Evidence of Bias by wuyunqing

VIEWS: 147 PAGES: 6

									                                 DIVERSITY & INCLUSION AT THE WORLD BANK GROUP
                                                  November 2005
THE BUSINESS CASE FOR DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION. Over the last several years, the WBG has come to view the
process of development through an increasing number of new lenses, including those provided by our clients. The business case, which
finds resonance not just in the WBG but among international organizations and continues to be affirmed by staff and managers, is:
   The way we look, sound and think matters to our clients, and our teams and country presence increasingly need to mirror them
   Our success in fostering respect and inclusion among diverse colleagues will lead to success in the same areas with our clients
   Managers who bring out the best in a diverse team have the greatest chance of delivering on the challenges of development
   Staff are more productive when their contributions are fully valued

STAFF, AN UNDER-UTILIZED ASSET                                                           Race. Discussions of racial discrimination have been
   On its face, the WBG is a paragon of diversity –                                       noted since 1971. Anecdotes highlighted in a 1978
women and men from 168 nationalities posted in 121                                        Washington Post article led to a report through which
countries, from a wide range of cultures, ethnic and                                      WBG black African staff expressed their belief that
language groups, academic and professional back-                                          only discrimination could explain low recruitment,
grounds. These differences are part of our comparative                                    slow advancement and lack of Africans in senior
advantage, but our organizational culture has tended to                                   positions. In 1997, the Dewey-Ballantine audit report
ignore or suppress them. As our work has become                                           on allegations of racial discrimination in the
more complex and multi-dimensional, our clients more                                      Controller’s VPU talked about “differing perceptions
demanding, our stakeholders more numerous and                                             of reality” between black staff who felt discriminated
vocal, and our own staff more diverse, the way in                                         against and managers who did not agree, believing
which we select, develop, and engage our staff must                                       their personnel actions were based solely on merit.
also evolve to leverage our varied strengths.                                             These perceptions continue today, as documented in
                                                                                          a recent Staff Association newsletter.
EVIDENCE OF BIAS                                                                         Gender. The 1987 reorganization increased drama-
  The current diversity strategy evolved in response to                                   tically the ranks of women first-line managers.
cumulative evidence of bias along several dimensions,                                     However, it did not take these women long to feel
notably race, gender, and Part I/Part II nationalities.                                   that they had hit a ceiling and that they were being

                                       DIVERSITY & INCLUSION MILESTONES, 1970-PRESENT
                                                                                                     1996                   1999
                                                                              1995             Catalyst gender      Disabilities working
                                                                        First woman MD          barriers study        group created

                            1978                                                                                                      2000
                                                                               1993
                    Washington Post article         1980                                                                   First African/woman MD
                                                                          Africa Issues
                     on WBG racial issues     First African VP          Committee report;                    1998
                                                                         GLOBE created                                                2001
                                                                                                      Racial equality
                                                                                                    initiative launched        WBG Diversity Director
                        1975
                                                                               1992                                                appointed
                First woman Director                    1982
                                                                          Stern report;
                                                  First woman VP                                                                                2003
                                                                       Gender equality
                                                                      initiative launched                 1997                             Inclusion study
                 1973
           Status of women                                                                         First woman RVP;                                   2004
         working group created                                             1991                  Dewey-Ballantine report                   First diversity & inclusion
                 by SA                                                Task force on                                                                  awards
                                                                   higher level women




                                                                                            Focus on Constituencies
           1970                                                                                                             Beyond                2006
                                                                                                                            Diversity
                                                                                                                                                 Diversity &
                                                                                                                                                  Inclusion
                                                            1987                                 1997
                                                        Reorganization                       Reorganization           1998
                                                                                                                 HR Reform;
                                                                                                            Diversity indicators set


                                                                                 1
  judged differently than men (where men were                     wide targets for HQ-appointed professional (GF+)
  deemed assertive, women were perceived to be                    staff. The longstanding Part II target was reaffirmed.
  abrasive). A 1996 study by Catalyst consultants                 New stretch targets were established for gender and
  showed subtle but unmistakable differences in the               race, originally set for June 2003 and eventually
  way performance appraisals were done: men were                  deferred to 2005. To account for increased
  described in more enthusiastic terms (“he had a great           decentralization, the Part II and gender targets were
  year” vs. “she had a solid year”) and high-performing           later recalibrated to account for both HQ and
  men were more clearly positioned for the future (“he            Country Office professional staff, and they are still in
  should be a Director within three years”) while                 effect pending a new strategy.
  women of similar performance were grounded in the              Accountability framework. In an attempt to hold
  present (“we couldn’t do without her”).                         managers more accountable, VP-level diversity
 Other studies. Pay-and-grade studies have been                  agreements were done, first in 1998 then again in
  carried out periodically since 1992, confirming dis-            2000. The agreements were instrumental in raising
  parities in pay both between Part I and Part II staff           awareness but actual results were mixed, and there
  and along gender lines. In 1998, a study of YPs by              were no evident consequences (good or bad) for
  DEC showed that after ten years, career outcomes                managers’ performance.
  diverged along the same Part I/Part II and gender              Broadening concept of diversity. Over the years,
  lines; a 2001 study added an SSA/CR analysis (proxy             the demand for recognition and inclusion of other
  for black staff), with similar results. In 2003, an             groups increased, leading to, inter alia, creation of the
  inclusion study (Bendick & Egan consultants) high-              Disabilities Working Group and cooperation with the
  lighted differentials in career outcomes for in- and            gay and lesbian group (GLOBE) on specific issues
  out-groups, based on a number of demographic                    such as domestic partner benefits. Through this
  variables. Anecdotal evidence collected through                 process, the institution came to realize it could not
  focus groups, workshops, team-building exercises,               keep adding programs and creating silos to respond
  etc. also supports the view that the WBG can do a lot           to specific constituencies and started to think about
  more to create a level playing field for all its staff.         how to address underlying causes of discrimination
                                                                  and intolerance more profoundly.
INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSE, 1992-2000: FOCUS ON
CONSTITUENCIES                                                  INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSE, 2001-2005: BEYOND
 Early approaches. Until the early 1990s, diversity            DIVERSITY
  issues were raised mainly by staff groups, with                  The evolution of the diversity strategy beyond a
  support from the Staff Association. Management                constituency-based approach received a boost with the
  responded with studies and reports, but little mean-          creation of a Director of Diversity position for the
  ingful progress was achieved. Things changed,                 WBG in 2001. The basic components of the strategy
  however, with the 1992 Stern Report on gender, which          (mainly, institutional and VPU targets) remained
  provided a blueprint for a more proactive approach            unchanged. In 2003, Diversity Compacts replaced the
  and set concrete five-year targets to redress imbal-          previous agreements, with VPU commitments that
  ances in key professional and management positions.           were more specific (e.g., recruitment plans, career
  A supporting infrastructure eventually emerged,               development strategies, improvements in the work
  including a Sr. Adviser position for gender issues,           environment, etc.) and accountability that was broader,
  voluntary action plans, VPU coordinators, a mentor-           tying entire management teams. The compacts are still
  ing program and awareness-raising programs. The               operative pending development of a new strategy, but
  Dewey-Ballantine recommendations drew on the                  real accountability remains elusive. Emphasis was put
  gender model to address racial inequality in a similar        on subtler but more deep-seated behavioral issues, such
  fashion (e.g., Sr. Adviser, targets, mentoring program,       as creating a more respectful and inclusive work
  targeted recruitment). In the absence of a true race          environment through workshops and training for intact
  indicator, SSA/CR nationality was adopted as a proxy          teams and management teams.
  for black staff.                                                 To provide recognition for positive behavior and
 Diversity targets. The HR Reform which followed               results, the WBG initiated diversion & inclusion
  the 1997 reorganization brought different diversity
  dimensions under a single umbrella, leading to WBG-           
                                                                 “HQ-appointed staff” are those with an appointment issued in
                                                                Washington or other developed countries. See Glossary for a brief
                                                                description of appointment categories.
                                                            2
leadership awards in 2004; past winners include both                                                      as, if not more than, recruitment.
managers and staff.                                                                                      Changes in systems, processes and behaviors.
   As it became increasingly apparent that some of the                                                    Major gains have been made in raising awareness, and
targets would not be met by the end-FY05 deadline,                                                        diversity considerations have been increasingly main-
additional effort was expended to address root causes                                                     streamed into recruitment, promotion, and staff
by identifying the cultural, systemic and organizational                                                  development decisions. Each year, HR analyzes pay-
reasons for the lack of progress in certain areas. The                                                    and-grade and performance rating data to identify
Bendick & Egan inclusion study (2003) brings to the                                                       outliers and address outsized pay disparities. Staff
WBG the latest thinking on inclusion issues, zeroing in                                                   survey results on diversity have been solidly positive.
unconscious biases that lead to differentiation between                                                   Selection shortlists are routinely scanned for diver-
in-groups (the typical or modal employee) and out-                                                        sity. Targeted recruitment programs and outreach
groups (staff differing from the modal archetype),                                                        missions are organized regularly. Partnership pro-
which typically results in less-favorable career outcomes                                                 grams bring in staff whose background and experi-
for out-groups. Differences in grading, salary, promo-                                                    ence may not always be an obvious fit, who yet
tion, etc., are often small enough not to be noticed or                                                   contribute in unexpected and creative ways.
challenged, but their accumulation can generate very                                                     More to be done. However, few would deny that
different career outcomes for equally-qualified staff.                                                    problems persist. Biases may be more subtle and
                                                                                                          cannot be measured systematically, and there is
SUMMARY OF PROGRESS TO DATE                                                                               always room for a more proactive approach to
 Progress against targets. The WBG has achieved                                                          recruitment, both externally and internally. As an
  mixed results against the numerical targets. By June                                                    example, a recent HR study noted the increased
  2005, the targets for Part II nationals were fully met;                                                 “regionalization” of staff, with growing numbers of
  Part II nationals now make up almost half of all                                                        Latin Americans in LCR, Eastern Europeans and
  WBG staff, compared to less than 40 percent ten                                                         Central Asians in ECA, Asians in EAP, etc., reflect-
  years ago. Gains against gender equality indicators                                                     ing legitimate language and business development
  were significant early on but have started to level off.                                                and effectiveness issues, but at the same time risking
  Progress against the SSA/CR target stalled, stuck at 8                                                  creation of enclaves that limit cross-Regional
  percent the last three years versus a 10 percent target.                                                experience.
  Progress has been uneven across WBG organizations
  and across VPUs. Except for brief periods of staff                                                    GAP ANALYSIS
  growth, low turnover in the WBG has limited the                                                          Changes in the diversity indicators are affected by (a)
  scope of meaningful change and has also skewed                                                        recruitment, (b) promotions into the measured ranks,
  managers’ incentives to focus on transfers as much                                                    (c) exits of staff from the non-preferred groups, and (d)
                                                       DIVERSITY INDICATORS, GF+ STAFF, FY98-FY05
                           Part I/II                                        Women, GF-GG & GH+                                                           SSA/CR
      55%                                                            55%                                                             12%

              Part II target,                                                 Women GF-GG
                                                                     50%                                                                             SSA/CR HQ
                                                                               target, 45%                                           11%
                 48.5%                                                                                                                               target, 10%
      50%                                                            45%
                                                                                                                                     10%
                                                                     40%
      45%
                                                                     35%                                                             9%
                            Part II HQ
                           target, 40%                               30%                                                             8%
      40%                                                                     Women GH+
                                                                     25%      target, 30%
                                                                                                                                     7%
      35%                                                            20%
                                                                                                                                     6%
                                                                     15%

      30%                                                            10%                                                             5%
            FY98
                   FY99
                          FY00
                                 FY01
                                         FY02
                                                FY03
                                                       FY04
                                                              FY05




                                                                            FY98
                                                                                   FY99
                                                                                          FY00
                                                                                                 FY01
                                                                                                        FY02
                                                                                                                FY03
                                                                                                                       FY04
                                                                                                                              FY05




                                                                                                                                           FY98
                                                                                                                                                  FY99
                                                                                                                                                         FY00
                                                                                                                                                                FY01
                                                                                                                                                                       FY02
                                                                                                                                                                              FY03
                                                                                                                                                                                     FY04
                                                                                                                                                                                            FY05




            Part II staff               Part II, HQ staff only             Women, GF-GG staff                  Women, GH+ staff                      SSA/CR, HQ staff only


                                                                                                 3
at the unit level, in- and out-flows from one unit to the          also acknowledged the need for an objective way to
next. Under current staffing patterns, attrition of older,         prioritize our recruitment and retention strategies to
Part I males have been key to the gains in the                     promote having a balanced and diverse mix of staff.
indicators. Nonetheless, recruitment can be an                    Diversity in the pipeline. Consultants and
important tool with great leverage if used judiciously.            temporaries form a natural pipeline for staffing.
   Gap analysis yields the following possible scenarios            Experience shows that managing diversity at the early
for reaching the targets over a two-year horizon.                  stages yields more diverse candidates for selection.
 Racial Equality. The share of SSA/CR nationals                   This is also true of other recruitment programs,
  among new HQ-GF+ recruits would need to triple                   including the flagship YP program.
  (from 7.5 to 20 percent), and their GE-to-GF                    Central guidance & local autonomy. While
  promotion rates would need to increase from 6.3 to               recognizing that the strength of the institution lies in
  10 percent.                                                      empowering staff and managers, there is the need to
 Women @GF-GG. The share of women recruits into                   balance local autonomy with collective strategic
  GF and GG would need to double (from 33 to 60                    thinking about the institution and, in this context, to
  percent), while keeping the GE-to-GF promotion                   infuse a sense of collective ownership of diversity and
  rate constant at 65 percent.                                     inclusion objectives in staffing decisions. Clarity
 Women @GH+. The share of women recruits at                       around the respective roles of various agents in the
  GH+ would need to double (from 27 to 50 percent),                strategic staffing process (managers, Sector Boards,
  and their GG-to-GH promotion rate would also have                HR, the Diversity Unit, etc.) is critical.
  to double (from 28 to 50 percent).                              Need for better data. Our analytical capabilities
                                                                   continue to be hampered by poor or incomplete data.
NEW INSIGHTS, ISSUES, STAKEHOLDERS                                 While HR and ISG can fix the systems problems,
   As the WBG has changed, its appreciation of the                 some data issues are at their core cultural or political
depth and complexity of diversity and inclusion issues             in nature. For example, we measure nationality
has grown. Some of the issues being considered are                 diversity only through passport, thus understating the
described briefly below.                                           diversity of staff who have adopted U.S. citizenship.
 Global staffing and decentralization. Most                       We identify blacks through a highly imperfect proxy
  diversity initiatives to date have focused on HQ                 of SSA/CR nationals, whereby African-Americans
  (Washington) staff, but Country Office staff now                 are not counted and non-black Africans are counted.
  make up one-third of the WBG. The institution                    HR has debated instituting a detailed demographic
  needs to fully consider their needs and ambitions –              census, but has backed off due to feedback that some
  different from, but no less equal to those of HQ staff           cultures consider it inappropriate to ask for data on
  – under a new inclusion strategy. Other possible                 race, ethnicity, disabilities, etc. and also because of
  inclusion issues within Country Offices include the              the technical difficulty in designing a taxonomy that
  interaction between international and local staff and            would fully capture the cultural richness of the
  potential ethnic and class divisions which reflect the           WBG’s staff.
  local environment.
 Women in senior positions. The share of women                  INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSE, 2006 & BEYOND:
  in the professional ranks decreases steadily at each           DIVERSITY & INCLUSION
  higher grade, from 47.5 percent at GF to 37 percent               We are moving ahead with a two-pronged strategy
  at GG, 27 percent at GH, and 24 percent at GI+.                for the medium-term: (a) a renewed commitment to a
  While this is a substantial improvement from before            diversity approach, based on relevant indicators; and
  and is evidence of a robust pipeline (since most GH-           (b) the adoption of a more fully developed inclusion
  and-above positions are filled internally), more can be        strategy that will shift our emphasis from numbers to
  done to accelerate the pace of change and anchor the           behavior changes. The first prong reflects recognition
  gains within a critical mass. It should be noted that          that there is still work to be done in specific areas of
  other groups (Part II, SSA/CR) are generally more              diversity. Experience over the past decade has given us
  evenly distributed across professional grade levels.           a better understanding of the challenges related to
 Nationalities of concern. Shareholders have                    those areas, and the prism through which we now
  become increasingly vocal in seeking greater “repre-           address issues of nationality, gender, race, disabilities,
  sentation” within the staff, often using voting shares         etc. The second prong takes us to a higher level.
  as approximation. The WBG has consistently                     Learning will become one of the major areas of activity.
  resisted any semblance of a quota system, but has              Building managerial competencies to better leverage the
                                                             4
                                    DIVERSITY & INCLUSION: COMPLEMENTARITIES
                                                                   An inclusion approach addresses
              A diversity approach focuses on…
                                                                       diversity but focuses on…
    Staff – having better representation of different    The employer – having the culture and practices that
    groups                                               enable different groups to contribute
    Numbers – representation of staff on board is an end The actions behind the numbers – the hiring,
    in itself                                            development and advancement decisions reflected in
                                                         the numbers
    Correcting outliers – ad hoc programs to address     Removing systemic barriers – creating more transparent
    inequities for certain groups                        systems and raising awareness about biases
    Changing staff – to “fit” organizational norms       Changing the organizational culture – to see differences as
    (removing the liability of difference)               assets

Bank’s diversity as a strategic asset will become more                  Lynk, Myles V. et. al. Report of the Dewey-Ballantine Audit
important, and measuring our progress on inclusion in                Team: An Analysis of Discrimination within the CTR Vice
a manner conducive to positive behavioral changes                    Presidency in the hiring, career development and compensation of
becomes a major challenge.                                           managers and professional and support staff who are Black African
   A task force, led by Shigeo Katsu of ECA, is in the               nationals or are of African origin (June 1997)
middle of fleshing out the specifics of this new strategy,              Oaxaca, Ronald L. and Ransom, Michael. An Analysis
and is is organized around four areas of change:                     of Gender and Nationality Differentials Among Higher Level Staff
 Accountability. How do we create shared responsibility             at the World Bank: 1988-92 (November 1992)
  for promoting diversity and inclusion, and how do                     __________________________. Salary and Promotion
                                                                     Differences between Gender and Nationality Groups for Specific
  we make results matter?
                                                                     Grade Levels (April 1993).
 Metrics. What do we measure to reflect our diversity                  Raspberry, William. “Blacks and Whites at the World
  and capture the degree to which our workplace is                   Bank,” The Washington Post (November 8, 1978).
  inclusive?                                                            Stern, Ernest et al. Excellence through Equality: An
 Behavior change. What types of assessment, learning,               Increased Role for Women in the World Bank: A Report of the
  incentives, sanctions, etc. are needed to address bias             Advisory Group on Higher-Level Women’s Issues (April, 1992).
  and leverage our diversity?                                           Townsend, Bickley (Catalyst Vice President).
 Strategic staffing. How do we ensure that actions                  “Performance Review Analysis (Memorandum to Anette
  around recruitment, selection, pay/grade, reward and               Pedersen, Sr. Adviser on Gender Equality; January 1997).
  recognition, and career development support a                         Unknown authors, Report of the Africa Issues Committee
  diverse workforce with equal chances for positive                  (July 1993).
  career outcomes for all?
   The task force is currently engaging in a consultative            GLOSSARY OF SELECTED TERMS
process across the WBG to surface issues, expand                        HQ staff refers to staff appointed in the U.S., Belgium,
dialogue and promote buy-in. Its recommendations,                    France, Great Britain, Germany, Italy, Japan, and
expected in the spring of 2006, will take into consid-               Switzerland (“HQ” locations). Country Office staff
eration the structure, systems, and incentives which                 refers to all other staff – i.e., staff appointed in non-HQ
may foster or hinder the pursuit of diversity and                    locations.
inclusion.                                                              Internationally recruited staff (IRS) are a subset of
                                                                     HQ staff at grades GF or above, based on their
REFERENCES                                                           recruitment modality; they can be located in HQ or
   Bendick, Marc Jr., Egan, Mary Lou and Miller, John J.             posted in a Country Office. Locally recruited staff
Enhancing Inclusion at the World Bank Group: Diagnosis and           (LRS) refers to all other staff. Country Office staff,
Solutions (December 2003).                                           irrespective of level, are locally recruited, but may subse-
   Filmer, Deon and King, Elizabeth M. Differences in Pay            quently apply for an internationally recruited position.
and Grade at the World Bank: 2001 Study (December 2001).
   King, Elizabeth, et. al. Assessing Bias in Pay and Grade at
the World Bank: A Summary of Quantitative and Qualitative
Analyses (July 1998).


                                                                 5
6

								
To top