individual’s unique combinations of discrimination and privilege. Each and every individual brings with them a range of personal characteristics and a unique social and political identity. Some facets of this unique profile can be linked to protected characteristics specified in legislation; others are not addressed by law (such as obesity and class). Some of these confer privilege, others disadvantage and the context in which this is assessed can vary. For example, would a white, gay, man experience greater privilege or disadvantage than a black, straight, man? There can be competing claims


flowing from the intersectionality of


overlapping protected


characteristics. This can result in employers finding it difficult to reconcile and manage the boundaries between, for example, religion and belief and other equality protected characteristics. For instance, certain religions may


consider homosexuality immoral, resulting in conflict between these equality strands. Intersectionality refers to the


interconnected nature of difference categories. In essence, the point is that it is not possible to categorise individuals under a single banner heading because everyone will be unique. This reinforces the need for inclusive voice mechanisms that truly hear what individuals’ circumstances are and respond to them, such that the playing field can be made as fair and just as possible. In this way everyone can reach their full potential through an equal share of career opportunities and seniority to the benefit of individuals, organisations and societies.


* www.equalityhumanrights. com/equality/equality-act-2010/ your-rights-under-equality- act-2010/direct-and-indirect- discrimination#direct- discrimination


EDI OR DEI? THAT IS THE QUESTION


The acronyms EDI (equality/equity, diversity and inclusion) and DEI (diversity, equality/equity and inclusion) often seem interchangeable. However, a subtle but significant shift is taking place with EDI becoming the preferred terminology. What is the significance of this and does the order matter? Historically EDI referred to equality,


diversity and inclusion. Equality is the basic underpinning, with equal opportunities rooted in legislation dating back several decades. Hence E (for equality) has tended to be cited first. Diversity, referring to the celebration of difference, is usually attributed to the work of Kandola and Fullerton’s diversity mosaic, and dates from the 1990s. Thus, D tends to follow on from E with equal opportunities being necessary to facilitate diversity. Inclusion (I) is a later concept, becoming part of the mainstream debate from the noughties. The notion of discussing equality (i.e.


equal opportunities) as part of EDI has shifted in its focus relatively recently. The emphasis is now on equity (i.e. fairness) and so within EDI, E typically now refers to equity rather than equality. Does the EDI/DEI order matter?


Although EDI and DEI both aim to address similar issues, their emphasis is different. DEI places diversity first. Its


DOWNLOAD


Download our Diversity Mini Factsheet series at thinkglobalpeople.com


emphasis is on bringing different people into - and retaining them within - the organisation. While this is important, given the positive results for business that can flow from embracing a wide range of perspectives, characteristics and talents, if the key focus is on diversity and the metrics that record it, this can sometimes overlook the need to prioritise equity. EDI, on the other hand, puts


equity first, namely ensuring that all employees, regardless of their background and levels of privilege or disadvantage, are able to succeed. Both DEI and EDI place emphasis


on inclusion – namely ensuring that all individuals have voice.


73


GLOBAL LEADERSHIP SUPPLEMENT


EDI


GLOBAL LEADERSHIP MINI FACTSHEET: DIVERSITY & INCLUSION


Equality & equity


The focus on equality is shifting in emphasis to that of the pursuit of equity alongside diversity and inclusion. In practice, the terms equity and equality appear to be used almost interchangeably but there is a difference and the implications are significant for organisations.


EQUALITY Equalities legislation sets the


legislative legal


framework for providing the same to everyone – everyone has an equal chance of success. The


framework


prohibits direct and indirect discrimination. The Equality and Human


Rights Commission* defines direct discrimination as: “when you are treated worse than another people because:


person or other


• you have a protected characteristic • someone thinks you have that protected characteristic (known as discrimination by perception)


• you are connected to someone with that protected characteristic (known as discrimination by association)”


The Commission defines indirect discrimination as: “when there is a policy that applies in the same way for everybody but disadvantages a group of people who share a protected characteristic, and you are disadvantaged as part of this group.” With respect to employment are


in the UK, there nine protected


characteristics listed in the Equalities Act 2010. This legislation prohibits direct and


indirect discrimination on grounds of: age; disability; gender reassignment; marriage and civil partnership; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; and sexual orientation. Other countries’ employment


legislation may be less comprehensive. Certain factors may not be recognised (for example, same-sex marriages) or be illegal (for example, homosexuality).


EQUITY Equity refers to fairness and justice and thus differs from equality. The pursuit of equity recognises that individuals all start from different places – not from a level playing field – and so adjustments will be needed to address these imbalances. The


equity agenda recognises the


requirements for organisational action to go beyond equal chance and promote equal access to opportunities in the workplace and an equal share of those opportunities. These include, for example, access by minority groups to – and an equal share of – leadership positions.


ORGANISATIONAL ACTIONS Positive action can help to facilitate equal access by minority groups to leadership roles. For example, organisations can ensure that minorities are made aware of positions that are available and are encouraged to apply for them. Positive action is not the same as positive discrimination. Open and transparent recruitment


and selection processes can help to widen access for minority groups. These include advertising all positions and adopting the use


Equal access goes some way towards achieving equity but


if minorities are


unable to achieve an equal share of career opportunities and leadership positions, then true equity has not been achieved. A culture of true equity is needed


if minorities are to gain an equal share of career opportunities. Robust voice and engagement processes can ensure that the barriers faced are identified and addressed. This requires top management support. Allies can support the progression of minorities. Coaches, mentors and sponsors can also play a valuable role.


* www.equalityhumanrights.com/ equality/equality-act-2010/ your-rights-under-equality- act-2010/direct-and-indirect- discrimination#direct-discrimination


of structured


interviews using diverse panels. Minority groups tend to have fewer


networks and role models. Organisational support for networks and role models can also help to widen access to career opportunities for minorities.


To access the Mini Factsheet series visit thinkglobalpeople.com and find out about events, webinars and podcasts. Contact us info@thinkglobalpeople.com


For comprehensive information on leadership and managing global mobility visit our sister website relocateglobal.com


relocateglobal.com |


thinkglobalpeople.com


© 2024: Relocate Global & Think Global People


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86