Driving meaningful conversations for inclusion from your engagement data
This was an exciting week as I was fortunate to be part of the People Analytics and HR Data Conference as a speaker and roundtable facilitator, organised by Aventedge . I was fortunate to have my team mates from the Cochlear talent team – Zubeyde (Zoe) Korkmaz and Henrietta Orendain join me during the event. The conference also enabled me to meet a number of new contacts like Dr. Paul Hunter Ryan Swindells Dr Philip Gibbs Iain Calman Sravan Rajupalem Jeff O.
For most of you who know me, use a lot of data and analytics in my work, but I wouldn’t dare claim to be someone from that area, so my contribution to this event was more a talent and DE&I perspective.
And the topic that I presented was – “Driving meaningful conversations for inclusion from your engagement data”.
“Understanding diversity includes knowing how diminished we all are when voices go unheard”
Preskill & Brookfield
My presentation focused on 4 parts; Building the Narrative, Driving the Conversation and Raising the Call to Action
Building the Narrative
To enable meaningful conversations on inclusion, we need the data from engagement surveys to build stories of how people experience inclusion at every angle you can break into e.g. by level, team, department, etc. So this, in other words is about ensuring that we measure what matters. And what are they?
There are two things you want to know from people in your organisation – to what degree do people experience inclusion (or exclusion) at your organisation AND to what degree do your leaders demonstrate inclusive leadership behaviours.
Some areas that you might want to cover in your survey:
There are many organisations providing inclusion competencies and frameworks out there, you may wish to check out the following:
There are endless demography dimensions you can cover, but the critical ones should include; age, country, employment status, gender, sexual orientation, job family, region, team role, tenure, carer responsibility, work preference and band/level.
So how does demographics matter for inclusion? I have seen many situations where the overall rating for a competency is excellent, and one would be inclined to think that leaders for that organisation/ team are doing well, right? Well, I have seen pockets of their people population indicating experience of exclusion – it can be someone from the LGBTIQ group, maybe people of a certain age group, tenure, part-timers, women, and the possibilities stretch across all demographic groups. Regardless of whatever platform you use, please be mindful to select one that provides reporting down to the lowest possible meaningful denomination (e.g. 10 people minimum in a team), where you can pull out reports at your fingertips.
A key consideration is – how do you go about it, given data/privacy laws and to some extent, questions of integrity/confidentiality and how the data will be used? People asked this during the conference, so my answer is – please ensure that there’s some form of governance in place to ensure integrity/confidentiality and to have commitment from the highest levels (e.g. Executive Team or Board) to follow-up with remedy and action. People need to be assured that it’s a safe platform to voice out and that the input will translate into impact and real change.
It is important that you provide benchmarks in your reports; if possible, indicate progress (or regress) for the items over time (e.g. 2024 versus 2023), compare the team rating against a global/industry average (if applicable) and the top 5/bottom 5 items.
By ensuring that we set up the right component/ constructs to measure, we enable our leaders to look at inclusion strategically backed by data.
“The deepest truth is found by means of a simple story."
Anthony De Mello
Verbatim provides context, substance, significance, circumstances, factors, definition, and/or explanation to the data.
For example, sometimes, we may have data that seem to contradict one another; e.g. a team may have a high sense of belonging but low psychological safety OR a department has high psychological safety ratings but leaders are less receptive of ideas that are different.
In situations like these, you need context to piece together the reality within the team, and verbatim is a good starting point. Every organisation, team is unique and so are their stories which verbatim can be a good place to start.
Also, during the conference, I had some good questions on how do we best leverage on verbatim:
Recommended by LinkedIn
I believe in simplicity, so I think it’s worthwhile to advise people to provide details which are relevant to illustrate the reality that they want HR to know, to be objective, focused and provide suggestions or solutions (but nothing more complicated than that). I am also inclined to position verbatim as a compass in telling where we need to do more exploration, take things with a pinch of salt.
I’d emphasise this– Data should be the starting point of the conversation on inclusion and belonging, not the outcome.
I also advised people to consider that if we use word clouds to summarise messages from verbatim, we may be defeating the entire purpose of verbatim. We may pick out 3 words from 21 different verbatim, but they may tell 21 different stories going separate directions or issues. And that doesn’t even factor in the part where 1 verbatim itself may be interpreted differently by 10 different people. Therefore, nothing beats real conversation because we need to remember – you can contextualise everything from a person’s work experience into 1 survey response. Let alone hundreds or thousands of people.
Driving the Conversation
This part is about challenging assumptions, biases and identifying inertia against change that may arise when leaders deliberate on the results of the inclusion data for your organisation.
“The signal is the truth. The noise is what distracts us from the truth.”
Nate Silver, statistician and author
As a consultant and in-house HR practitioner, I’ve heard of all these response from people leaders across all levels:
I am inclined to think that it’s the role of people in HR to facilitate the reflection with leaders and be part of their exploration of the inclusion reality in these teams. Some questions that I start with include:
Raising the Call to Action
The next steps is dependent on where your organisation is at and it will depend if:
Expect different levels of readiness or varying appetite for inclusion from leaders; I’d prioritise leaders who are on board with your DE&I agenda to get quick wins. There may also be cultural and leadership challenges, therefore unless you have champions or sponsors at the Executive Team or board level, it’s important to be smart with resources to focus on hanging fruit.
The best approach would be to assess, build and sustain appetite for inclusion. To build, it’s important to educate to strengthen knowledge, continue to influence with conversation and lead with a call to action. Always think from a change management perspective, take steps to do build momentum, change the culture and embed the target inclusion behaviours.
Having leaders who can walk the talk, are curious, empathetic and committed to your DE&I agenda are critical to build and sustain momentum; it is far more impactful when people can see, feel and experience their leaders demonstrating the way forward.
There’s a huge momentum when leaders lead inclusively from the front by role modelling the aspired behaviour and culture, when people can see them demonstrate real curiosity about difference, when they courageously lead challenging conversations around DE&I and behave with humility, compassion, flexibility and agility.
So you’d have engaged and educated leaders on DE&I, you might be considering more advanced topics e.g. advocacy, gender, race, disability and neuro diversity and strengthening your inclusion culture.
People may start from different levels of readiness or knowledge or misconceptions, therefore we need to provide knowledge for inclusion 101 through training to bridge the gap, e.g. providing the business case for inclusion, etc. For those who have bias, we also need to enable conversations on bias, how it impacts the organisation and its people.
Ensure that you build evaluation into the plan, including the structured and informal check-ins consistently to get context.
In some teams/ organisations, behaviour change isn’t enough – some of the bias is embedded into processes, systems, structure, policies (pay, flexibility, performance, hiring, etc.)
You’ll need to dive head on to tackle systemic issues, so pull in all the stops to get this right because you have one chance. Do try your best have the following:
“Diversity is having a seat at the table, inclusion is having a voice, and belonging is having that voice be heard.”
Liz Fosslien
Having the data delivered to you and leadership is only half the journey, therefore I’m reemphasising again that – Data should be the starting point of the conversation on inclusion and belonging, not the outcome.
Co-founder AHRA | Executive Leader in Digital Analytics | Championing HR Transformation with AI & Behavioural Science | Author & Conference Presenter
1yThanks Jason Teoh, FCPHR 🏳️🌈 I very much enjoyed your presentation. This is great summary and perspective from talent and DE&I point of view and agree verbatim is an underutilized source of data.
Senior Fellow and Lecturer/Researcher HRM | Academic Member CIPD (MCIPD) | Deputy Programme Director MSc Management Adam Smith Business School | Management Consultant
1yMany thanks for tagging me Jason. Very thoughtful article - I like the focus on building a narrative and taking into account qualitative elements to reveal contextual circumstances in more depth and detail that numbers don’t always reveal. I really enjoyed your presentation as well. It was a fantastic conference. I’ve made a lot of new friends in Australia.
Senior People Analyst at QBE Insurance
1yA fantastic presentation Jason!