The Knowledge Exchange Blog

The official blog of The Knowledge Exchange from Idox

“Same storm, different boats”: addressing covid-19 inequalities and the ‘long term challenge’

MS Queen Elizabeth in Stornoway

The coronavirus pandemic has impacted upon almost every aspect of life.  However, this impact has not been felt by everyone equally. Some groups of people have been particularly badly affected – both by the virus itself and by the negative social and economic consequences of social distancing measures.  The phrase ‘same storm, different boats’ has been used widely to emphasise this.

The pandemic has exposed and deepened many of the deep-rooted inequalities in our society, including gender, ethnicity and income.  It has also shone a light on more recent inequalities too, such as the growth of precarious employment among sections of the population.

As we move out of lockdown, the long term consequences of the pandemic will continue to be felt unevenly across different sections of society, with those on the lowest incomes being most vulnerable.

As thoughts turn to recovery, there is a growing sense that now is the time to consider how we can create a more equitable society that benefits those most in need.

 

The long-term challenge

During a recent Poverty Alliance webinar, ‘Build Back Better: Poverty, Health and Covid-19: emerging lessons from Scotland’, Dr Gerry McCartney, Head of the Public Health Observatory at Public Health Scotland noted that the coronavirus pandemic was causing three concurrent public health crises:

  • the direct impact of the virus (through ill health and/or death);
  • the indirect impacts on health and social care services (e.g. reduced hospital admissions/referrals, delayed diagnoses); and
  • the long term unintended consequences of physical distancing measures

Dr McCartney’s recent research sets out the different groups at particular risk from covid-19 and outlines a number of ways in which the unintended consequences of physical distancing measures may negatively impact upon health via a complex set of pathways – including reduced physical activity, fear, anxiety, stress, boredom and loneliness, economic stresses related to reduced income and unemployment, the impact of the loss of education, as well as the risk of abuse and exploitation of children not in school, substance abuse, and domestic abuse and violence.

Dr McCartney has also been involved in a project that sought to quantify the direct impact of the pandemic in terms of years of life lost.  The results showed that, over 10 years, the impact of inequality on life expectancy is actually at least six times greater than the direct impact of the pandemic itself.

Dr McCartney referred to this as the “long-term challenge” and argues that in order to address these inequalities, it is crucial that society aims to ‘build back better’ following the pandemic.

Build Back Better

But what does this mean?  Put simply, Build back better argues that pandemic offers an unprecedented opportunity to refocus society on the principles of equity and sustainability.

A recent paper by the Wellbeing Economy Alliance (WEAll) sets out 10 key principles for ‘building back better’, covering a range of environmental, social and governance issues:

It highlights international examples of each of these principles in action, for example, speeding up the adoption of the doughnut economics framework in Amsterdam in response to the pandemic, and through the wellbeing principles implemented by the Wellbeing Economy Governments (WEGo) group, consisting of Iceland, New Zealand and Scotland (and recently joined Wales).

Indeed, in Scotland, the independent Advisory Group on Economic Recovery, established by the Scottish Government, have recently published their findings on how to support Scotland’s economy to recover from the pandemic.  It states that “establishing a robust, wellbeing economy matters more than ever”.

Unequal employment impact

One of the guiding principles set out by the Advisory Group on Economic Recovery is to “tackle inequality by mitigating the risks of unemployment, especially among groups hit hard by the crisis”.

Indeed, unemployment following the pandemic is unlikely to affect everyone equally – women, young people, BAME individuals and the low-paid are predicted to suffer the brunt.

In a subsequent Poverty Alliance webinar, ‘Addressing unemployment after Covid-19’, Tony Wilson from the Institute for Employment Studies (IES) highlights the scale of the problem.  He states that unemployment is rising faster than at any point in our lifetimes (barring a blip in 1947), and is likely to increase by 3 million as a result of the pandemic.

Again, the impact of this will be uneven.  Anna Ritchie Allan, director of Close the Gap, discusses the impact upon women in particular.  As well as being more likely to work in a sector that has been shut down, women are also more likely to have lost their job, had their hours cut, or been furloughed. As women are also usually the primary carers of their children, they have disproportionately affected by the closure of schools and home learning.

A recent report by Close the Gap highlights how the impending post-covid downturn is different than previous recessions, as the restrictions imposed to tackle the virus have impacted most heavily upon sectors that employ large numbers of female (e.g. hospitality, retail, care), as well as services that enable women’s participation in the labour market (e.g. nurseries, schools, and social care). Young and Black and minority ethnic (BME) women have been particularly affected.

For example, Kathleen Henehan, Research and Policy Analyst at the Resolution Foundation, considers how young people’s employment prospects have been affected by the pandemic. She notes that young people leaving education are likely to be worst affected.  However, again, inequalities exist – with those with lower levels of qualifications being particularly affected, and women and BME individuals within those groups affected most of all.

According to Anna Allan, policy to address unemployment as a result of the pandemic needs to be both gender-sensitive and intersectional – taking account of the fact that women are not one homogenous group, and ensuring that any job creation is not just providing more ‘jobs for the boys’.  For example, recent research by the Women’s Budget Group shows that investing in care would create 7 times as many jobs as the same investment in construction: 6.3 as many for women and 10% more for men.

Building forwards

In a third webinar, ‘Disability, rights and covid-19: learning for the future’, Dr Sally Witcher, CEO of Inclusion Scotland, suggests that as well as exposing and deepening existing inequalities, the coronavirus pandemic has created the scope for new inequalities to be created – ‘faultlines’ created by the differing impacts of the virus.

Dr Witcher questions the term ‘build back better’ – she asks whether indeed we should want to build back, when the old normal didn’t work for a large proportion of people, particularly those with disabilities. Dr Witcher also questions ‘who’ is doing the building, and whether the people designing this new future will have the knowledge and lived experience of what really needs to change.

Dr Witcher suggests that for any attempt to ‘build back better’ to be meaningful, it needs to reach out to the people that don’t currently have a voice – the people who have been most heavily affected by the virus.  Not only do these groups need to be involved, but they need to be leading the discussion about what a post-covid future looks like.

A post-covid future

Whilst the coronavirus pandemic has had a massive, devastating impact on people and economies around the world, it has created an opportunity to reflect on what is important to us as individuals and as a society.

There is strong public demand for change. According to a new YouGov poll, only 6% of the public want to return to the same type of economy as before the coronavirus pandemic.

Building back better recognises that addressing the causes of the deep-rooted and long-standing inequalities in our society is critical to a successful post-covid recovery.

There is also a need to protect and enhance public services, address issues of low-pay and insecure work, and prioritise wellbeing and the environment through a ‘green recovery’.

As Tressa Burke, of the Glasgow Disability Alliance, states:

History will recount how we all responded to the coronavirus outbreak.  We need to ensure that the story told demonstrates our commitment, as a society, to protecting everyone from harm, particularly those most at risk of the worst impacts of covid.”


For further discussion of the wellbeing economy, you may be interested in our blog post ‘How well is your economy? Moving beyond GDP as an indicator of success

The Knowledge Exchange provides information services to local authorities, public agencies, research consultancies and commercial organisations across the UK. 

Follow us on Twitter to see what developments in policy and practice are interesting our research team.

An ageing workforce and growing emotional demands call for more sustainable employment

People Turning in Gears - Synergy

As a result of the global demographic challenge of an ageing population and the increasing diversity of working life, there has been a growing focus on sustainable work over the life course which has also placed greater emphasis on the importance of the quality of work and working conditions. As more and more people are having to work longer before retirement, it is important that they are able to do so.

A recent Eurofound report examined working conditions and their implications for worker’s health. Its findings confirmed a clear link between working conditions and the health and well-being of workers, highlighting the need to make work more sustainable.

Working conditions, health and wellbeing

Eurofound’s report found that this relationship can be depicted in a model based on the European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS), showing that health outcomes are the result of two processes: health-impairing processes (exhaustion) and motivational processes (engagement).

Health-impairing processes are associated with exposure to adverse work demands which tend to increase exhaustion, while motivational processes are associated with access to work resources that support engagement.

Such demands can include:

  • physical risks
  • work intensity
  • work extensity (long working hours)
  • emotional demands
  • social demands

Such resources can include:

  • social resources
  • work resources
  • rewards

It is noted in the report that the demand and resources model partly explains how well-designed jobs – characterised by high rewards, high work and social resources and suitable levels of demands – translate into better health: “Whereas job demands are linked to higher levels of exhaustion (which, in turn, are related to poorer health), job resources are associated with higher levels of work engagement (which, in turn, are related to better health and well-being).”

It is therefore suggested that as job control, social resources and rewarding working experiences all have positive effects, employers should be encouraged to introduce initiatives that focus on motivational aspects of work.

As recently highlighted, the discipline of worker health has traditionally focused on worker exposures to various workplace hazards. However, this has more recently broadened to include the concept of worker well-being, which is seen as increasingly important. Not only is it important for the individual but it is an important determinant of productivity for enterprise and society as well. Indeed, the Eurofound report highlights this growing importance.

Emotional demands

While the report notes that physical hazards have a direct effect on worker’s health and wellbeing and are undoubtedly remain important, these have not increased, but emotional demands have. This, it is argued, underlines the growing importance of psychosocial risks. It argues:

“In the context of ageing societies and services-dominated economies, it becomes more pressing to address these risks as the incidence of exposure increases.”

Other research has also highlighted the significance of emotional demands at work in relation to health. One recent study in the Danish workforce, for example, found emotional demands at work predicted a higher risk of long term sickness absence.

With the growing need for long-term care in ageing societies, it is argued that these demands are likely to increase further and, therefore, require particular attention. Different groups of people also face varying demands and are considered in the report. In particular, gender differences are considered throughout – highlighted as significant in some areas

Gender

The report found that men tend to report better health and wellbeing, and fewer health problems and better sleep quality than women. Men were also found to report fewer days of sickness absence and fewer days of presenteeism.

This is consistent with other research findings that show ill-health is more prevalent in women. One study exploring the association between work-related stress in midlife and subsequent mortality, and whether sense of coherence (measured as meaningfulness, manageability and comprehensibility) modified the association, found that occupation-based high job strain was associated with higher mortality in the presence of a weak sense of coherence – a result that was stronger in women than in men.

The Eurofound report findings show that as women often work in sectors like health or education, they are especially exposed to the psychosocial risks associated with these emotionally demanding jobs.

The report also notes that workers under 25 are most likely to face high demands while having the least access to work resources, and health sector employees in particular, face high emotional and social demands. It is therefore suggested that there should be investment in working conditions for particular risk groups, such as occupations requiring lower skills levels, reporting job insecurity, or witnessing workplace downsizing. Measures to promote high union density, good employment protection and gender equality which are likely to improve working conditions and contribute to workers’ health and wellbeing are also highlighted.

Way forward

The findings of the Eurofound report, and indeed other research, highlight the need to look beyond the ‘traditional’, narrower framework of occupational health and safety to include the psychosocial risks such as emotional demands, along with motivational aspects of work. This calls for a reduction in health-impairing conditions and a fostering of health-promoting ones.

Of course, the world of work will continue to change, particularly in an increasingly digital world. However, striking the right balance between demands and resources through coordination between different policy fields could contribute to a higher quality of working life that is sustainable, regardless of the ever changing environment.


Follow us on Twitter to see which topics are interesting our Research Officers this week. If you enjoyed this article you may also like to read:

Diversity and inclusion in the workplace: more than just demographics

 

The experts are in agreement: having a diverse workforce can drive innovation, improve performance and attract top talent.  As such, diversity and inclusion (D&I) is a ‘hot topic’, with many top organisations identifying it as a key element of their corporate strategy.

But what does effective D&I look like in practice?  In this blog, we will look at how to implement effective D&I initiatives in the workplace.

 

Progress still needed

While organisational diversity has improved in recent years, there is still a long way to go.

Action has been most visible in regards to gender.  However, although female employment rates have increased, male and female experiences of progression within the workplace are still vastly different.  For example, in 2018, FTSE 100 CEOs were still more likely to be called Dave or Steve than to be female.

Progress has been less tangible in regards to race and ethnicity.  A recent study by the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) found that while 75% of FTSE 100 companies set progression targets for gender, only 21% did the same for BAME. Indeed, only 6% of top management jobs are held by Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) leaders, whereas BAME groups make up 12% of the working population.

There is a similar lack of representation among disabled and LGBT employees.  This only increases when considering intersectionality – that is, employees who identify with more than one protected status.

 

Diversity and inclusion are separate concepts

Many organisational diversity initiatives have proved unsuccessful.  Where have they gone wrong?

Firstly, being a truly inclusive organisation is about more than just hiring a diverse workforce.  Diversity alone does not guarantee that every employee will have the same experience within the organisation.

A first step towards implementing an effective D&I strategy is to understand that diversity and inclusion are related, but distinct, concepts.

As the recent CIPD report on ‘Building inclusive workplaces’ explains:

  • Diversity refers to the demographic differences of a group. It usually references protected characteristics in UK law: age, disability, gender, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.
  • Inclusion, on the other hand, is often defined as the extent to which everyone at work, regardless of their background, identity or circumstance, feels valued, accepted and supported to succeed at work.

Thus, effective organisational D&I is more than just demographics.  Put simplyDiversity is the mix. Inclusion is making the mix work’.

 

Copy and paste mistakes

Another key mistake that many organisations make is ‘copying and pasting’ initiatives from another organisation into their own situation.

Just because a D&I initiative has been successful elsewhere does not mean that it will be effective in a different organisational context.  It is essential that D&I initiatives are tailored to suit individual organisational contexts.  Much will depend on the unique structural and individual barriers to inclusion that are faced in an organisation.

 

Addressing the barriers

Thus, it is crucial that organisations identify and tackle these specific barriers to inclusion.

Structural barriers may include a lack of flexible working opportunities, or a lack of BAME representation on recruitment selection panels or within senior management and HR.

Individual barriers may include prejudice and bias (both conscious and unconscious).  For example, the TUC Racism at Work survey found that 65% of BAME workers have suffered harassment at work within the last five years, while 49% had been treated unfairly.  Similarly, an NIESR study found that 23% of LGBT employees had experienced a negative or mixed reaction from others in the workplace due to being LGBT or being thought to be LGBT.

 

Tackling prejudice and bias

Addressing employees’ unconscious bias is one way to help tackle this.  Unconscious bias training involves teaching people about the psychological processes behind prejudice and techniques that can be used to reduce it. Research has found that unconscious bias training can be effective in increasing people’s awareness and knowledge of diversity issues.

However, evidence of its impact on attitudes and behaviours is less conclusive, so it is not a panacea.

 

Making the mix work

So what else can organisations do to help foster inclusion?

Research has found that there are several key aspects that contribute to individual feelings of inclusion.  In particular, individuals must feel valued for their uniqueness, and they must feel able to  be their authentic selves at work, regardless of any differences between them and other team members. This, in turn, leads to a sense of belonging, without the need to conform to ‘group norms’.

Individual feelings of inclusion are influenced both by the behaviours of others at work, as well as informal and formal organisational practices.

Some good practice examples of organisational inclusion include:

  • Fair policies and practices
  • Ensuring the availability of specific practices, such as flexible working, that can support inclusion
  • Involving employees in decision making processes and networks
  • Actively taking feedback on board
  • Ensuring that leaders are role models for inclusion
  • Genuinely valuing individual difference, not just hiring for representation

Other practices that may help promote inclusive working environments include mentorship, sponsorship and the creation of inclusive employee networks.

 

Learning from good practice

The good news is that an increasing number of organisations are working towards becoming truly diverse and inclusive.  Awards and certifications such as Business in the Community’s Race Equality Award, EDGE certification for gender equality, and Stonewall’s Workplace Equality Index for LGBT inclusion, all highlight the positive work that is being done.

For example, Pinsent Masons – currently the number 1 employer in the Workplace Equality Index – have worked to remove barriers to employment for trans individuals, provided support for LGBT women to overcome the ‘double glazed glass ceiling’ and facilitated the creation of an LGBT and allies employee network.

 

Inclusion leads to better, fairer workplaces 

Successful D&I cannot be measured by demographics – it is not enough to just have the right numbers on paper.  Every employee must feel valued as an individual and have equal access to opportunities.  In order to achieve this, organisations must look at their own contexts and develop initiatives that tackle the individual and structural barriers to inclusion that have been identified.  Listening to feedback from employees, and genuinely valuing and acting upon their input, is essential.

Becoming more inclusive is not only a moral obligation, it also has profound business implications – a recent study found that the potential benefit to the UK economy from full representation of BAME individuals across the labour market through improved participation and progression is estimated to be £24 billion per annum.  Thus, inclusive organisations are not only better and fairer places to work, but can also achieve better performance and innovation.


Follow us on Twitter to see what topics are interesting our research team.

Gender pay gap at universities could get even worse – here’s why

File 20181204 34148 fah1wc.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1

This guest blog was written by Nisreen Ameen, Lecturer at Queen Mary University London.

Britain has one of the largest gender pay gaps in the European Union, with women earning roughly 21% less than men. This means that women in UK universities today are still earning less than their male colleagues. So although laws on equal pay have been in place for more than 40 years, there is still a large gender pay gap in UK universities.

The difference in hourly pay between men and women is 15% in top UK universities and 37% in other universities. What’s more, men have most of the top jobs in UK universities, while women have more of the lower-paid jobs.

And this “gender pay gap” may keep getting wider if women aren’t supported to develop their digital skills. This is because women tend to have less advanced digital skills than men – skills that are increasingly in demand for university lecturer roles. And as universities around rely more extensively on digital technology, they need employees who have creative digital skills – which means women are more likely to miss out on jobs, promotions and pay increases.

Wanted: technical talent

The use of technology is now just part of the day job for anyone involved in teaching and learning in universities. Universities use technology to teach and communicate with students online – which can help to improve a student’s learning experience. Staff are also expected to use online learning and mobile learning platforms to teach, assess and talk to students in a virtual environment.

Universities also plan to use more advanced technology. Gamification is on the rise in universities. This is where universities personalise a student’s learning, using game design thinking in non-game applications. Wearable devices, such as an Apple Watch or Google Glass, can also encourage learners to get more involved in the subject. This type of technology will most likely be used more in universities over the coming years.

And as women in higher education are generally less likely to be skilled in using these technologies, they may well be left behind – widening the gender pay gap in higher education – while also making it harder for women to progress in their careers.

Digital skills divide

Our research which looks at the gender gap in smartphone adoption and use in Arab countries shows there is a wide gap in the way men and women use technology in some parts of the world. And we found similar patterns in the UK. Men have more advanced digital skills than women, and women are underrepresented in the technology sector, specifically in the digital sector in education.

This “digital divide” begins at a very early age in school. It continues into higher education – in the UK there is one of the highest gender gaps in technology-related courses among all university courses in the world.

Technology is advancing quickly, so academics and others working in higher education constantly have to update their skills. Without these skills, women in the sector are at a disadvantage when it comes to promotion and pay rises. So it’s more important than ever for universities to provide training and other programmes that help women develop their digital skills.

Closing the gender gap in digital skills would remove one factor contributing to the gender pay gap in UK universities. It would increase the chances of women being employed in the sector and make it easier for them to develop their careers. Tapping into female talent in technology would bring huge benefits to universities.

And above all, it would help to close the digital skills gap – while helping to build a more equal and fairer society.The Conversation


Nisreen Ameen, Lecturer in Information Technology Management, Queen Mary University of London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Follow us on Twitter to discover which topics are interesting our research team.

“Shifting into reverse” – the global gender gap

Gender equality

Image by GDJ via Creative Commons

By Heather Cameron

“Gender parity is shifting into reverse” – this was the finding of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF’s) most recent annual Global gender gap report, published last month.

This is the first time progress, albeit slow, towards gender parity has stalled since the WEF started measuring it in 2006.

Widening gap

On current trends, the overall global gender gap can be closed in exactly 100 years, compared to 83 years reported in last year’s report.

The economic situation is even worse.

Last year, we reported on the gender pay gap, which highlighted the WEF’s 2016 findings that the global economic gender gap will take 170 years to close. This year’s WEF report indicates that women may now have to wait over 200 years to achieve equality in the workplace:

“given the continued widening of the economic gender gap already observed last year, it will now not be closed for another 217 years.”

According to the report, the gaps between women and men on economic participation and political empowerment remain wide. Just 58% of the economic participation gap has been closed – a second consecutive year of reversed progress and the lowest value measured by the Index since 2008 – and about 23% of the political gap, unchanged since last year against a long-term trend of slow but steady improvement.

For the other indicators, the 144 countries covered in the report have closed 96% of the gap, on average, in health outcomes between women and men, unchanged since last year, and more than 95% of the gap in educational attainment, a slight decrease on last year.

Overall, an average gap of 32.0% remains to be closed worldwide in order to achieve universal gender parity, compared to an average gap of 31.7% last year.

The most challenging gender gaps remain in the economic and health spheres.

Country-level

The situation is more nuanced at the country and regional level, however. And the report highlights that a number of regions and countries have crossed “symbolic milestones” for the first time this year.

Countries that improved the economic gender disparity included France and Canada. The UK was one of the most improved this year in general, up five places on last year to 15th place. The report also notes that the UK has made notable progress on political empowerment and women in ministerial positions.

Despite this, the UK still performed more poorly than many other developed countries in a number of categories and things still need to be improved on economic and political participation in the UK.

The lack of any of the G20 nations within the top 10 has also been noted, suggesting that economic power does not necessarily equate to better gender equality. The WEF estimate that the UK could add $250bn to its gross domestic product (GDP) by achieving gender parity.

Final thoughts

Clearly, the importance of gender parity cannot be ignored, not only because it’s unfair but because it can also lead to better economic performance.

The WEF report argues that a key avenue for further progress is the closing of occupational gender gaps, which will require changes within education and business sectors and by policymakers.

It still appears to be the case that higher earning jobs are more commonly held by men. And with recent research suggesting that there is gender bias in job adverts across the UK, such changes can’t come soon enough.


If you enjoyed reading this, you may also like our other posts on the gender pay gap and the place of women in the ‘changing world of work’.

Follow us on Twitter to see what developments in public and social policy are interesting our research team.

How to tackle unconscious bias: Step 1 – read this!

What is unconscious bias?

Although levels of explicit prejudice are falling, discrimination continues to be a problem for many sections of society.  One reason for this may be ‘unconscious bias’.

Unconscious bias is “a bias that we are unaware of, and which happens outside of our control. It is a bias that happens automatically and is triggered by our brain making quick judgments and assessments of people and situations, influenced by our background, cultural environment and personal experiences.”

Everyone has some degree of unconscious bias.  Unconscious thoughts are often based on stereotypes and prejudices that we do not realise that we have.

From a survival point of view, these brain ‘shortcuts’ are a positive and necessary function – they help us to make snap decisions in dangerous situations, for example.  However, in everyday life, they can negatively effect rational decision-making.

Types of unconscious bias

Unconscious bias has different forms.  One common form is Affinity bias – the subconscious preference for people with similar characteristics to ourselves (sex, age, ethnicity, socioeconomic class, educational background etc.).  In 2015, the CIPD reported that recruiters were often affected by affinity bias, resulting in the tendency to hire ‘mini-mes’.

The Halo effect involves the tendency for an impression created in one area to influence opinion in another area.  For example, a disproportionate number of corporate CEOs are over six foot tall, suggesting that there is a perception that taller people make better leaders, or are more successful. Similar patterns have been observed in the military and even for Presidents of the United States.

The Horns effect is the opposite of the ‘Halo effect’ – where one characteristic clouds our opinions of other attributes.  For example, the perception that women are ‘less capable’ in certain occupations.  A review found that female psychologists and women in STEMM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine) departments were just as likely to discriminate against female candidates as their male counterparts.

The same qualities can also be perceived very differently in different people – for example, assertiveness in a man may be perceived more positively (‘strong leader’) than in a woman (‘bossy’).

Impact of unconscious bias

Unconscious bias not only influences our body language and the way we interact with people, it can also negatively influence a number of important decisions in the workplace, including:

  • Recruitment
  • Promotion
  • Staff appraisals
  • Workload allocations

As well as being unfair, decisions based on unconscious biases are unlikely to be optimal and can result in missed opportunities.  Where unconscious bias also effects a protected characteristic, it can also be discriminatory.

How to mitigate unconscious bias

So, now you know what unconscious bias is, what can you do about it?

The good news is that it is possible to mitigate the effects of unconscious bias. The first step is to become more aware of the potential of unconscious bias to influence your own decision-making. Large organisations such as Google and the NHS are already providing unconscious bias training to their staff.

You can take this awareness further by taking an Implicit Association Test, such as that provided by Harvard University.  This will help to identify and understand your own personal biases.

Other ways to help reduce the influence of unconscious bias include:

  • Taking time to make decisions
  • Ensuring decisions are justified by evidence and the reasons for decisions are recorded
  • Working with a wider range of people and get to know them as individuals, such as different teams or colleagues based in a different location
  • Focusing on positive behaviours and not negative stereotypes

At the corporate level, ways that organisations can help to tackle unconscious bias include:

  • Implement policies and procedures which limit the influence of individual characteristics and preferences, including objective indicators, assessment and evaluation criteria and the use of structured interviews
  • Ensure that selection panels are diverse, containing both male and female selectors and a range other characteristics where possible (ethnicity, age, background etc.)
  • Promote counter-stereotypical images of underrepresented groups
  • Provide unconscious bias training workshops

Tackling unconscious bias is not just a moral obligation; it is essential if organisations are to be truly inclusive.  By making best use of the available talent, it can also help to make organisations be more efficient and competitive.


If you enjoyed this blog, you may also be interested in our other articles on management and organisational development.

To see what other topics our researchers are interested in, follow us on Twitter.

#BeBoldForChange and the changing world of work: International Women’s day 2017

As women across the world mark the 106th International Women’s Day (IWD17) they are being encouraged to think about their place in the “changing world of work.” Perhaps by coincidence, only a few days earlier toy giant Lego announced plans for it’s latest toy set based on “real life female scientists, engineers and astronauts”. The design was the winner of the latest “Lego ideas” competition and will feature prominent female scientists including Katherine Johnson, a mathematician and space scientist who worked with NASA and was recently featured in the Oscar nominated film Hidden Figures.

Despite attempts to raise the profiles of successful and prominent women in employment, research consistently highlights the persistence of the gender pay gap, albeit more prominent in some professions than others. The “motherhood penalty” still stagnates, or even cripples the careers of many women, and women are still not present in equal numbers in business or politics. Figures show that globally, women’s education, health and violence towards women is still worse than that of men, and that these factors affect their ability to participate fully in employment.

The scale of gender inequalities

A report published by the charity Engender ahead of IWD17 found that of the 3029 top leadership positions across business, politics, public sector, media, culture and sport in Scotland, only 27% of positions are held by women. The report found that, although women make up 52% of the population, they represent only:

  • 35% of Members of the Scottish Parliament
  • 7% of senior police officers
  • 20% of museum and gallery directors
  • 25% of local councillors
  • 16% of local authority leaders
  • 28% of public body chief executives
  • 26% of university principals

Previous research by Engender also found that women still do the majority of “invisible” work including housework, raising children and caring for vulnerable relatives. According to the 2011 census data, 62% of unpaid carers are women and the UK household satellite accounts found that the value of informal childcare in 2010 was £343 billion – equivalent to 23% of GDP. A report published by the Fawcett Society highlighted that inequalities also exists between women. The report found that the gender pay gap was even more exaggerated in black and ethnic minority (BAME) women than in other groups.

Women in Employment

The most recent employment figures for the UK showed that unemployment stood at 4.8%, the lowest level since 2005, and the proportion of women in work reached a record high of 70%. The latest PwC Women in Work Index measures levels of female economic empowerment across 33 OECD countries, based on five indicators. It reported that the UK had rapidly improved since 2000. However it also said that at the current rate of progress it will still take until 2041 to close the gender pay gap in the UK.

In short the picture is improving, but what exactly is being done to help women enter and remain in employment?

Supporting women into work

Supporting women into work was highlighted as a key policy objective for both the coalition and Conservative governments. A number of strategies have been considered to help different groups of women into employment:

  • Supporting women from disadvantaged backgrounds into employment – this includes women who have little to no formal education, victims of domestic violence, disabled women, and female offenders.
  • Supporting young women into traditionally “non female” roles – this includes encouraging young women and girls to take subjects at school and continue these onto university. It also means making apprenticeships open and inclusive, and marketable to everyone.
  • Supporting women to start up their own businesses – recent research highlighted that the annual revenue of women-led companies in the UK is growing at 28 per cent with an average turnover of £3.7 million. Potential support includes making women aware of specific funding they are entitled to, and helping them with the initial start up process. We’ve blogged before about female entrepreneurs if you want to know more.
  • Incentives and increased flexibility for women with children – For many women, the cost of childcare for young children means that working does not make financial sense for them. Employers have been taking steps to make working hours and conditions more flexible, some even providing crèche facilities or credits for childcare to staff to ease the pressure of childcare on working families. Changes to maternity and paternity leave also allow fathers to take a greater caring responsibility for new babies, and can help make the transition back to work easier for some families.
  • Supporting older women – this group has been identified as having been somewhat neglected by back-to- or entry-to-work schemes. Age related conditions, increasing caring responsibilities for elderly parents or grandchildren, and decisions to retrain or change careers can all impact significantly on the professional careers of older women.
  • Supporting women to progress – Women typically still make up the majority of the low-skilled, low pay work force, with many working part time in order to meet childcare needs. However, research has shown that this impacts significant on their ability to progress. While progression is an issue across the board for women in employment, it is particularly noticeable for this group. Research from NPI showed that there were around 5.1 million low paid employees in 2015. 62%, or 3.2 million of them were women and options for progression were significantly lower than for men, which keeps many women in a cycle of low-skilled, low paid, often insecure work.

Supporting women back to work

Many women take career breaks during their professional lives, most commonly to start or look after family. However, when they decide to return they face a number of barriers. These barriers mean that many returners end up in lower skilled jobs, either because their old job does not accommodate new flexible working needs or because extended time away from work is associated with a loss of skill. The UK government have launched a number of strategies and consultations aimed at encouraging and supporting women back to work after a career break. Individual organisations have also developed their own schemes, including the Back to Business scheme developed by PwC and Relaunch your career from MasterCard.

Many schemes include coaching and mentoring, phased returns to work, flexible working options and job shares, where appropriate. Increasingly, organisations now offer childcare options. Employers are also now allowing more staff to work from home, with the increased use of videoconferencing and online document sharing.

Earlier this week, Vodafone announced that it is launching the one of the world’s largest supported return to work programmes, ReConnect to recruit women who have taken a career break, as well as committing to increasing the proportion of women in management and leadership roles.

Final thoughts

Fully unlocking women’s economic empowerment – one of the cornerstones of true gender equality – is reliant upon unlocking the full potential of women in the workplace. As people across the world celebrate the economic, social and political achievements of women, as well as a growing awareness of their collective power to agitate for change, International Women’s Day also provides the opportunity to reflect on the position of women within society, and the steps that can be taken to improve this in the future.

#BeBoldForChange is the official hashtag for this years #IWD17 celebrations. You can submit your #BeBoldForChange action via the IWD website.

Follow us on Twitter to see what developments in public and social policy are interesting our research team. If you found this article interesting, you may also like to read our other articles on women in employment and women in technology.

Girls with autism – a hidden issue?

Three young girls hanging upside down in a park and laughing

by Stacey Dingwall

At the end of last month, the National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT) held its Big Shout conference in London. The event gathered together school leaders, health and education experts, parents, carers and women on the autistic spectrum with the intention of raising awareness of the ‘underdiagnosis of thousands’ of girls with autism.

Gender difference in diagnosis

The National Autistic Society points to various studies that estimate the ratio of male/female autism diagnosis as being anywhere from 2:1 to 16:1. Last year, the National Association of Special Educational Needs (nasen) published a guide to supporting girls with autism spectrum conditions which states that the ratio is typically regarded as 4:1. The guide notes that this is an average figure, and that the ratio increases to 10:1 among intellectually able individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and shrinks to 2:1 for groups with ASD and moderate to severe learning disabilities.

Nasen suggests that this gender difference has only recently been questioned, and points to several possible explanations for the variation:

  • Gender bias in existing screening and referral processes, diagnostic criteria and tools
  • Protective and compensatory factors in females
  • Different gender-specific autism spectrum condition (ASC) profiles

Nasen points to research going back as far as 1944 which found that while the girls who took part in the research displayed signs that were “reminiscent of autism”, they were not as “fully formed” as those seen in the boys.

As noted by Francesca Happé of the MRC Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre at King’s College London, diagnostic systems, as well as research studies and stereotypes of ASD, are still based on the experiences of males to this day. Despite evidence which indicates differences between girls’ and boys’ social-communication skills – an important factor in the diagnosis of ASD – girls are being assessed using a system that is biased towards the opposite gender.

The only specialist state school in the UK

Limpsfield Grange school in Surrey is the only state school for girls with autism in the UK. Headteacher Sarah Wild believes that girls can often go undiagnosed due to their tendency towards ‘masking’. She suggests that autistic girls are often more interested in socialising and building relationships than their male peers, and learn to copy the behaviour of those around them from an early age as a coping strategy.

Nasen makes a similar point with regards to the topics that girls with autism can become obsessive about, which is often a neurological sign of autism. Girls’ special interests can tend to materialise in areas such as boybands, or looking after animals – interests that don’t seem out of the ‘ordinary’ for their age group. Boys, on the other hand, are more likely to focus on technical, niche topics that can make diagnosis more straightforward.

Sarah Wild is not a fan of the word ‘diagnosis’ when it comes to autism, which she thinks “makes it sound like cancer” or another illness. As opposed to US schools which focus on “curing”, Limpsfield Grange employs a ‘hybrid’ model that focuses on moving away from the medical model and towards the social integration model in place in Australia.

Taking action

As the only school of its kind in the UK, Limpsfield Grange recognises its important role in raising awareness of females with autism. The school has published two novels that follow the journey of an autistic girl called M, and made a documentary that was shown on ITV in 2015.

Speaking at the Big Shout, Professor Francesca Happé said that “Unless we change our male stereotypes of autism, and find out much more about female autism, girls will continue to miss out on the recognition and support in childhood that could have helped them to understand themselves and interact with others, to fulfil their potential.”

Her words were echoed by Professor Barry Carpenter, Chair of the Autism and Girls Forum, who said that action from politicians and researchers in this area was “desperately needed”.


Follow us on Twitter to see what developments in public and social policy are interesting our research team. If you found this article interesting, you may also like to read our other articles on children and young people.

Gender pay gap – will it ever close?

égalité des sexes

By Heather Cameron

Last Thursday was labelled ‘Equal Pay Day’ – the last day of the year women effectively stop earning relative to men – just one day later than the previous year.

According to the Fawcett Society, this means women are in effect ‘working for free’ until the end of the year as a result of the gender pay gap.

Given that it is 46 years since the Equal Pay Act was introduced ‘to prevent discrimination, as regards terms and conditions of employment, between men and women’, it is dispiriting that considerable inequalities remain between men and women’s pay.

How much of a gap?

The Fawcett Society has calculated the current gender pay gap for full-time workers at 13.9%.

Recent research by Deloitte suggests that the gender pay gap will not close until 2069 unless action is taken to tackle it now. It shows that the hourly pay gap between men and women is closing at a rate of just 2.5 pence per annum, and in some cases is even widening.

The study also notes that men receive considerably higher average pay even in female-dominated occupations, such as teaching and caring.

And new research from New Policy Institute (NPI) found that, although things have been improving with higher employment rates and increases in earnings, the formal employment rate for women is still lower and female weekly earnings are still less than 70% of male weekly earnings.

The research also highlighted that significant barriers continue to prevent women entering the labour market, particularly when it comes to high-paid, secure, quality jobs.

The overall global situation would appear even worse as the most recent Global gender gap report from the World Economic Forum indicates that the gap could take 170 years to close.

In terms of the economic impact, the gender pay gap has been highlighted as a particular issue in relation to the UK’s low productivity problem.

It has been suggested that equalising women’s productivity could add almost £600 billion to the economy, and that 10% could be added to the size of the economy by 2030 if the millions of women who wanted to work could find suitable jobs.

Causes

The gender pay gap has been attributed to four main causes by the Fawcett Society:

  • Discrimination – often women are still paid less than men for the same job and unfair treatment remains common, especially around maternity
  • Unequal caring responsibilities – women continue to play a greater role in caring for family
  • A divided labour market – women are more likely to be in low-paid and low-skilled jobs
  • Men in the most senior roles – men continue to make up the majority of those in the highest paid and most senior roles

Deloitte’s research similarly highlights that women are disproportionately more likely to enter low paid industries or sectors.

However, it emphasises that one contributory factor to the gender pay gap occurs before labour market entry, when boys and girls decide what to study at school and in further education. Three times more boys than girls take computing and 50% more boys than girls study design and technology.

This is significant because the gap in starting salaries between men and women who have studied Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subjects, and who go on to take jobs in these sectors, was found to be far smaller.

Way forward

Deloitte’s research therefore suggests that increasing the participation of females in STEM subjects and careers could help reduce the gender pay gap.

Nevertheless, it also notes that as there are several causes, no single measure will be enough to eradicate it.

The government’s policy to introduce mandatory gender pay gap reporting for all large companies employing more than 250 employees has been welcomed as a step forward. But there are concerns this is not enough. The NPI research suggests that it could go further, with extension of the duty to companies employing 50 people.

In addition, encouraging take-up of the voluntary living wage and boosting pay in sectors that have been traditionally low paid and have predominantly employed women are suggested as ways to help speed up the reduction of the gender pay gap.

The NPI report calls for ‘a multi-dimensional policy response, sitting underneath a clear gender focused employment strategy’ to reduce gender inequalities and the subsequent pay gap.


If you enjoyed reading this, why not take a look at some of our other posts on equalities issues

Follow us on Twitter to see what developments in public and social policy are interesting our research team.

Apprenticeships – inclusive and accessible to all?

AZUBI und Ausbildner

By Heather Cameron

The government is “committed to making apprenticeships inclusive and accessible to all”. But, unfortunately, this is not currently the case. Just 10.6% of the starting apprenticeships in England in 2014/15 came from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds, compared to 14.6% of the general population. And while women are well represented overall, there are significant disparities across sectors.

In response to a recent Ask a Researcher enquiry, we looked into the topic of diversity in apprenticeships and, in particular, the barriers that face some groups such as women and ethnic minorities.

Occupational gender segregation

Occupational gender segregation in apprenticeships was found to be a particular issue. Research has shown that, despite women apprentices having outnumbered men since 2010, young women miss out on certain opportunities as a result of this issue. For example, women comprise 94% of childcare apprentices but under 4% of engineering apprentices. And these figures have hardly changed in the last decade.

According to recent research, occupational gender segregation contributes to women losing out at every level with apprenticeships:

  • Women tend to work in fewer sectors
  • Women receive lower pay than men
  • Women are less likely to receive training as part of their apprenticeship
  • Women are more likely to be out of work at the end of their apprenticeship

In terms of the barriers facing women specifically, a lack of awareness of the careers advice and information services available, or of the funding available for training; formal entry qualifications; and child care and other caring responsibilities have all been cited.

Under-representation

The other significant issue highlighted by the research is the under-representation of BAME groups. The overwhelming majority (88.5%) of apprenticeship starters in 2014/15 were White and the provisional figures for 2015/16 are similar at 88.1%. This compares to just 10.6% of apprenticeship starts from BAME groups in 2014/15, with provisional figures for 2015/16 down slightly at 10.4%.

Similarly to women, BAME apprentices are also under-represented in specific sectors. Fewer than 3% of apprentices in construction, land based industries, science, engineering and manufacturing, building services engineering, and hair and beauty came from a BAME background.

Barriers facing ethnic minorities include a lack of awareness around the benefits of apprenticeships and parental influence. A study from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has therefore called for action to increase the awareness of apprenticeships among ethnic minority young people and their parents.

Progress

Despite the issues of occupational gender segregation and ethnic minority under-representation, it should be noted that progress has been made.

The most recent statistics on apprenticeships in England show that: there were 12% more apprenticeship starts in 2015 than in the previous year and that achievements increased by 1% over the same period; overall, between 2013/14 and 2014/15 the number of apprenticeship starts increased across all age groups except for people aged under 16 and those aged 18 to 24; the number of apprenticeship starts for learners with learning disabilities and/or difficulties was up by 12%; and although an overwhelming number of apprenticeship starters were White, the number of non-White apprenticeship starters increased by 17%.

Way forward

The government ambitiously aims to deliver 3 million quality apprenticeships by 2020, to reflect the widest spectrum of society. And it has pledged to increase the proportion of apprentices from black and minority ethnic backgrounds by 20% from 10% to 11.9%. However, no specific targets have been set for gender diversity.

The research suggests that formal entry criteria should be removed where not necessary to encourage better uptake of different apprenticeships by women, and awareness of apprenticeships should be increased with initiatives targeting ethnic minority young people and their parents. Other recommendations include introducing diversity targets within organisations, providing more part-time and flexible apprenticeships and providing better advice and support to apprentices at all stages.

Perhaps if such additional actions are taken, the government will move closer to its commitment of making apprenticeships truly inclusive and accessible to all.


If you enjoyed this post, you may also be interested in our previous blog on higher apprenticeships.

Our popular Ask-a-Researcher enquiry service is one aspect of the Idox Information Service, which we provide to members in organisations across the UK to keep them informed on the latest research and evidence on public and social policy issues. To find out more on how to become a member, get in touch.

Follow us on Twitter to see what developments in policy and practice are interesting our research team.

%d bloggers like this: