case

10/31/19, 3(20 PMCHAPTER FOURTEEN: Global Benchmarks for Diversity and Inclusion - Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Page 1 of 7https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/diversity-at-work/9781118415153/c14.xhtml

CHAPTER FOURTEEN

Global Benchmarks for Diversity and Inclusion

Julie O'Mara

“What is excellent diversity and inclusion work?” the organizational leader asked the inclusion practitioner.

“It depends,” the inclusion practitioner rightly replied.

“On what?” the leader asked.

The inclusion practitioner responded, “Your goals. Your starting point. Challenges. Your culture. Size of your organization. Sector you are in. Like that. One size does not fit all.”

The leader sighed.

Years ago I had a similar exchange with an organizational leader. He was committed to leading his organization in creating a diversity and inclusion initiative, but was not clear about what to do. He knew that he needed to do more than show up at a cultural event, introduce a training program, tell people they need to behave respectfully, or give money to a local organiza- tion focused on ethnic minority issues. People had told him to keep it simple, but he figured that if the practice of inclusion was that “simple,” it would be ingrained in every organization around the world, and he knew it wasn't. And he was correct. Implementing an effective inclusion initiative is not a simple or quick process.

His query set me on a course of study and practice that resulted in Alan Richter and me, along with seventy-nine expert panelists, publishing Global Diversity and Inclusion Benchmarks: Standards for Organizations Around the World (O'Mara & Richter, 2011), known to many in the field as simply GDIB. GDIB helps leaders and practitioners get clearer about what it takes to be considered a best practice organization in diversity and inclusion. As an organizational manager, professional association volunteer and leader, and external diversity and inclusion consultant, I have been concerned that many managers and leaders advocate for a “simple” approach to inclusion. What many want to do is to select two or three “things” to do. Then they seem to believe that because there is activity and because inclusion is “the right thing to do” that it will just happen.

In my experience, inclusion does not just happen, even with the best of in- tentions. It is not a matter of asking people to change some behaviors. It is much more complex. It requires adjustments in organizational systems— such as expanding recruiting efforts to reach out to publications that people with disabilities likely read, or instituting flexible work hours to accommo- date child- or elder-care challenges—as well as individual behavior changes. I know firsthand that this is not simple. I thought that a tool such as GDIB would be helpful.

This chapter describes the benchmarks, also called standards or outcomes, that can be selected to achieve an inclusion initiative. Benchmarks help peo- ple in organizations describe results or aspirations. In a new field like diver- sity and inclusion, it is im​​portant to develop benchmarks to help people know what is considered excellent work. Without benchmarks (or standards or outcomes), there can be a great disparity of opinion over what constitutes quality work.

The GDIB focuses on both diversity and inclusion. In the GDIB document (O'Mara & Richter, 2011), diversity is described as the “variety of differences and similarities/dimensions among people” (p. i). Inclusion “refers to how diversity is leveraged to create a fair, equitable, healthy, and high-perform- ing organization or community where all individuals are respected, feel en- gaged and motivated, and their contributions toward meeting organizational and societal goals are valued” (p. i).

One way to use GDIB is to first set a target for the outcomes you want to achieve—potentially the best-practice level for most of the thirteen GDIB categories of diversity and inclusion work in organizations. GDIB isn't a

P R E V Part Four: Key Application Issues and Domains

⏮ N E X T

CHAPTER FIFTEEN: The Chief Diversity O!icer's View of the Diversity and Inclusion Journ… ⏭

#$!

% Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

10/31/19, 3(20 PMCHAPTER FOURTEEN: Global Benchmarks for Diversity and Inclusion - Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Page 2 of 7https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/diversity-at-work/9781118415153/c14.xhtml

“how to” tool; it is a “what” tool. Targeting where you want to be—the out- comes you want to achieve—is a crucial step to take. Once you know where you want to go, using other tools and processes, many of which are described in other chapters in this book, you can determine the strategies and activities needed to reach that desired level.

Knowing the components of an effective initiative for fostering inclusion can be extremely helpful for organizations that either are starting on an inclusion journey or want to improve and sustain their organization's journey. The scope of issues and the dimensions to be considered in doing inclusion work are broader than many leaders and practitioners realize. Using GDIB can help an organization of any size, in any sector, in any region of the world, whether it calls itself “global” or not. In GDIB the use of the term global means that the benchmarks apply anywhere in the world.

The GDIB tool can be found on the Internet via a search under its name and the name of the authors. You can download and use it, free of charge. The authors simply require that you ask our permission; this is readily granted, with the agreement that you keep us posted on how you have used the benchmarks.

How the Global Benchmarks Were Developed This section describes the process for developing the benchmarks and the panel of experts who provided input.

The Methodology GDIB is the result of a collective opinion of experts. My co-author, Alan Richter, and I drafted the initial collection of global benchmarks based on original work by several practitioners at the Tennessee Valley Authority in the United States (Qirko, Metts, Landon, & Atchley, 1994). Our goal was to make the benchmarks more global in scope and to reflect contemporary practices. Then we identified forty-seven expert panelists to review and cri- tique our work. In round one, using a modified Delphi process, we sent them the first draft inviting feedback on our premise, the categories, the levels, and the benchmarks. In round two we incorporated their comments, created a revised version, and sent that to the expert panelists, inviting their feed- back on all aspects of GDIB. We compiled the comments and edited the benchmarks. Richter and I served as the final arbitrators on any disagree- ments among the expert panelists. We published the first version in 2006 (O'Mara & Richter, 2006; see also O'Mara & Richter, 2009, for a descrip- tion), and used a similar process to update the document in 2011 (O'Mara & Richter, 2011).

Between publishing the first version in 2006 and beginning the update in 2011, we kept track of user comments and compiled a list of possible changes. Although not all of the original expert panelists were able to work with us on the 2011 version, a total of sixty-two experts, including several new additions, worked on the 2011 version. For the round one review of the 2011 version, Richter and I added an expanded introduction; combined, re- named, and added categories; and added a graphic model emphasizing the systemic and interdependent nature of the categories. We compiled com- ments and ideas and created a round two version, for which we again re- ceived extensive comments. Richter and I then served as the final editors to create the current 2011 version.

GDIB 2011 represents the collective viewpoint of seventy-nine expert pan- elists plus Alan Richter and me. Included in this number are sixteen pan- elists who commented on the 2006 version but not on the 2011 version. Al- though most expert panelists commented on benchmarks in all or most cate- gories, as well as the introduction and the model, some commented on only the few categories of diversity and inclusion work in which they felt they had specific expertise.

Profile of the Seventy-Nine Expert Panelists We name and thank the expert panelists in the 2011 version. The depth and breadth of GDIB is a testament to the process of including different view- points and perspectives. Not all members of our expert panel agreed with all items and statements. Despite all attempts to be as global as possible, the truth is that most people are at least somewhat centric to the countries they know best and, likewise, to the sectors, size, and type of organizations they understand. Therein lies the value in having an expert panel made up of a diverse group of people.

We selected the expert panelists by tapping into our extensive networks. We asked colleagues whom we knew to be outstanding practitioners to identify others who likewise did what we and they considered best-practice work. Our goal was to assemble a group of people highly knowledgeable in many aspects of diversity and inclusion, including, but not limited to, social justice, cultural competence, multiculturalism, and diversity management. We sought panelists with a variety of personal diversity dimensions and experi- ence in various sectors, diversity and inclusion frameworks, types of organi- zations, size, cultures, regions around the world, and so forth. Most of our panelists are readily identified as diversity and inclusion experts. In a few cases (notably compensation, marketing, and supplier diversity) we identi- fied experts in those specialties whom we believed knew enough about diver- sity and inclusion to contribute to GDIB.

10/31/19, 3(20 PMCHAPTER FOURTEEN: Global Benchmarks for Diversity and Inclusion - Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Page 3 of 7https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/diversity-at-work/9781118415153/c14.xhtml

Because people move across both countries and organizations, and many have extensive global experience not limited to their current affiliation or lo- cation, we listed names of the expert panelists without affiliation, title, or lo- cation. Although many users have requested a more quantitative profile of the panelists, we resist providing it because many of the expert panelists have been influenced by multiple experiences. For example, a panelist may currently be employed by a small business in France but may have spent the majority of his or her career as a politician in Algeria. Another panelist may currently live in the United States but work mostly in Asia, where she grew up. Most of the panelists are members of LinkedIn or are easy to find using an internet search, if you want to know more about them.

Breadth and Depth of E!ective Inclusion Work Global Diversity and Inclusion Benchmarks (O'Mara & Richter, 2011) iden- tifies benchmarks in thirteen categories of diversity and inclusion work orga- nized into four groups, as follows:

1. The Foundation Group includes D&I vision, strategy, and business case; leadership and accountability; and infrastructure and implementation.

2. The Internal Group includes recruitment, development, and advancement; benefits, work-life, and flexibility; job design, classification, and compensation; and D&I education and training.

3. The Bridging Group includes assessment, measurement, and research; and D&I communications.

4. The External Group includes community, government relations, and social responsibility; products and services development; marketing, sales, distribution, and customer service; and supplier diversity.

To create an effective inclusion initiative that meets its goals, an organiza- tion needs to set targets and strive to meet the outcomes at the higher levels in most of the GDIB categories. The pace and thoroughness of each organi- zation's inclusion initiative must be determined by that organization based on its commitment, culture, and resources. Important for success is the de- gree of expertise in understanding how inclusion is both a process and an outcome of related activities.

The GDIB Model The GDIB model (see Figure 14.1) shows the relationships of the four groups and thirteen categories. The equilateral triangle symbolizes equality and strength—two tenets of diversity and inclusion. The Foundation Benchmarks form the base of the triangle. The Bridging Benchmarks are displayed as a smaller equilateral triangle in the center of the larger triangle, abutting not only the Foundation Benchmarks but also both the Internal Benchmarks on the left side and the External Benchmarks on the right side.

Figure 14.1. GDIB Model Source: Global Diversity and Inclusion Benchmarks: Standards for Orga- nizations Around the World, by J. O'Mara and A. Richter, 2011, p. 31. Copy- right 2011 by Julie O'Mara and Alan Richter. Reprinted with permission.

The lines separating the four groups are dashes, symbolizing permeability and the fact that all four groups operate as a system interacting with each other. For example, while recruitment is an Internal Benchmark, some talent is sourced externally; therefore successful recruiting depends on the organi- zation's reputation in the community, which is an External Benchmark. Likewise Customer Service, an External Benchmark, is enhanced by effective training and development, which is an Internal Benchmark. Communica- tions is a Bridging Benchmark because it enables the strategy to be known by all those impacted internally and externally. Strategy, Leadership, and In- frastructure are Foundation Benchmarks because they are necessary to the effective operation of all other benchmarks. Such relationships among the various groups and categories highlight the systemic nature of organizational diversity and inclusion initiatives.

Each organization will need to determine its priorities based on the impor- tance of each category to its current business needs. For example, the organi-

10/31/19, 3(20 PMCHAPTER FOURTEEN: Global Benchmarks for Diversity and Inclusion - Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Page 4 of 7https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/diversity-at-work/9781118415153/c14.xhtml

zation may be in an economic crisis and may not be able to achieve certain benchmarks for that reason. An example would be the benchmark “Financial resources as well as employee time and labor are provided for a variety of community projects; employees may be compensated for the time they vol- unteer for community involvement” (O'Mara & Richter, 2011, p. 10), which is a benchmark at the 100-percent level in Category 10: Community, Govern- ment Relations, and Social Responsibility. While this benchmark is desirable to meet and is considered a best practice at the 100-percent level, the organi- zation may need to forgo this as a goal until its financial situation is stronger. We do not mean to suggest that all organizations need to achieve every benchmark at the 100- and 75-percent level. Organizations will need to pri- oritize what they accomplish in diversity and inclusion just as they prioritize what they want to accomplish in other areas.

The Five Levels That Indicate Progress Each of the thirteen categories presents five levels of benchmarks that indi- cate progress toward the best practices, which are those at the 100-percent level in each category. In GDIB a best practice is what the expert panelists consider the highest-quality work described as an outcome or standard in that particular category. Based on the descriptions in Table 14.1, the expert panelists, using their judgment and experience, agreed on which level each benchmark best fit into. Although there were differences of opinions as to whether, for example, a certain benchmark belonged at a 50- or 75-percent level, after some discussion and clarification the expert panelists generally came to agreement as to which level each benchmark fell into. Again, we need to emphasize that these decisions are subjective, which is fitting for the intention of GDIB. It is meant to serve as a guide for creating an effective D&I program.

Table 14.1. Levels of Progress Toward Diversity and Inclusion Goals

Source: Adapted from Global Diversity and Inclusion Benchmarks: Stan- dards for Organizations Around the World, by J. O'Mara and A. Richter, 2011, p. 13. Copyright 2011 by Julie O'Mara and Alan Richter.

0% No D&I work has begun; appreciation of differences and a culture of inclusion are not organizational goals.

25% Compliance mindset at best; symbolic actions only.

50% Beginning of a programmatic thrust; moving in a healthy direction.

75% Seeing D&I systemically; a robust D&I approach.

100% Current best practices in D&I around the world.

Note: Going beyond 100 percent would make the organization a “pioneer”— and probably a model for the next GDIB update.

The levels are described as percentages to give the user a numerical label for convenience and as a heuristic to help assess against the current ideal or best practice; however, there is no quantitative measurement process to objec- tively determine at which level an organization falls. To determine your or- ganization's levels, individuals and groups will need to voice their opinions as to which benchmarks are met and which are not. Although the process of individuals and groups voicing their opinion is subjective, the consensus of which levels the organization is in becomes more objective as the number of participants increases. This is useful because it enables the organization to set realistic, objective goals. (See the process described in “How to Use GDIB” later in this chapter.)

Samples of Global Diversity and Inclusion Benchmarks Exhibit 14.1 shows all the benchmarks at the 100-percent level for Category 7: D&I Training and Education. I selected this category to show in this chap- ter because education and training are frequent applications for most inclu- sion initiatives. However, as can be seen from the GDIB Model (Figure 14.1) and gleaned from reading this chapter, even when education and training are executed at the 100-percent level it is not enough to result in an effective initiative. An effective inclusion initiative must include achieving bench- marks in other categories, such as D&I Vision, Strategy, and Business Case; Leadership and Accountability (also see Gallegos, Chapter 6, and Booysen, Chapter 10, this volume); and D&I Communications (also see Hayles, Chap- ter 2, this volume), as well as others.

10/31/19, 3(20 PMCHAPTER FOURTEEN: Global Benchmarks for Diversity and Inclusion - Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Page 5 of 7https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/diversity-at-work/9781118415153/c14.xhtml

Exhibit 14.1. Benchmarks at 100 Percent for Category 7: Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) Training and Education

D&I training and education include a learning reinforcement, application, and sustainability strategy.

D&I training and education involve an ongoing, multiyear, developmental curriculum that takes leaders through various stages of learning, applying, and leading D&I.

Learning is customized on an ongoing basis to meet changing local priorities and challenges, ensuring that it is not global at the expense of local relevance.

D&I education resources, including an extensive up-to-date library, use a variety of innovative learning methods that are accessible to all, fully supported by the organization, and shared externally.

D&I is woven into all training and education and is tied directly to the organization's strategy, vision, and values. The education and training provide employees and leaders at all levels with D&I concepts, knowledge, and skills needed to demonstrate the organization's D&I behaviors and competencies and achieve its vision and goals.

Challenging and sometimes controversial issues related to D&I —such as racism, sexism, ageism, homophobia, and unconscious bias—are addressed firmly and with sensitivity, conviction, and compassion.

Source: Adapted from Global Diversity and Inclusion Benchmarks: Standards for Organizations Around the World, by J. O'Mara and A. Richter, 2011, p. 31. Copyright 2011 by Julie O'Mara and Alan Richter.

There are a total of 151 benchmarks at the 75- and 100-percent levels. Table 14.2 presents a few samples of benchmarks. Most organizations target benchmarks at the 75- and 100-percent levels, although for organizations just beginning their inclusion journey, the 50-percent level in many cate- gories may be the most reasonable target for the short term. Usually organi- zations just starting their diversity and inclusion journey tend to be more fo- cused on basic diversity training, cultural events, or meeting legal and com- pliance regulations, which are generally at or below the 50-percent level. However, that is not always the case. Some organizations may have leaders with expertise in diversity and inclusion, and their initial efforts may be at the more advanced levels.

Table 14.2. Sample Benchmarks in Various Categories

Source: O'Mara and Richter, 2011.

Category Level Benchmark

D& I Vision, Strategy, and Business Case

75% “The spirit, as well as the requirement to embed equity, prevent harassment, reduce discrimination, and so forth is fully supported; violations of diversity-related policies are not tolerated” (p. 19).

Leadership and Accountability

100% “Leaders and board members understand that the work of D&I is systemic and designed to strengthen the organization's culture. They are owners, not just sponsors, of the organization's D&I work” (p. 22).

Recruitment, Development, and Advancement

75% “Recruitment and selection panels are representative of the diverse population the organization wants to attract and advance” (p. 26).

Assessment, Measurement, and Research

75% “Research on specific diversity dimensions, issues, interactions, and systems is conducted for both internal and external purposes. The organization invests in research to study D&I” (p. 32).

Community, Government Relations, and Corporate Responsibility

100% “The organization leads in supporting and advocating for diversity-related interests in government and societal affairs” (p. 36).

Marketing, Sales, Distribution, and Customer Service

75% “Diverse groups of customers and potential customers are surveyed on needs and satisfaction. The results shape marketing, sales, distribution, and customer service strategies” (p. 39).

How to Use GDIB There are several ways to use GDIB. If you are a novice at diversity and in- clusion work, begin by immersing yourself in a course of study and/or seek help from someone who has experience in designing an initiative. Many of the benchmarks at the 75- and 100-percent levels are difficult to achieve. The

10/31/19, 3(20 PMCHAPTER FOURTEEN: Global Benchmarks for Diversity and Inclusion - Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Page 6 of 7https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/diversity-at-work/9781118415153/c14.xhtml

GDIB model indicates how several benchmarks are related. The success of one benchmark may be dependent on the success of another. Embarking on and sustaining an inclusion initiative require significant competencies on the part of the practitioner. It is best to plan well and avoid mistakes—such as promoting someone before they have the competencies needed, introducing a product or service that has not been reviewed for its suitability for a desig- nated ethnic group, or requiring suppliers to meet terms that are not needed. Mistakes can require damage control that can be costly and embarrassing.

A Suggested Comprehensive Implementation Process The comprehensive process provided in this section is designed for medium to large organizations in most sectors. The process should be orchestrated by a knowledgeable practitioner. With some modification, it can be used in small organizations. The process is described at a high level and uses tech- niques and practices that are often identified as group process or organiza- tion development. It uses the behaviors of inclusion and collaboration to help achieve a successful implementation.

Step 1: Planning to Plan. A small team of internal and/or external practitioners works with senior organizational leaders to develop and agree on the major steps, key roles of those guiding the process, macro budget, and time parameters.

Step 2: Assemble and Train the Planning and Implementation Team. This is a core group of seven to ten persons who, working with senior organizational leaders and practitioners, will guide the process. It is a working, not an advisory group. As much as possible, it is a diverse group including differences in level, function, work style, skill sets, longevity in the organization, experience, background, and other dimensions of diversity important to the mission of the organization. Training should include familiarity with GDIB, group process, project management, skills needed, inclusive behaviors, and knowledge about the organization's plan from Step 1.

Step 3: Conduct and Analyze a Needs Assessment. Use a combination of interviews, focus groups, and an analysis of employee and customer opinion surveys and organizational and community statistics (hiring and promotion data; sales and service computations to various market segments; opinions of customers, employees, and other stakeholders) to conduct an objective exploration of what factors contribute to inclusion and what factors block inclusion. This may be the step at which to invest in external assistance to ensure that the data compiled are as objective as possible. Consider involving employees in the analysis of the data. In some cases, conducting a needs assessment can be minimized; such cases could include small organizations, organizations where funds are limited, organizations whose leadership and practitioners are confident that few inclusion issues exist, or organizations whose climate is such that the results of a needs assessment could be rejected.

Step 4: Use GDIB to Determine the Organization's Desired Future State. Invite multiple groups of employees and other stakeholders to prioritize which benchmarks the participants want the organization to achieve (or maintain) in approximately three to five years. The groups can be representative of all individual organizational units (divisions or departments), identity groups (for example, gender, sexual orientation, organizational level, job type, nationality, or other groups determined by the Planning and Implementation team), and customers of various service or product lines. Each group is provided with a summary of the needs analysis (if one was conducted) and a copy of the GDIB. The GDIB can be customized or formatted for easy use and made available in hard copy or online. After studying the needs assessment results, respondents are invited to identify up to five benchmarks from the 50-, 75-, or 100-percent level in each of the thirteen categories. Or the planning and implementation team can decide not to use several categories. (However, care should be taken to assure that elimination of some categories does not negatively impact the breadth and depth and therefore the effectiveness of the initiative.) The process can be done through group discussion and consensus-building sessions or through surveys. Results are compiled and analyzed, and the planning and implementation team makes the final determination of the five-year desired future state.

Step 5: Use GDIB to Determine the Organization's Current State. Using groups and a process similar to or the same as those used in Step 4, participants identify up to five benchmarks that indicate the current organizational state on each of the thirteen cate ​gories. As in Step 4, the planning and implementation team compiles the information from the various groups and makes the final determination.

Step 6: Determine What Will Be Done to Help the Organization Progress from Its Current State to Its Desired Future State. The planning and implementation team identifies the actions the organization needs to take to move from its current state to its desired state. Ideas for actions can be obtained from other chapters in this book and/or a search of the inclusion literature or discussions with others in the organization. Once those actions are identified, each needs to be assessed for potential effectiveness, cost, and other implementation factors. The planning and implementation team may want to involve others in the organization

10/31/19, 3(20 PMCHAPTER FOURTEEN: Global Benchmarks for Diversity and Inclusion - Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion

Page 7 of 7https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/diversity-at-work/9781118415153/c14.xhtml

Settings / Support / Sign Out © 2019 O'Reilly Media, Inc. Terms of Service / Privacy Policy

in determining the actions to take. If others, such as the marketing manager, are involved in determining the actions needed to be taken regarding marketing, then implementation may go more smoothly because the marketing manager would not need to be “sold” on the action. Next, measurable yearly goals need to be set for each action so that progress toward the desired state can be budgeted, prioritized, tracked, measured, and amended or celebrated on an annual basis.

Step 7: Reassess and Revisit the Plan Every Several Years to Ensure It Is on Track. Using a process similar to that used in Steps 4 and 5, GDIB can be used to measure progress.

Other Ways to Use GDIB Here are several other ways that GDIB can be used to help an organization create or sustain an inclusion initiative:

As an educational tool. Encourage leaders and planners to read GDIB focusing on the GDIB Model and the best practices. Select a few benchmarks from several categories to learn more about and focus on for the first several years.

To create an employee diversity and inclusion survey or to mine for items to add to an existing survey. Scan GDIB, select items of interest, and rewrite them to meet the style and standards of your organizational survey.

To identify organizations to study as examples of best practices. First, study GDIB. Then, by searching your network, the Internet, and other sources, screen organizations to determine if what they consider a best practice compares to what GDIB states is a best practice.

To assess one aspect of your existing diversity and inclusion initiative. For example, if your organization has a supplier diversity program, use Category 13 to determine at what level you are working for that program. The same process can be used for any of the categories.

To assist in hiring an internal inclusion practitioner or external inclusion consultant. Use several of the benchmarks to craft interview questions. Educate interviewers to listen for the level of experience candidates describe as they respond to the questions.

Conclusion The organizational leader asking the question in the vignette at the opening of this chapter sighed when the practitioner mentioned just a few of the vari- ables to address before knowing exactly what to do and how to do it. By us- ing Global Diversity and Inclusion Benchmarks: Standards for Organiza- tions Around the World, the leader and practitioner can feel confident that they know the standards for high-quality inclusion work and have some sug- gestions for how to approach the use of these benchmarks. Effective inclu- sion work is not a simple process. It involves careful, knowledgeable plan- ning and a well-orchestrated implementation effort to put systems in place that create an environment in which inclusive behaviors can thrive.

References

O'Mara, J., & Richter, A. (2006). Global diversity and inclusion benchmarks. Retrieved from http://www.workforcediversitynetwork.- com/docs/Articles/Article_GDIBenchmarksOct06_revJuly08%5B1%5D.pdf (http://www.workforcediversitynetwork.com/docs/Articles/Article_GDIBenchmarksOct06_rev-

July08%5B1%5D.pdf)

O'Mara, J., & Richter, A. (2009). Setting standards for organizational diver- sity work: It's a lot more than culture fairs and ethnic food. In E. Biech (Ed.), The 2009 Pfeiffer Annual: Consulting (pp. 157–163). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

O'Mara, J., Richter, A., et al. (2011). Global diversity and inclusion bench- marks: Standards for organizations around the world. Retrieved from http://www.omaraassoc.com/pdf/GDIB_2011.pdf (http://www.omaraassoc.com/pdf/GDIB_2011.pdf)

Qirko, H., Metts, V., Landon, G., & Atchley, K. (1994). Benchmarks for di- versity: A benchmarking and assessment guide. Knoxville, TN: Tennessee Valley Authority.

P R E V Part Four: Key Application Issues and Domains

⏮ N E X T

CHAPTER FIFTEEN: The Chief Diversity O!icer's View of the Diversity and Inclusion Journ… ⏭