Understanding Workplace Bias

If #diversity, #equity, and #inclusion practitioners want to get ahead of anti-DEI backlash, we have to address an elephant in the room: no two people in the same workplace perceive their workplace the same way. I see this every time I work with client organizations. When asked to describe their own experience with the workplace and its DEI strengths and challenges, I hear things like: 😊 "I've never experienced any discrimination or mistreatment; our leaders' commitment is strong." 🤨 "I had a good time in one department, but after transferring departments I started experiencing explicit ableist comments under my new manager." 🙁 "I've never had anything egregious happen, but I've always felt less respected by my team members because of my race." Who's right? Turns out, all of them. It starts to get messy because everyone inevitably generalizes their own personal experiences into their perception of the workplace as a whole; three people might accordingly describe their workplace as a "meritocracy without discrimination," an "inconsistently inclusive workplace dependent on manager," or "a subtly racist environment." And when people are confronted with other experiences of the workplace that DIFFER from their own, they often take it personally. I've seen leaders bristle at the implication that their own experience was "wrong," or get defensive in expectation they will be accused of lacking awareness. It's exactly this defensiveness that lays the foundation for misunderstanding, polarization, and yes—anti-DEI misinformation—to spread in an organization. How do we mitigate it? In my own work, I've found that these simple steps go a long way. 1. Validate everyone's experience. Saying outright that everyone's personal experience is "correct" for themselves might seem too obvious, but it plays a powerful role in helping everyone feel respected and taken seriously. Reality is not a question of "who is right"—it's the messy summation of everyone's lived experience, good or bad. 2. Use data to create a shared baseline. Gathering data by organizational and social demographics allows us to make statements like, "the average perception of team respect is 70% in Engineering, but only 30% in Sales," or "perception of fair decision making processes is 90% for white men, but only 40% for Black women." This establishes a shared reality, a baseline for any effective DEI work. 3. Make it clear that problem-solving involves—and requires—everyone. The goal of DEI work is to achieve positive outcomes for everyone. Those with already positive experiences? Their insights help us know what we're aiming for. Those with the most negative? Their insights help us learn what's broken. The more we communicate that collective effort benefits the collective, rather than shaming or dismissing those at the margins, the more we can unite people around DEI and beat the backlash.

Companies with senior DEI executives do not enjoy higher DEI performance. We find a negative coefficient in all four specifications, and it's negative and significant at the 10% level in one. This suggests that improving DEI is much more complex than just appointing a senior executive tasked with the issue. One interpretation is that appointing a DEI senior manager means that other executives no longer view it as their responsibility, to the detriment of DEI overall. A second is that companies may hire DEI senior managers to tick a box without empowering them to make significant changes. A recent WSJ article (https://lnkd.in/e7pHZfj5) explains: “chief diversity officers said company executives at times didn’t want to change hiring or promotion processes, despite initially telling CDOs they were hired to improve the talent pipeline.” This is a new result in my paper "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion" (with Caroline Flammer and Simon Glossner), where we measure DEI using employee perceptions in the Great Place to Work survey rather than demographic diversity statistics. As with our other results, we stress that we find correlations, not causation. An alternative explanation is that companies with poor DEI choose to hire senior DEI execs, and it takes time before they lead to an improvement. https://lnkd.in/eXtj2rev

The Games Industry’s Gatekeeping Is Awful for Everybody Everything below reflects a loud minority in games. All of it I've heard firsthand, repeatedly, over five years in the industry. For juniors, the wall is immediate: no experience, no trust. Seen by some as those who don’t know what to do, not worth the risk. For devs, it’s more layered. I’ve seen people told outright: “You’ve never made a game - your opinion doesn’t count.” Or, “You didn’t work at that company,” or “You don’t have enough years.” Or it’s the silence, the look, the disinterest when you mention your background. Ironically, many who say these things? I know you. I’ve heard the closed-door comments. And there are people at other studios who think you’re not real either when you're not in the room. Because you didn’t work on their tier or type of games. It’s a race to the bottom for all. Gatekeeping happens by role too. Design, narrative, art, engineering, etc - that’s “real.” BD, finance, legal, and more? “Not real devs,” to some. “What have you made and shipped?” Then there’s the attitude toward those who blend disciplines, have a public voice, or build communities. If your impact didn’t come from a credit screen, expect eye rolls. Sometimes it’s jealousy. Sometimes judgment. Often, it’s just cliques. “Did you pay your dues in the trenches?” Yes, it can overlap with demographics. But even more often, it’s just club bias, plain and simple. It’s strange. I’ve worked in many industries. I’ve never seen one where some are so obsessed with years and credits, like we’re applying to college again. Maybe it’s insecurity. Or just, “I suffered, so you should too.” But here’s the truth: things are changing. Social media and community impact matter. More diverse talent is coming in - like it or not. People are switching careers later. Adjacent creatives are entering. What upsets me most is the very rare but real contempt I hear for game buyers themselves, dismissed as nuisances or know-nothings. Gatekeeping sucks. I don’t say that as an outsider - I’m lived it. I know there’s a part of this field that will always sees unconventional people like me as a joke. Not real. Not credible. Not welcome. “You haven’t made anything.” "You got a trophy for making one spreadsheet." Some have no problem saying it right to my face. Some post it online. If my biggest dream was getting into games, the next is seeing gatekeeping fade. For everyone still fighting for their shot. A field that’s more diverse in thought, role, and path. It will happen. Tech and self-publishing are opening gates. Costs are dropping. More are shipping games. Soon, saying someone isn’t a “real gamer” will sound as ridiculous, and offensive, as it always should have. Also, I agree 100% with Aaron Bynum's comment below. Short version: Gatekeeping can mean either unfair exclusion for no reason or legitimate standards based on expertise, and it’s crucial not to confuse the two. Not every grievance is gatekeeping.

Recruiters can be gatekeepers, or we can be door openers. We can dutifully take orders from hiring managers, or we can offer guidance and advice to help them expand their idea of a great candidate. We can put out job postings with biased criteria like degree requirements or preferences for employed candidates, or we can point out biases and help HMs reflect on what's behind those biases so they don't hold this criteria against candidates. We can be focus on all the ways an applicant doesn't meet the mark, or we can look for all the ways that they do. We can closely guard information about the hiring process because we believe that the best candidate can navigate whatever comes their way, or we can freely share information because we believe that it's our job to help every candidate shine. We can follow outdated practices around not sharing compensation or offering the least a candidate is willing to accept, or we can advocate to change these practices in our work place and keep equity at the forefront of our compensation practices. Gatekeepers see their role as taking orders from hiring managers and executing them effectively. Door openers see their role as true partners and owners of the hiring process, and often that's what's needed to evolve outdated practices in the workplace.

It's time to stop avoiding the "Open to Work" banner. Yes, I've heard the reasons why people don't like it. But the stigma that shamers are raising makes me furious. Why in the world would we make people who've just been laid off feel ashamed or embarrasssed? Who does that serve? Only the employers who chose layoffs over other options. And to the recruiters who will only consider people who are currently working: I'm pretty sure your own job isn't guaranteed for life. Like the rest of us, you are just one merger or budget crisis away from unemployment yourself. You are missing great talent. Maybe try some compassion. Okay, now that I got that off my chest... Adding that green banner is just the start. A well-crafted post that positions you as a great new hire can accelerate your job hunt. Here's how to write a powerful "Open to Work" statement: ✅ Start with Clarity and Confidence Get right to the point, stay objective, and skip the long backstory. "I'm on the lookout for my next great job. Today I'm joining the ranks of those who are Open to Work." ✅ Share your wins Mention your top 3-5 achievements or projects, and quantify where possible. "I'm proud that during my time at [employer], I: -Drove $MM in new business -Led development of 5 products including A & B, resulting in $X revenue -Designed and facilitated new hire onboarding, and oversaw an X% increase in retention through new employee engagement programs." ✅ Be clear about your targets State the functions, job titles, and industries you are seeking "As I think about next steps, I'm looking for [job title], or [job title] and roles that will allow me to X, Y & Z within the [industry 1] or [industry 2] ✅Offer thank you's if appropriate and tag people "I'd like to thank [Name] and [Name] for their unwavering support of my work while at [company]. It was a great run!" ✅ End with a simple ask “I'm open to intros, referrals, or a cup of coffee just to catch up. Shoot me a DM and let's make plans!" Your goal? Make it EASY for others to help you. Done right, this post can launch your job search. Equally important is what NOT to do: ❌ Don't tell a long, drawn out story ❌ Don't disparage your employer or manager ❌ Don't share personal details about your family or finances If you’ve written one before, what made it work? Drop your tips below so we can learn from each other👇 🎉You've got this and I've got you!🎉 ♻️ Share to help job hunters find work! 🔔 Follow Sarah Baker Andrus for more career strategies 📌Want job search support? DM me to chat!

I once got feedback that I was “intimidating.” I took it to heart. I spent the next few years trying to be as approachable, warm, and agreeable as I could be. I assumed this was a character flaw that I needed to fix. But years later, I realized something: this feedback wasn’t about me. It was about the system - one that judges women more harshly and polices their personalities more than their performance. And the numbers back this up. 👇🏽 🎯 Women are 7x more likely to receive negative personality-based feedback than men. 🎯 56% of women have been called "unlikeable" in reviews (vs. 16% of men). 🎯 Harvard Business Review found that 76% of “aggressive” labels in one company’s reviews were given to women (vs. 24% to men). This Is the Leadership Double Bind: Speak up? You’re “too aggressive.” Stay quiet? You “lack confidence.” Show ambition? You’re “unlikeable.” Ask for a promotion? You’re “too pushy.” And here’s the kicker - it’s worst for high-performing women. This is why women... ↳  Hesitate to showcase ambition. ↳  Are reluctant to ask for opportunities. ↳  Are leaving workplaces faster than others. So, what can we do? Here are 3 ways we can start changing this narrative today: ✅ Check your language. Is the feedback about personality or performance? If you wouldn’t give the same critique to a man, please reconsider. ✅ Challenge vague feedback. “You need to be more confident” isn’t actionable. Women deserve the same clear, growth-oriented feedback as men. ✅ Support women’s ambition. If certain leadership traits (ex. being assertive) are seen as strengths in men, they should be seen as strengths in women too. Have you ever received unfair feedback? What’s one piece of feedback you’ve had to unlearn? 👇🏽 ♻️ Please share to help end unfair feedback. 🔔 Follow Bhavna Toor (She/Her) for more insights on conscious leadership. Source: Textio 'Language Bias in Feedback' Study, 2023 & 2024 #EndUnFairFeedback #IWD2025

𝗘𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗲𝗲𝘀 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗵𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗮𝘀𝗺 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗗𝗘𝗜’𝘀 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝗼𝗻 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗶𝘁𝘆, 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘀! 💡 While most employees view DEI initiatives positively—especially in terms of belonging, engagement, and well-being—only 43% believe DEI boosts productivity, with 17% seeing it as detrimental. 📈 Over 75% of organizations have DEI policies to promote equity, enjoying strong support from most respondents. 🚀 DEI initiatives are most effective when leaders communicate their importance and provide employee resource groups (ERGs). Leaders should highlight DEI’s benefits for all employees and use insights from ERGs to guide decision-making. ❗️ Employees generally see DEI as beneficial for fostering a strong workplace culture. However, the notable exception is the tracking of DEI targets and measures, which 52% of workers report has a neutral or negative effect on their work experience, according to a new interesting research published by The Conference Board using data 📊 from a survey of 1,345 US workers and leaders. ❌ For some workers, DEI efforts––particularly training and workshops––might be viewed as costly, time consuming, or even disruptive. Without clear alignment to organizational goals, metrics, and well-communicated benefits, DEI may be seen as performative or aimed at the “soft” side of business rather than a driver of performance. Resistance to change or misunderstanding of DEI’s long-term value could also contribute to the belief that it hinders productivity. Researchers discovered that : ✔️ 63% of employees indicated that executive support has had the most positive impact on their work experience, highlighting the tangible effects of leadership involvement in DEI initiatives. ✔️ Similarly, 62% of workers noted that affinity groups or ERGs positively affect their work experience, providing a sense of community and advocacy for employees across demographics. ☝️ 𝙈𝙮 𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙤𝙣𝙖𝙡 𝙫𝙞𝙚𝙬: This insightful research uncovered intriguing patterns about DEI, highlighting the need for C-Suite leaders to recognize its complexity and emphasize the broader benefits of DEI to boost organizational performance. To meet employee expectations and foster inclusivity, organizations must prioritize DEI. Leaders should continually revisit and refine their strategies to ensure they align with evolving business goals and employee needs. 🙏Thank you The Conference Board researchers team for sharing these insightful findings: Robin Erickson PhD Rita Meyerson, Ed.D. Diana Scott Dave Ulrich George Kemish LLM MCMI MIC MIoL ✍ In your opinion, how can leaders prioritize DEI programs to cultivate a culture that drives business success? #DEI #business #diversity #inclusion

We all want to reward employees fairly, yet decades of research--and for many people, their lived experience--show that bias persists. In other words, for the same performance, people earn less or more due to managerial error. New research from researchers at our Stanford VMware Women's Leadership Innovation Lab shows that many interventions are only targeting half the problem. Bias shows up both in how managers describe (view) performance as well as how they reward (value) behaviors. Viewing biases often show up in how performance is described differently based on who is performing it. Men’s approach may be called “too soft,” thus “subtly faulting them for falling short of assertive masculine ideals.” Valuing biases can show up as the same behavior being rewarded when men perform it but not when women do. Examples from the research show that men benefitted when their project specifics were described, whereas women were not. So the same description and behaviors showed up in reviews, but they were only rewarded on men’s. What can be done to curb biases? ✅ Standardize specific guidelines for how managers should view employee behaviors and assign corresponding rewards when giving employees feedback and making decisions about their careers. ✅ Help managers catch bias in both viewing and valuing. ✅ Monitor these impacts from entry level to executive leadership. It turns out that as the criteria shift, so can the way these biases work. A key lesson from our research shows that the work takes discipline, consistency and accountability. These steps may seem like a lot of “extra” work, but at the end of the day, managers also benefit when they weed out biases and fairly promote the most talented employees. Article by Alison Wynn, Emily Carian, Sofia Kennedy and JoAnne Wehner, PhD published in Harvard Business Review. #diversityequityinclusion #performanceevaluation #managerialskills

You’re not alone if you’ve noticed that, despite the time and resources invested, the DEI training programs in your organization aren’t delivering the impact you expected. The reality is, success isn’t just determined by the commitment of the participants —it’s heavily influenced also by how the program is structured and delivered. There are key signs to watch for that may suggest your DEI program is like a broken ladder, making it difficult for employees to climb toward meaningful change Here are 8 common pitfalls to watch out for, and what you can do to ensure the DEI trainings in your organization make a lasting impact: ❌ Single-session workshops ✅ Effective DEI programs involve spaced learning, delivered over time to allow for deeper understanding and lasting impact ❌ Same content for people in different roles  ✅ Does the training feel generic, like it’s meant for everyone but relevant to no one? A good DEI program should be tailored to specific roles and the needs of your group. ❌ Focusing on compliance and what not to do ✅ The focus should be on modeling inclusive behaviors and showing what to do in real situations and how to incorporate them into daily work ❌ Copy-pasting training content from global DEI programs ✅ If it feels like the examples or exercises don’t really apply to your workplace, the content may have been copy-pasted from global programs. Check how the material has been adjusted to reflect your specific organization’s culture and challenges. ❌ Run by passionate DEI advocates with no facilitation experience ✅ A passionate facilitator is great, but they should also know how to manage group dynamics and keep discussions productive. Pay attention to whether the facilitator is able to navigate complex conversations and make the space feel safe for everyone. ❌ Raising awareness without driving behavioral change ✅ DEI training should focus on translating awareness into concrete actions that people can start practicing immediately. ❌ Ignoring pushback and concerns ✅ A DEI training that shies away from tough conversations might miss real issues. Good training fosters open dialogue, allowing participants to voice concerns and discuss challenges openly. ❌ No follow-up or next steps ✅ A truly impactful program provides follow-up phases for implementation, ensuring the lessons learned are integrated and built upon. By paying attention to these aspects, you can transform the DEI training program into one that delivers meaningful, lasting change. Do any of these issues resonate with you? I’d love to hear your thoughts!

I recently led a workshop with senior leaders on unconscious bias, one of the most subtle yet impactful forces shaping workplaces today. Here are some key, thought-provoking takeaways: Talent Pipeline: - Bias in "fit" over potential– We often seek candidates who feel like a "good fit," but this focus on familiarity limits diversity of thought and experience. By sticking with what feels comfortable, we may be missing out on the very perspectives that can push our business forward. - Meritocracy myths– Many of us believe we’re creating a merit-based environment, but unconscious bias can lead us to underestimate talent that doesn't mirror our own journey or leadership style. Thought: Could the future leaders of your organization be getting overlooked because they don't fit the traditional mold? What opportunities are we missing by favoring comfort over potential? Performance management - Critical vs. nurturing feedback– Studies show men often receive feedback that highlights their potential, while women and minorities are judged more on their current performance. This can lead to a self-fulfilling cycle where some are groomed for leadership, while others are held back. - Bias in “leadership traits”– We tend to associate leadership with traditionally masculine traits like decisiveness and assertiveness, while underappreciating qualities like empathy and collaboration. This limits the development of diverse leadership styles and stifles more inclusive forms of leadership. Thought: Are we unconsciously reinforcing outdated ideas of leadership that prevent diverse talent from rising? What if the traits we’re overlooking are exactly what the future of leadership needs? Bias as a leadership challenge Unconscious bias isn’t just an HR issue—it’s a leadership challenge that permeates every level of decision-making: - Awareness isn’t enough– Simply recognising our biases isn’t sufficient. We need strategies that actively challenge our instincts and foster fairer, more inclusive decision-making. - Courageous conversations– Creating an environment where it’s safe to talk about bias isn’t easy, but it’s essential. These discussions help us redefine how we view leadership, success, and talent. Addressing unconscious bias isn't a one-time fix—it's an ongoing commitment to redefining how we lead and make decisions. By fostering a culture that actively challenges bias, we don't just create a more inclusive workplace—we build a stronger, more innovative organization. The real challenge is: Are we willing to do the hard work to make it happen? #leadership #highperformance #DEI #inclusion