about the experiences of LGBTQ+ employees in the workplace?

For LGBTQ+ employees , many workplaces today fall short of full inclusion, even if there is visible corporate support for LGBTQ+ communities. For example, LGBTQ+ women are more underrepresented than women generally in America’s largest corporations. Just four LGBTQ+ CEOs head these corporations—only one woman, and none identifies as transgender. An episode of the McKinsey Talks Talent podcast  considers the latest research on the LGBTQ+ experience in the workplace and highlights practical steps for all employees to signal support and boost progress for this community.

Transgender employees face a unique set of challenges. They earn 32 percent less money than cisgender employees ( cisgender refers to people whose gender identity aligns with the sex assigned to them at birth). More than half of transgender employees say they are not comfortable at work, and they report feeling less supported by managers. These strong feelings of exclusion have significant economic implications: greater transgender inclusion in the workforce through wage equity and increased employment could boost annual consumer spending by $12 billion a year. To help address the issues, companies can be intentional in recruiting (for example, by asking applicants what pronouns or names they prefer to use) or offer trans-affirming benefits, among other actions.

How do different industries approach diversity, equity, and inclusion?

Different industries may well need to take different approaches to diversity, equity, and inclusion, depending on the composition of their workforces. Several articles offer insight into those industry-specific dynamics, especially with regard to gender diversity:

• Companies can repair the broken rung on the career ladder for women in technical industries and roles .
• Organizations can work to close gender and race gaps in the US financial-services sector .
• Voices from the fashion industry on diversity offer insight on what actions might be most meaningful for creating more inclusive workplaces.
• Organizations can make traveling in cities safer and more comfortable for at-risk groups .
• The COVID-19 pandemic hit the education space  hard; as the recovery continues, ensuring that education is equitable and inclusive will be vital.
• In the public and social sectors , women are increasingly represented, but they are also feeling burned out—a few actions can bend the curve.
• Consumers are expecting more from brands than ever before— here’s what retailers can do to meet DEI needs .
• Private equity can help catalyze DEI efforts to transform the global business community and improve returns.
• In media and entertainment , women remain locked out of top roles.
• While women in healthcare and life sciences have  made progress, they remain underrepresented at senior levels.
• Research from the oil and gas industry  suggests actions for the sector to consider to help attract and retain women.
• Women are leaving the mining industry . Here’s why—and what companies can do about it.

Learn more about our Technology, Media & Telecommunications , Financial Services , Travel, Logistics & Infrastructure , Education , Public & Social Sector , and Healthcare Systems & Services  practices.

For more in-depth exploration of these topics, see McKinsey’s collection of insights on diversity and inclusion . Learn more about Diversity, Equity & Inclusion consulting  at McKinsey—and check out DEI-related job opportunities if you’re interested in working at McKinsey.

Articles referenced include:

• “ Being transgender at work ,” November 10, 2021, David Baboolall, Sarah Greenberg, Maurice Obeid , and Jill Zucker
• “ Women in the Workplace 2021 ,” September 27, 2021, Tiffany Burns , Jess Huang, Alexis Krivkovich , Ishanaa Rambachan , Tijana Trkulja, and Lareina Yee  
• “ The economic state of Black America: What is and what could be ,” June 17, 2021, Shelley Stewart III , Michael Chui , James Manyika , JP Julien , Vivian Hunt, Bob Sternfels , Jonathan Woetzel , and Haiyang Zhang
• “ COVID-19’s impact on Asian American workers: Six key insights ,” May 6, 2021, Grace Hua, Jess Huang, Samuel Huang, Lareina Yee
• “ The elusive inclusive workplace ,” March 23, 2021, Bryan Hancock  and Bill Schaninger
• “ Diversity wins: how inclusion matters ,” May 19, 2020, Sundiatu Dixon-Fyle , Kevin Dolan, Vivian Hunt, and Sara Prince

Want to know more about diversity, equity, and inclusion?

Related articles.

Diversity wins: How inclusion matters

The elusive inclusive workplace

Women in the Workplace 2022

• National Security
• Matthew Continetti
• Men of the Year

• Men Of The Year

Biden Food Stamp Chief Offloads Policymaking to Soros-Funded Think Tank, Ethics Complaint Charges

Harvard Professors on Israel Visit Describe ‘Existential Crisis’ for Jews Back Home–And Loss of Faith in DEI

Complaint alleges university of wisconsin dei czar, husband of harvard's dei chief, has decades-long history of research misconduct, everything you need to know about joe biden's new stability shoes for fall-prone seniors, poll: majority of palestinians want hamas control over gaza strip when war ends, the road to a republican senate, lavar charleston—who once assaulted a police officer—passed off old studies as new research at least five times.

The chief diversity officer of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, LaVar Charleston, who also teaches at the university’s school of education, has a decades-long track record of research misconduct, according to a complaint filed with the university on Wednesday and a Washington Free Beacon analysis. That misconduct includes presenting old studies as new research, which he has done at least five times over the course of his career.

The complaint , which was filed anonymously, implicates eight of Charleston’s publications, many of them coauthored, and accuses him of plagiarizing other scholars as well as duplicating his own work. It comes as the university is already investigating Charleston over a separate complaint filed in January, alleging that a 2014 study by him and his wife—Harvard University’s chief diversity officer, Sherri Ann Charleston—is a facsimile of a study he published in 2012.

"This is an extraordinary case of serial misrepresentation and deception," said Peter Wood, the head of the National Association of Scholars and a former associate provost at Boston University. "The closest analogy would be someone who sells the same real estate to five different buyers, all of whom are unaware of the others."

In January, Charleston won a lifetime achievement award for "excellence in higher education." The university trumpeted the award in a press release, praising his "unwavering dedication to creating inclusive environments in academia" and noting his "wealth of academic accolades."

Charleston’s CV, however, appears to have been inflated by duplicate publication, the practice of publishing the same research in multiple journals without attribution. In 2014, for example, he published a pair of papers in two separate journals—the Journal of Diversity in Higher Education and the Journal of Progressive Policy & Practice —that are near-verbatim copies of each other.

Both describe a 15-person focus group conducted by an African-American woman and feature identical quotes from participants, all of whom appear to have been recruited from the same academic conference.

Neither paper indicates the other was published elsewhere—a troubling omission, scholars who reviewed both studies said.

"It is academic misconduct to publish essentially the same paper twice with no acknowledgment of the duplication," Alexander Riley, a sociologist at Bucknell University, told the Free Beacon . "It seems fairly clear that Charleston is gaming the system in order to get more on his CV than is merited by the amount of research he has actually done."

Charleston also appears to have recycled findings and interview responses from his 2010 dissertation, which involved a survey of black computer science students, in four subsequent papers: the 2012 and 2014 studies that were the subject of the previous complaint, as well as two additional studies published in 2016 and 2022.

Each study is framed as a novel survey addressing a gap in the scholarly literature. None cite Charleston’s dissertation or indicate that they are drawing on previously published material.

The odds that different people would give the same quotes across different studies, said Lee Jussim, a professor of psychology at Rutgers University, are about the same as the odds that "monkeys typing on typewriters would reproduce Hamlet ."

Charleston did not respond to a request for comment.

The complaint raises serious questions about how a flagship public university vetted one of its top administrators, whose career has been marked not just by questionable research practices but by criminal conduct.

Shortly after joining UW-Madison as a researcher in 2009, Charleston was charged in 2011 with attempting to strangle a police officer, according to documents obtained by the MacIver Institute, a conservative think tank in Wisconsin. He avoided a conviction through the Deferred Prosecution Program , a local initiative run by the district attorney’s office that offers first-time felons the chance to do community service in lieu of jail time and removes their arrest records from public databases.

"Even with a PhD, I’m looked at as a criminal," Charleston said in an interview in 2020. "[I]t has to be because of my color."

The arrest didn’t stop Charleston from climbing the ranks of the school’s diversity bureaucracy. Between 2010 and 2017, he helped to build Wisconsin’s Equity and Inclusion Laboratory, which conducts research on "inclusive learning." He became assistant vice chancellor of student diversity at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater in 2017, then served as the inaugural dean of diversity, equity and inclusion at UW-Madison’s School of Education—the third-ranked education school in the country, according to US News and World Report . He became the chief diversity officer of the entire university in 2021.

Charleston is also a clinical professor of education, has led "anti-racism" workshops for Wisconsin public school teachers, and sits on the state’s Equity and Inclusion Council, which helps "advance diversity, equity, and inclusion practices across Wisconsin state government."

The complaint calls into question the originality of the feted diversity scholar, who draws a $280,000 salary from UW-Madison and oversees tutoring services for students.

"The two 2014 papers do indeed appear to be two versions of the same paper," Riley said. "I don't see the two as distinct from one another in any substantive way."

Both papers also share a prominent coauthor: Jerlando Jackson, now the dean of the Michigan State University College of Education, who advised Charleston’s dissertation at UW-Madison and also coauthored one of the studies based on it. The overlap raises additional questions about norms of academic integrity at education schools and within the field of DEI scholarship, which has come under intense scrutiny in recent months amid a drip-drip of plagiarism scandals.

"Either [Charleston and Jackson] are ignorant of this principle of research publication ethics," Riley said, referring to rules against duplicate publication, "or they were both aware of what they were doing."

Jackson did not respond to a request for comment.

The University of Wisconsin-Madison said it "takes all allegations of research misconduct seriously" and that it would investigate the complaint. Charleston, the school added, is a "valued member of the University of Wisconsin-Madison leadership team and we continue to support his work."

Wednesday’s complaint marks the fourth time this year that a DEI official has been hit with charges of research misconduct. In addition to Sherri Ann Charleston, Harvard’s chief diversity officer, plagiarism allegations have been made against Shirley Green , the Title IX coordinator for Harvard Extension School, and Alade McKen , the chief diversity officer of Columbia Medical School. The deluge followed the downfall of former Harvard president Claudine Gay, who resigned in January after half of her published work was found to contain plagiarized material.

Unlike those other officials, who work for private universities with lavish endowments, Charleston is a government employee subject to a state budget. His role was on the chopping block last year after Wisconsin Republicans proposed a budget that would have cut $32 million from the UW system—the exact amount it spends on DEI initiatives.

A watered-down version of the proposal still drew fierce blowback from the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents, which in December rejected a deal to cap DEI staff in exchange for pay raises and a new engineering school. The board reversed course after news broke that it had prioritized positions like Charleston’s over $800 million in additional funding.

That money has subsidized a scholar who appears to have little new to say. The four studies based on Charleston’s dissertation, which was submitted to the University of Wisconsin-Madison, are strikingly similar to each other, regurgitating not just interview results but entire pages of text.

Each one discusses the challenges faced by African-American science students and argues, among other things, that mentorship can promote success in computer science. Three of the four studies include identical descriptions of survey participants, whose testimonials form the backbone for each paper.

"I know of no other cases where a researcher has simply repeated his dissertation findings like a broken record for twelve years," Wood said.

While scholars can reuse data as much as they like and often turn their dissertations into peer-reviewed articles, they are expected to provide appropriate attribution to earlier research if it has already appeared in an academic journal. Failure to do so can result in retractions and infringe on the copyright of the publisher.

Duplicate publication is sometimes considered a more serious offense than plagiarism because, on top of stealing a journal’s intellectual property and padding a scholar’s CV, it biases meta-analyses—papers that aggregate the results of prior studies and use them to make statistical generalizations about a body of research. Some meta-analyses in education focus on the very issues Charleston’s work has addressed, including the effects of mentorship and diversity training .

Riley, the Bucknell sociologist, argued that the four studies didn’t quite meet the bar for "unethical behavior" because they were all based on a single dissertation, unlike the pair of papers from 2014. But, he added, the redundancies were revealing nonetheless.

"I gather that there are a lot of people doing this in the DEI universe—basically reiterating the same claims over and over and over again in different venues," Riley said. "The field draws such people to it more or less naturally, given the orthodoxy on which it is based."

The complaint also accuses Charleston of plagiarizing other scholars in his dissertation and some of his peer-reviewed papers, including the one from 2012. He lifts several passages from a Ph.D. thesis by Leslie Pendleton Graham, who earned her Ph.D. in counselor education in 1997, without citing her in a footnote or parentheses.

He also borrows from a dissertation by Craig Alan Green, who earned his Ph.D. from the University of Tennessee-Knoxville in 2008, without any sort of attribution.

The complaint points out that by recycling a plagiarism-laden thesis, Charleston ensured his subsequent work would contain plagiarism.

"Much of LaVar’s scholarly work since the dissertation lifts language from the dissertation verbatim," the complaint reads. "But the dissertation is full of plagiarism. So LaVar’s peer-reviewed work has plagiarism throughout."

Published under: DEI , Ethics , Higher Education , plagiarism , University of Wisconsin

• AR Podcasts
• How to Use This Site
• Activist’s Corner
• Print Back Issues
• Conferences
• Interviews & Appearances
• Send Us a Message
• Send Us News Stories
• Write For Us
• Cryptocurrency

Complaint Alleges University of Wisconsin DEI Czar, Husband of Harvard’s DEI Chief, Has Decades-Long History of Research Misconduct

Aaron Sibarium, Washington Free Beacon, March 21, 2024

The chief diversity officer of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, LaVar Charleston, who also teaches at the university’s school of education, has a decades-long track record of research misconduct, according to a complaint filed with the university on Wednesday and a  Washington Free Beacon  analysis. That misconduct includes presenting old studies as new research, which he has done at least five times over the course of his career.

The  complaint , which was filed anonymously, implicates eight of Charleston’s publications, many of them coauthored, and accuses him of plagiarizing other scholars as well as duplicating his own work. It comes as the university is already investigating Charleston over a  separate complaint  filed in January, alleging that a 2014 study by him and his wife—Harvard University’s chief diversity officer, Sherri Ann Charleston—is a facsimile of a study he published in 2012.

In January, Charleston  won  a lifetime achievement award for “excellence in higher education.” The university trumpeted the award in a press release, praising his “unwavering dedication to creating inclusive environments in academia” and noting his “wealth of academic accolades.”

Charleston’s CV, however, appears to have been inflated by duplicate publication, the practice of publishing the same research in multiple journals without attribution. In 2014, for example, he published a pair of papers in two separate journals—the  Journal of Diversity in Higher Education  and the  Journal of Progressive Policy & Practice —that are near-verbatim copies of each other.

Both describe a 15-person focus group conducted by an African-American woman and feature identical quotes from participants, all of whom appear to have been recruited from the same academic conference.

Neither paper indicates the other was published elsewhere—a troubling omission, scholars who reviewed both studies said.

Charleston also appears to have recycled findings and interview responses from his 2010 dissertation, which involved a survey of black computer science students, in four subsequent papers: the 2012 and 2014 studies that were the subject of the previous complaint, as well as two additional studies published in 2016 and 2022.

Shortly after joining UW-Madison as a researcher in 2009, Charleston was  charged  in 2011 with attempting to strangle a police officer, according to documents obtained by the MacIver Institute, a conservative think tank in Wisconsin. He avoided a conviction through the  Deferred Prosecution Program , a local initiative run by the district attorney’s office that offers first-time felons the chance to do community service in lieu of jail time and removes their arrest records from public databases.

“Even with a PhD, I’m looked at as a criminal,” Charleston said in an  interview  in 2020. “[I]t has to be because of my color.”

The arrest didn’t stop Charleston from climbing the ranks of the school’s diversity bureaucracy. Between 2010 and 2017, he  helped to build  Wisconsin’s Equity and Inclusion Laboratory, which  conducts  research on “inclusive learning.” He  became  assistant vice chancellor of student diversity at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater in 2017, then served as the inaugural dean of diversity, equity and inclusion at UW-Madison’s School of Education—the third-ranked education school in the country, according to  US News and World Report . He became the chief diversity officer of the entire university in 2021.

Charleston is also a clinical professor of education, has  led  “anti-racism” workshops for Wisconsin public school teachers, and  sits  on the state’s Equity and Inclusion Council, which  helps  “advance diversity, equity, and inclusion practices across Wisconsin state government.”

The complaint calls into question the originality of the feted diversity scholar, who  draws  a $280,000 salary from UW-Madison and  oversees tutoring services  for students.

Both papers also share a prominent coauthor: Jerlando Jackson, now the dean of the Michigan State University College of Education, who advised Charleston’s dissertation at UW-Madison and also coauthored one of the studies based on it. The overlap raises additional questions about norms of academic integrity at education schools and within the field of DEI scholarship, which has come under intense scrutiny in recent months amid a drip-drip of plagiarism scandals.

The complaint also accuses Charleston of plagiarizing other scholars in his dissertation and some of his peer-reviewed papers, including the one from 2012. He lifts several passages from a Ph.D. thesis by Leslie Pendleton Graham, who earned her Ph.D. in counselor education in 1997, without citing her in a footnote or parentheses.

He also borrows from a dissertation by Craig Alan Green, who earned his Ph.D. from the University of Tennessee-Knoxville in 2008, without any sort of attribution.

Original Article

• Far-Left and Media Try to Stage a Coup
• With Displacement Comes Chaos
• Fifty Books That Changed My Mind
• Illegal Immigrant Controversy Mars Biden’s Triumph
• Belgium Should Be Ashamed
• A New Golden Age for Heterodox Books on Race?
• Hopeless Haiti
• Supreme Court Refuses to Enforce Its Own Ruling
• Britain Hangs Itself
• Here Come the Haitians!
• US Border Crossings to Be Made ‘Climate-Friendly’
• Media’s Arrogance Leads to a ‘Bloodbath’

• Video Archive