Last week I had a very inspiring discussion with Jane Ide OBE who is a brilliant charity sector leader. In the conversation, we talked about how micro interventions could potentially be the way forward for the kind of inclusive change we are aiming to see in society. It got me thinking have we got our approach all wrong? Have we fixated too much on big ticket changes, seismic movements that would signal a momentous shift rather than concentrating on focused interventions, the sum of which could be greater than their collective parts?
In exploring this question, I thought about the small scale actions with very specific ambitions that are creating ripples that may potentially build up to a tidal wave for change. The first one that came to mind was Show The Salary, a simple ask ‘born out of frustration at the lack of action being taken to address pay gaps and inequity in the charity sector’. Using social media the organisers have consistently called out and challenged organisations posting jobs without showing the salary. Simultaneously, they encouraged organisations to sign their pledge to commit to always revealing it. If you want to understand more about why this is important you can read their excellent top eight reasons here. In summary though you get more candidates, you will run a fairer and more equitable process and you’ll help address pay equality within your organisation. If you are serious about being inclusive it’s a very simple positive action.
Next up was Stop Funding Hate, which was founded in 2016. The organisers were concerned about the drip feed of toxic headlines and the damaging effect they have on society. They want to see community harmony not fracture and therefore condemn those profiting from sowing seeds of division. So they are calling out companies who advertise in newspapers or channels (GB News the most recent focus) that they feel are having this impact. Their rationale is that newspaper sales are reducing and consequently advertising is a key element of profitability. So by encourage individuals to boycott companies who choose to advertise in those newspapers or channels they apply pressure to consider advertising elsewhere. In relation to GB News they have so far seemingly encouraged companies including Ikea, Kopparberg and Octopus Energy to stop advertising. What impact that will have is yet to be seen but their leverage is clearly evident.
Finally, I though about Change.org, which has just exploded this year. As a platform, it has become the epicentre for single issue campaigns and is reflective of the emergence of New Power (see video below). The impact of Change.org in 2020 was extraordinary and it is a wider signal of the power of mass mobilisation. Technology and social media have shifted the balance of power. It is now much more possible for ‘ordinary people’ to make real tangible change. So my question this week is whether the way forward is actually through small scale actions, lots of them, and that we achieve social justice through a thousand flowers blooming? If this is right how do we become more aware of the actions we can take? How do we track the small impacts and ensure that we amplify the difference they are making? Throw in one or two socially conscious mega influencers like Marcus Rashford and who knows what we could achieve… #ImNotTired
Sadly (or thankfully for those of you who have heard my not so dulcet tones), I’m not about to burst into a mid 70’s rock classic… because on this week’s topic I don’t like, I don’t like it, I don’t like it. This week I’ll be talking about recruitment and the challenges and opportunities open to us to lead for change and move away from the status quo.
As I have mentioned in previous blogs I am a big fan of achieving diversity through inclusion. However, there are some processes and diversity focused actions that are important. Recruitment is one of them. I believe there are three important components to think about:
Entry level recruitment
Progression pathways and development opportunities
Senior level appointments
Where I feel some organisations get it wrong is a solitary focus on the first element. Whilst it’s important to think about having more open and inclusive entry routes, on their own they are far from enough. The real challenge when we think about demographic diversity of a workforce is not in lower graded roles but in senior management. I believe you address this through rebalancing the support and development you provide to under represented groups to create more equitable opportunities to progress (more on this in a future post). Alongside this organisations and senior level hiring managers must start challenging themselves on how they attract and recruit into the top jobs.
It is at this point that an underlying desire to preserve the status quo kicks in. The primary cause? Affinity bias brilliantly explained in the video below. How many times have we heard phrases like “We need someone who will hit the ground running” or “I am looking for someone who will gel with the team”? In interviews how often do we attempt to ease someone into the conversation by checking their knowledge, understanding or affinity with the business we are in? This is especially prevalent within charities where we place an additional emphasis on a candidates affiliation to the cause. My view on this is that this is an unhelpful hindrance to more equitable and inclusive recruitment. Unless the role you are recruiting for is chief organisational cheerleader surely we should be more interested in whether someone has the skills and attributes to perform the primary function of the role. In asking this question you have a predetermined view of your preferred answer. Candidates who provide the response we expect are already more favourable and those that don’t will feel a mood change in the room that not only kicks things off on the wrong foot but may even throw them off their game for the rest of the conversation. If you want an gentle opening question ask them what interests them most or excites them about their field of specialism or proposed area of work.
It isn’t of course as simple as our opening question. Far too often hiring managers will assume the magic bullet to solving the diversity question is placing the advert on more diverse job boards. In reality the process of change starts before you’ve even realised you have a vacancy. Is there an honest recognition within the organisation that there is a systemic problem, a host of long held barriers to diversifying your workforce through recruitment? We need to move beyond CV and covering letter. We need to consider the language we use in our advertisements and job specifications. There are tools that exist that will let you know if your wording is less appealing or engaging for a particular audience. What subliminal messages is your recruitment campaign sending? In this instance words matter more than a few token images of a diverse range of staff. Does the new post holder really need a degree? If so why? How will you test their capability? What reasonable adjustments do you offer candidates and how do you advertise these? Moving beyond “let us know if you need any adjustments” and instead including a sentence such as “we really want you to perform at your best in this process, we have the following adjustments in place <insert list> but if you need us to make any additional reasonable adjustments please let us know”. The latter sentence sends a much more powerful signal. Ask yourself is your process really two ticks or actually two fingers?
So if you are in a position to bring in someone new or influence how your organisation recruits think about the power you have as a hiring manager and the positive outcomes you can have on your organisation by changing your recruitment mindset, processes and approach. I’d love to hear from others on their reflections so please do comment below.
Oh here we are and here we are and here we go, let me kno-oh-ow … your thoughts on improving our recruitment practices… #ImNotTired